1 / 35

Measuring Snow Pack Thickness Using Cosmic Rays

Measuring Snow Pack Thickness Using Cosmic Rays. Juliana Araujo March 11, 2004. Outline. Introduction Some definitions Previous attempts to measure snow water equivalent (SWE) Thermal & Epithermal Neutrons Conclusion. Introduction.

mseymour
Download Presentation

Measuring Snow Pack Thickness Using Cosmic Rays

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Measuring Snow Pack Thickness Using Cosmic Rays Juliana Araujo March 11, 2004

  2. Outline • Introduction • Some definitions • Previous attempts to measure snow water equivalent (SWE) • Thermal & Epithermal Neutrons • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Cosmic rays neutrons have been a topic of studies for many years. They are useful in quantifying production of isotopes, such as 36Cl. • Safe alternative to g-rays from highly radioactive 60Co, commonly used in snow gauge

  4. Introduction • Measuring snow pack thickness and SWE is of great importance for river forecasting and water resources planning. • Automation for remote areas: • snow pillows • radio nuclear devices, • Attenuation of g-rays in snow • monitoring of attenuation of natural isotopes in snow • profiling snow density through back scattering X-rays

  5. Previous Attempts Bissell 1974 Kodama 1975 Kodama 1980 Experiment Basic Theory Equipment Similarities Unanswered questions Topics of Discussion Thermal & Epithermal Neutrons Purpose Goals Some Preliminary results New Technique

  6. Some Definitions • Thermal, Epithermal, Fast, and High-energy neutrons • Thermal Neutrons: • Practically, the Cd-cutoff range • Neutrons with an energy <0.6 eV • Epithermal Neutrons: • Those between the thermal range and 1eV • Fast Neutrons: • Those that are produced in the atmosphere, due to secondary cascade, through ‘evaporation-like’ process from nuclear interactions of nuclear active particles with higher energies. • Some say, 1eV-100Kev, while others define as <10MeV. • The energy spectrum peaks at 1 MeV for fast neutrons. • High Energy neutrons: • Those produced from primary cosmic rays, E > 10MeV

  7. More Definitions • “evaporation” & “ground albedo” neutrons • These are slow neutrons produced in the soil, and escape back into the atmosphere, where it is absorbed by the 14N(n,p)14C reaction (Hendrick & Edge, 1966) • ‘Neutrons that are created into the soil and are backscattered from soil to air’ (Kodama 1980) • Function of soil moisture content due to diffusion and absorption of “albedo” neutrons.

  8. Bissell, 1974 • Deep Snow Measurements • Highly penetrating cosmic radiation • Counts are produced by NaI(TI) scintillator, g-rays are >3MeV • High-energy, to ensure that what they detect is entirely produced by comic radiation • The detectors function primarily by photons generated by cosmic interaction with nuclei in air, water, soil, and in the system.

  9. Counts/min >3 MeV, in 10cmX10cm scintillator as function of water depth Counts/min >3 MeV, in 10cmX10cm scintillator as function of water depth Counts/min >3 MeV, in 10cmX10cm scintillator as function of water depth Bissell, 1974 Lake Mead, Nevada • test dampening effect in the flux due to water at various depths • buried one detector in soil and other, suspended above snow

  10. Bissell, 1974

  11. Underground detector counts >3MeVflux as attenuated by snow cover <3MeV g-flux from radioisotopes in soil, and soil moisture near detector Suspended detector >3MeV fluxes “unattenuated” by snow <3MeVnatural terrestrial g-radiation attenuated by snow serves as a control from barometric pressures, seasonal and solar variations Bissell, 1974

  12. Preliminary Test to investigate absorption effects of neutrons in water. Type A and WS detector with counting rates ~170-300n/hr in Tokyo T can be accurate to a % of the depth, with one measurement per day Kodama, 1975 Kodama,1975 Water absorptions of neutrons in Tokyo, compared with 60Co measurements of g-rays.

  13. Kodama, 1975 Mt. Norikura (2,770m) • One detector was placed inside a snow-free building • The other placed on the ground • The difference in counts from the two detectors with use of empirical curvewater equivalent of snow pile Experimental error based on counting rates to measuring time and snow depth

  14. Kodama, 1975 1974 November December a) barometric pressure b) indoor neutrons counts/hr c) outdoor water equiv. (depth, cm) d) water depth Date Time profile of neutron counting rates. Snow fall

  15. Kodama,1980 • Winter season of 1977-1978 • Estimated to be effective for deep snow, >1m • Only have statistical errors due to n-counting, and change in moisture content in soil • Goal: • how cosmic-gauge is useful on continuous observations of SWE.

  16. Experiment: Takada, 13m a.s.l. Hirosaki (302m) Oritate, 1330m Ohtawa, 1440m Instrumentation: moderated BF3 counter, 2 cm polyethylene constant response in 1ev-1MeV range two sensors, WS, and HP After corrections for barometric pressures they used the following to convert the counts to water equivalents: (1) Nw =Noexp(1-0.753(1-exp(-0.77w))); w<30cm (2) Nw = N30exp(1-0.00578(w-30)); w>30cm (3) w1=13ln(0.753/(0.753-ln(No/ Nw))), cm (4) w2=173ln(N30/Nw) if w1>30cm Kodama, 1980

  17. Kodama, 1980

  18. Kodama, 1980 • Correlation between barometric pressure and cosmic ray neutron flux, under snow

  19. Kodama, 1980 • Good correlation between cosmic-ray gauge, and snow sampler, except near the snow cover maximum due to discordance or field discrepancies • Atmospheric pressure effects, varies with barometric pressure • The greater the snow cover depth, the harder the energy spectrum • Primary Cosmic ray modulation • daily variations affects the apparent swe of snow pack • Statistical Fluctuations

  20. All three experiments are used for high energy neutrons. Whether they use g-ray or neutrons, they measure these effects under snow shielding Related to the attenuation of neutrons in the snow, and moisture in soil. They do not look at lower energies. As in the case of Kodama 1980, the method was successful for long term measurements, and can be used for deep snow packs Conclusions from the past

  21. The new technique • Uses thermal and epithermal neutrons, as means to quantify moisture in the soil, and possibly applicable to snow pack thickness • Unique, because there has been no previous work of this nature, with thermal neutrons • My definition: • Thermal neutrons: 0-0.6eV • Epithermal neutrons: 0.6-100KeV

  22. The new technique Comparison of depth profiles for measured and calculated thermal neutron fluxes. Depth in concrete (g/cm2) Desilets—Personal Communication

  23. The new Technique • Scalable—volume could be corrected by adjusting the height of the instrument Fig.1: Comparison of epithermal and thermal neutron fluxes in a concrete block at Los Alamos National Laboratory * F. M Phillips et al., 2000.

  24. The new technique • Speculation: • Snow pack depresses neutron flux • Along with ponding, it could significantly skew the count rates of thermal neutrons. Fig. 8. Approximate neutron density near a water surface *Edge, R.D. 1958

  25. Fig. 3a. Epithermalneutron flux as a function of water content (%) • Fig. 3b. Thermalneutron flux as a function of water content. The thermal flux data of Hendrick and Edge 1966 are shown for comparison. * F. M Phillips et al., 2000.

  26. What This Means • Made-up Basalt • varying water content, 3%, 20%, 40% • varying amount of water on top of saturated soil, 5cm, 10cm, and 20cm of water. • Results are a good indication that we are on the right path • Although, some of it still is ambiguous

  27. Real Life Simulation, MCnp • For a typical Montana soil, 20% water content • Thermal & Epithermal above and below ground

  28. Real Life Simulation, MCnp • Thermal & Epithermal above and below ground • 20 cm of water

  29. Fake Basalt, variable WC Epithermal Thermal Thermal total Epithermal Thermal Epithermal total total

  30. Air/soil boundary effect Fig. 4 Slow cosmic-ray neutron density below water. *Edge, R.D. 1958

  31. Variable Water Depth

  32. Next Steps • Analysis of current results, what do they mean in terms of estimating snow pack thickness? • Correlation to snow water equivalent? • Boundary affects between air/water/soil. Function of thickness of water in between?

  33. References: Avdyushin, S.I., V.V. Abelentsev, E.V. Kolomeets, V.V. Oskomov, R.G.-E. Pfeffer, K.O. Syundikova, and S.D. Fridman, 1988. Estimating snow moisture reserve and soil humidity from cosmic rays. Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR, Seriya Fizicheskaya 52, 2454-2456. Bissell, V.C., and Z.G. Burson, 1974. Deep snow measurements suggested using cosmic radiation. Water Resources Research 10, 1243-1244. Kodama, M., S. Kawasaki, and M. Wada, 1975. A cosmic-ray snow gauge. International Journal of Applied Radiation and Isotopes 26, 774-775. Kodama, M.,1980. Continuous monitoring of snow water equivalent using cosmic ray neutrons. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 3: 295-303.

  34. 20% 3% 40% Above ground

  35. 40% 20% 3% Thermal & Epithermal 20% 40% 3%

More Related