Wim Haeck
Institut de radioprotection et de sûreté nucléaire
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Wim Haeck.
Medical Physics | 2010
Kristien Smans; J. Zoetelief; Beatrijs Verbrugge; Wim Haeck; Lara Struelens; Filip Vanhavere; Hilde Bosmans
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare and validate three methods to simulate radiographic image detectors with the Monte Carlo software MCNP/MCNPX in a time efficient way. METHODS The first detector model was the standard semideterministic radiography tally, which has been used in previous image simulation studies. Next to the radiography tally two alternative stochastic detector models were developed: A perfect energy integrating detector and a detector based on the energy absorbed in the detector material. Validation of three image detector models was performed by comparing calculated scatter-to-primary ratios (SPRs) with the published and experimentally acquired SPR values. RESULTS For mammographic applications, SPRs computed with the radiography tally were up to 44% larger than the published results, while the SPRs computed with the perfect energy integrating detectors and the blur-free absorbed energy detector model were, on the average, 0.3% (ranging from -3% to 3%) and 0.4% (ranging from -5% to 5%) lower, respectively. For general radiography applications, the radiography tally overestimated the measured SPR by as much as 46%. The SPRs calculated with the perfect energy integrating detectors were, on the average, 4.7% (ranging from -5.3% to -4%) lower than the measured SPRs, whereas for the blur-free absorbed energy detector model, the calculated SPRs were, on the average, 1.3% (ranging from -0.1% to 2.4%) larger than the measured SPRs. CONCLUSIONS For mammographic applications, both the perfect energy integrating detector model and the blur-free energy absorbing detector model can be used to simulate image detectors, whereas for conventional x-ray imaging using higher energies, the blur-free energy absorbing detector model is the most appropriate image detector model. The radiography tally overestimates the scattered part and should therefore not be used to simulate radiographic image detectors.
Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology | 2015
Emmanuel Farhi; Ghislain Ferran; Wim Haeck; Eric Pellegrini; Yoann Calzavara
In this study, we report on recent neutron inelastic scattering experiments performed at the Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL) for H2O and D2O. The measured dynamic structure factors S(q, ω) have been reduced, normalised and transformed into the S(α, β) formalism, where α and β stand for the unit-less momentum and energy transfers, respectively. The measurements were complemented with molecular dynamics simulations. After processing with NJOY, new water neutron scattering cross-sections have been generated for use with e.g. the Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) software in view to improve the accuracy of the nuclear facility models. As an example, we present improved accuracy calculations for the safety rod insertion impact on the criticality factor keff for the ILL high flux research reactor.
Journal of Nuclear Materials | 2008
A. Schubert; P. Van Uffelen; J. van de Laar; C.T. Walker; Wim Haeck
Journal of Nuclear Materials | 2011
P. Botazzoli; Lelio Luzzi; S. Brémier; A. Schubert; Paul Van Uffelen; C.T. Walker; Wim Haeck; W. Goll
Transactions of the american nuclear society | 2010
Wim Haeck; B. Cochet; Luis Aguiar
ND2016 International Conference on Nuclear Data for Science and Technology | 2017
Vaibhav Jaiswal; Luiz Leal; Wim Haeck; Emmanuel Farhi; Yoann Calzavara; S. Rols; Jacques Ollivier; Gilles Noguere; Juan Pablo Scotta; Valérie Vallet; Florent Réal
EPJ Web of Conferences | 2017
Raphaëlle Ichou; Nicolas Leclaire; Luiz Leal; Wim Haeck; B. Morillon; Pascal Romain; H. Duarte
EPJ Web of Conferences | 2017
O. Cabellos; F. Alvarez-Velarde; M. Angelone; Carlos Javier Díez; J. Dyrda; L. Fiorito; U. Fischer; Michael Fleming; Wim Haeck; I. Hill; R. Ichou; D. H. Kim; A. Klix; I. Kodeli; P. Leconte; F. Michel-Sendis; E. Nunnenmann; M. Pecchia; Y. Peneliau; A. Plompen; D. Rochman; P. Romojaro; A. Stankovskiy; J.-Ch. Sublet; P. Tamagno; S. C. van der Marck
EPJ Web of Conferences | 2017
Nicolas Leclaire; B. Cochet; Alexis Jinaphanh; Wim Haeck
EPJ Web of Conferences | 2017
Wim Haeck; Raphaëlle Ichou