Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Life Sciences in Space Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lssr

Applicability of composite materials for space radiation shielding

of spacecraft
Masayuki Naito a, Hisashi Kitamura a, Masamune Koike a, Hiroki Kusano a, Tamon Kusumoto a,
Yukio Uchihori a, Toshiaki Endo b, Yusuke Hagiwara b, Naoki Kiyono b, Hiroaki Kodama b,
Shinobu Matsuo b, Ryo Mikoshiba b, Yasuhiro Takami b, Masahiro Yamanaka b,
Hiromichi Akiyama c, Wataru Nishimura c, Satoshi Kodaira a, *
a
Radiation Measurement Research Group, National Institute of Radiological Sciences, National Institutes for Quantum and Radiological Science and Technology, Chiba
263-8555, Japan
b
Space Systems Division, Integrated Defense & Space Systems, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., Aichi 455-8515, Japan
c
Manufacturing Technology Research Department, Research & Innovation Center, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., Aichi 455-8515, Japan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Energetic ion beam experiments with major space radiation elements, 1H, 4He, 16O, 28Si and 56Fe, have been
Space radiation conducted to investigate the radiation shielding properties of composite materials. These materials are expected
Shielding to be used for parts and fixtures of space vehicles due to both their mechanical strength and their space radiation
Composite material
shielding capabilities. Low Z materials containing hydrogen are effective for shielding protons and heavy ions
Total charge changing cross section
due to their high stopping power and large fragmentation cross section per unit mass. The stopping power of the
composite materials used in this work is intermediate between that of aluminum and polyethylene, which are
typical structural and shielding materials used in space. The total charge-changing cross sections per unit mass,
σ UM , of the composite materials are 1.3–1.8 times larger than that of aluminum. By replacing conventional
aluminum used for spacecraft with commercially available composite (carbon fiber / polyether ether ketone), it
is expected that the shielding effect is increased by ~17%. The utilization of composite materials will help
mitigate the space radiation hazard on future deep space missions.

1. Introduction 2014). HZE composition is driven in part of the physics of stellar

The radiation environment in space, which consists primarily of
galactic cosmic rays (GCRs) and solar energetic particles (SEPs), is
recognized as one of the principal health hazards to humans engaged in
space exploration. Although the geomagnetic field partially shields
space travelers in low-Earth orbit (LEO), where the International Space
Station (ISS) is located, crews will encounter more serious radiation
hazards on upcoming long duration missions to the Moon, NASA’s Deep
Space Gateway (Crusan et al., 2018) and Mars due to the small magnetic
field. Protons and high atomic number and high energy (HZE) particles
from He to Fe nuclei in the GCR are known to increase radiation risks in
space (Cucinotta, 2015). Although a large fraction (~87%) of the GCR is
represented by protons (Simpson, 1983; George et al., 2009), the HZE
particles significantly contribute to the radiation dose due to their high
linear energy transfer (LET) and high biological effect (e.g., Cucinotta,
nucleosynthesis and nuclei, such as He, C, N, O, Ne, Mg, Si and Fe, are
relatively abundant. Data from the Mars Science Laboratory indicate
that a round-trip to Mars will result in a dose equivalent of ~660 mSv or
more (Zeitlin et al., 2013). Radiation shielding is one of the measures
being investigated to help reduce risks to crews due to radiation
exposure.
In accordance with the review by Durante (2014), passive shielding
is considered as a practical solution. Because it is not technically feasible
to completely stop HZE particles in a shielding material, one possible
and realistic approach is to absorb relatively low energy particles in the
material and to break up the HZE particles into lighter particles, whose
LET and dose contribution are smaller than primary heavier nuclei.
Shielding properties of various materials such as aluminum (Al) and
polyethylene (PE, (C2H4)n) have been studied through ground-based
experiments using particle accelerators (e.g., Miller et al., 2003; La

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: kodaira.satoshi@qst.go.jp (S. Kodaira).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lssr.2021.08.004
Received 19 April 2021; Received in revised form 17 August 2021; Accepted 18 August 2021
Available online 30 August 2021
2214-5524/© 2021 The Committee on Space Research (COSPAR). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
M. Naito et al. Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79

Tessa et al., 2005; Guetersloh et al., 2006; Zeitlin et al., 2006; DeWitt
et al., 2009). Hydrogen is known to be the most effective element for
shielding protons and heavy nuclei. However, since hydrogen is not
chemically stable and not easy to handle, hydrogen-rich materials such
as PE walls and water-rich towels in packages were proposed as
shielding materials on the ISS (Shavers et al., 2004; Kodaira et al., 2014).
In our previous work, we evaluated the physical parameters, stop­
ping power and nuclear fragmentation cross sections of various potential
space radiation shielding materials (Naito et al., 2020) and found that
composite materials have a potential for use as structural materials with
relatively high shielding efficiency.
In this paper, we have characterized the shielding properties of some
types of composite materials by means of heavy ion accelerator exper­
iments and Monte Carlo simulations. The enhanced shielding perfor­
mance achieved by replacing conventional Al in an actual spacecraft
with composite materials has been reported.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Shielding materials
2.2. Radiation dosimeters
We used two types of radiation dosimeters, an optical stimulated
luminescent detector (OSLD, ϕ7.2 mm × 0.35 mmt, Landauer Inc., USA)
and a CR-39 nuclear track detector (~25 mm × 25 mm × 0.9 mmt,
TechnoTrak, Chiyoda Technol Corp., Japan), to evaluate shielding ef­
ficiency of the target materials. OSLD has high sensitivity to radiation
with low LET (< 10 keV/μm) such as protons and He ions, while CR-39
records individual ion tracks with high LET particles (> 10 keV/μm) as
etch pits (Somogyi et al., 1976). CR-39 provides the LET spectrum
containing the primary ion beam and its fragments produced in the
target material. The absorbed dose behind the target material was ob­
tained by a combination of OSLD and CR-39, which is well-known as a
standard space radiation dosimetry (Doke et al., 1995; Benton et al.,
2002; Hajek et al., 2008; Tawara et al., 2011; Kodaira et al., 2014). The
analyses using CR-39 for the derivation of the absorbed dose were
summarized elsewhere (Kodaira et al., 2016). An OSLD unit consists of
four pieces covered with black tape for light tightness (the unit size is
about 29 mm × 8 mm). The absorbed dose recorded in the OSLDs was
measured by a commercial reader (microStar, Landauer Inc., USA).

The composite materials are made of resins, reinforced to enhance

2.3. Beam experiments
mechanical strength. The resin is an organic polymer such as polyether
ether ketone (PEEK), polyimide (PI) and polypropylene (PP), which is
To evaluate the shielding efficiencies of target materials, the mate­
selected based on its the chemical and thermal properties. Carbon fiber
rials were irradiated with protons and heavy ion beams representing
(CF) or silicon carbide is used for reinforcement. The selection of
major components of the GCR in the biological irradiation room of
appropriate resins and reinforcements allows the composite materials to
HIMAC (Heavy Ion Medical Accelerator in Chiba) of QST, Japan. Table 2
be more shock- and heat-resistant than resin and reinforcement alone.
lists the beam energies and calculated LET values in water. We note that
Composite materials are already used in automobiles, airplanes and
these energies are the maximum available for each ion at the HIMAC,
spacecraft because of their low density and high mechanical strength (e.
which are somewhat lower than the mean energy of the corresponding
g., Chen, 1997). Composite materials contribute not only to structural
GCR particles (~1 GeV/n). The ranges of beams in the target materials
strength in spacecraft but also to radiation shielding by their relatively
are listed in Table 3. As shown in a schematic of the experimental set-up
higher stopping power and a larger nuclear fragmentation cross section
(Fig. 1), the target materials were stacked with the two types of radiation
per unit mass compared to Al (Naito et al., 2020). We evaluated three
dosimeters. The dosimeter at 0 g/cm2 was attached in front of first target
types of target materials: reference materials (Al and PE), commercially
material. According to the Monte Carlo simulation, 228 MeV 1H particle
available composite materials and mixed composite materials as sum­
go through 10 g/cm2 Al slab with backward radiations, contributing to
marized in Table 1. The commercial materials were CF/PI (AURUM
~2% to absorbed dose. The backward radiations consist of 75% pho­
JCN3030, Mitsui Chemicals, Inc., Japan), CF/PEEK (Toray Cetex
tons, 20% neutrons, and 5% other particles. Therefore, the contribution
TC1200, Toray Advanced Composites, USA), CF/PP (TAFNEX CF/PP,
of backward primary and secondary particles would be small in the
Mitsui Chemicals, Inc., Japan) and CF/Epoxy (Mitsubishi Chemical
Corporation, Japan). The mixed composites were produced by mixing
resin (PE or PP) and reinforcement material (C or SiC powder) in the Table 2
volume ratios of 8:2 or 6:4 to imitate the elemental composition of a Energy and calculated LET in water of each beam.
composite material. For instance, PE SiC is made of 80% PE and 20% Ion Energy (MeV/n) LET in water (keV/μm)
SiC, and PP SiC20 is made of 80% PP and 20% SiC in volume. The un­ 1
H 228 0.4
certainties due to the variations of material thickness were included in 4
He 145 2.3
16
the measurement results. O 380 20.0
28
Si 440 56.9
56
Fe 410 199.5

Table 1
Target materials used in our experiments and their physical parameters.
Materiala Density (g/cm3) Size of sample (cm × cm) Resina Reinforcementa Resin fraction (wt%) ZT /AT AT
− 1/3

Al 2.7 10 × 10 —– —– —– 0.481 0.333

PE 0.94 10 × 10 —– —– —– 0.570 0.598
PP SiC20b 1.36 10 × 10 PP SiC 53 0.537 0.515
PP SiC40b 1.81 10 × 10 PP SiC 30 0.520 0.462
PP C 1.17 10 × 10 PP C 62 0.543 0.547
PE SiC 1.36 10 × 10 PE SiC 53 0.537 0.516
CF/PI 1.43 6×6 PI CF 70 0.511 0.466
CF/PEEK 1.62 5.5 × 5.5 PEEK CF 33 0.508 0.434
CF/PP 1.31 10 × 10 PP CF 33 0.523 0.502
CF/Epoxy 1.57 10 × 10 Epoxyc CF 34 0.510 0.464
*
PE, polyethylene; PI, polyimide; CF, carbon fiber; PEEK, polyether ether ketone; PP, polypropylene.
#
SiC20 and SiC40, the numbers indicate percent volume of SiC in the composite material.
+
Composition of the epoxy material is not publicly available. Therefore, ZT and AT of CF/Epoxy were estimated from its mass and density.

72
M. Naito et al. Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79

Table. 3 The fluence histograms as a function of LET measured by CR-39 were

Calculated range of each beam in each target material. CF/PI, CF/PEEK and CF/ fitted to a gaussian function to obtain the mean LET and the number of
PP were not tested with 1H, 4He and 16O beams. primary particles. The variations of the LET values and the number of
Material Range (mm) counts as a function of material thickness were obtained from the fitting
1
H 228 4
He 145 16
O 380 28
Si 440 56
Fe 410 results. The total charge-changing cross section, σ CC , was obtained from
MeV MeV/n MeV/n MeV/n MeV/n the reduction rates of the number of counts of primary particles, dCp /dx,
Al 153.1 70.1 90.0 64.6 34.4 as:
PE 326.2 149.5 193.0 138.8 73.9 /
PP 249.4 114.5 147.3 105.9 56.2 dCp dx
SiC20 σ CC = (2)
N
PP 198.0 91.3 116.7 84.0 44.7
SiC40 σ CC generally depends on the Bradt-Peters equation (Bradt and Pe­
PP C 276.5 127.2 163.9 118.0 62.6 ters, 1950; Durante and Cucinotta, 2011):
PE SiC 248.8 113.9 146.3 105.6 56.2
( )2
CF/PI 104.6 55.7
(3)
—– —– —–
CF/ —– —– —– 92.6 49.3
σ CC = c1 A1/3 1/3
p + Ap + c2

PEEK
CF/PP —– —– —– 110.4 58.8 where Ap is atomic mass of the projectile. c1 and c2 are semi-empirical
parameters. When we consider the cross section per target unit mass,
σ UM , Eq. (2) should become:
( )2
1/3 1/3
σCC c1 Ap + AT + c2
σ UM = = (4)
AT AT
These equations can be simplified with a parameter, c, as a rough
approximation (Durante, 2014):

σ CC ∝cA2/3 (5)
− 1/3
T , σ UM ∝cAT

Therefore, ZT /AT and A−T 1/3

Fig. 1. Schematic of the experimental setup. Target materials were stacked
with the two types of radiation dosimeters.
measurement data. We note that CF/PI, CF/PEEK and CF/PP were not
tested with 1H, 4He and 16O beams due to limitations on beam time. A
stack with OSLDs was irradiated with each beam of a dose of 100 mGy in
front of the stack, while that with CR-39 detectors was irradiated with
each beam of a fluence of ~3000 cm− 2. The irradiated dose and fluence
were chosen based on availability of beam intensity and analysis pro­
cedure of the detectors. Each beam intensity was independently moni­
tored with an ionization chamber and a plastic scintillator installed in
the beam line. The beam spot size was uniformly spread out to be 100
mm in diameter using a wobbler-scatterer method. The uniformity over
the 100 mm diameter was better than 5%, leading to a 5% systematic
error in the results. Finally, the measured data with OSLD and CR-39
were combined to obtain the total absorbed dose by assigning a
scaling parameter equal to the ratio of the irradiated dose on a stack with
OSLDs and fluence on a stack with CR-39 detectors. The factor was
applied to the dose data measured with CR-39 for each stack.
2.4. Shielding parameters
The stopping power of the target materials was evaluated by the
position of the Bragg peak. The stopping power, S, is defined by the
Bethe-Bloch equation, depending on NZ2p ZT /E where N, Zp , ZT and E are
the number density of target molecules, atomic numbers of the projectile
and target, and kinetic energy of the projectile, respectively. Therefore,
the mass stopping power, SUM , is described using the atomic mass of
target, AT , as:
NZp2 ZT ZT
SUM ∝ ∝ (1)
EAT AT
are useful parameters to compare SUM
and σUM among the target materials, respectively. We note that ZT and
AT have to be the mean values in the case of a chemical compound; for
instance, ZT and AT of PE are (1 × 4 + 6 × 2)/6 = 2.67 and (1.01 × 4 +
12.01 × 2)/6 = 4.68, respectively. These values of target materials are
also listed in Table 1. The composite and mixed materials have param­
eters intermediate between those of Al and PE.
2.5. Numerical simulation
We conducted Monte Carlo simulations with Geant4 ver. 10.04.02
(Agostinelli et al., 2003; Allison et al., 2006, 2016) to reproduce our
experimental results. For the simulations, ion beams with the same en­
ergies in the experiments were projected onto the target materials ar­
ranged in configurations similar to the experiment setup. It should be
noted that CF/Epoxy was excluded from the simulations since its
elemental composition is not publicly available. The LET and the num­
ber of primary particles were extracted and compared to the experi­
mental data. The effective dose equivalent due to primary and secondary
particles (neutrons, electrons, positrons, photons, positive and negative
pions, muons and lighter charged particles) behind the target materials
of 5 g/cm2 mass thickness were also obtained from the particle track
information using the ICRP fluence-dose conversion coefficient (ICRP,
2013). We note that the contribution of neutral pions was not considered
because the corresponding conversion coefficient is not given by ICRP.
Particle transport was terminated when the residual range in the ma­
terial was to be less than 0.7 mm. The simulations were conducted using
two Geant4 reference physics lists of “Shielding” and “QGSP_BIC_HP”. It
was confirmed that the two models gave similar results. The only result
obtained by the “Shielding” list is presented.
Spatial dose distribution due to space radiation in the spacecraft was
calculated using Monte Carlo simulations to assess the shielding effect of
composite materials. The Japanese spacecraft HTV (H-II Transfer
Vehicle, “The KOUNOTORI”) pressurized logistics carrier model (Fig. 2)
was exposed to GCR particles ranging from protons to iron nuclei with
GCR energy spectra ranging from 10 MeV/n to 100 GeV/n. The HTV
module has been used for the transportation of supplies to ISS. Although
human transportation has not been conducted yet, an update of the HTV
pressurized module for manned work space is planned. The HTV model

73
M. Naito et al. Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79

Fig. 2. The HTV module model; (a) side view and (b) top view.

is imported from CAD model into the Monte Carlo simulation. The en­
ergy spectra of GCR particles were derived from the DLR model at the
solar minimum phase (Matthiä et al., 2013), assuming the worst case
radiation exposure. Al and CF/PEEK were employed as the structural
materials of the HTV module for comparison. Although the employment
of CF/PEEK for whole structure may introduce other issues such as heat
resistance, transmission and emission, our calculation is a representative
comparison for future design studies of spacecraft from the viewpoint of
space radiation shielding. CF/PEEK was selected because of its superior
shock resistance compared to the other composite materials tested in
this work. We note that the scale of geometric model was fixed in units of
mm or cm since the CAD model is too complicated to implement the
density factor converting to g/cm2 scale. A 2000 cm × 2000 cm planar
source with a cosine angular distribution was fixed at z = ±250 cm. The
cosine angular distribution on the planar surface reproduces an isotropic
radiation environment. 10 particles/cm2 of primary particles were
projected for each ion. The spatial distribution of effective dose equiv­
alent due to the primary and secondary particles was obtained from the
track information. The spatial distribution of mean shielding thickness
in the HTV model was also obtained using particles that do not undergo
any interactions (so-called the ray-tracing technique). The shielding
thickness at any region can be obtained from the track information of
each particle.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Shielding properties of composite materials
The variation of absorbed dose in the target materials was obtained
for experimental beam irradiation, as shown in Fig. 3. The dose data
were normalized to those at 0 g/cm2 (i.e., in front of a stack). The Bragg
peaks of composite materials were located between those of PE and Al as
expected from the stopping power parameters in Table 1. No large dif­
ferences among the composite materials were observed. The differences
in the stopping power among the composite materials were trivial. We
note that there was a restriction on the measurement points due to the
available thickness of the materials.
The LET spectra measured at different target thicknesses with CR-39
were obtained for 16O, 28Si and 56Fe beam irradiations. For instance, LET
spectra for 56Fe irradiation are shown in Fig. 4. The broadness of peak at

Fig. 3. Variations of absorbed dose experimentally obtained in the target materials for irradiated beams: (a) 1H 228 MeV, (b) 4He 145 MeV/n, (c) 16O 380 MeV/n, (d)
28
Si 440 MeV/n and (e) 56Fe 410 MeV/n. Vertical axis was normalized to the dose in front of each stack (0 g/cm2).

74
M. Naito et al.
Fig. 4. The LET spectra of the 56Fe beam at in front of a stack (0 mm) and behind some of the target materials for (a) Al, (b) PE, (c) PP SiC20, (d) PP SiC40, (e) PP C,
(f) PE SiC, (g) CF/PI, (h) CF/PEEK, (i) CF/PP and (j) CF/Epoxy. Thin solid lines denote the gaussian fitting results of primary Fe ions. Some fragments with LET lower
than primary Fe ions were observed in the enlarged scale view of PE data (b).
0 mm mainly comes from the detector resolution and fluctuation of
energy loss in air layer. The LET resolution in CR-39 has been verified by
Kodaira et al. (2016). The peaks of Fe ion beam become broad with
increasing the target thickness due to the degradation of kinetic energy.
The LET of primary Fe ions increased due to the ionization energy loss,
while the number of counts decreased due to nuclear fragmentation in
the target material. The LET and the number of counts of each Fe ion
peak fitted with a gaussian function are indicated in the subfigure. The
experimentally-measured relative variations of the LET and the number
of counts of 16O, 28Si and 56Fe peaks are represented as a function of
target material thickness (Figs. 5a-c). Notably that ion tracks of low LET
1
H and 4He ions were not recorded in CR-39 due to the detection limit
(Kodaira et al., 2016). The rates of LET increase and count decrease were
comparable over the experimental energy range. This balance rendered
the flatness of the dose curve in the plateau regions in Fig. 3. The
stopping power depends on the reciprocal of particle kinetic energy (Eq.
(1)), while energy dependence of the fragmentation cross section is
relatively weak for particle energies ranging from a few hundred MeV/n
to about 2 GeV/n (e.g., Zeitlin et al., 2011). It is expected that frag­
mentation becomes dominant at the cosmic ray energy having a peak
around 1 GeV/n (Matthiä et al., 2013).
We plot the values of σ UM and σ CC obtained from the reduction rates
of the number of primary particles by Eqs. (2) and (4) as a function of
target material mass, AT (Fig. 6) The plots were fitted to Eq. (5) using a
least square method. The fitted lines are also shown. σUM , σ CC and fitted
parameter, c, are summarized in Table 4. The experimentally acquired
σ UM and σ CC are proportional to A−T 1/3 and A2/3
T , respectively. In accor­
dance with the previous studies, the σCC of 16O, 28Si and 56Fe ions in the
75
Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79
Al target are ~1200 mb (400 MeV/n, Zeitlin et al., 2011), 1550 mb (a
few hundred MeV/n to ~2 GeV/n, Binns et al., 1989) and 2000 mb
(1.05 GeV/n, Zeitlin et al., 1997) with errors of 2–3%, respectively. Our
results are consistent within ~10–20% deviations. A plausible expla­
nation of this discrepancy is systematic error of the experiments. The
ratios of experiment to simulation for the number of primary particles
offered 10–15% differences (Figs. 5(d-f)), which were caused by the
differences in the set-up of a stack and variation of material thickness.
The statistical and systematic errors due to the beam irradiation and
measurement offered the uncertainty of about 10%. Around the Bragg
peak, the differences between the experiment and simulation would
become large, especially for the LET. Judging from these views, the
experimental result is reasonable with the simulations, meaning that we
can successfully reproduced the fragmentation and transport of heavy
ions in the plateau region of the Bragg-curve using a Monte Carlo
simulation.
The effective dose equivalent values behind 5 g/cm2 mass thickness
of target materials were obtained by numerical calculations (Fig. 7). The
vertical axis was normalized to the effective dose equivalent at 0 g/cm2.
It should be noted that the effective dose equivalent was calculated by
the conversion coefficient for irradiation of a voxel phantom; i.e.,
effective dose equivalent in the voxel phantom. Meanwhile, the exper­
imental data in Fig. 3 comes from the absorbed dose on each dosimeter.
Although, the variation of absorbed dose in Fig. 3 was minimal at the
plateau regions, the effective dose equivalent was decreased with a thin
(5 g/cm2) target material. This is because of the difference in scales of
phantom and dosimeter. The fragmentation of projectile particles re­
duces effective dose equivalent for heavier ions except for protons.
Protons do not break down further and LET values increase due to the
M. Naito et al. Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79

Fig. 5. (a-c) Variations of the LET and the number of counts of primary ions as a function of material thickness. Closed plots with solid lines denote LET and open
plots with dotted lines denote the counts, respectively. (d-f) Their ratios of experimental to simulation results. The horizontal dotted and solid lines denote to ±10%
and±20% variation against the ratio = 1.0, respectively.

Fig. 6. (a) σUM and (b) σCC experimentally obtained as a function of AT . Fitted lines to Eqs. (3) and (4) are also shown.

energy loss in the material. The increase of LET added to the effective
dose equivalent behind 5 g/cm2 shielding (Fig. 7(a)). The production of
secondary particles due to target fragmentation also plays an important
role. The secondary particles contributed to increase the effective dose
equivalent, specifically ~1.0% for Al, ~0.6% for PE and ~0.7% for
composite and mixed materials in average. For heavy ion irradiations,
the contribution of secondary particles due to both projectile and target
fragmentation reactions increased with projectile mass: ~4.0% for 4He,
~5.3% for 16O, ~9.5% for 28Si and ~24% for 56Fe in PE target. How­
ever, the effective dose equivalent reduction by shielding was more than
compensated for the secondary yields (Fig. 7 (b-e)). In other words, the
fragmentation of primary particles contributes to the dose reduction of
space radiation in spite of the production of secondary particles. The
composite materials provided >30% higher dose reductions than Al for

76
M. Naito et al. Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79

Table. 4 3.2. HTV module simulation

σMU and σCC experimentally obtained and parameter c obtained by fitting in
Fig. 6. The spatial distribution of mean shielding thickness of the HTV
Material 16
O 380 MeV/n 28
Si 440 MeV/n 56
Fe 410 MeV/n module was calculated and is shown as a function of each axis (x and y)
σMU σCC σMU σCC σMU σCC in Figs. 8(a-b), where the ranges of y-z and z-x were fixed from − 50 cm
to +50 cm, respectively. Although any y-z and z-x ranges can be
Parameter 107 ±1 148 ± 2 224 ± 5
c selected, small area results very long calculation time to reduce statis­
Al 35 ± 5 940 ± 47 ± 5 1270 ± 80 ± 7 2150 ± tical errors. We chose these y-z and x-z ranges, where the errors along
140 128 174 with the results are statistically acceptable. The shielding thickness of Al
PE 66 ± 310 ± 98 ± 459 ±60 141 ± 660 ± 60 is larger than that of CF/PEEK by a factor of their density ratio, 2.7/1.62
10 45 13 13 = 1.67, since the calculations were made using the same model. The
PP SiC20 54 ± 390 ± 77 ± 559 ± 114 ± 835 ± shielding thickness at the central region becomes the maximum for the
10 71 17 120 22 160
axis direction (x) and minimum for the radius direction (y). This position
PP SiC40 49 ± 8 490 ± 67 ± 9 681 ± 91 98 ± 5 994 ± 48 dependence is due to the isotropic angular distribution of GCR particles.
80
The mean shielding thickness relies on the effect of inclination,
PP C 60 ± 370 ± 78 ± 474 ± 134 ± 821 ± 41
16 97 17 100 7
increasing the apparent thickness.
PE SiC 57 ± 410 ± 71 ± 514 ± 105 ± 765 ± 45
The spatial distribution of effective dose equivalent for each axis (x
11 79 15 110 6 and y) is presented in Figs. 8(c-d) in the same manner as for Figs. 8(a-b).
CF/PI —– —– 70 ± 6 693 ± 57 103 ± 1020 ± It should be noted that the vertical axes were normalized to the effective
10 96 dose equivalent in free space. Despite the fact that the shielding thick­
CF/PEEK —– —– 73 ± 890 ± 118 ± 1440 ± ness of CF/PEEK was 1.67 times smaller than that of Al, the relative
17 210 19 231 effective dose equivalent of CF/PEEK was comparable to that of Al.
CF/PP —– —– 73 575 ± 112 ± 890 ± 54 When we consider shielding material for space radiation, σUM is the
110 7
±14
dominant parameter rather than the mass stopping power due to the
CF/Epoxy 65 ± 655 ± 65 114 ± 1140 ±
—– —–
very high energy of the GCR. Depending on the projectile ions, the σUM
12 20 195
values of CF/PEEK were 35–70% larger than that of Al in our experi­
ments. In other words, the high shielding efficiency of CF/PEEK pro­
heavy ions. The dose reductions of the composite materials for heavy vided a comparable radiation environment to that in the module
ions were <30% lower than that of PE. Among the mixed and composite fabricated from Al, even though the spacecraft mass fabricated with CF/
materials, PPC provided the highest dose reduction rates (4.3% for 4He, PEEK was almost half of that with Al (1/1.67).
20% for 16O, 24% for 28Si, and 16% for 56Fe). This result is consistent A general comparison with the same shielding thickness could be
with the largest A− 1/3 values (Table 1) although the differences among conducted through the effective dose equivalent as a function of
the mixed and composite materials are not large, compared with the shielding thickness (Fig. 9). The mean values of relative dose equivalent
errors in the experimental results. inside the CF/PEEK HTV module (− 230 < x < 230 and − 150 < y < 150)

Fig. 7. Effective dose equivalent behind 5 g/cm2 mass thickness of target materials for (a) 1H 228 MeV, (b) 4He 145 MeV/n, (c) 16O 380 MeV/n, (d) 28Si 440 MeV/n
and (e) 56Fe 410 MeV/n. Vertical axis was normalized to the dose at 0 g/cm2. Bottom dark colors denote to the effective dose equivalent due to the primary particles.
Top light colors denote to the effective dose equivalent due to the secondary particles.

77
M. Naito et al.
Fig. 8. (a) x and (b) y distributions of mean shielding thickness in the HTV module derived from the ray-tracing technique. (c) x and (d) y distributions of effective
dose equivalent in the HTV module. Vertical axis was normalized to the dose equivalent in free space. The mean relative dose equivalents inside the module are
indicated at the center for Al and CF/PEEK.
Fig. 9. Normalized effective dose equivalents as a function of shielding thick­
ness of Al and CF/PEEK.
were calculated to be 0.64 for x average and 0.49 for y average. These
values correspond to 13 and 31 g/cm2 shielding thicknesses, respec­
tively. By multiplying these corresponding shielding thicknesses by the
density factor 1.67, the mean relative dose equivalents in the same
thickness can be evaluated as 0.55 for x and 0.41 for y. The mean values
of relative dose equivalent inside the Al HTV module were calculated to
be 0.62 for x average and 0.49 for y average. The dose reduction rates of
CF/PEEK HTV module were 1.18 times (for x) and 1.16 times (for y)
78
Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79
higher than those of Al HTV one in the same shielding thickness (g/cm2).
Therefore, the mean shielding effect of CF/PEEK was expected to be
~17% higher than that of Al. This result is consistent with the experi­
mental results on shielding performance with slabs irradiated with
heavy ion beams. For mitigating radiation hazards, there are strong
advantages to using composite materials in structures and fixtures in
space vehicles rather of conventional Al.
4. Conclusion
We have investigated the radiation shielding properties of composite
materials compared to conventional materials of polyethylene as a
shielding material and aluminum as a structural material in spacecraft.
The composite materials had shielding efficiency intermediate between
that of polyethylene and aluminum: >30% higher shielding efficiency
than aluminum and <30% lower than polyethylene. By using a
commercially available composite, CF/PEEK, for the HTV module
structure, the effective dose equivalent due to galactic cosmic ray par­
ticles was found to be comparable to that with the aluminum HTV
module despite its small mass by a factor of their density ratio of 1.67. A
35–70% larger CF/PEEK fragmentation cross section per unit mass
provides effective radiation shielding. The use of composite materials in
place of aluminum in spacecraft is a promising option for mitigation of
space radiation exposure.
5. Funding
The work by members of the National Institutes for Quantum and
Radiological Science and Technology has been partially funded by
M. Naito et al.
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
Agostinelli, S., et al., 2003. Geant4—A simulation toolkit’, nuclear instruments and
methods in physics research section a: accelerators, spectrometers. Detectors and
Associated Equipment 506 (3), 250–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9002(03)
01368-8.
Allison, J., et al., 2006. Geant4 developments and applications’. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 53
(1), 270–278. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2006.869826.
Allison, J., et al., 2016. Recent developments in Geant4’, nuclear instruments and
methods in physics research section a: accelerators, spectrometers. Detectors and
Associated Equipment 835, 186–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2016.06.125.
Benton, E., et al., 2002. Passive dosimetry aboard the mir orbital station: internal
measurements’. Radiat. Measurements. Pergamon 35 (5), 439–455. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S1350-4487(02)00075-6.
Binns, W.R., et al., 1989. ‘Charge, mass, and energy changes during fragmentation of
relativistic nuclei’, physical review C. Am. Phys Society 39 (5), 1785–1798. https://
doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.39.1785.
Bradt, H.L., Peters, B., 1950. ‘The heavy nuclei of the primary cosmic radiation’, physical
review. Am. Phys. Society 77 (1), 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.77.54.
Chen, W.-.C., 1997. ‘Some experimental investigations in the drilling of carbon fiber-
reinforced plastic (CFRP) composite laminates’. Int.J. Machine Tools and
Manufacture. Pergamon 37 (8), 1097–1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955
(96)00095-8.
Crusan, J.C., et al., 2018. ‘Deep space gateway concept: extending human presence into
cislunar space’. 2018 IEEE Aerospace Conference. IEEE, pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/
10.1109/AERO.2018.8396541.
Cucinotta, F.A., 2014. ‘Space radiation risks for astronauts on multiple international
space station missions’. PLoS ONE. Edited by P. J. Janssen. Public Libr.Sci. 9 (4),
e96099. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0096099.
Cucinotta, F.A., 2015. ‘Review of NASA approach to space radiation risk assessments for
mars exploration’. Health Phys. 108 (2), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1097/
HP.0000000000000255.
DeWitt, J.M., et al., 2009. ‘Assessment of radiation shielding materials for protection of
space crews using CR-39 plastic nuclear track detector’. Radiat. Measurements.
Pergamon 44 (9–10), 905–908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2009.10.041.
Doke, T., et al., 1995. ‘Estimation of dose equivalent in STS-47 by a combination of TLDS
and CR-39’. Radiat. Measurements. Pergamon 24 (1), 75–82. https://doi.org/
10.1016/1350-4487(94)00084-E.
Durante, M., 2014. ‘Space radiation protection: destination mars’. Life Sci. Space Res.
Elsevier 1, 2–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lssr.2014.01.002.
Durante, M., Cucinotta, F.A., 2011. ‘Physical basis of radiation protection in space
travel’, reviews of modern physics. Am. Phys. Society 83 (4), 1245–1281. https://
doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.83.1245.
George, J.S., et al., 2009. ‘Elemental composition and energy spectra of galactic cosmic
rays during solar cycle 23’. In: The Astrophysical Journal, 698. IOP Publishing,
pp. 1666–1681. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/698/2/1666.
79
Life Sciences in Space Research 31 (2021) 71–79
Guetersloh, S. et al. (2006) ‘Polyethylene as a radiation shielding standard in simulated
cosmic-ray environments’, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research
Section B: Beam Interactions With Materials and Atoms. North-Holland, 252(2), pp.
319–332. doi: 10.1016/j.nimb.2006.08.019.
Hajek, M., et al., 2008. ‘Convolution of TLD and SSNTD measurements during the
BRADOS-1 experiment onboard ISS (2001)’. Radiat. Measurements. Pergamon 43
(7), 1231–1236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radmeas.2008.04.094.
ICRP, 2013. ‘Assessment of radiation exposure of astronauts in space’. ICRP Publication
123. Annuals of the 42 (4), 1–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icrp.2013.05.004.
ICRP.
Kodaira, S., et al., 2014. ‘Verification of shielding effect by the water-filled materials for
space radiation in the international space station using passive dosimeters’.
Advances in Space Res. 53 (1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2013.10.018.
Kodaira, S., et al., 2016. ‘A performance test of a new high-surface-quality and high-
sensitivity CR-39 plastic nuclear track detector – TechnoTrak’. Nuc. Instrum.
Methods in Phys. Res. Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 383,
129–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2016.07.002.
Matthiä, D., et al., 2013. ‘A ready-to-use galactic cosmic ray model’. Advances in Space
Res.. Pergamon 51 (3), 329–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2012.09.022.
Miller, J., et al., 2003. ‘Benchmark studies of the effectiveness of structural and internal
materials as radiation shielding for the International Space Station’. Radiat. Res.
159, 381–390.
Naito, M., et al., 2020. ‘Investigation of shielding material properties for effective space
radiation protection’. In: Life Sciences in Space Research, 26. Elsevier Ltd,
pp. 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lssr.2020.05.001.
Shavers, M.R., et al., 2004. ‘Implementation of ALARA radiation protection on the ISS
through polyethylene shielding augmentation of the service module crew quarters’.
Advances in Space Res.. Pergamon 34 (6), 1333–1337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
asr.2003.10.051.
Simpson, J.A., 1983. ‘Elemental and Isotopic composition of the galactic cosmic rays’.
Ann. Rev. of Nucl. Particle Sci. 33 (1), 323–382. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.
ns.33.120183.001543. Annual Reviews 4139 El Camino Way, P.O. Box 10139, Palo
Alto, CA 94303-0139.
Somogyi, G., et al., 1976. ‘Revision of the concept of registration threshold in plastic
track detectors’. Nucl. Instruments and Methods. North-Holland 134 (1), 129–141.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-554X(76)90133-6.
Tawara, H. et al. (2011) ‘Characteristics of Mg2SiO4:tb (TLD-MSO-S) relevant for space
radiation dosimetry’, Radiation Measurements. Elsevier Ltd, 46(8), pp. 709–716.
doi: 10.1016/j.radmeas.2011.05.058.
La Tessa, C., et al., 2005. ‘Fragmentation of 1 GeV/nucleon iron ions in thick targets
relevant for space exploration’. Advances in Space Res.. Pergamon 35 (2), 223–229.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2005.02.007.
Zeitlin, C., et al., 1997. ‘Heavy fragment production cross sections from 1.05 GeV/
nucleon 56Fe in C, Al, Cu, Pb, and CH2 targets’. Phys Rev C Nucl Phys 56 (1),
388–397. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.56.388.
Zeitlin, C. et al. (2006) ‘Measurements of materials shielding properties with 1 GeV/nuc
56Fe’, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam
Interactions With Materials and Atoms. North-Holland, 252(2), pp. 308–318. doi:
10.1016/j.nimb.2006.08.011.
Zeitlin, C., et al., 2011. ‘Fragmentation of N14, O16, Ne20, and Mg24 nuclei at 290 to
1000 MeV/nucleon’. In: Physical Review C - Nuclear Physics, 83. American Physical
Society. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.83.034909.
Zeitlin, C., et al., 2013. ‘Measurements of energetic particle radiation in transit to Mars
on the Mars Science Laboratory’. Sci.. Am. Association for the Advancement of Sci.
340 (6136), 1080–1084. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1235989.