Experimental study reveals enhanced X-ray attenuation in tungsten-doped boro-tellurite glasses, suggesting a viable non-toxic alternative to lead shielding in diagnostic medical facilities.
The development of environmentally friendly radiation shielding materials has gained considerable attention as an alternative to toxic lead-based shields used in medical and industrial applications. In the present study, a series of WO 3 -doped boro-tellurite glasses with the composition (55−x) TeO 2 -20B 2 O 3 -15ZnO-10Na 2 CO 3 -xWO 3 (where x = 5, 10, 15, and 20 mol%) were successfully synthesized using the conventional melt-quenching technique. The X-ray shielding performance of the prepared glass samples (TBZNW1-TBZNW4) was experimentally evaluated using an Ultisys 52 diagnostic X-ray system operated over the tube voltage range of 50-140 kVp. The shielding characteristics were assessed in terms of the linear attenuation coefficient (LAC), mass attenuation coefficient (MAC), half-value layer (HVL), tenth-value layer (TVL), mean free path (MFP), radiation attenuation efficiency (Att%), and lead equivalent thickness (LET). The results revealed that increasing the WO 3 concentration significantly enhanced the attenuation capability of the glass system owing to the increase in density and effective atomic number. The TBZNW4 glass, containing 20 mol% WO 3 , exhibited the highest LAC and MAC values together with the lowest HVL, TVL, and MFP, indicating superior X-ray shielding performance. Moreover, the attenuation efficiency increased with WO 3 content, while the lead equivalent thickness demonstrated the potential of the developed glasses to replace conventional lead-based shielding in diagnostic energy ranges. Comparison with previously reported shielding materials further confirmed the improved attenuation performance of the present glass system. These findings demonstrate that WO 3 -doped boro-tellurite glasses are promising, environmentally benign candidates for transparent radiation shielding applications in medical diagnostic facilities, laboratories, and other radiation environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
VT et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: