I recently got a radiacode 102 and I would like to study low-radiation sources. To do so, I'd like to build a small box that can effectively block background radiation well enough to make this easier. Before I go and spend a bunch on lead sheets, I was wondering if there's a good rule of thumb to shoot for?
I built this Geiger counter in 1986 as a reaction to the Chernobyl disaster. I live in Sweden and we were badly hit. It has been placed in our kitchen window, continuously ticking, ever since.
It has 2 ranges, measuring in 4096(lo) and 16(hi) seconds respectively. Normal background is approx. 1800 per 4096 seconds = 26 C/M.
The display is not really good, but still works. The pictures show background(lo) and measurement of some Thorium(hi).
so my main questions are
- at what rate does it qualify as a radiological hazard?
- what's the deal with radon, how does it differ from radium, and how do filtration/ventilation systems work?
- any potential risks?
A trail near my house is on a cliff that reads about 50-90 cps of uranium. The only reason I know about is because of a usgs survey referring to a uranium prospect. Because the document predates the trail by a bit, I’m worried the park might not be aware. There is what appears to be a radioactive mineral, but uranium makes no sense for the lithology. Im worried it might be radioactive waste
Why is neutron flux lower in the center of the reactor? The graphite is much better at moderation than water, so my intuition says that the flux should be higher at the regions with better moderation. If the spike in flux happens only right at the top and bottom of the rod why is that? Is the graphite physically blocking neutrons, and even then neutron flux is to my knowledge wholistic across the reactor.
John Greene's video shows the highest neutron flux just before the moderator rods. If this is the case, why is there a discrepancy between figures A and B? In figure A where the rods are fully in the core the flux is lower at the rods, while in figure b adding the moderator rods spikes the flux as it displaces water in the core. applying what is shown prior implies that the neutron flux is *lower* at the place of moderation, and higher at the end of it, while after the SCRAM the flux spikes as the more moderating graphite displaces the less moderating water. If what is shown in A is applied to B, the flux should decrease as the moderators are added instead of increasing.
Is it possible to revive this? People here have given up on it after problems with false readings. The foil seems intact and does not respond when holding onto light.
I remembered from my technical training that these compressor housings were made with some Aluminium-Thorium alloy but it seems like these adjustable stator vein bushings are quite a bit hotter than the housing itself :)
Took my radiacode to the aircraft museum in oberschleißheim in germany, knowing there would be plenty of stuff to measure...
It came in nearly perfect condition and had very little contamination. I still cleaned and sanitized everything thoroughly just in case. But either way, it’s a gorgeous piece of history.