It's amazing how little information in TH-cam about a gamma-spec) Thank you for you video!! But I want more: how you work with the datebase, how you choose time for measermunte, how you work with the efficiency, how you prepare the samples and how you manage to measure activity of your samples. I realy hope that you are still there)) Thank you for your job here!
I got my spectrometer in the mail yesterday and my house is the hottest place I've found in the city so far. I needed a refresher on how to read the graph and of course one of your videos is the second search result! 💜
Bro, this video was perfect for me!!! THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'm an EE interning in nuclear physics and this really helped clear up the processes that I am studying but at a level I can actually absorb it. Many Thanks
Thank you for the explaination. I'm an environmental engineer graduate but somehow i got a job in national nuclear agency. They do have research regarding environmental studies but all these nuclear instruments and spectrometry thing is very new for me.
I use UCX 64-bit, by Spectrum Techniques. The software is custom and was designed to work with my UCS30 spectrometer. The nice spectrum you see with everything labeled, etc, was done by me by hand using MSPaint and GIMP (both are graphics programs). I insist on manual isotope identification to prevent the goofy mis-detection most auto ID software is known for.
BIER VII phase II suggests a dose of 100 mSv may equate to a 1/100 risk of cancer. Of course the relation to exposure is harder to confirm if you start from a dose, but 100 mSv / 0.01 * 10 = 1Sv/0.1 or 1 in 10 per Sv. For gamma without additional weighting factors, 1 Sv = 1 Gy, so I think I agree with your statement. Radiation carries risk. The source isn't important, only the dose.
Radon 222 is a common enough gas to find all over the world. Rn222 comes from the uranium 238 decay chain, and specifically from the alpha decay of radium 226. Radon's daughter products (progeny) are responsible for the high readings many people find when they test freshly fallen rain. If they saved their samples for a week and retested, the radioactivity wouldn't be detectable anymore.
I did watch it. I 100% think he should be using Cs134 and Cs137 for analysis of Japanese samples. That's the way to go, but lead 210 is a common and found all over the world. This isotope comes from rain water condensing on radon progeny. Check my website for examples of this found throughout the USA: NaturalUranium com =) I'm not against Dr. B., but I dislike when something so commonly known (to the science community) is misused. :( Thanks for the video!
According to the ICRP in 1991, just 5 mSv to the testes could cause damage to offspring - yet this dose was permitted yearly to members of the public, and ten times more was permitted to nuclear workers, in all countries prior to 1990. It continues today to be permitted yearly for nuclear workers in most countries.
I never said anything about a threshold. My most recent video explicitly states, as one of it's major points, that ALL radiation carries a risk. In my last comment I said, "Radiation carries risk", not 'Radiation carries risk, until some point'. The LNT model, I believe, is a good (rough) model for theoretical approximation of the statistical likelihood of mortality with respect to dose. For example, I believe that a fully body dose of 10 uSv probably results in a risk of 1/1 million of death.
Thats not an anihilation peak at 511keV, anihilation of e-p pairs uccurs when gamma energy E>1,022MeV. Then, production of pairs may happen and if one quantum escapes the detector, it forms first anihilation peak at E-511keV and if both quantums escapeit forms second peak at E-1022keV
NOTES: Please read details! Please watch in full HD! Watch later on the see the actual unit running and at the end I have a time-sped-up analysis. :) Thanks to Ian Goddard for the idea. :)
It seems , we can only detect radioactive elements by this method , so which method is use to detect non radioactive elements ? Of example finding doped element in Silicon and Germanium?
Those clouds are caused by pollution, condensation nucleii, etc. I've seen those on NOAA for years. Normally, when the weather is strong enough, they seem to be blown away. Also, you are seeing a segment of radar showing some of the material but having a finite range. This is like shining a light on falling snow in the dark... you only see the part your illuminating.
Not sure I agree with this. Beta energies are a continuum and subject to transmission intensity calculations. I assume you mean Sr90 (there are many isotopes of Sr with different characteristics). The maximum statistically viable distance would be very small and I don't know it (I would have to calculate). I have a sample of Sr90 and I believe I recall detecting it through my hand, but I would have to test it again. Again, my latest video says what you are saying.
I say radiation carries risk at all doses and this risk, which is statistically realized, changes with respect to dose in an approximately linear fashion with no safe level. Further, I agree that children are more at risk and internal exposure is massively worse than external. All of this is covered in my latest radiation video... What different point do you have? I must be missing it.
What do you mean that this isn't about risk but about fact? Is this to suggest that risk is not a fact? 1 Bq = one decay per second and this does not equal 100% damage to anyone. If the decay results in a particle which hits a DNA strand and breaks it (one example of damage) than there is a risk associated with that decay. Statistically, these risks are apportioned in such a manner.
Hey bro, I'm having a problem, I'm looking for someone that can help. I'm using the UCS30, with a source of Ba133 and trying to get the mass attenuation coefficient for water and milk, but somehow, the numbers I'm getting are much smaller than they should be in theory. Do you have any idea of what i could be doing wrong ?
No, I'm not taking into account any of those things. Could you recommend something for me to read about those things ? I don't even know what they are, and how to take them into account.
archie aion Ah. So let me explain a little and recommend a book: Dr. Gilbert Gilmore's Practical Gamma Spectrometry. It's pricey but explains it all! When a source emits photons in all directions, they radiate away from the source quickly loosing intensity (photons per square area. So, if you placed a 1 cm^2 square in front of a source emitting 1000 photons per second at a distance of 2 cm... the 1 cm^2 square would expect to be hit by around 19.8 photons per second. Move back to 3 cm distance and the square gets hit by 8.8 photons per second. At 5 cm distance only 3 hit the square. Imagine a large sphere expanding from the source and the same number of photons per second striking it... bigger sphere, less photons per unit area. The math: Let I (capitol i) = Intensity at a distance of r (the distance is r because it is also the radius of the imaginary circle). These need to be the same unit, so an area in mm^2 should be at a distance in mm. I(0) is the intensity at point zero, the source. I(x) is the intensity at distance r. I(x) = I(0) /(4πr^2) So, let I(0) = 5000 photons/second, I(x) is 1 cm^2, and calculate for distances (r) 1 cm, 4 cm, and 10 cm I(x) = I(0) /(4πr^2) = 5000 / (4π(1)^2) = 5000/(12.5664 * 1) = 397.887 photons/cm^2 I(x) = I(0) /(4πr^2) = 5000 / (4π(4)^2) = 5000/(12.5664 * 16) = 24.868 photons/cm^2 I(x) = I(0) /(4πr^2) = 5000 / (4π(10)^2) = 5000/(12.5664 * 100) = 3.979 photons/cm^2 This is where your missing photons are... this is called 4 pi r geometry and gets really complicated when the source and target become larger and complex in shape. Efficiency of the unit is measured in found / expected. So you do math and determine that 1000 photons/s should hit hitting your detector. You measure only 100. 100/1000 = 0.10 = 10% efficiency. Your unit will not be 100% efficient. A good gamma detector should be between 5% and 10% efficient.
I understood, but i don't see exactly how should i take those things in consideration. Let me explain exactly what im doing, I have samples of water and milk, and im trying to get the mass attenuation coefficient of them both through the beer lambert law. I have a source of Ba133, and Im using the ~32KeV energy. I'm getting around, for example 0,3 for water when literature says it should around 0,39. When i look on other works on this, the standard deviation is never this big, i should be getting 0,37 in the worst case, so i must be doing something wrong. But thanks for the help, ill try to find the book you recommend me, thank you very much.
Great video's. I can see you are very interested in the radiation on the ground. Check this out in the air. Radar from NOAA shows strange clouds across the USA. I posted a few clouds video's on you tube. They grow, diminish and are irradesent. They stay in the same place. Radon 222 is 9 times heavier than air. These strange clouds also accumulate over radar stations and the large Ion Collider on Long Island. You like particles. How about radon 222? Another curious soul from Ct.
Among your samples have you collected Trinitite? I have a sample on order and can not wait to try it out because their is supposed to be some plutonium in it among a host of gamma emitting nuclides.
And worth every penny! The UCS30 is my main spectrometer, but I also use a Polimaster PM1703MO-1B and a Gamma Spectacular GS1100. For probes, I have a 1" and a 1.5" NaI(Tl), and 1mmx25mm CsI(Tl). The Polimaster has a built-in 4cm^3 CsI(Tl)
antiprotons I would love to buy one. I saw Polimaster PM1703MO-1B is about $1 which is not that bad, but I also noticed that Polimaster is selling an attachment for the iphone for radiation detection. I'm sure this is not going to be as good as the PM1703MO, but it could be a nice toy.
I wouldn't worry about lead 210 from Japan. lol Lead 210 is in most of the soil on earth and is a direct result of decay of Uranium 238. The uranium in the cores of Fukushima would have less lead 210 than most natural uranium, given that it hasn't reached isotopic equilibrium. It worries me when Ph. D. scientists forget the basics. I hope he isn't on about that. lol The funniest (silliest) thing so far is the radon from Fuku... which cannot be =) Science gets in the way of conspiracy lol
I have a large set of lists of energies I have acquired over the years. I do use NUTDAT2 www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/ and nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/toi/radSearch.asp
+antiprotons Thanks. I already love the 2nd one! I would like to apply Machine Learning algorithms like K-NN or ANN to detect abnormal situations in a coal ash analyser. I haven't thought through the whole process though. Do you have any experience with Machine Learning?
Linde_Learn A little (computer science is what I do), but not likely in the way you mean. My interest is in machine consciousness, which is a juice blender of comp sci and total guesswork lol It would be interesting to see. A problem many radio nuclide detectors have are false positives. They pick the wrong nuclide because they can't account for the environment. For example, Co60 (industrial) and Cs137+Cs134(after a meltdown) look very close, especially if the detector calibration is a little off. A human can say, " That's not C060... this is fukushima, so my calibration has likely drifted). Anyhow, sounds like a really interesting project.You might also look into XRF for ID of the coal ash. I have a video on gamma spectroscopy of coal, too.
+antiprotons You really do interesting work. I looked for the spectroscopy video on coal you are referring to. Mind sending me a link? I can keep you updated on the work if you are interested. With your CS background you could really benefit from ML.
The beta radiation of strontium has a range of 1 millimeter. No matter where it is installed, it reaches the stem cells with its beta radiation. From the stem cells, everything is made. So the stem cells are bombarded constantly. Radioactivity means selective delivery of energy. On the molecules in our body. They are tiny pinholes in the shortest possible time. But with full force. the repair mechanisms are very complex and it takes time.
Ok... after this next comment I am wondering how your wording can be so close to my latest video... A quote from that video, "Our bodies and those of all other creatures on Earth evolved in a sea of ionizing radiation." You have now stated about half of the points from my latest video in your comments. lol
The shorter the life cycle of a cell, the less time remains for the repair.This explains why children with rapidly growing tissue, with rapidly dividing cells - are particularly sensitive to radiation. Mitosis.
lol It can't be Pb210; but perhaps it was Po210? I cannot figure Dr. Busby out. He starts out 100% scientific and goes along fine, than suddenly he will take a some radical and not quite scientific direction... than back again. Oh well, at least he actually tests things before making claims. That's more than can be said for some of the nutters.
![“อ.เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม” มาตามคำเรียกร้อง แหกศาสตร์ฮวงจุ้ย เตือนสติอย่างมงาย | แฉ 7 พ.ย. 67 [1/3]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5fc4S3xBNfc/mqdefault.jpg)
Over a decade later and this is still helping people out. Thank you!
Excellent tutorial ! You said more on this video than everything combined on TH-cam about gamma spectrocopy. Hope you continue thanks
It's amazing how little information in TH-cam about a gamma-spec)
Thank you for you video!! But I want more: how you work with the datebase, how you choose time for measermunte, how you work with the efficiency, how you prepare the samples and how you manage to measure activity of your samples.
I realy hope that you are still there))
Thank you for your job here!
I got my spectrometer in the mail yesterday and my house is the hottest place I've found in the city so far. I needed a refresher on how to read the graph and of course one of your videos is the second search result! 💜
This video is great. I am trying to understand gamma spectroscopy to help a friend. This video made all really easy to understand. Thank you so much!
Bro, this video was perfect for me!!! THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'm an EE interning in nuclear physics and this really helped clear up the processes that I am studying but at a level I can actually absorb it. Many Thanks
Thank you for the explaination. I'm an environmental engineer graduate but somehow i got a job in national nuclear agency. They do have research regarding environmental studies but all these nuclear instruments and spectrometry thing is very new for me.
I use UCX 64-bit, by Spectrum Techniques. The software is custom and was designed to work with my UCS30 spectrometer. The nice spectrum you see with everything labeled, etc, was done by me by hand using MSPaint and GIMP (both are graphics programs).
I insist on manual isotope identification to prevent the goofy mis-detection most auto ID software is known for.
Oh, man... You did a great job explaining it. I also enjoyed how you worked with PAINT which I thought was useless before this video.
BIER VII phase II suggests a dose of 100 mSv may equate to a 1/100 risk of cancer. Of course the relation to exposure is harder to confirm if you start from a dose, but 100 mSv / 0.01 * 10 = 1Sv/0.1 or 1 in 10 per Sv. For gamma without additional weighting factors, 1 Sv = 1 Gy, so I think I agree with your statement.
Radiation carries risk. The source isn't important, only the dose.
you are a very good teacher.
Radon 222 is a common enough gas to find all over the world. Rn222 comes from the uranium 238 decay chain, and specifically from the alpha decay of radium 226. Radon's daughter products (progeny) are responsible for the high readings many people find when they test freshly fallen rain. If they saved their samples for a week and retested, the radioactivity wouldn't be detectable anymore.
I here I am having issues trying to get my radiacode properly calibrated with all of my radioactive sources.
That is such an amazing video!
I did watch it. I 100% think he should be using Cs134 and Cs137 for analysis of Japanese samples. That's the way to go, but lead 210 is a common and found all over the world. This isotope comes from rain water condensing on radon progeny. Check my website for examples of this found throughout the USA: NaturalUranium com =)
I'm not against Dr. B., but I dislike when something so commonly known (to the science community) is misused. :(
Thanks for the video!
Please ensure that you don't flag valid comments as spam, please.
According to the ICRP in 1991, just 5 mSv to the testes could cause damage to offspring - yet this dose was permitted yearly to members of the public, and ten times more was permitted to nuclear workers, in all countries prior to 1990. It continues today to be permitted yearly for nuclear workers in most countries.
I never said anything about a threshold. My most recent video explicitly states, as one of it's major points, that ALL radiation carries a risk. In my last comment I said, "Radiation carries risk", not 'Radiation carries risk, until some point'.
The LNT model, I believe, is a good (rough) model for theoretical approximation of the statistical likelihood of mortality with respect to dose. For example, I believe that a fully body dose of 10 uSv probably results in a risk of 1/1 million of death.
Thats not an anihilation peak at 511keV, anihilation of e-p pairs uccurs when gamma energy E>1,022MeV. Then, production of pairs may happen and if one quantum escapes the detector, it forms first anihilation peak at E-511keV and if both quantums escapeit forms second peak at E-1022keV
NOTES: Please read details!
Please watch in full HD!
Watch later on the see the actual unit running and at the end I have a time-sped-up analysis. :)
Thanks to Ian Goddard for the idea. :)
It seems , we can only detect radioactive elements by this method , so which method is use to detect non radioactive elements ? Of example finding doped element in Silicon and Germanium?
Those clouds are caused by pollution, condensation nucleii, etc. I've seen those on NOAA for years. Normally, when the weather is strong enough, they seem to be blown away. Also, you are seeing a segment of radar showing some of the material but having a finite range. This is like shining a light on falling snow in the dark... you only see the part your illuminating.
Not sure I agree with this. Beta energies are a continuum and subject to transmission intensity calculations. I assume you mean Sr90 (there are many isotopes of Sr with different characteristics). The maximum statistically viable distance would be very small and I don't know it (I would have to calculate). I have a sample of Sr90 and I believe I recall detecting it through my hand, but I would have to test it again. Again, my latest video says what you are saying.
Great Video!!!!
I say radiation carries risk at all doses and this risk, which is statistically realized, changes with respect to dose in an approximately linear fashion with no safe level. Further, I agree that children are more at risk and internal exposure is massively worse than external. All of this is covered in my latest radiation video...
What different point do you have? I must be missing it.
Great Video
Hi. Where can I find the typical energies database for gamma spectroscopy? Have you shared your txt file somewhere?
1:15 Yeah , today google suggested the abcd list of it in wikki 😂
European Committee on Radiation Risk,ECRR goes into the right direction.
Just watched that vid now, amazing Paint work ;-) Can also try IrfanView - was the best thing since Paint (in my win days).
Kalin Kozhuharov MS Paint is a fun little program. GIMP works too.
thank u very much for this Lecture
nice
very much of help
Thank you
You comment got marked as spam for some reason. lol I unspammed it. Odd...
Great demo!
Glad to see I'm not the only one who can't spell worth pooh
What do you mean that this isn't about risk but about fact? Is this to suggest that risk is not a fact?
1 Bq = one decay per second and this does not equal 100% damage to anyone. If the decay results in a particle which hits a DNA strand and breaks it (one example of damage) than there is a risk associated with that decay. Statistically, these risks are apportioned in such a manner.
Hey bro, I'm having a problem, I'm looking for someone that can help. I'm using the UCS30, with a source of Ba133 and trying to get the mass attenuation coefficient for water and milk, but somehow, the numbers I'm getting are much smaller than they should be in theory. Do you have any idea of what i could be doing wrong ?
archie aion Are you taking into account 4(pi)^2 geometry? Detector effiency? Does your sample read as expected without the absorbers?
No, I'm not taking into account any of those things.
Could you recommend something for me to read about those things ? I don't even know what they are, and how to take them into account.
archie aion Ah. So let me explain a little and recommend a book: Dr. Gilbert Gilmore's Practical Gamma Spectrometry. It's pricey but explains it all!
When a source emits photons in all directions, they radiate away from the source quickly loosing intensity (photons per square area. So, if you placed a 1 cm^2 square in front of a source emitting 1000 photons per second at a distance of 2 cm... the 1 cm^2 square would expect to be hit by around 19.8 photons per second. Move back to 3 cm distance and the square gets hit by 8.8 photons per second. At 5 cm distance only 3 hit the square. Imagine a large sphere expanding from the source and the same number of photons per second striking it... bigger sphere, less photons per unit area.
The math:
Let I (capitol i) = Intensity at a distance of r (the distance is r because it is also the radius of the imaginary circle). These need to be the same unit, so an area in mm^2 should be at a distance in mm. I(0) is the intensity at point zero, the source. I(x) is the intensity at distance r.
I(x) = I(0) /(4πr^2)
So, let I(0) = 5000 photons/second, I(x) is 1 cm^2, and calculate for distances (r) 1 cm, 4 cm, and 10 cm
I(x) = I(0) /(4πr^2)
= 5000 / (4π(1)^2)
= 5000/(12.5664 * 1)
= 397.887 photons/cm^2
I(x) = I(0) /(4πr^2)
= 5000 / (4π(4)^2)
= 5000/(12.5664 * 16)
= 24.868 photons/cm^2
I(x) = I(0) /(4πr^2)
= 5000 / (4π(10)^2)
= 5000/(12.5664 * 100)
= 3.979 photons/cm^2
This is where your missing photons are... this is called 4 pi r geometry and gets really complicated when the source and target become larger and complex in shape.
Efficiency of the unit is measured in found / expected. So you do math and determine that 1000 photons/s should hit hitting your detector. You measure only 100. 100/1000 = 0.10 = 10% efficiency. Your unit will not be 100% efficient.
A good gamma detector should be between 5% and 10% efficient.
I understood, but i don't see exactly how should i take those things in consideration. Let me explain exactly what im doing, I have samples of water and milk, and im trying to get the mass attenuation coefficient of them both through the beer lambert law. I have a source of Ba133, and Im using the ~32KeV energy. I'm getting around, for example 0,3 for water when literature says it should around 0,39. When i look on other works on this, the standard deviation is never this big, i should be getting 0,37 in the worst case, so i must be doing something wrong. But thanks for the help, ill try to find the book you recommend me, thank you very much.
Great video's. I can see you are very interested in the radiation on the ground. Check this out in the air. Radar from NOAA shows strange clouds across the USA. I posted a few clouds video's on you tube. They grow, diminish and are irradesent. They stay in the same place. Radon 222 is 9 times heavier than air. These strange clouds also accumulate over radar stations and the large Ion Collider on Long Island. You like particles. How about radon 222? Another curious soul from Ct.
Among your samples have you collected Trinitite? I have a sample on order and can not wait to try it out because their is supposed to be some plutonium in it among a host of gamma emitting nuclides.
Beautiful piece of equipment, is almost $5k....
And worth every penny! The UCS30 is my main spectrometer, but I also use a Polimaster PM1703MO-1B and a Gamma Spectacular GS1100. For probes, I have a 1" and a 1.5" NaI(Tl), and 1mmx25mm CsI(Tl). The Polimaster has a built-in 4cm^3 CsI(Tl)
antiprotons I would love to buy one. I saw Polimaster PM1703MO-1B is about $1 which is not that bad, but I also noticed that Polimaster is selling an attachment for the iphone for radiation detection. I'm sure this is not going to be as good as the PM1703MO, but it could be a nice toy.
I wouldn't worry about lead 210 from Japan. lol Lead 210 is in most of the soil on earth and is a direct result of decay of Uranium 238. The uranium in the cores of Fukushima would have less lead 210 than most natural uranium, given that it hasn't reached isotopic equilibrium. It worries me when Ph. D. scientists forget the basics. I hope he isn't on about that. lol
The funniest (silliest) thing so far is the radon from Fuku... which cannot be =)
Science gets in the way of conspiracy lol
If you don't mind me asking,what database do use to identify the peaks?
I have a large set of lists of energies I have acquired over the years.
I do use NUTDAT2 www.nndc.bnl.gov/nudat2/
and nucleardata.nuclear.lu.se/toi/radSearch.asp
+antiprotons Thanks. I already love the 2nd one!
I would like to apply Machine Learning algorithms like K-NN or ANN to detect abnormal situations in a coal ash analyser. I haven't thought through the whole process though. Do you have any experience with Machine Learning?
Linde_Learn A little (computer science is what I do), but not likely in the way you mean. My interest is in machine consciousness, which is a juice blender of comp sci and total guesswork lol
It would be interesting to see. A problem many radio nuclide detectors have are false positives. They pick the wrong nuclide because they can't account for the environment. For example, Co60 (industrial) and Cs137+Cs134(after a meltdown) look very close, especially if the detector calibration is a little off. A human can say, " That's not C060... this is fukushima, so my calibration has likely drifted).
Anyhow, sounds like a really interesting project.You might also look into XRF for ID of the coal ash. I have a video on gamma spectroscopy of coal, too.
+antiprotons You really do interesting work. I looked for the spectroscopy video on coal you are referring to. Mind sending me a link?
I can keep you updated on the work if you are interested. With your CS background you could really benefit from ML.
The beta radiation of strontium has a range of 1 millimeter. No matter where it is installed, it reaches the stem cells with its beta radiation. From the stem cells, everything is made. So the stem cells are bombarded constantly. Radioactivity means selective delivery of energy. On the molecules in our body. They are tiny pinholes in the shortest possible time. But with full force. the repair mechanisms are very complex and it takes time.
Ok... after this next comment I am wondering how your wording can be so close to my latest video... A quote from that video, "Our bodies and those of all other creatures on Earth evolved in a sea of ionizing radiation."
You have now stated about half of the points from my latest video in your comments. lol
The shorter the life cycle of a cell, the less time remains for the repair.This explains why children with rapidly growing tissue, with rapidly dividing cells - are particularly sensitive to radiation. Mitosis.
lol It can't be Pb210; but perhaps it was Po210?
I cannot figure Dr. Busby out. He starts out 100% scientific and goes along fine, than suddenly he will take a some radical and not quite scientific direction... than back again.
Oh well, at least he actually tests things before making claims. That's more than can be said for some of the nutters.
All my words are quotes and knowledge, decades old. Basically it's know since Herman J Mueller 1927 and Abraham Petkau 1972
LOL
It's not about risk, it's about FACT. 1 becquerel = 100 % damage in body of a child.