well, alpha radiation has a very high linear energy transfer (LET), meaning they cause a lot of damage in their "range". they're shielded by the human skin, but when ingested, has a weighting factor of 20, which means it causes 20 times more damage (dose) than a conventional x-ray or gamma ray (weighting factor 1). beta radiation also has a weighting factor of 1, and for neutron radiation, it varies on the speed of the neutron, can be 1-20 (20 for thermal neutrons).
With such a source of intense x-rays it might be interesting to measure the sensitivity of some semiconductor detectors. If you google "beamstop_reprint" the first hit is about using a BAP64 diode as a sensor. I think people also use the much larger BPW34 photodiode to sense xrays (in a lightproof enclosure) I think you would need to reverse bias the diode and have a meter that can read currents down to nanoamps. With the same setup an (air) ionization chamber could also be tested.
lead is more dense than bismuth, so i suppose lead would still be superior even if they used the same material thickness for both gloves. however, bismuth is not much worse and MUCH less (actually non-)toxic , so it's probably a better option; depends on the application, i suppose. surgical gloves that end up in wounds, with probably bits being abraded, are probably better made with bismuth.
good demo about the protection provided by lead gloves. However, being in a 5 Sv/h radiation field for half an hour will make you sick, but you'll eventually recover. Staying in such a high field for 2 hours will definitely kill you, but only if it's a whole body exposure.
oh yeah, and for a "whole body" exposure, head and torso would be sufficient - no need to hit the arms and legs. that would be possible with this tube (you can amp it up more, too).
How is it even possible to get that kind of beam out. Aren't there any kind of safety mechanisms that prevent you accidentally radiating patients with 8mSv dose?
It would be interesting to see if there were a measurable dose from stray rays behind the leaded glass hideout during one of those crazy 8mSv doses.
Also, I TOTALLY need one of those stylin' FAG dosimeters!! I love that it's all capitalized too, tehee. I could point to it and be all like "let's see, how faggy am I feeling today? hm, 379.3 millifags, well that's not too bad!". lol, I'm like 10 years old.
stray rays are not measurable behind the lead glass; there sure are some getting through, but it'd probably require the tube to be run for 30 minutes or something to make the dosimeter even pick up 1 uSv (i cannot determine that, as the tube would auto-shutoff due to being too hot if i'd try that).
...also, the problem with this dosimeter is... it only picks up radiation @ ~75kV+. :/
@bionerd23 Hm, interesting, I'd've thought more! I don't understand, you mean it can only detect photons >75KeV?? Isn't it missing a big part of the dose then, because all the fluorescence and Compton scattered rays can't be seen?
oops. yeah, photons, of course. meant to say "x-radiation" for this case.
anyway, the dosimeter was designed for nuclear industry incidents such as in fukushima now, for gamma radiation; usually, being sensitive to >100 keV photons is sufficient in that case. it's civil defense equipment, not medical equipment.
an x-ray tube. that's basically a highly evacuated glass cylinder that contains a heating filament (much like an old-fashioned light bulb; will release electrons and "glow" / get hot when a current runs through it). however, as vitally opposed to a light bulb, you'll have an anode connected to an extremely high voltage - 40,000 to 150,000 volts (30kV - 150kV), usually made from tungsten. this will accelerate the electrons, and as they strike the anode, x-rays are generated.
yeah, a tv uses shielding - not sure about 40 pounds of lead ;P, but yes. you can still measure the x-rays from it with a very sensitive device, e.g. a contamination monitor. also, keep in mind that a TV uses much, much lower voltages... just up to 35kV acceleration voltage - so the x-rays are much less penetrating. :)
ah, okay. i thought just the front used lead, as it has to be see-through, and the shielding in the other part of the tube is archived with that grey coating material. never really looked into what that is though, to be honest. i'll queue it as the 158274th thing to look up.
never dropped a CRT on my foot so far, nevermind making one explode / implode; that's really hard to do unless you hit the tube backside (cathode) with a hammer, lol. :P
i love CRTs. still using them as my computer monitor and TV. i just like the image quality on them much better (if the refresh rate is sufficient and it's in general a good device; otherwise, they're horrible!).
i like lead, too. i easily have the weight of two adult men in lead here, it makes me feel safer... :D
@Serostern I don't think CRT phosphors have any phosphorus compounds in them, but matches and soft drinks do! if you google "crt_phosphor_research_20090315" that file says that P22 phosphors contain:
Blue: ZnS:Ag+Co-on-Al2O3 or ZnS:Ag+Pigment
Green: ZnS:Cu,Al or ZnS:Cu,Au,Al
Red: Y2O2S:Eu+Fe2O3 or Y2O2S:Eu+Pigment
The lead is pretty well trapped in the glass so I wouldn't worry about that too much, after all you can buy expensive decorative glass ornaments made of leaded "crystal" glass.
@Serostern Well I'm not afraid of implosion except when I have disassembled the case and I am behind it then I wear goggles, and I'm not really afraid of using them either having been unable to measure any x-rays from mine, though when I used one all day every day for a decade I did set the desktop background to a dark colour since that cost me nothing and reduced the average beam current quite a lot.
yep, having a dark background (and setting the monitor to go "dark" after e.g. 10 minutes of not using the computer) can save you quite a LOT of money, power-wise. =)
thus, i really liked the earth day "switch" here on youtube that let you turn youtube's background to black, lol. believe it or not, that indeed DID save quite a bit of energy!
@bionerd23 The grey coating on the back of the tube is "aquadag" which is electrically conductive and I think it's made with oolloidal graphite. I found that I could dissolve it from one tube with a solvent like alcohol. I think they put it there to make conductive layers inside and outside the glass tube to form a capacitor, like a Leyden jar, to smooth the high voltage.
@bionerd23 The worst X-ray emissions were from the early colour TVs which still used valves (vacuum tubes) for rectifying and regulating the high voltage. Most of the xrays came from the shunt regulator which drew a variable current to pull the CRT anode down to a constant voltage regardless of the screen brightness. You can get the rectifiers (GY501, DY802, DY86, EY87) and shunt regulators (GP5) from Pollin dot de, (quite cheap) though it is difficult to buy from them unless you're in Germany
I am disturbed by the writing above the LCD on the appliance :p
But Your experiments are superior as always! In my country You would be fired in like 50 seconds after doing such thing - using X-ray for non medical purpose. Or charged a lot for doing it :)
oh i was just WAITING for that comment! i should've known it'd be mentioned in the first comment already, haha. anyway, FAG stands for Fischers AktienGesellschaft, while "Fischers" is a name, and the latter word means "corporation". happy now? ^_^
oh, and... in my country, i am fine doing such experiments, as long as i do NOT do them on a mammal (and that includes humans, of course) and make 100% sure no human can walk in and accidentally get the slightest exposure. and so i did.
@bionerd23 No, it is not the point. The mentality difference is SO clear between our nations :(
Here the thing to make a song and dance about it would be the only fact You used PUBLIC equipment for an OWN purpose. Therefore the charge would be 'costs of wear'. Irradiating people is a secondary issue to say nothing of the animals...
And You should have known that I was gonna post the FAG comment ;)
lol the brand of the dosimeter says "FAG"
PlasmaCreator351 1 month ago
do you work in a hospital of how do you get access to all this stuff???????????
johnmarella 6 months ago
at 2:24 u can see the radiation from the x-ray taken
btsouthmost 6 months ago
I love the "snow" that flashes across the screen whenever the x-ray is run.
amethyst8teen 8 months ago
Hi, bionerd!
Sorry for calling you on your nickname, but I don't know your real name. :D
Anyway, I have a question for you... what type of x-rays are the most dangerous?
I've heard that alpha rays, if the radioactive material is ingested... or somehow introduced into the body...
cortexedge 9 months ago
@cortexedge
well, alpha radiation has a very high linear energy transfer (LET), meaning they cause a lot of damage in their "range". they're shielded by the human skin, but when ingested, has a weighting factor of 20, which means it causes 20 times more damage (dose) than a conventional x-ray or gamma ray (weighting factor 1). beta radiation also has a weighting factor of 1, and for neutron radiation, it varies on the speed of the neutron, can be 1-20 (20 for thermal neutrons).
bionerd23 6 months ago
grazie bionerd23
MrACMILANFOREVER 9 months ago
nimm mal den schwanz aus deinem Mund Mädel
HipHopKiller94 10 months ago
Are you male or female?
highvoltagedrummer1 10 months ago
With such a source of intense x-rays it might be interesting to measure the sensitivity of some semiconductor detectors. If you google "beamstop_reprint" the first hit is about using a BAP64 diode as a sensor. I think people also use the much larger BPW34 photodiode to sense xrays (in a lightproof enclosure) I think you would need to reverse bias the diode and have a meter that can read currents down to nanoamps. With the same setup an (air) ionization chamber could also be tested.
chrisgj198 10 months ago
"the tube would be on fire" LOL
HP0232988 11 months ago
you can see that the camera is affected buy the radiation
paddletug 11 months ago
bionerd23, you have a very soothing voice. I like to watch your videos before I go to bed. Keep up the good work.
seattlewa1984 11 months ago
Love how the device is called "FAG".
ScienceBroadcast 11 months ago
rofl @ your camera spacing out during the radiation waves o_O
XxkutaapxX 11 months ago
It just me or does that thing say FAG on it ?
1ownjoo2 11 months ago
Is the difference between Bi and Pb gloves due to the absorption properties of the actual elements, or due to the construction of the gloves?
AntiProtonBoy 11 months ago
@AntiProtonBoy
lead is more dense than bismuth, so i suppose lead would still be superior even if they used the same material thickness for both gloves. however, bismuth is not much worse and MUCH less (actually non-)toxic , so it's probably a better option; depends on the application, i suppose. surgical gloves that end up in wounds, with probably bits being abraded, are probably better made with bismuth.
bionerd23 11 months ago
good demo about the protection provided by lead gloves. However, being in a 5 Sv/h radiation field for half an hour will make you sick, but you'll eventually recover. Staying in such a high field for 2 hours will definitely kill you, but only if it's a whole body exposure.
Imabug01 11 months ago
@Imabug01
well, 2.5Sv would eventually kill approx. 40%-50% of the people that are exposed to it - it's nearly an LD50 dose. i'd say, deadly enough. :P
bionerd23 11 months ago
@Imabug01
oh yeah, and for a "whole body" exposure, head and torso would be sufficient - no need to hit the arms and legs. that would be possible with this tube (you can amp it up more, too).
bionerd23 11 months ago
How the heck do you have access to that kind of equipment?
I envy you =P
Serostern 11 months ago
How is it even possible to get that kind of beam out. Aren't there any kind of safety mechanisms that prevent you accidentally radiating patients with 8mSv dose?
AnimaDraconis 11 months ago
@AnimaDraconis
yes, but you can override them. :P
bionerd23 11 months ago
@bionerd23 I like it.... lol..
exceptional1414 11 months ago
Tolle(s) Video(s) :)
Weiter so! (aber bitte auf den Strahlenschutz achten)
LPscarredLP 11 months ago
Cheers for an awesome video! :)
nodariel 11 months ago
Hmmm, I wonder what this little red thing would show when staying close at your collection at home for one day :D
83CyborgX1 11 months ago
the poor dosimeter. :-( what had it done to you, that you toast this poor digital thing?
because it is a fag?
Feliday 11 months ago
It would be interesting to see if there were a measurable dose from stray rays behind the leaded glass hideout during one of those crazy 8mSv doses.
Also, I TOTALLY need one of those stylin' FAG dosimeters!! I love that it's all capitalized too, tehee. I could point to it and be all like "let's see, how faggy am I feeling today? hm, 379.3 millifags, well that's not too bad!". lol, I'm like 10 years old.
10mintwo 11 months ago
@10mintwo
stray rays are not measurable behind the lead glass; there sure are some getting through, but it'd probably require the tube to be run for 30 minutes or something to make the dosimeter even pick up 1 uSv (i cannot determine that, as the tube would auto-shutoff due to being too hot if i'd try that).
...also, the problem with this dosimeter is... it only picks up radiation @ ~75kV+. :/
bionerd23 11 months ago
@bionerd23 Hm, interesting, I'd've thought more! I don't understand, you mean it can only detect photons >75KeV?? Isn't it missing a big part of the dose then, because all the fluorescence and Compton scattered rays can't be seen?
10mintwo 11 months ago
@10mintwo
oops. yeah, photons, of course. meant to say "x-radiation" for this case.
anyway, the dosimeter was designed for nuclear industry incidents such as in fukushima now, for gamma radiation; usually, being sensitive to >100 keV photons is sufficient in that case. it's civil defense equipment, not medical equipment.
bionerd23 11 months ago
In a world full of stupidity, actual learning fun!
You would make one heck of a science teacher!
cyclenut 11 months ago
she lives in germany where their medical advancements are far more superior... impressive data gathering and analyses...
phukemonster 11 months ago
what is the source of X-rays in a typical Radiographic equipment ?
yvesgomez 11 months ago
@yvesgomez
an x-ray tube. that's basically a highly evacuated glass cylinder that contains a heating filament (much like an old-fashioned light bulb; will release electrons and "glow" / get hot when a current runs through it). however, as vitally opposed to a light bulb, you'll have an anode connected to an extremely high voltage - 40,000 to 150,000 volts (30kV - 150kV), usually made from tungsten. this will accelerate the electrons, and as they strike the anode, x-rays are generated.
bionerd23 11 months ago
@bionerd23 i want you to be my mother :D
thegameglider 11 months ago
@yvesgomez A Cathode Ray Tube.
Just like the Cathode Ray Tube in the old fat-type of TV and computer monitors =)
Your TV does create some Xrays, but there is a good 40 pounds of lead in it to keep it away from you ;P
Serostern 11 months ago
@Serostern
yeah, a tv uses shielding - not sure about 40 pounds of lead ;P, but yes. you can still measure the x-rays from it with a very sensitive device, e.g. a contamination monitor. also, keep in mind that a TV uses much, much lower voltages... just up to 35kV acceleration voltage - so the x-rays are much less penetrating. :)
bionerd23 11 months ago
@bionerd23 Well, the glass envelope in a CRTTV is high lead glass, and the front of the screen is often about 3-4 cm thick.
99% of a TVs weight is in the CRT glass, and a lot of that glass is lead =P
Serostern 11 months ago
@Serostern
ah, okay. i thought just the front used lead, as it has to be see-through, and the shielding in the other part of the tube is archived with that grey coating material. never really looked into what that is though, to be honest. i'll queue it as the 158274th thing to look up.
bionerd23 11 months ago
@bionerd23 Well, I have no idea how much actual lead there is in the screen, but that grey stuff peels off pretty easy.
Anyhow, CRTs are narly things. Either you drop them on your foot, or they explode, or you'll cut yourself on them.
And they contain stuff that is anything but good for you, lead and phosporus... Generally, stay away from them if you don't HAVE to mess with them =P
Serostern 11 months ago
@Serostern
never dropped a CRT on my foot so far, nevermind making one explode / implode; that's really hard to do unless you hit the tube backside (cathode) with a hammer, lol. :P
i love CRTs. still using them as my computer monitor and TV. i just like the image quality on them much better (if the refresh rate is sufficient and it's in general a good device; otherwise, they're horrible!).
i like lead, too. i easily have the weight of two adult men in lead here, it makes me feel safer... :D
bionerd23 11 months ago
@Serostern I don't think CRT phosphors have any phosphorus compounds in them, but matches and soft drinks do! if you google "crt_phosphor_research_20090315" that file says that P22 phosphors contain:
Blue: ZnS:Ag+Co-on-Al2O3 or ZnS:Ag+Pigment
Green: ZnS:Cu,Al or ZnS:Cu,Au,Al
Red: Y2O2S:Eu+Fe2O3 or Y2O2S:Eu+Pigment
The lead is pretty well trapped in the glass so I wouldn't worry about that too much, after all you can buy expensive decorative glass ornaments made of leaded "crystal" glass.
chrisgj198 10 months ago
@chrisgj198 Indeed, but as a general rule a CRT is bad for you. No matter if you sit in front of it getting fat or it implodes in your face.
Serostern 10 months ago
@Serostern Well I'm not afraid of implosion except when I have disassembled the case and I am behind it then I wear goggles, and I'm not really afraid of using them either having been unable to measure any x-rays from mine, though when I used one all day every day for a decade I did set the desktop background to a dark colour since that cost me nothing and reduced the average beam current quite a lot.
chrisgj198 10 months ago
@chrisgj198
yep, having a dark background (and setting the monitor to go "dark" after e.g. 10 minutes of not using the computer) can save you quite a LOT of money, power-wise. =)
thus, i really liked the earth day "switch" here on youtube that let you turn youtube's background to black, lol. believe it or not, that indeed DID save quite a bit of energy!
bionerd23 10 months ago
@bionerd23 The grey coating on the back of the tube is "aquadag" which is electrically conductive and I think it's made with oolloidal graphite. I found that I could dissolve it from one tube with a solvent like alcohol. I think they put it there to make conductive layers inside and outside the glass tube to form a capacitor, like a Leyden jar, to smooth the high voltage.
chrisgj198 10 months ago
@chrisgj198
thanks for the info, i always thought that stuff was used for shielding, as it'd be less expensive than the common lead glass. hmm.
bionerd23 10 months ago
@bionerd23 The worst X-ray emissions were from the early colour TVs which still used valves (vacuum tubes) for rectifying and regulating the high voltage. Most of the xrays came from the shunt regulator which drew a variable current to pull the CRT anode down to a constant voltage regardless of the screen brightness. You can get the rectifiers (GY501, DY802, DY86, EY87) and shunt regulators (GP5) from Pollin dot de, (quite cheap) though it is difficult to buy from them unless you're in Germany
chrisgj198 10 months ago
@chrisgj198
thanks for the hint, yeah, got a PD500 myself, i love those old tubes. =)
bionerd23 10 months ago
lol second comment
MrTwister9571 11 months ago
I am disturbed by the writing above the LCD on the appliance :p
But Your experiments are superior as always! In my country You would be fired in like 50 seconds after doing such thing - using X-ray for non medical purpose. Or charged a lot for doing it :)
Phacias 11 months ago
@Phacias
oh i was just WAITING for that comment! i should've known it'd be mentioned in the first comment already, haha. anyway, FAG stands for Fischers AktienGesellschaft, while "Fischers" is a name, and the latter word means "corporation". happy now? ^_^
oh, and... in my country, i am fine doing such experiments, as long as i do NOT do them on a mammal (and that includes humans, of course) and make 100% sure no human can walk in and accidentally get the slightest exposure. and so i did.
bionerd23 11 months ago
@bionerd23 No, it is not the point. The mentality difference is SO clear between our nations :(
Here the thing to make a song and dance about it would be the only fact You used PUBLIC equipment for an OWN purpose. Therefore the charge would be 'costs of wear'. Irradiating people is a secondary issue to say nothing of the animals...
And You should have known that I was gonna post the FAG comment ;)
Phacias 11 months ago
@Phacias Cost of wear for six minutes of use?
Heh, that damn thing will be used for a couple of hundred thousand minutes before it's scrapped, and they die from age, not overuse ;P
Serostern 11 months ago