Ionising Radiation 'stuff'

[llewop]

After some tangents and off topic discussions on the thread about Fukushima I did suggest 'there' that perhaps a thread 'here' may be a better place for technical or not so technical discussions on radiation.

There do appear to be a fair sprinkling of PHers 'in the industry' and others that perhaps are interested either professionally, through curiosity or to understand things better.

Part of my reason for this thread is that my background is in radiation protection so actually trying to help others understand ionising radiation and how to work/live with it safely and legally. Having said that I am certainly not the 'expert' on everything radiation related - I know how nuclear reactors work, but couldn't build one! But I would like to think I know what I'm talking about in some aspects of the radiation world - I've been doing it for the thick end of 30 years including 4 years at Chernobyl.

Any takers for 'radiological twaddle' chatter?

[llewop]

rhinochopig said:

I'll start, how have Lockheed solved the cusp confinement leakage problem in their fusion reactor design?

Edited by rhinochopig on Wednesday 26th November 21:11

I'll leave that one to someone who's got a background in fusion, not something I've spent a lot of time on. My only comment is that fusion is always touted as 'clean' vs fission - mostly true, but there are still some issues in terms of waste and doses.

[llewop]

Max_Torque said:

This DIY radiation monitoring network could become quite interesting in time:

http://www.uradmonitor.com/

McAfee didn't want me to go there! But I did anyway...

Could be interesting if there were enough locations, but only really if something happened. Most of the time I'd expect any given station to straight line, other than natural variations. Having said that the RIMNET system is similar so if there was an event it could be tracked across the country.

If there were an actual event then there would be extra input of local monitoring by a variety of agencies and responders around the event that would far exceed the input of any fixed stations.

[llewop]

Chimune said:

I used to be an industrial radiographer on mains gas lines....
Try working in Belfast with everyone calling you a 'bomber' !

[llewop]

Gary C said:

But the monitoring sites have a value for dose in millisieverts. I would question the accuracy of these sort of measurements.

It's hard enought when you know the nuclide mix likely to be present, but to stick a gm tube in a box and convert cps to sieverts is riddled with difficulties.

If the GM tube is energy compensated the energy response could be fairly flat over a wide energy range (perhaps losing low energy) so getting it to read Sieverts shouldn't be that hard with the right set up. Doing it accurately and consistently would of course require regular checks by an appropriate calibration centre.