So I've developed a fascination with radiation readings recently. I see both uSv/hr(micro), mSv/hr(milli), and mrem/hr used in multiple different posts. I want to make sure my understanding is correct where the micro and milli sievers are mostly used to be equivocal to gray? Rem can convert as well and also accounts for radiation exposure?

What's starting to confuse me as I read about things is when I see charts that list dangers in radiation exposure levels that are written in these units of say a sievert.

Example it will say 400mSv was the max radiation of Fukushima. Is that implied at some point the counter recorded 400mSv/hr (or 400,000 microSv/hr)? Or is it stating it was 0.04mSv/hr and it was the total dose in the year? (400mSv divided by 365 days, divided by 24hrs)? Because that seems high but not terribly high.

I just see some posts that list only mSv as units and others with mSv/hr. They all are referencing the mSv/hr correct?

I know a large dose over a short period is more dangerous than the same total dose over a longer time but does the size of the person or object matter? A 10ft tall 1000# man would be more at risk than a 5ft tall 100# man?

Lots of questions I know just trying to wrap my head around what I am reading.

I am looking for recommendations on which detector to purchase for STEM demonstrations of radiation. American Nuclear Society has some interesting experiments for exploring background radiation but does not recommend any specific detectors, they just say "Radiation detector – pancake probe or scalar preferred". Thanks for any help!

Let's say I may or may have not opened a radium painted watch, and subsequently sanded the surface of the dial. How fucked would I be (or, more specifically, I am more interested in those around me)?

As a disclaimer, I am 99.99% certain I did not. Radium painted watches were discontinued pretty early on and the chances that my watch was that old are slim to none. However, it's pretty hard to gather concrete information on Russian watches sometimes, and nonetheless the question keeps bugging me.

Hi everyone. I am getting into radiation detection and uranium glass collection and I bought myself a GQ GMC 600+. I am also keeping it around in case of a SHTF situation. How good is this geiger counter in terms of accuracy and quality?

I wanted to make something myself like this to take measurements on some of my spicier samples (specifically a DP-2 Sr-90 check source). Would some normal acrylic panels mounted be fine? If so how thick?

Thanks!

Looks neat!

Hi all,

Been reading through several of these posts about radioactive compasses. The ones I've seen here have been from the 1st and 2nd world war. It did get me thinking though, I have an old US compass I acquired while in the service that is marked radioactive on the bottom, it was produced in 2003. Do I need to be concerned about that? It is completely intact.

Thanks

As the title states, I’m wondering what it means when the letter “n” is included after a radioactive isotope. Is this another way to indicate a metastable isomer? If so, why would “n” be used instead of “m”?

Does anyone know the post I'm talking about? Can't remeber if it was posted here or in medical advice. Just curious how the guy is making out lol

Could it be some industrial process we use? Or could it be that someone is undergoing some kinda radiation therapy? Was in a health canada box that said "do not xray" on a desk

Scale is empty, goes up to 500 millirotgen, does the pen count down from 500 or does it count up from 0 towards 500?

I'm just the janitor, no idea why there's this here, maybe I'll snoop around with my giger counter and see if there's anyone that makes it go off?

How many bananas in one room does it take to kill someone?

Had this discussion with a friend a ways back and we couldn't really settle on an answer. In terms of accessibility the kearny fallout meter would seem to be the most realistic, though it's wrought with flaws. Its fairly easy to make out of common materials, and has a lot of development and support behind it, but it can't be used while moving and at least one retrospective study has found some serious flaws with the original design.

I think the closest we got to an answer was a Ludlum Model 3 with a variety of probes on hand to adjust to different situations. The absurdly long battery life, fixable analog electronics with intermediate experience, rugged design, and common usage resulting in lots of spare parts on the market seemed to make it one of the better candidates. However, we couldn't make up our minds, especially considering that just one meter will likely never answer all the needs a user may have, no matter how many attachments or modifications they may have.

What do you guys feel would be best?

Today I passed up a CD V715 (I think) with 2 c137 check sources at a garage sale and I had a few questions after researching. It is my understanding that this type of device was built for the express purpose of post attack/ disaster measurements. Is there any non-life-threatening items this type of detector would be able to pick up? I understand that in order to get higher measurement range means you lose sensitivity, so I figure Uranium Glass and the like are out of the question, but I was curious if ore or natural deposits of radioactive material are also out of the question.

I'll try to put this as shortly and clearly as I can I've always been fascinated by radiation, like, a lot, and since my city was founded there's rumours among elders that it was used as a "secret location" for some nuclear/army stuff, among some other reasons, because it was left out of maps for many years while the smaller and less populated neighbouring cities weren't, which people find a little suspicious.

So, because of my interest and curiosity for radiation and also my curiosity on whether those old rumours could be true, I've been thinking of buying a Geiger counter. Issue is, I'm a bit of a dummy, even though I love the subject of radiation, I do not know much and because of that struggle to understand which one would be best for me, which one would detect the kind of radiation that is most likely to be around if those rumors are true, etc.

I've been considering the Radiacode, because it's very portable and the mapping and spectrometer features seem very convenient and if what I understand is correct, it's better than others because I can just walk around the city collecting data instead of having to take slow steps and map/graph things on my own (but I can def be mistaken on that).

Short question: Am I right to assume it'll probably fit my needs very well? Or will it be too complicated or not sensitive enough or not sensitive to the kind I'd want it to be?

And if you're willing to: is there any other you'd recommend instead?

Apologies in advance for my English and lack of knowledge in the subject (Also, I will put a lot of effort to learn how to interpret the readings once I get one, don't worry. I just struggle to study without motivation and/or something more "palpable", I'm autistic.)

Canadian peeps, a nuclear moisture-density gauge was stolen yesterday in Laval / Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Troxler 3440 S# 30854 stamped on the end of the handle.

While not a rare occurrence internationally, but an unfortunate one nonetheless. If the individuals are careless with the device, such as source tampering, it does pose a significant risk of stochastic health effects (cancer) to those individuals.

For those curious, these devices are used to measure the density and moisture content of materials during construction such as roadways.

The device contains 0.30 GBq CS-137 (Gamma) and 1.48 GBq Am-241:Be (Neutron). Max dose rate at the unit in safe mode combined around 150 uSv/h. With the CS-137 source exposed, 1500uSv/h+.

Any info, or if you may be the individual, feel free to reply to this thread. I would be more than happy to organize safe return of the device anonymously with public and personal safety as a priority.

Anyone know why americium-241 is so expensive to dispose of?

Thanks in advance!