Oooh wow yeah! I was just watching his first video on this and I wondered if an older digital camera or film camera would have picked up/gotten messed up. Guess this particular one did and looks like it knocked out a few pixels maybe! Super cool to see.
Well spotted, I didn't notice that on the first watch. But it's difficult to say how much of the speckling was caused by the sensor's individual photodetectors being hit by radiation, as normal random electrical noise is amplified by setting the camera to a high sensitivity (which I assume would have been done for the shots showing this.) I would guess it's a combination of both factors.
That thing is shedding so much radon progeny all over your table and your hands from touching the detector. Every time I handle anything with more then 2 mCi of RaSO4 or any of the other ionic compounds of Radium my gloved hands become contaminated no matter how much scrubbing I do I can still detect contamination with my SEI Inspector USB. I have a DP-63a Russian dosimeter that has a RaSO4/Cl,Br scale in it that is extremely HOT. I’m not sure how much Ra is present in mCi but it’s definitely more then 2mCi that’s for sure. I also have one of the F3/F5 Pyrotronic industrial smoke detectors as well. It’s the 80mCi ver. I love your videos my friend! Looking forward to seeing more of your content.
I just picked up a westclox alarm clock that according to my Geiger counter if measured at the face is putting out about 42 usv/hr. Crazy that these were on peoples nightstands.
I use to think the same thing. But that level of radiation is still pretty low when comparing it to really high dose sources. Plus the radiation drops off pretty quick the further you get away from it.
Some of those old smoke detectors actually had plutonium in them back in the day, also it's worth noting that smoke detector heads were often tossed into attics and under floors on refurbishments over the years or just thrown into builders skips of demolition rubble or the trash can... I've noticed that they have very quickly and very quietly removed sealed source detectors out of the market and they are almost all fully optical detectors on sale now, this had happened in the last 4 years or so here in the UK and I imagine in the USA as well 🤔
Here in the US you can still buy Am241 smoke detectors from all the home improvement stores along with online stores. Maybe one day they will stop using them.
@@RadioactiveDrew You can get non ionising smoke detectors for domestic use, which are optical types. It's claimed that the older ionising types react quicker to flaming fires but the optical types react quicker to smouldering fire types, which I would have thought is better?
The Soviet RID series smoke detectors contain Plutonium239...several reviews up now on YT. Sources seem to be from unscrupulous operators out of Ukraine...lol
@@ajacks1349 I have one of these! Specifically a RID6. I was desperate for a plutonium source and now I finally have one. Unfortunately the spice is lacking and only an industrial model will do 😆.
as of Jan 2023 That seller has them cards. he also has some voltage regulator 900V Zenner unit for GM Tubes. I got a Russian GM tube in home made counter. just a HV source adj 900V threw a resistor to GM tube and a HV blocking cap to LM 386 audio amp to small speaker. simple but works to detect radiation . runs on 6V battery. made it years ago as a electronics project. from last night lots of GM tubes can be found on eBay and amazon .I may add VU meter to my unit. the clicks get louder as Radiation increases. I bult it with Radio shack parts years ago and GM tube from eBay . Thank you for the link.
This video was really cool, i just watched the first one with the smoke detector and left wondering how much radiation you'd experienced! The visualisation on that Alpha Radiation viewer, it was both exactly what i expected and really impressive at the same time! And you could see some of the particle damage in the camera too!
The alpha radiation concerns me when I see someone holding such a device and it's radioactive core directly in his fingers. I wonder how effective gloves are and I am wondering which kind of gloves had been used? Thanks for the video. It is a very interesting presentation, especially with the follow up.
afaik, alpha particles can't penetrate the layer of dead skin on your body. The biggest concern with an alpha source is inhaling or ingesting the radioactive material so alpha particles are generated inside the body. So gloves are useful not for stopping the alpha particles but instead for stopping your fingers becoming contaminated with the radioactive material. Therefore, almost any sort of disposable gloves would probably work well.
Wish you did a test without the shielding, but overall most likely still safe. For reference, once you get to 100 mSv (100 000 uSv) it starts to get dangerous. Add another tenfold and you will probably get radiation sickness.
@@RadioactiveDrew It sure does! It reminds me of those videos that people take when they send a camera through a food irradiator: ruclips.net/video/QZZR4DJLdfM/видео.html Or video I've seen taken at Chernobyl.
You didn't discuss the exposure from those portions of the previous video where you had removed the cap, taken out that post, or opened the can with the screen in it. I would surmise that it would have been a lot more than you video discussed for emissions from outside and sealed.
my school still uses them in the lunch room an gyms but there far away where the gieger counter's dont detect radiation we have them giegers counter because radiation was leaking out of the lunch room floor because there are uranium mines under the school bout 1 mile down
This guy is going end up like the Boy Scout who turned his parents back yard shed into a superfund site collecting smoke detectors to build a reactor lololol. That alpha viewer is pretty freakin cool though. My new favorite thing to do is make my vegan friends watch the Monsanto video and hear the wheels start spinning trying to argue how bad eating animals is
I don't live with my parents, so no risk in contaminating their house. I also take measures to make sure I don't contaminate my house with any of the sources I have.
You should see what I have in MY backdoor shed! Ha ha ha. Nothing to worry about. It's all out there...legally and lying around in the forests and mountains, homes....and workplaces! That kid didn't really take contamination and safety seriously either.
Does radiation intensity at "x" distance from the source obey the inverse square relationship: double the distance from the point source and amount of energy decreases by 1/4 based on Gamma Rays versus particles such as Alpha and Beta decay particles? Good Video!!!
The reason gamma radiation is the most important to measure is because alpha and beta radiation cannot penetrate near as far. The rule of thumb example is that Alpha radiation cannot penetrate paper, beta radiation cannot penetrate a credit card, and gamma can penetrate a lot. The real risk of Alpha and beta radiation would be ingestion of an emitting source. Something emitting constant alpha radiation from inside your body can be very bad.
Yup, and it’s why Geiger counters can give a false sense of ‘all okay’ if ingestion/inhalation is possible. Certainly possible to get a lethal dose of radiation from something eaten or inhaled while the Geiger counter is sitting there bored. Geiger counter is a great tool for if it’s okay just standing somewhere though.
@silly-youtube6053 well…that’s not true for the vast majority of isotopes you are going to run across that could be potentially dangerous. Anything in a high enough dose to make you sick or worse would be extremely radioactive and would set off any radiation detector. Also radiation detectors don’t need to sit around to be useful. I use mine to track radiation in environments and make maps showing dose rates.
Just subbed to your channel, soooooo interesting. I went to Ukraine and namely the Chernobyl exclusion zone in 2008. Was there a whole day. Next to the reactor building that blew up the guides Geiger counter I think read 500 msph, the red forest we went through was about 2000. If I recall correctly. Always wondered what the radiation dosage over the whole day was and if it could affect my body. I recently had 5 dental xrays done right after each other, would that have been more than my day in Chernobyl
You should look up Galen Windsor, you will find the answer you are seeking. Because this guy is a shill. Hence why he didn't answer you. Because he knows he will be lying to you..
I'm sorry but at 3:02 " 6 µSv absorbed dose " is wrong. Absorbed dose units are Gray. 1 Gray (Gy) = 1 J(energy) / 1 kg (matter). Sieverts add at least 1 other factor : type of radiation (Equivalent dose).
@@RadioactiveDrew Gamma radiation is attenuated by ALL materials! It depends on four factors: (1) the energy of the radiation, (2) the attenuation coefficient of the material for that energy (3) the thickness of the material and (4) the density of the material. Sometimes the attenuation coefficient is already multiplied by the density, that depends on what tables you use. Just like the half-life, the attenuation is often quoted in the more practical "half value layer" which is the thickness to reduce the gamma radiation by 50%. It is an exponential, so a double thickness does not totally stop the radiation, rather it reduces it to 25%. Low-energy gamma radiation, like "soft" x-rays, are more easily absorbed in human tissue than the higher-energy variety.
Rather than comparing it to a dental xray which is something most people only get every year or two, you should compare it to exposure on an aircraft flying coast to coast which is something some people do every day.
Great information, I feel we should have been taught all of this in high school..! How to recognize and monitor radiation and assess the threat level.. Thanks
Drew love all your videos , it really inspired me to learn about radioactivity and the history of the west especially with the Uranium mines around my area ( Cokorado, Utah ) , i remember seeing as a four year old the news about Chernobyl and then becoming interested in how nuclear power worked and reading books on it while friends were reading Berenstain Bears . Looking forward to some of the mines around Moab this spring with my new Mazur PRM-9000 ( couldn’t afford or even find that awesome B20 you use , but it’s virtually identical and perfect for me) .
Glad you are enjoying the videos. That Radeye B20 is a bit hard to come by. Seems like some people are having a hard time getting them from the company. That PMR-9000 should work pretty good I would imagine. I haven’t tested it yet but maybe in the future.
@@RadioactiveDrew i’ll def be doing a full review and comparing it to some of my other styles ( Better Geiger , and a few GQ series ) but will have fun this weekend at Rocky Flats ( old plutonium weapons mfg in Arvada CO)
You have to wonder why they used such a hot source just for smoke detection, and also why they didn't incorporate Lead as a more effective shielding to prevent errant radioactive particles from harming someone.
Apart from alpha particles with a range of only a few cm, little other radiation is emitted from a smoke detector source. I visited a factory that makes smoke detectors and they had a large glass jar full of those sources, probably several hundred, and there was little radiation to be detected with a GM placed right beside the jar.
Wouldn't the detector get more radioactive as time went on? E.g., radium has a half-life of 1,600 years but decays into radon with a half-life of 4 days and polonium which has a half-life of 138 days? I'd imagine the radiation wasn't so bad when the detector was brand new.
When it was first made it would have been a little less active. As radium decays it becomes other isotopes and I've been told that when it reaches radioactive decay secular equilibrium about half of that activity is from the daughter products. Its even higher for uranium. So if you make some uranium metal its not going to be as radioactive as uranium ore. But over a very long time it will start to increase in radioactivity as those decay chain isotopes begin to build up. It a crazy thing to think about.
In my estimation the most biologically significant radiation dose from making this video was probably beta exposure to the eyes. Wearing some glasses wouldn't be a bad idea. And that smoke detector (along with the bank indicators) is absolutely pumping radon into your house like a radioactive firehose.
I keep all my super hot items outside in a safe and I also run a radon monitor in the house. Of course here in Montana we have higher than normal radon but I never worry about it.
@@catfission I could only see that being a problem if I had an alpha source really close to my eyes. Usually alpha radiation doesn't go very far. Beta radiation can travel some distance.
@@RadioactiveDrew do I buy direct from fisher? They don’t sell directly to the public. And anywhere we can buy that cable so we can update our device? I already have the software.
@@icecorebaby I think I bought my detector and filter from Thermo Scientific. When I first bought this detector they wouldn't send it to CA. So I had it shipped to MT and shipped to me from there. CA has some weird thing about certain equipment or certain sellers selling direct to the civilian market.
And you'll be surprised that there are 2 filter types to measure the dose. H*(0.07) and H*(10). Each of them has its own apply type. I don't speak about alpha blocking filter because it confuses me.
I have and its extremely hard to see the blue glow. Best results seem to be with radium painted objects and americium buttons. To see the reaction nothing can be blocking the alpha radiation.
Watch: Understanding Bikini Atoll (PART V: BAKER) -- RUclips - The 1946 Baker test shot was the world's first radiological disaster. Radiation knowledge was in its infancy back then. Admiral Blandy didn't want to leave until Dr. Stafford Warren showed him a fish that X-rayed itself. Some of the fish were still living. They sliced it in half and laid it on X-ray film. That convinced Admiral Blandy. They basically said: "Let's get the hell out of Dodge." The video is just 10 minutes long.
I just checked to see how much the radeye was, and from fishersci.com it was $1.8k? I'd think a meter like this would be around $400 - $700, why is it so expensive?
The reason I got it was because I wanted something that was small and could take a drop and a smack. That was my main reason for buying it. But it also has different isotopes you can choose from as energy calibration and if you damage the pancake probe you can change it out pretty easily.
@@RadioactiveDrew did you get it for $1800, or cheaper from somewhere else? I have a similar geiger counter (The radiation alert ranger from SE international), and it also has a pancake probe (probably bigger actually), and all the other features you mentioned. To be honest I'm surprised the Ranger isn't more expensive than the radeye, as it seems higher quality. The ranger costs around $600, so it's strange to me that the radeye would be three times that price.
@@EvilScientist I've never handled a radiation alert ranger so I can't really make any type of comparison. I know that if you want to buy a Model 3 Ludlum meter to no probe new its going to cost close to $800 and then you need to buy a probe with it for an additional $325...the cheapest alpha/beta/gamma probe. I think the price is the price you pay for quality and its ability to survive in different environments...maybe. I haven't done a test between all those units. But for the most part you get what you pay for. I have had zero problems with that Radeye B20. I can't say they same about the Soeks 01M or the Gammaguard CT007-F. I plan on doing a review of the detectors I have used and own.
@@RadioactiveDrew, I agree with you. The price is of the Thermo decision. I choose B20-ER because its detector plate is moved out of the main body so I can securely put it on the surface without touching it with the fingers or other device parts. Also I was nicely surprised with Finder and Single search modes.
I have a Black Cat Systems Geiger counter I bought a few years ago for about $300. It converts you laptop into a Geiger counter which is why it is cheaper I guess.
Wow! Dude! Your videos are of excellent quality! Beautiful interior and excellent study of camera positions! Very interesting stories. And you yourself are very handsome and pleasant to look at you. Too bad your videos are so undervalued! Maybe you should invest a little in promotion on RUclips? I wish you more likes and subscribers! Greetings from Ukraine! :)
Your actual dose is probably slightly lower than what you have measured if the filer you are using only blocks betas and but doesn't "flatten" the energy response curve to gamma. The LND7311 / 7317 tubes commonly used in these type of instruments overestimate the dose rate for energies lower than the normally calibrated value for 662keV (Cs-137). Most of the gamma energies coming off Radium (with the exception of Bi-214) are bellow 600keV. This means that if your tube is not energy compensated or the filter doesn't perform such function, your reading will be over-estimated for this lower energy region. There are special filter using layers of different materials which can perform energy compensation.
Hey! I’ve just placed an order for one of these bad boys. How do you store yours? I keep my hottest radium 226/ strontium 90 sources under lead sheeting but I feel like something more substantial might be needed for this particular source.
@@catfission I'm sure that lead sheeting will do some good at blocking the radiation. I wouldn't be too concerned with it as long as you can keep some distance between you and the smoke detector. Do some tests and see what works best for where you are. If you're really concerned with it you could also keep the radium item in a water tight container and submerge it in a 5 gallon bucket of water. Water acts as a pretty good shield...if you can't get thick enough lead.
You don't need any lead, distance is the best shielding. 10 to 15 feet of distance is enough to bring the gamma radiation back to background levels. Radon the main problem, so keep it in a well ventilated area, ideally in a shed outside.
@@Sniperboy5551 I once built a cloud chamber for a science fair project. It was basically just a glass jar, rubbing alcohol and dry ice. I could see the trails of cosmic rays passing through it.
You say that you are exposed to it so many inches away. That is not accurate. You were and are holding it for much of the video which would put you fractions of a inch away.
I like how your camera's image sensor picked up radiation noise as well, when you got it close to the post.
Oooh wow yeah! I was just watching his first video on this and I wondered if an older digital camera or film camera would have picked up/gotten messed up. Guess this particular one did and looks like it knocked out a few pixels maybe! Super cool to see.
Well spotted, I didn't notice that on the first watch. But it's difficult to say how much of the speckling was caused by the sensor's individual photodetectors being hit by radiation, as normal random electrical noise is amplified by setting the camera to a high sensitivity (which I assume would have been done for the shots showing this.)
I would guess it's a combination of both factors.
I think this was likely hot pixels
@@T2D.SteveArcsnot hot pixels. The phone was rather far away and the source used isn't particularly active.
That thing is shedding so much radon progeny all over your table and your hands from touching the detector. Every time I handle anything with more then 2 mCi of RaSO4 or any of the other ionic compounds of Radium my gloved hands become contaminated no matter how much scrubbing I do I can still detect contamination with my SEI Inspector USB. I have a DP-63a Russian dosimeter that has a RaSO4/Cl,Br scale in it that is extremely HOT. I’m not sure how much Ra is present in mCi but it’s definitely more then 2mCi that’s for sure. I also have one of the F3/F5 Pyrotronic industrial smoke detectors as well. It’s the 80mCi ver. I love your videos my friend! Looking forward to seeing more of your content.
Do you mean uCi? millicuries have 1000x more activity than microcuries
1 mCi = 1000 uCi
@@ThatFurryonMainStreet No he means milicuries. 20 microcuries of anything wouldn't do fuck all.
@Knatrick the source in the radium smoke detector is 20 uCi, which is still very active.
@@RadioactiveDrew My mistake. For some reason I thought the source was millicuries.
@Knatrick 20 mCi would be very spicy. A source like that I would not be handling the same way as I’m handling the 20 uCi source.
Great video, and cool to see the blue glow to visualize the "spray pattern." It's not always necessarily equal in all directions.
I just picked up a westclox alarm clock that according to my Geiger counter if measured at the face is putting out about 42 usv/hr. Crazy that these were on peoples nightstands.
I use to think the same thing. But that level of radiation is still pretty low when comparing it to really high dose sources. Plus the radiation drops off pretty quick the further you get away from it.
This is presently the best video of a spinthariscope doing its thing anywhere in existence.
Thanks. I think it turned out pretty good as well.
Some of those old smoke detectors actually had plutonium in them back in the day, also it's worth noting that smoke detector heads were often tossed into attics and under floors on refurbishments over the years or just thrown into builders skips of demolition rubble or the trash can...
I've noticed that they have very quickly and very quietly removed sealed source detectors out of the market and they are almost all fully optical detectors on sale now, this had happened in the last 4 years or so here in the UK and I imagine in the USA as well 🤔
Here in the US you can still buy Am241 smoke detectors from all the home improvement stores along with online stores. Maybe one day they will stop using them.
@@RadioactiveDrew You can get non ionising smoke detectors for domestic use, which are optical types. It's claimed that the older ionising types react quicker to flaming fires but the optical types react quicker to smouldering fire types, which I would have thought is better?
The Soviet RID series smoke detectors contain Plutonium239...several reviews up now on YT. Sources seem to be from unscrupulous operators out of Ukraine...lol
@@ajacks1349 I have one of these! Specifically a RID6. I was desperate for a plutonium source and now I finally have one. Unfortunately the spice is lacking and only an industrial model will do 😆.
@@catfission Hope you're not planning on making a "dirty bomb"...🤣
as of Jan 2023 That seller has them cards. he also has some voltage regulator 900V Zenner unit for GM Tubes. I got a Russian GM tube in home made counter. just a HV source adj 900V threw a resistor to GM tube and a HV blocking cap to LM 386 audio amp to small speaker. simple but works to detect radiation . runs on 6V battery. made it years ago as a electronics project. from last night lots of GM tubes can be found on eBay and amazon .I may add VU meter to my unit. the clicks get louder as Radiation increases. I bult it with Radio shack parts years ago and GM tube from eBay . Thank you for the link.
This video was really cool, i just watched the first one with the smoke detector and left wondering how much radiation you'd experienced! The visualisation on that Alpha Radiation viewer, it was both exactly what i expected and really impressive at the same time! And you could see some of the particle damage in the camera too!
Thank you for the updated video. I too was concerned and wondering how much radiation you received making the video for us.
The alpha radiation concerns me when I see someone holding such a device and it's radioactive core directly in his fingers. I wonder how effective gloves are and I am wondering which kind of gloves had been used? Thanks for the video. It is a very interesting presentation, especially with the follow up.
afaik, alpha particles can't penetrate the layer of dead skin on your body. The biggest concern with an alpha source is inhaling or ingesting the radioactive material so alpha particles are generated inside the body. So gloves are useful not for stopping the alpha particles but instead for stopping your fingers becoming contaminated with the radioactive material. Therefore, almost any sort of disposable gloves would probably work well.
@@tmmtmmMost Alpha particles get stopped by the epidermis, but a small amount reach the upper layers of the Dermis.
Cool video in 40 years of using scintillation detectors. It was neat seeing it inaction so to speak
Excellent video with good information. United Nuclear sells small units for viewing alpha radiation.
Wish you did a test without the shielding, but overall most likely still safe. For reference, once you get to 100 mSv (100 000 uSv) it starts to get dangerous. Add another tenfold and you will probably get radiation sickness.
9:13 - Forget the alpha detecting film, I see those white specks appearing on your camera sensor! That's terrifying.
Radium emits a decent amount of gamma radiation.
@@RadioactiveDrew It sure does! It reminds me of those videos that people take when they send a camera through a food irradiator:
ruclips.net/video/QZZR4DJLdfM/видео.html
Or video I've seen taken at Chernobyl.
You didn't discuss the exposure from those portions of the previous video where you had removed the cap, taken out that post, or opened the can with the screen in it. I would surmise that it would have been a lot more than you video discussed for emissions from outside and sealed.
Ageed I was waiting for that part in this video and it never came up, that was the part of the first video where I was like ooohh dang.
Great video, you should try to get one of those plutonium smoke detectors, but they might be illegal in the US i think.
I've seen those plutonium smoke detectors before. I might be able to get one...maybe.
GEOElectronics is a great source. Especially for CDV-700 repair items.
You should make or buy a radiation cloud chamber! I would love to see how active those are in it!
One of these days that’s the plan.
my school still uses them in the lunch room an gyms but there far away where the gieger counter's dont detect radiation we have them giegers counter because radiation was leaking out of the lunch room floor because there are uranium mines under the school bout 1 mile down
Nice....love that alpha radiation viewing screen! please post when you have a link to purchase one :)
Sure thing...maybe I'll post a link to the eBay seller in the description so everyone can check on the availability of those screens.
This guy is going end up like the Boy Scout who turned his parents back yard shed into a superfund site collecting smoke detectors to build a reactor lololol. That alpha viewer is pretty freakin cool though. My new favorite thing to do is make my vegan friends watch the Monsanto video and hear the wheels start spinning trying to argue how bad eating animals is
I don't live with my parents, so no risk in contaminating their house. I also take measures to make sure I don't contaminate my house with any of the sources I have.
You should see what I have in MY backdoor shed! Ha ha ha. Nothing to worry about. It's all out there...legally and lying around in the forests and mountains, homes....and workplaces! That kid didn't really take contamination and safety seriously either.
Does radiation intensity at "x" distance from the source obey the inverse square relationship: double the distance from the point source and amount of energy decreases by 1/4 based on Gamma Rays versus particles such as Alpha and Beta decay particles? Good Video!!!
It does follow that law.
The reason gamma radiation is the most important to measure is because alpha and beta radiation cannot penetrate near as far. The rule of thumb example is that Alpha radiation cannot penetrate paper, beta radiation cannot penetrate a credit card, and gamma can penetrate a lot. The real risk of Alpha and beta radiation would be ingestion of an emitting source. Something emitting constant alpha radiation from inside your body can be very bad.
Yup, and it’s why Geiger counters can give a false sense of ‘all okay’ if ingestion/inhalation is possible. Certainly possible to get a lethal dose of radiation from something eaten or inhaled while the Geiger counter is sitting there bored.
Geiger counter is a great tool for if it’s okay just standing somewhere though.
@silly-youtube6053 well…that’s not true for the vast majority of isotopes you are going to run across that could be potentially dangerous. Anything in a high enough dose to make you sick or worse would be extremely radioactive and would set off any radiation detector.
Also radiation detectors don’t need to sit around to be useful. I use mine to track radiation in environments and make maps showing dose rates.
Just subbed to your channel, soooooo interesting.
I went to Ukraine and namely the Chernobyl exclusion zone in 2008. Was there a whole day. Next to the reactor building that blew up the guides Geiger counter I think read 500 msph, the red forest we went through was about 2000. If I recall correctly. Always wondered what the radiation dosage over the whole day was and if it could affect my body. I recently had 5 dental xrays done right after each other, would that have been more than my day in Chernobyl
You should look up Galen Windsor, you will find the answer you are seeking. Because this guy is a shill. Hence why he didn't answer you. Because he knows he will be lying to you..
I'm sorry but at 3:02 " 6 µSv absorbed dose " is wrong. Absorbed dose units are Gray. 1 Gray (Gy) = 1 J(energy) / 1 kg (matter). Sieverts add at least 1 other factor : type of radiation (Equivalent dose).
Try putting the foil in the dark with a long exposure. You should be able to see a slight blue glow!
I think that takes much more radium to see that blue glow on its own. I'll have to test it.
Have you considered that the beta "overcoming" the filter is actually creating bremsstrahlung X-rays?
That's a good question. Might have to setup a test for that.
Gamma passes straight through!
Yep, for the most part. It can be attenuated by water, concrete and some other materials.
@@RadioactiveDrew Gamma radiation is attenuated by ALL materials! It depends on four factors: (1) the energy of the radiation, (2) the attenuation coefficient of the material for that energy (3) the thickness of the material and (4) the density of the material. Sometimes the attenuation coefficient is already multiplied by the density, that depends on what tables you use. Just like the half-life, the attenuation is often quoted in the more practical "half value layer" which is the thickness to reduce the gamma radiation by 50%. It is an exponential, so a double thickness does not totally stop the radiation, rather it reduces it to 25%. Low-energy gamma radiation, like "soft" x-rays, are more easily absorbed in human tissue than the higher-energy variety.
Rather than comparing it to a dental xray which is something most people only get every year or two, you should compare it to exposure on an aircraft flying coast to coast which is something some people do every day.
There’s more people that get x-rays every year than people that fly cost to cost multiple times per year.
Great information, I feel we should have been taught all of this in high school..! How to recognize and monitor radiation and assess the threat level.. Thanks
Ok so I suggest buy a sand blaster cabinet and use it like glove box, line it with lead so you don't have shielding.
Drew love all your videos , it really inspired me to learn about radioactivity and the history of the west especially with the Uranium mines around my area ( Cokorado, Utah ) , i remember seeing as a four year old the news about Chernobyl and then becoming interested in how nuclear power worked and reading books on it while friends were reading Berenstain Bears . Looking forward to some of the mines around Moab this spring with my new Mazur PRM-9000 ( couldn’t afford or even find that awesome B20 you use , but it’s virtually identical and perfect for me) .
Glad you are enjoying the videos. That Radeye B20 is a bit hard to come by. Seems like some people are having a hard time getting them from the company. That PMR-9000 should work pretty good I would imagine. I haven’t tested it yet but maybe in the future.
@@RadioactiveDrew i’ll def be doing a full review and comparing it to some of my other styles ( Better Geiger , and a few GQ series ) but will have fun this weekend at Rocky Flats ( old plutonium weapons mfg in Arvada CO)
@@markvorgic5481 I've been out there before a couple years back. Might do a video about the area in the spring time.
9:49 wish you would've put the camera much closer to it so we can get better view of what's actually happening.
You have to wonder why they used such a hot source just for smoke detection, and also why they didn't incorporate Lead as a more effective shielding to prevent errant radioactive particles from harming someone.
Apart from alpha particles with a range of only a few cm, little other radiation is emitted from a smoke detector source. I visited a factory that makes smoke detectors and they had a large glass jar full of those sources, probably several hundred, and there was little radiation to be detected with a GM placed right beside the jar.
Question: how much radiation was i exposed too
Answer: yes
Wouldn't the detector get more radioactive as time went on? E.g., radium has a half-life of 1,600 years but decays into radon with a half-life of 4 days and polonium which has a half-life of 138 days? I'd imagine the radiation wasn't so bad when the detector was brand new.
When it was first made it would have been a little less active. As radium decays it becomes other isotopes and I've been told that when it reaches radioactive decay secular equilibrium about half of that activity is from the daughter products. Its even higher for uranium. So if you make some uranium metal its not going to be as radioactive as uranium ore. But over a very long time it will start to increase in radioactivity as those decay chain isotopes begin to build up. It a crazy thing to think about.
In my estimation the most biologically significant radiation dose from making this video was probably beta exposure to the eyes. Wearing some glasses wouldn't be a bad idea. And that smoke detector (along with the bank indicators) is absolutely pumping radon into your house like a radioactive firehose.
I keep all my super hot items outside in a safe and I also run a radon monitor in the house. Of course here in Montana we have higher than normal radon but I never worry about it.
@@RadioactiveDrew A video about the radon production as measured by the monitor would be very interesting, by the way.
@@MinSredMash I have plans to do a video about radon production from radium doped objects. I've already done some tests with some good results.
Alpha particles will also damage your cornea. That’s why I always wear goggles when working with really spicy sources :)
@@catfission I could only see that being a problem if I had an alpha source really close to my eyes. Usually alpha radiation doesn't go very far. Beta radiation can travel some distance.
Good stuff man
Thanks...glad you enjoy it.
That was wicked!
I wish I had the gamma filter for my thermo b20… I bought mine used.
You should be able to buy the gamma filter on its own.
@@RadioactiveDrew do I buy direct from fisher? They don’t sell directly to the public. And anywhere we can buy that cable so we can update our device? I already have the software.
@@icecorebaby I think I bought my detector and filter from Thermo Scientific. When I first bought this detector they wouldn't send it to CA. So I had it shipped to MT and shipped to me from there. CA has some weird thing about certain equipment or certain sellers selling direct to the civilian market.
And you'll be surprised that there are 2 filter types to measure the dose. H*(0.07) and H*(10). Each of them has its own apply type. I don't speak about alpha blocking filter because it confuses me.
"Too" or "to"?
Two
Have you tried those radiation viewing filters on samples of carnotite or other uranium ore?
I have and its extremely hard to see the blue glow. Best results seem to be with radium painted objects and americium buttons. To see the reaction nothing can be blocking the alpha radiation.
That filter measures actual dose you get 1 centimeter into your body
Would that Zinc sulfide screen glow to show the radium on a radium dial?
Is it strong enough?
Yes. It would show that. But the part painted with radium doped paint would have to be right up against the screen. Nothing in between it.
Watch: Understanding Bikini Atoll (PART V: BAKER) -- RUclips - The 1946 Baker test shot was the world's first radiological disaster. Radiation knowledge was in its infancy back then. Admiral Blandy didn't want to leave until Dr. Stafford Warren showed him a fish that X-rayed itself. Some of the fish were still living. They sliced it in half and laid it on X-ray film. That convinced Admiral Blandy. They basically said: "Let's get the hell out of Dodge." The video is just 10 minutes long.
What about your hands? How much radiation did they absorb?
I just checked to see how much the radeye was, and from fishersci.com it was $1.8k? I'd think a meter like this would be around $400 - $700, why is it so expensive?
The reason I got it was because I wanted something that was small and could take a drop and a smack. That was my main reason for buying it. But it also has different isotopes you can choose from as energy calibration and if you damage the pancake probe you can change it out pretty easily.
@@RadioactiveDrew did you get it for $1800, or cheaper from somewhere else? I have a similar geiger counter (The radiation alert ranger from SE international), and it also has a pancake probe (probably bigger actually), and all the other features you mentioned. To be honest I'm surprised the Ranger isn't more expensive than the radeye, as it seems higher quality. The ranger costs around $600, so it's strange to me that the radeye would be three times that price.
@@EvilScientist I've never handled a radiation alert ranger so I can't really make any type of comparison. I know that if you want to buy a Model 3 Ludlum meter to no probe new its going to cost close to $800 and then you need to buy a probe with it for an additional $325...the cheapest alpha/beta/gamma probe. I think the price is the price you pay for quality and its ability to survive in different environments...maybe. I haven't done a test between all those units. But for the most part you get what you pay for. I have had zero problems with that Radeye B20. I can't say they same about the Soeks 01M or the Gammaguard CT007-F. I plan on doing a review of the detectors I have used and own.
@@RadioactiveDrew, I agree with you. The price is of the Thermo decision. I choose B20-ER because its detector plate is moved out of the main body so I can securely put it on the surface without touching it with the fingers or other device parts. Also I was nicely surprised with Finder and Single search modes.
I have a Black Cat Systems Geiger counter I bought a few years ago for about $300. It converts you laptop into a Geiger counter which is why it is cheaper I guess.
So, what happens when the americium-241 in a regular smoke detector is burnt in a fire? Can it be bad for the environment?
Wow! Dude! Your videos are of excellent quality! Beautiful interior and excellent study of camera positions! Very interesting stories. And you yourself are very handsome and pleasant to look at you. Too bad your videos are so undervalued! Maybe you should invest a little in promotion on RUclips? I wish you more likes and subscribers!
Greetings from Ukraine! :)
Your actual dose is probably slightly lower than what you have measured if the filer you are using only blocks betas and but doesn't "flatten" the energy response curve to gamma. The LND7311 / 7317 tubes commonly used in these type of instruments overestimate the dose rate for energies lower than the normally calibrated value for 662keV (Cs-137). Most of the gamma energies coming off Radium (with the exception of Bi-214) are bellow 600keV. This means that if your tube is not energy compensated or the filter doesn't perform such function, your reading will be over-estimated for this lower energy region. There are special filter using layers of different materials which can perform energy compensation.
I'll have to find the spec sheet on using the gamma filter but as I remember it its energy compensated.
The B20 H*(10) filter is an energy compensated one from 17 keV to 1.3 MeV. You may see it in the B20 user manual and on the outer side of the filter.
Hey! I’ve just placed an order for one of these bad boys. How do you store yours? I keep my hottest radium 226/ strontium 90 sources under lead sheeting but I feel like something more substantial might be needed for this particular source.
I keep mine in an old concrete lined safe in my garage. Doesn't block all the radiation but does a decent job at kicking it down.
@@RadioactiveDrew I feel underprepared now.
@@catfission I'm sure that lead sheeting will do some good at blocking the radiation. I wouldn't be too concerned with it as long as you can keep some distance between you and the smoke detector. Do some tests and see what works best for where you are. If you're really concerned with it you could also keep the radium item in a water tight container and submerge it in a 5 gallon bucket of water. Water acts as a pretty good shield...if you can't get thick enough lead.
You don't need any lead, distance is the best shielding. 10 to 15 feet of distance is enough to bring the gamma radiation back to background levels. Radon the main problem, so keep it in a well ventilated area, ideally in a shed outside.
Would be cool to see this near a cloud chamber
I agree.
It’s not too hard to build one at home, there are plenty of cool tutorials on RUclips.
@@Sniperboy5551 I once built a cloud chamber for a science fair project. It was basically just a glass jar, rubbing alcohol and dry ice. I could see the trails of cosmic rays passing through it.
How to collabrate the prd?.
The man has become a ghoul.
so basically you took roughly a dose like you get from an intercontinental flight. maybe a bit higher.
Sound about right.
Have you done a smoke chamber with a strong source yet
I think you’re talking about a cloud chamber. I haven’t made one yet. It’s on my list of things to do.
Yeah they are pretty cool.... Try it with a black light in the dark
you ever calculate your yearly exposure?
No but I was thinking of getting a TLD to wear for a year so I could find out.
@@RadioactiveDrew coming from someone who had a lot of radiological response training, I'd say that's a good idea..
I sleep with fourteen of these smoke detectors under my pillow
You say that you are exposed to it so many inches away. That is not accurate. You were and are holding it for much of the video which would put you fractions of a inch away.
It isn't shielded?
Not inside the detector housing. It can easily be detected form a ways fully assembled.
@@RadioactiveDrew By the way do you know anyone named Jax? First time hearing that name today.
@@ThePeterDislikeShow nope…don’t know anyone by that name.
This is a pedantic nitpick but the title should be "How Much Radiation Was I Exposed To?" The answer might be "too much" but it wouldn't be "to much".
Galen Windsor says you were exposed to zero radiation....🤪
your Subscribed by me
Thanks for the sub.
Dose rate on the source directly?
I did a video about the dose rate after this video.
@@RadioactiveDrew you did! Thank you. Great work!
лайк
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍✌✌✌✌✌✌✌✌✌✌✌✌✌✌✌
You are unnecessarily exposing yourself to RADIATION ! You better be careful Mister !