Welcome
Username or Email:

Password:


Missing Code




[ ]
[ ]
Online
  • Guests: 65
  • Members: 0
  • Newest Member: omjtest
  • Most ever online: 396
    Guests: 396, Members: 0 on 12 Jan : 12:51
Members Birthdays:
One birthday today, congrats!
Daniel Davis (54)


Next birthdays
05/29 Zonalklism (34)
05/29 Dr Hankenstein (68)
05/30 Quantum Singularity (47)
Contact
If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.


Special Thanks To:
  • Aaron Holmes
  • Aaron Wheeler
  • Adam Horden
  • Alan Scrimgeour
  • Andre
  • Andrew Haynes
  • Anonymous000
  • asabase
  • Austin Weil
  • barney
  • Barry
  • Bert Hickman
  • Bill Kukowski
  • Blitzorn
  • Brandon Paradelas
  • Bruce Bowling
  • BubeeMike
  • Byong Park
  • Cesiumsponge
  • Chris F.
  • Chris Hooper
  • Corey Worthington
  • Derek Woodroffe
  • Dalus
  • Dan Strother
  • Daniel Davis
  • Daniel Uhrenholt
  • datasheetarchive
  • Dave Billington
  • Dave Marshall
  • David F.
  • Dennis Rogers
  • drelectrix
  • Dr. John Gudenas
  • Dr. Spark
  • E.TexasTesla
  • eastvoltresearch
  • Eirik Taylor
  • Erik Dyakov
  • Erlend^SE
  • Finn Hammer
  • Firebug24k
  • GalliumMan
  • Gary Peterson
  • George Slade
  • GhostNull
  • Gordon Mcknight
  • Graham Armitage
  • Grant
  • GreySoul
  • Henry H
  • IamSmooth
  • In memory of Leo Powning
  • Jacob Cash
  • James Howells
  • James Pawson
  • Jeff Greenfield
  • Jeff Thomas
  • Jesse Frost
  • Jim Mitchell
  • jlr134
  • Joe Mastroianni
  • John Forcina
  • John Oberg
  • John Willcutt
  • Jon Newcomb
  • klugesmith
  • Leslie Wright
  • Lutz Hoffman
  • Mads Barnkob
  • Martin King
  • Mats Karlsson
  • Matt Gibson
  • Matthew Guidry
  • mbd
  • Michael D'Angelo
  • Mikkel
  • mileswaldron
  • mister_rf
  • Neil Foster
  • Nick de Smith
  • Nick Soroka
  • nicklenorp
  • Nik
  • Norman Stanley
  • Patrick Coleman
  • Paul Brodie
  • Paul Jordan
  • Paul Montgomery
  • Ped
  • Peter Krogen
  • Peter Terren
  • PhilGood
  • Richard Feldman
  • Robert Bush
  • Royce Bailey
  • Scott Fusare
  • Scott Newman
  • smiffy
  • Stella
  • Steven Busic
  • Steve Conner
  • Steve Jones
  • Steve Ward
  • Sulaiman
  • Thomas Coyle
  • Thomas A. Wallace
  • Thomas W
  • Timo
  • Torch
  • Ulf Jonsson
  • vasil
  • Vaxian
  • vladi mazzilli
  • wastehl
  • Weston
  • William Kim
  • William N.
  • William Stehl
  • Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
Forums
4hv.org :: Forums :: Electromagnetic Radiation
« Previous topic | Next topic »   

Homemade X-ray machine question

first  3 4 5 6
Move Thread LAN_403
Proud Mary
Thu May 05 2011, 09:06PM
Proud Mary Registered Member #543 Joined: Tue Feb 20 2007, 04:26PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4992
Uzzors wrote ...

Using the above formula I got a dose rate of 2,88mGy/hr, or roughly a whole year's dose per hour. The assumptions I used are listed below. Shield attenuation was calculated using tables from Link2 The dose rate formula assumes you're standing in the main x-ray beam, unless I'm mistaken.

X-ray tube output fluence (1mm Be)

Target Atomic Number 74
Tube Voltage 50 kV
Tube current 4 mA
distance 1000 mm

Dose rate 9,92 mGy/sec

Attenuation of Pyrex (5mm, 50kV) 7,41E-001
Attenuation of lead (1mm, 50kV) 1,09E-004

Total dose rate 0,8 µGy/sec
2,88 mGy/hr

Radpro gives a dose rate of 13 mGy/sec with these numbers, compared with the 9.92 mGy/sec using the Glasgow equation, which I don't think to be significant given the very approximate nature of these calculations, and Radpro's inclusion of so-called build-up factor.

But as Anders has said, the 1 mm lead shielding attenuation figure produced by Radpro certainly does look wrong, even allowing for very conservative 'over-shielding.'

Serves me right for using someone's java calculator instead of working it all out in longhand!:-D
Back to top
uzzors2k
Thu May 05 2011, 09:11PM
uzzors2k Registered Member #95 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 04:57PM
Location: Norway
Posts: 1308
I don't consider those numbers anything other than a worst case scenario to have as a guideline. If I can reduce the calculated radiation levels to an acceptable level using the math above, then I assume my setup will not be worse than that. There's still the issue of other effects like x-ray scatter however. Part of the reason I accept higher than realistic figures is because I can pretend all the "unaccounted for effects" are lumped in with it.
Back to top
plazmatron
Sun May 08 2011, 11:47AM
plazmatron Registered Member #1134 Joined: Tue Nov 20 2007, 04:39PM
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 351
Proud Mary wrote ...


Radpro gives a dose rate of 13 mGy/sec with these numbers, compared with the 9.92 mGy/sec using the Glasgow equation, which I don't think to be significant given the very approximate nature of these calculations, and Radpro's inclusion of so-called build-up factor.

But as Anders has said, the 1 mm lead shielding attenuation figure produced by Radpro certainly does look wrong, even allowing for very conservative 'over-shielding.'

Serves me right for using someone's java calculator instead of working it all out in longhand!:-D


Ultimately Radpro, and even plain Math, will just ballpark your figures.

There are so many variations in tube design that even accurately calculating a tubes output is well nigh impossible, and that is before you factor in ageing and warm up.

Actual measurement is the way to go.


James wrote ...

Below 50kV you are unlikely to get much penetration,

Don't be so sure!

This image was taken at 50kVp:


Plug


It demonstrates the effective penetration through steel, you can expect to achieve at 50kVp.

And as Proud Mary says, there is a LOT of exploration to be done at sub 10keV. This is in fact where my work is at now, since everyone seems to have done to death the 50-150keV range!

To the original poster, find a decent sturdy steel box in which to house your tube, and line it with at least 3mm of lead, and operate the tube at no more than 50kV.

Les
Back to top
James
Sun May 08 2011, 09:10PM
James Registered Member #3610 Joined: Thu Jan 13 2011, 03:29AM
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 506
Or just find an old dental x-ray head and wire up a controller for it. That gives you a nice complete well shielded unit that is relatively safe to use.
Back to top
first  3 4 5 6

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob

Go to:

Powered by e107 Forum System
 
Legal Information
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.