[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Elaboration of Air Monitoring Problem
In the environment you state I would agree that a GM tube would be the
best detector. We use a LARGE energy compensated GM tube for
environmental monitoring and it works quite well. The tube has an
active area of 1 inch dia by 12 in length and is thus VERY sensitive.
The GM also does very well in an environment without heating or
cooling. In fact two years ago we built a solar powered station that
had no heating or cooling BUT does sit under the shade of a tree (solar
panel 110 ft away in full sun).
The detectors were built for us by HPI and for the GM and a moderated
He3 detector - the system only draws 85 mA from 12 VDC - including the
datalogger (communications by RS-232).
This would be the high sensitivity tube. The low sensitivity tube would
be easier and HPI has set that up for us too.
Using time to discharge technology would greatly enhance the upper range
of the high sensitivity tube - but I understand there are patent issues
with using this technology.
RadSafeInst@CS.COM wrote:
>
> Elaboration on my earlier question follows: (Thanks Again! Ed)
> This country plans to mount detectors in a desert environment on poles
> and
> states G-M or Proportional Counters are acceptable provided they meet
> these
> specs. Their question was: "Is this feasible?". Here are specs:
> LOW DOSE TUBE
> HIGH
> DOSE TUBE
>
> RANGE: 10 Nano-Sv to 2 Milli-Sv per hr 0.1
> MilliSv
> to 1 Sv per hr
>
>
>
> SENSITIVITY: 900 CPM for 1 Micro-Sv per hr 1 CPM for
> 1
> Micro-Sv/hr
>
>
>
> ENERGY: 40keV to 1.5 MeV 50
> keV to
> 1.5 MeV
>
>
>
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.