[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Detection of HEU, etc
I have not examined the details of their portable cooling system,
so I don't know how much of the resolution they have managed to preserve.
As for fully-featured MCA and identification software on a portable
system, they all are bound to be either mickey-mouse class and portable
or need an additional PC - all with one exception.
Dimiter
------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments
http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "Bob Shannon" <bobcat167@earthlink.net>
> To: "'Dimiter Popoff'" <didi@tgi-sci.com>,
> <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Subject: RE: Detection of HEU, etc
> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 05:46:16 -0700
>
> I believe that Ortec has developed a portable gamma spectroscopy system that
> uses a Sterling cooler and runs by battery power.
>
>
>
> While I haven't personally had the opportunity to use the equipment in the
> field, I have seen it, lifted it and it is really 'hand-held' portable - and
> that includes the power source. I believe that it is a step toward
> addressing many of the practical limitations surrounding portable Germanium
> spectroscopy. From the reports and minimal data I have seen, the stability
> of the instrument appears to be excellent. I have not had a chance to look
> more closely at the nuclide identification software so I can't weigh in on
> that.
>
>
>
> Here are a some links to the Ortec website that provide some information.
>
>
>
> http://www.ortec-online.com/papers/wco0904.pdf
>
> http://www.ortec-online.com/papers/detective_inmm04.pdf
>
>
>
> There is a paper on the subject of materials detection using the
> instrumentation scheduled at the Midyear HP conference. (Session 2: Advances
> in Instrument Instrumentation, Materials Detection and Measurement; An
> Improved Handheld Radiosotope Identifier (RIID) for Both Locating and
> Identifying Radioactive Materials. R.M. Keyser, T.R. Twomey, D.L. Upp;
> ORTEC)
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob Shannon
>
> Project Chemist / Radiochemist
>
> Kaiser Analytical Management Services
>
> Tel: 303-432-1137
>
> Fax: 720-889-2775
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> From: Dimiter Popoff <didi@tgi-sci.com>
> Subject: Re: Detection of HEU, etc
> Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:15:58 +0200
>
>
> No matter how well trained people are they will need usable instruments.
>
> The task takes more than the mickey-mouse GM or NaI devices which are
> currently deployed.
>
> Ge detector based systems can do the job, although they cost more and there
> are tradeoffs to be made because of the cooling system (which better be
> LN2, or you endup with an expensive Peltier cooled device which may
> dangerously approach the NaI class).
> I roughly estimate that a quad 35-50% Ge detector system will be about fine
> to inspect containers - such a thing would cost about $200k (at least
> I know I can deliver it at such price, I have heard of more expensive
> systems of the above mentioned mickey-mouse type being installed only
> to raise the question of how to actually do the job, but that's not a
> tech issue).
> Of course, there is also a variety of Ge based mickey-mouse
> systems on offer - and under "development" at fancy labs ....
>
> Dimiter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments
>
> http://www.tgi-sci.com
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> > To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
> > From: Brian Rees <brees@lanl.gov>
> > Subject: Detection of HEU, etc
> > Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 07:47:46 -0700
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Many instruments can detect HEU, the problem is that the signal may be
> > small enough that it's difficult to discern from other sources, and that to
> > avoid nuisance alarms many organizations turn the sensitivity on
> > instruments down (make them less sensitive). Of course, if you shield it,
> > the problem is more complex.
> > OK, here's my soapbox...
> > That is why it is VITAL that appropriate training be provided to ANYBODY
> > who gets an instrument. People understand that their jobs are important,
> > and everybody with a uniform or badge takes their responsibilities
> > seriously, they WANT too do a good job, but they have to know "what's
> > what". An understanding of radiation, and radiation detection is not
> > intuitive, and the debate over the potential hazard(s) of single mrems
> > makes it difficult for someone who has plenty of other issues to consider
> > during their "regular jobs" to do exactly what "we'd" like them to do when
> > they encounter something radioactive. Training them for 100% of what they
> > may encounter, and exactly what to do 100% of the time is not
> > realistic. 70%, 80%, 90% is debatable.
> >
> > There are solutions. While I'm not a big fan of DOE itself, the RAP
> > program is an excellent avenue for responders to get help when they
> > encounter radiation related issues. The proper resources can be called
> > upon, and assistance will be obtained. Many States have excellent
> > radiation programs, and provide response assistance as well. Any response
> > must consider the entire situation, and be graded for the situation. As
> > more people get and use radiation detectors, the response will get better,
> > but we must ensure that people don't become dismissive or complacent. So,
> > if you are involved with responders and instruments, ensure they are
> > appropriately trained so they will do the right things, 10 minutes isn't
> > enough, 8 hours may be too much.
> >
> > The risk from an RDD or the potential for a mushroom cloud can be debated,
> > but these things will happen, and we must do the best we can as a community
> > to help the public when it does. As we've seen from Boston this month, the
> > public (and the media) will be disproportionately concerned when the word
> > "radioactive" is used.
> >
> > (obviously) my own opinions, not those of my management or employment chain
> >
> > Brian Rees
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
************************************************************************
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. You can view the Radsafe archives at
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/