Is Cs-137 Effective for Calibrating Vintage Geiger Counters?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mfr1003
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gamma Source
mfr1003
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
So I have a bit of a story here. First of all, I work in my university's radiation safety department, where, among other things, I calibrate Geiger Counters. I also passed Modern Physics (Physics III), so I got some education on radioactive decay.

I have an old Counter from 1962, a Victoreen CDV-715, the one from the Civilian Defense boxes, model 1A. I replaced the battery, and it works, but it hasn't been calibrated since 1988. I calibrate meters all the time, but I use Cs-137 sources, in the mCi range, when first installed in 1992. My problem is that this meter requires Gamma sources to calibrated, and Cs-137 only has about 5.6% chance to decay the the meta-stable Ba-137, half-life about 3 minutes. Only in meta-stable Barium will it give off gamma radiation, .992 MeV worth. Does anyone who also deals with this stuff have a thought as to how I might go about using the Cs-137 sources to successfully calibrate this old meter? I can got it working, but wouldn't it be neat to get it FUNCTIONAL? Then when I get my hands on other old meters my office is throwing away, I can fix them as well!

I don't have the exact activity from the 6 sources I use to calibrate meters right now, but I can get all that info tomorrow. I'm just not at work right now. I can get their activity at any date, even in the future, as predicted by their decay models. I have all the formulas about activity and decay rates and distances and the like, I just need someone's input to put all these pieces together.

Thanks in advance!

Mike
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sorry about that

I meant .662 MeV of Gamma decay energy. Mistype. Also, I know that if the counter only picks up Gamma radiation, it won't be affected by the β- decay from the Cs-137, I just want to walk through all this logically before I stick it up on the rolling rack and start shooting rays at it. Also, I do have the manual for it.
 
Last edited:
Well, the direct gamma emission is easy - there is an equilibrium of Ba-137, so 5.6% of the beta-decays lead to a direct gamma decay. On the other hand, your high-energetic electrons can produce gamma rays, too, so you probably get some background.

Wikipedia has different numbers for the decay probabilities.
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top