Radiation Levels: Inverse Square Law Outcome at 6m

  • Thread starter Thread starter nonphysical
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Levels Radiation
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating radiation levels using the inverse square law, specifically determining the radiation level at 6m from a source emitting 400mGy/hr at 2m. It is clarified that the radiation level decreases with distance, and at 6m, the radiation level is 44.4mGy/hr, not 400mGy/hr as initially suggested. The total radiation remains constant, but the area over which it is distributed increases, leading to a lower radiation dose per unit area. Participants also discuss the implications of shielding and dose rates at different distances, emphasizing that while the total dose remains the same, it is spread over a larger area at greater distances. Understanding these principles is crucial for effective radiation safety and shielding calculations.
nonphysical
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Using the inverse square law could anyone tell me what the outcome of this problem is?
If the radiation level is 400mGy/hr at 2m from the point radiation source, what will be the radiation level at 6m?
I figured it would be 1600mGy/hr at the point, and therefore 44.4mGy/hr at 6m
being distance squared of 6m

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not quite. You can't use the inverse square law to find the radiation level AT the point, because the distance would be zero, and therefore the radiation infinite. Notice however that 6m is 3 times farther away than 2m... so by what factor should the radiation decrease?
 
Zhermes
Q. If the radiation level is 400mGy/hr at 2m from a point source, what will be the radiation level be at 6m?

Are you saying the radiation level will decrease by a factor of three?

If at the piont of radiation the level is 1600mGy/hr, then at 2m it should represent a factor of four , ie 400mGy/hr at 2m. therefore at 3m should represent a factor of nine, etc.

Does this mean the radiation dose level drops or just the area increases, or both?
 
nonphysical said:
If at the piont of radiation the level is 1600mGy/hr, then at 2m it should represent a factor of four , ie 400mGy/hr at 2m.
Again, you can't talk about the amount of radiation AT the point.
nonphysical said:
therefore at 3m should represent a factor of nine, etc.
There you go.

nonphysical said:
Does this mean the radiation dose level drops or just the area increases, or both?
Both. The total radiation is constant no matter how far away you are; the area over which that radiation is distributed increases as the distance squared. Therefore the radiation per unit area (which is proportional to the radiation dose) drops as the distance squared.
 
Thanks for the reply

OK so the radiation level at 6m is still 400mGy/hr but covering an area of 36m2

as per 400mGy/hr at 2m covering an area of 4m2

How come the x-radiation shielding HVL system has to be calculated?
Why not just shield for the given dose rate regardless of distance, if the dose remains constant?

If the dose remains the same but proportional given the area, does this therefore mean at 2m the dose rate is 100mGy/hr for each square metre
And the same would apply at a distance of 6m being 36m2 each sqare metre having radiation penetration equivanlent to the proportion of the original dose spread over that area ie 11.11each?
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top