| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Damien68 |
Posted - 08/10/2022 : 00:49:48
I don't know if I'm right, in the case of the explosion of a nuclear missile, I don't think that a counter like these ones (with Geiger-Muller tube) can evaluate the intensity of the primary radiation at a given location (radiation due to fission of uranium) because it must be almost instantaneous and therefore seen as 1 CPS. but we can always evaluate the secondary radiation due to thermal and other effects and also due to the difusion of unreacted uranium and other radioactive elements.
it would take a network a matrix of really small mini detectors and observe the synchronization of the detections which will give usable statistical data in this direction. but it could be compromised by the EMI produced.
If anyone knows anything about this, that's great. |
| 5 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Damien68 |
Posted - 12/11/2022 : 04:24:44
Hi radworker87, thanks for this very relevant information, in general I have the impression that people know how to protect themselves from contamination but less from irradiation. maybe the contaminations present a higher risk than the radiations themselves? |
| radworker87 |
Posted - 12/05/2022 : 07:06:02
A nuclear bomb emits a big burst of radiation called "prompt radiation" or "initial radiation" that last less than a second. It is made of gamma radiation and neutrons. Very few detectors can accurately measure it because of its incredibly high intensity (many thousands of sieverts per hour) However there are modern digital dosimeters for battlefield use that use an advanced chip than can detect prompt gamma and neutron. There was a seller selling surplus military dosimeter watches with this function for $50 last year on ebay.
In reality they are only useful for small tactical nukes because large thermonuclear bombs will kill you with the shockwave first. |
| Damien68 |
Posted - 08/19/2022 : 07:49:22
thank you the mike for your answer, it is very interesting.
as you say, if that happens, we will have other concerns than knowing the force of the explosion. |
| the_mike |
Posted - 08/17/2022 : 15:51:29
Disclaimer: i am not a physicist, and english's my 2nd language
If I remember my NBC-scout training correctly (which is also two decades old now), a lot of the radiation actually depend on where the explosion happens; back in service, we separated high, middle, low or ground explosion. The closer the explosion is to the ground, the more fallout by whirled up and thus "activated" dust will occure.
To measure the size of a bomb, we actually used squares applied to the cloud. Also we were to measure AFTER the explosion, covering the first minutes in our observation-posts. (to finish NBC-scout training - you acknowledged that you'll be with those, who stay outside and report everything as long as you can). Reason for this: ...our counters were not EMI-protected. Also, the radiation-shower with gammas - as damaging it is - isn't the problem. The fallout and the size of the contamination will be.
I remember the reporting-scheme from back in the day:
ATEX - atomic explosion, indicated with the azimuth.
ATO - first message: when the GM started clicking. message with add. infos about the explosion (size of the cloud, direction, altitude of expl.)
ATO - 2nd message: when maximum-radiation was shown (we had counters for beta and gamma) - message with radiation
ATO - 3rd message: when radiation was going down again (i remember a set interval that needed to be fullfilled before sending that message)
Ah yeah, how we determined the size of the cloud - so we were told: take the width of the strain of the mushroom-cloud; make it into a square; see how many times you can place the square along the mushroom-cloud. I don't remember the scale anymore...
Back then, we used the telephone-network, totally analog (my old unit was discared when they switched to digital). EMI-proofen devices (so they told us - who knows if the network would have survived an EMP).
Today, I'd say these small devices we have from GQe aren't exactly those I'd use to measure fallout/gamma-shower aso; they're good when bugging out ("if radiation goes up - change direction"), but for everything else i'd take other instruments...
Reading your question, I had flashbacks to the training; also due to a philosphical aspect:
what good does measuring the radiation of an ATEX - for me, measuring the fallout afterwards is more important to determine what to do. IMHO - if a nuclear explosion goes off, you have two spots you wanna be: far far away in a bunker built deep down in a mountain-massive with years of supplys, OR unprotected in ground zero for permanent stress relief...
Hope something in this post is helpfull...
|
| EmfDev |
Posted - 08/15/2022 : 10:31:43
It seems it is impossible to measure/detect the radiation intensity at the moment of impact/explosion. Maybe if we find out the specs of the nuke they used then we can calculate/estimate the amount of radiation produced. |
|
|
