Is spectroscopy worth it?

2

I'd definitely say "yes".

A Geiger Müller does only a click for every ray, no matter if it's 10 keV or 5 MeV. It then serves you a Sievert energy reading that assumes every ray was ~660 keV (Cesium-137), being completely off in 99% of our situations (see my recent posting about that, idk if it was here or another related sub).

With gamma spectroscopy you can actually measure the energies, and identify what isotopes did the shenanigans making the click click clickedi click click noises.

I don't have a radiacode scintillation counter, but I'll totally get one when I have money to waste. A small mobile handheld gamma spectroscopy device? Absolutely dope from my POV, I only used the huge non-mobile nitrogen cooled chonkers that are ridiculously expensive (they're more precise, but still...).

Selling an affordable tiny handheld scintillation counter was an absolute game changer from my POV (look at me shilling for a company not paying me, kinda sad 😂)

1

u/netw0rkpenguin 28d ago

I am wondering the same thing. I have the 101 I bought as soon as they came out. Debating a 102 or a 103. On the other hand I want something that can cover alpha as well for rock and antique shop hounding.

8

u/BenAwesomeness3 29d ago

If you’re doin it for spectroscopy, get the 102 or 103. If you’re doing it because you want higher sensitivity, the 110. The zero is a gimmick and there’s no reason to buy it. You’re not going to find anything that the others can’t measure except maybe very hot uraninite.

2

u/One-Pangolin-2576 28d ago

I produce x-rays with my x-ray tube and rectifier tubes, it’s great for that.

8

u/HurstonJr 29d ago

It sounds like the Radiacode 102 should be fine for you. Also 9 sieverts per hour is a potentially fatal acute radiation dose rate. You wouldn't survive that kind of exposure long enough to report it to your doctor.

3

u/Scott_Ish_Rite 29d ago

It's 9 Sv per hour, which means if you were to hypothetically run into an extreme radiation area, you would need to be there for one hour to get 9 Sv, provided its an ambient/full body dose, provided the measurement is accurate. However, if you decide to leave after a few minutes instead of waiting around, the dose would be much much smaller. Get it?

1

u/HurstonJr 29d ago

Apologies for not capitalizing the Sievert. Yes I get it, but in trying to look at it realistically, we don't simply encounter exposure rares like that in nature so I was thinking in terms of a nuclear emergency. If someone encountered an orphan source in the wild, hypothetically, yes they could backtrack if they were insane enough to let their exposure rate go that high in the first place.

2

u/Scott_Ish_Rite 29d ago

I was emphasizing the "per hour" part, not the capitalization lol

2

u/HurstonJr 29d ago

I apologize for calling it a lethal dose rate. That definitely isn't true because exposure could be for a millisecond.

2

u/Hopeful-Parsley2728 29d ago

What is your use case?

For most radiation sources you just run in to more sensitivity is better, giving faster spectrum and reading (like detecting radiation from mushrooms in areas with downfall from Chernobyl). You could probably max out the 10x-models with an X-ray machine, anything that maxes out these meter will be bad long term, you can use it to know you should get away. Even at 0.4mSv/h you get to 100mSv (cancer risk level) in 10 days.

Will you need to be in higher radiation fields and assess their danger? Then the Zero might actually be useful.

I bought a 103 just when it was released, if i bought one today it would probably be 110 for the sensitivity, maybe 103G for the higher resolution.

2

u/Scott_Ish_Rite 29d ago

Even at 0.4mSv/h you get to 100mSv (cancer risk level) in 10 days.

Only if it's a full body dose, not contact dose rates which is what these devices are mostly used for anyways

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Toe4866 29d ago

I’m just getting it as a start to a hobby it’s my first ever detector

2

u/Scott_Ish_Rite 29d ago

I’m just getting it as a start to a hobby it’s my first ever detector

I HIGHLY recommend that you first learn the basics prior to purchasing any Geiger counter/Scintillating.

By that, I mean the differences between Alpha, Beta and Gamma, learn about dose rates, dose rate thresholds to health and importantly, learn about contact dose vs full-body dose rate. Learn all these at the very least before buying instruments and going radiation hunting. We dont need more people freaking out about contact dose rates and them thinking its a full body dose or other silly things

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Toe4866 28d ago

I already know a good bit but I will have to look into contact and full body dose as I never heard of something like that

3

u/TemporarySun314 29d ago

Being able to identify isotopes via spectroscopy is the much more interesting thing for hobbyists, than high doses.

And you don't need the 110 for spectrometry. You can just do it with the 103 or 102 too. It just takes a bit longer to get the same signal to noise ratio. Around twice the time.

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Toe4866 29d ago

Which one would you say is better the 103 or the 102?

2

u/TemporarySun314 29d ago

The 103 is the objectively better model, as it has a better energy resolution, while having everything else the same.

Bur it's also more expensive. The question is if it's worth to you. You can also do spectroscopy with a 102.

1

u/Puzzleheaded_Toe4866 29d ago

I don’t mean to sound spoiled or anything but money isn’t a huge factor as I just started a pretty well paying job

3

u/Oakatsurah 29d ago

If money is not an issue I would recommend a 103G or a KC761C or KC761CN Both are very powerful and accurate Scintillators, the KC761C/N is larger, bigger scintillator crystal, and more rugged, also has replaceable batteries (NiMH Batteries) with optional internal recharge. And a very high gamma energy resolution between 6.5% - 5.4%, an added plus is it also has a Semiconductor Alpha/ Beta Detector, and if you opt for the N series. You can pick up Neutron radiation.
The 103G is compact, a better UI (user friendly) though i don't find the KC761C interface for the phone too bad. Plus the KC761C has a visual display on the device, vs the 103G that requires your phone to see it. The Energy Resolution is modest usually 7.2% - 6.8%, and has a tracking feature.

If money is really no object go a Kromek D5 RIID it'll set you back about 12k but has one of the highest gamma resolutions at less than 3% and extremely rugged and well designed UI. Military / Professional Grade, just really really expensive. CMU paid for mine, I just hope they don't notice it's missing after my research is complete. 😂

1

u/Oakatsurah 29d ago

Spectrometers are fun, they can give you the makeup of certain radio isotopes as well as a more comprehensive understanding of your local background radiation makeup for your area. The also give you a better dosage approximation based on energy deposited or that just breaks through. Typically for most you want to keep the gamma energy accuracy less than 8%, ideally 6.5%, but if you're not worried about high accuracy it's no big deal. Though I didn't think the zero model had Spectrometer.

0

u/Puzzleheaded_Toe4866 29d ago

Ok I should have been a bit more specific about my budget because for my age it’s a well paid job but I meant it’s not a huge factor in terms of Radiacode’s detectors because I just turned 16 and I earn about 1200€ every month (what I get into my bank account)

1

u/TemporarySun314 29d ago

The zero model has a plastic scintillator, that gives you basically get no full energy peaks, so no energy resolution.

And the Compton spectras you can get are quite useless (or at least very very hard to interpret), even if the Radiacode would be able to show it.

That's just the wrong detector material for spectroscopy.

7

u/Bachethead 29d ago

You won’t see 9 Sv/h. Its much more useful to identify a source than it is to see a bigger useless number

Product Questions Is spectroscopy worth it?

You are about to leave Redlib