SBM-20 and STS-5 (CTC-5) Sensitivity Comparison

  • Simomax
  • Simomax's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Nuts about radioactive everything!
More
4 months 1 week ago - 4 months 1 week ago #6758 by Simomax
I wanted to see if there was much difference between the sensitivity between a SBM-20 and STS-5 tubes. For a background test I had an SBM-20 running for a while then swapped it for a STS-5. I think the graph says it all. 

 
Attachments:
Last edit: 4 months 1 week ago by Simomax.
The following user(s) said Thank You: steadramon

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Simomax
  • Simomax's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Nuts about radioactive everything!
More
4 months 1 week ago - 4 months 1 week ago #6762 by Simomax
I took this a step further and compared the two tubes using 13 different sources. In hindsight I should have tested a J305 at the same time. It took a surprisingly long time, so I might set up some kind of testing jig and program an ESP to automate a lot of the task. I would also like to do tests at 1cm, 5cm and 10cm, so it would definitely need some kind of automation. I was actually a little surprised to see the STS-5 get a higher CPM for every source, yet the background is less for the STS-5.

Here are the results. There is also a PDF attached to download if you wish.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source                                  STS-5      SBM-20    Difference

    1  Uraninite                        9559        8380     14.07%
    2  Uranium Glass                    856         805       6.34%
    3  Uraninite with Gummite           2478        2301      7.69%
    4  Thorium Dioxide (Powder)         1117        958      16.60%
    5  Potassium Chloride               246         232       6.03%
    6  Thorium Dioxide (In Solution)    244         187      30.48%
    7  Autunite                         21871       19834    10.27%
    8  Amerecium 241                    886         785      12.87%
    9  Strontium 90                     69219       64654     7.06%
    10 Radium Watch Hands               181         174       4.02%
    11 Uranium Glaze                    5724        5130     11.58%
    12 Thorium Gas Mantle               10413       9361     11.24%
    13 Depleted Uranium                 3195        3002      6.43%
Attachments:
Last edit: 4 months 1 week ago by Simomax.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Juzzie

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
4 months 1 week ago #6766 by Juzzie
Excellent!
I am wondering if you used the same HV source (geiger counter) for your sample tests as for your background comparison - could there have been a different voltage applied to the GM tubes for background test compared to the samle tests?

Owner and operator of "southofhobart" monitoring stations.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Simomax
  • Simomax's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Nuts about radioactive everything!
More
4 months 6 days ago - 4 months 6 days ago #6769 by Simomax
Actually, no. I did use different counters for the background and source testing. The background was from a GK Radmon, and the source testing was done with my breadboard counter, which is effectively a GK v5.5 (older version.) However, I have checked the voltages of both counters and both are correctly set at 390-400v. It wouldn't hurt to repeat the test though using the same counter as the source testing, so I have thrown a SBM-20 on it for a day or so, and then I will swap out to the STS-5 for a day or so. I also think it might be worth repeating the tests I have already done with some averaging - 1 minute, 5 minutes, 15 minutes and maybe 30 minutes. When I was testing the sources with both tubes, the way I decided the CPM was a little fluffy. I let it sit for just over a minute, waited until it peaked and fell, and then used the CPM reading of it's next peak. It might also be worth getting a good background reading for each tube to be tested so that can be subtracted from the resulting CPM to give a more accurate result. I think that might be necessary for doing testing over a distance of 5/10cm.

I am considering actually building some kind of test rig and specific code so semi-automated testing. That way I can just set it up and swap things then push a button and let the Arduino/MCU do it's stuff. I have a few less sensitive tubes (SI3BG/Dextray 3G8B/DOB-50/DOB-80. It would be nice to get some kind of sensitivity data on these too as well as the more common tubes.

 
Last edit: 4 months 6 days ago by Simomax.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Simomax
  • Simomax's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Nuts about radioactive everything!
More
4 months 5 days ago #6773 by Simomax
I have compared the STS-5 and SBM-20 again on the same counter I used with the sources. Interesting result.... Hardly any difference.

 

It does beg the question though; why on the first counter (GK Radmon Basic) is there such a difference, yet on the second counter (breadboard GK v5.5) there is hardly any difference. I have doubly checked the voltage on the breadboard counter and its reading 404v right now. STrange. I shall have to have a look at the GK Radmon and see why..... 
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Simomax
  • Simomax's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Nuts about radioactive everything!
More
4 months 5 days ago #6776 by Simomax
Okay... So the GK Radmon now is showing the same background for both tubes. The graph is from radspod_two. I just grabbed this graph, that's why the timing is off the other from SimoTester. It's currently sitting on a shelf in my office and I have been swapping the tubes from that. Radspod_two has SBM-20, breadboard counter has STS-5, then radspod_two has STS-5, breadboard counter gets SBM-20. There was obviously something amiss with the first background reading with both tubes. I know the voltage was high on the GK Radmon, but I can't remember when I changed it back down to 400v. It wasn't when I changed tubes... Or maybe. I dunno. Can't remember. Too many counters around me at the moment. I really do think a purpose built semi-automated system would be a good idea for this. Something that logs every few seconds, checks voltage, or at least logs it and does some decent averaging. It would be super neat if I could fabricobble some kind of carousel that held 3 or 4 tubes and automatically rotated the next tube into place and started recording. I'd have to work out some kind of switching arrangement for them, so only one tube was on at a time. I'm thinking some relays and a RC servo to rotate the carousel to line the relevant tube up with the source. Oooo, a linear bearing/shaft thing and a stepper motor would work well for moving the source back. So 1st check with source nearly touching the tube, then move back to 1cm, then 5 then 10cm. Each time recording the results, then when done it automatically moves on to the next tube and goes again. I would have minimal work to do then as I would just need to set the source at the first instance, then push a button and sit back and drink wine. Sounds like a plan!

Anyway, the graph from radspod_two, that shows no change in background between tubes, this time....

 
Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: Gamma-Man
Time to create page: 0.259 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
Everything's free. Please support us by considering a donation. Log in first!
Solar powered Raspberry Pi 4 server stats: CPU 44% Memory 13% Swap 15% CPU temp=65.7'C Uptime 10 Days