Testing of Radiation Shielding and Calculation

of Half-Lives
By
Wilson Punyalack, Abdolmajid Raeisi, Yi-Hsuan Chiu, Supun Bakiwewa, Chiyoko Yagasaki and Lewis Risk

Abstract
Radioactivity, scientifically speaking is a relatively new pursuit of science and in
this day and age has proven to be one of the most beneficial discoveries. In this
report the types radiation that were studied were alpha, beta and gamma which all
have different properties which were tested through shielding and half life
calculations. It was found that lead was the best form of shielding but only after
taking into account the amount of flaws present in the experimental design.

Introduction:
In the past one hundred years, the study of radioactivity has been explored and
established. This field of study was introduced in the late 19th century, and later firmly
established by French scientists Marie Curie and Pierre Curie with their experiments
on radioactive elements (Hocking, 2005). Radioactivity is at the cutting-edge of
modern science for its significance in medical application as well as archaeological
and environmental importance.

The report describes the experiment designed and conducted in order to record the
absorption of different types of radiation by various materials; additionally, the decay
of radioactivity was also measured. The results of absorption were compared between
different materials and the half-life of various radioactive sources was calculated form
the data obtained.

Theory:
When an unstable nucleus decays it may give off several forms of radiation, three
well known forms of radiation that were measured in the first experiment were Alpha,
Beta and Gamma radiation. Each of these forms of radiation, or ionising radiation, has
different properties which affects how they interact with matter. Alpha radiation
consists of two protons and two neutrons and being a relatively large particle lacks the
penetrating power of other forms of radiation as it is quickly ionises. Beta radiation is
a single electron and due to its small size and high speed can penetrate more thicker
shields. Gamma radiation is a ray rather than a particle and is usually given off with
alpha and beta radiation. It is less ionising than the other forms of radiation as it does
not have a charge and as such is extremely penetrating. The second experiment
involved calculating the half life radioactive isotopes. This involves measuring the
amount of radiation over a period of time and the half life is calculated when the
radiation emitted is half that of the initial measurement. The general formula for half
life is:

Where Nt Is the final amount, N0 is the initial amount, t is the time passed and t1/2 is
the half life.
Materials and methods:

Materials:

Part I: radiation shielding

 Geiger-MÜller counter w/ GM TUBE (detector)

 Stop watch
 Latex gloves
 Radioactive sources:

• Alpha 37 kBq Am-241 (1987)

• Beta 37 kBq Sr/Y-90 1μCi (1985)
• Gamma 370 kBq Cs-137 10μCi (1985)

 Sheets of Paper
 Thin aluminium blocks
 Thick aluminium blocks
 Lead Blocks
 Plant material (leaf, bark)
 Meat material (beef patty)
 Wood blocks

Part II: Radiation half-life

 Geiger-MÜller counter w/ GM Tube (detector)

 Stop watch
 Microsoft excel
 Radioactive sources:

• Alpha 37 kBq Am-241 (1987)

• Beta 37 kBq Sr/Y-90 1μCi (1985)
• Gamma 370 kBq Cs-137 10μCi (1985)
• Barium -137m minigenerator
Methods:

Both parts of the experiment were performed under standard laboratory conditions at
room temperature.

Part I: Radiation Shielding

Apparatus consisting of a Geiger counter and GM tube (gaseous ionisation detector)

were appropriately organised and set up. The GM tube was situated 15cm from
radioactive source propped by a support bracket ensuring stability. Background
radiation checks were performed 5 times; the average utilised as appoint of reference.
Background radiation was accounted for simply by switching on the Geiger counter
and observing the produced numerical value after 1 min. Standardised sources of
alpha, beta and gamma radiation were then positioned in the support bracket
(handling requires use of latex gloves). The radioactivity of each source was recorded
over a period of 1min through four trials. These standards are used as a source of
comparison.

Following standard measurements, the different shielding materials selected were

individually placed in between the radioactive source and the GM tube. Each of the
shielding materials was subjected to all three types 1 min of radiation over a number
of 4 trials each. The amount of radiation able to penetrate the shielding material was
determined by the Geiger counter. These results were then entered into Microsoft
Excel of detailed analysis.

This proved to be scientifically unreliable as there were two variables being changed.
As such modifications were made to the experiment whereby there would be only one
variable being changed. That is, rather than using different shields of different
thicknesses the experiment was carried out using shields of the same thickness and
after each measurement the shields were made thicker until a the value for radiation
remained relatively consistent.

Part II: Calculating Half Life

Similarly, apparatus consisting of a Geiger counter and GM tube (gaseous ionisation

detector) were appropriately organised and set up. Background radiation checks were
performed 3 times over a time period of 5 min each.

To determine the half life of each radioactive substance (alpha, beta and gamma),
each sample was securely positioned into the support bracket over 5 min. Radiation
levels were noted in 30sec intervals. The radiation emitted over each 30 second
interval can be calculated simply by means of subtraction.

The results were processed in Excel and the appropriate graphs were produced for
analysis.
Results:

Shielding Experiment:

The following results depict graphs of radiation penetration through various

thicknesses of shielding.
Thick ne s s vs Radiation (Alpha-Wood)

40 y = 30.872e-0.0304x
R2 = 0.917
Radiation

30
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Thick ne s s (m m )

Thick ne s s vs. Radiation (Alpha-Alum inium )

y = 37.044e-0.05x
40
Radiation

R2 = 0.8716
30
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20
Thick ne s s (m m )

Thick ne s s vs . Radiation (Aplha-Lead)

30 y = 29.093e-0.0789x
Radiation

R2 = 0.9366
20

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Thick nes s (m m )

Figure 1 – Alpha Radiation and Shielding

 Figure 2 – Beta Radiation and Shielding
Thickness vs.Radiaton (Beta-Wood)

200

150
y = 123.21e-0.0698x
Radiation
100 R2 = 0.8488

50

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Thickness (mm)

Radiation vs. Thickness (Beta Aluminium)

y = 113.97e-0.0873x
120
R2 = 0.968
100
80
Radiation

60
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20
Thickness mm

Thickness vs. Radiation (Beta-Lead)

35
30
y = 34.071e-0.0745x
25
R2 = 0.8937
Radiation

20
15
10
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Thickness (m m)
 Radiation vs. Thickness (Gamma Wood)
y = 121.78e-0.0039x
140 R2 = 0.7083
120
100
Radiation

80
60
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Thickness (m m )

Radiation vs. Thickness (Gamma Aluminium)

y = 120.35e-0.0123x
140
R2 = 0.9943
120
100
Radiation

80
60
40
20
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Thickness m m

Radiation vs. Thickness (Gamma Lead)

y = 124.61e-0.0722x
140
R2 = 0.9573
120
100
Radiation

80
60
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Thickness m m

Figure 3 – Gamma Radiation and Shielding

From these graphs it is clear that the thicker the shield is the more radiation it will
stop, however – depending on the nature of the radiation certain materials will only
affect the radiation measured slightly. Lead was the best shield due to it’s high density
followed by aluminium and then paper. From these results the Amount of radiation
measured is inversely proportional to the Thickness and Density of the shielding
material.

Half – Life Experiment:

Initially the half-life experiment was conducted on the first three radiation emitters
used in the shielding experiment. The follow depicts results of the measurement of the
three radioactive isotopes over 5 minutes at 30 second intervals.

Am - 241 (Alpha)

0.08
alpha radiation

y = 0.0499e-0.0151x
0.06 R2 = 0.0287 Series1
0.04
Expon. (Series1)
0.02
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Tim e (m ins)

Figure 4 – Alpha Radiation Half Life results

Cs - 137 (Gamma)

0.23
Gamma radiation

0.22 y = 0.1983e0.0052x
R2 = 0.0246 Series1
0.21
Expon. (Series1)
0.2

0.19
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Tim e (m ins)

Figure 5 – Beta Radiation Half Life results

Sr/Y - 90 Raditation (Beta)

0.76
0.74
y = 0.7e-0.0012x 2nd β-radiation
0.72
0.7 R2 = 0.0026
0.68 Expon. (2nd β-
0.66
radiation)
0.64
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Figure 6– Gamma Radiation Half Life results

However due to problems encountered instead Cs-137 was reacted with an acid
forming Ba – 137m to give the following results over five minutes:

Time β -radiation (Cs-137 ratio of β -radiation

(mins) Liquid) reduction
0.5 401 1
1 358 0.89276808
1.5 353 0.880299252
2 302 0.753117207
2.5 207 0.516209476
3 298 0.743142145
3.5 216 0.538653367
4 162 0.403990025
4.5 152 0.379052369
5 144 0.359102244
Table 1: The change of the β -radiation for Cs-137 liquid against time

The change of the β-radiation for Ba-137m liquid against time is shown in Table 1.
Since our purpose of this experiment is to find out half-life, the ratio of β -radiation
reduction was calculated and indicated next to the β -radiation column. The β
-radiation for Ba-137m liquid decreased at a certain ratio.

Figure 7 shows the ratio of β -radiation reduction versus time. According to

exponential trend line, we obtained:
y=1.1713e-0.2394x
where x is time in minutes and y is the ratio of β -radiation reduction, and R2 =
0.8905.

Figure 7; the ratio of β -radiation reduction versus time

βI2 radiation reduction ratio

1.2 ratio of I2- radiation

ratio of I2- radiation

1 reduction
reduction

0.8
Expon. (ratio of I2-
0.6
radiation reduction
0.4 )
0.2 - 0.2394x
y =1.1713e
0 2
R = 0.8905
0 2 4 6
Time (mins)
Figure 8; β -radiation against time

β
I2-radiation

450
400
350
I2-radiation
300 I2-radiation (Cs-137
250 Liquid)
200 Expon. (I2-radiation
150 (Cs-137 Liquid))
100
50
0
-0.2394x
y = 2469.7e
0 2 4 6 R
= 0.8905
Time (mins)

The β -radiation against time was illustrated in Figure 8. From this graph, we obtained
Y = 469.7e-0.2394x where R2 = 0.8905.

From the equation from the graph R2D, when y=0.5

X = 3.56187 mins
From the equation from the Figure 8, half life is where y= 0.5*469.7
And we have the same answer as before, namely X = 3.56187 mins
Discussion:
In this experiment there were several results that were considered unreasonable or
more so that they did not fit into what was already known about physics. They were:

• That a sheet of paper blocked more radiation than a sheet of aluminium in the
alpha particle tests
• That a meat patty overall blocked more radiation than a sheet of lead (one of
the most dense elements)

Other than these results most of the other results were consistent with experiments
that were carried out previously in history.

However the results achieved in this experiment can not be considered reliable as they
differ from what is has begun to be expected from the global scientific community.
This is due to many factors, mainly:

• The Background Radiation was constantly fluctuating.

• Other radioactive sources were within relatively close proximity to the Geiger
counter and as such individual measurements could not be considered
accurate.
• The experiment itself was badly set out, involving insufficient variable control
as well as inappropriate radiation sources.

Background Radiation – Due to the nature of radiation it is very difficult to achieve

the same results twice in a row; this is because the way a particle can be emitted is
essentially random. Taking this into account the Background radiation during our
testing was seen to fluctuate considerably between 17 to 26 Geiger clicks meaning
that our final calculations of the radiation emitted by a radioactive source was
inaccurate. While this was partially solved by repeating the measurements several
times it was never completely possible to remove all chance of error considering how
radiation is never consistent.

Uncontrolled Radioactive Sources - During initial measurements, the serious

mistake was made of leaving other radioactive sources near the Geiger counter, this
created extremely varying results and by consequence had to be redone. This was
solved by placing the radioactive sources in a shielded box which was found to
sufficiently reduce the inaccuracies in results obtained; however the effectiveness of
this is still unknown creating greater doubts of accuracy in the experiments.

Experimental Design Flaws – In both parts of the experiment there were serious
flaws. In the first experiment there was insufficient variable control, meaning that
while we used different types of shielding as one variable the thickness of these
shields were inconsistent. This caused practically all our results to be inaccurate as
was demonstrated by how a sheet of paper blocked more than a sheet of aluminium.
This was due to the paper being around five times thicker than the aluminium. This
also explains how meat was found to be a better method of radioactive shielding than
lead. Because of this a new experimental design was created for the first experiment.
The second part of the experiment was also poorly designed as the measurement of
the half-life could not be obtained from the samples we were given. As shown by the
graphs R2A, R2B and R2C the trend line was not exponential at all and results
obtained were far too erratic to be considered for calculations. This was due to the fact
that Americium – 241 has a half life of approximately 400 years, Strontium – 90 a
half life of 30 years and Caesium – 137 a half life of 28 years (Plambeck, 1996).
Ideally to measure the half life of a radioactive substance it must either be done over
several years, or have a short enough half life to be measured in a laboratory session
(Knight, Jones and Field, 2007). The attempted solution to this was to use Caesium –
137 reacted with acid to modify its half life and radioactivity. The downside to this is
that it becomes irrelevant to the experiment at hand as it is a modified radiation
emitter meaning it can not be compared to the other emitters which were standard.

Improvements to the Experimental Design –

Shielding Experiment:

Set a certain value of Geiger clicks and incrementally increase the thickness of the
shield used until after a certain time the radiation level is reached. The more difficult
of the two options as it involves the most precision when using both the Geiger
counter the improvement in results above the first option is debatable but will provide
intuitive results. I.e. the shield which required the shortest length to reach the amount
of clicks with the specified time would be the best shield.

Half-Life Experiment:

If possible find other sources of Alpha Beta and Gamma radiation each with a half life
within five to ten minutes.

Conclusion:
In the tests conducted it was found that a shield of high density as well as thickness
would prove to be the best form of shielding from radioactive sources. Unfortunately
this could not be elaborated on through investigation into the half lives of alpha, beta
and gamma sources due to the unreliable design of the experiment.
References:
1. Toby Dylan Hocking, (2005), The History of Modern Physics, Berkley
University
2. Knight, Jones and Field, (2007), College Physics, Pearson International
3. James A. Plambeck, (1996), Chemical Sciences Data Table

Acknowledgements:
Wilson Punyalack – Speech, Report
Abdolmajid Raesisi – Measurements, Calculations
Yi-Hsuan Chiu – Research, Report,
Supun Bakmiwewa – PowerPoint, Calculations
Chiyoko Yagasaki – PowerPoint, Record Keeping
Lewis Risk – Speech, Measurements, Report