Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
-
- Posts: 1494
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 1:30 am
- Real name: Jon Rosenstiel
- Location: Southern California
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Mark,
As to your copper count conundrum, maybe try copper metal powder in a Marinelli beaker. I think they run somewhere around $15.00 each.
https://www.drct.com/dss/accessories/be ... eakers.htm.
Jon R
As to your copper count conundrum, maybe try copper metal powder in a Marinelli beaker. I think they run somewhere around $15.00 each.
https://www.drct.com/dss/accessories/be ... eakers.htm.
Jon R
- Mark Rowley
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 12:20 am
- Real name: Mark Rowley
- Location: Sacramento California
- Contact:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Hi Jon,
Not a bad idea. The site looks like a good overall resource too!
I’ve yet to give the copper bar a nice long exposure with the new cooling system. Tonight or tomorrow I’ll flux it with a good 15 minute run and see what turns up. Stay tuned!
Mark Rowley
Not a bad idea. The site looks like a good overall resource too!
I’ve yet to give the copper bar a nice long exposure with the new cooling system. Tonight or tomorrow I’ll flux it with a good 15 minute run and see what turns up. Stay tuned!
Mark Rowley
- Mark Rowley
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 12:20 am
- Real name: Mark Rowley
- Location: Sacramento California
- Contact:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Much better results with Copper activation. 10 minutes of flux time at a rough TIER estimate of 1.7E+6 n/s.
The Cu66 photopeak at 1.04MeV is very pronounced at 346 seconds.
At 1000 seconds shown with natural background in gray.
This is a 1000 second natural background count with a non-irradiated copper sample of the same size.
Total counts from irradiated sample: 5039
Total counts from non-irradiated sample: 3298
Total counts over background: 1741
Mark Rowley
The Cu66 photopeak at 1.04MeV is very pronounced at 346 seconds.
At 1000 seconds shown with natural background in gray.
This is a 1000 second natural background count with a non-irradiated copper sample of the same size.
Total counts from irradiated sample: 5039
Total counts from non-irradiated sample: 3298
Total counts over background: 1741
Mark Rowley
- Mark Rowley
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 12:20 am
- Real name: Mark Rowley
- Location: Sacramento California
- Contact:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
More progress with Copper activation today. The chart shows results after 533 seconds in the spectrometer. The 1.04MeV photopeak decayed to about nothing after 90 minutes however the 511keV is still cranking out gammas well above the natural artifact.
Flux time was 10 minutes.
Mark Rowley
Flux time was 10 minutes.
Mark Rowley
-
- Posts: 1494
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 1:30 am
- Real name: Jon Rosenstiel
- Location: Southern California
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Way cool Mark,12.7-hour Cu-64 spittin’ out the positrons. Just think how large that 511 peak would be if you could activate your copper sample for 24-hours.
Jon Rosenstiel
Jon Rosenstiel
- Mark Rowley
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 12:20 am
- Real name: Mark Rowley
- Location: Sacramento California
- Contact:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Thanks Jon, here’s a subsequent 3.75hr gamma spec of the same sample showing a much larger 511 photopeak.
On that note I’m working on getting a sustained 1hr flux time so I can take a crack at your Molybdenum / Tc99m run a few years back.
viewtopic.php?t=5817
I have a small sheet of 1x1” of 99% Molybdenum however I noticed yours was more like a heavy billet. Will my attempt suffer or totally fail from the comparative thinness?
Here’s a pic of what I have on hand:
Mark Rowley
On that note I’m working on getting a sustained 1hr flux time so I can take a crack at your Molybdenum / Tc99m run a few years back.
viewtopic.php?t=5817
I have a small sheet of 1x1” of 99% Molybdenum however I noticed yours was more like a heavy billet. Will my attempt suffer or totally fail from the comparative thinness?
Here’s a pic of what I have on hand:
Mark Rowley
-
- Posts: 1494
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 1:30 am
- Real name: Jon Rosenstiel
- Location: Southern California
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Mark, I suspect your 1" x 1" piece of Mo will work fine.
JonR
JonR
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Great 511 annihilation peak!
Richard Hull
Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
- Mark Rowley
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 12:20 am
- Real name: Mark Rowley
- Location: Sacramento California
- Contact:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
-Iodine Activation-
Subjected approx 30 grams of pure iodine prills to about 2.5 minutes of flux time at approx 6E+06 TIER n/s at 17cm distance.
Here it is comfortably nestled within the HDPE moderator.
So the plan was to zap this for a full 15 minutes so I could get not only the main activation product at 441keV but also the lesser one at 528keV. Unfortunately that didn’t work out due to operator error. Being that I’ve been conditioning my fusor the past 4 days I was overly elated to see my neutron count hovering in the 6E+06 range! So I added a tad more deuterium which caused a spike in current draw. That instantly put the precip power supply into some type of fault mode or failure where it’s only supplying 50% of its rated output. I’ve yet to dig into to the supply but when I do I’ll start a new topic or add it to one of the old ones.
Anyhoo, I decided to throw the 2.5 minute activated Iodine in the spectrometer. It was nice to see the decay product at 441keV but not a peep from the 528keV.
So that will be it for a few weeks till I get the power supply issue figured out.
Mark Rowley
Subjected approx 30 grams of pure iodine prills to about 2.5 minutes of flux time at approx 6E+06 TIER n/s at 17cm distance.
Here it is comfortably nestled within the HDPE moderator.
So the plan was to zap this for a full 15 minutes so I could get not only the main activation product at 441keV but also the lesser one at 528keV. Unfortunately that didn’t work out due to operator error. Being that I’ve been conditioning my fusor the past 4 days I was overly elated to see my neutron count hovering in the 6E+06 range! So I added a tad more deuterium which caused a spike in current draw. That instantly put the precip power supply into some type of fault mode or failure where it’s only supplying 50% of its rated output. I’ve yet to dig into to the supply but when I do I’ll start a new topic or add it to one of the old ones.
Anyhoo, I decided to throw the 2.5 minute activated Iodine in the spectrometer. It was nice to see the decay product at 441keV but not a peep from the 528keV.
So that will be it for a few weeks till I get the power supply issue figured out.
Mark Rowley
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Getting great result on the activation. Mark, you have probably activated more stuff than any one here, Keep up the good work and incredible neutron numbers.
Richard Hull
Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
- Mark Rowley
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 12:20 am
- Real name: Mark Rowley
- Location: Sacramento California
- Contact:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Thanks Richard. Fusoring and gamma spec is quite the mix!
After repairing the power supply I elected to try activating Vanadium. Figured it’d be better to go for a new element in the case I had another unexpected power supply issue. Happy to report that wasn't the case.
The vanadium sample was a 9.5g 5x10cm sheet at 99.98% purity.
This sample was fluxed at roughly 2E+06 n/s TIER for 12 minutes. Far cry from the numbers I had last week but I’m not going to press my luck. Best to take it easy. Spacing from the grid was 17cm.
Once it hit the spectrometer it registered 15.1 cps.
200 seconds: 12.1 cps
1000 seconds: 6.9 cps
2000 seconds: 5.1 cps
The expected photopeak at 1434keV was immediately apparent once the spectrometer started its run.
Since the fusor was down for repairs most of my wall loading had gone away. However, I’ll try building it back up again for a couple days in hopes of getting a better gamma spec of iodine. The 528keV photopeak was missing but I think a good 15 minute exposure at higher numbers should remedy that.
Mark Rowley
After repairing the power supply I elected to try activating Vanadium. Figured it’d be better to go for a new element in the case I had another unexpected power supply issue. Happy to report that wasn't the case.
The vanadium sample was a 9.5g 5x10cm sheet at 99.98% purity.
This sample was fluxed at roughly 2E+06 n/s TIER for 12 minutes. Far cry from the numbers I had last week but I’m not going to press my luck. Best to take it easy. Spacing from the grid was 17cm.
Once it hit the spectrometer it registered 15.1 cps.
200 seconds: 12.1 cps
1000 seconds: 6.9 cps
2000 seconds: 5.1 cps
The expected photopeak at 1434keV was immediately apparent once the spectrometer started its run.
Since the fusor was down for repairs most of my wall loading had gone away. However, I’ll try building it back up again for a couple days in hopes of getting a better gamma spec of iodine. The 528keV photopeak was missing but I think a good 15 minute exposure at higher numbers should remedy that.
Mark Rowley
- Jim Kovalchick
- Posts: 717
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:00 pm
- Real name:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
I bought a piece of that vanadium on ebay a month ago. You beat me to the activation! As always, nice work Mark.
Jim K
Jim K
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Indeed, fabulous work! I have added you to the elite fusioneers touting your multi-element continuous activation. Great work and a seeming non-stop effort.
Richard Hull
Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
- Mark Rowley
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 12:20 am
- Real name: Mark Rowley
- Location: Sacramento California
- Contact:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
I’m running out of things to activate! lol. Gadolinium seems like something fun to experiment with, at least in the neutron detector department.
Tonight’s run was a 15 minute Iodine activation at roughly 2.8E+06 n/s TIER. Compared to the ill fated first attempt (Nov 12th) which was abruptly stopped after the first couple minutes, this one resulted with a much stronger peak at 441keV. The peak at 528keV is still elusive, however when background was subtracted a small peak (or possibly noise) was near the 528keV region. Fwiw, after another 1000 seconds in the spectrometer the peak had decayed to zero but I’m still not really convinced.
It’s also likely that my spectrometer resolution is not good enough to isolate such a small photopeak so close to the wide base of the 411keV photopeak. As pointed out by Carl Willis in his Iodine activation report from years earlier, the 528keV accounts for a minuscule 1.5% of decays while the 411keV a whopping 14%. That’s a tiny blip to isolate with a crude NaI(TI) spectrometer. This actually highlights my concern with attempting a Molybdenum activation. Any hint of TC99m (140keV) will be very small and nudged up against or enveloped by the the wide base of the natural lead XRF peak at around 90kev. Background subtraction on Theremino MCA has a tendency to leave a bunch of xrf noise.
Regarding the iodine, maybe it just needs more neuts thrown at it! I may revisit this one again in the future.
Mark Rowley
Tonight’s run was a 15 minute Iodine activation at roughly 2.8E+06 n/s TIER. Compared to the ill fated first attempt (Nov 12th) which was abruptly stopped after the first couple minutes, this one resulted with a much stronger peak at 441keV. The peak at 528keV is still elusive, however when background was subtracted a small peak (or possibly noise) was near the 528keV region. Fwiw, after another 1000 seconds in the spectrometer the peak had decayed to zero but I’m still not really convinced.
It’s also likely that my spectrometer resolution is not good enough to isolate such a small photopeak so close to the wide base of the 411keV photopeak. As pointed out by Carl Willis in his Iodine activation report from years earlier, the 528keV accounts for a minuscule 1.5% of decays while the 411keV a whopping 14%. That’s a tiny blip to isolate with a crude NaI(TI) spectrometer. This actually highlights my concern with attempting a Molybdenum activation. Any hint of TC99m (140keV) will be very small and nudged up against or enveloped by the the wide base of the natural lead XRF peak at around 90kev. Background subtraction on Theremino MCA has a tendency to leave a bunch of xrf noise.
Regarding the iodine, maybe it just needs more neuts thrown at it! I may revisit this one again in the future.
Mark Rowley
- Mark Rowley
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 12:20 am
- Real name: Mark Rowley
- Location: Sacramento California
- Contact:
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Aside from silver, this marks the first substantial activation with the newly constructed flyback power supply (viewtopic.php?f=11&t=13907). In this test, the same puck of manganese used in last August’s test was used today.
At approximately 1.2E+6 n/s, the sample was fluxed for 5 minutes at a distance of 18cm from the grid. Moderator was HDPE.
As before, the MCA arrangement is Theremino with a Bicron scintillation probe. The 850keV photopeak was readily apparent within a second or two of activating the MCA.
Molybdenum is the ultimate goal but will require some extra modifications to ensure the system can endure a 45minute to 1hr run time.
Mark Rowley
At approximately 1.2E+6 n/s, the sample was fluxed for 5 minutes at a distance of 18cm from the grid. Moderator was HDPE.
As before, the MCA arrangement is Theremino with a Bicron scintillation probe. The 850keV photopeak was readily apparent within a second or two of activating the MCA.
Molybdenum is the ultimate goal but will require some extra modifications to ensure the system can endure a 45minute to 1hr run time.
Mark Rowley
- Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: Fusor 2020 Activation Experiments
Without sounding like a broken record.......Fabulous work! Kudos.
Richard Hull
Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment