Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 09:28 PM 12/9/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Abd ul-Rahman 
Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote:


Well, think about it, Axil. The button is a 
circular piece of metal, probably steel. It has 
a well in it, shallow, as I described. At the 
bottom of the well, there is what looks like, 
under magnification, some kind of "smear" of 
something. It would be americium oxide, which is 
insoluble. You can swallow this stuff, 
apparently without harm, because it does not 
dissolve with stomach acides. This would be 0.9 
microcurie of Am-241, which is really tiny.


Â
I think a danger with alpha sources is inhaling 
them in powdered form or when they are deposited 
on airborne dust or vapor, such that they become 
lodged in the lungs. Â Also, americium seeks 
bone if it enters the blood, where it remains for a long time [1].


Eric

[1] 
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp156.pdf


That source is pretty redunant, saying the same 
thing over and over. However, it did eventually 
acknowledge what I long ago heard: people have 
swallowed Am-241 sources, in the one microcurie 
range, with practically no untoward effect. They 
measured the level to which the Americium oxide 
or dioxide in the sources dissolved, by looking 
for it in the urine. The levels were extremely small.


Some guy was unfortunate enough to have a whole 
device blow up in his face, severely lacerating 
him and blasting maybe a hundred curies of Am 
into his body. He was treated with massive 
chelation therapy, and survived for eleven years, 
dying from unrelated causes. They really followed 
this guy, because you can't run experiments like this on humans!


He had some damage, all right. But it's not what 
killed him. He was pretty old at the time of the accident, I think he was 66.


Am-241 sources for ionization smoke detectors are 
0.9 microcuries. That amount of Americium, if 
somehow made airborne and absorbed into the 
lungs, could be a problem, for sure. But you'd 
really have to work to get it to do that. For 
starters, the oxide isn't terribly harmful on the 
skin or swallowed. Other compounds are much more 
effective at getting into the body and staying 
there, the nitrate, for example, has been studied with animals.


So I have an envelope on my desk here, with an 
Am-241 button in it. It's actually a bit more 
than the tiny button shown on that youtube video 
that someone posted, of a woman who dismantled a 
source. I think that my source is actually a 
piece of metal (I've thought it was steel, but 
some have claimed that these sources are mounted 
on aluminum; mine based strip of metal seems too 
strong and too hard to be aluminum, but I've not 
really investigated this.). I'd rather keep the 
source mounted. Harder to swallow, harder to 
lose. If the actual button fell on my floor, it would be pretty hard to see.


I've described the source as being a smear of 
material in the bottom of the well. However, that 
might not be true. What I see under magnification 
is an area of shiny material, with an irregular 
boundary, striated, in the middle of the bottom 
of the well, largely filling it. But surrounding 
this is a dark area that is not striated. That 
does not look like metal, whereas the middle of 
the bottom does. I'm thinking that the Am-241 
oxide (dioxide?) might be the dark material, up 
against the wall of the well. That would make it 
even harder to accidentally scrape some out. A 
bit more of the radiation would be absorbed by the walls of the well.


I'm much more concerned about my piece of 
Beryllium. It's got something that looks like 
grime on two edges. Wiped onto a tissue, that 
appears to be a very dark powder, under 
magification, the particles seemed very small, 
relatively uniform in size. Very tiny black 
specks. I strongly suspect that someone took some 
bar stock and cut it to make these pieces. And 
did not ensure that they were left clean. I've 
asked the seller. No response so far.


If the seller did the cutting, and did this 
extensively, he risked his own health and may 
have contaminated some equipment I saw no 
clue in any of his information that this was a 
hazardous material, which is worrisome all by 
itself. I was, myself, I assume, exposed to a 
little of this, a speck or two might have flown, 
but that level of exposure, if not repeated over 
time, is not terribly dangerous. The specks are 
not seen on the plastic bag the piece was 
enclosed in, so they are not "loose" until wiped off. They might be oily.


I'll keep the Beryllium in its plastic bag for 
now. Before using it, I'll need to clean it, I'll 
think about how to do that safely. The total 
amount of contamination here, if those particles 
are Be, is very small, I need to keep it from 
becoming airborne. I don't think I need to call 
in the hazmat team! There is a lot more Be 
floating around from beryllium brakes from 
cert

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Eric Walker]

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

Well, think about it, Axil. The button is a circular piece of metal,
> probably steel. It has a well in it, shallow, as I described. At the bottom
> of the well, there is what looks like, under magnification, some kind of
> "smear" of something. It would be americium oxide, which is insoluble. You
> can swallow this stuff, apparently without harm, because it does not
> dissolve with stomach acides. This would be 0.9 microcurie of Am-241, which
> is really tiny.
>

I think a danger with alpha sources is inhaling them in powdered form or
when they are deposited on airborne dust or vapor, such that they become
lodged in the lungs.  Also, americium seeks bone if it enters the blood,
where it remains for a long time [1].

Eric

[1] http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp156.pdf

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 06:17 PM 12/8/2012, Axil Axil wrote:
"The problem is that I have an Am-241 source which is a sheet of 
metal (steel?) with a circular ridge welded onto it. The Am-241 is 
in the well formed by the ridge. So if I place the beryllium on top 
of the ridge, it will be elevated from the source by ... okay, damn 
it! I'll go find the durn thing and measure it."


Use a  Americium 241 button to get around the spacing issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J_KqY81EmA


A closer look at the Americium 241 button from a smoke detector.


I have two buttons, but don't know what happened to the first, so 
another smoke detector had to die.


The buttons looked a bit different.

The Americium 241 button seems to be a standard product found in a 
large verity of smoke detectors.


My guess is that someone sells these. But a major smoke detector 
manufacturer may well make their own.



The design of the smoke detector must be radiation failsafe

The button is small but powerful. Use more than one button to 
increase alpha intensity by stacking them on each other.


Well, think about it, Axil. The button is a circular piece of metal, 
probably steel. It has a well in it, shallow, as I described. At the 
bottom of the well, there is what looks like, under magnification, 
some kind of "smear" of something. It would be americium oxide, which 
is insoluble. You can swallow this stuff, apparently without harm, 
because it does not dissolve with stomach acides. This would be 0.9 
microcurie of Am-241, which is really tiny. That amount should 
produce about 2.2 million disintegrations per minute. But half of 
those would have a trajectory not out of the button, but into the 
well. These will be absorbed.


There is no way to "increase alpha intensity" by stacking them, 
except maybe to stack *two*, well to well, in which case there would 
be double the intensity, but it would be rather useless. Half would 
have a track one way and half the other. Alphas will not penetrate a 
piece of paper, and I'm surprised that the penetration for air is as 
much as 4 cm for 5.5 MeV alphas, i.e., from Am-241. I have not 
attempted to separate the button from the small piece of sheet metal 
that it is mounted on. I suppose that if I did, I could arrange some 
well so that the "beams" intersected, but the alpha intensity would 
be reduced from distance, I'm not at all sure I'd gain anything. I'd 
rather have a strongly anisotropic source.


I imagine that the neutrons will remain anisotropic, more likely to 
exit the other side of the piece of beryllium, which is what I want.



Only trying to help:axil


Of course, Axil, thanks.

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 02:29 AM 12/8/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Eric Walker 
<eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:


The problem is that you don't find out if it 
what you did was safe for five years, and then 
you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.



More accurately, I think it would be something 
like this -- for each interaction with the 
beryllium, there is a probability b that an 
adverse beryllium event B occurs. Â You'll then 
find out five years on average, with some amount 
of variation, whether B occurred. Â If B isn't 
seen one or two standard deviations out from 
five years from 2017, you will have been 
cleared, as far as the initial beryllium 
interaction went. Â If B does occur, you'll have 
a 1/3 chance of dying and a 2/3 chance of 
disability. Â But I assume you will need to 
repeat this process for each interaction that you have with the beryllium.


I would not go near it.


That's a personal choice. From what I've seen, 
the adverse event, B, simply does not happen with 
contact with pure beryllium metal, as a solid 
piece, nor with contact with BeO as a ceramic. It 
does happen with inhalation of Be, BeO, and other 
Beryllium compounds, if they are airborne (i.e., 
suppose one is machinging the metal, and it is 
being ground away. Or one is working the 
beryllium brakes, a real place where people have 
been seriously exposed -- i.e., mechanics).


BeO is very dangerous if crushed. Don't crush 
beryllium oxide insulators!!! If I whack my piece 
of beryllium with a hammer, it might make a few 
very small particles. I'm not going to do it. 
Turns out I don't need to. But if there was a 
good reason, it would be *highly* unlikely to generate a case of berylliosis.


It appears that a single adverse event that even 
produces an acute reaction only very rarely ends 
up causing chronic berylliosis. Much more 
dangerous is continued low-level exposure, which 
may produce no immediate symptoms at all, but 
which can then show up as much as twenty years 
later, as very serious chronic berylliosis.


Okay, my package arrived. No warning signs on it, 
and I don't think they are required. Opening it 
up, inside a plastic bag, is a piece of metal, 
6.55 x 19.45 x 25.88 mm. (It is not cut perfectly 
squarely, those are averages.) It is indeed very 
light, it weighs 6.02 grams. (It was sold as 5.85 
grams). Thus the density (from measured weight) 
is 1.83 g/cm^3. The density of Be is reported as 
(Wikipedia) 1.85 g/cm^3. Pretty close. (The 
surface is scored, and my dimensions are pushed 
as to accuracy, I only could find my vernier 
caliper, so the actual material there might be slightly less volume).


I scratched it with the point of a scissor, a 
short scratch. It made a clean shallow groove. 
Aong the edges, particularly corners, it is 
broken, tiny pieces are missing. That's how I'd 
expect beryllium to look, it's brittle.


It seems to have a bit of grey film or dark dust 
on the surface, on one or two edges. That's 
worrisome. I wiped some off on a piece of tissue 
paper, and examined it under a microscope. It 
looks like a fine powder. Each side of the piece 
is scratched with parallel lines, apparently from when it was cut.


I will now write the seller and find out more 
what I have. If that's machining dust, i.e., 
finely powdered beryllium, or mixed with 
beryllium, and maybe with an oil used to keep 
dust from flying when machining, it's a bit 
dangerous. The material is not readiliy airborne, 
though. It would not blow off, for example, I 
don't think -- and I'm not about to try it. None 
of this material fell off the piece in its plastic bag. 

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.]

How about using gadolinium:
http://unitednuclear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=16_17_69&products_id=141

I bought a beryllium marble from them a few years ago for a coupe of bucks,
but they aren't listing it anymore.

Hoyt Stearns





On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> *"If I want a small piece of beryllium that will fit in the well of an
> Am-241 source, to get maximum neutron flux, I might arrange to buy some
> pieces like that."*
>  This is wrong thinking. To get the most neutron intensity, a very thick
> piece of beryllium (Be) is required to increase the probability of alpha
> particle interaction with a Be atom.
>
> A very thin piece of Be will not convert all the alphas to neutrons. After
> the neutron is produced, it will not be absorbed by Be atoms so a thick
> berillium tagret will not affect the neutron.
>  Cheers: axil
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
> wrote:
>
>> At 01:51 AM 12/8/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <>> a...@lomaxdesign.com>a**b...@lomaxdesign.com > wrote:
>>>
>>> Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would it crush? There could be
>>> a way to pull this off safely, with capture and proper disposal of any
>>> dust. Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But that's not for
>>> now.
>>>
>>>
>>> The problem is that you don't find out if it what you did was safe for
>>> five years, and then you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.
>>>
>>
>> The danger of beryllium is real and subtle. However, it's also being
>> exaggerated here. If one is exposed to serious levels of airborn beryllium,
>> which are pretty small, yes, even a subacute exposure have no symptoms for
>> many years (sometimes 20) and can pop up years later as very serious
>> chronic disease. But the experience with beryllium was with workers at
>> beryllium plants who were exposed to the material, at substantial levels,
>> day after day, for years, and if those people contracted berylliosis,
>> *then* there was a one-third chance of a seriously harmful outcome, like up
>> to and including death.
>>
>> If I were to take a piece of thin beryllium foil and cut it with some
>> snips, once or a few times, the chance of serious beryllium exposure is
>> extremely small. And even that "bold move" I'm not going to engage in
>> without a lot more research, and possible some serious precautions. I'm
>> going to experiment first with my solid piece of beryllium, which is very
>> safe. As long as I don't heat it seriously, or do any of a number of other
>> unwise things.
>>
>> I have children. I have utterly no willingness to risk their health. If I
>> were to do anything more bold than allowing this piece of beryllium to sit
>> on top of an Am-241 smoke detector source, I would not do it here. And I
>> might easily not do it at all. If I want a small piece of beryllium that
>> will fit in the well of an Am-241 source, to get maximum neutron flux, I
>> might arrange to buy some pieces like that. There are places selling
>> machined beryllium. And I'd attempt to recover my cost by selling the
>> pieces for exactly that application.
>>
>> The children will not be allowed to handle the beryllium. They will know
>> about it, though, and they will know that it is dangerous. Even though it
>> appears that one can swallow pieces of beryllium metal without harm, we
>> will not run that experiment.
>>
>> Here is what I will say to anyone considering using beryllium. It's a
>> totally cool substance, in many ways. However, anyone who is going to
>> handle it should study the MSDS guidance, and take it very seriously. Many
>> people have died from contact with beryllium. Airborn, it is totally nasty.
>>
>> There can be a bit of hysteria around it, see http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/
>> **2007/02/08/banned-beryllium/
>>
>> It's a judgment call. Beryllium has been used for jet aircraft brakes.
>> That generates dust. I can see why people would get upset. Bad News for Air
>> Force Mechanics. Beryllium for an engine piston, as described in the
>> f1fanatic site probably does not emit serious beryllium in engine exhaust,
>> or else the piston would wear out quickly. But that could be addressed by
>> testing.
>>
>> I'm looking forward to handling the metal, it is reputed to be amazingly
>> light, very palpably so. Source after source said that beryllium metal
>> parts were not a problem, even while warning very seriously about dust
>> (metal, oxide, or salts of beryllium). Absorption through the skin does not
>> appear to be a problem, doesn't seem to happen. They say that if a piece of
>> beryllium is lodged beneath the skin, remove it... that does seem like a
>> good idea, eh?
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Axil Axil]

*"The problem is that I have an Am-241 source which is a sheet of metal
(steel?) with a circular ridge welded onto it. The Am-241 is in the well
formed by the ridge. So if I place the beryllium on top of the ridge, it
will be elevated from the source by ... okay, damn it! I'll go find the
durn thing and measure it."*

Use a  Americium 241 button to get around the spacing issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J_KqY81EmA


A closer look at the Americium 241 button from a smoke detector.

The Americium 241 button seems to be a standard product found in a large
verity of smoke detectors.

The design of the smoke detector must be radiation failsafe

The button is small but powerful. Use more than one button to increase
alpha intensity by stacking them on each other.


Only trying to help:axil




On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 01:56 AM 12/8/2012, Axil Axil wrote:
>
>  IMHO, Beryllium does not need to be reformed in any way no matter what
>> its original shape. It is a neutron moderator; most neutrons will pass
>> right through it.  But some will be slowed if the beryllium is very thick.
>>
>
> The problem is that I have an Am-241 source which is a sheet of metal
> (steel?) with a circular ridge welded onto it. The Am-241 is in the well
> formed by the ridge. So if I place the beryllium on top of the ridge, it
> will be elevated from the source by ... okay, damn it! I'll go find the
> durn thing and measure it.
>
> By some total miracle, I found the source in only a minute.
>
> The well is about 0.7 mm deep.
> It is about 2.3 mm diameter.
> The range of Am-241 alphas. 5.5 MeV, in air, is about 4 cm.
>
> Might not be a problem at all.
>
> Let's see: 1  Ci = 3.7 × 104 disintegrations per second = 2.22 × 10^6
> disintegrations per minute.
>
> about half of these, if I understand the situation correctly, will be
> absorbed by the Be if it's sitting on top of the well. From Wikipedia, "a
> representative alpha-beryllium neutron source can be expected to produce
> approximately 30 neutrons for every one million alpha particles."
>
> So, roughly, I'd expect rougly 33 neutrons per minute. I'd think they
> might be anisotropic, heading in more or less the same direction as the
> original alphas. Then I need to look at how many of these would be detected.
>
> Using a bunch of detectors, I could look for anisotropy LR-115 is
> cheap.
>
> I can detect fast neutrons through proton knock-on, that's an advertised
> usage for LR-115, and I have a boron-t10 converter screen which I can use
> to detect slow neutrons. Hey, this is cool: Am-241 -> alpha -> (Be9, alpha,
> C12, n) -> (B10, n, alpha). The key will be finding alphas on the other
> side of the Be ingot, and only with a B10 screen. Aside from that, just
> using direct neutrons, how many triple tracks will I find? Turns out they
> are really easy to spot, the alphas hit the LR-115 like a brick, they make
> really clear tracks, and three radiating from a point stands out clearly.
> Proton tracks are more subtle. And that's part of what I want to test.
>
> So, now, how do I get a real proton source? My guess is that,
> realistically, if I want to calibrate my LR-115 for proton detection, I'll
> need to find someone willing to expose the material. Much easier, I'd
> think, to move a few tiny pieces of plastic film to a source, like a linear
> accelerator, than to move the source to the film
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Axil Axil]

*"If I want a small piece of beryllium that will fit in the well of an
Am-241 source, to get maximum neutron flux, I might arrange to buy some
pieces like that."*
 This is wrong thinking. To get the most neutron intensity, a very thick
piece of beryllium (Be) is required to increase the probability of alpha
particle interaction with a Be atom.

A very thin piece of Be will not convert all the alphas to neutrons. After
the neutron is produced, it will not be absorbed by Be atoms so a thick
berillium tagret will not affect the neutron.
 Cheers: axil


On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 01:51 AM 12/8/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <> a...@lomaxdesign.com>a**b...@lomaxdesign.com > wrote:
>>
>> Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would it crush? There could be a
>> way to pull this off safely, with capture and proper disposal of any dust.
>> Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But that's not for now.
>>
>>
>> The problem is that you don't find out if it what you did was safe for
>> five years, and then you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.
>>
>
> The danger of beryllium is real and subtle. However, it's also being
> exaggerated here. If one is exposed to serious levels of airborn beryllium,
> which are pretty small, yes, even a subacute exposure have no symptoms for
> many years (sometimes 20) and can pop up years later as very serious
> chronic disease. But the experience with beryllium was with workers at
> beryllium plants who were exposed to the material, at substantial levels,
> day after day, for years, and if those people contracted berylliosis,
> *then* there was a one-third chance of a seriously harmful outcome, like up
> to and including death.
>
> If I were to take a piece of thin beryllium foil and cut it with some
> snips, once or a few times, the chance of serious beryllium exposure is
> extremely small. And even that "bold move" I'm not going to engage in
> without a lot more research, and possible some serious precautions. I'm
> going to experiment first with my solid piece of beryllium, which is very
> safe. As long as I don't heat it seriously, or do any of a number of other
> unwise things.
>
> I have children. I have utterly no willingness to risk their health. If I
> were to do anything more bold than allowing this piece of beryllium to sit
> on top of an Am-241 smoke detector source, I would not do it here. And I
> might easily not do it at all. If I want a small piece of beryllium that
> will fit in the well of an Am-241 source, to get maximum neutron flux, I
> might arrange to buy some pieces like that. There are places selling
> machined beryllium. And I'd attempt to recover my cost by selling the
> pieces for exactly that application.
>
> The children will not be allowed to handle the beryllium. They will know
> about it, though, and they will know that it is dangerous. Even though it
> appears that one can swallow pieces of beryllium metal without harm, we
> will not run that experiment.
>
> Here is what I will say to anyone considering using beryllium. It's a
> totally cool substance, in many ways. However, anyone who is going to
> handle it should study the MSDS guidance, and take it very seriously. Many
> people have died from contact with beryllium. Airborn, it is totally nasty.
>
> There can be a bit of hysteria around it, see http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/*
> *2007/02/08/banned-beryllium/
>
> It's a judgment call. Beryllium has been used for jet aircraft brakes.
> That generates dust. I can see why people would get upset. Bad News for Air
> Force Mechanics. Beryllium for an engine piston, as described in the
> f1fanatic site probably does not emit serious beryllium in engine exhaust,
> or else the piston would wear out quickly. But that could be addressed by
> testing.
>
> I'm looking forward to handling the metal, it is reputed to be amazingly
> light, very palpably so. Source after source said that beryllium metal
> parts were not a problem, even while warning very seriously about dust
> (metal, oxide, or salts of beryllium). Absorption through the skin does not
> appear to be a problem, doesn't seem to happen. They say that if a piece of
> beryllium is lodged beneath the skin, remove it... that does seem like a
> good idea, eh?
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 01:56 AM 12/8/2012, Axil Axil wrote:

IMHO, Beryllium does not need to be reformed in 
any way no matter what its original shape. It is 
a neutron moderator; most neutrons will pass 
right through it.  But some will be slowed if the beryllium is very thick.


The problem is that I have an Am-241 source which 
is a sheet of metal (steel?) with a circular 
ridge welded onto it. The Am-241 is in the well 
formed by the ridge. So if I place the beryllium 
on top of the ridge, it will be elevated from the 
source by ... okay, damn it! I'll go find the durn thing and measure it.


By some total miracle, I found the source in only a minute.

The well is about 0.7 mm deep.
It is about 2.3 mm diameter.
The range of Am-241 alphas. 5.5 MeV, in air, is about 4 cm.

Might not be a problem at all.

Let's see: 1  Ci = 3.7 × 104 disintegrations per 
second = 2.22 × 10^6 disintegrations per minute.


about half of these, if I understand the 
situation correctly, will be absorbed by the Be 
if it's sitting on top of the well. From 
Wikipedia, "a representative alpha-beryllium 
neutron source can be expected to produce 
approximately 30 neutrons for every one million alpha particles."


So, roughly, I'd expect rougly 33 neutrons per 
minute. I'd think they might be anisotropic, 
heading in more or less the same direction as the 
original alphas. Then I need to look at how many of these would be detected.


Using a bunch of detectors, I could look for anisotropy LR-115 is cheap.

I can detect fast neutrons through proton 
knock-on, that's an advertised usage for LR-115, 
and I have a boron-t10 converter screen which I 
can use to detect slow neutrons. Hey, this is 
cool: Am-241 -> alpha -> (Be9, alpha, C12, n) -> 
(B10, n, alpha). The key will be finding alphas 
on the other side of the Be ingot, and only with 
a B10 screen. Aside from that, just using direct 
neutrons, how many triple tracks will I find? 
Turns out they are really easy to spot, the 
alphas hit the LR-115 like a brick, they make 
really clear tracks, and three radiating from a 
point stands out clearly. Proton tracks are more 
subtle. And that's part of what I want to test.


So, now, how do I get a real proton source? My 
guess is that, realistically, if I want to 
calibrate my LR-115 for proton detection, I'll 
need to find someone willing to expose the 
material. Much easier, I'd think, to move a few 
tiny pieces of plastic film to a source, like a 
linear accelerator, than to move the source to the film 

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 01:51 AM 12/8/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Abd ul-Rahman 
Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote:


Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would 
it crush? There could be a way to pull this off 
safely, with capture and proper disposal of any 
dust. Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But that's not for now.


The problem is that you don't find out if it 
what you did was safe for five years, and then 
you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.


The danger of beryllium is real and subtle. 
However, it's also being exaggerated here. If one 
is exposed to serious levels of airborn 
beryllium, which are pretty small, yes, even a 
subacute exposure have no symptoms for many years 
(sometimes 20) and can pop up years later as very 
serious chronic disease. But the experience with 
beryllium was with workers at beryllium plants 
who were exposed to the material, at substantial 
levels, day after day, for years, and if those 
people contracted berylliosis, *then* there was a 
one-third chance of a seriously harmful outcome, 
like up to and including death.


If I were to take a piece of thin beryllium foil 
and cut it with some snips, once or a few times, 
the chance of serious beryllium exposure is 
extremely small. And even that "bold move" I'm 
not going to engage in without a lot more 
research, and possible some serious precautions. 
I'm going to experiment first with my solid piece 
of beryllium, which is very safe. As long as I 
don't heat it seriously, or do any of a number of other unwise things.


I have children. I have utterly no willingness to 
risk their health. If I were to do anything more 
bold than allowing this piece of beryllium to sit 
on top of an Am-241 smoke detector source, I 
would not do it here. And I might easily not do 
it at all. If I want a small piece of beryllium 
that will fit in the well of an Am-241 source, to 
get maximum neutron flux, I might arrange to buy 
some pieces like that. There are places selling 
machined beryllium. And I'd attempt to recover my 
cost by selling the pieces for exactly that application.


The children will not be allowed to handle the 
beryllium. They will know about it, though, and 
they will know that it is dangerous. Even though 
it appears that one can swallow pieces of 
beryllium metal without harm, we will not run that experiment.


Here is what I will say to anyone considering 
using beryllium. It's a totally cool substance, 
in many ways. However, anyone who is going to 
handle it should study the MSDS guidance, and 
take it very seriously. Many people have died 
from contact with beryllium. Airborn, it is totally nasty.


There can be a bit of hysteria around it, see 
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/02/08/banned-beryllium/


It's a judgment call. Beryllium has been used for 
jet aircraft brakes. That generates dust. I can 
see why people would get upset. Bad News for Air 
Force Mechanics. Beryllium for an engine piston, 
as described in the f1fanatic site probably does 
not emit serious beryllium in engine exhaust, or 
else the piston would wear out quickly. But that could be addressed by testing.


I'm looking forward to handling the metal, it is 
reputed to be amazingly light, very palpably so. 
Source after source said that beryllium metal 
parts were not a problem, even while warning very 
seriously about dust (metal, oxide, or salts of 
beryllium). Absorption through the skin does not 
appear to be a problem, doesn't seem to happen. 
They say that if a piece of beryllium is lodged 
beneath the skin, remove it... that does seem like a good idea, eh? 

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium (Belynium?)

[Susanna Gipp]

Actually I heard that in Savona (Italy) University they found a rare
isotope of Beryllium. They named it Belynium an there are strong suspects
that (along Unobtainium) is part of Rossi's and Defkalion catalyzer secret
mixture.
As soon I found it I'll post the related paper.




2012/12/7 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 

> At 05:02 PM 12/6/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Yes, a more powerful reaction would be nice, but we must work with what
>> we have, as Abd stresses. We will die of old age if we sit around waiting
>> UPS to deliver a $1.5 million package of unobtainium.
>>
>
> It's coming? And the reward of patience is ... patience.
>
> Actually, I asked for $1.5 million so I could *attempt to obtain* this
> crucial material. That would include my overhead, travel expenses, etc. You
> don't think it's easy to buy unobtainium, do you?
>
> If we actually find some, we might need to go back for more funding to
> actually purchase it.
>
> However, the bright side: unobtainium is expected to be simply a catalyst.
> So it will not be destroyed in the experiments, and we could resell it.
> Given how much work it will have taken to find the material, we could
> probably break it down into smaller pieces and resell them to recover the
> funding, with the profit from resale covering the initial outlay.
>
> Actually, seriously, I just bought a bit over 5 grams of beryllium metal,
> 99.9% pure,on eBay for $37. What I really wanted was a very small piece of
> beryllium foil, but was I patient? No
>
> Did I ask if someone had a small piece they could spare? No
>
> I found how insanely expensive beryllium foil was and assumed that
> beryllium itself must be so as well. No, I paid a reasonable price, it
> turns out, for 5 grams. However, what I really want is a tiny piece that I
> can fit in the well of an Am-241 ionization source from a smoke detector,
> because the conversion rate for alphas to neutrons by Be-9 is very low, and
> so getting the beryllium as close as possible to the alpha source is
> desirable. In commercial Am-Be neutron sources, they actually blend the Be
> and Am oxide. And they use a thousand times as much Am-241, i.e., one
> mCurie, instead of the 0.9 uCurie in a smoke detector source.
>
> (My goal is to test LR-115 SSNTD material for neutron detection. I had the
> naive idea that I might be able to bash the Beryllium metal with a hammer
> to make a thin foil, then cut a piece. Maybe. Probably not a great idea.
> Beryllium is very hard, it might shatter. I don't want to use machining or
> cutting techniques that would create small fragments, turning my apartment
> or basement into a hazardous waste area. I may try using this little ingot
> directly, and maybe the Be itself will multiply the neutrons a bit. But any
> ideas?)
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Eric Walker]

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

The problem is that you don't find out if it what you did was safe for five
> years, and then you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.
>

More accurately, I think it would be something like this -- for each
interaction with the beryllium, there is a probability *b* that an adverse
beryllium event *B* occurs.  You'll then find out five years on average,
with some amount of variation, whether *B* occurred.  If *B* isn't seen one
or two standard deviations out from five years from 2017, you will have
been cleared, as far as the initial beryllium interaction went.  If
*B*does occur, you'll have a 1/3 chance of dying and a 2/3 chance of
disability.  But I assume you will need to repeat this process for each
interaction that you have with the beryllium.

I would not go near it.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Axil Axil]

IMHO, Beryllium does not need to be reformed in any way no matter what its
original shape. It is a neutron moderator; most neutrons will pass right
through it.  But some will be slowed if the beryllium is very thick.


Cheers:axil


On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> Yes. Apparently a solid piece of Be metal can be handled without risk, but
> exposure to dust is extremely dangerous. I mentioned that I'd be tempted to
> cut a piece of foil. With scissors, and I would not do this without a lot
> more checking. Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would it crush?
> There could be a way to pull this off safely, with capture and proper
> disposal of any dust. Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But
> that's not for now.
>
> Some were talking about heating it. No. Way too risky without taking
> complex precautions. I've read how it's handled commercially.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 8, 2012, at 1:17 AM, Jeff Berkowitz  wrote:
>
> Yeah, my friends say the same thing. "A lethal dose can be absorbed before
> there are any symptoms." "Symptoms can take up to 5 years to become
> apparent." I assume Abd knows this.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 9:45 PM, David Roberson  wrote:
>
>> I would not mess with that in any manner Abd.  Take care my friend.
>>
>>  Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
>> To: vortex-l ; vortex-l 
>> Sent: Sat, Dec 8, 2012 12:31 am
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium
>>
>>  At 11:27 PM 12/7/2012, Jeff Berkowitz wrote:
>> >A friend (not on this list) commented to me on the side: "Molten
>> >metals have a wicked high surface tension.  Would never flow, always
>> >ball-up." He says the only choice is hot forging/hot rolling.
>> >Comments: "You can turn glass on an ordinary lathe if it's red hot."
>>
>> I think this is where the video says: "Don't try this at home."
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Eric Walker]

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
wrote:

Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would it crush? There could be a
> way to pull this off safely, with capture and proper disposal of any dust.
> Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But that's not for now.
>
> The problem is that you don't find out if it what you did was safe for
five years, and then you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

Yes. Apparently a solid piece of Be metal can be handled without risk, but 
exposure to dust is extremely dangerous. I mentioned that I'd be tempted to cut 
a piece of foil. With scissors, and I would not do this without a lot more 
checking. Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would it crush? There could 
be a way to pull this off safely, with capture and proper disposal of any dust. 
Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But that's not for now.

Some were talking about heating it. No. Way too risky without taking complex 
precautions. I've read how it's handled commercially.

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 8, 2012, at 1:17 AM, Jeff Berkowitz  wrote:

> Yeah, my friends say the same thing. "A lethal dose can be absorbed before 
> there are any symptoms." "Symptoms can take up to 5 years to become 
> apparent." I assume Abd knows this.
> 
> Jeff
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 9:45 PM, David Roberson  wrote:
>> I would not mess with that in any manner Abd.  Take care my friend.
>> 
>> Dave
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
>> To: vortex-l ; vortex-l 
>> Sent: Sat, Dec 8, 2012 12:31 am
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium
>> 
>> At 11:27 PM 12/7/2012, Jeff Berkowitz wrote:
>> >A friend (not on this list) commented to me on the side: "Molten 
>> >metals have a wicked high surface tension.  Would never flow, always 
>> >ball-up." He says the only choice is hot forging/hot rolling. 
>> >Comments: "You can turn glass on an ordinary lathe if it's red hot."
>> 
>> I think this is where the video says: "Don't try this at home." 
>> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 12:45 AM 12/8/2012, David Roberson wrote:

I would not mess with that in any manner Abd.  Take care my friend.


Thanks for your concern. Don't worry.

The danger of the piece of Beryllium I've purchased is quite small. 
This is it: if it's got a white powder on it watch out!


If it got hit with a hammer and shattered or broke into fragments, 
watch out! Tiny fragments are dangerous, basically anything that can 
be inhaled would be dangerous.


It looks in the photo, nice and shiny and solid. The realistic danger 
I can see would be fire. I'm not sure how dangerous a 5 gram piece 
would be, though.


Here is the photo: 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pure-999-Beryllium-Metal-Element-Ingot-5-85-Grams-Science-/321035610716?_trksid=p2047675.m1850&_trkparms=aid%3D222002%26algo%3DSIC.FIT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D13536%26meid%3D4004484138843489494%26pid%3D100011%26prg%3D1080%26rk%3D1%26sd%3D220848114232%26


Yeah, I'm the one that paid $37.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pure-Beryllium-Metal-Element-Ingot-5-85-Grams-Science-/220848114232?nma=true&si=uZ46Rf%2BQ3oyENmIA6gfFNZo38us%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Someone bid $87 for the same thing. The item was relisted. I'm a 
little suspicious, but we'll see what I get.


This material can be sent, as it is, through the U.S. mail, if I'm 
correct. Beryllium salts are another matter. Hazardous material.


Beryllium oxide, if fired into a ceramic, is also safe.

It's machining the stuff (Beryllium or Beryllium Oxide) that is 
really dangerous, because of dust created.


Now, I just noticed 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pure-Beryllium-metal-foil-plate-x-ray-window-0-2x18x87-mm-/121033022584?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1c2e215c78 
-- a sheet of Beryllium foil, 0.2 mm thick. Now, I'd be tempted to 
cut that thin a piece, in spite of what it says But I'm not 
buying it now. Seems to me that these foil windows might show up from 
time to time if I need it in the future. That one piece, $42 is the 
starting bid, would make *many* little buttons for use with Am-241 
smoke detector alpha sources as a neutron source. 

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Jeff Berkowitz]

Yeah, my friends say the same thing. "A lethal dose can be absorbed before
there are any symptoms." "Symptoms can take up to 5 years to become
apparent." I assume Abd knows this.

Jeff



On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 9:45 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

> I would not mess with that in any manner Abd.  Take care my friend.
>
>  Dave
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
> To: vortex-l ; vortex-l 
> Sent: Sat, Dec 8, 2012 12:31 am
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium
>
>  At 11:27 PM 12/7/2012, Jeff Berkowitz wrote:
> >A friend (not on this list) commented to me on the side: "Molten
> >metals have a wicked high surface tension.  Would never flow, always
> >ball-up." He says the only choice is hot forging/hot rolling.
> >Comments: "You can turn glass on an ordinary lathe if it's red hot."
>
> I think this is where the video says: "Don't try this at home."
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[David Roberson]

I would not mess with that in any manner Abd.  Take care my friend.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
To: vortex-l ; vortex-l 
Sent: Sat, Dec 8, 2012 12:31 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium


At 11:27 PM 12/7/2012, Jeff Berkowitz wrote:
>A friend (not on this list) commented to me on the side: "Molten 
>metals have a wicked high surface tension.  Would never flow, always 
>ball-up." He says the only choice is hot forging/hot rolling. 
>Comments: "You can turn glass on an ordinary lathe if it's red hot."

I think this is where the video says: "Don't try this at home." 


 

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 11:27 PM 12/7/2012, Jeff Berkowitz wrote:
A friend (not on this list) commented to me on the side: "Molten 
metals have a wicked high surface tension.  Would never flow, always 
ball-up." He says the only choice is hot forging/hot rolling. 
Comments: "You can turn glass on an ordinary lathe if it's red hot."


I think this is where the video says: "Don't try this at home." 

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 10:57 PM 12/7/2012, Jeff Berkowitz wrote:

Abd, I assume you're aware of the hazards of working with this stuff?


Very. That, indeed, is the problem. If I were blissfully unaware of 
the dangers, I'd cheerfully start sawing it hammering it or filing it 
down, eh? Of course, it's pretty hard.


That being said, its melting point is not absurdly high - under 
2400F. Could you melt some under, say, an N2 or argon atmosphere, on 
perhaps a ceramic surface, so that it spread out into a thin layer, 
and then cool it?


Like I can do this in my apartment?

(Yes, it would need to be done in a non-oxidizing atmosphere. 
Beryllium Oxide is seriously dangerous. I feel reasonably safe having 
a piece of pure metal around. Heated, no.)


From Wikipedia:

Like all beryllium compounds, BeO is 
carcinogenic and may cause 
chronic beryllium disease. 
Once fired into solid form, it is safe to handle as long as it is 
not subjected to any machining that generates 
dust.[9] 
Beryllium oxide ceramic is not a hazardous waste under Federal law in the USA.


Hmmm http://www.americanberyllia.com/ claims that the oxide, 
fired, is safe, as implied in the quote from Wikipedia. Now, there 
might be some kind of part or spacer or insulator made from beryllia 
(BeO) that could be just the right size That would be nifty. Just 
drop a little pellet of BeO into the Am-241 well... ... and a nice, 
low-intesity neutron source?


On the other hand, Beryllium also is a neutron moderator, slowing 
neutrons. I really don't know what to expect.


But I'll have some fun with my little ingot first. I really want to 
see what happens, and it's another excuse to play with LR-115.

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Jeff Berkowitz]

A friend (not on this list) commented to me on the side: "Molten metals
have a wicked high surface tension.  Would never flow, always ball-up." He
says the only choice is hot forging/hot rolling. Comments: "You can turn
glass on an ordinary lathe if it's red hot."

Jeff


On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Jeff Berkowitz  wrote:

> Abd, I assume you're aware of the hazards of working with this stuff?
>
> That being said, its melting point is not absurdly high - under 2400F.
> Could you melt some under, say, an N2 or argon atmosphere, on perhaps a
> ceramic surface, so that it spread out into a thin layer, and then cool it?
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
> wrote:
>
>> At 05:02 PM 12/6/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, a more powerful reaction would be nice, but we must work with what
>>> we have, as Abd stresses. We will die of old age if we sit around waiting
>>> UPS to deliver a $1.5 million package of unobtainium.
>>>
>>
>> It's coming? And the reward of patience is ... patience.
>>
>> Actually, I asked for $1.5 million so I could *attempt to obtain* this
>> crucial material. That would include my overhead, travel expenses, etc. You
>> don't think it's easy to buy unobtainium, do you?
>>
>> If we actually find some, we might need to go back for more funding to
>> actually purchase it.
>>
>> However, the bright side: unobtainium is expected to be simply a
>> catalyst. So it will not be destroyed in the experiments, and we could
>> resell it. Given how much work it will have taken to find the material, we
>> could probably break it down into smaller pieces and resell them to recover
>> the funding, with the profit from resale covering the initial outlay.
>>
>> Actually, seriously, I just bought a bit over 5 grams of beryllium metal,
>> 99.9% pure,on eBay for $37. What I really wanted was a very small piece of
>> beryllium foil, but was I patient? No
>>
>> Did I ask if someone had a small piece they could spare? No
>>
>> I found how insanely expensive beryllium foil was and assumed that
>> beryllium itself must be so as well. No, I paid a reasonable price, it
>> turns out, for 5 grams. However, what I really want is a tiny piece that I
>> can fit in the well of an Am-241 ionization source from a smoke detector,
>> because the conversion rate for alphas to neutrons by Be-9 is very low, and
>> so getting the beryllium as close as possible to the alpha source is
>> desirable. In commercial Am-Be neutron sources, they actually blend the Be
>> and Am oxide. And they use a thousand times as much Am-241, i.e., one
>> mCurie, instead of the 0.9 uCurie in a smoke detector source.
>>
>> (My goal is to test LR-115 SSNTD material for neutron detection. I had
>> the naive idea that I might be able to bash the Beryllium metal with a
>> hammer to make a thin foil, then cut a piece. Maybe. Probably not a great
>> idea. Beryllium is very hard, it might shatter. I don't want to use
>> machining or cutting techniques that would create small fragments, turning
>> my apartment or basement into a hazardous waste area. I may try using this
>> little ingot directly, and maybe the Be itself will multiply the neutrons a
>> bit. But any ideas?)
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Jeff Berkowitz]

Abd, I assume you're aware of the hazards of working with this stuff?

That being said, its melting point is not absurdly high - under 2400F.
Could you melt some under, say, an N2 or argon atmosphere, on perhaps a
ceramic surface, so that it spread out into a thin layer, and then cool it?

Jeff



On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 05:02 PM 12/6/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Yes, a more powerful reaction would be nice, but we must work with what
>> we have, as Abd stresses. We will die of old age if we sit around waiting
>> UPS to deliver a $1.5 million package of unobtainium.
>>
>
> It's coming? And the reward of patience is ... patience.
>
> Actually, I asked for $1.5 million so I could *attempt to obtain* this
> crucial material. That would include my overhead, travel expenses, etc. You
> don't think it's easy to buy unobtainium, do you?
>
> If we actually find some, we might need to go back for more funding to
> actually purchase it.
>
> However, the bright side: unobtainium is expected to be simply a catalyst.
> So it will not be destroyed in the experiments, and we could resell it.
> Given how much work it will have taken to find the material, we could
> probably break it down into smaller pieces and resell them to recover the
> funding, with the profit from resale covering the initial outlay.
>
> Actually, seriously, I just bought a bit over 5 grams of beryllium metal,
> 99.9% pure,on eBay for $37. What I really wanted was a very small piece of
> beryllium foil, but was I patient? No
>
> Did I ask if someone had a small piece they could spare? No
>
> I found how insanely expensive beryllium foil was and assumed that
> beryllium itself must be so as well. No, I paid a reasonable price, it
> turns out, for 5 grams. However, what I really want is a tiny piece that I
> can fit in the well of an Am-241 ionization source from a smoke detector,
> because the conversion rate for alphas to neutrons by Be-9 is very low, and
> so getting the beryllium as close as possible to the alpha source is
> desirable. In commercial Am-Be neutron sources, they actually blend the Be
> and Am oxide. And they use a thousand times as much Am-241, i.e., one
> mCurie, instead of the 0.9 uCurie in a smoke detector source.
>
> (My goal is to test LR-115 SSNTD material for neutron detection. I had the
> naive idea that I might be able to bash the Beryllium metal with a hammer
> to make a thin foil, then cut a piece. Maybe. Probably not a great idea.
> Beryllium is very hard, it might shatter. I don't want to use machining or
> cutting techniques that would create small fragments, turning my apartment
> or basement into a hazardous waste area. I may try using this little ingot
> directly, and maybe the Be itself will multiply the neutrons a bit. But any
> ideas?)
>