- #1
neanderthalphysics
- 53
- 6
Hey,
I want to try to estimate the Roentgens/sec from an X-Ray tube. Here are my calculations, which I talk through so that I am not just throwing equations at you. I would be grateful if someone could comment if they are about right.
Stage 1: Estimation of emitted X-Ray strength
Assumed:
1. X-Ray tube input power: 1000W
2. X-Ray conversion efficiency: 1%
3. Total X-Ray energy: ~10W.
If the X-Ray source has an electron gun voltage of a few hundred keV, let's assume the Bremsstrahlung peak is at 100keV. Furthermore, for simplicity, let's use the 100keV value as the "characteristic" X-Ray wavelength. At this wavelength, our attenuation coefficient is 0.154 cm2/g (NIST tables for dry air)
Stage 2: Estimation of percent of X-Rays absorbed by 1kg of air
1 Roentgen is defined as 2.58e-4 C/kg
Dry air under these conditions has a density of 1.225 kg/m3. Therefore a 1kg cube of dry air has a length of 93.5cm on all sides.
The mass thickness of air = density of air x path length the radiation has to travel.
Therefore the mass thickness = 0.001225 x 93.5 = 0.1145 g/cc x cm
The ratio of the exiting X-Ray flux to the entering X-Ray flux, I/I0 = exp(-mass thickness x absorbance) = exp(-0.114 x 0.154) = 0.9825
Absorbed X-ray power = (1 - I/I0) x 10W = 0.175W
Stage 3: Converting the absorbed X-Rays into charges in the air
Average ionization energy of air = 34 eV = 5.45e-18 J
Assume that all the X-ray's energy is used to ionize the air at an energy of 34eV. I know that X-Rays are more energetic but because the proportion of ions to air molecules is very small (1x10-9) I am assuming that entropy prevails and all of the air molecules just absorb the first ionization energy.
Number of ion pairs created per second = 0.175W/5.45e-18 = 3.21e16 pairs
Fundamental charge = 1.6e-19 C
Charge produced per sec = 3.21e16 x 1.6e-19 x 2 (each pair of charges produced counts as 2x the fundamental charge) = 0.01 C/sec
Roentgens of source = 0.01/2.58e-4 = 40 Roentgens
What do you think about these calculations? Wide off the mark or about right? Could you improve on it?
I want to try to estimate the Roentgens/sec from an X-Ray tube. Here are my calculations, which I talk through so that I am not just throwing equations at you. I would be grateful if someone could comment if they are about right.
Stage 1: Estimation of emitted X-Ray strength
Assumed:
1. X-Ray tube input power: 1000W
2. X-Ray conversion efficiency: 1%
3. Total X-Ray energy: ~10W.
If the X-Ray source has an electron gun voltage of a few hundred keV, let's assume the Bremsstrahlung peak is at 100keV. Furthermore, for simplicity, let's use the 100keV value as the "characteristic" X-Ray wavelength. At this wavelength, our attenuation coefficient is 0.154 cm2/g (NIST tables for dry air)
Stage 2: Estimation of percent of X-Rays absorbed by 1kg of air
1 Roentgen is defined as 2.58e-4 C/kg
Dry air under these conditions has a density of 1.225 kg/m3. Therefore a 1kg cube of dry air has a length of 93.5cm on all sides.
The mass thickness of air = density of air x path length the radiation has to travel.
Therefore the mass thickness = 0.001225 x 93.5 = 0.1145 g/cc x cm
The ratio of the exiting X-Ray flux to the entering X-Ray flux, I/I0 = exp(-mass thickness x absorbance) = exp(-0.114 x 0.154) = 0.9825
Absorbed X-ray power = (1 - I/I0) x 10W = 0.175W
Stage 3: Converting the absorbed X-Rays into charges in the air
Average ionization energy of air = 34 eV = 5.45e-18 J
Assume that all the X-ray's energy is used to ionize the air at an energy of 34eV. I know that X-Rays are more energetic but because the proportion of ions to air molecules is very small (1x10-9) I am assuming that entropy prevails and all of the air molecules just absorb the first ionization energy.
Number of ion pairs created per second = 0.175W/5.45e-18 = 3.21e16 pairs
Fundamental charge = 1.6e-19 C
Charge produced per sec = 3.21e16 x 1.6e-19 x 2 (each pair of charges produced counts as 2x the fundamental charge) = 0.01 C/sec
Roentgens of source = 0.01/2.58e-4 = 40 Roentgens
What do you think about these calculations? Wide off the mark or about right? Could you improve on it?
Last edited: