Author Topic: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?  (Read 5166 times)

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
    • Political Solutions
  • Liked: 450
  • Likes Given: 3163
Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« on: 05/07/2017 12:09 pm »
Would Xenon be a good material to protect astronauts from radiation in space? I envision a spacecraft surrounded by a large rubber balloon that would protect the craft from debris because the rubber can absorb the impact and particles will bounce off. Inflating the balloon with Xenon could provide radiation protection. How effective would this be?
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk
Spacestation proposal: https://politicalsolutions.ca/forum/index.php?topic=3.0

Offline Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1340
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #1 on: 05/07/2017 12:16 pm »
I do not know about xenon's overall radiation protective value but space fluff at sufficient speed would shred the rubber balloon. Stuff in space travels really really fast as it is and the balloon would not survive that. But add to that speeds enough to make the craft really worthy of manned interplanetary travel and it gets even worse.
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
    • Political Solutions
  • Liked: 450
  • Likes Given: 3163
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #2 on: 05/07/2017 12:33 pm »
Rubber is amazingly resilient, but maybe it would need to be augmented with Kevlar or other material. Think Bigelow modules are more resistant than the ISS aluminium cans.
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk
Spacestation proposal: https://politicalsolutions.ca/forum/index.php?topic=3.0

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7277
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #3 on: 05/07/2017 06:24 pm »
No, xenon (and it is xenon, not Xenon), isn't much good for radiation protection, because of its high atomic weight: 131.3.  You want light nuclei, not heavy ones, so that cosmic rays and other energetic particles bouncing off the shielding nuclei lose a lot of energy.  If you throw a marble at a stationary bowling ball, the marble will bounce off without losing much speed.  If you throw a marble at another marble, the incoming marble will tend to transfer much of its energy to the second marble.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #4 on: 05/07/2017 06:51 pm »
Answer to thread title: No. The lower the atomic number, the better it is at shielding space radiation (especially GCR).
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3096
  • Liked: 3379
  • Likes Given: 777
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #5 on: 05/07/2017 07:41 pm »
Rubber is amazingly resilient, but maybe it would need to be augmented with Kevlar or other material. Think Bigelow modules are more resistant than the ISS aluminium cans.
Bigelow modules use many layers of various materials. Thickness data doesn't seem to be available, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was thicker than the standard ISS shielding. Also, their modules are expandable, not inflatable (a rubber balloon would be inflatable.)

Also, gasses of any kind make for terrible radiation shielding, because they are mostly empty space.

Offline as58

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 835
  • Liked: 300
  • Likes Given: 186
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #6 on: 05/07/2017 07:47 pm »
I'm curious: OP, where did the idea to use xenon come from? it feels a very arbitrary choice.

Offline Arcas

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • United States
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #7 on: 05/07/2017 07:54 pm »
No, xenon (and it is xenon, not Xenon), isn't much good for radiation protection, because of its high atomic weight: 131.3.  You want light nuclei, not heavy ones, so that cosmic rays and other energetic particles bouncing off the shielding nuclei lose a lot of energy.  If you throw a marble at a stationary bowling ball, the marble will bounce off without losing much speed.  If you throw a marble at another marble, the incoming marble will tend to transfer much of its energy to the second marble.
I've always assumed that radiation was best shielded by heavy atoms, which have many electrons. Is this only for gamma rays?
The risk I took was calculated, but boy am I bad at math.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2587
  • Likes Given: 2895
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #8 on: 05/07/2017 08:02 pm »
Water is probably the best because it can be used for humans.  Both fresh potable water and waste water.  Somewhere on this website I read that only 1' or 30cm of water would be enough shielding for most radiation.  Water can be stored in the exterior of a habitat module. 

Offline scienceguy

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 836
  • Lethbridge, Alberta
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 279
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #9 on: 05/07/2017 11:56 pm »
If you're going to use your radiation shielding for propellant then hydrogen is best.
e^(pi*i) = -1

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #10 on: 05/08/2017 12:06 am »
If you're going to use your radiation shielding for propellant then hydrogen is best.
Very true, if you can solve the insulation and active cooling problems and are structurally efficient (and aren't planning on landing your whole rocket, hydrogen is essentially unbeatable. Even could work in a hybrid electromagnetic shield setup, since hydrogen can cool the superconducting coils.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Roy_H

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
    • Political Solutions
  • Liked: 450
  • Likes Given: 3163
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #11 on: 05/08/2017 11:31 am »
I'm curious: OP, where did the idea to use xenon come from? it feels a very arbitrary choice.
Thankyou everyone for your responses.

I got the idea from reading about LFTRs (Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactors) where xenon is a byproduct of the fission process and must be removed because it blocks the neutrons propagating the fission process. I guess I didn't bother to think it through and realize that radiation is another thing altogether. I just assumed that a large atom would block or absorb everything.
"If we don't achieve re-usability, I will consider SpaceX to be a failure." - Elon Musk
Spacestation proposal: https://politicalsolutions.ca/forum/index.php?topic=3.0

Offline Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1340
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 92
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #12 on: 05/08/2017 02:24 pm »
argon which is related periodically to xenon is used in neutron detector tubes.

anyway; this development

https://phys.org/news/2017-05-space-lab-safer-missions.html

will result in more rapid development of space shielding stuff.
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Offline as58

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 835
  • Liked: 300
  • Likes Given: 186
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #13 on: 05/08/2017 02:38 pm »
I'm curious: OP, where did the idea to use xenon come from? it feels a very arbitrary choice.
Thankyou everyone for your responses.

I got the idea from reading about LFTRs (Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactors) where xenon is a byproduct of the fission process and must be removed because it blocks the neutrons propagating the fission process. I guess I didn't bother to think it through and realize that radiation is another thing altogether. I just assumed that a large atom would block or absorb everything.

I guessed that neutron absorption was what you were thinking about. Xe-135 indeed has a very high cross section for absorbing thermal neutrons, but a) thermal neutrons are not what you need to absorb in space and b) Xe-135 is radioactive with half-life of ~9 hours, so you couldn't make a shield of it.

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #14 on: 05/08/2017 02:54 pm »
If you're going to use your radiation shielding for propellant then hydrogen is best.
Very true, if you can solve the insulation and active cooling problems and are structurally efficient (and aren't planning on landing your whole rocket, hydrogen is essentially unbeatable. Even could work in a hybrid electromagnetic shield setup, since hydrogen can cool the superconducting coils.
Why do you need it cooled if it is for insulation? Just to increase density to improve shielding?

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7277
  • Liked: 2782
  • Likes Given: 1462
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #15 on: 05/08/2017 07:44 pm »
I've always assumed that radiation was best shielded by heavy atoms, which have many electrons. Is this only for gamma rays?

Yes: electrons, being so light, aren't of much help in stopping high-energy protons or heavier nuclei.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Would Xenon be good radiation protection?
« Reply #16 on: 05/17/2017 11:33 pm »
If you're going to use your radiation shielding for propellant then hydrogen is best.
Very true, if you can solve the insulation and active cooling problems and are structurally efficient (and aren't planning on landing your whole rocket, hydrogen is essentially unbeatable. Even could work in a hybrid electromagnetic shield setup, since hydrogen can cool the superconducting coils.
Why do you need it cooled if it is for insulation? Just to increase density to improve shielding?
Yes. If you don't cool it, pressure vessel mass will dominate over hydrogen mass. Also, a less dense shield is less effective in 3D if it's thickness is non-negligible compared to the volume you're protecting.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0