# What materials can X-Rays not pass through?

14 replies to this topic

### #1 bridgey

bridgey

Lepton

• Members
• 1 posts

Posted 17 April 2006 - 04:01 AM

I've been researching for a while now but i can't find anything that answers my question.

I'd like to know what are the radiopaque materials? That is, which materials can x-rays not pass through?

• 0

### #2 5614

5614

Genius

• Senior Members
• 6,428 posts
• LocationLondon, UK

Posted 17 April 2006 - 08:34 AM

I don't know but a google search came up with barium sulphate.
• 0
[acr=Hi, hope you have a nice day ]Jonathan aka 5614[/acr][acr=Hi, hope you have a nice day :)]
---
So, is the universe indeterministic? Probably![/acr]

### #3 YT2095

YT2095

Chemistry Expert

• Resident Experts
• 16,959 posts

Posted 17 April 2006 - 08:39 AM

yeah, Barium Sulphates a good one, but the original question is still too vague in the respect that theres no mention of Power levels or Type, such as Hard or Soft X-Rays, one could argue that Lead is another Blocker, but then thats only partly true also, as its efficiency depends upon many other factors.
• 0

### #4 5614

5614

Genius

• Senior Members
• 6,428 posts
• LocationLondon, UK

Posted 17 April 2006 - 09:00 AM

You could also argue that a blackhole is radiopaque
• 0
[acr=Hi, hope you have a nice day ]Jonathan aka 5614[/acr][acr=Hi, hope you have a nice day :)]
---
So, is the universe indeterministic? Probably![/acr]

### #5 YT2095

YT2095

Chemistry Expert

• Resident Experts
• 16,959 posts

Posted 17 April 2006 - 09:23 AM

Ill bring that up the next time I see a Radiologist for an X-Ray
• 0

### #6 swansont

swansont

Shaken, not stirred

• Moderators
• 26,412 posts
• LocationWashington DC region

Posted 17 April 2006 - 10:21 AM

As YT said, the energy matters, but nothing is actually opaque, really; it's a matter of being more or less transparent. In terms of e.g. taking an x-ray picture, you get contrast so the film is more or less exposed, and materials like lead will be better at shielding, but some fraction of x-rays will pass through, depending on the thickness (it's an exponential function, ).

If you want materials that are good at stopping x-rays, you want a large linear attenuation coefficient,
• 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum                                   To shake my vodka martini, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea

### #7 RyanJ

RyanJ

Primate

• Senior Members
• 2,254 posts
• LocationDirectly above the center of the Earth.

Posted 17 April 2006 - 11:43 AM

I've been researching for a while now but i can't find anything that answers my question.

I'd like to know what are the radiopaque materials? That is, which materials can x-rays not pass through?

Theoretically anything as long as there is enough of it

Cheers,

Ryan Jones
• 0
There are 3 kinds of people, those who can count and those who cannot.

### #8 sunspot

sunspot

Suspended

• Banned
• 592 posts

Posted 17 April 2006 - 11:56 PM

When I worked in Oak Ridge, our sister plant, the National Lab, had a swimming pool where they put hot/radioactive stuff from their experimental reactor. It was sort of weird walking along the catwalk and seeing the things glowing blue under the water. I believe about 20 ft or so of water is sufficient as an radiation shield including X-rays. This taught me a strategy if there ever was a nuclear incident nearby. If deep water is available, dive as deep as possible.

Another good shield is lead. If one gets an X-ray, this provides the family jewels some protection. Berylium is also good.

### #9 swansont

swansont

Shaken, not stirred

• Moderators
• 26,412 posts
• LocationWashington DC region

Posted 18 April 2006 - 01:00 AM

Another good shield is lead. If one gets an X-ray, this provides the family jewels some protection. Berylium is also good.

Berylium? Is this the same Berylium that has an attenuation coefficient of about 0.25/cm at 100 keV (as compared to Pb, with a value of 50/cm)?
• 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum                                   To shake my vodka martini, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea

### #10 Nevermore

Nevermore

Molecule

• Senior Members
• 726 posts

Posted 18 April 2006 - 01:50 AM

I think he meant barium.
• 0
Save the lungfish!
Email the Australian senators about it here.

### #11 jdurg

jdurg

Resident Expert

• Resident Experts
• 2,171 posts
• LocationSE Connecticut, USA

Posted 19 April 2006 - 03:33 PM

Pretty much any heavy, dense metal (or in some cases metal salts) will be good at blocking radiation. Uranium metal is actually VERY good at blocking gamma rays and x-rays, ironically enough.
• 0

### #12 YT2095

YT2095

Chemistry Expert

• Resident Experts
• 16,959 posts

Posted 19 April 2006 - 05:19 PM

I think he meant barium.

or perhaps Bismuth? I think Ide trust that alot more out of the "B" letter metals
• 0

### #13 ecoli

ecoli

murderator

• Moderators
• 8,606 posts
• LocationNY, NY

Posted 20 April 2006 - 03:39 AM

about a foot of concrete would work too.
• 0
[14:02] <Sato> I
[14:02] <Sato> want
[14:02] <Sato> Schroedinger
[14:04] == Schroedingers_hat [~matt@CPE-121-222-209-157.lnse1.woo.bigpond.net.au] has joined #sfn

### #14 washim

washim

Lepton

• Members
• 1 posts

Posted 24 October 2008 - 01:28 PM

I want no about materials which has very low X Ray absorbing property. The material should be transparent like glass. It has to be safe for medical instrument
• 0

### #15 swansont

swansont

Shaken, not stirred

• Moderators
• 26,412 posts
• LocationWashington DC region

Posted 24 October 2008 - 07:28 PM

X-rays are ionizing radiation. You'll want something with a low atomic density and low atomic number to minimize the number of potential targets.
• 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum                                   To shake my vodka martini, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea

#### 0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users