1 / 3
AWAN Cloud Chamber
2 / 3
(left) Alpha tracks from Uranitite (right) Alpha tracks from Americium-241
3 / 3
Vacuum Test of AWAN

Friday 12 March 2021

Preliminary Study: Detecting Cosmic Muons with Geiger-Muller Tube Pair

Since the completion of the coincident system recently, a test was planned for it to find out if a block of lead plates placed before the GM tube pair, will the coincident counter give different count rates?  The basis of this test was:

1. Could lead attenuate low energy secondary beta particles, thus reducing the coincident counts per hour (CPH)? 

2. Could the presence of lead increases the collision probability of whatever passing though the metal (electromagnetic component or muons) which induces cascade, thus increase the chance of coincidence count, which leads to higher CPH?  

The test was conducted where the electronics of coincident system and tube positions unchanged, but two sets of data was taken. One was when two GM tubes are left alone and while the other has a 13.0 mm fishing lead plates almost in contact to the upper GM tube (photo below). 


A total of 16 hours of data was collected for each set and are shown as below:


WITHOUT 13 MM LEAD PLATES (Left Figure)

Data [CPH]: 39, 47, 50, 49, 43, 46, 49, 48, 41, 49, 47, 39, 44, 30, 42, 54 (n=16)

Mean: 44.8125          Median: 46.5

Unbiased Standard Deviation: 5.7645

Simple reading: (45 ± 12) CPH


WITH 13 MM LEAD PLATES (Right Figure)

Data [CPH]: 46, 42, 28, 50, 38, 34, 47, 40, 77, 46, 36, 30, 44, 48, 34, 43 (n=16)

Mean: 42.6875          Median: 42.5

Unbiased Standard Deviation: 11.2648

Simple reading: (43 ± 25) CPH


Since n < 30, T-distribution was used to conduct a hypothesis testing. The test was to determine if there is a difference between the average or "mean" of the population (i.e. data using lead vs. data without lead) where:

Null Hypothesis: There is no difference between the population mean.

 Alternative hypothesis: There is a difference between the population mean.

The test statistics was computed using 2 sample Welch's T-test formula assuming unequal variance which gives a test statistics of  0.6717 with a degree-of-freedom 22. The resulting P-value is 0.5088. Thus, the null hypothesis is not rejected (insufficient evidence to accept alternative hypothesis).


In conclusion, there is no statistical significance in the difference between the population mean (i.e. with lead vs. without lead) within a short acquisition time. Experimentally, it makes no difference on the rate of photography regardless of the presence of a lead target.

Wednesday 10 March 2021

Two Geiger-Muller (GM) Tubes Coincident Circuit

I purchased two low cost Arduino-compatible Geiger-Muller (GM) tube module somewhere in 2013 but only recently I am finally able to assemble them to count coincident signals. 

If two GM tubes aligned on top of each other, both tubes sends a "click" signal simultaneously in time, it is highly probable that they are both detecting the same particle passing through it. To design an electric circuit that is able to recognize both signals coming in simultaneously while filtering others is what physicist calls "coincident circuit". 

Coincident signal is the OUTPUT of the AND logic gate, which triggers ON only when both GM Tube A and GM Tube B sends a signal simultaneously in time.

Early particle physicists studied cosmic rays using cloud chambers. To "catch" photos of high energy particles coming from the sky passing through a cloud chamber, the chamber is often installed two or more GM tubes parallel to it. If a pair or more of these tubes sends coincidence signal to a controller circuit, it will recognize the simultaneous signal and "turn on" the chamber momentarily for photography.

As I intend to repeat these findings, I must first build a coincidence detector.

When a particle passes through a GM tube, it always gives a LOW going pulse for a short time known as "dead time". The GM tube module I got gives a low of 0V for about 0.3 to 0.4 ms. These low going pulses, if connected directly to an Arduino's interrupt-sensitive pins (pin 2 and pin 3 for Arduino UNO), can be detected using attachInterrupt() command to count individual pulses. 

I do not have the programming expertise to sketch an Arduino C/C++ code that detects two LOW pulses in the same time, so I went for the old school logic system using analogue ICs. It seems to work just fine and here's how:

1. An ionizing particle passes through a GM tube, its output goes LOW for a short time. 

2. This LOW pulse triggers a 555 timer set up in monostable mode. The 555 timer reads the LOW pulse, and converts it to a square wave HIGH pulse. The duration of HIGH pulse can be adjusted with the following formula: t = 1.1RC. (Refer to the following diagram for the location of R and C) My RC values are chosen so I can extend the HIGH pulse from 0.5 ms to 2 ms. I am using 2 ms so far.

3. If two GM tubes sends LOW pulses at the same time, both 555 timers will invert and extend them to HIGH pulses. In reality, the high pulses are approximately +4.1 V with respect to LOW of +0.1 V, at Vcc of +5 V.

4. These HIGH going pulses are sent to a general purpose NPN transistors in series (I happen to have some 2N3904s) through a current limiter of 10 kOhms. The serial transistor act as an analog AND gate. Only both HIGH pulses from the 555 timers arriving the transistors at the same time will allow current passing through both transistors to the 5kohms pull-down resistor. 

5. When that happens, a lead wire from the pull-down resistor to Arduino pin 2 allows it to read the sudden changes of voltage if coincidence occurs. Arduino then proceeds to counting, putting result on 16x2 LCD screen. 

Simplified block diagram of the coincident-detecting system. A pulse shaping circuit (green) was necessary to "improve" the recognition of the pulse sent by the GM tubes. 

Simplified circuitry of the pulse shaping and logic gate part of the coincident system. the R = 20 kOhm allows HIGH pulse-width extension up to 2.0 ms.

The circuit works but flawed: The "pseudo-digital" LOW of the twin NPN transistor is no where near 0 V. Instead, it pulses from -0.3 V to 3 V whenever GM Tube B pulses HIGH. A coincidence signal from both tubes will give a pulse from -0.3 V to 5.5 V. Hence, the resistance of the pull-up resistor connected to the twin transistor must be selected in such a way tube B will only give a logic output less than 3V, so Arduino ADC will not recognize false HIGHs from tube B alone. 

The pull-up resistor I use has a value of 5kOhm. 

A pushbutton and 16x2 LCD was connected to the Arduino. The sketch written for this is very simple. It counts any interrupt from pin 2, and displays the counts on an LCD screen. The pushbutton resets the count:

const int pb = 5;
int pbValue;
volatile unsigned long CNT_AB;    // variable for counting interrupts coming from AND gate 

#include<LiquidCrystal.h>                     // adding LCD from the library
LiquidCrystal lcd(12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7);       // defining digital pinout for LCD

//====================================================================================
void setup() {
 pinMode (pb, INPUT);
 pbValue = 0;                // initial pushbutton value

 Serial.begin(9600);
 lcd.begin(16,2);            // initializes dimension of LCD display, 16 char x 2 lines
 CNT_AB = 0;                 // CNT value for AB initially 0

 lcd.setCursor(0,0);
 lcd.print("Coincidence V0.1");
 lcd.setCursor(0,1);
 lcd.print("ACJC 2021");
 delay(2000);
 cleanDisplay();
 
 attachInterrupt(digitalPinToInterrupt(2), GetEvent_AB, RISING);  // detect event in pin 2
}
//====================================================================================
void loop() {
 lcd.setCursor(0,0);                       // Sets cursor to character 0, row 0
 lcd.print("COINCIDENCE: ");               // Prints the defined word
 lcd.print(CNT_AB);
 
 pbValue = digitalRead(pb);
 if (pbValue == HIGH) {
  CNT_AB = 0;
 }
}
//====================================================================================
void GetEvent_AB() {
  CNT_AB++;
}
//====================================================================================
void cleanDisplay (){
  lcd.clear();
  lcd.setCursor(0,0);
  lcd.setCursor(0,0);
}



Preliminary finding of coincident signal per hour from this setup is not significantly different from another coincident detecting IC written long ago by a friend.

Coincident Counts per Hour (CPH) was calculated with both tubes configured in similar geometrical position. At a total of 16 hours acquisition time gives the following table (date, time, counts for the past hour):

My analog-IC Method                     16 Pin IC (C.K.'s program)

2/Mar/2021   22:48     47                    11/Oct/2020   18:00     47

2/Mar/2021   21:47     50                    11/Oct/2020   19:00     41

2/Mar/2021   20:47     39                    11/Oct/2020   20:00     45

3/Mar/2021   13:09     49                    11/Oct/2020   21:00     42

3/Mar/2021   12:05     43                    11/Oct/2020   22:00     47

8/Mar/2021   16:32     46                    11/Oct/2020   23:00     30

8/Mar/2021   15:31     49                    12/Oct/2020   09:00     39

8/Mar/2021   14:31     48                    12/Oct/2020   10:00     55

8/Mar/2021   13:31     41                    12/Oct/2020   13:00     46

8/Mar/2021   12:31     49                    12/Oct/2020   14:00     42

9/Mar/2021   23:14     47                    13/Oct/2020   09:00     43

10/Mar/2021   12:52     39                  13/Oct/2020   10:00     35

10/Mar/2021   13:52     44                  13/Oct/2020   11:00     42

10/Mar/2021   14:52     30                  13/Oct/2020   12:00     42

10/Mar/2021   15:53     42                  13/Oct/2020   13:00     55

10/Mar/2021   16:53     54                  13/Oct/2020   14:00     59

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Average:                       45 [CPH]                                 44 [CPH]


Thus, to answer the following questions in cyan:

1. Is the coincident system capable of operating continuously in long hours? 

Conclusion: (from preliminary results) Yes, with the exception of hardware problem whenever GM tube A PCB is torsionally stressed, it works well otherwise for at least 5 hours continuously. In actuality, every acquisition with a cloud chamber would only last at most an hour before condensant refill is necessary. About 40 photographs per hour, regardless of quality, is expected.  

2. Is the counts from my coincident system consistent with other coincident systems?

Conclusion: (from preliminary results) Yes, although only one system was compared, the compared system was fully-digital and written separately by a different author. He programmed the IC to extend each GM tube pulse to 0.5 ms while mine was set to 2.0 ms. Despite these differences, our CPH readings are comparable.  


Tuesday 3 November 2020

Derivation of Mass Ratio of Elastically Colliding Particles to its Scattering Angles

Disclaimer: The following is a non-rigorous, high-school mathematics "compatible" derivation that aims to provide quick proof of equations presented in Blackett's landmark paper. The concepts I used are based on elementary conservation rules in physics taught in many pre-university physics courses. 

BACKGROUND

In 1923, Blackett published a study of "forked" alpha particle tracks observed in a cloud chamber. In the paper, he interpreted those occasional Y-shaped tracks as a consequence of elastic nuclear collision between alpha particles and nucleus of atoms present in the atmosphere. To aid his discussion, he described a convenient way to determine the masses of the target nuclei by measuring the scattering angle of the particles from the initial trajectory of the incident particle. (see the actual equation below circled in red) 



The paper provide no mathematical derivation probably because it was considered trivial to the readers then. Since another form of this equation was cited once again in his 1948 Nobel lecture, this post attempts to show how this important equation came to be using physics concepts found in high-school texts.


DERIVATION

First, this equation concerns a situation where two rigid particles are colliding: A rigid incident particle of mass m1 (interpreted as the alpha particle) with initial velocity u is to collide elastically with a rigid stationary target particle of mass m2 (interpreted as the nucleus of atoms present in the atmosphere) in a classical 2-dimension Cartesian reference frame. 

The collision result in change of velocity (thus momentum) for both particles where the direction of incident velocity is taken as the "reference axis" and the scattering angle of both particles is the angle it subtends to the "reference axis" respectively. I provide a diagram below illustrating the system before and after collision;



To continue the derivation, we must first assume that the initial velocity of the target particle is zero. Practically, it means the speed of the target nucleus is negligible compared to the incident particle. Case in point: as RMS speed of the target atmospheric nuclei are in the order of 500 ms-1 while speed of alpha particles are in the order of 20,000,000 ms-1!


The final boxed equation is simple enough to use directly from cloud chamber photograph measurements to determine the mass of nucleus collided with an alpha particle. Moreover, it is also convenient to express the kind of scattering angles as one would expect from alpha particles colliding with nucleus of mass greater or less than that of itself. 

Friday 30 October 2020

Particle Energy and Momentum in Electron-Volt

In atomic, nuclear, and particle physics, physical quantities such as energy, momentum, mass, time, etc. are often expressed in electron-volts (eV). Historically the electron-volt was used as a convenient unit to describe the kinetic energy of subatomic particles accelerated by electrostatic generators. Units in electron-volts continued to be in use to today because of its relevance to fundamental constants such as elementary charge, Plank's constant, speed of light etc. rather than SI base units which are more relevant to our "experiences". 

The following are non-rigorous reviews on unit conversions for energy and momentum for novice home experimenters.



Monday 26 October 2020

Relationship between Radius of Curvature to its Tangent and Lateral Displacement

Consider a charged particle experiences Lorentz force and its track is bent into a circular arc. For simplicity, we let the magnetic field perpendicular to the path of the particle such that the resulting circular track is on the plane perpendicular to the viewer or camera. 

Point T represents the location where the particle enters the magnetic field and its tangent, D represents the linear path of the particle if field is absent.

When the particle exit the magnetic field at point T', it would have a lateral perpendicular displacement, x from the tangent, D. Experimentally, it is possible to determine both D and x through open source image measuring applications if calibration is done properly.

The relationship between D, x, and radius of curvature, R, is as follow;