Mystery metal

I have two small metal cylinders from who knows where. Anyway, they are of similar size, but have markedly different densities. Idle curiosity,
but I want to know what they are.
They are both 1.000" in diameter and similar in color to steel.
The lighter piece is 0.750" high and weighs 42.46 grams. In the center of one end there is a 0.14" diameter by 0.10" deep hole.
I calculate from this a density of about 5.07 g/cc, which leads me to believe it is a titanium alloy. What else might it be?
(BTW, these numbers are accurate to the precision given.)
The heavier cylinder is 0.935" high and has a flat milled along its length. The flat is 0.025" deep; that is, the distance from the opposite side of the cylinder to the face of the flat is 0.975". It is uniform to within 0.001" all along the cylinder. This piece weighs 163.73 grams and is quite hard. An X-acto blade doesn't scratch it.
For this one, I get a density of 13.7 g/cc. Well, it certainly isn't mercury! I thought perhaps it was some type of cemented carbide, but it seems a tad light for that. Also, I placed a couple drops of HCl on one end and left it there for about two minutes, but no discernable amount of cobalt was dissolved. Any other ideas?
Thanks,
Jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
5 g/cc is sort of odd. Some cast metals seem to be lighter than the pure metal, due to porosity, air, etc. Cast zinc? If it is an aluminum alloy, some battery acid ought scuzzy it up good after a while--white alum sulfate.
The heavier metal is odd, too. Carbide, iirc, is about 1.5 the density of steel? or about 11. So this material would seem to be a bit heavier? I'm told there are varying kinds of carbide, so maybe it is one variety of carbide Put it on a green wheel, and see how it sparks. I believe some carbide is weakly magnetic, as well. -- Mr. P.V.'d formerly Droll Troll

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 17:35:33 -0700, Jim Wilson

Do you have a geiger counter?
Gunner
"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I was thinking about that too. Wouldn't want to find yourself in the middle of a story like this:
http://www.answers.com/topic/goi-nia-accident
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Its more likely to be a piece of DU, which is no biggie
Gunner
"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gunner wrote...

(G) That occurred to me, too, but I think it's unlikely. I *can* get my hands on a geiger counter, though.
Jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gunner wrote...

Thanks, but not this time. For one thing, I have good friends in the physics and radiocarbon dating labs at the University of Arizona. No shipping required. But I seriously doubt this stuff could be radioactive anyway, and I'm not really planning on checking. :-)
Cheers, and thanks again!
Jim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:51:42 -0700, Jim Wilson

There are many true stories of items that were low level radioactive being found at scrap yards and so forth. DU is/was used as trim weights in helicopter blades and so forth, and have been found.
I collect lead for bullet casting..and have found more than one odd shaped lead container that was used to hold a source. Shrug
But if its magnetic..its not DU.
"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

OK, I can't be the _only_ one that has a geiger counter in the basement, right?

It's not holding on to those photons any more than your eyes are holding on to the light they've received.

I remember touring Fermilab in Illinois when I was in high school (advanced physics class field trip). They showed us two blocks of astonishingly dense material, I think it was tungsten. roughly brick sized and could barely move 'em.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have a radiation meter... (it is not exactly a geiger counter)
i

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have at least 6 different types, plus the pocket rad counters.

"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

    Well ... not in the basement -- but I have two. One is a simple "radiation survey meter" of the kind which used to be in CD fallout shelters and such, and the other is a nice multi-range one which is Navy surplus, and took quite a bit of work to adapt available batteries to replace the 135V brick with an octal socket with two keyways. :-)

    Agreed. As long as it is not alloyed with something which is knocked into a different isotope and which will later decay making secondary radiation.

    Unless it is in a steel housing. :-)

    :-)
    Enjoy,         DoN.
--
Email: < snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:47:23 +0000, snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com (DoN. Nichols) wrote:

Budda bing. Ive found "dust" inside them that was hot. Not really hot...but significantly higher than background. Washed em out with a garden hose and they read clean. This being years ago of course in another location.

"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I had one when I was a kid but never had the fancy batteries for it. Karl
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:50:34 GMT, "Karl Vorwerk"

All mine take D batteries, or self charge (dosimeters) using the reader which uses..a D battery.
Gunner

"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mine takes 2 or 3 9-volt batteries. Came from England. I was working on nuclear imaging cameras over there, we moved the operation here, and all the tooling and equipment got boxed up and sent over. This one wasn't type-certified in the US, so it had to be made to go away. I took care of that aspect of it.
A year ago or so I did a survey of household items and their radiation levels, it was kinda surprising. Ah, here it is: (thanks google) Radiation survey of everyday objects:
Background radiation, 4 sites inside house: 1.5 Counts per Second (CPS) Background radiation, 4 sites outside house: 1.5 CPS 4 over-ripe bananas, sensor in contact with skin: 3 CPS Clean diapers: 1.5 CPS (no detectable radiation; same as background) Dirty diapers, measured at top of diaper pail: 2 CPS (suspect banana involvement) 6 month old kid: 1.5 CPS plus drool and two giggles "First Alert" smoke detector, with Americium goodness: 50 CPS on surface 10 year old Trijicon (Tritium) gunsights on Glock 19: 1.5 CPS Granite boulder, roughly 1 meter in diameter. Pink: 4 CPS Black: 3 CPS Blue/black boulder of unknown ignious type: 1.5 CPS Garden soil: 1.5 CPS
Obviously this is only a slightly scientific survey, but shows some interesting non-background results.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sounds like a survey around here is overdue.
One thing I did test was the Naval bronze Port holes from a ship that was at Bikini - It was rather clean as I recall. I'll have to make a table and check out the odd ball stuff - Telescope and camera lenses - rare earth - and hum - how do I do myself - Binocs looking at meter at a distance - then get up close and see if there is an step up. Hum - worked and lived in a stones throw of blue pool coolant pond. But then I was young...
Martin Martin Eastburn @ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net NRA LOH & Endowment Member NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
Dave Hinz wrote:

-
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

    I know that some of the lenses used in the manufacture of the Starlight Scopes (Night Vision scopes) for the Army were mildly radioactive.
    Enjoy,         DoN.
--
Email: < snipped-for-privacy@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I understand the really hot ones - why I didn't get them- were the deck mounted Binocs on board during WWII. The Captains and near - would be able to see better with the radioactive lenses. I wonder how many paid the price with brain tumors.
Martin Martin Eastburn @ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net NRA LOH & Endowment Member NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member
DoN. Nichols wrote:

-
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:03:09 -0600, "Martin H. Eastburn"

Any logical explanation for why radioactive glass (I presume thats where the radioactivity was) would be better optically? Seems odd. The radioactivity can't matter by itself can it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.