Lead Glass vs Lead Acrylic vs ClearView

Home|Lead Glass vs Lead Acrylic vs ClearView
Lead Glass vs Lead Acrylic vs ClearView 2017-04-21T12:00:34+00:00
Steam Generator Shield Door
Transparent Radiation Shielding
Transparent Radiation Shielding
Transparent Gamma Shielding

Transparent Shielding Comparison

For a comparable attenuation of radiation and thickness, ClearView Radiation Shielding is superior to Lead Glass, Lead Acrylic and similar transparent shielding by 200% to 300%. Testing has demonstrated that ClearView will shield more than 20 different isotopes (shown in table below) used in Nuclear, Medical, Biological, Manufacturing and Food industries. ClearView’s Transparency, lightweight and superior shielding properties make ClearView most suitable for replacement of conventional transparent shielding for :

  • Shielding for Hot Cell Windows
  • Radiopharmocology, Oncology, and Imaging
  • High and Low Energy Gamma Isotope Shielding for Brachytherapy, Intraoperative radiation therapy, Nuclear Medicine.
  • Outperforming conventional transparent and high density neutron shields for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI).
IsotopeRadiation TypeApplication
N13Positron Emission, GammaTracer in Positron Emission Tomography (P.E.T.)
C14Beta DecayTracer in Positron Emission Tomography (P.E.T.), Radiocarbon dating
O15Positron EmissionTracer for Positron Emission Tomography (P.E.T.)
F18Positron EmissionNuclear Medicine, Radiopharmocology
P32Beta DecayIdentification of malignant tumors, Chemotherapy, Biochemistry, Label biological molecules
S32Beta DecayLabel amino-acids, detect phosphate group
Co58β+ , Gamma DecayFood Sterilization, Industrial Radiography, Radiopharmacy
Co60Gamma DecayBrachytherapy, Intraoperative radiation therapy, Nuclear Medicine, Calibrate radiation-detection equipment, Industrial radiography
Ga67Gamma DecayNuclear Medicine, Imaging, Scintigraphy
Sr89Beta Particle, Gamma DecayRadiotherapy, Palliative bone pain treatment
Y90Beta ParticleRefractory lymphoma, Interventional Radiology
Tc99mGamma Decay, Beta ParticleTracer, Radio-imaging, Organ scanning
Pd103Gamma DecayBrachytherapy
In111Gamma Decay, X-RayRadiopharmocology, Radio Imaging
I125Gamma DecayRadiopharmocology, Biological assays, Nuclear medicine imaging, Brachytherapy
I131Beta Particle, Gamma DecayIntravenous Nuclear Medicine, Diagnostic Imaging for Pheochromocytoma and Neuroblastoma, Chemotherapy
Cs137Beta Particle, Gamma DecayBrachytherapy, calibrate radiation-detection equipment, gamma ray well logging devices, moisture reading for flow meters
Sa153Beta Particle, Gamma DecayPalliative bone pain treatment, Chemotherapy
Ir192Beta Particle, Gamma DecayBrachytherapy, non-destructive testing of metals,
Ra223Alpha ParticleChemotherapy


Transparent Shielding Thickness Comparison 

Conventional Shields (mm)Pb.(mm)% attenuationClearView (mm)% ClearView attenuation
Lead Acrylic (8 mm)0.31.778 mm14.08
Lead Acrylic (12 mm)0.51.9712 mm19.96
Lead Glass Shield (7 mm)27.877 mm12.54
Lead Glass Shield (12 mm)27.8712 mm19.96

ClearView RS – A Construction Alternative in Radiation Shielding vs Concrete

A fabricated ClearView Shielding will provide greater attenuation, workability, and flexibility in radiation environments as opposed to concrete walls used as shielding for construction in Hot Cells, Fluoroscopy and other Nuclear Imaging & Medicine applications.

 ConcreteClearView RS
HVL, in (mm)2.28 (60.5)1.5 (38.1)
Mass of 20 inch dia shield, kg(lbs)30.65 (67.68)18.53 (41.57)

Additional Advantages:

  • At thickness of 2.28 inches, ClearView attenuates 82.11%, but concrete attenuates only 50%.
  • ClearView reduces dose better, being lighter than concrete with have a longer life time.
  • Unlike concrete, the ClearView will never degrade.

ClearView provides saving in thickness, thereby providing an increased work space. Comparisons are shown in the table below.

Shielding Thickness Saving with ClearView *
Concrete 37 %
Water 79.17 %
Lead Acrylic (8mm, 0.3 mm Pb. equivalence) 87.2 %
Lead Glass (12 mm, 2 mm Pb.  equivalence) 43.18 %
Lead Acrylic (12 mm, 0.6 mm Pb.  equivalence) 85.8 %
*based on the half value layers of respective shielding materials