JGSDF "Anti-Neutron Shield"

XM28

XM28

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
7 July 2024
Messages
5
Reaction score
7
While looking for a new armor model kit I found a NBC variant of the JGSDF Type 82 command vehicle that had what the box termed as a "anti-neutron shield". Curious, I then found other images from the early 2000s of it on the vehicle. I'm curious if anyone has any further information on the how's and why's of this device?

Based on my limited CBRN training I'm assuming the clear parts are a borated or leaded clear plastic. I heave heard about the Soviet tank models with neutron shielding (Nalboi I think they called it) and in many tests they found the roof of the vehicle was the weak point for neutron exposure, though that could be that there was such heavy armor upfront that it wasn't needed or material was sandwiched in. There also appears to be a secondary cover over the already limited closed areas of the viewports. I'd imagine this was not meant for long marches.

Any info is appreciated
pitg-04s_1.jpg
Img201323991.jpg l614963934.3.jpg 071028asaka_233.jpg
 
Hello, sorry for my poor English.
This is probably the "化学防護車用透明中性子遮蔽材" that RSC sells.
The construction company "Sanoya Sangyo" manufactures the products.
In 2000, it was delivered to the JSDF as "KRAFTON-C1". LINK
Regarding the materials, it says plastic resin and a large amount of hydrogen.
 
Yuduki said:
Hello, sorry for my poor English.
This is probably the "化学防護車用透明中性子遮蔽材" that RSC sells.
The construction company "Sanoya Sangyo" manufactures the products.
In 2000, it was delivered to the JSDF as "KRAFTON-C1". LINK
Regarding the materials, it says plastic resin and a large amount of hydrogen.
Click to expand...
ありがとうございます。私は2年間日本語を勉強しましたが、練習不足です。このウェブサイトはまさに私が探していたものです。改めて、ありがとうございます。
The information on the website you linked answered all of my questions. I appreciate your help and thank you for your time.
 
Perhaps with a layer of boron-rich material ??

( Been a long, lonnng time since that hapless 1st-yr Uni 'Nuclear & Radioactivity' side-course. I turned in robust evidence for an extracted isotope's half-life of precisely half the book-value. Supervisor checked my ample data, my wary math, sucked his teeth. After 'taking advice', he said that 'such happens', and advised me to 'keep my distance' from radioactive sources / reactors. Perhaps he was joking, but I've complied. FWIW, the 'trace handling' skills I'd learned won over a job interview panel when, alone among many better-qualified candidates, I promptly identified a standard bench test as a real-neat 'seeded precipitation'... :):):))
 
Nik said:
Perhaps with a layer of boron-rich material ??

( Been a long, lonnng time since that hapless 1st-yr Uni 'Nuclear & Radioactivity' side-course. I turned in robust evidence for an extracted isotope's half-life of precisely half the book-value. Supervisor checked my ample data, my wary math, sucked his teeth. After 'taking advice', he said that 'such happens', and advised me to 'keep my distance' from radioactive sources / reactors. Perhaps he was joking, but I've complied. FWIW, the 'trace handling' skills I'd learned won over a job interview panel when, alone among many better-qualified candidates, I promptly identified a standard bench test as a real-neat 'seeded precipitation'... :):)

:)
Click to expand...
Interestingly enough, the Japanese website and news article says Hydrogen was used. Not sure if it was in gas between panels or impregnated somehow. It was done in response to a criticality accident (I'm assuming that one where one of three individuals received a insanely high dose) so that explains its placement and the need for it. Hydrogen isn't something I heard of for such shielding but it is a low atomic number and that works for slowing/stopping neutrons right?

What isotope were you working with?
 
XM28 said:
Interestingly enough, the Japanese website and news article says Hydrogen was used. Not sure if it was in gas between panels or impregnated somehow. It was done in response to a criticality accident (I'm assuming that one where one of three individuals received a insanely high dose) so that explains its placement and the need for it. Hydrogen isn't something I heard of for such shielding but it is a low atomic number and that works for slowing/stopping neutrons right?

What isotope were you working with?
Click to expand...
Could be lots of hydrogen bound in the the form of long-chain hydrocarbons, which is usually how this works. Hydrogen-rich plastics like polyethylene are good radiation stoppers.
 
"Hydrogen-rich plastics ..."
Agreed. And lend themselves to robust transparency.
Within limits...

After an HF accident at UK 'gap in map' that led to several operators urgently seeking safer jobs, the nice lady who joined our small corner of 'Big Pharma' mentioned the multi-layered, boron-rich glass of the 'rod' handling cells. IIRC, plastic had an unfortunate tendency to 'scar' and 'fog' with time as particle tracks accumulated....

FWIW, the efficacy -to- weight of plastic neutron shielding is much better than borated glass. Putting big tanks of water, liquid hydrogen, liquid ammonia and/or liquid methane between source and solar storm-cellar helps, too.....
 
For vehicle use, it seems mud/rocks/dirt will limit the visibility faster than particle tracks ever could. That's why I was so curious of the purpose. Now that I know it was made to deal with a Criticality incident I get why they made it they way they did.

I just realized the liquids you mentioned are all fluids I have heard of for bubble chamber mediums. I'm assuming neutron blocking was a intended effect?
 
Last edited:
XM28 said:
I heave heard about the Soviet tank models with neutron shielding (Nalboi I think they called it) and in many tests they found the roof of the vehicle was the weak point for neutron exposure, though that could be that there was such heavy armor upfront that it wasn't needed or material was sandwiched in.
Click to expand...
No Soviet tanks since T-55A have substantial anti-radiation liner under the armor as well called podboi the external anti-radiation liner is both against neutron and induced radioactivity. Speaking of the vehicle its pretty blatant that they tried to have radiation protection at a minimally possible weight by sacrificing coverage. For reference when the Soviets modified vehicles like IMR-2, these vehicles gained as much as 2-20t of just passive radiation protection material because they had all-aspect radiation protection.
 
diwinent said:
No Soviet tanks since T-55A have substantial anti-radiation liner under the armor as well called podboi the external anti-radiation liner is both against neutron and induced radioactivity. Speaking of the vehicle its pretty blatant that they tried to have radiation protection at a minimally possible weight by sacrificing coverage. For reference when the Soviets modified vehicles like IMR-2, these vehicles gained as much as 2-20t of just passive radiation protection material because they had all-aspect radiation protection.
Click to expand...
Fascinating. I appreciate the info. I re-read the blog where I found the information (Tankograd T-72 SECTION NBC) and I see what you mean by limited coverage (below).

The IMR-2 Engineering Vehicle you speak of, are you referring to the variants used in Chernobyl/Pripyat or was there some variant for general survival in a highly contaminated environment?
crew positions and fuel tanks.png attenuation factor at various angles.png late model t-72a.jpg
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom