Running head: Recycling Against Radiation 1

Research Paper

Recycling Against Radiation: A Comparison between Recycled and Non-Recycled HDPE for

Radiation Shielding
Recycling Against Radiation 2

Abstract

Safety is the key to successful space exploration. Away from the surface of the Earth’s

magnetosphere, astronauts require artificial shields, both physical and electromagnetic, to protect

them from harmful forms of radiation present in the cosmos. Current methods of radiation

shielding are only effective when still somewhat within the Earth’s magnetosphere and some are

not cost effective. Should astronauts attempt to venture farther from the protective

magnetosphere of their home planet, they would be bombarded by high-energy forms of

radiation called gamma rays. This radiation can increase the risk of cancer and, under prolonged

exposure, cause radiation sickness. However, simple household objects comprised of a certain

hydrogen-rich plastic, known as polyethylene, can be recycled to ensure astronauts’ safety

against radiation, as well as a cleaner, non-polluted environment to welcome them home. The

experiment requires five 6 inch by 6 inch, 0.5 inch thick sheets of recycled high density

polyethylene (r-HDPE) and five non-recycled, or virgin, high density polyethylene (v-HDPE)

sheets of the same dimensions. In the procedure, a geiger counter was used to test the dosage of

the radiation that penetrates a horizontal stack of 1 to 5 of two types of HDPE: r-HDPE and

v-HDPE. The outcome of this experiment was that r-HDPE had a lower transmissivity, or

radiation permeability, to v-HDPE, indicating better performance as a radiation shield.

Recycling Against Radiation 3

Recycled Radiation Shields

Radiation is becoming an increasingly large threat as humans venture outside of the

protective bubble of the Earth’s magnetic shield. Humans are constantly being bombarded by all

forms of radiation. Through extensive experimentation, it has been found that most radiation

particles in space are low energy. However, there are some more harmful and powerful ones, like

gamma rays. These are emitted from the Sun and other distant cosmic bodies and deflected or

diffused by the magnetic field of the Earth. Other planets, and the space between them, do not

have such protection. Mars, for example, would require artificial radiation shielding for any

colonists or even research scientists staying under a year. Without this shield, astronauts would

be exposed to high-energy radiation, causing a higher likelihood of cancer later in life or even

radiation sickness (Frazier, 2015). Nonetheless, astronauts, such as those on the International

Space Station (ISS), are still exposed to more occupational radiation than any other person. They

are also exposed to a variety of radiation forms that other people on Earth, such as employees at

nuclear power plants, are not. Guidelines and requirements, such as the “as low as reasonably

achievable” (ALARA) precept, which requires that radiation exposure be limited and monitored,

help keep astronauts safe and help meet federal requirements for radiation exposure levels

(“​Implementation of ALARA,” 2014​).

There are many methods to limit radiation exposure in the ISS, including reinforcement

of physical radiation shields. The interesting fact about Earth’s magnetic field is that it is not

very strong, but it acts over a large distance. Current methods to replicate this for scientific uses

fail because they are the opposite; they are very strong, but act over a much smaller distance, and
Recycling Against Radiation 4

it is difficult to get a powerful enough field to act over such a short distance without also

harming the astronauts. This is called active shielding. Due to mass restrictions, refrigerated

superconducting coils must be used. Currently, the NbTi material would most likely be used for

this purpose. However, in the near future, new technologies such as Nb​3​Sn material or high-Tc

superconductors could drastically improve the efficiency of superconductors. After assuming a

deviation of 45​o​ within a radius of 0.25 m for the incoming radiation and a current density, or

electric current flow, of 3500 A/mm​2​ for the center, the superconductor coil’s mass and volume

can be found to be 103 kg and 27840 cm​3​ respectively. Finding the total mass of the

superconductor would only require adding the mass of the cooling system and the thermal

shielding (“Radiation shielding of spacecraft,” 2000). It is still unknown how much radiation is

experienced inside the generated magnetic shield, what the exact limits of the coverage of the

shielding are, or how to overcome other issues, such as where to get the energy for the generator

or how the structure to hold the coils should be built (Raval, 2013).

Physical shielding of radiation, or passive shielding, is also a viable option, if the right

material is used. Certain materials work especially well to stop cosmic radiation. For physical

shielding, materials with low atomic numbers work the best to reduce cosmic radiation.

Polyethylene is a plastic that is relatively inert and is made of hydrogen and carbon, elements

with low mass numbers. Because electrons and protons are a similar size, hydrogen works

especially well at “catching” radiation. Polyethylene is also inexpensive and easy to

manufacture. However, it has a density of about 0.97 g/cm​3​, which is low enough that volume

would be somewhat difficult to deal with. The ALARA Implementation of experimentation

relied on computer simulation to predict the results of using polyethylene as a physical radiation
Recycling Against Radiation 5

barrier. The experiment was heavily reliant on the placement of the radiation shield in order to

achieve minimum radiation exposure for astronauts. The shielding was distributed uniformly

around the cabin quarters of the simulated space shuttle. This was meant to reduce the radiation

exposure in the compartment in which the astronauts would theoretically spend the most time.

The numerical results concluded that a relatively small shielding of polyethylene with a

thickness of 4.8 g/cm​2​ had a 14% reduction in the amount of radiation that permeated the cabin

quarters. The type of radiation shielded against in this simulation were the charged solar protons

(with an average energy level of about 10​5​ MeV) from the Sun and other galactic cosmic rays

(GCRs) that constantly penetrate the Earth’s magnetosphere (“Implementation of ALARA,”

2004). In comparison, NASA performed an experiment aboard the International Space Station on

the shielding effects of aluminum, currently the most widely used material to shield radiation.

Experimentation showed that a similar thickness of aluminum was only able to shield radiation

energies of 10​3 ​MeV at max (“Radiation shielding of spacecraft,” 2000). This insufficiency in an

aluminum radiation shield’s abilities is the primary reason that this project is essential to regions

of “deep space” that are not protected by the Earth’s magnetic field. NASA later went on to

release another study in 2017 on the radiation shielding effects of polyethylene and Kevlar. The

results were clear: polyethylene outperformed Kevlar in nearly every trial. It also performed far

better than the aluminum shields had in their previous experiment. On average, a 5 g/cm​2

thickness of polyethylene resulted in a 19% reduction in radiation dosage and a 10 g/cm​2

thickness of polyethylene resulted in a 32% reduction in radiation dosage (“Performances of

Kevlar and Polyethylene,” 2017). Such a percentage reduction is far more favorable than any that

aluminum could supply. However, this percentage could still be increased further by using
Recycling Against Radiation 6

alternative forms of polyethylene, such as high density polyethylene, that are more compact and

allow for even less radiation to permeate through them.

Recycling Against Radiation 7

Question

How well do r-HDPE sheets shield radiation in comparison to professionally made

v-HDPE sheets? This question can be answered using the raw data for the experiment to

calculate the difference between the rate of change of the graphs of the r-HDPE versus the

v-HDPE, also referred to as the material’s radiation permeability. Can the time-span of

survivable radiation exposure in space really be increased simply by recycling plastic grocery

bags? The goal of this project is to answer such questions. Predictions and scientific inferences

can be applied to the results of the experiment to make even further predictions on broader

subjects. The answers to these questions will pave a foundation for future scientific inquiry and

discovery.
Recycling Against Radiation 8

Hypothesis

If sheets of r-HDPE are used to shield radiation, then they will have a better or worse

average performance than virgin sheets of HDPE. Should this hypothesis fail to be supported by

the data, the null hypothesis is as follows: if sheets of r-HDPE are used to shield radiation, then

they will have a similar average performance to v-HDPE. The graphs of the data can be used for

analyzing the data sets. The performance of the r-HDPE and v-HDPE will be compared using an

Independent T-Test.
Recycling Against Radiation 9

Materials and Methods

Materials​:

- v-HDPE sheets

- Plastic HDPE waste

- X-ray machine

- Geiger counter

- Saw

- Ruler

- Sanding Equipment

- Clamps

- Parchment paper

- Pancake griddle

- Oven

- Stirring/Molding rod
Recycling Against Radiation 10

Procedure​:

Molding recycled plastic

1. Recycled plastic was cut with scissors.

2. The shredded plastic was heated on the pancake griddle on top of parchment

paper until the pieces began to meld together in at least a 6 by 12 inch block.

3. Once the plastic pieces formed one large slab and the griddle no longer heated the

top enough, the plastic was transferred onto a cooking pan to be placed in the

oven.

4. After using the oven to sufficiently mold all the necessary plastic together to a

uniform ½ inch thickness, the slab was removed and cut horizontally into two 6

by 6 inch shields.

5. Uniform pressure was applied to the top of the shields during the cooling process

to prevent air bubbles and deformity.

6. Steps 1-4 were repeated twice. The second time, the slab was made to be 6 by 6

inches and was not cut at all.

Recycling Against Radiation 11

Testing plastic sheets

1. The first measurement taken was the control. This was done by simply measuring

the output radiation dosage of the X-ray machine with no barriers.

2. After measuring and recording the control, one ½ inch HDPE sheet was placed in

a position where it visibly would be penetrated by all X-rays travelling to the

geiger counter. The X-ray was activated by the technician and the geiger counter

readout recorded.

3. Step 2 was repeated four times, with another ½ inch HDPE sheet added directly in

front of the original sheet for each trial. For every trial, the position of the HDPE

stack did not move.

Recycling Against Radiation 12

Data Analysis

After all data is recorded, as detailed in the procedure, the averages can be calculated for

each of the trials. The normality of the data and variance between each data set can be found

using a Shapiro-Wilk Test and Levene's Test, respectfully. If the data is normal and the variance

between the data sets is homogeneous, then an Independent T-Test can be performed to find the

similarity between the averages of the recycled and virgin HDPE data sets. If the data is not

normal, normalize it using Excel's standardize function; if the variance between the data is too

large, use an adjustment to the degrees of freedom using the Welch-Satterthwaite method. The

T-Test will then be possible. All this can and should be done in Microsoft Excel.

Graphs were created using average dosage levels (measured microsieverts) as the

dependent variable and the thickness (in inches) of the HDPE stacks as the independent variable

for both data sets. The relationship (linear, quadratic, exponential, etc) can then be found for the

graphs. To compare the results, find the difference in the average rate of change for each graph.
Recycling Against Radiation 13

Average control measurement: 51 μSv

Recycled versus Virgin HDPE Shield Data

Penetrated Radiation (μSv)

Thickness (in)
r-HDPE v-HDPE

½ 47.7 49.5

1 47.9 49.2

1½ 45.0 50.3

2 42.9 48.1

2½ 42.7 48.9
Table 1. This data table shows the raw data from the experiment on February 18th. The data is

grouped into two categories: the data from the recycled radiation shields and the data from the

virgin radiation shields​.

Format: y = A * xB
Equation of r-HDPE graph:

Radiation permeability in microsieverts = (46.12) * (thickness in inches)−0.077

Equation of v-HDPE graph:

Radiation permeability in microsieverts = (49.33) * (thickness in inches)−0.010

Recycling Against Radiation 14

Radiation Dosage versus r-HDPE Thickness

Graph 1. This graph shows the exponential decrease in the amount of radiation permeating

through the shields as the thickness of the overall shielding stack increased.

Radiation Dosage versus HDPE Thickness

Graph 2. This graph shows the dampened exponential decrease, in comparison to the r-HDPE, in

the amount of radiation permeating through the shields as the thickness of the overall shielding

stack increased.
Recycling Against Radiation 15

The p-value of the Shapiro-Wilk’s Test for the r-HDPE is about 0.882. The p-value of the

Shapiro-Wilk’s Test for the v-HDPE is about 0.884. These are both greater than the chosen

a-value of 0.05, so the null hypothesis that both data sets are normally distributed is retained. The

p-value of the Levene’s Test for variance is about 0.019 and less than the a-value of 0.05. This

means that the null hypothesis, which states that there is no significant difference between the

means, must be rejected. The two sample T-Test assuming unequal variances gives a two-tail

value of about 0.02, which is less than the a-value of 0.05. This means the null hypothesis, which

states that the difference between the average of the two data sets is not significant, is rejected.

The mean radiation permeation of the r-HDPE is 45.24μSv and the variance is 6.278. The mean

radiation permeation of the v-HDPE is 49.2μSv and the variance is 0.65. Because the r-HDPE

has the smallest mean as well as the largest variance, it can be concluded that the r-HDPE

outperformed the v-HDPE.

Figure 1. This figure shows the basic calculations for the energy level of “hard” X-rays. On

average, the energy contained in a photon of Cosmic Background Radiation (gamma rays) is

roughly 1300 times more than in a photon of high-level X-rays.

Recycling Against Radiation 16

Extended Research

Figures 2-4. These figures show how the densities of the r-HDPE shields were measured and
recorded for comparison against the v-HDPE shields.

Figure 5. This figure shows the masses and volumes measured for each r-HDPE shield. The
average density was then calculated and compared to the density of the v-HDPE.
Recycling Against Radiation 17

Additional research was done after the experiment was completed and analyzed to

attempt to explain the results of the data analysis. First, the density of the r-HDPE was measured

and compared to the density of the v-HDPE. After that, further reading was performed where it

was discovered that there is a change to the chemical and tensile properties of the material during

the recycling process, which is the most likely explanation of the experiment’s results.

The results of the density test experiment do not support the initial idea that the r-HDPE

shields performed better than the v-HDPE shields simply because of a difference in density. A

3% difference in the densities is negligible when taking into account the possibility of

measurement inconsistencies and errors. Therefore, it can be concluded that the density of both

sets of radiation shields are equal and that density was not a factor in the r-HDPE radiation

shields demonstrating a higher average performance.

It is probable that the result of the experiment can be attributed to a change in the plastics

chemical properties during the recycling process. According to Alzerreca et al., “contact with

oxygen and other chemicals can modify the molecular structure. Recycled PE generally has a

higher concentration of hydroperoxide and peroxide groups, which can alter polymer stability

and lifetime significantly.” While this means that r-HDPE is mechanically weaker, it also means

it is more oxygen-rich, and hydroxyl, OH, is generally more reactive than hydrogen (Schnabel

278). This added oxygen could cause the r-HDPE to perform similarly to water, which also has

high concentrations of hydrogen and oxygen. Water is currently one of the best known materials

at shielding radiation.
Recycling Against Radiation 18
Recycling Against Radiation 19

References

Alzerreca, M. et al. (2015, Sept.). Mechanical properties and molecular structures of virgin and

recycled HDPE polymers used in gravity sewer systems. Retrieved on Sept. 9, 2019

from: doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2015.06.012.

Boundless. (n.d.). Boundless Physics. Retrieved on April​ ​4, 2019 from:

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-physics/chapter/the-electromagnetic-spectr

um/​.

Cosmic Ray Energies | COSMOS. (n.d.). Retrieved on April 4, 2019:

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/c/cosmic+ray+energies​.

Frazier, S. (2015). How to Protect Astronauts from Space Radiation on Mars. Retrieved on

November 29, 2018 from:

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/real-martians-how-to-protect-astronauts-from-spac

e-radiation-on-mars​.

Implementation of ALARA radiation protection on the ISS through polyethylene shielding

augmentation of the Service Module Crew Quarters. (2004). Retrieved​ ​on November 29,

2018 from: ​https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273117704002078​.

Narici, L., Casolino, M., Di Fino, L., Larosa, M., Picozza, P., Rizzo, A., & Zaconte, V. (2017,

May 10). Performances of Kevlar and Polyethylene as radiation shielding on-board the

International Space Station in high latitude radiation environment. Retrieved on October

4, 2018 from:​ ​https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5432003/​.

Recycling Against Radiation 20

Performances of Kevlar and Polyethylene as radiation shielding on-board the International Space

Station in high latitude radiation environment. (2017). Retrieved​ ​on October 23, 2018

from: ​https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5432003/​.

Radiation shielding of spacecraft in manned interplanetary flights. (2000). Retrieved ​ ​on

November 29, 2018 from:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168900299010918​.

Raval, S. (2013). Superconducting Magnets to Protect Spacecraft from Radiation. Retrieved on

December 17, 2018 from:

http://www.spacesafetymagazine.com/space-hazards/radiation/superconducting-magnets-

protect-spacecrafts-space-radiation/​.

Schnabel, Wolfram. “Polymers and Electromagnetic Radiation.” (n.d). Wiley-VCH. Retrieved

on April 23, 2019:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Abdelkader_Bouaziz/post/How_to_intrepet_the_col

or_change_of_polymers_upon_irradiation_with_ionizing_radiation/attachment/59d622d4

c49f478072e9910d/AS%3A272119621980160%401441889781884/download/Polymers

+and+Electromagnetic+Radiation+-+Fundamentals+and+Practical+Applications.pdf​.

Thomas, G.P. “Recycling of High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE or PEHD).” AZoCleantech.com.

Retrieved on July 24, 2019 from: ​www.azocleantech.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=255​.  

X-rays. (2017). Retrieved on October 23, 2018 from:

https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/what-is-radiation/ionising-radiation/

x-ray​.
Recycling Against Radiation 21

“Mechanical Properties and Molecular Structures of Virgin and Recycled HDPE Polymers Used

in Gravity Sewer Systems.” Polymer Testing, Elsevier. Retrieved on June 25, 2019 from:

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142941815001440​.