Radon surveys with charcoal and liquid scintillation counting
- 41 Downloads
- 6 Citations
Abstract
A detection system for indoor radon using vials with activated charcoal adsorbant and liquid scintillation spectrometry for measurement has been tested thoroughly for months during different seasons. Deviation in the results of two days of exposure from the mean value were at most about ±30%. This system was chosen for a pilot project for large area surveillance in Mühlviertel, a granitic area in the federal state of upper Austria. The distribution system of the detectors is described. The measurement of more than 1200 vials within about two weeks was possible by using ultra low-level liquid scintillation counters (“Quantulus”). The highest value observed so far was 3150 Bq/m3. Comparing the ratios of the results from the three different measurement systems (charcoal, track etch, electret) significant but acceptable differences were found not only between track etch (3 months exposure) and activated charcoal (3 days exposure), but also between track etch and electret, which both had been exposed for three months. The data are discussed regarding the dose to the population.
Keywords
Charcoal Radon Distribution System Liquid Scintillation Scintillation CountingPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.H.M. PRICHARD, T.F. GESELL, Health Physics, 45 (1983) 991PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.“Strahlenschutzverordnung” (Radiation Protection Ordinance), BGBl. Nr. 47, 12 Jan 1972, Vienna, in GermanGoogle Scholar
- 3.Recommendation of the Austrian Radiation Protection Commission concerning Concentration of Radon in Indoor Air, 29 June, 1992 Vienna, in GermanGoogle Scholar
- 4.P. BRUNNER, “Measurement of Radon by LSC in an Area with High Natural Background (Umhausen, Tyrol)”, paper presented at the International Conference on Advances in Liquid Scintillation Spectrometry, Vienna, 14.–18. Sept. 1992Google Scholar
- 5.G. PERSHAGEN et al., “Residential Radon Exposure and Lung Cancer in Sweden—A Nationwide Case-control Study”. New Eng. J. Med. 330 (1994) 159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.F. SCHÖNHOFER, unpublished resultsGoogle Scholar