Conclusions
Of the two methods of detector heating considered in this study, the first method gives a higher reproducibility for β than the second. The amplitude reading method and the second of the detector heating methods considered above are completely incompatible.
The reproducibility of β in the course of the first method of heating improves as the heat capacity of the detector C2 decreases (assuming that C1=const).
For a given construction of HE and detector there exists an optimal heating rate, at which the highest degree of reproducibility is attained.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literature cited
M. Frank, H. Durban, H. Lingertat, and L. Herforth, Kernergie,7, No. 6–7 (1964).
K. E. Perry, Nucl. Engin., No. 126 (1966).
K. K. Schwarz, T. K. Mezhs, and M. M. Grube, Radiatsionaya Fizika, V. Riga, Zinante (1967).
K. M. Kudelin, V. B. Bulgakov, and A. A. Lebedev, Pribory i Tekh. Éksperim., No. 1 (1968).
J. T. Fowler, E. Shuttleworth, V. Svarcer, J. T. Whithe, and C. Karzmark, Nature,207, No. 5000 (1965).
K. M. Kudelin, Pribory i Tekh. Éksperim., No. 6 (1967).
K. M. Kudelin, V. B. Bulkagov, and G. N. Popov, At. Énerg.,26, No. 4 (1969).
Yu. P. Shlykov and E. A. Ganin, At. Énerg.,9, No. 6 (1960).
Additional information
Translated from Izmeritel'naya Tekhnika, No. 9, pp. 74–75, September, 1971.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kudelin, K.M. Selection of heating cycles for thermoluminescent detectors. Meas Tech 14, 1404–1407 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00983124
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00983124