1976
DOI: 10.2172/4090471
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

1974 intercomparison of personnel dosimeters

Abstract: Thu reporl was prepared as in account of woik sponwrrd by Ihe United fitttel Government. Neither (he fJr>ireJ Surea nor the United State) fncigy Research ani: Devtiopmenl Aif-^jnijtration, nor any of fteii empli-yeeJ. nai any of Iheii contractor!, tubconliacton, or Iheij employees, makes any mrtntty. exptm or implied, o-mumes any legfil UabL' ity or reipon*ibiliiy foi thcaci icy.cornpleteneis or ^tvfulnesi of any tnformatKin, t?pira!ui. product or process diudotril, or representi Hut ill use would not infringe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1982
1982
1982
1982

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 2 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…25-27, 19741979 The PDIS provide an opportunity for organizations to determine how their dosimeters perform relative to others exposed under identical experimental conditions. Individual PDIS analysis reports have been published (Di76;Gi76;Gi79;Di80;Si8Oa;Sw81) and partial summaries have been presented at meetings (Di77; Di80a), but no overall summary and analysis has previously been published. This paper is a summary and analysis of all six previous PDIS and contains a listing of participants, the basic measured data, information derived from the basic data (e.g.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…25-27, 19741979 The PDIS provide an opportunity for organizations to determine how their dosimeters perform relative to others exposed under identical experimental conditions. Individual PDIS analysis reports have been published (Di76;Gi76;Gi79;Di80;Si8Oa;Sw81) and partial summaries have been presented at meetings (Di77; Di80a), but no overall summary and analysis has previously been published. This paper is a summary and analysis of all six previous PDIS and contains a listing of participants, the basic measured data, information derived from the basic data (e.g.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%