Eurados Intercomparisons on Whole-Body Dosemeters for Photons From 2008 to 2014

Abstract

Starting in 2008 the European Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) has been performing international intercomparisons on photon whole-body dosemeters for individual monitoring services. These intercomparisons were organised (on a biannual basis) in 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2014, each time with a similar set-up but with small alterations in the subsequent irradiation plans. With an increasing number of participants and participating systems, this intercomparison action has become an important tool for individual monitoring services to test their whole-body dosimetry systems, compare their results with other services or systems and to improve the quality of their dosimetry. The paper presents and compares the results of these four intercomparisons and compares the dosimetric results for the participating system types. Major dosimetric problems of the individual monitoring services are identified, and trends in the dosimetric performance of the different systems are shown. This gives the opportunity to identify some dosimetry issues that should be improved by application of the monitoring services' quality assurance systems and QA procedures.

The European radiation dosimetry group – Review of recent scientific achievements

“…The intercomparisons are funded on a cost recovery basis from participant fees, and the programme has been running since 2008 (Grimbergen et al 2016. Intercomparisons for whole-body photon/beta dosemeters (Figel et al 2016) are held in alternate years, with intercomparisons for extremity photon/beta (Stadtmann et al 2017) and for whole body neutron dosemeters (Chevallier et al, 2016)…”

EURADOS education and training activities

“…Organisation of ICs for IMSs is done by specific task groups of WG02, the so-called IC Organising Groups (OGs). The EURADOS IC programme [18,19] has so far led to the organisation of IC exercises for whole body dosemeters in photon fields every two years [20][21][22][23], IC exercises for extremity dosemeters in photon and beta fields in 2009, 2015 and 2019 [19,25,26], and IC exercises for neutron dosemeters in 2012 and 2017 [19,27,28].…”

Determining the Artificial Influence Factors for Quality Assessment of Personal Radiation Dosimetry Services

“…It is essential to monitor the personal radiation dose to ensure a reasonable effective dose limit for radiation workers. In report No.103 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), personal dose monitoring should consider deep individual dose, H p (10), and shallow individual dose, H p (0.07) [1]. The integrity of personal dose monitoring requires basic management, practical implementation, and dose record-keeping by a quali ed dosimetry service [2][3][4][5] The measurement accuracy of personal dosimeters is a critical issue.…”

“…In the United States, measurement accuracy refers to the American National Standards Institute and The Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13 series speci cation for the evaluation of tolerance level on personal dosimeter measurement performance [7,8]. In Europe, the European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) conducts routine intercomparison for dosimetry services within multiple countries using the measurement accuracy criteria in each country [9][10][11]. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also performs comparative studies of dosimetry services in various countries and establishes acceptance limits concerning the deviation between measurement and true irradiation value in ICRP reports [12][13][14][15].…”