Reproducibility of glow peak fading characteristics of thermoluminescent dosimeters

Dose response linearity and practical factors influencing minimum detectable dose for various thermoluminescent detector types

“…The effectiveness of additional calibration drops sharply after three calibrations, with the effect on s l becoming insignificant after five calibrations [12]. A reduction in s l from 5 to 4 % has only a small effect on the detection limit, but a profound effect on the determination limit at high radiation background values.…”

“…In the case of LiF:Mg,Ti over a typical personnel monitoring deployment period of 30 to 90 days, the sum of peaks 4 and 5 do not fade significantly [11,12], even at high ambient temperatures up to 40°C [13]. If peaks 2 and 3 are considered as well, their fading could cause the signal actually seen to drop below the minimum detectable signal level.…”

Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dosimetry: An Introduction

“…The use of OSL dosimeters versus other choices, such as thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) or film-based dosimeters, is attractive for a number of technical reasons, including: (1) the current material of choice for this application, α-Al 2 O 3 :C, is highly sensitive in that it emits a large amount of stimulated luminescence per unit of radiation dose absorbed [2][3][4][5][6]; (2) the optical readout method is fast and relatively simple [4]; and (3) the OSL technique lends itself to repeat readout of samples since, unlike thermal stimulation as used in TLDs, optical stimulation can be activated and deactivated very quickly, allowing fast readout of the dose information without a significant depopulation of the dosimetric traps. Although OSL dosimeters are frequently susceptible to light-induced fading [7][8][9], maintaining the material in a light-tight container during use does not present a significant problem in most applications, and this issue may be far less than the thermal fading effects encountered for thermoluminescent detectors [10,11].…”