[ RadSafe ] Bismuth-212 and 727-keV gammas
mcnaught at lanl.gov
Wed Oct 6 14:17:40 CDT 2010
Here is what I read in the RadSafe Archives. Please correct me if I am wrong.
1. You asked the question based on empirical data.
2. Others replied supplying references but no empirical data.
Please may I ask for more details about your empirical data? For example:
About how many samples were analyzed?
Were the samples from similar locations, similar conditions, or similar media? In other words, how similar or diverse were the samples?
Was this a one-time investigation, or many investigations?
I would appreciate whatever information you can provide.
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Leo M. Lowe
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 12:13 PM
To: radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Bismuth-212 and 727-keV gammas
This same issue was discussed previously on Radsafe. Look in the
archives in July 2003.
It was suggested at that time that ICRP38 and other normally
authoritative references were in error about the intensity of the 727
line,and that the National Nuclear Data Center (NNDC) at BNL should
be considered as THE most authoritative reference, such as ENSDF at
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of McNaughton,
Sent: 06 October 2010 15:25
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Bismuth-212 and 727-keV gammas
I have a problem with the gamma-spec results for bismuth-212. The
reported concentrations for bismuth-212 are consistently higher than
those for Pb-212, as well as for all the other nuclides in the
thorium-232 decay chain. This is the case for several types of samples,
collected over several years, and analyzed at several different
I suspect the problem is with the emission probability (or "intensity")
for the 727-keV gamma. Different publications list different numbers for
the emission probability. The numbers range from about 6% to 12%.
I would like to discuss this problem with others who are interested.
Los Alamos National Lab
mcnaught at lanl.gov
Leo M. Lowe, Ph.D., P.Phys., CRadP
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
More information about the RadSafe