[ RadSafe ] SCBA and beta dose connection?
m.w.charles at bham.ac.uk
Fri Apr 13 06:46:41 CDT 2012
Beta burns were indeed a major contributor to early deaths and to late
occurring cataracts in liquidators. The main contributors were Cs-137 and
Sr/Y-90. These beta energies penetrated normal clothing, aided by wet
conditions. Aluminised mylar (by which I presume you mean thin films) would
obviously provide totally inadequate shielding. I attach a paper I produced
for a NATO conference on radiation induced cataract associated with
Chernobyl. Figure 2 gives depth doses measured at Chernobyl Unit 3 by Dmitri
Osanov - a Russian dosimetrist who was himself a liquidator.
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Dan McCarn
Sent: 13 April 2012 07:53
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] SCBA and beta dose connection?
I, too, remain ignorant of many things...
I recall that in the immediate aftermath of the Chernobyl accident, beta
burn on skin, and I presume in the lungs, was an important consideration
along with total gamma dose for the ultimate prognosis of first responders.
The effect as described to me was much like a thermal burn to the patient.
In the discussion that I heard, it was the combination of severe beta burn
and gamma dose that caused death.
I would tend to agree that beta burn to the lungs may be neglected if using
SCBA. In the discussions that I heard, 10th Anniversary meetings of the
Chernobyl accident in Minsk and the 10th Anniversary meetings at the IAEA,
Belarus, aluminized Mylar was thought to be sufficient to prevent beta burn
But that's all second-hand information.
Dan W McCarn, Geologist
108 Sherwood Blvd
Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
+1-505-672-2014 (Home - New Mexico)
+1-505-670-8123 (Mobile - New Mexico)
HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 1:12 PM, <JOHN.RICH at sargentlundy.com> wrote:
> I have a document in front of me that states, " IF SCBAs are used, the
> beta dose rates may be neglected." The context is in a post -accident
> mission dose determination where the effect of SCBAs is discussed.
> I'll admit my ignorance on this one. Does anybody know where this
> came from or what would support it?
> thx in advance - -jmr
> John Rich
> 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:
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
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:
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Charles NATO Eye Dosimetry 1999.pdf
Size: 2372958 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the RadSafe