[ RadSafe ] Cs-137 beam calibrator output

[Thompson, Dewey L]

Clayton.

If it is an open beam, I would not expect too horrible of a contribution from Compton Scatter. There will be some, sure. I remember looking at an enclosed box calibrator some years ago, it would not only have the forward scatter but bounce back as well. You could see the effect, the measured dose rate was greater than narrow beam calculations, however it was no 27%.  I don't remember the details now, but I'm thinking it was like 7% to 9%.  Don't hold me to the number, I've slept since then.

A couple of thoughts, well, really one. How confident are you in the gamma constant you are using?  The numbers vary wildly depending on your reference. For example, the IEM website shows a gamma constant for CS~137 as 0,38184 R/C at a meter, that's .229 R/hr if I can still run a calculator.

Ditto to the previous poster on source strength accuracy.

Oh, and I guess I can come up with a second thought. If the source is Cesium salt powder, it can show "hot spots", and not be uniform.

Oh yeah.  A third thought. What instrument was used, and did it have the proper equilibrium shield?

All these errors compound of course.
Thoughts and musings.

Dewey
Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 22, 2014, at 6:01 PM, "clayton bradt" <dutchbradt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My apologies if this duplicates an earlier post. Having received no bounce
> notice for the previous one, I am re-sending from a different email account.
>
> ********
>
> Original post:
>
>
> I’ve been reviewing data for a beam calibrator containing a Cs-137 source
> with nominal activity 600 mCi on 1/18/2005.  The measured output at 1 meter
> along the beam center line was 0.2443 R/h on the same date.  Comparing that
> with the calculated exposure rate at 1meter from a 600 mCi point source I
> get 0.193 R/h, assuming a Gamma constant for Cs-137 of 0.322 R/h at 1 meter
> per Ci.   I am surprised at such a large difference (27%) between the
> theoretical value and measurement.  Should I be?  I know that scatter from
> the collimator will affect the actual exposure rate, but this much?
>
>
>
> Any help from people with more experience with exposure rate calibrations
> on this list will be most appreciated.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
The information contained in this message may be privileged and/or confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Note that any views or opinions presented in this message are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Ameren. All e-mails are subject to monitoring and archival. Finally, the recipient should check this message and any attachments for the presence of viruses. Ameren accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message and deleting the material from any computer. Ameren Corporation