[ RadSafe ] Adopting the International System of Units for Radiation Measurements in the United States: Proceedings of a Workshop

[Ted de Castro]

I have yet to see an cabinet x-ray leakage limit correctly specified in 
a MEASURABLE 35.8 pico C/Kg.sec - to go COMPLETELY SI (I hope I got that 
right).

Haven't seen an IC survey meter yet scaled in pico C/Kg.sec either.  Are 
they sold that way in Europe??

They all say mSv now - and that is incorrect.

On 3/6/2017 9:10 AM, Jason Meade wrote:
> "Did the workshop have anything to say about the rampant misuse of units
> afforded us by SI?"
>
> Sort of, briefly, and quite indirectly.
>
> But it was more covered under the confusion and misdirection in journalism,
> in the public arena, and in emergency response communication issues due to
> mix and match problems of dual system usage, an not really covered as a
> separate issue.
>
> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Ted de Castro <tdc at xrayted.com> wrote:
>
>> Did the workshop have anything to say about the rampant misuse of units
>> afforded us by SI?
>>
>> Thanks to an incredibly cumbersome EXPOSURE unit - regulatory exposure
>> limits are now being expressed in DOSE units without specifying - dose to
>> what.
>>
>> Back in the back old days when we where just too stupid to know any better
>> these things were expressed in exposure units.  When a DOSE unit was
>> expressed - rad - it was expressed as rad in xxxx. And was seldom measured
>> but usually calculated.
>>
>> So I recently encountered a quasi regulatory document called SEMI 2 which
>> has among other things:
>>
>> "Direct doserate measurement with an Ion Chamber {or equivalent) calibrated
>> to +/- 10% of true doserate at the surface of the equipment (or at the
>> closest
>> approach) in all areas where the operator may have access with the ionizing
>> radiation source active.*"
>>
>> *Sorry - wrong!  An ion chamber is an exposure instrument NOT dose rate -
>> and this is for analytical x-ray for which the spectrum from one end to the
>> other varies considerably and the exposure to dose ratio is spectrum
>> dependent and will vary more than the requisite 10% from one end to the
>> other.  Let along the body part to which their dose limits apply is not
>> specified.  (they give the limits in Sv) I maintain there is in fact no
>> survey instrument that can measure this!
>>
>> So - with their use of SI and misuse of type of unit we are confronted
>> with a published imperative which is clearly impossible to comply with.
>>
>> So - what did the workshop have to say about ion chambers with Sv marked
>> on the meter faces?
>> *
>>
>> ***
>> On 3/3/2017 5:51 AM, Jason Meade wrote:
>>
>>> It was a great workshop and well worth my time, but after it was done, I'm
>>> pretty sure it will be done again with almost an identical agenda in 10
>>> years time.
>>>
>>> Entirely too much "but this is the way we've always done it" and "it would
>>> be too hard" type talking among those who've always been doing the work
>>> and
>>> who are largely in charge for any type of shift in thinking, despite the
>>> fact that the majority of the scientific and academic portions of our
>>> education system have already made the change.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Cary Renquist <cary.renquist at ezag.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   From the National Academies Press.
>>>> One can always download the PDF version for free (might require an
>>>> account)
>>>>
>>>> Adopting the International System of Units for Radiation Measurements in
>>>> the United States: Proceedings of a Workshop
>>>>
>>>> Most countries in the world use the SI (Système International, also known
>>>> as the metric system) units for radiation measurements in commercial and
>>>> technical activities. The United States, in contrast, uses a mix of SI
>>>> and
>>>> conventional units for radiation measurements, despite 30-year-old
>>>> national
>>>> and international recommendations to exclusively use SI. Radiation
>>>> professionals in the United States are faced with the need to understand
>>>> both systems and make conversions between the two.
>>>> Short link
>>>> http://bit.ly/2mPP5bQ
>>>>
>>>> Adopting the International System of Units for Radiation Measurements in
>>>> the United States: Proceedings of a Workshop | The National Academies
>>>> Press
>>>> <https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24645/adopting-the-
>>>> international-system-of-units-for-radiation-measurements-in-
>>>> the-united-states?utm_source=NASEM+News+and+Publications&
>>>> utm_campaign=b2788914c1-Final_Book_2017_03_02_24645&utm_
>>>> medium=email&utm_term=0_96101de015-b2788914c1-102196093&
>>>> goal=0_96101de015-
>>>> b2788914c1-102196093&mc_cid=b2788914c1&mc_eid=3ee8f719d6>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Cary Renquist
>>>> cary.renquist at ezag.com
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/rad
>> saferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>
>
>