FW: 133-Ba dose calibrator source

["Page, Barry" <Barry.Page@HEALTH.WA.GOV.AU>]

This is an interesting situation to know where the error lies.   Any

comments, suggestions, responses are most welcome.



> -----Original Message-----

> From:	Barker, Patricia 

> Sent:	Friday, 7 June 2002 15:00

> To:	Page, Barry

> Subject:	FW: 133-Ba dose calibrator source

> 

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From:	Barker, Patricia 

> Sent:	Tuesday, 4 June 2002 14:48

> To:	'radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu'

> Subject:	133-Ba dose calibrator source

> 

> Hi Folks

> 

> We recently purchased a 133-Barium dose calibrator source. This was

> purchased from Australian Radioisotopes and was manufactured by AEA

> Technology.

> 

> We measured the source in our 2 Capintec dose calibrators and the readings

> were both high.

> 

> From the calibration certificate which stated a 3% overall uncertainty the

> activity should have been 9.13 MBq.

> On our Capintec 35-R we measured 10.24MBq and our 12-R we measured

> 10.19MBq.  We then measured it in various other Capintecs in Perth with

> similar results.

> 

> I referred the problem back to Capintec who said they had no reports of a

> problem with the 133-Ba setting.

> 

> We previously had a Du Pont source which always measured within 2% of the

> stated activity.

> 

> I referred the problem back to ARI who consulted the manufacturers.

> 

> They sent a report dated 1984 which was a response t a similar complaint

> from Mt. Vernon Hospital in England.

> 

> They suggest Capintecs factor is fault - but I doubt that is the sole

> cause since the Du Pont standard was measuring well within specification.

> 

> The source is calibrated on a Curiementor 2 calibrator - which is an

> instrument unfamiliar to me.

> 

> It seems it is a problem between the factor on this instrument and that on

> the Capintecs.

> 

> Has anyone met a similar problem?

> Do you think there is a problem with the Capintec factor for this isotope

> or is there some disparity between the Capintec factor and that of the

> Curiementor

> for 133-Ba?

> Has anyone found similar problems with other sources?

> 

> 

> Regards

> 

> Pat Barker

> 

> Pat Barker

> Dept. of Medical Physics

> Royal Perth Hospital

> 

> Tel: 08 9224 2770      Fax: 08 9224 1138

> E-mail: patricia.barker@health.gov.wa.au

> 

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/