RE: Subject: RE: Bq soon

Title: Message

If you think that's bad, I sat down for a moment to recall all of the various units of measure that we had in a nuclear power plant control room. Following is a partial list off the top of my head. I'm sure there were others. I've spelled some out because some of the ASCII characters will not survive many mail servers:

psig (pounds/in^2 - gauge)

psia (pounds/in^2 - absolute)

feet (level)

inches (level -- with many different reference points!)

mm Hg

in WG -- water gauge used for HVAC differential pressure

mV (SHE) standard hydrogen electrode -- used for corrosion monitoring

volts

amperes

watts

watts/ft^2 -- fuel monitoring parameter

watts/cm^2 -- fuel monitoring parameter

kW/L -- core power density

kW/ft -- fuel monitoring parameter

micro-siemens -- coolant conductivity

micro-mho/cm -- coolant conductivity

VAR (volt-ampere reactive)

MVAR (mega)

degrees F

degrees C

BTU/lb(m)

lb(m) (pounds mass)

lb(m)/minute

Mlb(m)/hour

gpm (gallons/min)

gph (gallons/hr)

cps (counts/second)

cpm (counts/minute)

R/h

mR/h

There were a great number of other computer-calculated parameters that appeared on various video displays and computer print-outs. While it seems like a human factors nightmare, each parameter was carefully displayed in a manner that conveyed normal versus abnormal condition. Many were displayed in a sometimes-called "green band". How did operators cope with such a plethora of units? One word: TRAINING.

Post-TMI, we changed the units of a number of critical operating parameters to harmonize units. Despite the initial hue and cry, the changes went off flawlessly because of thorough TRAINING.

I've lived in two border states (NY and WA), with plenty of opportunity to cross over to our friends in the North, as well as enjoy their broadcast media. From what I observed, the transition there was one that took a generation. Today's first year university student in Canada thinks in SI. For the US to achieve a successful transition, we need to start teaching SI as THE PRIMARY system of measure in our schools. We need to just stop teaching the units that are based on the Sovereign's various bodily properties; or maybe just make some casual reference to "historical" units. TRAIN then when they're young!

Most of the complaining that I've seen in this thread is either attributable to laziness, or a romantic notion that clinging to the bizarre system we embrace today is somehow patriotic.

That said, the ICRU and ICRP need to come up with a truly "coherent" system of radiological units, or somebody needs to give me some better training to understand how physical quantities (e.g., absorbed dose - J/kg) can have the same units as a quantity that cannot be directly measured (e.g., equivalent dose, J/kg). I say this somewhat tongue-in cheek (ah, the power of unitless factors!), but it's a problem nonetheless

Cheers!!

George J. Vargo, Ph.D., CHP

610-925-1954

610-925-5545 (fax)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu [mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu] On Behalf Of Sonter Mark
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 7:57 PM
To: 'Ivor Surveyor'; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: RE: Subject: RE: Bq soon

Yeah, let alone pounds per square inch, foot-poundals, slugs, acre-feet, and British Thermal Units!!

Mark Sonter

Farenheit is dead, Long live Celcius!!

-----Original Message-----
From: Ivor Surveyor [mailto:isurveyor@vianet.net.au]
Sent: Tuesday, 8 April 2003 6:38 PM
To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Subject: RE: Bq soon

To a person living outside of the USA it is a matter of amazement to find the bizarre combination of units used in American texts. For instance on a single page of a recently published text on Radiation Protection [ J. Shapiro 4th Edition] I found the student had to contend with a plethora of units.

On page 361:   Ft; Ft^2; Ft/min; Ft^3/min; cm^3/day; pCi/cc;   microCi/cc;   mCi; MBq

Or on page 372: 1 acre = 4,047 m^2; 1km^2 = 247 Acres; pCi/m^2-s
and a reminder to multiple mCi by 37 to obtain MBq, and pCi by 0.037 to convert to Bq; or Ci by 37 to obtain GBq.

Though out the book there is a continuous need to convert Sv to rem(s); Gy to rad(s); length in cm, ft or m and so on.

By the way in strict SI there is no place for the cm, cc, or cm^3. or use of "pleural forms for units.

I just wonder how this irrational jumble of old and new units is tolerated.   Surely more then one "Mars probe" must have gone astray, because of this confusing jumble?   I suspect that more then one author has developed a severe "headache" from proof reading of texts. The high quality of many American texts and publications are such as to have a great appeal to international readers     What a waste of intellectual effort is expanded in converting backwards and forwards from one system to the other, as one reads and studies papers, text books, or regulations.

I am not aware of any real problem in Australia or UK when we adopted the SI system, except perhaps a feeling of joyous relief.

Ivor Surveyor [isurveyor@vianet.net.au]

This e-mail is intended for the addressee(s) named and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it immediately and notify the sender. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender except where the sender expressly and with authority states them to be the views of the Environment Protection Authority.

References:

RE: Subject: RE: Bq soon
- From: Sonter Mark <sonterm@epa.nsw.gov.au>