Re: XRD Badging

[xug2@rpi.edu (Xie George Xu)]

Wes,

I appreciate your comments on my original question about badge for x-ray
users. Your comment is very interesting (and so were the others.) Thank all of
you!!

I know that CRCPD is working on X-ray badging issues. I remember that a
letter, which appeared in May 1994 issue of HPS Newsletter, addressed the use
of two badges in hospitals.  And that letter was written by an University of
Florida, Nuclear Engineering/Medical physics faculty member who is also a
member of CRCPD.  Being a researcher in personnel dosimetry myself, I would
like to get a copy of CRCPD publications on personnel dosimetry. Please let me
know where I get them. Thanks.

******************************************************************
George Xu, Ph.D.
Institute Radiation Safety Officer/Research Assistant Professor
Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics
NES Bldg., Tibbits Ave.
Rensselaer Polytechnic Instititue
Troy, NY 12180-3590

Tel: (518) 276-4014/4029
E-mail: xug2@rpi.edu
******************************************************************



On Mar 17,  2:16pm, "Wesley M. Dunn" wrote:
> Subject: XRD Badging
>
> Speaking as the Regulations Guru on this specific topic (I'm the
> Chair of the Conference of Radiation Control Protection Directors
> (CRCPD) Suggested State Regulations (SSR) committee on industrial x-
> rays and industrial accelerators), I don't think badging X-Ray
> diffraction users utilizing copper targets in interlocked
> boxes/beampaths makes any sense.
>
> Keep in mind that a properly collimated x-ray beam is very small
> compared to (A) the active area of the badge; and (B) the badge is
> very small in comparison to the surface area of the person.  Also,
> (C) While the x-ray beam is hot, it is (nearly) impossible to hold
> the beam over the same piece of skin, hence distributing the
> radiation exposure over a wider area for a lower dose to any one
> place.
>
> Extremity badges make some sense if you are working around the target
> and/or collimator while the unit is energized (which some people
> claim is necessary).
>
> Whole body badges make sense if users are clueless and are using
> a non-interlocked and/or poorly shielded/collimated tube housing OR
> you are using non-copper targets (e.g., larger characteristic x-rays).
>
> NEVER adjust/modify/remove the tube housing while the unit is plugged
> in and/or power is available to the unit.  Then you avoid the
> incidents that Ted describes.
>
> As a side note: Several years ago, we did a study using two TLDs
> in series (e.g., one in front of the other) and a copper-filtered x-
> ray beam.  We verified that the first badge was sufficient to shield
> the body.  Hence, if you have a badge reading, the person behind the
> badge was not really exposed to the radiation.  So badges DO have a
> protective function (albeit for a very small surface area).
>
> P.S., we are in the process of promulgating proposed rule-making to
> the effect of the above comments.
>
>
> Wes
>
> Chair, SR-3 Committee
>-- End of excerpt from "Wesley M. Dunn"