Re[2]: TLDs - False Positive Betas

[coogen_michael@hq2ccgw.hq.dla.mil]

I would recommend the following:  Evaluate the historical performance of that 
particular TLD; calibrate the TLD to known sources (e.g. 100 mRem and 300 mRem).
If the performance of the TLD is within standards, then you have to assume that 
that the TLD was exposed to a Beta Source.  Another possibility is that the TLD 
worn by the individual may have been paritially shielded.  In most instances, 
TLD are very reliable.  I don't believe that you will get significant reading 
from Grenz rays or x-ray diffractions sources unless you place the TLD directly 
in the field of radiation.  Although the TLD user states no betas, the TLD tells
a different story.  I have experience the opposite with gamma sources...mike 
coogen sends


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: TLDs - False Positive Betas
Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at hq2ccgw
Date:    7/19/95 9:41 PM


I haven't been in the TLD field for many years but I would expect very soft 
x-rays, e.g.Grenz rays or x-ray diffraction sources to give a big reading 
at the open window and thus be thought of as betas. 
John Cameron

>Has anyone experienced "false positive" beta responses with 
>their TLDs? We  have performed glow curve analyses on these 
>responses which say that there is a real beta response but 
>our TLD users say that there is no beta. Any comments?  
>
>Thanx
>
>Stu Torf
>torfsm@nu.com
>RP section
>Northeast Utilities
>203-665-5814
>
>P.S - whatever the standard disclaimers are, they apply.
John Cameron, 2571 Porter Rd., P.O. Box 405, Lone Rock, WI 53556-0405 
Phones: Voice: 608/583-2160; FAX 608/583-2269. NOTE:During the winter 
months Von & I will be at our winter home near the U.of Florida at 2678 SW 
14th Dr., Gainesville, FL 32608 - Phone not yet installed. My e-mail will 
be forwarded.