on-topic vs. off-topic, and x-ray calibration

["M. Woo" <melissa@zelda.ehs.uiuc.edu>]

So this is what happens when I'm out sick for a day and spend the next day out 
of the office doing HP stuff.  I knew I should have bought a cellular modem. 
<grin>

We're all adults and professionals here, so I would hope that we'd be capable of 
determining what is directly relevant to the discussion of radiation protection 
as opposed to topics which have a tenuous link to the field and would be far 
more appropriate discussed either privately or in another forum.

Just a comment though... if there is some question as to whether a particular 
subject is off-topic, chances are that it *is* off-topic.  Also, I might point 
out that discussion of whether or not a subject is off-topic could be considered 
off-topic.

RADSAFE now has more than 1500 subscribers.  Any time that you post publicly, 
ask yourself whether or not you really want 1500 of your colleagues to see your 
post.

So, that said...

Are there any "standards" or whatever for calibration of ionization chambers 
which are intended only to survey for leakage around analytical x-ray devices?  
Or does checking for x-ray leakage at such low average energies have little 
meaning?  Is calibrating to certain NIST beam quality codes for surveys of 
non-medical x-ray devices useful at all?

--
 Melissa Woo, Health Physicist                       | m-woo@uiuc.edu
 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign          | office 1.217.244.7233
 DEHS, MC-225, 101 S. Gregory St., Urbana, IL  61801 | fax    1.217.244.6594
 http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/m-woo                    |