RESUMO
Objective To compare Hp(3) calibration with a homemade (A) thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) and an imported (B) TLD in a standard X-ray RQR radiation field, to explore the different responses of A and B, and to provide foundation for the calibration of Hp(3). Methods A column mode was selected. Hp(3) calibration was performed using A and B in a standard X-ray RQR radiation field in the Secondary Standard Dosimetry Laboratory, National Institute for Radiological Protection, China Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Angle response, energy response, and linear response were calibrated with RQR4 (60 kV), RQR7 (90 kV), and RQR9 (120 kV), respectively. Results In terms of angle response, the calibration results of A were relatively high, while the calibration results of B were relatively low. In terms of energy response, the calibration results showed a similar pattern to angle response. In terms of linear response, the calibration results of both A and B were satisfactory. Conclusion Both A and B can be used for normal calibration of Hp(3) in a standard X-ray RQR radiation field. However, in actual monitoring, attention should be paid to the energy and angle response values of TLDs.
RESUMO
Objective To compare the calibration result of standard X-ray RQR radiation field between SSDL (NIRP) and CEA LIST LNHB (France),and to explore the feasibility of calibrating Hp (3) in standard X-ray RQR radiation field of SSDL (NIRP).Methods Using a column model with a diameter and high of 20 cm,TLD was calibrated in SSDL (NIRP) and CEA LIST LNHB (France) to measure the personal dose equivalent eye lens dose Hp (3),X-ray RQR radiation field included RQR4 (60 kV),RQR7 (90 kV),RQR9 (120 kV),with energy response,angle response and linear response.Results In terms of energy response,the calibration results of TLD in both SSDL (NIRP) and CEA LIST LNHB (France) were in good agreement.The difference between exposure value and response value was less than 10％.In terms of angle response,the calibration result of TLD in CEA LIST LNHB (France) was better in SSDL (NIRP).The difference between exposure value and response value in CEA LIST LNHB (France) was less than 6％,while the difference between exposure value and response value in SSDI (NIRP) was more than 10％ at angle of 20°.In terms of linear response,both calibration result of SSDL (NIRP) and CEA LIST LNHB (France) were in good agreement.Conclusions The standard X-ray RQR field in SSDL (NIRP) can be used for the calibration of Hp (3).
RESUMO
Objective@#To compare the calibration result of standard X-ray RQR radiation field between SSDL (NIRP) and CEA LIST LNHB(France), and to explore the feasibility of calibrating Hp(3) in standard X-ray RQR radiation field of SSDL(NIRP).@*Methods@#Using a column model with a diameter and high of 20 cm, TLD was calibrated in SSDL (NIRP) and CEA LIST LNHB (France) to measure the personal dose equivalent eye lens dose Hp(3), X-ray RQR radiation field included RQR4(60 kV), RQR7(90 kV), RQR9(120 kV), with energy response, angle response and linear response.@*Results@#In terms of energy response, the calibration results of TLD in both SSDL (NIRP) and CEA LIST LNHB (France) were in good agreement. The difference between exposure value and response value was less than 10%. In terms of angle response, the calibration result of TLD in CEA LIST LNHB (France) was better in SSDL(NIRP). The difference between exposure value and response value in CEA LIST LNHB (France) was less than 6%, while the difference between exposure value and response value in SSDL(NIRP) was more than 10% at angle of 20°. In terms of linear response, both calibration result of SSDL (NIRP) and CEA LIST LNHB (France) were in good agreement.@*Conclusions@#The standard X-ray RQR field in SSDL (NIRP) can be used for the calibration of Hp(3).