No abstract available

[en] Fundamentals of Radiation dosimetry is composed of 12 chapters and one appendix. The first chapter deals with the radiation field and defines fundamental quantities, including fluence, energy fluence rate, and mean energy.The second chapter discusses the interactions of ionizing radiations (photons, electrons, neutrons, and charged particles) with matter. Principles and methods for measurement of particle fluence, energy fluence, spectral distributions, absorbed dose, and exposure are described in the next three sections. Relationships between kerma, absorbed dose, and exposure (with the necessary conversion factors) are discussed in chapters 6-8. Various cavity theories are also presented. Chapters 9 and 10 deal with dose determination of photon, electron, and neutron beams, as well as the dosimetry of radionuclides. A discussion of dosimetric methods, including calorimetry, ionometry scintillation detection and chemical thermoluminescence, and photographic dosimetry are presented in chapter 11. The dosimetry of radiation protection is described in chapter 12

[en] The subject is covered in chapters, entitled: the radiation field; interactions of ionising radiations with matter; measurement of fluence, energy fluence and spectral distributions; direct measurement of absorbed dose; exposure and its measurement; the concept of Kerma and its relationships; determination of absorbed dose via exposure; determination of absorbed dose and exposure from cavity theory; comparison of electron, photon and neutron dosimetry; the dosimetry of radionuclides; methods of dosimetry; dosimetry in radiation protection. (U.K.)

[en] The subject is discussed under the headings: radioactivity; quantities and units; biological effects of ionizing radiations; routes by which radioactive waste might return to man and estimates of the likely hazard (alternative approaches to estimates of likely hazards; radioactive waste - variation of potential with time; the first few thousand years; periods beyond a few thousand years). (U.K.)

No abstract available

No abstract available

[en] The poor agreement in the photon calibrations of tissue-equivalent ionisation chambers between different participants in two major neutron dosimetry intercomparisons is noted. The methods of converting measurements made with a calibrated secondary standard exposure meter to the absorbed dose in the wall of a tissue-equivalent chamber are discussed. Calibrations of a TE ionisation chamber were made in five photon beams (250 kV, 300 kV, ¹³⁷Cs, ⁶⁰Co and 4 MV) and the different calibration factors were compared both for in-air and in-phantom measurements. Good agreement was found in these factors provided that allowance was made for the attenuation and scattering in the wall and build-up cap of the TE chamber for the in-air measurements, and that revised values of Csub(lambda) were used for the in-phantom measurements at the two higher energies. (author)

[en] It is argued that dose equivalent and effective dose equivalent are scientifically undesirable, are unstable, are largely unnecessary, are confusing, are potentially wasteful of radiobiological data, attempt to achieve the impossible and are abandoned when of greatest importance. It is stated that the place for judgemental factors is in the setting of limits, not in the definition of quantities. Proposals are made that absorbed dose, or a specially qualified absorbed dose, be used as the quantity in terms of which dose limits are set, and that different limits are laid down for high and low LET radiations. (author)

[en] ICRU has recommended values of the factors Csub(lambda) and Csub(E) to be used in the conversion of the reading of cavity ionization dosemeters into absorbed doses in water for photon or electron radiations, for dosemeters which have been calibrated against an exposure standard using ⁶⁰Co or 2 MV radiation. These Csub(lambda) and Csub(E) values are shown to be inconsistent, and it is suggested that the errors arise from the transition in behaviour of ion chambers from 'photon detectors' to 'electron detectors' at higher energies. These are apparent differences between reported G values for the ferrous sulphate dosemeter for high energy photons and for high energy electrons, but application of new Csub(lambda) and Csub(E) values, derived from extensive calculations of water/air stopping power ratios (Nahum, A.E., 1975, Thesis, University of Edinburgh), to the ionization dosimetry used in the G value determinations has brought these G value differences well within experimental error. It is therefore suggested that the current Csub(lambda) values are in need of revision. (U.K.)

No abstract available