Performance comparison of OSLD (Al2O3:C) and TLD (LiF:Mg,Cu,P) in accreditation proficiency testing |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Lotung Poh-Ai Hospital, Yilan, Taiwan, ROC;2. Department of Medical Imaging and Radiological Sciences, Central Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taichung 886, Taiwan, ROC;3. Department of Radiology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, ROC;4. Department of Biomedical Engineering and Environmental Sciences, National Tsing-Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, ROC;1. 306-A, Neelkanthgardens, Mumbai 400088, India;2. Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, P.O. Box 105, Yuseong, Daejeon, Republic of Korea;1. School of Chemistry, Physics and Mechanical Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia;2. School of Applied Science, Engineering and Health, RMIT, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia;3. Premion, The Wesley Medical Centre, Suite 1, 40 Chasely St, Auchenflower, QLD 4066, Australia;4. Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, 619 Lower Plenty Road, Yallambie, VIC 3085, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | The U.S. Navy uses a dosimetric system, which employs the LiF:Mg,Cu,P thermoluminescence dosimeters (TLDs), developed and produced by Thermo Fisher Scientific. Every two years, the Naval Dosimetry Center (NDC) performs proficiency testing to maintain its national accreditation. Since 2007, the U.S. Navy has also tested InLight Basic - OSLN Optically Stimulated Luminescence Al2O3:C dosimeters (OSLD) manufactured by Landauer. In 2011 and 2013, the Naval Dosimetry Center performed proficiency testing for both systems. Here we present a comparison of the performance of TLDs (LiF:Mg,Cu,P) and OSLDs (Al2O3:C) in five categories of proficiency testing. The testing included irradiation with photons, neutrons, beta particles and selected mixtures of these radiations. All irradiations were performed at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). The delivered doses were not reported to the NDC. The official comparison of delivered and reported doses was conducted by PNNL in terms of dose bias and its standard deviation for each category of accreditation. In total, the NDC reported to the PNNL doses for 147 dosimeters of each type (TLD and OSLD). Both NDC tested dosimetric systems have passed established limits. The comparison of OSLD and TLD system performance in each category is discussed. Advantages and disadvantages of both systems are analyzed. |
| |
| Keywords: | TLD OSL Personal dosimetry Proficiency testing |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
