Radon measurements—discussion of error estimates for selected methods

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2009.09.049Get rights and content

Abstract

The main sources of uncertainties for grab sampling, short-term (charcoal canisters) and long term (track detectors) measurements are: systematic bias of reference equipment; random Poisson and non-Poisson errors during calibration; random Poisson and non-Poisson errors during measurements. The origins of non-Poisson random errors during calibration are different for different kinds of instrumental measurements.

The main sources of uncertainties for retrospective measurements conducted by surface traps techniques can be divided in two groups: errors of surface 210Pb (210Po) activity measurements and uncertainties of transfer from 210Pb surface activity in glass objects to average radon concentration during this object exposure. It's shown that total measurement error of surface trap retrospective technique can be decreased to 35%.

Introduction

Radon measurement is complicated process and the correct estimation of appropriate uncertainties is very important. The purposes of radon measurements can be different—from the measurement of current value of radon concentration at workplace to retrospective assessment of average radon concentration for the last 20–50 years during epidemiological studies. The problems of measurements precision and accuracy of measurement results interpretation arise. The sources of uncertainties for grab sampling, short-term measurements (charcoal canisters), long term measurements (track detectors) and retrospective measurements (surface traps) were analyzed using data of Radon Calibration Laboratory of Ural State Technical University and experimental data obtained in the Institute of Industrial Ecology UB RAS. In general the typical radon measuring devices used in Russian Federation were considered.

The sources of uncertainties for practically all instrumental radon measurements can be divided in two groups—calibration errors and measurement errors. The calibration errors include in the systematic bias of reference equipment, random Poisson errors due to count statistic, non-Poisson random errors and residual systematic bias of calibration. The main sources of measurement errors are calibration bias, random Poisson errors (under typical concentration of radon), random non-Poisson errors and residual systematic bias of the measurement. It should be noted that some uncertainties of instrumental radon measurement techniques are common both to grab sampling and to integrating techniques. The error assessment was conducted by the estimation of Poisson error from counting statistic and calculation of non-Poisson error on the base of total measured random error and estimated Poisson error.

The common source of calibration error for all instrumental measurements is a residual systematic bias of calibration standard. The guaranteed by the state center of standards residual systematic error for the secondary calibration reference device (AlphaGUARD PQ 2000) used in the regional Radon Calibration Laboratory is 10%. The calibration of reference radon monitor AlphaGUARD in our laboratory using the NIST emanating radon source and GENITRON Gmbh calibration chamber gives the real residual systematic error wising 8–9%. The other sources of residual systematic biases during the calibration (except of systematic bias of reference device) are individual and depend on the kind of instrumental measurement. Our experience shows that such kinds of biases rarely exceed 3%.

Section snippets

Grab sampling devices

The most typical equipment in Russian Federation for grab sampling radon concentration measurements are RRA01-01 and RRA01-03 devices developed on the base of electrostatic chamber. For the assessment of measurement uncertainties of these devices the data of Radon Calibration Laboratory of Ural State Technical University for period 1998–2007 were analyzed. For devices passed the calibration procedure the difference between the calibrated device and reference device readings is not symmetric

Conclusions

The presented data shows that for instrumental methods of radon concentration measurements the most important sources of biases are the random errors due to count statistic (Poisson errors) and non-Poisson random errors aroused during the measurements. The influence of calibration error is less significant. The understanding of the origin of non-Poisson error and its decreasing will allow considerable improving of the quality of radon measurements. For retrospective radon measurements the most

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Russian Foundation for Basic Research (grant RFBR 06-08-00744a).

References (8)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (19)

  • Radon measurements using open-faced charcoal canisters - Measurement uncertainty and method optimization

    2020, Applied Radiation and Isotopes
    Citation Excerpt :

    Larger differences were found in dwellings with high RH values, up to 20%. Without explanation, Zhukovski et al. (2010) estimated this contribution at 12%–15% with p = 0.95. Very interesting findings by Ronca-Battista and Gray (1988) show that the influence of changing radon concentration is smaller if the concentration is higher during the later part of exposure, which is also observed by George (1984).

  • Geogenic and anthropogenic impacts on indoor radon in the Techa River region

    2016, Science of the Total Environment
    Citation Excerpt :

    The measurements of indoor radon concentration were made using solid state track detector based on Kodak LR-115 film placed in a closed diffusion chamber with low sensitivity to thoron (Nikolaev and Ilić, 1999). The uncertainty of single measurement by this type of track detector was estimated as about 30% (Zhukovsky et al., 2010). The detection limit is 20 Bq/m3 for one month measurement.

  • Reconstruction of national distribution of indoor radon concentration in Russia using results of regional indoor radon measurement programs

    2015, Journal of Environmental Radioactivity
    Citation Excerpt :

    According to these priorities, regional departments of Rospotrebnadzor were equipped mostly with short term radon measurements devices (grab sampling). Totally eleven types of devices for short term measurements of ECC of radon isotopes and eight types of devices for short term measurements of radon concentration are used (ISSDCR, 2014; Zhukovsky and Yarmoshenko, 1997; Zhukovsky et al., 2010). Such devices are relatively cheap and allow prompt control of exposure to radon progeny.

  • Radon as a tracer of daily, seasonal and spatial air movements in the Underground Tourist Route "Coal Mine" (SW Poland)

    2015, Journal of Environmental Radioactivity
    Citation Excerpt :

    Radon is considered as a tracer to predict earthquakes, volcanic eruptions or to analyse air movements in the environment (Cigolini et al., 2013a, 2013b; Kowalczk and Froelich, 2010; Kuo et al., 2013; Neri et al., 2011; Yang et al., 2005; Yasuoka et al., 2005; Zhang et al., 2013). Behaviour of radon in the environment can be examined using active and passive measurement techniques (Barillon et al., 1993; De Cicco et al., 2013; Lin et al., 2013; Raj Menon et al., 2015; Sorimachi et al., 2009; Tan et al., 2015; Zafrir et al., 2013; Zhukovsky et al., 2010). Characteristics of active measurement technique are as follows: electric or battery power is needed, the equipment is quite expensive, data logging is done every minute or every hour, laboratory analysis apart from data downloading on computer is not needed, other parameters such as temperature, humidity etc. can be recorded.

  • Monte Carlo simulation experiments on box-type radon dosimeter

    2014, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text