ScholarLens Back to search
2006•Radiation Protection DosimetryRequires access

Comparison of the effects of exposure to light in Harshaw LiF:Mg,Ti and LiF:Mg,Cu,P

S. T. Baker, P. J. Gilvin

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

The response of thermoluminescence dosemeters (TLDs) to light, in various conditions, has been studied. TLD cards containing both conventional lithium fluoride (LiF:Mg,Ti) and the high-sensitivity material LiF:Mg,Cu,P were available, so permitting a comparison between the two types. Also available for the tests were Harshaw extremity EXT-RAD (LiF:Mg,Cu,P) dosemeters. The LiF:Mg,Ti body TLD cards and the EXT-RAD extremity dosemeters both showed some response to fluorescent light, while the LiF:Mg,Cu,P cards showed no significant response. It is therefore concluded that LiF:Mg,Cu,P body cards need no special precautions to protect them from the effects of light. For LiF:Mg,Ti cards and extremity dosemeters, effects are small, but steps to avoid excessive light exposure should be considered.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The response of thermoluminescence dosemeters (TLDs) to light, in various conditions, has been studied. TLD cards containing both conventional lithium fluoride (LiF:Mg,Ti) and the high-sensitivity material LiF:Mg,Cu,P were available, so permitting a comparison between the two types. Also available for the tests were Harshaw extremity EXT-RAD (LiF:Mg,Cu,P) dosemeters. The LiF:Mg,Ti body TLD cards and the EXT-RAD extremity dosemeters both showed some response to fluorescent light, while the LiF:Mg,Cu,P cards showed no significant response. It is therefore concluded that LiF:Mg,Cu,P body cards need no special precautions to protect them from the effects of light. For LiF:Mg,Ti cards and extremity dosemeters, effects are small, but steps to avoid excessive light exposure should be considered.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The response of thermoluminescence dosemeters (TLDs) to light, in various conditions, has been studied. TLD cards containing both conventional lithium fluoride (LiF:Mg,Ti) and the high-sensitivity material LiF:Mg,Cu,P were available, so permitting a comparison between the two types. Also available for the tests were Harshaw extremity EXT-RAD (LiF:Mg,Cu,P) dosemeters. The LiF:Mg,Ti body TLD cards and the EXT-RAD extremity dosemeters both showed some response to fluorescent light, while the LiF:Mg,Cu,P cards showed no significant response. It is therefore concluded that LiF:Mg,Cu,P body cards need no special precautions to protect them from the effects of light. For LiF:Mg,Ti cards and extremity dosemeters, effects are small, but steps to avoid excessive light exposure should be considered.

Key concepts: Lithium fluoride, Thermoluminescent dosimeter, Thermoluminescence, Lithium (medication), Radiochemistry, Materials science, Fluoride, Chemistry

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of the effects of exposure to light in Harshaw LiF:Mg,Ti and LiF:Mg,Cu,P — Research Paper | ScholarLens