Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Radiation Units



"... this is probably an exaggeration (?)."

what's the antonym for exaggeration? From my experience (portable survey
meter), it is considerably more. Since my notes are not handy,

http://www.sel.noaa.gov/info/RadHaz.html

Less than memory, but still two orders at ~ 40k feet.

Even LK's calc. (and his claim that the limits for the laity is about twice
background) indicates violation. Ten percent of 2 R is the background - this
added to background results in ~ 0.4, the limit.

There is also a short term limit in mR /hr. Data not handy.

bc


P.s. for those who don't want to check out the above page:

We are continually exposed to dose equivalent rates of about 6 to 12 uSv per
day at sea-level due to GCR and radiation from the ground which is dependent
on our location, as well as radiation from within our own bodies. Thus a
two-hour flight at conventional altitudes (20,000 - 40,000 ft) may
approximately double one's radiation dose for the day.



Ludwik Kowalski wrote:

Suppose the dose rate in an airplane is 10 times higher than
on the earth surface; this is probably an exaggeration (?). In
that case a pilot flying 24 hrs and 7 days per week would get
~200*10=2000 mR = 2 R per year. What fraction of the year
is a typical pilot flying? I am sure it is well below 10%.
Therefore, my inclination is to think that the additional
dose due to flying is not excessive. But this is only a
Fermi-like guess. Are my assumptions wrong?
Ludwik Kowalski


cut