Semester

Spring

Date of Graduation

2016

Document Type

Problem/Project Report

Degree Type

MS

College

Statler College of Engineering and Mineral Resources

Department

Industrial and Managements Systems Engineering

Committee Chair

Steven Guffey

Committee Co-Chair

Gary Winn

Committee Member

Shaun Larsen

Abstract

A Radiological Survey of Two Bruker D8 Advance XRD Instruments Located in Separate Quality Control Laboratories By Justin Meador In October 2016, XYZ Laboratories requested assistance with conducting a radiological survey of each of their Bruker D8 Advance XRD instruments to determine compliance with Title 64 West Virginia Legislative Rule, Department of Health, Series 23, Radiological Health Rules (64CSR23) and 10 CFR Part 20 – Standards for Protection Against Radiation in regards to the X-Ray radiation being emitted during operation of the units. A review of ionizing radiation, sources of radiation, biological effects, unit descriptions, Federal and State standards, description of the Bruker units, and a meta-analysis were conducted in preparation and in conclusion of the survey. A thorough survey was conducted for both units, and results were communicated using tables, graphs, and statistical analysis. Data analysis showed a statistically significant difference between data observed in 2014 and 2015 for both labs when compared to the data from the 2016 survey, with the 2016 data showing higher measurements. Three possible explanations of the higher 2016 data were presented as follows: The first is the power setting for which the Bruker unit is being used has never been documented and could not be confirmed for consistency. The second is related to the recent replacement of the ceramic x-ray tubes. The third could be a result of the detector type that was used for the 2016 data since it was different than the one used in previous years. According to the survey results, both laboratories were near or below the background measurements with only one survey point above the background for each lab. In addition, the exposure summaries demonstrate that Lab A and Lab B are well below the 0.05 Sv/yr established by both the State and Federal standards, with measurements of 8.82E-05 Sv/yr and 1.12E-04 Sv/yr, respectively. It is recommended to continue with the current established procedures. This includes continuing the current Preventative Maintenance Program as well as replacing parts as needed. It should be noted that a survey must be conducted any time a replacement part is installed on the unit. According to both standards identified in this report, personal dosimetry is not needed due to the low measurements. If at any time a survey results in an above acceptable level, additional testing must be conducted and personal dosimetry considered. The final recommendation is to continue with the annual survey schedule conducted by or under the supervision of a Certified Health Physicist. A request should be submitted to record the locations and values associated with all survey points. With this more historical data can be obtained to see how levels fluctuate and where the strongest emissions occur. The power levels should be noted and kept consistent with each survey. In addition, a Scintillator detector should be used in future surveys to more accurately measure the lower level gamma radiation.

Download

Share

COinS