Next Article in Journal
The Efficiency of Primary Health Care Institutions in the Counties of Hunan Province, China: Data from 2009 to 2017
Previous Article in Journal
Holistic Governance for Sustainable Public Services: Reshaping Government–Enterprise Relationships in China’s Digital Government Context
Open AccessArticle

Intercomparison of Indoor Radon Measurements Under Field Conditions In the Framework of MetroRADON European Project

1
Radon Group, University of Cantabria, Santander, 39011 Cantabria, Spain
2
European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), I-21027 Ispra, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(5), 1780; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051780
Received: 30 January 2020 / Revised: 26 February 2020 / Accepted: 3 March 2020 / Published: 9 March 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Environmental Science and Engineering)
Interlaboratory comparisons are a basic part of the regular quality controls of laboratories to warranty the adequate performance of test and measurements. The exercise presented in this article is the comparison of indoor radon gas measurements under field conditions performed with passive detectors and active monitors carried out in the Laboratory of Natural Radiation (LNR). The aim is to provide a direct comparison between different methodologies and to identify physical reasons for possible inconsistencies, particularly related to sampling and measurement techniques. The variation of radon concentration during the comparison showed a big range of values, with levels from approximately 0.5 to 30 kBq/m3. The reference values for the two exposure periods have been derived from a weighted average of participants’ results applying an iterative algorithm. The indexes used to analyze the participants’ results were the relative percentage difference D(%), the Zeta score ( ζ ), and the z-score ( z ). Over 80% of the results for radon in air exposure are within the interval defined by the reference value and 20% and 10% for the first and the second exposure, respectively. Most deviations were detected with the overestimating of the exposure using passive detectors due to the related degassing time of detector holder materials. View Full-Text
Keywords: radon; proficiency test; quality assurance; metrology; interlaboratory comparison radon; proficiency test; quality assurance; metrology; interlaboratory comparison
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Rabago, D.; Fuente, I.; Celaya, S.; Fernandez, A.; Fernandez, E.; Quindos, J.; Pol, R.; Cinelli, G.; Quindos, L.; Sainz, C. Intercomparison of Indoor Radon Measurements Under Field Conditions In the Framework of MetroRADON European Project. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1780.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop