Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu radiological conditions

Author Topic: radiological conditions  (Read 29041 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Brett LaVigne

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 514
  • Karma: 1371
  • Gender: Male
  • This aggression will not stand, man.
Re: radiological conditions
« Reply #25 on: Mar 11, 2009, 08:26 »
Those little surprises make the job fun as long as you can keep control and don't end up on the wrong side of the table during the post job breifings.  :)

For sure.
I Heart Hippie Chicks!!!

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: radiological conditions
« Reply #26 on: Mar 12, 2009, 08:55 »
Beercourt, where were you 20 years ago when I was taking those hot smears?  I couldn't agree with you more.  Makes me wonder why we did the things we did for so long and no one asked "why".  There's no telling how much dose my hands have and I'm sure there's more than one tech out there that's wondered what their actual extremity dose is.  It's good to see that there's folks in the industry that are actually beginning to insert conscious thought into the process rather than blindly collecting data for the sake of collecting data.

I was taking those smears right along with you and everyone else.
Yeah, I thought it was kinda cool to get smears that you had to read with a teletektor.

I guess I just got inquisitive as I got older, but Brett is right -- you do what they tell you, even if you know it doesn't make sense because that is how we make our money.
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Offline SloGlo

  • meter reader
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 5828
  • Karma: 2646
  • Gender: Male
  • trust me, i'm an hp
Re: radiological conditions
« Reply #27 on: Mar 13, 2009, 11:50 »
 
   ...the yard was peach...


watt with all the radon in that region, 10 micro r duzzent seem out of place.  especially if yer talking about the back yard, the hill side of the plant.  wood ant take much of an atmospheric inversion to generate that level ~ 1 meter from the ground.
quando omni flunkus moritati

dubble eye, dubble yew, dubble aye!

dew the best ya kin, wit watt ya have, ware yinze are!

wlrun3@aol.com

  • Guest
Re: radiological conditions
« Reply #28 on: Mar 13, 2009, 12:27 »
watt with all the radon in that region, 10 micro r duzzent seem out of place.  especially if yer talking about the back yard, the hill side of the plant.  wood ant take much of an atmospheric inversion to generate that level ~ 1 meter from the ground.

   ...from experience, i was thinking that, as a reference point, 10 micro rem per hour is the average general area dose rate at all the protected area yards in the U.S....

   ...i was seeking confirmation of this generalization from those that have this kind of experience...

   ...thankyou again for the reply...

« Last Edit: Mar 13, 2009, 02:20 by wlrun3 »

Offline SloGlo

  • meter reader
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 5828
  • Karma: 2646
  • Gender: Male
  • trust me, i'm an hp
Re: radiological conditions
« Reply #29 on: Mar 13, 2009, 05:01 »
   ...from experience, i was thinking that, as a reference point, 10 micro rem per hour is the average general area dose rate at all the protected area yards in the U.S....


it's been over a decade since i was in a power plant p.a.  however, while i was there, as a contractor, i seldom used a ludlum model 19.  when i did the peach, i never used a m19!  especially in the back yard, where the rwcu tanks (i think that's what they are, been > decade for that plant) were.  but, for being in that area, a section of the reading prong after all, 10 micro r wouldn't be a big deal.  probably a couple of multiples of that rate wouldn't raise an eyebrow in most p.a.s of bwr plants.   
quando omni flunkus moritati

dubble eye, dubble yew, dubble aye!

dew the best ya kin, wit watt ya have, ware yinze are!

tweathers50

  • Guest
Re: radiological conditions
« Reply #30 on: Apr 24, 2011, 12:31 »
This is interesting.  For anyone that has ever done decon work they know that the more you decon the greater the dose rates on the tool that you are cleaning with.  Depending on the area that you are deconning you could see contamination spread all over the place.  By doing the decon contamination is built up along with increase dose rates.  What would possibly be worse?  Taking a smear or explaining to the boss that the ED alarm was caused by a deconner cleaning a valve.  Health Physics 101.

Offline OldHP

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 502
  • Karma: 276
  • Gender: Male
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: radiological conditions
« Reply #31 on: Apr 25, 2011, 11:09 »
This is interesting.  By doing the decon contamination is built up along with increase dose rates. 

 :->

Not if the decon staff is properly trained!   [dowave]

However, a lot of folks would rather just through a janitor in there and say, Do It!
Humor is a wonderful way to prevent hardening of the attitudes! unknown
The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other. Regan

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2024 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?