Dear HydroDave63, GLW, Rennhack,
Many thanks for your posts. They provide us very useful information for us in order to focus all our development. We love the technological development we are performing... but we are quite afraid of building something with no later users in the real world or too nice and expensive so no one will buy it!
Let me show you the picture we use in our organization to categorize the different uses of ionizing radiation detectors:
From the comments you made, I understand that it is useful to distinguish between the following kinds of detectors:
TYPE 1: Detectors that may be used in NPPs by Rad protection people during surveys inside controlled area (what we call A-3 in our picture) or to check contamination for entry/exit of equipment to controlled area (what we call A-4 in our picture). In this case, we assume a quantification of activity or dose (Bq/cm2 or rem/h) is needed, but that the identification of radionuclide is NOT needed. We think this is currently done using devices similar to the ones below (ranging 2.000 - 4.000 U$)
Do you think in this case showing (and quantifying) contamination/doses through augmented reality in 3D maps will be interesting? (that way you will not only have one or some punctual measurements, but a map with a 3D representation of the cubicle or the equipment of interest)
Do you think in this case this functionality will be worth the 9.000 U$?
How many of this detector you think could be purchased by one NPP?
TYPE 2: Detectors that may be used for contamination or dose surveys outdoors, typically in emergencies or after accidents (what we call in our picture B-4). We assume that a quantification is needed (Bq/cm2 or rem/h), but also that identification of radionuclide is not needed. Although detectors from the last type (Type 1) can be used, more sophisticated ones may include gps + mapping capabilities, as is the case of the Canberra Calibri (see below).
We think these sophisticated detectors are nice... but relatively expensive (8.000 U$?) for normal operation of NPPs. Do you agree?
We also think they provide a GPS mapping based on typical precision (within 1-2 meters), so no "hot spots" may be located, just average conditions.
Do you think that a system with better precision (around 10 cm) will be worth the 8.000 U$ and be useful in NPPs?TYPE 3: Detector that may be used to look for illicit trafficking of radioactive or special nuclear material (what we call C-2 in our picture). In this case, we assume the capability of detecting the radionuclide is basic to avoid confusing radioactive K from a banana container to a intent of smuggling of Pu or HEU. The devices used in this case are the identifinders, as the NaI-technology based SAIC GR-135 (or Flir Identifinder) or the HpGE-technology based as the ORTEC detective (range 9.000 U$ - 120.000 U$ in the detective!)
We assume this devices are not used in NPPs, basically due to the fact (as Rennhack pointed) that in NPPs the types of radionuclided are normally known so they are not worth their cost for this application.
Do you agree?TYPE 4: Detectors that may be used for the general public. We think there has been a little boom of this types of devices after Fukushima events. They, in principle are not in our scope (we are focused on providing tools for the industry), although... someones are very creative (and allow also the gps mapping function)!
What do you think of all this? Do you agree? Do you disagree or have other feelings?We follow asking you to comment any item or provide any other related information you think may be interesting... It will be very useful for us!!
Many thanks another time!
Eugenio Garnica
