Radon Group, University of Cantabria, Santander, 39011 Cantabria, Spain.
European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), I-21027 Ispra, Italy.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 9;17(5):1780. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17051780.
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/m. 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 (%), 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.
实验室间比对是实验室定期进行质量控制的基本部分，以保证测试和测量的性能。本文介绍的是在实验室自然辐射（LNR）中进行的现场条件下使用无源探测器和主动监测器进行的室内氡气测量的比对实验。目的是提供不同方法之间的直接比较，并确定可能存在不一致的物理原因，特别是与采样和测量技术有关的原因。在比较过程中，氡浓度的变化显示出很大的数值范围，水平从大约 0.5 到 30 kBq/m。两个暴露期的参考值是从参与者的结果的加权平均值得出的，应用了迭代算法。用于分析参与者结果的指标是相对百分比差异（%）、Zeta 分数（ζ）和 z 分数（z）。超过 80%的空气暴露氡的结果在参考值定义的区间内，而第一次和第二次暴露的结果分别为 20%和 10%。大多数偏差是由于探测器支架材料的相关脱气时间导致使用无源探测器高估暴露而检测到的。
