Evaluation of consumer digital radon measurement devices: a comparative analysis.

Kansas State University (KSU) Engineering Extension conducted an abridged evaluation of eight consumer grade digital radon monitors. Using the KSU secondary radon chamber, these devices were exposed to three different radon concentrations for 7 d in average household temperature and relative humidity conditions. The three different radon concentration ranges used were: 12.8 pCi Lto 15.5 pCi L(473.6 Bq m-573.5 Bq m), 27.7 pCi Lto 29.4 pCi L(1024.9-10 857.8 Bq m), and ambient room level average radon concentration of 0.6 pCi L(22.2 Bq m). The American National Standards Institute/American Academy of Radon Scientists and Technologists Performance Specifications for Instrumentation Systems Designed to Measure Radon Gas in Air (ANSI/AARST MS-PC) (ANSI/AARST MS-PC 2022(AARST Radon Standards)) minimum performance metrics were used to evaluate the accuracy and precision of each model type for each radon concentration tested. The eight different device models performed within the 0 ± 25% requirement for the individual percent error (IPE) for radon concentrations between 27.7 pCi Land 29.4 pCi L(1024.9-10 857.8 Bq m). For radon concentrations between 12.8 pCi Land 15.5 pCi L(444-592 Bq m) seven of the eight monitors fell within the IPE requirement and for ambient room radon concentrations six of the eight monitors fell within the IPE requirement for the ANSI/AARST MS-PC minimum performance requirement (ANSI/AARST MS-PC 2022(AARST Radon Standards)) ranges. All eight device models fell within the ± 15% ANSI/AARST MS-PC minimum performance requirement (ANSI/AARST MS-PC 2022(AARST Radon Standards)) coefficient of variation (CV) range for radon concentrations between 12.8 pCi Land 15.5 pCi L(444-592 Bq m) and for radon concentrations between 27.7 pCi Land 29.4 pCi L(1024.9-10 857.8 Bq m). In the future, evaluating the performance of these models over time to observe their long term accuracy and precision is anticipated.