Rethinking dosimeter assignment for military radiation safety Focusing on comparative performance of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and electronic personal dosimeters (EPDs) under portable x-ray exposure

The increasing use of portable X-ray generators in military operations—particularly for explosive detection and counter-terrorism—has highlighted the need for a radiation safety strategy tailored to field-based, low-dose environments. This study evaluates the performance of thermoluminescent dosimet...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inSeonjin gukbang yeongu (Online) Vol. 8; no. 1; pp. 37 - 56
Main Authors Chi, Hosub, Park, Jungmi, Choi, Gyoungjun, Ku, Kang
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published 방위사업연구소 16.05.2025
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2635-5531
2636-1329
DOI10.37944/jams.v8i1.273

Cover

More Information
Summary:The increasing use of portable X-ray generators in military operations—particularly for explosive detection and counter-terrorism—has highlighted the need for a radiation safety strategy tailored to field-based, low-dose environments. This study evaluates the performance of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and electronic personal dosimeters (EPDs) under controlled pulsed X-ray conditions using the XRS-3 generator, focusing on their sensitivity, dose-response characteristics, and operational suitability in military contexts. The results showed that while TLDs exhibited high accuracy in cumulative dose tracking, they failed to detect radiation beyond 3 meters or at low pulse counts. In contrast, EPDs—although they showed some inconsistencies in cumulative dose measurements under low-dose conditions—successfully detected radiation at all distances and pulse settings. Their ability to provide immediate feedback and detect fluctuations in real time makes them more suitable for dynamic radiation monitoring in military field environments. The study provides a solid foundation for revising current military dosimetry protocols in current military radiation safety management practices.
Bibliography:https://journal.idap.re.kr/index.php/JAMS/article/view/273
ISSN:2635-5531
2636-1329
DOI:10.37944/jams.v8i1.273