Worldwide Open Proficiency Test: Determination of ... - Nucleus - IAEA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4.1. General Draft, page 18 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In this PT, 6505 measurement results were reported to the IAEA from 266 laboratories in 69 countries. One month after the deadline for reporting results, each participant obtained an individual evaluation report using a dedicated on-line application to give a rapid feed back on the performance of the laboratories. The participants’ data along with the statistical performance evaluation were compiled and sorted by analyte and reported in Appendix I. The number of reported results and obtained evaluation as acceptable/warning/not acceptable of each laboratory is presented graphically in Figure 10. This way of presenting results evaluation allows the participating laboratories to compare their results to those reported by other laboratories and to benchmark their performance level with peers. In addition, all participating laboratories could share the technical information provided in the Appendix I to identify the commonly applied analytical procedures, the listed information could also be used to find out the weak or strong points in the analytical procedure adopted by each laboratory when comparing the laboratory evaluation results with other participating laboratories. To have an overview of the participants’ performance for each specific radionuclide, each radionuclide was studied individually. Table 4 shows the distribution of results scored as acceptable/warning/not acceptable for each evaluated radionuclide and for each sample. The S-shape charts of the reported analytical results are presented in Appendix I to give an overall view of the analytical performance of the laboratories population in this PT. The list of participating laboratories is presented in Appendix II. The overall evaluation showed that 26% of all reported results failed to meet the PT criteria. Contrary to expectation, it was noticed that the percentage of acceptable results for radionuclides in moss-soil was slightly higher (around 10%) than the observed performance level for the water samples. This could be attributed to the relatively low level of radioactivity in water samples. To compare the performance level of each laboratory a normalized average analytical performance and the percentage of “Not Acceptable” scores were calculated in the following way: Where: Normalized average performance (%) = ((A+W)/ NRR)*100 Percentage of “Not Acceptable scores” (%) = (N/NRR)*100 A: number of obtained “Acceptable” scores W: number of obtained “Warning” scores N: number of obtained “Not Acceptable” scores NRR: Total number of reported results. The results of the calculation are shown in Table 5 in ascending order according to the normalized average performance value. This approach of presenting the level of performance of all laboratories allows each participant to compare its own performance level with the level of peers.
TABLE 4. SUMMARY EVALUATION OF ALL NUCLIDES SORTED BY SAMPLE Sample 01 IAEA-447 moss-soil Sample 02 Spiked water Sample 03 Spiked water Sample 04 Spiked water Radionuclide No. of reported results Percentage of “Acceptable” results (%) Percentage of “Warning” results (%) Percentage of “Not Acceptable” results (%) K-40 247 80 7 13 Sr-90 79 38 4 58 Cs-137 250 79 11 10 Tl-208 205 51 4 45 Pb-210 178 72 5 23 Pb-210* 21 76 0 24 Po-210 59 51 12 37 Pb-212 179 84 5 11 Pb-214 218 75 3 22 Bi-214 217 74 4 21 Ra-226 189 52 8 40 Ac-228 226 89 1 10 Th-234 161 50 18 32 U-234 88 49 16 35 U-238 90 49 7 44 Pu-238 54 44 4 52 Pu-239+240 76 59 13 28 Am-241 144 70 11 19 Am-241* 42 55 7 38 Co-57 242 54 12 34 Co-60 257 77 6 17 Cs-134 257 61 8 32 Cs-137 252 82 4 14 Eu-152 245 62 11 27 Co-57 231 42 16 42 Co-60 250 61 16 23 Cs-134 257 61 8 31 Cs-137 260 69 8 23 Eu-152 235 60 12 28 Co-57 241 53 10 37 Co-60 257 76 6 18 Cs-134 257 63 7 30 Cs-137 260 78 6 16 Eu-152 247 64 11 25 * Radiochemical method Final Darft, page 19
Page 1 and 2: IAEA Analytical Quality in Nuclear
Page 3 and 4: FOREWORD A reliable determination o
Page 5 and 6: 1. INTRODUCTION A reliable determin
Page 7 and 8: 2.1. Proficiency test objectives 2.
Page 9 and 10: To confirm the assigned target valu
Page 11 and 12: program achieving complete sample d
Page 13 and 14: 2.3.4.3. Determination of U-234, U-
Page 15 and 16: AlphaCounts per channel 2000 1500 1
Page 17 and 18: 3. PERFORMANCE CRITERIA Several rat
Page 19: acceptable”, a further check is a
Page 23 and 24: Lab. code Number of reported Scored
Page 29 and 30: 4.2. General recommendations and le
Page 31 and 32: Difference S2-S4 (%) Difference S2-
Page 33 and 34: 4.4. Recommendations related to the
Page 35 and 36: [Bq/kg] 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Ra-2
Page 37 and 38: Figure 22: Part of the Thorium radi
Page 39 and 40: 5. CONCLUSIONS The IAEA-CU-2009-03
Page 41 and 42: REFERENCES [1] DUEWER, D.L., A Robu
Page 43 and 44: APPENDIX I: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Page 45 and 46: Lab code Rep. Value Rep. Unc. Unc.
Page 67 and 68: [Bq/kg] 650 575 500 425 350 275 200
Page 69 and 70: [Bq/kg] 650 600 550 500 450 400 350
Page 71 and 72:
[ B q /k g ] 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 L
Page 73 and 74:
Lab code Rep. Value Rep. Unc. Unc.
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
[Bq] 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 120
Page 95 and 96:
[Bq/kg] 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 25 223
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
[ B q /k g ] 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 72
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
[Bq/kg] 15 13 11 9 7 5 3 1 74 131 2
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
[Bq/kg] 45 41 37 33 29 25 21 17 13
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
[Bq/kg ] 19 17 15 13 11 9 7 5 3 286
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
[Bq/kg] 19 17 15 13 11 9 7 5 3 1 25
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
[ B q /k g ] 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
[ B q /k g ] 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
[Bq /kg ] 8.5 7.5 6.5 5.5 4.5 3.5 2
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
[Bq/kg] 7.5 6.5 5.5 4.5 3.5 2.5 1.5
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
[B q /k g ] 13 11 9 7 5 3 1 515 26
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
[Bq /kg ] 11 9 7 5 3 1 219 250 233
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
[Bq/kg] 13 11 9 7 5 3 1 273 5264 26
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
APPENDIX II: LIST OF PARTICIPATING
Page 227 and 228:
Dr. Victor Badulin Public Exposure
Page 229 and 230:
Dr. David Lobb Department of Soil S
Page 231 and 232:
Petr Rulik Monitoring Department Na
Page 233 and 234:
Mr. Benoit Daniel Eichrom Europe Ru
Page 235 and 236:
Prof. Dr. Constantin Papastefanou A
Page 237 and 238:
Mr. A.G. Hegde Health Physics Divis
Page 239 and 240:
Mr. Mario Montalto Istituto Di Radi
Page 241 and 242:
Mr. Samer J. Al-Kharouf Radiation P
Page 243 and 244:
Ms. Snezana Dimovska Radioecology R
Page 245 and 246:
Dr. Andrzej Komosa Department of Ra
Page 247 and 248:
Ms. Ana-Maria Apostu Dept. of Life
Page 249 and 250:
Mr. Peter Jovanovic Department of P
Page 251 and 252:
Dr. Catalina Gasco Leonarte Ed. 3a
Page 253 and 254:
Dra. Montserrat Llaurado Departamen
Page 255 and 256:
Mr. Abdullah Dirican Turkish Atomic
Page 257 and 258:
Dr. Paul Smedley Centre For Environ
Page 259 and 260:
Mr. Kevin T. Claver Environmental A
Page 261 and 262:
259
show all

Worldwide Open Proficiency Test: Determination of ... - Nucleus - IAEA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?