by Al Gerhart on Sun Jul 19, 2009 1:48 pm
Looks like the second one is more useful, has a lower range and reads in Roetgens ( uR/hr actually micro roentgens). As to accuracy, each unit gives a meV range it responds to, both are adequate but the second unit is a little bit closer to the actual engergies you will encounter.
One warning, even the most expensive hand held unit will ready between 3 and 5% of the radiation coming fromm the granite. Only a sophisticated gamma spectrometer with a large crystal (3 to 4" square) is capable of telling you what is actually present. Everything else is just a survey meter, allowing you to sort higher radiation stone from the lower radiatino stone.
One other point, I was talking with Dr. Steck today about his presentation at the HPS meeting last week. He sent me his power point presentation since I didn't get to stay for his presentation on granite countertops. In his testing, he has shown that a hand held meter can detect 90% of the problem stones, but the final 10% require isotope identification with very expensive equipment, then another 5% of the slabs require radon testing. One stone they found had low radiation levels, averaged 10 uR/hr over the surface, with occasional hot spots of 14 to 15 uR/hr, really mild stone. Yet these slabs "spewed" radon according to Dr. Steck, enough that they would be unsafe in a small energy efficient home.
You are doing the right thing by pretesting for radiation, but don't forget to have the slab checked for radon emanation which is the most dangerous form of radiation release.
If it is so safe, why are they fighting the testing effort?