Long-term comparison and performance study of consumer grade electronic radon integrating monitors

Abstract

Abstract This study reports the performance of 7 types of consumer grade passive Electronic Radon Integrating Monitors, ERIM (AlphaE, AER Plus, Canary, Corentium Pro, Radon Scout Home, Ramon and Wave) and passive etched track radon detectors. All monitors and passive radon detectors were exposed side by side for 2 periods of 3 months under controlled conditions in the UKHSA radon chamber and in a stainless steel container to an average radon concentration of 4781 Bq m−3 and 166 Bq m−3, respectively. The performance of each individual monitor was compared with Atmos 12DPX and AlphaGUARD P30 reference instruments. The performance of the monitors was evaluated by estimating the biased, precision and measurement errors of each type. It was found that UKHSA passive radon detectors showed excellent performance (measurement error < 10%) at both higher and lower exposures. The AlphaE, Canary and Ramon showed excellent performance, with measurement error <10%, when they were exposed to radon concentrations between 4000 Bq m−3 and 6000 Bq m−3 in the UKHSA radon chamber. However, when the monitors were exposed to radon levels below the UK radon Action Level of 200 Bq m−3, the only ERIM which had a measurement error <10% was the Radon Scout Home. All other monitors showed a significant decrease in their performance with measurement errors ranging between 20% and 50%. The calibration factor, which is the ratio between the measured value (background is subtracted) and the reference value, was also studied. It was found that the calibration factors of individual monitors changed significantly. Calibration measurements in 2019 and in 2023 found that the percentage change varied between −46% and +63%. This shows the importance of initial and regular calibration, and maintenance of the monitors.