GQ Electronics Technical Support Forum

GQ Electronics Technical Support Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 GQ Electronics Forums
 2.GQ Geiger Muller Counter
 Question about including Offset in firmware
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  


34 Posts

Posted - 08/01/2020 :  11:36:43  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I know it's a bit iffy, but would you consider it?

My GMC-600 has great detection on low and high radiation sources and is in line with my other counters except the general background radiation holds around 0.07 uSv/h. If I could offset this by +0.04 uSv/h, it would be more in-line with my other counters.

Calibration points don't really do it here as I'm only interested by the offset at low values and calibration would make it jump in readings unnaturally as it crosses the point.

Edited by - Searinox on 08/01/2020 11:37:48
Reply #1


1243 Posts

Posted - 08/03/2020 :  10:29:40  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Searinox, that is actually a feasible idea. We will see if we can implement it in future firmware.
Go to Top of Page
Reply #2


34 Posts

Posted - 08/04/2020 :  01:14:41  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Thank you so much! I look forward to it!

It is said that window tubes are better at measuring directional sources and tubes without window are better at ambient. With a large enough tube this ends up compensating but when the window is small like in an SBT-11, the background counts end up unusually low.

Supposedly the SBT-11 background is expected at 12 CPM which, considering 300 CPM for 1 uSv/h, is quite very low. I managed to get my tube up to 20 CPM background by tweaking the voltage, while keeping the calibration on point so source measurements remain accurate, but it's still much lower than my other counters report the background.

This is where an offset of +/- an amount of CPM/uSv/mR to the reported value is useful, with just +0.04 uSv/h I can bring this in line with my other device measurements while it also remains accurate at all higher values, where 0.04 uSv/h doesn't make much of a difference. This will solve my problems!

Also don't forget to check for underflows if you allow negative values for offset!

Edited by - Searinox on 08/04/2020 01:38:42
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
GQ Electronics Technical Support Forum © Copyright since 2011 Go To Top Of Page
Generated in 0.12 sec. Snitz's Forums 2000