I am trying to understand how much information can be lost when a GMC counter records or uploads data only once per minute.
For example, suppose the background is normally around 12–20 CPM, but a short event produces approximately 150 CPM for 10–15 seconds before returning to normal. A 1-minute average could make this event look much less significant than the actual peak count rate.
I would like to compare two logging methods:
1-second sampling for 10–30 minutes
1-minute sampling over the same period
Same detector and same physical location
No movement of the counter during the test
Record CPM, dose rate, timestamp, and the maximum CPM observed
My main questions are:
Does the GMC hardware internally retain enough information to identify short-lived CPM peaks between normal 1-minute data transmissions?
For GMC models with Wi-Fi, is the 1-minute transmission interval only a communication limitation, or is the underlying measurement itself averaged to 1 minute?
Has anyone compared the same GMC counter using local/high-frequency logging versus the standard 1-minute data stream?
What sampling interval would you recommend if the goal is to detect short changes while still producing a useful background trend?
For a practical test, I am considering collecting 30 minutes of background data and then repeating the test with a controlled source placed at a fixed distance for a short interval. I would compare the maximum CPM, total counts, mean CPM, and standard deviation from both logging methods.
I am especially interested in results from GMC-500+, GMC-600+, GMC-800, or other current GQ counters.
If anyone has already performed this comparison, I would appreciate seeing the raw data or methodology. I think this could help clarify whether a 1-minute graph is sufficient for detecting short events or mainly useful for long-term background monitoring. |
Can 1-minute logging hide short radiation spikes o
Posted - 08/22/2026 : 01:39:36
