Why do personnel contamination monitors do a better job than friskers at finding contamination?

• A. They are larger, and they are automated, leaving less room for human error
• B. They require less training
• C. They measure only gamma radiation
• D. They are cheaper

Answer: (A)

Contamination detection is more reliable when you screen a larger area consistently and with less dependence on individual technique. A personnel contamination monitor has a large detector and often operates automatically, scanning a wide region of the worker’s skin and clothing with minimal variation from one use to the next. This reduces gaps and missed spots that can happen with manual methods. Friskers, being small handheld devices, require the operator to sweep over surfaces, and effectiveness depends on how carefully and thoroughly the person works, which invites human error and inconsistent coverage. So the larger, automated monitor provides more uniform, comprehensive screening, leading to better detection of contamination.