Original Article

Dose assessment for natural radioactivity

resulting from tiling granite rocks
Kh. A. Allam1, Abou Bakr A. Ramadan2, Amal Taha
Departments of 1Nuclear Law, 2Siting and Environmental, Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority,
3 Ahmed El Zommer, Cairo, Egypt

Abstract
The gamma radiation in samples of a variety of natural tiling granite rocks from different quarries located in South Sinai, Egypt
used in the building industry is measured, using high‑resolution γ‑ray spectroscopy. The samples pulverized, sealed in plastic
Marinelli beakers, are analyzed in the laboratory with an accumulating time between 18 and 24 h each. Activity concentrations
are determined for 238U (from 18 to 361 Bq/kg), 232Th (range from 20 to 316 Bq/kg) and 40K (from 499 to 3089 Bq/kg). The total
absorbed dose rates in air ranged from 42 to 440 nGy/h. The external hazard index ranged (from 0.23 to 2.49), the internal
hazard index ranged (from 0.28 to 3.38), and the activity utilization index ranged (from 0.69 to 5.90). Applying dose criteria
recently recommended by the European Union for superficial materials, 25 of the samples meet the exemption dose limit of
0.3 mSv/year, two of them meet the upper dose limit of 1 mSv/year and only one clearly exceeds this limit.

Keywords: Environmental radioactivity, granite radioactivity, hazard index, high‑purity germanium detector

INTRODUCTION In terms of natural radioactivity, granites exhibit an

Granites are the most abundant plutonic rocks of
mountain belts and continental shield areas. They occur
in great batholiths that may occupy thousands of square
kilometers and are usually closely associated with quartz
Mennonite, granodiorite, diorite, and gabbro. They are
extremely durable and scratch resistant; their hardness
lends themselves for the stone to be mechanically
polished to a high gloss finish. Their variety of colors and
unique heat and scratch resistant properties make them
ideal for use as a work‑surface, flooring or external and
internal cladding. They mainly consist of coarse grains
of quartz, potassium (K) feldspar and sodium feldspar.
Other common minerals that granites consist of mica
and hornblende. Typical granite chemically composed
of 75% silica, 12% aluminum, <5% potassium oxide, <5%
soda, as well as by lime, iron, magnesia, and titania in
smaller quantities.
Access this article online
Quick Response Code:
Website:
www.rpe.org.in
DOI:
10.4103/0972-0464.137471
enhanced elemental concentration of uranium (U) and
thorium (Th) compared with the very low abundance
of these elements observed in the mantle and the crust
of the Earth. Geologists provide an explanation of this
behavior in the course of partial melting and fractional
crystallization of magma, which enables U and Th
to be concentrated in the liquid phase and become
incorporated into the more silica‑rich products. For
that reason, igneous rocks of granitic composition are
strongly enriched in U and Th (on an average 5 ppm of
U and 15 ppm of Th), compared with rocks of basaltic
or ultramafic composition (1 ppm of U).[1,2]
A gamma‑ray spectrometer based on high‑purity
germanium (HpGe) detector was used to determine the
concentration of natural radionuclides in an extensive
selection of Egyptian samples. The annual effective
dose rates and the gamma activity concentration
index will be evaluated and compared to the
average worldwide exposure limits represented in
UNSCEAR 2000 and to the dose criteria recommended
European Commission (EC, 1999), respectively.[3,4] In
addition, the correlations between Th, U and K will
be shown in this paper with an aim to correlate the
petrographic characteristics of commercial granites with
their corresponding dose rates for natural radioactivity.

Address for correspondence:

Dr. Kh. Allam, Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority, 3 Ahmed El Zommer, Cairo, Egypt.
E‑mail: khaledazalam@yahoo.com

Radiation Protection and Environment | July 2013 | Vol 36 | Issue 3 | 99

 Allam, et al.: Dose assessment for natural radioactivity

MATERIALS AND METHODS resolution gamma spectrometer based on a coaxial type

shielded HpGe detector, with a relative photo peak
Sample collection and preparation efficiency of 35% and energy resolution of 1.9 keV full
In this study, 30 samples of different types of the main
commercial granites used in Egypt were collected directly
from mining and quarries in three Egyptian locations in
Sinai: Wadi Umadawy, Wadi Mandar and Wadi Lethy as
shown in Figure 1 and listed in Table 1. Each sample is
crushed to small pieces and grinded. Then the samples
were weighed and packed in Marinelli‑type beaker (100
and 1000 ml capacities according to the available sample
amounts) to be analyzed using gamma spectrometers.
Samples were carefully sealed and stored for more than
4 weeks for secular equilibrium. The samples were
analyzed in the geometries used during the procedure
of efficiency determination.

Calibration and measurements by gamma ray

spectrometry
The gamma ray spectra of the prepared samples were
measured for at least 82,000 s using a typical high Figure 1: Sampling locations

Table 1: Samples province, rock type and activity concentration in Bq.kg−1

Sample code Province Quarry Rock type Concentration±total error (Bq/kg)
238
U 232
Th K
40

1 Wadi Umadawy A Metaandesite 65±9 74±6 2438±1

2 49±5 36±5 1395±1
3 77±9 55±11 2405±2
4 B Alkalifeldspar 75±4 62±4 1462±1
5 68±3 59±3 1372±1
6 C Syanogranite 345±2 269±2 2306±1
7 361±4 236±6 2045±3
8 D Syanogranite 28±6 22±8 1190±1
9 29±8 28±7 1267±1
10 53±6 62±4 2429±1
11 E Granodiorite 81±8 91±6 2995±1
12 75±6 75±5 2368±1
13 F Metaandesite 37±7 29±6 1119±1
14 63±4 48±3 2513±1
15 G Syanogranite 50±6 93±3 1370±1
16 H Granodiorite 87±9 119±5 2323±2
17 103±7 114±6 2493±1
18 Wadi Mandar I Syanogranite 31±8 42±5 1269±1
19 52±8 80±7 2412±2
20 J Granodiorite 51±11 54±9 2622±1
21 K Metaandesite 58±4 69±3 2215±1
22 L Syanogranite 87±8 86±7 2697±1
23 M Granodiorite 34±4 48±4 1313±1
24 Wadi Lethy N Syanogranite 233±5 316±3 3089±2
25 40±7 48±4 1445±1
26 O Granodiorite 72±5 96±3 2277±1
27 P Alkalifeldspar 46±11 30±13 2476±2
28 Q Granodiorite 18±15 20±13 499±2
29 R Syanogranite 215±6 256±5 2765±2
30 S Syanogranite 59±6 89±3 2651±1

100 Radiation Protection and Environment | July 2013 | Vol 36 | Issue 3 |

 Allam, et al.: Dose assessment for natural radioactivity

width at half maximum for the 1332 keV gamma ray
line of 60Co. The spectrum was collected and analyzed
using computer software called Genie 2000 software
made by Canberra Industries Inc, USA. The activity of
40
K was measured directly via its 1461 (10.7%) keV peak
of the gamma ray spectra. To determine the activity
concentration of 226Ra, the average value of gamma ray
lines 295.1 (19.2%) and 351.9 (37.1%) keV from 214Pb
to 609.3 (46.1%) and 1764.5 (15.9%) keV gamma rays
from 214Bi are used. Activity concentration of 232Th is
determined using the average value of gamma ray lines
238.6 (43.6%) keV from 212Pb, 338.4 (12%), 911.1 (29%) and
968.9 (17.4%) keV from 228Ac, 583.1 (86%) and 2614 keV
from 208Tl. The detector was calibrated for the efficiency
using 226Ra point source to first produce a relative
efficiency curve followed by standardization using KCl as
a standard solution (Farouk and Al Soraya, 1980).[5] Quality
control and quality assurance of the measurements using
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reference
materials (Soil6, IAEA‑326). In addition, duplicate samples
were added to insure the analyses consistency of the
measurements. Blank samples were added to eliminate
the cross‑contamination occurrence in the samples.
Radium equivalent activity (Raeq)
The distribution of natural radionuclides in the samples
under investigation is not uniform. Therefore, a
common radiological index has been used to evaluate
the actual activity level 226Ra, 232Th and 40K in the
samples and the radiation hazards associated with
these radionuclides.[7] This index usually known as a
radium equivalent activity.[7]
Ra eq = ARa + 1.43 ATh + 0.077 AK  (1)
Where ARa, ATh and AK are the specific activities of 226Ra,
232
Th and 40K respectively in Bq/kg. In the definition of
radium equivalent, it is assumed that 10 Bq/kg of 226Ra,
7 Bq/kg of 232Th and 130 Bq/kg 0f 40K produce an equal
gamma ray dose rate.[8,9]
The values of calculated Raeq for collected samples are
shown Table 2. The calculated Raeq values range from
84.8 to 922.9 Bq/kg with an average of 374.2 Bq/kg.
In this study, there are 19 samples found to be lower
than the criterion limit of 370 Bq/kg (Nuclear Energy
Agency [NEA] OECD (1979).[10]

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Dose rates (D), annual effective doses and activity
utilization index (Iu)
Specific radioactivity
If naturally occurring radioactive nuclides uniformly
The distribution of natural radionuclides distributed in sample environment, dose rates, D, in
in granite samples is presented in Table 1. The units of nGy/h can calculate by the following formula:[11]
activity concentrations of 238U ranged from 18 to
361 Bq/kg, 232Th from 20 to 316 Bq/kg and 40K from 499 '  $5D   $7K  $.  (2)
to 3089 Bq/kg). From the 30 samples measured studied
in this work, the maximum activity value of 238U was The total absorbed dose rates calculated from the
in the sample (7) (syanogranite) 361 Bq/kg and the concentrations of the nuclides of the 238U and 232Th series,
minimum value was in the sample (28) (granodiorite) and of 40K, range from 41.9 to 440.3 nGy/h. In round terms
18 Bq/kg. While for 232Th the maximum level was and for full utilization, 21 of the samples exhibit dose
observed in sample (24) (syanogranite) 361 Bq/kg rates that range from 100 to 250 nGy/h, four samples
and the minimum level in sample (28) (granodiorite) exhibit dose rates under the typical limit of 100 nGy/h
20 Bq/kg. The value of 40K ranged from 499 Bq/kg in
the sample (28) (granodiorite) to 3089 Bq/kg in the
sample (24) (syanogranite). Syanogranite appears to
present the highest concentrations of all the elements
investigated, reaching levels of 361 Bq/kg for 238U,
316 Bq/kg for 232Th, and 3089 Bq/kg for 40K. All measured
samples except of sample (28), show concentrations of
40
K above the value of 1000 Bq/kg. In addition, only four
samples appear to present concentration of 232Th and 238U
higher than 150 Bq/kg [Table 1].

The measured activity concentrations of 232Th, 238U and

K can be converted into total elemental concentrations
40

of U, Th (in ppm) and of the K (in percent), respectively.[6]

The extracted values for the elemental concentration are
for U (from 1.5 to 29.1 ppm), for Th (range from 5.0 to
79.0 ppm), and for K (from 1.52 to 9.42). The results are Figure 2: Total elemental concentrations of uranium, thorium (in ppm)
summarized in Figure 2. and of potassium (in percent)

Radiation Protection and Environment | July 2013 | Vol 36 | Issue 3 | 101

 Allam, et al.: Dose assessment for natural radioactivity

Table 2: The calculated dose rate, annual effective dose HE (mSv/year), utilization index, external hazard
index, internal hazard index, concentration index IC and elemental concentration (ppm)
Sample Dose rate HE IU Hex Hin IC Elemental concentration
(nGy.h−1) (mSv/year) ppm Percentage
238
U 232
Th K
40

1 179.57 0.88 3.39 0.97 1.14 1.40 5.24 18.50 7.44

2 103.59 0.51 1.94 0.56 0.69 0.81 3.95 9.00 4.25
3 170.67 0.84 3.38 0.92 1.13 1.33 6.21 13.75 7.34
4 134.87 0.66 2.07 0.75 0.95 1.05 6.05 15.50 4.46
5 126.09 0.62 1.93 0.70 0.88 0.98 5.48 14.75 4.18
6 424.01 2.08 5.74 2.45 3.38 3.27 27.82 67.25 7.03
7 397.94 1.95 5.56 2.31 3.29 3.07 29.11 59.00 6.24
8 76.64 0.38 1.72 0.41 0.48 0.60 2.26 5.50 3.63
9 84.30 0.41 1.81 0.45 0.53 0.66 2.34 7.00 3.86
10 166.05 0.81 3.44 0.89 1.03 1.30 4.27 15.50 7.41
11 221.15 1.09 4.16 1.19 1.41 1.73 6.53 22.75 9.14
12 181.58 0.89 3.27 0.98 1.19 1.41 6.05 18.75 7.22
13 82.19 0.40 1.56 0.44 0.54 0.64 2.98 7.25 3.41
14 164.54 0.81 3.62 0.88 1.05 1.29 5.08 12.00 7.67
15 140.93 0.69 2.09 0.78 0.91 1.09 4.03 23.25 4.18
16 214.14 1.05 3.30 1.18 1.41 1.66 7.02 29.75 7.09
17 224.82 1.10 3.50 1.24 1.52 1.74 8.31 28.50 7.60
18 94.57 0.46 1.77 0.51 0.59 0.74 2.50 10.50 3.87
19 176.89 0.87 3.38 0.95 1.09 1.38 4.19 20.00 7.36
20 167.97 0.82 3.80 0.89 1.03 1.32 4.11 13.50 8.00
21 163.87 0.80 3.08 0.88 1.04 1.28 4.68 17.25 6.76
22 207.87 1.02 3.73 1.13 1.36 1.62 7.02 21.50 8.23
23 101.70 0.50 1.82 0.55 0.64 0.79 2.74 12.00 4.00
24 440.15 2.16 5.90 2.49 3.12 3.39 18.79 79.00 9.42
25 109.82 0.54 2.00 0.59 0.70 0.85 3.23 12.00 4.41
26 190.46 0.93 3.16 1.04 1.23 1.48 5.81 24.00 6.94
27 143.71 0.71 3.79 0.75 0.88 1.13 3.71 7.50 7.55
28 42.00 0.21 0.69 0.23 0.28 0.33 1.45 5.00 1.52
29 378.86 1.86 5.05 2.14 2.73 2.92 17.34 64.00 8.43
30 195.93 0.96 3.70 1.05 1.21 1.53 4.76 22.25 8.08
The specific activity of 238U and 232Th are 4.07 and 12.21 Bq/kg respectively

and only five of the samples exhibit values over the limit
of 250 nGy/h.
The analytical results for the total absorbed dose rates in
the air for each of the measured samples and for various
fractional masses indicated are also given in Table 2. For
comparison, measurements in former Czechoslovakia,
in houses with outside walls containing uraniferous
coal slag, gave values approaching 1000 nGy/h,[12] while
measurements in a granite region of the United Kingdom,
where some of the houses are made of local stone, gave
100 nGy/h.[13]
The relative contribution to total absorbed dose due to
238
U ranges from 13% for sample no. (19, 20) to 39% for
sample no (7), due to 232Th ranges from 14% for sample
no.(27) to 40% for sample no (24), and due to 40K ranges
from 22% for sample no (7) to 72% for sample no (27).
102
In order to estimate the annual effective doses, one has
to take into account the conversion coefficient from
absorbed dose in air to effective dose and the indoor
occupancy factor. In the UNSCEAR reports (2000),
a value of 0.7 Sv/year is used for the conversion
coefficient from absorbed dose in air to effective dose
received by adults, and 0.8 for the indoor occupancy
factor, implying that 20% of time is spent outdoors, on
average, around the world.[14] The effective dose rate
indoors, HE, in units of mSv/year, calculated by the
following formula:
+ ( ' ð7 ð )  (3)
where D is the calculated dose rate (in nGy/h), T
is the indoor occupancy time (0.8 × 24 h × 365.25
d = 7008 h/year), and F is the conversion factor
(0.7 × 10−6 mSv/Gy).
Radiation Protection and Environment | July 2013 | Vol 36 | Issue 3 |
 Allam, et al.: Dose assessment for natural radioactivity

The annual effective doses indoors estimated, using

Equation 5. Four examined samples are below or
equal the average worldwide exposure of external
terrestrial radiation (indoors) ∼0.41 mSv/year due to
natural sources (UNSCEAR 2000 Report).[4] Twenty‑two
examined samples (73.3%) are meet the IAEA exemption
criteria for natural sources 1 mSv/year (General Safety
Requirements Part 3, 2011).

In order to facilitate the calculation of dose rates in air

from different combinations of the three radionuclides
in building materials and by applying the appropriate
conversion factors, an activity utilization index (IU) is
constructed that is given by the following formula:
§ $8 $7K $. · Figure 3: Internal and external hazard index for each sample
¨© %TNJ  I 8  %TNJ  I 7K  %TNJ  I . ¸¹ Z P 
Where A U, A Th and A K are the actual values of the
activities per unit mass (Bq/kg) of 238U, 232Th, and 40K
in the building materials considered; fU, fTh and fK are
the fractional contributions to the total dose rate in air
due to gamma radiation from the actual concentrations
of these radionuclides. In the NEA 1979 Report, typical
activities per unit mass of 232Th, 238U, and 40K in building
materials.[10]
The activity utilization index estimated using the fractional
contribution to the dose rate from the three radionuclides
for the 30 samples are presented in Table 2. As the activity
concentration of the three radionuclides (232Th, 238U, 40K)
and their corresponding fractional contribution to the
total dose rate vary from sample to sample, the activity
utilization index ranges from 0.7 for sample 28-5.9 for
sample 24. It should be noted that, 29 of the measured
samples exhibit an activity utilization index that ranges
from 1.5 to 5.9 and only one samples show values under
that range (≤1.0).
Radiation hazard indices
In order to measure the hazards one can define
radiation hazard indices (Beretka and Mathew (1985)
Mathew (1985) (a) the external radiation hazard,
Hex and (b) internal radiation hazard, Hin, as follows:[7]
External radiation hazard (Hex)
The external hazard index is another criterion to assess
the radiological suitability of a material. It is defined as
follows:
$5D $7K $.
+H[  
%TNJ 
%TNJ 
%TNJ  (5)
where A Ra, A Th and A K are the actual values of the
activities per unit mass (Bq/kg) of 238U, 232Th, and 40K in
(4)
the building materials considered: It is observed from
Table 2 that the mean value 1.0 of Hex is equal the criterion
value (1). Figure 3 shows different kind of building
materials with Hex.
Internal radiation hazard (Hin)
The internal hazard index is a criterion for index radiation
hazard. In addition to gamma rays, 222Rn plays an
important role for internal exposure in a room. Effectively,
the radio toxicity of 238U is increased by a factor of two to
allow for the contribution from 222Rn and its short lived
progeny. The internal exposure due to radon and its
daughter products is quantified by the internal hazard
index Hin. It’s given by the following formula:
$5D $7K $.
+H[ 
 
 (6)
%TNJ %TNJ %TNJ 
The internal hazard index is defined to reduce the
acceptable maximum concentration of 226Ra to half
the value appropriate to external exposures alone. For
the safe use of materials in the construction of dwellings,
the following criterion was proposed by Krieger Hin ≤ 1.
The mean value of Hin is determined to be 1.3, which is
bigger than one which indicates that the internal hazards
are bigger than the critical value. Figure 3 shows the
different kinds of building materials with internal hazards.
Finally, according to most recent regulations
and especially the recommendation No. 112
issued by the European Union in 1999 (European
Commission [EC], 1999),[3] building materials should
be exempted from all restrictions concerning their
radioactivity, if the excessive gamma radiation due to
those materials causes the increase of the annual effective
dose received by an individual with a maximum value
of 0.3 mSv.[3] Effective doses exceeding the dose criterion
of 1 mSv/year should be taken into account in terms
of radiation protection. It is therefore recommended

Radiation Protection and Environment | July 2013 | Vol 36 | Issue 3 | 103

 Allam, et al.: Dose assessment for natural radioactivity
that controls should be based on a dose range of
0.3-1 mSv/year, which is the building material gamma
dose contribution to the dose received outdoors.
In order to examine whether a building material meets
these two dose criteria, the following gamma activity
concentration index (IC):
$8 $7K $.
, (7)
 %TNJ   %TNJ   %TNJ 
where A U , A Th , A K are the Th, U and K activity
concentrations (Bq/kg) in the building material,
respectively. For superficial and other building materials
with restricted fractional mass usage, such as those
studied in this work, the exemption dose criterion (0.3
mSv/year) corresponds to an activity concentration
index IC ≤ 2, while the dose criterion of 1 mSv/year is met
for IC ≤ 6.[3] This approach has initially been developed
by the Radiation Protection Authorities in the Nordic
Countries (Nordic, 2000) and is generally accepted by
the EU member states and many other countries.[14]
Based on the activity concentration index calculated
according to Equation 4, 26 of the samples exhibit
IC ≤ 2, four of them, with IC ≅ 2.9-3.4, show values
2 ≤ IC ≤ 6, there is no sample exceeds clearly the dose
limit of 1 mSv/year. It should be noted that quite similar
conclusions are drawn by considering the effective dose
rates calculated according to Equations 4 and 5.
As shown in Table 2, the results for the activity utilization
index, the total absorbed dose rate in air due to gamma
radiation, and the indoor effective dose assessment for
a specific fractional mass for the 30 “granite” samples
presented.
CONCLUSIONS
Exploitation of high‑resolution γ‑ray spectroscopy
provides a sensitive experimental tool in studying
natural radioactivity and determining radionuclide
concentrations and dose rates in various rock types.
Most of the tiling rock “granite” samples studied in this
work reveal high values for the activity and radionuclide
concentrations of Th, U and K, thus contributing to
the high‑absorbed dose rates in the air. In general,
the calculated values are distinctly higher than the
corresponding population‑weighted (world‑averaged)
ones, they lie outside the typical range of variability
reported values from world‑wide areas due to terrestrial
gamma radiation, given in the recent UNSCEAR 2008
Report.[15]
In addition, according to the dose criteria recommended
by the European Union (EC, 1999), 26 of the samples meet
104 Radiation Protection and Environment | July 2013 | Vol 36 | Issue 3 |
the exemption dose limit of 0.3 mSv/year, and four of
them meet the upper dose limit of 1 mSv/year.[2] From
radiological protection considerations, use of the granites
is acceptable for their restricted utilization as superficial
materials like tiles, boards, etc.
REFERENCES
1. Faure G. Principles of Isotope Geology. 2nd ed. USA: John
Wiley and Sons; 1986.
2. Me`nager MT, Heath MJ, Ivanovich M, Montjotin C,
Barillon CR, Camp J, et al. Migration of uranium
from uranium‑mineralized fractures into the rock
matrix in granite: Implications for radionuclide
transport around a radioactive waste repository. Fourth
International Conference of Chemistry and Migration
Behavior of Actinides and Fission Products in the
Geosphere (Migration, 1993), Charleston, USA, 12‑17,
December 1993. Radiochimica Acta 1993;66/67:47‑83.
3. European Commission Report on “Radiological Protection
Principles concerning the Natural Radioactivity of
Building Materials”. Radiation Protection, 1999; 112.
4. UNSCEAR. Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation.
Report to General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes.
New York: United Nations; 2000.
5. Farouk M A, Al‑Soraya A M. 226Ra as a standard source
for efficiency calibration of Ge (Li) detector. Nucl Inst
Methods 1982;200:593-5 .
6. Tzortzis M, Tsertos H, Christofides S, Christodoulides G.
Gamma‑ray measurements of naturally occurring
radioactive samples from cyprus characteristic geological
rocks. Preprint UCY‑PHY‑02/02 (physics/0212099).
Radiat Meas 2003. [In press].
7. Beretka J, Matthew PJ. Natural radioactivity of Australian
building materials, industrial wastes and by‑products.
Health Phys 1985;48:87‑95.
8. Krisiuk EM, Tarasov SI, Shamov VP, Shalak NI,
Lisachenko EP, Gomelsky LG. A Study on Radioactivity
in Building Materials. Leningrad: Research Institute for
Radiation Hygiene; 1971.
9. Stranden E. Some aspects on radioactivity of building
materials. Phys Norv 1976;8:167‑73.
10. Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). Exposure to radiation
from the natural radioactivity in building materials. Report
by NEA Group of Experts, OECD, Paris; 1979.
11. Kohshi C, Takao I, Hideo S. Terrestrial gamma radiation
in Koshi prefecture, Japan. J Health Sci 2001;47:362‑72.
12. Thomas J, Hulka J, Salava J. New houses with high
radiation exposure levels. In: Proceedings of the
International Conference on High Levels of Natural
Radiation, Ramsar, 1990. Vienna: IAEA; 1993.
13. Wrixon AD, Green BM, Lomas PR, Miles JC, Cliff KD,
Francis EA, et al. Natural Radiation Exposure in UK
Dwellings. NRPB‑R190 . London: National Radiological
Protection Board; 1988.
14. Nordic, Åkerblom G, Mjönes L, Annanmäki M,
Magnusson S, Strand T, Ulbak K. Naturally Occurring
 Allam, et al.: Dose assessment for natural radioactivity

Radioactivity in the Nordic Countries‑Recommendations.
The radiation protection authorities in Denmark, Finland,
Iceland, Norway and Sweden ; 2000.
15. UNSCEAR. Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation.
Report to General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes.
New York: United Nations; 2008.
How to cite this article: Allam KA, Ramadan AA, Taha A. Dose
assessment for natural radioactivity resulting from tiling granite rocks.
Radiat Prot Environ 2013;36:99-105.
Source of Support: Nil. Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Author Help: Reference checking facility

The manuscript system (www.journalonweb.com) allows the authors to check and verify the accuracy and style of references. The tool checks
the references with PubMed as per a predefined style. Authors are encouraged to use this facility, before submitting articles to the journal.
• The style as well as bibliographic elements should be 100% accurate, to help get the references verified from the system. Even a
single spelling error or addition of issue number/month of publication will lead to an error when verifying the reference.
• Example of a correct style
Sheahan P, O’leary G, Lee G, Fitzgibbon J. Cystic cervical metastases: Incidence and diagnosis using fine needle aspiration biopsy.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;127:294-8.
• Only the references from journals indexed in PubMed will be checked.
• Enter each reference in new line, without a serial number.
• Add up to a maximum of 15 references at a time.
• If the reference is correct for its bibliographic elements and punctuations, it will be shown as CORRECT and a link to the correct
article in PubMed will be given.
• If any of the bibliographic elements are missing, incorrect or extra (such as issue number), it will be shown as INCORRECT and link to
possible articles in PubMed will be given.

Radiation Protection and Environment | July 2013 | Vol 36 | Issue 3 | 105