The effects of AMAD, absorption type, and intake pattern were compared and analysed for the internal dose evaluation of workers who chronically inhale uranium. The committed effective doses$(E_{50})$ based on AMAD, absorption type, and intake pattern were evaluated using 3 monthly lung predicted monitoring data due to a chronic intake of uranium for 5 years. The relative error ranges of $E_{50}$ evaluated with each AMAD$(0.1{sim}10{mu}m);to;E_{50}$ evaluated with $5{mu}m$ AMAD were $-37.0{sim}49.8%$, and the relative error ranges of En evaluated with Type M to $E_{50}$ evaluated with Type S were $15.9{sim}56.6%$, and the relative error ranges of $E_{50}$ evaluated with an acute intake to $E_{50}$ evaluated with a chronic intake were $0.55{sim}4.52%$. Thus AMAD and the absorption type affected the results of $E_{50}$, but the intake pattern didn't really affect the results of $E_{50}$.