This document discusses cross-calibrating an ionization chamber for dose measurements according to IAEA TRS 398. It involves cross-calibrating a parallel-plate chamber using a Farmer-type cylindrical chamber in a 15 MeV electron beam. The absorbed dose to water was measured for both chambers and compared. The results showed dose differences within 0.2% for different beam energies when using a constant coefficient, meeting measurement uncertainty requirements. Therefore, cross-calibration in the highest quality electron beam available at each treatment facility can effectively calibrate chambers.
This document discusses cross-calibrating an ionization chamber for dose measurements according to IAEA TRS 398. It involves cross-calibrating a parallel-plate chamber using a Farmer-type cylindrical chamber in a 15 MeV electron beam. The absorbed dose to water was measured for both chambers and compared. The results showed dose differences within 0.2% for different beam energies when using a constant coefficient, meeting measurement uncertainty requirements. Therefore, cross-calibration in the highest quality electron beam available at each treatment facility can effectively calibrate chambers.
This document discusses cross-calibrating an ionization chamber for dose measurements according to IAEA TRS 398. It involves cross-calibrating a parallel-plate chamber using a Farmer-type cylindrical chamber in a 15 MeV electron beam. The absorbed dose to water was measured for both chambers and compared. The results showed dose differences within 0.2% for different beam energies when using a constant coefficient, meeting measurement uncertainty requirements. Therefore, cross-calibration in the highest quality electron beam available at each treatment facility can effectively calibrate chambers.
This document discusses cross-calibrating an ionization chamber for dose measurements according to IAEA TRS 398. It involves cross-calibrating a parallel-plate chamber using a Farmer-type cylindrical chamber in a 15 MeV electron beam. The absorbed dose to water was measured for both chambers and compared. The results showed dose differences within 0.2% for different beam energies when using a constant coefficient, meeting measurement uncertainty requirements. Therefore, cross-calibration in the highest quality electron beam available at each treatment facility can effectively calibrate chambers.
Download as PPSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as ppsx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 11
CROSS CALIBRATION OF IONISATION CHAMBER
IAEA DOSIMETRY PROTOCOL TRS 398
AJITHKUMAR M, M.SC MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2019245002, ANNA UNIVERSITY, CHENNAI. PROJECT GUIDE
Internal Guide External Guide
Dr.S.Ganesan, Ramkumar, Professor, Junior medical physicist, Dept of medical physics, HCG, Anna university, Cybernife Centre, Chennai-600025. Bangalore. INTRODUCTION…
In the dosimetry protocol based on the absorbed dose standard
for water, the quality determination index of the electron beam is R50, and the accuracy of the dose measurement is improved.In order to injure it, the standard energy of the electron beam is R50>7 g/cm2 (E≳16 MeV).It is recommended to cross-calibrate the parallel plate chamber using the water absorption dose correction factor of the cylindrical chamber. However, only these conditions sufficient high-energy electron beams are difficult to possess in all treatment institutions. Therefore, in this study, Cross-calibration of parallel plate chamber obtained from high energy electron beams of 15 MeV. The dose difference was compared using a constant coefficient. Electron beam dose measurement is performed Farmer type cylinder of FC65G,IBA PPC40 was used, and the reference depth in the phantom zref=0.6(R50)−0.1(g/cm2) Cross-correction was performed by Cross-correction quality determined at 15 MeV The difference between the absorbed dose of water and the absorbed dose of water of electron beam energy to which the calculated correction factor is applied is within 0.2%.Showed the results of the study. Therefore, the results of mutual comparison of the absorbed dose values due to the difference in cross-correction quality match well within the measurement uncertainty Therefore, it is considered that cross-correction in the best electron beam quality of medical accelerators possessed by each institution is effective. EVALUATION OF ABSORBED DOSE MEASUREMENT:
Advances in radiation dosimetry continue to improve the accuracy of
calibrating photon and electron beams of radiation therapy. With the improved anatomical information obtained from sophisticated diagnostic imaging procedures, the data required to achieve better accuracy in patient treatment depends upon the measured dose. The success of radiotherapy depends on the absorbed dose delivered to the tumor, and it should not vary with respect to prescribed dose by more than ±5%. Recent protocols TG 51 and TRS 398 suggest the measurement of absorbed dose in phantom at a reference point, using absorbed dose to water calibration factor (ND,w). At present, Secondary Standard Dosimetry Laboratories (SSDL) does not provide calibration factors for all user beam qualities. They provide calibration factor only for 60Co beam. Quality specific conversion factor is to be used to determine absorbed dose to water for the interested beam qualities based on the SSDL reference calibration factor. REFERENCE CONDITION FOR DETERMINATION OF ABSORBED DOSE TO WATER IN HIGH ENERGY PHOTON BEAM ACCORDING TO TRS-398.
Phantom material: Water
Chamber type : R50≥4 gcm-2 Plane-parallel or Cylindrical Chamber, R50<4gcm -2 Plane-parallel Chamber Measurement depth zref 0.6R50-0.1 gcm-2 Reference point of chamber On the central axis at the center of the cavity volume(Cylindrical chamber).On the inner surface of the window as it’s centre(Plane-parallel chamber). Position of reference point of chamber At the measurement depth zref(Plane-parallel chamber).0.5rcyl deeper than zref(Cylindrical chamber) SSD 100 cm. Field size 10 cm x 10 cm. Cross calibration of parallel plane chamber in electron
where is the dosimeter reading for reference chamber, is the
dosimeter reading for chamber to be calibrated, is the absorbed dose to water calibration factor for reference chamber, and is the beam quality conversion factor for reference chamber Taken from Table 1.3.(TRS398)
The absorbed dose to water for user beam quality can be determined from the above calibration factor Where RESULT:
Cross calibration of PPC40 Chamber in the user beam quality:
PPC40 Chamber is calibrated in user beam quality. Since the factory calibration is done for reference beam quality Co-60 beam. We cross calibrated the PPC40 chamber against FC65-G chamber for 15 MeV electron beam with Quality R50=5.861 g/cc, as per TRS 398 cross calibration recommendation, beam quality to be chosen for cross calibration is R50 > 7.5 g/cc. But my study is R50 < 7.5 g/cc Our Cross calibration results are as shown %Variation FC65-G Vs PPC40
1.2
1.01 0.9
0.6 0.49 FC65-G 0.36 0.3 0.3 PPC40
0.15 0 0
-0.4 -0.54 CONCLUSION
In this study, the dose measurement of electron beams using a parallel
plate chamber. By cross-calibration based on the cylindrical chamber .The maximum dose calculated by applying the calculated correction factor. There was a difference of about less than ±2.0%
