‫بغن اهلل الشحوي الشح٘ن‬

Sudan Academy of Sciences, SAS

Atomic Energy Council

Calibration of Working Standard Ionization

Chambers and Dose Standardization

By
Ayman Abd Elsafy Beineen Abd Elmahmoud
B.Sc. (Honour) in Physics
University of Khartoum (2001)

A Thesis Submitted to Sudan Academy of Sciences in

Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of
Science in Radiation Physics

Supervisor
Dr. Ibrahim Idris Suliman

January 2011
 DEDICATION

To my parents especially my mother

Wife
Sisters
Brothers
And all those whom I love
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my sincere thanks and appreciation to my supervisor Dr.

Ibrahim Idris Suliman the head of secondary standard dosimetry laboratory (SSDL),
Sudan Atomic Energy Commission (SAEC) for his useful guidance, encouragement
and advice throughout the course of this thesis, without him this work would be
extremely difficult. I would also like especially thank the members of SSDL (Ali
Mohamed Ali, Maha Hassan, Maysa, Suhair and my dearest one Bodour Emam) for
their co-operation during this study, great thank for radiotherapy department, National
cancer institute, university of Gezira.and Ms fawzia Elsadig.

Finally, I thank all my friends everywhere Badr, Husham and Hamdelnil Rabie Gasim
Elseed and all my colleagues in (SAEC) for encouragements.
 ABSTRACT

Measurements were performed for the calibration of two working standard ionization
chambers in the secondary standard dosimetry laboratory of Sudan. 600 cc cylindrical
former type and 1800 cc cylindrical radcal radiation protection level ionization
chambers were calibrated against the 1000 cc spherical reference standard ionization
chamber. The chambers were calibrated at X-ray narrow spectrum series with beam
137
energies ranged from (33-116 KeV) in addition to Cs beam with 662 keV energy.
The chambers 0.6 cc and 0.3 cc therapy level ionization were used for dose
standardization and beam output calibrations of cobalt-60 radiotherapy machine
located at the National Cancer Institute, University of Gazira. Concerning beam
60
output measurements for Co radiotherapy machine, dosimetric measurements were
performed in accordance with the relevant IAEA dosimetry protocols TRS-277and
TRS-398. The kinetic energy released per unit mass in air (air kerma) were obtained
by multiplying the corrected electrometer reading (nC/min) by the calibration factors
(Gy/n C) of the chambers from given in the calibration certificate. The uncertainty of
measurements of air kerma were calculated for the all ionization chambers (combined
uncertainty) the calibration factors of these ionization chambers then were calculated
by comparing the reading of air kerma of secondary standard ionization chambers to
that from radcal and farmer chambers. The result of calibration working standard
ionization chambers showed different calibration factors ranged from 0.99 to 1.52 for
different radiation energies and these differences were due to chambers response and
specification. The absorbed dose to water calculated for therapy ionization chamber
60
using two code of practice TRS-277 and TRS-398 as beam output for Co
radiotherapy machine and it can be used as a reference for future beam output
calibrations in radiotherapy dosimetry. The measurements of absorbed dose to water
showed that the new code of practice TRS398 is easier and has fewer components
than TRS-277 therefore it has some advantage over the previous protocols which were
based on air kerma standards.
 ‫الخالصت‬

‫اخشٗج ُزٍ الق٘اعاث لوعاٗشة غشفخٖ حأٗي ع٘اسٗخ٘ي بوعول الوعاٗشة الثإًْ لخصبحا اعاط لق٘اط الدشعت‬
‫االشعاع٘ت بالغْداى ُّٖ ‪ًْ 600 cc‬ع ‪ 1800cc ّ farmer‬هي ًْع ‪ ّ . radcal‬قذ عْٗشث ُاح٘ي داخل‬
‫ق٘اعاث الغشفت الع٘اسٗت االعاع٘ت للوعول ‪ 1000 cc‬الخٖ عْٗشث بوعاهل الْكالت الذّل٘ت للطاقت الزسٗت‬
‫ّقذ حوج هعاٗشة الغشفخ٘ي فٖ حضم االشعت الغٌ٘٘ت الض٘قت راث الطاقاث‬ ‫)‪(IAEA‬‬
‫‪137‬‬
‫الوشع رّ الطاقت ‪662‬‬ ‫(‪ )33,48,65,83,100and116 KeV‬باالضافت الٔ حضهت اشعت قاها هي هصذس‪Cs‬‬
‫‪ .KeV‬اخشٗج ق٘اعاث لغشفخٖ الخاٗي ‪ 0.3cc ّ 0.6cc‬فٖ هغخْٓ العالج باالشعت لوعاٗشة ّحق٘٘ظ هشخع٘ت‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫العالخٖ بالوشكض القْهٖ للغشطاى خاهعت الدضٗشة ‪.‬كل ق٘اعاث الوعاٗشة‬ ‫الدشعت بالٌغبت لدِاص ال‪Co‬‬
‫ّهشخع٘ت الدشعت االشعاع٘ت اخشٗج ّفقا للطشائق الوخبعت فٖ الْكالت الذّل٘ت للطاقت الزسٗت (‪ )IAEA‬فٖ ق٘اط‬
‫الدشعت االشعاع٘ت (‪ . )TRS-277&TRS-398‬ق٘غج ك٘شها الِْاء هي حاصل ضشب قشاءة الدِاص الٌاحدت‬
‫هي الخشع٘ع (‪ )n C/min‬هع هعاهل هعاٗشة غشفت الخأٗي ًفغِا (‪ )Gy/n C‬هي شِادة الوعاٗشة ‪.‬اخشٗج ق٘اعاث‬
‫عذم الخأكذ (‪ )Uncertainty‬بالٌغبت لق٘اط ك٘شها الِْاء بالٌغبت لدو٘ع غشف الخأٗي ‪ .‬حن اٗداد هعاهل الوعاٗشة‬
‫لغشفخٖ الخأٗي ًْع ‪ radcal ّ farmer‬بالوقاسًت هع الغشفت االعاع٘ت الوشخع٘ت ‪ّ .1000cc‬قذ اعطج الٌخائح‬
‫هعاهل هعاٗشة فٖ الوذٓ هي (‪ )0.99-1.52‬لطاقاث هخخلفت ّٗعضٓ ُزا االخخالف الٔ اعخدابت الغشفت لالشعت‬
‫ّخصائص غشفت الخأٗي‪ .‬اخشٗج ق٘اعاث الدشعت الووخصت للواء بالٌغبت لغشفخٖ الخأٗي ًْع ‪ 0.3cc ّ 0.6cc‬هي‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫ّعْف حغخخذم فٖ الوغخقبل‬ ‫ًْع ‪ therapy‬باعخخذام ‪ TRS-277&TRS-398‬لالشعت هي هصذسال ‪Co‬‬
‫‪60‬‬
‫العالخٖ ‪.‬اّضحج الق٘اعاث اى ‪ TRS-398‬لَ هشكباث اقل هي‬ ‫لوعاٗشة خاسج االشعت هي هصذس ال‪Co‬‬
‫‪ُّTRS-277‬زا الى ‪ ُْ TRS-398‬الوغخخذم فٖ ُزٍ االًّت فٖ ق٘اط الدشعت االشعاع٘ت فٖ العالج باالشعت‪.‬‬
 Table of Contents

Abstract……………………………………………………………………….

Arabic abstract………………………………………………………………..

Chapter one

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….... 1

1.1 General Introduction ……………………………………………………………………… 1

1.2 Calibration and traceability ……………………………………………………………. 2

1.3 The aim of this study ……………………………………………………………………… 3

1.4 Thesis outlines ………………………………………………………………………………. 3

Chapter Two

Literature review………………………………………………………………………………….. 5

2.1 theoretical background: …………………………………………………………………… 5

Chapter Three

Radiation Physics and Dosimetry………………………………………………………….. 10

3.1 Ionizing Radiation…………………………………………………………………………... 11

3.1.1 Gamma ray ………………………………………………………………………………... 11

3.1.2 X-ray…………………………………………………………………………………………… 12

3.1.3 Heavy charged particle………………………………………………………………… 12

3.1.4 Fast electron………………………………………………………………………………. 12

3.1.5 Neutrons …………………………………………………………………………………… 12

3.2 Interaction of radiation with matter……………………………………………….. 13

3.2.1 Charged particle interactions………………………………………………………. 13

3.2.2 Stopping power…………………………………………………………………………… 14

3.2.3 Linear energy transfer ………………………………………………………………… 14

3.2.4 Photons interactions……………………………………………………………………. 15

3.2.5 Photon beam attenuation……………………………………………………………... 15

3.3 Types of photon beam interaction…………………………………………………… 15

3.3.1 Photo electric effect……………………………………………………………………... 16

3.3.2 Compton Effect......................................................................................................... 16

3.3.3 Pair production…………………………………………………………………………… 16

3.4 Radiometric quantities…………………………………………………………………… 16

3 .4.1 Particle Fluence (φ)……………………………………………………………………. 16

3.4.2 Energy fluence (Ψ)……………………………………………………………………… 17

3.5 Charged particles equilibrium…………………………………………………………. 17

3.6 Dosimetric quantities……………………………………………………………………… 18

3.6.1 Exposure(X)………………………………………………………………………………… 18

3.6.2 Energy imparted………………………………………………………………………….. 18

3.6.3 Kerma…………………………………………………………………………………………. 19

3.6.4 Absorbed dose…………………………………………………………………………….. 20

3.7 Bragg cavity theory………………………………………………………………………… 21

3.8 Relation between dosimetric quantities…………………………………………... 22

3.9 Radiation protection quantities………………………………………………………. 23

3.9.1 Organ dose…………………………………………………………………………………... 23

3.9.2 Equivalent dose…………………………………………………………………………… 23

3.9.3 Effective dose………………………………………………………………………………. 25

3.10 Operational radiation protection quantities…………………………………… 26

3.10.1 Ambient dose equivalent H*(d)…………………………………………………... 26

3.10.2 Directional dose equivalent H’(d, Ω)………………………………………….... 26

3.10.3 Personal dose equivalent Hp (d),………………………………………………… 27

3.11 Measurements of absorbed dose…………………………………………………… 27

3.11.1 Calorimetry……………………………………………………………………………….. 27

3.11.2 Fricke dosimetry………………………………………………………………………... 29

3.11.3 Ionization chamber dosimetry……………………………………………………. 30

3.12 Reference dosimetry with ionization chamber……………………………….. 31

3.12.1 Standard free air ionization chamber………………………………………….. 31

3.12.2 Cavity ionization chamber………………………………………………………….. 32

3.12.3 Phantom embedded extrapolation chambers……………………………… 32

3.13 Air kerma based protocol……………………………………………………………… 34

3.14 Absorbed dose to water based protocol…………………………………………. 36

3.15 Estimating the uncertainty……………………………………………………………. 37

Chapter Four

Materials and Methods…………………………………………………………………………. 39

4.1 Secondary standard dosimetry laboratory………………………………………. 39

4.1.2 Ionization chambers and dosimetry system………………………………….. 42

4.1.3Phantoms and other devices…………………………………………………………. 43

4.2Experimental setup…………………………………………………………………………. 44

Chapter Five:

Results and discussion…………………………………………………………………………. 47

5.1 Results…………………………………………………………………………………………… 47

5.1.1 Beam output measurements………………………………………………………… 47

5.1.2 Spherical reference standard chamber………………………………………….. 49

5.1.3 Working standard cylindrical chamber…………………………………………. 52

5.1.4 Radcal working standard ionization chamber……………………………….. 55

5.1.5 Determination of the calibration coefficients……………………………….. 56

5.1.6 Therapy level ionization chambers……………………………………………….. 58

5.2 Discussion……………………………………………………………………………………… 60

5.2.1 Calibration of working standards…………………………………………………. 60

5.2.2 Radiotherapy beam output calibration…………………………………………. 61

Chapter Six:

Conclusions and recommendations…………………………………………………………. 62

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………………… 63
List of tables

Table 3.1 radiation weighting factor 25

Table 3.2 tissue weighting factor 26

Table4.1 characteristic of cylindrical ionization chamber types as stated by the 43

manufacturers

Table 5.1 output for ISO 4037 X-ray qualiteis 48

Table 5.2 ion recombination and polarity effect corrections for 1000cc ionization 49
chamber

Table 5.3 calculation of air kerma and correction factors for spherical 1000cc 50
secondary ionization chamber

Table 5.4 calculated uncertainty in the air kerma measurements for 1000cc 51
chamber

Table5.5 measurements for the determination of polarity effect of cylindrical 52

chamber

Table 5.6 calculation of air kerma and correction factors for 600cc cylindrical 53
chamber

Table 5.7 calculated uncertainty in the air kerma measurements for cylindrical 54
ionization chamber

Table 5.8 calculation of air kerma for 1800cc radcal ionization chamber 55

Table 5.9 calculations of uncertainty for air kerma by radcal ionization chamber 55

Table 5.10the calculated NK factor for two ionization chambers 57

Table 5.11 results of absorbed dose to water measurements using TRS-277 59

Table 5.12 results of absorbed dose to water measurements using TRS398 59

 List of figures

Figure 3.1 standard water colorimeter 28

Figure 3.2 a schematic diagram of a free air chamber 32

Figure 4.1 air kerma measurements using reference ionization chamber used 41
from OB 85 gamma calibrator

Figure 5.1 output measurements of Cs-137 at different distances 48

 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 General review:-

Radiation doses from applications in medical field must be accurately determined in

order to maintain a reasonable balance between the purpose of application and the
exposure. There is, thus, a need to establish quality assurance for this application
(measurements). In order to achieve this, dose measurements must be reproducible and
the uncertainties associated with that measurements should be known. The need for
accurate measurement has been appreciated from the early days of the use of ionizing
radiation in the early 20th century, particularly in the fields of diagnostic and therapeutic
medicine. Over the years, the range of applications for ionizing radiation has expanded
both in scope and in the types and energies of radiation employed. This has led to the
need to develop a wide variety of measurement techniques and standards covering fields
ranging from the low doses experienced in environmental and protection applications to
the extremely high doses used in industrial processing. The different types of radiation
employed give rise to the need for dose measurements in radiation beams whose effective
penetration through a material such as water ranges from a few micrometers to several
meters.
Secondary Standard Dosimetry Laboratory (SSDL) situated at Sudan Atomic Energy
Commission (SAEC), currently calibrates most of the national measuring equipment used
in radiation protection and radiotherapy. Standard for radiation measuring instruments
used in diagnostic radiology are still under developments. The objective of the SSDL is
to calibration field radiation measuring instruments, provide traceability from Primary
Standard Dosimetry Laboratories (PSDLs) and advise on all aspects of ionizing radiation
metrology.

1
The calibration procedures of field radiation measuring instrument used in radiotherapy
are based on well known and widely accepted dosimetry protocols.
Most clinical dosimetry protocols in the past were based on air kerma standards to
establish the absorbed dose to water in clinical radiotherapy beams. However, this
approach has several problems. From the perspective of the clinical user, the dosimetry
protocols are excessively complex and may reduce the accuracy of clinical dosimetry as a
result of mistakes. From the perspective of a standards laboratory, the air kerma standards
themselves have problems because of changes in the theory of cavity ion chambers and
uncertainties in some of the physical data required. The basic problem is that all the
standards are based on the same measurement technique and are thus potentially subject
to common errors.
In contrast, many primary standards laboratories are developing standards of absorbed
dose to water. These are based on different approaches and thus a much more robust
system is being put in place. Once a high energy absorbed dose calibration service is
established, the question is how to use it most effectively. Since it is much more
60
expensive to calibrate chambers in Accelerator beams than in Co beams, and because
the vast majority of dosimetry standards laboratories do not have linear accelerators, any
dosimetry Protocol based on absorbed dose calibration factor should be based on
calibrations in a 60Co beam. Clinical dosimetry based on such a system is much simpler
than that based on air kerma calibrations.
1.2 Calibration and traceability:

The traceability of dose measurements to the international measurement system in a few

developed countries is ensured through national hierarchies of primary and secondary
standards dosimetry laboratories, and in the rest of the world through the network of
SSDLs maintained by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World
Health Organisation (WHO). The role of SSDLs is crucial in providing traceable
calibration with goal of achieving an uncertainty of the therapy level calibration factors

2
of the order of about 1%. The SSDLs should also play an important role in the global
effort to provide quality audits to radiotherapy centers. Besides the obvious needs of
accurate dose measurement in radiotherapy, accurate calibrations are needed for reliable
measurements in diagnostic radiology and radiation protection. The requirements for
traceable and reliable calibrations are also becoming more important for international
trade where radiation products are manufactured within strict quality control system in
order to conform to given safety and performance criteria (IAEA, 1999).
1.3 The aim of this study:

The objectives of this study were quality control for protection and therapy level
ionization chambers based on air kerma and absorbed dose measurements in addition to
that beam output as standard measurements which are:

1. Beam output calibration for the radiation protection calibration sources for the
available radiation energies using different protection level ionization chambers ;
Calibration of two working standard ionization chambers against the national
Secondary Standard Ionization Chamber;

60
2. Beam output calibration of Co radiotherapy unit in National Institute for cancer
based on absorbed dose to water (TRS-398) and air kerma (TRS-277) based
protocols

3. Analysis of uncertainties in the measurements air kerma for beam output

calibrations; and estimation of uncertainty in the calibration factor for the two
working standards. Measurements

1.4 Thesis outlines:

This thesis comprise six chapters: in chapter one general introduction is given, literature
review is given chapter two, in chapter three introduction on radiation physics and

3
dosimetry is given including the standard dose measurements. In chapter four, materials
and methods used in the study are presented. In chapter five results of the study are
presented and discussion is given on the results. Conclusions are given in chapter six.

4
 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 General background

P Munck af Rosensch¨old et al (2008) performed study on calibration of a kilovoltage X-

ray unit in terms of absorbed dose to water at the surface of a full-scatter phantom using
the guidelines of several different dosimetry protocols which are presently in use. The
authors used and compared the results of both NK- and ND,w-based protocols. Therefore,
not only the methodology and dosimetric data provided in each specific protocol, but also
the inherent differences in the air kerma and absorbed dose to water standards were
compared. The dosimetric differences found in their study were generally rather small
and inside the estimated experimental uncertainty pertaining to the reproducibility of
measurements, except for the in-air methods using the AAPM TG-61 and IPEMB
protocols in the 120 kV beam. In that case, results were obtained that were outside the
estimated uncertainty budget as compared to the NCS-10, the DIN and IAEA TRS-277
and TRS-398 protocols. Similarly, the in-air method for the AAPM TG-61 protocol
yielded results that were outside the estimated uncertainty budget as compared to results
obtained using the IAEA TRS-398 and (ND,w-based) DIN protocols for the 200 kV beam.
It should be noted that the magnitude of the deviation correlated with the magnitude of
the backscatter factor (BW) as a function of HVL is given by the AAPM TG-61 protocol.
This fact suggests that the deviations found in this study can be related to uncertainties in
the backscatter factor, whether it was intrinsically included in the measurement made or
taken from the protocol. The authors derived backscatter factors for the 120 and 200 kV
beams using a Monte Carlo model for the actual x-ray machine studied. When using the
Monte Carlo calculated backscatter factors the convergence between the protocols
improved, which indicates that applying generic backscatter factors tends to increased
dosimetric uncertainties. It is possible that the problem of using the HVL as the sole

5
beam quality specifier might be the cause for the observed deviations. The measured
central percentage depth dose data using plane-parallel and cylindrical ionization
chambers were shown to be in reasonably in good agreement with the data from the
literature, for the same beam qualities, as specified in first half-value layers of aluminum
and copper. Measured PDDs for both the 120 and 200 kV beams were in fair agreement
(within 2%) at 2 cm depth, using plane-parallel and cylindrical ionization chambers as
well as a diamond detector. Taken together, the present study leans in favor of calibrating
medium-range kilovoltage x-ray beams at 2 cm depth and using measured PDDs rather
than using the in-air method with generic backscatter factors. In the
specification/ordering of kilovoltage x-ray units, it is advantageous if the beam qualities
of the machine are matched to those available for the calibration of dosimeters at the
standards laboratory. By doing so, the dosimetric uncertainties in the commissioning
phase can be reduced. In addition, the authors concluded that medical physicist needs to
consider the limitations of the dosimetry protocol of choice in order to avoid the need to
deviate from the methods stipulated therein.
Jurado et al (2005) studied the performance and dose characterization of the Therapax
SXT 150. The dose characterization in that study was performed by applying the IAEA
TRS-398 protocol to the indicated beam qualities, which provides a solid, consistent and
reliable way of measuring the dosimetric parameters. Mechanical movements, interlocks
and applicator characteristics agreed with specifications. The tube head leakage was two
orders of magnitude less than the limits established in the ICRP 33. Timer accuracy was
better than 0.2% and linearity with dose was good. The output was stable, with
repeatability better than 0.3%, long term reproducibility better than 1.5% and no
dependence with tube head orientation. Measured first HVLs agreed with those of the
BJR Supplement 25 when comparison was possible, value so as to obtain absorbed doses
at the surface from absorbed dose measurements performed at 2 cm depth. This PDD
value involves the use of measurements at the surface, which are difficult to perform for
these qualities. To avoid this, the output factors used in our centre for these beam
6
qualities were re-defined to take into account only measurements performed at 2 cm
depth. Beam optical density profiles had small penumbras and field sizes agreed with the
applicator specifications. These profiles had good symmetry and flatness except for the
lowest energy beam, for which a heel effect was observed. Measurements of all the
parameters of the unit are strongly recommended. The data presented may provide a base
for comparison and a reference for other or potential new users of the unit.
Vargas and Francisco (2008) compared IPSM 1990 photon dosimetry code of practice
with AAPM TG-51 and IAEA TRS-398, and the similarities and differences between
IPSM 1990 and AAPM TG-51/IAEA TRS-398 have been discussed. Uncertainties have
been computed for all experimental results according to the ISO Guide for the Expression
of Uncertainty in measurement recommendations. Absorbed dose to water determinations
according to the three protocols agree within experimental uncertainty, and this
Uncertainty is similar to the one reported in IAEA TRS-398. The maximum difference in
absorbed dose to water determination is obtained for 18 MV: IPSM 1990 result is 0.7%
lower than the IAEA TRS-398 one using its theoretical beam quality conversion factors.
This maximum difference is mainly related to the use of experimental beam quality
conversion factors for IPSM 1990 and theoretical ones for IAEA TRS-398. It must be
stressed that this comparison has been performed with a single calibration from NPL and
that the use of different protocols and calibrations traceable to different standards
laboratories will add further differences increasing or lowering results.
Jan Seuntjens, et al (2005) presented a framework within which ionization chambers,
calibrated in terms of absorbed dose to water, can be used to determine absorbed dose to
water under reference conditions from a measurement in a solid phantom of known
density and composition. Such a procedure has the distinct advantage that measurements
in plastics can be done under conditions that simplify the interpretation of the chamber
signal and make the conversion to absorbed dose to water under reference conditions
direct and straightforward. We define a phantom dose conversion factor that relates an
absorbed dose-to-water calibration coefficient to an in-solid phantom absorbed dose-to-
7
water calibration coefficient valid at a depth scaled by electron density. For an Exradin
A12 C552 ionization chamber, we calculated and measured the phantom dose conversion
factor for a set of Solid Water phantoms and found that measured and calculated factors
differed by between 0.0% and 0.7% and the average measured dose conversion factor
was low by 0.4% compared to the calculated factor. For the one Lucite phantom tested
the difference was 0.2% or less for all energies. The magnitude of a difference between
measurement and calculation depends on the consistency of phantom composition with
the composition assumed in the calculations and on the phantom homogeneity and
construction in the experiments. When these are independently verified by the user in
accurate experiments for each phantom used, dose measurements using ionization
chambers calibrated in terms of absorbed dose to water lead to reference dose
determinations that are consistent with in-water measurements and absorbed dose-based
protocols to within a few tenths of a percent. As the calculation of phantom dose
conversion factors for different chamber types in combination with different phantom
materials is straightforward, a more general availability of these factors for different
chamber types and phantom materials could be useful.
M.Saiful Huq and Pedro Andreo (2000) compared the result of measurements from
AAPM TG-51 and TG-21 made with PTW and NE farmer chamber in water phantom
and exposed to 6,18 and 25 photon beams. depending upon the choice of ionization
chamber and beam quality , the discrepancy in absorbed dose to water between the two
protocols is found to range between 0.7% and 1.3% the AAPM TG- 51 dose to water are
found to be higher than the AAMP TG-21doses by up to 0.9% at 6 MV and up to 1.0 %
at 18 MV. the large discrepancy of 1.3 % is observed when NE chamber is used at 25
MV .the reason of the discrepancies has been analyzed ,with the finding that the data and
procedures recommended in the AAPM TG 51 protocol are responsible for a maximum
contribution of about 0.5%. the rest of difference is presumably caused by the change in
the primary standard used for chamber calibrations.

8
The recommendation of AAPM TG 51 protocol are followed the ratio of NE ti PTW
chamber doses are found to be 0.999,1.009 and 1.005 at 6.18 and 25 MV respectively .the
corresponding result for the AAPM TG protocol are 0.999 ,1.006 and 1,002 this apparent
inconsistency is presumably attributed to deficiencies in our present knowledge to
perturbation tractors and quantities used to calculate KQ values which are expected to be
reduced when direct calibration in terms of absorbed dose to water become feasible at
high energy photon qualities . The most important differences between this two protocol
are the formalism in the AAPM TG-51 is based on the calibration of lionization chamber
in term of absorbed dose to water on the other hand TG-21 based on exposure calibration
factor the lead to differences of up to 1, 4% between the measured ND,W and value to
ND,W calculated from NX.
Fujio Araki and H.Dal kubo,(2002). calculated the ratio of absorbed dose to water
between the existing JARP, TRS -277 and the new TRS-398 protocols and the new TG-
51 protocol for various farmer type chamber in photon and the electron beams, they
found in photon beams, the absorbed doses determined with TG-51 increases by 0.6% to
2.1 % ,0.7% to 1.7 % in comparison to those with JARP and TRS-277, respectively ,and
agree with TRS-398 within 0.4% for electron beams ,TG-51 shows slightly higher
increases i.e,1.5-3.8% and 0.2-1.9% in comparison to JARP and TRS-277, respectively,
and agrees with TRS 398 within 0.6% reasons for the observed discrepancies are
discussed by comparing Ngas or ND and a dose conversion factors FW. it is found that the
Ngas values calculated from the value of McoD,W and FW define with TG-51 become
higher by 1.8-2.9% and 0.5 – 1.5%with JARP and TRS -277,respectively.also,the ratio of
the cavity-gas calibration factor evaluated from this discrepancy, The ratio of TG-51
andTRS-381protocols is1.008. This ratio corresponds to discrepancy of 1.1%in the ratio
of the absorbed –dose to discrepancy of 1.1%in the ratio of the absorbed-dose to water
between MISI and MRC. However, the estimated uncertainty of the ratio between the
two cavities –gas calibration factors is 0.9 %( 1 s.d) and consequently, the observed
difference of 0.8%is not significant. In photon beams, Fw values for TG-51deaorease by

9
up to 1.8.1.Compared to JARP and agree with TRs-277 and TRs-398 within 0.7-1 for the
Fw values in electron beams,TG-51 agrees with the existing JARP and TRs-277
protocols within 1.1. and with TRs-398 within 0.3%

( GX Ding and J.E.and/ C.B.Kwok 2000) determined absorbed dose to water at the
reference point which within 1% for C60,0.5% for photon beam with energies of 6 and
18 MV and compared the result with that at electron beam and the result from ionization
chamber calibration factors (ND,w ,Nx). The implementation of new protocol will not
change the results of clinical reference dosimetry in photon beams by more than roughly
1% compared to those obtained by TG21 .It can be seen that there may be no significant
clinical consequences as a result to the implantation of the TG51.The estimated dose
changes in reference dosimetry are within 2% for Co60 beam, 1.5% for photon beam with
energies of 6 and 18µv, and 3%-4% for electron beam with the same energies.

10
 CHAPTER THREE
RADIATION PHYSICS AND DOSIMETRY
3.1 Ionizing Radiation

Radiation is classified into two categories: non ionizing and ionizing radiation depending
on the ability to ionize matter. Non ionizing radiation can not ionize matter because its
energy is lower than ionization potential of matter (the minimum energy required for
ionization). Ionizing radiation can ionize matter either directly or indirectly because its
energy exceeds the ionization potential of matter, it contains two major categories:

1. Directly ionizing radiation (charged particles): electrons, protons, alpha particles,

heavy ions

2. Indirectly ionizing radiation(neutral particles): photon (X-ray, gamma rays),

neutrons
Ionizing radiation is generally characterized by their ability to excite and ionize atoms of
matter with which they interact. The important types of ionizing radiation are as follow:

3.1.1 Gamma ray:

It is electromagnetic radiation emitted from a nucleus or annihilation reaction between

matter and anti matter, the quantum energy of any electromagnetic photon given in KeV
by
hc
E  h  (3.1)

Where, h is blank constant
ν is the frequency
λ is the wave length

11
 3.1.2 X-ray:

Electromagnetic radiation emitted by charged particles(usually electrons) in changing

atomic energy level (characteristic X-ray) or in slowing down coulomb force
field(continuous or bremsstrahlung )the energy of X-ray ranging from low energy(soft X-
ray) to megavoltage X-ray.
3.1.3 Heavy charged particle

Usually obtained from acceleration by Coulomb force field in cyclotron or heavy particle
linear accelerator, alpha particle also emitted from radioactive nuclei and these types
include proton, deuteron, triton and an alpha particle which is known as helium nucleus
(two protons and two neutrons).

3.1.4 Fast electron:

If positive in charge they are called positrons. If they are emitted from a nucleus they are
usually referred to as beta ray (positive, negative) and if they are result from a charged
particle collision they referred to as delta ray.
3.1.5 Neutrons:

Neutral particles obtained from nuclear reaction or fission since they can not themselves
be accelerated electrostatically.
All this type of ionizing radiation can interact with matter by tow way directly and
indirectly, the fast charged particles which deliver their energy to matter directly through
coulomb interaction along the particles track. Uncharged particles (photons, neutrons) at
first transfer their energy to charged particles in the matter through which they pass, the
resulting fast charged particles then in turn deliver the energy to the matter. That means
the deposition of energy in matter by (photon and neutrons) is tow step process. (F. Attix,
1986).
12
3.2 Interaction of radiation with matter:

The interaction of radiation with matter depend on several factors such as types of
radiation, the energy of radiation and the material it self. Thus the photon interaction with
matter differs significantly from that with beta and alpha.
Heavy charged particles and fast electrons interact with matter through the Coulomb
force with the electrons present in any medium through which they pass. Neutrons and
photons because they have no charge therefore are not subject to the Coulomb force,
these radiations first undergo a catastrophic interaction (often involving the nucleus of
constituent atoms).
X-ray and gamma ray transfer all or a part of its energy to electrons bears a close
similarity to the fast electron radiation (beta particles)
3.2.1 Charged particle interactions:

Electron as energetic traverse matter, it interact with matter through coulomb interaction
with atomic orbital electrons and atomic nuclei through this collisions the electron may
lose their kinetic energy or change their direction of travel .energy losses are describe by
stopping power.
When the incident electron interact with orbital electron (elastic collision) the electron is
deflected from its original path but no energy loss occurs, while in an inelastic collision
the electron is deflected from its original path and some of its energy transferred to an
orbital electron or emitted in the form of bremsstrahlung, the interaction between the
incident electron and orbital electron result in ionization (ejection of an orbital electron
from the absorber atom), and excitation (transfer of an orbital electron of the absorber
atom from an allowed orbit to a higher allowed orbit), atomic excitation and ionization
are characterized by collision stopping power.

13
The coulomb interaction between incident electron and nuclei of the absorber atom result
in electron scattering and energy loss of the electron through production of X-ray photon
and these types of energy loss is characterized by radiative stopping power.
3.2.2 Stopping power:

The inelastic energy losses by an electron moving through a medium with density ρ are
describe by the total mass energy stopping power (S/ ρ) ,represents the kinetic energy E
loss by the electron per unit path length(X) or:

S 1 dE
 ( MeVcm 2 g 1 )
  dx (3.2)
The mass energy stopping power consist of tow components, the mass collision stopping

S
 
power    col resulting from electron –orbit electron interaction, and the mass radiative

S
 
stopping power    rad resulting from electron- nucleus interaction.

S S S

     
   tot =    col +    rad (3.3)
S
 
   col Has an important role in radiation dosimetry and for expressing the absorbed dose
in a medium (E.D Podgorsak.E 2003)
3.2.3 Linear energy transfer:

The linear energy transfer or linear collision stopping power, L, of a material, for a
charged particle, is the quotient of dE and dl, where dE is the mean energy lost by the
particle, due to collisions with electrons, in traversing a distance dl; thus
dE
L
dl (3.4)

14
Unit: J·m–1
E may be expressed in eV, and hence L may be expressed in eV·m–1 or some Convenient
submultiple or multiple, such as keV·μm–1. (IAEA.2000)
3.2.4 Photons interactions:

Depending on their origin, photon radiation falls in to one of the following four
categories;

1. Bremsstrahlung (continuous X-ray) emitted through electron-nucleus interaction

2. Characteristic X-ray (discrete) emitted in transition of orbital electrons from one

allowed orbit to a vacancy in another allowed orbit.

3. Gamma ray (discrete) emitted through nuclear transition in gamma decay.

4. Annihilation radiation (discrete, typically 0.511 MeV)

3.2.5 Photon beam attenuation:

The intensity I(x) of a narrow photon beam attenuated by attenuator of thickness x given
I x   I 0  e   x
by (3.5)
Where I(0) is the original intensity of un attenuated beam
µ is the linear attenuation coefficient.
3.3 Types of photon beam interaction:

Photons interact with the atom of an attenuator in various ways depending on the energy
(hν) of the photon and on the atomic number (Z) of the attenuator.

15
It can also interact with bound electron with an atom as whole (photo electric effect),
with the field of the nucleus (pair production), or with free orbital electron (Compton
Effect)
3.3.1 Photo electric effect:

In the photo electric effect the photon interact with bound orbital electron of an attenuator
and disappear, while the orbital electron is ejected from the atom as a photo electron with
kinetic energy EK given as :( padgorsak E.B, 2003)

E K  h  E B (3.6)
Where hν is the incident photon energy and EB is the binding energy of the electron
3.3.2 Compton Effect:

The Compton Effect represents a photon interaction with orbital electron. The incident
photon energy is much larger than the binding energy of the orbital electron, the loses
part of its energy to recoil electron and is scattered as photon through a scattering angle θ,
angle φ represents the angle between the incident photon direction and the direction of
the recoil electron. The change in photon wave length ∆λ is given by the well known
Compton relationship :( padgorsak E.B 2003)
∆λ =λ (1-cosθ) (3.7)
3.3.3 Pair production:

In pair production the photon disappear and an electron-positron pair is a combined

kinetic energy is produced in the nuclear coulomb field.
3.4 Radiometric quantities

The radiation field can be defined by radiometric quantities such as :

3.4.1 Particle Fluence (φ):

Is the number of particles incident on sphere of cross sectional area

16
 dN

dA (3.8)
Unit = m2
3.4.2Energy fluence (Ψ):

The energy fluence is the quotient dR by dA where dR is the radiant energy incident on
sphere of cross sectional area dA:
dR
Ψ= dA (3.9)

Energy fluence can be calculated from particle fluence by

 dN 
Ψ=  dA  E = Φ E (3.10)
 
Where E is the energy of the particle and dN represents the number of particles with
energy E.
The particle fluence and energy fluence may change with time result in particle fluence
rate and energy fluence rate with units (m-2 s-1and Jm-2 s-1) respectively.
Radiation dosimetry It is now a pure physical science and has its origin in the medical
applications of ionizing radiation and we a protection against it, these applications
required quantitative method to determine a dose of radiation.
The radiation quantities are deal with energy deposited in a given medium by directly and
indirectly ionizing radiation. Number of physical quantities and units has been defined
for describing a beam of radiation and the dose of radiation.
3.5 Charged particles equilibrium:

If there is volume V containing a distributed radioactive source and there is also small
volume v inside V and there are four conditions for radiation equilibrium

1. The atomic composition of the medium is homogeneous

2. The density of the medium is homogeneous

3. The radioactive source is uniformly distributed

17
 4. There are no electric or magnetic fields present to perturb the charged particle path,
except the fields associated with atoms.

Charged particle equilibrium (CPE) exists for a given volume when for each charged
particle that exits the volume, there is a charged particle entering the volume. When
(CPE) exists, the dose is equal to the collision kerma (frank Herbert Attix 1986).

3.6 Dosimetric quantities

3.6.1Exposure(X):

Is defined as the quotient of dQ by dm where the value dQ is the absolute of the total
charge of the ions of one sign produced in air when all the electrons and positrons
librated or created by photon in mass dm of air are completely stopped in air
dQ
X 
dm (3.11)
With unit C/Kg and the unit used is (R) roentgen
1R  2.58 10 4 C/Kg

The average energy expended in air per ion pair formed Wair is the quotient of EK by N
where N is the mean number of ion pair formed when the initial kinetic energy E K of
charged particles is dissipated in air
EK
W air 
N (3.12)
eV
The current best estimated for the average value of Wair is 33.97 ionpair

3.6.2 Energy imparted:

Energy imparted, _, by ionizing radiation to matter in a volume, is defined by the relation

ε = Rin − Rout +∑Q (3.13)

18
where Rin is the sum of the energies (excluding rest energies) of all charged and
uncharged ionizing particles that enter the volume, Rout is the sum of the energies
(excluding rest energies) of all charged and uncharged ionizing particles that leave the
Volume and ∑Q is the sum of all changes of the rest mass energy of nuclei and
elementary particles in any interactions that occur in the volume. the unit of energy
imparted is joule.

3.6.3 Kerma:

Kerma is an acronym for kinetic energy released per unit mass. It has applicable to
indirectly ionizing radiation such as photons and neutrons; it quantifies the average
amount of energy transferred from indirectly to directly ionizing radiation.
Fro example the energy of photons is imparted to matter in two stage process, in the first
stage the photon radiation transfers energy to the secondary charged particles (electrons)
through various photon interactions. In the second stage the charged particles transfers’
energy to the medium through atomic excitation and ionization.
Through this the kerma is defined as the mean energy transferred from the indirectly
ionizing radiation to charged particles in the medium dE per unit mass dM:
dEtr
K (3.14)
dm
With unit J/Kg

Component of kerma:

The kerma for X or gamma rays consist of the energy transferred to electrons and
positrons per unit mass of medium. The kinetic energy of fast electron may be spent in
two ways:

19
  Coulomb force interaction with atomic electrons of the absorbing material resulting
in the local dissipation of the energy as ionization and excitation in or near the
electron track. These are called collision kerma

 Radiative interaction with the Coulomb force field at atomic nuclei in which Xray
photons are emitted as the electron decelerates. These Xray photons are relatively
penetrating compared to electrons and

Carry their quantum energy far away from the charged particle track. Thus kerma include
collision and radiative and:
K  Kc  Kr (3.15)

K c Is collision kerma

K r Is radiative kerma

3.6.4 Absorbed dose:

It’s the energy imparted by the ionizing radiation to matter of mass m in a finite volume
V.
And it is a quantity applicable to both indirectly and directly ionizing radiations.
Indirectly ionizing radiation means: the energy is imparted to matter in a two step
process.
• In the first step (resulting in kerma), the indirectly ionizing radiation transfers energy
as kinetic energy to secondary charged particles.
• In the second step, these charged particles transfer a major part of their kinetic energy
to the medium (finally resulting in absorbed dose).
For directly ionizing radiation means: charged particles transfer a major part of their
kinetic energy directly to the medium (resulting in absorbed dose).
(Padgorsak E.B 2005)

20
Thus the absorbed dose D is the expectation value of the energy imparted to matter per
unit mass.
3.7 Bragg cavity theory:

The Bragg–Gray cavity theory was the first cavity theory developed to provide a relation
between the absorbed dose in a dosimeter and the absorbed dose in the medium
containing the dosimeter. The conditions for application of the Bragg–Gray cavity theory
are:

1. The cavity must be small when compared with the range of charged particles
incident on it, so that its presence does not perturb the fluence of charged
particles in the medium;

2.
The absorbed dose in the cavity is deposited solely by charged particles
crossing it (i.e. photon interactions in the cavity are assumed negligible and
thus ignored).

Under these two conditions, according to the Bragg–Gray cavity theory,

The dose to the medium Dmed is related to the dose in the cavity Dcav as follows:

Dmed  Dcav  S 
   med,cav (3.16)
  
S
 
 It’s the ratio of the average unrestricted mass collision stopping powers of the
  med, cav

medium and the cavity. The use of unrestricted stopping

Powers rules out the production of secondary charged particles (or delta Electrons) in the
cavity and the medium.

21
3.8 Relation between dosimetric quantities:

The absorbed dose (D) defined for all types of radiation, and for mono-energetic photon
radiation valid:

D  cpe  E
 en
 (3.17)
Where D is the absorbed dose in (Gy)
 Is particle fluence (m-2)

E Is photon energy (J)

 en
 is mass energy cross section (m2Kg-1)
And for charged particle valid:

D    S 
   el (3.18)

S 
Where    el is the mass electron energy loss cross section (Jm2Kg-1)

Kerma defined for indirectly ionizing and for mono-energetic photon and neutron
radiation valid

K  E
 tr
 (3.19)

Where  is particle fluence ( m )

2

E is the energy (exclusive rest energy) (J)

 tr
 is the mass energy transferred cross section (m Kg )
2 -1

For mono-energetic photons of energy E the exposure is given by



X   E  tr  e
  air W  air
(3.20)

22
Thus
X  K C AIR e  W (3.21)
In charged particle equilibrium
D  Kc
(3.22)

D air   air  X
W
So  e
(3.23)
And


D cpe   E  en 
   air
(3.24)

X   E  en  e
   air Wair
Then (3.25)
3.9 Radiation protection quantities:

3.9.1 Organ dose:

The organ dose is defined as the mean dose dT in a specified tissue or organ T of human
body, given by :( Padgorsak E.B 2005)

1 T
DT 
mT  D dm 
mT
mt
(3.26)
Where
mT is the mass of the organ or tissue under consideration
ΕT is the total energy imparted by radiation to that tissue or organ

3.9.2 Equivalent dose:

The absorbed dose in an organ or tissue, DT is the absorbed dose averaged over the
volume of a tissue or organ T (rather than at a point). While the absorbed dose at a point

23
generally is the fundamental dose quantity, in radiation protection, the mean dose in an
organ becomes the basic protection quantity correlated with the exposure risk. This
concept, therefore, is obviously based on the linear dose-effect relationship and the
additively of doses for risk assessment as an appropriate approximation in the low dose
region. Otherwise, averaging of doses and adding of doses over long periods would not
be an acceptable procedure.

The equivalent dose in an organ or tissue is defined by :( ICRP 1991)

H T  WR DT , R
(3.27)

Where DT,R is the mean organ dose in the organ or tissue T from radiation of type R
incident on the Human body and WR are radiation weighting factors characterizing the
biological Effectiveness of the specific radiation R relative to photons. The sum is taken
over all types of radiation involved.
Radiation weighting factors:

For external irradiation, the values of the radiation weighting factors are given by the
parameters of the external radiation field only (by the type and spectral distribution of the
radiation incident on the body). This means that wR is a body-averaged value
representing a mean value for the relative biological effectiveness of all tissues of the
body. Because the WR value is the same for all organs in a body, this procedure obviously
ignores any local variation of the radiation quality in the human body which may result
from the generation of secondary radiation of different types in the human body. This
effect is important mainly in the case of incident neutrons where secondary photons
strongly contribute to the absorbed doses of various organs. The wR values for various
types of radiation are specified in table (3.1)

24
Table (3.1) radiation weighting factor

Radiation type Radiation weighting factor, wR

Photon 1

Electrons and mouns 1

Proton and charged pions 2

Alpha particles, fission fragments, heavy 20

ions

neutrons A continuous function of neutron energy

3.9.3 Effective dose:

The effective dose is the mean absorbed dose from a uniform whole-body irradiation that
results in the same total radiation detriment as from the non uniform, partial-body
irradiation in question. The effective dose is the weighted average of the mean absorbed
dose to the various body organs and tissues, where the weighting factor is the radiation
detriment for a given organ from a whole-body irradiation. (ICRP 2007)

E   wT H T
(3.28)
Where
wT : weighting factor for organ or tissue.
HT :equivalent dose for organ or tissue.
Recommended tissue weighting factor:

25
Table (3.2) tissue weighting factor
tissue WT ∑ WT

Bone- marrow(red),colon ,lung, 0.12 0.72

stomach, breast, remainder tissues

Gonads 0.08 0.08

Bladder, esophagus, liver, thyroid 0.04 0.16

Bone surface, brain, salivary 0.01 0.04

glands, skin

Remainder tissues: adrenals, extrathoracic (ET) region, gall bladder, heart, kidneys,
lymphatic nodes, muscle, oral mucosa, pancreas, prostate, small intestine, spleen, thymus,
uterus/cervix.

3.10 Operational radiation protection quantities:

3.10.1 Ambient dose equivalent: H*(d)

at a point in radiation field, is the dose equivalent that would be produced by the
corresponding aligned and expanded radiation field, in the ICRU sphere at a depth d, on
the radius vector opposing the direction of radiation incidence. For penetrating radiation
it is d = 10 mm
3.10.2 Directional dose equivalent: H’(d, Ω)

The directional dose equivalent’ (d, Ω), at a point of interest in the actual radiation field,
is the dose equivalent that would be produced by the corresponding expanded radiation
field, in the ICRU sphere at a depth d, on a radius in a specified direction Ω.For low-
penetrating radiation d is equal to 0.07 mm.

26
 3.10.3 Personal dose equivalent: Hp (d),

The personal dose equivalent, Hp (d), is the dose equivalent in ICRU tissue at a depth d in
a human body below the position where an individual dosimeter is worn. For monitoring
of the skin dose d = 0.07 mm is recommended and for monitoring effective dose d = 10
mm. In rare cases of monitoring the dose to the lens of the eye a depth d = 3 mm may be
appropriate.
3.11 Measurements of absorbed dose:

The basic output calibration of a clinical radiation beam by virtue of direct measurement
of dose or dose rate in water under specific reference conditions is referred to as
reference dosimetry. Three types of reference dosimetry technique are currently known:

1. Calorimetry

2. Fricke dosimetry

3. Ionization chamber dosimetry

These dosimeters can be used as absolute dosimeters but seldom used as such in clinics,
because their use in absolute dosimetry is cumbersome and more over, calibration in a
known radiation field offers certain advantage. When an absolute dosimeter is used
independently, it relies on its own accuracy instead of referring to a standard in common
with other radiation users.
3.11.1 Calorimetry:

It’s the most fundamental dosimetry technique since it relies on basic definitions of either
electrical energy or temperature. In principle calorimetry is simple, in practical however
the need for measuring extremely small temperature differences makes the technique
very complex and relegates it to sophisticated standards laboratories.
Two main types of absorbed dose calorimeter are currently used in standards laboratories:

27
 1. Graphite calorimeters;

2. Sealed water calorimeters.

In graphite calorimeters the average temperature rise is measured in a body that is

thermally insulated from surrounding bodies (‘jackets’) by evacuated vacuum gaps. Gap
corrections and dose transfer procedures are used in conjunction with graphite
calorimeters to allow for the transfer of absorbed dose from graphite to water. In stagnant
sealed water calorimeters use is made of the low thermal diffusivity of water, which
enables the temperature rise to be measured directly at a point in (continuous) water.
Dose transfer procedures are not needed, but the measurement and analysis are
complicated by the presence of conductive heat loss (or gain) and by the heat defect
induced by radiolysis.

Figure 1: standard water calorimeter.

Water calorimetry in stagnant water is fundamentally possible due to the fact that the
thermal diffusivity of water is so low that the temperature distribution remains in place to
enable accurate measurements at a point. Hence, in stagnant water calorimeters a

28
measured temperature rise TW is measured at a point and multiplication with the specific
heat capacity of water CW leads immediately to absorbed dose to water at that point.
However, practical determination of absorbed dose to water is complicated by effects that
can be categorized as either fundamental or technical. Fundamental effects are those that
potentially disturb the energy balance between absorbed energy and energy appearing as
a temperature rise. Technical issues are those that complicate a correct measurement of
the water temperature rise. Both these effects are usually treated as correction factors in
the dose equation. a water calorimeter determination of absorbed dose to water can be
thus based on the following generic equation:
DW  CW ,PTK h K hd K p K dd K 
(3.29)
Where CW,P is the specific heat capacity of water at constant pressure; T is the measured
thermistor temperature rise; Khd is the correction for the heat defect h (i.e. equal to 1/(1 −
h), where h represents the heat defect ); Kh is a general heat transfer correction factor,
which can result from conductive or convective modes of heat transfer; Kp is a
perturbation correction factor to account for the absorption and scattering of radiation due
to the presence of non-water materials; Kdd is a dose profile correction factor that corrects
the measured dose to the dose at the reference point and Kρ is a density correction factor
to account for the difference in density between the calorimeter operation temperature
and the temperature at which another detector (such as an ionization chamber) is
calibrated(Jan seuntjens and Simon Duane 2009) .
3.11.2 Fricke dosimetry:

The energy of ionizing radiation absorbed in certain media produces chemical change in
the absorbing medium, the amount of this change used as a measure of absorbed dose.
Fricke dosimetry which relies on oxidation of ferrous ions ferric ions produced in the
solution is measured by absorption spectrometry which ultraviolet light at 304 nm which
is strongly absorbed by the ferric ions.

29
Fricke dosimetry (sometimes referred to as chemical dosimetry or ferrous sulphate
dosimetry) depends on an accurate knowledge of the radiation chemical yield of ferric
ions, measured in moles produced per 1 J of energy absorbed in the solution. The
chemical yield is related to an older parameter, the G value, defined as the number of
ferric molecules produced in the ferrous sulphate solution by 100 eV of absorbed energy.
An accurate value of the chemical yield is difficult to ascertain because the chemical
yield is affected to a certain degree by the energy of the radiation, dose rate and
60
temperature of the solution during irradiation and readout. The best G value for Co g
rays is 15.6 molecules per 100 eV, corresponding to a chemical yield of 1.607 × 10–6
mol/J. The typical dynamic range for ferrous sulphate Fricke dosimeters is from a few
grays to about 400 Gy, making Fricke dosimetry impractical for routine use in a clinic.

3.11.3 Ionization chamber dosimetry:

The ionization chamber is the most practical and most widely used type of dosimeter for
accurate measurement of machine output in radiotherapy. It may be used as an absolute
or relative dosimetry.
It is sensitive volume is usually filled with ambient air. And the dose or dose rate related
measured quantities are the ionization charge Q or ionization current I respectively
produced by radiation in the chamber sensitive air mass m air. Charge Q and air mass m
are related to absorbed dose in air D by:

Q Wair 
D 
m air  e 
(3.30)

 W air 
 
Where  e  is the mean energy required to produce an ion pair in air per unit charge
(the current value for dry air is 33.97 eV/ion pair or 33.97 J/C). The subsequent

30
conversion of the air cavity dose Dair to dose to medium (usually water) DW is based on
the Bragg–Gray or Spencer–Attix cavity Theories
The sensitive air volume or mass in an ionization chamber is determined:

 Directly by measurement (the chamber becomes an absolute dosimeter under

special circumstances);

 Indirectly through calibration of the chamber response in a known radiation

field (the chamber is used as a relative dosimeter).
3.12 Reference dosimetry with ionization chamber:

Three types of ionization chamber are used in reference dosimetry as absolute dosimetry

 Standard free air ionization chamber

 Cavity ionization chamber

 Phantom embedded extrapolation chamber

3.12.1 Standard free air ionization chamber:

This chamber measure the air kerma in air according to its definition by collecting all
ions produced by the radiation beam that result from the direct transfer of energy from
photons to primary electrons in a defined volume in air, the determination of air kerma

 W air 
 
required accurate knowledge about  e  , the use of the standard free air ionization
chamber is limited to photons below 0.3 MeV

31
Figure 3.2: a Schematic diagram of a free-air chamber. Photons enter through an aperture
of radius rap and interact with the air of the chamber to produce secondary electrons (e1,
e2, e3). If the electrode separation d is sufficiently large, the secondary electrons come to
rest within the chamber. In the course of slowing down, charge is liberated and is swept
in the electric field between the electrodes. An isolated section of electrode creates a
region of air of length l (shaded) from which charge is collected and measured as
ionization current(D T Burn and L Buermann.2009).

3.12.2Cavity ionization chamber:

This chamber measure the air kerma for energies in the range from 0.6 to 1.5 MeV by
making use of the Bragg gray cavity relationship to standard free air ionization chambers.
The measurements required accurate knowledge of the sensitive air volume.

3.12.3Phantom embedded extrapolation chambers:

This chamber is un calibrated variable air volume extrapolation chamber built as an

integral part a water equivalent phantom. And it serves as radiation dosimeters in the
measurement of absorbed dose for megavoltage photon and electron beam.
Ionization chamber based dosimetry system:

32
Ionization chamber based dosimetry systems are in principle quite simple and consist of
three main components:

1. a suitable ionization chamber;

2. An electrometer

3. a power supply.

The circuitry of a simple ionization chamber based dosimetry system resembles a

capacitor (ionization chamber) connected to a battery (power supply), with the
electrometer measuring the ‘capacitor’ charging or discharging current.
Two types of ionization chamber are used in routine beam calibration:

1. Cylindrical (often referred to as thimble) chambers;

2. Parallel-plate (sometimes called end window or plane-parallel) chambers

For each ionization chamber, reference conditions are described by a set of influence
quantities for which a chamber calibration coefficient is valid without any further
corrections. Influence quantities are defined as quantities that are not the subject of a
measurement but yet influence the quantity being measured. Examples of influence
quantities in ionization chamber dosimetry are:

1. Ambient temperature and pressure

2. Ion recombination

3. Polarity effect

33
Outputs of clinical photon and beams are usually measured with ionization chambers that
have calibration coefficients traceable to a standards laboratory and are thus used as
relative dosimeters.
Before such a chamber is used in radiotherapy machine output calibration, the user must
identify a dosimetry protocol (code of practice) appropriate for the given radiation beam.
A dosimetry protocol provides the formalism and the data to relate a calibration of a
chamber at a standards laboratory to the measurement of absorbed dose to water under
reference conditions in the Clinical beam. Two types of dosimetry protocol are available:
● Protocols based on air kerma in air calibration coefficients;
● Protocols based on absorbed dose to water calibration coefficients
Most current megavoltage dosimetry protocols rely on chamber calibration coefficients
determined in Co-60 beams at standards laboratories. It is expected that the use of
megavoltage beam calibration qualities (X rays and electrons), today available only in a
few PSDLs, will become more widespread in the future.
It should be noted that the formalisms presented here, based on aCo-60 calibration
coefficient, work well for megavoltage photon and electron beams. The calibration of
superficial and orthovoltage X ray beams, on the other hand, relies on different principles
and the chamber calibration coefficient should be obtained for the particular X ray beam
quality that is being calibrated(IAEA2003)E.D podgorsak.E).
3.13 Air kerma based protocol:

Air kerma based protocols use the air kerma in air calibration coefficient NK, Co-60
obtained for a local reference ionization chamber in a Co-60 beam at a standards
laboratory. Routine ionization chambers are then cross-calibrated with the reference
ionization chamber in a local Co-60 beam. Two steps are involved in an air kerma based
protocol for the calibration of megavoltage photon beam.

34
A formalism based on an air kerma calibration of the user, ionization chamber is
recommended. It is recommended that the transfer be carried out according to the
procedure of calibration

The cavity air calibration coefficient N D,air is defined as:

Dair ,Co
N D, air 
M Co (3.31)
Where
Dair,Co It’s the absorbed dose to air in the chamber cavity.
MCo it’s the chamber signal corrected for influence quantities.
The absorbed dose to air in the cavity Dair,Co is determined from the total air kerma in air
(Kair)air as follows:
Dair ,co  K air air 1  g  K m  K att
(3.32)
Where

•g is the radiative fraction, i.e., the fraction of the total transferred energy expended in
radiative interactions on the slowing down of the secondary electrons in air.
• Km corrects for the non-air equivalence of the chamber wall and Buildup cap needed for
an air kerma in air measurement.
• Katt corrects for attenuation and scatter in the chamber wall.
The air kerma in air calibration coefficient N K,Co is:

K air air
N K ,Co
= M Co (3.33)
Dair ,CO  K air air 1  g  K m K att
(3.34)

The cavity air calibration coefficient ND,air is now:

35
 N D , air N K ,Co 1  g  K m K att
(3.35)
=
The absorbed dose to water at the point of interest can be calculated using:

DW Peff   Dair ,u SW ,air u Pu

(3.36)
Where (SW,air)u is the stopping power ratio water to air
And the absorbed dose to water is:

DW  M u N D SW ,air u
(3.37)
The above calculations is for Co-60 and for X-ray the absorbed dose can be calculated
from


DW  M u N K K u  en 
  W ,air
(3.38)
For medium energy and

DW  M u N K BK u 
 en 
  W ,air
(3.39)
For low energy (IAEA 1987)

3.14 Absorbed dose to water based protocol:

All dosimetry protocols aim at determination of the quantity absorbed dose to water. It is
therefore logical to provide ionization chambers directly with a calibration coefficient in
terms of this quantity, rather than in terms of the air kerma in air, if at all possible. Recent
developments have provided support for a change in the quantity used at present to
calibrate ionization chambers and provide calibration coefficients in terms of absorbed
dose to water ND,W for use in radiotherapy beams. Many PSDLs now provide ND,W

36
calibrations in60Co gamma ray beams and some laboratories have already extended these
calibration procedures to high energy photon and electron beams.
.Cobalt-60 calibration coefficients for megavoltage photon and electron beam. And
Calibration coefficients obtained for the particular beam quality used for superficial and
orthovoltage x-ray beams.
Calibration in a quality Qo beam (usually cobalt-60) at the standards laboratory:

DW ,Q0  M Q0 NW .Q0
(3.40)
Where MQ0 is the chamber reading under the reference conditions used in the standards
laboratory and corrected for influence quantities and NW,Q0 is the water dose calibration
coefficient for the chamber at beam quality Q0 (usually cobalt-60).
3.15 Estimating the uncertainty:

The uncertainty associated with a measurement is a parameter that characterizes the

dispersion of the values ‘that could reasonably be attributed to the measurand’ this
parameter is normally an estimated standard deviation. An uncertainty, therefore, has no
known sign and is usually assumed to be symmetrical. It is a measure of our lack of exact
knowledge after all recognized
An uncertainty may be estimated by some known statistical method (Type A) or
otherwise (Type B). This distinction is mainly of pedagogical relevance and can be
dropped once the numerical values for the uncertainties have been chosen. The Type A
standard uncertainty is obtained by the usual statistical analysis of repeated
measurements. It is not expected that a Type A standard uncertainty will be determined
individually for each instrument calibrated, but rather that representative values will be
obtained from a number of typical calibrations. It is normally found that the
reproducibility of each dosimeter model is essentially the same from one instrument to
the next. Thus, if the Type A standard uncertainty of an air kerma rate measurement is

37
determined for one kind of dosimeter, the same value can generally be used for other
instruments of that same model, measured under the same conditions.
There are many sources of measurement uncertainty that cannot be estimated by repeated
measurements. These are called Type B uncertainties. These include not only unknown,
although suspected, influences on the measurement process, but also little known effects
of influence quantities (pressure, temperature, etc.), application of correction factors or
physical data taken from literature. The Type B standard uncertainty can be derived by
first estimating some limits ±L and then dividing that limit by a suitable number. Some
times Type B uncertainties can be described by a rectangular probability density, i.e. that
they have equal probability anywhere within the given maximum limits –M and +M. It
can be shown that with this assumption the Type B standard uncertainty uB is given by:
M
uB 
3 (3.41)
And if the assumed distribution is triangular (with the same limits), the above relation
becomes:
M
uB 
6 (3.42)
Thus there are no rigid rules for estimating type B uncertainty and we should use our best
knowledge and experiences, and whatever method applied, provide estimates that can be
used as if they were standard deviations (IAEA 2000).
Type A and Type B uncertainties are both estimated standard deviations, they are
combined by using the statistical rules for combining variances (which are squares of
standard deviations).

38
 CHAPTER FOUR
MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study measurements were carried out in two irradiation facilities: the part on
ionization chamber calibration was carried out at the Secondary Standard Dosimetry
Laboratory of Sudan Atomic Energy Commission whereas beam output calibrations for a
cobalt-60 radiotherapy unit were performed at the National Cancer Institute, University
of Gazira.
4.1 Secondary Standard Dosimetry Laboratory:

The Secondary Standard Dosimetry Laboratory (SSDL) of Sudan atomic energy

commission was installed on 1995 under supervision of the International Atomic Energy
Agency. The laboratory is located in Suba, 15 Km distant from Khartoum in the premises
of Sudan Atomic Energy Commission. It was designated by the competent national
authorities to undertake the duties of ionizing radiation calibrations and standardization
of dose measurements within the country. The laboratory is equipped with devices for
improving accuracy and precision in applied radiation dosimetry used throughout the
country. SSDL consist of gamma calibrators OB-85 and X-ray unit producing ISO 4037
radiation energies of the narrow beam series (N-40, N-60, N80, N100, N120, N150) Two
moving trays were positioned in fixed metal tracks to allow the irradiation from the three
sources at different distances in a reproducible way. A laser system was positioned on the
right hand side of the calibration tray allowing for the accurate positioning of the
reference point of the instrument at a specified distance, and a second laser system, was
used for the alignment of the instrument according to the beam axis. The dosimeters
readings were viewed via a camera, which was coupled to a parallel display in the control
area. Two other cameras were positioned in the calibration room to provide for area
surveillance monitoring. Ionization chambers, electrometers, a gamma-calibrator unit,
and x-ray generator are used for different calibration purposes. During the calibration, the

39
reference gamma radiation was provided by a Cs-137 and Co-60 sources irradiator (OB-
85, is circular, with a diameter 50 cm at a distance of 2 m from the source) OB-85
containing three sources Co-60, Cs-137 and external Am-241 with activity 37 GBq, 740
GBq, 7.4 GBq, respectively. Sources Irradiator is supplied with a set of lead attenuators
with thickness of 2 , 1.8 cm that are placed at the exit window of the irradiator to vary
the air Kerma that is required to cover the instrument scales at a particular calibration
distance. The arrangement for air kerma measurements using reference ionization
chamber used from OB-85 gamma calibrator is shown in Figure 4.1.

40
Figure 4.1. Air kerma measurements using reference ionization chamber used from OB-
85 gamma calibrator.

41
Measurements were also performed at University of Gezira, National Cancer Institute in
60
a Co machine type cirus manufactured by Eric ROUCHON. This machine has the
following specifications: Source model: CoT20; S/N: 4273; Radionuclide: Co-60
Contained activity: 254.9 TBq ( 6890 Ci).
4.1.2 Ionization chambers and dosimetry system:
Five ionization chambers were used in this study three were radiation protection level
whereas two were therapy level ionization chambers.

1. Spherical 1 liter chamber LS-01 type 32002 with PTW electrometer. with
polarizing voltage 400 V(max),wall material from POM (CH2O)n, electrode
material graphite coated energy ranged from 45 keV to 50 MeV

2. 2575 600 cc Thin window ionization chamber with farmer electrometer

manufactured by nuclear technology, England. Wall material SRBP, collecting
electrode material is polypropylene, graphite coated. And the chamber has
additional three windows A,B and C made of clear melinex that are used for
different energies

3. Radcal 1800 cc cylindrical ionization chamber with Radcal electrometer intended

for low dose radiation. This chamber can be used in the energy ranged from 33
keV to 1.33 Me. Bias (300 VDC-600 VDC), wall material is polycarbonate.

Characteristics of cylindrical ionization chamber types (as stated by manufacturers) are

presented in Table 3.1.

42
Table 3.1. Characteristics of cylindrical ionization chamber types as stated by the
manufacturers.

Ionization chamber type PTW 30010 Farmer PTW 31003 flexible

Cavity volume(cm3) 0.6 0.3

Cavity length(mm) 23 16.3

Cavity radius(mm) 3.1 2.8

Wall material PMMA PMMA

Wall thickness(g cm-2) 0.045 0.078

Build-up cap material PMMA PMMA

Build-up cap thickness(g 0.541 0.357

cm-2)

Central electrode material aluminum aluminum

Waterproof No Yes

4.1.3 Phantoms and other devices:

In dosimetry system there were many devices to be used in additional to the ionization
chambers such as thermometer and barometer for measuring the temperature and pressure
used for the correction reading of electrometer. There are also phantom
(PMMA)10X10X5 with hole for holing ionization chamber, radioactive check sources
suitable for each chamber (90Sr and 241Am).

43
4.2 Experimental setup:
The calibration of ionization chamber was performed at secondary standard dosimetry
137
laboratory at Sudan Atomic Energy Commission in Cs gamma ray beam and narrow
X-ray series (N40, N60, N80, N100, N120, and N150). The measurements of secondary
standard ionization chamber type LS-01were taken in charge mode and subsequently
converted to air kerma using the appropriate calibration factor. All measurements were
carried out at 2 m distance from the relevant sources ( 137Cs source contained in a gamma
calibrator OB-85 and X-ray beam series previously specified. Prior to any measurement,
stability measurements were performed using radioactive check source (241Am).
Measurements of ambient conditions (temperature and pressure) were done during the
experiment. Measurements of the ion recombination and polarity effect were made
according to the formulae 4.1-4.3:
2
 u1  1
 u 
Kion   22
 u1   M 1
 u 
 2  M2 (4.1)

M  M
KP 
2M (4.2)

 T  273.2  P 
KTP    
 
T  273.2  P  (4.3)
For farmer ionization chamber and radcal the measurements were performed similar to
those with spherical ionization chamber at all qualities and conditions with all available
corrections.
The calculations of air kerma to all ionization chambers were performed utilizing the
formula:

K air  MN K K TP K ion K p
(4.4)
Where M was the electrometer reading in (nC/min).
44
NK is the calibration factor of chamber from its certificate
KTP correction for temperature and pressure
Kion correction for ion recombination
Kp correction for polarity effect.
The uncertainties of these measurements were estimated using:

 U M    U K pr    U KT    U K ion    U K P    U K d  
2 2 2 2 2 2

U K air               U N K 
2

 M   K pr   KT   K ion   K P   K d 

(3.43)
Where U(M)/M is the uncertainty of the reading, U(Kpr)/Kpr for pressure, U(KT)/KT for
temperature ,U(Kion)/Kion for ion recombination, U(KP)/KP for polarity effect, U(Kd)/Kd
for distance and the factor U(NK) is for calibration factors of the ionization chamber from
its certificate.
The calibration factor of the ionization chamber at reference was calculated according to:
M ref K ref
N K  N ref
M K KK (4.5)
Where Nref is the calibration factor of the reference ionization chamber from the
certificate
Mref and Kref are the reading and correction for the reference chamber
MK and KK are the reading and correction for the other chamber

Thus calibration factors of farmer and radcal ionization chambers were calculated for all
qualities using:
M
Cf 
m (4.6)
Where (M): is reading of secondary standard ionization chamber (spherical) and (m) the
reading of farmer or Radcal ionization chamber.
Concerning therapy level ionization chambers, and 0.6 cc ionization chamber was
calibrated in term of air kerma and absorbed dose to water whereas 0.3 cc ionization
45
chamber was only calibrated in terms of air kerma. Measurements were carried out using
20x20x10 cm water phantom at a reference depth of 5 cm, field size 10x10, and source to
surface distance (SSD) of 80 cm. The electrometer readings were corrected for ion
recombination, temperature, and pressure and polarity effect. The calculations of
absorbed dose to water according to TRS-277 and TRS-398 were performed using
relevant IAEA dosimetry protocol: initially absorbed dose to water at reference point of
60
Co beam were made according to IAEA TRS-277:
DW  M u N D S w,air Pu
(4.7)
N D  N K 1  g K att K m
Where (4.8)
60
Next, the absorbed dose to water at reference point of Co beam was made IAEA
according to protocol TRS-398:
DW Z ref   MN D , w
(4.9)

46
 CHAPTER FIVE
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
5.1 Results

The results obtained are presented in this chapter. These include quality assurance
measurements, beam output calibration measurements, measurements performed for ion
chamber calibrations and uncertainty analysis.

5.1.1 Beam output measurements:

137
Results of measurements of air kerma rate at different distances from Cs source are
presented graphically in the Figure 5.1. A linear relationship is observed between the air
kerma rate and the reciprocal of distance square according to the inverse square law. The
standard deviation of the measured mean air kerma rate is shown as error bars.
Results of measurements of air kerma rate at 2 m distance from three X-ray beam
qualities are presented in Table 5.1. The measured output ranged from 69 µGy/min to
178 µGy/min at 60 and 80 tube voltages; respectively. Variation of tube output between
different X-ray beam qualities is attributed to the different filtration used.

47
 137
Figure 5.1 a graph show output measurements of Cs at different distances and the
kerma rate range from few µGy to 550 µGy.
Table 5.1 output for ISO 4037 X-ray qualities

Quality Effective Energy Output

(kV/mA) (keV) (µGy/min) at 2 m
40/10 33 68.7
60/6 48 176.86
80/19 65 178.49
100/19 83 106.5
120/19 100 135.25
150/3 116 118.51

48
5.1.2 Spherical reference standard chamber

For accurate measurements of air kerma rate using an ionisation chambers ion
recombination and polarity effect should be measured and subsequently applied.
Measurements of these correction factors for spherical 1000 cc reference standard
ionization chamber are presented in Table 5.2.
The calculated air kerma and the related correction factors for spherical reference
chamber are presented in Table 5.3.
The measurements were performed by multiplying the corrected electrometer reading in
(nC) by the calibration factor NX (µGy/nC) of the chamber taken from the calibration
certificate according to equation 4.4. These measurements consider as a reference reading
at SSDL for routine calibration of the all instruments being calibrated in Sudan. The
results of uncertainity of the measurement evaluated at 95% confidence level are
presented in Table 5.4
The calculated of air kerma (kair ± Uexp) for (33, 48, 65, 83,100,116 and 662 KeV) were
(65.23±2.166), (186.77±6.065), (188.34±6.048), (111.02±3.567), (137.82±4.535),
(126.41±4.037) and (148.69±4.742); respectively.

Table 5.2 measurements for the determination of ion recombination an polarity

effect of spherical 1000 cc secondary standard ionization chamber

137
Quality Q40/10 Q 60/6 Q80/10 Q100/19 Q120/19 Q150/13 Cs
Energy 33 48 65 83 100 116 662
V1 400 400 400 400 400 400 400
V2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
M1 2.4 7.4 7.3 4.4 5.5 4.8 5.35
M2 2.3 7.4 7.3 4.41 5.7 4.8 5.33
M_ 2.5 7.35 7 3.89 5 4.75 5.36
M+ 2.4 7.4 7.2 4.1 5.5 4.78 5.35

49
V1 : normal operating voltage

V2 : reduced voltage value

M1 : electrometer reading at the normal operating voltage, V1

M2 : electrometer reading at the reduced operating voltage, V2

M- : electrometer reading at the reverse bias normal operating voltage, V1

M+ : electrometer reading at the normal operating voltage, V1

Table 5.3: Calculation of air kerma and correction factors for spherical 1000 cc
secondary standard ionization chamber
137
Quality Q 40/10 Q 60/6 Q80/10 Q100/19 Q120/19 Q150/13 Cs
Energy
(keV) 33 48 65 83 100 116 662
Readings 2.39 7.33 7.41 4.40 5.57 4.84 5.50
Nx 25.00 23.90 24.10 24.20 24.30 24.50 25.10
Ktp 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.08
Kp 1.02 0.99 0.99 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00
Kion 1.0002 0.995 1 0.999 0.997 1 1.000
µGy/min 65.23 186.77 188.34 111.02 137.82 126.41 148.69
Nx calibration factors of spherical chamber from certificate
Ktp correction for temperature and pressure
Kp correction for polarity effect

50
Table 5.4:the uncertainty of calculation air kerma by spherical ionization chamber.

137
quality 40/10 60/6 80/10 100/19 120/19 150/3 Cs
U(M)/M 0.010 0.006 0.002 0.001 0.006 0.001 0.001
U(T) 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020
U(P) 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004
U(ION) 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017
U(PO) 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.018 0.017 0.017
U(D) 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
U(Nk) 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002
U(kair) 0.033 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.033 0.032 0.032
U*Kair 2.166 6.065 6.048 3.567 4.535 4.037 4.742

51
5.1.3 Working standard cylindrical chamber

Measurements for the determination of polarity effect of 600 cc cylindrical chamber with
2526 farmer electrometer are presented in Table 5.5 The results of air kerma rate
calculated according to IAEA TRS 277 are presented in Table 5.6
Table 5.5,5.6 and 5.7 show polarity effect measurements, air kerma rate calculations and
the uncertainty a combined with these measurements by 600 cc farmer ionization
chamber for different energies (33, 48, 65, 83,100,116 and 662 KeV). The air kerma
rates were (43±2.122), (163.9±7.919), (153.5±7.412), (91±4.485), (125.7±6.071),
(103.9±6.158), (126.2±6.116) respectively. The ratio of air kerma rate from farmer by
that from spherical secondary standard ionization chamber were calculated for
calculations the calibration factors of each beams. In these measurements the air kerma
calculation were done also by multiplying the corrected electrometer reading (nC) by the
chamber sensitivity (m Gy/nC)

52
Table 5.5 Measurements for the determination of polarity effect of cylindrical chamber

Quality Q40/10 Q 60/6 Q80/10 Q100/19 Q120/19 Q150/13 137Cs

Effective Energy
(keV) 33 48 65 83 100 116 662
m- 0.93 3.47 3.25 1.9 2.66 2.69 2.67
m+ 0.93 3.45 3.24 1.97 2.65 2.69 2.68

M- : electrometer reading at the reverse bias normal operating voltage

M+ : electrometer reading at the normal operating voltage

Table 5.6 Calculation of air kerma and correction factors for of 600 cc cylindrical chamber
137
Beam Quality Q40/10 Q60/6 Q80/10 Q100/19 Q120/19 Q150/13 Cs
Effective
Energy (keV) 33 48 65 83 100 116 662
Reading (nC) 0.93 3.46 3.25 1.97 2.66 2.70 2.68
Nx (µGy/nC) 43.73 43.73 43.73 43.73 43.73 43.73 43.73
Ktp 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08
Kp 1 1.003 1.002 0.982 1.002 1 0.998
Kair (µGy/min) 43.87 163.97 153.47 91.17 125.73 127.32 126.16

Nx : calibration factors of farmer chamber from certificate.

Ktp : correction for temperature and pressure.
Kp : correction for polarity effect

Table 5.7 Calculated uncertainty in the air kerma measurements

53
 137
arameter Q40 Q60 Q80 Q100 Q120 Q150 Cs
U(M)/M 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.001 0.001 0.002
U(T)/T 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019
U(P)/P 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004
U(Nk) 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004
U(d) 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
U(Po) 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.045 0.044 0.044 0.044
U(Kair) 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.049 0.048 0.048 0.048
U*Kair 2.122 7.919 7.412 4.485 6.071 6.158 6.116

54
5.1.4 Radcal working standard ionization chamber:

Table 5.8: Calculation of air kerma for 1800 cc Radcal ionization chamber
137
Quality Q 40/10 Q 60/6 Q80/10 Q100/19 Q120/19 Q150/13 Cs
Energy 33 48 65 83 100 116 662
Reading(mGy/h) 2.498 9.906 9.324 5.452 7.86 7.162 7.9
Reading(µGy/min) 41.63333 165.1 155.4 90.86667 131 119.3667 131.6667
Ktp 1.062796 1.0627 1.0627 1.0627 1.0627 1.0627 1.081964
µ Gy/min 44.25 175.45 165.14 96.56 139.21 126.85 142.46

Table 5.9: calculations of uncertainty for air kerma by Radcal ionization chamber

quality Q40 Q60 Q80 Q100 Q120 Q150 137Cs

U(M)/M 0.012 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.002
U(T)/T 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020
U(P)/P 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004
U(Nk) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
U(d) 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
U(Kair) 0.026 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023
U*Kair 1.148 4.075 3.829 2.236 3.222 2.951 3.304

Table 5.8 and 5.9 show air kerma calculations with their correction by Radcal ionization
chamber for different energies (33, 48, 65, 83,100,116 and 662 KeV), and the air kerma
rate were (44.25±1.148), (175±4.075), (165.14±3.829), (96.56±2.236), (139.21±3.222),
(126.85±2.951) and (142.46±3.304) respectively. And the ratio of air kerma rate, arising

55
from radcal ionization chamber to that from spherical secondary standard ionization
chamber, were calculated to evaluate the calibration factors

5.1.5 Determination of the calibration coefficients

Calibration factors of cylindrical and Radcal ionization chamber obtained by dividing

the air kerma rate of secondary standard ionization chamber by that from cylindrical
and Radcal are presented in Table 5.10 with regard to the two working standard
ionisation chambers and considering all energies, optimum factor was shown in 116
keV i.e. 150 tube voltage X-ray beam quality using Radcal ionization chamber. As can
be seen from the Table 5.10, the calibration factor for the cylindrical ionization
chamber in all energies were extremely high in some X-ray beam qualities and do not
conform with the relevant international recommendations. Concurrently, appropriate
calibration factor was evident in 120 X-ray tube voltage (100 keV).
Based on the results obtained, Radcal ionization chamber showed good performance for
low energy beam qualities compared to the cylindrical ionization chamber.

56
Table 5.10. The calculated Nk factor for two working standard ionization chambers

Beam Effective Air kerma (µ Gy/min) NK for NK for

Energy Cylindrical Radcal
Quality(kV) Reference Cylindrical Radcal
(KeV) chamber chamber
chamber chamber chamber

40 33 65.23 43 44.25 1.52 1.47

60 48 186.77 163.9 175.45 1.14 1.06

80 65 188.34 153.5 165.14 1.23 1.14

100 83 111.02 91 96.56 1.22 1.15

120 100 137.82 125.7 139.21 1.10 0.99

150 116 126.41 103.9 126.85 1.22 1.00

137
Cs 662 148.69 126.2 142.46 1.18 1.04

57
5.1.6 Therapy level ionisation chambers

Table 5.11 presents the results of absorbed to water measurements using two therapy
level type PTW ionization chambers for 60Co beam. Measurements were made according
to international code of practice – IAEA TRS-277 based on air kerma calibration
standards.
Beam output was measured in term of air kerma at 80 cm SSD, the field size 10x10 and 5
cm depth. According to air kerma based protocol (TRS-277), measurements were
performed by calculating the absorbed dose to air (Dair ) and then the absorbed dose to
water ( DW ) utilizing the formalism given in the protocol.
Table 5.12 presents the results of absorbed dose to water measurements using 0.3 cc
60
therapy level type PTW ionization chambers for Co beam. Measurements were made
according to international code of practice – IAEA TRS-398 based on absorbed dose to
water standards. Beam output was measured in term of absorbed dose to water using the
formalism of absorbed dose water based protocol.

58
Table 5.11 Results of absorbed dose to water measurements using TRS-277.

0.3 cc Farmer type

chamber chamber 0.6 cc Farmer type chamber
reading 13.23 7.12
Kion 0.99 1.0
Kp 1.01 1.02
NK(Gy/n C) 1.08 1.07
Km.Katt 0.048 0.09
g 0.98 0.98
ND(Gy/n C) 0.003 0.01
Sw,air 1.13 1.13
Pu 0.99 1.001
Dw(eff) 0.76 0.74

Table5.12 Results of absorbed dose to water measurements usingTRS-398

Reading
(nC) Kion Kp Ktp ND(Gy/nc) Dw(eff)
13.234 0.998521 1.011364 1.077726 0.05 0.720169

59
5.2 Discussion:

5.2.1Calibration of working standards:

In this study two working standard ionization chambers were calibrated using secondary
standard ionization chamber. This was performed as a part of traceability of
measurements. Based on current measurement results, the determined calibration
coefficient ranged from 0.99-1.52 these chambers performed adequately and satisfy
international recommendations for calibration procedures and radiation dosimetry.
Determination of any reference field used for the calibration of dosemeters under certain
conditions can be achieved by selecting a suitable quantity of the operational radiation
protection. This requires the use of suitable and traceably calibrated secondary standard
dosemeters (Peter Ambroshi 2009). In this study a quantity being used in the calibration
of the ionization chamber was the air kerma which related to the operational quantities by
conversion coefficients. For low and medium energy dosimetry the calibration of
dosimeters performed is based on air kerma standards. The uncertainty specified for the
secondary standard dosemeter is sufficiently small for the purpose of calibrating the
reference field. In calibration of ionization chamber, measurements performed are
combined with relevant uncertainties. In this study, uncertainties were evaluated in the
calculation of beam output in terms of the physical quantity air kerma rate and also
uncertainties in the calibration factor determined. The uncertainty values in air kerma rate
measurements ranged from 1.15 to 7.9 for all beam qualities. These are expanded
uncertainty (over all uncertainty) evaluated at 95% confidence level (two standard
deviations) .

60
 5.2.2 Radiotherapy beam output calibration:

Based on the internationally accepted protocols for radiation dose measurements in

radiotherapy, radiation dose rely on many factors such as backscatter, the percentage dose
depth distribution, the uncertainty components and the formalism of used to determine
the absorbed dose to water as most recently developed procedures but also already
existing air kerma based standards. The results obtained in the present study
demonstrated that the the absorbed dose to water measured using IAEA air kerma based
protocol was well within 5 % deviation from the absorbed dose to water measured using
IAEA absorbed dose to water based protocol measured using 0.3 cc therapy level
ionisation chamber. The result clearly envisaged that both protocols can be used for
teletherapy beam output calibration with accuracy recommended. However,
measurements of absorbed dose to water more straightforward when using absorbed to
water based protocols as demonstrated elsewhere. The two ionization chambers used
were cylindrical type which is suitable for reference dosimetry in high energy photon
beam. The preference of absorbed dose to water based protocols such as IAEA TRS 398
come from the fact that the formalism for absorbed dose to water calculation using TRS-
277 has many parameters which makes the calculation somewhat complicated. These
problems were clearly addressed in the new and recently developed absorbed dose to
water protocols. Beam output measurements for Co-60 radiotherapy machine can be used
as a reference for future beam output calibration at the specified radiotherapy centre.

61
 CHAPTER SIX

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Calibration coefficients were determined for two working standard ionization chambers.
This offered the possibility of using three ionization chambers for routine beam output
measurements and calibration for all instruments being calibrated at SSDL in Sudan.
Uncertainties of measuring air kerma were estimated for all photon beam qualities and
for all ionization chambers.
Measuring of beam output in term of air kerma rate using secondary standard ionization
chamber and beam output for Co-60 radiotherapy beam in term of absorbed dose to water
was performed as a part of dose standardization and beam output calibration.
We proposed for any laboratories be continue in quality control and implementation of
quality system according to ISO recommendations such as ISO 17025.
As result of this study we recommend that:

 The authority has a rule to govern quality in radiation measurements

 In presence of all dosimetry tools researcher can expand their studies in ionization
chamber dosimetry

 In our country we have two centres for radiotherapy till now so the need for quality
is a priority

 Quality of measurements in radiation protection is required

 Available radiation sources(lineac,60Co and other sources) and radiation

equipments encourage and motivate the researchers to doing hard in their
research.

 Use of different protocols in the measurements and the select suitable one for being
the main procedures.

62
REFERENCES:

1- D.Jurado,T eudaldo,P carrasco, N jornet,A ruiz and M ribas,2005. Performance

assessment and dose determination using IAEA TRS-398 protocol The British
Journal of Radiology. 78 (2005), 721–732

2- D T Burn and L Buermann.(2009) Free-air ionization chamber. Metrologia 46-

S9–S23

3- Durham James(2007) Concept, quantities and dose limits in radiation protection

dosimetry.radiation measurements 41.S28-S35

4- Frank Attex (1986). Introduction to Radiological Physics and Radiation

Dosimetry, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH&Co.KGaA,Weinheim.

5- Fujio Araki and H.Dale kubo (2002).Comparison of high energy photon and
electron dosimetry for various dosimetry protocols.Med Phys29(5).S857-S868

GX Ding and J.E.and C.B.Kwok (2000). Clinical Reference dosimetry:-

6-
Comparison between AAPM TG21and TG51, Med.Phys.27 (6).

7- IAEA (2004). Absorbed dose determination in external beam radiotherapy: an

international code of practice for dosimetry based on standard absorbed dose to
water. IAEA TRS No.398, IAEA, Vienna.

8- IAEA (2003 ) International atomic energy agency. Review of radiation oncology

physics: a hand book for student and teacher. Ed. E.D podgorsak.E. IAEA,
Vienna.

63
9- IAEA (2000). Calibration of radiation protection monitoring instruments. IAEA
Safety Reports Series No.16, IAEA, Vienna.

10- IAEA(1999). Report of third research co-ordination meeting, development of a

quality assurance program for SSDLs.

11- IAEA(1987). Absorbed dose determination in photon and electron beams, an

international code of practice. IAEA TRS. No.277. IAEA, Vienna.

12- Jan Seuntjens, Jan Seuntjens, A Marina Olivares, Michael Evans, and Ervin
Podgorsak , ( 2005). Absorbed dose to water reference dosimetry using solid
phantoms in the context of absorbed-dose protocols Department of Medical
Physics, McGill University Health Centre, 1650 Cedar , Montreal, H3G 1A4,
Canada Med, Ph, Vol. 32, No. 9

13- Jan seuntjens and Simon Duane (2009). Photon absorbed dose standard.
Metrologia 46 (2009) S39–S58.

14- M. Saiful Huq and Pedro Andreo( 2000). Comparison of the AAPM TG-51 and
AAPM TG-21 dosimetry protocols.Med Phys.28(1)

15- PTW Freiburg (1996). Instruction manual.PTW-UNDOSE, universal dosimeter,

firmware No.2.20

16- Peter Ambrosi( 2009). Radiation protection and environmental standards.

Metrologia 46 (2009) S99–S111

64
17- Vargas Castrillóna and Francisco Cutanda Henríquez( 2008).Comparison of
(IPSM 1990) code of practice with IAEA (TRS-398) and AAPM (TG-51). Journal
of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. Vol. 10,1.

18- Wernli Christian (2004) Operational quantities and their measurement.11th

international congress of the International Radiation Protection Association
(IRPA). 2004. Madrid, refresher course RC-3b.paul schererr institute 5232
villgen, Switzerland.

65