Objective:The aim of this study was to measure the leakage by two methods with ion chamber and ready packs film,and to investigate the feasibility and the advantages of using two dosimetry methods for assessing leakag...Objective:The aim of this study was to measure the leakage by two methods with ion chamber and ready packs film,and to investigate the feasibility and the advantages of using two dosimetry methods for assessing leakage radiation around the head of the linear accelerators.Methods:Measurements were performed using a 30 cm3ion chamber;the gantry at 0°,the X-ray head at 0°,the field size at between the central axis and a plane surface at a FSD of 100 as a reference,a series of concentric circles having radii of 50,75,and 100 cm with their common centre at the reference point.The absorbed dose was measured at the reference point,and this would be used as the reference dose.With the diaphragm closed,the measurements were taken along the circumference of the three circles and at 45°intervals.Results:Leakage radiations while the treatment head was in the vertical position varied between 0.016%–0.04%.With the head lying horizontally,leakage radiation was the same order magnitude and varied between 0.02%–0.07%.In the second method,the verification was accomplished by closing the collimator jaws and covering the head of the treatment unit with the ready pack films.The films were marked to permit the determination of their positions on the machine after exposed and processed.With the diaphragm closed,and the ready packs films around the linear accelerator the beam turned on for 2500 cGy(2500 MU).The optical density of these films was measured and compared with this of the reference dose.Leakage radiation varied according to the film positions and the magnitude of leakage was between 0.005%–0.075%.Conclusion:The differences between the values of the leakage radiation levels observed at different measurement points do not only reflect differences in the effective shielding thickness of the head wall,but are also related to differences in the distances between the target and the measurement points.The experimental errors involved in dosimetric measurement also contribute to such differences.展开更多
文摘Objective:The aim of this study was to measure the leakage by two methods with ion chamber and ready packs film,and to investigate the feasibility and the advantages of using two dosimetry methods for assessing leakage radiation around the head of the linear accelerators.Methods:Measurements were performed using a 30 cm3ion chamber;the gantry at 0°,the X-ray head at 0°,the field size at between the central axis and a plane surface at a FSD of 100 as a reference,a series of concentric circles having radii of 50,75,and 100 cm with their common centre at the reference point.The absorbed dose was measured at the reference point,and this would be used as the reference dose.With the diaphragm closed,the measurements were taken along the circumference of the three circles and at 45°intervals.Results:Leakage radiations while the treatment head was in the vertical position varied between 0.016%–0.04%.With the head lying horizontally,leakage radiation was the same order magnitude and varied between 0.02%–0.07%.In the second method,the verification was accomplished by closing the collimator jaws and covering the head of the treatment unit with the ready pack films.The films were marked to permit the determination of their positions on the machine after exposed and processed.With the diaphragm closed,and the ready packs films around the linear accelerator the beam turned on for 2500 cGy(2500 MU).The optical density of these films was measured and compared with this of the reference dose.Leakage radiation varied according to the film positions and the magnitude of leakage was between 0.005%–0.075%.Conclusion:The differences between the values of the leakage radiation levels observed at different measurement points do not only reflect differences in the effective shielding thickness of the head wall,but are also related to differences in the distances between the target and the measurement points.The experimental errors involved in dosimetric measurement also contribute to such differences.
