Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T13:57:08.461Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Partial volume characteristics of ionization chambers in kilovoltage x-ray exposure measurements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2011

Syed F. Akber  and
Than S. Kehwar
Syed F. Akber
Affiliation:
Consulting Physicist, Lorain, OH 44053, USA
Than S. Kehwar*
Affiliation:
Consulting Physicist, Lorain, OH 44053, USA
*
Correspondence to: Than S. Kehwar, Ph.D., D.Sc., University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, UPMC Cancer Centers, Pittsburgh, PA 15232, USA. E-mail: drkehwar@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The partial volume (spatial) response of four ionization chambers (Keithley) in kilovoltage X-ray beams, generated by the Philips Super 80CP X-ray unit, was assessed. The volume of the ionization chambers were of 10 cm3, 15 cm3, 150 cm3, and 600 cm3 used with Keithley electrometer Model 35040. The beam output was measured using a monitor chamber (Radcal 6.0 cm3) placed close to the collimator. The source to chamber distance was kept constant at 1 m. For the measurement of the response of ionization chambers of 15 cm3, 150 cm3, and 600 cm3, a slit of 2.0 mm width was made in a lead sheet of 3.2 mm thick and size of 30 × 30 cm2 and was placed on the ionization chamber. The measurements were made for 81 kVp, 400 mA, and 0.25 s and the slit was moved at an increment of 2.0 mm over the entire length of the chamber. For the measurements of the ionization chamber of 10 cm3 (CT chamber), the beams of 120 kVp, 200 mA and 0.2 s were generated, and a slit of 5 mm width was made in a similar lead sheet that was moved at an increment of 5.0 mm. From the result it appears that the sensitive volumes of the ionization chambers affect the response of the ionization chamber to incident radiation.

Keywords

Ionization chambermonitor chamberpartial volume responsesensitive volume
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , September 2012 , pp. 184 - 188
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Broadbent, MV, Hubbard, LB. Science and perception of radiation risk. Radiographics 1992; 12:381–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trosko, E. Role of low-level ionizing radiation in multi-step carcinogenic process. Health Physics 1996; 70: 812–822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, BL. How dangerous is low level radiation? Risk Anal 1995; 15:645–653.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gough, M. It’s not science. what can science do about it? Health Phys 1996; 71:275–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Attix, FH. Introduction of radiological physics and radiation dosimetry. New York: Wiley & Sons; 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shani, G. Radiation Dosimetry. Instrumentation and Methods. CRC Press, Fl. 2001. 219.Google Scholar
Johns, HE, Cunningham, JR. The physics of radiology. 4th edn. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 1983.Google Scholar
Das, IJ, Akber, SF. Ion recombination and polarity effect of ionization chambers in kilovoltage x-ray exposure measurements. Med Phys 1998; 25:1751–1757.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Akber, SF, Das, IJ, Kehwar, TS. Broad beam attenuation measurements in lead in kilovoltage X-ray beams. Z Med Phys 2008; 18:197–202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kofler, JM Jr, Gray, JE, Daly, TR. Spatial and temporal response characteristics of ionization chambers used in diagnostic radiology for exposure measurements and quality control. Health Phys 1994; 67:661–667.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed