Engineering topics

Vynckier, S.

Publications and source records attributed to Vynckier, S..

4 records

DOE OSTI2016

Ion recombination correction in carbon ion beams

Purpose: In this work, ion recombination is studied as a function of energy and depth in carbon ion beams. Methods: Measurements were performed in three different passively scattered carbon ion beams with energies of 62 MeV/n, 135 MeV/n, and 290 MeV/n using various types of plane-parallel ionization chambers. Experimental results were compared with two analytical models for initial recombination. One model is generally used for photon beams and the other model, developed by Jaffé, takes into account the ionization density along the ion track. An investigation was carried out to ascertain the effect on the ion recombination correction with varying ionization chamber orientation with respect to the direction of the ion tracks. The variation of the ion recombination correction factors as a function of depth was studied for a Markus ionization chamber in the 62 MeV/n nonmodulated carbon ion beam. This variation can be related to the depth distribution of linear energy transfer. Results: Results show that the theory for photon beams is not applicable to carbon ion beams. On the other hand, by optimizing the value of the ionization density and the initial mean-square radius, good agreement is found between Jaffé’s theory and the experimental results. As predicted by Jaffé’s theory, the results confirm that ion recombination corrections strongly decrease with an increasing angle between the ion tracks and the electric field lines. For the Markus ionization chamber, the variation of the ion recombination correction factor with depth was modeled adequately by a sigmoid function, which is approximately constant in the plateau and strongly increasing in the Bragg peak region to values of up to 1.06. Except in the distal edge region, all experimental results are accurately described by Jaffé’s theory. Conclusions: Experimental results confirm that ion recombination in the investigated carbon ion beams is dominated by initial recombination. Ion recombination corrections are found to be significant and cannot be neglected for reference dosimetry and for the determination of depth dose curves in carbon ion beams.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

DOE OSTI2013

Extension of PENELOPE to protons: Simulation of nuclear reactions and benchmark with Geant4

Purpose: Describing the implementation of nuclear reactions in the extension of the Monte Carlo code (MC) PENELOPE to protons (PENH) and benchmarking with Geant4.Methods: PENH is based on mixed-simulation mechanics for both elastic and inelastic electromagnetic collisions (EM). The adopted differential cross sections for EM elastic collisions are calculated using the eikonal approximation with the Dirac–Hartree–Fock–Slater atomic potential. Cross sections for EM inelastic collisions are computed within the relativistic Born approximation, using the Sternheimer–Liljequist model of the generalized oscillator strength. Nuclear elastic and inelastic collisions were simulated using explicitly the scattering analysis interactive dialin database for {sup 1}H and ICRU 63 data for {sup 12}C, {sup 14}N, {sup 16}O, {sup 31}P, and {sup 40}Ca. Secondary protons, alphas, and deuterons were all simulated as protons, with the energy adapted to ensure consistent range. Prompt gamma emission can also be simulated upon user request. Simulations were performed in a water phantom with nuclear interactions switched off or on and integral depth–dose distributions were compared. Binary-cascade and precompound models were used for Geant4. Initial energies of 100 and 250 MeV were considered. For cases with no nuclear interactions simulated, additional simulations in a water phantom with tight resolution (1 mm in all directions) were performed with FLUKA. Finally, integral depth–dose distributions for a 250 MeV energy were computed with Geant4 and PENH in a homogeneous phantom with, first, ICRU striated muscle and, second, ICRU compact bone.Results: For simulations with EM collisions only, integral depth–dose distributions were within 1%/1 mm for doses higher than 10% of the Bragg-peak dose. For central-axis depth–dose and lateral profiles in a phantom with tight resolution, there are significant deviations between Geant4 and PENH (up to 60%/1 cm for depth–dose distributions). The agreement is much better with FLUKA, with deviations within 3%/3 mm. When nuclear interactions were turned on, agreement (within 6% before the Bragg-peak) between PENH and Geant4 was consistent with uncertainties on nuclear models and cross sections, whatever the material simulated (water, muscle, or bone).Conclusions: A detailed and flexible description of nuclear reactions has been implemented in the PENH extension of PENELOPE to protons, which utilizes a mixed-simulation scheme for both elastic and inelastic EM collisions, analogous to the well-established algorithm for electrons/positrons. PENH is compatible with all current main programs that use PENELOPE as the MC engine. The nuclear model of PENH is realistic enough to give dose distributions in fair agreement with those computed by Geant4.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2012

Monte Carlo computed machine-specific correction factors for reference dosimetry of TomoTherapy static beam for several ion chambers

Purpose: To determine k{sub Q{sub m{sub s{sub r,Q{sub o}{sup f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r},f{sub o}}}}}} correction factors for machine-specific reference (msr) conditions by Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for reference dosimetry of TomoTherapy static beams for ion chambers Exradin A1SL, A12; PTW 30006, 31010 Semiflex, 31014 PinPoint, 31018 microLion; NE 2571. Methods: For the calibration of TomoTherapy units, reference conditions specified in current codes of practice like IAEA/TRS-398 and AAPM/TG-51 cannot be realized. To cope with this issue, Alfonso et al. [Med. Phys. 35, 5179-5186 (2008)] described a new formalism introducing msr factors k{sub Q{sub m{sub s{sub r,Q{sub o}{sup f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r},f{sub o}}}}}} for reference dosimetry, applicable to static TomoTherapy beams. In this study, those factors were computed directly using MC simulations for Q{sub 0} corresponding to a simplified {sup 60}Co beam in TRS-398 reference conditions (at 10 cm depth). The msr conditions were a 10 Multiplication-Sign 5 cm{sup 2} TomoTherapy beam, source-surface distance of 85 cm and 10 cm depth. The chambers were modeled according to technical drawings using the egs++ package and the MC simulations were run with the egs{sub c}hamber user code. Phase-space files used as the source input were produced using PENELOPE after simulation of a simplified {sup 60}Co beam and the TomoTherapy treatment head modeled according to technical drawings. Correlated sampling, intermediate phase-space storage, and photon cross-section enhancement variance reduction techniques were used. The simulations were stopped when the combined standard uncertainty was below 0.2%. Results: Computed k{sub Q{sub m{sub s{sub r,Q{sub o}{sup f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r},f{sub o}}}}}} values were all close to one, in a range from 0.991 for the PinPoint chamber to 1.000 for the Exradin A12 with a statistical uncertainty below 0.2%. Considering a beam quality Q defined as the TPR{sub 20,10} for a 6 MV Elekta photon beam (0.661), the additional correction k{sub Q{sub m{sub s{sub r{sub ,Q}{sup f{sub m}{sub s}{sub r}{sub ,}f{sub r}{sub e}{sub f}}}}}} to k{sub Q,Q{sub o}} defined in Alfonso et al. [Med. Phys. 35, 5179-5186 (2008)] formalism was in a range from 0.997 to 1.004.Conclusion: The MC computed factors in this study are in agreement with measured factors for chamber types already studied in literature. This work provides msr correction factors for additional chambers used in reference dosimetry. All of them were close to one (within 1%).

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2011

Reference dosimetry for helical tomotherapy: Practical implementation and a multicenter validation

Purpose: The aim of this study was to implement a protocol for reference dosimetry in tomotherapy and to validate the beam output measurements with an independent dosimetry system. Methods: Beam output was measured at the reference depth of 10 cm in water for the following three cases: (1) a 5 x 10 cm{sup 2} static machine specific reference field (MSR), (2) a rotational 5 x 10 cm{sup 2} field without modulation and no tabletop in the beam, (3) a plan class specific reference (PCSR) field defined as a rotational homogeneous dose delivery to a cylindrical shaped target volume: plan with modulation and table-top movement. The formalism for reference dosimetry of small and nonstandard fields [Med.Phys.35: 5179-5186, 2008] and QA recommendations [Med.Phys.37: 4817-4853, 2010] were adopted in the dose measurement protocol. All ionization chamber measurements were verified independently using alanine/EPR dosimetry. As a pilot study, the beam output was measured on tomotherapy Hi-art systems at three other centers and directly compared to the centers specifications and to alanine dosimetry. Results: For the four centers, the mean static output at a depth of 10 cm in water and SAD = 85 cm, measured with an A1SL chamber following the TG-148 report was 6.238 Gy/min {+-} 0.058 (1 SD); the rotational output was 6.255 Gy/min {+-} 0.069 (1 SD). The dose stated by the center was found in good agreement with the measurements of the visiting team: D{sub center}/D{sub visit} = 1.000 {+-} 0.003 (1 SD). The A1SL chamber measurements were all in good agreement with Alanine/EPR dosimetry. Going from the static reference field to the rotational/non modulated field the dose rate remains constant within 0.2% except for one center where a deviation of 1.3% was detected. Conclusions: Following the TG-148 report, beam output measurements in water at the reference depth using a local protocol, as developed at different centers, was verified. The measurements were found in good agreement with alanine/EPR dosimetry. The presented methodology may provide a good concept for reference dosimetry.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗