Reference Dosimetry for Protons and Light-Ion Beams Based On Graphite Calorimetry
S. Rossomme1,2*, H. Palmans2, R. Thomas2, N. Lee2, M. Bailey2, D. Shipley2, L. Al-Sulaiti2,3, P. Cirrone4, F. Romano4,5, A. Kacperek6, D. Bertrand7, S. Vynckier1,8, (1) Molecular Imaging and Experimental Radiotherapy Department, Catholic University of Louvain, Brussels, Belgium (2) Division of Acoustics and Ionising Radiation, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, UK (3) University of Surrey, Guildford, UK (4) Laboratori Nazionali del Sud, Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Catania, Italy (5) Centro Studi e Ricerche e Museo Storico della Fisica "E. Fermi", Roma, Italy (6) Douglas Cyclotron, Clatterbridge Centre of Oncology, Wirral, UK (7) Ion Beam Application s.a., Louvain-la-Neuve , Belgium,(8) Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, BelgiumSU-E-T-146 Sunday 3:00:00 PM - 6:00:00 PM Room: Exhibit Hall
Purpose: The IAEA TRS-398 code of practice can be applied for the measurement of absorbed dose to water under reference conditions with an ionization chamber. For protons, the combined relative standard uncertainty on those measurements is less than 2% while for light-ion beams, it is considerably larger, i.e. 3.2%, mainly due to the higher uncertainty contributions for the water to air stopping power ration and the W air-value on the beam quality correction factors kQ,Q0. To decrease this uncertainty, a quantification of kQ,Q0 is proposed using a primary standard level graphite calorimeter. This work includes numerical and experimental determinations of dose conversion factors to derive dose to water from graphite calorimetry. It also reports on the first experimental data obtained with the graphite calorimeter in proton, alpha and carbon ion beams.
Methods: Firstly, the dose conversion has been calculated with by Geant4 Monte-Carlo simulations through the determination of the water to graphite stopping power ratio and the fluence correction factor. The latter factor was also derived by comparison of measured ionization curves in graphite and water. Secondly, kQ,Q0 was obtained by comparison of the dose response of ionization chambers with that of the calorimeter.
Results: Stopping power ratios are found to vary by no more than 0.35% up to the Bragg peak, while fluence correction factors are shown to increase slightly above unity close to the Bragg peak. The comparison of the calorimeter with ionization chambers is currently under analysis. For the modulated proton beam, preliminary results on W air confirm the value recommended in TRS-398. Data in both the non-modulated proton and light-ion beams indicate higher values but further investigation of heat loss corrections is needed.
Conclusions: The application of graphite calorimetry to proton, alpha and carbon ion beams has been demonstrated successfully. Other experimental campaigns will be held in 2012.