skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-F-T-71: A Practical Method for Evaluation of Electron Virtual Source Position

Abstract

Purpose: Since electrons are easily scattered, the virtual source position for electrons is expected to locate below the x-ray target of Medical Linacs. However, the effective SSD method yields the electron virtual position above the x-ray target for some applicators for some energy in Siemens Linacs. In this study, we propose to use IC Profiler (Sun Nuclear) for evaluating the electron virtual source position for the standard electron applicators for various electron energies. Methods: The profile measurements for various nominal source-to-detector distances (SDDs) of 100–115 cm were carried out for electron beam energies of 6–18 MeV. Two methods were used: one was to use a 0.125 cc ion chamber (PTW, Type 31010) with buildup mounted in a PTW water tank without water filled; and the other was to use IC Profiler with a buildup to achieve charge particle equilibrium. The full width at half-maximum (FWHM) method was used to determine the field sizes for the measured profiles. Backprojecting (by a straight line) the distance between the 50% points on the beam profiles for the various SDDs, yielded the virtual source position for each applicator. Results: The profiles were obtained and the field sizes were determined by FWHM. The virtual sourcemore » positions were determined through backprojection of profiles for applicators (5, 10, 15, 20, 25). For instance, they were 96.415 cm (IC Profiler) vs 95.844 cm (scanning ion chamber) for 9 MeV electrons with 10×10 cm applicator and 97.160 cm vs 97.161 cm for 12 MeV electrons with 10×10 cm applicator. The differences in the virtual source positions between IC profiler and scanning ion chamber were within 1.5%. Conclusion: IC Profiler provides a practical method for determining the electron virtual source position and its results are consistent with those obtained by profiles of scanning ion chamber with buildup.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ;  [1];  [2]
  1. East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina (United States)
  2. Houston Methodist Hospital, Sugar Land, TX (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22642319
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; BEAM PROFILES; ELECTRON BEAMS; EQUILIBRIUM; IONIZATION CHAMBERS; LINEAR ACCELERATORS; MEV RANGE 01-10; MEV RANGE 10-100

Citation Formats

Huang, Z, Jiang, W, Stuart, B, Leu, S, Feng, Y, and Liu, T. SU-F-T-71: A Practical Method for Evaluation of Electron Virtual Source Position. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956207.
Huang, Z, Jiang, W, Stuart, B, Leu, S, Feng, Y, & Liu, T. SU-F-T-71: A Practical Method for Evaluation of Electron Virtual Source Position. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956207.
Huang, Z, Jiang, W, Stuart, B, Leu, S, Feng, Y, and Liu, T. 2016. "SU-F-T-71: A Practical Method for Evaluation of Electron Virtual Source Position". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956207.
@article{osti_22642319,
title = {SU-F-T-71: A Practical Method for Evaluation of Electron Virtual Source Position},
author = {Huang, Z and Jiang, W and Stuart, B and Leu, S and Feng, Y and Liu, T},
abstractNote = {Purpose: Since electrons are easily scattered, the virtual source position for electrons is expected to locate below the x-ray target of Medical Linacs. However, the effective SSD method yields the electron virtual position above the x-ray target for some applicators for some energy in Siemens Linacs. In this study, we propose to use IC Profiler (Sun Nuclear) for evaluating the electron virtual source position for the standard electron applicators for various electron energies. Methods: The profile measurements for various nominal source-to-detector distances (SDDs) of 100–115 cm were carried out for electron beam energies of 6–18 MeV. Two methods were used: one was to use a 0.125 cc ion chamber (PTW, Type 31010) with buildup mounted in a PTW water tank without water filled; and the other was to use IC Profiler with a buildup to achieve charge particle equilibrium. The full width at half-maximum (FWHM) method was used to determine the field sizes for the measured profiles. Backprojecting (by a straight line) the distance between the 50% points on the beam profiles for the various SDDs, yielded the virtual source position for each applicator. Results: The profiles were obtained and the field sizes were determined by FWHM. The virtual source positions were determined through backprojection of profiles for applicators (5, 10, 15, 20, 25). For instance, they were 96.415 cm (IC Profiler) vs 95.844 cm (scanning ion chamber) for 9 MeV electrons with 10×10 cm applicator and 97.160 cm vs 97.161 cm for 12 MeV electrons with 10×10 cm applicator. The differences in the virtual source positions between IC profiler and scanning ion chamber were within 1.5%. Conclusion: IC Profiler provides a practical method for determining the electron virtual source position and its results are consistent with those obtained by profiles of scanning ion chamber with buildup.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956207},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Purpose: Every year, new radiotherapy techniques including stereotactic radiosurgery using linear accelerators give rise to new applications of Monte Carlo (MC) modeling. Accurate modeling requires knowing the size of the electron spot, one of the few parameters to tune in MC models. The resolution of integrated megavoltage imaging systems, such as the tomotherapy system, strongly depends on the photon spot size which is closely related to the electron spot. The aim of this article is to clarify the relationship between the electron spot size and the photon spot size (i.e., the focal spot size) for typical incident electron beam energiesmore » and target thicknesses. Methods: Three electron energies (3, 5.5, and 18 MeV), four electron spot sizes (FWHM=0, 0.5, 1, and 1.5 mm), and two tungsten target thicknesses (0.15 and 1 cm) were considered. The formation of the photon beam within the target was analyzed through electron energy deposition with depth, as well as photon production at several phase-space planes placed perpendicular to the beam axis, where only photons recorded for the first time were accounted for. Photon production was considered for ''newborn'' photons intersecting a 45x45 cm{sup 2} plane at the isocenter (85 cm from source). Finally, virtual source position and ''effective'' focal spot size were computed by backprojecting all the photons from the bottom of the target intersecting a 45x45 cm{sup 2} plane. The virtual source position and focal spot size were estimated at the plane position where the latter is minimal. Results: In the relevant case of considering only photons intersecting the 45x45 cm{sup 2} plane, the results unambiguously showed that the effective photon spot is created within the first 0.25 mm of the target and that electron and focal spots may be assumed to be equal within 3-4%. Conclusions: In a good approximation photon spot size equals electron spot size for high energy X-ray treatments delivered by linear accelerators.« less
  • We have determined the size and location of the distributed virtual source'' of an electron-beam evaporation source using a mask/shadowing technique. By depositing copper through slit masks onto glass witnesses, then measuring the width of the deposition pattern it was possible to calculate the size and location of the virtual source. We determined the source size to be 3.9[plus minus]1.0 cm side to side, 4.8[plus minus]0.5 cm front to back, 4.4[plus minus]0.5 cm across one diagonal and 4.4[plus minus]0.5 cm across the other diagonal while its location was 9[plus minus]3 cm above the hearth. The size of the virtual sourcemore » is dramatically larger than the area created by the electron beam rastering across the surface of the muffin. This data may be useful when high-tolerance vapor deposition into porous materials is desired (as in microchannel plates). In this application, the angle between the virtual source and the substrate may be critical for effective coating of the channels.« less
  • Scattered electrons from the accelerator components and applicator walls and their effect on the virtual source off and on the central axis have been studied for electron beams from a 20 MeV linear accelerator. Measurements were done with and without one of four commercially available fixed applicators of 5 x 5, 10 x 10, 15 x 15, and 20 x 20 cm. The effects of various settings of primary collimator jaws were studied. This approach allows for a first order discrimination of scatter from the various components in the system. The results of this study clearly indicate that the scattermore » contribution is significant. The effect of the scatter distribution decreases with increased beam energy, and significantly increases with the distance from the central axis. It is a major contributor near the edges of the field. In addition, scattered electrons affect the depth dose characteristics of these beams.« less
  • The evolution of the charge state distribution inside an electron beam ion source or trap (EBIS/T) is determined by interactions of the electron beam with the ions in the trap region. Hence, detailed information about the electron beam is required for evaluations of spectroscopic and ion extraction measurements performed at EBIS/T facilities. This article presents the results of investigations on the electron beam properties of an ion source of the Dresden EBIS type. For the first time theoretical predictions of the shape of the beam were tested for a noncryogenic EBIS working with low magnetic flux densities provided by permanentmore » magnets. Position and width of the electron beam were measured at different electron energies showing an oscillation in the beam structure. At an energy of E{sub e}=16 keV and an emission current of I{sub e}=30 mA the beam is compressed to a radius of r{sub e}=57 {mu}m (80% current). This refers to an average current density of <j{sub e}>=232 A/cm{sup 2}.« less
  • Maintaining the stability of the X-ray beam relative to the sample point is of paramount importance for beamlines and users wanting to perform cutting-edge experiments. The ability to detect, and subsequently compensate for, variations in X-ray beam position with effective diagnostics has multiple benefits: a reduction in commissioning and start-up time, less ‘down-time’, and an improvement in the quality of acquired data. At Diamond Light Source a methodical evaluation of a selection of monochromatic X-ray Beam Position Monitors (XBPMs), using a range of position detection techniques, and from a range of suppliers, was carried out. The results of these experimentsmore » are presented, showing the measured RMS noise on the position measurement of each device for a given flux, energy, beam size, and bandwidth. A discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of each of the various devices and techniques is also included.« less