Energy dependent calibration of XR‐QA2 radiochromic film with monochromatic and polychromatic x‐ray beams. Issue 1 (6th January 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Di Lillo, F.; Mettivier, G.; Sarno, A.; Tromba, G.; Tomic, N.; Devic, S.; Russo, P.
• Is Part Of: Medical physics. Volume 43:Issue 1(2016)
• Page Start: 583
• Page End: 588
• Publication Date: 2016-01-06
• Subjects: calibration -- diagnostic radiography -- dosimetry -- synchrotron radiation; Radiography -- Dosimetry/exposure assessment; Biological material, e.g. blood, urine; Haemocytometers -- Scintigraphy; synchrotron radiation -- radiochromic film -- dosimetry -- x‐rays; Calibration -- Dosimetry -- Photons -- Image scanners -- Error analysis -- Ionization chambers -- Ion beams -- Synchrotron radiation -- X‐rays; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Medical physics; Geneeskunde; Natuurkunde; Toepassingen; Biophysics; Periodicals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1118/1.4939063
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0094-2405

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: This work investigates the energy response and dose‐response curve determinations for XR‐QA2 radiochromic film dosimetry system used for synchrotron radiation work and for quality assurance in diagnostic radiology, in the range of effective energies 18–46.5 keV. Methods: Pieces of XR‐QA2 films were irradiated, in a plane transverse to the beam axis, with a monochromatic beam of energy in the range 18–40 keV at the ELETTRA synchrotron radiation facility (Trieste, Italy) and with a polychromatic beam from a laboratory x‐ray tube operated at 80, 100, and 120 kV. The film calibration curve was expressed as air kerma (measured free‐in‐air with an ionization chamber) versus the net optical reflectance change (netΔ R ) derived from the red channel of the RGB scanned film image. Four functional relationships (rational, linear exponential, power, and logarithm) were tested to evaluate the best curve for fitting the calibration data. The adequacy of the various fitting functions was tested by using the uncertainty analysis and by assessing the average of the absolute air kerma error calculated as the difference between calculated and delivered air kerma. The sensitivity of the film was evaluated as the ratio of the change in net reflectance to the corresponding air kerma. Results: The sensitivity of XR‐QA2 films increased in the energy range 18–39 keV, with a maximum variation of about 170%, and decreased in the energy range 38–46.5 keV. The present results confirmed and extended previous findings by this and other groups, as regards the dose response of the radiochromic film XR‐QA2 to monochromatic and polychromatic x‐ray beams, respectively. Conclusions: The XR‐QA2 radiochromic film response showed a strong dependence on beam energy for both monochromatic and polychromatic beams in the range of half value layer values from 0.55 to 6.1 mm Al and corresponding effective energies from 18 to 46.5 keV. In this range, the film response varied by 170%, from a minimum sensitivity of 0.0127 to a maximum sensitivity of 0.0219 at 10 mGy air kerma in air. The more suitable function for air kerma calibration of the XR‐QA2 radiochromic film was the power function. A significant batch‐to‐batch variation, up to 55%, in film response at 120 kV (46.5 keV effective energy) was observed in comparison with published data.