1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Changes in optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter (OSLD) dosimetric characteristics with accumulated dose
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.3267489
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/37/1/10.1118/1.3267489
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/37/1/10.1118/1.3267489

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

A diagram of the energy levels of a crystalline material that sustains thermoluminescence or optical luminescence. The numbers in the diagram represent charge flow reactions that are described in the text. SET, IET, and DET are electron traps of progressively deeper depth. DHT and F are hole (○) traps with being a luminescence center, which received energy from the recombination of the electron (●) and hole.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Apparatus used to hold nanodots for irradiation with Ir-192. The spacer, , is constructed from slabs of cardboard that are glued together. A hole is bored in the center of the cardboard block to hold the HDR catheter. The nanodots are fastened in position as shown with double-sided adhesive tape.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Measurements of an OSLD signal after various times of optical annealing. For an irradiation of 180 cGy the signal size before annealing was approximately 170 000 counts. The OSLDs were irradiated and then optically annealed for the indicated times with a THL or CFL.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

OSLD response versus absorbed dose. For each dose point the nanodot is irradiated, kept in the dark for 8 min, and then read. The solid line shows linear dependence on dose based on the response of the OSLD up to 20 cGy.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

OSLD response versus absorbed dose. For each dose point the nanodot is irradiated, kept in the dark for 8 min, and then read. The solid line is calculated based on Eq. (1), using the following parameters: , , and . The broken line (linear response) is based on the response of the OSLD at 20 cGy.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Percent difference between the calculated dose and the dose delivered to a nanodot; percent . The dose was calculated with the exponential model [Eq. (1)] and the quadratic model [Eq. (2)]. For the exponential model: , , and . For the quadratic model: With , , ; with , , ; with , , .

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

The change in parameter of Eq. (1) as a function of the accumulated dose to the nanodot. For each dose point the nanodot is irradiated, kept in the dark for 8 min, and then read. After 1000 cGy was delivered the nanodot was optical annealed to the plateau value shown in Fig. 3. Two different nanodots were used. One was optically annealed with the THL and the other with the CFL.

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

The change in parameter of Eq. (1) as a function of the accumulated dose to the nanodot. Other experimental details are the same as in the legend of Fig. 7.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

The change in parameter of Eq. (1) as a function of the accumulated dose to the nanodot. Other experimental details are the same as in the legend of Fig. 7.

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

The change in high dose limit value of Eq. (1) as a function of the accumulated dose to the nanodot. Other experimental details are the same as in the legend of Fig. 7.

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

OSLD response versus absorbed dose. For each dose point the nanodot is irradiated, kept in the dark for 8 min, and then read. The irradiation sequence was then repeated multiple times to give the total dose as indicated. The nanodot was not optically annealed between irradiations.

Image of FIG. 12.
FIG. 12.

OSLD response versus absorbed dose. The nanodot was irradiated with 1 kGy from Co-60 and 2 kGy from Ir-192 and then optically annealed to the plateau value shown in Fig. 3 with the CFL. For each dose point the nanodot is irradiated, kept in the dark for 8 min, and then read. The broken line, linear response, is based on the response of the OSLD at 20 cGy.

Image of FIG. 13.
FIG. 13.

Measurements of an OSLD signal after various times in the dark following optical annealing to the plateau value shown in Fig. 3 with the CFL. The various nanodots were irradiated with 30 to 180 Gy with 6 MV x rays and to 5 kGy with Co-60.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Characteristics of 17 nanodots that were randomly chosen from a new batch of devices. The dosimeters were all irradiated with 6 MV x rays. Parameters are for Eq. (1).

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Characteristics of nanodots that were irradiated with 1, 2, and 5 kGy. The 1 and 5 kGy were delivered with Co-60 and the 2 kGy was delivered with Ir-192. Parameters are for Eq. (1). Experimental details are given in the text and the legend of Fig. 13.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/37/1/10.1118/1.3267489
2009-12-04
2014-04-20
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Changes in optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter (OSLD) dosimetric characteristics with accumulated dose
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/37/1/10.1118/1.3267489
10.1118/1.3267489
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM