RESUMO
The preceding DIN 6800-2 (1997) protocol has been revised by a German task group and its latest version was published in March 2008 as the national standard dosimetry protocol DIN 6800-2 (2008 March). Since then, in Germany the determination of absorbed dose to water for high-energy photon and electron beams has to be performed according to this new German dosimetry protocol. The IAEA Code of Practice TRS 398 (2000) and the AAPM TG-51 are the two main protocols applied internationally. The new German version has widely adapted the methodology and dosimetric data of TRS-398. This paper investigates systematically the DIN 6800-2 protocol and compares it with the procedures and results obtained by using the international protocols. The investigation was performed with 6 MV and 18 MV photon beams as well as with electron beams from 5 MeV to 21 MeV. While only cylindrical chambers were used for photon beams, the measurements of electron beams were performed by using cylindrical and plane-parallel chambers. It was found that the discrepancies in the determination of absorbed dose to water among the three protocols were 0.23% for photon beams and 1.2% for electron beams. The determination of water absorbed dose was also checked by a national audit procedure using TLDs. The comparison between the measurements following the DIN 6800-2 protocol and the TLD audit-procedure confirmed a difference of less than 2%. The advantage of the new German protocol DIN 6800-2 lies in the renouncement on the cross calibration procedure as well as its clear presentation of formulas and parameters. In the past, the different protocols evoluted differently from time to time. Fortunately today, a good convergence has been obtained in concepts and methods.
RESUMO
This study is to keep the accuracy and stability of the output dose evaluations for linear accelerator photon beams by using the air ionization chambers (TM31010, 0.125 cc, PTW) through the Task Group 51 protocol. The absorbed dose to water calibration factor NdwCo-60 was delivered from the air kerma calibration factor Nk which was provided from manufacture through SSDL calibration for determination of output factor. The ionization chamber of TM31010 series was reviewed the calibration factor and other parameters for reduce the uncertainty within +/-2% discrepancy and we found the supplied NdwCo-60 which was derived from Nk has shown a -2.8% uncertainty compare to that of PSDL. The authors provided the program to perform the output dosimetry with TG-51 protocol as it is composed same screen of TG-51 worksheets. The evaluated dose by determination of output factor delivered to postal TLD block for comparison the output dose to that of MDACC (RPC) in postal monitoring program. The results have shown the 1.001+/-0.013 for 6 MV and 0.997+/-0.012 discrepancy for 15 MV X rays for 5 years followed. This study shows the evaluated outputs for linear accelerate photon beams are very close to that of international output monitor with small discrepancy of +/-1.3% with high reliability and showing the gradually stability after 2010.