Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The procedure recommended by different dosimetry protocols for the determination of the absorbed dose to air chamber factor, ND,pp, of plane-parallel chambers, comparing absorbed dose determinations in a high-energy electron beam with a reference cylindrical chamber having a known ND,cyl factor, has been investigated. Attention has been focused on the case that the chamber serving as reference has a solid aluminium central electrode. It has been found that using a wide spread Farmer-type chamber (NE 2571), together with recommendations which specifically take into account central electrode corrections for electron beam dosimetry, kcelpcel = pcel-global(IAEA) = 1.008, yields inconsistent results compared with those obtained from a fully homogeneous ionization chamber; for the NE 2571 chamber, a value kcelpcel = pcel-global(IAEA) congruent to 1.0 has been obtained. Analytical calculations of kmkatt for Farmer-type cylindrical chambers and experimental determinations of the product kmkattkcelpcel in electron beams agree within experimental uncertainties, with no evidence of statistical significance for the commonly used assumption pcel = 1, which yields a 0.8% correction (due to kcel only) for the effect of the NE 2571 aluminium electrode in electron beam dosimetry. The use of a 'NACP-chamber' specific factor (kpp or kmkatt) to obtain ND,pp from NK,pp in NACP plane-parallel chambers has been found unsatisfactory, and direct experimental determinations of ND,pp are recommended instead. It is suggested that Standard Dosimetry Laboratories provide ND,pp calibration factors in 60Co beams.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andreo et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: