首页> 外文期刊>Medical Physics >Monte Carlo dose calculations in homogeneous media and at interfaces: a comparison between GEPTS, EGSnrc, MCNP, and measurements.
【24h】

Monte Carlo dose calculations in homogeneous media and at interfaces: a comparison between GEPTS, EGSnrc, MCNP, and measurements.

机译:在均质介质中和界面处的蒙特卡洛剂量计算:GEPTS,EGSnrc,MCNP和测量值之间的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Three Monte Carlo photon/electron transport codes (GEPTS, EGSnrc, and MCNP) are bench-marked against dose measurements in homogeneous (both low- and high-Z) media as well as at interfaces. A brief overview on physical models used by each code for photon and electron (positron) transport is given. Absolute calorimetric dose measurements for 0.5 and 1 MeV electron beams incident on homogeneous and multilayer media are compared with the predictions of the three codes. Comparison with dose measurements in two-layer media exposed to a 60Co gamma source is also performed. In addition, comparisons between the codes (including the EGS4 code) are done for (a) 0.05 to 10 MeV electron beams and positron point sources in lead, (b) high-energy photons (10 and 20 MeV) irradiating a multilayer phantom (water/steel/air), and (c) simulation of a 90Sr/90Y brachytherapy source. A good agreement is observed between the calorimetric electron dose measurements and predictions of GEPTS and EGSnrc in both homogeneous and multilayer media. MCNP outputs are found to be dependent on the energy-indexing method (Default/ITS style). This dependence is significant in homogeneous media as well as at interfaces. MCNP(ITS) fits more closely the experimental data than MCNP(DEF), except for the case of Be. At low energy (0.05 and 0.1 MeV), MCNP(ITS) dose distributions in lead show higher maximums in comparison with GEPTS and EGSnrc. EGS4 produces too penetrating electron-dose distributions in high-Z media, especially at low energy (<0.1 MeV). For positrons, differences between GEPTS and EGSnrc are observed in lead because GEPTS distinguishes positrons from electrons for both elastic multiple scattering and bremsstrahlung emission models. For the 60Co source, a quite good agreement between calculations and measurements is observed with regards to the experimental uncertainty. For the other cases (10 and 20 MeV photon sources and the 90Sr/90Y beta source), a good agreement is found between the three codes. In conclusion, differences between GEPTS and EGSnrc results are found to be very small for almost all media and energies studied. MCNP results depend significantly on the electron energy-indexing method.
机译:三种蒙特卡洛光子/电子传输代码(GEPTS,EGSnrc和MCNP)相对于均质(低Z和高Z)介质以及界面上的剂量测量均标有基准。简要概述了每个代码用于光子和电子(正电子)传输的物理模型。将入射在均匀介质和多层介质上的0.5和1 MeV电子束的绝对量热剂量测量结果与三个编码的预测值进行比较。还与暴露于60Coγ射线源的两层介质中的剂量测量结果进行了比较。此外,还对(a)铅中的0.05至10 MeV电子束和正电子点源,(b)照射多层体模的高能光子(10和20 MeV)进行了代码之间的比较(包括EGS4代码)。水/钢铁/空气),以及(c)模拟90Sr / 90Y近距离放射治疗源。在均相和多层介质中,量热电子剂量测量与GEPTS和EGSnrc的预测之间观察到很好的一致性。发现MCNP输出取决于能量索引方法(默认/ ITS样式)。这种依赖性在同质介质以及界面中都非常重要。除了Be之外,MCNP(ITS)比MCNP(DEF)更适合实验数据。在低能量(0.05和0.1 MeV)下,与GEPTS和EGSnrc相比,铅中的MCNP(ITS)剂量分布显示出更高的最大值。 EGS4在高Z介质中会产生穿透力太强的电子剂量分布,尤其是在低能量(<0.1 MeV)下。对于正电子,在铅中观察到GEPTS和EGSnrc之间的差异,因为在弹性多重散射和and致辐射模型中,GEPTS都将正电子与电子区分开。对于60Co离子源,在实验不确定性方面,可以观察到计算和测量之间的良好一致性。对于其他情况(10和20 MeV光子源以及90Sr / 90Y beta源),在这三个代码之间找到了很好的协议。总之,对于几乎所有研究的介质和能量,GEPTS和EGSnrc结果之间的差异都很小。 MCNP的结果在很大程度上取决于电子能指数法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号