Proton beam monitor chamber calibration

Abstract

The first goal of this paper is to clarify the reference conditions for the reference dosimetry of clinical proton beams. A clear distinction is made between proton beam delivery systems which should be calibrated with a spread-out Bragg peak field and those that should be calibrated with a (pseudo-)monoenergetic proton beam. For the latter, this paper also compares two independent dosimetry techniques to calibrate the beam monitor chambers: absolute dosimetry (of the number of protons exiting the nozzle) with a Faraday cup and reference dosimetry (i.e. determination of the absorbed dose to water under IAEA TRS-398 reference conditions) with an ionization chamber. To compare the two techniques, Monte Carlo simulations were performed to convert dose-to-water to proton fluence. A good agreement was found between the Faraday cup technique and the reference dosimetry with a plane-parallel ionization chamber. The differences—of the order of 3%—were found to be within the uncertainty of the comparison. For cylindrical ionization chambers, however, the agreement was only possible when positioning the effective point of measurement of the chamber at the reference measurement depth—i.e. not complying with IAEA TRS-398 recommendations. In conclusion, for cylindrical ionization chambers, IAEA TRS-398 reference conditions for monoenergetic proton beams led to a systematic error in the determination of the absorbed dose to water, especially relevant for low-energy proton beams. To overcome this problem, the effective point of measurement of cylindrical ionization chambers should be taken into account when positioning the reference point of the chamber. Within the current IAEA TRS-398 recommendations, it seems advisable to use plane-parallel ionization chambers—rather than cylindrical chambers—for the reference dosimetry of pseudo-monoenergetic proton beams.