• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.393-402
• /
• 1997

Purpose : When an x-ray beam of small field size is irradiated to target area containing an air cavity, such as larynx, the underdosing effect is observed in the region near the interfaces of air and soft tissue. With a larynx model, air cavity embedded in tissue-equivalent material, this study is intonded for examining Parameters, such as beam quality, field size, and cavity size, to affect the dose distribution near the air cavity. Materials and Methods : Three x-rar beams, 4-, 6- and 10-MV, were employed to Perform a measurement using a 2cm $(width){\times}L$ (length in cm, one side of x-ray field used 2cm (height) air cavity in the simulated larynx. A thin window parallel-plate chamber connected to an electrometer was used for a dosimetry system. A ratio of the dose at various distances from the cavity-tissue interface to the dose at the same points in a homogeneous Phantom (ebservedlexpected ratio, O/E) normalized buildup curves, and ratio of distal surface dose to dose at the maximum buildup depth were examined for various field sizes. Measurement for cavity size effect was performed by varying the height (Z) of the air cavity with the width kept constant for several field sizes. Results : No underdosing effect for 4-MV beam for fields larger than $5cm\times5cm$ was found For both 6- and 10-MV beams, the underdosing portion of the larynx at the distal surface was seen to occur for small fields, $4cm\times4cm\;and\;5cm\times5cm$. The underdosed tissue was increased in its volume with beam energy even for similar surface doses. The relative distal surface dose to maximum dose was changed to 0.99 from 0.95, 0.92, and 0.91 for 4-, 6-, and 10-MV, respectively, with increasing field size, $4cm\times4cm\;to\;8cm\times8cm$, For 6- and 10-MV beams, the dose at the surface of the cavity is measured less than the predicted by about two and three percent. respectively. but decrease was found for 4-MV beam for $5cm\times5cm$ field. For the $4cm\timesL\timesZ$ (height in cm). varying depth from 0.0 to 4.8cm, cavity, O/E> 1.0 was observed regardless of the cavity size for any field larger than about $8cm\times8cm$. Conclusion : The magnitude of underdosing depends on beam energy, field size. and cavity size for the larynx model. Based on the result of the study. caution must be used when a small field of a high quality x-ray beam is irradiated to regions including air cavities. and especially the region where the tumor extends to the surface. Low quality beam. such as. 4-MV x-ray, and larger fields can be used preferably to reduce the risk of underdosing, local failure. In the case of high quality beams such as 6- and 10-MV x-rays, however. an additional boost field is recommended to add for the compensation of the underdosing region when a typically used treatment field. $8cm\times8cm$, is employed.

• Journal of Bio-Environment Control
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.215-235
• /
• 1996

The thermal analysis by mathematical model simulation makes it possible to reasonably predict heating and/or cooling requirements of certain greenhouses located under various geographical and climatic environment. It is another advantages of model simulation technique to be able to make it possible to select appropriate heating system, to set up energy utilization strategy, to schedule seasonal crop pattern, as well as to determine new greenhouse ranges. In this study, the control pattern for greenhouse microclimate is categorized as cooling and heating. Dynamic model was adopted to simulate heating requirements and/or energy conservation effectiveness such as energy saving by night-time thermal curtain, estimation of Heating Degree-Hours(HDH), long time prediction of greenhouse thermal behavior, etc. On the other hand, the cooling effects of ventilation, shading, and pad ||||&|||| fan system were partly analyzed by static model. By the experimental work with small size model greenhouse of 1.2m$\times$2.4m, it was found that cooling the greenhouse by spraying cold water directly on greenhouse cover surface or by recirculating cold water through heat exchangers would be effective in greenhouse summer cooling. The mathematical model developed for greenhouse model simulation is highly applicable because it can reflects various climatic factors like temperature, humidity, beam and diffuse solar radiation, wind velocity, etc. This model was closely verified by various weather data obtained through long period greenhouse experiment. Most of the materials relating with greenhouse heating or cooling components were obtained from model greenhouse simulated mathematically by using typical year(1987) data of Jinju Gyeongnam. But some of the materials relating with greenhouse cooling was obtained by performing model experiments which include analyzing cooling effect of water sprayed directly on greenhouse roof surface. The results are summarized as follows : 1. The heating requirements of model greenhouse were highly related with the minimum temperature set for given greenhouse. The setting temperature at night-time is much more influential on heating energy requirement than that at day-time. Therefore It is highly recommended that night- time setting temperature should be carefully determined and controlled. 2. The HDH data obtained by conventional method were estimated on the basis of considerably long term average weather temperature together with the standard base temperature(usually 18.3$^{\circ}C$). This kind of data can merely be used as a relative comparison criteria about heating load, but is not applicable in the calculation of greenhouse heating requirements because of the limited consideration of climatic factors and inappropriate base temperature. By comparing the HDM data with the results of simulation, it is found that the heating system design by HDH data will probably overshoot the actual heating requirement. 3. The energy saving effect of night-time thermal curtain as well as estimated heating requirement is found to be sensitively related with weather condition: Thermal curtain adopted for simulation showed high effectiveness in energy saving which amounts to more than 50% of annual heating requirement. 4. The ventilation performances doting warm seasons are mainly influenced by air exchange rate even though there are some variations depending on greenhouse structural difference, weather and cropping conditions. For air exchanges above 1 volume per minute, the reduction rate of temperature rise on both types of considered greenhouse becomes modest with the additional increase of ventilation capacity. Therefore the desirable ventilation capacity is assumed to be 1 air change per minute, which is the recommended ventilation rate in common greenhouse. 5. In glass covered greenhouse with full production, under clear weather of 50% RH, and continuous 1 air change per minute, the temperature drop in 50% shaded greenhouse and pad ＆ fan systemed greenhouse is 2.6$^{\circ}C$ and.6.1$^{\circ}C$ respectively. The temperature in control greenhouse under continuous air change at this time was 36.6$^{\circ}C$ which was 5.3$^{\circ}C$ above ambient temperature. As a result the greenhouse temperature can be maintained 3$^{\circ}C$ below ambient temperature. But when RH is 80%, it was impossible to drop greenhouse temperature below ambient temperature because possible temperature reduction by pad ||||&|||| fan system at this time is not more than 2.4$^{\circ}C$. 6. During 3 months of hot summer season if the greenhouse is assumed to be cooled only when greenhouse temperature rise above 27$^{\circ}C$, the relationship between RH of ambient air and greenhouse temperature drop($\Delta$T) was formulated as follows : $\Delta$T= -0.077RH＋7.7 7. Time dependent cooling effects performed by operation of each or combination of ventilation, 50% shading, pad ＆ fan of 80% efficiency, were continuously predicted for one typical summer day long. When the greenhouse was cooled only by 1 air change per minute, greenhouse air temperature was 5$^{\circ}C$ above outdoor temperature. Either method alone can not drop greenhouse air temperature below outdoor temperature even under the fully cropped situations. But when both systems were operated together, greenhouse air temperature can be controlled to about 2.0-2.3$^{\circ}C$ below ambient temperature. 8. When the cool water of 6.5-8.5$^{\circ}C$ was sprayed on greenhouse roof surface with the water flow rate of 1.3 liter/min per unit greenhouse floor area, greenhouse air temperature could be dropped down to 16.5-18.$0^{\circ}C$, whlch is about 1$0^{\circ}C$ below the ambient temperature of 26.5-28.$0^{\circ}C$ at that time. The most important thing in cooling greenhouse air effectively with water spray may be obtaining plenty of cool water source like ground water itself or cold water produced by heat-pump. Future work is focused on not only analyzing the feasibility of heat pump operation but also finding the relationships between greenhouse air temperature(T$_{g}$ ), spraying water temperature(T$_{w}$ ), water flow rate(Q), and ambient temperature(T$_{o}$).