• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.39 no.4
• /
• pp.607-614
• /
• 2016

The study investigates the necessity of 3 dimensional dose distribution evaluation instead of point dose and 2 dimensional dose distribution evaluation. Treatment plans were generated on the RANDO phantom to measure the precise dose distribution of the treatment site 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3 cm with the prescribed dose; 1,200 cGy, 5 fractions. Gamma analysis (3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm) of dose distribution was evaluated with gafchromic EBT2 film and ArcCHECK phantom. The average error of absolute dose was measured at $0.76{\pm}0.59%$ and $1.37{\pm}0.76%$ in cheese phantom and ArcCHECK phantom respectively. The average passing ratio for 3%/3 mm were $97.72{\pm}0.02%$ and $99.26{\pm}0.01%$ in gafchromic EBT2 film and ArcCHECK phantom respectively. The average passing ratio for 2%/2 mm were $94.21{\pm}0.02%$ and $93.02{\pm}0.01%$ in gafchromic EBT2 film and ArcCHECK phantom respectively. There was a more accurate dose distribution of 3D volume phantom than cheese phantom in patients DQA using tomotherapy. Therefor it should be evaluated simultaneously 3 dimensional dose evaluation on target and peripheral area in rotational radiotherapy such as tomotherapy.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.30 no.1_2
• /
• pp.107-116
• /
• 2018

Purpose : Intensity-modulated radiation therapy(IMRT) has been widely used for radiation therapy of Prostate Cancer because it can reduce radiation adverse effects on normal tissues and deliver more dose to the Prostate than 3D radiation therapy. Volumetric modulated arc therapy(VMAT) has been widely used due to recent advances in equipment and treatment techniques. VMAT can reduce treatment time by up to 55 % compared to IMRT, minimizing motion error during treatment. Materials and Methods : In this study, compared the MU and DVH values of 10 patients with prostate cancer by classifying them into 4 groups with 5 LN-Prostate groups and 5 Only-Prostate. And DQA measurements were performed using ArcCHECK and MapCHECK. Results : The results of Target and OAR dose distribution of Prostate patients are as follows. $D_{max}$ was in the range of 100~110 % in 4 groups, and more than 110 % of hot spot was not seen. Only-Prostate ($P_1$, $P_2$) without LN had a satisfactory dose distribution for the target dose, but slightly better for 2 arc plan($P_2$) than 1 arc plan($P_1$). The target dose $D_{98%}$ distribution in the LN-Prostate ($P_{L1}$, $P_{L2}$) group showed better 2 arc plan($P_{L2}$) than 1 arc plan($P_{L1}$), But in the case of 1 arc plan($P_{L1}$), the target dose $D_{98%}$ value was not enough. In OAR, the dose distribution of 1 Arc($P_1$) Plan and 2 Arc($P_2$) Plan in the Only-Prostate ($P_1$, $P_2$) Group satisfied the prescribed dose value. But, The dose distribution of 1 arc($P_1$) was slightly higher. In LN-Prostate OAR, 1 Arc($P_{L1}$) Plan showed higher dose than the prescribed dose. The Gamma evaluation pass rate of ArcCHECK and MapCHECK calculated from the DQA measurements was slightly higher than 99 % and the mean error range of the point dose measurements using the CC04 ion chamber was less than 1 %. Conclusion : In this study, Only-Prostate ($P_1$, $P_2$) group, the dose of 2 Arc plan was better. However, considering the treatment time and MU value, 1 Arc treatment method was more suitable. In the LN-Prostate ($P_{L1}$, $P_{L2}$) group, 2 Arc($P_{L2}$) treatment method showed better results and satisfied with Target $D_{98%}$ and OAR prescription dose.

• Journal of Welding and Joining
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.66-80
• /
• 1997

This paper describes a newly developed arc-sensing algorithm of seam-tracking for FCA W (flux-cored arc welding) horizontal fillet welding. In this algorithm, arc current and the Weighted-Are-Current (WAC) are used to adjust the position of a weld torch in directions of bead throat and weaving, respectively. The WAC, which is newly devised in this study, means that arc current in the vicinity of weaving end is more emphasized than that in the center of weaving. The reason of this is because there usually exists much noise in the center of weaving due to abrupt change of arc length in case some empty gaps exist in a fillet joint Variance analysis was performed in order to check the effect of weld parameters on arc current and the WAC. As a result, the relationships between tip-to-workpiece distance and arc current, and between weaving offset and the WAC were established.To check "the validity of the algorithm, seam-tracking experiments were performed ;mder various welding condition. The result of experiments showed a satisfactory tracking performance in the presence of empty gaps in a horizontal fillet joint.et joint.

• Plant Journal
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.71-75
• /
• 2010

In this study, the validity study has been carried out to apply the combustion burner in an electric arc furnace. The validity of applying the combustion burner has been studied in the aspect of the operation through the calculation of heat balance. The average decrease rate of power on time is 11.2%. When the maintainability is compared to the door lance manipulator type, the multi-functional combustion burner is simple to replace and repair. The location of burner can be adopted according to the drawings which are recommended in this study. As a result, the validity of applying the combustion burner to improve an efficiency of electric arc furnace has been confirmed.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.181-189
• /
• 2017

The conventional delivery quality assurance (DQA) process for RapidArc (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, USA), has the limitation that it measures and analyzes the dose in a phantom material and cannot analyze the dosimetric changes under the motional organ condition. In this study, a DQA method was designed to overcome the limitations of the conventional DQA process for internal target volume (ITV) based RapidArc. The dynamic DQA measurement device was designed with a moving phantom that can simulate variable target motions. The dose distribution in the real volume of the target and organ-at-risk (OAR)s were reconstructed using 3DVH with the ArcCHECK (SunNuclear, Melbourne, USA) measurement data under the dynamic condition. A total of 10 ITV-based RapidArc plans for liver-cancer patients were analyzed with the designed dynamic DQA process. The average pass rate of gamma evaluation was $81.55{\pm}9.48%$ when the DQA dose was measured in the respiratory moving condition of the patient. Appropriate method was applied to correct the effect of moving phantom structures in the dose calculation, and DVH data of the real volume of target and OARs were created with the recalculated dose by the 3DVH program. We confirmed the valid dose coverage of a real target volume in the ITV-based RapidArc. The variable difference of the DVH of the OARs showed that dose variation can occur differently according to the location, shape, size and motion range of the target. The DQA process devised in this study can effectively evaluate the DVH of the real volume of the target and OARs in a respiratory moving condition in addition to the simple verification of the accuracy of the treatment machine. This can be helpful to predict the prognosis of treatment by the accurate dose analysis in the real target and OARs.

• Korea-Australia Rheology Journal
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.13-16
• /
• 2009

We investigate time-temperature superposition from the viewpoint of geometry. The arc length of viscoelastic plots provides powerful resolution for check of the validity of time-temperature superposition. We also suggest a new algorithm for determination of shift factor which is base on the minimization of the total arc length and does not assume any functional form of viscoelastic function.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.32
• /
• pp.53-59
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare and analyze the difference between the MLC log file-based software (Mobius) and the conventional phantom-ionization chamber (ArcCheck) dose verification method according to the change of target volume. Material and method: Radius 0.25cm, 0.5cm, 1cm, 2cm, 3cm, 4cm, 5cm, 6cm, 7cm, 8cm, 9cm, 10cm with a Sphere-shaped target Twelve plans were created and dose verification using Mobius and ArcCheck was conducted three times each. The irradiated data were compared and analyzed using the point dose error value and the gamma passing rate (3%/3mm) as evaluation indicators. Result: Mobius point dose error values were -9.87% at a radius of 0.25cm and -4.39% at 0.5cm, and the error value was within 3% at the remaining target volume. The gamma passing rate was 95% at a radius of 9cm and 93.9% at 10cm, and a passing rate of more than 95% was shown in the remaining target volume. In ArcCheck, the average error value of the point dose was about 2% in all target volumes. The gamma passing rate also showed a pass rate of 98% or more in all target volumes. Conclusion: For small targets with a radius of 0.5cm or less or a large target with a radius of 9cm or more, considering the uncertainty of DQA based on MLC log files, phantom-ionized DQA is used in complementary ways to include point dose, gamma index, DVH, and target coverage. It is believed that it is desirable to verify the dose delivery through a comprehensive analysis.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.61-66
• /
• 2017

The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of portal dosimetry in comparison with the MapCHECK2 measurments. In this study, a total of 65 treatment plans including both volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) were retrospectively selected and analyzed (45 VMAT plans and 20 IMRT plans). A total of 4 types of linac models (VitalBeam, Trilogy, Clinac 21EXS, and Clianc iX) were used for the comparison between portal dosimetry and the MapCHECK2 measurements. The VMAT plans were delivered with two VitalBeam linacs (VitalBeam1 and VitalBeam2) and one Trilogy while the IMRT plans were delivered with one Clinac 21EXS and one Clinacl iX. The global gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry and the MapCHECK2 measurements were analyzed with a gamma criterion of 3%/3 mm for IMRT while those were analyzed with a gamma criterion of 2%/2 mm for VMAT. Spearman's correlation coefficients (r) were calculated between the gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry and those of the MapCHECK2 measurements. For VMAT, the gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry with the VitalBeam1, VitalBeam2, and Trilogy were $97.3%{\pm}3.5%$, $97.1%{\pm}3.4%$, and $97.5%{\pm}1.9%$, respectively. Those of the MapCHECK2 measurements were $96.8%{\pm}2.5%$, $96.3%{\pm}2.7%$, and $97.4%{\pm}1.3%$, respectively. For IMRT, the gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry with Clinac 21EXS and Clinac iX were $99.7%{\pm}0.3%$ and $99.8%{\pm}0.2%$, respectively. Those of the MapCHECK2 measurements were $96.5%{\pm}3.3%$ and $97.7%{\pm}3.2%$, respectively. Except for the result with the Trilogy, no correlations were observed between the gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry and those of the MapCHECK2 measurements. Therefore, both the MapCHECK2 measurements and portal dosimetry can be used as an alternative to each other for patient-specific QA for both IMRT and VMAT.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.87-92
• /
• 2015

The gated RapidArc may produce a dosimetric error due to the stop-and-go motion of heavy gantry which can misalign the gantry restart position and reduce the accuracy of important factors in RapidArc delivery such as MLC movement and gantry speed. In this study, the effect of stop-and-go motion in gated RapidArc was analyzed with varying gating window time, which determines the total number of stop-and-go motions. Total 10 RapidArc plans for treatment of liver cancer were prepared. The RPM gating system and the moving phantom were used to set up the accurate gating window time. Two different delivery quality assurance (DQA) plans were created for each RapidArc plan. One is the portal dosimetry plan and the other is MapCHECK2 plan. The respiratory cycle was set to 4 sec and DQA plans were delivered with three different gating conditions: no gating, 1-sec gating window, and 2-sec gating window. The error between calculated dose and measured dose was evaluated based on the pass rate calculated using the gamma evaluation method with 3%/3 mm criteria. The average pass rates in the portal dosimetry plans were $98.72{\pm}0.82%$, $94.91{\pm}1.64%$, and $98.23{\pm}0.97%$ for no gating, 1-sec gating, and 2-sec gating, respectively. The average pass rates in MapCHECK2 plans were $97.80{\pm}0.91%$, $95.38{\pm}1.31%$, and $97.50{\pm}0.96%$ for no gating, 1-sec gating, and 2-sec gating, respectively. We verified that the dosimetric accuracy of gated RapidArc increases as gating window time increases and efforts should be made to increase gating window time during the RapidArc treatment process.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.65-71
• /
• 2014

A Varian Portal Dosimetry system was compared to an isocentrically mounted MapCHECK 2 diode array for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) QA. A Varian TrueBeam STx with an aS-1000 digital imaging panel was used to acquire VMAT QA images for 13 plans using four photon energies (6, 8, 10 and 15 MV). The EPID-based QA images were compared to the Portal Dose Image Prediction calculated in the Varian Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS). An isocentrically mounted Sun Nuclear MapCHECK 2 diode array with 5 cm water-equivalent buildup was also used for the VMAT QAs and the measurements were compared to a composite dose plane from the Eclipse TPS. A ${\gamma}$ test was implemented in the Sun Nuclear Patient software with 10% threshold and absolute comparison at 1%/1 mm (dose difference/distance-to-agreement), 2%/2 mm, and 3%/3 mm criteria for both QA methods. The two-tailed paired Student's t-test was employed to analyze the statistical significance at 95% confidence level. The average ${\gamma}$ passing rates were greater than 95% at 3%/3 mm using both methods for all four energies. The differences in the average passing rates between the two methods were within 1.7% and 1.6% of each other when analyzed at 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm, respectively. The EPID passing rates were somewhat better than the MapCHECK 2 when analyzed at 1%/1 mm; the difference was lower for 8 MV and 10 MV. However, the differences were not statistically significant for all criteria and energies (p-values >0.05). The EPID-based QA showed large off-axis over-response and dependence of ${\gamma}$ passing rate on energy, while the MapCHECK 2 was susceptible to the MLC tongue-and-groove effect. The two fluence-based QA techniques can be an alternative tool of VMAT QA to each other, if the limitations of each QA method (mechanical sag, detector response, and detector alignment) are carefully considered.