• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.41 no.6
• /
• pp.20-28
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this study was to compare the ultra-violet(UV) radiation under the landscaping shade facilities and tree with natural solar UV of the outdoor space at summer middays. The UVA+B and UVB were recorded every minute from the $20^{th}$ of June to the $26^{th}$ of September 2012 at a height of 1.1m above in the four different shading conditions, with fours same measuring system consisting of two couple of analog UVA+B sensor(220~370nm, Genicom's GUVA-T21GH) and UVB sensor(220~320nm, Genicom's GUVA-T21GH) and data acquisition systems(Comfile Tech.'s Moacon). Four different shading conditions were under an wooden shelter($W4.2m{\times}L4.2m{\times}H2.5m$), a polyester membrane structure ($W4.9m{\times}L4.9m{\times}H2.6m$), a Salix koreensis($H11{\times}B30$), and a brick-paved plot without any shading material. Based on the 648 records of 17 sunny days, the time serial difference of natural solar UVA+B and UVB for midday periods were analysed and compared, and statistical analysis about the difference between the four shading conditions was done based on the 2,052 records of daytime period from 10 A.M. to 4 P.M.. The major findings were as follows; 1. The average UVA+B under the wooden shelter, the membrane and the tree were $39{\mu}W/cm^2$(3.4%), $74{\mu}W/cm^2$(6.4%), $87{\mu}W/cm^2$(7.6%) respectively, while the solar UVA+B was $1.148{\mu}W/cm^2$. Which means those facilities and tree screened at least 93% of solar UV+B. 2. The average UVB under the wooden shelter, the membrane and the tree were $12{\mu}W/cm^2$(5.8%), $26{\mu}W/cm^2$(13%), $17{\mu}W/cm^2$(8.2%) respectively, while the solar UVB was $207{\mu}W/cm^2$. The membrane showed the highest level and the wooden shelter lowest. 3. According to the results of time serial analysis, the difference between the three shaded conditions around noon was very small, but the differences of early morning and late afternoon were apparently big. Which seems caused by the matter of the formal and structural characteristics of the shading facilities and tree, not by the shading materials itself. In summary, the performance of the four landscaping shade facilities and tree were very good at screening the solar UV at outdoor of summer middays, but poor at screening the lateral UV during early morning and late afternoon. Therefore, it can be apparently said that the more delicate design of shading facilities and big tree or forest to block the additional lateral UV, the more effective in conditioning the outdoor space reducing the useless or even harmful radiation for human activities.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.30 no.1_2
• /
• pp.201-208
• /
• 2018

Purpose : The purpose of this study is to compare and analyze the set-up errors using the Combine IGRT with ExacTrac and CBCT phased in the treatment of Stereotatic Body Radiotherapy. Methods and materials : Patient who were treated Stereotatic Body Radiotherapy in the ulsan university hospital from May 2014 to november 2017 were classified as treatment area three brain, nine spine, three pelvis. First using ExacTrac Set-up error calibrated direction of Lateral(Lat), Longitudinal(Lng), Vertical(Vrt), Roll, Pitch, Yaw, after applied ExacTrac moving data in addition to use CBCT and set-up error calibrated direction of Lat, Lng, Vrt, Rotation(Rtn). Results : When using ExacTrac, the error in the brain region is Lat $0.18{\pm}0.25cm$, Lng $0.23{\pm}0.04cm$, Vrt $0.30{\pm}0.36cm$, Roll $0.36{\pm}0.21^{\circ}$, Pitch $1.72{\pm}0.62^{\circ}$, Yaw $1.80{\pm}1.21^{\circ}$, spine Lat $0.21{\pm}0.24cm$, Lng $0.27{\pm}0.36cm$, Vrt $0.26{\pm}0.42cm$, Roll $1.01{\pm}1.17^{\circ}$, Pitch $0.66{\pm}0.45^{\circ}$, Yaw $0.71{\pm}0.58^{\circ}$, pelvis Lat $0.20{\pm}0.16cm$, Lng $0.24{\pm}0.29cm$, Vrt $0.28{\pm}0.29cm$, Roll $0.83{\pm}0.21^{\circ}$, Pitch $0.57{\pm}0.45^{\circ}$, Yaw $0.52{\pm}0.27^{\circ}$ When CBCT is performed after the couch movement, the error in brain region is Lat $0.06{\pm}0.05cm$, Lng $0.07{\pm}0.06cm$, Vrt $0.00{\pm}0.00cm$, Rtn $0.0{\pm}0.0^{\circ}$, spine Lat $0.06{\pm}0.04cm$, Lng $0.16{\pm}0.30cm$, Vrt $0.08{\pm}0.08cm$, Rtn $0.00{\pm}0.00^{\circ}$, pelvis Lat $0.06{\pm}0.07cm$, Lng $0.04{\pm}0.05cm$, Vrt $0.06{\pm}0.04cm$, Rtn $0.0{\pm}0.0^{\circ}$. Conclusion : Combine IGRT with ExacTrac in addition to CBCT during Stereotatic Body Radiotherapy showed that it was possible to reduce the set-up error of patients compared to single ExacTrac. However, the application of Combine IGRT increases patient set-up verification time and absorption dose in the body for image acquisition. Therefore, depending on the patient's situation that using Combine IGRT to reduce the patient's set-up error can increase the radiation treatment effectiveness.