Photon Energy Response Matrix for Environmental Monitoring Systems Based on LiF:Mg,Ti and Hypersensitive Phosphors (LiF:Mg,Cu,P and a-Al2O3:C)

Robust determination of effective atomic numbers for electron interactions with TLD-100 and TLD-100H thermoluminescent dosimeters

“…This includes such applications as measurement of out-of-field organ doses in radiotherapy [2], where scattered and leaked radiation dominates and the radiation spectrum differs notably from the primary field. McKeever et al and the references therein provide a good overview of the characteristics of TLD-100 and TLD-100H dosimeters [3], the radiological properties of which are of significant interest [4][5][6][7][8][9][10].…”

LiF:Mg,Ti TLD response as a function of photon energy for moderately filtered x‐ray spectra in the range of 20–250 kVp relative to

“…30,31 Another LiF-based TLD, LiF:Mg,Cu,P ͑TLD-100H͒, has been shown to have differences of up to 35% between calculated and measured TLD response as a function of photon energy for x-ray beams from 30-250 kV. 16,32 Aside from TLDs, other media also demonstrate changes in response for varying irradiation energies. For example, the average energy required for ionization of dry air, W / e, is relatively constant over a wide range of photon energies of interest in medical physics, but it departs significantly when the secondary electron energies drop below 1 keV.…”

Performance testing of dosimeters used in interventional radiology: Results from the VERIDIC project

“…In addition, thermal treatment and the reading process can considerably affect the dosimeter properties. Regarding energy dependence of the dosimeter response, several studies were conducted in the ISO 4037 (ISO, 1996) standard N-series radiation qualities and reference photon beams of 137 Cs and 60 Co isotopes (Saez-Vergara et al, 1999;Olko et al, 2002;Davis et al, 2003;Apostolakopoulos et al, 2019;Parisi et al, 2019), while one study examined the performance of TLDs in the RQR-series (Radiation Qualities in Radiation beams emerging from the X-ray source assembly) (Carinou et al, 2008).…”

“…In case of the LiF:Mg,Ti results were more heterogeneous in different studies, but TLD energy dependence generally shows a maximum value in the 30-50 keV energy range. The cause of differences in TLD energy response may be due to the pellet material properties and not the reading and annealing procedures (Saez-Vergara et al, 1999). In the interventional procedures energy range from 15 keV up to 120 keV, the energy response deviates up to ±20% from unity, and up to +40% higher than unity, for LiF:Mg,Cu,P and LiF:Mg,Ti TLDs DOI: 10.1016/j.radmeas.2021.106515 CC-BY-NC-ND license respectively.…”