English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Dosimetric investigation of dual energy photon beams with assymmetric collimator jaws Many modern linear accelerators are equipped with asymmetric collimators or jaws that can be moved independently. Asymmetric jaws have got many clinical applications in radiation therapy. In the present study, the dosimetric characteristics of asymmetric collimators from our linear accelerator with 6 and 18 MV X-rays were carried out. The field size factors (FSF) and half value layer (HVL) were measured in a water phantom using 0.6 cc Farmer chamber for symmetric and asymmetric fields for both 6 and 18 MV X-rays. Measurements of beam penumbra, percentage depth dose (PDD), cross beam profiles and calculated isodose curves were measured by RFA 300 for both asymmetric and symmetric fields. The FSF were found to agree with in 3% for symmetric and asymmetric fields. The HVL in water was found to be 15.8 cm and 14.4 cm for 6 MV photons and 26 cm and 22.9 cm for 18 MV photons at the central axis and at 20 cm off the central axis. At 30 cm depth the percentage depth dose for symmetric and asymmetric fields were found to differ as high as 6% for 6 MV and 4% for 18 MV fields. No observable difference in penumbra was noticed for symmetric and asymmetric fields of same dimensions. The constrictions of isodose curves at the edge nearer to central axis were noticed for asymmetrically placed fields. The observed differences could be due to the passage of primary beam through differential thickness of the flattening filter which alters the beam quality.