Program Information
Accuracy of Charge Particle Transport in Magnetic Fields Using EGSnrc
E Mainegra-Hing1*, H Bouchard2 , F Tessier3 , B Walters4 , (1) National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, ON, (2) Universite de Montreal, Montreal, QC, (3) National Research Council Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, (4) National Research Council Canada, Ottawa, Ontario
Presentations
SU-F-J-152 (Sunday, July 31, 2016) 3:00 PM - 6:00 PM Room: Exhibit Hall
Purpose:Determine accuracy of the current implementation of electron transport under magnetic fields in EGSnrc by means of single scattering (SS) and Fano convergence tests, and establish quantitatively the electron step size restriction required to achieve a desired level of accuracy for ionization chamber dosimetry.
Methods:Condensed history (CH) dose calculations are compared to SS results for a PTW30013 ionization chamber irradiated in air by a 60Co photon beam. CH dose results for this chamber irradiated in a water phantom by a source of mono-energetic electrons are compared to the prediction of Fano’s theorem for step size restrictions EM ESTEPE from 0.01 to 0.1 and strengths of 0.5 T, 1.0 T, and 1.5 T.
Results:CH calculations in air for 60Co photons using an EM ESTEPE of 0.25 overestimate SS values by 6% for a 1.5 T field and by 1.5% for a 0.5 T field. Agreement improves with decreasing EM ESTEPE reducing this difference at 0.02 to 0.13% and 0.04% for 1.5 T and 0.5 T respectively. CH results converge with decreasing EM ESTEPE reaching an agreement of 0.2% at a value of EM ESTEPE of 0.01 for 100 keV electrons. SS results at 100 keV for 1.5 T show the same EM ESTEPE dependency as the CH results.
Conclusion:Accurate transport of charged particles in magnetic fields is only possible if the step size is significantly restricted. An EM ESTEPE value of 0.02 is required to reproduce SS results at the 0.1% level for a calculation in air. The EM ESTEPE dependency of the SS results suggests SS is bypassed when simulating the transport of charged particles in magnetic fields. Fano test results for in water calculation suggest that only a 0.2% accuracy can be achieved with the current implementation.
Contact Email: