Home

Search

Collections

Journals

About

Contact us

My IOPscience

Angular distribution and yield from bremsstrahlung targets (for radiation therapy)

This article has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text article. 1984 Phys. Med. Biol. 29 797 (http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9155/29/7/004) View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details: IP Address: 155.207.9.33 The article was downloaded on 29/04/2012 at 15:32

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

Phys. Med. Biol., 1984, Vol. 29, No. 7,797-810.

Printed in Great Britain

Angular distribution and yield from bremsstrahlung targets

B Nordell and A Brahme
Dept of Radiation Physics, Karolinska Institute, Box 60204, 104 01 Stockholm, Sweden Received 15 August 1983, in final form 21 October 1983 Abstract. A simple integral has been evolved for calculation of the angular distribution and photon yield from bremsstrahlung targets. Only basic scattering powers and radiation and collision stopping powers of the target material at the incident electron energy are needed as input data dependent on material. The integral has been evaluated for different target materials such as gold,tantalum, aluminium, carbonand beryllium of varying thicknesses in the range O.OO1-l.Oro at electron energies up to 50 MeV. Good agreement is found with published experimental and theoretical data.

1 Introduction .
During the past 10 years several investigations have been reported on the optimum target and filter design for photon radiation therapy with electron energies around 20 MeV (Sherman et a1 1974, Podgorsak er a1 1974, Hutcheon et a1 1979, Brahme and Svensson 1976, 1979). More recently there has been a renewed interest in the use of higher energy photon beams for radiation therapy (e.g., as parallel opposed fields (Brahme et a1 1980)) and for the production of short-lived positron-emitting radionuclides at the hospitals using photonuclearreactions(TrampischandSattler 1976, Brinkman 1980, Nordell et a1 1979, 1982, Piltingsrud 1982, 1983, Wagenbach 1981). In the present investigation the peak photon energy of interest has been raised as high as 50 MeV since new efficient methods have been developed for the production of photon beams for radiotherapy of high absorbed dose and spectral uniformity at thisenergy.It is highly impractical to useflatteningfilters atthese high energies (Brahme andSvensson 1979) due to the extensive photon absorption, spectral degradation and neutron production. Instead, the elementary bremsstrahlung beam is preferablyscanned by electromagnetic means (Brahme et a1 1980, Brahme andReistad 1981)toobtainbroad uniformradiation fields. Inordertomake full use of the radiation modalities at this high energy the design of the bremsstrahlung target must be optimised to give maximum yield and minimumangularspread of high-energy bremsstrahlungphotons.Intheapplication of scannedphotonbeams in dynamic conformation therapy a photon beam with the smallest possible divergence is also of considerableinterest.Thephotonangulardistribution is also of importancewhen using photonuclear reactions for radionuclide production because the dimensions of the target should be optimised to produce the maximum photon fluence rate integrated over the volume of the production vessel. In this paper a simple equation is presented for calculating the absolute photon energyfluencedifferential in anglefromdifferentmaterialsandtargetthicknesses. Measurements of the maximum absorbeddose in tissue-likematerials for 26 and
0031-9155/84/070797 + 14$02.25 @ 1984 The Institute of Physics 797

798

and l3 Nordell

A Brahme

50 MeV electrons impinging on bremsstrahlung targets made of carbon, aluminium and tantalum are also presented and compared with the calculations. The calculated angulardistributionsand yields havealsobeencompared with other theories and measurements over a wide range of energies and materials.

2. Theory
2.1. General When high-energy electrons pass through a target they lose energy in ionising collisions with the electronsand in radiative collisions with the nuclei,therebygenerating bremsstrahlungphotons.Thebremsstrahlungproductionprocess was reviewed by Koch and Motz (1959). Their presentation included the various cross-sections differentials in photon energy and photon scattering angle in thin targets. At a depth in a thick bremsstrahlung target the intrinsic angular photon distribution for a thin target must be folded with the angular distribution of the electroris produced by multiple scattering. For semi-thin targets, Shiff (1946) derived a formula for the angular photon distribution. This formula is based on the expression derived by Sommerfeld (1939) for the intrinsic angular photon distribution and on the angular electron distribution of Williams (1940). The Shiff formula is valid for angles >m,c2/E where m,c2 is the electron rest energy and E the photon energy. The mean radiative energy loss by electrons when slowed down in a target is given by the radiative mass stopping power which is a parameter tabulated for most elements and materials over awide range of energies (Berger and Seltzer 1982). This parameter and the mass scattering power (Rossi 1952, ICRU 1972, Brahme 1972) are the basic input data for thecalculation of the absolute yield and the angular photon distribution.

2.2. Radiative stopping power

Consider a beam of electrons with an energy Eo incident on a target of total thickness t (see figure 1). In a thin layer at a depth between z and z+dz, electrons lose energy

Figure 1. Schematic view of the bremsstrahlung target. The total photon energy fluence behind the target
is integrated from thin layers at depth z and with thickness d.?. The angular photon distribution "(0, z ) depends on the intrinsic angular photon distribution and on the angular electron distjbution which are assumed to have Gaussian distributions with mean square scattering angles of 0; and 0:, respectively.

Angular distribution and from yield

bremsstrahlung targets

799

in the form of bremsstrahlung as given by the radiative mass stopping power Srad/P multiplied by the layer thickness dz. The dependence o the radiative stopping power Srad/P on the depth 2 or mean f energy E ( z ) can be well approximated by srad(z)/P
=E(z)Erad

(1)

where &rad is the specific radiative mass stopping power Srad,O/P&. The assumption ? of strict proportionality between Srad/pand the mean electron energy l leads to a small overestimation of the total radiative energy loss at low energies. In figure 2 the

10

20 30 Energy l MeV 1

40

50

Figure 2. Specific radiative mass stopping power as a function of the energy for the materials tantalum, aluminium, carbon and beryllium. E,,,, = S , d / P E o .

specific radiation mass stopping power is plotted as a function o the energy for four f 10 different materials. The variation of s,,d,o/p& in the energy range from to 50 MeV is generally less than 10YO. This is quite a good approximation for the present purposes because of the fast decrease of the radiation stopping power with energy and the fact that most of the radiation is produced close to the surface of the entrance side of the target.

2.3. Electron mean energy

To be able to use equation ( l ) ,the depth dependence of the mean electron energy of must be known. Over the depth interval importance for bremsstrahlung production the mean energy of primary electrons is well approximated by the relation:

where Eo is the initial mean electron energy and S,,, the total mass stopping power (Brahme 1975, cf. also Andreo and Brahme 1981).
2.4. Radiation yield

To check the influence of using a constant specific radiative stopping power the total energyconverted to bremsstrahlungwhen anelectron is completelystopped was

800

B Nordell and A Brahme

calculated from
rt

Jo

The radiation yield or the energy fraction converted to bremsstrahlung is given by AErad/Eo. The radiation yield calculated using equations (1) and (2) was compared with data from Berger and Seltzer (1982) at different electron energies for the materials tantalum, aluminium, carbon and beryllium. The differences were 0.0, +2.9, +4.0, and +l.8% for 50 MeV and the corresponding figures at 6 MeV were -4.5, +5.8, +6.2 and +7.8'/0 respectively. This means that the absolute yield is slightly overestimated for low atomic number materialsby a few per cent but it is a very good approximation for high Z materials and high energies.

2.5. Intrinsic angular distribution of the bremsstrahlung process

The mean squareangle of the intrinsic bremsstrahlung process was derived by Stearns (1949) forincident energies between 50 and 300 MeV. Heshowed that the root mean square angle was given by

where mec2= rest mass of the electron ( = O S 1 1 MeV), Eo = initial electron energy in MeV, k =proportionality constant. Values of the constant k as a function of the photon energy and material have been calculated by Stearns (1949). Because the intrinsic angular distribution of the bremsstrahlung process for simplicity will be approximated by a Gaussian distribution the value of k has instead been estimated by a fit to experimental angular photon distributions. The value k = 0.26, independent of material and energy, was derived from radial dose profiles measured at 50 MeV by Brahme et a1 (1980) and was used throughout the present paper.

2.6. Angular distribution of electrons

For the scattering of the electrons a pureGaussian distribution (Williams 1940, Fermi 1941, Eyges 1948) is assumed, with a correction for the best fit of the central part of angular distribution according to Scott (1963) and Brahme et a1 (1981). The mean square scattering angle of the central portion was calculated from
-

0; = k,Tflz( 1

+EZ)

(5)

where To= d02/dl the linear scattering power, z =depth in target, E = total specific stopping power, k, = modifying factor ( k c= [l - (1.33/B)]/1.27 = 0.683 forB = 10 (cf. Brahme et a1 1981)). When the electrons reach the depth of full diffusion the relationabove no longer holds since the angular distribution reaches a state of equilibrium. e,?, is then set to the constant value 0.6 rad2 (cf. Roos et a1 1973).

Angular distribution yield bremsstrahlung and from targets

80 1

2.7. Total angular distribution of photons

The mean square value of the total angular distribution of bremsstrahlung photons produced in a thin layer of the target is contributed from threedifferent sources. These are the intrinsic angular spread the breEsstrahlungprocess, e;, the multiple scattering of ,: of of the electrons at a depth in&e target, e and the angular distribution the electron e: beam incident on the target,, determined by the emittenceof the beam. By assuming that all these contributions are independent and that they have Gaussian distributions, the resultant total mean square angular spread of the photons is given by

In the present calculationsit is assumed that the electron beam hitting the target is parallel and therefore the 0; term has been neglected. The total angular distribution of the bremsstrahlung energy fluence from a layer of thickness dz at a depth z of the target may thus be approximated by a Gaussian distribution with a mean square scattering angle e : ( z ) .

2.8. Mean photon attenuation coeficient

Since the photons generated at a depth z penetrate the remainder of the target they are attenuated by the factor exp[-fi(t- z ) ] where t is the total target thickness and fi is amass attenuation coefficient dependentonthephotonenergyspectraand consequently on the depth in the target. From the point of view of attenuation a bremsstrahlung spectrum is often well approximated by a monoenergetic beam with an energyof one third of the maximum photon energy of the bremsstrahlung spectrum (cf. Svensson and Brahme 1984). By assuming that most of the photons are produced very close to the surface of the entrance side of the target and that these photons must penetrate a substantial part of the target, the mean attenuation coefficient has been chosen from that of a monoenergetic photon beam with an energy of one third of the maximum photon (and electron) energy.
2.9. Target energy fluence differential in angle

The total angular distribution of the bremsstrahlung energy fluence from a layer of thickness d z of the target may thus be approximated by a Gaussian distribution with a mean square scattering angle e:(z)

The angular distribution of the energy fluence in equation (7) is normalised to one incident electron such that the integral

independent of the value of ? ( z ) .

802

B Nordell and A Brahme

Pn

The total photon energy fluence formula

differential in angle may now be given by the

, where C is a factor which normalises equation (9) to the measured data.

3. Experimental methods
Measurements of the photon yield versus target thicknesses in the forward direction have been performed for electrons with energies of 50.0 MeV and 26.6 MeV. The accelerator used was the racetrack microtron at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm from which electrons can be extracted in any of the 15 orbits, i.e., electron energies from 3.3 MeV to 50 MeVwith an energy spread of about one per cent (Rosander er a1 1982). During the experiments the accelerator was run at a pulse repetition frequency of 50 Hz and a pulse length of 5 ks. The mean electron beam current was about 1 PA. The experimental set up is shown schematically in figure 3. Electrons from the racetrack microtron were focused on to the target by two quadrupoles. Before hitting

AI wlndow

Electron team

++i

Inductlon coil Target

-/

50

30

2o

at dose maxlmum

Figure 3. Experimental set-up for the forward photon beam dose measurements. Measurements

in cm.

the target the electrons passed through a vacuum window made of aluminium with a thickness of 0.08 mm. The width of the beam at the target observed on a fluorescent was screen by means of a television camera and its width for half the maximum intensity was about 5 mm. The electron current was monitored by an induction monitor and its pulses were fed to a fast amplifier and an integrator. The absolute integratedsignal from the induction monitor was compared with simultaneous measurements of the current from a Faraday cup connected to an electrometer. The agreement between these two methods of measurement was generally better than 5%. A magnet with a pole gap of 3 cm was placed after the target to sweep out electrons penetrating the target or produced through multiple interactions. The forward photon fluence was collimated by a lead collimator with a hole diameter of 5 cm. The photon yield or the absorbed dose measured in a Perspex phantom20 cm X 20 cm X 20 cm was placed behind the collimator. The distance between the front of the targets and the front of the phantom was 126 cm. The absorbed dose was measured with a PTW

Angular distribution and from yield

bremsstrahlung targets

803

0.1 cm3 cylindrical ionisation chamber(Type M2332) operating 400 V and connected at to a Therados RDM electrometer. The ionisation chamber was placed at the build-up maximum which was at a depth of 7 cm and 4 cm for electron energiesof 50 MeV and 26 MeV respectively. Since the beams were unflattened the depth of dose maximum et was fairly independent of target thickness over the range studied (Brahme a1 1980). The determination of the absorbed dose was made according to the Nordic dosimetry protocol (NACP 1980). To ensure the correct setting of the magnet the ionisation current was observed when the current in the magnet was slowly increased. The magnetic field was set at a value of about 0.15 T when using 50 MeV electron energy at which strength the ionisationcurrentreachesaplateau.Withthe availablemagnet andexperimental set-up it was not possible to reach zero dose without bremsstrahlung target due to bremsstrahlung from the magnet poles and vacuum window. The measured data were corrected for this background, which for the very thin targets was as high as 15%. The ordinary background could be reduced by up to 50% by adding an extra magnet close to the tantalum target. This magnet could only be used with the tantalum target because of limited space behind the lov Z target materials. By measuring the yield relative to the target thickness for the two background levels with and without the extra magnet, a correction factor, which varied with the target thickness, was obtained and used to correct the measured data. The >art of the background which originated from the exit window was estimated by using equation (9).
4. Results

The constant k in equation (4), which describes the equivalent root mean square angle of the intrinsic photon distribution, was determined by a fit to the experimental data distribution from targets tantalum and carbon of of Brahme et al(1980) for the photon with thicknesses of 0.9 cm and22.5 cm respectively,i.e., targets which fully stop 50 MeV electrons. These data were measured in a water phanton one metre from the target with a silicon diode as detector, the energy of the electrons impinging on the target was 50 MeV. Figure 4 shows calculated data using equation (9) and k = 0.26

3 BEi MeV rod

4
)

Figure 4. Calculated photon energy fluence plotted against angle for targets that fully stop the electrons. Electron energy 50 MeV. Tantalum t = 15.1 g cm-*, aluminium t = 20.9 g cm-*, carbon t = 22.6 g and berylliumt = 26.5 g cm-* (solid curves). Measured data from Brahme (1980) to eta1 which the calculated data are fitted by changing the parameter k in equation (4) (dashed curves).

804

B Nordell and A Brahme

for tantalum and carbon with thicknesses corresponding to the maximum electron ranges in the target, i.e., 15.1 g cm-2 and 22.6 g cm-*, respectively. For comparison, the experimental data o Brahme et a1 (1980) are shown in the same figure.This f k-value can be compared with the value calculated by Stearns (1949) of about 0.65 with a slight dependence on the photon energy and target material. The reason for the difference is that Stearns predicts an angular distribution that is wider at large angles and more peaked forsmall angles than the Gaussian distribution assumed here for simplicity. Included in figure 4are calculated angular distributions for materials the aluminiumandberyllium at target thicknesses corresponding to the electron CSDA range, i.e., r, = 20.9 g cm-2 and 26.5 g cm-2, respectively. In figure 5 the theoretical and experimental data of Lanzl and Hansson (1951) are compared with calculated values for a gold target used with an electron energy of

BE l MeV rad I

Figure 5. Calculated photon energy fluence plotted against angle 17 MeV for gold targets with thicknesses at of r, = 8.6 g cm-2 (solid curves). The calculated data are compared with measurements at different target and thicknesses ( t =0.006 r, ( O ) , t=0.028 r, (A),t =0.11 r, (0) t =0.83 ro ( A ) ) and theoretical values (dashed curves) for thicknesses t = 0.006 r,, t = 0.028 r,, t = 0.1 I ro from Land and Hansson (195 I ) .

17 MeV. In this comparison equation (9) predicts a slightly wider distribution than these authors theoretical curves but it gives a very good agreement with their experimental data both as regards shape and dependence on target thickness. Comparisons have also been made with data from Kovalev et al (1972) with excellent agreement both for different target thicknesses and different materials. Calculations for different target thicknesses for tantalum at electron energies of 50 MeV were performed and shown in figure 6 in comparison with the Shiff (1946) formula. At 50 MeV and the tantalum target, equation (9) yields a slightly narrower distribution than that predicted Shiff but the shape and the relation between by different target thicknesses show good agreement. In figure7,calculations are shown for the same materials as in figure4 and a thicknessequal to r, but at 26 MeV electron energy. The experimental data from Podgorsak et a1 (1974) and Hutcheon et a1 (1979) are compared with calculation. The same figure also shows the angular distribution for a very thin beryllium target which characterises the width of the intrinsic angular photon distribution.

Angular distribution and yield from bremsstrahlung targets

805

Figure 6. Calculated photon energy fluence plotted against angle 50 MeV for tantalum targetsof different at thicknesses (solid curves). Dashed curves are calculated data Shiff (1946) for W and corresponding energy by and thicknesses. The Shiff formula is not valid for full range target ( t = ro).

The results of the calculation of the ph3ton yield in the forward direction are plotted against target thickness in figures 8 and 9 on arelativescaleforelectron aluminium and carbon. energies of 50 and 26.6 MeV and the target materials tantalum, In the same figures the experimental data are shown normalised to the maximum of the calculated curves for each material. The forward yield does not vary appreciably between different materials. Further, the yield from thick targets which fully absorb theelectrons is greatlydependent on self-absorption in thetarget, especially for aluminium targets give higher yields than tantalum at 50 MeV where carbon and tantalum.

' Ob.,
l
Hutcheon et o/ 1979 Ta

2 3 BE I MeV rod 1

Figure 7. Calculated photon energy fluence plotted against angle at MeV for different target materials. 26.6 Tantalum t = 11.2 g cm-', aluminium t = 13.2 g cm-', carbon t = 13.5 g cm-', and beryllium t = 12.5 g cm-' (solid curves). Comparison is made with measurements from Hutcheonet a1 (1979) at 25 MeV for tantalum r = 11.6 g cm-'and aluminium t = 14.6 g cm-', and Podgorsaketa1 (1974)at 25 MeV for lead t = 10.2 g cm-' and aluminium r = 14.0 g cm-'.

806

B Nordell and A Brahme

F
0.2
0.4
0.6

0.8

1.o

Target thlckness , f l ro I

Figure 8. Calculated forward yield 0 = 0 plotted against target thickness at MeV for tantalum, aluminium 50 and carbon. Each curve is normalised to 100% at the maximum yield. Data points are ionisation chamber 1.26 m from the target (cf. figure 3). Tantalum measurements at the maximum dose in a Lucite phantom r, = 15.1 g cm-' ( O ) ,aluminium r, = 20.9 g cm-' (A),and carbon r, = 22.6 g cm-' (W).

The energy fluence calculated per solid angle and electron from equation (9) has been converted to absorbed in tissue per unit electron energy for energies between dose 6 and 50 MeV and for several materials optimum target thickness, as well as targets of with thicknesses corresponding to one electron range and the results are shown in made at a point one metre figure 10 and table 2. The dose calculations have been from the front of the bremsstrahlung target with a build-up material corresponding to full electronic equilibrium:

D =w L " / P M

(10)

where D = absorbed dose per electron energy hitting the target, energy fluence, unit 9= p.,,/p = t h e meanenergyabsorption coefficient corresponding to one third of the maximum photon energy,A = correction factor for attenuation the build-up material. in

26.6 MeV
6

Ta Ai

.C

i
l
l

0t

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1D

Target thlckness, t ( r , )

Figure 9. Same as figure8 but 26.6 MeV. Tantalum r, = 11.2 g cm-' ( O ) ,aluminium r, = 13.2 g cm-' (A), and carbon r,, = 13.5 g cm-' (W). The measured data are in good agreement with corresponding ion chamber measurement by Sherman et al (1974) for an electron energy at 25.5 MeV for tantalum (A).

Angular distribution and yield from bremsstrahlung targets

807

1 10

20

30
Energy l MeV

LO
I

50

Figure 10. Calculated forward dose D ( 0 ) using equation (9) andan energy fluence todose conversion according to equation (lo), for electron energies from 6 to 50 MeV for tantalum and aluminium at both optimum target thickness, and at a thickness of electron full-range. The dose is given in mGy J" electron beam power at 1 m from the front of the target. To convert mGy J" to mGy min" PA" multiply by 60E, where E is the electron beam energy in MeV. For comparison, the yield curve from Karzmark and Pering 1973 is plotted. Data points are measured at 50 MeV using an ionisation chamber at dose maximum in a Lucite phantom. Optimum target tantalum ( 0 )t =0.14 r,, aluminium (A)t =0.26 r,, full range target tantalum (0) r,, aluminium ( A ) t = r,. The calculated curves are normalised to the measured data at t= 50 MeV by making the constant C =0.70 in equation (9). ,
Table 1. Data used in the conversion from energy fluence (MeV sr per electron) to absorbed dose (mGy J-l) in water. Mean Electron energy (MeV) (MeV)
0.0139 50 36 26.6 0.0162 0.0337 12 6

energy

Pc*/ P

(cm2 g-') (cm2

16.6 12.0 8.8 4.0 2 2.0 0.0149 0.0206 0.0260

depth, x (cm)
~

*/P

g-l)
~ ~~~~~

e-W
0.877

7 0.892 5.5

0.0188 0.0208

1.5 1969).

0.0489

0.935 0.929

p,,/p =mass energy absorption coefficient (Hubbell p / p =mass attenuation coefficient (Hubbell 1969).

808

and B Nordell

A Brahme

Table 2. Absorbed dose in tissue at 1 metre per unit of electron energy hitting the target.
Calculated (mGy dose Electron target Optimum energy Ta (MeV) C

J-)
Full range target target Optimum

Measured (mGy dose

J-)
Full range target

AI

Ta

AI

Ta

AI

Ta

AI

50 36 3.2 26.6 0.97 12 0.23 0.39 0.27 6 0.25 0.23 0.41

9.1 5.3

9.1 5.0 3.12.6 0.82

9.1 5.0 6.2 5.17.5 8.4 9.2 6.0 7.0 1.6 5.1 4.4 4.1 3.4 3.1 2.72.1 3.6 3.9 2.7 2.9 3.1 2.3 0.77 0.89 0.76 0.71

To convert mGy J- to rnGy )*A min the table values should be mltltiplied electron energy in MeV.

by 6 0 E where E is the

Data used in these calculations are shown in table 2 . The calculated data have been fitted to the measured data for tantalum at 50 MeV by applying a value of 0.70 for C, in equation (9) and this value is used for all energies and materials to correct for the non-Gaussian intrinsic photon distribution. For comparison variousexperimental data from Karzmark and Pering (1973) areincluded in figure 10. In this figure it should be noted that above 20 MeV the yield in the forward direction for the low atomic number materialsexceeds the yield for thehigh atomic number materialswhen using targets which fully stop the electrons. For the target thickness that gives maximum output the high atomic number materials give the highest dose rates-as would be expected from their higher bremsstrahlung yields.
5, Conclusions

A simple integral has been evolved for the calculation of the absolute yield and the angular distribution of photons from any material and for electron energies between 6 and 50 MeV. This integral has been used to calculate the angular distributions of bremsstrahlung photons from gold, tantalum, aluminium, carbon and beryllium targets for different thicknesses and energies. This integral shows that the width of the angular distribution is nearly inversely proportional to the electron energy. Since multiple scattering of the electrons in the target makes a large contribution to the angular distribution, the angular distribution of the photons is greatly dependent on the target material andthickness of the target, low Z materials and thin targetsgive distributions with smaller widths. Calculations of the absolute forward yield (8= 0) for target thicknesses up to the full range of the electrons have also beenperformed and compared with measurements at two electron energies, 26.6 and 50 MeV. Due to self-attenuation in the target, the maximum yield is obtained for thicknesses less than ro. At 50 MeV a tantalum target 5 will have a yield about 80% higher with the optimum thickness ( t ~ 0 . 1 ro) than with a full range target( t = ro). It should alsobe observed that range targets aluminium full of and carbon have a higher forward yield than tantalum at energies above 20 MeV due to less self-absorption and the reduced influence of multiple scatter. The forward yield for optimum target thickness, however, is higher for tantalum. This implies that a bremsstrahlung target for maximum yield in the forward direction should be made of a high atomic number material with a thickness of about 0.15 ro.

Angular distribution from and bremsstrahlung yield targets

809

If the penetrating electrons have to be stopped in the target this should be preferably done with an additional low atomic number electron stopper to minimise the concomitant absorption of high-energy photons (Brahme and Svensson 1979). In radionuclide production and activation analysis using photonuclear reactions the production vessel is often of limited size and it subjects a small solid angle, this means that the bremsstrahlung target should be made of a low atomic number material or o multiple layers; a thin high atomic number bremsstrahlung converter followed by f an electron stop made of a low atomic number. This would give better yield over a certain angle in the forward direction than using simply full-range high or low atomic number targets. To minimise collimationandradiation shielding problemsfor scanning photon beam therapy machines a thin beryllium target, followed by a graphite electron stop is a good choice since thiswill give a narrow beam, low photoneutron production and minimise the cost of the target.

Acknowledgment
We gratefully acknowledge contribution the Caracolias. tothemeasurementsfromThomas

Resume
Distribution angulaire et rendement de production du rayonnement de freinage dans une cible. Une fonction inttgrale simple a ttt mise au point pour calculer la distribution angulaire et la production de photons de freinage dans des cibles. Dans ce cas, les seules donntes ntcessaires i propos du milieu sont les pouvoirs de ralentissement par collision et par rayonnement et les paramttres de base de la diffusion. La fonction inttgrale a CtC tvalute pour difftrents mattriaux cibles tels que lor, le tantale, Ialuminium, le carbone et le btrillium, pour des tpaisseurs comprises dans la gamme 0,001 B 1,0 r, et pour des tnergies dtlectrons allant jusqui 50 MeV. Les rtsultats sont en bon accord avec les donntes exptrimentales et thtoriques de la litttrature.

Zusammenfassung
Winkelverteilung und Ausbeute bei Bremsstrahlungstargets. Entwickelt wurde ein einfaches Integral zur Berechnung der Winkelverteilung und der Photonenausbeute bei Bremsstrahlungstargets. Als Eingangswerte werden nur Streuvermogen und Strahlungs- und Stopbremsvermogen desTargetmaterials bei der einfallenden Elektronenenergiegebraucht. Das Integral wurde ausgewertet fur verschiedene Targetmaterialien wie Gold, Tantal, Aluminium, Kohlenstoff und Beryllium verschiedener Dicke im Bereich von 0.001-1.0 r, bei Elektronenenergien bis zu 50 MeV. Eine gute Ubereinstimmung mit den veroffentlichten experimentellen und theoretischen Werten wurde gefunden.

References
Andreo P and Brahme A 1981 Med. Phys. 8 682 Berger M J and Seltzer S M 1982 Stopping Powers and Ranges of Electrons and Positrons NBSIR 82-2550 Brahme A1972 On the Optimal Choice of Scattering Foils for Electron Therapy TRITA-EPP 72-17 (Stockholm: Royal Inst. of Technology) -1975 Simple Relations for thePenetration High Energy Electron Beams in Matter SS1 Report 1975-01 1 of (Stockholm: National Institute of Radiation Protection) Brahme A, Kraepelien T and Svensson H 1980 Acta Radiol. Oncol. 19 305 Brahme A, Lax I and Andreo P 1981 Acta Radiol. Oncol. 20 147 Brahme A and Reistad D 1981 IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-28 1880

810

B Nordell and A Brahme

Brahme A and Svensson H 1976 in Digest Fourth ICMP Canada 28.3 (abstract) Phys. Med. Biol. 22 565 1979 Acta Radiol. Oncol. 18 244 Brinkman G A 1980 In?. J. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 31 85 Eyges L 1948 Phys. Rev. 74 1534 Fermi E as cited by Rossi B B and Greisen K 1941 Rev. Mod. Phys. 13 265 Hubbell J H 1969 Photon Cross-sections, Attenuation Coefficients and Energy Absorption Coefficients from 10 k e V to 100 G e V NSRDS-NBS 29 (Washington: National Bureau of Standards) Hutcheon R M, Schriber S 0, Funk L W and Sherman N K 1979 Med. Phys. 6 211 ICRU1972 RadiationDosimetry.ElectronswithInitialEnergiesBetween 1 andSOMeV Report21 (Washington, DC: ICRU) Karzmark C J and Pering N C 1973 Phys. Med. Biol. 18 321 Koch H W and Motz J W 1959 Rev. Mod. Phys. 31 920 Kovalev V P, Kahrin V P and Gordeev V V 1972 Atom. Energie 32 1 Lanzl L H and Hansson A 0 1951 Phys. Rev. 83 959 NACP (Nordic Association of Clinical Physics) 1980 Acta Radiol. Oncol. 19 5 Nordell B, Brahme A and Reuthal M 1979 presented at 5th ICMP, Jerusalem (abstract) Phys. Med. Biol. 25 785 Nordell B, Wagenbach U and Sattler E L 1982 In?. J. Appl. Radiat. hot. 33 187 Piltingsrud H V 1982 Med. Phys. 9 514 - 1983 Med. Phys. 10 147 Podgorsak E B, Rawlinson J A, GlavinoviC M I and Johns H E 1974 A m . J. Roentgenol. 121 873 Roos H, Drepper P and Harder D 1973 in Proc. 4th Symp. on Microdosimetry EUR 5122 p 779 Rosander S, Sedlacek M, Wernholm 0 and Babic H 1982 Nucl. Instrum. Methods 204 1 Rossi B B 1952 High Energy Particles (New York: Prentice Hall) Scott W T 1963 Rev. Mod. Phys. 35 231 Sherman N K, Lokan K H , Hutcheon R M, Funk L W, Brown W R and Brown P 1974 Med. Phys. 1 185 Shiff L I 1946 Phys. Rev. 70 87 Sommerfeld A 1939 Atombau und Spectrallinien (Braunschweig: Vieweg) Vol 2, p 55 Stearns M 1949 Phys. Rev. 76 836 Svensson H and Brahme A 1984 in Progress in Medical Radiation Physics 11, ed. C. Orton Trampisch W and Sattler E L 1976 Kerntechnik 18 222 Wagenbach U 1981 Thesis, Justus-Liebig-Universitat, Giessen Williams E J 1940 Phys. Rev. 58 292
_ .