SHORT COMMUNICATION
Implementation of a high dose routine dosimetry in a self-shielded irradiator
Walter Vargas-Segura1,2
&
Laura Rojas-Rojas1
1. Technological Institute of Costa Rica, Physics School, Calle 15, Avenida 14 Cartago, Costa Rica; walvargas@itcr.ac.cr; laurarojas@itcr.ac.cr,
2. Hospital Mexico, Radiotherapy Department, San José, Costa Rica.
Recibido 15-III-2024 ● Corregido 04-VI-202 ● Aceptado 17-VI-2024
https://doi.org/10.22458/urj.v15i1.5229
|
Introduction: Ionizing radiation is applied in various fields, and dosimetric control guarantees the quality and safety of products during the irradiation process. There is a need for dosimetric calibration procedures in industrial irradiation plants, specifically for self-shielded irradiation systems. Objective: To implement high dose dosimetry in the routine control of irradiated materials within a self-shielded irradiator. Methods: We worked with 32 dosimeters; we divided the dose range used into 8 points and used four RED Perspex dosimeters per point. We measured the specific absorbance for each dosimeter; plotted these values against dose and produced a third-degree polynomial fit as a calibration curve. Results: We obtained the calibration curve with an r2 of 0,9997. The uncertainties due to the dispersion of the dosimeters and the calibration curve were 1,39% and 0,22%, respectively, for a total uncertainty of 4,80%. This uncertainty includes dose determination with a factor coverage (k) equal to 2 for a 95% confidence interval. Conclusion: Perspex RED dosimeters can be used for routine control of irradiated products in a self-shielded irradiator system.
Keywords: RED Perspex, calibration curve, PMMA dosimeters, high dose dosimetry, self-shielded irradiator, dose uncertainty.
|
RESUMEN. “Implementación de dosimetría de rutina de altas dosis en un irradiador autoblindado”. Introducción: La radiación ionizante se aplica en diversos campos, y el control dosimétrico garantiza la calidad y seguridad de los productos durante el proceso de irradiación. Existe una necesidad de procedimientos de calibración dosimétrica en plantas de irradiación industrial, específicamente para sistemas de irradiación auto blindados. Objetivo: Implementar la dosimetría de altas dosis en el control rutinario de materiales irradiados dentro de un irradiador auto blindado. Métodos: Trabajamos con 32 dosímetros; dividimos el rango de dosis en 8 puntos y utilizamos cuatro dosímetros RED Perspex por punto. Medimos la absorbancia específica de cada dosímetro; trazamos estos valores contra la dosis y produjimos un ajuste polinómico de tercer grado como curva de calibración. Resultados: Obtuvimos la curva de calibración con un r2 de 0,9997. Las incertidumbres debidas a la dispersión de los dosímetros y a la curva de calibración fueron del 1,39% y 0,22%, respectivamente, para una incertidumbre total de 4,80%. Esta incertidumbre incluye la determinación de la dosis, con un factor de cobertura (k) igual a 2 para un intervalo de confianza del 95%. Conclusión: Los dosímetros de Perspex RED sirven para el control rutinario de productos irradiados en un sistema de irradiador auto blindado.
Palabras clave: RED Perspex, curva de calibración, dosímetros PMMA, dosimetría altas dosis, irradiador autoblindado, incertidumbre de dosis.
|
The purpose of this study is to implement RED Perspex dosimeters as a high-dose dosimetry system for a self-shielded irradiation system for routine control of irradiated products. The materials involved, the control during irradiation process and its intended purpose are the factors that define the application of high dose ionizing radiation procedures (International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA], 2013). High-dose applications encompass a range of fields. In the context of food processing, doses typically range from 2kGy to 10kGy or even higher doses (Aquino et al., 2017; Eichholz 2003; Farkas & Mohácsi-Farkas, 2011). In addition, the sterilization of several materials, such as medical products require dose reaching up to 25kGy (International Organization for Standardization [ISO], 2006). Tissue irradiation, primarily for medical purposes, falls within the range of 10kGy to 25kGy (IAEA, 2005) and for cultural heritage preservation irradiation dose lie within the same ranges (IAEA, 2017). Literature provides extensive references on irradiation processes (Aquino et al., 2017; Eichholz 2003; Farkas & Mohácsi-Farkas, 2011; IAEA, 2005, 2013; ISO, 2006), including quality assurance and calibration of dosimetry systems in industrial irradiation plants (ISO, 2013a, 2017, 2020; Sharpe & Miller, 2009).
Dosimetry systems are categorized into several classes: primary standards, reference standards, routine (or working) standards, and transfer standards (Eichholz 2003; ISO, 2020). Within the routine or working dosimeters, there are RED Perspex dosimeters, which are manufactured from polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). These dosimeters undergo changes in their optical properties when exposed to ionizing radiation. These dosimeters find applications in facilities equipped with both radioactive sources and ionizing radiation generators. They exhibit a relatively low sensitivity to radiation, making them suitable for use within a range spanning from 5kGy to 50kGy (ISO, 2019).
In this study, we used the RED Perspex type 4034 dosimeters (batch PS) of a nominal thickness of 3±0.5mm (Harwell Dosimeters, 2022). These were manufactured by Harwell Dosimeters in the UK. We used a self-shielded gamma irradiator of the Isotop brand: Ob-Servo Ignis model by Izotop in Hungary, equipped with 24 Co-60 sources for irradiation of the dosimeters. The dosimeters were exposed to 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, and 40kGy, following the recommendations of Sharpe and Miller (2009) and ISO (2013a). The uncertainty associated with dose determination was 1,95%. We employed a cylindrical phantom made of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) located at the center of the irradiation chamber to irradiate the dosimeters. The phantom had 1,26cm external radius, 0,86cm internal radius, and 6,82cm in height. The phantom had the capacity to hold 2 dosimeters, so we conducted two separate irradiation rounds, utilizing a total of 4 dosimeters for each dose (ISO, 2013a), as shown in Fig. 1. The dosimeters were read using a Thermo UV-Visible Evolution 220 spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Massachusetts, USA) in absorption mode at a wavelength (λ) of 640nm (Harwell Dosimeters, 2022), with a single measurement taken for each dosimeter. For this study, we utilized the specific absorbance quantity as provided in ISO (2019).
To construct
the calibration curve, the specific absorbance 
was plotted as a function of the dose and
applying a polynomial fit. The fitted curve accounted for variations in
dosimeter readings at the same dose (Sharpe & Miller, 2009). The normality
of the residuals was verified by the Anderson-Darling method (Montgomery, 2012)
and its homoscedasticity with the Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey test (Gujarati &
Porter, 2009).
Fig. 1. (a) dosimeters position inside the PMMA phantom. (b) phantom position inside the irradiation chamber and (c) chamber placed inside the irradiation equipment
We examined several sources of dose uncertainty within the calibration process, a summary of this information is provided in Table 1.
Table 1
Uncertainty in the calibration process of the RED PMMA PERSPEX dosimeters
|
Source |
Type |
Probability distribution |
|
Dose determination |
B |
Normal |
|
Dosimeter-Dosimeter dispersion |
A |
Normal |
|
Calibration graph |
A |
Normal |
|
Temperature effect |
B |
Normal |
|
Spectrophotometer |
A |
Normal |
Duarte-Ladeira L. et al. (2015) reported a value of 0,01% for source decay uncertainty; for this reason, that uncertainty was not included in the uncertainty budget.
We studied the uncertainties in terms of dose. With the calibration
curve, 
values were transformed into their
corresponding dose. The uncertainties of calibration curve and dosimeters
dispersion were determined through residual analysis (Sharpe & Miller,
2009). In the dosimeter-dosimeter dispersion, reproducibility was also
included.
Regarding the influence of the spectrophotometer, two aspects were examined. The first aspect to consider was the repeatability, it was assessed in measuring the absorption by taking five measurements of absorption for the same dosimeter. The second aspect was the spectral resolution of the spectrophotometer that was 0,1nm and measured the variation in absorption resulting from this change. Both uncertainties were estimated as type A uncertainty (Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, 2008).
The selected
fitted method of the calibration curve was a third-degree polynomial 
(Fig. 2). We confirmed homoscedasticity and normality with 
.
Fig. 2. Calibration curve of RED PERSPEX dosimeters
We calculated
the uncertainties of the calibration curve and dosimeter-dosimeter dispersion,
with results of 0,22% and 1,39%, respectively, for a total uncertainty of these
two components of 1,41%. The dose uncertainty of the dosimeters as a function
of the irradiated dose with the results mentioned above are showed in the Fig.
3. These uncertainties have a coverage factor 
.
Fig. 3. Black line shows the uncertainty of the dose of the dosimeters as a function of the used dose. The orange line is the uncertainty due the dosimeter-dosimeter dispersion and the blue line is the contribution of the uncertainty due at the calibration curve and dispersion of the dosimeters.
The spectrophotometer’s uncertainties in measuring repeatability of absorption for the same dosimeter was found to be 0,03% and its contribution to dose uncertainty was 0,04%. Consequently, these uncertainties were not included in the overall dose uncertainty budget. Regarding the influence of temperature, Whittaker and Watts (1998) established that temperatures impact is insignificant at 30°C, and this was the maximum temperature to which the dosimeters were exposed while positioned inside the irradiator. Hence, the sources of uncertainty in dose as determined through dosimeter calibration were reduced to the influence of the calibration curve, dosimeters dispersion, and dose determination. A summary of this information is provided in table 2.
Table 2
Uncertainty budget of the calibration process of the RED PMMA PERSPEX dosimeters
|
Source |
Uncertainty |
Probability distribution |
Sensitivity coefficient |
Contribution Type |
||
|
Dosimeter calibration |
||||||
|
A |
B |
|||||
|
Dose determination |
1,95 |
N |
1 |
|
1,95 |
|
|
Uncertainty from calibration curve |
0,22 |
N |
1 |
0,22 |
|
|
|
Dosimeter-dosimeter dispersion |
1,39 |
N |
1 |
1,39 |
|
|
|
Combined
uncertainty |
|
|
|
2,40 |
||
|
Expanded
uncertainty |
|
|
|
4,80 |
||
Accurate determination of dose levels in irradiated material is of great importance to ensure quality in the irradiation process (IAEA, 2013; ISO, 2013b, 2020). The objective of this work was to implement the RED Perspex dosimeters as a high dose dosimetric system for a self-shielded irradiator in the routine dosimetric control of irradiated products. This process was validated by comparing the results obtained with standards used in industrial irradiation plants.
According to Sharpe and Miller (2009), the uncertainty resulting from the calibration curve and dosimeter-to-dosimeter dispersion yielded an average uncertainty across the dose range. This average uncertainty may result in an underestimation of uncertainty at the boundaries and an overestimation in the center of the dose range. The authors noted in their work that the effect at the boundaries of the dose range is attributed to the increase in signal-to-noise ratio at low doses. Additionally, the saturation of dosimeters at higher dose also contributes to an underestimation of uncertainty. The results obtained demonstrated this effect at the boundaries of the dose range used.
ISO (2019)
indicates the estimate of expanded uncertainty achievable with measurements
conducted using a routine dosimetry system, such as PMMA, typically is found
within a range of approximately ±6%
. This range corresponds to approximately to 
confidence level within a normal distribution of data. The results
were obtained within this range and therefore deemed acceptable. It's important
to note that these results are valid specifically for the irradiation system
and dosimetry system utilized. It's crucial to recognize that calibration
processes must consider the interdependence between irradiation and environmental
conditions, as discussed by Whittaker and Watts (1998), Sharpe and Miller
(2009) and ISO (2013a). It remains for a future study to evaluate the
uncertainty of the calibration process of the AMBER Perspex dosimeters, under
the same conditions carried out in this work.
The successful calibration of RED Perspex dosimeters for a self-shielded irradiation system yielded an uncertainty value in the calibration process within acceptable range indicated by ISO (2019) standard. This validation highlights to guarantee the quality and safety of irradiated product.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank the Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica, particularly Vicerrectoría de Investigación, for funding; and its Escuela de Física (Laboratorio de Espectroscopía Molecular, Imagen y Color), for access to essential equipment.
ETHICAL, CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The authors declare that they have fully complied with all pertinent ethical and legal requirements, both during the study and in the production of the manuscript; and that there are no conflicts of interest of any kind. This research received funding from Technological Institute of Costa Rica Research Vice Rectory under grant 1510101/1510150 from project “Pre-Clinical Treatment and Validation of Bone Tissue for Therapeutic Use”. They fully agree with the final edited version of the article. A signed document regarding all of this has been filed in the journal archives.
The statement of each author’s contribution to the manuscript is as follows: Conceptualization, WVS; Funding acquisition, WVS; Investigation, WVS; Methodology, WVS; Writing – original draft, WVS; Writing – review & editing, LRR. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
REFERENCIAS
Aquino, S., Lui, C. C., & Corrêa, B. (2017). Gamma Radiation Treatment Applied to Microbial Decontamination of Products Derived from Eggs Collected from the Retail Market in São Paulo. Arq. Bras. Med. Vet. e Zootec. 69, 1683–1692. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-4162-9241
Duarte-Ladeira, L., Zacarias-Mesquita A., & Tadeuy Pereira M. (2016). Calibrations of Perspex PMMA dosimeter in terms of absorbed dose to water for routine dosimetry at CDTN gamma irradiation laboratory. International Journal of Nuclear Energy Science and Technology, 9(3), 238-248. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJNEST.2015.074099
Eichholz, G. (2003). Dosimetry for Food Irradiation. Health Physics, 84(5), 665.
Farkas, J., & Mohácsi-Farkas, C. (2011). History and Future of Food Irradiation. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 22(2-3), 121–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2010.04.002
Gujarati, D. N., & Porter, D. C. (2009). Basic Econometrics (5th ed.) McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Harwell dosimeters (2022, February 17). Harwell Red 4034 Dosimeters. https://www.harwell-dosimeters.co.uk/harwell-red-4034/
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). (2005). Code of practice for the radiation sterilization of tissue allografts: Requirements for validation and routine control. Clinical Applications of Bone Allografts and Substitutes. 1–55, https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812701114_0001
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). (2013). Guidelines for the Development, Validation and Routine Control of Industrial Radiation Processes. https://www.iaea.org/publications/8676
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). (2017). Uses of Ionizing Radiation for Tangible Cultural Heritage Conservation. https://www.iaea.org/publications/10937
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2006). Sterilization of Health Care Products — Radiation — Part 1: Requirements for Development, Validation and Routine Control of a Sterilization Process for Medical Devices (ISO 11137-1:2006). https://www.iso.org/standard/33952.html
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2013a). Standard Practice for Calibration of Routine Dosimetry Systems for Radiation Processing (ISO/ASTM 51261:2013). https://www.iso.org/standard/60211.html
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2013b). Sterilization of Health Care Products — Radiation — Part 2: Establishing the Sterilization Dose (ISO 11137-2:2013). https://www.iso.org/standard/62442.html
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2017). Sterilization of Health Care Products — Radiation — Part 3: Guidance on dosimetric aspects of development, validation and routine control (ISO 11137-3:2017). https://www.iso.org/standard/63841.html
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2019) Practice for Use of a Polymethylmethacrylate Dosimetry System (ISO/ASTM 51276:2019). https://www.iso.org/standard/78276.html
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2020). Sterilization of Health Care Products — Radiation — Part 4: Guidance on Process Control (ISO/TS 11137-4:2020). https://www.iso.org/standard/69443.html
Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (2008). Evaluation of Measurement Data—Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement. https://www.bipm.org/en/committees/jc/jcgm/publications
Montgomery, D.C. (2012). Design and Analysis of Experiments (8th ed.) John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Sharpe, P., & Miller, A (2009). NPL Report CIRM 29: Guidelines for the calibration of routine dosimetry systems for use in radiation processing. Teddington: National Physical Laboratory. https://tinyurl.com/2dqhqolp
Whittaker, B., & Watts, M. F. (2001). The Influence of Dose Rate, Ambient Temperature and Time on the Radiation Response of Harwell PMMA Dosimeters. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 60(1-2), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-806X(00)00316-9