|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| [[File:Cloud chamber ani bionerd.gif|thumb|Diffusion [[cloud chamber]] with visible tracks of ionizing radiation (alpha particles)]]
| | Hello and welcome. My title is Figures Wunder. My day occupation is a meter reader. One of the extremely best things in the world for me is to do aerobics and now I'm attempting to earn money with it. For many years he's been residing in North Dakota and his family enjoys it.<br><br>Here is my web-site ... home std test ([http://happywedding.lonnieheart.gethompy.com/zbxe/wc_apply/372747 just click the following website]) |
| | |
| '''Linear energy transfer''' (LET) is a measure of the [[conservative force]] acting on a charged [[ionizing radiation|ionizing]] particle travelling through matter, generally measured using particles with an energy over a certain threshold.<ref name=ICRU85a>{{cite journal|last=International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements|title=Fundamental Quantities and Units for Ionizing Radiation|journal=Journal of the ICRU|date=October 2011|edition=Revised|volume=11|issue=1|doi=10.1093/jicru/ndr012|url=http://www.engin.umich.edu/class/ners580/ners-bioe_481/lectures/pdfs/2011-04-ICRU_Report85a-QuantitiesUnits(revised).pdf|accessdate=18 December 2012|editor1-first=Stephen M.|editor1-last=Seltzer|id=ICRU report 85a}}</ref> Since the energy ''loss'' is part of the definition, LET is a positive quantity. LET depends on the nature of the radiation as well as on the material traversed. A high LET will attenuate the beam more quickly, generally making shielding more effective and preventing deep penetration. On the other hand, the higher concentration of deposited energy can cause more severe damage to any microscopic structures near the particle track. If a microscopic defect can cause larger-scale failure, as is the case in [[biological cell]]s and [[microelectronics]], the LET helps explain why radiation damage is sometimes disproportionate to the [[absorbed dose]]. [[Dosimetry]] attempts to factor in this effect with [[radiation weighting factor]]s.
| |
| | |
| Linear energy transfer is closely related to [[stopping power (particle radiation)|stopping power]], since both equal the force. The unrestricted linear energy transfer is identical to linear electronic stopping power, as discussed below. But the stopping power and LET concepts are different in the respect that total [[stopping power (particle radiation)|stopping power]] has the nuclear stopping power component,<ref>{{cite book|last=Smith|first=Roger|title=Atomic & ion collisions in solids and at surfaces: theory, simulation and applications|year=1997|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge, UK}}</ref>
| |
| and this component does not cause electronic excitations. Hence nuclear stopping
| |
| power is not contained in LET.
| |
| | |
| Values in the [[international system]] are in [[newton (unit)|N]] but are typically given in units of {{sfrac|[[keV]]|μm}} or {{sfrac|MeV|cm}}. While medical physicists and radiobiologists usually speak of ''linear energy transfer'', most non-medical physicists talk about ''stopping power''.
| |
| | |
| ==Restricted and unrestricted LET==
| |
| | |
| The secondary electrons produced during the process of [[ionization]] by the primary charged particle are conventionally called delta rays, if their energy is large enough so that they themselves can ionize.<ref>[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/156866/delta-ray "Delta ray" in Encyclopedia britannica online, retrieved 22 Dec. 2012]</ref> Many studies focus upon the energy transferred in the vicinity of the primary particle track, and exclude interactions that produce delta rays with energies larger than a certain value.<ref name=ICRU85a /> This energy limit is meant to exclude secondary electrons that carry energy far from the primary particle track. This approximation neglects the directional distribution of secondary radiation and the non-linear path of delta rays, but simplifies analytic evaluation.<ref name=icru16 /> In mathematical terms, '''Restricted linear energy transfer''' is symbolized by
| |
| | |
| : <math>\Delta F = - \nabla \Delta E</math>
| |
| | |
| where <math>\Delta E</math> is the energy loss of the charged particle due to electronic collisions while traversing a distance d''x'', ''excluding'' all secondary electrons with kinetic energies larger than <math>E_0</math>fronte the count. If <math>E_0 = \infty</math>, the result <math>\Delta F = F</math> is called the '''unrestricted linear energy transfer''' and is identical to the electronic ''[[stopping power (particle radiation)|stopping power]]''.<ref name=ICRU85a />
| |
| | |
| Here, the use of the infinity symbol is not to be taken literally; it simply means that no energy transfers, however large, are excluded. <math>\Delta F_0</math>, on the other hand, symbolizes the LET from direct ionizations and excitations by the primary particle only. This is not a commonly used quantity, since it excludes the bulk of energy deposition.
| |
| | |
| ==Application to Radiation Types==
| |
| During his investigations of radioactivity, [[Ernest Rutherford]] coined the terms [[alpha rays]], [[beta rays]] and [[gamma ray]]s for the three types of emissions that occur during [[radioactive decay]].
| |
| | |
| ===Alpha particles and other positive ions===
| |
| [[File:Bragg Curve for Alphas in Air.png|thumb|300px|Bragg curve of 5.49 MeV [[alpha particle]]s in air. This radiation is produced from the initial decay of [[radon]] (<sup>222</sup>Rn). Stopping power (which is essentially identical to LET) is plotted here versus particle range]]
| |
| Linear energy transfer is best defined for monoenergetic ions, i.e. [[proton]]s, [[alpha radiation|alpha particles]], and the heavier nuclei called [[HZE ions]] found in [[cosmic ray]]s or produced by [[particle accelerator]]s. These particles cause frequent direct ionizations within a narrow diameter around a relatively straight track, thus approximating continuous deceleration. As they slow down, the changing [[particle cross section]] modifies their LET, generally increasing it to a [[Bragg peak]] just before achieving thermal equilibrium with the absorber, i.e., before the end of [[stopping power (particle radiation)|range]]. At equilibrium, the incident particle essentially comes to rest or is absorbed, at which point LET is undefined.
| |
| | |
| Since the LET varies over the particle track, an average value is often used to represent the spread. Averages weighted by track length or weighted by absorbed dose are present in the literature, with the later being more common in dosimetry. These averages are not widely separated for heavy particles with high LET, but the difference becomes more important in the other type of radiations discussed below.<ref name=icru16>{{cite book|last=International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements|title=Linear Energy Transfer|year=1970|location=Washinton D.C.|isbn=978-0913394090|url=http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8949/1/8949.pdf|accessdate=1 December 2012|id=ICRU report 16}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| ===Beta===
| |
| Linear energy transfer is less meaningful for electrons, because of their low mass relative to the atoms they ionize. Their track is often a crooked series of curves, along which they lose more energy to [[secondary electron]]s and [[brehmsstrahlung]] photons than to direct ionizations. The photons and some of the higher energy electrons, called [[delta ray]]s, carry energy far from the particle track before depositing it as ionization or excitation. Hence the range over which the primary electron loses energy is not so tightly related to the final density of energy deposition in the absorbing material.
| |
| | |
| ===Gamma===
| |
| [[Gamma ray]]s are photons, whose absorption cannot be described by LET. When a gamma quantum passes through matter, it may be absorbed in a single process ([[photoelectric effect]], [[Compton scattering|Compton effect]] or [[pair production]]), or it continues unchanged on its path. (Only in the case of the Compton effect, another gamma quantum of lower energy proceeds). Gamma ray absorption therefore obeys an [[exponential decay|exponential]] law (see [[Gamma ray]]s); the absorption is described by the absorption coefficient or by the [[half-value thickness]].
| |
| | |
| LET has therefore no meaning when applied to photons. However, many authors speak of "gamma LET" anyway,<ref>ICRP (International Commission on Radiation Protection) publication 103, ICRP 37 (2-4) (2007): "(116) Photons, electrons, and muons are radiations with LET values of less than 10 keV/microm."</ref> where they are actually referring to the LET of the [[secondary electrons]], i.e., mainly Compton electrons, produced by the gamma radiation.<ref>{{cite web|last=Chabot|first=George|title=Radiation Basics — Radiation Quantities and Units|url=http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q10010.html|work=Ask the Experts FAQ|publisher=Health Physics Society|accessdate=12 December 2012|quote=When the term "stopping power" is used in reference to photons, as seems to be the case for the example you give, it is not really being used for the photons themselves, but for the electrons set free by the photon interactions.}}</ref> The [[secondary electron]]s will ionize far more atoms than the primary photon. This gamma LET has little relation to the attenuation rate of the beam, but it may have some correlation to the microscopic defects produced in the absorber. It must be noted that even a monoenergetic gamma beam will produce a spectrum of electrons, and each secondary electron will have a variable LET as it slows down, as discussed above. The "gamma LET" is therefore an average.
| |
| | |
| The transfer of energy from an uncharged primary particle to charged secondary particles can also be described by using the ''mass energy-transfer coefficient''.<ref name=ICRU85a />
| |
| | |
| ==Biological effects==
| |
| [[File:QF vs LET.jpg|thumb|The [[ICRP]] used to recommend [[radiation weighting factor|quality factor]]s as a generalized approximation of RBE based on LET.]]
| |
| Many studies have attempted to relate linear energy transfer to the [[relative biological effectiveness]] (RBE) of radiation, with inconsistent results. The relationship varies widely depending on the nature of the biological material, and the choice of endpoint to define effectiveness. Even when these are held constant, different radiation spectra that shared the same LET have significantly different RBE.<ref name=icru16 />
| |
| | |
| Despite these variations, some overall trends are commonly seen. The RBE is generally independent of LET for any LET less than 10 keV/µm, so a low LET is normally chosen as the reference condition where RBE is set to unity. Above 10 keV/µm, some systems show a decline in RBE with increasing LET, while others show an initial increase to a peak before declining. Mammalian cells usually experience a peak RBE for LET's around 100 keV/µm.<ref name=icru16 /> These are very rough numbers; for example, one set of experiments found a peak at 30 keV/µm.
| |
| | |
| The ICRP proposed a simplified model of RBE-LET relationships for use in [[dosimetry]]. They defined a ''quality factor'' of radiation as a function of dose-averaged unrestricted LET in water, and intended it as a highly uncertain, but generally conservative, approximation of RBE. Different iterations of their model are shown in the graph to the right. The 1966 model was integrated into their 1977 recommendations for radiation protection in ICRP 26. This model was largely replaced in the 1991 recommendations of ICRP 60 by [[radiation weighting factor]]s that were tied to the particle type and independent of LET. ICRP 60 revised the quality factor function and reserved it for use with unusual radiation types that did not have radiation weighting factors assigned to them.<ref name=icrp92>{{cite journal|last=Sinclair|first=Dr. W. K. et al|title=Relative biological effectiveness (RBE), quality factor (Q) and radiation weighting factor (Wr)|journal=Annals of the ICRP|date=January 2003|volume=33|id=ICRP Publication 92|issue=4|url=http://www.elsevier.ca/ISBN/9780080443119/ICRP-Publication-92-Relative-Biological-Effectiveness-RBE-Quality-Factor-Q-and-Radiation-Weighting-Factor-wR|isbn=978-0-08-044311-9}}</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Application fields==
| |
| When used to describe the ''[[dosimetry]]'' of ionizing radiation in the biological or biomedical setting, the LET (like [[stopping power (particle radiation)|linear stopping power]]) is usually expressed in units of k[[electron volts|eV]]/[[micrometer|µm]].
| |
| | |
| In ''[[outer space|space]] applications'', [[electronic device]]s can be disturbed by the passage of energetic electrons, protons or heavier ions that may alter the state of a [[electronic circuit|circuit]], producing "[[single event upset|single event effects]]".<ref>V. Zajic and P. Thieberger, "Heavy Ion Linear Energy Transfer Measurements during Single Event Upset Testing of Electronic Devices," IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 46, pp. 59-69, (1999)</ref> The effect of the radiation is described by the LET (which is here taken as synonymous with stopping power), typically expressed in units of MeV·cm²/mg of material, the units used for [[stopping power (particle radiation)|mass stopping power]] (The material in question is usually Si for MOS devices). The units of measurement arise from a combination of the energy lost by the particle to the material per unit path length (MeV/cm) divided by the density of the material (mg/cm³).<ref>[http://radhome.gsfc.nasa.gov/top.htm Radiation Effects & Analysis Home Page of NASA]</ref>
| |
| | |
| "Soft errors" of electronic devices due to [[cosmic rays]] on earth are, however, mostly due to [[neutron]]s which do not directly interact with the material and whose passage can therefore not be described by LET. Rather, one measures their effect in terms of neutrons per cm<sup>2</sup> per hour, see [[Soft error]].
| |
| | |
| == References ==
| |
| | |
| <references/>
| |
| | |
| [[Category:Nuclear physics]]
| |
Hello and welcome. My title is Figures Wunder. My day occupation is a meter reader. One of the extremely best things in the world for me is to do aerobics and now I'm attempting to earn money with it. For many years he's been residing in North Dakota and his family enjoys it.
Here is my web-site ... home std test (just click the following website)