Draft protocol of APMP.RI(I)-K8 Reference air kerma rate for HDR Ir-192 brachytherapy sources

Similar documents
APMP supplementary comparison of absorbed dose rate in tissue for beta radiation

APMP key comparison for the measurement of air kerma for 60 Co (APMP.RI(I)-K1.1)

Abstract An indirect comparison of the standards for reference air kerma rate for

Key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K3 of the air-kerma standards of the NRC, Canada and the BIPM in medium-energy x-rays

Final Report on APMP.M.M-K4.1 - Bilateral Comparison of 1 kg Stainless Steel Mass Standards between KRISS and A*STAR

Key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K1 of the air-kerma standards of the LNE-LNHB, France and the BIPM in 60 Co gamma radiation

Comparison of national air kerma standards for ISO 4037 narrow spectrum series in the range 30 kv to 300 kv

Degrees of equivalence for the key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K3 between national primary standards for medium-energy x-rays

Comparison protocol EURAMET project

M [scale units/s] of the system

Key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K1 of the air-kerma standards of the NIM, China and the BIPM in 60 Co gamma radiation

Key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K7 of the air-kerma standards of the CMI, Czech Republic and the BIPM in mammography x-rays

AFRIMETS. Supplementary Comparison Programme. Calibration of Gauge Blocks. by Mechanical Comparison Method AFRIMETS.L S3.

Comparison of V and 10 V DC Voltage References

Bureau International des Poids et Mesures

Technical Protocol of the Bilateral Comparison in Primary Angular Vibration Calibration CCAUV.V-S1

Technical Protocol of the CIPM Key Comparison CCAUV.V-K5

Key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K3 of the air-kerma standards of the BEV, Austria and the BIPM in medium-energy x-rays

Report on APMP Supplementary Comparison High precision roundness measurement APMP.L-S4. Final report

Bureau International des Poids et Mesures

Bureau International des Poids et Mesures

Comparison of the air kerma standards for 137 Cs and 60 Co gamma-ray beams between the IAEA and the NIST. Ronaldo Minniti 1 and Ladislav Czap 2

Final report on CCQM-K36.1 with erratum

A bilateral comparison of a 1 kg platinum standard

A Correction Factor for Effects of Scattered X-rays at Calibration of Ionization Chambers in Low Energy X-ray Standard Fields

Progress Report on Radiation Dosimetry Standards at NMIJ/AIST and Photon Energy Spectra Measured in Fukushima

CCM short note on the dissemination process after the proposed redefinition of the kilogram

KCDB-Identifiers: EURAMET.RI(I)-K1.2 / EURAMET.RI(I)-K4.2 / EURAMET.RI(I)-K5.1. Pilot laboratory: BEV (AT) Andreas Steurer 1), Wilhelm Tiefenboeck

PRELIMINARY CHARACTERIZATION OF THE NIS FREE-AIR CHAMBER STANDARD AT THE BIPM

COOMET.M.V-S2 (587/RU-a/12) COOMET SUPPLEMENTARY COMPARISON IN THE FIELD OF MEASUREMENTS OF LIQUIDS KINEMATIC VISCOSITY

Report on Key Comparison COOMET.AUV.A-K5: Pressure calibration of laboratory standard microphones in the frequency range 2 Hz to 10 khz

Key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K4 of the absorbed dose to water standards of the METAS, Switzerland and the BIPM in 60 Co gamma radiation

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON OF PLATINUM RESISTANCE THERMOMETERS BETWEEN CHILE AND ECUADOR

Ionizing Radiation Metrology at NMIJ/AIST and ENEA-INMRI

Final Report 06 July 2006 Frank Wilkinson, Gan Xu, and Yuanjie Liu

Force Key Comparison APMP.M.F-K2.a and APMP.M.F-K2.b (50 kn and 100 kn) Final Report 6 August Pilot: KRISS, Republic of Korea Yon-Kyu Park

Technical protocol for the CCL-K11 key comparison of optical frequency/wavelength standards.

Supplementary Comparison EURAMET.EM-S19 EURAMET Project No. 688

Final Report EUROMET PROJECT 818 CALIBRATION FACTOR OF THERMISTOR MOUNTS. Jan P.M. de Vreede

APMP Key Comparison of DC Voltage at V and 10 V

ANNEXE 8. Technical protocols for the interlaboratory comparisons

8/2/2012. Larry DeWerd has a partial interest in Standard Imaging

FINAL REPORT ON KEY COMPARISON APMP.AUV.A-K3

BIPM Key Comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K6 PROTOCOL 3.0 CCRI(I) 6 November 2017

R SANAS Page 1 of 7

Work Programme. of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures. for the four years Comité international des poids et mesures

Document No: TR 12 Issue No: 1

Final Report on the Torque Key Comparison CCM.T-K2 Measurand Torque: 0 kn m, 10 kn m, 20 kn m Dirk Röske 1), Koji Ogushi 2)

International Atomic Energy Agency. Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications. IAEA Environment Laboratories

COMPARISON OF HUMIDITY MEASUREMENTS USING A DEW POINT METER AS A TRANSFER STANDARD APMP-IC-1-97 REPORT

RECENT ILC ACTIVITY IN ROMANIAN MASS MEASUREMENTS

TITLE: Air Kerma Primary Standard: Experimental and Simulation Studies on Cs-137

Implementation of MRA NMIs, BIPM,RMO-TCs Improvement of Global Measurement Standards NMIs, BIPM

8/2/2012 UPDATING TG-51. When will it end? Part 1 - photon addendum. What are these updates? Photons: Electrons: More widespread revision required

CCL-K5. CMM 1D: Step Gauge and Ball Bars. Final Report

Comparison of the standards for absorbed dose to water of the ENEA-INMRI (Italy) and the BIPM for 60 Co γ rays

Comparisons of the standards for air kerma of the GUM and the BIPM for 60 Co and 137 Cs gamma radiation

Final Report for the APMP.T-K4 (Draft B on October 27, 2011)

ASIA PACIFIC METROLOGY PROGRAME

Report on EURAMET.M.M-S9

Comparison of the standards of air kerma of the GUM and the BIPM for 60Co 'Y rays

Metrology Principles for Earth Observation: the NMI view. Emma Woolliams 17 th October 2017

Comparison of air kerma measurements for tungsten anode based mammography x-ray beam qualities (EURAMET.RI(I)-S4.1)

C. Michotte 1, G. Ratel 1, S. Courte 1, Y. Nedjadi 2, C. Bailat 2, L. Johansson 3, Y. Hino 4. Abstract

Comparison for Air Kerma from Radiation Protection Gamma-ray Beams with Brazilian Network /2017

Comparison of measurement uncertainty budgets for calibration of sound calibrators: Euromet project 576

H Bjerke 1, J Plagnard 2, J-M Bordy 2, A Kosunen 3, J Huikari 3, L Persson 4, and P O Hetland 1

FINAL REPORT. European co-operation for Accreditation (EA) Interlaboratory Comparison IR3: Calibration of a Radiation Protection Dosimeter

Measuring isotopes accurately for a safer, healthier and sustainable world

International Pyrheliometer Comparison IPC-XII

Referensdosimetri. Crister Ceberg Medical Radiation Physics Lund University Sweden

Hp(0.07) Photon and Beta Irradiations for the EURADOS Extremity Dosemeter Intercomparison 2015

Volume 1 No. 4, October 2011 ISSN International Journal of Science and Technology IJST Journal. All rights reserved

< Final report > Report on the APMP.M.F-S1 supplementary comparison for 2 MN Force

SIM FORCE STANDARDS COMPARISON UP TO 10 kn

Heuijin Lim, Manwoo Lee, Jungyu Yi, Sang Koo Kang, Me Young Kim, Dong Hyeok Jeong

Euramet project 1187 Comparison of Instrument Current Transformers up to 10 ka. Technical protocol (March 2012)

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON OF WATER TRIPLE POINT CELLS LEADING TO A MORE PRECISE DEFINITION OF THE KELVIN

High-Energy Photon Beam Therapy Dosimetry with Ionisation Chambers

Determination of contributions of scatter and distance error to the source strength of 192 Ir HDR brachytherapy source

G. Ratel*, C. Michotte*, Y. Hino** *BIPM and **NMIJ, Japan

The BIPM key comparison database (KCDB): linkage of key comparison results

EUROMET Project 702 EUROMET.M.D-K4

First international comparison of primary absorbed dose to water standards in the medium-energy X-ray range

Report from TCTF/TCL JWG on Optical Frequency Metrology

Commissioning of the Beta Secondary Standard (BSS2)

Activity measurements of the radionuclide 111 In for the LNE-LNHB, France in the ongoing comparison BIPM.RI(II)-K1.In-111

Final Report on the APMP Air Speed Key Comparison (APMP.M.FF-K3)

CCT Working Group for Humidity

GULF ASSOCIATION FOR METROLOGY. Calibration of Gauge Blocks by Mechanical Comparison Method GULFMET.L-S1

Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, Sèvres, France. *KEBS, Kenya Bureau of Standards P.O. Box , Nairobi, Kenya

Air Kerma Primary Standard: Experimental and. Simulation Studies on Cs-137. J. Cardoso, L. Santos, C. Oliveira

Force Key Comparison CCM.F-K1.a and CCM.F-K1.b 5 kn and 10 kn. Aimo Pusa MIKES Finland

International comparison of extrapolation chamber measurements of the absorbed dose rate in tissue for beta radiation

Final Report. APMP.EM-K4.1 APMP Key Comparison of Capacitance at 10 pf

APMP.M.P-K9 (Absolute pressure up to 110 kpa) 21 May, 2013 In-Mook CHOI*, Sam-Yong WOO

Updating reference dosimetry a decade after TG-51

Supplementary comparison SIM.M.FF-S12. Final Report for Volume of Liquids at 20 L

APMP.T-K3.4: Key comparison of realizations of the ITS-90 over the range C to C

Study on a thermal diffusivity standard for the laser flash method measurements 1

Transcription:

Draft protocol of APMP.RI(I)-K8 Reference air kerma rate for HDR Ir-19 brachytherapy sources T. Kurosawa and N. Saito National Metrology Institute of Japan (NMIJ), Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8568 JAPAN Revised 6 October, 016 Revised 1 December, 016 1. Introduction The objective of this comparison is to establish the degrees of equivalence between national standards or methods for determining the reference air kerma rate for HDR 19Ir brachytherapy sources (RAKR or K R ). For this purpose, it is proposed to use two well-type chambers as the transfer instruments. The NMIJ/AIST is the pilot laboratory and the NMIJ/AIST and the NRC are the linking laboratories to the BIPM.RI(I)-K8 key comparison. This protocol is based on the BIPM.RI(I)-K8 protocol document [1].. Participants The participants are listed in Table 1. Table 1. List of participants in the comparison. Institute Country Contact person E-mail PTKMR - Indonesia C. Tuti Budiantari ptkmr@batan.go.id BATAN INER Taiwan Wei-Han Chu weihan@iner.gov.tw KRISS Korea Chul-Young Yi cyyi@kriss.re.kr NMISA South Africa Sonwabile Arthur sangcezu@nmisa.org Ngcezu Malaysian Malaysia Mohd Taufik Dolah taufik@nm.gov.my Nuclear Agency NMIJ Japan Tadahiro Kurosawa tadahiro-kurosawa@aist.go.jp Norio Saito norio.saito@aist.go.jp NRC Canada Malcolm McEwen Malcolm.McEwen@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca 1/13

IAEA Int. Org. Paula Toroi P.Toroi@iaea.org 3. Comparison procedure 3.1 Transfer chambers Two well-type ionization chambers (Standard Imaging, HDR 1000 Plus)are to be used as the transfer standards for the comparison, as listed in Table. The signal connection of the chambers is a tri-axial BNT plug. An adapter of the plug (Triax BNC-F to Triax TNC-M/F Adapter 33-34) is also provided. The NMIJ will also send a source holder with the diameter. mm (Holder HDR 1000 part number 90008) for the guide tube. If this diameter is not compatible with the participant s Ir-19 source type, then the participants shall use their own holder. This should be noted in the report sent to the host laboratory. A system to measure the current from the chambers is NOT provided. Participants should use their own charge/current measuring system (electrometer). Table. Characteristics of well chamber HDR 1000 Characteristics Nominal Value Height of the chamber 15.6 cm Diameter of the chamber 10.cm Insert height 1.1 cm Insert Diameter 3.5 cm Active volume 45 cm 3 Potential of HV electrode with respect to collecting -300 V Electrode 3. Reference conditions The temperature, pressure and humidity at the time of the measurements should be reported; the measurements must be normalized to the reference environmental conditions of 0 C and 101.35 kpa. The reference relative humidity is 50 %. No correction for humidity is required if the value is in the range 0 % < RH < 80 %. 3.3 19 Ir source Each participant may choose their usual source construction/type and /13

appropriate activity. However, as the transfer chamber responses are dependent on the 19 Ir source design, the source reference code, manufacturer and apparent activity should be reported. The NMIJ measures the calibration coefficients of the transfer chambers for the sources provided from MicroSelectron mhdr-v and Varian Varisource VS000. It is advisable to use sources by MicroSelectron mhdr-v or Varian Varisource VS000. 3.4 Measurements The well-chamber response depends on the source position inside the chamber and therefore the calibration coefficient should be obtained for the source inserted to the point of maximum chamber response (sweet spot). The HDR-1000 well chamber has its nominal maximum response at about 50 mm from the bottom of the chamber insert. Each NMI shall measure this position of maximum chamber response (by stepping the brachytherapy source through the well chamber) and the position of this point should be reported in the comparison report as the distance (in mm) from the center of the 19 Ir source to the tip of the plastic catheter. The warm-up time for an electrometer should be more than 1 hours and the chamber should be connected to the electrometer more than 1 hour before measurements. The pre-irradiation of the chamber with around 5 minutes is considered to be appropriate. To ensure air communication, it should be verified that the vent hole on the chamber is not blocked. It should be allowed sufficient time for the well chamber to achieve equilibrium with laboratory conditions (temperature, humidity). To estimate the sensitivity to source positioning, it is recommended to make three sets of measurements, one for the sweet spot and two for the sweet spot plus or minus 0.5 mm. Each set should have three series of ten measurements, each measurement with an integration time of 60 seconds. Ideally, the whole process (determination of sweet spot and measurements at three positions) should be repeated. It is advisable to place the well chamber on a low-scatter support at a distance of 1 meter or more from any wall and from the floor of the calibration room []. 3.5 Calibration coefficient Participants should calibrate the transfer chambers in term of the reference air 3/13

kerma rate using their 19 Ir source. After the sweet-spot position has been identified and verified as indicated in section 3.4, the ionization current should be measured by the participant s electrometer and it is normalized to the reference temperature and pressure, corrected for decay to the reference date, and corrected for ion recombination depending on the ionization current actually measured. The calibration coefficient N K,NMI for the well-type chamber is expressed as N K,NMI ( M raw M leak K ) k R,NMI ele k ion k dec k PT (1) where: is the RAKR determined by the NMI with the reference standard/method, M raw M leak k ele k dec k PT is the raw current measured by the NMI without any correction, is the leakage or background current measurement, is the calibration coefficient of participant s electrometer,k ion is the correction factor for ion recombination in the well chamber, which is normally estimated by measuring the current with HV of 150 V and 300 V, is the correction factor for radioactive decay of the source, and is the correction factor for atmospheric conditions. No correction is required for any polarity effect as long as polarity of the collecting electrode is as indicated in Table. k ion where: V1 V is calculated using the following equation. k ion V 1 V 1 V 1 V M1 M () is Apply voltage for normal operation is Reduced apply voltage for ion recombination measurement M1 is Measured current at V1 M is Measured current at V. 4/13

3.6 Proposed schedule for the comparison The comparison is performed in a circular manner, as illustrated in Figure 1 and Table 3. Each participant shall pay the cost for shipping to the next participant. The chambers should stay at the participants site for no longer than 1 week. The NMIJ measures the calibration coefficients of the chambers before and after the comparison as a check on the stability. The circular path requires a fast turnaround for each laboratory to minimize the effect of any drift in transfer chamber response. The NMIJ and the NRC perform a preliminary bilateral comparison for a stability test of the chambers before the comparison starts. NMIJ IAEA PTKMR - BATAN KRISS NMISA NRC INER Nuclear Malysia Figure 1. Comparison shape. Table 3. Proposed schedule for the comparison. Institute Receive chambers Measurement Send chambers NMIJ* September, 016 October 15, 016 NRC* October 5, October November, November 10, 016 016 016 NMIJ November 0, 016 December, 016 May 15, PTKMR - BATAN May 6, May 9 June, June 5, NMISA June 16, June 19 June 3, June 6, 5/13

Nuclear Malaysia INER July 8, NRC August 18, KRISS September 8, IAEA September 9, NMIJ July 7, July 10 July 14, July 17, October 0, July 31 August 4, August 1 August 5, September 11 15, August 7, August 8, September 18, October 6, October 9, October, * This schedule is the preliminary bilateral comparison for the stability test. 1. The time allowed for measurements for each participant is one week.. Allowance is made for a transportation time for the chambers of about two weeks. 3.7 Calibration results and measurement uncertainty The pilot laboratory will provide the participants with MS-Excel sheets for reporting the participants radiation qualities, primary standards, calibration results and its estimated uncertainty. The calibration coefficient uncertainty shall be evaluated according to the criteria given in the Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement [3]. The participants shall provide a detailed uncertainty budget (with k = 1). 3.8 Submission of calibration results The participants shall submit to the pilot laboratory the MS-Excel file with the calibration results and the uncertainty estimation within 6 weeks of calibration. The pilot laboratory shall keep the results confidential until the Draft A is agreed by all the participants (see 3.10). 3.9 Analysis of results and linking Two of the participating laboratories, the NMIJ/AIST and the NRC, took part in the international key comparison BIPM.RI(I)-K8 organized by the BIPM; the corresponding results will be used to link the APMP/TCRI regional comparison to the international comparison. The comparison result of each participating NMI will be evaluated for each 6/13

linking lab i (i = NMIJ/AIST, NRC) as Where NK,NMI R NMI,LINKi = N K,NMI N K,LINKi (3) present comparison. and NK,LINKi are the calibration coefficients obtained in the The comparison ratio with respect to the BIPM is evaluated for each linking laboratory i as (R NMI,BIPM ) i = R NMI,LINKi. R LINKi,BIPM (4) where R LINKi,BIPM is the comparison result for laboratory i as published in the KCDB. As there are two linking laboratories, this will result in two values (RNMI,BIPM)i and the unweighted mean value will be taken: = R NMI,BIPM i=1 (R NMI,BIPM) i (5) The uncertainty ur,nmi of this mean value will take correlation between the NMI and BIPM standards into account using equation (1b) of reference [4] u u u u (6) R, NMI unmi ubipm fn NMI, n BIPM, n stab ulink n where ustab will be evaluated from the stability measurements at the NMIJ. The statistical uncertainty of the linking procedure, ulinki, is evaluated for each linking laboratory i as described in [4] and the use of two linking laboratories should reduce the combined value (used in the above equation) according to u LINK = i=1 u LINKi (7) However, if the two values (RNMI,BIPM)i do not agree at this level then ulink will be increased to reflect this discrepancy. 3.10 Comparison report According to the guidelines Measurement comparisons in the CIPM MRA [5], if, on examination of the complete set of results, the pilot institute finds results that appear to be anomalous, the corresponding institutes will be invited to check their results to ensure that there are no arithmetic, typographical or transcription errors involved, but without being informed as to the magnitude or sign of the apparent anomaly. If no numerical error is found, the result stands. The participants are not allowed to withdraw their results unless a reason not attributable to the performance of the laboratory can be assigned (for example, if 7/13

an excessive drift or a malfunction is detected in the travelling standard). Individual values and uncertainties may be changed or removed or the complete comparison abandoned, only with the agreement of all participants and on the basis of a clear failure of the travelling standard or some other phenomenon that renders the comparison or part of it invalid. At this stage, the pilot laboratory will prepare a Draft A report that includes the results transmitted by the participants, identified by name, for circulation to all participants for comments and discussion of the results. As the results may be changed due the reasons explained above, Draft A (in all its versions) must be considered confidential and distributed among the participants only. As results may change, Draft A reports cannot be used as support for claiming CMCs. Until all the participants have agreed on the report, it should be considered to be in Draft A stage, it being possible to have successive versions (Draft A1, A, etc). Once the Draft is agreed by the participants, it will become the Draft B report, that will be submitted to the APMP/TCRI Chairman for approval and then to the CCRI Executive Secretary for circulation through the CCRI(I). After the agreement of the CCRI(I), the final report will be published as a Technical Supplement in Metrologia. In addition, the comparison report will be sent to the BIPM for inclusion in the key comparison database (KCDB). 3.11 Cost and notice Participants shall pay any transportation costs to the next institute. When participant receives and ships the transfer instruments, he should notify about the receipt and shipment to the NMIJ and the participants of the turn before and after him. 4. References [1] BIPM.RI(I)-K8 Technical Protocol, Version 6.0, July 014, http://kcdb.bipm.org/appendixb/appbresults/bipm.ri(i)-k8/bipm.ri(i)-k8_tec hnical_protocol%0.pdf [] Chang L., Ho C., Lee J., Y Du and T Chen, 008, A statistical approach to infer the minimum setup distance of a well chamber to the wall or the floor for 19 Ir HDR calibration Med. Phys. 35, 14-16. 8/13

[3] Evaluation of measurement data Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM 1995 with minor corrections) JCGM 100: 008. [4] D. T. Burns and P. J. Allisy-Roberts, The evaluation of degree of equivalence in regional dosimetry comparisons, 007, CCRI(I)/07-04. [5] Measurement comparisons in the CIPM MRA, CIPM MRA-D-05, March 016. 9/13

Appendix A Addresses of the participants Pilot laboratory NMIJ Research Institute for Measurement and Analytical Instrumentation National Metrology Institute of Japan, NMIJ National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, AIST 1-1-1 Umezono, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8568, Japan contact person: Tadahiro Kurosawa Tel.: +81-9-861-597 Fax: +81-9-861-5673 e-mail: tadahiro-kurosawa@aist.go.jp Norio Saito Tel.: +81-9-861-5656 Fax: +81-9-861-5673 e-mail: norio.saito@aist.go.jp INER Institute: Institute of Nuclear Energy Research Address: 1000 Wenhua Rd. Jiaan Village, Longtan District, Taoyuan City 3546, Taiwan (ROC) Contact person: Wei-Han Chu E-mail address: weihan@iner.gov.tw Telephone number: 886-3-4711400 Ext.771 Fax number:886-3-4713489 KRISS Korea Research Institute of Standards & Science (KRISS) Address: Center for Ionizing Radiation Korea Research Institute of Standards & Science (KRISS) 67 Gajeong-Ro, Yuseong-Gu, Daejeon 34113, Rep. of KOREA Contact person: Chul-Young Yi E-mail address: cyyi@kriss.re.kr Telephone number: +8 4 868 5370 (office), +8 4 10 868 5687 (lab.) 10/13

Fax number: +8 4 868 5671 NMISA Institute: National Metrology Institute of South Africa Address: CSIR Campus, Building 6, Meiring Naude Road, Brummeria Pretoria 018 Contact person: Sonwabile Arthur Ngcezu E-mail address: sangcezu@nmisa.org Telephone number: +7 1 841 39 Fax number: +7 1 841 3367 Malaysian Nuclear Agency Institute: Malaysian Nuclear Agency Address: Bangi, 43000 Kajang, Selangor, Malaysia. Contact person: Mohd Taufik Dolah E-mail address: taufik@nm.gov.my Telephone number: +603-8911 000 Fax number: +603-895 588 NRC Institute: National Research Council of Canada Address: Building M-35, 100 Montreal Road, K1A 0R6 Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Contact person: Ernesto Mainegra-Hing E-mail address: Ernesto.Mainegra-Hing@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca Telephone number: +1 613 993-197 x60 Fax number: +1 613 95-9865 IAEA Institute: IAEA/NA/NAHU/DMRP, Address: Vienna International Centre, PO Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria Contact person: Ms Paula Toroi E-mail address: P.Toroi@iaea.org Tel:+43(1) 600 1660 PTKMR - BATAN Institute: PTKMR - BATAN 11/13

Address: Jalan Lebak Bulus Raya No, 49 Jakarta Selatan 1070, Indonesia Contact person: C. Tuti Budiantari E-mail address: ptkmr@batan.go.id Telephone number: +6-1-7513906 Fax number: +6-1-7657950 1/13

Appendix B Photographs of the chambers Standard Imaging, HDR 1000 Plus and Holder 13/13