Browsers that can not handle javascript will not be able to access some features of this site.
Skip Navigation
LARA: Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory AffairsMichigan.gov: Official Web Site for the State of Michigan
Michigan.gov HomeLARA Home | Sitemap | Contacts | Agencies | Online Services
Printer Friendly Version Printer Friendly   Text Only Version Text Version  Share this page.
Mammography Shielding Assumptions

Below are the assumptions made for the calculation of mammography room barrier thickness.  A brief explanation of each assumption is included.


Parameter

Assumption

Explanation

Workload

1200 mA-min/wk

This is based on data from our inspection database.  Some facilities average between 500-600 patients per month.  Assume 600 patients per month, 4 weeks/month, 4 films/patient, 120 mAs/film

kVp

25-35 kVp

Assume kVp spectrum estimated by D.J. Simpkin.  14 % @ 20-25 kVp, 70 % @ 26-30 kVp, 16% @ 30-35 kVp

Occupancy Factor

1

All occupiable areas are assumed for design purposes to be fully occupied.  This is to allow for future changes in areas adjacent to the room

Primary use factor

0.25

For machines that are capable of permitting primary beams to miss the film holder, it is assumed that they are directed to any particular barrier 1/4 of the time

Secondary use factor

1

Secondary radiation always strikes the barrier

Leakage technique factor

35 kVp, 5 mA

Assume the machine will meet 100 mR/hr at 1 meter leakage limit when operated continuously at 35 kVp and 5 mA

Primary Distance

1.5 meters

Based on observation during inspections.  Many machines are positioned close to the vertical barrier. 

Secondary Distance

1.5 meters

Same

Leakage Distance

1.5 meters

Same

SID

65 cm

Most machines have SIDs near 65 cm

Beam size at SID

720 cm2

Area of a 24 by 30 cm cassette

Scattering Angle

135 degrees

A conservative scattering angle

Shielding design goal

0.02 mGy per week
(1 mGy per year)

Based on NCRP No. 147


Using the above assumptions for a mammography room, the barrier thickness was determined using XRAYBARR v 1.2 by D.J. Simpkin, Ph.D.  These thicknesses are:

 

For machines manufactured after 9/30/99 (secondary radiation only)

mm

inches

Lead

0.139

5.5E-3

Concrete

16.6

0.65

Gypsum

45.8

1.8

Steel

0.731

0.029

Plate Glass

17.4

0.687

Wood

238

9.36



For machines manufactured on or prior to 9/30/99 (some primary radiation missing the film holder assembly is possible on some models if collimation misused)

mm

inches

Lead

0.193

6.6E-3

Concrete

23.1

0.9

Gypsum

60.3

2.37

Steel

1.03

0.0405

Plate Glass

24.5

0.964

Wood

389

15.3

 

February 14, 2005



Related Documents
BHS/HFS-852; Application for a Radiation Shielding Plan Review - 508021 bytes PDF icon
Related Content
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations in 2012
 •  Report and Notification of a CT Medical Event
 •  CT Operator Requirements
 •  What Is and What Isn't Covered in the CT Rules
 •  CT Operator Check of Dose Indicator/Dose Indices
 •  Calibration - "Traceable to a National Standard"
 •  Establishment and Review of Scanning Protocols
 •  Quality Control Program
 •  Results of the Second Public Hearing on Proposed CT Rules (Posted 12/22/2010)
 •  Second Public Hearing on Proposed CT Rules Scheduled (Posted 9/24/2010)
 •  CT Rules Public Hearing (posted 5/19/2010)
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations (posted 3/18/2010)
 •  Public Hearing on Proposed CT Rules Scheduled (posted April 13, 2010)
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations in 2000
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations in 2004
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations in 2006
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations in 2007
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations in 2008
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations in 2009
 •  Therapy Accelerator Misadministrations in 2010

Michigan.gov Home | LARA Home | State Web Sites | Office of Regulatory Reinvention
Accessibility Policy | Link Policy | Privacy Policy | Security Policy | Michigan News | Michigan.gov Survey


Copyright © 2001-2012 State of Michigan