Abstract
Many different types of detectors are used for dual energy x-ray radiography. We developed an objective, technology independent, experimental method to compare the performance of these detectors. Our method uses a quality factor defined as the signal to noise ratio squared divided by the dose. We measure this quality factor by making images of a calibration phantom containing steps with known aluminum and plastic thickness. From the energy selective data, we compute an aluminum equivalent thickness image. The signal is the difference in the average value between two steps of the phantom with different aluminum thickness. The noise is the standard deviation of the computed values over the steps. The dose is the incident x-ray exposure. We applied this method to compare three energy selective detectors: (1) a single exposure, double screen, 'sandwich' storage phosphor detector, (2) an active storage phosphor detector using two exposures with different x-ray tube voltages with a light pulse erasing the front screen signal between x-ray exposures, and (3) a single exposure, double screen film detector. We found that the quality factor of the active detector is much larger than the single exposure film detector which in turn is substantially larger than the single exposure, storage phosphor detector.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering |
| Editors | Richard L. Van Metter, Jacob Beutel |
| Pages | 534-543 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Volume | 2708 |
| State | Published - 1996 |
| Externally published | Yes |
| Event | Medical Imaging 1996: Physics of Medical Imaging - Newport Beach, CA, USA Duration: Feb 11 1996 → Feb 13 1996 |
Other
| Other | Medical Imaging 1996: Physics of Medical Imaging |
|---|---|
| City | Newport Beach, CA, USA |
| Period | 2/11/96 → 2/13/96 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Electrical and Electronic Engineering
- Condensed Matter Physics
Cite this
Experimental comparison of dual-energy x-ray image detectors. / Alvarez, Robert E.; Seibert, J Anthony.
Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering. ed. / Richard L. Van Metter; Jacob Beutel. Vol. 2708 1996. p. 534-543.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution
}
TY - GEN
T1 - Experimental comparison of dual-energy x-ray image detectors
AU - Alvarez, Robert E.
AU - Seibert, J Anthony
PY - 1996
Y1 - 1996
N2 - Many different types of detectors are used for dual energy x-ray radiography. We developed an objective, technology independent, experimental method to compare the performance of these detectors. Our method uses a quality factor defined as the signal to noise ratio squared divided by the dose. We measure this quality factor by making images of a calibration phantom containing steps with known aluminum and plastic thickness. From the energy selective data, we compute an aluminum equivalent thickness image. The signal is the difference in the average value between two steps of the phantom with different aluminum thickness. The noise is the standard deviation of the computed values over the steps. The dose is the incident x-ray exposure. We applied this method to compare three energy selective detectors: (1) a single exposure, double screen, 'sandwich' storage phosphor detector, (2) an active storage phosphor detector using two exposures with different x-ray tube voltages with a light pulse erasing the front screen signal between x-ray exposures, and (3) a single exposure, double screen film detector. We found that the quality factor of the active detector is much larger than the single exposure film detector which in turn is substantially larger than the single exposure, storage phosphor detector.
AB - Many different types of detectors are used for dual energy x-ray radiography. We developed an objective, technology independent, experimental method to compare the performance of these detectors. Our method uses a quality factor defined as the signal to noise ratio squared divided by the dose. We measure this quality factor by making images of a calibration phantom containing steps with known aluminum and plastic thickness. From the energy selective data, we compute an aluminum equivalent thickness image. The signal is the difference in the average value between two steps of the phantom with different aluminum thickness. The noise is the standard deviation of the computed values over the steps. The dose is the incident x-ray exposure. We applied this method to compare three energy selective detectors: (1) a single exposure, double screen, 'sandwich' storage phosphor detector, (2) an active storage phosphor detector using two exposures with different x-ray tube voltages with a light pulse erasing the front screen signal between x-ray exposures, and (3) a single exposure, double screen film detector. We found that the quality factor of the active detector is much larger than the single exposure film detector which in turn is substantially larger than the single exposure, storage phosphor detector.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029714347&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029714347&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:0029714347
SN - 0819420832
SN - 9780819420831
VL - 2708
SP - 534
EP - 543
BT - Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering
A2 - Van Metter, Richard L.
A2 - Beutel, Jacob
ER -