Qualification and testing of CT systems

This chapter focuses on system verification and conformance to specifications. System qualification is carried out to ensure that the system and its components achieve the best performance—usually corresponding to the specifications made by the manufacturer. Acceptance and reverification testing are undertaken on the overall integrated system to check whether the system performs as specified.

[1]  Pavel Müller,et al.  Verification of a CT scanner using a miniature step gauge , 2011 .

[2]  Alexander Sasov,et al.  Compensation of mechanical inaccuracies in micro-CT and nano-CT , 2008, Optical Engineering + Applications.

[3]  Willi A Kalender,et al.  Geometric misalignment and calibration in cone-beam tomography. , 2004, Medical physics.

[4]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Foundations of Image Science , 2003, J. Electronic Imaging.

[5]  Leonardo De Chiffre,et al.  Inter laboratory comparison on Computed Tomography for industrial applications in the slaughterhouses: CIA-CT comparison , 2014 .

[6]  Frank Welkenhuyzen,et al.  A test object with parallel grooves for calibration and accuracy assessment of industrial computed tomography (CT) metrology , 2011 .

[7]  Christoph Hoeschen,et al.  Measurement of the detective quantum efficiency (DQE) of digital X-ray detectors according to the novel standard IEC 62220-1. , 2005, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[8]  M. Flessner,et al.  Determination of metrological structural resolution of a CT system using the frequency response on surface structures , 2015 .

[9]  Frank Härtig,et al.  Procedure and reference standard to determine the structural resolution in coordinate metrology , 2014 .

[10]  Markus Bartscher,et al.  ISO test survey on material influence in dimensional computed tomography , 2016 .

[11]  Michael Neugebauer,et al.  Creating a Multi-material Probing Error Test for the Acceptance Testing of Dimensional Computed Tomography Systems , 2017 .

[12]  Leonardo De Chiffre,et al.  Selection of items for “InteraqCT Comparison on Assemblies” , 2016 .

[13]  Jörg Seewig,et al.  Unambiguous evaluation of a chirp measurement standard , 2014 .

[14]  S. Carmignato,et al.  Accuracy of industrial computed tomography measurements: Experimental results from an international comparison , 2012 .

[15]  P. Heřmánek,et al.  Reference object for evaluating the accuracy of porosity measurements by X-ray computed tomography , 2016 .

[16]  S Carmignato,et al.  Two-spheres method for evaluating the metrological structural resolution in dimensional computed tomography , 2017 .

[17]  L. De Chiffre,et al.  Comparison on Computed Tomography using industrial items , 2014 .

[18]  Jochen Hiller,et al.  Physical characterization and performance evaluation of an x-ray micro-computed tomography system for dimensional metrology applications , 2012 .

[19]  Philippe Rizo,et al.  X-ray cone beam CT system calibration , 1993, Optics & Photonics.

[20]  Philip J. Withers,et al.  A new method of performance verification for x-ray computed tomography measurements , 2014, Measurement Science and Technology.

[21]  T Varslot,et al.  Reliable automatic alignment of tomographic projection data by passive auto-focus. , 2011, Medical physics.

[22]  Tino Hausotte,et al.  C8.2 - CT measurements of microparts: Numerical uncertainty determination and structural resolution , 2015 .