Abstract

When comparing the performance of different industrial X-ray computed tomography (CT) systems, reconstruction algorithms, or scan protocols, it is important to assess how well the required inspection and measurement tasks can be performed. Furthermore, it can be very informative to quantify image quality (IQ) metrics that can provide insight into the IQ characteristics that lead to the resulting inspection or measurement task performance. Inspection and measurement task performance is determined by basic characteristics such as spatial resolution; feature contrast, size, and shape; random noise (noise due to statistical uncertainty in measurements); and image artifacts. In this report, we describe a modular phantom set that enables robustly quantifying these characteristics and also enables assessing the performance of the inspection or measurement tasks themselves. The phantom set includes two phantom bodies and several insert types that can be optionally installed in the bodies. Phantom body extensions can be optionally included to increase scatter. The phantom bodies combined with the available insert types can comprehensively evaluate all important IQ metrics and inspection or measurement tasks. The precisely-known phantom body geometry and insert location, geometry, and orientation supports automatic analysis of large, complex experiments of multiple variables. This phantom set, with the associated image analysis software, could potentially serve as a general evaluation method for non-destructive testing (NDT) CT.

References

References
1.
ASTM International
,
2013
, “E1695 Standard Test Method for Measurement of Computed Tomography (CT) System Performance,”
ASTM Standard
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
.
2.
Richard
,
S.
,
Husarik
,
D. B.
,
Yadava
,
G.
,
Murphy
,
S. N.
, and
Samei
,
E.
,
2012
, “
Towards Task-Based Assessment of CT Performance: System and Object MTF Across Different Reconstruction Algorithms
,”
Med. Phys.
,
39
(
7
), pp.
4115
4122
. 10.1118/1.4725171
3.
Yu
,
L.
,
Vrieze
,
T. J.
,
Leng
,
S.
,
Fletcher
,
J. G.
, and
McCollough
,
C. H.
,
2015
, “
Technical Note: Measuring Contrast- and Noise-Dependent Spatial Resolution of an Iterative Reconstruction Method in CT Using Ensemble Averaging
,”
Med. Phys.
,
42
(
5
), pp.
2261
2267
. 10.1118/1.4916802
4.
International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements
,
Burns
,
D. T.
,
Dawson
,
P.
,
Fantuzzi
,
E.
,
Gregoire
,
V.
, and
Paretzke
,
H. G.
,
2012
, “
ICRU Report No. 87: Radiation Dose and Image-Quality Assessment in Computed Tomography
.”
J. ICRU
,
12
(
1
).
5.
GE
,
2016
, “
Unique Tool for High Quality Scatter Reduced Industrial CT Scans Acquired in Significantly Shorter Scan Time
,”
GE Insp. Technol
, https://www.industrial.ai/sites/g/files/cozyhq596/files/2018-11/geit-31352_scatter_correct_en_0416.pdf, Accessed July 2019.
6.
Peterzol
,
A.
,
Létang
,
J. M.
, and
Babot
,
D.
,
2008
, “
A Beam Stop Based Correction Procedure for High Spatial Frequency Scatter in Industrial Cone-Beam X-Ray CT
,”
Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. B
,
266
(
18
), pp.
4042
4054
. 10.1016/j.nimb.2008.07.005
7.
Miceli
,
A.
,
2008
, “
An Experimental and Theoretical Approach to Correct for the Scattered Radiation in an X-Ray Computer Tomography System for Industrial Applications
,”
Ph.D. dissertation
,
University of Bologna
,
Bologna, Italy
.
8.
Shedlock
,
D.
,
Wang
,
A.
,
Nisius
,
D.
,
Hu
,
M.
,
Yoon
,
S.
,
Brooks
,
A.
,
Shapiro
,
E.
, and
Star-Lack
,
J.
,
2015
, “
Refinement of Imaging Processing of Scatter Correction and Beam Hardening Tools for Industrial Radiography and Cone Beam CT
,”
Conference Proceedings: Digital Industrial Radiology and Computed Tomography (DIR 2015)
,
June 22–25
,
Belgium, Ghent
.
9.
Navnina
,
B.
,
Jean Michel
,
L.
,
David
,
T.
, and
Fanny
,
B.
,
2015
, “
Scattering Correction in Cone Beam Computed Tomography
,”
Conference Proceedings: Digital Industrial Radiology and Computed Tomography (DIR 2015)
,
June 22–25
,
Belgium, Ghent
.
10.
Chen
,
B.
, and
Samei
,
E.
,
2013
, “Development of a Phantom-Based Methodology for the Assessment of Quantification Performance in CT,”
Proceedings Volume 8668, Medical Imaging 2013: Physics of Medical Imaging
,
R. M.
Nishikawa
, and
B. R.
Whiting
, eds.,
International Society for Optics and Photonics
,
Bellingham, WA
, p.
86681E
.
You do not currently have access to this content.