title: Measurement of focal spot size with slit camera using computed radiography and flat-panel based digital detectors.
abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of digital x-ray imaging detectors for the measurement of diagnostic x-ray tube focal spot size using a slit camera. Slit camera images of two focal spots for a radiographic x-ray tube were acquired with direct-exposure film (DF) (as specified by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association [NEMA] Standards Publication No. XR 5, 1992), computed radiography (CR) imaging plates, and an a-Si:H/CsI:Tl-based flat-panel (FP) detector. Images obtained with the CR and the FP were acquired over a broad range of detector entrance exposure levels. The DF slit images were evaluated according to NEMA specifications (visually, using a 7x magnifying glass with reticule) by six medical physicists. Additionally, the DF images were digitized and the focal spot sizes obtained from the digital profiles of the slit. The CR and the FP images were analyzed in a manner similar to the digitized DF images. It took less than 20 minutes for a complete CR or FP measurement of focal spot size in two dimensions. In comparison, a typical DF measurement with visual evaluation takes at least 60 minutes, in our experience. In addition to a great reduction in measurement time achieved by using digital detectors, the tube loading requirements were reduced to approximately 20 mAs compared with approximately 1000 mAs when using the DF technique. The calculated focal spot sizes for CR and FP differed from those of digitized DF by -2.4% to +4.8% (sigma=2.5%), far less than the -16.6% to +9.3% (sigma=8.1%) variability introduced by the visual evaluation of the slit image. In addition, the calculated focal spot sizes for the CR and the FP images maintained a coefficient of variation <1.0% over the broad range of exposure levels. Based upon these results, we conclude that (1) FP and CR detectors yield consistent results in measurements of x-ray tube focal spot sizes, (2) compared to DF, CR and FP significantly reduce measurement time and tube loading requirements, (3) CR and FP readily permit digital profile analysis, thereby eliminating observer error, and (4) unlike DF, CR and FP are independent of exposure level.
authors.affiliation: Department of Imaging Physics, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030-4009, USA. john-rong@ouhsc.edu
authors.forename: Xiujiang J
authors.initials: XJ
authors.lastname: Rong
authors.forename: Kerry T
authors.initials: KT
authors.lastname: Krugh
authors.forename: S Jeff
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Shepard
authors.forename: William R
authors.initials: WR
authors.lastname: Geiser
mesh_terms: D002138:Calibration / Q000592:standards*; D019544:Equipment Failure Analysis / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D005373:Film Dosimetry / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D011856:Radiographic Image Enhancement / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards*; D011874:Radiometry / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D014159:Transducers; D014481:United States; D014963:X-Ray Intensifying Screens