| ||Format||Pages||Price|| |
|14||$50.00||  ADD TO CART|
|Hardcopy (shipping and handling)||14||$50.00||  ADD TO CART|
|Standard + Redline PDF Bundle||28||$60.00||  ADD TO CART|
Significance and Use
4.1 There are several factors affecting the quality of a CR image including the basic spatial resolution of the IP system, geometrical unsharpness, scatter and contrast sensitivity. There are several additional factors (for example, software and scanning parameters) that affect the accurate reading of images on exposed IPs using an optical scanner.
4.2 This practice is to be used to establish a characterization of CR system by performance levels on the basis of a normalized SNR, interpolated basic spatial detector resolution and EPS. The CR system performance levels in this practice do not refer to any particular manufacturers’ imaging plates. A CR system performance level results from the use of a particular imaging plate together with the exposure conditions, standardized phantom, the scanner type, and software and the scanning parameters. This characterization system provides a means to compare differing CR technologies, as is common practice with film systems, which guides the user to the appropriate configuration, IP, and technique for the application at hand. The performance level selected may not match the imaging performance of a corresponding film class because of the difference in the spatial resolution and scatter sensitivity. Therefore, the user should always use IQIs for proof of contrast sensitivity and basic spatial resolution.
4.3 The measured performance parameters are presented in a characterization chart. This enables users to select specific CR systems by the different characterization data to find the best system for his specific application.
4.4 The quality factors can be determined most accurately by the tests described in this practice. Some of the system tests require special tools, which may not be available in user laboratories. Simpler tests are described for quality assurance and long term stability tests in Practice .
4.5 Manufacturers of industrial CR systems or certification agencies will use this practice. Users of industrial CR systems may use Practice or perform some of the described tests and measurements outlined in this practice, provided that the required test equipment is used and the methodology is strictly followed. Any alternative methods or radiation qualities may be applied if equivalence to the methods of this practice is proven to the appropriate cognizant engineering organization.
4.6 The publication of CR system performance levels will enable specifying bodies and contracting parties to agree to particular system performance level, as a first step in arriving at the appropriate settings of a system, or the selection of a system. Confirmation of necessary image quality shall be achieved by using Practice .
1.1 This practice describes the manufacturing characterization of computed radiography (CR) systems, consisting of a particular phosphor imaging plate (IP), scanner, software, and an image display monitor, in combination with specified metal screens for industrial radiography.
1.2 The practice defines system tests to be used to characterize the systems of different suppliers and make them comparable for users.
1.3 This practice is intended for use by manufacturers of CR systems or certification agencies to provide quantitative results of CR system characteristics for nondestructive testing (NDT) user or purchaser consumption. Some of these tests require specialized test phantoms to ensure consistency of results among suppliers or manufacturers. These tests are not intended for users to complete, nor are they intended for long term stability tracking and lifetime measurements. However, they may be used for this purpose, if so desired.
1.4 The CR system performance is described by the basic spatial resolution, contrast, signal and noise parameters, and the equivalent penetrameter sensitivity (EPS). Some of these parameters are used to compare with DDA characterization and film characterization data (see Practice and Test Method ).
Note 1: For film system characterization, the signal is represented by the optical density of 2 (above fog and base) and the noise as granularity. The signal-to-noise ratio is normalized by the aperture (similar to the basic spatial resolution) of the system and is part of characterization. This normalization is given by the scanning circular aperture of 100 µm of the micro-photometer, which is defined in Test Method for film system characterization.
1.5 The measurement of CR systems in this practice is restricted to a selected radiation quality to simplify the procedure. The properties of CR systems will change with radiation energy but not the ranking of CR system performance. Users of this practice may carry out the tests at different or additional radiation qualities (X-ray or gamma ray) if required.
1.6 The values stated in SI are to be regarded as the standard.
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and to determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
2. Referenced Documents (purchase separately) The documents listed below are referenced within the subject standard but are not provided as part of the standard.
E1316 Terminology for Nondestructive Examinations
E1815 Test Method for Classification of Film Systems for Industrial Radiography
E2002 Practice for Determining Total Image Unsharpness in Radiology
E2007 Guide for Computed Radiography
E2033 Practice for Computed Radiology (Photostimulable Luminescence Method)
E2445 Practice for Qualification and Long-Term Stability of Computed Radiology Systems
ICS Number Code 19.100 (Non-destructive testing)
|Link to Active (This link will always route to the current Active version of the standard.)|
ASTM E2446-16, Standard Practice for Manufacturing Characterization of Computed Radiography Systems, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016, www.astm.orgBack to Top