[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Mamm focal spot



>Date:         Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:17:21 -0600
>Reply-To: Medical Physics Mailing List <MEDPHYS@LISTS.WAYNE.EDU>
>Sender: Medical Physics Listserver <medphys@lists.wayne.edu>
>From: "Joel E. Gray, Ph.D." <joelgray@M3.SPRYNET.COM>
>Subject:      Re: Mamm focal spot
>To: MEDPHYS@LISTS.WAYNE.EDU
>
>Ann,
>
>Interesting problem!!  When you calculated the size from the slit image did
>you take into account the tube tilt angle?  This can make a difference of
>30 to 50%--and I am not sure of the tilt on the UC.
>
>The important issue is image quality, not the size of the focal spot.  If
>you measure resolutions specified in the ACR Manual, i.e., 13 c/mm parallel
>to the anode-cathode axis and 11 c/mm perpendicular, then the image quality
>should be adequate (especially since this is a measure of system resolution
>if you do it as specified by ACR).
>
>Both the size and the distribution of the focal spot are important.  The
>distribution can make a difference of 2 or greater in the resolution.  A
>gaussian distribution has far better resolution that a uniform distribution
>and a dual peaked distribution has about half the resolution as a uniform
>distribution.
>
>Bottom line-- if you meet the ACR resolution criteria then I would accept
>the x-ray tube!
>
>          Joel
>
>Joel E. Gray, Ph.D., Consultant
>2804 Second Street SW, Suite 334
>Rochester, Minnesota 55902
>
>Ph  507-286-8910
>Cell Ph  507-269-4247
>Fax  507-286-8910
>e-mail  joelgray@m3.sprynet.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>Hi
>>The focal spot sizes of 3 different Philips Diagnost
>>UC Mammographic x-ray machines were evaluated using a slit camera
>>and star pattern.  The calculated focal spot sizes were greater than
>>the 1.5 x nominal size specified by ACR.
>>Using a Du Pont/Ackerman phantom or test object, images taken on
>>these machines could resolve 10-12 lp/mm.
>>Do we tell the manufacturer to do something about it or just monitor
>>and see if they deteriorate?
>>We are attempting to establish a type of Mammography accreditation so
>>would like to know what our stand point should be on this aspect.
>> Many thanks
>>Ann Sweetlove
>>Medical Physicist, Bloemfontein, South Africa
>>gnbimas@med.uovs.ac.za
>>
>>                    *****
>>Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Medphys at:
>>http://www.mindspring.com/~sherouse/MPFAQ/
>
>                    *****
>Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Medphys at:
>http://www.mindspring.com/~sherouse/MPFAQ/
>