4.5 Review

Towards geometrical calibration of x-ray computed tomography systems-a review

期刊

MEASUREMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 26, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0957-0233/26/9/092003

关键词

x-ray computed tomography; geometrical calibration; dimensional metrology

资金

  1. European Union 7th Framework Programme [607817]
  2. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/M008983/1, EP/I033335/2, EP/I033335/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. EPSRC [EP/I033335/1, EP/M008983/1, EP/I033335/2] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Industrial x-ray computed tomography (XCT) is seen as a potentially effective tool for the industrial inspection of complex parts. In particular, XCT is an attractive solution for the measurement of internal geometries, which are inaccessible by conventional coordinate measuring systems. While the technology is available and the benefits are recognized, methods to establish the measurement assurance of XCT systems are lacking. More specifically, the assessment of measurement uncertainty and the subsequent establishment of measurement traceability is a largely unknown process. This paper is a review of research that contributes to the development of a geometrical calibration procedure for XCT systems. A brief introduction to the geometry of cone-beam tomography systems is given, after which the geometrical influence factors are outlined. Mathematical measurement models play a significant role in understanding how geometrical offsets and misalignments contribute to error in measurements; therefore, the application of mathematical models in simulating geometrical errors is discussed and the corresponding literature is presented. Then, the various methods that have been developed to measure certain geometrical errors are reviewed. The findings from this review are discussed and suggestions are provided for future work towards the development of a comprehensive and practical geometrical calibration procedure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据