07_1020_1034_15pgs 9/15/05 11:30 AM Page 1021
Oliver Scholarship
Digital Radiography: The Basics
Editor’s note: Ed Doucette was the recipient of
the 2005 Robert B. Oliver Scholarship, which
honors and assists students who have chosen
NDT as a career. It memorializes ASNT Past
President, Honorary Member and Fellow
Robert B. Oliver. An initial grant for the award
came from the Cabot Corporation and the fund
has since been supplemented by many friends of
ASNT.
t’s been said that nothing can stop an
I idea whose time has come. Digital radi-
ography is an example of a technology
whose applications are currently proliferat-
ing. This article will attempt to give an idea
of what digital radiography is, where it
began and where it is going. Enjoying ro-
bust growth, especially in the last couple of
years, digital radiography is well estab-
lished in the medical community and is
making substantial inroads in nondestruc-
tive testing (NDT). Conventional film has
not been completely displaced, but the
players in industrial digital radiography
are, not surprisingly, names that are recog-
nizable in conventional radiography. I will
not go into theory too deeply as a funda-
mental knowledge of imagery using ioniz-
ing radiation is all that is needed.
History
Computed radiography was intro-
duced in the 1980s with storage phosphor
imaging plates. While it allowed real time
(instant) image viewing, its sensitivity was
far below that of film.
The 1990s saw the advent of the digital
panel, providing a direct digital signal
which can be displayed and manipulated
with computer software technology that,
for some NDT companies, is as good as
film in sensitivity. However, a lack of codes
and reference radiographic images is a hin-
drance in some applications.
Currently the two leading technologies
competing for market share are amor-
phous selenium and amorphous silicon.
The differences between the two are too
subtle for this short overview, but both
offer speeds from one image every several
seconds to 30 images per second, allowing
them to replace the aging computed radi-
ography systems. The price for these in-
creased speeds is a decrease in resolution.
* 2664 Manx Norton Rd., Fort Ripley, MN 56449;
(218) 820-3878.
From Materials Evaluation, Vol. 63, No. 10, pp: 1021-1022.
Copyright © 2005 The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc.
by Ed Doucette*
Systems currently in use include the fol-
lowing:
■ X-ray image intensifiers — phosphor,
which becomes fluorescent when exposed
to ionizing radiation, is scanned and inten-
sified; the image is then displayed on a
monitor via a television camera
■ solid state detectors — used in low en-
ergy situations; semiconductors sensitive
to ionizing radiation capture the image
■ silicon based detectors — a phosphor
based device coupled to a silicon readout
device; image signals are digitized and
transferred to a computer for display
■ amorphous selenium — ionizing radi-
ation is absorbed directly in a photocon-
ductive material without converting it to
light; it is also digitized and transferred
to a computer.
There seem to be few
disadvantages to digital
radiography when
compared to
conventional film
radiography.
Advantages
The most striking advantage of digital
radiography is increased production due to
lower energy requirements to form the
image. The lower need for energy results
not only in shorter exposure times, but re-
duced radiation safety zones when using
gamma sources. A lab used to having a
production rate of two to three shots per
hour with conventional film can bring that
number to eight to ten shots per hour by
switching to digital radiography. Dramati-
cally shorter shot to view times are another
advantage.
Lower energy requirements mean an
ability to use a smaller focal spot or gamma
source, improving geometric unsharpness
enough to overcome the sensitivity advan-
tage of film in some applications.
A digitized image means its transmis-
sion (whether to in house stations or glob-
ally) is possible in seconds with no degra-
dation of quality.
While storage space becomes a moot
point, the ever changing state of the art in
digital storage could complicate long term
archival usage. Will the compact disk
someday go the way of the floppy disk? It
seems inevitable. Computer crashes and
viruses also remain a threat.
Greater latitude, or the ability to show
relatively thick and thin areas of a speci-
men on the same image, is another advan-
tage. This means a curved object, for exam-
ple, might not need to be X-rayed multiple
times to view all areas of interest.
Density (the darkness or lightness of the
image) of both the specimen and the back-
ground are adjustable over a wide range.
Some imaging plates or detectors can be
bent or cut, just as film can, and remain us-
able for hundreds of shots.
Of course, the costs of a film processing
lab, film and chemical costs, disposal fees
and the logistics of a truck mounted lab for
field operations are factors to also be con-
sidered. It seems the trend toward decreas-
ing size, better durability and improved
power efficiency of electronic equipment
will not slow anytime soon, and greater re-
mote capabilities can be expected for digi-
tal radiographic equipment as well.
Disadvantages
The significant initial cost of a digital ra-
diography system could be seen as a disad-
vantage, but the initial investment is offset
by the subsequent savings in operating
costs and the increase in production.
Film, particularly fine grained (slow)
film, still has the advantage in terms of res-
olution and sensitivity. As mentioned earli-
er, focal spot size must also be considered.
Table 1, compiled by the NDT team at Los
Alamos National Laboratory, illustrates the
differences between film and digital radi-
ographic focal spot sizes (Davis et al., 2000).
Radiation scatter accentuates blurring
of digital radiography. For this reason, film
is preferable for high energy, high resolu-
tion situations.
Not all standardizing organizations
have established codes for digital radiogra-
phy. As an example, ASTM’s subcommit-
tee E07.01 has been developing standards
Materials Evaluation/October 2005 1021
07_1020_1034_15pgs 9/15/05 11:30 AM Page 1022

Table 1 Differences in focal spot size between film and digital radiography for digital radiography for the past 20 years
and, as of fairly recently, was developing
Source Size Film Detectable Digital Radiography digital image files of reference radiographs.
Feature Size Dectectable Feature Size Given the speed of development of the
2 × 10-3 mm 3.6 × 10-3 mm 3.9 × 10-3 mm
technology and the degree to which a digi-
(7.9 × 10-5 in.) (1.4 × 10-4 in.) (1.5 × 10-4 in.)
1 × 10-2 mm 1.3 × 10-2 mm 1.8 × 10-2 mm tally generated image can be altered, you
(3.9 × 10-4 in.) (5.1 × 10-4 in.) (7.1 × 10-4 in.) get an idea of the difficulty of establishing
0.4 mm 3.8 × 10-2 mm 1.93 × 10-1 mm codes and standards for the technology.
(1.6 × 10-2 in.) (1.5 × 10-3 in.) (7.6 × 10-3 in.)
1 mm 3.9 × 10-2 mm 2.25 × 10-1 mm Conclusion
(3.9 × 10-2 in.) (1.5 × 10-3 in.) (8.9 × 10-3 in.) There seem to be few disadvantages to
4 mm 4 × 10-2 mm 2.46 × 10-1 mm digital radiography when compared to
(0.16 in.) (1.6 × 10-3 in.) (9.7 × 10-3 in.) conventional film radiography. The return
on investment can be short enough to
cause any organization to take notice and,
if patterns of new technologies are an indi-
cation, the cost can be expected to decrease.
However, it is unlikely digital radiography
will one day completely replace film.
Watch a movie at your local cinema: it is
X-Ray Inspection and still projected onto a screen, through a
moving ribbon of film, just as it was
50 years ago. Nostalgia has nothing to do
Industrial Imaging Solutions with it — film just works best for that situa-
tion. It’s hard to imagine the field of NDT
being any different.

References
Davis, Anthony W., Phillip C. Berry, Thomas N.
Claytor, David A. Fry, Martin H. Jones and
Sarah M. White, “An Analysis of Industrial
Nondestructive Testing Employing Digital
Radiography As an Alternative to Film Radi-
ography,” LA-UR-00-2560, ESA-MT, Los
Alamos, New Mexico, Nondestructive Testing
and Evaluation Team, Los Alamos National
Laboratory, 1 March 2000.
Ω

Hurricane Katrina and

Gulf Coast Mail Delivery
Due to the effects of Hurricane
Katrina, mail service to a number
of zip codes in the US Gulf Coast
region has been restricted. As we
X-Ray Computed Tomography for NDT go to press, the US Postal Service
is not accepting most classes of
3D X-Ray computed tomography technology, mail, including periodicals, for
zip codes beginning with 395,
fast image reconstruction, and high-resolution 700, 701 and 704. In addition,
forwarding orders for those living
3D image visualization for the NDT industry.
within these zip codes will not
apply to periodicals. When the
Visit us at ASNT Fall 2005 and inquire about Postal Service resumes delivery,
our new generation XT 3.0 Image Processor ASNT will distribute back issues
of its periodicals to all affected
for fast volumetric CT reconstruction and members and subscribers. In the
The MPB 8 Reconstruction Board meantime, ASNT will post the
volume rendering. containing 8 XTrillion Processors
complete content of all periodicals
on the Society’s Web site. For
more information on this and for
VISIONARY SYSTEMS DIVISION
other resources for ASNT
members affected by the
ctsales@terarecon.com www.terarecon.com 650.372.1100 877-354-1100 hurricane, see the ASNT Web site
at <www.asnt.org>.
Circle 39 on reader service card

1022 Materials Evaluation/October 2005