OBJECTIVE: The present study was aimed at evaluating the practical peak voltage (PPV) determined from the voltage waveform applied to x-ray tubes and comparing it with some kVp definitions for different types of x-ray equipment: single-phase (full-wave) and three-phase (six-pulse) clinical x-ray generators, and an industrial constant potential apparatus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study involved the comparison between invasively measured PPV (with voltage dividers) and values obtained with two commercial noninvasive meters, besides values of other quantities utilized for measuring the x-ray tube peak voltage. The PPV variation with the voltage ripple was also analyzed in the present study. RESULTS: The authors observed that the difference between PPV and the most common peak voltage definitions increases with the ripple. PPV values varied up to 3% and 5%, respectively, in the comparison between invasive and non-invasive measurements with single-phase and three-phase devices. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated that voltage ripple is the main quantity influencing the invasive or non-invasive PPV determination. Additionally, non-invasively measured PPV values should be evaluated taking into consideration their dependence on the data sample rate and waveform obtained by the device.
Practical peak voltage; X-ray tubes; Voltage divider; Voltage waveform; Peak voltage; kVp meters
