2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2008.12.194
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance tests of large area position-sensitive planar germanium detectors with conventional and amorphous contacts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Previous studies have shown that HPGe detectors can have energy resolution below 1% at 122 keV (Gros et al , 2009). To investigate our specific detector's capabilities, we acquired flood data over the entire detector using four different isotopes in the same acquisition.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Previous studies have shown that HPGe detectors can have energy resolution below 1% at 122 keV (Gros et al , 2009). To investigate our specific detector's capabilities, we acquired flood data over the entire detector using four different isotopes in the same acquisition.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The exception to this is the Liverpool group, who have focused on applications for PET or Compton imaging (Cooper et al , 2007). While one group has published results of germanium strip detector performance (Gros et al , 2009), their testing focused on characterizing the degree of charge sharing between strips, charge loss, and the influence of detector design on these problems. This paper instead focuses on characterizing detector properties that are relevant to small-animal SPECT imaging: energy resolution, detection efficiency at relevant energies, intrinsic spatial resolution, depth-of-interaction estimation capabilities, scatter rejection, and uniformity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To our knowledge no groups have recently investigated using HPGe for biomedical applications, with the exception of the Liverpool group, who have focused on PET and Compton imaging [5]. While another group investigated the performance of several different types of germanium strip detectors, their testing focused on characterizing the degree of charge sharing between strips, charge loss and the influence of detector design on these problems [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…o2.5 keV FWHM) at a peaking time of 1 μs, while also incurring minimal resolution loss at sub-microsecond peaking times, a configuration employing at most 5 mm wide strips separated by at least 3 mm wide gaps would be required. A well documented characteristic of HPGe strip detectors is that of incomplete charge collection resulting from events in which charge is collected to the detector surface in the inter-electrode gap region [14][15][16][17][18]. A standard strip configuration featuring inter strip gaps this wide would be likely to suffer from such high levels of charge loss as to make the design infeasible from a practical standpoint.…”
Section: Theoretical Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%