1980
DOI: 10.2307/3575311
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Comparison of Microdosimetric Measurements with Spherical Proportional Counters and Solid-State Detectors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

1981
1981
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The first comparison of microdosimetric measurements between a spherical proportional counter and a single junction solid-state detector were made by Dicello [2]. In this case, a silicon detector of a large area with 7 microns thickness was used.…”
Section: Solid State Microdosimetrymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first comparison of microdosimetric measurements between a spherical proportional counter and a single junction solid-state detector were made by Dicello [2]. In this case, a silicon detector of a large area with 7 microns thickness was used.…”
Section: Solid State Microdosimetrymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first comparison of a single p-n junction silicon solid-state detector to a gas proportional counter was made in 1980 [15]. The spectra from the silicon solid-state detector showed significant differences to that obtained from the gas proportional counter.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fe ions produce delta electrons with a range of more than 10 . Therefore they could be detected by coincidence measurements of neighboring SVs in the array if the distance between each SV, , was of the order of [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] . Such distances may be achieved with the planned implementation of 0.18 feature fabrication technology.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The sputtered events that can be seen are artefacts produced by ions which were initially directed towards their displayed location but were later made incident onto the SV of the microdosimeter due to scattering with the residual atoms and molecules within the evacuated beam tube. [15], respectively. In response to the more energetic, lower LET, 5.5 MeV ions the SV shows the same spatially resolved response as it does to the 3 MeV He ions.…”
Section: B Charge Collection Imaging: 2 Svmentioning
confidence: 99%