Evaluation of the charge-sharing effects on spot intensity in XRD setup using photon-counting pixel detectors

Nilsson, Hans‐Erik; Mattsson, Claes; Norlin, Börje; Fröjdh, Christer; Bethke, Klaus; Vries, R. de

doi:10.1016/j.nima.2006.01.091

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore the difference between both spectra should be even bigger. These data agree with comparison of measurement and simulation made by H.-E. Nillson et al [5].…”

Section: A Comparison Between Expected and Distorted Spectrumsupporting

confidence: 92%

Charge sharing between pixels in the spectral Medipix2 x-ray detector

Zeller

Dufreneix

Clark

et al. 2009

2009 24th International Conference Image and Vision Computing New Zealand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-This paper gives an overview of the Medipix2 x-ray detector and its use in medical imaging, with the MARS-CT scanner (MARS, Medipix All Resolution System) as an example. The Medipix2 chip is a photon counting pixel detector with the ability of energy discrimination. It was developed at CERN and is composed of a sensor layer bump bonded to electronics layer. It has 256x256 pixels, each one covering an area of 55x55µm². Furthermore, every pixel can be read out separately. The MARS-CT scanner uses these properties to scan biological objects obtaining multi-energy (spectral) x-ray images with high contrast between materials and high spatial resolution. Charge sharing is the phenomenon by which the electron-hole charge cloud, induced in the sensor layer by an absorbed photon, is detected by a cluster of neighbouring pixels. Each pixel in the cluster generates a signal corresponding to its fraction of the cloud, so the detector will record several photons each of lower energies. This effect has to be considered with the use of Medipix2, because of its small pixels and the hybrid architecture. The effect was measured and a simulation modelled with the aim to reconstruct the spectrum removing the distortion of the detection process.

show abstract

“…Therefore the difference between both spectra should be even bigger. These data agree with comparison of measurement and simulation made by H.-E. Nillson et al [5].…”

Section: A Comparison Between Expected and Distorted Spectrumsupporting

confidence: 92%