access icon openaccess Study on silicon drift detector efficiency using Monte–Carlo simulation and experimental methods

The energy calibration and efficiency calibration of one silicon drift detector (SDD) are introduced here. The energy calibration is achieved using four radioactive sources, and the linear correlation coefficient is close to one. The efficiency curve of the SDD is obtained by Monte–Carlo simulations from 0.5 keV to 40 keV. Then, the efficiency of the SDD is calibrated using two radioactive sources. The results of experiments are compared with the calculated and the relative deviation are within 5.6%.

Inspec keywords: radioactive sources; silicon radiation detectors; Monte Carlo methods; calibration

Other keywords: efficiency calibration; Monte–Carlo simulations; silicon drift detector efficiency; radioactive sources; linear correlation coefficient; electron volt energy 0.5 keV to 40.0 keV; energy calibration

Subjects: Semiconductor detectors; Monte Carlo methods; Radioactive sources; Particle and radiation detection and measurement; Measurement standards and calibration; Measurement standards and calibration

References

    1. 1)
      • 12. Bé, M.M., Chisté, V., Dulieu, C.: ‘Detailed calculation of K- and L-auger electron emission intensities following radioactive disintegration’, Appl. Radiat. Isot. Incl. Data Instrum. Methods for Use Agric. Ind. Med., 2006, 64, (10–11), p. 1435.
    2. 2)
      • 4. Lechner, P., Eckbauer, S., Hartmann, R., et al: ‘‘Silicon drift detectors for high resolution room temperature X-ray spectroscopy’, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., 1996, 377, (2–3), pp. 346351.
    3. 3)
      • 3. Cerofolini, G.F., Bertoni, S., Meda, L., et al: ‘The fluence spectrum allowing the formation of a connected buried layer in silicon by oxygen implantation’, Semicond. Sci. Technol., 1996, 11, (3), p. 398.
    4. 4)
      • 1. Malinowski, K., Chernyshova, M., Czarski, T., et al: ‘Simulation of energy spectrum of GEM detector from an X-ray quantum’, J. Instrum., 2018, 13, (1), pp. C01018C01018.
    5. 5)
      • 14. Chechev, V.P., Kuzmenko, N.K.: ‘Updated evaluations of the 233Th and 241Am decay characteristics [J]’, Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 2010, 68, (7-8), pp. 15781582.
    6. 6)
      • 8. Asai, M.: ‘Geant4-A simulation toolkit’, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., 2007, 506, (3), pp. 250303.
    7. 7)
      • 11. Nowotny, R.: ‘XMudat: photon attenuation data on PC version 1.0.1 of August 1998 – summary’, 1998.
    8. 8)
      • 6. Peyres, V., García-Toraño, E.: ‘Efficiency calibration of an extended-range Ge detector by a detailed monte carlo simulation’, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., 2007, 580, (1), pp. 296298.
    9. 9)
      • 13. Lépy, M.C., Plagnard, J., Ferreux, L.: ‘Measurement of (241)Am L X-ray emission probabilities’, Appl. Radiat. Isot. Incl. Data Instrum. Methods for Use Agric. Ind. Med., 2008, 66, (6–7), p. 715.
    10. 10)
      • 2. Li, H.B., Jia, M.Y., Wu, R., et al: ‘Calculation of spectrum to dose conversion function of portable HPGe γ spectrometer’, Hedianzixue Yu Tance Jishu/nuclear Electron. Detect. Technol., 2013, 33, (6), pp. 699704.
    11. 11)
      • 5. Guadilla, V., Taín, J.L., Agramunt, J., et al: ‘Calibration of a DSSSD detector with radioactive sources’. American Institute of Physics, La Rábida, Spain, 2013, pp. 173174.
    12. 12)
      • 9. Maleka, P.P., Maučec, M.: ‘Monte carlo uncertainty analysis of germanium detector response to γ γ mathContainer loading mathjax -rays with energies below 1 MeV’, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., 2005, 538, (1–3), pp. 631639.
    13. 13)
      • 7. Hendricks, J.S.: ‘MCNPX version 2.5.c’, Availability, 2003.
    14. 14)
      • 15. Lépy, M.C., Pearce, A., Sima, O.: ‘Uncertainties in gamma-ray spectrometry’, Metrologia, 2015, 52, (3), pp. S123S145.
    15. 15)
      • 10. Hansen, J.S., Mcgeorge, J.C., Nix, D., et al: ‘Accurate efficiency calibration and properties of semiconductor detectors for low-energy photons’, Nucl. Instrum. Methods, 1973, 106, (2), pp. 365379.
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/joe.2018.9051
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/joe.2018.9051
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading