Testing and Comparison of Imaging Detectors for Electrons in the Energy Range 10–20 keV
Interest in direct detectors for low-energy electrons has increased markedly in recent years. Detection of electrons in the energy range up to low tens of keV is important in techniques such as photoelectron emission microscopy (PEEM) and electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) on scanning electron...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of instrumentation 2017-11, Vol.12 (11), p.C11016-C11016 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Interest in direct detectors for low-energy electrons has increased markedly in recent years. Detection of electrons in the energy range up to low tens of keV is important in techniques such as photoelectron emission microscopy (PEEM) and electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) on scanning electron microscopes (SEMs). The PEEM technique is used both in the laboratory and on synchrotron light sources worldwide. The ubiquity of SEMs means that there is a very large market for EBSD detectors for materials studies. Currently, the most widely used detectors in these applications are based on indirect detection of incident electrons. Examples include scintillators or microchannel plates (MCPs), coupled to CCD cameras. Such approaches result in blurring in scintillators/phosphors, distortions in optical systems, and inefficiencies due the limited active area of MCPs. In principle, these difficulties can be overcome using direct detection in a semiconductor device. Growing out of a feasibility study into the use of a direct detector for use on an XPEEM, we have built at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory a system to illuminate detectors with an electron beam of energy up to 20 keV . We describe this system in detail. It has been used to measure the performance of a custom back-thinned monolithic active pixel sensor (MAPS), a detector based on the Medipix2 chip, and a commercial detector based on MCPs. We present a selection of the results from these measurements and compare and contrast different detector types. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1748-0221 1748-0221 |
DOI: | 10.1088/1748-0221/12/11/C11016 |