1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Experimental and theoretical response of distributed read-out imaging devices with imperfect charge confinement
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1063/1.3327412
/content/aip/journal/jap/107/8/10.1063/1.3327412
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/107/8/10.1063/1.3327412

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Schematic representation of the DROID geometry with a top and side view, the thickness of the layers is greatly exaggerated.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Different groups of quasiparticles in a DROID which are determined by position in the DROID (horizontal scale) and energy (vertical scale).

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Scatter plot of the sum vs normalized ratio of the result from the simulated shaping stages. Events from the STJs can be easily distinguished and selected by their spatial separation. The absorber events are divided into 11 sections along the position direction.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

The fit of the model to the measured charge output of the three DROID geometries. Each graph shows the charge output of the two STJs vs normalized charge ratio, (asterisk for , plus sign for ), with the fit of the model over plotted, solid lines. The dashed line is the calculated from the fit results. All measurements are from an illumination with 5 eV photons at an operating temperature of 295 mK. (a) Shows the responsivity of the DROID with 30 nm aluminum trapping layers at . (b) Shows a measurement from the same device with the same settings but biased at a voltage of for direct comparison with the other devices, and [(c) and (d)] show measurements for the DROIDs with 60 and 100 nm aluminum trapping layers, respectively.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Fitted values for the fraction of quasiparticles above as a function of bias voltage for the DROIDs with 30 nm (diamonds), 60 nm (triangles), and 100 nm (squares) aluminum trapping layers. The filled symbols are for the left STJ and the open symbols are for the right STJ.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Diffusion constant vs temperature for the DROID with 30 nm aluminum trapping layers. The different symbols denote the diffusion constant in the absorber (crosses), left STJ (open diamonds), and right STJ (filled diamonds). The solid line denotes the theoretical diffusion constant as predicted by Eq. (22).

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

DOS of the BCS tantalum absorber (solid line) and Ta/Al STJ (dashed line).

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Loss rates in the DROIDs with different lengths from 30 nm Al series. The loss rate in the absorber (crosses) is constant indicating homogeneous tantalum layer quality. The loss rate in the STJs (diamonds, open: left and filled: right) shows scatter between the DROIDs. This is caused by differences in plug quality.

Tables

Generic image for table
Table I.

Values of the fixed parameters. The values are calculated separately using different models.

Generic image for table
Table II.

The average parameters resulting from the fit of the model to the experimental data obtained with the reference device at and , for 60 and 100 nm Al layer, and , for 30 nm Al layer.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jap/107/8/10.1063/1.3327412
2010-04-28
2014-04-23
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Experimental and theoretical response of distributed read-out imaging devices with imperfect charge confinement
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jap/107/8/10.1063/1.3327412
10.1063/1.3327412
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM