Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors
Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Egarievwe, Stephen U [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2016 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: IEEE transactions on nuclear science - New York, NY : IEEE, 1963, 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:63 ; year:2016 ; number:2 ; pages:1091-1098 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC1975027728 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a2200265 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC1975027728 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230525173933.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 160609s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a PQ20160610 |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC1975027728 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728 | ||
| 035 | |a (PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10 | ||
| 035 | |a (KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 620 |q DNB |
| 100 | 1 | |a Egarievwe, Stephen U |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2016 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Hydrogen | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Etching | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Leakage currents | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Surface roughness | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Rough surfaces | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hossain, Anwar |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Okwechime, Ifechukwude O |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Egarievwe, Alexander A |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jones, Dominique E |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Roy, Utpal N |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a James, Ralph B |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t IEEE transactions on nuclear science |d New York, NY : IEEE, 1963 |g 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 |w (DE-627)129547352 |w (DE-600)218510-6 |w (DE-576)014998238 |x 0018-9499 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:63 |g year:2016 |g number:2 |g pages:1091-1098 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-TEC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHY | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 63 |j 2016 |e 2 |h 1091-1098 | ||
| author_variant |
s u e su sue |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:00189499:2016----::fetoceiatetetocztxaad |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2016 |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| allfields |
10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 doi PQ20160610 (DE-627)OLC1975027728 (DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728 (PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10 (KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 620 DNB Egarievwe, Stephen U verfasserin aut Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. Hydrogen Etching Leakage currents Surface roughness Rough surfaces Hossain, Anwar oth Okwechime, Ifechukwude O oth Egarievwe, Alexander A oth Jones, Dominique E oth Roy, Utpal N oth James, Ralph B oth Enthalten in IEEE transactions on nuclear science New York, NY : IEEE, 1963 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 (DE-627)129547352 (DE-600)218510-6 (DE-576)014998238 0018-9499 nnns volume:63 year:2016 number:2 pages:1091-1098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 Volltext http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 AR 63 2016 2 1091-1098 |
| spelling |
10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 doi PQ20160610 (DE-627)OLC1975027728 (DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728 (PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10 (KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 620 DNB Egarievwe, Stephen U verfasserin aut Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. Hydrogen Etching Leakage currents Surface roughness Rough surfaces Hossain, Anwar oth Okwechime, Ifechukwude O oth Egarievwe, Alexander A oth Jones, Dominique E oth Roy, Utpal N oth James, Ralph B oth Enthalten in IEEE transactions on nuclear science New York, NY : IEEE, 1963 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 (DE-627)129547352 (DE-600)218510-6 (DE-576)014998238 0018-9499 nnns volume:63 year:2016 number:2 pages:1091-1098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 Volltext http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 AR 63 2016 2 1091-1098 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 doi PQ20160610 (DE-627)OLC1975027728 (DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728 (PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10 (KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 620 DNB Egarievwe, Stephen U verfasserin aut Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. Hydrogen Etching Leakage currents Surface roughness Rough surfaces Hossain, Anwar oth Okwechime, Ifechukwude O oth Egarievwe, Alexander A oth Jones, Dominique E oth Roy, Utpal N oth James, Ralph B oth Enthalten in IEEE transactions on nuclear science New York, NY : IEEE, 1963 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 (DE-627)129547352 (DE-600)218510-6 (DE-576)014998238 0018-9499 nnns volume:63 year:2016 number:2 pages:1091-1098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 Volltext http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 AR 63 2016 2 1091-1098 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 doi PQ20160610 (DE-627)OLC1975027728 (DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728 (PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10 (KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 620 DNB Egarievwe, Stephen U verfasserin aut Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. Hydrogen Etching Leakage currents Surface roughness Rough surfaces Hossain, Anwar oth Okwechime, Ifechukwude O oth Egarievwe, Alexander A oth Jones, Dominique E oth Roy, Utpal N oth James, Ralph B oth Enthalten in IEEE transactions on nuclear science New York, NY : IEEE, 1963 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 (DE-627)129547352 (DE-600)218510-6 (DE-576)014998238 0018-9499 nnns volume:63 year:2016 number:2 pages:1091-1098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 Volltext http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 AR 63 2016 2 1091-1098 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 doi PQ20160610 (DE-627)OLC1975027728 (DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728 (PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10 (KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 620 DNB Egarievwe, Stephen U verfasserin aut Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. Hydrogen Etching Leakage currents Surface roughness Rough surfaces Hossain, Anwar oth Okwechime, Ifechukwude O oth Egarievwe, Alexander A oth Jones, Dominique E oth Roy, Utpal N oth James, Ralph B oth Enthalten in IEEE transactions on nuclear science New York, NY : IEEE, 1963 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 (DE-627)129547352 (DE-600)218510-6 (DE-576)014998238 0018-9499 nnns volume:63 year:2016 number:2 pages:1091-1098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 Volltext http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842 GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 AR 63 2016 2 1091-1098 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in IEEE transactions on nuclear science 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 volume:63 year:2016 number:2 pages:1091-1098 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in IEEE transactions on nuclear science 63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098 volume:63 year:2016 number:2 pages:1091-1098 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Hydrogen Etching Leakage currents Surface roughness Rough surfaces |
| dewey-raw |
620 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
IEEE transactions on nuclear science |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Egarievwe, Stephen U @@aut@@ Hossain, Anwar @@oth@@ Okwechime, Ifechukwude O @@oth@@ Egarievwe, Alexander A @@oth@@ Jones, Dominique E @@oth@@ Roy, Utpal N @@oth@@ James, Ralph B @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2016-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
129547352 |
| dewey-sort |
3620 |
| id |
OLC1975027728 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a2200265 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC1975027728</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230525173933.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">160609s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">PQ20160610</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC1975027728</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">620</subfield><subfield code="q">DNB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Egarievwe, Stephen U</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hydrogen</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Etching</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Leakage currents</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Surface roughness</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rough surfaces</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hossain, Anwar</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Okwechime, Ifechukwude O</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Egarievwe, Alexander A</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jones, Dominique E</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Roy, Utpal N</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">James, Ralph B</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">IEEE transactions on nuclear science</subfield><subfield code="d">New York, NY : IEEE, 1963</subfield><subfield code="g">63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129547352</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)218510-6</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014998238</subfield><subfield code="x">0018-9499</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:63</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1091-1098</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">63</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">1091-1098</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Egarievwe, Stephen U |
| spellingShingle |
Egarievwe, Stephen U ddc 620 misc Hydrogen misc Etching misc Leakage currents misc Surface roughness misc Rough surfaces Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors |
| authorStr |
Egarievwe, Stephen U |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)129547352 |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
620 - Engineering & allied operations |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
0018-9499 |
| topic_title |
620 DNB Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors Hydrogen Etching Leakage currents Surface roughness Rough surfaces |
| topic |
ddc 620 misc Hydrogen misc Etching misc Leakage currents misc Surface roughness misc Rough surfaces |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 620 misc Hydrogen misc Etching misc Leakage currents misc Surface roughness misc Rough surfaces |
| topic_browse |
ddc 620 misc Hydrogen misc Etching misc Leakage currents misc Surface roughness misc Rough surfaces |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| author2_variant |
a h ah i o o io ioo a a e aa aae d e j de dej u n r un unr r b j rb rbj |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
IEEE transactions on nuclear science |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
129547352 |
| dewey-tens |
620 - Engineering |
| hierarchy_top_title |
IEEE transactions on nuclear science |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)129547352 (DE-600)218510-6 (DE-576)014998238 |
| title |
Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC1975027728 (DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728 (PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10 (KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray |
| title_full |
Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors |
| author_sort |
Egarievwe, Stephen U |
| journal |
IEEE transactions on nuclear science |
| journalStr |
IEEE transactions on nuclear science |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2016 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
1091 |
| author_browse |
Egarievwe, Stephen U |
| container_volume |
63 |
| class |
620 DNB |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Egarievwe, Stephen U |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 |
| dewey-full |
620 |
| title_sort |
effects of chemical treatments on cdznte x-ray and gamma-ray detectors |
| title_auth |
Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors |
| abstract |
Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. |
| abstractGer |
Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_70 |
| container_issue |
2 |
| title_short |
Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842 |
| remote_bool |
false |
| author2 |
Hossain, Anwar Okwechime, Ifechukwude O Egarievwe, Alexander A Jones, Dominique E Roy, Utpal N James, Ralph B |
| author2Str |
Hossain, Anwar Okwechime, Ifechukwude O Egarievwe, Alexander A Jones, Dominique E Roy, Utpal N James, Ralph B |
| ppnlink |
129547352 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779 |
| up_date |
2024-07-04T05:37:01.862Z |
| _version_ |
1803625611246174208 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a2200265 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC1975027728</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230525173933.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">160609s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">PQ20160610</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC1975027728</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)GBVOLC1975027728</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(PRQ)i536-48284b8a88352d31bc5ffdfa9bccbbd7ca5cadcdc06dab43e4027ab9873601a10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(KEY)0054996720160000063000201091effectsofchemicaltreatmentsoncdzntexrayandgammaray</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">620</subfield><subfield code="q">DNB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Egarievwe, Stephen U</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effects of Chemical Treatments on CdZnTe X-Ray and Gamma-Ray Detectors</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Room-temperature semiconductor detectors, such as cadmium zinc telluride (CdZnTe), often are subjected to surface damage during fabrication, thus reducing their performance in detecting X-rays and gamma-rays. In this study, we compared two surface-passivation chemical solutions: Ammonium fluoride in hydrogen peroxide (<inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}+ {{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}+ {{\rm H}_2}{\rm O}</tex-math></inline-formula>) and potassium hydroxide in hydrogen peroxide (0.1 g of KOH + 10 ml of 30% <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{{\rm H}_2}{{\rm O}_2}</tex-math></inline-formula>). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopic analysis showed that the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4} {\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution is more effective at converting Te species on the CdZnTe surfaces into a more stable <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {TeO}}_2</tex-math></inline-formula> layer, attaining values of 4.90 and 5.34 for the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{3/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}{{\rm O}_2}/{\rm {Te}}3{d_{5/2}}</tex-math></inline-formula> peak-height ratios respectively, compared to the KOH-based solution with 1.25 and 1.19, respectively. The current-voltage measurements showed an increase in the bulk leakage current for freshly passivated samples compared to those of mechanically polished samples. However, within a period of about three to 14 days, their leakage currents reduced to values in the range of the mechanically polished samples. The resistivity of the CdZnTe samples is on the order of <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{10^{10}}\;\Omega\hbox{-cm}</tex-math></inline-formula>. The <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based chemical contributed less to the leakage current. Its leakage current at 60 V is 6.3 times that of the mechanically polished sample, compared to 30.5 for the sample passivated with the KOH-based solution. Analysis of the 59.5-keV peak of Am-241 showed that the sample passivated with the <inline-formula><tex-math notation="LaTeX">{\rm {NH}}_{4}{\rm F}</tex-math></inline-formula>-based solution has a better energy resolution compared to the one passivated with the KOH-based solution.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Hydrogen</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Etching</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Leakage currents</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Surface roughness</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rough surfaces</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hossain, Anwar</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Okwechime, Ifechukwude O</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Egarievwe, Alexander A</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jones, Dominique E</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Roy, Utpal N</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">James, Ralph B</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">IEEE transactions on nuclear science</subfield><subfield code="d">New York, NY : IEEE, 1963</subfield><subfield code="g">63(2016), 2, Seite 1091-1098</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129547352</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)218510-6</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014998238</subfield><subfield code="x">0018-9499</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:63</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1091-1098</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2016.2527779</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=7454842</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">63</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="h">1091-1098</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4005537 |