Abstract
Mercuric iodide (HgI/sub 2/) and lead iodide (PbI/sub 2/) have been under development for several years as direct converter layers for digital X-ray imaging. We deposited these materials on flat panel thin film transistor (TFT) arrays and found that they are good candidates for X-ray imaging applications in medical imaging, security applications, and non destructive testing (NDT). This paper present basic imaging parameters and compares both lead iodide and mercuric iodide imagers. A difficult challenge of both lead iodide and mercuric iodide is the higher than desired leakage currents. These currents are influenced by factors such as applied electrical field, layer thickness, layer density, electrode structure and material purity. Minimizing the leakage current must also be achieved without adversely affecting charge transport, which plays a large role in gain and is influenced by these parameters. New deposition and annealing technologies (M. Schieber, et al., 2003) have been developed through which the leakage current has now decreased by more than an order of magnitude while showing no negative affects on gain. Other challenges relate to increasing film thickness without degrading electrical properties. Both lead iodide and mercuric iodide were vacuum deposited by physical vapor deposition (PVD) on a-Si TFT arrays with 127 /spl mu/m pixel pitch. This coating technology is scalable to sizes required in common X-ray imaging applications, as proven by the present 4/spl times/4 and 8/spl times/10 imager results (G. Zentai, et al., 2003). The imagers were evaluated for both radiographic and fluoroscopic imaging. Modulation transfer function (MTF) was measured as a function of the spatial frequency. The MTF data were compared to values published in the literature for indirect detectors (CsI). Resolution tests on resolution target phantoms showed that resolution is limited by the TFT array Nyquist frequency (/spl sim/3.9 Ip/mm). The ability to operate at moderate voltages (/spl sim/0.5-1.0 V//spl mu/m) provides acceptable dark current for most applications and permits low voltage electronics design. Image lag characteristics of mercuric iodide appear adequate for fluoroscopic rates. The structure and X-ray diffraction data of the two materials were compared to explain the difference in image lag between them.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.