100 likes | 168 Views
Optimising THL-Masks for the Medipix-Quad May, 4 th 2006 Frank Nachtrab frank.nachtrab@physik.uni-erlangen.de Physikalisches Institut, Abt. IV Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen. medipix2. detector. MUROS 2.1. translation. rotation stage with. stages. object plate.
E N D
Optimising THL-Masks for the Medipix-Quad May, 4th 2006 Frank Nachtrab frank.nachtrab@physik.uni-erlangen.de Physikalisches Institut, Abt. IV Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen
medipix2 detector MUROS 2.1 translation rotation stage with stages object plate X-ray tube Medipix2 CT setup in Erlangen • Three translation stages (1 µm resolution) • One rotation stage(0.1 degree resolution) • MUROS 2.1 • Distances: • Focus-detector: 768mm • Focus-object plate: 635mm • Tungsten X-ray tube: • standard diagnostic tube • tube voltage 40 – 125 kV
Ring artefacts in CT Problem: variations in lower threshold lead to differing counting behavior for every pixel (‘gain’) -> ring artefacts in computed tomography
Equalisation using Flatfield Images Histogram of Flatfields: THL-maskbit 0, 7; different THS → calculate width and distance of distributions
Optimum THS - Quad Linear fit of right boundary of bit0-distribution vs THS → OptimumTHS (for every Chip on the Quad!)
Maskquality - Definition Countrate independent parameter for maskquality! (lower is better; zero for a perfect detector)
Mask quality Single Chip • All THL-Masks worse for higher thresholds • Flatfieldmasks better by a factor of ~ 1.35