Paper detail

Radiation damage assessment of SensL SiPMs

Silicon Photomultipliers (SiPMs) are quickly replacing traditional photomultiplier tubes (PMTs) as the readout of choice for gamma-ray scintillation detectors in space. While they offer substantial size, weight and power saving, they have shown to be susceptible to radiation damage. SensL SiPMs with different cell sizes were irradiated with 64 MeV protons and 8 MeV electrons. In general, results show larger cell sizes are more susceptible to radiation damage with the largest 50 um SiPMs showing the greatest increase in current as a function of dose. Current increases were observed for doses as low at ~2 rad(Si) for protons and ~20 rad(Si) for electrons. The U.S. Naval Research Laboratory's (NRL) Strontium Iodide Radiation Instrument (SIRI-1) experienced a 528 uA increase in the bias current of the on-board 2x2 SensL J-series 60035 SiPM over its one-year mission in sun-synchronous orbit. The work here focuses on the increase in bulk current observed with increasing radiation damage and was performed to better quantify this effect as a function of dose for future mission. These include the future NRL mission SIRI-2, the follow on to SIRI-1, Glowbug and the GAGG Radiation Instrument (GARI).

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.