Fundamental performance differences between CMOS and CCD imagers; Part II

James Janesick, James Andrews, John Tower, Mark Grygon, Tom Elliott, John Cheng, Michael Lesser, Jeff Pinter

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

15 Scopus citations

Abstract

A new class of CMOS imagers that compete with scientific CCDs is presented. The sensors are based on deep depletion backside illuminated technology to achieve high near infrared quantum efficiency and low pixel cross-talk. The imagers deliver very low read noise suitable for single photon counting - Fano-noise limited soft x-ray applications. Digital correlated double sampling signal processing necessary to achieve low read noise performance is analyzed and demonstrated for CMOS use. Detailed experimental data products generated by different pixel architectures (notably 3TPPD, 5TPPD and 6TPG designs) are presented including read noise, charge capacity, dynamic range, quantum efficiency, charge collection and transfer efficiency and dark current generation. Radiation damage data taken for the imagers is also reported.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationFocal Plane Arrays for Space Telescopes III
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2007
EventFocal Plane Arrays for Space Telescopes III - San Diego, CA, United States
Duration: Aug 27 2007Aug 28 2007

Publication series

NameProceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering
Volume6690
ISSN (Print)0277-786X

Other

OtherFocal Plane Arrays for Space Telescopes III
CountryUnited States
CitySan Diego, CA
Period8/27/078/28/07

Keywords

  • Backside illumination
  • CMOS and CCD imagers
  • Deep depletion
  • Fano- Noise
  • Radiation damage
  • X-ray

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Computer Science Applications
  • Applied Mathematics
  • Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Fundamental performance differences between CMOS and CCD imagers; Part II'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Janesick, J., Andrews, J., Tower, J., Grygon, M., Elliott, T., Cheng, J., Lesser, M., & Pinter, J. (2007). Fundamental performance differences between CMOS and CCD imagers; Part II. In Focal Plane Arrays for Space Telescopes III [669003] (Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering; Vol. 6690). https://doi.org/10.1117/12.740218