HPGe Detectors Long Time Behaviour in High-Resolut
HPGe Detectors Long Time Behaviour in High-Resolut
net/publication/251527065
Article in Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A Accelerators Spectrometers Detectors and Associated Equipment · August 2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.nima.2011.03.031
CITATIONS READS
6 870
10 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Andres Matias Sajo-Castelli on 26 October 2017.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: A large set of data on long term performance of n-type HPGe detectors used in GASP, EUROBALL and
Received 11 January 2010 CLARA g spectrometers, as well as environmental measurements have been collected over two decades.
Received in revised form In this paper a detailed statistical analysis of this data is given and detector long term behaviour is
18 March 2011
provided to the scientific community. We include failure, failure mode, repair frequency, repair
Accepted 18 March 2011
Available online 31 May 2011
outcome and its influence in the energy efficiency and energy resolution. A remarkable result is that
the life span distribution is exponential. A detector’s failure is a memory-less process, where a previous
Keywords: failure does not influence the upcoming one. Repaired spectrometers result in high reliability with deep
HPGe detectors implications in the management of large scale high-resolution gamma spectrometry related projects.
Gamma spectrometry
Findings show that on average, detectors initial counting efficiency is slightly lower ( 2%) than that
Long time performance
reported by the manufacturers and the repair process (including annealing) does not affect significantly
the energy efficiency, even after a long period of use. Repaired detector energy resolution statistics
show that the probability, that a repaired detector will be at least as good as it was originally, is more
than 3/4.
& 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
0168-9002/$ - see front matter & 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.nima.2011.03.031
Author's personal copy
L. Sajo-Bohus et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 648 (2011) 132–138 133
in this study, confirm that a good maintenance and repair 3. Maintenance and repairs
programme can preserve the HPGe detectors. Not only preserve
satisfactory operational conditions for a long period, but Most of the maintenance we have done in our laboratories
also provide a reduction of the financial burden of costly deals with electronic, vacuum and annealing. In the present
replacements. section we will start with a short description of each type of
repair and later we will show some statistics and summary of the
repairing process.
2. Detectors selection and employment
3.1. Electronic repairs
Our experience on detector repair, annealing, etc., is based on
99 detectors. Two groups of g spectrometers are considered Electronic repairs include not only the substitution of compo-
depending on the user’s laboratory location and application. The nents in the preamplifiers external stages and the HV filter but
first group consists of 9 detectors, the second of 90 detectors. For also components like the FET or the resistances inside the vacuum
the statistical analysis, Section 4, only a subset of these detectors chamber of the cryostat. Quite early it was decided not to
was used: those which had a full record available. This subset substitute internal temperature sensors (PT100 for crystal tem-
numbered 51 detectors. perature measurement or PT500 for annealing control) since it
was preferred to add an additional PT100 inside the Dewar
2.1. Spectrometers operating under low radiation environment instead of opening the crystal housing or the use of an external
self controlled system for the annealing.
Detectors are from five manufacturers (Ortec, PGT, Oxford-
Tennelec, Canberra and Selenia) selected for their characteristics 3.2. Vacuum recovery
that suit most applications including low-level g spectrometry for
nuclear analytical applications in Venezuela. In this study, a set of It is been reported in the literature that most of detector problems
nine HPGe detectors and three SiLi for X-ray spectrometry have are related to the vacuum loss and the resulting lack of required
operated for the better part of the decade 1990–2000 with few cooling capacity. Dewar vacuum has a limited life span and degrades
interruptions due to power supply break-down or spectrometer due to its inherent manufacturing design. Several alternative tech-
failure. Four units were acquired more recently in 2006, but most niques for liquid nitrogen cooling have been developed, some are
entered in operation between 11 and 17 years ago. based on the Kleemenko mixed-gas refrigerator [13]. The related
cooler detector combination reached the market standards, see Upp
et al. [14] and Keyser and Hagenauer [15], offering low cost/low
2.2. Spectrometers for in-beam nuclear structure studies
power cooler systems.
It is worthwhile to mention that Germanium crystal devices
The second group of detectors is related to large projects such
operating under continuous cryogenic conditions, stable reverse
as the GASP [7] or EUROBALL g-arrays at LNL. Most of the
bias and a low background radiation environment, are not
experience was acquired from a group of 90 spectrometers at
expected to suffer physical deterioration in the detector active
LNL employed for in-beam experiments carried out during the
volume or in the associated electronics.
past 18 years. Each one of these detectors is accompanied by a
Supporting evidence of the above statement is that, during
technical data sheet, which describes working and performance
data acquisition, the device’s current flow is almost negligible.
characteristics with a short technical description. An electronic
Likewise degradation due to the heat generated during operation
database was made containing these data sheets. It included
is negligible in contrast with the radiation related physical
detailed information on the annealing date, refurbishment (either
damage. This means that, in principle, long term operation could
electronic circuitry or mechanical modification), repair, shelve
be attained in a low background radiation environment. On the
time and time required to recover the unit to its original
other hand, detectors operating in high radiation fields degrade,
specification or close to it. It is possible to know if any technical
as experience shows. Neutron fields, for instance, favour nuclear
intervention on any detector changed the operational perfor-
reactions in the crystal itself with subsequent lattice modifica-
mance over the factory certified specifications. The detectors
tions, which cause worsening in the detector performance [16].
were employed at the LNL tandem accelerator for about the
Detector crystals with small cryostats are prone to malfunction;
50%–70% of the yearly total available beam time [5] and were
the usual way to repair is improving the cryostat low pressure.
exposed to a low intensity fast neutron flux as a result of the
However this can cause damage to the Ge-crystal, which in turn
reaction mechanism. Table 1 shows the number of detectors that
can be repaired by thermal recycling. Our experience shows that
have been used at the LNL for each gamma-array.
the most effective technique to regain the crystal’s original
operational performance is by the annealing procedure.
134 L. Sajo-Bohus et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 648 (2011) 132–138
L. Sajo-Bohus et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 648 (2011) 132–138 135
Table 5
Summary list of the most often encountered troubleshootings and repair outcomes.
Scatter Plot of Original and Post Repair Scatter plot of count efficiency for each detector
Measured Counting Efficiency (%)
95 90
80
85
75
80
0 10 20 30 40
75
Detector number
Fig. 3. Scatter plot of eCm(circles) and initial eCLNL(crosses) respect the detector
number. Values are bounded between 69% and 91%. The scatter is not significant.
70
70 75 80 85 90 95
Efficiency After Last Annealing Boxplot
Fig. 2. Comparison of detector efficiencies: original vs. measured values after the 90
annealing.
Count efficiency (%)
136 L. Sajo-Bohus et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 648 (2011) 132–138
Table 6 Table 7
Summary of the eCm and eCLNL variables. The means differ by 1.97%. Average life span for each detector group between two consecutive repairs.
where no and nL are the number of detectors, namely 43, sO and sL 4.2.2. Detector energy resolution
denote the standard deviations of eCm and eCLNL respectively. Note Since detector repair is a necessity, it would seem reasonable
that there are n ¼no þnL–2 ¼84 degrees of freedom. The rejection to know (based on previous experience) if it is worth the effort.
region is given by 9t9 4ta/2, 84. Finally obtaining t ¼1.85 and since Employing the 51 detectors data we compare the average of each
ta/2 ¼qt(0.95, 84) ¼1.66 we reject the null hypothesis with a p-value detector’s energy resolution after repair along its life span with the
of 0.0676, additionally we report a IC90% for the difference of the detector’s energy resolution published by the manufacturer. For
means each detector we use a hypothesis test (assuming normality too
mo mL A 0:20, 3:75 and with a confidence level of 97.5%). We define:
note that 0eCI90%. The data seems to show enough evidence to i ¼ 1. . .51, miO ¼ eim , miL ¼ meanðeiLNL,j Þ, j ¼ 1. . .ki
( )
support the discarding of Ho (with a confidence of 90%). Conse- HO ¼ miO miL ¼ 0
i
quently it can be assumed that the two means are not equal and HT ¼ ki : times detector i was repaired:
Ha ¼ miO miL a 0
therefore detectors initial performance is lower than the reported
by the manufacturers. in the event where Ho is not accepted, we investigate whether or
not we can assume that miO o miL . This is also evaluated with the
4.2. Long term detector statistical aspects same confidence level. The HTi were evaluated by the following
t-test:
Here we discuss some aspects that concerning the long term
miL mio
behaviour of the detector’s energy resolution (eLNL and em vari- Ti ¼ pffiffiffi
s= n
ables). The expected life span after repair of a detector is, in
average, 519 days (1y and 5m). During the ‘91–09’ period with n ¼n 1¼50 degrees of freedom and s being the standard
(18 years) there has been a total of 520 repairs made in our deviation. For the first case the reject region is 9ti9 4ta/2, 50 and
laboratory and 45 were done by the manufacturer for the selected the second optional case is ti o ta/2, 50. That is, if the data does
group of 51 detectors. The database describes the life span of the not support evidence that the average resolution is the same as
detectors excluding the ones of the last repair, related to a total of the manufacturer’s, we would like to know if the restored
513 repairs. Some questions arise concerning detector repair. detector’s resolution is higher or lower that the certified one.
Regarding the 51 detectors and all the corresponding repairs,
(a) Does annealing change the life span expectancy of the treated the results show that the average resolution after repair, com-
detector? pared to manufacturer’s initial value, the initial efficiency is
Author's personal copy
L. Sajo-Bohus et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 648 (2011) 132–138 137
recovered in 65% of the cases, 14% improve on the initial value where Oi and Ei are the observed and expected frequencies for
and on 21% there is improvement but the regained efficiency is bin i, respectively, a standard criteria to chose the number of
lower than the initial value. This means that it is quite an categories was used, k¼8 and the only free parameter is l (l¼ 1).
attractive alternative to repair damaged HPGe detectors. There At a confidence of 95% the test statistic approximated value is
stands a chance of more than 3/4 (79%) that the repaired detector w26 ¼ 7:48 with a p-value of 0.2787. HO is not rejected as the p-value
will be at least as good as it was originally. In particular we can is rather high: p-value¼0.278740.05¼ a.
observe that, after these 18 years of operation, 33 of the 51 It is worth noting that the Pearson GOF test is not as powerful as
detectors have the same resolution of the original one reported by the Anderson–Darling GOF test [18] and while the data supports
the manufacturer, 11 detectors show slightly less (4%) resolution the null hypothesis for the Pearson GOF, it was rejected when
and the remaining 7 detectors improved by 2%. Of course, we can applied to the Anderson–Darling GOF. We consider that the rejec-
not be sure of the influence of the preamplifiers substitution tion motive for the more powerful test is caused by the handling of
(described in Section 3.4) in these figures. the date logging (resolution of the t parameter: mm/yy). This is
evidenced in the P–P probability plot [19] shown in Fig. 7, where it
4.2.3. Break-down and life-span expectancy can be noted a ‘‘grouping’’ nature of the data, with groups appearing
Detectors malfunction or get damaged and it would be useful every 30 days (1 month). This artificial grouping is a consequence of
to be able to know in advance with what probability a set of having the date recorded just monthly although each failure has the
detectors will fail during a given interval of time. It is well known same chance to occur in any day of the month. This problem could
that electronic failures follow an exponential distribution, how- be avoided by adding to the data the day in which the detector
ever the failures in a detector can be either electronic or non- failing have occurred, so it is advisable to fill a more complete
electronic. From the available data on detector’s life span, we built control sheet that includes the exact failure and repair dates.
a histogram of the total working days for the detectors (see Fig. 6), Another way to approach this lack of information is by introducing
that results in an apparent exponential distribution (at first this an artifice, in order to undo this apparent 30 days grouping.
would not seem obvious), which provides insight of the combined Specifically, some kind of noise could be introduced to spread the
effect of electronic and non-electronic failures. The life-span data, which can be an interesting subject for a further research.
expectancy can be approximated by the most likelihood estimate Based on the previous results, simulations can be done (over
for the exponential density l 1e( t/l) with l ¼532 days (shown the failure period) as well as predictions on the amount of
also in Fig. 6). This brings all the statistical knowledge and proofs detectors needed to fulfil a given experiment, among other
from the exponential density, mainly the advantage to know that statistical estimations. As an illustrative example, Table 8 shows
it is a memory-less process, which means that assuming ageing results of a specific simulation run and data for comparison
independence, a previous failure does not influence the upcoming purposes, while Fig. 8 shows the corresponding histograms.
one. This has very deep implications in the management of large
scale projects (GASP, EUROBALL, CLARA, etc.).
The exponential approximation was validated with the following 5. Discussion and conclusions
hypothesis test and Pearson’s Chi Square Goodness of Fit statistic:
( ) The long time behaviour of a set consisting in 51 n-type HPGe
HO ¼ Sample data come from the ExpðlÞ distribution
detectors was analysed. These devices have been employed more
Ha ¼ Sample data does not come from the ExpðlÞ distribution than satisfactorily over almost two decades, but they suffered from
X ðOi Ei Þ2 degrading with time either due to radiation induced lattice defects,
w2n ¼ , n ¼ kl1 vacuum loss, electronic component failure or bad handling. However,
Ei
applying a scheduled maintenance programme and when necessary,
99.63
87.28
0.0015
53.12
24.29
Percent
Density
0.0010
9.82
3.69
0.0005 1.31
0.56
0.0000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 3 7 20 55 148 403 1097 2981
Days days
Fig. 6. Histogram and density approximation for the failure time (or life span) of Fig. 7. P–P Probability Plot for the life span of the detectors, assuming that the
the HPGe detectors. The density is approximated by MLE to an exponential with corresponding density function is Exp(l ¼532 days). The grouping nature is
rate equal to 1/532¼ 0.00188. attributed to the monthly logging of faulty detectors.
Author's personal copy
138 L. Sajo-Bohus et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 648 (2011) 132–138
0.0000 References
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
[1] J. Eberth, J. Simpson, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 60 (2) (2007) 283.
Days [2] K. Vetter, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 57 (2007) 363.
[3] J.F. Sharpey-Schafer, J. Simpson, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 21 (1988) 293.
Fig. 8. Histogram of a simulation run on detector life span (failing times). The [4] F. Albernhe, V. Borrel, P. Frabel, G. Vedrenne, R. Coszach, J.-M. Denis, P. Leleux,
white histogram is obtained from the simulation run while the light grey one is Detectors Assoc. Equip. 492 (1–2) (2002) 91.
from the experimental life span data shown for comparison purposes. [5] LNL Annual Report, INFN,Laboratorio Nazionale di Legnaro, Italy, 1992–2008.
[6] H.G. Thomas, J. Eberth, F. Becker, T. Burkardt, S. Freund, U. Hermkens,
T. Mylaeus, S. Skoda, W. Teichert, v.A D. Werth, P. von Brentano, M. Berst,
applying major repair or modifications, they could be back in D. Gutknecht, R. Henck, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 332 (1-2) (1993) 215.
operation satisfactorily. Experience shows that often detector char- [7] GASP Collaboration Report, INFN/BE-90/11, 1990; D. Bazzacco, in: Proceed-
acteristic could be fully recovered or even improved. In fact, our ings of the Workshop on Large g-ray Detector Arrays, Chalk River, Canada,
AECL-10613, 1992, p. 376.
study points out that there is a 79% chance that the restored detector
[8] F. Azaiez, Nucl. Phys. A 654 (1999) 1003c.
has at least the same energy resolution as that specified by the [9] F. Azaiez, G. deFrance, R. Julin, P.J. Nolan, B.M. Nyakó, P.M. Walker, EXOGAM
manufacturer in spite of a long period of activity. Under the Collaboration, J. Simpson, J. Fouan, W. Korten, G. Sletten, J. Gerl, Acta Phys.
Hung. A 11 (1-2) (2000) 159.
assumption of normality, the mean value of detector’s counting
[10] M.P. Carpenter, T.L. Khoo, I. Ahmad, R.V.F. Janssens, T. Lauritsen, G.A. Annan,
efficiency (eCLNL) differs from the manufacturer certified values (eCm), A.M. Baxter, M.E. Bleich, S. Harfenist, E.F. Moore, M. Torelli, D.W. Visser, Nucl.
with a confidence of 90%. Instr. and Meth. A353 (1994) 234.
Detector restoration such as annealing techniques do not [11] G. Duchene, F.A. Beck, P.J. Twin, G. de France, D. Curien, L. Han,
C.W. Beausang, M.A. Bentley, P.J. Nolan, J. Simpson, Nucl. Instr. and Meth.
influence life span (time interval between failures) significantly A432 (1999) 90.
being an effective practise to regain almost its original operational [12] J. Eberth, H.G. Thomas, P. von Brentano, R.M. Lieder, H.M. Jäger,
performance. One of the most interesting results can be deduced H. Kämmerling, M. Berst, D. Gutknecht, R. Henck, Nucl. Instr. and Meth.
A369 (1996) 135.
from Fig. 2, in which manufacturer’s efficiencies values and those [13] A.P. Kleemenko, One flow cascade cycle, in: Proceedings of the X International
measured after the last annealing are compared. A good agreement Congress on Refrigeration, Copenhagen. Pergamon Press, 1959, pp. 34–39.
can be observed, suggesting that (at least for n-type detectors) on [14] D.L. Upp, R.M. Keyser, T.R. Twomey, J Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 260 (2005) 121.
[15] R.M. Keyser, R.C. Hagenauer, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 277 (2008) 149.
the overall average spectrometers maintain their performance over [16] P. Leleux, F. Albernhe, V. Borrel, B. Cordier, R. Coszach, S. Crespin, J.M. Denis,
long operating times. Unfortunately we do not have any significant P. Duhamel, P. Frabel, W. Galster, J.-S. Graulich, P. Jean, B. Kandel,
experience with p-type detectors and it is expected that other J.P. Meulders, G. Tauzin, J. Vanhorenbeeck, G. Vedrenne, P. von Ballmoos,
Astron. Astrophys. 411 (2003) L85.
laboratories may provide data for comparison. No significant
[17] R Development Core Team, R: a language and environment for statistical
difference was found between the average long term behaviour computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria
among detectors produced by the different manufacturers. 3-900051-07-0, 2009 /http://www.R-project.orgS.
Average number of out-of-operation days for an individual [18] Ralph B. D’Agostino, Michael A. Stephens, Goodness-of-fit-techniques, 1st ed,
Statistics: a Series of Textbooks and Monographs, vol. 68, Dekker. ISBN:10
detector is estimated to be 23 days. The overall detector failing 0824774876.
time has an exponential distribution with an approximate (MLE) [19] F.F. Gan, K.J. Koehler, Technometrics 32 (3) (1990) 289 (July 1990).