Upscaling X-ray nanoimaging to macroscopic specimens

Du, M.; Di, Z.; Gürsoy, D.; Xian, R.P.; Kozorovitskiy, Y.; Jacobsen, C.

doi:10.1107/S1600576721000194

Figure 7
Optimum photon energy E_t (left scale; blue) and per-pixel imaging time T_p (right scale; red) for imaging 20 nm Cu features in Si (a) and 20 nm protein features in a 70% ice/30% protein mixture as tissue (b). The pixel imaging time T_p was calculated according to equation (10)

, using values of the estimated number of photons $[\bar{n}_{\rm pixel}]$ for a variety of photon energies shown in Fig. 2

and the future spatially coherent flux (at 0.1% bandwidth) values shown in Fig. 6

for the ALS-U (below 4.9 keV) and the APS-U (at 4.9 keV and above). For each background material thickness value t, the smallest value of T_p is used along with its associated photon energy E_t. This per-pixel imaging time T_p is assumed to be equal to the per-voxel imaging time T_v due to dose fractionation as discussed in Section 3.1

. Also shown is the energy E_est found by setting μ⁻¹(E_est) of equation (4)

equal to the total thickness t of the background material. In practice, one might be able to accept 1% spectral bandwidth and thus reduce the pixel time by a factor of ten, while reflection efficiencies of beamline and nanofocusing optics might increase the pixel time by about a factor of ten. Therefore the pixel time shown here represents a reasonable estimate.

JOURNAL OF
APPLIED
CRYSTALLOGRAPHY

ISSN: 1600-5767

Volume 54| Part 2| April 2021| Pages 386-401

https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600576721000194

Open

access

Search IUCr Journals		doi		Advanced search
Author		volume	page