DSS Conference 2010

Middleton Research, VTT, and Duquesne University are presenting "Comparative performance studies for tunable filter and push-broom chemical imaging systems"

Authors:

Jouko Malinen - VTT, Kaitoväylä 1, FI-90571 Oulu, Finland
Gabor Kemeny - Middleton Research, 8505 University Green, Middleton WI 53562
Zhenqi Shic and Carl Anderson - Duquesne University, Department of Pharmacy, 600 Forbes Ave. Pittsburgh PA 15282

Abstract: Multiple instrumental techniques are today available for recording hyperspectral data of solid samples for chemical imaging applications. Stationary samples are frequently measured using staring or tunable filter imagers (e.g. LCTF), which record complete 2D images sequentially for each wavelength. Push-broom imagers are useful for measuring moving sample material, thanks to capturing instantaneous line images with full spectral information linked to every pixel. Today push-broom imagers provide alternative high speed approach for studying laboratory samples too, by using sample movement stages synchronized to imager operation. Furthermore, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland is currently developing high speed hyperspectral techniques using Fabry-Perot interferometer, aiming for high speed applications without the need for sample movement.

With such a variety of instrumental techniques it is useful to understand differences of each technique in user point of view. This paper reports instrument characterization measurements, which were recently arranged to provide comparative information on different hyperspectral chemical imaging systems. The instruments studied included both tunable filter and push-broom techniques: MatrixNIR by Spectral Dimensions, SisuChema by Specim and the Fabry-Perot based imager prototype from VTT. The characterization procedure was designed to study instrumental noise, signal-to-noise ratio, linearity and spectral as well as spatial resolution. Finally, a tablet sample was measured with each instrument to demonstrate speed of measurement in typical application. In spite of differences in wavelength ranges and camera technologies used (InGaAs vs MCT) the results provide interesting information on instrumental pros and cons, which may be useful for selecting most suitable instrumentation for user applications.

Back to What's New