Translator Disclaimer
13 May 2016 A comparison flash lidar detector options
Author Affiliations +
This paper will discussion multiple flash lidar camera options and will compare sensitivity by calculating the required energy to map a certain area under specific conditions. We define two basic scenarios, and in each scenario look at bare earth 3D imaging, 3D imaging with 64 grey levels, or 6 bits of grey scale, 3D imaging with 3 return pulses from different ranges per detector element, and 3D imaging with both grey scale and multiple returns in each detector. We will compare Gieger Mode Avalanche Photo-Diodes, GMAPDs, Linear Mode Avalanche PhotoDiodes, LMAPDs, and low bandwidth cameras traditionally used for 2D imaging, but capable of being used for 3D imaging in conjunction with a rapid polarization rotation stage.
© (2016) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Paul F. McManamon, Paul Banks, Jeffrey Beck, Andrew S. Huntington, and Edward A. Watson "A comparison flash lidar detector options", Proc. SPIE 9832, Laser Radar Technology and Applications XXI, 983202 (13 May 2016);


32 x 32 Geiger-mode ladar camera
Proceedings of SPIE (April 29 2010)
Geiger-mode ladar cameras
Proceedings of SPIE (June 13 2011)
Single-photon sensitive Geiger-mode ladar cameras
Proceedings of SPIE (October 10 2012)

Back to Top