NIM system or Digital Detector

[Jackson Oswalt]

I saw a post in the new users section on the construction of a NIM system for neutron detection and it got me interested. After reading the NIM FAQ I noticed a paragraph which read “Small boxes the size of a pack of cigarettes now plug into the USB port via a cable and you have a complete gamma spectrometer. Jack fields and snarled patch cords are being replaced by software which is multi-faceted and multi-tasking, changing your laptop from a gamma spec. to a mass spec. with a touch of a function key.” This describes the device I used when I first achieved fusion. I was under the impression that a NIM system would be better, but maybe I have the wrong idea.

Is there any reason why I should invest in NIM, outside of the experience I would get from it? In other words does NIM have any advantages over it’s newer, digital successor?

Thanks,
Jackson Oswalt

[Rich Feldman]

Good question.

Just wanted to point out that NIM and "digital" are not mutually exclusive.
There's plenty of digital functionality available in NIM modules, for example timers and counters and coincidence detectors, with NIM and/or mainstream I/O signaling.
https://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~dodds/Files331/NIMuse.pdf

I think the new PC-based stuff is sort of analogous to software-defined radio.
They both use conventional electronic front-end methods, standing between real antennas/detectors and computer I/O.

[Richard Hull]

I have just added, verbatim, part of Rich's post above and credited him in the FAQ 2020 update. The URL will really help.

Richard Hull

[ian_krase]

I think that conventionally, software-defined radio is considered to *not* use conventional electronic frontends, but rather an incredibly thin frontend that is the absolute minimum to translate digital date in a blazingly fast DSP into an analogue signal.