NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTS AND METHODS IO9 (1973) 171-175; 0 NORTH-HOLLAND PUBLISHING CO.

A HEAVY ION IDENTIFICATION SCHEME BASED ON SEMIEMPIRICAL

RANGE-ENERGY CALCULATIONS

E. T. CHULICK, J. B. NATOWITZ and C. SCHNATTERLY*

Department of Chemistry and Cyclotron Institute, Texus A & M Unioersity, College Station, Texas 77843, U.S.A.

Received 20 December 1972

Particle identification schemes for heavy ions have been tested ratio of the energy loss in the front detector of a detector tele-
using the semiempirical range-energy calculations of Northcliffe scope to the total energy of the particle. Functions for determining
and Schilling as primary data. A new scheme is suggested in m and b are generated using the range-energy tables. The scheme
which the particle identifying output (PIO) may be calculated has been compared with other techniques and found to be useful
from the relationship PI0 = m&+6, where ET is the total for ions Z 2 4.
energy of the particle and m and b are functions of dE/ET, the

1. Introduction
A variety of schemes for particle identification have
been employed in nuclear reaction studies. These
schemes are usually based on the use of a detector Here B and C are adjustable constants and T is the
telescope for the simultaneous measurement of the thickness of the first detector. In the comparisons
total energy, ET, of a particle and the partial energy presented here, we have used B = I .85, C = 0.03 and
loss, AE, of that particle in the first detector. D = 300.
According to the Bethe energy loss equation’), We are currently involved in a series of experiments
in which it is necessary that we be able to identify ions
with atomic numbers from Z= 1 to 20, over a broad
cc AZ2,
energy range, starting at very low energies. We employ
a three detector stack consisting of a very thin
where (dE/dX) is the rate of energy loss, A is the particle (z2-15pm)transmissiondetector,athicker(50-500pm)
mass and 2 is the ionic charge. Thus, the identification transmission detector, and a thick (1-3 mm) back
of light particles has been accomplished by using the detector. Events are sorted into two groups based on
product AE x E, where E is the residual energy in the whether or not the particle reaches the third detector.
second detector. In such a case, the AE detector should With such stacks, we are able to observe simultaneously
be thin so that AE approximates (dE/dX). This scheme products with a wide range of energies and atomic
is of limited use for low energy heavy ions since the numbers. In order to push our energy threshold as low
ionic charge varies significantly with particle energy. as possible, we must use thin AE detectors. (These
Recently, Goulding et al.‘) have demonstrated the detectors are physically “thin” but not thin relative to
applicability of a power law identifier based on the the ranges of many of the particles for which identifi-
equation cation must be made.) As a result, we use the detector
telescopes primarily for Z identification and will use
PI0 = (E+AE)‘.73 - (E)‘.73. (1) time of flight for mass identification as required.
While the identification of particles may be carried
The use of this equation does not require that the first out by sorting the different AE signals which occur at
detector be thin relative to the total range of the each total energy, the processing of large amounts of
particle. Butler et aL3) have improved this approach data is greatly simplified by using the observed AE
for heavy ions by using a modified form of eq. (1) in and E values to generate a particle identifying tag to
which the exponent may be varied with increasing AE be used in the sorting step. Tests of the available
(and hence with increasing 2 and A). Their modified identification algorithms, using the calculated range-
equation takes the form energy values of Northcliffe and Schilling4) indicated
that these algorithms were not suited to our require-
* Robert A. Welch Foundation Undergraduate Fellow. ments. By utilizing the Northcliffe-Schilling tables, we

171
172
have developed a scheme which is well suited to low
energy heavy ions. Even though our own interest has
been primarily in Z identification, the scheme is appli-
cable for mass identification using thicker detectors.
2. Proposed identification scheme
The basis of our identification scheme is the obser-
vation that, for a fixed ratio of AE/ET, the energy ET
increases linearly with atomic number Z, for a wide
range of atomic numbers. This is illustrated in fig. 1,
where we have plotted as a function of atomic number,
the energy corresponding to particular values of
AE/ET, for an 8.4/~m A E detector. These energies were
determined from the Northcliffe-Schilling range-energy
calculations. From the data presented in fig. 1, it is
obvious that, for each value of A E / E T, a Z identification
could be made using the simple equation Z = m E T + b ,
where m and b are functions of AE/ET.
Our procedure was to determine, using the calculated
range energy curves, m and b as a function of AE/ET.
That body of data was fit by the method of least
squares to polynomials of the type,
(m or b) = Ki + K 2 ( A E / E T ) + K 3 ( A E / E T ) 2 + . . . .
We found that third order polynomials were adequate
to give reasonable fits to the data. However, tests of the
resultant identification scheme indicated that impro-
180
_ ' I 1ol I '
160
140
0.3
120
0.4
~ I00
0.5
uJ 80
0.6
6o
0.7
0.8
4o
0.9
2o
~ I , I , experiments, such ions are usually of sufficient energy
0 I0 20
Fig. 1. The total energy Ew associated with particular values of
A E / E T , plotted against atomic number. The d E detector is
8.4/~m thick. Values of A E / E T are indicated for each line. Data
is from ref. 4.
E.T. CHULICK et al.
vement could be made if we retained the original
polynomial for the slope, m, but generated a new
function for b, by setting b = Z - m E T and redeter-
mining b as a function of A E / E v. In order to obtain an
adequate fit to this new b function, a fourth order
polynomial was required. For the 8.4/~m detector
which was used to obtain the data presented here, the
two polynomials are
m = 0.00879 + 0.669 (AE/ET) -
- 0.959 (AE/ET) 2 + 1.01 ( A E / E T ) 3 , (3)
b = 3.90 - 12.02 (AE/E-r) + 43.77 (AE/E,r) 2 -
-- 71.11 (AE/ET) 3 + 3 5 . 5 0 ( A E / E T ) 4 . (4)
Thus, our identification scheme consists of
1) calculating AE/ET,
2) calculating m and b with eqs. (3) and (4),
3) calculating Z = m E T + b.
3. Tests of particle identification schemes
In order to compare this new identification scheme
with the algorithms in common use, we have used the
range energy data to calculate AE and E for N = Z
nuclei from Z = 3 to 23. These values have then been
used to calculate a particle identification output in
three different ways.
1) The calculation of P10 using the simple expo-
nential relationship of eq. (1).
2) The calculation of P10 using the modified expo-
nential relationship of eq. (2).
3) The calculation of PIO using the scheme described
in the preceding section.
The results of calculations for an 8.4/~m front
detector are presented in fig. 2. As has previously been
well established, the simple exponential form of eq. (1)
based on range energy curves for Z = 1 and Z = 2 ions
is seen to be of limited value for the low energy,
heavier ions. The variable exponent form of eq. (2) is
significantly better than the simple form but is inade-
quate for the lower energy heavy ions. As can be seen
in part C of the figure, the new identification scheme
proposed here should allow particle identification with
good resolution at much lower particle energies. The
scheme is not appropriate for ions of Z = 1 to 3. In our
30
to pass through both AE detectors and are identified
using a different algorithm.
To further evaluate our identification scheme, we
have performed the following experiment. A beam of
180 MeV 12C ions was used to irradiate a 100/~g/cm 2
 H E A V Y 1ON I D E N T I F I C A T I O N SCHEME 173

A1 target. A detector telescope placed at 6 ° to the products. In fig. 3, the identified spectra of ions which
incident beam and consisting of three detectors, an stopped in the second detector are shown. The upper
8.4/~m A E detector, a 500 gm d E detector and a 1 mm portion of fig. 3 shows the identification using the
E detector, was used to detect the nuclear reaction modified exponential equation. The lower portion
2o0! < depicts the identification using the scheme of section 2.
It should be emphasized that identification is being
attempted over a broad energy range. For example,
[ the C ions in fig. 3 [ P I O ~ 0 . 0 9 7 in part (a) and
PIO ~ 7.0 in part (b)] range from 7 to 150 MeV while

:!
the Mg ions [PIO ~ 0.26 in part (a) and PIO ~ 14.6 in
part (b)] vary in energy from 18 to 100 MeV, peaking
at ~ 40 MeV. Naturally, over a more restricted energy
kLl
range, each of the techniques will do a much better job
of identification. This may be seen in fig. 4 where the
identified spectra of ions with energies from 75 to
85 MeV are presented.
The discerning reader will note that although our
oo o:s 1:o ,5 2o 2s
PIO (XIO -s )
- • l 1 [ I F I [--I --
2oo •
' B= 1.85 B=185
C =003
C = 0.03 D :300
t D= 5 0 0 103

=<
10z
~ tO0 -

I
o

i01

.
0 0.000 0.043 0.086 0.129 0.172 0.215 0.258 0.301 0.344 0.387
0,0 0.1 0.2 03
PI0 PIO

2 0 0 ~-- - I
[ ] ~ [ [ I 1 [ I
L
L

l0 s

I
z

10 z
hi (/3
F- i'!
==
8
10'
- t
0 L J i J
0 4 12
PI0
r6 20 24
I i i L li
0.00 2.44 4.88 7.52 9.76 12.20 14,64 17.08 19.53 2L97
PIO
Fig. 2. Variation of the identifying tag (PIO) with total energy for
ions of Z = 3 to 23 (excepting Z = 14). The LIE detector is Fig. 3. Identified spectra f o r the reaction 180 M e V Z 2 C + 2 7 A I at
8.4fire thick. Top: simple exponential algorithm. Middle: 6% T o p : m o d i f i e d p o w e r l a w a l g o r i t h m with variable exponent.
modified algorithm with variable exponent. Bottom: technique B o t t o m : technique based on s e m i e m p i r i c a l range-energy calcula-
reported in this paper. tions. Identification is for b r o a d energy range. See text•
174 z.T. CHULICK et al.

identifying tag is intended to be equal to Z, there is a
shift such that Z = 12 ions appear at 14.6. This shift
corresponds to a higher energy loss in the AE detector
than is expected on the basis of the range-energy
curves. This appears to result from a combination of
detector nonuniformity and uncertainties in the range
energy calculations. We are exploring this question
further.
4. Generalization of the scheme
Initially, it might appear that the identification
scheme proposed above necessitates a new deter-
mination of the parameters for the slope and intercept
polynomials each time that a different detector is
employed. Fortunately, eqs. (3) and (4) are applicable
with the same constants, for a range of detector thick-
nesses if the measured value of AE/ET is replaced by
(AE/ET) x (8.4/T), where T is the thickness of the
detector actually employed. While the sufficiency of
this modification may not be immediately obvious, it
results from the fact that the range-energy curve of an
ion may be approximated by a straight line over a
fairly large energy increment. As a result the energy
loss, AE, scales very nearly with detector thickness.
As an example of the applicability of this modifi-
cation we present the calculated PIO for 4.2/~m and
10.1 pm detectors in fig. 5. In each case the PlO was
calculated by replacing AE/ET with a modified AE/ET
for use with eqs. (3) and (4). The figure illustrates the
applicability of this generalized approach. In applying
the generalization to detectors thinner than the
standard detector, one must recognize that the value
of AE/ET used in calculating rn and b should not exceed
1.0. As a result, the actual observed value of A E/Ev

F--
I F-- I ~ I" T -~- T I T 200 -- - - -

B:185 4.2,~
C=003
D:300
103

~ I0 z
~100

8 i0 ~
l!!, ,

, I, I
,,, ]
II
:1 ,: -
0
/
0 I0 15 20 25
O.O0 2.44 4.88 Z32 9.76 12.20 14.64 IZ08 19.53 21.97
PIO
PIO

200 1
1 - I I~- I" f l T ] I

lO.l,u.

103 --

d
z
z
I00
F-
Z

8
I0 ~

L t I
I I L[i , o
0 4 12 16 20 24
0.0( 2.44 4.88 Z32 9.76 12.20 14.64 IZ08 19,53 21.97 PIO
PIO
Fig. 5. Generalization o f the particle identification scheme
Fig. 4. Identified spectra for the reaction 180 M e V l e C + e T A I at proposed in this paper. Top: variation o f P10 with energy for a
6 °. Only particles o f energies 75-85 MeV are included. Top: 4.2pro detector. Bottom: variation o f P10 with energy for a
modified power law (abcissa multiplied by 60). Bottom: technique 10.1 p m detector. Parameters are those determined for an 8.4 l~m
based on semi-empirical range-energy calculations. detector. See text.
 HEAVY ION IDENTIFICATION
may be not greater than T/8.4, i.e., the constants are
not appropriate for energies below that corresponding
to penetration of an 8.4/tm detector. It is to be expected
that a significant reduction of detector thickness would
normally result from the desire to observe and identify
lower energy particles than those which just penetrate
the 8.4 pm detector. Therefore, in such a case, it would
be better to redetermine the constants for eqs. (3) and
(4) using the thinner detector as the base detector.
5. Conclusions
The identification scheme proposed here allows
identification of heavy ions, even at very low energies,
using simple functions of AE/ET. This scheme is
useful for low energy heavy ions with Z greater than 3.
SCHEME 175
Although utilized in this work only for Z identification,
the scheme also allows mass identification.
We appreciate the assistance of Mr F. Johnson, the
Cyclotron Institute Computer operator. This work was
supported by the United States Atomic Energy
Commission, The National Science Foundation and
the Robert A. Welch Foundation.
References
l) H. Bethe, Ann. Physik 5 (1930) 325.
o) F. S. G o u l d i n g , D. A. Landis, J. C e r n y a n d R. H. Pehl, Nucl.
Instr. a n d Meth. 31 (1964) I.
a) G . W . Butler, A . M . Poskanzer and D . A . Landis, N u c k
Instr. a n d Meth. 89 (1970) 189.
4) L . C . Northcliffe a n d R. Schilling, Nucl. D a t a 7 (1970) 233.