Zeitschrift fQr Physik A

Z. Phys. A - Atomic Nuclei 327, 341-355 (1987)

Atomic Nuclei
9 Springer-Verlag 1987

Low-Energy Cross Sections for liB(p, 3e)*

H.W. Becker, C. Rolfs, and H.P. Trautvetter
Institut fiir Kernphysik, Universit/it Mfinster, Federal Republic of Germany

Received March 16, 1987

The 11B(p, 3e) reaction has been investigated in the energy range from E .... --22 to
1100 keV with the use of either a proton beam and a 11B solid target or with the
use of a 11B heavy ion beam incident on a hydrogen jet gas target. The reaction mecha-
nisms have been studied via kinematically complete coincidence measurements showing
that the reaction proceeds predominantly by a sequential decay via 8Be. The measurement
of absolute cross sections, e-angular distributions and excitation functions is reported.
The astrophysical S(E) factor has been described by means of an empirical fit to the
data, leading to a zero-energy intercept of S(0)=197_+ 12 MeV b. Conclusions drawn
on the use of this reaction as an advanced fuel in fusion reactors remain essentially
unchanged by the present data.

Nuclear Reactions: laB(p, 3e), E . . . . =22 to ll00keV; measured a(E,O) and

[d3 o'/d(21 dr22 dE] (E, 01,02); deduced astrophysical S(E) factor; solid targets and
windowless gas targets, kinematically complete experiments.

PACS- 25.85.-w; 24.90.+d; 95.30.-k

1. Introduction distribution of the e-particles as determined predomi-

The easiest fuel in which to achieve a thermonuclear
reaction is a mixture of deuterium and tritium, which
ignites at about 5 keV. This reaction [T(d,n)4He,
Q=17.59 MeV] has the disadvantages of releasing
most of its energy as 14 MeV neutrons and of requir-
ing tritium, which must be bred. A search for ad-
vanced fusion reaction fuels [1-3], which do not have
these drawbacks, has led to a number of possibilities,
one of the more promising of which is liB(p, 3e) (Q
= 8.68 MeV). In the investigation of this reaction the
three identical particles produced as reaction pro-
ducts create problems in the analysis and interpreta-
tion of the e-particle spectra. As shown in Fig. 1 a
the reaction can proceed - in a single step directly
into three e-particles leading to a continuous energy
* Supported in part by the Landesamt Nordrhein-Westfalen
(IVB4-FAgl71) and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
(Ro429/15-1)
nantly by phase space features. Alternatively, the
reaction could be thought of as a sequential decay
via the states in 8Be (Fig. 1 b), whereby the primary
e-particles populating these states have well-defined
energies and their peak shapes reflect the total widths
of these states. The subsequent breakup of the 8Be
recoil nuclei into two secondary e-particles is charac-
terized by a continuous energy distribution. The ob-
served spectrum could then be a superposition of both
types of spectra. If the e-particles are detected in a
4re detector over their full range of energies, the total
cross section a(E) of the reaction is obtained by divid-
ing the total number of counts by three, since for
each reaction three e-particles are created. This deter-
mination of o-(E) is independent of the reaction mech-
anisms involved. In practice one uses detectors with
finite solid angles and thus this correction factor de-
pends critically on the type of reaction mechanisms
involved. For example, two of the e-particles can be
342
(o) DIRECT DECAY
E[--
15,96
118, p
~7.28
o
12E
(b) SEQUENTIAL DECAY
PRIMARY(:t-PARTICLES
E F = 1.5 MeV] of aBe. In both cases the
15.96 I"
118. p SECDNDARY
12C
emitted with a very small angle separating them and
can thus be detected in one detector, leading to a
correction factor of 2. Due to these and other features
the 1aB (p, 3 a) reaction was studied by many investiga-
tors [4], starting with Oliphant and Rutherford in
1933 [5 I. These investigations have not led to a coher-
ent picture of the reaction mechanisms involved at
low energies. The most recent work [6] carried the
studies to as low an energy as Ep=35.4 keV*. The
absolute cross section was derived [6] from the yield
of e-particles observed in a surface-barrier detector
of finite solid angle. The yield was divided by a factor
of 3. However, as just discussed, this factor depends
on the reaction mechanisms involved. An empirical
fit to the astrophysical S(E) factor,
S (E) = a (E) E exp (2 ~ t/)
where 2~z~/=4.7528E 1/2 (with E in MeV), led to an
extrapolated value of S(0)= 160 MeV b [6].
In view of the importance of this reaction and
of the above discussions, a renewed investigation was
carried out including kinematically complete mea-
surements as well as measurements of excitation func-
tions over a wide energy range and to an energy as
* T h r o u g h o u t this work, E is the center-of-mass (c.m.) energy and
Ep or EB the proton or 11B incident beam energy in the laboratory
system. Furthermore, the symbol ER is used to label a resonance
energy in the c.m. system and F is the c.m. width of the resonance
state
H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for liB(p, 3e)
~+r
=-PARTICLE ENERGY Fig. 1 a and b. Schematic diagram of the
relevant level scheme [4] and expected e-
particle spectrum of the liB(p, 3c0
reaction for the mechanisms of (a) a
direct breakup and (b) a sequential decay
via the groundstate [SBe(0), F = 6 . 8 eV]
and the first excited state [SBe(1),
spectra comprise a continuum which
extends to zero energy. In the energy
LES
range of the present work (E = 22 to
t-~ SECONDARY
I Or- PARTICLES ~ cz0 I 1100 keV), there are resonances reported
7.2B [4, 6] at ER(F)= 150(5.2), 620(300) and
1276(1150) keV with J ~ = 2 +, 2 - and 1 ,
respectively
(x-PARTICLE ENERfY
low as possible. The experimental equipment and set-
ups used in the various experiments are described in
Sect. 2, followed by the experimental procedures, data
analyses and results in Sect. 3. The results are discus-
sed in Sect. 4. Details of all aspects of this work be-
yond those reported in this paper can be found in
Ref. 7.
2. Experimental Equipmentand Set-Ups
2.1. Accelerators
The 350 keV accelerator at the Institut ffir Kernphy-
sik in Mfinster provided beams of H a and H2 ions
at energies Ep = 50 to 350 keV with particle currents
of up to 300 gA at the target. Details of the energy
calibration (error less than _+0.4 keV) and beam
energy spread (below 0.4 keV) have been described
[-7, 8]. The measurements have been extended to low-
er energies using the 100 kV accelerator [-9] at the
Dynamitron Tandem Laboratorium in Bochum (Ep
--25 to 90 keV; Ha, Hz and H 3 ion beam currents
of up to 1.95 mA at the target). The energy is known
to an accuracy of AE/E= ___5x 10 -4 leading to an
error in cross section of A a/a = ___0.7% at E = 22 keV
(Sect. 3.5). Finally, the 4 MV Dynamitron tandem ac-
celerator at Bochum supplied a 11B heavy ion beam
at EB= 1.68 to 13.20 MeV with particle currents of
up to 0.5 gA at the target. Information on the beam
properties of this accelerator (energy calibration
H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for l~B(p, 3e) 343

i i

Ep = /-,,5keY
OiQb = 90~
| 10s I

H - RECOIL
i I I l

1.1_1 ,,-:, 1r EB = 3,50MeV

Z 25 Z
Z (1, et,~b= 37.5~
< Z
"l- 10~
t..s 20 I
U
t-v-
la..l rw.
t'l 15 ILl
1/1 (11
b-- 102
Z 10 t,O
I---
O
t.../ Z
iZ) 101 ao
5 C)
I_.J

100 ,1~ ,
0 1 2 3 /, 5 2 h. 6 8 10
E~ ( M eV) E~ (MeV)
Fig. 2a and b. Sample e-particle spectra of the liB(p, 3c0 reaction (a) at 0~,b=90 ~ and E p = 4 5 keV as obtained with a Si detector and
a Ta-backed I~B target and (b) at 0~,b=37.5 ~ using a Si detector and a 3.50 MeV ~IB heavy ion beam incident on a H2 jet gas target.
Aside from the e0- and el-particle groups indicating the presence of the sequential decay mechanism (Fig. 1), one sees in both spectra
an e-particle continuum extending to low energies. The narrow low-energy peak in (b) arises from elastically scattered hydrogen recoil
nuclei. Here, the n u m b e r of counts of the elastic scattering peak provides information on the product of beam intensity and gas target
density. The spectra contain also information on the purity of the target gas (contaminations < 2 x 10-v, [7]

AE/E = _+4 x 10 . 4 and energy spread per charge state
~ < 8 keV) is contained in Ref. 10.
2.2. Set-Ups for Measurements Using Solid Targets
F o r the measurements of excitation functions with
solid-backed targets, the set-up used was similar to
that described previously [11]. Briefly, the beam pas-
sed through a 1 cm diameter T a collimator and was
focussed into a spot of a b o u t 1 cm diameter at the
target. The targets were m o u n t e d in a target holder
with its normal at an angle of 45 ~ with respect to
the b e a m direction. Direct water cooling was applied
to the target backing. A liquid-nitrogen-cooled (LN2)
copper tube (30 cm length) extended from the Ta colli-
m a t o r to within 5 m m of the target. This tube together
with the target formed the F a r a d a y cup for b e a m
integration. With this tube and two more L N 2 in-line
traps in the vacuum system, carbon-buildup on the
targets was negligible.
Silicon surface-barrier detectors (with an active
area of 300 m m 2) were positioned at 90 ~ and 135 ~
to the b e a m direction in close geometry (at a distance
of 7 cm from the target) and were electrically isolated
from the target chamber. Their effective solid angles
were determined with the use of a calibrated 241Am
source placed at the target position. The detectors
were covered with Ni foils thick enough to stop the
intense flux of elastically scattered protons from the
solid-backed targets (Fig. 2a). The set-up was used
in the measurements of excitation functions at
E < 3 2 5 keV.
Measurements of s-angular distributions have
been carried out using a scattering chamber of 35 cm
diameter. The beam direction was defined by two
3 m m diameter Ta collimators at the entrance of the
chamber. The c~-particles were observed with Si detec-
tors positioned at 0lab=40 ~ 60 ~ 90 ~ 120 ~ 140 ~ and
160 ~ (placed at a distance of 6 to 16 cm from the
target and collimated by 2 to 3 m m diameter apertu-
res in front of the detectors). The relative solid angles
of the detectors were determined using the calibrated
241Am source. The accuracy in angular position was
estimated to be _+2 ~ The b o r o n target on a carbon
foil was positioned in the center of the scattering
chamber with its normal at an angle of 50 ~ with re-
spect to the beam direction. In these measurements
( E = 124 to 321 keV) the b e a m current was limited
to < 6 0 hA.
All targets were fabricated by evaporation of natu-
ral b o r o n (81.5% 1aB) onto 0.1 m m thick Ta backings
or onto C foils of about 10 gg/cm z thickness. The
Ta-backed targets ranged in thickness from 2 to
100 j.tg/cm 2 and the C-foil-backed targets from 10 to
20 gg/cm 2. The target thicknesses were determined
by observing the width of the ER = 150 keV resonance
(F = 5.5 keV, Sect. 3.7).
2.3. Set-Ups for Measurements Using the
Supersonic Jet Gas Target
F o r the measurements of excitation functions and an-
gular distributions at higher energies as well as for
the investigations of the reaction mechanisms in-
volved, the role of projectiles and target nuclei were
344 H.W. Becker et al.: L o w - E n e r g y C r o s s Sections for l i B ( p , 3ct)

interchanged, i.e., the ~aB heavy ion beam was bom- Table 1. Survey of coincidence e x p e r i m e n t s
barded onto a hydrogen gas target of the quasi-point
E~ E Coincidences" Reaction mechanism b
supersonic jet type (for technical details and proper-
(MeV) (keV) 01 - 02
ties of the system, see [7, 12, 13]). Briefly, the H 2 direct sequential
target gas at an inlet pressure P0 (P0 = 0.5 to 1.0 bar)
flows through a Laval nozzle and expands adiabati- 1.78 148 c 15.0~ ~ I/
cally into the scattering chamber, in which the pres-
4.20 350
37.5 ~-
15.0~
90.0 ~
~
K
sure is several orders of magnitude lower, thus for-
ming a geometrically confined supersonic jet stream. 6.60 550 a
22.5 ~-
15.0~
87.5 ~
~
K
i/
After free expansion of about 6 ram, the jet stream 22.5 ~- 87.5 ~ K
is mostly captured by a receiver pumped by a Roots 10.00 833 15.0~ ~ i/
9 /

blower. In this arrangement the high density region 22'5~ 87'5~ V

in the supersonic jet near the outlet of the nozzle
is chosen as the target zone and this zone can be
seen from every scattering direction. For Po = 1.0 bar
the H2 jet target has a thickness of about
1 0 1 7 atoms/cm 2 and a geometrical width of about
3 mm. The cleaning elements used in the recirculation
system of the H2 target gas consisted of a zeolite ad-
sorption trap (cooled to LN2 temperature), which was
flooded with hydrogen to reach equilibrium between
H2 adsorption and H2 relaxation. It was found that
at this stage the zeolite trap was still pumping effi-
ciently heavier gas contaminations such a s N 2 , O 2
and oil vapours, and thus r a t h e r "clean" spectra
could be obtained (e.g., Fig. 2b). F o r tests of the
energy dependence of the ~ B + p elastic scattering
yields (Sect. 3.3), natural argon gas was admixed into
the H 2 target gas.
In the scattering chamber, Si detectors were
placed at 0lab = 22.5 ~ 37.5 ~ 52.5 ~ 75 ~ 97.5 ~ 135 ~ and
150 ~. The detectors were collimated by slit apertures
(0.5 to 5.0 mm width and 6.0 mm height) placed at
a distance of 70 to 90 mm from the jet target as well
as by 6 mm diameter collimators placed 25 mm in
front of the detectors. In this way, the detectors could
see a region of about + 3 mm around the jet target
[7] (for a determination of their effective scattering
angles and solid angles, see Sect. 3.3). This set-up was
used in the measurements of angular distributions,
excitation functions and absolute cross sections
(Sects. 3.4 to 3.6).
In order to investigate the reaction mechanisms
involved in 11B(p, 3e) and thus to have an improved
understanding of the singles spectra (Fig. 2 and
Sect. 3.2), the jet target set-up was used in coincidence
experiments carried out at several representative ener-
gies in the range of EB = 1.78 to 10.00 MeV (Table 1).
F o r this purpose, Si detectors were placed in the jet
target chamber in one plane at 0~,b = 15 ~ 22.5 ~ 37.5 ~
87.5 ~ 90 ~ 105 ~ and 135 ~ with similar collimating sys-
tems as described above. Coincidence events between
various pairs of these detectors (Table 1) have been
obtained using standard electronics in combination
with the N U C L E A R D A T A N D 6660 multiparame-
" Coincidences between detectors p l a c e d at the l a b o r a t o r y angles
01 a n d 0z a n d o n opposite sides of the b e a m axis
b Direct 3c~-particle b r e a k u p or s e q u e n t i a l decay via 8Be
c N e a r the E R = 150 keV r e s o n a n c e
d N e a r the E R = 620 keV resonance
ter system [7]. For each pair of detectors, their singles
events (two energy spectra) as well as their coinci-
dence events (two energy spectra and their associated
time spectrum) were recorded via a so-called "com-
plex configuration" in the event-by-event (list) mode
of the N D 6 6 6 0 system and stored on magnetic tape.
The proper operation of the electronics and of the
data acquisition system has been tested using kinema-
tical coincidences in the ~IB + 1 4 N elastic scattering
system at EB=6.6 MeV [7]. For the detector pairs
a time resolution of 10 to 15 ns was achieved. The
stored data have been analysed using the usual "play-
back" procedures.
3. Experimental Procedures, Data Analyses
and Results
3.1. Investigation of Reaction Mechanisms
3.1.1. Theoretical Considerations. As discussed in
Sect. 1, the l~B(p, 3e) reaction can be thought of to
proceed in the outgoing channel (Fig. 1) either as a
direct 3~-particle breakup (t~B+p--+3e) or as a se-
quential decay via 8Be (11B + p --, 8Be + e ~ 3 e). In
both cases the outgoing channel is characterized by
three e-particles, which are described by their mo-
menta Pl, P2 and P3 leading to 9 variables: e.g., P~,
Oi, ~bi (i= 1, 2, 3), where P/is the absolute value of
the momentum for particle i, 0 i its polar angle and
q~i its azimuthal angle. As a consequence of energy
and momentum conservation, the number of indepen-
dent variables to be determined in a kinematically
complete measurement reduces to 5. This can be
achieved by observing two particles in coincidence
at the directions (0~, ~b~) and (02, ~2) and by measu-
ring the energy of one of these particles, say Ea. In
H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for liB(p, 3c~)
16 i I I !
:1o.oo. v
I/.
12 / .....
(g~ , ~ ) = {135~, 0~}
>QJ 10 ' = ' in the E ~ - E 2 plane is then described by the density
8
uY
t~
2
0 i
0 I 2 3
E1 101) [HEY]
Fig. 3. Kinematical curves for l~B(p, 3c0 at
10.00 MeV, where two e-particles are observed in coincidence at
the laboratory directions (0~, ~bl) indicated
this case the energy E 2 of the other particle is then
determined. Thus, for a given set of directions all coin-
cidence events populate the locus in the Et - E 2 plane
called the kinematical curve. This requirement is inde-
pendent of the reaction mechanisms involved. Exam-
ples of kinematical curves are shown in Fig. 3. In the
general case with 3 differing particles in the outgoing
channel there are 3 differing kinematical curves for
a given beam energy and angle combination. In the
present case with 3 identical particles in the outgoing
channel, the 3 curves are degenerate, i.e., coincidence
events on a given locus of the kinematical curve can
have 3 differing contributions. For example, events
due to the sequential decay via 8Be will have contri-
butions from 3 differing regions of excitation energy
in 8Be [7]. Observing a particle with energy E1 at
the laboratory angle 01 in coincidence with a particle
at the laboratory angle 02, the differential cross sec-
tion is given by [14-16] :
[d3 a/dQa dO2 dE1](E~)=(2n/hvo) p~(E1) M 2.
Here, dr21 and d(2 2 are the solid angles of the detec-
tors 1 and 2, respectively, Vo is the projectile velocity,
p~ (E0 is the phase-space factor, and M is the transi-
tion amplitude containing the dynamics of the reac-
tion (e.g., a final-state interaction of the e-particles
in the outgoing channel). In the calculations of Pl (E0
it is assumed, that the probability for decay into 3 e-
particles with the momenta PI, !!2 and P3 is isotropic
and thus described entirely by the available phase
space. The resulting phase space factor in the labora-
tory system is then given by the relation [14] :
pl(E1)=[P1P22/(2Pz+PI cos A - P p cos 02)],
345
where P1 and Pz are the absolute momenta of the
e-particles 1 and 2, respectively, Pv is the absolute
o o -
momentum of the projectile, and A is the laboratory
angle between the particles 1 and 2. The relative prob-
ability for coincidences along the kinematical curve
function pz(E1, E2) [143:
/92 ( E l , E 2 ) = P l ( E O/E(1 --(dEa/dE,) z] 1/2, (3)
where the expression for the derivative dE2/dE 1 is
given in Ref. 14.
For a direct 3e-particle breakup, the transition
i amplitude M is nearly a constant and the intensity
t~
distribution along the kinematical curve is proportio-
nal to pz(E1, E2). The examples shown in Figs. 4a
E8=1.78 and and 4b exhibit an intensity distribution slowly vary-
ing with E 1 and E 2. A more precise calculation must
include the Coulomb interaction of the three e-partic-
les, but the results of such improved calculations [-15,
17] do not change the essential features shown in
the figure.
For a sequential decay via aBe, the transition am-
plitude M describes the probability for forming SBe
in its various states. In order to show the consequen-
ces of such a sequential decay on the intensity distri-
bution along the kinematical curve, the decay via the
first excited, broad state in SBe (=SBe(1), Fig. 1) is
discussed. The transition amplitude for decay via this
state may be represented by a Breit-Wigner ansatz
[-7, 20]:
M 2 ~- P(Ip~, E~) F(E)2/[(Eo + A (E)-- E) 2 + (F(E)2/4)]. (4)
Here, E is the excitation energy in 8Be, E~ the energy
of the primary e-particle populating SBe(1), P(lp,, E,)
the penetrability function of the primary e-particle
having an orbital angular momentum of Ip~,,F(E) the
energy-dependent width of the SBe(1) state (F(E)
=272P(/s~, E); 72=reduced width, /s~=2=orbital
angular momentum of the secondary e-particles), E o
(1)
the energy eigenvalue of the resonance in the e - e
channel and A (E) the associated Thomas-Lane energy
shift (A ( E ) = - ~)2S(Is~, E); S(I,~, E ) = usual shift func-
tion [20]). At energies far below the Coulomb barrier
the proton channel is dominated by s-partial waves
leading to a predominant orbital angular momentum
of lp~= 1 for the primary e-particles, except at the
E R = 150 keV resonance (J" = 2 +, lp~= 0). Equation 4
is valid for the observation of the primary e-particle
in coincidence with an e-particle from the subsequent
SBe(1) breakup. Because of the threefold degeneracy
discussed above, there are three possible contribu-
tions to M, which have to be added. Due to the iden-
(2) tity of the three e-particles the summation must in
346 H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for liB(p, 3e)

| |
Theory

, ..a . ~T~CTO R $ r

9 |
Fig. 4a--d. Calculated intensity distributions along the kinematical curve are shown for differing ~1B beam energies and angle combinations
assuming a direct 3e-particle breakup (a and b) and a sequential decay via 8Be(l) (c and d). The three-dimensional plots display the
number of relative coincidence events in the vertical axis (linear scale) as a function of the energies of the coincident e-particles (shown
as axes of the plane). The arrows in (e) and (d) indicate the energies of the primary el-particles for the given detection angles

principle be done coherently. Different approaches in
calculating the total transition amplitude M can be
found in the literature [18]. Since a complete under-
standing of this s u m m a t i o n is missing [-4], and in
order to calculate the rough structure of the intensity
distribution due to a sequential decay, the three con-
tributions have been added incoherently in the pre-
sent work [7], neglecting thus possible interference
effects. It was suggested however [-15], that the results
of such an incoherent s u m m a t i o n describe fairly well
the rough structures. The resulting intensity distribu-
tions (Figs. 4e and 4d) show different patterns compa-
red to those for a direct 3 a-particle breakup.
3.1.2. Experimental Results. The experimental results
obtained at E B= 10.00 MeV and for the angle combi-
nation (01, ~ 0 = (82.5 ~ 0 ~ and (02, q~2)= (22.5 ~ 180 ~
are displayed in Fig. 5. The observed intensity distri-
bution on the kinematical curve is consistent with
that calculated for a sequential decay via the first
excited state in SBe (Fig. 4d). The two intense peaks
(located also on the kinematical curve and labelled
E~-s and Eg+~in Fig. 5 e) arise from the sequential decay
via the groundstate of SBe. If the primary e-particle
(c%) is detected in the 0=82.5 ~ (q~=0 ~ detector, the
SBe (0) recoil nucleus is emitted at an angle of 0 = 22.1 ~
(~b = 180~ In order to be detected in the 22.5 ~ detec-
tor, one of the secondary e-particles from the SBe(0)
breakup must be emitted at an angle difference of
A 0 = 0 . 4 ~ Since the internal breakup energy (SBe(0)
2c~) is here smaller than the kinetic energy of the
SBe(0) recoil nuclei, there are two energetic solutions
in the laboratory system, namely Egs and E+s . Due
to the finite solid angle of the detectors, it is also
possible that both a-particles from the SBe(0) breakup
are observed in the 22.5 ~ detector. Such "triple" coin-
cidence events are of course not located on the kine-
matical curve and explain the peak outside this curve,
labelled Xg~ in Fig. 5e. The lines labelled ~o and ~1
in Fig. 5e represent the energies of the Co- and
H.W. Becket et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for ~B(p, 3c~) 347

I i I I I

1 0 "*'~ (11 01 = 8 2 5 ~

i 610
t0 .a
.-.J
i,i
z
z
-c~ I@*~
LJ

oc
b~
o.
I/l COINCIDENCES
I-- o
Z ~=82.5
0
,t.J

0 1 2 3 8 12 16 20
E~(HEY) E~(MeV)

Fig. 5a-e. Spectra are shown as

obtained at E n = 10.00 MeV with
detectors located at (0~, ~ ) = ( 8 2 . 5 ~
0 ~ and (0~, ~z)=(22.5 ~ 180~
?f Zgs
L
singles spectra of the two detectors
(a and b), associated coincidence
spectra (e and d) and a three-
dimensional plot showing in more
details the coincidence events (linear
scale) in the E ~ - E 2 plane (e). The
lines labelled by the arrows % and
e~ represent the energies of the
CI'I 0I0
associated peaks in the singles Ec~ , 2 2 . 5 ~ - DETECTOR
spectra (a and b). With the
exception of the peak labelled Z~:s |
(see text), the events located outside
the kinematical curve represent
random coincidences [7] (e.g., the
elastic scattering peak in d)

~-peaks in the singles spectra (Figs. 5a and 5b). The
cross points of these lines with the kinematical curve
represent the possible regions for coincidences due
to the sequential decay. It follows that the chosen
angle combination allows for the detection of the
el-breakup in both detectors and for the detection
of the %-breakup only in the 82.5 ~ detector.
The features just discussed for the sequential de-
cay via 8Be(0) explain the higher yields in the singles
spectrum of the 22.5 ~ detector below the ~l-peak
(Fig. 5 b). Since here the kinematics are not restricted
by a coincidence requirement, one observes all a-par-
ticles from the SBe(0) breakup between the minimal
(E~) and maximal (E~+s)possible energies.
Other examples of coincidence studies are shown
in Fig. 6 for EB= 1.78 MeV (near the ER= 150 keV
348 H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for liB(p, 3e)

@ E~ EB= 1.78 MeV

O1 = 90 ~
%
lI = 37.5~

i a
E=, 90~ . DETECTOR
/
% ~,o."

2+ T=1 resonance
| E e = 1.78 H e Y
oi = 13s"
e~ = 15~

\A!it,

alI

F'e, 135~ -
llJ DETECTOR
/
%
g"
Fig. 6a and b. Shown in a three-
dimensional plot are the coincidence
events (linear scale) in the E 1- E2
plane for the detectors located at (a)
(01, ~1)=(90 ~ 0~ and (02, ~b2)
=(37.5 ~ 180~ and (b) (01, 60
=(135 ~ 0~ and (02, ~z)=(15 ~
180~ as obtained at EB= 1.78 MeV
(near the ER=150 keV resonance).
For other details, see caption to
Fig. 5

resonance) and for two differing angle combinations.
A c o m p a r i s o n with the calculated intensity distribu-
tions along the kinematical curve (e.g., Figs. 4 a and
4c) shows that the observed coincidence events are
due to the sequential decay via 8Be(0) and 8Be(l).
T h e d a t a o b t a i n e d at all 11B b e a m energies a n d
at all angle c o m b i n a t i o n s (Table 1 and [-7]) can be
explained by the sequential e-decay of the 1 1 B + p
entrance channel into the g r o u n d s t a t e and first ex-
cited state of 8Be. Since there are essentially no coinci-
dence events outside the aBe(0) a n d SBe(1) regions,
it is concluded that the direct 3 e-particle process a n d /
or the sequential decay due to higher-lying states in
SBe m a k e no significant contributions to the total
cross section at the energies investigated. This conclu-
sion is also valid for the E R = 1 5 0 k e V resonance
(Fig. 6), c o n t r a r y to an earlier report [19].
3.2. Analyses of Singles Spectra
I n f o r m a t i o n on angular distributions and excitation
functions has been deduced from singles spectra (e.g.,
Fig. 2). F o r reliable analyses of these spectra, their
H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for HB(p, 3ct)
spectral shapes must be understood. As just discussed,
the laB(p, 3e) reaction proceeds - i n the energy range
investigated - predominantly via a sequential decay:
~B+p~ 8Be(0)+%~3e and l~B+p~SBe(1)
+ e l ~ 3 e . Due to the narrow width of 8Be(0) (F
=6.8eV), the primary %-particles are observed as a
relatively narrow peak, where the observed width of
the peak reflects the sum of contributions such as
the intrinsic resolution of the detectors, the kinemati-
cal broadening due to the finite solid angle of the
detectors and the energy straggling in the Ni foils,
if applicable. Compared to the %-peak, the ca-peak
is rather broad (Fig. 2) reflecting predominantly the
width of 8Be(l) ( F = 1.5 MeV). In the following the
shape of the spectra for the sequential decay ~IB
+p~SBe(1)+e~3e is calculated and compared
then with observation.
3.2.1. Expected Spectral Shape. In analogy to the cal-
culations of the coincidence spectra (Eqs. 1~4), the
spectral shape of the singles spectra in the laboratory
system is described by the relation [14] :
[d2a/df2dEJ(E~)=(Sn2/hvo)p(E~)l(m)l 2
where E~ is the a-particle energy in the laboratory
system and p(E~) the density function, which can be
expressed in this case as
/9 (E~) = EE~ (Ema x - - E ) ] 1/2
where E (and E m J is the energy (and maximum
energy) of the a-particles in the c.m. system. The
symbol ( M ) represents the transition amplitude
(Eq. 4) integrated over 02 and ~2 (Sect. 3.1.1).
The calculated spectral shape for the primary
el-particles at Ep=300keV and 0 1 , 8 = 4 0 ~ is shown
as a dashed curve in Fig. 7. Here, a width of
F = l . 5 MeV, a resonance energy of ER=3.05 MeV
[4] and an interaction radius of R = 6.75 fm [21] were
assumed for the first excited state in SBe. The penetra-
bility of the primary a-particles (Eq. 4) was assumed
to be described by p-partial waves (Sect. 3.1.1) with
an interaction radius of 4.31 fm.
In order to calculate the spectral shape of the se-
condary a-particles from the 8Be(l) breakup, one has
to integrate (5) over all possible angles 0 and 9 for
the primary ca-particles [7]. The resulting dotted
curve in Fig. 7 was obtained for the assumption that
the angular distribution of the primary el-particles
is isotropic in the c.m. system. This assumption is
in fair agreement with the data (Sect. 3.4).
The solid curve in Fig. 7 represents the summed
contributions of the primary and secondary e-parti-
cles and is the spectral shape to be compared with
observation (see below).
349
I I I I I I I
Ep = 300 keV
Ot~b = ~0~
t/3
I----
A
LI~ SEQUENTIAL DECAY
VIA 81~ (I)
//////A .... ..,.A.Y ~-~.T,CLES
LI.J - - SUM
I
1 2 3 t+ 5 6 7
or- ENERGY (HeV}
Fig. 7. Spectral shape of c~-particles emitted in the sequential decay
via the first excited state in 8Be, calculated for the conditions Ep
= 300 keV and 01,b= 40 ~ The dashed (dotted) curve represents the
results for the primary (secondary) c~-particles and the solid curve
their sum. The shaded area represents the spectrum fraction, from
which the cq-particle yields have been extracted, except at ER
= 150 keV (Sect. 3.2.3)
(5) 3.2.2. Spectra Obtained at Energies Outside the ER
=150 keV Resonance. Sample singles spectra are
shown in Figs. 8a and 8b as obtained at 01ab=135~
and Ep= 330 and 100 keV, respectively, using a Ta-
backed 11B target (0.75 ~tm Ni foils in front of the
(6) detectors), and in Figs. 8c and 8d as obtained at
0~,b=22.5 ~ and 150~ for a 11B heavy ion beam of
En = 3.50 MeV incident on a H 2 gas jet target, respec-
tively (no foils in front of the detectors). The curves
in the figures represent the spectral shapes calculated
for the sequential decay via the first excited state of
8Be using the parameters described in Sect. 3.2.1. The
secondary e-particles of the sequential decay via
SBe(0) contribute only in Fig. 8c to the yield below
the el-peak and is marked in the figure (see also
Fig. 5 b).
All the data are qualitatively reproduced by the
calculations including the low-energy parts of the
spectra. The calculations have been used to correct
the yields of the el-peaks for contributions of the
secondary a-particles (e.g., Fig. 7).
3.2.3. Singles Spectra near the ER=150 keV Reso-
nance. Singles spectra obtained near the ER = 150 keV
resonance [-5] are shown in Figs. 8e and 8f as ob-
tained with a 11B heavy ion beam incident on a H 2
jet gas target (0~,b=22.5 ~ and with a proton beam
incident on a solid-backed 11B target (0lab= 135~ re-
spectively. The curves in the figure are the spectral
shapes calculated for the assumptions described in
Sect. 3.2.1. It is apparent that the assumptions are
here not valid. Taking into account a differing orbital
350 H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for HB(p, 3e)

5000 100
Ep = 330 key @ Ep=100keV .

4000 etQb = 135~ 80 Btab =135 ~ _

SOLID TARfiEI SOLID TARGET

3000 80 0l 1

4:,;." .
2000 40

..., . . *..
1000 20 ,l,~..~-a .u ..:: .. 9 9 ~..
~ ~ . ~ . . 9 1~,~

0
,""'", , 2,.
0o 1 2 3 t, 5 1 2 3 t, 5

L~
z
z
800
@
(3.
EB= 3.50 HeY
Olob=22,5 o
100
| E B = 3.50 M e V

80 eIQb = 150~ .
7- 150 GAS TARGET- G A S TARGET
~J v.
rY 60
LAJ
CL 100 8Be[O) BREAKUP

40 .. ' " .
Z 9 ~?:..-.,;-,~.
-#
, .

50
C)
tJ

I I ' -"~'"~
I I , ~ I 0 .a k
2 4 6 B 10 12 0 1 2
2+ T=1 resonance
100
@ E B= 1.78 MeV .
20001| Ep = 165 keV Fig. 8a-f. Representative singles
Otob = 2 2 5 ~ Otab =ZZ.5~ spectra are shown as obtained in
80
GAS TARGET" 1500 - SOLID TARfiE1 the various set-ups (Sect. 2 and
text). The solid curves through the
80 OL1 , Ot0 OL1 data points represent the calculated
pulse height distributions for the
1000
sequential decay via 8Be(l)
40 .-, ~.,'-:':#. assuming the parameters given in
Sect. 3.2.1. The spectra (e) and (f)
9
- .,-,,t, . . . . -
"1 .'4 . are obtained near the ER= 150 keV
20 resonance. Note the different
intensity ratio of the c%- and
~ L' ~"";"
i "' l ' I ~l-peaks at this resonance energy
2 & 6 8 10 12 16. 1 2 3 /* 5

E~ (MeV)

angular m o m e n t u m of lp ~ = 0 for the primary a-parti- The singles spectra at the ER = 150 keV resonance
cles (Sect. 3.1.1), the resulting curves still cannot ex- have been analysed for the assumption that the rela-
plain the data. Previous observations of these differing tive contribution of the secondary e-particles to the
spectral shapes have been taken as evidence for the al-peak is the same as shown in Fig. 7. The deduced
presence of a direct 3a-particle breakup at the E R al-data obtained near this resonance are therefore
= 150 keV resonance [19]. Other analyses [22] could not as reliable as those obtained at other energies
explain these differing spectral shapes as an apparent (Table 2).
change in the width of the 8Be(l) state due to interfer-
ence effects (i.e., incoherent summation, Sect. 3.1.1).
The coincidence spectra obtained at this resonance 3.3. The 1lB..t_ p Elastic Scattering
(Fig. 6) support the analyses [22], in which a 3a-parti-
cle breakup is not responsible for the spectral shapes The liB(p, 3a) reaction yields obtained with the 11B
observed at ER = 150 keV. ion beam incident on the H 2 gas target (EB= 1.68
H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for HB(p, 3a) 351

Table 2. Summary of the ~~B(p,a) 8Be excitation functions 1.9

11Betel~7~TIC SCATTERING .
E" S(E) b (MeVb) E" S(E) b (MeVb) 1.6
(keV) (keV)
r ~1 ~0 ~1 1.3

Gas target experiments: Solid target experiments: ~" 1.0

p(llB, cq) 8Be~ liB(P, ~i) SBed
140 11.9 _+0.6 560+ 30 21.8 ~ 380_+90 0.7
143 23.0 _+1.1 940_+ 50f 26.1 ~ 230 _+16
145 42 -+2 1620_+ 80r 30.3 e 213_+14 0.4 I I I I I
146.5 64 -+3 2390+120 r 34.6 ~ 210_+11 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
148 98 _+5 3290_+160f 38.8 ~ 237+12 E (MeV)
150 76 _+4 2600_+130r 43.0 ' 207_11 Fig. 9, The energy dependence of the elastic scattering yield for
155 16.7 -+0.8 463-+ 23 f 45.4 ~ 192+14 11B+ p is shown relative to the Rutherford scattering law. The data
160 6.4 -+0.3 316-+ 16 51.3 2.9 +0.3 213-t-ll have been obtained using a H2-Ar gas mixture. The yields show
170 4.3 -+0.2 360_+ 18 54.5 ~ 187+10 pronounced deviations from the Rutherford scattering law near the
200 1.95_+0.10 253_+ 13 59.6 2.57+0.15 209+11 ER= 620 keV resonance. The solid curve through the data points
230 1.96_+0.14 263_+ 13 63.6 * 202+ 11 has been used in the normalization of the ~~B(p, 37) reaction yields
260 1.83_+0.11 272_+ 14 67.8 2.12___0.11 2054-10
292 1.91_+0.10 271___ 14 72.6 2.8 ___0.4 201+11
300 1.82+0.09 290_+ 15 77.6 2.12+0.14 218___11
350 1.78_+0.09 293_+ 15 84.3 2.34___0.18 213-t-ll t i o n angles a n d energy region. F o r this purpose, a
400 1.64_+0.09 332_+ 17 93.1 2.4 +0.2 235_+14 H 2 - A r gas m i x t u r e was filled i n t o the jet gas target
450 1.56_+0.08 361_+ 18 102.1 2.3 ___0.2 234___17 system a n d the 11B + p elastic scattering cross section
500 1.38+0.08 377_+ 19 111.2 2.62+0.13 266+20 was d e t e r m i n e d relative to that for 11B + 4~ elastic
550 1.11-+0.12 357_+ 18 120.3 2.82_+0.14 255___13
600 1.35_+0.08 340-+ 17 129.3 3.67+0.18 290+30 scattering [7]. D u e to the high C o u l o m b b a r r i e r (E c
642 1.14_+0.06 239-+ 12 135.9 5.0 __+0.2 328_+16 ~- 20 MeV), the a ~B + 4~ elastic scattering yield fol-
700 1.12_+0.06 135_+ 7 162.9 5.2 +0.3 392+20 lows the R u t h e r f o r d scattering law at the low i~B
750 1.29_+0.08 68_+ 4 171.9 3.2 +0.2 304___15 b o m b a r d i n g energies (E/E c <=0.5). The resulting 1~B
800 1.00_+0.06 55_+ 3 181 2.54-+0.13 284•
+ p elastic scattering yield curve at 0~,b = 37.5 ~ relative
850 0.94_+0.05 42_+ 2 190 2.16-+0.11 262+13
900 0.91_+0.05 35_+ 2 199 2.08+0.10 265_+13 to that for a r g o n is s h o w n in Fig. 9. T h e d a t a at low
950 0.74_+0.05 30_+ 2 208 1.87_+0.09 241__+12 energies (E __<0.3 MeV) are f o u n d to be c o n s i s t e n t with
1000 0.67_+0.04 26_+ 1 221 1.91_+0.16 266_+13 the R u t h e r f o r d scattering law [7]. T h e solid curve
1050 0.67_+0.04 26_+ 1 235 2.10_+0.11 270_+13 s h o w n in Fig. 9 was used for n o r m a l i z a t i o n of the
1100 0.56_+0.03 24_+ 1 244 1.98_+0.10 269-+13
253 1.98_+0.10 273 _+13 riB(p, 3c0 excitation f u n c t i o n s (Sect. 3.5) as well as
266 1.9 _+0.2 271_+13 for the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of their a b s o l u t e cross sections
284 1.77_+0.13 282_+15 (Sect. 3.6).
302 1.79_+0.09 280_+14 F o r the ~~B + 4~ system the spectra showed the
316 1.79-+0.09 290-+15
11B elastic scattering peak a n d the 4~ recoil p e a k
325 1.77-+0.09 315-+16
[7]. The ratio of their intensities d e p e n d s sensitively
a Effectivebeam energy within the target (Sect. 3.5) o n the scattering angles a n d allowed thus for a deter-
b Error does include all experimental uncertainties, but not the over- m i n a t i o n of the effective scattering angles. T h e a n a l y -
all -~6% error in the cross-section normalization (Sect. 3.6) sis of these ratios led to a n angle u n c e r t a i n t y , e.g.,
Thin target data
d Due to the thick targets used, data obtained near the ER= 150 keV of less t h a n _-4-1~ for the 22.5 ~ detector a n d of less
resonance do not represent cross section values [7] and have there- t h a n -t-0.5 ~ for the 37.5 ~ a n d 52.5 ~ detectors. T h e 11B
fore been omitted elastic scattering peaks allowed f u r t h e r m o r e for a de-
' Not determined t e r m i n a t i o n of the relative solid angles f2 of all detec-
f Analysis of the cq-data near the ER= 150 keV resonance is not
tors. A n a l y s i s at all 11B energies led to a precision
certain
for the (2 values of better t h a n _-t-5%. N o t e that the
angle error of the detectors for the elastic scattering
enters rather strongly into the final error of the reac-
to 13.20 MeV) have been n o r m a l i z e d to the llB--}-p t i o n cross section (Sect. 3.6).
elastic scattering yields, which were o b s e r v e d c o n c u r -
rently in the detectors (e.g., Fig. 2). F o r this n o r m a l -
i z a t i o n a precise k n o w l e d g e of the jet target density 3.4. Angular Distributions
a n d b e a m i n t e n s i t y is n o t required. However, the
m e t h o d r e q u i r e d a priori a k n o w l e d g e of the l i B + p A n g u l a r d i s t r i b u t i o n s were o b t a i n e d in the energy
elastic scattering cross sections at the relevant detec- r a n g e from E = 0 . 1 2 to 1.10 M e V using a l t B heavy
 352 H.W. Becket et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for ~B(p, 3c~)

11B ( p,c o ) 8Be 11B p,%) 8Be

10z 10z
E: 140 keY E = 148 keV E = 160 keV E: 140 keV E = 148 keV E = 160 keV
A A
t/3
101 I.-- 101 9 9 ii Ii

Z Z
:3 :E)

.--i ._i
I..U ILl . i
c~ 100 9 I , 1 , I , I . i . . i . i . i . i , i . , I , I . I , I , I .
rY 100 9 i , i . i . i . i , , i , I , I . I . i i , i , i , i , i i

E = 300 keV E = 642 keY E = 1100 keV E = 300 keY E : 642 keY E = 1100keY
r'-i
U.J i,i

10' ~- 101
I I

~5

100 10 0 , I , I , I , I , I , , I , I . I , I , I . , I , l , l , I , I l

0~ 30~ 60~ 90~176 ~ 0~ 30~ 60~ 90~ 120~ ~ O* 30~ 60~ 90~ 120~176176 0o 30 ~ 60 ~ 90o120o150o 0o 30 ~ 60~ 90~ 120~176 0~ 30 ~ 60 ~ 90o120o15001800

B E . m, ec.m.

t~
F--
1 LI3
z I--'-
ILl Z
LJ
LL 0 U 0
u_

-8 i
-1 8 -1 , i I
1

, [ , I , I , I ,
z +I i
<I;__ 1 (12 .,,r 1! a2
F--
IX3 nm
t..v- 0
t-.-- t--- t, 9 9
9 9 9 9 9 4

I./1
ER = 150keY 9
C3 -1 o
-1 , ~ I , I , I , I , I ,
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0 200 ~00 600 800 1000 1200
E (keY) E (keY)

Fig. 1O. Representative angular distributions for the %-particle
group of ~lB(p, c%) 8Be are shown in the upper part of the figure.
The solid curves through the data points are the results of fits using
Legendre polynomials of order k = 0, 1 and 2. The energy depen-
dence of the resulting a 1 and a2 angular distribution coefficients
are displayed in the lower part of the figure. Typical uncertainties
indicated on selected data points are based on counting statistics
ion beam incident on a H2 gas target as well as a
proton b e a m incident on a solid-backed ~ B target.
After transformation of the observed e-particle yields
into the c.m. system [23], the resulting distributions
were fitted [24] by Legendre polynomials Pk(0):
W(O. . . . ) = 1 - ] - E Ok Pk(O . . . . )
k
It was found [6, 7] that the data can be described
with a m a x i m u m order of k = 2. Representative exam-
ples of angular distributions as well as the deduced
a~ and a2 coefficients for the co-particle group are
displayed in Fig. 10, and those for the cq-particle
group in Fig. 11. N o t e that the coefficients are ana-
lysed with regard to the laB beam axis (i.e., a change
Fig. 11. Representative angular distributions and analyses for
ZlB(p, cq) 8Be (see caption to Fig. 10)
in the sign of the a I coefficient occurs with respect
to the experiments using a proton beam). The angular
distributions are asymmetric around 90 ~ at all ener-
gies, which require for their explanation interferring
amplitudes of differing parities. There is a pronounced
structure in the coefficients near the E R = 150 keV res-
onance. The results for the %-particle group are in
good agreement with previous work in the overlap-
ping energy region [6]. The data for the el-particle
group cannot be compared directly with those of pre-
vious work [6], since the previous analyses included
( k = l , 2 . . . . ).
the sum of all e-particles (primary plus secondary par-
ticles).
3.5. Excitation Functions
The measurements of excitation functions were car-
ried out using a I~B ion beam at E~=1.68 to
13.20 MeV and a H2 jet gas target (Sect. 2.3) as well
 H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for liB(p, 3~) 353

[ I I i I I which has to be evaluated numerically. For thicker

102
targets one must assume a form for the cross section
11B(p,Qo) 8Be @ curve and integrate over the target thickness to get
the effective energy for each measurement. This proce-
dure must be iterated until the o-(E) curve, integrated
over the target thickness, looks like the measured ex-
101 citation function. Values of the stopping power e(E)
have been obtained from recent compilations [26, 27].
% For the lowest energy of E = 140 keV using the ~IB
ion beam and the jet gas target, the total uncertainty
in the effective beam energy (Sects. 2.1 and 3.7) is
10o
AE= -t-0.14 keV leading to an error in the cross sec-
0 tion of Aa/a=+_0.8% (for E = l l 0 0 k e V , A~r/
I--'-
(D a = _+0.03%), which is negligible compared to other
~l , l , l , I , l ,
uncertainties (Sect. 3.6). In the case of a proton beam
and solid-backed 11B targets, the uncertainties in the
LI.I 11B( P, ~1 ) abe incident beam energy alone lead to an error of at
103 most Aa/a=_+0.7% (Sect. 2.1). The excitation func-
tions resulting from differing target thicknesses and
incorporating (7) in their analyses were found to be
in agreement within experimental uncertainties [7].
The relative excitation functions obtained with the
!
102 solid targets were normalized to those obtained with
t
the jet gas target in the overlapping energy region.
t The combined results of all measurements are illus-
Er~=620keV i E~ =1276keV
t trated in Fig. 12, and numerical values are given in
, I , ~ , li , i , T'~ i "~ Table 2 (for the determination of absolute cross sec-
0 200 ~00 600 800 1000 1200 tions, see Sect. 3.6).
E (keV)
Fig. 12a andb. Excitation functions for the reactions (a)
11B(p, ao) 8Be and (b) 1~B(p, al) 8Be are shown in form of the astro- 3.6. Absolute Cross Section
physical S(E) factor (the cross sections drop over nearly 10 orders
of magnitude to a value of 180_+40 pb at E = 2 2 keV). Where error
bars are not shown, the errors are smaller than the plotted points. The absolute cross section o-~of the 11B (p, e) aBe reac-
The errors given do not include an overall uncertainty of 6% in tion was determined at low energies relative to the
the absolute cross-section normalization. The solid curves through 11B+p elastic scattering cross section (:Tel(Sect. 3.3).
the data points represent the results of empirical fits (Sect. 4) The corresponding differential cross sections are relat-
ed through the equation

as using a proton beam at Ev=25 to 350 keV and
a solidly backed XlB target (Sect. 2.2). The observed
e-particle yields for the co-peak (Fig. 2) and el-peak
(Fig. 7) were corrected for the effects of finite target
thickness A (see below) as well as for angular-distribu-
tion effects (Figs. 10 and 11). It is well known that
at subcoulomb energies a precise knowledge of the
effective beam energy associated with observed yields
is as important as the yield measurements themselves.
With an incident beam at the target of energy E 0
and a relatively thin target A (A <E0, both in the
same units and the c.m. system), the effective energy
within the target is defined [25] by the integral equa-
tion (for S(E)= constant over the target thickness):
eo Eo e x p ( - 2 n q )
exp(-2nt/) dE=2 ~ dE,
Eeff
[d o-/d(2 (0. . . . )]~ = (I~/IJ [d a/d g2(0. . . . ) 3 el,
where I~/Iel represents the ratio of number of counts
in the e-particle and elastic scattering peaks (e.g.,
Fig. 2) corrected for solid angle effects between the
laboratory and c.m. systems [23]. With the knowl-
edge of the e-particle angular distributions (Sect. 3.4),
the absolute cross section a~ is determined. This deter-
mination is independent of the detector's solid angle,
target density and beam intensity. The error for as
depends only on the statistical uncertainties in the
number of counts In and Iel, the precision in angular
position [e.g., +0.5 ~ for the 37.5 ~ detector (Sect. 3.3)
leading to Aa/a= _+2%] and the uncertainty in the
correction for angular distribution effects. Using the
(7) 37.5 ~ detector one finds at E = 3 0 0 keV a value of
o-(C~o)=l.03_+0.06mb, where the +5.6% error was
354
obtained by the quadratic addition of uncertainties
in angular position ( _ 2 % ) , counting statistics and
angular distribution (• For the ~a-particle
group one finds at E = 3 0 0 keV a value of o-(~1)
= 1 6 5 + 10 mb, where the error of ___5.9% includes
in quadratures the uncertainties in number of counts
and angular distribution (+0.5%), contributions of
the secondary a-particles to the yield of the ~ - p e a k
(-t-5.5%, Fig. 7) and angular position (___2%). These
values have been used as the standards in the present
work (Table2). Previous work reports [6] a(eo
+70=105• at E = 305.6 keV, which differs
from the present work by a factor of - 2 / 3 (Sect. 4).
3.7. The E R = 150 keV Resonance
The energy and total width of the E R = 150 keV reso-
nance were determined using the a 1B heavy ion beam
incident on the H 2 jet gas target. In the c.m. system,
the beam energy spread is < 0.7 keV, the energy loss
of the beam up to the region of the jet target is
<0.08 keV and the jet target has a thickness of
<0.25 keV. Including these features in the analyses
of the observed excitation functions for the ao-particle
group near this resonance (Fig. 12a and Table 2), one
finds [7] an energy of ER=148.3• keV and a
width of F = 5.3 _+0.2 keV, in excellent agreement with
the reported values [6] of E R = 1 4 9 . 8 + 0 . 2 k e V and
F = 5.2 • 0.5 keV.
4. Discussion
Previous investigations at E -~ 1 to 5 MeV have shown
[4, 15] that the 1~B (p, 3 ~) reaction proceeds predomi-
nantly by a sequential decay via 8Be and that the
direct 3e-particle mechanism contributes less than
5% to the cross sections. The present work extends
this picture to lower energies, i.e., essentially to zero
energy, including the ER = 150 keV resonance.
The reaction can proceed in the entrance channel
either via the reported resonance states in the com-
pound nucleus 12C (Fig. 1 and [4]) or/and via a direct
(p, ~) reaction mechanism. If the groundstate of ~IB
(J~ = 3/2-) is described by an 3H x SBe cluster config-
uration (with orbital angular momentum l = 1), the
liB(p, e)8Be reaction may be visualized as a triton-
pick-up process. The process will proceed at low beam
energies predominantly from an incoming proton
partial wave of lp = 0 to an outgoing e-particle partial
wave of l~ = 1, and at higher energies transitions from
lp = 1 to l~= 0 and 2 come also into play. This direct
process should exhibit a nearly constant S(E) factor.
Interference effects between the lp=O and 1 partial
waves alone as well as additional interference effects
H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for liB(p, 3c0
with IR = 0 and 1 resonance amplitudes will result in
angular distributions asymmetric around 90 ~ and can
therefore qualitatively explain the data (see below).
It should be pointed out that the existence of such
a direct (p, ~) reaction mechanism at subcoulomb en-
ergies has been suggested from the data of reactions
7Li(p,~) 4He, 15N(p, a) 12C, 180(/9, e) 15N and
X9F(p, c() 160 [11, 13, 28, 29].
The S(E) factor data for 11B(p, eo) SBe show
(Fig. 12) the presence of the ER= 150 keV resonance
(F=5.5 keV, J ~ = 2 +) superimposed on a non-reso-
nant reaction yield, which decreases slowly with ener-
gy when approaching the ER= 1276 keV resonance
( F = l l 5 0 k e V , J ~ = l - ) . The J ~ = 2 - r e s o n a n c e at
E g = 620 keV (F = 300 keV) cannot contribute to the
ao-yield due to its unnatural J~ assignment, consistent
with the data. The ER = 150 keV resonance is formed
predominantly by In= 1 partial waves and the ER
=1276 keV resonance by In=O partial waves. The
slowly increasing a2 coefficient at E > 1 6 0 k e V
(Fig. 10) might therefore be taken as evidence for the
presence of the direct (p, ~) process with an increasing
probability for the transition Ip= 1 to /~=0 and 2.
The declining S(E) factor towards the ER = 1276 keV
resonance could possibly be explained as a destructive
interference between the resonance amplitude (lR = O)
and the Ip = 0 component of the direct process ampli-
tude. The explanation of the observed energy depen-
dence of the al coefficient must include then the lp = 0
and 1 amplitudes of the direct (p, e) process as well
as the lR= 1 and IR=O amplitudes of the ER= 150
and 1276 keV resonances, respectively.
The S(E) data for the 11B(p, al) SBe reaction
(Fig. 12) are dominated by the E g = 6 2 0 k e V reso-
nance (/g=0). A quantitative understanding of the
observed features might have to involve again the
lp = 0 amplitude of the direct process and the associat-
ed interference effects with the 620 keV resonance am-
plitude. The analyses of the relatively small al coeffi-
cient at E > 1 6 0 k e V (changing its sign near the
620 keV resonance, Fig. 11) as well as of the relatively
small a 2 coefficient (Fig. 11) should involve the l , = 1
component of the direct process.
In order to substantiate the above discussions,
quantitative calculations using the R-matrix formal-
ism [20] and incorporating the direct (p, ~) process
are highly desirable. Lacking such calculations, the
S(E) data for the c%-particle group have been de-
scribed by an empirical fit:
S(eo, E)=2.1 -- 1.26E--0.14E 2 +0.69 x 10-3/
[(E--0.148) 2 +7.13 z 10 -6]
(solid curve in Fig. 12a). The units of E are MeV
and the units of S(c%, E) are MeV b. Similarly, the
H.W. Becker et al.: Low-Energy Cross Sections for aaB(p, 3cr
S(E) data for the el-particle group are described by
S(cq, E) = 195 + 241 E + 231 E 2 + 1.76 x 10- 2/
[-(E--0.148)2 + 5.52 x 10 -6]
for E < 0 . 5 MeV (solid curve in Fig. 12b). It should
be noted that the lowest data points might indicate
the effects of atomic shielding on nuclear cross sec-
tions [30].
As discussed in Sects. 1 and 3, the analysis of the
singles spectra using detectors of finite solid angle
and thus the determination of the absolute cross sec-
tion depends on the reaction mechanisms involved
in riB(p, 3e). For the sequential decay via 8Be, the
correction factor is about 2, while previous work [6]
divided the total a-particle yields by a factor 3. If
the absolute cross section values reported in the pre-
vious work [6] are multiplied by a factor 3/2, they
are in excellent agreement with the results from the
present work. The extrapolated S(E) factor at zero
energy, Stot(O)=S(eo,O)+S(o:2,0)=2+195=197
• 12 MeV b, offers a somewhat more optimistic pros-
pect for liB(p, 3e) as an advanced fusion fuel than
previously envisioned [6].
The authors would like to thank L. Buchmann, S. Engstler, J.
G6rres, A. Krauss, P. Schmalbrock and R. Timmermann for assis-
tance during the course of the experiments and analyses. The techni-
cal help of K. Brand and of the staff at the Dynamitron Tandem
Laboratorium in Bochum is highly appreciated.
References
1. Weaver, T., Zimmerman, G., Wood, L.: Lawrence Laboratory
Reports UCRL-74191 and 74352 (1973) (unpublished)
2. Dawson, J.M.: UCLA Preprint, PPG-273 (1976)
3. Raeder, J., et al.: Kontrollierte Kernfusion. Stuttgart: Teubner
1981
4. Ajzenberg-Selove, F.: Nucl. Phys. A413, 1 (1984), A433, 1 (1985)
5. Oliphant, M.L.E., Rutherford, E.: Proc. R. Soc. (London) Ser.
A141, 259 (1933)
6. Davidson, J.M., Berg, H.L., Lowry, M.M., Dwarakanath, M.R.,
Sierk, A.J, Batay-Csorba, P.: Nucl. Pys. A315, 253 (1979)
355
7. Becker, H.W. :Thesis, Universit/it Miinster (1984)
8. Freye, T., Lorenz-Wirzba, H., Cleft, B., Trautvetter, H.P., Rolls,
C.: Z. Phys. A - Atoms and Nuclei 281, 211 (1977)
9. Krauss, A., Becker, H.W., Trautvetter, H.P., Rolfs, C.: Nucl.
Phys. A465, 150 (1987)
10. Trautvetter, H.P., Elix, K., Rolfs, C., Brand, K.: Nucl. Instrum.
Methods 161, 173 (1979)
11. Lorenz-Wirzba, H., Schmalbrock, P., Trautvetter, H.P.,
Wiescher, M., Rolls, C.: Nucl. Phys. A313, 346 (1979)
12. Becker, H.W., Buchmann, L., G6rres, J., Kettncr, K.U., Kr~iwin-
kel, H., Rolls, C., Schmalbrock, P., Trautvetter, H.P., Vlieks,
A.: Nucl. Instrum. Methods 198, 277 (1982)
13. Redder, A., Becket, H.W., Lorenz-Wirzba, H., Rolfs, C., Schmal-
brock, P., Trautvetter, H.P.: Z. Phys. A Atoms and Nuclei
305, 325 (1982)
14. Ohlsen, G.G.: Nucl. Instrum. Methods 37, 240 (1965)
15. Bronson, J.D., Simpson, W.D., Jackson, W.R., Phillips, G.C.:
Nucl. Phys. 68, 241 (1965)
16. Klein, H., Eichner, H., Helten, H.J., Kretzer, H., Prescher, K.,
Stehle, H., Wohlfarth, W.W. : Nucl. Phys. A 199, 169 (1973)
17. Beckner, E.H., Jones, C.M., Phillips, G.C.: Phys. Rev. 123, 255
(1961)
18. Duck, I.: Nucl. Phys. 57, 643 (1964)
19. Dehnhard, D., Kamke, D., Kramer, P.: Ann. Phys. 14, 201 (1964)
20. Lane, A.M., Thomas, R.G.: Rev. Mod. Phys. 30, 257 (1958)
21. Barker, F.C.: Austral. J. Phys. 22, 293 (1969)
22. Hudomalj, J., Antolkovic, B., Sch/ifer, K., Valkovic, V.: Nucl.
Phys. A186, 200 (1972)
23. Marion, J.B., Young, F.C.: Nuclear reaction analysis. Amster-
dam: North-Holland 1965
24. Bevington, P.R.: Data reduction and error analysis for physical
sciences New York: McGraw-Hill 1969
25. Rolls, C., Trautvetter, H.P., Rodney, W.S.: Rep. Prog. Phys. 50,
3 (1987)
26. Andersen, H.H., Ziegler, J.F.: Hydrogen-stopping powers and
ranges in all elements. New York: Pergamon 1977
27. Ziegler, J.F.: Stopping cross-sections for energetic ions in all
e]ements. New York: Pergamon 1980
28. Rolfs, C., Kavanagh, R.W.: Nucl. Phys. A455, 179 (1986)
29. Lorenz-Wirzba, H. : Thesis, Universit~t Miinster (1978)
30. Assenbaum, H.J., Langanke, K., Rolls, C.: Z. Phys. A - Atomic
Nuclei (submitted for publication)
H.W. Becker, C. Rolls, H.P. Trautvetter
lnstitut ftir Kernphysik
Universitfit M/inster
Domagkstrasse 71
D-4400 Miinster
Federal Republic of Germany