Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 703 (2013) 16–21

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in

Physics Research A
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/nima

SuN: Summing NaI(Tl) gamma-ray detector for capture

reaction measurements
A. Simon a,b,n, S.J. Quinn a,c,b, A. Spyrou a,c,b, A. Battaglia e, I. Beskin a, A. Best e,1, B. Bucher e, M. Couder e,
P.A. DeYoung f, X. Fang e, J. Görres e, A. Kontos a,e, Q. Li e, S.N. Liddick a,d, A. Long e, S. Lyons e,
K. Padmanabhan a, J. Peace a, A. Roberts e, D. Robertson e, K. Smith e, M.K. Smith e, E. Stech e,
B. Stefanek a,c, W.P. Tan e, X.D. Tang e, M. Wiescher e
a
National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
b
Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
c
Department of Physics & Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
d
Department of Chemistry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
e
Department of Physics and The Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA
f
Department of Physics, Hope College, Holland, MI 49423, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: High demand for nuclear reaction cross-section measurements relevant for astrophysical processes
Received 20 September 2012 requires the development of new experimental techniques that allow for investigation of, often very
Accepted 12 November 2012 low, cross-sections. For this purpose, a new 4p Summing NaI(Tl) detector (SuN) has been constructed,
Available online 20 November 2012
which is an 8-fold segmented NaI(Tl) barrel read by 24 photomultipliers. The design of the detector will
Keywords: be presented and detailed results of the commissioning experiments utilizing standard calibration
27
Gamma spectroscopy sources and known Alðp, gÞ28 Si resonances will be discussed.
Summing technique & 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Sodium iodide
Resonance strength

1. Introduction
Since the first description of nucleosynthesis [1], great
advancement in the understanding of stellar nucleosynthesis
processes has been made. These processes often involve ðp, gÞ
and ða, gÞ reactions and their inverse (photodisintegration). For the
proper description of these processes, greater knowledge of ðp, gÞ
and ða, gÞ reaction cross-sections within the appropriate Gamow
window is necessary.
There are several gamma detection techniques that are used
for measurements of radiative capture cross-sections. One of the
most common is the activation technique, which is used widely
for astrophysical applications (e.g. [2–4]). For this technique, a
sample of a target material is first irradiated with a proton or
alpha beam of a given energy to produce a radioactive final
nucleus. The sample is then placed in a counting station, where it
is shielded from background radiation. The gamma rays emitted
n
Corresponding author at: National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
E-mail address: SimonA@nscl.msu.edu (A. Simon).
1
Current address: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA
94720, USA.
by the decaying nuclei are detected with high resolution detectors
and the reaction cross-section can be deduced from the intensity
of the emitted gamma lines. Recently the activation technique
was extended to the detection of characteristic X-rays for cases
where gamma-rays are not suitable for measurement [5]. The
activation technique is limited to reactions that result in an
unstable final nucleus.
Cross-sections for ðp, gÞ and ða, gÞ reactions can be also mea-
sured directly by detecting gamma rays from the deexcitation of
the final nucleus during the target irradiation. When a projectile
with a kinetic energy Ep is captured, it will populate an excited
state of energy Eentry ¼ Ecm þQ , where
mt
Ecm ¼ Ep ð1Þ
mt þmp
is the total kinetic energy in the center of mass system, Q is the
reaction Q-value and mt and mp denote target and projectile mass,
respectively. The created system will deexcite through the emis-
sion of gamma radiation. If an array of high resolution detectors is
placed around the target, individual gamma rays and their
angular distributions can be measured [6,7]. This technique can
provide insight into the gamma cascade patterns of the final
nucleus and as such its structure. The shortcomings of this
method are the low efficiency of the high resolution detectors

0168-9002/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2012.11.045
 A. Simon et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 703 (2013) 16–21 17

and the difficulty of obtaining the total cross-section from various

low intensity gamma decay channels in addition to overcoming
the beam induced background.
An alternative method for the measurement of capture reac-
tion cross-sections is the gamma summing technique [8,9]. In an
ideal case, when a large volume detector covering close to 4p
solid angle surrounds the target, the gamma rays from a single
cascade are fully absorbed within the detector. As a result, gamma
rays emitted during one cascade are summed to an energy equal
to the energy difference between the entry and ground states.
Thus, if the entry state decays to the ground state, the spectrum
comprises of only one peak, the so-called sum peak, at the energy
ES ¼ Q þ Ecm . Scintillator detectors are usually used with this
technique as their response time (typically on the order of
100 ns for NaI(Tl) [10]) ensures full absorption of all the gamma
rays emitted from a given cascade while allowing for high
detection efficiency. If the reaction Q-value or beam energy are
sufficient, the energy of the resulting sum peak is much greater
than the energy of room or beam-induced background. Thus, the
sum peak will be registered within the region of the gamma
spectrum where the background is low. This technique has
already been extensively used for investigations of various proton
and alpha capture reactions [9,11–14].
In this paper, a new gamma ray detector (SuN) that imple-
ments the gamma summing technique is introduced. In Section 2
the design of the detector is presented and the digital data
acquisition system that is used for signal processing is discussed.
Further, the results of the detector commissioning with standard
gamma sources (Section 3) and in-beam measurements (Section
5) are given. The procedure for determining the summing effi-
ciency is discussed in detail in Section 4.

2. The SuN detector and its data acquisition system

SuN (Summing NaI(Tl)) is a scintillator detector developed at the

National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory (NSCL) and manu-
factured by SCIONIX [15]. Its core is a cylinder, 16 in. in diameter
and 16 in. long, with a 1.8 in. diameter bore hole along its axis. The
cylinder comprised two separate halves enclosed in aluminium
casings that allow for placing the detector around a beam line.
Within the two aluminium casings, each of the halves is additionally
divided into four optically isolated segments separated by 0.5 mm
aluminium plates covered with 0.25 mm reflecting material. A
schematic view of the detector is shown in Fig. 1.
Schematics of the SuN data acquisition system is presented in
Fig. 2. Each of the segments is read by three photomultipliers
positioned within the segment in a way that results in equal
spacing of 601 between the PMTs around the beam line when the
SuN detector is closed. A WIENER MPOD HV power supply
provides stable voltage to all the PMTs. The power supply can
be controlled by means of Simple Network Management Protocol Fig. 1. Schematic drawing of the SuN detector (top) and a cross-section (bottom)
(SNMP) commands, which provide a fast and precise way to gain where the optically isolated segments can be seen.
match all of the 24 channels. Additionally, a PHP based interface
serves as a user-friendly tool for monitoring and adjusting power
supply operating parameters. The photomultiplier signals are sent the gamma rays from a decay cascade. Data is recorded based on
to a dedicated amplifier/splitter module manufactured by Pico either independently self-triggered channels or the coincidence
Systems, from which they are directly fed into the NSCL Digital between an independently self-triggered channel and an exter-
Data Acquisition System (DDAS) [16,17]. nally input signal. In both cases, the data from channels are
DDAS is a 100 MSPS digitizer utilizing 16-channel PXI based timestamped (48-bit timestamp running at 100 MHz) and events
XIA LLC modules [18]. The firmware loaded to the modules are reconstructed in software based on user definable coinci-
allows for registering both energy and time information as well dence window.
as traces of individual signals. An important advantage of DDAS The SuN Data Acquisition System includes three DDAS modules,
is the wide dynamic range of accepted signals that allows for two of which are triggered with an external trigger signal and the
detection of gamma rays in a range from a few tens of keV up to third one operates in self-triggering mode. The externally triggered
several tens of MeV, which is crucial for proper summing of all DDAS modules record data directly from the photomultipliers, while
18 A. Simon et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 703 (2013) 16–21

Fig. 2. Schematic of the SuN electronics. Signals from all the PMTs are sent to DDAS while signals from the middle PMTs are additionally used as an external trigger signal
to reduce low-energy backgrounds. The third module is self-trigger and records the trigger signal spectrum for dead time corrections.

7
1000
6
resolution [%]

4 500
Cs 662 keV line
3 Co 1173 keV line
Co 1332 keV line
2 Co 2505 keV - sum peak
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
segment number
1500
number of counts

Fig. 3. Resolution of the individual segments of the SuN detector obtained for
137
Cs and 60Co sources. Error bars are within the size of the data points.
1000

the self-triggered one is mainly used as an independent dead time
monitor. The external trigger is generated by summing the signals
from the center PMTs from all the segments in a multiplicity
summing amplifier. This sum signal is fed into a constant fraction
discriminator whose output (after conversion from NIM to TTL)
triggers the DDAS modules that work in external trigger mode. This
ensures reduction of the low energy background in the gamma-ray
energy spectra from individual photomultipliers without eliminat-
ing true events. The sum signal is also used as an input signal for
two of the DDAS modules—one of the externally triggered and the
other self-triggered. Comparison of the number of counts in the
sum-peak region of these two signals serves as an independent
monitor of DDAS dead time.
3. Resolution and summing efficiency tests with standard
gamma sources
The resolution of individual channels and the detection effi-
ciency were tested with standard point-like 137Cs and 60Co
gamma sources. For individual segments an average resolutions
of 6.1(2)% and 5.8(2)% were obtained for the 662 keV 137Cs line
and single gamma lines (1173 and 1332 keV) from 60Co source,
respectively. The resolution of the individual segments is shown
in Fig. 3.
The 60Co source emits two gamma rays, 1173 and 1332 keV, in
coincidence, providing a simple way to test the summing effi-
ciency of the detector. Typical 60Co spectra registered by a single
segment, half of the detector and the whole SuN array are shown
in Fig. 4. With an increasing solid angle coverage the ratio of the
sum-peak height to the height of single 60Co gamma lines
increases and, for the data obtained with the whole detector,
the sum peak dominates the spectrum. For each of the cases the
obtained spectrum is very well reproduced by GEANT4 simula-
tions, also shown in Fig. 4.
500
0
3000
2000
1000
0
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
E [keV]
Fig. 4. 60Co gamma spectra obtained from a single segment, half of the array and
the whole SuN detector. Experimental results (black dotted line) are in a very good
agreement with GEANT4 simulations (solid blue line). (a) Single segment, (b) Top
half of the detector and (c) Total sum. (For interpretation of the references to color
in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Summing efficiencies of 85(2)% for 137Cs and 65(2)% for the 60Co
sum peak were obtained when the sources were placed at the center
of the SuN detector. Fig. 5 shows the summing efficiency obtained
experimentally for the 60Co source compared with GEANT4 simula-
tion as a function of source position within the detector. The
efficiency is almost constant within 20 mm distance from the
detector center, which implies that the summing technique will not
be very sensitive to the exact position of the target inside the detector.
A slight decrease in the efficiency for the source at the center of the
detector is due to the aluminium separating the segments. For
distances greater than 20 mm, the efficiency slowly decreases with
the increasing distance of the source from the detector center, due to
the decrease in the solid angle covered by the detector.
 A. Simon et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 703 (2013) 16–21 19

80 differently among the emitted gamma rays. This will result in a

experiment different response of the detector as the higher energy gamma
70 GEANT4 rays may interact with multiple segments resulting in a higher
60 value of the hit pattern centroid. Thus, for example, for
ES ¼ 10 MeV and /MS ¼ 2, the combination of 1þ9 MeV gamma
εΣ [%]

50 rays will have the /NS S ¼ 3:18ð1Þ while for two 5 MeV gamma
40 rays /NS S ¼ 3:31ð1Þ. The relation between the hit pattern cen-
troid and average gamma cascade multiplicity for a wide range of
30 the sum-peak energies was investigated using GEANT4 simula-
20 tions. The results for ES ¼ 10 MeV are shown in Fig. 7. For each of
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 the values of /MS various combinations of the energies of the
source position [mm] individual gamma rays were assumed, resulting in a range of
/N S S for each /MS.
Fig. 5. Efficiency of the SuN detector obtained for 60Co source as a position of the
The summing efficiency of the SuN detector as a function of
source along the SuN axis. The uncertainties are mainly due to the uncertainty of
the gamma source intensity. Solid line denotes GEANT4 simulations. the hit pattern centroid /NS S obtained from GEANT4 simulations
is shown in Fig. 8. The efficiency decreases with increasing /MS
and increasing sum-peak energy. Additionally, it can be noted
×103 that at a given ES energy for each value of /MS, the data points
form bands that cover a range of up to 20% of the efficiency value.
<M> = 2
15 However, the hit pattern centroid provides a sensitive tool for
number of counts

<M> = 3
measuring the detection efficiency within the same value of /MS,
which reduces the uncertainty of eS to less than 10%.
10

5 5. In-beam commissioning of the SuN detector

In-beam commissioning of the SuN detector was performed at

0 the FN Tandem Van de Graaff Accelerator at the Nuclear Science
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 27
NS
Laboratory, University of Notre Dame. Well-known Alðp, gÞ28 Si
resonances in the proton energy range of 2–4 MeV were investi-
Fig. 6. GEANT4 simulation of a hit pattern distribution for /MS ¼ 2 and /MS ¼ 3 gated using a 74:7ð3:7Þ mg=cm2 thick self-supporting aluminium
for ES ¼ 10 MeV obtained for a case when the total energy is divided equally target. The targets were created in the Detector Laboratory of the
among the emitted gamma rays. Solid black lines denote Gaussian fits that are NSCL and their thicknesses were measured at the Hope College
used to determine the hit pattern centroid.

4.5
4. Summing efficiency
4
As it was shown during earlier measurements utilizing the
<NS>

3.5
gamma summing technique [9], the most crucial part of the data
analysis is the proper determination of the summing efficiency eS , 3
which depends not only on the sum-peak energy but also on the
average multiplicity /MS of the decay cascade. However, in most 2.5
cases the level scheme of the investigated nucleus is not known,
thus it is impossible to determine /MS analytically. In the 1 2 3 4 5
previous work [9] the average multiplicity was estimated by <M>
means of the so-called ‘‘in/out’’ method. In the present paper an Fig. 7. Hit pattern centroid as a function of the average decay cascade multiplicity
alternative way of determining /MS is introduced, taking advan- /MS for ES ¼ 10 MeV obtained from GEANT4 simulations. The uncertainties of the
tage of the detector segmentation. /N S S are within the size of the data markers.
Information about /MS can be obtained from the distribution
of the gamma rays from a single decay cascade among the
segments—the hit pattern. With increasing multiplicity of the EΣ = 7 MeV
50 <M> = 1
cascade, the number of segments that ‘‘fired’’ during one event EΣ = 11 MeV
(NS) increases. Thus, the centroid of the hit pattern distribution <M> = 2
EΣ = 15 MeV
40
ð/N S SÞ will shift towards higher values. A sample distribution of
εΣ [%]

the hit pattern is shown in Fig. 6. The figure shows a simulation of <M> = 3
30
two gamma cascades of the same sum-peak energy ES ¼ 10 MeV <M> = 4
but different average multiplicities (/MS ¼ 2 and /MS ¼ 3). For 20 <M> = 5
this case, values of /N S S ¼ 3:30ð1Þ and /NS S ¼ 3:96ð1Þ were
obtained for /MS ¼ 2 and /MS ¼ 3, respectively. The difference 10
in the total number of events for each of the distributions is due
2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
to a different summing efficiency for the two different average
<NS>
multiplicities.
For reactions that have the same average multiplicity /MS Fig. 8. Summing efficiency of the SuN detector as a function of the average
and ES , slightly different positions of the hit pattern centroid number of hits /N S S for various sum-peak energies. The uncertainties of eS and
/NS S may be obtained, as the energy ES may be distributed /N S S are within the size of the data points.
20 A. Simon et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 703 (2013) 16–21

Ion Beam Analysis Laboratory (HIBAL) using the Rutherford
Backscattering (RBS) technique. The targets were irradiated with
a proton beam in 1–2 keV steps in the resonance energy region.
Since the summing efficiency depends on both the total energy
ðES Þ and the average decay cascade multiplicity /MS, resonances
with known /MS were investigated. The resonance gamma
spectra were reproduced with GEANT4 simulations using 28Si
decay schemes from Refs. [22,23]. In Fig. 9(a) a sample sum
27
spectrum obtained experimentally for the Alðp, gÞ28 Si resonance
at Ep ¼2517 keV is compared with GEANT4 simulations.
Fig. 9(b) of this figure shows a spectrum registered by individual
segments which is sensitive to the details of the decay cascade.
Both spectra are in excellent agreement with GEANT4 simula-
tions. Similarly, excellent agreement was observed for all the
resonances studied in the present work. For each of the investi-
gated resonances, the summing efficiency as a function of the hit
pattern centroid for the sum-peak energy of the given resonance
was obtained using GEANT4 simulations. Fig. 9(c) shows the sum-
peak efficiency as a function of /NS S for the 2517 keV resonance
together with a linear fit to the simulated values. The experi-
mental position of the hit pattern centroid at /NS S ¼ 4:01ð1Þ for
this particular resonance is also shown indicating the summing
efficiency of 21.1(1.2)%, where the uncertainty of the summing
efficiency was determined from the fitting procedure. The proce-
dure described above was used to determine the resonance
27
strength of 11 resonances in the Alðp, gÞ28 Si reaction.
400
300
200
number of counts
The resonance strength Sp is defined as
Sp ¼ ogð2J p þ 1Þð2Jt þ 1Þ ð2Þ
where Jp and Jt denote total projectile and target spin, respec-
tively, and og can be calculated from the integral of the excitation
curve using the finite target thickness formula:
Ag 2
og ¼ ð3Þ
eS n l2r
where Ag is the area under the resonance yield curve, n is the
target thickness, and lr is the de Broglie wavelength at the
resonance energy. The results are presented in Fig. 10 and
summarized in Table 1. The uncertainty of the resonance
strengths obtained with the SuN detector includes statistical
uncertainty as well as the uncertainty resulting from subtraction
of the background under the sum-peak. These errors, together
with the uncertainty of the total collected beam charge of 5%,
were propagated through the procedure of integration of the
excitation curve for the given resonance to obtain Ag . The
uncertainty in the target thickness of 5% was also included in
the total uncertainty of the resonance strength. For each of the
resonances, the uncertainty of the summing efficiency was
obtained using the procedure described in Section 4. The results
were compared to two compilations of data [19–21]. It can be
noticed that for most of the investigated resonances the strengths
obtained using the SuN detector are in agreement with those
from Ref. [19]. In the case of the resonance at Ep ¼2374 keV, the
current measurement was not able to reproduce the strength
from Ref. [19], but agreed with the value from Refs. [20,21].

SuN detector
100 40
Endt, Nucl. Phys. A 633 (1998) 1
NACRE database
0 30
Sp [eV]

80
20
60
10
40
0
20 2500 3000 3500 4000
Ep keV
0
4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 Fig. 10. Comparison of the resonance strengths obtained using SuN detector
E [keV] (red squares) with those published in [19] (black circles) and [20,21] (black
triangles). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
40
Table 1
30 Comparison of the resonance strengths obtained using SuN detector with those
εΣ [%]

found in literature.

20 Ep (keV) Sp (eV)

SuN detector Endt [19] NACRE [20,21]

10
2303.1 3.30 (60) 1.60 (48) 2.6 (1.3)
2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 2311.9 10.1 (1.8) 6.7 (1.3) 6.72 (84)
2359.9 2.8 (0.5) 5.4 (1.6) 1.32 (48)
<NS>
2373.8 3.9 (0.7) 26.0 (7.8) 4.2 (1.2)
2517.7 14.6 (2.1) 16 (3) 17.2 (1.9)
Fig. 9. Comparison of the experimentally obtained spectrum with GEANT4 2675.5 4.7 (1.0) 7.2 (1.4) 7.32 (84)
27 28
simulations for Alðp, gÞ Si resonance at Ep ¼ 2517 keV obtained with (a) the 2711.7 16.1 (2.2) 14 (3) 15.5 (3.0)
whole SuN detector and (b) one segment only. (c) The procedure of estimating the 3338.4 3.6 (7) 4.3 (9) 4.2 (8)
summing efficiency. Solid line – best fit to the simulation results (open circles), red 3674.9 33.3 (4.6) 35 (7) 33.5 (6.7)
square denotes the hit pattern centroid and corresponding efficiency for the 3791.7 11.9 (1.6) 7.3 (1.5) 7.1 (1.7)
2517 keV resonance (see text for details). (For interpretation of the references to 3960.8 5.4 (8) 3.3 (7) 3.2 (6)
color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
 A. Simon et al. / Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 703 (2013) 16–21
6. Conclusions
In this paper, a new segmented gamma summing NaI(Tl)
detector – SuN – was presented. SuN is ideal for the investigation
of ðp, gÞ and ða, gÞ reactions relevant for various nucleosynthesis
processes. The segmentation of the detector provides additional
information correlated with the average multiplicity /MS of the
decay cascade—the hit pattern centroid /NS S. This parameter
allows for the estimate of the summing efficiency with less than
10% relative uncertainty. The summing efficiency of the detector
was tested with both standard gamma sources and using known
27
Alðp, gÞ28 Si resonances. The results of the measurement are in
excellent agreement with GEANT4 simulations that can be used
as a tool to estimate the summing efficiency for various sum-peak
energies and average multiplicities. The obtained resonance
27
strengths for Alðp, gÞ28 Si resonances were in a good agreement
with these given in literature.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Renan Fontus, John Yurkon, Jerry
Lingle, and Matthew Sanford for their help with the preparation of
the commissioning experiment. This work was supported by the
National Science Foundation under Grants No. PHY-1102511 and
PHY-0822648 (Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics).
References
[1] E.M. Burbidge, G.R. Burbidge, W.A. Fowler, F. Hoyle, Reviews of Modern
Physics 29 (1957) 547.
[2] N. Özkan, A. Murphy, R. Boyd, A. Cole, M. Famiano, R. Güray, M. Howard,
L. S- ahin, J. Zach, R. deHaan, J. Görres, M. Wiescher, M. Islam, T. Rauscher,
Nuclear Physics A 710 (2002) 496.
21
[3] W. Rapp, M. Heil, D. Hentschel, F. Käppeler, R. Reifarth, Physical Review C 66
(2002) 015803.
[4] M. Famiano, R.S. Kodikara, B.M. Giacherio, V.G. Subramanian, A. Kayani,
Nuclear Physics A 802 (2008) 26.
[5] G.G. Kiss, T. Rauscher, T. Szücs, Z. Kertész, Z. Fülöp, G. Gyürky, C. Fröhlich,
J. Farkas, Z. Elekes, E. Somorjai, Physical Letters B 695 (2011) 419.
[6] S. Harissopulos, E. Skreti, P. Tsagari, G. Souliotis, P. Demetriou, T. Paradellis,
J.W. Hammer, R. Kunz, C. Angulo, S. Goriely, T. Rauscher, Physical Review C 64
(2001) 055804.
[7] S. Galanopoulos, P. Demetriou, M. Kokkoris, S. Harissopulos, R. Kunz, M. Fey,
J.W. Hammer, G. Gyürky, Z. Fülop, E. Somorjai, S. Goriely, Physical Review C
67 (2003) 015801.
[8] P. Tsagari, M. Kokkoris, E. Skreti, A.G. Karydas, S. Harissopulos, T. Paradellis,
P. Demetriou, Physical Review C 64 (2001) 015802.
[9] A. Spyrou, H.-W. Becker, A. Lagoyannis, S. Harissopulos, C. Rolfs, Physical
Review C 76 (2007) 015802.
[10] L.M. Bollinger, G.E. Thomas, Review of Scientific Instruments 32 (1961) 1044.
[11] S. Harissopulos, C. Chronidou, K. Spyrou, T. Paradellis, C. Rolfs, W. Schulte,
H.W. Becker, European Physical Journal A 9 (2000) 479.
[12] S. Harissopulos, A. Lagoyannis, A. Spyrou, C. Zarkadas, S. Galanopoulos,
G. Perdikakis, H.-W. Becker, C. Rolfs, F. Strieder, R. Kunz, M. Fey,
J.W. Hammer, A. Dewald, K.-O. Zell, P. von Brentano, R. Julin, P. Demetriou,
Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 31 (2005) S1417.
[13] A. Spyrou, A. Lagoyannis, P. Demetriou, S. Harissopulos, H.-W. Becker,
Physical Review C 77 (2008) 06589.
[14] D. Robertson, J. Görres, P. Collon, M. Wiescher, H.-W. Becker, Physical Review
C 85 (2012) 045810.
[15] SCIONIX, /www.scionix.nl S, 2012.
[16] K. Starosta, C. Vaman, D. Miller, P. Voss, D. Bazin, T. Glasmacher, H. Crawford,
P. Mantica, H. Tan, W. Henning, M. Walby, A. Fallu-Labruyere, J. Harris,
D. Breus, P. Grudberg, W.K. Warburton, NNuclear Instruments and Methods
in Physics Research Section A 610 (2009) 700.
[17] C. Prokop, et al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research
Section A, in preparation.
[18] XIA LLC, /www.xia.comS, 2012.
[19] P.M. Endt, Nuclear Physics A 633 (1998) 1.
[20] C. Angulo, M. Aronuld, M. Rayet, P. Descouvemont, D. Baye, C. Leclercq-
Willain, A. Coc, S. Barhoumi, P. Aguer, C. Rolfs, et al., Nuclear Physics A 656
(1999) 3.
[21] NACRE database, pntpm3.ulb.ac.be/Nacre/nacre.htm, 2012.
[22] J. Brenneisen, D. Grathwohl, M. Lickert, R. Ott, H. Roepke, J. Schmaelzlin,
P. Siedle, B.H. Wildenthal, Zeitschrift für Physik A 352 (1995) 149.
[23] M.A. Meyer, I. Venter, D. Reitmann, Nuclear Physics A 250 (1975) 235.