Compton Scattering

Author: Alexander Zderic

Partner: Kelly Olsen

Introduction

In this lab we studied the angular dependence of Compton scattering on photon

energy. Compton scattering is one of the earliest examples of the application of
quantization. Although it was discovered in 1923 it remains important to contemporary physics, e.g. inverse Compton scattering in the SunyaevZeldovich
effect. Also, we will explore how material thickness effects photon cross-section,
and its relationship to electron density in the material in question. Compton scattering is a straightforward concept and the methods we will use are
straightforward as well, but its worth developing an intimate understanding of
the concept if only to walk in the footsteps of those before us.

Theory

Compton scattering, discovered by, no surprise, Compton, is described by the

following equation:
h
(1 cos )
(1)
0 =
me c
This equation relates a photons wavelength before, , and after, 0 an elastic
collision with an electron to the angle, , with which the photon left the collision.
me is the mass of an electron, h is Planks constant, and c is the speed of light.
The relationship between energy and wavelength for light is,
E=

hc

(2)

Combining (1) and (2), we can get a relationship between angle and photon
energy,
E0E
me c2
=
0
EE
1 cos
or,


E
me c2
E0 =
me c 2
1 cos E + 1cos

or,
0

E =E

me c2
(E + me c2 ) E cos


(3)

In the lab we calculate scattered photon energy for a number of different angles,
and plot the data. Then this plot of data can be compared to a graph of (3) to
see how well our data compares to the theoretical description.
We will also determine the relationship between material density and thickness and photon cross-section. The transmission rate of gamma rays through a
material of thickness x is given by,
I(x) = I0 e
1

x/

(4)

Where is the mean free path between scattering events, and I0 is the incident
scattering rate. is also related to the Compton scattering cross-section, c ,
c =

1
ne

(5)

If we take data on photon rate for different thicknesses of Lucite (a plastic) we

should be able to fit an exponential to the data to obtain a value for . With
some knowledge about the density and chemical composition of Lucite we can
get a number for ne . From this we can calculate c .
In this lab we fit Gaussian functions to a number of spectrums. To calculate
the uncertainty from the FWHM we use the equation F W HM = 2.355. Also,
to determine the scattering cross-section we must integrate our Gaussian fits.
To expedite this process we can use the general formula,
r
Z

a(x+b)2
(6)
c0 e
dx = c0
a

The fitting program fits to an exponential of the form,

2

c0 e((xb)/c)

ln 2

+d

We can ignore d (it is determined by the background which we dont care about
here), therefore a from equation 6 is ln(2)
c2 . The integrals of the fits can be
calculated this way.
We will also need to calculate the solid angle of a number of objects in
reference to the source. To do this we will use the equation,
=

A
d2

d is the distance between the source and the object, while A is the 2D area of the
object as seen from the source. All our object will have circular cross-sections
so we can simplify this to,
r2
= 2
d

Description of Apparatus

Our gamma ray source was a 137 Cs source similar to what has been used in
previous labs. This was loaded into a circular metal tube encased in lead blocks.
There is a smallish hole in one of the lead blocks near the opening of the metal
tube. On the other side of the hole is a vertically oriented plastic scintillator
detector. Away from the plastic scintillator a NaI scintillator is attached to
a swiveling mount that can be moved around in a horizontal circle with the
plastic scintillator at the center. There are markings around the circle such
that the position of the NaI scintillator can be set to a specific angle. The
plastic scintillator will be used to register that a photon has scattered on it,
2

and set such that the NaI output is sent to the PHA when there is a coinciding
pulse on each detector.

Figure 1: NaI detector (far left), lead brick box, plastic scintillator (red), and
turntable (big silver disk)
The electronics were connected with coaxial cables (BNC or LEMO), and
scope traces were properly terminated. A normal two channel analog oscilloscope was used. We used a dual gate generator, discriminator, Ortec 575A
pulse-shaping amplifier, preamp, and a ccmputer. The preamp and Ortec amplifier were used to boost the signal of the NaI detector to be analyzed by PHA
software on the computer. The discriminator and gate generator are used to allow coincidence between the plastic detector and the sodium detector, by adding
a proper amount of delay and changing the size of the pulses.

Figure 2: Left to Right: Ortec amp, discriminator, and dual gate generator.

Procedure

4.1

Prepping the Electronics

Turn on the scope and power up the detectors (+1000V for the NaI and
+750V for the plastic).
Obtain a 22 Na source and place it the same distance, at least 10 cm, from
each detector.
Observe the output of the detectors on the scope (terminate with 50 to
make sure that the detectors are operating properly.
Once the detectors seem to be operating properly, attach the NaI detector
output to the preamp and then the pulse-shaping amplifier.
Set the pulse-shaping amplifier to output a positive going pulse with a
max amplitude of about 7 V (dont terminate here).
Adjust the Pole-zero screw on the shaping amplifier to obtain a pulse
with no over- or undershoot.
The output of the shaping amplifier is then connected to Ch 0 on the
back of the computer.
The plastic scintillator output is connected to the discriminator, the discriminator threshold is set at 30 mV, and the pulse width is set at about
30 ns.

4.2

Setting up the Coincidence Pulse

The output of the discriminator should be attached to the Start input

of the upper gate generator channel.
Connect the NIM output from the upper channel to the Start of the
lower output of the gate generator.
Connect the NIM output of the lower gate generator channel to the scope
and view the pulse.
Both the shaping amplifier output and the gate generator output should
be visible.
Adjust the gate generator settings until the gate generator output encompasses the shaping amplifier output.
Then connect the TTL output on the back of the gate generator to Ch.
1 on the back of he computer.

4.3

Calibrating the PHA

The computer PHA software must be set to take pulses only from channel
0.
Place a 137 Cs source near enough to the NaI detector to get a solid response, but not too many pulses to swamp the detector.
While viewing the output of the shaping amplifier on the scope adjust the
gain so the max peak height is about +8.5 V.
Take a spectrum of the source on the PHA and send it to another computer
to be analyzed during while taking other data
Repeat the above steps for

4.4

133

Ba and

22

Na.

Compton Scattering

Place the 137 Cs source in the metal tube that is incased in lead bricks such
that the black head of the source is flush with the opening of the metal
tube.
The detector positions should be adjusted such that the target (the plastic
scintillator) is 20 cm from the detector (the NaI scintillator), and the target
is 20 cm from the source.
With the PHA set on coincidence counting take spectrums with the detector at 80, 20, 140, 60, 120, 40, and 100.
The spectrums must be ran for at least 10 minutes to have quality data.
While spectrums are being taken, previous spectrums can be analyzed
with Gaussian distributions.
5

4.5

Compton Scattering Cross-section

Set the position of the NaI detector back to 0

Place a plastic slab such that it is covering the hole in the lead brick
enclosure.
Take PHA data for exactly 3 minutes.
Repeat above for different thicknesses of plastic slabs.
Analyze the data and fit Gaussian distributions to the photopeaks.

Data and Analysis

Spectrum Calibration
Our first step was to develop a calibration curve between photon energy and
peak height in the PHA software on the computer. To do this we obtained
spectrums from a number of radioactive sources with known photon energies,
and fit gaussian functions to their photopeaks. 137 Cs signal was set to about
such that the computer was receiving a max of 8.5 V pulses. From these fits
we obtained values for peak height and FWHM. From the FWHM we found
the uncertainty using the relationship described in the theory section of this lab
report.
Source
137
Cs
133
Ba
22
Na
137
Cs X-ray peak

Known (MeV)
0.662
0.356
0.511
0.0322

Measured Pulse Height

8.448611
4.663769
6.581777
0.478908

Uncertainty
0.14370276
0.09736603
0.126196178
0.024821656

These data points were used in a weighed fit in Mathematica. Here is a plot of
the data with the corresponding fit.

Figure 3: Calibration Curve

The equation for the line is 0.0701879 + 12.7471x. Uncertainties were given
by the fitting program. The parameters are then (b + ax): a = (12.75
0.08)V/MeV and b = (0.07 0.01)V. This slope will be used to convert pulse
height to photon energy for Compton scattered photons.

Exercise 1
The 60 Co source is the brightest source we have available to us in the lab.
This means its photons have the most energy giving us a brighter signal overall. However, the 60 Co source would be inappropriate for this lab because it
has two photon photopeaks of approximately the same energy. When used to
take Compton scattering data the two photons would interfere and skew the
scattering photopeak. The scattered photopeak data is already pretty messy,
and two photopeaks close together would only get closer after scattering. It
would be hard to discern the two closely-spaced, broadened photopeaks from
each other, and the fitting software would have a hell of a time fitting a Gaussian
distribution to the data. The cesium source is the next brightest source after
cobalt that we have available to us in the lab, and it only has one photopeak.
This makes it the ideal candidate for this experiment.

Exercise 2
The present activity of the cesium source is 63.51 Ci or 2.35 106 disintegrations per second. This corresponds to 2.35 106 photons created per second.
We will assume that all the photons that go through the hole in the brick hit
the target scintillator, and that the source radiates evenly in all directions on

the average. The distance between the hole and the source is (5.5 0.1) cm
and the radius of the hole is (1.3 0.1) cm. The solid angle of the hole is then,
target =

1.32
5.52

target = 0.1755 sr
6 photons
4 is the max solid angle so 0.1755
/sec = 3.28 104 photons/sec
4 (2.35 10 )
should be the number of photons that the target sees per second. The uncertainty is,
s

2
2

2
r +
d2
target =
r
d
s
2

2
2r
2r2
2
target =
r +
d2
d2
d3

target = 0.028 sr = 5200 photons/sec

P hotonRate = (3.2 0.5) 104 photons/sec
The detector is (39.5 0.1) cm away from the source and the detectors radius
is (2.8 0.1) cm. Therefore,
target =

target

2.82
39.52

target = 0.01578 sr
s
2

2
2r
2r2
2
=
r +
d2
d2
d3

target = 0.00113 sr = 211 photons/sec

P hotonRate = (2900 200) photons/sec
The fraction of counts on the target that the detector picks up should be the
ratio of the detectors counts to the targets counts. That is (9 1)% of the
photons that hit the target hit the detector.

Compton Fit
After completing the spectrum calibration, we took PHA data at a number of
different angles between 0 and 140 with the 137 Cs source. We fit Gaussian
distributions to the photopeaks of the spectrums we obtained.

Angle (Degrees) Peak Center (V) FWHM (V) Uncertainty (V)

120
3.021539
0.232215
0.098605096
60
5.196058
0.649893
0.275963057
140
2.707183
0.190858
0.081043737
20
8.41728
0.273152
0.11598811
80
4.200207
0.446816
0.189730786
0
8.448611
0.33842
0.14370276
40
6.145924
0.625749
0.265710828
100
3.509943
0.306643
0.130209
Corresponding Energy (MeV) Uncertainty (MeV)
0.237037365
0.007876542
0.407626676
0.021798968
0.212376384
0.006495348
0.660329016
0.0099942
0.329502946
0.015026493
0.662786908
0.012012715
0.482142919
0.021062207
0.275352276
0.01035925
The pulse height values were converted from V to MeV with the conversion
term found above. To do this we divided the peak center (pulse height) by the
(aka c)
conversion factor E = Pulse Height
. Also, uncertainties were distributed
a
using,
s
2

2
E
E
2
c +
a2
=
c
a
These points were then graphed with error bars in Mathematica. Equation (3)
was plotted on the same graph with me c2 = 0.510999 MeV and E = 0.662M eV .
Here is equation (3) rewritten,


0.510999
0
E = (0.662)
1.172999 0.662 cos
The graph of the fit is here,

Figure 4: Data plus error bars and theorectical function

As you can see, even though the error bars on the points dont always overlap
the theoretical function the data shares the general trend of the function. The
data at 20 is the outlier of the bunch. This could be because not all the photons
that were detected at that angle had scattered yet. The target was small and
relatively thin. At 20s the detector was still picking up photons coming directly
from the source. This moved the photopeak towards higher energy.
The count rates were higher for larger angles. This is because lower angle
Compton scattering doesnt deposit that much energy into the target. As such
it is less likely that the scintillator will become excited at this angle. As we were
using coincidence counting for this portion of the lab, the fewer the coincidence
pulses in the target the slower the counts accumulate.

Compton Scattering Cross-section

We took spectrums at 0 with varying thicknesses of Lucite plastic between the
source and the detector over a constant time period (3 minutes). If we integrate
the Gaussian distributions of the photopeaks we should be able to calculate the
number of photons that struck the detector in that time frame. This was done
using the method elaborated in the Theory section.

10

Number of Slabs
0
1
2
3
4
5

Thickness (cm)
0
1.1
2.2
3.3
4.4
5.5

c0
4298.415511
3875.51673
3419.291378
3217.38409
2818.782336
2505.383064

c
0.32358
0.318768
0.315751
0.328767
0.329851
0.333582

Area under Curve

2961.094909
2630.06569
2298.49259
2251.922244
1979.436656
1779.25833

The area under the curve is the number of photons that hit the detector in 3
minutes. Therefore, this is already in units of photons/time. This rate was then
plotted with its corresponding plastic thickness. An exponential fit of the form
of equation 4 was then fit to the points and a value for was determined. The
fit ended up being,
2961.09e0.0932369x
Where = (10.7 0.4)cm (the uncertainty was determined by the fitting software). The fit looks like so,

Figure 5:
We can get an idea for ne from the density of Lucite (1.18 g/cm3 ). The
chemical formula is (C5 O2 H8 )n , so the molar mass is (2(15.999) + 5(12.011)
+ 8(1.0079) = 100.1162)g/mol. Dividing the density by the molar mass we get
0.0117863 mol/cm3 . This corresponds to 7.095 1021 molecules/cm3 . There are
(2(16) + 5(12) + 8(1) = 100) electrons in each molecule. Therefore, there are
about 7.095 1023 electrons/cm3 . This is ne . Plugging ne and into equation
5 we get c = 1.317 1025 cm2 . This can be rewritten c = 131.7 mb. The

11

uncertainty on this can be propagated like so,

=

2 ne

= 5.62 1031 m2 = 5.6 mb

Therefore, our official value is,
c = (132 6) mb
The value in Leo for the Compton scattering cross-section with a photon of
0.662 MeV is about 1/3 of a barn. Our value doesnt agree, but we were liberal
in counting the number of electrons eligible for a scattering event. At least our
value is on the same order of magnitude.

Results

Our angle scattering data coincides pretty well with the expected theoretical
function. The one major outlier probably picked up non-scattered photons
directly from the source. Besides that the data points were all within one and a
half standard deviations of the theoretical function. Our value for the Compton
scattering cross-section does not agree with the literature value. However, we
are at least on the same order of magnitude. Our fit was not amazing, but it
wasnt awful. The reason for the difference between the literature value and
our calculated value probably lies in the calculation of ne . Maybe not all of the
electrons in the Lucite molecules can undergo Compton scattering with photons
of the energy of our source.

12