4.4 Article

Double difference method in deep inelastic neutron scattering on the VESUVIO spectrometer

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-9002(02)01921-6

Keywords

neutron absorption; instrumentation; spectroscopic technique; momentum distribution

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The principles of the Double Difference (DD) method, applied to the neutron spectrometer VESUVIO, are discussed. VESUVIO, an inverse geometry spectrometer operating at the ISIS pulsed neutron source in the eV energy region, has been specifically designed to measure the single particle dynamical properties in condensed matter. The width of the nuclear resonance of the absorbing filter, used for the neutron energy analysis, provides the most important contribution to the energy resolution of the inverse geometry instruments. In this paper, the DD method, which is based on a linear combination of two measurements recorded with filter foils of the same resonance material but of different thickness, is shown to improve significantly the instrumental energy resolution, as compared with the Single Difference (SD) method. The asymptotic response functions, derived through Monte-Carlo simulations for polycrystalline Pb and ZrH2 samples, are analysed in both DD and SD methods, and compared with the experimental ones for Pb sample. The response functions have been modelled for two distinct experimental configurations of the VESUVIO spectrometer, employing Li-6-glass neutron detectors and NaI gamma detectors revealing the gamma-ray cascade from the (n, gamma) reaction, respectively. The DD method appears to be an effective experimental procedure for Deep Inelastic Neutron Scattering measurements on VESUVIO spectrometer, since it reduces the experimental resolution of the instrument in both Li-6-glass neutron detector and gamma detector configurations. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available