A study on $^{7}$Li + $^{120}$Sn quasi-elastic scattering

Abstract

In the present study, we reexamine quasi-elastic scattering of 7 Li by 120 Sn at incident energies E Lab = 19.5, 20.5, and 25.0 MeV. The theoretical results are obtained by using both a phenomenological model and double-folding model (DFM) within the framework of an optical model. We also investigate the role of the surface potential, which is connected to direct reactions. The agreement between the phenomenological model and the DFM is shown in comparison to each other in connection with the experimental data. This comparison provides information about the similarities and the differences between the models used during the calculations.

A Theoretical Analysis of Quasi-elastic Scattering of 7Li by 120Sn Using Various Nuclear Potentials

“…In general sense, while the potentials are in agreement with each other at forwards angles, the results differ from each other at backwards angles. Finally, the results for all the potentials investigated with this work have been presented in comparison with the DFM results [8]. It has been seen that E-E and WS-WS and DFM results are generally very close to each other at forwards angles and the DFM results are slightly better than the results of E-E and WS-WS potentials.…”

“…The experimental data have been analyzed by using the São Paulo Potential (SPP) within the framework of the optical model (OM). For this system, Aygun et al [8] have conducted a theoretical study via phenomenological and double folding potentials and have obtained good agreement results with the experimental data. Zagatto et al [9] have performed coupled channels (CC) and coupled reaction channels (CRC) calculations in order to explain the measured data of 7 Li + 120 Sn reaction.…”

“…The smallest χ 2 /N value was found for G-G potential. Also, the results have been compared with the theoretical results obtained by using the double folding model (DFM) by Aygun et al [8]. It has been observed that G-G, Y-Y and WS 2 -WS 2 results are in better agreement with the experimental data than the DFM results.…”

“…Also, this situation can be seen from χ 2 /N values. In addition, the results have been compared with the DFM results [8]. It has been noticed that while the DFM results are similar to the other potential results at forward angles, they are different from each other at backward angles.…”