Compilation and systematics of proton-induced fission cross-section data

Prokofiev, Alexander V.

doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(01)00170-x

Cited by 82 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our value is 55% higher than the one obtained by E. Hagebø and T. Lund [46] σ f = 149 ± 6 mb from the integration of the mass distribution in the reaction nat P b + p at 600 MeV. A systematics obtained from the evaluation of different experiments on 208 P b and nat P b at different energies has recently been proposed by Prokofiev [43]. According to it, the total fission cross-section induced by protons at 500 A MeV of 208 P b is 118 mb.…”

Section: Total Fission Cross-sectionsupporting

confidence: 40%

“…However, it has to be noticed that the γ-spectrometry measurements have been done with a natural lead target at 553 MeV. The difference in the energy should not lead to significant differences if one refers to Prokofiev's systematics [43]. The average fissility of the natural lead is expected to be higher than the one of the isotope 208 since the average mass is 207.2.…”

Section: Comparison With Direct-kinematics Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This difference should be taken into account in the comparison of the cross-sections. According to [43], the ratio of the total fission cross-section induced by protons between natural lead and the isotope 208 has been estimated to be 1.1. Therefore, the value of the ratio should be increased by this value in the average.…”

Section: Comparison With Direct-kinematics Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This value is about a factor 2 lower than the one measured here. Note that in the systematics of reference [43], there are no experimental points for the total fission cross-sections of 208 P b between 100 A MeV and 1000 A MeV bombarding energies, while for nat P b there is only the one from Hagebø et al [46], the uncertainty associated to this measurement was estimated to be 20% in [43]. From the comparison between Gloris et al [16] and our data, done in section 3.2, it was concluded that their crosssections were 1.22 smaller than ours.…”

Section: Total Fission Cross-sectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Nuclide cross-sections of fission fragments in the reaction 208Pb + p at 500 A MeV

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The isotopic distributions and recoil velocities of the fission fragments produced in the spallation reaction 208 P b + p at 500 A MeV have been measured using the inverse-kinematics technique, a lead beam onto a liquid-hydrogen target, and the high-resolution spectrometer FRS at GSI. The shapes of the different distributions are found in good agreement with previously published data while the deduced total fission cross-section is higher than expected from existing systematics and some previous measurements. From the experimental data, the characteristics of the average fissioning system can be reconstructed in charge, mass and excitation energy, and the average number of post-fission neutrons can be inferred. The results are also compared to different models describing the spallation reaction. The intranuclear cascade code INCL4 followed by the de-excitation code ABLA is shown to describe reasonably well the evolution of the isotopic distribution shapes between 500 and 1000 A MeV.

show abstract

Section: Total Fission Cross-sectionsupporting

confidence: 40%

Section: Comparison With Direct-kinematics Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison With Direct-kinematics Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Total Fission Cross-sectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Nuclide cross-sections of fission fragments in the reaction 208Pb + p at 500 A MeV

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fission cross sections measured at such energies in different experiments differ so significantly from each other that it is difficult to use such data in development and validation of models and codes, without a special analysis of all details of every measurement. Fortunately, this has been done by Prokofiev [17] so we use his results. At our energies, we consider Prokofiev's systematics as the most reliable "experimental" fission cross sections and prefer to use them to develop and test our codes instead of using experimental values published in original publications by different authors.…”

Section: Calculation Of Fission Cross Sectionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

MCNP6 updated proton-induced fission cross section calculations at intermediate energies

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. MCNP6 has been Validated and Verified against intermediate-and high-energy fission crosssection experimental data. Recent improvements contained in CEM03.03F and MCNP6-F to consider precompound emission of heavy clusters up to 28 Mg has necessitated a re-calculation of fission cross sections. With our re-calculation, we find that CEM03.03F, which is used in MCNP6-F, predicts fission cross sections in good agreement with available experimental data for reactions induced by protons on both subactinide and actinide nuclei at incident energies from several tens of MeV to several GeV.

show abstract

Analysis of the main nuclear-physical characteristics of the interaction of proton beams with heavy metal targets

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is shown that the concept of relativistic heavy-nuclear energy is untenable. Using a large group of different experiments in the proton energy range 0. it is demonstrated that the high-energy hadron transport program SHIELD, which is based on modern nuclear models, has predictive power. The interaction of protons with energy ranging from 0.1 to 100 GeV with a simple model system target + blanket, containing heavy elements (lead, thorium, depleted and enriched uranium), is examined. The energy release, neutron production, and production of fissile isotopes in the system are calculated. It is found that for all values of the proton energy which are considered the useful yield of energy in weakly fissile media is inadequate (thorium, depleted uranium) and is completely absent in non-fissile media (lead). A blanket containing enriched uranium will be necessary in order to use the scheme for useful production of energy. In this variant, the optimal proton energy is 1-3 GeV, which corresponds to the conventional concept of electronuclear facilities whose main purpose is to transmute nuclear wastes and produce electricity at the same time.The concept of commercial production of energy using accelerators to accelerate heavy charged particles has been discussed since the beginning of the 1950s. According to this concept, a beam of protons or ions with sufficiently high energy should generate a large number of neutrons on interacting with a heavy target. Facilities which function according to this principle are said to be electronuclear facilities. The accelerator must be a high-current accelerator in order to produce more neutrons, and for this reason the target is a complicated technical system. An advantage of electronuclear facilities over conventional nuclear reactors is that there is no possibility of reactivity accidents.

show abstract

Compilation and systematics of proton-induced fission cross-section data

Cited by 82 publications

References 54 publications

Nuclide cross-sections of fission fragments in the reaction 208Pb + p at 500 A MeV

Nuclide cross-sections of fission fragments in the reaction 208Pb + p at 500 A MeV

MCNP6 updated proton-induced fission cross section calculations at intermediate energies

Analysis of the main nuclear-physical characteristics of the interaction of proton beams with heavy metal targets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About