Electron capture, ionization and excitation cross sections for keV collisions between fully stripped ions and atomic hydrogen in ground and excited states

Abstract

Using a semiclassical close-coupling approach, we have calculated electron capture, excitation and ionization cross sections for collisions of fully stripped hydrogen, helium and lithium ions with atomic hydrogen in the ground state and in all excited states up to n=3. The cross sections for collision energies between 1 and 100 keV/u are given in table form. Furthermore, we provide estimates of the accuracy of the cross sections. The set of data presented in this work represent the first complete and consistent quantum study of these collision systems and will find use in the modeling and diagnosis of thermonuclear fusion plasma reactors.

Proton impact on ground and excited states of atomic hydrogen

“…However, the excitation cross sections for H(2s) collisions are larger in magnitude than those of H(1s) collisions. From the comparisons with previous results, it can be seen that the present TC-BGM calculations from 1 to 10 keV are mostly consistent with the AOCC-GTO [10], AOCC-PS and TDL results [8] and follow the WP-CCC [9] trends at higher energies while the discrepancies with AOCC-PS are more pronounced in this regime. Although the cross section curves from the CTMC calculations [8] have similar structures as the other results, quantitative differences in the intermediate [14].…”

“…Although the cross section curves from the CTMC calculations [8] have similar structures as the other results, quantitative differences in the intermediate [14]. Theory: AOCC-PS, CTMC and TDL [8]; Sturmian-CC [4]; SC-CCC [5]; WP-CCC [9]; AOCC-GTO [10]; and present TC-BGM.…”

“…For H(1s) collisions, the present cross sections are compared with several previous theoretical results based on the TDL method from [2,8], close-coupling approaches based on a large Sturmian basis (Sturmian-CC) from [4], single-center convergent close-coupling (SC-CCC) calculations by Avazbaev et al [5], and the AOCC-GTO analysis by Agueny et al [10]. Note that the uncertainty bars shown from the AOCC-GTO results are estimates of the convergence of the cross sections [10]. Previous experimental results by Morgan et al [13] and Detleffsen et al [14] are shown alongside.…”

“…Moreover, although both the present TC-BGM and the AOCC approaches utilize a basisset expansion technique in the semi-classical approximation, the discrepancies between the TC-BGM and both AOCC data sets [8,10] may be attributed to the differences in the basis. Both AOCC-PS [8] and AOCC-GTO [10] calculations included bound states of hydrogen with angular momenta up to l = 4 compared to l = 5 in the present calculations. However, the AOCC-GTO calculation has more pseudostates included in the basis than the AOCC-PS calculation, which may explain the discrepancies between those results.…”

“…Comparisons of the capture cross sections of p-H(2s) collisions from these calculations all showed good agreement but there are discrepancies in the excitation results from 10 to 100 keV impact energy. These discrepancies could be due to differences in the target basis size which has been larger in the recent works [9,10] than in the AOCC-PS analysis [8]. These differences could indicate that these additional states serve as intermediate channels during the collision.…”