Erratum: Fusion probability in heavy nuclei [Phys. Rev. C<b>91</b>, 034619 (2015)]

Banerjee, Tathagata; Nath, S.; Pal, Santanu

doi:10.1103/physrevc.91.069901

Cited by 14 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As for example, the Fig. 4 shows a comparison for four reactions 19 F+ 181 Ta [49], 16 O+ 208 Pb, 16 O+ 154 Sm, and 58 Ni+ 54 Fe [50]. The comparison of the total fusion cross section between the phenomenological formula [52] and experiment displays a very good agreement for E cm > B f u and a departure starts appearing at low energies E cm < B f u , except for the reaction 16 O+ 154 Sm, because of the strong channel coupling effects for some reactions in the sub-barrier region [53].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, the present interaction barrier formula has been compared with the Bass interaction model [2,3]. It is seen that this work will be useful in various applications [1], for example, prediction of B f u or V B for the formation of the superheavy elements [16] and that of both B f u and B int for the significant physics research near the Coulomb barriers [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Search for a viable nucleus-nucleus potential for heavy-ion nuclear reactions

Nandi,

Swami,

Gupta

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have constructed an empirical formulae for the fusion and interaction barriers using experimental values available till date. The fusion barriers so obtained have been compared with different model predictions based on the proximity, Woods-Saxon and double folding potentials along with several empirical formulas, time dependent Hartree-Fock theories, and the experimental results. The comparison allows us to find the best model, which is nothing but the present empirical formula only. Most remarkably, the fusion barrier and radius show excellent consonance with the experimental findings for the reactions meant for synthesis of the superheavy elements also. Furthermore, it is seen that substitution of the predicted fusion barrier and radius in classic Wong formula [C. Wong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 31, 766 (1973)] for the total fusion cross sections satisfies very well with the experiments. Similarly, current interaction barrier predictions have also been compared well with a few experimental results available and Bass potential model meant for the interaction barrier predictions. Importantly, the present formulae for the fusion as well as interaction barrier will have practical implications in carrying out the physics research near the Coulomb barrier energies. Furthermore, present fusion barrier and radius provide us a good nucleus-nucleus potential useful for numerous theoretical applications.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Search for a viable nucleus-nucleus potential for heavy-ion nuclear reactions

Nandi,

Swami,

Gupta

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the cold reaction valleys of superheavy element 302 120, the probable combinations observed are 8 Be + 294, Lv, 10 Be + 292 Lv, 12 C + 290 Fl, 14 C + 288 Fl, 16 C + 286 Fl, 20 O + 282 Cn, 22 O + 280 Cn, 24 Ne + 278 Ds, 26 Ne + 276 Ds, 28 Mg + 274 Hs, 30 Mg + 272 Hs, 32 Si + 270 Sg, 34 Si + 268 Sg, 36 make these systems as suitable projectile-target combinations for the synthesis of super heavy nucleus 302 120. Since the above discussed combinations lie in the cold valleys, they are the optimal cases of binary splitting and hence can be identified as the optimal projectile-target combinations for the synthesis of super heavy element, with considerations to the nature of interaction barrier, potential pocket and the probability of CN formation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Near and above the barrier, using the values of P CN for each center of mass energy, fusion cross section is computed by using the equation σ fusion = σ capture X P CN for the above systems and the corresponding fusion excitation functions (σ fusion versus E CM plots) are shown in upper panels of Figs. [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. From the plots it can be seen that computed fusion cross section for combinations in the first deep region 44 < A P < 58 is in the order of micro barn, which is higher than in the second region 84 < A P < 100, where the fusion cross section is in the order of pico barn and for the combinations in region 60 < A P < 82, fusion cross section is in between that of region I and II.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic study of probable projectile-target combinations for the synthesis of the superheavy nucleus120302

Santhosh

Safoora

2016

Phys. Rev. C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probable projectile-target combinations for the synthesis of superheavy element 302 120 have been studied taking Coulomb and proximity potential as the interaction barrier. The probabilities of compound nucleus formation, P CN for the projectile-target combinations found in the cold reaction valley of 302 120 are estimated. At energies near and above the Coulomb barrier, we have calculated the capture, fusion and evaporation residue cross sections for the reactions of all the probable projectile-target combinations so as to predict the most promising projectile-target combinations for the synthesis of SHE 302 120 in heavy ion fusion reactions. The calculated fusion and evaporation cross section for the more asymmetric ("hotter") projectile-target combination is found to be higher than the less asymmetric ("colder") combination. It can be seen from the nature of quasi-fission barrier height, mass asymmetry, probability of compound nucleus formation, survival probability and excitation energy,

show abstract

“…We also include the effect of nuclear dissipation on fission width. Different combinations of the above effects have been considered by many authors in the past for statistical model analysis of fusion-fission reactions [7,[12][13][14]. All the four effects have been included in the statistical model analysis of pre-scission and post-scission multiplicity by Yanez et al [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quest for consistent modelling of statistical decay of the compound nucleus

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A statistical model description of heavy ion induced fusion-fission reactions is presented where shell effects, collective enhancement of level density, tilting away effect of compound nuclear spin and dissipation are included. It is shown that the inclusion of all these effects provides a consistent picture of fission where fission hindrance is required to explain the experimental values of both pre-scission neutron multiplicities and evaporation residue cross-sections in contrast to some of the earlier works where a fission hindrance is required for pre-scission neutrons but a fission enhancement for evaporation residue cross-sections. * Electronic address: he.tatha@gmail.com

show abstract

Erratum: Fusion probability in heavy nuclei [Phys. Rev. C91, 034619 (2015)]

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Search for a viable nucleus-nucleus potential for heavy-ion nuclear reactions

Search for a viable nucleus-nucleus potential for heavy-ion nuclear reactions

Systematic study of probable projectile-target combinations for the synthesis of the superheavy nucleus120302

Quest for consistent modelling of statistical decay of the compound nucleus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About