Role of Polar vs Non-polar Configurations in the Decay of 268Sg* Compound Nucleus Within the Skyrme Energy Density Formalism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15415/jnp.2021.91011Keywords:
Polar and non-polar configuration, Super heavy nuclei, Skyrme forces, Fission cross-sectionAbstract
The effect of polar and non-polar configurations is investigated in the decay of 268Sg* compound nucleus formed via spherical projectile (30Si) and prolate deformed target (238U) using the dynamical cluster decay model. The SSK and GSkI skyrme forces are used to investigate the impact of polar and nonpolar (equatorial) configurations on the preformation probability P0 and consequently on the fission cross-sections of 268Sg* nucleus. For non-polar configuration some secondary peaks corresponding to magic shells Z=28 and N=50 are observed, whose magnitude is significantly suppressed for the polar counterpart. The effect of polar and non-polar configurations is further analyzed in reference to barrier lowering parameter ΔVB. The calculated fission cross-section find adequate agreement with experimental data for chosen set of skyrme forces.
Downloads
References
S. Hofmann and G. M¨unzenberg, Rev. Mod. Phys. 72, 733 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.72.733
K. Morita et al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 73, 1738 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.73.2593
Y. Oganessian, J. Phys. G 34, R165 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/34/4/R01
Yu. Ts. Oganessian et al., Phys. Rev. C 70, 064609 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.70.064609
K. Nishio et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 29, 281 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/i2006-10091-y
K. Sandhu, M. K. Sharma and R. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C 86, 064611 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.86.064611
M. Kaur, R. Kumar and M. K. Sharma, Phys. Rev. C 85, 014609 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.85.014609
Rajni, R. Kumar and M. K. Sharma Phys. Rev. C 90, 044604 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.90.044604
G. Kaur, K. Sandhu and M. K. Sharma, Nucl. Phys. A 971, 95 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2018.01.017
J. Blocki, J. Randrup, W. J. Swiatecki and C. F. Tsang, Ann. Phys. (NY) 105, 427 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(77)90249-4
D. Vautherin, Phys. Rev. C 7, 296 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.7.296
Rajni, D. jain, I. Sharma and M. K. Sharma, Eur. Phys. J A 53, 208 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/i2017-12407-2
B. K. Agrawal, S. K. Dhiman and R. Kumar, Phys. Rev. C 73, 034319 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.73.034319
R. K. Gupta et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 31, 631 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/31/7/009
G. Wentzel, Z. Phys. 38, 518 (1926). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01397171
H. A. Kramers, Z. Phys. 39, 828 (1926). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01451751
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Rajni, Kirandeep Sandhu, M. K. Sharma
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
View Legal Code of the above-mentioned license, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
View Licence Deed here https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Journal of Nuclear Physics, Material Sciences, Radiation and Applications by Chitkara University Publications is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Based on a work at https://jnp.chitkara.edu.in/ |