Investigación

 

Phenomenological and microscopic model analysis of elastic scattering reactions of ¹⁸O by ²⁴Mg, ²⁸Si, ⁵⁸Ni, ⁶⁴Zn, ⁹⁰Zr, ¹²⁰Sn, and ²⁰⁸Pb target nuclei

 

M. Aygun^a, O. Kocadag^b, and Y. Sahin^b

 

^a Department of Physics, Bitlis Eren University, Bitlis, Turkey.

^b Department of Physics, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey.

 

Received 16 June 2015;
accepted 30 July 2015

 

Abstract

In the present study, the optical potentials are obtained to describe the interactions of ¹⁸O at different incident energies. With this goal, the elastic scattering angular distribution data measured for many systems, ranging from ²⁴Mg to ²⁰⁸Pb are analyzed by using the phenomeno-logical model (PM) and the double folding model (DFM) within the framework of optical model (OM). It is presented that the theoretical results with the PM and the DFM are in very good agreement with both the experimental data and the results of previous studies. A new global set of imaginary potential of the double folding calculations is derived to describe the interactions of ¹⁸O at low energies. Also, the volume integrals of potentials, the cross sections and x²/N values obtained by means of the theoretical calculations for each system are given.

Keywords: Optical model; elastic scattering.

PACS: 24.10.Ht; 24.50.+g; 25.70.-z

 

DESCARGAR ARTÍCULO EN FORMATO PDF

 

References

1. M. Aygun, Commun. Theor. Phys. 60 (2013) 69-72.         [ Links ]

2. M. Aygun and I. Boztosun, Few-Body Syst. 55 (2014) 203-209.         [ Links ]

3. M. Aygun, Acta Phys. Pol. B 45 (2014) 1875.         [ Links ]

4. M. Aygun, I. Boztosun and Y. Sahin, Phys. At. Nucl. 75 (2012) 963-968.         [ Links ]

5. M. Aygun, Y. Kucuk, I. Boztosun, and Awad A. Ibraheem, Nucl. Phys. A 848 (2010) 245-259.         [ Links ]

6. R.F. Simões et al., Phys. Lett. B 527 (2002) 187-192.         [ Links ]

7. D.S. Monteiro et al., Nucl. Phys. A 725 (2003) 60-68.         [ Links ]

8. R.N. Sagaidak et al., Phys. Rev. C 76 (2007) 034605.         [ Links ]

9. A.T. Rudchik et al., Nucl. Phys. A 860 (2011) 8-21.         [ Links ]

10. A.T. Rudchik et al., Nucl. Phys. A 927 (2014) 209-219.         [ Links ]

11. T.K. Steinbach et al., Phys. Rev. C 90 (2014) 041603(R).         [ Links ]

12. M. Bernas et al., Phys. Rev. C 22 (1980) 1872.         [ Links ]

13. M.C. Mermaz et al., Phys. Rev. C 19 (1979) 794.         [ Links ]

14. J.J.S. Alves et al., Nucl. Phys. A 748 (2005) 59-74.         [ Links ]

15. S. Salém-Vasconcelos et al., Phys. Rev. C 50 (1994) 927.         [ Links ]

16. V. Jha, B.J. Roy, A. Chatterjee and H. Machner, Eur. Phys. J. A 19 (2004) 347-354.         [ Links ]

17. B.C. Robertson et al., Phys. Rev. C 4 (1971) 2176.         [ Links ]

18. E. Vulgaris, L. Grodzins, S.G. Steadman and R. Ledoux, Phys. Rev. C 33 (1986) 2017.         [ Links ]

19. G.R. Satchler, Direct Nuclear Reactions (Oxford university Press, Oxford, 1983).         [ Links ]

20. Reference Input Parameter Library (RIPL-3), http://www-nds.iaea.org/RIPL-3/.         [ Links ]

21. D.T. Khoa, G.R. Satchler and W. von Oertzen, Phys. Rev. C 51 (1995) 2069.         [ Links ]

22. I.J. Thompson, Computer Phys. Rep. 7 (1988) 167.         [ Links ]

23. M. Aygun, Eur. Phys. J. A 48 (2012) 145.         [ Links ]