HASSANABADI Yukawa Form Potencial
HASSANABADI Yukawa Form Potencial
HASSANABADI Yukawa Form Potencial
Our purpose in this paper is to modify the original proximity potential by universal
function available in the literature. A potential model with Yukawa proximity potential
has been considered according to the modified model fusion reactions of 92 Zr + 12 C,
16 O + 92 Zr, 28 Si + 92 Zr, 16 O + 144 m, 28 Si + 28 Si, 28 Si + 29 Si, 28 Si + 30 Si, 24 Mg + 24 Mg,
24 Mg + 26 Mg and 24 Mg + 28 Si, 26 Mg + 28 Si, 24 Mg + 30 Si, 26 Mg + 30 Si which have been
discussed in detail. The results have a good agreement with the experimental data.
1. Introduction
Nuclear fusion is one of the most promising sources of clean energy. It is important
to know the potential between two colliding nuclei, Coulomb interactions alone can-
not define a fusion barrier. In this direction, approximations have been used for the
corresponding deformed potentials. The nucleus–nucleus potential is the sum of a
short-range attractive nuclear potential VN (r) and a long-range repulsive Coulomb
potential VC (r).1,2 The Coulomb part of the interaction potential is well known,
whereas the nuclear part is not clearly understood and there have been many ef-
forts to provide an accurate and simple from for the nuclear part. A large number
of theoretical and experimental works are studying the fusion of heavy nuclei.3–6
For the calculation of nuclear potential, there are many models at present, such
as double folding model,7–9 the liquid drop model,10–13 different version proxim-
ity potentials14,15 are used for fusion reactions often from proximity potential. By
‡ Corresponding author
1850120-1
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
determining the total potential, the barrier height and position can be calculated,
and then the cross-section fusion can be calculated. Different models depending
on the nucleus–nucleus potential such as Bass potential,16 Proximity potential,17
Wood–Saxon potential,18 CW potential19 and Modified Wood–Saxon potential20
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
are present. Furthermore, changes and modifications have been made to remove
differences between theory and data which contain a better form of surface energy
coefficient, universal function and nuclear radius. In proximity potential model, the
expression of the nuclear potential depends on the shape and geometry of two nu-
clei. The universal function is independent of the shapes of two nuclei and geometry
of nuclear system.21 In this paper, we have tried to modify the universal function
and by selecting this new universal function to form Yukawa in proximity potential
and to calculate nuclear potential, barrier height and position. Further, the modi-
fied model using Yukawa interaction has been presented in Sec. 2. In this section,
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
barrier height, position of barrier and its cross-section have been obtained. Results
and discussions are presented according to the evaluated results of the experiment
in Sec. 3. At the end, the conclusions are provided.
1850120-2
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
2
N −Z
γ = γ0 1 − ks , (7)
A
in which N , Z and A refer to the neutron, proton and total mass of the two
colliding nuclei. γ0 is the surface energy constant and ks is the surface asym-
metry constant.25,26 In this work, these parameters have been considered as
γ0 = 1.460734 MeV/fm2 and
ks = 4.0.27
The universal function φ r−C1b−C2 in Eq. (2) was derived by several authors
in different forms.18,22,28 In this study, universal function can be written as
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
⎧
⎪
⎪ −1.7817 + 0.9270ξ + 0.143ξ 2 − 0.09ξ 3 , for ξ ≤ 0.0 ,
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 2
⎨ −1.7817 + 0.9270ξ + 0.01696ξ
⎪ (8a)
3
φ(ξ) = − 0.05148ξ , for 0.0 ≤ ξ ≤ 1.9475 ,
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ α1
⎪
⎪ α ξ + C + C exp(−α0 ξ) , for ξ ≥ 1.9475 , (8b)
⎪
⎩ 2 1 2
where b is the surface width which has been evaluated close to unity. ξ = (r−C1b−C2 )
and constants α1 and α2 can be obtained from the continuity conditions of φEq. (8a)
and φEq. (8b) and α0 is the free parameter obtained from experimental data.
1850120-3
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
(a)
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
(b)
Fig. 1. (a) The nuclear part of the interaction potential, VN (r) vs. r and (b) the total interaction
VT (r) vs. r for the reactions of 12 C + 92 Zr and 26 Mg + 30 Si.
evaluated by fitting the model parameters on the experimental data using the least
root mean square (rms) method:
N
(σiexp − σitheo )2
i=1
χ= ,
N
1850120-4
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 2. Comparison of fusion barrier heights VBtheor (MeV) vs. VBexp t (MeV).
is plotted as a function of distance r by the Yukawa form potential for the reactions
of 12 C + 92 Zr and 26 Mg + 30 Si.
By using Yukawa potential, the Coulomb barrier height and position are ob-
tained by using
dVT (r) d2 VT (r)
=0 and ≤ 0.
dr dr2
r=RB r=RB
The height and position of the barrier are labeled, respectively, as VB and RB .
We have considered the fusion reactions of 16 O + 92 Zr, 12 C + 92 Zr, 28 Si + 92 Zr,
16
O + 144 Sm, 28 Si + 28 Si, 28 Si + 29 Si, 28 Si + 30 Si, 24 Mg + 24 Mg, 24 Mg + 26 Mg and
24
Mg + 28 Si, 26 Mg + 28 Si, 24 Mg + 30 Si, 26 Mg + 30 Si. In Fig. 2, the theoretical fusion
barrier heights VBtheor (MeV) have been calculated using Yukawa potential. The
experimental values are taken from Refs. 29–32. In Fig. 3, the percentage deviation
and variation between the theoretical and experimental values using Yukawa form
potential and ProxOld, ProxMod and ProxNew are presented. The difference be-
tween the theoretical and experimentally extracted fusion barriers is displayed. It
is clear from the figure that Yukawa form potential gives closer results.
Here, we have considered some fusion reactions and tried to reproduce their
experimental data of cross-section using the theory discussed before. During the
fitting process, the free parameters have been determined so that we have found
the least deviation for each reaction. To make a comparison between the prediction
of our calculation and others, we have listed the deviation of other calculations and
ours in Table 1. The details of each reaction will be mentioned in separate tables.
In Tables 2–14, the deviations of ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew are compared with
our calculation for each reaction. Fortunately, in each case, there is a considerable
1850120-5
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 3. (a) The percentage deviation ΔVB (%) vs. Z1 Z2 and (b) the variation of ΔVB vs. Z1 Z2 .
difference between deviation of our calculation and others. It means that our modi-
fication in the theory was successful. This point can also check the figures in which
the cross-sections of experimental data and theoretical predictions have been plot-
ted in the same figure. It is seen that our predicted data are very closer to the
experimental data than the other theoretical predictions.
The accuracy of Yukawa form potential is tested on fusion probabilities. In
Figs. 4–16, we have displayed the fusion cross-sections σfus (in mb) as a function of
the center-of-mass energy Ecm (MeV) for the reactions of 24 Mg + 28 Si, 26 Mg + 28 Si,
24
Mg + 30 Si, 26 Mg + 30 Si, 24 Mg + 24 Mg, 24 Mg + 26 Mg with the experimental
data taken from Morsad29 which can be seen in Figs. 4–9, 16 O + 92 Zr, 12 C + 92 Zr,
28
Si + 92 Zr with the experimental data taken from Newton30 which are seen
1850120-6
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
24 Mg + 28 Si
1850120-7
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
Table 3. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, Prox-
New and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction of 26 Mg + 28 Si.
26 Mg + 28 Si
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Table 4. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, Prox-
New and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction of 24 Mg + 30 Si.
24 Mg + 30 Si
1850120-8
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
26 Mg + 30 Si
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
24 Mg + 26 Mg
1850120-9
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
24
Mg + 24 Mg
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Table 8. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew
and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction of 12 C + 92 Zr.
12
C + 92 Zr
1850120-10
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Table 9. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, Prox-
New and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction of 16 O + 92 Zr.
16 O + 92 Zr
1850120-11
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
Table 10. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, Prox-
New and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction of 28 Si + 92 Zr.
28 Si + 92 Zr
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Table 11. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, Prox-
Mod, ProxNew and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction
of 28 Si + 28 Si.
28
Si + 28 Si
1850120-12
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
Table 12. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod,
ProxNew and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction of 28 Si + 29 Si.
28 Si + 29 Si
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Table 13. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod,
ProxNew and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction of 28 Si + 30 Si.
28 Si + 30 Si
1850120-13
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
Table 14. Fusion cross-sections σfus for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, Prox-
New and Yukawa form potential at energies Ecm for the reaction of 16 O + 144 Sm and
calculated standard deviation for each proximity models.
16 O + 144 Sm
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Fig. 4. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 24 Mg + 28 Si reaction.
1850120-14
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Fig. 5. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 26 Mg + 28 Si reaction.
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 6. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 24 Mg + 30 Si reaction.
Fig. 7. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 26 Mg + 30 Si reaction.
1850120-15
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Fig. 8. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 24 Mg + 26 Mg reaction.
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 9. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 24 Mg + 24 Mg reaction.
Fig. 10. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 12 C + 92 Zr reaction.
1850120-16
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Fig. 11. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 16 O + 92 Zr reaction.
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 12. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 28 Si + 92 Zr reaction.
Fig. 13. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 28 Si + 28 Si reaction.
1850120-17
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
by UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO CEARA on 07/11/18. Re-use and distribution is strictly not permitted, except for Open Access articles.
Fig. 14. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 28 Si + 29 Si reaction.
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Fig. 15. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 28 Si + 30 Si reaction.
Fig. 16. σfus (mb) vs. Ecm (MeV) for proximity models, ProxOld, ProxMod, ProxNew, Yukawa
form potential for 16 O + 144 Sm reaction.
1850120-18
Heavy-ion fusion reactions by using Yukawa form potential
that Yukawa form potential is in good agreement with the experimental data.
4. Conclusions
Among different potential models to describe fusion reaction, we modified the origi-
nal proximity potential. With the aim of Yukawa potential, we have made our mod-
ified potential model. Then using the new potential model, we discussed the barrier
height, position of barrier and cross-sections of the fusions reactions 16 O + 92 Zr,
12
C + 92 Zr, 28 Si + 92 Zr , 24 Mg + 28 Si, 26 Mg + 28 Si, 24 Mg + 30 Si, 26 Mg + 30 Si,
24
Mg + 24 Mg, 24 Mg + 26 Mg, 16 O + 144 Sm and 28 Si + 28 Si, 28 Si + 29 Si, 28 Si + 30 Si
Mod. Phys. Lett. A Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
in detail. Our results were compared with the experimental data which are in good
agreement with the experimental data. In other words, the comparison emphasized
that our modified potential model was successful in the expression of experimental
data.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank the referee for a thorough reading of our manuscript and for
constructive suggestion.
References
1. L. C. Chamon, G. P. A. Nobre, D. Pereira, C. P. Silva and E. S. Rossi, Jr., Braz. J.
Phys. 35, 3B (2005).
2. K. S. Jassim, F. A. Mageed and G. S. Jassim, Int. J. Sci. Res. ISSN (Online): 2319-
7064 (2012).
3. J. M. B. Shorto et al., Phys. Rev. C 81, 044601 (2010).
4. I. Dutt and R. K. Puri, Phys. Rev. C 81, 044615 (2010).
5. I. Dutt and R. K. Puri, Phys. Rev. C 81, 064609 (2010).
6. I. Dutt and R. Bansal, Chinese Phys. Lett. 27, 112402 (2010).
7. G. L. Zhang, X. Y. Le and H. Q. Zhang, Phys. Rev. C 80, 064325 (2009).
8. D. N. Basu, Phys. Lett. B 566, 90 (2003).
9. C. Xu and Z. Z. Ren, Nucl. Phys. A 753, 174 (2005).
10. G. Royer and B. Remaud, Nucl. Phys. A 444, 477 (1985).
11. G. Royer, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 12, 623 (1986).
12. G. Royer and J. Gaudillot, Phys. Rev. C 84, 044602 (2011).
13. R. Moustabchir and G. Royer, Nucl. Phys. A 683, 266 (2001).
14. Y. J. Yao et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 51, Article 122 (2015).
15. G. L. Zhang et al., Nucl. Phys. A 951, 86 (2016).
16. R. Bass, Nuclear Reactions with Heavy Ions, Chap. 7.4 (Springer-Verleg, 1980),
pp. 318–340.
17. J. Blocki et al., Ann. Phys. 105, 427 (1977).
18. R. A. Broglia and A. Winther, Heavy Ion Physics, Part I and Part II (Addison-Wesley,
1991).
1850120-19
A. Avar, H. Hassanabadi & S. Hassanabadi
1850120-20