BAPPA SRI NARAIN VOCATIONAL P.

G COLLEGE CHARBAGH LUCKNOW

DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
SESSION:2024-25

"TERM PAPER"

Liquid Drop Model, Single Particle Shell Model and Collective Model

ABHISHEK TIWARI Submitted to

B.sc 3 rd. year Dr. Shivani Ma’am
2210084010018
9889932963
 CONTENT

l. Nuclear Model

(I) Introduction
(Il) Liquid Drop Model
(Ill) Shell Model

2. Liquid Drop Model

(I) Introduction
(Il) Similarities between Liquid Drop and Nucleus
(Ill) Assumption of the Liquid Drop Model

3. Shell Model
(l) Introduction
(Il) Basic Assumptions of the Shell Model
(Ill) The Square well potential
(iv) The Harmonic Oscillator Potential
(v) Predictions of the Shell Model
(vi) Achievements of the Shell Model Failures of the Shell Model

4. Collective Model of the Nucleus

(l) Introduction
(Il) Assumptions made
(Ill) Quadrupole deformation parameters
(IV) Bohr - Wheeler parameterization
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my teacher, Dr.

Shivani, Ma’am for her invaluable guidance and feedback throughout
my internship. Her clear directions, innovative ideas, and prompt
responses to my queries significantly contributed to the success of my
project.

I also express sincere gratitude to my parents and friends for their

unwavering encouragement and support. Their motivation played a
substantial role in driving me forward, and I am thankful for their
presence in my life.

This project would not have been possible without the collective
contributions of these individuals. I offer my heartfelt thanks to each
of you for your support and guidance.

ABHISHEK TIWARI
 Nuclear Model

INTRODUCTION:

A
s discussed in SLM 44, the size of the nucleus is very small and nuclear
forces are far more complicated than other well-known forces. In fact, the
picture of nuclear forces is still not clear. This picture is different from the
ease of atom, where the forces are known and atomic model is well established for
deducing various properties in atomic domain. Due to the lack of detailed
knowledge of nuclear forces, nuclear models, namely liquid drop model, shell
model, Nilsson model, Fermi gas model, collective model, Bohr Mottelson model,
interacting boson model, etc. have been developed, each of which is useful in a
more or less limited fashion.

In order to understand and predict the properties of the nucleus, we have to know
the forces completely. For knowing nuclear forces, we adopt a different approach.
In nuclei, we choose an oversimplified theory, the treatment of which is
mathematically possible, but the theory should be rich in physics. If this theory is
fairly successful in accounting for at least a few properties of the nucleus, we can
then improve the model by adding additional terms so that it is capable to account
more nuclear properties. In this way, we construct a nuclear model, a simplified
view of nuclear structure, which still contains the essentials of the

The devotement of nuclear model has taken place along the filming lines. In the
first type oc nuclear model, treated like a drop of liquid, in which nucleus has been
nucleons present in the nucleus interact very strongly among thetnselves. This is
like tnolecules present in a drop of liquid, shish interact atoning thetnselves very
strongly. This treattnent gave rise to tnodels like liquid drop pnodel, collective
pnodcl, etc. The second type of ruodels is constructed in analogy with the shell
model of the atoni. In these tnodels, the nucleons are weakly interacting among
thetnselves. This treattnent gave rise to Fermni gas pnodel, shell tnodel, Nilson
tnodel, etc. In this chapter, we discuss only two models, i.e. liquid drop model and
shell model. In the end, a brief description of Collectives given. Nuclear properties.
A good nuclear model must satisfy following two criteria:

• It must reasonably well account for previously measured nuclear

properties. It must predict additional
 LIQUID DROP MODEL

INTRODUCTION: -

B ethe- Seersucker in 1935 proposed on the basis of experimental facts that a

nucleus resembles a drop of liquid. In 1939, Bohr and Wheeler further
developed this model to explain the phenomenon of nuclear fission.
Following are some of the similarities between a drop of liquid and nucleus, which
prompted Seersucker to develop the liquid drop model.

Similarities bet” ‘even liquid aid Drop and Nucleus: -

Nuclear forces are analogous to the surface tension of a liquid.
The nucleons be has in a manner similar to that of molecules in a liquid drop.
The density of the nuclear matter is almost independent of A, showing
resemblance to liquid drop where the density of a liquid is independent of
the size of the drop.
The constant binding energy per nucleon is analogous to the latent heat of
vaporization.
The disintegration of nuclei by the emission of particles is analogous to the
evaporation of molecules from the surface of liquid.
The absorption of bombarding particles by a nucleus corresponds to the
condensation of drops.
The energy of nuclei corresponds to internal thermal vibrations of drop
molecules.

Based on these similarities, Weizsacker in 1935 and Bohr and Wheeler in 1939 developed
liquid drop model. They ignored the finer features of nuclear forces but strong Internucleon
attraction is stressed
Assumptions of the Liquid Drop Model: -

1.the nucleus consists of incompressible matter

2.the nucleus force is identical for every nucleon,
3.the nuclear force saturates
 Semi empirical Mass Formula:-
The analogy between nucleus and liquid drop has

The binding energy B of a nucleus is given by the of five

terms as -

which are explained in the following sections.

Volume Energy Tenn (B1):-

The volume term arises from the interaction of the
nucleons through the strong force. When a liquid drop
evaporates, the energy required for this process is the
product of mass of the drop Mm and latent heat of
vaporization L. This energy is used to break all the
molecular bonds. This is same as the binding
energy of the drop. B = [Mm N
(2.3)
where N is the nurnber of molecules in the drop. Equation (2.3)
can also be written as

LMm = constant
 This means that B/N is independent of the number of molecules
present in the liquid drop. As we know that in the liquid drop, a molecule
interacts only with its nearest neighbor’s and number of neighbors is
independent of the size of the drop. This characteristic of the system shows
that range of interaction among the molecules is much smaller than the
dimensions of the drop.
In SLM 44, we have seen that neutrons and protons are
held together in nuclei by short- range attractive forces. These forces
reduce the mass of the nucleus below that of its constituents by an
amount proportional to the number of nucleons A. Since the volume of
the nucleus is proportional to A, hence this term is regarded as a
volume binding energy and in analogy to Eq. (2.4) is given by

Where av is proportionality constant and subscript v is for volume.

Surface Energy Term (B2):-

The surface term is a correction to the volume term to take
into account that the nucleons at the surface of the nucleus
do not have the same level of interactions as in the interior
of the nucleus, In the above discussion, save that All the
molecule arc surrounded by knighthood. while in actual
practice the molecule at the surface do not have any
neighbors on all the sides. So, these toneless are not a
tightly bound the wholesale in the interior. Extending thins
argument to the nuclear case, stone nucleons are nearer to
the surfaces and so they interact with fesver nucleons.
Thus, the binding energy is reduced by an amount
proportional to the surface area of the nucleus of radius r
as the nucleons on the surface are less tightly bound than
those in the interior. This term is proportional to the surface
area of the nucleus of rulius r 1/3). Therefore,

Or
 Which is usually expressed as?

(2.6)

where negative sign is for decrease in energy and as is

constant.
Cou10"1b Energy Term (B3):-

4m eo r
where r is the radius of the nucleus.
For a single-proton nucleu

r=R0A1/3 ,

4zceor
For a single-proton nucleus no work is done against
Coulotnb repulsion in assetnbling the nucleus. Thus, the true
Coulotnb energy tertn Cor a nucleus containing Z protons is
J!

i.e.

(2.7)
5 41tfor

13
The negative sign indicates the repulsive term. As r ,
Eq. (2.7) can be written as :-
 zcz-l) (2.8)
B3=-ac

Where ac is constant.

Asymmetry Energy Trent (B4):-

The asymmetry term reflects the stability of nuclei with the
proton and neutron numbers being approximately equal.
This is a term, which depends on the neutron excess (N —-
Z) in the nucleus and it decreases with the increasing nuclear
binding energy. For very few nuclei of low Z, N — Z 0 and
are more stable compared to their neighbors, i.e. their
binding energies are maximum. The
reduction in binding energy Cor higher VI nuclei is directly
proportional to (N or square co. excess co. neutrons and is
inversely proportional to roasts Nurnberg. So, we can write,

(N-Z)2

(2.9)

As El N + Z and aa IS constant
Pairin Ener Tern' B5

So far we have all the terms in the binding energy have

smooth variation with respect to N or Z or A. However, in the
actual binding energy versus A curve, there are several
discontinuities, particularly when N or Z becomes equal to 2,
4, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 or 126. These values correspond to shell
closure for N or Z. The nuclei having N or Z equal to one of
these numbers have large binding energy. This fact did not
appear in the liquid drop model, which does not consider
intrinsic spin of the nucleons and the shell effects. It is
interesting to classify all the stable nuclei into four groups,
first having even Z—even N, second even Z—odd N, third
odd Z—even N and last having oddZ—odd N. This
classification is shown in Table 3.1

TABLE 3.1 Number of stable isotopes

z Number of stable nuclei

Even Even 165

Even Odd 55

Odd Even 50

Odd Odd 5

the five stable odd Z--odd N nuclei are: ill, #Li, i !B, t 4N, 1 %Ta)
 From Table 2.1, it is clear that even Z—even N nuclei, being most
stable, are most abundant. Accordingly, odd Z—odd N nuclei are least
abundant and hence least stable. The remaining nuclei have intermediate
stability. Therefore, the binding energy also depends upon whether the
number of protons and neutrons are odd or even. This pairing effect
incorporated by putting Where

(2.10)

ap 33.5 MeV for even—even nuclei

0 for odd—even (or odd A) nuclei
—33.5 MeV for odd—odd nuclei

Substituting the values of B 1, B2, B3, B4 and B5 from Eqs. (2.5), (2.6),

ZcZ -l) (A-2Z)2 + a A-3/4

and in Eq. we get Substituting the value of B from the above equation in
Eq. (2.1), we get thesemi empirical mass formula as:-

(A -202 314
(2.11)
-apA
A

The various constants found are,

 15.5
MeV a 16.8
MeV a 0.7
MeV
23.0 MeV
34 MeV for even—even nuclei aO MeV for odd
A nuclei
— —34 MeV for odd—odd nuclei
Achievements of Liquid Drop Model:-

1. It predicts the atomic masses and binding energies of

various nuclei accurately.
2. It predicts emission of a- and b-particles in radioactivity.
3. The theory of compound nucleus, which is based on this
model, explains the basic features of the fission process.
Failures of Liquid Drop Model:-

1. It fails to explain the extra stability of certain nuclei,

where the numbers of protons or neutrons in the nucleus
are 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 or 126 (these numbers are called
magic numbers).
2. It fails to explain the measured magnetic moments of
many nuclei.
3. It also fails to explain the spin of nuclei.
4. It is also not successful in explaining the excited states in
most of thenuclei.
5. The agreement of semi empirical mass formula with
experimentally observed masses and binding energies is
poor for lighter nuclei compared to the heavy ones.
 SHELL MODEL
INTRODUCTION:-
Atomic theory based on the shell model has provided
remarkable clarification of the complicated details of
atomic structure. Nuclear physicist, therefore, attempted to
use a similar theory to study nuclear structure. In the atomic
shell model, we fill the shells with electrons in order of
increasing energy consistent with the requirement of the
Pauli principle. When we do so, one obtains an inert core
of filled shells, containing 2, 10, 18, 36, 54 and 86 electrons
(atomic numbers of inert gases) and some valence
electrons; the atomic properties are determined primarily
by the valence electrons. When compare some measured
properties of atomic system with the predictions of the
model, one finds remarkable agreement. The same kind of
effect has been observed in nuclei. Experimentally it was
found that nuclei that have 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 and 126
nucleons (protons or neutrons), called magic numbers, are
more abundant than other nuclei.
However, there exist several
significant differences between atomic and nuclear cases.
In the atomic case, the potential is provided by the
Coulomb field of the nucleus; the orbits are generated by
the external agent i.e. interaction between electrons and
nucleus. We can solve the Schrödinger equation for this
potential and calculate the energies of the sub-shells into
which electrons can then be placed. In case of nucleus,
there is no such external agent, the nucleons move in a
potential which is not well defined that they themselves
create.
 Another appealing aspect of atomic shell
theory is the existence of spatial orbits. It is often very
useful to describe atomic properties in terms of spatial
orbits of the electrons. The electrons can move in those
orbits relatively free of collisions with other electrons.
Nucleons which have a mass about 2000 times larger than
that of electrons have a diameter comparable to the size of
the nucleus, which is about 105 times smaller than that of
an atom. How can we regard the nucleons as moving in
well-defined orbits when a single nucleon can make many
collisions during each orbit?
All these observations tempted nuclear
physicists (Barlet, Guggenheimer et al.) to devise an
independent particle model formally called the shell
model. A shell structure means that nucleons move freely
inside the nucleus similar to the electron motion in atom.
This approach could explain the existence of first few
magic numbers. However, physicist lost interest in this
model till 1948 due to its failure to explain higher magic
nurnbers.
 In 1948, M.G. Mayer in USA brought together a considerable amount of
convincing information showing the evidence for the closed shells, which led to the
development of nuclear shell model which could explain all the magic numbers,
namely 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 and 126, which apparently represent closed shells in the
nucleus. Some of the main aspects of this evidence based on the study of stable
nuclei are as under:
1. Binding energy per nucleon vs. A curve. If we plot binding energy per nucleon
versus A curve, it shows that binding energy suddenly increases when the number
of nucleons is either 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 or 126 indicating that these nuclei are
exceptionally stable.
2. Number of stable isotopes. Relative stabilities of different elements are also
indicated by the number of stable isotopes per element.

19K = 3 20Ca=6 21 sc 1
491n 50Sn 51Sb 2
2 10 83Bi 1
81 Tl 82Pb 4
2
It is clear that number of stable isotopes for z 20, 50
and 82 are much larger compared to neighbouring
isotopes.
3. Number of stable isotones. The numbers of stable

isotones for N = 19,20, 21; 49, 50, 51 and 81, 82, 83

are shown in Table 3.3.
tnagie numbers

It is clear from the above table that the numbers of stable

isotones for N =2(), 50 and 82 are much larger as
compared to neighbouring stable isotones.

A table or relative abundances of nuclei compiled from

data on the composition of earth, sun, stars and Ineteorites
shows pronounced peaks at

160 (N
(N z = 20)
1 18Sn (Z 50)
88 90
sr, 89M, zr (N 50)
138Ba, 139La, (N 82)

208Pb
(Z 82, IV
126)
l . Binding energy of next neutron after a magic number
is small. The separation energy of the last neutron for
N 8, 9; 19, 20, 21 and 27,28 29 is shown in Table
3.4.
TABLE 3.4 Binding energy of the last neutron around
magic numbers

Nucleus N Sn(MeV) Nucleus N sn(MeV) Nucleus N sn(MeV)

15
0 7 13.2
47

27 7.3
39
ca 19 13.3 Ca
16 9.9
0 8 15.7 48
ca 28
15.7 20
17
0 9 4.14 41ca 21 8.4 49ca 29 5.1

From the above table it is clear that for neutron numbers

9, 21 and 29, the separation energy of the last neutron
suddenly decreases as compared to the case, when
neutron numbers are 8, 20 and 28.
1.1t is found that some isotopes are spontaneous neutron
emitters. They are: 17809, 8136Kr51, 13754Xe83,
8936Kr53
The end product of each series ends in N or Z equal to either
82 or 126.
1. Neutron absorption cross-section s, the probability of

absorption of neutron by the nucleus is small for

nuclides containing magic number ofneutrons
19 20 21 49 50 51
2.0 0.4 12. 19. 0.6 6.
0
 2. a-decay energies are rather smooth functions of A for
a given Z, but it shows striking discontinuities at IV
126 or Z = 82, the energy of u - particles Increases.
For example,
212841)0128 20882Pb126 + u (9 MeV)
Half-life t1/2 -3 x 10-7s where N = 126, Z- 82
206
210841)0126 821)b124 + (6 MeV) t1/2 = 3 x 10-7 s
Where N = 126, Z = 82
1. Similar behaviour is exhibited by b-emitters.
2. The electric quadrupole moment measures the departure
of nuclear charge distribution from sphericity. This
departure is a measure of nuclear deformation. A
spherical nucleus has no or nearly zero quadrupole
moments. It has been found that nuclei with proton or
neutron number equal to one of the magic numbers are
spherical in nature, i.e. all the three axes x, y and z are
equal like that of a tennis ball. For such nuclei the
quadrupole moment is either zero or nearly zero which
is also observed experimentally.
However, in some nuclei, out of three, two axes
are equal. In the case, where the unequal axis is shorter than
the others, the nucleus has somewhat of a pumpkin shape, it
is called oblate. Extreme case is that of a Hamburger as shown
in Figure 1.7. In the other case where the third unequal axis
is longer than the other two, the nucleus has somewhat of a
football shape, it is called prolate. Extreme case is that of a
cigar or Hot Dog as shown in Figure 1.6. In general, unequal
axis differs in length by about 20%. However, in lighter.
The answer to this question comes from Pauli's
exclusion principle. Consider in a heavy nucleus, a
collision between two nucleons in a state near the very
bottom of the potential well. When the nucleons
collide, they transferenergy to one another, but if all of
the energy levels are filled up to the level of valence
nucleon, there is no way for one of the nucleons to gain
energy except to move up to the valence level. The
other levels near the original level are filled and cannot
accept an additional nucleon. Such a transfer from a
low- lying level to the higher- lying level requires more
energy than the nucleons are likely to transfer in a
collision. Thus, the collisions cannot occur and the
nucleons can indeed orbit as if they were transparent to
one another!
The first step in developing the shell model is the
choice of the potential. Different forms of potential V(r)
have been employed in order to obtain the required
magic numbers. In the following, we consider two
potentials to solvethe Schrödinger equation.
The Square Well Potential:-
The problem can be mathematically simplified, if we
assume a potential well with infinite walls as
 REFERENCES

1.Nuclear Physics, Dr. S. N. Ghosal. Chand and company pvt. Ltd.

2.Concept of Nuclear Physics, Dr. S. P. Kuila, New Central

Book Agency pvt. Ltd
3.Introductory Nuclear Physics, Kenneth S. Krane John Wiley and
Sons.
4.Nuclear Physics, Irving Kaplan, Addison- Publishing
Company
5. J.D. Vimest S. Hodeges, 1 vampola, M. Stegall and G. piove
fundamentals of lupured and viable Detector Operation and
Testing 2...Edition, Wiley, New
Jersey, 2018

Dr. Shivani Ma’am