Home / Store / Journals / Electronic Articles / Nuclear Science and Engineering / Volume 172 / Number 3 / Pages 278-286
N. V. Kornilov, S. M. Grimes, A. Voinov
Nuclear Science and Engineering / Volume 172 / Number 3 / Pages 278-286
Format:electronic copy (download)
The variations of ˜14-MeV (n, p), (n, ), and (n, 2n) reaction cross sections with A and Z have been analyzed. We tried to answer a rather interesting question: Can a simple parameterization be useful in comparing with nuclear reaction model calculations? In addition, we checked several approaches for parameterization. Simple systematics gave a better prediction than model calculation for the (n, 2n) reaction at A > 120. At a low mass number, the difference between experimental data and calculated or fitted results may be connected with the structure of levels for residual nuclei. We saw better agreement between experimental and fitted data in comparison with results of model calculation in particular for the (n, ) reaction for A < 110. Both approaches failed to predict (n, p) cross sections inside experimental uncertainties for A < 110 and the (n, ) cross section for A > 110. This failure may be connected with low accuracy of experimental data or with some unknown physical effect that provides an additional splitting of experimental data.
Your cart is empty.
Home|Invoice Payment|Nuclear Links