Paper detail

Systematic study of fusion barrier characteristics within the relativistic mean-field formalism

Background: The nuclear interaction potential and hence the fusion barrier formed between the interacting nuclei are the keys to understanding the complex fusion process dynamics. Purpose: This work intends to explore the fusion barrier characteristics of different target-projectile combinations within the relativistic mean-field (RMF) formalism. Methods: The density distributions of interacting nuclei and the microscopic R3Y NN interaction are obtained from relativistic mean-field (RMF) formalism for non-linear NL1, NL3, TM1, and relativistic-Hartree-Bogoliubov (RHB) approach for DDME2 parameter sets. The fusion and/or capture cross-section for the different reaction systems is calculated using the well-known $\ell$-summed Wong model. Results: The barrier height and position of 24 heavy-ion reaction systems are obtained for different nuclear density distributions and effective NN interaction potentials. The comparison of fusion and/or capture cross-section obtained from the $\ell$-summed Wong model is made with the available experimental data. Conclusions: The phenomenological M3Y NN potential is observed to give higher barrier heights than the relativistic R3Y NN potential for all the reaction systems. The comparison of results obtained from different relativistic parameter sets shows that the densities from NL1 and TM1 parameter sets give the lowest and highest barrier heights for all the systems under study. We observed higher barrier heights and lower cross-sections for DDR3Y NN potential as compared to density-independent R3Y NN potentials obtained for considered non-linear NL1, NL3 and TM1 parameter sets. According to the present analysis, it is concluded that the NL1 and NL3 parameter sets provide comparatively better overlap with the experimental fusion and/or capture cross-section than the TM1 and DDME2 parameter sets.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.