# Studies of the 2α and 3α channels of the 12C+12C reaction in the range of Ec.m.=8.9 MeV to 21 MeV using the active target Time Projection Chamber

• The 12C+12C fusion reaction was studied in the range of Ec.m.=8.9 to 21 MeV using the active-target Time Projection Chamber. With full information on all tracks of the reaction products, cross sections of the 12C(12C,8Be)16Og.s. channel and the 12C(12C,3α)12C channel could be measured down to the level of a few milibarns. The 12C(12C,8Be)16Og.s. reaction channel was determined to be 10 $_{-8}^{+24}$ mb at Ec.m.=11.1 MeV, supporting the direct α transfer reaction mechanism. The 12C(12C,3α)12C reaction channel was studied for the first time using an exclusive measurement. Our result does not confirm the anomaly behavior reported in the previous inclusive measurement by Kolata et al. [Phys. Rev. C 21, 579 (1980)]. Our comparisons with statistical model calculations suggest that the 3α channel is dominated by the fusion evaporation process at Ec.m. > 19 MeV. The additional contribution of the 3α channel increases the fusion reaction cross section by 10% at energies above 20 MeV. We also find that an additional reaction mechanism is needed to explain the measured cross section at Ec.m. < 15 MeV at which point the statistical model prediction vanishes.
•  [1] L. R. Gasques, E. F. Brown, A. Chieffi et al., Phys. Rev. C 76, 035802 (2007) doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.76.035802 [2] B. B. Back, H. Esbensen, C. L. Jiang et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 317-360 (2014) doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.86.317 [3] Xiaodong Tang and Longhui Ru, EPJ Web Conf. 260, 01002 (2022) doi: 10.1051/epjconf/202226001002 [4] H. Esbensen, X. Tang, and C. L. Jiang, Phys. Rev. C 84, 064613 (2011) doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.84.064613 [5] J. J. Kolata, R. M. Freeman, and F. Haas, Haas, Phys. Rev. C 21, 579-587 (1980) doi: 1103/PhysRevC.21.579 [6] J. J. Kolata, R. E. Malmin, P. A. DeYoung et al., Phys. Rev. C 21, 776-778 (1980) doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.21.776 [7] B. Čujec, I. Hunyadi, and I. M. Szöghy, Phys. Rev. C 39, 1326-1334 (1989) doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.39.1326 [8] M. Beard, A. V. Afanasjev, L. C. Chamon et al., Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 96 (5) (2010) 541–566. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092640X10000331 [9] S. Beceiro-Novo, T. Ahn, D. Bazin et al., Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 84, 124-165 (2015) doi: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2015.06.003 [10] L. F. Canto, V. Guimarães, J. Lubián et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 56(11), 281 (2020) doi: 10.1140/epja/s10050-020-00277-8 [11] D. Bazin, T. Ahn, Y. Ayyad et al., Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics (2020) 103790. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146641020300375 [12] P. F. F. Carnelli, S. Almaraz-Calderon, K. E. Rehm et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 192701 (2012) doi: 192701 [13] P. Carnelli, S. Almaraz-Calderon, K. Rehm et al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 799, 197-202 (2015) doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2015.07.030 [14] W. Zhan, H. Xu, Z. Sun et al., International Journal of Modern Physics E 15, 1941-1956 (2006) doi: 10.1142/S0218301306005526 [15] Q. Liu, H. B. Liu, S. Chen et al., Journal of Instrumentation 8(11), C11008 (2013) doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/8/11/c11008 [16] Z. C. Zhang, X. Y. Wang, T. L. Pu et al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 1016, 165740 (2021) doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2021.165740 [17] J. Giovinazzo, T. Goigoux, S. Anvar et al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 840, 15-27 (2016) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2016.09.018 [18] R. O. Duda and P. E. Hart, Commun. ACM 15(1), 11-15 (1972) doi: 10.1145/361237.361242 [19] A. Weidinger, K. A. Eberhard, and E. Mathiak, Nucl. Phys. A 257(1), 144-164 (1976) doi: 10.1016/0375-9474(76)90480-2 [20] N. R. Fletcher, J. D. Fox, G. J. KeKelis et al., Phys. Rev. C 13, 1173-1179 (1976) doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.13.1173 [21] D. G. Kovar, D. F. Geesaman, T. H. Braid et al., Phys. Rev. C 20, 1305-1331 (1979) doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.20.1305 [22] N. Rowley and K. Hagino, Phys. Rev. C 91, 044617 (2015) doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.91.044617 [23] K. Hagino and J. M. Yao, EPJ Web of Conferences 117 (2016). URL https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201611708003 [24] M. Herman, R. Capote, B. V. Carlson et al., Nucl. Data Sheets 108(12), 2655-2715 (2007) doi: 10.1016/j.nds.2007.11.003 [25] R. Brun and F. Rademakers, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 389(1), 81-86 (1997) doi: 10.1016/S0168-9002(97)00048-X [26] F. E. James, Monte Carlo phase space, CERN, Geneva, 1968, p. 41 p, CERN, Geneva, 1 May 1968 URL https://cds.cern.ch/record/275743 [27] A. J. Koning and D. Rochman, Nucl. Data Sheets 113(12, SI), 2841-2934 (2012) doi: 10.1016/j.nds.2012.11.002 [28] D. H. Gloeckner, M. H. Macfarlane, and S. C. Pieper, Ptolemy, a program for heavy-ion direction-reaction calculations.[cross sections, optical model, dwba] (3 1976). URL https://www.osti.gov/biblio/7363080 [29] M. Ichimura, A. Arima, E. C. Halbert et al., Nuclear Physics A 204(2), 225-278 (1973) doi: 10.1016/0375-9474(73)90272-8 [30] M. Conjeaud, S. Gary, S. Harar et al., Nuclear Physics A 309(3), 515-532 (1978) doi: 10.1016/0375-9474(78)90493-1

Figures(14)

Get Citation
X. Y. Wang, N. T. Zhang, Z. C. Zhang, C. G. Lu, T. L. Pu, J. L. Zhang, L. M. Duan, B. S. Gao, K. A. Li, Y. T. Li, Y. Qian, L. H. Ru, B. Wang, X. D. Xu, H. Y. Zhao, W. P. Lin, Z. W. Cai, B. F. Ji, Q. T. Li, J. Y. Xu and X. D. Tang. Studies of the 2α and 3α channels of the 12C+12C reaction in the range of Ec.m.=8.9 MeV to 21 MeV using the active target Time Projection Chamber[J]. Chinese Physics C. doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/ac7a1d
X. Y. Wang, N. T. Zhang, Z. C. Zhang, C. G. Lu, T. L. Pu, J. L. Zhang, L. M. Duan, B. S. Gao, K. A. Li, Y. T. Li, Y. Qian, L. H. Ru, B. Wang, X. D. Xu, H. Y. Zhao, W. P. Lin, Z. W. Cai, B. F. Ji, Q. T. Li, J. Y. Xu and X. D. Tang. Studies of the 2α and 3α channels of the 12C+12C reaction in the range of Ec.m.=8.9 MeV to 21 MeV using the active target Time Projection Chamber[J]. Chinese Physics C.
Milestone
Article Metric

Article Views(54)
Cited by(0)
Policy on re-use
To reuse of subscription content published by CPC, the users need to request permission from CPC, unless the content was published under an Open Access license which automatically permits that type of reuse.
###### 通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
• 1.

沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

Title:
Email:

## Studies of the 2α and 3α channels of the 12C+12C reaction in the range of Ec.m.=8.9 MeV to 21 MeV using the active target Time Projection Chamber

###### Corresponding author: C. G. Lu, luchengui@impcas.ac.cn
• 1. Joint department for nuclear physics, Institute of Modern Physics and Lanzhou University, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
• 2. Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
• 3. School of Nuclear Science and Technology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
• 4. School of Nuclear Science and Technology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
• 5. Key Laboratory of Radiation Physics and Technology of the Ministry of Education, Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, China
• 6. School of Physics and State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China

Abstract: The 12C+12C fusion reaction was studied in the range of Ec.m.=8.9 to 21 MeV using the active-target Time Projection Chamber. With full information on all tracks of the reaction products, cross sections of the 12C(12C,8Be)16Og.s. channel and the 12C(12C,3α)12C channel could be measured down to the level of a few milibarns. The 12C(12C,8Be)16Og.s. reaction channel was determined to be 10 $_{-8}^{+24}$ mb at Ec.m.=11.1 MeV, supporting the direct α transfer reaction mechanism. The 12C(12C,3α)12C reaction channel was studied for the first time using an exclusive measurement. Our result does not confirm the anomaly behavior reported in the previous inclusive measurement by Kolata et al. [Phys. Rev. C 21, 579 (1980)]. Our comparisons with statistical model calculations suggest that the 3α channel is dominated by the fusion evaporation process at Ec.m. > 19 MeV. The additional contribution of the 3α channel increases the fusion reaction cross section by 10% at energies above 20 MeV. We also find that an additional reaction mechanism is needed to explain the measured cross section at Ec.m. < 15 MeV at which point the statistical model prediction vanishes.

Reference (30)

/