# Fusion reactions around the barrier for Be+238U

• Fusion-evaporation cross sections of $^{238}$U($^{9}$Be, 5n)$^{242}$Cm are measured over a wide energy range around the Coulomb barrier. These measured cross sections are compared with model calculations using two codes, namely HIVAP2 and KEWPIE2. HIVAP2 calculations overestimate the measured fusion-evaporation cross sections by a factor of approximately 3. In KEWPIE2 calculations, two approaches, namely the Wentzel-Kramers-Brillouin (WKB) approximation and the empirical barrier-distribution (EBD) method, are used for the capture probability; both of them properly describe the measured cross sections. Additionally, fusion cross sections of $^{7,9}$Be+$^{238}$U measured in two experiments are applied to constrain model calculations further through three codes, i.e., HIVAP2, KEWPIE2, and CCFULL. Parameters in these codes are also examined by comparison with measured fusion cross sections. All the comparisons indicate that the KEWPIE2 calculations using the WKB approximation agree well with the measured cross sections of both fusion reactions $^{7,9}$Be+$^{238}$U and the fusion-evaporation reaction $^{238}$U($^{9}$Be, 5n)$^{242}$Cm. Calculations using the fusion code CCFULL are also in good agreement with the measured fusion cross sections of $^{7,9}$Be+$^{238}$U.
•  [1] S. Hofmann and G. Münzenberg, Rev. Mod. Phys. 72, 733 (2000 doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.72.733 [2] B. B. Back, H. Esbensen, C. L. Jiang et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 317 (2014 doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.86.317 [3] Y. T. Oganessian and V. K. Utyonkov, Rep. Prog. Phys. 78, 036301 (2015 doi: 10.1088/0034-4885/78/3/036301 [4] M. Dasgupta, D. J. Hinde, R. D. Butt et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1395 (1999 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.1395 [5] D. J. Hinde, M. Dasgupta, B. R. Fulton et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 272701 (2002 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.272701 [6] R. Raabe, J. L. Sida, J. L. Charvet et al., Nature 431, 823 (2004 doi: 10.1038/nature02984 [7] R. Raabe, C. Angulo, J. L. Charvet et al., Phys. Rev. C 74, 044606 (2006 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.74.044606 [8] M. Dasgupta, D. J. Hinde, S. L. Sheehy et al., Phys. Rev. C 81, 024608 (2010 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.81.024608 [9] D. J. Hinde and M. Dasgupta, Phys. Rev. C 81, 064611 (2010 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.81.064611 [10] J. F. Liang and C. Signorini, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 14, 1121 (2005 doi: 10.1142/S021830130500382X [11] N. Keeley, R. Raabe, N. Alamanos et al., Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 59, 579 (2007 doi: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2007.02.002 [12] L. F. Canto, P. R. S. Gomes, R. Donangelo et al., Phys. Rep. 596, 1 (2015 doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2015.08.001 [13] V. Fekou-Youmbi, J. L. Sida, N. Alamanos et al., J. Phys. G 23, 1259 (1997 [14] V. Fekou-Youmbi, J. L. Sida, N. Alamanos et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 437, 490 (1999 doi: 10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00683-X [15] K. Nishio, H. Ikezoe, Y. Nagame et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 162701 (2004 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.162701 [16] K. Nishio, H. Ikezoe, S. Mitsuoka et al., Phys. Rev. C 77, 064607 (2008 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.77.064607 [17] K. Nishio, H. Ikezoe, I. Nishinaka et al., Phys. Rev. C 82, 044604 (2010 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.82.044604 [18] K. Nishio, S. Mitsuoka, I. Nishinaka et al., Phys. Rev. C 86, 034608 (2012 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.86.034608 [19] W. Reisdorf and M. Schädel, Z. Phys. A 343, 47 (1992 doi: 10.1007/BF01291597 [20] B. Bouriquet, Y. Abe, and D. Boilley, Comput. Phys. Commun. 159, 1 (2004 doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2003.10.002 [21] K. Hagino, N. Rowley, and A. T. Kruppa, Comput. Phys. Commun. 123, 143 (1999 doi: 10.1016/S0010-4655(99)00243-X [22] W. Hua, Y. H. Zhang, X. H. Zhou et al., Nucl. Phys. Rev. 34, 138 (2017 [23] N. Wang, K. Zhao, W. Scheid et al., Phys. Rev. C 77, 014603 (2008 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.77.014603 [24] H. Lü, A. Marchix, Y. Abe et al., Comput. Phys. Commun. 200, 381 (2016 doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2015.12.003 [25] N. T. Zhang, Y. D. Fang, P. R. S. Gomes et al., Phys. Rev. C 90, 024621 (2014 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.90.024621 [26] Y. D. Fang, P. R. S. Gomes, J. Lubian et al., Phys. Rev. C 91, 014608 (2015 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.91.014608

Figures(3)

Get Citation
Bo Mei, Dimiter L. Balabanski, Wei Hua, Yu-Hu Zhang, Xiao-Hong Zhou, Cen-Xi Yuan and Jun Su. Fusion reactions around the barrier for Be+238U[J]. Chinese Physics C.
Bo Mei, Dimiter L. Balabanski, Wei Hua, Yu-Hu Zhang, Xiao-Hong Zhou, Cen-Xi Yuan and Jun Su. Fusion reactions around the barrier for Be+238U[J]. Chinese Physics C.
Milestone
Article Metric

Article Views(35)
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:

## Fusion reactions around the barrier for Be+238U

###### Corresponding author: Wei Hua, huaw@mail.sysu.edu.cn
• 1. Sino-French Institute of Nuclear Engineering and Technology, Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai 519082, China
• 2. Institute of Modern Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China
• 3. Extreme Light Infrastructure Nuclear Physics, “Horia Hulubei” National R&D Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Strada Reactorului 30, 077125 Bucharest Magurele, Romania

Abstract: Fusion-evaporation cross sections of $^{238}$U($^{9}$Be, 5n)$^{242}$Cm are measured over a wide energy range around the Coulomb barrier. These measured cross sections are compared with model calculations using two codes, namely HIVAP2 and KEWPIE2. HIVAP2 calculations overestimate the measured fusion-evaporation cross sections by a factor of approximately 3. In KEWPIE2 calculations, two approaches, namely the Wentzel-Kramers-Brillouin (WKB) approximation and the empirical barrier-distribution (EBD) method, are used for the capture probability; both of them properly describe the measured cross sections. Additionally, fusion cross sections of $^{7,9}$Be+$^{238}$U measured in two experiments are applied to constrain model calculations further through three codes, i.e., HIVAP2, KEWPIE2, and CCFULL. Parameters in these codes are also examined by comparison with measured fusion cross sections. All the comparisons indicate that the KEWPIE2 calculations using the WKB approximation agree well with the measured cross sections of both fusion reactions $^{7,9}$Be+$^{238}$U and the fusion-evaporation reaction $^{238}$U($^{9}$Be, 5n)$^{242}$Cm. Calculations using the fusion code CCFULL are also in good agreement with the measured fusion cross sections of $^{7,9}$Be+$^{238}$U.

Reference (26)

/