Calculations for 56Ni transfer cross sections

(p,d) Zero-range and finite-range options give similar results Codes mostly consistent with increasing beam energy Inconsistency with different potentials

(d,3He) Discontinuity with increasing energy in TWOFNR calculations

with Daehnick deuteron potential [for (d,3He) reaction only]

Calculation details

• Same set of options for FRESCO and TWOFNR calcs– “brush” front end produces input file for both calculations

• did NOT include non-locality– not an option for FRESCO

• tried both ZR and FR (LEA) options– Near peak, very little difference – remaining calcs use FR (LEA)

Solid = TWOFNRDashed = FRESCO

56Ni(p,d)55NiChapel Hill 89 optical potential for pJS Adiabatic + CH89 potential for d

37 MeV/A

56Ni(p,d) 55Ni

15 Nov

56Ni(p,d) cross sections – comparing d potentials Chapel Hill 89 optical potential for pComparing deutron potentials (JS+CH89 and Daehnick)

Each color is a different beam energy (MeV/u)Solid = JS+CH89 (adiabatic)Dashed = Daehnick

Shape and magnitude of cross sections are different

With Daehnick (DWBA):- peak mag ~2x larger- flattened shape- shifted peaks at high E

15 Nov

56Ni(p,d) cross sections – increasing beam energyChapel Hill 89 optical potential for pJohnson-Soper Adiabatic potential + CH89 for d (ADWA)

Each color is a different beam energy (MeV/u)Solid = TWOFNRDashed = FRESCO

Little difference at peak with adiabatic pot.

Differences at: • larger angles • higher energy

15 Nov

56Ni(p,d) cross sections – different deuteron potentialChapel Hill 89 optical potential for pDaehnick Global optical potential for d (DWBA)

Each color is a different beam energy (MeV/u)Solid = TWOFNRDashed = FRESCO

Excellent agreement throughout the energy range using Daehnick deuteron potential

Shape and magnitude of cross section is much different than when using adiabatic potential

56Ni(d,3He)55Co

15 Nov

56Ni(d,3He) cross sections – increasing energy for (d,3He)Daehnick Global optical potential for dBechetti-Greenlees optical potential for 3He

Each color is a different beam energy (MeV/u)Solid = TWOFNRDashed = FRESCO

Little difference at low E (red, black, green)

Enormous differences above ~60 MeV/u

Related to Daehnick discontinuity ? [see later slides]

23 Nov

56Ni(d,3He) cross sections – different deuteron potential Perey-Perey optical potential for dBechetti-Greenlees optical potential for 3He

Each color is a different beam energy (MeV/u)Solid = TWOFNRDashed = FRESCO

Excellent agreement throughout the energy range with Perey-Perey deuteron potential

56Ni(d,3He)55CoDaehnick discontinuity

56Ni(d,3He) cross sections – Daehnick discontinuity Daehnick Global optical potential for dBechetti-Greenlees optical potential for 3He 17 Nov

TWOFNR Smooth change in cross

section with energy E<75 and E>76,

Discontinuity at E~75.85 MeV

Thick black lines are 60, 70, 80 MeV/uThin lines are 1 MeV/u steps

56Ni(d,3He) cross sections – no Daehnick discontinuity Daehnick Global optical potential for dBechetti-Greenlees optical potential for 3He 17 Nov

FRESCOSmooth change in cross

section with energy over entire range

Thick black lines are 60, 70, 80 MeV/uThin lines are 1 MeV/u steps

56Ni(d,3He) – local, zero-range, BG for 3He23 Jan

Daehnick for deuteron

Perey-Perey for deuteron

brush+twofnr10 brush12+twofnr11

56Ni(d,3He) – local, zero-range, BG for 3He23 Jan

Daehnick for deuteron – still has discontinuity in twofnr (dotted)

brush12+twofnr11