Nuclear Physics A 834 (2010) 208c–211c

www.elsevier.com/locate/nuclphysa

16 194
Study of fission fragment mass distribution for O+ Pt reaction
E. Prasada ∗ , K. M. Variera , B. R. S. Babua , N. Madhavanb , K. S. Goldab , S. Nathb , B.
P. Ajith Kumarb , J. J. Dasb , J. Gehlotb , P. Sugathanb , A. Jhinganb , A. K. Sinhac , B. R.
Beherad , Rohit Sandald , Hardev Singhd , R. Singhe , R. G. Thomasf and S. Kailasf
a
Department of Physics, University Of Calicut, Calicut-673635, India
b
Inter University Accelerator Centre, Aruna Asaf Ali Marg, New Delhi-110067, India
c
UGC-DAE Consortium for Scientific Research, Kolkatta Centre, Kolkatta-700098, India
d
Department of Physics, Panjab University, Chandigarh-160014, India
e
Department of Physics and Astrophysics, Delhi University, Delhi-110007, India
f
Nuclear Physics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre,Mumbai-400085, India

Fission fragment mass angle correlation and mass ratio distributions have been mea-
sured for 16 O + 194 Pt reaction forming the composite system 210 Rn in the energy range 75
MeV to 102 MeV in laboratory frame. No mass angle correlation was observed and the
mass ratio distributions were compared with theoretical calculations assuming compound
nucleus formation. No evidence of quasi-fission process is observed in the reaction.

1. Introduction
The study of fusion-fission dynamics in heavy ion induced reaction is a topic of intense
research even today. The time evolution of the composite system formed after reaction and
the parameters on which the dynamics depends are still not resolved fully. A systematic
study of these reaction products can reveal information about complex dynamics involved
in the process. Evaporation residues (ER) are the unambiguous signature of compound
nucleus (CN) formation and considerable effort is going on in the study of superheavy
elements and superheavy evaporation residues. A major challenge in superheavy element
production is the presence of a non-equilibrium process called quasifission (QF) [1,2]. In
terms of reaction time scale, QF bridges the gap between deep inelastic process (DIC) and
compound nucleus (CN) formation. Dynamical models proposed in the eighties predicted
the onset of these non equilibrium processes for symmetric systems, especially when the
product ZP ZT ≥ 1600 where ZP and ZT are the atomic charges of the projectile and target
respectively. Observation of anomalous angular anisotropies of fission fragments over the
predictions of transition state models(TSM) in heavy ion induced reactions using actinide
targets changed the scenario. QF is a fission like process which preceeds the formation
∗
prasad.e.nair@gmail.com
0375-9474/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2009.12.042
 E. Prasad et al. / Nuclear Physics A 834 (2010) 208c–211c 209c

of a compoiste mono nuclear system which dominates in the energy range where CN
formation also maximises. The experimental signatures of QF include a strong hindrance
to ER formation [3,4], anomalous angular anisotropies [5], strong fragment mass angle
correlation and broadened mass distributions [6,7]. Recent observation of the unexpected
presence of QF in asymmetric reactions forming systems as light as Po, Ra, Th [3,6,7]
evoked considerable interest in this field. In this context we have measured the mass angle
correlation and the mass ratio distributions for 16 O + 194 Pt forming the composite system
210
Rn.

1.1. Experiment
The experiment was performed at 15UD Pelletron accelerator facility of Inter University
Accelerator Centre (IUAC), New Delhi. General Purpose Scattering Chamber (GPSC)
was used for the measurements. Pulsed 16 O beam, with pulse separation of 250 ns and
pulse width 1 ns, in the energy range 75 MeV to 102 MeV, was used to bombard isotopi-
cally enriched 194 Pt target of thickness 300 μg/cm2 on 20 μg/cm2 thick carbon backing.
Two large area, position sensitive, Multi Wire Proportional Counters( MWPCs) of active
area 24 cm X 10 cm, were used for fission fragment measurement, by forming a time of
flight(TOF) set up. These detectors were mounted on the two arms of the chamber, the
forward detector centred at polar angle θ= 45◦ ( azimuthal angle φ= 90◦ ) and backward
detector centred at θ= 115◦ ( azimuthal angle φ= 270◦ ). The nearest distance to the
forward detector from the target was 56 cm and that to the backward detector was 30
cm. The target ladder was kept at 45◦ with respect to beam direction. Two solid state
detectors were fixed at ±10◦ with respect to the beam axis, which were used to monitor
the elastically scattered 16 O ions. The position information of the fragments entering the
detectors were obtained from the delay-line read out of the wire planes. The fast timing
signal from anode of both MWPC1 and MWPC2 were used to obtain the TOF of the
fragments with respect to the beam pulse.

Figure 1. Time correlation of the simultane- Figure 2. The Mass ratio versus centre-of-
ously detected fragments. mass angle density plot for 16 O + 194 Pt at
Elab 102 MeV.
210c E. Prasad et al. / Nuclear Physics A 834 (2010) 208c–211c

Figure 3. The Mass ratio distributions Figure 4. The Mass ratio width versus
for 16 O + 194 Pt at different energies. compound nucleus excitation energy plot
for 16 O + 194 Pt.

1.2. Analysis and Results

The MWPC detectors provide very good timing and position resolution. The fission
fragments were well seperated from elastic and quasi elastic channels, both in time and
energy loss spectra. Figure.1. shows the timing correlation of the two fragments detected
in coincidence in two MWPCs. The position calibration of the detectors were performed
using a fission source (252 Cf) of known strength. The position resolution of the detec-
tors was better than 1.5 mm. The calibrated positions ( X and Y) were converted to
polar angles ( θ and φ) and fragment velocities in laboratory frame were calculated using
TOF informations. The energy loss of the fragments in the target material were taken
in to consideration while reconstructing the velocity vectors of fragments with masses
m1 and m2 . These velocities were then converted into centre of mass frame using the
kinematic transformations. The mass distributions and mass ratio distributions of the
binary fragments were obtained event by event using the method given in ref.[9]. From
the conservation of linear momentum,

m1 v1c.m = m2 v2c.m (1)

the mass ratio is given by,

m2
MR = (2)
m1 + m2
The delay δt0 in ref.[9], which consists of two terms, the machine delay and the electronic
delay respectively, was corrected for each energy during the analysis.
The fragment mass ratio versus centre of mass angle at 102 MeV beam energy is plotted
in figure 2. The mass ratio is symmetric about 0.5 and no mass angle correlation is
observed for the system studied. As the detectors used were of finite size, a cut ( 120o
 E. Prasad et al. / Nuclear Physics A 834 (2010) 208c–211c 211c

to 130o shown in fig.2.) at the centre is made and only events inside the cut is taken
for obtaining the mass ratio widths for all energies. The mass ratio distribution for
different beam energies are plotted in figure 3. The width of the mass ratio distribution is
obtained by fitting the experimental mass ratio distribution using Gaussian function and
the standard deviation from the fittings are plotted against compound nucleus excitation
energy in figure 4. It is well known that in the case of an equilibrated compound nucleus,
2
the variance of fission like fragment mass distribution (σm ) varies linearly with saddle
point temperature (T) and mean sqaure angular momentum < J 2 >.
σm
2
= αT + β < J 2 > (3)
where, α and β are fitting constants. Fission < J 2 > values are calculated at ener-
gies above Coulomb barrier, using the couple channel code CCFULL (including target
deformation) and PACE3. The saddle point temperature T is given by

Ecm + Q − Bf − Erot − Epre
T = (4)
a
where Bf ( fission barrier at average angular momentum) and Erot are calculated using
Sierk Model [10] and Epre is the energy taken away by the neutrons, calculated from the
compilation of Saxena et al. [11]. The constants α (= 2.5877 × 10−3 ) and β (= 6.2889 ×
10−7 ) are obtained by chi square fitting and the fitting is done at above barrier energies
only, since the evaporation residue cross section is dominant over fission at lower energies.
The dotted line in figure 4. is the theoretical predictions.
1.3. Summary
Mass angle correlation and mass ratio distributions were measured for 16 O + 194 Pt
reaction at energies around the Coulomb barrier. No mass angle correlation is observed
and the mass ratio widths are behvaing normally which hints that QF process is absent
and the system proceeded through true CN formation
We are thankful to T. K. Ghosh and P. Bhattacharya for their help during the exper-
iment and S. Muralithar for contributions at different stages of this work. One of the
authors (E P) would like to thank University Grants Commission (U. G. C) for providing
financial support through S. R. F for carrying out this work

REFERENCES
1. W. J. Swiatecki, Phys. Scr. 24, 113 (1981).
2. J. P. Blocki et al., Nucl. Phys. A 459, 145 (1986)
3. A. C. Berriman et al., Nature(London) 413, 144 (2001).
4. D. J. Hinde et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 2820701 (2002).
5. B. B. Back et al., Phys. Rev. Lett 50, 818,(1983).
6. R. Rafie et al., Phys. Rev. C 77, 024606 (2008).
7. R. G. Thomas et al., Phys. Rev. C 77, 034610 (2008).
8. R. Bock et al., Nucl. Phys. A 388, 334 (1982).
9. R. K. Choudhury et al., Phys. Rev. C 60, 054609 (1999).
10. A. J. Sierk Phys. Rev. C 33, 2039 (1986)
11. A. Saxena et al., Phys. Rev. C 49, 932 (1994) .