Program - Brookhaven National Laboratory

[h]
Table 1: Comparison of all the nuclei in the trap mass measurements of [3] to FRDM 1992 and 2011a. A
# sign indicates that this AME2003 value is given by systematics.
Z & A AME2003 Trap FRDM1992 Dev.-1992 FRDM11a Dev.-2011a
& (MeV) (MeV) (MeV) (MeV) (MeV) (MeV)
38 & 80 -70.308 -70.313 -68.840 -1.473 -70.162 -0.151
38 & 81 -71.528 -71.528 -70.650 -0.878 -71.383 -0.145
38 & 84 -80.644 -80.648 -80.880 0.232 -81.022 0.374
40 & 86 -77.800 -77.971 -77.960 -0.011 -78.185 0.214
41 & 85 -67.150 -66.279 -65.350 -0.929 -66.200 -0.079
42 & 85 -59.100# -57.510 -55.750 -1.760 -57.078 -0.432
42 & 86 -64.560 -64.110 -62.720 -1.390 -63.557 -0.553
42 & 87 -67.690 -66.882 -66.030 -0.852 -66.666 -0.216
43 & 87 -59.120# -57.690 -56.540 -1.150 -57.466 -0.224
Ref. [2]. Locally substantial improvements were achieved, mainly in regions of shape coexistence. In the
table below the 1992 and 2011a tables are compared to all of the nuclei in the new trap measurements by [3]
in such a region of shape coexistence. For the 1992 table the rms is 1.10 MeV, for the new table 0.34 MeV,
for these nine nuclei. Currently some additional aspects of the calculations are further refined, in particular
ground-state correlations. In the heavy region it is important to select as the ground state the minimum
in the potential-energy surface with the highest barrier with respect to fission. Other minima may be
lower in energy but be unstable with respect to fission. This strategy could only be partially implemented
in FRDM(1992) because the potential energy could not be calculated in the axial-asymmetry space. The
computer codes now include axial asymmetry, so this necessary strategy is now fully implemented and leads
to significnat differences in the superheavy region relative to FRDM(1992). The studies are on track to be
completed in the next few months so that finalized results can be presented at at ND2013 as FRDM(2012),
which will include related quantities such as ground-state spins, half-lives and deformations [4].
[1] P. Möller, R. Bengtsson, K.-L. Kratz, and H. Sagawa, Proc. International Conference on Nuclear Data
and Technology, April 22–27, 2007, Nice, France, (EDP Sciences, (2008) p. 69, ISBN 978-2-7598-0090-2),
and http://t2.lanl.gov/molleretal/publications/nd2007.html. [2] P. Möller, W. D. Myers, H. Sagawa, and
S. Yoshida, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 052501. [3] E. Haettner, D. Ackermann, G. Audi et al., Phys.
Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 122501. [4] P. Möller and K.-L. Kratz, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables
, to be published.
Session BE Benchmark and Testing
Monday March 4, 2013
Room: Central Park West at 10:30 AM
BE 1 10:30 AM
Application of Subgroup Method in TPFAP Library
Ping Liu
China Institute of Atomic Energy
TPFAP is a transmission probability fuel assembly code package for burn-up calculations on BWR and
PWR. The transport calculation is started with a number of energy group calculations in the TPFAP
34