Prompt Fission Neutron Spectra And Anti Nu P

Methods used to obtain the evaluated prompt fisson neutron spectrum N(E) and the average prompt neutron multiplicity anti .nu./sub p/ are reviewed. The relative influence of experimental data; interpolated, extrapolated, and fitted experimental data; systematics; and nuclear theory are considered for the cases where (a) abundant experimental data exist, (b) some experimental data exist, and (c) no experimental data exist. The Maxwellian and Watt distributions, and the determination of the parameters of these distributions by data fitting, are described and compared to recent new theoretical work on the calculation of N(E). Similarly, various expressions for anti .gamma./sub p/ that have been obtained by data fitting and systematics are described and compared to recent new theoretical work. Complications in the evaluation of N(E) and anti .gamma./sub p/ due to the onset of multiple-chance fission and the interrelationships between N(E), anti .gamma delta./sub p/ and the multiple-chance fission cross section are discussed using the example of the fission of 235U. Some statistics and comments are given on the evaluations of N(E) and anti .gamma./sub p/ contained in ENDF/B-V, and a number of concluding recommendations are made for future evaluation work.

Although the fission of heavy nuclei was discovered over 75 years ago, many problems and questions still remain to be addressed and answered. The reader will be presented with an old, but persistent problem of this field: The contradiction between Prompt Fission Neutron (PFN) spectra measured with differential (microscopic) experiments and integral (macroscopic and benchmark) experiments (the Micro-Macro problem). The difference in average energy is rather small ~3% but it is stable and we cannot explain the difference due to experimental uncertainties. Can we measure the PFN spectrum with high accuracy? How may we compare results of different experiments to provide better accuracy? Are our traditional theoretical models correct? What can be done to solve the Micro-Macro problem in future? These questions are discussed in this monograph for the reader. The current work will be of interest to graduate students and researchers, particularly those working in nuclear and neutron physics.

A new calculation of the prompt fission neutron spectrum N(E) is presented as a function of both the fissioning nucleus and its excitation energy. The calculation, based upon standard nuclear-evaporation theory, accounts for the physical effects of the distribution of fission-fragment residual nuclear temperature and the energy dependence of the cross section for the inverse process of compound-nucleus formation. With the use of a residual nuclear temperature distribution based upon the Fermi-gas model, calculations were performed for two different assumptions concerning the cross section for compound-nucleus formation. Use of a constant cross section leads to a closed expression for the neutron energy spectrum, while use of an energy-dependent cross section, calculated with the optical model, yields a numerical integration. Results obtained for the two assumptions agree well with experimental data, although there is a preference for the energy-dependent cross section calculation. 7 figures.

Here, the energy spectrum of prompt neutrons emitted in fission (PFNS) plays a very important role in nuclear science and technology. A Coordinated Research Project (CRP) "Evaluation of Prompt Fission Neutron Spectra of Actinides" was established by the IAEA Nuclear Data Section in 2009, with the major goal to produce new PFNS evaluations with uncertainties for actinide nuclei.

Abstract: Calculations of prompt fission neutron spectra (PFNS) from the 235 U(n, f) reaction were performed with a semi-empirical method for E n = 7.0 and 14.7 MeV neutron energies. The total PFNS were obtained as a superposition of (n, xnf) pre-fission neutron spectra and post-fission spectra of neutrons which were evaporated from fission fragments, and these two kinds of spectra were taken as an expression of the evaporation spectrum. The contributions of (n, xnf) fission neutron spectra on the calculated PFNS were discussed. The results show that emission of one or two neutrons in the (n, nf) or (n, 2nf) reactions influences the PFNS shape, and the neutron spectra of the (n, xnf) fission-channel are soft compared with the neutron spectra of the (n, f) fission channel. In addition, analysis of the multiple-chance fission component showed that second-chance fission dominates the PFNS with an incident neutron energy of 14.7 MeV whereas first-chance fission dominates the 7 MeV case.