Finding the scattering cross section

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The total thermal neutron cross-section for the isotope 197Au was calculated to be 59 Barns using the formula for fraction scattered. However, this method proved inaccurate due to the high absorption fraction of 70%, leading to a correct value of 102 Barns when applying the exponential decay model I(x)=I_o exp^{-n σ x}. The discrepancy arises because the simplified formula assumes a small fraction absorbed, which is not valid in this case. The correct approach involves using the natural logarithm of the fraction of neutrons that survive the foil, resulting in a more accurate cross-section measurement.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of neutron scattering principles
  • Familiarity with exponential decay functions
  • Knowledge of the concepts of cross-section and absorption
  • Basic proficiency in algebra and logarithmic functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and application of the exponential decay model in particle physics
  • Learn about neutron interaction cross-sections in different materials
  • Explore the implications of high absorption fractions on scattering calculations
  • Investigate the relationship between density, atomic mass, and neutron scattering
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, researchers in nuclear physics, and professionals working with neutron scattering experiments will benefit from this discussion.

Muthumanimaran
Messages
79
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


In an experiment carried out with a beam of thermal neutrons it is found that on traversing a 2mm thick foil of 197Au, some 70% of the neutrons are removed. What is the total thermal neutron cross-section for this isotope of gold? Comment on the result of the cross-section measurement in the light of the fact that the radius of a gold nucleus is
6.5 x 10-15 m. (Density of gold: 19300 kg m-3)
Question is from this link #chap1http://physics-database.group.shef.ac.uk/phy303/303prob1.html#chap1

Homework Equations


$$\frac{R_s}{R_i}=\frac{N_{A}L{\rho}{\sigma}}{A{\times}10^{-3}}$$
$\frac{R_s}{R_i}$ is fraction scattered
A is mass number
L is thickness
$\rho$ is density

The Attempt at a Solution



I simply substituted the values in the above expression
$$0.7=\frac{6.02{\times}10^{23}{\times}(2{\times}10^{-3}){\times}(19300){\times}{\sigma}}{197{\times}10^{-3}}$$

And finally got $ \sigma = 59.32{\times}10^{-28} $ or 59 Barns but the actual answer turns out to be 102 Barns. where did made the mistake, I re did the problem but getting same answer for cross section
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
Physics news on Phys.org
I also got your same answer on the first attempt, but then made the observation that the formula you used for the fraction absorbed only holds accurately when the fraction absorbed is small. The problem involves an exponential drop in intensity of the beam as it traverses the 2mm foil: ## I(x)=I_o exp^{-n \sigma x} ## with ## \frac{I(L)}{I_o}=.3 ##.(70% absorption means 30% survived). Solving this gives ## n \sigma L=ln(10/3)=1.20 ## where ## n=(\rho N_A)/(A.W.) ##.(The 1.20 basically replaces the .7 in the formula that you used to solve it in the way that you did. 1.20/.7=102/59) ## \\ ## Editing: Notice in this second method we used ## -ln(1-.7)=1.2 ## . Now ## ln(1-x)=-x ## approximately for x<<1, but .7 was too large to give the result that ## -ln(1-.7)=.7 ##, thereby the simplified formula of the first method gave an inaccurate result.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Muthumanimaran
In the previous problem, it should be recognized that the intensity ## I ## satisfies the differential equation ## \frac{dI(x)}{dx}=-n \sigma I(x) ##. What is happening in this case is scatterers/blockers of area ## \sigma ## can each block the beam, but if ## A ## is the area of the target with thickness ## L ##, the total scattering cross section ## \sigma_{total} ## can not get any larger than the area ## A ##. For the first method of solving the problem, the total scattering cross section is computed to be ## \sigma_{total}=n \sigma V =n \sigma A L##. This calculation does not account for possible overlap in the areas that are getting blocked, and ultimately the computed ## \sigma_{total} ## will become larger than ## A ## by this method as ## L ## becomes large.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
739
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
893
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K