The difference between microscopic and macroscopic cross sections.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on comparing the microscopic absorption cross sections of B, Cd, Gd, and Hf with the fission cross section of U-235. Microscopic cross sections are measured in barns, representing the effective area for specific reactions. To calculate macroscopic cross sections, the formula Σ = N σ is used, where N is the atomic density of the nuclide. The reaction rate for interactions is determined by the equation Σ Φ, with Φ representing neutron flux. For varying energy spectra, integrals over the appropriate energy range must be applied.
CaptainMayhem
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello there folks. So I'm doing some homework, and one of the questions asks for a comparison of the microscopic absorption cross sections of B, Cd, Gd, and Hf with the fission cross section of U-235. I've found the fission cross section in my trusty 17th edition of Nuclides and Isotopes, but the next part of the question confused me. It then asks for the macroscopic cross sections assuming density is derived from the periodic table.

I'm not sure how to figure out the micro/macroscopic cross sections. There is only one given value per nuclide. Help?!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Microscopic cross-sections (σ) are given for each nuclide usually in units of barns, where 1 b = 1 x 10-24 cm2. It is essentially the effective area for the particular reaction.

The macroscopic cross-section (Σ) has units of cm-1 is derived from the microscopic section according to

Σ = N σ, where N is the atomic density of a particular nuclide.

The reaction rate for a give interaction = Σ Φ, where Φ is the neutron flux.

These forumla work well for average or thermal neutron energies. If a wide enough energy spectrum is considered then one has to use integrals over the appropriate energy range.
 
Hello, I'm currently trying to compare theoretical results with an MCNP simulation. I'm using two discrete sets of data, intensity (probability) and linear attenuation coefficient, both functions of energy, to produce an attenuated energy spectrum after x-rays have passed through a thin layer of lead. I've been running through the calculations and I'm getting a higher average attenuated energy (~74 keV) than initial average energy (~33 keV). My guess is I'm doing something wrong somewhere...
Back
Top