Nuclear Shell Model

Atomic theory based on the shell model has provided remarkable

clarification of the complicated details of atomic structure.

Nuclear physicists therefore attempted to use a similar theory to attack the

problem of nuclear structure, in the hope of similar success in clarifying
the properties of nuclei.

In the atomic shell model, we fill the shells with electrons in order of
increasing energy, consistent with the requirement of the Pauli principle.

When we do so, we obtain an inert core of filled shells and some number
of valence electrons;

the model then assumes that atomic properties are determined primarily by
the valence electrons.

When we compare some measured properties of atomic systems with the

predictions of the model, we find remarkable agreement.

In particular, we see regular and smooth variations of atomic properties

within a subshell, but rather sudden and dramatic changes in the properties
when we fill one subshell and enter the next.

When we try to carry this model over to the nuclear realm, we

immediately encounter several objections.

In the atomic case, the potential is supplied by the Coulomb field of the
nucleus; the subshells (“orbits”) are established by an external agent.

We can solve the Schrodinger equation for this potential and calculate the
energies of the subshells into which electrons can then be placed.

In the nucleus, there is no such external agent; the nucleons move in a

potential that they themselves create.
Another appealing aspect of atomic shell theory is the existence of spatial
orbits. It is often very useful to describe atomic properties in terms of
spatial orbits of the electrons.

The electrons can move in those orbits relatively free of collisions with
other electrons.

Nucleons have a relatively large diameter compared with the size of the
nucleus.

Experimental evidence that supports the existence of nuclear shells.

There are multiple experimentally determined facts that indicate the shell-
like structure of the atomic nucleus.

Some of them are listed below:

Nuclei with Z and N (or both) equal to 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 and 126 are
extra stable.

These numbers are called the magic numbers and

this stability variation is analogous to stability of 2, 8, 18, 32 etc electrons

in electronic shells.

The electric quadrupole moment is zero for a nucleus with N or Z equal to

a magic number indicating the spherical symmetry analogous to that in
closed shells of atoms.

Nuclear species with one neutron excess of a magic number readily emit a
single neutron indicating that the extra neutron is loosely bound to the rest
of the nucleus.

Nuclei with magic number of nucleons of a particular type have more

number of stable isotopes and isotones.

Nuclei which have neutron number and proton (atomic) numbers each
equal to one of the magic numbers are called "doubly magic", and are
especially stable against decay.
The known doubly magic isotopes are

He 2 ,
4
2

16
8 O 8,

Ca20,
40
20

Ca 28,
48
20

48
28 20¿ ,
56
28 28¿ ,

Sn50 ,
100
50

132
50 Sn82,

and 20882Pb126

Double-magic effects may allow existence of stable isotopes which

otherwise would not have been expected.

An example is 4020Ca20,

with 20 neutrons and

20 protons,

which is the heaviest stable isotope made of the same number of protons
and neutrons.

Both 4820Ca28 and 4828¿20 are doubly magic because 4820Ca28 has 20 protons and 28
neutrons while 4828¿20 has 28 protons and 20 neutrons.
48
20 is very neutron-rich for such a light element, but like 4020Ca20, it is made
Ca 28
stable by being double magic.

Magic number shell effects are seen in ordinary abundances of elements:

4
2 He is among the most abundant (and stable) nuclei in the universe and
208
82 Pb126 is the heaviest stable nuclide.

Sn (Z=50) has ten stable isotopes more than any other element, while

Ca ( Z =20) has six isotopes. This indicates that elements with Z = 50 and
Z = 20 are more than usually stable.

The doubly magic nuclei (Z and N both magic numbers)

He2 ,
4
2

O 8,
16
8

40
20 Ca 20 and
208
82 Pb126 are particularly tightly bound.

The binding energy of the next neutron or proton after a magic number is
very small.

Shell model potential.

The question of the existence of a nuclear potential is dealt with by the

fundamental assumption of the shell model:

the motion of a single nucleon is governed by a potential caused by all of

the other nucleons.

If we treat each individual nucleon in this way, then we can allow the
nucleons in turn to occupy the energy levels of a series of subshells.
The existence of definite spatial orbits depends on the Pauli principle.

Assumptions in the Independent-particle Model.

In contrast with the situation with atoms, the nucleus contains no massive
central body which can act as a force center.
This deficiency is circumvented by the bold assumption that each nucleon
experiences a central attractive force which can be ascribed to the average
effect of all the other (A - 1) nucleons in the nucleus.

On this assumption, each nucleon behaves as though it were moving

independently in a central field, which is describable as a short-range
potential well.

Secondly, this potential is assumed to be the same for all values of l .

In the assumed central potential, each nucleon is imagined to be capable of

describing an orbit of well-defined energy and angular momentum, in a
manner analogous to the behavior of atomic electrons.

This condition implies that each nucleon can describe at least several
revolutions without being disturbed or scattered in collisions with other
nucleons.

A simple rectangular well (Figure 2) having a great depth −V 0 and a radius

about equal to the nuclear radius R is a sufficiently good representation of
such a short-range force.

Fig 2: A realistic form for the shell-model potential.

The wave functions for independent particles within such a well obey the
radial wave equation for r < R and are zero at the well boundary r = R, as
well as outside the well r > R.
The allowed energy states then correspond to the sequence of solutions of
the radial wave equation (Bessel functions) which have zero values at r =
R.

Order of states: 1 s 1 p1 d 2 s 1 f 2 p 1 g

Occupation number 2(2 l+1): 2 6 10 2 14 6 18

Aggregate number∑ 2(2l+1): 2 8 18 20 34 40 58

Each state with orbital angular momentum l is degenerate (same energy)

with respect to ml since m does not occur in the radial wave equation.

Therefore, in each state of a given l , there can be (2 l+ 1) identical nucleons

when spin is neglected or 2(2 l+1) identical nucleons if the energy is
independent of spin orientation.

The order of energy states for the deep rectangular well turns out to be
(Fig 3) of nucleons where the letter gives the l value and the integer prefix
gives the radial quantum number.

Fig:3 Shell structure obtained with infinite well and harmonic

oscillator potentials. The capacity of each level is indicated to its right.
Large gaps occur between the levels, which we associate with closed
shells. The circled numbers indicate the total number of nucleons at
each shell closure.

This sequence fails to give any indication of a closed shell at 50 nucleons

and fails even more clearly for still larger nucleon numbers.

Spin-Orbit Potential

Mayer, Haxel, Suess, and Jensen showed in 1949 that the inclusion of a
spin-orbit potential could give the proper separation of the subshells.

As in atomic physics, in the presence of a spin-orbit interaction it is

appropriate to label the states with the total angular momentum j=l+s .

A single nucleon has s=1/2, so the possible values of the total angular
momentum quantum number are j=l+ 1/2 or j=l−1/2(except for l=0 in
which case only j=1/2 is allowed).

Consider a level such as the 1 f level (l=3 ),

The possible j values are l ±1/2 = 5/2 or 7/2 . Thus we have the levels 1 f 5 /2
and 1 f 7 /2.
The degeneracy of each level is (2 j+1), which comes from the m j , values.

The capacity of the 1 f 5 /2 level is therefore 6 and that of 1 f 7 /2 is 8,

Sequence of States in the Spin-orbit-coupling Model.

Additional assumptions are needed if the sequence of energy states is to

match the empirically known " magic numbers" 50, 82, and 126.

It was noted independently by Mayer and by Haxel, Jensen, and Suess that
this match could be obtained by postulating strong spin-orbit coupling for
nucleons.

Then, for the same l value, the energy of the j=l+ 1/2 state may be quite
different from the energy of the j=l−1/2 state.

As presently visualized, the "shell model," or

" spin-orbit-coupling model," or

jj -coupling model,"

involves the following assumptions in addition to those which are inherent

in every independent-particle model:

For the same value of the orbital angular momentum, the j=l+ 1/2 state
("parallel" orbit and spin) is deeper lying, or more tightly bound,
than the, j=l−1/ 2 state.

The energy separation between j=l+ 1/2 and j=l−1/2 increases with
increasing values of Z, being then approximately proportional to (2 l+ 1)2 /3
.

An even number of identical nucleons having the same l and j will

always couple to give even parity, zero total angular momentum, and
zero magnetic moment.

An odd number of identical nucleons having the same l and j will always
couple to give odd parity if l is odd and even parity if l is even, a total
angular momentum j , and a magnetic moment equal to that of a single
nucleon in the state j .

Figure illustrates the succession of states in a very deep rectangular

potential well and the general nature of their splitting by the spin-orbit
coupling.

Sequence of filling of the shell model states:

For Z odd
[ 1 s 1/ 2 ]2[ 1 p 3/ 2 , 1 p 1/2 ]8[ 1 d 5/ 2 , 2 s 1/ 2 , 1 d 3/ 2 ]20
[ 1 f 7 /2 ] 28 [ 2 p3 /2 , 1 f 5 /2 ,2 p1/ 2 , 1 g 9 /2 ]5[ 1 g 7/ 2 ,2 d 5 /2 ,1 h11/ 2 ,2 d 3 /2 ,3 s1 /2 ] 82

For N odd:
[ 1 s 1/ 2 ]2[ 1 p 3/ 2 , 1 p 1/2 ]8[ 1 d 5/ 2 , 2 s 1/ 2 , 1 d 3/ 2 ]20 [ 1 f 7 /2 ] 28 [ 2 p3 /2 , 1 f 5 /2 ,2 p1/ 2 , 1 g 9 /2 ] 50
[ 2 d 5/ 2 , 1 g 7 /2 ,3 s1 /2 ,1 h11 /2 ,2 d 3 /2 ]82 [ 2 f 7 / 2 , 1 h9/ 2 ,3 p3 /2 ,2 f 5/ 2 , 3 p1/ 2 , 1 i13 /2 , 2 g9 / 2 ] 126

As a general rule higher angular momentum states are filled first.

Shell model predicts exact ground state spins and parities of all nuclei.

Shell model predicts ground state spins and parities of all even Z-even
(even-even) nuclei as 0+¿ ¿ due to pairing of nucleons.

For odd Z or odd N (odd mass) nuclei, the ground state spin and parity
are dictated by the shell model state of the j and l of the odd unpaired
particle (N or Z).

For odd Z-odd N nuclei the ground state spin and parity is dictated by
the odd unpaired neutron and proton and the j and l of the shell model
states:
| j p+ j n|> j >| j p− jn| and π=(−1)l + l .
p n

Fig.: The effect of the spin-orbit interaction, which splits the levels
with l > 0 into two new levels. The shell effect is quite apparent, and
the magic numbers are exactly reproduced.
8.6 Solved Problems

Problem 8.1
Write the shell-model configurations and predict the ground state spin and
parity of the following nuclei: a) 12C b) 17O c) 27Al d) 45Sc e) 63Cu f)
73
Ge

Solution
12
a ¿ 6C : 6 protons and 6 neutrons : even-even:0+¿ ¿

b ¿ 8O: 9 neutrons: (1 s ½ )2 (1 p3/2 )4 (1 p½ ) 2 (1 d 5/2 )1 ⇒ 5/2+

17

c ¿ 13 Al :13 protons: (1 s ½ )2 (1 p3/2 )4 (1 p½ ) 2 (1 d 5/2 )5 ⇒5/2-

21

d ¿ 21Sc :21protons: (1 s ½ ) (1 p3/2 ) (1 p½ ) (1 d 5/2 ) (2 s ½ ) (1 d3/2 ) (1 f 7/2 ) ⇒ 7/2

45 2 4 2 6 2 4 1 -

e ¿ 29 Cu :29protons: (1 s ½ ) (1 p3/2 ) (1 p½ ) (1 d 5/2 ) (2 s ½ ) (1 d3/2 ) (1 f 7/2 ) (2 p3/2 ) ⇒

63 2 4 2 6 2 4 8 1

3/ 2−¿ ¿
f ¿ 13 Al :13 protons: (1 s ½ ) (1 p3/2 ) (1 p½ ) (1 d 5/2 ) ⇒5/2
21 2 4 2 5 -

Problem 8.2

For 17O the following states are experimentally observed: ground state
5/2+, 0.871 MeV ½+ state, 3.055 Mev1/2−¿ ¿state, 3.846 MeV 7 /2−¿¿ state,
4.553 MeV 3/ 2−¿ ¿state. Interpret these as single particle excitations.

Solution

O: 8 protons contribute 0 angular momentum.

17

The 9th neutron occupies 1d5/2 state and hence its ground state is 5/ 2+¿¿
2 4 2 1
( 1 s1/2 ) ( 1 p3/2 ) ( 1 p1/2 ) (1 d 5/2 )

When energy is given the 9th neutron is excited to the next shell model
state
( ) ( )
2 4 2 0 1
( 1 s½ ) 1 p3 ( 1 p ½ ) 1 d5 ( 2 s½ )
2 2

with its spin and parity 1/2+¿¿

With still higher energy the 9th neutron would occupy the next shell
model state
 2 4 2 0 0 1
(1 s ½ ) (1 p3/2 ) (1 p½ ) (1 d 5/2 ) (2 s ½ ) (1 d 3/2 )

with its spin and parity 3/2+¿ ¿

With still higher excitation energy the 9 th neutron would be excited

to the next shell model state

(1 s ½ )2 (1 p3/2 )4 (1 p½ ) 2 (1 d 5/2 )0 (2 s ½ )0 (1 d 3/2 )0 (1 f 7/2 ) 1

resulting in the excited state with its spin and parity 7 /2−¿¿

The excited state available for the 9th neutron is

2 4 2 0 0 0 0 1
(1 s ½ ) (1 p3/2 ) (1 p½ ) (1 d 5/2 ) (2 s ½ ) (1 d 3/2 ) (1 f 7/2 ) (2 p3/2 )

with its spin and parity 3/2

−¿ ¿

Thus all the experimentally observed excited states of 17O can be explained
as single particle excitations or shell model states.

Problem 8.3

(a) Using the harmonic-oscillator shell model, describe the expected

configurations for the ground states of the light stable nuclei with A ≤ 4,
specifying also their total L, S, and J quantum numbers and parity. (b) For
4
He, what states do you expect to find at about one oscillator quantum of
excitation energy?

Solution

(a) We have A = 1: The stable nucleus 1H has configuration: p(1s1/2)1,

L = 0, S = 1/2, Jp = 1/2+
A = 2: The stable nucleus 2H has configuration: p(1s1/2)1, n(1s1/2)1,
L = 0, S = 1, Jp = 1+
A = 3: The stable nucleus 3He has configuration: p(1s1/2)2, n(1s1/2)1,
L = 0, S = 1/2, Jp = 1/2+
A = 4: The stable nucleus 4He has configuration: p(1s1/2)2, n(1s1/2)2,
L = 0, S = 0, Jp = 0+
(b) Near the first excited state of the harmonic oscillator, the energy level
is split into two levels 1p3/2 and 1p1/2 because of the LS coupling of the p
state.

So the possible excited states are the following:

 When a proton (or neutron) is of 1p3/2 state, the other of 1s1/2 state,
the possible coupled states are 1−, 2−

 When a proton (or neutron) is of 1p1/2 state, the other of 1s1/2 state,
the possible coupled states are 0−, 1−

 When two protons (or two neutrons) are of 1p 1/2 (or 1p3/2) state, the
possible coupled state is 0+

Problem 8.4

Explain the following statements on the basis of physical principles: (a)

The motion of individual nucleons inside a nucleus may be regarded as
independent from each other even though they interact very strongly. (b)
All the even-even nuclei have 0+ ground state. (c) Nuclei with outer shells
partially filled by odd number of nucleons tend to have permanent
deformation.

Solution

(a) The usual treatment is based on the assumption that the interaction
among nucleons can be replaced by the action on a nucleon of the
mean field produced by the other nucleons.

The nucleons are considered to move independently of one another.

Despite the high nucleon density inside a nucleus it is assumed that
the individual interactions between nucleons do not manifest
macroscopically.

Since nucleons are fermions, all the low energy levels of the ground
state are filled up and the interactions among nucleons cannot excite a
nucleon to a higher level.
 We can then employ a model of moderately weak interaction to
describe the strong interactions among nucleons.

(b) According to the nuclear shell model, the protons and neutrons in an
even-even nucleus tend to pair off separately,

i.e., each pair of neutrons or protons are in the same orbit and have
opposite spins, so that the total angular momentum and total spin of
each pair of nucleons are zero.

It follows that the total angular momentum of the nucleus is zero. The
parity of each pair of nucleons is (−1)2 l=+1, and so the total parity of
the nucleus is positive.

Hence for an even-even nucleus, Jp = 0+.

Nucleons in the outermost partially-filled shell can be considered as

moving around a nuclear system of zero spin.

For nucleons with l ≠0 , the orbits are ellipses. Because such odd
nucleons have finite spins and magnetic moments, which can polarize
the nuclear system, the nucleus tends to have permanent deformation.