Atomic-orbital close-coupling calculations for collisions involving fusion relevant highly charged impurity ions using very large basis sets

Abstract

Electronic excitation and charge transfer processes in collisions between Mg (3 1 S 0 ) atoms and Rb + ( 1 S 0 ) ions in the 0.07-4.00 keV energy range

State-selective electron capture in collisions of fully stripped neon ions with ground-state hydrogen

“…The total electron-capture cross section, σ EC , for Ne 10+ + H(1s) collisions as a function of the projectile energy. The present WP-CCC results are compared with the MOCC, hCTMC and mCTMC calculations by Errea et al [19], the TC-AOCC calculations by Liu et al [23], the CTMC calculations by Perez et al [34], Maynard et al [35] and Olson and Salop [36] and the AOCC calculations by Igenbergs [22]. The experimental data are by Meyer et al [17] and Panov et al [18].…”

“…However, there are a few discrepancies in the nlresolved cross sections between the methods as recently discussed by Liu et al [23], including the OEDM calculations by Salin [24] for the 6l EC cross section and the CTMC calculations by Schultz and Krstic [25]. Additionally, the total electron-capture cross section calculated by Igenbergs [22] agrees with the hydrogenic CTMC calculations [19], whereas their total ionisation cross section (TICS) agrees more with the microcanonical results [19].…”

“…and Included are the present WP-CCC calculations, TC-AOCC calculations by Liu et al [23], and AOCC calculations by Igenbergs [22].…”

“…Thus, the example represents the most challenging energy region in terms of convergence. Included are the present WP-CCC calculations, TC-AOCC calculations by Liu et al [23], CTMC calculations by Schultz and Krstic [25], and AOCC calculations by Igenbergs [22].…”

“…Following this, Igenbergs [22] made calculations using the (two-center) atomic-orbital close-coupling (AOCC) method and very recently Liu et al [23] have performed calculations using the same method over the energy range of 0.1-500 keV/u. In their calculations, Igenbergs [22] included states with n 4, l 3 on the target and 4 n 14, l 13 on the projectile. Additionally, they include 34 pseudostates on the target.…”