Demonstrating Computational Equivalence Between Continuous and Discrete Adjoint Methods by Calculating Time-Dependent Adjoint Solutions with Neutron Diffusion Models

Abstract

The continuous adjoint method and the discrete adjoint method are two alternative approaches used to calculate adjoint solutions for adjoint systems. The continuous adjoint method derives adjoint equations analytically from continuous forward equations and then solves the adjoint equations either analytically or numerically in a discretized form whereas the discrete adjoint method calculates the adjoint solutions directly from the discretized forward equations. With regard to the methodology development and calculation procedure, distinct differences are well recognized between the two methods. For certain reasons, both methods are exclusively preferred and commonly used by different computational communities, but limited studies clarify the connections between the two adjoint methods from either of the communities. Herein, this paper demonstrates the computational equivalence between the continuous and discrete adjoint methods by investigating time-dependent adjoint solutions to the two-group neutron diffusion model in nuclear reactor analysis problems using both methods. Adjoint solutions can be used to estimate system parameters for reactor safety analysis. Appropriate final state conditions for the adjoint systems are specified in both of the methods, and the conditions are clarified with proper physical explanations. With the help of an event-based case study on neutron diffusion models, the accuracy of the time-dependent adjoint fluxes obtained from both methods is verified, and the pros and cons of both adjoint methods are examined. More importantly, the computational equivalence of both methods is demonstrated when they are applied to multigroup neutron diffusion systems. The advantage of calculating time-dependent adjoint fluxes by directly solving time-dependent adjoint systems rather than taking steady-state approximations as in common practice is also demonstrated.