Search NASA⌕ Search

DOE OSTI · 3017864

(Doublon) Benchmarking of Different Inverse Point Kinetics Implementations for an Autocorrected Reactimeter Algorithm

Abstract

In November 2017, the Transient Reactor Test Facility returned to operation. Since that time, many transient test series have been completed, such as the Transient Heatsink Overpower Response capsule (THOR), the Transient Water Irradiation System for TREAT (TWIST), and Sirius. Each has provided valuable data for materials performance and reactor safety that can be applied in future designs. During each experimental series, detector count rates provided important information on the core behavior during transients. However, a limitation of these data is that variations in the neutron distribution during experiments can cause errors when attempting to infer reactivity evolution from detector signals. Neutron physics codes can be used to compute the flux shape variations. However, this is a poor solution when the experimental data is used for code verification, validation and uncertainty quantification. Indeed, if the output of the code is used both as a reference and to correct what the reference is compared to, the circular dependency limits the quality of the verification, validation and uncertainty quantification approach. To overcome this problem, the autocorrected reactimeter algorithm (ACRA) has been developed. This approach infers a time-dependent reactivity evolution by testing different spatial corrections and selecting the one that minimizes reactivity variations when the core is in a frozen configuration (i.e., when there is no variation in parameters affecting reactivity). However, the scope of this method was limited to transients where there were negligible thermal feedback. Indeed, the core is never in a frozen configuration when the fuel temperature varies during the whole transient. This is our motivation for developing an improved version of the ACRA that does not require frozen configurations. To develop this new algorithm, we need a precise and unbiased implementation of the inverse point kinetic equations (IPKEs) as any error in the reactivity evaluation will be propagated into the choice of the optimal spatial correction. Indeed, the previous reactimeter algorithm would use approximations, such as a negligible flux amplitude derivative, to focus on rapidity. For the numerical validation of ACRA, we aim at absolute error under for reactivity derived from signals similar to the one of this study. In this summary, we test eight different IPKE implementations. Each will process a mockup signal built for this study, similar to those that the future ACRA will process. Each reactivity output will be compared to the reference reactivity that has been used to generate the mockup signal. The implementation minimizing the difference with the reference reactivity will be used in the development of a new ACRA formulation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ferney, Paul Alexandre, DeHart, Mark D. 2024-06-17. (Doublon) Benchmarking of Different Inverse Point Kinetics Implementations for an Autocorrected Reactimeter Algorithm. https://www.osti.gov/biblio/3017864

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

Validation and Verification of Python based Neutron Spectrum Unfolding Software

To validate and verify the python-based code (PySL), designed to replicate the programs used by STAYSL for Beam Correction Factor (BCF) and Self-Shielding Factor (SHIELD), a series of tests were performed. To test BCF a python script was written to generate a random flux history file and both versions of the code processed the data. The test verified matching values up to at least one decimal place, approximately 10,000 tests where run and each one passed. Isotopes began to fail the tests once neutron saturation was reached. To verify this the total time of exposure was varied the isotopes that failed were compared to a list of their half-lives. The test process for SHIELD was very similar but, in this case, the code began by producing an input file with varying thickness and device type/environment for the SHIELD input. The failure condition for this test was if any of the data points for an isotope had a difference above 3%. Approximately 40 of these tests were run and there were only 3 isotopes that had reoccurring failures but only 2% of their points were above the 3% difference. A visual comparison was conducted by plotting the results from both programs. Although the test failed, the differences between their values were minuscule, and the self-shielding factor’s shape was preserved when plotted. Next steps for this project will be validating and verifying the python-based SigPhi code and then reproducing and testing the least squares unfolding performed by STAYSL.

73 - NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Advanced Test Reactor Neutron Dosimetry Report - Cycle 175C: Results of Neutron Dosimetry Measurements for the Advanced Test Reactor Cycle 175C

Results of neutron dosimetry measurements in ATR for cycle 175C are presented. A single set of cobalt and nickel wires were installed in numerous irradiation locations for the duration of the cycle. The specific activity of these wire segments can be used in conjunction with the presented cycle history information to determine the thermal- and fast-neutron fluence rates for each irradiation position during the cycle using the referenced standard test methods.

73 - NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Radiological Dose Consequence Modeling Parameters for Reactor and Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities

To assure consistency between DOE and NRC safety basis requirements this ECAR documents the DOE basis requirements for dose consequence assessments in accordance with Standard DOE-STD-3009-2014. The methodology in this ECAR outlines parameters for evaluating airborne radiological releases and provides a consistent basis for assessing current and future DOE NE facilities.

73 - NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗