Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “nuclear criticality safety”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2

Nuclear Criticality Safety Repository, Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC), & NDA Program [Slides]

This lecture covers the Nuclear Criticality Safety Repository (NCSR), Radiation Safety Information Computational center (RSICC), and Non-destructive Assay (NDA) program. The lecture provides information on the Fiscal year of 2022 and various phases of the NCSR Program and NDA. Further background information is provided for the RSICC and operations summary.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

Hand Calculations for Nuclear Criticality Safety – Primer Revision

The document “ Hand Calculation Methods for Criticality Safety – A Primer, ” was published by the authors (Los Alamos National Laboratory report LA-14244-M) in December 2006 to provide an overview of the most common hand calculation methods used for criticality safety analysis. Hand calculation methods can be used as a starting point for more advanced calculations, and in many circumstances, they can provide sensitivity and perturbation information quicker than using a criticality code, such as KENO or MCNP. This report has been revised to augment existing basis information and example problems for each of the methods discussed: 1-group and modified 1- group diffusion theory, core-density conversions, buckling conversions, limiting surface density method, density analog method, surface density method, and solid angle method. This primer discusses the applicability of the various methods, illustrates how they are used, and provides an interpretation of the example problem results. The example problems provided are simple, practical problems, and the reference data to solve each example problem is provided. This paper will provide an overview of the Primer revision and how it can be useful for new Nuclear Criticality Safety practitioners.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety – overview & status [Abstract]

The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) were developed as the lessons-learned from process criticality accidents. These consensus standards were developed to reduce the rate of process criticality accidents in facilities that process, store, handle or transport fissionable materials by hand. After a significant increase in criticality accidents through the mid-1960’s, the rate of criticality accidents decreased due to these standards and the criticality accident rate is extremely low from an industrial safety perspective.

ANS↗

Nuclear Criticality Safety Program @ ORNL [Slides]

This presentation provides an overview of the Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) and its activities at Oak Ridge National Lab, including the program's history, mission and vision, accomplishments, challenges, initiatives, and tasks, as well as information regarding ORNL's NCSP budget.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Overview and Current Progress of the DOE/NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program Training and Education Program [Slides]

This presentation covers the Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) training & education program. The presentation details the training courses offered by the NCSP and the NCSP training pipelines. Additionally, the presentation shows the Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Education Training (NCSET) modules along with new capabilities and new courses. This lecture finishes up with some concluding remarks.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

Domestic and International Consensus Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety - Overview & Status

The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) were developed based on the lessons-learned from process criticality accidents. These consensus standards were developed to reduce the rate of process criticality accidents in facilities that process, store, handle, or transport fissionable materials by hand. After a significant increase in criticality accidents through the mid-1960s, the rate of criticality accidents decreased as a result of these standards, and the criticality accident rate is extremely low from an industrial safety perspective. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 47 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (almost 26 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American National Standards (ANS) that are prepared and published by the American Nuclear Society and approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently 18 standards in the ANS-8 series. Nine ANS-8 standards are either in revision mode or planned for revision. A new standard for the use of nondestructive assay measurements (ANSI/ANS-8.28-2024) for NCS was approved in March of 2024. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 “Nuclear Energy,” Subcommittee 5, “Nuclear Fuel Technology,” and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, four standards are proposed for revision, and four standards are at various stages of development. This paper provides the NCS community with a high-level overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.

Bowen, Douglas G [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000212460026)↗

Comparative Analysis of Standard and Advanced USL Methodologies for Nuclear Criticality Safety

The American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society national standards 8.1 and 8.24 provide guidance on the requirements and recommendations for establishing confidence in the results of the computerized models used to support operation with fissionable materials. By design, the guidance is not prescriptive, leaving freedom to the analysts to determine how the various sources of uncertainties are to be statistically aggregated. Due to the involved use of statistics entangled with heuristic recipes, the resulting safety margins are often difficult to interpret. Also, these technical margins are augmented by additional administrative margins, which are required to ensure compliance with safety standards or regulations, eliminating the incentive to understand their differences. With the new resurgent wave of advanced nuclear systems, e.g., advanced reactors, fuel cycles, and fuel concepts, focused on economizing operation, there is a strong need to develop a clear understanding of the uncertainties and their consolidation methods to reduce them in manners that can be scientifically defended. In response, the current studies compare the analyses behind four notable methodologies for upper subcriticality limit estimation that have been documented in the nuclear criticality safety literature: the parametric, nonparametric, Whisper, and TSURFER methodologies. Specifically, the work offers a deep dive into the various assumptions of the noted methodologies, their adequacies, and their limitations to provide guidance on developing confidence for the emergent nuclear systems that are expected to be challenged by the scarcity of experimental data. Here, to limit the scope, the current work focuses on the application of these methodologies to criticality safety experiments, where the goal is to calculate a bias, a bias uncertainty, and a tolerance limit for k eff in support of determining an upper subcriticality limit for nuclear criticality safety.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

Comparison of ISO and ANSI/ANS Nuclear Criticality Safety Standards

This paper provides a high-level comparison between the international and domestic Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) standards, as requested by members of the Nuclear Criticality Safety Division. Currently, there are 18 enacted American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American National Standards (ANS) and 1 ANSI/ANS standard in progress. There are 11 NCS standards from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 (TC85) on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 (SC5) on Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Working Group 8 (WG8). There are NCS standard revisions in progress for both standards organizations.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Comparison of ISO and ANSI/ANS Nuclear Criticality Safety Standards [Slides]

This paper provides a high-level comparison between the international and domestic nuclear criticality safety (NCS) standards, as requested by members of the Nuclear Criticality Safety Division. Currently, there are 18 enacted American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American National Standards (ANS) standards, and 1 ANSI/ANS standard, in progress. There are 11 NCS standards from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 (TC85) on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 (SC5) on Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Working Group 8 (WG8). NCS standard revisions are in progress for both standards organizations. The key differences between the ISO TC85/SC5/WG8 and ANSI/ANS-8 consensus NCS standards are summarized. The hard work done by the ANS-8 and WG8 volunteers allows for applicable, high-quality consensus standards for use by the NCS community. This paper defines the current status of each ANSI/ANS and ISO standard, the work in in progress, the revisions/amendments in progress, and WG8/ANS-8 non-standard business in progress. A forthcoming paper will compare the development process for ISO and ANSI/ANS standards.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Updated Guidance on Sensitivity/Uncertainty Methods Use for Nuclear Criticality Safety Validation

The use of sensitivity/uncertainty (S/U) methods in nuclear criticality safety (NCS) was established more than 25 years ago and has been increasing ever since. Recent interest in commercial applications involving uranium enrichments above 5 wt% 235 U has increased focus on demonstrating the applicability of existing critical experiments to this enrichment range. S/U techniques can also be particularly useful in assessing the similarity of new fuel forms in relation to those documented in existing published evaluations of benchmark critical experiments. Publishing updated recommendations for the use of these methods is thus important to ensure that new S/U practitioners can benefit from the years of development and application invested in generating a set of best practices to maximize the utility of these tools.

NCS↗

Nuclear Criticality Safety Pipeline Course with Hands-On Experimental Training at Lawrence Livermore's Inherently Safe Subcritical Assembly Training Center

The Nuclear Criticality Safety Divisions at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) have partnered with Prof. Massimiliano Fratoni of the University of California Berkeley to offer a semester long course on nuclear criticality safety. This course is part of a larger pipeline project among many of the Department of Energy (DOE) laboratories designed to stimulate student interest in the field of criticality safety. The course focuses on teaching the fundamentals of criticality safety, familiarity with national and consensus standards, and preparing criticality safety evaluations. Students also receive hands-on experience with special nuclear material by performing experiments with the Inherently Safe Subcritical Assembly (ISSA) at LLNL. Guest lectures are taught remotely and in-person by criticality safety engineers at LLNL and LANL, giving students an opportunity to interact with professionals in the field. The students complete a semester long project involving developing and writing a criticality safety evaluation. As universities tend to focus heavily on nuclear power and advanced nuclear reactor design, this course gives students a better understanding and perspective of what criticality safety entails. The goal of this pipeline course is to introduce students to criticality safety as another available field for nuclear engineers. It is also a way for criticality safety programs to identify talented students who have the interest and aptitude to work in criticality safety for hire upon graduation. LLNL and LANL have both hosted past students as summer students, participated in student's graduate projects, and hired students as criticality safety engineers. This has provided a unique opportunity for criticality safety programs to spot young talent with better retention outcomes.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Updates to SNL Nuclear Criticality Safety Benchmark Suite for MCNP

Members of the Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Program at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) have updated the suite of benchmark problems developed to validate MCNP6 Version 2.0 for use in NCS applications. The updated NCS benchmark suite adds approximately 600 new benchmarks and includes peer review of all input files by two different NCS engineers (or one NCS engineer and one candidate NCS engineer). As with the originally released benchmark suite, the updated suite covers a broad range of fissile material types, material forms, moderators, reflectors, and neutron energy spectra. The benchmark suite provides a basis to establish a bias and bias uncertainty for use in NCS analyses at SNL.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Hand Calculation Methods for Nuclear Criticality Safety

This primer provides an overview of the most common hand calculation methods used for criticality safety calculations. The most widely used tools available to a nuclear criticality safety (NCS) practitioner are probably the common Monte Carlo or deterministic criticality safety codes, which can be used to model very complex systems. However, use of these codes can obscure the parameters to which a particular fissile system may be sensitive, whereas the hand calculation methods can be used to delve into the ways each parameter may affect the reactivity of a fissile material system. Furthermore, practitioners must avoid using computer codes as devices that take inputs and simply provide outputs (i.e., a “black box”). Many years ago, pioneers such as Joe Thomas, David Smith, and Hugh Paxton, among others in the field of nuclear criticality safety, took the time before the advent of high-speed desktop computers to create simple hand methods for criticality safety analyses. Some of the methods can be used for single fissile units; others are applicable to fissile units arranged into simple array configurations. This primer discusses the applicability of the various methods, illustrates how they are used, and provides an interpretation of the various results. The NCS practitioner will need to spend time to master the methods that could be most useful; however, they can provide the practitioner with fast and accurate answers to criticality safety problems if they are used correctly and if critical data exist for the problem at hand. Hand calculation methods can be used as a starting point for more advanced calculations, and in many circumstances, they can provide sensitivity and perturbation information more quickly than using a criticality code.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Nuclear Criticality Safety Integral Experiment Covariance Determination

Integral benchmarks for criticality safety and nuclear data validation require expensive uncertainty quantification studies. Commonly, the uncertainty quantification ignores correlations between experiments that share components. Experiments such as the TEX (Thermal/Epithermal eXperiments) campaigns consist of many shared parts, such as fuel, which create a strong correlation in their uncertainties. While these correlations are known to exist, they are often not estimated due to the complexity of such calculations. This paper describes a software package that uses an intuitive method of determining the covariance for each of the experimental components, providing a correlation matrix for each family of parts across the multiple cases examined within a benchmark. The code uses the TEX-HEU campaign as a proof of concept, and we show that the correlations can be calculated with information commonly found in ICSBEP (International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project) benchmarks. The estimated covariances are used in χ 2 trending studies to evaluate their impact on nuclear data validation. Without covariances, χ 2 per degree of freedom was calculated as 2.203 and with covariances it was 1.179. The difference shows that omitting covariance information may cause overly pessimistic bias quantifications. The covariance determination code can be easily integrated into current benchmark evaluations as well as reevaluating legacy benchmark uncertainties. Uncertainty correlation calculations should become the baseline for criticality safety integral experiment benchmarks and can now be easily calculated with the described software package.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

The DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) [Slides]

This presentation provides an overview of the Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP), including its mission, vision, program element activities, current work, recent accomplishments, and budget/funding information.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Overview of the DOE/NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program [Slides]

This presentation provides an overview of the DOE/NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program, including the program's history, mission, vision, main functions, budgetary information, accomplishments, challenges, initiatives, and current work.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗