Results for “mcnp” — Page 23

DOE OSTI2022

Verification of the DIF3D Software to Support Fast Reactor Analysis

Ongoing design activities at Argonne National Laboratory are requiring a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes be performed. DIF3D is central to this system. The driver for this effort requires the 3D Cartesian, triangular-Z, and hexagonal-Z core geometry options of DIF3D be verified. Previous work identified the DIF3D features required to be verified to support current design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying DIF3D’s ability to correctly translate the user’s model in to DIF3D’s preferred format, verifying that options planned for use have the desired effect, and verifying the correctness of the eigenvalue, fixed-source, forward, and adjoint solvers in DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-VARIANT. This manuscript provides the verification tasks and their results with respect to the features needed for current design activities. Since analytic solutions of the neutron diffusion and transport equations are either limited in scope or not possible, multiple tiers of problems unique to each solver and geometry type were implemented. Each of these tiers tests features independent and complementary arguments for why the separate testing of functionalities is acceptable. Finally, this separate testing was also supplemented with a high-level integral check of each the diffusion and transport capabilities and applicable geometries. To accommodate cases which an analytic solution is not feasible, MCNP6.2 was relied upon to provide a higher-order reference solution. This therefore required that the capabilities within MCNP6.2 which were relied upon for this work are also verified in this work. No MCNP discrepancies were noted in this effort. Note that the MCNP6.2 verification included in this work does not stand as a full verification of MCNP6.2, but merely verifies the features used in verifying DIF3D. The verification effort identified no issues that are debilitating or otherwise impactful to design usage of DIF3D, and thus DIF3D version 11.0, release 3012 is considered verified. As some additional changes have been made to the ARC software since this point all versions between release 3012 and 3266 can be considered verified as version 3253 was used for all updates in this revision. The types of issues that were identified were predominantly in the areas of: unclear documentation, software bugs which were inconsequential to final results, editing options which were ignored in favor of printing more information than requested, bugs in the outputs of intermediate results, or secondary output binary file information which was not present. While not a bug, this verification report also identified that the algorithm used to evaluate the peak fast flux in a nodal transport solution can be quite unreliable due to the methodology used and the location of the peak within the mesh. The authors of the report therefore recommend the usage of the EvaluateFlux software (distributed with ARC) as a more robust alternative noting that DIF3D will properly notify the user when the peaking values it is providing are potentially incorrect.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Project Description for Student Symposium 2022: Modeling Approach to Critical in the Upcoming CERBERUS Experiment

The Critical Experiment Reflected By copper to BettEr Understand Scattering [CERBERUS] is an integral experiment that will be executed at the end of FY23. The experiment is designed to study the intermediate energy range, in particular elastic and inelastic scattering of neutrons in copper. Approaching criticality safely is of utmost importance, and having a computer mode is a useful tool when determining changes that can safely be made to the experiment. Multiple simulations are needed to analyze the approach to critical, and manually creating MCNP input files is both tedious and error prone. To solve this problem, a python script was created to develop and run these input files.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

LANL Nuclear Data Manager Format Specification v1.0

The LANL nuclear data manager tool is a Python utility that downloads nuclear data from the Nuclear Data Team’s website at https://nucleardata.lanl.gov, arranges it, and configures directory listings for nuclear codes such as the MCNP code to consume. In this document, the Version 1.0 API that this tool relies on will be discussed, which will show how an external provider of nuclear data could set up their website to provide a compatible implementation.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Status of the Slide Rule Update - Phase 4 Plutonium Configurations – Delayed Gamma [Slides]

The fourth phase of Slide-Rule update gives a calculation scheme for DFG doses and its application to five plutonium material, as well as comparisons between radiation transport and depletion codes such as MCNP, SCALE, COG and FISPACT. Overall, DFG dose rates calculated by each laboratory led to consistent results. Extra effort is under way to identify the cause of the remaining differences, especially for case 2, by comparing precisely the gamma source, and particularly nuclides inventories.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Modeling and Simulation of MC-Small Design

In order to design a lightweight, highly portable neutron multiplicity counter for use in higher risk regions by mobile field teams, a redesign of the MC-15 is being performed, with the goal of producing a detector below 30 lbs for ease of transport. To achieve this, multiple MCNP® simulations were run, evaluating the number and positioning of the He-3 tubes in the detector as well as the amount of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) surrounding the tubes. Based on these simulations, the proposed redesign of the MC-15 (aka MC-Small) possesses 11 tubes and is 13 in wide, 3.21 in thick and 13 in tall. Including the changes to the positioning of the tubes and the removal of HDPE from less sensitive regions of the detectors (i.e. bases of tubes, back of detector), this resulted in an efficiency of 0.56% when measuring a bare Cf-252 source 19.69 in away, only 28% less efficient (relatively) than the MC-15 while weighing 18 lbs, 12 lbs less than the weight of the MC-15.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2021

Comparison Study of Upper Subcritical Limits Derived Using Sensitivity/Uncertainty Tools: Case Studies of U233-SOL-THERM-001-001, MIX-COMP-THERM-001-001, IEU-MET-FAST-002-001, LEU-COMP-THERM-001-001, LEU-SOL-THERM-004-001

Neutron transport methods used to establish subcriticality require validation by comparison to critical experiments considered to be benchmarks. Whisper is a sensitivity/uncertainty analysis tool developed to assist with the task of validation in nuclear criticality safety. Details on the Whisper methodology can be found in References 1-3 on the MCNP® reference collection website at https://mcnp.lanl.gov. Whisper-1.0 was originally developed in 2014 and used to assist with nuclear criticality safety validation at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Whisper was upgraded in 2016 to Whisper-1.1 and prepared for release with MCNP6.2 [References 3-5]. Whisper contains a library of over 1100 critical experiment benchmarks and quantifies neutronic similarity of an application to benchmarks in the library. Using highest similarity benchmarks, Whisper computes a calculational margin (CM) encompassing of the worst-case bias and bias uncertainty at a 99% confidence level for each application. In addition, portions of the margin of subcriticality (MOS) for nuclear data uncertainty and potential code errors are computed. The baseline upper subcritical limit (USL) computed by Whisper is comprised of the CM, MOS nuclear data , and MOS code errors . The Whisper baseline USL is absent a portion of the MOS due to the area of application, which is applied based upon judgment by the criticality safety analyst. An objective of this paper is to present the baseline USL, CM and portions of the MOS as computed by Whisper for comparison with similar sensitivity/uncertainty tools, such as those used by IRSN and ORNL. An initial comparison involved four critical experiment benchmarks: HEU-MET-FAST-013-001, HEU-SOLTHERM-001-008, PU-MET-FAST-022-001, AND PU-SOL-THERM-001-001, which have been documented in References 10-13. This study extends the comparison to include cases U233-SOL-THERM-001-001, MIX-COMP-THERM-001-001, IEU-MET-FAST-002-001, LEU-COMP-THERM-001-001, LEU-SOL-THERM- 004-001.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2021

LANL Critical Benchmark Comparison Study and Subsequent Revision for Cases Involving LEU and MIX

As part of an international collaboration within the DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP), LANL is involved in a comparison study to quantify differences in k-effective results from neutron transport simulations of critical benchmark experiments. The DOE NCSP Mission and Vision details the activity in which the French Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN) leads the study with LANL, ORNL, and LLNL to compare results of various neutron transport codes and nuclear data libraries for ICSBEP benchmarks held in common by the entities. The task statement from the DOE NCSP Five-Year Execution Plan is given as: "The proposal is for IRSN to lead a new intercomparison based on the MORET code with the latest JEFF-3.3 data and ENDF/B-VIII.0 data, when available, using their existing comprehensive selection of 2,714 benchmarks and collate their results together with those from LLNL (COG), LANL (MCNP) and ORNL (SCALE). Due to the large number of benchmarks involved, this effort is envisioned to take three years with an additional year for IRSN to complete a summary report. The benchmark development will be performed independently to minimize modeling errors through discovery and resolution of discrepant results. A summary report will be generated (led by IRSN) to document the results of this study." This report documents results obtained for revisions made to cases involving Intermediate Enriched Uranium (IEU) and a mixture of Pu and Uranium (MIX), with a focus on the changes made to LANL benchmarks modeled with MCNP6 using ENDF/B-VII.1 nuclear data that appeared to have discrepant results when compared with results of other codes. Feedback was used to pinpoint review of particular benchmark input files and to revise them when necessary. This report documents the results of review and revision of specific benchmarks highlighted as possibly discrepant in the comparison study. In addition, there is an effort tied to this work involving collaboration between LANL XCP and NCS Divisions in the development of a shared review/revision procedure and use of a new benchmark repository.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

SCALE 6.2.4 Validation: Radiation Shielding

For safe and reliable use of computer codes by the community, accuracy must be clearly evaluated. In particular, the nuclear reactor engineering and licensing field needs accurate tools for radiation shielding modeling. Monaco with Automated Variance Reduction using Importance Calculations (MAVRIC) is one such tool, with built-in variance reduction methods distributed within the SCALE code, and its validity is demonstrated in this report for the released version 6.2.4. Representative benchmarks corresponding to shielding analysis are selected for the validation study. Typical experimental results analyzed from those benchmarks include neutron fluxes, detector count rates, detector energy response functions, neutron and gamma doses, foil neutron activation rates and activities, neutron leakage fluxes, and skyshine dose rates. Thousands of points of comparison between experiment and calculation are presented in this work. Other than rare outliers typically explained by either a lack of information or large uncertainties in the experiment conditions, material, or dimensions, MAVRIC agrees well with the experiment results. MAVRIC is also compared to Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) calculations when available, and both codes generally produce good agreements within estimated uncertainties. The selected benchmarks are obtained from reliable sources such as the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project Handbook (ICSBEP Handbook), the Shielding Integral Benchmark Archive & Database (SINBAD), and other shielding validation work found in the literature. Additional datapoints and benchmarks will be added to future versions of this report to incrementally expand the shielding validation suite incrementally.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Summary of LANL Critical Benchmark Comparison Study and Revisions for Cases Involving HEU, LEU, MIX, and Pu

This report documents results obtained for revisions made to cases involving Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU), Intermediate Enriched Uranium (IEU), a mixture of Pu and Uranium (MIX), as well as Pu cases. A previous summary of revisions for HEU an Pu cases was reported and additional investigations into four cases originally presented therein uncovered further revisions which led to better agreement with other transport codes, those cases are updated in this report. The summary of all cases reported in Reference 2 is updated in this report. In addition, a previous summary of revisions for LEU and MIX was reported, a summary of those revisions in reproduced in this report for a comprehensive summary of changes to benchmarks beginning in fiscal year 2020 to current date. The report focuses on the changes made to LANL benchmarks modeled with MCNP6 using ENDF/B-VII.1 nuclear data that appeared to have discrepant results when compared with results of other codes. Feedback was used to pinpoint review of benchmark input files and to revise them when necessary. This report documents the results of review and revision of specific benchmarks highlighted as possibly discrepant in the comparison study. In addition, there is an effort tied to this work involving collaboration between LANL XCP and NCS Divisions in the development of a shared review/revision procedure and use of a new benchmark repository. LANL has a benchmark library of critical experiments from the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) Handbook modeled for use with MCNP. This collection is now over 1100 benchmarks, referred to as the Whisper-1.1 library because it is used with the sensitivity/uncertainty package, Whisper, which supports nuclear criticality safety validation and is released with MCNP6.2. The collection, originally created several decades ago, is a combination of smaller collections, which has been revised and expanded, by various groups at LANL over the years. The original authors are no longer at the laboratory and little formal documentation of review and revision of these benchmarks exists today. A branch of the benchmark collection was already the subject of a formal review undertaken by the LANL NCS Division and expanded to include XCP Division.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Whisper Results of a PuCl "Solution" System Using LLNL TEX Cl Benchmark Model

This data set is to be shared with the Nuclear Criticality Safety Division (NCSD) at LLNL as part of a TEX Cl experiment. NCSD at LLNL shared the experimental model with the Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Division at LANL for comparison with an MCNP model of a PuCl application system. The experimental model was used in conjunction with Whisper to see how including it would impact the baseline USL for the PuCl application.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Second Target Station High-Fidelity Target Activation Comparison

The development of the Second Target Station (STS) target system at the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is well underway. The target system at STS consists of a rotating target disk that contains 21 segments of tungsten clad in tantalum clad in steel. A key aspect of the design of the target system is to account for the delayed heating and material damage caused by the delayed dose from decaying radionuclides. These radionuclides are a product of either spallation reactions or transmutation of the nuclei in the target system. These radionuclides build up in the target system components over the lifetime of the facility, and the radiation that is emitted can deposit energy in the components causing significant component heating and material damage. Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) Version 6.2 transports the various particle species and calculates the spallation products and neutron fluxes throughout the target system. These spallation products and neutron fluxes along with the material definition of each component are relayed to the CINDER2008 transmutation code to calculate the radionuclide inventories and the corresponding decay gamma emission spectra. MCNP6.2 coupled with CINDER2008 is the computational method-of-choice for the analysis discussed in the following sections of this report. The analysis focuses on validating major assumptions in calculating the radionuclide inventory in the STS target system: all of the target segments are fresh, unirradiated material when the protons are incident on the segment, the average of the 21 segments of the target is sufficient to represent a single segment, and that averaging the proton pulse structure over time does not significantly affect the radionuclide inventory. The position-averaged, high-fidelity, and single-tally computational methods are used to validate the assumptions and provide a point of comparison to evaluate how the assumptions impact the radionuclide inventories. A more detailed explanation of the three computational methods is provided in Section 2. The position-averaged and single-tally methods are less computationally expensive when compared with the high-fidelity method where 54,000 individual calculations are needed to calculate 1 hr of STS operation. Section 3 details the comparison of the three methods to show that the assumptions made in the position-averaged method do not significantly impact the radionuclide inventory after 1 hr of operation. The discussions and results in this report are for 1 hr of operation. Due to the computational cost associated with calculating the transmutation and activation using the high-fidelity method, only 1 hr of operation has been calculated. The discrepancies observed after 1 hr of operation are not extrapolated out to longer operational times, and this report does not address how the discrepancies between the computational methods may manifest for longer operational periods.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Numerical Analysis and Flow Induced Vibration Studies in Pressurized Helium Gas Cooling Channels

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is working with NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes (NMR) on their efforts to produce Mo-99 from the irradiation of Mo-100 targets. The NMR target consists of an Inconel window that allows the electron beam to penetrate and irradiate a stack of Mo-100 discs. The irradiation process generates large amounts of heat and is cooled using pressurized helium gas flowing at 400 g/s. LANL provides both numerical analysis support and experimental support. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations for both 300 g/s and 400 g/s are performed on the NMR target to analyze the helium flow through the NMR system. The pressure drop, the mass flow rate through each of the disc and window channels and the force applied on the first disc are some of the quantities estimated using CFD. These results will be combined with Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) estimates of heat flux into the system from the electron beam to perform conjugate heat transfer analysis (CHT). The experiments presented in this report focus on the effect of the flow induced vibrations from helium flowing through the coolant gaps between the discs. There is concern that the flow induced vibrations may lead to excessive mass loss of the enriched Mo-100 discs, and the goal would be to mitigate the mass loss. This work presents benchtop tests of flow through a subset of the target stack which involves high speed imaging and displacement measurements used to estimate disc vibration, as well as mass loss.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2023

ENDF/B-VIII.1 Validation (Preliminary Release 2 + New 239 Pu)

This document should serve as a reference for validation testing of nuclear data files included in the second preliminary release of ENDF/B-VIII.1 and the newly evaluated 239 Pu nuclear data file to be included in the third preliminary release of ENDF/B-VIII.1. Experiment names listed in this report are based on International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) Handbook designations. Additional information on ICSBEP handbook designations can be found at https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_20291/icsbep-handbook. The validation metrics used in this report include the effective neutron multiplication factor, k eff , and tritium production. All validation metrics were calculated using the radiation transport code Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP).

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Electron Production in MCATK

This document is the beginnings of combining the theory of electron production and the code implementations in MCNP and other codes. The hopes of this is to help translate all the theory into the theory manual of MCATK. In addition, this will help the MCATK team to know how other codes treat electron physics.

74 ATOMIC AND MOLECULAR PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Cost-optimized Automated Variance Reduction for Highly Angle-dependent Radiation Transport Analyses [Dissertation]

Monte Carlo variance-reduction techniques that directly bias particle direction have historically received limited attention despite being useful for many radiation transport applications such as those in which radiation travels through large regions with a low probability of colliding. One such technique is known as DXTRAN (short for deterministic transport) in the MCNP Monte Carlo radiation transport code. Until now, effectively applying DXTRAN in calculations is largely based on empirical observations of computational performance. Optimal DXTRAN parameters are identified through manual iteration. This work develops new mathematical descriptions of the DXTRAN variance-reduction process and demonstrates a new automated variance-reduction method that applies these mathematical formulations to determine the optimal application of DXTRAN in a given problem.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2023

DRiFT - Release 1.1.1: Organic Scintillators

DRiFT (a Detector Response Function Toolkit) is LANL-developed software that postprocesses output from the extensively validated radiation transport code, MCNP, and generates realistic nuclear instrumentation response. DRiFT is designed to be flexible, enabling users to specify detector type and many experimental settings, as well as accommodating the addition of their own desired features. Although DRiFT development has included scintillator, gas, and semiconductor features, the focus of this release is on organic scintillator and associated capabilities. Organic scintillators are widely used in the areas of nuclear safeguards and nuclear non-proliferation efforts. DRiFT has several diagnostic and detector physics features relevant to detailed scintillator simulations including: tracking source particle information, scintillation light production, the effects of PMT quantum efficiency and gain, and digitizer settings. Users can select responses from many scintillator and PMT types supported natively by DRiFT, or add their own by following the instructions in this document. We acknowledge that DRiFT is under active development, bug reports and general questions and comments should be directed to Madison Andrews, madison@lanl.gov. This manual is divided into four parts: I) An overview of DRiFT, including how to obtain and install the executable, II) A description of the detector physics related to scintillators available, III) a description of more general DRiFT features the user may find useful, and IV) a description of the test suite and examples made available with the code release.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

DOE OSTI2023

DRiFT - Release 2.1.0: Organic Scintillators and Gas Detectors

DRiFT (a Detector Response Function Toolkit) is LANL-developed software that post-processes output from the extensively validated radiation transport code, MCNP, and generates realistic nuclear instrumentation response. DRiFT is designed to be flexible, enabling users to specify detector type and many experimental settings, as well as accommodating the addition of their own desired features. The focus of this release is on organic scintillator, gas detector, and associated capabilities, while semiconductor features are still under development. Organic scintillators are widely used in the areas of nuclear safeguards and nuclear non-proliferation efforts. DRiFT has several diagnostic and detector physics features relevant to detailed scintillator simulations including: tracking source particle information, scintillation light production, the effects of PMT quantum efficiency and gain, and digitizer settings. Users can select responses from many scintillator and PMT types supported natively by DRiFT, or add their own by following the instructions in this document. DRiFT also has several diagnostic and detector physics features relevant to neutron gas detector simulations including: gas detector wall effects, inactive areas at the end of detector tubes, and effects of a preamplifier. We acknowledge that DRiFT is under active development, bug reports and general questions and comments should be directed to Madison Andrews, madison@lanl.gov. This manual is divided into four parts: I) An overview of DRiFT, including how to obtain and install the executable, II) A description of the detector physics related to scintillators available, III) a description of more general DRiFT features the user may find useful, and IV) a description of the test suite and examples made available with the code release.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

DOE OSTI2023

Verification of the DIF3D Software to Support Fast Reactor Analysis (Rev. 3)

Ongoing design activities at Argonne National Laboratory are requiring a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes be performed. DIF3D is central to this system. The driver for this effort requires the 3D Cartesian, triangular-Z, and hexagonal-Z core geometry options of DIF3D be verified. Previous work identified the DIF3D features required to be verified to support current design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying DIF3D’s ability to correctly translate the user’s model in to DIF3D’s preferred format, verifying that options planned for use have the desired effect, and verifying the correctness of the eigenvalue, fixed-source, forward, and adjoint solvers in DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-VARIANT. This manuscript provides the verification tasks and their results with respect to the features needed for current design activities. Since analytic solutions of the neutron diffusion and transport equations are either limited in scope or not possible, multiple tiers of problems unique to each solver and geometry type were implemented. Each of these tiers tests features independent and complementary arguments for why the separate testing of functionalities is acceptable. Finally, this separate testing was also supplemented with a high-level integral check of each the diffusion and transport capabilities and applicable geometries. To accommodate cases which an analytic solution is not feasible, MCNP6.2 was relied upon to provide a higher-order reference solution. This therefore required that the capabilities within MCNP6.2 which were relied upon for this work are also verified in this work. No MCNP discrepancies were noted in this effort. Note that the MCNP6.2 verification included in this work does not stand as a full verification of MCNP6.2, but merely verifies the features used in verifying DIF3D. The verification effort identified no issues that are debilitating or otherwise impactful to design usage of DIF3D, and thus DIF3D version 11.0, release 3012 is considered verified. As some additional changes have been made to the ARC software since this point all versions between release 3012 and 3266 can be considered verified as version 3253 was used for all updates in this revision. The types of issues that were identified were predominantly in the areas of: unclear documentation, software bugs which were inconsequential to final results, editing options which were ignored in favor of printing more information than requested, bugs in the outputs of intermediate results, or secondary output binary file information which was not present. While not a bug, this verification report also identified that the algorithm used to evaluate the peak fast flux in a nodal transport solution can be quite unreliable due to the methodology used and the location of the peak within the mesh. The authors of the report therefore recommend the usage of the EvaluateFlux software (distributed with ARC) as a more robust alternative noting that DIF3D will properly notify the user when the peaking values it is providing are potentially incorrect.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗