SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “safety reporting”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 55 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

Safety Considerations for Advanced Material Irradiation at the Advanced Test Reactor

The Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) is a light water reactor with aluminum-clad driver fuel. A primary mission of the ATR is to support the next generation of nuclear reactors. This support necessarily requires irradiation of advanced materials such as sodium, fuel salts, and metal eutectics. Irradiation of advanced materials in the ATR environment presents a challenge when completing accident analyses and demonstrating compliance to the Safety Analysis Report (SAR). Many advanced materials have the possibility to react with the ATR protective barriers such as the cladding or primary coolant system (PCS) boundary during postulated accident scenarios. Further, molten fuel experiments fall outside of the standard regulatory framework for dose consequence analyses. ATR is currently developing new safety analysis methods to support irradiation of advanced materials. The primary considerations for this development are 1) experiment containment design requirements, 2) primary coolant system response to an experiment containment failure, and 3) dose analyses for molten fuels.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Safety Considerations for Advanced Material Irradiation at the ATR

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Advances in Integral and Separate Effects Experiments for Water Cooled Small Modular Reactors

This paper focuses on the progress being made in water-cooled small modular reactor (SMR) advanced integral effects and separate effects experiments for reactor licensing. SMRs, considered modular in design, are mostly factory-built and then shipped to the reactor site. Of the several types of SMR designs available, water-cooled SMRs are likely to receive regulatory approval faster than others, as most of the technologies involved (e.g., the fuel and coolant technologies) are matured. However, the unique safety systems of SMRs, which depend on specific SMR design features, require integral and separate effects experiments to achieve reactor licensing. Thus, of the many SMR designs being proposed, only a few have successfully undergone licensing and reached the final development and demonstration stage. Many nuclear vendors and newcomer companies are investing millions of dollars to develop integral and separate effects testing facilities for preparing final safety analysis reports to include in licensing applications. Development and analysis of these experimental facilities is costly and takes about four to five years. The unique challenges involved can be reduced when stakeholders synergistically apply lessons learned, knowing the critical role played by advancements in experiments that support the licensing of SMR safety systems. Identification of knowledge/research gaps with the phenomena identification and ranking table (PIRT) and designing experimental facilities focusing on the phenomena of interest (POI) and figures of merit (FOMs) are pivotal to select the critical path to successful design demonstration and licensing application.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2021

University of Missouri Research Reactor LEU Fuel Element Flow Test Conceptual Design—Hydraulic Reactor Design Parameters

The University of Missouri-Columbia Research Reactor (MURR®) is one of five U.S. high performance research reactors (USHPRR), plus one critical facility, that actively collaborates with the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Material Management and Minimization(M 3 ) Reactor Conversion Program to convert to the use of low-enriched uranium (LEU, < 20 wt.% U-235) fuel. A new type of LEU fuel with very high density, based on an alloy of uranium and 10 weight percent molybdenum (U-10Mo), is expected to allow the conversion to LEU of USHPRR that have been found unable to be converted with previously qualified uranium silicide-aluminum (U 3 Si 2 -Al) dispersion fuel. MURR has been working with the USHPRR Reactor Conversion (RC) Pillar at Argonne National Laboratory to perform fuel element design and fuel cycle performance analyses, steady-state thermal hydraulics safety analyses, and accident safety analyses in preparation for the conversion of MURR and to support a preliminary Safety Analysis Report (SAR) for conversion to LEU fuel. This work is performed in preparation for the flow test campaign that will be conducted by the USHPRR RC Pillar. The purpose of the hydraulic performance evaluation of the MURR LEU fuel element designed by the RC Pillar is to test a prototypic commercially fabricated LEU fuel element to determine whether any failure modes are observed or predicted in the fuel element, including significant deformations such as plate bending, twisting, or plate detachment from the side plate under selected safety-basis limits for reactor hydraulic conditions. To support the design of the flow test for MURR LEU fuel element hydraulic performance evaluation, design parameters for hydraulic testing of the LEU fuel element are laid out in this report.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Fabrication Lessons Learned of Transportation Packaging from the Perspective of a Design Authority - 20322

This paper presents lessons learned regarding fabricating packaging systems from the perspective of a design authority (DA). Capturing and implementing lessons learned is critical for an organization to reduce systematic project risk and thereby promote the likelihood of project success. This paper defines the design authority as the organization responsible for technical design, resolving technical design issues, quality assurance program, and maintenance of the packaging system license. A package system is defined as the packaging, its contents, and auxiliary equipment. Packages are certified by the NRC under 10 CFR 71[1] for transportation by ground. The following lessons learned subjects are presented in the paper: quality assurance, interpretation of drawing dimensional requirements, execution of manufacturing processes, hardware dimensional inspection, and leakage rate testing. All discrepancies presented in this paper have been resolved as described in the appropriate final data package. All described package systems are in compliance with their Safety Analysis Report (SAR) and certificate of conformance requirements. The intent of this paper is to identify opportunities for improving the outcome of future projects and to mitigate fabrication challenges proactively. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

Dynamic and Responsive Distributed Energy Resource Education Solutions for Building, Fire, and Safety Department Officials (Final Technical Report)

From April 2021 through March 2024, the Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC) led a collaborative project to develop a free online clearinghouse of educational resources about solar photovoltaics (PV), energy storage systems (ESS), electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), and grid-interactive efficient building (GEB) technologies. Two websites—the Clean Energy Clearinghouse and CleanEnergyTraining.org—housed over 70 educational resources. Over the course of the three-year project, 154,272 unique visitors accessed the learning materials. Learner feedback was overwhelmingly positive. Even through the end of the project, there was sustained demand for education and communication. A primary innovation of the project was to drive multiple complementary audiences to the same place. Building owners, designers, installation contractors and developers, authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs), and fire service personnel all benefit from a shared understanding of clean energy technologies, including safety and code-related requirements. When considering the impact on the target audience, the project team worked with partners and advisors to inform resource creation and delivery in such a way as to address key motivational factors of the target audience and compel each user to seek additional information on the topic and return to the Clean Energy Clearinghouse website as their central location for more information. Resources were intentionally developed to be concise—five to 15 minutes—and accessible, meaning not overly technical. Providing basic information demystified the technologies and invited the professional to explore additional learning opportunities. Awardee and partner collaboration was key to project success. IREC facilitated collaboration among the other Topic 2 awardees, Southface and New Buildings Institute (NBI). The three awardees shared relevant information gained through discovery and validation questionnaires that informed product development and reduced duplication of effort by coordinating the development of complementary, and not competing, educational resources. Inspired by this collaboration, IREC brought on additional partners even in the final year of the project. Five regional energy efficiency organizations were part of the project, which expanded the connection between efficiency and distributed energy resources. We also included resources on the Clearinghouse that were developed through other federally funded projects, such as the Buildings Energy Efficiency Frontiers & Innovation Technologies (BENEFIT) program. The website was developed with the learner in mind, and not solely the funding source. Feedback from stakeholders throughout the project, and especially in its final year, indicated the need for continued education and facilitated communication among stakeholders to further the safe and widespread adoption of clean energy.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Dose Rate Analysis of the WCS Consolidated Interim Storage Facility

This report describes a confirmatory calculation for a proposed consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) to support the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s review of the license application submitted by the Interim Storage Partners. The scope of this report is limited to an assessment of the annual dose from direct radiation associated with Phase 1 of the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) CISF and the determination of the minimum controlled area boundary based on the 10 CFR 72.104 limit of 25 mrem annual dose to the whole body. The confirmatory dose rate calculations used the source term and shielding calculation capabilities of the SCALE 6.2.3 computer code system. The calculation method employed in the confirmatory calculations uses a detailed Monte Carlo radiation transport simulation from source to dose rate. This method differs from the two-step method used in the safety analysis report (SAR), which requires determination of the photon and neutron energy and angular distributions on the cask external surface and then the use of this surface source in a new radiation transport calculation to determine dose rate as a function of distance from the storage facility. A simulation was made using the complete site geometry (all casks present) but with only one cask containing source, and a total of 467 independent calculations were performed to obtain the dose rate maps produced by each storage cask. Basic input data and assumptions used in the SAR (e.g., cask design parameters and design basis assembly characteristics) were used in this confirmatory calculation for consistency with the SAR. Local atmospheric conditions for skyshine calculations were simulated using US standard atmosphere data, which describe average air temperature, pressure, and density as a function of altitude. The determined minimum required distances from the WCS Phase 1 CISF to a contour defined by the 25 mrem annual dose limit were approximately 623 m (0.387 miles) in the N-NE direction, 594 m (0.369 miles) in the SSW direction, and 533 m (0.331 miles) in the E-SE direction and the W-NW direction. The annual dose results of the confirmatory calculation are in relatively good agreement with the annual dose values presented in the WCS SAR. The annual dose produced by the Phase 1 CISF at the nearest site boundary, 0.75 miles away from the CISF, was estimated by this study to be approximately 6.02E-02 ± 2.0E-04 mrem, which is significantly smaller than the 25 mrem annual dose limit provided in 10 CFR 72.104. The SAR annual dose rate value for the nearest site boundary was 7.52E-2 mrem, which included 7.73E-03 mrem due to postulated leakage of the FO-, FC-, and FF-canisters. A comparison with the dose rate values reported in the SAR for 16 detector locations, D1 through D16, on the protected area boundary is also included in this report. This comparison shows that the SAR determined higher annual dose values for detectors D1 through D14 by 12% to 45% and lower annual dose values for detectors D15 and D16 by 18% and 8%, respectively, as compared with this ORNL confirmatory calculation. Sensitivity studies have been performed to support a comprehensive review of the application. In these studies, the effects on dose rate of the modeled air volume, density, and humidity were analyzed. The sensitivity calculations showed that the air volume used in the Monte Carlo simulations was adequate and that a larger air volume would not further increase the dose rate due to skyshine contributions. The sensitivity analysis showed that simulation of local atmospheric conditions is important for the accuracy of dose rate estimates at large distances from the facility. Air humidity was demonstrated to have negligible effects on dose rate values for the simulated local atmospheric conditions.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Automation of debris removal and resurfacing of insulators in terawatt pulsed power systems using state of the art laser technology

The increasing complexity and scale of pulsed power systems necessitate effective maintenance strategies to ensure optimal performance and safety. This report investigates the automation of debris removal and resurfacing of insulators in terawatt pulsed power systems using advanced laser cleaning technologies. The motivation for this research stems from the limitations of current manual cleaning methods, which are labor-intensive and pose health risks due to hazardous materials. The study addresses the problem of surface flashover, a significant issue affecting insulator performance, by evaluating two innovative cleaning techniques: Pulsed Laser Cleaning (PLC) and Flash Lamp Annealing (FLA). Experimental results demonstrate that PLC effectively restores the dielectric strength of Rexolite insulators, while FLA shows limited success. The findings highlight the potential for automated cleaning solutions to enhance safety and efficiency in insulator maintenance, paving the way for future advancements in pulsed power technology.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2025

Risk Analysis of Radiological Release from Pu-238 Targets During Manual Handling

Pu-238 Isotope Production Targets are routinely installed in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) core, transferred, and stored in the spent fuel canal. These evolutions involve manual handling and manipulation of the targets underwater using long handled tools. The ATR Safety Analysis Report (SAR) postulates a design basis accident which results in damage from manual manipulation of targets, and radiological consequences must be determined for receptors inside the reactor facility, as well as public receptors. This presentation presents the analysis used to determine the radiological consequences due to potential target damage in the ATR canal. The analysis considered radionuclide release fractions, damage ratios for handling evolutions, and entrainment of radionuclides in the canal water.

Advanced Test Reactor↗

DOE OSTI2020

Phase 1 NuScale SMR FOAK Nuclear Demonstration Readiness Project (Final Scientific/Technical Report)

The overarching objective of the Phase 1 NuScale SMR First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) Nuclear Demonstration Readiness Project was to enhance competitiveness of the U.S. nuclear industry by enabling timely deployment of the NuScale small modular reactor (SMR). The scope of this Phase 1 project continued to advance the licensing and design maturity, particularly in those areas related to supporting customer readiness, supply chain integration, cost competitiveness, and cost confidence. This investment provided by the Government has accelerated development of these designs and technologies so that the existing domestic fleet of nuclear power plants remains viable and the most mature in the nuclear industry. The intent is to have the new, advanced U.S. designs be deployed as early 2026, and be globally competitive. As a part of the First-of-a-Kind Nuclear Demonstration Readiness Project, NuScale has been developing an advanced reactor design, leading the path for other development projects or complex technology advancements for existing plants that have significant technical and licensing risk. The NuScale Power team (NuScale) is advancing licensing, engineering, supply chain development, testing, and other required activities to enhance the innovation and competitiveness of the U.S. nuclear industry by enabling timely deployment of the NuScale SMR. Specifically, NuScale is performing the following activities in Phase 1. Fully supporting the NRC review of the NuScale DCA to ensure approval of a final safety evaluation report by the end of 2020. Improving plant cost confidence and cost competitiveness through design and supply chain advancement, incorporation of constructability best practices, and margin recovery to increase plant power output. Accelerating design maturity, technology development, and operational program readiness to support a customer commitment for plant deployment. The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), a unit of the Office of Science, fulfills agency-wide responsibilities to collect, preserve, and disseminate both unclassified and classified scientific and technical information (STI) emanating from DOE-funded research and development (R&D) activities at DOE national laboratories and facilities and at universities and other institutions nationwide. This scientific and technical report provides summaries of the analyses and research that was performed by NuScale under this project that achieves the objective of disseminating information to the nuclear industry to ensure the innovations realized are shared for the benefit of the industry at large.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Human-System Interface Design Review Guidelines

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff reviews the human factors engineering (HFE) aspects of nuclear power plants in accordance with the Standard Review Plan (NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition). The Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model (NUREG-0711, Revision 3, issued November 2012) contains detailed design review procedures. As part of the review process, the interfaces between plant personnel and the plant's systems and components are evaluated for conformance with HFE guidelines. This document, Human-System Interface Design Review Guidelines (NUREG-0700, Revision 3), provides the guidelines necessary to perform this evaluation. The review guidelines address the physical and functional characteristics of human-system interfaces (HSIs). Because these guidelines only address the HFE aspects of design and not other related considerations, such as instrumentation and control and structural design, they are referred to as HFE guidelines. In addition to the review of actual HSIs, the NRC staff can use the NUREG-0700 guidelines to evaluate a design-specific HFE guidelines document or style guide. The HFE guidelines are organized into four basic parts, which are divided into sections. Part I contains guidelines for the basic HSI elements: information displays, user-interface interaction and management, and analog displays and controls. These elements are used as building blocks to develop HSI systems to serve specific functions. Part II contains the guidelines for reviewing the following HSI systems: alarm system, safety parameter display system, group-view display system, soft control system, computer-based procedure system, automation system, and communication system. Part III provides guidelines for the review of workstations and workplaces. Part IV provides guidelines for the review of HSI support (i.e., maintainability of digital systems and degraded HSI and instrumentation and control conditions).

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Combined Effort to De-Inventory the New Brunswick Laboratory of Plutonium Certified Reference Materials - 20504

To de-inventory plutonium Certified Reference Materials standards (CRMs) from the New Brunswick National Laboratory (NBL), the Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) and Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) formed a unique team. This teaming arrangement leveraged the different capabilities and expertise of both laboratories, helping to ensure the effort would be performed both safely and cost-effectively. With the NBL then physically housed on the ANL site, ANL served as the host-site, providing the necessary facilities and support services (e.g., supplying everything from hoods, loading equipment, and scales to Health Physics supports). From a packaging perspective, ANL's responsibilities focused mainly on characterizing and preparing the contents for shipment, followed by performing the Shipper of Record activities. With SRNL being the Package Design Authority of the 9978, the Type B packaging used for this effort, SRNL's scope included developing a Safety Analysis Report in Packaging (SARP) Letter Amendment to add the CRMs as authorized contents to the 9978. Recognizing competency, ANL prodigiously tasked SRNL to perform the actual loading of the CRMs into the 9978s, while physically on the ANL site. This paper details five different aspects of this effort. They are: 1. Characterization/validation of the CRM contents. 2. Development of the 9978 SARP Letter Amendment for the content change. 3. Development of the nitrogen inerting method to address SARP identified potential flammability concerns. 4. Renewal of the SRNL 9978 loading procedure. 5. Performance of the actual work execution activities. In 2017, the first nine packages were successfully loaded and shipped from NBL, while in 2019, the last ten were successfully loaded and planned for shipment. Without ANL leveraging SRNL's strengths, the de-inventorying of NBL of its plutonium CRMs would have likely taken many years longer. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Expanded Validation of Uranium Systems with the KENO Monte Carlo Codes and SCALE 6.2.4

The development of accident-tolerant fuel and advanced reactors fueled with high-assay low-enriched uranium has created an increased focus on systems with uranium enrichments between 5 and 20 wt % 235 U. SCALE criticality safety validation reports generated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory contain very few benchmark experiments in this range. The work presented herein is an initial investigation of expanded validation of the entire range of enrichments for uranium-fueled systems, including consideration of over 300 newly developed KENO models. The vast majority of the new models are between 4.4 wt % and 37.5 wt % enrichment and include a variety of thermal, intermediate, and mixed neutron spectra. This work finds no strong evidence of an enrichment-dependent bias, but there are indications of a spectrum-dependent bias. There are, however, only a limited number of independent experiments included at this time to distinguish intermediate enrichment effects from intermediate spectrum effects. Further work in this area is ongoing for intermediate enrichment systems. In the long run, the addition of these models to the Verified, Archived Library and Inputs and Data is planned, as funding and staff availability allow.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2024

SCALE inventory and reactivity analysis as part of the Hermes 2021 PSAR review

The readiness of SCALE for comprehensive studies of pebble-bed reactors has been demonstrated through detailed analysis of a fluoride salt–cooled, high-temperature pebble-bed reactor (PB-FHR). The methods developed for pebble-bed reactor modeling in SCALE, particularly for inventory generation, have proven effective in gaining insights into the reactor physics of this advanced reactor. Excellent agreement with another code package has been observed, further highlighting SCALE’s strong performance. The SCALE results supported the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s construction permit application review of the Hermes low-power PB-FHR demonstration reactor. A SCALE model of the Hermes reactor was developed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory using information from the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) and supplemented with publicly available data. SCALE reactivity coefficient simulations reproduced PSAR results within 1σ statistical uncertainties. Sensitivity studies emphasized the importance of graphite specifications for accurate keff predictions.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Verification and Validation of the PLTEMP/ANL Code for Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Experimental and Test Reactors

The document compiles in a single volume the verification and validation works done for the PLTEMP/ANL code during the years of its development and improvement. The verification of sixteen capabilities of the PLTEMP/ANL Version 4.3 code that were identified by research reactor analysts as frequently used in their thermal-hydraulic analysis are described and documented. Each chapter of the document deals with the verification or validation of a specific model. The model verification is usually done by comparing the code with hand calculation, Microsoft spreadsheet calculation, or Mathematica calculation. The model validation is done by comparing the code with experimental data or a widely tested code like the RELAP5 code. In addition, some PLTEMP/ANL verification works that are available in the open literature are simply referenced and not included in the document. PLTEMP/ANL has been used in conversion safety analysis reports of several US and foreign research reactors that have been licensed and converted. A list of such reactors is given.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Thermal Evaluation of the SAVY-4000 1 Quart Container at High Heat Loads

The SAVY-4000 Safety Analysis Report (SAR) was published in 2013 which established the design life of the container series through physical testing that meets applicable requirements from DOE M 441.1-1, Nuclear Material Packaging Manual. One critical requirement in DOE M 441.1-1 is to set a maximum heat load for the entire series to ensure that throughout the lifetime of the container, each of the components still performs within manufacture specifications. The original maximum decay heat limit has been defined within the SAVY-4000 SAR, which was accomplished by completing a series of tests that heat loaded the SAVY-4000 series and measured the steady state temperature and graded it against manufacture specifications. The container series is comprised of a corrosion resistant 316L stainless steel containment boundary, ceramic composite filter for the prevention of radiological particulate release and a chemically stable O-ring made of Viton ® . Currently, the SAVY 4000 maximum decay heat load is set at 25 Watts and the heat load expected during normal handling and storage is considered sufficient that the SAVY 4000 container requirements will not be the limiting factor for storage of most common material in use at TA-55, e.g. weapons grade oxide, americium, Pu-238 oxide and encapsulated heat sources. The SAVY 4000 lifetime was originally set as 5 years within the SAVY-4000 SAR, but in July 2019 the lifetime was extended to 15 years through a technical basis justification approved by the Department of Energy (DOE) Los Alamos Field Office. The 25 Watt limit applies to all SAVY 4000 container sizes; 1-quart, 2-quart, 3-quart, 5-quart, 8-quart, 12-quart, 5-gallon, and 10-gallon.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Reactor LEU Fuel Element Flow Test Conceptual Design – Hydraulic Reactor Design Parameters

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Reactor (MITR-II, also referred to as MITR) is one of six U.S. high performance research reactors (USHPRR), including one critical facility, that is actively collaborating with the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Material Management and Minimization (M 3 ) Reactor Conversion Program to convert to the use of low-enriched uranium (LEU, < 20 wt% 235 U) fuel. The MIT Nuclear Reactor Laboratory has been working with the USHPRR Reactor Conversion (RC) Pillar at Argonne National Laboratory to perform fuel element design and fuel cycle performance analyses, steady-state thermal hydraulics safety analyses, and accident safety analyses in preparation for the conversion of MITR and support a preliminary Safety Analysis Report (SAR) for conversion to LEU fuel.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Verification and Validation of the PLTEMP/ANL Code for Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Experimental and Test Reactors (Code Version 4.3)

The document compiles in a single volume the verification and validation works done for the PLTEMP/ANL code during the years of its development and improvement. The verification of sixteen capabilities of the PLTEMP/ANL Version 4.3 code that were identified by research reactor analysts as frequently used in their thermal-hydraulic analysis are described and documented. Each chapter of the document deals with the verification or validation of a specific part of the software that calculates a specific phenomenon, e.g., channel flow calculation, coolant property calculation, heat transfer calculation, and flow instability calculation. The software verification work is usually done by comparing the code with hand calculation, Microsoft spreadsheet calculation, or Mathematica calculation. The software validation is done by comparing the code with experimental data or a widely tested code like the RELAP5 code. In addition, some PLTEMP/ANL verification works that are available in the open literature are simply referenced and not included in the document. PLTEMP/ANL has been used in conversion safety analysis reports of several US and foreign research reactors that have been licensed and converted. A list of such reactors is given.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗