Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “fast reactors”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Qualification of SAS4A/SASSYS-1 for Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Authorization and Licensing (Final CRADA Report)

This project focuses on assessment and qualification of the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 advanced reactor safety analysis code and its capacity to fulfill requirements associated with license/authorization of a sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR). Specific objectives of this proposal include: development of a formal documentation requirements matrix that complies with a vendor’s NQA-1 program to identify needs for qualification documentation; completion of software methods qualification gap analysis to identify and close gaps in the verification and validation basis of the software; generation of an Acceptance Test Report to confirm compliance with the software requirements specification; and closure of gaps in Software Design Description (SDD) to assist with the eventual generation of a Modeling Licensing Topic Report (LTR).

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Experimental studies on metallic fuel relocation in a pin bundle core structure of a sodium-cooled fast reactor

Understanding the relocation behavior of metallic fuel in severe accident scenarios is one of the most important factors in the safety assessment of sodium-cooled fast reactors (SFRs). In the present study, the relocation behavior of uranium metallic fuel was investigated by conducting metallic fuel relocation experiments using 19-pin bundle test sections in the Argonne's Metallic Uranium Safety Experiment (MUSE) facility. Post-test radiographic images were taken to characterize the uranium fuel relocation within the pin bundle test section. In addition, the pressure drop in the test sections was measured after the relocation experiments to evaluate the blockage of the sodium coolant channel. The pressure drop in the pin bundle test sections was also analytically calculated by varying the porosity and the pore size of the relocated fuel. The porosity and pore size of the relocated fuel in the pin bundle test sections were estimated by comparing those calculated pressure drop values with the measured pressure drop values from the pressure drop tests. In this work, the experimental results showed that the more formation of the eutectics could lead to more fuel dispersion and less blockage due to the lower freezing point of the eutectics.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Multi-Physics Simulations of Molten Chloride Fast Reactor using Nek5000 and PROTEUS-NODAL

This report documents the FY20 work to demonstrate a specific multi-physics capability within NEAMS tools to model molten chloride fast reactors (MCFR). Specifically, the CFD code Nek5000 and the neutronics code PROTEUS-NODAL were coupled off-line to calculate the delayed neutron precursor distribution within the flowing fuel salts in an MCFR core. An MCFR benchmark problem and a 3D test problem based on a conceptual MSR design were successfully solved through the coupled simulation of Nek5000 and PROTEUS-NODAL. In the coupled simulations for these test problems, Nek5000 provided high-quality flow field information, and PROTEUS-NODAL performed the neutron diffusion calculation along with the precursor drift model. The impact of precursor drift on the core status was also investigated. Additionally, the precursor drift model implemented in PROTEUS-NODAL was verified by making use of the reference precursor distribution generated from Nek5000. Results of these test problems suggest that the multi-physics capability of Nek5000 and PROTEUS-NODAL was properly developed for tracking delayed neutron precursor drift.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

GIF Gas Cooled Fast Reactor: Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection White Paper

This white paper represents the status of Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection (PR&PP) characteristics for the Gas-cooled Fast reactor (GFR) reference designs selected by the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) GFR System Steering Committee (SSC). The intent is to generate preliminary information about the PR&PP features of the GFR reactor technology and to provide insights for optimizing their PR&PP performance for the benefit of GFR system designers. It updates the GFR analysis published in the 2011 report “Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection of the Six Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems”, prepared Jointly by the Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection Working Group (PRPPWG) and the System Steering Committees and provisional System Steering Committees of the Generation IV International Forum, taking into account the evolution of both the systems, the GIF R&D activities, and an increased understanding of the PR&PP features. The white paper, prepared jointly by the GIF PRPPWG and the GIF GFR SSC, follows the high-level paradigm of the GIF PR&PP Evaluation Methodology to investigate the PR&PP features of the GIF GFR 2400 MWth reference design. The ALLEGRO reactor is also described. The EM2 and HEN MHR reactor are mentioned. An overview of fuel cycle for the GFR reference design and for the ALLEGRO reactor are provided. For PR, the document analyses and discusses the proliferation resistance aspects in terms of robustness against State-based threats associated with diversion of materials, misuse of facilities, breakout scenarios, and production in clandestine facilities. Similarly, for PP, the document discusses the robustness against theft of material and sabotage by non-State actors. The document follows a common template adopted by all the white papers in the updated series.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

SAS4A/SASSYS-1 Verification Testing for Sodium Fast Reactor Applications: Acceptance Testing Report

SAS4A/SASSYS-1 (SAS) is a simulation tool used to perform deterministic analyses of anticipated events as well as design basis and beyond design basis accidents for advanced liquid-metal-cooled nuclear reactors. With its origin as SAS1A in the late 1960s, the SAS series of codes has been under continuous use and development for over forty-five years and represents a critical investment in safety analysis capabilities for the U.S. Department of Energy. To support demonstration of software pedigree and confirm key functional requirements, this report has been generated to provide detailed verification of the software. Although SAS was developed to support the analysis of any liquid-metal-cooled nuclear reactor, the acceptance testing described in this document focuses on the verification of SAS capabilities as they relate to pool-type Sodium Fast Reactors (SFRs). This report includes documentation of the test problem definition, analytical solution(s), computational solution(s), acceptance criteria, comparisons of analytical/computational solutions, and determination of acceptance of the computational solution(s). Deviations from acceptance criteria are noted.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2024

SAS4A/SASSYS-1 Verification Testing for Sodium Fast Reactor Applications (Acceptance Testing Report)

SAS4A/SASSYS-1 (SAS) is a simulation tool used to perform deterministic analyses of anticipated events as well as design basis and beyond design basis accidents for advanced liquid-metal- cooled nuclear reactors. With its origin as SAS1A in the late 1960s, the SAS series of codes has been under continuous use and development for over fifty years and represents a critical investment in safety analysis capabilities for the U.S. Department of Energy. To support demonstration of software pedigree and confirm key functional requirements, this report has been generated to provide detailed verification of the software. Although SAS was developed to support the analysis of any liquid-metal-cooled nuclear reactor, the acceptance testing described in this document focuses on the verification of SAS capabilities as they relate to pool-type Sodium Fast Reactors (SFRs). This report includes documentation of the test problem definition, analytical solution(s), computational solution(s), acceptance criteria, comparisons of analytical/computational solutions, and determination of acceptance of the computational solution(s). Deviations from acceptance criteria are noted.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

SCALE Demonstration for Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Fuel Cycle Analysis

In support of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission non-light-water reactor fuel cycle demonstration project, SCALE 6.3.1 capabilities for radionuclide characterization, criticality, and shielding were demonstrated for scenarios in the sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) nuclear fuel cycle. Three postulated accident scenarios were selected for analysis in this work. As a basis for all scenarios, irradiated fuel inventories were generated using SCALE/ORIGAMI. To cover multiple SFR design choices, two different types of SFR fuel, uranium/transuranic-loaded and U-based fuels, were considered. For the first scenario, SCALE/MAVRIC was used to calculate the radiation shielding and dose rates inside and outside of the containment building due to a drop of a spent fuel assembly from the fuel-handling system during unloading inside the containment building. For the second scenario, potential critical configurations in an electrofiner were investigated through criticality calculations with SCALE/CSAS. For the third scenario, the activity of the waste salt from an electrorefiner was evaluated using SCALE/ORIGEN. The dose rate produced by the analyzed SFR assemblies is similar to that produced by a typical pressurized water reactor (PWR) fuel assembly with a discharge burnup of 50 GWd/MTU, with the same cooling time of 10 days. The criticality analyses suggested that the different electrorefiner configurations have a large margin to criticality. The activity analysis of the electrofiner waste revealed that shielding and cooling may be required for the waste salt that contains transuranics and fission products produced by the electrorefiner because of the high activity of the waste salt. In general, the application of various capabilities in the SCALE code system for SFR fuel inventory generation, criticality, and shielding was successfully demonstrated for the selected scenarios in the SFR nuclear fuel cycle. Additional analyses can be performed to provide more accurate results when more details of the SFR nuclear fuel cycles are available, for example, the dimension of the electrorefiner and the salt compositions during reprocessing.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

SCALE 6.3.1 Radiation Source Terms and Shielding Analysis for a Postulated Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Accident Scenario

In support of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission non–light-water reactor fuel cycle demonstration project, SCALE 6.3.1 capabilities for radiation source term and shielding calculations are demonstrated for scenarios in the sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) fuel cycle. A postulated accident scenario, which consists of a seismic event causing the refueling machine to fall and release a spent fuel assembly inside the containment building (CB), is analyzed in this paper. Radiation source terms were generated for a U/TRU-10Zr metal fuel assembly with a 16.5% initial transuranic waste content and a discharge burnup of approximately 95 GWd/tHM; source terms were also generated for a high-assay low-enriched uranium metal fuel assembly (U-10Zr) with a 16.5% initial enrichment and a discharge burnup of 149.74 GWd/tHM. These radiation source terms were then used to determine the dose rate inside the CB and near the outer surface of the CB for a range of spent fuel assembly cooling times. The dose rate produced by the analyzed SFR assemblies is similar to that produced by a typical pressurized water reactor assembly with a discharge burnup of 50 GWd/MTU. Ultimately, the validation of the source terms predicted for SFRs with SCALE will need to be demonstrated via the use of assay measurements.

Radulescu, Georgeta↗
DOE OSTI2025

SAS4A/SASSYS-1 Verification Testing for Sodium Fast Reactor Application: Acceptance Testing Report

AS4A/SASSYS-1 (SAS) is a simulation tool used to perform deterministic analyses of anticipated events as well as design basis and beyond design basis accidents for advanced liquid-metal-cooled nuclear reactors. With its origin as SAS1A in the late 1960s, the SAS series of codes has been under continuous use and development for over sixty years and represents a critical investment in safety analysis capabilities for the U.S. Department of Energy. To support the dedication effort, this report has been generated to provide a detailed description of the available verification testing. The verification testing presented in this report captures functionality testing, focusing mainly on the testing of specific functions and algorithms for accuracy and precision of output, and interface testing, focusing mainly on the testing of critical input parameters and their valid ranges. Although SAS was developed to support the analysis of any liquid-metal-cooled nuclear reactor, the testing described in this document primarily focuses on the verification of SAS capabilities as they relate to a generic pool-type Sodium Fast Reactor (SFR).

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Continued Verification of MOOSE Structural Mechanics Tools for Modeling Core Bowing Phenomena in Fast Reactors

Under the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy’s Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) Program, an integrated multiphysics approach is being developed to model the core bowing phenomena important to liquid metal-cooled fast reactors. Core bowing is an important passive safety mechanism whereby increased power (which leads to temperature and flux gradients) influences the core to bow into less reactive configurations when the restraint system is properly designed. The phenomenon includes a complex interplay of radiation transport, duct temperature calculations involving fluid flow and heat transfer, and thermo-mechanical responses to the induced temperature and flux gradients. Structural material properties are also important to determining inelastic response to longer term flux gradients which cause irradiation creep and swelling. While core bowing provides a strong negative reactivity feedback when the restraint system is designed properly, it also results in additional forces between assemblies which increase the loads required to extricate them during refueling or control rod movement. Therefore, the restraint system must be designed with these tradeoffs in mind. The first stage of the work, which commenced in FY21 and continues through FY22, assesses thermo-mechanical modeling tools for producing core bowing predictions consistent with conventional tools. The Multiphysics Object Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE) Tensor Mechanics and Contact Modules are employed. This status report describes work on additional thermo-mechanical benchmark verification problems with increased complexity from the examples demonstrated in FY21. Several benchmark verification examples were selected from the IAEA verification and validation report. These examples involve clusters of ducts representative of a sector of a hexagonal reactor core which bow into each other and cause contact and load pad elevations, as well as single ducts subjected to irradiation fields undergoing swelling and subsequent bowing. The MOOSE-based results were compared to both IAEA benchmark participants’ results, analytic equations as available, and NUBOW-3D, a beam model code developed by Argonne National Laboratory. In every case, the MOOSE results agreed with other simulations results, providing additional verification basis of the tools for this particular physics application.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Out-of-Pile Furnace Tests on Fast Reactor Metallic Fuels Conducted at the AGHCF

An extensive out-of-pile furnace test program was conducted at Argonne’s Alpha-Gamma Hot Cell Facility (AGHCF) from 1987-1994 to evaluate the fuel/clad compatibility and performance of fast reactor metallic fuels. This test program included over 150 tests on irradiated fuels conducted in two furnace apparatuses. The available records of these tests have been preserved with the support of the Advanced Reactor Technology program and organized in the OPTD (Out-of-Pile Transient Database). This report provides at-a-glance summary information for each of the out-of-pile furnace tests, including information about the tested fuel samples, test conditions, purpose of the tests, and key results. It is intended for open and unlimited distribution to allow all interested persons to view key information about the out-of-pile tests.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Simulation of the Fast Reactor Fuel Assembly Duct-Bowing Reactivity Effect Using Monte Carlo Neutron Transport and Finite Element Analysis

This paper discusses a new method of simulating the fuel assembly duct-bowing reactivity coefficient for EBR-II run 138B. Quantification of the fuel assembly duct-bowing reactivity effect in liquid metal–cooled fast reactors has been a persistent problem since they were first designed and operated. Simulation of the duct-bowing reactivity effect is difficult because the level of detail required to simulate the effect has exceeded most modeling capabilities. The new method outlined in this paper utilizes the finite element analysis code ANSYS to analyze the thermal and structural components. Here, the displacement of the fuel assembly duct due to thermal expansion and mechanical interaction was calculated by ANSYS using recorded EBR-II run 138B temperature and power boundary value data. The displacement values were incorporated into to a Monte Carlo model of EBR-II run 138B and keff was calculated. Multiple Monte Carlo calculations were performed with duct displacement values corresponding to different reactor temperatures. Using the calculated keff values associated with the different duct displacement results allowed calculation of the duct-bowing reactivity coefficient. The duct-bowing reactivity coefficient was calculated to be –14.5 × 10 –4 $/°C/ ± 4.4%.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Nuclear Data Impact on Key Metrics for a Representative Molten Chloride Fast Reactor Model

Nuclear data are an essential component of the foundation on which all modeling and simulation methods and tools are relying upon, from the front end to the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. In this study, the impact of uncertainties in nuclear data is investigated for a representative molten chloride fast reactor, for several important metrics, including eigenvalue, reactivity differences, and nuclide inventories in fuel at 5-yr irradiation. Uncertainty of keff for a full core model was found to be similar between the fresh fuel and the irradiated fuel states (1.7-1.8%), with its primary driver being the uncertainty in the 235U (n,γ) cross section. The results obtained for the reactivity differences show large uncertainties, of over 100%, in elastic scattering sensitivities of several nuclides, which led to large uncertainties of temperature reactivity differences for cladding and reflector. These results provide evidence that the currently applied methods may not be sufficiently adequate for ensuring the reliable determination of such metrics.

Procop, Germina [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000342226393)↗
DOE OSTI2022

Examination of Ac-225 production from Ra-226 using fast reactor JOYO

In this study, the authors investigated the method of producing the radionuclide Ac{sup 225} used for targeted alpha therapy (TAT). Currently, Ac{sup 225} is mainly generated from ORNL's Th{sup 229} generator, and the annual production amount is limited to about 63 GBq, and methods for generating it using accelerators are under development in each country. The method using an accelerator has the advantage of being able to generate Ac{sup 225} from a small amount of target nuclides with high efficiency but has the disadvantage of not being able to irradiate a large amount of target nuclides at once due to the small irradiation area. Therefore, the authors investigated a method to generate Ac{sup 225} by neutron irradiation of Ra{sup 226} as a target nuclide using the experimental fast reactor JOYO, which has abundant neutrons and a large loading region. Irradiation of Ra{sup 226} with fast neutrons causes a (n, 2n) reaction to generate Ra{sup 225}, and then decay to produce Ac{sup 225}. In addition, although harmful Ac{sup 227} is also produced at the same time by the (n,γ) reaction, first of all the actinium isotope is chemically separated and eliminated. Since the remaining Ra{sup 225} collapses and Ac{sup 225} is produced, pure Ac{sup 225} can be extracted by performing chemical separation again. As a result of the analysis, 1 g of Ra{sup 226} is irradiated with JOYO for 60 days, and milking is performed 4 times every 17.5 days. By doing these three times a year, it was found that about 50 GBq of Ac{sup 225} was generated. (authors)

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

CFD Simulations to Support Pronghorn Modeling of a Molten Salt Fast Reactor

To assist with the deployment of next generation molten salt reactors (MSRs), the DOE NEAMS program is developing advanced simulation capabilities. As part of this work, the high-fidelity CFD tool, Nek5000 was used to inform model development for the engineering scale tool, Pronghorn. The particular case chosen was the EVOL molten salt fast reactor concept. This concept uses an open core design, which is well known to be sensitive to the particular geometry and can have complex flow behavior that varies across a range of conditions. This makes it an idea candidate for demonstration of the Hi2Lo concept of using higher fidelity models to benchmark lower fidelity models. Simulations of the EVOL design were performed using both LES (high-fidelity) and RANS (moderate-fidelity) in Nek5000. The LES results indicated discrepancies in 2-D axisymmetric RANS, indicating that the core is better modeled in RANS with a 3-D wedge representation of a portion of the core, which can accurately account for the effect of the inlet channels. Finally, results from the 3-D RANS were used to modify an existing turbulence model in Pronghorn. Improvement in the calibrated Pronghorn model was demonstrated. Future work is suggested to focus on expanding the LES calculation to provide a more direct point of comparison for both the RANS and Pronghorn models as well as incorporating more of the relevant MSR physics (such as delayed neutron precursor tracking) into the model.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

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. 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 polynomial order 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.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
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↗
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↗