Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “MCNP6.2”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Development of a high-fidelity multi-physics coupling between MCNP6.2 and CTF4.0 for VVER applications

Ensuring system safety in the design, licensing, and operation phases is a priority in the nuclear industry. Performing extensive, full-scale reactor safety experiments is often prohibitive due to the large associated costs. Computational simulations offer an alternative safety analysis method, typically with significant cost reductions. Recent high-level developments in technology and increased availability of computational resources have allowed the development of high-fidelity, high-resolution multi-physics coupled codes. Such developments may be used to generate reference models for deterministic core calculations. Under this framework, the high-fidelity continuous energy Monte Carlo-based neutron transport code MCNP6.2 was coupled externally with the state-of-the-art thermal-hydraulics subchannel code, CTF4.0 for VVER (Water-Water Energetic Reactor) applications. A VVER-1000 fuel assembly model was used to demonstrate the capability of the coupled code. The converged coupled solution is compared to initial results, consisting of the first MCNP evaluation and first CTF evaluation after initialization. The VVER-1000 type assembly results are compared to other evaluations of the same assembly model. The findings indicate good agreement with expectations and reference cases, where available. The initial results of the coupled MCNP6.2/CTF4.0 calculations at the assembly level for steady-state calculations are presented in this study, which may support future work toward high-fidelity coupled full-core modeling capabilities. The multi-physics model may be further improved, enhanced, and expanded for both cycle depletion and transient applications. Such a multi-physics system will also be applicable to the VVER-1200 and other triangular lattice designs and support their deployment and operation safely and economically. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

XE-100 modeling and simulation for neutronic analysis in MCNP6.2

XE-100 is a generation IV helium-cooled, graphite-moderated, pebble-bed reactor (HTGR). As part of the pathway toward a conceptually designing and licensing this reactor, an independent Monte Carlo model was created in MCNP6.2, and several distinct neutronic analyses were then performed. The double heterogeneity of TRISO fuel within graphite pebbles introduces unique modeling challenges related to particle and pebble clipping. The results show that for neutron and photon heating of ex-core components such as the reflector, RCSS, core barrel (CB), the model that contains clipping produces higher heating values. It is therefore concluded that removing clipping via compression of the particles and pebbles within the model distributes the neutrons and gammas preferentially toward the core center, and reduces the heating that is experienced toward the reactor periphery. Thus, the most conservative model for ex-core heating contains particle and pebble clipping. Also presented are results on the impact of chamfers that exist on the corners of graphite reflector blocks. As these chamfers could potentially create streaming paths, the neutron and gamma flux from the core to the CB were analyzed. It was determined that the chamfers do not significantly impact the neutron or gamma signatures on the CB, in that the shape of the neutron and photon flux on a detector imposed on the CB shows no preferential streaming path. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2024

ECAR-7300 Rev 1 Verification and Validation of MCNP6.2 for MARVEL Neutronic Analysis

This report documents the verification and validation (V&V) efforts of the Monte Carlo N-Particle transport code (MCNP) version 6.2 on the Sawtooth supercomputer for the Microreactor Applications Research Validation and Evaluation (MARVEL) microreactor required for the preliminary documented safety analysis. This document records V&V for a safety, hazards, analysis, and design software used for design and analysis of safety class structures, system and components (SSC)s.

21 - SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLAN↗
DOE OSTI2023

Installing MCNP6.2 on Microsoft Windows

This video shows how to install the MCNP code, version 6.2, on a Microsoft Windows 10 computer. After installation, the Xming software is installed, a quick calculation is performed, and geometry is plotted. At this point, this setup is ready for use in an MCNP classroom setting and/or for performing calculations of the viewer’s own creation.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Shielding Benchmark Comparison - MCNP6.2

This report documents the calculations performed for a shielding code comparison between various Department of Energy (DOE) sites. These shielding calculations were performed using an experiment drawn from the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments, published by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development/Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA). The benchmark selected for comparison is ALARM-CF-AIR-LAB-001 (“Neutron Fields in the Three-Section Concrete Labyrinth from Cf-252 Source, Benchmark ALARM CF AIR LAB-001”). The Y-12 submission for this code comparison was performed with Monte Carlo N Particle (MCNP) Transport Code System, Version 6.2 and Automated Variance Reduction Generator (ADVANTG).

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
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 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 OSTI2021

Verification and Validation Tests of Gamma Library of MC2-3 for Coupled Neutron and Gamma Heating Calculation

For the accurate assessment of the heat generation rate in fast reactors, the gamma library of MC2 -3 and the MC2 -3 + GAMSOR procedure employing the coupled neutron and gamma heating calculation has been thoroughly verified against Monte Carlo results and validated using the ZPPR-15D gamma dose measurement data. NJOY outputs are post-processed in a consistent way with the NJOY procedure to avoid any missing data or double counting of data. Prompt heating for 379 out of 391 isotopes in the gamma library was verified against MCNP6.2 to within 1% relative error in total heating for most isotopes. For both a simple one-dimensional slab problem representing a sodium cooled fast reactor and the Experimental Breeder Reactor II (EBR-II) benchmark problem, the root-mean-square values of assembly power error were less than 0.5% for fuel assemblies, ~1% in blankets and ~1 to ~3% in reflectors compared to MCNP6.2 results. The most plausible cause for the 3% error in a reflector assembly is believed to be the error in the multigroup neutron cross sections for the reflector assembly. For validation, gamma doses measured with thermoluminiscent dosimeters (TLDs) in the ZPPR-15D experiment were calculated using GAMSOR. Due to the uncertainty in the TLD measurement with regards to the energy deposition of photons and neutrons, the validation data leads to a 12.7% uncertainty on the experimental measurement. With this uncertainty bound, the calculated doses all fell within one standard deviation of the measured value. Combined with the accurate calculation of reaction rate distributions and neutron spectrum measurements, these results indicate good agreement for the neutron and gamma heating calculations that were performed.

coupled neutron and gamma heating↗
DOE OSTI2021

Benchmark of the Kilowatt Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY) Component Critical Configurations

Kilowatt Reactor Using Stirling TechnologY (KRUSTY) was a prototype for the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Kilopower Program. KRUSTY has a highly enriched uranium–molybdenum alloy (with 7.65 wt% molybdenum) annular core reflected by beryllium oxide with an outer stainless steel shield. Five configurations from the experimental campaign were chosen to be evaluated as benchmark cases. Uncertainties were evaluated in five categories: (1) criticality measurement, (2) mass and density, (3) dimensions, (4) material compositions, and (5) positioning. The largest contribution to the overall uncertainty in each case was from the radial alignment of the movable platen. A simplified model was created to increase computational efficiency, and an average bias of –16 pcm was calculated due to the simplifications. Sample calculations were completed for each case using MCNP6.2, COG, and MC21, all with ENDF/B-VIII.0 nuclear data. For MCNP6.2, the average difference (absolute value) between the calculated and experimental $k_{eff}$ for the five configurations was 14 pcm for both the detailed and the simplified models. The $k_{eff}$ results from all three codes are within 1σ of the benchmark values. KRUSTY’s value as a benchmark is due to its sensitivity to beryllium and molybdenum. For beryllium, KRUSTY adds an 18th benchmark with a total cross-section sensitivity greater than 0.05%/%/(unit lethargy). For molybdenum, KRUSTY adds a 9th benchmark with a total cross-section sensitivity greater than 0.004%/%/(unit lethargy).

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Development of HELIOS/BIPR/PARCS/MCNP6 Computation Route for WWER RPV Neutron Fluence Analysis and Validation Against Ex-Vessel Detector Measurement Data

Here, a computational route was developed for precise calculation of fast neutron fluence on a WWER-type reactor pressure vessel (RPV). The method is based on the transfer of neutronics data from HELIOS-2 lattice calculations and nodal diffusion neutronics data (power, density, and temperature) from BIPR7.1 and PARCS 3.36/PATHS core calculations into a three-dimensional (pinwise axially distributed) fixed neutron source for modeling of transport of fast neutrons from the reactor core to the outer surface of the RPV using MCNP6.2. Validation of the proposed computational method was carried out based on comparative analysis of MCNP6.2-predicted and neutron dosimetry–measured reaction rates [ 54 Fe(n,p) 54 Мn, 93 Nb(n,n') 93 mNb, and 58 Ni(n,р) 58 Со] on the outer surface of the Armenian Nuclear Power Plant (ANPP) Unit 2 RPV. Validation revealed that the MCNP6.2-predicted fast neutron fluence results are very sensitive to the ENDF-B neutron data. Particularly, MCNP6.2 with ENDF/B-VIII.0 significantly underpredicts (20% to 30%) fast neutron fluence while using ENDF/B-VII.1 data overpredicts it. Adding revised beta-released evaluations of 54 Fe, 56 Fe, 57 Fe, and 16 O from the International Nuclear Data Evaluation Network (INDEN) to ENDF/B-VIII.0 allows one to obtain reasonable agreement with measurement results for all types of measured reaction rates.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Radiation Damage Analysis of FNSF Components Using McCad and MCNP

The Fusion Energy System Studies Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FESS-FNSF) concept represents a transitional step between ITER and a commercial fusion power plant. The FNSF is a conceptualized D-T fueled tokamak with 518 MW of fusion power that has been extensively used to explore and optimize design features. The energetic 14.1-MeV neutrons can produce significant localized heating and activations, and can cause damage to plasma-facing components, which can determine maintenance/outage scheduling needs and also impact the lifetime of the device as a whole. This study illustrates a neutronics analysis that was conducted on a 22.5-degree symmetric sector of the FNSF with the goal of understanding the neutron heating and radiation damage that can be characterized by quantifying the displacements per atom (dpa). Concurrently, this study also focused on the development of analysis capabilities by converting a three-dimensional computer-aided design model of the FNSF into MCNP6.2 input using the McCad code. Accordingly, some confirmatory results on tritium production and the tritium breeding ratio (TBR) are provided to support model validation. The results produced by MCNP6.2 simulations showed that the highest heating and damage occurred in the outboard region, which concentrated approximately 290 MW of the total nuclear heating, in contrast to 97 MW within the inboard region. These results are consistent with previous studies that employed earlier versions of the FNSF concept and different modeling approaches. Furthermore, this study also provides additional details on neutron wall loading, as well as total heating from neutrons and gammas, results which show the total heating of the device (16 sectors) is approximately 477.83 ± 0.80% MW, indicating a neutron energy multiplication factor of 1.15. Additionally, the capability to calculate hydrogen and helium production, as well as dpa, is illustrated. Finally, the neutronics effects of using alternative materials to tungsten carbide were evaluated for the vacuum vessel, low-temperature shield, and structural ring components, which showed that compounds like YH 2 , Mg(BH 4 ) 2 , and ZrH 2 could reduce the total heating on the magnet and also reduce the TBR.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

MITR & NBSR DDE Irradiations in BR2 – Fluence in LEU Cladding and Structural Materials

The BR2 nuclear reactor is a material testing reactor (MTR) located in Mol, Belgium, and operated by the Belgian Nuclear Research Centre (SCK CEN) since 1963. The reactor is highly versatile as the number and location of fuel elements and control rods can change significantly from cycle to cycle to accommodate different needs. Argonne National Laboratory (ANL or Argonne) Reactor Conversion (RC) team has collaborated with SCK CEN for over a decade on the conversion of domestic and international research reactors from highly enriched uranium (HEU, ≥20 wt.% of 235 U) to low enriched uranium (LEU, <20 wt.% of 235 U) fuel. The U.S. High-Performance Research Reactor (USHPRR) project within the M3 Reactor Conversion Program aims at converting five U.S. high performance research reactors (MITR, MURR, NBSR, HFIR, and ATR) and one critical facility (ATR-C) to LEU fuel. These USHPRRs still use and regularly refuel with HEU fuel. Each facility has a unique reactor design, operating conditions, and fuel element design to accomplish its mission. The goal of the USHPRR project is to convert the USHPRRs and the critical facility to LEU fuel while maintaining experimental performance and ensuring safe facility operation. The current technical report focuses on two reactors requiring very high-density LEU fuel: the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Reactor (MITR) and the National Bureau of Standards Reactor (NBSR). To support the conversion of these reactors, so-called design demonstration elements (DDE) are planned to be irradiated in the BR2 reactor under conditions similar to the targeted reactors and using a prototypic geometry. In support of this experiment, SCK CEN studied and modeled the DDE irradiations using MCNP6.2 to investigate the feasibility of irradiating the MITR DDE and NBSR DDE in BR2. Argonne reviewed and confirmed the conclusions of this study. Structural analysis is another step toward converting USHPRR to LEU fuel. The objective of the current report is to provide information useful to the structural analysis of the NBSR & MITR DDEs to support its irradiation in BR2. Specifically, the goal is to provide the fast neutron (E>0.1MeV) fluence in the cladding of the fuel plates in BR2 for the whole period of irradiation (8 cycles for MITR DDE and 10 cycles for NBSR DDE). Additionally, fast neutron fluences in the side plates and in the NBSR DDE’s outside plates were calculated and reported. Neutronic calculations were performed using MCNP6.2 on the RTRHPC cluster.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Application of a Density Law via Python for Aqueous Plutonium Nitrate

A predictive density tool has been developed in Python to reduce bias and uncertainty in nuclear criticality safety calculations for plutonium nitrate systems. The Pitzer Method and an empirical method were implemented into the tool, allowing for plutonium nitrate density calculations. Additionally, the Python tool can generate atom densities for a MCNP6.2 material card using the density from the selected method and directly the densities into a prepared MCNP6 input text file. The material card and density are calculated based on customizable user inputs of plutonium content, nitric acid content, temperature, plutonium isotope weight percentages and impurity concentrations. The Python tool has been validated and verified against the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments to predict densities within a root mean square error of 1.0% for the Pitzer method and 1.8% for the empirical method. These errors in density were shown to lead to a ±0.5% error in MCNP6.2 calculated k effective for the Pitzer method and a ±1.7% error for the Empirical method. Simultaneous work is also being done at the University of New Mexico and Los Alamos National Laboratory to create a similar tool for plutonium chloride solutions, which aims to provide the accreditation of the chlorine absorption. These capabilities will not only provide more accurate models but also lead the way towards a better understanding of solution systems and potential relaxation in the conservatism of the current aqueous plutonium processing limits.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Sensitivity-based Experiment Design Optimization for a Molybdenum Critical Experiment

A lack of intermediate molybdenum benchmarks in the ICSBEP has been identified by LANL, Y-12, and IRSN. This lacking adversely effects criticality safety operations and leaves new differential molybdenum data unvalidated. NCERC is proposing a series of intermediate integral experiments to better the understanding of molybdenum systems. Using MCNP6.2 with the ENDF/B-VIII.0 nuclear data library a single unmoderated and four moderated system designs were identified using a sensitivity optimization method. Each proposed system was found to be at least twice as sensitive to the 95 Mo capture cross section in the URR as the sole existing intermediate molybdenum benchmark in the ISCBEP handbook. The addition of a new molybdenum sensitive intermediate system would improve future nuclear data evaluations.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗