Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Rattlesnake code”

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.

Neutronics Modeling of the pulsed plasma rocket reactor using rattlesnake

In the pulsed plasma rocket (PPR) reactor, neutron induced fission processes are utilized to implement a series of pulsed micro-explosions of very high power and eject plasma as a propellant. More specifically, projectiles (bullets) composed of moderated uranium are sent through the chamber of an unmoderated uranium barrel. By inducing rapid fission within the bullets, a plasma can be generated with appropriate delivery of neutrons. This study aims to assess the neutronics performance of the PPR reactor during normal operations using the MOOSE-based Rattlesnake code through the evaluation of the impact of the movement of the fuel bullet and the rotation of control drums on the criticality of the system. The Monte Carlo (MC) code Serpent 2 was employed to generate material-based cross sections for use in Rattlesnake and the reference neutronics solution. Cubit was used to generate the mesh for the Rattlesnake model. Parametric studies were conducted to evaluate the best approaches for cross section and mesh generation to ensure accurate results from Rattlesnake. As part of the verification process, the eigenvalue results of the system at various fuel bullet positions were obtained using Rattlesnake and compared with the reference solutions. The acceptable differences show that the Rattlesnake model with appropriate cross section and mesh generation procedure is a sufficiently accurate approximation of the continuous energy (CE) MC model for micro-sized reactors like the PPR reactor. Next, the impact of the rotation of the control drums on the system criticality was evaluated using the verified model. It was shown that the high-fidelity simulation using the deterministic code Rattlesnake can produce sufficiently accurate results for the evaluation of the reactor's neutronics performance in different phases of the normal operation with acceptable computational cost.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

Global error analysis of the Chebyshev rational approximation method

The Chebyshev rational approximation method (CRAM) has become a widely adopted method for solving nuclear depletion problems. Therefore, understanding CRAM’s accuracy is important for the safe operation of nuclear power plants. This article performs a global error analysis of CRAM and finds that, as the length of the time step approaches zero, the relative error measured between the exact and CRAM solutions at a fixed end time approaches one and infinity for even and odd orders, respectively; for intermediate time step sizes, a minimum in relative error is observed. Finally, we show that the reason for CRAM’s behavior is that the method is inconsistent. Two best practices for using CRAM, derived from these results, are: (1) use CRAM order 16 or higher, (2) if necessary, increase the CRAM order when multiphysics coupling requires smaller time steps.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Assessment of the Griffin Reactor Multiphysics Application Using the Empire Micro Reactor Design Concept

In late 2019, INL and ANL agreed to jointly develop the reactor physics code named Griffin based on the integration of the two code suites, MAMMOTH/Rattlesnake (INL) and MC2 - 3/PROTEUS (ANL). Griffin is being developed based on the MOOSE framework and MOOSE quality assurance procedures. This decision was made to be able to allow DOE-NE to efficiently invest funding to this area and to provide effective and timely support for existing and potential users; the latter includes industry and government organizations who are developing various types of advanced reactors in the near and long term. Since MAMMOTH/Rattlesnake has been developed based on the MOOSE framework, the INL/ANL Griffin development team agreed to build Griffin beginning with a merger of MAMMOTH and Rattlesnake into a single code and moving forward by implementing capabilities from the PROTEUS suite into Griffin. Moving forward, both ANL and INL efforts are equally invested in the Griffin project, with management support, to provide an advanced reactor multiphysics tool to assist in reactor design, optimization, and safety analysis. Much work remains in moving Griffin forward to migrate PROTEUS capabilities and to optimize performance to meet user needs. The main objective of this work is to assess the current status of Griffin capabilities in terms of performance and accuracy, to determine priorities for PROTEUS migration, and to identify capabilities and features to improve for supporting the code integration effort. For this assessment, the Empire micro reactor problem that was developed in the ARPA-E MEITNER program was selected as an advance reactor concept of interest to the technical community. The Empire reactor problem was expanded from its original incomplete specification to be a small heat-pipe-cooled micro reactor core with ~113 cm radius and 70 cm in height, composed of 18 fuel assemblies, 12 control drums, and beryllium radial and axial reflectors. In the current model, using 5 cm axial reflectors specified in the original Empire assembly model, more than 10% of neutrons leak axially and through the empty center safety hole, as well as through heat pipe channels in fuel assembly elements that extend through the top reflector region. Several calculation models of the core were defined for systematic assessment, including 2-D and 3-D fuel assemblies and whole cores with cylindrical boundaries. Cross sections were generated using Serpent 2, and meshes were produced using the Argonne mesh tool or the INL neutronics meshing tools combined with CUBIT. Cross sections and meshes were converted to the ISOXML and Exodus formats, respectively, so that Griffin and PROTEUS could use consistent data for solving the reactor problems. With the prepared cross sections and meshes, PROTEUS was run first to ensure that all input data were correctly generated and input options in terms of angle, mesh, and energy group were accurately determined. Comparisons against Serpent 2 solutions were made in terms of eigenvalue and pin power. The same calculations and comparisons were then conducted using Griffin. For the fuel assembly and whole core problems, the PROTEUS eigenvalues agreed well with reference Serpent 2 solutions within 100 and 30 pcm, respectively, and pin power differences relative to Serpent 2 were overall less than 2.2% and RMS 0.8% for the whole core models. This indicated that all input data were properly prepared. Using the same data, Griffin was run selecting the SAAF-CFEM SN solver with Legendre-Gaussian quadrature and NDA and DSA for acceleration. It was found that the SAAF-CFEM solver of Griffin required finer meshes to achieve eigenvalue and pin power solutions in good agreement with Serpent 2, consequently requiring more memory requirement and longer computation time. On the other hand, the SPH-Diffusion 2-D core calculations performed using Griffin were able to recover the exact eigenvalue from the reference Serpent 2 solutions, resulting in a pin-power distribution with an RMS of 0.6% and maximum absolute difference of less than 1.4%. The runtimes for SPH-Diffusion for the 2-D core were less than 3 minutes on 40 cores. During this evolution of this evaluation, many updates were made in Griffin by the Griffin development team of INL (focusing on software updates) and ANL (reviewing and supporting software updates) to complete this assessment. Observations from the code assessment are presented in the conclusion section of this report, followed by a discussion of recommendations for future work.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

Data and script associated with “Shifts in Rain-Snow Partitioning Drive Faster Water Transit Times in the US Pacific Northwest”

This data package contains the data and code to use and run the Water Tracer enabled version of the Weather Research and Forecasting Hydrologic model (WT-WRF-Hydro) with the Sequential Precipitation Input Tagging (SPIT) framework. It is associated with the publication “Shifts in Rain-Snow Partitioning Drive Faster Water Transit Times in the US Pacific Northwest” published in Scientific Reports (Butler et al., 2026; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-46539-1). We use the Continental U.S. (CONUSII; Rasmussen et al., 2021) dataset to force the model with an historical climate (2006–2013) and a future climate (2086–2093) with a representative carbon pathway (RCP) 8.5 scenario. We use the model to calculate water transit times in five headwater catchments within the U.S. Pacific Northwest. We also show key hydrologic and environmental variables that affect water transit times and changes in the future. Finally, we use observed data to validate the model such as stream water isotopes, snowpack characteristics, and stream discharge. For details on how to navigate data packages generated by this project, see https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/PNNLRiverCorridorSFA/About. In addition to a readme, this data package also includes a file-level metadata (FLMD) file that describes each file and a data dictionary (DD) that describes all column/row headers and variable definitions. The data package consists of 11 folders: (1) "Figures" contains the exported figures used in the manuscript; (2) "Model_Isotope_Date" contains the WT-WRF-Hydro isotope date used in model validation; (3) “Model_Outputs_Future” contains the WT-WRF-Hydro future climate outputs; (4) “Model_Outputs_Historical” contains the WT-WRF-Hydro historical climate outputs; (5) “Model_Outputs_Weights_Areas” contains the WT-WRF-Hydro weights per catchment used to calculate water transit times and isotopes in stream water; (6) “MODIS_data_scripts” contains data used to validate snow conditions in the study area; (7) “Observed_Flow_Data” contains the observed streamflow data used in model validation; (8) “Observed_Isotope_Data” contains the observed stream water isotope data used in model validation; (9) “Scripts” contains the Python scripts used to general results and the figures; (10) “Statistic_Outputs” contains the water transit time statistical outputs reported in this manuscript; (11) “Validation_SNOTEL” contains the SNOTEL data used in model validation. The files in this data package have the following file extensions: .tif, .txt, .csv, .pdf, .py, .jpg, and .png.

American River↗