Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “WATTS BAR-1 REACTOR”

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.

Status of the OECD/NEA Watts Bar unit 1 benchmark and calculations of local reactor core power data of the Zero Power physics tests

The paper aims to provide an update on the status of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) / the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Watts Bar 1 (WB1) Multi-Physics Multi-Cycle depletion benchmark and the results associated with Exercise 1. The benchmark relies on the set of benchmark progression problems developed by the Department of Energy (DOE) Consortium for the Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors (CASL) for the Virtual Environment for Reactor (VERA), which are based on real plant design and operational data. The OECD/NEA TVA WB1 benchmark is designed for validation of both traditional and novel high-fidelity multi-physics codes to analyze Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR) depletion cycles. The activities are conducted under the Expert Group on Reactor Systems Multi-Physics (EGMUP) at NEA/OECD. In this work, we analyze Exercise 1 of the benchmark: stand-alone Three-Dimensional (3D) neutronics at Start-up Zero Power Physics Test (ZPPT) at Hot Zero Power Conditions (HZP) and the resulting power maps. The code used to model the exercise is the continuous energy Monte Carlo code Serpent 2.1.31 along with the nuclear data library ENDF/B-VII.1. Serpent results are compared with the high-fidelity deterministic code MPACT, which is part of VERA. The paper presents three selected results from power calculations required output. The results compared are the normalized axially integrated radial core power maps, the normalized axial averaged core power shapes, and the normalized core hottest and coldest assemblies radial power maps. The Root Mean Square Deviation (RMSD) between Serpent and MPACT is 0.51 % for the axially integrated radial core power map, 1.41 % for the axial averaged core power shape, 2.42 % for the hottest assembly axial power shape, 0.88 % for the coldest assembly axial integrated hottest assembly radial pin power map, and 0.17 % for the axially integrated coldest assembly radial pin power map. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

Whole core analysis of OECD/NEA TVA-WB1 benchmark exercise 1 using continuous-energy Monte Carlo code MVP with JENDL-4.0u and ENDF/B-VII.0

The TVA WB1 benchmark problem was precisely modeled in accordance with the geometry and material specifications, and benchmark exercise 1 was solved with the MVP code and the nuclear data libraries based on JENDL-4.0u (JENDL-4.0 updated file) and ENDF/B-VII.0. The criticality, the control rod bank worth, the isothermal temperature coefficient (ITC), the integral rod worth of bank D, and differential soluble boron worth (DBW) were obtained. The criticality and the control rod bank worth were compared with the measured data and published calculation results with other codes, Serpent and KENO. The criticality and the control rod bank worth calculated by MVP and the libraries agree with the measured and the published calculation results within the criteria specified in the ANSI/ANS standard. From these results, the calculation model for the MVP and the libraries was verified. The other parameters such as ITC, the integral rod worth, and DBW were also compared between JENDL-4.0u and ENDF/B-VII.0. The comparison of the results shows JENDL-4.0u and ENDF/B-VII.0 give comparable results within the standard deviation, the difference between libraries is small. (author)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

MCS solutions for the TVA Watts Bar Unit 1 multi-physics depletion benchmark

The high-fidelity solution for exercises 1-3 of the recently developed TVA Watts Bar Unit 1 multi-physics and multi-cycle depletion benchmark using MCS was coupled with two different thermal-hydraulics (TH) codes: TH1D and COBRA-TF (CTF), and their solutions were compared. The solutions from MCS/CTF and MCS/TH1D for typical Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) problems are quite close. And to evaluate MCS solutions for the benchmark, their results were also compared against measured data as well as publicly available high-fidelity solutions. The MCS criticality solutions at Hot Zero Power (HZP) deviate within 50 pcm against the reference solutions. While for the critical boron concentration (CBC) search calculations, the difference on the MCS calculated CBC is about 7 ppm, and the root-mean-squared (RMS) errors for the assembly power distribution and outlet coolant temperature are less than 0.5% and 1 Celsius degree respectively. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗