SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Presentation topics include: Criticality Calculations with MCNP6.2 Results Compared with Experiments and Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS) Analysis with MCNP6.2 Results using Hybrid Geometry and Varian Reduction.
The Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS) for the Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) provides coverage for two primary processing facilities. For UPF, detailed documentation and drawings of the design are readily available. While this design information allows for some CAAS modeling features to match the actual design with a high level of accuracy, assumptions and simplifications are necessary as it is unrealistic and unnecessary to replicate many aspects of the design. A set of modeling guidelines and techniques were used to develop consistency between the MCNP6 models. While ensuring conservatism, overly conservative choices must be avoided to demonstrate the minimum accident of concern can be detected. To ensure proper modeling choices were made for the final models, a group of parametric studies were performed to evaluate the impact on the dose rates detected at the individual detectors. Some of these modeling choices and/or associated parametric studies include: - Modeling the grid steel area above the detectors as homogeneous stainless steel and determining the impact on detectability with an increasing density. - Modeling the presence of equipment in close proximity to the CAAS detectors. - Determining an appropriate material density to represent miscellaneous items not specifically modeled. - Evaluating the impact of sprinkler activation. The results of UPF CAAS analyses show that the modeling assumptions made based on the detailed design and parametric studies are appropriate and demonstrate accurate yet conservative models have been developed for detecting minimum accident of concern within the UPF.
From the countless critical experiments performed in the world during the past century, high-quality integral benchmarks experiments have been collected and gathered into the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments (ICSBEP Handbook), managed by the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) Working Group. This information preservation and dissemination effort is crucial for reactor licensing as well as criticality and radiation transport modeling validation. This summary reports on the status of a tentative benchmark addition to the ICSBEP Handbook. The proposed benchmark arises from legacy operation data of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Health Physics Research Reactor (HPRR). The HPRR was a small, unmoderated, unshielded fast burst reactor that was used for research in health physics and radiobiology as well as teaching and training. As part of a comprehensive investigation of the available HPRR operation data and characteristics, different possibilities for use of the valuable results were studied. A critical experiment benchmark evaluation was performed, analyzing data coming from sub-critical and critical operation of the HPRR during operator training, steady-state irradiation of samples and before critical bursts. The results of the evaluation do not satisfy for the ICSBEP standards as the benchmark relative standard uncertainty is of about 4% for k eff , and the relative difference between sample calculations and expected k eff results is of about 1.5%. Due to those unsatisfactory results, it was decided not to pursue critical experiments evaluation of the HPRR presently and to focus instead on shielding type data for the creation of a criticality accident alarm system (CAAS) and shielding category benchmark, which is currently very scarce in the ICSBEP handbook—especially concerning critical, pulsed assembly, or reactor operation data. Several dosimetry and shielding experiments from HPRR burst operation were evaluated, with different benchmark metrics as sulfur fluence, Element 57 dose, or neutron fluence at different distances and under different shield materials conditions. An evaluation focusing on the Element 57 neutron dose as a benchmark metric was submitted to the ICSBEP Technical Review Group (TRG) meeting in October 2021, and the inclusion of the evaluation in the ICSBEP Handbook was deferred. The main change proposed by the international experiment evaluation experts is to use the neutron fluence measured by Bonner spheres as a benchmark metric. This represents a quantity closer to that actually measured by the experimentalists of the HPRR compared to the Element 57 dose, which adds another step of data transformation, thus potentially adding uncertainty to the benchmark. The evaluation has been updated and will be submitted to the 2022 ICSBEP TRG meeting for inclusion in the 2023 edition of the ICSBEP Handbook. The evaluation is performed using the KENO and MAVRIC combination from the SCALE 6.2.4 code suite which was previously used in similar CAAS benchmarks to allow for the use of variance reduction techniques.
A workable design to perform a CAAS benchmark experiment is detailed herein. Key dimensions, materials, source intensity levels, and detectors are listed in this report. Sensitivity to 21 perturbations was determined to be acceptable. The next step will be for NCSP management to determine whether procurement should occur and if the experiment should proceed. The perturbation study suggests that the room return shield cavity radius and runout should be maintained to within a millimeter, the room return shield should be positioned carefully (perhaps with a laser range finder), and that the detectors should be mounted in a lightweight fixture such as aluminum, so their positioning is assured. Using a 3D scanner or photogrammetry to record part shapes may be beneficial. Further work is also needed to verify source reproducibility.
This report documents the experimental conditions and results for the testing of the Mirion Technologies CAAS-3S Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS) for the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) and Uranium Processing Facility (UPF). The testing was conducted at the Godiva IV Burst Reactor at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) during the week of January 11, 2021. The testing was conducted in accordance with 25774-QL-POA-JR00-00002-VDE-27.0, CAAS-3S Radiation Testing of Cabinet Components Test Plan. The tests subjected the CAAS-3S system to intense and short duration mixed neutron and gamma radiation fields and to high integrated radiation doses. The purpose of the test was to environmentally qualify various CAAS-3S components in a radiation environment. Successful completion of the tests was predicated on the collaborative efforts of several organizations. Sandia National Laboratory (SNL) and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) provided dosimetry to estimate photon and neutron dose. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) manages the NCERC facility, operated the Godiva IV reactor, and provided field support for CAAS-3S placement and communications interface for data acquisition systems supplied by Mirion Technologies. Throughout the test campaign, Y-12 and UPF personnel provided technical support in determining changes to the test schedule, as needed, interpretation of the results, and comparison between the measured dosimetry data and predicted results. Throughout the test campaign, Mirion personnel provided technical support in the operation of the CAAS-3S system itself.
This presentation discusses the Health Physics Research Reactor (HPRR) or Fast Burst Reactor (FBR) and how available data from Health Physics Research Reactor (HPRR) operation to can be used to create a benchmark report for inclusion in the ICSBEP, as a Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS) shielding benchmark. The evaluation of experimental data is also presented, specifically four experimental candidates are considered of potential value for the benchmark: 1. Neutron source estimation from a HPRR pulse (energy spectrum, fission yield), 2. Threshold Detector Unit (TDU) measurements at different distances from a HPRR pulse, shielded and unshielded, 3. Sulfur pellet activation at different distances from a HPRR pulse, shielded and unshielded, and 4. Total neutron fluence from a HPRR pulse measured by Bonner Sphere Spectrometry, shielded and unshielded. Additionally, a benchmark model overview is discussed as are sample calculation results.
The following is a summary of advice for CAAS modeling in SCALE. Refer to the SCALE Criticality Safety and Radiation Shielding training slides or to the SCALE manual for exact syntax. Use a mesh for the fission source that is the most adequate for the problem to solve (coarse/fine). Don’t spend unnecessary resources; simplify the model if it does not impact the final results of interest. Be careful to deactivate secondary fissions in MAVRIC or the calculation may never end. Check that k eff and $\overline{\upsilon}$ calculated results are logical. Between KENO and MAVRIC, cross section libraries, materials, geometry, and mesh grid can be the same or different. Iterative calculations are usually complex problems that need variance reduction. It will be hard to find the best solving parameters in the first attempt; expert judgement is needed. Check each step separately. Use Fulcrum to visualize fission source, mesh source, and spatial/energy distributions to find potential errors or impactful imprecisions.
Over the last few decades, the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) Working Group has focused on gathering critical and subcritical benchmark experiment data from different facilities around the world for inclusion in the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments (ICSBEP Handbook). The compiled data can be used by criticality safety analysts to help validate their calculation tools and cross-section libraries for a variety of applications.
Motivations for EPDs as a CAAS: Key features of the 2022 revision of ANS 8.3; Review of the relevant criteria in ANS-8.3 2022–How does (or could) an EPD based CAAS comply; Advantages & Disadvantages of Permanently Installed CAAS; Advantages & Disadvantages of EPD Based CAAS; Suggested Decision Criteria; Conclusions & Recommendations.
An experiment is currently being designed to provide a high-quality shielding benchmark for Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS) modeling. Previous benchmarks have suffered from uncertainty primarily due to two factors. The first factor is radiation that is not directly coming from the source, also known as room return. Room return is notoriously difficult to account for in experimental data and to model in benchmarks. The second factor is uncertainty associated with the source term itself. In order to reduce these two sources of uncertainty, this experiment will utilize a room return shield [1] that will reduce the effect of room return and previous work performed to ensure the reproducibility of the source term. The experiment will use the Godiva IV [2] assembly located at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) to provide a neutron source representative of a criticality accident. Previous experiments [3]-[4] have shown that Godiva IV is capable of producing both bursts and steady-state emissions of equal magnitude which will allow for reduced uncertainty in the source term. The room return shield will house and isolate the shielding samples, neutron activation foils, and other detectors. Data collected will provide a comparison of the neutron and gamma dose for shielded and unshielded configurations. This data will be used to validate shielding data used for modeling criticality accident alarm systems. Shielding samples included in this benchmark are C, Fe, NaCl, Pb, high density polyethylene, and SiO 2 . This paper details the design of the room return shield, the experimental plan, challenges, and mitigation strategies.
Godiva IV is a fast burst critical assembly constructed of approximately 65 kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel alloyed with 1.5 percent molybdenum for strength. Godiva is one of the last such critical assemblies in the United States, and can be used for studies of super-prompt critical behavior as well as irradiations and demonstrations. A demonstration of a Godiva burst is usually performed as a highlight of the hands-on portion of the Criticality Safety Training Classes taught at the National Criticality Experiment Research Center (NCERC). The Godiva burst is used to demonstrate the concept of super-prompt critical and the time-scale of a criticality accident. In addition, several NCSP projects have been conducted on Godiva IV over the past two years. One experiment focused on collecting data to support multiphysics simulations using Photo-Doppler Velocimetry (PDV) to measure surface movement and gamma detectors to measure the burst output as the burst develops from background to peak over ten orders of magnitude. Another experiment was performed to demonstrate the functionality of the Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS) system developed for installation in the Y-12 Uranium Processing Facility (UPF). The system must not only respond to a criticality event and alarm, but must also be shown to operate in a high dose environment.
This project uses available data from the Health Physics Research Reactor (HPRR) operation to create a benchmark report for inclusion in the ICSBEP, as a Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS) shielding benchmark.
The Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) is developing a shielding benchmark using the Godiva IV assembly as a source. Its present status is reviewed herein. Even eight decades into the nuclear era, substantial work remains to develop a database of shielding benchmarks to support future nuclear development. A nuclear simulation is only as good as its supporting data, inputs, and validation basis. Uncertainty in these areas is addressed using conservatism, which adds margin and, occasionally, cost. In many shielding situations, high accuracy is not necessary because additional material is not particularly expensive. After all, 1–2 cm of lead often reduces the gamma ray dose substantially. However, in certain areas, conservatism can add unnecessary cost. These areas include mobile shielding applications such as casks, ships, microreactors, and spacecraft, where weight and, thus, margin is expensive. Although these characteristics are side benefits for NCSP shielding benchmark development, the main driver is enabling more reliable placement of criticality accident alarm systems (CAASs) in nuclear material facilities, such as those dedicated to the production of advanced reactor fuels. CAAS placement relies on more than accurate data and code validation. It also relies on sufficiently accurate materials specifications, geometry specifications, and a well-defined, alarm-producing baseline accident. All these things require tacit knowledge and understanding of the problem being evaluated. Benchmarks can help ensure this understanding.
The presentation discusses the primary goal of the NCSP Task IP&D-5 which is to use available data from HPRR operation to create a benchmark report for inclusion in the ICSBEP, as a Criticality Accident Alarm System (CAAS) shielding benchmark. The presentation elaborates on the HPRR operation and how it relates to the KENO VI model, sulfur pellets measurements, and calculation methodology between KENO and MAVRIC FW-CADIS. The presentation concludes by stating that some work is still needed to evaluate uncertainties and to explain the discrepancy computation/experiment.
This presentation discusses the benchmark of the IER 498: Godiva-IV criticality accident alarm system (CAAS). It details the goal of the project which is to create a CAAS benchmark capability for Godiva-IV in order to create a shielding benchmark for NCSP software and data, to add geometrically diverse benchmark/benchmarks to the ICSBEP Handbook, to enable more precise measurements at NCERC, and to help assure CAAS performance is as-stated. It also states that work was completed on CED-1 in 2019 and that future work includes the completion of CED-2 in 2020.
The experiments analyzed in this report were conducted at the Health Physics Research Reactor (HPRR), also known as the $\textit{Fast Burst Reactor}$. The reactor was designed and built at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in 1961. The HPRR was an unmoderated, unshielded fast reactor that used highly enriched uranium and molybdenum alloy as fuel. The reactor was initially sent to the Nevada Test Site in 1962, where it was used to evaluate radiation doses received as a result of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings during World War II. A few years later, the reactor was sent back to ORNL to be part of the Dosimetry Application Research (DOSAR) facility shown in Figure 1, which included a reactor building shown on the left (west) of the picture and a control and laboratory building in the upper right corner (northeast). The critical assembly was used for numerous technical studies, including systems calibration, dosimetry, radiobiology of plants and animals, testing of radiation alarms, as well as teaching and training in radiation dosimetry and nuclear engineering. Between 1963 and 1987, the HPRR was operated for thousands of hours, achieving criticality close to 10,000 times and motivating many publications. The HPRR was decommissioned in 1987. The goal of this effort was to use historical data from operation of the HPRR to create a criticality accident alarm system (CAAS) benchmark to be included in the $\textit{International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments}$ (ICSBEP Handbook). A thorough inspection was performed of all available documentation and information available. The most promising experiments that were selected for evaluation were those described in the 1987 ORNL report entitled $\textit{Health Physics Research Reactor Reference Dosimetry}$, ORNL-6240. The report includes reference dosimetry results of the shielded and unshielded configurations of the HPRR after burst operations. Because of changes to the reactor positioning and storage systems that were made in 1985, the previous dosimetry reports became obsolete, and the newly designed experiments were needed to create the HPRR’s adjusted dosimetry data. The various results reported in ORNL-6240 include reference doses and dose equivalents from different conventions at different distances and elevations as determined using the detected neutron fluence and conversion factors. The HPRR neutron fluence was obtained through different methods, including sulfur pellet analysis and threshold detector unit data. Information about the HPRR spectrum was also obtained through Bonner sphere measurements. This benchmark is focused on a part of the measured sulfur fluences reported in Appendix H of ORNL-6240. Standard commercial sulfur pellets were placed at different distances from the HPRR centerline during burst operation and were activated due to the 32 S(n,p) 32 P reaction. The resulting 32 P activity was then measured and the information about the corresponding sulfur fluence and/or neutron dose could be extracted. Many of those measurements have 7 been performed with the HPRR in its bare configuration or with different shields (combinations of Lucite, concrete, steel). All the necessary, precise information about material and/or dimensions of the different shields was not found, so it was decided to focus only on the unshielded and steel-shielded configurations to minimize the benchmark uncertainty. A total of 31 cases (24 unshielded and 7 shielded cases at different positions) of sulfur fluence were selected before evaluation to develop the benchmark.
The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Health Physics Research Reactor (HPRR) was a research reactor designed and built at ORNL in 1961. The critical assembly was using a highly enriched uranium and molybdenum alloy as the fuel, and it could be operated in steady-state or burst modes. The reactor was used for about 25 years to produce a lot of publications related to dosimetry, radiobiology and radiation detectors testing before its decommissioning in 1987. In recent years, the idea of using legacy operation data from the to create a valuable critical accident alarm system shielding benchmark arose. Such a benchmark has been submitted to the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiment Project (ICSBEP) Technical Review Group for a potential inclusion in the 2022 version of the handbook. Another way to use the valuable data from the operation of the HPRR is to evaluate the feasibility of the creation of a subcritical or prompt supercritical benchmark for inclusion in the ICSBEP or the International Reactor Physics Experiments Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) handbooks. To initiate a burst, the HPRR had to be operated in a slightly subcritical state for a few minutes. Then, the insertion of the burst control rod would greatly increase the reactivity of the system and start the burst. No critical configuration of the HPRR critical assembly could be located. The only information available concerns stable subcritical and prompt supercritical states, found in a burst experiments’ logbook. In the recovered logbook pages, information about 8 different bursts is available. The information includes the rods positions before and during a burst, the recorded subcritical reactor period and reactivity, and the burst fission yield derived from the temperature elevation sulfur pellet irradiation analysis. By using the HPRR logbook information and the as-built drawings of the critical assembly, a highly detailed model of the HPRR was created with SCALE 6.2.4/KENO-VI. Eight KENO-VI models were created to replicate the sub-critical assembly configurations described in the eight bursts from the recovered logbook pages. KENO-VI calculates k eff and it can be linked to a reactivity value in cents by using the delayed neutron fraction B eff , also calculated by KENO-VI. KENO-VI can also be used to model the prompt super-critical configurations of the HPRR and to assess the similarity with the burst measurements by comparing the calculated k eff and the measured fission yields between each burst. Unfortunately, high uncertainty exist and the obtained discrepancies between experiments and calculation results are high, compromising the creation of a valuable critical benchmark from HPRR operation data. The reasons of the discrepancies and potential ways to solve them are explored.
The goal is to use available data from Health Physics Research Reactor (HPRR) operation to create a benchmark report for inclusion in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) Handbook, or SINBAD, as a criticality accident alarm system (CAAS) shielding benchmark.