IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency On the Compensating Effects in the Evaluated Cross Sections of 235 U A. Trkov, R. Capote International Atomic Energy.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Nuclear Reactor Theory, JU, First Semester, (Saed Dababneh). 1 1/ v 235 U thermal cross sections fission 584 b. scattering 9 b. radiative capture.

Advertisements

Combined evaluation of PFNS for 235 U(n th,f), 239 Pu(n th,f), 233 U(n th,f) and 252 Cf(sf) (in progress) V.G. Pronyaev Institute of Physics.

Monte Carlo Simulation of Prompt Neutron Emission During Acceleration in Fission T. Ohsawa Kinki University Japanese Nuclear Data Committee IAEA/CRP on.

Nuclear Reactor Theory, JU, First Semester, (Saed Dababneh). 1 Reactor Model: One-Group That was for the bare slab reactor. What about more general.

Interaction of radiation with matter - 5

EMERALD1: A Systematic Study of Cross Section Library Based Discrepancies in LWR Criticality Calculations Jaakko Leppänen Technical Research Centre of.

Interaction of Radiation with Matter - 6

Total Monte Carlo and related applications of the TALYS code system Arjan Koning NRG Petten, the Netherlands Technical Meeting on Neutron Cross- Section.

Benchmark test with OKTAVIAN data and Comment on kerma factor Yukinobu Watanabe Department of Advanced Energy Engineering Science, Kyushu University 3nd.

Neutron interaction with matter 1) Introduction 2) Elastic scattering of neutrons 3) Inelastic scattering of neutrons 4) Neutron capture 5) Other nuclear.

Status of Fusion Nuclear Data Development Mohamed Sawan Tim Bohm U. Wisconsin-Madison Fusion Neutronics Team.

1 - as a function of:electron energy scattering angle - wide angular range - accurate - elastic & inelastic N 2, CH 4, cyclopropane The Art of Measuring.

Energy deposition for 10 MeV neutrons in oxygen, carbon, argon and hydrogen gaseous chambers (1mx1mx1m). Energy Deposition in 90% argon (1.782mg/cm 3 )

1Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Simulation of βn Emission From Fission Using Evaluated Nuclear Decay Data Ian Gauld Marco Pigni.

Evaluation and Use of the Prompt Fission Neutron Spectrum and Spectra Covariance Matrices in Criticality and Shielding I. Kodeli1, A. Trkov1, R. Capote2,

U N C L A S S I F I E D LA-UR Current Status of the NJOY Nuclear Data Processing Code System and Initial ENDF/B-VII Data Testing Results Presented.

Fundamentals of Neutronics : Reactivity Coefficients in Nuclear Reactors Paul Reuss Emeritus Professor at the Institut National des Sciences et Techniques.

1 CN formation cross section in nucleon induced reactions on 238 U Efrem Soukhovitski, JINER Frank Dietrich, LLNL Harm Wienke, Belgonucleaire Roberto Capote,

Coupled-Channel Computation of Direct Neutron Capture and (d,p) reactions on Non- Spherical Nuclei Goran Arbanas (ORNL) Ian J. Thompson (LLNL) with Filomena.

1 How accurately can we calculate neutrons slowing down in water J-Ch Sublet, D. E. Cullen*, R. E. MacFarlane** CEA Cadarache, DEN/DER/SPRC, Saint.

Α - capture reactions using the 4π γ-summing technique Α. Lagoyannis Institute of Nuclear Physics, N.C.S.R. “Demokritos”

1 Roberto Capote, IAEA Nuclear Data Section Web: 14 th Int. Conference.

The Status of Nuclear Data above 20 MeV Masayoshi SUGIMOTO, Tokio FUKAHORI Japan Atomic Energy Agency IAEA’s Technical Meeting on Nuclear Data Libraries.

1 Low Neutron Energy Cross Sections of the Hafnium Isotopes G. Noguère, A. Courcelle, J.M. Palau, O. Litaize CEA/DEN Cadarache, France P. Siegler JRC/IRMM.

Anti-neutrinos Spectra from Nuclear Reactors Alejandro Sonzogni National Nuclear Data Center.

Operated by Los Alamos National Security, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy's NNSA UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED | 1 LA-UR LANL Experience using.

© 2013 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development © 2015 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 1 Compensating Effects due.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory PREPRO Accomplishments Dermott “Red” Cullen Presented at the Nuclear Criticality Safety Program Technical Conference.

JENDL/HE-2007 & On going Activities for JENDL-4 Japan Atomic Energy Agency S. Kunieda IAEA 1-st RCM of CRP on FENDL-3.0, 2-5 Dec Y. Watanabe Kyushu.

Fusion, transfer and breakup of light weakly-bound and halo nuclei at near barrier energies. J. Lubian Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Niteroi,

1 Roberto Capote, IAEA Nuclear Data Section Web: IAEA IAEA HQ, Vienna,

Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholz-Gemeinschaft Karlsruhe Institute of Technology Nuclear Data Library for Advanced Systems – Fusion Devices (FENDL-3)

AERB Safety Research Institute 1 TIC Benchmark Analysis Subrata Bera Safety Research Institute (SRI) Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) Kalpakkam –

6-1 Lesson 6 Objectives Beginning Chapter 2: Energy Beginning Chapter 2: Energy Derivation of Multigroup Energy treatment Derivation of Multigroup Energy.

Operated by Los Alamos National Security, LLC for NNSA U N C L A S S I F I E D LA-UR-10-draft Slide 1 ENDF/B-VII.0 Data Testing of 233 U/Th ICSBEP Benchmarks.

Benchmarks for Data Testing of Iron China Nuclear Data Center(CNDC) China Institute of Atomic Energy(CIAE) P.O.Box ,Beijing , P.R.China.

Neutrino cross sections in few hundred MeV energy region Jan T. Sobczyk Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Wrocław (in collaboration with.

Validation of EM Part of Geant4

1 n_TOF data-analysis workshop CERN, Geneva, February 2015 Roberto Capote, IAEA Nuclear Data Section www-nds.iaea.org NUCLEAR.

Short Update on Deliverables K. Yokoyama M. Ishikawa Japan Atomic Energy Agency Dec 4, 2015WPEC SG39, Institute Curie, Paris, France1.

Plans for Validation and General Observations Mohamed Sawan Fusion Technology Institute The University of Wisconsin-Madison 3 rd RCM on FENDL December.

Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) Geel, Belgium CRP Th - U, Vienna December 2004.

Update on sensitivity coefficient precise computations E. Ivanov WPEC/Sg. 39 Meeting December 4, , Rue Pierre et Marie Curie, France.

232 Th EVALUATION IN THE RESOLVED RESONANCE RANGE FROM 0 to 4 keV Nuclear Data Group Nuclear Science and Technology Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Slide 1 of Woonyoung So International Workshop on e-Science for Physics 2008 Extended Optical Model Analyses for the 9 Be+ 144 Sm System.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 1/20 A Stress Test on 235 U(n, f) in adjustment with HCI and HMI benchmarks.

© 2013 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development © 2015 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 1 WPEC/SG39 Short updates on.

4/14/2004DIS 2004 The Black Body Limit in DIS. Ted Rogers, Mark Strikman, Vadim Guzey, Xiaomin Zu Penn State University Based on hep-ph/ plus further.

1 FRENCH ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISION (CEA) - NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISION Nuclear Data Needs, SG26, NEA data bank, 3 May 2006CEA/DER Cadarache Centre Gérald Rimpault.

Comparison of Sensitivity Analysis Techniques in Monte Carlo Codes for Multi-Region Criticality Calculations Bradley T. Rearden Douglas E. Peplow Oak Ridge.

Review of Fundamentals

CCFE is the fusion research arm of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority Modern , d, p, n-Induced Activation Transmutation Systems EURATOM/CCFE.

Comparison of deterministic and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis including SAD/SED Ivo Kodeli, SG39 Meeting, NEA, Dec. 4, 2015.

Pion-Induced Fission- A Review Zafar Yasin Pakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences (PIEAS) Islamabad, Pakistan.

Nuclear and Radiation Physics, BAU, First Semester, (Saed Dababneh). 1.

Data Needs in Nuclear Astrophysics, Basel, June 23-25, 2006 Nuclear Astrophysics Resources of the National Nuclear Data Center B. Pritychenko*, M.W. Herman,

KIT – The cooperation of Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH and Universität Karlsruhe (TH) Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology Evaluation.

Pavel Oblozinsky NSDD’07, St. Petersburg June 11-15, 2007 ENDF/B-VII.0 Library and Use of ENSDF Pavel Oblozinsky National Nuclear Data Center Brookhaven.

NEEP 541 – Neutron Damage Fall 2002 Jake Blanchard.

Shifts in neutron single- particle states outside N=82 S.J.Freeman, B.P.Kay, J.P.Schiffer, J.A.Clark, C.Deibel, A.Heinz, A.Parikh, P.D.Parker, K.E.Rehm.

1 Radiation Environment at Final Optics of HAPL Mohamed Sawan Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI HAPL Meeting ORNL March.

Ciemat Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Tecnológicas D. Cano-Ott, 6 th Geant4 Space Users Workshop Evaluated neutron cross section.

Extracting β4 from sub-barrier backward quasielastic scattering

Satoshi Nakamura (Osaka University)

3. The optical model Prof. Dr. A.J. (Arjan) Koning1,2

Resonance Reactions HW 34 In the 19F(p,) reaction:

I.Hill, J.Dyrda, N.Soppera, M.Bossant

Design of A New Wide-dynamic-range Neutron Spectrometer for BNCT with Liquid Moderator and Absorber S. Tamaki1, I. Murata1 1. Division of Electrical,

The TALYS nuclear model code II

Presentation transcript:

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency On the Compensating Effects in the Evaluated Cross Sections of 235 U A. Trkov, R. Capote International Atomic Energy Agency Vienna, Austria

IAEA Evaluation Strategy “Best physics” not to be compromised by benchmark results Adjustments limited to uncertain quantities Recent work shows that PFNS should be softer for all actinides at all incident energies, resulting in strong impact on reactivity Compensating effects must be found to restore performance of the evaluated data From different reactions of the same material From other materials in the benchmark config CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA U-235 Example - Scope Considered for CIELO Starter File in this work: PFNS for incident thermal neutrons is softer, evaluated with GMA for “Standards”. PFNS for fast neutrons (0.5 MeV – 2 MeV) evaluated with GANDR (possibly too soft) PFNS evaluation by Talou for the CRP on PFNS Resonance parameters from ORNL Ver CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA U-235 Example – Scope (Cont.) New evaluation with EMPIRE above the resonance range Dispersive CC optical model fitted to all "optical scattering" data (total- quasielastic angular distributions, strength functions, etc) Fission channel was fitted to reproduce Neutron Standards fission The above constrain capture and elastic/inelastic CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA Benchmarking of Fast Systems Bess et al.: “What if Lady Godiva was wrong?” ND2013 paper Use of sensitivity profiles from ICSBEP for bare assemblies: Sensitivities to fission and capture are similar Different sensitivities to elastic and inelastic – reconciling differences between e.g. FMF001 and HMF008 seems possible, BUT… Direct calculations with perturbed cross sections: Coarse-group sensitivities inadequate Strong non-linearities Conclusions: Foreseen changes in elastic and inelastic do not reduce the difference Uncertainties in ICSBEP are likely to be underestimated ND2013 paper possibly biased by the choice of benchmarks CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA List of fast bare benchmark assemblies CM on Compensating Effects 1 HEU-MET-FAST-001\hmf001 Godiva 2 HEU-MET-FAST-008\hmf008 VNIIEF-CTF-bare 3 HEU-MET-FAST-018\hmf018 VNIIEF_Sphere 4 HEU-MET-FAST-051\hmf ORCEF-01 5 HEU-MET-FAST-051\hmf ORCEF-02 6 HEU-MET-FAST-051\hmf ORCEF-03 7 HEU-MET-FAST-051\hmf ORCEF-15 8 HEU-MET-FAST-051\hmf ORCEF-16 9 HEU-MET-FAST-051\hmf ORCEF HEU-MET-FAST-100\hmf100-1 ORSphere-1 11 HEU-MET-FAST-100\hmf100-2 ORSphere-2

IAEA Benchmarking of Fast Systems Testing PFNS: “u236g6b” GMA PFNS has “no” effect “u235g6c” GMA+Talou PFNS has “no” effect. “u235g6a” GMA+GANDR+Talou reduces reactivity – GANDR fast PFNS probably too soft CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA Benchmarking of Fast Systems Trial evaluations: “u235ib02o4cWg6anu” ORNL Ver.4 resonance data EMPIRE calculation above resonance range PFNS GMA thermal, GANDR fast, Talou above Adjusted capture (based on Wallner measurements) Adjusted thermal nu-bar (decreased by 0.34%) “u235ib02o4g6cnuf3” as above, but: No capture adjustment No GANDR PFNS (fast) Nu-bar (fast) increased by 0.3% In both cases good performance is restored for bare assemblies! The nu-bar increase could be smaller (~0.2%) CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA Other fast benchmarks Both new evaluations are comparable in most cases  compensation is not unique The “u235ib02o4g6cnu” evaluation is shown for comparison with “u235ib02o4g6cnuf3” and does not include the fast nu-bar adjustment (Note the greatly expanded scale) CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA List of fast benchmark assemblies CM on Compensating Effects 1 HEU-MET-FAST-001 hmf001 Godiva 2 HEU-MET-FAST-028 hmf028 Flattop-25 3 IEU-MET-FAST-007 imf007d Big_Ten(detailed) 4 HEU-MET-FAST-002 hmf002-1 Topsy-1 5 HEU-MET-FAST-002 hmf002-2 Topsy-2 6 HEU-MET-FAST-002 hmf002-3 Topsy-3 7 HEU-MET-FAST-002 hmf002-4 Topsy-4 8 HEU-MET-FAST-002 hmf002-5 Topsy-5 9 HEU-MET-FAST-002 hmf002-6 Topsy-6 10 IEU-MET-FAST-001 imf001-1 Jemima-1 11 IEU-MET-FAST-001 imf001-2 Jemima-2 12 IEU-MET-FAST-001 imf001-3 Jemima-3 13 IEU-MET-FAST-001 imf001-4 Jemima-4

IAEA CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA Thermal reactor benchmarks Both new evaluations are comparable to ENDF/B-VII.1 (labelled “e71”) Borated ORNL solutions slightly under-predicted in reactivity CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA List of thermal benchmark assemblies CM on Compensating Effects 1 HEU-SOL-THERM-009 hst009-1 ORNL_S1 2 HEU-SOL-THERM-009 hst009-2 ORNL_S2 3 HEU-SOL-THERM-009 hst009-3 ORNL_S3 4 HEU-SOL-THERM-009 hst009-4 ORNL_S4 5 HEU-SOL-THERM-013 hst013-1 ORNL_T1 6 HEU-SOL-THERM-013 hst013-2 ORNL_T2 7 HEU-SOL-THERM-013 hst013-3 ORNL_T3 8 HEU-SOL-THERM-013 hst013-4 ORNL_T4 9 HEU-SOL-THERM-001 hst R01 10 HEU-SOL-THERM-001 hst R02 11 HEU-SOL-THERM-001 hst R08 12 HEU-SOL-THERM-001 hst R09 13 HEU-SOL-THERM-001 hst R10 14 HEU-SOL-THERM-042 hst042-1 ORNL_C1 15 HEU-SOL-THERM-042 hst042-4 ORNL_C4 16 HEU-SOL-THERM-042 hst042-5 ORNL_C5 17 HEU-SOL-THERM-042 hst042-8 ORNL_C8 18 HEU-COMP-THERM-015 hct SB-1 19 HEU-COMP-THERM-015 hct SB-5

IAEA CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA Surprises… Out of about 200 benchmarks… Comet-UH3 strong positive swing in reactivity (~800 pcm) big shift already with ENDF/B-VII.1 data between cases 1/4 (DU+DU/Fe) and 6/7 (DU inner only) ZPR-9/34 U/Fe-stainless steel reflected strong positive swing in reactivity with new 235 U data high sensitivity to capture in the 10 keV region BW-XI 1-11 borated water assemblies strong negative swing (~500 pcm) LCT-042 – negative swing of ~300 pcm (case 2 contains B) IPEN-MB – negative swing of ~200 pcm (contains B in BP) CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA List of benchmarks with surprises CM on Compensating Effects 1 HEU-COMP-INTER-003 hci003-1 COMET-UH3-1 2 HEU-COMP-INTER-003 hci003-4 COMET-UH3-4 3 HEU-COMP-INTER-003 hci003-6 COMET-UH3-6 4 HEU-COMP-INTER-003 hci003-7 COMET-UH3-7 5 HEU-MET-INTER-001 hmi001 ZPR-9/34 6 LEU-COMP-THERM-008 lct BW-XI-1 7 LEU-COMP-THERM-008 lct BW-XI-2 8 LEU-COMP-THERM-008 lct BW-XI-5 9 LEU-COMP-THERM-008 lct BW-XI-7 10 LEU-COMP-THERM-008 lct BW-XI-8 11 LEU-COMP-THERM-008 lct BW-XI LEU-COMP-THERM-042\lct042-1 lct LEU-COMP-THERM-042\lct042-2 lct LEU-COMP-THERM-043\lct043-2 IPEN/MB-01

IAEA CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA Other materials ( 238 U, 16 O) There exist compensating effects due to other materials 238 U and 16 O were studied on fast benchmarks Jemima benchmarks show significant improvements CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA CM on Compensating Effects

IAEA Conclusions Effects that compensate the lower E av of PFNS in 235 U were investigated Two variants of a new evaluation were tested Both evaluations show performance comparable to ENDF/B-VII.1 “Surprises” could be attributed to energy regions or reactions that were less well evaluated, or to other materials in the system (to be checked…) The conclusions are applicable to other actinides, since lowering of E av is expected in all CM on Compensating Effects