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.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

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.

Advertisements

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

Evaluation of the absolute emission probability of 1077 keV  -ray for 68 Ga Huang Xiaolong 2013 ， 6 China Nuclear Data Center China Institute of Atomic.

Modeling of Photonuclear Reactions & Transmutation of Long-lived Nuclear Waste in High Photon Fluxes M.-L. GIACRI-MAUBORGNE, D. RIDIKAS, J.-C.

Сессия ЯФ ОФН РАН, г., ИТЭФ Статус экспериментальных работ по измерению магнитного момента нейтрино Старостин А.С. ИТЕФ.

Past Experience of reactor neutrino experiments Yifang Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing Nov. 28, 2003.

Compton Scattering Reporter: Hui He. Outline Theory Experimental setup Experimental results (1) Calibration (2) Angular Distribution of the 137 Cs Source.

Joint IAEA-ICTP Workshop on Nuclear Reaction Data for Advanced Reactor Technologies Student’s presentation Calculation of correction factors for neutron.

Boris Pritychenko Nuclear Physics Data Compilation for Nucleosynthesis Modeling, Trento, May 29 – June 1, 2007 MACS and Astrophysical Reaction Rates from.

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.

Nuclear and Radiation Physics, BAU, 1 st Semester, (Saed Dababneh). 1 Nuclear Fission Q for 235 U + n  236 U is MeV. Table 13.1 in Krane:

Neupert effect RHESSI analysis ot the Neupert effect A. Berlicki, R. Falewicz 1) Observatoire de Paris, Section de Meudon, LESIA, FRANCE 2) Astronomical.

Nuclear Data for ADS and Transmutation Joint TREND/SANDAT proposal for FP6 ADOPT- Meeting, Dec E. Gonzalez-Romero (CIEMAT) Introduction Sensitivity.

Some fission yields for 235U (n,f), 239Pu (n,f), 238U (n,f) reactions in ΣΣ neutron spectrum Dr. Cristina Garlea National Institute for R&D of Physics.

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.

Chapter 4. Power From Fission 1.Introduction 2.Characteristics of Fission 3. General Features 4. Commercial Reactors 5. Nuclear Reactor Safety 6. Nuclear.

Studies of Deuteron and Neutron Cross-sections Important for ADS Research Vladimír Wagner Nuclear physics institute of CAS, Řež, Czech Republic,

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.

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

Cross-sections of Neutron Threshold Reactions Studied by Activation Method Nuclear Physics Institute, Academy of Sciences of Czech Republic Department.

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

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

NUCLEAR LEVEL DENSITIES NEAR Z=50 FROM NEUTRON EVAPORATION SPECTRA IN (p,n) REACTION B.V.Zhuravlev, A.A.Lychagin, N.N.Titarenko State Scientific Center.

ThEC13, Geneva, 28th-31st Oct., 2013 C. H. Pyeon, Kyoto Univ. 1 Cheolho Pyeon Research Reactor Institute, Kyoto University, Japan

Current nuclear data processing status of JAEA JAEA Research Group for Reactor Physics and Standard Nuclear Code System Kenichi Tada 1.

Experimental Studies of Spatial Distributions of Neutrons Produced by Set-ups with Thick Lead Target Irradiated by Relativistic Protons Vladimír Wagner.

Lesson 2: MAGICMERV  Get SCALE  Thinking like a neutron  MAGICMERV.

Luiz Leal, Wim Haeck, GAIA : Nuclear data processing for transport and criticality safety calculations at IRSN Luiz.

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.

Nuclear Reactors, BAU, 1st Semester, (Saed Dababneh).

NASA 2001 Mars Odyssey page 1 Workshop HEND Russian Aviation and Space Agency Institute for Space Research Present knowledge of HEND efficiency.

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

MASSIMO (Measurements in Adapted Spectra of Spectral Indices and Material Oscillations): A Proposed Experimental Campaign at the NRAD Reactor.

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.

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

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

Nuclear Reactors, BAU, 1st Semester, (Saed Dababneh).

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

Monte-Carlo calculations in reactor design G.B. Bruna FRAMATOME-ANP.

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

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

9 th session of the AER Working Group “f “ - Spent Fuel Transmutations Simulations of experimental “ADS” Mitja Majerle, Gael de Cargouet Nuclear Physics.

Neutron Chain Reaction Systems William D’haeseleer.

Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Neutron capture measurements for the weak s-process Michael Heil Hirschegg workshop, January.

Workshop on Accelerator R&D for USR, Huairou, Beijing, China, Oct. 30-Nov. 1, 2012 Zhou Qiaogen Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, C.A.S. IDs for SSRF.

1 Alushta 2016 CROSS SECTION OF THE 66 Zn(n,α) 63 Ni REACTION at CROSS SECTION OF THE 66 Zn(n, α) 63 Ni REACTION at E n = 4.0, 5.0 and 6.0 MeV I. Chuprakov,

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

Studies of (n,xn) reaction cross-sections and also cross-sections of relativistic deuteron reactions obtained by the activation method Vladimír Wagner.

Jiaxin Wang and Robin P. Gardner Oct 6 th 2011, CEAR at NC State University, Raleigh, NC.

M-C simulation of reactor e flux;

Reactor As Neutrino Source

Scattering Reactions Scattering reactions - the incident particle collides with the target nucleus Elastic scattering – a collision between a particle.

Summary of the Neutronics Analysis of Blankets for the Hybrid Fusion Neutron Source A.V.Zhirkin, B.V.Kuteev, M.I.Gurevich, B.K.Chukbar, NRC “Kurchatov.

of the Muse-4 Experiments with the JEF-2.2 and JEFF-3.1 libraries

Paul Scherrer Institut

M-C simulation of reactor e flux;

AMSTRAMGRAM AMélioration de la Section Thermique de capture l’Américium 241 par Mesure intéGRAle dans MINERVE P. Leconte CEA (SPRC/LEPh) A. Gruel, B.

Overview of Serpent related activities at HZDR E. Fridman

Covariance Processing at ORNL Using PUFF-IV/ERRORJ Code

for collaboration “Energy plus transmutation”

Covariance Processing at ORNL Using PUFF-IV/ERRORJ Code

How precisely do we know the antineutrino source spectrum from a nuclear reactor? Klaus Schreckenbach (TU München) Klaus Schreckenbach.

Criteria for assessing adjustment methodologies

Nuclear Reactors, BAU, 1st Semester, (Saed Dababneh).

O. Svoboda, A. Krása, A. Kugler, M. Majerle, J. Vrzalová, V. Wagner

Presentation transcript:

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 WU Haicheng China Nuclear Data Center(CNDC) China Institute of Atomic Energy(CIAE) P.O.Box ,Beijing , P.R.China

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 2/20 OUTLINE 1. Background 2. Method of stress test 3. Results and discussion 4. Summary

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 3/20 1.Background In SG33 benchmark exercise, adjusted results for ZPR6-7 F49/F25, ZPPR9 F28/F25 and F49/F25 reaction ratios are getting worse (decreased), which is suspected to be compensation errors caused by missing essential constraints of 235 U(n,f) in 1~10keV energy region. A stress test on 235 U(n,f) to identify compensation errors was suggested with critical benchmarks sensitive to 235 U(n,f) in 1~10keV region.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 4/20 Case A (Sg33 benchmark exercise) –11 isotope 10 B, 16 O, 23 Na, 52 Cr, 56 Fe, 58 Ni, 235,238 U, 239,240,241 Pu –8 Reactions (n, el), (n, inl), (n, disappearance),(n, f), Nu-total, Chi-p, Mu, Nu-delay. –Covariance: JENDL-4.0 –20 Integral data JEZEBEL-Pu239 (k eff, F28/F25,F49/F25, F37/F25), -Pu240 (k eff ), FLATTOP-Pu (k eff, F28/F25, F37/F25), ZPR-6/7 (k eff, F28/F25, F49/F25, C28/F25), -High Pu240 (k eff ), ZPPR-9 (k eff, F28/F25, F49/F25, C28/F25, Na void reactivity (Step 3, 5)), JOYO Mk-I (k eff ). 2. Method of stress test

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 5/20 Case B (stress test 1) –The same isotopes, reactions and covariances –Integral data : + 1, HCI4.1 k eff added. HCI4.1 is a k_inf benchmark with intermediate spectrum. The benchmark model is an infinity HEU moderated with graphite. HCI4.1 was design to provide a sensitivity test of 235 U cross section over the energy range 10 eV to 10keV. Sensi. Coeffi. for 235 U(n,f), 235 U(n, γ ), 10 B(n, α ) and 238 U(n, γ ) were used in calculation. Note: S.C. of HCI4.1 is not most sensitive benchmarks on 1~10keV region in ICSBEP.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 6/20 Case C (stress test 2) –The same isotopes, reactions and covariances –Integral data : + 2, HCI4.1 and HMI6.2 k eff added. HMI6.2 is an intermediate-spectrum critical assembly with a graphite-HEU core surrounded by a copper reflector. Sensi. Coeffi. for 235 U(n,f), 235 U(n, γ ), 10 B(n, α ) and 238 U(n, γ ) were used in calculation.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 7/20 Sensitivities to 235 U(n,f) cross section –Joyo MK-I is the only benchmark selected by SG33, whose k eff is rather sensitive to 235 U(n,f) XS in 1~10keV energy region than others.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 8/20 3. Results and discussion Case A (20p) vs. Case B (21p) –The improvement of k eff values for SG33 cases are almost the same.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 9/20 Different constraint gives different direction of adjustment. Reaction ratio were increased in case B instead of decrease in case A. Different constraint gives different direction of adjustment. Reaction ratio were increased in case B instead of decrease in case A.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 10/20 To improve the k eff of HCI4.1, 235 U(n, f ) cross sections around 1 ~10keV were decreased in Case B instead of increased in case A. Different constraints can even lead to contrary direction of adjustment. To improve the k eff of HCI4.1, 235 U(n, f ) cross sections around 1 ~10keV were decreased in Case B instead of increased in case A. Different constraints can even lead to contrary direction of adjustment.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 11/20 To improve the k eff of HCI4.1, 235 U(n, γ ) cross sections around 1 keV were increased in Case B instead of decreased in case A.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 12/20 To improve the k eff of HCI4.1, 10 B(n, α ) cross section increased 0.1~0.6% < 1MeV.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 13/20 SVR results of ZPPR-9 were not change. Influence of 235 U data change is compensated by others, such as 23 Na(n, el ). SVR results of ZPPR-9 were not change. Influence of 235 U data change is compensated by others, such as 23 Na(n, el ).

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 14/20 Case A (20p) vs. Case B (21p) vs. Case C (22p) –The improvement of k eff values for SG33 cases are almost the same. –The new adjusted k eff of HCI4.1 get worse than case B.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 15/20 The adjusted reaction ratio in case C still a litter higher than those in case A. The adjusted reaction ratio in case C still a litter higher than those in case A.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 16/20 To improve the k eff of HCI4.1, 235 U(n, f ) cross sections were decreased between 0.5~2keV but increased between 2~10keV in Case C, which is not completely agree with case B.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 17/20 To keep the k eff of HMI6.2 good, 235 U(n, γ ) cross sections around 1 keV were decreased 2% in Case C instead of increased 5% in case B.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 18/20 SVR results of ZPPR-9 were not change. Influence of 235 U data change is still compensated by others, such as 23 Na(n, el ). But change of 23 Na(n, el ) get smaller.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 19/20 4. Comments Missing essential constraints will lead to compensation errors. –Different constraints can lead to different, even contrary adjustments for both integral and differential data. To avoid compensation error and make adjusted nuclear data for general purpose, we need complete constraints. –Global adjustment of library needs global constraints which we don’t have yet. Even to obtained adjusted library not for general purpose, construct of constraints still needs to be careful. –Different constraints (Such as benchmarks) give different library.

Presentation for WPEC/SG39 meeting, 2015 Nov.30 th to Dec. 4 th Paris, France 20/20 Thank you for your attention !