Comparison of measured and calculated reaction rate distributions in an scwr-like test lattice

High resolution gamma-ray spectroscopy measurements were performed on 61 rods of an SCWR-like fuel lattice, after irradiation in the central test zone of the PROTEUS zero-power research reactor at the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland. The derived reaction rates are the capture rate in 238U (C...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of nuclear energy 2011-04, Vol.38 (4), p.794-801
Hauptverfasser: Rätz, Dominik, Jordan, Kelly A., Murphy, Michael F., Perret, Gregory, Chawla, Rakesh
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:High resolution gamma-ray spectroscopy measurements were performed on 61 rods of an SCWR-like fuel lattice, after irradiation in the central test zone of the PROTEUS zero-power research reactor at the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland. The derived reaction rates are the capture rate in 238U (C 8) and the total fission rate ( F tot), and also the reaction rate ratio C 8/ F tot. Each of these has been mapped rod-wise on the lattice and compared to calculated results from whole-reactor Monte Carlo simulations with MCNPX. Ratios of calculated to experimental values (C/E’s) have been assessed for the C 8, F tot and C 8/ F tot distributions across the lattice. These C/E’s show excellent agreement between the calculations and the measurements. For the 238U capture rate distribution, the 1 σ level in the comparisons corresponds to an uncertainty of ±0.8%, while for the total fission rate the corresponding value is ±0.4%. The uncertainty for C 8/ F tot, assessed as a reaction rate ratio characterizing each individual rod position in the test lattice, is significantly higher at ±2.2%. To determine the reproducibility of these results, the measurements were performed twice, once in 2006 and again in 2009. The agreement between these two measurement sets is within the respective statistical uncertainties.
ISSN:0306-4549
1873-2100
DOI:10.1016/j.anucene.2010.11.021