DOE OSTI2015
The Jules Horowitz Reactor (JHR) is a Material-Testing Reactor (MTR) under construction in the south of France at CEA Cadarache (French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission). It will typically host about 20 simultaneous irradiation experiments in the core and in the beryllium reflector. These experiments will help us better understand the complex phenomena occurring during the accelerated ageing of materials and the irradiation of nuclear fuels. Gamma heating, i.e. photon energy deposition, is mainly responsible for temperature rise in non-fuelled zones of nuclear reactors, including JHR internal structures and irradiation devices. As temperature is a key parameter for physical models describing the behavior of material, accurate control of temperature, and hence gamma heating, is required in irradiation devices and samples in order to perform an advanced suitable analysis of future experimental results. From a broader point of view, JHR global attractiveness as a MTR depends on its ability to monitor experimental parameters with high accuracy, including gamma heating. Strict control of temperature levels is also necessary in terms of safety. As JHR structures are warmed up by gamma heating, they must be appropriately cooled down to prevent creep deformation or melting. Cooling-power sizing is based on calculated levels of gamma heating in the JHR. Due to these safety concerns, accurate calculation of gamma heating with well-controlled bias and associated uncertainty as low as possible is all the more important. There are two main kinds of calculation bias: bias coming from nuclear data on the one hand and bias coming from physical approximations assumed by computer codes and by general calculation route on the other hand. The former must be determined by comparison between calculation and experimental data; the latter by calculation comparisons between codes and between methodologies. In this presentation, we focus on this latter kind of bias. Nuclear heating is represented by the physical quantity called absorbed dose (energy deposition induced by particle-matter interactions, divided by mass). Its calculation with Monte Carlo codes is possible but computationally expensive as it requires transport simulation of charged particles, along with neutrons and photons. For that reason, the calculation of another physical quantity, called KERMA, is often preferred, as KERMA calculation with Monte Carlo codes only requires transport of neutral particles. However, KERMA is only an estimator of the absorbed dose and many conditions must be fulfilled for KERMA to be equal to absorbed dose, including so-called condition of electronic equilibrium. Also, Monte Carlo computations of absorbed dose still present some physical approximations, even though there is only a limited number of them. Some of these approximations are linked to the way how Monte Carlo codes apprehend the transport simulation of charged particles and the productive and destructive interactions between photons, electrons and positrons. There exists a huge variety of electromagnetic shower models which tackle this topic. Differences in the implementation of these models can lead to discrepancies in calculated values of absorbed dose between different Monte Carlo codes. The magnitude of order of such potential discrepancies should be quantified for JHR gamma-heating calculations. We consequently present a two-pronged plan. In a first phase, we intend to perform compared absorbed dose / KERMA Monte Carlo calculations in the JHR. This way, we will study the presence or absence of electronic equilibrium in the different JHR structures and experimental devices and we will give recommendations for the choice of KERMA or absorbed dose when calculating gamma heating in the JHR. In a second phase, we intend to perform compared TRIPOLI4 / MCNP absorbed dose calculations in a simplified JHR-representative geometry. For this comparison, we will use the same nuclear data library for both codes (the European library JEFF3.1.1 and photon library EPDL97) so as to isolate the effects from electromagnetic shower models on absorbed dose calculation. This way, we hope to get insightful feedback on these models and their implementation in Monte Carlo codes. (authors)
21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗