Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Critical Benchmarks”

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.

At least 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Availability of Shielding Benchmark Experiment Data in the ICSBEP Handbook

The International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Projects (ICSBEP) has over two decades of experience under the auspices of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) to identify, evaluate, and compile a comprehensive data set of criticality safety benchmark data [1]. The activities of the ICSBEP have led to the continued success of the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments (ICSBEP Handbook) [2]. The contents of the ICSBEP Handbook include benchmark specifications derived from nuclear facilities around the world, which have been utilized to support criticality safety efforts and also integral testing of nuclear data [3]. The 2020 edition of the ICSBEP Handbook will include data from 582 evaluations containing benchmark specifications for 5,053 critical, subcritical, or near-critical configurations. There are seven criticality-alarm-placement/shielding evaluations containing a total of 45 benchmark configurations, and ten fundamental physics evaluations containing a total of 237 measurements relevant to criticality safety applications. The purpose of this paper is to summarize those benchmarks relative to validation needs in shielding applications currently found within the ICSBEP Handbook. The current and future plans of shielding benchmarks with regards to the ICSBEP will also be discussed.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2015

Bare, Complex, and Potassium-Filled HEU Oralloy Annuli Benchmark Experiments

Hundreds of critical experiments were constructed from Oak Ridge Alloy (oralloy) during the 1960s and 1970s at the Oak Ridge Critical Experiments Facility (ORCEF) in support of criticality safety operations at the Y-12 Plant. The purpose of these experiments included the evaluation of storage, casting, and handling limits and providing data for verification of calculation methods and cross sections for nuclear criticality safety applications. Recent contributions to the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments (ICSBEP Handbook) include bare, complex, and potassium-filled annuli comprising multiple stacked units of highly enriched uranium (HEU), ~93.2 wt.% 235U, annuli, discs, and parallelepipeds. Prior contributions to the ICSBEP Handbook include bare (unreflected and unmoderated) cylinders; configurations of cylinders and annuli reflected with polyethylene, beryllium, or thin-graphite reflectors; GROTESQUE; and ORSphere. The newest contributions include a bare HEU 11-7 (11 inch outer diameter and 7 inch inner diameter) annulus capped at the top and bottom; bare HEU 13-7, 15-7, and 15-9 annuli; bare HEU complex annuli consisting of a 15-9 annulus containing either an off-center 7-inch-diameter cylinder, 5 × 5 inch parallelepiped, or split parallelepiped; and an HEU 13-7 annulus containing either empty stainless steel cans or potassium-metal-filled cans. The purpose of this latter pair of annulus configurations was to test the fast neutron cross sections of potassium as it was a candidate for coolant in some early space power reactor designs. A total of nine new configurations were evaluated as acceptable benchmark experiment measurements. Additional ORCEF oralloy experiments have also been identified for future benchmark evaluation.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2015

Growth of the international criticality safety and reactor physics Benchmark experiment evaluation projects since ICNC 2011 - 14102

Since the International Conference on Nuclear Criticality Safety (ICNC) 2011, the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) and the International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) have continued to expand their efforts. Twenty countries have continued to participate in the ICSBEP since 2011; participating countries in the IRPhEP have grown from 16 in 2011 to 20 in 2015. Since ICNC 2011, the contents of the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments have increased from 533 evaluations (approximately 58,000 pages), containing benchmark specifications for 4,552 critical or subcritical configurations to 561 evaluations (approximately 67,000 pages), containing benchmark specifications for 4,839 critical or subcritical configurations in the 2014 Edition of the ICSBEP Handbook. While the current number of criticality-alarm-placement/shielding benchmark configurations has remained at 24, the number of fundamental physics measurements relevant to criticality safety applications has increased from 200 to 207. Since ICNC 2011, the contents of the International Handbook of Evaluated Reactor Physics Benchmark Experiments have increased from 53 experimental series that were performed at 31 different reactor facilities to 143 experimental series that were performed at 50 different reactor facilities in the 2015 Edition of the IRPhEP Handbook. The status of the ICSBEP and the IRPhEP is discussed and benchmarks that have been more recently added to the handbooks are highlighted. (authors)

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2016

Development of Critical Experiments to Benchmark Moderator Temperature Reactivity Worth

The simulation of nuclear reactors requires being able to accurately model several different interrelated physical processes including neutronics, heat production, fluid/thermal physics, structural mechanics, fuel behavior, chemistry, and balance-of-plant. In order to design and use new types of nuclear reactors, modern codes have been developed which couple together the behavior of these different physical models to accurately consider the feedback effects between different physical effects. The SHARP toolset, part of the Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) project, is an example of an effort to combine models of neutronics, thermal-hydraulics, and structural mechanics in a coupled simulation to model any type of nuclear reactor as accurately as possible. The validation of multi-physics coupling techniques requires new experimental benchmark experiments specifically designed for that purpose. As a preliminary step towards design of these experiments, a series of measurements have been performed to demonstrate the temperature-dependent neutronic behavior of a well-characterized reactor assembly for comparison with the available codes. The facility adopted for these experiments is Walthousen Reactor Critical Facility (RCF) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI). The RCF is unique in several aspects and provides several advantages to this type of experiment. Built in 1954 by the American Locomotive Company (ALCO), the RCF has been used to design small compact reactors. RPI acquired the facility in 1963, and the highly-enriched uranium fuel was later swapped for low-enriched fuel pins that were excess from the SPERT facility experiments. Nowadays, The RCF is regarded as a teaching and research facility, permitting the training of licensed Senior Reactor Operators, and offering a critical experiments laboratory course to students. The reactor core standard configuration consists of 332 or 333 UO{sub 2} fuel pins, containing a total of 35.2 grams of U- 235 each (4.81 % enriched). The pins are arranged in a regular lattice with a pitch of 1.6256 cm. The number and configuration of these pins are flexible, and the reactor's overall thermal power is limited to no more than 15 W. As the low thermal output of the reactor does not induce any measurable temperature changes, the effect of temperature in the reactor is observed by applying two 18- kW electric heaters to the water moderator, with mechanical agitators to maintain uniformity in moderator temperature. Before beginning experiments, each fuel pin inside the core was surveyed for mechanical defects (bending or warping) that may contribute to uncertainty in core behavior. Every fuel pin has been individually removed from the core and checked for any irregularities on its surface (caused by shocks or usage). About 12 % of the 333 pins were found to have a small degree of warping and were replaced with excess pins available in the facility. In doing this, we made sure all the pins are identical, thereby increasing the accuracy of future models. (authors)

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2015

GROWTH OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICALITY SAFETY AND REACTOR PHYSICS BENCHMARK EXPERIMENT EVALUATION PROJECTS SINCE ICNC 2011

Since the International Conference on Nuclear Criticality Safety (ICNC) 2011, the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) and the International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) have continued to expand their efforts. Twenty countries have continued to participate in the ICSBEP since 2011; participating countries in the IRPhEP have grown from 16 in 2011 to 20 in 2015. Since ICNC 2011, the contents of the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments have increased from 533 evaluations (approximately 58,000 pages), containing benchmark specifications for 4,552 critical or subcritical configurations to 561 evaluations (approximately 67,000 pages), containing benchmark specifications for 4,839 critical or subcritical configurations in the 2014 Edition of the ICSBEP Handbook. While the current number of criticality-alarm-placement/shielding benchmark configurations has remained at 24, the number of fundamental physics measurements relevant to criticality safety applications has increased from 200 to 207. Since ICNC 2011, the contents of the International Handbook of Evaluated Reactor Physics Benchmark Experiments have increased from 53 experimental series that were performed at 31 different reactor facilities to 143 experimental series that were performed at 50 different reactor facilities in the 2015 Edition of the IRPhEP Handbook. The status of the ICSBEP and the IRPhEP is discussed and benchmarks that have been more recently added to the handbooks are highlighted.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2025

ORNL Testing of Multiple Graphite Benchmarks [Slides]

Integral criticality safety and reactor physics benchmark experiments from the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments (ICSBEP Handbook) and the International Handbook of Reactor Physics Experiments (IRPhE Handbook) are essential for nuclear data validation and testing

ENDF↗
DOE OSTI2018

Excluding Benchmark Statistical Outliers in Nuclear Criticality Safety Validation: A Comparison Study of Upper Subcritical Limits for Plutonium Systems using Whisper-1.1

Neutron transport methods used to establish subcriticality require validation by comparison to critical experiments considered to be benchmarks. Whisper is a sensitivity/uncertainty analysis tool developed to assist with the task of validation in nuclear criticality safety. Details on the Whisper methodology can be found in References 1-3 on the MCNP® reference collection website at https://mcnp.lanl.gov. During the process of validation there can be cases where a benchmark experiment may be found to be a statistical outlier, in which the calculated k-effective value and the experiment k-effective value differ by an amount atypical for similar experiments. A methodology optionally employed by Whisper is the exclusion of statistical outliers based upon the iterative diagonal chi-squared statistical rejection technique. Alternatively, there is an option to include all benchmarks in the Whisper library collection, even those benchmarks found to be statistical outliers, when computing the bias, bias uncertainty and margin of subcriticality (MOS) leading to establishment of the baseline upper subcritical limit (USL). A comparison study has been done to compute USLs with and without statistical outliers in the Whisper benchmark collection to determine what effect rejection of statistical outliers has on the recommended USL. The results show little overall difference in the recommended baseline USLs developed by Whisper when excluding statistical outliers. Additionally, there does not appear to be a clear trend in predicting whether the baseline USL will be higher or lower when rejecting statistical outliers from the benchmark critical experiment collection used for validation.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
NASA NTRS1972

Benchmark gas core critical experiment.

A critical experiment with spherical symmetry has been conducted on the gas core nuclear reactor concept. The nonspherical perturbations in the experiment were evaluated experimentally and produce corrections to the observed eigenvalue of approximately 1% delta k. The reactor consisted of a low density, central uranium hexafluoride gaseous core, surrounded by an annulus of void or low density hydrocarbon, which in turn was surrounded with a 97-cm-thick heavy water reflector.

Kunze, J. F.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Health Physics Research Reactor Criticality Accident Alarm System Benchmark Overview [Slides]

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.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2013

Benchmark Experiments in Water-Moderated Fully-Reflected 6.90% Enriched UO 2 Fuel Rod Lattices with a Fuel-to-Water Volume Ratio of 0.52 [Slides]

A second set of experiments in the Seven Percent Critical Experiment (7uPCX) has been completed. Additionally, an evaluation of the experiments as criticality safety benchmark experiments has been performed. The Reviews of the benchmark evaluation have been completed. This evaluation will be published in the 2013 edition of the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Benchmark Experiments as LEU-COMP-THERM-078 (LCT078). This presentation is a brief tour of these experiments.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2012

Benchmarking ENDF/B-VII.1, JENDL-4.0 and JEFF-3.1

Three nuclear data libraries have been tested extensively using criticality safety benchmark calculations. The three libraries are the new release of the US library ENDF/B-VII.1 (2011), the new release of the Japanese library JENDL-4.0 (2011), and the OECD/NEA library JEFF-3.1 (2006). All calculations were performed with the continuous-energy Monte Carlo code MCNP (version 4C3, as well as version 6-beta1). Around 2000 benchmark cases from the International Handbook of Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments (ICSBEP) were used. The results were analyzed per ICSBEP category, and per element. Overall, the three libraries show similar performance on most criticality safety benchmarks. The largest differences are probably caused by elements such as Be, C, Fe, Zr, W. (authors)

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2013

Results of Critical Experiments on Water-Moderated Fully-Reflected 6.90% Enriched UO2 Fuel Pin Arrays with a Fuel-to-Water Volume Ratio of 0.52 [Slides]

We have completed a second set of experiments in the Seven Percent Critical Experiment (7uPCX). We completed an evaluation of the experiments as criticality safety benchmark experiments. The reviews of the benchmark evaluation have been completed. The evaluation will be published in the 2013 edition of the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Benchmark Experiments as LEU-COMP THERM-078 (LCT078). This presentation is a brief tour of the experiments.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2017

Availability of Neutronics Benchmarks in the ICSBEP and IRPhEP Handbooks for Computational Tools Testing

In the past several decades, numerous experiments have been performed worldwide to support reactor operations, measurements, design, and nuclear safety. Those experiments represent an extensive international investment in infrastructure, expertise, and cost, representing significantly valuable resources of data supporting past, current, and future research activities. Those valuable assets represent the basis for recording, development, and validation of our nuclear methods and integral nuclear data [1]. The loss of these experimental data, which has occurred all too much in the recent years, is tragic. The high cost to repeat many of these measurements can be prohibitive, if not impossible, to surmount. Two international projects were developed, and are under the direction of the Organisation for Co-operation and Development Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD NEA) to address the challenges of not just data preservation, but evaluation of the data to determine its merit for modern and future use. The International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) was established to identify and verify comprehensive critical benchmark data sets; evaluate the data, including quantification of biases and uncertainties; compile the data and calculations in a standardized format; and formally document the effort into a single source of verified benchmark data [2]. Similarly, the International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) was established to preserve integral reactor physics experimental data, including separate or special effects data for nuclear energy and technology applications [3]. Annually, contributors from around the world continue to collaborate in the evaluation and review of select benchmark experiments for preservation and dissemination. The extensively peer-reviewed integral benchmark data can then be utilized to support nuclear design and safety analysts to validate the analytical tools, methods, and data needed for next-generation reactor design, safety analysis requirements, and all other front- and back-end activities contributing to the overall nuclear fuel cycle where quality neutronics calculations are paramount.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Nuclear Criticality Safety Integral Experiment Covariance Determination

Integral benchmarks for criticality safety and nuclear data validation require expensive uncertainty quantification studies. Commonly, the uncertainty quantification ignores correlations between experiments that share components. Experiments such as the TEX (Thermal/Epithermal eXperiments) campaigns consist of many shared parts, such as fuel, which create a strong correlation in their uncertainties. While these correlations are known to exist, they are often not estimated due to the complexity of such calculations. This paper describes a software package that uses an intuitive method of determining the covariance for each of the experimental components, providing a correlation matrix for each family of parts across the multiple cases examined within a benchmark. The code uses the TEX-HEU campaign as a proof of concept, and we show that the correlations can be calculated with information commonly found in ICSBEP (International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project) benchmarks. The estimated covariances are used in χ 2 trending studies to evaluate their impact on nuclear data validation. Without covariances, χ 2 per degree of freedom was calculated as 2.203 and with covariances it was 1.179. The difference shows that omitting covariance information may cause overly pessimistic bias quantifications. The covariance determination code can be easily integrated into current benchmark evaluations as well as reevaluating legacy benchmark uncertainties. Uncertainty correlation calculations should become the baseline for criticality safety integral experiment benchmarks and can now be easily calculated with the described software package.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Nuclear Criticality Safety Integral Experiment Covariance Determination

Integral benchmarks for criticality safety and nuclear data validation require expensive uncertainty quantification studies. Commonly, the uncertainty quantification ignores correlations between experiments that share components. Experiments such as the TEX (Thermal/Epithermal eXperiments) campaigns consist of many shared parts between experiments, such as fuel, which creates a strong correlation in their errors. While these correlations are known to exist, they are often not estimated due to the complexity of such calculations. This paper describes a software package that uses an intuitive method of determining the covariance for each of the experimental components, providing a correlation matrix for each family of parts across the multiple cases examined within a benchmark. The code uses the TEX-HEU campaign as a proof of concept, and we show that the correlations can be calculated with information commonly found in ICSBEP (International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project) benchmarks. The estimated covariances are used in χ 2 trending studies to evaluate their impact on nuclear data validation. The covariance determination code can be easily integrated into current benchmark evaluations as well as reevaluating legacy benchmark uncertainties. Uncertainty correlation calculations should become the baseline for criticality safety integral experiment benchmarks and can now be easily calculated with the described software package.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗