SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Criticality Safety”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2022

Hand Calculations for Nuclear Criticality Safety — Primer Revision [Abstract]

The document “ Hand Calculation Methods for Criticality Safety –A Primer, ” was published by the authors (Los Alamos National Laboratory report LA-14244-M) in December 2006 to provide an overview of the most common hand calculation methods used for criticality safety analysis. Hand calculation methods can be used as a starting point for more advanced calculations, and in many circumstances, they can provide sensitivity and perturbation information quicker than using a criticality code, such as KENO or MCNP. This report has been revised to augment existing basis information and example problems for each of the methods discussed: 1-group and modified 1-group diffusion theory, core-density conversions, buckling conversions, limiting surface density method, density analog method, surface density method, and solid angle method. This primer discusses the applicability of the various methods, illustrates how they are used, and provides an interpretation of the example problem results. The example problems provided are simple, practical problems, and the reference data to solve each example problem is provided. This paper will provide an overview of the Primer revision and how it can be useful for new Nuclear Criticality Safety practitioners.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

NASA NTRS2015

Planning the Unplanned Experiment: Towards Assessing the Efficacy of Standards for Safety-Critical Software

Safe use of software in safety-critical applications requires well-founded means of determining whether software is fit for such use. While software in industries such as aviation has a good safety record, little is known about whether standards for software in safety-critical applications 'work' (or even what that means). It is often (implicitly) argued that software is fit for safety-critical use because it conforms to an appropriate standard. Without knowing whether a standard works, such reliance is an experiment; without carefully collecting assessment data, that experiment is unplanned. To help plan the experiment, we organized a workshop to develop practical ideas for assessing software safety standards. In this paper, we relate and elaborate on the workshop discussion, which revealed subtle but important study design considerations and practical barriers to collecting appropriate historical data and recruiting appropriate experimental subjects. We discuss assessing standards as written and as applied, several candidate definitions for what it means for a standard to 'work,' and key assessment strategies and study techniques and the pros and cons of each. Finally, we conclude with thoughts about the kinds of research that will be required and how academia, industry, and regulators might collaborate to overcome the noted barriers.

Graydon, Patrick J.↗

DOE OSTI2020

Validation of Continuous-Energy ENDF/B-VIII.0 16 O, 56 Fe, and 63,65 Cu Cross Sections for Nuclear Criticality Safety Applications

Recently completed cross-section evaluations sponsored in part by the Nuclear Criticality Safety Program were incorporated into the 2018 release of the ENDF/B-VIII.0 cross-section library. Evaluated isotopes of interest to the nuclear data and criticality safety community include 16 O, 56 Fe, and 63,65 Cu. For performance validation, benchmark models defined in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project Handbook were selected based on energy-integrated k eff sensitivities to total cross sections of interest and compared with experimental values. Of the 102 benchmark configurations that were utilized, 63 are sensitive to 16 O, 32 sensitive to 63,65 Cu, and 25 sensitive to 56 Fe. Selected benchmarks were modeled in SCALE 6.2.3 Criticality Safety Analysis Sequence (CSAS) continuous-energy Monte Carlo k eff calculations with ENDF/B-VII.1, with a hybrid ENDF/B-VII.1 with ENDF/B-VIII.0 data substituted for individual isotopes of interest, and with ENDF/B-VIII.0. ENDF/B-VIII.0 showed improved agreement with experimental k eff for 56 Fe, 63 Cu, elemental copper, and full library substitution while producing lessened agreement for 16 O and 65 Cu. Furthermore, with full library and isotope-specific ENDF/B-VIII.0 performance, a best-case ENDF library was formed by excluding underperforming isotopes’ ENDF/B-VIII.0 data, reverting 16 O and 65 Cu cross sections to ENDF/B-VII.1. This resulted in the average relative deviation between calculated and experimental data improving from 1.45σ for the ENDF/B-VIII.0 library to 1.32σ for the best-case library, relative to benchmark uncertainty.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Brief Overview of the DOE/NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program [Slides]

The mission of the DOE/NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program is to provide sustainable expert leadership, direction and the technical infrastructure necessary to develop, maintain, and disseminate the essential technical tools, training, and data required to support safe, efficient fissionable material operations within DOE. The vision of the program is to create a continually improving, adaptable, and transparent program that communicates and collaborates globally to incorporate technology, practices, and programs to be responsive to the essential technical needs of those responsible for developing, implementing, and maintaining nuclear criticality safety.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2023

Nuclear Criticality Safety Pipeline Course - LLNL [Slides]

This presentation details the nuclear criticality safety pipeline course. An educational program from University of California, Berkeley. This course touches on nuclear criticality each fall semester. The curriculum instructs on the fundamentals of criticality safety and provides hands on experience with special nuclear material. This presentation covers lecture topics, project overview, and major criticality safety evaluation projects.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Microreactor Assembly Transportation Cask Model Description for Criticality Safety Validation Basis Assessment

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Microreactor Assembly Transportation Cask Model Description for Criticality Safety Validation Basis Assessment (Rev. 3)

Criticality safety analyses are completed on a transportation cask used for microreactor assembly shipment to provide an example of model and analysis to industry for reproducing this type of study on their microreactor fuel shipment. The fuel assembly considered is based on a gas-cooled microreactor (GC-MR), which utilizes HALEU fuel in the form of TRISO particles and utilizes various design options considered in industry designs. Various versions of this GC-MR assembly were studied, with and without YH 2 moderator, providing similar conclusions. The shipment cask design is revised based on an existing ES-3100 design, developed by Y-12 for the transport of highly enriched uranium (HEU), but is enlarged to hold the GC-MR fuel assembly. Criticality safety analysis for the cask/GC-MR fuel assembly package was performed using the CSAS6 sequence of SCALE6.3.2, utilizing the ENDF/B-VII.1 based continuous energy neutron library, and the analysis strictly follows the guideline from NRC reference reports. Different scenarios, e.g. normal operation, undamaged cask with water flooded, damaged cask with optimal water moderation, have been analyzed and it could be concluded the package would always have a large margin of subcriticality even packed in an infinite array. Sensitivity and similarity analyses are also performed using the TSUNAMI sequence of SCALE6.3.2, and the similarity analysis uses all the experiments from the ICSBEP Handbook with Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU), Intermediate and Mixed Enriched Uranium (IEU) and Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) systems, together with additional ones that are sponsored by the DNCSH program, and selected IRPhEP experiments using TRISO fuel and graphite moderator. These similarity analyses indicate that the dry nominal design has no similar benchmark experiments (ck values greater than 0.8), which may become problematic if more assemblies are shipped together (or a fully loaded core is shipped) and margin to criticality is reduced. However, the cask models with flooded assemblies exhibited similarities to many experiments with c k values greater than 0.8.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Overview and Current Progress of the DOE/NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program Training and Education Program

Since 2011, the US Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/NNSA) Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) has been providing a two-week nuclear criticality safety (NCS) practitioner course to support the training and qualification of new NCS staff. In 2013, an NCS Manager’s course was developed for process supervisors, managers, regulators, and other professionals with NCS-related responsibilities, and, in 2017, an additional course was proposed for Criticality Safety Officers (CSOs). In addition to hands-on training, other NCSP-funded tasks include training on sensitivity/uncertainty methods, NCS resource pipeline tasks, development of NCS guides, maintenance and development of Nuclear Criticality Safety Education Training (NCSET) modules and designing of a new subcritical assembly for hands-on training purposes. This paper provides an overview of the NCSP training and education program. The status of the NCSP hands-on training program will also be provided.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2023

Nuclear Criticality Safety Training: Needs and Efforts

Nuclear criticality safety (NCS) training is essential and required for NCS professionals to ensure that fissionable materials outside of nuclear reactors are safely processed, handled, stored, and transported. Furthermore, the requirement of training in NCS is mandated in several international and domestic documents. In this regard, management has an obligation to establish an NCS training program that provides confidence in the continuing proficiency of personnel, and supervisors must ensure that their staff is suitably trained. Training of all personnel in nuclear facilities is required to support the robust performance of operations. There is a continuing need to maintain, enhance, and develop new training courses to support the NCS community. This paper provides an outline of some of the ongoing and future training courses in the United States to support the field of NCS.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Criticality Safety at Los Alamos National Laboratory [Slides]

The agenda for the presentation is as follows: Critical Systems (Daghlian Accident, Criticality Safety); Nuclear Criticality Safety at Los Alamos National Laboratory (A day in the life); Los Alamos National Laboratory (History, Today, Mission); and, Los Alamos and Surrounding Areas.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Nuclear Criticality Safety in Practice [Slides]

The agenda for the presentation includes the following topics: Requirements; How is criticality safety practiced; criticality safety evaluations; fissionable material operation review; and, procedures.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

NASA NTRS2014

Is Model-Based Development a Favorable Approach for Complex and Safety-Critical Computer Systems on Commercial Aircraft?

A system is safety-critical if its failure can endanger human life or cause significant damage to property or the environment. State-of-the-art computer systems on commercial aircraft are highly complex, software-intensive, functionally integrated, and network-centric systems of systems. Ensuring that such systems are safe and comply with existing safety regulations is costly and time-consuming as the level of rigor in the development process, especially the validation and verification activities, is determined by considerations of system complexity and safety criticality. A significant degree of care and deep insight into the operational principles of these systems is required to ensure adequate coverage of all design implications relevant to system safety. Model-based development methodologies, methods, tools, and techniques facilitate collaboration and enable the use of common design artifacts among groups dealing with different aspects of the development of a system. This paper examines the application of model-based development to complex and safety-critical aircraft computer systems. Benefits and detriments are identified and an overall assessment of the approach is given.

Torres-Pomales, Wilfredo↗

NASA NTRS2015

Planning the Unplanned Experiment: Assessing the Efficacy of Standards for Safety Critical Software

We need well-founded means of determining whether software is t for use in safety-critical applications. While software in industries such as aviation has an excellent safety record, the fact that software aws have contributed to deaths illustrates the need for justi ably high con dence in software. It is often argued that software is t for safety-critical use because it conforms to a standard for software in safety-critical systems. But little is known about whether such standards `work.' Reliance upon a standard without knowing whether it works is an experiment; without collecting data to assess the standard, this experiment is unplanned. This paper reports on a workshop intended to explore how standards could practicably be assessed. Planning the Unplanned Experiment: Assessing the Ecacy of Standards for Safety Critical Software (AESSCS) was held on 13 May 2014 in conjunction with the European Dependable Computing Conference (EDCC). We summarize and elaborate on the workshop's discussion of the topic, including both the presented positions and the dialogue that ensued.

Graydon, Patrick J.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Some Challenges in the Design of Human-Automation Interaction for Safety-Critical Systems

Increasing amounts of automation are being introduced to safety-critical domains. While the introduction of automation has led to an overall increase in reliability and improved safety, it has also introduced a class of failure modes, and new challenges in risk assessment for the new systems, particularly in the assessment of rare events resulting from complex inter-related factors. Designing successful human-automation systems is challenging, and the challenges go beyond good interface development (e.g., Roth, Malin, & Schreckenghost 1997; Christoffersen & Woods, 2002). Human-automation design is particularly challenging when the underlying automation technology generates behavior that is difficult for the user to anticipate or understand. These challenges have been recognized in several safety-critical domains, and have resulted in increased efforts to develop training, procedures, regulations and guidance material (CAST, 2008, IAEA, 2001, FAA, 2013, ICAO, 2012). This paper points to the continuing need for new methods to describe and characterize the operational environment within which new automation concepts are being presented. We will describe challenges to the successful development and evaluation of human-automation systems in safety-critical domains, and describe some approaches that could be used to address these challenges. We will draw from experience with the aviation, spaceflight and nuclear power domains.

systems engineering↗

DOE OSTI2020

Performing k eff Validation of As-Loaded Criticality Safety Calculations Using UNF-ST&DARDS: Applicable Experiment Selection

The general method for performing validation of as loaded criticality safety calculations using UNF ST&DARDS is presented in a paper by Clarity, which includes a description of the UNF-ST&DARDS system. Proof-of-principle analyses were performed in the summer of 2019 for MPC-32 dual purpose canisters (DPCs) containing pressurized water reactor (PWR) fuel assemblies. Summaries of these results are presented in this and a companion paper for this conference. The current paper describes the TSUNAMI-IP calculations performed to select applicable experiments for validation of 11 MPC-32 DPCs. The companion paper discusses the TSUNAMI-3D calculations used to generate sensitivity data to support the experiment selections discussed here. Experiment selection is based on the sensitivity/uncertainty (S/U) methods used to validate criticality safety calculations of as-loaded DPCs containing pressurized water reactor (PWR) spent nuclear fuel (SNF). This process has been demonstrated and is summarized in this paper. The approach is similar to that used in NUREG/CR-7109, which provides an approach for validation of PWR burnup credit (BUC), including major and minor actinides and major fission products. The premise of S/U-based validation is that applicable experiments—those having a similar bias to a given application system—will have similar sensitivities for each isotope and reaction in the two systems. It is assumed that cross sections with larger uncertainties are more likely to contain data errors which contribute to the bias. The integral index c k thus propagates the system sensitivities with the nuclear covariance data to calculate a correlation coefficient representing the similarity of the two systems. In this work, a c k value of 0.8 or higher is interpreted as identifying an experiment with sufficient similarity for use in validation. This paper presents a brief summary of the characteristics of the 11 MPC-32 DPCs used in the proof of-principle analysis for as-loaded criticality safety calculation validation and an overview of the critical experiment suite with which each of these DPC models was compared. A summary and discussion of c k results is also presented, followed by conclusions and a discussion of future work to be performed for validation of UNF ST&DARDS as-loaded criticality safety calculations.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2020

KENO V.a Primer: Performing Calculations using SCALE’s Criticality Safety Analysis Sequence (CSAS5) with Fulcrum

The SCALE code system developed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory is widely used and accepted around the world for criticality safety analyses. The well-known KENO V.a three-dimensional Monte Carlo criticality computer code is one of the primary criticality safety analysis tools in SCALE. The KENO V.a primer is designed to help a new user understand and use the SCALE/KENO V.a Monte Carlo code for nuclear criticality safety analyses. It assumes that the user has a college education in a technical field. There is no assumption of familiarity with Monte Carlo codes in general or with SCALE/KENO V.a in particular. The primer is designed to teach by example, with each example illustrating two or three features of SCALE/KENO V.a that are useful in criticality analyses. The primer is based on SCALE 6.2 and 6.3, which includes the Fulcrum graphical user interface (GUI). Each example uses Fulcrum to provide the framework for preparing input data and viewing output results. Starting with a Quickstart section, the primer gives an overview of the basic requirements for SCALE/KENO V.a input and allows the user to quickly run a simple criticality problem with SCALE/KENO V.a. The sections that follow Quickstart include a list of basic objectives at the beginning that identifies the goal of the section and the individual SCALE/KENO V.a features that are covered in detail in the sample problems in that section. Upon completion of the primer, a new user should be comfortable using Fulcrum to set up criticality problems in SCALE/KENO V.a. The primer provides a starting point for the criticality safety analyst who uses SCALE/KENO V.a. Complete descriptions are provided in the SCALE/KENO V.a manual. Although the primer is self-contained, it is intended as a companion volume to the SCALE/KENO V.a training and documentation. The SCALE manual and training schedule are available at https://scale.ornl.gov. The primer provides specific examples of using SCALE/KENO V.a for criticality analyses; the SCALE/KENO V.a manual provides information on the use of SCALE/KENO V.a and all its modules. The primer also contains an appendix with sample input files. In addition, this primer, its errata and sample inputs are also available at https://code.ornl.gov/scale/primers/kenova.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2020

KENO-VI Primer: Performing Calculations using SCALE’s Criticality Safety Analysis Sequence (CSAS6) with Fulcrum

The SCALE code system developed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory is widely used and accepted around the world for criticality safety analysis. The well-known KENO-VI three-dimensional Monte Carlo criticality computer code is one of the primary criticality safety analysis tools in SCALE. The KENO-VI primer is designed to help a new user understand and use the SCALE/KENO-VI Monte Carlo code for nuclear criticality safety analysis. It assumes that the user has a college education in a technical field. There is no assumption of familiarity with Monte Carlo codes in general or with SCALE/KENO-VI in particular. The primer is designed to teach by example, with each example illustrating two or three features of SCALE/KENO-VI that are useful in criticality analysis. The primer is based on SCALE 6.2 and 6.3, which includes the Fulcrum graphical user interface. Each example uses Fulcrum to provide the framework for preparing input data and viewing output results. Starting with a Quickstart section, the primer gives an overview of the basic requirements for SCALE/KENO-VI input and allows the user to quickly run a simple criticality problem with SCALE/KENO-VI. Each following section begins with a list of basic objectives identifying the goal of the section and the individual SCALE/KENO-VI features covered in detail in the section’s sample problems. Upon completion of the primer, a new user should be comfortable using Fulcrum to set up criticality problems in SCALE/KENO-VI. The primer provides a starting point for the criticality safety analyst who uses SCALE/KENO-VI. Complete descriptions are provided in the SCALE/KENO-VI manual. Although the primer is self-contained, it is intended as a companion volume to the SCALE/KENO-VI training and documentation. The SCALE manual and training schedule are available at https://scale.ornl.gov. The primer provides specific examples of using SCALE/KENO-VI for criticality analysis; the SCALE/KENO-VI manual provides information on the use of SCALE/KENO-VI and all its modules. The primer also contains an appendix with sample input files. In addition, this primer, its errata, and sample inputs are also available at https://code.ornl.gov/scale/primers/kenovi/.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Domestic and International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety - Overview & Status [Abstract]

The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for staff performing hands-on work in operations with fissionable materials. These consensus standards have contributed directly to the significant reduction in the rate of criticality accidents in process facilities since the 1940s. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 43 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (22 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in the ANS-8 series. Currently, there are six ANS-8 standards in re- vision mode and eleven in a maintenance mode with one new standard under development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, three standards are in revision mode, and two standards are development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗