Results for “software development framework” — Page 67

DOE OSTI2020

Pahute Mesa-Oasis Valley Hydrostratigraphic Framework Model for Corrective Action Units 101 and 102: Central and Western Pahute Mesa, Nye County, Nevada (Rev. 0)

A new, revised three-dimensional (3-D) hydrostratigraphic framework model (HFM) for the Central and Western Pahute Mesa Corrective Action Units 101 and 102 was completed in 2019. The initial (Phase I) model was completed in 2002 and was documented in A Hydrostratigraphic Model and Alternatives for the Groundwater Flow and Contaminant Transport Model of Corrective Action Units 101 and 102: Central and Western Pahute Mesa, Nye County, Nevada (BN, 2002). Subsequent flow and transport modeling revealed the need to collect additional data to reduce uncertainties. The Phase II data collection and characterization effort included extensive well drilling and testing activities, and rebuilding of the Phase I 3-D HFM, resulting in the Phase II HFM (NSTec, 2014). Further drilling (Well ER-20-12), data collection, and interpretive work (e.g., Thirsty Canyon Lineament [Wurtz and Day, 2018]) were incorporated into the Pahute Mesa-Oasis Valley (PM-OV) HFM. The PM-OV HFM incorporates the area of interest from the Phase II HFM and adds additional areas, primarily to the north and west with minor additions to the south and east. The new, expanded area matches the PM-OV groundwater basin as defined in Fenelon et al. (2016) and includes Pahute Mesa, a former nuclear testing area at the Nevada National Security Site; and Oasis Valley, a groundwater discharge area downgradient from contaminant source areas on Pahute Mesa. The data and information necessary to build the PM-OV HFM are provided in Navarro (2019). The PM-OV HFM will be used by hydrologic modelers who are tasked with developing a model to determine how contaminants are transported by groundwater flow in an area of complex geology. The model area is large (more than 6,250 square kilometers) and geologically complex, including Paleozoic- to Mesozoic-age structures (e.g., thrust faults, Thirsty Canyon Lineament), at least seven Tertiary-age calderas, several intrusive bodies, and many relatively recent basin-and-range normal faults. Investigators from the U.S. Geological Survey; National Security Technologies, LLC; National Laboratories; and U.S. Department of Energy contractors have organized the more than 300 volcanic units and other rocks in the model area into 77 hydrostratigraphic units (HSUs). The volcanic rocks are subdivided into 42 aquifers, 11 confining units, and 9 composite units (containing both aquifer and confining unit rocks). The underlying pre-Tertiary rocks were divided into 5 HSUs, comprising 2 aquifers and 3 confining units. The model also includes 1 alluvial aquifer unit, 8 intrusive confining units, and 1 granite confining unit. The model depicts the thickness, extent, and geometric relationships of these HSUs (“layers” in the model) along with all the major structural features that control them, including calderas and faults. The most substantive differences between the Phase II HFM and the PM-OVHFM include (1) addition of the new data and resulting revised interpretations from the additional area encompassed by the PM-OV groundwater basin; (2) incorporation of 16 new faults; (3) 12 boreholes from the northern extension; (4) 2 additional caldera-collapse collars; and (5) correlation of the simulated faulting and hydrostratigraphy in the eastern part of the model domain with the delineations represented in the neighboring Rainier Mesa-Shoshone Mountain HFM-Prime and Yucca Flat-Climax Mine HFM. All PM-OV HFM delineations were based on published and unpublished data from geophysical investigations, surface geologic maps, and drill-hole records. Phase II approached model uncertainty using the model-building software to test model configurations and hydrologic consequences using a range of values for parameters such as fault offset amounts and HSU elevations. The PM-OV HFM expands on this approach to encompass the entire PM-OV groundwater basin.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Assessment of the Griffin Reactor Multiphysics Application Using the Empire Micro Reactor Design Concept

In late 2019, INL and ANL agreed to jointly develop the reactor physics code named Griffin based on the integration of the two code suites, MAMMOTH/Rattlesnake (INL) and MC2 - 3/PROTEUS (ANL). Griffin is being developed based on the MOOSE framework and MOOSE quality assurance procedures. This decision was made to be able to allow DOE-NE to efficiently invest funding to this area and to provide effective and timely support for existing and potential users; the latter includes industry and government organizations who are developing various types of advanced reactors in the near and long term. Since MAMMOTH/Rattlesnake has been developed based on the MOOSE framework, the INL/ANL Griffin development team agreed to build Griffin beginning with a merger of MAMMOTH and Rattlesnake into a single code and moving forward by implementing capabilities from the PROTEUS suite into Griffin. Moving forward, both ANL and INL efforts are equally invested in the Griffin project, with management support, to provide an advanced reactor multiphysics tool to assist in reactor design, optimization, and safety analysis. Much work remains in moving Griffin forward to migrate PROTEUS capabilities and to optimize performance to meet user needs. The main objective of this work is to assess the current status of Griffin capabilities in terms of performance and accuracy, to determine priorities for PROTEUS migration, and to identify capabilities and features to improve for supporting the code integration effort. For this assessment, the Empire micro reactor problem that was developed in the ARPA-E MEITNER program was selected as an advance reactor concept of interest to the technical community. The Empire reactor problem was expanded from its original incomplete specification to be a small heat-pipe-cooled micro reactor core with ~113 cm radius and 70 cm in height, composed of 18 fuel assemblies, 12 control drums, and beryllium radial and axial reflectors. In the current model, using 5 cm axial reflectors specified in the original Empire assembly model, more than 10% of neutrons leak axially and through the empty center safety hole, as well as through heat pipe channels in fuel assembly elements that extend through the top reflector region. Several calculation models of the core were defined for systematic assessment, including 2-D and 3-D fuel assemblies and whole cores with cylindrical boundaries. Cross sections were generated using Serpent 2, and meshes were produced using the Argonne mesh tool or the INL neutronics meshing tools combined with CUBIT. Cross sections and meshes were converted to the ISOXML and Exodus formats, respectively, so that Griffin and PROTEUS could use consistent data for solving the reactor problems. With the prepared cross sections and meshes, PROTEUS was run first to ensure that all input data were correctly generated and input options in terms of angle, mesh, and energy group were accurately determined. Comparisons against Serpent 2 solutions were made in terms of eigenvalue and pin power. The same calculations and comparisons were then conducted using Griffin. For the fuel assembly and whole core problems, the PROTEUS eigenvalues agreed well with reference Serpent 2 solutions within 100 and 30 pcm, respectively, and pin power differences relative to Serpent 2 were overall less than 2.2% and RMS 0.8% for the whole core models. This indicated that all input data were properly prepared. Using the same data, Griffin was run selecting the SAAF-CFEM SN solver with Legendre-Gaussian quadrature and NDA and DSA for acceleration. It was found that the SAAF-CFEM solver of Griffin required finer meshes to achieve eigenvalue and pin power solutions in good agreement with Serpent 2, consequently requiring more memory requirement and longer computation time. On the other hand, the SPH-Diffusion 2-D core calculations performed using Griffin were able to recover the exact eigenvalue from the reference Serpent 2 solutions, resulting in a pin-power distribution with an RMS of 0.6% and maximum absolute difference of less than 1.4%. The runtimes for SPH-Diffusion for the 2-D core were less than 3 minutes on 40 cores. During this evolution of this evaluation, many updates were made in Griffin by the Griffin development team of INL (focusing on software updates) and ANL (reviewing and supporting software updates) to complete this assessment. Observations from the code assessment are presented in the conclusion section of this report, followed by a discussion of recommendations for future work.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗