Advertisement

Atomic Energy

, Volume 126, Issue 1, pp 16–20 | Cite as

Calculation of the Neutron Distribution Function in Slabs with Extended Heterogeneous Fuel Zones

  • E. F. Mitenkova
  • T. V. Semenova
Article
  • 1 Downloads

The possibility of non-physical local neutron distributions in weakly coupled systems in Monte Carlo calculations of the criticality is engendering the development of new algorithms. New possibilities of the TDMCC code for calculating neutron distribution functions in weakly coupled systems are presented. The established distribution of fission neutrons which is obtained in criticality calculations by different Monte Carlo methods – conventional method of generations, fission matrix method, and method of generations using the concept of sub-ensembles – is analyzed in supercritical slabs with extended fuel zones. The features of each method in calculations of symmetric slabs with extended heterogeneous fuel zones are analyzed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    E. F. Mitenkova, D. A. Koltashev, and P. A. Kizub, “Distribution of the fi ssion reaction rate in a weakly coupled system for testing the checkerboard model,” At. Energ., 116, No. 6, 345–350 (2014); Atomic Energy, 116, No. 6, 421–427 (2014).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. F. Mitenkova and T. V. Semenova, “Use of the TDM CC code for solving problems with dominant ratio close to 1,” Vopr. At. Nauki Tekhn. Ser. Mat. Model. Fiz. Prots. No. 4, 3–13 (2015).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. A. Kizub and E. F. Mitenkova, Source of Fission Neutrons in Monte Carlo Calculations for Weakly Coupled Systems, Preprint No. IBRAE–2015-02.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Brissenden and A. Garlick, “Biases in the estimation of K eff and its error by Monte Carlo methods,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 13, 63–83 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. Ueki, F. Brown, D. Parsons, and D. Kornreich, “Autocorrelation and dominance ratio in Monte Carlo criticality calculations,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 145, 279–290 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Shim and C. Kim, “Real variance estimation using an intercycle fission source correlation for Monte Carlo eigenvalue calculations,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 162, 98–108 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Sutton and F. Brown, Analysis of the Monte Carlo Eigenvalue Bias. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, CIS-RPC-91-17, USA (1991).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Blomquist, M. Amirshaw, D. Hanlon, et al., Source Convergence in Criticality Safety Analysis, Phase I: Results of Four Test Problems, OECD/NEA (2006), No. 5431.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. V. Semenova and E. F. Mitenkova, “Expanding the possibilities of the TDMCC code for studying large and weakly coupled systems,” Vopr. At. Nauki Tekhn. Ser. Yad.-Reakt. Konst., No. 1, 31–35 (2015).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. Ueki, “Monte Carlo criticality calculation under extreme condition,” J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., 49, No. 12, 1134–1143 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. Morton, Criticality Calculations by Monte Carlo Methods, United Kingdom Atomic Energy Research Establishment, Harwell, Rep. T/R-1903 (1956).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    F. Brown, S. Carney, B. Kiedrowski, and W. Martin, “Fission matrix capability for MCNP, Part I – theory,” in: Int. Conf. on Mathematics and Computational Methods Applied to Nuclear Science and Engineering (M&C 2013), USA, May 5–9, 2013, pp. 2828–2839.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. F. Mitenkova
    • 1
  • T. V. Semenova
    • 2
  1. 1.Nuclear Safety Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences (IBRAE RAS)MoscowRussia
  2. 2.Russian Federal Nuclear Center – All-Russia Research Institute of Experimental Physics (RFYaTs – VNIIEF)SarovRussia

Personalised recommendations