Advertisement

Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry

, Volume 322, Issue 2, pp 513–518 | Cite as

Discrimination of weapons-grade plutonium from thermal reactors in nuclear forensics

  • G. NikolaouEmail author
  • S. R. Biegalski
Article
  • 98 Downloads

Abstract

A simulated fingerprinting approach is demonstrated, aiming the discrimination of weapons-grade plutonium (WG-Pu) from different reactors. Light and heavy water and graphite moderated thermal reactors are considered, charged with fresh fuel assemblies of different enrichments. The plutonium isotopic composition is considered as the required characteristic fingerprints in the approach. Hence, plutonium isotopic ratios are used in 3D isotopic correlations for the discrimination purposes. The WG-Pu from the different reactors is well resolved between them. Within the light water moderated cases, the WG-Pu is resolved in groups according to their fresh fuel enrichment and the reactor and fuel assembly type. The fingerprinting approach is sensitive to a ‘Pu age’ beyond 0.5 years.

Keywords

Weapons-grade Pu Nuclear forensics Isotopic fingerprinting Isotopic correlations 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Carson MJ, von Hippel F, Lyman E (2009) Explosive properties of reactor-grade plutonium. Sci Glob Secur 17:170–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chirayath SS, Osborn JM, Coles TM (2015) Trace fission product ratios for nuclear forensics attribution of weapons-grade plutonium from fast and thermal reactors. Sci Glob Secur 23:48–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fedchenko V (2014) The role of nuclear forensics in nuclear security. Strateg Anal 38:230–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jakopic R, Richter S, Kühn H, Benedik L, Pihlar B, Aregbe Y (2009) Isotope ratio measurements of pg-size plutonium samples using TIMS in combination with “multiple ion counting” and filament carburization. Int J Mass Spectrom 279(2–3):87–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kristo MJ, Tumey SJ (2013) The state of nuclear forensics. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res 294:656–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kristo MJ, Gaffney AM, Naomi Marks N, Knight K, Cassata WS, Hutcheon ID (2016) Nuclear forensic science: analysis of nuclear material out of regulatory control. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 44:555–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lantzos I, Kouvalaki Ch, Nikolaou G (2015) Plutonium fingerprinting in nuclear forensics of spent nuclear fuel. Prog Nuclear Energy 85:335–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nicolaou G, Koch L (1995) Identification of nuclear material with unknown irradiation history: a case study. In: Proceedings 17th annual ESARDA symposium on safeguards and nuclear material management, Aachen, Germany, 9–11 May 1995Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nicolaou G (2008) Provenance of unknown plutonium material. J Environ Radioact 99:1708–1710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nicolaou G, Biegalski SR (2018) Discrimination of plutonium from thermal reactors in the frame of nuclear forensics. J Radioanal Nuclear Chem 317:559–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    ORNL/TM-2005/39 (2011) SCALE: a comprehensive modeling and simulation suite for nuclear safety analysis and design ORNL/TM-2005/39 Version 61 Oak Ridge National Laboratory TennesseeGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Osborn JM, Kitcher ED, Burns JD, Folden CM, Chirayath SS (2018) Nuclear forensics methodology for reactor-type attribution of chemically separated plutonium. Nuclear Technol 201:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Osborn JM, Glenon KJ, Kitcher ED, Burns JD, Folden CM, Chirayath SS (2018) Computational and experimental forensics characterisation of weapons-grade plutonium in a thermal neutron environment. Nuclear Eng Tehnol 50:820–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robel M, Kristo MJ (2008) Discrimination of source reactor type by multivariate statistical analysis of uranium and plutonium isotopic concentrations in unknown irradiated nuclear fuel material. J Env Radioact 99:1789–1799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sendis M, Gauld I, Martinez JS, Alejano C, Bossant M, Boulanger D, Cabellos O, Chrapciak V, Cond J, Fast I, Gren M, Govers K, Gysemans M, Hannstein V, Havluj F, Hennebach M, Hondosy G, Ilias G, Kilger R, Mills R, Mountford D, Orlego P, Radulescu G, Rahimi M, Ranta-Aho A, Rantamaki K, Ruprecht B, Soppera N, Stuke M, Suyama K, Tittelbach S, Tore C, van Winckel S, Vasiliev A, Watanabe T, Toru Yamamoto, Toshihisa Yamamoto (2017) SFCOMPO-2.0: an OECD NEA database of spent nuclear fuel isotopic assays, reactor design specifications, and operating data. Ann Nuclear Energy 110:779–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Varga Z, Nicholl A, Wallenius M, Mayer K (2016) Plutonium age dating (production date measurement) by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. J Radioanal Nuclear Chem 307:1919–1926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wallenius M, Peerani P, Koch L (2000) Origin determination of plutonium material in nuclear forensics. J Radioanal Nuclear Chem 246(2):317–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringDemokritus University of ThraceXanthiGreece
  2. 2.The George Woodruff School of Mechanical EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations