Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
OF NEUTRON TRANSPORT IN
NUCLEAR ENGINEERING
A Hands-on, Easy-to-Understand Approach
Zafar-ullah Koreshi
7/13/2014
A textbook for building the foundations for advanced applications in nuclear computation for design.
TO
MY FAMILY
TO
MY TEACHERS AT SCHOOL
TO
PROF (LATE) CHARLIE MAYNARD (UW MADISON) AND TO PROF DR JEFFERY D LEWINS (CAMBRIDGE)
AND
TO
FOREWORD
Computational Methods in Science and Engineering, have reached a very high degree of sophistication compared with
classical solutions of the earlier days. In nuclear engineering, classical solutions like those from the Wiener-Hopf method
and the first numerical solutions of the neutron transport equation with the finite-difference method and refinements using
the Discrete Ordinates
deterministic approach as well as in the Monte Carlo approach to permit widespread generalization and application to
other areas of science and engineering where the underlying transport phenomena are similar.
The primary objective of computation in nuclear engineering is to obtain information on the flux of neutrons as a function
of energy, position and time in nuclear systems which vary from small assemblies to large nuclear power reactors. All
other quantities such as reactor power and thermal-hydraulic parameters can then be determined.
At of end 2012 there were 437 operational reactors contributing to about 15% of the worlds energy requirements. Many
of these reactors have aged; some are as old as 43 years and require re-engineering for life extension, while 140 have
been permanently shut down. Public perceptions, especially after Three Mile Island (1980), Chernobyl (1986), and
Fukushima (2009) have affected the image of nuclear technology as an energy source. Yet, there is the possibility of a
nuclear renaissance since this technology represents a reliable, safe and sophisticated high-density energy source. Thus, a
total of 64 power reactors are under construction with the lead taken by Asia: China (26), Russia (11), India (7), Pakistan
(4), Republic of Korea (2), and most recently, the United Arab Emirates (1).
As a discipline, nuclear engineering has a future as good as any other advanced technology, and thus computational
methods that address the transport of phenomena in a nuclear reactor will continue to lie at the heart of the field. Central
to all such analysis is the neutron transport equation which its roots in the Boltzmann transport equation expressed by
Ludwig Boltzmann (1844-1906) for the kinetic theory of gases. As a conservation equation, it can be interpreted as the
zero-th moment of the Boltzmann equation. All methods thus applicable to the kinetic theory of molecules are thus
ii
equally applicable to neutral particle transport (neutrons) as well as to electromagnetic radiation (photons and thermal
radiation) and charged particle transport (e.g. ions and electrons in plasmas).
These notes arise from a formalization of computational methods taught to graduate students at Air University. The
present text, along with other reference material on probability and statistics, and on Monte Carlo methods, was followed
for the graduate program in the Mathematical Modeling and Scientific Computing Program (Fall Semester 2012) for the
Elective course on Monte Carlo Methods. The MCQs, Mid-Term and Final Examinations given to the students are
attached at the end. I found that a large part of the course could be taught to the students with careful interjections of the
nuclear engineering context. While I have made every effort to include what I feel is necessary knowledge for
understanding neutron transport and mathematical methods and computation, I do not claim that it is complete. I have
assumed knowledge and skills obtained from the usual five or six mathematics undergraduate courses.
This book can thus be used for a course in a nuclear engineering program at the advanced undergraduate level if the heavy
mathematics of transport theory is largely skipped, or at the graduate level in its entirety. It can be part of a useful
collection for engineers and scientists entering the field from other disciplines. Nuclear engineers can skip the first chapter
while mathematicians can skip the second chapter. The body of the text begins essentially from the third chapter. For
professionals, it can serve as useful introductory material for tying-up neutron diffusion, transport and Monte Carlo
methods.
When compared with the existing text and teaching material in Monte Carlo methods, such as the first books by
Handscombe, by Cashwell and Everett or by Spanier and Gelbard, it is more engineering-oriented and makes use of
Matlab which of course was not available to them. Compared with the book by Lewis and Miller, it is easier to follow.
Standard nuclear engineering text books presently taught in universities (e.g. Lamarsh, Henry, Duderstadt, Stacey etc.)
cover more breadth and are undergraduate-focused.
I can say that if I had a book like this when I started my B.Sc (Hons.) in Nuclear Engineering at Queen Mary College
(now Queen Mary University of London, without the nuclear engineering program), what a difference it would have
iii
made! Afterwards at University of Wisconsin, Madison, I learnt Monte Carlo as an M.S. student from the late Prof.
Charlie Maynard who would so affectionately take us all through the details with the Los Alamos MCNP manual pages in
his hands. Remember those were the pre-PC days, and we had access only to mainframe computing. I was fascinated with
the Monte Carlo method as it seemed so intensive and so capable of handling real-world problems without any geometry
or model idealizations. Later on, at Cambridge with Jeffery Lewins, I went through the Ph.D. getting a grip on Monte
Carlo perturbation theory. In several discussions with Herbert Rief, at Ispra in Italy, I learnt the concepts; and turned out
my first paper with a simple close-to-analytical paper presented at Budapest. My work-horses were MORSE, an Oak
Ridge multi-group code, and the more versatile MCNP, a Los Alamos code, now running at Version 5. MCNP is a
production code; running it, they say, is almost as good as carrying out an experiment.
This book goes beyond the traditional material in neutron diffusion and stochastic transport; it is aimed at training
graduate students, as well as researchers, to think Monte Carlo, or analog simulation, and then write the equations rather
than the other way round. The book closes, in Chapter 10 with an applications approach for the nuclear engineering
practitioner involved with criticality storage systems, reactor core neutronics and neutronic applications in emerging areas
such as medical radiation physics.
Generally, computational methods will continue to find more relevance with new developments in computer hardware.
One such area is with Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), which are also being initiated in the Mechatronics
Engineering department; there is great scope for parallel computing with high speed-ups for large challenging simulation
problems.
Dr. Zafar ullah Koreshi
Professor, Mechatronics Engineering Department
Dean Faculty of Engineering,
Air University, Islamabad
July 2014
iv
Contents
FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................................................................ ii
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................................................ xii
Notation ................................................................................................................................................................................ 16
1
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 19
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
Neutron Current...................................................................................................................................................... 3
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11
Scattering .............................................................................................................................................................. 21
1.12
1.12.1
1.13
Criticality ............................................................................................................................................................... 28
References ........................................................................................................................................................................ 31
Problems ........................................................................................................................................................................... 32
2
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 35
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
Special Functions................................................................................................................................................... 42
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
2.6
2.7
Integro-differential Equations............................................................................................................................... 48
Complex Integration ................................................................................................................................................. 50
2.8 ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 50
2.9
2.9.1
2.9.2
2.10
2.11
2.11.1
2.11.2
2.11.3
2.11.4
2.11.5
2.11.6
2.11.7
2.11.8
2.11.9
2.11.10
2.11.11
2.11.12
2.12
2.13
Optimization.......................................................................................................................................................... 77
2.13.1
2.14
References ........................................................................................................................................................................ 84
Problems ........................................................................................................................................................................... 85
vi
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.5.1
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.3
4.4
4.4.1
4.4.2
4.4.3
4.5
4.5.1
4.5.2
4.5.3
4.6
4.7
5.1.1
5.2
5.2.1
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
5.10
5.11
5.12
5.13
5.14
5.15
5.16
5.17
5.18
6.2
6.2.1
6.2.2
DOT.............................................................................................................................................................. 163
6.2.3
6.2.4
PARTISN....................................................................................................................................................... 164
6.3
6.3.1
6.3.2
6.3.3
MORSE......................................................................................................................................................... 165
6.3.4
6.3.5
6.3.6
6.4
6.4.1
6.4.2
6.5
6.5.1
6.5.2
7.2
7.3
7.3.1
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.6.1
7.6.2
7.6.3
7.7
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
8.8
8.9
8.10
Matlab Program for Point Isotropic Source in a Finite Non-multiplying Sphere .............................................. 239
8.11
9.1.1
9.1.2
9.1.3
9.2
9.3
Comparison for Finite Sphere with a Point Isotropic Source .............................................................................. 266
9.3.1
9.3.2
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.3.1
10.3.2
10.3.3
10.3.4
10.3.5
10.4
10.5
xi
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 U238 total cross-section (ENDF/B-VII.0) ................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 1-2 U238 total cross-section: low energy 1/E behavior ............................................................................................... 5
Figure 1-3 U238 total cross-section: resonance behavior ...................................................................................................... 6
Figure 1-4 U238 total cross-section: high energy behavior .................................................................................................... 6
Figure 1-5 Nuclear fission...................................................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 1-6 Fission fragment yield (Lewis, p.15)..................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 1-7 Fission spectrum .................................................................................................................................................. 16
Figure 1-8 Fission spectra ..................................................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 1-9 Cranberg and Watt fission spectra ...................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 1-10 Neutron spectra in fast and thermal reactors ................................................................................................... 21
Figure 1-11 Elastic scattering ................................................................................................................................................ 22
Figure 1-12 Scattering angle in Lab and CM systems ........................................................................................................... 23
Figure 1-13 Reactor Core ...................................................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 1-14 Neutron multiplication keff ............................................................................................................................... 30
Figure 2-1 Bessel functions of the first and second kind ...................................................................................................... 45
Figure 2-2 Neutron transport in a 1-D albedo problem ........................................................................................................ 49
Figure 2-3 Some basic elements in FEM: (i) 1-D linear element, (ii) 2-D triangular element, (iii) 2-D square element, (Lewis
et al 2004) ............................................................................................................................................................................. 53
Figure 2-4 Triangular elements in a curved pipe .................................................................................................................. 55
Figure 2-5 Temperature contours in a curved pipe .............................................................................................................. 56
Figure 2-6 Two-dimensional quadratic element with 8 nodes ............................................................................................. 57
Figure 2-7 Numerical Integration .......................................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 2-8 Uniformly distributed random number ............................................................................................................... 59
Figure 2-9 Exponentially distributed random number ......................................................................................................... 60
Figure 2-10 Exponentially distributed random variable from Matlab(R) ............................................................................. 61
Figure 2-11 Exponential pdf from Matlab(R) GUI ................................................................................................................. 62
Figure 2-12 KL distance for 5 bins ......................................................................................................................................... 65
Figure 2-13 KL distance for 10 bins ....................................................................................................................................... 65
Figure 2-14 KL distance for 20 bins ....................................................................................................................................... 66
Figure 2-15 Estimates of value of ...................................................................................................................................... 70
Figure 2-16 Estimates of value of (M=500) ....................................................................................................................... 71
Figure 2-17 Estimates of (N=5000, 10000, 15000, 20000 for M=500) .............................................................................. 71
Figure 2-18 Estimates of .................................................................................................................................................... 72
Figure 2-19 A simplified picture of particles in a box. .......................................................................................................... 73
Figure 2-20 Absolute entropy S vs number of states N ........................................................................................................ 74
Figure 2-21 R, H contours for fixed surface area .................................................................................................................. 80
Figure 2-22 Maximum cylinder volume for fixed surface area ............................................................................................. 81
Figure 2-23 Area constraint for A=10 cm^2 and Volume contours ...................................................................................... 82
Figure 3-1 A volume element ................................................................................................................................................ 87
xii
Figure 7-10 Converged fluxes for Water-U235 atomic ratio 310:1291.73 ......................................................................... 197
Figure 7-11 Finite-difference convergence ......................................................................................................................... 198
Figure 7-12 Flat thermal flux with infinite water reflector ................................................................................................. 200
Figure 7-13 Fast and thermal fluxes with uniform fissile loading ....................................................................................... 201
Figure 7-14 Fast and thermal fluxes from non-uniform fissile loading of Fig. 7-13 ............................................................ 201
Figure 7-15 Non-uniform fissile loading in a 3-zone equi-volume core.............................................................................. 202
Figure 7-16 Effect of a step distribution on the critical mass ............................................................................................. 203
Figure 7-17 Fast and thermal flux ....................................................................................................................................... 205
Figure 7-18 variable atomic ratio ........................................................................................................................................ 209
Figure 7-19 Variable atomic distribution (3-zone PMP) ..................................................................................................... 209
Figure 7-20 Variable atomic ratio ....................................................................................................................................... 211
Figure 7-21 variable atomic ratio ........................................................................................................................................ 212
Figure 7-22 Variable atomic ratio ....................................................................................................................................... 212
Figure 7-23 Variable atomic ratio 400, 635 ........................................................................................................................ 213
Figure 7-24 Variable atomic ratio 500, 570 ........................................................................................................................ 213
Figure 8-1 ENDF/B-VII 20-group cross-sections of U235 .................................................................................................... 224
Figure 8-2 ENDF/B-VII 20 group cross-sections of U235..................................................................................................... 225
Figure 8-3 ENDF/B-VII 20-group cross-sections of U238 .................................................................................................... 225
Figure 8-4 ENDF/B-VII Fission cross-sections of U235 and U238........................................................................................ 226
Figure 8-5 Difference in ENDF/B-VII total cross-sections of U235 and U238 .................................................................... 226
Figure 8-6 Neutrons sampled as a function of number of neutrons emerging from fission .............................................. 227
Figure 8-7 Watt fission spectrum (a=0.7, b=1) ................................................................................................................... 228
Figure 8-8 Sampled Watt fission spectrum (a=0.7, b=1, N=100000) .................................................................................. 228
Figure 8-9 Sampled Watt fission spectrum (a=0.7, b=1, N=100000) .................................................................................. 229
Figure 8-10 Watt spectrum and sampled spectrum (a=0.7, b=1, N=100000) .................................................................... 229
Figure 8-11 keff for 100 neutrons, 20 generations .............................................................................................................. 231
Figure 8-12 keff for 50 neutrons, 30 generations................................................................................................................ 231
Figure 8-13 keff for 50 neutrons, 40 generations................................................................................................................. 232
Figure 8-14 keff for 10% perturbation in material density ................................................................................................... 232
Figure 8-15 keff for 90% enrichment.................................................................................................................................... 233
Figure 8-16 MC results for a one-group Godiva simulation................................................................................................ 234
Figure 8-17 MC one-group Godiva relative error ............................................................................................................... 235
Figure 8-18 Three histories for a point isotropic source at center of a non-multiplying sphere........................................ 237
Figure 8-19 Monte Carlo flux in a finite sphere .................................................................................................................. 244
Figure 9-1 Flux (exact solution) in slabs of Al, Fe, U, Au, B and Gd..................................................................................... 258
Figure 9-2 One-speed flux in an infinite medium (Ganapol) .............................................................................................. 259
Figure 9-3 One-speed flux in a 1-D slab .............................................................................................................................. 260
Figure 9-4 One speed flux in a 1-D slab (high-c media) ...................................................................................................... 260
Figure 9-5 One-speed flux in 1-D slab (DT vs P1) ................................................................................................................ 261
Figure 9-6 One-speed flux in Gd: DT, P1 and P2 comparisons............................................................................................ 261
Figure 9-7 Collision density due to a mono-directional point source incident from left.................................................... 262
xiv
Figure 9-8 Comparison of collision density: Monte Carlo vs Diffusion Theory ................................................................... 263
Figure 9-9 Collision density: MC (1000X5) vs Diffusion Theory in an Fe cube .................................................................... 264
Figure 9-10 Collision density: MC(2000X5) vs Diffusion Theory in an Fe cube ................................................................... 264
Figure 9-11 Collision density: MC(1000X5) vs DiffusionTheory in a Boron cube................................................................ 265
Figure 9-12 Flux estimates: Diffusion and Transport comparisons .................................................................................... 265
Figure 9-13. Transport Theory flux ..................................................................................................................................... 267
Figure 9-14. Diffusion Theory flux....................................................................................................................................... 269
Figure 9-15. Diffusion theory in a finite sphere .................................................................................................................. 270
Figure 9-16. Transport and Diffusion fluxes........................................................................................................................ 272
Figure 9-17 Ratio of Transport to Diffusion Flux ................................................................................................................. 273
Figure 9-18 MC flux vs Diffusion flux in a 10-equivolume sphere ...................................................................................... 274
Figure 9-19 Neutron flux MC TLE compared with Diffusion Theory in 30 equi-volume regions of aluminum .................. 275
Figure 9-20 Monte Carlo compared with Transport Theory (infinite medium) and Diffusion Theory ............................... 276
Figure 9-21 Transport Theory (asymptotic) compared with Diffusion Theory ................................................................... 277
Figure 9-22 Ratio of asymptotic transport flux to diffusion flux......................................................................................... 277
Figure 9-23 Kullback Leibler Divergence vs Sample Size N for 10 spatial bins.................................................................... 280
Figure 10-1 keff in a Godiva sphere .................................................................................................................................... 284
Figure 10-2 Flux in a Godiva sphere .................................................................................................................................... 284
Figure 10-3 UO2 sphere 70% enriched, den=10.9 g/cm3 , radius 200 kg ........................................................................... 285
Figure 10-4 Flux in a bare UO2 sphere ............................................................................................................................... 286
Figure 10-5 Flux in a UO2 sphere (in xy plane at z=0) ........................................................................................................ 286
Figure 10-6 Hexagonal array of fuel assemblies in a reactor core ...................................................................................... 287
Figure 10-7 A typical PWR fuel assembly ............................................................................................................................ 292
Figure 10-8 A 3X3 assembly ................................................................................................................................................ 293
Figure 10-9 Collision estimate of
.................................................................................................................................. 295
Figure 10-10 FOM of average
...................................................................................................................................... 296
Figure 10-11 Neutron flux in a 3X3 PWR pin cell ................................................................................................................ 297
Figure 10-12 Neutron flux in a 3X3 PWR pin cell (xy plane) ............................................................................................... 297
Figure 10-13 Effect of perturbation in material density ..................................................................................................... 299
Figure 10-14 Perturbation estimates using derivative sampling and one-group diffusion ................................................ 301
Figure 10-15 Perturbation estimates for J .......................................................................................................................... 302
Figure 10-16 4S-type core arrangement ............................................................................................................................. 302
xv
Notation
lethargy
direction cosine in
speed
extrapolation distance
direction cosine in
track length
fission
statistical weight
zo
extrapolation distance
distribution function
area
distribution function
buckling
Boltzmann constant
material buckling
geometrical buckling
unit vector
slowing-down density
collision operator
diffusion coefficient
scattering
time
derivative operator
energy
energy recoverable from fission
cumulative distribution function
entropy
Chandrasekhars function
diffusion time
moderation time
direction
Kullback-Leibler divergence
position vector
direction
joule
neutron current
Bessel function of the first kind
quality factor
kelvin
reaction rate
extrapolated radius
diffusion length
source
integro-differential operator
entropy
operator
temperature
atomic mass
transport operator
internal energy
no. of neutrons
volume
VCM
number density
Watt
random variable
spherical harmonics
Avogadros Number
P
phase space
probability
probability
atomic number
Greek (lower-case)
alpha radiation
beta radiation
Legendre polynomial
gamma radiation
17
delta function
fast fission factor
eta: neutrons emitted per neutron absorbed
Greek (upper-case)
orthogonal angle
neutron current
Hamiltonian
macroscopic cross-section
Lagrange multiplier
random number
auxiliary functions
solid angle
density
microscopic cross-section
Other Abbreviations
standard deviation
CFR
variance
eV
electron volt
neutron age
ENDF
azimuthal angle
Gy
neutron flux
Rad
Rem
complimentary solution
Sv
Sievert
particular solution
fission spectrum
collision density
eigenfunction
18
defined as 1/12th the mass of an unbound carbon C12 atom. Let us consider all atoms to have a relative mass
Essentially then, neutron transport takes place in matter as neutrons go about interacting with atoms which can be as light
as hydrogen (A~1) on one end, to heavy atoms such as uranium (A~238). Within the nucleus, the nucleons (neutrons are
protons) pair up with opposite spins and thus are bound inside. The binding energy is the difference between the massenergy of constituent nucleons
a tritium nucleus,
3
1,
.5
i.e. 1 proton and 2 neutrons, is calculated from the difference between its mass-energy of constituent
nucleons [ .0078 5
9
809.450575
.008665 ]9
.5
8 7.9
88 5
.0 6050
, i.e., 8.4813 MeV. An often quoted figure is the average binding energy per nucleon
which in this case is 2.81 MeV/nucleon. Nuclei, like electrons, have excited states and decay by emitting alpha, beta or
gamma radiation. Finally, neutrons can have a number of reactions with nuclei two important ones being fission, which is
the breaking-up of heavy nuclei into lighter nuclei, and fusion which is the fusing or joining of light nuclei into heavy
nuclei. Both these reactions make the system move towards an increase in the binding energy per nucleon and are
19
The methods considered in the following chapters will give the reader a capability will be developed to carry out detailed
whole-core computations and determine the neutron flux, the subsequent reactor power, fuel arrangement, and related
nuclear reactor design parameters.
References
1. Cacuci, D.G., Editor, Handbook of Nuclear Engineering, Nuclear Engineering Fundamentals, Springer Science
and Business Media LLC2010.
2. Cullen, D.E., Brown, P., Lent, E., MacFarlane, R., McKinley, S., Criticality Calculations using LANL and LLNL
Neutron Transport Codes, UCRL-TR, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2007.
3. Duderstadt, J. J. and Hamilton, L. J., Nuclear Reactor Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, 1976.
4. Etherington, H., Editor, Nuclear Engineering Handbook, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1958.
5.
Gantayet, L. M., Editor, BARC Highlights, Chemical Sciences and Engineering, Bhabha Atomic Research
Centre, Mumbai, India. http://www.barc.gov.in/publications/eb/golden/chemical/toc/chapter6/6_3.pdf
6. Glasstone, S. and Sesonske, A., Nuclear Reactor Engineering, Princeton, N.J., Van Nostrand, 1963.
7. Harmon, C.D. II, Busch, R D., Briesmeister, J. F., and Forster, R. A., Mendius, P. W., Ed., LA-12827-M Manual,
Criticality Calculations with MCNPTM: A Primer, Los Alamos National Laboratory, UC-714, Issued: August
1994.
8. Henry, A. F., Nuclear Reactor Analysis, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1975.
9. Isbin, H.S., Introductory Nuclear Reactor Theory, New York: Reinhold, 1963.
10. Lamarsh, J.R. and Baratta, A. J., Introduction to Nuclear Engineering, 3rd Ed., Prentice Hall, 2001.
11. Lamarsh, J. R., Introduction to Nuclear Reactor Theory, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1972.
12. Lewis, E.E., Fundamentals of Nuclear Reactor Physics, Academic Press, 2008.
13. Murray, R.L., Introduction to Nuclear Engineering, 2nd Ed., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1961.
14. Reuss, P., Neutron Physics, EDP Sciences, 2008.
15. Stacey,W.M., Nuclear Reactor Physics, John Wiley & Sons, 2001.
31
16. Stephenson, R., Introduction to Nuclear Engineering, 2nd Ed., New York: McGraw-Hill, 1958.
17. Shultis, J. K., and Faw, R. E., Fundamentals of Nuclear Science and Engineering, 2nd Edition, CRC Press/Taylor
& Francis, 2008.
18. Weinberg, A.M., and Wigner, E.P., The Physical Theory of Neutron Chain Reactors, Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1958.
19. National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory, http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/exfor/endf11.jsp
20. Encyclopdia Britannica Online, s. v. "nuclear reactor", accessed March 31, 2013,
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/421763/nuclear-reactor/45774/Coolant-system.
21. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), U.S. Department of Commerce,
http://www.physics.nist.gov/cgi-
bin/Star/compos.pl?matno=121
Problems
1. Given atomic fractions: U234 (0.0057%), U235(0.72%), and U238(99.27%), find the average atomic weight and the
corresponding weight percentages
2. Calculate atomic densities for the following:
and atomic fractions U238 0.992745 U235 0.007200.
c) Given the following data for the fast critical assemblies Godiva, Jezebel and Jezebel23 (Cullen et al,
2007) determine the weight fractions of each of the materials listed.
Model
Godiva
Jezebel
Jezebel23
Radius (cm)
8.7407
6.3849
5.9838
Density (g/cm3)
18.74
15.61
18.424
32
Composition
U235
4.4994e-2
Pu239
3.7047e-2
U233
4.6712e-2
(atoms/barn-cm)
U238
2.4984e-3
Pu240
1.7512e-3
U234
5.9026e-4
U234
4.9184e-4
Pu241
1.1674e-4
U238
2.8561e-4
Ga69
8.26605e-4
U235
1.4281e-5
Ga71
5.48595e-4
Mass (g)
52419.98
17019.77
16534.98
0.118055 and
0.881945
(weight fraction
=0.782610,
=0.02205,
=0.08875, N(C)=0.0277
6. Find the atomic densities in a solution of UO2F2 with a uranium enrichment of 5%, density of U235 of 0.04 g/cc
and a given ration of hydrogen to fissile atoms (H/X) of 500.U(4.89)O2F2 solution N235=1.0889e-4,
N238=2.0909e-3, Nf=4.3996e-3, Nh=5.7058e-2, No=3.2929e-2, Ntotal=9.6586e-2
7. Calculate the atomic densities in the following structural materials
a) stainless steel consisting of Fe with 18% chromium by weight, 8% nickel and 0.08% carbon, find the
atomic densities.
33
. Compare this with the corresponding mean free path for a thermal neutron for which
What possible use of boron could this have for a nuclear reactor?
11. For the reactor of Example 1.7, find the infinite multiplication
assuming that
, so that
for a
fuel to moderator mass fraction 1:80. Now determine the concentration of normal enrichment B4C (
,
34
2 Preliminaries: Mathematical
Foundations
2.1 Introduction
This chapter reviews the mathematical foundations and knowledge required for understanding the formulation,
performing a simulation, and coding for numerical implementation of problems in nuclear engineering. The material is
presented in the following order: general mathematics, mathematics specific to the neutron diffusion and transport
equations followed by mathematics, including probability and statistics, for Monte Carlo simulation. The purpose is,
again, to provide a comprehensive review of the mathematics applicable to nuclear engineering, usually spread over
different subjects, in one resource available for study before or during the phase when problems are encountered.
Neutron diffusion and transport can be expressed by ordinary differential equations, partial differential equations, integral
equations and integro-differential equations. We therefore discuss underlying solution techniques which will be used in
later chapters.
order where the order represents the order of the higher derivative of the dependent variable with respect to the
independent variable. It can be shown that
are easily cast as state-space equations amenable to standard algebraic methods of linear algebra.
The formulation of neutron diffusion can be expressed in the form of a second-order ordinary differential equation under a
set of assumptions which we will examine in a later chapter on diffusion. Let us therefore review a method of obtaining an
exact solution of a simple form of such an equation: the linear non-homogeneous form
35
(2.1)
Eq. (2.1) also represents the 1-D motion in the mass-spring-damper problem, when
and
represents time , where the restoring force of the spring is represented by Hookes Law and an external time-
dependent force
from
(2.2)
Thus, in operator form
(
(2.3)
. For roots
, the solution is
(2.4)
The solutions can thus be obtained after the usual factoring and algebraic manipulation. Constants in the solutions can
then be determined from the given boundary conditions which can be Dirichlet (with the dependent variable specified on
the boundaries), Neumann (with the normal derivative specified on the boundaries) or mixed Cauchy boundary
conditions.
Exercise 2.1
Find the exact solution of the equation
36
emitting neutrons cm-2 s-1 With the boundary conditions: (i) Dirichlet b.c: finite flux
/ ;
). Answer:
/ ;
homogeneous equation
(
The roots are
)(
[
(
]
)
and expressed as
[(
Now expanding (
( )
) ]
, gives
osh
and the coefficients
sinh
can be found from the boundary conditions. Using the boundary conditions gives
| | /
sinh[
osh[ ]
A second-order PDE
at a point
respectively.
The solution procedure is usually to convert PDEs to ODEs and then solved to obtain exact analytical solutions where
possible, or a system of algebraic equations
force vector. The solution is thus obtained, from standard numerical techniques, such as Gaussian elimination, GaussSiedel iterative methods, LU decomposition methods etc., by inversion of the matrix giving
where
(2.5)
. A solution for this can be obtained by multiplying both sides by the integration factor
38
(2.6)
where , a constant of integration, can be obtained from the given boundary condition.
Exercise 2.2
Using the classification criterion specified above, we can classify the PDE:
with
; thus
, and the equation, which will be introduced in the following chapter as the
time-dependent neutron diffusion equation, is a parabolic PDE. This implies a certain kind of boundary conditions: a
Dirichlet or Neumann b.c. on an open surface, to be specified for a stable solution. Similarly, elliptic PDEs require
Dirichlet or Neumann boundary conditions on a closed surface surrounding the region of interest, while hyperbolic PDEs
require Cauchy boundary conditions on an open surface.
39
Classification
Equation
Homogeneous/
Fredholm/Volterra
Type I/II
Inhomogeneous
Fredholm
Homogeneous
Fredholm
Homogeneous
II
Fredholm
Inhomogeneous
II
Volterra
Homogeneous
Volterra
Homogeneous
II
Volterra
Inhomogeneous
II
40
is called the kernel of the integral operator. One way of solving integral equations is by
by
differentiating w.r.t .
ii-
iii-
equation which will be used in a later chapter. How would you classify this equation?
(2.7)
When this equation is integrated over , the equation can be written in operator form as
(2.8)
where
(2.8a)
and
41
30
25
20
15
10
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
, the maximum volume, and twice the maximum volume. We see the volume contours shift towards the
right touching each other tangentially at the optimal value for the height for which the difference in the two values
goes to zero at the optimal radius. This represents the geometrical interpretation of the Lagrange multiplier as the
point where both volume and surface area contours are tangential to each other.
81
Height (cm)
20
15
Area constraint
V = 0.5Vo
10
V= V
V = 2Vo
5
0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.2
Radius (cm)
HV-HA
10
10
10
-5
X
10
-10
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Radius (cm)
Figure 2-23 Area constraint for A=10 cm^2 and Volume contours
( )
( )
82
( )
( )
is the adjoint neutron flux and is also called the importance function. For a critical reactor the
(2-57)
where u and v are any two functions which vanish at the physical boundaries. The above is also written in the form of an
inner product as
(
(2-58)
(2-59)
or equivalently as
For the second-order diffusion operator given in Eq,(2-x), it is readily shown, by carrying out an integration by parts,
that the operator is self-adjoint, i.e.
83
The solutions,
( )
(2-60)
( ), to both the forward and backward homogeneous equations respectively, are thus
References
1. Abramowitz, M., and Irene A. Stegun, I.A., Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs and
Mathematical Tables, Dover Publications, New York, 1972.
2. Bell, G. I. and Glasstone S., Nuclear Reactor Theory, Robert E. Kreiger Publishing Company, New York, 1979.
3. Brown, F. B., A Review of Monte Carlo Criticality Calculations Convergence, Bias, Statistics, International
Conference on Mathematics, Computational Methods & Reactor Physics (M&C 2009), Saratoga Springs, New
Your, May 3-7, 2009.
4. Densmore, J. D., and Edward W. Larsen, E. W., Variational Variance Reduction for Criticality Calculations
using Monte Carlo Adjoint Fluxes, Nuclear Mathematical and Computational Sciences: A Century in Review, A
Century Anew, Gatlinburg, Tennessee, April 6-11, 2003.
5. Duderstadt J. J. and Hamilton, L. J., Nuclear Reactor Analysis , John Wiley & Sons, 1976..
6. Henry, A. F., Nuclear Reactor Analysis, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1975.
7. Kroese, D. P., Cross-Entropy Method, University of Queensland, Australia. kroese@maths.uq.edu.au
8. Lamarsh, J. R., Introduction to Nuclear Reactor Theory, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1972.
9. Lewis, R. W., Nithiarasu P., and Seetharamu, K. N., Fundamentals of the Finite Element Method for Heat and
Fluid Flow, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2004.
10. Lux, I., and Koblinger, L., Monte Carlo Particle Transport Methods: Neutron and Photon Calculations, CRC
Press, Inc., 1991.
11. Shi, Bo., Entropy-based Diagnostics of Criticality Monte Carlo Simulation and Higher Eigenmode Acceleration
Methodology, M.S. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, August 2010.
84
12. Stone, M., and Goldbart, P., Mathematics for Physics I, Pimander-Casaubon, 2000-2008.
13. Ueki, T., and Brown, F.B., Stationarity and Source Convergence Diagnostics in Monte Carlo Criticality
Calculation, Nuclear Mathematical and Computational Sciences: A Century in Review, A Century Anew,
Gatlinburg, Tennessee, April 6-11, 2003.
Problems
with
as the pdf.
with g=20, c=1, So=1, p=100 to
( )(
) in the range (
).
85
86
( )
( )
(3.1)
Using a Taylor series first-order expansion for the current, we can write
(3.2)
( )
( )
(3.3)
( )
( )
(3.4)
( )
87
88
Table 3.1 Diffusion Theory neutron flux for some simple cases
Geometry
Medium
Source
Planar source at
Infinite
emitting
neutrons cm-
2 -1
Planar source at
(in y and z)
emitting
2 -1
/
)
Uniformly distributed
of thickness
sources emitting
-3 -1
neutrons cm s
Infinite
Source-free,
critical slab
reactor of
is the energy
cosh[
( )
cosh /
)
cosh (
)
at
cos
( )
at
recoverable from
fission (200 MeV)
(
Source-free,
Bare cubical
| |)/
si h[(
thickness
( )
lim ( )
Source condition
Infinite slab
and
( )
neutrons cm-
Slab
Source condition
Infinite slab
Flux
Finite flux ( )
lim ( )
of thickness
Boundary conditions
reactor of
is the energy
sides
recoverable from
at
( )
cos
cos
cos
Sphere
Infinite
Finite flux ()
at
Source condition
emitting
neutrons s-1
lim
()
4 ( )
89
Bare
spherical
reactor of
radius
Source-free,
is the reactor power,
is the energy
Finite flux ()
()
and ( )
si
recoverable from
fission (200 MeV)
()
Finite flux ()
at
emitting
neutrons s-1
Uniformly distributed
Finite sphere
sources emitting
of radius
and ( )
Finite flux ()
si h (
4
()
si h (
si h
)
si h (
)
and ( )
Cylinder
cylinder
Finite flux ()
Bare critical reactor
and ( )
()
90
Example 3.1 In a graphite slab of thickness 2a in the x-direction and infinite in the y and z directions, with uniformly
distributed sources emitting
()
cosh /
)
cosh (
)
Obtain an expression for the current density in the slab and calculate the escape probability for a slab of thickness 1 mean
free path.
The current density (Eq. 1.12) is obtained by Ficks Law:
si h
cosh (
)
( )
( )
from which the escape probability () is the fraction of neutrons leaking out of the system across the surface
()
( )
si h
cosh (
)
(for
).
91
of graphite:
oms cm
cm
4
(
cm
)
cm
These are used to find the diffusion coefficient and the diffusion length:
1
diffusion coefficient
1
(
diffusion length
cm
4 cm
and
extrapolation distance
cm
The mean free path , though not required in this example, is also determined:
1
cm
For a graphite slab of thickness 1 mean free path, the escape probability is thus
si h
cosh (
)
4 si h
cosh
4
4
92
Thus in this case there is a 99.85% probability that a neutron will escape from the surfaces. Figure 3.2 shows the escape
probability in the above graphite slab as a function of its thickness. The probability is high since graphite is a weak
absorber and is thus used for moderating neutrons in a reactor.
1
0.9
Escape Probability
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
10
20
30
40
50
60
Thickness (mfp)
70
80
90
100
Exercise 3.1
Using the data in Table 3-2 (Lamarsh and Baratta, p.254), and referring to Example 5.6 (Lamarsh and Baratta, p.255) fill
in the columns for thermal neutron flux (
neutrons/s and the permissible time a radiation worker may remain at this point if the maximum permissible dose
93
(100 mrems/week) is not to be exceeded. Assume that a thermal flux of 260 neutrons cm-2 s-1 gives 1 mrem hour-1. How
would the permissible time change if the incident flux consisted of fast (
) neutrons?
Table 3.2 Thermal data (at 20 C) for Diffusion Theory neutron flux: Infinite Medium calculation
Density
g cm
cm
cm
1.00
0.16
0.0197
2.85
1.10
0.87
9.3 X 10-5
97
1.85
0.50
1.04 X 10-3
21
1.60
0.84
2.4 X 10-4
59
Moderator
Graphite
*
cm
( )
with
for
and
for
)( )( )
)( ) ( )
1/
, the diffusion
(3.5)
is
94
(3.5a)
The flux can be obtained by solving Eq. 3.5 and applying the appropriate boundary conditions. For a bare sphere, the flux
is
()
si
(3.6)
Example 3.2 Consider a spherical reactor of radius R=8.7407 cm operating at a power of 100 W. Find the constant A in
the expression for thermal flux (Eq.3.6).
Use the data:
cm
4(
11
and since
the flux is
()
11
si
The flux thus has a magnitude determined by the operating power and a shape determined by the buckling, or the
curvature. Figure 3.2 shows the neutron flux in this reactor for two operating powers 100 Watts and 200 Watts; the higher
95
magnitude clearly corresponds to the higher power while the shape is the same. It is important to note that the flux is finite
at the surface and vanishes at the extrapolated boundary which in this case is at r = 9.7619 cm.
10
x 10
10
8
Power 200 W
7
6
5
4
Power 100 W
3
2
1
0
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Radius (cm)
10
(3.7)
( )
(3.7a)
(3.7b)
This expression, simple as it is, can be used to gain considerable insight into a simplified reactor core design which is
demonstrated in the following example.
96
Sinks
Cell
Total In
Total Out
1.0000
0.1467
0.8533
1.0000
0.8533
0.8533
0.0590
0.7943
0.8533
0.7943
0.7943
0.0411
0.7532
0.7943
0.7532
0.7532
0.0317
0.7215
0.7532
0.7215
0.7215
0.0256
0.6958
0.7215
0.6958
0.6958
0.0213
0.6745
0.6958
0.6745
0.6745
0.0181
0.6564
0.6745
0.6564
0.6564
0.0155
0.6409
0.6564
0.6409
0.6409
0.0134
0.6276
0.6409
10
0.6276
0.6276
0.0116
0.6160
0.6276
279
10
-1
Bins=10
-2
D(g||h)
10
10
10
-3
-4
10
10
10
10
10
Figure 9-23 Kullback Leibler Divergence vs Sample Size N for 10 spatial bins
References
1. Bell, G. I. and Glasstone S., Nuclear Reactor Theory, Robert E. Kreiger Publishing Company,
New York, 1979.
2. Clark, M, Jr., and Hansen, K. F., Numerical Methods of Reactor Analysis, Academic Press, 1964.
3. Ganapol, B. D. and Parsons, D. K., A heterogeneous medium analytical benchmark, Los
Alamos National Laboratory, 2008.
4. Ganapol, B. D., Analytical benchmarks for nuclear engineering applications Case studies in
neutron transport theory, Nuclear Energy Agency, NEA/DB/DOC (2008)1, OECD 2008.
280
5. Henry, A. F., Nuclear Reactor Analysis, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1975.
6. Lamarsh, J. R., Introduction to Nuclear Reactor Theory, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,
1972.
Problems
1.
In section 9.1 the eigenvalues are defined by the transcendental equation (Eq. 9.3a). Calculate for
= 1.0, 1.2, 1.4 and comment on the eigenfunctions.
2.
Repeat the analysis for Fig. 9.17 using values of for = 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 and comment on your results,
especially in the limits of low c and the case c=1.
3.
Repeat the Kullback-Leibler Divergence estimates given in Fig. 9.23 for the number of bins varying from 2
to 20 and comment on the convergence.
281
Applications
10.1 Introduction
This chapter considers full-scale state-of-the-art computation used for the simulation of nuclear systems
including essentially nuclear criticality systems and nuclear reactor core analyses.
While diffusion theory (Chapter 3) presented a somewhat simplistic modeling of neutron transport it was
useful to enable simple solutions which revealed considerable detail of the neutron flux and subsequent
reaction rates in idealized geometries and collision models. A better representation was the Boltzmann
formulation of the neutron transport equation (Chapter 4) which incorporated a higher level of
mathematical complexity but provided far more accurate results than the diffusion model, although in
idealized geometry. It was however an elegant formalism which stands to this day in spite of the
computational capability that enables full-scale modeling of real engineering systems.
It was then seen that numerical methods such as finite-difference and finite-element methods enabled
more modeling detail to be considered. That was called the deterministic approach in contrast to the
stochastic Monte Carlo approach which was seen to be far stronger in terms of more realistic modeling
of the underlying physics as well as the engineering design of systems.
The state-of-the-art in nuclear engineering thus recognizes Monte Carlo to be one of the best available
tools for the design and performance analysis of operational nuclear systems. And, in that domain, it is the
MCNP code of Los Alamos National Laboratory, which over several decades of continuous
improvement, based on very detailed experimentally obtained and validated nuclear cross-section data, is
extensively quoted as the most reliable code in neutronics extending into radiation physics, medical
282
imaging, oil-well logging and a number of other derivative areas. Several other codes were discussed in
chapter 6.
The underlying mathematics of the Monte Carlo methods was reviewed in Chapter 2 and simple
applications were demonstrated in chapter 8. A unified picture of neutron transport modeling, covering
deterministic and stochastic approaches, was given in chapter 9. The analyses were restricted to simplified
modeling and geometry to highlight the theoretical foundations. Real-life problems are complex in several
ways and require sufficiently realistic modeling to give useful results. This level of modeling is provided
by MCNP which will be used in this chapter to demonstrate practical applications.
The problems considered for demonstration are the Godiva assembly discussed in previous chapters, a
Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) core with a standard 17X17 fuel assembly, and nuclear criticality
safety assemblies. All validations of results presented in earlier chapters can easily be carried out as will
be shown for the case of simplified one region problem that was used in previous chapters to compare
diffusion, transport, and simple Monte Carlo analyses.
and flux
are shown in Figs. 10.1 and 10.2 respectively for a Godiva sphere of
density 18.74 g/cm3 and mass 52.44 kg as given in Section 8.4. The average of the collision, absorption
and track-length estimators for 1000 neutrons per cycle and 1000 cycles
flux is predominantly fast with the average neutron energy of 1.483 MeV for neutrons causing fission.
Of the total fissions, 5.43% fissions were caused by neutrons in the range 0.625 ev- 100 kev and the rest
by neutrons over 100 kev. The average fission neutrons produced per neutron absorbed including capture
and fission was 2.3261 while the average number of neutrons produced per fission was 2.597.
283
x 10
x 10
-3
-3
4.5
6
4
Flux (n/cm2-s)
3.5
2.5
1.5
0
10
5
10
5
Y (cm)
-5
-5
-10
-10
X (cm)
1
0.5
0
For a bare sphere of UO2 of the PWR fuel type, Fig. 10.3 shows the collision estimate for
enriched sphere of density
= 10.
in a 70%
flux in the sphere is shown in Figs. 10.4 and 10.5. The central peaking of the flux is evident, as well as the
finite flux at the boundaries consistent with the exact solutions discussed earlier.
Figure 10-3 UO2 sphere 70% enriched, den=10.9 g/cm3 , radius 200 kg
285
-3
x 10
x 10
-3
2.5
Flux n/cm2
1.5
1.5
1
0.5
0
20
0.5
20
10
0
Y (cm)
-20
-10
-20
0
X (cm)
-3
20
15
x 10
10
1.5
5
0
1
-5
-10
0.5
-15
20
10
-10
-20
-20
y(jset)=A(2,icount);
kset=jset;
z(kset)=A(3,icount); % only one value
flux(iset,jset)=A(4,icount);
error(kset)=A(5,icount); % not used
end
end
for i=1:xsets
for j=1:ysets
fprintf (gid,'\n %6.3f %6.3f %6.3f %12.4e
%12.4e',x(i),y(j),z(j),flux(i,j),error(j));
end
end
surf(x,y,flux);
fclose(fid);
fclose(gid);
361
Zafar ullah Koreshi [B.Sc.(Hons), Nuc. Engg., M.S., Nuc.Engg., Ph.D. Nuc.
Engg] is Professor and Dean, Faculty of Engineering, Air University,
Islamabad. With a cumulative research, industrial and academic experience of
about 30 years, Dr Koreshi has remained involved with a diverse engineering
profession spanning nuclear engineering, mechanical engineering, and more
recently inter-disciplinary mechatronics engineering.
His research work has been in Monte Carlo simulation for neutron transport
with applications in nuclear systems, in mechanical engineering areas covering process simulation with applications
in solar thermal energy storage for small power plants, and more recently in the optimal control of mobile robots.
Dr Koreshi has had a long association with the International Conference on Nuclear Engineering (ICONE) hosted
jointly by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Chinese Nuclear Society (CNS), and the
Japanese Nuclear Society (JNS). He has also been co-Chair of Track 14: Reactor Physics, Neutronics and
Computations Sessions of ICONE-19 (held in Japan) , ICONE-20 (held in USA), ICONE-21 (Chengdu, China) and
is Track Co-Chair for Track 11, ICONE-22 held in July 2014 in Prague, Czech Republic.
Dr Koreshi is life member of the Pakistan Nuclear Society, member of the Pakistan Engineering Council (NUC-05),
and member of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
362