COUPLED THERMAL HYDRAULICS/NEUTRONICS

ANALYSIS OF NUCLEAR REACTORS

NKLEER REAKTRLERN TERMAL HDROLK VE
NTRONK EZAMANLI ANALZ







SEFA KEMAL UZUN





Submitted to
HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY
THE INSTITUTE FOR GRADUATE STUDIES
IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
NUCLEAR ENGINEERING











2008



To the Directory of the Institute for Graduate Studies in Science and Engineering,

This study has been accepted as a thesis for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE
in NUCLEAR ENGINEERING by our Examining Committee.




Head:
_______________________
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Cemal Niyazi SKMEN


Member :
_______________________
Prof. Dr.Mehmet TOMBAKOLU


Member :
_______________________
Assist. Prof Dr. lker TARI







This is to certify that the Board of Directors of the Institute for Graduate Studies in
Science and Engineering has approved this thesis on //



Prof.Dr...................................
Director
The Institute for Graduate Studies in
Science and Engineering




i

COUPLED THERMAL HYDRAULICS/NEUTRONICS ANALYSIS OF NUCLEAR
REACTORS
Sefa Kemal UZUN
ABSTRACT

Nuclear reactor calculations include two main branches. These are thermal-
hydraulics and neutronics. Coupling of these calculations is important for nuclear
reactor dynamics and safety. In this study, coupled analysis of Pebble Bed Modular
Reactor is considered by using the DONJON code. OECD-PBMR400 cross section
database is used to realize coupling. The database contains temperature dependent
cross section set for defined region wise geometry. Temperatures of regions are
calculated by the thermal module which is embedded in DONJON. With an
Interpolation module cross sections are generated from temperatures. Generated
cross sections are used for neutronics calculations. Neutronics calculations results
gives the power generation for each region in the core and those power generations
are input for thermal module. So totally closed data cycle achieved between the
neutronics and thermal hydraulics modules. Temperature increase in core region
causes decrease of multiplication factor so that the PBMR is a stable nuclear reactor
design for the steady state conditions with the OECD-PBMR400 cross section
database.
Keywords: coupling, neutronics, thermal-hydraulics, PBMR, DONJON
Advisor: Prof. Dr. Cemal Niyazi SKMEN, Hacettepe University, Department of
Nuclear Engineering, Nuclear Engineering Section







ii

NKLEER REAKTRLERN TERMAL HDROLK VE NTRONK EZAMANLI
ANALZI
Sefa Kemal UZUN
Z

Nkleer reaktr hesaplamalar iki ana daldan olumaktadr, bunlar termalhidrolik ve
ntronik hesaplamalardr. Ntronik ve termalhidrolik hesaplamalarn ezamanl
yaplmas nkleer reaktr dinamii ve gvenlii bakmndan nemlidir. Bu almada
akl Yatakl Modler Reaktrn DONJON kodu kullanlarak ezamanl analizi
yaplmtr. Ezamanl hesab gerekletirmek iin OECD-PBMR400 tesir kesiti veri
taban kullanlmtr. Veritaban, blgelere ayrlm geometri iin scakla bal tesir
kesitlerini iermektedir. Blgelerdeki scaklk DONJON kodunun iine gmlen termal
modl tarafndan hesaplanmaktadr. Interpolasyon modl kullanlarak bu
scaklklardan tesir kesitleri retilmektedir. Uretilen tesir kesitleri ntronik
hesaplamalarda kullanlmaktadr. Ntronik hesaplamalarn sonular reaktr
kalbindeki her bir blge iin g retimlerini verir ve bu g retimleri de termal
modln girdi deerlerini oluturur. Bylece ntronik ve termalhidrolik modller
arasnda tamamen kapal bir veri ak dngs salanr. Reaktr kalbindeki scaklk
art arpm faktrnde de sebep olur. Ezamanl analiz sonular da
gstermektedir ki akl Yatakl Modler Reaktr, dzenli hal durumunda ve OECD-
PBMR400 tesir kesitlerine gre duraan bir reaktr tasarmdr.

Anahtar Szckler: ezamanl,ntronik,termalhidrolik,PBMR,DONJON
Danman: Prof.Dr. Cemal Niyazi SKMEN , Hacettepe niversitesi, Nkleer Enerji
Mhendislii Blm, Nkleer Enerji Mhendislii Anabilim Dal





iii



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank my advisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. C. Niyazi SKMEN for his helpful
guidance and endurance. I would also like to thank the committee members, Prof. Dr.
Mehmet TOMBAKOLU, and Assist. Prof. Dr. lker TARI for their valuable
comments. I would also like to thank my managers from General Directorate of
Security, IT Department, and Software Development Section and all members of
Hacettepe University Nuclear Engineering Department.

















iv

CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................... i
Z......................................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................................. iii
CONTENTS......................................................................................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................v
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................... vi
1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1
1.1 Objective of Thesis .......................................................................................................1
1.2 Overview of PBMR......................................................................................................2
1.2.1 Core Specifications of PBMR ................................................................................2
1.2.2 The Specifications of Fuel Sphere (Pebble) ............................................................3
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND of COUPLING............................................................4
2.1 Theory of Neutronics ....................................................................................................4
2.1.1 Multiplication Factor and Criticality.......................................................................4
2.1.2 Main Features of Neutronics ..................................................................................4
2.1.3 Two Group Diffusion Method................................................................................5
2.1.4 Xenon Poisoning....................................................................................................6
2.2 Theory of Thermal Hydraulics ......................................................................................6
2.3 Feedback Effects...........................................................................................................7
2.3.1 Fuel Temperature Coefficient.................................................................................8
2.3.2 Moderator Temperature Coefficient .......................................................................8
2.3.3 Feedback Effects for High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactors....................................8
3. PROBLEM DEFINITION..................................................................................................9
3.1 Problem Setup ..............................................................................................................9
3.1.1 Neutronics Definition.............................................................................................9
3.1.2 Thermal-hydraulics Definition .............................................................................10
3.1.3 Cross Section Tables Definition ...........................................................................12
4. COUPLING WITH DONJON CODE...............................................................................13
4.1 General Aspects of DONJON .....................................................................................13
4.2 Coupling Mechanism..................................................................................................13
5. RESULTS .......................................................................................................................15
5.1 Steady State Neutronics Results..................................................................................15
5.2 Coupled Results..........................................................................................................22
5.2.1 Results with Different Initial Guesses...................................................................30
REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................36
APPENDIX-A......................................................................................................................37







v

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1.1 ............................................................................................................................................. 3
FIGURE 3.1 ............................................................................................................................................. 9
FIGURE 3.2 ........................................................................................................................................... 10
FIGURE 4.1 DATA FLOW SCHEMA OF COUPLING........................................................................... 14
FIGURE 4.2 MODULAR DATA FLOW SCHEMA OF COUPLING ...................................................... 14
FIGURE 5.1 AXIAL POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION...................................................................... 16
FIGURE 5.2 PARTICIPANTS AXIAL POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION.......................................... 16
FIGURE 5.3 RADIAL POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION................................................................... 17
FIGURE 5.4 PARTICIPANTS RADIAL POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION....................................... 17
FIGURE 5.5 RADIAL FAST FLUX DISTRIBUTION.............................................................................. 18
FIGURE 5.6 PARTICIPANTS RADIAL FAST FLUX DISTRIBUTION ................................................. 18
FIGURE 5.7 AXIAL FAST FLUX DISTRIBUTION................................................................................. 19
FIGURE 5.8 PARTICIPANTS AXIAL FAST FLUX DISTRIBUTION..................................................... 19
FIGURE 5.9 RADIAL THERMAL FLUX DISTRIBUTION...................................................................... 20
FIGURE 5.10 PARTICIPANTS RADIAL THERMAL FLUX DISTRIBUTION ....................................... 20
FIGURE 5.11 AXIAL THERMAL FLUX DISTRIBUTION....................................................................... 21
FIGURE 5.12 PARTICIPANTS AXIAL THERMAL FLUX DISTRIBUTION........................................... 21
FIGURE 5.13COUPLED RADIAL FAST FLUX DISTRIBUTION .......................................................... 22
FIGURE 5.14 PARTICIPANTS COUPLED RADIAL FAST FLUX DISTRIBUTION............................. 22
FIGURE 5.15 COUPLED AXIAL FAST FLUX DISTRIBUTION............................................................ 23
FIGURE 5.16 PARTICIPANTS COUPLED AXIAL FAST FLUX DISTRIBUTION ............................... 23
FIGURE 5.17 COUPLED RADIAL THERMAL FLUX DISTRIBUTION ................................................. 24
FIGURE 5.18 PARTICIPANTS COUPLED RADIAL THERMAL FLUX DISTRIBUTION..................... 24
FIGURE 5.19 COUPLED AXIAL THERMAL FLUX DISTRIBUTION.................................................... 25
FIGURE 5.20 PARTICIPANTS COUPLED AXIAL THERMAL FLUX DISTRIBUTION........................ 25
FIGURE 5.21 COUPLED AXIAL TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION .................................................... 26
FIGURE 5.22 PARTICIPANTS AXIAL TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION........................................... 26
FIGURE 5.23 COUPLED RADIAL TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION.................................................. 27
FIGURE 5.24 PARTICIPANTS COUPLED RADIAL TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION .................... 27
FIGURE 5.25 COUPLED AXIAL POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION ................................................. 28
FIGURE 5.26 PARTICIPANTS COUPLED AXIAL POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION .................... 28
FIGURE 5.27 COUPLED RADIAL POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION............................................... 29
FIGURE 5.28 PARTICIPANTS COUPLED RADIAL POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION .................. 29
FIGURE 5.29 MULTIPLICATION FACTOR VS. ITERATION NUMBER OF INITIAL GUESS 1 .......... 30
FIGURE 5.30 MULTIPLICATION FACTOR VS. ITERATION NUMBER OF INITIAL GUESS 2 .......... 30
FIGURE 5.31 MULTIPLICATION FACTOR VS. ITERATION NUMBER OF INITIAL GUESS 3 .......... 31
FIGURE 5.32 MULTIPLICATION FACTOR VS. ITERATION NUMBER OF INITIAL GUESS 4 .......... 31
FIGURE 5.33 CONTOUR PLOT OF FAST FLUX OF PBMR ............................................................... 32
FIGURE 5.34 CONTOUR PLOT OF THERMAL FLUX OF PBMR....................................................... 32
FIGURE 5.35 CONTOUR PLOT OF TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION OF PBMR............................. 33
FIGURE 5.36 CONTOUR PLOT OF XE DISTRIBUTION OF PBMR CORE........................................ 33
FIGURE 5.37 CONTOUR PLOT OF ZERO ITERATION POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION............ 34
FIGURE 5.38 CONTOUR PLOTOF SEVEN ITERATION POWER DENSITY DISTRIBUTION........... 34






vi

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: MAJOR DESIGN AND OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PBMR......................... 2
TABLE 2 RISER PROPERTIES OF PBMR .......................................................................................... 12
TABLE 3 TABLE OF INITIAL GUESS................................................................................................... 30
















1


1. INTRODUCTION

A nuclear reactor design must be reliable, efficient and safe to be an acceptable
design. Design should prove that it includes all of the criteria. Safety assurance of a
reactor is the most important design criteria because historical experiences show that
unsafe reactors cause biting results for all people. To assure the safety of a reactor,
its behaviors should be predictable for expected and unexpected cases. This
requires coupling of all calculations about the reactor. Neutronics and thermal
hydraulics are the main calculations of a reactor design, therefore they should be
coupled. The stability of a reactor depends on the feedback effects of thermal
hydraulics to the neutronics events. Main concern, when sudden temperature
increase occurs in the core of the reactor, how it will effect the power generation of
the reactor. Coupled analysis gives the answer of the question. Furthermore, in the
process of developing a new type reactor like Pebble Bed Modular Reactor, results of
coupled analysis are very important to understand the reactor dynamics. With the
sponsorship of Nuclear Energy Agency of OECD (Organization for Economic Co-
operation and Development) PBMR COUPLED NEUTRONICS/THERMAL
HYDRAULICS TRANSIENT BENCHMARK THE PBMR-400 CORE DESIGN is
prepared to improve coupling methods and to simulate special transient cases of
PBMR. Benchmark definition includes two phases; first phase is about steady state
coupled case of thermal hydraulics/neutronics, and second phase is about some well
defined transient cases of PBMR. Results of the first phase are initial conditions for
transient cases. This study is focused on only steady state coupling case (phase 1)
of the benchmark problem.

1.1 Objective of Thesis

The specific goal of this study is making a coupled steady state analysis of PBMR.
Coupled analysis should give an idea about effects of neutronics to the thermal
hydraulics calculations and vice versa. Another objective of this study is improving a
useful coupling method for next transient cases.
2


1.2 Overview of PBMR

The PBMR is a pebble-type High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactor (HTGR). This
PBMR power plant incorporates a closed cycle primary coolant utilizing helium to
transport heat energy directly from the modular pebble bed reactor to a recuperative
Brayton cycle power conversion unit with a single shaft
turbine/compressor/generator. This replacement of the steam cycle that is common
in present nuclear power plants (NPP) with a direct gas cycle provides the benefits of
simplification and a substantial increase in overall system efficiency and inherent
safety with attendant lowering of capital and operational costs.
Table 1: Major Design and Operating Characteristics of the PBMR
PBMR Characteristics Value
Installed thermal capacity 400 MW(t)
Installed electric capacity 165 MW(e)
Load following capacity 100-40-100%
Availability 95 %
Core Configuration Vertical with fixed centre graphite reflector
Fuel TRISO ceramic coated U-235 in graphite
spheres
Primary coolant Helium
Primary coolant pressure 9 MPa
Moderator Graphite
Core outlet temperature 900 C.
Core inlet temperature 500 C.
Cycle type Direct
Number of circuits 1
Cycle efficiency 41 %
Emergency planning zone 400 meters


1.2.1 Core Specifications of PBMR

An annular core outer diameter 3.7 m and a fixed central reflector with an
outer diameter 2.0 m
An effective cylindrical core height of 11.0 m
3

A graphite side reflector of ~ 90 cm.
Reactivity control system consist 24 partial control rods (12 upper and 12
lower in the side reflector with 6.5 m effective length).
The core contains ~ 452000 fuel spheres or pebbles with a packing fraction
of 0.61.
1.2.2 The Specifications of Fuel Sphere (Pebble)

The uranium loading is 9 g per fuel-sphere with U235 enrichment at 9.6 wt%.
The inner 5 cm of the fuel sphere contains about 15 000 UO
2
TRISO-coated
micro spheres within a graphite matrix and surrounded by an outer graphite
fuel free zone.

Figure 1.1





4

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND of COUPLING

2.1 Theory of Neutronics

2.1.1 Multiplication Factor and Criticality

Nuclear fission is the basic phenomenon of the nuclear reactors. As a nature of
fission reaction, fuel material nucleus absorbs a neutron before fission, and emits
neutrons after fission. Average number of neutrons emitted from fission varies to fuel
material type. This number is at the interval of two and three. Neutrons emitted from
fission slow down (for thermal reactors) and causes other fissions. This is a chain
reaction and multiplication factor is the main indicator of this chain reaction.
Multiplication factor (k) is the ratio of the number of neutrons in one generation to the
number of neutrons in the preceding generation. If k is smaller than 1.0, it means that
number of neutrons is decreasing, so reactor will shut down itself automatically a
period later. If k is greater than 1.0 it means number of neutrons is increasing, so
power will increase exponentially. Consequently, unless multiplication factor is equal
to 1.0, reactor will not work at steady state conditions. This is the criticality condition
which is the basic the design parameter of a nuclear reactor.
2.1.2 Main Features of Neutronics

All of the neutronics equations about nuclear reactors derived from viewpoint of
neutron balance. This means that, number of neutrons generated in a control volume
plus comes in from out of volume should be equal to number of neutrons absorbed in
the volume plus leaks out. Source term for the balance equation comes from the
fission reaction of fuel material. Furthermore, fission cross sections of fissile materials
strongly depend on energy level of neutrons. Another important aspect of neutronics
equations is the scattering of neutrons which causes slowing down of neutrons.
When a neutron collide a nucleus, nucleus can absorb the neutron or scatter an
arbitrary angle. Angular neutron flux may be also important; therefore energy, time,
space and angle dependent neutron balance equation is called neutron transport
equation. Analytical solution of transport equation is very difficult without considering
any simplification. There are various approximations to simplify neutron transport
5
equation. One of these, grouping of neutrons due to energy level is a common and
reasonable approximation to reduce the energy dependence of the equation. Most
useful method to eliminate the angular dependency of the neutron transport
equation is the diffusion approximation. As a result of these approximations neutron
diffusion equation is obtained which is the adequate equation for most of the
neutronics calculations of nuclear reactors. Time dependent one speed diffusion
equation for semi infinite cylindrical geometry is shown at equation 2.1. shows
neutron flux (neutron/cm2/s) as a scalar quantity, D is the diffusion coefficient derived
from neutron transport equation. V is the mean velocity of neutrons, is the number
neutrons released per fission.

1
( , ) ( , ) a f D r t r t
V t

+ =

(2.1)

f
is the macroscopic fission cross section of fuel material.
a
is total macroscopic
absorbtion cross section defined as like following ;

moderator structure coolant fuel
a a a a a
fuel fuel fuel
a f
=
=
+ + +
+
(2.2)
fuel
represents the cross section of radiative capture is a interaction of neutron with
fuel material nuclei. That is nuclei absorbs neutron and emit gamma radiation.

2.1.3 Two Group Diffusion Method

Neutrons traveling in a reactor have energies in a scale of 10 MeV to less than 0.01
eV. To get more realistic results energy dependence must be considered also. By
choosing discrete energy levels (E
0
, E
1
..E
N
), neutrons groups will be determined
between these energy levels. So N number of diffusion equation will be solved for N
group of neutron.
Separating neutrons into two groups (fast and thermal) due to a cut off energy
around 3 eV (for gas cooled reactors) is a reasonable method. So diffusion equation
6
will be solved for fast and thermal groups. Steady state fast and thermal diffusion
equations shown at equations 2.3 and 2.4.

1 1 2
1 1 1 1 1 2 2
1
( ) + = +
r f f
D
k
(2.3)

2 1 2
2 2 2 1 a s
D

+ = (2.4)
Some assumptions considered at the above equations. Thus, there is no up
scattering from thermal to fast group, fission neutrons born in fast group.

1 1
1 2
= +
r s a
(2.5)
2.1.4 Xenon Poisoning

Xenon is the most important fission product which affects the neutron balance of the
reactor because it is a strong neutron absorber. So Xenon concentration must be
considered in the neutronics calculations. Xenon occurs by two mechanisms. One of
these direct from fission reaction xenon yields. The other source term of xenon
comes from decay of iodine. Steady state xenon equilibrium is shown at equation
2.6.

1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
( )( )
( )
f f x I
x a a
Xe


+ +
=
+ +
(2.6)
1
,
2
indicates fast and thermal fluxes,
1
f
and
2
f
denotes the fast and thermal
fission cross sections.
x
,
I
denotes effective fraction of fission products which are
Xe135 and I135.
1
a
,
2
a
denotes the fast and thermal microscopic absorption cross
sections of xenon.
x
indicates the beta decay constant of xenon.
2.2 Theory of Thermal Hydraulics

Universal principals of conservation of energy and conservation of momentum are
also base principals for nuclear reactor thermal hydraulics calculations. Therefore, to

7
get the temperature distribution of the nuclear reactor, solution of heat equation is an
obligation. In this study Pebble Bed Modular Reactor is modeled with solution
coordinate two dimensional cylindrical (r, z) coordinates. This heat equation for the
core region is shown at equation 2.7.


, ,
( )
1
0
r
p f out f in
mc T T
T T
kr k q
r r z z V

| | | |
+ + =
| |

\ \
&
& (2.7)



, ,
( )
p f out f in s lm
mc T T hA T = &
(2.8)



, ,
,
,
( ) ( )
ln
f in f ou t
l m
f in
f ou t
T T T T
T
T T
T T

=
| |
|
|

\
(2.9)

Thus, q& represents the volumetric heat generation rate,
, f out
T ,
, f in
T shows the fluid
(helium) outlet and inlet temperatures. T is the surface temperature the pebbles. m& is
the mass flow rate of the helium,
p
c is the specific heat capacity of helium. Equation
2.8 shows that the energy transported with helium is equal to convective heat
transfer between the fuel pebbles and helium.
lm
T Is the log-mean temperature
difference which is defined at equation 2.9.

2.3 Feedback Effects

The stabilization of nuclear reactors strongly depends on the feedback effects of
thermal-hydraulics calculations. Major feedback effects come from the fuel
temperature coefficient, moderator temperature coefficient and thermal expansion
terms. Unless, total of reactivity feedback terms is not negative, reactor do not
behave stable. The sign of the total reactivity feedback terms may alter according to
the operating conditions.
8


2.3.1 Fuel Temperature Coefficient

Increase of fuel temperature causes decrease of resonance escape probability due
to Doppler broadening. This means that less neutron reach thermal region and cause
fission. So as shown at four factor formula (equation 2.10), decrease of p (resonance
escape probability), reduce the multiplication factor.

k p f

=
(2.10)

2.3.2 Moderator Temperature Coefficient

The moderator temperature variation, affects the multiplication factor with various
mechanisms. Increase of temperature, causes decrease of the moderator density
and also increase the average energy of moderator atoms. These factors hardens
neutron energy spectrum. Another parameter affected by moderator temperature
changes is fuel utilization factor ( f ) but it is not easy to predict the sign and
magnitude of this effect. Moreover, the term predominates depend on the choice of
moderator and of fuel configuration.

2.3.3 Feedback Effects for High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactors

Density changes of the solid moderator with temperature are very small, so
moderator temperature coefficients of solid moderated reactors are less than liquid
moderated reactors. Although moderator temperature coefficient is relatively small in
magnitude, it is positive in sign. It is positive because the fuel loading contains
substantial amounts of uranium-233, a nuclide for which temperature coefficients of
is positive. But this factor may not be detrimental for reactor safety, if the fuel
temperature coefficient is sufficiently negative.
PBMR fuel loading doesnt contain U233 therefore this assures that there is no
prompt positive feedback effect in the core region. Although, because of structure of
9
PBMR, it contains large solid volume so temperature response of the reactor is slow.
After a transient case prompt effects preserves reactor stability but late cooling of the
moderator may bring a positive feedback effect.

3. PROBLEM DEFINITION

3.1 Problem Setup

3.1.1 Neutronics Definition

According to the benchmark definition guide neutronics domain for coupled cases is
given like figure 3.1. The x direction of the figure represents the radial direction, and
the y direction of the figure represents the axial direction. Number 1 regions shows
the centre and side reflectors, number 2 regions shows the control rod, and number 3
region shows the core barrel. Void regions represented with number 0. Core region is
shown 101 to 522. For uncoupled case cross section sets are given according to the
figure 3.2.

Figure 3.1.

10

For uncoupled case simplified cross section database is given according to the figure
3.2

Figure 3.2.

For both uncoupled and coupled cases, linear polynomial elements are used. In
radial direction, 18 regions from center split 4 pieces, 19.th, 20.th regions split 8 and
32 pieces. In axial direction, each region split 8 pieces, except top and bottom
regions split 32 pieces.
3.1.1.1 Boundary Conditions

For radial outer, top and bottom boundaries black condition is given. Black condition
means that, neutrons leaks out from the reactor but there is no neutron flow towards
to the reactor.
3.1.2 Thermal-hydraulics Definition

To get the temperature distribution necessary for this study, T-BED code is used as a
sub module of DONJON code. T-BED code solves the equation 2.7 (heat equation
for 2D cylindrical coordinates) with finite difference method. Convection through the
11
bottom reflector is modeled with average core outlet temperature as temperature of
coolant. Convection through the riser is modeled with average temperature of helium
in the riser. Void model of the core as defined like equation 3.1.

1
1 2
1 2
( ) ( )
(1 exp( )) (1 exp( ))
r r R r
C C
N N

= + +
(3.1)
Where;
1
100 r cm = , 185 R cm = , 0.39

= ,
1 2
1.36 C C = = ,
1 2
5
p
d
N N = = 6
p
d =
cm
The core is divided into 3 regions according to model the void distribution.
0.432 1 1.1417
0.390 1.1417 1.7083
0.436 1.7083 1.85
m r m
m r m
m r m

< <

= < <
`

< <
)

Heat transfer correlation for the heat transfer between helium and pebbles;

( 1 / 3 ) 0 . 5
0 . 3 6 0 . 8 6
1 . 1 8 1 . 0 7
P r P r
1 . 2 7 R e 0 . 0 3 3 R e N u

= +
(3.2)

k
h N u
d
= (3.3)

Effective thermal conductivity of the fuel element and reflector graphite;
21
15 / / 6.09 10
pebble
k W m K = =
21
23 / / 3.09 10
reflector
k W m K = =
Pressure Drop Correlation for Pebble bed core:


2
3
0 . 1
1
2
3 2 0 6
R e R e
( )
1 1
h
p u
d

=
= +

(3.4)

12
The core region has 10 nodes in radial direction and 20 nodes in axial direction. On
this way, there are 10 flow paths within core. There is no advection between
channels. So, mass, momentum and energy interchange of helium between channels
are totally neglected. An initial guess for mass flux distribution and temperature of the
core is assigned. Due to the void and temperature distribution within core, mass flux
of the channels is different. Mass flux distribution is calculated by taking the axial
pressure drop of each channel equal to each other for each step of the iteration.

1 2 1 0
1 2 1 0
. . .
. . .
t o t a l
P P P
m m m m
= = =
= + + + & & & &
(3.5)

3.1.2.1 Flow Parameters and Boundary Conditions

Helium temperature at the riser inlet 488.1 C
Inlet mass flow rate 185.31 kg/s
At the top, bottom and center boundaries adiabatic boundary condition is
applied
At r = 2.75 m convection boundary condition applied with the parameters
h=200W/m
2
K and T= 430 C.
Table 2 Riser Properties of PBMR

Number of Gas Riser in Side
Reflector

36
Radius of Risers
0.085 m
Mean Radius of the Location of the Risers in
the Side Reflector

2.526 m

3.1.3 Cross Section Tables Definition

The benchmark definition includes two cross section databases. One of these
simplified cross section database which is used for only neutronics calculations
(without thermal-hydraulics). The other one contains temperature, xenon and
13
buckling dependent cross section sets. According to the benchmark, sets are
generated from MICROX using the equilibrium core number densities with two
energy groups with a thermal cut-off of 2.38 eV. Cross section sets are given as
region wise as shown in figure 3.1. There are 34 tables for each region. The cross
sections are depending on 5 state parameters. The parameters are fuel temperature,
moderator temperature, fast buckling, thermal buckling and xenon concentration.
Buckling table given at Appendix A, in this study buckling terms assumed constant
for reflector and fuel regions. Fast and thermal buckling is assumed 1E-5, 1E-6. To
generate the cross sections from the tables, interpolation is required. FORTRAN
source code LINT5D.f is given to make linear interpolation on the cross section sets.

4. COUPLING WITH DONJON CODE

4.1 General Aspects of DONJON

DONJON is a neutronics code which is collection of FORTRAN77 modules. It solves
the multigroup neutron diffusion equation by using the finite element method. The
execution of DONJON is controlled by the generalized GAN driver. It is appropriate
for coupling because of modular structure.
4.2 Coupling Mechanism

To achieve the coupling, data transfer between the neutronics and thermal-hydraulics
modules must be acquired. DONJON code has a modular structure and it transfers
the data between modules by using LCM memory objects. LCM memory object can
save output of a module, and also can be input of another module. And also data on
a LCM memory object can be copied another memory object. This structure is very
suitable for coupling. Anyway DONJON includes neutronics modules but thermal-
hydraulics and interpolation modules put in the sources and recompiled. The CLE-
2000 control language allows loops and conditional statements to manage calling of
the modules. Figure 4.1 shows the general coupled data flow and the figure 4.2
shows the detailed data flow between the modules.

14

Figure 4.1. Data Flow Schema of Coupling






Figure 4.2. Modular Data Flow Schema of Coupling




15
THERMA module generates temperature distribution and this data used for cross
section interpolation by DENEME module. Beside temperature distribution for cross
section generation xenon concentration is required. Xenon concentration calculated
from equation 2.6 in the CONSXE module. Interpolated cross sections are used for
solving 2 group neutron diffusion equations in the FLUD module. By using the output
of neutronics calculations power distribution is obtained by OUT module. The power
distribution is also input for the THERMA module. As a result, completely closed data
cycle is designed. To initialize the cycle in the first iteration temperatures read from
an external file.

5. RESULTS

The results are compared with the benchmark participants results to make
validation. And also some extra figures are added to the results understand
coupling effect.

5.1 Steady State Neutronics Results

This part includes results about uncoupled pure neutronics calculations. Simplified
OECD-PBMR400 cross section set is used for this calculation. By taking the
convergence criteria 10
-6
, convergence occurred at 45. iteration.
K-effective = 0.996726 (DONJON)
K-effective = 1.000317 (Benchmark Participants Average).

16
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
AXIAL POSITION(CM)
P
O
W
E
R

D
E
N
S
I
T
Y

(
W
/
C
M
3
)

Figure 5.1. Axial Power Density Distribution


0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
AXIAL POSITION(CM)
P
O
W
E
R

D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
(
W
/
C
M
3
)
Figure 5.2. Participants Axial Power Density Distribution


This axial power density is calculated from average of radial power densities for each
row of core region. Axial power density result of the study fits the benchmark
participants results. Thus, maximum axial power occurs at a location around 350 cm
far from top of top reflector. And it has value approximately 9.5 W/cm3.

17
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
RADIAL POSITION (CM)
P
O
W
E
R

D
E
N
S
I
T
Y

(
W
/
C
M
3
)

Figure 5.3. Radial Power Distribution


3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
RADIAL POSITION(CM)
P
O
W
E
R

D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
(
W
/
C
M
3
)
Figure 5.4. Participants Radial Power Distribution


The radial power density distribution of PBMR core is calculated from average of
axial power densities for each column in PBMR core. Study and benchmark results
looks like same. And also maximum radial power density occurs at r=117 cm and its
value around 5.6 W/cm3.


18

Figure 5.5. Radial Fast Flux Distribution

0
1E+13
2E+13
3E+13
4E+13
5E+13
6E+13
7E+13
8E+13
9E+13
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
RADIAL DISTANCE
F
L
U
X
Figure 5.6. Participants Radial Fast Flux Distribution


Radial flux is calculated from axial average of each column of defined geometry at
figure 3.1 or figure 3.2. Fast flux results are reasonable because source of fast flux is
the fission in the core region. Anyway, fast flux increases in the core region. It has a
maximum value at the radial center of the core.


19

0.00E+00
1.00E+13
2.00E+13
3.00E+13
4.00E+13
5.00E+13
6.00E+13
7.00E+13
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Axial Position(cm)
F
l
u
x
(
n
/
c
m
2
/
s
)

Figure 5.7. Axial Fast Flux Distribution

0.0E+00
1.0E+13
2.0E+13
3.0E+13
4.0E+13
5.0E+13
6.0E+13
7.0E+13
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
AXIAL DISTANCE
F
L
U
X

Figure 5.8. Participants Axial Fast Flux Distribution

Axial fast flux distribution derived from radial average of fast fluxes for each row in
the figure 3.1.
20

Figure 5.9. Radial Thermal Flux Distribution
0
2E+13
4E+13
6E+13
8E+13
1E+14
1.2E+14
1.4E+14
1.6E+14
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
RADIAL DISTANCE
F
L
U
X

Figure 5.10. Participants Radial Thermal Flux Distribution
Radial thermal flux distribution derived from axial average of power densities for each
column in the figure 3.1. Thermal flux decreases in the core region significantly as
expected because fuel material absorbs thermal neutrons via fission reaction. And
also decreases towards to radial outer boundary due to black condition.
21
0.00E+00
2.00E+13
4.00E+13
6.00E+13
8.00E+13
1.00E+14
1.20E+14
1.40E+14
1.60E+14
1.80E+14
2.00E+14
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Axial position(cm)
F
l
u
x
(
n
/
c
m
2
/
s
)

Figure 5.11. Axial Thermal Flux Distribution

0.00E+00
2.00E+13
4.00E+13
6.00E+13
8.00E+13
1.00E+14
1.20E+14
1.40E+14
1.60E+14
1.80E+14
2.00E+14
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
AXIAL DISTANCE
F
L
U
X
Figure 5.12. Participants Axial Thermal Flux Distribution

Axial thermal flux distribution derived from average of radial thermal fluxes for each
row in the figure 3.1.
22


5.2 Coupled Results

Following results are obtained with 7 iterations between thermal hydraulics and
neutronics modules. Multiplication factor is converged to 1.009317. Converged
Average Fuel and Moderator Temperature of the core is 888 K. Participants average
multiplication factor is 1.00099. Participants converged average fuel temperature is
1080 K and average moderator temperature is 1065 K.

0
1E+13
2E+13
3E+13
4E+13
5E+13
6E+13
7E+13
8E+13
9E+13
1E+14
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Radial Position(cm)
F
l
u
x
(
n
/
c
m
2
/
s
)

Figure 5.13. Coupled Radial Fast Flux Distribution

0
1E+13
2E+13
3E+13
4E+13
5E+13
6E+13
7E+13
8E+13
9E+13
1E+14
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
RADIAL DISTANCE (CM)
F
L
U
X

(
n
/
c
m
2
/
s
)
Figure 5.14. Participants Coupled Radial Fast Flux Distribution

23
0.00E+00
1.00E+13
2.00E+13
3.00E+13
4.00E+13
5.00E+13
6.00E+13
7.00E+13
8.00E+13
9.00E+13
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Axial Position(cm)
F
l
u
x
(
n
/
c
m
2
/
s
)

Figure 5.15. Coupled Axial Fast Flux Distribution



Figure 5.16. Participants Coupled Axial Fast Flux Distribution


Studys fast flux distribution is a bit higher than participants around 300 cm below
from top of the reactor. 600 cm below from top of the reactor fast flux of the study
smaller than participants result.
24


0.0E+00
2.0E+13
4.0E+13
6.0E+13
8.0E+13
1.0E+14
1.2E+14
1.4E+14
1.6E+14
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Radial Position(cm)
F
l
u
x
(
n
/
c
m
2
s
)

Figure 5.17. Coupled Radial Thermal Flux Distribution

0
2E+13
4E+13
6E+13
8E+13
1E+14
1.2E+14
1.4E+14
1.6E+14
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
RADIAL DISTANCE (CM)
F
L
U
X

(
n
/
c
m
2
/
s
)
Figure 5.18. Participants Coupled Radial Thermal Flux Distribution


Radial thermal flux doesnt vary for uncoupled and coupled cases and also similar
results obtained with participants despite serious difference between thermal
hydraulics results.
25



0.00E+00
3.00E+13
6.00E+13
9.00E+13
1.20E+14
1.50E+14
1.80E+14
2.10E+14
2.40E+14
-200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Axial Position(cm)
F
l
u
x
(
n
/
c
m
2
/
s
)


Figure 5.19. Coupled Axial Thermal Flux Distribution



Figure 5.20. Participants Coupled Axial Thermal Flux Distribution
Around 300 cm below from top of the reactor thermal flux result of the study higher
than participants results. 800 cm below from top of the reactor lower results obtained
than participants.


26

700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Axial Position
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
K
)

Figure 5.21. Coupled Axial Temperature Distribution

500.00
550.00
600.00
650.00
700.00
750.00
800.00
850.00
900.00
950.00
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
AXIAL DISTANCE FROM TOP (CM)
F
U
E
L

T
E
M
P
.

(

C
)

Figure 5.22. Participants Coupled Axial Fuel Temperature Distribution


A serious difference occurred between temperature distribution result of the study
and participants result. This shows that there is a fault in the thermal hydraulics part
of coupling. The difference between the thermal hydraulics definition of the
benchmark and solution definition of T-BED may be cause of this fault. And also,
some modifications made on the T-BED code to use in the DONJON code. While
changing the code, there may be an error on the code.

27

860
865
870
875
880
885
890
895
900
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Radial Position
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
K
)

Figure 5.23. Coupled Radial Temperature




760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
RADIAL DISTANCE (CM)
F
U
E
L

T
E
M
P
.

(

C
)

Figure 5.24. Participants Coupled Radial Fuel Temperature Distribution


As a result of the fault in the thermal hydraulics module radial temperature
distribution results are completely different.

28
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
axial position(cm)
P
o
w
e
r

D
e
n
s
i
t
y
(
W
/
c
m
3
)
Zero iteration
7 iteration
Zero iteration With Benchmark Temp.

Figure 5.25. Coupled Axial Power Density Distribution



Figure 5.26. Participant's Coupled Axial Power Density Distribution


Figure 5.25 shows that zero iteration (thermal-neutronics) axial power density and
seven iteration (thermal-neutronics) axial power density. At seven iteration power
density a little shifts up at the axial location from 0 to 375 cm. After 375 cm power
density is lower than one iteration power density. And also participant power density
is comparable with power density of the study. With the benchmark temperature
distribution input, power density results are close to the other results.


29

4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9
5.1
5.3
5.5
5.7
100 120 140 160 180 200
radial position(cm)
P
o
w
e
r

D
e
n
s
i
t
y
(
W
/
c
m
3
)
Zero iteration
7 iteration
Zero iteration with Benchmark Temp.


Figure 5.27. Coupled Radial Power Density Distribution

4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9
5.1
5.3
5.5
5.7
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
RADIAL POSITION(CM)
P
O
W
E
R

D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
(
W
/
C
M
3
)

Figure 5.28. Participants Coupled Radial Power Density Distribution


Radial power density doesnt change drastically for uncoupled and coupled cases.
And also zero iteration and seven iteration cases results are close to each other.
Participants radial power density is similar with study results except r=185 cm there
is a small difference between results.






30



5.2.1 Results with Different Initial Guesses

Table 3 Table of Initial Guess

INITIAL
GUESS
NUMBER
AVERAGE FUEL
TEMP.(K)
AVERAGE
MODERATOR
TEMP.(K)
REFLECTOR and
CONTROL ROD
REGION
TEMP.(K)
CORE OUTER
BARREL
TEMP.(K)
Xe
CONCENTRATION
(#/barn-cm)
1 1080 1050 800 600 0
2 680 650 500 400 0
3 1080 1050 800 600 1E-10
4 680 650 500 400 1E-10



1.0016
1.0024
1.0032
1.004
1.0048
1.0056
1.0064
1.0072
1.008
1.0088
1.0096
1.0104
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
ITERATION NUMBER
K
-
E
F
F
E
C
T
I
V
E

figure 5.29. Multiplication Factor vs. Iteration Number of Initial Guess 1


1.008
1.009
1.01
1.011
1.012
1.013
1.014
1.015
1.016
1.017
1.018
1.019
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
ITERATION NUMBER
K
-
E
F
F
E
C
T
I
V
E

figure 5.30. Multiplication Factor vs. Iteration Number of Initial Guess 2


31

0.998
0.999
1
1.001
1.002
1.003
1.004
1.005
1.006
1.007
1.008
1.009
1.01
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
ITERATION NUMBER
K
-
E
F
F
E
C
T
I
V
E

figure 5.31. Multiplication Factor vs. Iteration Number of Initial Guess 3



1.0088
1.0096
1.0104
1.0112
1.012
1.0128
1.0136
1.0144
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
ITERATION NUMBER
K
-
E
F
F
E
C
T
I
V
E

figure 5.32. Multiplication Factor vs. Iteration Number of Initial Guess 4

Starting solution with different initial guesses doesnt affect convergence point of the
multiplication factor. Decreasing of the fuel, moderator and reflector temperature
increases the multiplication factor. The dominant factor increasing the multiplication
factor is the decrease of fuel temperature. Furthermore increase of fuel temperature
decreases the multiplication factor. Xe concentration also is another factor
decreasing the multiplication factor.
32



figure 5.33. Contour Plot of Fast Flux of PBMR




figure 5.34. Contour Plot of Thermal Flux of PBMR


33
Contour plots shows that, thermal and fast flux distributions are as like as expected.
In core region fast flux reaches the maximum value, in the centre reflector region
thermal flux reaches the maximum value. Rectangle in the plot denotes the
boundaries of the PBMR core region.


figure 5.35. Contour Plot of Temperature Distribution of PBMR




figure 5.36. Contour Plot of Xenon Distribution of PBMR Core
34

figure 5.37. Zero iteration Power Density Distribution of PBMR Core


figure 5.38. 7 iteration Power Density Distribution of PBMR Core






35








6. CONCLUSION

The results of the study are commonly concordant with the benchmark participants
results except the thermal results. Temperature values in the core region are
approximately 200 K lower than the participants average. And also multiplication
factor of the study is higher than participants average. Therefore there is a reverse
balance between multiplication factor and temperatures in the core. Results get with
different initial guesses shows that Xe effect on the multiplication factor. There is no
drastic difference between the study and benchmark power densities and fluxes
despite the temperature difference. So temperature dependencies of the cross
sections are small. This means that temperature feedbacks will more effective at fast
transients than slow transients. Consequently, at the steady state conditions
feedback effects are not so important. To make a coupled transient analysis
DONJON may be a good tool for neutronics part of coupled case and also it can
manage the data flow between the thermal hydraulics and neutronics modules.
















36







REFERENCES

OECD/NEA/NSC, PBMR Coupled Neutronics/ Thermal Hydraulics Transient
Benchmark The PBMR-400 Core Design, 20 June 2007

Lewis. E. E, Nuclear Power Reactor Safety, a Wiley-Interscience Publication John
Wiley & Sons (1977), 157-186.

Duderstadt J. James, Hamilton J. Louis, Nuclear Reactor Analysis, John Wiley &
Sons, 569-571.

Reitsma F, Strydom G, Haas J B M De, Ivanov K, Tyobeka B, Mphahlele, Downar T
J, Seker V, Gougar, Da Cruz D. F., Sikik U. E, The PBMR steady-state and coupled
kinetics core thermalhydraulics benchmark test problems

Incropera P. F, DeWITT P. D, Fundamentals of Heat and Mass Transfer, John Wiley
& Sons, 569-571. 382

Roy Robert, Hebert Alain, THE GAN Generalized Driver, Instiute De genie nucleaire
Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, March 2000.

Roy Robert, THE CLE-2000 TOOLBOX, , Instiute De genie nucleaire Ecole
Polytechnique de Montreal, December 1999.

Varin E., Hebert A., Roy R, Koclas J, A User Guide for DONJON Version
3.01,2005/08/15.

Varin E., Hebert A., Data Structures of DONJON VERSION 3.00 rev C 2003/11/28.






37

APPENDIX-A

DETAIL ON OECD-PBMR 400 CROSS SECTION LIBRARY
The ranges chosen for each parameter were selected based on the reactor
conditions for normal operation as well as for accident conditions. The following
values for the 5 state parameters were selected:
Fuel temperature (Doppler temperature): 300K, 800K, 1400K, 2400K
Moderator temperature: 300K, 600K, 800K, 1100K, 1400K, 1800K, 2400K
Xenon concentrations expressed as homogenised concentrations: 0.0 (or very small
1.0E-15), 2.0E-11, 8.0E-10 [#/barn.cm]
Buckling terms: Separate values for fast and thermal buckling and also for fissionable
ana non-fissionable material were defined; 3 values each

FUEL REFLECTOR
Fast Thermal Fast Thermal
-1.0E-04 -2.5E-03 -6.5E-01 - 1.1E-03
1.0E-04 -1.0E-05 -1.0E-04 5.0E-05
4.0E-03 5.0E-03 1.0E-02 1.0E-02

*
********************************
* OECD-PBMR400 *
********************************
*
*
* Each material set has:
*
* - ID number and description in quotes
* - Number of parameters
* - Number of data points for each parameter
*
***************************************************************************
* The first records of the data in each table is the points (or values) of
* all the state parameters specified for the material. The order is
* thus very important. The first four values are fuel temperatures,
* the next seven values are moderator temperatures, the following
* three are the fast buckling, then three thermal bucklings and the
* last three are the Xenon number densities.
*
*
* THE TABLES REFER TO,IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE:
*
* - Diffusion Coefficient Radial, fast group [cm]
* - Diffusion Coefficient Axial, fast group [cm]
* - Macroscopic Transport Corrected Total Cross-section, fast group [cm-1]
* - Macroscopic Absorption Cross-section, fast group [cm-1]
* - Macroscopic Nu-fission Cross-section, fast group [cm-1]
38
* - Macroscopic Fission Cross-section, fast group [cm-1]
* - Macroscopic Scattering Cross-Section from fast(1) to thermal(2) group [cm-1]
* - Inverse velocity, fast group [s.cm-1]
* - Fraction Beta(1) of delayed neutrons, fast group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(2) of delayed neutrons, fast group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(3) of delayed neutrons, fast group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(4) of delayed neutrons, fast group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(5) of delayed neutrons, fast group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(6) of delayed neutrons, fast group [dimensionless]
* - Kappa, Energy release per fission, fast group [MeV]
* - Microscopic Absorption Xenon Cross-section, fast group [cm2]
*
*
* - Diffusion Coefficient Radial, thermal group [cm]
* - Diffusion Coefficient Axial, thermal group [cm]
* - Macroscopic Transport Corrected Total Cross-section, thermal group [cm-1]
* - Macroscopic Absorption Cross-section, thermal group [cm-1]
* - Macroscopic Nufission Cross-section, thermal group [cm-1]
* - Macroscopic Fission Cross-section, thermal group [cm-1]
* - Macroscopic Scattering Cross-Section from thermal(2) to fast(1) group [cm-1]
* - Inverse velocity, thermal group [s.cm-1]
* - Fraction Beta(1) of delayed neutrons, thermal group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(2) of delayed neutrons, thermal group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(3) of delayed neutrons, thermal group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(4) of delayed neutrons, thermal group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(5) of delayed neutrons, thermal group [dimensionless]
* - Fraction Beta(6) of delayed neutrons, thermal group [dimensionless]
* - Kappa, Energy release per fission, thermal group [MeV]
* - Microscopic Absorption Xenon Cross-section, thermal group [cm2]



















39