Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Establishment of DeCART/MIG stochastic sampling code system and Application to UAM and BEAVRS benchmarks

  • Received : 2022.12.15
  • Accepted : 2023.02.17
  • Published : 2023.04.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, a DeCART/MIG uncertainty quantification (UQ) analysis code system with a multicorrelated cross section stochastic sampling (S.S.) module was established and verified through the UAM (Uncertainty Analysis in Modeling) and the BEAVRS (Benchmark for Evaluation And Validation of Reactor Simulations) benchmark calculations. For the S.S. calculations, a sample of 500 DeCART multigroup cross section sets for two major actinides, i.e., 235U and 238U, were generated by the MIG code and covariance data from the ENDF/B-VII.1 evaluated nuclear data library. In the three pin problems (i.e. TMI-1, PB2, and Koz-6) from the UAM benchmark, the uncertainties in kinf by the DeCART/MIG S.S. calculations agreed very well with the sensitivity and uncertainty (S/U) perturbation results by DeCART/MUSAD and the S/U direct subtraction (S/U-DS) results by the DeCART/MIG. From these results, it was concluded that the multi-group cross section sampling module of the MIG code works correctly and accurately. In the BEAVRS whole benchmark problems, the uncertainties in the control rod bank worth, isothermal temperature coefficient, power distribution, and critical boron concentration due to cross section uncertainties were calculated by the DeCART/MIG code system. Overall, the uncertainties in these design parameters were less than the general design review criteria of a typical pressurized water reactor start-up case. This newly-developed DeCART/MIG UQ analysis code system by the S.S. method can be widely utilized as uncertainty analysis and margin estimation tools for developing and designing new advanced nuclear reactors.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by a grant from Kyung Hee University in 2022. (KHU-20220911).

References

  1. J.Y. Cho, et al., DeCART2D v1.1 User's Manual," KAERI/UM-40/2016, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2016.
  2. J.Y. Cho, et al., MASTER v4.0 User's Manual," KAERI/UM-41/2016, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2016.
  3. J.Y. Cho, et al., DeCART v1.2 User's Manual," KAERI/TR-3438/2007, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2007.
  4. C.C. Lee, et al., Some Uncertainties of DeCART2D/MASTER4.0 for 17x17 PWR Core, Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Autumn Meeting, Gyeongju, Korea, 2017. October 26-27.
  5. R.P. Martin, A. Petruzzi, Progress in international best estimate Plus uncertainty analysis methodologies, Nucl. Eng. Des. 374 (2021), 111033.
  6. A. Aures, et al., Reactor Simulations with nuclear data uncertainties, Nucl. Eng. Deg. 355 (2019), 110313.
  7. M. Pusa, Incorporating sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to a lattice physics code with application to CASMO-4, Ann. Nucl. Energy 40 (2012) 153-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2011.10.013
  8. M.L. Williams, et al., A statistical sampling method for uncertainty analysis with SCALE and XSUSA, Nucl. Technol. 183 (2013) 515-526. https://doi.org/10.13182/NT12-112
  9. A.J. Koning, D. Rochman, Towards sustainable nuclear energy; putting nuclear physics to work, Ann. Nucl. Energy 35 (2008) 2024-2030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2008.06.004
  10. H.J. Park, H.J. Shim, C.H. Kim, Uncertainty propagation in Monte Carlo depletion analysis, Nucl. Sci. Eng. 167 (2011) 196-208. https://doi.org/10.13182/NSE09-106
  11. H.J. Park, et al., Uncertainty propagation analysis for yonggwang nuclear unit 4 by McCARD/MASTER core analysis system, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 46 (2014) 291-298. https://doi.org/10.5516/NET.01.2014.708
  12. T.Y. Han, et al., Development of a sensitivity and uncertainty analysis code for high temperature gas-cooled reactor physics based on the generalized perturbation theory, Ann. Nucl. Energy 85 (2015) 501-511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2015.06.005
  13. T.Y. Han, et al., Improvement and application of DeCART/MUSAD for uncertainty analysis of HTGR neutronic parameters, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 52 (2020) 461-468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.08.006
  14. H.J. Park, et al., McCARD/MIG stochastic sampling calculations for nuclear cross section sensitivity and uncertainty analysis, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 54 (2022) 4272-4279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2022.06.012
  15. K. Ivanov, et al., Benchmark for Uncertainty Analysis in Modelling (UAM) for Design, Operation and Safety Analysis of LWRs, Volume I: Specification and Support Data for the Neutronics Cases (Phase I), OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, 2012. NEA/NSC/DOC(2012).
  16. G.K. Delipei, et al., Summary of comparative analysis and conclusions from OECD/NEA LWR-UAM benchmark Phase I, Nucl. Eng. Des. 384 (2021), 111474.
  17. D.N. Horelik, et al., Benchmark for evaluation and validation of reactor Simulations, MIT Computational Reactor Physics Group, Rev03 29 August (2018).
  18. M.B. Chadwick, et al., ENDF/B-VII.1 nuclear data for science and technology: cross sections, covariance, fission product yields and decay data, Nucl. Data Sheets 112 (12) (2011) 2887-2996.
  19. G.E.P. Box, Mervin E. Muller, A note on the generation of random normal deviates, Ann. Math. Stat. 29 (2) (1958) 610-611. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177706645
  20. R. Macfarlane, et al., The NJOY Nuclear Data Processing System Version," LA-UR-17-20093, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NW, USA, 2016.
  21. New York Power, Indian Point 3 Nuclear Power Plant Cycle 11 Physics Test Report, New York Power Authority, 2000.
  22. O. Cabellos, et al., Propagation of nuclear data uncertainties for PWR core analysis, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 46 (3) (2014) 299-312. https://doi.org/10.5516/NET.01.2014.709
  23. D.A. Brown, et al., ENDF/B-VIII.0: the 8th major release of the nuclear reaction data library with CIELO-project cross sections, new standards and thermal scattering data, Nucl. Data Sheets 148 (2018) 1-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nds.2018.02.001