Geometry of Fast Reactor: Calculating Critical Dimensions & Masses

  • Thread starter thanphongvt
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Geometry
In summary: So the sphere is the smallest (critical) for a given volume. If you throw a point source in the middle, it will increase leakage, so it should increase the critical volume and critical mass.In summary, a fast reactor composed of U-235 in the form of a cube with a point source and strength So was discussed. The critical dimensions, volumes, and masses were calculated for spherical, cylindrical, and cubical cores. It was noted that the point source may increase leakage and therefore increase the critical volume and mass. The geometric buckling was also discussed as a method for solving for the critical dimensions. However, the impact of a source on the buckling was debated, with some suggesting it would not change and others suggesting
  • #1
thanphongvt
3
0
a fast reactor composed of U-235 in form of a cube(point source,strength So) .
calculate the :
critical dimensions,
critical volumes,
critical masses.
discuss more in cases of spherical , cylindrical and cubical cores.can i solve this practice by separating in 3 dimensions?
and what is the condition at the center of the cubic.?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
thanphongvt said:
a fast reactor composed of U-235 in form of a cube(point source,strength So) .
calculate the :
critical dimensions,
critical volumes,
critical masses.
discuss more in cases of spherical , cylindrical and cubical cores.


can i solve this practice by separating in 3 dimensions?
and what is the condition at the center of the cubic.?
The problem is a bit vague. Is one assuming that the fast reactor is simply pure U-235 (100% enrichment)? Or are there structural materials and coolant?

The different geometries will give different leakage rates depending on the fast flux at the boundaries and the total surface area.

What should the net current be at the center?
 
  • #3
You could get basic results with 1D diffusion theory with "fast" cross sections. There is a simple formula for geometric buckling in a cube.
 
  • #4
Classic problem.

You just need to set the material buckling to the geometrical buckling for an homogeneous reactor. I would assume it's all 235. By setting these equal, just solve for the length of the cube's side...then you can get volume and mass.

Though this doesn't handle the point source.
 
  • #5
Uranium said:
Though this doesn't handle the point source.

It's given in the problem statement as an initial condition, phi(r=0)=So
 
  • #6
I was indicating that my solution doesn't involve the given So...so I'm not sure how correct it would be.

I'm pretty sure my previous solution is correct. That's how it's usually done in practice problems like that.

I guess you could solve a 1-D diffusion equation to get a flux profile using So, but that wouldn't really answer any of the questions.

I'm not completely sure what is meant by "what is the condition at the center...".
 
  • #7
Uranium said:
Classic problem.

You just need to set the material buckling to the geometrical buckling for an homogeneous reactor. I would assume it's all 235. By setting these equal, just solve for the length of the cube's side...then you can get volume and mass.

Though this doesn't handle the point source.

That sounds about right to me. Cube and sphere geometry are the easiest to solve (the flux shapes in the cube reactor are simple cosines in each direction). I'm not sure how important the point source is in the determination of the parameters of a critical system.
 
  • #8
Kind of what I was thinking.

I think the point source only comes into play in solving the condition considering a uniformly distribution source (from the 235) and the point source at the center.
 
  • #9
If I remember my reactor physics correctly (I'll have to break out my D&H tonight), you can only use the geometric/material buckling equivalence if there is no source. Otherwise, you have a time-dependent problem for which you must solve the diffusion equation directly.

edit- forget that, he's not trying to solve for flux, he just wants the critical dimensions, which only depend on geometry and materials. The source is irrelevant unless you want to solve for the flux itself.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
That's quite likely.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Uranium said:
That's quite possible, and would definitely make sense since the buckling would be thrown off...

Well the geometric buckling would not change, it is not dependent on a source. It is the fundamental mode, the shape the flux takes after infinite time purely based on the geometry of the core. What would change would be the flux distribution as a function of power. But this is irrelevant when you just want the critical parameters.
 
  • #12
The buckling should change at least a little since you can accept greater leakage for criticality. The shape would still be a cosine, just one with greater curvature, right?

Or perhaps it would be more like a hump...not cosine.
 
  • #13
Uranium said:
The buckling should change at least a little since you can accept greater leakage for criticality. The shape would still be a cosine, just one with greater curvature, right?

Or perhaps it would be more like a hump...not cosine.

It doesn't work that way. A fixed source has no impact on the multiplication factor or the probability of non-leakage. The flux distribution would change but the definition of buckling is a solution of the diffusion equation that assumes S=0.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
I was struggling with a fast reactor made of pure U-235! As the question is posed, there is no other structural material or coolant. That's not so much a reactor as a recipe for a nuclear explosive. And by critical, is one referring to prompt critical? Normally we don't take reactors there. I was hoping the OP would elaborate.

For a given volume, the cube has the highest leakage, followed by cylinder, then the sphere which has the lowest leakage.
 

1. What is the purpose of calculating critical dimensions and masses in fast reactors?

The critical dimensions and masses in fast reactors are calculated to ensure that the reactor can sustain a chain reaction and produce enough energy. These calculations also help in designing safe and efficient reactor cores.

2. How are critical dimensions and masses calculated in fast reactors?

Critical dimensions and masses are calculated using mathematical models and simulations that take into account factors such as neutron flux, fuel composition, and geometry of the reactor core. These calculations are then verified through experiments and data analysis.

3. What are the key parameters that affect the critical dimensions and masses in fast reactors?

The key parameters that affect the critical dimensions and masses in fast reactors include the type of fuel, the arrangement of fuel assemblies, the neutron moderator material, and the geometry of the reactor core. Other factors such as temperature, pressure, and coolant flow rate also play a role.

4. Why is it important to accurately calculate critical dimensions and masses in fast reactors?

Accurate calculations of critical dimensions and masses are crucial for the safe and efficient operation of fast reactors. If these calculations are incorrect, it can lead to unstable reactions, fuel depletion or buildup, and potential safety hazards. Therefore, it is essential to ensure the accuracy of these calculations through rigorous testing and verification.

5. How do scientists and engineers use critical dimensions and masses in the design and operation of fast reactors?

Scientists and engineers use the calculated critical dimensions and masses as a basis for designing and optimizing the reactor core. These calculations help in determining the optimal fuel composition, configuration, and operating conditions to achieve the desired reactor performance. They also use these calculations to predict the behavior of the reactor during normal operations and potential accident scenarios.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
1
Views
902
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top