Clarifying Geometric and Material Buckling

AI Thread Summary
Geometric buckling measures the curvature of the neutron flux distribution in a reactor, influenced by its geometry. For slab reactors, it is calculated using the formula Bg^2 = (pi/a)^2, where 'a' is the extrapolation distance to zero flux. Material buckling describes the fuel characteristics in an infinite medium, represented by Bm^2 = (n*Sf - Sa) / D, indicating the balance between neutron production and absorption rates. A reactor achieves criticality when geometric buckling equals material buckling. Understanding these concepts is essential for analyzing reactor behavior and criticality conditions.
Szymanski
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,

I am studying for an upcoming exam and have become somewhat confused as to exactly what geometric and material buckling represent. Are they representative of the shape of the neutron flux distribution in the reactor? Are these quantities related to the structural deformation of the fuel due to temperature gradients?

As far as I have been able to determine, these quantities are useful to determine conditions for criticallity, but I would still like to understand them better, and all the copies of Stacey are checked out of the library!

Any insights or explanations would be appreciated.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Geometric buckling is a measure of the curvature of the neutron flux distribution of a reactor at equilibrium due to its geometry. For a slab reactor, Bg^2 = (pi/a)^2 where a is the extrapolation distance where flux is zero.

Material buckling is a description of the characteristics of the fuel material in an infinite medium. Bm^2 = n*Sf-Sa / D (neutron production rate minus absorption rate divided by the neutron diffusion coefficient)

A reactor is critical if the geometric buckling equals the material buckling.
 
Thank you.

That was helpful.
 
Hello, I'm currently trying to compare theoretical results with an MCNP simulation. I'm using two discrete sets of data, intensity (probability) and linear attenuation coefficient, both functions of energy, to produce an attenuated energy spectrum after x-rays have passed through a thin layer of lead. I've been running through the calculations and I'm getting a higher average attenuated energy (~74 keV) than initial average energy (~33 keV). My guess is I'm doing something wrong somewhere...
Back
Top