Eta (Reproduction Factor) Impact of Fuel Leg Change

  • Thread starter Thread starter ms.shafeie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reproduction
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the decline of the eta (Reproduction Factor) when the fuel leg is altered from its maximum yield level. It highlights the relationship between neutron energy spectral effects and temperature, noting that an increase in neutron velocity (v) can lead to a decrease in the fission cross-section while increasing absorption due to resonance absorption. The importance of considering both fissile and fertile species, along with other materials and coolant, is emphasized in understanding these dynamics. Clarification on the specific phrasing of the question is sought to better address the issue. Understanding these factors is crucial for optimizing fuel performance in nuclear reactions.
ms.shafeie
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
why does eta(Reproduction Factor) fall down when we change fuel leg from maximum level of yield?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
ms.shafeie said:
why does eta(Reproduction Factor) fall down when we change fuel leg from maximum level of yield?
I don't quite follow the question, specifically the part "when we change fuel leg from maximum level of yield". Please elaborate on this statement.

η = Ʃi (vi Ʃf,i) / Ʃa, where Ʃa is the weighted sum of the macroscopic absorption cross-section of the fuel material mixture. The index i refers to the fissile (and fertile) species. Fertile nuclides fission mainly with fast neutrons.

There are neutron energy spectral effects and temperature effects. If v (nu) increases, the fission cross-section decreases and the absorption increases (due to increased resonance absorption). One has to look at the fissile and fertile species, as well as other materials and coolant.
 
thanks a lot for ur good respond to my question.ur suggetion is right and I try to solve my problem in asking questions.
 

Thread 'Energy Spectrum Attenuation'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Writing: Input Wanted Sanity check: Alien reproduction
Replies
12
Views
2K
Humanoid-Alien Reproduction.... Should It Be Like Us Or Not?
Replies
14
Views
3K
How does D-T fusion reaction utilize its waste to create more fuel?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Safe zero base reactivity level nuclear fission reactor?
Replies
2
Views
2K
MCNP and simple nuclear physics
Replies
9
Views
3K
I Understanding extinction probability in simple GWP
Replies
1
Views
2K
Why does the US prefer fusion warheads to fission warheads?
Replies
13
Views
4K
I In ##\nabla\cdot\vec{E}## why can ##\nabla## pass through the integral?
Replies
8
Views
1K
A Confused about the Purcell effect in a cavity
Replies
2
Views
2K
Help me prove integral answer over infinitesimal interval
Replies
9
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top