Actinide Burner Conversion Rate: Fissile vs. Transuranic

[hmeier]

Folks,

I was reading the Cacuci Handbook of Nuclear Engineering, and he defines two times the conversion rate, once as:

C= fissile produced/fissile consumed

but later as :

C= transuranic produced/transuranic consumed

and said that the breeding rate is the former but for fissile.

Anyone knows which is the correct unequivocal name for the rate of an actinide burner? It has a rate for fissile and another for transuranic how I should call them?

Thanks,

Hernán

 

[Astronuc]

Cacuci is the editor of "Handbook of Nuclear Engineering." There are individual authors of the various chapters, e.g., Paul Turinsky on "Core Isotopic Depletion and Fuel Management," pp. 1241-1312.
Ref: http://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-0-387-98149-9_10#

It would help if one identifies the specific sections.

The term 'actinide' burner usually refers to TU nuclides, but could also include Th and U, as well as Np and Pu, which are of course, TU elements. However, given that use of Th is limited, actinide burners would focus mainly on U, Pu, Am, Cm.

The calculation of conversion ratio will be based on what fuel materials the system incorporates.

 

[hmeier]

Astronuc,

Thanks, you are right that Cacuci is just the editor. May be each author has a different definition.

My problem it´s with FRs classification, usually they are classified based on the conversion rate:
*<1 burner
*close 1 converter
*>1 breeder

Now If we compare the numbers for fissile conversion rate (C) vs TU conversion rate (T) I think that always T > C
But could exist a situation where T < C, or where the classification change if we choose T or C to classify?

Thanks in advance,

Hernán