Calculating Fission Cross-Sections for Nuclear Reactor Fuel Designs

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating fission cross-sections for different nuclear reactor fuel assembly designs, specifically comparing a standard Westinghouse 17x17 fuel design with a proposed new design. The focus includes theoretical considerations and assumptions necessary for the calculations, as well as the implications of various design parameters.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes the specifications of the current and proposed fuel designs, including fuel rod pitch, outer diameter, and clad thickness, and asks how to determine the fission cross-sections for each design.
  • Another participant questions whether the problem is a homework assignment and seeks clarification on how to determine the cross-section of any lattice, including the configuration of the lattice cell and the assembly envelope.
  • A subsequent post emphasizes the need for additional assumptions if the provided information is insufficient to solve the problem.
  • One participant suggests that class notes or textbooks may provide methods for determining cross-sections, mentioning macroscopic and microscopic cross-sections, and highlights the importance of self-shielding and neutron competition among materials.
  • The same participant raises considerations regarding the fuel-to-moderator ratio and whether to assume a homogeneous or heterogeneous composition of the fuel-moderator system, specifically mentioning Zircaloy-4 cladding composition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty regarding the adequacy of the provided information and the assumptions needed for calculations. There is no consensus on the methods or specific parameters to be used in determining the fission cross-sections.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various factors that may influence the calculations, such as the energy spectrum of neutrons, self-shielding effects, and the configuration of the lattice, indicating that assumptions about these factors may be necessary for accurate results.

TebatsoM
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
A utility is considering changing its fuel vendor and resulting fuel assembly design. The
current fuel in the reactor is standard Westinghouse 17x17 fuel with a fuel rod pitch of
1.215cm fuel rod OD of 0.916cm. The clad thickness is 0.055cm. The new fuel design has a
fuel rod pitch of 1.232cm and a fuel rod OD of 0.882cm with a clad thickness of 0.055cm. (Assume that there is no fuel-cladding gap).
Considering that the fuel for both designs is 4.5% enriched, and that the reactor pressure
and temperature conditions are 15.5MPa, and 304C

How to determine the fission cross-sections for each lattice design?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
This seems like a homework problem.

The pitch of a standard 17x17 design is 1.26 cm (12.6 mm) or 0.496 inch - at room temperature, or about 1.263 cm at hot conditions.

How does one determine the cross-section of any lattice? What does the lattice cell look like?

Is the assembly envelope the same?

Is one accounting for guide (thimble) tubes?
 
Given all this information how does one solve the problem and is it necessary to more assumptions if the info provided is not enough?

Yes this part of assignment
 
Presumably one's class notes and/or textbook would explain the methods used to determine cross-sections, which I take to mean either macroscopic cross-sections, or the weighted (equivalent, or adjsusted) microscopic cross-sections.

Self-shielding is an important factor, as is competition for neutrons among the different materials, as is the energy spectum of the neutrons.

Think about fuel-to-moderator ratio.

Consider infinite lattice, and whether or not one assumes homogenous or heterogeneous composition of the fuel-moderator. I expect one can assume Zircaloy-4 cladding (Zr-1.5Sn-0.24Fe-0.12Cr-0.125O, where the coefficients are in weight %).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K