Doppler effect neutron absorption

AI Thread Summary
The Doppler effect in U-238 plays a crucial role in controlling reactor stability by increasing neutron absorption as fuel temperatures rise, which reduces available neutrons for fission. This phenomenon occurs naturally, as the atomic vibrations of U-238 increase with temperature, broadening its resonance absorption range and allowing it to capture more neutrons. The majority of reactor fuel consists of U-238 due to its ability to mitigate reactivity fluctuations and prevent overpower events. Additionally, decreases in fuel and moderator density further contribute to reduced reactivity in the core. Understanding these dynamics is essential for safe and efficient reactor operation.
girts
Messages
185
Reaction score
22
Just a quick question I got in my mind while reading up about fission, the so called Doppler effect which manifests itself in fertile material like U238, I read it helps control reactor stability , hence the majority of fuel consists of U238, as the fuel heats up at some point, U238 starts to absorb more neutrons and hence less neutrons are available for fission which decreases the further rise of reactivity,

now firstly I assume this is a natural physical phenomenon that just so happens to serve in our favor in a reactor core?
secondly tell me please what exactly is the "magic" trick here, is it that while the temperature is lower in the fuel the nucleus of U 238 has lower motion and hence a smaller cross section so only neutrons of specific energy get absorbed while others are not and when the temp rises the target nucleus kind of "moves" more and hence it somehow can accept a wider range of neutrons energies and absorb them?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
girts said:
. . . . while reading up about fission, the so called Doppler effect which manifests itself in fertile material like U238, I read it helps control reactor stability, hence the majority of fuel consists of U238, . . . .
Not hence. Natural uranium is predominantly U-238 (~0.992) with some U-235 (~0.007), with traces of U-234. U-235 is fissile, so commercial LWR fuel is enriched (up to 4.95%) in order to operate for a given energy generation over a given time (cycle). U-238 and many heavy isotopes (not usually found in a core) absorb neutrons in the so-called 'resonance' region of the neutron spectrum, that is in the high eV to ~ 1 MeV. Pu-240 is another isotope in LWR fuel that provides resonance absorption, but it is formed from transmutation of Pu-239, which is formed from U-238 through neutron absorption and subsequent beta decay.

girts said:
a natural physical phenomenon that just so happens to serve in our favor in a reactor core?
secondly tell me please what exactly is the "magic" trick here, is it that while the temperature is lower in the fuel the nucleus of U 238 has lower motion and hence a smaller cross section so only neutrons of specific energy get absorbed while others are not and when the temp rises the target nucleus kind of "moves" more and hence it somehow can accept a wider range of neutrons energies and absorb them?
In resonance absorption, a high-Z nucleus, which preferentially absorbs neutrons of specific energy (resonance), helps control reactivity in the core, and it helps prevent over-power events (e.g., reactivity insertion accident (RIA)), where a control rod is inadvertently ejected (PWR) or dropped (BWR) from a core, which leads to a power excursion. When the power increases, the fuel temperature increases, and as the fuel temperature increases the atomic vibrations increase. The vibrational increase in U-238 and Pu-240 means that the resonances broaden allowing more neutrons to be capture, which prevents the power from increasing.

Decreases in fuel and moderator density also contribute to a reduction in core/fuel reactivity.
 
  • Like
Likes quarkle and girts
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...
Hi everyone, I'm a complete beginner with MCNP and trying to learn how to perform burnup calculations. Right now, I'm feeling a bit lost and not sure where to start. I found the OECD-NEA Burnup Credit Calculational Criticality Benchmark (Phase I-B) and was wondering if anyone has worked through this specific benchmark using MCNP6? If so, would you be willing to share your MCNP input file for it? Seeing an actual working example would be incredibly helpful for my learning. I'd be really...
Back
Top