Help, try to make one analysis in the RITM-200 reactor series, but can't find some informartion... any tips?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yukio
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Analysis Reactor
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on seeking information for conducting a neutronic analysis of the RITM-200 reactor series using MCNP software. Key details requested include the configuration of fuel assemblies, axial positions of spacer grids, dimensions, and material compositions, particularly regarding cladding and fuel rods. The RITM-200 features 199 fuel assemblies, each containing 69 fuel rods and various absorber rods, with a cladding made from a corrosion-resistant chromium-nickel alloy. Additional resources and documents were shared to assist in gathering the necessary data. The inquiry emphasizes the importance of detailed specifications for accurate modeling.
yukio
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Help, im try to make one work in the RITM-200 reactor series, but cant find some informartion... any tip?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

yukio said:
Help, im try to make one work in the RITM-200 reactor series, but cant find some informartion... any tip?
Can you be a little more specific please? Are you wanting to model it using a software package like MCNP, or are you wanting to drive a robot into a reactor to check on something? The more details you can give us, the better we will be able to try to help you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RITM-200
 
  • Like
Likes Astronuc and Alex A
If the RITM-200 fuel assembly is similar to or a modification of the KLT-40 fuel assembly, then it is likely a hexagonal, or triangular, lattice.

Reactor design (high level) - https://www.neimagazine.com/analysis/the-ritm-200n-as-a-terrestrial-unit/?cf-view=&cf-closed=

Fuel assembly - https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/8/3364

https://nucleus.iaea.org/sites/INPRO/df21/slides/3.10-Yurina.pdf

This document shows some details of a RITM fuel assembly.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/1019/1/012057/pdf
The core contains 199 fuel assemblies. According to [1] the structure of the fuel assembly remained the
same as in KLT-40S reactor. Each assembly has 69 fuel rods, 9 burnable type-one absorber rods and 6
type-two absorber rods, and 7 control rods in the center of the fuel assembly (Figure 2).
Structurally, the fuel rod is a smooth rod with a diameter of 6.8 mm with a length of the fuel
containing part of 1200 mm. Chromium-nickel alloy 42HNM (41% Cr, 0.2% Mn, 0.2% Mo, 56.1% Ni,
etc.) is used as fuel cladding, because it has a higher corrosion resistance and resistance to disruption of
the water chemistry regime than the traditional zirconium alloy E110. The thickness of the cladding is
0.5 mm. Inside the cladding, there is a dispersed fuel composition consisting of uranium dioxide granules
with low porosity and a silumin (87% Al, 11% Si, 2% Ni). The volume fraction of uranium-containing
material in the fuel pellet is 66%.

Rough schematic of RITM core.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.16195
 
Wow
Thanks!!
Wanna make one neutronic analyse, so all that information will be usefull
 
berkeman said:
Welcome to PF.


Can you be a little more specific please? Are you wanting to model it using a software package like MCNP, or are you wanting to drive a robot into a reactor to check on something? The more details you can give us, the better we will be able to try to help you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RITM-200
sure
apologise for my poor english, im trying to make one MCNP analyse in the reactor so any information about: Configuration of FA's (x, y and z), Axial positions of the spacer grids, Dimensions of the FA’s, Pass water between the rods ?, Enrichment and composition, Clading (composition) – E-110, Number of Fuel Rods
Number of Burnable Poison Sticks – VQ avaible will be apreciate
 
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