Nuclear Fission Q&A: Japan Disaster & Fuel Rods

  • Thread starter Thread starter jmnew51
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Japan
AI Thread Summary
Nuclear fission reactors continue to generate heat even after the reaction is stopped due to the residual radioactivity of short-lived isotopes, which produce heat as they decay. The withdrawal of moderating rods reduces power output but does not eliminate the heat generated by these isotopes. Keeping the reactor core submerged is crucial during the initial days post-reaction to prevent overheating and potential meltdowns. The heat production decreases exponentially over time, becoming less problematic after several days. Understanding these dynamics is essential for reactor safety and management.
jmnew51
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
I have a question about nuclear fission reactors. If the reaction is stopped, then why do the fuel rods continue to heat up after being exposed to air to the point where it could cause a meltdown.
Thank you
Jim
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
residual radioactivity of short lived isotopes
 
I'd also like to know, Pengwuino.

There are about 160 posts on that thread to filter. The only thing I seem to know is that withdrawl of the moderating rods stops the thing from producing power--or reduces the power--so why is keeping the core submerged important?
 
See granpa answer. There is still a lot of short lived isotopes that produce heat, these can't be stopped, they just have to decay. That takes time and produces heat.

From what I understand first several days are critical, later heat production is low enough to be not that problematic, after all it goes down exponentially.
 
As Penguino pointed out, there's already a thread on this in the appropriate section.
 
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