Peaking factor and power profile

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vnt666Skr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Power
AI Thread Summary
The radial peaking factor is related to the normalized radial power profile, as both assess local power in relation to core average power. Peaking factors are crucial for ensuring fuel integrity under operational anomalies and accidents by limiting local power density. To determine peaking factors at various axial and radial locations, one must calculate local power density using core simulation codes, which factor in neutron flux and enrichment effects. The average power density is derived from the reactor's thermal rating divided by the total active fuel length. Understanding these metrics is essential for optimizing fuel performance and minimizing irradiation-related issues.
Vnt666Skr
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Is the radial peaking factor same as normalized radial power profile?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Peaking factors are developed from normalized axial and radial/lateral power profiles.

One is interested in how the local power relates to the core average power, as well as the absolute magnitude of the power. Local power restricted by some margin to some absolute limit in order to ensure that under certain anticipated anomalies the fuel is not damaged, or in the event of a postulated accident, the fuel damage is limited and not underestimated.

From a fuel performance perspective, one wishes to 'flatten' the radial and axial profiles such that one minimizes corrosion and other irradiation-dependent behavior/consequences.
 
Thanks Astronuc.
Is it defined at each axial/radial position? Suppose I have a power profile of a single pin. How do I find out the peaking factors at various locations in the axial and radial direction?
 
Vnt666Skr said:
Thanks Astronuc.
Is it defined at each axial/radial position? Suppose I have a power profile of a single pin. How do I find out the peaking factors at various locations in the axial and radial direction?

FdH is ratio of the total pin power to the total core power divided by number of pins. This is a 2-D (radial) value and each pin as one value for FdH.

Fq(z) is the ratio of power density of the pin divided by the power density of the core. This is a 3-D (axial) value. Each pin has a Fq(z) as a function of height, and a peak Fq.

If your pin power profile is normalized, you need to first multiply by the assembly's relative power density. Fz is the maximum normalized power for the core, assembly, or pin.
 
Last edited:
Vnt666Skr said:
Thanks Astronuc.
Is it defined at each axial/radial position? Suppose I have a power profile of a single pin. How do I find out the peaking factors at various locations in the axial and radial direction?
A peaking factor would be determined from the local power density (or linear power) divided by the core average power density (or linear power). The average power density is found from the thermal rating of the reactor core divided by the total length of active fuel. The local power density is calculated with a core simulation code (e.g., SIMULATE or other proprietary code) which solves a multi-group neutron diffusion or transport problem. The codes calculate the neutron flux and local enrichment, which includes effects of depletion and transmutation, and from these determine the fission density, from power density is calculated.

An example of core average power. Given a 3700 MWt core, with 193 assemblies, 264 fuel rods per assembly, and an active fuel length of 12 ft (including blankets), the core average linear power in kW/ft is given by

3700000 kW / (193 * 264 * 12 ft) = 6.05 kW/ft or 19.85 kW/m
 
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