Question about neutron shielding and resonance integral

AI Thread Summary
Hydraulic materials like water effectively shield against neutrons because they contain light elements, such as hydrogen, which allow fast neutrons to lose significant kinetic energy through elastic collisions. In contrast, high-Z materials like lead are less effective for neutron shielding as they primarily scatter neutrons without substantial energy loss and can produce gamma radiation when absorbing neutrons. The cross-section versus energy graph demonstrates that while higher cross-sections are beneficial for absorption, they typically decrease at higher energies, leading to confusion about reaction rates. For neutron activation, materials like gold exhibit larger cross-sections at lower energies, which is advantageous for specific applications. Understanding the type of neutrons being shielded—fast or thermal—is crucial for selecting appropriate materials.
aznsaiyan1029
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
I have two nuclear engineer related questions, please bear with me.

1. Why is hydraulic material (like water) is good to shield against neutrons? Why not high Z material like lead?

2. In cross section vs. energy of the nuclei, the curve of the graph undergoes 1/E relationship until it hits the resonance integral, then the value of the cross section just keep going down as the energy increase. This may sound stupid, but isn't it always better to have a higher cross section since bigger cross section leads to more reaction rate right? The graph really confuses me since the graph shows bigger cross section in lower energy. For example, the gold element used in neutron activation is like that.

Let me rephrase if there is anything unclear (I have bad English), thanks.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
For neutron shielding, is one wishing to shield fast or thermal neutrons.

Bascially hydrogen and light elements are good shields for fast neutrons because the with each collising the fast neutron loses a good fraction of it's kinetic energy. If a neutron has a collision with a proton, it could lose almost all of it's energy, assuming the collision is perfectly elastic.

Higher Z materials are used for gamma interaction, through the Compton and photo-electric effects, and pair-production for gamma-rays of energy > 1.022 MeV.

High Z materials would simply scatter neutrons with little energy loss, and if they absorb neutrons, then they also become a gamma source (n, gamma reaction) as well as probably producing a beta emitting radionuclide.

In terms of absorption, having a high cross-section is desirable.

Does one have a particular set of data in mind?

See - http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/sigma/index.jsp?as=197&lib=endfb7.0&nsub=10
Total elastic cross-section Au-197 - http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/sigma/getPlot.jsp?evalid=4518&mf=3&mt=2&nsub=10
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top