Void Coefficient: Why Is It Negative in US Reactors?

In summary, the void coefficient in enriched US reactors is negative in order to prevent power increases in the event of a decrease in moderator density. This is accomplished by designing the reactor with a negative void coefficient.
  • #1
RWM
2
0
Why is the void coefficient in enriched US reactors negative?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Welcome to PF.

You should start here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Void_coefficient

Reactivity coefficients vary substantially in different reactor designs. Are you asking about boiling water reactors? Are you asking about both BWR and PWR as distinct from the Canadian CANDU?
 
  • #3
Void coefficients with respect to pressurized light water reactor designs utilizing enriched uranium fuels typical to the majority of USA reactors.
 
  • #4
Iirc, the late Edward Teller was the driver behind the US requirement for negative void coefficients.
The Chernobyl experience suggests this is a sensible requirement.
 
  • Like
Likes jim hardy
  • #5
It’s an interesting way to ask the question. The void coefficient is negative because light water reactors are undermoderated during normal operating conditions, meaning a reduction in moderator density will result in a loss of necessary moderation and a negative impact on reactivity.
 
  • #6
RWM said:
Why is the void coefficient in enriched US reactors negative?
Core and reload designs are intentionally made with negative reactivity, although I have seen some preliminary designs with positive reactivity such the reload fuel (lattices) had to be redesigned until negative reactivity was achieved.

Reactivity control is a mandated requirement. See Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, Appendix A, Group III, GDCs 26-29
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part050/part050-appa.html
Criterion 28—Reactivity limits. The reactivity control systems shall be designed with appropriate limits on the potential amount and rate of reactivity increase to assure that the effects of postulated reactivity accidents can neither (1) result in damage to the reactor coolant pressure boundary greater than limited local yielding nor (2) sufficiently disturb the core, its support structures or other reactor pressure vessel internals to impair significantly the capability to cool the core. These postulated reactivity accidents shall include consideration of rod ejection (unless prevented by positive means), rod dropout, steam line rupture, changes in reactor coolant temperature and pressure, and cold water addition.

Criterion 29—Protection against anticipated operational occurrences. The protection and reactivity control systems shall be designed to assure an extremely high probability of accomplishing their safety functions in the event of anticipated operational occurrences.

A positive moderator void coefficient would allow for a power increase in the event that a decrease in moderator density occurred, e.g., if nuclear boiling began in a single phase system such as a PWR, or vigorous boiling or dryout began in a BWR. An increase in local heat flux/transport would increase the voiding, and thus increase the local power through positive feedback. Such an event is precluded by designing a lattice and core with negative void coefficient. So a negative void coefficient assures control of power and power distribution in a reactor core.

With respect to a core/reload design, we necessarily must assure that during any overpower transient that limits on fuel temperature, e.g., fuel centerline melt, cladding strain (e.g., 1% cladding diametral or circumferential strain) or no cladding-liftoff are assured with some statistical confidence. These requirements relate to the integrity of the fuel and primary coolant pressure boundary under various anticipated operational occurrences (AOOs) and certain transient or postulated accident events. AOOs are expected to happen, as often as once per operating cycle, and we wish to assure that an AOO does not evolve into a worse problem.
 
  • #7
Even in heavy water reactors, reactivity coefficients are critically important.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R4_nuclear_reactor

That heavy-boiling-water reactor project was abandoned mid-project, because improved calculations showed that it had a positive void coefficient which adversely affect stability.
 

1. What is the void coefficient in US reactors?

The void coefficient is a measure of how the reactivity of a nuclear reactor changes when there is a change in the amount of steam or voids (empty space) in the reactor. It is expressed as a fraction of a percent change in reactivity per percent change in void fraction.

2. Why is the void coefficient negative in US reactors?

The void coefficient is negative in US reactors because they use a type of reactor called a pressurized water reactor (PWR). In a PWR, water is used as both the coolant and the moderator. When the water turns to steam (voids), it absorbs fewer neutrons and therefore decreases the reactivity of the reactor. This negative void coefficient is a safety feature that helps prevent the reactor from becoming too reactive and potentially causing a meltdown.

3. What are the implications of a negative void coefficient in US reactors?

The negative void coefficient in US reactors is beneficial for safety because it makes the reactor less likely to have a rapid increase in reactivity. This means that even if there is a loss of coolant or other accident, the reactor will automatically shut down or slow down, preventing a catastrophic meltdown.

4. Are there any potential drawbacks to a negative void coefficient in US reactors?

While the negative void coefficient is a safety feature, it can also make the reactor less efficient. This is because the voids in the reactor reduce the number of neutrons available for fission, which decreases the power output. Therefore, reactor operators must carefully manage the amount of voids in the reactor to balance safety and efficiency.

5. Is the void coefficient the same for all types of reactors?

No, the void coefficient can vary depending on the type of reactor. As mentioned previously, pressurized water reactors have a negative void coefficient, while other types of reactors, such as boiling water reactors, may have a positive or near-zero void coefficient. It is important for each type of reactor to be designed with the appropriate void coefficient to ensure safe and efficient operation.

Similar threads

  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
30
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top