Investigation of Nuclear Data Accuracy for the Accelerator- Driven System with Minor Actinide Fuel Kenji Nishihara, Takanori Sugawara, Hiroki Iwamoto JAEA, Japan Francisco Alvarez Velarde CIEMAT, Spain Andrei Rineiski KIT, Germany 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 1
Contents IAEA CRP benchmark activity o Depletion analysis for 800 MWt ADS (commercial grade) o Result by several nuclear libraries Uncertainty analysis using covariance matrix o Estimation of uncertainty by JENDL-3.3 and JENDL-4.0 o Reduction of uncertainty by the Transmutation Physics Experimental Facility, TEF-P. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 2
IAEA-CRP benchmark Heat exchanger Proton beam Pb-Bi Pump LBE cooled tank type reactor 800 MW (thermal power) 600 day/cycle Proton beam: 1.5GeV, 10-20mA LBE target with window Nitride fuel, (Pu+MA)N+ZrN o Pu-N/MA-N/Zr-N=19/31/50 (weight percent) o Total actinide amounts 4.2 ton Transmutation: 500kg/cycle (12%/cycle) MA fuel Beam window A. Stanculescu, The IAEA Coordinated Research Project (CRP) on Analytical and experimental benchmark analyses of accelerator driven systems, OECD/NEA 11 th Information Exchange Meeting, San Francisco, 1-4 Nov. 2010. (2010) 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 3
Feature of this benchmark Commercial grade ADS o High energy proton (1.5GeV) o MA-rich fuel o Burn-up up to 120 GWd/HMt Simplified R-Z geometry Fundamental knowledge of calculation accuracy at the present time for the commercial grade ADS Main issues for the calculation accuracy are, o Simulation of high energy reactions o Nuclear data for MA 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 4
LBE target LBE buffer Inner core Outer core LBE reflecctor SS reflector B 4 C shielding Beam duct (void) Nuber density of actinide (10 24 /cm 3 ) (cm) 270.0 250.0 150.0 120.0 50.0 Calculation model SS reflector Gas plenum SS reflector 0.0 0.0 21.0 42.5 89.8 119.8 155.0 189.7 (cm) 25.8 137.5 R-Z model 3.0E-3 2.5E-3 2.0E-3 1.5E-3 1.0E-3 5.0E-4 0.0E+0 Inner core Outer core Fuel composition K.Tsujimoto, et.al, J. Nucl. Sci. Tech., 41(1), 21 (2004). Cm-246 Cm-245 Cm-244 Cm-243 Am-243 Am-242m Am-241 Pu-242 Pu-241 Pu-240 Pu-239 Pu-238 Np-237 U-236 U-234 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 5
Participants Participant Code Library JAEA (Japan) CIEMAT (Spain) KIT (Germany) PHITS, NMTC or MCNPX (MC code for proton and neutron >20MeV) SLAROM (Cross section code) TWODANT (Deterministic neutron transport code) ORIGEN (Burn-up code) EVOLCODE2 (MCNPX-based burnup code) High energy particles are not analyzed. C4P, ZMIX (Cross section code) DANTSYS (Deterministic neutron tansport code) TRAIN (Burn-up code) JENDL-3.3 JENDL-4.0 JENDL-3.2 ENDF/B-VI JEFF-3.0 JEFF-3.0 (JEFF-3.1) a) (ENDF/B-VI) a) ENDF/B-VII JEFF-3.1 a) Library in parenthesis is only for the beginning of cycle (BOC). Deterministic vs. Monte-Carlo JENDL vs. ENDF vs. JEFF PHITS vs. MCNPX for high energy 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 6
k-eff, Endf/B-VI k-eff, JEFF3.0 k-eff, JEFF 3.1 Deterministic vs. Monte-Carlo 1.01 1 Monte Carlo 0.4%dk 1.01 1 1.01 1 Monte Carlo 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.7%dk 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 Determin istic 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.2%dk Monte Carlo Deterministic 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 Determin istic 0.94 0.93 BOC JAEA (Det.) EB6 CIEMAT (MC) EB6 EOC 0.94 0.93 JAEA (Det.) JEFF3.0 CIEMAT (MC) JEFF3.0 BOC EOC 0.94 0.93 KIT (Det.) JEFF3.1 CIEMAT (MC) JEFF3.1 BOC EOC ENDF/B-VI JEFF 3.0 JEFF 3.1 Good agreement is observed (0.2-0.7 %dk). Influence of calculation methods is small. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 7
k-eff, JENDL k-eff, ENDF k-eff, JEFF JENDL vs. ENDF vs. JEFF 1.01 1 0.99 0.98 JAEA J3.3 JAEA J3.2 JAEA J4.0 J4.0 1.01 1 0.99 0.98 EB6 JAEA EB6 CIEMAT EB6 KIT EB7 1.01 1 JF3.1 0.99 0.98 JAEA JEFF3.0 CIEMAT JEFF3.0 CIEMAT JEFF3.1 KIT JEFF3.1 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.96 EB7 0.96 JF3.0 0.95 J3.2, J3.3 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.93 BOC EOC 0.93 BOC EOC 0.93 BOC EOC JENDL ENDF JEFF k-effective disperse from 0.98 to 1.0 at BOC and 0.93 to 0.96 at EOC. Version-up changes k-effective by 2 to 3 %dk for each library. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 8
Δkeff due to library exchange (pcm) All Np-237 Pu-238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Pu-241 Pu-242 Am-241 Am-243 Cm-244 N-15 Pb-204 Pb-206 Pb-207 Pb-208 Bi-209 Δkeff due to library exchange (pcm) Cr-50 Cr-52 Cr-53 Cr-54 Mn-55 Fe-54 Fe-56 Fe-57 Fe-58 Ni-58 Ni-60 Ni-61 Ni-62 Ni-64 Mo-92 Mo-94 Mo-95 Mo-96 Mo-97 Mo-98 Mo-100 Zr-90 Zr-91 Zr-92 Zr-94 Zr-96 Which nuclide is responsible at BOC? 600 400 J4 to EB7 J4 to JF31 600 400 200 J4 to EB7 J4 to JF31 200 0 0-200 -200-400 -400-600 -800 Statistics error=20pcm -600-800 Statistics error=20pcm Δkeff due to library exchange of single nuclide from JENDL-4 to ENDF/B-VII or JEFF-3.1 estimated by MCNPX. Large changes are observed at Np-237, Pu-240, Am-241, Am-243, N-15 and Fe-56. Sensitivity analysis is needed in the future. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 9
Effect of isomer-state branching ratio (IR) of Depletion of keff, %dk Am-241 capture reaction 6% JAEA J3.3 JAEA EB6 JAEA JEFF3.0 KIT JEFF3.1 JAEA J4 KIT EB7 CIEMAT JEFF3.0 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% ENDF JENDL JEFF 0% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% IR, isomer-state branching ratio, Am242 / (Am242+Am242m) The depletion of keff becomes larger by 0.8%dk if the IR changes from 80% to 90%. JEFF-3.1 library gives smaller depletions than JENDL-4 and ENDF/B- VII. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 10
Proton current (ma) Proton beam current 25 20 15 10 JENDL-3.2, 3.3 JEFF3.0 J3.3 J3.2 J4.0 EB6 JEFF3.0 5 JENDL-4 ENDF/B-VI 0 BOC EOC Criticality affects too much on proton beam current to make comparison. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 11
Effect of high-energy particle calculation on current PHITS, NMTC or MCNPX (LA, model) Storage of neutron generated <20MeV TWODANT with JENDL-3.3 Comparison between high-energy codes was done with common low-energy code and library. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 12
Spallation neutrons per proton Spallation neutron per proton Neutron produced at energy below 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 MCNPX MCNPX PHITS NMTC (model) (LA150) N/P 47.72 50.06 45.04 44.71 MeV 4.10 3.70 3.95 3.88 Number of neutron and average energy (MeV) 20 MeV 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0.1 1 10 100 Energy (MeV) Spectrum of spallation neutron Number of neutron: PHITS > MCNPX Average energy of neutron: PHITS > MCNPX PHITS results in 8% larger efficiency of source proton. PHITS NMTC MCNPX (model) MCNPX (LA150) 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 13
Proton current (ma) Result of beam current 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 MCNPX PHITS, NMTC PHITS NMTC MCNPX (model) 12 MCNPX (LA150) 10 0 day 600 day Proton beam current based on JENDL-3.3 The difference of current is 8% between MCNPX and others. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 14
Summary of IAEA-CRP benchmark Small difference between participants (codes) with same library. k-effective disperse from 0.98 to 1.0 at BOC and 0.93 to 0.96 at EOC. o At BOC, Np-237, Pu-240, Am-241, Am-243, N-15 and Fe-56 affect. Beam current is not comparable due to different k- effective. o Based on JENDL-3.3, current differs by 8% between MCNPX and PHITS. To design an ADS is very difficult, if estimated k- effective changes 2 to 3 %dk. Uncertainty and its reduction by ctritical experiments should be evaluated. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 15
Uncertainty evaluation The error caused by the nuclear data is calculated as square root of GMG t. Sensitivity coefficient G o SAGEP code gives sensitivity of cross sections on: criticality, coolant void reactivity and Doppler coefficient Covariance data M o Covariance data are presented in JENDL-3.3 and JENDL- 4.0. o Provisional values were employed for nuclides and reactions which were not prepared in JENDL. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 16
Covariance data in JENDL-3.3 Nuclide Capture Fission ν Elastic Inelastic χ μ-bar Nuclide Capture Fission ν Elastic Inelastic χ μ-bar Pu-238 N-15 - - - Pu-239 Fe - - - Pu-240 Cr - - - Pu-241 Ni - - - Pu-242 Zr-90 - - - Np-237 Zr-91 - - - Am-241 Zr-92 - - - Am-242m Zr-94 - - - Am-243 Zr-96 - - - Cm-242 Pb-204 - - - Cm-243 Pb-206 - - - Cm-244 Pb-207 - - - Cm-245 Pb-208 - - - Cm-246 Bi-209 - - - Most of reactions for MA, Zr and Pb are missing in the JENDL-3.3. They are supplemented with provisional estimations. : Formally included :Provisional estimation, Nakagawa (2007) :Provisional estimation, Shibata (2007) 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 17
Covariance data in JENDL-4.0 Nuclide Capture Fission ν Elastic Inelastic χ μ-bar Nuclide Capture Fission ν Elastic Inelastic χ μ-bar Pu-238 N-15 - - - Pu-239 Fe-56 - - - Pu-240 Cr-52 - - - Pu-241 Ni-58 - - - Pu-242 Zr-90 - - - Np-237 Zr-91 - - - Am-241 Zr-92 - - - Am-242m Zr-94 - - - Am-243 Zr-96 - - - Cm-242 Pb-204 - - - Cm-243 Pb-206 - - - Cm-244 Pb-207 - - - Cm-245 Pb-208 - - - Cm-246 Bi-209 - - - All of the actinide reactions are covered in the JENDL-4.0! But, data for N-15, Zr and Pb are needed. (Provisional data in the JENDL-3.3 are used in the present study.) 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 18 Lack
Uncertainty of JENDL-3.3 and 4.0 JENDL-3.3 JENDL-4.0 Value (GMG t ) 0.5 Value (GMG t ) 0.5 Criticality (k-eff) 0.971 1320 pcm (1.4%) 0.999 1090 pcm (1.1%) Coolant void reactivity [Δk/k] 5300 pcm 350 pcm (6.6%) 3500 pcm 280 pcm (8.1%) Doppler reactivity coefficient [TΔk/dT] -3.5e-4 7.0% -3.3e-4 6.3% Uncertainties evaluated by JENDL-4.0 are equal or less than those by JENDL-3.3. The uncertainty of criticality, 1090 pcm, is smaller than the result of IAEA benchmark activity (2000-3000pcm). 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 19
MU Uncertainty in criticality (pcm) NU NU NU CHI NU NU NU NU NU Uncertainty in criticality (pcm) Breakdown of uncertainty (criticality) 600 500 400 J-3.3 J-4.0 Total uncertainty= 1320(J-3.3), 1090 (J-4.0) 300 200 100 0 Np-237 capture Pu-239 fission and chi Am-241 capture Am-243 capture Np237 Pu238 Pu239 Pu240 Pu241 Pu242 Am241 Am243 Cm244Cm245 600 500 400 300 200 100 J-3.3 J-4.0 Total uncertainty= 1320(J-3.3), 1090 (J-4.0) N-15 elastic Fe-56 inelastic Bi-209 elastic 0 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 20 N15 Fe56 Ni58 Zr90 Zr91 Zr92 Zr94Pb204 Pb206 Pb207 Pb208 Bi209
MU Uncertainty in Doppler coeficient (%) Uncertainty in criticality (pcm) Breakdown of uncertainty (void reactivity) 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 J-3.3 J-4.0 Void reactivity = 5300pcm(J-3.3), 3500pcm(J-4.0) Total uncertainty= 350pcm(J-3.3), 280pcm (J-4.0) NU CHI NU NU NU Np237 Pu239 Pu240 Am241 Am243 Cm244 Np-237 capture Pu-239 chi Am-241 capture 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 J-3.3 J-4.0 Void reactivity = 5300pcm(J-3.3), 3500pcm(J-4.0) Total uncertainty= 350pcm(J-3.3), 280pcm (J-4.0) N-15 elastic Fe-56 inelastic, mu Ni-58 inelastic Bi-209 elastic and inelastic N15Cr52 Fe56 Ni58 Zr91 Zr92 Zr94 Zr96 Pb204Pb206 Pb207Pb208 Pb208 Bi209 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 21
Uncertainty in Doppler coeficient (%) NU NU CHI NU NU Uncertainty in Doppler coeficient (%) Breakdown of uncertainty (Doppler) 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 J-3.3 J-4.0 Total uncertainty= 7.0%(J-3.3), 6.3% (J4.0) Np-237 capture Pu-239 chi Am-241 capture Np237 Pu238 Pu239 Pu240 Pu241 Am241 Am243 Cm244 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 J-3.3 J-4.0 Total uncertainty= 7.0%(J-3.3), 6.3% (J4.0) N15 Fe56 Zr90 Zr91 Zr92 Zr94 Pb206 Pb207 Pb208 Bi209 Zr-90 capture Zr-92 capture Zr-94 capture Pb-206 capture Bi-209 capture 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 22
Reduction of uncertainty by TEF-P Movable shield Fixed half assembly Fuel loading machine Stainless steel matrix Coolant simulator (Pb, Na, etc.) Core Plate-type fuel Spallation target Beam duct Proton beam Fuel drawer Proton beam Pin-type fuel Safety/control rod drive mechanism Movable half assembly 5.5cm 5.5cm Three calculation cases were performed to confirm effect of MA amount on the uncertainty reduction : CASE-mg: Measurement of the reaction rate ratio by using mg-order MA sample CASE-g: Measurement of the MA sample worth by using g-order MA sample CASE-kg: Various experiments by using kg-order MA to simulate spectrum dependences. 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 23
Experiments in CASE-kg Experiment descriptions of case-kg o Criticality: 1 case o Coolant void reactivity:3 cases(3 different void fractions) o Doppler reactivity:3 cases (300, 550, 800 ) o Measurement of reaction rate ratio:8 cases (Denominator: Pu-239 fission, Numerator: Fission and Capture for 4 MA nuclides, Np-237, Am-241, Am-243 and Cm-244) o Total 15 cases 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 24
J33 R233 CASE-mg CASE-g + Criticality + Void +Doppler +RR Error caused by nuclear data [%] Calculation Results (1/2) 1.4 ADS: Criticality J33: Result by using JENDL-3.3 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 35% CASE-kg R233: Adjusted by existing 233 integral data *1 ( It is able to consider R233 result as the current best value) +Criticality : Adjusted by CASE-g results and criticality experiment in CASE-kg. +RR : Adjusted by +Doppler result and measurement of reaction rate ratio in CASE-kg. Case The error was reduced significantly in CASE-g although the result in CASE-mg was hardly reduced. Experiments in CASE-kg was also effective to improve the error. The value was about 35% smaller than that in R233. 11th IEM, San Francisco *1: T. Hazama, et al., JNC TN9400 2002-064, 1-5, (2002) Nov, 2010 25
J33 R233 CASE-mg CASE-g + Criticality + Void +Doppler +RR J33 R233 CASE-mg CASE-g + Criticality + Void +Doppler +RR Error caused by nuclear data [%] Error caused by nuclear data [%] Calculation Results (2/2) 7 ADS: Void reactivity 7 ADS: Dopper reactivity 6 5 4 3 2 6 5 40% 45% 4 3 2 1 0 CASE-kg 1 0 CASE-kg Case For both coolant void and Doppler reactivity, the errors were hardly improved in CASE-mg and CASE-g. The measurement of coolant void reactivity or Doppler reactivity with kg-order MA was effective for the error reduction. Case 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 26
Summary for uncertainty analysis To estimate the uncertainty caused by the nuclear data o The uncertainty was 1090 pcm for the criticality, 280 pcm for the void reactivity and 6.3% for the Doppler reactivity based on the JENDL-4.0 covariance data. o However, the uncertainty of criticality, 1090 pcm, looks smaller than the result of IAEA benchmark activity (2000-3000pcm). To estimate the impact of the TEF-P o The uncertainty would be reduced up to 45% by the TEF-P. Thank you for your attention! 11th IEM, San Francisco 1-5, Nov, 2010 27