0
Research Papers

Comparison of the Reactivity Effects Calculated by DRAGON and Serpent for a PHWR 37-Element Fuel Bundle

[+] Author and Article Information
Jawad Haroon

Faculty of Energy Systems and Nuclear Science,
University of Ontario Institute of Technology,
2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON L1H 7K4, Canada
e-mail: Jawad.Haroon@uoit.ca

Leslie Kicka

Faculty of Energy Systems and Nuclear Science,
University of Ontario Institute of Technology,
2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON L1H 7K4, Canada
e-mail: leslie.kicka@uoit.net

Subhramanyu Mohapatra

Faculty of Energy Systems and Nuclear Science,
University of Ontario Institute of Technology,
2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON L1H 7K4, Canada
e-mail: Subhramanyu.Mohapatra@uoit.ca

Eleodor Nichita

Faculty of Energy Systems and Nuclear Science,
University of Ontario Institute of Technology,
2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON L1H 7K4, Canada
e-mail: Eleodor.Nichita@uoit.ca

Peter Schwanke

Faculty of Energy Systems and Nuclear Science,
University of Ontario Institute of Technology,
2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa, ON L1H 7K4, Canada
e-mail: Peter.Schwanke@uoit.ca

Manuscript received January 28, 2016; final manuscript received August 15, 2016; published online December 20, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Michal Kostal.

ASME J of Nuclear Rad Sci 3(1), 011011 (Dec 20, 2016) (5 pages) Paper No: NERS-16-1008; doi: 10.1115/1.4034571 History: Received January 28, 2016; Accepted August 15, 2016

Deterministic and Monte Carlo methods are regularly employed to conduct lattice calculations. Monte Carlo methods can effectively model a large range of complex geometries and, compared to deterministic methods, they have the major advantage of reducing systematic errors and are computationally effective when integral quantities such as effective multiplication factor or reactivity are calculated. In contrast, deterministic methods do introduce discretization approximations but usually require shorter computation times than Monte Carlo methods when detailed flux and reaction-rate solutions are sought. This work compares the results of the deterministic code DRAGON to the Monte Carlo code Serpent in the calculation of the reactivity effects for a pressurized heavy water reactor (PHWR) lattice cell containing a 37-element, natural uranium fuel bundle with heavy water coolant and moderator. The reactivity effects are determined for changes to the coolant, moderator, and fuel temperatures and to the coolant and moderator densities for zero-burnup, mid-burnup [3750  MWd/t(U)] and discharge burnup [7500  MWd/t(U)] fuel. It is found that the overall trend in the reactivity effects calculated using DRAGON match those calculated using Serpent for the burnup cases considered. However, differences that exceed the amount attributable to statistical error have been found for some reactivity effects, particularly for perturbations to coolant and moderator density and fuel temperature.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Discretized DRAGON model of the PHWR lattice cell

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Discretized Serpent model of the PHWR lattice cell

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Fuel temperature reactivity effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Coolant temperature reactivity effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Moderator temperature reactivity effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Coolant density reactivity effect

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Moderator density reactivity effect

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In