Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제53권1호
  • /
  • Pages.44-60
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Validation of spent nuclear fuel decay heat calculation by a two-step method

  • Jang, Jaerim (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Ebiwonjumi, Bamidele (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Kim, Wonkyeong (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Park, Jinsu (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Choe, Jiwon (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Lee, Deokjung (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology)
  • 투고 : 2020.01.08
  • 심사 : 2020.06.22
  • 발행 : 2021.01.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

In this paper, we validate the decay heat calculation capability via a two-step method to analyze spent nuclear fuel (SNF) discharged from pressurized water reactors (PWRs). The calculation method is implemented with a lattice code STREAM and a nodal diffusion code RAST-K. One of the features of this method is the direct consideration of three-dimensional (3D) core simulation conditions with the advantage of a short simulation time. Other features include the prediction of the isotope inventory by Lagrange non-linear interpolation and the use of power history correction factors. The validation is performed with 58 decay heat measurements of 48 fuel assemblies (FAs) discharged from five PWRs operated in Sweden and the United States. These realistic benchmarks cover the discharge burnup range up to 51 GWd/MTU, 23.2 years of cooling time, and spanning an initial uranium enrichment range of 2.100-4.005 wt percent. The SNF analysis capability of STREAM is also employed in the code-to-code comparison. Compared to the measurements, the validation results of the FA calculation with RAST-K are within ±4%, and the pin-wise results are within ±4.3%. This paper successfully demonstrates that the developed decay heat calculation method can perform SNF back-end cycle analyses.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) and the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea (No. 20171510102040).

참고문헌

  1. Status of spent fuel storage for the first quarter of 2019 [Online]. (Available from: http://www.khnp.co.kr/board/BRD_000179/boardView.do?pageIndex=1&boardSeq=70138&mnCd=FN051304& schPageUnit=10&searchCondition=0&searchKeyword=, 2019e. Accessed on April 2019.
  2. J, Jang, B, Ebiwonjumi, W, Kim, J, Park. D, Lee, Verification and Validation of Back-End Cycle Source Term Calculation of the Nodal Code RAST-K, PHYSOR 2020: Transition to a Scalable Nuclear Future Cambridge, United Kingdom, March 29th-April 2nd, 2020
  3. S. Choi, C. Lee, D. Lee, Resonance treatment using pin-based pointwise energy slowing-down method, J. Comput. Phys. 330 (2017) 134-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2016.11.007
  4. S. B Ebiwonjumi, M. Choi, D Lee Lemaire, Shin Hc, Lee Hs, Validation of lattice physics code STREAM for predicting pressurized water reactor spent nuclear fuel isotopic inventory, Ann. Nucl. Energy 120 (2018) 431-449, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.06.002.
  5. S. B Ebiwonjumi, M. Choi, D Lee Lemaire, Shin Hc, Lee Hs, Verification and validation of radiation source term capabilities in STREAM, Ann. Nucl. Energy 124 (2019) 80-87, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.09.034.
  6. Scale, A Comprehensive Modeling and Simulation Suite for Nuclear Safety Analysis and Design, ORNL/TM-2005/39, Version 6.1, June 2011. Available from: Radiation Safety Information Computational Center at Oak Ridge National Laboratory as CCC-785.
  7. G. Ilas, Ian C. Gauld, SCALE analysis of CLAB decay heat measurements for LWR spent fuel assemblies, Ann. Nucl. Energy 35 (37-48) (2008).
  8. G. Ilas, Ian C. Gauld, H. Liljenfeldt, Validation of ORIGEN for LWR used fuel decay heat analysis with SCALE, Nucl. Eng. Des. 273 (2014) 58-67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2014.02.026.
  9. S. Choe, P. Choi, J. Zhang, W. Park, HC Shin Kim, HS, J Jung Lee, D. Lee, Verification and validation of STREAM/RAST-K for PWR analysis, Nucl. Eng. Tech. 51 (2) (2019) 356-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.10.004
  10. J. Park, J. Choe, H. Kim, S. Choi, A. Cherezov, J. Jang, D. Yun, N. N, T. Mai, V. Dos, D. Lee, H.C. Shin, H.S. Lee, Development Status of Nodal Diffusion Code RAST-K v2.2, KNS Spring meeting Jeju, May 22-24, 2019.
  11. M.B. Chadwick, ENDF/B-VII.0: next generation evaluated nuclear data library for nuclear science and Technology, Nucl. Data Sheets 107 (12) (2006 Dec) 2931-3060, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nds.2006.11.001.
  12. A.B. Svensk Karnbranslehantering, Measurements of Decay Heat in Spent Nuclear Fuel at the Swedish Interim Storage Facility, CLAB, 2006. December.
  13. Spent Fuel Decay Heat Measurements Performed at the Swedish Central Interim Storage Facility, U.S.: U.S. National Regulatory Commission, 2010. NUREG/CR-6971.
  14. Validation of SCALE 5 Decay Heat Prediction for LWR Spent Nuclear Fuel, U.S.: U.S. National Regulatory Commission, 2010. NUREG/CR-6972.
  15. T. Yamamoto, D. Iwahashi, Validation of decay heat calculation results of ORIGEN2.2, CASMO5 Light Water Reac. Fuel 53 (12) (2016) 2108-2118, https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2016.1183528.
  16. B.J. Ade, SCALE/TRITON Primer: A Primer for Light Water Reactor Lattice Physics Calculations, U.S.NRC, 2012. NUREG/CR-7041.
  17. A. Quarteroni, R. Sacco, F. Saleri, Numerical Mathematics, 2007.
  18. S. Borresen, T. Bahadir, M. Kruners, Validation of CMS/SNF calculations against preliminary CLAB decay heat measurements, Transactions of the American nuclear society, Omni Shoreham Hotel Washington, D.C., November 14-18, 2004.
  19. S. Borresen, Spent fuel analyses based on in-core fuel management calculations, Proc. PHYSOR (2004). The Physics of Fuel Cycles and Advanced Nuclear Systems: Global Developments, Chicago, Illinois, April 25-29, 2004.
  20. R.J.J. Stamm'ler, M.J. Abbate, Methods of Steady-State Reactor Physics in Nuclear Design', Academic Press, 1983, p. 384.
  21. Curve Fitting Toolbox User's Guide, MathWorks, Inc., July 2001.
  22. Guide for Validation of Nuclear Criticality Safety Calculational Methodology, U.S.: U. S. National Regulatory Commission, 2001. NUREG/CR-6698.
  23. Technical Support for a Proposed Decay Heat Guide Using SAS2H/ORIGEN-S DATA, U.S.: U.S. National Regulatory Commission, 1994. NUREG/CR-5625.
  24. N. Soppera, M. Bossant, E. Dupont, Janis 4: an improved version of the NEA java-based nuclear data information system, Nucl. Data Sheets 120 (June 2014) 294-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nds.2014.07.071

피인용 문헌

  1. Verification and validation of isotope inventory prediction for back-end cycle management using two-step method vol.53, pp.7, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2021.01.009