截面一致性和协方差数据库对不确定性分析的影响研究

doi:10.11889/j.0253-3219.2018.hjs.41.110604

Nuclear Techniques ›› 2018, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (11): 110604-110604.doi: 10.11889/j.0253-3219.2018.hjs.41.110604

• NUCLEAR ENERGY SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING • Previous Articles Next Articles

Research on impact of cross section consistence and different covariance library in the process of uncertainty analysis

XU Jiayi, MA Xubo, CHEN Yixue

School of Nuclear Science and Engineering, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China

Received:2017-07-01 Revised:2018-01-09 Online:2018-11-10 Published:2018-11-20
Supported by:
Supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.11875128), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No.2015ZZD12)

Abstract

Abstract: [Background] The nuclear data is the fundamental input parameter of reactor physics computation and it is also one of the significant uncertainty sources to the result of nuclear physics calculation. Usually, the cross section is measured by the integral experiment. However, the cross section obtained from the experiment is always imprecise due to numerical approximation and model simply in the experiment.[Purpose] This study aims to evaluate the effect caused by relative factors of cross section consistence and different covariance library in the process of uncertainty analysis.[Methods] The home-developed code SUACL based on statistical sampling method was developed for the uncertainty analysis, and the Three Mile Island unit 1 (TMI-1) benchmark was taken to evaluate the impact of both the initial value of cross section and the various covariance matrices.[Results] It is found that the larger of the cross section value, the higher uncertainty caused by it in the same degree of perturbation. Therefore, it is better to use the practical initial value of cross section. The uncertainty of infinite effective multiplication factor would be different based on different evaluated neutron data library such as ENDF/B-VⅡ.1, JENDL4.0 and JEFF3.2. For example, the uncertainty of ²³⁸U fission cross section based on JEFF3.2 is smaller four orders of magnitude than that of ENDF/B-VⅡ.1 and JENDL4.0.[Conclusion] The appropriate covariance data and precise unperturbed initial value of cross section are critical to analysis uncertainty. Both of them have great impact on the uncertainty result.

Key words: Uncertainty analysis, Cross section, Covariance, Nuclear data

CLC Number:

TL32

XU Jiayi, MA Xubo, CHEN Yixue. Research on impact of cross section consistence and different covariance library in the process of uncertainty analysis[J].Nuclear Techniques, 2018, 41(11): 110604-110604.

References

1 Pusa M. Incorporating sensitivity and uncertainty analysis to a lattice physics code with application to CASMO-4[J]. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2012, 40(1):153-162. DOI:10.1016/j.anucene.2011.10.013.
2 Mercatali L, Ivanov K, Sanchez V H. SCALE modeling of selected neutronics test problems within the OECD UAM LWR's benchmark[J]. Science & Technology of Nuclear Installations, 2013, (2):573697. DOI:10.1155/2013/573697.
3 Wan C, Cao L, Wu H, et al. Code development for eigenvalue total sensitivity analysis and total uncertainty analysis[J]. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2015, 85:788-797. DOI:10.1016/j.anucene.2015.06.036.
4 Foad B, Takeda T. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for UO₂, and MOX, fueled PWR, cells[J]. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2015, 75(1):595-604. DOI:10.1016/j.anucene. 2014.08.068.
5 Xu J Y, Ma X B, Lu F, et al. Nuclear data and fuel/assembly manufacturing uncertainties analysis and preliminary validation of SUACL[EB/OL]. 2017. https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.06601.
6 Helton J C, Davis F J, Johnson J D. A comparison of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis results obtained with random and Latin hypercube sampling[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2005, 89(3):305-330. DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2004.09.006.
7 Helton J C, Davis F J. Latin hypercube sampling and the propagation of uncertainty in analyses of complex systems[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2003, 81(1):23-69. DOI:10.1016/S0951-8320(03)00058-9.
8 Chiba G, Kawamoto Y, Tsuji M, et al. Estimation of neutronics parameter sensitivity to nuclear data in random sampling-based uncertainty quantification calculations[J]. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2015, 75:395-403. DOI:10.1016/j.anucene.2014.08.049.
9 Helton J C, Johnson J D, Sallaberry C J, et al. Survey of sampling-based methods for uncertainty and sensitivity analysis[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2006, 91(10-11):1175-1209. DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2005. 11.017.
10 Wilks S S. Determination of sample sizes for setting tolerance limits[J]. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1941, 12(1):91-96.
11 潘昕怿, 兰兵, 张春明, 等. 多群核数据不确定性对堆芯物理计算的影响[J]. 核技术, 2016, 39(1):010602. DOI:10.11889/j.0253-3219.2016.hjs.39.010602. PAN Xinyi, LAN Bing, ZHANG Chunming, et al. Effect of uncertainty of multi-group nuclear data on core physics calculation[J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2016, 39(1):010602. DOI:10.11889/j.0253-3219.2016.hjs.39.010602.
12 Herman M, Trkov A. ENDF-6 formats manual[M]. 2009.
13 Chadwick M B, Herman M, Obložinský P, et al. ENDF/B-VⅡ.1 Nuclear data for science and technology:cross sections, covariances, fission product yields and decay data[J]. Nuclear Data Sheets, 2011, 112(12):2887-2996. DOI:10.1016/j.nds.2011.11.002.
14 Ivanov K, Avramova M, Kamerow S, et al. Benchmark for uncertainty analysis in modeling (UAM) for design, operation and safety analysis of LWRs (NEA-NSC-DOC-2013-7)[R]. Vienna, Austria:Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD, 2013.
15 万承辉, 曹良志, 吴宏春, 等. 基于抽样方法的特征值不确定度分析[J]. 原子能科学技术, 2015, 49(11):1954-1960. DOI:10.7538/yzk.2015.49.11.1954. WAN Chenghui, CAO Liangzhi, WU Hongchun, et al. Uncertainty analysis of the eigenvalue based on sampling method[J]. Atomic Energy Science and Technology, 2015, 49(11):1954-1960. DOI:10.7538/yzk.2015.49.11.1954.

[1]	Jifeng HU, Xiaohe WANG, Wenjiang LI, Xiaoxiao LI, Jianlong HAN. Uncertainties analysis of reactivity parameters caused by nuclear data of molten salt experiment reactor [J]. Nuclear Science and Techniques, 2019, 42(3): 30601-030601.
[2]	CHEN Rui, ZHOU Shumin. Multi-temperature cross section generation method in unresolved resonance energy region based on Neville interpolation [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2018, 41(9): 90601-090601.
[3]	WEI Bo, ZHANG Zhengjun, TONG Chuchu, CHEN Jingen, HU Jifeng. Theoretical calculations and analysis of the full set of microcosmic data for n+^74,75,77,79As nuclear reaction [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2018, 41(7): 70502-070502.
[4]	CHEN Rui, ZHOU Shumin. On-the-fly nuclear cross section generation based on numerical integral method [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2018, 41(12): 120602-120602.
[5]	CAO Zhen, CAO Kemei, WANG Jiayun. Uncertainty analysis of in vessel retention in three-layer melt pool configuration [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2018, 41(10): 100605-100605.
[6]	CUI Deyang, XIA Shaopeng, YU Chenggang, CAI Xiangzhou, CHEN Jingen. Methodologies for single-fluid,two-zone MSR burnup calculation based on SCALE/TRITON [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2017, 40(8): 80602-080602.
[7]	HONG Shuang, YANG Yongwei, ZHANG Lu, GAO Yucui. Fabrication and validation of multigroup cross section library based on the OpenMC code [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2017, 40(4): 40502-040502.
[8]	CHEN Rui, HAO Lijuan, SONG Jing, WU Bin, HE Peng. On-the-fly Doppler broadening method based on piecewise Gauss quadrature for generating neutron cross section [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2017, 40(4): 40503-040503.
[9]	LI Da, CHEN Da, JIANG Xinbiao, QI Tietao, YU Qingyu, YU Xiaoren, ZHANG Jihong, ZHANG Wenshou. A fast neutron fluence monitor method based on ¹⁰³Rh(n,n')¹⁰³Rh^m reaction [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2017, 40(1): 10203-010203.
[10]	WANG Chao, XIAO Jun, WANG Pan, LI Yingying, LI Ziyue, LUO Xiaobing. Nondestructive determination of the ²³⁸U content in mental uranium sample by using the activation method [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2016, 39(8): 80201-080201.
[11]	WANG Pan, XIAO Jun, LI Yingying, LI Ziyue, WANG Chao. Experimental measurement and Monte Carlo correction of neutron inelastic scattering cross section of ¹¹⁵In [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2016, 39(4): 40201-040201.
[12]	PAN Xinyi, LAN Bing, ZHANG Chunming, JING Jianping, YOU Guoshun. Influence of multigroup nuclear data uncertainties on the reactor core physics calculation [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2016, 39(1): 10602-010602.
[13]	XIE Mingliang, CHEN Yuqing, YU Lei, SHI Hao. Optimization analysis of the production process based on WIMS format multigroup nuclear data [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2015, 38(11): 110502-110502.
[14]	ZHOU Xuemei, WANG Xiaohe. Study on multigroup nuclear cross section library for TMSR-SF at high temperature [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2014, 37(12): 120602-120602.
[15]	WANG Hongwei,CHEN Jingen,CAI Xiangzhou,LIN Zuokang,MA Yugang,ZHANG Guilin,LI Chen,FANG Deqing,ZHANG Song,ZHANG Guoqiang,CAO Xiguang,ZHONG Chen,LU Fei,CAO Yun,HU Ruirong,JIN Jiang,HU Jianhui,CHEN Weiliang,HUANG Jianping,WANG Naxiu,HAN Jianlong,KANG Guoguo,DU Long,WANG Yuting,ZHU Liang,CHANG Le,ZHOU. Development of photo-neutron facility driven by electron LINAC [J]. Nuclear Techniques, 2014, 37(10): 100522-100522.

Research on impact of cross section consistence and different covariance library in the process of uncertainty analysis

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10