The Method to Predict First Critical Core Loading for Nuclear Reactors

Abstract

Nuclear power plants have an important role in carbon free electricity production in the world. One of the important steps of commissioning a nuclear power plant is the first core loading. This is also called approaching the criticality. Since the number of fuel elements for the criticality is not known, precautions must be taken to prevent safety incidents. Although the procedure is performed on-line such that the neutron counts are measured at each loading of fuel elements to calculate sub-critical multiplication and the number of fuel element to reach criticality were predicted, computer simulations can also be used. In this study, inverse sub-critical multiplication method was applied to Istanbul Technical University TRIGA Mark II research reactor first criticality in 1979 by using Monte Carlo simulation code MCNP6.2. Full 3-D model of the reactor was generated for calculations. Both results, experimental and simulation, showed that reactor became critical with 62 fuel elements. The core excess reactivity of 23.1 cents was predicted as 21.7 with the code. The simulation results are in good agreement with experimental results. The methodology and simulations can be used for power reactor analysis as well.

Keywords

• Criticality approach
• Monte Carlo method
• sub-critical multiplication
• reactor start-up

References

1. A. Rising, “World Nuclear Performance Report,” 2019.
2. International Atomic Energy Agency, “Nuclear Power Reactors in the World,” 2019.
3. IAEA, “The Database on Nuclear Power Reactors,” 2019..
4. Akkuyu Nükleer, “Akkuyu Nükleer Güç Santrali’nin temeli Rusya Federasyonu Devlet Başkanı ve Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanı’nın tatıldığı törenle atıldı,” 2018.
5. J. R. Lamarsh, Introduction to Nuclear Engineering. Addison-Wesley Company, 1977.
6. G. Gedeon, “Reactor Kinetics and Operation,” 1993.
7. M. Yoshinori and S. Takenori, “Review of Criticality Experiment Facilities In Japan,” in Experts Meeting on Experimental Needs in Criticality Safety, 1995.
8. K. O. Kim, B. J. Jun, B. Lee, S. J. Park, and G. Roh, “Comparison of first criticality prediction and experiment of the Jordan research and training reactor (JRTR),” Nucl. Eng. Technol., vol. 52, no.1, pp. 14-18, 2020.

9. N. Jahan, M. M. Rahman, M. Q. Huda, and S. M. Seo, “Sub-Criticality Measurement with Source Term for Research Reactor in Inverse Kinetics Method,” World J. Nucl. Sci. Technol., vol. 07, no. 03, pp. 129–135, 2017.
10. A. D. Barber and G. A. Harms, “Results for the First Approach-to-Critical for the Seven Percent Critical Experiment at the Sandia Pulse Reactor Facility,” 2009.
11. C. S. Lee, C. G. Seo, and B. Jun, “The Initial Criticality and Nuclear Commissioning Test Program at HANARO,” 1995.
12. C. J. Werner, “MCNP Users Manual - Code Version 6.2,” 2017.
13. E. H. Özkul and A. Durmayaz, “A Parametric Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Of I.T.U. Triga Mark-II Reactor,” in TRIGA users conference, p. 366., 2008.
14. M. Türkmen, “Design of Piercing Beam Port of ITU TRIGA Mark II Research Reactor for BNCT Application,” 2015.
15. J. Duderstadt and L. Hamilton, Nuclear Reactor Analysis. John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1976.
16. D. D. Glover, Experimental Reactor Analysis and Radiation Measurements. McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965.
17. G. Csom, Laboratory Training Manual on the Use of Research Reactors. International Atomic Energy Agency, 1979.