A new novel-1-step shutdown dose rate method combining the benefits of the rigorous-2-step and direct-1-step methods

A new novel-1-step shutdown dose rate method combining the benefits of the rigorous-2-step and direct-1-step methods

A new novel-1-step shutdown dose rate method combining the benefits of the rigorous-2-step and direct-1-step methods 150 150 Mathew
UKAEA-CCFE-PR(22)18

A new novel-1-step shutdown dose rate method combining the benefits of the rigorous-2-step and direct-1-step methods

A new method for the calculation of Shutdown Dose Rates (SDDR) has been developed, the Novel-1-Step (N1S) method. The new method retains the benefits of only requiring a single radiation transport calculation, as in the use of the direct-1-step (D1S) method, while removing the need for pre-calculations to determine dominant nuclides and time correction factors. The N1S method uses a time dependent source and decay data for all isotopes. When reactions in the transport occur leading to unstable daughter nuclide, the correct contribution of photon radiation from all the decay products of a nuclide are calculated with no need for additional external activation calculations. Weights of these decay photons are calculated for each decay time of interest and are analytically calculated based on the solutions to the Bateman equations. The N1S method has been implemented into MCNP and preliminary verification calculations performed. These calculations included the FNG ITER shutdown dose rate benchmark and the ITER SDDR cross comparison. For the FNG ITER SDDR benchmark the N1S method showed good agreement, within experimental error, for the first campaign apart from the first decay time where a C/E value of 1.34 was obtained. This was shown to be due to the decay of 64Cu inside the copper cup of the neutron generator. For the second campaign the N1S method showed an under prediction of up to 20% at short decay times and an over prediction up to 20% at longer decay times. These times are dominated by 56Mn and 58Co respectively and it is likely the difference is due to under and over predictions in the reaction rates leading to these isotopes. The ITER cross comparison showed good agreement between the N1S method and MCR2S (and by association other D1S and R2S codes). Difference seen in the results were shown to be due to difference in the calculated reaction rates using EAF2010, TENDL2019 and FENDL3.2.

Collection:
Journals
Journal:
Fusion Engineering and Design
Publisher:
Elsevier