2014
DOI: 10.5516/net.01.2014.710
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Oecd/Nea Benchmark for Uncertainty Analysis in Modeling (Uam) for LWRS – Summary and Discussion of Neutronics Cases (Phase I)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
11
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
3
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Results for k eff and two-group macroscopic cross sections at BOC and EOC are shown in Table 2. The calculated uncertainties are comparable to previously compiled results for the pin-cell benchmark [7] and the EOC results clearly show the effect of the larger variances associated with the higher actinides.…”
Section: Pin-cell Calculationssupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Results for k eff and two-group macroscopic cross sections at BOC and EOC are shown in Table 2. The calculated uncertainties are comparable to previously compiled results for the pin-cell benchmark [7] and the EOC results clearly show the effect of the larger variances associated with the higher actinides.…”
Section: Pin-cell Calculationssupporting
confidence: 78%
“…The uncertainties are comparable with other compilations of results for this benchmark [7]. With respect to the uncertainties of the delayed neutron fractions, note that the SCALE 6.1 covariance data do not contain uncertainties of the average number of delayed neutrons per fission (ν) separately, but only for the total ν.…”
Section: Depletion Calculationssupporting
confidence: 72%
“…2 together with the mean value of k inf calculated. Participant-averaged result from exercise I-b benchmark (only available for the final burnup condition in [4]) is presented in the fifth column for comparison purposes. The symbol ∆ is the difference between the value calculated in this study by SAMPLER and the reference value.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This was proposed in scope of the UAM benchmark in order to address uncertainties in nuclear fuel depletion calculation due to the basic nuclear data as well as the impact of processing the nuclear and covariance data. Summary and discussion of neutronic cases performed by the participants is available in [4]. Participantaveraged results for exercise I-b are reproduced here for comparison purposes despite different input covariance cross-sections were used by the participants.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been shown [1][2][3], that the nuclear data uncertainties are most fundamental contributors to the final uncertainty of safetyrelated reactor neutronic parameters. Effective neutron multiplication factor k eff , reactivity effects and neutron kinetic parameters remain fundamental for the sub-critical systems as well.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%