2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.anucene.2016.06.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Verification of MCNP6 model of the Jordan Research and Training Reactor (JRTR) for calculations of neutronic parameters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Also, additional research is needed to determine whether the slight differences in uncertainties produced by MCD and BNN are caused by the algorithms themselves or by the training data used in this study. Possible future studies to be considered include: (1) an attempt to use the measurement data for predicting 3D flux shapes, (2) investigate reasons for the inferior performance of NNs in the vicinity of the coupling piece of the control follower assemblies and find a way to increase the accuracy of predictions, thereby improve the overall performance of these models, and (3) benchmark with other machine learning techniques such as Gaussian Processes that can provide the interpolation uncertainties directly.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Also, additional research is needed to determine whether the slight differences in uncertainties produced by MCD and BNN are caused by the algorithms themselves or by the training data used in this study. Possible future studies to be considered include: (1) an attempt to use the measurement data for predicting 3D flux shapes, (2) investigate reasons for the inferior performance of NNs in the vicinity of the coupling piece of the control follower assemblies and find a way to increase the accuracy of predictions, thereby improve the overall performance of these models, and (3) benchmark with other machine learning techniques such as Gaussian Processes that can provide the interpolation uncertainties directly.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The knowledge of the neutron flux distribution is essential in determining various reactor physical parameters such as its absolute power, fuel burnup, power peaking factor (PPF), peak-clad fuel temperature, safety margins, as well as in the monitoring of the reactor operation. Furthermore, the determination of axial and radial neutron flux distribution is also important for fuel management, code verification and validation (V&V) studies [1,2] and experiments, as well as for various applications such as medical isotope production [3]. A good knowledge of the flux distribution is, therefore, crucial for an efficient operation of the reactors without violation of safety limits.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…e plate-type fuel with the uranium density of 3 gU/cm 3 was also used in the MPRR design with the power of 20 MW for achieving high neutron fluxes at irradiation channels [5]. Several designs of MPRRs include the OPAL reactor (20 MW) in Australia [9,10], the CARR reactor (60 MW) in China, the RA-10 reactor (30 MW) in Argentina [11], the HFIR reactor (85 MW) in USA, the FRM-II reactor (20 MW) in Germany [12], the HANARO reactor (30 MW) in Korea [13,14], JRR-3M (20 MW) in Japan, the RMB reactor (30 MW) in Brazil [15], and the JRTR reactor (5 MW) in Jordan [16]. A comparison among several MPRRs shows that the FRM-II reactor achieves the highest thermal flux per unit power with a maximum thermal neutron flux of 8 × 10 14 n•cm −2 •s −1 [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%