Boiling Water Reactor Core Simulation with Generalized Isotopic Inventory Tracking for Actinide ...

175 Pages·2016·4.66 MB·English

UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff TTeennnneesssseeee,, KKnnooxxvviillllee
TTRRAACCEE:: TTeennnneesssseeee RReesseeaarrcchh aanndd CCrreeaattiivvee
EExxcchhaannggee
Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School
8-2010
BBooiilliinngg WWaatteerr RReeaaccttoorr CCoorree SSiimmuullaattiioonn wwiitthh GGeenneerraalliizzeedd IIssoottooppiicc
IInnvveennttoorryy TTrraacckkiinngg ffoorr AAccttiinniiddee MMaannaaggeemmeenntt
Jack Douglas Galloway
[email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss
Part of the Nuclear Engineering Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Galloway, Jack Douglas, "Boiling Water Reactor Core Simulation with Generalized Isotopic Inventory
Tracking for Actinide Management. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2010.
https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/798
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee
Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized
administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
To the Graduate Council:
I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Jack Douglas Galloway entitled "Boiling Water
Reactor Core Simulation with Generalized Isotopic Inventory Tracking for Actinide
Management." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and
content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Nuclear Engineering.
G. Ivan Maldonado, Major Professor
We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance:
Kevin T. Clarno, Lee L. Riedinger, Arthur E. Ruggles
Accepted for the Council:
Carolyn R. Hodges
Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School
(Original signatures are on file with official student records.)
To the Graduate Council:

I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Jack Douglas Galloway entitled “Boiling
Water Reactor Core Simulation with Generalized Isotopic Inventory Tracking for Actinide
Management” I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and
content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Nuclear Engineering.

G. Ivan Maldonado, Major Professor
We have read this dissertation
and recommend its acceptance:

Kevin T. Clarno

Lee L. Riedinger

Arthur E. Ruggles

Accepted for the Council:

Carolyn R. Hodges
Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School

(Original signatures are on file with official student records.)
i
Boiling Water Reactor Core Simulation with
Generalized Isotopic Inventory Tracking for
Actinide Management

A Dissertation Presented for
the Doctor of Philosophy
Degree
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville

(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)Jack(cid:3)(cid:24)(cid:381)(cid:437)(cid:336)(cid:367)(cid:258)(cid:400)(cid:3)Galloway
(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:3)August 2010

i
Copyright © 2010 by Jack Douglas Galloway
All rights reserved.

ii
Acknowledgments
In this short space I would like to thank all the people who have worked to be a support to me
throughout this endeavor. First off, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. G. Ivan Maldonado,
who years ago pursued and encouraged me to enroll in graduate school and who has been an
invaluable technical advisor as well as friend through these years.
The number of people who have served as encouragements, technical support, and fellowship
are too numerous to mention, but those who have stood out will be mentioned. Dr. Matthew
Jessee as both friend and technical mentor, Dr. Kevin Clarno who is also serving on my
committee, Dr. Ian Gauld who always had his door open to help, David Dixon who’s friendship
has been a joy for years, Hermilo Hernandez, the number of collaborators at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory who have worked to keep me both funded and serving on a truly enjoyable project.
In addition I would like to thank Julie and Jon, my sister and brother, for their emotional
support and encouragement. I want to thank my wife, Becky, for the support and
encouragement she has provided throughout this journey. As I look at the people who have
surrounded me and been my support through these years I am both humbled and thankful.
The most influential people in my life are my parents Gary and Jennie Galloway. I am so
thankful for Mom’s constant encouragement and affirming words. I also thank my Dad; as a
mentor in Christ, as a Father figure, as a nuclear engineer. I only hope I can garner the respect
of my peers in technical prowess and more importantly in strength of character and humility
that he has over his years as a nuclear engineer.
Finally, and most importantly, I want to thank Christ Jesus, to whom I gave my life over to many
years ago, and who has never failed. As I look back through this journey, I see how He has
fulfilled his promise to never leave; especially in the most difficult times. May this document
serve as a witness to me and those who read, testifying to Christ’s faithfulness.
iii
Abstract
The computational ability to accurately simulate boiling water reactor operation under the full
range of standard steady-state operation, along with the capability to fully track the isotopic
distribution of any fueled region in any location in the core has been developed. This new
three-dimensional node-by-node capability can help designers track, for example, a full suite of
minor and major actinides, fission products, and even light elements that result from depletion,
decay, or transmutations. This isotopic tracking capability is not restricted to BWRs and can be
employed in the modeling of PWRs, CANDUs, and other reactor types that can be modeled with
the NESTLE code, the base core simulator employed in this research.
To accurately simulate boiling water reactor operation, a major thermal-hydraulics upgrade was
performed which involved the implementation of a drift-flux solution scheme to model steady-
state boiling water flow. Sub-cooled boiling and bulk boiling are accurately modeled and a
scheme for computing the correct flow distribution has been implemented. In addition, the
incorporation of a nodal ORIGEN-based microscopic depletion solution has been included which
allows for exceptional detail in tracking a large number of elements in every node of a core
design, thus accounting for spectral dependencies such as moderator density effects,
moderator temperature effects, fuel temperature effects, as well as controlled or uncontrolled
conditions.
The results of this study show the excellent fidelity of the two-phase solution for accurately
predicting the boiling of water when compared to experimental results. Likewise, the isotopic
inventory results show near-identical agreement with the well-established and validated
ORIGEN-based SCALE/TRITON isotopic depletion sequence. The aim of these developments is
to eventually produce a publicly available three-dimensional core simulator capable of
assessing detailed isotopic inventories, a capability particularly valuable for the evaluation of
recycling scenarios and actinide management in a variety of reactor types and fuel designs.
iv
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Literature Review ............................................................................................................. 4
1.2.1 Transmutation ........................................................................................................... 4
1.2.2 Thermal-Hydraulics ................................................................................................. 10
1.2.3 Isotopics .................................................................................................................. 11
2 Proof of Principle Studies ...................................................................................................... 13
3 Two-Phase Thermal-Hydraulic Model ................................................................................... 24
3.1 Thermal-Hydraulics Overview ........................................................................................ 24
3.2 Nestle Drift-Flux Solution ............................................................................................... 26
3.3 Flow Distribution ............................................................................................................ 37
3.4 Thermal Limits ................................................................................................................ 42
4 Code Validation ..................................................................................................................... 43
4.1 Water Property Validation ............................................................................................. 43
4.2 Thermal-Hydraulic Validation ........................................................................................ 46
4.2.1 Benchmark Overview .............................................................................................. 46
4.2.2 Experiment Description .......................................................................................... 47
4.2.3 Single Phase Results ................................................................................................ 48
4.2.4 Two-Phase Results .................................................................................................. 54
4.3 Coupled Neutronics and Thermal Hydraulics Validation ............................................... 61
v
4.3.1 NESTLE Input ........................................................................................................... 61
4.3.2 Peach Bottom Benchmark Description ................................................................... 61
4.3.3 Peach Bottom Benchmark Results .......................................................................... 69
5 Implementation of Generalized Isotopic Tracking ................................................................ 77
5.1 Description of SCALE Lattice Physics Coupling to NESTLE ............................................. 77
5.1.1 TRITON Computational Enhancement .................................................................... 78
5.2 ORIGEN Validation.......................................................................................................... 81
5.3 Coupling ORIGEN to NESTLE ........................................................................................... 83
5.4 End to End Demonstration of Actinide Recycling Illustrations ...................................... 89
6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 97
References .................................................................................................................................. 102
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................... 107
Appendix A – Peach Bottom II Cycle 1 Input Deck .................................................................. 107
Appendix B – TRITON Memory Management Script............................................................... 120
Appendix C – BOC Microscopic Cross-Sections ....................................................................... 122
Appendix D – EOC Microscopic Cross-Sections ....................................................................... 142
7 Vita ....................................................................................................................................... 162

vi
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Contribution to Heat Load in Spent Nuclear Fuel .......................................................... 3
Figure 2.1 Lattice to Core Process ................................................................................................ 14
Figure 2.2 Equilibrium Core Loading Pattern ................................................................................ 17
Figure 2.3 Equilibrium Core Bundle Design .................................................................................. 18
Figure 2.4 Spiked Bundle Locations .............................................................................................. 19
Figure 2.5 Spiked Bundle 241Am Transmutation ........................................................................... 20
Figure 2.6 Equilibrium Core Shutdown Margin ............................................................................ 21
Figure 2.7 Axial 241Am Transmutation .......................................................................................... 22
Figure 3.1 Thermal Hydraulic Nodal Discretization ...................................................................... 27
Figure 4.1 Single Phase Pressure Drop P70027 (psi) .................................................................... 49
Figure 4.2 Single Phase Pressure Drop P70028 (psi) .................................................................... 50
Figure 4.3 Single Phase Pressure Drop P70034 (psi) .................................................................... 52
Figure 4.4 Single Phase Pressure Drop P70035 (psi) .................................................................... 52
Figure 4.5 Single Phase Pressure Drop P70036 (psi) .................................................................... 53
Figure 4.6 Drift-Flux Star-CCM+ Comparison ................................................................................ 54
Figure 4.7 Bottom Peaked Power Profile ...................................................................................... 55
Figure 4.8 Outlet Void Fraction ..................................................................................................... 57
Figure 4.9 Two Phase Benchmark Density Results ....................................................................... 58
Figure 4.10 Two Phase Benchmark Void Fraction Propagated Error ........................................... 59
Figure 4.11 Axial Void Fraction Variation - Uniform Power.......................................................... 60
vii