Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations
Volume 2014, Article ID 132737, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/132737
Research Article

Decomposition Analysis of Void Reactivity Coefficient for Innovative and Modified BWR Assemblies

Lithuanian Energy Institute, Breslaujos Street 3, 44403 Kaunas, Lithuania

Received 14 November 2013; Accepted 14 February 2014; Published 18 March 2014

Academic Editor: Arkady Serikov

Copyright © 2014 Andrius Slavickas et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. H. R. Trellue, “Safety and neutronics: a comparison of MOX versus UO2 fuel,” Progress in Nuclear Energy, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 135–145, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. R. Ramirez-Sanchez, R. T. Perry, V. Gustavo Alonso, and H. Javier Palacios, “MOX fuel assembly design equivalent to enriched uranium fuel for BWR,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on the Physics of Reactors “Nuclear Power: A Sustainable Resource” (PHYSOR '08), pp. 1528–1532, Casino-Kursaal Conference Center, Interlaken, Switzerland, September 2008. View at Scopus
  3. J. L. François, C. M. D. Campo, and J. Hernández, “Design of an overmoderated fuel and a full MOX core for plutonium consumption in boiling water reactors,” Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 29, no. 16, pp. 1953–1965, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. T. Yamamoto, T. Umano, R. Kanda et al., “Core physics experiments and their analysis of high moderation full MOX BWR,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Global Environment and Advanced Nuclear Power Plants (GENES4/ANS '03), Paper 1123, Kyoto, Japan, September 2003.
  5. F. Franceschini and B. Petrović, “Core physics analysis of 100% MOX core in IRIS,” Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 35, no. 9, pp. 1587–1597, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. Z. Jitka and J. Wallenius, “Void reactivity feedback in BWRs with MA bearing MOX fuels,” Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 1968–1977, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. “A Comprehensive Modeling and Simulation Suite for Nuclear Safety Analysis and Design,” ORNL/TM-2005/39, Version 6.1, June 2011.
  8. M. D. DeHart, “Lattice physics capabilities of the SCALE code system using TRITON,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on the Physics of Reactors, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, September 2006. View at Scopus
  9. M. Pecchia, G. Kotev, C. Parisi, and F. D'Auria, “MOx benchmark calculations by deterministic and Monte Carlo codes,” Nuclear Engineering and Design, vol. 246, pp. 63–68, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. J. L. Francois and C. Martin del Campo, “Lattice physics codes comparisons for the NEA BWR-MOX benchmark,” in Proceedings of the International Topical Meeting on Advances in Reactor Physics and Mathematics and Computation into the Next Millennium, Pittsburgh, Pa, USA, May 2000.
  11. A. Yamamoto, T. Ikehara, I. T. O. Takuya, and E. Saji, “Benchmark problem suite for reactor physics study of LWR next generation fuels,” Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 900–912, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus