search

arfc / msr-neutronics

To hold development code, milestones, and developments for msr neutronics.
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
7 stars 9 forks source link

Radial reflector #6

Closed andrewryh closed 7 years ago

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Robertson robertson1 robertson2

Park park1 park2

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

  1. Introduced new material refl - 37% fuel and 63% carbon. 1.03821 +/- 0.00055 core_geom1_homogenizated_reflector core_geom1 core_mesh1

  2. Simplified geometry core_geom1_nest4

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Fixed geometry error and changed sizes annulus and reflector. k-eff (analog) = 1.03768 +/- 0.00054 [1.03662 1.03875] k-eff (implicit) = 1.03808 +/- 0.00024 [1.03761 1.03855] core_geom1 core_mesh1

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Trying use Circular cluster array lattice. Doesn't rotating surface core_geom1

katyhuff commented 7 years ago

I think the only way to do it is with radial planes that cross the centerline and traverse that space.

e.g. planes at:

x=0
y=0
x + y = 0
x - y = 0
x + 2y = 0
x - 2y = 0
.
.
.
andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Planes from the center of origin: core_number_planes_geom1

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Another option: Pad surface: serpent_manual core_geom1 core_mesh1 k-eff (analog) = 1.03557 +/- 0.00061 [1.03437 1.03677] k-eff (implicit) = 1.03649 +/- 0.00026 [1.03598 1.03699]

katyhuff commented 7 years ago

@andrewryh : I just noticed that these new images and results aren't accompanied by any new pushed commits or pull requests. I'd like to be able to see (and maybe help with) the serpent input files themselves over time. Anyway, it's best practice to try to commit as often as possible. If it is just stuff you're trying out, then you can keep those changes in experimental branches until they are ready to merge. Anyway, these images should be associated with some version of the input files, if possible. Thanks!

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Finished radial reflector Active cycle 500 / 500 Source neutrons : 9830 Running time : 0:44:14 Estimated running time : 0:44:14 Estimated running time left : 0:00:00 Estimated relative CPU usage : 100.0% k-eff (analog) = 1.04511 +/- 0.00057 [1.04400 1.04622] k-eff (implicit) = 1.04504 +/- 0.00025 [1.04455 1.04554] core_geom1 core_mesh1_compressed

katyhuff commented 7 years ago

bitmoji

katyhuff commented 7 years ago

I think this issue can be closed, then! Enjoy wisconsin.

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Check volumes: fuel salt - 36.991% Total volume of fuel salt in Zone-II: 8'326'890 cm3=294 ft3 (Robertson - 282ft3

radial_reflector2

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Calculated case with ALL I-B lattice (previous simulations were with zone I-A) geometry: k-eff (analog) = 1.04352 +/- 0.00060 [1.04234 1.04469] k-eff (implicit) = 1.04298 +/- 0.00024 [1.04251 1.04345] From my point of view this case much closer to Robertson conception and, surprisingly, Keff almost doesn't change. I think this IA-IB business created to manage thermal-hydraulics parameters (decrease pressure drops most likely). core_geom1 core_mesh1 Here is comparison our picture and pic from Robertson: compare_zone_ib

andrewryh commented 7 years ago

Gotcha! Robertson, p.46:

The salt fraction is 0.132 in both zones I-A and I-B, but the interstitial channels have been made smaller and the central hole larger in zone I-B. The purpose of this arrangement is to achieve flow control by orificing only the central hole rather than by complication the design with orifices for the interstitial channels as well.

So, because we making neutronics, we can choose favorite cell type and don't worry about it anymore. Perhaps, interesting idea for multiphysics optimization: find core configuration with both I-A and I-B to achieve the best flux profile (flat) with lowest possible pressure drop. Task for Moltres

katyhuff commented 7 years ago

Love this!