Validation of the Neutron and Gamma Flux Distributions in the JSI

Validation of the Neutron and Gamma Flux Distributions in the JSI
TRIGA Reactor Core
ˇ
Gaˇsper Zerovnik
Reactor Physics Department, Joˇzef Stefan Institute
Jamova cesta 19
SI-1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia
[email protected]
Tanja Kaibaa , Vladimir Radulovi´ca,b , Anˇze Jazbeca , Sebastjan Rupnika ,
Lo¨ıc Barbotb , Damien Fourmentelb , Luka Snoja , Jean-Franc¸ois Villardb
a
Reactor Physics Department, Joˇzef Stefan Institute
Jamova cesta 19
SI-1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia
CEA, DEN, DER, Instrumentation, Sensors and Dosimetry Laboratory
Cadarache
F-13108 St-Paul-Lez-Durance, France
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
b
ABSTRACT
Within the framework of the collaboration between JSI and CEA Cadarache, a series of on-line
neutron and gamma flux distribution measurements in the JSI TRIGA reactor core was performed.
CEA manufactured fission and ionization chambers were used in this experiment. Axial gamma flux
and fission rate distributions were measured in special measuring positions between fuel element in,
above and below the reactor core.
The measurements were compared with the Monte Carlo calculations using the JSI TRIGA
MCNP5 model. The fission chamber response function in pulse mode operation was compared with
the calculated fission rates, while the ionization chamber response in current mode was (after background subtraction) compared to the calculated gamma fluxes. Due to almost equal sensitivities to
gamma rays, the fission minus ionization chamber response in current mode was also compared to
the calculated fission rates. In general, the agreement is very good which provides additional proof
of the quality of the computational model. A new set of measurements with fission chambers operated in Campbell mode (fully selective response to neutrons) will be performed in 2014 and will also
append the available measurement database.
Apart from the validation of the TRIGA computational model, the main purpose of the experimental campaign is to determine the fission chamber response as a function of control rod positioning,
which will later serve as a basis for reactor thermal power measurements.
706.1
706.1
706.2
706.2
1
INTRODUCTION
The TRIGA Mark II research reactor at the Joˇzef Stefan Institute (JSI) is extensively used for
various applications, such as training and education [1], verification and validation of nuclear data,
computational methods and computer codes [2], testing and development of experimental equipment
used for core physics tests at the Krˇsko Nuclear Power Plant [3] and irradiation of various samples.
The latter activity related mainly to using the reactor as source of neutrons for use in nuclear analytical techniques, e.g. neutron activation analysis (NAA) [4], and as source of neutrons and gamma
rays for irradiation of silicon detectors [5] and related radiation damage studies of detector material
and of reading electronics for the ATLAS detector in CERN.
Optimal performance of the studies is often sensitive to the intensity and the shape of the neutron spectra at the points of irradiation. Nowadays such tailoring is commonly done with advanced
computer codes, such as MCNP [6]. However, the computational model in such calculations should
be thoroughly verified and validated with experiments. The first validation of the TRIGA Mark II
computational model in MCNP was done by comparing the calculated kef f with the criticality benchmark experiment performed in 1991 [7], later published in the ICSBEP handbook [8]. In order to
expand the utilization of the JSI TRIGA computational model, the model was validated in MCNP for
reaction rate distribution [2].
Since 2010 many experiments (neutron spectrum characterization, in-core flux mapping with
235
U and 238 U fission chambers, βef f measurements) have been performed in collaboration with
CEA Cadarache. The purpose of these experiments was on one hand to test neutron measurement
methods and equipment and on the other hand to use the measured data for verification and validation
of the computational model.
The use of CEA developed miniature fission chambers (FC) [9] and JSI developed moving mechanism [10] (“FC positioning system”) allowed measuring axial and radial neutron flux profiles, or to
be more exact, fission rate profiles, with a spatial resolution of 1 mm. In contrast to the above mentioned reaction rate measurements in irradiation channels, that give information on flux profile on a
plane only, the advantage of such a system is that enables full 3D neutron profile characterization.
In addition to neutron flux measurements, measurements of the gamma fields were performed as
well. The information on the intensity of the gamma field in the reactor is especially important for
applications such as radiation hardness studies [5]. The fission chambers were operated in pulse mode
as well as in current mode. Special attention was devoted to background determination, linearity tests
and dead time corrections.
2
2.1
JSI TRIGA REACTOR
Description
The TRIGA research reactor at JSI is a 250 kW TRIGA Mark II reactor. It is a light water pool
type reactor, cooled by natural convection. The reactor core is of annular configuration with diameter
of 44.2 cm and active fuel height of 38.1 cm. As shown in Fig. 1, there are 90 positions in the
reactor core available for fuel elements, control rods, irradiation channels, etc., including two larger
openings in the D-E rings. In the metal grid above the reactor core, there are 26 additional small
holes, i.e. measuring positions 8 mm and 10 mm in diameter, enabling access from above the core.
For example, fission and ionization chambers can be inserted in any of these positions to measure the
neutron or gamma flux at any axial position in (and above/below) the reactor core.
In total there are four control rods (Fig. 1), however during normal operation only regulating (R)
and compensating (C) rods are used while the pulse (P) and safety (S) rods are always completely
Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe, Portorož, Slovenia, September 8 ̶ 11, 2014
706.3
706.3
withdrawn. As of 2014, the current excess reactivity is smaller than the integral worth of any control
rod thus one control rod is sufficient to shut the reactor down.
F15
F14
F13
E10
F11
E12
D9
D10
F8
C6
D7
E8
MP2
MP25
D6
MP3
NS
MP4
D5
D11
IC
F20
E16
MP15
F21
D12
MP16
E17
C8
B4
B3
C4
F22
E18 FPTS
P
D14
B5
B2
CC
C10
B6
MP8
B1
C2
E5
S
MP9
C12
F25
E21
D17
D2
F5
E2
F4
D1
F26
E1
E22
D18
R
E3
MP12
PT
E20
MP21
MP22
MP11
F24
D16
C1
E4
E19
D15
C11
D3
F6
F23
MP10
MP26
MP20
D4
C9
MP17
A1
MP5
C3
E6
F7
MP14
D13
C5
E7
C
C7
MP13
F19
E14
E15
D8
F9
F18
E13
E9
MP1
F17
E11
F12
F10
F16
IC
E24
F28
MP23
F3
IC
F27
E23
F29
F2
MP24
F1
F30
Figure 1: Positions (A-F) in the reactor core including the small upper grid openings – measuring
positions (MP) for in-core measurements.
2.2
Measurements
2.2.1
Fission and ionization chamber design
The CEA manufactured miniature fission chambers (FC) were designed considering the operational constraints and the expected neutron flux in research reactors. CEA manufactured water-tight
fission chambers with integrated mineral cable have a fissile deposit approximately 10 µg of 98.49 %
enriched 235 U [9]. FCs are nominally 3 mm in diameter and sensitive length approximately 4 mm.
Mechanical parts are purchased from the PHOTONIS France SAS Company. Fissile deposits, detectors assembly and preliminary tests were performed in the CEA Cadarache facilities. The IC is
mechanically identical to the FC but with no fissile coating [11].
Fission chambers are designed to be operated in the three possible modes: pulse, Campbell and
current regarding the encountered neutron flux level and the associated signal acquisition system.
CEA manufactured fission chambers are all tested and absolutely calibrated in the MINERVE
zero-power reactor at CEA Cadarache site. The used 235 U reference FC is calibrated with an overall
uncertainty of 1.4 %.
2.2.2
Experimental setup
A FC was used to perform axial measurements (23 axial positions) of the fission rate along the
complete core height at radial measurement positions MP5 and MP8 (Fig. 1). These measurements
are used for verification and validation of our computational model as well.
Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe, Portorož, Slovenia, September 8 ̶ 11, 2014
706.4
706.4
The FCs were deployed into the reactor core by using a specially designed FC positioning system,
composed of Al guide tubes, positioning system and data acquisition system. The axial positioning
was ensured by an incremental system which measures the FC position relative to the reference
position at the end of the guide tube. The accuracy of the FC positioning system was ∼ 0.1 mm and
the repeatability of the FC position was within 0.3 mm.
2.2.3
Measurements in the JSI TRIGA reactor core
When FCs are used in current mode, in addition to the contribution from (mostly thermal) neutrons the signal includes contributions of both prompt and delayed gamma flux. Most of the delayed
gamma flux can be determined and later subtracted by performing zero-power measurements.
In pulse mode, the signals resulting from gammas are discriminated, enabling thus the measurement of neutrons almost exclusively. However, due to dead-time limitations, the FC may not operate
in pulse mode at higher power levels. For the measurements in the centre of the core, the upper limit
for using the pulse mode the reactor power is on the order of 1 kW.
An Ionization chamber (IC) with exactly the same geometry and material composition as the
fission chamber has been used to determine also the prompt gamma response. The difference of the
FC and IC signals should be sensitive only to neutrons. The problem of this combination is that it is
required to perform the FC and IC measurements sequentially, which is not favourable for accurate
online reactor power measurements, which is an objective, to which the present study serves as a
basis. Due to their larger diameter, a possible location for online measurements with both FCs and
ICs are the irradiation channels in the reactor core. For higher reactor powers the non-linear gamma
contribution at a fixed position becomes negligible.
Because of (almost) symmetrical configuration of the core, the variations due to control rod movement in normal operation mode, when the compensating (C) and the regulating (R) rods are partially
inserted, are the smallest in the central plane perpendicular to the R and C rods (Fig. 1). Measuring
positions MP5 and MP8 have been chosen due to higher flux levels in the centre of the core.
All measurements were performed relative to the reactor online power monitoring signal P , which
is performed using a compensating ionization chamber on the linear channel. For fixed positioning
of the control rods, this signal is assumed to be reliable and is therefore taken as a reference. On
the other hand, when comparing FC signals for different control rod positions, the power signal P is
corrected using MCNP calculated neutron flux redistribution factors [12].
2.3
Computational model
A detailed neutron spectrum and spatial flux distribution calculation has been performed using
the Monte Carlo neutron transport code MCNP5 [6] and the ENDF/B-VII.0 [13] cross section library.
A detailed 3D model of the JSI TRIGA reactor, has been developed in order to accurately calculate
physical parameters of the TRIGA reactor. The main advantage of our computational model is that
it has been thoroughly verified and validated with experiments.
For the calculations presented in this paper, the fission and ionization chambers have not been
modelled explicitly since it has been assumed that the impact on the signal due to the neutron interactions with the fission chamber and its guide tube is independent of FC position. Previously, the
perturbation of the thermal neutron flux due to FC and guide tube has been estimated to be of the
order of 2 % [12]. Self-shielding in the active part of the fission chamber is negligible.
Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe, Portorož, Slovenia, September 8 ̶ 11, 2014
706.5
706.5
3
RESULTS
3.1
Power range determination of the fission chamber
One of the objectives of this investigation is also the determination of the power ranges, where the
signal from the fission chamber is accurate and reliable. In future, reactor power measurements with
multiple fission chambers positioned at different locations in the reactor core, are considered [14].
Using an optimized system with multiple detectors, the accuracy of the online power monitoring
system can be significantly improved compared to the existing system, in which a single ex-core
large compensating ionization chamber is used. Secondly, the multiple-detector system could be
used for multiple-point-reactor kinetics studies. With these far-lying objectives in view, the detector
responses in both current mode (also applicable to ionization chamber) and pulse mode were studied.
3.1.1
Current mode
In current mode, the operation power range of the FC is limited by the (non-linear) contribution of
delayed gammas. In order to determine the lower limit, linearity of the FC response in current mode
has been studied. The FC response has been measured in measuring position MP26 approximately
in the centre of the active fuel height. There is almost perfect linearity of the signal down to around
10 W under the condition of well-known zero-power background contribution.
Consequently the current mode may be used from about 10 W in combination of background
determination before start-up under the condition that the reactor did not operate at high power (above
∼ 10 kW) in the last couple of 10s of hours. In case the reactor recently operated at higher power,
the current mode is completely reliable only above ∼ 1 kW.
3.1.2
Pulse mode
In pulse mode, the operation power range of the FC is limited on the lower side by count rate and
statistics requirements, and on the upper side by the electronics setup performances (dead-time, etc.).
The approximate count rate of the FC in the centre of the measuring position MP8 is 260 s−1 W−1 .
For example, if the target accuracy of the recorded number of counts is 1 % or a counting time of
1 s, the lower operation limit for FCs is approximately 40 W. For lower power levels, more sensitive
fission chambers with higher fissile material mass would have to be used.
Fig. 2 (left side) shows the response of the FC (in count rate C) in pulse mode as a function
of reactor power. In the centre of the measuring position MP8 (similarly for MP5) the deviation
from linearity becomes significant at around 20 W. The dead-time corrected count rate Ccorr can be
expressed as
Ccorr =
C
,
1 − tDT C
(1)
where tDT is the dead-time of the electronics and C is the measured count rate.
Assuming proportionality of the corrected count rate Ccorr to the reactor power P , the dead-time
corrected function has been fitted (Fig. 2 - left side) to the data; and the fitted dead-time of the
electronic setup was tDT = 4.69 µs ± 0.04 µs. The uncertainty of the dead-time has been obtained
by random sampling of the measured count rate within their uncertainties assuming Poisson statistics
and performing non-linear fit of tDT for each sample.
However, at higher power levels the signal starts to significantly deviate even from the standard
dead-time corrected function (Fig. 2 - left side). We assume that at higher count rates the pulses start
Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe, Portorož, Slovenia, September 8 ̶ 11, 2014
706.6
706.6
to superpose, i.e. they are piling up which results in the inability of the system to take into account
new coming pulses during this extended dead-time. This can also be interpreted as an “effective
dead-time” increase at higher power levels (above ∼ 1 kW).
By applying the dead-time correction, the count rate linearity is extended to significantly higher
powers (Fig. 2 - right side). The linearity of the dead-time corrected count rate is within ∼ 1 % up to
300 W.
Figure 2: Measured fission chamber count rate C as a function of reactor power P (black points) with
fitted dead-time corrected response function (line) on the left side and on the right side with dead-time
corrected count rate Ccorr (red) as a function of reactor power P (points) and corresponding fitted
dead-time corrected and linear response functions (dashed and solid line, respectively). FC located
in measuring position MP8 slightly above the centre of the active fuel height (301.8 mm above the
lowest axial point).
3.2
Gamma background at zero power
When the reactor was in shutdown condition, the axial distribution of the gamma background
has been measured in position MP5 using both the fission and ionization chambers. In such state,
the response of the FC and IC was expected to be equal in first approximation due to the negligible contribution of the neutrons and the same geometry of both detectors. Indeed the shape of the
axial distributions is practically equal, however slightly shifted. The difference in “zero current” of
approximately 0.1 nA is presumably due to a different current offset (i.e. different leaking currents)
between the two detectors due to different insulating resistances (1.6 TΩ for FC and 28 TΩ for IC).
Due to equal sensitivity to photons, the pure sensitivity of the FC to neutrons can be estimated by
subtracting the response of the IC from the measured FC response and taking into account the “zero
current” correction. The measured “zero current” is approximately 0.13 nA.
3.3
Axial gamma and neutron flux distributions
MCNP is capable of simulating the transport of prompt gamma rays, only. The axial distribution
of the delayed gamma ray flux (originating from the decays of fission and activation products) is
different, however it roughly follows the same (cosine) shape. Therefore, at higher power levels
(above 10 kW) the total gamma distribution (measured by IC) becomes similar to the prompt gamma
Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe, Portorož, Slovenia, September 8 ̶ 11, 2014
706.7
706.7
distribution (MCNP calculated) even though the delayed gamma contribution remains in the order of
a few %. This effect is shown in Fig. 3.
Figure 3: Comparison of the calculated (solid curve) axial prompt gamma flux distribution with the
measured total gamma flux distributions at different reactor power levels (dashed and dotted curves).
Measuring position MP5. All distributions are normalized to the variance-weighted average over the
total axial range.
Axial distributions of the fission reaction rates were measured using CEA manufactured fission
chambers at the measuring positions MP5 and MP8 in the JSI TRIGA reactor core in current and
pulse mode.
Fig. 4 shows the axial fission rate distribution in measuring positions MP5 and MP8 for fully
withdrawn compensating rod and regulating rod at the critical position (around step 580). The axial
distribution in current mode (at 100 W) systematically deviates from the calculated axial distribution
due to the contribution of the gamma rays which are not taken into account in the simulation. The
agreement between the calculated and measured distributions in pulse mode is generally relatively
good, especially taking into account the age of the JSI TRIGA reactor and relatively scarce information on reactor geometry and material composition. This result further validates the computational
model and will serve as a basis for further applications such as the characterization of the neutron and
gamma fields thermal column and dry chamber which can be used for neutron irradiation of larger
objects and will improve the overall utilization of the reactor.
In the next step, the sensitivity of the fission chamber response to control rod movement will
be determined (both experimentally and by simulation) and the feasibility of installation of a more
accurate online power monitoring system will be studied.
4
CONCLUSIONS
Linearity of the CEA manufactured miniature fission chamber response has been confirmed in
the current and pulse mode, and suitable power intervals in the chosen measurement positions of
the JSI TRIGA reactor core have been determined. Neutron and gamma flux distributions have
been determined in the JSI TRIGA reactor core. The measured axial gamma field and fission rate
Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe, Portorož, Slovenia, September 8 ̶ 11, 2014
706.8
706.8
Figure 4: Relative 235 U fission rates as a function of axial position z of the fission chamber in measuring positions MP5 (left) and MP8 (right). In MP5, the measurements were performed both in
current and pulse mode of the fission chamber. The discrepancy of the current mode is due to a
significant contribution of photons to the measured current. All distributions are normalized to the
variance-weighted average over the total axial range.
distributions have been compared with MCNP calculated distributions. In general, the agreement is
very good providing additional validation of the existing Monte Carlo model of the TRIGA reactor.
An online power monitoring system using multiple in-core fission chambers, which have been
studied in this work, is considered at the JSI TRIGA reactor. In order to achieve this goal, the response
of the detectors as a function of control rod movement will be studied in immediate future in the
frame a new bilateral collaboration project with CEA Cadarache. Simultaneous measurements with
multiple identical fission chambers will be performed using a CEA recently developed FC acquisition
system operating simultaneously in pulse and Campbell mode over a wide reactor power range [15].
Finally, the system will be adapted and constructed for routine operation in the JSI TRIGA reactor.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research is funded by the bilateral project “Experimental verification of neutron flux form
factors and Qualification of a new wide range multichannel neutron instrumentation” between the
Ministry of education, science and sport of the Republic of Slovenia and Commissariat a` l’´energie
atomique et aux e´ nergies alternatives (CEA) under contract number Q2-0012 1000-13-0106.
REFERENCES
ˇ
[1] L. Snoj, M. Kromar, G. Zerovnik,
M. Ravnik, 2011. Advanced methods in teaching reactor
physics. Nucl. Eng. Des. 241, 1008-1012.
ˇ
[2] L. Snoj, A. Trkov, R. Ja´cimovi´c, P. Rogan, G. Zerovnik,
M. Ravnik, 2011. Analysis of neutron
flux distribution for the validation of computational methods for the optimization of research
reactor utilization. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 69, 136-141. doi: 10.1016/j.apradiso.2010.08.019.
[3] A. Trkov, M. Ravnik, H. B¨ock, B. Glumac, 1992. Reactivity measurements in a close-to-critical
TRIGA reactor using a digital reactivity meter. Kerntechnik 57, 296-300.
Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe, Portorož, Slovenia, September 8 ̶ 11, 2014
706.9
706.9
[4] V. Radulovi´c, A. Trkov, R. Ja´cimovi´c, R. Jeraj, 2013. Measurement of the neutron activation
constants Q0 and k0 for the 27 Al(n,γ)28 Al reaction at the JSI TRIGA Mark II reactor. J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 298, 1791-1800. doi: 10.1007/s10967-013-2596-6.
[5] I. Mandi´c, V. Cindro, A. Goriˇsek, G. Kramberger, M. Mikuˇz, M. Milovanovi´c, M. Zavrtanik,
2013. TCT measurements of irradiated stripdetectors with a focused laser beam. J. Instr. 8,
P04016-1-P04016-14.
[6] X-5 Monte Carlo Team, 2004. MCNPTM – A General Monte Carlo N-Particle Transport Code,
Version 5, LA-UR-03-1987.
[7] M. Ravnik, R. Jeraj, 2003. Research reactor benchmarks. Nucl. Sci. Eng. 145, 145-152.
[8] ICSBEP, 2009. International Handbook of Evaluated Critical Safety Benchmark Experiments, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development – Nuclear Energy Agency,
NEA/NSC/DOC(95)03, Paris, published on DVD, ISBN 978-92-64-99054-8.
[9] B. Geslot, F. Berhouet, L. Oriol, S. Breaud, C. Jammes, P. Filliatre, J.-F. Villard, 2009. Development and manufacturing of special fission chambers for in-core measurement requirements
in nuclear reactor. In: Proceedings of the International Conference Advancements in Nuclear
Instrumentation Measurements Methods and their Applications (ANIMMA) 2009, Marseille,
France. IEEE Catalog Number: CFP0924I-CDR #111.
ˇ
ˇ Stancar,
[10] Z.
L. Barbot, C. Domergue, V. Radulovi´c, A. Trkov, L. Snoj, 2012. Evaluation of the
Axial Absolute Power Profile Measurements at the JSI Triga Mark II Reactor. In: Proceedings
of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe 2012, Ljubljana, Slovenia,
Paper no. 1008.
[11] P. Filliatre, L. Vermeeren, C. Jammes, B. Geslot, D. Fourmentel, 2011. Estimating the γ-ray
contribution to the signal of fission chambers with Monte Carlo simulations. Nucl. Instr. Meth.
A 648 (1), 228237. doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2011.05.065.
ˇ
[12] M. Podvratnik, L. Snoj, A. Trkov, G. Zerovnik,
2011. Calculations to Support Absolute Thermal Power Calibration of the Slovenian TRIGA Mark II Reactor. In: Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe 2011, Bovec, Slovenia, Paper no. 407.
[13] M.B. Chadwick, et al., 2006. ENDF/B-VII.0: Next Generation Evaluated Nuclear Data Library
for Nuclear Science and Technology. Nucl. Data Sheets 107 (12), 2931-3060.
ˇ
[14] G. Zerovnik,
L. Snoj, A. Trkov, L. Barbot, D. Fourmentel, J.-F. Villard, 2013. Improved Measurements of Thermal Power and Control Rods Using Multiple Detectors at the TRIGA Mark
II Reactor in Ljubljana. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Advancements in Nuclear Instrumentation Measurement Methods and their Applications (ANIMMA)
2013, Marseille, France. IEEE Catalog Number CFP1324I-CDR #1148. doi: 10.1109/ANIMMA.2013.6727959.
[15] M. Th´evenin, L. Barbot, G. Corre, R. Woo, C. Destouches, S. Normand, 2014. Digital RealTime Multiple Channel Multiple Mode Neutron Flux Estimation FPGA-based Device. In: Proceedings of the ISRD Conference, 18-23 May 2014, Aix en Provence, France.
Proceedings of the International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe, Portorož, Slovenia, September 8 ̶ 11, 2014