基于反应率预测的预估校正方法研究

温兴坚; 田超; 唐松乾; 翟梓安; 苗建新; 曹良志; 刘宙宇

doi:10.13832/j.jnpe.2022.S2.0213

基于反应率预测的预估校正方法研究

doi: 10.13832/j.jnpe.2022.S2.0213

1.
中国核动力研究设计院核反应堆系统设计技术重点实验室，成都，610213
2.
西安交通大学，西安，710049

详细信息

作者简介:
温兴坚（1993—），男，博士研究生，现主要从事反应堆源项与辐射屏蔽设计方面的研究，E-mail: wenxingjian35@126.com

中图分类号: TL329
计量
- 文章访问数: 168
- HTML全文浏览量: 86
- PDF下载量: 21
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2022-07-20
- 修回日期: 2022-09-27
- 刊出日期: 2022-12-31

Research on Predictor-Corrector Method Based on Prediction of Reaction Rates

1.
Science and Technology on Reactor System Design Technology Laboratory, Nuclear Power Institute of China, Chengdu, 610213, China
2.
Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, 710049, China

摘要

摘要: 传统预估校正方法通过平均预估步与校正步的核素组分修正燃耗计算结果，要求在每个燃耗步上进行2次中子学计算。为了降低输运燃耗耦合计算的时间，本研究对传统预估校正方法进行了分析，并开展了基于反应率预测的预估校正方法研究，该方法利用传统预估校正方法中预估步与校正步多群中子能谱差异随燃耗光滑变化的特性，通过拉格朗日插值方法对区域和燃耗时间相关的中子能谱偏差随燃耗时间的变化特征进行描述，获得解析的插值公式，在保证预估步计算次数不变的情况下，直接对部分校正步的反应率进行预测，避免该部分校正步的中子学计算；本研究以传统预估校正方法为参考，通过VERA燃耗基准题和JAEA燃耗基准题对提出的基于反应率预测的预估校正方法进行了验证。数值结果表明：基于反应率预测的预估校正方法可在保证棒功率分布与主要核素组分精度基础上，减少约20%的中子学计算时间。因此，本研究建立的基于反应率预测的预估校正方法能够用于高效的输运燃耗耦合计算。
- 输运燃耗耦合计算 /
- 预估校正方法 /
- 燃耗基准题
Abstract: Traditional predictor-corrector method revises the burnup calculation results by means of the nuclide inventory of the average predictor step and the corrector step, two neutronics calculations are required at each burn-up step. In order to reduce the time of transport-burnup coupling calculation, the traditional predictor-corrector method is analyzed in this work and the predictor-corrector method based on the prediction of the reaction rates is proposed in this work. This method makes use of the characteristics of the smooth variation of the multi-group neutron spectrum difference between the predictor step and the correction step with burnup in the traditional predictor-corrector method, Lagrangian interpolation method is used to describe the variation characteristics of regional and burnup time related neutron spectrum deviation with burnup time, and analytical interpolation formula is obtained. Under the condition that the calculation times of the predictor steps remain unchanged, the reaction rate of some corrector steps is predicted directly so as to avoid the neutronics calculation of such corrector steps. This study takes the traditional predictor-corrector method as reference, and verifies the proposed predictor-corrector method based on reaction rate prediction through VERA and JAEA burnup benchmark tasks. The numerical results show that the predictor-corrector method based on reaction rate prediction can reduce the neutronics calculation time by about 20% on the basis of ensuring the rod power distribution and the accuracy of the main nuclide components. Therefore, the predictor-corrector method based on reaction rate prediction established in this study can be used for efficient transport-burnup coupling calculation.
- Transport-burnup coupling calculation /
- Predictor-corrector method /
- Burnup benchmark task

HTML全文

图 1 基于反应率预测的预估校正方法计算流程图

Figure 1. Calculation Flowchart of Predictor-Corrector Method Based on Prediction of Reaction Rates

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 VERA燃耗基准题图

Figure 2. VERA Burnup Benchmark

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 34个燃耗点不同组件k_inf偏差对比结果

Figure 3. k_inf Comparison Results of Different Assemblies at 34 Burnup Points

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 34个燃耗点不同组件棒功率对比结果

Figure 4. Power Comparison Results of Different Assembly Rods at 34 Burnup Points

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 64个燃耗点不同组件k_inf偏差对比结果

Figure 5. k_inf Comparison Results of Different Assemblies at 64 Burnup Points

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 64个燃耗点不同组件棒功率对比结果

Figure 6. Power Comparison Results of Different Assembly Rods at 64 Burnup Points

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 JAEA燃耗基准题二维单组件算例组件径向排布

Figure 7. Assembly Radial Arrangement of 2D Single Assembly Example in JAEA Burnup Benchmark

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 JAEA燃耗基准题UO₂组件和MOX组件k_inf和棒功率相对偏差的对比结果

Figure 8. Comparison of Infinite Multiplication Factor and Rod Power between UO₂ Assembly and MOX Assembly in JAEA Burnup Benchmark

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 JAEA燃耗基准题UO₂和MOX组件不同燃耗时间点核素组分及其对比结果

Figure 9. Nuclide Components of UO₂and MOX Assemblies at Different Burnup Time Points and Their Comparison Results in JAEA Burnup Benchmark

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

参考文献(8)

[1]	SCHLAPPER G A. Methods of steady-state reactor physics in nuclear design[J]. Nuclear Technology, 1984, 65(2): 358-358. doi: 10.13182/NT84-A33423
[2]	GERRITY III T P. MCODE-3: Time-dependent depletion isotopics with MCNP-5 and SCALE-6.1[D]. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2012.
[3]	ISOTALO A E, AARNIO P A. Higher order methods for burnup calculations with Bateman solutions[J]. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2011, 38(9): 1987-1995. doi: 10.1016/j.anucene.2011.04.022
[4]	王芷妍. 基于改进半预估修正的蒙特卡罗输运—燃耗耦合策略研究[D]. 合肥: 中国科学技术大学, 2018.
[5]	GODFREY A. VERA core physics benchmark progression problem specifications, revision 4, CASL technical report: CASL-U-2012-0131-004[R]. Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2014.
[6]	KIM K S. Specification for the VERA depletion benchmark suite: CASL-X-2015-1014-000[R]. Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2015.
[7]	CHEN J, LIU Z Y, ZHAO C, et al. A new high-fidelity neutronics code NECP-X[J]. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2018, 116: 417-428. doi: 10.1016/j.anucene.2018.02.049
[8]	YAMAMOTO A, IKEHARA T, ITO T, et al. Benchmark problem suite for reactor physics study of LWR next generation fuels[J]. Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 2002, 39(8): 900-912. doi: 10.1080/18811248.2002.9715275