Coupled Neutronics/Thermal-Hydraulics Analysis of PT–SCWR With 54-Element Bundle Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The radial power distribution is uneven in the Pressure Tube type SCWR bundle because of the higher fuel enrichment and the separation of light water coolant and heavy water moderator. The uneven profile will usually result in high cladding temperature. In order to optimize bundle design, the analysis of coupled neutronics/thermal-hydraulics was carried out. The neutronics code WIMS-AECL and the subchannel code ATHAS are selected to conduct the coupled neutronics/thermal-hydraulics analysis for the PT-SCWR 54-elements bundle design. The analysis of the reference case showed that the maximum cladding surface temperature of the bundles at both Beginning of the Cycle (BOC) and End of the Cycle (EOC) exceed the design limits. The optimization was carried out through (1) adopting staggered radial uranium enrichment profile and (2) optimizing the pitch-circle diameters of element rings. The results showed that the optimized bundle can achieve lower maximum cladding surface temperature, which is well below the limiting criteria, and meet the criteria of neutronics demands.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".