MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090854997 · doi:10.1115/icone18-30338

ACR-1000™ Fuel Design Verification

2010· article· en· W2090854997 on OpenAlexaff
David J. Wren, Patrick Reid, Len L. Wright

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBundleOperabilityNuclear engineeringNuclear reactor coreEngineeringMaintainabilityReliability engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ACR-1000™ design is an evolutionary advancement of the proven CANDU® reactor design that delivers enhanced economic performance, safety, operability and maintainability. The fuel for the ACR-1000 design is based on the well established CANDU fuel bundle design that has over 40 years of demonstrated high performance. Building on its extensive experience in fuel design and analysis, and fuel testing, AECL has designed a CANFLEX-ACR™ fuel bundle that incorporates the latest improvements in CANDU fuel bundle design. The ACR-1000 fuel bundle also includes features that enable the ACR-1000 to achieve higher fuel burn-up and improved reactor core physics characteristics. To verify that the CANFLEX-ACR fuel bundle design will meet and exceed all design requirements, an extensive program of design analysis and testing is being carried out. This program rigorously evaluates the ability of the fuel design to meet all design and performance criteria and particularly those related to fuel failure limits. The design analyses address all of the phenomena that affect the fuel during its residence in the reactor core. Analysis is performed using a suite of computer codes that are used to evaluate the temperatures, deformations, stresses and strains experienced by the fuel bundle during its residence in the reactor core. These analyses take into account the impact of fuel power history and core residence time. Complementing the analyses, testing is performed to demonstrate the compatibility of the fuel with the reactor heat transport system and fuel handling systems, and to demonstrate the ability of the fuel to withstand the mechanical forces that it will experience during its residence in the core. The testing program includes direct measurement of prototype fuel element and fuel bundle properties and performance limits. A number of different test facilities are used including a cold test loop and a hot test loop with a full-scale ACR-1000 fuel channel that operates at reactor coolant temperatures, pressures and flows. This paper summarizes the out-reactor test program and related analysis that provide the basis for verifying that the ACR-1000 fuel design meets its requirements.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207