MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386617810 · doi:10.1115/1.4063388

Assessment of Reactor Physics Characteristics of Prismatic Fuel Concepts With a Hydrogen-Based Moderator for Use in a Fluoride Salt-Cooled Small Modular Reactor

2023· article· en· W4386617810 on OpenAlexafffund
Huiping V. Yan, Blair P. Bromley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear reactor physics and engineering
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
FundersAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsNuclear engineeringMaterials scienceRodCoolantModular designNeutron moderatorNuclear fuelGraphiteThorium fuel cycleMolten salt reactorMOX fuelMolten saltNuclear physicsNeutronUraniumNeutron cross sectionComposite materialComputer scienceEngineeringNeutron temperatureMetallurgyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fluoride-salt-cooled high temperature reactor (FHR) effectively combines the solid fuel and moderator design of high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) technology with the fluoride salt coolant (LiF-BeF2, FLiBe) of molten salt reactor (MSR) technology, enabling low-pressure (∼1 atm, 101.325 kPa), and high-temperature (∼700 °C) operations. The design and operational features of the FHR make it a potentially attractive option for a small modular reactor (SMR), provided that it can be modified and made physically small and operate at a low-enough power level (<350 MWth/<150 MWel). Most FHR-SMR designs use high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) fuel in the form of tri-structural isotropic (TRISO) fuel particles, combined with the use of a graphite moderator. However, there are alternative design concepts for an FHR-SMR that may offer superior performance characteristics, while utilizing an alternative fissile fuel supply option. In this exploratory study, lattice physics calculations were performed with Serpent to evaluate an alternative FHR-SMR prismatic fuel block design concept using coated annular fuel pellets instead of TRISO-particle fuel compacts, along with the use of hydrogen-based solid moderator rods made of 7LiH. In initial studies, it was found that fuel blocks with 120 moderator rods made of 7LiH tended to have large positive temperature reactivity coefficients (TRCs), which is undesirable for safety reasons. However, reducing the number of moderator rods to 90 or 54, while increasing the number of fuel rods and coolant holes led to low or negative temperature coefficients. For a prismatic fuel block design with 54-7LiH moderator rods, the isothermal temperature coefficient of reactivity (Isothermal TRC), with simultaneous changes in the fuel (F), graphite (G), hydrogen (H), and coolant (C) temperatures, ranges between −0.159 mk/K and −0.054 mk/K, depending on the operating temperature and fuel burnup. Such alternative FHR-SMR fuels could achieve a single-batch core life of ∼10 years with low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel, and ∼45 years with HALEU, in a 350-MWth reactor core.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicNuclear reactor physics and engineeringFrench-language works237,207