Investigation of the Performance of CANDU Reactor Using Different Uranium (Uo2, Uc, U3si2) Fuels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian Deuterium-Uranium Reactor (CANDU) and Light Water Reactor (LWR) have significant share on supplying world energy. LWRs use low enriched uranium fuel with ~3.5% 235U whereas CANDU utilizes natural uranium fuel with ~ 0.71 % 235U. In this work, neutronic performance of CANDU reactor, temporal change of fissile fuel breeding and fission power production were investigated in the CANDU reactors with different uranium (UO2, UC, U3Si2) fuels. Calculations were done with the aid of one dimensional computer code of SCALE 4.4a. According to calculational results, by taking k∞ = 1.06 as reference limit, burnup grades were found as 7700, 8900 and 7400 MW.D/MT and operation periods were obtained as 170, 260, 190 days for these fuels, respectively. According to these results, UC fuel showed better nuclear performance than natural UOand U3Si2 fuel with respect to criticality and burn up grade
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".