DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:2005.03206V1 [Nucl-Th] 7 May 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:2005.03206V1 [Nucl-Th] 7 May 2020 LA-UR-20-22603 Correlations Between Fission Fragment and Neutron Anisotropies in Neutron-Induced Fission A. E. Lovell,1, ∗ P. Talou,1 I. Stetcu,1 and K. J. Kelly1 1Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA (Dated: May 8, 2020) Several sources of angular anisotropy for fission fragments and prompt neutrons have been studied in neutron-induced fission reactions. These include kinematic recoils of the target from the incident neutron beam and the fragments from the emission of the prompt neutrons, preferential directions of the emission of the fission fragments with respect to the beam axis due to the population of particular transition states at the fission barrier, and forward-peaked angular distributions of pre- equilibrium neutrons which are emitted before the formation of a compound nucleus. In addition, there are several potential sources of angular anisotropies that are more difficult to disentangle: the angular distributions of prompt neutrons from fully accelerated fragments or from scission neutrons, and the emission of neutrons from fission fragments that are not fully accelerated. In this work, we study the effects of the first group of anisotropy sources, particularly exploring the correlations between the fission fragment anisotropy and the resulting neutron anisotropy. While kinematic effects were already accounted for in our Hauser-Feshbach Monte Carlo code, CGMF, anisotropic angular distributions for the fission fragments and pre-equilibrium neutrons resulting from neutron- induced fission on 233;234;235;238U, 239;241Pu, and 237Np have been introduced for the first time. The effects of these sources of anisotropy are examined over a range of incident neutron energies, from thermal to 20 MeV, and compared to experimental data from the Chi-Nu liquid scintillator array. The anisotropy of the fission fragments is reflected in the anisotropy of the prompt neutrons, especially as the outgoing energy of the prompt neutrons increases, allowing for an extraction of the fission fragment anisotropy to be made from a measurement of the neutrons. I. INTRODUCTION emission of fission fragments and neutrons during the de- cay. There are several sources of this anisotropy: fission fragment emission with respect to the incident beam, Being able to accurately and reliably model the fis- neutron emission from the fission fragments (including sion process and the resulting observables is important whether neutrons are emitted from the fully accelerated for a variety of applications, including security, non- fragments), along with the emission of scission, multi- proliferation, energy, and fundamental science. While chance, and pre-equilibrium neutrons before fission. microscopic models for this process, beginning from fundamental nucleon-nucleon interactions, are available Although, there is no reason to expect that fission [1, 2], more often these models are constructed based fragments should be emitted anisotropically with respect on a combination of macroscopic and microscopic theo- to the incoming neutron beam from the compound nu- ries [3, 4]. Still, at the moment, these methods are lim- cleus, many experimental studies from the 1950's through ited; they are computationally expensive, and the range today have shown that there can be a large degree of of observables that can be calculated generally ends at anisotropy - defined as the ratio of the cross section at the post-scission fission fragment yields. These results 0◦ to the cross section at 90◦. The enhancement with can then be used as input for codes that calculate the respect to the beam axis can be as much as 30% to 60%. prompt and delayed neutron and γ-ray observables. There have, in particular, been several measurements of the anisotropy of actinides, including 235U [12{16], 238U These codes (e.g, CGMF [5, 6], FREYA [7, 8], HF3D=BeOH [12, 15, 17{21], and 239Pu [15, 22, 23]. arXiv:2005.03206v1 [nucl-th] 7 May 2020 [9], FIFRELIN [10], GEF [11]) employ a variety of physics models describing how the excitation and kinetic energies This anisotropy was postulated, by A. Bohr [24], to are shared between the light and heavy fission fragments, stem from the populated transition states at the fission and determine neutron and γ-ray observables on either an barrier of the parent nucleus, which would account for the event-by-event basis or as averages. Event-by-event cal- changing anisotropy as a function of incident neutron en- culations allow for the determination of all observables, ergy. At low incident energies, few states are populated, including correlations, as consistently as possible, from resulting in an anisotropic distribution of fission frag- scission to prompt particle emissions, conserving energy, ments depending on the quantum numbers of the states spin, and parity at every step of the decay. One effect that are populated. As the incident energy increases, that has been studied over the years, but is not always more states are available in the parent nucleus (and the fully included in these types of codes, is the anisotropic angular distribution becomes more isotropic) until the second-chance fission channel opens up, at which point the A nucleus is fissioning instead of the A + 1 system, lowering the number of available states, increasing the ∗Electronic address: [email protected] anisotropy again. Of course, the picture is more compli- 2 cated than this since the opening of the second-chance II. THEORY fission channel leads to a possibility of fission from either the A+1 or A compound nucleus. A recent measurement There are several physical processes that could lead 239 of the anisotropy of Pu confirmed that the changes in to an anisotropic distribution of the prompt neutrons anisotropy track the shape of the fission cross section [16], emitted during the fission process. The following sec- in agreement with many previous measurements that ob- tions describe these processes along with the Monte Carlo served the same trends, e.g. [15, 22, 23]. Hauser-Feshbach code CGMF, used here to calculate the decay of the fission fragments by prompt neutron and There have also been several studies to assess whether γ-ray emissions. or not the prompt neutrons are emitted isotropically from the fission fragments, along with whether the neutrons are emitted from the fully accelerated fragments, both A. Fission Fragment Anisotropy of which are commonly assumed in the fission fragment deexcitation codes mentioned above. Often, differences The first process we discuss is the fission fragment an- between the measured and calculated neutron angular gular anisotropy coming from the population of the tran- distributions are attributed to scission neutrons, those sition states [24]. The angular distribution of the fission neutrons that are emitted during the rupture of the neck fragments can be described with the help of the Wigner of the compound nucleus. However, this interpretation d-matrices [33], defined as does not take into account the assumptions in the model J that could change the resulting calculations (such as that dM;K (θ) = all prompt neutrons are emitted from the fully acceler- 1=2 X [(J + M)!(J − M)!(J + K)!(J − K)!] ated fragments). The percentage of neutrons that are (−)n (J − M − n)!(J + K − n)!(M − K + n)!n! not emitted from fully accelerated fission fragments is n somewhat of a controversy [25{29]. θ 2J+K−M−2n θ 2n+M−K × cos sin ; (1) 2 2 As the incident neutron energy increases, reaction channels beyond first-chance fission open. Besides the where J is the total angular momentum of the compound scission neutrons that may be emitted, other pre-fission nucleus, K is its projection on the fission axis, M is its neutrons can be emitted before the compound nucleus projection on the beam axis, and θ is the angle of the fissions. Most often, these pre-fission neutrons are emit- fission fragments with respect to the beam axis. The ted from the fully equilibrated compound nucleus. How- angular distribution of the fission fragments in the lab frame would be ever, for incident neutrons with high enough energy, & 12 MeV, a neutron can be emitted with or without the dσ 2J + 1 f (J; K; M) = jdJ (θ)j2; (2) compound nucleus forming. When the compound nu- dΩ 2 M;K cleus does not form, the emitted neutrons are considered to be pre-equilibrium. These pre-equilibrium neutrons if the fission only occurred through one of these (J; K; M) have a different energy spectrum from the pre-fission neu- states. Instead, each state must be weighted by its pop- trons coming from the compound system [30] and have ulation, Ps(J; K; M), and the full angular distribution is a forward-peaked angular distribution, more akin to the given by angular distribution of an inelastically scattered neutron dσf X 2J + 1 than the isotropic distributions of the pre-fission neutrons W (θ) ≡ = P (J; K; M) jdJ (θ)j2: dΩ s 2 M;K emitted from the compound system [31]. Pre-equilibrium s(J;K;M) neutrons have been definitively observed and their angu- (3) lar distributions measured for the first time for neutron- The weight of each state is often extracted from exper- 239 induced fission of Pu [32]. imental measurements, e.g. [16], but these weights are P R dσf connected to the fission cross section, Ps = dΩ dΩ. Recently, the fission fragment anisotropy and pre- The anisotropy of the fission fragments is defined as the equilibrium angular distributions have been implemented ratio of the angular distribution at 0◦ to the angular dis- into the Monte Carlo Hauser-Feshbach code CGMF [5, 6]. tribution at 90◦ relative to the beam axis, often written In this work, we describe the implementation and study as W (0◦)=W (90◦). of the correlations between the fission fragment and neu- tron directions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • KINETIC ANALYSIS of SUB-PROMPT-CRITICAL REACTOR ASSEMBLIES Hy S Das Theoretical Physics Division
    BARC/1992/E/011 O 1 "o KINETIC ANALYSIS OF SUB-PROMPT-CRITICAL REACTOR ASSEMBLIES hy S Das Theoretical Physics Division 1992 BARC/1992/E/011 o UJ GOVERNMENT OF INDIA - AATOMIT C ENERGY COMMISSION U KINETIC ANALYSIS OF SUB-PROMPT-CRITICAL REACTOR ASSEMBLIES by S. Das Theoretical Physics Division BHABHA ATOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE BOMBAY, INDIA 1992 BARC/1992/E/011 BIBLIOBRAPHIC DESCRIPTION SHEET FOR TECHNICAL REPORT (as par IS i 94BNB - 1980) 01 Security classification i Unclassified 02 Distribution t External 03 Report status i New 04 Series i BARC External 05 Report type i Technical Report 06 Report No. i BARC/1992/E/011 07 Part No. or Volume No. i 08 Contract No. i 10 Title and subtitle i Kinetic analysis of sub-prompt- critical reactor assemblies 11 Collation i 14 p.f 4 figs., 1 tab. IS Project No. i 20 Personal author<s> i S. Das 21 Affiliation of author(s) i Theoretical Physics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Bombay 22 Corporate author(s) i Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Bombay - 400 085 23 Originating unit i Theoretical Physics Division, BARC, Bombay 24 Sponsor(s) Name i Department of Atomic Energy Type i Government 30 Date of submission i May 1992 31 Publication/Issue date i June 1992 Contd... (ii) 1 40 Publ i»h»r/Distributor t Head, Library and Information Division, Bhabha Atomic Rasaarch Contra, Bombay 42 Form of distribution t Hard Copy 50 Languaga of taxt i English 51 Languaga o-f summary i English 92 No. of references i % rafs. 53 Givas data on i 60 Abstract x Nautronic analysis of safaty-ralatad kinetics problams in experimental neutron multiplying assemblies has bean carried out using a sub-prompt-critical reactor model.
    [Show full text]
  • Total Prompt Energy Release in the Neutron-Induced Fission Of
    Nuclear Physics A 772 (2006) 113–137 Total prompt energy release in the neutron-induced fission of 235U, 238U, and 239Pu D.G. Madland Theoretical Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA Received 12 January 2006; received in revised form 28 March 2006; accepted 29 March 2006 Available online 2 May 2006 Abstract This study addresses, for the first time, the total prompt energy release and its components for the fission of 235U, 238U, and 239Pu as a function of the kinetic energy of the neutron inducing the fission. The com- ponents are extracted from experimental measurements, where they exist, together with model-dependent calculation, interpolation, and extrapolation. While the components display clear dependencies upon the incident neutron energy, their sums display only weak, yet definite, energy dependencies. Also addressed is the total prompt energy deposition in fission for the same three systems. Results are presented in equation form. New measurements are recommended as a consequence of this study. © 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. PACS: 24.75.+i; 25.85.Ec; 25.85.Ca; 27.90.+b Keywords: Energy release and energy deposition in neutron-induced fission; Experiment and Los Alamos model; 235U; 238U; 239Pu 1. Introduction This study is a consequence of open questions on the magnitudes of the total prompt energy re- lease in fission, the total prompt energy deposition in fission, the components of these quantities, and their dependencies upon the kinetic energy of the neutron inducing the fission. Our results are given in Eqs. (31)–(33) and Fig. 17 for the total prompt energy release in fission, and in Eqs.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation Detection from Fission
    ORNL/TM-2004/234 RADIATION DETECTION FROM FISSION J. T. Mihalczo DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY Reports produced after January 1, 1996, are generally available free via the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Information Bridge. Web site http://www.osti.gov/bridge Reports produced before January 1, 1996, may be purchased by members of the public from the following source. National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 Telephone 703-605-6000 (1-800-553-6847) TDD 703-487-4639 Fax 703-605-6900 E-mail [email protected] Web site http://www.ntis.gov/support/ordernowabout.htm Reports are available to DOE employees, DOE contractors, Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDE) representatives, and International Nuclear Information System (INIS) representatives from the following source. Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831 Telephone 865-576-8401 Fax 865-576-5728 E-mail [email protected] Web site http://www.osti.gov/contact.html This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Fission Dynamics: Past, Present, Needs, and Future
    NT@UW-19-18,LA-UR-19-32211 Nuclear Fission Dynamics: Past, Present, Needs, and Future Aurel Bulgac,1 Shi Jin,1 and Ionel Stetcu2 1Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195–1560, USA 2Theoretical Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA (Dated: March 23, 2020) Significant progress in the understanding of the fission process within a microscopic framework has been recently reported. Even though the complete description of this important nuclear reac- tion remains a computationally demanding task, recent developments in theoretical modeling and computational power have brought current microscopic simulations to the point where they can pro- vide guidance and constraints to phenomenological models, without making recourse to parameters. An accurate treatment compatible with our understanding of the inter-nucleon interactions should be able to describe the real-time dynamics of the fissioning system and could justify or rule out assumptions and approximations incompatible with the underlying universally accepted quantum- mechanical framework. Of particular importance are applications to observables that cannot be directly measured in experimental setups (such as the angular momentum distribution of the fission fragments, or the excitation energy sharing between the fission fragments, or fission of nuclei formed during the r-process), and their dependence of the excitation energy in the fissioning system. Even if accurate predictions are not within reach, being able to extract the trends with increasing exci- tation energy is important in various applications. The most advanced microscopic simulations of the fission process do not support the widely used assumption of adiabaticity of the large amplitude collective motion in fission, in particular for trajectories from the outer saddle towards the scission configuration.
    [Show full text]
  • Reactor Physics
    REACTOR PHYSICS COURSE INTRODUCTION This Training Manual assumes prior knowledge of Nuclear Theory. It extends this information into a discussion of Reactor Physics, particularly as it relates to CANDU reactors. The course begins with the general principles of reactor configuration required to maintain a self- sustaining chain reaction. It continues with reactor dynamics (in both the critical and subcritical core), reactivity feedback effects (temperature effects, fission product poisoning, and fuel burnup), and ends with operational considerations (at low and high power). The material covers four main areas, subdivided into eight major sections as follows: • The Critical Reactor at Steady Power Output (Section 1) • The Dynamic Reactor (Sections 2 and 3) • Reactivity Feedback Effects (Sections 4, 5, and 6) • Reactor Operations (Sections 7 and 8) CNSC i Science and Reactor Fundamentals – Reactor Physics Technical Training Group TABLE OF CONTENTS Objectives 1 The Critical Reactor at Steady Power Output 9 1.0 INTRODUCTION 9 1.1 Fission 9 1.2 Harnessing Fission 15 1.3 Movement of Neutrons Through the CANDU lattice Lattice 18 1.4 The Finite Reactor 26 Response of The Critical Reactor to a Reactivity Change 31 2.0 INTRODUCTION 31 2.1 Exponential Power Rise 31 2.2 Corrections to Exponential Reactor Response 33 2.3 The Effect of Delayed Neutrons 36 2.4 Prompt Criticality 40 2.5 Power Rundown: The Prompt Drop 42 Responsiveness of The Subcritical Reactor 45 3.0 INTRODUCTION 45 3.1 Neutron Flux in a “Shut Down” Reactor 45 3.2 Dynamics in the Subcritical
    [Show full text]
  • 1- TOPIC: 292001 KNOWLEDGE: K1.02 [3.0/3.1] QID: B45 the Term “Neutron Generation Time” Is Defined As the Average Time Betw
    NRC Generic Fundamentals Examination Question Bank--BWR May 2020 TOPIC: 292001 KNOWLEDGE: K1.02 [3.0/3.1] QID: B45 The term “neutron generation time” is defined as the average time between... A. neutron absorption and the resulting fission. B. the production of a delayed neutron and subsequent neutron thermalization. C. neutron absorption producing a fission and absorption or leakage of resultant neutrons. D. neutron thermalization and subsequent neutron absorption. ANSWER: C. TOPIC: 292001 KNOWLEDGE: K1.02 [3.0/3.1] QID: B174 Which one of the following is the definition of the term, prompt neutron? A. A high-energy neutron emitted from a neutron precursor, immediately after the fission process. B. A neutron with an energy level greater than 0.1 MeV, emitted in less than 1.0 x 10-4 seconds following a nuclear fission. C. A neutron emitted in less than 1.0 x 10-14 seconds following a nuclear fission. D. A neutron emitted as a result of a gamma-neutron or alpha-neutron reaction. ANSWER: C. -1- Neutrons NRC Generic Fundamentals Examination Question Bank--BWR May 2020 TOPIC: 292001 KNOWLEDGE: K1.02 [3.0/3.1] QID: B245 Delayed neutrons are neutrons that... A. have reached thermal equilibrium with the surrounding medium. B. are expelled within 1.0 x 10-14 seconds of the fission event. C. are expelled with the lowest average kinetic energy of all fission neutrons. D. are responsible for the majority of U-235 fissions. ANSWER: C. TOPIC: 292001 KNOWLEDGE: K1.02 [3.0/3.1] QID: B1146 (P1945) Which one of the following types of neutrons has an average neutron generation lifetime of 12.5 seconds? A.
    [Show full text]
  • Module 2: Reactor Theory (Neutron Characteristics)
    DOE Fundamentals NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND REACTOR THEORY Module 2: Reactor Theory (Neutron Characteristics) NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND REACTOR THEORY TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Co nte nts TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................iv REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ v OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................................vi NEUTRON SOURCES .................................................................................................... 1 Neutron Sources .......................................................................................................... 1 Intrinsic Neutron Sources ............................................................................................. 1 Installed Neutron Sources ............................................................................................ 3 Summary...................................................................................................................... 4 NUCLEAR CROSS SECTIONS AND NEUTRON FLUX ................................................. 5 Introduction .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 24)Ay Nuclear Criticality Safety Course
    NUCLEARCRITICALITYSAFETY: 2-DAYTRAININGCOURSE Offeredat o TheLosAlamosNationalLaboratory EditedandCompiledby JohnA. Schlesser LosAlamos NATIONAL LA80RATORV LosMnos, NO.Jhhxieo87S45 4P . , t . “ AnAffirmativeAction/EqualOpportunityEmpbyer TheLosAiamosNationalLaboratoryk operatedbytheUniversityofCaliforniafortheUnitedStatesDepartmentofEnergy undercont~t W-7405ENG-35. Theillustrationonthecoverwasdesi nedbyJohnSchlesserandGaryWebbanddrawn byAnnMarieDyson.Itdepictsoneof thecourse’stwocriticalexperiments. DISWNMER ThismanuscriprwaspraparadasanaccourrtofwwksponsoradbyanagencyoftfmUnitedStatesGovernment.Neitfwhe ntsofthaUniversityofCaMqnia,,theUnitadStatesGovarnqrepInoranyageqthemof, noranyoftheirempbyaes, 3% anywarrantyexpqmwxforI bed,orassumesanyI a!habdttyorresponshIty@rtheaccaracy,compfetenass,or usefufney30faniM’ormatmn,apa ,p*c~tip_%-,u_* tiWtmumwould~tkh~tim~y ownednghk ke~ herwrrto anyapqifc commercialprodurxprocess,or servioeby trqcfename, rnamkturar,orotherwrae,doasnotnemssanIyconstituteor&n yb endrxaementorecommendabon,orfavoringbyUp Un”ti StaresGOmrnmantorfyy ~ thereof.Theviews!snJ”q“nbnsofauthorsexpressedhereindonot~Y stateormflacttfmseoftheUrrned?&esGovernmentoranyagencyUmeof. This com ilation of notes is presented as a source re?erence for the criticality safety course. It represents the contributions of many people, particularly Tom McLaughlin, the course’s primary instructor. Tableof Contents I. General 2-Day Course Objectives Course Critique 11. History Early History of Criticality Safety Criticality Control in Operations with
    [Show full text]
  • Neutron Numbers 8, 20 and 28 Were Considered As Magic Over Several Decades
    Introduction to nuclear physics with accelerated beams O. Sorlin (GANIL) What are limits of stability ? Which new phenomena emerge at the drip lines (halo, clustering, breaking mirror symetry… ) ? How do nuclear structure and shape evolve along the chart of nuclides ? How does nuclear structure change with Temperature and Spin value ? How to unify nuclear structure and reaction approaches ? How to probe the density and isospin dependence of the nuclear equation of state ? What are nuclear processes that drive the evolution of stars and galaxies in the universe ? How / where are nuclei synthesized in the universe ? Find a universal interaction, based on fundamental principles, that can model nuclear structure and reactions in nuclei and in stars (i.e. from the fm to 104 km, over 1022 orders of magnitude) Scientific council IN2P3- June 26th Accelerators, reactions and instrumentation Detectors: Charged particles: GRIT, ACTAR-TPC g-rays: AGATA, nu-ball, PARIS Facilities: spectrometer GANIL, GSI, Dubna, RIKEN, Licorne Neutron wall Stable / radioactive beams EXPAND 5 - 500 MeV/A Reactions: Fusion, transfer, Fission, knockout... A wide variety of phenemona to understand Magic nuclei Fission, pear shapes GDR Soft GMR n p Implantation Residual nuclei b, a-decay, isomeric decay Exotic decays 2n halo molecular cluster rotation- deformation Scientific council IN2P3- June 26th Nuclear physics impact many astrophysical processes X-ray bursts normal star H surface Neutron star Neutron star merger Price & Rossworg ) r s r s Abundance ( solar Sneden & Cowan 2003 Log Mass Number H. Schatz (2016) Nuclear astrophysics Energy profile of X-ray burst and nuclear physics X-ray bursts X-ray burst normal star Neutron star 10s (p,g) (a,p) b- 3a Departure from Hot CNO cycle depends crucially on 15O(a,g)19Ne reaction It is followed by (a,p), (p,g) reactions and b-decays Determination of the 15O(a,g)19Ne reaction rate Cyburt et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Chicago Pile-1 - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Chicago Pile-1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Pile-1#Later_operation Chicago Pile-1 (CP-1) was the Site of the First Self Sustaining Nuclear world's first nuclear reactor to Reaction achieve criticality. Its construction U.S. National Register of Historic Places was part of the Manhattan U.S. National Historic Landmark Project, the Allied effort to create Chicago Landmark atomic bombs during World War II. It was built by the Manhattan Project's Metallurgical Laboratory at the University of Chicago, under the west viewing stands of the original Stagg Field. The first man-made self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction was initiated in CP-1 on 2 December Drawing of the reactor 1942, under the supervision of Enrico Fermi, who described the apparatus as "a crude pile of black bricks and wooden timbers".[4] The reactor was assembled in November 1942, by a team that included Fermi, Leo Szilard, discoverer of the chain reaction, Location Chicago, Cook County, and Herbert L. Anderson, Walter Illinois, USA Zinn, Martin D. Whitaker, and Coordinates 41°47′32″N 87°36′3″W George Weil. It contained 45,000 Built 1942[2] graphite blocks weighing 400 NRHP Reference # 66000314 [1] short tons (360 t) used as a neutron moderator, and was Significant dates fueled by 6 short tons (5.4 t) of Added to NRHP 15 October 1966 [1] uranium metal and 50 short tons (66000314) (45 t) of uranium oxide. In the Designated NHL 18 February 1965[2] pile, some of the free neutrons Designated CL 27 October 1971[3] produced by the natural decay of uranium were absorbed by other uranium atoms, causing nuclear fission of those atoms, and the release of additional free neutrons.
    [Show full text]
  • Sk00st112 Reactivity and High Negative Subcriticality L
    SK00ST112 REACTIVITY AND HIGH NEGATIVE SUBCRITICALITY L.Shishkov. RRC "Kurchatov Institute", Institute of Nuclear Reactors, Russia ABSTRACT In the paper the classical notion of core reactivity is discussed, various ways of this notion modifications are shown. Various methods for reactivity measurements are commented. The causes of significant disagreement between the calculation and experimental data on scram system efficiency are given, a suggestion on changing the interpretation of the results of WER startup experiments with scram are made. The author is of the opinion that the classical notions and determinations introduced by the founders of reactor physics should be kept unchanged. These should be followed not only out of respect to the authorities but rather in order to avoid confusion and K —1 alternative readings. Among these notions ths reactivity p = -~— should be K*ff mentioned, whose introduction into common use was, may be, not very fortunate but which has quite a single meaning. Indeed, using the generally accepted notation the neutron transport in the reactor can be described using the equations: *-"* ft _ fTyjyj (i) If we confine ourselves to the case of linearity OZQTAL operators, a part of equation (1) can be formally separated, forming a new relation: (2) 447 It has been proved that Eq.(2) has indispensably a single positive solution n>0, (1- p)>0, i.e. at Q and L unchanged the reactivity p, which "physically" characterizes the "proximity" of non-critical reactor to critical state, is unambiguously determined. Strictly speaking, only the "proximity (the degree of proximity) and nothing more. In some cases, using p, one can estimate the rate of change in the full reactor power, but not always.
    [Show full text]
  • The Study of Beta-Delayed Neutron Decay Near the Neutron Drip Line
    THE STUDY OF BETA-DELAYED NEUTRON DECAY NEAR THE NEUTRON DRIP LINE By Chandana Sujeewa Sumithrarachchi A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial ful¯llment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Chemistry 2007 ABSTRACT The Study of Beta-delayed Neutron Decay Near The Neutron Drip Line By Chandana Sujeewa Sumithrarachchi The study of neutron-rich oxygen and uorine isotopes can provide important information on the evolution of nuclear shell structure close to the neutron drip line. The structural changes in this region are reected with observations of the rapid change in the location of the drip line at uorine and appearance of a new shell closure at N = 14. The recent experiments along with the shell model calculations provide evidence for the doubly magic nature of 22O. The negative parity states in 22O rooted in the neutron pf orbitals are not experimentally known. The knowledge of nuclear structure in 23F, which has the structure of a single proton outside the doubly magic 22O, is also important as it should be sensitive to the proton s and d orbital splitting. The present work focused on the beta-delayed neutron and gamma- ray spectroscopes from 22N and 23O beta decay. The measurements of 22N and 23O were carried out at the NSCL using fragments from the reaction of 48Ca beam in a Be target. The desired isotopes were stopped in the implantation detector and then monitored for beta-delayed neutrons and gamma- rays using a neutron spectroscopic array and eight detectors from SeGA, respectively.
    [Show full text]