DOCSLIB.ORG

Development of Core Physics Evaluation Code for CANDU Reactors

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Development of Core Physics Evaluation Code for CANDU Reactors KINS/RR-225 23 n M 1L M yss2i s as7i^7HS Establishment of Safety Audit Evaluation System and Development of Safety Issue Relevant Regulatory Technology for CANDU Reactors yxtSEal SSg7t2E*M 7fl^ an# S7khi 14# Development of Core Physics Evaluation Code for CANDU Reactors 2004. 2. ^ \n r° a SL eE da rKr £ m r2 _ JU -41 rC 0|» £ hJ VJ — >- >H 3. fll£ mini 5 rw oDi r|m lo r° Hu -IX Hu CM fr <j Oh 4X r° 0 o$ nh R oW 12 r° ti° M 02 r° oy e ti£ □a ofi >4 0|H vj Hu oa 0|i fu|n vj raw- ¥ ry 5 [2 r2 r£ I jo □a HJ 4J 0|M H> No r\3 ofi djh r2 -U J; X' vj £ >£ 4> 0£ Ki 0£ ri° * In □a [£ 0|» 4J >d VJ 2004. m m> VI i-j ni£ ow 44 40 l> D£i n£ it ID£ 2. H> r° rh oa oh r° Hu 29. E° 0|X 12 Eh K) £4 rh: ofo Jffi 0>! ran- rw vj n 44 7}*** *#3* *1 o) #7}*4 ## 4*1*4 4# **4 44 4 44 **7} 4171431 *54, 44 7}***7} 2044 #4*3 *# 14 l 3.714 44/ 44444 4# 44*(Pressure Tube) 31(Creep)444 44 (Sagging) 44-4 44)44 3# 4444 4444 44# ##*3 44- 44 3.444-4 #444 4444 #44 444 *7}*4 ^*3 4## 44# 444 #44 *7}*53 3# 1*34 ###33 44# 444 43, *# 4## #3 #4 4# 45.4-41 434 #* 34 #4 #7}# *1*#. 44 # 4444# #43 *1*4 **l#4 4# 34# #7>7> 3 #4 44# 4## £44$!4. 4# 44 CANDU-6 444#434 q# 34#4 44 *4444 43 #431* #4# 31# #7>4 4# 4 4313 711144 #4# 3^4 3#4 *#44 44# 144 444 17}*#*. °1# 44 WIMSD-5B, MCNP, WIMS-AECL #433* 4*4 4 #44 314 *#4 2.5%4 5%1 #*, 4#7fl 7)2 #*5, 4434 4 4 #4 # 5 (relative fission density), 3#3 Pu *4*54 4#5(atom density) *4 3*4 #4#4# 43*454 4# HELIOS 334 44# 4-4- 43*44 * 4444# *44 31*44 34 #*54 44# 14# 3#* #4- 4# 441 WIMS-AECL #*33* 4**4 31*44 #4 **5 4 44# 14# l7}**54, *#*44**71*** 44**3 **4 *34# 71114* 34* **3 34^*711 #* CANNOD (CAndu Neutronics NODal code) 33# 1**4 31*44 3* *# * 4 44 # 1*1 3**33 #7>*7l 4*4 CANDU6 37)3*4 ** **5 14# *7>*#4-. #4 1 34 444 #4/ *4*4 3l#(Creep Ratio)* *7># 4*7)1 44*3# 7l5#*5(Void Reactivity) *7># 31*4 *7}3 *#44 £*#* *33 17}###. — 1 — SUMMARY C8 f- A ^ f) The lattice cell calculation is performed to assess the sensitivity of the reactor physics parameters to pressure tube creep resulting from radiation aging. The used lattice codes are WIMSD-5B code, MCNP code and WIMS-AECL code and the analyzed lattice parameters are the coolant void reactivity, the fuel fission density and the atom density of Pu isotopes. The reference model(normal state) and two perturbed models accounting for the pressure tube creep are developed on the basis of CANDU6 lattice cell. The 2.5% and 5% values of pressure tube diameter with respective to normal state are considered. Also, The effect on the analyzed lattice parameters by depletion is investigated for the reference model and two perturbed models. —11 — 4 1 4 4 ^ ................................................................................................................... 1 4 2 4 4^4 ^^4 £]3: bc4M# sg 7> ........................................... 6 4 1 4 4^4 434 #3 333333.......................................... 7 4 2 3 343 334 33 ^333 3 7}........................................ 7 4 3 4 4^........................................................................................................... 17 %JL5-4........................................................................................................................ 19 3 4- 3. *r s. n. 4^#................................................................................................... 3 5. 1.2. H^A>gjl 3 3 II.1. 37% q-gs 34 44 .................................................... 9 & H.2. 374 ^gi5L #1 5:^ ................................................................................ 9 5. II.3. Creep A] Pressure Tubes] ti>^ 4#............................................. 10 3 II.4. 4 ^r^A] Creep4# WIMS-AECL 34 7)14....................... 10 5. II.5. 8ppm 4^ 444 creep4 4# WIMS-AECL 4 a} 7)14...... 11 a II.6. Creep ^ 4 4 AH 444 4# ................................ 14 5. II.7. Creep 4# ^ai 4%^^44.................................................... 14 — iv — ZL^ 1.1. CANDU ^ ...................................................................... 4 zl^ i.2. ^ 444 4^8 ................................................. 4 zl^ i.3. q-gs. 4#4 SAJ-.................................................................................... 5 zl^ II.l. 37-g- 444a.............................................................................. 8 Zl^ II.2. Creepofl 4# 4K^M]4 ^4 ......................................................... 11 ZL^ II.3. Creep 0!] 4# Void Reactivity ^4.................................................... 12 ZL^ II.4. Loading Pattern of Fresh Core ............................................................ 13 ZI%] II.5. Half-Core Voided Pattern...................................................................... 13 ZL^] II.6. Creep Ratio 0]] 4# ^4 4"§-5-........................................................... 15 ZL%| II.7. Creep Ratio 0!] 4-c- Void Reactivity................................................... 15 ZL%j II.8 . Creep Ratio 0!] 4-5- Void Reactivity 4°1 ......................................... 16 all 1 # 4 s. 4 i # 4 # 44 €7}1#15 5 7}#155(pwr)15 €45 #157)441 ^515 4544 #54 444# #4#, 7}#555(PHWR)ii €45 #1571 41 515 1#5 Hi 7} 7}545# H# 3)51# #544 #5# 441# #54- 11545 415 1414 11 1445 #4 !47j)€ 55 5. 7}-g-£) 4 #44 (Pressure Tube), 54 ##7)| 2} 1544 #7} 5(Calandria)4 4414 144 €7}54(Calandria Tube), 41# #541 1144 55 End Fitting # Bellows, #444 €1541 ### #<# 4 #7))# ##7)) lf-4 ## 4-a #147) 44 Garter Spring Spacer 4—5. 4444 44 (22 € 1.1 ~ 1.3). 4 444 H"155 44 6.3 m, 4)1 103.4 mm, 44) 4.19 mm, 47)1 61.4 kg44, 71)44 Zr-2.5 wt% Nb(Niobium)##55 #4 #4 4 316°C41 10.9 MPa44 (4 1.1). 415 4444 515 4444 454}, 415 47)15 44 44, 415 4# 44 45, 447} 57}4=4 44, heatup/cooldown7) #445 #5-# 44 54 5#11 €455 444 45 544 #444 45 44) 144 #5 # 4 44-7)1 44-. 441 114 1#4 114 #5* €4 €1 #4)47}# 4 444 7) 5 CSA-N285.4 # CSA-N285.2# 514 45 1114 #7}# 5=544. €1 €14 15 4414 14# 4 64 55 10444 51155 5*345 4 54 17}A) 157)e# 5445 114 #144 111 17} 1- 5*344 45 51 45# 1145 44 19734 45 #41 4555 44 7}h7} 441 #14^54, 44415 €4 5# 17) 17}A) 7)55 5445 144 1#1#54, 4# #5 #145 si € 155 #4 (5. 1.2). -2- a i.i. 7 £ 15L71 23:7) 33:7) 43:7) Pickering #2 711 1 Zr 2.5% Nb Zr 2.5% Nb Zr 2.5% Nb Zr 2.5% Nb Zircaloy 2 m^ll (mm) 4.19 4.19 4.19 4.19 4.95 (mm) 103.4 103.4 103.4 103.4 103.4 Zr+2.5Nb+0.5 Spacer Wire Inconel X-750 Inconel X-750 Inconel X-750 Zircaloy 2 4 Cu 4 Girdle Wire Zircaloy 2 Zircaloy 4 Zircaloy 4 Zircaloy 4 Garter SpringDiameter Coil 5.59 4.83 4.83 4.83 6.81 (mm) Spacer Torus 124.5 107.9 107.9 107.9 4 4 4 4 2 Type Loose Tight Tight Tight Rolling Improved Improved Improved Improved Over Tift (ppm0(5)-) 25 10 5 5 2 3 4 4 5. 1.2. 51*11 A}e)l 9)3: 3)2)4# Shutdown 7)^4 1 1974. 8 Pickering 3 Over Rolling PT 17711 51*11 2 1975. 5 Pickering 4 Over Rolling PT 527fl 51*11 1071143 3 1982. 2 Bruce 2 Over Rolling PT 271) H*ll 47ni 4 1983. 8 Pickering 2 PT/CT 3# PT # an 51*11 5 1985. Pickering 3 Over Rolling PT I7fl 51*11 6 1986. 3 Bruce 2 Extrusion Lap PT/CT 17H 51*11 37n-@ 7 1994. 2 Wolsong 1 Debris Fretting PT 371) 51 ail — J — 1.1. CANDU $ ^5: Feeder Calandria Tube Feeder Bellows End Fuel Spacers Pressure Fitting Bundles 1.2. f Fuel Bundle Dz0 Coolant Garter Spring Pressure Tube Calandria Tube Annulus Gas ^9 1.3. a] <9 4#4 99 99 445 994# #s4 949 S44 491 (Creep) 9 9994 44 99 499 444 44 ##5. 944 494 49# #7>99 94- 444 # 45(candu9)9 7}## 90 ] 49 . 999 4494-7} 7^444, 0)5. 999 994 4999 9999 999 #47} 94- s9 99 999 #9 #9 4451- H9 (On-power Refueling)9 # 9S# 495 449 #945 5. 4449 94 . ^94 49 s. 994 9^49 3D49S5 4944 49 # 5.9999 #7}94 49 4^4 9544 #7}& 99 9 i 9#S7} 9^44 49 ^4 9999 4999 9## &4# 4s. 94 9 9949 h99 #9 49 49 9949=4 4444 4^A5. 94 495 49# 44^ 447)1 #9= 4999 #7}4t)) 4s.5 ^9 9^9 0.5. 99# 949 4^, 947)1 9# 4j7 #4 9# 4s94 a)-jla] ^ ^4 #4 #7}# 4949 49 99 44 99# 944 94 -5- *il 2 % *g-w »iimi ^1# <9 # ^7> 4 2# ^#<9# ^7} 4 1# ### ## ###### #44# #A# 44-4 ^44 4&H (creep) 443M1 44, 444 3:1-4 44 €4&4 444 444 444 444 ^7>44 44 4444 #4 4 44& 444 4444 4444 44-. 44-4- 44 7]44 CNSC(Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission) 4 444 444 # #5-4-71 444 #4#44#(GAI: Generic Action Items)A5. ##4-3 444 44 4-44- 44 44# A#3};n 44- o o]#43: 3] tl (ingress)# 44 o rolled-joint #4# 44 O 4-JE.!- 4-0] o 7}s.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Andrew S. Burrows, Robert S. Norris William M
    0?1' ¥t Andrew S. Burrows, Robert S. Norris William M. Arkin, and Thomas B. Cochran GREENPKACZ Damocles 28 rue des Petites Ecuries B.P. 1027 75010 Paris 6920 1 Lyon Cedex 01 Tel. (1) 47 70 46 89 TO. 78 36 93 03 no 3 - septembre 1989 no 3809 - maWaoOt 1989 Directeur de publication, Philippe Lequenne CCP lyon 3305 96 S CPPAP no en cours Directeur de publication, Palrtee Bouveret CPPAP no6701 0 Composition/Maquette : P. Bouverei Imprime sur papier blanchi sans chlore par Atelier 26 / Tel. 75 85 51 00 Depot legal S date de parution Avant-propos a ['edition fran~aise La traduction fran~aisede cette etude sur les essais nucleaires fran~aisentre dans Ie cadre d'une carnpagne mondiale de GREENPEACEpour la denuclearisation du Pacifique. Les chercheurs americains du NRDC sont parvenus a percer Ie secret qui couvre en France tout ce qui touche au nucleaire militaire. Ainsi, la France : - a effectub 172 essais nucleaires de 1960 a 1988. soil environ 10 % du nornbre total d'essais effectues depuis 1945 ; - doit effectuer 20 essais pour la rnise au point d'une t6te d'ame nuclhaire ; - effectual! 8 essais annuels depuis quelques annees et ces essais ont permis la mise au point de la bombe a neutrons des 1985 ; - a produit, depuis 1963, environ 800 tetes nuclbaires et pres de 500 sont actusllement deployees ; - a effectue pks de 110 essais souterrains a Mururoa. Les degats causes a I'atatI sont tres importants. La rbcente decision oflicielle du regroupement des essais en une seule carnpagne de tirs annuelle n'a probablement pas ete prise uniquernent pour des imperatifs econamiques ou de conjoncture internationale.
    [Show full text]
  • POLYNÉSIE 46 Essais Nucléaires Aériens
    POLYNÉSIE 46 essais nucléaires aériens Puissance Date / Heure Localisation / Nom de code Mode de tir Objectif (kT de locale Zone TNT) 02 juillet 1966 / Mururoa / Aldébaran barge = 10 m AN 52 28 kT 05h34 Dindon 19 juillet 1966 / 85 Km E Mirage IV = Tamouré AN 11 50 kT 05h05 Mururoa 1000 m Mururoa / sécurité 21 juillet 1966 Ganymède tour = 12 m 0 kT Colette AN 22 11 sept 1966 / Mururoa / Bételgeuse ballon 1200 m MR 31 110 kT 07h30 Denise 24 sept 1966 / Fangataufa / fission Rigel barge = 3 m 125 kT 07h00 Frégate dopée 04 oct 1966 / Mururoa / fission Sirius barge = 10 m 205 kT 11h00 Dindon dopée 05 juin 1967 / Mururoa / Altaïr ballon = 295 m militaire 15 kT 09h00 Denise 27 juin 1967 / Mururoa / fission Antarès ballon = 340 m 120 kT 08h30 Dindon dopée 02 juillet 1967 / Mururoa / fission Arcturus barge = 3 m 22 kT 07h30 Denise dopée 07 juillet 1968 / Mururoa / Capella ballon = 463 m militaire 115 kT 12h00 Denise 15 juillet 1968 / Mururoa / Castor ballon = 650 m MR 41 f 450 kT 09h00 Dindon 03 août 1968 / Mururoa / Pollux ballon = 490 m MR 41 150 kT 11h00 Denise 24 août 1968 / Fangataufa / 2,6 MT Canopus ballon = 520 m militaire 08h30 Frégate bombe H 08 sept 1968 / Mururoa / Procyon ballon = 700 m militaire 1,28 MT 09h00 Denise 15 mai 1970 / Mururoa / Andromède ballon = 560 m militaire 13 kT 10h00 Denise 22 mai 1970 / Mururoa / Cassiopée ballon = 500 m TN 60 224 kT 10h30 Dindon 30 mai 1970 / Fangataufa / Dragon ballon = 500 m militaire 945 kT 10h00 Frégate 24 juin 1970 / Mururoa / Éridan ballon = 560 m militaire 12 kT 10h30 Denise 03 juillet 1970
    [Show full text]
  • (CEA/DAM) Au Cœur De La Dissuasion Nucléaire Française
    La Direction des Applications Militaires (CEA/DAM) au cœur de la dissuasion au cœur de la dissuasion nucléaire française nucléaire dissuasion la de cœur au nucléaire française De l’ère des pionniers Direction des applications militaires au programme Simulation www-dam.cea.fr ISBN : 978-2-9574210-0-8 http://www.barcode-generator.de La Direction des Applications Militaires (CEA/DAM) (CEA/DAM) Militaires Applications des Direction La La Direction des Applications Militaires (CEA/DAM) au cœur de la dissuasion nucléaire française De l’ère des pionniers au programme Simulation SOMMAIRE CHAPITRE 1 5 DE BECQUEREL À GERBOISE BLEUE (1896 - 1960) Les premières découvertes scientifiques 12 Les atomiciens français dans la résistance à l’occupation nazie 14 La création du CEA 18 La planification industrielle de l’effort nucléaire français 21 Vers le premier essai nucléaire français 38 CHAPITR E 2 49 DE LA BOMBE ATOMIQUE À L’ARME THERMONUCLÉAIRE (1960 - 1968) Nucléaire de défense et programmation 54 L’émergence de la stratégie nucléaire française 58 La montée en puissance de la DAM 62 L’accès à la bombe H et le rôle clé des essais 66 CHAPITRE 3 71 LA CONSOLIDATION DU NUCLÉAIRE DE DÉFENSE FRANÇAIS (1969 - 1981) Le développement de la triade stratégique 76 Le développement de l’arme nucléaire tactique 80 La stratégie des essais 84 CHAPITRE 4 89 ENTRE RUPTURES ET CONTINUITÉ (1981 - 1996) Modernisation des forces et fin de la guerre froide 94 La politique française de désarmement 98 Du moratoire à l’arrêt définitif des essais 104 CHAPITRE 5 107 LA SIMULATION, OUTIL ULTIME DE GARANTIE DES ARMES NUCLÉAIRES FRANÇAISES (DEPUIS 1996) Le développement du programme Simulation 118 La politique d’ouverture du CEA/DAM 126 La DAM, acteur incontournable de l’appareil de défense français 130 DE BECQUEREL À GERBOISE BLEUE 18961 - 1960 Cette première partie est centrée sur les débuts la France Libre a poursuivi cette activité dans le plus de l’énergie nucléaire en France.
    [Show full text]
  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC Nuclear Program 1350 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 300 Washington D.C
    NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC Nuclear Program 1350 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 300 Washington D.C. 20005 Voice: 202-783-7800 (main) 202-624-9350 (Paine) 202-624-9329 (Cochran) 202-624-9328 (Norris) Fax: 202-783-5917 Internet: nrdcnuclear@igc. apc.org Evenings/weekend contact number: 703-527-0306 (Paine) Each of the five declared' nuclear powers--the United States, Soviet Union, Great Britain, France, and China--have gone through similar seeps to create their nuclear arsenals. I After a political decision to develop and test an atomic bomb there followed large scale' mobilization of scientific and engineering resources. Huge facilities were built to produce the fissile materials-- highly enriched uranium and plutonium--supplemented by laboratories, test sites and other essentials. A parallel effort was undertaken to develop and produce delivery systems, such as aircraft, missiles, ships and submarines. The U.S. and Soviet Union engaged in these activities on an enormous scale. While the three second-tier powers were much more modest in deploying their arsenals, they ,still managed to spend huge sums when measured on a per capita basis. The first U.S. test, codenamed "Trinity," on July 16, 1945 at the Alamogordo Bombing Range in south-central New Mexico was of a plutonium weapon. This was the culmination of a 27-month crash effort--to develop, test, and use an atomic bomb--known as the Manhattan Project. A B-29 bomber, named the "Enola Gay", flew over Hiroshima, Japan, on August 6; 1945, and at.g: 15 in the morning, local time, dropped an untested uranium- 235 gun-assembly bomb; nicknamed "Little' Boy.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapport D'information
    N 96 SENAT PREMIÈRE SESSION ORDINAIRE DE 1992 - 1993 Annexe au procès verbal de la séance du 9 décembre 1 992 RAPPORT D'INFORMATION FAIT au nom de la commission des Affaires étrangères , de la défense et des forces armées ( 1 ), en application de l'article 22 , premier alinéa , du Règlement sur la programmation des équipements militaires pour les années 1992-1994 , Par M. Jacques GENTON , Sénateur . ( Il Cette commission est composée de : MM . Jean Lecanuet . president , Yvon Bourses , Michel d'Aillieres, François Abadie, Guy Penne, vice présidents ; Jeun Garcia , Michel Alloncle , Roland Bernard, Xavier de Villepin , secrétaires ; Jean Luc Becart, Mme Mimique Ben Guiga , MM . Daniel Bernardet , André Bettencourt, André Boyer, Mme Paulette Brisepierre, MM . Michel Caldaguès, Paul Caron , Jean Paul Chambriard, Yvon Collin, Claude Cornac , Charles Henri de Cosse Brissac, Michel Crucis, Hubert Durand Chastel , Claude Estier , Gerard Gaud , Jean Claude Gaudin , Philippe de Gaulle . Jacques Genton , Jacques Golliet , Yves Guena , Bernard Guyomard , Jacques Habert . Mme Nicole de Hauteclocque , MM . Marcel Henry , Andre Jarrot , Louis Jung , Christian de La Malène, Marc Lauriol , Edouard Le Jeune , Max Lejeune , Philippe Madrelle , Michel Maurice Bokanowski , Pierre Mauroy , Jean Luc Mélenchon , Paul d'Ornano, Alain Poher , Michel Poniatowski , Andre Rouvière, Jean Simonin , Robert Paul Vigouroux , Serge Vinçon , Albert Voilquin . Defense • Programmation militaire ■ Rapports d'information. -I- SOMMAIRE Pages Introduction 15 CHAPITRE PRÉLIMINAIRE - LA MÉTHODOLOGIE FLUCTUANTE ET IMPARFAITE DES LOIS DE PROGRAMMATION 19 A - L'évolution des lois de programmation : une méthodologie fluctuante 20 1 . La première loi de programme : 1 960- 1 964 20 2 . La seconde loi de programme : 1965-1970 21 3 .
    [Show full text]
  • Direction-Applications-Militaires-Cea
    La Direction des Applications Militaires au cœur de la dissuasion nucléaire française De l’ère des pionniers au programme Simulation SOMMAIRE CHAPITRE 1 5 DE BECQUEREL À GERBOISE BLEUE (1896 - 1960) Les premières découvertes scientifiques 12 Les atomiciens français dans la résistance à l’occupation nazie 14 La création du CEA 18 La planification industrielle de l’effort nucléaire français 21 Vers le premier essai nucléaire français 38 CHAPITR E 2 49 DE LA BOMBE ATOMIQUE À L’ARME THERMONUCLÉAIRE (1960 - 1968) Nucléaire de défense et programmation 54 L’émergence de la stratégie nucléaire française 58 La montée en puissance de la DAM 62 L’accès à la bombe H et le rôle clé des essais 66 CHAPITRE 3 71 LA CONSOLIDATION DU NUCLÉAIRE DE DÉFENSE FRANÇAIS (1969 - 1981) Le développement de la triade stratégique 76 Le développement de l’arme nucléaire tactique 80 La stratégie des essais 84 CHAPITRE 4 89 ENTRE RUPTURES ET CONTINUITÉ (1981 - 1996) Modernisation des forces et fin de la guerre froide 94 La politique française de désarmement 98 Du moratoire à l’arrêt définitif des essais 104 CHAPITRE 5 107 LA SIMULATION, OUTIL ULTIME DE GARANTIE DES ARMES NUCLÉAIRES FRANÇAISES (DEPUIS 1996) Le développement du programme Simulation 116 La politique d’ouverture du CEA/DAM 124 La DAM, acteur incontournable de l’appareil de défense français 128 DE BECQUEREL À GERBOISE BLEUE 18961 - 1960 Cette première partie est centrée sur les débuts la France Libre a poursuivi cette activité dans le plus de l’énergie nucléaire en France. Elle montre à quel grand secret, d’abord en Grande-Bretagne, puis en point les équipes scientifiques françaises ont été, dès Amérique du Nord.
    [Show full text]
  • (CEA/DAM) a Key Player in Developing France's Nuclear Deterrent
    The Military Applications Division (CEA/DAM) a key player in developing France's nuclear deterrent a key player in developing France's nuclear deterrent nuclear France's in developing player a key From the pioneers of nuclear physics Military Applications Division (DAM) to the Simulation Programme www-dam.cea.fr ISBN : 978-2-9574210-1-5 http://www.barcode-generator.de The Military Applications Division (CEA/DAM) - (CEA/DAM) Division MilitaryThe Applications The Military Applications Division (CEA/DAM) a key player in developing France's nuclear deterrent From the pioneers of nuclear physics to the Simulation Programme CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 5 FROM BECQUEREL TO GERBOISE BLEUE (1896 – 1960) Early scientific discoveries 12 French nuclear scientists in the Resistance 14 Setting up the CEA 18 The plan to develop a French nuclear industry 21 Towards the First French nuclear test 38 CHAPTER 2 49 FROM THE ATOMIC BOMB TO THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS (1960 - 1968) Nuclear defence and planning 54 The emergence of France's nuclear strategy 58 The DAM: development and growth 62 Access to the H bomb and the key role of nuclear testing 66 CHAPTER 3 71 CONSOLIDATING FRANCE'S DEFENCE NUCLEAR CAPABILITY (1969 - 1981) Development of France's strategic Triad 76 Development of tactical nuclear weapons 80 Nuclear testing strategy 84 CHAPTER 4 89 SHIFTS AND CONTINUITY (1981-1996) Modernizing the Nuclear Forces and the end of the Cold War 94 France's disarmament policy 98 From the moratorium to the definitive end to nuclear tests 104 CHAPTER 5 107 SIMULATION, THE ULTIMATE TOOL GUARANTEEING THE FRENCH NUCLEAR WEAPONS SINCE 1996 Developing the Simulation Programme 118 The CEA/DAM's opening policy 126 The DAM, a key player in France's defence system 130 FROM BECQUEREL TO GERBOISE BLEUE 18961 - 1960 In this first chapter, we will focus on the early days Great Britain and then in North America.
    [Show full text]
  • Liste Complète Des Essais Français
    Liste complète des essais nucléaires français Essais nucléaires français au Sahara Ordre date Nom de code Heure Localisation Mode de tir Lieu Objectif Puissance Dircen Aériens 1 13/02/1960 Gerboise Bleue 7h04 Reggane-Hammoudia tour de 100 m effets 69 2 01/04/1960 Gerboise blanche 6h13 Reggane-Hammoudia au niveau du sol militaire 3 3 27/12/1960 Gerboise rouge 7h28 Reggane-Hammoudia tour de 50 m effets 2 4 25/04/1961 Gerboise Verte 6h08 Reggane-Hammoudia tour de 50 m ? 0,7 Souterrains 5 07/11/1961 Agathe 11h30 In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E1 Nord militaire 5 6 01/05/1962 Béryl 10 h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E2 AN 11 30 7 18/03/1963 Emeraude 10 h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E3 Sud militaire 15 8 30/03/1963 Améthyste 10 h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E3 Bis militaire 0,7 9 20/10/1963 Rubis 13 h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E5 militaire 60 10 14/02/1964 Opale 11 h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E1 Sud mil/pacifique 4 11 15/06/1964 Topaze 13 h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E6-1 militaire 1 12 28/11/1964 Turquoise 10h30 In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E4 militaire 5 13 27/02/1965 Saphir 11h30 In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E7 mil/pacifique 115 14 30/05/1965 Jade 11 h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E1-3 militaire 0,6 15 01/10/1965 Corindon 10 h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E6-2 militaire 4 16 01/12/1965 Tourmaline 10h30 In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E3 Nord militaire 10 17 16/02/1966 Grenat 11h In Eker-Taourirt Tan Afela tunnel E4-2 (Nord) mil/pacifique 15 Essais nucléaires français en Polynésie
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Wars and Weapons Reduction for Global Security 77 Nuclear Weapons, Nuclear War and Global Security: Major Trends and Consequences
    Online Study Materials on NUCLEAR WARS AND WEAPONS REDUCTION FOR GLOBAL SECURITY 77 NUCLEAR WEAPONS, NUCLEAR WAR AND GLOBAL SECURITY: MAJOR TRENDS AND CONSEQUENCES Introduction On 7 December 1988, the General Assembly adopted resolution 43/75 N, the operative paragraphs of which read as follows: The General Assembly, “1. Requests the Secretary-General to carry out, with the assistance of qualified governmental experts and taking into account recent relevant studies, an update of the Comprehensive Study on Nuclear Weapons that provides factual and up-to-date information on and pays regard to the political, legal and security aspects of: (a) Nuclear arsenals and pertinent technological developments; (b) Doctrines concerning nuclear weapons; (c) Efforts to reduce nuclear weapons; (d) Physical, environmental, medical and other effects of use of nuclear weapons and of nuclear testing; (e) Efforts to achieve a comprehensive nuclear-test ban; (f) Efforts to prevent the use of nuclear weapons and their horizontal and vertical proliferation; (g) The question of verification of compliance with nuclear-arms limitation agreements.” “2. Recommends that the study, while aiming at being as comprehensive as possible, should be based on open material and such further information as member states may wish to make available for the purpose of the study;” 1966 “3. Invites all Governments to co-operate with the Secretary-General so that the objectives of the study may be achieved;” “4. Requests the Secretary-General to submit the final report to the General Assembly well in advance of its forty-fifth session.” The update of the 1980 study has been prepared against the background of important changes that have occurred in international relations in the last 10 years since its publication.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Nuclear Weapons
    1. Nuclear weapons It is difficult to characterize 1989. It was a year during which the entire foundation of the cold war seemed to crumble and the most fundamental assumptions about East-West relations and military strategy required a complete reappraisal. Even a narrow assessment of the nuclear weapon developments of 1989 must take into account the extraordinary political changes in Eastern Europe, the overwhelming economic and political pressures to reduce military expenditure and forces, and the unprecedented level of co-operation between the USA and the USSR. It appears that these developments may permit a fundamental change in the nuclear postures and practices of the nuclear weapon states. Against this backdrop, future historians may see 1989 as the year in which the post-World War II era ended and a new era began. Even without this new situation the defence budgets of the five nuclear weapon nations in general and the budgets for nuclear weapons in particular are becoming severely constrained. For the fifth year in a row the US military budget declined, as measured in constant dollars. The Soviet Government stated, and the US Government apparently agrees, that Soviet military spending was less in 1989 than it was in 1988. France is now feel- ing the effect of its economic constraints, especially visible in the nuclear weapon programme. Nevertheless, nuclear weapon modernization continued in all five of the acknowledged nuclear weapon states: the USA, the USSR, the UK, France and China. In the USA there was a decrease in the strategic arsenal because of bomb and submarine retirements.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Nuclear Weapons
    1. Nuclear weapons Prepared by the Nuclear Weapons Databook staff and SIP R 1* 1. Introduction The year 1988 was the first in.history in which both the United States and the Soviet Union destroyed modern nuclear weapon systems under a disarmament treaty, the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter- Range Missiles (the INF Treaty). In the first part of the year the Treaty was ratified by both countries and then entered into force during the Reagan- Gorbachev summit meeting on 1 June. In the remaining seven months of the year nearly 700 missiles were physically destroyed. Although all five acknowledged nuclear weapon states (the USA, the USSR, the UK, France and China) continued to develop new weapon systems, all have been beset by technological, political and fiscal problems that may slow or alter the pace of the arms race. Political relations among the nuclear weapon nations have markedly improved, thus lowering the incentives for military competition. Two summit meetings were held in 1988 between Presidents Reagan and Gorbachev, and both nations signed an agreement to notify each other of their strategic ballistic missile launches (see appendix 1A).! Gorbachev's announcement at the United Nations on 7 December that the Soviet Union would cut and restructure its military forces will have a wide-ranging impact. The USA and the USSR continue to negotiate about large reductions of their strategic nuclear forces. Conventional arms control negotiations in Europe are imminent and will include the military forces of all the nuclear states except China. However, as in past years, the momentum of nuclear weapon developments continues, seemingly oblivious to changing political realities and future opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • NUCLEAR WEAPONS DATABOOK Projecf WORKING PAPER
    NUCLEAR WEAPONS DATABOOK PROJECf WORKING PAPER Andrew S. Burrows, Robert S. Norris, William M. Arkin, and Thomas B. Cochran Natural Resources Defense Council 1350 New York Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20005 202/783- 7800 An expanded version of this working paper will be published as a chapter in Thomas B. Cochran, William M. Arkin, Robert S. Norris, Andrew S. Burrows, et al., Nuclear Weapons Databook, Volume V: British, French, Chinese Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Weapons Proliferation (New York: Ballinger Publishing Company, forthcoming). Readers' additions and corrections would be appreciated. Introduction . 2 Reliability of estimateslSources of information 3 Early preparations 4 Testing in French Algeria 5 Atmospheric testing at Mururoa and Fangataufa 6 Underground testing at Mururoa and Fangataufa 8 Other activities at Mururoa 11 Damage to the atolls 12 Scientific inspection teams 16 Future underground test sites 17 Types of tests 19 Table 1: Known French nuclear tests, 13 February 1960- 31 December 1988 25 Table 2: History of French nuclear tests, 1960-1988 46 Figure 1: Map of the Tuamotu Archipelago 47 Figure 2: Map of the Mpruroa atoll 48 Figure 3: Geological cross-sectional diagram of Mururoa atoll .. 49 Figure 4: Map of the Fangataufa atoll 50 Appendix 1: Geography and geology of the French test sites ... 51 Appendix 2: Organization of agencies involved in French nuclear testing 53 French acronyms 55 Short titles used in the notes 57 'i .2i'-',.'.~.~,.. The NRDC Nuclear Weapons Databook Project Recent Nuclear Weapons Databook Publications Since 1960, France has conducted at least 172 nuclear tests (see Tables 1 and 2).
    [Show full text]