Refine your search:     
Report No.
 - 
Search Results: Records 1-3 displayed on this page of 3
  • 1

Presentation/Publication Type

Initialising ...

Refine

Journal/Book Title

Initialising ...

Meeting title

Initialising ...

First Author

Initialising ...

Keyword

Initialising ...

Language

Initialising ...

Publication Year

Initialising ...

Held year of conference

Initialising ...

Save select records

JAEA Reports

Report of summer holiday practical training on 2022

Ishitsuka, Etsuo; Ho, H. Q.; Kitagawa, Kanta*; Fukuda, Takahito*; Ito, Ryo*; Nemoto, Masaya*; Kusunoki, Hayato*; Nomura, Takuro*; Nagase, Sota*; Hashimoto, Haruki*; et al.

JAEA-Technology 2023-013, 19 Pages, 2023/06

JAEA-Technology-2023-013.pdf:1.75MB

Eight people from five universities participated in the 2022 summer holiday practical training with the theme of "Technical development on HTTR". The participants practiced the feasibility study for nuclear battery, the burn-up analysis of HTTR core, the feasibility study for $$^{252}$$Cf production, the analysis of behavior on loss of forced cooling test, and the thermal-hydraulic analysis near reactor pressure vessel. In the questionnaire after this training, there were impressions such as that it was useful as a work experience, that some students found it useful for their own research, and that discussion with other university students was a good experience. These impressions suggest that this training was generally evaluated as good.

JAEA Reports

HTTR burnup characteristic analysis with detailed axial burning region using MVP-BURN

Ikeda, Reiji*; Ho, H. Q.; Nagasumi, Satoru; Ishii, Toshiaki; Hamamoto, Shimpei; Nakano, Yumi*; Ishitsuka, Etsuo; Fujimoto, Nozomu*

JAEA-Technology 2021-015, 32 Pages, 2021/09

JAEA-Technology-2021-015.pdf:2.74MB

Burnup calculation of the HTTR considering temperature distribution and detailed burning regions was carried out using MVP-BURN code. The results show that the difference in k$$_{rm eff}$$, as well as the difference in average density of some main isotopes, is insignificant between the cases of uniform temperature and detailed temperature distribution. However, the difference in local density is noticeable, being 6% and 8% for $$^{235}$$U and $$^{239}$$Pu, respectively, and even 30% for the burnable poison $$^{10}$$B. Regarding the division of burning regions to more detail, the change of k$$_{rm eff}$$ is also small of 0.6%$$Delta$$k/k or less. The small burning region gives a detailed distribution of isotopes such as $$^{235}$$U, $$^{239}$$Pu, and $$^{10}$$B. As a result, the effect of graphite reflector and the burnup behavior could be evaluated more clearly compared with the previous study.

JAEA Reports

Mesh effect around burnable poison rod of cell model for HTTR fuel block

Fujimoto, Nozomu*; Fukuda, Kodai*; Honda, Yuki*; Tochio, Daisuke; Ho, H. Q.; Nagasumi, Satoru; Ishii, Toshiaki; Hamamoto, Shimpei; Nakano, Yumi*; Ishitsuka, Etsuo

JAEA-Technology 2021-008, 23 Pages, 2021/06

JAEA-Technology-2021-008.pdf:2.62MB

The effect of mesh division around the burnable poison rod on the burnup calculation of the HTTR core was investigated using the SRAC code system. As a result, the mesh division inside the burnable poison rod does not have a large effect on the burnup calculation, and the effective multiplication factor is closer to the measured value than the conventional calculation by dividing the graphite region around the burnable poison rod into a mesh. It became clear that the mesh division of the graphite region around the burnable poison rod is important for more appropriately evaluating the burnup behavior of the HTTR core..

3 (Records 1-3 displayed on this page)
  • 1