Optimization of Fuel Rod Size

Hypothetical Shinkori 1 and 2 NPP simulation

24th October 2023, 2nd semester

Mdachi Nixon Kerwa 20231206

 Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION 3
2 METHODOLOGY 3
2.1 MFR and four factors for infinite reactor 3
2.1.1 MFR vs enrichment (2.0%, 3.0%, 4.0% and 5.0%) 4
2.1.2 MFR vs boron concentration (10ppm, 500ppm and 1000ppm) 5
2.1.3 MFR vs Tm (365K, 485K and 590K) 6
2.1.4 MFR vs burnup (0,6 and 12.5) 7
2.2 Determining the average Optimum MFR 8
2.3 Determining the fuel rod size 8
3 CONCLUSION 9
REFERENCES 9
APPENDICES 10

2
1. INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to explore the complex relationship between the Moderator-
to-Fuel Ratio (MFR) and various critical nuclear parameters. The study focused on how MFR
affects factors such as fuel enrichment percentage, boron concentration, Tm (Moderator
Temperature) and Tf (Fuel Temperature) and how these variables interact to determine the
optimal moderation ratio. I this case, CASMO input, FA modelling using CASMO – 3,
CASMO – 3 run was used to evaluate a hypothetical Shinkori 1 and 2 PWR 1200MWe
reactor using A0 type fuel assembly without BA. Assumptions were: TFU = 960.95K, TMO
= 585.35K and thermal efficiency of 35%.

2. METHODOLOGY
The fuel rod radii were varied for each chosen enrichment i.e. 2.0%, 3.0%, 4.0% and
5.0% repectively and each run on CASMO – 3 program and the results recorded (Appendix
A). These results were used to plot a graph of MFR vs k- inf to get the optimun MFR from
each curve. The boron concentration in ppm was done at a constant Tm and Tf (as if the
reactor is at initial stage). The radii were varied for each concentration i.e. 10ppm, 500ppm
and 1000ppm and the results recorded (appendix B) which were used to plot a graph to
determine the optimum MFR for each ppm. Then the Tm was looked unto while the other
factors constant at at initial stage of the reactor where the radii were varied at 365K, 485K
and 590K, results were recorded ( Appendix C) where they were used to plot a graph of MFR
vs k – inf to obtain the optimum MFR for each temperature selected. Lastly, the radii were
varied at selected burnups values i.e. 0, 6 and 12.5GWD/MTU and results recorded
(Appendix D) to be used to plot a graph of MFR vs k –inf to obtain the optimum MFR for
each selected burnup.

2.1 MFR and four factors for infinite reactor

MFR is a parameter that describes the amount of moderator material (such as water)
relative to the amount of fuel material (such as uranium) in a nuclear reactor. The MFR
affects the neutron spectrum, the resonance absorption, and the thermal utilization of the
reactor. The Optimal MFR is the one that maximizes the multiplication factor of the reactor,
which is a measure of how well the reactor sustains a chain reaction. The four factors for
infinite reactor are the factors that determine the multiplication factor of an infinitely large
reactor, which has no neutron leakage and they are as follows:

i. Fast fission factor: The ratio of the total number of fissions to the number of fissions
caused by thermal neutrons.
ii. Resonance escape probability: The probability that a neutron will not be absorbed by
a resonance nuclide before reaching thermal energies.
iii. Thermal utilization factor: The ratio of the number of thermal neutrons absorbed in
the fuel to the number of thermal neutrons absorbed in all materials.
iv. Reproduction factor: The average number of neutrons produced per thermal
neutron absorbed in the fuel.

3
The four-factor formula is an equation that relates the multiplication factor to these four
factors. It is given by:

k ∞=η . ε . ρ . ϝ (1)

Where;

k∞ is the multiplication factor.

η is the reproduction factor.

ε the fast fission factor.

ρ the resonance probability.

f s the thermal utilization factor.

2.1.1 MFR vs enrichment (2.0%, 3.0%, 4.0% and 5.0%)

The results are shown by Fig. 1 below.

1.4

1.2

0.8
k - inf

0.6

0.4

0.2
k - inf at 2.0% k - inf at 3.0% k - inf at 4.0%
k - inf at 5.0% p f
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

MFR

Fig. 1 MFR vs enrichment

4
Observations:
As the enrichment was incresed, i.e. from 2.0% to 5.0%, the MFR and the k – inf increased.
Explanations:
As shown by Fig, 1 above;
i. At higher MFR values, the reactor is in a more moderated state which means the
neutrons are effectively slowed down by the moderator. Therefore, with a low k – inf
the reactor is less critical and less likely to sustain a chain reaction.
ii. MFR is reduced more the reactor becomes less moderated, and k – inf increases.
Meaning that the reactor is moving toward a more critical state, where the chain
reaction is sustained more effectively.
iii. The curve typically takes a downward trend, indicating that to achieve a higher k – inf
(criticality), MFR has to be reduced, thus having less moderation.
Deductions:
The established Optimum MFR was at 1.9961 and 1.0540 k- inf at the 2.0% enrichment.

2.1.2 MFR vs boron concentration (10, 500 and 1000ppm)

The results are shown on the Fig. 2 below.

1.2

0.8
k - inf

0.6

0.4 K - inf at 10ppm

k - inf at 500ppm
0.2 k - inf at 1000ppm
p
f
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

MFR

Fig. 2 MFR vs boron concentration

Observations:
As the boron concentration was increased i.e. from 10 – 1000ppm, the Optimum MFR and k -
inf decreased.

5
Explanations:
i. Boron aids in moderation of the fuel due to its neutron absorbing capabilities.
Therefore, less moderation volume was required to reach the Optimum MFR.
ii. Thermal utilization depends so much on the level of boron dilution in the primary
coolant. This is very important at the start of the reactor i.e. Beginning of Cycle
(BOC) then looses importance as boron concentration decreases.
Deductions:
The established Optimum MFR was at 1.2331 and 1.0047 k - inf at 500ppm.

2.1.3 MFR vs Tm ( 365K, 485K and 605K)

The results are shown in Fig. 3 below.

1.2

0.8
k - inf

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 2 4 6 k - inf 8at 365K10 k12- inf at 14
485K 16 k - inf
18 at 590K
20 p f

MFR

Fig. 3 MFR vs Tm

Observations:
The MFR generally decreases as the Tm increases the same as k – inf.
As the Tm was increased i.e. from 365K to 590K the Optimum MFR increased while k – inf
decreased.
Explanations:
i. As Tm increases, the kinetic energy of the neutrons also increases. Neutrons with
higher energy are more likely to induce fission reactions in fissile nuclei, leading to a
higher effective k - inf. Therefore, k - inf typically increases with rising Tm,
indicating an enhanced ability to sustain the nuclear chain reaction in the reactor core.

6
 ii. As Tm increases, the density of the moderator typically decreases, reducing its ability
to slow down and moderate neutrons effectively. This decrease in moderation leads to
a lower MFR, as there is less moderation occurring in the reactor. Consequently, MFR
generally decreases as Tm rises. This behavior signifies that, with higher Tm, fewer
neutrons are effectively slowed down, which can have implications for reactor
reactivity and power output.
Deductions:
The established Optimum MFR was at 1.0042 and 1.2330 k- inf at 590K.

2.1.4 MFR vs burnup (0, 6 and 12.5)

The results are shown in Fig. 4 below.

1.2

0.8
k - inf

0.6

0.4
k - inf at BU 0.0GWD/T k - inf at BU 6.0GWD/T
0.2 k - inf at BU 12.5GWD/T p
f

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

MFR

Fig. 4 MFR vs burnup (0, 6 and 12.5)

Observations:
The MFR tends to decrease as burnup increases in the same to k – inf.
Explanations:
As shown in Fig. 4 above;
i. As the temperature increases, the density of the moderator (e.g., water or heavy water)
decreases. Therefore, there are fewer moderator nuclei available to slow down fast
neutrons thus, the reactor becomes less moderated, and the MFR decreases.

7
 ii. At lower temperatures the moderator density increases, allowing for more effective
slowing down of fast neutrons. This leads to a higher MFR because there is a greater
amount of moderator available to moderate the neutrons.
iii. The temperature-related changes in MFR affects the reactivity and criticality of the
reactor. Control of temperature is done carefully to maintain the desired MFR,
eventually the overall performance and safety of the reactor.
Deductions:
The established Optimum MFR was at 1.2331 and 1.0041 k- inf at BU 0.0GWD/T.

2.2 Determining the average Optimum MFR

From the Optimum MFRs out of the four parameters i.e fuel enrichment, ppm, Tm
and burnup, the optimum value was picked considering k – inf at that level and values close
to criticality state of the reactor as shown on the table below.
Parameters Value Optimum MFR k - inf
Enrichment 2.0% 1.9961 1.0540
ppm 500ppm 1.2331 1.0047
Tm 590K 1.2330 1.0042
Burnup BU 0.0GDW/T 1.2331 1.0041
Average 1.4238 1.0168

Because all the four parameters were considered based on Optimum MFRs, the best value
was at the Ave. 1.4238 and Av. K- inf 1.0168.

2.3 Determining the fuel rod size

A graph of MFR vs Radius of Fuel was plotted as shown on Fig. 5 below to help
determine the optimum fuel size rod.
0.7
f(x) = − 0.0994473011594294 ln(x) + 0.458495058638165
0.6 R² = 0.979983833870391

0.5
Radius of Fuel

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

MFR

Fig. 5 MFR vs radius of fuel

8
From the graph equation: y = -0.099ln(x) + 0.4585, the radius of fuel (rf) was found as to be
0.4235cm. Then the radius of fuel rod (rc) was 0.4235 + 0.057 = 0.4815cm at k – inf 1.0168
at 2.0% enrichment, 500ppm boron concentration and Tm 590K.

3. CONCLUSIONS
It was established increasing MFR generally leads to decreased fuel enrichment
requirements. Because the moderator slows down neutrons, making them more likely to
cause fission in fissile materials, creating efficiency in power generation with less enriched
fuel. Conversely, reducing MFR necessitates higher fuel. The precise relationship between
these factors depends on the specific reactor design and operational requirements. MFR also
influences boron concentration in that, increasing MFR requires a higher boron concentration
to effectively control reactor power and prevent excessive neutron reactivity. MFR affects the
Tm in a such a way that increasing MFR results in a lower Tm because there is more
effective slowing down of fast neutrons by the moderator. Conversely, reducing MFR leads
to a higher Tm as there is less moderation of neutrons, requiring more kinetic energy to
sustain the nuclear chain reaction. MFR) higher MFR leads to lower burnup, as more
neutrons are moderated and absorbed by the fuel, resulting in less efficient fuel utilization.
Conversely, a lower MFR can lead to higher burnup. From this study, the optimum radius of
fuel rod (rc) was 0.4815cm at an Optimum MFR of 1.4238 & k – inf of 1.0168 at the
enrichment of 2.0%, boron concentration of 500ppm &Tm 590K.

REFERENCES
1. Westinghouse Technology Systems Manual Chapter 2 CORE CHARACTERISTICS, Rev.
0101, 2.1 – 4 and 2.1 – 9.
2. https://www.nuclear-power.com/nuclear-power/reactor-physics/reactor-dynamics/
moderator-to-fuel-ratio/
3. https://uidaho.pressbooks.pub/nuclearengineering/chapter/nuclear-reactor-physics/
4. R.A. Knief “Nuclear Engineering: Theory and Technology of Commercial Nuclear Power
Plants” 2nd Edition.

9
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Fuel radius and the MFR
Radius of Radius of Fuel + Cladding Vf = Vm = d2 MFR =
Fuel (rf) thickness (0.057)(rc) π(rf)2 – π(rc)2 Vm/Vf

0.16 0.407 0.080425 1.139058 14.16301882

0.24 0.297 0.180956 1.382342 7.639119476

0.32 0.377 0.321699 1.212948 3.770442205

0.4 0.457 0.502655 1.003341 1.996083011

0.48 0.537 0.723823 0.753521 1.041029869

0.56 0.617 0.985203 0.463489 0.470450516

0.64 0.697 1.286796 0.133245 0.103548051

10
Appendix B: Effective multiplication factor at different enrichments
MFR k - inf at k - inf at k - inf at k - inf at Sum Capture at Sum Fission Sum Fertile Sum Fertile Total Absortion Absorption p at 2.0% f at 2.0%
2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 2.0% at 2.0% Fission at 2.0% Capture at 2.0% Thermal Fission

18.7943 0.43353 0.57438 0.68763 0.68763 7.44E-02 4.00E-01 1.12E-02 1.79E-01 6.65E-01 2.16E+00 2.30E+00 9.37E-01 2.89E-01
9.3284 0.661 0.83017 0.95386 1.04827 7.54E-02 3.98E-01 1.29E-02 1.92E-01 6.78E-01 1.36E+00 1.51E+00 8.98E-01 4.49E-01
5.2889 0.84679 1.01661 1.13152 1.21449 7.65E-02 3.94E-01 1.62E-02 2.10E-01 6.97E-01 1.00E+00 1.18E+00 8.48E-01 5.91E-01
3.206 0.97807 1.13289 1.23167 1.30012 7.79E-02 3.89E-01 2.09E-02 2.35E-01 7.22E-01 8.04E-01 1.02E+00 7.87E-01 7.07E-01
1.9961 1.05398 1.18768 1.26942 1.32471 7.98E-02 3.82E-01 2.71E-02 2.68E-01 7.56E-01 6.77E-01 9.50E-01 7.13E-01 7.96E-01
1.2331 1.07813 1.19021 1.25734 1.30275 8.26E-02 3.72E-01 3.52E-02 3.12E-01 8.02E-01 5.81E-01 9.29E-01 6.25E-01 8.64E-01
0.7223 1.05202 1.14555 1.2029 1.24289 8.68E-02 3.60E-01 4.57E-02 3.75E-01 8.68E-01 4.94E-01 9.52E-01 5.19E-01 9.12E-01
0.364 0.97107 1.05435 1.10944 1.15149 9.33E-02 3.44E-01 5.98E-02 4.76E-01 9.73E-01 4.00E-01 1.03E+00 3.88E-01 9.45E-01
0.1035 0.82054 0.90787 0.97467 1.03079 1.03E-01 3.21E-01 7.92E-02 6.80E-01 1.18E+00 2.73E-01 1.23E+00 2.23E-01 9.65E-01

11
Appendix C: Effective multiplication factor at different Boron
concentrations
MFR k - inf at k - inf at k - inf at Sum Capture Sum Fission Sum Fertile Fission Sum Fertile Total Absortion Absorption p at 10ppm f at ppm
10ppm 500ppm 1000ppm at 10ppm at 10ppm at 10ppm Capture at 10ppm Thermal Fission
18.7943 0.62158 0.41546 0.31254 7.30E-02 4.05E-01 7.41E-03 2.09E-01 6.94E-01 1.52E+00 1.60E+00 9.46E-01 4.33E-01
9.3284 0.84933 0.629 0.50005 7.34E-02 4.01E-01 1.04E-02 2.27E-01 7.12E-01 1.06E+00 1.18E+00 9.06E-01 6.06E-01
5.2889 0.99492 0.80034 0.66994 7.39E-02 3.97E-01 1.45E-02 2.50E-01 7.34E-01 8.61E-01 1.01E+00 8.57E-01 7.31E-01
3.206 1.07265 0.91906 0.80435 7.46E-02 3.90E-01 1.98E-02 2.78E-01 7.63E-01 7.46E-01 9.34E-01 7.99E-01 8.17E-01
1.9961 1.09748 0.98587 0.89517 7.56E-02 3.82E-01 2.66E-02 3.16E-01 8.01E-01 6.66E-01 9.13E-01 7.30E-01 8.77E-01
1.2331 1.07956 1.00471 0.93976 7.72E-02 3.72E-01 3.54E-02 3.67E-01 8.52E-01 6.01E-01 9.28E-01 6.47E-01 9.17E-01
0.7223 1.02188 0.97661 0.9353 7.99E-02 3.59E-01 4.68E-02 4.39E-01 9.25E-01 5.36E-01 9.79E-01 5.48E-01 9.45E-01
0.364 0.91799 0.8949 0.87303 8.48E-02 3.41E-01 6.19E-02 5.58E-01 1.05E+00 4.59E-01 1.09E+00 4.22E-01 9.62E-01
0.1035 0.74863 0.74035 0.73232 9.37E-02 3.17E-01 8.28E-02 8.10E-01 1.30E+00 3.42E-01 1.34E+00 2.55E-01 9.72E-01

12
Appendix D: Effective multiplication factor at different Tms
MFR k - inf at k - inf at k - inf at Sum Sum Fission Sum Fertile Sum Fertile Total Absortion Absorptio p at f at 365K
365K 485K 590K Capture at at 365K Fission at Capture at Thermal n Fission 365K
365K 365K 365K
18.79 0.33422 0.36172 0.41992 7.04E-02 3.98E-01 1.27E-02 2.22E-01 7.04E-01 2.84E+00 2.98E+00 9.54E-01 2.36E-01
9.328 0.53133 0.56595 0.63407 7.12E-02 3.98E-01 1.27E-02 2.32E-01 7.15E-01 1.74E+00 1.88E+00 9.28E-01 3.81E-01
5.289 0.70916 0.74304 0.80469 7.18E-02 3.96E-01 1.50E-02 2.47E-01 7.30E-01 1.25E+00 1.41E+00 8.92E-01 5.19E-01
3.206 0.85096 0.87778 0.92197 7.24E-02 3.92E-01 1.87E-02 2.68E-01 7.50E-01 9.92E-01 1.17E+00 8.45E-01 6.39E-01
1.996 0.94967 9.66E-01 9.87E-01 7.33E-02 3.86E-01 2.39E-02 2.96E-01 7.78E-01 8.29E-01 1.05E+00 7.87E-01 7.40E-01
1.233 1.00264 1.00634 1.00418 7.46E-02 3.77E-01 3.09E-02 3.35E-01 8.17E-01 7.13E-01 9.97E-01 7.15E-01 8.20E-01
0.722 1.00694 0.99837 0.97458 7.68E-02 3.66E-01 4.07E-02 3.91E-01 8.75E-01 6.19E-01 9.93E-01 6.23E-01 8.81E-01
0.364 0.95412 0.93451 0.89153 8.07E-02 3.50E-01 5.45E-02 4.84E-01 9.69E-01 5.26E-01 1.05E+00 5.03E-01 9.25E-01
0.104 0.8149 0.78841 0.73656 8.85E-02 3.26E-01 7.56E-02 6.82E-01 1.17E+00 4.07E-01 1.23E+00 3.31E-01 9.54E-01

13
Appendix E: Effective multiplication factor at different burnups

MFR k - inf BU 0.0 k = inf BU k - inf 25.0 Sum Capture Sum Fission at Sum Fertile Sum Fertile Total Absortion Absorption p at BU 0.0 f at BU 0.0
GWD/T 15.0 GWD/T GWD/T at BU 0.0 BU 0.0 Fission at BU Capture at BU Thermal Fission GWD/T GWD/T
GWD/T GWD/T 0.0 GDW/T 20.0 GWD/T
18.7943 0.41992 0.38834 0.33047 7.31E-02 4.00E-01 1.13E-02 2.33E-01 7.18E-01 2.24E+00 2.37E+00 9.44E-01 3.02E-01
9.3284 0.63407 0.5911 0.51747 7.37E-02 3.98E-01 1.33E-02 2.48E-01 7.33E-01 1.42E+00 1.57E+00 9.06E-01 4.66E-01
5.2889 0.80469 0.75599 0.68183 7.42E-02 3.93E-01 1.71E-02 2.69E-01 7.54E-01 1.06E+00 1.24E+00 8.58E-01 6.08E-01
3.206 0.92197 0.87051 0.8058 7.50E-02 3.88E-01 2.22E-02 2.96E-01 7.81E-01 8.66E-01 1.08E+00 7.99E-01 7.21E-01
1.9961 0.98706 0.9341 0.88294 7.61E-02 3.80E-01 2.88E-02 3.33E-01 8.17E-01 7.39E-01 1.01E+00 7.29E-01 8.07E-01
1.2331 1.00418 0.94974 0.91136 7.78E-02 3.70E-01 3.73E-02 3.82E-01 8.67E-01 6.43E-01 9.96E-01 6.46E-01 8.71E-01
0.7223 0.97458 0.92025 0.89261 8.05E-02 3.57E-01 4.84E-02 4.54E-01 9.40E-01 5.59E-01 1.03E+00 5.45E-01 9.16E-01
0.364 0.89153 0.84877 0.83773 8.54E-02 3.40E-01 6.32E-02 5.72E-01 1.06E+00 4.69E-01 1.12E+00 4.19E-01 9.47E-01
0.1035 0.73656 0.75296 0.78197 9.43E-02 3.16E-01 8.36E-02 8.26E-01 1.32E+00 3.44E-01 1.37E+00 2.51E-01 9.66E-01

14