Date: 11/04/07

Presented by : Jim Gulliford

Summary of UK PIE data

Richard Moore

Slide 3

Overview

Sellafield Dataset Other Data

CERES, UK BUC validation measurements

Consistency, Completeness, UncertaintiesNeed for more data

Classification – suitability for benchmarking Lessons Learned UK participation in OECD-NEA PIE Experts Group

Slide 4

Sellafield Dataset

PIE data used to validate spent fuel inventory calculations to support UK nuclear operations

Database of PIE measurements from around the world

Database includes the results of calculations performedWIMS – TRAIL – FISPIN

Classification of validation data

Slide 5

Sellafield database

Beznau PWR

Zorita PWR

Gosgen PWR

Dodewaard BWR

Hinkley R4 AGR

Hinkley R3 AGR

Hunterston R3 AGR

Hunterston A Magnox

Bradwell Magnox

Obrigheim PWR

Gundrimmingen BWR

Trino PWR

Cooper BWR

Calvert Cliffs PWR

Includes:

Experimental result

Calculated result

C/E

Cooling

Enrichment

Assembly and sample irradiation

Laboratory

Classification

Calculation code and details

Slide 6

LWR PIE Summary

classification (numbers in each group)

ReactorBurnup

(GWd/t)Enrichment

(%) Cooling (yrs) A B C D Total A-D F N/A

AGR 11.0 - 26.0 1.542 - 2.55 0.5 - 3.78 679 - 1 2187 2867 650 10

BWR 17.84 - 55.28 2.53 - 4.94 3.18 - 7.26 - 60 - 16 76 103 123

BWR(MOX) 37.2 - 60.4 6.431(1) 3.18 - 8.25 - 52 - 21 73 21 148

Magnox 3.27 - 8.93 N/A 0.65 - 2.08 - - - 128 128 - 104

PWR 3.45 - 58.75 2.453 - 5.84 1.64 - 17.85 196 - - 1260 1456 34 298

PWR(MOX) 22.37 - 55.644.019 -

6.011(1) 1.92 - 7.03 56 65 110 107 338 129 94

Slide 7

LWR & MOX Data

MOX measurements (LWR)

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7

Enrichment (Pu/Pu+U+Am)

Irra

dia

tio

n (

MW

d/t

)

UOX measurements (LWR and AGR)

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Enrichment (%)

Irra

dia

tio

n (

MW

d/t

)

‘pulled-pin’ samples – not used for benchmarking

Slide 8

Other PIE Data

• Burnup Credit Programmes at Winfrith

• Used to valid WIMS & MONK

• CERES

• Reactivity and PIE measurements on PWR & BWR samples from France & USA

• PIE included analysis of 15 major BUC fission products

• Pre-CERES

• Reactivity and PIE on HEU research reactor fuel, AGR & PWR (Zorita & Besnau) samples

• UK ready to make data available (need to get agreement from US and French partners for CERES data)

Slide 9

CERES Reactivity Measurements – fuel samples

-100.0

-90.0

-80.0

-70.0

-60.0

-50.0

-40.0

-30.0

-20.0

-10.0

0.0

15 25 35 45 55 65

Burnup

Rea

ctiv

ity

(no

rmal

ised

)

Measured

Calculated

Actinide-Only

Irradiated

Slide 10

CERES Reactivity Measurements – FP samples

Main FP Isotope in Sample

CERES Sample Reactivity (C-E)/E

DIMPLE (Assembly II) MINERVE

SCALE ENDF/B-V WIMS7 JEF2.2 WIMS7 JEF2.2

Sm147 -2% 1% 3%

Sm149 -3% -5% -2%

Sm152 -1% 1% -2%

Nd143 -1% -6% -4%

Nd145 1% -1% 0%

Ag109 4% 2% 3%

Gd155 4% 4% 2%

Tc99 5% 7% -3%

Mo95 19% 6% 11%

Rh103 16% 11% 11%

Cs133 (II) 10% 11% 9%

Cs133 (III) 12% 12% 7%

Eu153 19% -9% -10%

Slide 11

CERES PIE Analysis

Isotope C/E

U234 0.90

U235 1.04

U236 1.00

U238 1.00

Pu239 1.08

Pu240 0.97

Pu241 1.04

Am241 0.94

Pu242 0.89

Isotope C/E

Tc99 1.11

Cs133 0.98

Cs135 1.03

Nd143 1.03

Nd144 0.97

Nd145 1.00

Nd146 1.01

Sm147 0.91

Sm148 0.90

Sm149 0.49

Nd150 1.04

Sm150 0.88

Sm151 1.29

Sm152 1.12

Eu153 1.05

Eu155 1.20

Gd155 1.07

• Result for Sm149 appears to be due to problem with measurement. Later PIE work gave much better agreement

Slide 12

Inter lab agreement

Alpha activity ratioCm244/Total alpha (2nd cycle)

0.30

0.50

0.70

0.90

1.10

2E5-7 2E11-2 2E11-4 2E11-7 2L11-7

Sometimes excellent, sometimes not…

Alpha activity ratioCm242/Total alpha (2nd cycle)

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

2E5-7 2E11-2 2E11-4 2E11-7 2L11-7

Slide 13

Inter-lab agreement

For measurements made in two laboratories:

Some studies show up to 77% of results agree to within 2-sigma errors

Statistically it should be 95%

77% is good when compared with other studies:

36% for fission products

22% for actinides

Demonstrates a problem with measurements or uncertainty estimation – need some other means to assess the reliability of validation data.

Slide 14

Data classifications

Class A [Most consistent and reliable data; laboratory cross checks performed and consistent]

Class B [Multiple laboratory measurement on dissolved sample and results consistent]

Class C [Single laboratory measurement on multiple similar samples and results consistent]

Class D [Reliable data as assessed by experts, without laboratory cross check]

Class F [Results unsuitable for validation]

Slide 15

Classification overview

A16%

B23%

C14%

D32%

F15%

A18%

B26%

C17%

D10%

F29%

Actinides

Fission products

Slide 16

Lessons Learned

•Chemical separation process is very delicate – (particularly for Fission Products) good idea to get independent verification

•‘Pulled-pin’ irradiations difficult to analyse – try to avoid if possible

•Rh chemistry difficult – we have experienced problems with sample manufacture and PIE

•Need to do thorough check on completeness of description of irradiation history & environment

•Inconsistent results - measurement uncertainty analysis appears incomplete in some cases (i.e. uncertainties in chemical separation)

Slide 17

UK Participation in PIE Experts Group

•Donation of data as/when available

•Review of other’s contributions

•Seek to identify remaining UK expertise in chemical separation to add to ‘lesson learned’

• Build consensus on reliable experimental techniques

•Benchmark new data and present summary of new and old benchmark results

• Identify gaps in database

• Highlight problem areas in calculations

Slide 18

Finally

Currently investigating whether we can give all this information for use in SFCOMPO

Hopefully we will be able to provide the data soon

Suggest inclusion of similar procedure to ICSBEP where evaluation includes results of ‘indicative’ calculation results

Provides test of completeness of data and gives early indication of gross errors