Published June 2016 | Version v1
Journal article

Nuclear data uncertainty for criticality-safety: Monte Carlo vs. linear perturbation

  • 1. Reactor Physics and Systems Behaviour Laboratory, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen (Switzerland)
  • 2. University of Florida, Gainsville (United States)
  • 3. Nuclear Research and Consultancy Group NRG, Petten (Netherlands)
  • 4. University of Uppsala (Sweden)
  • 5. Nuclear Data Section, IAEA, Vienna (Austria)

Description

This work is presenting a comparison of results for different methods of uncertainty propagation due to nuclear data for 330 criticality-safety benchmarks. Covariance information is propagated to keff using either Monte Carlo methods (NUSS: based on existing nuclear data covariances, and TMC: based on reaction model parameters) or sensitivity calculations from MCNP6 coupled with nuclear data covariances. We are showing that all three methods are globally equivalent for criticality calculations considering the two first moments of a distribution (average and standard deviation), but the Monte Carlo methods lead to actual probability distributions, where the third moment (skewness) should not be ignored for safety assessments.

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2016.01.042

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.anucene.2016.01.042;
PII
S0306-4549(16)30052-4;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Annals of Nuclear Energy (Oxford)
Journal Volume
92
Journal Page Range
p. 150-160
ISSN
0306-4549
CODEN
ANENDJ

INIS

Country of Publication
United Kingdom
Country of Input or Organization
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
INIS RN
47125190
Subject category
S22: GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS;
Descriptors DEI
ASYMMETRY; BENCHMARKS; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; CRITICALITY; DATA COVARIANCES; DISTURBANCES; M CODES; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTIONS; REACTOR SAFETY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY
Descriptors DEC
CALCULATION METHODS; COMPUTER CODES; EVALUATION; FUNCTIONS; SAFETY

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2016 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.