Benchmark tests for the MATXS-formatted XMAP libraries based on ENDF/B-VIII.0 and ENDF/B-VII.1

Zhang, Bin; Ma, Xubo; Hu, Kui; Chang, Changcheng; Zhou, Feng; Chen, Yixue

doi:10.1016/j.anucene.2021.108584

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The performances of CENDL-3.2 were reported to be acceptable by verifications on reactor designs and shielding benchmarks (Shu et al, 2021;Hu et al, 2021;(Zu et al, 2021). More verifications on ENDF/B-VIII.0 were performed, which consisted of critical and shielding benchmark tests (Park et al, 2019;Zhang et al, 2021), as well as sensitivity and uncertainty (S/U) analyses (Hartanto and Liem, 2021). However, such verification has been rare for high-temperature reactors (HTRs), i.e., one of the generation IV nuclear systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verification of CENDL-3.2 and ENDF/B-VIII.0 Evaluated Nuclear Data Library on HTR-10 Benchmark

Tian-yi

Shi-hang

et al. 2022

Front. Energy Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CENDL-3.2 and ENDF/B-VIII.0 referring to the latest version of CENDL and ENDF/B, respectively, evaluated nuclear data library. To examine the applicability the libraries to high-temperature reactors (HTRs), the HTR-10 benchmark calculations are conducted by adopting CENDL-3.2, ENDF/B-VIII.0, and ENDF/B-VII.1 library. The calculated results are compared with the experimental results. As indicated from the comparison, the results of ENDF/B-VIII.0 show the optimal consistency with the experimental results, and CENDL-3.2 outperforms ENDF/B-VII.1. A semi-quantitative analysis method, on the basis of the sensitivity result, is employed to assess the effect of the cross-section change to keff. As revealed from the further calculations and analyses, the difference between cross-sections of C-12 (n, γ) channel primarily causes the inconsistent performance of CENDL-3.2 and ENDF/B-VIII.0 on the benchmark.

show abstract