Verifiable Fuel Cycle Simulation Model (VISION): A Tool for Analyzing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Futures

“…VISION [Jacobson et al, 2010] was developed by the US DOE Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI) program (predecessor to the FCO campaign) as an evolution of the DYMOND code. It was developed to provide modeling capabilities that exceeded the limits at the time of DYMOND's software platform.…”

Section: Vision Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Standardized verification of fuel cycle modeling

Feng

Dixon

Sunny

et al. 2016

Annals of Nuclear Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A nuclear fuel cycle systems modeling and code-to-code comparison effort was coordinated across multiple national laboratories to verify the tools needed to perform fuel cycle analyses of the transition from a once-through nuclear fuel cycle to a sustainable potential future fuel cycle. The high-level objective was to derive information that can be used by the US Department of Energy (DOE) to help inform future research and development decisions. For this verification study, a simplified transition scenario was developed to serve as a test case for the four systems codes involved (DYMOND, VISION, ORION, and MARKAL), each used by a different laboratory participant. In addition, all participants produced spreadsheet solutions for the test case to check all the mass flows and reactor/facility profiles on a year-by-year basis throughout the simulation period. The test case specifications describe a transition from the current US fleet of light water reactors to a future fleet of sodium-cooled fast reactors that continuously recycle transuranic elements as fuel. After several initial coordinated modeling and calculation attempts, it was revealed that most of the differences in code results were not due to different code algorithms or calculation approaches, but due to different interpretations of the input specifications among the analysts. Therefore, the specifications for the test case itself were iteratively updated to remove ambiguity and to help calibrate interpretations. In addition, a few corrections and modifications were made to the codes as well, which led to excellent agreement between all codes and spreadsheets for this test case. Although no fuel cycle transition analysis codes matched the spreadsheet results exactly, all remaining differences in the results were due to fundamental differences in code structure and/or were thoroughly explained. The specifications and example results are provided so that they can be used to verify additional codes in the future for such fuel cycle transition scenarios.

show abstract

“…CYCLUS [3,4], DANESS [5], DYMOND [6], ORION [7], and VISION [8]. The development of these tools required testing and verification.…”

Section: Examples Of Fuel Cycle Simulation Tools Used Within the Fuelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of fuel cycle simulator functionalities for analysis of transition to a new fuel cycle

Brown

Carlsen

Dixon

et al. 2016

Annals of Nuclear Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dynamic fuel cycle simulation tools are intended to model holistic transient nuclear fuel cycle scenarios. As with all simulation tools, fuel cycle simulators require verification through unit tests, benchmark cases, and integral tests. Model validation is a vital aspect, as well. Although comparative studies have been performed, there is no comprehensive unit test and benchmark library for fuel cycle simulator tools. The objective of this paper is to identify some of the-must test‖ functionalities of a fuel cycle simulator tool within the context of specific problems of interest to the Fuel Cycle Options Campaign within the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE). This paper identifies the features needed to cover the range of promising fuel cycle options identified in the DOE-NE Fuel Cycle Evaluation and Screening and categorizes these features to facilitate prioritization. Features are categorized as essential functions, integrating features, and exemplary capabilities. A library of unit tests applicable to each of the essential functions should be developed as future work. An international dialog on the functionalities and standard test methods for fuel cycle simulator tools is encouraged.

show abstract

Verifiable Fuel Cycle Simulation Model (VISION): A Tool for Analyzing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Futures

Cited by 27 publications

References 3 publications

System Losses Study - FIT (Fuel-cycle Integration and Tradeoffs)

System Losses Study - FIT (Fuel-cycle Integration and Tradeoffs)

Standardized verification of fuel cycle modeling

Identification of fuel cycle simulator functionalities for analysis of transition to a new fuel cycle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About