skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Report on proposed improvements to FRAM uncertainty

Abstract

This report discusses uncertainty metrics pertaining to the FRAM (Fixed Energy, Response Function Analysis with Multiple Efficiencies) model with respect to several actinide nuclei, especially 241Am.

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [1];  [1]
  1. Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (NA-20)
OSTI Identifier:
1321661
Report Number(s):
LA-UR-16-26709
TRN: US1601888
DOE Contract Number:
AC52-06NA25396
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; 73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS; AMERICIUM 241; RESPONSE FUNCTIONS; ACCURACY; DATA ANALYSIS; GAMMA SPECTROSCOPY; PLUTONIUM 239; BRANCHING RATIO; FRAM; NDA; gamma-spectrometry

Citation Formats

Yoho, Michael Duncan, Porterfield, Donivan R., Rim, Jung Ho, and Vo, Duc Ta. Report on proposed improvements to FRAM uncertainty. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.2172/1321661.
Yoho, Michael Duncan, Porterfield, Donivan R., Rim, Jung Ho, & Vo, Duc Ta. Report on proposed improvements to FRAM uncertainty. United States. doi:10.2172/1321661.
Yoho, Michael Duncan, Porterfield, Donivan R., Rim, Jung Ho, and Vo, Duc Ta. 2016. "Report on proposed improvements to FRAM uncertainty". United States. doi:10.2172/1321661. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1321661.
@article{osti_1321661,
title = {Report on proposed improvements to FRAM uncertainty},
author = {Yoho, Michael Duncan and Porterfield, Donivan R. and Rim, Jung Ho and Vo, Duc Ta},
abstractNote = {This report discusses uncertainty metrics pertaining to the FRAM (Fixed Energy, Response Function Analysis with Multiple Efficiencies) model with respect to several actinide nuclei, especially 241Am.},
doi = {10.2172/1321661},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 9
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • Preliminary uncertainty analyses of pre-waste-emplacement groundwater travel times are presented for a potential high-level nuclear waste repository in the deep basalts beneath the Hanford Site, Washington State. The uncertainty analyses are carried out by means of a Monte Carlo technique, which requires the uncertain inputs to be described as either random variables or spatial stochastic processes. Pre-waste-emplacement groundwater travel times are modeled in a continuous, flat-lying basalt flow top that is assumed to overlie the repository horizon. Two-dimensional, steady state groundwater flow is assumed, and transmissivity, effective thickness, and regional hydraulic gradient are considered as uncertain inputs. Groundwater travel timemore » distributions corresponding to three groundwater models are presented and compared. Limitations of these preliminary simulation results are discussed in detail.« less
  • A variety of methods are described that deal with the uncertainties inherent in the performance assessment of the geologic disposal of nuclear waste. Utilizing these methods, an approach to uncertainty analysis for the SCEPTER (Systematic Comprehensive Evaluation of Performance and Total Effectiveness of Repositories) Program is proposed. The approach recognizes two fundamental types of uncertainty: (1) uncertainty in the adequacy of performance assessment models; and (2) data uncertainties. The first type of uncertainty will be addressed through model verification and validation. The second type will be accounted for by using either a simulation sampling method, or first order-second moment stochasticmore » methods. Among the former methods are Monte Carlo simulation, and Latin hypercube sampling. Among the latter methods are adjoint sensitivity and other first order numerical methods. The selection of an appropriate method depends on the data available and the application. A list of input and output variables, and a suggested level of sophistication for the uncertainty analysis, of each SCEPTER sub-system model is given. The relationship of performance assessment and uncertainty analysis between process, sub-system and system models is described.« less
  • This report introduces the concepts of a previously developed methodology which could readily be extended to the field of performance assessment for high-level nuclear waste isolation systems. The methodology incorporates sensitivities previously obtained with the GRESS code into an uncertainty analysis, from which propagated uncertainties in calculated responses may be derived from basic data uncertainties. Following a definition of terms, examples are provided illustrating commonly used conventions for describing the concepts of covariance and sensitivity. Examples of solutions to problems previously encountered in related fields involving uncertainty analysis and use of a generalized linear least-squares adjustment procedure are also presented.more » 5 refs., 14 tabs.« less
  • This memorandum builds upon Section 3.8 of SRNL (2016) and Flach (2017) by defining key error analysis, uncertainty quantification, and sensitivity analysis concepts and terms, in preparation for the next E-Area Performance Assessment (WSRC 2008) revision.
  • Assessment of the original REAP/N4OD3.1 code against the FLECHT SEASET series of experiments has identified some weaknesses of the reflood model, such as the lack of a quenching temperature model, the shortcoming of the Chen transition boiling model, and the incorrect prediction of droplet size and interfacial heat transfer. Also, high temperature spikes during the reflood calculation resulted in high steam flow oscillation and liquid carryover. An effort had been made to improve the code with respect to the above weakness, and the necessary model for the wall heat transfer package and the numerical scheme had been modified. Some importantmore » FLECHT-SEASET experiments were assessed using the improved version and standard version. The result from the improved REAP/MOD3.1 shows the weaknesses of REAP/N4OD3.1 were much improved when compared to the standard MOD3.1 code. The prediction of void profile and cladding temperature agreed better with test data, especially for the gravity feed test. The scatter diagram of peak cladding temperatures (PCTs) is made from the comparison of all the calculated PCTs and the corresponding experimental values. The deviation between experimental and calculated PCTs were calculated for 2793 data points. The deviations are shown to be normally distributed, and used to quantify statistically the PCT uncertainty of the code. The upper limit of PCT uncertainty at 95% confidence level is evaluated to be about 99K.« less