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

Title: Developing Diagnostic Tools for Low-Burnup Reactor Samples

Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1406152
Resource Type:
Journal Article: Publisher's Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Physical Review Applied
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 8; Journal Issue: 4; Related Information: CHORUS Timestamp: 2017-10-31 11:08:37; Journal ID: ISSN 2331-7019
Publisher:
American Physical Society
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

Citation Formats

Jaffke, Patrick, Byerly, Benjamin, Doyle, Jamie, Hayes, Anna, Jungman, Gerard, Myers, Steven, Olson, Angela, Porterfield, Donivan, and Tandon, Lav. Developing Diagnostic Tools for Low-Burnup Reactor Samples. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.8.044025.
Jaffke, Patrick, Byerly, Benjamin, Doyle, Jamie, Hayes, Anna, Jungman, Gerard, Myers, Steven, Olson, Angela, Porterfield, Donivan, & Tandon, Lav. Developing Diagnostic Tools for Low-Burnup Reactor Samples. United States. doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.8.044025.
Jaffke, Patrick, Byerly, Benjamin, Doyle, Jamie, Hayes, Anna, Jungman, Gerard, Myers, Steven, Olson, Angela, Porterfield, Donivan, and Tandon, Lav. 2017. "Developing Diagnostic Tools for Low-Burnup Reactor Samples". United States. doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.8.044025.
@article{osti_1406152,
title = {Developing Diagnostic Tools for Low-Burnup Reactor Samples},
author = {Jaffke, Patrick and Byerly, Benjamin and Doyle, Jamie and Hayes, Anna and Jungman, Gerard and Myers, Steven and Olson, Angela and Porterfield, Donivan and Tandon, Lav},
abstractNote = {},
doi = {10.1103/PhysRevApplied.8.044025},
journal = {Physical Review Applied},
number = 4,
volume = 8,
place = {United States},
year = 2017,
month =
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
This content will become publicly available on October 31, 2018
Publisher's Accepted Manuscript

Save / Share:
  • To evaluate neutron cross-section data of minor actinides (MAs), separated actinide samples and dosimetry samples were irradiated at the Dounreay Prototype Fast Reactor for 492 effective full-power days. Irradiated samples were analyzed both at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and at Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI). This independent duplication has resulted in the generation of reliable radiochemical analysis data. Based on the burnup calculations of major actinide ({sup 235}U and {sup 239}Pu) and dosimetry samples, the neutron flux distribution and the flux level were adjusted at the locations where MA samples were irradiated. The burnup calculations were carried out formore » MAs using the determined flux distribution and flux level. The calculated results were compared with the experimental data. A brief description of sample preparation and irradiation and a detailed discussion of radiochemical analysis at JAERI are given in a companion paper. The current paper discusses the burnup calculations and the validation of MA cross-section data in evaluated nuclear data libraries.« less
  • This article examines the concepts of quality management (QM) and quality assurance (QA), as well as the current state of QM and QA practices in radiotherapy. A systematic approach incorporating a series of industrial engineering-based tools is proposed, which can be applied in health care organizations proactively to improve process outcomes, reduce risk and/or improve patient safety, improve through-put, and reduce cost. This tool set includes process mapping and process flowcharting, failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), value stream mapping, and fault tree analysis (FTA). Many health care organizations do not have experience in applying these tools and therefore domore » not understand how and when to use them. As a result there are many misconceptions about how to use these tools, and they are often incorrectly applied. This article describes these industrial engineering-based tools and also how to use them, when they should be used (and not used), and the intended purposes for their use. In addition the strengths and weaknesses of each of these tools are described, and examples are given to demonstrate the application of these tools in health care settings.« less
  • During the past 10 years, there has been growing acceptance and encouragement of partnerships between medical teams and engineers. Using human factors and systems engineering descriptions of process flows and operational sequences, the author's research laboratory has helped highlight opportunities for reducing adverse events and improving performance in health care and other high-consequence environments. This research emphasized studying human behavior that enhances system performance and a range of factors affecting adverse events, rather than a sole emphasis on human error causation. Developing a balanced evaluation requires novel approaches to causal analyses of adverse events and, more importantly, methods of recoverymore » from adverse conditions. Recent work by the author's laboratory in collaboration with the Regenstrief Center for Healthcare Engineering has started to address possible improvements in taxonomies describing health care tasks. One major finding includes enhanced understanding of events and how event dynamics influence provider tasks and constraints. Another element of this research examines team coordination tasks that strongly affect patient care and quality management, but may be undervalued as 'indirect patient care' activities.« less
  • While window frames typically represent 20-30% of the overall window area, their impact on the total window heat transfer rates may be much larger. This effect is even greater in low-conductance (highly insulating) windows that incorporate very low-conductance glazing. Developing low-conductance window frames requires accurate simulation tools for product research and development. Based on a literature review and an evaluation of current methods of modeling heat transfer through window frames, we conclude that current procedures specified in ISO standards are not sufficiently adequate for accurately evaluating heat transfer through the low-conductance frames. We conclude that the near-term priorities for improvingmore » the modeling of heat transfer through low-conductance frames are: (1) Add 2D view-factor radiation to standard modeling and examine the current practice of averaging surface emissivity based on area weighting and the process of making an equivalent rectangular frame cavity. (2) Asses 3D radiation effects in frame cavities and develop recommendation for inclusion into the design fenestration tools. (3) Assess existing correlations for convection in vertical cavities using CFD. (4) Study 2D and 3D natural convection heat transfer in frame cavities for cavities that are proven to be deficient from item 3 above. Recommend improved correlations or full CFD modeling into ISO standards and design fenestration tools, if appropriate. (5) Study 3D hardware short-circuits and propose methods to ensure that these effects are incorporated into ratings. (6) Study the heat transfer effects of ventilated frame cavities and propose updated correlations.« less