Abstract
The most significant development in core design trend in the U.S. LMFBR program has been the increased attention given to the heterogeneous core design concept. In recent years, numerous core configuration trade-off studies have been carried out to quantify advantages and disadvantages of the heterogeneous concept relative to the homogeneous concept, and a consensus is emerging among the U.S. core designers. It appears that the technical and economic performance differences between homogeneous and heterogeneous core designs are very small; however, the heterogeneous concept provides a definite safety/licensing advantage. he technical and economic performance comparison between homogeneous and heterogeneous core configurations is difficult to quantify. In fact, in most cases, the perceived advantages and/or disadvantages are dictated by the consistency in the comparison (optimized for one concept versus non-optimized for the other, etc.) rather than by any inherent differences. Some of the technical and economic issues relevant to the homogeneous versus heterogeneous comparison are summarized.
Chang, Y I
[1]
- Applied Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL (United States)
Citation Formats
Chang, Y I.
Overview of homogeneous versus heterogeneous core configuration trade-off studies.
IAEA: N. p.,
1982.
Web.
Chang, Y I.
Overview of homogeneous versus heterogeneous core configuration trade-off studies.
IAEA.
Chang, Y I.
1982.
"Overview of homogeneous versus heterogeneous core configuration trade-off studies."
IAEA.
@misc{etde_20241837,
title = {Overview of homogeneous versus heterogeneous core configuration trade-off studies}
author = {Chang, Y I}
abstractNote = {The most significant development in core design trend in the U.S. LMFBR program has been the increased attention given to the heterogeneous core design concept. In recent years, numerous core configuration trade-off studies have been carried out to quantify advantages and disadvantages of the heterogeneous concept relative to the homogeneous concept, and a consensus is emerging among the U.S. core designers. It appears that the technical and economic performance differences between homogeneous and heterogeneous core designs are very small; however, the heterogeneous concept provides a definite safety/licensing advantage. he technical and economic performance comparison between homogeneous and heterogeneous core configurations is difficult to quantify. In fact, in most cases, the perceived advantages and/or disadvantages are dictated by the consistency in the comparison (optimized for one concept versus non-optimized for the other, etc.) rather than by any inherent differences. Some of the technical and economic issues relevant to the homogeneous versus heterogeneous comparison are summarized.}
place = {IAEA}
year = {1982}
month = {Jan}
}
title = {Overview of homogeneous versus heterogeneous core configuration trade-off studies}
author = {Chang, Y I}
abstractNote = {The most significant development in core design trend in the U.S. LMFBR program has been the increased attention given to the heterogeneous core design concept. In recent years, numerous core configuration trade-off studies have been carried out to quantify advantages and disadvantages of the heterogeneous concept relative to the homogeneous concept, and a consensus is emerging among the U.S. core designers. It appears that the technical and economic performance differences between homogeneous and heterogeneous core designs are very small; however, the heterogeneous concept provides a definite safety/licensing advantage. he technical and economic performance comparison between homogeneous and heterogeneous core configurations is difficult to quantify. In fact, in most cases, the perceived advantages and/or disadvantages are dictated by the consistency in the comparison (optimized for one concept versus non-optimized for the other, etc.) rather than by any inherent differences. Some of the technical and economic issues relevant to the homogeneous versus heterogeneous comparison are summarized.}
place = {IAEA}
year = {1982}
month = {Jan}
}