Loading…
BENCHMARKING OF THE SERPENT 2 MONTE CARLO CODE FOR FUSION NEUTRONICS APPLICATIONS
Analyses of radiation fields resulting from a deuterium-tritium (DT) plasma in fusion devices is a critical input to the design and validation of many aspects of the reactor design, including, shielding, material lifetime and remote maintenance requirements/scheduling. Neutronics studies, which perf...
Saved in:
Published in: | EPJ Web of conferences 2021-01, Vol.247, p.4015 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Analyses of radiation fields resulting from a deuterium-tritium (DT) plasma in fusion devices is a critical input to the design and validation of many aspects of the reactor design, including, shielding, material lifetime and remote maintenance requirements/scheduling. Neutronics studies, which perform in-depth analysis are typically performed using radiation transport codes such as MCNP, TRIPOLI, Serpent, FLUKA and OpenMC. The Serpent 2 Monte-Carlo code, developed by VTT in Finland, is the focus of this work which seeks to benchmark the code for fusion applications. The application of Serpent 2 in fusion specific analysis requires validation of the codes performance in an energy range, and a geometrical description, which significantly differs to conventional nuclear fission analysis, for which the code was originally developed.
A Serpent model of the Frascati Neutron Generator (FNG) Helium Cooled Pebble Bed (HCPB) mock up experiment has been prepared and the calculated results compared against experimental data, as well as the reference Monte Carlo code MCNP. The analysis is extended to a model of DEMO with HCPB blanket concept. For this model, the flux, nuclear heating, tritium production and DPA are calculated, all of which are integral nuclear responses in fusion reactor analysis. In general, a very good agreement is demonstrated for both of the benchmarks, with any discrepancies pinpointed to different physics models implemented. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2100-014X 2100-014X |
DOI: | 10.1051/epjconf/202124704015 |