EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Rechercher
Menu
Accueil Tous les numéros Volume 153 (2017) EPJ Web Conf., 153 (2017) 05017 Références
Open Access
Numéro
EPJ Web Conf.
Volume 153, 2017
ICRS-13 & RPSD-2016, 13th International Conference on Radiation Shielding & 19th Topical Meeting of the Radiation Protection and Shielding Division of the American Nuclear Society - 2016
Numéro d'article 05017
Nombre de pages 6
Section 5. Fission Facilities, Fuel Cycle & Waste Management Facilities, Decommissioning
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201715305017
Publié en ligne 25 septembre 2017
  1. G.B. Bruna and J. Planchard. Computation of the flux in a slightly sub-critical reactor in the presence of external sources. Prog. Nucl. Eng. 25, 1–6 (1991) [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  2. A. Greenspan. A Generalized source multiplication method for determining reactivity. Nucl. Sci. Eng., 55, 103–106 (1994) [Google Scholar]
  3. T. Chevret et al. Reactivity measurement of the lead fast subcritical VENUS-F reactor using beam interruption experiments. In: Proceedings of PHYSOR 2014 - The Role of Reactor Physics Toward a Sustainable Future, Kyoto, Japan. ANS, n. 1087437, available on CD-ROM (2014) [Google Scholar]
  4. S. Chabod et al. Reactivity measurement at Guinevere facility using the integral kp method. In: Proceedings of PHYSOR 2014 - The Role of Reactor Physics Toward a Sustainable Future, Kyoto, Japan. ANS, n. 1087437, available on CD-ROM (2014) [Google Scholar]
  5. C. Berglof et al. Spatial and source multiplication effects on the area ratio reactivity determination method in a strongly heterogeneous subcritical system. Nucl. Sci. Eng. 166, 134–144 (2010) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. V. Becares. Monte Carlo assessment of spatial and energy effects in the VENUS-F subcritical configuration and application for reactivity determination. In: Proceedings of PHYSOR 2014 - The Role of Reactor Physics Toward a Sustainable Future, Kyoto, Japan. ANS, n. 1087437, available on CD-ROM (2014) [Google Scholar]
  7. G. Mila et al. Pulsed neutron and source jerk experiments for reactivity assessment in deep subcritical configuration: a case study within the framework of the FREYA project. In: Proceedings of PHYSOR 2014 - The Role of Reactor Physics Toward a Sustainable Future, Kyoto, Japan. ANS, n. 1087437, available on CD-ROM (2014) [Google Scholar]
  8. R. Soule et al. Neutronic studies in support of accelerator-driven systems: the MUSE experiments in the MASURCA facility. Nucl. Sci. Eng. 148, 124–152 (2004) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. C. M. Persson et al. Analysis of reactivity determination methods in the subcritical experiment Yalina. Nucl. Instr. Methods A, 554, 374–383 (2005) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. J. L. Kloosterman. DELPHI: a new subcritical assembly at Delft University of Technology. In: Proceedings of PHYSOR 2004 - The Physics of Fuel Cycles and Advanced Nuclear Systems - Global Developments, Chicago, IL, USA. American Nuclear Society, IL, USA (2004) [Google Scholar]
  11. W. Uyttenhove et al. The neutronic design of a critical lead reflected zero power reference core for online subcriticality measurements in accelerator driven systems. Ann. Nucl. Energy, 38, 1519–1526 (2011) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. P. Saracco et al. A preliminary study of an improved area method adapted to short time transients in subcritical systems. In: Proceedings of PHYSOR 2014 - The Role of Reactor Physics Toward a Sustainable Future, Kyoto, Japan. ANS, n. 1087437, available on CD-ROM (2014) [Google Scholar]
  13. W. Uyttenhove et al. Static modal analysis of the current-to-flux subcriticality monitor for ADS. In: Proceedings of PHYSOR 2014 - The Role of Reactor Physics Toward a Sustainable Future, Kyoto, Japan. ANS, n. 1087437, available on CD-ROM (2014) [Google Scholar]
  14. D. Chersola, G. Ricco, M. Ripani and P. Saracco. An alternative observable to estimate keff in fast ADS. Ann. Nucl. Energy, 95, 42–47 (2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. N. Cerullo and G. Lomonaco. Generation IV reactor designs, operation and fuel cycle. Chapter 13 in I. Crossland editor, Nuclear Fuel Cycle Science and Engineering, pag. 333-395, Woodhead Publishing (2012) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. D. Chersola, G. Lomonaco and R. Marotta. The VHTR and GFR and their use in innovative symbiotic fuel cycles. Progr. Nucl. Energy, 83, 443–459 (2015) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. L. Mansani, M. Bruzzone, S. Frambati and M. Reale. An intrinsically safe facility for forefront research and training on nuclear technologies - General description of the system. Eur. Phys. J. Plus, 129, 65 (2014) [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  18. C. M. Viberti and G. Ricco. An intrinsically safe facility for forefront research and training on nuclear technologies - Core design. Eur. Phys. J. Plus, 129, 66 (2014) [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  19. G. Lomonaco, O. Frasciello, M. Osipenko, G. Ricco, M. Ripani. An intrinsically safe facility for forefront research and training on nuclear technologies - Burnup and transmutation. Eur. Phys. J. Plus, 129, 74 (2014) [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]