4.7 Article

Single-size and cluster dynamics modeling of intra-granular fission gas bubbles in UO2

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS
卷 583, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnucmat.2023.154453

关键词

Nuclear fuel; Fuel modeling; Fission gas; Nyx; Xolotl

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We simulated the evolution of intra-granular fission gas bubbles in UO2 using two models and compared the results to experimental data. The models showed excellent agreement with each other and with the experimental trends of bubble average size and number density. The calculated results either matched the data well or had errors within consistent uncertainties.
We perform simulations of intra-granular fission gas bubble evolution in UO2 using both a relatively simple, computationally inexpensive single-size model and a detailed cluster dynamics model. Simulations encompass 36 experimental cases from 4 different databases, covering various temperature and burnup levels. We systemati-cally compare results from the two models to each other and to post-irradiation experimental data of bubble average size and number density. Overall, the model-to-model comparisons reveal an excellent agreement across the set of simulations. This outcome indicates that, in spite of the underlying assumptions, the single-size model provides a good approximation of the complex physical behavior that is more rigorously described by the cluster dynamics model. Qualitatively, both models reproduce the trends of the experimental data with temperature and burnup correctly. Quantitatively, calculated results are either in good agreement with the data or within errors that appear consistent with the inherent uncertainties. Moreover, for the single-size model, we demonstrate and assess a multiscale approach whereby values for the fission gas atom diffusion coefficient from separate atomistic calculations are used. Systematic comparisons to experimental data point out a credible accuracy of the multi -scale model.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据