Esarda nda working group - Results of the Monte Carlo
"simple case" benchmark exercise
P
M J Chard UKAEA, Dounreay, UK, S Croft
Canberra Industries,
Meriden, US
O Mafra ABACC, Brazil
The ESARDA Non-Destructive Assay (NDA) Working Group (WG)
has previously organised several intercomparison exercises,
aimed at establishing the performance of NDA techniques currently
employed in safeguards. These include round - robin exercises
where laboratories make comparative NDA measurements on a
set of samples, and intercomparisons for data analysis codes.
Passive and Active Neutron Coincidence Counting is widely
used in safeguards for the verification of fuel pins and
assemblies, the measurement of the fissile content of scrap
residues from reprocessing activities, and the assay of individual
fuel pellets for process control.
The use of Monte Carlo modelling is becoming increasingly
widespread as a tool for reducing the reliance upon experiment
(which often requires the use of costly standards) for calibration
of neutron coincidence counting systems. Increasing availability
of powerful computers means that the complexity with which
physical systems can be modelled is increasing. However,
the accuracy of the results obtained is also influenced by
the nuclear data constants which are used by the program,
as well as the interpretational models used to convert calculated
quantities into measurement parameters. In this context,
there is increasing interest in the safeguards community
in establishing nuclear data sets and methodologies which
can be used reliably for these applications.
The NDA WG recently published,
the results of an Intercomparison Exercise, the "Reals
benchmark exercise", in which a number of participants
used MCNP TM, an established Monte Carlo code in safeguards,
to predict the coincidence counting rates for a standard
Euratom Active Neutron Coincidence Collar. The emphasis of
this exercise was placed on studying the methods used when
applying MCNP TM, that is, the interpretational models which
are used to convert the raw calculated quantities, into quantities
which are relevant to measurement, namely counting rates.
To this end, participants used the same nuclear data for
the actual MCNP TM runs, with a fixed, predefined geometry
model, but different interpretational models. The results
of comparisons with experiment demonstrated that predictions
could generally be made to an accuracy of 5 - 10 %. However,
due to uncertainties in the accuracy of the nuclear data
constants used (neutron cross-sections, neutron source spectra,
thermal neutron scattering treatments), it is not clear whether,
nor by how much, it is possible to further improve on this
figure, nor what are the factors which determine the fundamental
limits. Furthermore, the relative contributions to the differences
in results from i) differences in the nuclear data used in
the interpretational models, and ii) differences in the physics
of the interpretational models themselves, were not clear.
Although the MCNP TM modelling was based on as accurate a
geometry model as possible, certain physical effects were
not taken into account, such as the true effective active
length of the detectors, and the fractional wall effect losses.
This means that there is an additional, as yet unquantified,
source of uncertainty which undoubtedly affects the level
of agreement which can generally be expected between experiment
and calculation.
A new "Simple Case" benchmark Intercomparison
Exercise was launched, intended to study the importance of
the fundamental nuclear data constants, physics treatments
and geometry model approximations, employed by Monte Carlo
codes in common use. The exercise was also directed at determining
the level of agreement which can be expected between measured
and calculated quantities, using current state of the art
modelling codes and techniques. To this end, measurements
and Monte Carlo calculations of the Totals (or Gross) neutron
count rates have been performed using a simple moderated
3He filled cylindrical proportional counter array or "slab
monitor" counting geometry. It was decided to select
a very simple geometry for this exercise. This was to ensure
that there is little opportunity to introduce uncertainties
into the results as a consequence of errors in the geometry
modelling due to the geometry being not well defined. Furthermore
the use of a standard, well characterised detector system
minimises the risk of introducing additional uncertainties
due to errors in modelling details such as moderator density,
detector fill pressures, etc. so that there is minimum potential
for uncertainty due to unquantifiable variables in the geometry.
The comparison between measurement and calculation was directed
at the simplest possible measurable quantity, namely the
Totals counting rate, in order to direct the analysis towards
the influence of nuclear data, physics treatment and geometry
approximations, rather than the details of a potentially
complex interpretational model (the Reals Prediction benchmark
focussed on this).
It was agreed that Monte Carlo modelling would be carried
out by participants from as wide a range of organisations
as possible. By requesting that the participants each use
their preferred codes, the exercise facilitated a comparison
of all the codes in common use for NDA applications in safeguards.
Furthermore, the intention was for each participating group
to develop their own independent geometry model, based on
detailed drawings of the as – built detector system,
supplied by the project co-ordinator as obtained from the
manufacturers of the equipment. This gives a good overall
understanding of the range of possible geometry modelling
approximations and their effects. The simple geometry treated
in this exercise, gives a high degree of control over the
geometry variables. It was anticipated that each group would
use their own preferred nuclear data sets and physics treatments,
such that at the end of the exercise, analysis would allow
sensitivity studies to be performed for the various factors.
By benchmarking against the experiments, it was hoped that
a consensus could be reached for a preferred set of data
to be used for neutron assay systems as well as providing
insight into the fundamental accuracy limitations of the
Monte Carlo modelling.
This report describes the scope of the measurements and
calculations, and gives a summary of the results obtained
(the results were presented earlier). The results are compared,
and sensitivity studies shown, to determine the influence
of the various parameters. It is considered that this new "Simple
Case Benchmark" intercomparison exercise can potentially
offer interesting and useful results to the safeguards community.
The results will benefit both the NDA specialist interested
in the accuracy with which Monte Carlo modelling can be used
for design / calibration work and the inspector, who needs
to keep up to date with the expected performance of NDA instruments
and predictive tools which are increasingly being used to
assist calibrations of NDA equipment.
|

|
 
ABACC
Laboratories Quality Assurance Though Secondary
Standars Exchange Program
Considerations
on Safeguards Approach for Small Centrifuge Enrichment
Facilities
Development
of Low-Level Environmental Sampling Capabilities
For Uranium at Brazilian and Argentine Laboratories
by Abacc
Esarda nda working
group - Results of the Monte Carlo "simple case" benchmark
exercise
Ten
Years of Technical Cooperation Between the DOE and ABACC
Performance Values For Non Destructive Assay (Nda) - Techniques Applied to Safeguards:
The 2002 Evaluation by the Esarda NDA Working Group |