Measurement/Evaluation Techniques and Nuclear Data Associated with Fission of 239Pu by Fission Spectrum Neutrons

Baisden, P ; Bauge, E ; Ferguson, J ; Gilliam, D ; Granier, T ; Jeanloz, R ; McMillan, C ; Robertson, D ; Thompson, P ; Verdon, C ; Wilkerson, C ; Young, P

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

关键词: Calibration;    Fission;    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory;    Gamma Spectroscopy;    Irradiation;   

DOI  :  10.2172/974389
RP-ID  :  LLNL-TR-426165
RP-ID  :  W-7405-ENG-48
RP-ID  :  974389

美国|英语

来源: UNT Digital Library

【 摘 要 】

This Panel was chartered to review and assess new evaluations of work on fission product data, as well as the evaluation process used by the two U.S. nuclear weapons physics laboratories. The work focuses on fission product yields resulting from fission spectrum neutrons incident on plutonium, and includes data from measurements that had not been previously published as well as new or revised fission product cumulative yield data, and related quantities such as Q values and R values. This report documents the Panel's assessment of the work presented by Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). Based on the work presented we have seven key observations: (1) Experiments conducted in the 1970s at LANL, some of which were performed in association with a larger, NIST-led, program, have recently been documented. A preliminary assessment of this work, which will be referred to in this document as ILRR-LANL, shows it to be technically sound. (2) LLNL has done a thorough, unbiased review and evaluation of the available literature and is in the process of incorporating the previously unavailable LANL data into its evaluation of key fission product yields. The results of the LLNL effort, which includes a preliminary evaluation of the ILRR-LANL data, have been documented. (3) LANL has also conducted an evaluation of fission product yields for fission spectrum neutrons on plutonium including a meta-analysis of benchmark data as part of a planned upgrade to the ENDF/B compilation. We found that the approach of using meta-analysis provides valuable additional insight for evaluating the sparse data sets involved in this assessment. (4) Both laboratories have provided convincing evidence for energy dependence in the fission product yield of {sup 147}Nd produced from the bombardment of {sup 239}Pu with fission spectrum neutrons over an incident neutron energy range of 0.2 to 1.9 MeV. (5) Consistent, complete, and explicit treatment of both systematic and statistical uncertainties, including correlations, are critical to the assessment of both the experimental measurements (due to variations between experimental techniques, irradiation conditions, calibration procedures, etc.), and the evaluation of those experiments to extract fundamental nuclear data. A clear example of the importance of uncertainty analysis is in the justification for energy-dependent {sup 147}Nd fission product yield, where the magnitude of the effect is comparable to the uncertainties of the individual fission product yield measurements. Both LANL and LLNL are committed to the inclusion of full uncertainty analysis in their evaluations. (6) The Panel reviewed in detail two methods for determining/evaluating fission product yields from which fission assessments can be made: the K factor method and high-resolution gamma spectroscopy (both described more fully in Sections 3 and 4). The panel concluded that fission product yields, and thus fission assessments, derived using either approach are equally valid, provided that the data were obtained from well understood, direct fission measurements and that the key underlying calibrations and/or data are valid for each technique. (7) The Panel found the process of peer review of the two complementary but independent methods to be an extremely useful exercise. Although work is still ongoing and the numbers presented to the Panel may change slightly, both groups are now in much better agreement on not just one, but four key fission product yields. The groups also have a better appreciation of the strengths and weaknesses of each other's methods.