Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Figure 1.

Comparison of the neutron spectrum in different fast reactor systems.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Figure 2.

(Left): Simplified to scale vertical scheme of the MSFR system including the core, blanket and fuel heat exchangers (IHX) – (Right): Model of the core as used for the neutronic simulations with the fuel salt (yellow), the fertile salt (pink), the B4C protection (orange) and the reflectors and 20 mm thick walls in Ni-based allow (blue)[12].

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Table 1.

Proportions of transuranic nuclei in UOX fuel after one use in PWR without multi-recycling (burnup of 60 GWd/tHM) and after five years of storage.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 3.

Description of the calculation cycle for the simulation of a MSR.

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Figure 4.

Comparison of the keff evolution over the first cycle (left) and over the operational period of 40 cycles (right).

More »

Figure 4 Expand

Figure 5.

Evolution of the isotope inventory for the case based on Th-232 fertile material.

More »

Figure 5 Expand

Figure 6.

Evolution of the isotope inventory for the case of a fertile free core.

More »

Figure 6 Expand

Figure 7.

Evolution of the isotope inventory for the case based on U-238 fertile material.

More »

Figure 7 Expand

Table 2.

Masses which are initially to be put into the core for the three cases (thorium fertile, depleted uranium fertile, fertile free) and whole feeding mass over 40 cycles operational period.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Share of burnt material during the operation of 40 cycles for the different cases (thorium fertile, depleted uranium fertile, fertile free).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Masses of bred material which are unloaded from the core after 40 for the three cases (thorium fertile, depleted uranium fertile, fertile free) normalized by the over all feed of TRU material.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Comparison of the efficiency in burning of Plutonium and transuranium isotopes (Pu, Np, Am, Cm) between the MSFR and the 4/94 CAPRA oxide reference core.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Figure 8.

keff evolution over burnup for the 40 operational cycles (transmuter operation) and the extended operation with U-233 feed (deep burn phase).

More »

Figure 8 Expand

Figure 9.

Evolution of the isotope inventory for the case based on Th-232 fertile material with TRU feed in the transmuter operation and the deep burn phase using the U-233 bred in the blanket.

More »

Figure 9 Expand

Figure 10.

Highlight on the evolution of the plutonium isotope inventory for the continuation in the deep burn phase.

More »

Figure 10 Expand

Figure 11.

Highlight on the evolution of the minor actinide isotope inventory for the continuation in the deep burn phase.

More »

Figure 11 Expand

Figure 12.

Highlight on the evolution of the californium isotope inventory for the continuation in the deep burn phase.

More »

Figure 12 Expand

Table 6.

Isotopic vector of the uranium fuel left after 75 cycles.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Masses which are unloaded from the core after transmuter operation and after the deep burn phase.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Figure 13.

Comparison of the share of burnt material during the transmuter operation of 40 cycles for the different cases (thorium fertile, depleted uranium fertile, fertile free) and by a special add on time, the for deep burn phase of TRU.

More »

Figure 13 Expand

Table 8.

Isotopic vector of the uranium fuel left after 88 cycles.

More »

Table 8 Expand