Automated Nuclear Reactor Core Design for Power Uprate
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for designing nuclear reactor cores are time-consuming and labor-intensive, relying on manual trial and error with ASCII text files that are error-prone and lack guidance, leading to inefficient optimization of fuel bundle designs and increased manufacturing complexities and costs.
Innovation Solution
A system and method utilizing automated tools to simulate and optimize nuclear reactor core designs, including a graphical user interface for inputting constraints, selecting automated design tools, and iteratively modifying core designs to meet power uprate requirements, using objective functions to evaluate adherence to constraints and provide graphical feedback for iterative improvements.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If manual trial and error methods are used for core design, then flexibility in design exploration is maintained, but the design process becomes extremely time-consuming and labor-intensive
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces automated software tools as intermediaries between the designer and the complex simulation processes. These tools automatically generate input files, execute simulations, and interpret results, eliminating the need for manual trial-and-error while preserving design flexibility through automated exploration of multiple configurations.
Solution Approach 2:
The manual mechanical process of repeatedly creating input files, running simulations, and analyzing results is replaced by an automated computer-based system. The software automatically performs parameter variations, executes core simulation programs, and evaluates design constraints, substituting human manual operations with automated computational processes.
2Productivity
If automated tools are used to reduce design time, then productivity increases, but the complexity of the design system increases
Solution Approach 1:
The automated design system is segmented into distinct functional modules: input file generation, simulation execution, result analysis, and design optimization. Each module performs a specific function and can be independently configured, which manages overall system complexity while enabling high productivity through automated workflows.
Solution Approach 2:
The automated design tool is designed to be universal, handling multiple reactor types (BWR, PWR), various fuel bundle configurations, and different design constraints through a single integrated software platform. This multi-functionality increases productivity across different design scenarios while the standardized interface manages complexity.
3Adaptability or versatility
If the number of fuel rod types in a bundle is increased to satisfy design constraints, then design flexibility improves, but manufacturing complexity and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The automated design tool evaluates designs with varying numbers of fuel rod types and identifies solutions that satisfy design constraints with the minimum necessary diversity. By systematically exploring the design space, the tool finds optimal compromises that provide adequate design flexibility while minimizing manufacturing complexity compared to manual approaches.
4Device complexity
If manual ASCII text file input is used for simulation, then simplicity of input method is maintained, but error-proneness and lack of guidance increase
Solution Approach 1:
The automated design tool incorporates feedback mechanisms that automatically validate input parameters, check for consistency with design constraints, and provide guidance messages to users. This feedback loop eliminates manual errors in ASCII file creation while maintaining input simplicity through automated generation and verification processes.
Data Source
AI summary
In a method of designing a nuclear reactor core for uprated power operations, a set of constraints are inputted to be satisfied for uprated power operations, and a test reactor core design is generated based on the constraints. One or more automated tools may be selected from a set of automated tools to evaluate the test core design against the constraints. The selected tool may then be operated. Operation of the selected automated tool includes simulating reactor operation with the test core design, based on the constraints, to produce a plurality of outputs, comparing the outputs against the constraints, and providing data indicating constraints that were violated by the test core design during the simulation, based on the comparison. One or more of the automated tools are iterated until a test core design meets all constraints for uprated power operations, thereby representing an acceptable power uprate core design.