1: %%%%%%%%%% espcrc1.tex %%%%%%%%%%
2: %
3: % $Id: espcrc1.tex 1.2 2000/07/24 09:12:51 spepping Exp spepping $
4: %
5: \documentclass[fleqn,12pt]{article}
6: %\usepackage{espcrc1}
7:
8: % change this to the following line for use with LaTeX2.09
9: % \documentstyle[12pt,twoside,fleqn,espcrc1]{article}
10:
11: % if you want to include PostScript figures
12: %\usepackage{graphicx}
13: % if you have landscape tables
14: %\usepackage[figuresright]{rotating}
15:
16: % put your own definitions here:
17: % \newcommand{\cZ}{\cal{Z}}
18: % \newtheorem{def}{Definition}[section]
19: % ...
20: \newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134}
21: \newcommand{\AmS}{{\protect\the\textfont2
22: A\kern-.1667em\lower.5ex\hbox{M}\kern-.125emS}}
23:
24: % add words to TeX's hyphenation exception list
25: \hyphenation{author another created financial paper re-commend-ed Post-Script}
26:
27: % declarations for front matter
28: \title{Reactor as a Source of Antineutrinos: \\ Thermal Fission Energy}
29:
30: \author{V. Kopeikin\thanks{kopeykin@polyn.kiae.su}, L. Mikaelyan\thanks{mikaelyan@polyn.kiae.su},
31: V. Sinev\thanks{sinev@polyn.kiae.su}}
32: \date{Russian Research Centre "Kurchatov Institute", Moscow}
33:
34: \begin{document}
35:
36: % typeset front matter
37: \maketitle
38:
39: %\tableofcontents
40:
41: \begin{abstract}
42: Deeper insight into the features of a reactor as a source of antineutrinos is required for making further advances in studying
43: the fundamental properties of the neutrino. The relationship between the thermal power of a reactor and the rate of the chain
44: fission reaction in its core is analyzed.
45:
46: \end{abstract}
47:
48: \section*{Introduction}
49:
50: Experiments aimed at studying the fundamental properties of the neutrino and at testing the standard model of electroweak
51: interactions are being performed at reactors. A collaboration of researchers from the Kurchatov Institute and the Petersburg
52: Nuclear Physics Institute (PNPI, Gatchina) are conducting an experiment devoted to searches for the neutrino anomalous
53: magnetic moment [1]. A group of physicists from the Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics (ITEP, Moscow) and
54: the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR, Dubna) are preparing a similar experiment at the reactor of the Kalinin atomic
55: power plant [2]. The CHOOZ experiment [3], completed quite recently, set constraints on the neutrino-mixing-matrix element
56: $U_{e3}$. The KamLAND Collaboration, which is recording antineutrinos at a distance of a few hundred kilometers from
57: reactors, is able to determine the remaining two mixing-matrix elements $U_{e1}$ and $U_{e2}$ and to test the LMA MSW
58: hypothesis of solar-neutrino oscillations [4]. In addition, it should be noted that a program of neutrino studies at the reactors on
59: the Taiwan island is being developed [5] and that interesting proposals concerning searches for neutrino oscillations were put
60: forth in Germany [6]. (More details on the motivation of those investigations, their status, and their prospects can be found, for
61: example, in the review articles cited in [7].)
62:
63: Differing in many respects, the aforementioned experiments possess one common feature: the results obtained in these experiments
64: are analyzed by an absolute method $-$ specifically, the measured counting rates for neutrino events and their spectral distributions
65: are contrasted against their counterparts calculated on the basis of the theory of electroweak interactions. For input data in these
66: calculations, use is made of the set of features of neutrino radiation that, together with other data, form a metrological basis of the
67: experimental physics of neutrinos at nuclear reactors.
68:
69: The spectral density $f(E_\nu)\;({\rm cm^{-2} s^{-1} MeV^{-1}})$ of the flux of reactor electron antineutrinos
70: ( $\bar{{\nu}_e}$) incident on a detector is given by
71:
72: \begin{equation}
73: f(E_\nu) = N_f {\rho_f (E_\nu)}/ 4\pi R^2,
74: \end{equation}
75: where $N_{f}$ is the number of fission events in a reactor per second, ${{\rho}_f}({E_{\nu}})$
76: $({\rm MeV^{-1} fiss.^{-1}})$ is the spectrum of reactor electron antineutrinos that is normalized to a fission event,
77: and $R$ (cm) is the distance between the reactor and the detector used.
78:
79: In the fission of uranium and plutonium nuclei and in the subsequent radioactive decay of fission fragments, as well as in
80: accompanying neutron reactions, energy is released, its major part being absorbed in the reactor, whereby it is converted into
81: heat. Denoting by $E_f $ (MeV/fiss.) the energy absorbed in the reactor on average per fission event, we can represent
82: the chain-reaction rate $N_f $ in the form
83:
84: \begin{equation}
85: N_f = W/E_f,
86: \end{equation}
87:
88: The present study is devoted to exploring the quantity $E_f$ , which relates the fission-reaction rate $N_f$ (fiss./s) to the thermal
89: power $W$ of a reactor. First of all, we consider this relationship for the example of a standard operating period of a reactor
90: belonging to the PWR type, in which case isotopes undergoing fission include $^{235}$U, $^{239}$Pu, $^{238}$U, and
91: $^{241}$Pu. The method developed here and, upon introducing some specific corrections, the results presented below can be
92: used in neutrino experiments, both those that are being presently performed and those that are planned, at reactors of any other
93: type.
94:
95: The reactor staff determines the current value of the thermal power to a precision of about 1 to 2\%. In order to avoid increasing
96: the error in determining the ratio in (2), we will try to calculate the energy $E_f$ to a higher precision.
97:
98: \section{COMPONENTS OF THE ENERGY $E_f$}
99:
100: The energy $E_f$ can be represented as the sum of four terms; that is,
101:
102: \begin{equation}
103: E_f = E_{tot}- \langle {E_\nu} \rangle - \Delta E_{\beta \gamma} + E_{nc},
104: \end{equation}
105: where $E_{tot}$ is the total energy released in nuclear fission from the instant at which the neutron inducing this fission process
106: is absorbed to the completion of the beta decays of product fragments and their transformation into beta-stable neutral atoms,
107: $\langle E_{\nu} \rangle$ is the mean energy carried away by the antineutrinos that are produced in the beta decay of fission
108: fragments ($\sim 6\bar{{\nu}_e}/fiss.$), $\Delta E_{\beta \gamma}$ is the energy of beta electrons and photons from
109: fission fragments that did not decay at a given instant of time, and $E_{nc}$ is the energy absorbed upon neutron capture
110: (without fission) in various materials of the reactor core.
111:
112: That part of the total energy $E_{tot}$ which remains in the reactor and which transforms into heat forms the effective
113: fission energy $E_{eff}$,
114:
115: $$
116: E_{eff} = E_{tot} - \langle {E_\nu} \rangle - \Delta E_{\beta \gamma}. \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
117: \eqno (3.1)
118: $$
119: The expression for $E_{eff}$ can then be represented in the form
120:
121: $$
122: E_f = E_{eff} + E_{nc} . \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \eqno (3.2)
123: $$
124:
125: The above concerns the energy released in a single nuclear-fission event, but the chain fission reaction in a reactor proceeds over
126: a finite time interval. For this reason, we consider a chain fission reaction that begins at the instant $t = 0$ and proceeds at the rate
127: of $N_f$ = 1 fiss./s. We denote by $E(t)_{tot}$ the energy released per second at the instant $t$ reckoned from the
128: commencement of the process being considered. The quantity $E(t)_{tot}$ includes all kinds of energy, with the exception of
129: $E_{nc}$, which is the energy that is released in various materials upon the absorption in them of neutrons not involved in the
130: fission process. We will now consider the function $f_{tot}(t)$ determining the energy released per unit time after the lapse of
131: the time $t$ since a single fission event. It is obvious that
132:
133: \begin{equation}
134: E(t)_{tot} = \int_0^tf_{tot}(t')dt', \qquad f_{tot}(t) = \frac{dE(t)_{tot}}{dt}
135: \end{equation}
136: The energy $E(t)_{tot}$ grows with increasing fission process time $t$, tending to the limiting value $E(t)_{\infty}$,
137:
138: $$
139: E(\infty)_{tot}= \int_0^\infty f_{tot}(x)dx \equiv E_{tot}. \quad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \eqno (4.1)
140: $$
141: The above equations relate the energy release in a single fission event to the energy release per unit time in a continuous process.
142:
143: Neutrino investigations are performed at reactors where use is made of uranium whose enrichment in $^{235}$U is low. As this
144: isotope burns out, $^{239}$Pu and $^{241}$Pu are accumulated in the core of such a reactor. Just like $^{235}$U, these isotopes
145: undergo fission induced by thermal neutrons. There is also a contribution to the total number of fission events from $^{238}$U,
146: which is fissile under the effect of fast neutrons. Therefore, we have
147:
148: \begin{equation}
149: E_f = \sum {\alpha_i E_{fi}}, \qquad \sum \alpha_i = 1,
150: \end{equation}
151: where $\alpha_i \;(i = 5, 9, 8, 1) - $ are the contributions of the $^{235}$U, $^{239}$Pu, $^{238}$U and $^{241}$Pu isotopes to
152: the total number $N_f$ of fission events at a given instant of time. Information about $\alpha_i $ values, which change in the
153: course of reactor operation, is provided by the reactor staff with a relative error of 5\%. The $\alpha_i $ values typical of PWR
154: reactors are
155:
156: \begin{equation}
157: \alpha_5 = 0.59, \qquad \alpha_9 = 0.29, \qquad \alpha_8 = 0.07, \qquad \alpha_1 = 0.05.
158: \end{equation}
159:
160: It should be emphasized that the energy $E_f$ and the calculated number $W/E_f$ of fission events occurring in a reactor at
161: a given instant of time are not determined exclusively by the current reactor state, which is specified by the level of the reactor
162: power and by the isotopic composition of the burning nuclear fuel, but they are dependent on the prehistory of the reactor. This
163: dependence is controlled by the terms $E_{nc}$ and $\Delta E_{\beta \gamma}$ which appear in (3). The quantity $E_{nc}$
164: changes along with the composition of the materials in the reactor core in the course of reactor operation. Both terms involve
165: a contribution from longlived beta emitters and depend on the duration of the irradiation of the fuel.
166:
167: For the isotopes undergoing fission, the energies $E_{fi}$ in (5) for the whole reactor exceed 200 MeV/fiss. Going somewhat
168: ahead, we note that, for a PWR reactor, the absolute values of the terms appearing in expression (3) for the energy $E_f$ are
169: in the following ratio:
170:
171: \begin{equation}
172: E_{tot}: \langle{E_\nu}\rangle : \Delta E_{\beta \gamma}: E_{nc} \approx 200 : 9 : 0.3 : 10 \,.
173: \end{equation}
174:
175: \section{TOTAL $(E_{tot})$ AND EFFECTIVE $(E_{eff})$\quad \\ FISSION ENERGY }
176:
177: \subsection{$Total\; Fission\; Energy\; E_{tot}$}
178:
179: The energy $E_{tot}$ can be calculated by summing the mean values of various components of the energy release, such as
180: the fragment kinetic energy, the energy of prompt and delayed fission gamma rays, and the neutron and beta-electron kinetic
181: energies. However, much more precise results are obtained by directly applying the energy-conservation law to the fission
182: process; that\,is,
183:
184: \begin{equation}
185: M(A_0,Z_0) + M_n = \sum y_A\, M(A,Z_A) + n_f\, M_n + E_{tot},
186: \end{equation}
187: where $M (A_0,Z_0)$ is the atomic mass of the isotope undergoing fission (the speed of light is set to unity, c = 1); $A_0$ and
188: $Z_0$ are its mass and charge numbers, respectively; $M_n$ is the neutron mass; summation is performed over the mass numbers
189: $A$ of beta-stable fission products; $M(A,Z_A)$ are the masses of these products; $y_A$ are their total yields,
190: $\sum y_A = 2$; and $n_f$ is the mean total number of prompt and delayed fission neutrons (for the obvious reason, the
191: notation $\nu$, which is usually used for the mean number of fission neutrons, is replaced here by $n_f$.)
192:
193: Using the condition requiring that the number of nucleons be conserved in the fission process and introducing the mass excesses
194: for atoms, $m(A,Z)$, we can recast relation (8) into form
195:
196: \begin{equation}
197: E_{tot}= m(A_0,Z_0) - \sum y_A\,m(A,Z_A) - (n_f - 1)\,m_n
198: \end{equation}
199: where\quad $m(A,Z) = M(A,Z) - A\,m_0$\quad ($m_0$ is an atomic mass unit) and\quad $m_n = M_n - m_0 = {\rm 8.0713
200: \pm 0.0001}$ MeV is the neutron mass excess.
201:
202: The calculated total energy $E_{tot}$ and the quantities appearing in relation (9) are given in Table 1 for all four nuclei
203: undergoing fission. In computing these results, we employed data on the mass excesses for the atoms involved [8] and on
204: the yields of fission fragments [9] whose mass numbers took values in the range between 66 and 172 (see Fig. 1). The data
205: on the number of fission neutrons were borrowed from [10].
206:
207: \begin{table}[htb]
208: \caption{Mass excesses and total fission energy $E_{tot}$ (in MeV/fiss.)}
209: \label{table}
210: \vspace{10pt}
211: %\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
212: %\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
213: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
214: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
215: \begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c}
216: \hline
217: Fissile & Mass & Mass excess & Number & $(n_f -1)m_n$ & Total \\
218: nucleus & excess & for fission & of fission & & fission \\
219: & $ m(A_0,Z_0)$ & products, & neutrons, & & energy, \\
220: & & $\sum y_A\,m(A,Z_A)$ & $n_f$ & & $E_{tot}$ \\
221: \hline
222: $^{235}$U & 40.914 & -173.43 & 2.432 & 11.55 & 202.79 \\
223: & $\pm 0.002$ & $\pm 0.05$ & $\pm 0.0036$ & $\pm 0.03$ & $\pm 0.06$ \\
224: \hline
225: $^{238}$U & 47.304 & -173.39 & 2.829 & 14.76 & 205.93 \\
226: & $\pm 0.002$ & $\pm 0.10$ & $\pm 0.011$ & $\pm 0.09$ & $\pm 0.13$ \\
227: \hline
228: $^{239}$Pu & 48.584 & -173.87 & 2.875 & 15.13 & 207.32 \\
229: & $\pm 0.002$ & $\pm 0.07$ & $\pm 0.0060$ & $\pm 0.05$ & $\pm 0.08$ \\
230: \hline
231: $^{241}$Pu & 52.951 & -173.72 & 2.937 & 15.63 & 211.04 \\
232: & $\pm 0.002$ & $\pm 0.10$ & $\pm 0.0073$ & $\pm 0.06$ & $\pm 0.12$ \\
233: \hline
234: \end{tabular}\\[2pt]
235: \end{table}
236:
237: For the fissile nuclei being considered, the values of $E_{tot}$ differ from one another by a few MeV, increasing in the order of
238: their positions in the first column of Table 1. These distinctions are caused, above all, by an increase in the mass excess for the
239: atoms of the fissile isotopes and, to a lesser extent, by an increase in the number $n_f$ of fission neutrons. At the same time,
240: it can be seen from Table 1 that, for the set of stable fission fragments, the total mass excess $\sum y_A\,m(A,Z_A)$ is virtually
241: independent of the nucleus undergoing fission. This is because the quantity $m(A,Z_A)$ is approximately constant over the
242: region of high fragment yields $y_A$, sizably increasing only for products originating from highly asymmetric fission, where the
243: yields in question are relatively low (see Fig. 1). Therefore, even significant distinctions between the mass distributions of
244: fragments produced in the fission of uranium and plutonium nuclei have but a slight effect on the sums $\sum y_A\,m(A,Z_A)$.
245:
246: The error in the mass excess $\sum y_A m(A,Z_A)$ (see the third column in Table 1) depends on the uncertainty in the yields
247: $y_A$, since the overwhelming majority of the values of\, $m(A,Z_A)$ are known to a precision not poorer than 5\,keV. In
248: order to find this error, each of the yields $y_A$ was varied individually, irrespective of the others, under the assumption that it
249: obeys the a Gaussian distribution. Upon each variation, there arises a new set of $y_A$ values, and we calculated the value of
250: $\sum y_A m(A,Z_A)$ for this set. As a result, the total number $\sum y_A A$ of nucleons contained in fission products
251: changed somewhat. On the basis of the relation
252:
253: \begin{equation}
254: A_0 +1 = \sum y_A A + n_f,
255: \end{equation}
256: which expresses the law of nucleon-number conservation, we calculated the corresponding number $n_f$ of neutrons. A point
257: in the plane spanned by the variables $\sum y_A m(A,Z_A)$ and $n_f$ was associated with the pair of values found in this way
258: for the mass excess and the number of neutrons. The results of one such computational experiment performed for $^{235}$U,
259: where use was made of a Gaussian distribution characterized by a FWHM value of 0.12, are illustrated in Fig. 2 (ten thousand
260: points). From Fig. 2, it can be seen that the uncertainties in the yields of fission products introduce an error of about 35 keV in
261: the mass excess and that available experimental data on the yields of fission products and on the number of neutrons are quite
262: consistent.
263:
264: That the calculation of the total energies $E_{tot}$ on the basis of applying the energy-conservation law to the fission process
265: was highly precise was due to the above features.
266:
267: We also note that, in fact, the quantity $\sum y_A m(A,Z_A)$ is independent of the incident-neutron energy until the yields
268: $y_A$ change significantly near the humps of the mass distributions. The calculations reveal that, in $^{235}$U and
269: $^{235}$Pu fission induced by neutrons of the fission spectrum, the deviation of $\sum y_A m(A,Z_A)$ from the values
270: presented in Table 1 does not exceed 0.1 MeV.
271:
272: The values of $E_{tot}$ were obtained without taking into account ternary fission. Ternary fission accompanied by the emission
273: of a long-range alpha particle occurs approximately in one of 500 cases; other types of ternary fission are much less probable.
274: According to estimates, the change in $E_{tot}$ upon taking into account ternary fission does not exceed 0.02\%.
275:
276: In calculating $E_{tot}$, we disregarded the alpha decays of $^{144}$Nd, $^{147}$Sm and $^{149}$Sm nuclei, which are
277: formed upon the completion of beta-decay processes. The total yield of these alpha-particle emitters is about 10\%; however,
278: their half-lives exceed $10^{11}$ yr, so that they make no significant contribution to the energy release.
279:
280: \subsection{$Effective\; Energy\; E_{eff}$}
281:
282: In this subsection, we describe schematically a procedure for calculating the energies $\langle{E_\nu}\rangle$ carried away by
283: antineutrinos and the corrections $\Delta E_{\beta \gamma}$ and present the results of these calculations, along with the values
284: found for the effective energies $E_{eff}$ according to relation (3.1). \medskip
285:
286: {\bf 1.}$\,$ Along with electron antineutrinos ($\bar{\nu_e}$) emitted by fission fragments, a considerable number of electron
287: antineutrinos are generated in a reactor that are emitted in the beta decay of nuclei produced upon the activation of the materials
288: occurring in the reactor by neutrons. In calculating the energy $\langle{E_\nu}\rangle$, we take into account only those reactor
289: antineutrinos that are emitted by fission fragment not perturbed by the interaction with neutrons rather than all of them.
290:
291: The $\bar{\nu_e}$ spectrum decreases fast with increasing energy $E_\nu$, virtually vanishing at $E_\nu \approx 10$ MeV.
292: In this spectrum, the hard section $E_\nu \ge 2$ MeV contains about 60\% of the energy $\langle E_\nu \rangle$ that is carried
293: away by antineutrinos.
294:
295: In the case of $^{235}$U, $^{239}$Pu, and $^{241}$Pu, the $\bar{\nu_e}$ spectra necessary for calculating
296: $\langle{E_\nu}\rangle$ were determined in the following way:
297:
298: \begin{itemize}
299: \item For the region of energies above 1.8 MeV, use was made of the spectra found in the Laue$-$Langevin Institute (ILL) by
300: reconstructing the measured spectra of beta electrons emitted by fission fragments [11], small corrections of about 2.5\% that
301: correspond to the contributions of long-lived beta emitters [12] and which were disregarded in [11] being introduced in
302: these spectra.
303: \item The $\bar{\nu_e}$ spectra that we calculated for the energy range 0$-$3 MeV were smoothly matched in the segment
304: between 2 and 2.5 MeV with the corrected ILL spectra. As a result, the calculated values changed by 2 to 3\%.
305: \end{itemize}
306:
307: In the case of $^{238}$U, the energy $\langle{E_\nu}\rangle$ was found on the basis of the $\bar{\nu_e}$ spectrum calculated
308: in the present study.
309:
310: In the region $E_\nu < 2$ MeV, it is not easy to estimate the error in the energy carried away by electron antineutrinos. The
311: database used in the relevant calculation includes information about 571 fission fragments. For them, the overwhelming majority
312: of decay diagrams is well known. The error in determining this part of $\langle{E_\nu}\rangle$ is likely to be within 4\%.
313:
314: We recall that, in fission, nuclei emit about 6 $\bar{\nu_e}$ of mean energy approximately equal to 1.5 MeV. For the fissile
315: isotopes in question, the $\langle{E_\nu}\rangle$ values (in MeV/fiss.) found in the way outlined above are
316:
317: $$
318: ^{235}{\rm U} : 9.07 \pm 0.32 \qquad ^{238}{\rm U} : 11.00 \pm 0.80 \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad \;\;
319: $$
320:
321: \begin{equation}
322: ^{239}{\rm Pu} : 7.22 \pm 0.27 \qquad ^{241}{\rm Pu} : 8.71 \pm 0.30
323: \end{equation}
324:
325: We note that the errors in our knowledge of the outgoing-neutrino energies $\langle{E_\nu}\rangle$ are much greater
326: than the errors in determining the energies $E_{tot}$.
327:
328: Part of the energy carried away by antineutrinos of energy $E_\nu \ge 1.8$ MeV can be directly compared with data obtained in
329: an experiment at the reactor of the Rovno atomic power plant [13]. In that experiment, the positron spectrum was measured
330: in the inverse beta-decay reaction $\bar{\nu_e}+p \rightarrow n + e^+$¯ and the $\bar{\nu_e}$ spectrum was reconstructed
331: in the energy region $E_\nu >$ 1.8 MeV. The value found with the aid of this spectrum for the energy that is carried away is
332: in satisfactory agreement with that which was calculated in the present study; that is,
333:
334: \begin{equation}
335: X_{Rovno/calc} = 4.679/4.815 = 0.972.
336: \end{equation}
337:
338: {\bf 2.}$\:$We recall that the energy $E_{\beta\gamma}$ released upon the complete beta decay of a pair of fission fragments is
339: contained in the total fission energy $E_{tot}$. The correction $\Delta E_{\beta\gamma}(t)$ takes into account the fact that,
340: at the instant of observation $t$, the decay processes have not yet been completed,
341:
342: \begin{equation}
343: \Delta E_{\beta\gamma}(t) = E_{\beta\gamma}(\infty) - E_{\beta\gamma}(t) = \int_t^\infty dt' f_{\beta\gamma}(t'),
344: \end{equation}
345: where $E_{\beta\gamma}(t)$ is the energy released per second at the instant $t$ reckoned from the beginning of the fission
346: process proceeding at a rate of 1 fiss./s and $f_{\beta\gamma}(t)$ is the energy released per unit time after a lapse of time $t$
347: from a single fission event [compare with the analogous expressions in (4) for $E_{tot}$].
348:
349: The energy $\Delta E_{\beta\gamma}(t)$ of fission fragments that did not decay first decreases fast with increasing duration
350: of the irradiation of the fuel used; this decrease gradually becomes slower, with the result that, at irradiation times of about 1.5 yr,
351: $\Delta E_{\beta\gamma}(t)$ virtually reaches a plateau (see Fig. 3). The formation of this plateau is associated with fragments
352: whose lifetime exceeds 30 yr. Presented immediately below are the values of $\Delta E_{\beta\gamma}(t)$ (in MeV/fiss.) at
353: the fuel-irradiation time corresponding to the midpoint of the standard operating period of a PWR reactor:
354:
355: $$
356: ^{235}{\rm U} : 0.35 \pm 0.02 \qquad \;\; ^{238}{\rm U} : 0.33 \pm 0.03 \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
357: $$
358:
359: \begin{equation}
360: ^{239}{\rm Pu} : 0.30 \pm 0.02 \qquad ^{241}{\rm Pu} : 0.29 \pm 0.03.
361: \end{equation}
362:
363: It is useful to have an analytic expression for the energy $\Delta E_{\beta\gamma}(t)$. Over a wide interval of the times $t$,
364: the expression
365:
366: $$
367: ^{fit}\Delta E_{\beta\gamma}(t) = E_0\, exp(-\lambda_0 t^\alpha) + \varepsilon, \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
368: \qquad \qquad
369: $$
370:
371: \begin{equation}
372: 0.5 < t < 500\; days
373: \end{equation}
374: at the $E_0$, $\lambda_0$, $\alpha$, and $\varepsilon$ values given in Table 2 agree with the results of the precise calculation
375: to within 2 \%.
376:
377: \begin{table}[htb]
378: \caption{Parameters of the functions $^{fit}\Delta E_{\beta\gamma}(t)$}
379: \label{table}
380: %\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
381: %\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
382: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
383: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
384: \vspace{5pt}
385: \hspace{60pt}
386: \begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|}
387: \hline
388: Fissile nucleus & $E_0,$MeV & $\lambda_0$ & $\alpha$ & $\varepsilon,$ MeV\\
389: \hline
390: $^{235}$U & 8.80 & 2.15 & 0.108 &\ 0.185\\
391: $^{238}$U & 9.20 & 2.22 & 0.106 &\ 0.165\\
392: $^{239}$Pu & 8.50 & 2.18 & 0.109 &\ 0.155\\
393: $^{241}$Pu & 8.20 & 2.16 & 0.105 &\ 0.135\\
394: \hline
395: \end{tabular}\\[2pt]
396: \end{table}
397:
398: The first term in (15) describes an exponential decay with a decay probability decreasing with time, while the second term
399: corresponds to the plateau. \medskip
400:
401: {\bf 3.} To conclude this section, we present the values of the effective fission energy $E_{eff}$ (in MeV/fiss.) that
402: correspond to the midpoint of the reactor operating period:
403:
404: $$
405: ^{235}{\rm U} : 193.37 \pm 0.33 \qquad ^{238}{\rm U} : 194.60 \pm 0.81 \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad
406: $$
407:
408: \begin{equation}
409: ^{239}{\rm Pu} : 199.80 \pm 0.28 \qquad ^{241}{\rm Pu} : 202.04 \pm 0.32.
410: \end{equation}
411:
412: \section {TOTAL THERMAL ENERGY $E_f$}
413:
414: In this section, we present the results obtained by calculating the energy $E_{nc}$ (in MeV/fiss.) absorbed in a reactor upon
415: the capture of neutrons not involved in the chain reaction, determine the total thermal energy $E_f$, and consider its variation
416: within the reactor operating period.
417:
418: {\bf 1}. Of the total number $n_f$ of neutrons emitted in a fission event, only one contributes to the chain reaction. The
419: remaining neutrons are absorbed almost completely in the reactor core, reflector, and vessel. The probabilities of the
420: absorption of these neutrons by various substances and the energies $E_{nck}$ released in the capture of one neutron in
421: those substances are quoted in Table 3.
422:
423: \begin{table}[htb]
424: \caption{ Balance of the absorption of neutrons not involved in the chain reaction and of the thermal energy $E_{nck}$
425: released upon the absorption of a single neutron in a given material (midpoint of the operation period)}
426: \label{table}
427: \vspace{10pt}
428: %\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
429: %\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
430: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
431: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
432: \begin{tabular}{c|c|c||c|c|c}
433: \hline
434: & Capture & $E_{nck}$, & & Capture & $E_{nck}$, \\
435: Material & probability & $ \frac{MeV}{neutron}$ & Material & probability & $\frac{MeV}{neutron}$ \\
436: & $\eta_k, $\% & & & $\eta_k, $\% & \\
437: \hline
438: $^{235}$U & 11.6 & 6.54 & $^{149}$Sm & 0.8 & 7.99 \\
439: $^{238}$U & 38.4 & 5.72 & Other fragments & 6.8 & 7.88 \\
440: $^{239}$Pu & 10.5 & 6.53 & Zirconium & 7.0 & 8.11 \\
441: $^{240}$Pu & 6.1 & 5.24 & $^{10}$B & 5.6 & 2.79 \\
442: $^{241}$Pu& 3.6 & 6.31 & Water & 4.4 & 2.22 \\
443: $^{135}$Xe& 3.4 & 7.49 & Other materials & 1.8 & 5.67 \\
444: \hline
445: \end{tabular}\\[2pt]
446: \end{table}
447:
448: From those data, it can be seen that more than 80\% of $(n_f-1)$ neutrons are absorbed in the fuel and in the accumulated
449: fission fragments. In all cases, with the exception of that of $^{10}$B, the neutrons are absorbed via $(n,\gamma)$ reactions.
450: The energies $E_{nck}$ include the energy of photons emitted in radiative neutron capture and, if beta-radioactive nuclei are
451: formed, the energy of beta electrons and photons originating from the subsequent transformations of these nuclei.
452:
453: The mean energy absorbed in the reactor in the capture of one neutron, $E_{n1} = \sum \eta_k E_{nck}$, and calculated on
454: the basis of the data given in Table 3 is $E_{n1} = 5.97 \pm 0.15$ MeV/neutron, its increase within the period from 1 day to
455: the end of the operating period being 0.55 MeV/neutron.
456:
457: At \ the \ midpoint \ of \ the \ reactor \ operating \ period, \ the \ energies $E_{nci} = E_{n1}\cdot (n_{fi}-1)$ (in MeV/fiss.) entering into the
458: total thermal energy of the fission of uranium and plutonium isotopes are:
459:
460: $$
461: ^{235}{\rm U} : 8.55 \pm 0.22 \qquad \quad ^{238}{\rm U} : 10.92 \pm 0.28 \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \quad
462: $$
463:
464: \begin{equation}
465: ^{239}{\rm Pu} : 11.19 \pm 0.28 \qquad ^{241}{\rm Pu} : 11.56 \pm 0.29.
466: \end{equation}
467:
468: {\bf 2}. We now present the values obtained for the total thermal energies $E_{fi}$ of fissile isotopes by summing the
469: components found above, see Table 4.
470:
471: \begin{table}[htb]
472: \caption{\ Thermal \ fission \ energies \ $E_{fi}$, \ at \ the \ midpoint \ of \ the \ reactor \ operating period}
473: \label{table}
474: %\newcommand{\m}{\hphantom{$-$}}
475: %\newcommand{\cc}[1]{\multicolumn{1}{c}{#1}}
476: %\renewcommand{\tabcolsep}{2pc} % enlarge column spacing
477: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2} % enlarge line spacing
478: \vspace{5pt}
479: \hspace{55pt}
480: \begin{tabular}{c|c}
481: \hline
482: Isotope & $E_{fi}$, MeV/fission \\
483: \hline
484: $^{235}$U & 201.92 $\pm$ 0.46 \\
485: $^{238}$U & 205.52 $\pm$ 0.96 \\
486: $^{239}$Pu & 209.99 $\pm$ 0.60 \\
487: $^{241}$Pu & 213.60 $\pm$ 0.65 \\
488: \hline
489: \end{tabular}
490: \end{table}
491:
492: The total thermal energy $E_f = \sum \alpha_i E_{fi}$ and the contributions of fissile isotopes to the total number of fission
493: events within the operating period of a PWR reactor are given in Fig. 4 versus the time of reactor operation. At the midpoint of
494: the operating period, we have $E_f = 205.3$ MeV/fission. The errors in the values $E_f$ are estimated at 0.6 MeV, which
495: corresponds to about 0.3\%. They include both the errors in $E_{tot}$, $\langle E_{\nu}\rangle$, $\Delta E_{\beta \gamma}$,
496: and $E_{nc}$ and the errors in $\alpha_i$. It is assumed that the latter are 5\% (relative errors). The increase in $E_f$ over
497: the segment from 0.5 d after the start-up to the end of the operating period is 3.75 MeV. This increase is caused by three
498: reasons: the growth of the energy $E_{nc}$ released in neutron capture, a decrease in the fraction of $^{235}$U and an
499: increase in the contributions of $^{239}$Pu and $^{241}$Pu in the process of reactor operation, and the “start-up effect”
500: that is associated with the growth of the beta- and gamma-radiation energy and which is the most sizable within the first week
501: after the start-up (see Fig. 4).
502:
503: \section {CONCLUDING COMMENTS}
504:
505: The energy $E_f$, which relates the number of fission events occurring in a reactor \ to \ its \ thermal \ power, \ has \ been \
506: calculated \ with \ an \ error \ of $\delta E_f/E_f \approx 3 \times 10^{-3}$. The high precision of the calculation of this energy
507: has been achieved owing to the possibility of finding its main component $E_{tot}$ with a relative error as small as about
508: $5\cdot 10^{-4}$. The three other components, $\langle E_{\nu} \rangle$, $\Delta E_{\beta \gamma}$, and $E_{nc}$,
509: have been computed to a poorer precision, but they are relatively small, not exceeding 5\% of $E_f$ .
510:
511: The energy $E_f$ increases throughout the operating period. At a constant thermal power, the number of fission events in the
512: reactor decreases from the beginning to the end of the operating period.
513:
514: We note that all of the components appearing in expression (3) for the energy $E_f$, with the exception of $E_{nc}$, are
515: characteristics of the fission of the nuclei being considered, so that their calculation is based on nuclear-physics data $-$ in
516: particular, data associated with the physics of fission.
517:
518: The special features of a reactor manifest themselves in the following:
519: \begin{itemize}
520: \item Use is made of the chain-reacting condition, which implies that one of the fission neutrons from the preceding generation
521: induces one new fission process in the next generation.
522: \item Numerical data on the fission branching fractions $\alpha_i$ and on their time dependence are employed.
523: \item The term $E_{nc}$ is calculated with the aid of data on the balance of neutron absorption in a reactor.
524: \end{itemize}
525:
526: As a typical example, we have presented results (see Fig. 4) concerning a standard operating period of PWR reactors, which
527: are widely used in Europe, the United States of America, and Japan. However, an actual operating period of a PWR reactor may
528: differ from a standard one significantly. There also exist other high-power reactors at which neutrino investigations are being
529: presently performed or are planned. These reactors differ from their PWR counterparts by the duration of the operating period,
530: the enrichment of the nuclear fuel used, and some other special features. In all such cases, the method developed in the present
531: study and the results obtained here can be used in neutrino investigations to perform a quantitative analysis of the relationship
532: between the level of power and the rate of the chain reaction in the reactor core.
533:
534: For the first time, thermal fission energies were calculated more than 30 years ago [14]. Later on, a new calculation was
535: performed [15] in connection with neutrino investigations at the Rovno atomic power plant. In the present study, we have
536: employed the most recent data concerning the issue being considered and, for the first time, have traced the dynamics
537: of thermal fission energy throughout the reactor operating period.
538:
539: \section*{Acknowledgments}
540:
541: We are grateful to M.S. Yudkevich, V.D. Sidorenko, and S.N. Bolshagov for consultations on problems in the physics
542: of nuclear reactors.
543:
544: This work is supported by the Russian Foundation of Basic Research (project no. 03-02-16055) and was also funded with
545: a grant in support of leading scientific schools.
546:
547: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
548: \bibitem {Koz}Yu. Kozlov et al., Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl. ) {\bf 87}, 514 (2000).
549: \bibitem {Be} A.G. Beda, E.V. Demidova, A.S. Starostin, and M.B. Voloshin, Yad. Fiz. {\bf 61}, 72 (1998) [Phys. At.
550: Nucl. {\bf 61}, 66 (1998)].
551: \bibitem {Ap}M. Appolonio et al. (CHOOZ Collab., Phys. Lett. B {\bf 420}, 397 (1998); {\bf 466}, 415 (1999).
552: \bibitem {Kam} KamLAND Collab., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 021802 (2003).
553: \bibitem {Wo}H.T. Wong and J. Li arXiv: hep-ex/0201001.
554: \bibitem {Scho}S. Schoenert, T. Lassere, and L. Oberauer, hep-ex/0203013; Astropart. Phys., {\bf 18}, 565 (2003).
555: \bibitem {De}A.V. Derbin, Fiz.@ Elem. Chastits At Yadra {\bf 32}, 739 (2001); \\ L.A. Mikaelyan, Yad. Fiz. {\bf 65},
556: 1206 (2002) [Phys. At. Nucl. {\bf 65}, 1173 (2002)].
557: \bibitem {Au} G. Audi and A.H. Wapstra, Nucl. Phys. A {\bf 595}, 409 (1995).
558: \bibitem {En} T.R. England and B.F. Rider, LA-UR-94 3106, ENDF-349, LANL (Los Alamoos, 1994).
559: \bibitem {Ab} L.P. Abagyan et al., Vopr. At. Nauki Tekh., Ser.: Fiz. At. Reaktorov {\bf 3}, 50 (2001).
560: \bibitem {Sch} K. Schreckenbach et al., Phys. Lett. B {\bf 160}, 325 (1985); A. Hahn et al., Phys. Lett. B {\bf 218},
561: 385 (1989).
562: \bibitem {Ko} V.I. Kopeikin, L.A. Mikaelyan, and V.V. Sinev, Yad. Fiz. {\bf 64}, 914 (2001) [Phys. At. Nucl. {\bf 64},
563: 849 (2001)].
564: \bibitem {Kop} V.I. Kopeikin, L.A. Mikaelyan, and V.V. Sinev, Yad. Fiz. {\bf 60}, 230 (1997) [Phys. At. Nucl. {\bf 60},
565: 172 (1997)].
566: \bibitem {Ja} M.F. James, J. Nucl. Energy {\bf 23}, 517 (1969).
567: \bibitem {Kopei} V.I. Kopeikin, Preprint IAE-4305/2 (Kurchatov \ Institute \ of \ Atomic \ Energy, Moscow, 1986).
568: \end{thebibliography}
569: \end{document}
570: