Pressure-tube heavy water reactors (PT-HWR) are advantageous for implementing plutonium/thorium fuels because of their online refuelling capability and high neutron economy. The use of annular seed–blanket core concepts in a PT-HWR where higher fissile-content seed fuel bundles are physically separate from lower fissile-content blanket bundles allows more flexibility in fuel management. The bundle concept modeled was a 35-element fuel bundle made with a mixture of reactor grade PuO2 (~67 wt% fissile) and ThO2, with a central zirconia rod to reduce coolant void reactivity. Eight annular heterogeneous seed-blanket core concepts with plutonium/thorium-based fuels in a 700 MWe-class PT-HWR were analyzed, using a once-through thorium cycle. Blanket region(s) represented approximately 50% of the total fuel volume. There were 1–4 different blanket regions and 1–4 different seed regions. The seed fuel tested was 3 wt% or 4 wt% PuO2, whereas the blanket fuel tested was 1 wt% or 2 wt% PuO2, mixed with ThO2. For comparison, 2 homogeneous reactor cores with either 3 wt% PuO2 fuel or 4 wt% PuO2 fuel were also analyzed. For a number of the core concepts investigated, the fissile utilization was up to 30% higher than what is achieved in a PT-HWR using natural uranium fuel bundles. It was also found among the various core concepts that up to 67% of the Pu was consumed, up to 43% of the energy was produced from thorium, and up to 363 kg/year of fissile uranium (mainly 233U) was produced in the discharged fuel.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Blair Patrick Bromley (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: