Difference between revisions of "TF NEUP 2011"
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/history/HFBR_main.asp | http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/history/HFBR_main.asp | ||
| − | a 40 MW reactor at Brookhaven's High Flux Beam Reactor (HBFR) produced a neutron flux of <math>1.5 \times 10^{15} \frac{n /cm^2}{s}</math> for experiments. The neutron flux was a maximum outside the core because the neutrons were directed tangentially to the core instead of radially. Let' assume this flux is an upper limit for a detector to measure neutron fluxes in a reactor core. The pulse width of a regular GEM detector is <math>50 \times 10^{-9}</math> sec. Because of the high gain a signal may be observed over a surface area of 3 cm^2 (10 cm by 300 \times 10^{-3} cm ). A GEM detector with this active area would only be able to count neutron fluxes of <math>1 \times 10^{7} \frac{n /cm^2}{s}</math> if the detector efficiency was 100 %. The pulse width of a standard ionization chamber is on the order of 300 nsec, so a standard GEm detector would only be able to have a factor of 6 higher rate than a typical ionization/fission chamber. | + | a 40 MW reactor at Brookhaven's High Flux Beam Reactor (HBFR) produced a neutron flux of <math>1.5 \times 10^{15} \frac{n /cm^2}{s}</math> for experiments. The neutron flux was a maximum outside the core because the neutrons were directed tangentially to the core instead of radially. |
| + | |||
| + | 1e11 to 1e12 neutrons per cm^2 per second may be more typical | ||
| + | |||
| + | Let's assume this flux is an upper limit for a detector to measure neutron fluxes in a reactor core. The pulse width of a regular GEM detector is <math>50 \times 10^{-9}</math> sec. Because of the high gain a signal may be observed over a surface area of 3 cm^2 (10 cm by 300 \times 10^{-3} cm ). A GEM detector with this active area would only be able to count neutron fluxes of <math>1 \times 10^{7} \frac{n /cm^2}{s}</math> if the detector efficiency was 100 %. A detector efficiency of 10^{-5} would be able to see rates of 10^{11}. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | The pulse width of a standard ionization chamber is on the order of 300 nsec, so a standard GEm detector would only be able to have a factor of 6 higher rate than a typical ionization/fission chamber. | ||
=Path to work accomplishments= | =Path to work accomplishments= | ||
Revision as of 04:20, 14 October 2011
Project Summary
We propose to develop a gaseous detector sensitive to fast (100 keV - 100 MeV) neutrons which may be used to monitor the neutron flux in nuclear reactors.
Neutron fluxes in reactors
according to http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/history/HFBR_main.asp
a 40 MW reactor at Brookhaven's High Flux Beam Reactor (HBFR) produced a neutron flux of for experiments. The neutron flux was a maximum outside the core because the neutrons were directed tangentially to the core instead of radially.
1e11 to 1e12 neutrons per cm^2 per second may be more typical
Let's assume this flux is an upper limit for a detector to measure neutron fluxes in a reactor core. The pulse width of a regular GEM detector is sec. Because of the high gain a signal may be observed over a surface area of 3 cm^2 (10 cm by 300 \times 10^{-3} cm ). A GEM detector with this active area would only be able to count neutron fluxes of if the detector efficiency was 100 %. A detector efficiency of 10^{-5} would be able to see rates of 10^{11}.
The pulse width of a standard ionization chamber is on the order of 300 nsec, so a standard GEm detector would only be able to have a factor of 6 higher rate than a typical ionization/fission chamber.
Path to work accomplishments
Deliverables and outcomes
1.) Neutron sensitive ionization chamber (no position readout)
Time Frame
Budget
Each year
2 grad students ($50k)
2 faculty summer months ($20k)
Beam time: electron experiment which produces isotropic neutrons. Compare neutron rates seen by several know detectors to the rate from the THGEM based detector.
Bibliography
- File:NEUP Pre-app RFP.pdf
- "Fission chambers for CANDU SDS neutronic trip applications", V. Mohindrs, M. Vartolomei, and A. McDonald, 28th Annual Canadian Nuclear Society (CNS) conference, June 3-6, 2007New Brunswick, Canada Media:Virender_CANDU2007.pdf