ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Jan 2026
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
February 2026
Nuclear Technology
January 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
November 2025
Latest News
ORNL to partner with Type One, UTK on fusion facility
Yesterday, Oak Ridge National Laboratory announced that it is in the process of partnering with Type One Energy and the University of Tennessee–Knoxville. That partnership will have one primary goal: to establish a high-heat flux facility (HHF) at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Bull Run Energy Complex in Clinton, Tenn.
Rui Hu, Mujid S. Kazimi
Nuclear Technology | Volume 177 | Number 1 | January 2012 | Pages 8-28
Technical Paper | Fission Reactors | doi.org/10.13182/NT12-A13324
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The TRACE/PARCS code was applied in this work to examine the validity of the coupled three-dimensional thermal-hydraulics and neutronics system analysis codes for boiling water reactor stability analysis. The evaluation was performed against the Ringhals-1 stability tests and compared with the frequency domain analysis using the code STAB. A comprehensive assessment of modeling choices for the TRACE stability analysis has been made, including effects of time-space discretization and numerical schemes, thermal-hydraulics channel grouping, neutronics modeling, and control system modeling. It was found that with careful control of numerical diffusion, the predictions from TRACE agree reasonably well with the Ringhals-1 test results and the predictions from STAB. The benchmark results of both codes against the Ringhals stability test are found to be at the same level of accuracy. The biases for the predicted global decay ratio are [approximately]0.07 in TRACE results and -0.04 in STAB results. However, the standard deviations of their decay ratios are both large, [approximately]0.1, indicating large uncertainties in both analyses. The uncertainties in both modeling approaches are identified. Although the TRACE code uses more sophisticated neutronics and thermal-hydraulics models, the modeling uncertainty is not less than that of the STAB code.