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 Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
August 24–27, 2026
Dallas, TX|Hilton Anatole
Latest Magazine Issues
Jun 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
July 2026
Nuclear Technology
June 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
May 2026
Latest News
North American construction is back—smaller and faster—at OPG’s Darlington
“The nuclear renaissance is real here,” said Ontario Power Generation’s Subo Sinnathamby on May 8, one year to the day after OPG secured a final investment decision to build the first of four planned BWRX-300 reactors at its Darlington nuclear power plant, and shortly after the new reactor’s foundation was lifted into place. “We got our license to construct in April and our [final investment decision] in May, and we’ve been off to the races since.”
Gang Li
Nuclear Technology | Volume 189 | Number 1 | January 2015 | Pages 11-29
Technical Paper | Fission Reactors | doi.org/10.13182/NT13-115
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The purpose of this investigation is to design a nonlinear pressurized water reactor (PWR) core load-following control system for regulating the core power level and axial power difference and to analyze the global stability of the system. In modeling a two-point–based nonlinear PWR core without boron, the power rod and axial offset (AO) rod are considered. The two points are the bottom half and top half of the core. When the power rod and AO rod are in the same point (case 1), the power rod is an input, and the core power level is an output. When the power rod and AO rod in the core are not in the same point (case 2), the power rod and the AO rod are two inputs, and the core power level and axial power difference are two outputs. For each case, linearized models of the core at five power levels are chosen as local models of the core to substitute for the nonlinear core model over the global range of the power level. For case 1, proportional integral derivative (PID) control is utilized to design a controller of every local model as a local controller of the nonlinear core. For case 2, inverse Nyquist array control with the linear matrix inequalities method and PID control are adopted to devise a decoupling compensator and a dynamic controller for every local model, and their combination is a local controller of the nonlinear core. Based on the local models and local controllers of each case, the idea of flexibility control is used to design a decent controller of the nonlinear core at a random power level. A nonlinear core model and a flexibility controller at a random power level compose a core load-following control subsystem. The combination of core load-following control subsystems at all power levels is the core load-following control system for every case. Two global stability theorems are deduced to show that the core load-following control systems for the two cases are globally asymptotically stable within the whole range of the power level. Finally, the core load-following control system for each case is simulated, and the simulation results show that the control system is effective.