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.”
Hangbok Choi, Myunghee Choi, Ryan Hon
Nuclear Technology | Volume 205 | Number 3 | March 2019 | Pages 486-505
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2018.1495001
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Calculations have been conducted for the KRITZ-2 (KRITZ-LWR-RESR-001/002/003) and the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) (FFTF-LMFR-RESR-001) Nuclear Energy Agency benchmark problems using the PARCS reactor simulation code with lattice parameters generated by the DRAGON reactor physics code and with the MCNP6 Monte Carlo code. The benchmark analyses examined the DRAGON cross-section library, PARCS energy group structure, DRAGON fuel assembly modeling, and nuclide self-shielding effect. For KRITZ-2, the PARCS 2-group core calculations with a DRAGON 361-group library based on ENDF/B-VII.1 reproduced the benchmark keff with a root-mean-square (rms) error of 0.19% δk. DRAGON/PARCS also predicted the fission rates within 5%. The MCNP results are consistent with the DRAGON/PARCS results but with a small underestimation when compared to the benchmark value. For FFTF, the PARCS 33-group core calculations underpredicted the benchmark keff by 0.19% δk while the MCNP calculation overpredicted the benchmark keff by 0.23% δk. The neutron spectrum distributions calculated by PARCS and MCNP are consistent with measured data. Since the energy boundary values of the measured neutron spectrum are not available, the calculated spectra could not be directly compared to the measured value. The DRAGON/PARCS solution to a numerical benchmark of a gas-cooled fast reactor (GFR), i.e., the Energy Multiplier Module, predicted the keff and assembly power with 0.46% δk and 3.7% rms error, respectively, when compared to the MCNP simulation. The benchmark calculations of the selected thermal and fast reactors have shown that DRAGON/PARCS simulates small reactor cores with good accuracy.
