neutronics analysis of hylife-ii blanket for fissile fuel breeding in an inertial fusion energy...

Neutronics analysis of HYLIFE-II blanketfor fissile fuel breeding in an inertial

fusion energy reactor

Sumer Sahina,*, Senay Yalcınb, Hacı Mehmet Sahina,Mustafa Ubeylia

aGazi Universitesi, Teknik Egitim Fakultesi, Besevler, Ankara, TurkeybBahcesehir Universitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakultesi, I

.stanbul, Turkey

Received 12 August 2002; accepted 2 October 2002

Abstract

A protective, 60 cm thick flowing liquid wall coolant is investigated as energy carrier, and

fusile and fissile breeder medium in an inertial fusion energy (IFE) reactor. Flibe as the mainconstituent is mixed with increased mole-fractions of heavy metal salt (ThF4 and UF4) startingwith 2 mol% up to 12 mol%. For a plant operation period of 30 years, radiation damage

values were found as DPA=�65 for 2 mol% heavy metal in the coolant, and remain practi-cally constant with increasing heavy metal fraction, well below the presumable limit ofDPA=100. Helium production values are calculated as �270 appm for 2 mol% heavy metalfraction, also being far below the limit value of 500 appm and remain at the same level with

increasing heavy metal fraction. Such a flowing protective liquid wall extents the lifetime ofthe rigid first wall structure to a plant lifetime of 30 years. Fissionable metal salt in the flowingliquid enables one to breed high quality fissile fuel for external reactors by a self-sustaining

tritium breeding for the fusion plant and increases plant power output.# 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Research efforts on fusion energy production are conducted on two mean lines,namely magnetic fusion energy (MFE) and inertial fusion energy (IFE). One of themajor design concepts of an IFE reactor is known as HYLIFE-II, a molten salt

Annals of Nuclear Energy 30 (2003) 669–683

www.elsevier.com/locate/anucene

0306-4549/03/$ - see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

PI I : S0306-4549(02 )00109 -3

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-312-2124304; fax: +90-312-2120059.

E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Sahin).

http://www.sciencedirect.com



http://www.elsevier.com/locate/anucene/a4.3d

mailto:[email protected]

inertial fusion energy power plant where heavy ion beams are focused onto a targetto initiate micro-explosions with a frequency of �6 Hz. In HYLIFE-II, a thickmolten salt layer (Flibe=Li2BeF4) is injected between the reaction chamber wallsand the explosions. Molten salt coolant eliminates the fire hazard and leads to alower tritium inventory than lithium coolant. Detailed information about HYLIFE-IIcan be found in related literature, and hence not repeated here (House, 1992, 1994;Moir, 1992; Moir et al., 1991, 1994).

The market penetration of a fusion reactor will probably be in the far future,probably later than 2050 even toward 2100. On the other hand, the combination of afusion and fission reactor may have realistic chances for a relatively earlier intro-duction of fusion power plants for electricity production. In previous work, thehybrid version of two major design concepts of MFE reactors, namely the hybridPROMETHEUS reactor (Yapıcı et al., 2002) and the hybrid ARIES-RS reactor(Sahin et al., 2002) were studied. In the present work, the fusion–fission (hybrid)version of the HYLIFE-II as one of the major design concepts of an IFE reactor willbe investigated.

2. Problem description

In fusion blankets, the damage mechanisms for structural materials will be dis-placements of the atoms from their lattice sites as a result of collisions with highlyenergetic fusion neutrons and gas production in the metallic lattice resulting fromdiverse nuclear reactions, mainly through (n,p) and (n,a) and to some extentthrough (n,d) and (n,t) reactions. The hydrogen isotopes will diffuse out of themetallic lattice under high operation temperatures, but a-particle’s will remain inmetal and generate helium gas bubbles. These reactions will limit the lifetime of thefirst wall to few years. The highest material damage will occur in the first wall as itwill be exposed to the highest neutron, gamma ray and charged particle currents,which are produced in the fusion chamber. In HYLIFE-II concept, a verticallyflowing liquid zone has been used to protect the first wall from a direct exposure tothe fusion reaction products and to extend the lifetime of the first wall to theexpected lifetime of the fusion reactor, namely to 30 years. The same idea was ori-ginally suggested by Moir to provide protection for the rigid reactor structure, notonly for IFE reactors, but also MFE reactors (Moir, 1987, 1995, 1997). Anadvanced design concept with a protective flowing liquid wall has been developedwithin the framework of the APEX-project (Abdou et al., 1999a,b, 2001).

In previous work, neutronic calculations have been carried out for the pure fusionversion of the HYLIFE-II blanket, both for IFE (Sahin et al., 1994a, 1996) andMFE (Sahin et al., 1997, 1998) applications. The study for IFE application hasshown that a vertically flowing liquid Flibe layer with thickness of �60 cm is neededto keep the material damage at acceptable levels in order to eliminate a replacement ofthe chamber wall over the entire plant lifetime of �30 years and to allow shallowburial of the structural materials after the decommissioning of the power plant (Sahinet al., 1994a). The same Flibe thickness allows also self-sufficient tritium breeding.

670 S. Sahin et al. / Annals of Nuclear Energy 30 (2003) 669–683

In the present study, the flowing liquid zone will be composed of a mixture ofFlibe and fissionable heavy metal salt for the purpose of both fusile and fissile fuelbreeding. Material damage criteria displacement per atom (DPA) <100 (Smith etal., 1984; Moir et al., 1994) and He <500 parts per million by atom (appm) (Blink etal., 1985; Perlado et al., 1995) after 30 years of operation, sufficient tritium breeding(TBR > 1.05), energy deposition and energy deposition ratio in the coolant areevaluated.

3. Blanket geometry

Fig. 1 shows the neutronic calculation model of the blanket, adapted in this studyfrom House (1994) and Moir et al. (1994), where detailed description of the reactoris presented, and hence not repeated here.

In this model, the blanket consists of two main parts:

� A rigid blanket region in a sandwich structure: It starts with the first wallR=300 cm and contains an important coolant mass. It serves primarily asthermal shielding. With an outer radius R=3729.6 mm, the rigid part has atotal thickness of �73 cm beyond the fusion chamber.

� A liquid zone inside the fusion reaction chamber for first-wall protection: Itstarts by R=50 cm, with a thickness of the flowing liquid zone by DR=60cm, found as an optimal value for the pure Flibe case in (Sahin et al., 1996). Inthe present work, as two alternative options, ThF4 and UF4 have been addedto Flibe for the purpose of fissile fuel breeding. The molecular fraction of theheavy metal salt is gradually increased from 2 up to 12% in the coolant.

Fig. 1. Calculation model of the HYLIFE II blanket. (Dimensions in mm, not to scale.)

S. Sahin et al. / Annals of Nuclear Energy 30 (2003) 669–683 671

Steel structures are made of SS-304 steel in order to satisfy the 10CFR61 regu-lations (NRC, 1982) for a C-class nuclear waste disposal after decommissioning(Sahin et al., 1994a,b, 1996, 1998).

The effects of neutron spectral shifting in the highly compressed (D,T) targetmaterial has been considered by assuming that about 30% of the fusion fuel isburned at the internal layers of the target which is assumed to have an areal densityof �*�R=3 g/cm2 (Duderstadt and Moses, 1982).

For simplicity, the calculations are conducted in one-dimensional spherical geo-metry. This is an acceptable geometric simulation for the objectives of this paper.The liquid zone for our calculations is assumed to have no void.

4. Numerical calculations

Neutron transport calculations are conducted with the help of SCALE4.3 SYS-TEM by solving the Boltzmann transport equation with code XSDRNPM (Greeneet al., 1997a) in S8-P3 approximation with Gaussian quadratures (Sahin, 1991) usingthe 238 groups library, derived from ENDF/B-V (Jordan and Bowman, 1997). Theresonance calculations in the fissionable fuel element cell are performed with

� BONAMI (Greene, 1997) for unresolved resonances and� NITAWL-II (Greene et al., 1997b) for resolved resonances.

CSAS control module (Landers and Petrie, 1997) is used to produce the resonanceself-shielded weighted cross-sections for XSDRNPM.

The numerical output of XSDRNPM is processed with XSCALC (Yapıcı, 2001)to evaluate following reactor data:

1. Tritium breeding in the blanket.2. Fissile fuel breeding in the blanket.3. Fusion energy deposition in the coolant.4. Material damage: The main source for material damage in fusion reactor

structure will be displacement per atom and helium gas production.(Smith et al., 1984; Moir et al., 1994) suggest a DPA value of <100 and(Blink et al., 1985; Perlado et al., 1995) suggest a damage limit of He <500appm.

Calculations are conducted for 2.857 GW fusion power, corresponding to1.013*1021 (D,T) fusion neutrons/s for the sake of a consistent comparison withprevious work (Sahin et al., 1996), where Flibe without a heavy metal salt contentwas used as flowing protective liquid wall, tritium breeder and coolant.

The cited parameters above are evaluated as space-dependent or volume-integratedreaction rates using the corresponding cross-sections and blanket neutron spectrum.Hence, the latter has paramount importance. Figs. 2 and 3 show the neutron spectrain the selected regions of the blanket with ThF4 and UF4 content, respectively. One


can observe easily the softening of the neutron spectrum by deep penetration infollowing the indicated positions in Fig. 1. While the primary fusion neutronsdominate on the left side of the flowing liquid zone (position in Figs. 2 and 3),secondary neutrons (collided neutrons+fission neutrons) begin to dominate bydeeper penetration into the liquid zone. Neutron attenuation throughout the liquidzone reaches six to seven orders of magnitude at intermediate and high energies.

Fig. 2. Blanket neutron spectrum at selected locations (with ThF4 in the flowing liquid wall) On the

left side of the flowing liquid wall; in the middle of the flowing liquid wall; on the right side of the

flowing liquid wall; in the first wall; leakage spectrum —2% ThF4 ; -.-12% ThF4.


This strong neutron flux reduction in the liquid eliminates a replacement of the firstwall and extents its life to plant life time of �30 years. The increase of heavy metalalong with the decrease of lithium has compensating effects on neutron absorptionwith very minor effects on the spectrum, keeping the latter practically unchanged forthe investigated coolant compositions. Resonance depressions in neutron fluxes forlower eV energies are clearly noticeable in the blanket with UF4 (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Blanket neutron spectrum at selected locations (with UF4 in the flowing liquid wall; legend as

Fig. 2). —2% UF4 ; -.-.- 12% UF4.


4.1. Tritium breeding in the blanket

Fig. 4 depicts the TBR values and the gross tritium breeding per year in theoverall blanket as a function of the heavy metal fraction in the liquid protective wall.Tritium breeding decreases with the increase of the heavy metal fraction, as obvious.However, self-sufficient tritium breeding (TBR > 1.05) is still observed for theinvestigated range of molten salt mixtures in the flowing liquid wall, except with12% ThF4 case, where TBR drops to 1.03. On the right ordinate, one can read thegross tritium production for 1 full power year (FPY). The sacrifice on gross tritiumproduction between 2 and 12 mol% heavy metal content becomes �8 and �12%for UF4 and ThF4, respectively. It is definitely lower than the fissile fuel gained,calculated in Section 4.2. A self-sufficient tritium breeding for the fusion driver canbe maintained successfully along with fissile fuel production for utilization in externalfission reactors. On the other hand, excess tritium gain for external fusion reactors isreduced significantly with the introduction of heavy metal into the coolant.

Fig. 4 further shows tritium production ratio in 6Li (T6) and in 7Li (T7). The latterhas an approximately constant value (�0.12 to �0.13) for all investigated cases,making �10–12% of total tritium production. Almost all of the tritium is producedin the flowing liquid wall (96–99%) so that Flibe regions beyond the first wall actpractically as neutron shield and produce only minor quantities of tritium (�1 to�4%).

Fig. 4. Tritium production in the blanket. — TBR total; - - - - T6; -.-.- T7; : with ThF4 in the flowing

liquid wall; : with UF4 in the flowing liquid wall.


4.2. Fission power production

The fissionable heavy metal component in the flowing liquid wall undergoesnuclear fission. The integral fission reaction in the blanket per fusion source neutronis depicted in Fig. 5. Although the fission is in a relatively modest level, energyrelease per fission is considerably higher than per fusion event. Hence, there is moreor less an important contribution of the fission energy release to total plant powerproduction depending on heavy metal content in the coolant.

Fig. 6 depicts the main components of the volumetric neutron heat release densityin the flowing liquid wall in W/g coolant mass, namely in heavy metal and inlithium. All of them have an exponentially decreasing character, as expected for anexternal source driven blanket. Most of the volumetric nuclear heat is produced inthe first �20 cm of the liquid region. There is a very sharp heat peak on the left sideof the liquid wall for > 4 mol% UF4 content.

In addition to the volumetric neutron heating, the internal regions of the liquidwall are also directly exposed to charged particles (a’s as reaction products andunburned fuel) X-rays, Bremsstrahlung and debris from the target, which all causean intense heat flux at the internal wall surface. Hence, the heat peak on the left sideis much sharper than in Fig. 6. Excessive heat flux at the internal surface wouldincrease the local wall temperature dramatically, which would be intolerable forholding the vacuum conditions in the fusion chamber. Local temperature rise can becontrolled with a fast flowing internal layer (Abdou et al., 1999a,b, 2001). On theother hand, a global high temperature of the liquid under consideration of vaporpressure limits is required for a high plant thermodynamic efficiency. This can be

Fig. 5. Fission reaction rate in flowing liquid wall versus heavy metal content (per incident fusion neu-

tron) ThF4, UF4.


accomplished with relatively longer exposing time of the bulk of the liquid region toneutron flux with a slow velocity. Also reasonable pumping power requirementsdictate slow coolant velocity for the main liquid mass (Abdou et al., 1999a,b, 2001).

Fig. 7 shows the energy absorption ratio in flowing liquid coolant, which can alsobe called blanket energy multiplication factor. It remains practically unaffected withThF4 content and increases slowly with increased UF4 content. This means that

Fig. 6. Components of the nuclear power density in the liquid flowing wall versus radial distance.

Fission heat density in the liquid flowing wall with 12% UF4 content. Fission heat density in the liquid

flowing wall with 2% UF4 content. Fission heat density in the liquid flowing wall with 12% ThF4 con-

tent. Fission heat density in the liquid flowing wall with 2% ThF4 content. Heat release density in

lithium in the liquid flowing wall with 12% UF4 content. Heat release density in lithium in the liquid

flowing wall with 2% UF4 content. Heat release density in lithium in the liquid flowing wall with 12%

ThF4 content. Heat release density in lithium in the liquid flowing wall with 2% ThF4 content.


contribution on nuclear heat production in ThF4 and lithium are fairly comparableso that a gradual replacement of lithium by ThF4 does not vary the gross plantpower. On the other hand nuclear heat production in UF4 is higher than in lithium,causing power increase with additional UF4.

4.3. Fissile fuel breeding

Fissile fuel breeding in the liquid wall is plotted in Fig. 8. It increases almost lin-early along with the heavy metal fraction. In the coolant, high quality nuclear fuelproduced in form of 233U or 239Pu. We remember that the LWRs are charged withlow enriched fuel (�3–4%) and the discharged spent fuel still contains �2% fissilefuel. Under this considerations, fuel production values in Fig. 8 can be used to pre-pare MOX fuel LWR-fuel for external fission reactors, equivalent to > 50-fold oftheir weight.

4.4. Displacement per atom in the first wall

At present there is no consensus on a DPA limit backed up by experimental datadue to the lack of an intense fusion neutron source at present. Earlier work hasassumed higher limits for fusion reactors, namely DPA=300–1000 (Duderstadt andMoses, 1982). (Blink et al., 1985; Perlado et al., 1995) suggested a lower damage limitas DPA=165. Technologically admissible damage limit for DPA can be significantly

Fig. 7. Energy absorption ratio in flowing liquid wall versus heavy metal content (per incident fusion

neutron) ThF4, UF4.


higher than those values. In the present work, a very conservative limit ofDPA=100 is assumed.

Fig. 9 shows the DPA values after a plant operation of 30 full power years (FPY)as a function of the heavy metal fraction in the liquid protective wall. Damagevalues start by DPA=�65 for 2 mol% heavy metal, well below the presumablelimit and remains practically constant with increasing heavy metal fraction, as the

Fig. 8. Fissile fuel breeding in flowing liquid wall per incident fusion neutron versus heavy metal content.232Th(n,g)233U; 238U(n,g)239Pu.


neutron leakage spectrum out of the liquid zone remains nearly unchanged, seecurve , Figs. 2 and 3. For the same geometry and without a heavy metal compo-nent in the flowing liquid wall, a DPA=54 was evaluated in previous work (Sahin etal., 1996), using a different data set with 30 energy groups, called CLAW-IV (Al-Kusayer et al., 1988). This is an excellent agreement between two independentstudies with totally different numerical tools in evaluating the atomic displacementin steel. Heavy metal in molten salt will have very minor effects with respect toatomic displacement in fusion reactor structures.

4.5. Helium production in the first wall

Fig. 10 shows the helium production values after a plant operation of 30 fullpower years (FPY) as a function of the heavy metal fraction in the liquid protectivewall. Helium production values start by �270 appm for 2 mol% heavy metal, anddecreases very slowly with increasing heavy metal fraction, for the same reasons asin DPA case, outlined in chapter 4.1. Material damage due to the gas productionremains also well below limit values, reported in the related literature (Blink et al.,1985; Perlado et al., 1995). In previous work, for the same geometry and without aheavy metal component in the flowing liquid wall, helium production �500 wasevaluated (Sahin et al., 1996). Helium production cross sections in the newly eval-uated SCALE system module from ENDF/V result with lower values than those ofthe older CLAW-IV based on ENDF/IV.

Fig. 9. DPA in the first wall after 30 FPY plant operation versus heavy metal content ThF4, UF4.


5. Conclusions and discussion

Inclusion of heavy metal enables one to breed fissile material in the HYLIFE-IIblanket. However, this will imply additional engineering problems with respect toincreased pumping power requirements and increased metallic erosion.

The apparent benefits with respect to blanket neutronic considerations out of thework can be cited as follows:

(a) A protective flowing liquid wall consisting of 60 cm thick Flibe with multiplefunctions can increase the lifetime of the rigid first wall structure to a plantlifetime of 30 years.

(b) Inclusion of heavy metal salt into the flowing liquid in form of ThF4 and UF4

has reducing effects on material damage on the first wall with respect to dis-placement per atom and helium gas production in metal lattice due to spec-trum softening and increased absorption.

(c) Liquid wall can serve as energy carrier as well as fusile and fissile breedermedium.

(d) Sacrifice on tritium breeding caused by fissile fuel breeding for external reac-tors remains within acceptable limits for a self-sustaining tritium production.

In the chamber of an IFE reactor, flowing liquid coolant will have a certain vaporpressure at high temperatures and will cause vacuum pumping problems to be mastered

Fig. 10. Helium production in the first wall after 30 FPY plant operation versus heavy metal content

ThF4, UF4.


for a regular functioning of the plant, which are extensively outlined in (Moir et al.,1991, 1994). Heavy metal in the coolant leads to the production of gaseous fissionproducts with additional problems in the same direction. However, the fission rate inthe coolant remains modest, as shown in Fig. 5, and the flowing coolant is removedcontinuously out of the reactor chamber. This gives very short residence time forgaseous fission products in the chamber and very low probability for diffusionthrough the bulk coolant mass. One can, at least qualitatively, expect only minorincrease of additional pumping requirements due to the presence of fission products.

References

Abdou, M.A. et al., 1999a. On the Exploration of Innovative Concepts for Fusion Chamber Technology:

APEX Interim Report. UCLA-ENG-99-206, University of California-Los Angeles.

Abdou, M.A., The APEX Team, 1999b. Exploring novel high power density concepts for attractive fusion

systems. Fusion Engineering and Design 45, 145.

Abdou, M.A., The APEX Team, Ying, A., et al., 2001. On the exploration of innovative concepts for

fusion chamber technology. Fusion Engineering and Design 54, 181.

Al-Kusayer, T.A., Sahin, S., Drira, A., 1988. CLAW-IV Coupled 30 Neutrons, 12 Gamma-Ray Group

Cross Sections with Retrieval Programs for Radiation Transport Calculations, Radiation Shielding

Information Center, RSIC Newsletter, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, p. 4.

Blink, A. et al., 1985. In: Essary, K.L., Lewis, K.E. (Eds.), High-Yield Lithium-Injection Fusion Energy

(HYLIFE) Reactor, UCRL-53559. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

Duderstadt, J.J., Moses, G.A., 1982. Inertial Confinement Fusion. John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Greene, N.M., 1997. BONAMI, Resonance Self-Shielding by the Bondarenko Method, NUREG/CR-

0200, Revision 5, 2, section F1, ORNL/NUREG/CSD-2/V2/R5, Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Greene, N.M., Petrie, L.M., 1997a. XSDRNPM, A One-Dimensional Discrete-Ordinates Code For

Transport Analysis, NUREG/CR-0200, Revision 5, 2, Section F3, ORNL/NUREG/CSD-2/V2/R5,

Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Greene, N.M., Petrie, L.M., Westfall, R.M., 1997b. NITAWL-II, Scale System Module For Performing

Resonance Shielding and Working Library Production, NUREG/CR-0200, Revision 5, 2, Section F2,

ORNL/NUREG/CSD-2/V2/R5, Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

House, P.A., 1992. HYLIFE-II reactor chamber mechanical design. Fusion Technology 21, 1487.

House, P.A., 1994. HYLIFE-II reactor chamber design refinements. Fusion Technology 26 (3), 1178.

Jordan, W.C., Bowman, S.M., 1997. Scale Cross-Section Libraries, NUREG/CR-0200, Revision 5, 3,

section M4, ORNL/NUREG/CSD-2/V3/R5, Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Landers, N.F., Petrie, L.M., 1997. CSAS, Control Module For Enhanced Criticality Safety Analysis

Sequences, NUREG/CR-0200, Revision 5, 1, Section C4, ORNL/NUREG/CSD-2/V1/R5, Oak Ridge

National Laboratory.

Moir, R.W., 1987. Rotating liquid blanket for a toroidal fusion reactor. Fusion Engineering and Design

5, 269.

Moir, R.W., Adamson, M.G., Bangerter, R.O. et al., 1991. HYLIFE-II Progress Report, UCID-21816,

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

Moir, R.W., 1992. HYLIFE-II inertial fusion energy power plant design. Fusion Technology 21, 1475.

Moir, R.W., Bieri, R.L., Chen, X.M. et al., 1994. HYLIFE-II: a molten-salt inertial fusion energy power

plant design-final report. Fusion Technology 25/1, 5.

Moir, R.W., 1995. The logic behind thick, liquid-walled, fusion concepts. Nuclear Engineering and Design

29, 34.

Moir, R.W., 1997. Liquid first walls for magnetic fusion energy configurations. Nuclear Fusion 37, 557.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1982. Code of Federal Regulations, Licensing Requirements for Land

Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Title 10, Part 61, Washington DC.


Perlado, M., Guinan, M.W., Abe, K., 1995. Radiation Damage in Structural Materials, Energy from

Inertial Fusion. International Atomic Energy Agency, 272, Vienna.

Smith, D.L. et al., 1984. Blanket Comparison and Selection Study-Final Report, ANL/FPP-84-1,

Argonne National Laboratory.

Sahin, S., 1991. Radiation Shielding Calculations For Fast Reactors (in Turkish), Gazi University, Pub-

lication No. 169, Faculty of Science and Literature, Publication No. 22, Ankara, Turkey.

Sahin, S., Moir, R.W., Lee, J.D., Unalan, S., 1994a. Neutronic investigation of IFE blankets for HYLFE-II

and MHD applications. Fusion Technology 25 (4), 388.

Sahin, S., Moir, R., Unalan, S., 1994b. Neutronic investigation of a power plant using peaceful nuclear

explosives. Fusion Technology 26, 1311.

Sahin, S., Moir, R. W., Sahinaslan, A., Sahin, H.M., (1996). Radiation damage in liquid-protected first

wall materials for IFE-reactors, Fusion Technology, 30(3), Part 2A, 1027.

Sahin, S., Sahinaslan, A., Kaya, M., Yılmaz, S., (1997). Radiation damage in liquid-protected first-wall

materials for MFE-reactors. Transactions of the American Nuclear Society 1997 Winter Meeting, 77,

158 (Albuquerque 16–20 November 1997).

Sahin, S., Sahinaslan, A., Kaya, M., 1998. Neutronic calculations for a magnetic fusion energy reactor

with liquid protection for the first-wall. Fusion Technology 34 (2), 95.

Sahin, S., Yalcın, S., Sahin, H.M., Ubeyli, M., 2002. Neutronic investigation of a hybrid version of the

ARIES-RS fusion reactor. Annals of Nuclear Energy 30, 245.

Yapıcı, H., 2001. XSCALC for Interfacing Output of XSDRN to Calculate Integral Neutronic Data,

Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.

Yapıcı, H., Ubeyli, M., Yalcın, S., 2002. Neutronic analysis of prometheus reactor fuelled with various

compounds of thorium and uranium. Annals of Nuclear Energy 29, 1871.


neutronics analysis of hylife-ii blanket for fissile fuel breeding in an inertial fusion energy...

Documents