GENERIC FUNDAMENTALS

REACTOR THEORY COURSE

VOLUME 2
GFRT02SG

REVISION 0

PREPARED BY
 Notice
GSE Systems, Inc. (“GSE”) has exercised great care to ensure that the information
contained in this document is accurate and current; however, no guaranty or
warranty in this regard is given or implied. Although GSE warrants that it undertakes
reasonable efforts to keep the information contained herein accurate, GSE does not
warrant the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or fitness for a particular purpose of
the information contained in those databases, or in any way endorse the individuals
described therein. The above warranty is the only warranty of any kind, either
express or implied, including warranties of merchantability or fitness for any
particular purpose, made by GSE with respect to this document. In no event shall
GSE be liable for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the information
contained therein.

The policy of GSE is to periodically improve and update documentation. Therefore,

the information in this document is subject to change without notice.

Proprietary Notice
The information disclosed herein is considered confidential and/or proprietary to
GSE. Neither this document nor any information disclosed herein shall be
reproduced or transferred in any manner, in whole or in part, or used or disclosed to
others for any purpose whatsoever, except as specifically authorized in writing by an
authorized representative of GSE. Neither this document, nor any database, data,
listings, nor other constituent elements may be downloaded, republished, or
duplicated, in whole or in part, for commercial purposes, for purposes of compiling
mailing lists or any other lists, or for any other purposes without the prior express
written permission of GSE.

This proprietary notice shall not be construed as a warranty of the information herein
contained, or as a limitation of the right of GSE Systems, Inc. to make revisions
thereto.

GSE Systems logo is a registered trademark of GSE Systems, Inc.

Title Reactor Theory Vol. 2

Number GFRT02SG

Program Generic Fundamentals

Author Eric Johnson Date 2/15/10

Approved Chuck Kelly Date 2/15/10

Author’s Supv’s
Rev Date Reason for Revision
Initials Initials

0 2/15/10 Initial Development EJJ CWK

 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS ................................................................................ 11

TERMINAL OBJECTIVE ....................................................................................... 11
ENABLING OBJECTIVES .................................................................................... 11
192004 – REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS KNOWLEDGE & ABILITIES ................ 13
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 14
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS ............................................................................. 14
MODERATOR EFFECTS ON REACTOR CONTROL .......................................... 14
Macroscopic Slowing Down Power.................................................................... 15
Moderating Ratio ............................................................................................... 15
Moderator to Fuel Ratio ..................................................................................... 15
TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENTS OF REACTIVITY ........................................... 17
Moderator Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity .............................................. 17
Fuel Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity........................................................ 28
PRESSURE COEFFICIENT OF REACTIVITY ..................................................... 50
VOID COEFFICIENT OF REACTIVITY ................................................................ 50
Moderator Density Effects on Void Coefficient .................................................. 51
POWER COEFFICIENT OF REACTIVITY ........................................................... 52
MTC and FTC Effects on Power Coefficient ...................................................... 53
REACTIVITY DEFECTS ....................................................................................... 53
Doppler Defect................................................................................................... 54
REACTIVITY BALANCE IN AN OPERATING REACTOR CORE......................... 55
Reactivity Required to Account for Reactor Heatup .......................................... 56
Reactivity Required to Account for Power Increase........................................... 57
Reactivity Required to Account for Fission Product Poisons ............................. 58
Reactivity Required to Account for Core Life ..................................................... 59
Total Reactivity Required for Reactor Operation ............................................... 59
USING BORON TO CONTROL REACTIVITY (CHEMICAL SHIM) ...................... 62
Mechanism for Reactivity Control with Chemical Shim...................................... 62
Purpose for Chemical Shim ............................................................................... 64
Changing Core Reactivity with Chemical Shim ................................................. 65
Changes In Boron Worth With Changes In Boron Concentration ...................... 65
Prepared By:
4 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Differential and Integral Boron Worth ................................................................ 65

Changes In Boron Worth With Changes In Moderator Temperature ................. 67
Changes in Boron Concentration Over Core Life .............................................. 68
SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 72
REVIEW QUESTIONS ......................................................................................... 75
REVIEW ANSWERS ............................................................................................ 82

CONTROL RODS .................................................................................................... 86

TERMINAL OBJECTIVE ....................................................................................... 86
ENABLING OBJECTIVES .................................................................................... 86
192005 – CONTROL RODS (FULL AND/OR PART LENGTH) KNOWLEDGE &
ABILITIES ............................................................................................................. 88
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 89
SELECTION OF CONTROL ROD MATERIALS ................................................... 89
Black and Grey Neutron Absorbing Materials.................................................... 89
Resonance Neutron Absorbers ......................................................................... 90
TYPES OF CONTROL RODS .............................................................................. 90
CONTROL ROD DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION .............................................. 91
Materials of Construction ................................................................................... 91
Control Rod Shapes .......................................................................................... 91
Pressurized Water Reactor Control Rods.......................................................... 91
Advantages of Using Boron Carbide in Control Rods ........................................ 94
Advantages of Using Hf and Ag-In-Cd in Control Rods ..................................... 96
EFFECT OF CONTROL RODS ON THE NEUTRON LIFE CYCLE ..................... 97
Effects on Six Factor Formula ........................................................................... 98
CONTROL ROD EFFECTIVENESS ................................................................... 100
Control Rod Worth ........................................................................................... 101
INTEGRAL AND DIFFERENTIAL CONTROL ROD WORTH ............................. 102
Differential Rod Worth ..................................................................................... 103
Integral Rod Worth .......................................................................................... 108
Integral and Differential Rod Worth Examples ................................................. 110
EFFECTS OF CORE CONDITIONS ON CONTROL ROD WORTH .................. 115
Prepared By:
5 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Moderator Temperature Effects....................................................................... 116

Neutron Absorber Effects ................................................................................ 117
Power Level Effects ......................................................................................... 118
Control Rod Effects ......................................................................................... 120
EFFECTS OF CONTROL RODS ON REACTOR OPERATIONS ...................... 124
Effects on Core Power Distribution .................................................................. 124
Control Rod Design and Operational Considerations ...................................... 127
HOT CHANNEL FACTOR AND POWER PEAKING .......................................... 136
SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 139
REVIEW QUESTIONS ....................................................................................... 143
REVIEW ANSWERS .......................................................................................... 149

FISSION PRODUCT POISONS............................................................................. 153

TERMINAL OBJECTIVE ..................................................................................... 153
ENABLING OBJECTIVES .................................................................................. 153
192006 – FISSION PRODUCT POISONS KNOWLEDGE & ABILITIES ............ 155
XENON ............................................................................................................... 157
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS ......................................................................... 157
Most Abundant Fission Product Poisons ......................................................... 157
Fission Product Poison Effect on Neutron Life Cycle ...................................... 158
Fission Product Poison Concentration............................................................. 159
Fission Product Poison Equilibrium ................................................................. 159
Other Fission Product Poisons ........................................................................ 159
Reactivity Effects of Fission Product Poisons.................................................. 160
PRODUCTION AND REMOVAL OF XENON-135 .............................................. 160
Iodine-135 Production and Removal ............................................................... 160
Equilibrium Iodine ............................................................................................ 161
Xenon-135 Production and Removal ............................................................... 161
Equilibrium Xenon ........................................................................................... 162
Equilibrium Xenon versus Reactor Power Level .............................................. 163
Time to Reach Equilibrium Xenon ................................................................... 164

Prepared By:
6 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Maintaining Constant Reactor Power During Xenon Buildup .......................... 164

Changes in Xenon Concentration with Reactor Power Level .......................... 164
XENON-135 RESPONSE TO REACTOR OPERATIONS .................................. 165
Startup From A Xenon Free Condition ............................................................ 165
Xenon-135 Response to Reactor Shutdown (Trip) .......................................... 167
Xenon-135 Response to Reactor Power Changes .......................................... 173
Xenon-135 Oscillations.................................................................................... 176
EFFECTS OF XENON ON CORE FLUX PROFILE............................................ 178
Effects of Xenon on Core Flux Due to a Control Rod Insertion ....................... 179
Effects of Xenon on Core Flux versus Core Life .............................................. 181
SAMARIUM ........................................................................................................ 181
PRODUCTION AND REMOVAL OF SAMARIUM-149 ....................................... 181
Samarium Production ...................................................................................... 182
Equilibrium Samarium ..................................................................................... 182
Samarium Removal ......................................................................................... 183
CHANGES IN SAMARIUM CONCENTRATION DURING REACTOR OPERATION
............................................................................................................................ 184
Initial Reactor Startup ...................................................................................... 184
Reactor Shutdown ........................................................................................... 185
Reactor Startup After Shutdown ...................................................................... 186
SAMARIUM OVER CORE LIFE ......................................................................... 186
EFFECTS OF SAMARIUM VERSUS EFFECTS OF XENON............................. 187
OTHER NEUTRON POISONS ........................................................................... 188
Other Fission Product Poisons ........................................................................ 188
Materials in the Core ....................................................................................... 188
SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 189
REVIEW QUESTIONS ....................................................................................... 192
REVIEW ANSWERS .......................................................................................... 203

Prepared By:
7 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4-1 Change in Density versus Change in Temperature for Water ................ 19
Figure 4-2 Boron Effect on MTC .............................................................................. 23
Figure 4-3 Change in MTC with Changing Boron Concentration ............................. 24
Figure 4-4 Effect of Fuel Temperature on Resonance Absorption Peaks ................ 29
Figure 4-5 Urnaium-238 Cross Section for Absorption Curve .................................. 31
Figure 4-6 Doppler Effect in Uranium-238 Capture Reaction................................... 32
Figure 4-7 Resonance Capture in Nucleus Vibrating at 5 eV................................... 34
Figure 4-8 UO 2 Fuel Pellet at Room and Operating Reactor Temperature.............. 37
Figure 4-9 Fuel Pellet Temperature Profile .............................................................. 41
Figure 4-10 Fuel Pellet Temperature versus Self Shielding Effect ........................... 42
Figure 4-11 Change in Magnitude of Doppler Coefficient versus Fuel Temperature 46
Figure 4-12 Total Cross Section for Plutonium-240 ................................................. 48
Figure 4-13 Value of Doppler Coefficient vs Temperature Over Core Life ............... 49
Figure 4-14 Doppler Defect versus Rated Reactor Core Power .............................. 55
Figure 4-15 Integral Boron Worth............................................................................. 66
Figure 4-16 Differential Boron Worth ....................................................................... 66
Figure 4-17 Reactivity Worth of Boron versus Moderator Temperature ................... 68
Figure 4-18 Integral Boron Worth over Core Life ..................................................... 69
Figure 5-1 Typical Rod Cluster Control Assembly ................................................... 92
Figure 5-2 Typical Control Rod Assembly................................................................ 94
Figure 5-3 Thermal and Epithermal Neutron Absorption in B 4 C Control Rods ........ 95
Figure 5-4 Neutron Absorption in Ag-In-Cd Control Rods ........................................ 96
Figure 5-5 Effect of Control Rod on Radial Flux Distribution.................................. 100
Figure 5-6 Integral Control Rod Worth ................................................................... 102
Figure 5-7 Differential Control Rod Worth .............................................................. 103
Figure 5-8 Axial Flux Variation in a Bare Homogenous Core................................. 105
Figure 5-9 Shift in Core Axial Neutron Flux due to Control Rod Insertion .............. 106
Figure 5-10 Differential Rod Worth for Banked Control Rods ................................ 107
Figure 5-11 Integral Rod Worth Curves Referenced to Bottom and Top of Core ... 108
Figure 5-12 IRW and DRW Curves for Westinghouse Plant at HZP ...................... 110
Figure 5-13 Rod Worth Curves for Example Problems .......................................... 111
Prepared By:
8 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 5-14 Rod Worth Curves from Example 3 .................................................... 114

Figure 5-15 Changes in Control Rod Worth due to Changes in Temperature ....... 116
Figure 5-16 Group Rod Worth versus Temperature over Core Life ....................... 117
Figure 5-17 Bank Control Rod Worth Changes due to Spectrum Hardening ......... 118
Figure 5-18 Shift in Radial Neutron Flux Profile over Core Life ............................. 119
Figure 5-19 Radial Thermal Neutron Flux Profile with No Control Rods ................ 120
Figure 5-20 Control Rod Shadowing Effects on Thermal Flux ............................... 122
Figure 5-21 Neutron Flux Profiles for Bare and Reflected Reactor ........................ 125
Figure 5-22 Distortion of Radial Neutron Flux in Heterogeneous Core .................. 127
Figure 5-23 Effect of Bank Overlap on Differential Rod Worth............................... 129
Figure 5-24 Effect of Bank Overlap on Integral Rod Worth .................................... 129
Figure 5-25 Rod Insertion Limits for a Westinghouse PWR ................................... 130
Figure 5-26 Upper and Lower Power Range Neutron Detector Locations ............. 131
Figure 5-27 Location of QPTR Detectors for Typical PWR Core ........................... 133
Figure 6-1 Fission Yield Curve for Uranium-235 .................................................... 157
Figure 6-2 Equilibrium Iodine-135 and Xenon-135 Concentrations vs. Neutron Flux
............................................................................................................................... 163
Figure 6-3 Time to Reach Equilibrium Xenon for Various Power Levels................ 166
Figure 6-4 Xenon-135 Reactivity After Reactor Shutdown..................................... 168
Figure 6-5 Xenon-135 Variations During Power Changes ..................................... 173
Figure 6-6 Xenon Behavior During Reactor Startup Xenon Present in Core ......... 175
Figure 6-7 Thermal Flux versus Xenon Concentration after Control Rod Insertion 180
Figure 6-8 Samarium-149 Buildup to Equilibrium................................................... 184
Figure 6-9 Behavior of Samarium-149 in a Typical Light Water Reactor ............... 186

Prepared By:
9 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 RO and SRO Importance Ratings ............................................................... 10

Table 4-1 K eff Required for Various PWR Fuel Cycles............................................. 61
Table 4-2 Macroscopic Cross Section for Absorption versus Boron Concentration . 65
Table 5-1 Properties of PWR Control Rod Materials................................................ 97
Table 5-2 Characteristics of Natural Hafnium .......................................................... 97
Table 6-1 Effects of Xenon Compared to Effects of Samarium.............................. 187

Table 1
RO and SRO
Importance Ratings

Rating Importance for Safe Operation

5 Essential
4 Very Important
3 Fairly Important
2 Of Limited Importance
1 Insignificant Importance
* or ? Indicates variability in the rating responses. The * indicates the rating
spread was very broad. ? indicates 15% of reviewers were not familiar
with the K or A.
† More than 20% of the raters indicated the level of knowledge or ability
required by an SRO is different than the level of knowledge or ability
required by an RO

Prepared By:
10 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2

REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

TERMINAL OBJECTIVE

GFRT0204.00 DESCRIBE the various reactivity coefficients associated with

the operation of a pressurized water reactor and how they are
affected by changing reactor conditions.

ENABLING OBJECTIVES

GFRT0204.01 EXPLAIN the difference between reactivity coefficients and

reactivity defects.

GFRT0204.02 EXPLAIN the conditions of overmoderation and

undermoderation and why many reactors are designed to be
operated in an under moderated condition.

GFRT0204.03 DESCRIBE the effect that a change in moderator temperature

will have on the moderator to fuel ratio.

GFRT0204.04 DESCRIBE the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity

and EXPLAIN why a negative temperature coefficient of
reactivity is desirable.

GFRT0204.05 DESCRIBE how the moderator temperature coefficient varies

with changes in the following parameters:
a. Moderator temperature
b. Core age
c. Boron concentration

GFRT0204.06 DESCRIBE the fuel temperature coefficient of reactivity and

EXPLAIN why the fuel temperature coefficient is more effective
than the moderator temperature coefficient in terminating a
rapid power rise.

GFRT0204.07 EXPLAIN the concept of Doppler broadening of resonance

absorption peaks.

GFRT0204.08 DESCRIBE the concept of self shielding and how it affects

Doppler Broadening.

Prepared By:
11 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
GFRT0204.09 DESCRIBE how the fuel temperature coefficient varies with
changes in the following parameters:
a. Moderator temperature
b. Fuel temperature
c. Core age

GFRT0204.10 LIST two nuclides that are present in reactor fuel assemblies
that have significant resonance absorption peaks.

GFRT0204.11 DESCRIBE the pressure coefficient of reactivity and EXPLAIN

why the pressure coefficient of reactivity is usually negligible in
a reactor cooled and moderated by a subcooled liquid.

GFRT0204.12 DESCRIBE the void coefficient of reactivity and the moderator

conditions under which the void coefficient of reactivity becomes
significant.

GFRT0204.13 DESCRIBE the power coefficient of reactivity and how the

power coefficient is affected by the moderator temperature
coefficient and the fuel temperature coefficient.

GFRT0204.14 DESCRIBE the term Doppler defect and its effect on core
reactivity.

GFRT0204.15 DESCRIBE the elements associated with a reactivity balance

for an operating nuclear reactor including the amount of
reactivity required to compensate for the following:
a. Reactor heatup
b. Reactor power increase
c. Fission product poison buildup
d. Core life

GFRT0204.16 EXPLAIN how boron is used to control excess reactivity in a

nuclear reactor.

GFRT0204.17 DESCRIBE how boron reactivity worth changes with the

following:
a. Boron concentration
b. Moderator temperature

GFRT0204.18 EXPLAIN the change in reactivity addition rate resulting from

changing boron concentration over core life.

Prepared By:
12 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
192004 – REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS KNOWLEDGE & ABILITIES

Associated K/A Knowledge Importance

Objective(s) RO SRO
GFRT0204.04 K1.01 Define moderator temperature coefficient 3.1 3.2
of reactivity.
GFRT0204.06 K1.02 Define fuel temperature coefficient of 3.0 3.2
GFRT0204.10 reactivity.
GFRT0204.05 K1.03 Describe the effect on the magnitude of 2.9 3.1
the temperature coefficient of reactivity
from changes in moderator temperature
and core age.
GFRT0204.07 K1.04 Explain resonance absorption. 2.4 2.4
GFRT0204.07 K1.05 Explain Doppler broadening and self 2.3* 2.4*
GFRT0204.08 shielding.
GFRT0204.05 K1.06 Describe time effects of core age, 3.1 3.1
moderator temperature, and boron
concentration on moderator temperature
coefficients.
GFRT0204.09 K1.07 Describe the effects of core age, fuel 2.9 2.9
temperature, and moderator temperature
on fuel temperature (Doppler) coefficient.
GFRT0204.06 K1.08 Describe the components of power 3.1 3.1
coefficient.
GFRT0204.17 K1.09 Compare boron reactivity worth vs. 2.8 2.9
boron concentration.
GFRT0204.17 K1.10 Compare boron reactivity worth vs. 2.9 2.9
moderator temperature.
GFRT0204.18 K1.11 Explain the change in reactivity addition 2.9 3.1
rate due to boration/dilution over core
life.
GFRT0204.01 K1.12 Explain the differences between 2.7 2.7
reactivity coefficients and reactivity
defects.
GFRT0204.13 K1.13 Explain and describe the effect of power 2.9 2.9
GFRT0204.14 defect and Doppler defect on reactivity.

Prepared By:
13 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
INTRODUCTION

Changes in the physical properties of the materials in the reactor will result in
changes in the reactivity. Reactivity coefficients are useful in quantifying the
reactivity change that will occur due to the change in a physical property such as the
temperature of the moderator or fuel. The core operating parameters of greatest
concern to the operation of a nuclear reactor are moderator temperature, fuel
temperature, and core steam void fraction. The reactivity coefficients associated
with these parameters are described below.

REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

The change in reactivity (Δρ) due to per unit change in some associated parameter
(x) is called the reactivity coefficient (α) for that parameter (x). A reactivity coefficient
is defined in general terms as:

𝛥𝜌
𝛼𝑥 =
𝛥𝑥
Where:
𝛼𝑥 = reactivity coefficient for plant parameter x
Δρ = change in reactivity (Δk/k)
Δx = change in some plant parameter
If the parameter (x) increases and positive reactivity is added, then 𝛼𝑥 is positive. If
the parameter increases and negative reactivity is added, then 𝛼𝑥 is negative.
It is important for the reactor operator to know how a change in any of the plant
parameters will affect reactor power. This knowledge allows the operator to predict
the reactor response during plant evolutions and transients that involve changes in
plant operating parameters.

MODERATOR EFFECTS ON REACTOR CONTROL

As discussed previously, a moderator possesses specific desirable characteristics.

• Large neutron scattering cross section
• Low neutron absorption cross section
• Large neutron energy loss per collision
• High atomic density

Prepared By:
14 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
With the exception of the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR), the remaining
major reactor types that are currently employed use moderating materials to reduce
fission neutron energies to the thermal range (thermal reactors). Light moderators
(composed of light nuclei, such as water) are found to be more effective than heavy
moderators because the light moderator removes more energy per collision than a
heavy moderator. Therefore, the neutrons reach thermal energy more rapidly and
are less likely to be lost through resonance absorption.

Macroscopic Slowing Down Power

As discussed previously, the ability of a given material to slow down neutrons is

referred to as the macroscopic slowing down power (MSDP) and is defined as the
product of the logarithmic energy decrement per collision (𝜉 ) times the macroscopic
scattering cross section for neutrons (ΣS ) as follows.

𝑀𝑆𝐷𝑃 = 𝜉𝛴𝑆
Moderating Ratio

Macroscopic slowing down power indicates how rapidly slowing down occurs in the
material in question, but it does not completely define the effectiveness of the
material as a moderator. An element such as boron has a high logarithmic energy
decrement and a good slowing down power, but is a poor moderator. It is a poor
moderator because of its high probability of absorbing neutrons. This effect may be
accounted for by dividing the macroscopic slowing down power by the macroscopic
absorption cross section. This relationship is called the moderating ratio (MR).

𝜉𝛴𝑆
𝑀𝑅 =
𝛴𝑎
The moderating ratio is merely the ratio of slowing down power to the macroscopic
absorption cross section. The higher the moderating ratio, the more effectively the
material performs as a moderator.

Moderator to Fuel Ratio

Another ratio, the moderator-to-fuel ratio (Nm/Nu), is very important in the discussion
of moderators. As the reactor designer increases the amount of moderator in the
core (that is, Nm/Nu increases), neutron leakage decreases. Neutron absorption in
the moderator (Σ𝑎𝑚 ) increases, causing a decrease in the thermal utilization factor.
Having insufficient moderator in the core (that is, Nm/Nu decreases) causes an
increase in slowing down time and results in a greater loss of neutrons by resonance
absorption. This also causes an increase in neutron leakage.
The effects of varying the moderator-to-fuel ratio on the thermal utilization factor and
the resonance escape probability are shown in Figure 5 (from a previous chapter).
Prepared By:
15 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

Figure 5
Effect of Over and Undermoderation on k eff
Because the moderator-to-fuel ratio affects the thermal utilization factor and the
resonance escape probability, it also affects keff . The remaining factors in the six
factor formula are also affected by the moderator-to-fuel ratio, but to a lesser extent
than f and ρ.

Overmoderation versus Undermoderation

As illustrated in Figure 5, which is applicable to a large core fueled with low-enriched

fuel, there is an optimum point above which increasing the moderator-to-fuel ratio
decreases k eff due to the dominance of the decreasing thermal utilization factor.
Below this point, a decrease in the moderator-to-fuel ratio decreases k eff due to the
dominance of the increased resonance absorption in the fuel. If the ratio of
moderator-to-fuel is above this point, the core is said to be over moderated, and if
the ratio is below this point, the core is said to be under moderated.
In practice, water-moderated reactors are designed with a moderator-to-fuel ratio
such that the reactor is operated in an under moderated condition. The reason for
this is to provide inherent stability for reactor control.

Prepared By:
16 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
If the reactor were over moderated, an increase in temperature would decrease the
Nm/Nu due to the expansion of the water as its density became lower. This decrease
in Nm/Nu would be a positive reactivity addition, increasing k eff and further raising
power and temperature in a dangerous cycle. If the reactor is under moderated, the
same increase in temperature results in the addition of negative reactivity, and the
reactor becomes more self-regulating and more stable from a control standpoint.

TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENTS OF REACTIVITY

The change in reactivity per degree change in temperature is called the temperature
coefficient of reactivity. Various materials in the reactor are capable of changing the
amount of reactivity present in the core as temperature changes. Temperature
coefficients of reactivity are used to quantify these changes. The two dominant
temperature coefficients of reactivity are the moderator temperature coefficient
(MTC) and the fuel temperature coefficient (FTC).

Moderator Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity

The change in reactivity per degree change in moderator temperature is called the
moderator temperature coefficient (MTC) of reactivity. The magnitude and sign
(+ or -) of the moderator temperature coefficient is primarily a function of the
moderator-to-fuel ratio.
If a reactor is under moderated, it will have a negative MTC. If a reactor is over
moderated, it will have a positive MTC. A negative MTC is desirable because of its
self-regulating effect. For example, an increase in reactivity causes the reactor to
produce more power. This raises the temperature of the core and in turn the
temperature of the moderator, adding negative reactivity, which slows down, or
turns, the power rise.
The MTC is defined as the change in reactivity per unit change in temperature (°F)
of the moderator. In equation form it is:

𝛥𝜌
𝛼𝑚 =
𝛥𝑇𝑚𝑜𝑑

�𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 �
𝛼𝑚 =
�𝑇𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝑇𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 �
Where:
α m = moderator temperature coefficient (MTC) (Δk/k/°F)
Δρ = change in reactivity associated with change in moderator temperature (Δk/k)
ΔTmod = change in moderator temperature (°F)

Prepared By:
17 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
The symbols αm and αT are both used to represent moderator temperature
coefficient. In this text, the symbol α m will be used.
Example:
A reactor is operating at 480 °F with an effective multiplication factor of 1.000 (k eff =
1.000). The moderator temperature is increased to 490 °F and k eff decreases to
0.999. What is the value of the moderator temperature coefficient?
Solution:
First, determine the change in reactivity (Δρ) due to the change in temperature.

�𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 �
𝛼𝑚 =
�𝑇𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝑇𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 �

1−1
𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 =
1
𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 0
0.999 − 1
𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 =
0.999
𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 = −1.001 × 10−3
Then, calculate the value of MTC.

�𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 �
𝛼𝑚 =
�𝑇𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝑇𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 �

(−1.001 × 10−3) − (0)

𝛼𝑚 =
(490 − 480℉)

−1.001 × 10−3 ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
𝛼𝑚 =
10℉
∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
𝛼𝑚 = −1.001 × 10−4
℉
𝑝𝑐𝑚
𝛼𝑚 = 10
℉
Example:

Prepared By:
18 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Moderator temperature coefficient is defined as the change in core reactivity per
degree change in...
A. fuel temperature.
B. fuel clad temperature.
C. reactor vessel temperature.
D. reactor coolant temperature.
The moderator temperature coefficient is the change in reactivity per unit change in
temperature of the reactor moderator. The reactor coolant is the reactor moderator
as well as coolant. The correct answer is: D.

Value of Moderator Temperature Coefficient

A good approximation for an average value of the MTC is -1×10-4Δk/k/°F for the
normal range of moderator temperature in a commercial nuclear reactor.

Moderator Temperature versus Moderator Density

Most commercial reactors (in the USA) use light water as both a coolant and a
moderator. An increase in moderator (water) temperature results in a decrease in
moderator density. Conversely, a decrease in moderator temperature results in an
increase in moderator density.

As shown in Figure 4-1, the magnitude of the density change for a given
temperature change gets larger with increasing temperatures.
WATER MOLECULAR DENSITY (NM)

∆ρ

∆ρ

∆T ∆T

Figure 4-1
Change in Density versus Change in Temperature for Water

Prepared By:
19 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
This results in the magnitude of the moderator temperature coefficient having a
larger value (more negative) at higher temperatures. This means that the MTC in
water at high temperature (499 to 500°F) is more negative (larger absolute value)
than the MTC for water at low temperature (99 to 100°F).

Moderator Temperature Effects on Effective Multiplication Factor

Since the reactivity in the core of a nuclear reactor is defined in terms of effective
multiplication factor (k eff ) it is necessary to examine how a change in the
temperature of the moderator affects the effective multiplication factor and more
specifically, the factors in the six factor formula.
Recall that the six factor formula defines the effective multiplication factor for a
nuclear reactor of finite size (leakage terms included).

𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 𝜀𝐿𝑓 𝜌𝐿𝑡ℎ 𝑓𝜂

An increase in moderator temperature will result in a corresponding decrease in

moderator (water) density. This results in an accompanying increase in slowing
down length and thermal diffusion length. This is caused by the moderator atoms
being farther apart, requiring neutrons to travel farther between collisions with
moderator atoms. Increasing the slowing down length increases the probability that
a neutron may reach the fuel while still at resonance energy.

Resonance Escape Probability

Since slowing down length for neutrons increases with decreased moderator
density, slowing down time also increases, meaning that neutrons spend more time
at resonance energy levels. The probability of a neutron escaping resonance
capture is decreased; therefore the resonance escape probability (ρ) decreases.
This effect is shown on the plot for resonance escape probability (ρ) on Figure 5.
(Ratio of moderator to fuel decreasing.)

Thermal Utilization Factor

A decrease in moderator density due to increased water temperature also causes

thermal neutron absorption in the moderator to decrease. This is due to fewer
moderator atoms being present in the core (moderator to fuel ratio decreasing).
Because of this the probability of thermal neutron absorption in the fuel increases
resulting in a slight increase in thermal utilization factor (f) as shown in Figure 5.
Recall the equation:
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛴𝑎
𝑓= 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛴𝑎 + 𝛴𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑑 + 𝛴𝑎𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟

Prepared By:
20 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
This equation can also be written as:
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝜎𝑎
𝑓=
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑁𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑚𝑜𝑑 𝑁
𝜎𝑎 + �𝜎 � + 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 �𝜎 �
𝑁𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑎 𝑁𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙

In the above equation, as temperature increases, the concentration of the moderator

atoms (N mod ) decreases, so, as discussed above, thermal utilization factor (f)
increases.

Fast and Thermal Non-Leakage Probabilities

Decreasing the moderator density also increases the migration length of the
neutrons in the core, which leads to an increase in the fraction of neutrons that leak
out of the core, therefore decreasing the non-leakage probabilities (L f and L th ). For
large commercial power reactors the neutron leakage terms in the six factor formula
are usually considered to be so small as to be insignificant.

Fast Fission Factor

Decreasing the moderator density results in the fast fission factor increasing slightly
due to increased slowing down length, but this effect is minimal.

Reproduction Factor

The reproduction factor is not dependent on moderator density, so it does not

change significantly as moderator temperature changes.

Dominant Effect on Keff

As shown in Figure 5, moderator temperature changes result in essentially two

competing processes which impact the value of k eff : Resonance escape probability
(ρ) and thermal utilization factor (f).
The resonance escape probability has the dominant effect, causing k eff and reactor
power to decrease as moderator temperature increases. Since increasing
moderator temperature (decreasing moderator to fuel ratio) decreases k eff , the
moderator temperature coefficient is negative.

Undermoderation

The region to left of the maximum effective neutron multiplication factor value on
Figure 5 is referred to as the under-moderated region. In this region, an increase in
temperature results in a reduction of effective neutron multiplication factor. This
means that in this region the moderator temperature coefficient is negative.

Prepared By:
21 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Operating in the under-moderated region is very important in terms of reactor
control. In this region, if reactor power suddenly increases, the moderator
temperature will rise, inserting negative reactivity (caused by decreasing k eff ) into the
system, limiting the magnitude of the power excursion. Commercial nuclear reactors
are generally designed with a moderator-to-fuel ratio such that the moderator
temperature coefficient is negative across the range of temperatures in which the
reactor is expected to operate.
Also, at higher temperatures, the moderator temperature coefficient becomes more
negative due to the larger change in density for the same change in temperature.
This tends to make the reactor more inherently stable. As temperature in the reactor
increases, the moderator temperature coefficient increases in magnitude meaning
that any increase in temperature at higher moderator temperatures results in a
greater magnitude of negative reactivity being added to the core, lowering reactor
power. This effect is highly desirable where nuclear reactor core thermal limits are
concerned. (Core thermal limits will be discussed in greater detail later in this text).

Overmoderation

The region to right of the maximum effective neutron multiplication factor value on
Figure 5 is called the over-moderated region. In the over-moderated region a
reduction in moderator density (due to increased temperature) has a greater effect
on thermal utilization factor than resonance escape probability.

In this region, the increased value of the thermal utilization factor results in positive
reactivity addition to the reactor core with increasing moderator temperature. If the
reactor were allowed to operate in the over-moderated region, any increase in
reactor power would result in an increase in moderator temperature, adding positive
reactivity which would result in an additional increase in reactor power followed by a
corresponding increase in temperature, which would add more positive reactivity to
the core. From a core thermal limits standpoint, this type of effect is not desirable.

Change in Moderator Temperature Coefficient With Boron Concentration

To this point, the moderator temperature coefficient has been described under the
assumption that the moderator is “pure” water. In commercial PWRs however,
boron, in the form of boric acid, is added to moderator/coolant as a method of
controlling excess reactivity in the core.

Boron has a high thermal neutron absorption cross section and acts as a soluble
“control rod”, adding negative reactivity to the core (control rods will be discussed in
greater detail later in this text). Over the life of a nuclear reactor core the fuel is
depleted. As this happens, boron concentration in the reactor coolant is decreased
(diluted) to compensate for the decrease in reactivity caused by the fuel depletion.

Prepared By:
22 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
The highest differential boron worth occurs at zero boron concentrations, since
boron atoms are not competing with as many other boron atoms. When boron
concentration increases, the individual atoms are in greater competition for the core
neutrons, so differential worth drops. In essence, as the boron concentration
becomes greater, there are more boron atoms in the moderator that there is a
tendency for some of the boron atoms to block others from neutrons. The actual
probability that an individual boron atom will absorb a neutron drops resulting in the
drop in differential boron worth for the higher boron concentrations. As reactor
coolant boron concentration is reduced there are fewer boron molecules in solution
and the DBW (Differential Boron Worth) becomes more negative.
The presence of boron in the moderator/coolant changes the value of the MTC. The
magnitude of the impact on the MTC is dependent on the boron concentration in the
coolant.
Since boron acts as neutron absorber, the presence of boron in the coolant results in
a reduction in the value of the thermal utilization factor (f). Figure 4-2 illustrates the
dependence of the thermal utilization factor (f) on moderator/coolant boron
concentration.

1.0
THERMAL UTILIZATION

NO 1000 2000
BORON PPM PPM
FACTOR (f)

MODERATOR-TO-FUEL RATIO (Nmod/Nfuel)

MODERATOR TEMPERATURE (Tmod)

Figure 4-2
Boron Effect on MTC

Prepared By:
23 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
On Figure 4-2, the slope of the change in MTC with the change in boron
concentration curves is of greatest interest. As can be seen on Figure 4-2, the slope
of these curves becomes more positive with increasing moderator/coolant boron
concentration.
As was previously discussed, the major effect on the MTC is the result of a
combination of the impact of changing moderator density on resonance escape
probability and thermal utilization factor. Recall that the change in the value of the
thermal utilization factor was dominant over the effect of the change in the value of
the resonance escape probability (can be thought of as Δp/ΔT < 0 and Δf/ΔT > 0).
As shown on Figure 4-2, the change in the value of the thermal utilization factor with
respect to the change in temperature becomes more positive with increasing boron
concentration. Therefore, the MTC becomes less negative as boron concentration
increases. This effect is shown in Figure 4-3.

(1) 0 PPM

keff
1000 PPM

2000 PPM

MODERATOR TEMPERATURE (TMod)

MODERATOR-TO-FUEL RATIO (NMod/NFuel)

Figure 4-3
Change in MTC with Changing Boron Concentration

The MTC becoming less negative as the boron concentration of the

moderator/coolant increases means that the boron concentration of the
moderator/coolant must be limited in order to prevent the MTC from becoming
positive during nuclear reactor power operations.

Prepared By:
24 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Some facilities are allowed to operate with a positive MTC up to some designated
power level, but above that, MTC is required to be negative for safety
considerations. For these facilities, as the reactor continues to operate, boron is
withdrawn from the coolant, such that MTC becomes more negative when required.

Alternate Explanation 1

The change in MTC with a change in boron concentration can also be explained as
follows.
The multiplication factor (k eff ) can be computed for each of the thermal utilization
factor curves shown in Figure 4-3 above. If the reactor was designed with a certain
moderator-to-fuel ratio and no boron was present in the moderator/coolant, the MTC
would be negative, as at position 1 on the 0 PPM curve in Figure 4-3.
As more boron is added to the moderator/coolant, the maximum point of the curve
shifts to the lower moderator-to-fuel ratios, until a point is reached where the MTC is
now positive (for fixed moderator-to-fuel ratio). This reinforces the idea that limits
must be placed on the moderator/coolant boron concentration.
• Beginning of core life (BOL), when boron concentration is high, the MTC may be
+0.1 × 10-4 Δk/k/°F
• End of core life (EOL), when boron has been diluted, the MTC is approximately -
2.6 x 10-4 Δk/k/°F

Alternate Explanation 2

The change in MTC with a change in boron concentration can also be explained as
follows.
Consider a moderator temperature increase of one degree Fahrenheit (1°F). Due to
this temperature increase, three effects take place:
• The boron concentration (atoms/cm3) decreases, resulting in a positive
reactivity insertion.
• The thermal utilization factor (f) increases slightly, causing a positive reactivity
insertion. This insertion is smaller than the insertion due to the boron effects.
 This positive reactivity insertion is a result of fewer water molecules and
boron atoms per cubic centimeter (cm3) available for absorption reactions
within the reactor core.
• The resonance escape probability (ρ) drops due to fewer moderator
molecules per cm3 being present in reactor core, resulting in an insertion of
negative reactivity.

Prepared By:
25 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
The above listed processes are three competing effects that take place with each
moderator/coolant temperature increase. For higher boron concentrations, MTC
tends to be less negative (or more positive). Conversely, as boron concentration
approaches zero, MTC tends to be more negative. Therefore, as stated previously,
MTC at the beginning of core life (BOL) can be slightly positive, whereas the MTC at
the end of core life (EOL) will be at its most negative value.
Examples:
As the reactor coolant boron concentration increases, the moderator temperature
coefficient becomes less negative. This is because, at higher boron concentrations,
a 1°F increase in reactor coolant temperature at higher boron concentrations results
in a larger increase in the...
A. fast fission factor.
B. thermal utilization factor.
C. total nonleakage probability.
D. resonance escape probability.
Born acts as a neutron absorber but as the boron concentration is increased the
change in thermal utilization factor compared to temperature change becomes more
positive as the moderator temperature coefficient becomes less negative. The
correct answer is: B.
As reactor coolant boron concentration is reduced differential boron reactivity worth
(ΔK/K per ppm) becomes...
A. less negative due to the increased number of water molecules in the core.
B. more negative due to the increased number of water molecules in the core.
C. less negative due to the decreased number of boron molecules in the core.
D. more negative due to the decreased number of boron molecules in the core.
With a zero boron concentration the highest differential boron worth is obtained
since boron atoms are not competing with other boron atoms. When the boron
concentration is increased the boron atoms compete for the neutrons and the
differential boron worth drops overall. So when the amount of boron is reduced with
fewer boron available in solution but less competition for existing boron the
differential boron worth is more negative. The correct answer is: D.
With higher concentrations of boron in the reactor coolant, the core neutron flux
distribution shifts to ____________ energies where the absorption cross-section of
boron is ____________.
A. higher; lower
B. higher; higher
C. lower; lower

Prepared By:
26 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
D. lower; higher
The boron microscopic cross section for absorption will increase as the neutron
energy decreases. The higher concentration of boron willingly absorbs low energy
neutrons that results in a shift of the neutron flux to higher energy levels. More
higher energy neutrons are absorbed in this flux hardening condition due to the
lower microscopic cross section for absorption. The correct answer is: A.

Change In Moderator Temperature Coefficient With Core Age

As previously discussed, the MTC becomes more negative as a nuclear reactor core
ages. The principal reason for MTC becoming more negative over core life is the
significant drop in boron concentration in the moderator/coolant as the core ages.
Since boron acts as a neutron absorber, the presence of boron in the
moderator/coolant results in a reduction of the thermal utilization factor (f).
As the moderator/coolant boron concentration is increased, the change in thermal
utilization factor (f) with respect to a change in temperature (Δf/ΔT) becomes more
positive, causing MTC to become less negative.
Boron concentration is also adjusted to compensate for fuel depletion. As the
reactor continues to operate, boron is withdrawn from the moderator/coolant,
causing the MTC to become more negative.

Note: Commercial PWRs are also limited on how negative the MTC can become.
This restriction is required because of the Main Steam Line Break Accident which
has been analyzed for commercial nuclear reactors. During a steam line break
accident, the reactor coolant system (RCS) will undergo a rapid cooldown because
the steam system begins to act like an infinite heat sink. This rapid cooldown will
result in large positive reactivity insertion to the reactor core. Some plant accident
analyses demonstrate that the reactor could actually be rendered supercritical with
all control rods fully inserted. An example of such a limit on the MTC is typically
-44 pcm/°F (-4.4 × 10-4 ∆k/k/°F).

Examples:
Which one of the following will result in a less negative fuel temperature coefficient?
(Consider only the direct effect of the change in the listed parameters.)
A. Increase in fuel burnup.
B. Decrease in fuel temperature.
C. Increase in void fraction.
D. Decrease in moderator temperature.

Prepared By:
27 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
A high moderator density will result in a short slowing down length and slowing down
time. The changes seen in the resonant peaks will cause a relatively small effect
compared to the effects observed at a lower moderator density. Fuel temperature
coefficient is more negative at high moderator temperatures and is most negative at
high void fractions. The correct answer is: D.
Under which one of the following conditions is a nuclear reactor core most likely to
have a positive moderator temperature coefficient?
A. Low coolant temperature at beginning-of-life
B. Low coolant temperature at end-of-life
C. High coolant temperature at beginning-of-life
D. High coolant temperature at end-of-life
The correct answer is: A.
A nuclear reactor has operated at steady-state 100% power for the past 6 months.
Compared to 6 months ago, current moderator temperature coefficient is...
A. more negative due to control rod withdrawal.
B. less negative due to control rod insertion.
C. more negative due to decreased reactor coolant system (RCS) boron
concentration.
D. less negative due to increased RCS boron concentration.
After 6 months of operation, the boron concentration will reduced to compensate for
fuel and burnable poison depletion. The correct answer is: C.
In which of the following conditions is the moderator temperature coefficient most
negative?
A. Beginning of core life (BOL), high temperature
B. BOL, low temperature
C. End of core life (EOL), high temperature
D. EOL, low temperature
The correct answer is: C.

Fuel Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity

Another temperature coefficient of reactivity, the fuel temperature coefficient, has a

greater effect on reactivity in the core than the MTC for some reactors. The fuel
temperature coefficient (FTC) is the change in reactivity per degree change in fuel
temperature. This coefficient is also called the "prompt" temperature coefficient
because an increase in reactor power causes an immediate change in fuel
temperature.
Prepared By:
28 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
A negative FTC is generally considered to be even more important than a negative
MTC because fuel temperature immediately increases following an increase in
reactor power. The time for heat to be transferred to the moderator is measured in
seconds. In the event of a large positive reactivity insertion, the moderator
temperature cannot turn the reactor power rise for several seconds, whereas the
FTC starts adding negative reactivity immediately.
Another name applied to the FTC of reactivity is the fuel Doppler reactivity
coefficient. This name is applied because in typical low enrichment, light water
moderated thermal reactors the FTC of reactivity is negative and is the result of the
Doppler Effect, also called Doppler broadening.
The phenomenon of the Doppler Effect is caused by an apparent broadening of the
resonance peaks for absorption due to thermal motion of nuclei as illustrated in
Figure 4-4.
Stationary nuclei will absorb only neutrons of energy E o . If the nucleus is moving
away from the neutron, the velocity (and energy) of the neutron must be greater than
E o to undergo resonance absorption.
Likewise, if the nucleus is moving toward the neutron, the neutron needs less energy
than E o to be absorbed. Raising the temperature causes the nuclei to vibrate more
rapidly within their lattice structures, effectively broadening the energy range of
neutrons that may be resonantly absorbed in the fuel.
Two nuclides present in large amounts, in the fuel of some reactors, with large
resonant peaks that dominate the Doppler Effect are uranium-238 and plutonium-
240.

Figure 4-4
Effect of Fuel Temperature on Resonance Absorption Peaks

Prepared By:
29 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Doppler Effect

The Doppler Effect is generally associated with the physics of sound and light,
however it also apples to nuclear physics. The Doppler Effect is most easily
illustrated by considering the example of the change in pitch of sound when the
source of the sound, or the listener, or both, are in motion relative to air.
As an example, consider the change in pitch of a train whistle experienced by an
observer in a parked car at a railroad crossing as the train approaches the crossing.
This phenomenon can be explained by considering velocity of sound waves in air.
Sound waves have a velocity of about 730 miles per hour in air. As the train
approaches the crossing at 35 miles per hour, the relative speed of the sound waves
coming from the train’s horn to the stationary listener located in the car is 765 miles
per hour.
As the train moves away from the car, the speed of the sound waves relative to the
stationary listener is 695 miles per hour. This difference in the velocity of the sound
waves as the train approaches and moves away from the listener results in a change
in pitch of the sound of the horn.
In nuclear reactor fuel, the Doppler Effect can be used to explain the probability of
resonant absorption as a function of the fuel’s temperature.

Doppler Broadening

As previously discussed, neutrons give up energy incrementally via collisions with

the nuclei of materials present in the reactor. The microscopic cross section for
absorption (σ a) for uranium-238 is 5500 barns for neutrons at an energy level of
21 eV. However, the microscopic cross section for absorption is only 15 to 20 barns
for a neutron with an energy level of 20 or 22 eV.
Figure 4-5 shows U-238 resonance capture cross section as a function of neutron
energy for two different fuel temperature conditions.

Prepared By:
30 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

Figure 4-5
Urnaium-238 Cross Section for Absorption Curve

The capture cross section for uranium-238 is affected by the relative motion between
the incident neutron and the target nucleus. Resonance peaks for an absorption
reaction which exist at room temperature (68°F [~21°C]), where the incident nucleus
provides the majority of the kinetic energy required for the reaction will be different
from the resonance peaks for absorption which exist at elevated temperatures within
a reactor (due to heatup of reactor coolant or at-power operation of the reactor).
As the temperature increases, the average kinetic energy of the uranium-238
nucleus increases. The motion (kinetic energy) or vibration of the nucleus has a
direct impact on its magnitude of capture cross section.
To demonstrate this phenomenon, consider the three neutron-nuclear reactions
depicted in Figure 4-6 a, b, and c respectively.

Prepared By:
31 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

Figure 4-6
Doppler Effect in Uranium-238 Capture Reaction

Suppose, for example, an incident neutron having 21 eV of kinetic energy impinges

on a target nucleus at room temperature (roughly 0.0025 eV), as shown in Figure 4-
6a. As discussed previously, the microscopic cross section for absorption for
uranium-238 at 21 eV is 5500 barns. In this case, the neutron is likely to be
absorbed.

Prepared By:
32 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Now consider Figure 4-6b. In this case, a 20 eV neutron impinges on nucleus that is
vibrating toward it with kinetic energy of 1eV. In this case, the relative energy
between the incident neutron and target uranium-238 nucleus is, once again 21 eV.
Again, the resultant absorption cross section for this case would also be about 5500
barns and the neutron is likely to be absorbed by the urnanium-238 nucleus.
Finally, consider Figure 4-6c. In this last example, the incident neutron possesses
kinetic energy of about 22 eV, and the target uranium-238 nucleus is vibrating away
from the neutron with kinetic energy of 1 eV. In this example, the relative energy
between the incident neutron and the target uranium-238 nucleus is, once again 21
eV. Again the resultant absorption cross section for this case would be about 5500
barns and the neutron is likely to be absorbed by the nucleus.
Figure 4-6 depicts a phenomenon that has become known as Doppler Effect in
nuclear physics. As fuel temperature increases, the kinetic energy of the fuel atoms
increases. This results in neutrons of both higher and lower kinetic energy (than
what would be required at room temperature) having an increased probability of
resonance absorption by the fuel atoms.
Figure 4-7 also illustrates the Doppler Effect as it relates to the relative motion
(energy) between neutrons and uranium-238 nuclei at the aforementioned 21 eV
resonance peak.

Prepared By:
33 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Figure 4-7
Resonance Capture in Nucleus Vibrating at 5 eV

Figure 4-7 illustrates the effect of heat energy being applied to a nucleus. When 5
eV of heat energy is added to the nucleus, it rapidly vibrates in all directions. The
nucleus still prefers a 21 eV neutron, and only captures those neutrons that it “sees”
as having 21 eV of energy.
Because of the relative motion between the nucleus and the surrounding neutrons,
the nucleus now absorbs any neutron within the kinetic energy range of 16 eV to 26
eV, depending upon the neutron’s angle of approach to the nucleus. (Neutron must
“appear” to the nucleus to be a 21 eV neutron due to relative motion between the
neutron and the nucleus).
If more heat energy is added to the nucleus, its speed and area of motion due to
vibration increases, however, because it is vibrating faster, it now spends less time
at any given energy within its kinetic energy range. The vibrating nucleus now has
the capability of capturing “off-resonance” neutrons of 16 eV and 26 eV respectively.
The probability for capturing a 21 eV “resonance” neutron has now been reduced for
the vibrating nucleus, but it is still probable that the neutron would be captured in the
uranium oxide (UO 2 ) fuel pellet.
The net result of heating nuclear fuel is to “broaden” and flatten the uranium-238
resonance capture cross-section curve as shown by elevated temperature curve in
Figure 4-5. This shift in resonant capture cross section peaks for uranium-238 is
referred to as Doppler broadening.
The effects of Doppler broadening result in a modified capture cross section curve,
as shown in Figure 4-5. The area under both the original and the broadened curve
will theoretically be same. It could be assumed that the overall capture of neutrons
by uranium-238 should not change significantly.
It has been shown however, that broadening of the uranium-238 capture cross
section curve increases the resonant neutron capture in uranium oxide (UO 2 ) fuel
pellets. To understand this important phenomenon, it is necessary to examine the
effects of self-shielding which take place within the fuel pellets.
Examples:
Why does the fuel temperature (Doppler) coefficient becomes less negative at
higher fuel temperatures?
A. As reactor power increases, the rate of increase in the fuel temperature
diminishes.
B. Neutrons penetrate deeper into the fuel, resulting in an increase in the fast fission
factor.
C. The amount of self-shielding increases, resulting in less neutron absorption by
the inner fuel.
Prepared By:
34 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
D. The amount of Doppler broadening per degree change in fuel temperature
diminishes.
Normally as fuel temperature rises, the resonance peaks become shorter and
broader. The resultant broadening amount that occurs per degree of fuel
temperature rise gets progressively smaller, making the FTC less negative at higher
fuel temperatures. The correct answer is: D.
Which one of the following will cause the Doppler power coefficient to become more
negative?
A. Increased clad creep
B. Increased pellet swell
C. Lower power level
D. Higher reactor coolant boron concentration
With a lower power level the overall fuel temperature will be lower. The amount of
Doppler Broadening per degree rise in temperature is greater at lower temperatures.
Lower fuel temperature and power cause the doppler only power coefficient to be
more negative. The correct answer is: C.
Which one of the following adds the most positive reactivity following a reactor
trip/scram from full power at the beginning of core life? (Assume reactor coolant
system parameters stabilize at their normal post-trip values.)
A. Void coefficient
B. Pressure coefficient
C. Fuel temperature coefficient
D. Moderator temperature coefficient
The average fuel temperature drop after a scram is very large (approx 1000F) and
with a fuel temp coefficient of −1 𝑝𝑐𝑚⁄𝐹 a large amount of reactivity is added. The
correct answer is: C.
A nuclear reactor has been operating at steady state 50% power for one month
following a refueling outage. Reactor power is ramped to 100% over the next 2
hours. During the power increase, most of the positive reactivity added by the
operator is necessary to overcome the negative reactivity associated with the...
A. increased reactor coolant temperature.
B. buildup of core Xe-135.
C. burnout of burnable poisons.
D. increased fuel temperature.

Prepared By:
35 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
The fuel temperature will respond almost immediately to a change in reactor power,
so with the negative fuel temperature coefficient, positive reactivity must be added
while power is being ramped up. For any power change, the fuel temperature effect
on reactivity is mostly always greater in magnitude than the coolant temperature
effect on reactivity because fuel temperature varies considerably more than coolant
temperature. The correct answer is: D.

Self Shielding

If all reactors were homogeneous, the Doppler Effect would not affect the operation
of the nuclear reactor at all; however, commercial nuclear reactors are not
homogeneous.
The fuel in a commercial nuclear reactor is made up of ceramic pellets that are
housed in a helium gas-filled, zircaloy-clad, cylindrical fuel pin. The neutrons are
slowed down (thermalized) in the surrounding moderator (usually light water). High
energy neutrons pass through the fuel pellets and the surrounding cladding into the
moderator. The moderator slows the neutrons down into the epithermal
(intermediate) and thermal energy range.
At low fuel temperatures, a neutron entering the fuel pellet with exact resonant
energy has a very high probability of absorption; most likely in the outer edge of fuel
pellet. Epithermal neutrons of other than resonant energies are more likely to pass
directly through the pellet without being absorbed. The outer fuel atoms tend to
shield the inner fuel atoms from resonant energy neutrons. This is referred to as the
self-shielding effect.
Self-shielding can also be described by considering a uranium oxide (UO 2 ) fuel
pellet at room temperature and another one at operating nuclear reactor fuel
temperature, as shown in Figures 14 a and b.

22 eV 20 eV 22 eV 20 eV
n n n n

n n
21 eV 21 eV

a: UO2 FUEL PELLET AT b: UO2 FUEL PELLET AT

ROOM TEMPERATURE OPERATING REACTOR
TEMPERATURE AT POWER

Prepared By:
36 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Figure 4-8
UO 2 Fuel Pellet at Room and Operating Reactor Temperature

Figure 4-8 a depicts the UO 2 fuel pellet at room temperature. In this case, only
resonance neutrons would be captured, as shown by the 21 eV resonance neutron.
Off-resonance neutrons would pass right through and not be “seen” by the UO 2 fuel
pellet. Because the resonance neutron is captured as soon as it enters the fuel
pellet and the off-resonance neutrons are not captured, it can be said that the inner
region of the fuel pellet is “self-shielded” by the outer periphery of the pellet.
Figure 4-8 b illustrates what happens when the fuel pellet is at an elevated
temperature as would be experienced in a nuclear reactor core operating at power.
The uranium-238 nuclei tend to capture both resonance and off-resonance neutrons
as a result of increased vibration due to increased heat energy (Doppler Effect).
Figure 4-8 b also shows that there is a reduction in fuel pellet self-shielding under
these circumstances. The central portion of the fuel pellet now tends to capture both
off-resonance and resonance neutrons.

Fuel Temperature Effects on Self Shielding

There are two issues that must be considered to determine the amount of self-
shielding that will occur within a uranium oxide fuel pellet in a nuclear reactor: The
physical size of the fuel pellets and the design characteristics of the fuel pellets.
Both are primarily a function of the design of the fuel. Although they are usually
addressed as separate issues, the effects on self shielding due to the design
characteristics of the fuel pellet is actually an extension of the effects on self
shielding due to the physical size of the fuel pellets. It is the combination of these
two effects that determines the overall effect of fuel temperature on neutron
population within a nuclear reactor core.

Physical Size of Fuel Pellets

The first issue relates to the physical size of the fuel pellets and the average
distance that a neutron can travel into a pellet prior to resonance absorption
occurring. Recall that the mean free path (Σ) is defined as average distance that a
neutron travels before being absorbed. An equation can be written for the mean free
path for absorption:

1
𝛴𝑎 =
𝑁𝜎𝑎
Where:
Σ a = mean free path (cm)
N = atomic density (atoms/cm3)

Prepared By:
37 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
σ a = microscopic cross section for absorption (barns)

The atomic density (N) is approximately 2 x 1022 atoms/cm3 for the uranium-238
contained in a typical fuel pellet. For this discussion, assume that in three (3) mean
free paths every neutron is absorbed.
If 100 neutrons, all at the energy level of 21 eV, enter the fuel pellet, all of the
neutrons will be absorbed if fuel pellet is three mean free paths wide. (At 21 eV,
uranium-238 has resonance peak of 5500 barns).

Recall that 1 barn = 10-24 cm2:

1
𝛴𝑎 = 2
𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑠 −24 𝑐𝑚 �
�2 × 1022 � (5500 𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑛𝑠 ) �1 × 10
𝑐𝑚3 𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑛

𝛴𝑎 = 0.009 𝑐𝑚
Since the average fuel pellet is 1.0 cm in diameter, all 100 neutrons at 21 eV
entering the fuel pellet will be absorbed (0.009 cm x 3 = 0.027 cm < 1 cm).
For neutrons that are not at an energy level of a resonance peak for uranium-238
(e.g. 22 eV) the microscopic cross section for absorption is about 15 barns.
This makes the mean free path for these neutrons 3.33 cm.

1
𝛴𝑎 = 2
𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑠 −24 𝑐𝑚 �
�2 × 1022 � (15 𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑛𝑠 ) �1 × 10
𝑐𝑚3 𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑛

𝛴𝑎 = 3.33 𝑐𝑚
In order for all of these 22 eV-neutrons to be absorbed in the uranium-238, the fuel
pellet would have to be about 10 cm (3.33 cm x 3), or approximately 4.0 inches in
diameter. Because of this, very few of the off-resonance neutrons will be absorbed
by the uranium-238 in the fuel pellet.
For the purposes of this discussion, assume that 100 neutrons enter the fuel pellet at
22 eV. Of these 100 neutrons assume 2 are absorbed within the pellet. Including
the 21 eV neutrons in this discussion, altogether 102 out of 200 neutrons are
absorbed within the fuel pellet by uranium-238.
As the fuel temperature increases, the microscopic cross section for absorption of
neutrons at energy levels corresponding to uranium-238 resonance peaks
decreases, but the absorption cross section actually increases for neutrons with
energy levels around the resonance peaks due to Doppler broadening.

Prepared By:
38 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
This means that for a 1.0 cm fuel pellet there would still be 102 neutrons absorbed
within the pellet. However, at the higher temperature, not all of the neutrons at an
energy level corresponding to the resonance peak (21 eV) are absorbed. Some
neutrons not at energies corresponding to resonance peaks (22 eV) will be
absorbed. For example, assume that at 600°F fuel temperature, 99 of the resonant
energy (21 eV) neutrons are absorbed and 3 of off-resonance energy (22 eV)
neutrons are absorbed. The total number of neutrons absorbed is the same (102)
but the number of resonant and non-resonant energy neutrons absorbed has
changed.
Recall that the microscopic cross section for absorption has decreased for the 21 eV
neutrons and increased for the 22 eV neutron at this higher temperature. There is a
slight possibility that some of 21 eV-neutrons will escape the fuel pellet without being
captured.
This decreasing of the microscopic cross section for absorption has the effect of
decreasing the self-shielding occurring within the fuel pellet. A 21 eV-neutron is
likely to travel farther into the fuel pellet prior to being captured, and some of these
neutrons may pass completely through the pellet without being captured.
The off-resonance neutrons (22 eV) that normally would have passed completely
through the pellet now have an increased probability of being captured by uranium-
238 within the fuel pellet.
As previously stated, the average fuel pellet has diameter larger than the three mean
free paths assumed to be needed for total neutron absorption. The internal portion
of the fuel pin doesn’t see neutron flux at low fuel temperatures with neutron energy
levels at uranium-238 resonance peaks. If the fuel temperature is increased, the
mean free path increases due to decreased microscopic cross section caused by
Doppler broadening. This means that more of the fuel pellet now experiences the
neutron flux having energy levels of the uranium-238 resonance peaks, in other
words, self-shielding decreases.

If the diameter of the fuel pellet is sufficiently large compared to the mean free path,
the effect of self-shielding can be quite pronounced.

Even though the diameter of the fuel pellet may be 1 cm, not all paths that a neutron
can take through a fuel pellet will lead through the center of the fuel pellet. In other
words not all neutrons entering a fuel pellet will have the opportunity to travel 1 cm
through the pellet. The average straight line distance a neutron will travel through
the fuel pellet is about 0.625 cm.

Using this information, three mean free paths for the average neutron would involve
a distance of 0.625 cm/3 or 0.21 cm of travel through the pellet. Plugging this
information into the mean free path equation from above yields a value of
approximately 240 barns as the microscopic cross section for absorption for a
0.21 cm mean free path.

Prepared By:
39 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
1
𝜎𝑎 =
𝑁𝛴𝑎
1
𝜎𝑎 = 𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑠
�2 × 1022 � (0.21 𝑐𝑚)
𝑐𝑚2
𝜎𝑎 = 238 𝑏𝑎𝑟𝑛𝑠
In a real fuel pellet, any neutron at an energy level with a microscopic cross section
of greater than 240 barns will, at some point, appear as a resonant energy neutron
and be absorbed in fuel pellet.
Refer to Figure 4-5 for the energy levels with cross sections for absorption above
240 barns. If the temperature of the fuel were to increase to 600°F, as in our
previous example, the energy levels for resonant neutron absorption in uranium-238
with cross sections above 240 barns are greatly expanded. Therefore, the Doppler
Effect, when combined with the above described reduction in self-shielding, results
in an increased resonance absorption by uranium-238 at higher fuel temperatures.

The above examples have concentrated on uranium-238. It should be noted

however, that all resonant absorbers found in a nuclear reactor will be affected by
increased temperature in a manner similar to uranium-238.

Fuel Pellet Design Characteristics

The second issue that contributes to determining the amount of self-shielding

experienced within a fuel pellet relates to the design characteristics of the fuel
pellets. In order to understand this effect the characteristics of the fuel pellets that
are affected by temperature must be investigated.
Nuclear reactor fuel pellets are manufactured as ceramic pellets (uranium oxide).
Like any ceramic structure, the fuel pellets are generally poor conductors of heat.
This results in large temperature gradients being experienced from the center of the
pellets to outer surfaces of the pellets. This characteristic of the fuel pellets is a
major contributor to the reduction in self-shielding as the fuel temperature is
increased.
Figure 4-9 shows temperature gradients that might be encountered for fuel pellets
located in low and high power regions of the core.

Prepared By:
40 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

Figure 4-9
Fuel Pellet Temperature Profile

Comparing the two gradient curves for high and low temperature conditions, it can
be concluded that for each 1 °F increase in the average fuel temperature, the
temperature gradients get larger between the fuel centerline and the fuel outer
surfaces.
For fuel pellets in high power regions of the core, the fuel centerline temperatures
may be above 3000 °F, while temperatures near the fuel pellet surface may be
closer to 1000 °F. For fuel pellets in lower power regions of the core, the centerline
temperature may be 1500 °F whereas the temperature at the surface of the pellet is
closer to 700 °F.
The effect of this increasing temperature gradient on self-shielding is illustrated in
Figure 4-10.

Prepared By:
41 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

Figure 4-10
Fuel Pellet Temperature versus Self Shielding Effect

An epithermal neutron that is not at resonance energy may appear as a resonance

energy neutron upon entering a pellet located in a low power region of the core, as it
penetrates deeper into the pellet. Because the temperature gradient is not as large
as that found in a pellet located in a higher power region of the core, the off-
resonance energy neutron could also pass completely through the pellet and never
be captured.
The same neutron entering a fuel pellet in a high power region of the core has a
higher probability of appearing as a resonance energy neutron upon entering the
pellet. It also has a much greater probability of appearing as a resonance energy
neutron as it goes deeper into the pellet.
Therefore, as the fuel temperature is increased, the effective capture area for
epithermal neutrons also increases. For pellets in high power regions of the core,
only a very small fraction of the epithermal neutrons escape resonance capture in
the fuel pellet because of the large increase in effective capture area.

Overall Effect of Temperature on Self Shielding

Prepared By:
42 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Increasing the fuel temperature will result in a greater fraction of neutrons in the core
being resonantly captured, even though the doppler broadening of the resonance
peaks does not increase the probability that more neutrons will be lost. This results
from a combination of the effect produced by Doppler broadening and the fuel
design.
Doppler broadening makes a larger fraction of neutrons available for capture, even
though the probability for capture does not increase. The fuel design is such that it
clumps a large volume of those probabilities (resonance absorbers) together in a
very dense area. This makes it difficult for any one neutron to escape capture (high
probability of capture).
As the fuel temperature increases, Doppler broadening results in a larger fraction of
neutrons available for capture. Although the probability for capture remains same,
more neutrons are lost from the neutron life cycle (captured) because more are
made available to be lost (captured).

Doppler Coefficient

The Doppler coefficient (α D ), also known as the fuel temperature coefficient (FTC), is
defined as the change in reactivity per unit change in fuel temperature.

∆𝜌
𝛼𝐷 = � �
∆𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝛼𝐷 =
𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙

Where:

α D = Doppler coefficient (FTC) (Δk/k/°F)

Δρ = change in reactivity associated with change in fuel temperature (Δk/k)

ΔT fuel = change in fuel temperature (°F)

A good approximation for a value of the Doppler coefficient is -1 x 10-5 Δk/k/°F or

-1pcm/°F for commercial reactors.
Example:
A reactor with an effective multiplication factor of 1.009 (k eff = 1.009) has a fuel
temperature of 100°F. When fuel temperature is raised to 600°F, k eff = 1.000.
What is value of Doppler coefficient?
Solution:
First, solve for ρ initial and ρ final .
Prepared By:
43 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

(1.009 − 1)
𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 =
1.009
𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 = 8.92 × 10−3 ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
(1 − 1)
𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 =
1
𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 = 0

Then, use the above equation to solve for α D using ρ initial and ρ final .

∆𝜌
𝛼𝐷 = � �
∆𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙
𝛼𝐷 =
𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙

(0) − (8.92 × 10−3 ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘 )

𝛼𝐷 =
600 − 100℉
(8.92 × 10−3 ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘 )
𝛼𝐷 =
500℉
∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
𝛼𝐷 = 1.78 × 10−5
℉
Doppler Coefficient Mechanism

An increase in fuel temperature results in a higher vibrational frequency of the atoms

in the fuel, which produces more neutron absorption by uranium-238 (Doppler
Effect). As described above, the movement of uranium-238 atoms relative to
incident high velocity neutrons results in a broadening and flattening of the sharp
neutron resonance absorption peaks for uranium-238 (Figure 4-9) such that incident
neutrons encounter a significant absorption cross section over a wider range of
neutron energies. This results in more resonance absorptions in uranium-238 and in
a reduction of effective multiplication factor (k eff ).
In low enrichment reactor fuel (commercial reactors), most of the uranium found in
the fuel rods is uranium-238. The magnitude of the Doppler coefficient in these
reactors is about -1 x 10-5 Δk/k/°F.

Prepared By:
44 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Although the coefficient is small, the reactivity effect increases to a very high value
as the reactor power level changes from 0 to 100% during at power operations. The
average fuel temperature at 100% reactor power is about 1200°F; however, peak
fuel temperature in some fuel rods could be as high as 4000 °F. Because of this, the
magnitude of the change in reactivity due to fuel temperature changes is large.

Importance of the Doppler Coefficient

The characteristic that makes the Doppler coefficient particularly important is that the
fuel temperature immediately increases following an increase in reactor power.
Since uranium oxide (UO 2 ) is a relatively poor conductor of heat and since a
cylindrical rod has a small heat transfer surface per unit volume, the time required
for heat generated at any instant to be transferred to the moderator/coolant is
relatively long, generally on order of 7 to 9 seconds. In the event of a large positive
reactivity addition to the reactor, the MTC and the void coefficient (described below)
will not respond for several seconds and therefore would have little immediate effect
in countering the insertion of positive reactivity.
Because it is associated with the temperature of the fuel itself, the Doppler
coefficient starts to react to a positive reactivity insertion immediately and represents
the primary shutdown mechanism for a fast power rise transient in an operating
nuclear reactor. This is the reason that the Doppler coefficient is referred to as a
“prompt” coefficient, whereas the MTC and the void coefficient are referred to as
“delayed” coefficients. The Doppler coefficient is one of the more important safety
features inherent to a pressurized water reactor (PWR).
The Doppler coefficient is the first coefficient to respond to an accidental, large,
positive reactivity addition. The Doppler coefficient is of paramount importance in
the event of rod drop accident. If core power increases rapidly, the fuel temperature
increases. As fuel temperature increases, more and more negative reactivity is
added to core by the Doppler coefficient to counteract the positive reactivity addition.

Changes In Doppler Coefficient With Changes In Fuel Temperature

As the fuel temperature increases in a nuclear reactor, the resonance peaks for
absorption broaden, allowing the fuel to resonantly capture neutrons over a larger
range of energy levels. This results in the following effects:
• The resonance escape probability decreases. This is a negative effect on the
neutron life cycle.
• The energy of thermal neutrons in fuel increases. As thermal energy
increases, the absorption cross section of the fuel decreases.
• The thermal utilization factor decreases. This is a small negative effect on the
neutron life cycle.

Prepared By:
45 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
At low fuel temperatures the resonance absorption peaks for uranium-238 (and other
nuclides) are very narrow (Figure 4-9), and only a small fraction of the neutrons
passing through the resonance energy spectrum are absorbed. The thermal neutron
energy is relatively low at low fuel temperatures, and a sizeable fraction of the
neutrons are absorbed in the fuel by uranium-235.
A small increase in fuel temperature causes a significant fractional increase in the
number of neutrons resonantly absorbed in the fuel by uranium-238 and plutonium-
240. Additionally, due to a small increase in energy, a slightly lower number of
thermal neutrons are absorbed in the fuel by uranium-235. The net result of these
effects is that the magnitude of the Doppler coefficient is larger at low fuel
temperatures.
At high fuel temperatures, the resonance absorption peaks for uranium-238 (and
other nuclides) are broad, and a large fraction of the neutrons being slowed down in
the core are resonantly captured.
A small increase in temperature will result in a small fractional increase in the
number of neutrons being resonantly absorbed and will also result in a small
decrease in the number of thermal neutrons being absorbed in fuel by uranium-235.
The net result of these effects is that the magnitude of the Doppler coefficient is
smaller at higher fuel temperatures, as illustrated in Figure 4-11.

-0.4

-0.6
-5
α D (∆ k/k / ° F) × 10

-0.8

-1.0

-1.2

-1.4

-1.6

-1.8
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

AVERAGE FUEL TEMPERATURE (° F)

Figure 4-11
Change in Magnitude of Doppler Coefficient versus Fuel Temperature

Prepared By:
46 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Figure 4-11 illustrates that a 1 °F change from 1000 °F to 1001 °F results in a larger
magnitude of change for the Doppler coefficient (αD ) than a 1 °F change from 3000
°F to 3001 °F. This is a result of the magnitude of the “additional vibration” of the
uranium-238 target nuclei being greater at lower fuel temperatures than at higher
fuel temperature. This results in a greater amount of Doppler broadening at lower
fuel temperatures (1000 °F to 1001 °F) than at higher fuel temperatures (3000 °F to
3001 °F).
It is important to note that αD is always negative. Its negative magnitude is simply
smaller in value at higher fuel temperatures than at lower fuel temperatures.

Changes In Doppler Coefficient With Changes In Core Age

At the beginning of a fuel cycle the fuel in a nuclear reactor consists predominantly
of uranium-238 and uranium-235. These fuels will cause a reasonable amount of
resonance absorption to occur.
As discussed above, as the fuel temperature is increased slightly, broadening of the
resonance capture peaks, primarily for uranium-238 (Figure 4-9), results in a
significant increase in the fraction of neutrons which are resonantly absorbed by the
fuel. Also, a slightly smaller number of the thermal neutrons are absorbed in fuel.
Therefore, the Doppler coefficient is negative at the beginning of core life (BOL).
At the end of the fuel cycle (end of life [EOL]), approximately the same amount of
uranium-238 is still present in the fuel. At EOL, uranium-235 has typically been
reduced to approximately 60% of its original concentration. Plutonium-239 and
plutonium-240 are also present in the fuel in significant amounts due to capture
reactions. As the fuel is burned up over the life of the reactor core, plutonium-240 is
produced within the fuel from uranium-238 by the following reactions:
238
92𝑈 + 10𝑛 �⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯� 239
92𝑈
𝜎𝛾 =277𝑏

𝛽− ,𝛾
239
92𝑈 �⎯� 239
93𝑁𝑝

𝑡1⁄2 = 23.5 𝑚
𝛽− ,𝛾
239
93𝑁𝑝 �⎯� 239
94𝑃𝑢

𝑡1⁄2 = 2.355 𝑑
239
94𝑃𝑢 + 10𝑛 �⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯� 240
94𝑃𝑢
𝜎𝛾 =200𝑏

Prepared By:
47 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
For the above reactions plutomium-239 will produce plutonium-240 approximately
27% of the time from a neutron capture and neutron absorption by plutonium-239
will result in fission about 73% of the time.
Figure 4-12 shows the total cross section for plutonium-240. The capture cross
section represents the largest component of the total cross section for plutonium-
240.

SLOW INTERMEDIATE
(THERMAL) (EPITHERMAL) FAST

1,000,000

~ 1.2 x 10 5 barns
100,000
PLUTONIUM-240
σ total (Pu-240)

TOTAL CROSS
10,000
SECTION (σ total )

1,000

100

10

1.0

0.1
10 -2 10 -1 1.0 10 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 6 10 7 eV
MeV
10 -8 10 -7 10 -6 10 -5 10-4 10 -3 10-2 0.1 1.0 10

NEUTRON ENERGY

Figure 4-12
Total Cross Section for Plutonium-240

As a result of plutonium-240 production over the life of a nuclear reactor core, the
Doppler temperature coefficient will become more negative because plutonium has a
very high capture cross section for 1 eV kinetic energy incident neutrons
(approximately 1 × 105 barns). Therefore, as plutonium-240 builds up in the reactor
core, the value for αD becomes more negative later in core life as shown in
Figure 4-13. There are also fission products present in the core that were not
present at the BOL which resonantly capture a considerable number of neutrons.

Prepared By:
48 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

-0.6

-0.8
-5 NEW CORE
OLD CORE
σD(k/k/° F) × 10
-1.0

-1.2

-1.4

-1.6

-1.8
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

AVERAGE FUEL TEMPERATURE (° F)

Figure 4-13
Value of Doppler Coefficient vs Temperature Over Core Life

A small increase in fuel temperature at core EOL results in broadening of the

uranium-238 resonance absorption peaks as previously described (Figure 4-13), but
also causes the pultonium-240 resonance absorption peaks to broaden. The
presence of plutonium-240, along with additional fission products with high
resonance absorption peaks, causes a large fractional increase in the number of
neutrons that will undergo resonance capture in the core. The Doppler coefficient is
more negative at core EOL than BOL (Doppler coefficient becomes more negative
as the core ages).
Typical values for the Doppler coefficient in a nuclear reactor over core life are:
• -1 x 10-5 Δk/k/°F at BOL
• -1.5 x 10-5 Δk/k/°F at EOL

Changes In Doppler Coefficient With Changes In Moderator Density

Moderator density also affects the value of the Doppler coefficient. If the moderator
density is high (low temperature), the slowing down length and slowing down time of
the neutrons are very short. Changes in resonant absorption peaks will cause a
relatively small effect on the Doppler coefficient compared to the effects resulting
from lower moderator density (high temperature).

Prepared By:
49 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
When the moderator is hot or contains voids, slowing down length and slowing down
time for the neutrons is longer. Any change in resonance absorption peaks will be
more significant at low moderator density (higher temperature) since the neutrons
will spend relatively longer periods of time in the resonance energy region. This
means that the Doppler coefficient is more negative at high moderator temperatures
and is most negative at high void fractions.
Examples:
Which one of the following isotopes is the most significant contributor to resonance
capture of fission neutrons in a nuclear reactor core at the beginning of core life?
A. U-233
B. U-238
C. Pu-239
D. Pu-240
U-238 contributes significantly to resonance capture with large resonance peaks at
different energy levels. The correct answer is: B. U-238

PRESSURE COEFFICIENT OF REACTIVITY

The reactivity in a reactor core can be affected by the system pressure. The
pressure coefficient of reactivity is defined as the change in reactivity per unit
change in pressure. The pressure coefficient of reactivity for the reactor is the result
of the effect of pressure on the density of the moderator. For this reason, it is
sometimes referred to as the moderator density reactivity coefficient.
As pressure increases, density correspondingly increases (opposite of effects of
temperature on density), which increases the moderator-to-fuel ratio in the core. In
the typical under moderated core the increase in the moderator-to-fuel ratio will
result in a positive reactivity addition. A typical value for the pressure coefficient of
reactivity in a pressurized water reactor (PWR) is 1 x 10-6 Δk/k/psi. As a rule of
thumb, a 100 psi increase in pressure introduces approximately the same reactivity
as a one degree decrease in temperature.

In reactors that use water as a moderator, the absolute value of the pressure
reactivity coefficient is seldom a major factor because it is very small compared to
the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity.

VOID COEFFICIENT OF REACTIVITY

In systems with boiling conditions, such as boiling water reactors (BWR), the
pressure coefficient becomes an important factor due to the larger density changes
that occur when the vapor phase of water undergoes a pressure change. Of prime
importance during operation of a BWR, and a factor in some other water-moderated
reactors, is the void coefficient.
Prepared By:
50 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
The void coefficient is caused by the formation of steam voids in the moderator. The
void coefficient of reactivity is defined as the change in reactivity per percent change
in void volume.
As the reactor power is raised to the point where the steam voids start to form, voids
displace moderator from the coolant channels within the core. This displacement
reduces the moderator-to-fuel ratio, and in an under moderated core, results in a
negative reactivity addition, thereby limiting the reactor power rise. The void
coefficient is significant in water-moderated reactors that operate at or near
saturated conditions.

Moderator Density Effects on Void Coefficient

Bulk boiling of the moderator/coolant does not occur in a PWR as it does in a boiling
water reactor (BWR). Nevertheless, steam bubbles will form in the
moderator/coolant around the fuel elements as the reactor heats up. These bubbles
are eventually swept into the bulk coolant and collapse.
These steam bubbles, or voids, have the effect of reducing the moderator density in
the area of the voids or bubbles. The result of this phenomenon is similar to the
result created by an increase in moderator/coolant temperature. Lowering the
moderator density as voids and bubbles are created leads to a decrease in the
resonance escape probability (ρ) and an increase in the thermal utilization factor (f).
The dominant effect here is the decrease in moderating efficiency due to the
decrease in resonance escape probability. Because of this the void coefficient is
negative. An approximate value for α v in a commercial reactor is -1 x 10-3 Δk/k/%
void.
At full power, voids occupy about 0.5% of the total moderator/coolant volume, so the
total reactivity inserted by the void fraction is very small compared to the MTC
contribution.
Example:
Compute the approximate negative reactivity due to voids in a pressurized water
reactor (PWR) at 100% reactor power.
Given:

∆k / k
α V = −1× 10 −3
% voids

Void fraction at 100% power = 0.6%

Solution:

Prepared By:
51 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
∆𝜌𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑑𝑠 = �−1 × 10−3 � (0.6% 𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑑𝑠)
%𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑑𝑠

∆𝜌𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑑𝑠 = −0.6 × 10−3 ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘

∆𝜌𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑑𝑠 = −6 × 10−4 ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘

∆𝜌𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑑𝑠 = −60 𝑝𝑐𝑚

Note: Many facilities ignore the void coefficient due to the fact that its reactivity effect
is small.

POWER COEFFICIENT OF REACTIVITY

For the purposes of convenience various reactivity coefficients are sometimes

combined into a single coefficient: The power coefficient of reactivity (α Power ).
As discussed above there are reactivity coefficients associated with the fuel
temperature, the moderator temperature, and voids. Ultimately however, reactor
power level is of the greatest concern to the operation of a nuclear reactor.
Reactor power is much more easily measured than quantities such as percent voids
in the coolant or actual core fuel temperature. Reactivity changes due to changes in
reactor power are also fairly easy to calculate.
The equation for the power coefficient of reactivity (α Power ) is similar to the equations
for other reactivity coefficients:

∆𝜌
𝛼𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 =
∆%𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
Where:
α Power = Power coefficient of reactivity (Δk/k/°F)
Δρ = change in reactivity associated with change in power (Δk/k)
Δ% Power = change in reactor power (%)

For all practical purposes, the only reactivity coefficients that need to be considered
when calculating the impact on reactor power are the moderator temperature
coefficient and the fuel temperature (Doppler) coefficient. The amount of voids
present in the reactor coolant should not change significantly from 0% power to
100% reactor power in a PWR. Reactor pressure is also maintained relatively
constant during at-power operations, so reactivity changes associated with pressure
fluctuations are small and can be considered insignificant.
Based on this information, the power coefficient equation can be rewritten as:
Prepared By:
52 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

𝛼𝐷 ∆𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝛼𝑀 ∆𝑇
𝛼𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 =
∆%𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
Typical values for the power coefficient are:
• -1.5 x 10-4 ∆k/k % power (-15 pcm/% power) at core BOL
• -2.2 x 10-4 ∆k/k/ % power (-22 pcm % power) at core EOL

MTC and FTC Effects on Power Coefficient

The response of a nuclear reactor to a reactivity change introduced by the MTC and
the FTC (Doppler coefficient) will be different.
As previously discussed, the MTC is slow acting because the fuel must first heat up
and then transfer heat to the moderator/coolant. Moderator heating will begin at the
fuel cladding surface and proceed throughout the bulk of the moderator/coolant.
The FTC (Doppler coefficient) is the quickest acting of all of the reactivity coefficients
because an increase in power results in an immediate change in fuel temperature.
In reactor design, it is essential that both the MTC and FTC be negative. If power is
increased due to a positive reactivity insertion, the resultant increase in fuel
temperature and moderator temperature will result in negative reactivity being added
to the reactor which in turn will limit or turn the power increase. This phenomenon
makes the reactor inherently stable due to the negative feedback effect of increasing
moderator and fuel temperature.
If the MTC and FTC were positive, any increase in reactivity (positive reactivity
addition) would result in an increase in reactor power, which in turn would increase
the reactor temperature, which would result in additional positive reactivity addition
to the reactor, and the reactor could “run away.” This is what happened at
Chernobyl Unit 4.
The Chernobyl reactor was designed having positive moderator/void coefficient
(graphite moderated/water cooled). Therefore, as the water in the reactor coolant
began to heat up and create voids a large amount of positive reactivity was inserted.
This rendered the reactor prompt supercritical, which resulted in a rapid temperature
increase, a steam explosion and destruction of the reactor core and containment
vessel. Due to the extreme heat, a portion of the reactor core was vaporized and
expelled from the reactor into the atmosphere. The explosion also resulted in fuel
and moderator being expelled from the reactor building onto the surrounding
property at the Chernobyl site.

REACTIVITY DEFECTS

The term “reactivity defect” (ρ x) is used to describe the total amount of reactivity
added, positive or negative, due to changing a certain nuclear reactor parameter by
a given amount. This can be expressed as an equation:

Prepared By:
53 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

𝜌𝑥 = (∆𝑥 )(𝛼𝑥 )
∆𝜌
𝜌𝑥 = (∆𝑥 ) � �
∆𝑥
Where:
ρ x = reactivity defect (Δk/k)
x = specific parameter (fuel temp, moderator temp, etc)
Δx = change in parameter x
αx = parameter x reactivity coefficient (fuel temp, moderator temp, etc)

Doppler Defect

Doppler defect is an example of a reactivity defect. As discussed above, changes in

fuel temperatures affect the reactivity of the core in a nuclear reactor, and
subsequently the effective multiplication factor (k eff ).
• The reproduction factor (η), the fast fission factor (ε), both non-leakage terms
L f and L th , and the thermal utilization factor (f) are unaffected by a fuel
temperature increase.
• As more neutrons are resonantly absorbed due to the Doppler Effect as the
fuel temperature increases, the resonance escape probability (ρ) decreases.
• Also, as the fuel temperature increases, the resonance absorption in the fuel
increases, also resulting in a decrease in resonance escape probability (ρ).
For these reasons, in a PWR core, as the fuel temperature and power increase,
negative reactivity will always be inserted. This results in a negative effect on the
effective multiplication factor (k eff ) and as a consequence, reactor power.
In fact, because the effect of the increasing resonance absorption (Doppler Effect) is
occurring at the source of fission (in the fuel), the Doppler coefficient will provide the
quickest negative reactivity insertion to help turn the reactor power upswing or power
excursion. This negative reactivity insertion which occurs as a function of reactor
power increase is referred to as Doppler defect.
An example of how Doppler defect behaves is shown in Figure 4-14.

Prepared By:
54 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

-0.009

DOPPLER DEFECT (∆k/k) -0.008

-0.007

-0.006

-0.005

-0.004

-0.003

-0.002

-0.001

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

RATED POWER (%)

Figure 4-14
Doppler Defect versus Rated Reactor Core Power

REACTIVITY BALANCE IN AN OPERATING REACTOR CORE

A convenient method of summarizing reactor’s state of criticality or overall reactivity

value is by performing a reactivity balance. In reality, these balances are
numerically inaccurate, but they are useful in providing a rough indicator of the total
reactivity in a nuclear reactor to an operator.
All reactivity balances assume as a starting point that the reactor is capable of
achieving cold criticality (i.e. cold, clean, k eff = 1.0).
Note: “Cold”, as used here, refers to a temperature of 68°F. “Clean” means that
there are no fission product poisons, such as xenon and samarium, etc., present in
the reactor. After initial core criticality and at-power operation, the reactor is no
longer considered clean; the reactor is then referred to as “xenon-free” rather than
“clean”.
Since the starting point for this reactivity balance is from a cold, clean, critical
condition, enough fuel (positive reactivity) must present in the core to form critical
mass at 68 °F. Much more fuel (positive reactivity) must be added to the critical
mass in order to be able to achieve 100% power equilibrium conditions in the reactor
(and sustain power levels throughout core life). This extra added reactivity above
the amount required for critical mass under cold, clean conditions is termed excess
reactivity (ρ ex ).
Prepared By:
55 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
As previously discussed, the effective multiplication factor (k eff ) associated with this
excess reactivity is k excess . The definition of k excess is the amount of neutron
multiplication available in the core above the neutron multiplication required for
criticality. This value is given by the following equation.

𝑘𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓 − 1 = 𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 1

The maximum effective multiplication factor (k max ) is k eff in a cold, clean reactor with
no control rods inserted. The definition of k max therefore, is the maximum amount of
neutron multiplication available under reactor cold, clean conditions with no control
rods inserted.
The value of k eff listed as k max is the installed value of k eff at core BOL conditions. If
k max is known then the excess reactivity can be found by using a formula for
determining the amount of reactivity present in the core when the effective neutron
multiplication factor (k eff ) is known.

𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓 − 1
𝜌=
𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓
For the purposes of this discussion, the effective neutron multiplication factor (k eff )
can be designated k max and the reactivity (ρ) can be designated excess reactivity.
This results in following relationship:

𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 1
𝜌𝑒𝑥 =
𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥
In order to determine the amount of reactivity present in the core the amount of
positive reactivity due to excess fuel in the core above critical mass must be
determined. This reactivity (excess fuel) is necessary to allow the reactor to achieve
100% power at equilibrium conditions.
The amount of excess reactivity in the core can be determined by considering the
processes that occur in order to take the reactor from a cold, clean, critical condition
to a 100% power equilibrium condition.

Reactivity Required to Account for Reactor Heatup

In order to achieve 100 % equilibrium reactor power, the reactor will have to be
heated up from cold conditions to a hot operating temperature of about 545 °F.
Heating up the reactor will result in negative reactivity being added to the core by the
moderator temperature coefficient and the Doppler coefficient.
• The reactivity defect associated with the moderator temperature increase can
be found as follows, assuming a value of -1 x 10-4 Δk/k/°F for the MTC:

∆𝑇 = 545 − 68℉
Prepared By:
56 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

∆𝑇 = 477℉

∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
𝜌𝑚 = �−1 × 10−4 � (477℉)
℉𝑚𝑜𝑑

𝜌𝑚 = −4.77% ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
• The reactivity defect associated with fuel temperature increase can be found
as follows, assuming a Doppler coefficient of -1 x 10-5 Δk/k/°F fuel :

𝜌𝐷 = 𝛼𝐷 ∆𝑇

∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
𝜌𝐷 = �−1 × 10−5 � (477℉)
℉𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙

𝜌𝐷 = −0.477% ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
Based on the above calculation, if the core contained only enough fuel to achieve
cold, clean, critical mass, the negative reactivity added by the MTC and the Doppler
coefficient as temperature increased would cause the reactor to become subcritical
(k eff < 1.0). Therefore, positive reactivity must be added in order to keep the reactor
critical.
As mentioned earlier, positive reactivity is added to the core at the beginning of life
in the form of excess fuel. The amount of positive reactivity required to keep the
reactor critical at 545 °F, according to our reactivity balance, must be equal to the
negative reactivity added by the MTC and the Doppler coefficient as temperature
increases. In order to make the reactor critical at 545 °F, a total of +5.247% Δk/k
(+4.77% Δk/k plus +0.477% Δk/k) must be added.

Reactivity Required to Account for Power Increase

In order to achieve 100% equilibrium reactor power, the reactor will have to be taken
from the hot, clean, critical condition described above (545 °F, no fission product
poisons) to a 100% power, clean, critical condition. Some additional amount of fuel
(positive reactivity) must be loaded into the core to allow this to happen. The
reactivity associated with this additional fuel can be determined as follows.
In order to take the reactor from a hot, clean, critical condition to a 100% power,
clean, critical condition, the fuel temperature must be increased, which also results
in heating of the coolant (moderator).
As a result of this heating, negative reactivity is added to the core by the fuel
temperature increase (Doppler coefficient) and the coolant temperature increase
(MTC).

Prepared By:
57 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
• The reactivity defect associated with the fuel temperature increase can be
found as follows, assuming a Doppler coefficient of -1 x 10-5 Δk/k/°F fuel . A
typical fuel temperature at 100% power is approximately 1400 °F.

∆𝑇𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 = 1400 − 545 = 855℉

∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
𝜌𝐷 = �−1 × 10−5 � (855℉)
℉𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙

𝜌𝐷 = −0.855% ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
• The reactivity defect associated with the moderator temperature increase can
be found as follows, assuming a value of -1 x 10-4 Δk/k/°F for the MTC. The
average change in coolant temperature as the reactor power is raised 100%
can be assumed to be 35°F (ΔT = 35 °F).

𝜌𝑚 = 𝛼𝑚 (∆𝑇)

∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
𝜌𝑚 = �−1 × 10−4 � (35℉)
℉𝑚𝑜𝑑

𝜌𝑚 = −0.350% ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘
Based on the above calculation, the process of going to a 100% power clean, critical
condition adds a total of -1.205% Δk/k (-0.855% plus -0.350% reactivity) to the core
due to the associated fuel temperature increase and moderator temperature
increase. Therefore, for the reactor to remain critical at 100% power, clean critical
conditions, an equal amount of positive reactivity (in the form of fuel) must be added:
+1.205% Δk/k.

Reactivity Required to Account for Fission Product Poisons

The process of fission invariably results in the creation of fission fragments which
were not originally present in the reactor fuel. Some of these fission fragments are
nucleons which will readily absorb neutrons. These types of nucleons are referred
to as fission product poisons because they remove neutrons from the neutron life
cycle. The most important of these fission product poisons are xenon and
samarium.
In an operating nuclear reactor the reactivity associated with the xenon and
samarium present in the core is very important. Fission product poisons will be
discussed in greater detail later in this text. For the purposes of this discussion it
should be noted that increasing the concentration of fission product poisons in the
core results in the addition of negative reactivity, whereas the removal of fission
product poisons results in positive reactivity being added to the core.
Prepared By:
58 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
To continue the reactivity balance, equilibrium conditions at 100% power must be
accounted for. The term equilibrium refers to equilibrium xenon (Xe) and samarium
(Sm) concentrations within the core. For a typical commercial nuclear reactor core
the reactivity associated with these equilibrium values are as follows:
• Equilibrium samarium = -1.0% Δk/k
• Equilibrium xenon = -3.0% Δk/k

Additional fuel (positive reactivity) must be added to the core in order to account for
the buildup of these fission product poisons (negative reactivity) in the reactor.
Without additional reactivity from additional fuel, sustained criticality would be
impossible since the buildup of fission product poisons in the core adds negative
reactivity.
The total value of negative reactivity added by equilibrium samarium and equilibrium
xenon is -4% Δk/k. In order to remain critical, this negative reactivity in the reactor
must be balanced by adding enough additional fuel to equal +4% Δk/k.

Reactivity Required to Account for Core Life

At this point the reactivity balance accounts for enough fuel to operate at 100%
power equilibrium conditions. As the reactor is operated, the fuel in the reactor is
burned up or depleted.
Unless additional fuel is loaded into the reactor core, this depletion of fuel will add
negative reactivity to the reactor core and will eventually cause the reactor to
become subcritical. When this happens, the reactor power level will decrease,
causing the fuel temperature and the moderator temperature to decrease, adding
positive reactivity to reactor. This positive reactivity addition will offset the negative
reactivity from the fuel depletion and the reactor will become critical again, but at
lower power level.
Since commercial reactors are used to generate power (and therefore revenue for
the operating company), this scenario is undesirable. In order to allow the reactor to
be operated for a specified period of time at 100% power equilibrium conditions, an
additional amount of fuel will have to be added to the core.
This specified period time is referred to as the fuel cycle. An 18-month fuel cycle
(typical) requires approximately +15% Δk/k.

Total Reactivity Required for Reactor Operation

The total amount of excess reactivity required to operate a nuclear reactor through
an 18-month fuel cycle can be determined by summing all of the reactivities involved
in the reactivity balance discussed above. These values are shown in the table
below.
Positive Reactivity Required (∆k/k) Reactivity Balance

Prepared By:
59 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
4.770% due to α m Heatup from 68 to 545 °F
0.477% due to α D Heat up from 68 to 545°F
0.855% due to α D Heat up to 100% power, 545 to 1400°F
0.350% due to α m Heat up to 100% power 545 to 580°F
1.000% due to samarium Equilibrium Samarium
3.000% due to xenon Equilibrium Xenon
15.000% for 18 month cycle Core life
25.452% excess reactivity Reactivity Total

From this information k excess can be determined.

Example:
What will k excess be for an 18-month fuel cycle in a nuclear reactor?
Assume ρ ex = 25.5%∆k/k.
Solution:
Use the equation:

𝑘𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓 − 1 = 𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 1

Note: k max is installed k eff in the reactor.

𝑘𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 1
1
𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
1 − 𝜌𝑒𝑥
1
𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
1 − 0.255
𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1.34
1
𝑘𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
1 − 𝜌𝑒𝑥

𝑘𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 1.34 − 1 = 0.34

𝑘𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 0.34 ∆𝑘 ⁄𝑘

Prepared By:
60 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
It should be noted that an 18-month fuel cycle for a PWR will require about 15%∆k/k
of excess reactivity in order to account for the effects of fuel burnup alone.
Ultimately the core requires an installed effective multiplication factor (k eff or k max ) of
about 1.34 to account for the cumulative effects of temperature, fission product
poisons, and fuel depletion.

Table 4-1
K eff Required for Various PWR Fuel Cycles

PWR Fuel Cycle (Time) ρ ex Required to Account K eff installed at BOL

for Fuel Burnup
12 months 10%∆k/k ≈1.26
18 months 15%∆k/k ≈1.34
24 months 20%∆k/k ≈1.44

Examples:
A reactivity coefficient measures a/an ________________ change in reactivity while
a reactivity defect measures a _________________ change in reactivity due to a
change in the measured parameter.
A. integrated; total
B. integrated; differential
C. unit; total
D. unit; differential
The total reactivity change by varying a parameter is called the defect while the
change in reactivity associated with the per unit change in an associated parameter
is known aas the reactivity coefficient for that parameter. The correct answer is: C.
During power operation, while changing power level, core reactivity is affected most
quickly by...
A. boron concentration adjustments.
B. power defect (deficit).
C. xenon transients.
D. fuel depletion.

Prepared By:
61 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
When changing the reactor power fuel temperature changes immediately to change
the rate of heat transfer from the fuel to the reactor coolant. The power increase is a
result of positive reactivity being added, this added reactivity increases the rate of
reaction, which increases power, which quickly increases the fuel temperature.
When fuel temperature increases, more and more negative reactivity is added to the
core due to affect of temperature change, which will counteract the positive reactivity
addition. The Doppler coefficient is the first coefficient to respond to an accidental,
large, positive reactivity addition. The correct answer is: B.
Which one of the following statements concerning the power defect is correct?
A. The power defect necessitates the use of a ramped Tave program to maintain an
adequate reactor coolant system subcooling margin.
B. The power defect increases the rod height requirements necessary to maintain
the desired shutdown margin following a reactor trip.
C. The power defect is more negative at the beginning of core life because of the
higher boron concentration.
D. The power defect causes control rods to be withdrawn as reactor power is
decreased.
As the power is raised more positive reactivity is added by the power defect during a
reactor trip. This reactivity must be counteracted by rod worth or boron
concentration capabilities rods are normally raised. The correct answer is: B.

USING BORON TO CONTROL REACTIVITY (CHEMICAL SHIM)

As previously discussed, boron is often added to the moderator/coolant in a

commercial PWR as a method of countering the excess reactivity present in the core
due to increased fuel loading. Once in the coolant, adjusting the boron
concentration is referred to as “chemical shim”. This term stems from the movement
of control rods to control reactivity in the reactor core. Inserting and withdrawing
(shimming) a reactor’s control rods will vary the amount of reactivity present in the
core. Similarly, adjusting the concentration of boron present in the coolant (chemical
shim) will affect the amount of reactivity present in the reactor core. Control rods will
be discussed in greater detail later in this text.

Mechanism for Reactivity Control with Chemical Shim

Once boric acid has been added and circulated in the moderator/coolant, the boron
is uniformly distributed throughout moderator/coolant. The acid concentration
required to be present in the moderator/coolant is based on the amount of excess
reactivity (ρ excess , k excess ) that must be present at BOL to permit the reactor to
operate for a specified period of time at 100% equilibrium power.

Prepared By:
62 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
The effect of this “chemical shim” is to increase the macroscopic cross section for
absorption of the moderator/coolant throughout the core. As result, the thermal
utilization factor of fuel is decreased, reducing the amount of reactivity in the core.
As the reactor operates and the fuel is depleted, the reactivity in the core decreases.
By removing some of the chemical shim (diluting the boron concentration in the
moderator/coolant), reactivity is increased (negative reactivity removed) to
compensate for the loss of fuel due to depletion (burnup).
Chemical shim is a solution of boric acid (H 3 BO 3 ) and water. Chemical shim
concentration is measured in parts per million of boron by weight. Boron
concentration (C B ) is defined as follows:

𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑜𝑛
𝐶𝐵 =
𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
When 1000 ppm of boron is present in solution, this ratio is:

0.001 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑜𝑛

1000𝑝𝑝𝑚 =
1.0 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
Since concentrations are highly dilute, it can be assumed that no water is displaced
when H 3 BO 3 is added to the reactor coolant system.
A 1000 ppm concentration of boron also means:
• 0.001 grams of boron/cm3 of water using water density of 1 g/cm3
• 0.001 grams of boron/ml of water using 1 cm3 of water = 1 ml of water
Example:
Calculate the macroscopic cross section (Σ a ) for a 1000 ppm solution of H 3 BO 3 and
H 2 O, (Σ a Solution (H 3 BO 3 + H 2 O) for a 1000 ppm solution). Given the following
information:
• Atomic weight of boron = 10.81 amu
• 1000 ppm contains 0.001 g/cm3 of boron
• Σ a of boron is 765 barns
• Σ a of boric acid (H 3 BO 3 ) is approximately 765 barns
• Σ a of pure water is 0.022 cm-1
Solution:
First, find the total number of atoms of boron/cm3 in a 1000 ppm solution. The total
number of atoms of boron/cm3 in a 1000 ppm solution is determined as follows:

𝑁𝑜
𝑁= 𝜌
𝐴

Prepared By:
63 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Where:
N = Atoms/cm3
N o = Avogadro’s Number
A = atomic mass of boron or number of grams per GAW for boron
ρ = density of boron

𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑠
6.02 × 1023 𝑔
𝑔 𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑠
𝑁=� 𝑔 � × �0.001 3
�
10.81 𝑐𝑚
𝑔 𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑠
𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑠
𝑁 = 5.57 × 1019
𝑐𝑚3

19
𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚 −22
𝑐𝑚2
𝛴𝑎𝐵 = �5.57 × 10 � �7.65 × 10 �
𝑐𝑚3 𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚

𝛴𝑎𝐵 = 0.042 𝑐𝑚−1

For 1000 ppm boron solution in water:

𝛴𝑎 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝛴𝑎 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 + 𝛴𝑎𝐵

𝛴𝑎 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 0.022 𝑐𝑚−1 + 0.042 𝑐𝑚−1

𝛴𝑎 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 0.064 𝑐𝑚−1

Purpose for Chemical Shim

Chemical shim is principally used to control the effects of processes in the reactor
that vary reactivity slowly (over time). It also serves to reduce the overall control rod
reactivity requirements in a PWR.

Chemical shim combined with multi-region fuel loading and control rod programming
serves to reduce peak to average power density in a PWR. Through the use of
chemical shim, a reactor may be operated with most of the control rods fully
withdrawn producing a flatter radial and axial power distribution within the core. This
reduces the probability of forming regions of excessively high heat flux along any
individual fuel rod. The use of chemical shim also reduces the number of control
rods required for reactivity control in the reactor.

Prepared By:
64 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Changing Core Reactivity with Chemical Shim

Changing the concentration of the soluble poison dissolved in the moderator/coolant

in a nuclear reactor is a slow process. As a result, the maximum rate of change in
reactivity which can be attained using chemical shim is approximately
3 pcm/second. As a consequence, chemical shim is primarily used for
compensating for the effects of more slowly changing parameters that affect the
amount of reactivity present in the core such as fuel depletion and conversion of
uranium-238 into plutonium-239 over core life.

Chemical shim may also be used to counter the changes in reactivity due to
changes in fission product poison concentration. The effects of fission product
poisoning are long term; therefore chemical shim can be used to counter them. As
previously mentioned, the most important fission product poisons are xenon-135 and
samarium-149.

Changes In Boron Worth With Changes In Boron Concentration

The variation of the macroscopic cross section for absorption (Σa ) with boron
concentration is shown in Table 3 below.

Table 4-2
Macroscopic Cross Section for Absorption versus Boron Concentration

C B (ppm) Σ a Boron (cm-1) Σ a B and H 2 O (cm-1)

0 0 0.022
500 0.021 0.043
1000 0.042 0.064
1500 0.063 0.085
2000 0.084 0.106
2500 0.105 0.127
3000 0.126 0.148
3500 0.147 0.169

It can be seen that macroscopic absorption cross section of boric acid dissolved in
water varies linearly with boric acid concentration in parts-per-million.

Differential and Integral Boron Worth

Differential boron worth refers to the reactivity effect of each incremental increase of
dissolved chemical shim which is added to the core. Integral boron worth refers to
the total reactivity effect on the core for a specified boron concentration.
Prepared By:
65 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Integral boron worth is usually expressed in units of pcm as shown in Figure 4-16.

INTEGRAL BORON 78°F

REACTIVITY WORTH
-3000

∆ρ (pcm) 578°F

-2000

-1000

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000

BORON CONCENTRATION (ppm)

Figure 4-15
Integral Boron Worth

Differential boron worth is usually expressed in units of pcm/ppm for PWR as shown
in Figure 4-16.

BORON CONCENTRATION (ppm)

0 1000 2000 3000 4000
0
∆ρ/∆ CB (pcm/ppm)

578 °F
-5

78 °F

-10

-15

Figure 4-16
Differential Boron Worth

Prepared By:
66 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Note that highest (most negative in magnitude) differential boron worth occurs for
low boron concentrations. This is because the boron atoms which are present in the
moderator/coolant are not competing with as many boron atoms as would be
present at higher concentrations.
However, as the concentration of boron in the moderator/coolant (C B ) increases,
individual boron atoms are in greater competition for absorbing neutrons, so the
value of the differential worth drops. In effect, as boron concentration becomes
greater, there are so many boron atoms in the moderator/coolant that there is a
tendency for some of the boron atoms to be “shielded” from neutrons by other boron
atoms. As a result, the probability that an individual boron atom will absorb a given
neutron drops. This results in a decrease in differential boron worth for higher boron
concentrations.
As an example, differential boron worth at 578 °F is of a lower magnitude (less
negative) than at 78 °F because fewer atoms of boron are actually in reactor core
due to lower moderator/coolant density at the higher temperature.

Changes In Boron Worth With Changes In Moderator Temperature

Referring to Figure 4-17, it can be seen that the reactivity worth of boron is a
function of the moderator temperature. The differential boron worth curve is the one
usually encountered by a commercial reactor operator. This graph is useful when
making small reactivity changes in reactor.

Prepared By:
67 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
-5

-6

-7

-8

∆ρ /∆CB (pcm/ppm or 10 % ∆ k/k / ppm) -9

-10

-11 2000 ppm

-3

-12 1500 ppm

-13
1000 ppm
-14
500 ppm
-15

-16
0 ppm
-17

-18

-19

-20
0 100 200 300 400 500 600

MODERATOR TEMPERATURE (° F)

Figure 4-17
Reactivity Worth of Boron versus Moderator Temperature

At higher temperatures the reactor core contains a smaller mass of water due to the
expansion of water at constant pressure (reactor core pressure is automatically
maintained) within reactor core as temperature increases. The smaller mass of
water results in a smaller mass of boron in the core for a given concentration of
boron (ppm). This causes a lower boron density in core, resulting in lower boron
differential worth.
Note that the concentration (ppm value) of boron in the moderator/coolant does not
change as the temperature of the reactor is increased, but the actual mass of the
water and boron in the system decreases while volume remains same.

Changes in Boron Concentration Over Core Life

Figure 4-18 is a graph of boron concentration over core life.

Prepared By:
68 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
1200

CRITICAL BORON CONCENTRATION (PPM)

1000

800

600

400

200

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10,000

BURNUP (EFPH)

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000

BURNUP (MWD / MTU)

Figure 4-18
Integral Boron Worth over Core Life

As was discussed previously, boric acid is added to the reactor coolant system to
help control excess reactivity (k excess ) which must be supplied for fuel depletion
effects and to compensate for fission product poisoning and temperature reactivity
effects in reactor core.
At beginning of life, the amount of reactivity controlled by chemical shim is about
20% Δk/k or about 20,000 pcm, when the reactor core is at cold shutdown conditions
and borated to about 2000 ppm. It can be seen from differential boron worth curve
(Figure 4-16) that the differential boron worth at this time in core life is about -10 to -
11 pcm/ppm. Assuming a value of -10 pcm/ppm, the negative reactivity effect on the
reactor due to a 2000 ppm concentration of boron can be calculated as follows:

∆𝜌 −10 𝑝𝑐𝑚
=
∆𝐶𝐵 𝑝𝑝𝑚
−10𝑝𝑐𝑚
∆𝜌(𝑝𝑐𝑚) = × 2000 𝑝𝑝𝑚
𝑝𝑝𝑚

∆𝜌(𝑝𝑐𝑚) = −20000 𝑝𝑐𝑚

Prepared By:
69 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
However, as the reactor coolant system is heated up, the reactor is taken critical,
and reactor power is increased to 100%, the reactor’s control rods must be
withdrawn and the chemical shim must be reduced by dilution.
Nominally, the reactor would be taken critical at boron concentration between 1150-
1250 ppm at beginning of life (BOL). Figure 4-18 illustrated how boron
concentration must be reduced gradually over core lifetime.

Beginning of Core Life Boron Concentration

At BOL, boron concentration is about 1200 ppm. The sharp drop in boron
concentration at BOL is due to buildup of fission product poisons having large
neutron absorption cross sections. The major negative reactivity insertion from
fission product poisons is due to xeon-135 and samariun-149 production. The
buildup of these fission product poisons requires the insertion of positive reactivity in
order to maintain reactor criticality. This is accomplished by diluting boric acid
concentration in reactor coolant system.

End of Core Life Boron Concentration

Figure 4-18 shows that boron concentration must gradually be reduced over core life
until at EOL the boron concentration is around 50 ppm. The flat portion of this curve,
(around 200 EFPH) is a result of fuel depletion in the core and depletion of burnable
poisons (rods or installed poisons) in core. The boron concentration then drops in
nearly linear manner over remainder of core life due to fuel burnup effects in reactor.

Boron Dilution over Core Life

Because the volume of the reactor coolant system and the concentration of the boric
acid used during boron addition are constant over core life, a given addition of boric
acid will produce same ppm change in boron concentration at any time in core life.
Dilutions are a different matter. The concentration of boron dissolved in the coolant
will be much lower at core EOL as compared to core BOL. This means that every
gallon of borated water removed from the core through dilution will carry with it much
less boron at core EOL than at core BOL.
Over core life, the boron concentration is reduced by approximately a factor of 10.
This means that at core EOL, 10 times as much water must be removed to cause
the same ppm decrease in boron concentration as would be needed at core BOL.
Examples:
Differential boron reactivity worth will become _______ negative as moderator
temperature increases because, at higher moderator temperatures, a 1 ppm
increase in reactor coolant system boron concentration will add _______ boron
atoms to the core.
A. more; fewer
Prepared By:
70 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
B. more; more
C. less; fewer
D. less; more
When at higher temperatures a reactor core contains fewer coolant molecules due to
thermal expansion of the coolant at constant pressure within the reactor core which
results in less boron atoms in the core at the given value of ppm. Less boron will be
added to the core with a 1 ppm increase when the moderator temperature is higher
so the differential boron worth is less negative at a higher moderator temperatures.
The correct answer is: C. less; fewer
Differential boron worth (ΔK/K/ppm) becomes more negative as...
A. burnable poisons deplete.
B. boron concentration increases.
C. moderator temperature increases.
D. fission product poison concentration increases.
As the burnable poisons deplete there will be less competition for the neutrons
allowing boron more chances to interact with a neutron. The correct answer is: A..

Prepared By:
71 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

SUMMARY

• The change in reactivity (Δρ) due to per unit change in some associated
parameter (x) is called the reactivity coefficient (α) for that parameter.
• The term “reactivity defect” (ρ x) is used to describe the total amount of
reactivity added, positive or negative, due to changing a parameter by a given
amount.
• A reactor is undermoderated when a decrease in the moderator-to-fuel ratio
decreases k eff due to the increased resonance absorption.
• A reactor is overmoderated when an increase in the moderator-to-fuel ratio
decreases k eff due to the decrease in the thermal utilization factor.
• Reactors are usually designed to operate in an under moderated condition so
that the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity is negative.
 Increasing the moderator temperature will decrease the moderator-to-fuel
ratio.
 Decreasing the moderator temperature will increase the moderator-to-fuel
ratio.
 A negative temperature coefficient of reactivity is desirable because it makes
the reactor more self-regulating.
 An increase in power, resulting in an increase in temperature, results in
negative reactivity addition due to the temperature coefficient.
 The negative reactivity addition due to the temperature increase will slow or
stop the power increase.
• The moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity is the change in reactivity
per unit change in the temperature (°F) of the moderator.
 The moderator temperature coefficient for a one degree change at a high
temperature is more negative than the moderator temperature coefficient at a
low temperature.
 Δf/ΔT becomes more positive with increasing boron concentration, therefore
MTC becomes less negative.
 The MTC becomes more negative with core age due to the significant drop in
boron concentration in the moderator/coolant.
• The Doppler coefficient (α D ), also known as the fuel temperature coefficient
(FTC), is defined as the change in reactivity per unit change in fuel
temperature.
 The FTC is more effective than the MTC in terminating a rapid power rise
because the fuel temperature immediately increases following a power
increase, while the moderator temperature does not increase for several
seconds.
 The magnitude of the Doppler coefficient is smaller at higher fuel
temperatures.
 The value for αD becomes more negative later in core life.
Prepared By:
72 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
 The Doppler coefficient is more negative at high moderator temperatures.
• The Doppler broadening of resonance peaks occurs because the nuclei may
be moving either toward or away from the neutron at the time of interaction.
 Neutron may actually have either slightly more or slightly less than the
resonant energy, but still appear to be at resonant energy relative to the
nucleus.
• Self shielding - The outer fuel atoms tend to shield the inner fuel atoms from
resonant energy neutrons.
 At low fuel temperatures, a neutron entering a fuel pellet with exact resonant
energy has a very high probability of absorption; most likely in the outer edge
of fuel pellet.
 Epithermal neutrons of other than resonant energies are more likely to pass
directly through the pellet without being absorbed.
• Uranium-238 and plutonium-240 are two nuclides present in some reactor
fuels that have large resonance absorption peaks.
• The pressure coefficient of reactivity is the change in reactivity per unit change in
pressure.
 The pressure coefficient of reactivity is usually negligible in reactors
moderated by subcooled liquids because the density of the liquid does not
change significantly within the operating pressure range.
• The void coefficient of reactivity is the change in reactivity per unit change in
void volume.
 The void coefficient of reactivity becomes significant in a reactor in which the
moderator is at or near saturated conditions.
 Lowering the moderator density as voids and bubbles are created leads to a
decrease in the resonance escape probability (ρ) and an increase in the
thermal utilization factor (f).
• The Power Coefficient of reactivity is:
αD ∆Tfuel + αM ∆Tmod
αPower =
∆% Power
 The MTC is slow acting, whereas the FTC (Doppler coefficient) is the quickest
acting of all of the reactivity coefficients because an increase in power results
in an immediate change in fuel temperature, therefore the FTC has a larger
impact on the value of the power coefficient than the MTC does.
• Negative reactivity insertion as a function of power is referred to as the
Doppler defect.
• A reactivity balance for an operating nuclear reactor involves the reactivities
shown in the table below:

Prepared By:
73 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
Positive Reactivity Required (∆k/k) Reactivity Balance
4.770% due to α m Heatup from 68 to 545 °F
0.477% due to α D Heat up from 68 to 545°F
0.855% due to α D Heat up to 100% power, 545 to 1400°F
0.350% due to α m Heat up to 100% power 545 to 580°F
1.000% due to samarium Equilibrium Samarium
3.000% due to xenon Equilibrium Xenon
15.000% for 18 month cycle Core life
25.452% excess reactivity Reactivity Total

• Boron is added to the moderator/coolant of a nuclear reactor to control

excess reactivity. This is known as chemical shim.
 By removing some of the chemical shim (dilution), which decreases boron
concentration in the core, reactivity is increased.
 The highest differential boron worth occurs for low boron concentrations.
 At higher temperatures the reactor core contains a smaller mass of water due
to expansion of the water at constant pressure within the reactor core. The
reactor core pressure is automatically maintained. The smaller mass of water
results in a smaller mass of boron in the core at the given concentration
(ppm). This causes a lower boron density in the core, resulting in a lower
differential worth.
• At EOL, 10 times as much water must be removed to cause the same Boron
concentration decrease as would be needed at BOL.

Prepared By:
74 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

REVIEW QUESTIONS

1. Moderator temperature coefficient is defined as the change in core reactivity

per degree change in _______________.

A. fuel temperature
B. fuel clad temperature
C. reactor vessel temperature
D. reactor coolant temperature

2. Which one of the following will result in a less negative fuel temperature
coefficient? (Consider only the direct effect of the change in the listed
parameters.)

A. Increase in fuel burnup.

B. Decrease in moderator temperature.
C. Increase in void fraction.
D. Decrease in fuel temperature.

3. Under which one of the following conditions is a nuclear reactor core most
likely to have a positive moderator temperature coefficient?

A. Low coolant temperature at beginning-of-life

B. Low coolant temperature at end-of-life
C. High coolant temperature at beginning-of-life
D. High coolant temperature at end-of-life

4. As the reactor coolant boron concentration increases, the moderator

temperature coefficient becomes less negative. This is because a 1°F
increase in reactor coolant temperature at higher boron concentrations results
in a larger increase in the _______________.

A. fast fission factor

B. thermal utilization factor
C. total nonleakage probability
D. resonance escape probability

Prepared By:
75 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
5. Which one of the following pairs of isotopes is responsible for the negative
reactivity associated with a fuel temperature increase near the end of core
life?

A. Uranium-235 and Plutonium-239

B. Uranium-235 and Plutonim-240
C. Uranium-238 and Plutonium-240
D. Uranium-238 and Plutonium-239

6. Refer to the drawing of microscopic cross section for absorption versus

neutron energy for a 6.7 electron volt (ev) resonance peak in Uranium-238 for
a nuclear reactor operating at 50% power (see figure below).

If fuel temperature decreases by 50°F, the area under the curve will
___________ and positive reactivity will be added to the core because
____________.

A. decrease; fewer neutrons will be absorbed by Uranium-238 overall

B. decrease; fewer 6.7 ev neutrons will be absorbed by Uranium-238 at the
resonance energy
C. remain the same; fewer neutrons will be absorbed by Uranium-238
overall
D. remain the same; fewer 6.7 ev neutrons will be absorbed by Uranium-
238 at the resonance energy

Prepared By:
76 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
7. Which one of the following groups contains parameters that, if varied, will
each have a direct effect on the power coefficient?

A. Control rod position, reactor power, moderator voids

B. Moderator temperature, RCS pressure, Xenon level
C. Fuel temperature, xenon level, control rod position
D. Moderator voids, fuel temperature, moderator temperature

8. Differential boron reactivity worth will become _______ negative as moderator

temperature increases because, at higher moderator temperatures, a 1 ppm
increase in reactor coolant system boron concentration will add _______
boron atoms to the core.

A. more; fewer
B. more; more
C. less; fewer
D. less; more

9. The amount of pure water required to decrease the reactor coolant boron
concentration by 20 ppm at the end of core life (100 ppm) is approximately
______________ the amount of pure water required to decrease reactor
coolant boron concentration by 20 ppm at the beginning of core life (1000
ppm).

A. one-tenth
B. the same as
C. 10 times
D. 100 times

10. During power operation, while changing power level, core reactivity is affected
most quickly by ______________.

A. boron concentration adjustments

B. power defect (deficit)
C. xenon transients
D. fuel depletion

11. Factors that affect resonance absorption of a neutron by a nucleus include...

A. kinetic energy of the nucleus, kinetic energy of the neutron, and

excitation energy of the nucleus.

Prepared By:
77 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
B. kinetic energy of the neutron, excitation energy of the nucleus, and
excitation energy of the neutron.
C. excitation energy of the nucleus, excitation energy of the neutron, and
kinetic energy of the nucleus.
D. excitation energy of the neutron, kinetic energy of the nucleus, and
kinetic energy of the neutron.

12. Which one of the following conditions will cause the moderator temperature
coefficient (MTC) to become more negative? (Consider only the direct effect
of the indicated change on MTC.)

A. The controlling bank of control rods is inserted 5% into the core.

B. Fuel temperature decreases from 1500°F to 1200°F.
C. Reactor coolant boron concentration increases by 20 ppm.
D. Moderator temperature decreases from 500°F to 450°F.

13. Which one of the following contains two isotopes, both of which are
responsible for the negative reactivity inserted when fuel temperature
increases near the end of core life?

A. U-235 and Pu-239

B. U-235 and Pu-240
C. U-238 and Pu-239
D. U-238 and Pu-240

14. During a nuclear power plant heat-up at end of core life, the moderator
temperature coefficient becomes increasingly more negative. This is
because...

A. as moderator density decreases, more thermal neutrons are absorbed

by the moderator than by the fuel.
B. the change in the thermal utilization factor dominates the change in the
resonance escape probability.
C. a greater density change per °F occurs at higher reactor coolant
temperatures.
D. the core transitions from an undermoderated condition to an
overmoderated condition.

15. A nuclear reactor is operating at full power following a refueling outage. In

comparison to the current moderator temperature coefficient (MTC), the MTC
just prior to the refueling was...

Prepared By:
78 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
A. less negative at all coolant temperatures.
B. more negative at all coolant temperatures.
C. less negative below approximately 350°F coolant temperature and more
negative above approximately 350°F coolant temperature.
D. more negative below approximately 350°F coolant temperature and less
negative above approximately 350°F coolant temperature.

16. A nuclear power plant is operating at 70% power. Which one of the following
will result in a less negative fuel temperature coefficient? (Consider only the
direct effect of the change in each listed parameter.)

A. Increase in Pu-240 inventory in the core

B. Increase in moderator temperature
C. Increase in fuel temperature
D. Increase in void fraction

17. Which one of the following describes how the magnitude of the fuel
temperature coefficient of reactivity is affected over core life?

A. It remains essentially constant over core life.

B. It becomes more negative due to the buildup of Pu-240.
C. It becomes less negative due to the decrease in RCS boron
concentration.
D. It becomes more negative initially due to buildup of fissions product
poisons, then less negative due to fuel depletion.

18. Which one of the following groups contain parameters that, if varied, will each
have a direct effect on the power coefficient?

A. Control rod position, reactor power, moderator voids

B. Moderator temperature, RCS pressure, Xenon level
C. Fuel temperature, xenon level, control rod (CEA) position
D. Moderator voids, fuel temperature, moderator temperature

19. A nuclear reactor is exactly critical at the point of adding heat during a xenon-
free reactor startup at the beginning of core life. Reactor power is ramped to
50% over the next 4 hours.

During the power increase, most of the positive reactivity added by the
operator is necessary to overcome the negative reactivity associated with
the...

Prepared By:
79 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
A. buildup of core Xe-135.
B. increased fuel temperature.
C. burnout of burnable poisons.
D. increased reactor coolant temperature.

20. The following are the initial conditions for a nuclear power plant:
Reactor power is 50%.
Average reactor coolant temperature is 570°F.

After a power increase, current plant conditions are as follows:

Reactor power is 80%.
Average reactor coolant temperature is 582°F.

Assume that the initial and current reactor coolant boron concentrations are
the same. Which one of the following describes the current differential boron
worth (DBW) in comparison to the initial DBW?

A. The current DBW is more negative because a 1°F increase in reactor

coolant temperature will remove more boron-10 atoms from the core.
B. The current DBW is more negative because a 1 ppm increase in reactor
coolant boron concentration will add more boron-10 atoms to the core.
C. The current DBW is less negative because a 1°F increase in reactor
coolant temperature will remove fewer boron-10 atoms from the core.
D. The current DBW is less negative because a 1 ppm increase in reactor
coolant boron concentration will add fewer boron-10 atoms to the core.

21. The amount of pure water required to decrease the reactor coolant boron
concentration by 20 ppm at the end of core life (100 ppm) is approximately
______________ the amount of pure water required to decrease reactor
coolant boron concentration by 20 ppm at the beginning of core life (1000
ppm).

A. one-tenth
B. the same as
C. 10 times
D. 100 times

Prepared By:
80 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
22. Given the following initial parameters, select the final reactor coolant boron
concentration required to decrease average coolant temperature by 4EF.
(Assume no change in rod position or reactor/turbine power).

Initial reactor coolant system boron concentration = 600 ppm

Moderator temperature coefficient - = 0.015% ΔK/K per EF
Differential boron worth = -0.010% ΔK/K per ppm
Inverse boron worth = -100 ppm/% ΔK/K

A. 606 ppm
B. 603 ppm
C. 597 ppm
D. 594 ppm

23. Neglecting the effects of changes in core Xe-135, which one of the following
power changes requires the greatest amount of positive reactivity addition?

A. 3% power to 5% power
B. 5% power to 15% power
C. 15% power to 30% power
D. 30% power to 60% power

24. Neglecting the effects of core Xe-135, which one of the following power
changes requires the smallest amount of positive reactivity addition?

A. 2% power to 5% power
B. 5% power to 15% power
C. 15% power to 30% power
D. 30% power to 50% power

Prepared By:
81 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS

REVIEW ANSWERS

1. Moderator temperature coefficient is defined as the change in core reactivity

per degree change in _______________.

D. reactor coolant temperature

2. Which one of the following will result in a less negative fuel temperature
coefficient? (Consider only the direct effect of the change in the listed
parameters.)

B. Decrease in moderator temperature.

3. Under which one of the following conditions is a nuclear reactor core most
likely to have a positive moderator temperature coefficient?

A. Low coolant temperature at beginning-of-life

4. As the reactor coolant boron concentration increases, the moderator

temperature coefficient becomes less negative. This is because a 1°F
increase in reactor coolant temperature at higher boron concentrations results
in a larger increase in the _______________.

B. thermal utilization factor

5. Which one of the following pairs of isotopes is responsible for the negative
reactivity associated with a fuel temperature increase near the end of core
life?

C. Uranium-238 and Plutonium-240

6. If fuel temperature decreases by 50°F, the area under the curve will
___________ and positive reactivity will be added to the core because
____________.

C. remain the same; fewer neutrons will be absorbed by Uranium-238 overall

7. Which one of the following groups contains parameters that, if varied, will
each have a direct effect on the power coefficient?

D. Moderator voids, fuel temperature, moderator temperature

Prepared By:
82 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
8. Differential boron reactivity worth will become _______ negative as moderator
temperature increases because, at higher moderator temperatures, a 1 ppm
increase in reactor coolant system boron concentration will add _______
boron atoms to the core.

C. less; fewer

9. The amount of pure water required to decrease the reactor coolant boron
concentration by 20 ppm at the end of core life (100 ppm) is approximately
______________ the amount of pure water required to decrease reactor
coolant boron concentration by 20 ppm at the beginning of core life (1000
ppm).

C. 10 times

10. During power operation, while changing power level, core reactivity is affected
most quickly by ______________.

B. power defect (deficit)

11. Factors that affect resonance absorption of a neutron by a nucleus include...

A. kinetic energy of the nucleus, kinetic energy of the neutron, and excitation
energy of the nucleus.

12. Which one of the following conditions will cause the moderator temperature
coefficient (MTC) to become more negative? (Consider only the direct effect
of the indicated change on MTC.)

A. The controlling bank of control rods is inserted 5% into the core.

13. Which one of the following contains two isotopes, both of which are
responsible for the negative reactivity inserted when fuel temperature
increases near the end of core life?

D. U-238 and Pu-240

14. During a nuclear power plant heat-up at end of core life, the moderator
temperature coefficient becomes increasingly more negative. This is
because...

C. a greater density change per °F occurs at higher reactor coolant

temperatures.

15. A nuclear reactor is operating at full power following a refueling outage. In

comparison to the current moderator temperature coefficient (MTC), the MTC
just prior to the refueling was...
Prepared By:
83 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
B. more negative at all coolant temperatures.

16. A nuclear power plant is operating at 70% power. Which one of the following
will result in a less negative fuel temperature coefficient? (Consider only the
direct effect of the change in each listed parameter.)

C. Increase in fuel temperature

17. Which one of the following describes how the magnitude of the fuel
temperature coefficient of reactivity is affected over core life?

B. It becomes more negative due to the buildup of Pu-240.

18. Which one of the following groups contain parameters that, if varied, will each
have a direct effect on the power coefficient?

D. Moderator voids, fuel temperature, moderator temperature

19. A nuclear reactor is exactly critical at the point of adding heat during a xenon-
free reactor startup at the beginning of core life. Reactor power is ramped to
50% over the next 4 hours.

During the power increase, most of the positive reactivity added by the
operator is necessary to overcome the negative reactivity associated with
the...

B. increased fuel temperature.

20. The following are the initial conditions for a nuclear power plant:
Reactor power is 50%.
Average reactor coolant temperature is 570°F.

After a power increase, current plant conditions are as follows:

Reactor power is 80%.
Average reactor coolant temperature is 582°F.

Assume that the initial and current reactor coolant boron concentrations are
the same. Which one of the following describes the current differential boron
worth (DBW) in comparison to the initial DBW?

D. The current DBW is less negative because a 1 ppm increase in reactor

coolant boron concentration will add fewer boron-10 atoms to the core.

21. The amount of pure water required to decrease the reactor coolant boron
concentration by 20 ppm at the end of core life (100 ppm) is approximately
______________ the amount of pure water required to decrease reactor
Prepared By:
84 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
REACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS
coolant boron concentration by 20 ppm at the beginning of core life (1000
ppm).

C. 10 times

22. Given the following initial parameters, select the final reactor coolant boron
concentration required to decrease average coolant temperature by 4°F.
(Assume no change in rod position or reactor/turbine power).

Initial reactor coolant system boron concentration = 600 ppm

Moderator temperature coefficient - = 0.015% ΔK/K per °F
Differential boron worth = -0.010% ΔK/K per ppm
Inverse boron worth = -100 ppm/% ΔK/K

Figure out the effect of change in moderator temperature using moderator

temperature coefficient
(−4℉) × (−0.015% ∆𝑘⁄𝑘⁄℉) = 0.060% ∆𝑘⁄𝑘
So the amount of −0.060% ∆𝑘⁄𝑘 must be offset by a change in boron
concentration.
(−0.060% ∆𝑘⁄𝑘)
= 6𝑝𝑝𝑚
(−0.010% ∆𝑘⁄𝑘)
600𝑝𝑝𝑚 + 6𝑝𝑝𝑚 = 606𝑝𝑝𝑚
A. 606 ppm

23. Neglecting the effects of changes in core Xe-135, which one of the following
power changes requires the greatest amount of positive reactivity addition?

D. 30% power to 60% power

24. Neglecting the effects of core Xe-135, which one of the following power
changes requires the smallest amount of positive reactivity addition?

A. 2% power to 5% power

Prepared By:
85 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2

CONTROL RODS

TERMINAL OBJECTIVE

GFRT0205.00 DESCRIBE nuclear reactor control rods including, construction

and arrangement in the core, how they affect the neutron
lifecycle, why they are required for safe reactor operation and
how they are affected by various core conditions.

ENABLING OBJECTIVES

GFRT0205.01 DESCRIBE the difference between a "grey" neutron absorbing

material and a "black" neutron absorbing material and EXPLAIN
why a "grey" neutron absorbing material may be preferable to a
"black" neutron absorbing material for use in control rods.

GFRT0205.02 EXPLAIN why resonance absorbers are sometimes preferred

over thermal absorbers as a control rod material.

GFRT0205.03 LIST various types of control rods which may be used in nuclear
reactors.

GFRT0205.04 DESCRIBE the design and construction of control rods used in

commercial pressurized water reactors, including the types of
materials used, control rod shapes types of control rods and
core arrangement.

GFRT0205.05 EXPLAIN the effect of control rods on the neutron lifecycle

including how control rod movement affects reactor power level.

GFRT0205.06 DESCRIBE the term Control Rod Worth and EXPLAIN how it is
affected by the following:
a. Neutron flux
b. Control rod location

GFRT0205.07 DESCRIBE the term Differential Rod Worth and EXPLAIN how
Differential Rod Worth is affected by control rod position in the
core and grouping control rods.

GFRT0205.08 DESCRIBE the shape of a typical differential control rod worth

curve and EXPLAIN the reason for the shape.

GFRT0205.09 DESCRIBE the term Integral Rod Worth and EXPLAIN the
shape of a typical integral control rod worth curve and the
reason for the shape.

Prepared By:
86 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
GFRT0205.10 EXPLAIN how Control Rod Worth is affected by the following
core conditions:
a. Moderator temperature
b. Poison concentration
c. Reactor power level
d. Presence of additional control rods.

GFRT0205.11 DESCRIBE the term Spectrum Hardening.

GFRT0205.12 EXPLAIN Rod Shadowing.

GFRT0205.13 EXPLAIN how control rods affect core power distribution.

GFRT0205.14 DESCRIBE the following control rod operational considerations

including:
a. Flux shaping
b. Bank overlap
c. Rod insertion limits

GFRT0205.15 DESCRIBE Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio.

GFRT0205.16 DISCUSS the nuclear reactor operator’s responsibilities with

regard to control rods.

GFRT0205.17 DESCRIBE the terms Hot Channel Factor and Power Peaking.

Prepared By:
87 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

192005 – CONTROL RODS (FULL AND/OR PART LENGTH) KNOWLEDGE &

ABILITIES

Associated K/A Knowledge Importance

Objective(s) RO SRO
GFRT0205.01 K1.01 Name the material used for thermal 1.8* 1.9*
GFRT0205.02 neutron absorption in control rods.
GFRT0205.04
GFRT0205.01 K1.02 Describe nuclear properties of active 1.9 2.0*
GFRT0205.02 neutron absorber material in the control
GFRT0205.04 rod.
GFRT0205.05 K1.03 Predict direction of changes in reactor 3.5 3.6
power for a change in control rod
position.
GFRT0205.05 K1.04 Define reactor scram/trip. 3.2* 3.2*
GFRT0205.13
GFRT0205.07 K1.05 Define control rod worth, differential and 2.8 3.1
GFRT0205.08 integral rod worth.
GFRT0205.09
GFRT0205.07 K1.06 Explain the shape of curves for 2.6 2.9
GFRT0205.08 differential and integral rod worth versus
GFRT0205.09 position.
GFRT0205.10 K1.07 Explain direction of change in magnitude 2.5 2.8
GFRT0205.11 of CRW for a change in moderator
GFRT0205.12 temperature, boron concentration and
fission product poisons.
GFRT0205.14 K1.08 State the purpose of flux shaping. 2.7 2.9
GFRT0205.14 K1.09 State the purpose of rod sequencing and 2.8 3.0
overlap.
GFRT0205.13 K1.10 †Describe axial flux imbalance, including 3.0 3.3
GFRT0205.14 long-range effects.
GFRT0205.13 K1.11 †Describe the effects of quadrant power 2.8 3.2
GFRT0205.15 tilt (symmetric offset), including long-
range power effects.
GFRT0205.13 K1.12 †Describe power peaking or hot-channel 2.9 3.1
GFRT0205.17 factors.
GFRT0205.13 K1.13 †Define and calculate quadrant tilt 2.9 3.3
GFRT0205.15 (symmetric offset) ratio.

Prepared By:
88 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Associated K/A Knowledge Importance
Objective(s) RO SRO
GFRT0205.13 K1.14 Explain the effects of full and/or part 3.2 3.5
length rods on Delta I (flux distribution).
GFRT0205.14 K1.15 †Discuss rod insertion limits. 3.4 3.9
GFRT0205.17 K1.16 †Describe the effects of control rods on 2.8 3.1
power peaking or hot-channel factors.

INTRODUCTION

Most reactors contain control rods made of neutron absorbing materials that are
used to adjust the reactivity of the core. Control rods can be designed and used for
coarse control, fine control, or fast shutdowns. Control rods are generally employed
to compensate for short term reactivity effects due to fission product poisons, etc.
This is as opposed to boron concentration in the coolant/moderator which is used to
compensate for long term reactivity changes, such as caused by fuel depletion.

SELECTION OF CONTROL ROD MATERIALS

Rods of neutron-absorbing material are installed in most reactors to provide precise,

adjustable control of reactivity. These “control” rods are able to be moved into or out
of the reactor core and typically contain elements such as silver, indium, cadmium,
boron, or hafnium.
The material used for the control rods varies depending on reactor design.
Generally, the material selected should have a good absorption cross section for
neutrons and a long lifetime as an absorber (not burn out rapidly).

Black and Grey Neutron Absorbing Materials

The ability of a control rod to absorb neutrons can be adjusted during manufacture.
A control rod that is referred to as a "black" absorber absorbs essentially all incident
neutrons. A "grey" absorber absorbs only a part of them. While it takes more grey
rods than black rods to produce a desired reactivity effect, the grey rods are often
preferred because they cause smaller depressions in the neutron flux and power in
the vicinity of the rod. This leads to a flatter neutron flux profile and more even
power distribution in the core.
When grey rods are desired, the amount of material with a high absorption cross
section that is loaded into the rod is limited. Material with a very high absorption
cross section may not be desired for use in a control rod, because it will burn out
rapidly due to its high absorption cross section.

Prepared By:
89 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
The same amount of reactivity worth can be achieved by manufacturing a control rod
from material with a slightly lower cross section and by loading more of the material.
This also results in a rod that does not burn out as rapidly.

Resonance Neutron Absorbers

Another factor in control rod material selection is that materials which resonantly
absorb neutrons are often preferred to those that merely have high thermal neutron
absorption cross sections. Resonance neutron absorbers absorb neutrons in the
epithermal energy range.
The path length traveled by the epithermal neutrons in a reactor is greater than the
path length traveled by thermal neutrons. Therefore, a resonance absorber absorbs
neutrons that have their last collision farther (on the average) from the control rod
than a thermal absorber. This has the effect of making the area of influence around
a resonance absorber larger than around a thermal absorber and is useful in
maintaining a flatter flux profile.

TYPES OF CONTROL RODS

There are several ways to classify the types of control rods used in nuclear reactors.
One classification method is by the purpose of the control rods. Three purposes of
control rods are listed below.
• Shim rods - used for coarse control and/or to remove reactivity in relatively
large amounts.
• Regulating rods - used for fine adjustments and to maintain desired power or
temperature.
• Safety rods - provide a means for very fast shutdown in the event of an
unsafe condition.
 Addition of a large amount of negative reactivity by rapidly inserting the safety
rods is referred to as a "scram" or "trip."
Not all reactors have different control rods to serve the purposes mentioned above.
Depending upon the type of reactor and the controls necessary, it is possible to use
dual-purpose or even triple-purpose rods.
For example, consider a set of control rods that can insert enough reactivity to be
used as shim rods. If the same rods can be operated at slow speeds, they will
function as regulating rods. Additionally, these same rods can be designed for rapid
insertion, or scram. These rods serve a triple function yet meet other specifications
such as precise control, range of control, and efficiency.

Prepared By:
90 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
CONTROL ROD DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

Control rods are movable pieces of neutron absorbing material which, as the name
suggests, are used to control the reactor. Since control rods absorb neutrons, any
movement of the rods affects the effective multiplication factor (k eff ) of the system
and therefore the number of neutrons in the neutron lifecycle.

Materials of Construction

Over the course of the last several decades, several materials have been used for
reactor control rods, including:
• Boron steel
• Hafnium
• Cadmium
• Silver
• Indium
• Various alloys of the above metals

Control Rod Shapes

Rods may be constructed in a cylindrical shape, such as those which are typically
used in a pressurized water reactor (PWR), or they may formed into sheets or
blades arranged in a cruciform shape, such as the control rods which are typically
used in a boiling water reactor (BWR).

Pressurized Water Reactor Control Rods

Generally speaking the number, design and arrangement of control rods in a

commercial PWR are unique to the reactor’s manufacturer. Most commercial
nuclear power plants in operation in the USA were designed and manufactured by
one of three companies:
• Westinghouse
• Combustion Engineering (CE)
• Babcock & Wilcox (B&W)

Westinghouse PWR

In a typical Westinghouse four-loop plant, the core contains 193 fuel assemblies.
Each fuel assembly contains a 17 x 17 fuel array. There core is also provided with
53 full-length control rods referred to as rod cluster control assemblies (RCCAs).
Each RCCA in a 17 x 17 fuel assembly contains 24 individual absorber rods, or
rodlets (fingers). A typical RCCA is shown in Figure 5-1.

Prepared By:
91 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

Figure 5-1
Typical Rod Cluster Control Assembly

Two and three loop Westinghouse plants typically contain 33 and 48 RCCAs
respectively. The RCCA individual absorber rods in a Westinghouse plant are
composed of a silver-indium-cadmium alloy (Ag-In-Cd) rod clad in stainless steel.

Note: In the recent past, some Westinghouse-designed plants used hafnium control
rods clad in stainless steel. Hafnium is not currently used at these plants due to
problems with control rod swelling.

Prepared By:
92 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Combustion Engineering PWR

The core of a typical CE System 80 plant has 89 control rods called control element
assemblies (CEAs). The CEAs are provided in three basic arrangements:
• 48 twelve-finger full-length rods
• 28 four-finger full-length rods
• 13 four-finger part-length rods
The full-length rodlets are constructed of 150 inches of Boron Carbide (B 4 C) pellets
inside inconel tubes. The partial length rodlets are made up of combination of solid
inconel, a floodable inconel tube, and B 4 C pellets.
Some CE designs include silver-indium-cadmium alloy (Ag-In-Cd) tips on selected
control absorber rodlet sections. For these rodlets the bottom foot is constructed of
the Ag-In-Cd alloy.

Babcock & Wilcox PWR

A typical B&W plant has 61 control rods, referred to as control rod assemblies
(CRAs), 8 axial power shaping rod assemblies (APSRAs), and 40 burnable poison
rod assemblies (BPRAs). Each type of assembly contains 16 rodlets.
The CRAs utilize a silver-indium-cadmium alloy (Ag-In-Cd) as the neutron absorber,
whereas the APSRAs use inconel as the neutron absorber. Both types of rods are
clad with type 304 Stainless Steel. A typical CRA is shown in Figure 5-2.

Prepared By:
93 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

Figure 5-2
Typical Control Rod Assembly

Advantages of Using Boron Carbide in Control Rods

Boron carbide (B 4 C) is a common boron compound with several desirable properties

for use in nuclear reactor control rods. In particular, it is stable in the environment
presented by the core of a nuclear reactor (high temperatures, etc.) and it has the
ability to absorb neutrons without forming long lived radionuclides.

Prepared By:
94 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Natural boron is composed of boron-10 and boron-11 in percentages of
approximately 20% and 80% respectively. Boron-10 readily absorbs thermal
neutrons and is therefore the isotope of interest where reactor control is concerned.
Boron-10 is also referred to as 1/v absorber.
During manufacture boron carbide powder is compacted into a stainless steel tube in
order to form a control rod. This leaves room for the accumulation of helium, which
results from the boron capture reaction shown in the equation below.
10
5𝐵 + 10𝑛 → ( 115𝐵 )∗ → 73𝐿𝑖 + 42𝐻𝑒
Boron is used in control rods because of its high thermal neutron cross section
(σ a = 3837 barns at 0.025 eV). Boron also exhibits a large cross section for
absorption of neutrons in the epithermal energy region. Epithermal is another term
for "above thermal"; it refers to that region where neutrons are slowing down in
reactor.
Figure 5-3 shows thermal and epithermal absorption probabilities for boron carbide
(B 4 C) control rods used in CE reactors.
% NEUTRONS ABSORBED

THERMAL EPITHERMAL

100%

50%

0.1 1.0 10 100

NEUTRON ENERGY (eV)

Figure 5-3
Thermal and Epithermal Neutron Absorption in B 4 C Control Rods

Prepared By:
95 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
As shown in Figure 5-3, the boron carbide control rods can absorb almost 100% of
the neutrons in a reactor whose energies range from thermal (approximately 0.025
eV at 546 °F) up to about 10 eV in the epithermal spectrum. Above 10 eV up to
about 100 eV, the neutron absorption probability for a boron carbide control rod
drops almost linearly because as the velocity of an incident neutron increases, the
cross section for the boron absorption reaction shown above (n, α) decreases
approximately linearly. This characteristic of boron carbide however, provides for
effective neutron absorption over a broad range of neutron energies.
Because the control rods in a thermal nuclear reactor encounter a greater
concentration of thermal neutrons (than fast or epithermal neutrons), these control
rods are frequently considered thermal neutron absorbers.

Advantages of Using Hf and Ag-In-Cd in Control Rods

The hafnium (Hf) or silver-indium-cadmium alloy (Ag-In-Cd) control rods used by

Westinghouse and B&W PWRs have large absorption cross sections for thermal
neutrons (Cd) and/or epithermal neutrons (Ag, In, Hf).
Silver-indium-cadmium rods are excellent neutron absorbers over a large energy
range.
The Silver-indium-cadmium rods absorb all neutrons from thermal energy to
approximately 50 eV, as shown in Figure 5-4.

THERMAL EPITHERMAL
CADMIUM
100%
INDIUM
80%
% NEUTRONS
ABSORBED

SILVER MANY
60%
RESONANCES

40%

20%

0.01 0.1 1.0 10 100 1000

NEUTRON ENERGY (eV)

Figure 5-4
Neutron Absorption in Ag-In-Cd Control Rods

Table 1 shows the nuclide cross sections for neutron absorbers in both boron
carbide and silver-indium-cadmium control rods used in PWRs.
Prepared By:
96 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Table 5-1
Properties of PWR Control Rod Materials

Isotope Abundance Microscopic Cross Microscopic Neutron

Section for Thermal Cross Section for Energy
Neutrons (σ a ) Resonant
Absorption (σ a )
B-10 19.9 % 3,837 barns 1,722 barns Epithermal
Average
Ag-107 51.8% 45 barns 630 barns 16.6 eV
Ag-109 48.2% 92 barns 12,500 barns 5.1 eV
In-113 4.3% 12 barns 310 barns Epithermal
Average
In-115 95.7% 203 barns 30,000 barns 1.46 eV
Cd-114 12.2% 20,000 barns 7,200 barns 0.18 eV
Some control rods also use hafnium as part of the control rod blade. The advantage
of using hafnium is that when hafnium absorbs a neutron, another stable isotope of
hafnium is formed that still has a high cross section for absorption of thermal
neutrons. In fact, hafnium has five stable isotopes that are capable of absorbing
neutrons in a successive fashion as shown in the reaction below.
176
72𝐻𝑓 + 10𝑛 → 177
72𝐻𝑓 + 10𝑛 → 178
72𝐻𝑓 + 10𝑛 → 179
72𝐻𝑓 + 10𝑛 → 180
72𝐻𝑓
This characteristic of hafnium leads to longer control rod life. Table 2 shows the
characteristics of natural hafnium.

Table 5-2
Characteristics of Natural Hafnium

Isotope Natural Microscopic Cross Section

Abundance for Neutron Absorption (σ a )
Hf-176 5.2 % 26 barns
Hf-177 18.6 % 373 barns
Hf-178 27.3 % 84 barns
Hf-179 13.6 % 43 barns
Hf-180 35.1 % 13 barns

EFFECT OF CONTROL RODS ON THE NEUTRON LIFE CYCLE

Prepared By:
97 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
As control rods are moved within the core (withdrawn and inserted) the amount of
reactivity in the core is changed. This change in reactivity due to control rod motion
is a result of the effects of the control rods, which are neutron absorbers, on the
effective multiplication factor (k eff ) and the neutron life cycle.

Effects on Six Factor Formula

Recall that the effective multiplication factor can be expressed using the six factor
formula:

𝑘𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 𝜀𝐿𝑓 𝜌𝐿𝑡ℎ 𝑓𝜂

As a control rod assembly is withdrawn (or inserted) from the core, a strong neutron
absorber is removed (inserted) from the core. Relating the effects of control rod
motion to the six factor formula explains how this results in positive (negative)
reactivity addition to the core.
The terms in the six factor formula most affected by control rod motion are the non-
leakage probabilities (L f and L th ) and the thermal utilization factor (f). For example
consider the effects on the six factor formula as control rods are withdrawn from the
core.

Effects on Non-leakage Probabilities

Control rod withdrawal results in a change in the local neutron flux and can also
affect core wide flux distribution. Control rod withdrawal also effectively increases
the size of the core for neutron production. As effective core size increases, the
average neutron must travel farther in order to leak out of the core. Because of this,
neutron leakage decreases resulting in an increase in both of the non-leakage
probabilities (L f and L th ).

Effects on Thermal Utilization Factor

The contribution to the overall change in reactivity resulting from the changes in the
magnitudes of the fast and thermal non-leakage terms on the six factor formula due
to control rod withdrawal is small in comparison to the change in thermal utilization
factor. Recall that the equation for the thermal utilization factor (f) had a term in it
that accounted for absorption of neutrons in other core materials, including control
rods. This equation can be written to show the control rod contribution to the
thermal utilization factor:
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛴𝑎
𝑓= 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛴𝑎 + 𝛴𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑑 + 𝛴𝑎𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑠 + 𝛴𝑎𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟

Prepared By:
98 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
As the control rod is removed, the control rod’s macroscopic cross section for
absorption(Σ𝑎𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑠 ) decreases. This decreases the denominator in the above
equation and therefore increases the value of f.
Increasing the value of the thermal utilization factor (f) means that a greater number
of neutrons are available to be absorbed by the fuel. Increasing the value of f
means an increase in k eff . Since the fuel is absorbing more neutrons, and k eff has
increased, positive reactivity has been inserted into core. This positive reactivity
addition will result in a reactor power increase as control rods are withdrawn.
On the other hand, when a control rod is inserted into core, the control rod’s
macroscopic cross section for absorption is increased. This results in a decrease in
the value of f, meaning that fewer neutrons are available for absorption in the fuel.
Since fewer neutrons are available to cause fission, k eff is decreased and negative
reactivity is added to the core. This negative reactivity causes reactor power to
decrease.
The ability to insert negative reactivity into the core using control rods is very
important to the safe operation of a nuclear reactor. Occasions may arise during
reactor operation where the reactor must be shutdown rapidly. Control rods provide
a means of inserting a very large amount of negative reactivity very quickly.
Note: An operational action or transient known as a reactor trip (scram) is a rapid
insertion of all of a reactor’s control rods to their fully inserted position. This action
causes a large amount of negative reactivity to be inserted in the core in a very short
period of time rendering the reactor sub-critical.
Examples:
A nuclear reactor is exactly critical below the point of adding heat (POAH) during a
reactor startup at the end of core life. Control rods are withdrawn for 20 seconds to
establish a 0.5 dpm startup rate.

Reactor power will increase...

A. continuously until control rods are reinserted.
B. and stabilize at a value slightly below the POAH.
C. temporarily, then stabilize at the original value.
D. and stabilize at a value slightly above the POAH.
When the POAH is achieved the temperature change in the moderator and fuel will
add negative reactivity which will offset the positive reactivity added by the rods.
The correct answer is: D.
A nuclear reactor is critical at 50% power. Control rods are inserted a short
distance. Assuming that the main turbine-generator load remains constant, actual
reactor power will decrease and then...
A. stabilize in the source range.
Prepared By:
99 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
B. stabilize at a lower value in the power range.
C. increase and stabilize above the original value.
D. increase and stabilize at the original value.
By inserting rods the reactor temperature will initially drop. This drop adds positive
reactivity to the core, raising reactor power back to the initial level. RCS
temperature will stabilize out at a new lower value. However reactor power follows
steam demand which remained unchanged, so reactor power will return to its
original value. The correct answer is: D.

CONTROL ROD EFFECTIVENESS

The effectiveness of a control rod (ability to add positive or negative reactivity to the
core) depends largely upon the value of the ratio of the neutron flux at the location of
the rod to the average neutron flux in the reactor. The control rod has a maximum
effect (inserts the most reactivity) if it is placed in the reactor where the flux is
maximum.
If a reactor has only one control rod, the rod should be placed in the center of the
reactor core. The effect of such a rod on the flux is illustrated in Figure 5-5.

Figure 5-5
Effect of Control Rod on Radial Flux Distribution

If additional rods are added to this simple reactor, the most effective location to
place them would be in a location where the flux is maximum, such as point A.
Prepared By:
100 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Numerous control rods are required for a reactor that has a large amount of excess
reactivity (that amount of reactivity in excess of that needed to be critical). The exact
amount of reactivity that each control rod inserts depends upon the reactor design.
The change in reactivity caused by control rod motion is referred to as control rod
worth.

Control Rod Worth

The effectiveness of a specific control rod in absorbing neutrons is referred to as that

rod’s control rod worth (CRW). As a control rod is moved into or out of a nuclear
reactor core, the core characteristics change, primarily in the region near the tip of
the control rod. Since only a small region of the core near the tip of the rod is
affected by rod motion, the amount of reactivity inserted into the core is determined
by conditions in this region.

Effect of Neutron Flux on Control Rod Worth

If the neutron flux in the area of the core near the tip of a particular rod is large, a
larger fraction of neutrons within the core have a chance of being absorbed by the
control rod. The reactivity change due to the motion of this particular control rod will
be greatest when the tip of the rod is moving through the region of the core
experiencing the greatest neutron flux.

Effect of Control Rod Location on Control Rod Worth

Another factor determining control rod worth is the relative importance of the
neutrons near the tip of the control rod. Neutrons produced near the edge of the
core are more likely to leak out of core. Additionally, neutrons which are thermalized
in a region of the core with a high poison concentration are likely to be captured by
the poison.
Neutrons near the edge of the core, in regions of high poison concentration or in
areas with low fuel concentration, are of lesser importance to a reactor’s chain
reaction because they are less likely to cause fission in the first place. The neutrons
most likely to cause fission are those which are born near the center of the reactor’s
core, in regions of low poison concentration and high fuel concentration.
Because of this, reactivity changes due to control rod motion are largest when the tip
of a particular control rod moves through regions where the neutrons being
produced are relatively important to the nuclear chain reaction. In most cases, the
neutron flux tends to be greater in the same areas of the core where the importance
of the neutrons is greater.

Prepared By:
101 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
The result of this is that in general, control rods located near the center of the core of
a nuclear reactor tend to produce a greater reactivity effect during motion than those
located on the periphery of the core. For a particular control rod, the amount of
reactivity change produced by motion of the control rod tends to be greater when the
tip of the rod is moving near the center of the core.

INTEGRAL AND DIFFERENTIAL CONTROL ROD WORTH

The exact effect of control rods on reactivity can be determined experimentally. For
example, a control rod can be withdrawn in small increments, such as 0.5 inch, and
the change in reactivity can be determined following each increment of withdrawal.
By plotting the resulting reactivity versus the rod position, a graph similar to Figure 5-
6 is obtained.
The graph in Figure 5-6 depicts integral control rod worth over the full range of
withdrawal. The integral control rod worth is the total reactivity worth of the rod at
that particular degree of withdrawal and is usually defined to be the greatest when
the rod is fully withdrawn.

Figure 5-6
Integral Control Rod Worth

Prepared By:
102 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
The slope of the curve (∆r/∆x), and therefore the amount of reactivity inserted per
unit of withdrawal, is greatest when the control rod is midway out of the core. This
occurs because the area of greatest neutron flux is near the center of the core;
therefore, the amount of change in neutron absorption is greatest in this area.
If the slope of the curve for integral rod worth in Figure 5-6 is taken, the result is a
value for rate of change of control rod worth as a function of control rod position. A
plot of the slope of the integral rod worth curve, also called the differential control rod
worth, is shown in Figure 5-7.

Figure 5-7
Differential Control Rod Worth

At the bottom of the core, where there are few neutrons, rod movement has little
effect so the change in rod worth per inch varies little. As the rod approaches the
center of the core its effect becomes greater, and the change in rod worth per inch is
greater. At the center of the core the differential rod worth is greatest and varies
little with rod motion. From the center of the core to the top, the rod worth per inch is
basically the inverse of the rod worth per inch from the center to the bottom.

Differential Rod Worth

Differential control rod worth is the reactivity change per unit movement of a control
rod. This value is normally expressed as r/inch, ∆k/k per inch, or pcm/inch.
Differential rod worth (DRW) is the change in reactivity resulting from a unit change
of control rod position. Since control rods move vertically, control rod position is
referred to as rod height. For a commercial nuclear reactor, control rod position is
usually measured by the number of steps taken by the control rod’s lifting
mechanism.
Differential rod worth is given by the equation:
Prepared By:
103 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

𝛥𝜌
𝐷𝑅𝑊 =
𝛥𝐻
Where:
DRW = differential control rod worth
Δρ = reactivity change
ΔH = change in control rod height

The units of differential rod worth are pcm/step or %Δk/k/% withdrawn.

The differential rod worth depends on the relative flux near the control rod’s tip, the
relative importance of the neutrons near the control rod tip, and the control rod itself.

𝜙𝑡𝑖𝑝
𝐷𝑅𝑊 = 𝐶 � �𝛹
𝜙𝑎𝑣𝑔

Where:
DRW = differential control rod worth
C = constant based on control rod size, shape and material
Φ tip = neutron flux near control rod tip
Φ avg = average neutron flux in core
ψ = flux importance factor

In most reactors, flux importance factor is proportional to local flux, so:

𝜙𝑡𝑖𝑝
𝛹≈
𝜙𝑎𝑣𝑔

Therefore, differential rod worth is proportional to the square of the local relative flux
as shown in the following equation:

𝜙𝑡𝑖𝑝
𝐷𝑅𝑊 = 𝐶 � �𝛹
𝜙𝑎𝑣𝑔

𝜙𝑡𝑖𝑝
𝛹≈
𝜙𝑎𝑣𝑔

𝜙𝑡𝑖𝑝 𝜙𝑡𝑖𝑝
𝐷𝑅𝑊 = 𝐶 � �� �
𝜙𝑎𝑣𝑔 𝜙𝑎𝑣𝑔
Prepared By:
104 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

2
𝜙𝑡𝑖𝑝
𝐷𝑅𝑊 ∝ � �
𝜙𝑎𝑣𝑔

Differential Rod Worth versus Rod Position in the Core

As a control rod moves in the core of a nuclear reactor, the differential worth of the
control rod changes. The neutron flux in a bare homogeneous core is the greatest
near the core midplane. Figure 5-8 shows this axial flux variation.

Figure 5-8
Axial Flux Variation in a Bare Homogenous Core

As can be seen from Figure 5-8, differential rod worth will be the greatest near the
core midplane, and the least near the top and bottom of the core. This is due to the
neutron flux being greater near the core midplane than near the top and bottom of
the core.
It should also be noted that any change in the reactor core which affects the axial
flux distribution depicted in Figure 5-8 will affect the differential worth of the control
rods within the core.
For example, the movement of the control rods themselves changes the axial flux
shape within the core and therefore the values of differential rod worth. Neutron flux
will be depressed in the region of the core where control rods are inserted and will
be greater in core regions where there are no control rods or where the control rods
have been withdrawn.

Prepared By:
105 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Axial neutron flux distribution shifts as control rods move into or out of the core.
Figure 5-9 shows the axial neutron flux shift from core midplane to core bottom as
control rods are inserted.

CONTROL ROD
TOP BANK ALMOST TOP CONTROL ROD
FULLY WITHDRAWN BANK INSERTED
AS SHOWN

CORE CORE
HEIGHT HEIGHT

BOTTOM BOTTOM

AXIAL φ AXIAL φ

Figure 5-9
Shift in Core Axial Neutron Flux due to Control Rod Insertion

When the control rods are near the bottom of the core, the maximum neutron flux
will shift back to the core midplane. Because of this axial neutron flux shift caused
by the control rods, the highest differential rod worth actually occurs at a rod height
below the core midplane.

Differential Rod Worth for Banked Rods

A rod bank is group of control rods in a reactor which are moved together. A graph
of differential rod worth versus rod height in a typical reactor with banked control
rods is given in Figure 5-10.

Prepared By:
106 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

DIFFERENTIAL ROD WORTH (PCM/INCH)

25

20

15

10

0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150

CONTROL ROD BANK HEIGHT (INCHES)

Figure 5-10
Differential Rod Worth for Banked Control Rods

As can be seen from Figure 5-10, the differential rod worth for a group of rods is
similar to the differential rod worth for an individual rod. Group differential rod worth
is greatest near the core midplane and least near the top and bottom of the core.
Examples:
As moderator temperature increases, the differential rod worth becomes more
negative because...
A. decreased moderator density causes more neutron leakage out of the core.
B. moderator temperature coefficient decreases, causing decrease competition.
C. fuel temperature increases, decreasing neutron absorption in fuel.
D. decreased moderator density increases neutron migration length.
An increased moderator temperature increases the space between moderator
molecules becoming less dense. The neutrons are able to travel farther without
interaction due to this density change and are more likely to reach a control rod
increasing the control rod effect on the core. The correct answer is: D.

Prepared By:
107 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Integral Rod Worth

The reactivity inserted by moving a control rod from a reference position to any other
rod height is called the integral rod worth (IRW) at that height. The integral rod
worth at a given withdrawal is merely the summation of all the differential rod worths
up to that point of withdrawal. It is also the area under the differential rod worth
curve at any given withdrawal position.
The reference position for control rods is selected for the convenience of the reactor
operator and may be the fully inserted control rod position or the fully withdrawn
position. For commercial nuclear reactors, the control rods are normally fully
withdrawn, so the top of the core is selected as the reference position for control rod
movement.
As previously discussed, when control rods are withdrawn, positive reactivity is
inserted into the reactor core. In this case, the integral rod worth is zero at zero
steps (fully inserted) and increases as the control rods are withdrawn from the core.
Conversely, the control rods will add negative reactivity to the core as they are
inserted from reference position (fully withdrawn). In this case, the integral rod worth
is zero when the rods are fully withdrawn and becomes more negative as the control
rods are inserted into the core. Figure 5-11 shows graphs of the integral rod worth
corresponding to the differential rod worth curve shown in Figure 5-10.

Figure 5-11
Integral Rod Worth Curves Referenced to Bottom and Top of Core

Figure 5-11 also displays the two standard methods of denoting IRW; either as
positive reactivity added to core or negative reactivity removed from core. Also note
that rod bank height may be denoted in percent, inches, or steps withdrawn.

Prepared By:
108 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Figure 5-11 (A) has the reference for rod worth at the bottom of the core, while
Figure 5-11 (B) has the reference at the top of the core. In either case, the reactivity
change resulting from any rod motion is given by the following:

∆𝜌 = 𝐼𝑅𝑊𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝐼𝑅𝑊𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙
Figure 5-12 shows a typical differential and integral rod worth curve for a
Westinghouse commercial nuclear reactor for Cycle 1 fuel loading at the beginning
of core life (BOL), and hot zero power (HZP) conditions.

Note: The acronym for Cold zero power is CZP.

-3200 16.0

IRW
-2800 14.0
DRW

DIFFERENTIAL ROD WORTH (PCM/STEP)

-2400 12.0
INTEGRAL ROD WORTH (PCM)

-2000 10.0

-1600 8.0

-1200 6.0

-800 4.0

-400 2.0

0 0.0
0 40 114 200 228
BANK B
0 114 228
BANK C
0 114 228
BANK D
ROD BANK POSITION STEPS WITHDRAWN

Prepared By:
109 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Figure 5-12
IRW and DRW Curves for Westinghouse Plant at HZP

Example:
The total amount of reactivity added by a control rod position change from a
reference height to any other rod height is called...
A. differential rod worth.
B. shutdown reactivity.
C. integral rod worth.
D. reference reactivity.
The integral rod worth is zero at zero steps and will increase as rods are withdrawn
from the core. Many commercial reactors operate with all of the control rods
withdrawn completely, so the top of the core is selected as the reference. The
control rods add negative reactivity as they are inserted from the reference position.
The integral rod worth is zero when rods are fully withdrawn and becomes more
negative as the rods are inserted. The integral rod worth is the total reactivity added
(positive or negative) from one reference point in core to another point within the
core. The correct answer is: C.

Integral and Differential Rod Worth Examples

The following exercises are intended to reinforce an understanding of the concepts

of integral and differential rod worth.
Example 1:
Using the integral rod worth curve provided in Figure 5-13, find the reactivity inserted
by moving the rod from 12 inches withdrawn out to 18 inches withdrawn.

Prepared By:
110 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Figure 5-13
Rod Worth Curves for Example Problems

Solution:
The integral rod worth at 12 inches is 40 pcm and the integral rod worth at 18 inches
is 80 pcm.

∆𝜌 = 𝜌𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 − 𝜌𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙

∆𝜌 = 𝜌181 − 𝜌121

∆𝜌 = 80 𝑝𝑐𝑚 − 40 𝑝𝑐𝑚

∆𝜌 = 40 𝑝𝑐𝑚
Example 2:
Using the differential rod worth curve provided in Figure 5-13, calculate the reactivity
inserted by moving the rod from 10 inches withdrawn to 6 inches withdrawn.
Solution:
The solution is basically given by the area under the curve for the interval. The
answers obtained in the following approximation may vary slightly depending upon
the degree of approximation.
• Method 1. Treating the range from 10 inches to 6 inches as a trapezoid, that
is, taking the end values of pcm/inch and multiplying their average by the 4
inches moved yields the following. (This is negative because the rod was
inserted).

𝑝𝑐𝑚 𝑝𝑐𝑚
8 +3
� 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ � (4 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) = −22 𝑝𝑐𝑚
2

• Method 2. Using the central value of rod position at 8 inches yields an

average rod worth of 5.5 pcm/inch. Multiplying by the 4 inches of rod travel
yields the answer:
𝑝𝑐𝑚
�5.5 � (4 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) = −22 𝑝𝑐𝑚
𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ
• Method 3. Breaking the rod travel total into two parts (10 inches to 8 inches
and 8 inches to 6 inches) yields:

Prepared By:
111 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

𝑝𝑐𝑚 𝑝𝑐𝑚
8 + 5.5
� 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ � (−2 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) = −13.5 𝑝𝑐𝑚
2

𝑝𝑐𝑚 𝑝𝑐𝑚
5.5 +3
� 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ � (−2 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠) = −8.5 𝑝𝑐𝑚
2

(−13.5 𝑝𝑐𝑚) + (−8.5 𝑝𝑐𝑚) = −22 𝑝𝑐𝑚

In this example the various approximations used did not cause any difference
because the problem deals with a section of the curve with an approximately
constant slope. To obtain the value over the interval between 8 inches and 20
inches, however, would require the use of several subintervals (as in the last
approximation) to obtain an accurate answer.
Example 3:
For the differential rod worth data given below, construct differential and integral rod
worth curves.
INTERVAL REACTIVITY
(INCHES) INSERTED (PCM)
0 to 2 10
2 to 4 20
4 to 6 40
6 to 8 60
8 to 10 60
10 to 12 40
12 to 14 20
14 to 16 10

Solution:

Differential Rod Worth:

Prepared By:
112 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
For each interval, the number of pcm/inch must be determined. For example, in the
first interval (0 inches to 2 inches), 10 pcm is added. Therefore, the differential rod
worth equals an average 5 pcm/inch. This value of differential rod worth is plotted at
the center of each interval. The center of the interval 0 inches to 2 inches is 1 inch.
The values of pcm/inch for each interval are then listed as shown below and plotted
on Figure 5-14.
INTERVAL PCM/IN
CENTER
1 5
3 10
5 20
7 30
INTERVAL PCM/IN
CENTER
9 30
11 20
13 10
15 5

Integral Rod Worth:

To plot the integral rod worth, merely develop a cumulative total of the reactivity
added after each interval and plot the summed reactivity insertion vs. rod position as
shown in Figure 5-14.
INTERVAL SUMMED
ENDPOINT REACTIVITY
2 10
4 30
6 70
8 130
10 190
12 230
14 250
16 260

Prepared By:
113 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

Figure 5-14
Rod Worth Curves from Example 3

If an integral rod worth curve is supplied, a differential rod worth curve can be
generated from the integral rod worth data. Merely select a convenient interval of
rod withdrawal, such as 1 inch or 2 inches. Then, determine from the curve the
amount of reactivity added for each constant interval of rod withdrawal. A plot of this
reactivity addition versus rod withdrawal represents differential rod worth.
Examples:
A control rod is positioned in a nuclear reactor with the following neutron flux
parameters:
Core average thermal neutron flux = 1012 neutrons/cm2-sec
Control rod tip neutron flux = 5 x 1012 neutrons/cm2-sec
If the control rod is slightly withdrawn such that the tip of the control rod is located in
a neutron flux of 1013 neutrons/cm2-sec, then the differential control rod worth will
increase by a factor of _______. (Assume the average flux is constant.)
A. 0.5
B. 1.4
C. 2.0
D. 4.0
The DRW is proportional to the square of the local relative flux. The reactivity worth
at the tip of a control rod is proportional to the square of the surrounding neutron
flux. The increase in neutron flux at tip from5x1012 up to 1x1013, which is an
increase by a factor of two, produces a DRW increase by a factor of four. The
answer is D.

Prepared By:
114 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Which one of the following parameters typically has the greatest effect on the shape
of a differential rod worth curve?
A. Core radial neutron flux distribution
B. Core axial neutron flux distribution
C. Core xenon distribution
D. Burnable poison distribution
Differential rod worth is the change in reactivity resulting from a unit of change of rod
position. Because the differential rod worth is the change in reactivity resulting from
a unit change of rod position, the axial flux at one rod height differs from another rod
height will greatly affect it. The control rods all move in an axial position so that
every movement of rods has an effect on axial flux distribution. The correct answer
is: B.
During normal full power operation, the differential control rod worth is less negative
at the top and bottom of the core compared to the center regions due to the effects
of...
A. reactor coolant boron concentration.
B. neutron flux distribution.
C. xenon concentration.
D. fuel temperature distribution.
The differential rod worth is dependent upon on the relative flux around the rod tip,
the relative importance of the neutrons near the rod tip, and the rod itself. Due to
leakage there is less flux at the bottom and top of the core, neutron flux distribution
directly affects the differential rod worth. The correct answer is: B.

EFFECTS OF CORE CONDITIONS ON CONTROL ROD WORTH

Various conditions in a nuclear reactor core will affect the reactivity worth of the
control rods. The following characteristics are among those that will affect control
rod worth:
• Moderator temperature
• Fission product poisons
• Soluble boron concentration
• Reactor power
Additionally, the presence of other control rods in the core will affect the reactivity
worth of individual control rods or banks of control rods.

Prepared By:
115 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Moderator Temperature Effects

The moderator/coolant temperature has a significant impact on the reactivity worth

of control rods as shown in Figure 5-15.

Figure 5-15
Changes in Control Rod Worth due to Changes in Temperature

As the moderator/coolant temperature increases, it becomes less dense. At this

lower density, neutrons are able to travel a greater distance before interacting with
water molecules. Since neutrons travel a greater distance, they have a higher
probability of reaching a particular control rod.
Because of this, as the moderator/coolant temperature increases, the control rod
worth increases due to the control rod’s increased sphere of influence.
Figure 5-16 shows a rod worth curve for a specific plant showing changes in
reactivity worth of a particular control rod bank over core life at two different
temperatures. Note that Figure 5-16 shows that both moderator/coolant temperature
and core life affect the value of control rod worth. The effects of core life can be
attributed to fuel burnout and fission product poison buildup. This tends to cause the
negative reactivity worth of the control rods to increase over core life. These effects
will be described in more detail below.

Prepared By:
116 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
4000

3800
HOT ZERO POWER 547°F
3600

TOTAL CONTROL BANK WORTH (PCM)

3400

3200

3000

2800

2600

2400

2200

2000

COLD ZERO POWER 200°F

1800

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3
BURNUP (x10 MWD/MTU)

Figure 5-16
Group Rod Worth versus Temperature over Core Life

Neutron Absorber Effects

Most fission products poisons and chemical shim (boron) are strong thermal neutron
absorbers. Both of these neutron poisons tend to shift the neutron flux spectrum
within a reactor to the epithermal energy range. This phenomenon is referred to as
spectrum hardening.
Since boron carbide (B 4 C), hafnium, and silver-indium-cadmium control rods are
strong epithermal neutron absorbers, they have increased reactivity worth when
fission product poisons or chemical shim concentrations are high.

Prepared By:
117 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
As shown in Figure 5-17, for a given temperature, the reactivity worth of the control
rod bank increases with core age as fission product poison inventory increases.

-4000
INCREASED ROD WORTH DUE
TO φ SPECTRUM HARDENING
AND φ DISTRIBUTION CHANGE
FROM FUEL BURNUP
-3500

-3000
ROD REACTIVITY WORTH (PCM)

-2500

EOL
-2000

BOL

-1500

-1000

-500

0
BANK D 0 100 200 223
BANK C 0 100 200 228
BANK B 0 100 200 228
BANK A 0 228

Figure 5-17
Bank Control Rod Worth Changes due to Spectrum Hardening

Power Level Effects

Although the reactivity worth of the control rods in a reactor does not depend on the
absolute magnitude of flux in the core, control rod reactivity worth does change with
reactor power level. This change is small and is normally considered to be
negligible.

Prepared By:
118 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
The changes in neutron flux profile due to Doppler reactivity effects, changes in
moderator temperature, and buildup of fission product poisons causes the neutron
flux distribution within a reactor’s core to change with reactor power. The shifting
neutron flux distribution and the spectrum hardening effect caused by fission product
poison buildup combine to cause control rod reactivity worth to increase as reactor
power increases. For purposes of analysis, these two effects may be considered
individually.

Shifting Flux Distribution Effects

In general, the radial neutron flux in a nuclear reactor tends to move radially outward
over the life of the reactor core life (BOL to EOL), as shown in Figure-18.

BOL

RADIAL EOL
NEUTRON
FLUX

CORE
CENTERLINE

CORE DIAMETER
Figure 5-18
Shift in Radial Neutron Flux Profile over Core Life

The result of this shift in the radial neutron flux profile toward the outer edges of the
core is an overall increase in control rod worth over core life. The reason for this is
that as the radial flux moves outward within the core, it tends to interact with a
greater number of control rods. This is because there are usually more control rods
located in the periphery of the core than there are in the very center of the core.

Prepared By:
119 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Spectrum Hardening Effects

The increase in core thermal neutron absorbers in reactor core over core life, due to
the buildup of fission product poisons, has the tendency to lower the fractional
number of thermal neutrons impinging on control rods later in core life. As a result of
this a greater fraction of epithermal (above thermal energy) neutrons impinge on
these control rods. This shift in neutron flux spectrum from thermal toward
epithermal is referred to as spectrum hardening.
As previously discussed, pressurized water reactor (PWR) control rods are generally
good absorbers of epithermal neutrons, especially silver-indium-cadmium (Ag-In-Cd)
control rods. This characteristic of PWR control rods combined with the
phenomenon of spectrum hardening also results in an increase in control rod worth
over core life.

Control Rod Effects

Figure-19 shows radial thermal neutron flux distribution with respect to average
thermal flux in a reactor core for a nuclear reactor with no control rods.

φ( r )
RADIAL THERMAL
NEUTRON FLUX

φAVG

WITHOUT RODS

RADIAL DISTANCE (r)

Figure 5-19
Radial Thermal Neutron Flux Profile with No Control Rods

As shown previously in Figure 5-5, the presence of a control rod in the core will
result in a disturbance in the radial flux profile within the core. Thermal flux levels
will be depressed in the area of the rod tip and flux peaks will form radially around
the control rod.

Prepared By:
120 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Rod Shadowing

Recall that control rod worth is proportional to the relative flux squared (or relative
power squared):
2
𝜙𝑡𝑖𝑝
𝐷𝑅𝑊 ∝ � �
𝜙𝑎𝑣𝑔
Because the magnitude of the radial thermal neutron flux is not constant across the
reactor core, the worth of a control rod can vary depending upon its relative radial
location within the reactor core. It should also be noted that because of the effect on
the radial thermal flux presented by an individual control rod (Figure 5-5), the
presence of other control rods within the core will impact the reactivity worth of any
individual control rod within the reactor core. This reactivity worth change due to the
presence of other control rods is referred to as rod shadowing.
As previously discussed, the insertion of a control rod changes the shape of the
neutron flux profile in the reactor. Figure 5-20 shows the effect on thermal neutron
flux in the vicinity of a particular control rod as a second control rod is inserted into
the core in the proximity of the first control rod.

Prepared By:
121 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Figure 5-20
Control Rod Shadowing Effects on Thermal Flux

Figure 5-20 (a) illustrates the sharp drop in thermal neutron flux as one individual
control rod assembly enters into the thermal neutron flux in a reactor core. Inserting
one control rod would result in significant power reduction in the upper region of
core, as shown by the thermal flux profile in Figure 5-20 (a).
If a second control rod (No. 2) is inserted at position A as shown in Figure 5-20 (b),
the reactivity worth of the second rod is lower than the reactivity worth of the first rod
(No. 1) because the neutron flux has already been depressed by the presence of the
first control rod. This is an example of rod shadowing.
Rod shadowing is the process by which the movement of an individual control rod
results in a neutron flux increase or decrease in the vicinity of one or more other
control rods within the core, resulting in a change in the reactivity worth of the
affected rod(s).
This can also be thought of in the following way. As an adjacent control rod is
inserted, its worth is reduced because of the lower local flux profile created by the
insertion of the first rod. The power reduction caused by inserting the second rod is
also less than the power reduction caused by inserting the first rod. In this case, the
second rod is said to be “shadowed” by the first rod.
In general, one control rod is capable of shadowing another control rod if it is within
one neutron thermal diffusion length of the other rod.

Positive Shadowing

Shadowing can increase or decrease the worth of the adjacent control rod
depending on the existing core conditions, specifically, the ratio of local to average
neutron flux. In Figure 5-20 (b) the second control rod (No. 2) has been "shadowed"
by the presence of the first control rod (No. 1). This particular example of shadowing
is referred to as positive shadowing.
The positive shadowing shown in Figure 5-20 (b) results in the reactivity worth of the
second rod decreasing. This is referred to as positive shadowing because the
reactivity worth of the second control rod has been made less negative (more
positive) by the presence of the first control rod.

Negative Shadowing

Prepared By:
122 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
In the above discussion on positive shadowing, neutron flux was shown to be
lowered in one region of the core by the presence of a control rod. In order to
counteract this effect and maintain a constant reactor power level, the neutron flux
must increase in some other region of the core. Peaks created in the neutron flux
profile due to the insertion of a control rod can result in an increase in the reactivity
of other control rods depending upon their placement within the core. This effect is
known as negative shadowing.
In Figure 5-20 (c) a second control rod (No. 2) has been inserted into the core a
significant distance (Point B) from the first control rod (No.1). In this case the
second control rod (No. 2) will have a higher reactivity worth as compared to what its
reactivity worth would have been without the first control rod (No. 1). This is due to
the change in the neutron flux profile created by the insertion of the first rod (No. 1).
In this case, the second control rod (No. 2) is said to be negatively shadowed. This
effect is referred to as negative shadowing because the reactivity worth of the
second control rod has been made more negative by the presence of the first control
rod.

Rod Placement to Avoid Shadowing Effects

Figure 5-20 (d) shows the effect of control rod insertion where no shadowing effect is
involved. When the second control rod (No. 2) is inserted into the core in position C
it has the same reactivity worth whether the first control rod (No. 1) is inserted into
the core or not. This is because in position C the neutron flux profile in this area of
the core is the same (same point on both flux curves) with or without the first control
rod inserted. In this case, no rod shadowing has taken place.

Grouping of Control Rods

In commercial PWRs, control rods are withdrawn in symmetrical arrays known as

rod groups. The overall objective of rod grouping is to maintain the flattest possible
flux profile across the entire volume of the core. This tends to minimize rod
shadowing effects and the reactivity worth of the individual control rods (ratio of local
thermal flux to overall core thermal flux squared is approximately equal to 1).
In commercial PWRs, the control rods are normally grouped such that the individual
control rods in the group are not located in the immediate core vicinity of the other
control rods in the group. This arrangement results in individual control rods being
separated by a large number of fully inserted control rods as rod withdrawal begins
for the first control rod groups to be pulled during a reactor startup. These control
rods are normally pulled continuously from their full-in to their full-out position.
The large spacing between these control rods as rod withdrawal begins results in
neutron flux peaks in the area where each control rod has been withdrawn.
Because neutrons are limited to a small area of travel, movement of any one control
rod has little shadowing effect on any of the other control rods in the same group.

Prepared By:
123 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
As the startup progresses and each new rod group is withdrawn, the average core
neutron flux increases. This tends to couple the core together such that each
additional rod group has a larger effect on the core-wide flux profile resulting in
increased values of rod worth. Because of this, at some point in the startup
sequence the rods are no longer withdrawn continuously from full-in to full-out, to
ensure that the amount of reactivity being added by rod withdrawal can be
adequately controlled by the reactor operator.
It should be noted that the first control rod in a particular group to be withdrawn
always has the highest reactivity worth of any of the rods in that group. The first rod
in a group to be withdrawn will have the greatest impact on core neutron flux. This is
true for any control rod withdrawn while a relatively flat neutron flux profile exists in
the core.
The largest impact on neutron flux will occur in the location where the rod is being
withdrawn. The peak flux in that particular area of core could be significantly higher
than in other areas of the core, depending upon the distance that the rod is moved.
The overall objective of rod grouping is to minimize the flux peaking associated with
any one control rod within a particular group and to minimize the shadowing of other
rods in that group.

EFFECTS OF CONTROL RODS ON REACTOR OPERATIONS

Effects on Core Power Distribution

Each individual nuclear reactor has a certain core volume and a certain number of
square feet of heat transfer surface. If a reactor could be operated in an ideal
manner, all portions of the core would be producing equal amounts of power at the
maximum rate allowed by core material heat transfer limits. Under these ideal
conditions, the fuel in the core would be burned uniformly, core size would be
minimized, and the costs associated with the fuel would be minimal.
Unfortunately, there are a number of unavoidable factors associated with core
design and operation which make it impossible to achieve a perfectly uniform power
distribution across the core.

Bare (Unreflected) Reactor

Consider a very simple homogenous uncontrolled reactor surrounded by a vacuum.

This arrangement is known as a bare (unreflected) reactor and is shown in Figure 5-
21.

Prepared By:
124 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

Figure 5-21
Neutron Flux Profiles for Bare and Reflected Reactor

In this type of reactor, the power density within the core drops off significantly in any
direction outward from the core’s center. This happens because neutrons born near
the edge of the reactor have a far greater probability of leaking out of the core as
compared to a neutron born near the center of the core. Since neutrons that leak
out of the core are removed from the neutron life cycle and are no longer available to
cause fission, the fission rate or power production rate is depressed along the edges
of the core, and consequently are increased toward the center of the core.
Most reactor cores approximate a right circular cylinder. The horizontal dimension
from one side to the other (across the radius of the core) is referred to as the core’s
radial dimension. The vertical dimension from the top to the bottom of the (along the
vertical axis) is referred to as the core’s axial dimension.
In the simple bare reactor described above, at any particular elevation (height) within
the core, the power distribution would look like the positive half of a cosine curve in
radial dimension. Similarly, the power distribution in the axial dimension would also
approximate the same shape.
This idealized distribution is referred to as a cosine distribution, and would be similar
to the axial and radial flux curves for the bare reactor shown in Figure 5-21, since
the thermal neutron flux distribution in a reactor is directly proportional to the power
distribution. The only difference between these two shapes is a result of the
existence of thermal neutrons outside the core, which do not result in fissions.
Therefore, power distribution drops abruptly to zero at the edge of the core, whereas
the neutron distribution outside the core gradually falls to zero.

Prepared By:
125 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Reflected Reactor

In reality, bare homogenous reactors do not exist. Therefore, the role of a reflector
on the operation of a homogenous core must be considered. A reflector is a
material that is present in or near the reactor, which as the name implies, reflects
neutrons back into the reactor core. In a typical commercial PWR, the coolant
downcomer region and the moderator in the bottom of the core act as reflectors.
Figure 5-21 also shows the radial and axial neutron flux profiles for a homogenous
reactor equipped with a reflector. The reflector produces two effects in regard to flux
distribution:
• It scatters some of the thermal neutrons that have leaked form the core back
into fuel.
• It serves to moderate some of the fast neutrons that leaked from the core.
 This moderation of fast neutrons produces a big “pileup” of thermal neutrons
just outside the core.
 This “pileup” of thermal neutrons is referred to as reflector peak.
 Many of these “piled up” neutrons reenter the core.
Both of the above-described effects tend to increase the neutron flux at the edges of
the core as compared to what flux levels would be without a reflector. Therefore, the
addition of a reflector to the bare homogenous reactor tends to flatten the neutron
flux distribution across the core, as shown in Figure 5-21.

Heterogeneous Reactor

Just as there are no real reactors which are bare, there are also no real reactors
which are homogenous. Commercial PWR’s are heterogeneous, meaning that the
fuel, control rods, moderator, coolant, etc contained within the core are separate
entities and are not uniformly mixed within the core.
Although the neutron flux distribution in a heterogeneous reactor tends to be similar
to the modified cosine shape described above, the radial shape would be rougher
due to discontinuities caused by the separation of the moderator and the fuel.
In a heterogeneous reactor most thermal neutrons are produced in the moderator
but they are absorbed before they reach the center of the fuel rod. This results in a
flux depression in each rod and a corresponding flux peak in the water gaps
between the fuel rods. Therefore, instead of a smooth flux distribution like the one
described for a homogenous core, the heterogeneous core has radial distribution
similar to the distribution shown in Figure 5-22.

Prepared By:
126 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

Figure 5-22
Distortion of Radial Neutron Flux in Heterogeneous Core

The axial flux in a heterogeneous reactor is disturbed by the presence of control

rods in the core. This effect was previously shown in Figure 5-9 of this text.

Control Rod Design and Operational Considerations

Several factors are taken into consideration when designing nuclear reactor control
rods, placing them in the core and deciding how the control rods will be operated for
a particular reactor design. Among these factors are:
• Flux Shaping
• Bank Overlap
• Rod Insertion Limits
• Axial Flux Difference
• Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio
• Rod Speed

Flux Shaping

Flux shaping refers to a method of control rod operation which is used to control the
radial and axial neutron flux distribution in a reactor core. The goals associated with
flux shaping include minimization of localized power peaking and control of control
rod worth in order to minimize fuel burnout problems and optimize fuel depletion.
Flux shaping is accomplished by establishing a specific pattern of control rod
withdrawal and insertion referred to as a rod sequence, which is employed during
reactor operation. The rod sequence in a PWR is designed to control the reactor’s
core radial power distribution. Flattening the neutron flux distribution allows a higher
average power density.
Prepared By:
127 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
The rod sequence required to accomplish the goals described above is established
by grouping individual control rods into rod banks. Withdrawal of these rod banks is
then performed in a specific sequence in order to maintain what is known as “bank
overlap”.

Bank Overlap

In a commercial nuclear reactor, each control rod in the core can be moved
individually, however, a single control rod’s reactivity worth will not produce
adequate reactor control response without large, time-consuming rod movement. To
expedite core reactivity changes with minimum rod movement, control rods are
operated in symmetrically arranged groups (banks) of control rods.
As previously described, a typical four-loop Westinghouse commercial nuclear
reactor has four control banks and four or five shutdown banks. The shutdown
banks are always fully withdrawn during reactor operations, whereas the control
banks are operated at various core heights in order to maintain the reactor critical.
Both CE and B&W reactors identify a specified number of rod groups, for example,
seven groups, distributed between shutdown and control or regulating groups to
accomplish these same shutdown and control functions.
These control banks, or groups, are operated with a certain amount of overlap.
Before one control bank or group is fully withdrawn, another control bank or group
will begin to move off the bottom of the core. This method of rod withdrawal is
referred to as bank overlap. The amount of overlap between control rod groups
depends on reactor design considerations and will be designated as some fraction of
control rod height.
An example of bank overlap for a Westinghouse-designed reactor plant would be:
• First, control bank A is withdrawn from 0 to 228 steps.
• When control bank A reaches 115 steps, control bank B begins to move
outward.
• When control bank A reaches 228 steps and control bank B is at 114 steps,
control bank C begins to move out of the core.
Bank, or group, overlap provides for a more uniform differential control rod worth and
a more uniform axial neutron flux distribution within the core during control rod
movement. A non-uniform axial flux distribution could result in abnormally high
power peaks in core, and fuel damage. A uniform differential control rod worth
ensures that rod motion always produces a change in reactivity. If differential control
rod worth is zero or very small (e.g., control rod at top or bottom of core), no
reactivity is added when the control rods are moved. This is undesirable since
control rods must add reactivity immediately during an accident or transient.
Figures-23 and 24 illustrate the effect of control rod bank overlap on differential and
integral rod worth curves.

Prepared By:
128 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
MORE UNIFORM DIFFERENTIAL ROD WORTH
OVERLAP REGIONS

∆ρ / ∆ H (pcm/step)

% WITHDRAWN

Figure 5-23
Effect of Bank Overlap on Differential Rod Worth

A NEGATIVE SLOPE ALWAYS

EXISTS DUE TO BANK
OVERLAP, OTHERWISE IT
WOULD TEND TO FLATTEN
OUT TO A ZERO SLOPE
WITHOUT BANK OVERLAP

−ρ
(PCM)

% WITHDRAWN

Figure 5-24
Effect of Bank Overlap on Integral Rod Worth

Rod Insertion Limits

Although the design of a reactor may allow control rods to be positioned axially
anywhere in core, procedurally, control rods must be above a specified height during
reactor operations. This height is referred to as the rod insertion limit.
Prepared By:
129 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
For example, during operation of a Westinghouse PWR, which employs a magnetic
jack stepping mechanism for rod motion, control rods must be maintained above a
rod height specified in Figure-25 for a given reactor power level. Each step of the
jack stepping mechanism measures 5/8 inch, therefore 228 steps (top of core)
corresponds to a rod height of about 12 feet.

TOP 228 RODS

FULL OUT
200
ROD GROUP STEP POSITION

BANK B

150 ACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE

BANK C

100 UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE

BANK D

50

RODS
BOTTOM 0 FULL IN
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
PERCENT OF RATED THERMAL POWER

Figure 5-25
Rod Insertion Limits for a Westinghouse PWR

The rod insertion limits are designed to minimize the consequences of an ejected
rod accident, guarantee sufficient shutdown margin from a given power level, and
produce an axial flux distribution which prevents high local peak power levels within
the core.

Rod Ejection

Maintaining control rods high in the core, while the reactor is at full power conditions,
prevents an ejected control rod from inserting an excessive amount of positive
reactivity into the core. With control rods high in the core, the amount of reactivity
inserted by a rod ejection should be small enough so as not to result in an
uncontrolled power excursion. Instead, a rod ejection should result in nothing more
than a small-break loss-of-coolant-accident (SBLOCA), due to the rupture of the
associated control rod drive housing.

Reactor Trip

Prepared By:
130 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
When a reactor trips, positive reactivity is actually added to the core by two
mechanisms: the power defect (the change in Doppler coefficient due to a change
in temperature) and moderator/coolant temperature decrease below the no-load
average coolant temperature (due to cooldown from continued steam demand).
Rod insertion limits ensure that the control rods have sufficient negative reactivity to
shutdown the reactor from a given power level with sufficient shutdown margin to
maintain the reactor in a safe shutdown condition.

Axial Flux Distribution

If a reactor’s control rods are inserted too far into the core, the power production in
the top of the core will be suppressed, resulting in a corresponding increase in
power production in the bottom of the core. The higher power in bottom of core
could result in abnormally high fuel temperatures and eventually, fuel damage.

Axial Flux Difference

The axial flux difference (ΔΦ or ΔI) is the difference in power level (difference in
currents, ΔI) between power range detectors (located external to the core)
monitoring the upper and lower halves of core. Relative locations for the upper and
lower detectors are shown in Figure 5-26.

Figure 5-26
Upper and Lower Power Range Neutron Detector Locations

Prepared By:
131 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
This difference is also proportional to difference in axial neutron flux between upper
and lower halves of core and may be expressed as:

∆𝛷 = 𝛷𝑡𝑜𝑝 − 𝛷𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑚
For the detectors, the change in flux can be equated to a change in detector current:

𝛥𝑙 = 𝑙𝑡𝑜𝑝 − 𝑙𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑚
The axial flux difference must be maintained in a specified band during reactor
operation to ensure a more uniform axial flux distribution across the core and
thereby preventing high peak power in either the top or the bottom of the core. A
high peak power results in a high fission product concentration in that location. The
decay heat generated by these fission products could overheat fuel during a loss of
coolant accident.
Control rod position is used to maintain the axial flux difference within the allowed
operating range during reactor operations. Under most operating conditions, the
axial flux difference limitation described here is more restrictive than the rod insertion
limits described above.
After a control rod is fully inserted (from the fully withdrawn position), the effect on
the axial flux shape is minimal. This is because...
A. the differential rod worth is constant along the length of the control rod.
B. the fully inserted control rod is an axially uniform poison.
C. a control rod only has reactivity worth if it is moving.
D. a variable poison distribution exists throughout the length of the control rod.
The correct answer is: B. the fully inserted control rod is an axially uniform poison.
Why are the control rod insertion limits power dependent?
A. Power defect increases as power increases.
B. Control rod worth decreases as power increases.
C. Doppler (fuel temperature) coefficient decreases as power increases.
D. Equilibrium core xenon-135 negative reactivity increases as power increases.
The correct answer is: A. Power defect increases as power increases.

Quadrant Power Tilt Ratio

The quadrant power tilt ratio (QPTR) is used to monitor the radial neutron flux
distribution in a reactor’s core. Figure 5-27 illustrates the location of neutron
detectors used to determine the QPTR.

Prepared By:
132 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

CH I CH II

CH IV CH III

REACTOR CORE TOP VIEW

Figure 5-27
Location of QPTR Detectors for Typical PWR Core

When the QPTR is equal to one, the core’s radial neutron flux distribution is uniform,
indicating an even radial power production throughout the core.
When radial power production is not uniform (QPTR not equal to one), reactor power
or neutron flux is said to be “tilted”. A tilted flux results in uneven fuel burnup and
high local peak power levels resulting in possible fuel damage.
To prevent flux tilting, control rods are operated in symmetrical bank configurations,
with each individual control rod’s height within a specified tolerance as compared to
the height of the entire bank.
Examples:
Which one of the following describes why most of the power is produced in the lower
half of a nuclear reactor core that has been operating at 100% power for several
weeks with all control rods withdrawn at the beginning of core life?
A. Xenon concentration is lower in the lower half of the core.
B. The moderator to fuel ratio is lower in the lower half of the core.
C. The fuel loading in the lower half of the core contains a higher U-235 enrichment.
D. The moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity is adding less negative
reactivity in the lower half of the core.
Prepared By:
133 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
The average temperature of the moderator water is colder at the bottom of the core,
which provides better neutron moderation. With more neutrons in the lower portion
of the core a higher flux level develops and therefore higher power level. As the
moderator flows up the temperature rises thereby reducing moderation leading to a
lower neutron flux level, reducing power level. The correct answer is: D.
A nuclear reactor is operating at 75% power in the middle of a fuel cycle. Which one
of the following actions will cause the greatest shift in reactor power distribution
toward the top of the core? (Assume control rods remain fully withdrawn.)
A. Decrease reactor power by 25%.
B. Decrease reactor coolant boron concentration by 10 ppm.
C. Decrease average reactor coolant temperature by 5°F.
D. Decrease reactor coolant system operating pressure by 15 psia.
By decreasing reactor power without changing rod position causes the flux to shift
upward in the core. The xenon concentration in the lower portion of the core would
be initially higher than the top of the core. When power was reduced, the xenon
concentration would tend to force power higher in the core. The correct answer is:
A..
If core quadrant power distribution (sometimes referred as quadrant power tilt or
azimuthal tilt) is maintained within design limits, which one of the following conditions
is most likely?
A. Axial power distribution is within design limits.
B. Radial power distribution is within design limits.
C. Nuclear instrumentation is indicating within design accuracy.
D. Departure from nucleate boiling ratio is within design limits.
By always maintaining core quadrant power distribution within the design limits the
radial power distribution is ensured to be within design limits. The correct answer is:
B.
Consider a nuclear reactor core with four quadrants: A, B, C, and D. The reactor is
operating at steady state 90% power when a fully withdrawn control rod in quadrant
C drops to the bottom of the core. Assume that no operator actions are taken and
reactor power stabilizes at 88%.
How are the maximum upper and lower core power tilt values (sometimes called
quadrant power tilt ratio or azimuthal power tilt) affected by the dropped rod?
A. Upper core value decreases while lower core value increases.
B. Upper core value increases while lower core value decreases.
C. Both upper and lower core values decrease.
D. Both upper and lower core values increase.
Prepared By:
134 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
The dropped rod will affect the radial neutron flux distribution making it no longer
uniform in shape. The rod will affect both upper and lower regions of the core. The
correct answer is: D.

Rod Speeds

The control rod insertion rates on a scram are designed to be sufficient to protect the
reactor against damage in all transients that are expected to occur during the life of
the reactor.
During normal rod motion, the control rods must be able to move rapidly enough to
compensate for the most rapid rate at which positive reactivity is expected to build
within the reactor in order to provide positive control.
The transient that is normally considered when setting this minimum rod speed is the
burnout of maximum peak xenon while at full power. Xenon burnout is usually the
most rapid, non-accident transient expected.
The maximum rod speed is normally limited in order to reduce the severity of an
accident involving the continuous withdrawal of control rods.

Operator Responsibilities

During reactor operations, the reactor operator is responsible for the safe operation
of the reactor at all times. The reactor operator’s responsibilities for control rod
operations are:
• Ensure that control rods are operated with proper bank overlap.
• Ensure control rods remain above rod insertion limits.
• Ensure axial flux difference (ΔI) is maintained within allowed operating range
by proper positioning of control rods.
• Ensure that all control rods are maintained within specified tolerance.
Examples:
The main reason for designing and operating a nuclear reactor with a flattened
neutron flux distribution is to...
A. provide even burnup of control rods.
B. reduce neutron leakage from the core.
C. allow a higher average power density.
D. provide more accurate nuclear power indication.
The farther the reactor is operated away from local power peaking, the higher the
power the reactor can be operated at. If the local power peaking was too high, the
reactor power levels would have to be lowered to ensure fuel limits are not
exceeded. The correct answer is: C.

Prepared By:
135 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
Which one of the following is a reason for neutron flux shaping in a nuclear reactor
core?
A. To minimize local power peaking by more evenly distributing the core thermal
neutron flux
B. To reduce thermal neutron leakage by decreasing the neutron flux at the edge of
the reactor core
C. To reduce the size and number of control rods needed to ensure the reactor
remains subcritical following a reactor trip
D. To increase control rod worth by peaking the thermal neutron flux at the top of
the reactor core
The flux shape is forced to control the radial and axial neutron flux distribution within
the reactor core. By controlling the resultant flux the local power peaking can be
minimized, thereby ensuring that fuel design limits are not exceeded. The correct
answer is: A.
What is a purpose of control rod bank overlap?
A. Provides a more uniform differential rod worth and axial flux distribution.
B. Provides a more uniform differential rod worth and allows dampening of xenon-
induced flux oscillations.
C. Ensures that all rods remain within the allowable tolerance between their
individual position indicators and their group counters, and ensures rod insertion
limits are not exceeded.
D. Ensures that all rods remain within their allowable tolerance between individual
position indicators and their group counters, and provides a more uniform axial
flux distribution.
Overlapping of control rod banks provides more even reactivity additions that ensure
a more uniform differential control rod worth and a more uniform axial neutron flux
distribution. The correct answer is: A.

HOT CHANNEL FACTOR AND POWER PEAKING

Another description of neutron flux in core is ratio of maximum flux in core to

average flux. This ratio of Φ max /Φ avg is often referred to as hot channel factor. A hot
channel factor of 1.0 indicates a flat flux profile in core. This comparison of the heat
flux in the hottest coolant channel to the average heat flux in the core is call the hot
channel/peaking factor.
Hot channel factors greater than 1.0 indicate that the core flux profile is peaked.
Since core power distribution within the core is proportional to the thermal neutron
flux distribution, a high hot channel factor would indicate that high local power
densities exist in reactor core.

Prepared By:
136 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
The maximum local power density in the core is expressed in terms of total core
peaking factor. This total core peaking factor is a product of the radial and axial
peaking factors. These two factors are the peak to average flux ratios for their
respective flux profiles.
The hot channel factors account for variations in core power density due to fuel
burnup, control rods, non-uniform fuel loading, voids, water gaps, etc. In order to
prevent fuel melting or fuel cladding degradation, the maximum local power density
is limited by reactor operating and design specifications.
Examples:
A comparison of the heat flux in the hottest coolant channel to the average heat flux
in the core describes...
A. a core correction calibration factor.
B. a hot channel/peaking factor.
C. a heat flux normalizing factor.
D. an axial/radial flux deviation factor.
The hot channel or peaking facto is the combination of axial and radial peaking
factors that are used to ensure no localized power peaking could result in damage to
the fuel. The correct answer is: B.
A nuclear reactor has been taken critical following a refueling outage and is currently
at the point of adding heat during a normal reactor startup. Which one of the
following describes the axial power distribution in the core as power is increased to
10% by control rod withdrawal? (Neglect reactivity effects of reactor coolant
temperature change.)
A. Shifts toward the bottom of the core.
B. Shifts toward the top of the core.
C. Shifts away from the center toward the top and bottom of the core.
D. Shifts away from the top and bottom toward the center of the core.
In the reactor core flux will shift upward and will continue until all rods are fully
withdrawn and power is eventually raised to full power. Once all rod withdrawn the
point power will shift back towards the bottom of the core. The correct answer is: B.
A nuclear reactor is operating at 75% power with all control rods fully withdrawn.
Assuming reactor power does not change, which one of the following compares the
effects of dropping (full insertion) a single center control rod to the effects of partially
inserting (50%) the same control rod?
A. A dropped rod causes a smaller change in axial power distribution.
B. A dropped rod causes a smaller change in radial power distribution.
C. A dropped rod causes a smaller change in shutdown margin.
Prepared By:
137 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
D. A dropped rod causes a greater change in shutdown margin.
The partially inserted rod would cause a larger flux suppression in the upper portion
of the core whereas the dropped rod is evenly distributed throughout the core. The
correct answer is: A.
A nuclear reactor is operating at 85% power with all control rods fully withdrawn.
Assuming reactor power does not change, which one of the following compares the
effects of partially inserting (50%) a single center control rod to the effects of
dropping (full insertion) the same control rod?
A. A partially inserted rod causes a smaller change in axial power distribution.
B. A partially inserted rod causes a smaller change in radial power distribution.
C. A partially inserted rod causes a greater change in shutdown margin.
D. A partially inserted rod causes a smaller change in shutdown margin.
The control rod insertion will change the shape of the reactor neutron flux and the
partially inserted rod would have a greater influence on the upper portion of the core.
The dropped rod would affect the flux throughout the core therefore the radial flux is
affected less by a partially inserted rod. The correct answer is: B.

Prepared By:
138 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

SUMMARY

• A black neutron-absorbing material absorbs essentially all incident neutrons.

• A grey neutron-absorbing material absorbs only part of the incident neutrons.
• A grey neutron-absorbing material may be preferable to a black neutron
absorbing material in the construction of control rods because the grey absorber
causes smaller depressions in neutron flux and power in the vicinity of the rod.
• Resonance absorbers are sometimes preferred to thermal absorbers as control
rod materials because they have a larger area of influence and result in a flatter
flux profile.
• Nuclear Reactor may use the following types of control rods:
 Shim rods - used for coarse control and/or to remove reactivity in relatively
large amounts.
 Regulating rods - used for fine adjustments and to maintain desired power or
temperature.
 Safety rods - provide a means for very fast shutdown in the event of an
unsafe condition
 A reactor scram or trip is the addition of a large amount of negative reactivity
by rapidly inserting control rods into the reactor core
• Control rods are normally constructed of the following materials:
 Boron steel
 Hafnium
 Cadmium
 Silver
 Indium
 Various alloys of the above metals
 Control rods may be cylindrical or cruciform in shape
• Commercial PWRs use the following control rod configurations:
 A Westinghouse 4 loop PWR contains 53 full-length control rods referred to
as rod cluster control assemblies (RCCAs).
 Two and three loop Westinghouse plants typically contain 33 and 48 RCCAs
respectively.
 The core of a typical CE System 80 plant has 89 control rods called control
element assemblies (CEAs). The CEAs are provided in three basic
arrangements:
o 48 twelve-finger full-length rods
o 28 four-finger full-length rods
o 13 four-finger part-length rods
 A typical B&W plant has 61 control rods, referred to as control rod assemblies
(CRAs), 8 axial power shaping rod assemblies (APSRAs), and 40 burnable
poison rod assemblies (BPRAs)

Prepared By:
139 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
• The terms in the six factor formula most affected by control rod motion are the
non-leakage probabilities (L f and L th ) and the thermal utilization factor (f)
 Control rod withdrawal results in an increase in both of the non-leakage
probabilities (L f and L th )
 Control rod is withdrawal increases the value of the thermal utilization factor
(f)
• Inserting control rods results in a decrease in reactor power due to the addition of
negative reactivity by the control rods
• Removal of control rods results in an increase in reactor power, due to the
insertion of positive reactivity by the control rods.
• The effectiveness of a specific control rod in absorbing neutrons is referred to as
that rod’s control rod worth
• Reactivity change due to the motion of a particular control rod will be greatest
when the tip of the rod is moving through the region of the core experiencing the
greatest neutron flux.
• Reactivity changes due to control rod motion are largest when the tip of a
particular control rod moves through regions where the neutrons being produced
are relatively important to the nuclear chain reaction – normally the center of the
core.
• Integral control rod worth is the total reactivity worth of the control rod at a
particular degree of withdrawal from the core.
• Differential control rod worth is the reactivity change per unit movement of a
control rod.
• The typical differential control rod worth curve has a bell shape.
 It has very low values at the top and bottom of the core and a maximum value
at the center of the core.
 The curve has this shape because rod worth is related to neutron flux, and
flux is highest in the center of the core.
• The typical integral control rod worth curve has an "S" shape.
 It has a relatively flat slope at the top and bottom of the core and a maximum
slope at the center of the core.
• Integral or differential control rod worth curves can be used to determine the
reactivity change due to a control rod movement between two positions.
• Integral or differential control rod worth curves can be plotted based on
measured control rod worth data.
• Differential rod worth will be the greatest near the core midplane, and the least
near the top and bottom of the core.

Prepared By:
140 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
• Core parameters have the following effects on CRW:
 As the moderator/coolant temperature increases, the control rod worth
increases due to the control rod’s increased sphere of influence
 Control rods have increased reactivity worth when fission product poisons or
chemical shim concentrations are high
 Control rod reactivity worth to increase as reactor power increases
 As an adjacent control rod is inserted into the core, its worth is reduced
because of the lower local flux profile created by the insertion of the first rod.
• The shift in neutron flux spectrum from thermal toward epithermal is referred to
as spectrum hardening.
 Caused by the increase in core thermal neutron absorbers in reactor core
over core life, due to the buildup of fission product poisons.
• Rod shadowing is the process by which the movement of an individual control
rod results in a neutron flux increase or decrease in the vicinity of one or more
other control rods within the core, resulting in a change in the reactivity worth of
the affected rod(s).
• Both the axial and radial flux distribution and power distribution are affected by
the presence of control rods in the reactor core.
• Flux shaping refers to a method of control rod operation which is used to control
the radial and axial neutron flux distribution in a reactor core
• Bank overlap describes a method of operating control rods where one control
bank or group is fully withdrawn, before another control bank or group will begin
to move off the bottom of the core.
• Rod insertion limits are designed to minimize the consequences of an ejected rod
accident, guarantee sufficient shutdown margin from a given power level, and
produce an axial flux distribution which prevents high local peak power levels
within the core.
• The following considerations apply to control rod speed:
 Control rod insertion rates on a scram are designed to be sufficient to protect
the reactor against damage in all transients
 Minimum rod motion speed is based on control rods being able to move
rapidly enough to compensate for the most rapid rate at which positive
reactivity is expected to build within the reactor – xenon burnout at full power
 Maximum rod speed is based on reducing the severity of a continuous rod
withdrawal casualty
• Quadrant power tilt ratio (QPTR) is used to monitor the radial neutron flux
distribution in a reactor’s core.
 When the QPTR is equal to one, the core’s radial neutron flux distribution is
uniform, indicating an even radial power production throughout the core.

Prepared By:
141 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
• The reactor operator’s responsibilities for control rod operations are:
 Ensure that control rods are operated with proper bank overlap.
 Ensure control rods remain above rod insertion limits.
 Ensure axial flux difference (ΔI) is maintained within allowed operating range
by proper positioning of control rods.
 Ensure that all control rods are maintained within specified tolerance.
• The ratio of Φmax /Φavg is often referred to as hot channel factor.
 A hot channel factor of 1.0 indicates a flat flux profile in core.
• The maximum local power density in the core is expressed in terms of total core
peaking factor.

Prepared By:
142 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

REVIEW QUESTIONS

1. Which of the following types of material are normally found in commercial PWR
control rods? (Circle all that apply).

A. Hafnium
B. Cadmium
C. Indium
D. Cesium

2. Which of the following terms in the six factor formula are most affected by
control rod motion?

A. Fast non-leakage probability (Lf)

B. Resonance escape probability (Lth)
C. Thermal non-leakage probability (ρ)
D. Thermal utilization factor (f)

3. A nuclear reactor is operating at equilibrium full power when a single control

rod fully inserts (from the fully withdrawn position). Reactor power is returned
to full power with the control rod still fully inserted. Compared to the initial
axial neutron flux shape, the current flux shape will have a
_______________.

A. minor distortion, because a fully inserted control rod has zero reactivity
worth
B. minor distortion, because the fully inserted control rod is an axially
uniform poison
C. major distortion, because the upper and lower core halves are loosely
coupled
D. major distortion, because power production along the length of the rod
drastically decreases

4. Control rod insertion limits are established for power operation because
excessive rod insertion will _______________.

A. adversely affect core power distribution

B. generate excessive liquid waste due to dilution
C. cause reduced control rod lifetime
D. cause unacceptable fast and thermal neutron leakage

Prepared By:
143 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
5. A nuclear reactor is operating at 75% power. Assuming reactor power does
not change, which one of the following compares the effects of dropping a
center control rod to the effects of partially inserting (50%) the same control
rod?

A. A dropped rod causes a greater change in shutdown margin.

B. A dropped rod causes a smaller change in shutdown margin.
C. A dropped rod causes a greater change in axial power distribution.
D. A dropped rod causes a greater change in radial power distribution.

6. A nuclear reactor is critical below the point of adding heat. If control rods are
manually inserted for 5 seconds, reactor power will decrease...

A. to a shutdown power level low in the source (startup) range.

B. temporarily, then return to the original value due to the resulting
decrease in moderator temperature.
C. until inherent positive reactivity feedback causes the reactor to become
critical at a lower neutron level.
D. temporarily, then return to the original value due to subcritical
multiplication.

7. A nuclear reactor is exactly critical below the point of adding heat (POAH)
during a normal reactor startup. If a control rod is manually withdrawn for 5
seconds, reactor power will increase...

A. to a stable critical power level below the POAH.

B. temporarily, then decrease and stabilize at the original value.
C. to a stable critical power level at the POAH.
D. temporarily, then decrease and stabilize below the original value.

8. Criticality has been achieved during a xenon-free nuclear reactor startup.

The core neutron flux level is low in the intermediate range and a stable 0.5
dpm startup rate (SUR) has been established. The operator begins inserting
control rods in an effort to stabilize the core neutron flux level near its current
value. The operator stops inserting control rods exactly when the SUR
indicates 0.0 dpm.

Immediately after the operator stops inserting the control rods, the SUR will
become ____________; then the core neutron flux level will
_______________.

A. positive; increase exponentially

B. positive; increase linearly
Prepared By:
144 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
C. negative; decrease exponentially
D. negative; decrease linearly

9. Integral control rod worth is the change in ____________ per ____________

change in rod position.

A. reactor power; total

B. reactivity; unit
C. reactor power; unit
D. reactivity; total

10. Which one of the following expresses the relationship between differential rod
worth (DRW) and integral rod worth (IRW)?

A. DRW is the IRW at a specific rod position.

B. DRW is the square root of the IRW at a specific rod position.
C. DRW is the slope of the IRW curve at a specific rod position.
D. DRW is the area under the IRW curve at a specific rod position.

11. Which one of the following expresses the relationship between differential rod
worth (DRW) and integral rod worth (IRW)?

A. IRW is the slope of the DRW curve.

B. IRW is the inverse of the DRW curve.
C. IRW is the sum of the DRWs between the initial and final control rod
positions.
D. IRW is the sum of the DRWs of all control rods at any specific control rod
position.

12. Differential rod worth will become most negative if reactor coolant system
(RCS) temperature is __________ and RCS boron concentration is
__________.

A. increased; decreased
B. decreased; decreased
C. increased; increased
D. decreased; increased

13. A nuclear reactor is operating at 80% power near the end of a fuel cycle with
the controlling group of control rods inserted 5% into the core. Which one of
the following will cause group differential rod worth to become less negative?
(Consider only the direct effect of the indicated change.)
Prepared By:
145 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
A. Burnable poison rods become increasingly depleted.
B. Core Xe-135 concentration decreases toward an equilibrium value.
C. Reactor coolant temperature is allowed to decrease from 575°F to
570°F.
D. Reactor power is decreased to 70% using control rods for control of RCS
temperature.

14. The purposes of using control rod bank overlap are to...

A. provide a more uniform axial power distribution and to provide a more

uniform differential rod worth.
B. provide a more uniform differential rod worth and to provide a more
uniform radial power distribution.
C. provide a more uniform radial power distribution and to maintain
individual and group rod position indicators within allowable tolerances.
D. maintain individual and group rod position indicators within allowable
tolerances and to provide a more uniform axial power distribution.

15. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 100% power for 3 weeks shortly after
a refueling outage. All control rods are fully withdrawn. Which one of the
following describes why most of the power is being produced in the lower half
of the core?

A. The fuel loading in the lower half of the core contains a higher U-235
enrichment.
B. Reactor coolant boron is adding more negative reactivity in the upper
half of the core.
C. There is a greater concentration of Xe-135 in the upper half of the core.
D. The moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity is adding more
negative reactivity in the upper half of the core.

16. By maintaining the radial and axial core power distributions within their
prescribed limits, the operator is assured that ______________ will remain
within acceptable limits.

A. power density (kW/foot) and departure from nucleate boiling ratio

(DNBR)
B. DNBR and shutdown margin
C. core delta-T and power density (kW/foot)
D. shutdown margin and core delta-T

Prepared By:
146 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
17. A nuclear reactor is operating at equilibrium full power when a single control
rod fully inserts (from the fully withdrawn position). Reactor power is returned
to full power with the control rod still fully inserted.

Compared to the initial axial neutron flux shape, the current flux shape will
have a...

A. minor distortion, because a fully inserted control rod has zero reactivity
worth.
B. minor distortion, because the fully inserted control rod is an axially
uniform poison.
C. major distortion, because the upper and lower core halves are loosely
coupled.
D. major distortion, because power production along the length of the rod
drastically decreases.

18. Control rod insertion limits ensure that control rods will be more withdrawn as
reactor power ____________ to compensate for the change in
____________.

A. increases; xenon reactivity

B. decreases; xenon reactivity
C. increases; power defect
D. decreases; power defect

19. Why are control rod insertion limits established for power operation?

A. To minimize the worth of a postulated dropped control rod.

B. To maintain a negative moderator temperature coefficient in the reactor.
C. To provide adequate shutdown margin after a reactor trip.
D. To ensure sufficient positive reactivity is available to compensate for the
existing power defect.

20. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 80% power for four weeks with the
controlling rod group inserted 10% from the fully withdrawn position.

Which one of the following will be most significantly affected by inserting the
controlling group an additional 5%? (Assume reactor power does not
change.)

A. Total xenon reactivity

B. Radial power distribution
C. Quadrant (azimuthal) power distribution
Prepared By:
147 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
D. Axial power distribution

21. A nuclear reactor is operating at 75% power. Assuming reactor power does
not change, which one of the following compares the effects of dropping a
center control rod to the effects of partially inserting (50%) the same control
rod?

A. A dropped rod causes a greater change in shutdown margin.

B. A dropped rod causes a smaller change in shutdown margin.
C. A dropped rod causes a greater change in axial power distribution.
D. A dropped rod causes a greater change in radial power distribution.

Prepared By:
148 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS

REVIEW ANSWERS

1. Which of the following types of material are normally found in commercial

PWR control rods? (Circle all that apply).

A. Hafnium
B. Cadmium
C. Indium

2. Which of the following terms in the six factor formula are most affected by
control rod motion?

C. Thermal non-leakage probability (ρ)

3. A nuclear reactor is operating at equilibrium full power when a single control

rod fully inserts (from the fully withdrawn position). Reactor power is returned
to full power with the control rod still fully inserted. Compared to the initial
axial neutron flux shape, the current flux shape will have a
_______________.

B. minor distortion, because the fully inserted control rod is an axially uniform
poison

4. Control rod insertion limits are established for power operation because
excessive rod insertion will _______________.

A. adversely affect core power distribution

5. A nuclear reactor is operating at 75% power. Assuming reactor power does

not change, which one of the following compares the effects of dropping a
center control rod to the effects of partially inserting (50%) the same control
rod?

D. A dropped rod causes a greater change in radial power distribution.

6. A nuclear reactor is critical below the point of adding heat. If control rods are
manually inserted for 5 seconds, reactor power will decrease...

A. to a shutdown power level low in the source (startup) range.

7. A nuclear reactor is exactly critical below the point of adding heat (POAH)
during a normal reactor startup. If a control rod is manually withdrawn for 5
seconds, reactor power will increase...

C. to a stable critical power level at the POAH.

Prepared By:
149 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
8. Criticality has been achieved during a xenon-free nuclear reactor startup.
The core neutron flux level is low in the intermediate range and a stable 0.5
dpm startup rate (SUR) has been established. The operator begins inserting
control rods in an effort to stabilize the core neutron flux level near its current
value. The operator stops inserting control rods exactly when the SUR
indicates 0.0 dpm.

Immediately after the operator stops inserting the control rods, the SUR will
become ____________; then the core neutron flux level will
_______________.

A. positive; increase exponentially

9. Integral control rod worth is the change in ____________ per ____________

change in rod position.

D. reactivity; total

10. Which one of the following expresses the relationship between differential rod
worth (DRW) and integral rod worth (IRW)?

C. DRW is the slope of the IRW curve at a specific rod position.

11. Which one of the following expresses the relationship between differential rod
worth (DRW) and integral rod worth (IRW)?

C. IRW is the sum of the DRWs between the initial and final control rod
positions.

12. Differential rod worth will become most negative if reactor coolant system
(RCS) temperature is __________ and RCS boron concentration is
__________.

A. increased; decreased

13. A nuclear reactor is operating at 80% power near the end of a fuel cycle with
the controlling group of control rods inserted 5% into the core. Which one of
the following will cause group differential rod worth to become less negative?
(Consider only the direct effect of the indicated change.)

C. Reactor coolant temperature is allowed to decrease from 575°F to 570°F.

14. The purposes of using control rod bank overlap are to...

A. provide a more uniform axial power distribution and to provide a more

uniform differential rod worth.

Prepared By:
150 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
15. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 100% power for 3 weeks shortly after
a refueling outage. All control rods are fully withdrawn. Which one of the
following describes why most of the power is being produced in the lower half
of the core?

D. The moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity is adding more

negative reactivity in the upper half of the core.

16. By maintaining the radial and axial core power distributions within their
prescribed limits, the operator is assured that ______________ will remain
within acceptable limits.

A. power density (kW/foot) and departure from nucleate boiling ratio (DNBR)

17. A nuclear reactor is operating at equilibrium full power when a single control
rod fully inserts (from the fully withdrawn position). Reactor power is returned
to full power with the control rod still fully inserted.

Compared to the initial axial neutron flux shape, the current flux shape will
have a...

B. minor distortion, because the fully inserted control rod is an axially uniform
poison.

18. Control rod insertion limits ensure that control rods will be more withdrawn as
reactor power ____________ to compensate for the change in
____________.

C. increases; power defect

19. Why are control rod insertion limits established for power operation?

C. To provide adequate shutdown margin after a reactor trip.

20. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 80% power for four weeks with the
controlling rod group inserted 10% from the fully withdrawn position.

Which one of the following will be most significantly affected by inserting the
controlling group an additional 5%? (Assume reactor power does not
change.)

D. Axial power distribution

21. A nuclear reactor is operating at 75% power. Assuming reactor power does
not change, which one of the following compares the effects of dropping a

Prepared By:
151 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
CONTROL RODS
center control rod to the effects of partially inserting (50%) the same control
rod?

D. A dropped rod causes a greater change in radial power distribution.

Prepared By:
152 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2

FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

TERMINAL OBJECTIVE

GFRT0206.00 DESCRIBE the effect of fission product poisons such as xenon-

135 and samarium-149 in an operating nuclear reactor and its
effects on reactor operation.

ENABLING OBJECTIVES

GFRT0206.01 DESCRIBE the term fission product poison and how fission
product poisons affect the neutron life cycle.

GFRT0206.02 LIST the most important fission product poisons to the operation
of a nuclear reactor.

GFRT0206.03 EXPLAIN how xenon-135 is produced and removed in the core

of a nuclear reactor.

GFRT0206.04 EXPLAIN the following terms:

a. Equilibrium Iodine
b. Equilibrium Xenon
c. Transient Xenon
d. Peak Xenon
e. Xenon Free
f. Xenon Precluded Startup
g. Xenon Dead Time

GFRT0206.05 EXPLAIN how xenon-135 concentration reacts during the

following nuclear reactor operations, including the effects of
changing xenon concentration on reactor operation and
methods used to counteract these effects:
a. Initial reactor startup (xenon free)
b. Reactor shutdown
c. Decrease in reactor power
d. Increase in reactor power
e. Reactor startup with xenon present in core.

GFRT0206.06 EXPLAIN the effect that pre-shutdown power levels have on the
xenon-135 concentration after shutdown.

GFRT0206.07 DESCRIBE the causes and effects of a xenon oscillation.

Prepared By:
153 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
GFRT0206.08 STATE the approximate time following a reactor shutdown at
which the reactor can be considered "xenon free."

GFRT0206.09 EXPLAIN the effects of xenon concentration on a nuclear

reactor core’s thermal flux profile for the following:
a. Control rod motion
b. Core life.

GFRT0206.10 EXPLAIN how samarium-149 is produced and removed from

the reactor core during reactor operation.

GFRT0206.11 DESCRIBE equilibrium samarium-149 concentration.

GFRT0206.12 DESCRIBE how samarium-149 concentration varies with

reactor power level.

GFRT0206.13 EXPLAIN how equilibrium samarium-149 concentration varies

with the following reactor operations:
a. Initial Reactor Startup
b. Reactor Shutdown
c. Reactor Startup after Shutdown.

GFRT0206.14 DESCRIBE the effects of samarium-149 concentration on

reactor operation over core life.

GFRT0206.15 COMPARE the effects of samarium-149 to the effects of xenon-

135 on reactor operation.

GFRT0206.16 DESCRIBE the conditions under which helium-3 will have a

significant effect on the reactivity of a reactor.

Prepared By:
154 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
192006 – FISSION PRODUCT POISONS KNOWLEDGE & ABILITIES

Associated K/A Knowledge Importance

Objective(s) RO SRO
GFRT0206.01 K1.01 Define fission product poison. 2.5 2.6
GFRT0206.01 K1.02 State the characteristics of Xenon-135 3.0 1.1
as a fission product poison.
GFRT0206.03 K1.03 Describe the production of Xenon-135. 2.7 2.8
GFRT0206.03 K1.04 Describe the removal of Xenon-135. 2.8 2.8
GFRT0206.04 K1.05 Describe Equilibrium Xenon and state its 3.1 3.1
GFRT0206.05 effect on reactor power.
GFRT0206.04 K1.06 Describe Transient Xenon and state its 3.2 3.4
GFRT0206.05 effect on reactor power.
GFRT0206.05 K1.07 Describe Xenon following a scram and 3.4 3.4
state its effect on reactor power.
GFRT0206.07 K1.08 Describe the effects that Xenon 3.3 3.4
GFRT0206.09 concentration has on flux shape and
control rod patterns.
GFRT0206.05 K1.09 Plot the curve and explain the reasoning 3.0 3.1
for the reactivity insertion by Xenon-135
versus time for initial reactor startup an
ascension to rated power.
GFRT0206.05 K1.10 Plot the curve and explain the reasoning 3.1 3.2
for the reactivity insertion by Xenon-135
versus time for reactor startup with
Xenon-135 already present in the core.
GFRT0206.05 K1.11 Plot the curve and explain the reasoning 3.1 3.1
for the reactivity insertion by Xenon-135
versus time for power changes from
steady-state power to another.
GFRT0206.05 K1.12 Plot the curve and explain the reasoning 3.1 3.1
for the reactivity insertion by Xenon-135
versus time for reactor scram.
GFRT0206.04 K1.13 Plot the curve and explain the reasoning 2.9 3.0
GFRT0206.05 for the reactivity insertion by Xenon-135
GFRT0206.06 versus time for reactor shutdown.
GFRT0206.08

Prepared By:
155 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Associated K/A Knowledge Importance
Objective(s) RO SRO
GFRT0206.05 K1.14 Explain the methods and reasons for the 3.2 3.3
operator to compensate for the time
dependent behavior of Xenon-135
concentration in the reactor.
GFRT0206.10 K1.15 State the characteristics of Samarium- 1.9* 1.9*
GFRT0206.11 149 as a fission product poison
GFRT0206.12
GFRT0206.10 K1.16 Describe the production of Samarium- 1.8* 1.8*
149.
GFRT0206.10 K1.17 Describe the removal of Samarium-149. 1.8* 1.8*
GFRT0206.11 K1.18 Define equilibrium samarium. 1.8* 1.8*
GFRT0206.13 K1.19 Plot the curve and explain the reasoning 1.8* 1.9*
for reactivity insertion by Samarium-149
versus time for an initial reactor startup
and ascension to rated power.
GFRT0206.13 K1.20 Plot the curve and explain the reasoning 1.7* 1.8*
for reactivity insertion by Samarium-149
versus time for a reactor shutdown.
GFRT0206.12 K1.21 Describe the effects of power changes 1.7* 1.8*
GFRT0206.13 on samarium concentration.
GFRT0206.15 K1.22 Compare effects of Samarium-149 on 1.8* 1.8*
reactor operation with those of Xenon-
135.

Prepared By:
156 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
XENON

Xenon-135 has a tremendous impact on the operation of a nuclear reactor. It is

important to understand the mechanisms that produce and remove xenon from the
reactor to predict how the reactor will respond following changes in power level.

FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

Fission fragments generated at the time of fission decay to produce a variety of

fission products. Fission product poisons are of concern in reactors primarily
because they become parasitic absorbers of neutrons and result in long term
sources of heat. Fission product poisons remove neutrons from the neutron life
cycle, because they are strong absorbers of thermal neutrons. Fission products with
a large microscopic cross section for capture of thermal neutrons are called reactor
poisons.

Most Abundant Fission Product Poisons

Although several fission products have significant neutron absorption cross sections,
xenon-135 and samarium-149 have the most substantial impact on reactor design
and operation and are likely to result from fission as shown in Figure 6-1 below.

Figure 6-1
Fission Yield Curve for Uranium-235

Prepared By:
157 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Examples:
Fission products that have large microscopic cross sections for capture of thermal
neutrons are called...
A. breeder fuels.
B. burnable poisons.
C. fissionable fuels.
D. reactor poisons.
Fission product poisons fission products or fission product daughters that have a
substantial neutron absorption cross section and do not fission. This removes the
neutron through capture from the neutron lifecycle. These are called reactor poisons
since they absorb neutrons but do not fission. The correct answer is: D.
Fission product poisons can be differentiated from other fission products in that
fission product poisons...
A. have a longer half-life.
B. are stronger absorbers of thermal neutrons.
C. are produced in a larger percentage of fissions.
D. have a higher fission cross section for thermal neutrons.
The fission product poisons will have a very large cross-section for absorption for
neutrons whereas fission products do not. The correct answer is: B.

Fission Product Poison Effect on Neutron Life Cycle

Xenon-135 and samarium-149 both have high absorption cross sections: 2.6 x 106
barns for xenon-135 and 4.0 x 104 barns for samarium-149. Because xenon and
samarium remove neutrons from the reactor, they will have an impact on the thermal
utilization factor and thus k eff and reactivity.
Looking at the equation for thermal utilization factor (f) shown below, it can be seen
that an increase in the macroscopic cross section for absorption by any neutron
poison in the reactor will result in an overall decrease in the value of f.
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛴𝑎
𝑓= 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛
𝛴𝑎 + 𝛴𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑑 + 𝛴𝑎𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 + 𝛴𝑎
As the atomic density of the fission product poisons increases, the denominator in
the above equation increases. This results in the fractional value of the thermal
utilization factor decreasing.
Example:
Xenon-135 is considered a major fission product poison because it has a large...
Prepared By:
158 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
A. fission cross section.
B. absorption cross section.
C. elastic scatter cross section.
D. inelastic scatter cross section.
Due to Xenons’s large cross-section for absorption removing neutrons from the
neutron life-cycle. The correct answer is: B.

Fission Product Poison Concentration

The concentration of fission product poisons present in a nuclear reactor core at any
given time depends upon the poison’s production and removal rate. Fission product
poisons may be directly produced from fission or may be produced as a result of the
decay of a fission product into an isotope which will readily absorb neutrons. The
removal of a fission product poison from a nuclear reactor core can be accomplished
by radioactive decay or by neutron absorption. Where fission product poisons are
concerned, both decay and absorption generally result in the production of an
isotope with a much lower neutron absorption cross section.
Other factors that influence the concentration of a fission product poison in a nuclear
reactor core are the neutron absorption and decay characteristics of the particular
isotope and the reactor power level.

Fission Product Poison Equilibrium

A term that is often associated with fission product poisons is equilibrium. At

equilibrium, the production rate of the poison equals the removal rate of the poison,
and therefore, the concentration of the poison is constant within the reactor core.

Other Fission Product Poisons

There are many other fission products (besides xenon and samarium) that have
appreciable cross sections for neutron absorption. However, the concentration of
these poisons is not necessarily depleted by neutron capture.
Due to their moderate cross sections and their continued production by fission, these
other fission product poisons are often referred to as permanent poisons. In a
thermal reactor, it can be assumed that these permanent poisons accumulate at rate
of about 50 barns per fission. This permanent poison accumulation has the effect of
decreasing the positive reactivity in the reactor core over core life.

Prepared By:
159 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Reactivity Effects of Fission Product Poisons

The reactivity effects of fission product poisons such as xenon and samarium occur
relatively slowly as compared to other factors which influence reactivity such as
control rods and changes in moderator temperature. Changes in nuclear reactor
core reactivity due to fission product poisons are evidenced over periods of time
ranging from hours to days to years, rather than seconds or minutes.

PRODUCTION AND REMOVAL OF XENON-135

Xenon-135 has a 2.6 x 106 barns neutron absorption cross section. It is produced
directly by some fissions, but is more commonly a product of the tellurium-135 decay
chain shown below. The fission yield (γ) for xenon-135 is about 0.3%, while γ for
tellurium-135 is about 6%.

𝛽− 𝛽− 𝛽− 𝛽−
135 �� 135 �� 135 �� 135 ��
52𝑇𝑒 53𝐼 54𝑋𝑒 55𝐶
19 𝑠𝑒𝑐 6.57 ℎ𝑟 9.10 ℎ𝑟 2.3 × 106 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
As can be seen from the decay chain above, the half-life for tellurium-135 is so short
compared to the other half-lives that it can be assumed that iodine-135 is produced
directly from fission. Iodine-135 is not a strong neutron absorber, but decays to form
the neutron poison xenon-135. Ninety-five percent of all the xenon-135 produced
comes from the decay of iodine-135. Therefore, the half-life of iodine-135 plays an
important role in the amount of xenon-135 present in the core of a nuclear reactor.

Iodine-135 Production and Removal

The rate of change of iodine concentration is equal to the rate of production minus
the rate of removal. This can be expressed in the equation below.

𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑖𝑜𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛

= 𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑓𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 − 𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑦 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 − 𝐵𝑢𝑟𝑛𝑢𝑝 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒

Or
∆𝑁𝑖 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
= 𝛾𝑖 𝛴𝑓 𝛷 − 𝜆𝑖 𝑁𝑖 − 𝜎𝑎𝑖 𝑁𝑖 𝛷
∆𝑡
Where:
N i = Iodine-135 concentration
γ i = fission yield of iodine-135
Σ f fuel = macroscopic cross section in fuel
Φ = thermal neutron flux

Prepared By:
160 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
λ I = decay constant for iodine-135
σI a = microscopic absorption cross section for iodine-135

Since the microscopic absorption cross section (σI a ) is very small, the burn up rate
term may be ignored, and the expression for the rate of change of iodine
concentration is modified as shown below.

∆𝑁𝑖 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
= 𝛾𝑖 𝛴𝑓 𝛷 − 𝜆𝑖 𝑁𝑖
∆𝑡
Equilibrium Iodine

When the rate of production of iodine equals the rate of removal of iodine,
equilibrium exists. The iodine concentration remains constant and is designated
N I (eq). The following equation for the equilibrium concentration of iodine can be
determined from the preceding equation by setting the two terms equal to each other
and solving for N I (eq).
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝐼 𝛴𝑓 𝛷
𝑁𝐼 (𝑒𝑞) =
𝜆𝐼
Since the equilibrium iodine concentration is proportional to the fission reaction rate,
it is also proportional to reactor power level.

Xenon-135 Production and Removal

The rate of change of the xenon concentration is equal to the rate of production
minus the rate of removal. Recall that 5% of xenon comes directly from fission and
95% comes from the decay of iodine. The rate of change of xenon concentration is
expressed by the following equations.

Rate of change = xenon-135 yield + iodine-135 - xenon-135 - xenon-135

of xenon-135 from fission decay decay burnup
concentration

𝛥𝑁𝑋𝑒 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
= 𝛾𝑋𝑒 𝛴𝑓 𝛷 − 𝜆𝐼 𝑁𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼 𝑁𝐼 − 𝜎𝑎𝑋𝑒 𝑁𝑋𝑒 𝛷
𝛥𝑡
Where:
N Xe = Xenon-135 concentration
γ Xe = fission yield of xenon-135

Prepared By:
161 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛴𝑓 = macroscopic cross section in fuel
Φ = thermal neutron flux
N I = Iodine-135 concentration
λ I = decay constant for iodine-135
λ Xe = decay constant for xenon-135
σ a Xe = microscopic absorption cross section for xenon-135

The xenon burnup term above refers to neutron absorption by xenon-135 by the
following reaction.
135 136
54𝑋𝑒 + 10𝑛 → 54𝑋𝑒 +𝛾
Xenon-136 is not a significant neutron absorber; therefore, the neutron absorption by
xenon-135 constitutes removal of poison from the reactor. The burnup rate of
xenon-135 is dependent upon the neutron flux and the xenon-135 concentration. In
an operating nuclear reactor approximately 80% of the xenon removed from the core
is due to burnup.
As shown in the decay chain above, Xenon-135 decays by beta emission to cesium-
135 (9.10 hour half-life). Cesium-135 has a very long half-life (>106 years) and a
small absorption cross section for neutrons. Xenon decay accounts for
approximately 20% of the total removal rate for xenon in an operating nuclear
reactor.

Equilibrium Xenon

When the production and removal rates of xenon-135 are equal to each other,
equilibrium is established. The concentration of xenon-135 present in the reactor
during this condition is referred to as equilibrium xenon.

The equilibrium concentration of xenon-135 is designated N Xe (eq), and is

represented as shown below.
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝑋𝑒 𝛴𝑓 𝜙 + 𝜆𝐼 𝑁𝐼
𝑁𝑋𝑒 (𝑒𝑞 ) =
𝜎𝑎𝑋𝑒 𝜙 + 𝜆𝑋𝑒

For xenon-135 to be in equilibrium, iodine-135 must also be in equilibrium.

Substituting the expression for equilibrium iodine-135 concentration into the equation
for equilibrium xenon results in the following:
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝑋𝑒 𝛴𝑓 𝜙 + (𝛾𝑋𝑒 + 𝛾𝐼 )
𝑁𝑋𝑒 (𝑒𝑞 ) =
𝜎𝑎𝑋𝑒 𝜙 + 𝜆𝑋𝑒

Prepared By:
162 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
From this equation it can be seen that the equilibrium value for xenon-135 increases
as power increases, because the numerator is proportional to the fission reaction
rate.
Thermal flux is also in the denominator; therefore, as the thermal flux exceeds 1012
neutrons/cm2-sec, the term begins to dominate, and at approximately 1015
neutrons/cm2-sec, the xenon-135 concentration approaches a limiting value.

Equilibrium Xenon versus Reactor Power Level

The equilibrium iodine-135 and xenon-135 concentrations as a function of neutron

flux are illustrated in Figure 6-2.

Figure 6-2
Equilibrium Iodine-135 and Xenon-135 Concentrations vs. Neutron Flux

The higher the power level, or flux, the higher the equilibrium xenon-135
concentration, but equilibrium xenon-135 is not directly proportional to power level.
For example, equilibrium xenon-135 at 25% power is more than half the value for
equilibrium xenon-135 at 100% power for many reactors.
Because the xenon-135 concentration directly affects the reactivity level in the
reactor core, the negative reactivity due to the xenon concentrations for different
power levels or conditions are frequently plotted instead of the xenon concentration.
Prepared By:
163 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Example:
Which one of the following is a characteristic of xenon-135 in a nuclear reactor core?
A. Xenon-135 is produced from the radioactive decay of barium-135.
B. Xenon-135 is primarily a resonance absorber of epithermal neutrons.
C. Thermal neutron flux level affects both the production and removal of xenon-135.
D. Thermal neutrons interact with xenon-135 primarily through scattering reactions.
The correct answer is: C.

Time to Reach Equilibrium Xenon

In a pressurized water reactor (PWR) equilibrium xenon-135 concentration is

reached sooner at higher reactor power levels. This is due to the faster production
rate of xenon at higher power levels. Equilibrium xenon concentration is typically
reached approximately 40 hours after a reactor startup to full power operation. For a
reactor startup to 50% power, approximately 44 hours are required to reach xenon
equilibrium. This time is extended to approximately 48 hours at lower reactor power
levels.

Maintaining Constant Reactor Power During Xenon Buildup

In order to maintain constant reactor power levels as xenon-135 concentration builds

up in the core, positive reactivity must be added to compensate for the negative
reactivity added by the xenon. Positive reactivity addition is usually accomplished by
reducing boron concentration, withdrawing control rods or both.
If no operator action is taken in a reactor operating with a constant steam demand, a
change in xenon-135 concentration leads to a change in the reactor coolant
temperature to compensate for the reactivity change associated with the xenon.

Changes in Xenon Concentration with Reactor Power Level

Because of the reactivity changes associated with the changing concentration of

xenon-135 in a nuclear reactor core, it is important to understand how changes in
reactor power level affect xenon concentration. Changes in reactor power level
affect the production and loss terms associated with the xenon equilibrium equation.
For example, assume that xenon-135 equilibrium conditions exist in a reactor
operating at a 50% power level. When the reactor power level is doubled to 100%,
the xenon-135 equilibrium concentration will increase. This can be seen by
examining the effects of increasing reactor power on the equilibrium xenon equation.
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝑋𝑒 𝛴𝑓 𝜙 + (𝛾𝑋𝑒 + 𝛾𝐼 )
𝑁𝑋𝑒 (𝑒𝑞 ) =
𝜎𝑎𝑋𝑒 𝜙 + 𝜆𝑋𝑒

Prepared By:
164 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
An increase in reactor power level leads to an increase in the thermal flux (Φ) in the
core. This means that the production rate of xenon will increase. However, the
increased thermal flux level also leads to an increase in the burnout rate of xenon-
135. This increased xenon burnout tends to lessen the effect of the production
terms on the equilibrium concentration.
The net effect of this increase in power is that the equilibrium xenon-135
concentration in the core increases, but it does not quite double. For a typical
commercial PWR (depending on the size of the core) the 50% reactor power, xenon
equilibrium concentration adds reactivity to the core equal to about -2.1% Δk/k. At
100% reactor power, the reactivity associated with the equilibrium xenon-135 in the
core is about -2.7% Δk/k.

XENON-135 RESPONSE TO REACTOR OPERATIONS

As previously discussed, changes in xenon-135 concentration within the core of a

nuclear reactor affects the amount of reactivity present in the core. Various reactor
operations can result in significant changes in the concentration of xenon-135 and
therefore, significant changes in reactivity. In order to achieve or maintain a desired
reactor power level, the reactor operators must be able to recognize and account for
these effects.

Startup From A Xenon Free Condition

A xenon free condition is as the name implies a condition in which the core of a
nuclear reactor is considered “free” of xenon-135. A xenon free condition exists at
the beginning of core life (BOL) prior to reactor operation, when no xenon has been
produced within the core. A xenon free condition can also occur anytime in core life
when the reactor has been shutdown long enough to allow any xenon-135 to
completely decay away. This condition generally occurs approximately 70 – 80
hours after reactor shutdown from at-power operations.
Figure 6-3 shows the time required to reach equilibrium xenon concentration from a
xenon free condition for three different power levels: 100%, 50% and 25% reactor
power.

Prepared By:
165 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

100% EQUILIBRIUM Xe-135

-2.7
Xe REACTIVITY

50% EQUILIBRIUM Xe-135

(% ∆k/k)

-2.1
25% EQUILIBRIUM Xe-135

40 44 48
TIME (HO URS)

Figure 6-3
Time to Reach Equilibrium Xenon for Various Power Levels

Commencing reactor at-power operation from a xenon-free condition results in the

immediate production of xenon-135 directly from fission. A large amount of iodine-
135 is also produced directly from fission. As time progress, additional xenon-135 is
produced as a result of the decay of iodine-135. The production of xenon-135 by
these two mechanisms leads to an increase in the concentration of xenon-135 in the
core.
Even as the concentration of xenon is building within the core, xenon is being
removed by burnout and decay. Eventually the production rate and loss rates for
xenon-135 will balance and an equilibrium concentration of xenon-135 will be
reached within the core.
In order to maintain a constant power level in the core (criticality), without changing
the temperature of the reactor coolant during the buildup of xenon-135, the reactor
operator must add positive reactivity to the core by reducing coolant/moderator
boron concentration or withdrawing additional control rods.
Example:
A nuclear power plant is being returned to operation following a refueling outage.
Fuel preconditioning requires reactor power to be increased from 10% to full power
gradually over a one week period.
During this slow power increase, most of the positive reactivity added by the
operator is required to overcome the negative reactivity from...
A. fuel burnup.
B. xenon buildup.
C. fuel temperature increase.
Prepared By:
166 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
D. moderator temperature increase.
The equilibrium xenon at BOL is more negative reactivity to overcome than fuel
temperature and moderator temperature effects combined, therefore, it is the correct
answer. Thecorrect answer is: B.

Xenon-135 Response to Reactor Shutdown (Trip)

When a reactor is shutdown (or trips due to scram), the neutron flux is reduced
essentially to zero. Therefore, after shutdown, xenon-135 is no longer produced by
fission and is no longer removed by burnup. The only remaining production
mechanism is the decay of the iodine-135 which was present in the core at the time
of shutdown. The only removal mechanism for xenon-135 after shutdown is beta
decay. The behavior of xenon-135 after shutdown can be described using the
equation below.

𝛥𝑁𝑋𝑒
= 𝜆𝐼 𝑁𝐼 − 𝜆𝑋𝑒 𝑁𝑋𝑒
𝛥𝑡
Peak Xenon

Because the decay rate of iodine-135 is faster than the decay rate of xenon-135, the
xenon concentration builds to a peak in a reactor core that has been shut down from
at-power operations. Peak xenon is reached when the product of the terms λ I N I is
equal to λ Xe N Xe (approximately 6 to 10 hours after the shutdown). Subsequently,
the production from iodine decay is less than the removal of xenon by decay, and
the concentration of xenon-135 decreases.
The amount of time to reach peak xenon in a shutdown reactor can be estimated
using the following rule of thumb:
• Time to peak xenon (in hours) is equal to the square root of the percent (%)
reactor power prior to the shutdown (trip).
Using this rule, a shutdown (trip) from 100% reactor power will result in peak xenon
concentration occurring about 10 hours later. Similarly, a shutdown from 50% power
will result in peak xenon concentration approximately 7 hours later.
The greater the flux level prior to shutdown, the greater the concentration of iodine-
135 at shutdown; therefore, the greater the peak in xenon-135 concentration after
shutdown. This phenomenon can be seen in Figure 6-4, which illustrates the
negative reactivity value of xenon-135 following shutdown from various neutron flux
levels.

Prepared By:
167 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

Figure 6-4
Xenon-135 Reactivity After Reactor Shutdown

Examples:
Immediately after a reactor trip from sustained high power operation, xenon-135
concentration in the nuclear reactor will...
A. increase due to the decay of iodine already in the core.
B. decrease because xenon is produced directly from fission.
C. remain the same because the decay of iodine and xenon balance each other out.
D. decrease initially, then slowly increase due to the differences in the half-lives of
iodine and xenon.
With the sustained high power operation the iodine is at equilibrium for 100% power.
Then the reactor trip occurs the iodine continues to decay to xenon which in turn
causes the xenon concentration to rise. The correct answer is: A
Xenon-135 is produced in a nuclear reactor by two primary methods. One is directly
from fission, the other is from the decay of...
A. cesium-135.
B. iodine-135.

Prepared By:
168 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
C. xenon-136.
D. iodine-136.
Iodine-135 will beta minus decay directly to xenon135. The correct answer is: B.
Following a reactor trip from sustained power operation, the xenon-135 removal
process consists primarily of...
A. beta decay.
B. gamma decay.
C. electron capture.
D. gamma capture.
The xenon in the core is generally removed one of two ways: absorption of a themal
neutron or beta decay to cesium-135. Since a reactor trip has occurred the neutron
flux is no longer available therefore the beta decay is the only means of removal
remaining. The correct answer is: A.
Two identical nuclear reactors have been operating at a constant power level for one
week. Reactor A is at 50% power and reactor B is at 100% power.
If both reactors trip/scram at the same time, Xe-135 will peak first in reactor ______
and the highest Xe-135 reactivity peak will occur in reactor ______.
A. A; B
B. A; A
C. B; B
D. B; A
For reactor A peak xenon will occur at about 7 hours and for reactor B peak xenon
will occur at about 10 hours. Peak xenon will be a result of the initial power history
and I-135 production rates so the higher the reactor power the higher the peak
xenon will be. The correct answer is: A.

Peak Xenon Effects on Reactor Operation

The xenon-135 peak following a reactor shutdown can have an important effect on
plant operations. As an example, suppose that a reactor must be shutdown from full
power operation for an extended period of time. Also assume that the reactor is
initially shut down by 2% Δk/k.
The increasing concentration of xenon-135 immediately following the reactor
shutdown increases the reactor shutdown margin by adding additional negative
reactivity to the core. After the peak xenon-135 concentration is reached, the
concentration of xenon-135 slowly decreases until a xenon free condition is
eventually reached.

Prepared By:
169 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
The removal of xenon-135 by decay after the peak is reached results in a decrease
in the shutdown margin of the reactor (as compared to the value at peak xenon) due
to the removal of the negative reactivity associated with the xenon. After
approximately 20 hours, the shutdown margin in the reactor will have returned to its
initial value. As the xenon-135 in the core continues to decay, the reactor’s
shutdown margin continues to decrease.
If the reactor was at 100% power prior to shutdown, the reactivity in the reactor core
due to equilibrium xenon-135 was approximately -2.7% Δk/k. In this case it would
be possible for the reactor to regain criticality when all of the xenon-135 has
decayed away as the positive reactivity added to the core by the xenon decay would
actually exceed the original shutdown margin of 2% Δk/k.
Because shutdown margin for a reactor is calculated based on xenon-free
conditions, the above scenario should not occur unless all of the reactor’s control
rods could not be inserted for some reason.
Example:
A nuclear reactor has been shut down for seven days to perform maintenance. A
reactor startup is performed and power level is increased to 50% over a 5-hour
period.
When power reaches 50%, the magnitude of core xenon negative reactivity will be...
A. increasing toward a peak value.
B. increasing toward an equilibrium value.
C. decreasing toward an equilibrium value.
D. decreasing toward an upturn.
The xenon-135 will take about 40 hours to reach equilibrium at full power and since
the reactor is only taken to 50% it takes around 44 hours. So it will be 39 hours until
equilibrium xenon is reached. The correct answer is: B.

Xenon Precluded Startup

Negative xenon reactivity, also referred to as xenon poisoning, may provide

sufficient negative reactivity to make the reactor inoperable because there is
insufficient positive reactivity available from control rod removal or chemical shim
dilution to counteract it. This usually occurs late in core life when the reactor is
shutdown from a high power level with excess reactivity levels as low as 1% Δk/k
due to fuel depletion. The inability of the reactor to be started up due to the effects
of xenon is sometimes referred to as a xenon precluded startup.
This inability to start the reactor due to xenon concentration will persist for several
hours until the concentration of xenon-135 in the reactor core decays to the point
where control rod withdrawal can add sufficient positive reactivity to overcome the
negative reactivity attributed to the xenon.

Prepared By:
170 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Example:
Xenon poisoning in a nuclear reactor core is most likely to prevent a reactor startup
following a reactor shutdown from ____________ power at the ____________ of
core life.
A. high; beginning
B. low; beginning
C. high; end
D. low; end
Near the end of core life after a reactor shutdown, the xenon-135 peak can preclude
a reactor startup for several hours to a day or more. This is generally a problem if
the reactor is shut down for a short term problem and restored quickly. If a reactor
was operating at 100% power for a long duration the equilibrium xenon-135 built into
the core at time of shutdown, the xenon-135 concentration begins to increase.
Xenon will peak at about 10 hours after 100% power operations, in just a few hours
after shutdown, the reactivity associated with the xenon-135 buildup is more than the
excess reactivity available. The negative reactivity associated with the xenon-135 in
the core cannot be compensated for by the addition of positive reactivity addition
from control rod withdrawl the reactor is said to be xenon precluded. The xenon
peak concentrations are higher when the reactor trips from high operating power.
The correct answer is: C.

Xenon Dead Time

The period of time where the reactor is unable to "override" the effects of xenon is
called xenon dead time. Because the amount of excess core reactivity available to
override the negative reactivity of the xenon is usually less than 10% ∆k/k, thermal
power reactors are normally limited to flux levels of about 5 x 1013 neutrons/cm2-sec
so that timely restart can be ensured after shutdown.
For reactors with very low thermal flux levels (≈5 x 1012 neutrons/cm2-sec or less),
most xenon is removed by decay as opposed to neutron absorption. For these
cases, reactor shutdown does not cause any xenon-135 peaking effect.

Time to Reach Xenon Free Conditions

Following the peak in xenon-135 concentration at about 10 hours after shutdown,

the xenon-135 concentration will decrease at a rate controlled by the decay of
iodine-135 into xenon-135 and the decay rate of xenon-135 itself.
For some reactors, the xenon-135 concentration about 20 hours after shutdown from
full power will be the same as the equilibrium xenon-135 concentration at full power.

Prepared By:
171 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
About 3 days (70 – 80 hours) after shutdown, the xenon-135 concentration will have
decreased to a small percentage of its pre-shutdown level, and the reactor can be
assumed to be xenon-free without a significant error introduced into reactivity
calculations. It should be noted that the higher the reactor power level at the start of
a shutdown, the longer the time required to reach a xenon-free condition.
Examples:
A nuclear reactor has been operating at full power for several days when it is shut
down rapidly (within 2 hours) for maintenance. How will core xenon reactivity
change?
A. Peak in 2 to 4 hours and then decay to near zero in about 1 day.
B. Peak in 2 to 4 hours and then decay to near zero in 3 to 4 days.
C. Peak in 6 to 10 hours and then decay to near zero in about 1 day.
D. Peak in 6 to 10 hours and then decay to near zero in 3 to 4 days.
When a reactor shutdown occurs the production of iodine-135 and xenon-135 by
direct fission stops but existing iodine-135 concentration will continue the production
of xenon-135 by the decay will continue at almost the same rate as before the
shutdown. Since initially the xenon-135 production continues at almost the
equilibrium rate, and the removal rate is significantly diminished, and the
concentration of xenon-135 in the core increases following shutdown. As the iodine-
135 concentration diminishes the rate at which the xenon-135 is produced will
diminish as well. The xenon will decay at a constant decay rate, and the rate at
which the xenon-135 concentration is increasing decreases. The two rates will
eventually reach a point where xenon production from iodine-135 decay equals
xenon removal from natural decay and concentration of xenon-135 reaches a
maximum, or peak, value. After the peak is achieved the rate at which the xenon-
135 decays exceeds the rate at which xenon-135 is produced from the decay of the
iodine. The concentration of the xenon-135 in the core begins to decrease as the
iodine-135 in the core is depleted, the rate at which the xenon-135 is being produced
essentially drops to zero, and the removal rate of the xenon-135 will approach its
half life time of 9.1 hours. The correct answer is: D.
Four hours after a reactor trip from equilibrium full power operation, a reactor is
taken critical and power is immediately stabilized for critical data. To maintain a
constant reactor power, the operator must add __________ reactivity because core
Xe-135 concentration is __________.
A. positive; increasing
B. positive; decreasing
C. negative; increasing
D. negative; decreasing

Prepared By:
172 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Four hours after the reactor trip the xenon-135 level will not yet completely decayed
and the pause for documentation of critical data, there will not be enough neutron
flux to cause a significant drop in xenon. Xenon concentration is building in from the
decay of iodine–135 which means the xenon is adding negative reactivity so the
reactor operator must add POSITIVE reactivity to maintain a stable reactor power.
The correct answer is: A.

Xenon-135 Response to Reactor Power Changes

During periods of steady state operation, at a constant neutron flux level, the xenon-
135 concentration builds up to its equilibrium value for that reactor power in about 40
to 50 hours. Figure 6-5 illustrates a typical xenon transient that occurs as a result of
a change in reactor power level.

POWER DECREASE 50% EQUILIBRIUM POWER INCREASE

TO 50% XENON TO 100%
100% EQUILIBRIUM
XENON
XENON CONCENTRATION

8-10 HRS
30-40
HRS 5 HRS 25 HRS

40-50 HRS

TIME (HOURS)

Figure 6-5
Xenon-135 Variations During Power Changes

Decrease in Reactor Power

Assume that a reactor is operating at 100% power with equilibrium xenon present in
the core. When the reactor power is decreased (also referred to as a down power
transient) from 100% to 50% power, there is an immediate decrease in xenon
burnup, which results in an increase in xenon-135 concentration. The decay rate of
xenon-135 remains constant. The iodine-135 concentration is still at the higher
equilibrium level for 100% power and is therefore still producing xenon-135 at the
higher rate.
Prepared By:
173 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
The xenon-135 concentration continues to rise at a decreasing rate due to the decay
of iodine-135, until the rate of production of xenon-135 becomes equal to the rate of
removal (roughly 8 to 10 hours after the initial reduction in power level). During this
time, the reactor operator will have to withdraw control rods to add positive reactivity
to account for the increasing negative reactivity added by xenon.
The xenon-135 concentration then gradually decreases to the new equilibrium level
in about 50 to 60 hours. A greater power change requires longer time for xenon to
reach equilibrium. During this time, the reactor operator will have to insert control
rods to account for the changing reactivity due to xenon until equilibrium xenon
levels are reached.
The magnitude of the xenon peak is greatest if the initial power level is very high.
Maximum peak xenon occurs when a reactor that is operating at 100% equilibrium
xenon concentration is suddenly shut down.

Increase in Reactor Power

Refer again to Figure 6-5. Reactor power is raised from 50% power to 100% power.
When the reactor power is increased (up power transient), xenon concentration
initially decreases because the burnup of xenon is increased at the new higher
power level. The decay of xenon remains constant.
An immediate increase in the direct production of xenon-135 from fission also
occurs. Since the direct production of xenon from fission only accounts for
approximately 5% of the xenon in the core, the burnout term dominates and the
concentration of xenon in the core initially decreases.
Because 95% of the xenon production in the core is from iodine-135 decay, which
has a 6 to 7 hour half-life, the production of xenon remains constant for several
hours. After a few hours (roughly 4 to 6 hours depending on power levels) the rate
of production of xenon from iodine and fission equals the rate of removal of xenon by
burnup and decay. At this point, the xenon concentration reaches a minimum. The
xenon concentration then increases to the new equilibrium level for the new power
level in roughly 20 to 30 hours.
It should be noted that the magnitude and the rate of change of xenon concentration
during the initial 4 to 6 hours following the power change is dependent upon the
initial power level and on the amount of change in power level. The xenon
concentration change is greater for a larger change in power level. The most rapid
possible burnout of xenon occurs when a reactor is started up and operated at full
power while this maximum peak xenon condition exists.
To maintain constant reactor power levels and stable reactor coolant temperature
during periods of xenon burnout, the reactor operator must add negative reactivity by
inserting control rods. When xenon concentration turns and begins increasing, the
reactor operator will have to begin adding positive reactivity by withdrawing control
rods.

Prepared By:
174 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Right Here
Example:
A nuclear reactor that has been operating at rated power for two weeks is quickly
reduced in power to 50%. Xenon-135 will reach a new equilibrium condition in
______________ hours.
A. 8 to 10
B. 20 to 25
C. 30 to 35
D. 40 to 50
The correct answer is: D. 40 to 50

Reactor Startup With Xenon Present

Commercial reactor operations may require a reactor to be started up after a short

term shutdown, prior to the point where all of the xenon-135 which was present in
the core at the time of shutdown has completely decayed. Figure 6-6 shows a graph
of xenon concentration versus time for such a case.
XENON CONCENTRATION

100% EQUILIBRIUM
SHUTDOWN

STARTUP

0 10 20 30 40 50

TIME AFTER STARTUP (HOURS)

Figure 6-6
Xenon Behavior During Reactor Startup Xenon Present in Core

Prepared By:
175 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
The first portion of curve in Figure 6-6 illustrates xenon concentration approaching
peak xenon after the reactor is shutdown. At time zero a reactor startup is
commenced. Once the reactor attains a significant power level (5-10%), the xenon-
135 concentration starts to decrease due to burnout. This decrease is much faster
than what would occur during a long term shutdown where the xenon is allowed to
decay away.
This accelerated decrease in xenon concentration during the startup is a result of
two factors:
• The burnout rate is predominant and is even increased above what would
normally be experienced in an up power transient, due to fact that a high
concentration of xenon-135 already exists within the core.
• The direct production of iodine-135 and xenon-135 from fission is again
occurring, but it takes several hours for equilibrium conditions to be re-
established within the core.
If the reactor were to be taken critical but the power level was at about 1-2% or
lower, the burnout mechanism for xenon would not be sufficient to alter the xenon
removal rate. In this case the xenon decay curve would follow the normal shutdown
decay curve.
The lag in recovery of xenon-135 concentration during this sort of startup can be
directly attributed to half-life of iodine-135. Although iodine-135 concentration starts
to recover immediately, the production of xenon-135 from iodine-135 lags behind by
several hours.
The initial drop in xenon-135 concentration following a return to power after a short
term shutdown is often referred to as xenon-135 burnout.

Xenon-135 Oscillations

Large thermal reactors with little flux coupling between regions may experience
spatial power oscillations because of the non-uniform presence of xenon-135. The
mechanism is described in the following four steps.
• An initial lack of symmetry in the core power distribution (for example,
individual control rod movement or misalignment) causes an imbalance in
fission rates within the reactor core, and therefore, in the iodine-135 buildup
and the xenon-135 absorption.
• In the high-flux region, xenon-135 burnout allows the flux to increase further,
while in the low-flux region, the increase in xenon-135 causes a further
reduction in flux. The iodine concentration increases where the flux is high
and decreases where the flux is low.
• As soon as the iodine-135 levels build up sufficiently, decay to xenon
reverses the initial situation. Flux decreases in this area, and the former low-
flux region increases in power.

Prepared By:
176 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
• Repetition of these patterns can lead to xenon oscillations moving about the
core with periods on the order of about 15 hours.
With little change in overall power level, these oscillations can change the local
power levels by a factor of three or more. In a reactor system with strongly negative
temperature coefficients, the xenon-135 oscillations are dampened quite readily.
This is one reason for designing reactors to have negative moderator-temperature
coefficients.
Examples:
Reactor power is increased from 50% to 60% in 1 hour. The most significant
contributor to the initial change in core xenon reactivity is the increase in xenon...
A. production from fission.
B. decay to cesium.
C. absorption of neutrons.
D. production from iodine decay.
The correct answer is: C. absorption of neutrons.
A nuclear reactor has been operating at 50% power for one week when power is
ramped in 4 hours to 100%. Which one of the following describes the new
equilibrium xenon concentration?
A. Twice the 50% power concentration.
B. Less than twice the 50% power concentration.
C. More than twice the 50% power concentration.
D. Remains the same because it is independent of power.
The correct answer is: B. Less than twice the 50% power concentration
A nuclear reactor has been operating at 25% power for 24 hours following a 2-hour
power reduction from steady-state full power. Which one of the following describes
the current status of core xenon- 135 concentration?
A. At equilibrium
B. Decreasing toward an upturn
C. Decreasing toward an equilibrium value
D. Increasing toward a peak value
The correct answer is: C. Decreasing toward an equilibrium value
A nuclear reactor has been operating at 50% power for one week when power is
quickly ramped (over 4 hours) to 100%. How will the core xenon-135 concentration
respond?
A. Decrease initially, then build to a new equilibrium concentration in 8 to 10 hours
Prepared By:
177 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
B. Increase steadily to a new equilibrium concentration in 20 to 30 hours
C. Decrease initially, then build to a new equilibrium concentration in 40 to 50 hours
D. Increase steadily to a new equilibrium concentration in 70 to 80 hours
The correct answer is: C. Decrease initially, then build to a new equilibrium
concentration in 40 to 50 hours

EFFECTS OF XENON ON CORE FLUX PROFILE

The production of xenon-135 and its precursor, iodine-135, is dependent on thermal

neutron flux. Because of this the production rate of these two isotopes at any local
point in a reactor core depends on the thermal neutron flux being experienced by the
fuel at that location within the core. Since neutron flux is not uniform over the entire
volume of the core, the production and removal rates, and isotopic concentrations of
xenon-135 and iodine-135 will not be uniform over the volume of the core. Because
of this xenon-135 produces a local reactivity effect which tends to change the
thermal neutron flux profile across the core.
In areas of the core where local xenon concentration is relatively high, the thermal
neutron flux will be depressed. In areas of the core where local xenon concentration
is relatively low, the thermal neutron flux will tend to be greater. The effects on the
magnitude of thermal flux in these local areas of the core are due to the effects of
xenon-135 on the neutron life cycle. Areas of high xenon-135 concentration in the
core will absorb a greater number of thermal neutrons, removing them from the
neutron life cycle, as compared to areas of lower xenon-135 concentration.
An example of this localized effect of xenon-135 concentration on the thermal
neutron flux profile in a nuclear reactor occurs during a xenon oscillation. As
previously discussed, a xenon oscillation occurs when the xenon-135 concentration
changes at different rates in different locations within the core (usually the top and
bottom halves of the core).
During core operation, the reactivity effect of the moderator (water) temperature
causes the equilibrium thermal neutron flux to shift towards the bottom of the core.
This is because colder, denser water will be near the bottom of the core. The denser
water (moderator) at the bottom of the core will lead to an increase in the
thermalization of neutrons near the bottom of the core as compared to the top of the
core. For this reason, the thermal flux at the bottom of the core will be greater than
the thermal flux at the top of the core.
Equilibrium iodine and xenon concentrations are directly proportional to the local
thermal neutron flux level. Since the thermal flux level is greater in the bottom half of
core, the concentration of iodine and xenon will also be greater near the bottom of the
core. It is also important to note that the decay of iodine accounts for approximately
95% of the xenon-135 production in core.
Example:

Prepared By:
178 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Slow changes in axial power distribution in a nuclear reactor that has operated at a
steady-state power for a long time can be caused by xenon...
A. peaking.
B. override.
C. burnup.
D. oscillation.
The correct answer is: D. oscillation.

Effects of Xenon on Core Flux Due to a Control Rod Insertion

As an example of this phenomenon, consider a pressurized water reactor (PWR)

operating at steady-state conditions, as shown in Figure 6-7 (A). When the reactor
control rods are inserted a short distance (while maintaining a constant reactor
power) the thermal flux in the top half of the core decreases, while the thermal flux in
bottom half of the core increases (Figure 6-7 (B)). As a result of this axial shift in
thermal flux, the rate of xenon-135 burnup in the lower portion of the core increases
immediately (Figure 6-7 (C)).
The higher flux in the bottom portion of the core also results in an immediate
increase in production of iodine-135. Iodine-135 has a 6.6 hour half-life. As a result
of this half-life, there is a delay between the increase in the axial thermal flux in the
lower half of the core and the increase in xenon-135 production.
The net result of these effects is that, initially, the xenon concentration in the upper
portion of the core increases, further suppressing the axial thermal flux in the top half
of the core. The higher thermal flux in the bottom portion of the core results in
greater xenon-135 burnup (and greater iodine-135 production) in the lower portion of
the core.

Prepared By:
179 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

Figure 6-7
Thermal Flux versus Xenon Concentration after Control Rod Insertion

The overall effect is a continuous decrease in xenon-135 concentration (due to

burnup) and a corresponding increase in the axial thermal neutron flux in the bottom
half of the core for about 6.5 hours (Figure 6-7 (C)).

Prepared By:
180 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
With constant reactor power and control rod position, the higher thermal neutron flux
in the bottom portion of the core will continue to produce an increased concentration
of iodine-135 in the bottom portion of the core. The increased iodine-135
concentration will eventually produce sufficient xenon-135 to overcome the initial
burnup effect on the xenon-135 concentration in the bottom portion of the core.
After about 19.5 hours, the axial thermal flux and xenon concentration profiles
shown in Figure 6-7 (D) will exist in the core.
At this point, the axial thermal flux is suppressed in lower portion of the core and is
at a peak in the upper portion of the core. The higher xenon-135 concentration that
was previously present in the top half of the core, has now begun to decay away,
thereby allowing the axial thermal flux to peak in the top portion of the reactor core.
As the transient continues, the axial thermal flux and xenon profiles shown in Figure
6-7 (E) will result. Thermal neutron flux begins to decrease in the top portion of the
core because of increased xenon-135 production from the decay of iodine-135. The
thermal neutron flux in the bottom half of the core will begin to increase due to the
decreased xenon-135 production from iodine-135 decay.
The cycle time for a xenon-induced oscillation in thermal neutron flux such as the
one described here is approximately 26 hours.

Effects of Xenon on Core Flux versus Core Life

At beginning of core life, the reactivity effects due to moderator temperature tend to
dampen the above-described xenon oscillations and prevent their growth. Xenon
oscillations are more prevalent at the end of core life because the fuel is mostly
depleted in the axial center of the core, and there is less neutronic coupling (neutron
sharing) between the upper and lower halves of the core. If left unchecked, the
magnitude of these flux shifts could continue to increase and could result in
violations of reactor thermal limits.

SAMARIUM

The fission product poison that has the most significant effect on reactor operations
other than xenon-135 is samarium-149. Samarium-149 behaves significantly
different from xenon-135 due to its different nuclear properties.

PRODUCTION AND REMOVAL OF SAMARIUM-149

Samarium-149 is the second most important fission product poison because of its
high thermal neutron absorption cross section of 4.1 x 104 barns.

Prepared By:
181 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Samarium Production

Negligible amounts of Samariun-149 are produced directly from fission. However,

1.1% of all fissions result in the production of either neodymium-149 or promethium-
149.
Samarium-149 is the end product of a decay chain containing neodymium and
promethium. Samarium-149 is produced from the decay of the neodymium-149
fission fragment as shown in the decay chain below.
𝛽− 𝛽−
149
60𝑁𝑑
�� 149
61𝑃𝑚
�� 149
62𝑆𝑚
1.73 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 53 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
Equilibrium Samarium

For the purpose of examining the behavior of samarium-149, the 1.73 hour half-life
of neodymium-149 is sufficiently shorter than the 53.1 hour value for promethium-
149 that the promethium-149 may be considered as if it were formed directly from
fission. This assumption, and neglecting the small amount of promethium burnup,
allows the situation to be described as follows:
Rate of change of promethium-149 = yield from fission - decay of promethium-149

Therefore:

𝑑𝑁𝑃𝑚 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
= 𝛾𝑃𝑚 𝛴𝑓 𝜙 − 𝜆𝑃𝑚 𝑁𝑃𝑚
𝑑𝑡
Where:
N Pm = Promethium-149 concentration
γ Pm = Promethium-149 fission yield
λ Pm = decay constant for promethium-149

Solving for the equilibrium value of promethium-149 gives the following.

𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝑃𝑚 𝛴𝑓 𝜙
𝑁𝑃𝑚 (𝑒𝑞) =
𝜆𝑃𝑚
The rate of samarium-149 formation is described as follows.
Rate of change of Samarium-149 = yield from fission + Promethium-149 decay –
Samarium-149 burnup

Therefore:

Prepared By:
182 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

𝑑𝑁𝑆𝑚 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
= 𝛾𝑆𝑚 𝛴𝑓 𝜙 + 𝜆𝑃𝑚 𝑁𝑃𝑚 − 𝑁𝑆𝑚 𝜎𝑎𝑆𝑚 𝜙
𝑑𝑡
Where:
N Sm = samarium-149 concentration
γ Sm = Samarium-149 fission yield
𝜎𝑎𝑆𝑚 = microscopic absorption cross section of samarium-149

The fission yield of samarium-149, however, is nearly zero; therefore, the equation
becomes the following.

𝑑𝑁𝑆𝑚
= 𝜆𝑃𝑚 𝑁𝑃𝑚 − 𝑁𝑆𝑚 𝜎𝑎𝑆𝑚 𝜙
𝑑𝑡
Solving this equation for the equilibrium concentration of samarium-149 and
substituting
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝑃𝑚 𝛴𝑓 𝜙
𝜆𝑃𝑚 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁𝑃𝑚 (𝑒𝑞)
Yields the following:
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝑃𝑚 𝛴𝑓
𝑁𝑆𝑚 =
𝜎𝑎𝑆𝑚
This expression for equilibrium samarium-149 concentration during reactor operation
illustrates that equilibrium samarium-149 concentration is independent of neutron
flux and power level. The samarium concentration will undergo a transient following
a power level change, but it will return to its original value.

Samarium Removal

Samarium-149 has half-life of 1016 years and is considered to be stable. Therefore,

the only removal mechanism for samarium-149 in an operating nuclear reactor is by
neutron capture. Neutron capture results in the conversion of samarium-149 to
samarium-150 as shown below.
149
62𝑆𝑚 + 10𝑛 → 150
62𝑆𝑚 +𝛾
The microscopic cross section for absorption for samarium-149 is 4.1 x 104 barns.
Samarium-150 is considered stable and has low absorption cross section for
neutrons (approximately 103 barns).

Prepared By:
183 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
CHANGES IN SAMARIUM CONCENTRATION DURING REACTOR OPERATION

Initial Reactor Startup

Although the equilibrium level of samarium in a nuclear reactor is not a function of

the reactor’s power level, the amount of time required to reach equilibrium samarium
is directly related to power level.
When a new reactor is taken to power for the first time, the production of
promethium-149 begins. The promethium then starts to decay to samarium-149. As
shown in Figure 6-8, samarium-149 concentration builds until an equilibrium level is
reached.
Sm REACTIVITY

100 % POWER 50 % POWER

(% ∆k/k)

-1.0

5 10 15 20 25 30 35

DAYS OF REACTOR OPERATION

Figure 6-8
Samarium-149 Buildup to Equilibrium

Samarium equilibrium concentration is reached in about 20 to 25 days if the reactor

is operated at significant power levels. The time to reach samarium equilibrium will
be longer at lower reactor power levels. Since samarium-149 does not decay and is
practically stable, the reactor is never again samarium free.
During this period of samarium buildup, positive reactivity must be added to the
reactor by the reactor operator in order to maintain constant reactor power
(criticality). This is required to counteract the negative reactivity being added by the
samarium. Positive reactivity may be added by withdrawing control rods, adjusting
recirculation flow, etc.
It should be noted that for a reactor with a constant steam demand, the negative
reactivity added to the core as samarium builds up will be countered by a decrease
in reactor coolant temperature if no operator action is taken. Control rod withdrawal
is required to maintain a constant reactor power level at a constant reactor coolant
temperature.

Prepared By:
184 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
Reactor Shutdown

Since the neutron flux drops to essentially zero after reactor shutdown, the rate of
samarium-149 production becomes the following:

𝑑𝑁𝑆𝑚
= 𝜆𝑃𝑚 𝑁𝑃𝑚
𝑑𝑡
Because samarium-149 is not radioactive and is not removed by decay, it presents
problems somewhat different from those encountered with xenon-135, as illustrated
in Figure 6-5. The equilibrium concentration and the poisoning effect build to an
equilibrium value during reactor operation. This equilibrium is reached in
approximately 20 days (500 hours), and since samarium-149 is stable, the
concentration remains essentially constant during reactor operation.
When the reactor is shutdown, the samarium-149 concentration builds up as a result
of the decay of the accumulated promethium-149. The buildup of samarium-149
after shutdown depends upon the power level before shutdown. Samarium-149
does not peak as xenon-135 does, but increases slowly to a maximum value at
about 12.5 days as shown in Figure 6-9.
The negative reactivity due to samarium-149 increases to about -1.4% Δk/k after
shutdown from 100% reactor power. Even though the operating value of equilibrium
samarium is always -1.0% Δk/k, the peak value after shutdown will vary, based on
power prior to shutdown. Samarium will peak at a higher value after shutdown from
higher power, due to the greater amount of promethium-149 present in the core at
the time of shutdown.
Samarium concentration remains constant throughout the shutdown due to the long
half-life of samarium-149.

Prepared By:
185 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

Figure 6-9
Behavior of Samarium-149 in a Typical Light Water Reactor

Reactor Startup After Shutdown

After shutdown, if the reactor is then operated at power, samarium-149 is burned up

and its concentration returns to the equilibrium value. When the reactor is restarted,
the neutron flux begins to burnout samarium-149 immediately. Due to the long half-
life of promethium-149, significant formation of additional samarium-149 is delayed.
The result of this is shown in Figure 6-9. Samarium-149 concentration in the reactor
core decreases below its equilibrium level in about the first day at full power
operation. The burnout continues for several days, and the samarium-149
concentration continues to dip below an equilibrium concentration value. The
concentration of samarium-149 remains below equilibrium level for about one week,
until the promethium-149 decay rate returns the samarium-149 concentration to at-
power equilibrium levels.

SAMARIUM OVER CORE LIFE

As previously discussed, the greatest change in samarium-149 concentration occurs

immediately following the initial startup of a new reactor core. However, the
concentration of samarium-149 will present the greatest challenge for reactor
operations near the end of core life. This is because samarium-149 increases in
concentration throughout core life and remains in the core, presenting a constant
source of negative reactivity.

Prepared By:
186 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
At the end of core life the available positive reactivity from the fuel, etc. may be
insufficient to override the added negative reactivity from samarium-149. At any
operating power, equilibrium samarium-149 concentration has an associated
reactivity of approximately -1.0% Δk/k. Samarium peaks, after shutdown from 100%
equilibrium conditions, can result in about -1.4% Δk/k. This value of negative
reactivity may prevent the reactor from being restarted toward the end of core life.

EFFECTS OF SAMARIUM VERSUS EFFECTS OF XENON

Samarium poisoning is minor when compared to xenon poisoning. Although

samarium-149 has a constant poisoning effect during long-term sustained operation,
its behavior during initial startup and during post-shutdown and restart periods
requires special considerations in reactor design.
Table 6-1 provides a comparison between xenon-135 and samarium-149.

Table 6-1
Effects of Xenon Compared to Effects of Samarium

Effect Xenon-135 Samarium-149

Microscopic Cross Section for Absorption 2.6 x 106 Barns 4.1.x 104 Barns
(σ a)
Time to Peak Concentration Square root of ≈ 12.5 days
power prior to
S/D or Trip
Time to Equilibrium Concentration 40 – 48 hours 20 – 25 days
Reactivity Worth -2.7% Δk/k at -1.0% Δk/k at
100% power power
equilibrium equilibrium
-4.7% Δk/k at -1.4% Δk/k at
peak peak
Removal by Decay? Yes No
Concentration Dependent on Power? Yes Small
Distribution Problem (Oscillations)? Yes No

As can be seen from Table 6-1, samarium-149 presents a much smaller operational
problem for a reactor than xenon-135 does. The negative reactivity value added by
samarium is much smaller, and changes related to the concentration and reactivity
of samarium occur over a period of days rather than hours.
Additionally, the negative reactivity value attributable to xenon-135 at equilibrium
concentration is nearly three times that of samarium-149 at 100% reactor power.

Prepared By:
187 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
The negative reactivity value of xenon-135 at its peak is comparable to the amount
of positive reactivity required to allow a reactor core to operate for approximately a
year (≈5% Δk/k).
Samarium reaches a peak after a reactor shutdown and remains at that peak, since
it does not decay. Xenon reaches a peak after a reactor shutdown and then slowly
decays away.
The result of this comparison is that samarium does not present the same
operational problem that xenon does. A commercial reactor operator is seldom
aware that samarium exists, as compared to xenon. Xenon on the other hand,
presents a significant operational problem, especially if a reactor startup is
attempted when xenon concentration is near its peak value.

Note: The xenon-135 and samarium-149 poisoning mechanisms are dependent on

their very large thermal neutron absorption cross sections and only affect thermal
reactor systems. In fast reactors, neither these nor any other fission products have
a major poisoning influence.

OTHER NEUTRON POISONS

Other Fission Product Poisons

As previously discussed, there are numerous other fission products that, as a result
of their concentration and thermal neutron absorption cross section, have a
poisoning effect on reactor operation. Individually, they are of little consequence,
but "lumped" together they have a significant impact. These are often characterized
as "lumped fission product poisons" and accumulate at an average rate of 50 barns
per fission event in the reactor.

Materials in the Core

In addition to fission product poisons, other materials in the reactor will decay to
materials that act as neutron poisons. An example of this is the decay of tritium to
helium-3. Since tritium has a half-life of 12.3 years, normally this decay does not
significantly affect reactor operations because the rate of decay of tritium is so slow.
However, if tritium is produced in a reactor and then allowed to remain in the reactor
during a prolonged shutdown of several months, a sufficient amount of tritium may
decay to helium-3 adding a significant amount of negative reactivity. Any helium-3
produced in the reactor during a shutdown period will be removed during
subsequent operation by a neutron-proton reaction.

Prepared By:
188 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
SUMMARY

• Fission product poisons act as parasitic absorbers of neutrons, removing

neutrons from the neutron life cycle.
• Xenon-135 and Samarium-149 are fission product poisons of greatest concern to
reactor operation.
• When the rate of production of iodine equals the rate of removal of iodine,
equilibrium exists.
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝐼 𝛴𝑓
𝑁𝐼 (𝑒𝑞) =
𝜆𝐼
• Xenon-135 is produced directly as a fission product and by the decay of iodine-
135 during reactor operation.
• Xenon-135 is removed from the core by radioactive decay and by neutron
absorption (burnout) during reactor operation.
• The equilibrium concentration for xenon-135 is determined by the following
equation.
𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝑋𝑒 𝛴𝑓 𝜙 + 𝜆𝐼 𝑁𝐼
𝑁𝑋𝑒 (𝑒𝑞) =
𝜎𝑎𝑋𝑒 𝜙 + 𝜆𝑋𝑒
• The xenon-135 concentration increases with increasing power level in a non-
linear manner.
 Equilibrium xenon-135 concentration reaches a maximum at a flux of about
1015 neutrons/cm2-sec.
• Peak xenon is reached when the product of the terms λI NI is equal to λXe NXe
(approximately 6 to 10 hours after the shutdown).
 The greater the pre-shutdown power level, the greater the peak value of
xenon.
• The core can be considered xenon-free about 3 days after shutdown.
• A xenon precluded startup occurs when there is insufficient reactivity in the
control rods to overcome the negative reactivity of xenon-135.
• Xenon dead time is the period of time where the reactor is unable to override the
effects of xenon.
• After a power decrease, xenon-135 concentration will initially increase due to
production by iodine decay being greater than the burnout.
 Xenon-135 will reach a maximum about 8-10 hours after the power decrease
and then decrease to a new, lower equilibrium value.
• After a power increase, xenon-135 concentration will initially decrease due to the
increased removal by burnout.
Prepared By:
189 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
 Xenon-135 will reach a minimum about 4-6 hours after the power increase
and then increase to a new, higher equilibrium value as the production from
iodine decay increases.
• In order to maintain constant reactor power levels as xenon-135 concentration
builds up in the core, positive reactivity must be added to compensate for the
negative reactivity added by the xenon.
• Following a reactor shutdown, xenon-135 concentration will increase due to the
decay of the iodine inventory of the core.
 Xenon-135 will peak approximately 6-10 hours after the shutdown (from
100%) and then decrease as xenon-135 decay becomes greater than the
iodine-135 decay.
• The accelerated decrease in xenon concentration during a startup with xenon
present in the core is a result of:
 The burnout rate is predominant and is even increased above what would
normally be experienced in an up power transient, due to fact that a high
concentration of xenon-135 already exists within the core.
 The direct production of iodine-135 and xenon-135 from fission is again
occurring, but it takes several hours for equilibrium conditions to be re-
established within the core.
• A xenon-135 oscillation may be caused by a rapid perturbation in the core power
distribution.
 The xenon-135 oscillation can change local power levels in the core by a
factor of three or more.
• Control rod movement can result in the concentration of xenon-135 oscillating
between the top and bottom portions of the core resulting in a change in the axial
thermal flux profile within the core.
• Xenon oscillations are more prevalent at the end of core life because the fuel is
mostly depleted in the axial center of the core, and there is less neutronic
coupling between the upper and lower halves of the core.
• Samarium-149 is produced directly from fission and from the decay of
promethium-149 during reactor operation.

𝛽− 𝛽−
149
60𝑁𝑑
�� 149
61𝑃𝑚
�� 149
62𝑆𝑚
1.73 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 53 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
• Samarium-149 is removed from the core by neutron absorption, it does not
decay.
149
62𝑆𝑚 + 10𝑛 → 150
62𝑆𝑚 +𝛾
• The equation for equilibrium samarium-149 concentration is stated below.

Prepared By:
190 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙
𝛾𝑃𝑚 𝛴𝑓
𝑁𝑆𝑚 =
𝜎𝑎𝑆𝑚
• The equilibrium samarium-149 concentration is independent of power level.
• During initial reactor startup, production of promethium-149 begins - promethium
decays to samarium-149.
• Samarium equilibrium concentration is reached in about 20 to 25 days if the
reactor is operated at significant power levels.
• Following a reactor shutdown, the samarium-149 concentration increases due to
the decay of the promethium-149 inventory of the core and the loss of the burnup
factor.
• If the reactor is restarted following a shutdown, the samarium-149 concentration
decreases as samarium is burned up and returns to its equilibrium operating
value.
• Samarium-149 increases in concentration throughout core life and remains in
core, presenting a constant source of negative reactivity.
• At end of core life available positive reactivity from fuel, etc. may be insufficient to
override added negative reactivity from samarium-149.
• Effects of Xenon versus Samarium
Effect Xenon-135 Samarium-149
Microscopic Cross Section for Absorption (σ a ) 2.6 x 106 Barns 4.1.x 104 Barns
Time to Peak Concentration Square root of ≈ 12.5 days
power prior to
S/D or Trip
Time to Equilibrium Concentration 40 – 48 hours 20 – 25 days
Reactivity Worth -2.7% Δk/k at -1.0% Δk/k at
100% power power
equilibrium equilibrium
-4.7% Δk/k at -1.4% Δk/k at
peak peak
Removal by Decay? Yes No
Concentration Dependent on Power? Yes Small
Distribution Problem (Oscillations)? Yes No
• Helium-3 will become a significant neutron poison if significant amounts of tritium
are left in a reactor during a shutdown period that lasts longer than several
months.

Prepared By:
191 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

REVIEW QUESTIONS

1. The major contributor to the production of Xe-135 in a nuclear reactor that

has been operating at full power for two weeks is _______________.

A. the radioactive decay of I-135.

B. the radioactive decay of Cs-135.
C. direct production from fission of U-235.
D. direct production from fission of U-238.

2. Following a two-week shutdown, a nuclear reactor is taken critical and

ramped to full power in 6 hours. How long will it take to achieve an
equilibrium xenon condition after the reactor reaches full power?

A. 70 to 80 hours
B. 40 to 50 hours
C. 8 to 10 hours
D. 1 to 2 hours

3. Compared to other poisons in the core, the two characteristics that cause Xe-
135 to be a major reactor poison are its relatively _________ absorption
cross section and its relatively _________ variation in concentration for large
reactor power changes.

A. small; large
B. small; small
C. large; small
D. large; large

4. A nuclear reactor had been operating at 50% power for two weeks when
power was increased to 100% over a 3-hour period. In order to maintain
reactor power stable during the next 24 hours, which one of the following
incremental control rod manipulations will be required?

A. Withdraw rods slowly during the entire period

B. Withdraw rods slowly at first, then insert rods slowly
C. Insert rods slowly during the entire period
D. Insert rods slowly at first, then withdraw rods slowly

Prepared By:
192 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
5. A nuclear reactor startup is being performed 5 hours after a reactor trip from
100% equilibrium power. The nuclear power plant is being returned to rated
power at 2.0%/minute instead of the normal rate of 0.5%/minute.

At the faster rate of power increase, the minimum amount of core xenon will
occur ____________ and the amount of equilibrium core xenon will be
____________.

A. sooner; the same

B. sooner; smaller
C. later; the same
D. later; smaller

6. A nuclear reactor that had been operating at 100% power for about two
months was shutdown over a 2-hour period. Following the shutdown, core
xenon-135 will reach a long-term steady-state concentration in
______________ hours.

A. 8 to 10
B. 20 to 25
C. 40 to 50
D. 70 to 80

7. Following a seven day shutdown, a reactor startup is performed and the

nuclear power plant is taken to 100% power over a 16-hour period. After
reaching 100% power, what type of reactivity will the operator need to add to
compensate for core xenon-135 changes over the next 24 hours?

A. Negative only
B. Negative, then positive
C. Positive only
D. Positive, then negative

8. Which of the following is the major contributor to the concentration of

samararium-149 in a nuclear reactor core?

A. Direct production from fission

B. Decay of xenon-135
C. Decay of promethium-149
D. Neutron capture in promethium-148

Prepared By:
193 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
9. Which of the following accounts for the majority of the removal of samarium-
149 from a nuclear reactor core?

A. Decay to neodyum-159
B. Neutron capture resulting in the production of samarium-150
C. Fission of samarium-149
D. Neutron capture resulting in the production of promethium-149

10. Which of the following statements describes the behavior of samarium-149

upon initial reactor core startup?

A. Samarium-149 concentration slowly builds to an equilibrium value over

the first 20-25 days of reactor operation at power.
B. Samarium concentration initially decreases, then slowly increases to an
equilibrium value over the first 20-25 days of reactor operation at power.
C. Samarium-149 initially increases to a peak and then slowly decreases to
an equilibrium concentration over the first 20-25 days of reactor
operation at power.
D. Samarium-149 remains at equilibrium concentration throughout core life
regardless of changes in reactor power.

11. A commercial reactor has been operating at 100% power for several months,
at which time it is shutdown for maintenance. The concentration of
samarium-149 in the reactor core will initially _______________ and then
_______________ until the reactor is again started up.

A. increase; decrease
B. decrease: increase
C. decrease; remain constant
D. increase: remain constant

12. When will samarium-149 concentration present the greatest challenge to

nuclear reactor operation?

A. During initial core startup and ascension to power.

B. Early in core life when a large amount of excess reactivity exists within
the core.
C. Toward the middle of core life when samarium-149 concentration
reaches its peak.
D. Late in core life when there is a small amount of excess reactivity exists
within the core.

Prepared By:
194 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
13. A fission product poison can be differentiated from all other fission products in
that a fission product poison...

A. will be radioactive for thousands of years.

B. is produced in a relatively large percentage of thermal fissions.
C. has a relatively high probability of absorbing a fission neutron.
D. is formed as a gas and is contained within the fuel pellets and fuel rods.

14. A fission product poison can be differentiated from all other fission products in
that a fission product poison...

A. will be produced in direct proportion to the fission rate in the core.

B. will remain radioactive for thousands of years after the final reactor
criticality.
C. will depress the power production in some core locations and cause
peaking in others.
D. will migrate out of the fuel pellets and into the reactor coolant via pinhole
defects in the clad.

15. Which one of the following exhibits the greatest microscopic cross section for
absorption of a thermal neutron in an operating nuclear reactor core?

A. Uranium-235
B. Boron-10
C. Samarium-149
D. Xenon-135

16. A nuclear reactor has been operating at full power for several weeks. Xenon-
135 is being directly produced as a fission product in approximately
_________% of all fissions.

A. 0.3
B. 3.0
C. 30
D. 100

Prepared By:
195 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
17. Which one of the following lists the production mechanisms of Xe-135 in an
operating power reactor?

A. Primarily from fission, secondarily from iodine decay

B. Primarily from fission, secondarily from promethium decay
C. Primarily from iodine decay, secondarily from fission
D. Primarily from promethium decay, secondarily from fission

18. Xenon-135 undergoes radioactive decay to...

A. iodine-135.
B. cesium-135.
C. tellurium-135.
D. lanthanum-135.

19. Nuclear reactors A and B are operating at steady-state 100% power with
equilibrium core Xe-135. The reactors are identical except that reactor A is
operating at the end of core life (EOL) and reactor B is operating at the
beginning of core life (BOL).

Which reactor core has the greater concentration of Xe-135?

A. Reactor A (EOL) due to the smaller 100% power thermal neutron flux.
B. Reactor A (EOL) due to the larger 100% power thermal neutron flux.
C. Reactor B (BOL) due to the smaller 100% power thermal neutron flux.
D. Reactor B (BOL) due to the larger 100% power thermal neutron flux.

20. A nuclear power plant has been operating at 100% power for several months.
Which one of the following describes the relative contributions of beta decay
and neutron capture to Xe-135 removal from the reactor core?

A. Primary - neutron capture; secondary - beta decay.

B. Primary - beta decay; secondary - neutron capture.
C. Beta decay and neutron capture contribute equally.
D. Not enough information is given to make a comparison.

Prepared By:
196 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
21. A nuclear reactor was operating at 100% power for one week when power
was decreased to 50%. Which one of the following describes the equilibrium
core xenon-135 concentration at 50% power?

A. The same as the100% value.

B. More than one-half the 100% value.
C. Less than one-half the 100% value.
D. One-half the 100% value.

22. Nuclear reactors A and B are operating at steady-state 100% power with
equilibrium core Xe-135.The reactors are identical except that reactor A is
operating near the end of core life and reactor B is operating near the
beginning of core life.

Which reactor is experiencing the most negative reactivity from equilibrium

core Xe-135?

A. Reactor A due to a greater concentration of equilibrium core Xe-135.

B. Reactor A due to lower competition from the fuel for thermal neutrons.
C. Reactor B due to a greater thermal neutron flux in the core.
D. Reactor B due to a smaller accumulation of stable fission product
poisons.

23. A nuclear reactor was operating for 42 weeks at a stable reduced power level
when a reactor trip occurred. The reactor was returned to critical after 12
hours and then ramped to 60% power in 6 hours.

How much time at steady state 60% power will be required to reach
equilibrium xenon?

A. 20 to 30 hours
B. 40 to 50 hours
C. 70 to 80 hours
D. Unable to determine without knowledge of previous power history

Prepared By:
197 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
24. A nuclear reactor has been operating at a constant power level for 15 hours
following a rapid power reduction from 100% to 50%. Which one of the
following describes the current core xenon-135 concentration?

A. Increasing toward a peak.

B. Decreasing toward an upturn.
C. Increasing toward equilibrium.
D. Decreasing toward equilibrium.

25. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 75% power for two months. A
manual reactor trip is required for a test. The trip will be followed immediately
by a reactor startup with criticality scheduled to occur 12 hours after the trip.

The greatest assurance that fission product poison reactivity will permit
criticality during the startup will exist if the reactor is operated at
____________ power for 48 hours prior to the trip and if criticality is
rescheduled for ____________ hours after the trip.

A. 100%; 8
B. 100%; 16
C. 50%; 8
D. 50%; 16

26. Select the combination below that completes the following statement.
The amount of control rod withdrawal needed to overcome peak core xenon-
135 negative reactivity will be smallest after a reactor trip from equilibrium
_______ reactor power at the _______ of core life.

A. 20%; beginning
B. 20%; end
C. 100%; beginning
D. 100%; end

Prepared By:
198 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
27. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 80% power for several weeks with
power production equally distributed axially above and below the core
midplane. Reactor power is increased to 100% using boron dilution to control
reactor coolant temperature while maintaining control rods fully withdrawn.

During the power increase, axial power distribution will...

A. shift toward the top of the core.

B. shift toward the bottom of the core.
C. remain evenly distributed above and below the core midplane.
D. peak at the top and the bottom of the core.

28. Which one of the following occurrences can cause reactor power to fluctuate
between the top and bottom of the core when steam demand is constant?

A. Steam generator level transients

B. Iodine spiking
C. Xenon oscillations
D. Inadvertent boron dilution

29. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 100% power for several weeks with a
symmetrical axial power distribution that is peaked at the core midplane.
Reactor power is reduced to 50% using boration to control reactor coolant
temperature while maintaining control rods fully withdrawn.

During the power reduction, the axial power distribution will...

A. shift toward the top of the core.

B. shift toward the bottom of the core.
C. peak at the top and the bottom of the core.
D. remain symmetrical and peaked at the core midplane.

30. A nuclear reactor has been shut down for 5 days to perform maintenance. A
reactor startup is performed and power is ramped to 75% over a 16 hour
period.

When power reaches 75%, the concentration of core xenon-135 will be...

A. decreasing toward an upturn.

B. increasing toward a peak value.
C. decreasing toward an equilibrium value.
d. increasing toward an equilibrium value.

Prepared By:
199 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
31. A nuclear reactor was shut down for seven days to perform maintenance. A
reactor startup was performed, and power level was increased from 1% to
50% over a two hour period.

Ten hours after reactor power reaches 50%, the magnitude of core xenon-
135 negative reactivity will be...

A. increasing toward a downturn.

B. increasing toward an equilibrium value.
C. decreasing toward an equilibrium value.
D. decreasing toward an upturn.

32. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 100% power for eight weeks when a
reactor trip occurs. The reactor is critical 6 hours later and power is increased
to 100% over the next 6 hours.

What is the status of core xenon-135 concentration when power reaches

100%?

A. Increasing toward an equilibrium value.

B. Burning out faster than it is being produced.
C. Increasing toward a peak value.
D. At equilibrium.

33. A nuclear power plant startup is in progress 5 hours after a reactor trip from
100% equilibrium power. The power plant is currently at 10% power and
being returned to 100% power at 0.25% per minute instead of the normal rate
of 0.5% per minute.

At the slower rate of power increase, the maximum amount of core xenon-135
will occur ____________ than normal; and the amount of equilibrium core
xenon-135 at 100% power will be ____________.

A. sooner; the same

B. sooner; smaller
C. later; the same
D. later; smaller

Prepared By:
200 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
34. A nuclear reactor that has been operating at rated power for about two weeks
is reduced in power to 50%. What happens to the Xe-135 concentration in
the core?

A. There will be no change because iodine concentration is constant.

B. Xenon will initially build up, then decrease to a new equilibrium value.
C. Xenon will initially decrease, then build up to a new equilibrium value.
D. Xenon will steadily decrease to a new equilibrium value.

35. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 70% power for 26 hours following a
one-hour power reduction from steady-state 100% power. Which one of the
following describes the current core xenon-135 concentration?

A. At equilibrium
B. Increasing toward a peak
C. Decreasing toward an upturn
D. Decreasing toward equilibrium

36. Compare a nuclear reactor that has been operating at 50% power for several
days when a reactor trip occurs, to a reactor that had been operating at full
power prior to the trip. For the 50% power reactor, xenon would peak
_____________ and the peak xenon reactivity would be ______________.

A. earlier; the same

B. at the same time; the same
C. earlier; less negative
D. at the same time; less negative

37. Following a reactor trip, negative reactivity from xenon initially increases due
to...

A. xenon production from the decay of iodine-135.

B. xenon production from the spontaneous fission of uranium.
C. the reduction of xenon removal by decay.
D. the reduction of xenon removal by recombination.

Prepared By:
201 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
38. After a reactor shutdown from equilibrium core xenon conditions, the
maximum xenon -135 negative reactivity (height of the xenon peak) is
_______________ the preshutdown equilibrium power level.

A. independent of
B. directly proportional to
C. inversely proportional to
D. dependent on but not directly proportional to

39. A nuclear power plant was shut down following three months of operation at
full power. The shutdown occurred over a 3 hour period with a constant rate
of power decrease.

Which one of the following describes the reactivity added by core xenon
during the shutdown?

A. Xenon buildup added negative reactivity.

B. Xenon buildup added positive reactivity.
C. Xenon burnout added negative reactivity.
D. Xenon burnout added positive reactivity.

40. A nuclear reactor startup is being conducted and criticality has been achieved
15 hours after a reactor trip from long term operation at full power. After 1
additional hour, reactor power is stabilized at 10-4% power and all control rod
motion is stopped.

Which one of the following describes the response of reactor power over the
next 2 hours without any further operator actions?

A. Power increases toward the point of adding heat due to the decay of Xe-
135.
B. Power increases toward the point of adding heat due to the decay of
Sm-149.
C. Power decreases toward the shutdown neutron level due to the buildup
of Xe-135.
D. Power decreases toward the shutdown neutron level due to the buildup
of Sm-149.

Prepared By:
202 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS

REVIEW ANSWERS

1. The major contributor to the production of Xe-135 in a nuclear reactor that

has been operating at full power for two weeks is _______________.

A. the radioactive decay of I-135.

2. Following a two-week shutdown, a nuclear reactor is taken critical and

ramped to full power in 6 hours. How long will it take to achieve an
equilibrium xenon condition after the reactor reaches full power?

B. 40 to 50 hours

3. Compared to other poisons in the core, the two characteristics that cause Xe-
135 to be a major reactor poison are its relatively _________ absorption
cross section and its relatively _________ variation in concentration for large
reactor power changes.

D. large; large

4. A nuclear reactor had been operating at 50% power for two weeks when
power was increased to 100% over a 3-hour period. In order to maintain
reactor power stable during the next 24 hours, which one of the following
incremental control rod manipulations will be required?

D. Insert rods slowly at first, then withdraw rods slowly

5. A nuclear reactor startup is being performed 5 hours after a reactor trip from
100% equilibrium power. The nuclear power plant is being returned to rated
power at 2.0%/minute instead of the normal rate of 0.5%/minute.

At the faster rate of power increase, the minimum amount of core xenon will
occur ____________ and the amount of equilibrium core xenon will be
____________.

A. sooner; the same

6. A nuclear reactor that had been operating at 100% power for about two
months was shutdown over a 2-hour period. Following the shutdown, core
xenon-135 will reach a long-term steady-state concentration in
______________ hours.

D. 70 to 80

7. Following a seven day shutdown, a reactor startup is performed and the

nuclear power plant is taken to 100% power over a 16-hour period. After
Prepared By:
203 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
reaching 100% power, what type of reactivity will the operator need to add to
compensate for core xenon-135 changes over the next 24 hours?

C. Positive only

8. Which of the following is the major contributor to the concentration of

samararium-149 in a nuclear reactor core?

C. Decay of promethium-149

9. Which of the following accounts for the majority of the removal of samarium-
149 from a nuclear reactor core?

B. Neutron capture resulting in the production of samarium-150

10. Which of the following statements describes the behavior of samarium-149

upon initial reactor core startup?

A. Samarium-149 concentration slowly builds to an equilibrium value over the

first 20-25 days of reactor operation at power.

11. A commercial reactor has been operating at 100% power for several months,
at which time it is shutdown for maintenance. The concentration of
samarium-149 in the reactor core will initially _______________ and then
_______________ until the reactor is again started up.

D. increase: remain constant

12. When will samarium-149 concentration present the greatest challenge to

nuclear reactor operation?

D. Late in core life when there is a small amount of excess reactivity exists
within the core.

13. A fission product poison can be differentiated from all other fission products in
that a fission product poison...

C. has a relatively high probability of absorbing a fission neutron.

14. A fission product poison can be differentiated from all other fission products in
that a fission product poison...

C. will depress the power production in some core locations and cause
peaking in others.

15. Which one of the following exhibits the greatest microscopic cross section for
absorption of a thermal neutron in an operating nuclear reactor core?
Prepared By:
204 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
D. Xenon-135

16. A nuclear reactor has been operating at full power for several weeks. Xenon-
135 is being directly produced as a fission product in approximately
_________% of all fissions.

A. 0.3

17. Which one of the following lists the production mechanisms of Xe-135 in an
operating power reactor?

C. Primarily from iodine decay, secondarily from fission

18. Xenon-135 undergoes radioactive decay to...

B. cesium-135.

19. Nuclear reactors A and B are operating at steady-state 100% power with
equilibrium core Xe-135. The reactors are identical except that reactor A is
operating at the end of core life (EOL) and reactor B is operating at the
beginning of core life (BOL).

Which reactor core has the greater concentration of Xe-135?

C. Reactor B (BOL) due to the smaller 100% power thermal neutron flux.

20. A nuclear power plant has been operating at 100% power for several months.
Which one of the following describes the relative contributions of beta decay
and neutron capture to Xe-135 removal from the reactor core?

A. Primary - neutron capture; secondary - beta decay.

21. A nuclear reactor was operating at 100% power for one week when power
was decreased to 50%. Which one of the following describes the equilibrium
core xenon-135 concentration at 50% power?

B. More than one-half the 100% value.

Prepared By:
205 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
22. The reactors are identical except that reactor A is operating near the end of
core life and reactor B is operating near the beginning of core life.

Which reactor is experiencing the most negative reactivity from equilibrium

core Xe-135?

B. Reactor A due to lower competition from the fuel for thermal neutrons.

23. A nuclear reactor was operating for 42 weeks at a stable reduced power level
when a reactor trip occurred. The reactor was returned to critical after 12
hours and then ramped to 60% power in 6 hours.

How much time at steady state 60% power will be required to reach
equilibrium xenon?

B. 40 to 50 hours

24. A nuclear reactor has been operating at a constant power level for 15 hours
following a rapid power reduction from 100% to 50%. Which one of the
following describes the current core xenon-135 concentration?

D. Decreasing toward equilibrium.

25. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 75% power for two months. A
manual reactor trip is required for a test. The trip will be followed immediately
by a reactor startup with criticality scheduled to occur 12 hours after the trip.

The greatest assurance that fission product poison reactivity will permit
criticality during the startup will exist if the reactor is operated at
____________ power for 48 hours prior to the trip and if criticality is
rescheduled for ____________ hours after the trip.

D. 50%; 16

26. Select the combination below that completes the following statement.
The amount of control rod withdrawal needed to overcome peak core xenon-
135 negative reactivity will be smallest after a reactor trip from equilibrium
_______ reactor power at the _______ of core life.

A. 20%; beginning

Prepared By:
206 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
27. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 80% power for several weeks with
power production equally distributed axially above and below the core
midplane. Reactor power is increased to 100% using boron dilution to control
reactor coolant temperature while maintaining control rods fully withdrawn.

During the power increase, axial power distribution will...

B. shift toward the bottom of the core.

28. Which one of the following occurrences can cause reactor power to fluctuate
between the top and bottom of the core when steam demand is constant?

C. Xenon oscillations

29. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 100% power for several weeks with a
symmetrical axial power distribution that is peaked at the core midplane.
Reactor power is reduced to 50% using boration to control reactor coolant
temperature while maintaining control rods fully withdrawn.

During the power reduction, the axial power distribution will...

A. shift toward the top of the core.

30. A nuclear reactor has been shut down for 5 days to perform maintenance. A
reactor startup is performed and power is ramped to 75% over a 16 hour
period.

When power reaches 75%, the concentration of core xenon-135 will be...

D. increasing toward an equilibrium value.

31. A nuclear reactor was shut down for seven days to perform maintenance. A
reactor startup was performed, and power level was increased from 1% to
50% over a two hour period.

Ten hours after reactor power reaches 50%, the magnitude of core xenon-
135 negative reactivity will be...

B. increasing toward an equilibrium value.

Prepared By:
207 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
32. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 100% power for eight weeks when a
reactor trip occurs. The reactor is critical 6 hours later and power is increased
to 100% over the next 6 hours.

What is the status of core xenon-135 concentration when power reaches

100%?

B. Burning out faster than it is being produced.

33. A nuclear power plant startup is in progress 5 hours after a reactor trip from
100% equilibrium power. The power plant is currently at 10% power and
being returned to 100% power at 0.25% per minute instead of the normal rate
of 0.5% per minute.

At the slower rate of power increase, the maximum amount of core xenon-135
will occur ____________ than normal; and the amount of equilibrium core
xenon-135 at 100% power will be ____________.

C. later; the same

34. A nuclear reactor that has been operating at rated power for about two weeks
is reduced in power to 50%. What happens to the Xe-135 concentration in the
core?

B. Xenon will initially build up, then decrease to a new equilibrium value.

35. A nuclear reactor has been operating at 70% power for 26 hours following a
one-hour power reduction from steady-state 100% power. Which one of the
following describes the current core xenon-135 concentration?

D. Decreasing toward equilibrium

36. Compare a nuclear reactor that has been operating at 50% power for several
days when a reactor trip occurs, to a reactor that had been operating at full
power prior to the trip. For the 50% power reactor, xenon would peak
_____________ and the peak xenon reactivity would be ______________.

C. earlier; less negative

37. Following a reactor trip, negative reactivity from xenon initially increases due
to...

A. xenon production from the decay of iodine-135.

Prepared By:
208 Revision 0
 REACTOR THEORY
VOLUME 2
FISSION PRODUCT POISONS
38. After a reactor shutdown from equilibrium core xenon conditions, the
maximum xenon -135 negative reactivity (height of the xenon peak) is
_______________ the preshutdown equilibrium power level.

D. dependent on but not directly proportional to

39. A nuclear power plant was shut down following three months of operation at
full power. The shutdown occurred over a 3 hour period with a constant rate
of power decrease.

Which one of the following describes the reactivity added by core xenon
during the shutdown?

A. Xenon buildup added negative reactivity.

40. A nuclear reactor startup is being conducted and criticality has been achieved
15 hours after a reactor trip from long term operation at full power. After 1
additional hour, reactor power is stabilized at 10-4% power and all control rod
motion is stopped.

Which one of the following describes the response of reactor power over the
next 2 hours without any further operator actions?

A. Power increases toward the point of adding heat due to the decay of Xe-
135.

Prepared By:
209 Revision 0