PAPER 1.12 COMPARISON OF ANALYSIS OF FAST CRITICAL ASSEMBLIES USING SEVERAL CROSS SECTION DATA SETS AND DIFFERENT CROSS SECTION PROCESSING CODES*

Author(s):  
F. L. Fillmore ◽  
H. Alter ◽  
J. M. Otter ◽  
P. F. Rose ◽  
C. L. Dunford ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 1635-1648 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Redondas ◽  
R. Evans ◽  
R. Stuebi ◽  
U. Köhler ◽  
M. Weber

Abstract. The primary ground-based instruments used to report total column ozone (TOC) are Brewer and Dobson spectrophotometers in separate networks. These instruments make measurements of the UV irradiances, and through a well-defined process, a TOC value is produced. Inherent to the algorithm is the use of a laboratory-determined cross-section data set. We used five ozone cross-section data sets: three data sets that are based on measurements of Bass and Paur; one derived from Daumont, Brion and Malicet (DBM); and a new set determined by Institute of Experimental Physics (IUP), University of Bremen. The three Bass and Paur (1985) sets are as follows: quadratic temperature coefficients from the IGACO (a glossary is provided in Appendix A) web page (IGQ4), the Brewer network operational calibration set (BOp), and the set used by Bernhard et al. (2005) in the reanalysis of the Dobson absorption coefficient values (B05). The ozone absorption coefficients for Brewer and Dobson instruments are then calculated using the normal Brewer operative method, which is essentially the same as that used for Dobson instruments. Considering the standard TOC algorithm for the Brewer instruments and comparing to the Brewer standard operational calibration data set, using the slit functions for the individual instruments, we find the IUP data set changes the calculated TOC by −0.5%, the DBM data set changes the calculated TOC by −3.2%, and the IGQ4 data set at −45 °C changes the calculated TOC by +1.3%. Considering the standard algorithm for the Dobson instruments, and comparing to results using the official 1992 ozone absorption coefficients values and the single set of slit functions defined for all Dobson instruments, the calculated TOC changes by +1%, with little variation depending on which data set is used. We applied the changes to the European Dobson and Brewer reference instruments during the Izaña 2012 Absolute Calibration Campaign. With the application of a common Langley calibration and the IUP cross section, the differences between Brewer and Dobson data sets vanish, whereas using those of Bass and Paur and DBM produces differences of 1.5 and 2%, respectively. A study of the temperature dependence of these cross-section data sets is presented using the Arosa, Switzerland, total ozone record of 2003–2006, obtained from two Brewer-type instruments and one Dobson-type instrument, combined with the stratospheric ozone and temperature profiles from the Payerne soundings in the same period. The seasonal dependence of the differences between the results from the various instruments is greatly reduced with the application of temperature-dependent absorption coefficients, with the greatest reduction obtained using the IUP data set.


2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 22979-23021 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Redondas ◽  
R. Evans ◽  
R. Stuebi ◽  
U. Köhler ◽  
M. Weber

Abstract. The primary ground-based instruments used to report total column ozone (TOC) are Brewer and Dobson Spectrophotometers, in separate networks. These instruments make measurements of the UV irradiances, and through a well-defined process a TOC value is produced. Inherent in the algorithm is the use of a laboratory determined cross-section data set. We used five ozone cross section data sets: three Bass and Paur, Daumont, Malicet and Brion (DMB) and a new Institute of Environmental Physics (IUP), University of Bremen, set. The three Bass and Paur (1985) sets are: quadratic temperature coefficients from IGACO web page (IGQ4), the Brewer network operational calibration set (BOp), and the set used by Bernhard et al. (2005), in the reanalysis of the Dobson absorption coefficient values (B05). The ozone absorption coefficients for Brewer and Dobson are then calculated using the normal Brewer operative method which is essentially the same as used on Dobson. Considering the standard TOC algorithm for the Brewer instruments and comparing to the Brewer standard operational calibration data set, using the slit functions for the individual instruments: we find the UIP data set changes the calculated TOC by −0.5%, the DBM data set changes the calculate TOC by −3.2%, and the IGQ4 data set at −45 °C changes the calculated TOC by +1.3%. Considering the standard algorithm for the Dobson instruments, and comparing to results using the official 1992 ozone absorption coefficients values and the single set of slit functions defined for all Dobson instruments, the calculated TOC changes by +1%, with little variation depending on which data set is used We applied the changes to the European Dobson and Brewer reference instruments during the Izaña 2012 Absolute Calibration Campaign. The application of a common Langley calibration and the IUP cross section the differences between Brewer and Dobson vanish whereas using Bass and Paur and DBM produce differences of 1.5% and 2% respectively. A study of temperature dependence of these cross section (XS) data sets is presented using the Arosa, Switzerland total ozone record of 2003–2006, obtained from two Brewer instrument types and a Dobson instrument, combined with the stratospheric ozone and temperature profiles from the Payerne soundings in the same period. The seasonal dependence of the differences between the results from the various instruments is greatly reduced with the application of temperature dependent absorption coefficients, with the greatest reduction obtained using the IUP data set.


2012 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Anzai ◽  
H. Kato ◽  
M. Hoshino ◽  
H. Tanaka ◽  
Y. Itikawa ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
T Mart

Abstract We present an addendum to our previous paper to improve the performance of the proposed isobar model in describing the $\gamma + n\to K^0+\Lambda$ reaction observables. Since two new data sets have become available for this reaction channel that show sizable discrepancies, i.e. the CLAS and MAMI data, we propose three different models, M1, M2, and M3, obtained from including the CLAS, MAMI, and both data sets, respectively, in the fitting database. The new models can nicely describe the $\gamma+p\to K^++\Lambda$ observables, as in the case of the previous model, but significantly improve the agreement with the new $\gamma + n\to K^0+\Lambda$ cross section data. The extracted resonance properties in the present models can be well constrained within the current Particle Data Group estimates. The different contributions of the background and resonance terms in the previous and present calculations are thoroughly discussed. A brief discussion on the problem of data discrepancy is also presented.


Author(s):  
Davide Chersola ◽  
Guglielmo Lomonaco ◽  
Guido Mazzini

This paper reports the results of a comparison among JEFF and ENDF/B data sets when used by SERPENT and MONTEBURNS codes on a gas-cooled fast reactor (GFR)-like configuration. Particularly, it shows a comparison between the two Monte Carlo-based codes, each one adopting three different cross-section data sets, namely, JEFF-3.1, JEFF-3.1.2, and ENDF/B-VII.1. Calculations have been carried out on the Allegro reactor, i.e., an experimental GFR-like facility that could be built in the European Union as a GFR demonstration. Results include nuclear parameters, such as the effective multiplication factor and fluxes, as well as the atomic densities for some important nuclides versus burn-up.


Econometrica ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 552
Author(s):  
V. K. Chetty

1986 ◽  
Vol 94 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 49-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. C. Hertzog ◽  
P. D. Soran ◽  
J. S. Schweitzer

2010 ◽  
Vol 68 (9) ◽  
pp. 1656-1661 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.S. Uddin ◽  
M.R. Zaman ◽  
S.M. Hossain ◽  
I. Spahn ◽  
S. Sudár ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document