measurement of the fission mass yields of am242 at the ... · pdf filecharlotte amouroux1...
TRANSCRIPT
CharlotteAMOUROUX1
MeasurementofthefissionmassyieldsofAm242attheLohengrin Spectrometer
A.Bidaud2,N.Capellan2,S.Chabod2,H.Faust3,G.Kessedjian2,U.Kster3,
A.Letourneau1,F.Martin2,T.Materna1,S.Panebianco1,Ch.Sage2,O.Serot4
1CEA,DSMSaclay,France2LPSCGrenoble,CNRS/IN2P3,France
3InstitutLaueLangevin,France4CEA,DENCadarache,France
242Am(Z=95)
241Am:90%oftheradiotoxicity ofthenuclearwaste (without plutonium)between 200and1000years >Transmutationof241Am
n+241 Am 242 AmFP1
FP2
242Am:two longlived statesZ=95(odd charge)
2/12CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
141Y
16.02H1
5
48.6keV
PLAN
Experimental Setup&AnalysisMethod EnergyandChargeDistributions UncertaintiesDetermination Results
CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012 3/17
HighneutronfluxReactor
Target
Magnet:Selection A/q
Condenser:Selection:E/q
Detector:E
Experimental setup
4/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
Howdowe measure theenergy ofthefragment?
E>E/q>A/q>A
*A.Bail thesis
=>Y(A,E,q)CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
EEIonisationChamber
5/17
Energy Distributionforagiven q
ChargeDistributionforagiven E
N(A,q,E)according toqandE
Valid ifnocorrelation between Eandq
Howtocalculate thefissionyields ?
Inrealitywe haveacorrelation butits influenceonY(A)inless than 3%
6/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
Example ofQdistribution:two differents casesMeasured Chargeis determined at thelastcrossed material
(Nickel)
With nanosecond isomerWithout nanosecond isomer
QDistribution
A=105
A=136
Target
Target
NickelFoil NickelFoil
Magnet Magnet
Q~2122 Q~2425
7/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
EDistribution
A=105Q=21
8/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
0.6MeVfordetermination ofKE0.6MeVfor(q,E)correlation
Kinetic energy asafonctionofthefragmentmass
9/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
EDistributionStatisticerrors:
~1%
Amplitu
de[a
.u]
Energy [MeV]
~1,5%ofthetotalarea
_
maximalfluctuationof
1,5%between 2Edistribution
~0,8%ofthetotalarea
_
maximalfluctuationof
1,0%between 2Edistribution
A=105Q=21
Systematics errors:
1,5%lowenergypart 1,0%highenergypart
10/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
Determination ofthesystematic errorThispointis known twice
Forthesame massasafunction oftime:
Forallmasses:
~3%
11/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
Source Contribution
Statistical ~1%
Extrapolationofthelowpartoftheenergydistribution
1.5%
Extrapolationofthehighpartoftheenergydistribution
1%
Discrepanciesbetweenthetwomeasurementsofthe
commonpoint3%
Normalisation ?
Totalofthesystematicerror 3.5%
Sourcesofrelativeuncertaintiesandtheirrespectivecontributions.
CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
n+241 Am
242m Am
242
Am
Y
Yfission=2644(281)barn*91,4%
8,6%
Y=Y ?
Objectivesoftheexperiment:
FissionMassYieldsfromAm241(2n,f)
IsthereanydifferencebetweenthefissionyieldsofAm242(n,f)andAm242m(n,f)?
FissionYields ofAm242
(141y)
(16h)
fission=6856(656)barn*
*G.Fioni etal,Nucl Phys.A693(2001)546O.Bringer,Ph.D Thesis,INP Grenoble,
October 2007
13/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
Howdowe proceed toobserveapossibledifference ?
B:vaccum problemA:Strong evolution ofthepropertiesofthetarget (largeenergy shift)
A
Shutdow
nofthe
reactor
B
14/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
Hypothesis:X=0.
forX=0(0,04forallYand0,07forYm )
Generalcase: ~1
What is themaximumpossibledifference ?
n+241 Am242m Am
242
Am
15/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
Conclusions
Nodifference between theyields:quantificationongoing.
Ifyou assumethey areequal
NormalisationY105=6,5%
Onlystatisticalerror
16/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
17/17CharlotteAMOUROUXWONDER25/09/2012
Isotopic fissionyields
Future
239Pu233U
*A.Bail Thesis *MeetingGEDEPEONJan2011G.Kessedjian (F.Martin thesis (ongoing))
241Pu
242AmThank you
for your attention
235U
Backup
18
Comparaisonwith theGEFcode(June 2012)
19
Number offissions
20
Evolutionofthekinetic energy asafunction oftime
21
FWHMoftheenergy distributionasafunction oftime
22
PLANHow do we proceed to observe a possible difference ?Conclusions