Kristina Kristina, Amir Hamzah, Muhammad Subekti, Menik Ariani



The management of spent fuel is an issue of safety for Indonesia in the phase of designing RDE. Several studies regarding spent fuel are limited by geometrical characteristics and number of nuclides library. Therefore, different methodologies utilizing MCNPX2.6.0 were applied to get better information for further research. In this study, a single fuel pebble containing UO2, was burned using 5 cycles of multi-pass loading scheme for 1080 days to obtain the same energy as RDE’s core, which is about 79.90 GWd/MTU. The multiplication factor k-inf decreased at each cycle and stopped at 1.14575. The calculation results in the nuclides composition of the spent fuel after 1080 days of burning and 5 years of cooling containing 241 nuclides consist of 21 actinides and 220 nonactinides. Actinides with the highest activity of 8.96 Ci is with mass of 0.0867 g, whose half-life time is 14 years long. Nonactinides with the highest activity of 4.47 Ci is  with mass of 0.0514 g, whose half-life time is 30.17 years long. The total activity of spent fuel pebble is 22.9 Ci with total mass of 5.28 g. The mass and activity data of each nuclide contained in the spent pebble will be used in the future research for performing safety analysis of the spent fuel storage tank.

Keywords: Nuclides composition, Pebble, Spent fuel, RDE, MCNPX

Full Text:



  1. Hong L.P., Sembiring T.M., Arbie B., Subki I. Analysis of the optimum fuel composition for the Indonesian experimental power reactor (10 MWth Pebble-Bed HTGR). in: The 5th International Conference on Advanced in Nuclear Sciences and Engineering, Bandung. 2015. pp. 1-4.
  2. BATAN. Experimental Power Reactor [Accessed: 12 September 2019]. Available from:
  3. Husnayani I., Udiyani P.M. Radionuclide characteristics of RDE spent fuels. Tri Dasa Mega. 2018. 20(2):69-76.
  4. Aisyah, Mirawaty, Saputra D.L.I., Setiawan R. Characteristization of radionuclides in spent fuel from experimental pebble-bed reactor (in Indonesian). Urania. 2019. 25(1):45-58.
  5. Kristina, Subekti M. Analysis of nuclides composition of spent fuel of experimental power reactor (EPR) using MCNPX 2.6.0 (in Indonesian). Sigma Epsilon. 2018. 22(2):63-70.
  6. Wu Z., Yu S. HTGR projects in China. Nucl. Eng. and Tech. 2007. 39(2):103-110.
  7. Wang J., Huang Y., Tang Y., Wu B. Natural safety analysis of the spent fuel residual heat removal in loading and storage process of HTR-10. Energy Procedia. 2013. 39:227-239.
  8. NEA Spent Nuclear Fuel Assay Data for Isotopic Validation. State-of-the-art Report NEA / NSC / WPNCS / DOC (2011) 5. OECD Publishing; 2011.
  9. University of Calgary. Spent Nuclear Fuel [Accessed: 21 September 2019]. Available from:
  10. IAEA Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel. Safety Guide No. SSG-15. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2012.
  11. Hedin A. Spent Nuclear Fuel - How Dangerous Is It. Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co; 1997.
  12. Kim S., Kim M.H. A Study on MCNPX-CINDER90 System for Activation Analysis. in: Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Autumn Meeting, Pyeongchang. 2014.
  13. Croff, A.G. A User's Manual for the ORIGEN2 Computer Code. Springfield: Oak Ridge National Laboratory; 1980.
  14. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. RSICC Computer Code Collection. Oak Ridge: Oak Ridge National Laboratory; 2008.
  15. Terry W.K. Evaluation of The Initial Critical Configuration of the HTR-10 Pebble-Bed Reactor. Idaho: Idaho National laboratory; 2006.
  16. Duderstadt J.J. Nuclear Reactor Analysis. Canada: John Wiley & Sons; 1976.
  17. Bratton I.J. Modeling and Validation of The Fuel Depletion and Burnup of The OSU Research Reactor Using MCNPX/ CINDER'90. Ohio: The Ohio State University; 2012.
  18. Stacey W.M. Nuclear Reactor Physics. Canada: John Wiley & Sons; 2001.
  19. Waltar A.E., Todd D.R., Tsvetkov P.V. Fast Spectrum Reactors. New York Dordrecht Heidelberg London:Springer-Verlag; 2012.
  20. Pelowitz D.B. MCNPXTM User's Manual Version 2.6.0. Los Alamos: Los Alamos National Laboratory; 2008.
  21. Luthfi W., Setiadipura T., Zuhair, Suwoto, Bakhri S. Criticality and burnup study on different TRISO modeling of HTR Pebble. J. Phys. 2019. 1198:1-16.
  22. Fensin M.L, Hendricks J.S., McKinney G.W. Monte Carlo Burnup Interactive Tutorial. Los Alamos: Los Alamos National Laboratory; 2009.
  23. Zuhair. Study on HTR pebble-bed calculation using various model of kernel and pebble lattices (in Indonesian). Sains Dasar. 2012. 1(1):7-17.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

PTKRN Digital Library Mendeley