NUGN580: Finish report 7

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/chapters/appendices/app0A.tex

@@ -1,10 +1,26 @@
 \chapter{Detailed data tables}
 \label{app:app01}
 
-\initial{T}his appendix presents the raw data from the experiment in table~\ref{tab:data}.
-
+\initial{T}his appendix presents the raw data from the experiment in table~\ref{tab:data}. The discrepancy in the decay time is due to the time of spectrometry measurement, ten minutes, and the time to set up the next sample in the spectrometer. One can note that the masses given for sample 3 and 5 (respectively -42.5 mm and 11 mm) and the associated activity and flux are, as discussed in the uncertainty section, likely erroneous.
 
 
+\begin{table}[]
+\centering
+\caption{Detailed data}
+\label{tab:data}
+\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
+\hline
+Height (mm) & mass (mg) & Activity (Ci) & Time of decay (s) & Flux ($n.cm^{-2}.s^{-1}$) \\ \hline
+-74.5       & 0.48      & 1.50E-07      & 95590             & 1.88E+12                  \\ \hline
+-58.5       & 0.34      & 2.51E-07      & 94796             & 4.40E+12                  \\ \hline
+-42.5       & 0.47      & 3.09E-08      & 94131             & 3.88E+11                  \\ \hline
+-27         & 0.42      & 2.96E-07      & 93397             & 4.11E+12                  \\ \hline
+11          & 0.44      & 6.63E-09      & 92698             & 8.73E+10                  \\ \hline
+34          & 0.4       & 4.96E-08      & 91931             & 7.12E+11                  \\ \hline
+50.5        & 0.4       & 1.03E-07      & 91146             & 1.46E+12                  \\ \hline
+65.5        & 0.42      & 6.55E-08      & 90355             & 8.77E+11                  \\ \hline
+\end{tabular}
+\end{table}
 
 
 \

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/chapters/chapter01/chap01.tex

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ \section{Flux calculation}
 \section{Procedure}
 The flux can be measured at different radial positions in the core, using existing sample testing tubes in the GSTR: lazy susan, central thimble and R1 dry tube. The location analyzed in this particular experiment is the central thimble.
 
-A vertical span of 20 centimeters in the core is considered. Every two centimeters, approximately, a sample will be placed. The samples need to be weighed carefully and irradiated for the right amount of time. This ensures that the activity levels of the samples are not so high that the samples cannot be easily manipulated or so low that the activity cannot be accurately measured. The irradiation time and the decay time must be practical from a GSTR operator standpoint. These constraints, coupled with Equations~\ref{eq:act} and~\ref{eq:decay}, allowed us to compute the given sample weight (0.4 mg), irradiation time (5 minutes) and decay time (24 hours).
+A vertical span of 20 centimeters in the core is considered. Every two centimeters, approximately, a sample will be placed. The samples need to be weighed carefully and irradiated for the right amount of time. This ensures that the activity levels of the samples are not so high that the samples cannot be easily manipulated or so low that the activity cannot be accurately measured. The irradiation time and the decay time must be practical from a GSTR operator standpoint. These constraints, coupled with Equations~\ref{eq:act} and~\ref{eq:decay}, allowed us to compute the given sample weight (0.4 mg), irradiation time (10 minutes) and decay time (24 hours).
 
 The target sample are placed in an irradiation container, hold in position by a piece of foam. The position and weight of each target is carefully measured. Gloves need to be worn in order to not contaminate the samples.
 

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/chapters/chapter02/chap02.tex

@@ -9,13 +9,31 @@ \chapter{Results}
 
 \section{Results}
 
+Figure~\ref{fig:flux2} illustrates the position of each sample versus the calculated flux in that area. From the figure, we may surmise that the samples were not fully centered, as we would expect a symmetrical curve centered around the zero position. Instead, we see a skewing to the left (corresponding to down in the reactor), meaning that flux was greatest in the lower areas, and peaked around the $-58\ \text{mm}$ position.
+
 \begin{figure}[t!]
 	\centering
 	\includegraphics[height=0.4\textheight]{fig02/flux2.png}
 	\mycaption[Thermal neutron flux seen in the samples]{Thermal neutron flux seen in the samples.}
 	\label{fig:flux2}
 \end{figure}
 
+We see in the above graph two obviously erroneous points, which we have circled in red. These points have been disregarded and will be further examined in the errors and uncertainty portion of the report delineated below. It is possible that with more accurate measurements and sample points, we would see a peak nearer the zero position, meaning that flux is maximized at this point. 
+
+From our usable data, a maximum value of $0.296\ \micro\text{Ci}$ was achieved at the $-27\ \text{mm}$ position. From our measured mass of $0.42\ \text{mg}$, this activity corresponded to a neutron flux of $4.11 * 10^{12}\ n.cm^{-2}.s^{-1}$. A maximum flux of $4.40 * 10^{12}\ n.cm^{-2}.s^{-1}$ was found at position $-58\ \text{mm}$. This flux is a decade off from the expected maximum flux of $1$ to $3 * 10^{13}\ n.cm^{-2}.s^{-1}$.
+
+A full presentation of sample positions, masses, activity, and flux values are presented in the appendix.
+
 \section{Uncertainties}
 
+Several errors persist through this lab that caused a variance in our expected results. 
+
+First, we used a very small amount of mass in our samples. This lends itself to several errors. With this small amount of salt in the container, even small variance in the scale’s reading can lead to huge deviations from our expected values. Small currents of air could have affected our measurements on the scale, even though the scale area has a small box in order to prevent such an event. When we use ~0.4 mg of salt, every single grain is important. Most containers needed only 2 or 3 grains of salt to meet our weight requirement. This means that salt sticking to the outside of our container could have skewed our weight measurements. When this salt was brushed or washed off the outside of the container, our assumed weight would no longer be valid, and our calculations would be tremendously off. 
+
+Irradiation times also play a small role in our uncertainty calculations. Our sample was irradiated for a five minute fetch of time, however our calculations had assumed a ten minute irradiation period. This, initially, lead to a large deviation of observed values of activity from our expected values. 
+
+A human error may have been introduced during irradiation. It is possible that some of the sample containers were not entirely shut. This would lead to water penetrating the container, and washing away the salt. 
+
+During extraction and activity measurement of the samples, several human errors may have been introduced to cause a large deviation from our expected results. During the extraction of the sample containers from the tube, tweezers were used to pull containers from a Styrofoam housing. Due to the orientation of the plastic containers in the Styrofoam, it was very difficult to extract the container with the tweezers without popping the pressure-sensitive lid open. Lid-opening occurred on several occasions, though we were careful to try to not spill any salt, it is possible that a grain or two fell out of the containers, which may explain the variance in our results. It is recommended that if the experiment is repeated, that the containers be oriented differently in the styrofoam housing. 
 
+When the activity of the salt was measured, it was placed on the gamma spectrometer in the plastic container. It is possible that some of the salt stuck to the top side of the plastic container instead of sitting at the bottom, immediately on top of the detector. This could cause small deviations and incongruities in the activity measurements of the samples. 

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/chapters/conclusion/conclusion.tex

@@ -5,7 +5,11 @@
 \chapter{Conclusion}
 \label{chap:conclusion}
 
-\initial{E}xperiment is shit.
+\initial{W}e utilized Gamma Spectrometry to irradiate high purity NaCl in order to ascertain flux values across the profile of the reactor in the Central Thimble. We irradiated 8 samples of salt for five minutes, then a day later measured the activity of the $Na_{24}$ to determine flux values. By waiting a day, the radioactive Cl, due to its short half life, decayed away into a stable state, thus allowing us to focus solely on the sodium. The low mass of salt we loaded into the core allowed us to use such a short irradiation time.
+
+Our calculations determined that flux was maximized 58 mm below the center of the Central Thimble. A maximum flux value of $4.40 * 10^{12}$ was calculated. This varies by a decade from our expected maximum of approximately $10^{13}$. A maximum activity of 0.296 $\micro$Ci was measured using the Gamma Spectrometer. 
+
+Due to some amount of measurement errors, we had to disregard two of our data points, which tremendously skewed our final results. We expect that accurate measurements at these two positions would have given us more insight into the flux profile across the central thimble. As these two positions were near to the center of the thimble, we would expect them to have high values of flux, and as such, we would expect a more symmetric flux profile across the central line. Thus, we must recommend that this lab be repeated in order to obtain more valid measurements.
 
 
 %=======

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/frontmatter/abstract.tex

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ \chapter*{Abstract}
 \begin{SingleSpace}
 \initial{T}he absolute values of the neutron flux over the vertical axis of the core can be computed by irradiating a sample and determining the neutron flux received from spectrometry results. Knowing the absolute neutron flux values at different positions in or out the core can be used to obtain local peak factor in the fuel elements, more precise fuel burnup, the production rate of fission products, and other useful information. Well chosen target materials are used. They are irradiated for a given period of time, after which the samples decay until they can be used in the spectrometry chamber. Their activation are used to compute the neutron flux they experienced within the reactor.
 
-Sodium is used in this experiment to calculate the flux in the central thimble. The results obtained are inconclusive.
+Sodium is used in this experiment to calculate the flux in the central thimble. Due to some amount of measurement errors, we had to disregard two of our data points, which tremendously skewed our final results. We expect that accurate measurements at these two positions would have given us more insight into the flux profile across the central thimble. As these two positions were near to the center of the thimble, we would expect them to have high values of flux, and as such, we would expect a more symmetric flux profile across the central line. Thus, we must recommend that this lab be repeated in order to obtain more valid measurements.
 
 \end{SingleSpace}
 \clearpage

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/frontmatter/title.tex

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
 \vspace{6.5mm}
 {\large By}\\
 \vspace{6.5mm}
-{\large\textsc{Samuel Kerber and Guillaume L'HER}}\\
+{\large\textsc{Samuel Kerber and Guillaume L'Her}}\\
 \vspace{11mm}
 \includegraphics[scale=0.6]{logos/CSM}\\
 \vspace{6mm}

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/project.aux

@@ -55,22 +55,24 @@
 \@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {chapter}{\chapternumberline {2}Results}{5}{chapter.2}}
 \newlabel{chap:result}{{\M@TitleReference {2}{Results}}{5}{Results}{chapter.2}{}}
 \@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2.1}Results}{5}{section.2.1}}
-\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2.2}Uncertainties}{5}{section.2.2}}
 \@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {2.1}{\ignorespaces Thermal neutron flux seen in the samples}}{6}{figure.2.1}}
 \newlabel{fig:flux2}{{\M@TitleReference {2.1}{Thermal neutron flux seen in the samples}}{6}{Thermal neutron flux seen in the samples}{figure.2.1}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2.2}Uncertainties}{6}{section.2.2}}
 \@writefile{lof}{\addvspace {10pt}}
 \@writefile{lot}{\addvspace {10pt}}
-\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {chapter}{\chapternumberline {3}Conclusion}{7}{chapter.3}}
-\newlabel{chap:conclusion}{{\M@TitleReference {3}{Conclusion}}{7}{Conclusion}{chapter.3}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {chapter}{\chapternumberline {3}Conclusion}{9}{chapter.3}}
+\newlabel{chap:conclusion}{{\M@TitleReference {3}{Conclusion}}{9}{Conclusion}{chapter.3}{}}
 \@writefile{lof}{\addvspace {10pt}}
 \@writefile{lot}{\addvspace {10pt}}
-\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {appendix}{\chapternumberline {A}Detailed data tables}{9}{appendix.A}}
-\newlabel{app:app01}{{\M@TitleReference {A}{Detailed data tables}}{9}{Detailed data tables}{appendix.A}{}}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {appendix}{\chapternumberline {A}Detailed data tables}{11}{appendix.A}}
+\newlabel{app:app01}{{\M@TitleReference {A}{Detailed data tables}}{11}{Detailed data tables}{appendix.A}{}}
+\@writefile{lot}{\contentsline {table}{\numberline {A.1}{\ignorespaces Detailed data}}{11}{table.A.1}}
+\newlabel{tab:data}{{\M@TitleReference {A.1}{Detailed data}}{11}{Detailed data}{table.A.1}{}}
 \bibstyle{siam}
 \bibdata{biblioproject}
 \bibcite{glher01}{{1}{}{{}}{{}}}
 \bibcite{debey01}{{2}{}{{}}{{}}}
 \providecommand\NAT@force@numbers{}\NAT@force@numbers
-\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {chapter}{Bibliography}{11}{section*.5}}
-\memsetcounter{lastsheet}{17}
-\memsetcounter{lastpage}{11}
+\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {chapter}{Bibliography}{13}{section*.5}}
+\memsetcounter{lastsheet}{19}
+\memsetcounter{lastpage}{13}

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/project.log

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.16 (TeX Live 2015/Debian) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2016.8.24)  8 NOV 2016 09:18
+This is pdfTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.16 (TeX Live 2015/Debian) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2016.9.11)  8 NOV 2016 18:59
 entering extended mode
  restricted \write18 enabled.
  %&-line parsing enabled.
@@ -2001,25 +2001,30 @@ Package pdftex.def Info: chapters/chapter01/fig01/decay.png used on input line
 (pdftex.def)             Requested size: 411.82198pt x 254.63622pt.
  [3 <./chapters/chapter01/fig01/decay.png>]) (./chapters/chapter02/chap02.tex [
 4]
-<chapters/chapter02/fig02/flux2.png, id=156, 602.25pt x 372.39125pt>
+<chapters/chapter02/fig02/flux2.png, id=157, 602.25pt x 372.39125pt>
 File: chapters/chapter02/fig02/flux2.png Graphic file (type png)
 
 <use chapters/chapter02/fig02/flux2.png>
 Package pdftex.def Info: chapters/chapter02/fig02/flux2.png used on input line 
-14.
+16.
 (pdftex.def)             Requested size: 411.82198pt x 254.63622pt.
-) (./chapters/conclusion/conclusion.tex [5
 
-] [6 <./chapters/chapter02/fig02/flux2.png>])
-(./chapters/appendices/app0A.tex [7
+Underfull \vbox (badness 2922) has occurred while \output is active []
 
-] [8
+ [5
 
 ]
+[6 <./chapters/chapter02/fig02/flux2.png>])
+(./chapters/conclusion/conclusion.tex [7] [8
+
+]) (./chapters/appendices/app0A.tex [9] [10
 
-LaTeX Warning: Reference `tab:data' on page 9 undefined on input line 4.
+]
 
-) [9] [10
+LaTeX Warning: No positions in optional float specifier.
+               Default added (so using `tbp') on input line 7.
+
+) [11] [12
 
 ] (./project.bbl
 
@@ -2036,7 +2041,7 @@ Package nag Warning: Command \sc is an old LaTeX 2.09 command.
 
 Package nag Warning: 3 complaints in total.
 
-[11
+[13
 
 ]
 \tf@toc=\write7
@@ -2055,37 +2060,27 @@ Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtVeryEndDocument' on input line 402.
 Package atveryend Info: Executing hook `AtEndAfterFileList' on input line 402.
 Package rerunfilecheck Info: File `project.out' has not changed.
 (rerunfilecheck)             Checksum: 2257AAE74B46E1A1761B71025CC47724;750.
-
-
-LaTeX Warning: There were undefined references.
-
-
-LaTeX Warning: Label(s) may have changed. Rerun to get cross-references right.
-
  )
-(\end occurred when \ifx on line 15 was incomplete)
+(\end occurred when \ifx on line 17 was incomplete)
 (\end occurred when \ifx on line 82 was incomplete) 
 Here is how much of TeX's memory you used:
- 29354 strings out of 493029
- 542943 string characters out of 6136234
- 819889 words of memory out of 5000000
- 32009 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+600000
- 85875 words of font info for 191 fonts, out of 8000000 for 9000
+ 29385 strings out of 493029
+ 543197 string characters out of 6136234
+ 819836 words of memory out of 5000000
+ 32008 multiletter control sequences out of 15000+600000
+ 87055 words of font info for 211 fonts, out of 8000000 for 9000
  1146 hyphenation exceptions out of 8191
  52i,12n,80p,1007b,416s stack positions out of 5000i,500n,10000p,200000b,80000s
-pdfTeX warning (dest): name{
-figure.2.2} has been referenced but does not exist, replaced by a fixed one
-
-{/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/enc/dvips/base/8r.enc}</usr/share/texlive/
-texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/fourier/fourier-mlit.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texm
-f-dist/fonts/type1/public/fourier/fourier-ms.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist
-/fonts/type1/urw/ncntrsbk/uncb8a.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1
-/urw/ncntrsbk/uncr8a.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/urw/ncntrsb
-k/uncri8a.pfb>
-Output written on project.pdf (17 pages, 114669 bytes).
+{/usr/share/texlive/texmf-di
+st/fonts/enc/dvips/base/8r.enc}</usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/publi
+c/fourier/fourier-mlit.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/public/fo
+urier/fourier-ms.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/urw/ncntrsbk/un
+cb8a.pfb></usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/urw/ncntrsbk/uncr8a.pfb></u
+sr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/type1/urw/ncntrsbk/uncri8a.pfb>
+Output written on project.pdf (19 pages, 122027 bytes).
 PDF statistics:
- 221 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607)
- 189 compressed objects within 2 object streams
- 43 named destinations out of 1000 (max. 500000)
+ 232 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607)
+ 198 compressed objects within 2 object streams
+ 45 named destinations out of 1000 (max. 500000)
  38028 words of extra memory for PDF output out of 42996 (max. 10000000)
 

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/project.lot

@@ -6,3 +6,4 @@
 \addvspace {10pt}
 \addvspace {10pt}
 \addvspace {10pt}
+\contentsline {table}{\numberline {A.1}{\ignorespaces Detailed data}}{11}{table.A.1}

NUGN580/Report7_Flux-Monitoring/project.toc

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
 \contentsline {section}{\numberline {1.5}Procedure}{4}{section.1.5}
 \contentsline {chapter}{\chapternumberline {2}Results}{5}{chapter.2}
 \contentsline {section}{\numberline {2.1}Results}{5}{section.2.1}
-\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2.2}Uncertainties}{5}{section.2.2}
-\contentsline {chapter}{\chapternumberline {3}Conclusion}{7}{chapter.3}
-\contentsline {appendix}{\chapternumberline {A}Detailed data tables}{9}{appendix.A}
-\contentsline {chapter}{Bibliography}{11}{section*.5}
+\contentsline {section}{\numberline {2.2}Uncertainties}{6}{section.2.2}
+\contentsline {chapter}{\chapternumberline {3}Conclusion}{9}{chapter.3}
+\contentsline {appendix}{\chapternumberline {A}Detailed data tables}{11}{appendix.A}
+\contentsline {chapter}{Bibliography}{13}{section*.5}