Neutron difference density

Top section of neutron differences density map (F — Fc, a ) the calculated structure factors (F oj do not include any water molecules. The peak at the bottom right depicts a molecular feature not included in the structure factor calculation. The shape of that peak suggests a D,0 molecule. Middle the same section of the neutron density map (F ) with phases (a for all atoms depicted incbuling the DjO molecule. Bottom the same section of the neutron density map (FJ with phases (aj for all atoms depicted. In this case, the phases were calculated for H,0 not D,0. The Fourier feature obviously does not agree with the difference map the correct solution is shown in the middle of the figure with a D,0 molecule D bonded to Ns, of histidine (5EF) and D bonded to O of isoleucine (18E). 

Figure 2. Section of the neutron difference density map (Fq — Fc, olc) the calculated structure fac tors do not include any water molecules. Peaks in the center are interpreted as three water (0 0) molecules, On the right-hand side the neutron density map (Fo) for the same section with all atoms included in the phase calculation (ac).

The well-known methods of measming subcriticality of any multiplication systems can be grouped into dynamic (active) and statistical (passive) ones. Dynamic methods incorporate different devices that vary reactivity of the system imder study or its neutron flux density according to a certain law. With the application of statistical methods these devices are usually not used. And if they are used, they do not result in determined variation of reactivity and neutron flux density. 

Noble gas measurements were made on bulk samples of four density fractions (Amari et al., 1995b). In contrast to SiC, a substantial fraction of Ne-E in graphite seems to come from the decay of short-lived (T1/2 = 2.6 yr) Na (Clayton, 1975). This is supported by the low " He/ Ne ratios measured in individual grains (Nichols et al., 2003). Krypton in graphite has two s-process components with apparent different neutron exposures, residing in different density fractions (Amari et al., 1995b). 

X-ray and neutron specular reflection Molecular structure across the interface, laterally averaged over the beam area X-rays electron density profiles neutrons scattering length density profiles of the nuclei of atoms). With neutrons different parts of the monolayer can be studied independently by selective H/D substitution. See ellipsometry. 

Figure 14. Neutron diffraction studies on trypsin. (A) A difference map (F t, — exp i a ,<. calculated with only the deuterium between His57 and Aspl02 left out of the phase calculation. The difference peak shows the deuterium bound to the imidazole nitrogen. (B) A Fourier synthesis calculated with terms (2f obs T caic) c P cajc-1" t is map both deuteriums were omitted from the phase calculation. It is clear that both deuteriums are located on the imidazole. (C) A difference map in which the deuterium was placed by stereochemistry on the Aspl02. The difference density peak clearly shows the preferred location of the deuterium on the imidazole of His57. From Kossiakoff and Spencer [246].

Fig. 2. Schematic variation of neutron scattering density for an object composed of a central sphere of RNA and a concentric outer shell of protein, i.e. a simple virus. The contrast difference dp is the difference between the scattering density of the solvent pg and the solute py. High positive and negative dp are seen in 0 and 100% H20. The protein shell is matched-out in 43% H20 and the RNA core is matched-out in 72% H20. Note that for reason of solvent H- H exchange, the average protein and RNA densities increase slightly on going from 0 to 100% H20. Solution scattering is observed where the solute and solvent densities are different. Note that the fluctuations in scattering densities pp(r) within each of the protein and RNA components do not disappear at their respective matchpoints. See Section 2.3 for a further explanation of the terms in dp, ps, Py and Pp(r).

A basic requirement for accurate NAA is the correct characterization of the irradiation facility (Becker 1987). Local and temporal neutron flux density gradients as well as gradients in the neutron energy spectrum of the irradiation position must be well understood and known for each irradiation. O Figure 30.5 illustrates the gradients in an irradiation capsule as measured by flux monitor foils. A difference of 1 mm in sample positioning will result in a 0.6% relative difference in the measured concentration. 

A one-dimensional transport theory code ANISN with the Hansen-Roach cross-section set and a buckling approximation of the form OB p for the finite longitudinal cylinder dimension, were used for the analysis of the experimental data. The largest difference between computed and experimental values of k ff was 0.016, as shown in the table. The code also permits calculation of the neutron current densities at the fuel-reflector interface and, therefore, provides an indication of the number and energy of the neutrons that are returned to the fuel region. The computations thus indicate that the changes In reactivity of the solution cylinders induced by the steel reflector are primarily the result of the competition between the effective decrease in the reflection of the thermal component and the effective increase in the reflection of the epithermal component of the neutron flux at the fuel-reflector interface with increasing thicknesses of steel. 

The investigations cited above (like others performed in this field) yielded results on the amounts of corrosion products formed under PWR operating conditions, but not on the amounts of the associated radionuclides. As was emphasized above, Co source must not be confused with the term of essential interest Co source . Moreover, it has to be pointed out that the conclusions drawn from such evaluations of corrosion rates are only fully valid if the deposition of corrosion products on the fuel rod surfaces and subsequent neutron activation there, i. e. mechanism 1 in Fig. 4.26., were the most important contributor to the production of Co carried in the coolant. If this assumption does not apply, as will be discussed below, then these arguments would be of less significance. In order to correlate the two figures Co supply to the coolant and Co supply to the coolant , the activation period and the neutron flux density to which the different potential sources are exposed also have to be taken into account. Such calculations are comparatively... 

---