[PRE REVIEW]: kugelpy: A Python package for modeling pebble bed reactor run-in

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @ethan-fowler (Ethan Fowler)
Repository: https://github.com/idaholab/kugelpy.git
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss_paper
Version: v0.1.0
Editor: @kellyrowland
Reviewers: @sskutnik, @damar-wicaksono
Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c6c494948f0a7374f1c2782964784404"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c6c494948f0a7374f1c2782964784404/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c6c494948f0a7374f1c2782964784404/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/c6c494948f0a7374f1c2782964784404)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @ethan-fowler. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@ethan-fowler if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Checking the BibTeX entries failed with the following error:

Failed to parse BibTeX on value "," (COMMA) ["@", #<BibTeX::Entry >, {:title=>["High-fidelity simulations of the run-in process for a pebble-bed reactor"], :author=>["Stewart, Ryan Hunter and Balestra, Paolo and Reger, David and Merzari, Elia and Strydom, Gerhard"], :abstractnote=>["Pebble-bed reactors (PBRs) rely on a continual feed of fuel pebbles being cycled through the core. As a result, they require a “run-in” period in order to reach an equilibrium state. The run-in period for a PBR is a complex, time-dependent problem that requires the injection of new fuel, different types of fuel, and power increases. This complexity in the run-in makes it important to capture the physical processes in order to generate an accurate representation. The present work details the creation of a high-fidelity Monte Carlo methodology for analyzing the run-in and subsequent approach to equilibrium for PBRs. The methodology entails a Python module wrapped around Serpent so as to perform neutronics calculations, move pebbles, refuel the core, and discharge pebbles, thereby modeling the explicit behavior of the PBR run-in. Further, three run-in simulations (a constant temperature profile, a linear temperature profile, and a constant temperature profile using control rods) were examined in order to identify the key physical phenomena present in the run-in process. Utilizing kugelpy, we found the inclusion of a temperature profile to be important for accurately capturing a discharge burnup (around 141 MWd/kg), a consistent k-eff (around 1.005), and an average pebble power (around 2.5 kW/pebble) that all fall within acceptable limits."], :doi=>["10.1016/j.anucene.2023.110193"], :url=>["https://www.osti.gov/biblio/2282751"], :journal=>["Annals of Nuclear Energy"], :issn=>["0306-4549"]}, ",", "number", "="]

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.07 s (430.8 files/s, 114399.2 lines/s)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                      files          blank        comment           code
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                           14            568            923           2946
MATLAB                            3            616            216           1756
Markdown                         10            155              0           1145
TeX                               1              5              0             76
YAML                              2              3              5             27
Bourne Again Shell                1              0             18             20
Dockerfile                        1              7              2              9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                             32           1354           1164           5979
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    16	Fowler
     3	Wendy Skinner

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 885

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

Pyrokinetics - A Python library to standardise gyrokinetic analysis
Submitting author: @bpatel2107
Handling editor: @kellyrowland (Active)
Reviewers: @the-rccg, @rogeriojorge
Similarity score: 0.7301

OpenTerrace: A fast, flexible and extendable Python framework for thermal energy storage packed bed simulations
Submitting author: @jakobhaervig
Handling editor: @AdamRJensen (Active)
Reviewers: @baperry2, @AdamRJensen
Similarity score: 0.7130

Monte Carlo / Dynamic Code (MC/DC): An accelerated Python package for fully transient neutron transport and rapid methods development
Submitting author: @jpmorgan98
Handling editor: @kellyrowland (Active)
Reviewers: @lewisfish, @szabo137
Similarity score: 0.7122

Moltres: finite element based simulation of molten salt reactors
Submitting author: @lindsayad
Handling editor: @kyleniemeyer (Active)
Reviewers: @scopatz
Similarity score: 0.6943

pysrim: Automation, Analysis, and Plotting of SRIM Calculations
Submitting author: @costrouc
Handling editor: @katyhuff (Retired)
Reviewers: @ledius
Similarity score: 0.6894

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

[arfon]

@ethan-fowler - thanks for your submission to JOSS. We're currently managing a large backlog of submissions and the editor most appropriate for your area is already rather busy.

For now, we will need to waitlist this paper and process it as the queue reduces. Thanks for your patience!

[kellyrowland]

hi @arfon 👋 I can take this on - a few of my current submissions are awaiting some wrap-up.

[kyleniemeyer]

@editorialbot assign @kellyrowland as editor

Sorry for missing your volunteering, and thanks!

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @kellyrowland is now the editor

[kellyrowland]

hello @jpmorgan98 @giozu 👋 would you be interested in and available for reviewing this JOSS submission?

[kellyrowland]

hello @gwenchee @andrewryh 👋 would you be interested in and available for reviewing this JOSS submission?

[kellyrowland]

hello @sskutnik @damar-wicaksono 👋 would you be interested in and available for reviewing this JOSS submission?

[sskutnik]

@kellyrowland I'm interested.

[kellyrowland]

great, thanks! I'll add you as a reviewer - once we've got a second reviewer, then I'll get the review issue going.

[kellyrowland]

@editorialbot add @sskutnik to reviewers

[editorialbot]

@sskutnik added to the reviewers list!

[damar-wicaksono]

Hi @kellyrowland, thanks for the invitation. Yes, I would be interested to review the submission.

[kellyrowland]

@editorialbot add @damar-wicaksono to reviewers

[editorialbot]

@damar-wicaksono added to the reviewers list!

[kellyrowland]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in #7727.