SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Tanks”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 271 records · Page 15

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2013

Hanford Double-Shell Tank Extent-of-Condition Construction Review

During routine visual inspections of Hanford double-shell waste tank 241-AY-102 (AY-102), anomalies were identified on the annulus floor which resulted in further evaluations. Following a formal leak assessment in October 2012, Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) determined that the primary tank of AY-102 was leaking. The formal leak assessment, documented in RPP-ASMT-53793,Tank 241-AY-102 Leak Assessment Report, identified first-of-a-kind construction difficulties and trial-and-error repairs as major contributing factors to tank failure. To determine if improvements in double-shell tank (DST) construction occurred after construction of tank AY-102, a detailed review and evaluation of historical construction records were performed for the first three DST tank farms constructed, which included tanks 241-AY-101, 241-AZ-101, 241-AZ-102, 241-SY-101, 241-SY-102, and 241-SY-103. The review for these six tanks involved research and review of dozens of boxes of historical project documentation. These reviews form a basis to better understand the current condition of the three oldest Hanford DST farms. They provide a basis for changes to the current tank inspection program and also provide valuable insight into future tank use decisions. If new tanks are constructed in the future, these reviews provide valuable "lessons-learned" information about expected difficulties as well as construction practices and techniques that are likely to be successful.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2011

EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE DEFENSE WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY (DWPF) LABORATORY GERMANIUM OXIDE USE ON RECYCLE TRANSFERS TO THE H-TANK FARM

When processing High Level Waste (HLW) glass, the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) cannot wait until the melt or waste glass has been made to assess its acceptability, since by then no further changes to the glass composition and acceptability are possible. Therefore, the acceptability decision is made on the upstream feed stream, rather than on the downstream melt or glass product. This strategy is known as 'feed forward statistical process control.' The DWPF depends on chemical analysis of the feed streams from the Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) and the Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) where the frit plus adjusted sludge from the SRAT are mixed. The SME is the last vessel in which any chemical adjustments or frit additions can be made. Once the analyses of the SME product are deemed acceptable, the SME product is transferred to the Melter Feed Tank (MFT) and onto the melter. The SRAT and SME analyses have been analyzed by the DWPF laboratory using a 'Cold Chemical' method but this dissolution did not adequately dissolve all the elemental components. A new dissolution method which fuses the SRAT or SME product with cesium nitrate (CsNO{sub 3}), germanium (IV) oxide (GeO{sub 2}) and cesium carbonate (Cs{sub 2}CO{sub 3}) into a cesium germanate glass at 1050 C in platinum crucibles has been developed. Once the germanium glass is formed in that fusion, it is readily dissolved by concentrated nitric acid (about 1M) to solubilize all the elements in the SRAT and/or SME product for elemental analysis. When the chemical analyses are completed the acidic cesium-germanate solution is transferred from the DWPF analytic laboratory to the Recycle Collection Tank (RCT) where the pH is increased to {approx}12 M to be released back to the tank farm and the 2H evaporator. Therefore, about 2.5 kg/yr of GeO{sub 2}/year will be diluted into 1.4 million gallons of recycle. This 2.5 kg/yr of GeO{sub 2} may increase to 4 kg/yr when improvements are implemented to attain an annual canister production goal of 400 canisters. Since no Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) exists for germanium in the Tank Farm, the Effluent Treatment Project, or the Saltstone Production Facility, DWPF has requested an evaluation of the fate of the germanium in the caustic environment of the RCT, the 2H evaporator, and the tank farm. This report evaluates the effect of the addition of germanium to the tank farm based on: (1) the large dilution of Ge in the RCT and tank farm; (2) the solubility of germanium in caustic solutions (pH 12-13); (3) the potential of germanium to precipitate as germanium sodalites in the 2H Evaporator; and (4) the potential of germanium compounds to precipitate in the evaporator feed tank. This study concludes that the impacts of transferring up to 4 kg/yr germanium to the RCT (and subsequently the 2H evaporator feed tank and the 2H evaporator) results in <2 ppm per year (1.834 mg/L) which is the maximum instantaneous concentration expected from DWPF. This concentration is insignificant as most sodium germanates are soluble at the high pH of the feed tank and evaporator solutions. Even if sodium aluminosilicates form in the 2H evaporator, the Ge will likely substitute for some small amount of the Si in these structures and will be insignificant. It is recommended that the DWPF continue with their strategy to add germanium as a laboratory chemical to Attachment 8.2 of the DWPF Waste Compliance Plan (WCP).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2011

TANK 26F SUPERNATANT AND 2F EVAPORATOR EDUCTOR PUMP SAMPLE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS

In an effort to understand the reasons for system plugging problems in the SRS 2F evaporator, supernatant samples were retrieved from the evaporator feed tank (Tank 26F) and solids were collected from the evaporator eductor feed pump for characterization. The variable depth supernatant samples were retrieved from Tank 26F in early December of 2010 and samples were provided to SRNL and the F/H Area laboratories for analysis. Inspection and analysis of the samples at SRNL was initiated in early March of 2011. During the interim period, samples were frequently exposed to temperatures as low as 12 C with daily temperature fluctuations as high as 10 C. The temperature at the time of sample collection from the waste tank was 51 C. Upon opening the supernatant bottles at SRNL, many brown solids were observed in both of the Tank 26F supernatant samples. In contrast, no solids were observed in the supernatant samples sent to the F/H Area laboratories, where the analysis was completed within a few days after receipt. Based on these results, it is believed that the original Tank 26F supernatant samples did not contain solids, but solids formed during the interim period while samples were stored at ambient temperature in the SRNL shielded cells without direct climate control. Many insoluble solids (>11 wt. % for one sample) were observed in the Tank 26F supernatant samples after three months of storage at SRNL which would not dissolve in the supernatant solution in two days at 51 C. Characterization of these solids along with the eductor pump solids revealed the presence of sodium oxalate and clarkeite (uranyl oxyhydroxide) as major crystalline phases. Sodium nitrate was the dominant crystalline phase present in the unwashed Eductor Pump solids. Crystalline sodium nitrate may have formed during the drying of the solids after filtration or may have been formed in the Tank 26F supernatant during storage since the solution was found to be very concentrated (9-12 M Na{sup +}). Concentrated mineral acids and elevated temperature were required to dissolve all of these solids. The refractory nature of some of the solids is consistent with the presence of metal oxides such as aluminosilicates (observed as a minor phase by XRD). Characterization of the water wash solutions and the digested solids confirmed the presence of oxalate salts in both solid samples. Sulfate enrichment was also observed in the Tank 26F solids wash solution, indicating the presence of sulfate precipitates such as burkeite. OLI modeling of the Tank 26F filtered supernatant composition revealed that sodium oxalate has a very low solubility in this solution. The model predicts that the sodium oxalate solubility in the Tank 26F supernatant is only 0.0011 M at 50 C. The results indicate that the highly concentrated nature of the evaporator feed solution and the addition of oxalate anion to the waste stream each contribute to the formation of insoluble solids in the 2F evaporator system.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

A Review of Tank 48H Treatment of Tetraphenylborate with Permanganate

Tank 48H contains roughly 270,000 gallons of radioactive waste material. The waste stored in this tank was to be processed in multiple stages utilizing facilities at the Savannah River Site (SRS) almost 30 years ago. The In-Tank Precipitation Process (ITP) was initiated in Tank 48H, which precipitated highly radioactive cesium-137 using sodium tetraphenylborate (NaTPB). While the process succeeded in precipitating the Cs, Sr, and other actinides, it also generated an unexpectedly large amount of benzene. The evolved benzene created a safety concern and made the waste incompatible with further downstream processing. This halted the ITP, and a new method of treatment was required to continue processing the legacy waste contained in Tank 48H. A myriad of treatment options have been proposed with multiple teams of researchers assembled to work on this highly complex issue over the last few decades. This review investigated one potentially viable treatment option, in-tank oxidation with sodium permanganate. Permanganate has been well known in literature as a strong oxidizing agent for organic compounds, as well as being utilized at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in other processes. A small number of studies have been conducted utilizing waste simulants to evaluate the use of permanganate as an oxidant for tetraphenylborate (TPB). A search of the literature and data from these studies indicates that permanganate could be a viable treatment for destruction of TPB in Tank 48H. While the scoping studies had a small number of individual experiments and nonideal conditions, the permanganate decomposed up to 90% of the TPB. A free hydroxide concentration above 1.0 M is required for tank corrosion control. Simulant studies indicate no decrease in TPB decomposition by permanganate until pH 14. The simulant studies show an increase in TPB decomposition as the temperature of the solution is increased to 40 °C. The post-reaction analysis of previous simulant tests did not look at all of the organic degradation products. Investigations into what these organic products are and in what quantity will help guide determinations as to whether the downstream processing facilities are able to handle the material that will be generated. Study on the time frame for the reaction between permanganate and TPB should be investigated as the literature reports only extend out to two weeks reaction time. The permanganate treatment conditions indicate no corrosion control concerns and a longer timescale reaction may be needed for in-tank treatment. In addition, further study would be useful to identify a lower boundary condition for the ratio of TPB and oxidant. The simulant tests applied large excesses of permanganate, and this may be unnecessary. The size constraint of the tank means that there will be practical limitations on the amount of sodium permanganate that can be added to the tank. The amount of permanganate should be minimized as much as possible while still ensuring decomposition of the TPB to minimize the amount of manganese dioxide solids generated.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

Video Camera Improvements to Support Hanford Tank Farms - 17141

Hanford Tank Farms consist of 177 underground storage tanks that contain 56 million gallons of radioactive waste. The current mission is to safely manage this waste in preparation to feed the Waste Treatment Plant. Fulfilling this mission includes inspecting each tank regularly to ensure tank integrity and support ongoing operations such as transferring waste from older single-shell tanks to the newer double-shell tanks. Video cameras derived from commercially available equipment have provided the ability to remotely see inside the tanks, reducing some of the challenges of fulfilling this mission. However, there are many challenges and limitations with the currently used video systems. Among some of the challenges are limited tank interior entry points for camera deployment, high radiation dose rates, limited equipment longevity in the environmental conditions, need for high resolution image quality, low light conditions, and in-tank obstructions. Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) has identified and tested new video systems that will effectively manage these challenges and increase capability, efficiency, and improve safety. The new camera systems are planned for deployment to support the next Single Shell Tank Retrieval Project in the A/AX tank Farm complex. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2015

Progress of the enhanced Hanford single shell tank (SST) integrity project - 15497

To improve understanding of the single-shell tanks (SSTs) integrity, Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS), the US DOE Hanford Site tank contractor, developed an enhanced Single-Shell Tank Integrity Project (SSTIP) in 2009. An expert panel on SST integrity, consisting of various subject matter experts in industry and academia, was created to provide recommendations supporting the development of the project. This panel developed 33 recommendations in four main areas of interest: structural integrity, liner degradation, leak integrity and prevention, and mitigation of contamination migration. In late 2010, seventeen of these recommendations were used to develop the basis for the M-45-10-1 Change Package for the Hanford Federal Agreement and Compliance Order, which is also known as the Tri-Party Agreement. The change package identified two phases of work for SST integrity. The initial phase was focused on efforts to envelope the integrity of the tanks. The initial phase was divided into two primary areas of investigation: structural integrity and leak integrity. If necessary, based on the outcome from the initial work, second phase would be focused on further definition of the integrity of the tanks and liners. Combined these two phases are designed to support the formal integrity assessment of the Hanford SSTs in 2018 by an Independent Qualified Registered Engineer. As the initial phase of this work completes in early 2015, this paper summarizes the project formation and status the work of the past few years associated the implementation of the Phase one recommendations. Work in the initial phase to further define the DOE's understanding of the structural integrity SSTs involved preparing a modern Analysis of Record (AOR) using finite element analysis. Structural analyses of the SSTs have been conducted since 1957, but these analyses used analog calculations, less rigorous models, or focused on individual structures. As such, an integrated understanding of all of the SSTs has not been developed to modern expectations. In support of this effort, other activities addressed the visual inspection of tank internal conditions and the collection of concrete core samples from the tanks, including a full height tank sidewall core, for analysis of current mechanics properties. The work on the liner leak integrity has examined leaks from 25 tanks with known liner failures. Individual leak assessments were developed for each tank to identify the leak cause and location and estimate historic leak rates. A common cause/failure analysis study was performed to take data from individual tanks to look for trends in the causes of failure. A separate activity is being conducted to examine the propensity for corrosion in select SSTs with aggressive waste layers. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2015

Double-Shell tank Integrity program - 15533

Waste at Hanford is stored in 149 single-shell tanks and 28 double-shell tanks (DSTs). Concerns related to aging radioactive waste storage facilities throughout the US DOE complex led to Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) developing guidelines for structural integrity programs for tank systems (BNL-52527, Guidelines for Development of Structural Integrity Programs for DOE High-Level Waste Storage Tanks). The committee of experts who developed these guidelines is commonly known as the Tank Structural Integrity Panel (TSIP). The US DOE has subsequently adopted these guidelines, and requires site operators to have a program consistent with them (DOE M 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual). The Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) manages the tanks for the US DOE Office of River Protection (ORP) under the Tank Operations Contract (TOC). The US DOE-ORP contractual agreement with the TOC (11-NSD-010) includes a requirement to 'maintain the tank structural integrity program as described in RPP-7574, Double-Shell tank Integrity Project Plan'. The DST integrity is maintained with a variety of activities such as ultrasonic and visual inspections, chemistry controls, corrosion monitoring and structural analyses methods. The recent loss of tank 241-AY-102 has led to the formation of the High-Level Waste Integrity Assessment Panel to evaluate the DST integrity project (DSTIP) and to recommend improvements to the DSTIP. This panel continues the DOE practice of seeking expert advice to guide the formulation and continuous assessment of tank integrity activities. The panel has concluded its work and WRPS has developed a series of tasks to implement their recommendations. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2016

Overcoming Waste Removal Challenges at Savannah River Site: A Case Study of Tank 15 - 16198

Tank 15 is a High Level Waste Tank at the Savannah River Site containing sludge waste that had been allowed to dry due to several flaws in the primary tank wall. In order to remove the tank waste, the sludge had to first be re-hydrated. Due to the age of Tank 15 and the thirty years of 'dry sludge tank' status, there were numerous technical challenges and risks that had to be addressed to demonstrate operational readiness to add liquid to a tank with known flaws. Liquid management was a key to readiness since Tank 15 did not have the infrastructure to mitigate waste accumulating in the annulus or to transfer waste out of the primary tank as a means to control a large leak. The project team's fundamental expectation was that some amount of liquid would migrate to the annulus through identified flaws as the sludge waste was re-hydrated. Communication was crucial to ensuring this expectation was propagated to management, the customer, and the regulators. Equipment upgrades, provisions for annulus liquid management (monitoring and removal), and readiness for outgoing transfers mitigated waste migration. Liquid addition methodology and facility modifications were developed to safely re-hydrate the sludge while monitoring the integrity of the primary tank. These efforts culminated in successfully adding 697 m{sup 3} (184,000 gal) of liquid to Tank 15, re-hydrating the sludge waste. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

TCCR Operational Summary and Optimization for Tank 9 Processing - 20314

Savannah River Remediation (SRR) manages and operates the liquid waste facilities at Savannah River Site (SRS) for the Department of Energy (DOE). Stored liquid waste is a complex mixture of insoluble solids (sludge) and soluble salts in an alkaline solution. SRR has deployed the Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) system, a tank-side ion exchange process, to remove radioactive cesium from salt waste and enable onsite disposal of the resulting decontaminated salt solution as low-level waste at the Saltstone facilities. The TCCR system consists of two prefilters, four ion exchange (IX) columns, one resin trap, and a ventilation system. The IX process uses a form of inorganic crystalline silicotitanate (CST), which has a high affinity for cesium and other alkali metals, strontium, and actinides. This process is currently deployed utilizing salt feed from Tank 10, with future plans to dissolve solid salt in Tank 9 and transfer the salt solution to Tank 10 for processing through TCCR. The feed for TCCR must be created from salt-cake in Tank 10 through a dissolution process. Once enough salt has been dissolved, a qualification process is entered. This process characterizes the feed and ensures the cesium loading on the columns will not cause boiling of waste within the columns during or after processing. Once the batch has been qualified, salt waste is fed to the TCCR system through a transfer pump in the center of the tank. The waste is filtered through a set of two shielded, dead-end prefilters that prevent solids buildup in the columns. The filtered salt solution then travels to the shielded IX columns, which can be operated individually or in series, where the cesium is sorbed on the CST media. The decontaminated salt solution (DSS) then travels through a resin trap and out of the module to Tank 11. TCCR has successfully processed approximately 795,000 L of Tank 10H radioactive salt waste over two batches to date. There has not yet been a system induced shutdown. The prefilters performed as expected with only minor degradation in recovery of differential pressure after a backflush sequence. The time between backflushes decreased as each batch reached the end of processing. The hydraulics in the IXCs mostly performed as expected at all flow rates, except for one IXC that will be further investigated during Batch 3 processing. The TCCR system has shown some opportunities for more efficient processing during the length of the demonstration so far. For future processing of material from Tank 9H through Tank 10H and the TCCR unit, TCCR 1A will implement changes to the prefilters and the IXCs. The prefilters will have an increased surface area and a new filter media in an effort to increase time between filter swaps and improve backwashing cleaning capability. The IXCs will have a reduced diameter to allow for increased heat transfer out of the column and increased loading of Cs-137. Additionally, a new form of CST with an increased kinetic performance is being investigated for use during TCCR 1A operation. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2013

Test Report for Permanganate and Cold Strontium Strike for Tank 241-AN-102

Tanks 241-AN-102 and 241-AN-107 supernatants contain soluble Sr-90 and transuranic elements that require removal prior to vitrification to comply with the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant immobilized low-activity waste specification (WTP Contract, DE-AC27-01RV 14136, Specification 2.2.2.8, "Radionuclide Concentration Limitations") and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission provisional agreement on waste incidental to reprocessing (letter, Paperiello, C. J., "Classification of Hanford Low-Activity Tank Waste Fraction"). These two tanks have high concentrations of organics and organic complexants and are referred to as complexant concentrate tanks. A precipitation process using sodium permanganate (NaMnO 4 ) and strontium nitrate (Sr(NO 3 ) 2 ) was developed and tested with tank waste samples to precipitate Sr-90 and transuranic elements from the supernate (PNWD-3141, Optimization of Sr/TRU Removal Conditions with Samples of AN-102 Tank Waste). Testing documented in this report was conducted to further evaluate the use of the strontium nitrate/sodium permanganate process in tank farms with a retention time of up to 12 months. Previous testing was focused on developing a process for deployment in the ultrafiltration vessels in the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. This environment is different from tank farms in two important ways: the waste is diluted in the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant to ~5.5 M sodium, whereas the supernate in the tank farms is ~9 M Na. Secondly, while the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant allows for a maximum treatment time of hours to days, the in-tank farms treatment of tanks 241-AN102 and 241-AN-107 will result in a retention time of months (perhaps up to12 months) before processing. A comparative compilation of separation processes for Sr/transuranics has been published as RPP-RPT-48340, Evaluation of Alternative Strontium and Transuranic Separation Processes. This report also listed the testing needs for the permanganate precipitation process to be field-deployable. A more comprehensive listing of future testing needs to allow the process to be field deployable are contained in RPP-PLAN-51288, Development Test Plan for Sr/TRU Precipitation Process.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2014

Assessment of performing an MST strike in Tank 21H

Previous Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) tank mixing studies performed for the Small Column Ion Exchange (SCIX) project have shown that 3 Submersible Mixer Pumps (SMPs) installed in Tank 41 are sufficient to support actinide removal by MST sorption as well as subsequent resuspension and removal of settled solids. Savannah River Remediation (SRR) is pursuing MST addition into Tank 21 as part of the Large Tank Strike (LTS) project. The preliminary scope for LTS involves the use of three standard slurry pumps (installed in N, SE, and SW risers) in a Type IV tank. Due to the differences in tank size, internal interferences, and pump design, a separate mixing evaluation is required to determine if the proposed configuration will allow for MST suspension and strontium and actinide sorption. The author performed the analysis by reviewing drawings for Tank 21 [W231023] and determining the required cleaning radius or zone of influence for the pumps. This requirement was compared with previous pilot-scale MST suspension data collected for SCIX that determined the cleaning radius, or zone of influence, as a function of pump operating parameters. The author also reviewed a previous Tank 50 mixing analysis that examined the ability of standard slurry pumps to suspend sludge particles. Based on a review of the pilot-scale SCIX mixing tests and Tank 50 pump operating experience, three standard slurry pumps should be able to suspend sludge and MST to effectively sorb strontium and actinides onto the MST. Using the SCIX data requires an assumption about the impact of cooling coils on slurry pump mixing. The basis for this assumption is described in this report. Using the Tank 50 operating experience shows three standard slurry pumps should be able to suspend solids if the shear strength of the settled solids is less than 160 Pa. Because Tank 21 does not contain cooling coils, the shear strength could be larger.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2019

Cesium Ion Exchange Testing Using a Three-Column System with Crystalline Silicotitanate and Hanford Tank Waste 241-AP-107

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is working to support early production of immobilized low-activity waste by feeding Hanford tank supernate from tank farms to the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) Low-Activity Waste (LAW) facility. This goal incorporates the design of a Tank-Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system, which in effect filters tank waste supernate and processes it through a cesium ion exchange medium to remove 137Cs. The 137Cs-depleted product is sent to the WTP for vitrification. Rovira et al. (2018) reported the successful Cs removal from Hanford tank 241-AP-107 waste (hereafter called AP-107) using crystalline silicotitanate (CST) ion exchange media manufactured by Honeywell UOP, LLC (product IONSIVTM R9140-B, Batch 2081000057) in a lead-lag column system. Since that testing, WRPS has changed the column design to a three-column system. WRPS requested a repeated study with AP-107 tank waste using a different batch of IONSIVTM R9140-B, Lot 2002009604, in a three-column format. A small-scale test platform was constructed to demonstrate solids filtration, Cs removal, and LAW vitrification and installed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. This report describes the small-scale ion exchange testing system component of the test platform and the processing of approximately 8.55 L of filtered AP-107 supernate using CST, Lot 8056262-999, that passed through a 25-mesh filter. This report also describes the Cs ion exchange batch contact testing to determine the Cs distribution coefficient and the maximum Cs loading capacity in the AP-107 tank waste matrix. Batch contact testing helps to evaluate CST performance on tank waste supernate and is often used prior to processing tank waste through ion exchange columns to assess some performance metrics (e.g., 50% Cs breakthrough). Batch contact tests were performed with the filtered AP-107 tank waste at four Cs concentrations at a phase ratio of 200 (liquid volume to exchanger mass). The distribution coefficient (K d ) at the equilibrium condition of 9.2 µg Cs/mL (AP-107 feed condition) was determined to be 806 mL AP 107/g CST. With a CST bed density of 1.01 g/mL (<25 mesh CST), this K d corresponded to a predicted 50% Cs breakthrough of 814 bed volumes (BVs). The Cs load capacity at the equilibrium feed condition was determined to be 8.3 mg Cs/g dry CST. The three-column format testing was prototypic to the intended TSCR operations, albeit on a small scale with 10-mL CST beds. Flowrate was adjusted to match the CST contact time expected for the full-scale operation, i.e., matched bed volumes per hour (BV/h) flow rate. The feed was processed downflow through the lead column, then through the middle column, and then through the polish column. Loading continued at an average of 1.88 BV/h (1.83 to 2.04 BV/h range) until the entire available AP-107 feed was processed. The Cs-decontaminated product will be provided for vitrification testing. The lead column only reached 45% Cs breakthrough after processing 855 BVs of feed. The 50% Cs breakthrough was extrapolated to occur at ~900 BVs. This extrapolated 50% Cs breakthrough value differed from the batch contact estimate (814 BVs) by 13%. The waste acceptance criteria (WAC) or contract limit for the WTP LAW vitrification facility is 3.18E-5 Ci 137 Cs per mole Na. For the AP-107 tank waste, only 0.127% of the influent 137 Cs concentration may be delivered to the WTP; this required a Cs decontamination factor of 787. The Cs effluent from the middle column reached the WAC after processing 590 BVs. Cs breakthrough from the polish column began at 590 BVs, reaching 6.3E-3 µCi/mL or 4.3E-3% Cs breakthrough after processing 844 BVs of feed.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

NASA NTRS2004

Polymer/Silicate Nanocomposites Used to Manufacture Gas Storage Tanks With Reduced Permeability

Over the past decade, there has been considerable research in the area of polymer-layered silicate nanocomposites. This research has shown that the dispersion of small amounts of an organically modified layered silicate improves the polymer strength, modulus, thermal stability, and barrier properties. There have been several reports on the dispersion of layered silicates in an epoxy matrix. Potential enhancements to the barrier properties of epoxy/silicate nanocomposites make this material attractive for low permeability tankage. Polymer matrix composites (PMCs) have several advantages for cryogenic storage tanks. They are lightweight, strong, and stiff; therefore, a smaller fraction of a vehicle's potential payload capacity is used for propellant storage. Unfortunately, the resins typically used to make PMC tanks have higher gas permeability than metals. This can lead to hydrogen loss through the body of the tank instead of just at welds and fittings. One approach to eliminate this problem is to build composite tanks with thin metal liners. However, although these tanks provide good permeability performance, they suffer from a substantial mismatch in the coefficient of thermal expansion, which can lead to failure of the bond between the liner and the body of the tank. Both problems could be addressed with polymersilicate nanocomposites, which exhibit reduced hydrogen permeability, making them potential candidates for linerless PMC tanks. Through collaboration with Northrop Grumman and Michigan State University, nanocomposite test tanks were manufactured for the NASA Glenn Research Center, and the helium permeability was measured. An organically modified silicate was prepared at Michigan State University and dispersed in an epoxy matrix (EPON 826/JeffamineD230). The epoxy/silicate nanocomposites contained either 0 or 5 wt% of the organically modified silicate. The tanks were made by filament winding carbon fibers with the nanocomposite resin. Helium permeability was measured by Northrop Grumman, showing that the leak rate/day of the nanocomposite matrix tank was approximately 80-percent less than that of the neat epoxy matrix tank.

Campbell, Sandi G.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Integral Radiator and Storage Tank

A simplified, lightweight system for dissipating heat of a regenerative fuel- cell system would include a heat pipe with its evaporator end placed at the heat source and its condenser end integrated into the wall of the regenerative fuel cell system gas-storage tanks. The tank walls act as heat-radiating surfaces for cooling the regenerative fuel cell system. The system was conceived for use in outer space, where radiation is the only physical mechanism available for transferring heat to the environment. The system could also be adapted for use on propellant tanks or other large-surface-area structures to convert them to space heat-radiating structures. Typically for a regenerative fuel cell system, the radiator is separate from the gas-storage tanks. By using each tank s surface as a heat-radiating surface, the need for a separate, potentially massive radiator structure is eliminated. In addition to the mass savings, overall volume is reduced because a more compact packaging scheme is possible. The underlying tank wall structure provides ample support for heat pipes that help to distribute the heat over the entire tank surface. The heat pipes are attached to the outer surface of each gas-storage tank by use of a high-thermal conductance, carbon-fiber composite-material wrap. Through proper choice of the composite layup, it is possible to exploit the high longitudinal conductivity of the carbon fibers (greater than the thermal conductivity of copper) to minimize the unevenness of the temperature distribution over the tank surface, thereby helping to maximize the overall heat-transfer efficiency. In a prototype of the system, the heat pipe and the composite wrap contribute an average mass of 340 g/sq m of radiator area. Lightweight space radiator panels have a mass of about 3,000 g/sq m of radiator area, so this technique saves almost 90 percent of the mass of separate radiator panels. In tests, the modified surface of the tank was found to have an emissivity of 0.85. The composite wrap remained tightly bound to the surface of the tank throughout the testing in thermal vacuum conditions.

Burke, Kenneth A.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Oxygen Storage Tanks Are Feasible for Mars Transit

The Mars transit tanks will probably be titanium lined, composite over wrapped pressure vessels (COPVs) similar to those used in the space shuttle and International Space Station(ISS). Since the mass of a storage tank is proportional to the mass of the gas it contains, the required oxygen will use about the same mass of tanks regardless of the number and size ofthe tanks. Using existing relatively small COPVs is possible. Pressure vessels can fail due torupture and leakage but no failures have occurred in space and the expected failure rates are very low. Since one or two spare tanks are required for reliability, using smaller tanks can reduce the total mass. For a Mars round trip, the mass of oxygen and tanks including spares is roughly equal to the mass of the ISS Oxygen Generation Assembly (OGA) and its spares. Since the OGA must orbit Mars and be returned to Earth, while half the storage tanks are emptied on the way to Mars and can be abandoned, storage tanks have a significant launch mass advantage over the OGA. Storage tanks are simpler, more reliable,and have fewer failure modes than an OGA. They would have smaller design and development costs and need less crew time and maintenance. Oxygen storage tanks are feasible for Mars transit and are attractive compared to the ISS OGA.

Jones, Harry W.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Numerical Modeling of No Vent Filling of a Cryogenic Tank

This paper presents a multi-node finite volume model of the chilling and filling of a cryogenic tank using the Generalized Fluid System Simulation Program (GFSSP), a general purpose flow network code. Vented Chill and No Vent Fill (VCNVF) tests were conducted at Marshall Space Flight Center where a flight-like tank was filled with liquid nitrogen from a supply tank. In the VCNVF tests, the tank was partially chilled while the vent valve was open. After the partial chilling, the vent valve was closed and the tank was filled without any venting. An integrated numerical model of the test set up was developed. The model included the transfer line from the supply tank, the target tank with the spray nozzle and solid walls, and the discharge line with the vent valve. The tank was discretized into multiple fluid nodes and branches to represent the ullage and liquid nitrogen and multiple solid nodes to represent the tank wall and structure. The heat transfer between solid to fluid was calculated from pool boiling correlations which include film, transition, and nucleate boiling, as well as natural convection during pre- and post-boiling. The model also accounts for the condensation of vapor in the tank when it comes in contact with the liquid spray. The predicted pressure, resident mass, wall and ullage temperature in the tank were compared with the test data.

Alok Majumdar↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Numerical Modeling of No Vent Filling of a Cryogenic Tank

Alok Majumdar↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Liquid Hydrogen Tank Chill and No-Vent Fill Prediction using Computational Fluid Dynamics

Cryogenic tank chill and fill is an important cryogenic fluid management (CFM) technology that supports and enables many of NASA’s long-duration space missions. For no-vent fill, the receiver tank pressure remains below the supply tank pressure during the entire duration of the fill so that the tank does not require venting. This is especially advantageous for tank fill operations in low gravity where the position of the liquid is not always known and venting the tank may cause loss of propellant by venting liquid. In lieu of expensive tests conducted on-orbit, accurate computational models capable of predicting receiver tank pressure during cryogenic propellant tank fill may be used to reduce system and propellant mass as well as mission risk. However, these numerical models must be validated or anchored to test data. This study presents a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model with conjugate heat transfer that is used to predict a liquid hydrogen tank chill and no-vent fill ground test conducted at Lewis Research Center (now Glenn Research Center) in 1991. The specific test case chosen for model validation implemented an upward-facing jet near the bottom of a cylindrical 34 liter tank. CFD predictions are compared to experimental measurements of tank pressure, fill level, fluid temperatures, and wall temperatures. The CFD results show reasonable agreement to the test data but overpredict the pressure collapse near the end of the fill despite the liquid jet penetrating the liquid-vapor interface. Several sensitivity studies are considered due to notable uncertainties in the experiment.

Computational Fluid Dynamics↗