Mechanical Loads on Spent Nuclear Fuel in the General 30 cm Package Drop Scenario
The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) Spent Fuel and Waste Science & Technology (SFWST) research program is guided by the high-level goal of closing prioritized knowledge gaps related to spent nuclear fuel (SNF) storage and transportation, which are summarized by Saltzstein et al. (2020). One of the high-priority knowledge gaps is the identification and quantification of mechanical loads that are expected to affect SNF during normal conditions of transportation and storage to inform the range of physical SNF test programs. This report uses modeling and analysis methods to estimate the mechanical loads on spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in the general 30 cm package drop scenario. The drop scenario assumes impact limiters are in place in the transportation configuration and the impact surface is perfectly rigid. The goal of this analysis is to consider the universe of potential mechanical loading conditions that can happen to SNF and present the results in a manner that is useful for materials testing, decision making, and regulatory rule making purposes. This study uses validated finite element models and methods to perform a broad parametric study of key variables that can affect the mechanical loads on SNF during a hypothetical package free drop scenario. Physical drop test data from a cask and fuel assembly drop test campaign is the basis for model validation. Additionally, the results of the parametric study are used to inform a damage model, which uses multiple nonlinear regression to estimate the relationships between input variables and output response. The parametric finite element analyses consider thousands of input variable combinations, while the damage model estimates millions of combinations. The breadth of this study provides confidence that the potential range of mechanical loads that SNF might experience during the general 30 cm package drop scenario are characterized well enough to consider this knowledge gap closed. While this report documents the overall peak values calculated in this study, the 95 th percentile values, the histograms, and the observed trends are equally important. This study covered a large range of SNF temperatures, room temperature to 300°C, and burnups, 10 GWd/MTU to 62 GWd/MTU. Each temperature and burnup combination has a different cladding yield strain, so it is more meaningful to summarize the calculated cladding strain response as its factor of safety, which is defined relative to the yield strain. The factor of safety is calculated as the yield strain divided by the peak cladding strain. A factor of safety greater than unity indicates that the cladding remains below yield, whereas a value less than unity is indicative of plastic deformation. In all cases of this study a safety factor over 1.0 was calculated, although in the most limiting case at 300°C the safety factor was only 1.01, which suggests that yielding could occur when additional loads like rod internal pressure are included. When the temperature is restricted to 200°C the limiting safety factor increases to 1.28, which has significant margin to accommodate internal pressure and potential local cladding defects that could cause a local stress concentration. An important trend in the calculated fuel rod mechanical loads is that the 2 nd highest loaded fuel rod in an assembly tends to be significantly lower than the highest loaded rod. The implication is that even if one rod in an assembly experiences a failure the loads would have to be significantly higher to cause two or more rods to fail.