Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ASMS”

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.

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

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

Understanding the Long-Term Spectral Variability of Cygnus X-1 from BATSE and ASM Observations

We present a spectral analysis of observations of Cygnus X-1 by the RXTE/ASM (1.5-12 keV) and CGRO/BATSE (20-300 keV), including about 1200 days of simultaneous data. We find a number of correlations between intensities and hardnesses in different energy bands from 1.5 keV to 300 keV. In the hard (low) spectral state, there is a negative correlation between the ASM 1.5-12 keV flux and the hardness at any energy. In the soft (high) spectral state, the ASM flux is positively correlated with the ASM hardness (as previously reported) but uncorrelated with the BATSE hardness. In both spectral states, the BATSE hardness correlates with the flux above 100 keV, while it shows no correlation with the flux in the 20-100 keV range. At the same time, there is clear correlation between the BATSE fluxes below and above 100 keV. In the hard state, most of the variability can be explained by softening the overall spectrum with a pivot at approximately 50 keV. The observations show that there has to be another, independent variability pattern of lower amplitude where the spectral shape does not change when the luminosity changes. In the soft state, the variability is mostly caused by a variable hard (Comptonized) spectral component of a constant shape superimposed on a constant soft blackbody component. These variability patterns are in agreement with the dependence of the rms variability on the photon energy in the two states. We interpret the observed correlations in terms of theoretical Comptonization models. In the hard state, the variability appears to be driven mostly by changing flux in seed photons Comptonized in a hot thermal plasma cloud with an approximately constant power supply. In the soft state, the variability is consistent with flares of hybrid, thermal/nonthermal, plasma with variable power above a stable cold disk. Also, based on broadband pointed observations simultaneous with those of the ASM and BATSE, we find the intrinsic bolometric luminosity increases by a factor of approximately 3-4 from the hard state to the soft one, which supports models of the state transition based on a change of the accretion rate.

Zdziarski, Andrzej A.↗
DOE OSTI2024

ECAR-6580 Rev 0 ASME Section III, Division 5 Analysis of the MARVEL PCS and GVS Top Corner

The purpose of this Engineering Calculations and Analysis Report (ECAR) is to document the structural evaluation for part of the Microreactor Applications Research Validation and Evaluation (MARVEL) Primary Coolant System (PCS) and Guard Vessel System (GVS). For the PCS this relates specifically to the Distribution Plenum (DP), The Intermediate Heat Exchanger (IHX), and the Upper Downcomer (UD). For the GVS, this will include only the top corner that is machined into the DP Top Plate. These components will be evaluated using the 2021 version of ASME Section III, Division 5 [1] which is a design code that governs the construction of vessels, storage tanks, piping, pumps, valves, supports, core support structures and nonmetallic core components for use in high temperature reactor systems and their supporting systems. Materials at high temperature are subject to creep and fatigue mechanisms that require additional analyses that aren’t covered in ASME Section III, Division 1 rules. Division 5 contains two approaches: elastic or inelastic, however, additional Code Cases specific to Division 5, allow for an Elastic-Perfectly Plastic (EPP) approach. The components analyzed in this ECAR will use a combination of the elastic and EPP approach. Only Design and Service Levels A and B are evaluated in this ECAR. Service Level D evaluations for the entire PCS are documented in ECAR-6564, “MARVEL Project Primary Coolant System Pressure Vessel Stress Documentation” [2] and for the entire GVS are documented in ECAR-6574, “MARVEL Guard Vessel System FEA and ASME Analysis” [3]. The Design and Service Level A and B analyses for the PCS Downcomer piping and Core Barrel are documented in ANL-24/36, "Engineering Calculations and Analysis of the Core Barrel and Downcomer Piping in the MARVEL PCS” [4], and the GVS (except for the top corner) is in ECAR-6574, “MARVEL Guard Vessel System FEA and ASME Analysis.” See Section 2.0 for more detail on the analysis boundaries.

21 - SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLAN↗
DOE OSTI2024

ASME Code Development: Design Rules

ASME Code Development: Design Rules, ASME BPVC, and ASME BPVC HHA-3000, Design Task Group Papers, Presentations, and Memorandums, and records.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Initial ASME code rule analysis on Simple and Full assessment

ASME & ASTM codes present simple and full assessment methodologies to qualify nuclear grade graphite components. This report explains the theory behind the statistical portion of the codes and describes the issues discussed in a 2020 workshop in the simple assessment, as well as the full assessment. The methodology for the full assessment was developed by Hindley []. He used a validation methodology to match the experimental average failure load of test specimens from several geometries to the calculated 50% POF load to tune the grouping criteria parameters based on an RMSE penalty function. The grouping criteria consists of a minimum volume to satisfy the weakest link theory of the Weibull distribution and a minimum stress range parameter. Hindley’s work found a minimum link volume of 10 times the grain size and a stress range parameter of 7% [satisfy the validation requirements. Several studies found that the link volume of 10 times the grain size was not satisfactory for the volume grouping criteria for graphite grades with fine grains. ASME 2021 code adopted a new volume grouping criteria based on fracture toughness for calculation of the process zone volume. However, errors were found in the ASME 2021 code process zone volume equation and the question is now open as to what volume grouping criteria is satisfactory. This report presents results from sensitivity studies that were done to evaluate the volume grouping criteria effect on the full assessment POF. This report also presents results from sensitivity studies on other aspects of the code that affect the POF, the mesh size and the choice of the Weibull threshold parameter. All three sensitivity studies: the volume grouping criteria, the mesh size, and the threshold parameter choice are found to affect the component qualification decision for components of structural reliability class 1 (SRC-1). The sensitivity analysis results are presented in the body of the report for NBG-18, which is the same grade of graphite as Hindley used in his thesis. Results from NBG-17, IG-110, 2114, and PCEA are presented in the Appendix. For NBG-18, it was found that increasing the threshold increases the POF, finer meshes result in higher POFs, and that smaller link volume requirements lead to higher POFs (which is inconsistent with Hindley’s findings). This report proposes a new validation study similar to Hindley’s []. The purpose of the new validation study is to tune the threshold, mesh size and grouping criteria based on results from multiple grades of graphite, including finer grain graphites T220 (1-3 microns) and NG-CT-50 (5 microns). The test specimens will be broken at 3 labs, such that we can measure between lab measurement variability, with at least 5 test specimens per lab such that the within lab uncertainty can also be measured. Hindley’s validation method tried matching the average experimental load with the median. The future study will attempt to match failures at lower percentiles, which would be closer to the SRC POF limit. We are currently looking into what geometries make sense and the best method to measure multi-axial stress states. These design decisions are still being set.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2023

ASME Irradiation Model

ASME Irradiation Model: How to deal with irradiation data in ASME code rules. Includes discussion on challenges to nuclear graphite, such as lack of sufficient irradiation data to qualify graphite for nuclear application for all grades and temperatures, variety of grades, and time/room in available MTRs to get all the required data. Discussion of Irradiation behavior, Leveraging data generated by GIF countries the past 20 years, Dimensional Change Theory, behavior, analysis, turnaround, and data. Future discussions include Arrhenius approach to predict turnaround behavior for the ASME MDS requirements for all nuclear graphite.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

ASME Design Code Rule Changes for Nuclear Graphite

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler Pressure and Vessel Code (ASME BPVC) Section III, Division 5, Article HHA-3000 outlines graphite core component and graphite core assembly design guidelines. Graphite core components are defined as ?components manufactured from graphite that are installed to form a graphite core assembly within the reactor pressure vessel of a high temperature, graphite moderated fission reactor.? (p. 413) Graphites? inherent defect distributions do not allow for deterministic material reliability. Rather, graphite has variable strength distributions which change by grade. Article HHA-3000 outlines two semi-probabilistic methods, the full and simplified assessments, which set design load limit targets for each of three component structural reliability classes. The Design Task Group was officially recognized as a specialized task group within ASME November of 2023, though we?ve been collaborating since 2022. The purpose of the Design Task Group is to correct, clarify, and make HHA-3000 function as intended. The Design Task Group will sunset once we?ve achieved our objectives. The Design Task Group was specifically told to not write new Code. While there may be more precise and more accurate methods to determine reliability targets, the current methods are conservative, relatively simple to implement, and have thus far been considered satisfactory for setting design reliability targets. Much of the ground-work to write proposal files and background documents for records to make the changes needed to achieve our objective have been completed. The Design Task Group has documented much of their work through papers, presentations, and memorandums. Three memorandums in which INL team members had substantial contributions are found in the Appendices: FEA Modeling for the Baseline Program, Evaluating the Effects on Margin of Updating the Threshold and Shape Parameters in the Full Assessment, and Interpretations of the Full and Simplified Assessments in ASME BPVC. Most of the on-going work to achieve the Design Task Group?s objective will be addressing comments on existing records and moving records through the balloting process. The Design Task Group met bi-weekly mostly through the end of FY2023. Since February 2024, the Design Task Group has mostly been completed with solving and documenting the technical issues associated with the assessments. Unless new tasks are identified, the remaining work of the Design Task Group will be political and editorial.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Report on FY 2020 Testing in Support of the Development and Extension of ASME Code Rules for Grade 91

This report summarizes the FY 2020 research and activities at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in support of the ASME code rule development and code extension for Grade 91 (Gr. 91) steel. Incorporation of the Gr. 91 temperature-dependent fatigue curves in Section III Division 5 was one major task, and the associated major aspects brought up during the course of the ASME balloting process are documented in this report. Experiments and analysis continued on the development of the alternative creep-fatigue evaluation based on elastic–perfectly plastic (EPP) plus simplified model test (SMT) methodology. The focus of the study in FY 2020 was the evaluation of the hold-time effect at high cycle and low strain range region. Baseline testing in support of the evaluation of hold time effects was started and will continue in FY 2021. Major on-going experiments and activities in support of the ASME code development and extension of Gr. 91 will be completed in FY 2021.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Advancements Toward ASME Nuclear Code Case for Compact Heat Exchangers

Our research team proposes to advance the state of the ASME section III code (nuclear service) for Compact Heat Exchangers (CHX). This work will improve the technical state of CHXs and lay the foundation necessary for these heat exchangers to be certified for use in nuclear service. During the course of this work, we will advance the understanding of the performance, integrity, and lifetime of the CHXs for use in any industrial application, making their use more attractive and accessible to the industry. We will do this by developing qualification and inspection procedures that utilize Non-destructive evaluation (NDE) and advanced in-service inspection techniques, with insight from the industrial utility leader EPRI. We have enlisted colleagues at MPR Associates (MPR), an elite nuclear code consulting firm, who are experts on the ASME section III code and who, with input from members of the ASME section III committee, will direct the testing and help develop a series of documents that define the rules and regulations for use of the CHX. Colleagues at North Carolina State University (NCSU) and Oregon State University (OSU) will conduct extensive tensile, creep, and fatigue experiments on diffusion bonded samples (manufactured by US-based Vacuum Process engineering) along with modeling using the elastic perfectly plastic assumptions and comprehensive full inelastic finite element analysis (FEA). This work will allow analysis by design and confidence in the strength of different internal structures. To ensure industry acceptance and long term confidence, team members at the University of Wisconsin–Madison (UW), University of Michigan (UM), Georgia Tech (GT), and the University of Idaho (UI) will extensively test prototypic heat exchangers manufactured by US-based manufactures CompRex and Vacuum Process Engineering (VPE), a leader in the development of advanced CHX. This testing will include the use of various working fluids (salt, sodium, helium, and sCO2) to evaluate operational issues as well as structural integrity under the most severe conditions. Post-test analysis of the tested CHXs coupled with pre/in-service/post NDE (ultrasonic and radiography) led by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) will be incorporated into the development of the rules and regulations for their use in nuclear service.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Identifying Limitations of ASME Section III Division 5 For Advanced SMR Designs

This report provides an overview of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Section III, Division 5 rules for the design and construction of high temperature nuclear reactor components. The overview focuses on the application of the rules to the design of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). The discussion covers the general ASME Code rules for base metal design and construction, the rules for designing weldments, and provides an overview of environmental degradation mechanisms affecting reactor structural materials. The analysis includes historical context on the development of the ASME design approach and a description of what actions could be taken to mitigate the gaps identified in the report. The report concludes with a summary of the key gaps identified in the rules, as they apply to SMR, and a list of recommendations on how those gaps might be addressed.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Reference constitutive model for Alloy 617 and 316H stainless steel for use with the ASME Division 5 design by inelastic analysis rules

This report describes the development, calibration, and validation of an inelastic constitutive model describing the monotonic, cyclic, and creep behavior of Alloy 617 from room temperature to 983 °C . The model is intended for incorporation into a new Nonmandatory Appendix to Section III, Division 5, Subsection HB, Subpart B of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code providing guidance on developing models for use with the ASME design by inelastic analysis provisions as well as a listing of acceptable material models for each Class A material that designers can use without further validation. The report described the development of the A617 model as well as providing an updated draft appendix, ready for ASME ballot, incorporating the A617 and and the previously-developed 316H model. The development of this appendix and the related material models will promote the widespread application of the generally more efficient inelastic analysis rules rules.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Initial development of viscoplastic constitutive model of Alloy 800H in support of the use of inelastic analysis methods for ASME Section III, Division 5, Class A applications

This report describes the development of a preliminary inelastic constitutive model for the thermomechanical behavior of Alloy 800H. The objective is to develop a model suitable for incorporating into Nonmandatory Appendix Z to Section III, Division 5 of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code, which provides guidance and reference constitutive models for the ASME design by inelastic analysis rules for Class A components. The report describes the process of collecting experimental data, developing a mathematical form for the model, and training the model against the test data. The initial version of the model captures most of the relevant material deformation mechanisms, including dynamic strain aging effects. However, further development of the model form will be required to develop a final model suitable for ASME use.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Code Standard Evaluation for ASME AG-1-2019, Section FL

ASME AG-1 Section FL Deep Bed Sand Filters includes a requirement to use Special Test Sections to provide a representative assessment of the filter efficiency. The SRPPF project design basis is to test the entire filter bed (versus a representative sample) following the same basis methodology to test the existing filters at the Savannah River Site. Using a combination of: 1) the filter testing experience at SRS since the early 1970’s, 2) the methodology found in ASME AG-1 for testing high capacity HEPA filter housings and 3) requirements for stack or duct sampling systems published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Special Test Sections methodology for Deep Bed Sand (DBS) filters in ASME AG-1 Section FL has been replaced with a methodology to test the entire DBS filter system.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

ASME Code change proposal to implement new universal high temperature constitutive models for Section III, Division 5

This report completes work on a universal high temperature constitutive model suitable for use with the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Division 5 rules for the design by inelastic analysis of Class A nuclear reactor components. The goals of this work are to provide a simple model form that adequately captures the high temperature response of materials and can be applied to any future Code material. Additionally, the report describes an automated process for calibrating a model against test data. The idea is to simplify the effort required to generate a constitutive model for an arbitrary material, provided test data is available. This will accelerate the process of qualifying new Code materials in the future. In addition, the report provides calibrated models and detailed validation comparisons to test data for five currently-qualified or soon-to-be qualified materials: 316H, Grade 91, Alloy 800H, Alloy 617, and Alloy 709. The report surveys the available data for the remaining two ASME Class Materials --- 2.25Cr-1Mo and 304H --- concluding that there is enough data data to generate a model for 2.25Cr-1Mo steel provided some additional sources of non-public data can be included in the test database, but that a dedicated cyclic test campaign would be needed for 304H. Supplemental material includes the full text of an ASME Code change proposal to incorporate the models for the four currently-qualified Class A material, detailed validation comparisons to test data for the five material models, and input files for reference implementations of the constitutive models in the NEML and NEML2 modeling frameworks.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Graphite Licensing (ASME) and Testing (ASTM) Technical Assistance

DOE ART Graphite R&D program is currently involved in developing the structural code for licensing the new High Temperature Reactor (HTR) designs through the ASME Boiler Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC). The basic structural design code for graphite core components has been written, approved, and within the BPVC since 2012. However, several areas within the graphite code remain to be improved, specifically the addition of material property changes resulting from environmental degradation (neutron flux and oxidation). The incorporation of this data, which can significantly affect the graphite components and alter the structural integrity of the core during operation, is proving to be an important activity. How this data will be incorporated within the code and how it will be used for license applications will be critical to a number of HTR applicants in the future. These modifications to the code must take into account the unique irradiation and oxidation response of the wide spectrum of available nuclear graphite grades currently under consideration for HTR applications. Additionally, the ASME BPVC requires material property testing within the expected operational conditions of the HTR core including neutron radiation flux, elevated temperatures, and after chronic/acute oxidation of the graphite components. Currently, no standardized graphite testing methods are approved for these environmental conditions. New American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standardized tests for elevated temperature testing, small sample testing, and testing after oxidation must be developed to support the requirements within the ASME code.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

ASME Section III

This presentation is for ASME Section III at University of Tennessee Student Event on October 18, 2023. Includes ASME Section III - Rules for construction of nuclear facility components, including an all-inclusive term that includes material, design, fabrication, installation, examination, testing, overpressure protection, inspection, stamping, and certification, and discusses Division 1-5.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

ASME Code Activities

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is currently assessing ASME Section III, Division 5 (2017 Edition) and accompanying Code Cases for endorsement Draft Regulatory Guide (DG-1380) and draft NUREG (2245) on the endorsement of Division 5 were issued and public comment phase completed DG-1380 places conditions in the areas of general requirements, mechanical design, metallic materials allowable stresses, and graphite materials/design of Division 5 DG-1380 is a revision to Regulatory Guide 1.87, Revision 1, 1975 (which endorsed the 159X series of ASME Code Cases, with conditions) NRC staff is currently reviewing the low-temperature and elevated temperature Alloy 617 code cases for endorsement Results of the review will be incorporated into DG-1380 and changes will be announced publicly The formal endorsement of Section III, Division 5 and accompanying code cases, with conditions, will be made through Regulatory Guide 1.87, Revision 2

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

ASME, Section III, Division 5, Metallic

Presentation on American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Section III, Division 5 design rules for metallic components at the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel (BPV) III International Meeting, September 25 to 28, 2023

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

ASME – Grappling with the Concept of Component Failure

ASME concepts of component failure. Definition for failure, functionality, damage tolerance, including Magnox reactors and AGRs. How ASME is addressing damage tolerance, and Section III division 5 Design, Classification, Reliability Target for SRC-1 components, Basic analysis approach, simple assessment, and full assessments, Reference to reliability and integrity management and strategy for graphite components.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗