Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “standardized reactor design”

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.

454 records · Page 26
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Westinghouse Accident Tolerant Fuel Phase 2B with Higher Enriched and Higher Burnup Add-On Project Final Technical Report Deliverable Volume 1

The Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (Westinghouse) accident tolerant fuel (ATF) program funded by Westinghouse and the US Department of Energy (DOE) utilized chromium (Cr) coated zirconium alloy cladding with doped UO 2 (ADOPT(TM)) and uranium silicide (U 3 Si 2 ) high density/high thermal conductivity fuel for its lead test rod (LTR) program with irradiation beginning in 2019. ADOPT is a Cr 2 O 3 +Al 2 O 3 doped UO 2 pellet with increased oxidation resistance and density, and increased resistance to fission gas release. Due to the issues with U 3 Si 2 fuel reaction in pressurized water reactor (PWR) environments, uranium nitride (U 15 N) has been substituted for U 3 Si 2 as a long-term fuel option. Cr coated cladding with ADOPT fuel is the near-term Westinghouse EnCore fuel product. The long-term EnCore ® fuel product is SiGA ® SiC/SiC composite cladding with high density/high thermal conductivity UN fuel. In 2020, the higher burnup and higher enriched and (HBHE) program was integrated into the ATF program. The objective of this expanded program is to extend ATF burnups to at least 75 MWd/kgU to economically facilitate 24-month cycles in PWRs. The ATF program now includes ADOPT fuel with enrichments >5% 235 U. Over the past several years, Westinghouse has tested the Cr coated zirconium (Zr) and silicon carbide (SiC) claddings in Westinghouse Churchill autoclaves and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) reactor. Additionally, the Cr coated cladding has been tested in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and in LTR programs at the Doel 4 and Bryon 2 commercial reactors. High temperature tests at the state-of-the-art Westinghouse facilities in Churchill, PA and at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) have been carried out to determine the time and temperature limits for the Cr coated zirconium claddings. These tests indicate that Cr coated Zr cladding can take temperatures up to about 1500°C for short periods of time without becoming totally oxidized. The main issue is the formation of the Cr-Zr eutectic at 1333°C resulting in the migration of this eutectic inward with the formation of ZrCr 2 which rapidly oxidizes to ZrO 2 on the outside of the tube. The Cr coated Zr cladding also delays the bursting of the tube, reduces the burst area, and reduces hydriding and embrittlement of the Zr which is a major benefit for reducing fuel fragmentation, redistribution, and dispersal (FFRD), the major licensing issue faced by HBHE. The manufacturing parameters for the SiC have been found to have a significant effect on the corrosion rate of the SiC in light water reactor (LWR) conditions and significant improvements have been made in the yield, quality, and oxidation resistance of the SiC cladding by identifying and tightening manufacturing process parameters. Current autoclave results for SiC composite claddings indicate that a corrosion rate of fewer than 2 micrometers per year can be achieved which meets corrosion requirements under normal operating conditions. High temperature steam oxidation tests at the state-of-the-art Westinghouse facilities in Churchill, PA and at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) have been carried and determined that SiC cladding can withstand temperatures up to about 1800°C to 1900°C before excessive corrosion reactions begin, and that the SiC will not balloon and burst. ADOPT fuel pellets were incorporated into the Westinghouse ATF program because of their increased density and oxidation resistance. A topical report supporting the use of ADOPT pellets has been submitted to the NRC and will be approved shortly. ADOPT pellets have been a product in Europe for over 15 years. The additives work to make larger grain sizes which appear to reduce fission gas release during transients as well as increase the density of the pellet. Fuel rod and assembly design in preparation for the lead test rod (LTR) and lead test assembly (LTA) programs is underway as well as licensing efforts with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Finally, accident analyses coupled with economic evaluations for both operating savings as well as fuel savings have been initiated. Modular Accident Analysis Program 5 (MAAP5) calculations indicate that both Cr coated cladding and SiC composite cladding can increase the time to fuel rod loss of geometry for up to two hours longer than current Zr based cladding in a station blackout scenario. This additional time is due to the much higher oxidation resistance of the SiC and Cr coated cladding. These two hours can be used to implement additional response options instituted through the Diverse and Flexible Mitigation Capability (FLEX) program by reactor operators. Both ATF cladding options also reduce hydrogen production which dramatically reduces primary system and containment pressure and the risk of fission product release beyond containment in the unlikely event of an accident. The lower pressure in the system allows more time to feed cooling water to the core, resulting in the avoidance of fuel melting. The coping time is extended indefinitely if the modest water flow provided by FLEX continues. Experimental work on methods to rapidly fabricate SiC composite structures with high density and reduce the fabrication price of SiC fibers while maintaining a high level of performance is needed. Methods for mitigating or stopping the Cr-Zr eutectic are also needed to further improve the oxidation resistance of Cr coated Zr. Minimal (<1%) swelling of U 3 Si 2 and subsequent fission gas release has been demonstrated up to 20 MWd/kgU. Irradiation experiments with U 3 Si 2 fuel in ATR to determine these properties at 40 MWd/kgU were completed but post irradiation examinations were not done since U 3 Si 2 has been replaced by UN. UN has three issues that are being addressed. The first is increasing the oxidation resistance so that there is not excessive reaction up to ~1500°C. While UN increases the pellet density and additives to the UN postponed the temperature at which rapid oxidation occurred by ~100°C to 200°C, this is not enough, and pellet coating options are now being pursued. The second is developing a method to manufacture that does not require the multi-step process of UF 6 to UO 2 to UC to UN. Efforts are underway looking at UF 6 to UN 2 to UN and UF 6 to UF 4 to UN 2 to UN reactions. Finally, an economically acceptable process for potentially enriching the 15 N content of the nitrogen used to make UN to >95% 15N was identified though not experimentally validated. In addition to the work supported by the DOE, research and testing activities are being carried on in a world-wide effort funded by many countries such as Sweden, United Kingdom, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Japan, and France. This work is being facilitated through the Westinghouse led Collaboration for Advanced Research on Accident Tolerant Fuel (CARAT) program. Annual meetings were organized in 2018 and 2019 by Westinghouse as a venue for presentation of this work and to provide for the cross-fertilization of ideas among the many outstanding researchers in the ATF area. No meetings were held in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID-19 related restrictions on traveling and gatherings. Since SiC, coated cladding, and high-density fuel options are not currently used in the nuclear industry; support from the government and industry members is needed to further the significant effort of setting new standards. The same is true for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) which must review and approve the commercial use of these new fuels since all current regulations are oriented toward Zr/UO 2 fuel. Several meetings have been held with the NRC to generate a fast-track approach to licensing ATF using a combination of atomic modeling, in-rod sensors, and in-reactor testing. This approach was memorialized in an “Accelerated Fuel Qualification White Paper” prepared by the Accelerated Fuel Qualification Working Group lead by General Atomics.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Westinghouse Accident Tolerant Fuel Phase 2B with Higher Enriched and Higher Burnup Add-On Project Final Technical Report Deliverable Volume 2

The Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (Westinghouse) accident tolerant fuel (ATF) program funded by Westinghouse and the US Department of Energy (DOE) utilized chromium (Cr) coated zirconium alloy cladding with doped UO 2 (ADOPT(TM)) and uranium silicide (U 3 Si 2 ) high density/high thermal conductivity fuel for its lead test rod (LTR) program with irradiation beginning in 2019. ADOPT is a Cr 2 O 3 +Al 2 O 3 doped UO 2 pellet with increased oxidation resistance and density, and increased resistance to fission gas release. Due to the issues with U 3 Si 2 fuel reaction in pressurized water reactor (PWR) environments, uranium nitride (U 15 N) has been substituted for U 3 Si 2 as a long-term fuel option. Cr coated cladding with ADOPT fuel is the near-term Westinghouse EnCore ® fuel product. The long-term EnCore fuel product is SiGA ® SiC/SiC composite cladding with high density/high thermal conductivity UN fuel. In 2020, the higher burnup and higher enriched and (HBHE) program was integrated into the ATF program. The objective of this expanded program is to extend ATF burnups to at least 75 MWd/kgU to economically facilitate 24-month cycles in PWRs. The ATF program now includes ADOPT fuel with enrichments >5% 235 U. Over the past several years, Westinghouse has tested the Cr coated zirconium (Zr) and silicon carbide (SiC) claddings in Westinghouse Churchill autoclaves and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) reactor. Additionally, the Cr coated cladding has been tested in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and in LTR programs at the Doel 4 and Bryon 2 commercial reactors. High temperature tests at the state-of-the-art Westinghouse facilities in Churchill, PA and at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) have been carried out to determine the time and temperature limits for the Cr coated zirconium claddings. These tests indicate that Cr coated Zr cladding can take temperatures up to about 1500°C for short periods of time without becoming totally oxidized. The main issue is the formation of the Cr-Zr eutectic at 1333°C resulting in the migration of this eutectic inward with the formation of ZrCr 2 which rapidly oxidizes to ZrO 2 on the outside of the tube. The Cr coated Zr cladding also delays the bursting of the tube, reduces the burst area, and reduces hydriding and embrittlement of the Zr which is a major benefit for reducing fuel fragmentation, redistribution, and dispersal (FFRD), the major licensing issue faced by HBHE. The manufacturing parameters for the SiC have been found to have a significant effect on the corrosion rate of the SiC in light water reactor (LWR) conditions and significant improvements have been made in the yield, quality, and oxidation resistance of the SiC cladding by identifying and tightening manufacturing process parameters. Current autoclave results for SiC composite claddings indicate that a corrosion rate of fewer than 2 micrometers per year can be achieved which meets corrosion requirements under normal operating conditions. High temperature steam oxidation tests at the state-of-the-art Westinghouse facilities in Churchill, PA and at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) have been carried and determined that SiC cladding can withstand temperatures up to about 1800°C to 1900°C before excessive corrosion reactions begin, and that the SiC will not balloon and burst. ADOPT fuel pellets were incorporated into the Westinghouse ATF program because of their increased density and oxidation resistance. A topical report supporting the use of ADOPT pellets has been submitted to the NRC and will be approved shortly. ADOPT pellets have been a product in Europe for over 15 years. The additives work to make larger grain sizes which appear to reduce fission gas release during transients as well as increase the density of the pellet. Fuel rod and assembly design in preparation for the lead test rod (LTR) and lead test assembly (LTA) programs is underway as well as licensing efforts with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Finally, accident analyses coupled with economic evaluations for both operating savings as well as fuel savings have been initiated. Modular Accident Analysis Program 5 (MAAP5) calculations indicate that both Cr coated cladding and SiC composite cladding can increase the time to fuel rod loss of geometry for up to two hours longer than current Zr based cladding in a station blackout scenario. This additional time is due to the much higher oxidation resistance of the SiC and Cr coated cladding. These two hours can be used to implement additional response options instituted through the Diverse and Flexible Mitigation Capability (FLEX) program by reactor operators. Both ATF cladding options also reduce hydrogen production which dramatically reduces primary system and containment pressure and the risk of fission product release beyond containment in the unlikely event of an accident. The lower pressure in the system allows more time to feed cooling water to the core, resulting in the avoidance of fuel melting. The coping time is extended indefinitely if the modest water flow provided by FLEX continues. Experimental work on methods to rapidly fabricate SiC composite structures with high density and reduce the fabrication price of SiC fibers while maintaining a high level of performance is needed. Methods for mitigating or stopping the Cr-Zr eutectic are also needed to further improve the oxidation resistance of Cr coated Zr. Minimal (<1%) swelling of U 3 Si 2 and subsequent fission gas release has been demonstrated up to 20 MWd/kgU. Irradiation experiments with U 3 Si 2 fuel in ATR to determine these properties at 40 MWd/kgU were completed but post irradiation examinations were not done since U 3 Si 2 has been replaced by UN. UN has three issues that are being addressed. The first is increasing the oxidation resistance so that there is not excessive reaction up to ~1500°C. While UN increases the pellet density and additives to the UN postponed the temperature at which rapid oxidation occurred by ~100°C to 200°C, this is not enough, and pellet coating options are now being pursued. The second is developing a method to manufacture that does not require the multi-step process of UF 6 to UO 2 to UC to UN. Efforts are underway looking at UF 6 to UN 2 to UN and UF 6 to UF 4 to UN 2 to UN reactions. Finally, an economically acceptable process for potentially enriching the 15 N content of the nitrogen used to make UN to >95% 15 N was identified though not experimentally validated. In addition to the work supported by the DOE, research and testing activities are being carried on in a world-wide effort funded by many countries such as Sweden, United Kingdom, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Japan, and France. This work is being facilitated through the Westinghouse led Collaboration for Advanced Research on Accident Tolerant Fuel (CARAT) program. Annual meetings were organized in 2018 and 2019 by Westinghouse as a venue for presentation of this work and to provide for the cross-fertilization of ideas among the many outstanding researchers in the ATF area. No meetings were held in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID-19 related restrictions on traveling and gatherings. Since SiC, coated cladding, and high-density fuel options are not currently used in the nuclear industry; support from the government and industry members is needed to further the significant effort of setting new standards. The same is true for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) which must review and approve the commercial use of these new fuels since all current regulations are oriented toward Zr/UO 2 fuel. Several meetings have been held with the NRC to generate a fast-track approach to licensing ATF using a combination of atomic modeling, in-rod sensors, and in-reactor testing. This approach was memorialized in an “Accelerated Fuel Qualification White Paper” prepared by the Accelerated Fuel Qualification Working Group lead by General Atomics.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Multi-Sourced Collaboration for the Production and Refining of Rare Elements and Critical Metals (Final Technical Report)

The project objective was to develop a feasible and cost-effective method for recovering rare earth elements (REEs) and critical materials (CMs) from coal and coal byproducts, resulting in high-purity individually separated REEs and CMs. The targeted REEs included Y, Pr, Nd, Gd, Dy, and Sm, with a purity of over 99.5%, while the CMs included Co, Mn, Ga, Sr, Li, Ni, Zn, and Ge, with a purity of over 90%. The project aimed to design a prototype facility capable of producing 1-3 tonnes/day of high-purity REO mixes. The work was divided into four designated circuits: 1) REE extraction and concentration, 2) REE separation and purification, 3) RE metal production, and 4) CM production. To achieve these goals, the project involved 11 tasks, including technology reviews, research, process flow diagram development, mass balance estimation, and preliminary technical-economic analysis. The project team included researchers from the University of Kentucky, University of Alabama and Virginia Tech as well as process specialists from Argonne National Laboratory. MP Materials provided technical support regarding rare earth markets and processing while Alliance Coal performed resource assessment. The project included a market analysis for Nd/Pr, Tb, Dy, Gd, Y, Co, Mn, Li, Sr, Ga, Ni, Zn, and Ge. These analyses provided insights into the supply and demand trends as well as historic and future projections of market price relative to purity requirements for these elements. Two coal resources were selected for the project: the West Kentucky No. 13 (Baker) Seam and an undisclosed lignite resource in the Illinois coal basin. The estimated quantities of REEs in these resources were calculated based on production samples and drilling data. It was estimated that there is adequate supply for an operation producing one metric ton daily of higher purity mixed rare earth oxides (MREO) for approximately 20 years at a site located in western Kentucky. In Circuit 1, project data was obtained from a pilot heap leach and REE concentration facility. It was concluded that the existing circuit, which generated a MREO concentrate, two types of CM mixed products, and Li- and Sr-containing waters, would be suitable feed for circuits 2-4. Data from the first-of-its-kind coal coarse refuse heap leach pilot pad played a crucial role in estimating reliable elemental concentrations of the pregnant leaching solution (PLS). The average total REE concentration in the PLS was found to be 28.6 ppm. In Circuit 2, several concepts were explored including a novel process referred to as solvent-assisted chromatography (SAC). This concept involved a novel columnar reactor that incorporated multiple mixer/settlers, thereby enabling the operation of counter-flowing aqueous and organic phases. Unfortunately, due to project time constraints, a complete fundamental modeling analysis could not be completed to fully evaluate the technology. Molten salt electrowinning was considered as an alternative for circuit 3 following circuit 2 purification circuit utilizing the novel SAC process. A mass and energy balance of Nd reduction to metal in a fluoride containing molten salt electrolyte was conducted. Comparisons were made with the current state of Asian molten salt electrorefining, and potential improvements in siphoning rare earth metals (REM) from the reactor were presented. A cost estimate was performed for the production of 1 tonne per day, which yielded a total of $2.29 million for the nine electrowinning (EW) cells required. The selected option for circuits 2 and 3 was a plasma distillation process, which initially separates rare earth elements (REEs) from other elements. This is followed by selective electrowinning in various ionic liquids. The selection was made on the basis of thermodynamic modeling and experimental data previously published by a project partner. The combination offers an innovative approach to integrated refining and RE metal production. For Circuit 4, an extensive literature review was conducted for the processing of the CMs. The ultimate decision was to utilize a combined plasma and ionic liquid process as well to produce individual high-purity concentrates of Zn, Ni, Co, Mn, and Mg. A separate flowsheet for Li and Sr was recommended, which would yield carbonates of these elements. Due to the lack of suitable experimental data at this time, a process recommendation could not be provided but several methods have been proposed for consideration. Lastly, a techno-economic analysis (TEA) was conducted to assess the effectiveness of the proposed process for further investigation. The TEA results revealed a capital expense (CapEx) of $737 million and an annual operational expense (OpEx) of $220 million. Due to the selected elements, the hypothetical heap leach pad can produce 1 metric tonne per day of REO equivalent, but a conscious decision was made to only treat targeted REEs, resulting in the production of 0.4 metric tonne of REM. An estimated annual revenue of $90.87 million was projected based on standard market pricing information provided by the funding agency. During the TEA, ten different modules were evaluated for costing purposes. The precipitation circuit was identified as the largest single operational expense, followed by the Mg/Mn process due to the amount of treated metal. In terms of capital expenditures, the heap leach process incurred the highest cost, followed by the Mg/Mn process. The scalability of the plasma process is a crucial consideration since the reactors cannot be scaled beyond the largest demonstrated size due to their reliance on surface area of the slag and vapor phase. The purity estimate for the REEs are generally 98%±2% to produce a metal. The purity level being lower than the project objective was due to the lack of specific experimental data needed to tighten the tolerance of the estimates. Based on literature and previous experience, the CMs are estimated as follows; Ga (95%+, metal), Sr (95%+, carbonate), Li (95%+, carbonate), Ni (98%±2%, metal), Zn (95%+, metal sponge), Ge (95%+, metal), Co (98%±2%, metal), and Mn (98%±2%, metal).

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2020

Proposed guidance for preparing and reviewing a molten salt non-power production or utilization facility application

Development of non-power molten salt reactors (MSRs) are under consideration to further establish an MSR experience base, support the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.43(e), and provide any additional analyses needed for development of a full-scale MSR. Guidance provided in this report is based on MSRs operating with liquid fuel (i.e., fuel dissolved within a molten salt). These reactors, unless owned by the DOE or DOD, will require licensing by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. Standard review plan (SRP) guidance for large light water reactors (LWRs) is available in NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants; Light Water Reactor (LWR) Edition. However, NRC staff observed that NUREG-0800 is very cumbersome to apply to non-power reactors “because of the great differences in complexity and hazards between non-power reactors and nuclear power plants.” Therefore, a program to develop performance-based guidance applicable to non-power reactors was initiated. In 1996, NUREG-1537, Parts 1 and 2, Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors, was published. Part 1, the format and content guide, suggests a uniform format for presenting information in non-power reactor applications that is acceptable to the NRC staff, but conformance with the format and content is not required. Part 2, the SRP, ensures the quality and uniformity of the staff review of an application. Unfortunately, the application guidelines and SRP do not provide adequate guidance for all advanced non-LWR technologies and applications. This discrepancy eventually led to the 2012 development of interim staff guidance (ISG) for NUREG-1537, which includes criteria for describing and reviewing aqueous homogeneous reactors (AHRs). Specifically, NUREG-1537 ISG, 2012 expanded the original document to address three areas: 1. updated criteria for heterogeneous non-power reactors, 2. criteria for licensing AHRs, and 3. criteria for licensing a Part 50-licensed isotope production facility. In 2015, the US Department of Energy (DOE) opted to build on the AHR NUREG-1537 ISG experience by performing a gap analysis of the guidance that would be used to license a non-power MSR. MSRs represent one of the advanced non-LWR technologies selected by DOE for development through a multiyear cost share award with Southern Company Services. Under this Advanced Reactor Concepts 2015 (DOE Advanced Reactor Concepts [ARC] 15) award program, the DOE tasked Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to evaluate the guidance changes that the NRC may need to consider when licensing an MSR non-power reactor. ORNL staff, with support from Boston Government Services, LLC, focused on five system-related chapters in NUREG-1537 that were considered most relevant to inform the effort that would be required for a non-power MSR applicant. ORNL documented this review in a technical report, ORNL/TM-2018/834, Proposed Guidance for Preparing and Reviewing Molten Salt Non-Power Reactor License Applications (NUREG-1537). The report was subsequently shared with industry and the NRC. The 2018 review was limited in scope, focusing on key system chapters based on the expected significance of each chapter relative to expected differences in addressing advanced non-LWR technologies, specifically non-power MSRs, compared with heterogeneously fueled non-power reactors. In the ORNL report, proposed generic adaptations were suggested for the following NUREG-1537 chapters: Chapter 4, “Reactor Description”; Chapter 5, “Reactor Coolant Systems”; Chapter 6, “Engineered Safety Features”; Chapter 9, “Auxiliary Systems”; Chapter 11, “Radiation Protection Program and Waste Management” The inclusion of Chapter 11 in the previous review effort was intended to provide guidance for categorizing the waste-handling process for an MSR operating with homogenous fuel. The introductions from Parts 1 and 2 of the 2012 NUREG-1537 ISG provide guidance for the application and review of production facilities. After a period of operation, non-power MSRs with homogenous fuel will include gaseous and soluble fission products. The gaseous fission products will be collected and held for decay in an off-gas system. There might also be an initiative to polish or filter the soluble fission products in the fuel salt by some mechanical or chemical means. The treatment and handling of fission products in the non-power MSR fuel salt and the description of this process in the safety analysis report (SAR) must be very precise to avoid the waste treatment facility being construed as a co-located special nuclear material (SNM) fuel cycle facility (see Section 2.3 of this report). Subsequent to the release of ORNL/TM-2018/834, NRC staff expressed a desire to continue the regulatory gap analysis that was begun in that report. This would provide additional clarity and information addressed in certain sections of the original report, while also providing new guidance on certain topics not addressed in the original report. This revision would benefit the NRC staff reviewing applications involving non-power MSR designs and would help developers understand how the NRC staff might approach the review of such applications. The focus of this report is to provide infrastructure support to the NRC staff for the regulatory review of non-power MSRs.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗