SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
This study uses the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM) to examine the critical role and future of nuclear energy in the global energy system, with a focus on the United States. We also analyzed the U.S. government’s new strategic vision for the nuclear energy sector.
GAIN Project CRADA Number NFE-21-08839, entitled “SMR Containment Cable and EPA System” was initiated by the partnership of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and Engineered Solutions Group (ESG) to test an ESG-designed Electrical Penetration Assembly and Containment Cabling System Qualified for not only SMR technologies, but also Advanced Reactors design. An Electrical Penetration Assembly (EPA) is a component used to allow electrical power and signal conductors as well as optical fiber through the nuclear reactor’s containment structure while maintaining a pressure barrier. The EPA ensures the containment's integrity both during the normal operation and also accident conditions by providing a sealed passage for power and signals. This project was undertaken to fill the equipment gap of EPA and Cabling Systems that require much more severe environmental requirements than legacy plant applications present due to their smaller containment volumes that result in high energy densities compared to legacy designs. This high energy density results in severe accident environments and also more severe normal operating conditions.This document describes cost effective approaches to qualify a unique EPA for Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technologies as legacy LWR EPA technologies will likely have inherent material performance insufficiencies. The DBA profiles for SMRs (and some Advanced Reactor Technologies) are more severe than the legacy qualification requirements making the design of the qualification testing system challenging as the temperatures and pressures can approach the limits permitted by ASME Pressure Vessel Code, as well as accident temperatures exceeding the capability of polymeric gaskets and dielectrics. Small Modular Reactors are designed to have, as the name suggests, modularity which implies sized for factory fabrication and subsequent assembly at the power plant site. SMR containment is much smaller than a legacy Light Water Reactor containment. The containment walls are likely to be comprised of stainless steel. Qualifying Electrical Penetration Assemblies (EPAs) through these steel vessels are of interest in this work. Methods are presented here that discuss critical safety and cost effectiveness for these SMR EPA’s test systems.
Droplet entrainment in steam-flow is a prominent phenomenon that needs adequate safety and risk analysis of postulated transient and accident scenarios—including experimental investigation and representative modeling and simulation (M&S)—for small modular reactor (SMR) system design and demonstration. This study identifies knowledge gaps by evaluating experimental and computational fluid dynamics modeling approaches to support early-stage reactor system design, testing, and model evaluation. Previous studies reported in the literature for steam-flow entrainment primarily focused on gigawatt capacity pressurized water reactor (PWR) systems. However, entrainment phenomena are even more prominent for PWR-type SMRs due to their more compact integrated designs, which need further research and development. To fill the research gaps, this study provides insight by specifying the phenomena of interest by leveraging the lessons learned from past research, adopting advanced M&S techniques and advanced instrumentation and control. The findings and recommendations are applicable for evaluating steam-flow entrainment models and for designing integral effect test and separate effect test facilities for gaining reactor design approvals.
Nearly 50% of the total energy consumed by the industrial sector in the United States is used to produce process steam with natural gas and coal-fired boilers1 . This project conducts a technoeconomic assessment of a NuScale Small Modular Reactor (SMR) coupled with a chemical plant as an Integrated Energy System (IES) where nuclear produces steam and electric power to meet the requirements of a large chemical plant. In a 2020 study, ORNL evaluated the feasibility of using advanced SMRs, including the NuScale design, to supply energy to the Eastman Chemical Plant. However, since that report was published, NuScale received NRC approval for its uprated 77 MWe design with 56% more power and has also introduced a high-temperature, high pressure, steam heat-augmentation system, a key focus of the new study. The new study also benefits from revised capital costs, a 10-day refueling outage time, reduced plant staffing, higher capacity factors, and a site boundary Emergency Planning Zone methodology. The study consists of a techno-economic assessment of two possible energy sources (nuclear and natural gas) in a number of steam and power generation configurations (NuScale Power Modules (NPMs), boilers and combinations of both) to satisfy the steam and power demand with the most reliable and cost competitive system. A total of 2,947.3 klb/hr of steam and 72.5 MWe of electricity are required for the demonstration case. A range of scenarios and solutions are explored, from a 12-NPM plant (3,000 MWth)—with excess capacity and redundancy, capable of supplying a significant amount of extra power to the grid—to a 4-NPM (1,000 MWth) plant—supplemented with existing boilers or grid power for redundancy. The study uses historical steam and power data from a chemical plant and examines the sensitivity to natural gas and grid power cost variations. Scenarios with up to two times gas and electricity costs were considered. Profitability in a 60-year time horizon was analyzed, consistent with NuScale’s design life specification. A steady-state site integration and reliability analysis was performed, and trade-offs were identified.
Supporting Data can be downloaded at: https://gain.inl.gov/content/uploads/4/2024/06/INL-RPT-24-77048-R1.xlsx Nuclear energy is a critical cornerstone of the current United States clean energy supply and may play a larger role in the future in support of a transition to a net-zero economy. The current fleet of nuclear reactors predominantly consists of large light-water reactors (LWRs), while many of the reactor designs under consideration are smaller and/or different technologies. Because these new designs have not yet been built, there is a high degree of uncertainty associated with their cost. This complicates energy-planning efforts because cost projections are not always standardized, consistent, and centralized in an easily accessible location. To help support energy planning in the US, this report provides advanced nuclear cost ranges using a transparent methodology along with other relevant information that can be used to help support decision making and energy planning. The purpose of this work was to conduct a methodical process for cost evaluation using only public information that was vetted with the end-goal to provide reference cost projections for nuclear energy. To provide a solid basis for these values, the approach and assumptions are explicitly laid out throughout the report allowing any user of the data to challenge or reconsider them. Because future US nuclear-reactor costs are still unknown due to little recent observed data, the report opted to compile a comprehensive list of bottom-up estimates and evaluate averages/trends within the data to identify reference ranges. This was deemed preferable to opining on the robustness or validity of one cost estimation versus another. To that end, the work evaluated thousands of lines of cost subaccounts from several bottom-up cost estimates. A wide variety of different reactor types captured in the data are of various sizes and technologies. Some of these reactors will be representative of advanced reactors under development while others will not. Thus, the results here are dependent on the data that are available and the accuracy of the estimates that are used. Each bottom-up estimate was reviewed to determine whether it was complete. Incomplete data sets were corrected to ensure an adequate basis of cross-comparison. The report is not without limitations and should be interpreted as an initial step to develop cost ranges for nuclear technology. Ultimately, future work can build upon the methodology with refined cost estimates to reduce uncertainty. US-based overnight capital cost (OCC) estimates were compiled from extensive data sets into ranges for both large and small reactor sizes for 2030. To project the cost declines over time, learning rates were sampled from literature sources. No SMRs were previously built; hence, learning rates based on bottom-up approaches (e.g., by quantifying the impact stemming from fabrication of different components, modular work, site construction, commissioning) were prioritized. For larger reactors, actual learning rates from deployments were used to project future costs (adjusted to account for standardization or lack thereof between designs). Other costs included are fixed and variable operations and maintenance costs. The final variables were capacity factors and ramp rates to support energy planning.
GAIN Project CRADA Number NFE-21-08839, entitled “SMR Containment Cable and EPA System” was initiated by the partnership of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and Engineered Solutions Group (ESG) to test an ESG-designed Electrical Penetration Assembly and Containment Cabling System Qualified for not only legacy LWR designs, but also Small Modular Reactors designs currently being designed by several different suppliers. This project was undertaken to fill the equipment gap of EPA and Cabling Systems that require much more severe environmental requirements than legacy plant applications present due to their smaller containment volumes that result in high energy densities compared to legacy designs. This high energy density results in severe accident environments and more severe normal operating conditions as well. We developed two approaches to qualify Electrical Penetration Assembly (EPA) and Containment Cabling Systems for SMRs and Advanced Reactors. We take into consideration the more severe environmental parameters found with SMR designs. The system will need to meet a qualification test program addressing wear/cyclic aging, potential radiation exposure, thermal aging, vibration aging, thermal cycling, seismic qualification, electrical fault testing (per IEEE 317) and accident simulation. The equipment must meet the requirements of 10CFR50.49, GDC 50 in 10CFR50 Appendix A, and 10CFR50 Appendix J. NRC Regulatory Guides (RGs) identify an acceptable way of meeting regulatory requirements. RGs frequently endorse a standard for meeting these requirements. Specific to this review, equipment would be qualified in accordance with the following IEEE Standards. • IEEE 317-2013 (Electrical Penetration Assemblies), which is endorsed by RG 1.63, Rev. 3, • IEEE 323-2003 and the more current IEC/IEEE 60780-323 (Environmental Qualification of 1E Equipment) which is endorsed by RG 1.89. IEEE 323-2003 is endorsed by RG 1.209, • IEEE 344-2020 (Seismic Qualification. The 2013 version endorsed by RG 1.100, Rev. 4, with exceptions), • IEEE 383-2015 (Electrical Cables) (which is endorsed by RG 1.189 Rev. 4 and the -2003 version endorsed by RG 1.211 rev. 0), • IEEE 572-2019 (Electrical Connectors and Assemblies), which is endorsed by 1.156 Rev 1, and • [IEEE 1202 (endorsed by RG 1.189) would normally be applicable but the advanced cable designs are impervious to this cable flame test.] The primary goal of such a program is to provide an EPA design that can meet the qualification requirements for all legacy light water reactor plants currently operating as well as new plant designs including light water Small Modular Reactors. Thus, these requirements are applicable to plants licensed under 10CFR50 and 10CFR52. Other reactor designs may be evaluated, and this test system and qualification method applied to those applications if the requirements would satisfy the requirements of the intended plant. A secondary benefit of this work is to document some of the history and background in these requirements as there have been recent delays in an SMR licensing process due to NRC Requests for Additional Information in this subject matter area.
Current small modular reactor (SMR) deployment use cases consider both rural and urban deployments, depending on the operational in-country needs for clean and reliable sources of energy. Many studies have been conducted analyzing security in rural and remote deployment locations, but this study looks at the physical security implications of an SMR placed in an urban environment and its uses for electricity production, district heating, and process heating. SMRs used for electricity production, district heating, and process heating may be key sources of both energy infrastructure and commercial infrastructure within a city and a State. As a result, long-term shutdowns could have a serious impact on a State’s overall energy or commercial production. Therefore, operators may consider further security applications to protect an SMR plant from physical attacks against both radiological sabotage and sabotage acts that could result in the SMR facility being offline for a significant amount of time. In this study, the team designed and analyzed a physical protection system (PPS) for securing an urban SMR facility against acts of radiological sabotage and sabotage acts that could disrupt the facility’s long-term operation. Additionally, this work analyzed the nuanced security issues related to siting an SMR near an urban environment (versus in a rural environment). The result of these analyses includes recommendations for PPSs for urban SMR facilities used for energy production, district heating, and process heating.
U.S. nuclear power facilities face increasing challenges in meeting dynamic security requirements caused by evolving and expanding threats while keeping costs reasonable to make nuclear energy competitive. In consideration of the economic viability of small modular reactor (SMR) facilities, many designers and utilities are considering a modular approach to the construction and operation of these facilities. This modular approach considers building and operating a first unit; once the first reactor is in operation, construction will begin on a second reactor. This process would allow the vendor or utility to ensure production of energy and financial income while the second reactor is under construction. This project evaluates the feasibility of modular construction in terms of physical protection and identifies several recommendations for vendors and utilities considering this approach. To conduct this evaluation, a hypothetical three-unit SMR facility was developed, a physical protection system (PPS) was considered for the design, and a hypothetical design basis threat (DBT) was used to evaluate this PPS. Multiple outsider sabotage scenarios were examined, with adversary team sizes ranging from 4-to-8 to determine security system effectiveness. The results of this work will influence PPS designs and facility designs for U.S. domestic SMRs. This work will also demonstrate how a series of experimental and modeling capabilities across the Department of Energy (DOE) complex can impact the design and completion of security-by-design (SeBD) for SMRs considering modular construction. The conclusions and recommendations in this document may be applicable to all SMR designs.
Large Load Integration Tasks: Task 1 – Workshops Support stakeholder engagement across industry to promote collaboration and identify solutions to challenges that will guide other work Task 2 – Ancillary Services Characterize different types of large loads to assess under what conditions they may be utilized to provide grid stability services Task 3 – Communications Explore the cybersecurity and communications infrastructure required to enable large loads to interface with grid operations to provide ancillary services Task 4 – Nuclear Integration Explore risks and methods for supporting large load energy needs with SMRs and incorporating them into the wider power system Task 5 – Decision Support and TA Provide support to stakeholders through the creation of planning tools and direct technical assistance.
Recently, nuclear power plant build projects in the West have run over budget due to high capital costs and schedule overruns. Compared to other sources of energy, nuclear power plants have higher capital costs. Reactors are often different at every site, resulting in a lack of standardization. Nuclear is expected to compete with other low carbon sources of energy which have lower capital costs making it essential for nuclear to develop ways of reducing costs. Strategies such as standardization, learning rates, modularization, and schedule reduction in advanced reactors can reduce nuclear costs by about 40%. Standardization as a way of cutting capital costs has been explored even in large nuclear power plants. Standardization of certain plant components can result in lower component and installation costs and higher learning from experience. Standardization can be achieved by adopting a criterion of key performance indicators and general design principles for a specific system or component such as the balance of plant. Modularization allows the construction of certain components of SMRs in a factory, which saves time, increases productivity, and encourages higher learning rates. Production learning decreases the time and the cost related to an activity. The potential for modularized components of advanced reactors to be manufactured in factories makes it conducive to achieving higher learning rates. Developing large-capacity nuclear programs through sequential builds cultivates a higher learning rate, which in effect may reduce schedule overruns. Open architecture has been identified as a way to drive standardization among advanced reactor designs and result in cost savings. Open architecture (OA) is defined as a design enabling a diverse supply chain by defining and publishing requirements of systems or equipment in functional and/or interface terms, utilizing technical standards in widespread use. Currently, the nuclear industry’s approach is to use closed architecture, making most designs proprietary. However, collaboration between various advanced reactor vendors and suppliers utilizing the concept of open architecture can result in modular and standardized architecture of subsystems or subcomponents of a nuclear power plant. Completely standardizing nuclear power plants may be impossible, however, certain common subsystems amongst the various reactor designs could be standardized and/or access a wider supply chain and leverage existing learning from other sectors. Open architecture will save time and allocate resources to the parts of the plants that have the most unique features. A key advantage of open architecture is its ability to improve production learning across advanced reactors (AR) types in the industry, by providing and utilizing the same kind of component. Sodium fast reactor (SFR), High Temperature Gas Reactor (HTGR) and Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) are the advanced reactors considered for this project. This paper aims to determine the cost savings in advanced reactor programs due to open architecture learning rate. This work is an extension of work done on light water reactor small modular reactors; the cost methodology was utilized to investigate the impact of open architecture on advanced reactors with a particular focus on sodium fast reactors. The cost data on sodium fast reactors used in the model presented the most adequate information required for the analysis.
Small pressurized water reactors (PWRs) can feature boron free operation, natural circulation mode, reduced height assemblies and/or long refueling cycles. This paper attempts to explore core design optimization for each of these design evolutions. In consequence, five core design layouts are developed incorporating boron free operation with continuous control rods insertion, natural circulation with low burnup/low power density design, natural circulation with high burnup/low power density design, forced circulation with standard core power density design, and forced circulation with high power density design. These cores’ performance is compared to a standard 4-loop PWR. The design process aims to improve the fuel cycle cost under safety constraints through core design optimization using CASMO4E/SIMULATE3 reactor physics codes and FRAPCON4.1 fuel performance assessment tool. Core modeling assumes standard 17x17 PWR fuel assemblies loaded with low enriched uranium (LEU) up to 5wt% or LEU+ (i.e., below 10wt% enrichment) pellets with gadolinium oxide (Gd2O3) as the burnable poison. Satisfactory core and fuel performances are obtained for all the designed cores under steady state and considered overpower transients. For low power density operation, long cycle lengths are achieved reaching a 2.5- and a 5-year cycles and peak rod-average burnup is pushed to 83 MWd/kgU. Other cycle lengths are maintained at 18 months. Boron free operation exhibits the ability to achieve longer cycle lengths at the cost of higher peaking factors leading to high local power and fuel temperatures which prevents sizable power uprates and is deemed uneconomical. Fuel assembly height reduction allows coolant velocity retrofit which enables higher core power density without violating structural integrity of the fuel assembly. As a result, a core power density of 123 kW/l is reached where total cladding hoop strain becomes the limiting parameter.