Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Light-Water Reactor Fuels Testing”

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.

62 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI1988

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 29, No. 3, July-September 1988]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 259 Fifteenth Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting by E. G. Silver; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 284 Reliability Technology to Improve and/or Maintain Emergency Diesel Generator Performance by S. Karimian and J. H. Taylor, 293 A Noise Diagnostics System for Operator Advice by G. Hessel, P. Liewers, P. Schumann, W. Schmitt, and F.-P. Weiss; PLANT SAFETY FEATURES: 307 A Passive Containment System for Advanced Light-Water Reactors by O. B. Falls, Jr., and F. W. Kleimola; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 318 Data Base Construction for a Computerized Radiological Risk Investigation System by L. M. Hively, J. E. Nyquist, J. L. Bledsoe, and A. L. Sjoreen, 326 Erratum to "Radiation Hormesis and Nuclear Safety," Vol. 29, No. 1; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 327 Operational Safety Experience and Passive Safety Testing at the Fast Flux Text Facility by Q. L. Baird, J. L. Rathbun, D. D. Stepnewski, R. L. Stover, and A. E. Waltar, 344 Backfilling of Independent Residual Heat Removal Systems in West Germany and Switzerland by G. Eckert and Y. Salomon, 353 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 356 Selected Safety-Related Events Compiled by G. A. Murphy, 363 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 384 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 390 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 395 Status of Power-Reactor Projects Undergoing Licensing Review Compiled by E. G. Silver, 400 Proposed Rule Changes as of Mar. 31,1988; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 283 International ENS/ANS Conference on Thermal Reactor Safety "NUCSAFE 88", 317 Northwestern University Short Course on Radiation Safety, 407 Second International Seminar on Small- and Medium-Sized Nuclear Reactors, 407 International Workshop on New Developments in Occupational Dose Control and ALARA Implementation at Nuclear Power Plants and Similar Facilities, 408 Fourth International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Reactor Thermal Hydraulics (NURETH-4), 404 The Authors.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Recommendations for an Applicant to Calculate Activity Data for Greenhouse Gases Estimates

In 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) directed the NRC staff to address climate change issues and consider the impacts of the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) in its environmental reviews for major licensing actions (NRC 2009b). To implement this direction from the Commission, the staff issued guidance in 2011 and updated guidance in 2014 in Attachment 1 to Interim Staff Guidance COL/ESP-ISG-026 (NRC 2011; NRC 2014). This guidance provides a simpler method than the method described in RG 4.2 Rev. 3, that an applicant can use to meet the plant parameter envelope (PPE) value from the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors (NR GEIS). NRC staff estimated the 97-year lifecycle GHG emissions from a reference 1000 megawatt electrical (MWe) light-water reactor (LWR) for various activities associated with construction, operation (including uranium fuel cycle), and decommissioning of nuclear power plants and presented the results in Appendix H of the NR GEIS. Appendix H of the NR GEIS includes estimates of direct emissions from construction equipment and emergency diesel engines in a nuclear facility and indirect emissions from workforce vehicular traffic, fuel transportation and the uranium fuel cycle. The NR GEIS Section 3.3 extended the estimates in Appendix H for the installation of two 1000 MWe nuclear reactors on the same site. Scaling factors were used to extrapolate the GHG emissions of a reference 1000 MWe reactor to a two-unit nuclear reactor plant (each reactor unit generating 1000 MWe). GHG emission estimates for building, operation, decommissioning and safe storage (SAFSTOR) for a two-unit nuclear reactor plant would be based on the plant’s physical size, and therefore estimates for these source categories were assumed to be twice the value of the reference 1000 MWe reactor. However, GHG emissions from the fuel cycle (including fuel transportation) were scaled upward by a factor of 3, based on plant efficiencies greater than the 80 percent assumption in Appendix H. Table 1 below shows the PPE emissions for two 1000 MWe nuclear reactors as provided in NR GEIS. The total GHG emissions for two 1000 MWe reactors were calculated as 2,534,000 metric tons (MT) of CO 2 equivalent (CO 2 (e)) based on a 97 year GHG life cycle period. The GHG emissions lifetime of 97 years for a reference nuclear reactor includes a 7-year building phase, 40 years of operation, 10 years of active decommissioning, and 40 years of SAFSTOR operations (NRC 2024). Construction equipment and vehicular traffic from workers commute would contribute to the GHG emissions during a 7-year building phase. Uranium fuel cycle, vehicular traffic, fuel and waste transportation, and testing of standby diesel generators would contribute to GHG emissions during the 40-year operations phase. While NRC’s regulations allow up to 60 years of reactor facility decommissioning, Appendix H estimated that most of the GHGs would occur over an estimated 10-year period during which to the licensee would engage in significant demolition and earth-moving activities, as discussed in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0586 (NRC 2002). Vehicular traffic by the workforce during a 40-year SAFSTOR period would additionally contribute GHG emissions. The carbon footprint for a 40-year SAFSTOR period was separately analyzed from the decommissioning activities as provided in Table YYYY-2 of the staff issued guidance in 2011 (NRC 2011).

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI1992

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 33, No. 4, October-December 1992]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 499 Technical Note: Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Examination Question Bank System, C. L Jensen and N. L. Skinner; 506 Report on the Specialists’ Meeting on Passive and Active Safety Features of Liquid-Metal Fast Breeder Reactors Organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency at Oarai Engineering Centre of Power Reactor and Nuclear Development Corporation, Japan, November 5-7,1991, S. R. Paranjpe; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 514 A Review of Hydrogen Production During Melt/Water Interaction in LWRs, D. F. Fletcher, B. D. Turland, and S. P. A. Lawrence; 535 A Review of the U 3 0 8 -Al Reaction as a Potential Heat Source in Research and Test Reactor Accidents, J. L. Snelgrove; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 543 Multilevel Interfaces for Power Plant Control Rooms II: A Preliminary Design Space, K. J. Vicente; DESIGN FEATURES: 549 Twenty-Second DOE/NRC Nuclear Air Cleaning and Treatment Conference, R. R. Bellamy, D. W. Moeller, and M. W. First; 562 Book Review: Safety Assessment of Unit 5 (WWER-440/W-213) of the Greifswald Nuclear Power Station, M. H. Fontana; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 576 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 586 Analysis of Corrective Actions Applied to Nuclear Power Plant Operations, A. E. Cross; 593 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 596 Operating U.S. Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 609 Non-Commercial Power Operating Experience; 614 World Nuclear Performance, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 623 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 635 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 639 Proposed Rule Changes as of June 30, 1992; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 513 Fourth International Conference on Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing and Waste Management RECOD '94; 585 International Topical Meeting on Advanced Reactors Safety; 622 International Workshop on Implementation of ALARA at Nuclear Power Plants; 648 Short Course on Nuclear Criticality Safety; 648 8th Topical Meeting on Problems in Reactor Physics MEPhi-VOLGA-93; 643 The Authors; 646 Reviewers of Nuclear Safety, Vol. 33

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI1994

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 35, No. 2, July-December 1994]

Nuclear Safety is a journal that covers significant issues in the field of nuclear safety. Its primary scope is safety in the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear power reactors worldwide and the research and analysis activities that promote this goal, but it also encompasses the safety aspects of the entire nuclear fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing and handling, and nuclear waste disposal, the handling of fissionable materials and radioisotopes, and the environmental effects of all these activities. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 179 Consideration of Postaccident Consequences in the Determination of Safety Objectives for Future Nuclear Power Plants in France, D. Queniart, A. Sugier, and J. Lochard; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 187 Nuclear Safety Research: The Phebus FP Severe Accident Experimental Program, P. von der Hardt, A. V. Jones, C. Lecomte, and A. Tattegrain; 205 Containment Performance Analysis of the Advanced Neutron Source Reactor at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, S. H. Kim, R. P. Taleyarkhan, and V. Georgevich; 213 Assessment of Fission Product Deposits in the Reactor Coolant System: The DEVAP Program, G. Le Marois and M. Megnin; 222 Erratum to “A Review of the Available Information on the Triggering Stage of a Steam Explosion," Vol. 35, No. 1, CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 223 Effects of Normal Aging on Calibration and Response Time of Nuclear Plant Resistance Temperature Detectors and Pressure Sensors, H. M. Hashemian; DESIGN FEATURES: 235 Defense in Depth Against the Hydrogen Risk—A European Research Program, F. Fineschi; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 246 Technical Note: A Preliminary Analysis of the Risks to Hong Kong Resulting from Potential Accidents of Daya Bay Nuclear Power Plant, Z. Shi and X. Wei; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 253 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; SPECIAL SECTION ON TMI-2 VESSEL INVESTIGATION PROJECT: 256 Three Mile Island—New Findings 15 Years After the Accident A. M. Rubin and E. Beckjord; 269 Relocation of Molten Material to the TMI-2 Lower Head, J. R. Wolf, D. W. Akers, and L. A. Neimark; 280 Insight Into the TMI-2 Core Material Relocation Through Examination of Instrument Tube Nozzles, L. A. Neimark; 288 Physical and Radiochemical Examinations of Debris from the TMI-2 Lower Head, D. W. Akers and B. K. Schuetz; 301 Results of Metallographic Examinations and Mechanical Tests of Pressure Vessel Samples from the TMI-2 Lower Head, D. R. Diercks and G. E. Korth; 313 Margin-to-Failure Calculations for the TMI-2 Vessel, J. Rempe, L. Stickler, S. Chavez, G. Thinnes, R. Witt, and M. Corradini; U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INFORMATION AND ANALYSES: 328 1993 Accident Sequence Precursor (ASP) Program Results, L. N. Vanden Heuvel, J. W. Cletcher, D. A. Copinger, J. W. Minarick, B. W. Dolan, and P. D. O’Reilley; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 339 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 345 Proposed Rule Changes as of June 30, 1994; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 234 Thirty-First Annual Meeting of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 356 1995 International Incineration Conference; 358 Fifth International Controls and Instrumentation Conference; 359 ANS International Topical Meeting on Safety of Operating Reactors; 359 Fifth International Conference on Nuclear Criticality Safety; 360 International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment Methodology and Applications; 351 The Authors; 357 Reviewers of Nuclear Safety, Vol. 35.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Risk-Informed Safety Analysis for Accident Tolerant Fuels

Accident Tolerant Fuels (ATF) are being tested by different nuclear vendors and research organization and their introduction in light water reactors fleet is planned for the second half of the 2020`s. In the framework of the US-DOE Light-Water Reactor Sustainability program, Risk-Informed Safety Analysis pathway (LWRS-RISA), research activities are being conducted at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) for developing tools and methods that can help the industry in quantifying the ATF introduction benefits. In this paper we describe the developed risk-informed methodology, the codes improvements and we present some results for selected accidental conditions. The developed methodology combines INL state-of-the-art deterministic Best Estimate tools like RELAP5-3D code, and Probabilistic Risk Analysis tools like RAVEN and SAPHIRE codes. The analyses are performed on a three-loops pressurized water reactor (PWR) simulating accidental conditions like Station Blackout and LB-LOCA and considering near-term ATF (FeCrAl and Chromium-coated clads). Finally, we show, through our methodologies, how the delta-Core Damage Frequency can be assessed.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2023

CTF Theory Manual: Version 4.4

Coolant-Boiling in Rod Arrays – Two Fluids (COBRA-TF) is a thermal/hydraulic (T/H) simulation code designed for light-water reactor (LWR) vessel analysis. It uses a two-fluid, three-field (i.e., fluid film, fluid drops, and vapor) modeling approach. Both subchannel and 3D Cartesian forms of its governing equations are available for the solution. The code was originally developed by Pacific Northwest Laboratory in 1980 and has been used and modified by several institutions over the last few decades. COBRA-TF also found use at the Pennsylvania State University (PSU) by the Reactor Dynamics and Fuel Modeling Group (RDFMG) and has been improved, updated, and subsequently rebranded as CTF. CTF was later adopted in the early 2010s by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) for use in the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors (CASL) program, which led to a significant advancement of the code’s software quality, modeling accuracy, testing systems, and capabilities for improved support in modeling common LWR nominal and transient behavior. As part of the improvement process, it was necessary to generate sufficient documentation for the public domain code which had lacked such material upon being adopted by RDFMG. This document serves as a theory manual for CTF, detailing the many two-phase heat transfer, drag, and important accident scenario models contained in the code, as well as the numerical solution process utilized. Additional documents available in the CTF documentation suite include the user manual and the verification and validation manual.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Impact of Time-Dependent Reactor and Sensor Physics on Core Power Synthesis (Rev.1)

Online synthesis of power distribution is critical in the operation and control of nuclear power reactors to ensure that the core is operating within safety margins and to provide essential knowledge associated with the burnup of the fuel. In light-water reactors, power synthesis is achieved by using some a priori knowledge of the state of the reactor core and updating based on the signals coming from in-core sensors—namely, self-powered neutron detectors (SPNDs). This report examines the effects of fuel burnup and sensor degradation on the ability to accurately synthesize the power distribution in a pressurized water reactor (PWR), considering the typical low-enriched uranium (LEU, 3%-5% enrichment) fuel cycle as well as the higher enrichment LEU+ (5%-8% enrichment) fuel cycle. Several modeling tools were used to simulate power synthesis based on the responses of SPNDs, with emitters made out of Rh or V. A representative PWR LEU core was modeled using the Polaris/Purdue Advanced Reactor Core Simulator (PARCS) approach. The Monte Carlo N-Particle Transport 6 (MCNP6) code was used as well to calculate response functions between different segments of fuel to individual SPNDs; this is a crucial parameter for power synthesis. The Oak Ridge Isotope GENeration (ORIGEN) package in the Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluation (SCALE) code was used to model the time-dependent isotopic transmutation in the SPND emitters. All these data were fed into a custom code that enacted the point-based iterative method to simulate power synthesis. Developmental work was also performed on high-fidelity SPND models in the GEometry ANd Tracking 4 (Geant4) code, which enables higher-accuracy modeling of the current responses from SPNDs. In this work, five sets of time-dependent power synthesis test cases were conducted. In these test cases, systematic changes in the input conditions enabled an analysis of the effect of (1) slightly inaccurate a priori power distribution assumptions with respect to fuel burnup, (2) highly inaccurate a priori power distribution assumptions with respect to fuel burnup (such that burnup is not included in the a priori assumed distribution), and (3) differences between Rh and V SPNDs in terms of downstream consequences of the transmutation in the emitters and the extended nature of the LEU+ fuel cycle in comparison with LEU. The authors discovered that one may permissibly have slightly inaccurate a priori assumptions of the fuel burnup (such that the level of burnup may be slightly underapproximated or overapproximated by the accumulated burnup in approximately 9.3 full power days), but to not account for burnup at all in the a priori assumptions leads to severe levels of error, approaching 25% at maximum (for LEU). The authors also discovered that V SPNDs are extraordinarily robust in both the LEU and LEU+ fuel cycles considered in this modeling work, whereas Rh SPNDs undergo significant transmutation that can result in large errors in the synthesized power distribution.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Results of the CHF-SERTTA In-Pile Transient Boiling Experiments at TREAT

To advance the current understanding of heat transfer between nuclear fuel rod cladding and the surrounding coolant under transient scenarios involving critical heat flux (CHF), the CHF-Static Environment Rodlet Transient Test Apparatus (CHFSERTTA), an in-pile experiment, was developed for and irradiated in the Transient Reactor Test (TREAT) facility at Idaho National Laboratory. The CHF-SERTTA experiment consists of a hollow, borated stainless steel rod submerged in a static water pool. The rod, heated via the (n, a) reaction in boron-10, was designed for investigating in-pile transient heat transfer between the rod surface and the coolant, avoiding the complexity of including the heat transfer between the fuel, gas gap, and cladding in typical light-water reactor (LWR) fuel rods. The instrumentation package for CHF-SERTTA focused on capturing those data that best describe the heat transfer behaviour between the rod and coolant. This paper outlines the CHFSERTTA experiment design and presents the initial results of the experiment campaign.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗