DOE OSTI2017
For any technology, the pace of development is determined in part by the time and expense required to explore alternatives to the current state of the art. For example, the capabilities of software are growing exponentially in large part because the costs of experimentation are so low (e.g., a programmer can often try out a new idea in a matter of minutes). For nuclear fuels and materials, the time and cost of iterating on alternatives is extremely high, which in turn helps to explain why nuclear reactor development can be excruciatingly slow. The pace of development, however, can be accelerated in two distinct ways: (1) improvements in the productivity of our irradiation testing and post-irradiation examinations infrastructure; (2) the use of a variety of alternatives to radiological work, including physically-based models, extensive literature reviews, increased reliance on out-of-reactor testing, and evaluation of the impact of fuel system developments on reactor plant performance. Viewed in this context, a fuel development program effort consists not only of test pin fabrication, irradiation testing, and post-irradiation examinations, but also on physically-based models, out-of-reactor testing, benchmarking of models against historic fuel performance data, and literature reviews. Of course, elements of these efforts are already in place, but increased emphasis on these activities are expected to speed the fuel development effort. Quite simply, the approach calls for obtaining as much knowledge and understanding as possible using whatever means necessary while minimizing the amount of radiological work that is required. In this manner, once an irradiation test program is designed and initiated, there is not only an improved likelihood that the fuel system will behave as expected but there is also a better chance, if the testing is successful, that the fuel design will result in substantial improvements to reactor plant economics and/or safety.
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗