Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “safety evaluation”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 117: Panel: Operational Excellence Through a Strong Safety Culture (R9.1)

This panel focused on the what the Department of Energy (DOE) and its contractors are doing to promote safety and excellence. The Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) is crucial, but additional support provided by the Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG), DOE, and environmental, safety, and health (ES and H) professionals in the field are equally imperative. The panelists discussed the importance of sharing lessons learned as well as are developing performance metrics to track operational and safety successes. This panel focused on current trends in building a strong operational safety culture and will include results from recent national workshops. Safety culture is the foundation of strong operational performance. Panel discussion included best practices from industry, DOE, and US NRC and also review tools being used to measure and evaluate safety culture programs. Panelists with presentations: Strong Safety Culture Promotes Operational Excellence (Kliss McNeel, Patricia Hughes); Safety Culture (Patricia Allen); DOE Safety Culture Improvement (Julie Goeckner); Supporting Safety Culture on the Front Line (Jan Preston); Interdependence of Safety Culture and Organizational Performance (Rizwan Shah)

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Lessons Learned From Ventilation and Glovebox Flooding Via Overfilling of the Wet Vacuum System in a Plutonium Facility

In the summer of 2021, operations personnel requested maintenance personnel to fill a wet vacuum (Wetvac) seal water tank in a plutonium facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). After the filling was finished, the fill valve of the Wetvac seal water tank was left open and a ‘dead-man’ valve on an isolation line failed to close properly. After a series of other failures, the water exited the glovebox and contaminated three rooms of the first floor of the facility and an underlying area in the basement. A retrospective analysis of this event determined that there was no risk of a criticality due to the inherent design features of the ventilation system. This paper will explain the driving factors behind how this event was able to happen, as well as some of the major lessons learned that can be universally applied to other nuclear facilities. One of the main causes of the event was the delegation of work to maintenance personnel that were not qualified for the work being asked of them. Additionally, there was a lack of coordination between criticality safety engineers and facility operations equipment owners regarding equipment and connections present on the seal water tanks for the Wetvac, specifically the presence of overflow drain lines. The respective criticality safety evaluation credited an overflow drain line being present on the seal water tanks that was later found to have not been present. Lastly, there are lessons to be learned regarding equipment configuration and designing systems with safety in mind.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Plan to Qualify New Fuel for the High Flux Isotope Reactor for Material Minimization

The High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is one of five high power research reactors the Office of Material Management and Minimization (M3) Program, Office of Conversion is working to convert from using highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to using low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. This effort stems from the primary objective within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to achieve permanent threat reduction by minimizing, and when possible, eliminating weapon-usable nuclear material around the world. Under M3’s Office of Conversion, the U.S. High Performance Research Reactor (USHPRR) Project is pursuing fuel qualification and licensing of the high-performance reactors to operate with LEU fuels. All high-performance reactors except HFIR will be converted to LEU monolithic uranium-molybdenum alloy fuel. HFIR will be evaluated for conversion to LEU using a uranium silicide fuel, namely, U3Si2-Al dispersion fuel.The mission of the USHPRR Project is to develop the technology needed to reduce, and eventually eliminate, worldwide use of HEU in civilian applications. The goal is to develop the technical means needed to use low enriched uranium (LEU) instead of HEU fuel in research and test reactors without significant penalties in performance, economics, or safety of the reactors. The USHPRR Project has four major elements, called Pillars: Fuel Qualification (FQ) managed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Fuel Fabrication (FF) managed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Reactor Conversion (RC) managed at Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne), and Cross-Cutting (CC) managed at Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). FQ is responsible for the qualification of the fuel type. RC is responsible for supporting reactor conversion analysis and overseeing licensing submittals leading to conversions of domestic reactors to LEU fuel. For the FQ effort, FQ (INL) worked in collaboration with RC (Argonne) and ORNL to develop the plan for the uranium silicide fuel qualification for HFIR.The resulting HFIR Fuel Qualification Plan provides the general approach for the USHPRR team to move the selected uranium silicide fuel design for HFIR conversion through qualification. Authorization and use in HFIR will be approved through the DOE’s Office of Science. Uranium silicide fuel was previously qualified in NUREG-1313 at an approximate maximum heat flux of 1.4 MW/m2 and a maximum fuel section temperature of about 130°C. In addition to the different regulator process utilized by DOE, these upper limits will be exceeded in HFIR; therefore, further testing will be necessary to ensure the fuel can meet HFIR qualification requirements. The HFIR fuel loading may exceed 4.8 gU/cm3 which was determined in the NUREG-1313 safety evaluation to be acceptable for use in non-power NRC-regulated reactors provided there exist no other safety considerations. In addition, the uranium silicide fuel will need to be qualified in a HFIR-specific design. This plan includes the currently available information from the USHPRR Project Functions and Requirements document and expands these requirements to ensure that planned tests have traceable results providing evidence that the requirements have been met. Data collection methods are discussed as well as the process to show that the requirements have been met. This document is designed to provide a pathway for researchers to obtain data necessary and at the appropriate quality level for HFIR fuel qualification.

Shokes, Tamara↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Plan to Qualify New Fuel for the High Flux Isotope Reactor for Material Minimization

The High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is one of five high power research reactors the Office of Material Management and Minimization (M3) Program, Office of Conversion is working to convert from using highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to using low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. This effort stems from the primary objective within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to achieve permanent threat reduction by minimizing, and when possible, eliminating weapon-usable nuclear material around the world. Under M3’s Office of Conversion, the U.S. High Performance Research Reactor (USHPRR) Project is pursuing fuel qualification and licensing of LEU fuels to support the high-performance reactors. All high-performance reactors except HFIR will be converted to LEU monolithic uranium-molybdenum alloy fuel. HFIR will be evaluated for conversion to LEU using a uranium silicide fuel, namely, U3Si2-Al dispersion fuel. The mission of the USHPRR Project is to develop the technology needed to reduce, and eventually eliminate, worldwide use of HEU in civilian applications. The goal is to develop the technical means needed to use low enriched uranium (LEU) instead of HEU fuel in research and test reactors without significant penalties in performance, economics, or safety of the reactors. The USHPRR Project has four major elements, called Pillars: Fuel Qualification (FQ) managed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Fuel Fabrication (FF) managed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Reactor Conversion (RC) managed at Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne), and Cross-Cutting (CC) managed at Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). FQ is responsible for the qualification of the fuel type. RC is responsible for supporting reactor conversion analysis and overseeing licensing submittals leading to conversions of domestic reactors to LEU fuel. For the FQ effort, FQ (INL) worked in collaboration with RC (Argonne) and ORNL to develop the plan for the uranium silicide fuel qualification for HFIR. The resulting HFIR Fuel Qualification Plan provides the general approach for the USHPRR team to move the selected uranium silicide fuel design for HFIR conversion through qualification. Authorization and use in HFIR will be approved through the DOE’s Office of Science. Uranium silicide fuel was previously qualified in NUREG-1313 at an approximate maximum heat flux of 1.4 MW/m2 and a maximum fuel section temperature of about 130°C. In addition to the different regulator process utilized by DOE, these upper limits will be exceeded in HFIR; therefore, further testing will be necessary to ensure the fuel can meet HFIR qualification requirements. The HFIR fuel loading may exceed 4.8 gU/cm3 which was determined in the NUREG-1313 safety evaluation to be acceptable for use in non-power NRC-licensed reactors provided there exist no other safety considerations. In addition, the uranium silicide fuel will need to be qualified in a HFIR-specific design. This plan includes the currently available information from the USHPRR Project Functions and Requirements document and expands these requirements to ensure that planned tests have traceable results providing evidence that the requirements have been met. Data collection methods are discussed as well as the process to show that the requirements have been met. This document is designed to provide a pathway for researchers to obtain data necessary and at the appropriate quality level for HFIR fuel qualification

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Development and demonstration of a methodology to evaluate high burnup fuel susceptibility to pulverization under a loss of coolant transient

For economic reasons, the US nuclear industry is renewing efforts to build a technical basis to extend rod average burnup limits above the current regulatory burnup limit of 62 GWd/MTU. The primary driver is to increase pressurized water reactor cycle lengths to 24 months, reducing the number of fresh fuel assemblies and core design constraints, thereby making core energy utilization more efficient. However, fuel pellet fragmentation and pulverization, termed high burnup fuel fragmentation (HBFF), has been observed in the high burnup (>90 GWd/MTU) Halden loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA) integral test series. The issue gained attention when fuel fragmentation and pulverization were also observed closer to the current US regulatory limit during the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) sponsored out-of-core integral test at Studsvik Nuclear in early 2011. This led to NRC concerns with potential changes to fuel and core designs relative to fuel pellet pulverization. In a letter to the NRC Commissioners, the staff specifically identified a need to “…define the boundary of safe operation for key fuel design and operating parameters,” stating that “the staff is challenged to evaluate the acceptability of future fuel design advancements and fuel utilization changes.” As such, it can be concluded that HBFF and potential dispersal into the reactor coolant system introduces additional complications in light-water reactor (LWR) fuel safety evaluations. However, it is not clear how much fuel will be susceptible to HBFF; nor has there been a methodology developed to evaluate fuel susceptibility to HBFF. To that end, this paper proposes an analysis methodology to assess fuel susceptibility to HBFF during LOCA scenarios. The work presented here uses the BISON fuel performance code to evaluate a representative pressurized water reactor fuel rod exposed to a rod average burnup of 75 GWd/MTU. Sensitivity studies investigated the impact of the peak cladding temperature, transient fission gas released, and pre-transient fission gas release on cladding ballooning and burst timing. Subsequently, a methodology to assess fuel susceptibility to HBFF will be developed based on experimental data published in the open literature. The methodology will then be demonstrated by calculating the mass of fuel susceptibility to HBFF. The BISON results conclude that increasing peak cladding temperature drastically decreased time to failure, and decreased balloon size both of which have been confirmed experimentally. Additionally, the effect of pre-transient and transient fission gas release affected cladding balloon size and burst timing. Finally, fuel susceptibility to HBFF significantly decreased as a function of peak cladding temperature.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Effect of Nuclear Data Covariances on Integral Experiment Design with Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) uses MCNP6.2 and the Whisper code for criticality safety analyses of the Hanford Tank Farm. Together the codes derive baseline upper subcritical limits (USLs) for the waste models using experimental benchmarks. Whisper returns higher USLs, i.e. , has less of a conservative penalty, when the neutronic similarity of the experimental benchmarks to the application is high. Unfortunately, few critical benchmarks have high similarity to the Hanford tanks. The waste in the tanks is highly dilute in plutonium and contains large masses of weakly neutron-absorbing elements like iron and manganese. Experimental benchmarks typically have low sensitivity to these absorbers because they are present as structural materials. Lacking similar benchmarks, new Thermal Epithermal eXperiment (TEX) configurations with high Pu content and interstitial iron absorbers have been designed for the criticality safety validation. The features of the design have been iterated upon to maximize the similarity between the experiment and different Hanford waste models. The similarity is quantified with sensitivity analysis and uncertainty quantification using the representativity coefficient, or c k . The representativity calculation requires nuclear data covariances, which may differ between nuclear data libraries and between library versions. Because of these variations, the optimal design may depend on the nuclear data covariances library. A scenario can be envisioned where an experiment is designed, and c k is maximized, with one set of covariance data. However, when the covariance data is changed, say from ENDF/B-VII.1 to ENDF/B-VIII.0, and the benchmark is used in a criticality safety evaluation, the experiment becomes suboptimal with respect to c k . In this paper, we present how the optimal design of the new TEX experiments varied depending on the nuclear data covariances used to calculate c k . We compare ENDF/B-VII.1 and ENDF/B-VIII.0, as if the library had been updated since the design of the experiment. Additionally, we use JEFF3.3 to simulate if the covariance data of a different library had been used. The results show that the covariances do have an important effect on the designs, less so for thermal systems (where the data are more consistent between evaluations) and more so for epithermal systems where more differences exist.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Nuclear Criticality Safety Pipeline Course - LLNL [Slides]

This presentation details the nuclear criticality safety pipeline course. An educational program from University of California, Berkeley. This course touches on nuclear criticality each fall semester. The curriculum instructs on the fundamentals of criticality safety and provides hands on experience with special nuclear material. This presentation covers lecture topics, project overview, and major criticality safety evaluation projects.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Applications and Performance of a Lightning Risk Assessment using Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM) Data

Lightning is a hazard globally, particularly in lesser-developed countries. Cloud-to-ground lightning strikes are a threat to human safety, motivating a desire to monitor location-based lightning risk to mitigate harm. A lightning risk assessment for human safety was created that uses a combination of probabilistic risk calculation and spatial lightning mapping data to produce a risk magnitude. This risk magnitude evolves with time and changing conditions and is compared to tolerability thresholds in order to evaluate safety. The risk assessment using lightning mapping array (LMA) flash extent density (FED) data was found to perform comparatively (with respect to issuing lightning warnings) to a more standard method of monitoring lightning safety where National Lightning Detection Network (NLDN) flashes were monitored within a 5 nautical mile radius of a location of interest. This research investigates the replacement of LMA FED with FED from the Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM) within the risk assessment framework. Using GLM FED would allow for risk to be calculated outside of LMA domains and anywhere within the GLM field of view, including areas outside of the United States (US). A few applications of the risk method with GLM FED are shown and discussed for locations both in and outside of the US. Additionally, the performance of the risk method is compared based on the type of lightning input source (LMA vs GLM). The end goal of this work is to provide forecasters and end users with a tool to help monitor lightning risk in decision support scenarios.

Kelley Murphy↗
DOE OSTI2023

Local Power Impact Experiment Design for a New Fuel Type for use in the Advanced Test Reactor

The Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), and complimentary zero-power ATR Critical (ATRC) reactor, located at Idaho National Labs (INL), are undergoing conversion from Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Low Enriched Uranium (LEU). Both have a variety of testing locations that can receive large variations in flux due to its unique serpentine design, consisting of five lobes (see Figure 1). Initial criticality and power distribution throughout the core are controlled by core-external outer shim control cylinders (OSCCs). Distinct test loops allow for testing at specific temperatures, pressures, and irradiation conditions. The ATR is one of the key nuclear engineering research and testing facilities within the DOE National Laboratory Complex, and the ATRC supports its operation [1]. Currently, the Office of Material Management and Minimization (M3) within the National Nuclear Security Administration of the DOE is working to convert the remaining research reactors, including the ATR, from 93% HEU fuel to 19.75% LEU fuel (LEU) to support non-proliferation [2]. Extensive materials testing at INL and internationally has demonstrated that a high-density uranium molybdenum (U 10Mo) alloy can meet the performance requirements of the remaining high powered research reactors. However, there are many technical challenges to address before the conversion to LEU can be successful, including the accurate characterization of the reactor core physics with LEU fuel. Reactor physics safety evaluations currently use Monte Carlo for the 21st Century (MC21), a continuous-energy Monte Carlo radiation transport code [3]. Existing MC21 models of the ATR and ATRC cores have a validation basis for use in neutronics analyses with HEU fuel. The models are used to support safety analyses that include comparisons to the safety requirements for the reactors. However, the use of the LOWE element in the ATR and ATRC is not currently covered by the current model validation basis. To deploy the new fuel type, extensive computational reactor physics support is necessary to support the use of LOWE in the ATR and ATRC. Therefore, LOWE requires a rigorous validation basis, aligned with that of HEU fuel, that takes advantage of the existing software tools and processes currently used for the ATR and ATRC. The experiment to validate of the MC21 models for determining power, the Power Impact Validation Experiment, will consist of two flux runs in the ATRC, one with fully HEU loading and one with a single LOWE element. Both flux runs will be instrumented with 20 sets of azimuthal fission wires and 3 sets of axial fission wires, as shown in Figure 4. Standard flux run methodology will be used [4]. Power Impact Validation Experiment data will be compared against MC21 calculated data, both for absolute fission rate accuracy and to determine the relative change in fission rates between the two runs. The results of the Power Impact Validation Experiment and subsequent evaluations will provide the validation basis for MC21 for use with LOWE elements. Key features of the Power Impact Validation Experiment include: (1) Two flux runs to allow for LOWE perturbed measurements to be compared to already validated measurements taken from a full core of HEU fuel, (2) Optimization of instrumentation to balance analytical needs with practical considerations (e.g., limited time window to count beta particles from fission products), and (3) Standard ATRC core loading, including both driver positions and flux traps, to minimize cost while remaining representative of typical ATR core loading.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Systems Theory Principles and Complex Systems Engineering Concepts for Protection and Resilience in Critical Infrastructure: Lessons from the Nuclear Sector

Part of the Presidential Policy Directive 21 (PPD-21) (PPD 2013) mandate includes evaluating safety, security, and safeguards (or nonproliferation) mechanisms traditionally implemented within the nuclear reactors, materials, and waste sector of critical infrastructure—including a complex, dynamic set of risks and threats within an all-hazards approach. In response, research out of Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) explores the ability of systems theory principles (hierarchy and emergence) and complex systems engineering concepts (multidomain interdependence) to better understand and address these risks and threats. Herein, this Sandia research explores the safety, safeguards, and security risks of three different nuclear sector-related activities—spent nuclear fuel transportation, small modular reactors, and portable nuclear power reactors—to investigate the complex and dynamic risk related to the PPD-21-mandated all-hazards approach. This research showed that a systems-theoretic approach can better identify inter-dependencies, conflicts, gaps, and leverage points across traditional safety, security, and safeguards hazard mitigation strategies in the nuclear reactors, materials, and waste sector. Resulting from this, mitigation strategies from applying systems theoretic principles and complex systems engineering concepts can be (1) designed to better capture interdependencies, (2) implemented to better align with real-world operational uncertainties, and (3) evaluated as a systems-level whole to better identify, characterize, and manage PPD-21's all hazards strategies.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Collaborative Host Facility for Lunar Operations

This project establishes a new collaborative simulation connectivity capability for JSC utilizing existing facilities. The principal collaborating organizations are Safety & Mission Assurance (Code NA) and Engineering Directorate (Code EA), but the capability is open for any JSC user. The core of the connectivity resides in Code ER7’s Concept Exploration Laboratory (CEL) and is part of ER7’s Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) complex. NA Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) work proactively in situ with EA and commercial crew counterparts to evaluate Safety Review Panel (SRP) protocols for landers, habitation modules, and lunar roving systems using the same tools, terrain models and data as the designers. NA software initiated under two JSC Center Innovation Fund (CIF) and Innovation Charge account (ICA) funded projects will be used to configure the CEL to function as an EA maintained facility. Collaboration via the CEL with the U.S. Space Force (USSF) provides visibility for USSF. The potential for commercial crew and vehicle suppliers will require IT security and associated security architecture to be implemented in additional CIF based proposals.

Collaborative Simulation Hosting↗
DOE OSTI2022

Is Nonflammability of Electrolyte Overrated in the Overall Safety Performance of Lithium Ion Batteries? A Sobering Revelation from a Completely Nonflammable Electrolyte

It has been widely assumed that the flammability of the liquid electrolyte is one of the most influential factors that determine the safety of lithium-ion batteries (LIBs). Following this consideration, a completely nonflammable electrolyte is designed and adopted for graphite||LiFePO 4 (Gr||LFP) batteries. Contrary to the conventional understanding, the completely nonflammable electrolyte with phosphorus-containing solvents exhibits inferior safety performance in commercial Gr||LFP batteries, in comparison to the flammable conventional LiPF 6 -organocarbonate electrolyte. Mechanistic studies identify the exothermic reactions between the electrolyte (especially the salt LiFSI) and the charged electrodes as the “culprit” behind this counterintuitive phenomenon. The discovery emphasizes the importance of reducing the electrolyte reactivity when designing safe electrolytes, as well as the necessity of evaluating safety performance of electrolytes on a battery level.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2022

A risk-informed assessment tool to support review of license amendment requests for spent nuclear fuel dry cask storage systems

We report that while risk-informed safety evaluations are common methodologies used by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), their application in the field of commercial spent nuclear fuel (SNF) dry storage has received limited attention. For instance, license amendment requests (LARs) for SNF dry cask storage systems (DCSSs) are evaluated according to U.S. NRC standard review plans (SRPs). However, risk-informed LAR review strategies could improve the understanding of critical system modifications, and lead to more predictable, efficient, and consistent LAR review processes. A methodology to develop a risk-informed LAR review tool is presented. Although focused on DCSSs, this methodology can be used to develop similar tools for a broad spectrum of safety-relevant systems. The end product (i.e., the tool) includes a tree diagram to help visualize the review risk significances assigned to a predefined set of system modifications and supporting rationale documentation. Instructions support correct tool application and provide the user with a path to incorporate currently unevaluated modifications in the tool structure. The demonstration of the methodology leads to the conclusion that risk-informed reviews of DCSS LARs are possible, although the tool precision could benefit from additional risk information. Further, the results indicate that many typical LARs involve low-risk or medium-risk modifications.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

High-Safety Electrolytes for Lithium-Ion Batteries : Is non-flammability of electrolyte overrated in the overall safety performance of lithium ion batteries?

It has been widely considered that the flammability of the liquid electrolyte is one of the most influential factors that determine the safety of lithium ion batteries (LIBs). Following this consideration, a completely non-flammable electrolyte was designed and adopted to graphite||LiFePO 4 (Gr||LFP) batteries. Contrary to the conventional understanding, the completely non-flammable electrolyte with phosphorus-containing solvents exhibits inferior safety performance in commercial Gr||LFP batteries, in comparison to the flammable conventional LiPF 6 -organocarbonate electrolyte. Mechanistic studies identify the exothermic reactions between the electrolyte (especially the flame retarding phosphate solvent) and the charged electrodes as the “culprit” behind such a counterintuitive phenomenon. The discovery emphasizes the importance of reducing the electrolyte reactivity when designing safe electrolytes, as well as the necessity of evaluating safety performances of electrolyte on a battery level.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Impact of Heaters on Molten Salt Reactors Dynamics

Recently, there has been renewed interest in the Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) concept. This interest is mainly due to its advantages over Light Water Reactors (LWRs). Among these advantages are the flexibility in the fuel choice and the possibility to burn actinides [1]. Currently, two molten research reactors are under development. A 2 MW molten salt experimental reactor has been constructed and is planned for operation in China. A 1 MW Molten Salt Research Reactor is under construction in the United States [2]. Thus, Research and Development (R&D) programs are needed for the MSR technology. Reactor dynamics studies are crucial safety evaluation studies. The development of reactor dynamics tools for MSRs started during the Molten Salt Reactor Program (MSRP) at ORNL, focusing on the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) [3]. Although various dynamic simulation tools are available, R&D efforts to develop specialized tools for MSRs are still ongoing [4]. The primary motivation for this interest is the goal of commercializing MSRs. Developing a dynamics tool for MSRs is crucial for analyzing their safety and supporting their demonstration efforts. A crucial safety issue in MSRs is ensuring that the fuel salt in the primary loop remains molten. This concern becomes particularly important when the reactor operates at lower power levels. Most chloride and fluoride salts used as fuel have a melting point of approximately 450 °C [5]. Therefore, maintaining fuel salt temperatures above this melting point is essential to prevent it from freezing. Freezing of the fuel salt can lead to volume expansion, potentially causing damage to reactor components [6]. Moreover, it can create local blockages within fuel salt channels, reducing cooling efficiency and resulting in hot spots [7]. Various methods can prevent fuel salt from freezing at low power levels. These include reducing the fuel mass flow rate in the primary loop, decreasing heat exchange between the primary and secondary loops in the reactor, and using electric fuel salt heaters. Reducing the mass flow rate of fuel salt in the primary loop can increase the fuel salt transit time in the core, enhancing heat production and increasing temperature. However, it can potentially lead to challenges. These include increasing the potential for fuel salt deposition on the reactor channel walls [8], affecting the overall heat transfer processes. Thus, alternative methods should be used [9]. This research investigates the effects of fuel salt heaters on the dynamics and stability during MSR operation. The investigation includes studying the reactor stability with the fuel salt heaters on and off. In addition, the reactor response to transients is compared with and without the operation of fuel salt heaters. These transients include reactivity insertion, primary and secondary pump failure, and heat sink temperature increase. The results of the reactivity insertion transient are presented in the summary.

73 - NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

CHALLENGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ELECTROREFINING PROCESS AT Y-12

In order to ensure future capabilities of the Y-12 site as older buildings retire, a new process was developed, the Metal Purification Process. The purpose of this new process is to provide a simpler and more efficient uranium metal purification that the previous multi-staged, complex chemical processes. The basis for this technology currently exists in the US DOE complex, but it has not been utilized on a large scale for uranium at higher enrichments. The system requires larger-geometry vessels and furnaces in order to meet the through-put requirements. The crux of the process is the electrorefining cell, consisting of several concentric liners and an unfavorable geometry cylindrical crucible. Within the crucible, a molten Li-CL-KCL-UCL3 salt electrolyte is present. ‘Dirty’ metal is placed into a loading basket and loaded into an electrorefining cell. Here, the metal reacts into the molten salt within the cell to form UCL3, while ‘clean’ metal simultaneously plates out from the salt electrolyte in the form of metal dendrites. These dendrites are then collected and removed from the cell. After removal from the cell, the dendrites are taken to a furnace to remove adhered salts. Then, the salt-free dendrites are moved to a separate furnace for consolidation into the final product form. The development of the Criticality Safety Evaluation for this complex system brought with it many NCS Challenges and lessons learned. These challenges include: design decisions for ensuring subcriticalty in the electrorefining cell during abnormal conditions, the interface of the main glovebox system with auxiliary systems such as the purification system and designated storage, implementation of mass tracking, and concerns from production and operation regarding the movement of material within the system.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Decay heat analysis for advanced reactor spent fuel transportation and storage applications

Accurate characterization of nuclide inventories and decay heat in spent nuclear fuel is critical for ensuring its safe handling, storage, transportation, and disposal. Although extensive research has been conducted on light-water reactor fuel, advanced reactors present unique challenges due to their diverse core configurations, fuel characteristics, neutron energy spectra, and burnup levels. Building upon previous efforts that developed representative reactor core models for various advanced reactor types and fuels, this study evaluates reactor-specific decay heat characteristics. The results highlight significant variations across advanced reactor types as well as across reactor designs within the same reactor type, and they provide comparison to typical commercial light-water reactor fuel. For example, thermal-spectrum reactor fuels were observed to have an approximately 100-fold decrease in decay heat over the first decade of cooling, whereas the reduction was 10-fold for fast-spectrum reactor fuels. Mass-specific decay heat at discharge can differ by three orders of magnitude among the fast and thermal reactor systems considered. Overall, for the analyzed advanced reactor fuel, fewer than 17 nuclides account for over 99% of total decay heat at 0.5 years, and that number drops to fewer than 7 nuclides at 100 years of cooling. By quantifying reactor-specific decay heat trends and nuclide contributions, this work provides a technical basis to support the development of spent fuel management strategies for advanced reactor fuels as well as safety evaluations for storage, transportation, and long-term waste disposal.

Advanced reactors↗