Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “storage, Standardized Canisters,”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2019

Initial DOE SNF Standardized Canister Storage Configuration Alternatives Study

This study looks at storage configuration alternatives for United States Department of Energy (DOE) Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Standardized Canisters loaded with DOE-owned SNF. The focus of the study is for the DOE SNF Standardized Canisters that would be packaged in the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) area at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), but its general findings are useful across the DOE Complex. The study considered storage in existing facilities, modified existing facilities, new facilities, and new modular systems. The existing INTEC facilities considered in the study include the CPP-603 Irradiated Fuel Storage Facility (IFSF), the CPP-749 Underground Fuel Storage Facility (UFSF), the CPP-666 SNF Wet Storage Basin Facility, CPP-1774 Three Mile Island (TMI) Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facility (ISFSF), and the CPP-2707 Cask Pad Facility. The new facilities considered in the study include the Foster Wheeler designed Idaho Spent Fuel (ISF) Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) and some conceptual designs. The new modular systems considered in the study include Holtec International’s HI-STAR/HI-STORM, NAC International’s MAGNASTOR/UMS/MPC and Orano TN’s MATRIX/NUHOMS. Based on considerations of various factors, including but not limited to capacity, impact to facility operations, capital costs, expenditure rate, licensing issues, agreements with the State of Idaho, and road ready conditions, new modular storage systems from commercial vendors may have clear advantages over other storage alternatives. This is further supported by recent experience with West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) storage project for High Level Waste Glass canisters.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Remaining Life Prediction of SNF Storage Canisters Exposed to CISCC Environments

• DOE Standardized SNF Storage Canisters o DOE designed standard spent nuclear fuel (SNF) storage canisters for storage of DOE SNF. o DOE canisters are significantly different from commercial MultiPurpose Canisters (MPC) in size. o MPC canisters are large, a height = 15.8 ft, OD = 68”, WT = 0.5”. o DOE canisters are small with 18” / 24” diameter, 10’ / 15’ length. • Integrity Evaluation of DOE versus MPC Canisters o Many investigations have been performed for MPC canisters. o Limit investigations were performed for DOE standard canisters. Most were done at Idaho National Lab (INL). o DOE has sponsored integrity studies to evaluate weld integrity using drop tests and FEA simulations. o No evaluation on CISCC/service life of DOE canister in literature. o MPC canister: 4 axial welds, 1 center girth weld, 2 closing welds.

ZHU, Xiankui↗
DOE OSTI2026

Flaw Tolerance Assessment for DOE Standard SNF Dry Storage Canisters - 26550

The U.S. DOE has designed four spent nuclear fuel (SNF) dry storage canisters for storing DOE standardized SNFs. The DOE standard canisters are cylindrical shells with a diameter of 24 inches (610 m) or 18 inches (457 m), a wall thickness of 0.5 inches (12.7 m) or 0.375 inches (9.53 m), and a length of 15 feet (4.57 m) or 10 feet (3.05 m). These DOE canister geometries are completely different from commercial canisters. The latter may experience chloride-induced stress cracking corrosion (CI-SCC) because they are stored near coastal regions. The former may not experience CI-SCC but face different challenges because they are stored in the SNF storage facilities. Because of large residual stresses, mechanical flaws may occur in the DOE canisters during long-distance transportation or lifting handling. To date, only limited structural integrity analyses were carried out through drop tests on the DOE canisters, but a more general flaw tolerance assessment has not been performed. Therefore, the failure assessment diagram (FAD)-based fracture mechanics method, as codified by the latest API 579-1/ASME FFS-1-2021 Edition, is adopted in this work to assess surface flaw tolerance for DOE canisters under operation loading and welding residual stresses (WRS), where the new code-recommended WRS distributions are used. To more adequately consider the transverse distribution of WRS, an equivalent WRS distribution is proposed to account for the WRS reduction with distance from the weld centerline. Moreover, the closed-form solutions of stress intensity factor K, which serves as the crack driving force during subcritical crack growth, are developed from the tabular data of the K factors provided in API 579-1/ASME FFS-1 and used to determine more accurate flaw sizes at flaw instability. Subsequently, the Level 2 assessment procedures with 12 assessment steps, as codified and detailed in API 579-1 and ASME FFS-1, are followed to assess the flaw tolerance for the surface flaws in the DOE standard canisters with consideration of normal or accident operation loads combined with WRS. The assessment results show that the four designs of DOE standard canisters can tolerate all surface flaws that meet the code permitted maximum sizes of a flaw length of 8 inches (i.e., 200 mm) and a flaw depth of 80% wall thickness. This demonstrates that all designs of DOE standard canisters are robust and reliable.

DOE standard canister↗
DOE OSTI2020

Milestone 2.8: Preliminary Radiolytic Gas Generation Measurements from Helium-Backfilled Samples

The Department of Energy (DOE) is currently managing nearly 13 metric tons of aluminum-clad spent nuclear fuel (ASNF) with the intention of extended (> 50 years) dry storage in helium-backfilled canisters. Due to in-reactor and cooling pond conditions, oxyhydroxide corrosion layers have formed on the surface of the ASNF elements. These corrosion layers are susceptible to radiolysis and the formation of molecular hydrogen gas (H 2 ) due to the fuel’s inherent radiation field. Consequently, a rigorous evaluation of the effect of helium gas on radiolytic H 2 production is necessary to support the Technical Considerations and Challenges for Extended (> 50 yrs) Dry Storage of ASNF program, especially as previous Task 2 - Oxyhydroxide Layer Radiolytic Gas Generation Resolution work demonstrated a significant effect of gas composition on the radiolytic yield (G-value) of H 2 . Here we report preliminary G-values for the radiolytic formation of H 2 from the gamma irradiation of pre-corroded aluminum alloy 1100 coupons flame sealed in helium environments. Irradiations yielded G(H 2 ) values of (5.1 ± 0.5) x 10 –4 and (9.4 ± 0.9) x 10 –4 µmol J –1 for pristine coupons, and (10.1 ± 0.4) x 10 –4 and (15.1 ± 1.2) x 10 –4 µmol J –1 for pre-corroded coupons for 0% and 50% relative humidity, respectively. These helium environment G(H 2 ) values are between 28% and 58% higher than previously reported values for argon environments. This enhancement is attributed to the significant difference in first ionization energy between helium (24.59 eV) and argon (15.76) facilitating additional processes, e.g., Penning ionization. These new preliminary helium environment G(H 2 ) values will be employed by Task 3 - Sealed and Vented System Episodic Breathing and Gas Generation Prediction to model the effect of radiolytic H 2 accumulation in helium environments to evaluate the practicality of the extended storage standard canister design.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
DOE OSTI2020

Preliminary Evaluation of Loading DOE Standard Canisters in the INL CPP-603 Irradiated Fuel Storage Facility - 20543

This paper looks at the equipment and operations necessary to load United States Department of Energy (DOE)-owned Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) into DOE Standard Canisters in the CPP-603 Irradiated Fuel Storage Facility (IFSF) in the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) area at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). Two types of fuels are looked at in this evaluation: Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) fuel (uranium-aluminide fuel with aluminum cladding) and Peach Bottom fuel (thorium-uranium carbide fuel in a graphite matrix). The fuel ready for loading would come from fuel storage canisters in the CPP-603 facility. The paper describes the facility, the fuel types, the DOE Standard Canisters, and existing equipment; lists the needed loading operations; reviews facility features and equipment to perform the operations; and then lists the decisions, analyses, designs, demonstrations, and modifications that will be needed to perform the loading of DOE-owned SNF into DOE Standard Canisters in the CPP-603 IFSF. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Preliminary Evaluation of Loading DOE Standardized Canisters in the CPP-603 Irradiated Fuel Storage Facility

This evaluation looks at the equipment and operations necessary to load United States Department of Energy (DOE) -owned Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) into DOE SNF Standardized Canisters in the CPP-603 Irradiated Fuel Storage Facility in the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) area at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). Two types of fuels are looked at in this evaluation: Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) fuel (uranium-aluminide fuel with aluminum cladding) and Peach Bottom fuel (thorium-uranium carbide fuel in a graphite matrix). The ATR fuel ready for loading would come from fuel storage canisters in the CPP-603 facility, while the Peach Bottom fuel ready for loading could come from either fuel storage canisters in the CPP-603 facility and or containers in the CPP-749 Underground Fuel Storage Facility – Generation I Vaults.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Considerations for Managing DOE Standard Canisters within an Over-canister as Part of an Integrated Waste Management System

To better enable informed decision making regarding the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management Program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring the research into a comprehensive integrated waste management system (IWMS) that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). An important aspect of the IWMS is DOE-managed SNF. DOE and its predecessor agencies have generated, transported, received, stored, and reprocessed SNF at DOE facilities nationwide, and DOE is responsible for managing the SNF currently in its possession. These fuels come from a wide range of reactor types that employ various cladding materials, fuel materials, and enrichments. To enable interim, road-ready dry storage (RRDS) of the wide variety of SNF types found in the DOE inventory, a standardized canister system (i.e., the DOE Standard Canister) was proposed. This robust, welded canister system is designed to confine radionuclides, prevent criticality by precluding content moderation, and satisfy other requirements as part of a larger storage, transportation, and disposal system. While SNF has yet to be loaded into a DOE Standard Canister, DOE Standard Canister designs were included in past storage facility and disposal facility design licensing endeavors. In a renewed effort to evaluate packaging SNF at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in a RRDS configuration, researchers are planning the RRDS Packaging Demonstration. This demonstration is supplemented by analytical structural, criticality, and material compatibility evaluations that support management of SNF in DOE Standard Canisters, taking advantage of past analysis work to the extent possible. One of the largest differences between the current Packaging Demonstration and past analytical evaluations is the inclusion of an over-canister containing multiple DOE Standard Canisters. For the Packaging Demonstration, DOE Standard Canisters loaded with SNF are planned to be placed in a larger diameter over-canister. The sealed over-canister could then be placed in a storage overpack for onsite storage, or in a transportation overpack for shipment to an offsite storage location or disposal site once one becomes available. This paper examines the relevant considerations and provides a preliminary evaluation of integrating the over-canister configuration into the storage, transportation, and disposal processes of the overall waste management system. For storage and transportation, the over-canister can be considered analogous to a multi-purpose canister (MPC) for commercial SNF. For disposal, the DOE Standard Canisters could be removed from the over-canister and placed in a co-disposal waste package with canisters containing vitrified HLW similar to configurations examined previously, or the sealed over-canisters might be capable of direct disposal in a waste package.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Considerations for Managing DOE Standard Canisters within an Over-canister as Part of an Integrated Waste Management System PPT

To better enable informed decision making regarding the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management Program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring research into a comprehensive integrated waste management system (IWMS) that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). An important aspect of the IWMS is DOE-managed Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF). DOE and its predecessor agencies have generated, transported, received, stored, and reprocessed SNF at DOE facilities nationwide, and DOE is responsible for managing the SNF currently in its possession. These fuels come from a wide range of reactor types that employ various cladding materials, fuel materials, and enrichments. To enable interim, road-ready dry storage (RRDS) of the wide variety of SNF types found in the DOE inventory, a standardized canister system (i.e., the DOE Standard Canister) was proposed for the packaging demonstration. This robust, welded canister system is designed to confine radionuclides, prevent criticality by precluding content moderation, and satisfy other requirements as part of a larger storage, transportation, and disposal system. While SNF has yet to be loaded into a DOE Standard Canister, DOE Standard Canister designs were included in past storage facility and disposal facility design licensing endeavors. In a renewed effort to evaluate packaging SNF at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in a RRDS configuration, researchers are planning the RRDS Packaging Demonstration. This demonstration is supplemented by analytical structural, criticality, and material compatibility evaluations that support management of SNF in DOE Standard Canisters, taking advantage of past analysis work to the extent possible. One of the largest differences between the current Packaging Demonstration and past analytical evaluations is the inclusion of an over-canister containing multiple DOE Standard Canisters. For the Packaging Demonstration, DOE Standard Canisters loaded with SNF are planned to be placed in a larger diameter over-canister. The sealed over-canister could then be placed in a storage overpack for onsite storage, or in a transportation overpack for shipment to an offsite storage location or disposal site once one becomes available. This paper examines the relevant considerations and provides a preliminary evaluation of integrating the over-canister configuration into the storage, transportation, and disposal processes of the overall waste management system. For storage and transportation, the over-canister can be considered analogous to a multi-purpose canister (MPC) for commercial SNF. For disposal, the DOE Standard Canisters could be removed from the over-canister and placed in a co-disposal waste package with canisters containing vitrified high-level radioactive waste (HLW) similar to configurations examined previously, or the sealed over-canisters might be capable of direct disposal in a waste package.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Criticality Analysis of FSV Spent Nuclear Fuel in the DOE Standard Canister

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for managing over 300 types of spent nuclear fuel (SNF). To manage this large variety of fuel types, DOE plans to employ standardized canisters for the transportation, long-term storage, and eventual disposal of SNF. Idaho National Laboratory is currently supporting DOE’s SNF Packaging Demonstration Project, in which Fort Saint Vrain (FSV) fuel assemblies will be loaded into a DOE Standard Canister. This paper presents criticality calculations demonstrating that all four or five FSV fuel assemblies loaded into the DOE Standard Canister will remain subcritical in any expected normal or credible abnormal conditions. Previous criticality analyses were performed for one FSV fuel assembly and 12 Peach Bottom Core 2 fuel elements loaded into a DOE Standard Canister. This paper covers the criticality analysis performed for loading both four and five FSV fuel assemblies into a DOE Standard Canister. Various intact and degraded mode configurations were modeled in conducting the criticality calculations. This analysis encompassed three different configurations: (1) a single DOE Standard Canister loaded into a concrete storage overpack, (2) seven DOE Standard Canisters loaded into a concrete storage overpack, and (3) nine DOE Standard Canisters loaded into a concrete storage overpack. The overpack dimensions were varied for each of the three configurations, and transport, storage, and disposal scenarios were analyzed for each configuration. For transport scenarios, a pair of degradation cases was analyzed. In the first case, the fuel compacts became degraded and were removed from the fuel block, then deposited at the bottom of a horizontally placed canister, thereby simulating a drop event. The canister was considered to remain intact. In the second case, the spacing between horizontally placed canisters in a nine-canister overpack was reduced such that the canisters were piled on top of each other, simulating a drop event. For this case, no degradation of the canister internals or fuel was considered. For storage scenarios, the water moderator location in the system was varied to enable identification of the most reactive configurations. Dry and wet conditions were analyzed for the fuel materials, canister, and overpack. For disposal scenarios, two degradation cases were analyzed. In the first, the stainless-steel internals of the canister degraded to either hematite or goethite under both dry and wet conditions. In the second case, degraded FSV fuel formed a uranium-water slurry that filled the coolant/void holes. None of the cases presented exceeded the application specific upper subcritical limit.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Modeling of ATR fuel in DOE Standard Canisters with Helium Backfilled Condition

Road-ready and final disposition packaging configurations for the advanced test reactor (ATR) fuel dictates storage within helium backfilled sealed DOE standard canisters. These sealed canisters are intended for extened (>50 year) dry storage). The typical packaging configuration for the 15-foot DOE canisters places 10 ATR elements within a Type 1a basket, and three baskets are loaded within each DOE canister. During in-reactor operations and cooling pond storage conditions, oxyhydroxide layers form on the surface of the aluminum clad fuel. These layers produce hydrogen gas over time due to the fuel’s radiation field. As part of the packing procedure, the ATR fuel should be dried to remove any residual physio-/chemi- sorbed water from the surface. As testing to the effectiveness of the drying procedure is still underway, this modeling will include results at fully saturated and fully dried conditions. In previous modeling efforts, the G-value for the production of hydrogen from the oxyhydroxide layers was assumed to be in argon environments as measured by Task 2 - Oxyhydroxide Layer Radiolytic Gas Generation Resolution. Previous experimental testing showed differences in the hydrogen generated based on the gaseous environment. In the associated experimental work, Task 2 - Oxyhydroxide Layer Radiolytic Gas Generation Resolution, additional tests were completed in a helium environment, and updated G-values for the radiolytic production of hydrogen from the oxyhydroxide layers were provided. These values are 28% and 58% higher than values for argon. In addition, a change to the modeling of the oxyhydroxide radiolysis has been made from previous reports. This change assumes the dependency of the dose rate on the overall reaction rate is applied to the total weight of the sample, rather than to just the weight of the oxyhydroxide layer. This decreases the dependency of the radiolytic reaction on the thickness of the oxyhydroxide layer. For a nominal scenario of stored ATR fuel, assuming the chemi-/physio- sorbed water have been fully removed, the internal canister pressure increases to 1.61 atm over a 50 year period, with a hydrogen mole percentage of 21%. As in previous modeling, any oxygen present is in negligible amounts (<1 ppt). If a small amount residual air is present, nitric acid can form up to 1300 ppm. For a scenario with high fuel decay heat, the model shows internal pressure increasing to 2.1 atm, with 39.3 mole percentage of hydrogen. In a scenario where significant chemi-/physio- sorbed water is present within the corrosion layer, the nominal scenario shows a pressure increase to 2.54 atm, with 21.1 mole percent hydrogen. The high decay heat case shows a pressure increase to 3.18 atm with 39.9 mole percent hydrogen.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Oxygen Limit for Flammability of a Gas Mixture of Helium – Hydrogen – Oxygen in the U.S. Department of Energy Standard Canister

The radiolytic breakdown of residual free, physisorbed, and chemisorbed waters is anticipated in the sealed dry storage of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), releasing H 2 gas into the initial cover gas of helium. For aluminum-clad SNF (ASNF) in particular, the expected total hydrogen in the canister is enough to dominate the cover gas mixture if fully released, and based on experimental rates of H 2 generation, H 2 percentages exceeding the lower flammability limit appear likely. However, no evidence of radiolytic generation of O 2 has been observed to date, so the potential for flammability is averted due to the lack O 2 . Lack of oxygen has been credited for avoiding flammability in some existing storage and transportation approaches for SNF and other waste. This report reviews literature on flammability limits with a focus on the limiting oxygen concentration to provide technical underpinnings to refine a flammability criterion for gas mixtures of helium, hydrogen, and oxygen where the oxygen is expected to be the limiting species. While there is general consensus on H 2 flammability limits at standard temperature and pressure, the decay heat and gas generation within ASNF sealed dry storage canisters could push them to elevated temperatures and pressures, so the goal is to identify an oxygen threshold that will bound the behavior over the temperature and pressure range of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Standard Canister. The information reviewed in this document supports the criterion that the oxygen concentration in a He-H 2 -O 2 mixture should be less than 1.5% to avoid flammability at temperatures and pressures relevant to sealed dry storage of ASNF in the DOE Standard Canister, i.e., up to 343°C (650°F) and 500 psig, respectively. Note that while data covering the full range of temperature at atmospheric pressure and nearly the full range of pressure at room temperature were available, data for the combined effects was available only at moderate temperatures and pressures; the recommended 1.5% O 2 threshold is based on the breadth of available data reported here and apparent trends therein.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

DOE Standard Canister Loading Methodology Poster

Over 250 different types of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) are managed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The current configuration of SNF at INL is not transportable off-site. In the Yucca Mountain Repository License Application, the SNF was to be loaded into DOE Standard Canisters which are capable of storage, transportation, and eventual disposal using the proper overpacks. The DOE Standard Canister will allow INL to place the SNF in a Road-Ready configuration in preparation for transportation off-site. The focus of this work is development of a general loading methodology for the DOE Standard Canister. This methodology is to be general enough that it will apply to all SNF to be loaded into the DOE Standard Canister. The main sections of the methodology to be outlined are prerequisites before loading (including any issues with materials such as inserts or baskets), loading of SNF, and canister closure and quality assurance (including welding and inspection). Each subsection will analyze and provide the bases for each step.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Modeling Summary of ASNF in DOE Sealed Standard Canisters

A pathway for road-ready and final disposition packaging configurations for the aluminum-clad spent nuclear fuel (ANSF) fuel dictates storage within helium backfilled sealed DOE standard canisters. The typical packaging configuration for the 15-foot DOE canisters places 10 advance test reactor (ATR) elements within a Type 1a basket, and three baskets are loaded within each DOE canister. During in-reactor operations and cooling pond storage conditions, oxyhydroxide layers form on the surface of the aluminum clad fuel. These layers produce hydrogen gas over time due to the fuel’s radiation field. As part of the packing procedure, the ATR fuel should be dried to remove any residual physio-/chemi- sorbed water bound to the surface. The results of this modeling will include results at fully saturated and fully dried conditions. In addition, fuels that are currently stored at the Savannah River Site were also studied for their potential for hydrogen and pressure build up. These two additional fuels modeled were the Missouri University Research Reactor (MURR) fuel, which is packaged in the same configuration as the ATR, but with a 10-foot-tall DOE standard canister. This was selected due to its relatively high decay heat compared to other DOE-managed ASNF. The second additional fuel studied with the modeling effort was the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) fuel. This fuel is modeled as two separate DOE canisters with the inner and outer annulus split for storage. The HFIR was selected for study due to its high aluminum cladding surface area. In the associated experimental work, Task 2 - Oxyhydroxide Layer Radiolytic Gas Generation Resolution, additional tests were completed in a helium environment, and updated G-values for the radiolytic production of hydrogen from the oxyhydroxide layers were provided. These values were 2.92 ×10 -4 µmol/J at 50% relative humidity and 4.12 ×10 -4 µmol/J at 100% relative humidity. These values are lower than the value for Argon that was used in prior modeling results. In addition, prior modeling results have been completed with the G-value applied to just the mass of the corrosion layer, and this has been updated to apply the G-value for hydrogen generation to the full mass of the fuel. These two effects combine to show much smaller pressure and hydrogen build up for the sealed canister model. For a nominal scenario of stored ATR fuel, after 50 years the model results give a 1.36 atm total pressure, 7% mole percent hydrogen, for the upper decay heat, 1.51 atm total pressure, 16% mole percent hydrogen, and for upper decay heat with undried fuel 2.6 atm total pressure, 15% mole percent hydrogen. For the MURR nominal case, the model results give 1.34 atm and 6% hydrogen, for upper decay heat this gives 1.41 atm total pressure with 10.8 % hydrogen, and for upper decay heat with undried fuel, this gives 2.38 atm total pressure with 9.9% hydrogen. The nominal scenario for HFIR fuel gives 1.39 atm total pressure with 9.9% hydrogen, the upper decay heat case gives 1.43 atm with 12.1% hydrogen, and the upper decay heat with undried fuel gives 2.17 atm total pressure with 11.9% hydrogen. These results confirm the ATR scenario bounds the other intact ASNF modeled here. No case modeled yields significant oxygen, and the lower decay heat cases for all fuels modeled have hydrogen concentrations that are under the 4% flammability limit after 50 years of storage. In addition, the modeled pressures for all cases are all significantly below the 500-psi limit for the DOE standard sealed canister.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Review and Summary of Oxide Thickness Data for Aluminum-Clad Spent Nuclear Fuel

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) owns a large inventory of aluminum-clad spent nuclear fuel (ASNF) in interim storage pending ultimate disposition, with more being generated by currently operating research reactors. Dry storage in sealed DOE Standard Canisters is being investigated as an approach for long-term interim storage and/or disposition in a repository for ASNF. A primary challenge for ASNF storage is the presence of aluminum (oxy)hydroxide layers formed on the cladding surfaces during water exposure in the reactor and in wet storage, which forms a reservoir of chemisorbed water not readily removed at low (<100°C) drying temperatures. Free, physisorbed, and chemisorbed water are all susceptible to radiolytic breakdown under irradiation and can release hydrogen gas. Identifying the likely range of (oxy)hydroxide loadings on ASNF that may be placed in dry storage will help to ensure that the impact of the (oxy)hydroxide is adequately accounted for while avoiding over conservatism and enable mitigation strategies to be implemented where needed. The current report summarizes information on (oxy)hydroxide thicknesses and characteristics from the literature and from recent measurements taken in the present research campaign. In general, corrosion studies have indicated that the corrosion and oxide buildup on aluminum are affected by numerous conditions, including pH, temperature and heat flux, coolant flowrates, irradiation (in-reactor vs. unirradiated tests), duration of water exposure, and the amount of oxide already on the surface. Some of these factors are interrelated (e.g., the local temperature, heat flux, and coolant flowrate). Observations of the impact of irradiation (in-reactor versus ex-reactor measurements) on corrosion and oxide thickness are mixed, but multiple studies indicate that there is a significant difference between in-reactor and ex-reactor corrosion kinetics, even when other operating conditions such as pH, flowrate, heat flux, etc., simulate those in a reactor.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Modeling Radiolysis and Chemical Reactions during Dry Storage of Aluminum-clad Spent Nuclear Fuel

After aluminum-clad spent nuclear fuel (ASNF) is removed from the reactor, it is initially stored in spent fuel pools, which are specially designed water-filled basins that provide temporary cooling to reduce the temperature of the fuel assemblies and provide radiation shielding. ASNF continues to generate heat due to the radioactive decay of elements within the fuel, which persists for many years post-shutdown as the residual radioactive products decay into more stable elements. During the wet storage period, an oxyhydroxide layer composed of boehmite/bayerite forms on the surfaces of the aluminum cladding from exposure to water in the pools. Road-ready packaging for long-term disposition of the ASNF involves dry storage in helium backfilled DOE standard canisters (DSCs). When the ASNF is removed from water storage and dried, most of the water is removed, but some physisorbed and chemisorbed water remains in the oxyhydroxide layers. This residual water can produce hydrogen when exposed to radiation from the ASNF during dry storage. Predicting hydrogen accumulation over time in the DSCs is critical for long-term storage considerations. Previous modeling efforts have developed coupled computational fluid dynamics (CFD)-chemical models to simulate temperature, pressure, and gas phase concentrations within the DSCs. These models use the thermal field predicted by CFD as input to a radiolysis model for the gas phase and the surface oxyhydroxide layer chemistry. Given the long storage period of the DSCs and the impracticality of long-term experiments, a simulation-based approach is necessary to assess chemical evolution within the canisters. This study advances the development of a modeling framework designed to simulate the chemical evolution of spent fuel canisters. Both thermal and radiation-driven reactions are considered, with radiation kinetics quantified using G-values. Sensitivity analysis identifies key parameters influencing species composition. Reaction pathway diagrams offer insight into dominant species formation routes, enabling more effective comparisons between model predictions and experimental observations, particularly regarding the production of hydrogen. Results show that the model predicts significant hydrogen gas production with minimal oxygen generation, primarily due to hydrogen formation via boehmite pathways. These findings underscore the importance of accurately characterizing surface-bound species and radiolysis kinetics. A deeper understanding of these mechanisms is critical for evaluating the long-term safety of nuclear waste storage.

12 - MGMT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE WASTE↗
DOE OSTI2020

Chemical Modeling of ATR Fuel in DOE Standard Canisters with Borated Stainless Steel Corrosion

Road-ready and final disposition packaging configurations for the ATR fuel dictates storage within helium backfilled sealed DOE standard canisters. The packaging configuration for the DOE canisters places 10 ATR elements within a Type 1a basket, and three baskets are loaded within each DOE canister. In order to provide a criticality control mechanism, these stainless baskets are proposed to be built with 1-2 weight percentage of boron. This report seeks to identify effects of corrosion of this basket material over time. The primary reaction found through surveying literature was the oxidation of the iron in steel by water to produce some hydrogen. This reaction was built into the previous chemical model of the DOE canister to assess additional hydrogen and pressure build up over time. Literature for non-borated stainless steel, and carbon steel has shown that irradiation increases the rate of corrosion, and it is assumed a similar effect would occur with borated stainless steel. Due to the wide range of results in literature, and the variation of the corrosion with boron content, a wide range of corrosion rates was tested in the model from 80 nm/yr up to 1800 nm/yr.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Modeling DOE Standard Canister Configurations with Updated Surface Chemistry

Road-ready and final disposition packaging configurations for the advanced test reactor (ATR) fuel currently specifies storage within helium backfilled DOE sealed standard canisters. The aluminum cladding of the ATR fuel contains an oxyhydroxide layer of boehmite/bayerite that generates hydrogen when subjected to irradiation. Understanding the effect of this hydrogen buildup over time to important for long term storage considerations. Previous modeling efforts have built a coupled CFD-chemical model to simulate the temperature gas phase concentrations within the DOE sealed standard canisters. These models have coupled the temperature conditions to both the gas phase radiolysis chemistry and the surface chemistry associated with the oxyhydroxide layer. Continued experimental work has identified trends for aluminum surrogate samples with oxyhydroxide layers for tests done at higher dose rates. At low initial doses a fast generation rate of hydrogen occurs which starts to roll over to a lower generation rate as the total dose applied in increased. A previous study created a small-scale chemical model was built to replicate a mini-canister surrogate system at SRNL as well as for the smaller capsule tests performed at INL. The previous iteration of the model utilized step function for its G-values for the hydrogen generation over a 200-year period. This model makes an update to the surface chemistry to account for theorized surface chemistry reactions allowing for oxygen to remain bounded to the oxyhydroxide layer. As additional experiments continue, the kinetic fits may be adjusted to adapt to new data. Three canister configurations are modeled – the base 18-inch, 15-foot DOR standard canister with 30 ATR fuel elements, an 18-inch, 10-foot DOE standard canister with 32 ATR fuel elements and a 24-inch, 10-foot DOE standard canister with 40 ATR fuel elements. In previous reports, the primary sensitivity of the canister conditions was identified as the decay heat of the fuel and the dried condition of the fuel. Only these parameters are studied in the report. For the nominal case with dried fuel, the hydrogen generation is only about 2%, so it is even less than the flammability limit if it were exposed to oxygen. For the densely packed 18-inch case the total hydrogen concentration is only around 4% with the nominal decay heat. For the densely packed 24-inch case the total hydrogen concentration is only 2.5%, roughly 20% higher than the original packing design, and still under flammability conditions if exposed to oxygen.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗