DOCSLIB.ORG

Nuclear Fuels and Reprocessing Technologies: a US Perspective

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nuclear Fuels and Reprocessing Technologies: a US Perspective INL/EXT-20-59106 Review – Nuclear Fuels and Reprocessing Technologies: A U.S. Perspective March 2021 Guy Fredrickson Tae-Sic Yoo DISCLAIMER This information was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness, of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. References herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. INL/EXT-20-59106 Review – Nuclear Fuels and Reprocessing Technologies: A U.S. Perspective Guy Fredrickson Tae-Sic Yoo March 2021 Idaho National Laboratory Pyrochemistry & Molten Salt Systems Department Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 http://www.inl.gov Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517 Page intentionally left blank ABSTRACT Reprocessing and/or waste management issues are of concern to the “back end” of the nuclear fuel cycle. Of course, there are a great many “nuclear fuel cycle” scenarios to consider; if not in practice, then at least in theory. The simplest conceptually is the “once through” fuel cycle in which the spent fuel is discarded. The more complex fuel cycle scenarios involve reprocessing spent nuclear fuels and a family of nuclear reactor technologies to accommodate burning and breeding for various military and commercial needs. Therefore, the selection of a specific “fuel cycle” is what ultimately imposes the engineering requirements of the reprocessing and waste management technologies. No one part is independent of the other parts in a fuel cycle flowsheet; all parts should be fully integrated. This paper presents a summary of nuclear chemistry processes, nuclear reactor technologies, associated nuclear fuel types, and the reprocessing technologies that serve the different nuclear fuel types. Comprehending how this series of topics are related to each other is a prerequisite to understanding the requirements of any reprocessing strategy. The summary materials presented here are selective, as opposed to comprehensive. More detailed information on any one subject can be found in the reference materials. iii Page intentionally left blank iv CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1 2. MATERIALS BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Mining and Extraction of Uranium and Thorium .................................................................... 5 2.2 Uranium, Lithium, Chlorine, and Nitrogen Enrichment .......................................................... 5 2.3 Hydrogen .................................................................................................................................. 7 2.4 Krypton, Xenon, and Iodine Fission Products ......................................................................... 7 2.5 Burnable Poisons/Neutron Absorbers ...................................................................................... 8 2.6 Neutron Moderators and Reflectors ......................................................................................... 9 3. NUCLEAR REACTORS .................................................................................................................. 10 4. NUCLEAR FUELS ........................................................................................................................... 13 4.1 Nuclear Fuel Taxonomy ......................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Natural Uranium Oxide Fuel .................................................................................................. 18 4.3 Low Enriched Uranium Oxide Fuel ....................................................................................... 18 4.4 Mixed Oxide Fuel .................................................................................................................. 19 4.5 Natural Uranium Metal Fuel .................................................................................................. 20 4.6 Sodium-Bonded Metallic Fuel ............................................................................................... 23 4.7 Research Reactor Dispersion Fuel ......................................................................................... 24 4.8 Coated-Particle Dispersion Fuel ............................................................................................ 26 4.9 Naval Reactor Fuel ................................................................................................................. 28 4.10 Inert Matrix Fuel .................................................................................................................... 29 4.11 Molten Salt Fuel ..................................................................................................................... 30 5. REPROCESSING ............................................................................................................................. 32 5.1 Aqueous-Based Reprocessing Technologies ......................................................................... 33 5.2 Non-aqueous Reprocessing Technologies ............................................................................. 38 5.3 ORNL MSBR Salt Processing ............................................................................................... 45 5.4 Chloride Volatility Processes ................................................................................................. 46 5.5 Fluoride Volatility Processes ................................................................................................. 46 5.6 Fluoride Salt Electrowinning (Hall-Héroult Analog) ............................................................. 47 5.7 Mercury Amalgamation Processes ......................................................................................... 48 5.8 Salt Cycle Process .................................................................................................................. 48 5.9 Salt Transport Process ............................................................................................................ 49 5.10 Two Phase Exchange Processes ............................................................................................. 49 5.11 Processes Applied to TRISO-Type Fuels .............................................................................. 50 v 5.12 Weapons Plutonium Refining ................................................................................................ 50 6. EFFECT OF REPROCESSING EFFICIENCY ................................................................................ 52 6.1 The Importance of Maximizing the Retention of Fissile Materials ....................................... 53 6.2 The Importance of Maximizing the Rejection of Fission Products........................................ 54 6.3 Remarks on the Abstracted Fuel Cycle Models ..................................................................... 56 6.4 The Considerations of Fundamental Complexities ................................................................ 57 7. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 58 8. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 59 FIGURES Figure 1. Cascade of gas centrifuges at Piketon, Ohio. DOE. ...................................................................... 6 Figure 2. Photograph of CANDU reactor fuel bundle. A typical CANDU fuel bundle is about 0.1-m-diameter and 0.5-m-length, and weighs about 24 kg. This bundle appears to contain 37 fuel elements in sequential layers of 18, 12, 6, and 1. .............................................. 18 Figure 3. Photograph of PWR fuel assembly. Typical PWR and BWR grids are square and contain 14 to 18 and 8 to 10 fuel elements per row, respectively. The square dimensions range from about 0.14 to 0.23 m, lengths from 3.9 to 4.8 m, and weights from 500 to 700 kg. Enrichment levels range up to about 5 wt% 235U. ...................................... 19 Figure 4. Photograph of BN-800 Reactor fuel assemblies, Beloyarsk Nuclear Power Station, Sverdlovsk Oblast, Russia. MOX fuel clad in stainless steel. The BN-800 reactor is an SFR. ............................................................................................................................................ 20 Figure 5. Photograph of Ohma Nuclear Power Plant fuel assembly, Aomori Prefecture, Japan. MOX fuel clad in zirconium alloy. The Ohma reactor is an ABWR. ........................................ 20 Figure 6. Photograph of typical Hanford Reactor fuel elements (single-pass-coolant reactor design). Single extruded tube of NU clad in aluminum
Load more

Recommended publications
  • WASH-1097.Pdf
    WASH 1097 UC-80 THE USE OF THORIUM IN NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS JUNE 1969 PREPARED BY Brookhaven National Laboratory AND THE Division of Reactor Development and Technology WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY BABCOCK & WILCOX GULF GENERAL ATOMIC OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $1.25 FOREWORD This report on "The Use of Thorium in Nuclear Power Reactors" was prepared under the direction of the Division of Reactor Development and Technology, U.S.A.E.C., as part of an overall assessment of the Civilian Nuclear Power Program initiated in response to a request in 1966 by the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. It represents the results of the inquiry by the Thorium Systems Task Force whose membership included representatives of Babcock & Wilcox Company, Gulf General Atomic Company, the Argonne National Laboratory, the Brookhaven National Laboratory, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, and the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. Publication of this report, which provides information basic to the AEC reactor development program, completes one phase of the evaluation effort outlined in the 1967 Supplement to the 1962 Report to the President on Civilian Nuclear Power, issued in February 1967. The 1967 Supplement outlined changes since 1962 in the technical, economic and resource picture and provided background for further study. Specifically, this report represents the consensus of the task force on the potential use of the thorium cycle and the specific thorium fueled reactor designs which have been proposed.
    [Show full text]
  • Eighth World Conference on Nondestructive Testing Huitieme Conference Moiudiale Sur Les Essais Non Destructifs
    ./ 1ÍOIS_ UJ._ EIGHTH WORLD CONFERENCE ON NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING HUITIEME CONFERENCE MOIUDIALE SUR LES ESSAIS NON DESTRUCTIFS A NONDESTRUCTIVE EXAMINATION PROGRAM FOR UNCLAD CARBON-COMPOSITE REACTOR FUEL ELEMENTS UN PROGRAMME D'KSSAIS NON DESTRUCTIFS POUR LES ELEMENTS COMBUSTIBLES DE REACTEUR NON GAINÊS EN COMPOSITE DU CARBONE FULLBRIGHT H. J. LOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY U. S. A. SUMMARY- ^ non<lestructive testing program for the examination of (U,Zr)C—C reactor fuel elements is described. RESUME :O n décrit un programme d'essais non destructifs pour examiner les elements combustibles de réacteur en (U.Zr)C-C. I. INTRODUCTION The Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory has been active for the past twenty years in the development and testing of graphitic-based high temperature reactor fuel elements. The initial involvement was in the field of nuclear propulsion systems. Project Rover began as a program to develop a nuclear-powered, hydrogen-propelled rocket engine. The target exhaust temperature of the propellant was about 2775 K. The fuel element for such an engine would have to maintain its integrity and strength at higher temperatures and would have to resist currosion by the hot hydrogen gas, which is very reactive. These constraints limited the choice of materials to a very few. Carbon melts above about 3800 K, has excellent high-tenperature strength, and is not a strong neutron absorber. It is very reactive to high temperature hydrogen. The basic fuel element foi the Rover Program became uranium-loaded graphite. The enriched uranium fuel was incorporated into the graphite matrix as uranium oxide, later as py- rolytic-carbon coated uranium dicarbide inicrospheres, and, aosf recently, as a solid solution of uranium carbide and zirconium carbide.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Nuclear Power – Science, Technology and UK
    sustainable development commission The role of nuclear power in a low carbon economy Paper 1: An introduction to nuclear power – science, technology and UK policy context An evidence-based report by the Sustainable Development Commission March 2006 Table of contents 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 3 2 ELECTRICITY GENERATION ................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Nuclear electricity generation ................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Fission – how does it work?..................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Moderator ................................................................................................................................. 5 2.4 Coolant...................................................................................................................................... 5 2.5 Radioactivity ............................................................................................................................. 6 3 THE FUEL CYCLE: FRONT END ............................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Mining and milling ................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Conversion and
    [Show full text]
  • Quantities of Fissile Materials in US and Soviet
    Quantities of Fissile Materials in --US and Soviet ~uclearWeapons Arsenals * Frank von Hippel David H. ~lbri~ht+ Barbara G. Levi PU/CEES Report No. 168 July 1986 * Also Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University . + Also Federation of American Scientists, 307 Massachusetts Ave. N.E., Washington, DC 20002. Center for Energy and Environmental Studies The Engineering Quadrangle Princeton University Princeton, NJ 08544 TABLE OF CONTENTS a I. INTRODUCTION 11. US STOCKPILE OF WEAPON-GRADE URANIUM 111. US STOCKPILE OF WEAPON-GRADE PLUTONIUM a IV. DISPOSITION OF THE US GOVERNMENT'S STOCKPILE OF NATURAL URANIUM V. SOVIET STOCKPILE OF PLUTONIUM I. INTRODUCTION --TABLE OF CONTENTS History of the Proposal to Cut Off the Production of Fissile Material for Nuclear Weapons a The Verifiability of a Fissile Cutoff The Importance of Knowing the Amounts of Fissile Materials Already in the Nuclear Arsenals 2 REFERENCES Table 1-1. The Amounts of Fissile Material in the US Weapons Stockpile and An Upper-Bound Estimate of the Amount of Separated Plutonium in the USSR I. INTRODUCTION History of the Proposal to Cut Off the Production -of Fissile Material for Nuclear Weapons Although the original nuclear weapons control proposals such as the 1946 Baruch Plan - focused on the control of nuclear weapons materials, recent arms control negotiations have focused principally on the control of long-range nuclear weapons delivery systems. This has been in part due to the shift in the focus of the nuclear arms race from the quantitative to the qualitative. In part also it resulted from the Soviet Union's reluctance to allow intrusive verification arrangements.
    [Show full text]
  • Ultra High Temperature Reactor Critical Experiment (Ucx) Safety Analysis Report
    r-- Cs ‘iA-:279 CL-I 4 FIE~ORT COLLECTION IREYRODUCTIQN COPY LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY LOS ALAMOS of the ~ NEW MEXICO University of California ULTRA HIGH TEMPERATURE REACTOR CRITICAL EXPERIMENT (UCX) SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT J— UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION CONTRACT W-7405 -ENG. 36 ,— LEGAL NO TIC E-I This report was prepared as an account of Government sponsored work. Neither the United States, nor the Commission, nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission: A. Makea any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with respect to the accu- racy, completeness, or usefulness of tbe information contatned in this report, or that the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed In this report may not Infringe privately owned rights; or B. Assumes any liabilities with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report. As used in the above, “person acttng on behalf of the Commission” includes any em- ployee or contractor of the Commission, or employee of such contractor, to the extent that such employee or contractor of the Commission, or employee of such contractor prepares, disseminates, or provides access to, any information pursuant to his employment or contract with the Commteeion, or MS employment with such contractor. Printed in USA. Price $4.00. Availablefrom the Clearinghousefor Federal Scientific and Technical Information, NationalBureau of Standards, U. S. Department of Commerce, Springfield,Virginia LA-3279 UC-80, REACTOR TECHNOLOGY TID-4500 (38thEd.) LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY LOS ALAMOS of the> NEW MEXICO University of California Report written: March 1965 Report distributed:March 31, 1965 ULTRA HIGH TEMPERATURE REACTOR CRITICAL EXPERIMENT (UCX) SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Prepared By K-Division o 9 I AESTRACT The UHTREX Critical Experiment uses the core, reflector, fuel elements, and control rod materials of UHTREX to produce data for the verification of nuclear design calculations.
    [Show full text]
  • NRC Collection of Abbreviations
    I Nuclear Regulatory Commission c ElLc LI El LIL El, EEELIILE El ClV. El El, El1 ....... I -4 PI AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following sources: 1. The NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Lower Level, Washington, DC 20555-0001 2. The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P. 0. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20402-9328 3. The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161-0002 Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publica- tions, it is not intended to be exhaustive. Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda; NRC bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investigation notices; licensee event reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensee docu- ments and correspondence. The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the Government Printing Office: formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC-sponsored conference pro- ceedings, international agreement reports, grantee reports, and NRC booklets and bro- chures. Also available are regulatory guides, NRC regulations in the Code of Federal Regula- tions, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances. Documents available from the National Technical Information Service Include NUREG-series reports and technical reports prepared by other Federal agencies and reports prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission, forerunner agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature items, such as books, journal articles, and transactions.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Preliminary Criteria for Safeguarding Advanced Nuclear Reactors
    A. NILSSON et al. IDENTIFYING PRELIMINARY CRITERIA FOR SAFEGUARDING ADVANCED NUCLEAR REACTORS A. NILSSON AN & Associates Uppsala, Sweden [email protected] C. JORANT SDRI Consulting Paris, France [email protected] A. FINAN Nuclear Innovation Alliance Cambridge, MA, USA [email protected] E. REDMOND Nuclear Energy Institute Washington, DC, USA [email protected] K. LUONGO Partnership for Global Security Washington, DC, USA [email protected] Abstract Climate change and the urgent need to reduce carbon emission globally forecast a significant rise in the interest of advanced nuclear reactors. The contributed paper presents the results of a dedicated study of proliferation resistance of the main technologies for advanced nuclear reactors. Much of the current safeguards system has been developed and implemented for the water-cooled reactors that dominate the nuclear energy landscape. Advanced nuclear reactors are distinctly different compared with light-water reactors, with the use of different coolants and a broader spectrum of fuel compositions. Some advanced reactor designs employ a fast neutron spectrum, often associated with an ability to create plutonium. The variety of advanced reactor designs and their coolants present challenges to the existing safeguards regime. Some of the designs allow for on-line fuel processing and unique refuelling schemes. These features may require updated or new tools for nuclear accountancy and control as well as built-in technological features to prevent malicious use of the facility. The paper communicates the results of an overview of the most prominent advanced nuclear reactor designs, in which their proliferation resistance is assessed in comparison with the implementation of IAEA safeguards at a light water-cooled reactor (LWR) fuelled with low enriched Uranium, as established in States with comprehensive safeguards agreements and additional protocols.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Operated by Battelle for the U.S
    PNNL-11510 UC-2050 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Operated by Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Graphite Reactor D&D Experience APR 14 1997 OSTI S.M.K. Garrett N. C. Williams February 1997 "0 Z Z T Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO1830 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY operated by BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE for the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830 ' This document was printed on recycled paper. PNNL-11510 UC-2050 U.S. Graphite Reactor D&D Experience S.M.K. Garrett N. C. Williams DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government.
    [Show full text]
  • TRANSMUTATION of AMERICIUM and CURIUM in a LANTHANIDE MATRIX COMPANY WIDE CW-123700-CONF-018 Revision 0
    Conference Paper TRANSMUTATION OF AMERICIUM AND CURIUM IN A LANTHANIDE MATRIX COMPANY WIDE CW-123700-CONF-018 Revision 0 Prepared by Rédigé par Hyland Bronwyn Reviewed by Vérifié par Edwards Geoffrey W R Approved by Approuvé par Hyland Bronwyn 2012/07/04 2012/07/04 UNRESTRICTED ILLIMITÉ Atomic Energy of Énergie Atomique du Canada Limited Canada Limitée Chalk River, Ontario Chalk River (Ontario) Canada K0J 1J0 Canada K0J 1J0 Proceedings of Global 2011 Nagoya, Japan, December 11-15, 2011 UNRESTRICTED CW-123700-CONF-018 Transmutation of Americium and Curium in a Lanthanide Matrix B. HYLAND1, E.D COLLINS2, R. J. ELLIS2, G. DEL CUL2 and M. MAGILL1 1Chalk River Laboratories, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, Canada, K0J 1J0 Tel: +1(613)584-9243 ex. 44707 , Fax: +1(613)584-8198 , Email: [email protected] 2Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge, Tennessee, U.S.A. Abstract – With world stockpiles of used nuclear fuel increasing, the long-term remediation of used fuel is a growing concern. Many of the transuranic (TRU) actinides in nuclear spent fuel produce decay heat for long durations, resulting in significant nuclear waste management challenges. Partitioning and transmutation of the spent fuel is one possibility to deal with the long-lived transuranic actinides. It is desirable to develop a partitioning and transmutation scheme that is as straightforward as possible for both the reprocessing step and the transmutation in reactor. This study looks at a reprocessing scheme that is simplified to keep the americium, curium and lanthanides together in one recycle stream. These actinides can be transmuted to fissionable isotopes and then to shorter-lived fission products in a CANDU reactor.
    [Show full text]
  • Very High Efficiency Reactor (VHER) Concepts for Electrical Power Generation and Hydrogen Production
    SANDIA REPORT SAND2003-1755 Unlimited Release Printed June, 2003 Very High Efficiency Reactor (VHER) Concepts for Electrical Power Generation and Hydrogen Production Edward J. Parma Paul S. Pickard Ahti J. Suo-Anttila Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 and Livermore, California 94550 Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. Approved for public release; further dissemination unlimited. Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Restricted Data Declassification Decisions 1946 to the Present (RDD 8)
    OFFICIAL USE ONLY RESTRICTED DATA DECLASSIFICATION DECISIONS 1946 TO THE PRESENT (RDD-8) January 1, 2002 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security Office of Classification Contains information which may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), exemption number(s) 2. Approval by the Department of Energy prior to public release is required. Reviewed by: Richard J. Lyons Date: 3/20/2002 NOTICE This document provides historical perspective on the sequence of declassification actions performed by the Department of Energy and its predecessor agencies. It is meant to convey the amount and types of information declassified over the years. Although the language of the original declassification authorities is cited verbatim as much as possible to preserve the historical intent of the declassification, THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT TO BE USED AS THE BASIS FOR DECLASSIFYING DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS without specific authorization from the Director, Information Classification and Control Policy. Classification guides designed for that specific purpose must be used. OFFICIAL USE ONLY OFFICIAL USE ONLY This page intentionally left blank OFFICIAL USE ONLY OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOREWORD This document supersedes Restricted Data Declassification Decisions - 1946 To The Present (RDD-7), January 1, 2001. This is the eighth edition of a document first published in June 1994. This latest edition includes editorial corrections to RDD-7, all declassification actions that have been made since the January 1, 2001, publication date of RDD-7 and any additional declassification actions which were subsequently discovered or confirmed. Note that the terms “declassification” or “declassification action,” as used in this document, refer to changes in classification policy which result in a specific fact or concept that was classified in the past being now unclassified.
    [Show full text]
  • Porosity Effect in the Core Thermal Hydraulics for Ultra High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor
    Porosity Effect in the Core Thermal Hydraulics for Ultra High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactor Motoo FUMIZAWA Department of Mechanical Systems Engineering, Shonan Institute of Technology 1-1-25 Tsujido-Nishikaigan, Fujisawa, Kanagawa 251-8511 Japan Yoshihiko KANEKO Department of Energy Science and Nuclear Engineering, Musashi Institute of Technology, Japan Masanori IZUMI Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Japan Abstract ∆Tsl(z): temperature difference between fuel matrix surface and fuel element surface; (oC) This study presents an experimental method of porosity evaluation and a predictive thermal-hydraulic analysis with packed spheres in a nuclear reactor core. The porosity 1. Introduction experiments were carried out in both a fully shaken state with the closest possible packing and in a state of non-vibration. The Nowadays, the very high temperature gas-cooled reactor predictive analysis considering the fixed porosity value was projects, or so called GIF (Generation IV International Forum), applied as a design condition for an Ultra High Temperature is energetically developing design studies to establish 1,000 oC Reactor Experiment (UHTREX). The thermal-hydraulic as a coolant outlet temperature and to realize hydrogen computer code was developed and identified as PEBTEMP. production [1-2]. Over an extended period, a fundamental The highest outlet coolant temperature of 1316 oC was design studies have been carried out in the field of high achieved in the case of an UHTREX at Los Alamos Scientific temperature gas-cooled reactors, or HTGR’s [3-8], which show Laboratory, which was a small scale UHTR. In the present that the coolant outlet temperature was around 900 oC. Interest study, the fuel was changed to a pebble type, a porous media.
    [Show full text]