DOCSLIB.ORG

Advanced Fuel Technologies at General Atomics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Advanced Fuel Technologies at General Atomics NEA/NSC/DOC(2013)9 Advanced fuel technologies at General Atomics Christina A. Back General Atomic (GA), US General Atomics (GA) has made significant contributions since its founding in the 1950s to develop nuclear power for peaceful means. With the conception and construction of the TRIGA reactors and research on TRISO particles, GA has long recognised the importance of “accident-tolerant” materials. Before the accident at Fukushima Daiichi, GA had already initiated work on silicon carbide (SiC) and SiC-related technologies for application in nuclear reactors. At that time, the work was initiated in support of the GA advanced gas-cooled fast reactor concept called the Energy Multiplier Module, EM2. This work continues, however, the reasons that make SiC materials attractive for fast reactor concepts also make them attractive for advanced light water reactors. These include superior performance over zircaloy for high-temperature strength, especially above 1 500°C, and significantly reduced hydrogen production in accident scenarios. The current focus on “accident-tolerant” components is to develop cladding made of silicon carbide fiber and silicon carbide matrix, SiC-SiC composites. The goal for this work is to produce a cladding that provides strength and impermeability to meet reactor performance and safety requirements. To date, GA has examined the trade-offs between processing time and infiltration uniformity to reduce fabrication time, fabricated cylindrical prototypes, and refined material properties for fracture toughness, impermeability, and thermal conductivity. Generally, the GA programme is developing innovative fuel elements that employ both high density uranium-bearing fuels that enable longer lifetime with higher burn-up, and claddings that are more resistant to neutron damage. In addition to fabrication, significant effort is devoted to measuring the critical parameters, such as thermal conductivity, mechanical strength and component performance at reactor-relevant operational conditions, using a mix of commercial equipment, customised in-house test rigs, and specialised fixtures. Furthermore, GA strives to iteratively refine models and simulations with benchtop experimental data to accelerate process development and optimise component design. Throughout the programme, GA maintains active collaborations with industry, universities, and national laboratories. This work has been supported by General Atomics internal funding. 34 INCREASED ACCIDENT TOLERANCE OF FUELS FOR LIGHT WATER REACTORS, © OECD 2013 Advanced Fuel Technologies at General Atomics By Dr. Christina A. Back Presented at OECD/NEA Workshop on Accident Tolerant Fuels of LWRs Paris, France 10 December 2012 OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 1 SiC Composite Clad for Light Water Reactors Can Make a Major Improvement in Safety • Zr + 2H2O è ZrO2 + 2H2 + 595 kJ/g-mole è • SiC + 4H2O SiO2 + CO2 + 4H2 + 264 kJ/g-mole Fukushima Daiichi 2.0 Zircaloy 100%)consumed " Eliminate hydrogen explosions 1.5 9.5 9.5 Zircaloy SiC-SiC 1400oC mm mm clad clad rod surface 2 o 1100 C 0.57 mm 1.0 1.0 mm 8.19 7.5 mm mm generated/m 0.5 2 o 1400 C UO2 UO2 H 3 o m 1100 C SiC _ <1%)consumed 0.0 β 0 1 2 /SiC β reaction)time)(days) SiC ZIRCALOY OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 2 β-SiC Composite (SiCβ/SiCβ) Is an Attractive Material for Nuclear Applications β-phase (diamond) compared to α-phase (hexagonal) SiC •! Much better resistance to irradiation damage •! Higher strength in irradiated material at high temps (>1200oC) •! Better corrosion resistance crystalline SiCβ fiber pyrocarbon interface SiCβ matrix infiltration SiCβ/SiCβ component a,b c Properties Zircaloy-4 SiCβ/SiCβ Density @ 25oC, g/cc 6.56 2.8 – 3.0 Design tensile stress @316oC, MPa ~450 120-250 Usable tensile strength above 800oC, MPa None 120-250* Irradiated fracture toughness @316oC, Mpa-m0.5 < 45 25-37 Reaction rate with air at 1200oC, mm/s0.5 0.45 0.0026 o 0.5 Reaction rate with H2O at 1200 C, mm/s 5.9 0.005 Thermal absorptions per source neutron, barns/n 7.21E-04 3.27E-04 DPA limit ~10 > 40 Unirradiated thermal cond. at 316oC, W/m-K 18 ┴ 25 a - F Azzarto, JNM (1969) OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF b – E Ibrahim, JNM (1984) 3 c – Y Katoh, JNM (2007) SiC-SiC Improves LWR Safety Through High Temperature Strength •! CVD SiC, stoichiometric SiC fiber, and SiC-SiC composites can hold fission gas pressure beyond 1500°C and shape beyond 2000oC •! Zircaloy shows ~90% drop in strength at 800°C SiC-SiC composites Both Zircaloy and SiCβ/SiCβ meet design condition maintain mechanical properties at high temperatures SiCβ-SiCβ •! Strength •! Stiffness •! Toughness Geelhood, et al., PNNL-17700 (2008) Zircaloy-4 Gulden, J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. (1969) Katoh, et al., J. Nuc. Mat. (2010) Hironaka, et al., J. Nuc. Mat. (2002) Hasegawa, et al., J. Nuc. Mat. (2000) Snead, et al., J. Nuc. Mat. (2007) OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 4 GA has a 40 Year History of Nuclear Fuel Development with Emphasis on Use of SiC for "Accident-Tolerance" •! Improving Nuclear Fuel Clad via Silicon Carbide Composite (SiCβ/SiCβ) •! Developing SiCβ/SiCβ clad fuel rod for a new reactor concept, EM2 TRISO fuel •! Making substantial investment in people & equipment to develop SiCβ/ SiCβ fab processes EM2 SiC/SiC fabrication •! Vested interest in LWR fuel supply fuel development lab – mining, U3O8 supply and UF6 conversion Rio Grande Resources Heathgate Resources Nuclear Fuel Services EM2 reactor U.S.A and Canada Australia OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 5 GA Sol-Gel Fabrication Laboratory Produces High-density Uranium Fuels Sol-gel column drying calcining sintering UC pellets gel UC kernels UN kernels Sol-Gel particles with carbon - Materials achieve highly uniform composition - Kernel size and morphology can be controlled OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 6 GA SiCβ/SiCβ Development Addresses All Aspects of Fuel Cladding Fabrication GA SiC lab End plug fabrication Composite tubes Joint sample Monolith fragment Infiltration Prototypes High strength joint is β-SiC OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 7 Many Resources Are Used to Measure Critical Parameters Commercial analysis equipment Custom test rigs Load Thermal conductivity End plug push-out test assembly Specialized fixtures Iosipescu mechanical testing OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 8 Advanced Reactor Concepts Pose Research Challenges in Cladding Development and Testing EM2 reactor Challenges: example •! Survive high dpa •! Achieve high thermal conductivity •! Retain structural integrity with joints •! Withstand fuel swelling and thermo-chemical interactions Vented composite endcap •! Coated 10um fibers in EM2 bundle • Bundle ! GA modeling capabilities assembly accelerate process Core development OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 9 Development of SiC-SiC Composites Is GA’s Primary Focus for Accident Tolerant Fuel Work •! Design to provide strength, impermeability stress –! Meet performance and safety requirements •! Research to accelerate SiC-SiC fabrication time –! Reduce fabrication cost –! Achieve high density for improved material properties –! Model fabrication to aid process optimization •! Research to produce irradiation resistant joints –! Ensure joint material is compatible with the parent composite material –! Improve irradiation resistance, thermal expansion, relative density, mechanical properties, etc •! Measure and characterize materials and parts OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 10 CVI Processing Parameters Are Being Optimized for Composite Fabrication •! Diffusion of MTS between fibers –! Affected by sample geometry, depletion, and spatial variation •! Trade-off between processing time and uniformity 3 Start of Process 2.5 Mass gain 2 1.5 30% fiber 1 35% fiber 0.5 Normalized mass andrate Normalized rate 0 Start Normalized Infiltration time → End End of Process OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 11 Cylindrical Prototypes Have Been Infiltrated and Polished Bi-axial braid Fibers inside tow 5 µm 1/2 foot Polished Tube OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 12 GA Experiments Show Interfaces Have Strong Effect on Thermal Conductivity •! Multi-layer interface showed lower thermal conductivity compared to thin or regular pyrolytic carbon interface –! Normalized to density, multi-layer conductivity is ~24% lower than the regular interface; the thin interface is ~9% higher •! Density differences do not account for the effect 25 Regular Mul4-layer Thin-layer 20 15 10 Conducvity (W/m-K) 5 0 processingSlow-Fast 1 processingSlow-Slow 2 OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 13 GA Makes Robust Joints With Polymer-derived β-SiC Material •! Larger crystal size undergo fewer irradiation induced structural changes and amorphization than finer crystal structures •! XRD analysis and peak broadening evaluation Scherrer: D=λ/(βcosθ) D=Crystal grain size λ=wavelength of radiation β=integral breadth of peak –! Control of crystal size ~10 nm at TB to ~100 nm at TC –! Tyranno SA3 SiC fibers Davg~100-200nm exhibit good irradiation performance 100 nm grain size is targeted for nuclear applications OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 14 The Strength of Polymer-derived Joints Can Be Enhanced by Improving Joint Density Base polymer 10 µm Slurry 50 µm • Use of polymer alone leads to high porosity and low joint strength • Addition of SiC powder decreases porosity, crack nucleation sites OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 15 GA is Drawing from Industry, Academia and National Labs to Meet the Technological Challenges • University of California, Berkeley – Use of Focused Ion Beam and Transmission Electron Microscopy techniques to study matrix cracking • San Diego State University - SiC joining through spark plasmas sintering • Matech – SBIR involvement to perform characterization of fibers • University of California at San Diego – Development of fatigue testing • Brookhaven National Laboratory - 3-D X-ray tomography of SiC OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 16 Contact Information Christina A. Back [email protected] (858) 455-2025 This work supported by General Atomics internal funding OECD/NEA Workshop on ATF 17 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Comparison of Advanced Nuclear Technologies
    A COMPARISON OF ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES Andrew C. Kadak, Ph.D MARCH 2017 B | CHAPTER NAME ABOUT THE CENTER ON GLOBAL ENERGY POLICY The Center on Global Energy Policy provides independent, balanced, data-driven analysis to help policymakers navigate the complex world of energy. We approach energy as an economic, security, and environmental concern. And we draw on the resources of a world-class institution, faculty with real-world experience, and a location in the world’s finance and media capital. Visit us at energypolicy.columbia.edu facebook.com/ColumbiaUEnergy twitter.com/ColumbiaUEnergy ABOUT THE SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS SIPA’s mission is to empower people to serve the global public interest. Our goal is to foster economic growth, sustainable development, social progress, and democratic governance by educating public policy professionals, producing policy-related research, and conveying the results to the world. Based in New York City, with a student body that is 50 percent international and educational partners in cities around the world, SIPA is the most global of public policy schools. For more information, please visit www.sipa.columbia.edu A COMPARISON OF ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES Andrew C. Kadak, Ph.D* MARCH 2017 *Andrew C. Kadak is the former president of Yankee Atomic Electric Company and professor of the practice at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He continues to consult on nuclear operations, advanced nuclear power plants, and policy and regulatory matters in the United States. He also serves on senior nuclear safety oversight boards in China. He is a graduate of MIT from the Nuclear Science and Engineering Department.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Small and Medium Sized Reactor Designs
    STATUS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM SIZED REACTOR DESIGNS A Supplement to the IAEA Advanced Reactors Information System (ARIS) http://aris.iaea.org @ September 2012 STATUS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM SIZED REACTOR DESIGNS A Supplement to the IAEA Advanced Reactors Information System (ARIS) http://aris.iaea.org FOREWORD There is renewed interest in Member States grids and lower rates of increase in demand. in the development and application of small They are designed with modular technology, and medium sized reactors (SMRs) having an pursuing economies of series production, factory equivalent electric power of less than 700 MW(e) fabrication and short construction times. The or even less than 300 MW(e). At present, most projected timelines of readiness for deployment new nuclear power plants under construction of SMR designs generally range from the present or in operation are large, evolutionary designs to 2025–2030. with power levels of up to 1700 MW(e), The objective of this booklet is to provide building on proven systems while incorporating Member States, including those considering technological advances. The considerable initiating a nuclear power programme and those development work on small to medium sized already having practical experience in nuclear designs generally aims to provide increased power, with a brief introduction to the IAEA benefits in the areas of safety and security, non- Advanced Reactors Information System (ARIS) proliferation, waste management, and resource by presenting a balanced and objective overview utilization and economy, as well as to offer a of the status of SMR designs. variety of energy products and flexibility in This report is intended as a supplementary design, siting and fuel cycle options.
    [Show full text]
  • “Advanced” Isn't Always Better
    SERIES TITLE OPTIONAL “Advanced” Isn’t Always Better Assessing the Safety, Security, and Environmental Impacts of Non-Light-Water Nuclear Reactors “Advanced” Isn’t Always Better Assessing the Safety, Security, and Environmental Impacts of Non-Light-Water Nuclear Reactors Edwin Lyman March 2021 © 2021 Union of Concerned Scientists All Rights Reserved Edwin Lyman is the director of nuclear power safety in the UCS Climate and Energy Program. The Union of Concerned Scientists puts rigorous, independent science to work to solve our planet’s most pressing problems. Joining with people across the country, we combine technical analysis and effective advocacy to create innovative, practical solutions for a healthy, safe, and sustainable future. This report is available online (in PDF format) at www.ucsusa.org/resources/ advanced-isnt-always-better and https:// doi.org/10.47923/2021.14000 Designed by: David Gerratt, Acton, MA www.NonprofitDesign.com Cover photo: Argonne National Laboratory/Creative Commons (Flickr) Printed on recycled paper. ii union of concerned scientists [ contents ] vi Figures, Tables, and Boxes vii Acknowledgments executive summary 2 Key Questions for Assessing NLWR Technologies 2 Non-Light Water Reactor Technologies 4 Evaluation Criteria 5 Assessments of NLWR Types 8 Safely Commercializing NLWRs: Timelines and Costs 9 The Future of the LWR 9 Conclusions of the Assessment 11 Recommendations 12 Endnotes chapter 1 13 Nuclear Power: Present and Future 13 Slower Growth, Cost and Safety Concerns 14 Can Non-Light-Water Reactors
    [Show full text]
  • Testimony of Dr. John A. Parmentola Sr. Vice President, Energy and Advanced Concepts, General Atomics Before the Subcommittee on Energy U.S
    Testimony of Dr. John A. Parmentola Sr. Vice President, Energy and Advanced Concepts, General Atomics Before the Subcommittee on Energy U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space and Technology May 13, 2015 Thank you, Chairman Weber, Ranking Member Grayson, and other Members of this Subcommittee, for holding this hearing on this important subject. I believe, as many others do, that it is important to the future national security, energy security, and environmental quality of the United States (U.S.) that ample supplies of competitively priced nuclear energy are available. Unfortunately, it appears that nuclear energy is dying in the U.S.: there are few new plants being built, several have closed recently, and most of the 99 existing plants will be closed down within the next 40 years. To place this in context, last year nuclear energy consumed by our citizens represented 20% of U.S. electricity supply worth $80B. It also appears that the few plants being built require special regulatory arrangements because they cannot compete head-to-head on the numbers with other energy sources. We believe this future scenario can be avoided, but it will require active involvement and investment by the U.S. Government. Why? The energy market is indicating that existing nuclear power technology (Light Water Reactors [LWRs]) is not commercially viable. For nuclear power to play any future role, the U.S. will need new nuclear power technologies that will produce significantly cheaper electricity, while ensuring public safety. However, the private sector will not be able to develop these on its own.
    [Show full text]
  • Andlinger Nuclear Distillate
    Small Modular Reactors A Window on Nuclear Energy An Energy Technology Distillate from the Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment at Princeton University Contributors Alexander Glaser, M.V. Ramana, Ali Ahmad, and Robert Socolow Table of Contents Article 1: Introduction Article 2: Small Modular Reactor Families Article 3: Safety Article 4: Linkages to Nuclear Weapons Article 5: Siting Flexibility Article 6: Economics Article 7: Policy Appendix: Key Concepts and Vocabulary for Nuclear Energy Biographical sketches of contributors and their disclosures are available at http://acee.princeton.edu/distillates. The contributors would like to acknowledge the helpful feedback from John Balkcom, Robert Goldston, Mark Holt, Thomas Kreutz, Granger Morgan, Robert Rosner, Mycle Schneider, Tatsujiro Suzuki, and Frank von Hippel. The Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment is grateful to the High Meadows Foundation, the Nicholas Family, and an anonymous donor whose gifts are helping to advance public understanding of critical issues related to energy and the environment through this Energy Technology Distillate. Current revision: June 2015 1 Article 1: Introduction Nuclear capital cost The future of nuclear power over the next few scenarios achieve their target while phasing out decades is murky. In the United States and other nuclear power, relying on other low-carbon energy $7,000/kW Gas wins Nuclear wins industrialized countries, a looming question is what strategies – notably, renewable energy, fossil fuel use will happen when the current nuclear power plants without carbon dioxide emissions (“carbon dioxide $5,000/kW Gas winsare retired. Of the 99 currentlyNuclear functioningwins U.S. capture and storage”), and energy demand reduction.
    [Show full text]
  • NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY REVIEW 2012 NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY REVIEW 2012 International Atomic Energy Agency International Atomic Energy
    NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY REVIEW 2012 NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY REVIEW 2012 International Atomic Energy Agency www.iaea.orgAtoms for Peace International Atomic Energy Agency Vienna International Centre PO Box 100 1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone:Atoms for(+43-1) Peace 2600-0 @ Fax: (+43-1) 2600-7 Email: [email protected] NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY REVIEW 2012 The following States are Members of the International Atomic Energy Agency: AFGHANISTAN GHANA NIGERIA ALBANIA GREECE NORWAY ALGERIA GUATEMALA OMAN ANGOLA HAITI PAKISTAN ARGENTINA HOLY SEE PALAU ARMENIA HONDURAS PANAMA AUSTRALIA HUNGARY PAPUA NEW GUINEA AUSTRIA ICELAND PARAGUAY AZERBAIJAN INDIA PERU BAHRAIN INDONESIA PHILIPPINES BANGLADESH IRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF POLAND BELARUS IRAQ PORTUGAL BELGIUM IRELAND QATAR BELIZE ISRAEL REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA BENIN ITALY ROMANIA BOLIVIA JAMAICA RUSSIAN FEDERATION BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA JAPAN SAUDI ARABIA BOTSWANA JORDAN SENEGAL BRAZIL KAZAKHSTAN SERBIA BULGARIA KENYA SEYCHELLES BURKINA FASO KOREA, REPUBLIC OF SIERRA LEONE BURUNDI KUWAIT SINGAPORE CAMBODIA KYRGYZSTAN SLOVAKIA CAMEROON LAO PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC SLOVENIA CANADA REPUBLIC SOUTH AFRICA CENTRAL AFRICAN LATVIA SPAIN REPUBLIC LEBANON SRI LANKA CHAD LESOTHO SUDAN CHILE LIBERIA CHINA LIBYA SWEDEN COLOMBIA LIECHTENSTEIN SWITZERLAND CONGO LITHUANIA SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC COSTA RICA LUXEMBOURG TAJIKISTAN CÔTE D’IVOIRE MADAGASCAR THAILAND CROATIA MALAWI THE FORMER YUGOSLAV CUBA MALAYSIA REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA CYPRUS MALI TUNISIA CZECH REPUBLIC MALTA TURKEY DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC MARSHALL ISLANDS UGANDA OF THE CONGO
    [Show full text]
  • [Document Title]
    [EHNUR WP 4] ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONCEPTS AND TIMETABLES FOR THEIR COMMERCIAL DEPLOYMENT Steven C. Sholly1 VIENNA, June 2013 1 Institute of Safety/Security and Risk Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Copyright Vienna, June 2013 Media owner and editor: University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Department of Water, Atmosphere and Environment, Institute of Safety and Risk Sciences, Borkowskigasse 4, 1190 Wien, Austria URL: http://www.risk.boku.ac.at ReportWP4 – Advanced Nuclear Power Plant Concepts and Timetables EHNUR EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Most currently operating nuclear power plants are Generation II reactors (except for a few remaining Generation I units and a few Generation III units). Generation III and Generation III+ nuclear power plant concepts are widely recognized to be significant improvements over Generation II reactor designs. Both Generation III designs (standardized designs safer than Generation II) and Generation III+ designs (standardized designs safer than Generation II and with the expectation of greater economy of scale) are available for immediate deployment. The absolute minimum schedule for a Generation III or III+ nuclear power plant project is 10 years from feasibility study to completion of startup testing. Such a schedule is only achievable by: (a) an experienced utility, (b) with the reactor sited at an existing nuclear power plant site, and (c) with a design for which first-of-a-kind engineering (FOAKE) is complete. Under other circumstances (e.g. a utility new to nuclear generation, a greenfield site, a utility in a country without significant nuclear infrastructure, a nuclear power plant design where FOAKE has not yet been accomplished), the schedule would extend from fifteen to seventeen years and perhaps more.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter Meeting & Expo
    Winter Meeting & Expo 2016 Official Program Nuclear Science + Technology Imperatives for a Sustainable World Gen IV November 6-10, 2016 Caesars Palace Las Vegas, NV Winter Meeting & Expo Sponsors Nuclear Science & Technology: Imperatives for a Sustainable World Our most sincere thanks to our sponsors for their support! PLATINUM SPONSOR BRONZE SPONSORS COPPER SPONSORS OTHER SPONSOR Table of Contents GENERAL MEETING INFORMATION Meeting Officials .............................................................................4 Daily Schedule ................................................................................5-11 General Information ........................................................................12-15 Mobile App .....................................................................................14 Book Signing ..................................................................................14 PLENARY, SPECIAL EVENTS & OTHER SESSIONS High Temperature Reactor Technology (HTR2016) Workshop ...............16 ANS President’s Reception ...............................................................16 Opening Plenary Session ..................................................................16 Embedded Topical HTR 2016 Opening Plenary ..................................17 ANS President’s Special Session ......................................................17 OPD Dinner ....................................................................................17 BRONZE SPONSORS Fukushima Session ..........................................................................17
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Reactor Types
    Advanced Reactor Types he Department of Energy Office of Nuclear range of new advanced reactor technologies to Energy (NE) and its national laboratories help meet the nation’s energy, environmental, T support research and development on a wide and national security needs. Advanced Reactor Features Walk-Away Safety Waste Re-use and Disposal Requires no or minimal operator Can greatly reduce the amount of spent intervention to remain safe in the fuel requiring disposal, and some event of an accident. technologies can re-use spent fuel. Versatility Financeability Can provide heat energy for industrial Can employ factory manufacturing and processes, water desalination, and be made with less capital cost. load-following to support intermittent power sources. Advanced Reactor Sizes Microreactors Small Modular Reactors Full-Size Reactors Range: Range: 1 MW to 20 MW Range: 20 MW to 300 MW 300 MW to 1,000+MW Can fit on a flatbed truck, and are Can be scaled up or down by Can provide reliable, emissions-free mobile and deployable. adding more units. baseload power. MW refers to one million watts of electricity. Advanced Reactor Types temperatures and lower pressures than Advanced Small Modular Water-Cooled Reactor current reactors. (SMR) uses water as a coolant and is smaller than traditional light water reactors (LWR). Gas-Cooled Reactor is cooled by flowing gas and designed to operate at high temperatures. Liquid Metal-Cooled Fast Reactor uses metal (sodium or lead) as a coolant instead of water, Molten Salt Reactor uses molten fluoride or allowing the coolant to operate at higher chloride salts as a coolant.
    [Show full text]
  • Implications for Waste Handling of the Energy Multiplier Module
    Implications for Waste Handling of the Energy Multiplier Module by John Rawls June 29, 2010 132-10/rs 1 Changing the Game for Nuclear Energy Key National Issues EM2 Goals 1. Economics – To reduce capital investment and power cost by 30% compared to ALWRs 2. Used Nuclear Fuel – To consume & reduce used nuclear fuel inventory, i.e. minimize need for long-term repositories 3. Non-Proliferation – To reduce need for uranium enrichment; eliminate conventional fuel reprocessing 4. Energy Security – To advance electrification through site- flexibility & process heat applications; to reduce foreign energy imports 5. Human Dimension – To attract eager young minds to a challenging new enterprise 132-10/rs 2 EM2 is a Fast Gas-Cooled Reactor in which Fuel is Made and Burned in situ Schematic EM2 core Basics of the breed and burn in situ approach • A starter region containing fissile material provides initial criticality fertile • The burn spreads to the fertile region, where it is sustained by newly bred fuel starter • The geometrical arrangement has low excess reactivity for decades, improving fuel utilization and simplifying control control drum 1.15 2 1.10 EM core reactivity reflector 1.05 1.00 k-effective 0.95 Argonne National Laboratory predicted longer core life and 0.90 lower excess reactivity 0.85 0 10 20 30 40 Time (Yr) 132-10/rs 3 Reactor Concept Point design features Grade • 500 MWt, He cooled at 850oC outlet suitable for process heat applications Power • 240 MWe at ~48% net efficiency (~45% Conversion with dry cooling), at power cost Module comparable to natural gas at $7/Mbtu • Burns used LWR fuel w/o reprocessing (also DU, natural U, WPu, Th admixture) • 30+-yr core w/o refueling or reshuffling; 18 m EOL core can be recycled with 30-60% fission product removal 5 m • Passively safe, underground sited Reactor • Modules factory manufactured & shipped by commercial trucks 132-10/rs 4 Core Composition and Arrangement Fuel Element 5.19kg 5.0 m (15.6 ft) 17,136 units Fuel Elements (typ.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Fission Product Transport in a Gen. IV Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Plant Utilizing Vented Fuel
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Wesley Deason for the degree of Master of Science in Nuclear Engineering presented on May 31, 2013. Title: Characterization of Fission Product Transport in a Gen. IV Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Plant Utilizing Vented Fuel Abstract approved: _____________________________________________________________________ Andrew C. Klein Fission product transport in a Gen. IV Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Plant utilizing vented fuel has been characterized using analytical and computational methods. The goal was to increase current understanding of fission product transport in helium- cooled GFRs using vented fuel and to provide a toolset for determining issues which may arise during normal and abnormal operating conditions. A review of the Peach Bottom Unit 1 reactor, the Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor, the Gen IV Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor, and the Energy Multiplier Module—all helium- cooled nuclear systems utilizing vented fuel—provided sufficient background for understanding the design methodology behind vented system and helium purification system design. From documentation for these systems and other literature, the phenomena of fission product generation and decay, volatile fission product chemistry, fission product diffusion and release in fuel, fission product leakage through non-fuel components, fission product plateout, and collection of gaseous fission products through adsorption in the charcoal beds were identified as having a significant effect on the transport of fission products within a vented fuel system. Understanding of vented fuel system design and identified fission product transport phenomena was then used for the development of a vented fuel system model in the systems modeling program, STELLA. The model was used to analyze test cases, characterizing the time-dependent accumulation and decay of fission products in a vented fuel system.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Readiness and Gaps Analysis of Commercial Optical Materials and Measurement Systems for Advanced Small Modular Reactors
    PNNL-22622, Rev. 1 SMR/ICHMI/PNNL/TR-2013/04 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Technical Readiness and Gaps Analysis of Commercial Optical Materials and Measurement Systems for Advanced Small Modular Reactors NC Anheier M Bliss JD Suter BD Cannon A Qiao R Devanathan ES Andersen A Mendoza EJ Berglin DM Sheen August 2013 PNNL-22622, Rev. 1 SMR/ICHMI/PNNL/TR-2013/04 Technical Readiness and Gaps Analysis of Commercial Optical Materials and Measurement Systems for Advanced Small Modular Reactors NC Anheier M Bliss JD Suter BD Cannon A Qiao R Devanathan ES Andersen A Mendoza EJ Berglin DM Sheen August 2013 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352 Executive Summary This report supports the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) Nuclear Energy Research and Development Roadmap and industry stakeholders by evaluating optically based instrumentation and control (I&C) concepts for advanced small modular reactor (AdvSMR) applications. These advanced designs will require innovative thinking in terms of engineering approaches, materials integration, and I&C concepts to realize their eventual viability and deployment. The primary goals of this report include: 1. Establish preliminary I&C needs, performance requirements, and possible gaps for AdvSMR designs based on best-available published design data. 2. Document commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) optical sensors, components, and materials in terms of their technical readiness to support essential AdvSMR in-vessel I&C systems. 3. Identify technology gaps by comparing the in-vessel monitoring requirements and environmental constraints to COTS optical sensor and materials performance specifications.
    [Show full text]