Recent Predictions on NPR Capsules by Integrated Fuel Performance - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

recent predictions on npr capsules by integrated fuel
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Recent Predictions on NPR Capsules by Integrated Fuel Performance - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Department of Nuclear Engineering Advanced Reactor Technology Pebble Bed Project Recent Predictions on NPR Capsules by Integrated Fuel Performance Model Jing Wang Advisors: Prof. R. Ballinger & Prof.


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

MIT Nuclear Engineering Departm ent

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Department of Nuclear Engineering

Advanced Reactor Technology Pebble Bed Project

Recent Predictions on NPR Capsules by Integrated Fuel Performance Model

Jing Wang Advisors: Prof. R. Ballinger & Prof. S. Yip Sponsor: Idaho National Engineering Lab. July 19, 2002

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

CANES

Outline

Overview of Integrated Fuel Performance Model Predictions on NPR Capsules

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

CANES

Integrated Fuel Performance Model

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

CANES

Pebble Bed Reactor and TRISO Fuel

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

CANES

Modules in the Integrated Model

Fission gas release model Thermal model Mechanical analysis Chemical analysis Fuel failure model Simulation of refueling in the reactor core

OPyC SiC IPyC Buffer PyC Fuel Kernel

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

CANES

Mechanical Analysis

System: IPyC/SiC/OPyC Methods: Analytical or Finite Element Viscoelastic Model Mechanical behavior

– irradiation-induced dimensional changes (PyC) – irradiation-induced creep (PyC) – pressurization from fission gases – thermal expansion

Stress contributors to IPyC/SiC/OPyC

Dimensional changes Creep Pressurization Thermal expansion

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

CANES

Benchmarking Stress Calculations on NPR Type Fuel

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Fast Neutron Fluence (10^21nvt) Stress (MPa)

MIT INEEL

Stresses in isotropic IPyC under constant temperature 1032°C

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

CANES

Weibull Strength Theory

σ0 – characteristic strength (MPa.meter3/m) m – Weibull modulus

∫ − =

− dV f

m

e P

) / (

1

σ σ

( )

m mf

e Pf

σ σ /

1

− =

σmf – mean fracture strength (MPa)

applicable when microscopic cracks prevail

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

CANES

Fracture Mechanics Based Failure Model

IPyC SiC OPyC

PI PO

Irradiation

σt

a y IPyC K

t I

π σ = ) ( ) (SiC KIC

applied when macroscopic crack present s

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

CANES

Simulation of Refueling through Non-isothermal MPBR Core

reflector coolant control reflector fuel shutdown pressure vessel

VSOP Model of MPBR core

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

CANES

Simulation of Refueling - cont’d

0.0E+00 2.0E+06 4.0E+06 6.0E+06 8.0E+06 1.0E+07 1.2E+07 1.4E+07 1.6E+07 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Irradiation time (days) Power density (W/m^3)

A typical power history of a pebble in MPBR core

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

CANES

Integrated Fuel Performance Model

Power Distribution in the Reactor Core Sample a pebble/fuel particle Randomly re-circulate the pebble Get power density, neutron flux

t=t+∆t

T distribution in the pebble and TRISO Accumulate fast neutron fluence FG release (Kr,Xe) PyC swelling Mechanical model Failure model Mechanical Chemical Stresses FP distribution Strength Pd & Ag

Failed In reactor core

Y

10 times 1,000,000 times MC Outer Loop MC inner loop

N N Y

Monte Carlo outer loop: Samples fuel particle statistical characteristics MC inner loop: Implements refueling scheme in reactor core

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

CANES

Predictions on NPR capsules

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

CANES

Typical NPR Particle Parameters

Mean Value

  • Std. Deviation
  • Distr. Type

Kernel Diameter (µm)

195 5.20 Triangular

Buffer Thickness (µm)

100 10.2 Triangular

IPyC Thickness (µm)

53 3.68 Triangular

SiC Thickness (µm)

35 3.12 Triangular

OPyC Thickness (µm)

43 4.01 Triangular

Fuel Density (g/cm3)

10.52 0.01 Triangular

Buffer Density (g/cm3)

0.9577 0.05 Triangular

IPyC σ0 (MPa.meter3/m)

24.4 9.5 (modulus) Weibull

OPyC σ0 (MPa.meter3/m)

20.1 9.5 (modulus) Weibull

SiC σ0 (MPa.meter3/m)

9.64 6.0 (modulus) Weibull

SiC KIC (MPa. µm1/2)

3300 530 Triangular

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

CANES

Example of Compact Irradiation History

Temperature history

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Full Power Days Temperature (C)

Fast fluence history

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Ellapsed Time (day) Fast Fluence (10^21nvt)

Burnup v.s. Fast Fluence

20 40 60 80 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Fast Fluence (10^21n/cm^2) Burnup (% FIMA)

Temperature history

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Elapsed Time (day)

Temperature (C)

NPR-1 A8

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

CANES

Fuel Failure Predictions

Irradiation Conditions Fuel Compact ID Fast Fluence (1025 n/m2) Irradiation Temp. (°C) Burnup (%FIMA) NPR-2 A4 3.8 746 79 NPR-1 A5 3.8 987 79 NPR-1 A8 2.4 845 72 NPR-1A A9 1.9 1052 64 IPyC Layer * % Failed 95% Conf. Interval (%) INEEL Calc. MIT Calc. NPR-2 A4 65 54<p<76 100 99.6 NPR-1 A5 31 17<p<47 100 26.6 NPR-1 A8 6 2<p<16 100 60.7 NPR-1A A9 18 5<p<42 100 23.9 SiC Layer * % Failed 95% Conf. Interval (%) INEEL Calc. MIT Calc. NPR-2 A4 3 2<p<6 8.2 13.9 NPR-1 A5 0.6 0<p<3 1.6 0.358 NPR-1 A8 0<p<2 4.9 2.74 NPR-1A A9 1 0<p<5 0.9 0.492

(*: layer failure is considered as a through wall crack as measured by PIE. )

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

CANES

Systematic Study on NPR-1 Capsule

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

CANES

NPR-1 R/B of Selected Fission Gases

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

CANES

  • Irr. Conditions for NPR-1 Compacts

Compact ID A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 EOL Fluence (1021n/cm2) 2.4 3.0 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.5 3.0 2.4 EOL Burnup (% FIMA) 74.0 77.0 78.5 79.0 79.0 78.5 77.0 74.0

  • Avg. Irr. T

(C) 874 1050 1036 993 987 1001 1003 845 EFPD (Day) 170.0 Irradiation Time (Day) 308.3

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

CANES

Prediction of Failures /w Real Irr. History

Compact ID A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 IPyC Failure 47.38% 6.440% 14.99% 33.54% 26.61% 24.43% 15.64% 60.70% OPyC Failure 3.87% 0.262% 0.461% 1.91% 1.14% 1.00% 0.548% 6.13% Particle Failure 1.61% 0.0001% 0.025% 0.857% 0.358% 0.272% 0.068% 2.74%

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

CANES

Prediction of Failures /w Ideal Irr. History

Compact ID A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 IPyC Failure 84.24% 16.71% 19.42% 33.85% 36.26% 30.26% 29.06% 91.71% OPyC Failure 13.1% 0.436% 0.549% 1.564% 1.85% 1.23% 1.11% 16.3% Particle Failure 8.32% 0.038% 0.074% 0.613% 0.790% 0.400% 0.337% 9.64%

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

CANES

Overall Failure of NPR-1 Capsule

Irradiation Test Prediction (Real Irr. History) Prediction (Ideal Irr. History)

  • No. Particles Contained

77500 77500 77500

  • No. Failed Particles

625 (a) 656 2384 Failure Probability 0.806% 0.846% 3.076% Peak Fluence at Initial Failure (1021n/cm2) 1.7 0.587 0.071 Peak Burnup at Initial Failure (% FIMA) 72% 59% 24% EFPD at Initial Failure 108 73.9 20.45 Peak Temperature at Initial Failure (C) 1123 1025 1086 (a): From readings of the Kr85m R/B

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

CANES

Kr85m R/B of NPR-1 Capsule

1.0E-09 1.0E-08 1.0E-07 1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04 1.0E-03 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Irradiation Time (efpd) R/B Experiment Prediction-real Prediction-ideal

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

CANES

Path Forward

Develop Advanced Failure Model

Follows PyC Cracking & Stress Distribution after initial PyC failure

Develop and Incorporate Chemistry Model

INEEL Inputs FP Migration Experimental Results Pd Interaction Results Other Input