Advertisement

JOM

, 63:81 | Cite as

Light water reactor fuel performance modeling and multi-dimensional simulation

  • Joseph Y. R. RashidEmail author
  • Suresh K. Yagnik
  • Robert O. Montgomery
Advanced Fuel Performance: Modeling and Simulation Overview

Abstract

Light water reactor fuel is a multicomponent system required to produce thermal energy through the fission process, efficiently transfer the thermal energy to the coolant system, and provide a barrier to fission product release by maintaining structural integrity. The operating conditions within a reactor induce complex multi-physics phenomena that occur over time scales ranging from less than a microsecond to years and act over distances ranging from inter-atomic spacing to meters. These conditions impose challenging and unique modeling, simulation, and verification data requirements in order to accurately determine the state of the fuel during its lifetime in the reactor. The capabilities and limitations of the current engineering-scale one-dimensional and two-dimensional fuel performance codes is discussed and the challenges of employing higher level fidelity atomistic modeling techniques such as molecular dynamics and phase-field simulations is presented.

Keywords

Stress Corrosion Crack Fuel Pellet Fuel Performance Fuel Behavior Power Maneuver 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    J.S. Armijo, L.F. Coffin, and H.S. Rosenbaum, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry; Tenth International Symposium, ASTM STP 1245, ed. A.M. Garde and E.R. Bradley (Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1994), pp. 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J.P. Mardon, D. Charquet, and J. Senevat, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Twelfth International Symposium, ASTM STP 1354, ed. G.P. Sabol and G.D. Moany (West Conshohocken, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, 2000), pp. 505–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    G.P. Sabol, R.J. Comstock, R.A. Weiner, P. Larouere, and R.N. Stanutz, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry; Tenth International Symposium, ASTM STP 1245, ed. A.M. Garde and E.R. Bradley (Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1994), pp. 724–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    “Falcon Fuel Performance Code Version 1,” Product ID: 1020707 (Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, 2010).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    “Fuel Reliability Guidelines—Pellet-Cladding Interaction,” Product ID 1015453 (Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, November 2008).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G.A. Berna, C.E. Beyer, K.L. Davis, and D.D. Lanning, “FRAPCON-3: A Computer Code for the Calculation of Steady-State, Thermal-Mechanical Behavior of Oxide Fuel Rods for High Burnup,” NUREG/CR-6534, Vol. 2, PNNL-11513 (Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, December 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M.E. Cunningham, C.E. Beyer, and P.G. Medvedev, “FRAPTRAN: A Computer Code for the Transient Analysis of Oxide Fuel Rods,” NUREG/CR-6739, Vol. 1, PNNL-13576 (Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 2001).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Brochard, F. Bentejac, and N. Hourdequin, “Nonlinear Finite Element Studies of the Pellet-cladding Mechanical Interaction in a PWR Fuel” (Paper presented at CW/4, Transactions of the 14th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 14), Lyon, France, August 17–22, 1997).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Lassmann, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 57 (1980), pp. 17–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D.T. Hagrman, “MATPRO—A Library of Materials Properties for Light Water Reactor Accident Analysis,” SCDAP/RELAP5/MOD3.1 Code Manual, Vol. 4, NUREG/CR-6150, EGG-2720 (Washington, D.C.: Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June 1995).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    W. Lyon, R. Montgomery, J. Rashid, and S. Yagnik, “PCI Analysis and Fuel Rod Failure Prediction using FALCON” (Paper presented at the 2009 Water Reactor Fuel Performance Meeting, Paris, France, September 6–10, 2009).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    “CASL—Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors,” a DOE Energy Innovation Hub (May 28, 2010, formally opened May 3, 2011), www.casl.gov.
  13. 13.
    S.K. Yagnik, D.S. Sunderland, and B. Cheng, “Effect of PWR Restart Ramp Rate on Pellet-Cladding Interactions” (Paper presented at the International Seminar on Pellet-Clad Interactions with Water Reactor Fuels, Aix-en-Provence, France, March 2004).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. Yang et al., “An Integrated Approach to Maximizing Fuel Reliability” (Paper presented at the 2004 International Meeting of LWR Fuel Performance, Orlando, Florida, September 2004).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. Stan, Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 41(1) (February 2009), pp. 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Tonks et al., Nuclear Engineering and Design, 240(10) (2010), pp. 2877–2883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. Vega et al. “Toward an Atomistically Informed Fuel Performance Code: Thermal Properties Using FRAPCON and Molecular Dynamics,” Nuclear Technology, 165 (March 2009), pp. 308–312.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    T. Watanabe et al., J. Nuc. Mater., 375 (2008), pp. 388–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    B. Wirth et al., “Multiscale Investigation of the Mechanisms Controlling Irradiation Effects in Materials” (Presentation at the OSU-INL Multiphysics Methods Workshop, Sunriver, Oregon, June 8–9, 2010).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Palagin, “Analysis of Thermal Conductivity of Irradiated UO2 Fuel,” Transactions, SMiRT 19 August 2007), paper C04/2.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© TMS 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joseph Y. R. Rashid
    • 1
    Email author
  • Suresh K. Yagnik
    • 2
  • Robert O. Montgomery
    • 3
  1. 1.ANATECH Corp.San DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Electric Power Research InstitutePalo AltoUSA
  3. 3.Pacific Northwest National LaboratoryRichlandUSA

Personalised recommendations