Study on the mechanism of diametral cladding strain and mixed-oxide fuel element breaching in slow-ramp extended overpower transients
Source abstract
Abstract
Cladding strain caused by fuel/cladding mechanical interaction (FCMI) was evaluated for mixed-oxide fuel elements subjected to 70–90% slow-ramp extended overpower transient tests in the experimental breeder reactor II. Calculated transient-induced cladding strains were correlated with cumulative damage fractions (CDFs) using cladding strength correlations. In a breached high-smeared density solid fuel element with low strength cladding, cladding thermal creep strain was significantly increased to approximately half the transient-induced cladding strain that was considered to be caused by the tertiary creep when the CDF was close to the breach criterion (=1.0), with the remaining strain due to instantaneous plastic deformation. In low-smeared density annular fuel elements, FCMI load was significantly mitigated and resulted in little cladding strain. The CDFs of the annular fuel elements were lower than 0.01 at the end of the overpower transient, indicating a substantial margin to breach. A substantial margin to breach was also maintained in a high-smeared density fuel element with high strength cladding.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Nuclear Materials and Properties · Nuclear reactor physics and engineering · Molten salt chemistry and electrochemical processes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (16)
Show source-provided references
1. H. Tsai, L.A. Neimark, et al., in: Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on Nuclear Engineering, Kyoto, Japan, April 23–27, S210–1, vol. 2, 1995, pp. 843–848.
2. Uwaba · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 416 · 35010.1016/j.jnucmat.2011.06.033 ↗
3. Tsai · J. Nucl. Mater. · 1993 · 204 · 21710.1016/0022-3115(93)90220-S ↗
4. H. Tsai, L.A. Neimark, et al., in: Proc. Int. Topical Meeting on Advanced Reactor Safety, Pittsburgh, PA, April 17–21, 1994, pp. 29–38.
5. Uwaba · J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. · 2008 · 45 · 118310.1080/18811248.2008.9711907 ↗
6. S. Nomura, S. Shikakura, et al., in: Proc. Int. Conf., Fast Reactors and Related Fuel Cycles I, 1991, pp. 7.4-1-10.
7. Uwaba · J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. · 2010 · 47 · 71210.1080/18811248.2010.9711647 ↗
8. Kramer · J. Nucl. Mater. · 1993 · 204 · 20310.1016/0022-3115(93)90218-N ↗
9. Uwaba · J. Nucl. Eng. Des. · 2004 · 234 · 5110.1016/j.nucengdes.2004.07.019 ↗
10. Ukai · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2000 · 278 · 32010.1016/S0022-3115(99)00233-0 ↗
11. Yano · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2010 · 398 · 5910.1016/j.jnucmat.2009.10.010 ↗
12. T. Mizuno, T. Asaga, S. Shikakura, Int. Conf. Design and Safety of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants, Tokyo, Japan, vol. III, October 25–29, 1992, pp. 28.3-1-7.
13. T. Yoshitake, T. Ohmori, et al., Annual Mtg. Atomic Energy Society of Japan, March, 27–29, N1, 2002.
14. Yano · J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. · 2007 · 44 · 153510.1080/18811248.2007.9711403 ↗
15. Yano · J. Nucl. Mater · 2007 · 398 · 12710.1016/j.jnucmat.2007.03.156 ↗
16. Uwaba · J. Nucl. Mater. · 2011 · 412 · 29410.1016/j.jnucmat.2011.02.052 ↗