Proceedings of the ASME 2016 Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference
PVP2016
July 17-21, 2016, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT: FRENCH SIMPLIFIED
ANALYSIS METHOD APPLIED TO UNDERCLAD POSTULATED DEFECT IN
NOZZLE
Adolfo ARRIETA-RUIZ Eric MEISTER
EDF - SEPTEN EDF - SEPTEN
Villeurbanne, France Villeurbanne, France
adolfo.arrieta-ruiz@edf.fr
ABSTRACT
Structural integrity of the Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) is
one of the main concerns regarding safety and lifetime of
Nuclear Power Plants (NPP) since this component is considered
as not reasonably replaceable. Fast fracture risk is the main
potential damage considered in the integrity assess ment of
RPV.
In France, deterministic integrity assessment for RPV vis-
à-vis the brittle fracture risk is based on the crack initiation
stage. As regards the core area in particular, the stability of an
under-clad postulated flaw is currently evaluated under a
Pressurized Thermal Shock (PTS) through a dedicated fracture
mechanics simplified method called “beta method”. However,
flaw stability analyses are also carried-out in several other areas
of the RPV. Thence-forward performing uniform simplified in-
service analyses of flaw stability is a major concern for EDF.
In this context, 3D finite element elastic-plastic
calculations with flaw modelling in the nozzle have been
carried out recently and the corresponding results have been
compared to those provided by the beta method, codified in the
French RSE-M code for under-clad defects in the core area, in
the most severe events.
The purpose of this work is to validate the employment of
the core area fracture mechanics simplified method as a
conservative approach for the under-clad postulated flaw
stability assess ment in the complex geometry of the nozzle.
This paper presents both simplified and 3D modelling flaw
stability evaluation methods and the corresponding results
1 Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90494/ on 04/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo
PVP2016-63564
Stéphane VIDARD
EDF - SEPTEN
Villeurbanne, France
obtained by running a PTS event. It shows that the employment
of the “beta method” provides conservative results in
comparison to those produced by elastic-plastic calculations for
the cases here studied.
INTRODUCTION
With the concrete containment, the RPV is one of the two
components which have a direct impact on the lifetime of the
whole NPP since they are considered as not reasonably
replaceable.
Under a PTS event, the stresses in the RPV caused by rapid
cooling and pressure is an increase in the potential for brittle
fracture, accepted as being the main possible damage, and
consequently the main limiting factor, if a pre-existing
fabrication or in-service-induced flaw is present. Under-clad
flaws are of primary concern as far as the PTS event produces
most serious cooling in the inner vessel wall. Therefore, the
integrity assessment for RPV is based on the stability
evaluation, through a dedicated fracture mechanics simplified
method as regards the core area, of an under-clad postulated
flaw under a PTS event. Nevertheless, flaw stability analyses
are also carried-out in several other areas of the RPV.
EDF’s implemented strategy for NPP lifetime extension
beyond 40 years lies within the deterministic framework since
there is no existing framework for probabilistic analyses.
Consequently, a concerted effort is made so as to improve as
much as possible the deterministic approach with regards to the
input data and analysis methods. Performing uniform simplified
in-service analyses of flaw stability is a major concern for EDF.
 This paper presents the results of the work carried out so as
to analyse the employment of the core area fracture mechanics
simplified method “beta method” as a conservative approach
for the under-clad postulated flaw stability assessment in the
complex geometry of the nozzle, by running a PTS event.
(emergency situations) and level D (faulted situations), level D
having the lowest probability of occurrence but the most
important mechanical impact. According to the French
regulations, loads are multiplied by safety coefficients in
accordance with Table 1.

NOMENCLATURE The thermal hydraulic system transients in a PWR are

KI Elastic stress intensity factor (MPa. m1/2) classified according to the estimated frequency in which they
can be expected to occur.
Maximum of K I during the duration of the
KI max transient corresponding to t = tmax Temporal variation of temperature, pressure and heat
Elastic stress intensity factor including a plastic transfer coefficient in the RPV downcomer characterise the
Kβ correction (MPa. m1/2) thermal hydraulic transients considered for the mechanical
analysis, which are a selection of the most serious transients in
Kβ Maximum of K β during the duration of the
each level of situations.
max transient corresponding to t = tmax
KJ Plastic stress intensity factor (MPa.m1/2) The following description concerns the core area integrity
Irwin plastic zone radius: assessment and is taken from [1], [2], and [3].
Ry
Ry = (1/(6*π)) (KI/Sy)2 (mm)
Sy Yield stress (MPa) 1.1. Thermal mechanical analysis in RPV core area
tclad Thickness of the cladding (mm) The thermal problem to be solved is non-linear and
tbm Thickness of the base metal (mm) involves two different materials (cladding and base metal)
a Total depth of the semi-elliptical flaw (mm) which properties are depending on the temperature. As a
2c Total length of the semi-elliptical flaw (mm) consequence of the assumed homogeneous nature of the
T Temperature (°C) thermal hydraulic loading and the rotational symmetry of the
P Pressure (MPa) geometry considered, the heat flow through the RPV wall has
t Time (s) only a radial component, as shown on Figure 1.
H Heat transfer coefficient (W/mm²/°C)
Cs Safety coefficient
RTNDT Reference Temperature for Nil Ductile Transition
φ Neutron fluence E>1Mev (n/cm²)

1. INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT FOR RPV CORE

AREA : AN OVERVIEW OF THE SIMPLIFIED
APPROACH – THE “BETA METHOD”

The deter ministic approach is the foundation of the

integrity assessment for RPV. As far as brittle fracture risk
under a pressurized thermal shock event is accepted as being
the main potential damage, the integrity assessment for the
RPV core area, in which the input parameters are taken into
account in a conservative manner, includes two analyses of
Figure 1: ONE-DIMENSIONAL THERMAL PROBLEM
flaw stability under a PTS event:
REPRESENTATION
- The generic study of a crack whose dimensions cover the
detectable guaranteed minimum, which is placed at the most
stressed and irradiated position of the vessel with highest RTNDT Thus, the temperature field in the wall thickness is a
among the Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) French fleet,
solution of the following one-dimensional unsteady heat
- The study of the few in-service-detected cracks that are
conduction equation in cylindrical coordinates:
larger than the minimum detectable and for which their size,
and position and the RTNDT of the vessel concerned are taken
into account. ∂Ψ & ∂ 2 T  k ∂k  ∂T
T = k 2 + +  (1)
∂T ∂r  r ∂r  ∂r
Three levels of transients are studied in both cases: level A
(corresponding to nor mal and upset situations), level C

2 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90494/ on 04/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 Boundary conditions presented on the figure above result longitudinal flaw). In respect of the cladding side study, the
in Eq. (2) and Eq. (3): A C
highest value between K I et K I is selected.
∂T
=0 (2)
∂r r = Re xt K Iclad = max(K IA , K IC ) (6)

−k
∂T
∂r
[
= H T r =R int − T fluid ] (3)
r = R int

Once the temperature field is known through the RPV wall

thickness, elastic stresses are calculated by solving the
equilibrium equation:

σ = λ ⋅ tr (ε ) ⋅1 + 2 µ ε − (3λ + 2 µ ) ⋅ α ⋅ ∆T1 (4)

Where λ and µ are the Lamé coefficients:

 E ⋅ν
λ = (1 +ν )(1 − 2ν )
 (5)
µ = E
 2(1 +ν ) Figure 2: ASSUMED UNDER-CLAD FLAW

For the RPV core area integrity assessment, this is done by

means of a finite difference method code. 1.2.2. Taking plasticity into account

Plasticity is considered through the “beta method” plastic

1.2. Fracture mechanics simplified method for the core correction for the stress intensity factor. This method is based
area analysis on 3D elastic-plastic calculations for RPV core area.

1.2.1. Fracture mechanics analysis in elasticity For t < tmax :

Generic and in-service-detected flaw analyses in the core K β (t ) = β ⋅ K I (t ) (7)
area are both based on the same fracture mechanics simplified
approach. In the following paragraphs, only the generic study is
considered.
For t > t max :

The generic analysis crack is an under-clad longitudinally

postulated flaw placed at the most stressed and irradiated
K β (t ) = K I (t ) + K β ( max
− KI max
) (8)

position in the RPV ring of the vessel with highest RTNDT

among the PWR French fleet. Consistently with the hypotheses Where:
assumed for the structural integrity demonstration of a French  36 ⋅ ryclad 
PWR, the flaw is considered as semi-elliptical, as shown on β = 1 + C ⋅ tanh  (8)
Figure 2.  t clad 
From the stress field previously calculated, the elastic 2
stress intensity factors in both cladding (tips A and C) and base 1  K Iclad 
ryclad =   (9)
metal side (tip B) of the flaw are calculated by the “influence 6π  Sy clad 
functions” simplified method detailed in the French RSE-M
Code [4]. Only the K I open mode is analyzed (neither K II For a longitudinal flaw, C = 0.465*(1+a/100) for the base
nor K III open modes have consequences on an under-clad metal side analysis.

3 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90494/ on 04/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 Loads are multiplied by safety coefficients Cs. In the brittle placed in the inlet nozzle bore. In the other hand, an under-clad
range, the safety coefficients are defined in the table below: semi-circular longitudinally postulated flaw is placed at the
inlet nozzle corner.
Level Cs
A (normal and upset situations) 2 These two types of meshes are shown on Figure 4.
C (emergency situations) 1.6
D (faulted situations) 1.2 Remark: each mesh comprises a unique flaw.
Table 1: SAFETY COEFFICIENTS IN THE BRITTLE
RANGE

1.2.3. Conservatis m of the plastic correction

Regarding the conservatism of this simplified method, it

has been shown ([5]) that considering plasticity through the
“beta method” for fracture mechanics analyses in RPV core
area leads to conservative results in comparison to those
produced by elastic-plastic calculations.

1.3. Margins calculation

The neutron fluence φ is a parameter affecting the RPV
core area throughout its operating life directly on the Reference
Temperature for Nil Ductile Transition RTNDT. A RTNDT shift is
calculated to take into account the operating life. The fracture Figure 3: 3D GEOMETRY FOR NOZZLE INTEGRITY
toughness is directly dependent on the RTNDT. The deter ministic ASSESSMENT
margin is the ratio between the fracture toughness K IC of the
RPV and the load including safety coefficients K β (Cs) . The
current integrity assessment rule can be described as follows:

K IC
Fm = ≥1 (10)
K β (Cs)

2. 3D F. E. FLAW MODELING IN THE NOZZLE

As part of EDF’s implemented strategy for NPP lifetime
extension beyond 40 years for the deterministic approach, 3D
finite element elastic-plastic calculations with under-clad flaw
modelling in the nozzle have been carried out recently. They
are presented in this section.

2.1. Presentation of model

The aim of the study presented here is to evaluate the
elastic-plastic stress intensity factor of an under-clad assumed
flaw in a French PWR nozzle representative geometry.

The model is comprised of an inlet and an outlet nozzles

whose dimensions are representative of a French RPV.
Vertically, it extends from the joint plane of the vessel flange
until the core area, as shown on Figure 3.

2.2. Meshes
Two flaw configurations are considered: in one hand an Figure 4: MESH GLOBAL VIEW AND FLAW VECINITY
under-clad semi-elliptical longitudinally postulated flaw is VIEWS

4 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90494/ on 04/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 The two sorts of flaws described above are shown on
Figure 6 and Figure 6 for the semi-circular and the semi-
elliptical under-clad flaws respectively. For the the semi-
elliptical under-clad flaw, the “d” dimension considered here is
d=20mm.
With regard to the mechanical behaviour of the materials
for the elastic-plastic calculations, an isotropic nonlinear
hardening is used. Codified [7] dimensionless stress-strain
relationships have been employed.
2.4. Loading conditions
In all calculations, a typical LOCA event for a French RPV
is considered. Temporal variation of temperature, pressure and
heat transfer coefficient is given in Figure 7.

Figure 5: FLAW MODELLING DETAIL: SEMI-

CIRCULAR UNDER-CLAD FLAW

Figure 6: FLAW MODELLING DETAIL: SEMI-

ELLIPTICAL UNDER-CLAD FLAW

2.3. Materials properties

Ther mal ( λ , ρ cp ) and mechanical ( α , E ,ν , S y ) Figure 7: PTS EVENT – TEMPORAL VARIATION OF
properties are taken from [6] and [7] for both cladding (308L TEMPERATURE, PRESSURE AND HEAT TRANSFER
austenitic stainless steel) and base metal (16MDN5 alloy steel). COEFFICIENT
They are dependent on temperature. Linear interpolation is
performed between the given values.

5 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90494/ on 04/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 Ther mal loadings are given by the temporal variation of considered) in the base metal side of the flaw (tip B in Figure 5
fluid temperature and heat transfer coefficient in the inner wall and Figure 6) provided by 3D F.E. calculation, “ K IB−3 D ”,
of the RPV. As shown on the Figure 1, outer wall is equipped
with thermal insulation. under the PTS event.

Imposed displacements are UY=0 on the bottom surface, F. E. calculations are carried out using the EDF open
r r source Code_Aster software [8]. The local energy release rate
parallel to the XZ plane, and U ⋅ n = 0 on lateral surfaces. G in the metal side tip is calculated using the G-theta method
available in the code. Four different paths are studied so as to
The mechanical loadings are given by the temporal ensure the path-independent nature of the G value in elasticity
variation of pressure P (which is applied on the inner wall), and plasticity cases.
presented above, and the corresponding closed ends effect,
which is taken into account by means of a pressure PEF Figure 9 shows a zoom on the maximum G values obtained
in the elasticity case in the metal side tip for the under-clad
representing the end loads. P and PEF values obey the semi-elliptical longitudinally postulated flaw placed at the inlet
equation: nozzle bore. A very good agreement is observed between the
Rint
2 different paths studied.
PEF = P. (11)
Rext − Rint 2
2
Quite comparable results in terms of path-independent G-
values are obtained for the case of the semi-circular postulated
Finally, a uniform Y-displacement is imposed on the top flaw placed at the inlet nozzle corner.
surface.

Mechanical loadings and boundary conditions appear on

Figure 8.

Figure 9: G-ELASTIC VALUES OBTAINED FOR

DIFFERENT PATHS

In all cases, the average value of G is adopted for the

Figure 8: MECHANICAL LOADINGS stress intensity factor calculation. The link between G and K I
is made according to the equation established by Irwin (plane
strain assumption):

3. 3D F. E. CALCULATIONS
E.G
3.1. Elastic case KI = (12)
The first step is to determine the temporal variation of the 1 −ν 2
elastic stress intensity factor (only the K I opening mode is

6 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90494/ on 04/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 Figure 10 shows the temporal evolution of K IB−3 D Figure 11 shows the temporal evolution of K JB −3 D
provided by 3D F. E. calculation. provided by 3D F. E. calculation for the overall loading phase,
between 0s and 1500s.

4. EMPLOYMENT OF THE BETA METHOD IN THE

NOZZLE
Finally, in order to compare the values provided by the 3D
F.E. elastic-plastic calculations in regard to the stress intensity
factor K β provided by the plastic correction method K β is
also calculated according to the method described in paragraph
1.2.

Figure 12 shows the temporal evolution of K IB , K β and

K JB −3 D during the loading phase in the case of the semi-
elliptical flaw placed in the inlet nozzle bore. We can notice
that K β is higher than K JB −3 D throughout this phase. In
particular, Kβ max
= 204 MPa. m is 40% higher than
K JB −3 D max
= 144 MPa. m .
Figure 10: PTS EVENT - K IB−3 D TEMPORAL
VARIATION
A differential of similar magnitude between K β and
max

K JB −3D is obtained for the case of the semi-circular flaw

3.2. Elastic-Plastic case max
placed at the inlet nozzle corner.
The elastic-plastic stress intensity factor K JB −3 D in metal
base side of the flaw is obtained using the method described in
paragraph 3.1.

Figure 12: SEMI-ELLIPTICAL FLAW UNDER PTS

Figure 11: PTS EVENT - K JB −3 D TEMPORAL EVENT - K IB−3 D , K β AND K JB −3 D TEMPORAL
VARIATION VARIATION EVOLUTION COMPARISON

7 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90494/ on 04/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo

 These values confirm the expected conservatism provided
by the beta method in regard to 3D flaw modelling calculations.

5. CONCLUSION
In France, deterministic integrity assessment for RPV is
based on the crack initiation stage. As regards the core area in
particular, the stability of an under-clad postulated flaw is
currently evaluated under a Pressurized Thermal Shock (PTS)
through a dedicated fracture mechanics simplified method
called “beta method”.

In fact, flaw stability analyses are also carried-out in

several other areas of the RPV. Thence-forward performing
uniform simplified in-service analyses of flaw stability is a
major concern for EDF.

In this context, 3D finite element elastic-plastic

calculations with flaw modelling in the nozzle have been
carried out recently and the corresponding results have been
compared to those provided by the beta method, codified in the
French RSE-M code, in the most severe events.

In the cases here studied, the plastic correction for the

stress intensity factor produces values higher than those
provided by the elastic-plastic calculations. In particular, a
conservatism of about 40% can be obtained for the maximum
value of the elastic-plastic stress intensity factor.

In this example, the employment of the beta method for the

under-clad postulated flaw stability assessment meets the
objectives expected.

REFERENCES
[1] Beaufils R. et al. “Using a probabilistic approach in the
brittle fracture deterministic integrity assess ment of a
nuclear reactor pressure vessel”, 2011 ASME PVP,
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
[2] Churier H. et al. “French nuclear reactor pressure vessel
integrity assessment and life management strategy”,
2011 ASME PVP, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
[3] Churier H. “French reactor vessel integrity”, 2012
ASME PVP, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
[4] Appendix 5.4 of the RSE-M Code, 2010, AFCEN.
[5] Arrieta-Ruiz A. et al. “Nuclear reactor pressure vessel
integrity assessment: enhancement provided by 3D
modeling flaw stability calculations”, 2013 ASME PVP,
Paris, France.
[6] Appendix ZI of the RCC-M Code, 2000 and addendum
2007.
[7] Appendix 5.6 of the RSE-M Code, 2010, AFCEN.
[8] www.code-aster.org

8 Copyright © 2016 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/conferences/asmep/90494/ on 04/05/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/abo