THE OECD-NEA SFP PROJECT AN EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME AND RELATED ANALYSES FOR THE CHARACTERIZATION OF HYDRAULIC AND IGNITION

PHENOMENA OF PROTOTYPIC WATER REACTOR FUEL ASSEMBLIES

THE OECD-NEA SFP PROJECT AN EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME AND RELATED ANALYSES FOR THE CHARACTERIZATION OF HYDRAULIC AND IGNITION PHENOMENA OF PROTOTYPIC WATER REACTOR FUEL ASSEMBLIES

1.

Program Background and Experiment Description

1.1 Objective The objective of the proposed project to is to perform a highly detailed thermal-hydraulic characterization of full length, commercial 1717 pressurized water reactor (PWR) fuel assembly mock-ups to provide data for the direct validation of MELCOR or other appropriate severe accident codes. MELCOR model predictions based on extrapolations from the results of a previously conducted boiling water reactor (BWR) study indicate that PWR assemblies will ignite and radially propagate in a spent fuel pool complete-loss-of-coolant accident. The proposed PWR characterization will be similar to that successfully conducted for the BWR study and will lead to two full-scale PWR fire tests where the zirconium alloy cladding is heated in air to ignition. The PWR experimental design and data analysis will be closely coupled with MELCOR modeling as was done in the previous BWR study. The previous BWR results are not directly applicable to a PWR assembly due to significant geometric differences in the assembly designs (see Section 1.3 for details). The most significant difference is the absence of the Zircaloy channel box on the PWR assembly. The annular flow between the tube bundle and storage cell wall is fundamentally different in the PWR leading to unique hydraulic and convective heat transfer characteristics. The absence of the Zircaloy channel box in the PWR assembly also reduces the relative inventory of zirconium and may significantly alter the nature of the axial and radial burn front propagation. The technical expertise gained during the BWR ignition tests allows a number of experimental improvements to be incorporated into the proposed PWR study. An improved thermocouple layout will minimize the number of sensors lost when ignition occurs, allowing more information to be collected on the nature of the burn front. The exclusive use of full length assemblies will permit the direct measurement of the naturally induced buoyancy driven flow in all assemblies. Finally, the incorporation of prototypically pressurized rods in some assemblies will allow the measurement of the effect of ballooning on the thermal response and ignition characteristics of the PWR assembly. These and other experimental improvements will greatly increase the realism of the experimental results obtained in the proposed PWR study. 1.2 Testing Outline The study will be conducted in two phases. Phase 1 will focus on axial heating and burn propagation. A single full length test assembly will be constructed with zirconium alloy clad heater rods. As demonstrated in the previous BWR study, the thermal mass of the compacted MgO powder will be used to make the electric heated rods an excellent match to spent fuel. The assembly thermal-hydraulic characteristics will be measured in two different sized storage cells and conclude with an ignition test. The ignition test will determine where in the assembly ignition first occurs and the nature of the burn along the axis of the assembly. The insulated boundary conditions will experimentally represent a hot neighbor situation which isa bounding scenario. 2

Phase 2 will address radial heating and burn propagation and will include effects of fuel rod ballooning. Bench scale ballooning tests will be conducted to help finalize the ballooning rod test. Five full length assemblies will be constructed and tested in a 14 configuration. The center assembly will be of the same heated design as used in Phase 1. The four peripheral assemblies will be unheated but highly prototypic, incorporating prototypic fuel rods and end plugs. These boundary conditions experimentally represent a cold neighbor situation, which complements the bounding scenario covered by Phase 1. The peripheral fuel rods will be filled with high density MgO ceramic sized to precisely match the thermal mass of spent fuel. Studies using this test assembly will conclude with a fire test where the center assembly is heated to ignition, which eventually propagates radially to the peripheral assemblies. All of the fuel rods in two of the four peripheral assemblies will be pressurized with helium so that these fuel rods will balloon when the zirconium alloy cladding reaches high enough temperature. The two peripheral assemblies without pressurized rods would serve as control for evaluating the effect of ballooning. The pressurized rods in two peripheral assemblies are expected to balloon before they ignite. The ballooning will restrict the buoyancy driven flow in the assembly which in turn will increase the heating rate and result in a more rapid progression to ignition. Comparison of the induced flow and thermal response of the two peripheral assemblies with ballooned rods and the two peripheral assemblies without ballooned rods will provide a direct measure of the effect of ballooning. As was done in the previous BWR study, MELCOR modeling results will be utilized in all stages of testing. Pre-test MELCOR modeling results will be used to guide the experimental test assembly design and instrumentation. For example, the location and routing of thermocouples as well as the sizing of hot wire flow sensors will be based on the initial MELCOR results. MELCOR modeling results will also be used to choose experimental operating parameters such as the applied assembly power. Post-test data analysis will be performed using the MELCOR model. At each step in the testing, improvements will be made to the MELCOR model such that confidence in the modeling validity will continually improve. 1.3 Technical Motivation A detailed hydraulic characterization of a full scale, highly prototypic PWR assembly mockup has been conducted. This study was a vital first step for characterizing a PWR assembly but a detailed thermal-hydraulic characterization is also needed. A similar characterization was performed on a full scale, highly prototypic BWR assembly in a previous study but these results are not applicable to a PWR. The geometry of a PWR assembly differs significantly from the BWR assembly in a number of important ways: 1) The water rods in the center of the BWR assembly carry a significant fraction of the total induce flow and aid in cooling. Water rods are not present in the PWR assembly. 2) Eight of the seventy-four rods in the 99 BWR assembly are partial length and end 1.32 m (52 in.) below the top of the assembly. The increased void space in this upper portion of the BWR greatly reduces flow resistance in this upper region. Partial length rods are not present in the PWR assembly. 3) The tube bundle of the BWR is contained inside of a Zircaloy canister that provides a well-defined, confining flow boundary. The absence of a canister on a PWR assembly means that the walls of the storage cell provide the flow boundary and an appreciable annular gap between the wall and the tube bundle exists. This annular 3

flow path complicates the thermal-hydraulic coupling in the PWR assembly. The absence of the Zircaloy channel box on the PWR assembly also reduces the relative inventory of zirconium in the assembly, which is expected to significantly alter the nature of the axial and radial burn front propagation. The presently ongoing PWR hydraulic characterization is providing vital parameters required for calculating the buoyancy driven flow that is established in a heated assembly. This flow must be calculated accurately in order to predict the thermal response of a spent fuel assembly in a complete loss-of-coolant accident. While the hydraulic characterization in Phase I includes the effects of the annular gap, the ability of severe accident codes to model the multi-dimensional flow paths and the magnitude of the corresponding heat transfer to the annular flow will be determined. This can only be accomplished through highly prototypic heated experimentation as proposed in this study. Fuel rod ballooning is an important phenomena expected to occur prior to ignition. Rod ballooning has been shown to occur in the temperature range of 950 K to 1150 K. In the BWR 14 ignition test a peak clad temperature of 1050K was reached at 2.75 hrs and the rapid escalation in temperature to ignition began at 4.75 hrs at a clad temperature of 1200 K. Thus fuel rod ballooning is expected to occur during the crucial period prior to ignition and could be expected to decrease the time to ignition by an hour or more. 1.4 Current Studies In an ongoing study, the hydraulic characterization of a full scale, highly prototypic PWR assembly mockup is being conducted using three state-of-the-art quartz crystal differential pressure gauges and a laser Doppler anemometer (LDA) apparatus. The pressure gauges allow accurate measurement of the pressure drop across individual spacers at very low Reynolds numbers (Re = 12 to 1000). The LDA can accurately measure velocities as low as 0.001 m/s. A clear plastic window running the entire length of the assembly allows probing the flow field at any point in the assembly. 2. Phased Experimental Approach

2.1 Phase 1 The testing in Phase 1 will focus on axial heating and burn propagation. The test assembly will prototypically represent commercial 1717 PWR fuel bundle. The various components comprising a typical 1717 PWR assembly are illustrated in Figure 1. The main structural component of the assembly is the core skeleton which consists of eleven spacers permanently attached to twenty-five guide tubes. The 264 fuel rods pass through the spacers and are held in place in the assembly by the top and bottom nozzles.

Guide tubes Bottom nozzle Spacer Top nozzle

Figure 1

Various components in a typical 1717 PWR fuel assembly. 4

The single full length heated PWR assembly will be fabricated using prototypic, commercial 1717 PWR fuel assembly components and 0.375 heater rods made from 0.422 zirconium alloy tubing supplied by an industrial vendor. The heater rods will be manufactured by a commercial vendor using the same fuel rod simulator design proven highly successful in the BWR study. The spent fuel rod simulators will have a linear power profile and a maximum output of 82 W/m (25 W/ft). An important attribute of the heater design is that the thermal mass of the compacted magnesium oxide (MgO) powder used to electrically insulate the central heating element from the cladding is virtually the same as the thermal mass of spent fuel over the entire temperature range of interest (as shown in Figure 2). These spent fuel simulators will therefore heat at the same rate and store the same amount of thermal energy as spent fuel rods.
3.8E+06 3.6E+06 3.4E+06 rho Cp (J/m3/K) 3.2E+06 3.0E+06 2.8E+06 2.6E+06 2.4E+06 2.2E+06 2.0E+06 0 500 Tem p (K) 1000 1500 Melcor spent fuel MgO heater

Figure 2

Thermal mass comparison of spent fuel and MgO fuel rod simulators.

The experimental approach and instrumentation will be similar to that used in the previous BWR study. Figure 3 shows the test assembly used in the heated BWR study. The full length electrically heated PWR test assembly will be positioned inside a storage cell that is covered with a thick layer of high temperature insulation. The instrumentation will include hot wire flow meters, oxygen sensors, quartz light pipes, and a large number of thermocouples (TCs). Most of the TCs will be located within the bundle. The TCs in the top third of the bundle will be routed out the top of the assembly while those lower will be routed out the bottom in order to minimize the number of sensors lost when ignition occurs. Pre-test MELCOR modeling results will be used to determine the actual TC routing.

High temperature insulation

Thermocouple

Storage cell

Light pipe

O2 Sensor

Hot wire Flow meter

Figure 3

Heated BWR test assembly and instrumentation.

The Phase 1 test plan will be very similar to the corresponding plan in the BWR study. For the pre-ignition testing, the assembly will be heated at a given power and the resulting steady state temperatures and induce flow rate determined. The maximum temperatures must be kept below 900 K in order to avoid excessive oxidation of the zirconium components. Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6 show some of the corresponding data generated in the BWR study (in red) along with the MELCOR model calculations (in blue). The steady state buoyancy driven flow and resulting temperature profile are highly coupled. The thermal gradient inside the bundle creates the buoyancy that drives the flow. The flow in turn convectively cools the bundle such that the flow and the thermal gradients come into balance. The resulting data set provides an excellent validation database for any dynamic thermal-hydraulic numerical model of the assembly. In contrast to the previous BWR project, two series of heated pre-ignition PWR experiments will be conducted using two different size storage cells that span those typically found in commercial storage casks and spent fuel pools. The two different sized storage cells will form two different sized annular gaps between the tube bundle and the storage cell wall. The parallel annular flow path between the bundle and the inner storage cell wall complicates the thermal-hydraulic coupling in the PWR assembly. The partitioning of flow between the annular and bundle regions will be characterized by the laser Doppler anemometer (LDA) used in the recent PWR hydraulic characterization study. The ability and validity of severe accident codes to account for the magnitude of the heat transported to the annular flow will be determined.

150 125 Flow Rate (slpm) 100 75 50 25 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Assembly Power (Watts)

Figure 4

Volumetric flow rates as a function of assembly input power for experiment (symbols) and MELCOR (line).

1100

900

PCT (K)

700

500

300 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Assembly Power (Watts)

Figure 5

Peak cladding temperature as a function of assembly input power for experimental (symbols) and MELCOR (blue line).

700

600 Temperature (K)

500

400

300 0 2 4 6 Time (hrs) 8 10 12

Figure 6

Comparison of the experimentally measured thermal transient response (solid red) with the MELCOR code (dashed blue) for an assembly power input of 1370 W.

The Phase 1 testing will conclude with the ignition of the assembly much like that conducted for the BWR study. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the peak clad temperature and oxygen concentration data (in red) collected during the ignition of a full length BWR assembly. MELCOR predictions agreed favorably with experimental data. The corresponding MELCOR calculations are shown in blue. The power used represented a 100 day old assembly. The insulated boundary conditions experimentally represented a 100 day old assembly surrounded by 100 day old neighbors. This hot neighbor scenario represents an important bounding situation where the oldest, lowest power assembly can heat to ignition. In the BWR test, ignition initiated about two thirds the way up the heated length and then burned downwards. Once ignition occurred the oxygen concentration dropped sharply to zero above the burn front. The downward advance of the burn front was driven by the upward flowing supply of oxygen. All of the zirconium was not consumed as the front moved downward. Once the bottom was reached, the burn front reversed directions and moved back up the length of the assembly consuming the remaining zirconium. The assembly was completely destroyed by the fire as shown in Figure 9. The burn front could not move upwards initially because the burning Zircaloy rods and channel box consumed all the oxygen. The absence of a Zircaloy channel box on a PWR assembly could lead to different burn characteristics. If some oxygen can bypass the burning rods in the annulus, the burn front may proceed further upwards initially, and the burning of the zirconium may be more complete as the burn front moves down. This burn behavior would also likely affect the radial propagation characteristics, which is the focus of the testing in Phase 2.

2300

1900 Temperature (K)

1500

1100

700

300 0 2 4 6 Time (hr) 8 10 12

Figure 7

PCT for both the ignition experiment (solid red) and the MELCOR model (dashed blue).
25

20 O2 Concentration (%)

15

10

0 0 2 4 6 Time (hr) 8 10 12

Figure 8

Oxygen concentration within the bundle as measured in the ignition experiment (solid red) and predicted by MELCOR (dashed blue).

Figure 9

Postmortem of the assembly after ignition.

2.2 Phase 2 The testing in Phase 2 will address radial heating and burn propagation. Five full length assemblies that prototypically represent commercial 1717 PWR assemblies will be constructed and tested in a 14 configuration as shown in Figure 10 and Figure 11. The center assembly will be comprised of the same unpressurized heated design as used in Phase 1. The four peripheral assemblies will be unheated but highly prototypic incorporating not only the commercial structural skeleton but also commercial zirconium alloy fuel tubes, surrogate ceramic fuel pellets, and commercial end plugs. Two of the peripheral assemblies will contain pressurized rods, which will balloon when a critical temperature is reached. The internal pressure of some of the pressurized rods will be monitored with strain gauges. The 10

five assemblies will be positioned in a highly prototypic 33 commercial pool rack. The pool rack will be covered with a thick layer of high temperature insulation. The boundary conditions experimentally represent a cold neighbor situation, which signifies an important bounding situation and complements the bounding scenario covered by Phase 1. The use of all full length assemblies in the 14 configuration allows the naturally induced flow generated by each assembly to be monitored and represents a considerable experimental enhancement over the short assemblies used in the previous BWR study. A similar set of pre-ignition characterization experiments will conducted with the Phase 2 test apparatus. The center assembly will be heated at a given power with the resulting steady state temperatures and induced flow rates determined in all five assemblies. The maximum temperatures again must be kept below 900 K in order to avoid excessive oxidation of the zirconium components. The Phase 2 testing will conclude with the ignition test of the test apparatus similar to that conducted for the BWR study. The center assembly will simulate a younger, higher powered assembly than that used in the Phase 1 ignition test. The cold neighbor boundary conditions require a higher power in order to achieve ignition since these peripheral assemblies act as a heat sink. In the previous BWR test, a 15 day old assembly was simulated. Figure 12 shows the thermal response of the center and peripheral assemblies in the BWR 14 ignition test. Figure 13 shows the oxygen response of the center assembly. The data is shown in red and the corresponding MELCOR simulation is shown in blue. Again, the BWR ignition corresponds to a steep drop in oxygen concentration. The inability of any oxygen to bypass the burn front may be an artifact of the Zircaloy canister burning. The absence of a Zircaloy channel box on a PWR assembly could lead to different burn characteristics. If some oxygen can bypass the burning rods in the annulus, the burn front may proceed further upwards initially and the burning of the zirconium may be more complete on the way down. This burn behavior would likely affect the radial propagation characteristics. MELCOR predictions agreed favorably with the experimental data. This validation shows that MELCOR can be used to analyze the different mitigation strategies for the safety of SFP.

11

Electrically heated center assembly. 0.422 Zircaloy tubes made into 0.375 heaters

Prototypic 3x3 pool rack

Boral panel in steel wrapper Unheated peripheral assemblies. 0.374 Zircaloy tubes packed with MgO and capped with prototypic end plugs

17x17 PWR

Prototypic

Figure 10

Side view of the 14 configuration.

Prototypic 3x3 pool rack Ballooning peripheral assembly

Unheated peripheral assemblies. 0.374 Zircaloy tubes with MgO fill and capped with prototypic end plugs. Electrically heated center assembly. 0.422 Zircaloy tubes made into 0.375 heaters 0.075 Boral composite in stainless steel wrapper

Figure 11

Plan view of the 14 configuration.

12

2300

1900 Temperature (K)

1500

1100

Center

700

Peripherals

300 0 2 4 Time (hrs) 6 8

Figure 12

PCT of the center and peripheral assemblies as measured in the ignition experiment (red lines) and as modeled in MELCOR (blue lines).

25

20 O2 Concentration (%)

15

10

0 0 2 4 Time (hrs) 6 8

Figure 13

Oxygen concentration within the center bundle as measured in the ignition experiment (solid red) and predicted by MELCOR (dashed blue).

13

2.2.1 Ballooning Rod Design and Testing Fuel rods balloon because the rods contain pressurized gas. At high enough temperature, the metallic walls soften and can no longer contain the pressure. Ballooning is a serious issue not only because the rupture of the fuel rod wall is the first step in a radioactive release, but the ballooned rods restrict the flow path in the bundle leading to a faster temperature rise toward ignition. The fuel rods in a commercial 1717 PWR assembly are initially backfilled with about 17.2 bar (250 psi) helium at ambient temperature. After two years in the reactor, gaseous fission product release increases the internal pressure to about 24.8 bar (360 psi) at ambient temperature. At an average rod temperature of 1050 K, the internal pressure reaches almost 89.6 bar (1300 psi). Rod ballooning has been shown to occur in the temperature range of 950 K to 1150 K [Nucl Sci. & Tech., Vol 42, No. 2 p. 209-218 Feb 2005]. In the BWR 14 ignition test, a peak clad temperature of 1050 K was reached at 2.75 hrs and the rapid escalation to ignition began at 4.75 hrs at a clad temperature of 1200 K. Thus, fuel rod ballooning is expected to occur during the crucial period prior to ignition and could significantly decrease the time to ignition. This study incorporates the phenomena of ballooning into the design of two of the four peripheral assemblies. The rods in two of the peripheral assemblies would be pressurized and the rods in the two other assemblies would be vented to atmosphere. The level of pressurization is yet to be determined. The use of commercial fuel rod tubing, end plugs, and surrogate ceramic fuel pellets in the peripheral assemblies provides the opportunity to backfill the rods with inert gas in prototypic commercial fashion. The end plugs will be laser welded onto the tube. The pressurized rods are filled through a small hole in the top end plug, which is then laser welded closed. Vendors have been identified that have laboratory capability for performing these fabrication procedures. If agreements cannot be instituted with these vendors, in-house capability would need to be developed at SNL. An important design issue for a ballooning rod is the choice of fill material that accurately represents the thermal mass of an actual spent fuel rod without altering the ballooning characteristics. MgO has been identified as having a higher thermal mass per volume (Cp) with a temperature dependence that parallels UO2 fuel pellets. Because the thermal mass of MgO is greater it can be adjusted downward to accurately match UO2 by incorporating voids. The packed MgO powder with 25% voids used in the heater rod design has been shown to accurately match spent fuel. However, an issue with this approach is that the pore space in the compacted MgO may be so small that ballooning would be inhibited. Another possible design for the rods in the peripheral assemblies is shown in Figure 14. The ceramic fill is composed of high density magnesium oxide pellets. The pellets would be custom made so that the outer diameter allows easy installation into the tubes but the gas gap is not large enough to hinder thermal conduction into the pellet. The inner hole is sized so that the thermal mass of the ceramic pellets matches the thermal mass of spent fuel as shown in Figure 2. Other design concerns such as the effect of the stored energy of the gas will also need to be considered. Single rod balloon testing will be required in order to sort out the best design. A tubular muffle furnace will be used to heat sections of pressurized simulated fuel rods of various designs to point of ballooning. A control design will incorporate solid high density alumina or magnesia ceramic pellets so that the plenum volume is represented prototypically. The nature of ballooning of the various test rods will be compared to the control rod and used as a factor in determining the best design for the Phase 2 experimental apparatus.

14

Top end plug with gas fill hole Spring

High density MgO ceramic

Zircaloy tube

Bottom end plug

Figure 14 Ballooning rod simulator design.

3. Time Schedule and Indicative Cost The proposed project is expected to take thirty nine months to complete and is estimated to cost $5.2 M US. The proposal includes two full scale test apparatuses. Each test apparatus will be subjected to a battery of pre-ignition testing and a final destructive ignition test. In the second test apparatus, two of the five assemblies will be constructed with pressurized rods so as to incorporate rod ballooning phenomena.

3.1

Time Schedule of Deliverables 15

Table 1 Testing Phase Phase 1 (Test Plan) Phase 1 (Test Report) Phase 2 (Ballooning Rod Design) Phase 2 (Test Plan) Phase 2 (Test Report)

Time schedule of deliverables. Time from Project Deliverable Type Start Letter Report 3 mo. SAND Report 12 mo. Letter Report Letter Report SAND Report 18 mo. 20 mo. 39mo.

3.2

Cost Summary Phase 1: Single full length 1717 PWR with Zirlo clad heater rods Technical Summary Measure thermal response and naturally induced flow for various assembly powers Conclude with ignition experiment Major Material Estimate Summary ($200k) Zircaloy tubing Heater fabrication PWR skeleton Instrumentation Labor Estimate Summary ($1,300k) Two engineers Three technicians Phase 2: 14 full length 1717 PWRs with one heated center and four unheated peripheral assemblies. Two peripheral assemblies have pressurized rods. Technical Summary Develop ballooning rod simulator Pressurize fuel rods in two peripheral assemblies to characterize ballooning Measure thermal response and naturally induced flow for various assembly powers Conclude with ignition experiment that includes rod ballooning in peripheral assemblies Major Material Estimate Summary ($1,400k) Zircaloy tubing Heater fabrication Peripheral rod fabrication Peripheral rod pressurization for ballooning PWR skeletons Instrumentation Labor Estimate Summary ($2,300k) 16

Two engineers Three technicians

4. Addendum 1: Analysis Support An objective of the thermal-hydraulic and ignition characterization of the PWR assemblies is to provide prototypic data for code validation. The NRC has previously developed computer codes for the analysis of spent fuel response to a range of accident conditions. In the absence of prototypic validation data, the inputs were specified using available geometric data and textbook correlations. The codes were subsequently used for a variety of studies to characterize the response of spent fuel in casks and spent fuel pools (SFPs) to accident conditions. With the generation of the thermal-hydraulic data in the recent BWR SFP and the proposed PWR experimental programs, a higher degree of confidence can be developed on the appropriateness of the models in the codes and the accuracy of the results. In the previous BWR SFP experimental program, an analysis task was integrated into the program to support the experimental design with pre-test predictions and post-test analysis. The experimental design analysis was used to answer a range of design questions such as the magnitude of the heat loss versus the insulation thickness and optical port size, the impact of MgO as a surrogate for UO2, the impact of a linear power profile versus a prototypic axial profile, the impact of heater rod failure (i.e., the decay heat source) on the test progression, the impact of reduced oxygen concentration on partial length tests, etc. The test program also allowed improvements to be made in the analytical model. For example, the use of the prototypical assembly and rack in the experimental program resulted in precise calibration of component weights, dimensions, and design for input to the analysis code. The characterization of the hydraulic tests gave new insights into laminar flow losses and the role of flow in the water rods that was not previously available. Finally, the thermal testing gave invaluable insights into the radiative emissivity of oxidized surfaces, the effective thermal resistance of the canister and rack wall, three-dimensional effects, and the appropriateness of the simplified correlation for breakaway oxidation derived from isothermal thermogravimetric (TGA) tests conducted at SNL.1 A similar analysis effort is proposed for the PWR thermal-hydraulic and ignition testing. The analysis effort would include three components, (1) experimental design analysis, (2) pretest predictions, and (3) post-test analysis. The NRC will use MELCOR code. The MELCOR code is based on a building block design (i.e., a user-specified arrangement of control volumes, flow paths, and heat conductors). The code includes specialized models to represent the primary thermal radiation pathways for SFP or cask geometry. MELCOR also includes an empirical lifetime breakaway oxidation model that was developed from SNL testing. The code currently does not include a thermal-mechanical model for rod ballooning but does have provisions for variable inertial and viscous resistance as a function of other calculated parameters. A simplified rod ballooning model is a desired modeling outcome from the testing program. Other severe accident codes are expected to be utilized by other project participants. In order to facilitate the comparison of these various codes, a detailed test plan for each test phase including boundary and input conditions will be made available to project participants. Likewise, the test results for each test phase will be shared with each project participant to allow comparison with the pre-test predictions. This coupling of prototypic testing and
1

Natesan, K., and Soppet, W.K. Air Oxidation Kinetics for Zr-Based Alloys, NUREG/CR-6846, Argonne National Laboratories, June 2004.
17

advanced modeling is expected to generate greater confidence in the ability to evaluate these accident scenarios.. 5. Addendum 2: Addressing CSNI Expert Recommendations A CSNI Experts meeting was held in Paris to review this proposal on September 9 and 10, 2008. The purpose of this addendum is to summarize how the recommendations will be addressed in the project. These recommendations are documented in Section 9 of the Summary Record of the Experts Meeting on the Proposed OECD Sandia Fuel Project (SFP) Paris 9-10 September 2008. From an experimental implementation perspective the most pertinent recommendations are found in items 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 17 and are listed below: 3. The materials employed are appropriate. The option to use Zirlo or Zr-4 as cladding material is to be discussed. 4. The material of the cell is important to keep for as long as possible the geometry of the cell after ignition (for Phase 1 testing). 6. Some aspects of instrumentation will need further discussion. In particular: a. The use of high-temperature thermocouples in addition to the K-type should be explored. b. Where feasible, the Nitrogen consumption/release should be traced. 7. The potential for using guide tubes as instrument carrier was encouraged. 8. SNL will check the possibility to expand the laser velocimetry measurements to the thermal-hydraulic, pre-ignition test in Phase 1. 9. Options for in-rod pressure measurements (e.g. bellows/LVDT coupling) alternative to strain gauges should be considered. 10. Some post-test analyses should complement the on-line experimental data. 17. The power level is an important parameter that will need to be discussed in the Project. Two other recommendations are concerned with numerical modeling, items 13 and 15. 13. The programme is to be devised to support the validation of a variety of computer codes of interest to participants (not only MELCOR). 15. The use of some sets of experimental data for CFD applications should be considered. These items are addressed in turn below. Note that many of these items are interrelated. Item 3. Two zirconium alloys are under consideration for use in the pressurized ballooning rod design, Zr-4 and ZIRLO. ZIRLO is a modern alloy incorporating niobium developed by Westinghouse and is similar to M5, the modern alloy developed by Areva. Of concern is that the niobium may lower the melting point of the ZIRLO and M5 alloys such that ballooning occurs at a lower temperature than with Zr-4. Modeling of the ballooning phenomena will require material specific temperature dependent creep data. Creep data for Zr-4 is publically available. Creep data for ZIRLO is proprietary Westinghouse information. In order to consider using ZIRLO Sandia would have to obtain the creep data from Westinghouse under a nondisclosure agreement. Under the nondisclosure agreement, Sandia may not be able to share the data with other participants. At least one other participant already has access to the data but also can not share it. If the ballooning models of participants cannot be adequately accommodated with ZIRLO data, full assembly construction using Zr-4 will be considered. 18

Consideration will also be given to using both materials. One pressurized assembly would be built with Zr-4 the other pressurized assembly would be built of ZIRLO. The two unpressurized control assemblies would be split by material, one Zr-4 the other ZIRLO. By this approach a direct comparison between Zr-4 and ZIRLO may be possible, although experimental symmetry may be compromised. Item 4. The storage cells typically used in industry are made of stainless steel which melts at ~1700K. The cells used in the BWR ignition tests were made of stainless steel. The melting of the cell raises three experimental issues: 1) Relocation of the molten steel may accelerate the downward movement of the burn front. While this is a prototypic phenomenon, the recommendation is to consider cell material options that could possibly eliminate molten metal relocation in order to simplify the modeling. 2) Once the storage cell melts, air can be drawn radially into the assembly through the insulation. This is not prototypic and may have unpredictable consequences on the burn front behavior. 3) The loss of the storage cell integrity contributes to the difficulty of extinguishing the burn at the end of the experiment. The full length BWR ignition test could not be extinguished by blocking the air inlet. More than enough air was drawn through the insulation to keep the zirconium burning for days afterwards. Other chromium/nickel steels (Hastelloy, Incoloy, Inconel, Invar, or Kovar) all melt by ~1700 K. To be useful, the material must be viable at temperatures up to at least 2000 K. This requires a ceramic material. The feasibility of accommodating this feature will be evaluated as part of this project. A number of technical issues can be anticipated. High purity alumina can be fashioned into custom shapes like the rounded corner square tube required but an alumina storage cell fabricated as a 4 m long single piece would not be possible. There would need to be joints approximately every 0.5 m that will need to be sealed. The implementation of axially distributed gas sample ports is complicated by the use of a ceramic material. Instrumentation of the storage cell with thermocouples is also more complicated. However, if successfully implemented, the use of a ceramic storage cell would likely mitigate the three experimental issues listed above. Alternatively, a secondary containment around a stainless steel cell is being considered. This containment could be fashioned from a pipe or duct set around the cell with insulation between the two. This solution would address the radial ingress of air and the ability to extinguish the fire but not the relocation of molten metal from the cell. Items 6 and 7. The guide tubes will make good access points for some high temperature thermocouples (TCs). A typical spent PWR assembly would likely have something located inside the guide tubes such as a burnable absorber assembly or a control rod assembly. The appropriate amount of ceramic will be placed in the guide tubes to simulate the thermal mass of a typical assembly. Some of this ceramic can be used as insulators for high temperature platinum (Pt) type TCs. Platinum melts at ~1900 K which is much better than the type K (~1400K) but not high enough to survive the 2000 K temperatures of the burn. This has serious implications for the desired instrumentation. The 24 guide tubes are most easily accessed from the top. However, any TCs routed down a guide tube from the top with a sensing junction located below the ignition point will be lost. This means TCs routed from the top are useful for measuring the upward burn rate but not the downward burn rate. The PWR is expected to have a better chance of an upward burn component than seen in the BWR so some (~10) Pt type TCs at the top of the assembly would be desirable. The TCs need to be routed up from the bottom of the assembly in order to measure the downward burn rate. Unfortunately, space is more constrained at the bottom of the 19

assembly because restrictions to natural draft flows must be minimized. The number of Pt type TCs routed up from the bottom of the assembly should be limited to 2 to 4. Tracking nitrogen consumption will require simultaneous measurement of nitrogen and argon concentrations. Essentially argon is used as a nonreactive tracer. If nitrogen is consumed, the ratio of argon to nitrogen will increase. This type analysis can be done by relatively simple packed column gas chromatography in about six minutes as described recently in the literature.2 Consideration will be given to setting up on-line instrumentation or the collection of samples for off-site analysis. Item 8. The incorporation of a limited number of optical windows in the bottom portion of the stainless steel storage cell used in the first pre-ignition Phase 1 test should be feasible. Item 9. Alternatives to strain gauges, such as end-tube LVDTs, for in-rod pressure measurements will be considered if strain gauges prove ineffective in the single rod balloon testing. Item 10. Post-test inspection of the burnt assemblies will be performed. Special attention will be given to the Phase 2 test to determine the location and extent of ballooning. Detailed posttest chemical analyses will be of most value if the ignition test can be successfully terminated (i.e. the burn extinguished) at desired point in time. Detailed post-test chemical analyses were not conducted on the BWR specimens in part because the burn could not be stopped and most instrumentation was lost days before the experiment extinguished. Based on the experience of the BWR burn tests, consideration will be given to insuring that the PWR burn tests can be extinguished at a desired point in the experiment. Using a ceramic storage cell or secondary containment in the Phase 1 ignition test should help with extinguishing the burn.

Sutour, C., Stumpf, C., Kosinski, J-P. Surget, A., Hervou, G., Yardin, C., Madec T., and Gosset, A., Determination of the argon concentration in ambient dry air for the calculation of air density, Metrologia 44 (2007) 448452.
20

Item 17. The power level options under consideration will be provided to all participants and comments will be encouraged. The ultimate decision on power level will be made by Sandia and USNRC. Item 13. The same data set available for MELCOR modeling will be made available to all participants with the caveat that any proprietary Westinghouse information will be protected according to applicable non-disclosure agreements. Sandia would cooperate with providing additional data to support other participant modeling efforts. This would likely apply to the ZIRLO creep data and geometric specifics of the spacer mixing vanes. Item 15. There is no specific plan or funding available for Sandia to perform CFD modeling. However, most available CFD codes are capable of modeling the separate effects to be studied as part of the test programme. Sandia would cooperate with providing the data to support other participant CFD modeling efforts subject to applicable non-disclosure agreements.

21