Bignell, John B.; Hanson, Brady; Cantonwine, Paul; Montgomery, Rosemary; Torres, Ricardo; Billone, Mike
The Sibling Pin test campaign is a Department of Energy (DOE) research activity within the Spent Fuel and Waste Science and Technology (SFWST) program that is tasked with characterization of high burnup (HBU) fuel in support of the High Burnup Spent Fuel Data Project. Of the 25 fuel rods in the Sibling Pin inventory, approximately 9 rod lengths have been consumed during the first phase (Phase I) of the test campaign leaving approximately 16 rod lengths for the second phase (Phase II) of testing. This plan outlines the Phase II testing and the motivations for performing these tests. Priorities for Phase II testing are based on previously identified knowledge gaps, lessons-learned from Phase I work, the original objectives of the High Burnup Spent Fuel Data Project and the Sibling Pin test campaign, and input from external stakeholders. The priorities for Phase II testing are to obtain data to characterize the effects of annealing on cladding mechanical properties and fuel rod performance, to quantify the creep behavior of cladding materials and fuel rods and the effects of creep deformations on the performance of cladding and fuel rods, and to gather data to support the final closure of the hydride reorientation and radial hydride induced embrittlement gap for HBU fuel rods.
Criticality Control Overpack (CCO) containers are being considered for the disposal of defense-related nuclear waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP).
Safety basis analysts throughout the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex rely heavily on the information provided in the DOE Handbook, DOE-HDBK-3010, Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, to determine radionuclide source terms from postulated accident scenarios. In calculating source terms, analysts tend to use the DOE Handbook's bounding values on airborne release fractions (ARFs) and respirable fractions (RFs) for various categories of insults (representing potential accident release categories). This is typically due to both time constraints and the avoidance of regulatory critique. Unfortunately, these bounding ARFs/RFs represent extremely conservative values. Moreover, they were derived from very limited small-scale bench/laboratory experiments and/or from engineered judgment. Thus, the basis for the data may not be representative of the actual unique accident conditions and configurations being evaluated. The goal of this research is to develop a more accurate and defensible method to determine bounding values for the DOE Handbook using state-of-art multi-physics-based computer codes. This enables us to better understand the fundamental physics and phenomena associated with the types of accidents in the handbook. In this fourth year, we improved existing computational capabilities to better model fragmentation situations to capture small fragments during an impact accident. In addition, we have provided additional new information for various sections of Chapters 4 and 5 of the Handbook on free fall powders and impacts of solids, and have provided the damage ratio simulations for containers (7A drum and standard waste box) for various drops and impact scenarios. Thus, this work provides a low-cost method to establish physics-justified safety bounds by considering specific geometries and conditions that may not have been previously measured and/or are too costly to perform during an experiment.
To determine the in-plane crush properties of a perforated aluminum and Kevlar® layered composite, confined compression tests were performed. Cylindrical samples were used in the test. The samples were cut by waterjet from bulk material. The tests were conducted in the geomechanics laboratory at Sandia National Laboratories. Force and displacement data were recorded to determine the stress versus volumetric strain up to full compaction of the material. Full compaction was determined to be when the displacement was negligible or when the material had compacted about 63 percent in volume, which was the open volume percent of the aluminum layers in the uncompressed specimens. This testing is intended to capture data for use in the structural models used in support of the certification of the AWG-711 hazardous materials air transportation package.
Safety basis analysts throughout the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex rely heavily on the information provided in the DOE Handbook, DOE-HDBK-3010, Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, to determine radionuclide source terms from postulated accident scenarios. In calculating source terms, analysts tend to use the DOE Handbook’s bounding values on airborne release fractions (ARFs) and respirable fractions (RFs) for various categories of insults (representing potential accident release categories). This is typically due to both time constraints and the avoidance of regulatory critique. Unfortunately, these bounding ARFs/RFs represent extremely conservative values. Moreover, they were derived from very limited small-scale bench/laboratory experiments and/or from engineered judgment. Thus, the basis for the data may not be representative of the actual unique accident conditions and configurations being evaluated. The goal of this research is to develop a more accurate and defensible method to determine bounding values for the DOE Handbook using state-of-art multi-physics-based computer codes.
Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) conducted in the summer of 2017 its third fracture challenge (i.e., the Third Sandia Fracture Challenge or SFC3). The challenge, which was open to the public, asked participants to predict, without foreknowledge of the outcome, the fracture response predictions of an additively manufactured tensile test coupon of moderate geometric complexity when loaded to failure. This paper outlines the approach taken by our team, one of the SNL teams that participated in the challenge, to make a prediction. To do so, we employed a traditional finite element approach coupled with a continuum damage mechanics constitutive model. Constitutive model parameters were determined through a calibration process of the model response with the provided longitudinal and transverse tensile test coupon data. Comparison of model predictions with the challenge coupon test results are presented and general observations gleaned from the exercise are provided.
Safety basis analysts throughout the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex rely heavily on the information provided in the DOE Handbook, DOE - HDBK - 3010, Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, to determine radionuclide source terms. In calculating source terms, analysts tend to use the DOE Handbook's bounding values on airborne release fractions (ARFs) and respirable fractions (RFs) for various categories of insults (representing potential accident release categories). This is typically due to both time constraints and the avoidance of regulatory critique. Unfortunately, these bounding ARFs/RFs represent extremely conservative values. Moreover, they were derived from very limited small-scale bench/laboratory experiments and/or from engineered judgment. Thus, the basis for the data may not be representative of the actual unique accident conditions and configurations being evaluated. The goal of this research is to develop a more accurate and defensible method to determine bounding values for the DOE Handbook using state-of-art multi-physics-based computer codes. This enables us to better understand the fundamental physics and phenomena associated with the types of accidents in the handbook. In this year, this research included improvements of the high-fidelity codes to model particle resuspension and multi-component evaporation for fire scenarios. We also began to model ceramic fragmentation experiments, and to reanalyze the liquid fire and powder release experiments that were done last year. The results show that the added physics better describes the fragmentation phenomena. Thus, this work provides a low-cost method to establish physics-justified safety bounds by taking into account specific geometries and conditions that may not have been previously measured and/or are too costly to perform.
Ductile failure of structural metals is relevant to a wide range of engineering scenarios. Computational methods are employed to anticipate the critical conditions of failure, yet they sometimes provide inaccurate and misleading predictions. Challenge scenarios, such as the one presented in the current work, provide an opportunity to assess the blind, quantitative predictive ability of simulation methods against a previously unseen failure problem. Rather than evaluate the predictions of a single simulation approach, the Sandia Fracture Challenge relies on numerous volunteer teams with expertise in computational mechanics to apply a broad range of computational methods, numerical algorithms, and constitutive models to the challenge. This exercise is intended to evaluate the state of health of technologies available for failure prediction. In the first Sandia Fracture Challenge, a wide range of issues were raised in ductile failure modeling, including a lack of consistency in failure models, the importance of shear calibration data, and difficulties in quantifying the uncertainty of prediction [see Boyce et al. (Int J Fract 186:5–68, 2014) for details of these observations]. This second Sandia Fracture Challenge investigated the ductile rupture of a Ti–6Al–4V sheet under both quasi-static and modest-rate dynamic loading (failure in (Formula presented.) 0.1 s). Like the previous challenge, the sheet had an unusual arrangement of notches and holes that added geometric complexity and fostered a competition between tensile- and shear-dominated failure modes. The teams were asked to predict the fracture path and quantitative far-field failure metrics such as the peak force and displacement to cause crack initiation. Fourteen teams contributed blind predictions, and the experimental outcomes were quantified in three independent test labs. Additional shortcomings were revealed in this second challenge such as inconsistency in the application of appropriate boundary conditions, need for a thermomechanical treatment of the heat generation in the dynamic loading condition, and further difficulties in model calibration based on limited real-world engineering data. As with the prior challenge, this work not only documents the ‘state-of-the-art’ in computational failure prediction of ductile tearing scenarios, but also provides a detailed dataset for non-blind assessment of alternative methods.
Iridium alloys have been utilized as structural materials for certain high-temperature applications due to their superior strength and ductility at elevated temperatures. In some applications where the iridium alloys are subjected to high-temperature and high-speed impact simultaneously, the high-temperature high-strain-rate mechanical properties of the iridium alloys must be fully characterized to understand the mechanical response of the components in these severe applications. In this study, the room-temperature Kolsky tension bar was modified to characterize a DOP-26 iridium alloy in tension at elevated strain rates and temperatures. The modifications include (1) a unique cooling system to cool down the bars while the specimen was heated to high temperatures with an induction heater; (2) a small-force pre-tension system to compensate for the effect of thermal expansion in the high-temperature tensile specimen; (3) a laser system to directly measure the displacements at both ends of the tensile specimen independently; and (4) a pair of high-sensitivity semiconductor strain gages to measure the weak transmitted force. The dynamic high-temperature tensile stress-strain curves of the iridium alloy were experimentally obtained with the modified high-temperature Kolsky tension bar techniques at two different strain rates (~1000 and 3000 s-1) and temperatures (~750 and 1030 °C).
Conventional Kolsky tension bar techniques were modified to characterize an iridium alloy in tension at elevated strain rates and temperatures. The specimen was heated to elevated temperatures with an induction coil heater before dynamic loading; whereas, a cooling system was applied to keep the bars at room temperature during heating. A preload system was developed to generate a small pretension load in the bar system during heating in order to compensate for the effect of thermal expansion generated in the high-temperature tensile specimen. A laser system was applied to directly measure the displacements at both ends of the tensile specimen in order to calculate the strain in the specimen. A pair of high-sensitivity semiconductor strain gages was used to measure the weak transmitted force due to the low flow stress in the thin specimen at elevated temperatures. The dynamic high-temperature tensile stress–strain curves of a DOP-26 iridium alloy were experimentally obtained at two different strain rates (~1000 and 3000 s−1) and temperatures (~750 and 1030 °C). The effects of strain rate and temperature on the tensile stress–strain response of the iridium alloy were determined. The iridium alloy exhibited high ductility in stress–strain response that strongly depended on strain-rate and temperature.