FRAPCON-3: Modifications to fuel rod material properties and performance models for high-burnup application

Predictive Bias and Sensitivity in NRC Fuel Performance Codes

“…These comparisons are reported in Lanning et al (1997a) and can be seen in Figures 2.1 through 2.5. There have been no comparisons made to HWR rods such as those from the Halden reactor.…”

“…This document describes the work that was done to evaluate the USNRC fuel performance codes FRAPCON-3.3 (Lanning et al, 1997a, Lanning et al, 1997b, Berna et al, 1997, Lanning et al, 2005a and FRAPTRAN 1.3 (Cunningham et al, 2001a, Cunningham et al, 2001b for any predictive bias and to determine the sensitivity of model, manufacturing, and power history uncertainties on predictions of fuel centerline temperature, cladding strain, and rod internal pressure. The intent of this report is not to ensure the conservatism in predicted fuel behavior.…”

“…If new data were discovered, these data were compared to the models in FRAPCON-3.3 and FRAPTRAN-1.3 in order to determine if the model is biased relative to the data. This section will not validate the current models, as this work has already been performed (Lanning et al, 1997a, Lanning et al, 1997b, Lanning et al, 2005a, Cunningham et al, 2001b.…”

“…The MOX thermal conductivity model in FRAPCON-3.3 is described in Lanning et al (2005a). This model is a function of burnup, oxygen to metal ratio and temperature.…”

“…This model is a function of burnup, oxygen to metal ratio and temperature. Lanning et al (2005a) provides no model to data comparisons. A literature search was performed and several sources of unirradiated MOX thermal conductivity were found (Duriez, 2000, Philipponneau, 1992.…”