Stationary Liquid Fuel Fast Reactor

Yang, Won Sik; Grandy, Andrew; Boroski, Andrew; Krajtl, L.; Johnson, Terry R.

doi:10.2172/1227267

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 5 summarizes the kinetic parameters and reactivity coefficients at the end of equilibrium cycle (EOEC). The loop-type arrangement of the primary heat transport system was selected for SLFFR design due to the relative compactness of the reactor vessel that supports the use of a rapid and frequent refueling system that does not require a large span across the reactor vessel head (Yang et al, 2015). The reactor core and the heat exchangers of DRACS are contained in a reactor vessel, and the primary pumps and IHXs are located in shielded cells outside the reactor vessel.…”

Section: Computational Models Of Slffr Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For effective burning of hazardous TRU elements of used nuclear fuel, a transformational advanced reactor concept named the stationary liquid fuel fast reactor (SLFFR) was proposed based on a stationary molten metallic fuel (Yang and Grandy, 2012). The net consumption rate of TRU is maximized in the SLFFR by utilizing a uranium-free fuel that reduces the TRU conversion ratio to zero.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fuel cycle performances were analyzed with detailed depletion calculations and ex-core fuel cycle models. A multi-channel safety analysis code named MUSA was developed, tailored to SLFFR, and various protected and unprotected accidents were analyzed (Yang et al, 2015). The resulting, latest core design of SLFFR is described in this paper and the companion paper.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Stationary liquid fuel fast reactor SLFFR — Part II: Safety analysis

Tian¹,

Jung²,

Yang³

2016

Nuclear Engineering and Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Safety characteristics have been evaluated for the stationary liquid fuel fast reactor (SLFFR) proposed for effective burning of hazardous TRU elements of used nuclear fuel. In order to model the geometrical configuration and reactivity feedback mechanisms unique to SLFFR, a multi-channel safety analysis code named MUSA was developed. MUSA solves the timedependent coupled neutronics and thermal-fluidic problems. The thermal-fluidic behavior of the core is described by representing the core with one-dimensional parallel channels. The primary heat transport system is modeled by connecting compressible volumes by liquid segments. A point kinetics model with six delayed neutron groups is used to represent the fission power transients. The reactivity feedback is estimated by combining the temperature and density variations of liquid fuel, structural material and sodium coolant with the corresponding axial distributions of reactivity worth in each individual thermal-fluidic channel. Preliminary verification tests with a conventional solid fuel reactor agreed well with the reference solutions obtained with the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 code. Transient analyses of SLFFR were performed for unprotected transient overpower (UTOP), unprotected loss of heat sink (ULOHS) and unprotected loss of flow (ULOF) accidents. The results showed that the thermal expansion of liquid fuel provides sufficiently large negative feedback reactivity for passive shutdown of UTOP and ULOHS. The ULOF transient is also terminated passively with the negative reactivity introduced by the gas expansion modules installed at the core periphery. The maximum coolant temperatures have sufficient margins to the sodium boiling point for all three unprotected transient scenarios.

show abstract

Section: Computational Models Of Slffr Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stationary liquid fuel fast reactor SLFFR — Part II: Safety analysis

Tian¹,

Jung²,

Yang³

2016

Nuclear Engineering and Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the burnup reactivity loss is much faster at a low conversion ratio and hence appropriate means for reactivity compensation must be employed (e.g., shorter length cycles with more frequent refueling or a large number of control assemblies). In order to overcome these difficulties in achieving very low or zero TRU conversion ratios in conventional solid fuel fast reactors, a new type of molten metallic fuel reactor concept named the stationary liquid fuel fast reactor (SLFFR) was proposed (Yang and Grandy, 2012). The feasibility of achieving a zero TRU conversion ratio with sufficiently negative prompt feedbacks was shown through preliminary core design studies for a 1000 MWt SLFFR using TRU-Ce-Co fuel, Ta-10W fuel container, and sodium coolant Jing et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several design iterations were made to provide not only the customary safety margins in design basis events, but also to deliver superior safety performance in beyond design basis events involving multiple equipment failures or unplanned operator actions. Specifically, it was required that the double-fault accidents such as the unprotected loss of flow (ULOF), the unprotected loss of heat sink (ULOHS) and the unprotected transient over-power (UTOP) could be terminated passively (Yang et al, 2015;Jing et al, 2016a). Detailed neutronics and thermalfluidic analyses were performed to evaluate the steady-state performance characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stationary liquid fuel fast reactor SLFFR – Part I: Core design

Tian¹,

Yang²,

Jung³

et al. 2016

Nuclear Engineering and Design

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For effective burning of hazardous transuranic (TRU) elements of used nuclear fuel, a transformational advanced reactor concept named the stationary liquid fuel fast reactor (SLFFR) has been proposed based on a stationary molten metallic fuel. A compact core design of a 1000 MWt SLFFR has been developed using TRUCe Co fuel, Ta-10W fuel container, and sodium coolant. Conservative design approaches have been adopted to stay within the current material performance database. Detailed neutronics and thermal-fluidic analyses have been performed to evaluate the steady-state performance characteristics. The analysis results indicate that the SLFFR of a zero TRU conversion ratio is feasible while satisfying the conservatively imposed thermal design constraints. A theoretical maximum TRU consumption rate of 1.01 kg/day is achieved with uranium-free fuel. Compared to the solid fuel reactors with the same TRU conversion ratio, the core size and the reactivity control requirement are reduced significantly. The primary and secondary control systems provide sufficient shutdown margins, and the calculated reactivity feedback coefficients show that the prompt fuel expansion coefficient is sufficiently negative.

show abstract

Multiphysics Coupling of PROTEUS-NODAL and SAM for Molten Salt Reactor Simulation

Jaradat

Yang

Park

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Verification tests of the coupled system of PROTEUS-NODAL and SAM were performed using the steady state and transient problems derived from the MSFR benchmark problem. Since the radial crossflow is neglected in the current SAM model, the effect of this simplification was first examined by comparing the steady state results with those obtained by a manually coupled calculation of PROTEUS-NODAL and ANSYS CFX. The SAM calculation used four parallel axial channels and CFX performed the full 3D CFD calculation in the cylindrical geometry of the MSFR core. Due to the neglect of the radial velocity field in the SAM calculation, SAM underestimated the axial velocity at the core center slightly, and this resulted in a slightly top-skewed power distribution: 0.1% overestimation in the upper part and 0.2% underestimation in the lower part of the core. The UTOP, ULOF, and ULOHS accidents of the MSFR transient benchmark were analyzed by including the outer loop in the SAM model. The results were compared with the PSI solutions from a coupled PARCS and TRACE calculation and the TUDelft solutions obtained from a coupled neutron diffusion and CFD calculation. In general, the power and core-averaged fuel temperature solutions of the coupled PROTEUS-NODAL and SAM calculations agreed well with the other solutions.

show abstract

Stationary Liquid Fuel Fast Reactor

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Stationary liquid fuel fast reactor SLFFR — Part II: Safety analysis

Stationary liquid fuel fast reactor SLFFR — Part II: Safety analysis

Stationary liquid fuel fast reactor SLFFR – Part I: Core design

Multiphysics Coupling of PROTEUS-NODAL and SAM for Molten Salt Reactor Simulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About