FeCrAl-UN燃料棒性能模拟分析

涂腾; 高士鑫; 周毅; 陈平; 张瑞谦; 杨青峰; 廖楠

doi:10.13832/j.jnpe.2021.S2.0165

FeCrAl-UN燃料棒性能模拟分析

doi: 10.13832/j.jnpe.2021.S2.0165

1.
中国核动力研究设计院，成都，610213
2.
中国核动力研究设计院核反应堆系统设计技术重点实验室，成都，610213

基金项目: 国家重点研发计划（2019YFB1901000）

详细信息

作者简介:
涂　腾（1990—），男，工程师，现从事核燃料元件设计及性能分析工作， E-mail: tuteng422@163.com

中图分类号: TB535
计量
- 文章访问数: 351
- HTML全文浏览量: 77
- PDF下载量: 43
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-07-19
- 录用日期: 2021-12-06
- 修回日期: 2021-10-22
- 刊出日期: 2021-12-29

Simulation Analysis of FeCrAl-UN Fuel Rod Performance

1.
Nuclear Power Institute of China, Chengdu, 610213, China
2.
Science and Technology on Reactor System Design Technology Laboratory, Nuclear Power Institute of China, Chengdu, 610213, China

摘要

摘要: FeCrAl包壳和UN芯块作为耐事故燃料（ATF）的重要选项，需要对其在压水堆环境中的性能进行分析。本文基于国内外最新的FeCrAl包壳和UN燃料物性数据和行为模型，对燃料性能分析程序FUPAC进行了二次开发，从而对不同线功率密度下FeCrAl/UN、FeCrAl/UO₂、Zr-4/UN和Zr-4/UO₂燃料棒堆内性能进行分析。通过对比，FeCrAl/UN燃料棒在芯块温度、裂变气体释放、燃料棒内压等方面具备良好性能，但由于FeCrAl包壳的蠕变率低，一旦包壳-芯块间隙闭合，包壳应力迅速增加，该现象需要在后续研究中加以关注。
- 耐事故燃料（ATF） /
- 氮化铀（UN）燃料 /
- FeCrAl包壳
Abstract: FeCrAl cladding and UN fuel pellet are important accident tolerant fuel (ATF) candidates, it’s necessary to analyze the performance of FeCrAl cladding and UN fuel pellet under PWR operation condition. Based on the latest FeCrAl cladding and UN fuel physical property data and behavior model at home and abroad, the fuel performance analysis program FUPAC is redeveloped to analyze the in-reactor performance of FeCrAl/UN, FeCrAl/UO₂, Zr-4/UN and Zr-4/UO₂ fuel rods under different linear power densities. Through comparison, the results showed that FeCrAl/UN fuel rod has good performance in aspects like pellet temperature, fission gas release, fuel rod internal pressure, etc. But due to low creep rate of FeCrAl cladding, once the cladding-pellet gap closes, the cladding stress increases rapidly. This phenomenon needs to be paid attention during the following research.
- Accident tolerant fuel (ATF) /
- Uranium nitride (UN) fuel /
- FeCrAl cladding

HTML全文

图 1 4根燃料棒的燃耗对比

Figure 1. Burn-up Comparison of 4 Fuel Rods

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 不同燃料棒包壳-芯块间隙及芯块中心温度对比

Figure 2. Comparison of Cladding-Pellet Gap and Pellet Center Temperature Between Different Fuel Rods

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 4根燃料棒的裂变气体释放率及燃料棒内压对比

Figure 3. Comparison of Fission Gas Release and Fuel Rod Internal Pressure Between 4 Fuel Rods

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 线功率密度为18.82 kW/m时4根燃料棒的包壳应变和应力对比

Figure 4. Comparison of Cladding Strain and Stress Between 4 Fuel Rods(Linear Power Density is 18.82 kW/m)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 线功率密度为23.53 kW/m时4根燃料棒包壳应变和应力对比

Figure 5. Comparison of Cladding Strain and Stress between 4 Fuel Rods (Linear Power Density is 23.53 kW/m)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 燃料棒尺寸

Table 1. Dimension of Fuel Rods

燃料棒类型	FeCrAl/UN	FeCrAl/UO₂	Zr-4/UN	Zr-4/UO₂
包壳厚度/mm	0.35	0.35	0.57	0.57
芯块直径/mm	8.632	8.632	8.192	8.192
包壳-芯块间隙/mm	0.084
包壳外径/mm	9.5

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 不同线功率密度下4根燃料棒性能对比

Table 2. Comparison of Fuel Performance of 4 Fuel Rods Under Different Linear Power Density

性能	线功率密度/( kW·m⁻¹)	FeCrAl/UN	FeCrAl/UO₂	Zr-4/UN	Zr-4/UO₂
燃耗/[MW·d·t⁻¹(U)]	18.82	32110	44995	35702	50029
燃耗/[MW·d·t⁻¹(U)]	23.53	40137	56244	44628	62536
包壳-芯块间隙/μm	18.82	20	0	0	0
包壳-芯块间隙/μm	23.53	9	0	0	0
芯块中心温度/℃	18.82	446	869	451	913
芯块中心温度/℃	23.53	472	1120	491	1203
裂变气体释放率/%	18.82	0.9	0.94	0.97	2.22
裂变气体释放率/%	23.53	1.11	10.29	1.27	16.22
内压/MPa	18.82	5.842	7.318	7.973	8.862
内压/MPa	23.53	6.298	13.114	8.477	18.579
包壳应变/μm	18.82	−0.65	−0.64	−1.17	−0.39
包壳应变/μm	23.53	−0.66	0	−1.05	0.34
包壳应力/MPa	18.82	−133	143	2	74
包壳应力/MPa	23.53	−124	245	8	87

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(13)

[1]	BRAASE L, MAY W E. Advanced fuels campaign FY 2014 accomplishments report[R]. Idaho Falls: U. S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Under DOE Idaho Operaton Office, 2014.
[2]	涂腾,李文杰,李伟,等. UN燃料性能数值分析[J]. 核动力工程,2017, 38(6): 185-188.
[3]	涂腾,李文杰,陈平,等. UN燃料稳态和瞬态性能初步分析[J]. 中国核电,2017, 10(1): 335-340.
[4]	MATTHEWS R B. Irradiation performance of nitride fuels[R]. Washington: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1993.
[5]	WU X, KOZLOWSKI T, HALES J D. Neutronics and fuel performance evaluation of accident tolerant FeCrAl cladding under normal operation conditions[J]. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 2015, 85: 763-775. doi: 10.1016/j.anucene.2015.06.032
[6]	BATES J F, STRAALSUND J L. An empirical representation of irradiation-induced swelling of solution treated type 304 stainless steel[J]. Nuclear Technology, 1972, 14(3): 292-298. doi: 10.13182/NT72-A31119
[7]	SWEET R, GEORGE N, TERRANI K, et al. BISON Fuel Performance Analysis of FeCrAl cladding with updated properties[R]. Oak Ridge: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2016.
[8]	HAYES S L, THOMAS J K, PEDDICORD K L. Material property correlations for uranium mononitride: II. Mechanical properties[J]. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 1990, 171(2-3): 271-288. doi: 10.1016/0022-3115(90)90375-W
[9]	HAYES S L, ThOMAS J K, PEDDICORD K L. Material property correlations for uranium mononitride: I. Physical properties[J]. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 1990, 171(2-3): 262-270. doi: 10.1016/0022-3115(90)90374-V
[10]	HAYES S L, THOMAS J K, PEDDICORD K L. Material property correlations for uranium mononitride: III. Transport properties[J]. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 1990, 171(2-3): 289-299. doi: 10.1016/0022-3115(90)90376-X
[11]	HAYES S L, THOMAS J K, PEDDICORD K L. Material property correlations for uranium mononitride: IV. Thermodynamic properties[J]. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 1990, 171(2-3): 300-318. doi: 10.1016/0022-3115(90)90377-Y
[12]	EL-GENK M S, ROSS S B, MATTHEWS R B. Uranium nitride fuel swelling and thermal conductivity correlations[C]//Proceedings of the Transactions of the Fourth Symposium on Space Nuclear Power Systems. 1987: 313-317
[13]	STORMS E K. An equation which describes fission gas release from UN reactor fuel[J]. Journal of Nuclear Materials, 1988, 158: 119-129. doi: 10.1016/0022-3115(88)90161-4