ML21033A638
| ML21033A638 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07103036 |
| Issue date: | 12/31/2019 |
| From: | Kyoto Univ, Kyoto Univ, Japan |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| NJDevaser - NMSS/DFM/STL - 301.415.5196 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML21033A635 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML21033A638 (604) | |
Text
SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT OF JRF-90Y-950K 2019 Kyoto University
CONTENTS Page
() Description of nuclear fuel package ************************** ()
A. Purpose and conditions *************************************** ()--1 B. Kinds of package ********************************************* ()--1 C. Packaging **************************************************** ()--1 D. Contents of packaging **************************************** ()--1
() Safety analysis of nuclear fuel package ********************** ()
A. Structural analysis ****************************************** ()--1 A.1 Structural design ****************************************** ()--1 A.1.1 General description ************************************* ()--1 A.1.2 Design standards **************************************** ()--2 A.2 Weight and center of gravity ******************************* ()--33 A.3 Mechanical properties of materials ************************* ()--33 A.4 Requirements of the package ******************************** ()--50 A.4.1 Chemical and electrical reactions *********************** ()--50 A.4.2 Low temperature strength ******************************** ()--51 A.4.3 Sealing device ****************************************** ()--52 A.4.4 Hoisting accessory ************************************** ()--53 A.4.5 Tightening device *************************************** ()--58 A.4.6 Pressure ************************************************ ()--66 A.4.7 Vibration *********************************************** ()--68 A.5 Normal test conditions ************************************* ()--71 A.5.1 Thermal test ******************************************** ()--71 A.5.1.1 Outline of temperature and pressure ****************** ()--71 A.5.1.2 Thermal expansion ************************************ ()--73 1
A.5.1.3 Stress calculation *********************************** ()--74 A.5.1.4 Comparison of allowable stress *********************** ()--82 A.5.2 Water spray ********************************************* ()--84 A.5.3 Free drop *********************************************** ()--84 A.5.4 Stacking test ******************************************* ()--201 A.5.5 Penetration ********************************************* ()--207 A.5.6 Corner or edge drop ************************************* ()--209 A.5.7 Summary of results and evaluation *********************** ()--209 A.6 Accident test conditions *********************************** ()--210 A.6.1 Mechanical test - Drop test I (9m drop) ***************** ()--210 or mechanical test - Drop (dynamic pressure pickles)
A.6.1.1 Vertical drop **************************************** ()--216 A.6.1.2 Horizontal drop ************************************** ()--230 A.6.1.3 Corner drop ****************************************** ()--237 A.6.1.4 Inclined drop **************************************** ()--240 A.6.1.5 Summary of the results ******************************* ()--244 A.6.2 Mechanical test --- Drop (1m drop) ******************** ()--246 A.6.2.1 Summary of results *********************************** ()--252 A.6.3 Thermal test ******************************************** ()--253 A.6.3.1 Summary of temperatures and pressure ***************** ()--253 A.6.3.2 Thermal expansion ************************************ ()--253 A.6.3.3 Comparison of allowable stresses ********************* ()--254 A.6.4 Water immersion ***************************************** ()--256 A.6.5 Summary of result and evaluation ************************ ()--265 A.7 Reinforced immersion test ********************************** ()--267 A.8 Radioactive content **************************************** ()--267 A.9 Fissile package ******************************************** ()--268 A.9.1 Normal test conditions ********************************** ()--268 A.9.2 special test conditions for **************************** ()--270 fissionable transported articles 2
A.10 Appendix ************************************************** ()--275 B. Thermal analysis ******************************************** ()--1 B.1 General description **************************************** ()--1 B.2 Thermal properties of the materials ************************ ()--6 B.3 Specifications of components ******************************* ()--10 B.4 Normal test conditions ************************************* ()--11 B.4.1 Thermal analytical model ******************************** ()--11 B.4.1.1 Analytical model ************************************* ()--11 B.4.1.2 Test model ******************************************* ()--13 B.4.2 Maximum temperatures ************************************ ()--13 B.4.3 Minimum temperatures ************************************ ()--14 B.4.4 Maximum internal pressure ******************************* ()--14 B.4.5 Maximum thermal stress ********************************** ()--14 B.4.6 Summary of results and evaluation *********************** ()--15 B.5 Accident test conditions *********************************** ()--16 B.5.1 Thermal analytical model ******************************** ()--16 B.5.1.1 Analytical model ************************************* ()--16 B.5.1.2 Test model ******************************************* ()--20 B.5.2 Evaluation conditions for packages ********************** ()--21 B.5.3 Temperatures of packages ******************************** ()--21 B.5.4 Maximum internal pressure ******************************* ()--23 B.5.5 Maximum thermal stresses ******************************** ()--23 B.5.6 Summary of results and evaluation *********************** ()--24 B.6 Appendix *************************************************** ()--26 C. Containment analysis ***************************************** ()--1 C.1 General **************************************************** ()--1 C.2 Containment system ***************************************** ()--1 C.2.1 Containment system ************************************** ()--1 3
C.2.2 Penetration of containment system *********************** ()--4 C.2.3 Gasket and weldings of the containment system *********** ()--4 C.2.4 Lid ***************************************************** ()--5 C.3 Normal test conditions ************************************* ()--6 C.3.1 Leakage of radioactive materials ************************ ()--6 C.3.2 Pressurization of the containment system **************** ()--19 C.3.3 Coolant contamination *********************************** ()--19 C.3.4 Loss of coolant ***************************************** ()--19 C.4 Accident test conditions *********************************** ()--20 C.4.1 Fissile gas ********************************************* ()--20 C.4.2 Leakage of radioactive materials ************************ ()--21 C.5 Summary of the results and the evaluation ****************** ()--24 C.6 Appendix *************************************************** ()--25 D. Shield analysis ********************************************** ()--1 D.1 Outline **************************************************** ()--1 D.2 Radiation source specification ***************************** ()--1 D.2.1 Gamma radiation source ********************************** ()--2 D.2.2 Neutron source ****************************************** ()--11 D.3 Model specification **************************************** ()--14 D.3.1 Analysis model ****************************************** ()--14 D.3.2 Numeric density of atoms in each area of analysis model * ()--20 D.4 Shield evaluation ****************************************** ()--22 D.5 Summary of the results and evaluation ********************** ()--27 D.6 Appendix *************************************************** ()--29 E. Criticality analysis ***************************************** ()--1 E.1 General **************************************************** ()--1 E.2 Parts to be analyzed *************************************** ()--3 E.2.1 Content ************************************************* ()--3 4
E.2.2 Packaging *********************************************** ()--3 E.2.3 Neutron absorbing materials ***************************** ()--7 E.3 Model specification **************************************** ()--8 E.3.1 Calculation model *************************************** ()--8 E.3.2 Regional densities for each analyzed model region ******* ()--10 E.4 Evaluation for subcriticality ****************************** ()--28 E.4.1 Calculation conditions ********************************** ()--28 E.4.2 Water immersion into package **************************** ()--29 E.4.3 Calculation method ************************************** ()--29 E.4.4 Results ************************************************* ()--31 E.5 Benchmark test ********************************************* ()--34 E.6 Summary of results and evaluation ************************** ()--44 E.7 Appendix *************************************************** ()--45 F. Assessment of the compliance with the regulation and the notification ************* ()-
() Basic policy for quality management ************************** ()
A. Quality management system ************************************ ()-1 A.1 General requirement **************************************** ()-1 A.2 Requirements for documentation ***************************** ()-2 B. Responsibility of the management ***************************** ()-4 B.1 Commitment of the management ******************************* ()-4 B.2 Responsibility and authority ******************************* ()-4 B.3 Management review ****************************************** ()-5 C. Education and training *************************************** ()-9 C.1 Securing resources ***************************************** ()-9 C.2 Section personnel ****************************************** ()-9 C.3 Education and training, etc. ******************************* ()-9 5
D. Design control *********************************************** ()-10 D.1 Planning of processes required by individual operations **** ()-10 D.2 Determination of individual operations requirements ******** ()-10 D.3 Review of individual operations requirements *************** ()-11 D.4 Transmission of information to external parties ************ ()-11 D.5 Design and development planning **************************** ()-11 D.6 Input related to design and development ******************** ()-12 D.7 Output related to design and development ******************* ()-12 D.8 Design and development review ****************************** ()-13 D.9 Design and development verification ************************ ()-13 D.10 Validation of design and development *********************** ()-14 D.11 Control of design and development changes ****************** ()-14 E. Manufacturing order of transport packaging ******************* ()-16 E.1 Quality management plan ************************************ ()-16 E.2 Procurement process **************************************** ()-16 E.3 Evaluation of the Manufacturer of Transport Packaging ****** ()-16 E.4 Quality Management Requirement to the Manufacturer ********* ()-17 E.5 Verification of manufacturing of transport packaging ******* ()-18 E.6 Schedule management and certification of special processes * ()-18 E.7 Measurement, analysis and improvement ********************** ()-18 E.8 Content of quality management system by manufacturer of transport packaging ************** ()-24 F. Handling and Maintenance ************************************* ()-33 F.1 Handling Management **************************************** ()-33 F.2 Maintenance and storage management ************************* ()-33
() Handling methods and maintenance of nuclear fuel package A. Package handling methods ************************************* ()--1 A.1 Method of loading ****************************************** ()--1 A.2 Package inspection prior to shipment *********************** ()--2 6
A.3 Method of unloading **************************************** ()--2 A.4 Preparation of empty packaging ***************************** ()--2 B. Maintenance requirements ************************************* ()--1 B.1 Visual appearance inspection ******************************* ()--1 B.2 Pressure durability inspection ***************************** ()--1 B.3 Airtight leakage inspection ******************************** ()--1 B.4 Shielding inspection *************************************** ()--1 B.5 Subcriticality inspection ********************************** ()--1 B.6 Thermal inspection ***************************************** ()--1 B.7 Lifting inspection ***************************************** ()--1 B.8 Actuation check/inspection ********************************* ()--1 B.9 Maintenance of auxiliary systems *************************** ()--2 B.10 Maintenance of the valves, gaskets, etc. of sealing devices ()--2 B.11 Storage of the transport packaging ************************* ()--2 B.12 Retention of records *************************************** ()--2 B.13 Others ***************************************************** ()--2 (V) Important Notice about a safe design and the safe transportation ********* (V) 7
List of Figures Page Chapter I
()-Fig.A.1 Rough drawing of package *************************** ()--7
()-Fig.C.1 Rough drawing of package *************************** ()--2
()-Fig.C.2 Package under transport condition ****************** ()--3
()-Fig.C.3 Package under transport condition ****************** ()--4
()-Fig.C.4 Seal boundary of package *************************** ()--5
()-Fig.C.5 General drawing of package ************************* ()--9
()-Fig.C.6 Main body ****************************************** ()--10
()-Fig.C.7 Inner lid ****************************************** ()--11
()-Fig.C.8 Basket for box type fuel *************************** ()--12
()-Fig.C.9 Outer shell lid ************************************ ()--13
()-Fig.D.1 Metal spacer ************************************** ()--4
()-Fig.D.2 JRR-3 standard type fuel element ******************* ()--8 (uranium silicon aluminum dispersion alloy)
()-Fig.D.3 JRR-3 follower type fuel element ******************* ()--9 (uranium silicon aluminum dispersion alloy)
()-Fig.D.4 JRR-4B type fuel element *************************** ()--10
()-Fig.D.5 JRR-4L type fuel element *************************** ()--11
()-Fig.D.6 JRR-4 fuel element ********************************* ()--12 (uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy)
()-Fig.D.7 JMTR standard fuel element ************************* ()--13
()-Fig.D.8 JMTR follower type fuel element ******************** ()--14
()-Fig.D.9 KUR standard and half-loaded fuel element ********** ()--15 (uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy)
()-Fig.D.10 KUR special fuel element *************************** ()--16 (uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy)
()-Fig.D.11 JMTRC standard fuel element *********************** ()--17 (A type, B type, C type)
()-Fig.D.12 JMTRC standard fuel element (pin fix type) ******** ()--18 (C type)
()-Fig.D.13 JMTRC special fuel element (special A type) ******** ()--19
()-Fig.D.14 JMTRC special fuel element (special B type) ******** ()--20
()-Fig.D.15 JMTRC special fuel element ************************* ()--21 8
(special C type, special D type)
()-Fig.D.16 JMTRC fuel follower (HF type) ********************** ()--22
()-Fig.D.17 JMTRC standard fuel element (MA, MB, MC type) ****** ()--23
()-Fig.D.18 JMTRC special fuel element ************************* ()--24 (special MB type, special MC type)
()-Fig.D.19 JMTRC fuel follower (MF type) ********************** ()--25
()-Fig.D.20 KUCA Coupon type fuel ****************************** ()--26
()-Fig.D.21 KUCA flat type fuel ******************************** ()--27 9
Chapter
()-Fig.A.1 Position of center of gravity ********************** ()--33
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--37 SUS304 according to changes in temperature (1/5)
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--38 SUS304 according to changes in temperature (2/5)
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--39 SUS304 according to changes in temperature (3/5)
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--40 SUS304 according to changes in temperature (4/5)
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--41 SUS304 according to changes in temperature (5/5)
()-Fig.A.3 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--42 SUS630 according to changes in temperature (bolt material)(1/4)
()-Fig.A.3 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--43 SUS630 according to changes in temperature (bolt material)(2/4)
()-Fig.A.3 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--44 SUS630 according to changes in temperature (bolt material)(3/4)
()-Fig.A.3 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--45 SUS630 according to changes in temperature (bolt material)(4/4)
()-Fig.A.4 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--46 SUS630 according to changes in temperature(1/1)
()-Fig.A.5 Variations in mechanical properties of ************* ()--47 AG3NE according to changes in temperature (1/1)
()-Fig.A.6 Design fatigue curve (austenitic type stainless **** ()--48 steel and high nickel alloy)
()-Fig.A.7 Design fatigue curve ******************************* ()--48 (high tensile strength bolt)
()-Fig.A.8 Stress-strain curve of shock absorber ************** ()--49
()-Fig.A.9 Analytical model for eye-plate ********************* ()--53
()-Fig.A.10 Analytical model of welded part on eye-plate ******* ()--56
()-Fig.A.11 Acceleration during transportation ***************** ()--58
()-Fig.A.12 Analytical model for eye-plate ********************* ()--60
()-Fig.A.13 Analytical model for welded part of eye-plate ****** ()--63
()-Fig.A.14 Vibration analytical model of packaging ************ ()--68
()-Fig.A.15 Analytical model of thermal expansion ************** ()--73 10
()-Fig.A.16 Stress evaluation position under ******************* ()--75 normal test conditions
()-Fig.A.17 Stress analysis model of inner shell *************** ()--76 center portion
()-Fig.A.18 Stress analysis model of inner shell bottom plate ** ()--77
()-Fig.A.19 Stress analysis model of inner lid center portion ** ()--78
()-Fig.A.20 Analytical model of inner lid O-ring displacement ** ()--79
()-Fig.A.21 Stress analysis model of bolt of the inner lid ***** ()--80 (initial clamping stress)
()-Fig.A.22 Stress analysis model of bolt of inner lid ********* ()--81 (stress due to internal pressure)
()-Fig.A.23 Stress analysis model of bolt of inner lid ********* ()--82 (stress due to thermal expansion)
()-Fig.A.24 Acceleration evaluation position of steel plate **** ()--88 for horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.25 Acceleration analysis model of outer shell plate *** ()--89 for horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.26 Cross section of outer shell lid flange ************ ()--92
()-Fig.A.27 Acceleration analysis model of outer shell head **** ()--95 plate for horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.28 Cross section of partition plate ******************* ()--97
()-Fig.A.29 Deformation analysis model of eye plate ************ ()--99
()-Fig.A.30 Analytical model of eye-plate fixing-plate ********* ()--100
()-Fig.A.31 Analytical model of flange of outer shell ********** ()--102
()-Fig.A.32 Analytical model of eye-plate fixing lug *********** ()--104
()-Fig.A.33 Acceleration analysis model of steel plate ******** ()--106 for vertical drop
()-Fig.A.34 Acceleration analysis model of steel plate ********* ()--108 for corner drop
()-Fig.A.35 Stress evaluation position for 1.2m **************** ()--111 horizontal drop (main body of inner shell)
()-Fig.A.36 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--112 due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2m horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.37 Stress analysis model of inner shell for *********** ()--113 1.2m horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.38 Stress analysis model of inner shell *************** ()--114 bottom plate for 1.2m horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.39 Stress analysis model of inner she11 *************** ()--115 upper part for 1.2m horizontal drop 11
()-Fig.A.40 Stress analysis model for inner lid **************** ()--117 clamping bolt for 1.2m horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.41 Analytical model of section ************************ ()--118 modulus of rectangular fuel basket
()-Fig.A.42 Evaluation of fuel elements for l.2m *************** ()--122 horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.43 Analytical model of rectangular fuel elements for ** ()--123 l.2m horizontal drop perpendicular to fuel plate
()-Fig.A.44 Analytical model of rectangular fuel element for *** ()--124 1.2m horizontal drop parallel to fuel plate
()-Fig.A.45 Analytical model of holder ************************* ()--129
()-Fig.A.46 Analytical model of fuel plate for ***************** ()--130 1.2m horizontal drop parallel to fuel plate
()-Fig.A.47 Analytical model of coupon fuel for **************** ()--131 1.2m horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.48 Analytical model of flat fuel plate for 1.2 m ****** ()--132 horizontal drop in the plane direction of the fuel plate
()-Fig.A.49 Analytical model of flat fuel plate for 1.2 m ****** ()--133 horizontal drop in the direction parallel to the fuel plate
()-Fig.A.50 Stress evaluation position for 1.2m lower ********** ()--141 side vertical drop (main body of packaging)
()-Fig.A.51 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--142 due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2m lower side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.52 Stress analysis model of inner shell for *********** ()--143 1.2m lower side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.53 Stress analysis model of inner shell bottom ******** ()--144 plate for 1.2m lower side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.54 Stress analysis model of inner lid for ************* ()--146 1.2m lower side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.55 Stress analysis model of rectangular fuel ********** ()--148 element for 1.2m lower side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.56 Analytical model of 1.2m lower portion ************* ()--150 vertical drop of lowly irradiated fuel element
()-Fig.A.57 Analytical model of 1.2m lower portion vertical **** ()--152 drop of lowly irradiated fuel element
()-Fig.A.58 Analytical model of hold down part ***************** ()--153
()-Fig.A.59 Analytical model of 1.2m vertical drop: *********** ()--155 coupon fuel 12
()-Fig.A.60 Analytical model of 1.2m vertical drop: coupon fuel ()--156 flat fuel
()-Fig.A.61 Stress evaluation position for 1.2m lid side ******* ()--164 vertical drop (main body of a packaging)
()-Fig.A.62 Analytical model of interference inner ************* ()--165 shell due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2m lid side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.63 Stress analysis model of inner shell for *********** ()--166 1.2m lid side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.64 Stress analysis model of inner shell *************** ()--167 bottom plate for 1.2m lid side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.65 Stress analysis model of inner lid for ************* ()--169 1.2m lid side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.66 Stress analysis model of rectangular fuel ********** ()--175 element for l.2m lid side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.67 Analytical model of 1.2m upper portion ************ ()--177 vertical drop of lowly irradiated fuel element
()-Fig.A.68 Analytical model for 1.2m upper portion vertical *** ()--179 drop of lowly irradiated fuel element
()-Fig.A.69 Analytical model of hold down part ***************** ()--180
()-Fig.A.70 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--191 due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2m corner drop
()-Fig.A.71 Analytical model of stress on inner lid ************ ()--193 clamping bolts for lid side corner drop
()-Fig.A.72 Analytical model of interference with inner shell ** ()--197 due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2m lower side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.73 Relationship between acceleration and drop angle *** ()--198 for 1.2m lower side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.74 Analytical model of interference with inner shell ** ()--199 due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2m upper side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.75 Relationship between acceleration and drop angle *** ()--200 for 1.2m upper side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.76 Stress evaluation position for compressive load **** ()--202
()-Fig.A.77 Analytical model of inner lid under **************** ()--202 compressive load
()-Fig.A.78 Analytical model of inner shell under ************** ()--204 compressive load
()-Fig.A.79 Penetration model ********************************** ()--207
()-Fig.A.80 Shearing model ************************************* ()--208 13
()-Fig.A.81 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--216 due to shock absorber deformation for 9m lower side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.82 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--223 due to shock absorber deformation for 9m upper side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.83 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--230 due to shock absorber deformation for 9m horizontal drop
()-Fig.A.84 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--237 due to shock absorber deformation for 9m corner drop
()-Fig.A.85 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--240 due to shock absorber deformation for 9m lower side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.86 Relationship between acceleration and drop angle *** ()--241 for 9m lower side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.87 Analytical model of interference to inner shell **** ()--242 due to shock absorber deformation for 9m upper side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.88 Relationship between acceleration and drop angle *** ()--243 for 9m upper side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.89 Analytical model for drop test ****************** ()--246
()-Fig.A.90 Analytical model for penetration strength ********** ()--248 under conditions of drop test
()-Fig.A.91 Stress evaluation position of inner shell ********** ()--256 for 15m immersion test
()-Fig.A.92 Analytical model of allowable buckling ************* ()--257 pressure for frame of inner shell
()-Fig.A.93 Curve representing buckling behavior factor ******** ()--258 of inner shell under external pressure
()-Fig.A.94 Stress analysis model of center of inner shell ***** ()--259
()-Fig.A.95 Stress analysis model of bottom plate ************** ()--260 of inner shell
()-Fia.A.96 Stress analysis model of center of inner lid ******* ()--261
()-Fig.A.97 Displacement analysis model of O-rings of ********** ()--262 inner lid under external pressure
()-Fig.A.98 Normal test conditions ***************************** ()--268
()-Fig.A.99 Accident test condition **************************** ()--270
()-Fig.A.100 Drop attitude and test order *********************** ()--272
()-Fig.A.101 Analytical model of shock absorber ***************** ()--276 14
()-Fig.A.102 Analytical model by uniaxial displacement method *** ()--277
()-Fig.A.103 Compressive stress/strain relationship of materials ()--278
()-Fig.A.104 Proportion of shock absorber *********************** ()--281
()-Fig.A.105 Analytical model of inner lid for 1.2m ************* ()--283 lid side vertical drop
()-Fig.A.106 Stress/strain characteristics curves for *********** ()--288 shock absorber at low temperatures
()-Fig.A.107 Stress/strain curves for hard polyurethane foam **** ()--289
()-Fig.A.108 Low temperature strength of SUS 304 **************** ()--290
()-Fig.A.109 Low temperature impact value of SUS 304 ************ ()--291
()-Fig.A.110 Low temperature impact value of SUS 630H1150 ****** ()--292
()-Fig.A.111 Analytical model for initial clamping force ******** ()--293 of inner lid clamping bolts
()-Fig.A.112 Triangle diagram for inner lid clamping bolt ******* ()--298
()-Fig.B.1 Component of packaging ***************************** ()--3
()-Fig.B.2 Concept of thermal transmission ******************** ()--4
()-Fig.B.3 Two dimensional axis symmetrical model ************* ()--17
()-Fig.B.4 Temperature time history under accident ************ ()--22 test conditions
()-Fig.B.5 TRUMP flowchart (1/3)***************************** ()--32
()-Fig.B.5 TRUMP flowchart (2/3)***************************** ()--33
()-Fig.B.5 TRUMP flowchart (3/3)***************************** ()--34
()-Fig.B.6 Fuel basket model ********************************** ()--35
()-Fig.B.7 Comparison of prototype packaging test results ***** ()--43 with analysis results
()-Fig.C.1 Containment boundary of packaging ****************** ()--3
()-Fig.D.1 Neutron fission energy spectrum ******************** ()--12
()-Fig.D.2 Gamma radiation shield calculation model *********** ()--16
()-Fig.D.3 Relationship between packaging surface angles ****** ()--17 flux and calculation point of packaging surface 15
()-Fig.D.4 Neutron shield calculation model ******************* ()--19
()-Fig.D.5 Mesh distribution drawing ************************** ()--31
()-Fig.E.1 Calculation model of arrayed packages for ********** ()--11 criticality with 10 box type fuel elements (except KUR)
()-Fig.E.2 Calculation model of arrayed packages for ********** ()--12 criticality with 10 box type fuel elements (KUR and KUCA fuel)
()-Fig.E.3 Calculation model of package for criticality ******* ()--13 with 10 box type fuel elements
()-Fig.E.4 Calculation model of package for criticality ******* ()--14 with HEU and MEU
()-Fig.E.5 Criticality calulation model of JRR-3 ************** ()--15 standard fuel element
()-Fig.E.6 Criticality calculation model of JRR-4B type ******* ()--16 fuel element
()-Fig.E.7 Criticality calculation model of JRR-4L type ******* ()--17 fuel element
()-Fig.E.8 Criticality calculation model JRR-4 type *********** ()--18 fuel element
()-Fig.E.9 Criticality calculation model of JMTR standard ******* ()--19 type fuel element
()-Fig.E.10 Criticality calculation model of JMTRC standard *** ()--20 type fuel element (HEU)
()-Fig.E.11 Criticality calculation model of JMTRC standard***** ()--21 type fuel element (MEU)
()-Fig.E.12 Criticality calculation model of KUR standard******* ()--22 type fuel element
()-Fig.E.13 Criticality calculation model of KUCA coupon******** ()--23 type fuel
()-Fig.E.14 Criticality calculation model of KUCA flat ********** ()--24 type fuel element
()-Fig.E.15 Schematic flow of criticality analysis ************* ()--30
()-Fig.E.14 Relationship between effective multiplication ****** ()--32 factor (keff+/-3) and water density (contained ten JRR-3 standard type fuel elements (uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy))
()-Fig.E.16 Configuration of TCA criticality experiments ******* ()--38
()-Fig.E.17 SPERT-D fuel *************************************** ()--39 16
()-Fig.E.18 SPERT-D fuel (continued) *************************** ()--40
()-Fig.E.19 Core arrangement *********************************** ()--41
()-Fig.E.20 Fuel element *************************************** ()--42
()-Fig.E.21 Core arrangement *********************************** ()--43
()-Fig.E.22 Relationship between effective multiplication ****** ()--48 factor (keff+/-3) and water density type fuel element (contained ten JRR-3 standard type fuel elements (uranium silicon Aluminum dispersion type alloy))
Chapter
()-Fig.B.1 Quality assurance organization for design of the transport packaging *****************()-8 17
List of Tables Chapter
()-Table A.1 Specification of fuel enclosed in package ******** ()--3
()-Table C.1 Material of packaging **************************** ()--15
()-Table C.2 Dimension of packaging *************************** ()--16
()-Table C.3 Weight of packaging ****************************** ()--17
()-Table D.1 Specification of fuel element ******************** ()--5 (fresh fuel element)
()-Table D.2 Specification of fuel element ******************** ()--6 (lowly irradiated fuel element)
()-Table D.3 Specification of fuel element ******************** ()--7 (fresh fuel for KUCA)
Chapter
()-Table A.1 Design standard for structural analysis ********** ()--4
()-Table A.2 Design load, combination of load (1/2) *********** ()--5
()-Table A.2 Design load, combination of load (2/2) *********** ()--6
()-Table A.3 Load condition (1/2) ***************************** ()--7
()-Table A.3 Load condition (2/2) ***************************** ()--8
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--9 of structural analysis (1/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--10 of structural analysis (2/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--11 of structural analysis (3/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--12 of structural analysis (4/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--13 of structural analysis (5/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--14 of structural analysis (6/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--15 of structural analysis (7/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--16 of structural analysis (8/24) 18
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--17 of structural analysis (9/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--18 of structural analysis (10/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--19 of structural analysis (11/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--20 of structural analysis (12/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ (II)--21 of structural analysis (13/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--22 of structural analysis (14/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--23 of structural analysis (15/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--24 of structural analysis (16/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--25 of structural analysis (17/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--26 of Structural analysis (18/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--27 of structural analysis (19/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--28 of structural analysis (20/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--29 of structural analysis (21/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--30 of structural analysis (22/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--31 of structural analysis (23/24)
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods ************ ()--32 of structural analysis (24/24)
()-Table A.5 Mechanical properties of materials *************** ()--35
()-Table A.6 Mechanical properties of materials to be used **** ()--36 as design standards
()-Table A.7 List of different materials contacted ************ ()--50
()-Table A.8 Minimum temperatures of parts of package ********* ()--51
()-Table A.9 Summary of analyses under routine transport ****** ()--65 19
()-Table A.10 Stresses evaluation under changed pressure ******* ()--67
()-Table A.11 Design temperature under normal test conditions ** ()--71
()-Table A.12 Design pressure under normal test conditions ***** ()--72
()-Table A.13 Stress evaluation under normal test conditions *** ()--83 (thermal test)
()-Table A.14 Deformation and acceleration of shock ************ ()--87 absorber under normal test conditions
()-Table A.15 Design acceleration under normal test conditions * ()--110
()-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2m horizontal drop (1/6) ** ()--135
()-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2m horizontal drop (2/6) ** ()--136
()-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2m horizontal drop (3/6) ** ()--137
()-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2m horizontal drop (4/6) ** ()--138
()-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2m horizontal drop (5/6) ** ()--139
()-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2m horizontal drop (6/6) ** ()--140
()-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2m bottom side *********** ()--158 vertical drop(1/6)
()-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2m bottom side *********** ()--159 vertical drop(2/6)
()-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2m bottom side *********** ()--160 vertical drop(3/6)
()-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2m bottom side *********** ()--161 vertical drop(4/6)
()-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2m bottom side *********** ()--162 vertical drop(5/6)
()-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2m bottom side *********** ()--163 vertical drop(6/6)
()-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2m lid side ************** ()--185 vertical drop (1/6)
()-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2m lid side ************** ()--186 vertical drop (2/6)
()-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2m lid side ************** ()--187 vertical drop (3/6)
()-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2m lid side ************** ()--188 vertical drop (4/6)
()-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2m lid side ************** ()--189 vertical drop (5/6) 20
()-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2m lid side ************** ()--190 vertical drop (6/6)
()-Table A.19 Design acceleration for corner drops ************* ()--192
()-Table A.20 Stress evaluation for 1.2m lid side ************** ()--196 corner drop
()-Table A.21 Relationship between drop angle and acceleration * ()--198
()-Table A.22 Relationship between drop angle and acceleration * ()--199
()-Table A.23 Stress evaluation for stacking test ************** ()--206
()-Table A.24 Deformation and acceleration of shock absorber *** ()--214 under accident test conditions
()-Table A.25 Design acceleration under accident *************** ()--215 test conditions
()-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9m lower side ************** ()--217 vertical drop (1/6)
()-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9m lower side ************** ()--218 vertical drop (2/6)
()-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9m lower side ************** ()--219 vertical drop (3/6)
()-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9m lower side ************** ()--220 vertical drop (4/6)
()-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9m lower side ************** ()--221 vertical drop (5/6)
()-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9m lower side ************** ()--222 vertical drop (6/6)
()-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9m upper side ************** ()--224 vertical drop (1/6)
()-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9m upper side ************** ()--225 vertical drop (2/6)
()-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9m upper side ************** ()--226 vertical drop (3/6)
()-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9m upper side ************** ()--227 vertical drop (4/6)
()-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9m upper side ************** ()--228 vertical drop (5/6)
()-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9m upper side ************** ()--229 vertical drop (6/6)
()-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9m horizontal drop (1/6) *** ()--231
()-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9m horizontal drop (2/6) *** ()--232 21
()-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9m horizontal drop (3/6) *** ()--233
()-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9m horizontal drop (4/6) *** ()--234
()-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9m horizontal drop (5/6) *** ()--235
()-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9m horizontal drop (6/6) *** ()--236
()-Table A.29 Design acceleration for corner drop ************** ()--238
()-Table A.30 Stress evaluation for 9m upper corner drop ******* ()--239
()-Table A.31 Relationship between drop angle and acceleration * ()--241
()-Table A.32 Relationship between drop angle ****************** ()--243 and acceleration for drop test
()-Table A.33 Relationship between drop angle ****************** ()--244 and acceleration for drop test
()-Table A.34 Evaluation of penetration for drop test ******* ()--252
()-Table A.35 Design temperatures used for ********************* ()--253 accident test condition
()-Table A.36 Design pressure of package under accident ******** ()--253 condition
()-Table A.37 Stress analysis and evaluation under accident **** ()--255 test conditions (thermal test)
()-Table A.38 Stresses evaluated for 15m water immersion test ** ()--264
()-Table A.39 Damages of the fissile package under the normal ** ()--269 test conditions
()-Table A.40 Compliance with requirements for fissile package ()--269 under normal test conditions
()-Table A.41 Deformations and design accelerations of shock *** ()--273 absorber under accident test conditions (combined evaluation)
()-Table A.42 Damage of the fissile package under special test * ()--274 conditions
()-Table A.43 Comparisons of analytical values ***************** ()--281 by CASH- and experimental values
()-Table A.44 Comparison of analytical and experimental ******** ()--282 results
()-Table A.45 Analysis results of displacement of ************** ()--287 inner O-rings of inner lid
()-Table B.1 Conditions of thermal analyses ******************* ()--5
()-Table B.2 Methods of thermal analyses ********************** ()--6 22
()-Table B.3 Thermal properties of stainless steel ************ ()--7
()-Table B.4 Thermal properties of air ************************ ()--7
()-Table B.5 Thermal properties of shock absorber (balsa) ***** ()--8
()-Table B.6 Thermal properties of heat insulator ************* ()--9 (hard polyurethane foam)
()-Table B.7 Specifications of silicone rubber O-ring ********* ()--10
()-Table B.8 Specifications of fusible plug ******************* ()--10
()-Table B.9 Thermal conditions under normal test conditions ** ()--12
()-Table B.10 Maximum temperatures of each part of package ***** ()--13
()-Table B.11 Thermal conditions under accident test conditions * ()--19
()-Table B.12 Maximum temperatures of package under accident *** ()--21 test conditions
()-Table B.13 Maximum pressure in packaging under accident ***** ()--25 test conditions
()-Table B.14 Convection heat transfer coefficient between ***** ()--37 package surface and ambient environment
()-Table B.15 Radiation factor and radiation morphological ***** ()--37 coefficient
()-Table B.16 Calculation result for packaging internal ******** ()--40 pressure
()-Table B.17 Design pressures for specific test conditions **** ()--41
()-Table B.18 Comparison of prototype packaging test results *** ()--42 with analysis results
)-Table C.1 Design pressure and design temperature of ********* ()--2 containment system
()-Table C.2 The dimensions and material of the gasket ******** ()--5
()-Table C.3 Inner shell clamping bolt ************************ ()--5
()-Table C.4 Maximum permissible leakage rate of the air ****** ()--7
()-Table C.5 The maximum radius of leak hole on leakage rate ** ()--10 test
()-Table C.6 The maximum gas leakage rate under normal test *** ()--11 conditions 234 236
()-Table C.7 Weight proportions of U and U used for ******* ()--13 caluculations
()-Table C.8 Surface contamination level per fuel element **** ()--14 23
()-Table C.9 Leakage rate of radioactive substances under ***** ()--15 normal test condition
()-Table C.10 Nuclide of JMTRC fuel surface water and ********** ()--16 radioactive concentration
()-Table C.11 Surface activity per one fuel element of lowly ** ()--17 irradiated fuel element
()-Table C.12 Leak rate of the radioactivity under normal ****** ()--18 test condition
()-Table C.13 The maximum gas leakage rate under the accident * ()--21 test conditions
()-Table C.14 Leakage rate of radioactive substances under *** ()--23 normal test conditions
()-Table C.15 Leakage rate of radioactive substances under **** ()--23 accident test condition
()-Table D.1 Gamma radiation emission rate of uranium ********* ()--3 isotope
()-Table D.2 Gamma radiation source intensity for one fuel **** ()--3 element
()-Table D.3 Specific activity used for calculation *********** ()--4 234 236
()-Table D.4 U and U weight rate used for calculation ****** ()--4
()-Table D.5 Radioactive nuclide weight per one element used ** ()--4 in calculation
()-Table D.6 Gamma radiation emission rate of uranium isotope * ()--7
()-Table D.7 Gamma radiation source intensity per ************* ()--7 one mixed fuel element (actinoids)
()-Table D.8 Specific activity used for calculation *********** ()--8 234 236
()-Table D.9 U and U weight rate used for calculation ****** ()--8
()-Table D.10 Radioactive nuclide weight per one element ******* ()--8 used in calculation
()-Table D.11 Radioactivity rate of the fission products ******* ()--10 obtained by ORIGEN
()-Table D.12 Uranium isotope spontaneous fission speed ******** ()--11
()-Table D.13 Emission rate of spontaneous fission of ********** ()--13 uranium isotope
()-Table D.14 Material and density ***************************** ()--20 24
()-Table D.15 Volumetric rate of shield material for each ****** ()--20 area used in shield calculation
()-Table D.16 Atom density for each material ******************* ()--21
()-Table D.17 Gamma radiation energy group structure and ******* ()--23 dose-equivalent rate calculation factor
()-Table D.18 Dose-equivalent rate by gamma radiation ********** ()--24 (fresh fuel elements loading)
()-Table D.19 Dose-equivalent rate by gamma radiation ********** ()--24 (lowly irradiated fuel elements loading)
()-Table D.20 Neutron dose-equivalent rate ********************* ()--25
()-Table D.21 Dose-equivalent rate of neutron irradiation ****** ()--26 (lowly irradiated fuel elements loading)
()-Table D.22 Package dose-equivalent rate ********************* ()--27 (fresh fuel element loading)
()-Table D.23 Package dose-equivalent rate ********************* ()--28 (lowly irradiated fuel elements loading)
()-Table E.1 Specifications of fuel element ******************* ()--4
()-Table E.2 Specification of fuel plate (1/2) **************** ()--5
()-Table E.2 Specification of fuel plate (2/2) **************** ()--6
()-Table E.3 Distance from the surface of the inner shell ***** ()--7 to the surface of the packaging
()-Table E.4 Requirements defined in the regulation *********** ()--25 And analysis condition
()-Table E.5 Atom density of regions used in ****************** ()--26 criticality calculation (atoms/barncm)
()-Table E.6 Atom density of fuel element used in ************* ()--27 criticality calculation (atoms/barncm)
()-Table E.7 Fuel elements to be analyzed ********************* ()--28
()-Table E.8 Results of criticality analysis when immersed **** ()--33
()-Table E.9 Analysis result of benchmark criticality test **** ()--37
()-Table E.10 Effective multiplication factor for various ****** ()--47 water density [contained ten JRR-3 standard type fuel elements (uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy) and (300 KUCA flat plates in a package)]
25
()-Table F.1 Assessment of the compliance with the technical standards stipulated in the regulation and the notification ****************************** ()--2 Chapter Chapter
()-Table A.1 Procedures for pre-shipment inspection of the package *********************************** ()--3 26
(I) Description of nuclear fuel package
Purpose and conditions
(I) Description of nuclear fuel package (I)-A. Purpose and conditions This packaging is intended for carrying fresh fuel elements to be charged into Kyoto University Research Reactor (KUR) and Kyoto University Critical Assembly (KUCA) installed at the Institute for Integrated Radiation and Nuclear Science, Kyoto University, from fabrication plants, domestic and overseas, to KUR and KUCA.
In addition, this packaging is intended for carrying fresh fuel elements to be charged into JRR-3 installed at the Tokai Research Institute of the Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) and into JMTR and JMTRC installed at the Oarai Research Institute, from fabrication plants, domestic and overseas, to JRR-3 etc.
Moreover, this is also intended to transport JRR-4 installed at the Nuclear Science Research Institute and the JMTRs new fuel elements installed at the Oarai Research and Development Center, as well as fuels low-irradiated in the JMTRC of the Oarai Research and Development Center to overseas counties or regions.
The conceptual drawing of this packaging is shown in ()-Fig.A.1.
(1) Name of packaging JRF-90Y-950K (2) Type BU type fissile package (3) Allowable number of packages Unlimited (4) Allowable arrangement of packages Not specified (5) Transport index 1.9 (6) Criticality safety index 0 (7) Weight of package 950kg or less (8) Size of packaging (a) Diameter approx. 840mm (b) Height approx. 1800mm (9) Maximum weight of packaging approx. 860kg (Rectangular fuel element loaded) 1
(10) Main materials for packaging (a) Main body : Stainless steel, Balsa wood, Hard polyurethane foam (b) Outer lid : Stainless steel, Balsa wood, Hard polyurethane foam (c) Inner lid : Stainless steel, Silicone rubber (d) Fuel basket : Stainless steel, Silicone rubber (11) Nuclear fuels contained in packaging The packaging may contain low-enriched uranium (called LEU fuel here in after), medium-enriched uranium and high-enriched uranium (referred to HEU fuel hereafter) fuel elements for research reactor. These fuels are categorized as, based on their usage purpose, the standard fuel element, the half-loaded fuel element, the special fuel element and the fuel follower. In addition, coupon type and flat type fuels using low-enriched uranium may be contained as fuels for critical assembly.
(a) Fresh fuels : 10 or less The fresh fuels having the equal nominal enrichment only are contained.
(b) Lowly irradiated fuels : 10 or less The lowly irradiated fuels, HEU and MEU, are contained together.
(c) KUCA fuel Coupon type fuels : 1200 or less Flat type fuels : 300 or less The KUCA fuels having same fuel type only are contained.
(12) Specifications for nuclear fuels contained in packaging The specification for fuel is shown in ()-Table A.1.
(13) Form of shipment (a) Transport method Sea transport is done by seagoing vessels and transport over land is done by carrier. Each is exclusively loaded.
(b) Loading method The packaging is tightly fastened with specially designed tools.
2
(I)-Table A.1 Specification of nuclear material contained in shipping container (1/4) (Fresh Fuel Element)
Reactor KUR (Kyoto University Research reactor)
KUR KUR KUR Fuel Element Standard Fuel Element Special Fuel Element Half-loaded Fuel Element Number of Fuel Elements (element/package) 10 or less Fuel Type LEU fuel Materials of Nuclear Fuel Uranium-silicon -aluminum dispersion alloy 235 U weight (g or less/package) 2,180 1,090 1,090 U weight (g or less/package) 11,150 5,580 5,580 Weight 235 U weight (g or less/element) 218 109 109 U weight (g or less/element) 1,115 558 558 Enrichment (wt% or less) 19.95 3
Total (GBq or less/package) 29.8 234 U 28.6 Activity of 235 Principal Radionuclide U 0.38 Contents 236 (GBq or less/package) U 0.59 238 U 0.24 Physical State Solid Burn-up (% or less) 0 (Fresh Fuel)
Total Heat Generation Rate 0 (Fresh Fuel)
(W or less/package)
Cooling Time (days) 0 (Fresh Fuel)
-Loading a transport package with different types of nuclear fuel material is allowed for each reactor only when all the fuel elements contained are the same type having the same enrichment level.For the nuclear fuel material from JMTRC, however, mixed loading of fuel elements of different types and different enrichment levels is allowed.
- The values of weight and heat generation are calculated proportionally from the maximum weight and heat generation for each type of fuel element according to the number of assemblies contained.
(I)-Table A.1 Specification of nuclear material contained in shipping container (2/4) (Fresh Fuel Element)
Reactor JRR-3 JRR-4 JMTR JRR-3 JRR-3 standard follower JRR-4B type JRR-4L type fuel JRR-4 type fuel JMTR fuel Fuel Element JMTR standard fuel element fuel type fuel fuel element element element followers element element Number of Fuel Elements 10 or less (element/package)
Fuel Type LEU fuel HEU fuel LEU fuel MEU fuel LEU fuel Uranium-silicon Uranium Uranium-silicon Uranium-silicon Uranium-aluminum Uranium-aluminum Materials of Nuclear Fuel -aluminum dispersion -aluminum -aluminum -aluminum dispersion alloy dispersion alloy alloy alloy dispersion alloy dispersion alloy 235 U weight 4,850 3,100 1,700 2,300 2,100 3,200 4,250 2,800 (g or less/package)
U weight 24,810 15,860 1,830 11,770 10,750 7,280 21,740 14,330 (g or less/package)
Weight 235 U weight 485 310 170 230 210 320 425 280 (g or less/element) 4 U weight 2,481 1,586 183 1,177 1,075 728 2,174 1,433 (g or less/element)
Enrichment 19.95 93.3 19.95 46.0 19.95 (wt% or less)
Total 29.8 (GBq or ess/package)
Activity 234 Principal U: 28.6 of 235 Contents Radionuclide U: 0.38 236 (GBq or U: 0.59 238 less/package) U: 0.24 Physical State Solid Burn-up 0 (Fresh Fuel)
(% or less)
Total Heat Generation Rate 0 (Fresh Fuel)
(W or less/package)
Cooling Time (days) 0 (Fresh Fuel)
-Loading a transport package with different types of nuclear fuel material is allowed for each reactor only when all the fuel elements contained are the same type having the same enrichment level.For the nuclear fuel material from JMTRC, however, mixed loading of fuel elements of different types and different enrichment levels is allowed.
- The values of weight and heat generation are calculated proportionally from the maximum weight and heat generation for each type of fuel element according to the number of assemblies contained.
(I)-Table A.1 Specification of nuclear material contained in shipping container (3/4) (Low Irradiated Fuel Element)
Reactor JMTRC JMTRC JMTRC JMTRC Fuel Element JMTRC Standard JMTRC Standard JMTRC Follower Special Follower Special Number of Spent Fuel Elements 10 or less (element/package)
Fuel Type HEU fuel MEU fuel Materials of Nuclear Fuel Uranium-aluminum alloy Uranium-aluminum dispersion alloy 235 U weight 2,850 1,990 3,170 2,860 2,100 (g or less/package)
U weight 3,180 2,220 7,210 6,500 4,780 (g or less/package)
Weight 235 U weight 285 199 317 286 210 (g or less/element)
U weight 5
318 222 721 650 478 (g or less/element)
Enrichment (wt% or less) 90.0 46.0 Total (GBq or ess/package) 17.3 (a) 234U: 16.2 Activity of (b) 235U: 0.25 Principal Radionuclide Contents (c) 236U: 0.29 (GBq or less/package)
(d) 238U: 0.05 (e) Others: 0.52 Physical State Solid Burn-up (% or less) 7.23x10-5 1.76x10-5 Total Heat Generation Rate 4.30x10-5 3.29x10-5 (W or less/package)
Cooling Time (days) 5,475 or more 1,460 or more
-Loading a transport package with different types of nuclear fuel material is allowed for each reactor only when all the fuel elements contained are the same type having the same enrichment level.For the nuclear fuel material from JMTRC, however, mixed loading of fuel elements of different types and different enrichment levels is allowed.
- The values of weight and heat generation are calculated proportionally from the maximum weight and heat generation for each type of fuel element according to the number of assemblies contained.
(I)-Table A.1 Specification of nuclear material contained in shipping container (4/4) (Fresh Fuel Element)
Reactor KUCA (Kyoto University Critical Assembly)
Fuel Element Coupon Flat Number of Fuel Elements 1,200 or less 300 or less (element/package)
Fuel Type LEU Fuel Uranium-molybdenum Uranium-silicon -aluminum Materials of Nuclear Fuel -aluminum dispersion dispersion alloy alloy 235 U weight (g or less/package) 4,800 4,500 U weight (g or less/package) 24,600 23,400 Weight 235 U weight (g or less/element) 4 15 U weight (g or less/element) 20.5 78 Enrichment (wt% or less) 19.95 Total (GBq or less/package) 15.5 6
234 U 14.5 Activity of 235 Principal Radionuclide U 0.38 Contents 236 (GBq or less/package) U 0.27 238 U 0.24 Physical State Solid Burn-up (% or less) 0 (Fresh Fuel)
Total Heat Generation Rate 0 (Fresh Fuel)
(W or less/package)
Cooling Time (days) 0 (Fresh Fuel)
-Loading a transport package with different types of nuclear fuel material is allowed for each reactor only when all the fuel elements contained are the same type having the same enrichment level.For the nuclear fuel material from JMTRC, however, mixed loading of fuel elements of different types and different enrichment levels is allowed.
- The values of weight and heat generation are calculated proportionally from the maximum weight and heat generation for each type of fuel element according to the number of assemblies contained.
Approximately 840 Inner shell lid Outer shell lid Eye-plate Outer shell main body Inner shell Main body Approximately 1800 Fuel basket Fuel element Main body
()-Fig.A.1 Rough drawing of package 7
Kinds of package
(I)-B. Kinds of package (1) Requirements for different kinds of package Since the radioactive substances stored are fresh fuel plates of uranium fuel and the radioactivity level exceeds the value of A2, this package must satisfy requirements for type BU package.
(2) Requirements for a fissile package Since this package contains fuel with an enrichment level between l9.95wt%
235 to 93.3wt% and more than 15g of U, it must satisfy requirements for fissile package.
Accordingly, this package corresponds to a type BU fissile package.
Packaging
(I)-C. Packaging
- 1. Outline of packaging This packaging is a cylindrical type in the form, which is maintained in vertical posture during both transport and handling.
The package outline is shown in ()-Fig.C.1.
The package tie down condition os shown in ()-Fig.C.2.
The package under transport condition is shown in ()-Fig.C.3.
The general feature of the packaging is as follows.
(1) The fuel basket of this packaging is designed to be rectangular type so that the rectangular fuel can be loaded.
(2) The inner shell is designed as a pressure vessel against the design pressure of 9.81x10-2MPa.Gauge (3) This packaging is handled by a crane using the eye-plate installed on the main body.
(4) To absorb impact energy caused by drop, there are the shock absorbers at the upper and lower parts of the packaging.
(5) To reduce the heat gain caused by fire, there are the heat insulators at the upper and lower parts of the packaging and shell.
(6) The containment boundary of this packaging is shown in ()-Fig.C.4.
1
Inner lid Outer lid Eye plate Outer main body Inner main body Fuel basket Fuel element Main body
()-Fig.C.1 Rough drawing of package 2
Transportation packaging Eye plate Lashing device
()-Fig.C.2 Package under transport condition 3
Ocean container Transportation shell Lashing device Side view Ocean container Transportation shell Lashing device Top view
()-Fig.C.3 Package under transport condition 4
Leak test orifice O-ring made by silicon rubber Inner shell lid bolts Weld Inner shell main body Weld The range that the surrounded with a slanted line shows a seal border.
()-Fig.C.4 Seal boundary of package 5
- 2. Structure of packaging (Refer to ()-Fig.C.5)
This packaging consists of 4 main parts:
(1) Main body (2) Inner lid (3) Fuel basket (4) Outer lid Following is the description of each part.
2.1 Main body (Refer to ()-Fig.C.6)
The main body is in the cylindrical shape of 1,559mm in height and 840mm in outer diameter and consists of the outer shell and inner shell.
The outer shell consists of 3mm thick stainless steel and 6mm thick stainless steel at the bottom. The inner shell consists of 10mm thick stainless steel and 35mm thick stainless steel at the bottom.
The shell and bottom plate is welded completely.
The space between the outer and inner shells, heat insulators and shock absorbers are applied to reduce the heat gain caused by fire and to absorb impact energy caused by drop.
At the upper side of the main body, the eye-plates are welded at 4 places to lift the packaging.
Eight fusible plugs is provided on the outer shell. These plugs are provided to avoid the pressure raise by steam or gas generated from the heat insulator and shock absorber due to heat during fire.
The inner shell is provided with three bosses at the upper side of the inner surface and the convex section at the bottom, in order to fix the fuel basket.
6
The boss and fuel basket upper part are fixed with bolts, and the fuel basket lower part is inserted into the convex section.
When fixing, to avoid metal contact of the inner shell and fuel basket, the cushion rubber is provided.
2.2 Inner lid (Refer to ()-Fig.C.7)
The inner lid is in the cylindrical shape, 62Omm in outer diameter and 55mm in thickness.
The inner lid is tied down with the main body, using 16 inner lid tightening bolts, and the contact section of the inner lid and inner shell is constructed so that leaktightness is maintained with O-ring. This O-ring is doubly provided to assure leaktightness, and a leak test hole between the double O-ring is provided to make it possible to perform a leak test.
2.3 Fuel basket (Refer to (()-Fig C.8)
The fuel basket is manufactured to locate each fuel element in the specified position of the packaging and maintain its relative position, and 10 fuel elements can be contained. The fuel basket is shown in ()-Fig.C.8 rectangular pipes to enclose the fuel elements, are assembled by welding, and the upper and the lower portions of the rectangular pipes, are welded to the flanges and basket bottom is attached to the flange bottom by the three bolts. The inside dimension of the rectangular pipe is 94mmx94mm, the outside diameter of the fuel basket is 459mm, and the height is 1293mm.
And also, the fuel basket is fixed to the three bosses located at the upper inside portion of the inner shell by bolt, the movements to the vertical and circumferential direction are restricted, and the vibration is also restricted.
7
2.4 Outer lid (Refer to ()-Fig.C.9)
The outer lid is in of the cylindrical shape 398mm in height and 840mm in outer diameter.
The outer cover plate consists of 3mm thick stainless steel shell and 6mm thick stainless steel upper plate. The inner cover plate consists of 3mm thick stainless steels.
The space between the outer and inner cover plates, the heat insulators and shock absorbers are applied to reduce the heat gain caused by fire and to absorb impact energy caused by drop.
4 eye-bolt bosses for lifting are welded to the outer lid. 4 fusible plugs are provided on the outer cover plate. These plugs are used to avoid the pressure raise by steam or gas generated from the heat insulator and shock absorber due to heat during fire.
The outer lid is tied down with the outer lid tightening bolts through the rubber packing to the upper part of the main body in such a manner that it covers the inner lid. Such a structure prevents water from intruding into the clearance between the main body and the outer lid.
Also, the tightened section between the main body and outer lid can he sealed and locked.
8
(Outer lid O.D.) Outer shell lid Inner shell inner lid bolts (Inner lid O.D.)
Shock absorber material Inner shell Outer shell inner lid bolts Inner shell main body Outer shell main body Insulation material Shock absorber material
()-Fig.C.5 General drawing of package 9
Outer shell main body Inner shell main body Insulation material Shock absorber material
()-Fig.C.6 Main body 10
Positioning pin M24 bolt with the hexagon hole Leak test orifice O-ring The A part details
()-Fig.C.7 Inner shell lid 11
Upper part flange Square pipe Cushion rubber Lower part flange Lower part basket
()-Fig.C.8 Basket for box type fuel 12
Outer cover plate Insulation material Shock absorber material Melting plug Inner cover plate
()-Fig.C.9 Outer shell lid 13
- 3. Material of packaging
() -Table C.1 shows the material of the packaging.
- 4. Dimension of packaging
() -Table C.2 shows the dimension of the packaging.
- 5. Weight of packaging
() -Table C.3 shows the weight of the packaging.
14
()-Table C.1 Material of packaging Name of Part Material Number Notes (1) Main body Outer shell Stainless steel 1S Inner shell Stainless steel 1S Eye plate Stainless steel 4 Boss Stainless steel 3 Heat insulator Hard polyurethane foam 1S Shock absorber Balsa wood 1S O-ring Silicone rubber 1S Fusible plug Solder, Stainless steel 8S Gasket Ethylene propylene rubber 1 (2) Inner Lid Inner Lid Stainless steel 1 (3) Fuel Basket Rectangular pipe Stainless steel 10 Upper flange Stainless steel 1 Lower flange Stainless steel 1 Cushion rubber Silicone rubber 1 (4) Outer Lid Outer cover plate Stainless steel 1S Inner cover plate Stainless steel 1S Heat insulator Hard polyurethane foam 1S Shock absorber Balsa wood 1S Fusible plug Solder, Stainless steel 4S 15
()-Table C.2 Dimension of packaging Name of Part Item Dimension(nominal) Notes (1) Main body Outer Diameter 840 Inner Diameter 460 Height 1,559 (2) Inner Lid Outer Diameter 620 Thickness 55 Size of Bolt M24 (3) Fuel Basket Outer Diameter 459 Height 1,293 Inner width 94x94 (4) Outer Lid Outer Diameter 840 Inner Diameter 630 Height 398 Size of Bolt M24 16
()-Table C.3 Weight of packaging No. Name Weight (kg) Notes 1 Inner shell main body 480 2 Inner shell lid 120 3 Fuel Basket 138 4 Outer shell lid 120 5 Total 858 The weights of the contents are shown in ()-Table D.1 and ()-Table D.2, the weight becomes maximum of 92kg when the ten JRR-3 standard fuel elements are contained and the maximum weight of the package is 950kg.
17
Contents of packaging
(I)-D. Contents of packaging D.1 Fresh fuel Among the contents of packaging, fresh fuel elements for research reactors are plate type fuels to be charged in JRR-3, JRR-4, JMTR and KUR. There are three kind of enrichment, high-enriched uranium fuel (HEU fuel), medium-enriched uranium fuel (MEU fuel), and low-enriched uranium fuel (LEU fuel).
The fuel meat is uranium aluminum alloy for HEU fuel, uranium aluminum dispersion type alloy for MEU fuel, and uranium aluminum dispersion type alloy or uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy for LEU fuel.
Fuel plates are processed as follows : a fuel meat sandwiched by a frame and cover (cladding material) of aluminum alloy is hot-rolled. After being cold-rolled to the required thickness, it is cut longitudinally and transversely while being monitored by fluoroscopy so that the fuel meat can be located within the required zone.
On side plate or mounting plate of the aluminum alloy, the required number of grooves are provided for mounting the fuel plates. The width of a groove is equal to the thickness of the plate. Fuel plates are inserted into these grooves and mechanically fixed so that the fuel plates can resist a tensile stress of 265N/cm.
Required mounting parts are fixed by welding and other methods to complete a standard type fuel elements and follower type fuel elements (referred to as fuel elements hereinafter).
The fuel element is wrapped by some buffer, such as polyurethane foam, then put into an organic high-molecular compound bag such as polyethylene (Protective sheets), and loaded into the fuel basket of packaging.
When the fuel element are loaded, silicone rubber spacers are used to the upper and lower sides of the fuel element in order to absorb possible impact energy during transport, and also to fix the fuel element. For the KUR fuel elements, metal spacers (outer dimension : 84 x 90 x 875mm or 954mm) shown in (I)- Fig.
D.1 are inserted into the fuel basket, and the fuel elements are loaded into the metal spacers.
1
The specifications of fuel elements loaded in the packaging are shown in
()-Table D.1.
D.2 Lowly irradiated fuel Among the contained fuels in the packaging, the lowly irradiated fuels are the plate type fuels loaded in the JMTRC, consisting of 61 HEU fuels and 31 MEU fuels. The core material of the fuel is the uranium-aluminum alloy for HEU fuel and is the uranium-aluminum dispersion type alloy for MEU. On the side plate or attachment plate made of aluminum alloy, are provided for the required number of the grooves corresponding to the thickness of the fuel plate. The fuel plate inserted is mechanically fixed by roll swage or fixed by the aluminum alloy pin to withstand the tensile force of more than 265N/cm.
The required parts are welded to the fuel plates to complete the standard fuel element, the special fuel element and the fuel follower (referred to as fuel elements etc. hereinafter).
The special fuel element has the structure where a part of the fuel plates are not mechanically fixed and can be removed. The fuel elements etc. are charged after cutting the unnecessary upper and lower portions to reduce the weight. For the special fuel elements, they are provide with a hold-down for fuel plate as shown in ()-Fig.D.13 through ()-Fig.D.15 and in ()-Fig.D.18.
The fuel elements etc. are packed with the shock absorber such as polyurethane foam etc. and is put in the bag made of organic high molecular compound such as polyethylene (protection sheet), and is enclosed in the fuel basket of the packaging.
In case the fuel element etc. are loaded, the spacers of silicone rubber are used at the top and bottom of the fuel element etc. in order to absorb the impact in the transportation and to fix the fuel element etc. by adjusting the position. The specification of the fuel element etc., used for the safety analysis of packaging is shown in ()-Table D.2.
2
D.3 Fresh fuel for KUCA Among the contents of packaging, fuels for critical assembly are fuel plate to be charged in KUCA. There are two types of fuels, a square plate fuel (coupon) and a flat plate fuel (flat), both of which are low-enriched uranium fuels (LEU fuel).
The fuel meat is a uranium molybdenum aluminum dispersion type alloy for coupon type, and a uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy for flat type.
Coupon plates are processed as follows : a fuel meat is enclosed in a case and a cover (covering material) made of an aluminum alloy.
Flat plates are processed as follows : a fuel meat sandwiched by a frame and cover (cladding material) of aluminum alloy is hot-rolled. After being cold-rolled to the required thickness, it is cut longitudinally and transversely while being monitored by fluoroscopy so that the fuel meat can be located within the required zone.
The coupon plates are inserted into the aluminum sheath after sandwiching the cushion material such as aluminum sheet for protection between the fuel plates, and it is wrapped by some buffer such as polyurethane foam, then loaded into the fuel basket of packaging. The flat plates are wrapped by some buffer such as polyurethane foam after sandwiching the cushion material such as aluminum sheet for protection between the fuel plates, then loaded into the fuel basket of packaging.
When the KUCA fuels are loaded, silicone rubber spacers are used to the upper and lower sides of the fuel plates in order to absorb possible impact energy during transport, and also to fix the fuel plates.
The specifications of fuel elements loaded in the packaging are shown in
()-Table D.3.
3
(I)-Fig.D.1 Metal Spacer 4
()-Table D.1 Specification of fuel element (fresh fuel element)
Fuel Basket Type Box Type Reactor JRR-3 JRR-4 JMTR KUR Fuel JRR-3 JRR-3 JRR-4 JRR-4 JMTR JMTR KUR KUR KUR JRR-4 Element Standard Follower B L Standard Follower Standard Special Half-loaded Type Plate fuel Total no. of loaded 10 or less (fuel/Package)
Kind LEU fuel HEU fuel LEU fuel MEU fuel LEU fuel LEU fuel U-235 enrichment 19.95 or less 93.3 or less 19.95 or less 46.0 or less 19.95 or less 19.95 or less Nuclear spec.
(wt%)
U-235 contained 485 or less 310 or less 170 or less 230 or less 210 or less 320 or less 425 or less 280 or less 218 or less 109 or less 109 or less (g/one element)
U contained 5
2481 or less 1586 or less 183 or less 1177 or less 1075 or less 728 or less 2174 or less 1433 or less 1115 or less 558 or less 558 or less (g/one element)
Burnup (%) 0 (Fresh fuel)
Heat 0 (Fresh fuel) generation(w/container)
Cooling down days(day) 0 (Fresh fuel)
Radioactivity 29.8 or less (GBq/Package)
Uranium Uranium Uranium Uranium silicon Uranium silicon Uranium Uranium Uranium silicon Uranium Uranium silicon Uranium silicon silicon silicon silicon Core material alminum alminum alminum alloy alminum alminum alminum alminum alminum alminum alminum alminum dispersion alloy dispersion alloy dispersion alloy dispersion alloy dispersion alloy dispersion alloy dispersion alloy dispersion dispersion dispersion alloy alloy alloy Material Clad material Alminum alloy Side plate, Alminum alloy Attached plate Burnable Cadmium wire - Cadmium wire absorber Fuel cross Shape Rectangular type section shape Ref. drawing (I)-Fig.D.2 (I)-Fig.D.3 (I)-Fig.D.4 (I)-Fig.D.5 (I)-Fig.D.6 (I)-Fig.D.7 (I)-Fig.D.8 (I)-Fig.D.9 (I)-Fig.D.10 (I)-Fig.D.9 Fuel weight(kg/one 9.2 6.0 6.3 7.9 6.5 7.6 8.4 5.8 6.0 5.5 5.5 element)
()-Table D.2 Specification of fuel element (lowly irradiated fuel element)
Fuel Basket Type Box Reactor JMTRC Type JMTRC JMTRC JMTRC JMTRC JMTRC JMTRC Fuel Element Standard Special Follower Standard Special Follower Type Plate fuel Total no. of loaded 10 or less (fuel/Package)
Kind HEU fuel MEU fuel U-235 enrichment Nuclear spec.
90.0 or less 46.0 or less (wt%)
U-235 contained 285 or less 285 or less 199 or less 317 or less 286 or less 210 or less (g/one element)
U contained 318 or less 318 or less 222 or less 721 or less 650 or less 478 or less 6
(g/one element)
Burnup (%) 7.23x10-5 or less 1.76x10-5 or less
-5 Heat generation(w/container) 4.30x10 or less Cooling down days(day) 5475 or more 1460 or more (GBq/Package) 17.3 or less uranium uranium uranium Uranium alminum alminum alminum Core material Uranium Alminum alloy Uranium Alminum alloy Alminum dispersion dispersion dispersion Material alloy type alloy type alloy type alloy Clad material Alminum alloy Side plate, Alminum alloy Attached plate Burnable absorber - -
Fuel cross section Shape Rectangular type shape Ref. drawing (I)-Fig.D.11 (I)-Fig.D.12 (I)-Fig.D.13 (I)-Fig.D.14 (I)-Fig.D.15 (I)-Fig.D.16 (I)-Fig.D.17 (I)-Fig.D.18 (I)-Fig.D.19 Fuel weight(kg/one element) 6.3 6.6 2.0 6.9 4.1 6.7 6.9 4.4 Ref. drawing - (I)-Fig.D.13 (I)-Fig.D.14 (I)-Fig.D.15 - - (I)-Fig.D.18 -
Holder Weight
- 1.4 2.6 1.4 - - 1.4 -
(kg/one element)
()-Table D.3 Specification of fuel element (fresh fuel for KUCA)
Fuel Basket Type Box Reactor KUCA Type Fuel Element Coupon Flat Type Plate fuel Total no. of loaded 1200 or less 300 or less (fuel/Package)
Kind LEU fuel U-235 enrichment Nuclear spec.
19.95 or less (wt%)
U-235 contained 4 or less 15 or less (g/one plate) 7 U contained 20.5 or less 78 or less (g/one plate)
Burnup (%) 0 (Fresh fuel)
Heat generation(w/package) 0 (Fresh fuel)
Cooling down days(day) 0 (Fresh fuel)
(GBq/Package) 15.5 or less 15.5 or less Uranium molybdenum aluminum Uranium silicon aluminum Core material dispersion alloy dispersion alloy Material Clad material Aluminum alloy Side plate, Attached plate Burnable absorber -
Fuel cross section Shape Rectangular type shape Ref. drawing (I)-Fig.D.20 (I)-Fig.D.21 Fuel weight(kg/one plate) 36 230
8
()-Fig.D.2 JRR-3 standard type fuel element (uranium silicon alminum dispersion alloy)
9
()-Fig.D.3 JRR-3 follower type fuel element (uranium silicon alminum dispersion alloy)
10
()-Fig.D.4 JRR-4B type fuel element
11
()-Fig.D.5 JRR-4L type fuel element
12
()-Fig.D.6 JRR-4 fuel element (uranium silicon alminum dispersion type alloy)
13
()-Fig.D.7 JMTR standard fuel element
14
()-Fig.D.8 JMTR follower type fuel element
After curving 69.33 70.67 (target for information t=1.52 (R=139.7 target for information) 625.5 Inner plate676.3 outer plate Fuel Plate Cladding Fuel Meat B C Fuel Plate Cross Section 15 Uranium silicon alminum dispersion Fuel plate 5 alloy 2 (outer) Aluminum alloy Uranium silicon alminum dispersion Fuel plate 4 alloy 16 (inner) Aluminum alloy 3 Handle Aluminum alloy 1 2 Side plate Aluminum alloy 2 1 nozzle Aluminum alloy 1 No. Name Material Q'ty View B Section A-A View C
()-Fig.D.9 KUR Standard and Half-loaded fuel elements Uranium silicon alminum dispersion alloy
After curving 69.33 70.67 (target for information t=1.52 (R=139.7 target for information) 625.5 Inner plate676.3 outer plate B C Fuel Plate Cladding Fuel Meat Fuel Plate Cross Section 16 Uranium silicon alminum Fuel plate 6 dispersion alloy 2 (outer) Aluminum alloy Uranium silicon alminum Fuel plate 5 dispersion alloy 7 (inner) Aluminum alloy 4 Middle plate Aluminum alloy 2 3 Side plate Aluminum alloy 2 Upper 1 2 Aluminum alloy Structural Part 1 Nozzle Aluminum alloy 1 No. Name Material Q'ty View B Section A-A View C
()-Fig.D.10 KUR Special fuel element Uranium silicon alminum dispersion alloy
17
()-Fig.D.11 JMTRC standard fuel element (A type, B type, C type)
18
()-Fig.D.12 JMTRC standard fuel element (pin fix type) (C type)
19
()-Fig.D.13 JMTRC special fuel element (special A type)
20
()-Fig.D.14 JMTRC special fuel element (special B type)
21
()-Fig.D.15 JMTRC special fuel element (special C type, special D type)
22
()-Fig.D.16 JMTRC fuel follower (HF type)
23
()-Fig.D.17 JMTRC standard fuel element (MA, MB, MC type)
24
()-Fig.D.18 JMTRC special fuel element (special MB type, special MC type)
25
()-Fig.D.19 JMTRC fuel follower (MF type)
26 Uranium molybdenum 2 Fuel meat aluminum dispersion alloy Aluminum alloy 1 Cladding (AG3NE)
No. Name Material
()-Fig.D.20 KUCA Coupon type fuel
27 Uranium silicon 2 Fuel meat aluminum dispersion alloy Aluminum alloy 1 Cladding (AG3NE)
No. Name Material
()-Fig.D.21 KUCA flat type fuel
() Safety analysis of nuclear fuel package
()
() Safety analysis of nuclear fuel packages The safety analysis for this transported article will be conducted in order to show that the transported article complies with the technical standards as a BU-type fissionable transported article in accordance with the Rules on Transporting Nuclear Fuel Materials outside the Plant or Place of Business (Prime Ministers Office Order No. 57 of 1978) (hereafter called the Rules) and the Science and Technology Agencys Notice No. 5 of 1990 [Notice on the Details of Technical Standards for Transport of Nuclear Fuel Materials Etc.
Outside Plants] (hereafter called the Notice).
The safety analysis on the present package is performed to demonstrate compliance of the package with the technical standards in accordance with the following Regulations:
- 1. Structural analysis In the structural analysis, besides the confirmation of the fact that any particular anomalies such as cracks, fissures etc. Would not be produced on the packages during the normal transportation, verification shall be conducted of the integrity of containment devices, which is to be the prerequisite for containment analysis, both under normal and accident test conditions.
And also to obtain the conditions for evaluation of the thermal and shielding analysis, the features and integrity of the packages under the normal and accident test conditions were evaluated. Further considering the fact that this packages are the particular BU type fissile packages, the status and integrity of packages under the normal and accident test conditions regarding the fissile packages, were evaluated in order to verify the subcritical assurance.
- 2. Thermal analysis In the thermal analysis, considering the results of structural analysis above
()1
mentioned, the temperature and pressure of each part of packages under the normal condition of transport and under, the normal and accident test conditions, are evaluated to provide for the conditions for evaluating the structural integrity, containment, shielding and criticality analysis. And also the compatibility of the packages was confirmed with the accessible surface temperature standards (85) of the packages under the normal test conditions.
- 3. Containment analysis In the containment analysis, on the basis of the above-mentioned conditions 1 and 2 and also on the basis of allowable release rate of leakage tests before shipment the leak rate of radioactive materials under the normal and accident test conditions was evaluated to show that the standard values were duly satisfied.
- 4. Shield analysis In the shielding analysis, considering the above-mentioned conditions 1 and 2, the dose equivalent rate at the surface of packages, or at the locations 1 meter apart from the surface of the packages during the normal condition of transport, under the normal and accident test conditions, was evaluated to show that the standard values were duly satisfied.
- 5. Criticality analysis In the criticality analysis, it is indicated that no structural change or the like that may affect the criticality assessment will occur under the general test conditions for fissionable transported articles based on the result of 1 cited above, and that subcriticality will be ensured in cases of both isolated-system and arranged-system transported articles, under the general test conditions and special test conditions for transported articles during normal transport,
()2
transported articles in an isolated system, and fissionable transported articles.
- 6. Evaluation of the compliance with the regulation and the notification Based on the above-cited results and descriptions regarding the nuclear fuel packages given in chapter A, it was duly ensured that the design of this packages were compliance with the technical standards which was established by the regulation and the notification. In the following, chapter ()-A through ()-F will show particulars for each of analyses and evaluations.
()3
-A Structural analysis
()
()-A. Structural analysis A.1 Structural design A.1.1 General description A Type B(U) packaging consists of an inner shell, an outer shell, and a fuel basket as shown in ()-Fig.C.1.
The inner shell consists of a shell containing a fuel basket and a lid.
Fuel baskets are the rectangular type as shown in ()-Fig.C.7. A basket for rectangular elements or wrapped KUCA fuels can contain up to ten elements, After being placed in the fuel basket, the fuel elements and wrapped KUCA fuels are fixed by a spacer made of silicone rubber.
Inner shell combined with its lid forms containment boundary as shown in
()-Fig.C.3 and also works as a pressure vessel against inner pressure. Inner lid attached to inner shell by inner lid bolts keep containment of its joint using double O-ring system.
Outer shell with its lid forms containment boundary as shown in ()-Fig.C.4.
Heat insulator and shock absorber are filled between inner shell and outer shell.
Outer lid attached to outer shell with outer lid bolts keep containment of its joint using Gasket.
Inner lid would never be opened by any possible contingency since it is covered by outer lid during transport. Outer lid bolt has a lock and a seal so that they would show evidence that it has not been opened.
This packaging is lifted and tied down with 4 eye-plates shown in ()-Fig.C.5.
The package is tie_down to tie down device shown in ()-Fig.C.2 with eye-plates during transport.
()1
A.1.2 Design standards The design standards for the packaging are based on the Public Notification and Section -Subsec, NB of ASME. Analytical standard are determined for each set of test conditions.
(1) Analytical standards
()-Table A.1 shows the various test conditions for the design standards corresponding to the items being analyzed. The analytical standards will be determined on the basis of the mechanical properties of the materials shown in section ()-A.3 and the temperatures shown in section ()-B.
The design standard value in which distortion level has no influence on the packaging's containment under accident test conditions is used for the inner lid clamping bolts, which are essential for the containment boundary.
Yield stress is used as the analytical standard for the hoisting and clamping device in accordance with the Public Notification". Penetration resistance is chosen as the analytical standard for the collision during the penetration test.
Welding efficiency is 1.0 for welding parts inspected by radiation method and 0.45 for other welding parts.
Symbols of the design standard value in Tables are as follows; Sm ; Design stress intensity value Sy ; Yield point of the designh Su ; Design tensile strength Sa ; Alternative peak stress N ; Number of cycles Na ; Allowable number of cycles DF ; Accumulative usage factor (= N/Na)
()2
(2) Combinations of design load Combinations of design load are determined on conditions (structure temperature, material, safety factor, etc.) of each components shown in
()-Table.A.2 and ()-Table.A.3.
(3) Margin for safety Margin of safety (MS) is obtained as follows.
The designs standard Analytical tan dard value value Margin for safety (MS)= -1 Analytical value According to the design standards described above, ()-Table A.4 (1/24)
(24/24) shows conditions of structural analysis, analytical item and method, etc.
()3
()-Table A.1 Design standard for structural analysis Pm; General primary membrane stress Q ; Secondary stress PL; Local primary membrane stress F ; Peak stress Pb; Primary bending stress DF; Accumulative usage factor Component Primary+secon Primary+secon Primary stress -dary+peak Condition Item -dary Stress Position stress to be evaluated Pm(PL) PL+Pb PL+Pb+Q PL+Pb+Q+F Lifting device Eye plate <Sy <Sy Routine Tie-down device Eye plate <Sy <Sy transport Pressure Package Withstanding the effect of changing ambient pressure.
Vibration Package Withstanding the effect of vibration during transport.
Inner shell <Sm <1.5Sm <3Sm Fatigue Thermal test Inner lid evaluation
<2/3Sy <Sy <Sy Inner lid bolt (DF<1)
Water spray test Package Withstanding the water spray test.
Normal Inner shell
<Sm <1.5Sm <3Sm conditions Fuel basket Free drop test of Inner lid (1.2m height) transport Inner lid bolt <2/3Sy <Sy <Sy Fuel element/plate Inner shell <Sm <1.5Sm <3Sm Stacking test Inner lid <2/3Sy <Sy <Sy Penetrating test Outer shell No penetration Inner shell 2
< Su <Su Fuel basket 3 Drop test Inner lid (9m height)
Inner lid bolt <2/3Sy <Sy Fuel element/plate Outer shell No penetration Accident Drop test 2
conditions (1m height Inner shell < Su <Su 3
of penetration) <2/3Sy Inner lid <Sy transport 2 Inner shell < Su <Su 3
Thermal test Inner lid
<2/3Sy <Sy Inner lid bolt 2
Water immersion Inner shell < Su <Su 3
(15m depth) <2/3Sy Inner lid <Sy Note: The same criteria for stress evaluation are used for both Type B(U) packages and fissile packages.
()4
()-Table A.2 Design load, combination of load (1/2)
Component Load Require-Condition Item Position Internal External Thermal ment Mass* Other to be evaluated pressure pressure expansion Lifting device Eye plate Routine Tie-down device Eye plate transport Pressure Package Vibration Package Inner shell Thermal test Inner lid Inner lid bolt Water spray test Package Normal Inner shell conditions Fuel basket of Free Drop test Inner lid transport (1.2m height)
Inner lid bolt Fuel element/plate B(U) Penetrating test Outer shell package Stacking test Inner shell Inner shell Fuel basket Drop test Inner lid (9m height)
Inner lid bolt Fuel element/plate Accident Drop test Outer shell conditions (1m height Inner shell of penetration) Inner lid transport Inner shell Thermal test Inner lid Inner lid bolt Water immersion Inner shell (15m depth) Inner lid
- Analyzed under combination of load. : Analyzed under single load.
- : Mass does not mean weight simply but means mass (force) considering impact force such as given (mass) x (acceleration).
()5
()-Table A.2 Design load, combination of load (2/2)
Component Load Require-Condition Item Position Internal External Thermal ment Mass* Other to be evaluated pressure pressure expansion Water spray test Package Inner shell Normal Fuel basket Free drop test conditions Inner lid (1.2m height) of Inner lid bolt transport Fuel element/plate Stacking test Inner shell Penetrating test Outer shell Inner shell Fuel basket Fissile Drop test Inner lid packages (9m height)
Inner lid bolt Fuel element/plate Accident Drop test Outer shell conditions (1m height Inner shell of penetration) Inner lid transport Inner shell Thermal test Inner lid Inner lid bolt Water immersion Inner shell (0.9m depth) Inner lid
- Analyzed under combination of load. : Analyzed under single load.
- : Mass does not mean weight simply but means mass (force) considering impact force such as given (mass) x (acceleration).
()6
()-Table A.3 Load conditions (1/2)
Component Load Require
-ment Condition Item Position Internal External Thermal Mass* expan-s Other to be evaluated pressure pressure ion x3 times Lifting device Eye plate =6.99x103N x2[g]
(up, down, front, Tie-down device Eye plate back)
Routine x1[g]
(Left, right) transport Initial clamping Pressure Package 9.81x10-2MPa 60kPa force 5.89x104N Vibration Package Inner shell 9.81x10-2MPa Inner lid 9.81x10-2MPa Thermal test Initial clamping Inner lid bolt 9.81x10-2MPa 75()
force 5.89x104N Water spray test Package Normal Inner shell xAcceleration 9.81x10-2MPa conditions Fuel basket =254.1[g]
of Inner lid (for horizontal drop) 9.81x10-2MPa transport =250.6[g] Initial Free drop test (for vertical drop) clamping (1.2m height) Inner lid bolt 9.81x10-2MPa 75()
=90.8[g] force (for corner drop) 5.89x104N B(U) Fuel Package element/plate Stacking test Inner shell x5 times+Self weight 9.81x10-2MPa Penetrating test Outer shell 6kg Bar drop Inner shell xAcceleration 9.81x10-2MPa Fuel basket =367.0[g]
Inner lid (for horizontal drop) 9.81x10-2MPa
=388.4[g] Initial Drop test (for vertical drop) clamping (9m height) Inner lid bolt 9.81x10-2MPa
=310.9[g] force (for corner drop) 5.89x104N Fuel element/plate Self weight Accident Outer shell x1m drop on mild conditions Drop test steel bar of (1m height Inner shell xAcceleration 9.81x10-2MPa transport penetration)
=72.1g(Horizontal)
Inner lid 9.81x10-2MPa
=147.1[g](Vertical)
Inner shell 9.81x10-2MPa Inner lid 9.81x10-2MPa Thermal test Initial clamping Inner lid bolt 9.81x10-2MPa force 5.89x104N Water immersion Inner shell 147kPa (15m depth) Inner lid 147kPa
- : Mass does not mean weight simply but means mass (force) considering impact force such as given (mass) x (acceleration).
()7
()-Table A.3 Load conditions (2/2)
Component Load Require Thermal Condition Item Internal External
-ment Position Mass* expan-s Other to be evaluated pressure pressure ion Water spray test Package Water spray Inner shell xAcceleration 9.81x10-2MPa Fuel basket =254.1[g]
Inner lid (for horizontal drop) 9.81x10-2MPa Normal =250.6[g] Initial Free drop test conditions (for vertical drop) clamping (1.2m height) Inner lid bolt =90.8[g] 9.81x10-2MPa 75()
of force transport (for corner drop) 5.89x104N Fuel element/plate
-2 Stacking test Inner shell x5 times+Self weight 9.81x10 MPa Penetrating test Outer shell 6kg bar drop Inner shell 9.81x10-2MPa Fuel basket xAcceleration Inner lid =379.0[g] 9.81x10-2MPa (for horizontal drop) Initial Drop test
=446.2[g] clamping Fissile (9m height) Inner lid bolt 9.81x10-2MPa (for vertical drop) force package
=332.3[g] 5.89x104N Fuel (for corner drop) element/plate Outer shell Self weight Accident 1m drop on mild Drop test conditions steel bar (1m height of Inner shell xAcceleration 9.81x10-2MPa penetration) transport =72.1g(Horizontal) -2 Inner lid 9.81x10 MPa
=147.0[g](Vertical)
Inner shell 9.81x10-2MPa Inner lid 9.81x10-2MPa Initial Thermal test clamping Inner lid bolt 9.81x10-2MPa force 5.89x104N Water immersion Inner shell 9 kPa (0.9m depth) Inner lid 9 kPa
- : Mass does not mean weight simply but means mass (force) considering impact force such as given (mass) x (acceleration).
()8
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (1/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Routine 1. Chemical and galvanic transport reaction Activation difference of (1) Chemical reaction Corrosion electric no chemical reaction Nil (2) Galvanic reaction Corrosion position no galvanic reaction Nil
- 2. Strength at low temperature No (1) Body SUS304 -40 Material 1 Degradation Allowable lowest temperature brittle (2) Bolt SUS630 -40 Material 1 Degradation Allowable lowest temperature fracture (3) O-ring Silicon- -40 Material 1 Degradation Allowable lowest temperature -40 rubber
- 3. Containment system 9
(1) Inner lid ()-Fig.C.3 SUS630 75 Opening due to Possibility of Nil contingency contingency
- 4. Lifting device M:Bending moment t:Plate thickness b:Width of eye plate (1) Eye plate ()-Fig.A.9 SUS304 75 Mass of package 3 Bending stress 6M Sy b = 2 tb F
3 Shear stress = 0.6Sy A
Combined stress = b 2 + 4 2 S
- 5. Tie-down device 6M (1) Eye plate ()-Fig.A.11 SUS304 75 Mass of package 2 Bending stress b = 2 Sy tb F
()-Fig.A.12 2 Shear stress = 0.6Sy A
Combined stress = b 2 + 4 2 S
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (2/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Routine 6. Pressure transport Note 1:
PDm (1) Frame of SUS304 75 1 Combined stress = Design Inner shell 2t standard of P Dm Formula for each stress z =
4t thin cylinder component is P determined r =
2 Note 1 using Sm.
Reduction of Note 2:
P a2 (2) Inner bottom plate SUS304 75 ambient 1 Combined stress = 0.225 Analysis h 2 Formula pressure 60kPa standard of P a2 for r = 0.75 each stress fixed disc h2 component is z = P determined 10 Formula using Sy.
P a2 for (3) Inner shell lid SUS630 75 1 Combined stress = r = 1.24 simply Note 3:
h2 Initial margin supported z = P disc of tightening Note 2 is about 1.1mm.
F (4) Inner shell SUS630 75 Initial bolt 1 Tensile stress t =
Ar load lid bolt F Internal 1 Tensile stress t =
pressure n Ar P a4 SUS630 75 Internal 1 Displacement = Formula (5) Displacement of inner 64 O-ring part of inner pressure for 2
shell lid 1 r 2 displace- Note 3 a ment of O-ring 5+ r 2 part 1+ a 2
- 7. Vibration No (1) Package ()-Fig.A.14 SUS304 75 Vibration 1 Resonance 1 k resonance fu =
2 m (2) Fuel basket fu :characteristic frequency
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (3/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Normal 1. Thermal condition test 1.1 Thermal expansion conditions approx. Thermal (1) Gap between basket ()-Fig.A.15 SUS304 62/63 expansion 1 Compression Presense of gap between inner Free and inner shell shell and basket.
1.2 Stress Calculation Note 1:
(1) Frame of Inner shell ()-Fig.A.16 SUS304 75 Internal 1 Combined Stress Formula for thin cylinder Design
()-Fig.A.17 pressure standard of Note 1 each stress (2) Inner bottom plate ()-Fig.A.18 SUS304 75 Internal 1 Combined Stress Formula for fixed disc component is pressure determined using Sm.
(3) Inner shell lid ()-Fig.A.19 SUS630 75 Internal 1 Combined Stress Formula for simply supported 11 pressure disc Note 2:
Analysis F
(4) Inner shell lid bolt ()-Fig.A.21 SUS630 75 Initial bolt 1 Tensile stress t = standard of Ai Note 2 load each stress Internal Tensile stress F component is t =
pressure n Ai determined Thermal Tensile stress Negrigible using Sy.
expansion Note 3:
Initial margin of tightening (5) Displacement of ()-Fig.A.20 SUS630 75 Internal 1 Displacement Formula for displacement of is about 1.1mm.
Note 3 O-ring part of inner pressure O-ring part lid
- 2. Water spray test Water spray 1 Absorption Absorption Nil Water-repellent Water-repellent Good
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (4/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Normal 3. Free drop test 3.1 Horizontal drop Note 1:
conditions (1) Deformation of shock ()-Fig.A.35 Horizontal drop 1 Deformation OH Effect of absorber ()-Fig.A.36 from 1.2m height O: Minimum thickness before deformation drop will be judged H: Deformation Note 1 in thermal
- Thickness after drop test.
M b = Note 2:
(2) Frame of Inner shell ()-Fig.A.37 SUS304 75 ditto 1 Bending stress Z Analytical F standard of (3) Inner bottom plate ()-Fig.A.38 SUS304 75 ditto 1 Shear stress =
A Note 2 each stress F component is (4) Upper part of inner ()-Fig.A.39 SUS630 75 ditto 1 Shear stress = determined A
shell (Inner lid) using Sm.
12 ML (5) Inner shell lid ()-Fig.A.40 SUS630 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = max 1 Note 3:
bolt M b = Analysis (6) Fuel basket ()-Fig.A.41 SUS304 75 ditto 1 Bending stress Z standard of M each stress b =
(7) Fuel element/plate ()-Fig.A.42 AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Bending stress Z Note 3 component is 44 determined W
1 Compression c = using Sy.
stress a (h 2 h 1 )
y = cr (1 + sec e L cr )
1 Buckling stress r 2K ENote 4 Note 4:
yYield stress Analysis crbuckling stress standard is Sy.
E modulus of direct elasticity Kradius-of-gyration of area Note 5:
Llength Analysis r section modulus/cross standard of section each stress eeccentricity component is (8) Fuel element hold down M determined b = Note 5 using Sy.
part ()-Fig.A.45 A6061P 75 ditto 1 Bending stress Z Note: Bolt stress due to internal pressure and initial bolt load is obtained from the design condition and formula described in1.2 Stress calculation.
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (5/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Normal 3.2 Vertical drop ()-Fig.A.46 test (Bottom side) Note 1:
conditions Effect of (1) Deformation of shock ()-Fig.A.47 Vertical drop 1 Deformation OV deformation absorber (Bottom side) O: Minimum thickness before will be judged from 1.2m height drop Note 1 in thermal V: Deformation test.
- Thickness after drop Note 2:
Analytical standard of F each stress (2) Frame of Inner shell ()-Fig.A.48 SUS304 75 ditto 1 Compression c = component is A
stress Note 2 determined using Sm.
13 (3) Inner bottom plate ()-Fig.A.49 SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc Note 3:
Analysis standard of each stress (4) Inner shell lid ()-Fig.A.50 SUS630 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported component is disc Note 3 determined using Sy.
(5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 F
=
(6) Fuel Element/plate ()-Fig.A.51 AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Shear stress 2 (h 2 h 1 ) b 53 Wo t =
1 Tensile stress A W
1 Compression c = Note 3 A
stress W
(7) Fuel element hold ()-Fig.A.54 A6061P 75 ditto 1 Compression c =
A down part stress
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (6/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Normal 3.3 Vertical drop ()-Fig.A.55 test (Lid side) Note 1:
condition (1) Deformation of shock ()-Fig.A.56 Vertical drop 1 Deformation OV Effect of absorber (Lid side) from O: Minimum thickness before deformation 1.2m height drop Note 1 will be judged V: Deformation in thermal
- Thickness after drop test.
F Note 2:
(2) Frame of Inner shell ()-Fig.A.57 SUS304 75 ditto 1 Compression c = Analytical A
stress Note 2 standard of each stress (3) Inner bottom plate ()-Fig.A.58 SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc component is determined (4) Inner shell lid ()-Fig.A.59 SUS630 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported using Sm.
14 disc Note 3 R Note 3:
(5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 Tensile stress t =
n Ai Analysis standard of F each stress (6) Fuel Element/plate ()-Fig.A.60 AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Shear stress = component is 2 (h 2 h 1 ) b 62 determined 1 Tensile stress Wo using Sy.
t =
A Note 3 1 Compression W stress c =
A (7) Fuel element hold ()-Fig.A.63 A6061P 75 ditto 1 Compression W down part stress c =
A 3.4 Corner drop ()-Fig.A.63 Corner drop from Analyzed for each item of para.5.15.3 above from 1.2m drop horizontal and vertical component of impact (1) Inner shell lid bolt ()-Fig.A.64 SUS630 75 (Lid side) 1 Bending stress max N V W L V VMAX V =
2 2Ar Note 3 N H W L H HMAX H =
2 2 Ar 3.5 Inclined drop ()-Fig.A.65 Inclined drop Analyzed for each item of para.5.15.3 above from 68 from 1.2m height horizontal and vertical component of impact
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (7/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Normal 4. Stacking test test F + mg Note 1:
condition (1) Frame of Inner shell ()-Fig.A.72 SUS304 75 Mass of package x5+Self weight Bending stress Z = Note 1 Design A
standard of each stress component is determined using Su.
(2) Inner shell lid ()-Fig.A.71 SUS630 75 Mass of package x5+Self weight Combined stress Formula for simply supported Note 2 disc Note 2:
Analysis standard of each stress component is determined 15 using Sy.
- 5. Penetration test (1) Outer shell ()-Fig.A.72, SUS304 75 Impact of mild x1 Absorbed energy 1 No E2 = Cr d t 2 73 steel bar 2 penetra-(Cr: Shear strength)=0.6Su tion
- 6. Free drop on each Not applicable corner or each rim
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (8/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Accident 1. Drop test test 1.1 Vertical drop Note 1:
conditions (Bottom side) Effect of (1) Deformation of shock ()-Fig.A.75 Vertical drop 1 Deformation OV deformation absorber (Bottom side) O: Minimum thickness before Note 1 will be judged from 9m height drop in thermal V: Deformation test.
- Thickness after drop (2) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Compression W Note 2:
c =
stress A Analytical Note 3 standard of (3) Inner bottom plate SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc each stress component is determined (4) Inner shell lid SUS630 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported using Su.
16 disc Note 2 Note 3:
(5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 Analysis standard of each stress F component is (6) Fuel element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Shear stress = determined 2 (h 2 h 1 ) b using Sy.
Wo 1 Tensile stress t =
A 1 Compression W Note 2 c =
stress A W
(7) Fuel element hold down A6061P 75 ditto 1 Compression c =
A part stress
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (9/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Accident 1.2 Vertical drop test (Lid side) Note 1:
conditions Effect of (1) Deformation of shock ()-Fig.A.76 Vertical drop 1 Deformation OV deformation absorber (Lid side) from O: Minimum thickness before will be judged 9m height drop Note 1 in thermal V: Deformation test.
- Thickness after drop Note 2:
Analytical F standard of (2) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Compression c = each stress A
stress Note 2 component is determined (3) Inner bottom plate SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc using Su.
17 Note 3:
Analysis (4) Inner shell lid SUS630 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported standard of disc each stress F component is (5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 Tensile stress t =
n Ai determined using Sy.
F (6) Fuel element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Shear stress =
2 (h 2 h 1 ) b Note 3 Wo 1 Tensile stress t =
A 1 Compression W c =
stress A W
(7) Fuel element hold down A6061P 75 ditto 1 Compression c =
A part stress
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (10/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Accident 1.3 Horizontal drop test OH Note 1:
conditions (1) Deformation of shock ()-Fig.A.77 Horizontal drop 1 Deformation O: Minimum thickness before Effect of absorber from 9m height drop Note 1 deformation
- Thickness after drop will be judged H: Deformation in thermal test.
M (2) Frame 0f Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = Note 2:
Z Note 3 Analytical standard of (3) Inner bottom plate SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc each stress component is F determined (4) Upper part of inner SUS630 75 ditto 1 Shear stress =
using Su.
18 shell (Inner lid) A M
(5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = max Note 3:
I Analytical M standard of (6) Fuel basket SUS304 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = Note 2 each stress Z
component is M
(7) Fuel element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = determined Z using Sy.
1 Compression W stress c =
a (h 2 h 1 )
1 Buckling stress y = cr (1 + sec e L cr )
r 2K E Note 4:
yYield stress Analysis crbuckling stress standard is E modulus of direct cr.
elasticity Note 4 Kradius-of-gyration of area Llength r section modulus/cross section eeccentricity (8) Fuel element hold down A6061P 75 ditto 1 Bending stress part M Note 2 b =
Z
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (11/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Accident 1.4 Corner drop ()-Fig.A.78 Corner drop 1 Analyzed for each item of para.8.18.3 above from test from 9m height horizontal and vertical component of impact Note 1:
conditions Analytical (1) Inner lid bolt SUS630 75 Corner drop 1 Bending stress max standard of from 9m height N V W L V VMAX each stress V =
(Lid side) 2 2Ar component is Note 1 determined N H W L H HMAX H = using Sy.
2 Ar 2
19 1.5 Inclined drop ()-Fig.A.79 Inclined drop 1 Analyzed for each item of para.8.18.3 above from
()-Fig.A.82 from 9m height horizontal and vertical component of impact
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (12/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Accident 2. Drop test test 2.1 Penetration ()-Fig.A.83 conditions (1) Outer lid ()-Fig.A.84 SUS304 75 Drop onto a mild 1 Penetration No bar from 1m energy Penetra-height tion (2) Outer bottom plate SUS304 75 ditto 1 Penetration energy (3) Frame of Outer shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Penetration energy
- 3. Thermal test 3.1 Thermal expansion Note 1:
20 Analytical (1) Gap between inner SUS304 500/ Thermal 1 Compression Presense of gap between inner free standard of shell and fuel basket 225 expansion shell and basket each stress component is 3.2 Stress by pressure determined using Su.
(1) frame of Inner shell SUS304 500 Internal pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for thin cylinder Note 2:
(2) Inner bottom plate SUS304 500 Internal pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for fixed disc Note 1 Analytical standard of (3) Inner shell lid SUS630 225 Internal pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for simple support disc each stress component is (4) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 225 Initial torque 1 Tensile stress F determined t =
Ai using Sy.
Note 2 F
225 Internal pressure 1 Tensile stress t =
n Ai Note 3:
Initial margin Formula for displacement of of tightening (5) Displacement of SUS630 225 Internal pressure 1 Displacement Note 3 is about 1.1mm.
O-ring part of inner O-ring part lid
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (13/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element B(U) package Accident 4. Water immersion test ()-Fig.A.85 test 4.1 Water immersion Note 1:
conditions (15m depth) Analytical standard of (1) Frame of Inner shell ()-Fig.A.88 SUS304 External pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for thin cylinder each stress Note 1 component is (2) Inner bottom plate ()-Fig.A.89 SUS304 External pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for fixed disc determined using Su.
(3) Inner shell lid ()-Fig.A.90 SUS630 External pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for simply supported Note 2 disc Note 2:
4Bt Analytical (4) Buckling of inner ()-Fig.A.86 SUS304 External pressure 1 Buckling stress Pe = Note 1 standard of 2 Do shell each stress B : Buckling factor component is DO: Outer diameter of inner determined 21 shell using Su.
Note 3:
(5) Displacement of ()-Fig.A.91 SUS630 External pressure 1 Displacement Formula for displacement of Note 3 Initial margin O-ring part of inner O-ring part of tightening lid is about 1.1mm.
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (14/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Normal 1. Water spray test Water spray 1 Absorption Absorption Nil package test Water-repellent Water-repellent Good conditions 22
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (15/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Normal 2. Free drop package test 2.1 Horizontal drop Note 1:
conditions OH Effect of (1) Deformation of shock ()-Fig.A.95 Horizontal drop 1 Deformation O: Minimum thickness before deformation absorber from 1.2m height drop will be judged H: Deformation Note 1 in thermal
- Thickness after drop test.
M Note 2:
(2) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b =
Z Analytical standard of (3) Inner shell bottom =
F Note 2 SUS304 75 ditto 1 Shear stress each stress plate A component is (4) Upper part of inner F determined SUS630 75 ditto 1 Shear stress =
shell (Inner lid) A using Sm.
23 ML (5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = max Note 3:
1 Analysis M
(6) Fuel basket SUS304 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = standard of Z
each stress M Note 3 component is (7) Fuel element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b =
Z determined 1 Compression using Sy.
W c =
stress a (h 2 h 1 )
1 Buckling stress Note 4:
y = cr (1 + sec e L cr )
r 2K E Note 4 Analysis standard is yYield stress cr.
crbuckling stress E modulus of direct Note 5:
elasticity Analysis Kradius-of-gyration of area standard of Llength each stress r section modulus/cross component is section determined eeccentricity using Sy.
(8) Fuel element hold M Note 5 A6061P 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b =
down part Z
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (16/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Normal 2.2 Vertical drop package test 2.2.1 Vertical drop Note 1:
conditions (Bottom side) Effect of deformation (1) Deformation of shock ()-Fig.A.96 Vertical drop 1 Deformation OV will be judged absorber (Bottom side) O: Minimum thickness before in thermal from 1.2m height drop Note 1 test.
V: Deformation
- Thickness after drop Note 2:
Analytical standard of each stress F
(2) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Compression c = component is A
stress determined Note 2 using Sm.
24 (3) Inner shell bottom SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc Note 3:
plate Analysis standard of each stress (4) Inner shell lid SUS630 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported component is disc Note 3 determined using Sy.
(5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 F
(6) Fuel element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Shear stress =
2 (h 2 h 1 ) b Wo 1 Tensile stress t =
A Note 3 1 Compression W c =
stress A (7) Fuel element hold A6061P 75 ditto 1 Compression W c =
down part stress A
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (17/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Normal 2.2.2 Vertical drop package test (Lid side) Note 1:
condition Effect of (1) Deformation of shock Vertical drop 1 Deformation OV deformation absorber (Lid side) from O: Minimum thickness before will be judged 1.2m height drop Note 1 in thermal V: Deformation test.
- Thickness after drop Note 2:
F Analytical (2) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Compression c = standard of A
stress Note 2 each stress component is (3) Inner shell bottom SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc determined plate using Sm.
25 (4) Inner shell lid SUS630 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported Note 3:
disc Analysis Note 3 R standard of (5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 Tensile stress t =
n Ar each stress component is F determined (6) Fuel Element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Shear stress = using Sy.
2 (h 2 h 1 ) b 1 Tensile stress t =
Wo A
1 Compression W Note 3 stress c =
A W
(7) Fuel element hold A6061P 75 ditto 1 Compression c =
down part stress A 2.3 Corner drop Corner drop from Analyzed for each item of para.3.13.3 above from 1.2m drop horizontal and vertical component of impact (1) Inner lid bolt SUS630 75 Corner drop from 1 Bending stress max 1.2m drop N V W L V VMAX V =
(Lid side) 2 2Ar Note 3 N W L H HMAX H = H 2 2 Ar
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (18/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Normal 3. Stacking test package test F + mg Note 1:
condition (1) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 Mass of package x5+Self weight Bending stress Z = Note 1 Analysis A
standard of each stress component is determined using Su.
(2) Inner shell lid SUS630 75 Mass of package x5+Self weight Combined stress Formula for simply supported Note 2 disc Note 2:
Analysis standard of each stress component is determined 26 using Sy.
- 4. Penetration test (1) Outer shell SUS304 75 Impact on mild 1 Absorbed energy 1 No E2 = Cr d t 2 steel bar 2 penetra-(Cr: Shear strength)=0.6Su tion
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (19/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Accident 1. Drop test package test 1.1 Vertical drop Note 1:
conditions 1.1.1 Vertical drop Effect of (Bottom side) deformation will be judged (1) Deformation of shock Vertical drop 1 Deformation OV in thermal absorber (Bottom side) O: Minimum thickness before test.
from 9m height drop Note 1 V: Deformation Note 2:
- Thickness after drop Analytical standard of each stress W component is (2) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Compression c = determined A
stress Note 3 using Su.
27 (3) Inner shell bottom SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc Note 3:
plate Analysis standard of each stress (4) Inner shell lid SUS630 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported component is disc Note 2 determined using Sy.
(5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 F
(6) Fuel element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Shear stress =
2 (h 2 h 1 ) b Wo 1 Tensile stress t =
A 1 Compression W c = Note 2 stress A (7) Fuel element hold down A6061P 75 ditto 1 Compression W part stress c =
A
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (20/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Accident 1.1.2 Vertical drop package test (Lid side) Note 1:
conditions (1) Deformation of shock Vertical drop 1 Deformation OV Effect of absorber (Lid side) from O: Minimum thickness before deformation 9m height drop will be judged V: Deformation Note 1 in thermal
- Thickness after drop test.
(2) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Compression F stress c = Note 2:
A Note 2 Analytical (3) Inner shell bottom SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc standard of plate each stress (4) Inner shell lid SUS630 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported component is disc determined F using Su.
28 (5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 Tensile stress t =
n Ar Note 3:
F (6) Fuel element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Shear stress = Analysis 2 (h 2 h 1 ) b standard of Wo Note 3 each stress 1 Tensile stress t =
A component is determined Compression W 1 c = using Sy.
stress A (7) Fuel element hold down Compression W A6061P 75 ditto 1 c =
part stress A
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (21/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Accident 1.2 Horizontal drop package test Note 1:
conditions (1) Deformation of shock Horizontal drop 1 Deformation OH Effect of absorber from 9m height O: Minimum thickness before deformation drop Note 1 will be judged
- Thickness after drop in thermal H: Deformation test.
M (2) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = Note 2:
Z Note 2 Analytical (3) Inner shell bottom SUS304 75 ditto 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc standard of plate each stress F component is (4) Upper part of inner SUS630 75 ditto 1 Shear stress = determined shell (Inner lid) A using Su.
29 M
(5) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = max Note 3:
I Analytical M
(6) Fuel basket SUS304 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = standard of Z each stress Note 3 component is M
(7) Fuel element/plate AG3NE 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b = determined Z
using Sy.
1 Compression W c =
stress a (h 2 h 1 )
1 Buckling stress cr )
y = cr (1 + sec e L Note 4 Note 4:
r 2K E Analytical yYield stress standard is crbuckling stress cr.
E modulus of direct elasticity Kradius-of-gyration of area Llength r section modulus/cross section eeccentricity Note 3 M
(8) Fuel element hold down A6061P 75 ditto 1 Bending stress b =
part Z
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (22/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Accident 1.3 Corner drop Corner drop 1 Analyzed for each item of para.1.1 and 1.2 above package test from 9m height from horizontal and vertical component of impact Note 1:
conditions Analytical standard of each stress component is determined using Sy.
(1) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 75 Corner drop 1 Bending stress max from 9m height N W L V VMAX V = V (Lid side) 2 2Ai Note 1 N H W L H HMAX H =
2 2 Ai 30
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (23/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Temp. Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Accident 2. Drop test package teset 2.1 Penetration conditions (1) Outer shell lid SUS304 75 Drop onto a mild 1 Penetration No bar from 1m energy Penetra-height tion (2) Outer shell bottom SUS304 75 ditto 1 Penetration No plate energy Penetra-tion (3) Frame of Outer shell SUS304 75 ditto 1 Penetration No energy Penetra-tion 31
- 3. Thermal test 3.1 Thermal expansion Note 1:
Analytical (1) Gap between inner SUS304 500/ Thermal 1 Compression Presence of gap between shell free standard of shell and fuel basket 225 expansion and basket each stress component is 3.2 Stress by pressure determined using Su.
(1) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 500 Internal pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for thin cylinder Note 2:
(2) Inner shell bottom SUS304 500 Internal pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for fixed disc Note 1 Analytical plate standard of (3) Inner shell lid SUS630 225 Internal pressure 1 Combined Stress Formula for simply supported each stress disc component is determined (4) Inner shell lid bolt SUS630 225 Initial torque 1 Tensile stress F using Sy.
t =
Ai Note 2 F Note 3:
225 Internal pressure 1 Tensile stress t =
n Ai Initial margin of tightening Formula for displacement of is about 1.1mm.
(5) Displacement of SUS630 225 Internal pressure 1 Displacement Note 3 O-ring part of inner O-ring part lid
Symbols;
- Principal stress t : Torsional stress b : Bending stress F : Load
()-Table A.4 Design conditions, analytical methods of structural analysis (24/24) c : Compressive stress P : Pressure
- Shear stress A : Cross section Design condition Analytical methods Requirement Condition Item Reference Design load Remark Material Applied formula or element Standard figure Type Loading factor Element Fissile Accident 4. Water immersion test package test 4.1 Water immersion Note 1:
conditions (0.9m depth) Analytical standard of (1) Frame of Inner shell SUS304 External pressure 1 Combined stress Formula for thin cylinder each stress Note 1 component is (2) Inner shell bottom SUS304 External pressure 1 Combined stress Formula for fixed disc determined plate using Su.
(3) Inner shell lid SUS630 External pressure 1 Combined stress Formula for simply supported Note 2 disc Note 2:
4Bt Analytical (4) Buckling of inner SUS304 External pressure 1 Buckling stress Pe = Note 1 standard of 2 Do shell each stress B : Buckling factor component is DO: Outer diameter of inner determined 32 shell using Su.
Note 3:
(5) Displacement of SUS630 External pressure 1 Displacement Formula for displacement of Note 3 Initial margin O-ring part of inner O-ring part of tightening lid is about 1.1mm
A.2 Weight and center of gravity As indicated in ()-Table-C.3, the package weighs 950 kg in maximum. Its center of gravity is shown in ()-Fig.A.1.
27.6° 1800 22.8° 997 840
()-Fig.A.1 Position of center of gravity A.3 Mechanical properties of materials
()-Table.A.5 is a list of the mechanical properties of the materials used in the analysis.
()-Table.A.6 shows the mechanical properties of the materials to be used as analytic references.
In addition, the value based on the current appropriate source is indicated in (). Even in a case where values based on these current, appropriate sources are used for mechanical property of major members etc. of this shipping cask, it is confirmed that the impact on the analysis result will be minimal, and there will be no problem for safety.
() 33
Mechanical properties of stainless steel and aluminum alloy versus temperature is indicated in ()-Fig.A.2, ()-Fig.A.3, ()-Fig.A.4, and
()-Fig.A.5.
()-Fig.A.6 and ()-Fig.A.7 show a design fatigue curve for the analysis.
A stress-strain curve of balsa used as a shock absorber is indicated in
()-Fig.A.8. The figures are quoted from references shown later.
() 34
()-Table.A.5 Mechanical properties of materials Modulus of Linear Design Design yield Design stress longitudinal expansion tensile strength Sy intensity Poisson's Stress-strai Material Code Main application parts elasticity E factor strength Su Sm ratio n diagram 2 2 2 2
[N/mm ] [l/] [N/mm ] [N/mm ] [N/mm ]
Main body of inner shell
[2]
Main body of outer shell ()-Fig.A.2 ()-Fig.A.2 ()-Fig.A.2 ()-Fig.A.2 ()-Fig.A.2 Stainless steel SUS304 0.3 and outer lid (4/5) (5/5) (1/5) (2/5) (3/5)
(austenitic)
Fuel basket
[2]
35 Inner lid Stainless steel SUS630 ()-Fig.A.3 ()-Fig.A.3 ()-Fig.A.3 ()-Fig.A.3 ()-Fig.A.4 Inner lid clamping bolt 0.3 precipitation H1150 (3/4) (4/4) (1/4) (2/4) (1/1)
Outer lid clamping bolt hardened type
[14]
Fuel element (A) ()-Fig.A.5 Aluminum alloy AG3NE 0.3 Fuel plate (1/1)
[4]
Balsa Shock absorber ()-Fig.A.8 Stainless steel: see Literature [2] Numbers shown in brackets ( )
Aluminum alloy : see Literature [14] indicate the number of the sheets Balsa : see Literature [4] for the Figure No.
()-Table.A.6 Mechanical properties of materials to be used as design standards
- Normal conditions
- Normal test conditions Accident test conditions
- Accident test conditions (excluding thermal (only for thermal tests)
Evaluated position Material tests)
T Sm Sy Su E T Sm Sy Su E 183 1.92 16.71 1 Inner shell main body SUS304 75 137 466 500 387 (180) (1.91) (15.9) 311 688 847 1.99 9.38 2 Inner lid SUS630 75 225 612 (310) (687) (846) (1.92) (11.3) 183 1.92 16.71 3 Fuel basket SUS304 75 137 466 (180) (1.91) (15.9) 183 1.92 16.71 36 4 Outer shell main body SUS304 75 137 466 (180) (1.91) (15.9) 183 1.92 16.71 5 Outer lid SUS304 75 137 466 (180) (1.91) (15.9) 688 1.99 9.38 6 Inner lid clamping bolt SUS630 75 229 847 225 612 (687) (1.92) (11.3) 688 1.99 9.38 7 Outer lid clamping bolt SUS630 75 229 847 (687) (1.92) (11.3)
Fuel element (A) 63.8 8 AG3NE 75 167 0.697 25.7 Fuel plate 63.7 JRR-4B type 9 Fuel element (B) 75 63.8 88.3 fuel plate Fuel element hold down 10 A6061P 75 245 295 part T: Temperature [] Sm: Design stress intensity [N/mm2] Sy: Design yield point [N/mm2] Su: Design tensile strength [N/mm2]
E: Modulus of longitudinal elasticity [x105N/mm2] : Linear expansion factor [x10-6-1]
( ): Code for Nuclear Power generation Facilities: Rules on of Materials Nuclear Power Plants (2012 edition) of the Japan Society of mechanical Engineers
37
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS304 according to changes in temperature (1/5)
38 Design yielding strength
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS304 according to changes in temperature (2/5)
39 Design yielding strength
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS304 according to changes in temperature (3/5)
Elastic coefficient long 40
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS304 according to changes in temperature (4/5)
Liner expansion coefficient 41
()-Fig.A.2 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS304 according to changes in temperature (5/5)
42
()-Fig.A.3 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS630 according to changes in temperature (bolt material) (1/4)
43
()-Fig.A.3 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS630 according to changes in temperature (bolt material) (2/4)
Elastic coefficient long 44
()-Fig.A.3 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS630 according to changes in temperature (bolt material) (3/4)
Liner expansion coefficient 45
()-Fig.A.3 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS630 according to changes in temperature (bolt material) (4/4)
46
()-Fig.A.4 Variations in mechanical properties of SUS630 according to changes in temperature (1/1)
Design yielding strength 47
()-Fig.A.5 Variations in mechanical properties of AG3NE according to changes in temperature (1/1)
Sa Repetition peak stress strength Na The permission repetition number of times
()-Fig.A.6 Design fatigue curve (austenitic type stainless steel and high nickel alloy)[2]
Sa Repetition peak stress strength Na The permission repetition number of times
()-Fig.A.7 Design fatigue curve (high tensile strength bolt)[2]
48
()-Fig.A.8 Stress-strain curve of shock absorber[4]
49
A.4 Requirements of the package A.4.1 Chemical and electrical reactions
()-Table A.7 is a list of the different materials that come in contact with each other in this package. The materials used in this package, being chemically stable in air, will not trigger any chemical or electrical reaction when coming in contact with one another.
()-Table A.7 List of different materials contacted Positions Materials Inner shell Shock absorber Stainless steel Timber Outer shell Inner shell Heat insulator Stainless steel Hardened Outer shell polyurethane Inner shell main body O-ring Stainless steel Silicone rubber Inner lid Fuel basket Spacer Stainless steel Silicone rubber Inner lid Protective sheets Spacer Polyethylene Silicone rubber Protective sheets Fuel basket Polyethylene Stainless steel Protective sheets Peripheral Polyethylene Polyurethane foam shock absorber Protective sheets Fuel element Polyethylene Aluminum alloy Peripheral shock Fuel element Polyurethane foam Aluminum alloy absorber Cushion rubber Lower part of Silicone rubber Stainless steel the fuel basket Inner shell Gasket Stainless steel Ethylene propylene Outer shell rubber Fitting bracket Fusible plug Stainless steel Solder 50
A.4.2 Low temperature strength This package is a BU type package, as is indicated in ()-B. This section will demonstrate the reliability of the packaging in ambient conditions of -
40.
The minimum temperatures of each part of the package and the materials involved are shown in ()-Table A.8.
()-Table A.8 Minimum temperatures of parts of package Minimum Brittleness transition Citation, Evaluated position Material temperature temp./min. service literatures and
() temperature () references Aluminum 1 Content Aluminum alloy -40 No brittle fracture Hand Book20 Austenitic 2 Inner shell -40 No brittle fracture JIS B 8270 stainless steel Stainless Steel Austenitic 3 Outer shell -40 No brittle fracture Manual16 stainless steel Precipitation Stainless steel 4 Inner lid hardened stainless -40 Below -40 Heat steel Treatment18 Austenitic 5 Outer lid -40 No brittle fracture JIS B 8270 stainless steel Stainless Steel Austenitic 6 Fuel basket -40 No brittle fracture Manual16 stainless steel Precipitation Inner lid clamping 7 hardened stainless -40 Below -40 bolt Stainless steel steel Heat Precipitation Outer lid clamping Treatment18 8 hardened stainless -40 Below -40 bolt steel Summary of technology for 9 Inner lid O-ring Silicone rubber -40 Below -40 hybrid materials21 10 Shock absorber Balsa -40 Below -40 Appendices A.10.4 Hardened Internal data of 11 Heat insulator -40 Below -40 polyurethane foam manufacturers22 The austenitic stainless steels of the inner and outer shells, as shown in
()-Fig.A.103 and the precipitation hardened stainless steels of the inner lid and bolts as shown in ()-Fig.A.104 can maintain adequate value of strength 51
endurable to impulse at the temperature -40, and also the Aluminum alloy used for fuel elements is free from any brittle fracture at the temperature -40, as show in ()-Table.A.8.
The tolerable temperature for the silicone rubber used for the O-ring is lower then -40. The O-ring preserves full sealing performance at -40.
The Balsa wood used for the shock absorber, as shown in ()-Fig.A.100, can maintain the function as the shock absorber sufficiently at the temperature
-40, since the material properties are free of any significant error at each temperatures, at room temperature, -20 and -40.
Therefore, at -40, this package is completely functional.
A.4.3 Sealing device After the fuel elements are stored in the main body of the inner shell, the inner lid is clamped with bolts and then secured with the outer lid. Thus, the inner lid cannot be opened inadvertently. Similarly, the outer lid cannot be easily opened as it is locked and sealed after being fixed to the main body of the outer shell.
If opened, it will easily be detected.
52
A.4.4 Hoisting accessory The hoisting accessory described in this section is a hoisting eye-plate fixed to the side of the main body of the outer shell. For design standard of the stress generated at the hoisting accessory, the yield stress Sy at the temperature of 75 is employed with safety margin, in consideration of 65, the maximum temperature at the point of eye-plate on the outer surface of the packaging on normal transportation, obtained by (II) -B Thermal Analysis.
()-Fig.A.9 shows an analytical model of an eye-plate of the hoisting accessory for the main body.
29 15 45 90 32 Eye-plate 10 50
()-Fig.A.9 Analytical model for eye-plate The gross weight of a package lifted (mo) on a hoisting eye-plate of the main body is 950 kg at the maximum, as indicated in ()-Table C.3.
A maximum load F(N) applied on one of four eye-plates when lifting a package is given by the following equation, with the load factor of 3.
1 3 F= (3xgxmo)= x9.81x950=6.99x103 [N]
n 4 53
where g: gravitational acceleration; g=9.81 [m/sec2]
Therefore, when the upward vertical load , F=6.99x103 [N] as shown in
()-Fig.A.9 works on the eye-plate, stress on each cross section is analysed as follows.
(1) Section A-A The shearing stress [N/mm2] generated in the shaded portion (section A-A) of the eye-plate shown in ()-Fig.A.9 is given by the following equation.
F F
A th where
- Shearing stress [N/mm2]
F: Maximum load, F=6.99x103 [N]
t: Plate thickness, t=15 [mm]
h: Height, h=29 [mm]
Therefore, 6.99 10 3
= =16.1 [N/mm2]
29 15 So it is less than the design standard value allowable correspond to shearing stress on the eye-plate material (SUS 304) (0.6sy=108 N/mm2). And the margin of safety (MS) is 0.6Sy 110 MS= -1= -1=5.70 16 .1 (2) Section B-B The bending stress b [N/mm2] generated at the fixing point of the eye-plate as indicated in ()-Fig.A.9 is given by the following equation.
M F 1 b = = 2 Z tb / 6 where M: Bending moment [N/mm2]
54
Z: Section modulus [mm3]
l: Moment arm, l=50 [mm]
b: Width of eye-plate, b =90 [mm]
t: Plate thickness, t=15 [mm]
Therefore, 6.99 10 3 50 b = =17.3 [N/mm2]
15 90 2 / 6 and it is less than the design yield strength (Sy=180N/mm2) of the eye-plate material (SUS304).
The margin of safety (MS) turns out Sy 183 MS= -1= -1=9.40 b 17 .3 And the shearing stress generated in the section B-B is given by the following equation.
F F 6.99 10 3
= = = =5.18 [N/mm2]
A tb 15 90 It is therefore less than the design standard value allowable correspond to shearing stress on the eye-plate material (SUS304).
The margin of safety (MS) is 0.6Sy 110 MS= -1= -1=19.8 5.18 The composite stress [N/mm2] of the above-mentioned bending stress b and shearing stress is given by the following equation.
= b + 4 2 = 17.3 2 + 4 5.18 2 =20.2 [N/mm2]
2 It is less than the yield point of the design of the eye-plate material (SUS304).
The margin of safety (MS) is Sy 183 MS= -1= -1=7.91 20.2 55
(3) Welded part on the section B-B 15 90 50
()-Fig.A.10 Analytical model of welded part on eye-plate.
The bending stress b [N/mm2] generated on the welded fixing part of the eye-plate shown in ()-Fig.A.10 is given by the following equation M F 1 b = =
Z Z where Z: Section modulus of the welded part [mm3]
1 Z= 2ab2 6
a: Weld-throat thickness, a=7 [mm]
b: Width of a plate, b=90 [mm]
Therefore, b will be 6.99 10 3 50 b = =18.5 [N/mm2]
1 2 7 90 2 6
This is less than the design standard value on the welded part (0.45Sy=81.0N/mm2).
The margin of safety (MS) is 0.45Sy 0.45 183 MS= -1= -1=3.37 b 18.5 56
The shearing stress generated on the welded part of the section B-B is given by the following equation.
F F 6.99 10 3
= = = =5.55 [N/mm2]
A 2a b 2 7 90 This is less than the design standard value allowable correspond to shearing strength on the welded part (0.45xO.6xSy=48.6 N/mm2).
The margin of safety (MS) is 0.45 0.6 Sy 0.45 0.6 183 MS= -1= -1=7.75 5.55 The composite stress [N/mm2] of the bending stress mentioned above b and the shearing stress is given by the following equation
= b 2 + 4 2 = 18.5 2 + 4 5.55 2 =21.6 [N/mm2]
It is less than the design standard value on the welded part (0.45Sy=81.0N/mm2).
The margin of safety (MS) is, 0.45Sy 0.45 183 MS= -1= -1=2.75 21.6 The results of the analysis mentioned above is outlined in ()-Table A.9.
As indicated in ()-Table A.9, the margin of safety (MS) in every analysis is positive and the eye-plate is sound during hoisting.
57
A.4.5 Tightening device This packaging is transported after being tightened by a device, shown in
()-Fig.A.11.
The packaging and the tightening device are secured with an eye-plate and a turnbuckle.
()-Fig.A.11 Acceleration during transportation 58
The acceleration which occurs during transportation is 2G from front to rear, 1G from left to right, 1G towards the top and 3G towards the bottom, as indicated in ()-Fig.A.11.
After taking the combined force of these factors into consideration, the tensile strength applied to the turnbuckle due to the overturning moment around the supporting points and as indicated in ()-Fig.A.11 is as follows:
2 HG + R TA= xmoxg [N]
2H T sin sec + 2 cos R (1 + cos ) + E cos 3 H G cos + R TB= xmoxg [N]
H T sin + (2R + E) cos where TA : Tensile force of the turnbuckle taking as the supporting point.
TB : Tensile force of the turnbuckle taking as the supporting point.
HG : Gravity height, HG= 997 [mm]
HT : Height to the center of the eye-plate, HT= 1320 [mm]
R: Outer radius of the packaging, R= 420 [mm]
E: Length where the eye-plate is fixed: E= 50 [mm]
- Angle of the turnbuckle, = 15°
- Direction angle of the eye-plate, = 45° mo: Weight of the package, mo= 950 [kg]
g: Gravitational acceleration, g = 9.81 [m/s2]
The following equations are given, 2 997 + 420 TA=
2 1320 sin 15 sec 45 + 2 cos15 420(1 + cos 45) + 50 cos 45 x950x9.81=9.30x103 [N]
3 997 cos 45 + 420 TB= x950x9.81=1.97x104 [N]
1320 sin 15 + (2 420 + 50) cos15 Therefore, the tensile force is greater when point is taken as the supporting point T=TB=1.97x104 [N]
Thus, the stress analysis is conducted at this load level.
59
The following equations demonstrate the horizontal and the vertical components of force (F and V) when the eye-plate of the packaging receives the maximum tensile force T from the tie-down turnbuckle during transport.
T= 1.97x104 [N]
F= Tsin=1.97x104xsin15°=5.10x103 [N]
V= Tcos=1.97x104xcos15°=1.90x104 [N]
The analytical model for this case is displayed in ()-Fig.A.12 15 45 90 32 29 Eye-plate 10 15° 50
()-Fig.A.12 Analytical model for eye-plate 60
The following is an analysis of the stress generated in each cross section when the directional load of the turnbuckle T =1.97x104 [N] is applied to the eye-plate as indicated in ()-Fig.A.12.
(1) A-A cross section The following equation demonstrates the shearing stress (N/mm2) generated in the shaded portion (A-A cross section) of the eye-plate shown in ()-Fig.A.12.
T T
A th where
- shearing stress [N/mm2]
T: maximum load, T=l.97xl04 [N]
t: board thickness, t =15 [mm]
h: height, h=29 [mm]
Therefore 1.97 10 4
= =45.3 [N/mm2]
29 15 It is less than the design standard value allowable correspond to shearing strength (0.6Sy =l08N/mm2 of the eye-plate material (SUS 304).
The margin of safety MS is 0.6Sy 110 MS= -1= -1=1.38 45.3 (2) B-B cross section The following equation demonstrates the bending stress b(N/mm2) generated in the fixed part (B-B cross section) of the eye-plate shown in
()-Fig.A.12.
M V 1 b = =
Z tb 2 / 6 where M: bending moment [Nmm]
61
z: section modulus [mm3]
V: vertical component force, V=1.9OxlO4 [N]
t: eye-plate board thickness, t=15 [mm]
l: moment arm, l =50 [mm]
b: eye-plate width, b=90 [mm]
Therefore, 1.90 10 4 50 b = =46.9 [N/mm2]
15 90 2 / 6 is obtained, and it is less than Yield point of the design (Sy=180N/mm2) of the eye-plate material (SUS 304).
The margin of safety MS is Sy 183 MS= -1= -1=2.83 b 46.9 The shearing stress generated in the B-B cross section is given by the following equation:
V V 1.90 10 4
= = = =14.1 [N/mm2]
A t b 15 90 It is less than the design standard value allowable correspond to shearing stress (0.6Sy=108N/mm2) of the eye-plate material (SUS 304).
The margin of safety (MS) is 0.6Sy 110 MS= -1= -1=6.65 14 .1 The composite stress (N/mm2) of the bending stress b (N/mm2) mentioned above and the shearing stress is given by the following equation
= b + 4 2 = 46.9 2 + 4 14.12 =54.7 2
[N/mm2]
It is less than Yield point of the design (Sy =180N/mm2) of the eye-plate material (SUS 304).
The margin of safety (MS) is Sy 183 MS= -1= -1=2.29 54.7 62
(3) Welded part of B-B cross section 15 90 50
()-Fig.A.13 Analytical model for welded part of eye-plate The following equation demonstrates the bending stress b(N/mm2) generated in the welded part of the fixed part of the eye-plate shown in
()-Fig.A.13.
M V 1 b = =
Z Z where Z: Section modulus of the welded part, 1
Z= 2ab2 [mm3]
6 a: Throat depth, a = 7 [mm]
b: Board width, b = 90 [mm]
Therefore, b is 1.90 10 4 50 b = =50.3 [N/mm2]
1 2 7 90 2 6
This is less than the design standard value (0.45Sy= 81.0N/mm2) of the welded part.
63
The margin of safety (MS) is 0.45Sy 0.45 183 MS= -1= -1=0.61 b 50.3 The shearing stress generated at the welded part of the B-B cross section is given by the following equation V V 1.90 10 4
= = = =15.1 [N/mm2]
A 2a b 2 7 90 This is less than the design standard value allowable correspond to shearing stress (0.45x0.6xSy=48.6N/mm2) of the welded part.
The margin of safety (MS) is 0.45 0.6 Sy 0.45 0.6 183 MS= -1= -1=2.21 15.1 The composite stress (N/mm2) of the bending stressb and the shearing stress is given by the following equation
= b 2 + 4 2 = 50.3 2 + 4 15.12 =58.7 [N/mm2]
This is less than the design standard value (0.45Sy=81.0N/mm2) of the welded part.
The margin of safety (MS) is 0.45Sy 0.45 183 MS= -1= -1=0.37 58.7 A summary of the results of the above-mentioned analyses is given in
()-Table A.9.
As shown in ()-Table A.9, the margin of safety (MS) of the results of the analyses being positive in each case, the eye-plate is sound when tied down.
64
()-Table.A.9 Summary of analyses under routine transport The design Analysis Conditions Analysis item Type of load Design standard standard value result Margin of safety MS N/mm2 N/mm2 Hoisting accessory 1.Eye-plate during hoisting Weight of the packagex3 A-A cross section (1)Shearing stress 0.6Sy 108 16.1 5.70 B-B (1)Bending stress Sy 180 17.3 9.40 cross section (2)Shearing stress 0.6Sy 108 5.18 19.8 (3)Composite stress Sy 180 20.2 7.91 B-B (1)Bending stress 0.45Sy 81.0 18.5 3.37 65 cross section (2)Shearing stress 0.27Sy 48.6 5.55 7.75 (welded part) (3)Composite stress 0.45Sy 81.0 21.6 2.75 Routine transport Tightening device Acceleration 2.Eye-plate in tie-down position Left-right:1G Front-rear:2G A-A Top :1G Cross section (1)Shearing stress Bottom :3G 0.6Sy 108 45.3 1.38 B-B (1)Bending stress Sy 180 46.9 2.83 cross section (2)Shearing stress 0.6Sy 108 14.1 6.65 (3)Composite stress Sy 180 54.7 2.29 B-B (1)Bending stress 0.45Sy 81.0 50.3 0.61 cross section (2)Shearing stress 0.27Sy 48.6 15.1 2.21 (welded part) (3)Composite stress 0.45Sy 81.0 58.7 0.37
A.4.6 Pressure We shall analyze the soundness and sealing performance of the packaging in the case where external pressure would decrease to 60 kPa When external pressure decreases to 60 kPa, the pressure in the inner shell is P2 = P0 - Pa = 0.1013 - 0.060 = 0.0413 [MPa]
where P0 : Inner shell initial internal pressure (atmospheric pressure),P0= 0.1013 [MPa]
Pa : External pressure after pressure decrease, Pa= 0.060 [MPa]
For purposes of stress evaluation, in A.5.1.3 Stress Calculation, the internal pressure utilized in the packaging is 9.81xlO-2MPa. In this section, we will analyze the internal pressure, utilizing the total of differential pressure P = P1 + P2 = 0.0981 + 0.0413 0.140 [MPa]
The stress evaluation parts and the analysis method are the same as in section A.5.1.3 and the results of the stress evaluation are shown in ()-Table A.10.
()66
Stress units
-Table A.10 Stresses evaluation under changed pressure ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Primary+secondary Stress due Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to stress to internal Position initial thermal Pm(PL) Sm MS PL+Pb 1.5Sm MS PL+Pb 3Sm MS PL+Pb Sa Na DF MS pressure to be evaluated clamping expansion +Q +Q+F
-0.070 Frame of Inner min 1 3.29 3.36 137 39.7 3.36 411 121 3.36 1.68 500 5x10-4 2x10 shell 10 1.65 Inner Surface 4.53 1.36 Bottom plate -0.140 min 2 of the inner 0.140 137 977 4.67 205 42.8 4.67 411 87.0 4.67 2.34 500 5x10-4 2x10 10 Outer Surface shell -4.53 67
-1.36 0
Inner Surface
-4.66
-4.66 Inner shell -0.140 2/3Sy Sy Sy min 3 0.140 3270 4.66 146 4.66 146 4.66 2.33 500 5x10-4 2x10 lid 458 687 687 10 Outer Surface 4.66 4.66 0
Inner shell Sy/1.5 Sy 4 lid 174 4.59 180 1.55 180 2.82 720* 360 500 4000 0.125 7.0 clamping bolt 459 688 Displacement of the (1) Displacement 1.72x10-2mm (3) Residual margin of tightening of O-ring 5
inner lid O-ring (2) Initial clamping value of the O-ring 1.1mm t1.082mm PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; t; Ability of bolt stress; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety;
- Stress concentration factor = 4; r; Diameter direction stress; o;Periphery direction stress; t; Axial stress;
A.4.7 Vibration This package is secured with a turnbuckle on a tightening device, as indicated in ()-Fig.C.2. The turnbuckle is safely secured in order to avoid loosening due to vibration from the transport vehicle. Hence, we shall assume that no vibrations will be caused by this. Below, we shall calculate the natural frequency of the package itself, which will be compared to the vibration caused by the vehicle or ship of transport, and demonstrate that this will not cause the package to resonate during transport.
(1) Vibrations of the packaging
()-Fig.A.14 shows an analytical model for the vibration of the packaging.
4 4
3 3
2 1
1 2
()-Fig.A.14 Vibration analytical model of packaging (68
As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.14, by assuming that the packaging is a mass system supported by four types of parallel springs, the natural
[8]
frequency at that time can be given by the following equation :
K 0= 10 3 [rad/sec]
m Therefore, 0 1 K 10 3 f0= = [Hz]
2 2 m where 0 : Natural angular frequency of the packaging [rad/sec]
f0 : Natural frequency of the packaging [Hz]
m : Package mass, m=950 [kg]
K : Parallel spring constant[kg/mm]
K= 4
= ki = K1 + K2 + K3 + K4 i =1 A i E i A1 E 1 A 2 E 2 A 3 E 3 A 4 E 4
= 4 = + + +
i =1 1i 11 12 13 14 A1 : Cross section of the reinforcement, A1 =2.83x103 [mm2]
A2 : Cross section of the balsa, A2 =4.76xl05 [mm2]
A3 : Cross section of the outer shell board, A3 =7.92x103 [mm2]
A4 : Cross section of the turnbuckle, A4 =2.83xl03 [mm2]
E1 : Modulus of longitudinal elasticity of the reinforcement; E1 =1.92xl05 [N/mm2]
E2 : Modulus of longitudinal elasticity of the balsa, E2 =98.1 [N/mm2]
E3 : Modulus of longitudinal elasticity of the outer shell board, E3 =1.92xl05 [N/mm2]
E4 : Modulus of longitudinal elasticity of the turnbuckle, E4 =2.04xl05 [N/mm2]
l1 : Length of the reinforcement, l1 =194 [mm]
l2 : Length of the balsa, l2 =341 [mm]
(69
l3 : Length of the outer shell board, l3 =1320 [mm]
l4 : Length of turnbuckle, l4 =470 [mm]
Therefore, k1 : Spring constant of the reinforcement, k1 =2.79x106 [N/mm]
k2 : Spring constant of the balsa, k2 =0.137x106 [N/mm]
k3 : Spring constant of the inner shell board, k3 =1.15x106 [N/mm]
k4 : Spring constant of the turnbuckle, k4 =1.23x106 [N/mm]
K=(2.79+0.14+1.15+1.23)x106 =5.31x106 Therefore, the natural frequency is 1 5.32 10 6 10 3 f0= =377 [Hz]
2 950 This natural frequency of 377 Hz is outside the vibration range of 0 to 50 Hz which will present in the vehicle or ship during transport. Therefore, there is no possibility of coincidental vibration.
(2) Fuel basket The fuel basket is supported by a spacer in the inner shell, and will not receive directly any external vibration.
The fuel element is also protected at top and bottom by a silicone foam spacer, and will not receive any vibrations.
(3) Evaluation The natural frequency of this packaging is higher than the vibration generated by the transport vehicle, and so, coincidental resonance will not occur.
Therefore, the inner lid clamping bolt and other clamping devices will not loosen during transport, and sealing performance will be fully preserved.
In addition, the fuel basket and the fuel element are supported by rubber inside the inner shell, and soundness will be fully preserved despite the vibrations during transport.
(70
A.5 Normal test conditions This package is a BU type package. Therefore, the normal test conditions defined on the regulation are as follows.
(1) Water spray test The following tests shall be performed after test (1).
(2) Free drop test (3) Stacking test (4) Penetration test The following test shall be performed after tests (1) to (4).
(5) One week period placed in an environment of -40 to 38.
The following section will analyze the effect to the package caused by the tests mentioned above. The results of this analysis shall demonstrate that the design standards for normal test conditions are satisfied.
A.5.1 Thermal test A.5.1.1 Outline of temperature and pressure This section is a summary of the pressure and temperature used for design analysis under normal test conditions.
(1) Design temperature As determined in ()-B.4.2 Maximum Temperature, the package temperature may rise to a maximum of 65. Therefore, the design temperature under normal test conditions shall be conservatively determined to be 75, adopting a margin of safety, as indicated in
()-Table A.11, for both the inner and outer shells.
()-Table A.11 Design temperature under normal test conditions Part Design temperature()
1 Fuel element 75 2 Fuel basket 75 3 Inner shell main body 75 4 Inner lid 75 5 Outer shell 75 (71
(2) Design pressure As determined in ()-B.4.4 Maximum Internal Pressure, the internal pressure of the inner shell may increase up to 0.016 MPa in gauge pressure.
Therefore, the design pressure in normal test conditions shall be conservatively determined as 0.0981 MPa, adopting a margin of safety, as indicated in ()-Table A.12.
()-Table A.12 Design pressure under normal test conditions Portion Design pressure 1 In the inner shell 9.81x10-2MPaG (72
A.5.1.2 Thermal expansion This section will assess the stress generated when differential thermal expansion causes the inner shell and fuel basket to come into contact. The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.15 Rubber packing Inner shell Fuel basket Rubber packing
()-Fig.A.15 Analytical model of thermal expansion The increase in temperature in the fuel basket and the inner shell is 75, as indicated in ()-B Thermal Analysis. There is no temperature difference, where thermal expansion does not occur, since the two parts are made of the same material (SUS 304).
There is also practically no temperature difference between the outer and inner shells. The inner shell will not be influenced by thermal expansion of the outer shell.
(73
Therefore, no stress will be generated by thermal expansion in the fuel basket and inner shell.
A.5.1.3 Stress calculation Stress calculation shall be conducted in this section.
Temperature gradient, loads from the outside and pressure may generate stress in each part of the package.
The ratio of the inner shell's inner radius to the board thickness is higher than 10 and can be considered as a thin cylinder. Therefore, temperature differences will little occur inside the board thickness of the shell. Also, although the inner lid and the bottom plate of the inner shell are thicker than the other parts, temperature differences will have little possibility of occurring since these parts are protected by heat insulators and shock absorbers, as in the outer lid.
The same applies to the fuel basket, where the board thickness is 3 or 3.4mm.
This thinness will make it improbable for temperature differences to occur.
Therefore, since the thermal stress due to temperature differences in the plate thickness of the parts of the packaging is minimal, this stress is not calculated in this section.
Next, we shall analyze the stress generated in each part by internal pressure, keeping in mind the fact that the internal pressure of the inner shell is the pressure used in the package.
We shall also analyze the inner lid clamping bolt, which is a crucial part in the sealing boundary, after taking into consideration the initial clamping strength and thermal expansion.
(74
(1) Stress evaluation positions The stress evaluation position of the inner shell under normal test conditions is shown in ()-Fig.A.16. In this section, the main stress shall be determined, the different types of stress being shown in ()-Table A.13.
A stress evaluation will be conducted in section A.5.1.4.
Code Evaluation position Frame of inner shell Bottom plate of inner shell Inner lid Inner lid O-ring displacement Inner lid clamping bolt
()-Fig.A.16 Stress evaluation position under normal test conditions 75
Inner shell In the center of the inner shell, pressure inside the inner shell shall be utilized as internal pressure.
The analytical model of the stress generated in the center of the inner shell which subjected to internal pressure is shown in ()-Fig.A.17. The stress
(,z,r) generated in the center of the shell is given as a thin cylinder
[7]
by the following equations :
()-Fig.A.17 Stress analysis model of inner shell center portion PDm
=
2t PDm z=
4t P
r=-
2 where
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
z : Axial stress [N/mm2]
r : Radial stress [N/mm2]
P: Design pressure inside the inner shell, P =9.81x10-2 [MPagauge]
Dm: Frame of inner shell mean diameter, Dm =D + t =460 +1O=47O [mm]
t: Frame of inner shell board thickness, t=10.0 [mm]
D: Frame of inner shell bore, D =460 [mm]
Thus, the stresses are 9.81 10 2 470
= =2.31 [N/mm2]
2 10 9.81 10 2 470 z= =1.15 [N/mm2]
4 10 r=-0.0491 [N/mm2]
76
Bottom plate of the inner shell
()-Fig.A.18 shows an analytical model for the stress on the bottom plate of the inner shell when receiving internal pressure.
The stress generated in the fixed part of the peripherally supported disc is, P a2 Inside P
=+/-0.225 h2 Outside 2 P a2 r=+/-0.75 h2
()-Fig.A.18 Stress analysis model of inner z=-P (Inner surface) shell bottom plate where
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
z : Axial stress [N/mm2]
r : Radial stress [N/mm2]
P: Design pressure inside the inner shell, P =9.8lx10-2 [MPagauge]
a: Radius of inner shell bottom plate, a =230 [mm]
h: Wall thickness of inner shell bottom plate, h =35 [mm]
Therefore, the stresses are 9.81 10 2 230 2
=+/-0.225 = +/-0.953 [N/mm2]
35 2 9.81 10 2 230 2 r=+/-0.75 = +/-3.18 [N/mm2]
35 2 z=-0.098 (Inner Surface) [N/mm2]
The double signs of the stress values correspond to the inner and outer surface respectively.
77
Inner lid
()-Fig.A.19 shows an analytical model of the stress on the inner lid when receiving internal pressure.
The stress (, r, z ) generated in the peripherally simply supported disc is maximum at the center P a2
=r= 1.24 h2 z=-P (Inner surface) where
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
r : Radial stress [N/mm2]
z : Axial stress [N/mm2]
P: Design pressure inside the inner shell, P =9.81x10-2 [MPagauge]
a: Radius of inner shell bottom plate, a =285 [mm]
h: Wall thickness of inner shell bottom plate, h =55 [mm]
Therefore, the following values are obtained, 9.81 10 2 285 2
=r= 1.24 = 3.27 [N/mm2]
55 2 z=-0.098 (inner surface) [N/mm2]
The double sign indicates the inside for the top, the outside for the bottom.
Bolt circle Inside Outside 2a
()-Fig.A.19 Stress analysis model of inner lid center portion 78
Inner lid O-ring displacement An analytical model of the inner lid O-ring displacement is shown in
()-Fig.A.20.
An displacement (mm) of the simply supported disc shown in ()-Fig.A.20 can
[7]
be determined by the following equations :
P a4 r2 5 + r2
= 1 2 64D a 1 + a 2 where P: Design pressure in the inner shell, P =9.81x10-2 [MPagauge]
- Poisson's ratio, =0.3 a: Radius of the support points circle of the inner lid, a =285 [mm]
r: Distance from the center to the evaluation point, ri : radius of inner O-ring groove, ri =237.5 [mm]
D: Inner lid bending stiffness, E h3 D = [Nmm]
12(1 2 )
E: Modulus of longitudinal elasticity E =1.99x105 [N/mm2]
h: Minimum plate thickness of the inner lid, h=36.7 [mm]
Therefore, the displacementi of the groove portion of the inner O-ring is 9.81 10 2 285 4 12 (1 0.3 2 ) 237 2 i = 1 64 1.99 10 5 36.7 3 285 2 5 + 0.3 237 2
= 1.17 10 2 2
1 + 0.3 285 [mm]
i is sufficiently smaller than the initial clamping value 1.1mm Groove for (Difference of O-ring groove inner O-ring depth and O-ring diameter)
Bolt circle p
()-Fig.A.20 Analytical model of inner lid O-ring displacement 79
Inner lid clamping bolt The stress generated by initial clamping stress, internal pressure and thermal expansion shall be analyzed regarding the inner lid clamping bolt (hereinafter referred to as bolt).
(a) Initial clamping stress The analytical model figure of the stress generated by the initial clamping force in the bolt is shown in ()-Fig.A.21.
The tensile stress t generated in the Lid bolt as shown in ()-Fig.A.21 Upper end is given by the equation F
t =
Ai ()-Fig.A.21 Stress analysis model of bolt of inner lid (initial clamping stress)
Where F : Initial clamping force of the bolt, T 2.825 10 5 F= = =5.89x104 [N]
kd 0.2 24 T : Initial clamping torque, T =2.825x1O5 [Nmm]
k : Torque coefficient, k=0.2 d : Nominal diameter of the bolt, d=24 [mm]
Ai: Cross section of the trough radius of the bolt (M24),
Ai = di2 = x20.7522 =338.2 [mm2]
4 4 di: Minimum diameter of the bolt, di =20.752 [mm]
Therefore, the following va1ue is obtained 5.89 10 4 t = =174 [N/mm2]
338 .2 80
(b) Stress due to internal pressure The analytical model of the stress generated by the internal pressure in the bolt is shown in ()-Fig A.22.
The tensile stresst generated in the bolt as shown in ()-Fig.A.22 is given by the following equation ri P 2
t =
n Ar where ri : Radius of the surface receiving pressure, ri =237.5 [mm]
P : Design pressure in the inner shell, P =9.81x10-2 [MPa[gauge))
Ar: Cross section of the minimum diameter of the bolt M24, Ar=338.2 [mm2]
n : Number of bolts, n =16 Therefore, the tensile stress is, 237 2 9.81 10 2 t = =3.20 [N/mm2]
16 338 .2 Bolt circle Inner radius of the Bolt inside O-ring grove 16-M24 P
2
()-Fig.A.22 Stress analysis model of bolt of inner lid (stress due to internal pressure) 81
(c) Stress due to thermal expansion The analytical model of the stress generated by thermal expansion in the bolt is shown in ()-Fig.A.23.
The temperature of the bolt and of the inner lid is 75, in accordance with
()-B Thermal Analysis, and there is no temperature difference. The material also is the same, the SUS63O, Stress due to thermal expansion is negligible.
M24
()-Fig.A.23 Stress analysis model of bolt of inner lid (stress due to thermal expansion)
A.5.1.4 Comparison of allowable stress The results of stress evaluation related to each of the analyses conducted in section ()-A.5.1.3 are summarized in ()-Table A.13.
As is shown in this table, the margin of safety against the design standard value allocated to each case, whether they are simple or multiple loads, is positive.
Therefore, under normal test conditions (thermal test), the soundness of the package can be maintained.
In addition, in the case where the number of usage of the package is set at 500*, the margin of safety in regard to allowable cycles is, as shown in ()-Table A.13, positive. Therefore, the soundness of the packaging will not be lost through repeated loads.
Times of use N = 8/yearx30 yearsxtolerance ratio 500 times 82
Stress units
-Table A.13 Stress evaluation under normal test conditions (thermal test) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal Pm(PL) Sm MS PL+Pb 1.5Sm MS PL+Pb 3Sm MS PL+Pb Sa Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F
-0.0491 min 1 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 2.36 137 57.0 2.36 411 173 2.36 1.18 500 5x10-4 2x10 10 1.15 Inner Surface 3.18 0.953 Bottom plate -0.098 min 2 of the inner 0.098 137 1396 3.28 205 61.5 3.28 411 124 3.28 1.64 500 5x10-4 2x10 10 Outer Surface shell -3.18 83
-0.953 0
Inner Surface
-3.27
-3.27
-0.098 2/3Sy Sy Sy min 3 Inner shell lid 0.098 4672 3.27 209 3.27 209 3.27 1.64 500 5x10-4 2x10 458 687 687 10 Outer Surface 3.27 3.27 0
Inner lid 2/3Sy Sy 4 174 3.22 177 1.58 177 2.89 708 354 500 4000 0.125 7.0 clamping bolt 458 687 Displacement of the (1) Displacement 1.16x10-2mm (3) Compression dipth of O-ring 5 inner shell lid (2) Initial clamping value of O-ring 1.1mm t1.088mm O-ring PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; t; Ability of bolt stress NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYield point of deesign; MSMargin of safety;
- Stress concentration factor = 4 rDiameter direction stress oPeriphery direction stress
A.5.2 Water spray The outside surface of this packaging is made of stainless steel, and there is no water absorption. Therefore, there is no possibility of degradation of the material due to the spraying of water.
In addition, the outer lid is secured to the main body with a outer lid clamping bolt using a washer. This is waterproof and presents no risks of water entering inside the packaging.
A.5.3 Free drop The weight of this package is maximum 950 kg. Since it is below 5000 kg, the free drop height under normal test conditions is determined by regulation standards as 1.2 m.
The free drop posture is analyzed for the following four cases:
- 1) Horizontal drop
- 2) Vertical drop (lid side and bottom side)
- 3) Corner drop (lid side and bottom side)
- 4) Inclined drop (lid side and bottom side)
The purposes of this analysis are,
- 1) To demonstrate that the sealing performance of the inner shell is preserved by demonstrating that the deformation wrought by a free drop do not extend to the inner shell which is the sealing boundary.
- 2) The inner shell will not be damaged by the shock caused by the free drop, and will preserve full leak tightness.
- 3) There is no damage of the contained material.
(1) Analysis method The following are the analysis conditions for the stress generated in the contained material, the fuel basket, the main body of the packaging and for the deformation of the transport packaging in the case where the package would 84
be subjected to a free drop test of 1.2m.
(a) Deformation
- 1) The drop energy of the package will be completely absorbed by the shock absorber in the case where the shock surface is a rigid body. Therefore, the deformation of the outer shell will be the deformation of the shock absorber.
This is conservative assumption ignoring absorption by the steel plate or the heat insulator.
- 2) The deformation and acceleration caused by the shock absorber shall be calculated on the basis of the shock absorbing function analysis program CASH- indicated in A.10.1.
(b) Stress
- 1) The drop energy of the package shall be absorbed by the deformation of the steel plate utilized in the shock absorber, the main body of the outer shell and the outer lid.
- 2) The acceleration utilized in the stress analysis (hereafter referred to as design acceleration) shall be 1.2 times the calculation value (acceleration generated in the shock absorber) of "CASH- (this value was determined through comparison with test results as indicated in section A.10.1) plus the acceleration of the steel plate.
This is a safety evaluation since the shock strength present in the package will be combined to the acceleration of the shock absorber and the acceleration of the steel plate.
Design acceleration = calculation results of CASH- x 1.2
+ acceleration due to steel plate.
- 3) Generated acceleration of the steel plate will be determined using simplified calculations.
85
(2) Drop energy The weight of the package utilized in the analysis is 960 kg as indicated in A.2 Weight and Center of Gravity. The drop energy is Ea = Ev = mgh where Ea: Energy absorption of the shock absorber [J]
Ev: Drop energy of the package [J]
m: Package mass, m=950 [kg]
h: Drop height, h=1.20 [m]
g: Gravitational acceleration, g =9.81 [m/s2]
Therefore, the following value is obtained Ea = Ev = 960x9.81x1.2 =1.12x104 [J]
=1.12x107 [Nmm]
(3) Performance of the shock absorbers obtained by means of the CASH- analysis program The results of the deformation in the shock absorber and of the acceleration through the shock absorbers performance analysis program CASH- are shown in
()-Table A.14.
The acceleration which is 1.2 times the results of the CASH- program utilized in the analysis is also shown in the above table.
86
()-Table A.14 Deformation and acceleration of shock absorber under normal test conditions Acceleration (xg)
Deformation Drop posture Calculation (mm) x 1.2 value Horizontal 20.9 89.3 107.1 Lid side 24.1 58.8 70.5 Vertical Bottom side 18.2 78.9 94.6 Lid side 27.6° 58.6 16.3 19.6 Corner Bottom side 22.8° 50.3 17.3 20.8 5° 21.5 14.1 16.9 15° 41.5 13.0 15.6 30° 60.8 17.1 20.5 Lid side 45° 65.8 21.7 26.0 60° 59.3 25.7 30.8 75° 46.9 34.5 41.4 85° 27.4 36.5 43.8 Inclined 5° 22.2 5.96 7.15 15° 40.1 16.8 20.2 30° 56.2 19.5 23.4 Bottom side 45° 60.4 22.5 27.0 60° 61.4 24.9 29.9 75° 44.4 29.0 34.8 85° 25.0 30.2 36.2
- This is the angle of the center line of the package to the drop direction.
(same below) where g: Gravitational acceleration, g = 9.81 [m/s2]
87
(4) Increase in acceleration caused by steel plate (i) Horizontal drop We will obtain the increase in acceleration caused by the steel plate during a horizontal drop.
The position of evaluation is shown in ()-Fig.A.24.
Code Position of evaluation Outside cylinder steel plate Outer lid flange Stiffening ring Outer shell panel Partition Eye-plate Eye-plate fixation plate Flange of the main body of the outer shell Eye-plate fixation leg
()-Fig.A.24 Acceleration evaluation position of steel plate for horizontal drop 88
Outside cylinder steel plate An analytical model of the outside cylinder steel plate as an annulus ring on which the whole weight of the package rests uniformly is shown in ()-Fig.A.25.
()-Fig.A.25 Acceleration analysis model of outer shell plate for horizontal drop As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.25, the bending moment of the annulus ring on which the uniform load w rests, can be given by the following equation.
1 M= wR2 cos + sin + cos sin 2 + cos + ( ) sin 2
In the above equation, M is maximum at =, and the following is obtained, 3
M= wR2 + sin 2 cos + (2 ) sin 2
When the stress generated by the bending moment becomes equal to the deformation stress s, the maximum resistance force F may be generated.
3 wR 2 + sin 2 cos + (2 ) sin s =
M
= 2 Zp Zp Therefore, the uniform load w at this time is given by the following 89
s Zp W=
3 R 2 + sin 2 cos + (2 ) sin 2
Therefore, the maximum resistance force is the following 2s Zp F= 2wR=
3 R + sin 2 cos + (2 ) sin 2
where M: Bending moment of the annulus ring [Nmm]
w: Uniform load [N/mm]
F: Maximum resistance force [N]
R: Radius of the annulus ring, R =420 [mm]
s: Deformation stress (at ordinary temperatures),s =520 [N/mm2]
- Arbitrary angle based on OC [rad]
- Radius of the deformed part, R 1 420 20.9
= cos 1 = cos = 18.15 = 0.317 [rad]
R 420
- Deformation, =20.9 [mm]
Zp: Plasticity section modulus, 1 1500 3 2 Zp= bh 2 = = 3375 [mm3]
4 4 b: Annulus ring width, b =1500 [mm]
h: Annulus ring thickness, h=3 [mm]
Therefore, the maximum resistance force is, 2 520 3375 F=
3 420 + sin 2 18.15 cos18.15 + (2 0.317 ) sin 18.15 2
= 3.57x104 [N]
90
The equation of the increase in acceleration NH1 caused by the outside cylindrical steel plate is, F 3.57 10 4 NH1= = =37.6=3.83g [m/s2]
m 950 where m: Weight of the package, m=950 [kg]
91
Flange of the outer lid The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.25, as with section A.5.3 (4)(i)
. But, since the deformation has not reached the annulus ring, the in the moment equation is given as 0.
The cross section of the flange of the outer lid is given in ()-Fig.A.26.
5 106 367
()-Fig.A.26 Cross section of outer shell lid flange
[10]
The maximum resistance force is given by the following 4 4 F= sZp= x520x1.40x104 =8.31x104 [N]
3R 3 367 where F: Maximum resistance force [N]
R: Radius of the annulus ring, R =367 [mm]
s: Deformation stress (at ordinary temperatures), s =520 [N/mm2]
Zp: Section modulus of plasticity, 1 2 5 106 2 Zp = bh = =1.40x104 [mm3]
4 4 b: Annulus ring width, b =5 [mm]
h: Annulus ring thickness, h =106 [mm]
Therefore, the increase in acceleration NH2 caused by the flange of the outer 92
lid is, F 8.31 10 4 NH2= = =87.5=8.92g [m/s2]
m 950 93
Stiffening ring The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.25, as with section A.5.3(4)(i)
[10]
. The maximum resistance force is given by the following equation 2 s Z p F=
3 R + sin 2 cos + (2 ) sin 2
where F: Maximum resistance force [N]
R: Radius of the annulus ring, R =406 [mm]
s: Deformation stress (ordinary temperature), s =520 [N/mm2]
- Deformation amount, =6.9 [mm]
- Half angle of the deformed part, R 1 406 6.9
= cos 1 = cos = 10.58 = 0.185 [rad]
R 406 Zp: section modulus of plasticity [mm3],
h Zp= {(b-h)2+h2 }
4 3
= {(40-3)2+32 }
4
=1.03x103 [mm3]
b: Ring width, b=40 [mm]
h: Ring thickness, h=3 [mm]
Therefore, F is 2 520 1.03 10 3 F=
3 406 + sin 2 10.58 cos10.58 + (2 0.187 ) sin 10.58 2
=8.30x103 [N]
Therefore, the increase in acceleration NH3 due to the stiffening ring is F 8.30 10 3 NH3= = =8.74=0.891g [m/s2]
m 950 94
Panel of the outer lid The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.27.
()-Fig.A.27 Acceleration analysis model of outer shell head plate for horizontal drop As indicated in ()-Fig.A.27, bending moment is generated by the reaction force of the drop in the outer lid panel at the curved point of the head. When the stress produced by this bending moment becomes equal to the deformation stresss, the maximum resistance force F, assuming that it is generated, is given by the equation s s C h 2 F= Zp =
r r 4 where F: Maximum resistance force [N]
s: Deformation stress (room temperature), s =520 [N/mm2]
Zp: Section modulus of plasticity, C h2 Zp= [mm3]
4 C: Shock absorber deformation width, C =262 [mm]
h: Panel thickness, h=3 [mm]
r: Radius of the corner, r=150 [mm]
95
Therefore, the following equation is given.
520 262 3 2 F= =2.04x103 [N]
150 4 Two panels are provided in the packaging, and the increase in acceleration NH4 caused by the outer lid panel is 2 F 2 2.04 10 3 NH4= = =4.29=0.437g [m/s2]
m 950 96
Partition The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.25, as with section A.5.3(4)(i)
.But, since the deformation has not reached the annulus ring, in the moment equation is given as 0.
The cross section of the partition is given in ()-Fig.A.28.
3 h=97 368.5
()-Fig.A.28 Cross section of partition plate The maximum resistance force is given by the following equation.
4 4 F= zZp= x520x7.06x103 3R 3 368 .5
=4.17x104 [N]
where F: Maximum resistance force [N]
R: Radius of the annulus ring, R =368.5 [mm]
z : Deformation stress (at ordinary temperatures),z =520 [N/mm2]
Zp: Plasticity section modulus, 1 3 97 2 Zp= b h2 = =7.06x103 [mm3]
4 4 b: Annulus ring width, b=3 [mm]
97
h: Annulus ring thickness, h =97 [mm]
Therefore, the increase in acceleration NH5 caused by the partition is obtained by the following.
F 4.17 10 4 NH5= = =43.9=4.48g [m/s2]
m 950 98
Eye-plate The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.29.
90 32 15 X-X section
()-Fig.A.29 Deformation analysis model of eye plate As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.29, when the eye-plate is hit by a direct force, maximum compression stress is generated at the cross section X-X. When this stress is equal to the deformation stress s, maximum resistance force F is generated, shown by the following equation F=sA =s(b-d) t where F: Maximum resistance force [N]
s: Deformation stress (at room temperatures),s =520 [N/mm2]
A: Evaluated cross sectional area [mm2]
b: Eye-plate width, b=90 [mm]
t: Eve-plate board thickness, t=15 [mm]
d: Eye-plate hole radius, d=32 [mm]
Therefore, F=520x(90-32)x15=4.52x105 [N]
The increase in acceleration NH6 due to the eye-plate is obtained by the following equation.
F 4.52 10 5 NH6= = = 476 = 48.5g [m/s2]
m 950 99
Eye-plate fixation plate The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.30.
(Unit: mm)
()-Fig.A.30 Analytical model of eye-plate fixing-plate As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.30, the fixed bridge beams which receive the concentrated load in their center generate maximum bending moments on both extremities.
When this stress is equal to the deformation stress s, maximum resistance
[7]
force F is generated, shown by the following equation 8
F= sZp 1
where F: Maximum resistance force [N]
s: Deformation stress (at ordinary temperatures),s =520 [N/mm2]
Zp: Plasticity section modulus, 1
Zp= b h2 4
b: Eye-plate width, b=110 [mm]
h: Eye-plate board thickness, h=10 [mm]
l: Distance between fixed points, l=130 [mm]
Therefore, 8 1 F= x520x x110x102 =8.80x104 [N]
130 4 The increase in acceleration NH7 due to the eye-plate fixation plate is obtained by the following equation 100
F 8.80 10 4 NH7= = =92.6 [m/s2] =9.44g m 950 101
Flange of the outer shell The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.31.
(Unit: mm)
()-Fig.A.31 Analytical model of flange of outer shell As indicated in ()-Fig.A.31, the fixed beam, having a long thin rectangular cross section, suffers side buckling when receiving the concentrated load on its center. If this buckling load is equal to the maximum resistance force F, it is given by the following equation[19]
16.93 B y C F=
2 where F: Maximum resistance force [N]
- Distance between supported points, =130 [mm]
By : Bending rigidity on Y axis, 1 1 By = Ebh 3 = x1.95x105x113x53=2.30x108 [Nmm2]
12 12 E: Modulus of longitudinal elasticity (at ordinary temperatures);
E=1.95x105 [N/mm2]
h: Flange board thickness, h =5 [mm]
b: Flange point width, b =113 [mm]
C: Twisting rigidity, 102
bh 3 h C= 1 0.630 G 3 b 113 5 3 5 1 0.630 7.51 10 4
=
3 113
=3.44x108 [N/mm2]
G: Modulus of transverse elasticity (at ordinary temperatures);
G=7.51x104 [N/mm2]
Therefore, F is 16.93 2.30 10 8 3.44 10 8 F= 2
=2.82x105 [N]
130 The increase in acceleration NH8 caused by the flange in the main body of the outer shell is F 2.82 10 5 NH8= = =297 [m/s2] = 30.3g [m/s2]
m 950 103
Eye-plate fixation lug The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.32.
(Unit: mm)
()-Fig.A.32 Analytical model of eye-plate fixing lug As indicated in ()-Fig.A.32, when the compression stress at the X-X cross section is equal to the deformation stress s, maximum resistance force F is generated and given by F=sA =s2h(b1 + b2) where F: Maximum resistance force [N]
s: Deformation stress (at room temperatures);s =520 [N/mm2]
A: Evaluated cross sectional area [mm2]
b1 : Plate width, b1 =50 [mm]
b2 : Plate width, b2 =40 [mm]
h: Plate thickness, h=4 [mm]
Therefore, F=520x2x4x(50+40)=3.74x105 [N]
The increase in acceleration NH9 due the eye-plate fixation leg is, F 3.74 10 5 NH9= = = 394 = 40.2g [m/s2]
m 950 Based on the results mentioned so far, the equation for the total increase in 104
acceleration caused by the steel plate during the horizontal drop is NH = NH1 + NH2 + NH3 + NH4 + NH5 + NH6 + NH7 + NH8 + NH9
= (3.83+8.92+0.891+0.437+4.48+48.5+9.44+30.3+40.2)xg
= 147.0g [m/s2]
105
(ii) Vertical drop We shall obtain the increase in acceleration caused by the steel plate during a vertical drop. An analytical model is given in ()-Fig.A.33.
420 115 3
Corner of r150 outer cylinder Reinforcing plate 15.5° 15.5° 3 Deformation 166.5
()-Fig.A.33 Acceleration analysis model of steel plate for vertical drop As indicated in ()-Fig.A.33, the resistance force is the addition of the strength F1 which compresses the outside cylinder corner and the strength F2 which compresses the conical reinforcement plate. The deformation of the steel plate is equal to the deformation of the shock absorber indicated in ()-Table A.14. The resistance forces F1 and F2, which arise when the stress is equal to the deformation stress, can be obtained by the following equations.[17]
F1=2hrsin2s F2=2h(R2+tan)coss where F1 : Outside cylinder corner resistance force [N]
F2 : Conical reinforcement plate resistance force [N]
106
h : Board thickness, h =3 [mm]
r : Radius of the outside cylinder corner, r=150 [mm]
- Angle for deformation ,
=cos-1 1 r
- deformation, Lid side vertical drop : 1 = 24.l [mm]
Bottom side vertical drop : 2 = 18.2 [mm]
24.1 1 = cos-1 1 =32.9° 150 18.2 2 = cos-1 1 =28.5° 150 R2 : Radius of the upper part of cone, Lid side vertical drop : R2 = 115 [mm]
Bottom side vertical drop : R2 = 113 [mm]
- Conical angle, =15.5° s: Flow stress (at room temperatures), s =Su=52O [N/mm2]
Therefore, F1 and F2 in a lid side vertical drop are as follows, F1 = 2x3x150xsin2 32.9°x520=4.34x105 [N]
F2 = 2x3x(115+24.1xtan15.5°) xcos15.5°x520
=11.49x105 [N]
and in a bottom side vertical drop, F1 = 2x3x150xsin2 28.5°x520=3.35x105 [N]
F2 = 2x3x(113+18.2xtan15.5°) xcos15.5°x520
=11.15x105 [N]
Hence, the acceleration generated by these can be determined by the following equation, F F1 + F2 NV = =
m m In a lid side vertical drop, 4.34 + 11.49 NV = x105 =1.67x103 [m/s2]=170.2g [m/s2]
950 In a bottom side vertical drop, 3.35 + 11.15 NV = x105 =1.53x103 [m/s2]=156.0g [m/s2]
950 where g: Gravitational acceleration, g=9.81 [m/s2]
107
(iii) Corner drop We shall determine the increase in acceleration caused by the steel plate during a corner drop.
The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.34.
Fall angle Volume of deformation
()-Fig.A.34 Acceleration analysis model of steel plate for corner drop.
108
As indicated in ()-Fig.A.34, the maximum resistance force caused by the outer steel plate during a corner drop is given by the following[15]
tan sin Bcos B 3 3 R R i F o x R o sin where F : Maximum resistance force [N]
Ro: Cylindrical steel plate outer radius, R 420 [mm]
Ri: Cylindrical steel plate inner radius, R 417 [mm]
h : Cylindrical steel plate board thickness, h 3 [mm]
- Drop angle Lid side corner drop: 27.6°O.482 [rad]
Bottom side corner drop: 22.8°0.398 [rad]
- Deformation Lid side corner drop 58.6 [mm]
Bottom side corner drop 50.3 [mm]
B : Angle cos-1 R o sin Lid side corner drop, 58.6 cos-1 45.7°0.797 [rad]
420 sin27.6 Bottom side corner drop, 50.3 cos-1 46.3°0.808 [rad]
420 sin22.8 s: Deformation stress (at room temperatures),s=520 [N/mm2]
Therefore, F is in the lid side corner drop, 420 3417 3 tan27.6 0.797sin45.7 cos45.7 F x520 420 sin27.6 6.55x105 [N]
and in the bottom side corner drop, 420 3417 3 tan22.8 0.808sin46.3 cos46.3 F x520 420 sin22.8 6.53x105 [N]
Therefore, the acceleration generated by these is given by the following equation.
F N
m In the lid side corner drop, 6.55 10 5 N 689 [m/s2]70.3[m/s2]
950 and in the bottom side corner drop, 6.53 10 5 N 687 [m/s2]70.0[m/s2]
950 109
(5) Design acceleration As with the corner drop, we shall determine the acceleration during an inclined drop. This is shown in ()-Table A.15. In addition, we shall calculate the design acceleration utilized in the drop stress analysis which will be summarized in the same table.
Design acceleration = Calculation results of CASH-x1.2Acceleration due to steel plate
()-Table A.15 Design acceleration under normal test conditions Acceleration Design CASH-Drop posture due to steel acceleration x1.2 plate (xg) (xg)
Horizontal 107.1 147.0 254.1 Lid side 70.5 170.2 240.7 Vertical Bottom side 94.6 156.0 250.6 Lid side 27.6° 19.6 70.3 89.9 Corner Bottom side 22.8° 20.8 70.0 90.8 5° 16.9 161.7 178.6 15° 15.6 90.7 106.3 30° 20.5 67.9 88.4 Lid side 45° 26.0 56.3 82.3 60° 30.8 50.7 81.5 75° 41.4 58.9 100.3 85° 43.8 75.6 119.4 Inclined 5° 7.15 169.2 176.4 15° 20.2 86.4 106.6 30° 23.4 60.5 83.9 Bottom side 45° 27.0 49.6 76.6 60° 29.9 53.3 83.2 75° 34.8 54.3 89.1 85° 36.2 65.9 101.8 where g: Gravitational acceleration, g = 9.81 [m/s2]
110
(6) Stress analysis of 1.2m horizontal drop The stress analysis of the 1.2 m horizontal drop are conducted separately with the main body, the fuel basket and the fuel element. In addition, as for the stress analysis in each of these sections, the only principal stress will be determined, the evaluation of the stress intensity and the stress classification shall be conducted in section A.5.3(6)(d).
(a) Main body of the packaging The stress evaluation positions of the main body of the packaging during the 1.2 m horizontal drop are determined as shown in ()-Fig.A.35 from a sealing performance preservation.
Symbol Evaluation position Shock absorber (deformation quantity)
Inner shell Bottom plate of the inner shell Top part of the inner shell (Inner lid)
Inner lid clamping bolt
()-Fig.A.35 Stress evaluation position for 1.2m horizontal drop (main body of inner shell) 111
Deformation of the shock absorber We shall determine that even if the shock absorber is deformed by the 1.2 m horizontal drop, this deformation will not reach the inner shell nor to the inner lid.
The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.36.
Shock absorber
()-Fig.A.36 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2 m horizontal drop As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.36, the remaining thickness (mm) of the shock absorber after the 1.2 m horizontal drop can be given by the following equation O
where OMinimum thickness of the shock absorber before the test, O104 [mm]
HDeformation of the shock absorber,H 20.9 [mm]
Therefore, the remaining thickness is 104 20.983.1 [mm]
This determines that the deformation caused by the 1.2 m horizontal drop will concern the shock absorber only, and will not reach the main body of the inner shell nor to the inner 1id.
112
Inner shell
()-Fig.A.37 shows an analytical model of the stress on the inner shell for the 1.2 horizontal drop.
()-Fig.A.37 Stress analysis model of inner shell for 1.2m horizontal drop As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.37, the inner shell is supported at both ends, the beam is assumed to support the uniform load, the bending stress b is at its maximum in the center of the supporting points and can be given by the following equation M
Z where M: Bending moment, F1 1 M= = m N l [Nmm]
8 8 F: Impact load, F mN [N]
m: Load between the supporting points of the package, m700 [kg]
N: Design acceleration, N =254.1g [m/s2]
l: Length between the supporting points, l 1359 [mm]
1 M x700x254.1x9.81x13592.96x108 [Nmm]
8 Z: section modulus, 4 4 d 2 d Z= [mm3]
32 d2 113
d2: Outside diameter of the inner shell, d2 480 [mm]
d1: Inside diameter of the inner shell, d1 460 [mm]
480 4460 4 Z= = 1.70 10 6 [mm3]
32 480 Therefore, the bending stress is given by the following equation.
2.96 10 8 174 [N/mm2]
1.70 10 6 Bottom plate of the inner shell An analytical model of the stress on the bottom plate of the inner shell for the 1.2 horizontal drop is shown in ()-Fig.A.38.
R1 R2
()-Fig.A.38 Stress analysis model of inner shell bottom plate for 1.2m horizontal drop As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.38, the A-A cross section of the inner shell's bottom plate receives the drop force of the fuel basket for horizontal drop. The stress generated at this time is, F
A where F: Impact force, 1
F mBmFxN [kg]
2 114
mB : Mass of fuel basket, mB 138 [kg]
mF : Mass of contents, mF 92 [kg]
N: Design acceleration, N254.1 g [m/s2]
1 F 13892x254.1 x9.812.87x105 [N]
2 A: Cross sectional area of the inner shell's bottom plate (shaded portion in ()-Fig.A.38)
A R R tan 2 2 R1: Outside radius of inner shell's bottom plate outside the protruding section, R1l3O [mm]
R2: Inside radius of inner shell's bottom plate inside the protruding section, R2105 [mm]
R
- Angle, cos-1 2 36.1°0.631 [rad]
R1 A 130x 0.631 105x tan 36.1 2 2 3 2 6.60x10 [mm ]
Therefore, the shearing stress is, 2.87 10 43.5 [N/mm]
6.60 10 Upper part of the inner shell An analytical model of the stress on the upper part of the inner shell for the 1.2 horizontal drop is shown in ()-Fig.A.39.
N.W 0.5 1.0
()-Fig.A.39 Stress analysis model of inner shell upper part of 1.2m horizontal drop 115
As indicated in ()-Fig.A.39, the inner lid slides to the drop direction and comes in contact with the upper part of the inner shell at point .
Shearing stress is generated in the inner lid, F
A where, F: Impact strength, FNm [N]
m: Weight of the inner lid, m120 [kg]
N: Design acceleration, N254.1g [m/s2]
F 254.1x9.81x120 2.99x105 [N]
A: Cross sectional area of the inner shell's upper part (shaded portion in ()-Fig.A.39),
AR12 R tan 2 2 R1: Outside radius of the inner shell flange, R1307 [mm]
R2: Inside radius of the inner shell, R2230 [mm]
- Angle, R
cos 41.5°0.724 [rad]
R A 307 2 0.724 230 2 tan 41.5 2 2 4.35x104 [mm]
Therefore, the shearing stress is, 2.99 10 5
= 6.87 [N/mm]
4.35 10 4 116
Inner lid clamping bolt An analytical model of the stress on the inner lid clamping bolt for the 1.2 m horizontal drop is shown in ()-Fig.A.40.
()-Fig.A.40 Stress analysis model for inner lid clamping bolt for 1.2m horizontal drop As indicated in ()-Fig.A.40, the momentum of the inner lid acts on the clamping bolts of the inner lid for the 1.2m horizontal drop.
Bending stress b [N/mm2] is thus generated in the clamping bolt, and this is given by the following equation ML max NmLL max LAr 2
I where M: Angular momentum M = NmL [Nmm]
N: Design acceleration, N254.1g [m/s2]
m: Weight of the inner lid, m120 [kg]
L: Moment arm, L 18.0 [mm]
L: Distance from each bolt to the overturning point [mm]
L1 42.5 L5 437.8 L2 121.2 L6 516.5 L3 223.9 L7 559.O L4 335.1 117
Lmax: Distance from the overturning point to the farthest bolt, LmaxL 559 Ar: Cross section of the groove of the inner lid clamping bolt (M24),
Ar dr x20.752 338.2[mm2]
4 4 Therefore, the stress is, 254.1 x 9.81 x 120 x 18.0 x 559 2 x (42.5 121.2 223.9 2 335.12 437.8 2 516.5 2 559 2 ) x 338.2 2 2 4.68 [N/mm]
(b) Fuel basket In this section, we shall analyze the stress generated in the fuel basket at the 1.2m horizontal drop. The fuel basket is the rectangular type. We shall determine the section modulus for this type.
The stress shall be evaluated according to the axial strength of the pipe.
(1) Section modulus of square fuel basket We shall determine the section modulus of the square fuel basket.
The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.41.
()-Fig.A.41 Analytical model of section modulus of rectangular fuel basket 118
(i) Section modulus regarding X-X axis As indicated in ()-Fig.A.41, the section modulus regarding the X-X axis is given by the following equation, 2
10 6Ay1 Z
ey where Zx : Section modulus regarding the X-X axis [mm3]
Io : Second moment of area of a single square pipe, 1 1 I h24h14 1004944 12 12 1.83x106 [mm4]
h1 : Outside dimension of the square pipe, h1100 [mm]
h2 : Inside dimension of the square pipe, h294 [mm]
A : Cross sectional area of the square pipe, Ah12 h22 1002 942 1.16x103 [mm2]
y1 : Distance to the center of the square pipe, y1lOO [mm]
ey : Distance to the top surface of the fuel basket, ey150 [mm]
Therefore, the section modulus is 10 x 1.83 x 10 6 6 x 1.16 x 10 3 x 100 2 Z 5.86x105 [mm3]
150 (ii) Section modulus regarding Y-Y axis As indicated in ()-Fig.A.41, the section modulus regarding the Y-Y axis is given by the following equation 2 2 2 102A 1 22 3 Zy e
where Zy : Section modulus regarding the Y-Y axis [mm3]
Io : Secondary moment of the cross section of a single square pipe, I1.83x106 [mm4]
A: Cross sectional area of the square pipe, A1.16x103 [mm2]
X1 : Distance to the center of the pipe, x1 50 [mm]
X2 : Distance to the center of the pipe, x2 100 [mm]
119
X3 : Distance to the center or the pipe, x3 150 [mm]
ex : Distance to the top part of the fuel basket, ex200 [mm]
Therefore, the following equation is obtained.
10 x 1.83 x 10 6 2 x 1.16 x 10 3 x50 2 2 x 100 2 x 150 2 Zy 200 6.14x105 [mm3]
(iii) Section modulus regarding U-U axis As indicated in ()-Fig.A.41, the section modulus regarding the U-U axis is given by the following equation.
2 2 2 2 10 I 2A v1 v 2 v 3 v 4 Z
ev where Zu : Section modulus regarding the U-U axis [mm3]
Io : Second moment of area for a single square pipe, I 1.83x106 [mm4]
A : Cross sectional area of the square pipe, Al.16xl03 [mm2]
V1 : Distance to the center of the pipe, v1 25 2 35.4 [mm]
V2 : Distance to the center of the pipe, v2 50 2 70.7 [mm]
V3 : Distance to the center of the pipe, v3 75 2 106 [mm]
V4 : Distance to the center of the pipe, v4 100 2 141 [mm]
ev : Distance to the top of the fuel basket, ev 150 2 212 [mm]
Therefore, the sectional modulus is 10 x 1.83 x 10 6 2 x 1.16 x 10 3 x35.4 2 70.7 2 106 2 1412 Zu 212 4.95x105 [mm3]
Of the values mentioned above, the smallest shall be adopted ZminZxZyZu4.95x105 [mm3]
(2) Axial strength of square fuel basket The analytical model is the same as in ()-Fig.A.41.
The bending stress generated in the fuel basket reaches its maximum in the center and is given by the following equation.
120
2 M f p NL b
Z 8Z where Bending stress [N/mm2]
M: Maximum bending moment [Nmm]
f p NL2 M
8 Wf : Uniform weight due to the fuel element (This uniform load should be of the maximum weight per unit length among all square fuel elements (JRR-3 Standard type))
m 92 W 0.08 [kg/mm]
1150 mf : Weight of the fuel element, mf92 [kg]
l: Length of the fuel element, l1150 [mm]
Wp : Uniform weight due to the individual weight of the fuel basket, mp 138 Wp 0.115 [kg/mm]
L 1200 mp : Weight of the fuel basket, mp138 [kg]
L: Length of the supporting point, L1200 [mm]
N: Acceleration, N254.1 g [m/s2]
Z: Section modulus of the fuel basket, Z4.95x105 [mm3]
Therefore, the bending stress is, 0.080.115 x 254.1 x 9.81 x 1200 2 177 [N/mm2]
8 x 4.95 x 10 5 121
(c) Fuel elements and fuel plate (c)-1. Fuel elements In this paragraph, an analysis of stress is performed on fuel elements for the 1.2 m horizontal drop. As indicated in (I)-D, specifications of the rectangular fuel elements.
(1) Evaluation of the fuel elements for a drop case Fuel elements are evaluated for two cases of horizontal drop as shown in
()-Fig.A.42.
Horizontal drop to the direction perpendicular to the fuel plate Rectangular fuel elements Horizontal drop to the direction parallel to the fuel plate Rectangular fuel elements
()-Fig.A.42 Evaluation of fuel elements for 1.2 m horizontal drop 122
(2) Fuel elements (i) Fuel plate As shown in ()-D with regard to the rectangular fuel element, there are 11 types of fresh fuel elements including 3 KUR fuel elements, and there are 9 types of lowly irradiated fuel elements. In this section, horizontal drop to the direction perpendicular to fuel plate and to the direction parallel to the fuel plate are treated separately. Furthermore, it is assumed that uranium aluminum alloy has the same strength as the covering material.
Horizontal drop to the direction perpendicular to fuel plate In this section, the analysis method for JRR-3 standard type is shown and the analysis result for the other 19 types, using the same analysis method, is shown in ()-Table A.16.
The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.43.
1.52 0.76 66.6
()-Fig.A.43 Analytical model of rectangular fuel elements for 1.2 m horizontal drop perpendicular to fuel plate.
As indicated in ()-Fig.A.43, a beam with both ends fixed and receiving uniform load due to dead load will receive maximum bending moment at its fixed end. The bending stress is, M
Z where M: Bending moment per unit [Nmm/mm]
wl 2 M
12 w: Uniform load [N/mm2]
m 0.279 w N x254.1x9.811.36x10-2 ba 66.6 x 770 m: Weight of the fuel plate, m0.279 [kg]
123
N: Design acceleration, N254.1 g [m/s2]
a: Length of the fuel plate, a770 [mm]
l: Distance between fixed points, l66.6 [mm]
Z: Cross sectional area per unit width, 3 3 1 h h 1 1 1.27 30.513 Z 2 x 0.251 [mm3/mm]
6 h2 6 1.27 h2 : Fuel plate thickness, h2 1.27 [mm]
h1 . Fuel plate core thickness, h1 0.51 [mm]
Therefore, the bending stress is, 1.36 x 10 -2 x 66.6 2 20.0 [N/mm2]
12 x 0.251 Horizontal drop to the direction parallel to the fuel plate As shown in ()-D with regard to the fuel elements, the KUR fuel elements consists of curved fuel plates, so the inertial force of the fuel plates and side plates may cause both compressive and buckling stress. Therefore, buckling stress analysis is performed for KUR fuel elements.
For the KUR special fuel element, the two middle plates of 3.1mm thickness placed in parallel to the fuel plates receive the inertial force of the side plates. Therefore, for the fuel plates of the KUR special element, stress analysis of the middle plates will be perfomed, followed by stress analysis of the fuel plates.
For the fuel elements of other reactor types, the analysis method for JRR-3 standard type is shown in the following and the analysis result for the other 16 types, using the same analysis method, is shown in ()-Table A.16.
The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.44.
()x
()-Fig.A.44 Analytical model of rectangular fuel element for 1.2m horizontal drop parallel to fuel plate 124
As indicated in ()-Fig.A.44, the rectangular plate which receives its dead load and the partial weight of the side plate generates compressive stress .
m Fm xN
[N/mm2]
A ah 2h 1 where N: Design acceleration, N254.1g [m/s2]
mF: Weight of the fuel plate, m 0.279 [kg]
ms: Partial weight of the side plate, ms 0.038 [kg]
a: Length of the fuel plate, a770 [mm]
h2: Fuel plate thickness, h2 1.27 [mm]
h1: Fuel plate core thickness, h10.51 [mm]
Therefore, the compressive stress is, 0.2790.038 x 254.1 x 9.81 1.35 [N/mm2]
770 x1.270.51 Next, the analysis for the KUR fuel elements are summarized as following.
Firstly, KUR standard and half-loaded fuel elements are analyzed. Here, the analysis method for KUR standard type is shown, and the half-loaded fuel elements are analyzed using the same method.
For a curved beam subject to compressive axial load, the maximum bending moment occurs at the concave surface of the beam. Here, the buckling stress is analyzed based on the following formula by Southwell [23], where the combined compressive stress and yield stress are correlated; e L cr y = cr 1 + sec ---------------------
r 2k E where P
cr:bucking stress of the beamaveraged axial compressive stress), [N/mm2]
A P compressive load of the beam [N]
A cross section of the beam [mm2]
y yield stress [N/mm2]
E modulus of direct elasticity [N/mm2]
beam length [mm]
e eccentricity of the beam [mm]
I k radius-of-gyration of area [mm]
A I geometrical moment of inertia [mm4]
Z modulus of section [mm3]
125
Z r [mm]
A The corresponding values for KUR standard elements are as follows; modulus of direct elasticity at 75E = 6.97x104 [N/mm2]
yield stress at 75y = 63.7 [N/mm2]
cross section per fuel plate unit width A = ( 1.52 0.5 )x1= 1.02 [mm2 / mm]
geometrical moment of inertia per fuel plate unit width I = 0.282 [mm4 / mm]
modulus of section per fuel plate unit width Z = 0.371 [mm3 / mm]
eccentricitye = 4 [mm]
widthL = 66 [mm]
Then we obtain; I
k =
A 0.282
=
1.02
= 0.526 [mm]
Z r =
A 0.371
=
1.02
= 0.364 [mm].
By substituting the above values to RHS of Eq., cr could be obtained as cr = 4.67 [N/mm2].
The compressive stress is obtained using the following formula as in the case of JRR-3 standard fuel element; W (mf+ms)N c = = [N/mm2]
A a(h2-h1) where N Design acceleration, N = 254.1g [m/s2]
mfWeight of the fuel plate, mf = 0.235 [kg]
Ms msPartial weight of the side plate,ms =
n Msweight of side plate 0.650 [kg]
nnumber of fuel plates 18 [plates]
126
0.650 ms = = 0.036 [kg]
18 a Length of the fuel plate a = 625 [mm]
h2Fuel plate thickness h2 = 1.52 [mm]
h1Fuel plate core thickness h1 = 0.50 [mm]
Therefore, compressive stress is (0.235+0.036)x254.1x9.81 c =
625x(1.52 - 0.50)
= 1.07 [N/mm2].
This gives c = 1.07 [N/mm2] cr = 4.67 [N/mm2],
which shows that the integrity of fuel plates of KUR standard fuel elements are maintained under the horizontal drop condition to the direction perpendicular to the fuel plate.
Next, the KUR special elements will be analyzed as follows.
The KUR special fuel elements have two middle plates (thickness 3.18mm) placed in parallel to the fuel plates. In the analysis, we first assume that the inertial force of the side plates are totally received by these two middle plates and verify the integrity of the middle plates.
Then, the integrity of the fuel plates will be analyzed.
The compressive stress of the middle plates c are given as follows; W (m+ms)N c = = [N/mm2]
A at where N Design acceleration, N = 254.1g [m/s2]
mmweight of middle plate, mm= at [kg]
a length of middle plate, a = 721 [mm]
tthickness of middle plate, t= 3.18 [mm]
distance between fixed edge, = 66 [mm]
density, = 2.7x10-6 [kg/mm3]
mm= 721x3.18x66x2.7x10-6
= 0.409 [kg]
Ms msweight of side plate section, ms =
n Msweight of side plate, 0.650 [kg]
nnumber of middle plates, 2 [plates]
0.650 ms = = 0.325 [kg]
2 127
Therefore, the compressive stress is (0.409+0.325)x254.1x9.81 c =
721x3.18
= 0.80 [N/mm2],
which is less than the design yield strength of the material at 75 (63.7N/mm2). Thus the integrity of the middle plates are maintained.
The integrity of the fuel plates are analyzed as follows. As the fuel plates of the KUR special type elements are identical to those of the KUR standard fuel elements,the buckling stress cr is identical to that of KUR standard fuel element, i.e.
cr = 4.67 [N/mm2].
The compressive stress c is given as follows; W mfN c = = [N/mm2]
A a(h2-h1) where, N Design acceleration, N = 254.1g [m/s2]
mfWeight of the fuel plate, mf = 0.235 [kg]
a Length of the fuel plate a = 625 [mm]
h2Fuel plate thickness h2 = 1.52 [mm]
h1Fuel plate core thickness h1 = 0.50 [mm].
Therefore, 0.235x254.1x9.81 c =
625x(1.52 - 0.5 )
= 0.92 [N/mm2],
This gives c = 0.92 [N/mm2] cr = 4.67 [N/mm2],
which shows that the integrity of fuel plates of KUR special fuel elements are maintained under the horizontal drop condition to the direction perpendicular to the fuel plate.
128
(ii) Fuel element hold down part The lowly irradiated fuel element, as shown in section I-D, is cut at the portion of the lower adapter and the upper holder in order to reduce the weight. Therefore, since the total length becomes short, a hold-down part is provided to adjust the length. In this section, the stress analysis method and the stress generated at the hold-down. part are shown, the result is described in ()-Table A.16, and the stress analysis model is described in ()-Fig.A.45.
Hold down part Fuel element
()-Fig.A.45 Analytical model of holder As shown ()-Fig.A.45, the hold-down part is considered to be a beam supported at the both end, subjected to the uniform load of its own weight, the maximum bending moment occurs at the center of the beam, and the stress is given as follows.
M Z
where M: Bending moment per unit length [Nmm]
wl 2 M
8 w: Uniform load [N/mm2]
w m z x N l
1.4 x254.1x9.8117.1 204 1
M = x17.1x2042=8.90x104 [N mm]
8 mz: Mass of the hold down part, mz1.4 [kg]
N : Design acceleration, N=254.1g [m/s2]
l : Length of hold down part, l=204 [mm]
z : Modulus of elasticity 4 4 Z= ho hi 32 ho
=9.242x103 [mm3]
ho: Outside diameter of hold down part; ho60 [mm]
hi: Inside diameter of hold down part; hi52 [mm]
Therefore, 8.90 x 104 b = = 9.63 [N/mm2]
9.242 x 103 129
(c)-2. Fuel plate (for Critical Assembly fuel (KUCA fuel))
In this paragraph, an analysis of stress is performed on KUCA fuel for the 1.2 m horizontal drop. As indicated in (I)-D, specifications of the rectangular fuel plate.
The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.46.
x a
()-Fig.A.46 Analytical model of the fuel plate for 1.2m horizontal drop parallel to fuel plate As indicated in ()-Fig.A.46, the fuel plate which receives its dead load generates compressive stress .
m Fm xN
[N/mm2]
A ah 2h 1 where mF: Weight of the fuel plate [kg]
a: Length of the fuel plate [mm]
h2: Fuel plate thickness [mm]
h1: Fuel plate core thickness [mm]
h2-h1:Cladding thickness [mm]
N: Design acceleration [m/s2]
130
In the case of horizontal drop, the design acceleration is applied to coupon fuel in the direction shown in ()-Fig.A.47 Aluminum Aluminum Case Cover
()-Fig.A.47 Analytical model of the coupon fuel for 1.2m horizontal drop In this case, the total thickness of cladding is 0.8 mm, which is the total of the bottom plate of aluminum case (thickness 0.4 mm) and the aluminum cover (thickness 0.4mm).
mF: Weight of the fuel plate mf=0.036 [kg]
l: Length of the fuel plate l=50.8 [mm]
h2-h1:Cladding thickness h2-h1= 0.8 [mm]
N: Design acceleration N=254.1g [m/s2]
Therefore, the compressive stress c are given as follows.
(0.036x254.1xg)/(50.8x0.8) 2.21 N/mm2 Regarding flat fuel plate, two cases are conceivable: one is horizontal drop in the plane direction of the fuel plate and the other horizontal drop in the 131
direction parallel to the fuel plate.
In the case of horizontal drop in the plane direction of the fuel plate
(()-Fig.A.48), the compressive stress c is obtained by the fuel plate width (62 mm) , fuel core width (56 mm) and as follows.
mF: Weight of the fuel plate mf=0.23 [kg]
l: Length of the fuel plate l=600 [mm]
h2: Fuel plate thickness h2 =62 [mm]
h1: Fuel plate core thickness h1= 56 [mm]
N: Design acceleration N=254.1g [m/s2]
Therefore, the compressive stress c are given as follows.
(0.23x254.1xg)/(600x(62-56))
0.16 N/mm2
()-Fig.A.48 Analytical model of the flat fuel plate for 1.2m horizontal drop in the plane direction of the fuel plate In the case of horizontal drop in the direction parallel to the fuel plate
(()-Fig.A.49),
mF: Weight of the fuel plate mf=0.23 [kg]
l: Length of the fuel plate l=600 [mm]
132
h2: Fuel plate thickness h2 =1.5 [mm]
h1: Fuel plate core thickness h1= 0.5 [mm]
N: Design acceleration N=254.1g [m/s2]
Therefore, the compressive stress c are given as follows.
(0.23x254.1xg)/(600x(1.5-0.5))
0.96 N/mm2
()-Fig.A.49 Analytical model of the flat fuel plate for 1.2m horizontal drop in the direction parallel to the fuel plate 133
(d) Comparison of the allowable stress A summary of the stress evaluation results obtained for each analysis in section
()-A.5.3(6) is given in ()-Table A.16.
As demonstrated in this table, the margin of safety in regard to the design standard value is positive for individual or multiple loads.
Therefore, the soundness of this package is maintained under test conditions of the 1.2m horizontal drop.
134
Stress units
-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m horizontal drop (1/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue at due to due to stress Stress initial internal thermal Position Pm(PL) Sm MS PL+Pb 1.5Sm MS PL+Pb 3Sm MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS stress +Q +Q+F to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion
-0.0491 1 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 2.36 137 57.0 175 205 0.171 1.15 174 3.18 Bottom plate of 0.953 2 0.098 137 1396 87.1 205 1.35 the inner shell -0.098 135 43.5
-0.0491 Upper part of 2.31 3 the inner shell 2.36 137 57.0 13.9 205 13.7 1.15 (Inner lid) 6.87 174 3.20 Inner shell lid 2/3Sy Sy Sy 4 4.68 177 1.58 182 2.77 182 2.77 clamping bolt 458 687 687 5 Square fuel basket 177 177 205 0.158 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYield point of the design; MS; Margin of safety r; Diameter direction stress o; Periphery direction stress 2; Axial stress b; Bending stress ; Shear stress t ; Ability of bolt stress
Stress units
-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m horizontal drop (2/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Stress Impact Primary stress Fatigue at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JRR-3 standard Surface element 20.0 20.0 63.8 2.19 direction 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum Axial 1.35 1.35 63.8 46.2 dispersion alloy) direction JRR-3 follower Surface element 13.2 13.2 63.8 3.83 direction 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum Axial 1.13 1.13 63.8 55.4 dispersion alloy) direction Surface 16.0 16.0 63.8 2.98 JRR-4 B type direction 3
element Axial 1.17 1.17 63.8 53.5 direction Surface 16.4 16.4 63.8 2.89 JRR-4 L type direction 136 4
element Axial 1.62 1.62 63.8 38.3 direction JRR-4 Surface 22.0 22.0 63.8 1.90 (Uranium silicon direction 5
aluminum Axial dispersion alloy) direction 1.50 1.50 63.8 41.5 Surface JMTR 20.3 20.3 63.8 2.14 direction 6 standard Axial element 1.37 1.37 63.8 45.5 direction Surface JMTR 13.9 13.9 63.8 3.58 direction 7 follower Axial element 1.18 1.18 63.8 53.0 direction PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYield point of design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c ; Compression stress
Stress units
-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m horizontal drop36 ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Stress Impact Primary stress Fatigue at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F KUR standard Surface element 13.9 13.9 63.7 3.58 direction 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum Axial 1.06*1 1.06 4.67 3.40 dispersion alloy) direction KUR Special Surface element 13.9 13.9 63.7 3.58 direction 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum Axial 1.06*1 1.06 4.67 3.40 dispersion alloy) direction KUR half-loaded Surface 13.9 13.9 63.7 3.58 element direction 3 (Uranium silicon aluminum Axial 0.92*1 0.92 4.67 4.07 dispersion alloy direction 137 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYield point of design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c ; Compression stress
- 1axial compression stress
Stress units
-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m horizontal drop (4/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Stress Impact Primary stress Fatigue at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JMTRC Surface 15.5 15.5 63.8 3.11 Standard fuel direction 1 element Axial (A,B,C type) 1.10 1.10 63.8 57.0 direction JMTRC Surface Standard fuel 15.4 15.4 63.8 3.14 direction 2 element (2.2pin,fix type) Axial (B,C type) 1.09 1.09 63.8 57.5 direction JMTRC Surface 23.2 23.2 63.8 1.75 Special fuel direction 3 element Axial (Special A type) 1.10 1.10 63.8 57.0 direction JMTRC Surface 15.9 15.9 63.8 3.01 Special fuel direction 138 4 element Axial (Special B type) 1.37 1.37 63.8 45.5 direction JMTRC Surface Special fuel 23.1 23.1 63.8 1.76 direction 5 element (Special C, Axial 1.65 1.65 63.8 37.6 Special D type) direction Surface JMTRC 9.92 9.92 63.8 5.43 direction 6 fuel follower (HF type) Axial 0.89 0.89 63.8 70.6 direction JMTRC Surface 15.4 15.4 63.8 3.14 Standard fuel direction 7 element Axial (MA,MB,MC type) 1.09 1.09 63.8 57.5 direction JMTRC Surface Special fuel 23.0 23.0 63.8 1.77 direction 8 element Axial (Special MB, 1.08 1.08 63.8 58.0 Special MC type) direction Surface JMTRC 10.0 10.0 63.8 5.38 direction 9 fuel follower Axial (MF type) 0.91 0.91 63.8 69.1 direction PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c ; Compression stress
Stress units
-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m horizontal drop (5/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Stress Impact Primary stress Fatigue at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JMTRC Special fuel element hold 1 down part 9.63 9.63 245 24.4 (Special A type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold 2 down part c 15.6 15.6 245 14.7 (Special B type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold 3 down part c 9.63 9.63 245 24.4 (Special C,Special D type)
JMTRC 139 Special fuel element hold 4 down part c 9.63 9.63 245 24.4 (Special MB,Special MC type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c ; Compression stress
Stress units
-Table A.16 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m horizontal drop (6/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Stress Impact Primary stress Fatigue at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F 1 KUCA coupon c 2.21 2.21 63.7 28.8 Surface 0.16 0.16 63.7 398 direction 2 KUCA flat plate Axial c 0.96 0.96 63.7 66.4 direction PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c ; Compression stress 140
(7) Analysis of stress for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop Analysis of stress for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop is separately performed for the main body of the packaging and fuel elements. Stress analysis in each portion should be performed in order to determine the principal stress. Classification of stress and evaluation of stress intensity are conducted in A.5.3 (7)(c).
(a) Main body of the packaging The positions for stress evaluation of the main body of the packaging for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop are given as in ()-Fig.A.50 from the standpoint of maintaining sealing performance.
Symbol Evaluation position Shock absorber (for quantity of deformation)
Barrel of the inner shell Bottom plate of the inner shell Inner lid Inner lid clamping bolt
()-Fig.A.50 Stress evaluation position for 1.2m lower side vertical drop (main body of packaging) 141
Deformation of the shock absorber Even if the shock absorber is deformed for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop, the deformation should not reach the bottom of the inner shell.
An analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.51.
()-Fig.A.51 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2 m lower side vertical drop As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.51, residual quantity (mm) of the shock absorber for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop is, 0v where 0Minimum thickness of the shock absorber before deformation, 0194 [mm]
vDeformation of the shock absorber, v18.2 [mm]
Therefore, the deformation is 19418.2175.8 [mm]
Thus, for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop, deformation suffered by the shock absorber does not reach the bottom of the inner shell.
142
Frame of Inner shell
()-Fig.A.52 shows an analytical model for the stress on the frame of inner shell for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop.
()-Fig.A.52 Stress analysis model of inner shell for 1.2m lower side vertical drop As shown in ()-Fig.A.52, compression force, due to dead weight and the weight of the peripheral part of the inner lid, acts on the inner shell.
The stress resulting from the compression is, F
A where F: Compressive force acting on the side of inner shell, Fm1m2m3m4m5 N [N]
m1 : Weight of the inner shell (side and flange), m1200 [kg]
m2 : Weight of the inner lid m2120 [kg]
m3 : Weight of the fuel basket m3138 [kg]
m4 : Weight of the content m4 92 [kg]
m5 : Weight of the outer lid m5120 [kg]
N : Design acceleration, N250.6g[m/s2]
F(20012013892120)x250.6x9.811.65x106 [N]
A: Cross sectional area of the inner shell 143
A d22d12 [mm2]
4 d2 : Outer diameter of the inner shell, d2=48O [mm]
d1 : Inner diameter of the inner shell, d1=460 [mm]
A 480246021.48x104 [mm2]
4 Therefore,c due to compression is, 1.65 10 6 c 111 [N/mm2]
1.48 10 4 Bottom plate of the inner shell
()-Fig.A.53 shows the stress analysis model of the inner shell's bottom plate for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop.
Inner surface Outer surface
()-Fig.A.53 Stress analysis model of inner shell bottom plate for 1.2m lower side vertical drop As indicated in ()-Fig.A.53, the weight of the fuel baskets contents and the dead weight of the inner shell's bottom plate act uniformly on the bottom of the inner shell. The stress, generated on the disc which receives uniform load, reaches its maximum at the fixing point of the circumferentially fixed disc.
144
The stress is w a 2
+/-0.225 h2 w a 2 r+/-0.75 h2 zwinner surface where
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
r: Radial stress [N/mm2]
Z: Axial stress [N/mm2]
a: Inner radius of inner shell's bottom plate, a230 [mm]
h: Thickness of the inner shell's bottom plate, h 35 [mm]
w: Uniform load, m 3 4 7 N w=
a 2 m3 :Weight of the fuel basket, m3 138 [kg]
m4 :Weight of the content m4 92 [kg]
m7 :Weight of the inner shell's bottom plate, m7 55 [kg]
N: Design acceleration, N250.6 g [m/s2]
1389255 250.6 9.81 w 4.22 [N/mm2]
230 2 Therefore, 4.22 230 2
+/-0.225x +/-41.0 [N/mm2]
35 2 4.22 230 2
+/-0.75x +/-137 [N/mm2]
35 2 4.22inner surface [N/mm2]
For the double signs of the stress values, the upper sign () corresponds to the inner surface and the lower sign () to the outer surface 145
Inner lid
()-Fig.A.54 shows the stress analytical model of the inner lid for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop.
Outer surface Inner surface
()-Fig.A.54 Stress analysis model of inner lid for 1.2m lower side vertical drop As indicated in ()-Fig.A.54, the dead weight acts uniformly on the inner lid.
The stress, generated in the disc which receives uniform load, reaches its maximum in the center of the disc.
The stress is, wa 2 1.24 h2 wouter surface where
- Radial stress [N/mm2]
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
Axial stress [N/mm2]
a: Radius of the circle of the inner lid supporting points, a285 [mm]
h: Thickness of the inner lid, h55 [mm]
w: Uniform load resulting from dead weight of the lid, whN7.93x10-6x55x250.6x9.811.07 [N/mm2]
146
N: Design acceleration, N 250.6 g [m/s2]
- Density of the inner lid, 7.93x10-6 [kg/mm3]
Hence, 1.07 285 2 1.24 = 35.6 [N/mm2]
55 2 1.07outer surface [N/mm2]
For the double signs of the stress values, the upper sign () corresponds to the outer surface and the lower sign () to the inner surface.
Inner lid clamping bolt In a bottom side vertical drop, no load is received by the inner lid clamping bolt.
Therefore, no stress is generated.
147
(b) Fuel elements and fuel plate (b)-1. Fuel elements (1) Fuel plate This section analyzes the stress generated on the rectangular fuel element for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop.
() In case of calking both ends of fuel plate With regard to the rectangular fuel element, there are 11 types of fresh fuel elements including the follower type, and there are 9 types of lowly irradiated fuel elements. In this section the analysis method is described for the JRR-3 standard, the same analysis was conducted for the other 11 types, and the result is shown in the ()-Table A.17.
However, analysis is performed on the assumption that uranium-aluminum alloy has the same strength as the covering material.
()-Fig.A.55 shows an analytical model.
()-Fig.A.55 Stress analysis model of rectangular fuel element for 1.2m lower side vertical drop.
As indicated in ()-Fig.A.55, the fuel plate is caulked and fixed at both extremities. Its sustaining force is, FH2b where FH : Strength to sustain the fuel plate [N]
f: Sustaining force per unit length; f26.5 [N/mm]
148
b: Length of the fuel plate; b770 [mm]
Therefore, FH 26.5x2x7704.08x104 [N]
Thus, the force for dropping of the fuel plate is FmN where F: Force for dropping [N]
m: Weight of the fuel plate, m0.279 [kg]
N: Design acceleration, N250.6 g [m/s2]
Therefore, F0.279x250.6x9.81686 [N]
Thus, the fuel plate does not slip down since the force to sustain the fuel plate exceeds the force for dropping of the plate.
As shown above, when a force for dropping due to the dead weight of the fuel plate which is fixed on its extremities acts on it, the shearing stress occurs. This stress is, F
2 h 2 h 1b where
- Shearing stress [N/mm2]
F: Force for dropping of the fuel plate, F686 [N]
h2: Thickness of the fuel plate, h21.27 [mm]
h1: Thickness of fuel plate core, h10.51 [mm]
b: Length of the fuel plate, b770 [mm]
Thus, the shearing stress is 686 0.586 [N/mm2]
2 1.270.51 770 149
() In case of fuel plate fixed by pin The stress of the pin fixing of the fuel plate of the lowly irradiated fuel element, generated at 1.2m vertical drop, is analyzed. There are 6 types of lowly irradiated fuel elements including follower types, in this section, the stress analysis method for the pin fixing type fuel element is described and its result is shown in the ()-Table A.17.
The uranium aluminum alloy is treated to have the same strength as the clad material in the analysis.
The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.56.
Pin
()-Fig.A.56 Analytical model of 1.2m lower portion vertical drop of lowly irradiated fuel element As shown in ()-Fig.A.56, the fuel plate is fixed with pin at the side plate.
This retaining force is given as follows.
FH = a x A [N]
Where, FH : Force for retaining fuel plate [N]
a : Allowable shear stress of pin = 36.8 [N/mm2]
A : Sectional area of pin [mm2]
= xd2xn 4
d : Pin diameter = 2.2 [mm]
n : No. of pin = 62 [-]
FH =ax xd2xn 4
150
= 36.8x x2.22x62=8.67x103 [N]
4 The force acting on the fuel plate due to the acceleration is given as
- follows, F = mN Where, F : Force acts on fuel plate when dropping [N]
m : Weight of the fuel plate = 0.217 [kg]
N : Design acceleration = 250.6 [m/s2]
Therefore the following value is obtained.
F = 0.217x250.6x9.81 = 533 [N]
From the above, the retaining force of the pin is larger than the dropping force of the fuel plate by the acceleration. The fuel plate does not slide from fixing.
When the fuel plate, fixed with pin at the both ends, is freely dropped, the tensile force occurs at the pin portion of the fuel plate and is given as follows, t = W o A
Where, WN Wo =
n/2 0.217 250.6 9.81 Wo = = 17.2 62 / 2 t : Stress of fuel plate pin [N/mm2]
Wo : Load acting on fuel pin portion [kg]
n : No. of pin, n = 62 N : Design acceleration, N = 250.6g [m/sec2]
A : Effective sectional area of pin [mm2]
A = ((L1 - L2)/2 - d)xt1 L1 : Width of fuel plate, L1 =70.6 [mm]
L2 : Width of fuel plate core, L2 =61.8 [mm]
151
t1 : Thickness of fuel plate, t =1.27 [mm]
d : Pin diameter, d =2.35 [mm]
A = ((70.8 - 60.4)/2 - 2.35)x1.27 = 2.60 [mm2]
Therefor the following value of stress is obtained.
17.2 t = = 6.61 [N/mm2]
2.60
() In case of fuel plate not fixed by the side plate The stress of the lowly irradiated fuel element, when dropped vertically from 1.2m height, is analyzed. There are five types of lowly irradiated fuel elements including follower types, in this section. The fuel element not fixed by the side plate is analyzed and the result is shown in ()-Table A.17.
The uranium aluminum alloy is treated to have the same strength as the clad material in this analysis. The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.57.
x
()-Fig.A.57 Analytical model of 1.2m lower portion vertical drop of lowly irradiated fuel element As shown in ()-Fig.A.57, the compressive stress is generated in the rectangular plate subjected to its own weight of the fuel element, and is given as follows, W mF N c = =
A l (h 2 h1)
Where, mF : Fuel plate mass, mF = 0.223 [kg]
152
l : Width of fuel plate, l =66.6 [mm]
h2 : Thickness of fuel plate, h2 =1.27 [mm]
h1 : Thickness of fuel plate core, h1 =0.51 [mm]
N : Design acceleration, N =250.6g [m/s2]
Therefore, the following value of stress is obtained.
0.223 250.6g c = = 10.8 [N/mm2]
66.6 (1.27 0.51)
(2) Fuel element hold-down part As shown in ()-D section, the lowly irradiated fuel elements are cut at the lower adapter portion and the upper holder portion in order to reduce the weight, therefore the total length becomes short, A hold-down part is provided to adjust the length. In this section, the stress analysis method for the stress occurs in the hold down part is shown and the result is summarized in ()-Table A.17.
The analysis model is shown in ()-Fig.A.58.
Fuel element Hold down part
()-Fig.A.58 Analytical model of hold down part As shown in ()-Fig.A.58, the hold-down part is subjected to the own weight and the fuel element weight, and the compressive stressc is generated as follows, W (m z + m f ) N c = =
A 1 (h o 2 hi 2 )
4 Where, 153
mz : Mass of hold down part, mz = 1.3x2 [kg]
mf : Mass of hold element, mf = 2.0 [mm]
N : Design acceleration, N =250.6g [m/s2]
ho : Outside diameter of hold down part, ho =60 [mm]
hi : Inside diameter of hold down part, hi =52 [mm]
Therefore, following is obtained.
(2.6 + 2.0) 250 .6 g c = = 16.1 [N/mm2]
1 (60 2 52 2 )
4 154
(b)-2. Fuel plate for the critical assembly fuel (KUCA fuel)
This section analyzes the stress generated in the fuel plate for the critical assembly at the time of 1.2 m vertical drop. The analysis model is the same as the lowly irradiated fuel elements shown in ()-Fig.A.57 (when the fuel plate and side plate are not fixed).
For the coupon fuel in vertical drop, the design acceleration is applied to the perpendicular direction to the plane of the fuel as shown in ()-Fig.A.59.
hl hg
()-Fig.A.59 Analytical model of 1.2m vertical drop: coupon fuel In the case, the total thickness of cladding is 6 mm, which is the twice width of aluminum case.
mF: Weight of the fuel plate mf=0.036 [kg]
l: Length of the fuel plate l=50.8 [mm]
h2-h1:Cladding thickness h2-h1= 6 [mm]
N: Design acceleration N=250.6g [m/s2]
Therefore, the compressive stress c are given as follows.
(0.036x250.6xg)/(50.8x6) 0.30 N/mm2 155
For the flat fuel in vertical drop, the design acceleration is applied to the parallel direction to the plane of the fuel plate as shown in ()-Fig.A.60.
hg hl
()-Fig.A.60 Analytical model of 1.2m vertical drop: flat fuel In the case, mF: Weight of the fuel plate mf=0.23 [kg]
l: Length of the fuel plate l=62 [mm]
h2: Fuel plate thickness h2 =1.5 [mm]
h1: Fuel plate core thickness h1= 0.5 [mm]
N: Design acceleration N=250.6g [m/s2]
Therefore, the compressive stress c are given as follows.
(0.23x250.6xg)/(62x(1.5-0.5))
9.12 N/mm2 156
(c) Comparison of allowable stress Results of the stress evaluation in each analysis item in ()-5.3 (7) are shown together in ()-Table A.17.
As shown in this table, the margin of safety in regard to analysis reference is positive even if each or combined load is applied.
Therefore, the integrity of this package is maintained under the condition of the 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop test.
157
Stress units
-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop (1/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) Sm MS PL+Pb 1.5Sm MS PL+Pb 3Sm MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F
-0.0491 1 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 112 137 0.223 1.15 -111 Inner Surface 3.18 137 0.953 41.0 4.32 137 30.7 144.5 205 0.418 Bottom plate of -0.098 -4.22 2
Outer Surface the inner shell -3.18 -137 158
-0.953 -41.0 0 137 140 205 0.464 0 0 Inner Surface
-3.27 35.6 2/3Sy Sy
-3.27 35.6 0.098 4672 32.4 20.2 458 687 Upper part of
-0.098 0 3 the inner shell Outer Surface 3.27 -35.6 (Inner lid) 2/3Sy Sy 3.27 -35.6 1.07 427 31.3 20.9 458 687
-1.07 174 3.20 Inner shell lid 2/3Sy 4 177 1.58 clamping bolt 458 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYeild point of the design; MSMargin of safety rDiameter direction stress oPeriphery direction stress 2Axial stress bBending stress Shear stress tAbility of bolt stress
Stress units
-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop (2/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JRR-3 standard 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.586 0.586 63.8 107 dispersion alloy)
JRR-3 follower element 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.479 0.479 63.8 132 dispersion alloy) 3 JRR-4 B type element 0.439 0.439 63.8 144 159 4 JRR-4 L type element 0.693 0.693 63.8 91.0 JRR-4 5 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.603 0.603 63.8 104 dispersion alloy)
JMTR 6 standard element 0.595 0.595 63.8 106 JMTR 7 follower element 0.498 0.498 63.8 127 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of design; MSMargin of safety Shear stress
Stress units
- N/mm2
-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop (3/6)
Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F KUR standard 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.454 0.454 63.7 139 dispersion alloy)
KUR Special element 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.454 0.454 63.7 139 dispersion alloy)
KUR half-loaded element 3 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.454 0.454 63.7 139 dispersion alloy) 160 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of design; MSMargin of safety Shear stress
-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop (4/6)
Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JMTRC 1 Standard fuel element 0.45 0.45 63.8 140 (A,B,C type)
JMTRC Standard fuel element 2 (2.2pin,fix type) t 6.61 6.61 63.8 8.65 (B,C type)
JMTRC 3 Special fuel element c 10.8 10.8 63.8 4.90 (Special A type)
JMTRC 4 Special fuel element c 0.38 0.38 63.8 166 (Special B type) 161 JMTRC 5 Special fuel element c 11.0 11.0 63.8 4.80 (Special C,Special D type)
JMTRC 6 fuel follower 0.36 0.36 63.8 176 (HF type)
JMTRC 7 Standard fuel element 0.45 0.45 63.8 140 (MA,MB,MC type)
JMTRC Special fuel element 8 (Special MB,Special MC c 10.7 10.7 63.8 4.96 type)
JMTRC 9 fuel follower 0.36 0.36 63.8 176 (MF type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety cCompression stress Shear stress tStress of the part of fuel plate pin
-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop (5/6)
Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JMTRC Special fuel element hold 1 down part c 16.1 16.1 245 14.2 (Special B type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFFatigue accumulation coefficient; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety cCompression stress 162
-Table A.17 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m bottom side vertical drop (6/6)
Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F 1 KUCA Coupon type b 0.30 0.30 63.7 212 2 KUCA Flat type b 9.12 9.12 63.7 7.0 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFFatigue accumulation coefficient; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety bBending stress cCompression stress 163
(8) Stress analysis for 1.2m lid side vertical drop This section analyzes the stress for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop separately for the main body of the packaging and fuel basket. Stress analysis in each item is performed for the purpose of determining the principal stress.
Classification of stress and evaluation of stress intensity are conducted in A.5.3(8)(c).
(a) Main body of the packaging Stress evaluation positions of the main body of the packaging for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop are determined as shown in ()-Fig.A.61 from the viewpoint of maintaining the containment.
Symbol Evaluation position Shock absorber (Quantity of deformation)
Barrel of an inner shell Bottom plate of an inner shell Inner lid Inner lid clamping bolt
()-Fig.A.61 Stress evaluation position for 1.2m lid side vertical drop (main body of a packaging) 164
Deformation of the shock absorber Even if the shock absorber is deformed for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop, the deformation should not reach the bottom of the inner shell.
An analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.62.
()-Fig.A.62 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2m lid side vertical drop As is indicated in ()-Fig.A.62, the remaining quantity (mm) of the shock absorber in the 1.2 m lid side vertical drop is, 0
where 0: Minimum thickness of shock absorber before deformation, 0186 [mm]
v: Deformation of the shock absorber, 24.1 [mm]
Hence, the remaining thickness is, 18624.1161.9 [mm]
Therefore, for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop, it is only the shock absorber that suffers deformation and the deformation does not attain the inner lid.
165
Frame of Inner shell
()-Fig.A.63 is a stress analysis model of the frame of inner shell for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop.
()-Fig.A.63 Stress analysis model of inner shell for 1.2m lid side vertical drop As shown in ()-Fig.A.63, compression, due to dead weight and the weight of the peripheral part of the inner lid, acts on the frame of inner shell.
The stress generated from the compression is given by the following equation.
F A
where F: Compression force acting on the inner shell Fm1m3m6N [N]
m1 : Weight of the inner shell (side and flange), m1210 [kg]
m3 : Weight of the fuel basket, m3138 [kg]
m6 : Weight of the outer shell, m6225 [kg]
N : Acceleration, N240.7g [m/s2]
F(210138225)x240.7x9.811.35x1O6 [N]
A: Cross sectional area of the frame of inner shell, A d22d12 [mm2]
4 166
d2 : Outer diameter of the inner shell, d2 480 [mm]
d1 : Inner diameter of the inner shell, d1 460 [mm]
480246021.48x104 [mm2]
4 Therefore, 1.35 10 6 91.2 [N/mm2]
1.48 10 4 Bottom plate of the inner shell
()-Fig.A.64 shows the stress analysis model of the inner shell's bottom plate for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop.
Outer surface Inner surface
()-Fig.A.64 Stress analysis model of inner shell bottom plate for 1.2m lid side vertical drop As indicated in ()-Fig.A.64, the dead weight of both the bottom of the outer shell and the bottom plate of the inner shell act uniformly on the bottom of the inner shell. Stress generated in the disc which receives the uniform load reaches its maximum at the fixed end.
The stress is wa 2
+/-0.225 h2 167
wa 2 r+/-0.75 h2 wOuter surface where
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
- Radial stress [N/mm2]
- Axial stress [N/mm2]
a: Inner radius of the inner shell's bottom plate, a 230 [mm]
h: Plate thickness of the inner shell's bottom plate, h35 [mm]
w: Uniform load, m 8 N w 7 a2 m7 : Weight of the inner shell's bottom plate, m7 55 [kg]
m8 : Weight of the bottom of the outer shell, m8 120 [kg]
N: Acceleration, N240.7g [m/s2]
55120 240.7 9.81 w 2.49 [N/mm2]
230 2 Therefore, 2.49 230 2
+/-0.225x +/-24.2 [N/mm2]
35 2 2.49 230 2
+/-0.75x +/-80.6 [N/mm2]
35 2 2.49outer surface For the double signs of the stress values, the plus sign corresponds to the outer surface and the minus sign to the inner surface.
168
Inner lid
()-Fig.A.65 shows a stress analysis model of the inner lid for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop.
()-Fig.A.65 Stress analysis model of inner lid for 1.2m lid side vertical drop 169
As indicated in ()-Fig.A.65, the weight of the contents and the fuel basket act uniformly on the center of the inner lid, and the dead weight of the inner lid also acts uniformly, while the latter is being supported by the circular reaction of the shock absorber and the inner lid clamping bolt.
The stress, generated on the circumferentially supported disc under these loads, reaches its maximum in the disc center. It can be given by superposing the analysis results of each of the models (1),(2),(3) and (4) shown in ()-Fig.A.65.
Contents and fuel basket As shown in ()-Fig.A.65-(1), the stress, generated within the concentric circle of the circumferentially supported disc under uniform load, reaches its maximum in the disc center. It is given by the following equation[]
2 b 3P 1 b 4 (1 ) ln a
4 (1 )
8 h2 b a P1inner surface where
- Radial stress [N/mm2]
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
- Axial stress [N/mm2]
a: Radius of supporting points circle on inner lid, a285 [mm]
b: Radius of load, b230 [mm]
h: Plate thickness of the inner lid, h55 [mm]
P1 Uniform load resulting from content and fuel basket, m m P1 3 2 4 N [N/mm2]
b m3 : Weight of the fuel basket, m3138 [kg]
m4 : Weight of the bottom of the outer shell, m492 [kg]
N: Acceleration, N240.7g [m/s2]
13892 P1 240.7 9.813.27 [N/mm2]
230 2
- Poisson's ratio, 0.3 Therefore, 3 3.27 230 2 285 230 2 4(1 0.3 ln 4 (10.3 8 55 2 230 285 2 170
99 .9 [N/mm2]
3.27 inner surface For the double sign of the stress value, the upper sign () corresponds to the inner surface and the lower sign () to the outer surface.
The supporting point reaction R1 in this case is, R1 m3m4 N 13892x240.7x9.815.43x105 [N]
Dead weight of inner lid As indicated in ()-Fig.A.65-(2), the stress, generated on the circumferentially supported disc under the uniform load resulting from the disc's dead weight, reaches its maximum at the disc center. It is given by the following equation P2a 2 1.24 h2 P2inner surface where Radial stress [N/mm2]
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
- Axial stress [N/mm2]
a: Radius of supporting points circle on inner lid, a285 [mm]
h: Plate thickness of the inner lid, h55 [mm]
N: Acceleration, N240.7g [m/s2]
- Density of the inner lid, 7.93x10-6 [kg/mm3]
P2 : Uniform load resulting from the lid's dead weight, P2hN 7.93xl0-6x55x240.7x9.811.03 [N/mm2]
Hence, the stress on the lid is 1.03 285 2 1.24 2 34.3 [N/mm2]
55 1.03inner surface The upper sign () of the stress value corresponds to the inner surface and the lower sign () to the outer surface.
171
The supporting points' reaction force R2 in this case is as follows.
R2 P2a2 1.03xx28522.63x105 [N]
Deduction of the shock absorber's reaction As shown in ()-Fig.A.65-(3), the stress, generated within the concentric circle of the circumferentially supported disc under uniform load, reaches its maximum at the disc center. It is given by the following equation[7]
3P3 2
a c2 4 1 ln 4 (1 8h 2 c a2 P3inner surface where
- Radial stress [N/mm2]
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
- Axial stress [N/mm2]
a: Radius of supporting points circle on inner lid, a 285 [mm]
c: Radius of load; ccOtan11524.1xtan15.5°122 [mm]
cO: Upper radius of the circular cone, cO 115 [mm]
- Circular cone angle, 15.5°
- Deformation thickness in the shock absorber, 24.1 [mm]
h: Plate thickness of the inner lid, h 55 [mm]
- Poisson's ratio, 0.3 P3 : Compressive stress on the shock absorber, P3 0.932 [N/mm2]
Therefore, 3 0.932 122 2 285 122 2 4(1 0.3)ln 4 (10.3 8 55 2 122 285 2 14.2 [N/mm2]
0.932inner surface[N/mm2]
For the double sign of the stress value, the upper sign () corresponds to the inner surface and the lower sign () to the outer surface.
The supporting points' reaction in this case is R3P3c20.932xx12224.36x104 [N]
172
Reaction of the shock absorber As shown in ()-Fig.A.65-(4), the stress, generated in the circumferentially supported disc under uniform load of the shock absorber's reaction, reaches its maximum at the disc center, and it is given by the following equation.
P4a 2 r 1.24 h2 P4outer surface where
- Radial stress [N/mm2]
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
- Axial stress [N/mm2]
a: Radius of supporting points circle on inner lid, a285 [mm]
h: Plate thickness of the inner lid, h55 [mm]
P4 : Compressive stress on the shock absorber, P40.932 [N/mm2]
Hence, the stress on the lid is 0.932 285 2 1.24 = 31.0 [N/mm2]
55 2 0.932outer surface [N/mm2]
For the double sign of the stress value, the upper sign () corresponds to the inner surface and the lower sign () to the outer surface.
The supporting points' reaction force R4 in this case is, R4P4a2-0.932xx2852-2.38x105 [N]
On the basis of the results mentioned above, the superposed reaction is, 99.9 34.3 14.2 31.0 = 117 [N/mm2]
3.271.030.9325.23inner surface[N/mm2]
The upper signs of these terms correspond to the inner surface and the lower signs to the outer surface.
The combined reaction of the supporting points is, R5.432.630.442.38x1056.12x105 [N]
173
Inner lid clamping bolt As indicated in A.5.3 (8)(a)(D), the dead weight of the contents, the fuel basket and the inner lid act on the inner lid. On the other hand, the inner lid is supported by the reaction of the shock absorber, the reaction of the conical reinforcing plate and the inner lid clamping bolt.
The supporting point reaction R works on the inner lid clamping bolts.
Therefore, the tensile stress arising in these bolts is, R
nA where
- Tensile stress [N/mm2]
R: Supporting points reaction, R 6.12x105 [N]
n: Number of inner lid clamping bolts, n 16 Ar: Root thread area of the clamping bolt M 24, Ar d2 20.752 2 338.2 [mm2]
4 4 dr: Minimum diameter of the clamping bolt, dr20.752 [mm]
Therefore, 6.12 10 5 113 [N/mm2]
16 338.2 174
(b) Fuel elements, fuel plate (b)-1. Fuel element
() Fuel plate In this section, the stresses of the rectangular fuel elements are analyzed for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop.
(i) In case of calking both ends of fuel plate With regard to the rectangular fuel element, there are 7 types of fresh fuel elements including the follower type, and there are 9 types of lowly irradiated fuel elements. In this section, the analysis method is described for the JRR-3 standard, the same analysis was conducted for the other 8 types and the result is shown in the
()-Table A.18.
However, the analysis is performed on the assumption that uranium-aluminum alloy has the same strength as the covering material.
()-Fig.A.66 shows an analytical model.
()-Fig.A.66 Stress analysis model of rectangular fuel element for 1.2m lid side vertical drop As indicated in ()-Fig.A.66, the fuel plate is caulked and fixed at both ends and its retaining strength is, FHf2 b where 175
FH : Strength to sustain the fuel plate [N]
f: Sustaining strength per unit length, f26.5 [N/mm]
b: Length of the fuel plate, b770 [mm]
Therefore, FH26.5x2x7704.08x104 [N]
On the other hand, the force for dropping of the fuel plate is FmN where F: Dropping force of the fuel plate [N]
m: Weight of the fuel plate, m0.279 [kg]
N: Design acceleration, N240.7g [m/s2]
Therefore, F 0.279x240.7x9.81659 [N]
Thus, the fuel plate does not slip down since the strength to sustain the fuel plate exceeds the dropping force.
As shown above, when the fuel plate which is fixed at its both ends suffers a dropping force due to its own dead weight, a shearing stress arises.
F 2 h 2h 1b where
- Shearing stress [N/mm2]
F: Dropping force of the fuel plate, F659 [N]
h2: Thickness of the fuel plate, h2l.27 [mm]
h1: Thickness of the core of the fuel plate, h10.51 [mm]
b: Length of the fuel plate, b770 [mm]
Therefore, the shearing stress is, 659 0.563 [N/mm2]
21.270.51 770
() In case of fuel plate fixed by pin 176
The stress of the pin-fixing the fuel plate of the lowly irradiated fuel element, generated at 1.2m vertical drop, is analyzed.
There are 6 types of lowly irradiated fuel elements including follower types, in this section, the stress analysis method for the pin fixing type fuel element is shown and it's result is shown in ()-Table A.18.
The uranium aluminum alloy is treated to have the same strength as the clad material in the analysis.
The analytical model is shown in ()-Fig.A.67.
Pin
()-Fig.A.67 Analytical model of 1.2m upper portion vertical drop of lowly irradiated fuel element As shown in ()-Fig.A.67, the fuel plate is fixed with pin at the side plate.
This retaining force is given as follows.
FH = a x A [N]
Where, FH : Force for retaining fuel plate [N]
a : Allowable shear stress of pin = 36.8 [N/mm2]
A : Sectional area of pin [mm2]
= xd2xn 4
d : Pin diameter = 2.2 [mm]
n : No. of pin = 62 177
Therefore, the following value is obtained.
FH =ax xd2xn 4
= 36.8x x2.22x62=8.67x103 [N]
4 The force acting on the fuel plate due to the acceleration is given as follows, F = mN Where, F : Force acts on fuel plate when dropping [N]
m : Weight of the fuel plate = 0.217 [kg]
N : Design acceleration = 240.7g [m/s2]
Therefore the following value is obtained.
F = 0.217x240.7x9.81 = 512 [N]
From the above, the retaining force of the pin is larger than the dropping force of the fuel plate by the acceleration, the fuel plate does not slide from fixing.
When the fuel plate, fixed with pin at the both ends, is freely dropped, the tensile force occurs at the pin portion of the fuel plate and is given as follows, t =
Wo A
Where, WN Wo =
n/2 0.217 240.7 9.81 Wo = = 16.5 [N]
62 / 2 t : Stress of fuel plate pin [N/mm2]
Wo : Load acting on fuel pin portion [kg]
n : No. of pin, n = 62 N : Design acceleration, N = 240.7g [m/sec2]
A : Effective sectional area of pin [mm2]
A = ((L1 - L2)/2 - d)xt1 178
L1 : Width of fuel plate, L1 =70.6 [mm]
L2 : Width of fuel plate core, L2 =61.8 [mm]
t1 : Thickness of fuel plate, t =1.27 [mm]
d : Pin diameter, d =2.35 [mm]
A = ((70.6 - 61.8)/2 - 2.35)x1.27 = 2.60 [mm2]
Therefore, the following value of stress is obtained.
16.5 t = = 6.35 [N/mm2]
2.60
() In case of fuel plate not fixed by the side plate The stress of the lowly irradiated fuel element, when dropped vertically from 1.2m height, is analyzed. Among five types of lowly irradiated fuel element including follower types, in this section, the fuel element not fixed by the side plate is analyzed and the result is shown in ()-Table A.18.
The uranium aluminum alloy is treated to have the same strength as the clad material in this analysis. The analytical model is shown in
()-Fig.A.68.
x
()-Fig.A.68 Analytical model for 1.2m upper portion vertical drop of lowly irradiated fuel element 179
As shown in ()-Fig.A.68, the compressive stress is generated in the rectangular plate subjected to the fuel element own weight, and is shown as follows, W mF N c = =
A l (h 2 h1)
Where, mF : Fuel plate mass, mF = 0.223 [kg]
l : Width of fuel plate, l =66.6 [mm]
h2 : Thickness of fuel plate, h2 =1.27 [mm]
h1 : Thickness of fuel plate core, h1 =0.51 [mm]
N : Design acceleration, N =240.7g [m/s2]
Therefore, the following value of stress is obtained.
0.223 240.7g c = = 10.4 [N/mm2]
66.6 (1.27 0.51)
() Fuel element hold down part As shown in ()-D section, the lowly irradiated fuel elements are cut at the lower adapter portion and the upper holder portion in order to reduce the weight, Therefore the total length becomes short. A hold-down part is provided to adjust the length. In this section, the stress analysis method for the stress occurs in the hold-down part is shown and the result is summarized in ()-Table A.18.
The analysis model is shown in ()-Fig.A.69.
Fuel element Hold down part
()-Fig.A.69 Analytical model of hold down part 180
As shown in ()-Fig.A.69, the hold down part is subjected to the own weight and the fuel element weight, and the following compressive stress is generated.
W ( m z + mf ) N c = =
A (h o 2 h i 2 )
4 Where, mz : Weight of the hold down part = 1.4 [kg]
mf : Weight of the fuel element = 6.6 [kg]
N : Design acceleration = 240.7g [m/sec2]
ho : Outer diameter of the hold down part = 60 [mm]
hi : Inner diameter of the hold down part = 52 [mm]
Therefore, (1.4 + 6.6) 240 .7g c = = 26.8 [N/mm2]
(60 52 )
2 2 4
181
(b)-2. Fuel plate for the critical assembly fuel (KUCA fuel)
This section analyzes the stress generated in the fuel plate for the critical assembly at the time of 1.2 m vertical drop. The analysis model is the same as the lowly irradiated fuel elements shown in ()-Fig.A.68 (when the fuel plate and side plate are not fixed).
For the coupon fuel in vertical drop, the design acceleration is applied to the perpendicular direction to the plane of the fuel as shown in ()-Fig.A.59 and the total thickness of cladding is 6 mm, which is the twice width of aluminum case.
mF: Weight of the fuel plate mf=0.036 [kg]
l: Length of the fuel plate l=50.8 [mm]
h2-h1:Cladding thickness h2-h1= 6 [mm]
N: Design acceleration N=240.7g [m/s2]
Therefore, the compressive stress c are given as follows.
(0.036x240.7xg)/(50.8x6) 0.28 N/mm2 For the flat fuel in vertical drop, the design acceleration is applied to the parallel direction to the plane of the fuel plate as shown in ()-Fig.A.60.
In the case, mF: Weight of the fuel plate mf=0.23 [kg]
l: Length of the fuel plate l=62 [mm]
h2: Fuel plate thickness h2 =1.5 [mm]
h1: Fuel plate core thickness h1= 0.5 [mm]
N: Design acceleration N=240.7g [m/s2]
182
Therefore, the compressive stress c are given as follows.
(0.23x240.7xg)/(62x(1.5-0.5))
8.76 N/mm2 183
(c) Comparison of the allowable stresses The results of the stress evaluation concerning each analyzed item in()-5.3(8) are shown together in ()-Table A.18.
As shown in this table, the margin of safety in regard to the analysis reference is positive for individual and combined loads.
Therefore, the integrity of this package is maintained under the 1.2 m lid side vertical drop test conditions.
184
Stress units
-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop (1/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) Sm MS PL+Pb 1.5Sm MS PL+Pb 3Sm MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F
-0.0491 1 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 92.4 137 0.482 1.15 -91.2 Inner Surface 3.18 -80.6 0.953 -24.2 0.098 137 1396 77.3 205 1.65 Bottom plate of -0.098 0 2
Outer Surface inner shell -3.18 80.6 185
-0.953 24.2 2.49 137 54.0 79.9 205 1.56 0 -2.49 Inner Surface
-3.27 -117 2/3Sy Sy
-3.27 -117 5.33 84.9 115 4.97 458 687
-0.098 -5.23 3 Inner shell lid Outer Surface 3.27 117 2/3Sy Sy 3.27 117 0.932 490 121 4.67 458 687
-0.932 174 3.20 113 Clamping bolt of 2/3Sy 4 290 0.579 inner shell lid 458 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety t ; Ability of bolt stress r ; Diameter direction stress o ;Periphery direction stress 2 ; Axial stress b ;Bending stress ; Shear stress
Stress units
-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop (2/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JRR-3 standard element 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.563 0.563 63.8 112 dispersion alloy)
JRR-3 follower element 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.460 0.460 63.8 137 dispersion alloy) 3 JRR-4 B type element 0.422 0.422 63.8 150 186 4 JRR-4 L type element 0.666 0.666 63.8 94.7 JRR-4 5 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.579 0.579 63.8 109 dispersion alloy)
JMTR 6 standard element 0.572 0.572 63.8 110 JMTR 7 follower element 0.479 0.479 63.8 132 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress
Stress units
- N/mm2
-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop (3/6)
Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F KUR standard 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.436 0.436 63.7 145 dispersion alloy)
KUR Special element 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.436 0.436 63.7 145 dispersion alloy)
KUR half-loaded element 3 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.436 0.436 63.7 145 dispersion alloy)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; 187 SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress
-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop (4/6)
Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JMTRC 1 Standard fuel element 0.44 0.44 63.8 144 (A,B,C type)
JMTRC Standard fuel element 2 (2.2pin,fix type) t 6.35 6.35 63.8 9.04 (B,C type)
JMTRC 3 Special fuel element c 10.4 10.4 63.8 5.13 (Special A type)
JMTRC 4 Special fuel element c 0.37 0.37 63.8 171 (Special B type) 188 JMTRC 5 Special fuel element c 10.4 10.4 63.8 5.13 (Special C,Special D type)
JMTRC 6 fuel follower 0.34 0.34 63.8 186 (HF type)
JMTRC 7 Standard fuel element 0.43 0.43 63.8 147 (MA,MB,MC type)
JMTRC Special fuel element 8 (Special MB,Special MC c 10.3 10.3 63.8 5.19 type)
JMTRC 9 fuel follower 0.35 0.35 63.8 181 (MF type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress c ; Compression stress t ; Stress of the part of fuel pin
-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop (5/6)
Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F JMTRC Special fuel element hold 1 down part c 26.8 26.8 245 8.14 (Special A type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold 2 down part c 15.4 15.4 245 14.9 (Special B type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold 3 down part c 27.9 27.9 245 7.78 (Special C,Special D type)
JMTRC 189 Special fuel element hold 4 down part c 27.9 27.9 245 7.78 (Special MB,Special MC type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety c ; Compression stress
-Table A.18 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop (6/6)
Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress Position initial internal thermal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sy MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F 1 KUCA coupon type b 0.28 0.28 63.7 227 2 KUCA Flat type b 8.76 8.76 63.7 7.3 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety b ; Bending stress c ; Compression stress 190
(9) Corner drop A corner drop is a special case of inclining drops The package is made to drop with its corner directed downwards, as shown in ()-Fig.A.70, where the line drawn from the center of gravity to the point which first touches the ground meets at a right angle to the solid plane.
(a) Deformation of shock absorber
()-Fig.A.70 shows the relationship between the deformation of the shock absorber and its remaining thickness.
This figure shows that deformation only occurs in parts of the shock absorber and does not reach the inner shell.
()-Fig.A.70 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2 m corner drop 191
(b) Stresses on the packaging and content
()-Table A.19 shows the horizontal and vertical components of the design acceleration for the corner drops (see ()-Table A.15).
()-Table A.19 Design acceleration for corner drops (xg)
Drop type Total acceleration Vertical component Horizontal component for specimen (N) (NV = Ncos) (NH = Nsin)
Lid side 89.9 79.7 41.7 Corner Bottom side 90.8 83.7 35.2
()-Table A.19 shows that each accelerating component is smaller than the acceleration recorded in the vertical and horizontal drop. Hence, stress is not analyzed here.
The analyses of the inner lid clamping bolts of different kinds other than those shown in section A.5.3(6) to (8) are described in the following paragraphs.
192
(c) Stress on the inner lid clamping bolts for corner drop During the drop of the bottom side corner, the acceleration of the vertical component is far greater than that of the horizontal component. For this reason, the stress due to momentum on the bolts of the lid can be neglected.
During the drop of the upper corner, stress occurs on the bolts due to momentum of the inner lid. The stress is analyzed in this section.
()-Fig.A.71 shows an analytical model of the stress.
G: Center of gravity of the inner lid H: Horizontal direction pivoting point V: Vertical direction pivoting point
()-Fig.A.71 Analytical model of stress on inner lid clamping bolts for lid side corner drop 193
Bending stress occurs on the inner lid clamping bolts due to the momentum of the inner lid when the package is made to fall with its lid side corner facing downwards (see ()-Fig.A.71).
The maximum bending stress that occurs on the bolt (8) and (8') during this drop is obtained as follows:
max NmLl 8 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Ar N HmL Hl' 8 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1' 2 1' 3 1' 4 1' 5 1' 6 1' 7 1' 8 Ar where max : Maximum bending stress on bolts 8 and 8' [N/mm2]
- Stress due to vertical acceleration component [N/mm2]
- Stress due to horizontal acceleration component [N/mm2]
N : Vertical acceleration component Nv = 79.7g [m/s2]
N : Horizontal acceleration component NH = 41.7g [m/s2]
m : Load applied on the inner lid m = 350 [kg]
L : Vertical momentum arm Lv = 310 [mm]
L : Horizontal momentum arm LH = 18.6 [mm]
l : Distance from pivoting point V to a bolt [mm]
l': Distance from pivoting point H to a bolt [mm]
l1 = 30.5 12 = 73.0 l'2 = 42.5 13 = 151.7 l'3 = 121.2 14 = 254.4 l'4 = 223.9 15 = 365.6 l'5 = 335.1 16 = 468.3 l'6 = 437.8 17 = 547.0 l'7 = 516.5 18 = 589.5 l'8 = 559.0 Ar: Area of core section of bolt(M24);
Ar = dr 2 = 20.752 2 = 338.2 [mm2]
4 4 194
Hence, the stresses are obtained as follows:
=
79.7 9.81 350 310 589.5 2 (30.5 73.0 151.7 2 254.4 2 365.6 2 468.3 2 547.0 2 589.5 2 2 2 338.2
= 67.6 N/mm2 41.7 9.81 350 18.6 559.0
=
242.5 121.2 223.9 2335.1 2437.8 2516.5 2559 2 2 2 338.2
= 2.32 [N/mm2]
()-Table A.20 shows an evaluation of the stresses on the inner lid clamping bolts for lid side corner drop.
195
Stress units
-Table A.20 Stress evaluation for 1.2 m lid side corner drop
- N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Impact Primary+secondary Stress Primary stress Fatigue at due to due to stress stress initial internal thermal Position Horizontal Vertical Pm(PL) Sm MS PL+Pb 1.5Sm MS PL+Pb 3Sm MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion Component Component +Q +Q+F 174 3.20 Inner lid 2/3Sy Sy 1 2.32 67.6 177 1.58 247 1.78 clamping bolt 458 687 196 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYield point of the design; c ; Compression stress MSMargin of safety t ; Ability of bolt stress b ; Bending stress, ; Shear stress
(10) Bottom side inclined drop (a) Deformation in shock absorber
()-Fig.A.72 shows the relationship between the angle of dropping and the deformation for various types of bottom side inclined drop.
Angle of Minimum thickness Deformation of Remaining thickness dropping of shock absorber shock absorber of shock absorber before deformation 5° 211.9 22.2 189.7 15° 236.8 40.1 196.7 30° 260.2 56.2 204.0 45° 265.7 60.4 205.3 60° 252.9 61.4 191.5 75° 222.6 44.4 178.2 85° 193.7 25.0 168.7
()-Fig.A.72 Analytical model of interference with inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2 m lower side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.72 shows that at the drop, deformation only occurs in parts of the shock absorber and does not reach the inner shell.
197
(b) Stresses on packaging and content
()-Table A.21 shows the horizontal and vertical components of the design acceleration at the bottom side inclined drop (()-Table A.15).
()-Fig.A.73 shows the relationships between the angle of dropping and the acceleration.
()-Table A.21 Relationship between drop angle and acceleration Angle at Acceleration (G) dropping Acceleration Vertical component Horizontal component (degrees) (N) (Ncos) (Nsin) 5 176.4 175.7 15.4 15 106.6 103.0 27.6 30 83.9 72.7 42.0 45 76.6 54.2 54.2 60 83.2 41.6 72.1 75 89.1 23.1 86.1 85 101.8 8.9 101.4
()-Fig.A.73 Relationship between acceleration and drop angle for 1.2 m lower side inclined drop
()-Table A.21 shows that each acceleration component is smaller than the acceleration recorded in the horizontal and vertical drop.
Hence, stress is not analyzed here.
198
(11) Lid side inclined drop (a) Deformation of the shock absorber
()-Fig.A.74 shows the relationship between the dropping angle and the deformation.
Angle at Minimum thickness Deformation in Remaining thickness dropping of shock absorber shock absorber of shock absorber
() before deformation 5° 201.1 21.5 179.6 15° 210.5 41.5 169.0 30° 212.2 60.8 151.4 45° 199.1 65.8 133.3 60° 171.9 59.3 112.6 75° 132.7 46.9 85.8 85° 101.1 27.4 73.7
()-Fig.A.74 Analytical model of interference with inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 1.2 m upper side inclined drop
()-Fig.A.74 shows that deformation only occurs in parts of the shock absorber and does not reach the inner shell.
199
(b) Stresses on the packaging and content
()-Table A.22 shows the vertical and horizontal components of the design acceleration for lid side inclined drop (see ()-Table A.15).
()-Fig.A.75 shows the relationships between the angle of drop and the acceleration.
()-Table A.22 Relationship between drop angle and acceleration Angle at Acceleration (G) dropping Acceleration Vertical component Horizontal component (degrees) (N) (Ncos) (Nsin) 5 178.6 177.9 15.6 15 106.3 102.7 27.5 30 88.4 76.6 44.2 45 82.3 58.2 58.2 60 81.5 40.8 70.6 75 100.3 26.0 96.6 85 119.4 10.4 118.9
()-Fig.A.75 Relationship between acceleration and drop angle for 1.2 m upper side inclined drop
()-Table A.22 shows that each acceleration component is smaller than the acceleration recorded in the horizontal and vertical drop. Hence, stress is not analyzed here.
200
A.5.4 Stacking test We will analyze here the stresses that may occur on the package when a compressive load on technical standards is applied on it.
In the analysis of the stresses, the principal stress is obtained. The stress classifications and stress intensity evaluations are shown in section A.5.4(3).
(1) Compressive load The specified load to be applied to the specimen under the test condition is ;
the greater of the two, the compressive load W1 five times as high as the weight of the package, or the load W2 obtained by multiplying the projected area A of the package by the pressure of 0.013 [MPa] (any which is larger).
For the package in question, these loads are respectively W1 = 5mog [N]
W2 = 0.013A [N]
Where, mo: Weight of the package, mo = 950 [kg]
A: Projected area of the package, A = D2 = x8402 =5.54x105 [mm2]
4 4 D: Outer diameter of the package, D = 840 [mm]
g: Gravitational acceleration, g = 9.81 [m/s2]
Thus, W1 = 5x950x9.81 = 4.66x104 [N]
W2 = 0.013x5.54x105 = 7.20x103 [N]
and W1 > W2.
The compressive load F is defined.
F = W1 =4.66x104 [N]
(2) Analysis of the stresses We will analyze stresses that may be generated when a compressive load is applied for a period of twenty-four hours to different parts of the packaging.
()-Fig.A.76 shows the positions where stresses under the compressive load are to be evaluated.
201
Inner shell lid part The inner shell trunk
()-Fig.A.76 Stress evaluation position for compressive load (A) Inner lid
()-Fig.A.77 shows an analytical model of the inner lid.
()-Fig.A.77 Analytical model of inner lid under compressive load 202
()-Fig.A.77 shows that both its own weight and the compressive load act uniformly on the inner lid which, supported on its circumference, suffers the maximum stress at the center. The stress results are as follows.
w a2 r = = 1.24 h2 z = - w (outer surface) where r : Radial stress [N/mm2]
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
z : Axial stress [N/mm2]
a: Diameter of inner lid supporting points, a = 285 [mm]
h: Thickness of inner lid, h = 55 [mm]
w: Uniform load, (m 2 + m 5 ) g + F w = [N/mm2]
a 2 m2: Weight of inner lid, m2 = 120 [kg]
m5: Weight of outer lid, m5 = 120 [kg]
F : Compressive load, F = 4.66 x 104 [N/mm2]
(120 + 120) 9.81 + 4.66 10 4 W = =0.192 [N/mm2]
285 2 Thus, the stress to be obtained is, 0.192 285 2 r = = 1.24 2
= 6.39 [N/mm2]
55 z = - 0.192 (outer surface) [N/mm2]
The upper and lower parts of the double sign correspond to the outer and inner surfaces respectively.
203
(B) Inner shell
()-Fig.A.78 shows an analytical model of the inner shell.
()-Fig.A.78 Analytical model of inner shell under compressive load
()-Fig.A.78 shows that both the weight of the inner shell and compressive load act on the inner shell. The stress z which is generated by this compressive force is, F+ mg z =
A where z : Compressive load [N/mm2]
F : Compressive force [N] F = 4.66x104 [N]
m : Weight of the inner shell m = m1 +m2 +m3 +m4 +m5 +m6 m1 : Weight of inner shell (barrel and flanges), m1 = 200 [kg]
m2 : Weight of inner lid, m2 = 120 [kg]
m3 : Weight of fuel basket, m3 = 138 [kg]
m4 : Weight of content, m4 = 92 [kg]
204
m5 : Weight of outer shell, m5 = 120 [kg]
m6 : Weight of outer lid, m6 = 120 [kg]
m = 200 + 120 + 138 + 92 + 120 + 120 = 790 [kg]
g : Gravitational acceleration, g = 9.81 [m/s2]
A : Cross section of inner shell, A = (d22 - d12) 4 d2 : Outer diameter of inner shell, d2 = 480 [mm]
d1 : Inner diameter of inner shell, d1 = 460 [mm]
A = (4802 - 4602) = 1.48x104 [mm2]
4 Thus, the stress to be obtained is, 4.66 10 4 + 895 9.81 z = = 3.74 [N/mm2]
1.48 10 4 (3) Comparison of allowable stress The results of the stress evaluation from the analyzed items defined in section A.5.4 are put together in ()-Table A.23.
This table shows that in relation to the reference values, a positive margin of safety can be achieved when single or superposed loads are generated.
Therefore, the soundness of the package can be maintained under normal test conditions (compression).
205
Stress units
-Table A.23 Stress evaluation for stacking test ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Primary+secondary Impact Primary stress Fatigue Stress at due to due to stress initial internal thermal Position stress Pm(PL) Sm MS PL+Pb 1.5Sm MS PL+Pb 3Sm MS PL+Pb Sa N Na DF MS to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion +Q +Q+F Inner Surface
-3.27 6.39 2/3Sy Sy
-3.27 6.39 0.098 4672 3.22 212 458 687
-0.098 0 1 Inner shell lid Outer Surface 3.27 -6.39 2/3Sy Sy 206 3.27 -6.39 0.192 458 2384 2.93 687 233 0 -0.192 0.0491 2 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 4.83 137 27.3 1.15 -3.74 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; Q Secondary stress; F Peak stress; SaRepeated peak stress; N Number of uses; NaPermissible number of repetition; DFCumulative fatigue coefficient; SmDesign stress intensity value; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety r ; Diameter direction stress o ;Periphery direction stress 2 ;Axial stress
A.5.5 Penetration The penetration test is carried out to demonstrate that a bar of 32 mm in diameter and 6kg in weight dropped vertically from a height of 1 meter with its hemispherical end downwards does not penetrate the weakest part of the package.
In the analyses, the contributions from the shock absorber and heat insulator under the outer shell is neglected on the assumption that the entire energy will be consumed in the deformation of the outer steel plate of the outer shell. Thus, the evaluation will ensure the maximum in safety.
The inner shell and lid that form the main structure of the containment system is covered with an outer shell and lid. The thickness of the outer steel sheet is 3 mm. ()-Fig.A.79 shows an analytical model of the package.
()-Fig.A.79 Penetration model We will describe below the case where the testing bar drops and reaches the object in such an orientation that the outer steel sheet is penetrated with the greatest of ease (see ()-Fig.A.79).
The potential energy E1 [Nmm] of the bar before the drop is obtained as follows.
E1 = mgh where m: Weight of the bar, m = 6 [kg]
h: Drop height, h = 1000 [mm]
g: Gravitational acceleration, g = 9.81 [m/s2].
207
Thus, E1 = 6x9.81x1000 = 5.89x104 [Nmm]
The energy E2 which is necessary to permit the bar to penetrate the 3 mm steel sheet is obtained as follows.
t E2 = o crd(t-y)dy Where, cr: Shearing strength of the outer steel sheet, cr = 0.6xSu = 0.6x466 = 280 [N/mm2]
Su: Design tensile strength, Su =466 [N/mm2]
d: Diameter of the bar, d = 32 [mm]
t: Thickness of the outer steel sheet, t = 3 [mm].
When the equation is integrated with the above values, 1
E2 =crdx xt2 2
1
= 280xx32x x32 = 1.27x105 [Nmm]
2 E1 = 5.89x104 [Nmm] E2 = 1.27x105 [Nmm]
Therefore, the dropping bar does not penetrate the outer steel sheet.
()-Fig.A.80 shows an analytical model for this test.
y cr dy
()-Fig.A.80 Shearing model This concludes that the dropping bar does not adversely affect the containment system or the soundness of the package.
208
A.5.6 Corner or edge drop These requirements should be applied for the wooden or fiber plate made rectangular parallels piped shapes weighting less than 50kg and the cylindrical objects made of fiber plate weight less than 100kg. This packages, weighting 950kg, will be excluded from those requirements.
A.5.7 Summary of results and evaluation An outline of the test results for the package under normal test conditions is given below.
(1) 1.2 m drop As shown in section A.5.3, deformations in the shock absorber in different cases of 1.2 m drop come within the range from 18.2 mm (vertical drop) to 58.6 mm (corner drop). Hence, deformation in each orientation does not affect the inner shell.
The impact accelerations occurring come within the range from 89.9G to 254.1G. Stresses occurring are lower than the analytical reference values. Hence, the package retains its soundness and containment.
(2) Other analyses The tests concerning the pressures at drop, vibration, water spraying, stacking test, and the analyses for penetration, prove that the inner shell constituting the containment barrier retains its sound containment and leaktightness.
(3) Comparison with the allowable stresses The analyses conducted in consideration of the composite effect of different loads described in section A.l.2-(2) show that the package conforms with all the items of the design reference in section A.1.2-(1).
The package retains its sound containment and leaktightness.
209
A.6 Accident test conditions This package is classified as B(U) type, and has the following test conditions set out in the relevant technical standards.
(1) Drop test After the drop test I, package must be exposed to the following conditions.
(2) Drop test (3) Thermal test (4) Water immersion test After these tests (1) to (4) the package must be exposed to the following test conditions.
This section analyzes the effects that the preceding test conditions have on the package and shows how test results satisfy the design standards for the accident test conditions.
A.6.1 Mechanical test - Drop test I (9 m drop) or mechanical test-Drop test (dynamic pressure pickles)
This section describes the effects at 9 m drop that has on the package and covers the following four types of drop, which shows this package can maintain its soundness at 9m drops.
- 1) Vertical drop (lid side, bottom side)
- 2) Horizontal drop
- 3) Corner drop (lid side, bottom side)
- 4) Inclined drop (lid side, bottom side)
(a) Analysis model Analysis illustrates the stresses generated in these drop tests.
The energy generated by a 9 m drop is absorbed by the deformation of the shock absorber installed at the top and bottom sections of the outer shell.
This section evaluates the shock force applied to the package and analyzes its effects.
(b) Prototype test The details are given in the accompanying document.
210
(c) Model test Not applicable.
This analysis is intended to ensure ;
- 1) The deformation in outer shell, caused by the 9 m drop, is not transmitted to the sealed inner shell, thus precluding breaking of the containment
- 2) The impact of the 9 m drop does not damage the inner shell and break the seal.
- 3) No damage to package content.
(1) Analysis methods The following characteristics of deformation and stress generated in the packaging, fuel baskets and content are analyzed when the 9 m drop tests performed on the package.
(a) Deformation
- 1) It is assumed that impact is with a rigid surface and the drop energy of the package is absorbed only by the shock absorber. This means the volume of outer shell deformation is equivalent to the extent of shock absorber deformation. It ignores absorption by the metal plating and heat insulator, and leads to the higher deformation values, safety evaluation.
- 2) The acceleration and volume of deformation caused by the shock absorbing material are calculated using the CASH- absorption performance program described in section A.10.1.
(b) Stress
- 1) The drop energy of the package is absorbed by the deformation of the shock absorber and the metal plating that constitutes the outer shell body and outer lid.
- 2) The design acceleration used for analyzing stress is a summation of the acceleration of the metal plating and the CASH- value 211
(acceleration generated in the external shock absorber) multiplied by 1.2 (factor established through comparisons with test results shown in section A.10.1.)
As this acceleration combines the acceleration factors of both the shock absorbing material and metal plating, it is used for safety evaluations of impact generated in the package.
Design accelerations = CASH- resultxl.2 + metal plating acceleration
- 3) The acceleration generated in the metal plating is obtained by simple calculations.
(2) Drop force As indicated in section A.2 Weight and Center of Gravity, the weight of the package used for analysis is 950kg and drop force is calculated using the following equation:
Ua = Uv = mgh where Ua: Energy absorbed by shock absorber [J]
Uv: Drop energy of the package [J]
m: Mass of transportation packaging, m = 950 [kg]
h: Height of drop, h = 9 [m]
g: Gravitational acceleration g = 9.81 [m/s2]
And drop energy is Ua = Uv = 950x9.81x9 = 8.39x104 [J]
= 8.39x107 [Nmm]
(3) Results of CASH- shock absorber analysis program
()-Table A.24 shows the results of CASH- program calculations of the values for acceleration and deformation generated in the shock absorbing material.
The table also lists the acceleration of the CASH- values multiplied by 1.2, which are used in stress analysis.
212
(4) Design acceleration
()-Table A.25 lists the CASH- calculation code values multiplied by 1.2, shown in ()-Table A.24, and the acceleration factors for identical metal plating described in section A.5.3(4) and calculated using identical procedures.
The design acceleration factors, used for drop stress analysis, are calculated according to the following equation and are also listed in the table.
Design acceleration = CASH- resultx1.2 + metal plating acceleration.
213
()-Table A.24 Deformation and acceleration of shock absorber under accident test conditions Volume of Acceleration [xg]
Drop posture Deformation Calculated
[mm] x1.2 value Horizontal 81.6 162.6 195.1 Lid side 126.7 110.4 132.5 Vertical Bottom side 106.3 102.4 122.9 Lid side 27.6° 128.6 61.8 74.2 Corner Bottom side 22.8° 111.3 65.1 78.1 5° 35.7 34.6 41.5 15° 85.2 50.2 60.2 30° 133.9 62.6 75.1 Lid 45° 145.2 76.5 91.8 side 60° 129.6 81.3 97.6 75° 98.4 81.5 97.8 85° 49.5 61.0 73.2 Inclined 5° 36.0 21.4 25.7 15° 84.6 60.3 72.4 30° 127.1 65.2 78.2 Bottom 45° 135.6 74.8 89.8 side 60° 133.5 76.5 91.8 75° 93.7 67.7 81.2 85° 44.8 45.9 55.1 where g: Gravitational acceleration, g=9.81 [m/s2]
214
()-Table A.25 Design acceleration under accident test conditions Acceleration Design CASH-due to steel acceleration Drop posture plate x1.2
[xg] [xg]
Horizontal 195.1 171.9 367.0 Lid side 132.5 277.3 409.8 Vertical Bottom side 122.9 265.5 388.4 Lid side 27.6° 74.2 225.6 299.8 Corner Bottom side 22.8° 78.1 232.8 310.9 5° 41.5 342.8 384.3 15° 60.2 296.1 356.3 30° 75.1 214.8 289.9 Lid 45° 91.8 176.2 268.0 side 60° 97.6 158.7 256.3 75° 97.8 175.5 273.3 85° 73.2 181.1 254.3 Inclined 5° 25.7 349.2 374.9 15° 72.4 291.7 364.1 30° 78.2 194.9 273.1 Bottom 45° 89.8 160.0 249.8 side 60° 91.8 165.6 257.4 75° 81.2 163.3 244.5 85° 55.1 156.1 211.2 where g: Gravitational acceleration, g=9.81 [m/s2]
215
A.6.1.1 Vertical drop (1) Bottom side vertical drop Shock absorber deformation is 106.3 mm as shown in ()-Table A.24 and acceleration is 388.4g as shown in ()-Table A.25 when package is dropped 9 m vertically onto its bottom.
(a) Deformation in shock absorber This shows that deformation in the shock absorber caused by at 9 m vertical drop onto its bottom is not transmitted to the bottom of the inner shell.
()-Fig.A.81 shows an analytical model.
()-Fig.A.81 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 9 m lower side vertical drop As shown in ()-Fig.A.81, the remaning mm of shock absorber after the package is dropped vertically 9 m onto its bottom is calculated using the following equation.
= o - v where o : Minimum thickness of shock absorber prior to deformation, o = 194 [mm]
v : Deformation of shock absorber, v = 106.3 [mm]
The remained thickness is,
= 194 - 106.3 = 87.7 [mm]
The deformation produced by dropping the package vertically 9 m onto its bottom is limited to the shock absorber and is not transmitted to the bottom of the inner shell.
(b) Stress generated in various parts of package The analysis procedures and evaluation positions described in section ()
A.5.3 (7) are used and the analysis and evaluation results are both listed in ()-Table A.26.
216
Stress units
-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9 m lower side vertical drop (1/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Su MS PLPb Su MS to be evaluated clamping pressure
-0.0491 1 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 173 310 0.791 1.15 -172 Outer Surface Inner Surface Outer Surface Inner Surface 3.18 211 0.953 63.4 6.63 310 45.7 221 466 1.10 Bottom plate of -0.098 -6.53 2
inner shell -3.18 -211 217
-0.953 -63.4 0 310 214 466 1.17 0 0
-3.27 55.3 2/3 Sy Sy
-3.27 55.3 0.098 458 4672 52.1 687 12.1
-0.098 0 3 Inner shell lid 3.27 -55.3 2/3 Sy Sy 3.27 -55.3 1.66 458 274 50.4 687 12.6 0 -1.66 174 3.20 Inner shell lid 2/3 Sy 4 177 458 1.58 clamping bolt PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; SuDesign tensile strength; MSMargin of safety r; Diameter direction stress o; Periphery direction stress 2;Axial stress b; Bending stress ; Shear stress t; Ability of bolt stress
Stress units
-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9 m lower side vertical drop (2/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure JRR-3 standard element 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.908 0.908 63.8 69.2 dispersion alloy)
JRR-3 follower element 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.742 0.742 63.8 84.9 dispersion alloy) 3 JRR-4 B type element 0.680 0.680 63.8 92.8 218 4 JRR-4 L type element 1.074 1.074 63.8 58.4 JRR-4 5 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.935 0.935 63.8 67.2 dispersion alloy)
JMTR 6 standard element 0.922 0.922 63.8 68.1 JMTR 7 follower 0.772 0.772 63.8 81.6 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress
Stress units
-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9 m lower side vertical drop (3/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure KUR standard 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.703 0.703 63.7 89.6 dispersion alloy)
KUR Special element 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.703 0.703 63.7 89.6 dispersion alloy)
KUR half-loaded element 3 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.703 0.703 63.7 89.6 dispersion alloy)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; 219 SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress
Stress units
-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9 m lower side vertical drop (4/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure JMTRC 1 Standard fuel element 0.71 0.71 63.8 88.8 (A,B,C type)
JMTRC Standard fuel element 2 (2.2pin,fix type) t 10.2 10.2 63.8 5.25 (B,C type)
JMTRC 3 Special fuel element c 16.8 16.8 63.8 2.79 (Special A type)
JMTRC 4 Special fuel element c 0.59 0.59 63.8 107 (Special B type)
JMTRC Special fuel element 220 5 c 17.1 17.1 63.8 2.73 (Special C,Special D type)
JMTRC 6 fuel follower 0.56 0.56 63.8 112 (HF type)
JMTRC 7 Standard fuel element 0.70 0.70 63.8 90.1 (MA,MB,MC type)
JMTRC Special fuel element 8 (Special MB,Special MC c 16.6 16.6 63.8 2.84 type)
JMTRC 9 fuel follower 0.56 0.56 63.8 112 (MF type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety t; Ability of bolt stress c; Compression stress ; Shear stress
Stress units
-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9 m lower side vertical drop (5/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure JMTRC Special fuel element hold 1 down part c 24.9 24.9 245 8.83 (Special B type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety 2;Axial stress 221
Stress units
-Table A.26 Stress evaluation for 9 m lower side vertical drop (6/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure 1 KUCA coupon type 0.46 0.46 63.7 138 KUCA flat type 14.2 14.2 63.7 4.5 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress 222
(2) Lid side vertical drop Shock absorber deformation is 126.7 mm as shown in ()-Table A.24 and acceleration is 409.8g as shown in ()-Table A.25 when the package is dropped 9 m vertically onto its top.
(a) Deformation in shock absorber This shows that deformation in the shock absorber caused by a 9 m vertical drop onto its top is not transmitted to the top area of the inner shell.
()-Fig.A.82 shows an analytical model.
()-Fig.A.82 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 9 m upper side vertical drop As shown in ()-Fig.A.82, the remaining mm of shook absorber after the package is dropped vertically 9 m onto its top is calculated using the following equation.
= o - v where o : Minimum thickness of shock absorber prior to deformation, o = 186 [mm]
v : Deformation of shock absorber, v = 126.7 [mm]
The remained thickness is,
= 186 - 126.7 = 59.3 [mm]
This shows that deformation in the shock absorber caused by a 9 m vertical drop onto its top is not transmitted to the inner shell lid.
(b) Stress generated in various parts of package The analysis procedures and evaluation positions described in section
()A.5.3(8) are used and the analysis and evaluation results are both listed in ()-Table A.27.
223
Stress units
-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9 m upper side vertical drop (1/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Su MS PLPb Su MS to be evaluated clamping pressure
-0.0491 1 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 156 310 0.987 1.15 -155 Outer Surface Inner Surface Outer Surface Inner Surface 3.18 -137 0.953 -41.1 0.098 310 3162 134 466 2.47 Bottom plate of -0.098 0 2
inner shell -3.18 137
-0.953 41.1 4.23 310 72.2 138 466 2.37 224 0 -4.23
-3.27 -193 2/3 Sy Sy
-3.27 -193 10.1 458 44.3 186 687 2.69
-0.098 -10.0 3 Inner shell lid 3.27 193 Sy 3.27 193 196 687 2.50 0 0 174 3.20 150 Inner shell lid 2/3 Sy 4 327 458 0.400 clamping bolt PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; SuDesign tensile strength; MSMargin of safety r; Diameter direction stress o; Periphery direction stress 2; Axial stress b; Bending stress t; Stress of the part fuel plater pin
Stress units
-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9 m upper side vertical drop (2/6)
- N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure JRR-3 standard element 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.958 0.958 63.8 65.5 dispersion alloy)
JRR-3 follower element 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.783 0.783 63.8 80.4 dispersion alloy) 3 JRR-4 B type element 0.718 0.718 63.8 87.9 4 JRR-4 L type element 1.133 1.133 63.8 55.3 225 JRR-4 5 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.987 0.987 63.8 63.6 dispersion alloy)
JMTR 6 standard element 0.973 0.973 63.8 64.5 JMTR 7 follower 0.815 0.815 63.8 77.2 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress
Stress units
-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9 m upper side vertical drop (3/6)
- N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure KUR standard 1 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.741 0.741 63.7 84.9 dispersion alloy)
KUR Special element 2 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.741 0.741 63.7 84.9 dispersion alloy)
KUR half-loaded element 3 (Uranium silicon aluminum 0.741 0.741 63.7 84.9 dispersion alloy)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress 226
Stress units
-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9 m upper side vertical drop (4/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure JMTRC 1 Standard fuel element 0.74 0.74 63.8 85.2 (A,B,C type)
JMTRC Standard fuel element 2 (2.2pin,fix type) t 10.8 10.8 63.8 4.90 (B,C type)
JMTRC 3 Special fuel element c 17.7 17.7 63.8 2.60 (Special A type)
JMTRC 4 Special fuel element c 0.63 0.63 63.8 100 (Special B type)
JMTRC 5 Special fuel element c 18.1 18.1 63.8 2.52 (Special C,Special D type) 227 JMTRC 6 fuel follower 0.59 0.59 63.8 107 (HF type)
JMTRC 7 Standard fuel element 0.73 0.73 63.8 86.3 (MA,MB,MC type)
JMTRC Special fuel element 8 (Special MB,Special MC c 17.6 17.6 63.8 2.62 type)
JMTRC 9 fuel follower 0.59 0.59 63.8 107 (MF type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety t; Stress of the part fuel plater pin ; Shear stress c; Compression stress
Stress units
-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9 m upper side vertical drop (5/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure JMTRC Special fuel element hold 1 down part c 45.7 45.7 245 4.36 (Special A type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold 2 down part c 26.3 26.3 245 8.31 (Special B type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold 3 down part c 47.4 47.4 245 4.16 (Special C,Special D type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold down part 228 4 c 47.4 47.4 245 4.16 (Special MB,Special MC type)
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety t; Compression stress
Stress units
-Table A.27 Stress evaluation for 9 m upper side vertical drop (6/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure 1 KUCA coupon type 0.50 0.50 63.7 127 2 KUCA flat type 15.0 15.0 63.7 4.2 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety ; Shear stress 229
A.6.1.2 Horizontal drop The deformation of 81.6 mm as shown in ()-Table A.24 and acceleration of 367.0g as shown in ()-Table A.25 are generated in the shock absorber when horizontal drop is 9 m.
(1) Deformation in shock absorber This shows that the deformation generated in the shock absorber by a 9 m horizontal drop is not transmitted to the inner shell. ()-Fig.A.83 shows an analytical model.
Shock absorber
()-Fig.A.83 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 9 m horizontal drop As shown in ()-Fig.A.83, the remaining mm of shock absorber after a 9 m horizontal drop is calculated by the following equation,
= o - H where o : Minimum thickness of shock absorber prior to deformation, o = 104 [mm]
H : Deformation of shock absorber, H = 81.6 [mm]
The remaining thickness is,
= 104 - 81.6 = 22.4 [mm]
The deformation produced by a 9 m horizontal drop is limited to the shock absorber and is not transmitted to the inner shell.
(2) Stress generated in package and content The analysis procedures and evaluation positions described in section ()
A.5.3(6) are used and both the analysis and evaluation results are listed in
()-Table A.28.
230
Stress units
-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9 m horizontal drop (1/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3Su MS PLPb Su MS to be evaluated clamping pressure
-0.0491 1 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 2.36 310 130 253 466 0.841 1.15 252 3.18 Bottom area of 0.953 2 0.098 310 3162 125 466 2.72 inner shell -0.098 62.6
-0.0491 Top area of 2.31 2/3 Sy Sy 231 3 2.36 120 50.6 20.0 180 8.00 inner shell 1.15 9.93 174 3.20 Inner shell lid 2/3 Sy Sy 4 6.78 177 458 1.58 184 687 2.73 clamping bolt Rectangular 5 255 255 466 0.827 fuel basket PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; SuDesign tensile strength; MSMargin of safety r; Diameter direction stress o; Periphery direction stress 2; Axial stress b; Bending stress t; Stress of the part fuel plater pin ; Shear stress
Stress units
-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9 m horizontal drop (2/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure JRR-3 standard element Surface 28.8 28.8 63.8 1.21 (Uranium silicon directio 1 aluminum Axial n
1.94 1.94 63.8 31.8 dispersion alloy) directio JRR-3 follower element Surface n
19.0 19.0 63.8 2.35 (Uranium silicon directio 2 aluminum Axial n
1.63 1.63 63.8 38.1 dispersion alloy) directio Surface n
23.1 23.1 63.8 1.76 directio 3 JRR-4 B type element Axial n
1.68 1.68 63.8 36.9 directio Surface n
24.6 24.6 63.8 1.59 directio 4 JRR-4 L type element Axial n
2.34 2.34 63.8 26.2 directio 232 JRR-4 Surface n
31.8 31.8 63.8 1.00 (Uranium silicon directio 5 aluminum Axial n
2.17 2.17 63.8 28.4 dispersion alloy) directio Surface n
29.6 29.6 63.8 1.15 JMTR directio 6 standard element Axial n
1.99 1.99 63.8 31.0 directio Surface n
20.1 20.1 63.8 2.17 JMTR directio 7 follower Axial n
1.71 1.71 63.8 36.3 directio n
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c; Compression stress
Stress units
-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9 m horizontal drop (3/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure KUR standard Surface 20.1 20.1 63.7 2.16 (Uranium silicon directio 1 Axial aluminum n 1.54 *1 1.54 4.67 2.03 dispersion alloy) directio KUR half-loaded Special element Surface n
20.1 20.1 63.7 2.16 element (Uranium silicon directio 2 Axial (Uranium aluminum silicon n 1.54 *1 1.54 4.67 2.03 aluminum dispersion alloy) directio KUR Special element dispersion alloy) Surface n
20.1 20.1 63.7 2.16 (Uranium KUR standard silicon directio 3 Axial aluminum (Uranium silicon n 1.33 *1 1.33 4.67 2.51 dispersion aluminum alloy) directio PmGeneral primary dispersion n alloy)membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; SuDesign tensile strength; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c; Compression stress
- 1axial compression stress 233
Stress units
-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9 m horizontal drop (4/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure Surface JMTRC 22.4 22.4 63.8 1.84 directio 1 Standard fuel element Axial (A,B,C type) n 1.59 1.59 63.8 39.1 directio JMTRC Surface n
22.2 22.2 63.8 1.87 Standard fuel element directio 2 (2.2pin,fix type) Axial (B,C type) n 1.58 1.58 63.8 39.3 directio Surface n
JMTRC 33.4 33.4 63.8 0.91 directio 3 Special fuel element Axial (Special A type) n 1.59 1.59 63.8 39.1 directio Surface n
JMTRC 22.9 22.9 63.8 1.78 directio 4 Special fuel element Axial (Special B type) n 1.98 1.98 63.8 31.2 directio 234 JMTRC Surface n
33.4 33.4 63.8 0.91 Special fuel element directio 5 (Special C, Axial n
Special D type) 2.39 2.39 63.8 25.6 directio Surface n
JMTRC 14.3 14.3 63.8 3.46 directio 6 fuel follower Axial (HF type) n 1.29 1.29 63.8 48.4 directio Surface n
JMTRC 22.3 22.3 63.8 1.86 directio 7 Standard fuel element Axial (MA,MB,MC type) n 1.57 1.57 63.8 39.6 directio JMTRC Surface n
33.2 33.2 63.8 0.92 Special fuel element directio 8 (Special MB, Axial n
Special MC type) 1.56 1.56 63.8 39.8 directio Surface n
JMTRC 14.4 14.4 63.8 3.43 directio 9 fuel follower Axial (MF type) n 1.31 1.31 63.8 47.7 directio n
PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c; Compression stress
Stress units
-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9 m horizontal drop (5/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure JMTRC Special fuel element hold down 1 part 13.9 13.9 245 16.6 (Special A type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold down 2 part 22.5 22.5 245 9.88 (Special B type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold down 3 part 13.9 13.9 245 16.6 (Special C,Special D type)
JMTRC Special fuel element hold down 4 part 1.39 1.39 245 16.6 (Special MB, Special MC type) 235 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress
Stress units
-Table A.28 Stress evaluation for 9 m horizontal drop (6/6) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to Position initial internal stress Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure 1 KUCA coupon type c 3.19 3.19 63.7 20.0 Surface direction 0.24 0.24 63.7 265 2 KUCA flat type Axial direction c 1.39 1.39 63.7 45.8 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety b; Bending stress c; Compression stress 236
A.6.1.3 Corner drop (1) Deformation of shock absorber
()-Fig.A.84 shows the deformation and the remaining thickness of the shock absorber. Deformation affects only the external shock absorber and is not transmitted to the inner shell.
Lid side corner drop Bottom side corner drop
()-Fig.A.84 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 9m corner drop 237
(2) Stresses of packaging and content
()-Table A.29 shows the design acceleration factors for the corner drop, listed in ()-Table A.25, separated into vertical and horizontal elements.
()-Table A.29 Design acceleration for corner drop (xg)
Vertical acceleration Horizontal acceleration Drop type Acceleration (N)
(NV = Ncos) (NH = Nsin)
Corner Lid side 299.8 265.7 138.9 Bottom side 310.9 286.6 120.5 As ()-Table A.29 shows, acceleration components for all directions are smaller than those for vertical and horizontal drop. For this reason stress analysis is omitted.
The procedures described in section () A.5.3 (9) are used for the inner lid clamping bolts and the analysis and evaluation results are both listed in
()-Table A.30.
238
Stress units
-Table A.30 Stress evaluation for 9 m upper corner drop ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Impact Primary stress Stress at due to stress Position initial internal Horizontal Vertical Pm(PL) 2/3 Sy MS PLPb Sy MS to be evaluated clamping pressure Component Component 174 3.20 Inner lid 1 clamping bolt 7.73 226 177 459 1.58 411 687 0.671 239 PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; MSMargin of safety t ; Ability of bolt stress b ; Bending stress ; Shear stress
A.6.1.4 Inclined drop (1) Bottom side inclined drop (a) Deformation of shock absorber
()-Fig.A.85 shows the relationship between the angle at dropping and the deformation.
Residual volume Volume of deformation Angle at Minimum thickness Deformation of Remaining thickness dropping of shock absorber shock absorber of shock absorber before deformation (mm) (mm)
(mm) 5° 211.9 36.0 175.9 15° 236.8 84.6 152.2 30° 260.2 127.1 133.1 45° 265.7 135.6 130.1 60° 252.9 133.5 119.4 75° 222.6 93.7 128.9 85° 193.7 44.8 148.9
()-Fig.A.85 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 9m lower side inclined drop 240
()-Fig.A.85 shows that in the drop, deformation occurs only in parts of the shock absorber and does not reach the inner shell.
(b) Stresses of packaging and content
()-Table A.31 shows the horizontal and vertical components of the design acceleration for the bottom side corner drop ()-Table A.25.
()-Fig.A.86 shows the relationships between the angle of drop and the acceleration.
()-Table A.31 Relationship between drop angle and acceleration Angle at Acceleration (G) dropping Acceleration (N) Vertical component Horizontal component (Ncos) (Nsin) 5 374.9 373.5 32.7 15 364.1 351.7 94.2 30 273.1 236.5 136.6 45 249.8 176.6 176.6 60 257.4 128.7 222.9 75 244.5 63.3 236.2 85 211.2 18.4 210.4
()-Fig.A.86 Relationship between acceleration and drop angle for 9m lower side inclined drop 241
()-Table A.31 shows that each accelerating component is sma11er than the acceleration recorded for the vertical and horizontal drop. Hence, stress is not analyzed here.
(2) Lid side inclined drop (a) Deformation of the shock absorber
()-Fig.A.87 shows the relationship between the angle at dropping and the deformation.
Residual volume Volume of deformation Angle at Minimum thickness Deformation in Remaining thickness dropping of shock absorber shock absorber of shock absorber before deformation (mm) (mm)
(mm) 5° 201.1 35.7 165.4 15° 210.5 85.2 125.3 30° 212.2 133.9 78.3 45° 199.1 145.2 53.9 60° 171.9 129.6 42.3 75° 132.7 98.4 34.3 85° 101.1 49.5 51.6
()-Fig.A.87 Analytical model of interference to inner shell due to shock absorber deformation for 9 m upper side inclined drop 242
()-Fig.A.87 shows that deformation only occurs in parts of the shock absorber and does not reach the inner shell.
(b) Stresses on the packaging and content
()-Table A.32 shows the horizontal and vertical components of the design acceleration when dropped on the lid side corner ()-Table A.25.
()-Fig.A.88 shows the relationships between the angle of dropping and the acceleration.
()-Table A.32 Relationship between drop angle and acceleration for drop test Angle at Acceleration (G) dropping Acceleration (N) Vertical component Horizontal component (Ncos) (Nsin) 5 384.3 382.8 33.5 15 356.3 344.2 92.2 30 289.9 251.1 145.0 45 268.0 189.5 189.5 60 256.3 128.2 222.0 75 273.3 70.7 264.0 85 254.3 22.2 253.3
()-Fig.A.88 Relationship between acceleration and drop angle for 9 m upper side inclined drop
()-Table A.32 shows that each acceleration component is smaller than the acceleration recorded for the horizontal and vertical drop. Hence, stress is not analyzed here 243
A.6.1.5 Summary of the results We will describe here what deformations occur on the package observed in the mechanical test (drop I). The analysis will evaluate the possibility of the inner shell being damaged.
()-Table A.33 shows the deformations in various drop tests.
()-Table A.33 Relationship between drop angle and acceleration for drop test Analyzed part of Minimum Deformation Remaining Design Item shock absorber thickness in shock thickness acceleration of shock absorber of absorber shock before absorber deformation Drop type (mm) (mm) (mm) xg(m/s2)
Lid side end 186 126.7 59.3 409.8 Vertical drop Bottom side end 194 106.3 87.7 388.4 Cylindrical Horizontal drop 104 81.6 22.4 367.0 part Lid side end 218.9 128.6 90.3 299.8 Corner drop Bottom side end 254.1 111.3 142.8 310.9 Lid side end 201.1 35.7 165.4 384.3 5° Bottom side end 211.9 36.0 175.9 374.9 Lid side end 210.5 85.2 125.3 356.3 15° Bottom side end 236.8 84.6 152.2 364.1 Lid side end 212.2 133.9 78.3 289.9 30° Bottom side end 260.2 127.1 133.1 273.1 Inclined Lid side end 199.1 145.2 53.9 268.0 45° drop Bottom side end 265.7 135.6 130.1 249.8 Lid side end 171.9 129.6 42.3 256.3 60° Bottom side end 252.9 133.5 119.4 257.4 Lid side end 132.7 98.4 34.3 273.3 75° Bottom side end 222.6 93.7 128.9 244.5 Lid side end 101.1 49.5 51.6 254.3 85° Bottom side end 193.7 44.8 148.9 211.2 244
()-Table A.33 shows that deformation occurs only in parts of the shock absorber and does not reach the inner shell in a bottom side corner drop.
()-Tables A.26, A.27, A.28 and A.30 show that stress occurring on the packaging and content for each drop does not exceed the standard value, and therefore does not cause any damage to them.
Thus, the package do not affect the containments and shielding performance of the packaging.
245
A.6.2 Mechanical test - - - Drop test (1 m drop)
In this section we will analyze the package on the assumption that drop test is carried out after drop test I.
We will examine here how the package is affected when it is dropped from the height of one meter onto a mild steel cylinder with a diameter of 150 mm.
()-Fig.A.89 shows the package to be examined in this section for three different drops:
(a) Vertical lid side drop (direct hit on to the outer lid)
(b) Vertical bottom side drop (direct hit on to the outer shell bottom plate)
(c) Horizontal drop (direct hit on to the outer shell).
Package Package Center of Center of gravity gravity Mild steel bar (a) Vertical lid side drop (b) Vertical bottom side drop Center of Package gravity (c) Horizontal drop (direct hit on to the outer shell)
()-Fig.A.89 Analytical model for drop test 246
(1) Penetration We will demonstrate in this section that the evaluated portions shown in
()-Fig.A.89 are not penetrated.
In the analyses, the contributions from the shock absorber and heat insulator under the outer shell is neglected on the assumption that the entire energy will be consumed in the transformation of the outer steel plate of the outer shell. Thus, the evaluation will ensure the maximum of safety.
(a) Direct hit of outer lid onto test cylinder (vertical drop) with the lid side end directed downwards.
()-Fig.A.82(a) shows the case of a direct hit of the outer lid onto the mild steel test cylinder, the dropping energy Uo of the package is obtained by the equation.
Uo = mgH where m: Weight of the package, m = 950 [kg]
H: Height from which the package is dropped, H = 1000 [mm]
g: Gravitational acceleration, g = 9.81 [m/s2]
Thus, Uo is, Uo = 950x9.81x1000 = 9.32x106 [Nmm]
The deformation (U) is obtained on the assumption that the dropping energy Uo is equal to the deforming energy U.
U = sV where s: Stress on the panel, s = 466 [N/mm2]
V: Volume of panel deformed, V = {(d + t)t} [mm3]
d: Diameter of mild steel cylinder, d = 150 [mm]
t: Thickness of the panel, t = 6 [mm]
- Deformation [mm]
On the assumption that Uo is equal to U, 9.32x106 = 466x{(150 + 6)6}
247
Hence,
= 6.8 [mm]
When the deformation of 126.7 mm caused in drop test I is added to the above value, we obtain 133.5 mm. As the minimum thickness before deformation of the heat insulator is 186 mm, its remaining thickness after deformation is 52.5 mm. Therefore, deformation does not reach the inner shell.
The strength of the outer lid panel is evaluated on the assumption that the deformational strain is smaller than the specified elongation of the material. Drop test will not cause any penetration in the panel.
()-Fig.A.90 shows an analytical model of the panel.
()-Fig.A.90 Analytical model for penetration strength under conditions of drop test As ()-Fig.A.90 shows, the elongation (1) of the outer lid panel under the conditions of drop test is obtained by the equation 1 = 1'- 1 where 1': Length of the panel after deformation, 1'= 2 + d [mm]
2 1: Length of the panel before deformation, 1 = 2 x + d [mm]
- Deformation, = 6.8 [mm]
d: Diameter of the mild steel bar, d = 150 [mm]
Therefore, 248
1 = 2 + d - (2 + d) = 1.14 2
The strain in the case of such an elongation is 1 1.14 1.14 6.8
= = = = 0.047 1 2 + d 2 6.8 + 150 The strain in head plate is 4.7 (%). Because the outer lid head plate of type SUS 304 has a specified elongation of more than 40 % before penetration, no real penetration can occur.
(b) Direct hit of the outer shell bottom plate onto the mild steel bar (Vertical drop, bottom side down)
As shown in ()-Fig.A.89 (b), the deformation produced when the bottom plate of the outer shell directly hits the mild steel bar, is 6.8mm because the thickness and materials of the bottom plate and head plate are the same as those described in the preceding section.
When the above value is added to the deformation value of 106.3 mm obtained in drop test I, 113.1 mm is obtained. As the minimum thickness of the heat insulator before deformation is 194 mm, its remaining thickness after deformation is 80.9 mm. Therefore, deformation does not reach the inner shell.
The strain is 4.7 %, the same as that described in the preceding section, and likewise, the elongation before penetration is 40 %. Therefore, no penetration occurs in the outer shell bottom plate.
(c) Direct hit of the outer shell on to mild steel bar (horizontal drop)
As ()-Fig.A.89(c) shows, the deformation which occurs when the outer shell directly hits the mild steel bar is obtained by the equation Uo = s{(d + t)t }
Where Uo : Dropping energy, Uo = 9.32x106 [N/mm]
d: Diameter of the mild steel bar, d = 150 [mm]
t: Thickness of shell plate, t = 3 [mm]
s: Deforming stress on the shell,s = 466 [N/mm2]
Hence, 9.32x106 = 466x{(150 + 3)x3 }x
= 13.9 [mm]
249
When the above value is added to the value of deformation 81.6 mm obtained in drop test I, 95.5 mm is obtained. As the remaining thickness of the heat insulator before deformation is 177 mm, its remaining thickness after deformation is 81.5 mm. Therefore, deformation does not reach the inner shell.
As in the preceding cases, the strain is obtained by the following equation.
1 1.14
1 2 + d where 1: Elongation [mm]
1: Length before deformation [mm]
- Deformation, = 13.9 [mm]
d: Diameter of the mild steel bar, d = 150 [mm]
Hence, 1.14 13.9
= =0.089 2 13.9 + 150 The strain in the shell sheet is 8.9 %. Because the outer lid head plate of type SUS304 has an elongation of more than 40 % before penetration, no real penetration can occur.
(2) Study of the packaging The packages acceleration which occurs at the 1m drop will be obtained in this section.
(a) Lid side vertical drop The acceleration, N, of the package which occurs when the outer lid directly hits the mild steel bar (see ()-Fig.A.89(a)) is obtained by using the analytical model (see ()-Fig.A.90) and the following equation, F
N = [m/s2]
m where F: Reaction force in the deformation of the panel, F =s(d + t)t [N]
250
s: Deforming stress in the panel, s = 466 [N/mm2]
d: Diameter of the mild steel bar, d = 150 [mm]
t: Thickness of the panel, t = 6 [mm]
m: Weight of the package, m = 950 [kg]
Therefore, N is, 466 (150 + 6) 6 N = = 1442 = 147.0g [m/s2]
950 (b) Bottom side vertical drop The acceleration, N, of the package which occurs when the outer lids bottom plate directly hits the mild steel bar (see ()-Fig.A.89(b)) is 147.0 g because the thickness and material of the head plate is the same as those described in the preceding section.
(c) Horizontal drop The acceleration, N, of the package which occurs when the outer shell directly hits the mild steel bar (see ()-Fig.A.89(c))is obtained by using the analytical model (see ()-Fig.A.90) and the following equation, F
N = [m/s2]
m where F: Reaction force in the deformation of the panel, F =s(d + t)t [N]
s: Deforming stress in the panel, s = 466 [N/mm2]
d: Diameter of the mild steel bar, d = 150 [mm]
t: Thickness of the panel, t = 3 [mm]
m: Weight of the package, m = 950 [kg]
Hence, N is 466 (150 + 3) 3 N = = 707 = 72.1g [m/s2]
950 This result of the analysis is smaller than the design acceleration obtained in drop test I (()-Table A.33 shows horizontal: 367.0g, vertical/lid side end: 409.8g; vertical/bottom side end: 388.4g). For this reason, stresses are not analyzed in this section.
251
A.6.2.1 Summary of the results
()-Table A.34 shows the results of the analyses and evaluation of drop test
/mechanical test.
()-Table A.34 Evaluation of penetration for drop test (1) Deformation Minimum insulator Deformation Evaluated Deformation Remaining thickness in drop test position in drop test thickness before deformation (mm) (mm)
(mm) (mm) 1 Outer shell lid 186 126.7 6.8 52.5 Outer shell 2 194 106.3 6.8 80.9 bottom plate Frame of outer 3 177 81.6 13.9 81.5 shell (2) Deformed strain Reference Evaluated Reference in Margin of value Result position analysis safety in analysis 1 Outer shell lid Rupture strain 40 % 4.7 % 7.51 Outer shell 2 Rupture strain 40 % 4.7 % 7.51 bottom plate Frame of outer 3 Rupture strain 40 % 8.9 % 3.49 shell (3) Acceleration Reference Evaluated Reference in Margin of value Result position analysis safety in analysis Acceleration 1 Outer shell lid 409.8g 147.0g 1.79 in drop test I Outer shell Acceleration 2 388.4g 147.0g 1.64 bottom plate in drop test I Frame of outer Acceleration 3 367.0g 72.1g 4.09 shell in drop test I
()- of the packaging and contents are not damaged because the acceleration Table A.34 shows that the deformed strain of different parts observed in drop test is smaller than the reference elongation of SUS304. Therefore, no penetration occurs and the damage in this case does not reach the inner shell.
The acceleration occurring at drop test is lower than that which occurs at drop test I.
Thus, dropping conditions that may cause maximum damage to the package do not affect the containment and shielding performance of the packaging.
252
The main body on is lower than that at drop test I.
A.6.3 Thermal test A.6.3.1 Summary of temperatures and pressure In this section, we will describe the outline of the temperatures and pressures to be used in the designing and analysis of the behavior of the package under accident test conditions.
(1) Design temperatures The evaluation of ()-B.5.3 revealed that the temperature rises up to 209.9 in the fuel basket, 483.2 in the inner shell and 187.8 in the inner lid.
Therefore, the design temperature under accident conditions is evaluated in the manner that contributes to ensuring the maximum safety as shown in ()-Table A.35.
()-Table A.35 Design temperatures used for accident test condition Position Temperature ()
1 Fuel basket 225 2 Inner shell 500 3 Inner lid 225 (2) Design pressure As was evaluated in the section ()-B.5.4, the pressure in the inner shell can rise up to 0.065 MPa (measured at the gauge). Hence, the design pressure in the package under accident test conditions is evaluated to achieve maximum safety on the assumption that a pressure difference of 0.0981 MPaG occurs (see ()-Table A.36).
()-Table A.36 Design pressure of package under accident condition Position Design pressure 1 Inner shell inside 9.81 x 10-2 MPa A.6.3.2 Thermal expansion Stress due to the difference of thermal expansion between the inner surface of the inner shell and the outer surface of the fuel basket will be described here.
The temperature of fuel basket and the inner shell may rise to 225 and 500 respectively (see ()-Table A.35).
However, stress is generated by difference of thermal expansion because the fuel basket is not fixed to the inner shell.
253
A.6.3.3 Comparison of allowable stresses (1) Stress calculation Stress generated on different parts of the package due to the design pressure will be analyzed for the same parts as those described in section A.5.1.3, using the same method.
In this analysis, the temperatures shown in ()-Table A.35 will be used on the parts of the package.
(2) Displacement of the O-rings of inner lid Displacement that can be generated at the O-rings due to the design pressure will be analyzed for the same parts as those described in section A.5.1.3(1) ,
using the same method.
(3) Stress analysis and evaluation
()-Table A.37 shows the results of the stress analyses.
These results demonstrate that the integrity of the package can be maintained under accident test conditions (thermal test).
254
Stress units
-Table A.37 Stress analysis and evaluation under accident test conditions (thermal test) ;N/mm2 Stress Stress Stress Stress at due to due to Primary stress Position initial internal thermal to be evaluated clamping pressure expansion Pm(PL) 2/3Su MS PLPb Su MS
-0.0491 1 Frame of Inner shell 2.31 2.36 258 108 1.15 Outer Surface Inner Surface Outer Surface Inner Surface 3.18 0.953 0.098 258 2631 3.28 387 116 Bottom plate of -0.098 2
inner shell -3.18
-0.953 0 258 3.18 387 120 255 0
-3.27 2/3 Sy Sy
-3.27 0.098 408 4162 3.17 612 192
-0.098 3 Inner shell lid 3.27 2/3 Sy Sy 3.27 0 408 3.27 612 186 0
Inner shell lid 2/3 Sy 4 174 3.22 177 408 1.30 clamping bolt Interior : 1) Displacement = 1.29x10-2 mm Displacement of the 5 2) Initial clamping value of the O-ring = 1.1 mm inner lid O-ring 3) Remaining height of O-rings l = - 1.087 mm PmGeneral primary membrane stress; PLLocal primary membrane stress; PbPrimary bending stress; SyYield point of the design; SuDesign tensile strength; MSMargin of safety r ; Diameter direction stress o ;Periphery direction stress 2 ;Axial stress t ; Ability of bolt stress
A.6.4 Water immersion In this section we will demonstrate that when immersed 15 m under water, the package can sufficiently endure the external pressure of 147 kPa.
We supposed here that the inner shell is subjected to this pressure. ()-Fig A.91 shows the parts evaluated for stress.
Since the radioactivity of this package will not exceed 105 times A2 , then water immersion test is not required.
Symbol Evaluated position Frame of inner shell Bottom plate of inner shell Inner shell lid Displacement of O-rings on inner shell lid
()-Fig A.91 Stress evaluation position of inner shell for 15 m immersion test 256
Frame of inner shell The frame of inner shell suffering external pressure is evaluated for its buckling and for the stress that may occur at its center.
(a) Buckling
()-Fig.A.92 Analytical model shows the permissible buckling pressure for the frame of inner shell under external pressure.
()-Fig.A.92 Analytical model of allowable buckling pressure for frame of inner shell The allowable buckling pressure Pe (()-Fig.A.92) for the frame of inner shell
[1]
is obtained by the following equation The formula and figure for finding the respective allowable bucking stress Pe are applied also to the current, appropriate source.
4B t Pe =
2 Do where Pe : Allowable buckling pressure [MPa]
Do : Outer diameter of inner shell, Do = 480 [mm]
t: Wall thickness of frame of inner shell, t = 10 [mm]
B: Factor obtained from ()-Fig.A.93, B = 650 1: Length of the inner shell, 1 = 1324 [mm]
Hence, 4 650 10 9.81 Pe = = 1.17 [MPa]
3 480 100
= 2.86 [MPa]
Therefore, the margin of safety MS for the external pressure P = 0.147 MPa which the frame of inner shell suffers is, 257
Pe 1.77 MS = 1 111.0 P 0.147 Hence, the inner shell does not buckle under external pressure.
Stainless Steel (SUS304)
(Remarks)
- 1. The intermediate value shall be obtained by proportional calculation.
- 2. The way of application of this figure shall be given in the following, In case of the cylinder shape subjected to a pressure on the outer surface (1) Take a value, 1/Do, on the axis of ordinates.
(2) Calculate the value, Do/t, assuming the thickness, t, of the plate to be used.
(3) Draw a horizontal line from the point responding to 1/Do and obtain the crossing point of the horizontal line with the curve responding to Do/t.
(4) Draw a vertical line through the crossing point obtained in (c), and obtain the crossing point of the vertical line with the curve corresponding to the operating temperature.
(5) Draw a horizontal line from the crossing point obtain in (d), obtaining B which is the crossing point of the said horizontal line with the axis of ordinates.
()-Fig.A.93 Curve representing backling behavior factor of inner shell under external pressure 258
(b) Center of inner shell
()-Fig.A.94 shows an analytical model for the stresses occurring at the center of the inner shell under external pressure. The stress that may occur at the center of the inner shell is supposed to be a thin cylindrical wall and is obtained by the following equation.
()-Fig.A.94 Stress analysis model of center of inner shell P Dm
= -
2t P Dm z = -
4t P
r = -
2 where
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
z : Axial stress [N/mm2]
r : Radial stress [N/mm2]
P: External pressure, P = 0.147 [MPa]
Dm: Average diameter of frame of inner shell, Dm = D + t = 460 + 10 = 470 [mm]
t: Wall thickness of frame of inner shell, t = 10.0 [mm]
D: Inner diameter of frame of inner shell, D = 460 [mm]
Hence, the following values are obtained.
0.147 470
= - = -3.45 [N/mm2]
2 10 0.147 470 z = - = -1.73 [N/mm2]
4 10 259
r = - 0.0735 [N/mm2]
Bottom plate of inner shell
()-Fig.A.95 Analytical model shows the stresses on the bottom plate of the inner shell under external pressure.
Assuming that the bottom plate of the inner shell is a disk fixed on its circumference, the stress on this fixed part is, P a2
= +/-0.225 h2 P a2 r = +/-0.75 h2 z = - P (outer surface)
()-Fig.A.95 Stress analysis model of bottom plate of inner shell where
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
r : Radial stress [N/mm2]
z : Axial stress [N/mm2]
P: External pressure, P = 0.147 [MPa]
a: Diameter of the bottom plate of inner shell, a = 230 [mm]
h: Wall thickness of the bottom plate of inner shell, h = 35 [mm]
Hence, 0.147 230 2
= +/-0.225 = +/-1.428 [N/mm2]
35 2 0.147 230 2 r = +/-0.75 = +/-4.76 [N/mm2]
35 2 z = - 0.147 (outer surface) [N/mm2]
For the double sign of the stress value, the upper sign (-) corresponds to the inner surface and the lower sign (+) to the outer surface respectively.
260
Inner lid
()-Fig.A.96 Analytical model shows the stresses that may occur on the inner lid under external pressure.
The stress [N/mm2] that may occur on the disk supported on its circumference is at a maximum in the center (see ()-Fig.A.96) and is obtained as follows.
P a2
= r = 1.24 h2 z = - P (outer surface)
()-Fig.A.96 Stress analysis model of center of inner lid where
- Circumferential stress [N/mm2]
r : Radial stress [N/mm2]
z : Axial stress [N/mm2]
P: External pressure, P = 0.147 [MPa]
a: Diameter of the bottom plate of inner shell, a = 285 [mm]
h: Wall thickness of the bottom plate of inner shell, h = 55 [mm]
Hence, 0.147 285 2
= r = 1.24 = 4.89 [N/mm2]
55 2 z = - 0.147 (outer surface) [N/mm2]
For the double sign of the stress value, the upper sign (-) corresponds to the inner surface and lower sign (+) to the outer surface respectively.
261
Displacement of the O-rings of inner lid
()-Fig.A.97 Analytical model shows the displacement of the O-rings on the inner lid under external pressure.
Outside O-ring groove Inside O-ring groove
()-Fig.A.97 Displacement analysis model of O-rings of inner lid under external pressure The outer O-ring is at a distance of 1 from the supporting point of the disk suffering the uniform load. Its displacement is obtained as follows:
P a3
= 1 = x1 [mm]
8D (1 + )
where
- Displacement of the outer O-ring [mm]
- Angle of deflection at supporting point [rad];
P a3
=
8D (1 + )
P: External pressure, P = 0.147 [MPa]
- Factor of safety, = (R/a)2 a : Distance from the center of inner lid to the supporting point, a = 230 [mm]
R : Radius of the inner lid, R = 310 [mm]
D : Bending stiffness, E t3 D = [Nmm]
12(1 2 )
E : Longitudinal elastic modulus of the inner lid, E = 1.92 x 105 [N/mm2]
t : Minimum wall thickness of the inner lid, t = 36.7 [mm]
- Poisson's ratio, = 0.3 1 : Distance from the supporting point to the outer O-ring, 1 =30.1 [mm]
Hence, the displacement of the outer O-ring is 262
0.147 (310 / 230 ) 2 230 3 12 (1 0.3 2 )
= x30.1 8 1.99 10 5 36.7 3 (1 + 0.3)
= 0.0108 [mm]
This value is far smaller than the initial clamping value of the O-ring (
= 1.1 mm). For this reason, the packaging cannot be adversely affected when exposed to external pressure.
263
()-Table A.38 shows the test results of items to .
()-Table A.38 Stresses evaluated for 15 m water immersion test Stress Primary stress Stress Position Pm (PL) 2/3 Su Ms Pl+Pb Su Ms r -0.0735 Center of 3.38 310 91.7 inner shell -3.45 z -1.73 Outer Surface Inner Surface Outer Surface Inner Surface r -4.76
-1.428 Bottom plate z 0 of 0.147 310 2107 4.91 466 93.9 inner r 4.76 shell 1.428 z -0.147 r 4.89 4.89 Inner z 0 2/3 Sy Sy 0.147 3114 4.89 139 lid 458 687 r -4.89
-4.89 z -0.147
-External pressure P = 0.147 MPa Buckling of
-Allowable external pressure Pe = 1.77 MPa the inner shell
-Margin of safety MS = 11.0 Displacement of
-Displacement of outer O-ring = 0.0108 mm O-rings on inner
-Initial clamping value of O-rings = 1.1mm lid Note. Stress and stress intensity units: N/mm2 These figures show that the package can maintain the integrity for its containment.
264
A.6.5 Summary of result and evaluation The tests under accident conditions were examined by analytical methods. The results of the mechanical test (drop test ) revealed that only the outer shell suffered deformation.
The results of the mechanical test (drop test ) revealed that only the outer shell suffered local deformation.
In addition, the stress that occurs on each part of the inner shell does not exceed the allowable value, so the containment interface, suffering no damage, is not adversely affected.
In the thermal test, the stress that occurs on each part of the inner shell does not exceed the allowable value, so the containment interface, suffering no damage, is not adversely affected.
In the water immersion test, the inner shell can endure an external pressure of 147 KPa and maintain its soundness. Further, the fuel elements will never get fractured in the strength test, and the stress generated is not more than the allowable value.
The results of the evaluation of the outer shell, inner shell and content will be used for (B) Thermal analysis, (C) Containment analysis, (D) Shielding analysis, and (E) Criticality analysis.
In the (B) Thermal analysis, (C) Containment analysis, (D) Shielding analysis, and (E) Criticality analysis, the results of the (A) Structural analysis were taken into consideration as follows.
(1) Thermal analysis Those parts of the packaging which are essential to the thermal analysis are represented by the inner shell and inner lid.
The inner lid is covered with the outer lid.
In the structural analysis, the deformation of the lid side shock absorber is 126.7 mm at the vertical drop and 81.6 mm at the horizontal drop, while the thickness before deformation of the material is respectively 186 mm and 104 mm. So the deformation does not occur in the inner shell.
No penetration occurs in the outer shell at drop test .
The outer lid does not come off, sufficiently maintaining its functions as 265
a heat insulator.
We therefore suppose that in the thermal analysis, the inner shell is not damaged, and that the remaining thickness of the heat insulator and the shock absorber are determined to ensure the maximum in safety.
(2) Containment analysis In the structural analysis, both the containment system of the packaging and the fuel elements suffer no damage and maintain their integrity.
In the containment analysis, the results are used to evaluate the leakage of radioactive material.
(3) Shielding analysis In the shielding analysis, damage of either the outer shell, inner shell or fuel elements will influence the results.
In the structural analysis, the thickness of the lid side and bottom side shock absorber is 186 mm in the axial direction and 104 mm in the radial direction. Thus, deformation does not reach the inner shell and the packaging maintains its integrity.
In drop test , the outer shell is locally deformed, but the inner shell is not deformed.
Thus, in the shielding analysis we supposed that the inner shell would not be deformed, and, in order to ensure the maximum in safety, that the package has no outer shell, no heat insulator, and no shock absorbers.
(4) Criticality analysis As in the case of the shielding analysis, we supposed here that the inner shell would not be deformed, and, in order to ensure the maximum in safety, that the package has no outer shell, no heat insulator, and no shock absorbers.
266
A.7 Reinforced immersion test The maximum quantity of radioactivity of these transported articles is less than 100,000 times of the A2 level, which is not considered relevant.
A.8 Radioactive content The fuel element, the radioactive content in the package consists of laminated fuel plates supported by the side plates on its ends (see ()-Fig.D.1). The fuel is located between aluminum alloy plates.
The specifications of the fuel element are shown in ()-Table D.
Structural analyses of the fuel elements are carried out under normal and accident test conditions on the assumption that they will suffer the same impact acceleration as that in the transport packaging. Therefore, the stress generated in any of the fuel elements is not more than the allowable stress under general and specific testing conditions, so that the fuel element are free from getting fractured.
267
A.9 Fissile package This package, under the category of the fissile package in the Regulations, is used at an ambient temperature of more than -40. It is very unlikely that the package, as described in A.4.2, will be damaged or cracked at operating temperatures between
-40 and 38.
Therefore, here is analyzed the damage of the package under the following test conditions, which is assumed for criticality analysis in (II)-E Criticality Analysis.
A.9.1 Normal test conditions In consideration of (II) E Criticality Analysis, damage of the package is analyzed on the results of A.5 and A.9.2 as show in ()-Fig.A.98.
- 1) water 2) 1.2m free 3) stacking 4) steel bar spraying drop penetration Steel bar 1.0 Package Package Package Package 1.2
()-Fig.A.98 Normal test conditions A 9.1.1 Continuous test (1) Water spray The same as A 5.2, there is no damage to the package.
(2) 1.2m free drop(1.2m drop)
The same as the normal test conditions for the B(U) type package, there is no damage to the inner cell of criticality system as described in A 5.3 A 9.1.2 Stacking test The same as A 5.4 there is no damage to the inner cell of criticality model.
268
A9.1.3 Penetration test The same as A 5.5, there is no damage to the inner cell of criticality model.
With the results above, the damages of the package are summarized as shown in (II)-Table A.39. This package, as shown in (II)-Table A40, meets the requirements for the fissile package under the normal tests conditions stipulated by the regulation and the notification.
(II)-Table A 39 Damages of the fissile package under the normal test conditions Test conditions Damage to the package Note Water spray No damage _______________
1.2m drop Deformation of outer shell, Outer shell, shock absorber and shock absorber and heat heat insulator are neglected in insulator criticality analysis. Eye-plate has possibility to be deformed, but it is neglected in criticality analysis.
Acceleration, stress at each part of the package, etc. do not exceed the value of 9m drop test respectively.
Stacking No damage _______________
6kg penetration No damage _______________
(II)-Table A40 Compliance with requirements for fissile package under normal test conditions Requirements for fissile package Evaluation The structure should not be made a dent The outer shell, shock absorber and heat which contains a cube of 10cm. insulator are deformed, but the deformation of inner shell, constituting criticality system, is not deformed with a dent which contains a cube of 10cm.
The package shall preserve the minimum The external dimensions of the inner overall outside dimensions of the shell, which is a system subject to package to at least 10cm. criticality assessment, are 48 cm in outer diameter and 140 cm in length, and each side of the circumscribed rectangular solid is 10 cm or more.
269
A.9.2 Special test conditions for fissionable transported articles The accident test conditions for the fissile packages are given as the testing procedures shown in ()-Fig.A.99, as A and B, i.e.,
The damage incurred under normal test conditions and composite effect caused by the different tests including 9 m drop, 1 m penetration, fire test (800 for 30 minutes) and 0.9 m immersion.
The damage incurred under normal test conditions and 15 m immersion test.
Among the above given A and B, the safety evaluation is to be executed under the condition A, in which the composite effect is taken into account considering 9 m drop test which is presumed having significant effect on the critical system and the fire test where the shock absorber burns out and adjacent packages come to be placed closer to each other.
[a]
- 1) Normal test 2) Drop test 3) Drop test 4) Fire test 5) Water conditions immersion test (A.9.1)
Water 800x30min. 0.9 Package Package Package Package
[b]
- 1) Normal test conditions 2) Immersion test (A.9.1)
Water 15 Package
()-Fig.A.99 Accident test condition
()270
Here is employed as normal test conditions a continuous test accompanying damage, as shown in (II)-Table A 39.
In consideration of criticality analysis in () E, damage affected package is evaluated as follows.
- 1. Continuous test of normal test conditions Damage of the package under the mentioned test conditions is as shown in
()-Table 39.
- 2. drop test(9m)
(1)Dropping attitude and the order of the drop test Dropping attitude and the order of the drop test are given in ()-Fig.A.100.
In case the dropping directions of 1.2m drop and 9m drop test are the same, deformation of the shock absorber will be considered the greatest, and thus here is considered that case.
()271
(Horizontal)
(Vertical) 1.2m drop (Corner)
(Horizontal)
(Corner)
(Vertical) 9m drop
()-Fig.A.100 Drop attitude and test order
()272
(2)Deformations and design accelerations Deformations and design accelerations of the fissile package produced in the drop test I (1.2 drop test and the consecutive 9m drop test) for fissile package are analyzed by the method described in section A.5.3.
()-Table A.41 shows the results of the analyses.
()-Table A.41 Deformations and design accelerations of shock absorber under accident test conditions (combined evaluation)
Acceleration and Acceleration (g) Rate of Deformation acceleration to Drop Deformation design CASH- Steel plate Design height (mm) acceleration due x1.2 acceleration acceleration Drop to drop test attitude (9m drop only)
Horizontal 206.2 172.8 379.0 88.8 1.033 Upper 161.8 284.4 446.2 136.6 1.089 Portion Vertical Lower 131.4 276.2 407.6 117.6 1.049 9m portion Upper 85.6 238.2 323.8 133.9 1.080 Portion Corner Lower 87.1 245.2 332.3 115.7 1.069 Portion
- 1: 9 m drop is evaluated by considering the deformation by 1.2 m drop.
(3)Evaluation of damages of the package Design acceleration of the drop test for the fissile package, as shown in (II)-Table A.41, increases by 9% at the maximum in comparison with that of the drop test 1 for the B(U) fissile package. Among the structural evaluation results of drop test 1 of the fissile package, the part of the smallest safety margin is an inner shell lid fastening bolt on the vertical drop, as shown in (II)-Table A. 27. The safety margin is 0.404 or 40.4%.
In structural evaluation of the package, the increasing rate of acceleration is the same as that of the generated stress. Even when the design acceleration and the generated stress increases by 9%, the smallest safety margin is 0.348, which shows that the structural integrity of the packaging and its contents is maintained.
()273
- 3. 1m penetration test In the drop test of A 9.2.1 and A 9.2.2 above, the outer shell, shock absorber and heat insulator are deformed, but these are not related to evaluation of 1m penetration test, as shown in A 6.2. Therefore, the damage of the package on the present test will be the same as the results in A 6.2(See the summary A 6.2).
- 4. Thermal test In the thermal test, deformation of outer shell, shock absorber and heat insulator is taken into account, but effect of their deformation is considered negligible. Thus, damage evaluation of the package under this test will be the same as A 6.3.3(3).
- 5. Immersion test(0.9m)
As proved by 15m immersion test, the package damage in 0.9m immersion test will not expand.
- 6. Summary of the package damage Summary of damage to the package under special test conditions is described here.
(II)-Table A. 42 Damage of the fissile package under special test conditions Conditions Damage of the package Notes drop(9m) Deformation of outer shell, shock Outer shell, shock absorber and absorber and heat insulator heat insulator are neglected in criticality analysis.
Penetration(1m) Deformation of outer shell, shock Outer shell, shock absorber and absorber and heat insulator heat insulator are neglected in criticality analysis.
Thermal Partly damaged by a fire In criticality analysis, heat test(fire) Rise in temperature for each part insulator is neglected and water density is set at 1.0g/cm3 Immersion(0.9m) No damage In criticality analysis, assessed for the package filled with water
()274
A.10 Appendix A.10.1 Analysis program for absorbing performance of shock Absorber : CASH- ***** ()-A-276 A.10.2 Validity of the free drop analyses of JRF-90Y-950K package ****************** ()-A-282 A.1O.3 Displacement of inner lid O-rings ******************************************* ()-A-283 A.10.4 Stress/strain characteristics of the shock absorber at low temperatures ***** ()-A-288 A.10.5 Stress/strain characteristics of hard polyurethane foam ********************* ()-A-289 A.10.6 Low temperatures strength of SUS 304 **************************************** ()-A-290 A.lO.7 Low temperature impact value of SUS 304 ************************************* ()-A-291 A.10.8 Low temperature impact value of SUS 630/H1150 ******************************* ()-A-292 A.10.9 Method for calculating the torque of inner lid clamping bolt **************** ()-A-293 A.10.10 Mechanical characteristics of JRR-4B fuel plate ***************************** ()-A-299 A.10.11 Literature ****************************************************************** ()-A-301
()275
A.10.1 Analysis program for the absorbing performance of shock absorber :
CASH-(1) General CASH- is a calculation code which is used to analyze the shock absorber by an uniaxial displacement method (U.D.M) when the package equipped with shock absorber on its top and bottom is dropped.
The deformation, the energy absorbed, and the impact force (acceleration and g value) occurring in the package when dropped with various postures (vertical, horizontal, and inclined).
As shown in ()-Fig.A.101, this code can be applied to shock absorbers consisting of areas (called material areas) of different mechanical characteristics (stress/strain relationships).
A, B, and C represent material areas.
()-Fig.A.101 Analytical model of shock absorber (2) Analysis theory The CASH- code is a program for analyzing the impact performance of the packages shock absorber in various inclined drop tests (inclination = 0 degrees: vertical drop, inclination = 90 degrees: horizontal drop) in a uniaxial displacement method (U.D.M.) which is based on the following two basic principles.
a) Energy absorbing characteristics are analyzed by a U.D.M.;
()276
b) Uniaxial bars with inclined orientation is replaced with an equivalent couple of uniaxial bars of horizontal and vertical orientation.
The analysis theory of the CASH- code based on these principles is described below.
a) Uniaxial displacement method (U.D.M.)
This is a theory which assumes that each area subject to deformation absorbs the deforming energy in a uniform and uniaxtial manner. Areas subject to deformation such as shock absorber are replaced with a number of uniaxial bars. The energy absorbing characteristics of the entire shock absorber is evaluated on the basis of the energy absorbing characteristics of the uniaxial bars.
We will consider here a case where a mass which weighs W and has an energy EO hits the structure shown in ()-Fig.A.102.
l0 : Initial length l : Final Leigh l : Displacement A : Cross section Uniform deformation Before deformation After deformation
()-Fig.A.102 Analytical model by uniaxial displacement method
()277
The compressive stress/strain relationship of the structure is supposed to appear as shown in ()-Fig.A.103
()-Fig.A.103 Compressive stress/strain relationship of material The deformation l of the structure and the acceleration a which occurs in the mass are obtained as follows.
The strain that is generated when a structure suffers a l deformation is,
= l / l0 (A.10-1)
The stress is,
= f() = f(l / l0) (A.10-2)
Hence, the force F that occurs when the structure suffers a l deformation is, F = A = Axf(l / l0) (A.10-3)
The energy E that is absorbed by the structure when it suffers a l deformation is,
/ 0 E = o Fdl= l0 o A()d (A.10-4)
When the energy E0 that the structure has to absorb is given, the final deformation l* is determined using formula A.10-4,
- / 0 E0 = l0 o A()d (A.10-5)
When l* is substituted in formula(A.10-3), we obtain as follows, F* = Af(l* / l0) (A.10-6)
Therefore, the acceleration a* is, a* = F* / W (A.10-7)
()278
b) Uniaxial bar with inclined orientation We will describe in this section how to handle the uniaxial bars inclined orientation based on a uniaxial displacement method.
Calling the inclined drop angle, we suppose that the following equation is valid among the stresses with inclined direction, vertical z and horizontal direction x for the same strain ,
() =z() cosm+ x() sinm (A.10-8)
Where m is the constant for inclination of the material.
In this case, there is approximately the following relationship between E
, Ez, and Ex, E = Ez cosm-2+ Ex sinm-2 (A.10-9) also, approximately the relationship between F, Fz, and Fx, F = Fz cosm-1+ Fx sinm-1 (A.10-10) where E and F are respectively the energy and force generated when the uniaxial bars oriented to the inclination suffer, while the energy and force generated in Ez and Fz when the uniaxial bars are vertically oriented suffer, and the energy and force generated in Ex and Fx when the uniaxial bars are horizontally oriented suffer (see the following charts).
Uninaxial Uninaxial bar bar Uninaxial bar F Fz Fx Uniaxial bars Uniaxial bars Uniaxial bars oriented to the inclination vertically oriented horizontally oriented
()279
(3) Demonstration of CASH- code To demonstrate the validity of the CASH-, drop tests carried out for four kinds of casks were analyzed. The comparison of the analytical and experimental values are shown in ()-Table A.43.
()-Table A.43 shows that, a) The deformation of the shock absorber was found to be greater in the analytical values based on the CASH- code than in the experimental values, thus ensuring the maximum safety.
b) The design value of the acceleration based on the CASH- was found to be equal to, or greater than, the experimental value, thus ensuring valid results.
The weight of the package is 95O kg which remains within the weight range of the four different casks.
()-Fig.A.104 shows that the shock absorber used in the package is in the same proportion as those of other packagings and cause no problems in applying the analysis code.
These results permit us to suppose that evaluation of the shock absorber performance based on the CASH- code will lead to justifiable results.
However, in the designing of the shock absorber, the following points are taken into account, i) A design acceleration + 20 % of the value based on the CASH- code is adopted as the acceleration that can occur.
ii) Calculated values are adopted as the deformation of the shock absorber because the CASH- code leads to higher values.
()280
()-Table A.43 Comparisons of analytical values by CASH- and experimental values Type of cask TYPE 1 TYPE 2 TYPE 3 TYPE 4 Weight (kg) 62,000 43,500 710 9,600 Outer dimensions (mm) 6,080x2,400 6,220x1,800 3,960x566 3,290x1,080 Posture at droping Verti- Hori-z Verti- Hori-z Corner Verti- Hori-z Verti- Hori-z Corner cal ontal cal ontal cal ontal cal ontal Analytical value 78.2 90.8 95.4 112.4 115.4 131.4 274.9 167 128 73.3 Acceleration (g)
Design value 93.8 109.0 115 135 138.4 158 330 201 152 88.0 (g)
Experimental value 70 67 114 117 73 135 320 200 150 51.5 (g)
Deformation Analytical value 172 190.3 187 156 383 189.4 50.0 63.4 120 310.1 (mm)
Experimental value 131 117 88 73 155 68.5 16.3 50.0 73.7 22.4 (mm)
- The design values which are equal to the values of the analytical value multiplied by a factor of 1.2 are used in the designing, taking possible variations of test results into account.
The main body shock absorber of shell L
L D
D TYPE 1 TYPE 2 TYPE 3 TYPE 4 Package L1/L2 0.42 0.53 0.56 0.68 0.43 D1/D2 0.52 0.67 0.56 0.57 0.57 Shock Balsa Plywood Plywood Balsa Balsa absorber +Redwood
()-Fig A.104 Proportion of shock absorbers
()281
A.10.2 Validity of the free drop analyses of the JRF-9OY-950K package
()-Table A.44 compares the results of a drop tests and the analytical results obtained from a prototype packaging.
Generally, the analytical results were obtained so as to ensure the maximum in safety.
()-Table A.44 Comparison of analytical and experimental results Ratio of Analytical Item Test results analyses/ Remarks results test Acceleration Drop test 367.0 366 1.003 (G) Drop test 80.4 18.3 4.393 Deformation Drop test 94.0 46 2.043 (mm)
()282
A.10.3 Displacement of inner lid O-rings
()-Fig.A.105 shows an analytical model showing the displacement of the O-rings in the 1.2 m lid side vertical drop of the package.
()-Fig.A.105 Analytical model of inner lid for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop
()283
()-Fig.A.105 shows that the uniform load consisting of the weight of the content and that of the fuel basket act at the center of the inner lid, and that the uniform load due to the dead weight of the inner lid acts on the lid.
On the other hand, the inner lid is supported by inner lid clamping bolt and the shock absorber which has a circular reaction force.
Displacement of the O-rings fixed on the inner lid which suffer these loads can be calculated by combining the results of the analyses using the ,, and models (see ()-Fig.A.99).
Contents + fuel basket The displacement that can occur in the disk suffering a uniform load on its concentric circle(see ()-Fig.A.105) is, P1 b 4 r4 4a 2 (1 )b 2 r 2 r 2 a 1 = 4 2 2 2 + 1 1n +
16 D 4b 2(1 + )a 2 b b b 4(3 + )a 2 (7 + 3)b 2 4(1 + )b 2 where 1 : Displacement of the inner O-ring [mm]
- Poisson's ratio, =0.3 a: Radius of the supported points of the inner lid, a = 285 [mm]
b: Radius of the loads, b = 230 [mm]
r: Radius of the inner O-ring groove, r = 237.5 [mm]
m3 : Weight of the fuel basket, m3 = 138 [kg]
m4 : Weight of the content, m4 = 92 [kg]
N: Acceleration, N = 240.7g [m/s2]
h: Minimum wall thickness of the inner lid, h = 36.7 [mm]
E: Longitudinal modulus of elasticity, E = 1.99x1O5 [N/mm2]
P1 : uniform load of the content/fuel basket, (m 3 + m 4 ) (138 + 92)
P1 = N= x240.7x9.81 = 3.27 [N/mm2]
b 2 230 2 D: Bending stiffness of the inner lid, E h3 1.99 10 5 36.7 3 D = = = 9.01x108 [Nmm]
12(1 2 ) 12(1 0.3 2 )
Hence the displacement 1 due to the content + fuel basket is,
()284
3.27 230 4 237 .54 4 285 2 (1 0.3) 230 2 237 .52 1 =
16 9.01 10 8 4 230 4 2 (1 + 0.3)285 2 230 2 237 .52 285 4(3 + 0.3)285 2 (7 + 3 0.3)230 2 2 + 1 n +
230 2 230 4(1 + 0.3)230 2
= 0.341 [mm]
Weight of the inner lid The displacement 2 (mm) that can occur in the disk suffering a uniform load (see ()-Fig.A.105 ) is, P2 a 4 r 2 5 + r 2 2 = 1 2 64 D a 2 1 + a where 2 : Displacement of the inner O-ring [mm]
- Poisson's ratio, = 0.3 a: Radius of the supported points of the inner lid, a = 285 [mm]
r: Radius of the inner O-ring groove, r = 237.5 [mm]
h: Wall thickness of the inner O-ring groove, h = 55 [mm]
N: Acceleration, N = 240.7g [m/s2]
- Density of the inner lid, = 7.93x10-6 [kg/mm3]
D: Bending rigidity of the inner lid, D = 9.01x108 [Nmm]
P2 : Uniform load due to the dead weight of the inner lid, P2 =hN = 7.93x10-6x55x240.7x9.81 = 1.03 [N/mm2]
Hence the displacement 2 due to the weight of the inner lid is, 1.03 285 4 237 .52 5 + 0.3 237 .52 2 =
64 9.01 108 1 285 2 1 + 0.3 285 2 = 0.122 [mm]
Reaction force of the shock absorber to be subtracted The displacement 3 (mm) that can occur in the disk suffering a uniform load on its concentric circle (see ()-Fig.A.105 ) is, P3 C 4 r 4 4a 2 (1 )C 2 r 2 r 2 a 3 = 4 2 2 2 + 1 1n +
16 D 4C 2(1 + ) 2 C C C 4(3 + )a 2 (7 + 3)C 2 4(1 + )C 2 where 3 : Displacement of the inner O-ring [mm]
- Poisson's ratio, = 0.3 a: Radius of the supported points of the inner lid, a = 285 [mm]
()285
C: Radius of the load, C = C0 +tan = 115 + 24.1tan15.5°= 122 [mm]
C0: Upper radius of the circular cone, C0 = 115 [mm]
- Circular cone angle, = 15.5° [degrees]
- Deformation of the shock absorber, = 24.1 [mm]
D: Bending rigidity of the inner lid, D = 9.01x108 [Nmm]
P3 : Compressive stress on the shock absorber, P3 = 0.932 [N/mm2]
r: Radius of the inner O-ring groove, r = 237.5 [mm]
Hence, 3 is, 0.932 122 4 237 .54 4 285 2 (1 0.3) 122 2 237 .52 3 =
16 9.01 108 4 122 4 2 (1 + 0.3)285 2 122 2 237 .52 285 4(3 + 0.3)285 2 (7 + 3 0.3)122 2 2 122 2 + 1 n 122 + 4(1 + 0.3)122 2
= 0.0370 [mm]
Reaction force of the shock absorber The displacement 4 (mm) that can occur in the disk which suffers a uniform load on its concentric circle (see ()-Fig.A.105 ) is, P4 a 4 r 2 5 + r 2 4 = 1 2 64 D a 2 1 + a where, 4 : Displacement in the inner O-ring [mm]
- Poisson's ratio, = 0.3 a: Radius of the supported points of the inner lid, a = 285 [mm]
r: Radius of the inner O-ring groove, r = 237.5 [mm]
D: Bending rigidity of the inner lid, D = 9.01x108 [Nmm]
P4 : Compressive stress on the shock absorber, P4 = 0.932 [N/mm2]
Hence the displacement 4 due to the reaction force of the shock absorber is, 0.932 285 4 237 .52 5 + 0.3 237 .52 2 =
64 9.01 108 1 285 2 1 + 0.3 285 2 = 0.110 [mm]
Thus, the total displacement is,
()286
=1 +2 +3 -4 = 0.341 + 0.122 + 0.0370 - 0.110 = 0.390 [mm]
Incidentally, as for the 9 m lid side vertical drop test replacing the values of acceleration, (409.8g), compressive stress of shock absorber, (2.66N/mm2) and displacement, (127mm), with the corresponding value for 1.2 m lid side vertical drop test, the same analysis is conducted and the results of evaluation are given in ()-Table A.45.
()-Table A.45 Analysis results of displacement of inner O-rings of inner lid Name of Total
- Analysis condition Displacement Remaining height displacement displacement Normal condition (internal pressure) 0 0.0116 1 0.341 1 1.2 m lid side 0.402 0.698 2 0.122 vertical drop 3 0.0370
-4 -0.110 Normal condition (internal pressure) 0 0.0116 1 0.581 2 9 m lid side 0.636 0.464 2 0.207 vertical drop 3 0.151
-4 -0.315
- Note: Residual tightening interference = Initial clamping value (1.1 mm) - Total displacement As shown in ()-Table A.45, remaining height of the inner O-ring in each of the cases of 1.2 m and 9 m lid side vertical drop tests is always positive so that it can be granted that the containment of packages will be duly maintained.
()287
A.10.4 Stress/strain characteristics of the shock absorber at low temperatures
()-Fig.A.106 shows the stress/strain characteristics of the shock absorber at low temperatures.
(1) Direction perpendicular to the wood grain of the shock absorber (2) Direction parallel to the wood grain of the shock absorber
()-Fig.A.106 Stress/strain characteristics curves for shock absorber at low temperatures
()288
A.10.5 Stress/strain characteristics of hard polyurethane foam
()-Fig.A.107 shows the stress/strain characteristics of the hard polyurethane foam.
()-Fig.A.107 Stress/strain curves for hard polyurethane foam
()289
A.10.6 Low temperature strength of SUS 304
()-Fig.A.108 shows the mechanical characteristics of the material SUS 304 at low temperatures.
[16]
()-Fig.A.108 Low temperature strength of SUS 304
()290
A.10.7 Low temperature impact values of SUS 304
()-Fig.A.109 shows the low temperature impact values of the material SUS 304.
[16]
()-Fig.A.109 Low temperature impact value of SUS 304
()291
A.10.8 Low temperature impact Value of SUS 630/H1150
()-Fig.A.110 shows the low temperature impact values of the material.
[18]
()-Fig.A.110 Low temperature impact value of SUS 630H1150
()292
A.10.9 Method for calculating torque of inner lid clamping bolts In this section, we will analyze the initial clamping force of the inner lid clamping bolt (called the bolt below).
B42 a=32 k=40 d27 s=10 L=30 M24 d24
()-Fig.A.111 Analytical model for initial clamping force of inner lid clamping bolts The minimum required clamping force for the bolt shown in ()-Fig.A.111 is, Fmin = FC + FG + FH where Fmin : Minimum force required for tightening the bolt [N]
FC : Loss of compressive force in the inner lid when external force is applied
[N]
FG : Clamping force assured by the O-rings [N]
FH : Decrease of clamping force due to differential thermal expansion [N]
These three values will be analyzed below.
()293
(1) FC , the loss of compressive force in the inner lid when external force is applied is FC = (1-)Wa = (1-)(W1 + W2)/n where Wa : Axial external force, Wa = (W1 + W2)/n
= (0.309 + 8.13)x105/16 = 5.27x104 [N]
W1 : Load due to internal pressure, 2
W1 = P G1 = 0.175x x4742 = 3.09x104 [N]
4 4 where P: Maximum internal pressure, P = 0.175 [MPa]
G1 : Inner O-ring diameter, G1 = 474 [mm]
W2 : Load occurring at 9 m lid side vertical drop, W2 = 8.13x105 [N]
n: Number of bolts, n = 16
- Internal force factor of the bolt, Ft Kt 1.50 10 6
= = = = 0.178 [-]
Wa K t + K C (1.50 + 6.92) 10 6 where Kt : Tension spring constant of the bolt, l l + l Kt = Eb / a + s = 1.45x106 [N/mm]
b A A s where la : Length of the bolt cylinder, la = 32 [mm]
ls : Length of the thin bolt cylinder, ls = 10 [mm]
Ab : Cross section of the bolt cylinder, 2 2 Ab = d = 24 = 452 [mm2]
4 4 As : Effective cross section, 2
As = d2 = 22.0512 = 382 [mm2]
4 4
()294
Where d2 : Core diameter of the bolt, d2 = 22.051 [mm]
Eb : Longitudinal modulus of elasticity of the bolt, Eb = 1.99x105 [N/mm2]
l: Length equivalent to the elastic displacement in the fitting parts of the nut, l = 0.57d = 13.7 [mm]
KC : Compression spring constant of the inner lid, EC KC = [dm2-d12] = 6.68x106 [N/mm2]
lK 4 Where lK : Tightening length, lK = 40 [mm]
d1 : Diameter of bolt hole, d1 = 27 [mm]
B: Diameter of the contact surface of the bolt head, B = 42 [mm]
dm : Diameter of equivalent cylinder, lK 40 dm = B + = 42 + = 50 [mm]
5 5 EC : Longitudinal modulus of elasticity of the inner lid, Ec = 1.92x105 [N/mm2]
- Hence, FC = (1-) Wa = (1 - 0.178)x5.27x104 = 4.33x104 [N]
The tensile force Ft in the bolt due to external force is, Ft = Wa = 0.178x5.27x104 = 9.38x103 [N]
(2) Clamping force for the O-rings The clamping force FG for the O-rings is, FG = (G1 + G2)xq / n where G1 : Diameter of the inner O-ring, G1 = 474 [mm]
G2 : Diameter of the outer O-ring, G2 = 514 [mm]
q: Linear load of the O-rings, q = 14.3 [N/mm]
()295
- Hence, FG = x(474 + 514)x14.3 / 16 = 2.77x103 [N]
(3) Decrease of clamping force FH due to differential thermal extension FH is 0 because the material of the inner lid is the same as that used for the bolts.
Thus, the minimum required clamping force is, Fmin = FC + FG + FH = (4.33 + 0.277 + 0)x104 = 4.61x104 [N]
(4) The initial clamping force for the bolt The initial clamping force F0 of the bolt is a little more than the minimum required force.
F0 = 5.89x104 [N] = 6.0x103 [kgf]
(5) Initial torque for the bolt The initial torque for the bolt is, T = kdF0 = 0.2x24x5.89x104 = 2.83x105 [Nmm]
= 28.8 [kgfm]
where k is the torque coefficient (k = 0.2).
(6) Bolt clamping triangle The above analysis results are shown in the bolt clamping triangle (see
()-Fig.A.112).
The following is the symbols used in ()-Fig.A.112.
F0 : Initial clamping force of bolt, F0 = 5.89x104 [N]
Fmin : Minimum required force for clamping the bolt, Fmin = 4.61x104 [N]
Wa : Axial external force, Wa = 5.27x104 [N]
Ft : Increment of the bolts tensile force when external force is applied, Ft = 0.94x104 [N]
FC : Loss in the lids compressive force when external force is applied, FC = 4.33x104 [N]
FC' : Residual compressive force in the inner lid, FC' = 1.56x104 [N]
()296
FH : Decrease of clamping force due to differential thermal extension, FH = 0 [N]
Fb : Bolt tensile force, FB = 6.83x104 [N]
FG : O-rings clamping force, FG = 0.28x104 [N]
()-Fig.A.112 shows that the residual compressive force FC' on the inner lid is higher than the O-ring's clamping force FG.
Therefore, the containment of the O-rings can be maintained by the initial clamping force F0.
()297
Load
[x10]
7 Fo Ft 6
5 Fmin 4 Wa Fc Kt Kc Fb 3
2 FG 1
Fc 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 Growth [mm]
()-Fig.A.112 Triangle diagram for inner lid clamping bolt Explanation of ()-Fig.A.112 (1) This illustration shows that even if axial external force Wa acts from the initial clamp force of bolt F0, the residual compressive force in the inner lid FC would be larger than O-ring clamping force FG.
(2) On the axial part of the bolts a tensile force Fo will be imposed by the initial clamping, and on the body to be clamped, (that is the lid part), a compressive force Fo will be generated, two forces being in balance with each other at point
, the status of which is shown in the illustration.
(3) When axial external force Wa, acts on any of the bolts in axial direction, the status of the bolt and lid will be moved to point and point .
Point will be removed from Point by means of elongation being generated, by a tensile force Ft acting on the bolt axial part, and point will be removed from point to point by means of clamping length being extended as much as according to the compressive force, FC, being lost from
()298
the body to be clamped, (that is the lid part).
(4) That is to say, on the bolt a tensile force Ft is added, from the body to be clamped, (the lid part) a compressive force FC being removed, and the clamping length will be extended as much as where the compressive force remaining on the body to be clamped (The lid part).
A.10.10 Mechanical characteristics of JRR-4B fuel plate In order to define the analysis criteria by which the plastic deformation will never be generated in the analysis of fuel plate, the proof stress is taken as the analysis standard value.
The proof stress of the JRR-4B fuel plate which is the material for the fuel element (B) shall be specified as given below, (1) The mechanical property of AG3NE, which is the material of fuel element (A) is shown in IAEA Guide Book, Vol.2 (referential document [14]), in which it is specified that the design yielding point (Sy) is not less than 63.8 N/mm2 at the evaluating temperature 75.
(2) JRR-4B fuel has been subjected to a tensile strength test on the basis of a tensile strength test piece which is manufactured from a sheet of fuel plate sampled from each roll badge, the criteria of the test being 88.3 (N/mm2) in the tensile strength; that is <9kgf/mm2>.
This test is considered as one of the subjects of precommissioning test of the nuclear reactor facility.
(3) Besides the above, the results of measurements on 20 pieces of samples in the tensile strength test cited in the proceeding articles (2) are as follows.
Results of measurements Minimum Maximum Average Proof stress 97.1 135 114 (0.2%)(N/mm2)
Tensile strength 108 143 122 (N/mm2)
()299
(4) H12 materials of JIS 1100P and A1200P, which are the raw materials of JRR-4B type fuel plate cladding material, are deemed to have the strength more than those figures shown in the table given below.
JIS A 1100P H12 A 1200P H12 Proof stress (N/mm2) 73.6 Tensile strength (N/mm2) 93.2128 (5) Looking from the above, it can be deemed as the safety side estimation that the proof stress for the fuel plate having the tensile strength of 88.3N/mm2 as previously cited in the article (2) as the proof stress of the mechanical property of JRR-4B type fuel may be adopted as 63.8N/mm2 (yield point of the design) which is equal proof stress mentioned in proceeding article (1).
()300
A.10.11 Literature
[1] ASME Sec. Subsec. NB (1974).
[2] Technical Standards for Atomic Energy Installation for Power Generation Including Standards for Structure, ministerial Notice No.501, 1980.
[3] Commentary on Standards for the Structure of Boilers and Pressure Vessels, Japan Boiler Association, 1980.
[4] In-house data of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. Ltd.
[5] Roark, J.R., Formulas for Stress and Strain (4th edition), Mc'Graw-Hill International Book Company, 1965.
[6] Timoshenko, S.P., Theory of Plate and Shell (I); Japanese translation version by Hasegawa, T.
[7] Manual for Mechanical Engineering, 6th revised edition, Japan Society of Mechanical Engineering, 1977.
[8] Den Hartog, J.P., Mechanical Vibrations, Mc'Graw-Hill Book Co.
[9] Mizuhara, A. et al., Handbook for Structural Calculation, Sangyo Tosho Publishing, 1965.
[10] Formulas Used in Structural Dynamics, compiled by Japan Society of Civil Engineering.
[11] Sekiyu, T. et al., Handbook for Flat Structure Strength, Asakura Shorten.
[12] Handbook for Elastic Stability, Long Column Research Committee, Corona.
[13] Report on Development and Arrangement of Structural Analysis of Transport Packaging for Used Nuclear Fuel , Japan
[14] IAEA Guide Book Vol.2: Research Reactor Core Conversion Safety Analysis and Licensing Issues Fuels.
[15] On the Prediction of Deformation and Deceleration of a Composite Cylindrical Body for the Corner Drop Case, CONF-710801 (Vol.2), 1971, pp.733-776.
()301
[16] Hasegawa, M., Manual for Stainless Steel, Nikkan Kogyo Shinbun.
[17] Data Book for Strength Designing, compiled by Editorial Committee for data book for strength designing.
[18] Fujita, T., Thermal Processing for Stainless Steel, Nikkan Kogyo Shinbun.
[19] Timoshenko, S.P., Buckling Theory; Japanese translation version by Naka, I. et al., Corona.
[20] Aluminum Hand Book (4th edition), Light Metal Society, (1990)
[21] Summary of Technology for Hybrid Materials, Industrial Technology Center, 1990
[22] In-house data of Nichias Co.,Ltd
[23] Code for Nuclear Power Generation Facilities: Rules on Materials Nuclear Power Plants (2012 edition) of The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers
[24] Code for Nuclear Power Generation Facilities: Rules on Design and Construction for Nuclear Power Plants (2012 edition) of The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers
()302
()-B Thermal analysis
()
()-B Thermal analysis B.1 General description This analysis shows that this package maintains the integrity and satisfies the thermal performance under normal and accident conditions specified in IAEA Regulation.
This packaging is dry type. The package is transported by vertically fixed on the tie-down device. Consequently, the thermal analysis is carried out as the package is located as vertically.
B.1.1 Thermal design The configuration of this packaging is shown in ()-Fig.B.1. As shown in this figure, this packaging consists of the main body, inner lid, fuel basket, and outer lid.
The design features of this packaging are described below.
(1) There are 22 types of fuel elements as shown in the paragraph D of section (). The heat generation from the radioactive contents is ignored in this analysis, since the decay heat generated from unirradiated fuel elements are negligibly small.
(2) Heat transmission (Refer to ()-Fig.B.2)
(a) Heat gain from the surface of package consists of solar insulation and heat during fire under accident conditions.
(b) The heat on the external surface of package is transmitted into the internal surface of inner shell or inner lid by conduction.
(c) The heat on the internal surface of inner shell or inner lid is transmitted to the external surface of fuel basket by natural convection and conduction.
(d) The interior of the basket is not taken into account in the thermal analytical model, the temperature on the outer surface of the basket represents the temperature on the fuel elements and basket on the assumption that insulation is effective.
()1
i) No temperature gradient occurs since minimal heat is generated in the basket under normal test conditions.
ii) Only external heat affects the package under accident test conditions, rendering the external maximum temperature higher than the internal maximum temperature.
(3) The balsa used as shock absorber maintains its insulating characteristics even under accident test conditions.
(4) the outer shell and the external sheet have fusible plugs through which any vapor or gases emitted by the shock absorber and heat insulator under accident test conditions are discharged, preventing the inner pressure from rising.
(5) The O-ring provided on the inner lid to maintain the leaktightness of the packaging is protected from the heat resulting from fire under accident test conditions by the heat insulation effect of the heat insulator and shock absorber.
()2
()-Fig.B.1 Component of packaging
()3
Unit (mm)
()-Fig.B.2 Concept of thermal transmission
()4
B.1.2 Conditions and methods of thermal analyses (1) Conditions of thermal analyses
()-Table B.1 shows the thermal conditions used for the normal and accident test conditions.
()-Table B.1 Conditions of thermal analyses Condition Accident test Normal test conditions conditions Before During After Item fire fire fire Decay heat 0 0 0 0 0 0 Environmental Ambient 38 38 -40 38 800 38 conditions temp. Stagnant Stagnant Stagnant Stagnant 30min Stagnant air air air air air Solar rad.
No Yes No Yes Yes Yes heat Ambient rad. 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 factor Radiation factor for 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4) 0.8) 0.6) packaging surface a): Surface radiation factor for steel (SUS304) not exposed to fire.
b): Surface radiation factor for steel (SUS304) being exposed to fire.
c): Surface radiation factor for steel (SUS304) exposed to fire.
()5
- 2) Methods of thermal analyses
()-Table B.2 shows the methods by which thermal analyses are performed.
()-Table B.2 Methods of thermal analyses Item Description Specifications of contents See Section D of Chapter (I) of fuel elements Maximum decay heat (W) 0 Calculation model Packaging Axially symmetric two-dimensional model Contents Temperature calculation Simplified analyses TRUMP, non-steady state thermal analysis code(see B.6.2)
Physical properties used See Section B.2Thermal Properties of the (thermal properties) Materials.
- :Under normal test conditions.
- Under accident test conditions.
B.2 Thermal properties of the materials The materials used for the package are described in Chapter I.
Of these, the materials shown below were used in the thermal analyses.
Stainless steel Air Shock absorber (balsa)
Heat insulator (hard polyurethane foam).
This section will describe the thermal properties of these materials.
(1) Stainless steel The thermal properties of the stainless steel used are shown in (1)
()-Table B.3 Stainless steel is used as the main structural material for the principal elements of the packaging.
()6
()-Table B.3 Thermal properties of stainless steel Specific weight 7.875g/cm3 Temperature Specific heat Thermal conductivity
() (kJ/kgK) (mW/mK) 50 0.469 1.477x104 100 0.490 1.558x104 200 0.519 1.697x104 400 0.561 1.953x104 600 0.594 2.232x104 800 0.640 2.488x104 (2) Air (2)
()-Table B.4 shows the thermal properties of the air used.
()-Table B.4 Thermal properties of air Specific weight 9.16x10-4 g/cm3 Temperature Specific heat Thermal conductivity
() (kJ/kgK) (mW/mK) 0 1.005 24.07 40 1.009 27.21 100 1.013 31.63 140 1.017 34.54 200 1.026 38.61 500 1.093 56.17 800 1.156 70.94
()7
(3) Shock absorber (balsa) 6)
()-Table B.5 shows the thermal properties of the shock absorber (balsa).
This material, which is used as the shock absorber in the upper and lower part of the packaging, has a heat insulation capability.
()-Table B.5 Thermal properties of shock absorber (balsa)
Specific weight 0.16 g/cm3 Temperature Specific heat Thermal conductivity
() (kJ/kgK) (mW/mK) 0 1.750 187.2 50 1.695 187.2 100 1.796 175.6 150 1.988 200 1.905 195.5 250 1.955 275 1.867 255.8 320 1.453 255.8 350 0.917 255.8 500 0.130 255.8 900 0.071 255.8
()8
(4) Heat insulator (hard polyurethane foam)
()-Table B.6(3) shows the thermal properties of the heat insulator (hard polyurethane foam).
()-Table B.6 Thermal properties of heat insulator (hard polyurethane foam)
Specific weight 0.04 g/cm3 Temperature Specific heat Thermal conductivity
() (kJ/kgK) (W/mK) 20 1.193 0.535 50 1.402 0.581 100 1.645 0.675 250 1.859 0.937 300 1.344 0.937 400 0.193 0.937 800 0.151 0.937
()9
B.3 Specifications of components The following components are taken into account in the thermal analyses.
(1) Silicone rubber O-ring
()-Table B.7(4) shows the specifications of the silicone rubber O-ring.
()-Table B.7 Specifications of silicone rubber O-ring Item Specifications Material Silicone rubber Hardness Shore hardness: 70 Normal service temperature -47 to 150 Service temperature and period under accident 250, 5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> conditions (2) Fusible plug
()-Table B.8 shows the specifications of the fusible plugs.
()-Table B.8 Specifications of fusible plug Item Specifications Material Solder (JIS Z 3282 H63A)
Melting point 183 to 184
()10
B.4 Normal test conditions The following sections will show how the package meets the requirements of the technical standards under normal test conditions.
B.4.1 Thermal analytical model Since the decay heat of fuel elements is minimal, the heat emitted by the contents is not taken into account in the analyses.
No heat is generated by the contents of the package and no solar radiation enters, in the shade with a 38 ambient temperature, the temperature on the outer surface does not exceed 38.
Increase in temperature of the package under normal test conditions is caused by entry of solar radiation heat with a 38 ambient temperature.
This analysis uses a vertically positioned package model.
Solar radiation heat enters it and is transmitted by natural convection and radiation.
In this analysis, simplified calculation methods are used (B.6.1, APPENDIX).
B.4.1.1 Analytical model This section will describe the following items related to the calculations.
Geometrical model Conditions for analyses Heat transfer in the package.
(1) Geometrical model The geometrical model for thermal analyses under normal test conditions supposes that no deformation occurs in the cylindrical packaging that is 840 mm in diameter and 1,800 mm in height.
()11
(2) Conditions for analyses
()-Table B.9 shows the thermal conditions under normal test conditions.
()-Table B.9 Thermal conditions under normal test conditions Item Conditions Decay heat (W) 0 0 0 Environmental Ambient Stagnant Stagnant Stagnant conditions temp.() air air air 38 38 -40 Solar rad. 400 ,
2 0 0 heat (W/m ) 800 Ambient rad.
1.0 1.0 1.0 factor Radiation factor for packaging 0.4 0.4 0.4 surface
- Although the radiant heat on the surface of an article that is vertically transported is 200 w/m2, 400 W/m2 shall be conservatively set as the value for other surfaces.
- "The surface of an article that is horizontally transported" and "the surface turned upward" (3) Heat transfer in the package (see ()-Fig.B.2)
With regard to heat transfer in the package, the following conditions apply, (a) Deformation is not taken into account since deformation under normal test conditions is minimal.
(b) Steady state thermal calculations are performed for the package surface of the model in which heat entry (solar radiation heat) and heat emission (natural convection to the atmosphere and radiation) are in equilibrium.
(c) The maximum temperature on the package surface (paragraph b) represents the maximum temperature in the package.
()12
(d) Only solar radiation heat enters the package. This heat is transferred to the outer surface of the package by natural convection and radiation.
(e) Heat reaching the outer surface of the package is transferred to the inner surface of the inner shell by thermal conduction.
Based on these conditions, steady state thermal calculations were performed by simplified methods.
The details of the results are given in B.6.l, APPENDIX.
B.4.1.2 Test model An analytical model is used, and a test model is not used.
B.4.2 Maximum temperatures
()-Table B.10 shows the maximum temperatures on the main parts of the package under normal test conditions.
()-Table B.10 Maximum temperatures of each part of package Item Normal test conditions No solar rad. Solar rad. No solar rad.
heat heat heat Ambient Ambient Ambient Parts temp.: 38 temp.: 38 temp.:-40 Ext. surface 38 65 -40 of basket Inner lid 38 65 -40 O-ring Inner surface 38 65 -40 of inner shell Outer surface of 38 65 -40 main body
()13
The maximum temperature of the package under normal test conditions is uniformly 62.1 at these parts as shown in section B.6.1 Appendix. The value of 65 is adopted here as a conservative figure.
B.4.3 Minimum temperatures Since the small amount of decay heat of the contents is not taken into account, temperatures at various parts of the package are uniformly -40 under the conditions of no solar radiation heat and -40 stagnant air. Under this thermal condition, the packaging maintains its capabilities, since the value -40 lies within the normal service temperature range of the silicone rubber O-ring (-47 to 150). The structural material is stainless steel and does not embattle.
Hence, the packaging maintains its integrity.
B.4.4 Maximum internal pressure As described in Section B.4.2, the maximum temperature of the package is 65 under normal test conditions. In the evaluation of the maximum inner pressure under normal test conditions, pressures due to thermal expansion of the air contained in the packaging are taken into account on the supposition that the temperature of each part of the package is uniformly 65, as shown in Section B.6.4., APPENDIX.
The inner pressure in the packaging is thus 0.016 MPaG. Since this value is far lower than the design pressure of 0.0981 MPaG, the package maintains its integrity.
B.4.5 Maximum thermal stress Thermal stresses under normal test conditions do not adversely affect the structural strength of the package as shown in Section A.5.1, Chapter ().
()14
B.4.6 Summary of the results and evaluation We confirmed that the structural strength and containment of the package are not adversely affected by the normal test conditions, as shown by the following evaluations of the thermal analyses.
(1) Surface temperature of package The surface temperature of the package is 65, lower than the allowable reference value 85.
(2) Structural strength The various parts of the package were analyzed for their maximum inner pressure, thermal stress and maximum temperature, which constitute the main factors for structural strength. For the maximum internal pressure, the internal pressure rises by 0.016 MPaG in the packaging, far lower than the design pressure of 0.0981 MPaG and does not adversely affect the structural strength.
Thermal stresses do not adversely affect the structural strength of the packaging, as described in Section A.5.1, Chapter ().
(3) Containment The inner lid O-ring, functioning as containment border and thus constituting the most important part for containment, was evaluated for its temperature, deformation and maximum internal pressure.
The temperatures of the O-ring, containment border, are within the range from -40 to 65. Since this range is within its normal service temperature range (-47 to l50), the O-ring does not deteriorate.
No deformation occurs that might adversely affect the containment border.
()15
B.5 Accident test conditions This section will describe how the package meets the technical standards under accident test conditions.
B.5.1 Thermal analytical model Thermal evaluations were conducted for accident test conditions, using the three-dimensional, non-steady state thermal analysis code TRUMP.
B.5.1.1 Analytical model The section concerns the following items used in the calculation by TRUMP.
Geometrical model Conditions for analyses Heat transfer in the package.
(1) Geometrical model As shown in Section A (Structural Analyses), Chapter (), the packaging maintains its integrity in spite of small local deformations in the drop tests under accident test conditions, as required for Type B(U) packages.
Since the drop test I showed the deformation imposed was 126.7mm in vertical direction, being 81.6mm in horizontal direction, the thermal analysis under the specific testing conditions adopted the dimensions of shock absorber and heat insulating material reduced up to 51mm (deformation;135mm) despite 186mm before the deformation imposed in the former in axial direction and up to 82mm (deformation:95mm) despite 177mm before the deformation imposed in the latter in radial direction respectively.
However, the drop test showed the deformation rather localized and it seemed there were no significant effects considered thermally, so that no particular modeling was considered.
()-Fig.B.3 shows the geometrical model (axially symmetrical, two-dimensional model) under the accident test conditions.
In this geometrical model, a circular section was adopted despite the actual angular section, as shown in B.6.3.
The following parts were evaluated.
Fuel basket Inner surface of the inner shell Inner lid O-ring Outer surface of the main body.
()16
Unit (mm)
()-Fig.B.3 Two dimensional axis symmetrical model
()17
(2) Conditions for analyses The following thermal conditions were used in the analyses.
The decay heat of the contents is minimal and is not considered. The thermal analyses for the accident test conditions suppose that the package is placed under fire accident conditions subsequently to the mechanical test conditions under accident test conditions. The temperature distribution for the normal test conditions is used for the packaging which has not undergone the fire conditions.
The thermal conditions during fire accident are, ambient temperature of 800 , period of 30 minutes, fire radiation factor of 0.9, and radiation factor for the package surface of 0.8. The package is supposed to suffer solar radiation heat. Both radiation and convection are taken into account with regard to the heat transfer from the ambient environment to the packaging.
The thermal conditions after fire accident are, ambient temperature of 38 , radiation factor for outer surface of the main body as packaging surface of 0.6, and radiation factor for ambient environment of 1.0.
Natural convection and radiation are taken into account with regard to the heat diffusion from the outer surface of the packaging. Solar radiation heat is also taken into account.
()-Table B.11 shows the above conditions for analyses.
The evaluation takes into account any entry of heat due to a fire resulting from combustion of the heat decomposition gas from hard polyurethane foam.
()18
()-Table B.11 Thermal conditions under accident test conditions Item Initial During After conditions fire fire accident accident Decay heat (W) 0 0 0 Environmental Ambient Stagnant 30 minutes Stagnant Conditions temp.() air air 38 800 38
() ()
Solar rad. 400 , 400 , 400(),
heat (W/m2) 800() 800() 800()
Ambient rad.
1.0 0.9 1.0 factor Radiation factor for packaging 0.4() 0.8() 0.6()
surface (a): Surface radiation factor for steel (SUS304) not exposed to fire.
(b): Surface radiation factor for steel (SUS304) being exposed to fire.
(c): Surface radiation factor for steel (SUS304) exposed to fire.
(d): Although the radiant heat on the surface of an article that is vertically transported is 200 w/m2, 400 W/m2 shall be conservatively set as the value for other surfaces.
(e): "The surface of an article that is horizontally transported" and "the surface turned upward" (3) Heat transfer for package (see ()-Fig.B.2)
For the heat transfer for the package, the evaluation supposes that, (a) External heat is transferred to the outer surface of the package through natural convection and radiation.
(b) The heat on the outer surface of the package is transferred to the inner surface of the inner shell through thermal conduction.
(c) The heat on the inner surface of the package is transferred to the outer surface of the fuel basket by radiation and thermal conduction.
(d) The interior of the basket maintains its heat insulating capability as under the normal test conditions.
The relational expressions used in the analyses of these heat transfers are shown in Section B.6.3, APPENDIX.
()19
(4) Thermal analyses of fissile packages As shown below, the deformation of the fissile package which suffers composite effect of different drops under normal test conditions plus a 9 m drop is smaller than that obtained for this thermal analytical model(()-Fig.B.3) except in the case of the vertical drop, in which deformation slightly exceeds 1.6 mm.
Vertical Item Horizontal Lid side Bottom side Minimum thickness before deformation 186 199 177 (mm)
Deformation at 9m 126.7 106.3 81.6 drop as BU package (59.3) (87.7) (95.4)
(mm)
Deformation at 9m 136.6 117.6 88.8 drop as Fissile package (49.4) (76.4) (88.2)
(combination) (mm)
Deformation of 135 95 thermal analytical model (51) (82)
(mm)
Numbers given in brackets( )indicate remaining thickness.
In addition, a combination of drops test I and causes no deformation in the inner shell, and deformations are local.
There supposed to be no significant difference between the thermal analytical model taking into account the composite effect of various conditions on fissile packages and the thermal analytical model, for this reason, the package is not analyzed here for thermal conditions under the accident test conditions.
B.5.1.2 Test model An analytical model is used, and a test model is not used.
()20
B.5.2 Evaluation conditions for packages In the evaluation, the conditions shown in ()-Fig.B.3, which take into account deformations resulting from drop tests under accident test conditions, were used.
B.5.3 Temperatures of packages
()-Fig.B.4 shows the results of the calculations using the analytical model described in Section B.5.1.1. Temperature evolutions for various parts of the package under accident test conditions are plotted here in relation to time. ()-Table B.12 shows the maximum temperature of each part and the period of time required from the occurrence of fire to the attainment of the maximum temperature.
()-Table B.12 Maximum temperatures of package under accident test conditions Item Accident test conditions Maximum temp. Time required from fire occurrence of fire to attainment Parts of maximum temp.
Fuel basket 209.9 Approx. 1.6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> Inner lid O-ring 187.8 Approx. 0.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> Inner surface of 483.2 Approx. 0.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> inner shell Outer surface of 1,226.6 Approx. 0.4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> main body Note: The fact that the maximum temperature of the outer surface of the main body exceeds the ambient temperature of 800 is explained by the combustion of the gases generated from the heat insulator passing through fusible plugs.
()21
()22
()-Fig.B.4 Temperature time history under accident test conditions
B.5.4 Maximum internal pressure The evaluation of the maximum internal pressure under accident test conditions takes into account the pressure due to thermal expansion of the air contained in the packaging. The calculation methods shown in Section B.6.4, APPENDIX, were used.
The value 0.065 MPaG was obtained for the internal pressure in the packaging. Since this value is lower than the design value, the packaging maintains its integrity at its different parts.
B.5.5 Maximum thermal stresses Thermal stresses occurring in the package under accident test conditions do not adversely affect its structural strength, as shown in Section A.6.3, Chapter ().
()23
B.5.6 Summary of results and evaluation We confirmed that the structural strength and containment of the package are not adversely affected by the accident test conditions, as shown by the following evaluations of the thermal analyses.
(1) Temperatures
()-Table B.12 shows the maximum temperatures of various parts of the package under accident test conditions, and ()-Fig.B.4 shows the recorded temperatures of various parts under accident test conditions.
The fuel basket under accident test conditions reaches its maximum temperature of 209.9 1.6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> after the occurrence of fire. Since this evaluation supposes maintenance of heat insulation in the basket, the temperature of plate-shaped fuel elements to be actually contained does not exceed 209.9.
This value is lower than the temperature of occurrence of blistering (allowable temperature for fuel) of 400 for plate-shaped fuel elements used in the experiment and research reactors of the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute and Institute for Integrated Radiation and Nuclear Science, Kyoto University. Therefore, the contents maintain their soundness.
The inner lid O-ring reaches its maximum temperature of l87.8, 0.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> after the occurrence of fire. This value is lower than the service temperature 25O for the silicone rubber O-rings under accident. Thus, the O-ring maintains its integrity even under the accident test conditions, and the packaging retains its containment.
(2) Pressure As described in the preceding section, the temperature of the parts of the package rises under the accident test conditions. This rise in temperature causes the air in the packaging to thermally expand, raising the internal pressure.
The packaging is evaluated for its internal pressure, supposing the maximum temperature of the outer surface of the basket to be 209.9. ()-Table B.13
()24
shows the maximum pressure in the packaging under accident test conditions.
()-Table B.13 Maximum pressure in packaging under accident test conditions Conditions Maximum pressure under accident Position test conditions (MPa[gauge])
Inside the packaging 0.065 The pressure 0.065 MPa[gauge] is lower than the design pressure for the packaging, 0.0981 MPa[gauge].
Thus, the packaging maintains its integrity.
(3) Structural strength This section concerns the maximum inner pressure, thermal stresses and maximum temperature in the packaging, which are to be examined for structural strength of the packaging.
As far as the maximum inner pressure is concerned, the pressure rise in the packaging 0.065 MPa[gauge] is lower than the design pressure 0.0981 MPa
[gauge] and does not adversely affect the structural strength of the packaging.
As shown in Section A.5, Chapter (), thermal stresses do not adversely affect the structural strength of the packaging.
(4) Containment The maximum temperature of the O-ring provided on the inner lid, which constitutes the containment border, is l87.8. This value is lower than the service temperature 250 of silicone rubber O-ring under accident conditions, and the package thus maintains its containment.
()25
B.6 Appendix B.6.1 Maximum temperature of package under normal test conditions
- ()-B-26 B.6.2 Outline of TRUMP -- General purpose program for heat transfer
- ()-B-29 B.6.3 Input data for TRUMP used for temperature calculations for accident test conditions ********************************* ()-B-35 B.6.4 Internal pressure of the package ************************* ()-B-40 B.6.5 Validity Justification of thermal analysis methods ******* ()-B-41 B.6.6 Bibliography ********************************************* ()-B-44 B.6.1 Maximum temperature of package under normal test conditions The maximum temperature is obtained, using the thermal balance for a steady state, as follows.
The quantity of entering heat Qin [kcal/h] only consists of solar radiation heat, and the quantity of emitted heat Qout [kcal/h] is the sum of radiation heat Q1
[kcal/h] and emitted heat due to natural convection Q2 [kcal/h]. The packaging reaches its maximum temperature, when Qin = Qout .
It is obtained with the outer surface temperature of the packaging t [],
supposing, to : Ambient temperature, to = 38 []
Av : Vertical area to which heat is transferred, Av =x0.84x1.8 = 4.750 [m2]
Ah : Upper horizontal area to which heat is transferred, Ah = 0.842x/4 [m2] = 0.554 [m2]
()26
(1) Radiation heat from solar heat Qin Qin = 400 [W/m2]xxAv + 800 [W/m2]xxAh
= 344 [kcal/m2h] kxxAv + 688 [kcal/m2h] xxAh ...(6.1-1) where : radiation factor for the packaging outer surface,
= 0.4 (2) Radiation heat from package Q1 Q1 = (Av + Ah)xxx(T4 - To4)
= (4.75 + 0.554)x0.4x4.88x10-8x{(t + 273)4 - (38 + 273)4 }
= 10.353x10-8x{(t + 273)4 - 3114 } .....................(6.1-2)
T = t + 273 where T: Absolute temperature [K]
t: Outer surface temperature for the package []
- Stefan -Boltzmann constant [kcal/m2 hk4]
(3) Emitted heat due to natural convection Q2 Heat transfer of natural convection of vertical cylindrical surface is given (5) by Mc Adams formula as follows.
Nuv= 0.13 (Gr/Pr)1/3(5) [109<Gr/Pr<1012] .....(6.1-3)
Nuv: Nusselt number, Nuv = h vL/K .....(6.1-4)
Gr: Grashof number, Gr = gL3t/2 ....(6.1-5)
Pr: Prandtl number, Pr = Cp/K .....(6.1-6) where hv : Heat transfer coefficient for vertical, cylindrical surface [kcal/m2h]
L : Representative length [m]
K : Heat transfer coefficient for air [kcal/mh]
g : Gravitational acceleration, 9.8 [m/sec2] = 1.27x108 [m/h2]
()27
- Coefficient of cubical expansion for air [l/K]
t: Difference of temperatures (t-to) []
- Coefficient of kinematic viscosity for air [m2/h]
CP : Isopiestic specific heat for air [kcal/kg]
- Viscosity of air [kg/mh]
The Nusselt number Nu is obtained by Equations (6.1-3), (6.1-5), and (6.1-6),
and the heat transfer coefficient for vertical, cylindrical surface hv by Equation (6.1-4). The heat transfer coefficient for horizontal surface hh is similarly obtained by Equations (6.1-7) and (6.1-8).
Nun= 0.14(GrPr)1/3 [2x107< GrPr<3x1010] ........(6.1-7)
Nun= hhL/k ......................................(6.1-8)
The emitted Heat due to Natural Convection Q2 is Q2 = (hvAv + hvAv)(t - to) .....................(6.1-9)
(4) Calculation of the maximum temperature tmax When the air temperature is 38, each value is, L = 1.8 [m]
g = 1.27x108 [m/h2]
k = 0.0271 [kcal/mh]
= 1/(273+38) = 3.22x10-3 [l/K]
t= tmax - to []
= 0.0623 [m2/h]
a = 0.0882 [m2/h]
Hence, by equations (6.1-6), (6.1-5), and (6.1-3),
Pr = /a = 0.0623/0.0882 = 0.706 Gr = gL3t/2
= 1.27x108x3.22x10-3x1.83xt/0.06232
= 6.14x108xt
()28
Nu = 0.13(GrPr)1/3 = 98.4xt1/3 Thus, using equation (6.1-4),
Nuv k hv = = 1.481xt1/3 [W/m2K]
L and Nuh k hh = = 1.595xt1/3 [W/m2K]
L The thermal balance in the steady state is Qin = Qout. The convergence calculation for the difference of temperatures t, using Equations (6.1-1),
(6,1-2), (6.1-9) and the heat transfer coefficient h, leads to the maximum temperature tmax.
tmax = 62 []
The value of 65 is adopted here as a conservative figure.
B.6.2 Outline of TRUMP --General purpose program for heat transfer (1) General TRUMP is a program developed in 1968 by the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory for heat transfer calculations based on a node method.
(2) Functions The program TRUMP is designed to handle heat generation, chemical reactions, phase changes, and heat transfer. This program can cover 3-dimensional objects by dividing them into elements by means of rectangular, cylindrical, rotating body or polar coordinates.
Material properties such as heat transfer coefficient and specific heat are given as functions of temperature or time.
The program can handle heat transfer between elements resulting from thermal conduction, natural convection, forced convection, and radiation as well as that resulting from natural or forced convection and radiation as boundary condition. In this program, boundary temperatures can be expressed as functions of time. Initial temperature can vary with position in the space.
()29
TRUMP outputs can be obtained, such as temperature distribution for determined time points and thermal balance for each element.
(3) Calculation methods (see ()-Fig.B.5)
The TRUMP solves simultaneous partial differential equations that have four independent variables regarding space coordinates and time as well as a total of three dependent variables, temperature and two densities of reactant.
In case of normal three dimensions, the equations for heat generation, thermal conduction accompanied by chemical reactions and mass transfer are given in the form of normal vector operations:
DT T
= +vT Dt t 1 Qa a Qb b
= KT+G-C C t C t Da a
= +va Dt t E
=-aexp Z a a R T Db b
= +vb Dt t E
=-bexp Z b b R T T T K1 1 i = hi(T2i - T1i) = K2 2 i r r hi = hio + hic [(T2i - T1i)2]Pi/2 + Fi(T1i + T2i)(T21i - T22i)
The conductance hi for the boundary surface is expressed in a common form that takes into account contact conductance, natural convection, forced convection, and radiation. is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant and F is the overall radiation morphological coefficient.
T K s = Usb(Tb - Ts) r where Tb : external temperature
()30
Usb : surface conductance.
As in the case of mass phase, Usb is Usb = hso + hsc[(Tb - Ts)2]Pi/2
+Fb(Ts + Tb)(Ts2 + Tb2)
The TRUMP solves actual equations in relation to minute periods of time. In fact, the time differential u/t should be replaced by (u' - u)/t in the preceding equation. U' and U are the initial and final value of the period of time t.
(4) Utilization of TRUMP The TRUMP program, developed by the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, has been and is being used in many laboratories in the United States.
()31
Start Data input Physical properties Description of node shape (volume)
Description of internal/external heat contact Description of initial conditions/boundary conditions(external temperature)
Description of attributes of chemical reactions Description of internal heat (arbitrary) generation Description of mass flow Initial setting Entered data printout 3
Selection of period of time t Calculation of node attributes Data such as node such as heat transfer coefficient, temperatures are mass, thermal capacity, quantity of heat, printed at specified latent heat, mean temperature, etc. times.
Internal Yes heat generation Generated heat is calculated, No heat flow due to heat generation emitted from/applied to nodes is calculated.
Yes Chemical reactions Chemical reaction attributes such No as chemical reaction heat are calculated, heat flow due to chemical reactions emitted from/
applied to nodes is calculated.
1
()-Fig.B.5 TRUMPflowchart (1/3)
()32
1 Internal heat Yes contact No Contact conductance for heat radiation, contact conductance between nodes with different heat transfer coefficient, and heat flow through nodes in mutual contact are calculated.
Yes Mass flow No Mass flow rate, quantity of heat transferred by mass flow, latent heat for diffusion or absorption, and enthalpy are calculated, density evolution and density are also calculated.
Yes External contact No Quantity of distributed heat flow caused by thermal contact, external temperature, heat transfer coefficient, and quantity of heat flow caused by thermal contact are calculated.
Yes Phase change No Latent heat for diffusion or absorption in nodes with changing phase 2
()-Fig.B.5 TRUMPflowchart (2/3)
()33
2 Yes Special node No In case special nodes are contained in external thermal contact, internal thermal contact, contact through mass flow, each quantity of heat flow is calculated, in case of contact between special nodes, calculation is performed repeatedly under the convergence condition for temperature changes.
Yes Phase change No Quantity of phase change is calculated.
No 3 Task end Yes End
()-Fig.B.5 TRUMPflowchart (3/3)
()34
B.6.3 Input data for TRUMP used for temperature calculations for accident test conditions (1) Modeling of fuel basket (see ()-Fig.B.6)
The fuel basket was modeled to a cylindrical shape the wall thickness of which is equal to the smallest gap between the inner shell and the fuel basket.
The heat capacity of the fuel basket was corrected to be equivalent by compensating the specific weight.
The inner diameter of the Main body of inner shell
()-Fig.B.6 Fuel basket model (a) The outside radius R1 of the cylindrical model R1 is, R1 = R - G where R: Inside radius of inner shell, R = 230 [mm]
G: Gap (minimum), G = 230 - 150x 2
= 17.87 [mm]
R1 = 230 - 17.87
= 212.13 [mm]
()35
(2) Heat transfer between package outer surface and ambient environment (a) Convection heat transfer coefficient The heat transfer coefficient for natural convection on the outer surface of the package is obtained by McAdams equation5),
(i) Outer surface of vertical cylinder g L3 t Gr = ....(6.3-1) 2 Nuv= 0.13(GrPr)1/3 [109<GrPr<1012] ....(6.3-2)
Nuv k h = ....(6.3-3)
L (ii) Upper horizontal, flat surface g L3 t Gr =
2 Nuh= 0.14(GrPr)1/3 [2x107<GrPr<3x1010] ....(6.3-4)
Nuh k h =
L Where h : Convection heat transfer coefficient [cal/cm2 s]
k : Heat transfer coefficient of air [cal/cm s]
During fire: 7.094x10-4 (at 800)
After fire: 2.706x10-5 (at 38)
L : Representative length [cm]
Vertical surface: 152 [cm]
Horizontal surface: 65 [cm]
g : Gravitational acceleration; g = 980 [cm/s2]
- Coefficient of cubical expansion [1/K]
During fire: 1/(273+800) = 9.23x10-4 After fire: 1/(273+38) = 3.22x10-3
- Coefficient of kinematic viscosity [cm2/s]
During fire: 1.37
()36
After fire: 0.173 Gr: Grashof number Pr: Prandtl number; Pr = 0.706 Nu: Nusselt number
()-Table B.14 shows the results of a calculation in which the preceding values were substituted for the corresponding letters of Equations (6.3-1) to (6.3-4)
()-Table B.14 Convection heat transfer coefficient between package surface and ambient environment Position Vertical cylindrical Upper horizontal Condition surface surface During fire 6.459x10-5t13 6.956x10-5t13 After fire 1.480x10-4t13 1.594x10-4t13 (b) Radiation heat transfer The radiation morphological coefficient is 1
F12 = .....(6.3-5) 1 / 1 + 1 / 2 1 Where F12 : Radiation morphological coefficient 1 : Radiation factor for surface No. 1 2 : Radiation factor for surface No. 2
()-Table B.15 shows the radiation factors for both surfaces and the radiation morphological coefficient obtained using Equation (6.3-5).
()-Table B.15 Radiation factor and radiation morphological coefficient Condition During fire After fire Item Radiation Package Surface 0.8 0.6 factor Ambient environment 0.9 0.1 Radiation morphological coefficient 0.735 0.6
()37
(3) Heat transfer between basket and inner cylinder (a) Convection heat transfer coefficient The heat transfer coefficient for the closed fluid layer between vertical, concentrical cylinders2) is obtained by means of the following equations.
Nu = 1.0 [Ra<103] ...........(6.3-6)
Nu = 0.28Ra1/4(L/D)1/4 [103<Ra<107] ........(6.3-7) g D 3 t Ra = .................(6.3-8) a Nu k h = .................(6.3-9)
D where Nu : Nusselt number Ra : Raleigh number g : Gravitational acceleration, g = 980 [cm/s2]
- Coefficient of cubical expansion,
= 1/(273+250) = 1.912x10-3 [1/K]
D : Thickness of fluid layer, D = 23 - 21.213 = 1.787 [cm]
t: Temperature difference between inner and outer cylinder []
a : Thermal diffusivity, a = 6.194x10-1 [cm2/s]
- Coefficient of kinematic viscosity,
= 0.426 [cm2/s]
L : Length of fuel basket [cm]
k : Heat transfer coefficient, k = 4.175x10-4 [cal/cm s]
h : Heat transfer coefficient for natural convection,
[cal/cm s]
980 1.912 10 3 1.787 3 Ra = t 6.194 10 1 0.426
= 40.52xt
()38
When 200 [] is substituted for t the Reynolds number Ra is, Ra = 40.52x200 = 8.104x103 [103<Ra<107]
Nu is obtained by Equation (6.3-7)
Nu = 0.28Ra1/4(L/D)-1/4
= 0.28x(8.104x103)1/4x(125.6/1.787)-1/4
0.918 Thus, using Equation (6.3-9), the heat transfer coefficient for natural convection h is Nu K 0.918 4.175 10 h =
D 1.787
= 2.145x10-4 [cal/cm2s]
(b) Radiation heat transfer The radiation morphological coefficient for the gas layer between concentrical cylinders is obtained using the following equation:
1 F12 = ..........(6.3-10) 1 / 1 + (A1 / A 2 )(1 / 2 1)
A1 / A2 = r1 / r2 ..............(6.3-11) where F12 : Radiation morphological coefficient 1 : Radiation factor for surface No.1; 1 = 0.4 2 : Radiation factor for surface No.2; 2 = 0.4 r1 : Inside radius of external cylinder; r1 = 230 [mm]
r2 : Outside radius of internal cylinder; r2 = 212.13 [mm]
1 F12 =
1 / 0.4 + (230 / 212.13)(1 / 0.4 1)
= 0.242 (4) Entry of Heat due to Fire Resulting from Combustion of Hard Polyurethane Foam The package was analyzed on the assumption that the heat resulting from combustion of hard polyurethane foam (23.45 kJ/g) exists on the outer surface of the package in the form of fire.
()39
B.6.4 Internal pressure of the package The internal pressures of the package under normal and accident test conditions are calculated.
(1) Operating pressures The operating pressure of the air in the packaging is obtained.
(a) Initial pressure The initial pressure in the packaging is equal to the atmospheric pressure
(=0.101 MPa abs).
(b) P1 The pressure resulting from air expansion P1 is obtained using the following equation based on the Boyle-Charles law.
T1 P1 = P0 .......(6.5-1)
T0 where P0: initial pressure (at 20);
P0 = 0.101 [MPa]
T0 : Initial temperature; T0 = 273 + 20 = 293 [K]
T1 : Air temperature under specific conditions [K]
()-Table B.16 shows the results of this calculation.
()-Table B.16 Calculation result for packaging internal pressure Position Air in the packaging Test conditions Normal Accident Pressure (MPa 0.016 0.065
[gauge])
Temperature() 65 209.9
()40
(2) Design pressures The conservative design pressures shown in ()-Table B.17 are used for the various parts of the package evaluation.
()-Table B.17 Design pressures for specific test conditions Inside the packaging Normal test conditions 0.0981 MPa[gauge]
Accident test conditions 0.0981 MPa[gauge]
B.6.5 Validity Justification of thermal analysis methods This section describes the examination of the analyses simulating the fire test (herein referred to as analyses ) on the basis of the results of the fire test on a prototype packaging, analyses carried out to verify the justifiability of the thermal analysis methods described in this section.
(1) Prototype Packaging and Test Methods Prototype packaging: see ()-Fig.G.1.
Test methods: see ()-G-6
()41
(2) Examination of analysis results
()-Table B.18 and ()-Fig.B.7 show the test and analysis results.
Analyses were performed using the conditions described in Section B.6.3.
The measurements recorded in the tests of prototype packaging were used as input data for the initial temperature and the temperatures in furnace in order to simulate actual test conditions. This indoor test does not take into account solar radiation heat.
As shown in ()-Table B.18 and ()-Fig.B.7, the analytical values are conservative and the thermal analysis methods shown in Sections B.5 and B.6.3 are valid.
()-Table B.18 Comparison of prototype packaging test results with analysis results Conditions Maximum Time required before temperature the maximum temperature
() hour(h)
Evaluation position Test Analysis Test Analysis Near O-ring 88.6 161.0 2.0 1.0 Inner surface 396.2 464.1 0.6 0.5 of inner shell Outer surface 123.3 182.5 1.0 1.6 of fuel basket Outer surface of 1051.6 1229.7 0.1 0.1 packaging
()42
()43
()-Fig.B.7 Comparison of prototype packaging test results with analysis results
B.6.6 Bibliography (1) Study on an application of inelastic structures analyzing methods (), a report at Section Meeting for Application of Inelastic Structures Analyzing Methods (EPIOC), Mechanical Engineering society of Japan, 1977.
(2) Material for Heat Transfer Engineering, Edition, Mechanical Engineering Society of Japan, 1975.
(3) In-house data of Nihon Asbestos Co., Ltd.
(4) In-house data of Nippon Valqua Industries, Ltd.
(5) McAdams, Heat transmission.
(6) In-house data of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
()44
()-C Containment analysis
()-C. Containment analysis C.1 General The following part relates to the sealing performances of this packaging tested under normal and accident test conditions. The containment system is considered as the part which ensures the sealing of the packaging. The containment system of this packaging consists of an inner shell comprising a main body and a lid, and the contact between the main body and the lid is sealed by a silicon rubber O-ring (inner shell lid O-ring).
The leakage rate of the containment system is checked by leak tightness test and must meet the reference value during the manufacturing process and the maintenance period. The leakage rate of the O-ring of the inner shell lid is checked by a leak tightness test carried out before shipment of the package and must be confirmed meet the reference value.
C.2 Containment system C.2.1 Containment system (1) Structure The containment system of this packaging is composed, as shown in ()-Fig.C.1, of an inner shell main body and an inner shell lid.
(2) Materials The material used for the fabrication of the main body and the lid of the inner shell is stainless steel, and the sealing part of the inner shell lid is a silicon rubber O-ring.
(3) Design pressure and design temperature As shown in the ()-Table C.1, the leakage rate is evaluated according to the design pressure and design temperature.
1
()-Table C.1 Design pressure and design temperature of containment system Conditions Item Containment System Normal test Design pressure (MPa[gauge]) 0.0981 conditions Design temperature () 65 Accident test Design pressure (MPa[gauge]) 0.0981 conditions Design temperature () 209.9 2
Leak test orifice O-ring made by silicon rubber (Inner shell lid O-ring)
Inner shell lid Weld Inner shell main body Weld The range that the surrounded with a slanted line shows a seal border.
()-Fig.C.1 Containment boundary of packaging 3
(4) Seal Since the inner shell lid is covered by the outer shell lid, there is no possibility of the clamping bolts being removed inadvertently.
Moreover, after installation of the clamping bolts to fix the lid to the main body of the inner shell, the lid is sealed and locked.
(5) Manufacture and checking Manufacture and checking of the structural parts of the containment system are conducted by a suitable method which ensures sealing performances.
C.2.2 Penetration of the containment system Since the on1y opening of this packaging is the inner shell lid, this item is not applicable.
C.2.3 Gasket and weldings of the containment system (1) Containment system gasket For a gasket of the containment system gasket a silicon rubber O-ring is used.
With this O-ring no chemical or electrical reaction should occur, as explained in ()-A.4.l. Moreover, this ring shows excellent sealing performances under the pressures and temperatures in normal and accident test conditions.
(2) Specifications of the gasket (C-4) (C-3)
The dimensions and material of the gasket are shown in (II)-Table C.2 The silicon rubber O-ring can maintain the sealing performance of the inner shell lid under the normal and special test conditions and at the lowest temperature of use, with its heat-resistant property(See B.3 Specifications of components) and cold-resistant property(See A.4.2 Low temperature strength).
4
(II)-Table C.2 The dimensions and material of the gasket Positions dimensions material Note Inner shell Inner side 5.4xI.D. 473 silicone O-ring lid Outer side 5.4xI.D. 513 rubber (3) Weldings The weldings of the flange, of the barrel, and of the bottom plate are performed as explained in Chapter ()-A. Weldings are subjected to a non-destructive test during the fabrication process, as explained in Chapter
()-B, the integrity of the weldings is checked and a pressure resistance test is carried out to check the absence of leakage.
C.2.4 Lid The inner shell lid is equipped with 2 drains for the 2 silicon rubber O-rings, as shown in the ()-Fig.C.1. Moreover, the inner shell lid has been designed to be resistant under normal and accident test conditions and to maintain its performances. To preserve the sealing performances of the packaging, the inner shell clamping bolts are tightened to an appropriate torque as shown in
()-Table C.3.
()-Table C.3 Inner shell clamping bolt Designation Size Number Tightening torque (Nm)
Inner shell clamping bolts M24 16 Approx. 280 5
C.3 Normal test conditions The integrity of the containment system of this package remains unchanged after an impact under normal test conditions as required for all type B(U) packages, and as shown in the results of structural analyses in () - A.
Moreover, the results of thermal analyses in () - B show that variations in pressure or temperature under normal test conditions do not affect the integrity of the containment system.
Therefore, as the sealing performances of the containment system remain unchanged under normal test conditions, in these analyses, the evaluation of the sealing performances based on the leak tightness test of the O-ring of the inner shell lid which must meet the reference value, conducted before shipment of the package, shows that the leakage rate of radioactive substances under normal test conditions is lower than the IAEA regulation standard value.
C.3.1 Leakage of radioactive materials C.3.1.1 Volume of Leakage from the Inner Shell The containment system is checked against leakage by a leak tightness test carried out during the manufacturing process and the maintenance period.
For sealing performance, it is confirmed, further, on each shipment that the leakage rate of the package is lower than the reference value.
The leakage rate of radioactive materials is analyzed, on the assumption that, regarding the air supplied to the seal of inner shell lid on a leak tightness test, the pressure change corresponding to the maximum permissible leakage rate is detected in a certain time.
Radioactive materials exist in the gas of containment system and its leakage rate is different from that obtained from the air leakage rate.
Therefore, leakage rate of the gas under normal test conditions is first determined from the maximum permissible air leakage rate and then the obtained 6
leakage rate is applied to acquire leakage rate of the radioactive materials from concentration of radioactive materials in the gas. It is finally confirmed that the leakage rate of the radioactive materials is below the reference values specified by the regulation and notification.
(1) Maximum permissible leakage rate of the air The maximum permissible leakage rate of the air La specified in design criteria for containment analysis is given as the leakage rate of the air in (II)-Table C.4 (II)-Table C.4 Maximum permissible leakage rate of the air Item Containment boundary (inner shell lid O-ring)
La: maximum permissible leakage rate of the air(std cm3/s) 1.08x10-1 (2) Leakage rate at leak tightness test and the test conditions (a)Leakage rate at leak tightness test Leakage rate at leak tightness test by pressure drop is given by the following formula.
1)
VTS P1 P2 LR = (C.3-1) 60 HPS T1 T2 where, LR :Leakage rate(std cm3/s) under normal condition at 25, 0.101MPa(1 atm abs.)
V: Volume of the testing system(100m3)
H: Testing time TS:Reference temperature 298(K)
T1:Air temperature at the beginning of the test(K)
T2: Air temperature at the end of the test(K)
PS:eference pressure(0.101MPa, (1 atm abs.))
P1:Air pressure at the beginning of the test(MPa) 7
P2:Air pressure at the end of the test(MPa)
The formula (C-31) above will determine the air leakage rate with the following leak tightness test conditions, and the deduced value will be confirmed to be lower than the maximum permissible leakage rate, the reference value.
(b)Leak tightness test conditions
()Air pressure at the beginning of the test is fixed at 0.493(MPa)
()Air pressure at the end of the test is fixed at 0.297(MPa)
()Testing time is fixed at 30 min.
(iv)In calculation the temperature is set T1=T2=TS:= 298(K) (25).
These conditions are applied to the formula(C-31) to obtain the maximum permissible air leakage rate. The results of calculation is given in (II)-Table C.4.
(v)In consideration of the conditions (i) to (iv) above and the volume of the testing system, the testing time H and pressure dropP(P1-P2) is fixed to confirm that the air leakage rate LR(LR=LR i) at O-ring of inner shell lid is lower than the maximum permissible air leakage rate LR( LR=2.21x 10-2cm3/s at 0.493 MPa (1.08 std cm3/s), 298K).
(3) The maximum gas leakage rate under normal test conditions The maximum gas leakage rate under normal test conditions is obtained on the basis of the maximum permissible air leakage rate LRt as follows.
(a)Diameter of leak The leak is assumed to be a round hole which crosses the sealing part along the shortest path. Fluid is considered to pass through the leak in the form of free molecular flow or continuous flow and its leakage rate is given by the following formula.
L=(Fc+Fa)(Pu-Pd) 2)(C.3-2) where, L: Volume leakage rate at pressure Pa (cm3/s at Pa, Ta) 8
Pa: Average pressure of flow (M Pa)
Pa =
1 (Pu + Pd ) (C.3-3) 2 Ta: Average temperature of fluid Pu: Pressure on upstream side Pd: Pressure on downstream side Fc: Flow heat conduction coefficient for continuous flow(cm3/MPas)
Fm: Flow heat conduction coefficient for free molecular flow(cm3/MPa. s) 2 D4 FC = 2.49 10 (C.3-4) a T
D3 Fm = 3.81 10 3 M (C.3-5) aPa Where, D: Diameter of leak (cm) a: length of leak (cm)
- Viscosity coefficient of the air(MPa.s)
T: Temperature of fluid(K)
M: Molecular weight(g/mol)
Diameter of leak hole is obtained by the following formula and the formula (C-3-2)
Ps Ta L = LR i (C.3-6)
Pa Ts Where, LR i: Air leakage rate at containment boundary(std cm3/s)
Ta: Average temperature(=TS)(K)
The maximum diameter of leak of inner shell lid on leakage rate test is given in (II)-Table C.5.
Note: the formula ANSI 4.5 is converted into SI unit.
9
(II)-Table C.5 The maximum radius of leak hole on leakage rate test Positions O-ring parts Items LR i: Air leakage rate at containment 1.08x10-1 boundary(std cm3/s)
Pu: Pressure on upstream side(M P ) 0.493 a
Pd: Pressure on downstream side(M P ) 0.101 a
Pa: Average pressure of flow (M Pa) 0.297 Ta. T: Temperature of the air(K) 298 L: Air leakage rate on leak tightness 3.673x10-2 test(cm3/s at Pa, Ta)
- Viscosity coefficient of the 1.85x10-11 at 25*1 air(MPa.s) a: length of leak hole(cm) 0.54 (note)
M: Molecular weight(g/mol) 29.0 Fc: Thermal conductivity coeffim3/MPa 2.49x109D4 s)
Fm: Thermal conductivity coefficient for 7.61x104D3 free molecular flow D: Diameter of leak (cm) 2.490x10-3 Note: Diameter of cross section of O-ring is employed.
1 : Since viscosity coefficient of the air increases with temperature, it is conservative to employ the low temperature.
10
(b)The maximum gas leakage rate under normal test conditions The maximum gas leakage rate under normal test conditions is obtained by substituting the values of pressure, gas and the maximum diameter of leak under normal test conditions into the formula (C.3.2) to (C.3.5).
Gas leakage rate Lx calculated from(C.3.2) is converted to leakage rate Ls, x under normal test conditions, at 25, 0.101MP abs(1 atm abs), by the following formula.
Pa , x 298 Ls , x = L x (C.3-7) 0.101 Ta , x where, Subscript x: Normal test conditions but it is assumed that Ta,x=Tu,x Gas leakage rate under normal test conditions is provided in (II)-Table C. 6. The maximum gas leakage rate at O-ring is employed for calculation.
(II)-Table C.6 The maximum gas leakage rate under normal test conditions Position Containment boundary Item (O-ring of inner shell lid)
D: Diameter of leak (cm) 2.490x10-3 a: Length of leak (cm) 0.54
- Viscosity coefficient of the 1.85x10-11at 25*1 gas(MPa.s)
Pu,x: Pressure of containment system 0.199 under normal test conditions(MPa abs)
Pd, x: External pressure under normal test 0.060 conditions(MPa abs)
Tu,x: Gas temperature under normal test 338 conditions(K)
M: Molecular weight(g/mol) 29 Lx: Leakage rate under normal test 1.38x10-2 conditions(cm3/s at Pa,x Ta,x)
Ls,x: Leakage rate under normal test 1.55x10-2 conditions(cm3/s at 25 0.10MPa) (5.58x101cm3/h) 1 : Since viscosity coefficient of the air increases with temperature, it is conservative to employ the low temperature 11
C.3.1.2 Evaluation of the volume of leakage radioactive substances (1) In transporting the fresh fuel elements and critical assembly fuel (a) Evaluation of the radioactive substances contained in the inner shell concerning the leakage.
Since there is no possibility of degradation of the fuel plates under normal test conditions, as described in part ()-A, it is considered that there is no leakage of the enriched uranium contained in the fuel plates. It is supposed that the only radioactive substances that may have leaked are the uranium particles which adhere to the surface of the fuel elements during the manufacturing process, in other words, uranium surface contamination.
It is supposed that the level of contamination is 8.00x10-2 Bq/100cm2[235U](1 g235U/100cm2) for the whole surface of the fuel elements, which is the reference value of the surface contamination test during manufacturing process.
It is supposed that the contaminated surface uranium are 93% enriched uranium, 45% enriched uranium, 20% enriched uranium and 93% enriched uranium 234 of the degraded uranium for which the rate of U/235U is at its maximum level.
The weight of radioactive nuclides of 93% enriched uranium adhering to one fuel element is calculated according to the usual method as follows.
235
() Quantity of U: This quantity is calculated by using the level of 8.00 x10-2 Bq/100cm2 and of the whole surface of the fuel element (l 235 U/100cm2).
238 234 236
() Quantity of U: The quantity of U and U being considered as nil, 238 the quantity of U is calculated by using the lower limit of the 235 tolerance of the enrichment (93.15 +/- 0.15 wt%) of U calculated in
().
234 236 234 236
() Quantity of U and U: No weight limit has been fixed for U and U, because these are decided during the fuel manufacturing.
12
The quantity of 234U and 236U is calculated using the maximum weight proportion recorded in the past material record and in rounding off these figures (x
- 2) according to the usual method.
Moreover, the total weight of uranium needed for these calculations is 235 obtained by adding the quantity of U calculated in () and the quantity 238 234 236 of U calculated in (). The weight proportions of U and U used for the calculations are shown in the ()-Table C.7.
The Surface contamination level is shown in ()-Table C.8.
234 236
()-Table C.7 Weight proportions of U and U used for calculations Maximum weight Weight proportions Enrichment Isotope proportions in the used for calculations (wt%)
mill sheets (wt%) (wt%)
234 U 1.08 2.2 93.15+/-0.15 236 U 0.47 0.94 13
()-Table C.8 Surface contamination level per fuel element Radioactivity (Bq)
Fuel element 234 235 236 238 U U U U Total JRR-3 Standard Type (Uranium silicon 1.58x103 2.31x101 7.00 2.71x10-1 1.61x103 aluminum dis-persion type alloy)
JRR-3 Follower Type (Uranium silicon 8.80x102 1.29x101 3.90 1.51x10-1 8.97x102 aluminum dis-persion type alloy)
JRR 4B Type 9.34x102 1.37x101 4.14 1.60x10-1 9.52x102 JRR 4L Type (Uranium aluminum 9.34x102 1.37x101 4.14 1.60x10-1 9.52x102 dispersion type alloy)
JRR-4 (Uranium silicon 9.34x102 1.37x101 4.14 1.60x10-1 9.52x102 aluminum dis-persion type alloy)
JMTR Standard 1.22x103 1.78x101 5.41 2.09x10-1 1.24x103 JMTR 8.74x102 1.28x101 3.88 1.50x10-1 8.91x102 Follower Fuel KUR Standard & Half 1.12x103 1.64x101 4.97 1.93x10-1 1.14x103 Loaded KUR Special 8.01x102 1.17x101 3.56 1.38x10-1 8.17x102 KUCA Coupon (120 coupons as one 3.69x102 5.40 1.64 6.35x10-2 3.76x102 fuel element)
KUCA Flat (30 plates as one 1.25x102 1.83x101 5.56 2.16x10-1 1.28x103 fuel element) 14
(b) Evaluation of the leakage volume of radioactive substances under normal test conditions.
The uranium responsible for the surface contamination which adheres to the surface of the elements is assumed to be powder. For the evaluation of the leakage rate, this uranium is supposed to be completely separated and uniformly dispersed in the cavity of the inner shell.
The leakage rate under normal test conditions is calculated by multiplying the concentration of each radioactive nuclide existed in the cavity of the inner shell by the leakage rate calculated in C.3.1.13 (b). By using the JRR-3 standard fuel element, (Uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy) which is highest surface uranium contamination fuel, and by calculating the leakage rate of radioactive substances, the results are obtained as shown in ()-Table C.9.
As shown in the ()-Table C.6, the level of the leakage rate of radioactive substances under normal test conditions is lower than the standard value.
()-Table C.9 Leakage rate of radioactive substances under normal test conditions Nuclide Radioactivity Leakage rate Standard Rate Value (A2x10-6)
(TBq/cm3) (TBq/h) (TBq/h) 234 U 1.07x10-13 5.97x10-12 6x10-9 9.96x10-4 235 U 1.56x10-15 8.71x10-14 0 236 U 4.73x10-16 2.64x10-14 6x10-9 4.40x10-6 238 U 1.83x10-17 1.02x10-15 0 Total 1.00x10-3
- : Use 1.48x105cm3 for the inner air volume.
15
(2) In transporting of lowly irradiated fuel element (a) Evaluation of radioactive material in the inner shell concerning leak.
As shown in ()-A, the fuel plate does not failure under the normal test condition, the enriched uranium contained in the fuel plate does not leak.
The radioactive material concerning leak, the surface contaminated uranium, adheres when the fuel element is produced, is similarly assumed as the previous section of C.3.1.2(1), (a).
The water in the reactor is assumed to adhere in a thickness of 1 mm on the all surface of the lowly irradiated fuel element.
Therefore, the radioactive material to be considered in studying the seal function is the radioactive nuclide contained in the water of the reactor.
The leak of the radioactive material is evaluated by assuming that the radioactive concentration of the water in the reactor is 12Bq/cm3, which is two times of the maximum value of the measured data of the No.1 canal water, obtained for past twenty years.
The radioactive concentration of the water adheres on the fuel element surface is 12Bq/cm3, the nuclide is 60 Co and shown in ()-Table C.10.
The surface radioactivity per one lowly irradiated fuel element is shown in ()-Table C.11.
()-Table C.10 Nuclide of JMTRC fuel surface water and radioactive concentration Radioactive concentration Nuclide (Bq/cm3) 60 Co 12 16
()-Table C.11 Surface activity per one fuel element of lowly irradiated fuel element Activity (Bq) 234 235 236 238 U U U U Total JMTRC Standard fuel element 1.19x103 1.74x101 5.28x100 2.04x10-1 1.21x103 (Uranium aluminum alloy)
(A,B,C type)
JMTRC Standard fuel element 1.19x103 1.74x101 5.28x100 2.04x10-1 1.21x103 (Uranium aluminum alloy)
(B,C type)
JMTRC Special fuel element 1.24x103 1.82x101 5.50x100 2.13x10-1 1.26x103 (Special A type)
(Uranium aluminum alloy)
JMTRC Special fuel element 4.65x102 6.82x100 2.06x100 7.98x10-2 4.74x102 (Special B type)
(Uranium aluminum alloy)
JMTRC Special fuel element 1.27x103 1.86x101 5.62x100 2.17x10-1 1.29x103 (Special C, Special D type)
(Uranium aluminum alloy)
JMTRC Control rod fuel 8.41x102 1.23x101 3.73x100 1.44x10-1 8.57x102 Follower (HF type)
(Uranium aluminum alloy)
JMTRC Standard fuel element (MA, MB, MC type) 1.19x103 1.74x101 5.28x100 2.04x10-1 1.21x103 (Uranium aluminum dispersion type alloy)
JMTRC Special fuel element (Special MB, Special MC type) 1.25x103 1.83x101 5.55x100 2.14x10-1 1.27x103 (Uranium aluminum dispersion type alloy)
JMTRC Fuel follower (MF type) 8.41x102 1.23x101 3.73x100 1.44x10-1 8.57x102 (Uranium aluminum dispersion type alloy) 17
(b) Radioactive material leak evaluation under normal test condition It is similarly assumed as the previous section of C.3.1.2(1),(a) that the all surface contaminated uranium adheres on the fuel surface is separated and uniformly dispersed in the air in the inner container.
The radioactive concentration of the water adheres on the fuel element surface is 12Bq/cm3, and the nuclide is 60 Co.
The leak rate of the radioactive material under the general test condition is obtained by multiplying the concentration of the nuclide existing in the air of the inner shell by the leak rate obtained in the section of C.3.1.1(2).
The radioactive concentration on the surface of the fuel for the HEU special fuel element (Special C,D types), which has the largest surface area, is shown in ()-Table C.12.
The leak rate of the radioactive material is obtained by assuming that the radioactive material is uniformly dispersed in the air of the inner container of seal boundary, and is shown in ()-Table C.12.
As shown in ()-Table C.12, the leak rate of the radioactive material is smaller than the allowable value under the normal test condition.
()-Table C.12 Leak rate of the radioactivity under normal test condition Radioactive Leak Allowable Nuclide concentration rate Value(A2x10-6) Rate (TBq/cm3) (TBq/h) (TBq/h) 60 Co 1.89x10-12 1.06x10-10 4.0x10-7 2.64x10-4 234 U 8.64x10-14 4.82x10-12 6.0x10-9 8.04x10-4 235 U 1.27x10-15 7.09x10-14 0 236 U 3.83x10-16 2.14x10-14 6.0x10-9 3.56x10-6 238 U 1.48x10-17 8.26x10-16 0 Total 1.07x10-3 18
C.3.2 Pressurization of the containment system Since this package is transported in 'dry' condition, it does not contain any water which becomes a cause of pressurization by the effects of radiation or heat.
Therefore, the only cause of pressurization in the inside part of the package is expansion of the air caused by a temperature rise. This case is explained in ()-Table B.16.
Concerning the analyses of the pressure resistance of the containment system, a safe margin has been taken from the results of internal pressure of the
()-Table B.16 and these analyses have been conducted against the design pressure of the ()-Table B.17.
C.3.3 Coolant contamination Since coolant is not used for this package, this item is not applicable.
C.3.4 Loss of coolant Since coolant is not used for this package, this item is not applicable.
19
C.4 Accident test conditions The integrity of the containment system of this package remains unchanged after an impact under accident test conditions, as required for all types of B(u) packages and the results of structural analyses is shown in ()-A.
Moreover, the results of thermal analyses in ()-B show that variations in pressure or temperature under accident test conditions have no effect on the integrity of the containment system.
Therefore, as the sealing performances of the containment system remain unchanged under accident test conditions, in these analyses, the evaluation of the sealing performances based on the leak tightness test of the O-ring of the inner shell lid which must meet the reference value, conducted before shipment of the package, shows that the leakage rate of radioactive substances under accident test conditions is lower than the legally established standard value.
C.4.1 Fissile gas (1) In transporting fresh fuel element Since the contents are composed of non-irradiated fuel elements, no fissile gas will appear.
(2) In transporting lowly irradiated fuel elements Under the accident test condition, as described in the section ()A.6, since the failure of the fuel element does not occur and the fissile gas contained in the fuel plate does not leak, the enrichment of the fissile gas in the sealed shell is the same value as for the normal test condition, shown in the ()-Table C.10 and in the ()-Table C.11.
20
C.4.2 Leakage of radioactive materials C.4.2.l Leakage from the inner shell The maximum gas leakage rate under the accident test conditions The maximum gas leakage rate under the accident test conditions can be obtained by substituting the relevant values of pressure, gas and the maximum leak hole diameter under the same test conditions into the formula(C3-2) to (C.3-5) and (C. 3-7).
Gas leakage rate under the accident test conditions is shown in (II)-Table C. 13. The maximum gas leakage rate is calculated concerning the inner shell lid.
(II)-Table C. 13 The maximum gas leakage rate under the accident test conditions Position Containment boundary Item (O-ring of inner shell lid)
D: Diameter of leak (cm) 2.490x10-3 a: Length of leak (cm) 0.54
- Viscosity coefficient of the gas(MPa.s) 1.85x10-11 at 25*1 Pu,x: Pressure of containment system under normal 0.199 test conditions (MPa abs)
Pd,x: External pressure under normal test conditions 0.060 (MPa abs)
Tu,x: Gas temperature under normal test conditions(K) 482.9 M: Molecular weight(g/mol) 29 Lx: Leakage rate under normal test conditions 1.38x10-2 3
(cm /s at Pa,x Ta,x)
Ls,x: Leakage rate under normal test conditions 1.09x10-2 (cm3/s at 25 0.10MPa) (6.59x103cm3/week)
- 1: Since the viscosity coefficient of air increases as the temperature rises, it is conservative to use the low temperature.
C.4.2.2 Evaluation of the volume of leakage of radioactive materials (1) In transporting the fresh fuel element and critical assembly fuel As described in Chapter ()-A, since no deterioration of the fuel Plates occurs under accident test conditions, it can be supposed, as in the case of normal test conditions, that the only radioactive substances affected by the leakage are the uranium particles which adhere to surface of the fuel elements 21
during the manufacturing process, i.e. uranium surface contamination.
Surface contamination level per fuel element is shown in the ()- Table C.8.
The leakage rate of radioactive substances under accident test conditions is calculated by multiplying the concentration of each nuclide present in the cavity of the inner shell by the leakage rate calculated in C.4.2.1.
()-Table C.14 gives the leakage rate for radioactive substances for the JRR-3 standard fuel element (Uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type alloy),
which is the highest uranium surface contamination element.
As shown in ()-Table C.14, the leakage rate of radioactive substances under accident test conditions is lower than the standard value.
(2) In transporting the lowly irradiated fuel elements As described in the section ()-A, under the accident condition, since the failure of the fuel plate does not occur, the leakage of the enriched uranium contained in the fuel plate is similarly assumed not to occur as for the normal test condition.
The surface radio activity per one fuel element is shown in ()-Table C.10 and in ()-Table C.11.
The leakage rate of the radioactive substance under the accident condition is obtained by multiplying the enrichment of the nuclide existed in the shell by the leakage rate obtained in the paragraph C.4.2.1.
The radioactive enrichment on the fuel element surface for the HEU special fuel element C, D type, having the maximum surface, is obtained by the same method in the paragraph C.3.1.2.(2) and is shown in the ()-Table C.15. As shown in the ()-Table C.15, the leakage rate of the radioactive substance under the accident condition is less than the reference value.
22
()-Table C.14 Leakage rate of radioactive substances under normal test conditions Nuclide Radioactive Leakage rate Standard Rate substance value concentration (TBq/cm3) (TBq/week) (TBq/week) 234 U 1.07x10-13 7.05x10-10 6x10-2 1.18x10-7 235 U 1.56x10-15 1.03x10-11 0 236 U 4.73x10-16 3.12x10-12 6x10-2 5.20x10-10 238 U 1.83x10-17 1.21x10-13 0 Total 1.18x10-7
()-Table C.15 Leak rate of radioactive substances under accident test condition Nuclide Radioactive Leakage rate Allowable Rate concentration value (TBq/cm3) (TBq/week) (TBq/week) 60 Co 1.89x10-12 1.25x10-8 4.0x10-1 3.11x10-8 234 U 8.64x10-14 5.69x10-10 6.0x10-3 9.49x10-8 235 U 1.27x10-15 8.37x10-12 0 236 U 3.83x10-16 2.52x10-12 6.0x10-3 4.21x10-10 238 U 1.48x10-17 9.75x10-14 0 Total 1.26x10-7 23
C.5 Summary of the results and the evaluation (1) In transporting the fresh fuel element and critical assembly fuel Concerning the leakage of radioactive substances, it may be supposed to all the particles of uranium responsible for the surface contamination which adhere to the surface of the elements during the manufacturing process are completely separated, and that these particles are dispersed uniformly in the air in the inner shell. If the concentration of each radioactive substance is multiplied by the leakage rate to evaluate the leakage rate under normal and accidental test conditions, it can be seen, as shown in ()-Table C.9 and in ()-Table C.14, that the leakage rate for radioactive substances is lower than the standard value.
(2) In transporting lowly irradiated fuel element The leak rate is evaluated under general and special test conditions, by multiplying each radioactive concentration by leak rate, by assuming that the all surface contaminated uranium, adheres when the fuel element is produced, is separated and is uniformly dispersed in the air of the inner shell and also by assuming that the all pool water adheres on the surface of the fuel element is evaporated and uniformly dispersed in the air of the inner shell, the leak rates for both test conditions are smaller than the allowable value, as shown in
()-Table C.12 and ()-Table C.15.
24
C.6 Appendix C.6.1 Design temperature for containment analyses The design temperature for the containment analyses is used for the calculation of the internal pressure of the inner shell, and this pressure is calculated from the average temperature of the air contained in the inner shell.
The volume of the air contained in the fuel basket constitutes the largest proportion (77%) of the total air volume contained in the inner shell, and since there is no emission of heat from the fuel, the temperature of the air contained in the fuel basket is lower than the temperature of the fuel basket.
For greater safety, the temperature of the air contained in the fuel basket is regarded as equivalent to the average temperature of the fuel basket (180.7) and the temperature of the air contained in the space between the fuel basket and the main body of the inner shell is regarded as equivalent to the average of the average temperature of the fuel basket and the average temperature of the main body of the inner shell (403.4), namely a temperature of 292.1, proceeding in this way, the average temperature of the air inside the inner shell can be calculated as 206.3, which is lower than the maximum temperature of the fuel basket (209.9).
As explained above, if the maximum temperature of the fuel basket (209.9) is used as the average temperature of the air contained in the inner shell, the internal pressure of the inner shell is overestimated. Therefore, the maximum temperature of the fuel basket is used as the design temperature for the containment analyses.
- Value obtained by the calculation of the average of the TRUMP CODE 25
C.6.2 Reference documents (1) ANSI-N 14.5 American National Standard for Leakage Tests on Packages for Shipment of Radioactive Materials (1977)
American national Standards Institute, Inc.
American national Standards for radioactive materials Leakage test on packages for shipment (1997)
ANS N14.5 - 1997 (2)Document for Heat Transfer Engineering, EditionMechanical Engineering Society of Japan.
26
()-D Shield analysis
()-D. Shield analysis D.1 Outline In the case where the package contents consist of fresh fuel elements 235 238 (including KUCA fuel), U and U are considered as a gamma radiation source, and neutrons emitted by the uranium spontaneous fission is considered as a neutron source.
235 238 In case of the lowly irradiated fuel elements, U, U and the radioactive nuclides are considered as a gamma radiation source, and the uranium spontaneous fission is considered as the neutron source.
Regarding the gamma radiation source calculation, we have to consider that under normal test conditions and accident test conditions, the outer shell is subjected to a transformation and that, under normal transport conditions, with normal test conditions and accident test conditions, the dose-equivalent rate is evaluated by assimilation of the inner shell surface to the package surface.
The neutron dose-equivalent rate is calculated by assimilating the uranium content to the point radiation source. There, the content are distributed inside the cavity, but their position is calculated in such a way that the distance between the point radiation source and the inner shell surface is as small as possible. In the same way, the gamma radiation source calculation is evaluated by considering the inner shell surface to be equivalent to the package surface and for safety reasons, by ignoring the inner shell shield effect and considering only the distance attenuation effect.
D.2 Radiation source specification There are unirradiated fresh fuel element and lowly irradiated fuel element in the package.
235 238 For unirradiated uranium, the radioactive nuclide such as U and U etc.
are considered as the gamma radiation source.
The neutron emitted by uranium spontaneous fission is considered as the neutron source.
1
In case of the lowly irradiated fuel element, the radioactive element such as the 235U, 238U etc. are considered as the gamma radiation source, and the neutrons emitted by spontaneous fission of uranium etc. are considered as the neutron source.
D.2.1 Gamma radiation source (1) In loading the fresh fuel element 234 235 236 The uranium isotope contained in the fuel packaged are U, U, U and 238 U, and these gamma ray emitting rates are shown in ()-Table D.1.(1)
The gamma radiation source intensity per one fuel element of the JRR-3 standard type (Uranium silicon aluminum dispersion alloy) (Enrichment 19.75
+/- 0.2wt%), which has highest radioactivity, is sown in ()-Table D.2.
The gamma radiation source intensity is obtained as follows.
SE = CWRE Where, SE : Gamma radiation source intensity (Photons/s) of energy E C : Specific activity (Bq/g), shown in ()-Table D.3(2)
W : Uranium isotope weight (g)
RE : Gamma ray emission rate of energy E (photons/decay)
The weight of the uranium isotope is conservatively obtained as follows.
235 235 (a) U :Maximum U contained quantity in the fuel element.
238 234 236 (b) U :By assuming the quantities of U and U are to be zero, the 238 235 quantity of U is obtained by using the quantity of the U obtained above and the lower limit of the enrich tolerance.
234 236 234 236 (c) U, U:As the quantities of U and U are determined when the fuel element is produced, the weight limit is not determined. Therefore the maximum weight rate is selected from the past material record sheet, by using the conservatively rounded up weight rate, the quantities of 235 236 U and U are obtained. In this case, the necessary 235 total uranium quantity is the sum of the U obtained in 238 (a) and U obtained in (b).
234 236 The weight rates of U and U used in the calculation are shown in
()-Table D.4.
The uranium isotope weight for one element used in calculation is shown in ()-Table D.5.
2
()-Table D.1 Gamma radiation emission rate of uranium isotope Gamma radiation Gamma radiation Uranium energy emission rate isotope (MeV) (photons/decay) 234 U 0.05322 0.00119 0.12090 0.000405 235 U 0.10914 0.015 0.14376 0.105 0.16335 0.047 0.18572 0.54 0.20212 0.010 0.20531 0.047 236 U 0.04937 0.00079 0.11275 0.00019 238 U 0.04955 0.0032
()-Table D.2 Gamma radiation source intensity for one fuel element Gamma radiation Energy Source intensity (MeV)
(photons/s) 0.04937 4.716x104 0.04955 7.948x104 0.05322 3.434x106 0.10914 5.820x105 0.11275 1.134x104 0.12090 1.169x106 0.14376 4.074x106 0.16335 1.824x106 0.18572 2.095x107 0.20212 3.880x105 0.20531 1.824x106 3
()-Table D.3 Specific activity used for calculation Uranium isotope Specific activity (Bq/g) 234 U 2.309x108 235 U 8.001x104 236 U 2.397x106 238 U 1.244x104 234 236
()-Table D.4 U and U weight rate used for calculation Isotope Weight rate (wt%)
Mill sheet Value used for maximum value calculation 234 U 0.13 0.5 236 U 0.21 1.0
()-Table D.5 Radioactive nuclide weight per one element used in calculation Uranium isotope Weight (g) 234 U 12.41 235 U 485 236 U 24.81 238 U 1996 4
(2) In loading lowly irradiated fuel element (a) Gamma radiation source by the isotope from uranium 234 235 The uranium isotope contained in the package fuel are mainly U, U, 236 238 U and U etc., and these gamma ray emission rates are shown in ()-Table D.6.(1)
The gamma radiation source intensity of the one equivalent fuel element (mixed fuel elements) of the JMTRC HEU fuel element, which has the highest radioactivity and the MEU fuel element, by assuming these fuel elements are packaged together, is shown in ()-Table D.7.
The gamma radiation source intensity is obtained as follows.
SE = CWRE Where, SE : Gamma radiation source intensity of energy E (Photons/s)
C : Specific activity (Bq/g), shown in ()-Table D.8(2)
W : Weight of Uranium isotope (g)
RE : Gamma ray emission rate of energy E (Photons/decay)
The weight of the uranium isotope is conservatively obtained as follows.
235
() U :Maximum contained quantity in the fuel element.
238
() U :The quantity of 238U is obtained, by assuming the quantities 234 236 235 of U and U are to be zero, by using the quantity of U obtained in (1) and the lower limit of the enrichment tolerance.
234 236 234 236
() U, U:The quantities of U and U are determined when the fuel element is produced, the limit of the weight is not determined. Therefore the maximum weight rate is selected from the past material record sheet, and the 234 236 weights of U and U are obtained by using the conservatively rounded up weight rate.
5
In this case, the necessary total uranium weight is 235 the sum of the weight of U obtained in (1) and the 238 234 weight of U obtained (). The weight rate of U and 236U used in the calculation are shown in ()-Table D.9.
The weight of uranium isotope per one fuel element used in the calculation is shown in ()-Table D.10.
6
()-Table D.6 Gamma radiation emission rate of uranium isotope Gamma radiation Gamma radiation Uranium energy emission rate isotope (MeV) (photons/decay) 234 U 0.05322 0.00119 0.12090 0.000405 235 U 0.10914 0.015 0.14376 0.105 0.16335 0.047 0.18572 0.54 0.20212 0.010 0.20531 0.047 236 U 0.04937 0.00079 0.11275 0.00019 238 U 0.04955 0.0032
()-Table D.7 Gamma radiation source intensity per one mixed fuel element (actinoids)
Gamma radiation Energy source intensity (MeV)
(photons/s) 0.04937 2.321x104 0.04955 1.609x104 0.05322 1.923x106 0.10914 3.804x105 0.11275 5.583x103 0.12090 6.545x105 0.14376 2.663x106 0.16335 1.192x106 0.18572 1.369x107 0.20212 2.536x105 0.20531 1.192x106 7
()-Table D.8 Specific activity used for calculation Uranium isotope Specific activity (Bq/g) 234 U 2.309x108 235 U 8.001x104 236 U 2.397x106 238 U 1.244x104 234 236
()-Table D.9 U and U weight rate used for calculation Weight rate (wt%)
Uranium HEU fuel MEU fuel isotope element element 2.2 (2 times of the 0.47 (1.5 times of 234 U actual contained the actual contained substance weight) substance weight) 0.94 (2 times of the 1.7 (1.5 times of the 236 U actual contained actual contained substance weight) substance weight)
()-Table D.10 Radioactive nuclide weight per one element used in calculation Uranium isotope Weight (g) 234 U 7.00 235 U 317 236 U 12.26 238 U 404 8
(b) Gamma ray from the fission product The irradiation time and the cooling time of the JMTRC fuel element is as follows.
() HEU fuel: 302h irradiation (100W equivalence)(0.0013MWd) 15 years cooling
() MEU fuel: 100h irradiation (100W equivalence)(0.0005MWd) 4 years cooling The fission products are calculated by using ORIGEN for the above 2 types of fuel elements with the following assumption.
The peaking factor of the fuel element during operation is 2.00.
The effect of the radioactivity except the main nuclide is considered by scaling the radioactivity of the main nuclide to be 100%.
The radioactivity of the fission product of the mixed fuel elements is determined from the fuel element which has the higher radioactivity.
The radioactivity and the gamma radiation source intensity of the main nuclides are shown in ()-Table D.11.
9
()-Table D.11 Radioactivity rate of the fission products obtained by ORIGEN Gamma ray Emission Radioactivity Main Scaling energy rate by ORIGEN Photons/s nuclide factor*
(MeV) (%) (Bq) 0.662 85.1 1.11x107 Cs-137 0.0364 1.3 1.261x107 1.70x105 0.0322 5.6 7.33x105 Kr-85 0.514 0.43 1.072x106 4.78x103 1.05 1.6 1.050x103 1.74x101 Rh-106 0.662 9.9 1.08x102 0.512 20.4 2.22x102 0.671 1.8 1.452x104 2.71x102 0.636 11.3 1.70x103 1.0391 0.607 5 7.54x102 0.601 17.9 2.70x103 Sb-125 0.463 10.5 1.58x103 0.428 29.6 4.46x103 0.176 6.8 1.03x103 0.0355 4.3 6.48x102 Sr-90 1.234x107 Y-90 1.7608 0.012 1.234x107 1.54x103 Ba-137m 1.179x107 Total 5.017x107 1.21x107
- Ratio of total radioactivity (5.213x107Bq) by ORIGEN versus radioactivity (5.017x107Bq) of main nuclide.
10
D.2.2 Neutron source (1) In loading fresh fuel element As the contents are non-irradiated uranium, it is necessary to take into consideration that, the neutron emission, occurs by spontaneous fission of uranium is considered as a neutron source.
The uranium isotope spontaneous fission speed is shown in ()-Table D.12(3).
()-Table D.12 Uranium isotope spontaneous fission speed 234 235 236 238 Isotope U U U U Spontaneous fission 3.5x10-3 3.1x10-4 2.8x10-3 7.0x10-3 speed (unit/gs) 238 Since among uranium isotope, the spontaneous fission speed of U is the largest, the intensity of the neutron source for one JRR-3 fuel element (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy) in which uranium content is largest, reaches maximum. This value is 35.6 (n/s). The neutron source intensity by spontaneous fission is calculated by the following formula.
Sn = Wf n In this formula Sn : Neutron source intensity for one fuel element (n/s)
Wi : Uranium isotope weight for one element (g)
()-Table D.5 fi : Spontaneous fission speed of uranium isotope (unit/gs)
()-Table D.12 n : No. of neutrons emitted by one core fission(4) (2.5)
The energy spectrum of neutrons emitted by fission is shown in ()-Fig.
D.1(4). The higher the neutron energy, the bigger the calculation factor becomes consequently, to evaluate a dose-equivalent factor in a safe way, the neutron total energy emitted should be 10 MeV.
11
From the result of criticality analysis, the keff effective multiplication factor of one package containing 10 JRR-3 standard elements (Uranium Silicon 235 Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy) of 20 wt% enrichment without water whose U content reaches a maximum, and is 0.032 by considering 3 . By the same calculation method, if for safety reasons the effective multiplication rate is fixed to 0.1, it is necessary to consider the multiplication effect of neutrons (1/(1-k eff ) = 1.11 ) on the intensity of neutrons radiation.
()-Fig. D.1 Neutron fission energy spectrum (2) In loading lowly irradiated fuel element It is neutron emission by the spontaneous fission of uranium etc. that is necessary to be considered as the neutron source.
The emission rate of the spontaneous fission of these isotopes is shown in ()-Table D.13.(3) 12
()-Table D.13 Emission rate of spontaneous fission of uranium isotope 234 235 236 238 Uranium isotope U U U U Emission rate of Spontaneous fission 3.5x10-3 3.1x10-4 2.8x10-3 7.0x10-3 (Unit/gs)
The neutron source intensity per one mixed fuel element having the highest radioactivity is maximum of 7.46(n/s)
The neutron source intensity by the spontaneous fission is calculated by the same method as the paragraph D.2.3(1).
13
D.3 Model specification D.3.1 Analysis model (1) Gamma radiation dose-equivalent rate The ANISN code(5) is used for calculation of the gamma radiation shield. The evaluation of the dose-equivalent rate is performed by considering that both under normal test conditions and accident test conditions, the outer shell is subjected to a deformation, and that under routine transport conditions, both under normal and accident test conditions, the inner shell surface is assumed to be the content surface. The gamma radiation shield calculation model is shown ()-Fig.D.2.
The Intensity of gamma radiation is identical to 19.75 wt % enriched JRR-3 standard fuel (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy), but in order to reduce fuel self shielding, the data of JRR-4L type fuel for which aluminum weight is limited is used, and it is supposed that the source area, for one fuel element, is a 6.8 cm long, 8.0 cm wide and 61.0 cm high rectangular solid.
For the lateral part of the radiation source area model, 10 cylindrical fuel elements with equivalent cross section are evenly distributed. At this time, the shielding effect of the basket is ignored, but as shown in ()-Table B.6, the gap between the fuel basket and the inner shell barrel represents, for the lateral model, a 1.8 cm empty space. In view of this space thickness, the model was realized in order that the source area surface could be as close as possible to the detection point.
Since the detection point is one meter from the packaging surface, and for safety reasons, the dose-equivalent rate is evaluated by the ANISN calculation code, we have to proceed with empty space attenuation effect by the following formula.
14
Supposing that the angles flux of the packaging surface obtained by the ANISN code shield calculation is 4( rs , E, ), it calculates the source flux
( r p , E ) and the source volume rate D at rp calculation point of space shown in ()-Fig.D.3 by the following formula.
dS (r p , E ) = ' (r s , E, ') (', ) cos 2 d (D.3-1)
S r
D = E K(E) (rp , E) dE (D.3-2)
In this formula, d : Surface element of the packaging surface r : Distance between surface element ds and calculation point
= rp rS K(E): Dose rate conversion factor
- Angle between and n, normal vector of ds Unit vector which indicates the angle between ds and calculation point
' Unit vector which indicates the arbitrary angle direction from ds E Energy 15
(1) Upper portion (2) Middle portion (3) Lower portion
()-Fig.D.2 Gamma radiation shield calculation model 16
()-Fig. D.3 Relationship between packaging surface angles flux and calculation point of packaging surface 17
(2) Neutron dose-equivalent rate Neutron dose-equivalent rate, as it is shown in ()-Fig.D.4, is calculated by considering the content of uranium as the point radiation source. The content is distributed in the cavity, but its position is evaluated so that the distance between the radiation source point and inner shell surface is as small as possible. For safety reasons, the evaluation of the neutron shield calculation is performed considering the surface of the inner shell to be equivalent to the surface of the package. Then, proceeding with the evaluation, for more safety, the shielding effect of the inner shell lid, bottom and barrel parts should be ignored, and only the distance attenuation effect should be taken into consideration.
18
(1) Upper portion (2) Middle portion (3) Lower portion
()-Fig. D.4 Neutron shield calculation model 19
D.3.2 Numeric density of atoms in each area of analysis model Density and material for each zone used for calculation of the gamma radiation shield are shown in ()-Table D.14 and the volumetric rate of shield material for each area is shown in ()-Table D.15. The numeric density of atoms for each shield material is shown in ()-Table D.16.
For neutron dose-equivalent rate, the material of the structure is not taken into consideration and then the following tables are not applicable.
()-Table D.14 Material and density Part name Material Density (g/cm2)
Inner shell lid SUS 630 7.85 Inner shell barrel SUS 304 7.85 Inner shell bottom plate SUS 304 7.85
()-Table D.15 Volumetric rate of shield material for each area used in shield calculation Volumetric Area Shield material rate (%)
Radiation source area Fuel core 16.7 (lateral part evaluation) Cladding 14.3 Cavity 69.0 Radiation source area Fuel core 6.43 (lid and bottom part Cladding 5.51 evaluation)
Cavity 88.06 Inner shell lid Stainless steel (SUS 630) 100 Inner shell barrel Stainless steel (SUS 304) 100 Inner shell bottom plate Stainless steel (SUS 304) 100 20
()-Table D.16 Atom density for each material (atoms/barncm)
Radiation source Radiation source area area Nuclide SUS 304 SUS 630 (lateral part (lid and bottom evaluation) parts evaluation)
C 1.18x10-4 2.76x10-4 Al 1.7985x10-4 6.9293x10-5 Si 1.68x10-3 1.68x10-3 Cr 1.73x10-2 1.50x10-2 Mn 1.72x10-3 8.60x10-4 Fe 5.66x10-2 6.22x10-2 Ni 8.86x10-3 3.22x10-3 Cu 2.98x10-3 235 U 7.0793x10-6 2.7275x10-238 U 7.0793x10-6 2.7275x10-6 21
D.4 Shield evaluation (1) Dose equivalent rate by gamma radiation (a) In loading fresh fuel element The ANISN code is used for the shield calculation for fresh fuel loading.
The cross section of the energy group structure (group 18) of the DLC-23E/CASK library(6) is used as the cross section for the gamma ray.
This energy group structure is shown in ()-Table D.17.
The dose equivalent rate calcuration factor for the gamma ray to obtain the dose equivalent rate(7) is shown in ()-Table D.17.
The calculation result is shown in ()-Table D.18.
As for the increasing rate of the does equivalent rate under the normal test condition, by considering the deformation of the outer shell, the surface of the inner shell is considered to be the package surface in the analysis under the usual transport condition, normal test condition and accident condition, so, the does equivalent rate does not increase and is within the allowable value.
22
()-Table D.17 Gamma radiation energy group structure and dose-equivalent rate calculation factor Dose-equivalent rate Upper limit energy Energy groups calculation factor (eV)
((mSv/h)/(/cm2s))
1 1.00x107 8.4944x10-5 2 8.00x106 7.2388x10-5 3 6.50x106 6.1456x10-5 4 5.00x106 5.2036x10-5 5 4.00x106 4.4163x10-5 6 3.00x106 3.7842x10-5 7 2.50x106 3.3385x10-5 8 2.00x106 2.8967x10-5 9 1.66x106 2.4817x10-5 10 1.33x106 2.0800x10-5 11 1.00x106 1.7275x10-5 12 8.00x105 1.4112x10-5 13 6.00x105 1.0523x10-5 14 4.00x105 7.5325x10-6 15 3.00x105 5.4060x10-6 16 2.00x105 3.2205x10-6 17 1.00x105 1.9332x10-6 18 5.00x104 2.6973x10-6 1.00x104 23
()-Table D.18 Dose-equivalent rate by gamma radiation (fresh fuel elements loading)
Dose-equivalent rate Evaluated position (mSv/h)
Package surface Lid <0.001 Side 0.033 Bottom 0.003 1m apart from package surface Lid <0.001 Side 0.004 Bottom <0.001 (2) In loading lowly irradiated fuel element The shield analysis of the gamma radiation for the case where the lowly irradiated fuels are loaded, is conducted by the same method described in the section of previous (1)(a). The result of the analysis is shown in ()-Table D.19.
As for the increase rate of the dose-equivalent rate under the general test condition, the surface of the inner shell is evaluated as the surface of the package under the usual transport condition, the normal test condition and the accident test condition, by considering that the outer shell is deformed under the normal test condition, therefore the increase of the dose-equivalent rate does not occur and satisfies the criteria.
()-Table D.19 Dose-equivalent rate by gamma radiation (lowly irradiated fuel elements loading)
Dose-equivalent (mSv/h) Total Evaluated position Actinides FP (mSv/h)
Package Lid <0.001 0.025 0.026 surface Side 0.022 0.145 0.167 Bottom 0.002 0.069 0.071 1m apart Lid <0.001 0.005 0.006 from package Side 0.003 0.015 0.018 surface Bottom <0.001 0.013 0.014 24
(3) Neutron dose-equivalent rate (a) In loading fresh fuel element Neutrons dose-equivalent rate is calculated by following formula.
S nn Dn = A x k 4 r2 In this formula, Dn : Dose-equivalent rate (mSv/h)
Sn : Neutron source intensity for one fuel element 35.6 (n/s) n : Number of fuel elements for one packaging 10 r : Distance from point radiation source to evaluation point (cm) k : Neutron multiplication effect 1.11 A : Conversion facter of Dose-equivalent rate of 10 MeV energy neutron flux(7) 0.00159 ((mSv/h)/(n/cm2s))
The calculation result of neutron dose-equivalent rate is shown in
()-Table D.20
()-Table D.20 Neutron dose-equivalent rate Calculation result Dose-equivalent rate Evaluated position (mSv/h)
Package surface Lid part 0.002 Middle part 0.007 Bottom part 0.005 Position at one meter Lid part <0.001 from container surface Middle part <0.001 Bottom part <0.001 25
(b) In loading the lowly irradiated fuel element The does-equivalent rate of the lowly irradiated fuel element loading is calculated by the same method in the previous section of (2)(a).
The analysis result of the does-equivalent rate of the lowly irradiated fuel element loading is shown in ()-Table D.21.
()-Table D.21 Dose-equivalent rate of neutron irradiation (lowly irradiated fuel elements loading)
Dose-equivalent rate Evaluated position (mSv/h)
Package surface Lid <0.001 Middle 0.002 Bottom <0.001 1m apart from Lid <0.001 package surface Middle <0.001 Bottom <0.001 26
D.5 Summary of the results and evaluation Dose-equivalent rate results obtained with the present package shield analysis for the fresh fuel element and the lowly irradiated fuel element are shown in ()-Table D.22. and in ()-Table D.23. Gamma radiation dose-equivalent rate is calculated with the one dimensional discrete ordinates transport code ANISN, neutron dose-equivalent rate is easily calculated by using the model of point radiation source.
As shown in ()-Table D.22, and in ()-Table D.23, the result of calculation always satisfies the standard values.
()-Table D.22 Package dose-equivalent rate (fresh fuel element loading) (unit: mSv/h)
Evaluated position Position at one meter Package surface from the packaging surface Item Middle Lid Bottom Middle Lid Bottom Routine Gamma radiation 0.033 <0.001 0.003 0.004 <0.001 <0.001 transport condition Neutron 0.007 0.002 0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Total 0.040 0.003 0.007 0.005 0.002 0.002 Standard value 2 or less 0.1 or less Normal test Gamma radiation 0.033 <0.001 0.003 condition Neutron 0.007 0.002 0.005 Total 0.040 0.003 0.008 Standard value 2 or less Accident Gamma radiation 0.004 <0.001 <0.001 test condition Neutron <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Total 0.005 0.002 0.002 Standard value 10 or less 27
()-Table D.23 Package Dose-equivalent Rate (lowly irradiated fuel element loading) (unit: mSv/h)
Evaluation point Position at one meter Package surface from the packaging surface Item Middle Lid Bottom Middle Lid Bottom Routine Gamma radiation 0.167 0.026 0.071 0.018 0.006 0.014 transport condition Neutron 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Total 0.169 0.027 0.072 0.019 0.007 0.015 Standard value 2 or less 0.1 or less Normal test Gamma radiation 0.167 0.026 0.071 condition Neutron 0.002 <0.001 <0.001 Total 0.169 0.027 0.072 Standard value 2 or less Accident Gamma radiation 0.018 0.006 0.014 test condition Neutron <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Total 0.019 0.007 0.015 Standard value 10 or less 28
D.6 Appendix D.6.1 Explanations of ANISN code **************************** ()-D-30 D.6.2 Reference literature ********************************** ()-D-33 29
D.6.1 Explanations of ANISN code The ANISN code developed by ORNL in the USA, is a numerical calculation of the one dimensional Boltzmann transport equation based upon Discrete Ordinates Sn.
The transport equation is a mathematical representation of the balance between formation and disintegration of particles inside a volume element phase space resulting from position, energy and the direction of progression, the equation is given by the following formula.
(r,E,)t(r,E)(r,E)
= (r,E,)s(r,E E, ) dE,dS(r,E,)(D.6-1) where, (r,E,) Angle neutron flux (number of particles passing per unit time through the surface perpendicular to the unit vector and per unit solid angle in the direction of unit vector at position r) t(r,E) Total macro cross section s(r,EE,) Dispersion macro cross section or creation of a macro cross section of secondary gamma radiation from neutrons S(r,E,) External radiation source The Sn method is a numeric evaluation of the transport equation discretely dealing with position, energy and direction of progression. It is called the Sn method because of the special way evaluating the angle division point(Sn division point).
This technique uses the fundamental cell to express the transport equation for the direction of progression of each energy group, then calculates until convergence, by iterations of the difference equation.
30
To express the primary transport equation (r, r), (,)
with the adjacent mesh that determines the fundamental cell (see ()-Fig.D.5 below)
W(AN - AiNi) N - N
=V(S - t)NW ************************************ (D.6-2)
()-Fig.D.5 Mesh distribution drawing
- Where, N Neutron flux (including angles distribution)
(for each energy group)
- Cosine A Surface factor for flat plate shape: 1.0 for cylindrical shape: 2r for circular shape: 4r2 W : Weight coefficient of direction cosines W = 1.0 31
V : Volume factor for flat plate shape : -
for cylindrical shape : 2 - 2 for circular shape : 4/3 (r3 - r3) t: Total cross section S : Radiation source term (external radiation source + dispersion integral term)
- Value given by the following formula
= - W(AA)
= 0.0 The formula (D.6-2) is obtained by multiplying the phase space to (D.6-1) formula, integrating it and substituting the differential value to difference value.
The formula (D.6-2) includes 5 unknown variables (N, NN, N, N). To reduce the number of unknown variables, diamond difference calculation method or approximation step function can be used.
Diamond difference calculation: Linear approximation at adjacent meshes intermediate point.
N = 1/2 (NN)=1/2N N Step function approximation : N = N = N for < 0 N = N = N for > 0 For the diamond difference calculation, in case > 0 2
2 AN i N N -1/2 SV N = W (D.6-3) 2 2 A tV W
32
Then,
= 1/2(n1/2 n1/2)
A = 1/2(A A)
To calculate this difference equation, an initial value is assigned, then the equation calculated iteratively until it converges. This gives the basic solution.
D.6.2 Reference literature (1) Murakami Yukio:Radioactivity Data BookChijinshokan (1982).
(2) IAEA Safety Guides : Advisory Material for the IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Redioactive Material(1985) IAEA Safety Series No.37 (1985)
(3) Ethesington :Nuclear Engineering Handbook(1965)
(4) Nuclear Handbook. Glaston (1965)
(5) ORNL/RSIC Computer Code Collection ANISN-WA One Dimensional Discrete Ordinates Transport CodeCCC-82 (6) RSIC Data Library Collection DLC-23Cask 40 Group Coupled Neutron and Gamma-Ray Cross Section Data (7) Japan Isotope Association:Conversion factor for use in Radiological Protection against External Radiation ICRP Publication 74 (1998) 33
()-E Criticality analysis
()-E. Criticality analysis E.1 General The criticality analysis on the present package is performed to demonstrate compliance of the package with the technical standards in accordance with the following Regulations:
(a)The Regulations Regarding the Transporting of the Nuclear Fuel Material etc. Outside of the Factory or Workshop(Ordinance No. 57 dated on Dec. 28, 1978 of the Prime Ministers Office, Ordinance No.1 dated on June 15, 2001 of Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport) (hereinafter referred to as Ordinance) and (b)The Notification Stipulating the Particulars Concerning the Technical Standards for the Transportation of Nuclear Fuel Materials etc. Outside of the Factory or Workshop (Notification No. 11 dated on Dec. 18, 1978 of Science and Technology Agency, Notification No.1 dated on June 15, 2001 of Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport)
(hereinafter referred to as Notification) 20 types of fuel elements are contained in this package. The numbers of the fuel elements contained in one package is 10. For KUCA fuel, the coupon type has a maximum of 120 plates as one fuel element, and the flat type has a maximum of 30 plates as one fuel element, and the numbers of the fuel elements contained in one package is 10. In this analysis, the criticality analysis is conducted for the case where the nine types of fuel elements, excluding the fuel follower, special fuel and half-loaded fuel element, are contained. The weight of 235 contained U per one fuel follower, special fuel and half-loaded fuel element is equal or less than the standard fuel element, therefore, the effective multiplication constant for the package becomes small, and the analysis is not conducted. For the criticality analysis of KUCA fuel, the coupon type is treated a maximum of 120 plates as one fuel element, and the flat type is treated a maximum of 30 plates as one fuel element. As for the JMTRC fuel elements, two types of fuels of different enrichment (MEU, HEU fuels), are contained and 1
transported. In this analysis, the subcriticality is also confirmed for containing MEU fuel elements and ten HEU fuel elements, and in addition, for containing five HEU fuel elements and five MEU fuel elements as the case of mixed sample.
2
E.2 Parts to be analyzed E.2.1 Content The package is designed to contain ten box-type fuel elements maximum as shown in ()-Table E.1. All fuel elements to be loaded have the same 235 enrichment. The maximum mass of U loaded in a package is 4.85 kg, which corresponds to the JRR-3 standard type fuel element (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy). The fuel element is composed of the fuel plate which has a fuel meat made of an uranium-aluminum-silicon dispersion alloy. The uranium-aluminum dispersion alloy, the uranium-aluminum-silicon dispersion alloy or the uranium-molybdenum-aluminum dispersion alloy is covered with the aluminum alloy cladding. The specifications of fuel plate are shown in ()-Table E.2.
E.2.2 Packaging As described in (I)-A.9, a part of shock absorber and heat insulator of outer shell is deformed under normal test conditions concerning fissile package, but there is no deformation of inner shell, affecting criticality analysis.
Fuel elements or inner shell is not damaged while a part of shock absorber and heat insulator is deformed, under the accident test conditions concerning fissile package.
Therefore, this analysis model, excluding conservatively shock absorber and heat insulator as mentioned in (II)-E. 3.1, can be applied to the undamaged package during transport and the damaged package under the normal test conditions as well as the accident test conditions concerning the fissile package.
(II)-Table E.3 shows the deformation and remaining thickness of the shock absorber under normal transport conditions as well as under normal and accident test conditions of the fissile package.
3
()-Table E.1 Specification of fuel element 235 Item Total Length Cross Section U Maximum Number of Fuel Mass of 235U Enrichment Elements Loaded in Remark (g/one fuel element)
Fuel element (mm) (mm) (wt%) a Package JRR-3 standard type (Uranium silicon aluminum 1150 76.2x76.2 19.95 485 10 dispersion type alloy)
JRR-3 follower type (Uranium silicon aluminum 880 63.6x63.6 19.95 310 10 dispersion type alloy)
JRR-4 B type fuel element 1025 80.0x80.0 93.3 170 10 JRR-4 L type fuel element 1025 80.0x80.0 19.95 230 10 JRR-4 (Uranium silicon aluminum 1025 80.0x80.0 19.95 210 10 dispersion type alloy) 46.0 320 10 MEU 4
JMTR standard fuel element 1200 77.0x77.0 19.95 425 10 LEU JMTR fuel follower 890 64.0x64.0 19.95 280 10 LEU A 285 B 800 90.0 242 10 HEU JMTRC C 199 77.0x77.0 standard fuel element A 317 B 800 46.0 286 10 MEU C 255 90.0 199 10 HEU JMTRC fuel follower 800 64.0x64.0 46.0 210 10 MEU A 970 77.0x77.0 199 B 435 65.7x65.7 90.0 67 HEU JMTRC C 242 10 special fuel element D 285 970 77.0x77.0 B 46.0 286 MEU C 255 KUR Standard fuel element 873.1 75.40x79.18 19.95 218 10 LEU KUR Half-loaded fuel element 952.5 75.40x79.18 19.95 109 10 LEU KUR Special fuel element 873.1 75.40x79.18 19.95 109 10 LEU KUCA coupon fuel - - - - 1200 LEU KUCA flat fuel - - - - 300 LEU 3
()-Table E.2 Specification of fuel plate (1/2)
Item Fuel plate Fuel plate Clad Weight per Fuel plate width thickness thickness one fuel total length Remark Name of fuel plate (mm) elements (mm) (mm) (mm) (g)
JRR-3 standard fuel element (Uranium silicon 770 71.4 1.27 0.38 279 aluminum dispersion type alloy)
JRR-3 follower type fuel element (Uranium silicon 770 59.4 1.27 0.38 228 aluminum dispersion alloy)
JRR-4B type fuel element Outer fuel 734 74.5 1.26 0.38 189 plate Inner fuel 630 74.5 1.26 0.38 171 plate JRR-4L type fuel element Outer fuel 734 74.5 1.65 0.38 270 plate Inner fuel 630 74.5 1.65 0.38 266 plate JRR-4 type fuel element Outer fuel 734 74.5 1.26 0.38 262 (Uranium silicon plate aluminum dispersion Inner fuel 630 74.5 1.26 0.38 235 alloy) plate JMTR-standard fuel 271 MEU element 778 70.8 1.27 0.385 287 LEU JMTR-fuel follower 769 58.9 1.27 0.385 235 LEU JMTRC-standard fuel A 204 element B 775 0.380 201 HEU C 199 70.8 1.27 A 212 B 778 0.385 209 MEU C 206 JMTRC-fuel follower 780 58.5 0.380 171 HEU 1.27 750 57.9 0.385 168 MEU JMTRC-special fuel A 778 70.8 199 element B 385 58.5 71 1.27 0.38 HEU C 201 800 70.6 D 204 B 209 800 70.8 1.27 0.385 MEU C 205 KUR Standard fuel element 676.3 max 69.93 1.52 0.51 235 LEU KUR Half-loaded fuel element 676.3 max 69.93 1.52 0.51 235 LEU KUR Special fuel element 676.3 max 69.93 1.52 0.51 235 LEU KUCA coupon fuel 50.8 50.8 2.3 0.4 30 LEU KUCA flat fuel 600 62 1.5 0.5 190 LEU 5
()-Table E.2 Specification of fuel plate (2/2)
Item Weight of Fuel plate Fuel plate Fuel plate 235 U per one core core width core fuel plate length (mm) thickness Fuel plate core material Remark Name of fuel (g) (mm) (mm) element JRR-3 standard fuel Uranium silicon Element (Uranium silicon aluminum dispersion 23.1 750 62.0 0.51 aluminum dispersion alloy alloy)
JRR-3 follower type fuel Uranium silicon element (Uranium silicon aluminum dispersion alloy 18.2 750 49.0 0.51 aluminum dispersion alloy)
JRR-4B type fuel element Uranium aluminum Outer fuel 6.0 alloy plate 600 68.0 0.50 Inner fuel 11.9 plate JRR-4L type fuel element Uranium aluminum Outer fuel 7.4 dispersion alloy plate 600 65.4 0.89 Inner fuel 14.8 plate JRR-4 type fuel element Uranium silicon Outer fuel (Uranium silicon 7.5 aluminum dispersion alloy plate aluminum dispersion 600 65.4 0.50 Inner fuel alloy) 15.0 plate JMTR-standard fuel Uranium aluminum element 16.8 0.50 dispersion type MEU 759 61.6 alloy Uranium silicon 22.4 0.51 LEU aluminum dispersion alloy JMTR-fuel follower Uranium silicon 17.5 750 49.7 0.50 LEU aluminum dispersion alloy JMTRC-standard fuel A 15.0 Uranium aluminum element B 12.7 750 58.0 0.508 alloy HEU C 10.5 A 16.7 Uranium aluminum dispersion alloy B 15.1 759 61.6 0.50 MEU C 13.4 JMTRC-fuel follower Uranium aluminum 12.4 762 45.5 0.51 HEU alloy Uranium aluminum 13.1 730 49.7 0.50 MEU dispersion alloy JMTRC-special fuel A 10.5 750 61.8 Uranium aluminum element alloy B 4.2 375 49.9 0.51 HEU C 12.7 750 61.8 D 15.0 B 15.1 Uranium aluminum 759 61.6 0.50 dispersion alloy MEU C 13.4 Uranium silicon aluminum KUR Standard fuel element 11.83 594.0 63.0 0.50 LEU dispersion alloy Uranium silicon aluminum KUR Half-loaded fuel element 11.83 594.0 63.0 0.50 LEU dispersion alloy Uranium silicon aluminum KUR Special fuel element 11.83 594.0 63.0 0.50 LEU dispersion alloy Uranium molybdenum KUCA coupon fuel 4 44.8 44.8 1.45 LEU aluminum dispersion alloy Uranium silicon aluminum KUCA flat fuel 15 570 56 0.5 LEU dispersion alloy 6
()-Table E.3 Distance from the surface of the inner shell to the surface of the packaging (Unit : mm)
Conditions Normal transport Normal test Accident test condition condition condition for fissile (undamaged package) for fissile packages packages Item Distance from the surface of the inner shell to that of the 180 180 180 packaging Deformation 0 34.8 102.7 Remained thickness 180 145.2*1 77.3*1
- 1 In the damage system, it suppose distance from the pestle surface to the transportation container surface to be zero.
E.2.3 Neutron absorbing materials The packaging is designed to use no neutron absorbing materials.
7
E.3 Model specification E.3.1 Calculation model This packaging is designed to contain fifteen types of rectangular fuel elements. The fuel follower contains less U235 per fuel element, compared with the standard type fuel element, so that the effective multiplication factor of the packaging will become smaller, and consequently we will analyze, here, 9 kinds of fuel elements, excluding the fuel follower and the special fuel element. The KUCA coupon and flat fuel are included in the analysis.
In the evaluation of subcriticality, under the assumption that all of the gap existing inside and outside of the packaging are filled with water, investigation will be conducted to select the package under severest condition among the damaged package and undamaged package in isolation and in arrays so that the analysis is to be executed under the severest conditions.
(1) Package in isolation (damaged package vs. undamaged package)
As for the packages in isolation, the zone surrounding the packaging of undamaged package consists of insulaling material and the damaged packages are assumed as those having insulation taken out, to be replaced by water.
In this context, the neutron reflecting effect and neutron moderating effect of the water are greater than those of insulating material so that the conditions to which the damaged packages to be subjected will be severer since they have larger neutron reflecting effect and moderating effect.
(2) Arrays of packages (damaged package vs. undamaged package)
In the arrays of packages, the damaged packages which have no insulating material will be subjected to the severer conditions, compared with the undamaged packages, because the distances between the adjacent packaging in the arrays of packages are smaller and the neutron mutual interference effect is larger.
8
(3) Damaged packages in isolation vs. damaged packages in array As for the damaged packages in isolation and in array, in case of packaging being filled by water, the neutrons will be sufficiently moderated in this model, and the extent of neutron moderation will be almost same in both of the cases, and the arrays of packages of perfect reflection with no leaks of neutrons at all will be subjected to severer results than the packages in isolation in which the neutrons leaks are considered smaller, taking the reflecting effect into account.
Consequently in this analysis the arrays of packages in radial direction will be taken, as shown in ()-Fig.E.1 and ()-Fig.E.2, as a triangular lattice type having the most densely arranged infinitive arrays composed of packaging having external shock absorber and insulating materials removed completely. In the axial direction, the evaluation will be conducted on the analysis model of damaged packages in array placed under the severest condition having infinite length of fuel part.
Therefore, the moderation of neutrons is at the same level in packages in isolation and those in array.
Packages in array in which no leakage of neutrons is supposed to occur may be subjected to more severe conditions than those in isolation in which less leakage of neutrons is supposed to occur because of the reflecting effect of the water.
Requirements defined in the regulation and analysis conditions is shown in ()-Table E.4 9
()-Fig.E.3 (box type fuel element) shows the model of the fuel element loaded in the inner shell. The inner shell is filled and surrounded with water, the density of which is 1.0g/cm3. Any structure materials except fuel baskets in inner shell are replaced by water to neglect neutron absorption by these materials.
As for the JMTRC fuels, two kinds of fuels of different enrichment are mixed in the package, as a sample of this case, ()-Fig.E.4 shows the criticality analysis model for mixed fuels.
Calculation model of 9-types fuel elements used in these analyses are shown in ()-Fig.E.5 to ()-Fig.E.14. The model of both JMTR standard fuel elements (LEU and MEU) is the same except for fuel meat compositions. JRR
-4 B, JRR-4 L type fuel elements and JRR-4 fuel elements (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy) have the outer fuel plates which contain less amount of fissile than inner plates.
These outer plates are conservatively assumed to be the same with inner plates.
For the KUCA fuels, the analysis was conducted assuming the fuel core part and the aluminum cladding part were homogenized and the fuel plate was spread evenly throughout the square pipe of the basket. The coupon fuel was evenly arranged in the vertical direction in the square pipe, and the flat fuel was arranged in the horizontal direction in the square pipe.
E.3.2 Regional densities for each analyzed model region Atomic number density used in the calculation models of the package and the fuel elements are shown in ()-Table E.5 and ()-Table E.6 respectively.
235 Conservatively, the maximum value of enrichment of U considering the tolerance is assumed for each fuel element.
10
Boundary Conditions (full reflection) Boundary Conditions
( (full reflection)
Water Water Water 83.14cm
( (
Water Water Water Inner Shell trunk
( (full Boundary Conditions reflection) 4 8c m In this model of criticality, 60cm is chosen for the axial length and full reflection is supposed for the boundary conditions.
()-Fig.E.1 Calculation model of arrayed packages for criticality with 10 box type fuel elements (except KUR) 11
Boundary Conditions (full reflection)
Water Water Water KUR KUR KUR KUCA KUCA KUCA Boundary Boundary Conditions KUR KUR KUR KUR Conditions (full reflection)
KUCA KUCA KUCA KUCA (full reflection)
Water KUR KUR KUR Water KUCA KUCA KUCA Inner Shell Boundary Conditions (full reflection)
Water In this model of criticality, 60cm in the axial length is chosen for KUR and KUCA flat fuel, 120cm in the axial length is chosen for KUCA coupon fuel and full reflection is supposed for the boundary conditions. In the calculation, metal spacer was not included.
()-Fig.E.2 Calculation model of arrayed packages for criticality with 10 box type fuel elements (KUR and KUCA fuels) 12
JRR-3 JRR-4 JMTR JMTRC KUR KUCA fuel
()-Fig.E.3 Calculation model of package for criticality with 10 box type fuel elements 13
()-Fig.E.4 Calculation model of package for criticality with HEU and MEU 14
()-Fig.E.5 Criticality calculation model of JRR-3 standard fuel element 15
()-Fig.E.6 Criticality calculation model of JRR-4B type fuel element 16
()-Fig.E.7 Criticality calculation model of JRR-4L type fuel element 17
()-Fig.E.8 Criticality calculation model JRR-4 type fuel element 18
()-Fig.E.9 Criticality calculation model of JMTR standard type fuel element 19
()-Fig.E.10 Criticality calculation model of JMTRC standard type fuel element (HEU) 20
()-Fig.E.11 Criticality calculation model of JMTRC standard type fuel element (MEU) 21
Thickness 0.152 Pitch 0.281 Side Plate Fuel Plate water water Fuel Meat Fuel Plate
()-Fig.E.12 Criticality calculation model of KUR standard type fuel element 22
Fuel basket9.4 cm square Coupon 5.08cm square Thickness: 2.4 mm 120 cm Water The fuel core part and the aluminum cladding part were homogenized.
The 120 fuel plates were spread evenly.
The gap of fuels: 0.77 cm The area except for the fuels is water.
()-Fig.E.13 Criticality calculation model of KUCA coupon type fuel 23
Fuel basket9.4 cm square 60 cm The 30 fuel plates were spread evenly.
The gap of fuels:
1.633 cm Water The fuel core part and the aluminum cladding part were homogenized.
()-Fig.E.14 Criticality calculation model of KUCA flat type fuel 24
()-Table E.4 Requirements defined in the regulation and analysis conditions Requirement defined in the regulation Analysis condition Infiltration of Infiltration of Placement of the Transport water into the Approach of water water into the Approach of water Conditions transported product transported reflection transported reflection materials articles articles
- 1. Normal Transportation None None Conditions 2.
1 pc Available Available Independent A
- 3. General 1 pc triangular-lattic test Available Available This is assessed with Isolation e type model, in condition an infinite number, which inner shells
- 4. Special 1 pc Available which is stricter than are infinitely test Isolation Available Available proximity/reflection most condition of water.
densely-arranged,
- 5. General 5N pc* was adopted test (Array Available condition
- 6. Special 2N pc*
test (Array Available condition
- : N is Transport limited number. In this transport shell N=Infinite 25
()-Table E.5 Atom density of regions used in criticality calculation (atoms/barncm)
Inner shell Water Nuclide and pipe of (1.0g/cm3) fuel basket H 6.686x10-2 O 3.343x10-2 Cr 1.727x10-2 Mn 1.721x10-3 Fe 5.905x10-2 Ni 7.449x10-3 26
()-Table E.6 Atom density of fuel element used in criticality calculation (atoms/barncm)
JRR-3 Standard JRR-4 JRR-4 L Type Fuel Fuel Element JMTR JMTR JMTRC JMTRC KUR Type JRR-4 Element (Uranium (MEU) (LEU) (HEU) (MEU) (LEU)
Nuc (Uranium B Type Cladd-
-lide Silicon Fuel (Uranium Silicon Standard Standard Standard Standard Standard ing Aluminum Aluminum Fuel Fuel Fuel Fuel Fuel Aluminum Element Dispersion Dispersion Element Element Element Element Element Dispersion Alloy) Alloy) Alloy) 3.0820 5.6159 4.7729 3.8562 5.2434 3.3440 6.0614 5.0660 4.353 5.9922 Al x10-2 x10-2 x10-2 x10-2 x10-2 x10-2 x10-2 x10-2 x10 -2 x10-2 8.6527 6.4118 8.2830 4.932 5.7890 Si 0 0 0 0 0 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10 -3 x10-5 1.3387 Fe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x10-4 235 2.4952 1.5415 1.1563 1.8490 1.8459 2.4515 1.7397 1.8511 1.661 U 0 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 238 9.8853 1.0930 4.5811 7.3249 2.1395 9.7126 1.9890 2.3294 6.741 U 0 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-3 x10-4 x10-3 x10-3 Nuc- KUCA Nuc lide -lide KUCA flat Coupon 6.0262 6.0262 Al Al x10-2 x10-2 1.5956 2.3213 Mo Si x10-3 x10-2 235 1.7266 235 7.0175 U U x10-3 x10-4 238 6.8407 238 2.7802 U U x10-3 x10-3 27
E.4 Evaluation for subcriticality E.4.1 Calculation conditions (1) Content
()-Table E.7 shows the 11 kinds of fuel elements, the content of packaging to be analyzed.
()-Table E.7 Fuel elements to be analyzed Item Enrichment Maximum number of U235 of elements Fuel element (wt%)* per package JRR-3 standard type fuel element (Uranium 20 10 Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy)
JRR-4 B type fuel element 93 10 JRR-4 L type fuel element 20 10 JRR-4 fuel element (Uranium Silicon Aluminum 20 10 Dispersion Type Alloy)
JMTR standard type fuel element 46 10 JMTR standard type fuel element 20 10 JMTRC standard type fuel element 90 10 JMTRC standard type fuel element 46 10 KUR standard type fuel element 20 10 KUCA coupon fuel 20 1200 KUCA flat fuel 20 300
- Nominal value (2) Packaging We evaluated the packaging on the assumption that the surface of the inner shell is the surface of the packaging (see ()-Fig.E.3) 28
E.4.2 Water Immersion into package The Keff calculations when varying the density of water within and surrounding package are performed assuming that water enter into the package.
The maximum Keff is observed at the density of water about 0.02g/cm3, and even in this case, the package is maintained subcritical.
In this calculation the displacement of package or temperature change due to water immersion is ignored.
The evaluation of Optimum Moderating Water Density is shown in E.7.1.
Appendix.
E.4.3 Calculation method Criticality calculations are performed using a combination of the KENO-
.a Monte Carlo computer code[1] with the 137-energy group MGCL neutron cross-section library(2). The explanations of KENO-V.a and MGCL is shown in E.6.2 and E.6.3. The slab geometry Dancoff-Ginsberg correction factor is considered in calculating the resonance self-shielding effects with MAIL code(1) included in the MGCL.
For the KUR fuel element (including KUCA fuel), criticality calculations were performed using the SCALE code system(3). KENO-VI Monte Carlo module together with the 238-energy group ENDF/B-V neutron cross section library of the SCALE code system was used for the calculation of keff. The resonance self-shielding effects were treated using the BONAMI and CENTRM modules of the SCALE code system. The explanation of KENO-VI code is shown in E.6.2.
()-Fig.E.15 shows the procedure of the calculation.
29
For Fuel elements
<for Fuel elementsexcept For KUR and
<for KUR Fuel KUCA fuel elements >
except KUR>
KUR and KUCA fuel SCALE code system MGCL 137 ENDF/B-V Group Library 238 group library MAIL Generate Macroscopic Effective Cross-Section BONAMI CENTRM (Resonance Self-shielding)
Macroscopic Effective Cross-Section eff KENO-V.a KENO-VI Monte Carlo Monte Carlo Criticality Calculation Criticality Calculation Effective Effective Multiplication Multiplication Factor Factor
()-Fig.E.15 Schematic flow of criticality analysis 30
E.4.4 Results In the evaluation of subcriticality, arrays of damaged packages were analyzed which could be subjected to the most severe conditions (Section E.3.1).
()-Table E.8 shows the calculation results of the effective multiplication factor in arrays of damaged packages under submergence.
The maximum K +/- is 0.902+/-0.005 (standard deviation of the Monte Carlo calculation) with JRR-3 standard type fuel elements (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy) in a package. The maximum K at a 99%
confidence level of this result K eff +3 is 0.917, which is less than the standard value of 0.95.
For KUCA coupon fuel, when 1200 KUCA coupon fuels in a package (120 coupons are inserted into one grid of rectangular pipe) and the coupon gaps were 0.4 cm, and the fuel in each grid is at the center of the basket, the maximum K +/- is 0.8080+/-0.0026. The maximum K at a 99%
confidence level of this result K eff +3 is 0.8158, which is less than the standard value of 0.95.
For KUCA flat fuel, when 300 KUCA flat fuels in a package (30 flat plates are inserted into one grid of rectangular pipe) and the fuel plates gaps are evenly spread most, and the fuel in each grid is at the center of each grid, the maximum K +/- is 0.9055+/-0.003. The maximum K at a 99%
confidence level of this result K eff +3 is 0.9145, which is less than the standard value of 0.95.
The effect of optimum moderation by water is considered by varying the density of water within and surrounding the inner shell from 1.0g/cm3 to 0.0g/cm3. The calculations are performed for the JRR-3 standard type fuel element (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy) which shows the highest effective multiplication factor of the 11 types of fuel elements at Max density of water 1.0 g/cm3. The results show that the optimum moderation occurs at a water density of 0.02 g/cm3, and it is subcritical 31
(keff+3=O.939).
For KUCA fuel, the effect of optimum moderation by water is considered by varying the density of water within and surrounding the inner shell from 1.0g/cm3 to 0.0g/cm3. The calculations are performed for the flat fuel which shows the highest effective multiplication factor at Max density of water 1.0 g/cm3. The results show that the optimum moderation occurs at a water density of 0.001 g/cm3, and it is subcritical (keff+3=O.9325).
As for JMTRC fuel, there is a case in which two kinds of fuel of different enrichment (MEU, HEU fuels) are mixed in the package and transported.
235 In this case, the quantity of U loaded is less than the case where the MEU fuels are loaded, and the effective multiplication factor becomes smaller than the case of MEU fuels loading.
32
()-Table E.8 Results of criticality analysis when immersed Number Enrichm Mass 235 *1 of Meat ent of U Fuel Element Fuels*2 Keff +/- Keff +/-3 Material of 235U*1 (g/elemen (Unit/pac (wt%) t) kage)
Uranium-Silicon 19.95 485 10 0.902+/-0.005 0.917 JRR-3
-Aluminum Standard Type 0.939*3 dispersion Alloy JRR-4 Uranium-Aluminum 93.3 182 10 0.811+/-0.006 0.829 B Type Alloy JRR-4 Uranium-Aluminum 19.95 245.3 10 0.801+/-0.007 0.822 L Type dispersion Alloy Uranium-Silicon 19.95 210 10 0.799+/-0.004 0.811 JRR-4 -Aluminum dispersion Alloy JMTR 46.0 320 10 0.827+/-0.006 0.845 Uranium-Aluminum Standard Type dispersion Alloy (MEU)
JMTR Uranium-Silicon 19.95 425 10 0.893+/-0.004 0.905 Standard Type -Aluminum (LEU) dispersion Alloy JMTRC Uranium-Aluminum 90.0 285 10 0.783+/-0.004 0.796 Standard Type Alloy (HEU)
JMTRC 46.0 317 10 0.812+/-0.004 0.825 Uranium-Aluminum Standard Type dispersion Alloy (MEU)
Uranium-Aluminum 90.0 285 5 0.796+/-0.004 0.809 JMTRC Alloy Standard Type 46.0 317 5 Uranium- Aluminum (HEU,MEU) dispersion Alloy Uranium-Silicon 19.95 218 10 0.771+/-0.001 0.774 KUR
-Aluminum Standard Type dispersion Alloy KUCA Uranium-Molybdenum 19.95 4 1200 0.8080+/- 0.81584 Coupon fuel -Aluminum (120/ 0.0026 dispersion Alloy grid)
KUCA 19.95 15 300 0.9055+/- 0.9145 Uranium-Silicon Flat fuel -Aluminum (30/ 0.003 dispersion Alloy grid 0.93255
- 1 : The value utilized in calculation
- 2 : Number of fuel elements loaded in a package
- 3 : Water density 0.02g/cm3
- 4 : Fuels was slide at the center of basket
- 5 : Water density 0.001g/cm3 which is outside of basket 33
E.5 Benchmark test (1) Benchmark test To verify the validity of the criticality analysis method by using a combination of the KENO-a code and the 137 energy group MGCL Library which is used in this chapter, the analysis is conducted for the following experiments, and the result is evaluated.
(a) The criticality test (TCA criticality test)(3) conducted in National institute of Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA), in which the lowly enriched UO2 fuel rods clad by Aluminum are arrayed.
(b) The criticality test (International benchmark test)(4) conducted in ORNL 235 using the SPERT-D fuel (Uranium Aluminum alloy, 93.17% U enrichment)
(c) The criticality test(5) conducted for JRR-4 (20% enrichment, U3Si2, plate type fuel)
(2) Description of benchmark experiment (a) TCA criticality test The benchmark experiment was performed at Tank-type Critical Assembly (TCA) of JAEA. The critical water heights were measured by the experiment.
The experiment was performed varying fuel type, rod lattice pattern, lattice pitch and fixed poisons. The fuel material is uranium or uranium-plutonium oxide.
The experimental configuration of TCA facility and the dimension of uranium oxide rod are shown in ()-Fig.E.16.
The fuel rods are arrayed on a square pitch in the tank and four kind of lattice pitch, which correspond to the water-to-fuel volume ratio are 1.50, 1.83, 2.48 and 3.00. The number of fuel rods in a tank is changed according to the lattice pitch.
The calculations are performed for five cases of above experiment with 235 low enriched (2.6% U) uranium oxide fuel.
34
(b) International benchmark test OECD/NEA planned ICSBEP (International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project in 1994 to verify the criticality safety analysis code, and produced the International Handbook of Evaluation Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments. In this handbook, the criticality test conducted in ORNL (23 tests) to determine the specification of fuel storage, transport and reprocessing by using SPERT-D fuel (Uranium aluminum alloy, 235 93.17% U enrichment, shown in ()-Fig.E.17, ()-Fig.E.18) is described.
The three cases of criticality data, which are close to the JRR-4, are selected from the above test data as the international benchmark test data, are analyzed by using MGCL library and KENO- a code. The above three cases are described as follows.
() CASE3 (SPART3)
Shape of lattice :4x3.09 No. of criticality fuel :12.36+/-0.17 Criticality mass (235U) :3.79+/-0.05kg Lattice array :Refer to ()-Fig.E.19 (The figure shows the No. of the fuel plate)
() CASE15 (SPART15)
Shape of lattice :16x3 No. of criticality fuel :48 Criticality mass (235U) :19.62kg Lattice array :Refer to ()-Fig.E.19 (The figure shows the No. of the fuel plates) 35
() CASE23 (SPART23)
Shape of lattice :6x5.55 No. of criticality fuel :33.12+/-0.10 Critical mass (235U) :10.15+/-0.03kg 235 U enrichment :3.99g/
Boron enrichment :0.871g/
Lattice array :()-Fig.E.19 (The figure shows the No. of fuel plates)
(c) JRR-4 critical test JRR-4 is a swimming pool type research reactor of maximum 3.5MW output, and the fuel is lowly enriched uranium silicon aluminum dispersion type fuel.
The fuel elements are arrayed in the 4x5 lattice, and the graphite reflector (Lid tank side, the large reflector is made of Aluminum),
irradiation shell and the neutron source are arranged outside the fuels.
The plate shape 5 control rods and back up safety control rod are located between the fuel elements and the reflector. The moderator and the coolant are light water.
The fuel elements and the core arrangement are shown in ()-Fig.E.20 and ()-Fig.E.21 respectively. The minimum core and total core criticality tests are conducted in July in 1998.
As for the minimum core, the 12 fuel elements are arranged on the cross lines, and the graphite reflector is located outside the fuel elements, and the control rods of C1, C2 and C3 are being withdrawn by full stroke, and the C4 control rod and the C5 control rod are being withdrawn by 369mm and 292mm respectively. The core temperature during the experiment is approximately 20.
The criticality analysis for these minimum core criticality and for the maximum core criticality are conducted by combining the MGCL library and KENO- a code.
36
(3) The result of the benchmark test In order to verify the accuracy of the criticality analysis by combining the MGCL library and the KENO-.a code used in this analysis, the effective multiplication factors by using MGCL and KENO-.a are obtained for the following conditions, and the result is shown in ()-Table E.9.
(a) The criticality experiment (TCA criticality experiment) in which the lowly enriched UO2 fuel rod with the Aluminum clad, conducted in JAEA.
(b) The criticality experiment (International benchmark experiment) 235 conducted in ORNL using SPERT-D fuel (Uranium Aluminum alloy, U enrichment of 93.17%)
(c) The maximum and minimum core criticality experiment conducted in JRR-4 (20% enrichment, U3Si2, plate fuel)
From these results, the analytical procedure and the nuclear data is judged to bring the valid result.
()-Table E.9 Analysis result of benchmark criticality test Test name Fuel rod (Plate)(Element) array Keff 1 Keff+3 17x171.83 0.9926 0.0042 1.0052 21x211.83 0.9911 0.0043 1.0040 TCA criticality 20x201.50 0.9883 0.0040 1.0003 experiment 18x182.48 0.9859 0.0041 0.9982 17x173.00 0.9981 0.0041 1.0104 (88x681x2) 0.98896 0.00174 0.99418 International (352x88) 0.98865 0.00141 0.99288 benchmark test (132x110111211121211) 0.99110 0.00138 0.99524 JRR-4 (2x44) 0.98901 0.00138 0.99315 criticality test (4x5) 0.98319 0.00116 0.98667
- : Volumetric ratio of fuel and water 37
()-Fig.E.16 Configuration of TCA criticality experiments 38
39
()-Fig.E.17 SPERT-D fuel
()-Fig.E.18 SPERT-D fuel (continued) 40
41
()-Fig.E.19 Core arrangement
()-Fig.E.20 Fuel element 42
()-Fig.E.21 Core arrangement 43
E.6 Summary of results and evaluation If it is assumed that the article is under the general test conditions for fissionable transported articles, the deformation of the shipping casket is the deformation of the outer shell, which is outside a system subject to criticality assessment (surface of the transported article with the state of damage considered).
No dent containing a cube measuring 10 cm on a side would occur in the inner shell that is a system subject to criticality assessment, and each side of a circumscribed rectangular solid would not be below 10 cm.
The maximum effective multiplication factor was obtained when one package contained ten JRR-3 standard type fuel elements (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy) as shown in ()-Table E.7.
K+3=O.917 and the packaging is in subcriticality.
44
E.7 Appendix E.7.1 Evaluation of optimum moderating water density E.7.2 Description of KENO-V a code and KENO-VI code E.7.3 Explanation of MGCL neutron cross section library and MAIL code E.7.5 References 45
E.7.1 Evaluation of optimum moderating water density The effect of water density change to the subcriticality of the package is evaluated under the condition of water immersion in the package.
The water density at optimum moderation depends on the distance and the neutron absorbing materials between fuel elements. In case of this package, there is no considerable difference in the pitch of steel pipe enveloping a fuel element.
Therefore, the evaluation of multiplication factor under the optimum moderation is performed for the case where the most reactive fuel element in the water of 1.0g/cm3 is loaded to the package.
As the JRR-3 standard type fuel element (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy) is the most reactive in the water of 1.0g/cm3, the critical calculation is performed for JRR-3 standard type fuel elements (Uranium Silicon Aluminum Dispersion Type Alloy) by varying the water density from 0.0 to 1.0g/cm3. In addition, KUCA flat fuel case was investigated by varying the water density from 0.0 to 1.0g/cm3. The calculation model and material compositions except water composition is same as the water density of 1.0g/cm3.
()-Table E.10 and ()-Fig.E.22 show the calculated multiplication factors for various water density. For JRR-3 standard type fuel, the optimum moderation is observed at the condition that the water density is about 0.02g/cm3. The calculated multiplication factor at the optimum moderation is 0.939 in 99% confidence level (keff + 3), lower than reference value of 0.95. For KUCA flat fuel case, the optimum moderation is observed at the condition that the water density is about 0.001g/cm3. The calculated multiplication factor at the optimum moderation is 0.9325 in 99%
confidence level (keff + 3), lower than reference value of 0.95.
This result indicates that the package is maintained subcritical at any water density.
46
()-Table E.10 Effective multiplication factor for various water density
[contained ten JRR-3 standard type fuel elements (uranium silicon Aluminum dispersion type alloy)]
Water Density Keff Keff+3 (g/cm3) 1.00 0.9021 0.0047 0.9162 0.60 0.8391 0.0052 0.8547 0.40 0.8189 0.0041 0.8312 0.20 0.8572 0.0040 0.8692 0.10 0.9028 0.0034 0.9130 0.05 0.9286 0.0026 0.9364 0.02 0.9305 0.0026 0.9383 0.01 0.9294 0.0019 0.9351 0.00 0.9067 0.0017 0.9118 (300 KUCA flat plates in a package)
Water Density Keff Keff+3 (g/cm3) 1.00 0.9055 0.003 0.9145 0.5 0.8321 0.0022 0.8387 0.1 0.9208 0.0019 0.9265 0.001 0.9295 0.0010 0.9325 0.00 0.9190 0.0009 0.9216 47
48
()-Fig.E.22 Relationship between effective multiplication factor (keff+/-3) and water density (contained ten JRR-3 standard type fuel elements (uranium silicon Aluminum dispersion type alloy))
E.7.2 Description of KENO-V. a code and KENO=VI code (1) KENO-V. a code KENO-V. a, developed by the U.S. ORNL, is a Monte-Carlo criticality calculation code. Based on the multigroup Monte-Carlo method, the KENO code is capable of calculating neutron multiplication factors for complicated systems.
As the library for neutrons cross section, the KENO code uses a library with neutron scattering matrix expressed by Legendre's extended terms (PL) in multigroup form.
The KENO-IV, the version preceding the KENO-V. a, is only capable of handling primary degrees (P1) for extension of scattering matrix, while the latest KENO-V. a is capable of handling any degrees. (However, the application only covers primary degrees.) The KENO-V. a has increased accuracy especially in systems where the anisotropy of neutrons' scattering has a great influence on their effective multiplication factor.
The KENO-V. a uses the same basic calculation method for effective multiplication factor as the KENO-IV. This method is based on the assumption that fissile neutrons generated in a field containing fissile material lose their weight in the course of collision with the medium according to their absorption cross section in the medium.
Neutrons will be traced until their weight falls lower than a specified value or until some of the neutrons begin to leak from the system. In the collision in a medium containing fissile material, the weight of fission is recorded and used for the distribution of neutron generations in the next generation. Generating neutrons (usually 300 neutrons) for one generation and repeating the generation of neutrons according to the weight distribution of fission in the preceding generation will bring about a distribution similar to that of actual fissile neutron generations. The effective multiplication factor of the system is the mean of the effective multiplication factors of the different generations.
49
NPB Ncou f Wt ij j =1 i =1 t Keff = NPB Wtoj j =1 where NPB : Number of neutrons generated in one generation NCOLL: Number of collisions of neutrons Wt : Weight of neutrons at the time of fission Wt : Weight of generated neutrons
- Number of neutron generations per fission
- Macro fissile cross section
- Total macro cross section
- Number of collisions of neutrons
- Number of neutron generated in one generation (2) KENO-VI code KENO-VI is the latest version of the Monte-Carlo criticality calculation code KENO, and is incorporated as Monte-Carlo criticality calculation module in SCALE code system. The calculation procedures are similar to those of KENO-V.a, whereas KENO-VI can handle more complicated geometry.
E.7.3 Explanation of MGCL neutron cross section library and MAIL code MGCL is the multi-group neutron cross section library generated at JAEA by processing ENDF/B-IV(1) evaluated neutron cross section with SUPERTOG, PIXSES and other cross section processing codes. The energy group structure of MGCL master library is 137 groups.
MGCL master library includes the infinite diluted cross sections, resonance self shielding factors and scattering matrix for sixty seven nuclides. The scattering matrix is represented by p1 approximation.
MAIL is the computer code to generate macroscopic effective cross section from MGCL in the form used by KENO-IV and ANISN. The heterogeneous effect of resonance self shielding is corrected with Dancoff-Ginsberg factor.
50
E.7.4 References (1) Y. Naito, et al. MGCL-PROCESSUR: A Computer Code System for Processing Multi Group Constant Library MGCL, JAERI-M9396 (1981).
(2) L. M. Petrie. et al. KENO-V a: A Monte Carlo Criticality Program with Super Grouping, NUREG/CR-2O0 rev. 3 sec. F-11 (1984).
(3) SCALE: A Modular Code System for Performing Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluation, ORNL/TM-2005/39, Version 5.1, Vols.
I-III, November 2006. Available from Radiation Safety Information Computational Center at Oak Ridge National Laboratory as CCC-732.
(4) Y. Komuro, et al KENO-IV Code Benchmark Calculation (10) (Critical Experiment of Light Water Type Critical Assembly), JAERI-M9147(1980)
(in Japanese).
(5) K. Woods, et al. Critical Experiments of SPERT-D Fuel in Water, NEA/NSC/DOC(95)03/ Volume (1998).
(6) Y. Nakano, et al. Neutronics Characteristics of JRR-4 Low Enriched Uranium Core, Proceedings of 21th International of RERTER (1998).
51
()-F Assessment of the compliance with the regulation and the notification
(II)-F. Assessment of the compliance with the regulation and the notification This transported article is in conformity to the relevant items of technical standards stipulated in the regulation and the notification as shown in (II) Table F.1.
(II) - F - 1
(II) Table F.1: Assessment of the compliance with the technical standards stipulated in the regulation and the notification Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 3-1-1 Article 3 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Article 3-1-2 Article 4 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Article 3-1-3 Article 4 The nuclear fuel material contained in this (I)-B and transported article corresponds to those Appended other than special-form nuclear fuel table 1 materials, and is uranium alloy with enrichment of the fuel material being below 93.3 wt%.
Since the amount of radioactivity contained in the cask exceeds the A2 value, this transported article corresponds to a BU-type transported article.
Article 3-2 Article 5 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Since this transported article is a BU-type (I)-D Article 3-3 transported article, it is subject to the technical standard stipulated in Article 7 of the regulation.
Article 4 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Article 5 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Article 6 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Article 7-1 1. The maximum weight of this (II)-A.4.4 Article 4-1 transported article is approximately 950 kg.
- 2. To lift this transported article, an eye plate shall be used. The eye plate is designed to have a load factor three times the standard type, and is capable of withstanding abrupt lifting and lowering.
- 3. Except for the eye plate, the transported article is not attached with any hoisting tool that may be used to lift the transported article.
(II) - F - 2
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 7-1 There is a difference between the natural (II)-A.4.7 Article 4-2 (continued) frequency of this transported article and the frequency expected during the transport, and the article will not resonate during the transport. Therefore, damage such as cracking or breakage due to vibration or the like is unlikely to occur.
This transported article is unlikely to (II)-A.5 Article 4-2 have damage such as cracking or breakage at the temperature and pressure in the general test conditions, which are severer than the temperature and pressure expected during the transport.
The surface of this transported article is (I)-C Article 4-3 a smooth surface made of stainless steel, and has a structure that enables easy removal of contamination.
In this shipping cask, physical or chemical (II)-A.4.1 Article 4-4 action will not occur between the materials, or between the casket and the fuel elements.
The inner shell of this transported article (II)-C.2.1 Article 4-5 serves as a sealed boundary for the (II)-A.4.3 transported article, and no valve is provided. The lid of the inner shell is covered with the lid of an outer shell.
Therefore, the lid of the inner shell will not be carelessly opened.
The lid of the outer shell is secured to the body of the outer shell with bolts, and is locked and sealed. Therefore, it will not be opened carelessly. Even if the lid were opened, that would be detected.
Article 9 It shall be confirmed that the density of the (IV)-A.2 Article 4-8 radioactive material on the surface of this transported article does not exceed the following value in a pre-shipment inspection.
- 1. Radioactive material emitting alpha ray:
0.4 Bq/cm2
- 2. Radioactive material not emitting alpha ray:
4 Bq/cm2 (II) - F - 3
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 7-1 The loading of fuels in the shipping cask (IV)-A.2 Article 4-10 (continued) is performed in accordance with prescribed procedures. Further, a content inspection is conducted as the pre-shipment inspection of the transported article. Therefore, no material that may impair the safety of the transported article will be loaded.
In this transported article, each side of the (I)-C Article 5-2 circumscribed cube is 10 cm or more as (I) Fig. C.1 indicated below.
JRF-90Y-950K type Height: approx. 1,800 mm Outer diameter: approx. 840 mm Although the opening/closing section of (II)-A.4.3 Article 5-3 the transported article is the lid of the inner shell, the lid is covered with the lid of the outer shell. Therefore, it will not be carelessly opened. In addition, the lid of the outer shell is locked and sealed.
The components of this transported article are unlikely to have damage such as (II)-A.3 Article 5-4 cracking or breakage in the temperature (II)-A.4.2 range from -40 to +38C.
Even if the ambient pressure reaches 60 kPa, the soundness and the sealability of (II)-A.4.6 Article 5-5 the inner shell, which is the sealed boundary of this transported article, will be maintained. Therefore, no radioactive material will be leaked from this transported article.
This shipping cask will not contain radioactive material in liquid form. Article 5-6 The maximum dose equivalent rate on the surface of the transported article is (II)-D.5 Article 5-7 0.169 mSv/h, not exceeding 2 mSv/h.
The maximum dose equivalent rate in a position 1 m distant from the surface of the (II)-D.5 Article 5-8 transported article is 19 Sv/h, not exceeding 100 Sv/h.
(II) - F - 4
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 7-1 Not applicable since the maximum (II)-A.6.4 Article 6-5 (continued) amount of radioactivity of this shipping cask is less than 100,000 times the A2 value.
Article 7-2 Article 19 Appendix 7 General test conditions for BU-type Appendix transported articles 4-1 With ambient temperature of 38C (II)-B.4.1 assumed, 800 W/m2 is applied as the solar radiant heat to a flat surface, and 400 W/m2 to a curved surface, for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day in assessment.
Appendix 4-2 Appendix 3-1-i i. Water spray test The effect of spraying water equivalent (II)-A.5.2 to a precipitation of 50 mm/h for one hour is assessed.
Appendix 3-1-ii ii. After the specimen is placed under the condition (i), it is placed under the following condition.
Appendix 3-1-ii (1) Free-fall drop test The maximum total weight of this (II)-A.5.3 transported article is approximately 950 kg, and the drop height is 1.2 m. Analysis is conducted so that the maximum damage Appendix caused by the drop can be assessed.
3-1-ii (3)
Stack test (II)-A.5.4 Since applying a load equivalent to five times the transported article in self-weight will represent a severer condition, the strength of the inner shell under this condition is assessed.
(II) - F - 5
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 7-2 Appendix Penetration test (continued) 3-1-ii (4) In this test, a mild steel bar with a weight (II)-A.5.5 of 6 kg and a diameter of 3.2 cm was dropped from a height of 1 m to the weakest part of this transported article.
The deformation of cushioning in the (II)-D.4 Article general test conditions is marginal, and the 5-9-ii dose equivalent rate on the surface of the inner shell assumed as the surface of the transported article is far below the reference level of 2 mSv/h. Therefore, the dose equivalent rate on the surface would not significantly increase under the general test conditions.
Article 15 If the transported article were placed (II)-C.3.1 Article under the general test conditions, the 6-2-ii sealing performance would not decline. The leakage per hour of radioactive materials would not exceed the A2 value x 10-6.
The temperature of the surface of this (II)-B.4.2 Article transported article is 38C in the shade, and 6-2-iii will not exceed 50C.
Article 9 The sealability of this transported article (I)-A.2 Article would not decline even under the general 6-2-iv test conditions. Therefore, the contamination would not spread, and the contamination density on the surface which was observed in the pre-shipment inspection would not be exceeded.
Article 7-3 Article 20 Appendix 8 Special test conditions for BU-type (II)-A.6 Appendix transported articles 5-1-i Drop test I (II)-A.6.1 The maximum total weight of this transported article is 950 kg. To assess the maximum damage caused by the drop, an analysis is conducted in which the article falls from a height of 9 m to the drop test bench, which has a rigid surface, in the vertical, corner, horizontal and tilt directions.
(II) - F - 6
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 7-3 Appendix (continued) 5-1-ii Drop test II (II)-A.6.2 An analysis is conducted in which this transported article falls from a height of 1 m above a mild steel bar in vertical and horizontal drops where the center of gravity of this transported article is directly above the mild steel round bar, so that this transported article receives the maximum damage.
Appendix 5-2 -i Fire resistance test (II)-A.6.3 An analysis is conducted in which after this transported article is applied with the same solar radiation heat as the general test conditions at environmental temperature of 38C and it reaches a thermal equilibrium state, the article is exposed to an environment with radiation heat of 0.9 and temperature of 800C. In addition, the surface absorptance of the transported article is 0.8.
Appendix Calculation is performed for this 5-2-ii transported article until all internal temperatures start to fall in a state of natural cooling while the same heat input as the above is applied at environmental temperature of 38C after the heating is stopped.
Appendix 5-3 Immersion test (water depth:15 m)
An analysis is conducted in which this (II)-A.6.4 transported article was immersed in water at depth of 15 m for eight hours.
The soundness of this transported article (II)-D.5 Article will not be impaired even in special test 6-3-i conditions, the dose equivalent rate in a position 1 m distant from the surface is 0.019 mSv/h, and the reference value of 10 mSv/h will not be exceeded.
(II) - F - 7
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 7-3 Article 17 If this transported article is placed under (II)-C.4.2 Article (continued) special test conditions, the outer shell 6-3-ii would be partially deformed. However, the sealability of the inner shell would be maintained.
The leakage of radioactive material would not exceed the A2 value per week.
Article 7-4 The components of this transported (II)-A.3 article are unlikely to have damage such as (II)-B.4.2 cracking or breakage in the temperature range from -40 to +38C.
Article 7-5 For this transported article, no (II)-B.1 mechanical cooling device will be used.
Instead, it has a structure that provides cooling of the content.
Article 7-6 The maximum inner pressure of this (II)-B.4 transported article is 0.016 MPa [gauge] (II)-B.5 under the general test conditions, or 0.065 MPa [gauge] under special test conditions, and will not exceed 700 kPa [gauge].
Article 8 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Article 9 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Article 10 Not applicable since this transported article is a BU-type transported article.
Article 11 Article 23 Since this transported article will contain 15 (I)-B g or more of uranium 235, and the (I)-D enrichment of uranium 235 will be 19.95 to 93.3%, it corresponds to the requirements for fissionable transported articles.
Article 11-1 Article 24 Appendix (General test conditions) 11-1-2 The effect of spraying water equivalent (II)-A.9.1 to a precipitation of 50 mm/h for one hour is assessed.
The maximum total weight of this (II)-A.9.1 transported article is approximately 950 kg, and the drop height is 1.2 m. An analysis is conducted so that the maximum damage caused by the drop can be assessed.
(II) - F - 8
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 11-1 Appendix Since applying a load equivalent to five (II)-A.9.1 (continued) 11-3 times the transported article in self-weight will represent a severer condition, the strength of the inner shell under this condition is assessed.
In this test, a mild steel bar with a weight (II)-A.9.1 of 6 kg and a diameter of 3.2 cm was dropped from a height of 1 m to the weakest part of this transported article.
Article 11-1-i In the drop assessment, no dent (II)-A.9.1 containing a cube with a side of 10 cm was formed in the structural member.
Article 11-1-ii Each side of a rectangular solid (II)-A.9.1 circumscribed to this transported article will not be below 10 cm.
Article 11-2-i, Article 25 With regard to this transported article at (II)-E.3.1 ii and iii the time of normal transport, the conditions (II)-E.4.4 for an arranged system under special test (II)-E.5 conditions are severer in terms of criticality assessment than any of the isolated system conditions, general test conditions and special test conditions. Therefore, the criticality assessment shall be conducted for the arranged system.
Article 11-2-iv Article 27 If this transported article were placed (II)-E.3.1 and v under the conditions for an arranged (II)-E.4.4 system, the special test conditions for the (II)-E.5 system are severer in terms of criticality assessment than the general test conditions.
Therefore, the arrangement of an infinite number of transported articles is simulated.
In addition, the entry of water, which is severer in terms of criticality assessment, is assumed. In such a case, the effective multiplication constant (Keff + 3) would not exceed 0.95.
Therefore, subcriticality of this transported article is secured even in an arranged system under special test conditions, which are the severest conditions.
(II) - F - 9
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 11-2-iii Article 26 The effect of spraying water equivalent (II)-A.9.1 and v Appendix to a precipitation of 50 mm/h for one hour 12-1-i is assessed.
The maximum total weight of this (II)-A.9.1 transported article is approximately 950 kg, and the drop height is 1.2 m. Analysis is conducted so that the maximum damage caused by the drop can be assessed.
Since applying a load equivalent to five (II)-A.9.1 times the transported article in self-weight will represent a severer condition, the strength of the inner shell under this condition is assessed.
In this test, a mild steel bar with a weight (II)-A.9.1 of 6 kg and a diameter of 3.2 cm was dropped from a height of 1 m to the weakest part of this transported article.
Appendix The maximum total weight of this (II)-A.9.2 12-1-ii (1) transported article is 950 kg. To assess the maximum damage caused by the drop, an analysis is conducted in which the article falls from a height of 9 m to the drop test bench, which has a rigid surface, in the vertical, corner, horizontal and tilt directions.
Appendix An analysis is conducted in which this (II)-A.9.2 12-1-ii (2) transported article falls from a height of 1 m above a mild steel bar in vertical and horizontal drops where the center of gravity of this transported article is directly above the mild steel round bar, so that this transported article receives the maximum damage.
Appendix An analysis is conducted in which after (II)-A.9.2 12-1-iii this transported article is applied with the (II)-B.5.6 same solar radiation heat as the general test conditions at environmental temperature of 38C and it reaches a thermal equilibrium state, the article is exposed to an environment with radiation heat of 0.9 and temperature of 800C.
In addition, the surface absorptance of the transported article is 0.8.
(II) - F - 10
Item Item of the Item of the corresponding to Explanation Remarks regulation notification description in the application form Article 11-2-iii Calculation is performed for this (II)-A.9.2 and v transported article until all internal (continued) temperatures start to fall in a state of natural cooling while the same heat input as the above is applied at environmental temperature of 38C after the heating is stopped.
Appendix For this transported article, and analysis (II)-A.9.2 12-1-iv is conducted while taking into account the entry of water.
Article 11-3 The components of this transported (II)-A.3 article are unlikely to have damage such as (II)-A.4.2 cracking or breakage in the temperature range from -40 to +38C.
(II) - F - 11
(III) Basic policy for quality management Chapter III: Basic policy for quality management The basic policy for this quality management stipulates the requirements for quality assurance activities by reference to the Guidelines for Quality Assurance on the Safety at Nuclear Power Plant Equipment (JEAC4111-2009).
A. Quality management system A.1 General requirements (1) In order to comply with the technical criteria of the relevant regulations and design specifications and manufacturing methods described in the application for confirmation regarding transport or application for transport packaging approval, Institute for Integrated Nuclear and Radiation Science, Kyoto University (hereinafter referred as KURNS) shall establish, perform and maintain the quality management system (hereinafter referred as QMS) concerning design, manufacture, handling, maintenance and transport of the transport packaging and nuclear facilities relevant to handling, maintenance and transportation of transport packaging (hereinafter referred as transport packaging, etc.). This quality assurance system shall be improved continuously through management review.
(2) KURNS shall carry out the following operations:
a) clarifying the details of the necessary processes entailed by the QMS (including the results to be achieved by said processes), be able to identify how said processes will be individually applied.
b) Determine the order of these processes and their mutual relationships.
c) Determine the criteria and methods necessary for ensuring the implementation of processes and the effectiveness of their management.
d) Ensure a system that enables the use of the resources and information necessary for the implementation of processes, as well as their monitoring and measurement.
e) Monitor, measure, and analyze processes. However, where measurement is difficult, measurement shall not be required.
f) Take the necessary measures for obtaining the results of the processes set forth in item (i) and for maintaining effectiveness.
g) Render processes and organizations pertaining to the implementation of (III)-1
quality assurance consistent with the QMS.
h) Promote safety activities based on findings from the social sciences and behavioral sciences.
A.2 Requirements for documentation A.2.1 General In order to establish a QMS pursuant to the provisions of A.1, KURNS shall prepare the following documents and implement the items prescribed in said documents.
a) A Quality Policy Statement and a Quality Objective Statement.
b) A document specifying the provisions of the QMS (Quality Assurance Plan).
c) Documents necessary for ensuring the effective and planned implementation and management of processes.
d) Procedural manuals and records as defined in the Quality Assurance Plan.
A.2.2 Document management (1) KURNS shall manage the documents specified in this document and other documents necessary for the QMS (excluding records; hereinafter referred as quality management documents").
(2) KURNS shall prepare procedural manuals stipulating the controls required for the following operations:
a) When issuing quality management documents, to review the validity of said documents and approve their release.
b) When updating quality management documents after performing the necessary reviews, to approve said updates.
c) To make it possible to identify content changes and the status of the latest revisions to quality management documents.
d) When using a revised quality management document, to ensure that systems are able to use the appropriate revised version of said document.
e) To ensure that quality management documents are easy to read and in a state such that their contents can be easily grasped.
(III)-2
f) To identify quality management documents prepared by external bodies and manage their distribution.
g) To prevent the unintentional use of obsolete quality management documents. In such cases, when retaining said documents, to identify such regardless of their purpose.
A.2.3 Control of records (1) As well as clarifying the object of records specified in this document and of records demonstrating compliance with other requirements and effective implementation of the QMS, KURNS shall prepare and manage said records in a searchable format while ensuring that their contents are easy to read and can be easily grasped.
(2) KURNS shall prepare procedural manuals stipulating necessary controls relating to the identification, preservation, protection, search, retention period, and disposal of the records set forth in the previous paragraph.
(3) KURNS shall confirm the following items regarding the quality records of the transport packaging:
a) Quality records shall include quality records submitted by the manufacturer of the transport packaging, b) Retention periods of the quality records shall be determined with regards to the validity period of the packaging license and design license of the transport packaging.
(III)-3
B. Responsibility of the Applicant B.1 Commitment of the management The director of KURNS (hereinafter referred as Director), as operating representative, shall demonstrate responsible leadership through his or her involvement in establishing, implementing, and maintaining the effectiveness of the QMS by conducting the following operations:
a) Establishing a quality policy.
b) Ensuring the establishment of quality objectives.
c) Promoting activities that foster a safety culture.
d) Implementation of management review.
e) Ensuring systems that are able to utilize resources.
f) Informing personnel implementing safety activities (hereinafter, Section personnel) of the importance of observing the applicable laws and regulations and otherwise ensuring the safety of nuclear energy.
B.2 Responsibility and authority B.2.1 Responsibility and authority (1) System Figure III-B.1 shows the quality assurance organization which performs the duties regarding the quality assurance plan.
(2) Responsibility and authority The Director shall ensure that the responsibilities and authorities of each Section and Section personnel (including responsibility for explaining the content of safety activities) are defined, documented, and widely understood.
B.2.2 Quality assurance representatives The director shall grant responsibility and authority for the following operations to personnel responsible for managing and supervising the QMS (III)-4
(hereinafter, quality assurance representatives).
a) Ensure that processes are established and implemented, and that their effectiveness is maintained.
b) Report to the director the implementation status of the QMS and any needed improvements.
c) In each Section, raise awareness about observing the applicable laws and regulations and otherwise ensure the safety of nuclear energy.
B.2.3 Responsibilities and authority of section heads The Director shall grant responsibility and authority for the following operations to the heads in each Section (hereinafter, Section Heads) as the parties responsible for managing and supervising these processes.
a) Ensure that processes for the individual operations managed by the Section Head are established and implemented, and that their effectiveness is maintained.
b) Raise awareness regarding individual operations requirements on the part of Section personnel engaged in individual operations managed by the Section Head.
c) Conduct evaluations regarding the performance of individual operations managed by the Section Head.
d) Promote activities that foster a safety culture.
B.2.4 Internal audit representative (1) The Director shall appoint an internal audit representative.
(2) The internal audit representative shall perform operations for planning and implementing the internal audit as the responsible personnel of the internal audit.
B.3 Management review B.3.1 General (1) The Director shall, at predefined intervals, review the QMS to confirm its (III)-5
validity and effectiveness, as well as maintain its effectiveness (including evaluation of room for improvement and the need for changes to the QMS, quality policy, or quality objectives; hereinafter, management review).
(2) KURNS shall arrange for quality assurance representatives to prepare and manage records of the results of the management review.
B.3.2 Input to management review The Director shall carry out management review based on the following inputs:
a) Audit results.
b) Feedback from parties outside KURNS (e.g., external institutions, regulatory agencies, the Kyoto University administration, local residents, and users).
c) Process implementation status.
d) The results of inspections of the transport packaging, etc.
e) Quality objective achievement status.
f) Implementation status of activities for fostering a safety culture.
g) Compliance status regarding applicable laws and regulations.
h) The status of corrective actions (hereinafter understood as remedial actions carried out to prevent the reoccurrence of nonconformities, which in turn are hereinafter understood as states that do not conform to requirements) and preventive actions (hereinafter understood as preventive measures to prevent potential nonconformities.)
i) Measures taken in response to the results of previous management reviews (follow-up measures).
j) Changes that may affect the QMS.
k) Proposals for improvements from each Section or from Section personnel.
B.3.3 Output from management review The Director shall obtain information pertaining to the following matters from the management review and take steps as necessary.
a) Improvements needed to maintain the effectiveness of the QMS and operations.
b) Improvements to safety activities associated with the planning and (III)-6
implementation of individual operations.
c) Resources necessary for ensuring maintenance of the validity and effectiveness of the QMS.
(III)-7
(III)-Fig.B.1 Quality assurance organization for design of the transport packaging (III)-8
C. Education and training C.1 Securing resources KURNS shall determine and secure the necessary resources for ensuring safety.
C.2 Section personnel KURNS shall ensure that Sections are staffed with personnel who have demonstrated their abilities sufficiently to satisfy the following requirements.
a) Have appropriate education and training.
b) Have the requisite skills and experience.
C.3 Education and training, etc.
KURNS shall undertake the following operations.
a) Determine the kinds of abilities required by Section personnel.
b) Clarify the need for education and training among Section personnel.
c) Provide education and training and otherwise take steps to fulfill the need for education and training set forth in the previous item.
d) Evaluate the effectiveness of measures set forth in the previous item.
e) Ensure that Section personnel are aware of the relationship and importance of their own individual operations to achieving quality objectives, and that they recognize ways of making their own contributions.
f) Prepare and manage appropriate records regarding the education and training, as well as skills and experiences of Section personnel.
(III)-9
D. Design control D.1 Planning of processes required by individual operations (1) KURNS shall formulate and establish plans for the processes required by individual operations for transport packaging etc.
(2) Plans formulated pursuant to the provisions of the previous paragraph (hereinafter referred as individual operations plans) shall be consistent with the requirements of the other processes.
(3) When formulating individual operations plans, KURNS shall appropriately determine with regard to the following items.
a) Quality objectives and individual operations requirements pertaining to individual operations and transport packaging, etc.
b) Necessary processes, and quality management documents and resources that are specific to individual operations or transport packaging, etc.
c) Necessary verification, validation, monitoring, and measurement, as well as inspection and testing specific to the individual operations or transport packaging, etc., and criteria for determining the compliance of individual operations or transport packaging, etc.
(hereinafter, compliance-determining criteria).
d) Records necessary for verifying that processes pertaining to individual operations and transport packaging, etc., and the results thereof conform to individual operations requirements.
e) KURNS shall ensure that outputs relating to the formulation of individual operations plans take forms that correspond to work methods.
D.2 Determination of individual operations requirements KURNS shall determine the following items as individual operations requirements.
a) Matters that, although not explicitly stated by outside parties, are known to be necessary requirements for individual operations or transport packaging, etc.
b) Applicable laws and regulations that concern said individual operations and transport packaging, etc.
c) Other requirements deemed necessary by KURNS.
(III)-10
D.3 Review of individual operations requirements (1) Prior to implementing individual operations or utilizing transport packaging, etc., KURNS shall implement a prior review of individual operations requirements.
(2) When implementing the review set forth in the previous paragraph, KURNS shall confirm the following items.
a) That individual operations requirements have been specified for said individual operations or transport packaging, etc.
b) Where the individual operations requirements pertaining to said individual operations or transport packaging, etc. differ from individual operations requirements determined beforehand, those said differences are clarified.
c) That KURNS has the ability to comply with the predetermined requirements.
(3) KURNS shall prepare and manage records pertaining to the results of the review set forth in the first paragraph, as well as records pertaining to the steps taken based on the results of the said review.
(4) When individual operations requirements are changed, in addition to revising the relevant documents, KURNS shall ensure that the relevant Section personnel are informed of the modified individual operations requirements.
D.4 Transmission of information to external parties KURNS shall clarify and implement effective methods for the transmission of information to external parties.
D.5 Design and development planning KURNS, as well as formulating plans for design and development (Hereinafter design and development plans understood as the definition of specifications for transport packaging, etc., taking their necessary requirements into consideration.), shall also manage design and development.
(1) When formulating design and development plans, KURNS shall determine the (III)-11
following items:
a) Stages of design and development.
b) Review, verification, and validation as appropriate for each stage of design and development.
c) The responsibility and authority of Section and Section personnel involved with design and development (including the responsibility to explain the content of safety activities).
(2) In order to ensure the effective transmission of information and clear assignment of responsibility and authority, KURNS shall manage and supervise communication between the various individuals involved in design and development.
(3) KURNS shall properly update the design and development plan formulated pursuant to the provisions of the first paragraph in accordance with the progress of design and development.
D.6 Input related to design and development (1) As well as determining inputs relating to design and development as listed below with regard to the requirements pertaining to transport packaging, KURNS shall prepare and manage records relating to the pertinent information.
a) Requirements pertaining to transport packaging with regard to function or performance in accordance with intended usage.
b) Information obtained from the prior implementation of similar design and development that is applicable as input to said design and development.
c) Applicable laws and regulations.
d) Other requirements essential to design and development.
(2) KURNS shall review and approve the validity of inputs relating to design and development.
D.7 Output related to design and development (1) KURNS shall retain outputs related to design and developments in a format that enables verification relative to inputs related to design and development.
(III)-12
(2) When approving progress from design and development to the next stage in the process, KURNS shall first approve the relevant outputs related to design and developments.
(3) KURNS shall ensure that outputs related to design and development meet the following conditions.
a) Compliance with requirements that constitute inputs related to design and development.
b) Provision of appropriate information for procurement, for the implementation of individual operations, and for the use of transport packaging, etc.
c) Inclusion of compliance-determining criteria.
d) Prescription of specific characteristics of transport packaging, etc..
that are indispensable for the safe and proper use of transport packaging, etc.
D.8 Design and development review (1) At the appropriate stage, KURNS shall implement a systematic review of design and development (hereinafter, design and development review) including the following items in accordance with the design and development plan.
a) Evaluate whether the results of design and development can comply with requirements.
b) Where problems with design and development exist, ensure the ability to identify the problematic content in question and propose the necessary measures.
(2) In the design and development review process, KURNS shall involve representatives of the Sections associated with the design and development stage that is the object of the review in question, as well as experts related to said design and development.
(3) Where the necessary measures have been taken based on records of the results of design and development review and the results in question, KURNS shall prepare and manage the records thereof.
D.9 Design and development verification (III)-13
(1) KURNS shall implement verification in accordance with the design and development plan in order to ensure that outputs related to design and development are in a state of conformance with requirements that are inputs related to the design and development in question. In this case, it shall ascertain conformity with the requirements when proceeding to the next stage in the process in accordance with the design and development plan.
(2) KURNS shall prepare and manage records of the results of the verification set forth in the preceding paragraph (including records of necessary measures taken based on the results of the verification in question).
(3) KURNS shall not allow any Section or Section personnel involved in the design and development in question to conduct the verification set forth in the first paragraph.
D.10 Validation of design and development (1) In order to ensure that transport packaging comply with the requirements concerning the prescribed performance, purpose of use, and intended usage method, KURNS shall implement the validation of the design and development in question in accordance with the design and development plan as it relates to the transport packaging in question (hereinafter referred to in this article as design and development validation).
(2) When using the transport packaging, KURNS shall first complete design and development validation. However, if it is not possible to carry out validation until after the installation of the transport packaging in question, then design and development validation shall be carried out prior to commencing the use of the transport packaging.
(3) Where the necessary measures have been taken based on records of the results of design and development validation and the results of the validation in question, KURNS shall prepare and manage the records thereof.
D.11 Control of design and development changes (1) When a design and development change has been made, as well as ensuring that the ability to identify the content of said changes, KURNS shall prepare and manage a record pertaining to the change in question.
(2) When implementing design and development changes, KURNS shall approve these (III)-14
after first carrying out the appropriate review, verification, and validation.
(3) KURNS shall ensure that the scope of the review of design and development changes includes evaluation of the impact of the changes in question on transport packaging (including an evaluation of impact on materials and components that constitute the transport packaging in question).
(4) KURNS shall prepare and manage records relating to the results of the review of changes under the provisions of paragraph 2 (including any records of necessary measures taken based on the results of said review).
(III)-15
E. Manufacturing order of transport packaging E.1 Quality management plan KURNS shall establish a quality management plan defining the quality management operation of transport packaging manufacturing, including the quality control of manufacturer and supplier of transport packaging.
E.2 Procurement process (1) When ordering the manufacturing of the transport packaging, KURNS shall ensure that the manufacturing of the transport packaging complies with the technical criteria set by law, design specifications specified in application for transport packaging design approval or application for transport packaging approval and manufacturing process specified in application for transport packaging design approval, and shall ensure that externally procured goods and services procured (hereinafter referred as procured goods, etc.)
shall comply with its own specified requirements pertaining to procured goods, etc. (hereinafter referred as requirements for procured goods, etc.).
(2) KURNS shall ensure the items in the preceding paragraph when KURNS orders the manufacturing of the part(s) of the transport packaging and supplies the part(s) to the manufacturer of the transport packaging.
E.3 Evaluation of the Manufacturer of Transport Packaging KURNS shall perform the following items:
(1) Evaluate the ability of the manufacturer of transport packaging to manufacture the transport packaging and select the manufacturer. The following items shall be considered upon evaluating the manufacturers ability.
a) Technology and personnel regarding the transport packaging manufacturing.
b) Quality policy, quality management plan of the manufacturer and their implementation status.
c) Supply experience of transport packaging or similar products.
d) Usage experience and quality records of transport packaging or similar products.
e) Evaluation of test products and samples, etc.
(III)-16
(2) Clarify the method and level of management of the manufacturer performed by KURNS.
E.4 Quality Management Requirement to the Manufacturer When ordering the manufacturing of transport packaging, KURNS shall clearly instruct the manufacturer of the transport packaging about the following requirements in a document such as a specification sheet, and ensure the manufacturer to implement the requirements:
a) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall implement quality control that complies with "E.8 Content of Quality Management by Manufacturer of the Transport Packaging".
b) Measures shall be taken so that the personnel of KURNS and the regulatory authorities can inspect the manufacturer of the transport packaging and the supplier of the manufacturer of the transport packaging during the manufacture of the transport packaging and confirm the quality control status.
c) Measures shall be taken so that KURNS can examine and approve the selection criteria for suppliers of manufacturer of the transport packaging. Measures shall be taken so that KURNS can confirm the selection status of the manufacturer of the transport packaging's supplier.
d) Measures shall be taken to clarify the relationship of responsibilities between business operators involved in the manufacture of transport packaging through contracts.
e) Measures shall be taken to ensure that the manufacturer of the transport packaging and the supplier of the manufacturer of the transport packaging fully understand the meaning and importance of the numerical values regarding the safety-critical material specifications specified by KURNS.
f) When using special materials that are of high safety importance in the manufacture of transport packaging, information on the construction, analysis, and inspection methods related to manufacturing shall be exchanged beforehand between the business operators involved in the manufacture of transport packaging and take measures to ensure that technical studies are carried out sufficiently.
(III)-17
g) In processes that involve multiple business operators regarding the manufacture of transport packaging, clarify the arrangements such as work instructions and delivery agreements and ensure close cooperation.
h) If a non-conforming product occurs and it is used by rework, etc., notify KURNS in writing and receive instructions for handling.
i) Immediate reporting and approval of any significant changes in the manufacturer of the transport packaging's manufacturing process.
E.5 Verification of manufacturing of transport packaging (1) KURNS shall conduct quality audits on the manufacturer of the transport packaging, understand the status of quality audits by the manufacturer of the transport packaging on suppliers, and directly check the quality control status with the supplier if necessary.
(2) When inspecting transport packaging, KURNS shall perform witness inspection and record inspections considering the importance of safety and other factors, while considering the existence of public standards and official qualification systems and the status of quality control of manufacturer of the transport packaging and suppliers.
(3) KURNS shall prepare and implement documents such as inspection plans, inspection procedures, and implementation procedures for quality inspections related to the production and inspections of transport packaging.
E.6 Schedule management and certification of special processes KURNS shall create and manage the manufacturing schedule and inspection schedule for manufacturing the transport packaging. KURNS shall also certify processes that cannot be sufficiently verified in the subsequent inspection as special processes, and clarify the method of certifying and managing workers and processes.
E.7 Measurement, analysis and improvement E.7.1 General KURNS shall formulate and implement a plan concerning processes related to the monitoring, measurement, analysis, and improvements necessary for the following (III)-18
operations (including applicable methods of inspection and testing [including statistical methods] and the determination of the scope of the application of the methods in question):
a) Demonstrating conformity with individual operations requirements.
b) Ensuring the conformity of the QMS and maintaining its effectiveness.
E.7.2 Opinions from outside parties (1) As part of the monitoring and measurement of the implementation status of the QMS, KURNS shall grasp the opinions of individuals external to the transport packaging, etc., for ensuring safety.
(2) KURNS shall clarify its grasp of the opinions referenced in the preceding paragraph, as well as determine methods concerning the reflection of said opinions.
E.7.3 Internal audit (1) In order to determine whether the QMS meets the following requirements, KURNS shall implement an internal audit by an Internal Audit Committee at predefined intervals. KURNS shall arrange for an Internal Audit Representative to convene and instruct the Internal Audit Committee.
a) KURNS conforms to the requirements of the individual operations plan, the provisions of this document, and the requirements related to the QMS in question.
b) Effective implementation and maintenance have been carried out.
(2) KURNS shall formulate an internal audit implementation plan that takes into consideration the status and importance of the areas and processes targeted by the internal audit, as well as the results of previous audits.
(3) KURNS shall establish the criteria, scope, frequency, and method of the internal audit.
(4) KURNS shall ensure objectivity and impartiality in its selection of internal audit committee members and in the implementation of the internal audit.
(5) KURNS shall not allow the internal audit committee to conduct an internal audit of its own individual operations.
(6) KURNS shall establish the responsibility, authority, and requirements for formulating and implementing an internal audit implementation plan, as well (III)-19
as reporting the results of the internal audit and managing the records thereof, in a procedural manual.
(7) KURNS, in addition to having managers responsible for the areas subjected to internal audit take rapid measures to eliminate any discovered nonconformities and the causes of said nonconformities, shall also arrange for the verification of said measures and the reporting of their results.
E.7.4 Process monitoring and measurement (1) When conducting the monitoring and measurement of processes, KURNS shall apply monitoring and measurement methods suited to the monitoring and measurement of said processes.
(2) Using the monitoring and measurement methods set forth in the preceding paragraph, KURNS shall demonstrate that processes are able to obtain the results prescribed in the quality management plan and individual operations plans.
(3) In the event that it is not possible to obtain the results prescribed in the quality management plan and individual operations plans, KURNS shall take appropriate remedial and corrective action to ensure conformity with individual operations requirements.
E.7.5 Inspection and test (1) KURNS shall carry out the inspection and testing of transport packaging in order to verify that the transport packaging conform to requirements.
(2) KURNS shall carry out the inspection and testing set forth in the previous paragraph at the appropriate stage of processes relating to the implementation of individual operations, according to the individual operations plan and the procedural manuals.
(3) KURNS shall prepare and manage records, etc., related to the results of inspection and testing, which constitute evidence of conformity with the compliance-determining criteria of inspection and testing.
(4) KURNS shall prepare and manage records specifying individuals who approve proceeding to the next stage in a process.
(III)-20
(5) KURNS shall not approve proceeding to the next stage of a process until inspection and testing based on the individual operations plan is completed and found to be free of trouble.
(6) KURNS shall designate individuals to conduct inspection and testing in accordance with the importance of individual operations and transport packaging. In this case, the neutrality of the individuals who will conduct inspection and testing shall be taken into consideration.
E.7.6 Management of nonconformity (1) In order to prevent individual operations and transport packaging that do not conform to requirements from being neglected, KURNS shall identify the individual operations and transport packaging in question and ensure that they are managed correctly.
(2) KURNS shall set out management pertaining to the handling of nonconformities and the responsibility and authority associated with such in a procedural manual.
(3) KURNS shall handle nonconformities using one of the following methods.
a) Taking measures to eliminate any nonconformities discovered.
b) Approving the implementation of individual operations, the use of transport packaging or advancement to the next stage of a process (hereinafter, specially adopted measures).
c) Taking measures to prevent the originally intended use or application.
d) In the event that a nonconformity is discovered after the implementation of an individual operation, taking appropriate measures against the effects or potential effects of the nonconformity.
(4) KURNS shall prepare and manage records of the content of nonconformities and of measures (including specially adopted measures) taken against said nonconformities.
(5) Where a nonconformity has been modified, KURNS shall carry out a secondary verification to confirm conformity with individual operations requirements in the wake of the modification.
E.7.7 Data analysis (III)-21
(1) In order to demonstrate that the QMS is appropriate and effective and to evaluate room for improvement in terms of its effectiveness, KURNS shall determine, collect, and analyze appropriate data (including data obtained from the results of monitoring and measurement and data from other relevant information sources).
(2) By analyzing the data set forth in the preceding paragraph, KURNS shall obtain information relating to the following items.
a) Opinions from parties external to the transport packaging b) Conformity with individual operations requirements c) Characteristics and trends of processes and transport packaging (including those that will serve as the starting point for preventive action) d) The supply capacity of the suppliers of procured goods, etc.
E.7.8 Improvement As well as clarifying all items for which changes are necessary for maintaining the validity and effectiveness of the QMS through the utilization of its quality policy, quality objectives, the results of internal auditing, data analysis, corrective actions, preventive actions, and management review, KURNS shall implement the changes in question.
E.7.9 Corrective actions (1) KURNS shall take appropriate corrective action in light of the impact of the nonconformities discovered. In such cases, KURNS shall conduct an analysis for investigating the fundamental causes of matters that have arisen affecting nuclear energy safety (hereinafter, root cause analysis) after establishing procedures for doing so.
(2) KURNS shall prepare a Corrective Action Procedural Manual stipulating the following requirements.
a) Review of nonconformities.
b) Determination of the causes of nonconformities.
c) Evaluation of the necessity of measures for ensuring that nonconformities do not reoccur.
d) Determination and implementation of the necessary corrective actions (III)-22
(including document updates).
e) In the event that a survey has been carried out regarding corrective actions, recording of the results thereof and of corrective actions taken based on said results.
f) Review of the corrective actions taken and their effectiveness.
E.7.10 Preventive actions (1) KURNS shall determine and take appropriate preventive action in light of the impact of the potential problems. In such cases, KURNS shall reflect appropriately not only on findings obtained through the implementation of safety activities in its own transport packaging, etc., but also on findings obtained from other facilities.
(2) KURNS shall prepare a Preventive Action Procedural Manual stipulating the following requirements (including requirements relating to root cause analysis).
a) Determination of potential nonconformities and their causes.
b) Evaluation of the necessity for preventive action.
c) Determination and implementation of the necessary preventive actions.
d) In the event that a survey has been carried out regarding preventive actions, record of results thereof and of preventive actions taken based on said results.
e) Review of the preventive actions taken and their effectiveness.
(III)-23
E.8 Content of quality management system by manufacturer of transport packaging KURNS shall require the following items related to quality management from the manufacturer of transport packaging when placing an order for manufacturing the transport packaging with the manufacturer of transport packaging.
E.8.1 Quality management system E.8.1.1 General The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall establish, document, implement and maintain a quality management system in order to implement the manufacturing in conformity with the requirements related to the manufacturing of transport packaging.
E.8.1.2 Documentation requirements E.8.1.2.1 General The quality management system documentation shall include a documented statement of quality policy and quality objectives, and E.8.1.2.2 through E.8.1.2.4 below.
E.8.1.2.2 Quality Manual The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall develop and maintain a quality manual containing a description of the scope of the quality management system, the documented procedures established for the quality management system and the interrelationships between the processes of the quality management system.
E.8.1.2.3 Document management The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall control the documentation required by the quality management system. Establish documented procedures that (III)-24
define the controls required for document approval and review and identification.
E.8.1.2.4 Quality record management The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall create and maintain readable, identifiable, and searchable quality records. The manufacturer shall establish a documented procedure that defines the controls required for the identification, storage, protection, retrieval, storage period and disposal of quality records.
The quality record shall include the quality record submitted by the supplier.
E.8.2 Responsibility of the Manufacturer of the Transport Packaging E.8.2.1 Chief Executive Commitment The chief executive of the manufacturer of the transport packaging shall show evidence of its commitment to establishing and implementing a quality management system and continually improving its effectiveness by setting quality policies, ensuring that quality objectives are set, and conducting management reviews.
E.8.2.2 Responsibility and authority E.8.2.2.1 Responsibility and authority The chief executive of the manufacturer of the transport packaging shall ensure that the responsibilities and authorities for the operations that affect the quality of the production of the transport packaging are defined and are known to the entire organization.
E.8.2.2.2 Management Representative Officer The chief executive of the manufacturer of the transport packaging shall appoint a management representative officer who has the responsibility and authority for the implementation of the quality management system from the management personnel level.
(III)-25
E.8.2.3 Management review The chief of the manufacturer of the transport packaging shall regularly review the quality management system to ensure that it is effective.
E.8.3 Resource operation management E.8.3.1 Provision of personnel The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall identify and provide the personnel necessary to implement and maintain the quality management system and to continually improve its effectiveness.
E.8.3.2 Education and training (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall clarify the competence required for personnel engaged in work that affects the quality of manufacturing of transport packaging, educate and train them to have the necessary competence and maintain the records.
(2) Persons engaged in the specified work shall be qualified based on appropriate education/training history and experience as necessary.
E.8.4 Manufacturing of transport packaging E.8.4.1 Quality control plan (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall establish a quality control plan that defines quality management operations related to the manufacturing of transport packaging, including quality control of suppliers, and formulate a quality control plan.
(2) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall consider the following items as appropriate in order to meet the requirements related to the manufacture of transport packaging.
a) All control measures, processes, equipment (including inspection equipment), equipment, management resources and technology that are considered necessary to achieve the requirements shall be secured.
(III)-26
b) Manufacturing process, inspection procedures and documents shall be coordinated.
c) Quality control and inspection techniques shall be updated as necessary.
d) Verification method in the transport packaging manufacturing process shall be clarified.
e) Acceptance criteria shall be clarified.
f) Quality records shall be created E.8.4.2 Confirmation of Contract Details (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall establish the procedure for confirming the contract content.
(2) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall confirm the contents before submitting the quotation specification or before contracting, and confirm that he/she has the ability to meet the contract requirements.
E.8.4.3 Purchasing E.8.4.3.1 General The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall define the procedure for conforming the purchased items (including services; the same shall apply hereinafter) to the requirements. It should be noted that this does not apply to purchased goods manufactured based on JIS or other public standards, or those for which the items to be checked for inspection are simple or general-purpose products, and whose compatibility can be confirmed by inspection at the time of acceptance.
E.8.4.3.2 Evaluation of the suppliers The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall implement the following items.
a) Develop selection criteria for suppliers, evaluate whether suppliers have the ability to meet the requirements of supply contracts, and make selections.
(III)-27
b) Clarify to the supplier the type and extent of controls performed by the manufacturer of the transport packaging.
E.8.4.3.3 Purchasing data The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall prepare a purchase document stating the supply requirements and instruct the supplier.
E.8.4.3.4 Purchase verification (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall prepare a document such as a guideline for the inspection of purchased products.
(2) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall verify the purchased items by performing necessary inspections or other activities.
E.8.4.4 Process control (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall carry out the following items when planning and controlling the manufacturing process of transport packaging.
a) Develop a written procedure that clarifies the method of manufacturing that may affect quality.
b) In each process, use appropriate equipment and ensure an appropriate work environment.
c) Perform all processes according to quality control plans, procedures, etc.
d) To monitor the characteristic values of processes and products.
e) Appropriate maintenance of equipment to maintain continuous process capability.
f) In the event of a supplier nonconformity or significant change in the manufacturing process, prompt documentation shall be provided and appropriate action shall be taken.
(2) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall certify the process whose results cannot be sufficiently verified by the subsequent inspection as a special process in consultation with the applicant, and clarify the method of certifying and controlling the worker and the process. Records shall be kept as appropriate for the certified processes, equipment and personnel.
(III)-28
E.8.4.5 Identification and traceability (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall establish a procedure for identifying the condition of the transport packaging at all stages from receiving the material to manufacturing.
(2) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall establish procedures to enable tracking of quality records for individual transport packaging.
E.8.4.6 Managing customer supplies The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall establish procedures for verification, storage and management of the goods supplied by the applicant for incorporation into the manufactured transport packaging or for related work. For lost or damaged supplies and other supplies not suitable for use, record and report to the applicant.
E.8.4.7 Inspection E.8.4.7.1 General The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall establish the procedure for inspection work. Required inspections and records shall be specified in the quality control plan or procedure manual.
E.8.4.7.2 Acceptance inspection The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall not use or process the purchased product until it confirms that the purchased product complies with the requirements.
E.8.4.7.3 In-process inspection The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall implement the following items:
(III)-29
a) Inspect the transport packaging in accordance with the provisions of the quality control plan and procedure manual.
b) Do not proceed to the next step until the prescribed inspection is completed or the required report is received and verified.
E.8.4.7.4 Final inspection The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall perform a final inspection in accordance with the quality control plan and procedure manual to confirm that the transport packaging complies with the requirements.
E.8.4.7.5 Inspection record The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall create and keep an inspection record of the transport packaging. These records shall show whether the inspection has been passed according to the criteria. If the inspection does not pass, apply the procedures for managing nonconforming products.
E.8.4.8 Control of inspection, measurement and test equipment E.8.4.8.1 General (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall define procedures for controlling and calibrating inspection, measurement and test equipment (hereinafter referred to as "measuring equipment, etc."). Use the measuring device according to the measuring ability.
(2) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall define the scope and frequency of inspection of measuring devices and keep the records.
E.8.4.8.2 Management procedure The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall implement the following items:
a) Clarify the measurement items and the required accuracy, and select appropriate measurement equipment.
b) To specify calibration of measuring devices.
(III)-30
c) Calibrate and adjust measuring devices, etc. regularly or before use. If there are no international or national standards for calibration and adjustment, record the standards used for calibration.
d) Identify the calibration status of the measuring device, etc., by using an appropriate sign.
e) Keep calibration records of measuring devices.
f) If the measuring device is discovered to be out of the calibration standard, the validity of the past inspection results shall be evaluated and recorded.
g) Calibration, inspection, measurement and testing shall be performed under appropriate environmental conditions.
h) Protect the measuring device etc., from damage and deterioration during handling, maintenance and storage.
E.8.4.9 Inspection Status The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall identify the inspection status of the transport packaging in all processes of manufacturing in order to ship only the transport packaging that has passed the inspection, in accordance with the provisions of the quality control plan and the procedure manual.
E.8.5 Measurement, analysis and improvement E.8.5.1 Internal Audit (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall conduct internal audits on a regular basis to clarify whether the quality management system is effectively implemented and maintained. The audit plan and its implementation shall be defined in a documented procedure. Auditors shall not audit their own work.
(2) The person in charge of the audited area shall ensure that any nonconformities found and their causes can be taken without delay. The results of the internal audit shall be input to the management review.
E.8.5.2 Management of nonconforming products (III)-31
(1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall ensure to identify and control transport packaging that do not meet the requirements. Controls and associated responsibilities and authorities for handling nonconforming products shall be established in documented procedures.
(2) Repaired or reworked transport packaging shall be reverified to demonstrate compliance with the requirements.
E.8.5.3 Improvement E.8.5.3.1 Corrective Action (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall take measures to eliminate the cause of nonconformity in order to prevent recurrence.
(2) Documented procedure shall be established by the manufacturer to specify requirements for:
a) Applicant's complaint and confirmation of nonconforming product report contents.
b) Identification of the causes of nonconformities related to transport packaging, processes and quality management systems.
c) Assessing the need for action to ensure the prevention of nonconformity recurrence.
d) Determination and implementation of necessary measures.
e) Recording the results of the actions taken.
E.8.5.3.2 Preventive Measures (1) The manufacturer of the transport packaging shall decide the action to eliminate the cause in order to prevent the occurrence of possible nonconformity.
(2) The manufacturer shall establish a documented procedure to specify requirements for:
a) Identification of possible nonconformities and their causes.
b) Assessing the need for action to prevent the occurrence of nonconformities.
c) Determination and implementation of necessary actions.
d) Recording the results of the actions taken.
(III)-32
F. Handling and Maintenance F.1 Handling Management (1) In order to prevent accidental operation and damage to the transport packaging during handling, KURNS shall establish in a document a handling management method including the following items and manage it appropriately.
a) Measures to prevent erroneous operation and damage during inspection and handling of handling equipment.
b) Handling conditions for transport packaging.
c) Conditions and methods for loading and unloading transport packaging from storage facilities.
d) Person in charge of facility management.
(2) KURNS shall clearly indicate the handling requirements to the person who handles it, and reflect it in the prevention of incorrect operation and damage of the transport packaging.
F.2 Maintenance and storage management (1) In order to maintain conformity with the requirements for transport packaging, KURNS shall establish in a document a storage management method that includes the following items and manage them appropriately.
a) Measures to prevent damage during storage.
b) Storage method and storage area setting in consideration of environmental conditions.
c) Inspection during storage.
d) Person in charge of facility management.
(2) KURNS shall clearly indicate the requirements for maintenance and storage management to those who perform maintenance and storage management, and reflect them in the prevention of erroneous operation and damage to the transport packaging.
If the quality management system is reviewed, the revised content shall be applicable.
(III)-33
() Handling methods and maintenance of nuclear fuel package
()-A Package handling methods A.1 Method of loading The contents of this package are loaded in the following manner.
(1) Preparation of the contents Before being loaded, the contents shall pass a content inspection based on the pre-shipment content inspection indicated in ()-A.2.
(2) Loading of contents and installation of inner lid The packaging shall be transferred by means of handling tools to a location for loading and removal of the outer lid and inner lid. After this operation, the contents prepared in advance shall be loaded into a fuel basket and a top spacer shall be inserted.
After completion of the above operations, the inner lid shall be installed and the inner lid clamping bolt shall be fastened at a specified torque.
(3) Leak-tightness inspection on the inner lid Leak-tightness inspection on the inner lid shall be conducted.
(4) Installation of an outer lid The outer lid shall be fitted and fastened by a clamping bolt with a specified torque, and sealed and locked.
()1
A.2 Package inspection prior to shipment Pre-shipment inspection indicated in ()-Table A.1 is performed on each shipment of the package.
A.3 Method for removal The contents shall be removed from the package in the following procedure.
(1) Remove the outer lid and the inner lid.
(2) Remove the upper spacer.
(3) Remove the contents from the package.
(4) Install the inner lid and the outer lid.
A.4 Preparation of empty packaging After the contents are removed from the packaging, conduct radiation control of the inner surface of the packaging, and conduct decontamination as needed. In addition, conduct a visual appearance inspection of the packaging to confirm it has no anomaly, and then store it indoor.
()2
(IV) Table A.1: Procedures for pre-shipment inspection of the package Item of Method for inspection Acceptance criterion inspection Visual Visually inspect the appearance No cracking, abnormal flaw, deformation, etc. is appearance of the main body, inner lid and observed.
inspection outer lid.
Lifting With the package lifted, inspect The eye-plates have no cracking, abnormal flaw, inspection its appearance. deformation, etc.
Weight Measure the total weight of the The weight is not more than 950 kg.
inspection package.
Surface Measure the surface density of The surface density is not more than 0.4 Bq/cm2 for density the package by the smear method radioactive materials emitting alpha ray, or not inspection or the like. more than 4 Bq/cm2 for radioactive materials not emitting alpha ray.
Dose With fuel elements loaded, The sum of the dose equivalent rate for gamma ray equivalent measure the dose equivalent rate and neutron ray is not more than 2 mSv/h on the rate for gamma ray and neutron ray. surface of the package, or not more than 100 Sv/h inspection in a position 1 m distant from the package surface.
Subcriticalit Visually inspect the appearance 1. The fuel basket is installed in the y inspection of the fuel basket. prescribed position.
- 2. No cracking, abnormal flaw, deformation, etc.
is observed.
Content Inspect/measure the type, 1. Type inspection concentration, volume, It must be the design approval conditions.
appearance and surface density.
- 2. Concentration and volume It must be the design approval conditions.
- 3. Appearance: no anomaly is observed.
- 4. Surface density: not more than 0.056 Bq/cm2 for radioactive materials emitting alpha ray Airtight Apply air pressure of 0.392 MPa The leakage rate does not exceed 1.09 x 10-2 MPa leakage [gauge] to the sealed parts of cm3/s.
inspection the inner lid for 30 minutes, and measure the pressure drop to determine the leakage rate.
Pressure The decay heat generated from the contents is minimal, and the vessels measurement / temperature will remain the same as the ambient temperature. Therefore, this inspection inspection shall not be conducted.
Temperature The decay heat generated from the contents is minimal, the pressure in the package measurement / will remain constant, and therefore the pressure from inside the package will remain inspection the same as the ambient pressure. Therefore, this inspection shall not be conducted.
()3
()-B Maintenance requirement (IV)-B. Maintenance requirements The transport packaging shall be stored indoor. Periodical self-controlled inspections shall be conducted in accordance with the following instructions at least once every year (at least once every 10 times of use for those used 10 times or more yearly).
B.1 Visual appearance inspection Perform a visual inspection to confirm that there is no cracking, abnormal flaw, deformation, etc.
in the inner and outer surfaces of the main body, fuel basket, inner lid, and outer lid.
B.2 Pressure durability inspection If a repair or the like that may affect the pressure durability performance has been conducted, install a provisional inner lid and inspect the leakage rate for the main body of the inner shell by pressurized leakage testing (initial inspection pressure: 0.392 MPa [gauge] or more; inspection time: 30 minutes or more) to confirm that the leakage rate is not more than 1.09 10-2 MPacm3/s.
Subsequently, perform a visual inspection to confirm that there is no cracking, abnormal flaw, deformation, etc. in the inner surface of the main body of the inner shell.
B.3 Airtight leakage inspection Conduct airtight leakage inspection for the O-ring of the inner lid by pressurized leakage testing (inspection pressure: 0.392 MPa [gauge] or more; inspection time: 30 minutes or more) to confirm that the leakage rate is not more than 1.09 x 10-2 MPacm3/s.
B.4 Shielding inspection This does not apply since no particular shield is used in this transport packaging.
B.5 Subcriticality inspection Perform visual inspection to confirm that there is no anomaly in the dimensions, shape, etc. of the fuel basket, such as cracking, abnormal flaw, and deformation.
B.6 Thermal inspection This does not apply since this transport packaging has no particular exothermic body.
B.7 Lifting inspection With the transport packaging lifted, inspect the appearance of the transport packaging to visually confirm that the eye-plates have no cracking, abnormal flaw, deformation, etc.
B.8 Actuation check/inspection This does not apply since this transport packaging has no special articles such as valves.
()1
B.9 Maintenance of auxiliary systems This does not apply since this transport packaging has no auxiliary system.
B.10 Maintenance of the valves, gaskets, etc. of sealing devices This transport packaging has no valve or the like.
Inspect the O-ring of the inner lid to confirm that it has no cracking, abnormal flaw, deformation, etc. If any anomaly is observed, replace the O-ring.
B.11 Storage of the transport packaging The transport packaging shall be stored indoor.
B.12 Retention of records While this transport packaging is in service, retain a record of inspection conducted during fabrication and a record of periodical self-controlled inspection.
B.13 Others Not Applicable
()2
() Important Notice about a safe design and the safe transportation Not Applicable
()1