Distribution & Access For Publication Downloads News About Us Contact Us
Paper Titles
Twice Optimized Evaporative Cooling System with Vortex Tube
p.103
The Thermophysical Bases of Monitoring of the Fireproof Lining Wear in the Blast Furnace Hearth
p.113
Numerical Analysis of the Oscillating Water Column (OWC) Wave Energy Converter (WEC) Considering Different Incident Wave Height
p.120
Estimate of the Wave Climate on the Most Energetic Locations of the South-Southeastern Brazilian Shelf
p.130
Evaluation of the Seasonal Pattern of Wind-Driven Waves on the South-Southeastern Brazilian Shelf
p.141
Constructal Design of Double-T Shaped Cavity with Stochastic Methods Luus-Jaakola and Simulated Annealing
p.152
Thermal Fatigue Analysis in a High Pressure Cooling System (HPCS) Nozzle of a Boling Water Reactor
p.162
The Influence of Post-Heat-Treatments on the Tensile Strength and Surface Hardness of Selective Laser Melted AlSi10Mg
p.171
Automatized Estimation of the Effective Thermal Conductivity of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Composite Materials
p.177

Thermal Fatigue Analysis in a High Pressure Cooling System (HPCS) Nozzle of a Boling Water Reactor

Article Preview

Abstract:

In this paper, the Cumulative Usage Factor (CUF) of a High Pressure Core Cooling System (HPCS) reactor nozzle of a Boiling Water Reactor was calculated. This fatigue damage has been caused by the sudden injection of cold water into the reactor vessel through such nozzle. For this purpose, a three-dimensional analysis was carried out. Accordingly, a transient heat transfer analysis was developed. The temperature distribution was determined. With this information, the stress analysis was carried out. The safe end was restricted to move along its axial direction and the forging end was free to expand axially and radially. The resultant stress field established the magnitude of the alternative stresses. In the last step, a fatigue analysis was developed. The most critical point is the junction of the nozzle with the thermal sleeve. The fatigue performance was evaluated during a period of sixty years. It was assumed that 1.5 cycles per year will take place. The fatigue curves of ASME code section III were used. The results showed that the Cumulative Usage Factor (CUF) vary with the temperature injection, being 0.4090 when the water injected was 4.44°C and 0.3797 when the water temperature was 37.77°C. Both of them were estimated for a period of 60 years of operation. Therefore, damage is reduced as the temperature of the injected water increases. Besides, it is advisable to at least follow the recommendations of the NUREG ́s 1800 and 1801 [1, 2]. In this way, the aging of the nozzle is adequately managed.

You might also be interested in these eBooks
Transfer Phenomena in Fluid and Heat Flows View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Defect and Diffusion Forum (Volume 370)

Pages:

162-170

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/DDF.370.162

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

January 2017

Authors:

Luis Héctor Hernández-Gómez*, Brayan Leonardo Pérez-Escobar, Juan Alfonso Beltrán-Fernández, Juan Alejandro Flores-Campos, Salatiel Pérez-Montejo, Krisselby Ivonne Jiménez-Santiago, Pablo Ruiz-López, Guillermo Manuel Urriolagoitia-Calderón

Keywords:

Aging, Cooling System, Cumulative Usage Factor, Nozzle

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions:

Request Permissions

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG 1800 Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear. Rev. 2. (2010).

Google Scholar

[2] United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG 1801 Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report. Rev. 2. (2010).

Google Scholar

[3] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III: Rules for Construction of Nuclear Power Plant Components, Division 1, Subsection NB: Class 1 Components (2015).

DOI: 10.1115/1.802183.ch6

Google Scholar

[4] K. Wright. A total Life Fatigue Assessment Approach with Quantified Margins for LWRs. IAEA Technical Meeting on Fatigue Assessment in Light Water Reactors for Long Term Operation: Good Practices and Lessons Learned, Erlangen, Germany, 6th to 8th July (2016).

Google Scholar

[5] M. Giglio. Fatigue analysis of different types of pressure vessel nozzle. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 80 (2003) 1–8.

DOI: 10.1016/s0308-0161(02)00151-5

Google Scholar

[6] V. Chaudhry, A. Kumar, S. M. Ingole, A. K. Balasubramanian and U. C. Muktibodh. Thermo-Mechanical Transient Analysis of Reactor Pressure Vessel. Procedia Engineering 86 (2014) 809–817.

DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.11.101

Google Scholar

[7] U. Tariq Murtaza, M. Javed Hyder. Fracture analysis of the set-in nozzle of a PWR reactor pressure vessel – Part 1: Determination of critical crack. Engineering Fracture Mechanics. In press (2016).

DOI: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2016.03.049

Google Scholar

[8] Information on http: /nrcoe. inel. gov/resultsdb/SysStudy/HPCS.

Google Scholar

[9] J. P. Poloski, G. M. Grant, C. D. Gentillon, W. J. Galyean. High-Pressure Core Spray System Reliability, 1987–1993 AEOD/S98-02 (1NEEL/EXT-95-00133) (1998) 20-25.

DOI: 10.2172/1773488

Google Scholar

[10] I. Sauceda-Meza, L. H. Hernández-Gómez, G. Urriolagoitia-Sosa, J. A. Beltrán-Fernández, E. A. Merchán-Cruz, J. M. Sandoval-Pineda, A. T. Velázquez-Sánchez. Thermal Fatigue Analysis of an Emergency core cooling System Nozzle of a BWR, by the Finite Element Method. Científica, Vol. 11, Núm. 3. (2007).

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.13-14.173

Google Scholar

[11] GE Nuclear Energy, Alternate BWR Feedwater Nozzle Inspection Requirements, GE-NE-523- A71-0594-A, May (2000).

Google Scholar

[12] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III: Rules for Construction of Nuclear Power Plant Components, Division 1, Appendices (2007).

Google Scholar

[13] S. Zengah, A. Aid, M. Benguediab. Comparative study of fatigue damage models using different number of classes combined with the rainflow method. Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, 3(3), (2013) pp-446.

DOI: 10.48084/etasr.325

Google Scholar

[14] ANSYS, Inc. ANSYS Mechanical User´s Guide (2013).

Google Scholar

[15] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section II Part D. Properties, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York (1971).

Google Scholar

[16] United State Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG 0619 BWR Feedwater Nozzle and Control Rod Drive Return Line Nozzle Cracking. Rev. 1 (1980).

Google Scholar

[17] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI: Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components, Subsection IWB-3512 (2007).

DOI: 10.1115/1.859872.ch29

Google Scholar

[18] Electric Power Research Institute, NP-5835SP FATIGUEPRO: On-line Fatigue Usage Transient Monitoring System. Final Report (1988).

Google Scholar

Scientific.Net is a registered brand of Trans Tech Publications Ltd
© 2024 by Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved