Fretting-Wear Behavior of Zircaloy-4, OPTIN™, and ZIRLO™ Fuel Rods and Grid Supports Under Various Autoclave and Hydraulic Loop Endurance Test Conditions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract High fuel duty, eighteen-month and longer cycle lengths, and higher burnups have put increased demands on pressurized water reactor (PWR) fuel during recent years. As a result of these demanding operating conditions, the fretting-wear performance of PWR fuel rods against structural grid supports is being challenged. To understand the in-reactor fretting-wear performance of PWR fuel, Westinghouse Electric Company (W) and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) have performed investigations to study the fretting-wear behavior of zirconium alloy nuclear fuel rods and grid supports. Experimental work was carried out at the AECL Chalk River Laboratories (Canada) in autoclave impact fretting-wear test machines and at the W Columbia, South Carolina (USA) plant in the Westinghouse — Vibration Investigation Pressure-Drop Experimental Research (VIPER) hydraulic test loop. Autoclave impact fretting-wear tests were conducted for several grid-support/fuel-rod designs using either ZIRLO™, Zircaloy-4, and/or OPTIN™ materials. Rod-to-grid relative displacements and contact forces were measured throughout each test. The wear volumes of each fret mark on the fuel rod specimens were measured via surface profilometry at the end of each test. From these wear volumes, wear rates and wear coefficients for the fuel rod in contact with either springs or dimples were determined. The VIPER loop is used for full-scale nuclear fuel assembly vibration and wear testing. Endurance tests were performed with severe flow conditions to induce fuel fretting-wear for different grid support and assembly designs using either all ZIRLO™ or all Zircaloy-4 materials. The wear volumes of the most severe fret marks on the fuel rods were measured via surface profilometry at the end of each test. From the profilometry of each fret mark, and using the fretting-wear coefficient derived from autoclave wear tests, the available energy (i.e., work-rate) to cause the fretting-wear damage was determined. Fretting-wear scars on ZIRLO™, Zircaloy-4, and/or OPTIN™ fuel rods from the autoclave impact fretting-wear tests and the VIPER hydraulic tests were examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to compare the fretting-wear mechanisms for different grid-support designs. Fretting-wear mechanisms from both types of tests were shown to be comparable and related to the grid-support design. For a given material (i.e., ZIRLO™, Zircaloy-4, or OPTIN™) under similar test conditions, there was no difference in the fretting-wear performance.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».