Crack Growth Resistance of Irradiated Zr-2.5Nb Pressure Tube Material at Low Hydrogen Levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary factors influencing the crack growth resistance of irradiated Zr-2.5Nb pressure tube material at low concentrations of hydrogen/deuterium are reviewed. These factors include the initial characteristics of the material, which have brought about improvements in the toughness, and the operating conditions in reactor. The paper presents an update on the current status of this work using J-R curves. Such curves are determined from curved compact and rising-pressure burst test specimens at 250°C, i.e., the lower end of the operating temperature range. Some of the challenges encountered in assessing the crack growth toughness of this high-strength, thin-walled material are discussed. The role of chlorine, known to be responsible for the presence of Zr-Cl-C particles and preferential decohesion and fissuring, is also highlighted. The results from the curved compact specimens suggest a limiting level of chlorine above which no further significant degradation in crack growth resistance occurs. This level of chlorine is about 3 wt ppm for material having a low concentration of zirconium phosphide (P < 20 wt ppm). Such results require confirmation using burst tests on material with intermediate levels of chlorine and low levels of zirconium phosphide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".