MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3075467178 · doi:10.1115/1.4048120

Toward a Mechanistic Model of Stress Corrosion Cracking in PHWR Fuel Sheaths

2020· article· en· W3075467178 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Oussoren, Paul K. Chan, Diane Wowk, Andrew A. Prudil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear LaboratoriesRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStress corrosion crackingMaterials scienceCorrosionStress (linguistics)Nuclear engineeringCrackingMechanicsComposite materialEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This work builds on the iodine-induced stress corrosion cracking (ISCC) model of Lewis and Kleczek by integrating the fuel performance model fuel and sheath modeling tool (FAST) to provide thermal and mechanical analysis of the fuel sheath, which was previously required as input parameters. The iodine transport methodology of the Lewis–Kleczek model has been modified to utilize the more mechanistic diffusion model in FAST, and an empirical surface multiplier term has been derived to predict iodine release rates under normal operating conditions based on measured release rates from in-reactor sweep gas tests. A fracture mechanics analysis is implemented using threshold stress intensity values and crack growth rates reported in literature. A correlation to predict crack initiation has been derived by analysis of a database of power histories with known ISCC defects. This correlation is based on the change in sheath hoop strain during a power ramp and is shown to be more accurate at discerning failure versus nonfailure than the correlations used in the previous Lewis–Kleczek model and FUELOGRAMS. Failure time prediction of the model is compared against power ramp test FFO-104 performed at the National Research Experimental (NRX) reactor. Fuel failure is predicted to occur 27% faster than experimentally measured; failure time is explored in a series of sensitivity studies to suggest areas for further development. The model improvements represent a step forward in the mechanistic modeling of stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in pressurized heavy water reactor (PHWR) nuclear fuel.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation ScienceSame topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207