NPTDS' Brochure (PDF File)
September 2006

WEB-PAGE OF A IAEA COORDINATED RESEARCH PROJECT ON SMALL REACTORS WITHOUT ON-SITE REFUELLING (CRP I25001)

WELCOME!

Updated on 2007-06-01
Click on the links below to download PDF versions of indicated documents.

VISION STATEMENT OF SMALL REACTORS WITHOUT ON-SITE REFUELLING

What is SRWOR?
SRWOR stands for Small Reactor (of 300 MW(e) or less) without On-site Refuelling.

What are the SRWORs?
SRWORs are reactors designed for infrequent replacement of well-contained fuel cassette(s) in a manner that impedes clandestine diversion of nuclear fuel material Small reactors without on-site refuelling could be:

Factory fabricated and fuelled transportable reactors; or
Reactors with a once-at-a-time core refuelling at a site performed by a special team that brings and takes away the core load and refuelling equipment
Specifically, SRWORs will reduce obligations of the user for spent fuel and waste management

What are the features of SRWORs?

A key feature could be absence of the refuelling equipment present permanently in the reactor or at the site
Another key feature is that no fresh or spent fuel is being stored outside vessel at the site during reactor operation
SRWORs incorporate increased refuelling interval (from 5 to 30 years) consistent with plant economy and considerations of energy security
Strong reliance on passive safety design options and a potential for simplified operational control (passive load follow operation)

What could be the market for SRWORs?

Cities in developing countries with small electricity grids and insufficient infrastructure
Autonomous small settlements
Power sources for district heating and desalination plants
Power sources for advanced non-electric applications, such as hydrogen production, coal liquefaction, etc.
Remote areas in the North with complicated access and high cost of energy from fossil fuel
Dispersed or remote islands; mountainous areas, etc.

Why do we consider SRWORs?

Through adding a certain degree of independence on fuel supplier, SRWORs could, perhaps, secure a motivation for a state to skip the development of the indigenous fuel cycle
SRWORs may provide an attractive domain for fuel or even NPP leasing
SRWORs could facilitate implementation of adequate safeguards in a scenario of expanded deployment of nuclear power, through:

Operation with weld-sealed reactor vessel and remote monitoring,
Absence of refuelling equipment and fuel storages at the site,
Streamlined safeguard missions, etc.

What could be energy systems with SRWORs?

The proposers of SRWORs often consider them in conjunction with centralized, perhaps, regional fuel cycle centres, probably, operated under an international control:

When systems with SRWORs and regional fuel cycle centres are added to an overall energy system, this would reduce the degree of worldwide dispersal of enrichment, reprocessing, fuel fabrication and, possibly, waste repository facilities
An integrated fuel cycle and SRWORs offer the potential for improved management of LWR-SNF – via relatively (compared to LWR-MOX) long sequestration in power-producing SRWORs

What are the design approaches to ensure long-life core operation?

Reduced core power density
Burnable absorbers (in thermal reactors)
High conversion ratio in the core (in fast reactors)
Refuelling performed without opening the reactor vessel cover (on this way a large-capacity reactor without on-site refuelling might evolve)

SRWORs end at the same or less values of fuel burn-up and irradiation on the structures, although obtained over a longer period than in conventional reactors

What is the status of SRWORs?

More than 30 concepts and designs of SRWORs are being developed worldwide; the majority are at a conceptual or a pre-conceptual design stage, but some have reached basic or even detailed design stage
The targeted dates for prototype deployment range from ~2010 to ~2030

What are the R&D needs for SRWORs?

Most of SRWORs need validation, testing and demonstration of safety and reliability under long-life core operation
The available experience of marine reactors is limited by 7-8 years of continuous operation; some SRWORs target 25 years or even longer core lifetime
In addition to this, technologies of remote refuelling would need to be developed; safety of spent fuel load/reactor transportation should be validated for short cooling periods after operation
Construction and operation of a prototype plant will be a must for all SRWORs
An approach to licensing for long-life core operation should be elaborated and established (e.g., based on License-by-Test)
Economic competitiveness of SRWORs should be proven for anticipated market conditions of certain markets
It may be diesel or candle lighting rather that a combined gas-turbine cycle plant that SRWORs will compete with
Legal, institutional and infrastructure provisions for operation with regional fuel cycle centres should be elaborated
Leasing? Build – Operate - Transfer? Build – Own - Operate? Etc.

Click on the links below to download PDF versions of indicated documents.

2004

Original coordinated research programme

2005 - Status, Deliverables, and Events

Participating Institutions and Chief Scientific Investigators

First year reports:

J. Augutis (LEI, Lithuania)
A. Dedul (Gidropress, Russia)
E. Grishanin (VNIIAM, Russia)
F. Henning (Eletronuclear, Brazil)
P.D. Krishnani (BARC, India)
F. Sefidvash (UFRGS, Brazil)
G. Toshinskiy (IPPE, Russia)
Ha Van Thong (INST, Vietnam)
Zaki Su’ud (ITB, Indonesia)
E. Ivanov (RRC KI, Russian Federation)
N. Cavlina (FER, University of Zagreb, Croatia) - available from the project officer upon a request
L. Erradi (Mohammed V University, Morocco)

Second year reports:

First Research Coordination Meeting (21 – 25 November 2005)

2007 Second Research Coordination Meeting (4-7 June 2007)

IMPORTANT MILESTONES

Group 1 “Revising the Need for Relocation and Evacuation Measures Unique to NPPs with Innovative SMRs”

The plan for the 2nd year of the CRP is as follows:

Westinghouse (USA):

Continue work on the overall approach and methodology; support POLIMI/FER analyses;
Present/discuss the proposed revision in the USA; interact with the US NRC and EPRI;

POLIMI (Italy):

Continue development of integrated, risk-informed methodology;
Continue PRA analyses to refine classification of relevant accident sequences;

FER (Croatia):

Continue development of deterministic models for IRIS severe accident (SA) sequences;
Perform and refine analyses of SA sequences;

LEI (Lithuania):

Prepare meteorological data for a typical European location;
Continue evaluation of benefits of reduced EPZ for district heating applications;

Eletronuclear (Brazil):

Evaluate capital cost (infrastructure cost) and O&M cost (emergency planning cost) of EPZ for the Angra site in Brazil;
Evaluate benefits of reduced EPZ for desalination applications.

Paper “Methodologies and decision criteria for demonstrating competitiveness of SMRs” by Westinghouse, submitted for a new IAEA report “Approaches to Assess SMR Competitiveness”

Deadlines: Participants who have a research contract renewal have to submit progress report and an application for another renewal not later than 3 weeks before the expiration of their renewed contracts.

For progress of these activities see second-year reports of Dr. N. Cavlina and Dr. J. Augutis, and relevant presentations at RCM-2 from all members of the group.

Group 2 “Design and Technology Development for LWRs with Coated Particle Based Fuel”

(2.1). TASK 1. Finalize the work plan for 2006 - 2008 (done).

The leader of this activity is Prof. G. Tsiklauri (PNNL, USA)

(2.2). TASK 2. Prepare a draft TECDOC: “Design and Technology Development for Small Water Cooled Reactors with Coated Particle Based Fuel”, to be published in 2007

Chapter I. Short description of the four concepts of small water cooled reactors with coated particle fuel.

Chapter 1 will based on the first-year CRP reports from Russia, the USA, Japan and Brazil.
The leader of this activity is Prof. G. Tsiklauri (PNNL, USA)

Original papers by Dr. E. Grishanin:

Chapter II.

(II.1). Specification of numerical benchmarks, identification of codes for benchmarking – a simplified data for each of the 4 reactor concepts to be considered is to be provided in order to perform preliminary lattice or cell calculations with a special emphasis on double heterogeneity treatment; the codes to be used are to be identified

The leader of this activity is Prof. Y. Shimazu (Hokkaido University, Japan)

Final set of benchmark problems for cells of reactors with coated particle based fuel

(II.2). Calculations of simple models of coated particle based fuel cell in steam –water coolant. Analysis and comparison of the results

The leader of this activity is Prof. Y. Shimazu, (Hokkaido University, Japan)

Summary paper “Benchmark Results of Various Particle Fuels for Small Reactors without On-site Refuelling” by participants of Group 2

Chapter III. Benchmark calculations for the whole core for selected concepts, models and codes. The results will be presented during the next RCM

The leader for this optional activity is Prof. L. Erradi (Mohammed V University), Morocco

Chapter IV. Benchmark experiment on the corrosion of SiC in high pressure and high temperature water and steam. Participants from Group 2 will provide samples of SiC-coated fuel elements (or mock-ups). Possible experimental facilities are those of VNIIAM and a critical test reactor “ASTRA” of the RRC “Kurchatov Institute”. The support from IAEA could be requested.

The leader of this activity is Dr. E. Grishanin VNIIAM (Russian Federation)

Chapter V. Optimization of coated particle size taking into account fabrication technology and the results of neutronic analysis. What is the maximum size of a micro fuel element that could be manufactured using the available fabrication technologies?

The leader of this activity is Prof. G. Tsiklauri

Chapter VI. The available data on maximum achievable burn-up and fluence for coated particles in a range of parameters characteristic of LWRs.

The leader of this activity is Dr. E. Grishanin

Original deadline to prepare the draft: October 2006

(Pending)

Group 3 “Design and technology development for lead, lead-bismuth, and molten salt cooled reactors”

(3.1). TASK 1. Finalize the work plan for 2006 - 2008

The leader of this activity is Dr. I.V. Dulera (BARC, India).

I.V. Dulera on 2005-12-12 “Design and technology development for lead, lead-bismuth, and molten salt cooled reactors: proposed activities for 2006”

(3.2). TASK 2. Exchange of data on Pb, Pb-Bi and molten salt thermo-physical characteristics as well as exchange of information on the used computer codes would be the first step towards the compilation of a handbook.

The data on the properties, among others, would include:

(a) Data used for the neutronic calculations of Pb, Pb-Bi, and molten salt cooled reactors (variation with respect to temperature up to 1000oC or more);
(b) Data used for thermo-hydraulic calculations of Pb, Pb-Bi, and molten salt cooled reactors (variation with respect to temperature up to 1000oC or more);
(c) Heat transfer correlations and coefficients;
(d) Compatibility data for structural materials with coolant and results of the corrosion behaviour studies;
(e) Mechanical properties of structural materials with respect to temperature and fluence;
(f) Description of the computer codes used for neutronics, thermal-hydraulics and safety analyses.

The contributors are requested to include the details of references (sources of data).

D. Wade on 2006-01-20 “Modified Proposal for the Content and Structure of a Handbook of Core Design Data for Pb/Pb-Bi/MS Small Reactors”

The leader of these activities is Dr. I.V. Dulera (BARC, India)

(3.3). TASK 3. Neutronics-related benchmark analysis.

There could be two types of neutronic benchmarks for Pb-Bi/ Pb/ molten salt cooled systems:

For reactors with fast neutron energy spectrum;
For reactors with intermediate neutron energy spectrum.

Deadlines: By January 2006 - First suggestion on reactor configurations;

The leader of these activities is Dr. I.V. Dulera (BARC, India)

The participants responsible for this activity is Prof. Z. Su’ud (ITB, Indonesia) and Mr. A. Sedov (RRC KI, Russian Federation)

Mode of Calculation

Final RBEC-M Results from “Kurchatov Institute” (Russian Federation)
Final RBEC-M Results from TokyoTech (Japan)
RBEC-M Results from “Gidropress” (Russian Federation) - under recalculation
Final RBEC-M Results from ANL (USA)
Final RBEC-M Results from BARC (India)
Draft Summary of Results by Mr. A. Nagata 15-12-2006
Summary of Results by Mr. A. Nagata
Eigenvalue Summary by ANL

(3.4). TASK 4. Fission products analysis model

Deadline:

Prof. Zaki Su’ud will distribute partial results of his fission products analysis model studies.

Elaboration of a fission product model for long-life cores – Second year report by Prof. Z. Su’ud

(3.5). TASK 5. Benchmark analysis for natural circulation of the coolant

The model selected and agreed upon by all participants of the group would give all the details necessary for carrying out analysis such as:

Core details including overall dimensions;
Pool or loop geometry;
Details on heat removal path/steam generator. etc.

Attempt will be made to select a model for which experimental results are either available or can be found out experimentally.

The leader of these activities is Dr. I.V. Dulera (BARC, India)

Outcome of NEA OECD’s LACANES meeting of 17 May 2007 and further steps.

Proposal for tests from G.I. Toshinskiy 26 January 2006.

4. A Proposed CRP activity for 2006 - Intra regional and multi regional scenario studies of the role of small reactors without on-site refuelling (SRWOR) in sustainability

As a follow up to the studies performed in ANL (USA) during the first year of work, several additional scenario studies were proposed during the meeting, such as to:

(1) Add diverse SRWOR types to the reactor mix in world multi-region scenarios, such as the following:

Early in the century deployments of water cooled SRWOR;
Benefits of high conversion ratio LWRs or HTGRs to increase world conversion ratio (CR);
Early deployments of liquid metal fast breeder reactors (LMFBRs) to raise world CR;

(2) Analyze options for intra-regional symbiosis, including:

Potential case study for South-East Asia region (good representation from South-East Asia is present in the CRP);
Potential case study involving SRWOR coupled to a regional grid, e.g.,

Middle East Forum - MEF (Jordan, Egypt, etc. 7 nation grid); or
Former Soviet Union - FSU (Lithuania, etc. in a central European regional grid).

Deadlines:

Dr. D. Wade will prepare and distribute a more detailed description of his proposal regarding a new scenario study with small reactors of different types (Done)

D. Wade on 2006-01-09 “A description of the DANESS code used for dynamic scenario modelling; a list of the data required to model a given reactor type and fuel cycle type”