Nuclear Safety

ISBN 978-92-64-99091-3

Nuclear Fuel Behaviour in
Loss-of-coolant Accident(LOCA) Conditions

State-of-the-art Report© OECD 2009
NEA No. 6846

NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENTORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENTThe OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 30 democracies work together to address the
economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts tounderstand and to help governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate
governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides
a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify
good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies.
The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark,Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico,
the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Commission of the European Communities takes
part in the work of the OECD.
OECD Publishing disseminates widely the results of the Organisation’s statistics gathering and researchon economic, social and environmental issues, as well as the conventions, guidelines and standards agreed
by its members.

This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The
opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official
views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries.

NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCYThe OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) was established on 1st February 1958 under the name of the
OEEC European Nuclear Energy Agency. It received its present designation on 20th April 1972, when Japan
became its first non-European full member. NEA membership today consists of 28 OECD member countries:
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Republic ofKorea, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States.
The Commission of the European Communities also takes part in the work of the Agency.
The mission of the NEA is:–

to assist its member countries in maintaining and further developing, through international cooperation, the scientific, technological and legal bases required for a safe, environmentally friendly
and economical use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, as well as–

to provide authoritative assessments and to forge common understandings on key issues, as input
to government decisions on nuclear energy policy and to broader OECD policy analyses in areas
such as energy and sustainable development.

Specific areas of competence of the NEA include safety and regulation of nuclear activities, radioactive
waste management, radiological protection, nuclear science, economic and technical analyses of the nuclear
fuel cycle, nuclear law and liability, and public information.
The NEA Data Bank provides nuclear data and computer program services for participating countries. In
these and related tasks, the NEA works in close collaboration with the International Atomic Energy Agency in
Vienna, with which it has a Co-operation Agreement, as well as with other international organisations in the
nuclear field.

Corrigenda to OECD publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/publishing/corrigenda.

© OECD 2009
You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia
products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgment of OECD as source
and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to rights@oecd.org. Requests for
permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC)
at info@copyright.com or the Centre français d'exploitation du droit de copie (CFC) contact@cfcopies.com.

FOREWORD

The NEA Working Group on Fuel Safety (WGFS) is tasked with advancing the current
understanding of fuel safety issues by assessing the technical basis for current safety criteria and theirapplicability to high burn-up and to new fuel designs and materials. The group aims at facilitatinginternational convergence in this area, including as regards experimental approaches and interpretationand the use of experimental data relevant for safety.
In 1986, a working group of the NEA Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations (CSNI)
issued a state-of-the-art report on water reactor fuel behaviour in design-basis accident (DBA)
conditions. The 1986 report was limited to the oxidation, embrittlement and deformation ofpressurised water reactor (PWR) fuel in a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA).
Since then, considerable experimental and analytical work has been performed, which has led to abroader and deeper understanding of LOCA-related phenomena. Further, new cladding alloys havebeen produced, which might behave differently than the previously used Zircaloy-4, both undernormal operating conditions and during transients. Compared with 20 years ago, fuel burn-up has beensignificantly increased, which requires extending the LOCA database in order to cover the high burnup range. There was also a clear need to address LOCA performance for reactor types other than
PWRs.
The present report has been prepared by the WGFS and covers the following technical aspects:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Description of different LOCA scenarios for major types of reactors: BWRs, PWRs, VVERs
and to a lesser extent CANDUs.
LOCA phenomena: ballooning, burst, oxidation, fuel relocation and possible fracture atquench.
Details of high-temperature oxidation behaviour of various cladding materials.
Metallurgical phase change, effect of hydrogen and oxygen on residual cladding ductility.
Methods for LOCA testing, for example two-sided oxidation and ring compression for
ductility, and integral quench test for strength.
Predictive computer codes.

The WGFS is currently preparing a similar state-of-the-art report on reactivity-initiated accident(RIA) phenomena, which is expected to be issued in December 2009.

3

Acknowledgements

The NEA Secretariat wishes to express its gratitude to Dr. Kjell Pettersson (MATSAFE AB) for
his efforts in drafting the report, to the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) for supporting thework, as well as to Dr. Haijung Chung for reviewing the draft.
The following WGFS members and other experts from the industry also provided valuable input
to various chapters of the report:
Michael Billone, ANL, United States
Toyoshi Fuketa, JAEA, JapanClaude Grandjean, IRSN, France
George Hache, IRSN, France
Lothar Heins, Areva NP, Germany
Zoltan Hozer, KFKI, Hungary
Jan In de Betou, SSM, Sweden
Seppo Kelppe, VTT, Finland
Ralph Mayer, USNRC, United States
Fumihisa Nagase, JAEA, Japan
Joelle Papin, IRSN, France
Harold Scott, USNRC, United States
Heinz Sonnenburg, GRS, Germany
Sham Sunder, AECL, Canada
Mojmir Valach, NRI Rez, Czech RepublicJohn Voglewede, USNRC, United States
Vera Vrtilkova, UJP, Czech Republic
Nicolas Waeckel, EdF, France
Wolfgang Wiesenack, HRP, Norway
Martin Zimmermann, PSI, Switzerland

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword ...........................................................................................................................................

3

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 21
1.

Introduction...............................................................................................................................
1.1 General overview and introduction to the LOCA safety issue ...........................................
1.2 Current safety criteria and their background ......................................................................
1.2.1 Current safety criteria in the United States .............................................................
1.2.2 Background to the safety criteria ............................................................................
1.2.2.1 Metallurgy of cladding embrittlement ......................................................
1.2.2.2 The 17%-oxidation criterion and the Baker-Just oxidation law ...............
1.2.2.3 The 2 200°F criterion................................................................................
1.2.3 LOCA safety criteria in other countries ..................................................................
1.3 References ..........................................................................................................................

25
25
26
27
30
31
33
36
39
40

2.

Description of LOCA accident scenarios for major types of reactors .................................
2.1 The pressurised water reactor .............................................................................................
2.1.1 PWR large break LOCA .........................................................................................
2.1.2 PWR small break LOCA.........................................................................................
2.2 Boiling water reactor LOCA ..............................................................................................
2.3 Risk-informed changes to NRC LOCA technical requirements ........................................
2.4 CANDU reactor LOCA ......................................................................................................
2.4.1 Large break LOCA .................................................................................................
2.4.2 Small break LOCA .................................................................................................
2.5 VVER reactor LOCA .........................................................................................................
2.5.1 Large break LOCA .................................................................................................
2.5.2 Small break LOCA .................................................................................................
2.6 References ..........................................................................................................................

43
43
43
44
45
48
49
51
51
52
53
54
54

3.

State of fuel and cladding at various burn-up levels .............................................................
3.1 State of fuel at various burn-up levels ................................................................................
3.1.1 UO2 fuel ..................................................................................................................
3.1.2 MOX fuel and high burn-up UO2 fuel ....................................................................
3.2 State of cladding .................................................................................................................
3.2.1 PWR cladding .........................................................................................................
3.2.2 BWR cladding.........................................................................................................
3.3 High burn-up CANDU fuel ................................................................................................
3.4 References ..........................................................................................................................

55
55
55
56
58
58
61
63
64

4.

Phenomena that need to be addressed by experiments and modelling ................................ 65
4.1 Types of damage to fuel and cladding................................................................................ 65
4.2 Changes of temperature and geometry with influence core coolability ............................. 675

4.2.1 The FEBA and SEFLEX programmes ....................................................................
4.2.1.1 FEBA test results ......................................................................................
4.2.1.2 SEFLEX test results..................................................................................
4.2.2 THETIS programme ...............................................................................................
4.2.3 FLECHT SEASET programme ..............................................................................
4.2.4 Conclusions from the programmes on cooling of deformed bundles .....................
4.2.4.1 Main results from the experimental programmes .....................................
4.2.4.2 Pending questions .....................................................................................
4.3 Radiological consequences.................................................................................................
4.3.1 Harmonisation efforts in Europe .............................................................................
4.3.1.1 List of nuclides to consider in the calculationof the radiological consequences ..............................................................
4.3.1.2 The failed fuel fraction .............................................................................
4.3.1.3 The release from failed fuel ......................................................................
4.3.1.4 The retention in the reactor coolant system and the initial releaseof fission products to the containment atmosphere ..................................
4.3.1.5 Retention in the containment ....................................................................
4.3.1.6 Conclusions of the European harmonisation effort ..................................
4.4 References ..........................................................................................................................
5.

67
68
69
71
72
75
75
75
76
77
78
80
80
81
81
83
83

Overview of LOCA testing methodology ................................................................................ 85
5.1 Separate effect tests ............................................................................................................ 85
5.1.1 Creep tests ............................................................................................................... 85
5.1.2 Determination of diffusion constants ...................................................................... 93
5.1.3 Determination of the α to α+β and α+β to β transformation temperatures ............. 93
5.1.4 Ductility tests .......................................................................................................... 96
5.1.4.1 The ring compression test ......................................................................... 96
5.1.4.2 Ring tensile tests ....................................................................................... 99
5.1.4.3 Tube bending tests .................................................................................... 100
5.1.4.4 Impact tests ............................................................................................... 101
5.1.5 Oxidation tests ........................................................................................................ 103
5.2 Tests with moderate integration ......................................................................................... 107
5.2.1 Steam oxidation tests followed by quenching......................................................... 108
5.2.2 Deformation or ballooning tests in steam ............................................................... 110
5.2.3 Constrained deformation or ballooning tests in steam with or without quench ...... 113
5.3 Fully integrated tests .......................................................................................................... 114
5.3.1 In-reactor tests ......................................................................................................... 114
5.3.1.1 The FR2 facility ........................................................................................ 114
5.3.1.2 LOC tests in the power burst facility ........................................................ 117
5.3.1.3 PHEBUS test ............................................................................................ 117
5.3.1.4 LOCA tests in the Halden reactor............................................................. 120
5.3.1.5 BTF test .................................................................................................... 123
5.3.2 Out-of-reactor integral tests .................................................................................... 124
5.3.2.1 The REBEKA programme at Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe ........... 124
5.3.2.2 Single and multi-rod tests at the Japanese Atomic Energy ResearchInstitute (JAERI)....................................................................................... 126
5.3.2.3 Single and multi-rod burst test (MRBT) at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory (ORNL), USA ........................................................................ 129
5.3.2.4 The Russian PARAMETR-M and TEFSAI-19 facilities ......................... 131
5.4 References .......................................................................................................................... 134

66.

Preservation of integrity of cladding during oxidation and embrittlement ........................ 141
6.1 The kinetics of the zirconium alloy steam reaction ............................................................ 141
6.1.1 Isothermal oxidation of Zircaloy in steam .............................................................. 142
6.1.2 Isothermal oxidation of other zirconium alloys in steam ........................................ 149
6.1.3 Breakaway oxidation of zirconium alloys............................................................... 154
6.1.4 Effect of irradiation on high-temperature zirconium alloy oxidation ..................... 157
6.1.5 Effect of specimen geometry .................................................................................. 157
6.1.6 The behaviour of alloying elements during oxidation ............................................ 158
6.1.6.1 Zircaloy-4 ................................................................................................. 158
6.1.6.2 Zr-1Nb ...................................................................................................... 159
6.1.7 High-temperature oxidation of pre-oxidized zirconium alloys ............................... 159
6.1.8 Oxidation of zirconium alloys in impure steam ...................................................... 165
6.1.9 Influence of hydrogen in steam on zirconium alloy oxidation................................ 166
6.1.10 High-temperature oxidation of zirconium alloys in high pressure steam ............... 173
6.1.11 Effect of deformation on zirconium alloy oxidation ............................................... 173
6.1.12 Stress and dimensional changes in oxidized zirconium alloys ............................... 175
6.2 Embrittlement of zirconium alloy fuel cladding ................................................................ 176
6.2.1 Current embrittlement criteria................................................................................. 177
6.2.2 Embrittlement and distribution of oxygen in the cladding wall .............................. 179
6.2.3 Embrittlement below thermal shock temperatures .................................................. 182
6.2.4 Comparison of embrittlement in-reactor and out-of-reactor ................................... 187
6.2.5 The effect of constraint during quenching .............................................................. 188
6.2.6 Quench embrittlement of pre-hydrided or high burn-up Zircaloy cladding............ 190
6.2.7 Recent post-quench ductility tests of Zircaloy, ZIRLO and M5 cladding .............. 195
6.2.8 The post-quench embrittlement of E110 cladding .................................................. 205
6.3 Calculation of transient oxidation, hydrogen generation and embrittlement ..................... 210
6.3.1 Calculation of hydrogen generation ........................................................................ 210
6.3.2 Calculation of oxygen distribution.......................................................................... 212
6.4 Discussions on embrittlement criteria ................................................................................ 214
6.4.1 Regulatory analysis ................................................................................................. 214
6.4.1.1 Beta-layer embrittlement by oxygen ........................................................ 214
6.4.1.2 Beta-layer thinning ................................................................................... 214
6.4.1.3 Localised hydrogen-induced embrittlement in the balloon ...................... 215
6.4.1.4 Hydrogen-enhanced β-layer embrittlement by oxygen ............................ 215
6.4.1.5 General hydrogen-induced embrittlement from breakaway oxidation ..... 215
6.4.1.6 Oxygen pickup from the cladding inside diameter (ID) ........................... 216
6.4.1.7 Embrittlement criteria ............................................................................... 216
6.4.1.8 Summary of U.S. regulatory analysis ....................................................... 217
6.4.2 Discussions on impact of recent results on criteria ................................................. 217
6.4.2.1 Billone’s proposal ..................................................................................... 217
6.4.2.2 Vrtilková’s criterion ................................................................................. 218
6.4.2.3 The proposal by Vitanza and Hrehor ........................................................ 219
6.4.2.4 Criteria proposed by Chung ...................................................................... 221
6.5 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 223
6.5.1 General conclusions on oxidation and hydrogen generation .................................. 223
6.5.2 General conclusions on embrittlement .................................................................... 224
6.6 References .......................................................................................................................... 224

7.

Plastic deformation of cladding ............................................................................................... 235
7.1 The problem ....................................................................................................................... 235
7.1.1 Internal pressures of fuel rods ................................................................................. 235
7

7.2 Factors controlling deformation and rupture of cladding ................................................... 235
7.2.1 Measurement of blockage ....................................................................................... 237
7.3 Experimental data ............................................................................................................... 239
7.3.1 In-reactor tests ......................................................................................................... 240
7.3.1.1 Single rod tests in the FR2 reactor............................................................ 240
7.3.1.2 Single rod tests in the PBF ....................................................................... 244
7.3.1.3 Single rod tests in the ESSOR reactor ...................................................... 247
7.3.1.4 Single rod tests in the SILOE reactor ....................................................... 250
7.3.1.5 Multi-rod tests in the NRU reactor ........................................................... 251
7.3.1.6 Multi-rod tests in the PHEBUS loop ........................................................ 253
7.3.1.7 LOCA tests in the Halden reactor............................................................. 261
7.3.2 Out-of-reactor tests ................................................................................................. 269
7.3.2.1 The REBEKA programme at Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe ........... 269
7.3.2.2 Single and multi-rod testing at KWU, Erlangen ....................................... 277
7.3.2.3 Single and multi-rod testing at the Japanese Atomic Energy
Research Institute (JAERI) ....................................................................... 284
7.3.2.4 The single and multi-rod burst test (MRBT) programme
at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) ............................................. 293
7.3.2.5 Single and multi-rod testing at Westinghouse Electric Corporation ........ 306
7.3.2.6 Single rod testing at Saclay – CEA........................................................... 307
7.3.2.7 Single and multiple rod testing in the United Kingdom ........................... 318
7.3.2.8 Experiments in the PARAMETR-M and TEFSAI-19 facilities in Russia..... 322
7.3.2.9 Ballooning of E110 cladding in comparison with Zircaloy-4 .................. 326
7.4 References .......................................................................................................................... 328
8.

Predictive computer codes ....................................................................................................... 335
8.1 Some general comments on computer codes ..................................................................... 335
8.1.1 Types of computer codes ........................................................................................ 335
8.1.2 Documentation ........................................................................................................ 336
8.1.3 Code verification ..................................................................................................... 337
8.1.4 Code validation ....................................................................................................... 337
8.1.5 The accuracy of codes ............................................................................................. 338
8.2 Single rod codes ................................................................................................................. 339
8.2.1 Steady-state codes ................................................................................................... 339
8.2.2 Transient codes ....................................................................................................... 340
8.3 Assembly/channel codes .................................................................................................... 341
8.4 System codes ...................................................................................................................... 343
8.5 References .......................................................................................................................... 343

9.

Energy and core damage distribution assessment: methodologies and results................... 345
9.1 A review of core damage assessment practices in Europe ................................................. 345
9.2 Damage assessments for a Westinghouse PWR................................................................. 349
9.3 A German example of core damage extent analysis .......................................................... 350
9.4 References .......................................................................................................................... 352

10. Conclusions................................................................................................................................ 353
AppendicesA. Taking account of anisotropy in creep calculations.................................................................... 365
B. List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................... 371

8

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1

Figure 1.2
Figure 1.3

Figure 1.4
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.4

Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 4.1

Schematic illustration of microstructure (top) and oxygen distribution (bottom)
in oxide, stabilised alpha and prior-beta (transformed beta) layers
in Zircaloy cladding after oxidation near 1 200°C .........................................................
Ductility of two-side-oxidized Zircaloy rings as function of slow- or fastcompression temperature and fraction of transformed-beta-layer (from Hobson) .........
Summary of multistep procedure used to establish 17% oxidation criterion
during 1973 Rule-Making Hearing (from Docket RM-50-1, April 16, 1973).
Note equivalent cladding oxidized was calculated per Baker-Just correlation.
For comparison, time to reach threshold fraction of combined oxide and alpha layersof 0.44 is shown as determined per Hobson and Rittenhouse and Pawel ......................
The zirconium rich corner of the Zr-O phase diagram. The thin vertical line
shows 0.7 wt % O...........................................................................................................

32
34

35
38

PWR primary system arrangement ................................................................................ 43
Double ended cold leg break, pressure difference across the cladding andcladding temperature at the hot spot .............................................................................. 45
Steam and recirculation water flow paths in the BWR .................................................. 46
A schematic of a CANDU primary heat transport system (Legend: 1. Steam line leading
to electric turbines, 2. Pressuriser, 3. Steam generator, 4. Pumps, 5. Inlet headers,
6. Calandria vessel, 7. Fuel channel, 8. Moderator recirculation pump, 9.
Heat exchanger, and 10. Online refueling machines) .................................................... 50
Grain boundary gas versus pellet burn-up in UO2 and MOX fuel(left: ratio from created gas, right: concentration) ......................................................... 58
PWR fuel state at high burn-up. BWR fuel has a similar state with the exceptionof the oxide layer which is thinner and with less total pickup of hydrogen in the metal 59

Figure 4.6

FEBA 5×5 bundle with 90% blockage, left and SEFLEX 5×5 bundle
with 90% blockage, right ...............................................................................................
FEBA 5×5 bundle geometries of test series I through VIII ...........................................
Temperatures measured in the midplane of a 90% blockage and in the blockage
by-pass of FEBA and SEFLEX rod bundles ..................................................................
Bundle-wide blockage and axial distributions for FLECHT-SEASET
configurations C, D, E and F ..........................................................................................
Rod temperatures for unblocked and coplanar configurations. a) Central rod b)
Peripheral rod .................................................................................................................
Best estimate failure thresholds for PWR fuel in a large break LOCA..........................

Figure 5.1
Figure 5.2
Figure 5.3

Creep properties of Zircaloy-2 in the temperature range 650-800°C ............................. 87
Heating arrangement in the experiments by Fiveland et al. ........................................... 88
The 15.2 cm long specimen used by Chung and Kassner .............................................. 88

Figure 4.2
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.5

9

68
69
70
73
74
80

Figure 5.4

Maximum circumferential strain at rupture versus burst temperature for axiallyconstrained and unconstrained Zircaloy-4 cladding at a heating rate of 115 K/s.
The axial strain of unconstrained tubes also is shown ................................................... 89
Figure 5.5 A pseudobinary phase diagram for the Zircaloy-oxygen system ................................... 90
Figure 5.6 Schematic of Rosinger’s high temperature creep apparatus........................................... 91
Figure 5.7 Typical creep test results from Rosinger’s investigation at 1 573 K .............................. 92
Figure 5.8 The effect of initial condition on creep properties at 600°C
The lowest yield strengths correspond to fully recrystallized material
while the other pointr represent various degrees of recystallization .............................. 92
Figure 5.9 Oxygen-rich-side Zircaloy-4-oxygen phase diagram determinedfrom metallography of quenched samples, from Chung and Kassner............................ 94
Figure 5.10 Comparison between transformation models and experiments on coolingof Zircaloy-4................................................................................................................... 95
Figure 5.11 Plot of Tα/α+β and Tβ/α+β temperatures measured upon heating and cooling at
10°C/min as a function of hydrogen content. The straight lines (average between
heating and cooling) are assumed to be representative of equilibrium temperatures..... 96
Figure 5.12 The arrangement for a ring compression test ................................................................. 97
Figure 5.13 Load-displacement record from a ring compression teston an oxidized Zirlo specimen ....................................................................................... 97
Figure 5.14 Residual ductility (defined as offset displacement at failure divided by ring
diameter) plotted against ECR for E110 alloy ............................................................... 98
Figure 5.15 Components of a ring tensile test, D grip to the left and specimen to the right ............. 99
Figure 5.16 Three-point bending test apparatus ................................................................................ 100
Figure 5.17 Load-displacement records from three-point bend tests of oxidized Zircaloy-4............ 100
Figure 5.18 Schematic description of a four-point bend test ............................................................. 101
Figure 5.19 Dynamic fracture toughness of oxygen-alloyed Zircaloy-4 ........................................... 102
Figure 5.20 Notched impact specimen fabricated from oxidized cladding. Results of tests
with this specimen type .................................................................................................. 103
Figure 5.21 The steam oxidation apparatus MiniZWOK .................................................................. 104
Figure 5.22 Apparatus for Zircaloy oxidation in hydrogen-steam mixtures.
The test specimen, with welded thermocouples, is placed in the centreof the bell jar facing a pyrometer through a quartz glass ............................................... 106
Figure 5.23 High-temperature oxidation apparatus ........................................................................... 106
Figure 5.24 The UNOPRO facility for continuous recording of weight gain during oxidation ........ 107
Figure 5.25 Facility for continuous recording of specimen weight gain during oxidation usedby Baek et al................................................................................................................... 107
Figure 5.26 Weight gain vs time record for Zircaloy-4 oxidized at 900°C in the facility107
shown in Figure 5.25 ...................................................................................................... 107
Figure 5.27 The DEZIROX oxidation and quench facility ............................................................... 108
Figure 5.28 Apparatus for oxidation tests of cladding followed by quench in water ........................ 109
Figure 5.29 UVS, the universal rig for testing overheated core materials......................................... 110
Figure 5.30 The PROPAT facility for study of cladding deformation in a steam atmosphere.......... 110
Figure 5.31 Schematic diagram of ballooning test apparatus used at Chalk River ........................... 111
Figure 5.32 Schematic view of the EDGAR-2 test facility ............................................................... 112
Figure 5.33 Test apparatus for constrained ballooning tests in steam ............................................... 113
Figure 5.34 Schematic illustration of the LOCA simulation facility usedat the Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute ........................................................... 114
Figure 5.35 Simplified flow scheme of the DK loop, operated with superheated steam,in the FR2 reactor ........................................................................................................... 115
Figure 5.36 In-pile test section of the DK loop in the FR2 reactor (simplified)................................ 115
Figure 5.37 Test fuel rod design for the FR2 experiments ................................................................ 115
10

Figure 5.38 Electrically heated fuel rod simulator design, heated section (not to scale) .................. 116
Figure 5.39 Cross section of the PBF-LOC experiment .................................................................... 117
Figure 5.40 Schematic design of the PHEBUS test loop................................................................... 118
Figure 5.41 Test train instrumentation............................................................................................... 119
Figure 5.42 Sketch of the flow starvation facility. 1, main circulation pump; 2, flow regulating
valve; 3, electric heater; 4, main circuit cooler; 5, regenerative cooler; 6, purification
circuit cooler; 7, cooler; 8, ion exchanger; 9, helium pressurizing tank; 10, watersupply pump; 11, graphite seal unit; 12, seal; 13, heat exchanger; 14, central tube
for cabling; 15, pressure flask; 16, shroud; 17, triangular tube for cabling; 18, tube
for water downflow; 19, fuel rods .................................................................................. 120
Figure 5.43 Cross section of the IFA-54X assembly and pressure flask ........................................... 121
Figure 5.44 Simplified drawing of the loop used for the IFA-650 experiments................................ 122
Figure 5.45 The test rig used in the IFA-650 tests (left) and a cross section of the test rig
with outer shroud (right) ................................................................................................ 123
Figure 5.46 Fuel rod cladding loading in a 2F-cold leg break LOCA ............................................... 125
Figure 5.47 The REBEKA fuel rod simulator ................................................................................... 125
Figure 5.48 Test loop for ballooning experiments. Bundle tests (REBEKA) ................................... 126
Figure 5.49 Schematic diagram of the facility for burst test of a fuel assembly at JAERI................ 127
Figure 5.50 Schematic drawing of the fuel rods and the heating system of the JAERI tests ............ 127
Figure 5.51 Locations of the thermocouples in the JAERI tests ....................................................... 128
Figure 5.52 Sequence of the post burst examinations of an assembly in the JAERI tests................. 128
Figure 5.53 MRBT fuel pin simulator also used in the single-rod tests.] .......................................... 129
Figure 5.54 Schematic of the B1 4×4 multi-rod test assembly.......................................................... 130
Figure 5.55 Typical simulator response in the B-3 test ..................................................................... 130
Figure 5.56 Schematic view of the 37-rod assembly in the PARAMETR-M facility ....................... 132
Figure 5.57 Schematic view of the fuel rod simulators used in PARAMETR-M and
TEFSAI facilities ........................................................................................................... 133
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.2

Zircaloy-2 oxidized in steam at 1 200°C for 1 200 s. 80× ............................................. 141
The parabolic rate constant as a function of inverse temperature as determinedby different researcher. The unit for the parabolic rate constant is (g O2/cm2)2 s-1 ........ 145
Figure 6.3 The parabolic rate constant as a function of inverse temperature as determinedby different researcher. The unit for the parabolic rate constant is (g O2/cm2)2 s-1 ........ 146
Figure 6.4 Parabolic oxide layer growth rate constants obtained for pure steam environments
vs inverse temperature.................................................................................................... 148
Figure 6.5 High temperature steam oxidation of Zircaloy-4 cladding. Kinetics of of ZrO2 scale
growth and α-Zr(O) layer growth. Note the slower kinetics for oxide growth
before transition to linear kinetics after long time exposure. at low temperature .......... 148
Figure 6.6 Weight gains of VVER-type claddings oxidized in steam at atmospheric pressure ...... 149
Figure 6.7 Temperature dependence of the reaction rate constant Kp for zirconium alloys ........... 150
Figure 6.8 Oxidation results on Zr1Nb at different laboratories. Note that the original figure
has been edited to remove incorrect data and to conform with reference numberingof the present report ....................................................................................................... 150
Figure 6.9 The kinetics of the steam oxidation reaction of E110 in the temperature range
800-1 200°C. The black line is calculated with the Cathcart-Pawel equation ............... 151
Figure 6.10 Results of transient test modes converted to equivalent time at constant temperaturefor E110.......................................................................................................................... 152
Figure 6.11 Kinetics of the sponge based E110 claddings compared to standard E110 ................... 152
Figure 6.12 The oxidation of M5 and Zircaloy-4 at 1 000, 1 100, and 1 200°C ............................... 153
Figure 6.13 Oxidation of E635 at 1 100°C compared to other zirconium alloys .............................. 153

11

Figure 6.14 Suggested mechanism for high temperature breakaway oxidation in Zircaloy
by Leistikow and co-workers ......................................................................................... 155
Figure 6.15 The hydrogen pickup in E110 and Zircaloy-4 during steam oxidation .......................... 156
Figure 6.16 The appearance of E110 cladding tubes oxidized in steam at 1100°C
to different ECR levels ................................................................................................... 156
Figure 6.17 Nb X-ray map obtained by electron microprobe of the α(O) + β(Nb) layer
below the oxide in M5 alloy oxidized to ECR ~17% at 1100 ˚C ................................... 160
Figure 6.18 Examples of corrosion of Zircaloy-4 in different PWRs ............................................... 160
Figure 6.19 Oxidation results for cladding pre-oxidized with a 10 µm oxide ................................... 161
Figure 6.20 Normalised values of high temperature oxidation of spent fuel cladding
as a function of initial oxide thickness, Ozawa et al. ..................................................... 162
Figure 6.21 Cross sections of pre-oxidized samples oxidized at 1 100°C for various times.
White arrows indicate initiation of high temperature oxidation..................................... 163
Figure 6.22 High temperature oxidation below an oxide nodule formed during
pre-oxidation. 80x .......................................................................................................... 164
Figure 6.23 Weight gains recorded in isothermal tests in different gases on Zircaloy-4 .................. 165
Figure 6.24 The effect of air on the oxidation of the E110 alloy ...................................................... 166
Figure 6.25 Total weight gain of oxidized specimen as function of hydrogen-to-steam
volume ratio ................................................................................................................... 167
Figure 6.26 Hydrogen content absorbed by specimen in a steam-hydrogen mixture ........................ 168
Figure 6.27 Ratio of parabolic oxide layer growth rate constant obtained in hydrogen steam
mixtures to that obtained in unlimited flux of pure steam as a function of
Zircaloy-4 temperatures and steam supply rate.............................................................. 169
Figure 6.28 Ratio of parabolic oxide layer growth rate constant obtained in flowing hydrogensteam mixtures to that obtained in unlimited flux of pure steam as a function of Zircaloy4 temperatures and average hydrogen mole fraction in the inlet mixtures..................... 170
Figure 6.29 Fraction of hydrogen atoms dissolved in Zircaloy-4 cladding tube out of totalhydrogen atoms produced as a result of Zircaloy steam reaction at isothermaloxidation temperatures ................................................................................................... 171
Figure 6.30 The effect of prehydriding on the high temperature oxidation of low Sn Zircaloy-4 .... 172
Figure 6.31 Effect of hydrogen content on M5 and Zircaloy oxidation kinetics at 1 200°C............. 172
Figure 6.32 Effect of steam pressure on the oxidation of Zircaloy-4 and Zr1%Nb at 850°C ........... 173
Figure 6.33 Time dependence of oxidation induced strains at 1 350°C ............................................ 176
Figure 6.34 Clad embrittlement data from USA and UK compiled by Parsons ................................ 178
Figure 6.35 Thermal-shock failure map for Zircaloy-4 cladding (bottom flooded with waterat the oxidation temperature) relative to the ECR parameter and maximum oxidation
temperature after rupture in steam. The best-estimate failure boundary for claddingthat was slow cooled through the β→α’ before flooding with water and the dataof Hesson et al. and Scatena are shown for comparison ................................................ 180
Figure 6.36 Failure map for Zircaloy-4 cladding by thermal shock relative to fractional thicknessof previous β-phase layer and oxidation temperature after rupture in steam and floodingwith water at oxidation temperature. Cooling rate through the β→ α’ transformationwas ~100 K/s .................................................................................................................. 180
Figure 6.37 Failure map for Zircaloy-4 cladding by thermal shock relative to fractional saturationof β-phase and oxidation temperature after rupture in steam and flooding with waterat oxidation temperature. The failure boundary for cladding that was slow cooled(~5 K/s) through the phase transformation is shown for comparison ............................ 180
Figure 6.38 Failure map fo Zircaloy-4 cladding by thermal shock relative
to the wall thickness with ≤0.9 wt % oxygen after isothermal oxidationand flooding with water at the oxidation temperature. Cooling rate
through the β→α’ transformation was ~100 K/s ............................................................ 181
12

Figure 6.39 Capability of Zircaloy-4 cladding to withstand an impact energy of 0.3 J
at 300 K relative to the thickness of β-phase layer containing <0.7 wt % oxygen
and the hydrogen content of the cladding. The above criteria are applicable irrespectiveof the oxidation temperature, the initial cladding wall thickness and the wall thickness
that results from ballooning and deformation ................................................................ 184
Figure 6.40 Correlation between distributions of inner surface oxide layer thicknes,
ring-compression deflection, and absorbed hydrogen content ....................................... 185
Figure 6.41 Iso-deflection curves obtained on segments of burst cladding andtubes oxidized in steam as functions of oxidation temperature and time ....................... 186
Figure 6.42 Time-temperature oxidation conditions resulting in integrated energies tomaximum load above and below 0.3 J from load-vs-deflection curves during slow
diametral compression of tube and ring specimens at 300 and 373 K respectively ....... 186
Figure 6.43 Failure map for Zircaloy-4 cladding due to handling relative to wall thickness
with < 0.7 wt % oxygen ................................................................................................. 188
Figure 6.44 Results from quenching experiments on burst fuel rods. The results to the left
are from unconstrained specimens and the results to the right arefrom constrained specimens ........................................................................................... 189
Figure 6.45 Load histories during quench under various conditions of constraint............................ 190
Figure 6.46 Typical post-failure appearances of failed cladding....................................................... 191
Figure 6.47 Failure maps of cladding tubes tested under fully restrained conditions (a)as-received, (b) pre-hydrided tubes (c) pre-hydrided with reduced wall thickness........ 191
Figure 6.48 Failure maps in terms of ECR and hydrogen content for the four restrained................. 192
Figure 6.49 Fracture map in terms of oxidation and initial hydrogen concentration
for irradiated and unirradiated cladding with a restraint force of 540 N ........................ 192
Figure 6.50 Fracture/no-fracture conditions, relevant to ECR value and initial hydrogenconcentration .................................................................................................................. 194
Figure 6.51 Quench survival/failure of isothermally oxidized Zircaloy-4.
Diamonds = unrestrained tests, Squares = partially restrained tests,
Triangles = fully restrained tests. Filled symbols represent failures .............................. 194
Figure 6.52 Embrittlement threshold at 135°C as a function of hydrogen content
for prehydrided unirradiated Zircaloy-4 oxidized at 1 200°C andeither quenched at 800°C or cooled without quench...................................................... 197
Figure 6.53 Ductility at 135°C after oxidation in steam at 1200°C and cooled slowly
for irradiated and unirradiated Zircaloy-4 cladding ....................................................... 197
Figure 6.54 High-oxygen alpha layer on the ID resulting from oxygen diffusionfrom the ZrO2 fuel-to-cladding bond following OD steam oxidation at 1 200°C .......... 198
Figure 6.55 Measured hydrogen and oxygen content in in-cell (ICL) tests
on high-burn-up BWR Zircaloy-2 fuel rods ................................................................... 198
Figure 6.56 Residual ductility parameter derived from the ring compression test
as a function of weight gain at 1 100°C ......................................................................... 199
Figure 6.57 Room temperature ring compression tests on as-received and pre-hydrided M5
and low-tin Zircaloy-4 after oxidation and quench at 1 200°C ...................................... 200
Figure 6.58 Typical fractographs of the internal prior β-phase layer of Charpy impact
tested as-received and pre-hydrided material ................................................................. 201
Figure 6.59 Impact energy vs the correlation parameter K defined in Equation 6.6 ......................... 202
Figure 6.60 Evolution of prior β phase oxygen content (mean value) of as-received andprehydrided Zircaloy-4 (a) and M5 (b) alloys vs the weight gain after oxidation at
1 200°C .......................................................................................................................... 203
Figure 6.61 Full correlation between the impact energy, the oxygen and hydrogen contents,
and the correlation parameter K’ .................................................................................... 204
Figure 6.62 Results of ring compression tests at 135°C after various cooling scenarios .................. 204
13

Figure 6.63 Relative displacement at failure in ring compression tests as a functionof ECR for E110 and Zircaloy-4 .................................................................................... 205
Figure 6.64 The impact behaviour of oxidized cladding vs oxidation ECR ...................................... 206
Figure 6.65 Deformation vs ECR in 20°C ring compression tests of E110 alloy ............................. 206
Figure 6.66 Relative deformation to failure (first crack) of E110 and Zircaloy samples
as a function of oxidation ratio (ECR) and hydrogen content ........................................ 208
Figure 6.67 Relative deformation as function of hydrogen content for E110 and Zircaloy-4
samples oxidized in steam .............................................................................................. 208
Figure 6.68 Hybrid E110 sample following oxidation at 1 000°C for 290 seconds.
Machined-and-polished section is lustrous black,
hile as-fabricated E110 section is in breakaway oxidation ............................................ 209
Figure 6.69 Ductility as a function of calculated oxidation at 1 473 K (1 200°C) for irradiatedand unirradiated Zircaloy-4 (rough surface), tested at 408 K (135°C)........................... 215
Figure 6.70 Specimen of E110 cladding that exhibited severe breakaway oxidation
after 1 400 seconds at 1 000°C ....................................................................................... 216
Figure 6.71 Diffusion couple character of oxygen sources and cladding metal ................................ 216
Figure 6.72 Post-quench ductility results at RT for isothermally exposed E110 specimens.
Ac is the residual ductility.............................................................................................. 219
Figure 6.73 Results of Hungarian ring compression tests of specimens subjected
to isothermal high temperture steam oxidation .............................................................. 220
Figure 6.74 Maximum calculated cladding temperatures in a simulated 200% cold-leg
LBLOCA in the PAKS NPP .......................................................................................... 220
Figure 6.75 The burn-up dependence of T300s Zircaloy-4, E110 and M5 .......................................... 221
Figure 7.1

Schematic representation of strain anisotropy in zirconium alloy tubing
resulting in the “hot side straight” effect ........................................................................ 236
Figure 7.2 General definition of coolant channel blockage ............................................................. 237
Figure 7.3 Examples of blockage .................................................................................................... 237
Figure 7.4 Mask method for measurement of blockage .................................................................. 238
Figure 7.5 Deficiencies of the total area method ............................................................................. 238
Figure 7.6 Definition of sub-channel blockage (left) and sub-channel perimeters
and rod gaps (right) ........................................................................................................ 239
Figure 7.7 Proposals for dealing with the various types of sub-channels and burst openings......... 239
Figure 7.8 Typical temperature and pressure histories for the FR-2 tests.
Measured data of test B3.1 ............................................................................................. 214
Figure 7.9 Relative increase of total void volume versus maximum circumferential
elongation (a) and deformation profiles for tests below the average (b),above the average (c), and tests F1 through F5 representing the average (d) ................ 242
Figure 7.10 Post test neutron radiograph of test E5 fuel rod ............................................................. 243
Figure 7.11 Maximum circumferential strain vs burst temperature .................................................. 243
Figure 7.12 Fuel mass per unit volume of deformed cladding tube after relocation
during LOCA burst test .................................................................................................. 244
Figure 7.13 Comparisons of the axial profiles of cladding circumferential strain
in the high pressure fresh and irradiated rods, rods 11 and 12, which burst
in the alpha phase. (LOC tests in PBF) .......................................................................... 245
Figure 7.14 Comparisons of the axial profiles of cladding circumferential strain
in the high pressure fresh and irradiated rods, rods 3 and 4, which burst
in the alpha-plus-beta transition. (LOC tests in PBF) .................................................... 246
Figure 7.15 Comparisons of the axial profiles of cladding circumferential strain
on the unirradiated high pressure rods, rods 7A and 7B
with initially undeformed and collapsed cladding. (LOC tests in PBF)......................... 247
14

Figure 7.16 Test procedure for EOLO tests....................................................................................... 248
Figure 7.17 Post-irradiation diametral metrology of the five burst claddings in the
EOLO experiments......................................................................................................... 249
Figure 7.18 EOLO-2 evolution of the cladding temperature at the level 0.65 m, coolant flow
and rod fill gas pressure during the test.......................................................................... 249
Figure 7.19 EOLO-2 clad temperature and neutron flux axial profiles during the test ..................... 250
Figure 7.20 Appearance of fuel at rupture plane in the FLASH-5 experiment ................................. 251
Figure 7.21 Axial distribution of strain in NRU MT-1 test ............................................................... 252
Figure 7.22 Axial distribution of strain in the NRU MT-2 test ......................................................... 252
Figure 7.23 Axial distribution of strain in the NRU MT-3 test ......................................................... 252
Figure 7.24 Axial distribution of strain in the NRU MT-4 test ......................................................... 252
Figure 7.25 PHEBUS test 215P. History of clad temperatures measured
between two grid spacers ............................................................................................... 253
Figure 7.26 PHEBUS test 215P. Axial deformation profile between interior spacer grids
and flow area restriction versus distance from bottom of fuel stack .............................. 254
Figure 7.27 PHEBUS test 215-P. Comparison of maximum burst strains
with radial position. (Low pressure in rods 2, 4 and 6) .................................................. 254
Figure 7.28 PHEBUS test 215-P. Metallographic coss sections at elevations 285 and252 mm from fuel bottom .............................................................................................. 255
Figure 7.29 PHEBUS test 215-R. Histories of clad and fuel temperatures on Rod 6 ....................... 255
Figure 7.30 PHEBUS test 218. View of burst strains of rods as projected in a same plane.............. 257
Figure 7.31 PHEBUS test 219. Burst strain versus average azimuthal temperature
difference in the 22-25 s time interval of the transient................................................... 259
Figure 7.32 Temperature histories in the PHEBUS LOCA tests ....................................................... 259
Figure 7.33 Temperature transient a cladding level 4 in the IFA-543 ballooning test ...................... 263
Figure 7.34 Comparison of predictions of rupture strain as a functionof pellet excentricity for MT-3 and IFA-54X ................................................................ 264
Figure 7.35 Measured clad (TTC1-4) and heater (TCH1-2) temperatures,
linear heat rate of heater (QH) and readings of Co neutron detector(Cobalt ND5) during the LOCA test run ........................................................................ 266
Figure 7.36 Ballooned region with relocated fuel in the Halden IFA-650.2 test............................... 267
Figure 7.37 Through wall cracks with brittle appearance. Halden IFA-650.2 test ............................ 267
Figure 7.38 REBEKA test philosophy and test objectives ................................................................ 270
Figure 7.39 Burst strain vs azimuthal temperature difference in REBEKA out-of-pile tests............ 271
Figure 7.40 Burst strain vs burst temperature of Zircaloy claddings................................................. 271
Figure 7.41 First bundle test REBEKA, Test data and test procedure.
Starting temperature was 520°C ..................................................................................... 272
Figure 7.42 Circumferential strain of the 9 Zircaloy claddings and fuel blockagein the REBEKA 1 experiment ........................................................................................ 272
Figure 7.43 The temperature history at two axial locations in REBEKA 2 ...................................... 273
Figure 7.44 Circumferential strain of the 9 Zircaloy claddings and fuel blockagein the REBEKA 2 experiment ........................................................................................ 273
Figure 7.45 Circumferential strain of the 9 Zircaloy claddings and fuel blockagein the REBEKA 3 and REBEKA 4 experiments............................................................ 274
Figure 7.46 REBEKA-5. Circumferential cladding strain and flow blockage
under reversed flow ........................................................................................................ 276
Figure 7.47 REBEKA-6. Circumferential cladding strain and flow blockage
under unidirectional flow ............................................................................................... 277
Figure 7.48 Controlled temperature transient test (left) and creep rupture test (simulationof 2nd peak, right) in the KWU programme .................................................................... 278

15

Figure 7.49 Burst temperature vs pressure from single rod tests under idealised conditions
Comparison of different initial cladding conditions....................................................... 278
Figure 7.50 Burst strain vs burst temperature from single rod tests under idealised
conditions. Comparison of different cladding materials ................................................ 279
Figure 7.51 Burst strain vs wall thickness variation from single rod creep rupture
tests under idealised conditions ...................................................................................... 279
Figure 7.52 Burst strain vs mean normalised azimuthal temperature difference
from single rod creep rupture tests under idealised conditions ...................................... 280
Figure 7.53 Tube bending vs normalised azimuthal temperature differencein single rod creep rupture test in air .............................................................................. 280
Figure 7.54 Local axial strain vs tangential strain in the plane of maximum deformation ............... 281
Figure 7.55 Axial strain vs tangential strain for creep rupture tests with non-homogeneoustemperature distribution on the circumference............................................................... 281
Figure 7.56 Bow vs azimuthal temperature difference ...................................................................... 282
Figure 7.57 Axial profile of circumferential strain for transient test (5 K/s, 50 bar)in air and flowing steam ................................................................................................. 282
Figure 7.58 Indirectly heated multirod test (3×4) with one isobarically pressurised sample(65 bar) ........................................................................................................................... 283
Figure 7.59 Indirectly heated multirod test (3×4) with one isobarically pressurised sample(65 bar) ........................................................................................................................... 283
Figure 7.60 Axial temperature and strain profile from KWU multirod testwith forced air cooling ................................................................................................... 284
Figure 7.61 Burst strain vs burst temperature from single rod and multi rod tests(schematically) ............................................................................................................... 285
Figure 7.62 Histories of cladding temperatures and internal pressure in JAERI test 7805 ............... 285
Figure 7.63 Axial distribution of ballooning in the JAERI 7×7 multirod tests ................................. 286
Figure 7.64 Axial locations of burst position and ballooned region in assembly No. 7805 .............. 287
Figure 7.65 Axial locations of burst position and ballooned region in assembly No. 7910 .............. 287
Figure 7.66 Axial locations of burst position and ballooned region in assembly No. 7911 .............. 288
Figure 7.67 Portions of tubes with greater than 34% strain in assembly 7912.................................. 289
Figure 7.68 Illustrated deformation mechanism of a rod surrounded by external heater .................. 290
Figure 7.69 Axial locations of burst position and ballooned region in tests Nos. 20 and 21 ............ 291
Figure 7.70 Axial locations of channel blockage in tests Nos. 19 and 21, 20 and 23 ....................... 291
Figure 7.71 Cross-section of maximum blockage in test No. 24....................................................... 292
Figure 7.72 Average rupture strain from single-rod tests heated at 28 K/s ....................................... 294
Figure 7.73 Change in Zircaloy heated length in single-rod tests294
Figure 7.74 Comparison of burst strain in creep rupture and low heating rate tests with datafor 28 K/s tests ............................................................................................................... 295
Figure 7.75 Comparison of tube volume increase (qualitatively equivalent to average tube
strain) in creep rupture and low heating rate tests with data for 28 K/s tests ................. 295
Figure 7.76 Comparison of burst strains in B-1, B-2 and B-3 tests with single rod tests data .......... 296
Figure 7.77 Comparison of B-3 bundle burst data with ORNL and KfK single-rod datafor heating rate of ~10 K/s ............................................................................................. 297
Figure 7.78 Portions of tubes with greater than 32% strain in B-3 test ............................................. 297
Figure 7.79 Axial distribution of bursts in multi-rod burst tests B-1 and B-3 ................................... 298
Figure 7.80 Burst location can be displaced by change in steam flow .............................................. 299
Figure 7.81 Deformation agrees with axial temperature distribution ................................................ 299
Figure 7.82 Comparison of B-1 and B-2 bundle data with ORNL and KfK single-rod datafor heating rate of ~28 K/s ............................................................................................. 300
Figure 7.83 Radial temperature distribution base on row- and column-averaged data 43 s
after power-on for B-5 rods............................................................................................ 301
16

Figure 7.84 Simulator average temperature 43 s after power-on in B-5 test ..................................... 302
Figure 7.85 Approximate orientation of bursts in the B-5 test. The figure showsa predominance of bursts towards the flow channel and the N.E. corner ...................... 302
Figure 7.86 Sections from highly deformed regions of B5 and B3 bundles showing effectsof confinement. Small unconstrained bundles do not produce the same deformation
pattern as large constrained bundles for same test conditions........................................ 303
Figure 7.87 Tube dilatation greater in B-5 interior simulators than in exterior simulators andgreater than in comparable B-3 (4×4) test ...................................................................... 304
Figure 7.88 Subdivision of B-5 data show interior subarrays have greater coolant flow
area restriction ................................................................................................................ 304
Figure 7.89 Preliminary B-5 data show inner 4×4 array has greater flow restriction
than B-3 (4×4) array ....................................................................................................... 305
Figure 7.90 ORNL-MRBT. Burst strains of B5 tubes. B3 (4×4) data are shownfor comparison with inner 4×4 array of B-5................................................................... 305
Figure 7.91 Burst strain vs internal pressure in Westinghouse single rod burst tests ........................ 307
Figure 7.92 Westinghouse multi-rod burst test results. ..................................................................... 307
Figure 7.93 Effect of previous heat treatment of the cladding in the two phase domain
on reduced creep rates. ................................................................................................... 308
Figure 7.94 Uniform elongation versus modified burst temperature in EDGAR tests...................... 309
Figure 7.95 Total elongation versus modified burst temperature in EDGAR tests. .......................... 309
Figure 7.96 Time-to-rupture versus stress for EDGAR creep tests of Zircaloy-4, M4
and M5. .......................................................................................................................... 310
Figure 7.97 Total elongtion as a function of test temperature for the alloys M4, M5
and Zircaloy-4 ................................................................................................................ 311
Figure 7.98 Influence of heating rate on total elongation in EDGAR thermal ramp tests
for the M5 alloy .............................................................................................................. 312
Figure 7.99 (a) Deformation of as-received and hydrided Zircaloy-4 in a thermal ramp test(b) Calculated phase fraction in as-received and hydrided Zircaloy-4 ...................... 313
Figure 7.100Time-to-rupture versus stress for EDGAR creep tests performedon as-received and hydrided Zircaloy-4 cladding tube .................................................. 313
Figure 7.101Time-to-rupture versus stress for EDGAR creep tests performed on as-received
and M5 cladding tubes ................................................................................................... 314
Figure 7.102Total elongation measured after EDGAR creep tests versus test temperature
for as-received and hydrided (~600 and ~1 000 ppm) Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes ......... 315
Figure 7.103Comparison between the burst criterion for as-received and hydride(at 600 ppm) Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes ......................................................................... 316
Figure 7.104Comparison between experimental and simulated time to rupture of Zircaloy-4
hydride to 600 ppm using two different models: (a) a model based on experimentswith as-received Zircaloy-4 [76], dashed line, and (b) a new model basedon experiments with hydrided Zircaloy-4 and taking into account the effect ofhydrogen on the α/β phase transformation ..................................................................... 316
Figure 7.105Evolution of a sample during a thermal ramp test under uniaxial stress loading ........... 317
Figure 7.106Influence of irradiation and hydrogen content on the axial strainof Zircaloy-4 samples during a thermal ramp test under uniaxial loading(80 MPa) upon heating with 100 K/s ............................................................................. 318
Figure 7.107Results of stylised transient testing of Zircaloy-4 PWR cladding
with mainly convective cooling ..................................................................................... 319
Figure 7.108Processes controlling strain and its stabilization ............................................................ 319
Figure 7.109Variation of tube rupture strain with rupture temperature during isothermal
tests at Springfields Nuclear Laboratories ..................................................................... 320

17

Figure 7.110Mechanical restraint by deformable neighbours. CANSWEL-2 idealization (a)compared with (b) Springfields 4×4 cladding deformation rig cross sections. .............. 321
Figure 7.111Cladding temperature (A) and pressure records (B) for test No. 1 (Zr1%Nb alloy) ...... 323
Figure 7.112Axial cladding strain distributions in tests Nos. 1, 2 and 3. ........................................... 324
Figure 7.113Microhardness distribution along the simulator 2.1 of test No. 1. ................................. 325
Figure 7.114Post-test appearance of E635 and Zr1%Nb alloy. .......................................................... 325
Figure 7.115Burst pressure versus burst temperature of E110 and Zircaloy-4 claddings
tested under similar conditions....................................................................................... 326
Figure 7.116Burst pressure an maximum deformation versus oxide layer thickness of
E110 cladding................................................................................................................. 327
Figure 7.117Burst pressure versus pressurization rate for E110 alloy ............................................... 327
Figure 8.1. Flowchart for the code FRAPTRAN-1.3 ....................................................................... 340
Figure 8.2. Deformation pattern at level 15 of the MT-1 experiment as calculated by FRETA-B .. 342
Figure 8.3 Example of DRACCAR calculation in a bundle geometry with rod deformation
as the result of a LOCA type transient ........................................................................... 343
Figure 9.1
Figure 9.2
Figure 9.3
Figure 9.4
Figure 9.5
Figure 9.6
Figure 9.7

Determination of fuel failure rate after LOCA with deterministic method .................... 347
Probability for fuel rod failure as a function of rod power at different burn-ups ........... 347
Power and burn-up distribution in a core with failure threshold. Each number gives
the number of fuel rods at the particular power-burn-up combination (Siemens) ......... 348
Peak cladding temperature response for deterministic assessment of extent of rupture 349
Flow chart over statistical damage assessment for German PWRs ................................ 351
Map over core damage extent in German PWR after a large break LOCA
(Text is visible in magnified view) ................................................................................ 351
Number of failed fuel rods / failure rate during LOCA ................................................. 352

18

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1
Table 4.2
Table 4.3
Table 4.4
Table 4.5

Blockage shapes and configurations tested in the FLECHT SEASET 21-Rod bundle..
BWR Core Inventory Fraction Released Into Containment ...........................................
LOCA Release Phases....................................................................................................
Computation of the iodine release ..................................................................................
The release from the gap and fuel for radiologically significant nuclides .....................

Table 6.1
Table 6.2
Table 6.3

Temperature dependence of published isothermal parabolic rate equations .................. 144
Temperature dependence of parabolic growth constants for oxide and α-phase............ 144
Summary of cladding oxidation parameters and performance limits for the ECCs
in two PWRs for a double-ended guillotine break in the pump discharge leg.
Evaluation of ECCS margin of performance ................................................................. 183
List of the cladding specimens ....................................................................................... 193
List of LOCA-simulated experiments ............................................................................ 193
Variation of embrittlement threshold (percent equivalent cladding reacted)
for unirradiated zirconium-alloy cladding materials oxidized in steam at 1 200°C ....... 196
H2 generation from the Zr/H2O reaction ........................................................................ 211

Table 6.4
Table 6.5
Table 6.6
Table 6.7
Table 7.1
Table 7.2
Table 7.3
Table 7.4
Table 7.5
Table 7.6
Table 7.7
Table 7.8
Table 7.9
Table 9.1
Table 9.2

73
77
77
78
81

FR-2 in-pile tests of fuel behaviour, test matrix............................................................. 241
Summary of cladding deformation data from Tests LOC-3, LOC-5 and LOC-9 .......... 246
Summary of the main measurements in the EOLO tests................................................ 248
Thermomechanics of the PHEBUS LOCA tests ............................................................ 260
Summary of the rod burst strains in IFA-54X................................................................ 262
Summary of the test programme in the REBEKA rig .................................................... 275
Test parameters of single and multirod investigations by KWU ................................... 278
JAERI test matrix of bundle burst tests using W-Re wire heaters anda close fitting unheated shroud ....................................................................................... 286
The main test parameters and results of VVER type assemblies
under LOCA conditions in electroheated facility........................................................... 324
Best estimate analyses of percentage of fuel rod failures .............................................. 348
Cases of peak clad temperature (PCT) above 925°C ..................................................... 350

19

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 1986, a Working Group of the Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations (CSNI) issued
a State-of-the-Art Report (SOAR) on pressurised water reactor fuel behaviour in design basis accident(DBA) conditions. The current State-of-the-Art Report on fuel behaviour in LOCA conditions is an
updated version that describes phenomena of importance in the loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA). New
information has been produced concerning these phenomena. Older cladding materials have been
replaced by newer alloys that may behave differently under postulated accident conditions. There isalso a clear need to include discussions on accident issues for other water cooled reactor types. This isespecially important now when the Eastern European countries have joined the discussion on nuclear
safety issues.
In the design of nuclear power plants, the consequences of hypothetical accidents are analysed sothat suitable mitigating systems can be devised. For design basis accidents, a fundamental acceptancecriterion is that there should be no or very limited radiological consequences to the public. In order tofulfill this criterion, derivative acceptance criteria have been formulated for the safety systems of thereactor.
For example the pressurised water reactor design basis loss-of-coolant-accident involves thebreak of one of the large coolant pipes between the reactor vessel and the main circulation pump. In
order to mitigate the consequences of this break, it is necessary to design the emergency core coolingsystems so that the fuel is cooled efficiently during all phases of the accident. This requirement
naturally leads to a criterion that the fuel must maintain its coolable geometry throughout the whole
LOCA sequence and that the structural integrity of the fuel rods is maintained.
The requirement of coolable geometry and structural integrity has turned out to be a very
complex issue due to the particular properties of the zirconium alloys used as cladding for the fuel.
During the event, the cladding heats up to temperatures over 1 000°C. When the temperature reaches
about 800°C, zirconium starts to transform from alpha to the beta phase. Oxygen dissolves in the metaland embrittles the alpha phase. Therefore, there must be a limit on the oxygen-stabilised alpha phase,since the load bearing prior beta layer may be too thin to ensure structural integrity of the fuel during
the quench phase of the LOCA.
There are many other issues which must be taken into account. When the fuel rods heat up during
the LOCA and the external pressure is lost, the rod internal pressure is large enough to cause plastic
deformation of the cladding which leads to ballooning and burst. The ballooning can potentially be
detrimental to cooling of the fuel assemblies, and the burst of a rod also leads to cladding oxidationfrom the inside. In addition, a significant amount of hydrogen is picked up by the cladding. Hydrogen
pickup exacerbates cladding embrittlement, especially after the quenching phase. Finally, at elevatedtemperatures, the rate of steam-cladding oxidation may become so high that the heat can no longer beadequately dissipated by cooling, and may eventually lead to autocatalytic oxidation. If not arrested,
cladding metal and reactor core can melt.

21

Most fuel safety criteria are based on the criteria applied by the United States Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (USNRC). The exceptions include Japan, which has adopted a lower maximum oxidation
value. The Japanese criteria on cladding embrittlement are not based on the concept of zero ductility of
cladding, but on the failure threshold value determined in the integral thermal shock tests underrestrained conditions.
Other countries have also made changes. In Germany, for example, an additional requirement is
imposed that the fraction of burst fuel rods shall not exceed 10% of the total rods in the core. The
purpose of this requirement is to limit fission gas release due to cladding burst.
The different phenomena involved in the heat-up, cool down and quench during a LOCA are
more complex. This complexity results from the changes of properties of the zirconium cladding
alloys that occur during the transient.
High temperature oxidation tests have been conducted to determine oxidation kinetics of thecladding since early 1970s. Tests are necessary for determining cladding embrittlement after a LOCA
simulation, which is very important to safety. The ring compression test technique has been the mostwidely used ductility test because it is very straightforward to perform, requires a minimum of
specimen preparation and is appropriate when there is a limited amount of material to be tested.
However, there seems to be no common definition of an acceptable level of ductility in ring
compression tests.
Tests with moderate integration have been performed in Canada, France, Japan, Korea, Russia
and the United Kingdom to examine steam oxidation, cladding deformation or ballooning in steam,and constrained deformation or ballooning in steam with or without quench. Some of the tests are stillused to investigate high burnup effect on the cladding deformation and fracture during a LOCA.
Fully integrated tests were performed at FR-2 (Germany), PBF (US), PHEBUS (France). Those
tests provided valuable data base for understanding fuel behaviour in the bundle geometry under more
realistic LOCA conditions and validation of computer codes in this category. The test series recently
performed at the Halden reactor is a very unique program, where the primary objective is to assess theextent and effect of axial relocation of fuel fragments into the ballooning volume of single rod
experiments. These tests were performed with high burnup fuels, taking advantage of various in-pilemeasurement techniques at the Halden reactor.
In the recent years there has been considerable testing of the post-quench ductility of current
cladding alloys in Hungary, France, Russia and the United States. In the case of Zircaloy, the objective
has been to determine the effects of the changes in fuel rods associated with high burnup operation,such as due to thick corrosion layer, high hydrogen concentration in the cladding, and pellet-cladding
bonding. Results show that unirradiated zirconium alloy cladding types exhibit different embrittlement
thresholds. The variations in embrittlement threshold appear to result mainly from manufacturing
differences rather than from specific alloy composition. Tests with the so-called pre-hydrided
specimens showed a strong effect of hydrogen concentration for some cladding. A cooling-rate effect
was also seen that was absent in fresh cladding that contained no hydrogen.
The effect of hydrogen on oxygen solubility in the β-phase has a significant impact on the postquench ductility of high burnup cladding and on post-quench ductility of ballooned cladding whichhave absorbed hydrogen in the oxidation reaction on the inside surface of the cladding. Similar effects
may also arise in long term transients at about 1 000°C when breakaway oxidation leads to significant
hydrogen pickup. These effects are not addressed by the present regulatory criteria and hence there is aneed to revise criteria.
22

WGFS concludes that CSNI and CNRA should consider the following future activities to further
refine the nuclear community’s understanding of the key aspects of the water reactor fuel behaviour in
LOCA conditions:•

To update the CSNI State-of-the-Art Report on water reactor fuel behaviour in LOCA
conditions in suitable intervals, to provide a useful reference for workers in this area.

•

Ductility-based LOCA criteria derived from ring compression tests of double-side oxidized
specimens, and fracture-based LOCA criteria derived from integral rod testing result in quite
different burn-up effect on the derived safety limit. There are thus a number of open
questions about the different results and the two different methodologies, which have to befurther discussed and assessed.

•

The breakaway oxidation, which occurs in specific temperature ranges, has been identified
as a major problem for the cladding LOCA performance since it is associated with asignificant hydrogen pickup which degrades post-quench properties. Therefore, careful
examinations are required also for advanced high corrosion-resistance cladding alloys to
examine the temperature-time range where the breakaway oxidation occurs.

•

As-fabricated cladding was used in the most performed oxidation tests. Data have been
accumulated to a certain extent on effects of irradiation, alloying elements, pre-oxidizing andpre-hydriding of the cladding, steam purity (addition of nitrogen or air), and highatmospheric pressure. However, more investigations may be required to better understandthe oxidation behaviour of the high burnup fuel cladding.

23

1. INTRODUCTION

Dated December 1986, the Task Group on Fuel Behaviour of the Committee on the Safety of
Nuclear Installations (CSNI) Working Group No. 2 issued the report “The deformation, oxidation andembrittlement of PWR cladding in a loss-of-coolant accident” as a state-of-the-art report on pressurised
water reactor (PWR) fuel behaviour in design basis accident conditions [1]. Now more than twenty years
later the time has come for making an updated report on the phenomena of importance to the designbasis accidents. The reasons for an update are several. New information of importance has been
produced concerning the phenomena in the previous report. More importantly, the cladding alloys usedthen have now largely been replaced by new cladding alloys which behave differently both during
normal operation and under postulated accident conditions. There is also a clear need to include
discussions on the loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA) issue for other reactor types than the PWR. This isespecially important now when the Eastern Euoropean countries have joined the discussion on nuclear
safety issues and when the OECD countries in various forms give economic and technical support for
improving the safety of the VVER and RBMK reactors.
Compared to the situation twenty years ago the burn-up of the fuel rods before they are taken out ofservice has increased considerably. This has led to increased oxide thickness and relatively morehydrogen uptake in the fuel cladding, phenomena which influence the behaviour also under loss of
coolant conditions. New phenomena have also been identified in the fuel pellets with increasing burn-up.
New experiments which take these developments into account must be included in the updated report.
Another safety issue which has been given increased attention during the twenty years since thelast state-of-the-art report is the Reactivity Initiated Accident (RIA). This accident scenario is quite
different from the LOCA scenarios as are the relevant degradation phenomena of the fuel. Fuelbehaviour under RIA conditions will therefore be the subject of a separate state-of-the-art report.
1.1 General overview and introduction to the LOCA safety issue
In the design of nuclear power plants, it is required that various operational occurrences are
considered and that the consequences of such occurrences are analysed so that suitable mitigating
systems can be designed [2]. Normal operation of the plant can be defined as operation within specified
operational limits and conditions. Anticipated operational occurrences (AOOs) are operational
processes deviating from normal operation which are expected to occur at least once during the lifetimeof a facility but which, in view of appropriate design provision, do not cause any significant damage toitems important to safety or lead to accident conditions. The latter condition may be simply defined as
deviations from normal operation more severe than anticipated operational occurrences. Accident
conditions can be divided into design basis accidents (DBAs) and severe accidents. For the accident
conditions, there are acceptance criteria which must be fulfilled. For the design basis accidents, themost fundamental acceptance criterion is typically that there should be no or at most very limited
radiological consequences to the public. However, in order to fulfil this criterion, there will be a numberof other acceptance criteria related to the different safety systems of the reactor. How these criteria areformulated will depend on the general design of the reactor and the various physical phenomena ofimportance to the occurrence of a particular design basis accident.
25

One of the design basis accidents for water cooled reactors is the loss of coolant caused by the
failure of a large coolant pipe. More specifically, for the pressurised water reactor the initiating event of
the design basis accident is the double-ended guillotine break of one of the large coolant pipes between
the reactor vessel and the main circulation pump. In order to mitigate the consequences of this break, it
is necessary that the reactor has several emergency core cooling systems. At the time of definition ofthis design basis accident in late sixties to early seventies, it was generally accepted that in order tominimise radiological consequences to the public it is necessary to prevent the fuel melting and avoid
excessive fuel dispersal. It was thus necessary to design the emergency core cooling systems so that thefuel could be cooled efficiently during all phases of the DBA. This requirement naturally led to acriterion that the fuel must maintain a coolable geometry through the whole LOCA sequence and thatthe structural but not necessarily the hermetical integrity of the fuel rods should be maintained.
The requirement of coolable geometry and structural integrity turned out to be a very complex
issue due to the particular properties of the zirconium alloys used as cladding tubes for the fuel. During
normal operation, the zirconium alloy oxidizes slowly in the reactor water by the growth of a thin oxide
scale on the surface. Inside the oxide the metal is hexagonally close packed α-phase zirconium with amore or less fine dispersion of second phase particles. During a LOCA, the metal heats up totemperatures over 1 000°C. When the temperature reaches about 800°C the α-phase zirconium starts totransform to the body centred cubic β phase. At the same time, the oxidation reaction starts to accelerate
and the growth of the oxide scale becomes significant. At the same time, oxygen dissolved in the metalstabilises the α phase. Therefore, a layer of α phase with a high content of oxygen starts to grow on theβ phase underneath the oxide scale. The problem is that oxygen also embrittles the α phase and that theoxide itself is very brittle when the hot fuel rod is quenched back to low temperature. It is therefore
clear that there must be a limit on the amount of growth of brittle oxide and oxygen-stabilised α phase,since the load bearing prior β layer must not be too thin in order to ensure structural integrity of the fuelduring the quench phase of the LOCA, when the fuel rods are subjected to various types of stresses (e.g.
thermal stress, thermal-hydraulic stress associated with the violent quenching, and residual mechanicalstress associated with rod ballooning and burst).
There are also many detail issues which must be taken into account. When the fuel rods heat up
and the external pressure is lost the rod internal pressure is large enough to cause plastic deformation of
the cladding which leads to ballooning and burst. The ballooning can potentially be detrimental tocooling of the fuel assemblies and the burst of a rod leads to cladding oxidation also from the inside. It
is also possible that the zirconium reacts with Fe- and Ni-based alloys in other core components to form
low-melting eutectic mixtures. Significant amount of hydrogen is picked up by the cladding both during
low-temperature oxidation under normal operation and during the high-temperature oxidation in the
LOCA sequence. Pickup of hydrogen in the cladding significantly exacerbates cladding embrittlement,
especially after the quenching phase. Last but not least, important is the large exothermic heat generated
during oxidation of the cladding. At high enough temperatures, the rate of steam-cladding oxidation isso high that the heat can no longer be adequately dissipated by cooling, eventually leading to run-away
oxidation. If run-away or autocatalytic oxidation is not arrested, cladding metal and reactor core could
melt. Although this temperature is well above any temperature expected in a design basis loss-ofcoolant-accident, such events occurred in the accident of Three Mile Island PWR.
In the following sections, these phenomena will be described in considerable detail based on theextensive research efforts spent on the LOCA problem over a period of almost forty years.
1.2 Current safety criteria and their backgroundThe detailed safety criteria vary from country to country but it is probably fair to say that most ofthese criteria are modelled or copied from the criteria applied by the United States Nuclear Regulatory
26

Commission (NRC). Therefore, the NRC criteria will be described in this section with much of thesection being devoted to review the background and history of how the criteria were established.
1.2.1 Current safety criteria in the United States
The NRC Regulations, contained in Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, come in parts
numbered between 1 and 171 and can be found on the NRC web site. The relevant part for the LOCA
issue is Part 50 “Domestic licensing of production and utilisation facilities”. Part 50 also contains an
Appendix A, “General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants”. For the purpose of the present
report, it may be relevant to quote the following definition from Appendix A:
Loss of coolant accidents. Loss of coolant accidents mean those postulated accidents that result
from the loss of reactor coolant at a rate in excess of the capability of the reactor coolant makeup
system from breaks in the reactor coolant pressure boundary, up to and including a breakequivalent in size to the double-ended rupture of the largest pipe of the reactor coolant system.
This definition forms the basis for General Design Criterion 35:
Criterion 35 − Emergency core cooling. A system to provide abundant emergency core coolingshall be provided. The system safety function shall be to transfer heat from the reactor corefollowing any loss of reactor coolant at a rate such that (1) fuel and clad damage that could
interfere with continued effective core cooling is prevented and (2) clad metal-water reaction islimited to negligible amounts. [additional text has been omitted]
In the main text of Part 50, we find § 50.46 “Acceptance criteria for emergency core coolingsystems for light-water nuclear power reactors”. It is these criteria that are often referred to as the
LOCA criteria. An abbreviated version of § 50.46 is as follows:(a) (1)(i) Each boiling or pressurised light-water nuclear power reactor fueled with uraniumoxide pellets within cylindrical Zircaloy or ZIRLO1 cladding must be provided with an
emergency core cooling system (ECCS) that must be designed so that its calculated cooling
performance following postulated loss-of-coolant accidents conforms to the criteria set forthin paragraph (b) of this section. ECCS cooling performance must be calculated in accordancewith an acceptable evaluation model and must be calculated for a number of postulated lossof-coolant accidents of different sizes, locations, and other properties sufficient to provide
assurance that the most severe postulated loss-of-coolant accidents are calculated.
(b) (1) Peak cladding temperature. The calculated maximum fuel element cladding temperatureshall not exceed 2 200°F [1 204°C].
(2) Maximum cladding oxidation. The calculated total oxidation of the cladding shall nowhere
exceed 0.17 times the total cladding thickness before oxidation. As used in thissubparagraph total oxidation means the total thickness of cladding metal that would be
locally converted to oxide if all the oxygen absorbed by and reacted with the cladding
locally were converted to stoichiometric zirconium dioxide. If cladding rupture is
calculated to occur, the inside surfaces of the cladding shall be included in the oxidation,
beginning at the calculated time of rupture. Cladding thickness before oxidation means theradial distance from inside to outside the cladding, after any calculated rupture or swelling
has occurred but before significant oxidation. Where the calculated conditions of transientpressure and temperature lead to a prediction of cladding swelling, with or without
cladding rupture, the unoxidized cladding thickness shall be defined as the cladding crosssectional area, taken at a horizontal plane at the elevation of the rupture, if it occurs, or at
1.

Other alloys of zirconium may be used by exemption from the regulation.

27

the elevation of the highest cladding temperature if no rupture is calculated to occur,
divided by the average circumference at that elevation. For ruptured cladding thecircumference does not include the rupture opening.
(3) Maximum hydrogen generation. The calculated total amount of hydrogen generated fromthe chemical reaction of the cladding with water or steam shall not exceed 0.01 times the
hypothetical amount that would be generated if all of the metal in the cladding cylinders
surrounding the fuel, excluding the cladding surrounding the plenum volume, were to react.
(4) Coolable geometry. Calculated changes in core geometry shall be such that the coreremains amenable to cooling.
(5) Long-term cooling. After any calculated successful initial operation of the ECCS, thecalculated core temperature shall be maintained at an acceptably low value and decay
heat shall be removed for the extended period of time required by the long-lived
radioactivity remaining in the core.
(c) As used in this section: (1) Loss-of-coolant accidents (LOCAs) are hypothetical accidents
that would result from the loss of reactor coolant, at a rate in excess of the capability of thereactor coolant makeup system, from breaks in pipes in the reactor coolant pressure
boundary up to and including a break equivalent in size to the double-ended rupture of thelargest pipe in the reactor coolant system.
(d) The requirements of this section are in addition to any other requirements applicable to
ECCS set forth in this part. The criteria set forth in paragraph (b), with cooling performance
calculated in accordance with an acceptable evaluation model, are in implementation of thegeneral requirements with respect to ECCS cooling performance design set forth in this part,
including in particular Criterion 35 of Appendix A.
Finally we have Appendix K to Part 50, “ECCS Evaluation Models” which regulates how thecalculations used to demonstrate that the criteria are fulfilled shall be performed. It is shown in astrongly abbreviated version below:“I. Required and acceptable features of the evaluation models
A. Sources of heat during the LOCA. For the heat sources listed in paragraphs I.A.1 to 4 ofthis appendix it must be assumed that the reactor has been operating continuously at a
power level at least 1.02 times the licensed power level (to allow for instrumentation
error), with the maximum peaking factor allowed by the technical specifications. A rangeof power distribution shapes and peaking factors representing power distributions that
may occur over the core lifetime must be studied. The selected combination of power
distribution shape and peaking factor should be the one that results in the most severe
calculated consequences for the spectrum of postulated breaks and single failures that are
analysed.
1. The initial stored energy in the fuel. The steady-state temperature distribution andstored energy in the fuel before the hypothetical accident shall be calculated for theburn-up that yields the highest calculated cladding temperature.
2. Fission heat. Fission heat shall be calculated using reactivity and reactor kinetics.
3. Decay of actinides. The heat from the radioactive decay of actinides, including
neptunium and plutonium generated during operation, as well as isotopes of uranium,
shall be calculated.
4. Fission product decay. The heat generation rates from radioactive decay of fission
products shall be assumed to be equal to 1.2 times the values for infinite operatingtime in the ANS Standard (Proposed American Nuclear Society Standards − “Decay
Energy Release Rates Following Shutdown of Uranium-Fueled Thermal Reactors”.
Approved by Subcommittee ANS-5, ANS Standards Committee, October 1971).
28

5. Metal-water reaction rate. The rate of energy release, hydrogen generation, andcladding oxidation from the metal/water reaction shall be calculated using the BakerJust equation (Baker, L., Just, L.C., “Studies of Metal Water Reactions at High
Temperatures, III. Experimental and Theoretical Studies of the Zirconium-Water
Reaction,” ANL-6548, page 7, May 1962). For rods whose cladding is calculated torupture during the LOCA, the inside of the cladding shall be assumed to react after
the rupture.
B. Swelling and rupture of the cladding and fuel rod thermal parameters
Each evaluation model shall include a provision for predicting cladding swelling andrupture from consideration of the axial temperature distribution of the cladding and fromthe difference in pressure between the inside and outside of the cladding, both asfunctions of time.
C. Blowdown phenomena
Omitted here.”
In September 1988, the NRC staff amended the requirements of Paragph 50.46 and Appendix K,
so that these regulations reflect the improved understanding of ECCS performance during reactor
transients that was obtained through the extensive research performed since the promulgation of theoriginal requirements in January 1974. Paragraph 50.46(a)(1) now permits licensees or applicants touse either Appendix K features or a realistic evaluation model. These realistic evaluation models must
include sufficient supporting justification to demonstrate that the analytic techniques employedrealistically describe the behaviour of the reactor system during a postulated loss-of-coolant accident.
Paragraph 50.46(a)(1) also requires that the uncertainty in the realistic evaluation model be quantified
and considered when comparing the results of the calculations with the applicable limits in Paragraph50.46(b) so that there is a high probability that the criteria will not be exceeded.
Regulatory Guide 1.157, “Best-Estimate Calculations of Emergency Core Cooling System
Performance,” (May 1989) describes models, correlations, data, model evaluation procedures, andmethods that are acceptable-to the NRC staff for meeting the requirements for a realistic or bestestimate calculation of ECCS performance during a loss-of-coolant accident and for estimating theuncertainty in that calculation. Of particular interest to the SOAR on LOCA are use of a more recent
version of the standard on decay heat [3] and an improved model for metal-water reaction [4].
There are three specific points that are the focus of the current NRC criteria and Appendix K:•••

The calculated maximum fuel element cladding temperature shall not exceed 2 200°F.
The calculated total oxidation of the cladding shall nowhere exceed 0.17 times the total
cladding thickness before oxidation.
The rate of energy release, hydrogen generation, and cladding oxidation from themetal/water reaction shall be calculated using the Baker-Just equation

The purpose of the first two criteria, regarding maximum cladding temperature and total
oxidation, was to ensure that the cladding shall remain sufficiently ductile so that it does not shatter
into pieces during and after the quench phase of the LOCA transient. Another important purpose of the
2 200°F (1 204°C) limit was to ensure that fuel cladding does not enter the regime of runaway
oxidation and uncontrollable core heatup. As is well-known, both criteria were violated in the case of
the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. The debate or controversy with regard to the use of the BakerJust oxidation correlation is that it results in significant conservatism in comparison with more recent
oxidation correlations of zirconium alloys applicable to LOCA.

29

1.2.2 Background to the safety criteria
The following account is based largely on a paper by G. Hache and H. M. Chung entitled “Thehistory of LOCA embrittlement criteria” [5]. The Hache-Chung paper covers considerably more thanjust the background to the current criteria; it also discusses alternative criteria in the light of later
findings concerning the behaviour of zirconium alloys under LOCA conditions. Those questions willbe the subject of later parts of the present report. The same subjects along with LOCA-specific issues
associated with high burn-up and the use of Nb-modified cladding were also reviewed by Chung [6].
In 1967, an Advisory Task Force on Power Reactor Emergency Cooling [7], appointed to provide“additional assurance that substantial meltdown is prevented” by core cooling systems, concluded that:“The analysis of (a LOCA) requires that the core be maintained in place and essentially intact topreserve the heat-transfer area and coolant-flow geometry. Without preservation of heat-transfer
area and coolant-flow geometry, fuel-element melting and core disassembly would be expected…
Continuity of emergency core cooling must be maintained after termination of the temperaturetransient for an indefinite period until the heat generation decays to an insignificant level, or until
disposition of the core is made.”This rationale makes it plainly clear that it is most important to preserve the heat transfer area andthe coolant flow geometry not only during the short-term portion of the core temperature transient but
also for long term.
Consistent with the conclusions of the Task Force, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
promulgated Criterion 35 of the General Design Criteria which states that: “... fuel and clad damage
that could interfere with continued effective core cooling is prevented.” It also promulgated Criterion 3of the Interim Acceptance Criteria for ECCS for LWR [8] which states that: “The clad temperaturetransient is terminated at a time when the core geometry is still amenable to cooling, and before thecladding is so embrittled as to fail during or after quenching.”
These criteria were subjected to a Rule-Making Hearing in 1973, which was extensively
documented in the Journal of Nuclear Safety in 1974 [9-10]. During the hearing process, the last partof the Criterion 3 was replaced by the modified Criterion 1 and the new Criterion 2 of the Code ofFederal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50.46, Article (b), commonly referred to as 10 CFR 50.46 [11].
Thus, the AEC Commissioners wrote:“In view of the fundamental and historical importance of maintaining core coolability, we retain
this criterion as a basic objective, in a more general form than it appeared in the Interim
Acceptance Criteria. It is not controversial as a criterion… Although most of the attention of the
ECCS hearings has been focused on the events of the first few minutes after a postulated majorcooling line break, up to the time that the cladding would be cooled to a temperature of 300°F or
less, the long-term maintenance of cooling would be equally important [12].”
There are two key factors to consider to evaluate the change in coolable geometry of the core.
One is related to cladding ballooning, burst, and coolant channel blockage. This mode was not treatedin the Hache-Chung paper but will be treated later in the present report. The focus in the Hache-Chungpaper is on the second factor, the change in coolable geometry due to cladding embrittlement andfailure, because that is also the main concern addressed by the criteria. An understanding of the criteria
requires an understanding of zirconium properties and behaviour.
Beginning only in the early 1970s, it has been understood, that embrittlement of Zr-alloy cladding
such as Zircaloys is caused by the diffusion of oxygen into the metal underneath the surface oxiderather than by the surface oxide itself. That is, while the best measure of the heat generation from Zr
30

metal-water reaction (hence, core heat-up) is total oxidation (more than about 85% of oxygen pickup
being in the oxide layer), cladding structural integrity is really controlled by the small fraction ofoxygen atoms (less than about 7%) that are dissolved in the remaining β Zr layer. In retrospect, it
appears that out of simplicity and in absence of a good method of calculating oxygen distribution in
the metallic layers at that time, the NRC regulations used the time required to accumulate 17%oxidation as a surrogate measure of the time required to diffuse enough oxygen into the underlying
metal to embrittle it. In doing so, 10 CFR 50.46 also imposed a parallel limit in maximum cladding
temperature of 2 200°F. Both processes of oxide growth and oxygen diffusion in the metal obey
exponential kinetics laws, which is discussed in detail in the following section.
1.2.2.1 Metallurgy of cladding embrittlement
In 1960s, Wilson and Barnes performed laboratory tests simulating steam reactions with
Zircaloy-clad fuel rods at high temperatures. They observed embrittlement of oxidized cladding well
below the melting temperature of Zircaloy, either during the test itself or during removal of thespecimen from the oxidizing furnace. The results were reported in Argonne National Laboratory(ANL) progress reports and synthesised later in [13]. At the same period, investigators in Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (ORNL) conducted TREAT Test No. 6 with Zircaloy cladding in steam andobserved that the specimen was severely embrittled by oxidation [14]. Also at about the same period,
many tests were conducted that simulated reactivity-initiated accident (RIA) in SPERT-CDC andTREAT reactors. Results of metallurgical examination in these tests showed that embrittlement wascaused by severe microstructural modification of the cladding. Brittle cladding cross sections
exhibited oxide layer, oxygen-stabilised α-phase layer and a region of acicular prior β-phase. The
results were later reported by Fujishiro et al. [15].
As a result of these observations, the scientific community was alerted to the fact that oxidationof Zircaloys above the α-to-β transformation temperature results in the formation of inherently brittle
phases, i.e., Zr oxide, oxygen stabilised α-Zr (hcp structure), and diffusion of oxygen into theunderlying β phase (bcc structure). This is shown schematically in Figure 1. Ductility of cladding
could be severely degraded if the degree of oxidation is high. It was also realised that, if the embrittled
cladding fragments into small pieces, the coolability of the core could be seriously impaired during thequench phase as well as during the more long-term cooling after the quench.
The sequence of events in the formation of the microstructure seen in Figure 1.1 would normallybe that the α-phase zirconium present at operating temperature is transformed to β at around 815°C
when the cladding is heated. At the same time, the oxide starts to grow. Some of the oxygen in theoxide is dissolved in the metal matrix which is then re-transformed to α which is referred to as oxygenstabilised α. The growth of the oxide and α layers is controlled by diffusion of oxygen through thelayers. The columnar structure of the α layer is the result of this diffusion controlled growth. Inside theα layer a large-grained structure of β is formed. When we can observe the β layer it has retransformed
to α during cooling. Since the transformation of β zirconium to α almost invariably takes place byformation of Widmanstätten plates of α it is very easy to identify the previous β by its acicular
structure as shown in Figure 1.1. Occasionally, some of the β is retransformed to α by growth into theβ layer of a columnar crystal of α from the α layer, a so called α incursion.
Whereas oxygen is an α stabiliser, hydrogen is a β stabiliser. In other words, the solubility ofoxygen is higher in α and the solubility of hydrogen is higher in β. Therefore, during transformation of
β to α, oxygen and hydrogen solutes in the β layer redistribute themselves during cooling, i.e., oxygen
towards and hydrogen away from the growing Widmanstätten plates. This is pronounced only duringslow cooling, sometimes leading to precipitation of small hydrides at the periphery of the
Widmanstätten plates.

31

Figure 1.1 Schematic illustration of microstructure (top) and oxygen distribution (bottom)
in oxide, stabilised α and prior-β (transformed β) layers in Zircaloy cladding
after oxidation near 1 200°C

28.0

Original OD Surface
Before Oxidation

ID

O xygen Concentration (w t.% )0.625 mm
oxide
oxide

6.7
alpha

alpha

Load-Bearing
Metal

0.7

prior beta
0

0.12

0.25

0.60

Distance from OD Oxide Surface

Significantly embrittled cladding can break into two pieces or fragment during the quenchingphase of a LOCA. Cladding fragmentation is conducive to significant fuel dispersal. The action ofrewetting by ECCS water involves the collapse of the vapour film that covers the cladding outerdiameter (OD) surface prior to subsequent transition to nucleate boiling. This event takes place at a32

more or less constant temperature, i.e., the Leidenfrost temperature. For oxidized Zircaloy-4 cladding
rewetted by bottom-flooding water, ANL investigators reported that rewetting occurs in the range of
475-600°C [16]. The abrupt change in the heat transfer conditions induces large thermal-shockstresses, which can break or fragment the cladding, if it is sufficiently embrittled by oxidation.
Below the Leidenfrost temperature, there is continued risk of clad failure or fragmentation after
quenching, which will influence long-term coolability of the core. The post-LOCA forces, which need
to be taken into account, are the hydraulic, seismic, handling, and transport forces.
There are two primary factors that exacerbate the susceptibility of oxidized cladding to postquench embrittlement in comparison with susceptibility to fragmentation during quenching: i.e., (1)more pronounced effect of oxygen dissolved in prior β phase at lower temperature of loading (i.e.,
more pronounced after quench than during quench) and (2) more pronounced effect of hydrogen
uptake at post-quench temperature. Note that significant hydrogen uptake can occur during irradiation(e.g., in high-burn-up Zircaloy-4) or during transient oxidation in steam (e.g., from cladding innersurface in contact with stagnant steam near a ballooned and burst region). For cooling rates typical ofbottom flooding of core (i.e., 1-5 K/s), most hydrogen atoms remain in solution in the prior β phase atLeidenfrost temperature, and in such state, hydrogen has little effect on the fracture resistance of anoxidized Zircaloy. However, a higher level of hydrogen dissolved in β increases the solubility ofoxygen in the β, thereby in effect exacerbating the embrittling effect of oxygen. It should be noted
however that hydrogen effects were not a great concern in the initial discussions on the criteria
established in 1973.
1.2.2.2 The 17%-oxidation criterion and the Baker-Just oxidation law
The rationale for the 17% oxidation criterion and the regulated use of the Baker-Just oxidation
equation is described in this section. The following description is basically a direct quote from the
Hache-Chung paper [5].
As indicated in a few reports [1,16] that reviewed the results of the LOCA-related tests performed
before and after the 1973 Hearing, the 17% ECR and 1 204°C criteria were primarily based on the
results of post-quench ductility tests and metallographic analysis conducted by Hobson [17,18] andadditional metallographic analysis by Pawel [19].
Figure 1.2 summarises the results of Hobson’s ring compression tests performed at 23-150°C.
Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes were oxidized in steam in a high temperature furnace. The tubes wereoxidized on two sides, followed by direct quenching into water. Then, short ring specimens cut fromthe oxidized tube were either compressed slowly to a total deflection of 3.8 mm or squashed by impact
loading. After the test, all broken pieces of the ring were assembled back to determine the degree ofbrittleness. Zero ductility was defined on the basis of the macroscopic geometry of the broken pieces
and the morphology of the fracture surface on microscopic scale. Each data point in Figure 1.2
indicates failure type, test identification number, oxidation time in min., oxidation temperature in °F,
and first maximum load in pound.
The dashed line on the left side of Figure 1.2 denotes the zero ductility domain for slowcompression rate. This domain is valid only for oxidation temperatures of <2 200°F or <1 204°C.
During the 1973 Hearing, ORNL investigators suggested to consider a zero-ductility temperature (ZDT)
no higher than the saturation temperature during reflood, i.e., ≈135°C. Zero-ductility threshold at thistemperature is equivalent to a prior β-layer fraction of ≈0.58, or a fraction of combined oxide layer plus
α-layer thickness (defined as XT) of ≈0.42 (based on as-oxidized cladding wall). The latter fraction
corresponds to ≈0.44 if it is calculated based on fresh nonoxidized cladding wall (defined as Wo).

33

Figure 1.2 Ductility of two-side-oxidized Zircaloy rings as function of slow- or fast-compression
temperature and fraction of transformed-β-layer (from Hobson, [14, 15].

The threshold fractional thickness of the combined oxide and α layer (XT/Wo, defined as Xoa in
Figure 1.3) of 0.44, which corresponds to zero ductility threshold for slow compression at 135°C, was
the key number in the establishment of 17% oxidation criterion in the 1973 Hearing. During thehearing, the AEC Regulatory Staff wrote:“Giving due credit to the numerous quench experiments and the ORNL zero ductility experimental
data points for both impact and slow compression, the staff suggests that an embrittlement criterion
be based on a calculated XT/Wo that shall not exceed 0.44. This is equivalent to a zero ductility
temperature of about 275°F based on the slow compression tests [20].”
Then, it was concluded:“To preclude clad fragmentation and to account for effects noted in the tests described above, alimit of XT/Wo ≤0.44 was earlier suggested by the Regulatory staff as an embrittlement criterion(Exhibit 1113). This limit was inferred from quench tests and mechanical tests. Criterion (b)(2) is
now proposed as a better method of specifying a similar limit on the extent of cladding oxidation.
The bases for proposing this method are described below: (The) use (of the 17 percent reaction
limit) with the Baker-Just equation is conservative when compared to the previously suggested
limits of XT/Wo≤0.44. This is shown in Figure 1.3 (of the present report) for isothermal34

conditions. Four lines of constant calculated XT/Wo (two for 0.44 and two for 0.35) areconstructed on the plot of percent reaction versus a parameter proportional to the square root of
exposure time. The solid XT/Wo lines are based on Pawel’s equation (Exhibit 1133) [19], and thedashed lines are based on Exhibit 09, Figure 5 [17]. As can be seen, the XT/Wo = 0.44 lines areboth above the 17 percent reaction line...”Figure 1.3 Summary of multistep procedure used to establish 17% oxidation criterion
during 1973 Rule-Making Hearing* (from Docket RM-50-1, April 16, 1973)*

Note equivalent cladding oxidized was calculated per Baker-Just correlation. For comparison, time toreach threshold fraction of combined oxide and α layers of 0.44 is shown as determined per Hobson
and Rittenhouse [17] and Pawel [19].

Results of a total of five key tests and calculations are summarised in Figure 1.3, a complex but
the most important step used to reach the 17% oxidation limit. They are:
1.
2.

3.

4.
5.

Equivalent cladding reacted (ECR) calculated as function of oxidation temperature andsquare root of time based on the Baker-Just correlation.
Two broken curves which define the time and temperature to reach the threshold fractional
thickness of the combined oxide and α layer (denoted as Xoα) of 0.44 and 0.35, as determinedbased on the data given in [17] (Figure 5).
Two solid curves that define the time and temperature to reach the threshold fractional
thickness of the combined oxide and α layer of 0.44 and 0.35, as determined based on themethod of Pawel [19].
Six ECR-(time)0.5 curves from the thermal-shock tests of Hesson et al. [13].
Results from Combustion Engineering (CE) ring compression tests after one-sided oxidation.
35

By definition, ECR parameter varies depending on cladding wall thickness, either due to differencesin fuel design or due to ballooning and burst during the heat-up phase in a LOCA. Figure 1.3 shows how
to take account of the effects of variations in wall thickness and one- vs. two-sided oxidation.
Two of Hesson’s thermal-shock experiments resulted in cladding fragmentation at calculated
ECR values of ≈19 and ≈30%, as indicated in the figure. The other four did not fail at ECR values of≈21, ≈16.5, ≈10, and ≈9.5%. The time-temperature transients in Hesson’s tests were integrated also byusing the Baker-Just equation.
The CE data, discussed in the Hearing, are represented by squares on the oxidation isotherms of
2 500, 2 400, 2 300, and 2 100°F. If the sample fractured on compression by CE’s load standard, it wasconsidered to have failed and is denoted with a filled square. Open squares denote CE’s non-failed
specimens. By the CE’s load standard, only those samples with calculated ECR values >17% failed.
Based on the results given in Figure 1.2 and the five sets of information shown in Figure 1.3, one
can conclude that no samples tested by slow compression at >135°C failed with zero ductility if
equivalent cladding reacted (ECR), calculated on the basis of Baker-Just correlation, was less than
17%. Furthermore, all samples oxidized to <17% ECR (again calculated with Baker-Just correlation)
survived direct quenching.
In summary, the AEC Commissioners concluded that the very good consistency between the 17%
limit, if calculated with the Baker-Just equation, and a wide variety of experiments supports adoptionof this procedure [21], and it was further stated:“There is relatively good agreement among the industrial participants as to what the limit on total
oxidation should be… The regulatory staff in their concluding statement compared various
measures of oxidation and concluded that a 17% total oxidation limit is satisfactory, if calculatedby the Baker-Just equation… As argued by the regulatory staff, it appears that the 17% oxidation
limit is within the Rittenhouse criteria. Thus a remarkable uniformity of opinion seems to exist
with regard to the 17% oxidation limit [12].”
It is clear that the primary rationale of the 17% criterion is retention of cladding ductility attemperatures higher than 275°F (135°C, i.e., the saturation temperature during reflood). Of major
importance in this proceeding is that the threshold ECR value of 17% is tied with the use of Baker-Justcorrelation. That is, the 17% ECR criterion is specific to the Baker-Just correlation that must be used
to determine the degree of total oxidation. If an oxidation correlation other than the Baker-Just
equation (e.g., Cathcart-Pawel correlation) were used, the threshold ECR would have been less than
17%. This means that use of a best-estimate correlation may not necessarily be conservative in
evaluating post-quench cladding ductility.
Also note that the 17% ECR limit was derived on the basis of zero ductility data obtained fromthe slow compression test only, that is, excluding similar data obtained from impact-type ring-crushingtest. If the latter type of data were used, the ECR limit would have been ≈14% (Figure 1.3). No
rationale for this exclusion was given in the 1973 Hearing.
1.2.2.3 The 2 200°F criterion
From the results of posttest metallographic analysis of the slow-ring-compression specimens,
Hobson [18] observed a good correlation between zero ductility temperature (ZDT) and fractional
thickness of transformed-β layer (or the sum of oxide plus α layer thickness) as long as the specimen was
oxidized at ≤2 200°F (1 204°C) (Figure 1.2). However, in spite of comparable thickness of transformed βlayer, specimens oxidized at 2 400°F (1 315°C) were far more brittle. This observation was explained on
the basis of excessive solid-solution hardening of transformed-β phase at high oxygen concentrations.
36For mechanical properties near room temperature the critical concentration of oxygen in the transformedβ was estimated to be ≈0.7 wt%. Above this concentration, transformed β phase becomes brittle nearroom temperature. Because of the solubility limit of oxygen in the β phase, this high O concentration
cannot be reached at 2 200°F (1 204°C) but can be reached at 2 400°F (1 315°C). Hobson concluded
that: “embrittlement is not simply a function of the extent of oxidation alone, but is related in yet anotherway to the exposure temperature.”
The NRC understood that a criterion based solely on the extent of total oxidation is not enough, andthat some additional criterion is needed to assure that the metal under the oxide layer is not too brittle.
Thus during the 1973 Rule-Making Hearing, AEC Staff endorsed Hobson’s conclusion and wrote: “Thestaff recognises the importance of oxygen concentration in the β phase in determining the load bearing
ability of Zircaloy cladding, and the implication from the recent compression tests that this may not besatisfactorily characterised above 2 200°F by a ZDT as a function of remaining β fraction only. We
therefore believe that peak cladding temperatures should be limited to 2 200°F [20].”Subsequently, it was also concluded that:“Additional metallurgical and slow compression mechanical tests on other quenched samples
from the ORNL experiments indicated that an important consideration was the amount anddistribution of oxygen in the nominally ductile prior-β phase. However, these factors could not becorrelated as functions of time and temperature in the same manner as the (combined oxide and αlayer) penetration. In particular, the slow compression tests indicated a greater degradation in
cladding ductility at higher temperatures than would be expected from considerations of(combined oxide and α layer) penetration alone. It was on this basis that the staff previously
suggested a 2 200°F maximum cladding temperature… What was observed in the slow
compression tests was that 6 samples exposed at 2 400°F for only two minutes and with relatively
high values of Fw (Fw being fractional thickness of prior β, all greater than 0.65) all fractured with
nil ductility... Only when brittle failure was detected at high Fw in the slow compression tests did
the suspicion arise that ductility was a function of both Fw and the exposure temperature… As thetemperature rises above 2 200-2 300°F, solid solution hardening in the β phase appears tocontribute significantly to formation of a brittle structure. That is, brittle failure occurs eventhough α incursions are not observed, and the fraction of remaining β is greater than that observedin lower temperature tests. This is confirmed by examination of the six samples from the ORNL
exposed at 2 400°F for two minutes (Exhibit 1126)… From the foregoing, there is ample
evidence that load bearing ability and ductility decrease with increasing exposure temperatures,
even for transients with comparable Fw. Increased solubility of oxygen in the prior-β phase has
been discussed as a contributing factor... The staff believes that because of high-temperaturedegradation… phenomena (… strongly suggested by the experimental evidence cited), thesuggested 2 200°F limit should be imposed [21].”
Then it was added:“The situation is complicated by the fact that not all of the prior β phase is equally strong or ductile,
since these properties depend on the amount of dissolved oxygen. This fact has been suspected forsome time... From the phase diagram, given by both Scatena and Westinghouse, it is obvious that it
is possible for the β-phase zirconium to take on a higher oxygen content at 2 600°F than at 2 000°F.
Furthermore, since the diffusion rate depends exponentially upon temperature, one might expect agreater incursion of oxygen into the β phase for a given thickness of oxide and stabilised α phase at
higher temperatures... Others (than Hobson) have also observed that the resistance to rupture
depends upon the temperature at which oxidation occurs as well as the extent of oxidation... To
recapitulate, measures of Zircaloy oxidation, whether by percent, XT, or Fw, are largely or wholly
determined from the brittle layers of zirconium oxide or stabilised α phase, while the ductility and37

strength of oxidized zirconium depend upon the condition and the thickness of the prior β phase…
Thus a criterion based solely on the extent of total oxidation is not enough, and some additional
criterion is needed to assure that the prior β phase is not too brittle. The specification of a
maximum temperature of 2 200°F will accomplish this adequately. The data cited in exhibit 1113
would not support a choice of a less conservative limit [12].”Subsequent work has deduced that an oxygen content of 0.7 wt% in the β phase is a critical limit
for ductility of the prior β layer at room temperature [19,22]. Although somewhat different from thephase diagram of Zircaloy-oxygen [23], the partial phase diagram of the Zr-oxygen binary shown in
Figure 1. 4 serves as a guide to show how this limit was reached at the α/β interface at about 1 200°C.
At temperatures higher than that the oxygen content will soon be well above the 0.7% limit in the βsince oxygen diffusion in β is quite fast at these temperatures. In 30 s, (2Dt)0.5 is about 125 μm at
1 250°C. Both Pawel and Sawatsky proposed alternative criteria based on the 0.7 wt% limit. The
drawback with both these criteria is that they require diffusion calculations which are certainly more
complicated than the simple 1 204°C temperature limit. On the other hand, any LOCA analysis requires
extensive calculations and calculating the 0.7 wt% β content only adds marginally to this hardship.
Figure 1.4 The zirconium rich corner of the Zr-O phase diagram
The thin vertical line shows 0.7 wt% O

It is important to realise that in the early experiments of oxidation of Zircaloys at hightemperatures [13,17-18], specimen temperatures were not measured directly, e.g., by using spotwelded thermocouples. Likewise, specimen temperatures in the experiment of Baker-Just [24] were
determined indirectly. Before mid-1970s, it appears that the effect of the large exothermic heat ofoxidation of Zr was not well recognised by the investigators. In Hobson’s experiments [17-18], thetemperature of Zircaloy tube being oxidized was assumed to be the same as the temperature of theuniform central zone of the high-temperature furnace. This assumption would be reasonable for low
temperatures, e.g., <800°C. However, at higher temperatures − e.g. >1 100°C − high rate of self heatgeneration from oxidation causes actual specimen temperature significantly higher than that of thefurnace temperature. In this respect, actual oxidation temperature of a Zircaloy tube reported in
Hobson’s experiment is believed to be significantly higher, e.g., 1 200°C vs. 1 260°C.

38

At about >1 100°C, a relatively small difference in isothermal oxidation temperature can cause asignificant difference in actual or calculated values of ECR, which depends on oxidation time attemperature. At about >1 200°C, it also influence significantly the distribution of oxygen in the βlayer, hence, the degree of cladding embrittlement.
Note also that the Zircaloy-oxygen pseudobinary diagram was reported only after the 1973
Hearing [23]. It is considerably different from the Zr-oxygen binary diagram shown in Figure 1.4.
Oxygen solubility in β phase is also influenced by the hydrogen concentration.
Because of the above-mentioned uncertainties (in actual specimen temperature, threshold ECR,
and threshold oxygen concentration in β phase), a lingering question remained after the 1973 Hearing
whether indeed post-quench ductility is assured for the limiting condition of 2 200°F PCT and 17%
ECR. Only in 1980, it was demonstrated for Zircaloy-4 (wall thickness the same as that of Hobson’s
study) that a sufficient level of post-quench ductility was retained after exposure to this limiting
condition in the study of [16]. In this study, several improved techniques were used; that is, specimen
temperature was measured directly using spot-welded thermocouples, load-elongation behavior wasmeasured, and accurate ECR value was determined on the basis of measured thicknesses of oxide, α,and prior β layers.
1.2.3 LOCA safety criteria in other countries
The similarity of LOCA safety criteria between different countries was demonstrated in a recent
compilation of safety criteria in NEA member countries performed by NEA/CSNI [25]. With few
exceptions the different countries have adopted the NRC criteria. In the cases when there are
exceptions, they must in most cases be regarded as fairly small. Thus Japan has adopted an ECR-valueof 15% instead of the usual 17% while the Czech Republic uses a value of 18% for VVER 440
reactors but retains the 17% value for VVER 1 000 reactors. This is related to the different cladding
materials in the two types of reactor, Zr1Nb and Zircaloy-4 respectively. The 18% ECR-value is also
applied in Russia [26]. However this value is based on quench test results rather than on ring
compression tests as the American criteria [27]. As will be discussed in later sections, an E110
criterion based on ring compression tests would probably be much more restrictive than the 17% ECR
criterion. Hache has estimated that an application of the same methodology as in the 1973 Rulemaking hearing would have led to a limit of 6% ECR [27].
With regard to peak cladding temperature (PCT) most countries have chosen to round down the
NRC limit of 1 204°C to 1 200°C. In the application of the ECR criterion some countries include thepre-LOCA oxidation and some do not.
The Japanese LOCA criteria on cladding embrittlement, 15% ECR and 1 200°C peak cladding
temperature, were established in 1975 and were based on the concept of zero ductility of cladding as in
the U.S. The oxidation criterion was reduced by 2% taking account of uncertainty for the effect ofcooling rate on cladding embrittlement, which was pointed out after the establishment of the criteria in
the U.S. After their establishment, Uetsuka et al. found that inner surface oxidation after rod burst isaccompanied by significant hydrogen absorption [28]. Ring compression tests were performed by
Uetsuka and coworkers [28-30] on the cladding specimens that experienced rod burst and double sided
oxidation to examine the embrittlement of the cladding due to oxidation and hydrogen absorption. The
ductility of ring specimens fell down to the zero ductility range when the cladding was oxidized toseveral percent ECR, indicating that significant hydrogen absorption enhances cladding embrittlement[29]. Accordingly, they conducted “integral thermal shock tests” to evaluate the failure bearing
capability of oxidized cladding under simulated LOCA conditions [30]. In the test, a short test rod washeated up, burst, oxidized in steam and quenched by flooding water. Obtained results confirmed thatthe criterion of 15% ECR still had safety margin when the Baker-Just correlation was used, and the39results were referred when the LOCA criteria were reassessed in 1981. Therefore, the current Japanese
LOCA criteria on fuel safety are not based on the concept of zero ductility of cladding, but on the
failure threshold value determined in the integral thermal shock tests under restrained conditions.
An exception to the rule of using specified temperature and oxidation criteria is Canada. Canadian
reactor safety analysis is based on ensuring that the radiological dose to the public resulting from adesign basis accident remains below a given amount. The regulator does not prescribe how this is to beachieved, but makes it the responsibility of the industry to demonstrate compliance. To do this, theCanadians use a suite of qualified computer codes to analyse the consequences of the postulated designbasis accidents to determine: the fission product inventory in the fuel, the probable number of fuelsheath failures, the transport of fission products through the heat transport system to containment, therelease of fission products from containment, the dispersion of fission products into the atmosphere, andfinally the dose to the public. Thus, there are no formalised PCT or ECR limits in Canada.
In addition to the maximum temperature and oxidation limits, safety criteria in Germany containan additional requirement that the fraction of burst fuel rod shall be no more than 10% of the total rodsin the core. The purpose of this requirement is to limit fission gas release due to cladding burst.
1.3 References
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

14.

Parsons, P.D., Hindle, E.D., and Mann, C.A., “PWR fuel behaviour in design basis accident
conditions. A State-of-the-Art Report by the Task Group on Fuel Behaviour of CSNI Principal
Working Group No 2”, Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear Energy
Agency, CSNI Report 129.
IAEA (2001), Safety Assessment and Verification for Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA, Vienna.
ANSI/ANS-5.1-1994: Decay Heat Power in Light Water Reactors. 1994, American Nuclear Society.
Cathcart, J.V., et al., “Zirconium metal-water reaction kinetics. IV. Reaction rate studies”,
ORNL/NUREG-17.
NEA (2001), Hache, G. and Chung, H.M., “The History of the LOCA embrittlement criteria”(pp. 37-64), Topical Meeting on LOCA Fuel Safety Criteria held in Aix-en-Provence, OECD.
Chung, H.M., “Fuel behavior under loss-of-coolant-accident situations”, Nuclear Engineering andTechnology, 37(2005), pp. 327.
Report of Advisory Task Force on Emergency Cooling, TID-24226.
“Interim Acceptance Criteria for Emergency-Core-Cooling Systems for Light-Water Power
Reactors”, U.S. Federal Register 36 (125). 1971. p. 12247-12250.
Cottrell, W.B., “ECCS rulemaking hearings”, Nuclear Safety, 15(1974), pp. 30-55.
New acceptance criteria for emergency core-cooling systems of light-water-cooled nuclear powerreactors, Nuclear Safety, 15(1974), pp. 173-184.
Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light-Water Nuclear Power
Reactors, U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, Section 46. 1974.
Atomic Energy Commission Rule-Making Hearing, Opinion of the Commission, Docket RM-50-1,
28 December, 1973.
Hesson, J.C., et al., “Laboratory Simulations of Cladding-Steam Reactions Following Loss-ofCoolant Accidents in Water-Cooled Power Reactors”, Argonne National Laboratory, ANL-7609,
January 1970.
Parker, J.W., et al., ”Release of fission products from reactor fuels during transient accidents
simulated in TREAT”, International Symposium on Fission Product Release and Transport under
Accident Conditions., 1965, Oak Ridge.
4015. Fujishiro, T., et al., “Light water reactor fuel response during reactivity initiated accident
experiments”, NUREG/CR-0269., August 1978.
16. Chung, H.M. and Kassner, T.F., “Embrittlement Criteria for Zircaloy Fuel Cladding Applicableto Accident Situations in Light-Water Reactors. Summary Report”, NUREG/CR-1344, January
1980.
17. Hobson, D.O. and Rittenhouse, P.L., “Embrittlement of Zircaloy Clad Fuel Rods by SteamDuring LOCA Transients”, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL-4758, January 1972.
18. Hobson, D.O., “Ductile-brittle behavior of Zircaloy fuel cladding”, ANS Topical Meeting on
Water Reactor Safety, 1973, Salt Lake City, pp. 274-288.
19. Pawel, R.E., “Oxygen diffusion in β Zircaloy during steam oxidation”, Journal of Nuclear
Materials, 50(1974), pp. 247-258.
20. Atomic Energy Commission Rule-Making Hearing, Supplemental Testimony of the Regulatory
Staff, Docket RM-50-1, 26 October, 1972.
21. Atomic Energy Commission Rule-Making Hearing, Concluding Statement of the Regulatory
Staff, Docket RM-50-1, 16 April, 1973.
22. Sawatsky, A., “Proposed criterion for the oxygen embrittlement of Zircaloy-4 fuel cladding”, 4th
Symposium on Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1978, Stratford-on-Avon, ASTM STP-681,
ASTM, pp. 479-496.
23. Chung, H.M. and Kassner, T.F., “Pseudobinary Zircaloy-oxygen phase diagram”, Journal of
Nuclear Materials, 84(1979), pp. 327-339.
24. Baker, L. and Just, L.C., “Studies of metal-water reactions at high temperatures. III. Experimental
and theoretical studies of the zirconium-water reaction”, Argonne National Laboratory, ANL
6548, May 1962.
25. Fuel safety criteria in NEA member countries. Compilation of responses received from member
countries, NEA Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations, NEA/CSNI/R(2003)10, March
2003.
26. Bibilashvili, Y.K., et al., “Thermomechanical properties of zirconium-based alloys oxidized
claddings in LOCA simulating conditions”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Fuelbehaviour under transient and LOCA conditions., 2001, Halden, Norway, IAEA, pp. 186-208.
27. Hache, G., “Rationale of the LOCA 10 CFR 50.46b criteria and comparison with the E 110
alloy”, Topical Meeting on LOCA Fuel Safety Criteria., 2001, Aix-en-Provence, Nuclear Energy
Agency, pp. 17-36.
28. Uetsuka, H., et al., “Zircaloy-4 cladding embrittlement due to inner surface oxidation undersimulated loss of coolant conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 18(1981),
pp. 705-717.
29. Furuta, T., Uetsuka, H., and Kawasaki, S., “Estimation of conservatism of present embrittlement
criteria for Zircaloy fuel cladding under LOCA”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Sixth
International Symposium, 1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 734-746.
30. Uetsuka, H., Furuta, T., and Kawasaki, S., “Failure-bearing capability of oxidized Zircaloy-4
cladding under simulated loss-of-coolant conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Science andTechnology, 20(1983), pp. 941-950.

41

2. DESCRIPTION OF LOCA ACCIDENT SCENARIOSFOR MAJOR TYPES OF REACTORSThe following descriptions come mainly from a USNRC PIRT (Phenomenon Identification andRanking Tables) study of LOCAs in PWRs and BWRs with high burn-up fuel [1]. The description thus
applies to American types of reactors. It is expected that conditions will be similar for other types of
PWRs while the variations in behaviour will be greater in different types of BWRs around the world. For
instance, for BWRs with internal recirculation pumps the large break LOCA is more or less non-existent.
For other main types of reactors, the CANDU and the VVER reactors separate descriptions are given.
2.1 The pressurised water reactor
2.1.1 PWR large break LOCAA PWR primary system is shown in Figure 2.1. The design basis accident in the PWR is adouble-ended guillotine break in a cold leg between the reactor coolant pump and the reactor vessel.
Figure 2.1 PWR primary system arrangement

The blowdown period (0-30 s) occurs as a result of a break in the coolant system through which
the primary coolant is rapidly expelled. Within a fraction of a second after the break, the core voids
43and goes through departure from nuclear boiling. The negative void reactivity rapidly shuts down thecore. With the diminished cooling and the redistribution of stored energy in the fuel, the cladding heats
up. Interactions between the pump and the break dynamics cause intermittent flow reversals. The
primary system pressure rapidly decreases and the high-pressure safety injection begins, but most of
this flow is lost out of the break. Injection from the cold-leg accumulators begins but much of theinjected flow is swept around the downcomer, into the broken-loop cold leg and out the break. As theblowdown progresses, an increasing amount of the accumulator-injected coolant stays in thedowncomer and some water begins to enter the lower plenum. The average peak cladding temperature(PCT) during the blowdown phase of a large-break LOCA is approximately 1 500°F (815°C) and the
PCT at 95% confidence level is about 1 750°F (954°C), assuming a loss-of-offsite power and theworst single failure assumption for the emergency core cooling system.
The refill period occurs between 30 and 40 s following the start of the LOCA. The primarypressure has decreased to a level at which the low-pressure injection system activates and begins to
inject water into the system. The lower plenum begins to fill with accumulator water as coolant bypass
diminishes. While refilling of the lower plenum is underway, however, the core heats up in a near
adiabatic mode due to decay heat. Some fuel rods balloon and burst, causing blockage of some of theflow channels during refill.
The reflood period occurs between 40 and 200 s; it begins at the time when the lower plenum has
filled and the core begins to refill. Water injected by the accumulators fills the downcomer and creates
the driving head for refilling the core. The lower elevations of the core quench, generating a two-phasemixture that provides some cooling to the upper elevations of the core. However, the fuel rods
continue to heat up until the quench front begins to move upward through the core. Some additional
number of fuel rods may burst during the reflood period. Zirconium-water reactions can occur for hightemperature regions of the core. As the quench front continues to advance, the fuel rod upper
elevations are cooled by a dispersed non-equilibrium two-phase mixture of superheated steam andentrained droplets. Eventually, there is sufficient cooling in advance of the quench front to terminate
the increase in cladding temperature and the PCT is reached. The average reflood PCT during thisperiod is approximately 1 680°F (915°C) and the PCT at 95% confidence is about 1 975°F (1 080°C).
The maximum amount of cladding oxidized at a given location during this phase of the LOCA is about
10% for beginning-of-life (BOL) UO2 fuel and the total oxidation is less than 1%.
An example of the complete pressure and temperature history for a fuel rod is shown in Figure 2.2[2]. Note that the figure demonstrates principle rather than detail. The exact history will depend on fuelrod location and type of PWR as can be seen for instance in Figures 6.68 and 9.4.
2.1.2 PWR small break LOCA
Breaks with flow areas typically less than 1-ft2 and greater than 3/8 in. in diameter span the
category of small breaks. A small break is sufficiently large that the primary system depressurises tothe high-pressure safety injection set point and a safety injection or “S” signal is generated,
automatically starting the High-Pressure Safety Injection (HPSI) system. Breaks smaller than 3/8-inch
in diameter do not depressurise the reactor coolant system because the reactor charging flow canreplace the lost inventory. The control rods shut down the reactor such that only decay heat is
generated in the core. The limiting small-break LOCA is determined by the inter-play between core
power level, the axial power shape, break size, the high-head safety injection performance, and thepressure at which the accumulator begins to inject. The limiting break is one that is large enough thatthe high-pressure safety injection system cannot make-up the mass loss from the reactor system but
small enough that the reactor system does not quickly depressurise to the accumulator set point. This
combination of circumstances leads to a core uncovery.
44

Figure 2.2 Double ended cold leg break, pressure difference across the cladding
and cladding temperature at the hot spot [2]For Westinghouse plants, the limiting breaks are typically in the 2-4 inch range. A spectrum of
break sizes has been calculated for a Westinghouse three-loop plant. Calculations were performed
assuming both fresh fuel and fuel with burn-up between 30 and 54 GWd/t. These calculations arethought to accurately display the effect of burn-up on fuel performance. As an example, with fresh
fuel, a three-inch break was found to produce the highest PCTs for breaks in the range of 2 to 6 inches.
The PCT of 1 830°F (1 000°C) occurred at approximately 1 480 s. The core average cladding
oxidation was 0.5%. No bursting of the fuel is predicted for fresh fuel.
The available calculated results for fuel that has been in the reactor indicate that as burn-up
increases, some of the fuel will burst and experience double-sided cladding reactions. However, theburn-up reduces the linear heat rate such that the calculated PCTs are below those for fresh fuel and are,therefore, less limiting. At 54 GWd/t, the hot rod PCT is predicted to be approximately 1 500°F (815°C).
2.2 Boiling water reactor LOCA
The steam and recirculation water flow paths in a General Electric type BWR-6 are shown in
Figure 2.3. The steam-water mixture first enters steam separators after exiting the core. After
subsequent passage through steam dryers located in the upper portion of the reactor vessel, the steam
flows directly to the turbine system. The water, which is separated from the steam, flows downward in
the periphery of the reactor vessel and mixes with the incoming main feed flow from the turbine. This
combined flow stream is pumped into the lower plenum through jet pumps mounted around the inside
periphery of the reactor vessel. The jet pumps are driven by flow from recirculation pumps located inrelatively small-diameter external recirculation loops, which draw flow from the plenum just above thejet pump discharge location.

45

Figure 2.3 Steam and recirculation water flow paths in the BWR

The fuel is uranium dioxide (UO2) and the cladding is Zircaloy-2 with a zirconium-based inner
liner. Each fuel assembly has several fuel rods with a burnable poison, gadolinia (Gd2O3) mixed insolid solution with UO2.
The design basis accident for a BWR-6 is a double-ended break in the suction-side of therecirculation line. Shortly after the break, the reactor scrams, typically on drive flow pressure. Becauseof the large flow reductions immediately following the LOCA caused by the depressurisation, there isa rapid increase in the core average void fraction. The negative void reactivity rapidly shuts down thecore. The flow reverses in the broken loop jet pump. With the flow reversal all the drive flow to thatjet pump is lost and one-half the drive flow that is supporting the core flow is lost.
A loss of offsite power is also assumed. Thus, there is no power to the recirculation pump, whichmeans that the intact loop pump also starts to coast down. The coastdown time of the pump is on theorder of 10-15 seconds. With the loss of pumped flow, there is an almost instantaneous and large
reduction in the core flow, which causes an early boiling transition in the core, typically within one
second after the break.
The cladding temperature rapidly increases; the resulting blowdown peak cladding temperature isdominated by the stored energy in the fuel.
Valves are closed to isolate the system, typically within four seconds after the LOCA. Systemdepressurisation and loss of liquid inventory continue. As a result of the loss of inventory, the waterlevel in the downcomer decreases and as the water level eventually drops down to the top of the jetpump. This opens a flow path through which steam can flow to the break. The rate of depressurisation
increases following jet pump uncovery.
46

During normal operation, the inlet subcooling at the bottom of the core is 20°F (11 K). With therapid depressurisation, there is a large amount of flashing of the fluid in the lower plenum, thisoccurring at approximately 10 s. This causes a large increase in the coolant flow through the core,quenching the fuel, and returning the cladding temperature to the saturation temperature.
As the LOCA and depressurisation continue, the level inside the core region decreases, as well as
forming a level in the lower plenum region. The flow into the core is limited and the core uncovery
leads to a second boiling transition. That typically happens at approximately 20 secs into the transient.
Within 35-40 s following the LOCA, the high pressure core spray system begins to deliver
coolant to the top of the core, the time being determined by the time to start the diesel generator thatdrives the high pressure core spray system. The low-pressure injection begins when the systempressure drops below the shutoff head for the pumps, typically on the order of about 200 psi.
A second transition and core heatup begins in the period 20-35 s. This heatup is terminated by theoperation of the BWR-6 safety systems.
The BWR-6 has one high-pressure coolant system, one low-pressure core spray system, and three
low-pressure coolant injection (LPCI) systems injecting into the bypass region. The worst single
failure for the BWR-6 is the failure of one of the diesel generators that will drive two of the LPCI
systems. The outcome of this failure is that the system behaviour is based on the availability of thehigh-pressure core spray, the low-pressure core spray and one LPCI system that injects into the bypass
region.
Given the operation of these systems, the core refills before the lower plenum. The refilling andreflooding processes restores the liquid inventory in the core and quenches the core in the period 100150 s following the LOCA. Throughout the transient, the best-estimate peak cladding temperature fornominal conditions is approximately 800°F (427°C). The upper bound estimate for a 95%-95% upperbound is approximately 1 200-1 300°F (590-700°C).
For the BWR/4, the ECC configuration is slightly different. However, the early part of thetransient is very similar to the BWR-6. These differences cause the core reflood during the refilling
and reflooding phase of the LOCA to take somewhat longer than in a BWR-6. This results in asomewhat higher peak cladding temperature for the BWR/4, with the peak cladding temperature fornominal conditions being approximately 1 000°F (540°C) and the upper bound estimate approximately
1 400-1 500°F (760-815°C).
The BWR/2 is the older-generation BWR without jet pumps. The core cannot be reflooded. The
peak cladding temperature is controlled by a balance between decay heat and the core spray heattransfer. Typically, the peak cladding temperature occurs late in the transient, perhaps 600-800 s
following the LOCA. Quenching of the fuel rods is also very slow. The upper bound peak cladding
temperature for the BWR/2 is approximately 1 700°F. For these plants, cladding oxidation, rather than
PCT, may be limiting.
For the purposes of the PIRT [1], the panel did not differentiate between BWR small-break andlarge-break LOCAs. The BWR is designed to automatically convert postulated small-breaks thatwould uncover the core into a large-break through the activation of an Automatic Depressurisation
System (ADS). The ADS opens several of the standard safety relief valves, causing a controlled
depressurisation with system response quite similar to that for a postulated large break in the reactor
steam line.

47

2.3 Risk-informed changes to NRC LOCA technical requirements
In June 1999, the NRC decided to implement risk-informed changes to the LOCA technicalrequirements. As a result, the requirements for large-break loss of coolant accident were re-examined.
A number of possible changes were considered. These included changes to General Design Criterion(GDC) 35 and changes to Paragraph 50.46 acceptance criteria, evaluation models, and functionalreliability requirements. The NRC also proposed to refine previous estimates of LOCA frequency forvarious sizes of LOCAs to more accurately reflect the current state of knowledge of the mechanisms
and likelihood of primary coolant system rupture.
Industry interest in a redefined LOCA was shown by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) filing ofPetition for Rulemaking in February 2002. The petition requested that the NRC amend § 50.46 andAppendices A and K to allow − as an option to the double-ended rupture of the largest pipe in thereactor system − the maximum LOCA break size to be “up to and including an alternate maximum
break size that is approved by the NRC.
NRC received 17 sets of comments. Most were from the power reactor industry in favour of thepetition. A few other stakeholders were concerned about potential impacts on defence-in-depth orsafety margins if significant changes were made to reactor designs based upon use of a smaller breaksize. The NRC staff considered the technical issues raised by the petitioner and stakeholders in this
proposed rulemaking.
During public meetings, industry representatives expressed interest in a number of possible
changes to licensed power reactors as a result of redefining the large-break LOCA. These include
lengthening diesel generator start times, optimizing containment spray system setpoints, increasing
power, improving fuel management, and other changes.
July 2004, the Commission stated that the NRC staff should determine an appropriate riskinformed alternative break size and that breaks larger than this size should be removed from the designbasis event category. The proposed rule should be structured to allow operational as well as designchanges and should include requirements for licensees to maintain the capability to mitigate the full
spectrum of LOCAs up to the double-ended guillotine break of the largest reactor coolant system pipe.
To maintain the core in a coolable geometry, the Commission stated that a high-level criterion in therule should include the requirement for the licensee to provide effective mitigation capabilities,
including effective severe accident mitigation strategies directed at break sizes larger than thealternative maximum break size permitted by the rule.
The Commission also stated that the mitigation capabilities for beyond-design-basis eventsshould be controlled by NRC requirements commensurate with the safety significance of thesecapabilities. Finally, the Commission stated that LOCA frequencies should be periodically reevaluatedand if increases in frequency required licensees to restore the facility to its original design basis or
make other compensating changes,
Based on the above Commission guidance, the staff has prepared a proposed rule whichcontained alternative emergency core cooling system (ECCS) evaluation requirements [“Proposed
Rulemaking for “Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements”,
SECY-05-052 (March 2005). These alternative requirements would be codified in a new regulation,
Paragraph 50.46a, and could be used in lieu of the requirements in the current Paragraph 50.46. The
rule could be adopted by current nuclear power reactor licensees. The proposed rule would divide thecurrent spectrum of LOCA break sizes into two regions. The division between the two regions isdetermined by a “transition break size” (TBS). The first region includes small breaks up to andincluding the TBS. The second region includes breaks larger than the TBS up to and including the48

double-ended guillotine break of the largest reactor coolant system pipe. The term “break” in the TBS
does not mean a double-ended guillotine break; rather it refers to an equivalent opening in the reactor
coolant system boundary.
The staff determined that an appropriate TBS would be the cross-sectional area of the largest pipe
attached to the reactor coolant system. Thus, the TBS will vary from plant to plant depending on thespecific piping system design. For pressurised water reactors (PWRs), the largest attached pipe would
be the pressuriser surge line whose diameter varies from about 8 inches to 14 inches. For boiling water
reactors (BWRs), the area of the TBS break is the cross-sectional flow area of the larger of either the
feedwater or the residual heat removal piping inside primary containment. The BWR TBS corresponds
to a pipe diameter of approximately 20 inches.
Pipe breaks in the smaller break size region are considered much more likely than pipe breaks in
the larger break size region. Consequently, each region will be subject to ECCS requirementscommensurate with the relative likelihood of breaks in that region. LOCAs in the smaller break size
region would continue to be “design basis accidents” and would continue to be analyzed by current
methods, assumptions, and criteria.
In the design basis accident region, licensees must perform analyses under current ECCS
requirements to determine the limiting size and location for breaks up to and including the TBS. Pipe
breaks larger than the TBS, because of their lower likelihood, can be analyzed by the more realistic
and less stringent analysis methods established in the new Paragraph 50.46a. Although LOCAs forbreak sizes larger than the transition break will become “beyond-design-basis accidents,” the proposed
rule includes requirements ensuring that licensees maintain the ability to mitigate all LOCAs up to andincluding the double-ended guillotine break of the largest reactor coolant system pipe. Although thesebreaks must be mitigated, the methods and initial and boundary conditions used for the mitigation
analysis may be more realistic. The analysis results must show that the core remains amenable tocooling. Licensees would be allowed to take credit for reliable non-safety related systems without
assuming other independent failures. The specific metrics for demonstrating “coolable core geometry”
are not necessarily limited to a peak cladding temperature of 2 200°F and less than 17% local cladding
oxidation, as required for breaks smaller than the TBS. Licensees could use other metrics andacceptance criteria for demonstrating coolable core geometry if an adequate technical basis is provided
to support the licensee’s proposal.
Licensees who perform LOCA analyses using the risk-informed alternative requirements may
find that their plant designs are no longer limited by certain parameters from previous largebreakanalyses. The new analyses could enable licensees to propose a wide range of design or operationalchanges. The intent of the proposed rule is that licensees use the revised Paragraph 50.46a to optimise
safety system design and setpoints, and that overall implementation would result in a net reduction inrisk to public health and safety. Nevertheless, the proposed rule would require that any increases incore damage frequency (CDF) and large early release frequency are themselves small and that plantbaseline risk remains relatively small.
The NRC continues to pursue this regulatory development in this area. The current status may befound in “Rulemaking to Make Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident TechnicalRequirements,” SECY-07-082 (May 2007).
2.4 CANDU reactor LOCA
The information in this section was provided by A.F. Williams and S. Sunder. In a CANDU
reactor, the fuel is loaded into horizontal pressure tubes, and is cooled by the flow of pressurised49

heavy water [3], Figure 2.4. The moderator is also heavy water contained in a calandria vessel. The
pressure tubes pass through the calandria vessel and are separated from the moderator by a calandria
tube and a CO2 filled annulus. Coolant is supplied to the pressure tubes via a system of large headersand smaller feeder pipes. The moisture content of the CO2 is continuously monitored and it provides
early warning of any potential leak in the system.
Figure 2.4 A schematic of a CANDU primary heat transport system

Legend:1. Steam line leading to electric turbines.
2. Pressuriser.
3. Steam generator.
4. Pumps.
5. Inlet headers.

6. Calandria vessel.
7. Fuel channel.
8. Moderator recirculation pump.
9. Heat exchanger.
10. Online refueling machines.

In broad terms, a LOCA in a CANDU follows a similar sequence to that described for a PWR. A
break in the heat transport system initiates reactor shut down. There is an initial period of blowdown
as the pressurised coolant vents from the system. As the coolant pressure drops, cooling is degraded
and the fuel under goes a temperature transient. During this period, there is the possibility of fueldamage and the release of fission products to containment. Initiation of the emergency core cooling(ECC) system re-floods the reactor core, cooling the fuel and terminating the accident.
Despite these similarities with the PWR LOCA sequence, the horizontal pressure tube design andheavy water moderator mean that the details of the accident progression are quite different. In the
CANDU-6 design, the coolant void reactivity is positive but the coolant void reactivity is negative in50

the advanced CANDU reactor (ACR) design. The presence of the moderator around the fuel channels
also plays an important role as a heat sink during the accident. Hence the determination of the pressure
tube behaviour plays an important role in CANDU safety analysis.
LOCA type accidents are divided into two categories, according to the size of the break in theheat transport system.
2.4.1 Large break LOCA
A large break LOCA involves a break in the heat transport system pressure boundary of sufficientmagnitude that the reactor regulating system (RRS) is incapable of maintaining reactivity balance. As
the pressure tubes and feeder pipes are of relatively small diameter this type of LOCA can only be due
to a break in the larger headers above the reactor core.
The initial phase of the accident (0-5 s) is characterised by a short power transient, which is
terminated by either a neutron or process trip. The main safety concern for this short period prior toreactor trip is that the fuel temperature might rise sufficiently high for the formation of molten UO2,
which could potentially cause pressure tube rupture. In turn the resulting hot spots in the pressure tube
could result in localised straining and possible failure of the pressure tube. In practice, this safetyconcern is not realised as the fuel is cooled by the flow of coolant resulting from the blowdown.
The second phase of the accident (5-30 s) is characterised by the blowdown and depressurisationof the fuel channel prior to ECC injection. Despite the reactor shutdown, fuel temperatures may
remain high due to the degradation in cooling, decay heat and oxidation of the fuel sheath. The fuelsheath may undergo significant deformation and may fail releasing fission products to the fuel channeland subsequently to containment. During this phase, the temperature of the pressure tube also rises andthe pressure tube deforms into contact with the calandria. Once the pressure tube is in contact with thecalandria tube, the moderator acts as a heat sink, cooling the pressure tube and preventing failure of
the fuel channel.
The third phase of the accident (30-200 s) is characterised by the initiation of ECC. During thisperiod, ECC is being injected into the primary heat transport system, but has not yet reached sufficientlevels to effectively cool the fuel. Depressurisation of the heat transport system continues and stored
heat and decay heat from the fuel is radially removed to the moderator through the pressure tube andcalandria tube. Fuel failures are likely during this stage of the accident.
During the fourth and final phase of the accident (>200 s) the injection of ECC has reached alevel where it can effectively cool the fuel. The heat transport system pumps have tripped, refill of thechannels in the core proceeds and a quasi-steady state is attained.
2.4.2 Small break LOCA
A small break LOCA refers to a break where the reactor regulating system is capable of preventing
a significant power excursion. A small LOCA may occur due to a break in a header or other heattransport pipes such as feeders and steam generator tubes. Because the range of possible locations of asmall beak LOCA is far wider than that of a large break LOCA, the safety analysis is more complex.
Small break LOCAs are divided into categories depending on the location and type of break.
A special class of small LOCA events are single channel events involving breaks in the primaryheat transport system up to the size of the largest feeder. Breaks may occur spontaneously or may be aconsequence of flow blockages within a fuel channel. Single channel events may occur outside of thecore or within the core. Breaks within the core fall into two categories. In one category, only the51

pressure tube fails, leading to steam discharge to containment via the annulus between the pressure
tube and calandria. In the other category both the pressure tube and calandria may fail in which casethe discharge is ultimately to containment via the moderator.
The following general features characterise a single channel event or small break LOCA:
1.

2.

3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

A modest power excursion to approximately 105% of full power is possible, driven by rapid
coolant voiding in the affected channel. Reactor shut down systems may not detect the
failure immediately so that the reactor continues to operate at or slightly above full power.
A low rate of coolant discharge from the break into containment, moderator and other reactor
subsystems, such as the steam generator secondary side, occurs, depending on the breaklocation.
There is limited potential for pressure tube deformation from early impairment of fuel cooling.
Fuel failures occur in the affected channel in the case of flow blockages or flow stagnation.
Significant increases in heat load to the moderator via the coolant discharge are possible in
the event of channel failure.
For very small breaks, the reactor could be shutdown manually and the heat transport systemcooled in a controlled manner to avoid the necessity for ECC injection.
An over pressure period in containment develops during which there can be a pressure
driven release outside of containment. Maximum pressure tends to be lower than for large
break LOCA due to the lower discharge rate.

2.5 VVER reactor LOCA
The VVER reactors are a type of pressurised water reactors. However they differ from the PWRs
discussed in Section 2.1 in a few respects [4]. For instance, the VVER-440 reactors differ from the
PWR in the following respects:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Six loops of primary circuit.
Loop seals in hot legs.
Horizontal steam generator with two headers.
Elevation of the top of steam generators tubes related to the top of the active (about 4 m,
PWR about 10 m).
Shrouded fuel assemblies with hexagonal fuel rod arrangement.
ECCS injection points.
Secondary side water volume in steam generators compared with nominal thermal core
power is larger.
Two isolation valves in each main look.
Special pressure suppression system (bubble condenser).
Each control rod consists of two parts: lower fuel assembly and upper absorber.
Lower plenum volume larger and different internal structures.

The VVER-1000 plants are equipped with ECCS (emergency core cooling system) andcontainment spray systems that have a similar design basis and basic configuration as in western
PWRs. These systems have 3×100% redundancy with the exception of the ECCS water storage tank,which is common to all subsystems. The same tank serves as a containment sump. The tank is locatedunder the containment and has open connections to the containment through the bottom plate:••

Four loops of primary circuit.
Horizontal steam generators with 2 headers.
52

•
•
•
•

ECCS injection points.
Secondary side water volume of the steam generators compared with the nominal thermalcore power is larger.
Lower plenum internal structures.
Fuel assemblies with hexagonal fuel rod arrangements.

2.5.1 Large break LOCA
A guillotine break of the VVER-1000 reactor main circulation pipeline (diameter 850 mm) at thereactor inlet is considered an initiating event of a LB LOCA.
It is conservatively assumed that simultaneously with the main circulation pipeline break occur
also: loss of unit power supply, loss of steam removal to turbine and tripping of the main circulation
pumps. Steam pressure in steam generator rises.
A break of the large diameter primary pipeline resulting in the blow-out of large quantities of
coolant leads to a pressure drop in the primary circuit and core dewatering. Consequently, the heatremoval from the core worsens and temperature of the fuel cladding rises sharply with the rate of
approximately 102 K/s (due to the heat accumulated in the core).
When the primary circuit parameters reach the corresponding setting points (in 0.01 s after theaccident started) the emergency protection signal is actuated. As a result of decreased coolant density
in the core and the emergency protection system response, the reactor power decreases up to theresidual heat level.
The boric acid solutions needed for emergency core cooling are supplied by the emergency corecooling system (SAOZ) – ECCS, which includes:•••

High-pressure safety injection system (HPSI).
ECCS passive part (pressurised accumulator tanks).
Low-pressure safety injection system.

When the primary circuit pressure becomes lower than the gas pressure in accumulator tanks (in7-9 s after the accident started), the non-return valves (check valves) on the connecting pipelines open,
and boron solution is fed into the reactor. It results in a partial core flooding; the temperature rise on
fuel cladding stops (for the fuel assembly with the maximum calculated power the first peak is approx.
1 000°C, for a group of fuel elements (assemblies ) with higher heat flux density – approx. 900°C).
(Group of fuel elements resp. assemblies with higher heat flux density is composed of assemblies withthe relative power 1.2-1.4 and burn-up up to approx. 37 MWd/tU.) The coolant pressure at theapproximately same time becomes lower than the inner pressure in fuel elements (in 3-9 s after theaccident started, depending on burn-up). Thus, depending on combination of the temperature-loading
conditions during the accident first phase, is possible both − cladding collapse to the fuel column andits swelling/ballooning up to rupture.
After lapse of time needed for the safety systems actuation and preparation for action (not morethan 40 s after the accident started), the pumps of high- and low-pressure injection systems start tofeed boron solution into the primary circuit.
When the boron solution volume in accumulator tanks drops below acceptable level (after 53-58 s
after accident started), the shut-off valves are triggered, the boron solution supply from the tanks is cut– to preclude gas getting into the primary circuit; further cooling is ensured by emergency injection
systems. During such regime the cladding temperature of fuel elements with high heat rate/linear
53

power may rise with the rates of 1-5 K/s (due to residual heat). The temperature maximum can bereached in 100-200 s after the accident started, and its value can be approx. 1 100°C for the fuelassembly with the maximum calculated power and approx. 950°C for a group of fuel elements(assemblies) with higher heat rate/linear power. When cladding temperature becomes higher than
800°C, the cladding balloons and high heat rated fuel rods burst.
Cladding oxidation kinetics is complex due to non-stationary temperature regime, cladding
deformation and loss-of-tightness, etc. According to conservative computations, ECR of fuel elements/
assembly with maximum calculated power can reach ≈ 5%. In a group of fuel elements with higher heatrates, ECR can reach 1%.
According to computational assessments the share of oxidized zirconium in the core is not higherthat 0.1-0.2% of its total mass in fuel claddings usually.
Core re-flooding is finished in 200-400 s after the accident started (depending on the calculation
scenario). Estimates of cladding oxidation state allow to say with confidence that fuel elements willwithstand thermo-mechanical loads during reflooding.
A guillotine break of the VVER-440 reactor main circulation pipeline (diameter 500 mm) at thereactor inlet is considered an initiating event of a LB LOCA.
Since the linear heat rates in VVER-440 are significantly lower than in VVER-1000, the main
thermo-mechanical and corrosion/oxidation characteristics/damage levels of fuel elements during an
VVER-440 accident are much lower than for VVER-1000.
Computational assessments of PCT for the fuel assembly with the maximum calculated power are
not higher than 900°C, ECR – not higher than 1%. For a group of fuel elements (assemblies) with highheat linear rating, computational assessments of PCT are not higher than 700°C, ECR – not higher
than 0.1%; under these circumstances ballooning and cladding failure are not expected.
2.5.2 Small break LOCA
A small leak break of the VVER-1000 primary pipeline of a small diameter or the main
circulation pipeline rupture (equivalent diameter ≤ 100) is considered an initiating event of a Small
Break LOCA.
According to the SB LOCA thermohydraulic calculations, the departure from nucleate boilingcan occur only on the fuel elements with the highest heat flux density/linear heat rates, its duration and
PCT level are significantly smaller than in LB LOCA. Consequently ECR is also significantly lower;
ballooning and cladding failure are not expected.
2.6 References
1.

2.
3.
4.

Boyack, B.E., et al., “Phenomenon Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRTs) for Loss-ofCoolant Accidents in Pressurised and Boiling Water Reactors Containing High Burn-up Fuel”,
Los Alamos National Laboratory, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-6744,LAUR-00-5079, December 2001.
Rininsland, H., et al., “Stand der Reaktorsicherheitsforschung in Projekt Nukleare Sicherheit”,
KfK Jahrescolloquium, 1982.
Hart, R.S., “CANDU Technical Summary”, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, October 1997.
Valach, M., Private communication. 2006.

54

3. STATE OF FUEL AND CLADDING AT VARIOUS BURN-UP LEVELSThis section is basically cut and pasted from Appendices G and H of the PIRT report [1], separate
contributions on CANDU fuel and MOX fuel. Some editing was done since the PWR fuel description
addressed fuel behaviour during RIA transients while the BWR fuel description addressed fuelbehaviour during power oscillations. It may be assumed that fuel behaviour in other types of watercooled reactors with UO2 fuel and zirconium base alloy cladding is sufficiently similar to these two
types so that further descriptions are unnecessary. However, a section on MOX fuel has been added
The extended operational exposure that accompanies high burn-up causes changes to the fuel andcladding that may affect the fuel rod’s ability to withstand the accident without losing its integrity(Figure 3.2). These changes, which occur gradually over the life of the fuel rod, can be considered as
initial conditions for the accident.
There are many changes that occur to the fuel and cladding as a result of prolonged exposure to
the irradiation field present in a reactor core, and to the corroding environment and high temperature.
The combination of high temperature, radiation damage, transmutations, mechanical stresses andchemical reactions causes the microstructure of cladding and fuel to evolve considerably during
reactor exposure. These changes in microstructure, microchemistry, and macroscopic characteristics ofpellet and cladding are responsible for the changes in material behaviour observed at high burn-up.
These changes are very complex and difficult to predict in a mechanistic fashion. Of the many changes
to the fuel and cladding, it is important to discern which are of greatest importance to determining fuelrod behaviour during LOCA. Some of the more important material degradation phenomena are listed
below, recognising that the list may not be inclusive. The changes to the fuel and cladding areimportant to both pressurised water reactor (PWR) and boiling water reactor (BWR) fuel types. While
the state of fuel is more or less identical for PWR and BWR fuel and can thus be treated together, there
are significant differences for the claddings which make it necessary to treat them in separate sections.
3.1 State of fuel at various burn-up levels
3.1.1 UO2 fuelFission Products
During normal operation, solid and gaseous fission products are generated within the UO2 fuelpellet. Whereas the solid fission products generally remain at the birthsite, the gaseous fission products
are more mobile and distribute largely into five separate inventories: (i) gas dissolved in the UO2matrix, (ii) gas in intragranular (matrix) bubbles, (iii) gas in intergranular (on grain boundaries)
bubbles (iv) gas released to the fuel rod void volume and (v) gas in fuel porosity. The amount of gas
dissolved in the UO2 matrix is limited by the solubility in UO2. Solid fission products result in a
progressive swelling of the fuel material with irradiation exposure. Gaseous fission productinventories (iii), and to a lesser extent (ii) and (v), under high temperature low restraint conditions, canalso result in fuel swelling with consequent pellet-cladding contact. Ramp experiments on high burnup fuel have demonstrated that in connection with a temperature increase a transient swelling may
occur which can deform the cladding. Inventory (iv) is referred to as fission gas release (FGR) and55

produces an increase in the fuel rod internal pressure and corresponding cladding loading. The exact
partitioning of the fission gases among the identified inventories is dependent primarily on the fuelpellet microstructure and thermal operating history.
Rim formation
Because of U-238 resonance neutron capture near the UO2 pellet surface, the amount of Pu formedin the fuel is greater at the edge of the pellet than in the centre. This causes the fission rate near thepellet surface to slowly increase with burn-up while the fission rate in the bulk of the pellet decreases.
The ratio of fission at the edge of the pellet to the centre may be as high as 3 at high burn-ups. Such a
region is called the rim region and its thickness is approximately 100 to 300 microns. The rim region isformed when the local burn-up at the rim exceeds approximately 60 GWd/t (40-45 GWd/t radial
averaged). The rim region has a characteristic microstructure that consists of sub-micron size grains
with bubbles under high gas pressures and has high porosity (20-30%). Some of these bubbles may bein non-equilibrium with the matrix because there are large strain fields around the smaller bubbles andthere is further evidence that they exist within the interior of the pellet as well as on the rim if theirradiation temperatures are low.
The main concern with the formation of the rim region concerns its effects on the amount offission gas loading, and the relocation or dispersal of fuel during a LOCA.
Fuel restructuring and macrocracking
During the initial rise to power, the thermal stresses caused by the pellet radial temperature
gradient cause the pellet to crack (primarily radially). With the release of strain energy, the cracked
pellet segments relocate outwards toward the cladding (called fuel relocation or restructuring). With
continued irradiation, additional outward movement of the pellet segments can occur. At ~mid-life
exposures, the combined effects of pellet relocation, fuel irradiation swelling, and cladding creepdown
result in a closed pellet-cladding gap. From this point, (1) a reduction in the fuel pellet expansion (suchas caused by a power decrease) can result in partial gap opening, and (2) additional fuel expansion (byprogressive fuel swelling or as a result of a power increase) can cause pellet radial cracks to (partially)close, thereby increasing the effective pellet stiffness, and imposing loading and deformation of thecladding. No particular change in this behaviour is expected at elevated exposures.
Pellet-Cladding Interface
With the onset of pellet-cladding contact, a bond layer develops between the fuel pellet and the
cladding. Pellet-cladding bonding is thought to progress as oxygen atoms inter-diffuse between cubic(U,Pu)O2 and cubic ZrO2 which is formed under irradiation. At elevated exposure, the magnitude (bondlayer thickness) and extent (circumferential and axial surface coverage) increases. The development of
this bond layer inhibits the ability of the pellet and cladding to move independently, and thereby affects
load transfer from the pellet to the cladding and the subsequent cladding stress state. Pellet-cladding
bonding is conducive to a smaller clad ballooning strain under otherwise similar conditions. The bondlayer can fracture during cooldown or power reductions, leading to an intermediate state.
One important fuel property with regard to LOCA is obviously the fission gas release since it
directly affects the internal pressure and consequently the ballooning behaviour of the fuel. Another isthe fuel-cladding bonding layer as a source of oxygen during a high temperature accident.
3.1.2 MOX fuel and high burn-up UO2 fuel (Contributed by J. Papin)
The high burn-up fuel is characterised by a quasi-closed gap, with a more or less pronounced
bonding between fuel and internal zirconia layer, and a high fission gas retention; this high fission gas
56

content results from a low gas release under normal operating conditions and increases quasi-linearlywith burn-up. Furthermore, in irradiated fuel, a significant increase of the gas volume located inside
pores and bubbles at the grain boundaries (called “grain boundary − GB gases”) occurs with theformation of the typical High Burn-up Structure (HBS), in the rim zone of high burn-up UO2 fuel andin the (U,Pu)O2 clusters of the MOX MIMAS fuel, which initially concentrate almost all the fissile
material. This MOX heterogeneous structure results from its fabrication process that blends 25-30%
enrichment Pu particles (mixture of UO2 and PuO2 powders with average particle sizes ranging up to
several tens of micro-meters) into a depleted UO2 matrix. That leads to two phases in the fresh fuelmicrostructure of the MIMAS/AUC (Ammonium Urano-Carbonate) type MOX: the (U,Pu)O2
agglomerates with a Pu content of about 27% and the UO2 matrix that contains some residual Pu.
The formation of high burn-up fuel structures starts at a local burn-up of about 70-80 GWd/tM,
and is fully developed at a local burn-up of about 120 GWd/tM. It is characterised by the subdivisionof the original grains, the depletion of intra-granular gas inventory, and the development of a highporosity (up to approximately 20%) in the form of over-pressurised micrometer size pores that containa major portion of the created gases. In UO2 fuels, this microstructure change appears in the outer coldzones of the high burn-up UO2 fuels above an average pellet burn-up of about 40 GWd/tM, and is wellestablished on a peripheral layer of 100 µm width at an average pellet burn-up of approximately
60-65 GWd/tM. In MOX fuels, the “rim structure” or HBS is clearly observed earlier, above a meanpellet burn-up of about 30 GWd/tM, with a measured local burn-up in the (U,Pu)O2 agglomerates of100-160 GWd/tM, depending on the initial enrichment. However, only the agglomerates of asignificant size (higher than the recoil distance of fission gas atoms − 7 to 9 μm) are involved; theothers contribute to the increase of gas retention in the MOX fuel matrix and probably to someaccumulation of fission gases at inter-granular sites.
There is substantial experimental evidence from RIA tests and also during heating ramps in outof-pile annealing tests simulating LOCA transients [2-4] that the grain boundary gas can be easily
available for release during heat-up transients. The grain boundary gas contribution to transient fuelswelling is obvious in the case of no or low external constraint (NSRR tests [5] and annealing tests[2-3]), in relation with the fission gas release that may influence the rod internal pressure under LOCA
transients. The grain boundary gas inventory is probably one of the more relevant parameters to
predict the high burn-up fuel behaviour during accidental events, either in RIAs and LOCA since it
may contribute significantly to transient fuel swelling and gas release.
Some estimates of the GB gas content in irradiated UO2 and MOX fuel can be obtained from thefew microprobe measurements presently available that have been performed on various samples
coming from rods irradiated in French commercial reactors up to 60-65 GWd/tM. In microprobe
analysis, only Xenon in solution or precipitated in micro-bubbles (≤100 nm) within the fuel matrix canbe detected. Microprobe results show that the difference between the detected gas and the calculated
formation increases with burn-up, and is higher than the gas released during the irradiation. Therefore,
the surplus corresponds to the gas accumulated in porosities (as-fabricated pores or pores resulting
from irradiation) and to the gas precipitated into inter and intra-granular micro-bubbles of a large size.
This last part can be neglected, as examinations by optical microscopy (OM) and scanning electronic
microscopy (SEM) do not show significant intra-granular precipitation inside the grains of the fuelmatrix in the range of examined burn-up. Finally, an upper bound of the grain boundary (GB) gas
content (averaged on the pellet) in irradiated fuel can be deduced from the microprobe results, taking
into account the local gas release. Typical results are plotted in Figure 3.1 in fraction of creation, andin cm3 (Xe+Kr) STP/g versus burn-up.

57

Figure 3.1 Grain boundary gas versus pellet burn-up in UO2 and MOX fuel(left: ratio from created gas, right: concentration)

In spite of the large scatter observed in the results, it appears clear that, at similar burn-up levels,
the GB gas concentration is much higher in MOX fuel than in UO2 fuel, mainly in the range of low andmedium burn-up. This relative difference decreases in the high burn-up range, due to the decreasing
influence of clusters in MOX fuel, and to the increasing rim formation in the UO2 fuel. The major partof this GB gas content is contained in the large pores of the irradiated fuel (as-fabricated pores or pores
resulting from irradiation with a strong contribution from the HBS zones). In high burn-up UO2 fuel(60-65 GWd/tM), the contribution of the rim zone to the total GB gas quantity is about 50% (mainly
located in large pores under high pressure − 50 to 100 MPa), and represents approximately 8-10% of
the pellet total retention. In MOX fuel, the major part of GB gas is located in the large over-pressurised
pores inside the (U,Pu)O2 agglomerates. Furthermore, from both “experimental” and “theoretical”
estimations [5], it has been concluded that the GB gas fraction increased with initial Pu enrichment, assoon as the agglomerates have reached the full restructuration threshold.
3.2 State of cladding
The difference in operating temperature between PWR and BWR has a significant effect on thestate of cladding in the two types of reactors. It is therefore appropriate to treat PWR and BWR
cladding separately.
3.2.1 PWR cladding
In early years PWR cladding was almost exclusively fabricated from Zircaloy-4. Recently
however Zircaloy-4 has largely been replaced by Zr-Nb-Sn (Zirlo) and Zr-Nb (M5) alloys In VVER
reactors similar Russian alloys (E635 and E110) are also used. The Nb alloyed claddings arecharacterised by significantly lower corrosion rates than Zircaloy-4 and consequently also lower
hydrogen pickup rates. The main degradation mechanisms to PWR cladding include uniform
waterside corrosion, hydriding, and radiation damage.
Uniform waterside corrosion occurs throughout the reactor exposure. Uniform corrosion in thepresent context means primarily that the waterside oxide layer is more or less uniform with respect tocircumferential direction; the oxide layer varies in fact strongly with respect to grid span (axial
direction). The corrosion rates depend on many factors including alloy chemistry and thermomechanicaltreatment, coolant chemistry, radiation-induced changes to cladding microchemistry, and irradiation
temperature. For cladding with burn-ups in excess of 50 GWd/t, the oxide thickness can exceed 100 μm
depending on fuel duty, i.e., power and temperature versus time and burn-up.
58

Figure 3.2 PWR fuel state at high burn-up
BWR fuel has a similar state with the exception of the oxide layer
which is thinner and with less total pickup of hydrogen in the metal
Oxi de spal l ati on• Extent of spall ati on• Hydri de preci pi tati on• Bl ister formati on

Hydrogen in Zircal oy• H pickup fracti on(h ydrogen l evel i n clad)• Hydri de orientation• Hydri de radi al distribution(h ydride ri m th ickness

Waterside corrosi on• Corrosi on th i ckness• Hydrogen pi ckup
• Non-uni formi ties
i n oxide th ickness

Cl addi ng i nternal
corrosion (SSC)
Loose fuel pi eces

Large scale pell et cracki ng fromnormal operation• Wi dth of cracks - mi ssi ng fuel• Crack spaci ng
Fuel -cl addi ng ch emi ca l bondi ng• Cl addi ng creepdown & fuel swell i ng
• Compound formation
Radi ati on damage to cl adding• Formati on of di sl ocati on l oops •• Preci pitate evoluti on• Irradiati on creep a nd growth(wall th i nning)

Hi gh er h ydrogencontent i n between
Pel l etConsti tuti ve
properties ch ange
• Strain h ardeni ng• Strain rate h ardeni ng• Deformation local izati on(di sl ocati on ch annel formati on)
Devel opment of rim region• Grain si ze• Bubbl e si ze di stribution• Bubbl e pressure• Total gas i n ri m
• Pu content & sol i d fissi on products

Fission gas i n fuel matrix• Fi ssi on gas amount i n sol ution• Intergranul ar bubbl es• Intragranul ar bubbles• Conducti vi ty degradati on• Fi ssi on gas rel eased during
normal operati on• Porosi ty gas content

The burn-up level at which any given oxide thickness is reached for a given alloy is dependent on
the fuel duty. The more modern alloys such as ZIRLO and M5, can have lower corrosion rates thanstandard Zr-4 and low-Sn Zr-4 at similar burn-up. All of the zirconium alloys examined to date show atransition in corrosion rate when the oxide exceeds a certain thickness (20 to 30 μm in thickness),which indicates a change in corrosion regime, termed breakaway corrosion. Therefore, it is likelythat even the new modern alloys such as ZIRLO will eventually experience breakaway corrosion. The
question with the new modern alloys is the burn-up level at which breakaway corrosion will occur.
A fuel rod that experiences a high fuel duty will experience breakaway corrosion at a lower burn-up
level than a fuel rod with a lower fuel duty. One of the concerns with large oxide thicknesses is the higher
probability of oxide delamination, whereby portions of the oxide layer are detached from the adherentoxide creating an oxide region with worse heat conduction characteristics. Ultimately the detached oxide
can break off (oxide spalling) creating a thinner oxide. The associated temperature gradients created by59

spalling have been shown to influence hydride blister formation in the spalled region [6]. The hydride
blister is brittle, and its presence has been shown to affect overall cladding ductility.
The main concerns associated with excessive uniform corrosion are: (a) potential for oxide
spalling resulting in hydride blisters, which affect the overall cladding ductility, (b) loss of thermal
conductivity, (c) non-uniform wall thinning (non-uniform oxide), (d) overall wall thinning. and (e)excessive hydrogen uptake and hydriding in general. Excessive levels of oxide layer thickness andhydriding in PWR fuels play major roles in high-burn-up LOCA situations.
Local variations in the degree of oxide thickness, oxide spalling, hydride blisters, metal wall
thinning, and a hydride rim are conducive to a greater circumferential temperature variations during
cladding ballooning under LOCA conditions, which is conducive to a smaller ballooning and smaller
burst opening.
Hydriding occurs as hydrogen is absorbed into the cladding as a result of the cladding uniform
corrosion (roughly 15 to 20% of the hydrogen generated by the corrosion reaction is absorbed into thealloy). Clad H/D pickup is influenced by coolant chemistry (e.g., H concentration), neutron fluence,
coolant/clad temperatures and clad properties [7]. The hydrogen precipitates as hydrides throughout
the cladding thickness at corrosion thicknesses greater than 50 microns. When the overall hydrogenlevel is high enough (>2 000 ppm), the cladding is brittle when tested at operating temperatures.
Lower levels of hydrogen (600-800 ppm) affect cladding ductility at low temperature.
However, lower levels of hydrogen, can also degrade the overall cladding ductility depending on
the hydride distribution. The mobility of hydrogen is high, and its solubility in Zircaloy is very low, sohydrogen will tend to precipitate out in any cold spot formed in the material. For example, there is amuch greater hydride concentration near the surface of the cladding creating a hydride rim with local
hydrogen levels higher than about 1 000 ppm. In addition to being radially localised, the axial
distribution of hydrogen is also non-homogeneous, with greater concentration in the region in-between
the fuel pellets due to the slightly lower heat fluxes and lower temperatures at pellet interfaces.
The main concerns associated with hydriding are: (a) lower ductility and/or embrittlement
resulting from an overall change in constitutive properties, (b) creation of weak spots in cladding
resulting from the formation of a hydride rim, and/or hydride blisters, and (c) a sub-critical crack
growth phenomenon due to precipitation and cracking of hydrides at a loaded crack tip, delayed
hydride cracking (DHC) [8], observed in connection with power ramps.
Radiation damage. When irradiated to 30 GWd/t (corresponding to a fast fluence of ~1022 n/cm2,
E>1 MeV) the cladding suffers an amount of radiation damage calculated at about 20 dpa(displacements per atom) [9]. The dpa level is roughly proportional to the fluence or burn-up, so that
60 GWd/t corresponds to about 40 dpa and 75 GWd/t to 50 dpa. This very high level of displacements
is translated mostly into radiation-induced dislocation loops, both <a> and <c> type that form from theagglomeration of point defects. Although the overall <a> dislocation density saturates after about one
month of reactor irradiation, the <c> type dislocations evolve over a more extended period of time. In
addition there are microchemical changes in the alloy related to irradiation-induced amorphisation anddissolution of intermetallic precipitate, which can change normal corrosion resistance and hydrogen
pickup. However these latter changes are more important at BWR operating temperatures.
The constitutive response of the cladding is also affected by the radiation damage, in particularby the dislocation loops formed under irradiation. The yield stress increases, and the uniform strain
decreases, i.e. the material undergoes hardening and ductility decrease. The increase in dislocation
loop density decreases the strain hardening coefficient of the material. At the microscopic level, theseloops can also influence deformation localisation (dislocation channeling); the effects of these60

microscopic processes on macroscopic deformation and failure are not clear at the moment. There isalso cladding creepdown, which can cause the gap to be closed, creating the conditions for fuel-cladchemical bonding to develop. Another phenomenon related to irradiation creep is bundle bowing due
to excessive compressive forces on the bundle structure.
The main concerns relating to radiation damage are (a) radiation hardening and possible
embrittlement, (b) change of corrosion resistance through microchemical changes, (c) mechanicalproperty changes and (d) deformation localisation (e.g dislocation channeling, possibly leading toeasier axial crack propagation).
However, the impact of these phenomena on the LOCA behaviour is varied. The most importantphenomenon with regard to LOCA is probably hydrogen uptake. Hydrides are rarely observed in theprior beta layer after LOCA-typical slow cool-down and quenching. But redistributed hydrogen atoms
in the beta layer from dissolved hydrides at >1 100°C leads to significantly increased oxygen level inthe prior beta, thereby significantly exacerbating post-quench embrittlement of the cladding. The
presence of a thick oxide itself is probably less of a problem as will be clear later in the present report.
The importance of radiation damage is minimal since most of the damage will have been annealed out
well before the cladding reaches 800°C. Irradiation creep as it affects bundle bowing may have some
impact on clad ballooning and burst behaviour during LOCA, since it changes both the geometry of
the core and the power distribution in the core.
3.2.2 BWR cladding
The cladding material applied in BWRs is Zircaloy-2, mostly in annealed and fully recrystallized
condition with a zirconium-based inner liner, although cold-worked stress relieved material and nonliner applications also exist. The zirconium liner can contain varying amounts of alloy additions,which is intended for post-defect corrosion resistance. Similar to PWR fuel cladding, primary effectsof BWR operation are waterside corrosion, hydriding, and radiation damage.
Cladding corrosion occurs through direct exposure of the cladding outer surface to a hightemperature, highly oxidizing environment enhanced by the radiation field. The effects of cladding
corrosion are wall thinning, increased heat transfer resistance, and cladding hydrogen absorption. In
general, the BWR suppliers have progressively refined the cladding fabrication process to minimise
the occurrence of nodular corrosion, thereby resulting in a more uniform corrosion these days.
Whereas large cladding corrosion occurs typically at higher grid span elevations in PWRs, thecorrosion distributions are generally flatter along the fuel rod length in a BWR, with possible peaking
at the lower elevations. Circumferential variations in cladding oxide layer thickness are observed in
BWRs, but are generally minor in magnitude. Whereas cladding corrosion thicknesses of up to or
greater than 100 μm has been observed in PWRs, BWR cladding corrosion is significantly less,typically less than 50 μm at exposures up to ~62 GWd/MtU peak rod average exposure.
An important consideration is oxide layer cracking, delamination, and spalling. Oxide layer
cracking and delamination can lead to an acceleration in the oxide layer growth rate. Spalled oxide
regions result in a cooler cladding metal temperature during operation than exists under the adjacentunspalled oxide regions. The presence of such “cold spots” can promote redistribution of anyhydrogen absorbed from the cladding outer surface corrosion process, thereby leading to hydride
localisations and even bulk hydride formation (observable as bulges or blisters) in the outer region of
the cladding. Such bulk hydride formation regions are highly embrittled and are often accompaniedwith partial cladding cracks even in the absence of applied loading by the fuel pellets. This is causedby the volume expansion associated with the conversion of zirconium to zirconium hydride. Whereas
significantly accelerated corrosion and oxide layer spalling have been observed in PWRs, similar
conditions are rarely observed in BWR fuels with modern cladding materials.
61

Corrosion localisations have been observed near fuel assembly spacer locations, adjacent toInconel components (typically referred to as “shadow corrosion”). Accelerated localised corrosion,leading to fuel rod failure, has occurred at one BWR with an earlier cladding material type. This typeof corrosion localisation develops relatively quickly, but then remains relatively stable for modern
BWR claddings, at least to exposure levels up to ~62 GWd/MtU
BWRs operate with several water chemistry options: Hydrogen Water Chemistry, Zinc Injection,
and Nobel Metal Chemical Addition. To date, unacceptable changes in the cladding corrosion
performance have not been observed under these water chemistry options.
In summary, for modern BWR cladding, the primary corrosion-related effects are: (1) wall
thinning, (2) decreased heat transfer, and (3) hydrogen pickup.
Hydriding occurs as hydrogen, liberated by the cladding outer surface corrosion process, isabsorbed into the cladding. For a typical BWR cladding, less than 20% of the hydrogen generated by
the corrosion reaction is absorbed by the cladding. This absorbed hydrogen precipitates mostly as
circumferential hydride stringers when the amount of absorbed hydrogen exceeds the solubility level.
Available testing has demonstrated no adverse influence of hydrogen on elevated temperatureirradiated Zircaloy ductility (total elongation) for hydrogen contents up to at least 850 wppm [10]. At
higher hydrogen levels, e. g. in excess of 1 000 ppm, the cladding ductility can be reduced at operating
temperatures. Typically, modern BWR cladding contains <200 wppm hydrogen at ~50 GWd/MtU rod
average exposure. Although higher levels (up to ~600 wppm) have been observed in older cladding
types at elevated exposures (up to ~65 GWd/MtU rod average exposure), even this level is below that
required to significantly affect the cladding mechanical properties.
With the generally lower hydrogen concentration observed in BWR fuel cladding, PWR-like
dense hydride rims or extreme localisations at pellet-pellet interfaces are not typically observed,
although the tendency of hydride accumulations toward the cladding outer surface or near pellet-pellet
interfaces has been observed.
Another consideration, although not typically observed in either PWR or BWR applications is thedevelopment of radially oriented hydrides, which, in significant concentration, could affect the
cladding ductility near operating temperatures.
In summary, for BWR fuel, the primary concerns related with cladding hydriding are: (1) the
impact on cladding mechanical properties, and (2) hydride localisations conducive to producing weak,damage-susceptible regions. However, these effects have not been found to be significant for thehydrogen contents observed in modern BWR cladding to date. Sub-critical crack growth due to the
DHC phenomenon has been observed in BWR cladding in connection with power ramping.
Radiation damage to the cladding material occurs as a direct consequence of exposure to fastneutrons. Radiation damage is manifested as radiation-induced dislocation loops, both <a> and <c>type that form from the agglomeration of point defects. Although the overall <a> dislocation density
saturates very early in life, the <c> type dislocations evolve over a more extended period of time. The
effect of this damage is a strengthening of the material, with a corresponding reduction in ductility,
and increased irradiation-induced stress-free growth (which occurs in the absence of an applied stress).
Additionally, microchemical changes occur as irradiation induces amorphisation and dissolution ofintermetallic precipitates, which can alter the mechanical properties, corrosion resistance and possibly
also the hydrogen pickup of the cladding material.
In addition to irradiation-induced growth of the cladding material, irradiation also induces
cladding creep in response to the applied fuel rod internal-external pressure difference and pellet
expansion loadings.
62

In summary, the primary considerations relative to cladding radiation damage are (1) radiation
hardening and the corresponding impact on mechanical properties, and (2) deformation caused byirradiation-induced growth and creep.
Out of these factors, only hydriding and hydrogen in solution are expected to have any significancefor the LOCA behaviour of BWR cladding. In an unlikely case that fresh or low-burn-up BWR fuel isheated to a sufficiently high temperature so that cladding ballooning and burst occur, the Zr liner may
exacerbate breakaway corrosion and hydrogen absorption from the inner surface near the burst opening.
3.3 High burn-up CANDU fuel (contributed by M. Floyd and S. Sunder)
A brief description of the design of CANDU reactors is given in Section 2.4 of this report.
CANDU reactors use UO2, containing natural abundance of uranium isotopes, as fuel. Althoughnormal nominal burn-up in CANDU reactors is lower than that in light water reactors (e.g., the burnup of reference CANDU fuel for the Canadian nuclear fuel waste management program is~190 MWh/kg U, i.e., ~8 GWd/t U1 [11]), considerable work has been carried out to study the
behaviour of CANDU fuel at higher burn-ups. Significant experience exists with CANDU fuelirradiated to extended burn-ups up to 1200 MWh/kg HE2 (i.e., 50 GWd/t HE) including natural UO2
power reactor fuel and experimental fuel containing UO2, MOX and thoria pellets. Results of thestudies on high burn-up CANDU fuel have been documented by Floyd [7] and the following summaryof studies on CANDU fuel at extended burn-ups is based on his paper.
It was observed that the fission-gas release (FGR) from the pellets to the free void of the fuelelement is a key performance parameter at extended burn-up. Stress-corrosion cracking related defects
may be observed due to overpressurisation when FGR exceeds 100 mL in standard 37-element fuel.
Other fuel parameters such as endcap closure-weld geometry may also influence defect thresholds.
The means to avoid gas overpressurisation at a given burn-up include increasing element internal void
space (e.g., plenums and/or modified pellet geometry), and lowering element linear powers (throughgreater subdivision of the bundle; i.e., CANFLEX [12]).
UO2 microstructural changes follow a similar trend to that of FGR. An apparently benign rim
structure may begin to develop in CANDU fuels irradiated to >500 MWh/kg HE.
CANLUB3 retention is typically higher at <350 MWh/kg HE, but typically declines above thisburn-up, especially at >500 MWh/kg HE. As such, diminished CANLUB retention does not appear tobe an issue for fuel that experiences power ramps up to 350 MWh/kg HE. The waterside sheath (fuelcladding) corrosion rate above 450 MWh/kg HE is approximately twice that observed below
450 MWh/kg HE. Nevertheless, corrosion layers up to 30 μm appear to be benign. Internal sheathcorrosion is inhibited by the presence of the CANLUB interlayer.
Large variations are observed in sheath (fuel cladding) H/D concentrations, suggesting thatparameters in addition to burn-up (irradiation time) have a dominant effect on H/D pickup. The H/Dlevels observed in extended-burn-up fuel are not, of themselves, detrimental to fuel performance,
although they may influence stress-corrosion cracking (SCC) thresholds.
Sheath strain is primarily influenced by fuel power, but also increases with increasing burn-up due
to pellet fission-product swelling. Midpellet residual sheath strains are typically limited to 1.0%, but may
increase beyond this value when internal gas volumes exceed 100 mL (in standard 37-element fuel).
Pellet geometry/density and as-fabricated pellet-sheath diametral clearance also influence sheath strain.
1.
2.
3.

24 MWh/kg HE = 1 GWd/t HE.
HE stands for Heavy Element, e.g., U, Pu, Th.
CANLUB is a “graphite-based” coating on the inner bore of the fuel sheath.

63Extended-burn-up fuel cycles will require power ramps at burn-ups >150 MWh/kg HE, where
failure margins are smaller than at <150 MWh/kg HE. Tests are underway to better define power-ramp
defect thresholds at burn-ups >150 MWh/kg HE, and to confirm the effectiveness of advanced
coatings and optimised fuel element designs.
In summary, AECL has significant experience with CANDU fuel behaviour at extended burn-up.
By understanding the parameters that affect fuel behaviour at extended burn-up, confidence exists indesigning fuel that will achieve the same excellent performance experienced with natural uranium fuelpresently operating in CANDU reactors. AECL has a number of fuel irradiation tests underway thatwill further elucidate extended burn-up fuel behaviour, and confirm both individual and integrated
design features for extended burn-up application.
3.4 References
1.

Boyack, B.E., et al., “Phenomenon Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRTs) for Loss-ofCoolant Accidents in Pressurised and Boiling Water Reactors Containing High Burn-up Fuel”,
Los Alamos National Laboratory, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-6744, LAUR-00-5079, December 2001
2. Guèrin, Y., “In pile and out-of-pile burst release of fission gases”, EHPG Meeting, 2002,
Storefjell, Norway, OECD Halden Reactor Project.
3. Pontillon, Y., et al., “Experiemental and theoretical investigation of fisson gas release from UO2
up to 70 GWd/t under simulated LOCA type conditions: the GASPARD program”, 2004
International Meeting on Light Water Reactor Fuel Performance, 2004, Orlando, Florida,
American Nuclear Society, pp. 490-499.
4. Une, K., Kashibe, S., and Takagi, A., “Fission gas release behavior from high burn-up UO2 fuelsat rapid heating conditions”, ANS-Water Reactor Fuel Performance Meeting, 2005, Kyoto, Japan,
American Nuclear Society.
5. Lemoine, F., et al., “The role of grain boundary gases in high burn-up fuel under reactivity
initiated accident”, International Topical Meeting on Fission Gas Behaviour in Water Reactor
Fuel, 2000, Cadarache, France.
6. Garde, A.M., Smith, G.P., and Pirtek, R.C., “Effects of Hydride Precipitate Localization and
Neutron Fluence on the Ductility of Irradiated Zircaloy-4”, 11th International Symposium on Zr
in the Nuclear Industry, 1995, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, ASTM STP-1295, ASTM, pp. 407-430.
7. Floyd, M.R., “Extended-burn-up CANDU fuel performance”, 7th CANDU Fuel Conference,
2001, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, pp. 5A-1 to 5A-20.
8. Pettersson, K., Efsing, P., and Kese, K., “Studies of delayed hydride cracking of Zircaloy
cladding”, 9th International Symposium on Environmental Degradation of Materials in Nuclear
Power Systems-Water Reactors, 1999, Newport Beach, Minerals, Metals and Materials
Society/AIME, pp. 1201-1210.
9. “Standard Practice for Neutron Radiation Damage Simulation by Charged-Particle Irradiation”,
Standard Practice E521-96. 1996, American Society for Testing and Materials.
10. Wisner, S.B. and Adamson, R.B., “Combined Effects of Radiation Damage and Hydrides on the
Ductility of Zircaloy-2”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 185(1998), pp. 33-49.
11. Sunder, S., “Calculation of radiation dose rates in water layer in contact with used CANDU UO2fuel”, Nuclear Technology, 122(1998), pp. 211-221.
12. Floyd, M.R. and Harrison, N.F., “Recent irradiations and PIE supporting the development ofadvanced CANDU UO2 fuel technology”, 9th CANDU Fuel Conference, 2005, Belleville,
Ontario, Canada.
64

4. PHENOMENA THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSEDBY EXPERIMENTS AND MODELLINGAs should be clear from the previous sections the different phenomena involved in the heat-up,
cooldown and quench during a LOCA transient are much more complex than one might first think.
This complexity comes from the changes of properties of the zirconium cladding alloys which takeplace during the transient. In the following description of the types of damage to fuel and cladding
which must be addressed by experiment and modelling, they are most easily followed as they takeplace during the transient.
4.1 Types of damage to fuel and cladding
Typically a LOCA transient will start with the fuel under normal operating conditions. The
cladding then has a temperature slightly above 300°C. At the pellet cladding interface the temperature
is about 400°C with an approximately parabolic temperature distribution in the pellet. The centre
temperature in the pellet is perhaps 1 200-2 000°C depending on the local power level. At the start of
the LOCA, the fissions quickly cease due to the loss of moderator and insertion of control rods. With
the loss of coolant, the cladding will start to heat up. The stored energy in the pellet redistributes
towards a more flat radial temperature profile but heatup still will occur due the decay heat of the fuel.
The initial heat-up of the cladding is mainly due to the redistribution of heat, the stored energy of thepellet, but in the longer term, it is the decay heat which is responsible for the heating of the cladding.
During the heat-up the pressure in the cladding will increase due to heatup of the mixture of thefill gas and the fission gases. At the same time the strength of the cladding is reduced and eventually
the cladding will start do deform plastically, it will start to creep. It is thus necessary to have a goodknowledge of the strength and creep properties of zirconium alloys and how they depend on alloy
composition and other factors. There are however several complications along the way and these makeboth analytical modelling and interpretations of experimental results difficult. The first complication isthat zirconium alloys generally are very anisotropic when they are in the hexagonal α phase condition.
The typical anistropy of a cladding tube is such that, when the diameter is increased, the material
shrinks in the axial direction. For an isotropic material, the diametral expansion by plastic deformation
has no effect on other dimensions of a tube. The importance of the shortening comes when there is a
non-uniform temperature distribution around a tube. It will deform more on the hotter side and thus
shorten more on that side which of course leads to bending of the tube. This phenomenon will be
discussed in more detail later but obviously, a good understanding of the phenomenon is central to a
successful modelling of a LOCA event.
The second complication is the phase transformation which takes place at temperatures around
800°C and above. Pure zirconium transforms from the hexagonal closed packed phase α to the body
centred cubic β phase at ~860°C. However, commercial zirconium alloys generally contain βstabilizing elements which means that the transformation temperature is reduced. It also means that thetransformation takes place over a temperature interval rather than at a fixed temperature. In thetemperature interval, the volume fraction of β increases from zero to 100%. Since β has different creep
properties from α, the creep during the transformation must be estimated by some law of mixtures. In
65

fact, things may be even more complicated. It has been shown that in the α+β field zirconium alloys
have displayed superplastic behaviour [1], an indication that a deformation mode unique to the
mixture may be at work rather than a combination of the creep mechanisms of the two phases.
Somewhat paradoxically though experiments on cladding tubes result in a ductility minimum in the α
to β transformation range [2]. The type of damage which primarily results from the creep is rupture of
the cladding. Quite clearly a number of different phenomena must be mastered in order to predict the
instance of rupture.
In about the same temperature range as when the material starts to transform to β, oxidation starts
to become important. The oxidation reactions are:
H2O + 2e-→H2 + O2- on the oxide surface or somewhere in the oxide
andZr → Zr4+ + 4e- at the oxide-metal interface.
The oxide is understoichiometric and the oxidation rate is controlled by oxygen diffusion into theoxide. The hydrogen is released into the outer environment and it is this hydrogen which may lead tohydrogen explosions if it is not taken care of by recombination equipment. Some of the hydrogen may
be absorbed into the cladding where it will contribute to embrittlement of the cladding at low
temperatures.
The main source of embrittlement however is the absorption of oxygen into the cladding. As canbe seen in Figure 1.4, oxygen stabilises the α phase. This means that the β phase adjacent to the oxide
will retransform to α and an α layer will start to grow on the β as can be seen in Figure 1.1. The
dissolved oxygen embrittles the α phase and the ductility goes down to zero above a certain level ofoxygen content. The thickness of the oxygen-stabilised α layer is controlled by the diffusion rate ofoxygen in the α layer. As can be seen in Figure 1.4, the β phase also dissolves some oxygen. This
oxygen is also important to the ductility of the cladding since the β retransforms to α during cooling andif the oxygen content in the β is too high the retransformed β will also have zero ductility. Anothercontributor to the embrittlement of the cladding are the cracks in the oxide which serve as crack
initiators for the underlying α phase. In case hydrogen has been absorbed, it will also affect ductility
both through an intrinsic effect and through an increase of oxygen solubility in the β phase.
Another important effect of oxidation is that it strengthens the cladding so that the creep rate
slows down in cases where the cladding tubes have not yet ruptured. For some slow LOCA transients
this can lead to a new type of low ductile clad rupture. Cracks in the oxide may lead to a concentrationof strain to the underlying α + β layers so that these layers will deform faster than the oxide can reformat the bottom of the crack. The final result is that the metal is drawn out to a chisel point and a crack
has formed in the cladding.
In the analysis of what happens to the cladding in a LOCA transient it is also important toconsider the state of the cladding at the start of the transient. A cladding with a thick oxide layer canpotentially behave differently from a cladding with a thin oxide layer. With a thick layer the initialhigh temperature oxidation may be slower. However, the reason why the oxide layer can become thickduring normal operation is that the outer layers of the oxide are fairly permeable for water molecules
so it is doubtful whether this protective effect is significant. Perhaps the most important effect of a
thick initial layer is the reduced metal thickness and the hydrogen absorbed in association with theformation of the thick oxide layer. Cracks in a thick initial oxide layer may also influence the rupture
behaviour during the LOCA transient.

66

When zirconium oxidizes significant heat is released. At high temperatures, when oxidation isfast the heat from oxidation can be significant in comparison with the decay heat in the fuel. At
1 200°C the heat generation from a 75 µm thick oxide is about 2 W/cm which is comparable to the
decay heat at the time the oxide has reached this thickness. If higher temperatures were to be reached arunaway oxidation might start as the result of the heat generation from oxidation.
The behaviour and possible damage modes of the fuel are much less complex than for the
cladding. During normal operation the fuel cracks so that a pellet is actually a conglomerate of several
mm-sized fragments. If the cladding balloons, it is obvious that there is a possibility that thesefragments move and for instance fill the additional space in a balloon. At high burn-up however
several new phenomena are encountered which may or may not have an effect on the LOCA
behaviour. Quite frequently, the pellet will bond with the cladding, a phenomenon which gives some
limitation to the movement of pellet fragments, but it may also affect the ballooning behaviour.
Another high burn-up effect is the increasing amount of fission gases in the fuel which might result inbubble swelling of the fuel if it reaches high temperatures. The last burn-up effect which might havean effect on LOCA behaviour is the so-called rim effect. Due to the resonance capture of neutrons in238
U large amounts of fissile, Pu is formed in the rim of the pellet which therefore receives a locallyvery high burn-up. This gives the fuel material special properties. Whether or not those properties
have an impact on the LOCA behaviour is still uncertain.
4.2 Changes of temperature and geometry with influence on core coolability
A LOCA will lead to a global temperature increase in the core of the reactor, which is later
terminated by a cool down phase. This might lead to temperature gradients which in turn lead tobending of fuel bundles and thermal stresses due to differences in thermal expansion between for
instance control rod guide tubes and fuel rods. A recent analysis of such cases can be found in [3].
Impaired coolability could result from plastic deformation of the cladding, leading to constrictionof the sub-channels between rods, or from fragmentation of the cladding through oxidation andembrittlement. The coolability of a deformed assembly is a key question for the post-LOCA phase of apipe rupture accident and has thus been subject to extensive research. Parts of this research aredescribed in the following sections based on a recent review by C. Grandjean [4-5].
4.2.1 The FEBA and SEFLEX programmes
The FEBA (Flooding Experiments with Blocked Arrays) programme [6] involved performing
separate effects tests under different reflood conditions (reflood rate, system pressure and feedwatertemperature) with the specific aim of quantifying the effects of:••

A partial blockage in a group of fuel rods, with the presence of a by-pass region or not (nondeformed fuel rods at the blockage periphery) and
The presence of spacer grids, upon cladding/ coolant heat exchanges in the vicinity of theblockage.

upon cladding/coolant heat exchanges in the vicinity of the blockage.
The SEFLEX (fuel rod Simulator Effects in Flooding Experiments) programme [7-8] was designed
to evaluate the sensitivity of FEBA-type reflood test results on fuel rod and blockage simulation
technologies. This analysis was based on a limited number of tests performed under conditions identical tothose in corresponding FEBA tests, thus enabling the immediate comparison of results.
The FEBA and SEFLEX tests were performed in the same facility at the KFZ Karlsruhe,
Germany. Both experiments used 5×5 rod arrays enclosed in a stainless steel shroud with a large heat67

capacity to simulate the thermal environment of surrounding fuel rods. The rods were 3.9 m long andheld by 7 spacer grids. The rod internal heaters in the FEBA bundle tests were “solid-type” simulators,
each composed of a spiral heating element embedded in a magnesium oxide insulator, itself tightly
encased in 1 mm thick stainless steel cladding. The heater rods used in the SEFLEX tests were themore representative fuel rod electric simulators used in the REBEKA programme described in Section
5.3.2.1. Figure 4.1 illustrates the main features of the fuel bundles in the two experiments.
Figure 4.1 FEBA 5×5 bundle with 90% blockage,left and SEFLEX 5×5 bundle with 90% blockage, rightThe blockage in the FEBA bundles was simulated with hollow stainless steel sleeves with arelatively large wall thickness, 1 mm for 62% blockage and 1 to 2.35 mm for 90% blockage. In the
SEFLEX tests on the other hand the blockage was simulated by deforming the Zircaloy tubes in asuitable mould. Thus the wall thickness in the balloons was representative of that of real balloons.
4.2.1.1 FEBA test results
The FEBA test matrix is shown in Figure 4.2 where each of the 8 test series correspond to a
specific blockage scenario. Tests were performed using the same experimental procedure:••

Reaching initial steady-state operating conditions in stagnant steam with the required power
to obtain the desired temperature at the bundle mid-plane, between 600 and 800°C.
Establishing reflood at a constant forced rate with a power history defined according to the
decay law ANS71 +20%, 40 seconds after reactor shutdown.

Within the same series, the test parameters included: reflood rate, coolant inlet temperature andsystem outlet pressure. A pressure of 4 bar and a reflood rate of 3.8 cm/s were chosen as reference
conditions.

68

The main FEBA test result was that temperature in the blockage generally was lower than in theby-pass even with 90% blockage. This observation also applied to the cases of double blockage. In
cases without a by-pass, the coolability was significantly increased.
Figure 4.2 FEBA 5×5 bundle geometries of test series I through VIII

Even though the FEBA test results did not reveal any alarming behaviour impairing thecoolability of a blocked fuel assembly under reflood conditions (no detrimental behaviour with a 62%
blockage ratio and only a 40°C penalty upon the maximum temperature downstream from a 90%
blockage), the programme could be criticised for the poor representativity of tests in comparison tofuel rods subjected to realistic PWR conditions, in which clad ballooning, proportionally reduces the
cladding thickness, hence thermal inertia. It was also pointed out that superimposing sleeves on heaterrods induces a delay in rewetting immediately downstream from the blockage due to the axial thermal
conduction on rod cladding from the hot region located under the sleeve. These issues led to thecarrying out of the SEFLEX tests with realistic blockage design.
4.2.1.2 SEFLEX test results
The SEFLEX tests were divided into four series:
●
●
●

●

Series 1 was performed on a blockage-free bundle containing 7 spacer grids; rods werepressurised with helium. This series of reference tests is to be compared with the FEBA series I.
Series 2 is a variation of series 1 using argon-pressurised fuels rods.
Series 3 involves a 90% blockage ratio near the mid-plane elevation in a 3×3 cluster in thecorner of the 5×5 array, with the mid-plane spacer grid having been removed. Fuel rods werepressurised with helium. This series is to be compared with series III of the FEBA
programme.
Series 4 is a variation of series 3 using argon-pressurised fuel rods.

Fuel rods were pressurised with helium or argon in order to study the effect of the gap thermal
conductivity on the reflood behaviour: helium is the filling gas for fresh fuel rods whereas argon
thermal conductivity roughly simulates that of the fission gases mixed with helium found in high burnup fuel rods. The internal pressure of rods was set at 1 bar above test pressure conditions.
Figure 4.3 compares temperature variations measured at the mid-plane of the 90% blockage for a
FEBA test (Plot A) and two SEFLEX tests, with helium-pressurised (Plot B) and argon-pressurised(Plot C) rods. All three tests were performed under the same reflood conditions (3.8 cm/s, 2.1 bar).
Concerning the FEBA test, the sleeve temperature is lower than the cladding temperature on a by-pass69

rod at the same level for a period of 300 s, after which it becomes higher until rewetting that occurs at
385 s, approximately 30 s after that on the by-pass rod. As for the SEFLEX tests, ballooned cladding
temperatures are always lower than those of the by-pass rod and moreover, cladding rewetting occurs
at a considerably earlier stage – around 15 s – than it does for a by-pass rod, occurring between 130 to
150 s. This difference in behaviour can be explained by the much lower thermal capacity of the
SEFLEX balloons in comparison to the FEBA sleeves, as well as greater thermal decoupling from theheater rod due to a larger gap. After balloon rewetting, the temperature of the heater sheath underneaththe balloon remains high, particularly for the argon-pressurised rod, due to the high thermal resistancein the 2.3 mm wide gap; this had already been observed on the FEBA test rod (Plot A), with however anarrower steam-filled gap (∼0.8 mm).
Figure 4.3 Temperatures measured in the midplane of a 90% blockage andin the blockage by-pass of FEBA and SEFLEX rod bundles

70

The SEFLEX programme results illustrate that – within the limited range of the selected test
conditions – better cooldown and significantly earlier cladding rewetting occur within and downstream
from the blockage in comparison to the by-pass or during a blockage-free test.
However, it would have been beneficial that the SEFLEX test matrix had included blockage tests
performed under severe reflood conditions: 2 cm/s reflood rate, 2 bar pressure and inlet temperature ofabout 100°C. Such tests would have made it possible to evaluate the effect of favourable elements(low thermal inertia of the cladding or balloon, low conductance with the heater rod) under the mostadverse thermohydraulic conditions, particularly taking into account the trends observed in FEBA and
THETIS tests which partially met these conditions.
Concerning the simulation of a blockage for which the heater elements remain unchanged in theballoons and non-deformed regions, SEFLEX test results tend to highlight the marked conservatism of
FEBA test results. In contrast, the marked difference between comparable test results from the two
programmes seems to indicate that a high coupling between the heat source and the ballooned
cladding – such as what can be found in a reactor situation for a balloon filled with relocated fuelfragments – might significantly impair the coolability of a blockage formed by such balloons incomparison to a scenario without fuel relocation. This question cannot be correctly investigated byextrapolating FEBA or SEFLEX test results and therefore requires performing specific tests.
4.2.2 THETIS programme
The THETIS programme was carried out by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority(UKAEA) at the Atomic Energy Establishment in Winfrith. This programme involved conducting a
set of thermohydraulic tests on an assembly containing 49 full-length fuel rod simulators with a severe
blockage of 90% [9] or 80% [10-11] over a length of 20 cm.
Four different types of experiments were performed:
1)
2)
3)
4)

Single-phase (nitrogen) flow heat transfer tests.
Forced reflood tests.
Gravity reflood tests.
Level swell tests.

Forced reflood test results, being the greatest in number and providing analytical information on
the cooling of a partially blocked assembly, only are discussed by Grandjean in [5]. Gravity reflood
test results are reviewed in [2] and show similar results in terms of blockage coolability, to forced
reflood test results conducted under comparable initial conditions, which justifies the choice of forced
reflood tests for the study of partially blocked assembly cooling.
The THETIS test assembly consisted of a 7×7 rod array with a 4×4 group of rods containing theblockage region. The assembly was enclosed in a square shroud tube with an inside width of 115.5 mm
and a thickness of 6.5 mm. The fuel rod simulators, of SGHWR-size (12.2 mm in diameter), had aheated length of 3.58 m and were held in a set of 7 spacer grids. These fuel rod simulators were solidtype electric simulators similar to FEBA test rods.
Ballooning of the rod cladding was simulated by superimposing a pre-shaped Inconel sleeve. The
maximum blocked region extended over 200 mm, with entry and exit tapers, 200 mm and 50 mm longrespectively, connecting the circular rod section with the sleeve square section. The cladding balloons
therefore occupied almost a complete grid interval. The sleeve thickness in the maximum deformed
region was 0.3 mm, which is comparable to that of a real cladding balloon.

71

The most important results of the THETIS experiments can be summarised as follows:
The series of forced reflood tests simulating a 90% blockage with a pressure of 2 bar and an inlet
temperature of 90°C produced the following observations:••With a 3 cm/s reflood rate, the blockage was found to be coolable, with the peak blockage
temperature not exceeding the peak by-pass temperature by more than 60°C.
With a 2 cm/s reflood rate, the maximum blockage temperature rose above the facility
operating limit, which made it necessary to reduce power before the complete cooling of theblockage was achieved. It may therefore be believed that these test conditions do not permit
suitable blockage cooling.

THETIS test results seem to imply that a long 90% blockage may no longer be coolable at aconstant reflood rate below 2 to 3 cm/s.
When comparing results of tests performed with 90% and 80% blockages under similar
conditions, it became apparent that an 80% blockage is more efficiently cooled at high reflood rates.
However, differences tended to be minor, sometimes proving to be even better for the 90% blockagewith intermediate reflood rates that are most relevant to reactor safety analysis. These results therefore
reveal that the blockage ratio of 90% – considered as an upper bound value of the flow blockage ratio
possibly obtained under a LOCA with a fresh fuel assembly – does not necessarily represent the mostpenalising case in terms of coolability for extended axial deformations such as those simulated in the
THETIS experiments.
4.2.3 FLECHT SEASET programme
The FLECHT SEASET programme (Full Length Emergency Cooling Heat Transfer – Separate
Effects and System Effects Tests) [12] was an extensive programme that was launched in 1977 incooperation between USNRC, EPRI and Westinghouse. The programme’s main objective was toimprove understanding of the complex thermohydraulic phenomena occurring during a hypothetical
LOCA scenario. In the short term, programme results were to be used to identify excessive
conservatisms in licensing requirements.
The FLECHT SEASET programme part dealing with blocked assembly cooling involved threemain tasks:•••

Performing tests on a 21-rod array to determine the effects of different blockage
configurations and geometries upon reflood heat transfer.
Performing tests on a 163-rod array to evaluate the effect of a large flow by-pass under themost severe heat transfer conditions observed in the 21-rod bundle test series.
Analysing results and developing associated models with the COBRA-TF code.

The average blockage ratios used were no higher than 62% in the most detrimental coplanar
configuration which had particularly short balloons, 60 mm in length with a cosine profile. Therefore,
results of these tests cannot be compared to test results with high blockage ratios from previously
discussed programmes. In [5] Grandjean limits the discussion mainly to the tests with 21-rod
assemblies; results of 163-rod tests are discussed in the extended review [2]. Table 4.1 shows the
6 blockage configurations used in the 21-rod tests with appropriate comments.
The test assembly was composed of 21 full-length heater rods, with a diameter of 9.5 mm and aheated length of 3.05 m, held in 8 spacer grids and including 4 triangular solid fillers. The assembly
was housed in a stainless steel cylindrical shroud, with an inside diameter of 6.82 mm and a thicknessof 4 mm.
72

Table 4.1 Blockage shapes and configurations tested in the FLECHT SEASET 21-Rod bundle
Test
Configuration Description
Comments
SeriesA
No blockage on the rods
This configuration served as a reference.
B
Short concentric sleeve, coplanar blockage on 9 This series provided for both blockage effect andcentre rods. Maximum strain = 32.6%
some by-pass effects.
C
Short concentric sleeve, coplanar blockage on This series was the easiest to analyze since it
provided no flow by-pass effects with maximum
all 21 rods.
flow blockage effect at one axial plane.
Maximum strain = 32.6%
D
Short concentric sleeve, non-coplanar blockage This test series examined a non-coplanar blockage
on all 21 rods. Maximum strain = 32.6%
distribution and was comparable to series C.
E
Long non-concentric sleeve, non-coplanar This test series permitted a one-to-one comparison
with series D in which all rods were blocked.
blockage on all 21 rods.
Comparison of series D and E with unblocked data
Maximum strain = 36%
indicated the worst shape.
F
Test series E with increased sleeve strain, non- This test series increased the blockage effect relative
coplanar blockage on all 21 rods.
to series E.
Maximum strain = 44%

The choice of 36% strain as the most representative value for the non-concentric sleeves was
based on results from ORNL and REBEKA burst tests. The orientation of bulges for non-concentric
sleeves was based on known effects of temperature variations in a bundle. Figure 4.4 illustrates theaxial distributions of bundle-wide blockage ratio for configurations C, D, E and F, all with a sleeve on
all 21 fuel rods. As expected, configuration C (coplanar concentric) produces the highest blockage
ratio (62%), whereas the non-coplanar configurations barely reach a maximum bundle blockage ratioof 30%, even if the local blockage in a specific sub-channel can reach much higher values (90%).
Figure 4.4 Bundle-wide blockage and axial distributions
for FLECHT-SEASET configurations C, D, E and F

In total, 87 forced reflood tests and 10 gravity reflood tests were conducted. Forced reflood tests
were used to study the separate effects of variations upon the different test parameters:•

Reflood rate:from 1.27 cm/s (0.5 in./s) to 15.2 cm/s (6 in./s).
73

•
•
•

Pressure:
Inlet fluid temperature sub-cooling:
Initial peak linear power:

from 1.4 bar to 2.8 bar.
22°C (40°F) and 78°C (140°F).
from 0.89 kW/m to 2.57 kW/m.

The same set of test conditions were used for each configuration.
Figure 4.5 a and b compares the temperature variations for a central and a peripheral rod,
respectively, in the three configurations: no-blockage, co-planar blockage with and without by-pass.
Figure 4.5 Rod temperatures for unblocked and coplanar configurationsb) Peripheral roda) Central rod

Following a short period of about 15 s after flood during which temperature variations appear
indistinguishable – corresponding to the start of boiling at the assembly bottom – the temperature riseslows down in blockage configurations, particularly in the configuration without by-pass. Thisdecrease in the temperature rise results from cooling generated by liquid droplets carried in the steam
flow, which is even more pronounced when this flow is deprived of a by-pass. For the central rod, thedifference in maximum temperatures approaches 100°C between the blockage-free configuration andthe blockage configuration without by-pass, and about half that value between the blockage-free
configuration and the blockage configuration with by-pass.
For the non coplanar blockages the temperatures were generally lower in the blocked region
compared to the unblocked configuration, with the exception of the short balloons for which there waslittle difference between the temperatures.
The main conclusion derived from the 163-rod array test results was that the beneficial effect of
the blockage upon the increase in heat transfer remains sufficiently dominant, at least at the beginningof the transient. This compensates for the detrimental effect of the flow by-pass and produces lower
maximum temperatures in comparison to those obtained in a blockage-free configuration.
The FLECHT SEASET 21-rod array test results – backed up by FEBA 25-rod array test results –highlighted the importance of considering the two-phase nature of the flow and the considerable
influence of the liquid droplets field via:••

The entrainment of droplets in the steam flux even at low reflood rates (2.5 cm/s), which areswept into the blockage region when they have sufficient inertia.
The shattering of these droplets on balloon surfaces, creating finer droplets, more easily
evaporated, hence increasing steam de-superheating and surface heat transfer both in anddownstream from the blockage.
74

4.2.4 Conclusions from the programmes on cooling of deformed bundles
The following conclusions, with associated pending questions, were drawn by C. Grandjean in [5].
Vast experimental programmes have been devoted to answering the question of coolability underpostulated LOCA conditions of an assembly containing a partial blockage. All of these programmes
have focused on large break LOCA scenarios and more particularly on blockage cooling under reflood
conditions. Examination of these main programmes has helped establish a more global understandingof the physical processes involved in such a situation.
4.2.4.1 Main results from the experimental programmes
Temperature variations in and downstream from a blockage region in a fuel rod assembly resulting
from cladding deformation during a LOCA transient are generally conditioned by heat transfers taking
place at the beginning of the reflood phase with two-phase mist flow conditions. A blockage induces
antagonistic effects whose relative significance depends on the geometrical conditions of the blockage
and its by-pass, as well as the thermohydraulic conditions of the reflood. These effects result from thefollowing physical phenomena:•

Reduction of the flow passage in the blockage leads to flow diversion towards the by-pass,therefore reducing the mass flow in blockage sub-channels. For sufficiently long blockages(≥200 mm), the reduction in the steam flow is approximately proportional to the reduction in
the cross section area. This reduction in coolant flow therefore tends to restrict blockage
coolability.

•

However, in a two-phase flow, the inertia of droplets favours their penetration of the blockage,
particularly if the quench front is sufficiently far off to have permitted their acceleration in thesteam flow. Inside the blockage, the liquid droplets are dispersed due to their impact on theblockage surfaces, fragmented and re-entrained in the form of finer droplets, whichsignificantly increases heat transfer with steam. This de-superheating of steam, associated with
the increase in turbulence, improves the coolability of the blockage surfaces.

•

At the blockage outlet, the deceleration of the steam flow in the widening section can cause
bigger droplets to fall under gravity onto the hot blockage surfaces, thereby leading todispersion and evaporation in steam jets, which once again leads to an accentuated cooling in
the region.

It must be noted however that though it seems that blockages of significant ratios (90%) but ofmoderate lengths (<10 cm) do not create any particular problems in terms of coolability, it should not
be assumed, as one might be tempted to do considering FEBA and SEFLEX test results, that a 90%
blockage is always coolable. It has also been demonstrated that the maximum blockage ratio of 90%
does not necessarily represent the most penalising case in terms of coolability for axially extended
deformations.
4.2.4.2 Pending questions
In conclusion, it is important to underline the fact that all results and trends discussed inGrandjean’s review were drawn from out-of-pile tests performed on assemblies containing electric fuelrod simulators. The fixed heated elements in these simulators cannot be used to simulate a possible
accumulation of fuel in the balloons (fuel relocation) as was demonstrated in in-pile tests performed onirradiated fuel rods. Furthermore, the significant difference between comparable FEBA and SEFLEX
test results seems to indicate that significant thermal coupling between the heat source and the75ballooned cladding – as may exist in a clad balloon full of relocated fuel fragments – is susceptible ofsignificantly hindering the coolability of a blockage with such balloons, in comparison to a case wherefuel relocation does not occur. This question cannot be correctly investigated by extrapolating FEBA or
SEFLEX test results. The effect of fuel relocation (leading to a local accumulation of power and quasiclosure of the gap in the blockage) upon the blockage coolability was not explored in any existing tests
and therefore remains to be investigated in specific tests. Such tests should be conducted preferentially,
as in those discussed above, on rod arrays bearing pre-shaped deformed regions, but with taking
account of a local increase in power density and a reduction in gap width to simulate the relocation offuel in the balloons.
4.3 Radiological consequences
Even after a successfully terminated large break LOCA transient, where all safeguard systems
have worked as planned, a large number of fuel rods will have failed. Large amounts of radioactivity
will have reached the containment in the form of gases or particulate aerosols. From a regulatory pointof view some of this radioactivity will leak out of the containment and reach the environment outside
the nuclear plant where it will cause a dose burden to the public. For calculation of the doses it has tobe assumed that the containment leak rate is the highest permissible rate stated in the technicalspecifications of the plant [13-16]. Other pathways out of the containment must also be considered likethe systems for recirculation of sump water outside the containment and the main steam isolation
valves for BWRs. That leaks do occur in connection with radioactive releases to the containment wasdemonstrated at the Three Mile Island incident although releases of iodine were significantly lower
than expected from assumed maximum leak rates for the containment [17]. In calculations of external
radiological consequences the basis always is the so-called “in-containment source term” which is theobject of the present section.
When a break of the reactor coolant system occurs at operating conditions, approximately 50% of
the primary coolant mass will flash leading to steam discharged into the containment which thencondenses in the atmosphere or on the surfaces of primary containment. From the atmospherecondensation droplets or from some small water droplets discharged from the break, an aerosol waterphase is present in the containment atmosphere. Following a LOCA, in the cold leg, the fission
products released by the fuel are transferred to the containment in different steps [18]. During the dry
phase (up to 250 s), noble gases and a fraction of iodine and caesium (CsI) are transferred by the steam
to the containment. At this time, only a small fraction of iodine is released as molecular iodine. During
the wet phase (after reflooding), molecular iodine is generated by water radiolysis in the vessel
and released through the break. In the long term, all the fission product inventory in the water vessel istransferred by the water to the containment sump. The concentration of fission products in thecontainment atmosphere (noble gases, iodine, caesium and other species released by the fuel) depends
on the release rate from the break and the depletion mechanisms. For designs not provided with aspray system, the aerosol behaviour is affected only by natural process, such as agglomeration andsteam condensation, and aerosols will be removed from the containment atmosphere by gravity andphoretic effects [18]. For the volatile species (molecular iodine), the depletion in the containment
atmosphere is governed by the gas/liquid mass transfer and adsorption on painted surfaces. In designs
provided with a spray system, this system provides an additional mechanism for airborne aerosols
or molecular iodine depletion from the containment atmosphere. In the evaluation of radiologicalconsequences of a LOCA, licensing approaches may consider a global removal rate coefficient for theevaluation of fission product depletion from the containment atmosphere. This coefficient depends on
the physical and chemical nature of the species. Different practices consider a constant value ofremoval rate coefficient up to a maximum decontamination factor (from 100 to 1 000) or consider
different values for this coefficient for different time periods.

76

It is in principle possible to include corrosion products dissolved in the primary water in the incontainment source term since they will spread in the containment in connection with the LOCA.
However it has been shown that they give a negligible contribution to the external dose [19]. The same
argument applies to fission products and actinides released to the coolant before large scale fuel failuresin connection with the LOCA [19]. The main contributor to the in-containment source term thus is therelease of the core inventory of fission products. This inventory can be calculated with appropriate
isotope generation and depletion computer codes such as ORIGEN- 2, ORIGEN-ARP [13-14] or FISPIN[19]. The inventory of fission products is distributed unevenly in the fuel rods and not all of them areavailable for release. The distribution is also strongly burn-up dependent. The part of the inventory most
readily released is the gap inventory consisting noble gases and volatile iodine compounds. In the gap
there may also be water soluble fission products like caesium species. The fission products less readily
available for release are slowly leached out from the fuel matrix. The rates of release will depend on the
fragmentation of the fuel which may be highly burn-up dependent. With knowledge of fission productdistributions and reliable estimates of the number of failed fuel rods it would in principle be possible toreach reasonably realistic numbers for the in-containment source term.
However, from a regulatory point of view, it is in the United States for instance assumed that
there is a core melt and that the containment nonetheless should retain most of the fission products.
Therefore, conservative core-melt release fractions are provided in Regulatory Guides 1.3 and 1.4.
More realistic alternative source terms for a core-melt are provided in Regulatory Guide 1.183 andthese release fractions are given by the following table [13-16]:
Table 4.2 BWR core inventory fraction released into containment
Group
Noble gases
Halogens
Alkali metals
Tellurium metals
Ba, Sr
Noble metals
Cerium group
Lanthanides

Gap release phase
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

Early in-vessel phase
0.95
0.25
0.20
0.05
0.02
0.00250.00250.0002

Total
1.0
0.3
0.25
0.05
0.02
0.00250.00050.0002A corresponding table for PWR is almost identical. As can be seen in the table, two release phases
are identified: gap release and early in-vessel. The timing of these phases varies according to reactor
type.
Table 4.3 LOCA release phases
PWRs
Phase
Gap release
Early in-vessel

Onset
30 s
0.5 hr

BRWs
Duration
0.5 hr
1.3 hrOnset
2 min
0.5 hrDuration
0.5 hr
1.5 hr

4.3.1 Harmonisation efforts in Europe
Regulatory practice in Europe has been more varied as demonstrated by a questionnaire within arecent project aimed at increasing the harmonisation in the area of the safety of nuclear installations[19]. Examples of the variation of approach can be seen in Table 4.4 which shows how iodine releasehas been calculated in different countries.
77

Table 4.4 Computation of the iodine release
I131 released
Additional fraction of the gap Iodine forms of the release (initiallyrelease
B, E, HU, SI=
in the atm., unless otherwise specified)fraction of the CI
Mol.
Part.
Org.
25% atm
91%
5%
4%−
50% sumps

ECCCS
injection

Failedfuel
fractionGapinventory

B

C

100%

N

F [3.1]

C

100%

Y

100% (atm)

90%

0%

10%

≤33%

Y

1%
2% atm

99%
97.8%
water

0%
0.2% atm

Y

10% dry phase(atm)
90% wet phase to
the sump
100% (10% atm)

50% atm/
50% sumps
100% (atm)(10% dry phase
90% wet phase)

95.5%

2.5%

2%

2% ot thetotal release
will be I2

99.8%

Formation:
0.2%

Dry phase: 10%
Wet phase: 90%

Wet phase
55%

100%
init.

CountryF – updated
hypothesis
under
discussion
D

CH

10%

E

C

100%

Valuesbased on an
old calcul.
N

UK

C

100%

Y

Y

CZ
FIN

VVER
CH

100%
100%

Y
Y

−
Y

HU

VVER

100%

Y

N

I
NL

C
CH

100%
10%

Y
N

N
N

SI

C

100%

N

−

CH

CH

10%

cf D

−

No assumptions explicitly made.

Formation
100%
75% atm
25% sumps
25% atm
50% sumps

49.5%
50%

49.5%
0%

1%
50%

91%

5%

4%

1.7%

1%

One reason for the differences in approach is that there is a difference between the German PWRs
and other PWRs. The German plants have simultaneous injection of ECC water in both the hot andcold leg while the other plants have ECC injection in the cold leg only. Another difference is that theformer do not have a containment spray while the latter have such a spray. Hot and cold leg injection
leads to lower fuel temperatures and fewer failed fuel rods in connection with a large break LOCA.
The absence of containment spray on the other hand leads to a slower removal rate of fission products
from the containment atmosphere.
As a basis for the harmonisation effort reported in [19] a previous attempt at calculating realistic
values for releases and consequences of a large break LOCA was used [18]. The report on
harmonisation lists a number of proposals for a common position on the various issues of importanceto the analysis of the radiological consequences of a large break LOCA.
4.3.1.1 List of nuclides to consider in the calculation of the radiological consequences
It is noted that the dose of the successfully terminated LBLOCA is mainly due to a small numberof nuclides (iodine, caesium and noble gases). Iodine and noble gases are always considered in thelicensing studies. With the present computers, it is possible to consider all fission products and tocompute the source term for each of them. The main problem is the lack of data, especially for the78

Table 4.4 Computation of the iodine release
Spray

Additive
element(Init./
Recirc.)

Y

NaOH

R

Y

NaOH

‫׀‬+5min

Y

NaOH

‫׀‬

Removal rate of iodine ( /h – i=immediate)(max. decontamination factor)
Mol.
10 after
20 min(100)‫׀‬(1000)
20
×Radioactive Daughter
decay
products

Part.
0.8
(100)

Org.
0

Y

Y

B

0

0

Y

Y

F [3.1]

4
××

0

F – updated
hypothesis
under
discussion
D

7h to reach equilibrium value: ‫׀‬water/‫׀‬gas=104

N

Y

Na3PO4R

Y

Na3PO4R

Y
Y

N2H4-KOH‫׀‬Y(severe acc:
N2H4-KOH)
NaOH

Y
N
Y

NaOH

Y

−

‫׀‬

20+3.13(100)
0Country

5.46 (50)0.55
1.3(<0.6h) 0.5(>0.6h)(10000)

0

Y

Y

E

0

Y

N

UK

Y

Y

CZ
FIN

Y

Y

HU

12 (200)−

3.1 (200)
−

0
−

Y
Y

N
Y

I
NL

10 (100)

3.8 (100)

0

Y

Y

SI

Y

Y

CH

Elem. Iodine: 0.5% after 4h

release fractions of involatile fission products and actinides. Corrosion products and actinides may beconsidered to be negligible contributors to the dose and do not need necessarily to be taken into
account. Moreover, the computation of their consequences will be subject to a large uncertainty.
However, it is very important for public acceptance that actinides are considered. Thus even if they are
negligible, it should be explicitly justified if they are not taken into account for the dose calculations.
Given that some countries already consider an extended list of radionuclides (except very short halflife nuclides):••Accounting for an extended list of radionuclides in the calculation of radiologicalconsequences is possible and easy with the available computers.
It is important for public acceptance to demonstrate that all radionuclides are considered,even if they are negligible for the dose assessment.

It is proposed, for future licensing studies, that:•••All fission products should be considered. If some fission products are not considered, ajustification must be presented.
Actinides should be considered. They may be screened out, based on qualitative arguments.
It is not necessary to consider the corrosion products for this accident.
794.3.1.2 The failed fuel fraction
For the fraction of failed fuel, the results from another joint European study were used [20]. The
objectives of that study were to:•••

Review the existing clad failure criteria and licensing approaches in each participant’s country.
Form a consensus view on clad failure criteria.
Determine the impact of the clad failure criteria on the extent and form of clad failure for areference design in each of the participants’ country.

Mechanistic and non-mechanistic clad failure criteria were considered. Mechanistic models havebeen developed by EdF, GRS, Siemens and NNC. A non-mechanistic (empirical) model for cladding
failure has been produced in NUREG-0630 [21] as part of a methodology for clad swelling andrupture for use in LOCA analysis. More recent experimental data have been compared to the NUREG0630 clad rupture temperature correlation and revised best estimate and conservative correlations havebeen proposed.
On the basis of the mechanistic anlyses participants in the project determined failure thresholds
for the fuel. The best estimate failure threshold is shown in Figure 4.6 [20]. A similarly estimatedconservative failure lie about 50-150 W/cm lower depending on participant. Based on the failure
thresholds, the failed fuel fraction could be calculated. In the best estimate analyses only one of theparticipants arrived at a non-zero value. In the more conservative analyses, failed fuel fractions
between 0 and 16.6% were obtained. These values were significantly below the 100% normallyapplied by the different countries. Therefore, it was suggested as a common position that in licensing
calculations a failed fuel fraction of 33% should be applied for reactor designs with cold leg injection
only. For reactors with injection into both hot and cold legs, a failed fuel fraction of 10% was
supported which is the same at that adopted in the German licensing methodology.
Figure 4.6 Best estimate failure thresholds for PWR fuel in a large break LOCA

4.3.1.3 The release from failed fuelFor the common position on release from the fuel the recommendation is based on the study ofrealistic releases. The recommendations are summarised in Table 4.5. The table gives both the gap
release and a contribution from the fragmentation of the fuel. The recommendations are valid for fuelwith a burn-up up to 50 GWd/te. With regard to the release of fuel particulates from fuel, especially athigh burn-up the study did not result in any recommendation. It was noted however that experimental
data is available but needs to be reviewed before any recommendation can be given.
80

Table 4.5 The release from the gap and fuel for radiologically significant nuclides

4.3.1.4 The retention in the reactor coolant system and the initial release of fission products to thecontainment atmosphere
In a successfully terminated large break LOCA some of the fission products may be retained in
the reactor coolant system (RCS). Based among other things on calculation with the severe accident
code MELCOR the joint European study arrived at the following proposal for retention of fission
products and timing of the release [19]:All the noble gases are released directly to the containment atmosphere during the dry phase. The
releases of the other radionuclides (I, Cs) are divided into the dry phase (10%) and the wet phase (90%).
For the design with injection only into the cold leg, the molecular iodine (2% of the total iodine
release – the same applies for bromine) and all the dry phase are entirely released to the containment
atmosphere.
For the design with injection into both hot and cold legs, the molecular iodine (2% of the total
iodine release − the same applies for bromine), 10% of the rest of the iodine (and bromine) releaseoccurring during the dry phase, 10% of the dry phase release of the alkalines and 1% of the dry phaserelease of the other nuclides enter to the containment atmosphere.
Some part of this release may be retained in the RCS itself but this retention is a matter submitted
to a great number of uncertainties. Therefore, it is concluded that radionuclide retention in the RCS
should not be credited for licensing DBA source term analyses.
The rest of the release transfers into the reactor coolant. The release occurring into the water isassumed to be transferred to the sumps.
4.3.1.5 Retention in the containment
The most complex part of the containment source term problem is the retention in the containment
since it also determines the time dependence of the source term. In the European harmonisation project
the problem was divided into a number of subproplems. Proposals for plants with cold and hot leg
injections are only relevant to Germany.
4.3.1.5.1 Iodine behaviour and chemistry
Design with cold leg and hot leg injection without spray
In future licensing calculations the retention of iodine in the containment and the effect of pH in
the sump water should be considered. The iodine behaviour (especially the effect of pH in the sump)81

should be calculated e.g. with an iodine code. In this calculation the initial release form of iodine
should be CsI (100 %).The release should be supposed to occur instantaneously.
The following phenomena should be considered in the calculation: aerosol CsI removal,
radiolysis in the water phase, other reactions in the water phase, reactions in the gas phase, masstransfer from sump to the gas phase, deposition on wall surfaces in the gas phase and formation oforganic iodine.
Cold leg injection with containment spray
For this case, performed studies show that dominant effects concerning the concentration ofiodine species in the containment atmosphere are:•••Release of molecular iodine following in vessel radiolysis during the wet phase.
pH condition on spray droplets and sump water, leading to retention or release of iodine
dissolved in the water.
Adsorption of molecular iodine on the non-submerged containment surfaces, leading tomolecular iodine retention and organic iodine formation and release.

Then, it is recommended to use a specific iodine code taking into account a realistic iodine
release kinetic model during the dry and wet phase, and iodine removal by spray and adsorption on thecontainment wall. In this case there is no need to assume a maximum decontamination factor.
When a validated iodine code is not available, in addition to the atmosphere containment releaseas recommended in Section 4.3.1.4, 60% of the wet phase release of iodine (bromine) is supposed tobe converted into I2 (Br2) and also directly released to the containment atmosphere (recommendationof [18]). Iodine removal could be evaluated by removal constants associated to a maximum
decontamination factor (depending on pH conditions). New values (compared to [18]) for moleculariodine spray removal constant are proposed depending on pH conditions of the spray water: λspray =0.2 h-1 for acidic spray droplet water, λspray = 2.7 h-1 in the case of alkaline spray droplet water. The
removal constants associated to iodine adsorption on nonsubmerged painted surface are still very
uncertain.
Organic iodine
A value of 0.2% of the iodine released in the dry phase is assumed to be converted into organic
iodine, instantaneously present in the containment atmosphere. There is no other removal than byradioactive decay. This value of 0.2 % is of the same order of magnitude as the value recommended in
the 1992 study [18].
4.3.1.5.2 Aerosol removal (including iodine aerosols)
In the case of LOCA, aerosols are released during the first 250 seconds of the accident when thecontainment reactor pressure is highest (at least in the case with spray actuation) leading to the highest
leak rates. In order to evaluate realistic fission products release from the containment, it could be
advisable to use a detailed mechanistic aerosol collection model taking into account different removal
mechanisms models as function of the aerosol size and considering an aerosol size distribution. Thisshould lead to higher removal rate effectiveness at the beginning of the accident. In this case, amaximum decontamination factor should not be considered. If this model is not available, for aconservative approach, a total removal coefficient should be used (as proposed in [18]), associated to a
maximum decontamination factor.

82

4.3.1.6 Conclusions of the European harmonisation effort
The work has resulted in progression towards harmonisation of the licensing methodology for the
successfully terminated LBLOCA (calculation of the source term inside the containment). It was
proposed that the list of nuclides used to compute the radiological consequences should be extended toinclude more fission products than iodine and noble gases which are normally considered. This is
more from the aspect of meeting public acceptability in demonstrating that the safety calculations arecomplete and does not imply that there were shortcomings in earlier assessments. General assumptions
regarding the sequence definition were agreed between the partners. There exists an agreement
concerning the percentage of failed fuel which could be used in future licensing assessments (however
this subject is still under discussion in France, a lower value is thinkable).
For the release from damaged fuel, the agreement was not complete: AVN (Belgium) wished tomaintain its present approach. IPSN (France), GRS (Germany) and NNC (UK) prefer to use their own
methodologies that result in slightly different values to the proposed values for a common position.
There are currently no recommendations for the release of fuel particulates. An agreement was reachedon the fact that no retention in the RCS is to be accounted for, and on the release part going to thecontainment atmosphere.
For the retention in the containment (chemistry of iodine and spray/natural removal of iodine andaerosols), the partners agreed for the recommendation to use a code allowing an accurate modelling of
the phenomena. However, such codes may not be available for everybody or are still subject to somevalidation problems. In that case, simple conservative models are proposed.
The problem of organic iodine formation is still a controversial subject but a value of 0.2% of therelease to the containment atmosphere seems to be acceptable.
4.4 References1.

Kearns, J.J., McCauley, J.E., and Nichols, F.A., “Effect of α/β phase constitution onsuperplasticity and strength of Zircaloy-4”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 61(1976), pp. 169184.

2.

Grandjean, C., “A state-of-the-art review of past programs devoted to fuel behaviour under
LOCA conditions: 1st Part: Clad swelling and rupture, assembly flow blockage”, IRSN,
Technical Report DPAM/SEMCA 2005/313, December 2005.

3.

Waeckel, N., et al., “Evaluation of fuel rod axial forces during LOCA quench”, Topical Meetingon LOCA Fuel Safety Criteria., 2001, Aix-en-Provence, France, Nuclear Energy Agency.

4.

Grandjean, C., “A state-of-the-art review of past programs devoted to fuel behaviour under
LOCA conditions: Part 2. Impact of clad swelling on assembly cooling”, IRSN, Technical Report
SEMCA 2006-183, July 2006.

5.

Grandjean, C., “Coolability of blocked regions in a rod bundle after ballooning under LOCA
conditions”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 237(2007), pp. 1872-1886.

6.

Ihle, P. and Rust, K., “FEBA. Flooding experiments with blocked arrays. Evaluation Report”,
KfK 3657, March 1984.

7.

Ihle, P. and Rust, K., “SEFLEX. Fuel rod simulator effects in flooding experiments. Part 1:
Evaluation Report”, KfK 4024, March 1986.

8.

Ihle, P. and Rust, K., “PWR reflood experiments using full length bundles of rods with Zircaloy
cladding and alumina pellets”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 99(1987), pp. 223-237.
83

9.

Pearson, K.G., et al., ”Reflooding experiments on a 49-rod cluster containing a long 90%
blockage”, UKAEA Report AEEW-R 1591, September 1983.

10. Cooper, C.A., Pearson, K.G., and Jowitt, D., “The THETIS 80% blocked cluster experiment. Part
3: Forced reflood experiments”, UKAEA Report AEEW-R 1765, September 1984.
11. Pearson, K.G., Cooper, C.A., and Jowitt, D., “The THETIS 80% blocked cluster experiment. Part
4: Gravity reflood experiments”, UKAEA Report AEEW-R 1766, September 1984.
12. Hochreiter, L.E., “FLECHT SEASET program final report”, NUREG/CR-4167; EPRI NP-4112;
WCAP-10926, November 1985.
13. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.195, “Methods and Assumptions for
Evaluating Radiological Consequences of Design Basis Accidents at Light-Water Nuclear Power
Reactors (ML0314906401113 – May 2003).
14. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.183, “Alternative Radiological Source
Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors” (ML003716792 – July
2000).
15. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.3, “Assumptions Used for Evaluating
the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Loss of Coolant Accident for Boiling Water
Reactors” (Rev. 2, ML003739601) – June 1974).
16. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.4, “Assumptions Used for Evaluating
the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Loss of Coolant Accident for Pressurized Water
Reactors” (Rev. 2, ML003739614) – June 1974).
17. Soffer, L., et al., “Accident source terms for light-water nuclear power plants”, Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1465, February 1995.
18. Stephenson, W., et al., “Realistic methods for calculating the releases and consequences of alarge LOCA”, Commission of the European Communities, EUR14179EN, 1992.
19. “Determination of the in-containment source term for a large-break loss of coolant accident”,
European Commission, April 2001.
20. “Fuel cladding failure criteria”, European Commission, EUR 19256EN, September 1999.
21. Powers, D.A. and Meyer, R.O., “Cladding swelling and rupture models for LOCA analysis”,
NUREG-0630, April 1980.

84

5. OVERVIEW OF LOCA TESTING METHODOLOGYLOCA testing methodology comprises a large number of different techniques. One reason for thisvariety of techniques is that the objectives of the different experiments vary. Because it is simply
impossible to accurately simulate a LOCA, one must incorporate simulations of important factors as
best as possible and as much as the test scope and cost allow. The objective can vary from determining
the effect of a LOCA transient on a complete fuel bundle, irradiated or non-irradiated, to determining
the effect of alloy elements on phase transformation behaviour. The former types of experiment are
obviously quite complicated, expensive, and require extensive instrumentation and post-test
metallographic evaluation. The latter experiment can be performed on small amounts of material withequipment on a laboratory workbench. However, it is still part of LOCA testing methodology because itis performed for the sole purpose of providing knowledge necessary for understanding and modelling
LOCA phenomena and it may also require particular attention to experimental details unique to the
LOCA question.
A somewhat arbitrary classification of various types of test could be the following:•••

Separate effects tests aimed at elucidating one phenomenon.
Tests with moderate integration, tests in which the interaction between two or more
phenomena is studied.
Integrated tests − tests on single real or simulated fuel rods or fuel bundles in or out ofreactor.

For the separate effects test many of the main results will be presented in this section of the report
while the results of latter types of tests are given in Sections 6 and 7.
5.1 Separate effects tests
5.1.1 Creep tests
The creep properties of cladding alloys are central to modelling the deformation and failure ofcladding tubes during a LOCA. Therefore, creep tests have been performed in the absence of anoxidizing steam atmosphere. Hardy [1] and Hunt and Foote [2] studied the high-temperature deformation
behaviour of Zry-4 and Zry-2.5 Nb cladding tubes of the dimension typical of CANDU reactor fuel. The
test technique was heating of 0.5 m long sections of cladding tubes in vacuum by passing an electricalcurrent through the tubes. A heating rate of 25 K/s was used and the pressure was held constant. At apredetermined temperature, the electrical power was switched off and the internal pressure vented. Aftercooling in vacuum the diametral expansion was measured at room temperature. The procedure wasrepeated until specimen burst after which a curve of strain versus temperature could be evaluated. No
axial constraint was used in these tests and it was observed that the specimens contracted while thetemperature was in the α-phase range [1]. Zry-2.5Nb is a stronger alloy than Zry-4. However, since ittransforms to soft β at a lower temperature than Zry-4 it deforms at a higher rate than Zry-4 until all α
has been transformed to β because of the low strength of the two phase mixture of α and β. As soon as
the transformation was complete, a discontinuous decrease in creep rate was observed for both alloys.

85

This decrease is explained as an effect of solution hardening since all alloying elements are dissolved inthe β phase. The same equipment has later been used in a study of LOCA transients on β heat treatedmaterial [3].
There are a couple of technical details worth commenting on since they apply to the methodology
used by many of the experimenters. The use of self-resistance heating of cladding tubes which areexpanded by an internal pressure leads to a relatively uniform temperature distribution in the tubes. The
reason is that the power density in the material is ρi2 where ρ is the resistivity of the material and i thecurrent density. To a first approximation then the current density remains constant when the tube
expands since the cross sectional area remains constant. Even if a local bulge starts to develop, it does
not lead to any locally increased power density which would lead to a thermal instability. This behaviour
is in contrast to the behaviour of a uniaxially stressed specimen with electrical heating for which any
tendency to non-uniform deformation is exacerbated by the locally increased heating.
The other point to note is the change in stress with diametral expansion when the test is
performed with constant internal pressure. An exact treatment of the deformation of cladding tubes
requires that they are treated as thick-walled tubes. However, in the present context we will simplify
the treatment by regarding them as thin-walled tubes. If the initial diameter is D0 and the initial wall
thickness is h0, volume constance during deformation leads to:D0 h0 = Dh

(5-1)

We can define engineering diametral strain e as

e = D / D0 − 1(5-2)

The stress under the internal pressure p is given by:σ=pD pD0(1 + e)2 = σ 0 (1 + e)2
=
2h
2h0

(5-3)

where σ0 is the nominal stress or initial stress of the test. In terms of true stresses
and strains the relationship is:σ = σ 0 exp(2ε )(5-4)

The exponential in (5-4) perhaps better than (5-3) demonstrates that the stress increases sharply
with diametral expansion. Under creep conditions there is no strain hardening of the material. If abulge starts to develop, it will be unstable and lead to a local failure. Hunt and Foote, in agreementwith most other workers in the field, assumed a strain rate equation of the form:⎛ Q ⎞ n⎟σ
⎝ RT ⎠

ε& = A exp⎜ −(5-5)

where A is a constant, Q the activation energy, and σ the effective stress evaluatedwith regard to the anisotropy of the tubes. In an isothermal test, the time t to reachthe strain ε is given by:1(1 − exp(− 2nε ))
(5-6)
2nε&0
where ε&0 is the strain rate at time 0. In particular, the time tf to reach infinite straint =is given by:

tf =

1
2nε&0

(5-7)

86

Often n has a value of 4-5. Then this failure time deviates little from the the time to failure if the
tube would fail at say 50% strain. With n=5 the time to reach 50% strain is 99.3% of tf. Another point
to note is that if there is a small irregularity in the wall thickness this will lead to the formation of abulge or balloon on the specimen but again the effect on time to failure will be small.
The discussion above implicitly assumed that the material was isotropic. However, as mentioned
before, α-zirconium is anisotropic. If a tube is expanded under internal pressure, it becomes shorter.
Therefore, the relation (5-1) is not strictly true. How it is modified for zirconium alloys and otheraspects of the anisotropy are discussed further in Appendix A.
Rose and Hindle used a similar technique with electrical heating when they studied thedeformation and fracture of Steam Generating Heavy Water Reactor cladding [4]. However, in contrast
to Hunt and Foote, they performed isothermal tests and used photography to record strains in tests on
unirradiated cladding. On irradiated cladding, the deformation was tracked with a telescope. Some of
their results are summarised in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1 Creep properties of Zircaloy-2 in the temperature range 650-800°C

Fiveland et al. used a different arrangement for heating the cladding in a tube burst test [5] (Figure5.2). They used a tungsten rod as an internal radiation heater. Its primary advantage is its quick
response. To simulate the surrounding environment in a reactor core, the test rod or rods weresurrounded by a heated stainless steel shroud. The temperature during testing was monitored by up to
12 Type K thermocouples. Specimen pressure was monitored continuously by calibrated pressuretransducers. The tests were carried out in an argon atmosphere and argon was also used for the internalpressurisation of the tubes. A test started at a constant temperature of 315°C until steady state wasreached, then the temperature was increased at a constant rate until all tubes had ruptured. The pressure
remained nearly constant during the test. A main result of the test series was a relation between rupture
temperature and hoop stress:TR(˚C) = 1008 - 3.17 σ (MPa)

87

(5-8)

Figure 5.2 Heating arrangement in the experiments by Fiveland et al. [5]Chung and Kassner reported tests in vacuum and steam of Zircaloy cladding heated withalternating current [6]. Their specimen design is shown in Figure 5.3.
Figure 5.3 The 15.2 cm long specimen used by Chung and Kassner

In addition to the extensometer seen in the figure for monitoring of diametral expansion, thespecimen was also photographed with a high-speed camera during the test for post-test evaluation ofdiametral expansion and axial deformation. The gap between end plugs and Al2O3 mandrel could bevaried in order to produce various degrees of axial constraint. The experiments were carried out in abell jar vacuum chamber with or without steam flow. Several different heating rates were used, from
5 K/s to 115 K/s. For the analysis of the onset of ballooning, Chung and Kassner used a theory
developed by Franklin [7]. However, this theory probably does not apply to this type of test. It is moreprobable that ballooning is started as a combined effect of temperature maxima and wall thickness
minima. Figure 5.4 shows the rupture strain of unconstrained tubes tested in vacuum as a function of
burst temperature, which provides baseline burst behaviour for unoxidized cladding.
Tube axial strain (shrinkage in length) can also be seen in Figure 5.4. The axial shrinkage, hence,the effect of axial constraint, should be greatest when the material is at the highest temperature yet
when the material is still in anisotropic α phase. This temperature is about 812-815°C. Once thematerial starts to transform to α+β, it becomes more or less isotropic because the softer β controls theoverall deformation. Then, the effect of constraint should disappear, because multiple slip systems inthe softer β control the overall deformation, rather than the limiting prism slip in the hard α material.
Axial shrinkage, hence, the effect of axial constraint, is still observed for higher burst temperatures
because pre-ballooning uniform deformation still occurs in α-phase range, i.e., at <815°C. This preballooning axial contraction is, therefore, more or less independent of burst temperature.

88

Figure 5.4 Maximum circumferential strain at rupture vs burst temperature
for axially constrained and unconstrained Zircaloy-4 cladding at a heating rate of 115 K/s.
The axial strain of unconstrained tubes also is shown.

Although the authors did not discuss the three ductility maxima in great detail, they attributed thefirst maximum is to the superplasticity observed near the α/β-boundary temperature from isothermal
uniaxial tensile tests [8-9]. The first strain maximum in Figure 5.4 was very sensitive to the magnitudeof azimuthal temperature variation that was produced by the variation in heat transfer between thecladding and the internal mandrel or alumina pellets that simulated fuel pellets. The second and thethird strain maxima were strongly suppressed by the high-temperature steam oxidation, the latter being
almost invisible at slow heating rate.
In summary, ballooning and burst behaviour is strongly influenced by and a complex function of
maximum cladding temperature, azimuthal temperature variation in the ballooning region, axialconstraint, heating rate, and steam oxidation.
The strong effect of azimuthal temperature variation in the ballooning region is one of the mostimportant factors that determine fuel rod burst behaviour near 800°C and fuel assembly flow channel
blockage under LOCA. Axially extended uniform ballooning accompanied by large burst strain is
conducive to serious flow channel blockage in the core. This concern was once a serious LOCA issue
in late 1970s and early 1980s, and numerous experimental programmes were devoted to address theissue in the early years. On single-rod basis, Chung and Kassner showed that such extended uniform
ballooning with large burst strain is very difficult to occur because of azimuthal and axial temperature
non-uniformity of various origins [6].
Rizkalla et al. studied the effect of oxygen concentration on the high temperature deformation of
Zircaloy-2 [10]. The four alloys used were made by consumable arc melting of Zircaloy-2 andzirconium oxide to produce nominal oxygen concentrations of 1 200, 4 000, 8 000, and 12 000 ppm byweight. The alloys were prepared in the form of 12.7 mm diameter rods by extrusion and grinding.
The tests were carried out in an Instron testing machine modified for constant true-strain-rate hotcompression. Specimens 13.8 mm long and 8.2 mm in diameter were machined from the rods. Tests
89were carried out at 1 273, 1 373, and 1 473 K under a vacuum of 10-4 Pa. The flow behaviour atdifferent strain rates and temperatures was too complicated to be described in the present context. Oneof the conclusions of the work was that the effect of oxygen on strength is twofold in the α + β region:
the oxygen contributes to solid solution strengthening and it also increases the volume fraction of α.
The authors also evaluated by metallography the effect of oxygen on the fractions of α and β atdifferent temperatures to produce the pseudobinary Zircaloy-2 − oxygen phase diagram shown in
Figure 5.5. Great caution must be exercised in this technique, because unless such a metallographic
specimen is rapidly quenched from the equilibrating high temperature, significant fraction of β-phase
periphery transforms and is absorbed into equiaxed α grains during cooling. Because of these uniquecharacteristics, the phase boundary in Figure 5.5 needs careful scrutiny. This topic is discussed later inmore detail.
Figure 5.5 A pseudobinary phase diagram for the Zircaloy-oxygen system

Hindle has performed stress rupture tests of Zircaloy-4 PWR tubes of the 17×17 type [11]. The
results showed that their rupture life can be predicted approximately using the simple relationshipε&i ⋅ t R = 1 / 2n where ε&i is the initial secondary creep rate and n the stress exponent according to
eq. 5-5. This prediction is a consequence of eq. 5-7.
It is important, however, to note that some simulation techniques lead to unrealistically uniform
and large tube deformation that is not applicable to LOCA situations. Such simulation techniques areusually simpler, and the results are academically easier to model, e.g., isothermal creep or slow-strainrate test using uniform heating method. Deformation behaviour under LOCA is, however, far more
complex, and great caution is needed in the interpretation of such results relative to LOCA situations.
Rosinger [12] and Rosinger et al. [13] have performed an extensive study of the creep ofZircaloy-4 fuel cladding from 940 to 1 873 K. As can be seen in Figure 5.6, the specimens were tested
in uniaxial tension.
The specimens were heated by ac current at a rate of 50 to 100 K/s. A constant load during testing
could be maintained through the load control mode of the MTS system. The creep tests were
terminated after either 10 min or 0.15 strain. Figure 5.7 shows some typical results from the tests.
90

Figure 5.6 Schematic of Rosinger’s high temperature creep apparatus

Rosinger et al. summarised their results with some results from the literature and found thefollowing equation for the steady-state creep of Zircaloy-4 α-phase at 940K≤ T ≤ 1 095 K:

ε&ss = 2000σ (5.32±0.14 ) exp(− 284000 / RT )(5-9)

A corresponding relation for the β-phase is:ε&ss = 8.1σ (3.79± 0.02 ) exp(− 142300 / RT )(5-10)In the two phase region, 1 095<T<1 245 the strain rate dependence of stress is creep ratedependent. For strain rates over 3×10-3 s-1

ε& ss = 84σ (2.28±0.06 ) exp(− 155100 / RT )(5-11)

and for strain rates less than 3x10-3 s-1

ε& ss = 6.8σ 1.8 exp(− 56600 / RT )(5-12)The latter equation indicates that grain boundary sliding is an important deformation mode in thetwo phase region and it is also this mechanism which leads to the superplastic behaviour observed inthis region.
91

Figure 5.7 Typical creep test results from Rosinger’s investigation at 1 573 K [13]The creep experiments performed by Ortlieb et al were performed on tubes heated by resistanceheating in order to obtain a very uniform temperature [14]. The object of the experiments was todetermine if there was any influence of initial material condition on the deformation of Zircaloy-4
cladding tubes at 600 and 800°C. The cladding tube deformation was recorded by an automatic
camera. The pressurizing medium was helium and the outer environment air. The specimens contained
a fixed volume of gas which leads to a decreasing pressure with increased strain but still amonotonically increasing circumferential stress. For creep tests, the temperature was increased by
50 K/s and then held constant until specimen rupture. In creep rupture tests, different heating rates
were used until the specimen ruptured. The main result of the investigation was that the initialcondition played little role at 800°C while at 600°C effects of initial condition were observed asplotted in Figure 5.8.
Figure 5.8 The effect of initial condition on creep properties at 600°C
The lowest yield strengths correspond to fully recrystallized material
while the other point represent various degrees of recrystallization [14]92

5.1.2 Determination of diffusion constants
Modelling of the growth of the oxide layer and the oxygen stabilised α layer requires knowledgeof the diffusion coefficients of oxygen in the two phases. In addition, it is necessary to know thediffusion coefficient in the β layer in order to calculate how fast the α grows into the β. It is, inprinciple, possible to infer from observed growth rates what magnitude and temperature dependence
the diffusion constants should have provided that one also has reliable information on thecompositions at the phase boundaries. This is also what many investigators have tried to do. However,there is a considerable advantage with directly determined diffusion constants since they provide
independent confirmation of the values determined in a less direct manner.
Early examples of direct determination of oxygen diffusion in α-phase, β-phase and oxide can befound in the review by Douglass [15]. The only example of a direct determination related to the LOCA
issue can be found in a paper by Pawel et al. [16]. They determined the diffusion coefficient in β phaseby studying the diffusion of the 18O isotope. For determination of the tracer diffusion coefficient, a
2 µm thick oxide layer was grown from H218O at 800°C which was subsequently dissolved in themetal. The chemical diffusion coefficient was determined by studying a diffusion couple with
0.1 wt% O on one side and 0.6 wt % O on the other side with the oxygen enriched in 18O by anoxidation annealing process. The tracer diffusion samples and diffusion couples were heat treated in a
vacuum furnace for different times at different temperatures. After heat treatment, the specimens weresectioned in the direction of diffusion and prepared metallographically. Concentration gradients were
determined by radiographic techniques that involved either proton bombardment radioactivation of 18O
or by Auger electron spectroscopy. The observed concentration was correlated to known solutions to
the respective diffusion problems. It turned out that observed values of the tracer diffusion coefficientand the chemical diffusion coefficient belonged to the same data set. A best fit to the data set after
correction for the mass difference between 18O and 16O is:Dβ = 0.063 exp(− 14192 / T )(5-13)

This value differs somewhat from values given in Douglass [15].
5.1.3 Determination of the α to α + β and α + β to β transformation temperatures
The temperatures, when α starts to transform to β and when the transformation to β is complete,depend on the alloying elements in zirconium. The pure Zr metal transforms at 862°C but the additionof an alloying element will change this transformation temperature. It also changes the character of thetransformation so that it occurs in a temperature interval over which the volume fraction of β grows at
the expense of the volume fraction of α. The beginning of the temperature interval will be denoted
Tα/α+β and the end Tα+β/β. The addition of an alloying element either increases or decreases thetransformation temperature. If it increases the temperature the element is called an α stabiliser.
Examples are O which is a strong α stabiliser and Sn. Examples of β stabilisers are most other elements
including common alloying elements like Nb, Fe, Cr and Ni and inadvertently added elements like H.
In several earlier works [10,17] the transformation interval for Zircaloy has been charted bymetallographic evaluation of the volume fraction of β after fast cooling from a known temperature. The
former β, which at room temperature of course also is α, is easily distinguished from the hightemperature α phase by the transformation structure in the former β grains which consists of fineWidmanstätten plates. At a temperature slightly above the α-β equilibrium boundary, only a small
amount of the β phase is present at grain boundary triple points and as thin films surrounding the αgrains. This type of β can be detected only through direct quenching of the equilibrated specimen into acold bath of oil or water [17]. Under usual cooling conditions without direct quenching from the93

equilibration temperature, this type of β cannot be detected, because such thin β is quickly absorbed into
the equiaxed α grains during cooling. Thus, at room temperature the sample contains only equiaxed α,
misleading the true structure present at equilibration temperature. Because of this difficulty characteristicof a Zr-based alloy, early investigations commonly led to α-β phase-boundary temperatures significantly
higher than true boundary temperatures, e.g., the boundaries deduced from metallography of nonquenched sample shown in Figure 5.5.
Figure 5.9 shows equilibrium phase boundaries reported by Chung and Kassner fromexamination of quenched metallographic specimens of Zircaloy-4 [17]. Note that for as-received
Zircaloy-4 that contains oxygen concentration of ≈0.12 wt %, α-β boundary temperature is ≈812°C.
This temperature is close to the temperature at which the first superplastic strain peak and maximum
axial contraction occur during ballooning (Figure 5.4). Based on the result of Figure 5.9, Chung and
Kassner developed a correlation for solubility of oxygen in β phase (Cs) as function of absolutetemperature (T) for as-fabricated Zircaloy-4 (hydrogen content <50 wppm):
Cs = exp (5.02 – 8220.0/T)
Cs = -2.505 +0.00211T

for T ≥ 1373.16° K
for T < 1373.16° K

Figure 5.9 Oxygen-rich-side Zircaloy-4-oxygen phase diagram determinedfrom metallography of quenched samples, from Chung and Kassner [17]As described in Chapter 1, pages 1-19, Pawel deduced 0.7 wt % as the threshold oxygen
concentration in β below which post-quench ductility was retained in the Zircaloy-4 specimens thatwere oxidized on two sides and tested by Hobson in 1973 [18,19]. It is interesting to note that thisthreshold concentration corresponds to true specimen temperature of ≈1 256°C rather than Hobson’s
furnace temperature of 1 204°C (2 200°F).
More recently the interest in the α to β transformation has grown because of the increased use of
Nb containing alloys and the expected high hydrogen concentrations in high burn-up fuel. Of particularimportance is the effect of increased concentration of H (a β stabiliser) on the solubility limit of O (an αstabiliser) in β phase.
94Forgeron et al. studied the transformation temperatures for Zircaloy-4, M4, and M5 alloys [20].
Their methods were calorimetry, dilatometry, and image analysis on elemental X-ray maps. A hightemperature high-sensitivity calorimeter was used with slow heating-cooling rates for determining quasiequilibrium values. For studies of the α→β kinetics a dilatometer was used on 12 mm long pieces ofcladding. The point of using cladding pieces instead of other forms of the alloys is that initial
metallurgical conditions were found to have a large effect on the α→β kinetics upon heating. On theother hand, compensation for texture and the resulting anisotropy of thermal expansion had to be made.
Volume fractions of α and β were also evaluated by image analysis on samples which had beenheat treated 2 hours at the equilibrium temperature. The microstructures used for image analysis were
Sn X-ray maps. Since Sn accumulates in α at the equilibration temperature and is a slow diffuser, the
X-ray maps should give a relatively accurate picture of the amount of α phase at temperature eventhough the samples were not quenched rapidly. The result of the image analysis compared to thecalorimetric results was that full equilibrium is not achieved by the 2-hour heat treatment.
The experimental results were compared to two analytical models. One model due to Holt et al.
on a mechanistic basis could be made to fit well to data from heatup but did not work well on datafrom cooling. Therefore the authors developed a more empirical model based on the sigmoidal shapeof the transformed volume fraction versus temperature curves. If y is the transformed volume fraction
the following equation leads to a sigmoidally shaped curve:

dy / dt = K (T ) ⋅ y ⋅ (1 − y )(5-14)

where K(T) is an empirical function of temperature:(

K = ± T − Teq ⋅ exp c1 + c 2 ⋅ T − Teq)(5-15)

The constants c1 and c2 are to be fitted to experimental data. Figure 5.10 shows how the model
works on two different cooling rates from 1 020°C.
Figure 5.10 Comparison between transformation models and experiments on cooling of Zircaloy-4

The same techniques were used in a study by Brachet et al. on the effect of hydrogen on thephase transformation of the same three alloys [21]. Figure 5.11 shows the effect of hydrogen on thetransformation temperatures of Zircaloy-4.
95

In the calorimetric measurements, they performed several cycles and noted that hydrogen was lostby desorption in each cycle. It was also possible to determine the hydrogen content after each cycle bynoting when hydride precipitation started. In a separate run with specimens with known hydrogencontent, it had been established that the onset of hydride precipitation agreed well with literature values.
Thus a curve like Figure 5.11 required fewer specimens than the number of data points suggests. Data
from dilatometric measurements were used to determine transformation temperatures at different
heating rates. The observations were used to calibrate a model for the transformation kinetics describedin detail in their paper [21].
Figure 5.11 Plot of Tα/α+β and Tβ/α+β temperatures measured upon heating and coolingat 10°C/min as a function of hydrogen content
The straight lines (average between heating and cooling) are assumed
to be representative of equilibrium temperatures [21]Note that in Figure 5.11, the β-to-α transformation in as-received Zircaloy-4 (hydrogen content≈15 wppm) starts at about 812-815°C, virtually the same as the equilibrium temperature shown in
Figure 5.11. This indicates that virtual equilibrium was maintained for the slow cooling rate of 10 K/s.
As part of a study on the creep rupture behaviour of Zircaloy-4 Sell and Ortlieb determined thephase fraction β with the aid of synchrotron radiation [22]. The measurements were done on electricallyheated tubes which were prevented from oxidation by an argon atmosphere. The synchrotron radiation
was monochromatised at a photon energy of 70 keV corresponding to 0.18 Å with a spot size of
2×1 mm2. A horizontal slice of the diffraction cone was recorded moving an image plate detector
continuously behind a slit. This permitted a quasi continuous evaluation of the kinetics of thetransformation. In one test series, the diffraction pattern as a function of the time was determined at
different temperatures. In another test series, the diffraction pattern as a function of the time wasdetermined at two different heat-up rates, 1 and 10 K/s. The evaluated phase fractions from thediffraction patterns agreed well with but did not exactly correspond to the data by Forgeron et al. [20].
5.1.4 Ductility tests
5.1.4.1 The ring compression test
Ever since the original work by Hobson and Rittenhouse [18-19] the ring compression test has
been the most widely used ductility test for determining cladding embrittlement after a LOCA
simulation. Its main advantage is that it is very simple to perform, requires a minimum of specimen
preparation and requires only a limited amount of material. Figure 5.12 shows an example of thearrangement for a ring compression test [23].
96Figure 5.12 The arrangement for a ring compression test [23]The experiment is typically performed with a displacement rate of the order of 1 mm/min and to apredetermined displacement, or until it is clear that the specimen has fractured. When the specimen
has been oxidized on the outside diameter only fracture occurs at the 3 and 9 o’clock positions whilewith two-sided oxidation it is also possible to have fracture in the 6 and 12 o’clock positions. Aninteresting question which seems to be rarely discussed in connection with the tests is whether or notthese positions are equivalent. A simple stress analysis based on the theory of the bending of beams
with constant curvature shows that there is a significant difference in the magnitude of the bending
moments between the 3 and 9 o’clock locations and the 6 and 12 o’clock locations. The bending
moment is in fact about 75% higher in the loading positions than in the horizontal diameter positions.
Since there is in the latter positions also a compressive stress due to the vertical load, the tensile stressin the horizontal positions is only about half of the tensile stress in the loading positions. Thesestatements are based on an analysis of the ring as a homogeneous isotropic material. The real case ofan oxidized ring is much more complex with outer layers of oxide and oxygen stabilised α whichcrack easily and a more or less brittle inner layer of prior β-phase. Figure 5.13 shows a representative
load versus displacement record from a ring compression test on a Zirlo ring.
Figure 5.13 Load-displacement record from a ring compression teston an oxidized Zirlo specimen [25]97The record shows three large load drops which correspond to fracture of the ring in one of thecritical locations. Quite frequently a load-displacement record will contain some minor load drops
corresponding to fracture of the oxide and/or α layer but the large load drops seen in the figure are
typical of all through cracks. The line drawn from the first load drop parallel to the elastic loading line
defines the offset displacement at fracture. If the offset displacement is divided by the specimen
diameter, a nominal plastic hoop strain at failure can be defined. According to Billone et al. [24], forsmall offset displacement, it is recommended to unload the specimen at the first load drop and measure
the difference between the diameter at the load point before and after testing. For some reason, this is
not equal to offset displacement evaluated from the load displacement record. The displacement divided
by the diameter is sometimes also called the “relative displacement” [23].
There seems to be no clear definition on what is an acceptable ductility from the ring
compression test. However, in most cases, when the ring compression test is used, tests are performedat several different levels of oxidation. Then, if the offset displacement at failure or the “residual
ductility” as defined by Yegorova et al, [23] is plotted against ECR there is usually a relatively narrow
ECR interval when the residual ductility decreases rapidly with ECR (Figure 5.14).
Figure 5.14 Residual ductility(defined as offset displacement at failure divided by ring diameter)plotted against ECR for E110 alloy [23]Then it is natural to define the critical ECR as that obtained by extrapolating the fall in residual
ductility to zero.
Another definition of unacceptable brittleness has been proposed by Hózer and Györy [26], andan example of its application can be found in a paper by Hózer et al. [27]. Hózer and Györy proposed
to use strain energy per mm of specimen length spent during the compression test up to the formationof the first through crack as a brittleness criterion. If the strain energy is <50 mJ/mm, the specimen isdefined as brittle. They note that any one of relative deformation, residual ductility or energy will
work as a fracture criterion but prefer the latter because of the similarity with the standard for reactor
vessel embrittlement. As another advantage they note that by using mJ/mm, it is possible to compare
specimens of different lengths. This is obviously also true for relative displacement at failure as well
as residual ductility unless length has some unexpected effect on the results of the ring compression
tests. That such unexpected effects are in fact absent has been verified by Yegorova et al. [23] in aseries of ring compression tests on specimens of different lengths, 8 mm, 15 mm and 25 mm.
However, they warn that in case short specimens that were oxidized in their final dimension are tested,
then the oxides present on the ends of the specimen may have an adverse effect on ductility.
98Quite clearly all the proposed criteria or test results will to some extent be dependent on cladding
dimension. This should be clear from the fact that results of calculations of the stresses for ahomogeneous material vary somewhat with cladding dimension. However, there are currently
relatively small differences between the dimensions of different types of tested cladding tubes.
Therefore, in view of the variations in results inherent in a complex process such as steam oxidation
followed by a ductility test, it seems reasonable to assume that these attempts to standardise thebrittleness criteria can be quite successful.
5.1.4.2 Ring tensile tests
The ring tensile test can be almost as simple to perform as a ring compression test. In a study ofoxygen embrittlement criteria Sawatsky [28] used rings of cladding tube in which D grips wereinserted to provide tangential load on the specimen. The D grips were attached to the pull rods of thetensile machine. The specimen circumference was taken as gage length. Friction between the specimen
and grips resulted in scattered and consistently low elongation values.
A bit more elaborate arrangement for a ring tensile test is shown in Figure 5.15 with the D grip in
the upper left corner of the Figure.
Figure 5.15 Components of a ring tensile test, D grip to the left and specimen to the right [29]Here the ring has been milled so that two parallel-sided gage lengths have been formed. The gagelength is loaded by the D grip which is connected to the tensile machine pull rods. It is necessary to
lubricate the surface between D grip and specimen in order to get a uniform value for the stress along
the gage length. Kim and Lee have shown that lubricating with vacuum grease or teflon tape results inalmost identical stress-strain curves [29]. An alternative way of performing the ring tensile test is toorient the gage lengths so that they are parallel with the loading direction. In this orientation
lubrication is less critical but with increasing deformation the specimen will tend to straighten in the
gap between the D grips. This disadvantage can be remedied to some extent by adjusting the shape of
the D grips so that supporting pieces with the same curvature as the inner surface of the cladding canbe placed at the gap.
The main difference between the ring compression test and the ring tensile test is the stress
distribution over the specimen wall thickness. In the compression test, it is a typical bending stress whichgoes from compression to tension. In the ring tensile stress, the stress distribution is approximately auniform tensile stress. In view of that difference, it seems possible that results of the two types of tests
will not give comparable results. However, Yegorova et al. have performed a comparison between thering compression test and ring tensile test. In tests performed on E110 alloy oxidized at 1 100°C, bothtypes of test resulted in the same value of the zero ductility threshold [23].
995.1.4.3 Tube bending tests
A typical three-point bending test is shown in Figure 5.16.
Figure 5.16 Three-point bending test apparatus, from [23]In the work reported in [23], the sample length was 80 mm and the distance between the outer
supports was 70 mm. Both the supports and the loading point were cylindrical rollers with 5 mm diameter.
This minimises friction effects during the bending of the tube. The specimen is typically loaded with
1 mm/min and the relation between displacement and load is recorded during the test. Typical records areshown in Figure 5.17.
Figure 5.17 Load-displacement records from three-point bend tests of oxidized Zircaloy-4 [30]In the three-point bend tests, the stress distribution is nominally uniform over the specimen thickness
while its magnitude and sign varies around the circumference. The word nominally is used because in a testof LOCA-oxidized material, the differences in properties between the different layers will lead to nonuniformity of the stress distribution during a test. It can be also noted that, in the three-point bend test, thematerial is stressed axially which is perhaps a more realistic loading situation in relation to real LOCA
loads. Yegorova et al. have also compared the three-point bend test with the ring compression test with100

regard to the critical ECR for clad embrittlement [23]. For E110 cladding tubes oxidized at 1 100°C, thezero ductility threshold determined by the three-point bend test was ECR=11.8% whereas the ring
compression test gave ECR=8.3%. In comparison with the ring compression test, Portier et al. have notedthat it is easier to detect complete failure through the cladding wall in the three-point bend test [31].
Occasionally four-point bend tests are performed. One such test is described schematically in
Figure 5.18. As shown in the figure, there is a constant bending moment between the two inner
supports. Therefore, the four-point bend test can be used to find the weakest point along the tube incase there are axial variations in brittleness or some other property of interest. In the case shown in
Figure 5.18, the burst location has been oriented so that it is subjected to a tensile stress. In cases
where tubes have burst, it is not necessarily the burst location which is the most brittle since innersurface oxidation after the burst may lead to extensive hydrogen pickup a few cm from the hole [32].
This effect makes it interesting to identify the weakest point axially on a tube after specimen burst.
Figure 5.18 Schematic description of a four-point bend test [33]5.1.4.4 Impact tests
An impact test reveals sensitivity to embrittlement at high strain rates. The reason why high strain
rate is conducive to more pronounced embrittlement is that the high strain rate results in a higher stresslevel for plastic deformation than a low strain rate. Some materials exhibit a brittle-to-ductile
transition behaviour in a narrow range of test temperature. Such materials have an intrinsic fracture
stress which when it is exceeded results in brittle fracture. Ductile behaviour starts when the in generaltemperature dependent yield strength falls below this fracture stress. In most impact tests, a notched
specimen is used. Just under the notched surface, a triaxial stress state is obtained which raises thegeneral stress level before yield. Thus, a brittle behaviour of materials with a brittle-to-ductile
transition will be obtained at a significantly higher temperature than under uniaxial loading.
Zircaloy or other zirconium alloys do not in themselves have a brittle-to-ductile transition.
However, ,when zirconium alloys contain a certain amount of hydrides a ductile-to-brittle transition isobserved in the temperature range 100-200°C, depending on alloy composition, hydrogen content andstrain rate [34]. Although it has not been investigated systematically until recently by Stern et al. [35], itis reasonable to assume that a ductile-to-brittle transition may also occur in zirconium alloys with an
oxygen content above a certain level as was in fact confirmed in the work by Stern et al. It is, however,well established that there is no ductile-to-brittle transition even at extremely low temperatures at theoxygen levels typical of commercial cladding, i.e. 0.10-0.14 wt %.
A more practical reason to perform impact tests in the LOCA context is that some of the loads ofconcern may be in the form of impact, for instance rod-to-rod impact in ballooned regions during
quenching or post-quench handling. In fact the first ring compression tests performed by Hobson andRittenhouse were impact tests in which 10.7 mm diameter rings were compressed 3.81 mm by impact
101

loading [19]. Later Hobson reported slower strain rate compression tests on the same material [18].
The results of these later tests are plotted in Figure 1.2 in which the zero ductility temperature (ZDT)
observed in the impact tests are shown as full lines while the ZDT estimated from the slow tests areshown as dashed lines. The difference in the zero ductility temperatures for the two types of test for agiven value of Fw can be calculated to be about 185 K from formulae given by Hobson [18].
Chung et al. attempted to determine basic information on fracture of Zircaloy-4 with different
oxygen contents with impact tests [36]. The material was sheet fabricated into 5×5 mm2 and 55 mm
long Charpy V-notch specimens. The specimens were oxidized in steam to produce oxygen contents
between 0.2 and 1. 2 wt %. After oxidation, the specimens were heat treated at 1 400°C for a sufficient
time to homogenise the oxygen. The success of the homogenisation was checked by microhardness
testing over the thickness. The impact tests were conducted in a dropweight machine. Instrumentationon the tup permitted recording of load- and energy-time data during a test. From the maximum load
during a test a dynamic fracture toughness could be evaluated as shown in Figure 5.19.
Figure 5.19 Dynamic fracture toughness of oxygen-alloyed Zircaloy-4

Chung et al. also impact tested Zircaloy-4 tubing after it had been subjected to steam oxidationtransients [36-37]. In one type of test, 152-mm-long undeforned two-side-oxidized tubes which had
survived a quench after steam oxidation were subjected to pendulum impact in a three-point bend
configuration with relatively small loads and a low tup velocity. Impact energies of 0.03, 0.15, and 0.3 J
were used. The results were later plotted together with failure data from quench tests to provide maps ofvarious degrees of embrittlement as a function of oxidation temperature and time at temperature and thedegree of oxidation.
In another type of test, 152-mm-long tube specimens were internally pressurised, ballooned,
burst, steam oxidized, slow-cooled, and quenched. After cooling to the test temperature, impact testing
was performed in-situ on tubes that survived the quenching thermal shock with both ends of the tubes
in fixed position. An 11-mm-wide impact tup with a tup radius of 1 mm was used. The bottom and the
top ends of the tube specimen were tightly fixed using a Sawgelok and a three-finger gripping device,respectively. The load was increased in 10 g steps until the tube failed. The energy was calculated as
E=mgh where m is the mass of the weight with tup, h the elevation before drop and g the gravitational
acceleration. Chung and Kassner [37] found that an impact failure energy of 0.03 J corresponds to thetube threshold oxidation state which separated failure and survival of the tube during bottom-flooding
and quenching. Therefore, the toughness of a test specimen that withstands 0.3-J impact isapproximately 10 times greater that the toughness required to survive the quenching thermal shock.

102

A more recent use of impact tests has been reported by Brachet et al. [30]. After an oxidationtransient one of the many experiments performed in the French programme to characterise post-LOCA
properties is an impact test on a notched specimen as shown in Figure 5.20. The notch serves mainly
to localise the fracture location. The wall thickness of the cladding is too small to produce any
significant triaxiality of the stress state below the notch surface. The impact energies seen in
Figure 5.20 can be compared to the tests performed by Chung and Kassner [36], with 0.03 J and 0.3 J
which translate to 0.15 J/cm2 and 1.5 J/cm2 ,respectively, for the cladding dimensions used by them.
Caution must be exercised, however, when one interprets a plot like Figure 5.20 in terms ofdegree of oxidation, because the combined effect of oxygen distribution in and the thickness of β layer
controls failure impact energy rather that the total weight gain from oxidation.
Figure 5.20 Notched impact specimen fabricated from oxidized cladding
Results of tests with this specimen type5.1.5 Oxidation tests
In early 1970s, cladding tube oxidation tests seem to have been regarded as fairly simple tests andin many cases only very sketchy descriptions are given. Hobson and Rittenhouse [19] describeoxidation of 0.45 m long cladding specimens in a ceramic muffle tube inserted in a furnace. Steamwas supplied from below in amounts so that the reaction was not steam limited. Exposure
temperatures were from 926 to 1 370°C with exposure times from 2 to 60 minutes.
A very important aspect of the early experiments of Hobson and Rittenhouse [19] and Hobson[18] in early 1970s is that apparently specimen temperature was not measured but was assumed to be
the same as the measured furnace temperature. This assumption may be reasonably accurate for low
temperatures, e.g., for <800°C. However, for high temperatures, e.g., >1 100°C, self heat generationfrom large exothermic heat of Zr oxidation is significant, and true specimen temperature must havebeen measured directly, e.g., by use of spot-welded thermocouples. Their papers do not mention this,and only describes the temperature variation of 6°C over a distance of 7.5 cm at the centre of thefurnace heat zone.
In view of this and similar lack of direct measurement of specimen temperatures in the oxidation
experiment of Baker-Just, ORNL investigators in late 1970s embarked on a series of oxidation
103

experiments, in which accurate specimen temperature measurement was one of the primary efforts.
Pawel et al. discuss the importance of accurate temperature measurement and control in order toachieve success in an experimental oxidation programme [16]. They devoted a substantial effort to thatproblem, which was described as difficult, not only because of the high temperatures involved but also
because of the environment in the steam oxidation experiments. Their experimental apparatuses andprocedures were designed to minimise errors in temperature measurements. This goal required
numerous tests and equipment modifications before the final version of their primary oxidation
apparatus was decided.
Figure 5.21 shows the apparatus used for most of their experiments. The MiniZWOK is a low
thermal inertia system in which the temperature of the specimen is controlled to a programmed
temperature-time excursion. The specimen is a 3 cm length of Zircaloy-4 PWR tubing supported
between two machined quartz tubes as shown in the insert. During an experiment steam flows past theoutside surface of the specimen while a slightly positive pressure of helium is maintained inside thesupport tube to prevent leakage of steam. Each specimen was instrumented at its midpoint on the innersurface with three carefully calibrated Pt/Pt-10Rh thermocouples. The thermocouples were welded on
the specimen using an iridium pad and positioned at 12, 1, and 6 o’clock. The diametrically positioned
couples were used for data acquisition while the 1 o’clock thermocouple was used for control oftemperature. Although this arrangement permitted arbitrary temperature excursions most experiments
were run as isothermal exposures. For each temperature investigated at least ten specimens wereoxidized. The apparatus has also been used in other studies [38].
Figure 5.21 The steam oxidation apparatus MiniZWOKThe ORNL investigators relied on heating from the outside in furnaces although with different
thermal inertias. From late 1970s and on, many other investigators commonly used welded
thermocouples to measure specimen temperature directly. Sawatsky also used a furnace for heating
and oxidizing 1 cm long specimens [39]. The specimens were pushed in and out of the furnace with aceramic push rod. The heating time for a specimen was about 10 s. In another facility Sawatsky used a
20-kW induction heating unit for heating the specimen which was placed on a zirconia pedestal inside104

a vertical quartz tube. The temperature was varied manually from 850°C to above the melting point ofzirconium. The steam was supplied by a 6 000 W steam generator at a rate of up to 1 g/s. The steam
was preheated to 660°C before entering the quartz tube. Sawatsky did not report any differences
caused by the two heating methods.
Dobson et al. used a commercial specimen heating system, a Gleeble, which originally is a weld
simulation system [40]. In the Gleeble, the specimen is heated by a current. In addition, the test facility
comprised a steam generator and superheating supply, a reaction chamber, a condensing system, and avacuum system. A control circuit within the Gleeble monitors temperature and compares measured
temperature to programmed temperatures. If there is any deviation, the system will correct it.
An interesting variant of induction heating was used by Urbanic [41]. Instead of tubes he usedcylindrical specimens about 2.54 cm in length and 1.27 cm in diameter. The specimen was supported
inside a graduated glass column by a recrystallised alumina tube closed at one end. The temperature
was measured with a thermocouple inside the alumina tube. The specimens were heated inductively
with a 30 kW induction heating unit. The surface temperature of the specimens was measured with an
optical pyrometer which had been calibrated against known melting points of various metals. Before
testing, the glass column was filled with water. The specimen was heated rapidly producing a steam
blanket around the specimen. The rate of hydrogen production from the reaction was determined bymeasuring the times it took to displace successive volumes of water from the top of the column. After
converting the gas volumes to standard temperature and pressure, the quantities of collected hydrogenwere converted to equivalent amounts of reacted Zry-2.5Nb. This was checked by weighing thespecimens after each exposure.
Leistikow and co-workers have performed extensive investigations of the oxidation of Zircaloy
tubing in steam using an atmospheric pressure steam loop with heating of 3 cm long segments of
cladding tube in a resistance furnace and the extent of oxidation estimated by both gravimetry andoxidized phase width measurements [42].They also in one case compared oxidation behaviour of
Zircaloy with stainless steel [43].
The Three Mile Island accident in 1979 resulted in an increased interest in zirconium alloy
oxidation at temperatures in excess of 1 200°C and in presence of hydrogen-steam mixtures. Figure 5.22
shows one arrangement for study of Zircaloy oxidation in a steam-hydrogen mixture used by Chung andThomas [44]. The bottom end of the specimen was tightly sealed to prevent access for the hydrogensteam mixture. The top end was left partially open to simulate fuel cladding rupture thus exposing thespecimen inner surface to a hydrogen-rich environment containing a limited amount of steam. The
specimen was heated by a-c power self-resistance. Specimen temperature was controlled by a feedback
circuit of the power supply driven by the amplified signal from a spot-welded thermocouple at the centre.
The pyrometer, calibrated against thermocouples, was used as an auxiliary temperature measurement.
Specimen temperatures from thermocouples were recorded as function of time under isothermaloxidation conditions.
Figure 5.23 shows a low-thermal-inertia equipment which also was used by Prater andCourtwright for measurement of oxidation kinetics at very high temperatures, higher than normal
LOCA temperatures although still of course of interest to the LOCA problem [45]. The specimen is
only 3.8 mm in diameter and 0.9 mm thick. The heating is accomplished from one side with a
defocussed CO2 laser beam. The temperature measurements by a pyrometer were considered to beaccurate to within 15°C. Oxidation was measured metallographically. The heating from one side
resulted in temperature gradients through the specimen which altered the cubic-to-tetragonal thickness
ratio at high temperature and which possibly may have an effect on the oxidation kinetics.

105

Figure 5.22 Apparatus for Zircaloy oxidationin hydrogen-steam mixtures

Figure 5.23 High-temperatureoxidation apparatus

The test specimen, with welded thermocouples,is placed in the centre of the bell jar
facing a pyrometer through a quartz glass.

A heating method not represented among the separate effects test of oxidation but widely used in
more integral experiments is the use of internal heating elements. This heating method is the one mostsimilar to the real case and a question arises whether or not the method of heating has any effect on theoxidation behaviour. This question has been discussed rather extensively in a paper by Ocken et al.
[46]. They distinguish between experiments with external heating, using radiant furnaces and what
they call internal heating, either resistance heating or inductive heating. They show that the oxidation
parameters evaluated from the different experiments agree fairly well but that there are statisticallysignificant differences between parameters from different types of experiments. They also note that themethod of determining the amount of oxidation does not play any role for the differences observed in
the oxidation parameters. The most important difference is that the experiments with external heating
have a slightly higher activation energy.
The method of heating also affects the relative thicknesses of the oxide and oxygen stabilised αlayers. This is a result of the sign and magnitude of the thermal gradient through the cladding duringoxidation. In an externally heated experiment the outside is hottest while in an internally heatedexperiment the inside tends to be hotter. This implies that in experiments in which specimens are
externally heated the oxide layer forms at a higher temperature than the stabilised α layer, with theconverse holding for experiments in which specimens are heated internally. Consequently, higher
oxide-stabilised α thickness ratios would be expected in those experiments in which specimens are
externally heated, since the range of oxygen concentrations in the α is greater when the temperature islower (see the phase diagram, Figure 5.9).
Some of the oxidation experiments have been conducted with continuous recording of the weightgain. One example is the Russian UNOPRO facility [47-48] shown in Figure 5.24.
The cladding samples used in the facility were typically 30 or 60 mm in length.

106

Figure 5.24 The UNOPRO facility for continuous recording of weight gain during oxidation

Another example of continuous recording of specimen weight gain has been reported by Baek et al.
[49]. The apparatus used is a modified Shimadzu TGA (Thermogravimetric Analyzer) (Figure 5.25).
The test specimen hangs freely from a Pt wire connected to the TGA apparatus. The steam
generator can supply steam continuously to the furnace. The steam flow rate was 0.5-0.6 mm/min so
as not to affect the weighing accuracy due to bouyancy effects. The weight change could bedetermined within ±0.001 mg. The heating rate used was 50 K/min and the temperature was controlled
to within ±0.°C by a computer system. The specimens were 8 mm in length and both ends of thespecimens were ground carefully by SiC 1200 emery paper to minimise the error during oxidation. A
typical weight gain versus time record is shown in Figure 5.26.
Figure 5.25 Facility for continuous recordingof specimen weight gain during oxidation
used by Baek et al. [49]Figure 5.26 Weight gain vs time record
for Zircaloy-4 oxidized at 900°C in thefacility shown in Figure 5.25

5.2 Tests with moderate integration
A possible classification of tests with moderate integration used in the present report is thefollowing:•••

Steam oxidation tests followed by quenching.
Deformation or ballooning tests in steam.
Constrained deformation or ballooning tests in steam with or without quench.

It should be noted that this overview is incomplete. Tests similar to those described subsequently
have been done at other laboratories. The purpose of the overview is rather to describe typical featuresof the various test techniques.
1075.2.1 Steam oxidation tests followed by quenching
The DEZIROX facility shown in Figure 5.27 is basically an oxidation test facility but qualifies as
an integrated test because it is possible to release the oxidizing specimen so that it falls down in a cold
water bath [30].
Figure 5.27 The DEZIROX oxidation and quench facility

As shown in Figure 5.27 the maximum temperature is 1 700°C. The purpose of the white tissue inthe water bath is to collect spalled oxide which can be weighed together with the oxidized specimen to
determine the total weight gain and the fraction of delaminated oxide. The length of the sample isnormally 150 mm and the temperature gradient along the tube is less than 20 K.
A similar facility used by Yegorova et al. is shown in Figure 5.28 [23].
The oxidation facility consists of the following basic elements:
•
•
•
•
•
•

Electric furnace.
Device for the movement of E110 sample in the several given positions (cold position, hot
position, and quench position).
Steam generator.
System to supply argon gas to the oxidation facility.
Measurement apparatus (measurement of temperature inside and outside of E110 sample,
temperature of water in the steam generator).
Tank with water in the low part of facility.

The electric furnace provides the radiant heating and cooling of cladding sample with various
heating rates. In the experiments, various types of temperature cycles were simulated, fast heating/fastcooling (FF), fast heating/slow cooling (FS), slow heating/fast cooling (SF) and slow heating/slow
cooling (SS) [23].
108Figure 5.28 Apparatus for oxidation tests of cladding followed by quench in water [23]The steam generator provides the generation of water steam with the following parameters:●●●

Temperature: 150°C.
Mass flow rate: 0.01–0.04 g/s (mass flow rate is a function of electric power).
Atmospheric pressure.

The system to supply argon gas to the oxidation facility was used at the beginning of each test
mode. The gas-supply system flushed the inner atmosphere of the test facility.
The temperature limit was used to change the type of coolant. The Ar flow was stopped at thetemperature about of 300°C and after that the heating was continued with the water steam. The
cladding samples used in the facility were empty cladding samples with a useful length of 100 mm.
The test specimens could be either open or closed. The specimen temperature was measured with athermocouple located inside the specimen. In a separate test series, it was determined that thisthermocouple registered the same temperature as a thermocouple spot welded to the outside of thespecimen except during the transient heating and cooling cycles termed F.
Another similar Russian facility described as a universal rig to investigate the behaviour of corematerials to overheated above the operating temperature in inert gas, air or steam gas environment,
UVS, is shown in Figure 5.29 [47].
Different fuel rod simulators were used in the rig in order to include the effect of pellets inside
the tubes on the possible embrittlement during the quench and subsequent disassembly and handling of
the specimen. Segments of fuel cladding irradiated to burn-ups from 46 to 50 MWd/kg have beentested in the facility.
109

Figure 5.29 UVS, the universal rig for testing overheated core materials

5.2.2 Deformation or ballooning tests in steam
Figure 5.30 shows a photograph of the PROPAT rig used at the Springfields laboratory in the
United Kingdom to study deformation of zirconium alloys cladding tubes in steam [50]. In the facility,
conditions could be arranged so that the heat loss is mainly by convective cooling with a heat transfer
coefficient of about 80 W/m2·K which is typical of those that are calculated to occur during a LOCA.
This required a steam flow of 80 litres/min in the arrangement shown in Figure 5.30. Radiative heatloss was minimised by surrounding the specimen with a cylindrical copper shroud, a half of which canbe seen behind the specimen in Figure 5.30. The choice of copper was dictated by its high reflectivity
in the wave length band of the spectrum typical of black body radiation at about 1 000 K. It wasestimated that 96% of the heat was reflected back so the specimen received about as much radiative
heat as if it had been surrounded by similar bodies at a temperature of (0.96)1/4T. With T=1 023 K thatgives an effective temperature of 740°C.
Figure 5.30 The PROPAT facility for study of cladding deformation in a steam atmosphere

110The specimen contained alumina pellets and an internal free volume of about 20 ml. The methodof heating was direct electric heating. The specimen was heated to about 600°C, held for about 60 s
while the internal pressure was applied, and then ramped at 10 K/s as measured by the centrally placed
thermocouple. The temperature at that point was maintained until the specimen failed.
An important purpose of the test arrangement described here was to determine the effect ofconvective cooling. The result is the carrot shaped specimen seen in Figure 5.30.
The arrangement used by Sagat et al. [51] in Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories for the study ofcladding deformation in a steam atmosphere is shown in Figure 5.31. The furnace chamber houses the
specimen which can be either vacuum at about 1.3 Pa or steam. The specimen is electrically heated byits own resistance (Joule heating). Temperature was measured by tungsten-rhenium thermocouples
which were spot-welded directly to the surface of the specimens. Prior to each test in steam, steam wasadmitted into the test chamber at a flow of 2 g/s to provide an oxidizing environment on the specimen
outside diameter. The apparatus was allowed to stabilise for 600 s and after the specimen wasinternally pressurised with helium to the test pressure after which the temperature was ramped until apredetermined strain was reached or until burst occurred. During the tests, the specimens were axiallyunconstrained and could freely expand or contract via an Edwards rotary seal.
Figure 5.31 Schematic diagram of ballooning test apparatus used at Chalk RiverAt CEA, in France, the EDGAR facility has been used for biaxial creep testing in a steam
atmosphere. The first EDGAR facility was used from the 1970s to determine the LOCA properties ofZircaloy-4 [52]. The EDGAR-2 facility shown in Figure 5.32 was built in 1993 to similar
specifications as the original EDGAR facility [20].
111The facility allows testing of any kind of simultaneous and independent thermal and pressuretransients on 490 mm length cladding specimens. To obtain rapid heating a low voltage alternating
electric current is passed through the specimen. It is regulated by a thyristor device controlled by feedback from the external clad temperature, Te, via a microcomputer that controls the whole test and also
performs data recording in real time. The specimen is internally pressurised by argon gas through a
servo-controlled device managed by the microcomputer. The tests are performed inside a containment
vessel in a flowing steam environment. To preserve the biaxial stress state of a closed-end tube, theupper grip of the specimen is free to move and its weight is compensated mechanically.
The EDGAR-2 facility operates in the temperature range 350 to 1 400°C in steady-state ortransient conditions. The heating rates can be controlled between 0.1 and 250 K/s. The maximum
internal pressure is limited to 200 bars. Pressure rates can be controlled between -10 to +10 bar/s intransient conditions.
The temperatures and the diametral deformation are measured at the same axial location of thespecimen, around the middle of the useful part of the specimen which is about 300 mm. The
temperature gradient in the useful part is less than 5 K. The external clad temperature is measured by
optical pyrometers or by spot-welded Pt-PtRh type thermocouples. The internal gas temperature ismeasured by an internal K type thermocouple. The change in the cladding diameter during the test is
continuously measured by a laser device that operates, like the pyrometers, through a quartz window
fitted in the vessel. The displacement of the top grip is measured by an inductive transducer. The realtime recording of the measurements was achieved by the microcomputer with an adjustable frequency
in the 0.5 to 5 Hz range.
Figure 5.32 Schematic view of the EDGAR-2 test facility [20]The tests are normally performed until cladding burst. Postmortem measurements, made with thinpaper ribbons, are made of three cladding circumferences, one at the largest diameter in the ballooned
section and one each on the two diameters located 20 mm above and below the edges of the burst
opening. The largest of these diameters defines the uniform elongation as the circumferential strain atthat section. The total elongation is defined as the circumferential strain at the largest diameter.
1125.2.3 Constrained deformation or ballooning tests in steam with or without quench
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Furuta and co-workers [53-55] performed ballooning
experiments in steam in which the cladding was axially constrained. More recently Nagase andcoworkers have performed similar experiments on hydrided, preoxidized and irradiated cladding [5664]. Figure 5.33 shows a schematic view of the test equipment. The appearance of the equipment vary
somewhat from publication to publication, the one chosen here is from [58].
The cladding tube is filled with alumina pellets to simulate the heat capacity of UO2 pellets. Afterwelding Zircaloy end caps to the cladding, the rods are pressurised to about 5 MPa with Ar gas atroom temperature and sealed. For non-irradiated cladding, the length used has been 580 mm while theirradiated cladding has been tested in lengths of 190 mm.
Figure 5.33 Test apparatus for constrained ballooning tests in steam [58]As can be seen in Figure 5.33, the furnace with the various connections is placed in the frame of atensile test machine in which one part of the cladding tube is fixed to the mobile cross-head while theother end is fixed to the frame. With the use of a servo-controlled machine, it is in principle possible tocontrol any parameter relevant for the cladding tubes. Tests have been run with a fully constrained
tube and with the axial load fixed at a constant value.
In a typical test, the cladding would be heated with a rate of 10 K/s. Steam is introduced prior theheat-up at a rate of about 36 mg/s, sufficient to oxidize the cladding without steam starvation. During
the heating up to the temperature for isothermal oxidation, the specimen normally ruptures. Typicallythe isothermal oxidation is run for 120 to 500 s.
At the end of isothermal oxidation, the axial restraint is initiated and the cladding is allowed tocool down in the steam flow to about 700°C when quenching starts by flooding the specimen withwater. The average cooling rate is about 20 K/s from the oxidation temperature to 900°C and about
5 K/s from 900 to 700°C. The water for the quench rises with a rate of 30 to 40 mm/s.
The test rod is quenched under non-restrained or restrained condition. The rod can be fully
restrained or fixed at a certain axial load in simulation of the frictional forces that occur between
cladding and spacer grids during a real LOCA.
113

Another apparatus for quench testing of ballooned cladding tubes under axial restraint used at
Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute is shown in Figure 5.34 [65-66]. The cladding tube length is
330 mm, 200 mm of which is considered the actual heating length. Direct heating by the specimen
ohmic resistance allows heating up to temperatures between 1 000 and 1 250°C. The specimen
temperature is measured by a pyrometer. To simulate the cooling during the ECCS phase of a LOCA,
the specimen is cooled to an intermediate temperature of 700°C for 100 s after oxidation and thenquenched.
Figure 5.34 Schematic illustration of the LOCA simulation facility
used at the Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute [65-66]

During the test, the specimen may be subjected to unnecessary loads due to an attached electrode,wire and connecting rod etc. In order to compensate for such a load, the same weight is applied with areverse direction to balance the net force in the test specimen to zero. A crosshead is installed in theupper part of the specimen to control the axial stress. A load cell and a linear variable differential
transducer is used to measure the change of specimen thermal stress and length during the oxidationand thermal shock All the data and procedures are collected and controlled by a computer.
5.3 Fully integrated tests
5.3.1 In-reactor tests
5.3.1.1 The FR2 facility
The FR2 research reactor a heavy water cooled and moderated tank reactor located at KfK was
shut down in 1981. The LOCA experiments were performed in the DK loop of the reactor which could
provide the desired thermal hydraulic conditions for the tests [67]. A simplified scheme of the DK
loop is shown in Figure 5.35.
During the steady state phase of the test the loop was operated at a pressure of 60 bar at a steam
temperature of about 300°C and a coolant mass flow of 120 kg/h. The loop was particularly suitablefor experiments on fuel rod failure because it was equipped with condensation and filter systems forretaining fission products and retarding noble gases.
114

Figure 5.35 Simplified flow scheme of the DK loop, operated with superheated steam,in the FR2 reactor

The test specimens were contained in the in-pile test section shown in Figure 5.36.
Figure 5.36 In-pile test section of the DK loop in the FR2 reactor (simplified)

The fuel rod design is shown in Figure 5.37. Its radial dimensions were identical to those of a fuelrod of a German 1 300 MWe PWR with an active fuel length of 50 cm. The test rod had only an upper
plenum compared with the two plenums of a German PWR fuel rod. The size of plenum volume
including the internal volume of the pressure measuring system was chosen to equal the void volumeof the two plenums in a PWR rod.
Figure 5.37 Test fuel rod design for the FR2 experiments

For comparison some unfueled test rods with internal electrical heaters were used in some of theexperiments. The design of the fuel rod simulators is shown in Figure 5.38.
115

Figure 5.38 Electrically heated fuel rod simulator design, heated section (not to scale)

Both the fuel rods and the electrically heated fuel rod simulators were instrumented withthermocouples and a pressure sensor. The pressure sensor was of strain-gauge type which was connectedto the plenum by a tube approximately 5 m long with an inside diameter of 1.6 mm. During preirradiation, the diaphragm through which the pressure sensor capillary tube would eventually penetrate
was protected by a specially designed end cap.
The nuclear test rods were initially filled with 0.3 MPa He at room temperature and pre-irradiatedin bundles of six rods in fuel element positions of the FR2 reactor. The coolant pressure was 2.5 bar
and the coolant temperature was 60°C.
Each test began with a steady state phase during which the rod was pressurised to the desired
level at steady state temperature by adding helium to the fission gas generated during pre-irradiation.
Also during this phase instrumentation calibration, rod power determination and axial flux profile
measurements were performed. The test rod was then exposed to a standard temperature history
derived from licensing calculations for a PWR fuel rods in a LB-LOCA. The transient in the test loop
was initiated by interruption of the loop coolant flow and system depressurisation. This was done by
rapidly closing the coolant shutoff valve and simultaneously opening a relief valve with a large crosssection downstream of the test section (Figure 5.35).
The coolant flow past the test rod decreased to zero and the system pressure to approx. 0.1 bar
within 8 to 10 s. During the subsequent heatup phase, the test rod power was kept constant until thetarget cladding temperature of approximately 930°C was reached. At that temperature, the rod power
was rapidly reduced by reactor scram. After the turnaround point as the result of the reactor scram,when the cladding temperature had decreased to about 730°C, the coolant mass flow reactivated and aquenching effect took place. Results of the tests can be found in Section 7.3.1.1.
116

5.3.1.2 LOC tests in the power burst facility
The power burst facility (PBF) at INEL in Idaho was a water-cooled and -moderated tank typeresearch reactor used for various reactor transient tests. One of the test series performed was the PBFLOC tests which simulated a large break LOCA. Four tests were performed with four fuel rods in eachtest. The rods were 15×15 PWR rods with a 0.91 m active length, each contained in a separate
unheated shroud. The rods were subjected to the same thermal-hydraulic conditions existing in the test
section (Figure 5.39).
The test transient starts from a steady-state regime under water at nominal condition: 320°C,
15.2 MPa, 45 kW/m linear heat rate. After isolation of the test section from the PBF circuit, a valve
opening leads to blowdown representative of a cold leg break large LOCA. The axial profile of thenuclear power has been flattened to simulate the mid height of a PWR. During the test the power ismonitored in order to reach and maintain the target temperature of the test.
The heating rate of the different rods in a test will vary between rods, depending on initial stored
energy and the fuel/clad heat transfer. After having maintained the plateau temperature for a sufficientduration so as to reach rod rupture, the test is terminated by quenching. Results and details of the PBFLOC tests are presented in Section 7.3.1.2.
5.3.1.3 PHEBUS test
The PHEBUS experiments are in-pile experiments which allow simulation of real fuel behaviourin bundle configuration involving all the potential phenomena in a plant [52,68]. The programme at
PHEBUS has been performed to fulfil the following general objectives:•••

To assess the phenomenology of the fuel rod behaviour under LOCA conservative conditions,
including rod rupture and a subsequent temperature plateau for clad oxidation up to theacceptance limit, before a final representative quenching.
To assess the adequacy of safety criteria with respect to the coolability of fuel rods and theclad embrittlement, so as to allow an assessment of safety margins.
To provide an experimental data base for the validation of computer codes used in thesimulation of the thermohydraulics and mostly the thermomechanics in LB LOCA, particularly
the CATHACOMB module of the CATHARE system code.
Figure 5.39 Cross-section of the PBF-LOC experiment

117

The central component of the experimental facility is the test train. It consists of a bundle of
25 rods of fresh UO2 fuel of PWR type on a 5×5 pattern, maintained by 4 Inconel spacer grids. The
fuel pins are 1 m long (0.8 m active length) and can be internally pressurised. The fuel bundle issurrounded by a massive Zircaloy-2 shroud that links the square section of the bundle to the circularsection of the concentric outer structures: a zirconia insulation layer and the Zircaloy-2 test tube
114 mm in O.D. The test tube is itself placed in successive concentric outer tubes (pressure tube andsafety tube) to insure the confinement of the test train and the circulation of coolant around it.
The test device is thus included in a loop inserted in the PHEBUS driver core that provides theneutronic flux for the nuclear heating of the test rods. The test loop (Figure 5.40) allows reproducing theinitial steady state conditions of the power plant, before transient initiation. The transient is initiated byisolating the test section of the loop containing the fuel bundle, then rapid opening of valves on the
upstream and downstream pipes to simulate breaks on the cold and hot legs. Simultaneously, the powerof the driver core is decreased to simulate the nuclear power transient following plant shutdown.
Figure 5.40 Schematic design of the PHEBUS test loop

The area of the breaks was adjusted in order to provide the desired system pressure history as
well as the flow rates in the hot and cold legs, that allows to control the position of the stagnation point(zero flow). Four injection lines, upstream and downstream of the test train, allowed the refill of theloop and the bundle reflooding after the blowdown phase.
The instrumentation is designed for two kinds of measurements, flow measurements and rod
bundle measurements.
For flows, the usual measurements were made of coolant temperatures in several places, ofsystem pressures, structure temperature and injection flow rates. In addition, two instrumental pipe
sections were installed in the hot and cold legs including gamma-ray, turbine and venturi, in order toobtain the best possible information on two-phase flows (Figure 5.40). A drag disk was also inserted at
the bottom of the test train (Figure 5.41), and gave valuable information on the flow at the bundle
inlet. For the last tests the flow at the bundle inlet was also measured with a turbine.
118

For the fuel bundle, the instrumentation shown in Figure 5.41 enables measurement of:
•
•
•
•
•

The cladding temperature.
The fuel centreline temperatures which enable along with cladding temperatures determinationof the thermal behaviour of the rods.
The gas plenum temperatures which, besides temperature transient measurements, giveaccurate determination of rod rupture times.
The rod internal pressure, which along with system pressure, give an indication of the loadon the cladding and of rupture time.
The nuclear power in the bundle by using fission chambers.
Figure 5.41 Test train instrumentation

An evaluation of the accuracy of the different measurements has been carried out, especially for the
cladding temperatures in transient conditions that were measured with thermocouples on the outer side.
A detailed specific study of the rod thermal behaviour has provided an estimate of the temperature
difference between clad and thermocouple, allowing an assessment of the influence of the thermocouples
on the rod thermal behaviour:•••

The small size of the thermocouples and the way they were implemented on the claddings
allows to limit the deviations induced by these sensors.
During the 1st temperature peak and the subsequent pseudo-adiabatic phase of the transient,
the TC induce a low temperature difference (around 10°C) in the circumferential temperature
distribution.
The difference between the “true” temperature and the measured one strongly depends on theheat flux exchanged on the clad surface: it remains <20°C for low heat fluxes but can reach
50°C for the more elevated heat flux in the cooling phase.
1195.3.1.4 LOCA tests in the Halden reactor
5.3.1.4.1 The IFA-511.X and IFA-54X experiments
The IFA-511.X and IFA-54X experiments were performed in one of the four flow starvation
facilities of the Halden reactor. A scetch of the facility is shown in Figure 5.42 [69].
Figure 5.42 Sketch of the flow starvation facility

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Main circulation pump.
Flow regulating valve.
Electric heater.
Main circuit cooler.
Regenerative cooler.
Purification circuit cooler.

7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

Cooler.
Ion exchanger.
Helium pressurising tank.
Water supply pump.
Graphite seal unit.
Seal.

13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.

Heat exchanger.
Central tube for cabling.
Pressure flask.
Shroud.
Triangular tube for cabling.
Tube for water downflow.
Fuel rods.

The IFA-511X experiments were pure thermohydraulic experiements and were performed with abundle with 7 rods in a circular configuration. In the ballooning tests IFA 54X the 5 rod bundle was in
the form of a cross (Figure 5.43). Four downcomer tubes were placed in the corners of the cross tocomplete a 3×3 square array. The unheated downcomers presented to the other rods curved surfaces
corresponding to cladding at a strain of 33%.
One of the objectives of the IFA-511.X and IFA-54X experiments was to determine if there wereany differences between nuclear heating with fuel pellets and internal electric heating used in manyout-of-pile experiments. Therefore about half of the experiments were performed with nuclear heatingand half with internal electric heating using either REBEKA heaters (Figure 5.47) or a heater called
the Semiscale heater. The experiments were monitored by several thermocouples at critical locations.
The cladding was Zircaloy-2 with 9.5 mm diameter and a fuelled length of 1 482 mm. The rods had acold fill pressure of 5 MPa with He. The free volume was 25.5 cm3 [70].
120The transients of the test series were initiated by a blow-down phase, usually a hot leg blow down,
opening an electric valve connected with an ambient pressure tank. When local dry-out conditions wereachieved, the heat-up phase started. At a predetermined time, the reflood coolant was injected into theassembly, controlled by the proper flow restriction valves.
Figure 5.43 Cross-section of the IFA-54X assembly and pressure flask

5.3.1.4.2 The IFA-650.X test series
The test conditions in the IFA-650.X series are planned to meet the following primary objectives:●●

To maximise the ballooning size to promote fuel relocation and to evaluate its possible effecton the cladding temperature and oxidation.
To investigate the extent (if any) of “secondary transient hydriding” on the inner side of thecladding around the burst region.

Test are planned to be carried out on pre-irradiated fuel rods with high burn-up. The rods arefilled with a gas mixture of 5% helium and 95% argon at typically 40 bar. Argon is used to simulatefission gases whereas a small amount of helium is required for leak test of the rod.
The fuel rod is located in a standard high-pressure flask in the IFA-650 test rig, which is connected
to a high-pressure heavy water loop and a blow-down system. A simplified layout of the loop ispresented in Figure 5.44. During normal operation prior to the test, the rig is connected to the loop.
Shortly before the test start the outer loop is bypassed, and after a few minutes with natural circulationin the rig the LOCA is initiated by opening the valves leading to a 110-litre shielded blow-down tank.
The initial pressure in the loop is ~70 bar and the counter pressure in the blow-down tank is ~2 bar. A
gamma monitor is placed on the blow-down line to measure total transported activity.
The rod is located in the centre of the rig and surrounded by an electrical heater inside the flask.
The heater is part of a flow separator, which divides the space into a central channel surrounding thefuel rod and an outer annulus. The heater length is slightly longer than the fuel length, ~518 mm.
121

Figure 5.44 Simplified drawing of the loop used for the IFA-650 experiments [71]
F
631

P
630

purification
system

TA6300
40l

T
632

VA
6308

VA 6300
HA 6301

VA 6307
PA 6300

HA 6303
VA
6306
VA
6305
P
632

spray system

VA 6301

He55
15kW

VA 6327
VA 6331

VA 6302
VA
6303

VA 6328

P
639
P
634

T
630

VA 6304
P
631

TA6301

VA 6333

Mon 40

T
633

HA 6302

VB 606
VB 605

IFA-650

VA 6334= flow during forced circulation= flow in the isolated loop during natural circulation phase and blow-down of the rig= flow from the rig to TA6301 during blow down ("LOCA")

The pressure flask is inserted inside a shroud with a He3-coil incorporated. Neutron detectors areattached inside the He3-coil. The heater is used to simulate the isothermal boundary conditions, i.e.
heat from adjacent fuel rods during a LOCA. Cladding temperature is influenced by both rod andheater power. The rod power can be controlled by changing the reactor power and by the He3-coil.
However, the He3-coil is not used in every test.
A schematic of the test rig with its instrumentation is shown in Figure 5.45 together with the crosssection of the test rig. The rig instrumentation consists of three cladding surface thermocouples (TCC), a
cladding extensometer (EC), a fuel pressure sensor (PF), two fast response cobalt neutron detectors andthree vanadium neutron flux detectors at three elevations, two heater surface thermocouples (TCH) andthermocouples at the inlet (TI) and outlet (TO) of the rig. Two cladding thermocouples are located 8 cm
below the fuel top and one 10 cm above the fuel bottom. The fourth cladding thermocouple, TCC3, isplaced “hanging” in the inner flow channel ~9 cm above the fuel top. The temperature of the heater ismeasured by two embedded thermocouples, one 10 cm below the fuel top and the other 3.5 cm below thefuel mid plane. The axial power distribution can be observed by three self-powered vanadium neutron
detectors (ND). Rapid power changes can be monitored using two fast responding cobalt NDs.
In the preparatory phase of a test the rod is at a predetermined LHGR with the outer loop
connected and forced circulation flow. Then the LHGR is reduced to ~0.1 kW/m by decreasing reactor
power. At this stage the heater is turned on to a preset value. The power levels are based on previous
tests and calculations to achieve the desired peak cladding temperature.
When the correct power level has been reached the rig is disconnected from the loop. At thisstage, there is natural convection flow in the rig and still full pressure. The temperatures in the rig areallowed to stabilise before blow-down which is started opening the valve to the dump tank. The rig ispractically emptied of water in a few tens of seconds.

122

Figure 5.45 The test rig used in the IFA-650 tests (left) anda cross section of the test rig with outer shroud (right)

Stagnant superheated steam around the test rod provides inadequate cooling and the fuel cladding
temperature increases rapidly. The heater power is turned down stepwise when target temperature isapproached. Ballooning and rupture will usually take place during the heat up phase and is detected by
the pressure drop in the rod. Depending on the desired character of the transient spray injection can bestarted as appropriate. After the test, the outer loop is not reconnected in order to avoid contamination.
The rig is filled with helium to secure dry storage.
5.3.1.5 BTF test
5.3.1.5.1 Introduction
Integrated tests on CANDU fuel elements were carried out in a specially designed facility called
Blowdown Test Facility (BTF) in Canada. The BTF experiments were performed in the NRU reactor
at the Chalk River Laboratories of AECL. The CANDU Owners Group (COG) sponsored the BTF
experiments under joint funding from Ontario Power Generation (OPG), Hydro Québec, New
Brunswick Power, and AECL.
Four BTF in-reactor experiments were performed in order to improve the understanding of
CANDU fuel and fission-product behaviour under accident conditions, and to provide data for use inreactor safety code validation [72]. All four BTF tests have been completed.

1235.3.1.5.2 Description of facility and test results
BTF tests were conducted in the NRU reactor at the AECL Chalk River Laboratories [72]. The
insulated test section was oriented vertically in a Zircaloy re-entry flow tube, which fit inside a thickwalled stainless-steel pressure tube located in the reactor core. The BTF test section and the NRU
reactor core had separate heat transport systems. Test assemblies in the BTF were cooled withpressurised water or saturated steam. An accident sequence was initiated by isolating the in-reactor test
section from the rest of the loop, and voiding the coolant through an instrumented blow-down line anda wire-mesh filter into a sealed tank in the basement of the reactor building. Steam, inert gas and cold
water were available for post-blow-down cooling in the BTF. The blow-down line was instrumented
to measure coolant thermalhydraulic parameters and fission-product γ emissions.
In the BTF-107 experiment, a three-element cluster of CANDU-sized fuel elements was
subjected to severely degraded cooling conditions resulting in a high-temperature (≥2 770 K) transient[73-74]. A partial flow blockage developed during the test due to relocation of a molten U-Zr-O alloy
and the high-temperature transient was terminated with a cold-water quench. The results of the BTF107 test were used in development and validation of safety thermalhydraulics and fuel behaviour
codes [73,75].
The other three experiments in the BTF programme, BTF-104, BTF-105A and BTF-105B, wereconducted with single CANDU-sized fuel elements at maximum temperatures of 1 800-2 200 K in
steam-rich environments. The tests were performed to evaluate the behaviour of a CANDU fuelelement and the resultant fission-product release and transport in a LOCA/LOECC scenario.
•••

The BTF-104 experiment, provided data on fuel behaviour and volatile fission-productrelease and transport (Kr, Xe, I, Cs, Te and Ba) from a previously irradiated fuel element at avolume-averaged fuel temperature of about 1800 K [76-79].
The BTF-105A experiment used an internally instrumented fresh fuel element [80-83]. The
BTF-105A test provided data for validation of transient fuel performance codes and tested
instrumentation for the BTF-105B experiment.
The BTF-105B experiment investigated fission-product release and transport from apreviously irradiated fuel element at an average fuel temperature of 2 100 K [84-85]. The
thermalhydraulic boundary conditions for the BTF-105B test were better quantified than forprevious BTF tests due to improved measurements of fuel-cladding temperature, flow andneutron flux, and better control of steam condensation in the test section.

Data from BTF-107, BTF-104 and BTF105A experiments were used to qualify the transient fuelcode ELOCA [86], used in CANDU safety analysis. Data from BTF-105A experiment was also usedby OPG to qualify the fuel and fuel channel safety analysis code FACTAR [87]. The fission-productrelease, deposition and aerosol measurements from the BTF-104 and BTF-105B tests are being used tovalidate the fission product fraction release code SOURCE [88] and the fission product transport code
SOPHAEROS [89].
5.3.2 Out-of-reactor integral tests
5.3.2.1 The REBEKA programme at Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe (KfK)This programme [90] uses single and multi-rod geometries to investigate the deformation of
Zircaloy fuel cladding during the refilling and reflooding phases of a LOCA (Figure 5.46).

124

Figure 5.46 Fuel rod cladding loading in a 2F-cold leg break LOCA

There is particular emphasis on the conditions relating to the KWU design of PWR which
includes hot leg injection of cooling water in addition to the cold leg injection used in US-designed
PWRs. The fuel rod has a plenum at both top and bottom instead of one at the top as in US designs.
There is thus more than double the internal volume in the German rod, i.e.~40 cm3 [91].
The source of heat in REBEKA is an internal electrically heated fuel simulator shown in
Figure 5.47 [92]. The multi-rod tests use full-length rods (heated length 3 900 mm) with spacer grids at
positions corresponding to those in a fuel assembly. The test loop can provide steam cooling from the
top to simulate hot leg injection effects, and steam or reflooding water from the bottom. These facilities
enable the rig to simulate the adiabatic heating of a “blown-down” core followed by emergency cooling(Figure 5.48).
Figure 5.47 The REBEKA fuel rod simulator

125

Figure 5.48 Test loop for ballooning experiments. Bundle tests (REBEKA) [92]The test procedure is firstly to circulate water around the lower part of the loop and steam down
the test section; both exit via the same valve. Meanwhile the test bundle is heated to about 800K andthe rods are pressurised. Then they are fed with 8.57 kW each which causes them to ramp in the
downward flowing steam at about 7 K/s. Reflooding is initiated by shutting the exit valve which forces
the circulating water to flow up the test section. This firstly reverses the flow of steam and then, as thewater contacts the hot rods, produces an upward flow of steam with entrained water droplets i.e. twophase cooling. During reflooding, the power is reduced to 6.6 kW ±3% to give 20 W/cm, equivalent todecay heat, in the central region of the fuel rod simulators. The reason for the extra power during heatup is that the rods have about 20% greater heat capacity than an actual fuel rod and thus require theextra power ramp at the rate calculated for actual fuel rods.
5.3.2.2 Single and multi-rod tests at the Japanese Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI)
The rod size used in the JAERI tests, which have 7×7 arrays, represents those used in a 15×15
type of PWR fuel assembly. Figures 5.49 and 5.50 are schematic representations of the test rig andheating systems whilst Figure 5.51 shows the location of the thermocouples [93].
The heat source for the cladding in the more recent tests, i.e. number 5 onwards, was six W-3%
Re wires, running through holes in a stack of alumina pellets. The minimum distance between theouter edge of the pellet and the surface of the wires was 0.05 in. The W-3% Re wire has a higher
positive temperature coefficient of resistivity than either the Kanthal used in the ORNL heaters orInconel used in the Kf K heaters. Because of this a hot spot tends to cause an increase in local heatgeneration i.e. at 1 000° a 50°C local increase in the temperature of the wire results in a 5% increase inlocal heat generation [94].
The tests are conducted in a steam atmosphere but the flow rate was so low in most of the tests
reported in Section 7, that flow effects can be discounted. A higher steam flow, 5.79 g/cm min, hasbeen used in later work; however, this is still lower than that used in the ORNL test series [94].
The system for destructive examination of the test assemblies is unique; they are disassembled
first into vertical rows and photographed, then into individual rods, and measured, then all the rods arereassembled into a 7×7 array set in resin and finally sectioned horizontally (Figure 5.52).

126

Figure 5.49 Schematic diagram of the facility for burst test of a fuel assembly at JAERI

Figure 5.50 Schematic drawing of the fuel rods and the heating system of the JAERI tests

127

Figure 5.51 Locations of the thermocouples in the JAERI tests

Figure 5.52 Sequence of the post burst examinations of an assembly in the JAERI tests

1285.3.2.3 Single and multi-rod burst test (MRBT) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), USA
A series of tests at ORNL sponsored by the USNRC started in 1975 and had the following
objectives: effects of rod to rod interaction on failure behaviour, magnitude and geometry of resulting
blockage patterns, rupture temperature-pressure inter-relationships, flow resistance coefficients as afunction of flow blockage and to provide an internally consistent data set that is amenable to statisticalanalysis.
The Zircaloy-4 tubing used was from the master lot purchased specifically for use in all the NRC
cladding research programmes [95]. The dimensions (10.92 mm o.d. wall thickness 0.635 mm) wereintermediate between then current PWR and BWR designs. The electric heater rod used to simulate
the fuel had a spiral wound Kanthal heating element and a uniform heat flux profile [96]. In the outer
stainless steel sheath, there were four grooves spaced at 90° in which lie thermocouples attached attheir ends to the inner cladding surface (Figure 5.53). The test specimens had a heated length of
915 mm and an internal gas volume of 49-51.5 cm3, which is the minimum that is attainable with thisparticular design. Of this volume, 13% is in the heated portion of the annulus between the heater andcladding and 10% in the unheated portion, 33% in the pressure transducer and piping, and 44% in theend regions (mainly the upper) of the test specimen. This volume is about the same as used in the
REBEKA fuel simulators but over twice that used in the then current U.S. PWR fuel (~17 cm3).
Figure 5.53 MRBT fuel pin simulator also used in the single-rod tests [97]In the multi-rod burst tests, the test vessel shown in Figure 5.54 was used [98]. The fuel pin
arrays were suspended from the vessel cover flange to allow free axial movement. A thin shroud
surrounded the test arrays to provide well-defined flow boundaries. The arrangement shown in the
Figure is for the 4×4 tests when an electically heated shroud located 13 mm from the rod grid wasused. Heating of the shroud at a temperature close to that of the test array has provided a good radial
temperature boundary. However, the large spacing between shroud and outer rod rows has allowed
non restrained deformation and bowing of these outer rods without contact.
The tests carried out on a 8×8 rod array used an unheated shroud spaced 1.8 mm from the outersurface of the outer rods row (that is nearly one half of the gap thickness between two adjacent rods).
This low spacing did not allow a direct resistance heating of the shroud as in the 4×4 and 6×6 tests.
Therefore, the shroud was made of a thin (0.1 mm) stainless steel layer, with a highly polished goldplated inner surface to minimise thermal capacity and radiative losses. The stainless steel sheet was
backed on the outside with an isolating and strong support structure.

129

Figure 5.54 Schematic of the B1 4×4 multi-rod test assembly

Preparations for a test included equilibration at initial temperature conditions using electric heaters
external to the test vessel and a small downward flow (288 g/s/m2) of low-pressure superheated steam.
Power was not applied to the simulators during equilibration. Immediately prior to the transient, thehelium pressure inside the simulators was adjusted to a value that would cause fracture in the high α
range. Then the simulators were individually isolated from the gas supply system to ensure testing underconditions of constant gas inventory. The tests were conducted under essentially constant heating rate
conditions by applying d-c voltage at a constant value. Figure 5.55 shows typical data recorded by thecomputer-controlled data acquisition system during the B-3 test. The data system also counted the tube
bursts as they occurred and generated a signal to terminate the power input after the final tube burst.
Figure 5.55 Typical simulator response in the B-3 test [99]130Post-test examination included casting each array in an epoxy matrix and sectioning it at 10- to
20-mm intervals. Enlarged photographs of the sections were digitised to facilitate computer analysis of
the deformation data. These data were processed to obtain strain profiles of the individual tubes,
deformed tube areas and centroids, and flow area restriction as a function of bundle axial position.
5.3.2.4 The Russian PARAMETR-M and TEFSAI-19 facilities
In Russia, fully integrated tests are carried out on 19 and 37 rod VVER type assemblies in theelectroheated facilities PARAMETR-M and TEFSAI-19 [100]. The PARAMETR-M facility is locatedat the Science Industrial Association, “LUCH”, while the TEFSAI-19 facility is located at the
A.A. Bochvar All-Russia Research Institute of Inorganic Materials, VNIINM.
Variables studied in the experiments are heating rate, max fuel rod cladding temperature, steam
flow rate, quench conditions and fuel rod cladding material.
The objectives of the experiments and post-test examinations are:●●●Investigation of the temperature-force loading parameters, corresponding to different
thermohydraulic LB-LOCA scenarios, influence on the assemblies damage characteristics.
Research of deformation behaviour of the fuel rod simulator claddings gathered in an assembly
and their depressurisation parameters (temperature, pressure, deformations and coordinates ofplaces of rupture).
Definition of the FA cross-section blockage and cladding balloonings distribution along theassembly height.

Verification of the codes used to design VVER-type reactors is an important goal of the integral
experiments. The results of the experiments presented are used for verification of the RAPTA-5 code.
The 37-rod VVER fuel assembly used in the PARAMETR-M tests is shown in Figure 5.56 andthe electroheated and passive rods used in the assembly is shown in Figure 5.57. The fuel assembly isplaced in a hexagonal Zr1%Nb shroud with thermal insulation of porous ZrO2.
In the 37-element assembly the central simulator and 12 simulators of the second row are passive,
while 6 simulators of the first row and 18 of the fourth are electro-heated by means of the central
tungsten electrode.
The 19-element assemblies tested on the PARAMETR and TEFSAI-19 facilities have a similar
design. All the fuel rod simulators of the 19-element assembly are electro-heated.
Cladding thermocouples and the internal pressure transducers are used to record pressure andtemperature during the experiments. After the experiments the FAs are dismantled and the claddings
cross-section perimeters are measured.
The calculated estimated cross section blockage for the hexagonal cell of one fuel rod isdetermined using the equation:⎛ 3⎞
Bsin gl = π R 2 − R02 / ⎜⎜H gr − πR02 ⎟⎟ × 100% (5-16)
⎝ 2
⎠

(

)

where R0 is the initial radius of the rod, R the post-test radius taking crack width into
account, and Hgr the pitch of the hexagonal grid.

131

Figure 5.56 Schematic view of the 37-rod assembly in the PARAMETR-M facility132

Figure 5.57 Schematic view of the fuel rod simulators used in PARAMETR-M
and TEFSAI facilities

The assembly cross section is calculated as an arithmetic mean of the blockages Bsingl as afunction of axial location z:

B( z ) = ∑ Bi ( z ) / N(5-17)

where N is the number of fuel rods in an assembly and Bi(z) the cross section
blockage for the i:th simulator as a function of the axial coordinate z.

133

5.4 References
1.

Hardy, D.G., “High temperature expansion and rupture behaviour of Zircaloy tubing”, Topical
Meeting on Water Reactor Safety, 1973, Salt Lake City, USA, pp. 254-273.

2.

Hunt, C.E.L. and Foote, D.E., “High temperature strain behaviour of Zircaloy-4 and Zr-2.5Nb
fuel sheaths”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1976, Quebec, Canada, ASTM STP 633,
ASTM, pp. 50-65.

3.

Hunt, C.E.L. and Newell, W.G., “Effect of Β-phase heat treatment on the subsequent α-phaseballooning behavior of Zircaloy-4 fuel sheaths”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: (Fourth
Conference), 1978, ASTM STP 681, ASTM, pp. 447-464.

4.

Rose, K.M. and Hindle, E.D., “Diameter increases in Steam Generating Heavy Water Reactor
fuel cans under loss-of-coolant conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1976, Quebec,
Canada, ASTM STP 633, ASTM, pp. 24-35.

5.

Fiveland, W.A., Barber, A.R., and Lowe, J., A.L., “Rupture characteristics of Zircaloy-4 cladding
with internal and external simulation of reactor heating”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry,
1976, Quebec, Canada, ASTM STP 633, ASTM, pp. 36-49.

6.

Chung, H.M., Garde, A.N., and Kassner, T.F., “Deformation and rupture behavior of Zircaloy
cladding under simulated loss-of-coolant conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1976,
Quebec, Canada, ASTM STP 633, ASTM, pp. 82-97.

7.

Franklin, D., “Theory of plastic instability in thin-wall tubes’, Acta Metallurgica, 20(1972),
pp. 839-843.

8.

Garde, A.N., Chung, H.M., and Kassner, T.F., “Micrograin superplasticity in Zircaloy at 850 C”,
Acta Metallurgica, 26(1978), pp. 153-166.

9.

Kearns, J.J., McCauley, J.E., and Nichols, F.A., “Effect of α/β phase constitution onsuperplasticity and strength of Zircaloy-4”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 61(1976), pp. 169-184.

10. Rizkalla, A., Holt, R.A., and Jonas, J.J., “Deformation of oxygen enriched Zircaloy-4 at elevatedtemperatures”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry (Fourth Conference), 1978, Stratford-on-Avon,
UK, ASTM STP 681, ASTM, pp. 497-513.
11. Hindle, E.D., “Stress rupture and creep of Zircaloy-4 fuel cladding in the temperature range 875
to 915 K”, UKAEA Report ND-R-191(S), September 1978.
12. Rosinger, H.E., et al., “The steady-state creep of Zircaloy-4 fuel cladding from 940 to 1873 K”,
AECL-6193, Nov. 1978.
13. Rosinger, H.E., Bera, P.C., and Clendenning, W.R., “Steady-state creep of Zircaloy-4 fuelcladding from 940 to 1873 K”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 82(1979), pp. 286-297.
14. Ortlieb, E., Cheliotis, G., and Weidinger, H.W., “Influence of the initial material condition on the
deformation behavior of Zircaloy cladding tubes in the high-α-phase region”, Zirconium in the
Nuclear Industry: Seventh International Symposium, 1985, Strasbourg, France, ASTM STP 939,
ASTM, pp. 539-554.
15. Douglass, D.L., “The metallurgy of zirconium. Atomic Energy Review, Supplement. 1971,
Vienna: IAEA.
16. Pawel, R.E., et al., “Diffusion of oxygen in β-Zircaloy and the high temperature Zircaloy-steam
reaction”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1976, Quebec, Canada, ASTM STP 633, ASTM,
pp. 119-133.

134

17. Chung, H.M. and Kassner, T.F., “Pseudobinary Zircaloy-oxygen phase diagram”, Journal of
Nuclear Materials, 84(1979), pp. 327-339.
18. Hobson, D.O., “Ductile-brittle behavior of Zircaloy fuel cladding”, ANS Topical Meeting on
Water Reactor Safety, 1973, Salt Lake City, pp. 274-288.
19. Hobson, D.O. and Rittenhouse, P.L., “Embrittlement of Zircaloy Clad Fuel Rods by SteamDuring LOCA Transients”, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL-4758, January 1972.
20. Forgeron, T., et al., “Experiment and modeling of advanced fuel rod cladding behavior under
LOCA conditions: Α-Β phase transformation kinetics and EDGAR methodology”, Zirconium in
the Nuclear Industry: Twelth International Symposium, 1998, Toronto, ASTM STP 1354, ASTM,
pp. 256-278.
21. Brachet, J.-C., et al., “Influence of hydrogen content on the α/β phase transformation
temperatures and the thermal-mechanical behavior of Zy-4, M4 (ZrSnFeV), and M5 (ZrNbO)
alloys during the first phase of a LOCA transient”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: ThirteenthInternational Symposium, 2001, Annecy, ASTM STP 1423, ASTM, pp. 673-701.
22. Sell, H.-J. and Ortlieb, E., “Effects of α-β transformation on high temperature (LOCA) creep
behavior in Zr-alloys”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Thirteenth International Symposium,
2001, Annecy, ASTM STP 1423, ASTM, pp. 658-672.
23. Yegorova, L., et al., “Experimental study of embrittlement of Zr-1%Nb VVER cladding under
LOCA-relevant conditions”, NUREG/IA-0211, IRSN 2005-194, NSI RRC KI 3188, March 2005.
24. Billone, M., Yan, Y., and Burtseva, T.A., “Post-quench ductility of Zircaloy, E110, Zirlo andM5”, SEGFSM Topical Meeting on LOCA Issues, 2004, Argonne, USA.
25. Yan, Y., Burtseva, T., and Billone, M.C., “Post-quench ductility results for Zry-4 and ZIRLO
oxidized at 1000 C and 1100 C”, Argonne National Laboratory, (available at www.nrc.gov in
NRC’s public document system, ADAMS, as ML041420178).
26. Hózer, Z. and Györy, C., “Derivation of a LOCA ductility limit from AEKI ring compression
tests”, SEGFSM Topical Meeting on LOCA Issues, 2004, Argonne, USA.
27. Hózer, Z., et al., “Ductile-to-brittle transition of oxidised Zircaloy-4 and E110 claddings”,
Journal of Nuclear Materials, 373(2008), pp. 415-423.
28. Sawatsky, A., “Proposed criterion for the oxygen embrittlement of Zircaloy-4 fuel cladding”,
4th Symposium on Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1978, Stratford-on-Avon, ASTM STP-681,
ASTM, pp. 479-496.
29. Kim, S. and Lee, C., “Mechanical tests based on ring tensile tests of high burn-up nuclear fuelcladding in hot cell”, SEGFSM Topical Meeting on LOCA Issues, 2004, Argonne, USA.
30. Brachet, J.-C., et al., “Mechanical behaviour at room temperature and metallurgical study of low
tin Zy-4 and M5 (Zr-Nb) alloys after oxidation at 1100 C and quenching”, IAEA TechnicalCommittee Meeting on Fuel behaviour under transient and LOCA conditions., 2001, Halden,
Norway, IAEA, pp. 139-158.
31. Portier, L., et al., “Influence of long service exposures on the thermal-mechanical behavior of Zy4 and M5 alloys in LOCA conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: FourteenthInternational Symposium, 2004, Stockholm, ASTM STP 1467, ASTM, pp. 896-920.
32. Uetsoka, H. et al., “Zircaloy-4 cladding embrittlement due to inner surface oxidation undersimulated loss of coolant conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 18(1981),
pp. 707-717.

13533. Yan, Y., Billone, M., and Burtseva, T.A., “LOCA test results for high-burn-up BWR fuel andcladding”, SEGFSM Topical Meeting on LOCA Issues, 2004, Argonne, USA.
34. Northwood, D.O. and Kosasih, U., “Hydrides and delayed hydrogen cracking in zirconium andits alloys”, International metals reviews, 28(1983), pp. 92-121.
35. Stern, A., et al., “Investigations of the microstructure and mechanical properties of prior βstructure as a function of the oxygen content in two zirconium alloys”, Zirconium in the Nuclear
Industry: 15th International Symposium, 2007, Sun River, USA, ASTM.
36. Chung, H.M., Garde, A.N., and Kassner, T.F., “Development of an oxygen embrittlement
criterion for Zircaloy cladding applicable to loss-of-coolant accident conditions in light-water
reactors”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry (Fourth Conference), 1978, Stratford-upon-Avon,
UK, ASTM STP 681, ASTM, pp. 600-627.
37. Chung, H.M. and Kassner, T.F., “Embrittlement Criteria for Zircaloy Fuel Cladding Applicableto Accident Situations in Light-Water Reactors. Summary Report”, NUREG/CR-1344, January
1980.
38. Pawel, R.E. and Campbell, J.J., “A comparison of the high-temperature oxidation behavior of
Zircaloy-4 and pure zirconium”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry; Fifth Conference, 1980,
Boston, USA, ASTM STP 754, ASTM, pp. 370-389.
39. Sawatsky, A., Ledoux, G.A., and Jones, S., “Oxidation of zirconium during a high-temperaturetransient”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1976, Quebec, Canada, ASTM STP 633, ASTM,
pp. 134-149.
40. Dobson, W.G., Biederman, R.R., and Ballinger, R.G., “Zircaloy-4 oxidation in steam undertransient oxidizing conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1976, Quebec, Canada,
ASTM STP 633, ASTM, pp. 150-167.
41. Urbanic, V.F., “Oxidation of zirconium alloys in steam at 1000 to 1850 C”, Zirconium in the
Nuclear Industry, 1976, Quebec, Canada, ASTM STP 633, ASTM, pp. 168-181.
42. Leistikow, S., Schantz, G., and Berg, H.V., “Kinetics and morphology of isothermal steam
oxidation of Zircaloy-4 at 700-1300 C”, KFK 2587, Mar. 1978.
43. Leistikow, S., “Comparison of high-temperature steam oxidation kinetics under LWR accident
conditions: Zircaloy-4 versus austenitic stainless steel 1.4970”, Zirconium in the Nuclear
Industry: Sixth International Symposium, 1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM,
pp. 763-779.
44. Chung, H.M. and Thomas, G.R., “High temperature oxidation of Zircaloy in hydrogen steam
mixtures”, Sixth International Symposium on Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1982,
Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 793-809.
45. Prater, J.T. and Courtwright, E., “Oxidation of Zircaloy-4 in steam at 1300-2400 C”, 7thInternational Symposium on Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1985, Strasbourg, ASTM STP
939, ASTM, pp. 489-503.
46. Ocken, H., et al., “Evaluation models of Zircaloy oxidation in light of recent experiments”,
Fourth International Symposium on Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1978, Stratford-on-Avon,
ASTM STP 681, ASTM, pp. 514-536.
47. Bibilashvili, Y.K., et al., “Thermomechanical properties of zirconium-based alloys oxidized
claddings in LOCA simulating conditions”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Fuelbehaviour under transient and LOCA conditions., 2001, Halden, Norway, IAEA, pp. 186-208.

136

48. Sokolov, N.B., et al., “Thermomechanical behaviour of zirconium-based alloys claddings under
LOCA conditions”, Fontevraud 5 International Symosium, 2002, Fontevraud, France, pp. Paper 93.
49. Baek, J.H., Park, K.B., and Jeong, Y.H., “Oxidation kinetics of Zircaloy-4 and Zr-1Nb-1Sn-0.1Fe
at temperatures of 700-1200&nbsp;[deg]C”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 335(2004),
pp. 443-456.
50. Hindle, E.D. and Mann, C.A., “An experimental study of the deformation of Zircaloy PWR fuelrod cladding under mainly convective cooling”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry; Fifth
Conference, 1980, Boston, USA, ASTM STP 754, ASTM, pp. 284-302.
51. Sagat, S., Sills, H.E., and Walsworth, J.A., “ Deformation and failure of Zircaloy fuel sheaths
under LOCA conditions”,
Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Sixth International Symposium,
1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 709-733.
52. Greandjean, C., “A state-of-the-art review of past programs devoted to fuel behaviour under
LOCA conditions: 1st Part: Clad swelling and rupture, assembly flow blockage”, IRSN,
Technical Report DPAM/SEMCA 2005/XX.
53. Furuta, T., et al., “Zircaloy clad fuel rod burst behaviour under simulated loss of coolant
conditions in PWRs”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 15(1978), pp. 736-744.
54. Furuta, T., et al., “Ductility loss of Zircaloy cladding by inner surface oxidation during hightemperature transients”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 18(1981), pp. 802-810.
55. Furuta, T., Uetsuka, H., and Kawasaki, S., “Estimation of conservatism of present embrittlement
criteria for Zircaloy fuel cladding under LOCA”,
Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Sixth
International Symposium, 1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 734-746.
56. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Effect of Pre-Hydriding on Thermal Shock Resistance of Zircaloy-4
Cladding under Simulated Loss-of-Coolant Accident Conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Scienceand Technology, 41(2004), pp. 723-730.
57. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Behavior of Pre-Hydrided Zircaloy-4 Cladding under Simulated
Loss-of-Coolant Accident Conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 42(2005),
pp. 209-218.
58. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Results from Simulated LOCA Experiments with High Burn-up PWR
Fuel Claddings”, 2004 International Meeting on Light Water Reactor Fuel Performance, 2004,
Orlando, Florida, American Nuclear Society.
59. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Study of high burn-up fuel behaviour under a LOCA conditions at
JAERI: Hydrogen effects on the failure-bearing capability of cladding tubes”, 29th Nuclear Safety
Research Conference, 2001, Washington, USA, NRC.
60. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Recent results from LOCA study at JAERI”, 2003 Nuclear Safety
Research Conference, 2003, Washington, USA, NRC.
61. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Results from studies on high burn-up fuel behavior under LOCA
conditions”, 2004 Nuclear Safety Research Conference, 2004, Washington DC, NRC, pp. 224-230.
62. Nagase, F., et al., “Experiments on high burn-up fuel behavior under LOCA conditions at
JAERI”, 2000 International Topical Meeting on Light Water Reactor Fuel Performance, 2000,
Park City, Utah, American Nuclear Society.
63. Nagase, F., Otomo, T., and Uetsuka, H., “Oxidation kinetics of low-Sn Zircaloy-4 at thetemperature range from 773 to 1573 K”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 40(2003),
pp. 213-219.

13764. Nagase, F., Tanimoto, M., and Fuketa, T., “Study on high burn-up fuel behaviour under a LOCA
condition at JAERI”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Fuel behaviour under transient andLOCA conditions., 2001, Halden, Norway, IAEA,
65. Kim, J.H., et al., “Embrittlement behavior of Zircaloy-4 cladding during oxidation and waterquench”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 235(2005), pp. 67-75.
66. Kim, J.H., et al., “Deformation of Zircaloy-4 cladding during a LOCA transient up to 1 200°Χ”,
Nuclear Engineering and Design, 234(2004), pp. 157-164.
67. Karb, E.H., et al., “LWR fuel rod behaviour in the FR2 in-pile tests simulating the heatup phaseof a LOCA”, KfK 3346, March 1983.
68. Réocreux, M. and Scott de Martinville, E.F., “A study of fuel behavior in PWR design basis
accident: an analysis of results from the PHEBUS and EDGAR experiments”, Nuclear
Engineering and Design, 124(1990), pp. 363-378.
69. Svanholm, K., et al., “Halden Reactors IFA-511.2 and IFA-54X: Experimental series underadverse cooling conditions”, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 11(1995).
70. Vitanza, C., Johnsen, T., and Högberg, N.W., “In-pile data report on the first cladding ballooning
experiment in the Halden reactor (IFA-543)”, OECD Halden Reactor Project, HPR 291,
December 1983.
71. Ek, M., “LOCA testing at Halden, the third experiment IFA-650.3”, OECD Halden Reactor
Project, HWR-785, October 2005.
72. Walsworth, J.A., et al., “The Canadian in-reactor blowdown test facility (BTF)”, IAEA
Specialists Meeting on Program in Support of Reactor Safety, 1989, IAEA, IAEA-SM-310/102.
73. DeVaal, J.W., et al., “Post-test simulations of BTF-107: An in-reactor loss-of-coolant test withflow blockage and rewet”, Third International Conference on CANDU fuel, 1992, Pembroke,
Ontario.
74. MacDonald, R.D., et al., “An in-reactor loss-of-coolant test with flow blockage and rewet”,
Thermal Reactor Safety Meeting, 1991, Portland, Oregon.
75. Popov, N.K., et al., “Post-test analysis of the BTF-107 severe-fuel-damage experiment using the
CATHENA thermohydaulic code”, International Conference on New Trends in Nuclear System
Thermohydaulics, 1994, Pisa, Italy.
76. Dickson, L.W., et al., “Preliminary results of the BTF-104 experiment: An in-reactor test of fuelbehaviour and fission-product release and transport under LOCA/LOECC conditions”,
16th Annual Conference Canadian Nuclear Society, 1995, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
77. Dickson, L.W., et al., “The BTF-104 experiment: An in-reactor test of fuel behaviour and fissionproduct release and transport under LOCA/LOECC conditions”, Fourth International Conference
on CANDU Fuel., 1995, Pembroke, Ontario, Canada.
78. Dickson, R.S., et al., “Post-test analysis of the BTF-104 severe fuel damage experiment using the
VICTORIA fission product transport code”, Third OECD Specialist Meeting on Nuclear
Aerosols in Reactor Safety, 1998, Köln, Germany.
79. Popov, N.K., et al., “Post-test analysis of the BTF-104 severe-fuel-damage experiment using the
CATHENA thermalhydraulics code”, ASME-JSME Fourth International Conference on Nuclear
Engineering (ICONE-4), 1996, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, pp. 205-213.

138

80. DeVaal, J.W., et al., “Preliminary results of the BTF-105 test: An in-reactor instrument
development and fuel behaviour test”, Fifth International Conference on CANDU Fuel, 1997,
Toronto, Canada.
81. Popov, N.K., et al., “Post-Test Analysis of the BTF-105A Severe-Fuel-Damage Test Using the
CATHENA Thermalhydraulics Code”, Sixth International Conference on Nuclear Engineering(ICONE-6), 1998, San Diego, California, USA.
82. Valliant, P.J., Irish, J.D., and Craig, S.T., “Post-irradiation results from the BTF-105A
LOCA/LOECC test”, Sixth International Conference on CANDU Fuel, 1999, Niagara Falls,
Canada.
83. Walters, L.C., et al., ”Development of a model for calculating sheath thermocouple finning losses
for application in the in-reactor severe fuel damage tests”, Canadian Nuclear Society Simulation
Symposium, 1997, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, Canada.
84. Irish, J.D., Craig, S.T., and Valliant, P.J., “Preliminary fission product and post-irradiation
examination results from the BTF-105A LOCA/LOECC test”, Sixth International Conference on
CANDU Fuel, 1999, Niagara Falls, Canada.
85. Irish, J.D., et al., “Preliminary results of the BTF 105B experiment: An in-reactor test of fuelbehaviour and fission-product release and transport under LOCA/LOECC conditions”, 19th
Annual Conference of the Canadian Nuclear Society, 1998, Toronto, Canada.
86. Williams, A.F., “The ELOCA fuel modelling code: Past, present and future”, 9th International
Conference on CANDU Fuel, 2005, Belleville, Ontario, Canada.
87. Middleton, P.B., Rock, R.C.K., and Wadsworth, S.L., “FACTAR 2.0 code validation”, Fifth
International Conference on CANDU Fuel, 1997, Toronto, Canada.
88. Barber, H., et al., “SOURCE IST: Fission product release code”, 9th Internationa Conference on
CANDU Fuel, 2005, Belleville, Ontario, Canada.
89. Dickson, L.W., et al., SOPHAEROS-IST 2.0 Validation: An update on the current status, CNS
6th International Conference on Simulation Methods in Nuclear Engineering, 2004, Montreal,
Québec, Canada.
90. Erbacher, F.J., “LWR fuel cladding deformation in a LOCA and its interaction with the
emergency core cooling”, ANS/ENS Topical Meeting on Reactor Safety Aspects of Fuel
Behaviour, 1981, Sun Valley, USA,
91. Karwat, H., “Specification of international standard problem 14: Behaviour of a fuel bundle
simulator during a heat-up and flooding period (REBEKA experiment)”, GRD Technische
Universität, FRG, March 1983.
92. Erbacher, F.J., Neitzel, H.J., and Wiehr, K., “Interactions between thermohydraulics and fuel cladballooning in a LOCA - results of REBEKA multi-rod burst tests with flooding”, 6th Water
Reactor Safety Information Meeting, 1978, Gaithersburg, USA, NRC.
93. Parsons, P.D., Hindle, E.D., and Mann, C.A., “PWR fuel behaviour in design basis accident
conditions. A State-of-the-Art Report by the Task Group on Fuel Behaviour of CSNI Principal
Working Group No 2”, Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear Energy
Agency, CSNI Report 129.
94. Longest, A.W., “Multi-rod burst test program. Progress report Jan-June 1981”, NUREG/CR-2366Vol. 1 ORNL/NUREG/TM-8058, December 1981.

139

95. Chapman, R.H., “Characterization of Zircaloy-4 tubing procured for fuel cladding research
programs”, ORNL/NUREG/TM-29, June 1976.
96. McCulloch, R.W., Jacobs, P.T., and Clark, D.L., “Development of a fabrication procedure for the
MRBT fuel simulator based on the use of cold-pressed boron nitiride performs, NUREG/CR1111, March 1980.
97. Chapman, R.H., “Multi-rod burst test program: progress report”, July-September 1977,
ORNL/NUREG/TM-200, June 1978
98. Chapman, R.H., Crowley, J.L., and Longest, A.W., “Effect of bundle size on cladding
deformation in LOCA simulation tests”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Sixth International
Symposium, 1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 693-708
99. Chapman, R.H., et al., “Zirconium cladding deformation in a steam environment with transientheating”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: (Fourth Conference), 1978, ASTM STP 681,
ASTM, pp. 393-408.
100. Bibilashvili, Y.K., et al., “WWER-1000 type fuel assembly tests on electroheated facilities in
LOCA simulating conditions”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Fuel behaviour undertransient and LOCA conditions., 2001, Halden, Norway, IAEA, pp. 169-185.

140

6. PRESERVATION OF INTEGRITY OF CLADDING
DURING OXIDATION AND EMBRITTLEMENT

6.1 The kinetics of the zirconium alloy steam reaction
As discussed previously in this report zirconium alloy fuel cladding is reactive in steam. The
following description refers to Zircaloy but also applies to other Zr-base alloys with the exception ofsome details. The products of the reaction can be represented in a simple form by an elementary
molecular equation:

Zr+2H2O →ZrO2+2H2(6-1)

The rate of reaction is dependent on temperature and at temperatures above ~950°C in conditions
where the availability of steam is unlimited and the integrity of the oxide film is maintained, isgenerally believed to be controlled by the rate of diffusion of oxygen anions in the anion deficientzirconia film.
The reaction products are also dependent on temperature. At temperatures below the α→(α+β)
transus, 812°C for Zry-4, the oxidation of Zircaloy results in the formation of a zirconia film and the
diffusion of some oxygen into the underlying α-Zircaloy metal.
At higher temperatures, hexagonal close packed α-Zircaloy is unstable and transforms to body
centred cubic β-Zircaloy. Hence, Zircaloy oxidized at temperatures above the transformation
temperature consists of an outer layer of zirconia, a layer of high oxygen Zircaloy metal which isstabilised in the α-Zircaloy form by the high oxygen content, and beneath this a β-Zircaloy layer. The
resulting structure is illustrated in Figure 6.1 which shows a section of Zircaloy-2 cladding tubeoxidized in a Swedish BWR LOCA transient corresponding to 800 s at 1 200°C [1].
Figure 6.1 Zircaloy-2 oxidized in steam at 1 200°C for 1 200 s 80×

141

Diffusion controlled solid state processes are characterised by a parabolic rate law. If w represents
the amount of reactant used or product formed then:dw 1 δ 2=
dt 2 w(6-2)

The constant of proportionality is the parabolic rate constant and is generally given thenomenclature δ2/2 such that on integration, equation 6-2 becomes:

w2 = δ 2t + c(6-3)

where t is the time of oxidation and c is zero in fresh cladding (other systems ofnotation define the parabolic rate constant Kp as the constant of proportionality inequation 6-2 such that w2 = 2Kpt).

The parabolic rate of reaction constant, δ2/2 or Kp, is dependent on temperature according to an
Arrhenius expression:δ 2 / 2 or Kp = A exp− Q / RT
Where:

A = pre-exponential factor.
T = temperature, K.

(6-4)
Q = activation energy, J/mol.
R = gas constant, 8.314 J/mol/K.

In the present report, δ2/2 will be used for the rate constants. However, in some of the sourcesfrom which figures have been reproduced, Kp has been used. Typical units for the parabolic rate
constant are g2 O2 cm-4s-1 if the reaction is monitored by total oxygen uptake, i.e. weight gain, org2 H2 cm-4s-1 if hydrogen production is monitored. The growth of the oxide and stabilised α-Zircaloy
layers are also found to obey a parabolic rate law over a wide range of temperature and respective
parabolic rate constants have been measured for the growth of these layers.
Other rates of reaction have also been observed in Zircaloy steam reactions. At lower
temperatures e.g. below ~950°C, the formation of zirconia is observed to conform to a cubic rate lawwhilst stabilised α-Zr[O] continues to grow according to a parabolic rate law. Additionally at generally
lower temperatures i.e. <1 050°C and longer times, the Zircaloy-steam oxidation reaction transforms toa linear rate i.e. breakaway oxidation is observed.
6.1.1 Isothermal oxidation of Zircaloy in steam
Since the 1950s, many measurements of the rate of reaction of Zircaloy in steam have been madeand in 1973 the US AEC adopted the isothermal parabolic rate constants published by Baker and Just[2] in 1962 for calculation of total oxygen uptake in cladding exposed to steam in thermal transients.
Starting in 1974 more detailed and accurate measurements have been made in laboratories in the US,
the United Kingdom, Japan, W. Germany and Canada. A review of all the available data in 1977 [3]showed the Baker-Just data to be conservative. Likewise recently completed programmes of oxidation
measurements also confirmed that the Baker-Just correlation overpredicts the reaction rate. Thisconservatism was recognised by the NRC with issuance of Regulatory Guide 1.157, “Best-Estimate
Calculations of Emergency Core Cooling System Performance,” (May 1989) which permits use of an
improved model for metal-water reaction.
In the temperature range of interest in LWR conservative accident analyses, the Zircaloy is highly
reactive with steam and the high temperatures and exothermicity of the reaction introduce considerable
experimental difficulties in determining the kinetics of the reaction. The major sets of data are,however, in general agreement although there are many differences in detail and in the following
section the main conclusions from the available data are briefly reviewed.
142

The reaction rate constants for Zircaloy-4 in steam were measured in the temperature range 8711 482°C by Biederman et al. [4]. Steam had access to both o.d. and i.d. of a Zircaloy fuel tube which wasresistance-heated in a Gleeble testing machine. The extent of reaction was measured by weight gain andby metallographic measurements of oxidized phase thickness. No effect of steam superheat temperatureor flow rate was detected unless the steam flow rate dropped to a value such that steam availability was
limited or hydrogen was not removed efficiently. A tin-rich phase which became coarser with increasingoxidation time and temperature was observed to precipitate near the middle of the oxide film. Other
investigators have also observed this phenomenon and Biederman suggested that the phase was
responsible for the loss of uniformity of the oxide/α-phase boundary at lower temperatures due to thepinning action of the tin-rich precipitates. Above 1 482°C, the oxide phase also contains stabilised αphase and a fine unidentified lenticular phase.
The reaction was found to follow a parabolic rate law above the α/α+β transus and thetemperature dependence of the parabolic rate constant for oxygen uptake is shown in Figure 6.2 andlisted in Table 6.1. The temperature dependences of the growth of the oxide and combined oxide and αphases are listed in Table 6.2.
The Zircaloy-steam reaction was also investigated by Biederman et al. [5] in a lower temperature
range of 650-980°C. The growth of the oxidized phases was measured at temperatures below the α/βtransus, i.e. ~871°C and also in the α + β range i.e. ~871-980°C. Below the α transus the oxidation rate,
although remaining parabolic, deviated from extrapolation of data obtained at higher temperatures. The
temperature dependence did not conform to an Arrhenius relationship over the range 871-980°C i.e. the
α + β region. At temperatures above and below the α + β range of coexistence in equilibrium, theparabolic rate constants obeyed an Arrhenius relationship, the activation energy being much lower in thelower temperature range 650-820°C.
The measured rate constants are shown as a function of reciprocal temperature in Figure 6.2 andthe Arrhenius temperature dependence of the parabolic rate constant for the lower temperature range islisted in Table 6.1. The temperature dependence of the growth rate constants for the oxidized layers
are listed in Table 6.2.
The parabolic rates of reaction over the temperature range 973-1 251°C have been measured byWesterman and Hesson [6] in 7.5 g min-l flowing steam in an induction furnace. The extent of reaction
was measured by metallographic measurement of oxidized phase layer thicknesses and bymeasurement of the product hydrogen evolved. The temperature dependence of the parabolic rate
constants derived from this work are also shown in Figure 6.2, where the results are compared toseveral other works. The temperature dependence of the parabolic rate constants is also listed inTable 6.1. Westerman and Hesson also measured the hydrogen uptake in the oxidized samples andreported 220-250 ppm hydrogen which is in excess of that reported by other workers [4,8] typically
20-30 ppm.
Kawasaki et al. [9] used gravimetry and phase thickness measurements to determine the rates ofreaction of Zircaloy-4 exposed to 0.4 g cm-2 min-l flowing steam in a resistance furnace over thetemperature range 1 000-1 330°C. Steam flow was found not to be rate limiting above 0.18 g cm-2 min-l
and the oxidation followed a parabolic rate law at temperatures of 1 000°C and above, deviating from aparabolic law at 900 and 950°C. The temperature dependence of the rate constant describing oxygen
uptake is plotted in Figure 6.2 and listed in Table 6.1. The temperature of the rate constants describing
the growth of the oxide and α-layers are listed in Table 6.2.

143

Table 6.1 Temperature dependence of published isothermal parabolic rate constants
I
SourceLeistikow et al. [7]
KfK
Pawel et al. [8]ORNL
Kawasaki et al. [9]JAERIBrown et al. [10]BNL
Biederman et al. [4]
WPI [5]Westerman et al. [6]BNWL
Urbanic et al. [11]AECL
Baker-Just [2]⎛δ 2 ⎞⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ O 2 / 2 (gm/cm 2 ) 2 / s⎝ 2 ⎠Temperature range°CA

Q in J/mol

1 000-1 300

0.262

174 360

1 000-1 500

0.1811167 190900-1 300

0.234

170 4101 000-1 200 single oxide

0.1028163 190

1 000-1 400 double
980-1 480
650-8160.22380.01915.73·10-4

174 250
139 690
114 445970-1 250

0.0321

145 255

1 050-1 580
1 580-1 850…-1 852

0.01820.0541
2.049

139 900
138 155
190 465

Table 6.2 Temperature dependence of parabolic growth constants for oxide and α-phase
Authors
Leistikow et al. [7]Pawel et al. [8]Biederman et al. [4-5]Kawasaki et al. [9]Urbanic and Heidrick [11]Sagat et al. [12-13]

Oxide δ2 cm/s
AQ
3.91×10-2
168 127
1.126×10-2 150 236
9.392×10-4 122 734
1.07×10-2
150 110
6.48×10-4
169 978
4.2×10-2
169 978

α-phase δ2/2 cm/s
A
Q
0.254
182 347
0.7615
201 5150.0189154 4220.0765164 9370.303
183 561

A detailed and comprehensive study of the oxidation of Zircaloy-4 in steam at temperatures
between 900-1 500°C was performed by Pawel et al. [8,14]. Very fast heating and cooling of small
sections was achieved in a radiant infra-red furnace. The most important task of accurate temperature
measurements was performed meticulously with a great degree of precision. Steam flowed up thereaction tube at 1 m s-1 and measurements were made of phase widths and weight gain. The oxide andα-phase layers grew parabolically at temperatures above 1 000°C, below this temperature the oxide
phase deviated from parabolic behaviour and tended towards a cubic growth rate, thought to be afeature of the tetragonal to monoclinic phase transformation. The parabolic rate constants derived fromthis work are reproduced in Tables 6.1 and 6.2 and compared to other data in Figure 6.2.
The weight gain of Zircaloy-2 specimens exposed to steam in the temperature range 1 0001 200°C was measured by Brown and Healey [10]. The specimens were heated in a tube furnace andcooled rapidly by quenching. Different oxidation behaviour was observed above and below 1 200°C.
Above this temperature the oxide film was duplex whereas only occasionally was a duplex film
formed below 1 200°C. In common with many other workers the authors report the occurrence of atin-rich layer of precipitate particles at the interface of the two types of oxide layer above 1 200°C. The
weight gain data was analysed as conforming to a parabolic rate law of oxidation and the rate constantsfor single layer and double layer oxide growth are listed in Table 6.1. Although this data set belongs to
the same category as the data in Figure 6.2, for clarity it is included among the high-temperature data
in Figure 6.3.
144

Temperature dependence of published isothermal parabolic rate constants Table 6.1
IIIII⎛δ 2 ⎞⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ H 2 / 2 (STP gm/cm 2 ) 2 / s⎝ 2 ⎠Kp (mgZr/cm2)2/s

A
5.14·105
3.55·105
4.59·1052.02·105
4.39·1053.74·1041.12·104
6.30·104
3.57·104
1.06·1054.02·106

Q
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I

QA
42.58·10529.32·10538.03·10516.71·10536.37·105
3.10·1059.32·1035.22·1052.96·105
8.79·105333·105

As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I
As column I

Figure 6.2 The parabolic rate constant as a function of inverse temperature as determinedby different researcher. The unit for the parabolic rate constant is (g O2/cm2)2 s-1
1,0E-04

Baker-Just
Pawel et. al.
WPI
Leistikow
KawasakiWesterman

Parabolic rate constant

1,0E-05

1,0E-06

1,0E-07

1,0E-08

1,0E-09
0,00040,00050,00060,00070,0008Inverse temperature,1/K

145

0,00090,001

Figure 6.3 The parabolic rate constant as a function of inverse temperature as determinedby different researcher. The unit for the parabolic rate constant is (g O2/cm2)2 s-1
1,0E-04
Baker-Just
Pawel et. al.
Brown-HealeyI
Urbanic

Parabolic rate constant

1,0E-05

1,0E-06

1,0E-07

1,0E-08

1,0E-09
0,00040,00050,00060,00070,00080,00090,001

Inverse temperature,1/K

The kinetics of both Zircaloy-2 and Zircaloy-4 oxidized in unlimited steam were measured by
Urbanic and Heidrick [11] in the temperature range 1 150-1 850°C using an induction furnace. Phaseboundary movement, hydrogen evolution and weight gain were measured and yielded parabolicoxidation rates over the whole temperature range. However, at ~1 580°C, the parabolic rate constantincreases sharply with only a small change in activation energy.
The increase is due to a change in the kinetics of the formation of the oxide phase associated withthe tetragonal to cubic phase transformation in zirconia. The rate of growth of the α-phase remained atthat which would be extrapolated from the lower temperature region. The temperature dependences ofthe oxidation rate constants are listed in Table 6.1 and compared to other data in Figure 6.3.
A number of measurements of oxide and α-layer formation during transient heating have been
performed by Sagat et al. [12-13] at Chalk River. The parabolic rate constants determined duringtransient heating agree closely with those of Leistikow [7] for isothermal conditions (Table 6.2).

146

Perhaps the most extensive investigation of the kinetics of the Zircaloy-steam reaction has been
performed 1978-1982 by Leistikow, Schanz and co-workers at KfK. Initially, the rates of reaction
were measured for short exposure times, up to 15 mins, in the temperature range 700-1 300°C [7].
Zircaloy-4 samples were heated in a flow of steam, 1 m/s in a resistance furnace and the extent ofoxidation was determined by both gravimetry and oxidized phase width measurements. The reaction
obeyed a parabolic rate law at and above 900°C but below 900°C, it tended to exhibit a cubic rate law.
Limited observations of oxidation at longer times at 1 000°C showed an accelerated rate of reaction
associated with fissuring of the oxide film. Isothermal parabolic rate constants for total reaction
derived from this work are compared with other data in Figure 6.2 and listed in Table 6.1. The growthconstants for oxide and α-layer are also listed in Table 6.2. The published oxidation rate constants
were established from the data in the temperature range 1 000-1 300°C but they are reported to be agood approximation over the temperature range 800-1 500°C.
Oxidation rate has also been investigated at temperatures up to 1 600°C [15-16]. Zircaloy-4
cladding tube sections were exposed isothermally in flowing steam at 50°C intervals between 1 300
and 1 600°C. A dense protective columnar grained oxide scale was formed in all tests which varied intime/temperature from 60 min at 1 300°C to about 6 min at 1 600°C and in all tests a parabolic rate
law was obeyed. However, at 1 550 and 1 600°C the parabolic reaction rates were considerably higher
than the extrapolation from lower temperatures. The microstructure of Zircaloy oxidized at 1 550 and
1 600°C exhibited a dual layered appearance, the inner layer of zirconia containing stringers andprecipitates of α-Zr[O] along crystallographic directions and grain boundaries. The inner oxide isthought to have been cubic zirconia at the isothermal oxidation temperature but later transformed oncooling by a eutectoid decomposition to the stable monoclinic ZrO2 and α-Zr[O].
The parabolic rates of reaction for oxygen uptake at 1 300 to 1 600°C are plotted in Figure 6.3
and compared with the measurements of Baker-Just [2] and Urbanic and Heidrick [11].
Chung and Thomas [17] also measured the zirconia scale growth at temperatures above andbelow the nominal temperature of the tetragonal to cubic zirconia phase transformation and observed a
stepwise increase in the parabolic rate constant at ~1 580°C with a similar activation energy in bothtemperature regimes. Figure 6.4 shows the zirconia scale growth rate constants of Urbanic andHeidrick [11], Leistikow et al. [16] and Chung and Thomas [17] at temperatures above 1 580°C incomparison with the Baker-Just [2] correlation converted to equivalent ZrO2. The difference between
the former and the latter (Baker-Just) rates is significantly smaller for >1 580°C than for <1 580°C.
The parabolic rates of reaction for oxygen uptake at 1 300 to 1 600°C are plotted in Figure 6.3
and compared with the measurements of Baker-Just [2] and Urbanic and Heidrick [11]. Chung [17]also measured the zirconia scale growth at temperatures above and below the nominal temperature of
the tetragonal to cubic zirconia phase transformation and observed an increase in the parabolic rate
constant at ~1 580°C with a similar activation energy in both temperature regimes. Figure 6.4
compares the zirconia scale growth kinetics of Urbanic and Heidrick [11], Leistikow et al. [16] andChung and Thomas [17] at temperatures above 1 580°C with the Baker-Just [2] correlation converted
to equivalent ZrO2.
Leistikow and co-workers have also investigated the kinetics of Zircaloy-steam reactions after
times much greater than previously reported, i.e. for times up to 25 hours. The temperature range ofinvestigation was from 700°C up to 1 600°C and since the Zircaloy test pieces were from cladding
tube the times at higher temperatures were limited to those at which complete consumption of the tube
wall occurred, e.g. ~6 min at 1 600°C and ~40 min at 1 500°C. The zirconia scale and the α-layer
growth are shown in Figure 6.5 as functions of time and temperature along with earlier data up to
15 min exposure time.
147

Figure 6.4 Parabolic oxide layer growth rate constants obtainedfor pure steam environments vs inverse temperature

Figure 6.5 High-temperature steam oxidation of Zircaloy-4 cladding
Kinetics of ZrO2 scale growth and α-Zr(O) layer growth. Note the slower kinetics for oxide growth
before transition to linear kinetics after long time exposure at low temperature.

Above ~1 050°C, the oxide scales remain protective and the kinetics remain parabolic, however
at lower temperature there is significant acceleration of oxidation rate at longer times. The kinetics of
α-layer growth remain constant until consumption by conversion to zirconia.
148

6.1.2 Isothermal oxidation of other zirconium alloys in steam
The E110 alloy, Zr1%Nb, has been used extensively in the Soviet designed VVER reactors built in
Russia and other countries in Eastern Europe. Work to determine the steam oxidation properties of thealloy performed up to about 1995 has been reviewed by Bibilashvili et al. [18]. The bulk of the data has
been obtained in experimental rigs with well-thermostated work-sections. A significant amount of thisdata has been recorded in rigs with continuous measurement of weight gain during the steam/zirconium
reaction. Short lengths of cladding tubes were used typically 10, 30 or 60 mm in length. The temperature
was measured by Pt-PtRh thermocouples in immediate proximity of the specimens.
As a measure of the reaction W, the specimen weight gain, was used. Thicknesses of the different
layers formed were measured metallographically. However, weight gain was the preferred measure due
to possible spalling of oxide film and the intrinsic inaccuracy of thickness measurements inmetallographic cross sections.
Oxidation behaviour under a wide range of temperatures from 700°C upwards and times fromseveral seconds to 10 hours was investigated. Figure 6.6 summarises the results for different temperatures
and times. It is interesting to note the similarities with Figure 6.5, i.e. (1) a higher parabolic rate exponent
at higher temperatures than at lower temperatures and (2) that at lower temperatures there is a transition
to faster kinetics after a certain time.
Figure 6.6 Weight gains of VVER-type claddings oxidized in steam at atmospheric pressure

The weight gain data was analysed according to Eq. 6-2 and the temperature dependence of theKp parameter was determined. It was found that a bounding relation for the oxidation to be used indesign estimates is Kp=84640 exp(-20820/T) mg2cm-4s-1 in the temperature range 550 to 1 200°C.
Expressed in the terms of Table 6.1 this means A=0.423 g2cm-4s-1 and Q=173 100 J/mol. These values
are close to the Baker-Just relation as can be seen in Figure 6.7. A more realistic estimate also shownin Figure 6.7 lies slightly below Urbanics data for Zr2.5Nb [19] which in turn are almost coincident
with his data for Zircaloy. Thus Bibilashvili’s reported values for Zr-1Nb seems to indicate that E110
oxidizes slower than Zircaloy in the range of parabolic growth.
More recently an extensive investigation of the LOCA properties of E110 alloy has been
performed by Yegorova et al. under international sponsorship [20]. The object of the investigation was
to resolve various issues with regard to the behaviour of the E110 alloy raised from tests in several
149

laboratories. Another issue was the observed differences in behaviour between E110 and the Frenchalloy M5 which is also a Zr1%Nb alloy often denoted Zr1Nb(O) to emphasise that it is produced fromsponge Zr with a higher concentration of oxygen than that used in the production of E110.
Figure 6.7 Temperature dependence of the reaction rate constant Kp for zirconium alloys

Figure 6.8 Oxidation results on Zr1Nb at different laboratories
Note that the original Figure [20] has been edited to remove incorrect data andto conform with reference numbering of the present report.

The equipment used by Yegorova et al. is shown in Section 5.2.1. Tests performed on Zircaloy-4
showed results quite similar to other published data which allows a confidence in the subsequently
produced results of theirs on E110. Figure 6.8 shows the results obtained on E110 at 1 100°C incomparison with results from other laboratories.
Figure 6.9 shows the result of their evaluation of the kinetics of the reaction.

150

Figure 6.9 The kinetics of the steam oxidation reaction of E110
in the temperature range 800-1 200°C
The black line is calculated with the Cathcart-Pawel equation.

The results show that E110 oxidizes slightly slower than Zircaloy-4 under conditions of steadyscale growth. However as will be discussed in the next section E110 is prone to oxide spalling andtransition to linear growth kinetics. Therefore, it is not generally true that it oxidizes slower thanZircaloy-4.
Another factor is the contribution from the oxidation during heating and cooling. The oxidation
experiments by Yegorova et al. were carried out under isothermal conditions. However, the approachto the peak oxidation temperature as well as the post-oxidation cooling were done with different rates,
ranging from direct quenching to very slow cooling or heating which were of significant durationcompared to the time at constant temperature. The results which form the basis for Figure 6.9 are allfrom fast cooling and heating. For slower cooling and heating, it is necessary to calculate an equivalent
time at temperature. This was done according to the relation:
t ox

⎛

Q

⎞

∫ exp⎜⎜⎝ − RT (t ) ⎟⎟⎠dt

t eq = 0

where

⎛
Q ⎞⎟
exp⎜ −⎜ RT ⎟
eq ⎠
⎝

(6-5)

tox = time for the complete oxidation
Q = the activation energy
R = the gas constantT(t) = the oxidation temperature as a function of time
Teq = the assigned steady temperature.

The success of the approach can be seen in Figure 6.10 where the transient data converted toequivalent time at constant temperature has been plotted with the parabolic law for isothermal tests.
To compare oxidation behaviour with M5, Yegorova et al. tested modified E110 cladding tubes
that were fabricated from sponge Zr instead of the mixture of iodide and electrolytic Zr normally usedin Russia (see [21] for a comparison of fabrication processes of M5 and E110). These materials differ
not only in oxygen content but also in the various impurities present in the materials [20]. Somewhat
surprisingly, the sponge-Zr-based modified E110 exhibited a different kinetics than most otherzirconium alloys, as can be seen in Figure 6.11. Note in the figure significant difference in weight gain
rate constant vs. inverse temperature.

151

Figure 6.10 Results of transient test modes converted to equivalent timeat constant temperature for E110

Metallography revealed that the relative amounts of ZrO2 layer growth compared to α-Zr(O) layer
growth differs between the two materials and this is the reason for the difference in kinetics. It isbelieved that the underlying cause for this difference is the differences in impurity elements between
the materials. It is not caused by the difference in oxygen content since M5 with high oxygen follows
the kinetics of standard E110.
Figure 6.11 Kinetics of the sponge based E110 claddings compared to standard E110

The isothermal oxidation kinetics of the M5 alloy, Zr1%Nb(O), has been reported by Mardon andcoworkers [22-23] and by Portier et al. [24]. Figure 6.12 shows parabolic oxidation curves for M5compared to Zircaloy-4 and the Cathcart-Pawel correlation [24]. Note that the data points for weightgain vs. square root of oxidation time follow well a straight line for 1 100°C and 1 200°C, whichindicates a good control of isothermal oxidation temperature.

152

Figure 6.12 The oxidation of M5 and Zircaloy-4 at 1 000, 1 100, and 1 200°C

It is clear that the oxidation kinetics of M5 is very similar to the kinetics of the Zircaloy-4 used in
the same investigation and slightly slower than the Cathcart-Pawel correlation which is based on older
data on Zircaloy-4.
There is only limited data on the Russian alloy E635 (Zr-1%Nb-1.2%Sn-0.35%Fe). According toBibilashvili et al. [25], its oxidation properties are similar to those of E110. This is also illustrated by
Figure 6.13 from the report by Yegorova et al. [20].
Figure 6.13 Oxidation of E635 at 1 100˚C compared to other zirconium alloys

Another relatively new alloy is ZIRLO™ (Zr-1%Nb-1%Sn-0.1%Fe-1200ppmO). Leech hasreported oxidation data for ZIRLO in comparison with Zircaloy-4 oxidized under identical conditions[26]. The test samples were 32 mm long open ended tubing which were exposed to steam at
temperatures between 980 and 1 200°C for times ranging from 5 to 30 minutes. When weight gains ofidentically exposed samples of the two alloys were plotted as function of the square root of time all
points fell close to a straight line indicating that ZIRLO oxidized about 10% faster than Zircaloy-4. For
both alloys the oxide layers were black shiny, adherent and with no sign of delaminations.
1536.1.3 Breakaway oxidation of zirconium alloys
Leistikow et al. [16] reported that the kinetics of the Zry-4/steam reaction in the temperature
range 600-800°C change from cubic to linear with time, before finally exhibiting a decreased rate ofreaction due to the finite thickness of the specimen. The weight gain at which accelerated oxidation
begins increases with temperature. The microstructure of Zircaloy oxidized for long times between
600-800°C exhibits numerous lateral fissures and penetrating radial cracks. It was postulated that theoxide cracking is the cause of the accelerated oxidation which is analogous to the breakaway oxidation
phenomena reported for lower temperature aqueous and gaseous oxidation.
In the interval between 850-950°C, oxide cracking was observed to be much reduced andtransition to a breakaway accelerated oxidation rate did not occur although there was an increase inrate to a parabolic rate of oxidation. At 1 000-1 050°C the breakaway type of accelerated oxidation reoccurs. Leistikow et al. [16] also report that under transient oxidation conditions, oxide scales showed
breakaway above the critical oxide thickness, but recovered at a temperature where the oxide thickness
was less than critical and the conclusion was made that the isothermal breakaway data could beincorporated into transient calculations.
Consideration of the mechanism of breakaway oxidation was initially concerned, with breakaway
phenomena at lower temperatures in aqueous media or in some cases in gaseous media. Subsequently
several studies have been made of a wide range of zirconium based alloys in different oxidizing media anda temperature range up to ~800°C. Cox [27] summarised the conclusions of many investigators anddescribed two alternative mechanisms of breakaway oxidation. One mechanism is based on the hypothesisthat cracking of the oxide film, caused by the stresses generated in growing oxide films, is the primarycause of a transition to accelerated corrosion. The alternative mechanism is that the stresses induced in theoxide cause a phase transformation and pore generation in the oxide film, the pores promoting theformation of cracks. However, the precise mechanism of the transition from cubic/parabolic kinetics tolinear kinetics has not been established to the general satisfaction of all workers in the field not eventoday, about 30 years after Cox review.
Leistikow and his coworkers [16,28] have considered the mechanism of breakaway oxidation of
Zircaloy in steam at temperatures above ~700°C. Their proposed mechanism is illustrated in Figure 6.14.
After the initial growth of the tetragonal polymorph of zirconia, which is stabilised at a lower
temperature by stress in the growing oxide film, it is postulated that the tetragonal to monoclinic
zirconia phase transformation (martensitic) is initiated by a combination of stress relaxation, columnar
grain coarsening and point defect recombination. At this stage of the process, a scalloped oxide/metalinterface is observed which is due to the formation of pores at the interface thus locally retarding theoxide growth. The oxide then becomes more brittle as a result of oxygen saturation and lateral cracks
form followed by vertical penetrating cracks. The short circuiting of the oxidation path by suchcracking leads to the higher rates of oxidation. This cycle is repeated with the initiation of fresh oxide
formation and the overall response is a linear kinetics. The oxidation response of Zircaloy in thetemperature range 850-900°C does not seem to conform to the above pattern of behaviour. A transitionof oxidation rate is observed but it is a less abrupt change to parabolic kinetics. This behaviour is notwell understood but other factors may have an influence on the reaction kinetics in the temperature
range 850-900°C for instance two phase (α+β) matrix and hydrogen uptake of the Zircaloy.
The breakaway oxidation has been identified as a major problem for the E110 cladding LOCA
performance since it is associated with a significant hydrogen pickup [20,29] which degrade postquench properties. The hydrogen affects the α/β transformation temperature and therefore indirectly
the high-temperature deformation properties of the material. It also increases significantly the154solubility of oxygen in β for given temperature. The most significant effect of hydrogen is that it can
result in a post-transient loss of ductility as will be discussed in a later section. Figure 6.15 shows anexample of the hydrogen pickup in E110 in connection with steam oxidation [29].
Figure 6.14 Suggested mechanism for high-temperature breakaway oxidationin Zircaloy by Leistikow and coworkers [16, 28]

Normally the oxide film serves as a barrier to hydrogen pickup since the decomposition of thewater molecules takes place on the outside of the oxide. However, according to the model by Schantz
and Leistikow, after the onset of breakaway, the water or steam molecules can penetrate through thecracks in the oxide and then react on the outside of the thin inner protective layer of oxide, which is far
less of a diffusion barrier than a thick uncracked compact oxide.
The breakaway in E110 has been described as a form of nodular oxidation, because many nodulelike white-coloured oxide spots are initially observed [30]. Nodular oxidation is different from thebreakaway mechanism described by Schanz and Leistikow. At a certain stage in the oxidation process,small lenticular spots of white oxide form in the otherwise uniform black oxide. These nodules growboth in diameter and depth at a much higher rate than the uniform oxide. More familiar nodularoxidation near operating temperatures has been observed both in-pile, in boiling water environment,
and in high-temperature autoclave tests. As for the breakaway transition, there is still no generally
accepted theory for the mechanism behind nodular oxidation. The appearance of a cladding tube
subjected to nodular oxidation is somewhat similar to the appearance of the E110 cladding that wasoxidized under LOCA conditions, see Figure 6.16 which is reproduced from the report by Yegorava et
al. [20].
155

Figure 6.15 The hydrogen pickup in E110 and Zircaloy-4 during steam oxidation

Figure 6.16 The appearance of E110 cladding tubes oxidized in steam
at 1 100°C to different ECR levels

However Yegorova et al. did not consider the breakaway in E110 to be a form of nodularoxidation. In contrast to the metallographic cross sections reported by Chung [30], nodules examinedby Yegorova et al. [20] was relatively uniform in depth and lacked the depthwise growth characteristicof nodular oxidation. Instead they note that breakaway oxidation starts in small local points on thecladding surface after about 7% ECR. The breakaway spots then grow laterally giving the appearanceof growing nodules. The breakaway is in this case probably the formation of a lateral crack in theoxide. Once the cracked area has grown to a certain size, the oxide starts to flake off as has been
observed on E110.
Chung has attempted to explain the contrasting susceptibility to breakaway oxidation of E110 andM5 both of which have nominally similar chemical composition [30]. Although he is not referring toactual mechanism of either nodular corrosion or breakaway, his proposed explanation is based on thepremise that a stoichiometric oxide (monoclinic) is more susceptible to microcracking than asignificantly understoichiometric oxide (tetragonal). He proposed that minor impurities pick-up during
fabrication of the E110 or M5 cladding play an important role in determining the oxide stoichiometry
during high-temperature oxidation. He thus concentrated on the effects of minor impurity ionsassociated with nuclear-grade Zr production on the transport properties and phase stability of the oxide.
156

By examining the differences in the manufacturing routes of E110 and M5, Chung concludes that in
M5 manufacturing, Ca and Al are picked-up in association with Hf purification by the process of
methylisobutyl ketone and extractive distillation, respectively, and Mg is picked-up in association withthe production of sponge Zr by the Kroll process. These strongly undervalent impurities are beneficial,because they keep the oxide more understoichiometric and in relatively tougher tetragonal form, in effectleading to suppression of the susceptibility to breakaway oxidation. Absence of such pickup is predicted
to be deleterious, because they are conducive to making the oxide stoichiometric and monoclinic.
In the production of E110 or E635 on the other hand, fluorine is picked-up, because zircon ore isdecomposed by the use of potassium fluozirconate, and Hf is purified by the process of fractionalcrystallization. Most Zr in E110 is reduced by electrolysis of the F-containing compound of potassium
fluozirconate in a molten bath; only minor portion of iodide Zr is used. Such F pickup, combined withthe absence of fabrication-related pickup of Ca, Mg, or Al, is predicted to conjointly exacerbate thesusceptibility to nodular oxidation.
6.1.4 Effect of irradiation on high-temperature zirconium alloy oxidation
The measurements of oxidation kinetics described above have been determined using virgin
zirconium alloy samples in unlimited steam, in the absence of radiation. Reactor cladding subject tohigh-temperature transients in accident situations will begin the transient with a range of in-service
histories. Although the neutron flux will be minimal in a LOCA situation a γ-irradiation field will bepresent. The effects of the deposition of energy from γ-radiation in Zircaloy or in the steam phase on
the oxidation rate of Zircaloy in LOCA conditions have not been systematically investigated.
However, the effect of irradiation on the oxidation of Zircaloys and other zirconium based alloys inwater and steam at near operating temperatures has been extensively investigated by numerous
workers and reviewed by Cox [27,31] and Asher [32]. Enhanced corrosion has been observed in waterin the presence of a fast neutron flux. In steam, even with added oxygen, the in-reactor enhancement isonly very small and is related to the effects of neutron irradiation on the transport properties of thesolid oxide/metal rather than the gas phase. It is further concluded that the small effects vanishcompletely at 400-450°C possibly due to thermally activated recovery processes.
Mixed gaseous environment may reduce available oxidizing species for incorporation into the oxide
lattice or the oxygen anion concentration gradient within the oxide. Such a condition may arise from
simple steam starvation or by effects produced by high hydrogen concentration (Section 5.2.4). For
Zircaloy oxidation in unlimited steam, the rate limiting process is generally believed to be the transportof oxygen anions in the n-type anion deficient oxide film by a process involving point defects. A
perturbation of the defect population by the radiation field after a LOCA would be negligible. Thus
measureable influence of radiation on Zircaloy oxidation rates is not predicted in LOCA.
In view of this discussion, experience with steam oxidation experiments of spent fuel cladding
will be regarded as experiments on pre-oxidized cladding and discussed in that section.
6.1.5 Effect of specimen geometry
Pawel and Campbell [33] have pointed out that initial parabolic kinetics only apply whilst the
cladding behaves as a semi-infinite sink for oxygen. Experimental work at 1 300°C and calculations
for oxidation in the range 1 000-1 500°C have shown that once the β-phase begins filling with oxygen
the kinetics of oxide and α layer growth deviate from the initial parabolic rate and become faster, theeffect being much larger on the α-phase growth kinetics. At 1 300°C one-sided oxidation experiments
showed that the initial parabolic rates were maintained for ~500 s but thereafter the rate of boundary
movements increased; the cladding original oxygen concentration was 0.12 w% and the wall thickness
157was 0.0635 cm. On saturation of the β-phase, growth of the oxide and α-phase would proceed at a newincreased parabolic rate until the α-phase began to fill with oxygen. However, the total oxygen uptake
rate is slightly lower since no additional oxygen is being absorbed by the β-phase. For Zircaloy withsaturated α-phase, growth rate constants for the oxide and α phases between 1 000-1 500°C were
calculated to increase by ~3 to ~17% and ~45 to ~135% respectively. The overall oxygen uptake rate
constant decreased by ~3 to ~13%.
A perhaps more trivial effect is the effect of specimen length in cases of cladding oxidation
studies. As discussed by for instance Yegorova et al. [20] specimen end effects lead to an increasedoxidation and in cases of breakaway also to an increased hydrogen pickup. The ends get a higher ECR
value and become more embrittled than the main parts of the tubes. The ECR value for the whole
specimen becomes too high if the ends are included. Another undesirable aspect is that the end-effects
intensify the development of breakaway. These considerations led Yegorova et al. to use specimens
with a minimum length of 100 mm in their study.
6.1.6 The behaviour of alloying elements during oxidation
6.1.6.1 Zircaloy-4
The corrosion resistance of Zircaloy under normal operation is structure dependent and can be
optimised by heat treatments to produce certain distributions of second phase particles. The particles
are intermetallics that precipitate during fabication along the edges of the Widmanstätten α-platelets
formed on transformation from β to α [34]. They are reported to be mostly Zr,Fe,Cr compounds with a
C14 Zr(CrFe)2 crystal structure and a composition ZrFe2-xCrx.[35-36] in Zry-4. Zry-4 phase equilibria
at high temperatures, 750-1 050°C have been investigated by Miquet and Charquet [34], whodetermined the number and nature of the phase domains between the α- and β-solid solution states.
Four phase domains were observed, αSS+Zr(Fe,Cr)2 up to 808°C; αSS+Zr(Fe,Cr)2+βSS from 808 to
845°C, αSS+β SS from 845 to 1 000°C and βSS above 1 000°C. In the α+Zr(Fe,Cr)2 domain, Sn isdissolved in the αSS phase, whilst in the α+Zr(Fe,Cr)2+β domain Sn is also present in β as well assome Fe,Cr in β. It was previously thought that in the α+β domain, Sn has greater solubility inβ [37]. However, recent studies of the phase equilibria Sn-Zr have shown that Sn is an α-stabiliser [38]and therefore α must have the higher Sn content in the α +β domain. In the β domain, all the alloying
elements are in solid solution.
Subsequent re-distribution of alloying elements during high-temperature oxidation of Zircaloy has
been observed by many workers. Yurek et al. [39] characterised oxide scales in terms of alloying
element distribution in Zry-4 oxidized in steam at 1 000-1 300°C. Prior to oxidation, Sn ishomogeneously distributed in α-Zr and Fe,Cr are present mostly as intermetallic Zr(Fe,Cr)2 precipitatesin the grains. After oxidation the Fe and Cr were observed to have been segregated in the prior β-phase.
The oxide scale contained a Sn rich intermetallic which existed as a line of particles at about the middepth of the scale. In the scale outer layer there was little Sn except for a thin layer at the oxide/gas
surface. The inner oxide contained columnar grains of ZrO2 with a fine metallic phase at the grainboundaries. During continued oxidation the Sn-rich intermetallics move towards the metal. Biederman etal. [4] determined the composition of the intermetallic phase in the oxide as Zr4Sn and suggested thegrain boundary phase in the inner oxide was α-Zr(O). Urbanic and Heidrick [11] observed globules andstringers of α-Zr(O) in the oxide scales of Zry-4 oxidized in steam at 1 050-1 800°C. The volume
fraction of α-Zr(O) in oxides formed below 1 580°C was ~2%. This is consistent with the ZrO2
(tetragonal)→ZrO2 + α-Zr(O) eutectoid transformation on cooling at ~1 000°C. In oxides formed at>1 580°C, the volume fraction of α-Zr(O) was ~10%, which is consistent with the ZrO2x (cubic)→ZrO2(tetragonal)+α-Zr(O) eutectoid transformation on cooling at ~1 577°C.
158

The behaviour of alloying elements in Zry-4 transiently oxidized in 80%-20% argon-oxygen at
higher temperatures (1 600-1 800°C) was reported by Gambini et al. [40]. The composition of theintermetallic particles in the oxide scale was determined to be ZrSn1.1-ZrSn1.9. In the α-Zr(O) layer,
adjacent to the oxide, two metallic phases were observed. The most abundant phase was ofcomposition near Zr5Sn3, the other being Zr(Fe,Cr)0.5-0.8. Both phases contained ~10% oxygen after
oxidation at 1 600°C and ~20-25% oxygen at 1 700-1 800°C. Islands of Zr5Sn were also observed in
the growing ZrO2 near the oxide/metal interface. The morphology, distribution and composition of the
Zr-Sn intermetallics in the oxide scale were found to be strongly dependent upon temperature and thecharacteristics of the transient. At higher temperature and at longer time, Zr4Sn particles observed byprevious workers are, are thought to have transformed to Sn rich liquid droplets by progressiveoxidation of the zirconium component. The formation and migration of liquid droplets is attributed togeneral transportation of the alloying elements in liquid form towards the inner surface of cladding. It
is interesting to note that a quantitative appraisal of the nature and distribution of the intermetallic
phases in high-temperature oxidized Zry-4 may facilitate the estimation of temperature of cladding in
high-temperature severe fuel damage experiments.
6.1.6.2 Zr-1Nb
When the layer of oxygen stabilised α, α−Zr(O), starts to grow on the β layer, β−stabilisingelements like Fe, Cr, and Nb are rejected from the α and are forced into the β phase. This is no
problem in Zry-4 since the concentrations of Fe and Cr are low and their diffusion coefficients are highenough to permit a sufficient diffusion away from the interface. Thus, in Zry-4 growth of the α−layer
usually results in a sharp and straight interface between the β and α. In Zr1Nb on the other hand the
Nb diffuses relatively slowly. Brachet et al. have reported that at 1 100°C the Nb diffuses about 10-20
times slower than Cr and 40-80 times slower than Fe [41]. Since there is no time for the Nb to diffuse
away, an eutectoid like structure is formed inside the oxide where thin Nb rich β lamellae lie between
coarse α-phase needles (Figure 6.17). As a result, there is no sharp interface between the oxygenstabilised α and the underlying β layer in the Zr1Nb alloys.
Brachet et al. also measured the oxygen content in the former β-phase in both Zircaloy-4 and M5
by electron microprobe analysis. For oxidation at 1 100°C, the concentration was 5 500-6 000 wppm
in Zry-4while it was between 2 000-4 000 wppm in M5. It is likely that both values are too high due tooxygen contamination on the sample surfaces. However, the relative difference between the oxygen
contents of the two alloys is considered to be fairly accurate.
6.1.7 High-temperature oxidation of pre-oxidized zirconium alloys
Zircaloy cladding oxidizes slowly during normal operation of an LWR. Many out-of-reactor
studies have been made of oxidation in the temperature range relevant to normal running and some inreactor measurements of oxidation have also been made [42-43] The initial oxidation rate in reactor is
cubic (for ~100-500 days). When the oxide is a few microns thick (~2-5 µm), the oxidation rate
becomes linear owing to the transition discussed earlier. This transition is normally associated withfissuring of the oxide film. Later in life a second transition to an even higher oxidation rate may occur.
The waterside corrosion of Zircaloy-4 in the hydrogen overpressure environment of a PWR waspreviously not a fuel life or performance limiting factor for reactor operation. However, with current
industry-wide burn-up goals an oxide thickness of up to 100 µm may be reached as can be seen in
Figure 6.18. There is also an incentive to maintain a high coolant pH to minimise the transport ofhighly activated corrosion products, and hence, minimise man-rem doses.

159

Figure 6.17 Nb X-ray map obtained by electron microprobe of the α(O)+β(Nb) layer
below the oxide in M5 alloy oxidized to ECR ~17% at 1 100°C [41]Figure 6.18 Examples of corrosion of Zircaloy-4 in different PWRs

160

Oxidation of Zircaloy may be enhanced in extended burn-up simply because of increased
exposure time. Additionally, a thicker oxide film with associated poor heat transfer characteristics,
raises the oxide/metal interface temperature and further increases the oxidation rate. Data are alsoavailable that show the enhanced corrosion of Zircaloy in very high pH (high lithia) water. This effectis thought to occur from hide-out and concentration of lithia in porous oxide.
The effect of lithia on oxidation of Zircaloy under LOCA conditions is not reported but thesubsequent high-temperature steam oxidation of pre-oxidized Zircaloy (albeit mostly at higher
temperatures than reactor operating) has been reported by a number of workers.
High-temperature oxidation of Zircaloy with pre-formed oxide has been studied by Leistikow etal. [7] who pre-formed oxide in the range of 350-600°C up to 50 µm in thickness prior to furtheroxidation at temperatures of 1 000 and 1 200°C. The authors concluded that the pre-formed oxides
were generally protective if the temperature of further oxidation did not exceed 1 200°C. Beyond thistemperature highly defective tetragonal zirconia formed and the protective action of the pre-formedoxide decreased. Leistikow et al. [44] also pre-formed oxides ~30 µm thick in the temperature range of~400-800°C and exposed the samples to transient high-temperature oxidation. The authors concluded
that pre-oxidation in this range did not affect subsequent high-temperature oxidation systematically.
Their data did not provide a sufficient basis for an analytical description of the high-temperaturetransient oxidation of pre-corroded Zircaloy.
Zircaloy specimens pre-oxidized at 871°C for 110 s and 500 s t(oxide films 5 µm and10 µm thickrespectively) were oxidized in steam isothermally at 980-1 315°C by Biederman et al. [5]. Oxidation athigh temperature continued to obey a parabolic rate law although as shown in Figure 6.19 the amount ofoxidation became increasingly less than that expected on virgin cladding as the isothermal oxidation
time increased. Figure 6.19 shows the results on 10 µm pre-oxidized cladding. The results for 5-µm
pre-oxidation are basically similar. Note that the treatment of data in Figure 6.19 is not self-consistent.
In parabolic square root representation pre-oxidized material do not give straight lines unless the preformed oxide is completely non-protective. On the other hand, the smaller slopes in the figure, whichmeans reduced reaction rate coefficients, are only possible if a moderating influence on the rate
limiting mechanism is assumed. Possibly influencing this behaviour are the boundary values or profileof the anion vacancy concentration of the ZrO2 scale.
Kawasaki et al. [9] also pre-corroded Zircaloy in pressurised water at 300°C to give an oxide film
~1 µm thick. Subsequent oxidation in steam at 900 and 950°C showed a protective effect i.e. lessoxidation for up to 50 mins at these temperatures.
Figure 6.19 Oxidation results for cladding pre-oxidized with a 10 µm oxide

161

Iglesias [45] has pointed out that tests with pre-oxidized Zircaloy have been interpreted in terms ofa premise that a “protective” oxide forms at temperatures below 1 200°C. However only three points in
Figure 6.19 (2 000°F and 1 800°F for t1/2 > 16) support this premise. If specimens are pre-oxidized, theoxygen gradient produced in the stabilised α-layer dictates the speed of advancement of the oxide/αinterface during further oxidation at different temperature. As the oxygen gradient adjusts itself bydiffusion to be aligned with the new oxidation temperature, parabolic kinetics will be re-established. At
high temperatures (>1 200°C), oxygen diffusion is so rapid that concentration gradient re-aligns easily
and little effect of pre-oxidation is noted. Such an effect cannot be represented using parabolic rate laws
but can be accounted by means of moving-boundary diffusion models (see Section 6.3.2).
Ozawa et al. [46] reported oxidation tests on both pre-oxidized unirradiated cladding of Zry-4 andspent fuel cladding after four cycles of irradiation to a burn-up of 45.9 MWd/kgU. The unirradiatedcladding was tested (1) as-received, (2) hydrogen precharged and (3) hydrogen precharged and preoxidized. The irradiated cladding had initial oxide thicknesses of 7 to 56 µm based on measurements
on sibling rods. From this oxide thickness its hydrogen content was estimated based on a hydrogen
pickup fraction of 12%. The oxidation tests were carried out on 1-cm-long cladding segments and theweight gain was recorded. For the irradiated material spalling off of the oxide occurred frequently
during testing, but the spalled oxide was collected in a saucer under the specimen so that it could be
included in the weight measurement.
A comparison of results from the hydrogen precharged specimens, 420-840 wppm, with results
for as-received specimens tested at 1 060-1 225°C revealed no effect of the hydrogen uptake on theoxidation kinetics. This is in contrast to low-temperature corrosion behaviour in which hydrides canexert a significant effect on corrosion rate [47]. The authors conclude that the hydrogen probably
dissolved rapidly in the β-phase and therefore no hydrides were present.
For the irradiated cladding oxidation at high temperature was somewhat slower than for the asreceived cladding. In Figure 6.20, the oxidation result for irradiated cladding has been normalised withrespect to the result for as-received cladding oxidized under the same conditions. There is a clear trendthat the high-temperature oxidation of irradiated cladding is retarded by the presence of the oxide
formed during reactor operation.
Figure 6.20 Normalised values of high-temperature oxidation of spent fuel cladding
as a function of initial oxide thickness, Ozawa et al. [46]162Basically the same behaviour is observed for unirradiated cladding pre-oxidized before the hightemperature exposure. The presence of a thick oxide retards the high-temperature oxidation.
Metallographic observations on the irradiated cladding show that the initial oxide lies more or lessunaffected by the high-temperature test on the outside of the oxide layer formed at high temperature.
There is no indication that the initial oxide to any extent has dissolved in the α-phase.
Nagase et al. have reported oxidation tests on pre-oxidized low Sn Zircaloy-4 [48]. In isothermal
tests at 1 100°C, the weight gain of samples pre-oxidized to 40 to 50 µm thickness were lower thanthose for as received samples for times shorter than 1 800 s. For longer times, the weight gains werecomparable. Metallographic cross sections on samples oxidized for various times revealed themechanism behind this behaviour (Figure 6.21).
Figure 6.21 Cross sections of pre-oxidized samples oxidized at 1 100°C for various times
White arrows indicate initiation of high-temperature oxidation.

As can be seen in the Figure, no additional oxidation is observed in cladding samples exposed tohigh-temperature steam for times shorter than 180 s. An additional oxide is locally formed at cracked
positions of the pre-formed oxide after 180 and 900 s as indicated with arrows in the figure, and after
1800 s the high-temperature oxide grows uniformly beneath the pre-formed oxide layer. These results
show that pre-formed oxide can be a protective layer for the high-temperature oxidation, that hightemperature oxidation initiates at cracks in the pre-formed oxide, and that this retarding effect ismaintained until additional oxide layer by high-temperature oxidation is uniformly formed beneath thepre-formed oxide layer.
Recently Brachet et al. reported the effect of 5 and 15 µm oxides formed in a hot water loop
before LOCA testing [49] for both Zircaloy-4 and M5. The pre-formed oxides reduced the weightgains in the LOCA tests significantly. However, the resulting microstructure beneath the oxide scales
were not affected. Thus post-quench ductility was similar for specimens tested with and without thepre-formed oxide.
An interesting example of the pre-formed oxide acting as a barrier to high-temperature oxidationis shown in Figure 6.22 which is from a study by Pettersson and Haag on the effects of nodular
preoxidation [1]. The nodule was formed dring a 10 MPa steam autoclave treatment at 500°C for
24 hours. One of the explanations to low-temperature nodular oxidation is that the oxide in a nodule isvery much non-protective like most post-transition oxides. It is therefore somewhat surprising that the
nodules as well as the other pre-oxides seem to have a protective function during LOCA transients.
One part of the explanation is that the nodules as well as the post-transition oxides are stoichiometric.
Therefore oxygen vacancies in the oxide will be negligible to permit solid state diffusion of oxygen.
Then steam has to be transported at high temperature through the pores in the stoichiometric oxide
until it reaches the fresh substoichiometric oxide. Under normal oxidation conditions this transport is163

very rapid compared to the prevailing corrosion rates, and the oxide is totally non-protective.
However, under the fast oxide growth during a LOCA transient the steam transport through the preoxide may well be rate limiting. This hypothesis could also explain the change of rate constant foroxide growth after pre-oxidation which was observed in the experiments by Biedermann et al. [5]Figure 6.22 High-temperature oxidation below an oxide nodule formed during pre-oxidation 80×

A metallographic analysis was reported by Chung on a PWR high-burn-up spent-fuel cladding thatwas oxidized in steam in a LOCA-like transient situation [21]. Fuel burn-up was ≈63 MWd/kgU, and thespent-fuel cladding, fabricated from standard Zircaloy-4, had a pretransient corrosion layer thickness of≈70 µm, remaining metal wall thickness of ≈0.70-0.71 mm, and a total hydrogen uptake of ≈550800 wppm. The fuel-containing cladding segment was heated rapidly to ≈1 050°C, then slowly heatedfrom ≈1 050°C to ≈1 200°C in ≈70 s, and held at ≈1 200°C for various periods of time up to ≈300 s.
Post-quench nil-ductility was observed by the time the cladding was exposed to ≈1 200°C for ≈100120 s. For a similar cladding in non-irradiated fresh state under nominally the same time-temperature
exposure condition, total oxidation calculated with Cathcart-Pawel correlation was ≈10% ECR.
However, metallographic measurements of the oxide and stabilised layer thicknesses in the
LOCA-like-oxidized spent-fuel cladding showed that actual ECR was significantly less, indicating astrongly retarding effect of the pretransient corrosion. Compared to optical metallography, scanningelectron microscopy allowed more accurate thickness measurement of cauliflower-shaped pretransient
corrosion layer, columnar high-temperature-oxide layer, and stabilised α layer. There were indications
that the inner portion of the porous pretransient corrosion layer (predominantly monoclinic oxide)
transformed to compact columnar oxide (tetragonal oxide) during the high-temperature exposure. The
combined thickness of the two types of oxide was not much different from the thickness of the
pretransient corrosion layer, i.e., ≈70 µm. Furthermore, the thickness of the stabilised α layer was alsosignificantly smaller than that predicted by the equation developed by Cathcart-Pawel. Chungsuggested that the large amount of hydrogen atoms that are dissolved in the β layer can lead to a
relatively thinner layer of stabilised α, because hydrogen is a strong β stabiliser. The pretansient
corrosion layer formed in PWR is most likely a hydroxide rather than an oxide. This may be a factor
related to the high-temperature transformation of the inner part of the corrosion layer to columnar
tetragonal oxide indicated in this study. At any rate, it seems that oxidation of high-burn-up Zircaloy-4
PWR cladding cannot be predicted well by Cathcart-Pawel correlation, from the standpoint of not only
post-quench embrittlement but also oxidation-related heat generation.
1646.1.8 Oxidation of zirconium alloys in impure steam
The oxidation of Zircaloy at high temperatures in oxidizing media other than pure steam has been
investigated for a range of conditions. Cathcart et al. [50] added small amounts of impurity (N2 or O2,
up to 10 vol.% and H2 up to 5 vol.%) to steam and oxidized Zircaloy at temperatures of 1 100 and
1 300°C. Yet no significant effects on the oxidation rate were observed.
Zircaloy was exposed to pure N2, O2 and air by Leistikow et al. [7] in the temperature range of
900-1 150°C. The results at 1 100°C are shown in Figure 6.23 which show that the weight gain isslightly higher for oxidation in air or oxygen than in steam. In air, zirconium nitride forms which isitself oxidized, permitting further easier access of oxidant. In oxygen, there are no gaseous reaction
products and hence no perturbations to the flux of oxidizing species arriving at the oxidized surface.
Results at the other temperatures were similar.
Figure 6.23 Weight gains recorded in isothermal tests in different gases on Zircaloy-4

Leistikow, Kraft and Pott [51] also oxidized Zircaloy tubes in steam and air in comparative stressrupture tests. It was concluded that at temperatures up to ~800°C the oxidation characteristics in air andsteam were similar as were the mechanical properties in stress rupture. However, at ~1 000°C, although
the oxide formed in steam remained adherent and protective and delayed stress rupture, the oxide formed
in air was extensively cracked and conferred no strengthening effect in stress rupture. The mechanism ofenhanced corrosion in air at temperature > ~1 000°C was the dissolution of nitrogen and the formation of
zirconium nitride which is highly reactive, brittle, and has a high Pilling-Bedworth ratio.
Bibilashvili et al. have reported the effect of air-steam mixtures on the oxidation of the E110
alloy at 800, 1 000 and 1 200°C [18]. The mixtures in the study contained 10, 50 and 90% air. The
largest effect on the oxidation was observed at 1 000°C (Figure 6.24). At 1 200°C, there was no effectof 10% air. At the higher concentrations of air, the oxididation rate increased significantly similar tothe observation at 1 000°C. At the lower temperatures, there was a characteristic inflection in the
curves, possibly indicating start of breakaway oxidation.
165

Figure 6.24 The effect of air on the oxidation of the E110 alloy [18]They have also reported a study of the effect of nitrogen concentration on oxidation kinetics. The
results are similar to the results in air. Both in air and nitrogen mixtures they explain the increase inreaction rate as a result of the “activising” influence of nitrogen. They also note that the transition fromparabolic to linear kinetics at low temperatures comes earlier with nitrogen than with pure steam.
6.1.9 Influence of hydrogen in steam on zirconium alloy oxidation
All previously published measurements of Zircaloy oxidation have been made with flows ofsteam such that the reaction never became limited by gas-phase diffusion, a condition that was ensured
by experimentally determining the minimum flow rate necessary to supply the oxide/gas phaseinterface with sufficient oxidizing species.
In some circumstances, notably in some beyond design basis accidents (i.e., severe-fuel-damage
accident) it is envisaged that the supply of steam to oxidize the fuel cladding will be from the boil-off
of water as the core is uncovered. The steam flows convectively up the fuel channels and the oxidationof fuel cladding produces hydrogen gas which increases in concentration with height above the boilingwater. In such circumstances, calculation of the extent of cladding reacted using kinetic data obtained
as above, may be unrealistic.
Additionally, in the region of the perforation in ballooned and burst cladding, the steam ingressoxidizes the cladding inner surface. The residual hydrogen gas in this situation results in a high hydrogensteam ratio adjacent to certain locations of the inner surface. This strongly influences the mode ofoxidation, and in some circumstances, the degree of local embrittlement (Section 6.2.3) at these locations.
The effect of hydrogen on the oxidation characteristics of Zircaloy was noted at ~750°C, inearlier years by Westerman [52] who reported lower weight gain in an approximately 80% hydrogensteam mixture.
Furuta et al. [53] observed different oxidation characteristics on the inner diameter of a dummyfuel rod burst and oxidized in flowing steam. Further work by JAERI on the oxidation of burst dummyfuel rods in steam [54-57] has shown a different morphology of oxide formed on the inner surface andthe effects of such oxidation on the mechanical properties of oxidized Zircaloy.
Evaluation of the fuel rods after in-reactor LOCA tests in the FR2 reactor, performed by KfK in
Germany, has identified thicker internal oxide compared to the external oxide layers near the rupture166

elevation for all high-burn-up fuel rods. Steam consumption, hydrogen enrichment, as well as burn-up
influences (growth of defective scales) have been interpreted as contributing to this modified oxidation
behaviour [58].
The effects of hydrogen-steam mixtures on the oxidation of non-deformed Zircaloy have beenreported by JAERI investigators [56,59,60]. Small sections of Zircaloy-4 cladding were heatedisothermally in the temperature range of 950-1 100°C in a flowing mixture of steam and hydrogen.
The volume ratio of hydrogen to steam was varied over the range of 0.05-2.0. The total weight gain
was found to be a function of flow rate, temperature, time and hydrogen concentration. At a high flowrate of 18.3 cm3s-1 and temperatures of 1 000, 1 100°C there was a slight but definite decrease in theweight gain of specimens oxidized in mixed gas of VH2/VH2O ratio 0.4 as compared to those in steam.
At a flow rate of 0.5 cm3s-1, weight gain as a function of time, temperature and H2/H2O volume ratio isshown in Figure 6.25. For temperatures of 1 000°C and above, there is a critical H2/H2O volume ratio
below which the oxidation behaviour is the same as in pure steam, but above which the weight gain
exhibits a marked decrease. This critical ratio depends on temperature and flow rate and tends to belower as the temperature increases from 1 000-1 100°C.
Figure 6.25 Total weight gain of oxidized specimen as function of hydrogen-to-steam volume ratio

The effect of hydrogen concentration in mixed hydrogen/steam gas on the hydrogen uptake inoxidized Zircaloy-4 is shown in Figure 6.26. Below the critical H2/H2O volume ratio, the hydrogen
uptake is similar to that observed in pure steam. At the critical ratio the hydrogen uptake increases
rapidly.
In hydrogen/steam below the critical ratio the oxide structure and morphology were the same as inpure steam that is the oxide was compact, dense and in room temperature examination, has a monoclinic
crystal structure. Above the critical ratio, the increased hydrogen concentration caused the oxide to form
as a porous oxide consisting of both the monoclinic and tetragonal polymorphs of ZrO2. Additionally, ameasurement of oxygen distribution in the transformed β-phase of specimens oxidized for 1 200 s at
1 000°C showed a lower oxygen concentration in the specimen that was oxidized in a mixed gas of
H2/H2O ratio above the critical ratio. This sample contained as much as 3 230 ppm hydrogen.

167

Figure 6.26 Hydrogen content absorbed by specimen in a steam-hydrogen mixture [59]The authors conclude that hydrogen in steam can have a marked effect on the oxidation
characteristics of Zircaloy-4 in steam hydrogen mixtures. The weight gain varies with the H2/H2O
volume ratio at temperatures of 950-1 100°C and the effect is more pronounced as the flow rate
decreases. The critical value of the H2/H2O ratio depends on temperature and flowrate. Tetragonal oxide
associated with oxidation in gas mixtures above the critical H2/H2O ratio is promoted by the absorbedhydrogen observed in such samples. The oxygen concentration profile in transformed β-Zircaloy can be
influenced by hydrogen uptake and the occupancy by the hydrogen of the octahedral sites in ZrO2.
Chung and Kassner [61] and Chung and Thomas [17,62-63] have also investigated the effects ofhydrogen/steam mixed gas oxidation of Zircaloy mainly to study the implications to core heat up in
degraded core type accidents where hydrogen in steam and reaction kinetics above 1 200°C are
particularly significant. Chung and Kassner [61] observed anomalous oxidation on the inner and outersurfaces of Zircaloy cladding oxidized in steam. Several types of specimens were examined including
Al2O3-pelleted, pressurised and ruptured cladding. Tests were performed with pellets of various
diameter. Undeformed claddings with various sizes of holes were also tested to admit steam into thecladding inner volume at various rates. Significant variations in oxide and α-phase thicknesses were
frequently observed in ruptured cladding which were not attributable to local temperature fluctuations.
Two distinct types of anomalous oxide were observed. An oxide observed only on the outer surface ischaracterised by white contrast under polarised light and is somewhat similar to that observed in the
breakaway oxidation regime at low temperatures (Section 6.1.3). A second type of porous oxide wasobserved on both inner and outer surfaces and is characterised by small circumferential cracks and amuch larger oxide thickness relative to normal dense oxide. This type of oxide was observed in highly
localised areas which suggest that temperature or H2/H2O ratios are not particularly influential since
they would not vary much over the small distances observed. The authors suggest local stressvariations are more likely to have influenced the formation of such oxides. However, in the very
narrow capillary-type gap between the pellets and the cladding inner diameter, mixing of stagnant
steam and hydrogen gas is difficult. This may lead steep gradients in H2/H2O ratio over a shortdistance along the gap. Since many interdependent factors combine to determine the precise conditions
168

of oxidation in such type of tests, e.g. local stress concentrations, size of rupture, steam/hydrogentransport, outside and inside the cladding, distance from the rupture centre, and temperature variations,
it was not possible to unequivocally establish the relationship between the various factors such as
H2/H2O ratio on the oxidation characteristics of the Zircaloy cladding.
Chung and Thomas [17,62-63] have also investigated the effects of hydrogen/steam mixture onoxidation of Zircaloy-4 at very high temperatures. The objective was mainly to study the implications tocore heat up under severe-fuel-damage-accident situations where hydrogen in steam and reaction
kinetics are particularly large. They performed a series of experiments to investigate the influence ofhydrogen in steam on the oxidation of the free outer surface of Zircaloy-4 cladding in simulated
environments that can occur in a severe-fuel-damage accident. In the first series of experiments, theoxidation rate in hydrogen-steam mixtures was measured in the temperature range 1 200-1 700°C in an
overpressure of 33 KPa hydrogen in a total pressure of ~38-45 KPa. Steam-helium mixtures were also
used to distinguish between rate limitations in the gas phase and surface reactions. The extent ofreaction was measured as oxide thickness. The ratio of the parabolic oxide layer growth constants
obtained in steam-hydrogen and in pure steam is plotted as function of cladding temperature and steam
supply rate in Figure 6.27. It is evident that the oxidation rate is retarded in steam hydrogen mixtures.
The retardation is greater for higher hydrogen-steam ratios and for a given hydrogen-steam ratio, thiseffect is more pronounced at higher temperatures. In pure steam, the oxidation rate was always
parabolic and similar to previously reported data, hence steam starvation was not occurring in thesetests. Oxidation in hydrogen-steam mixtures is parabolic or linear depending on the specimen
temperature, the pressures of steam and hydrogen at the specimen surface and the time of oxidation i.e.
the oxide layer thickness. Initial oxidation kinetics in hydrogen-steam were linear rather than parabolicat the lower steam supply rates and were lower. This indicates that the oxidation was limited by either
gas-phase diffusion or some kind of surface reaction (e.g. dissociation of water molecules or subsequent
reduction of oxidizing species). Since oxidation in steam-helium mixtures in similar conditions wasobserved to be parabolic, based on the assumption that steam has similar diffusivities in hydrogen andhelium, it was concluded that the rate limiting process in steam-hydrogen is a surface reaction.
Figure 6.27 Ratio of parabolic oxide layer growth rate constant obtainedin hydrogen steam mixtures to that obtained in unlimited flux of pure steam
as a function of Zircaloy-4 temperatures and steam supply rate [17]

CLADDING TEMPERATURE (°C)

Eventually as the oxide film thickens, the flux of oxidizing species at the oxide/metal interface
decreases, solid state diffusion becomes rate limiting and parabolic kinetics are obeyed. In these169

circumstances lower oxidation rates than would be achieved in pure steam were observed, and it ispostulated that hydrogen dissolved in the cladding is responsible for decreased oxygen diffusion. It issuggested that this is due to interstitial or substitutional H+ ions producing an increase in the oxygen
vacancy concentration in the oxide near the gas/specimen surface thus decreasing the oxygen vacancy
concentration gradient across the oxide and hence the oxygen diffusion rate.
The limitations of the former experiments in adequately quantifying the effects of hydrogen on
Zircaloy oxidation in the realistic conditions of flowing steam were subsequently stated by Chung andThomas [17]. In the above experiments, the steam molecules impinge on the oxide by naturalconvection in a static overpressure (~33 KPa) of hydrogen. Steam impingement rate varies by virtue ofa controlled steam supply rate, a decreased supply rate implying an increased hydrogen molar fraction.
Under these conditions the oxidation rate is a function of steam supply rate as well as temperature andit is not possible to quantify the steam and hydrogen partial pressures at the reaction site. Chung andThomas [17] reported further experiments in which a shroud was placed around the Zircaloy cladding
and flowing steam-hydrogen mixtures were passed over the Zircaloy. A flow of hydrogen wasmaintained at 10 l/min and the steam supply varied between 0.5-3.2 g/min to give hydrogen molar
fractions ranging from 0.94 to 0.71. The ratio of the oxide layer growth constants for the hydrogensteam and pure steam are shown in Figure 6.28 as a function of cladding temperature. The lower
parabolic rates observed in steam hydrogen mixtures are again interpreted as being due to hydrogenentering the zirconia lattice either as interstitial or substitutional H+ ions. Confirmation that hydrogen
was contained in the surface oxide was obtained by powdering the surface layers and chemical
analysis. The analysis showed that the oxide formed in hydrogen-steam mixtures contained asignificant quantity of hydrogen in the outer layer, having a composition which approximates to ZrOH.
Zircaloy oxidized in pure steam contained little hydrogen (≤0.03 w.%) but as the hydrogen-steam ratio
increased the hydrogen content of the outer oxide increased and the oxygen content decreased.
Figure 6.28 Ratio of parabolic oxide layer growth rate constant obtained in flowinghydrogen steam mixtures to that obtained in unlimited flux of pure steam as a functionof Zircaloy-4 temperatures and average hydrogen mole fraction in the inlet mixtures [17]The fraction of the total hydrogen generated which becomes dissolved in the cladding can besignificant as shown by Figure 6.29. The data derives from tests on pressurised ballooned ruptured andoxidized Zircaloy tubes in simulated LOCA situations [61]. Anomalous porous oxidation generally
observed on the inner diameter at ≤1 120°C is responsible for the large dissolved hydrogen fraction atabout 1 120°C. Chung and Thomas [17] point out that such data demonstrate the importance of
Zircaloy cladding as a sink for hydrogen and also point out that further data are required for asatisfactory understanding of all the features associated with hydrogen-steam oxidation of Zircaloy.
170

Figure 6.29 Fraction of hydrogen atoms dissolved in Zircaloy-4 cladding tube
out of total hydrogen atoms produced as a result of Zircaloy steam reaction
at isothermal oxidation temperatures. Data from [17,61]

Chung and Thomas [64] analysed the implications of high hydrogen concentrations on core heatup in beyond-design-basis accidents and although more data are required on oxidation rates in highhydrogen/steam ratios before a quantitative analysis is possible, it was concluded that, during
prolonged core uncovery, the cladding oxidation rate will be lower and therefore the core-heat-up rate
will be lower. Additionally, the lower oxidation rate should not affect embrittlement behaviour since
this will be established before the high hydrogen concentrations have an effect. Finally, less liquid
UO2 and debris will be formed than would be predicted using unlimited steam oxidation kinetics.
A later investigation by Prater and Courtright [65] conflicts with that reported above in thatoxidation in steam-hydrogen mixtures between 1 300°C and 2 400°C has failed to show any influenceof hydrogen on the initial parabolic growth rates of the ZrO2 and α-Zr(O) phase thicknesses until thehydrogen concentration reaches ~90 mol %. At this high concentration the gas-phase mass-transfer ofsteam molecules is reduced to a flux less than that required to oxidize Zircaloy at the rate determined bysolid-state diffusion.
Results on Zr1%Nb reported by Bibilashvili et al. did not reveal any significant influence ofhydrogen on the rate of zirconium/steam kinetics at tests done at 1 200°C in which tests in pure steam
were compared to tests in 90% hydrogen-steam mixture [18].
At high burn-up, when the oxide layer may reach thicknesses of up to 100 µm, there is also asignificant hydrogen pickup in the cladding. For a pickup fraction of 15%, the expected hydrogencontent will be about 600 ppm at an oxide thickness of 100 µm. Due to thermal diffusion of hydrogen,much of this hydrogen will be located near the outer surface of the cladding. At low temperatures, it
has been observed that the presence of hydrides has an accelerating effect on corrosion [47]. However,as soon as the material has been transformed to the β-phase in a LOCA transient, practically all
hydrides become dissolved in the metal. As suggested by Chung and Thomas, hydrogen dissolved inoxide may have a retarding effect on oxide growth [63]. The results of Ozawa et al. presented in
Section 6.1.7 did not reveal any effect of hydrides formed in the metal [46].
Nagase et al. have studied the effect of prehydriding on the high-temperature steam oxidation of
low-Sn Zircaloy [48]. As can be seen in Figure 6.30, the effect is very small. However, in all cases
except at the highest temperature (1 100°C), the presence of hydrogen in the material serves toaccelerate the oxidation.
171

Figure 6.30 The effect of prehydriding on the high-temperature oxidation of low Sn Zircaloy-4

Portier et al. compared M5 with Zircaloy-4 and also included the effect of hydrogen content in
the comparison [24]. As can be seen in Figure 6.31 there are small differences between Zircaloy-4 andM5 and the effect of hydrogen content is minimal. The rationale for only testing a low content for M5
was because in-reactor corrosion rate of M5 is much lower than Zircaloy-4. Thus M5 is not expected
pick up more hydrogen than 200 ppm at the end-of-life.
Figure 6.31 Effect of hydrogen content on M5 and Zircaloy oxidation kinetics at 1 200°C

More recently E. Perez-Feró et al. have reported results on the oxidation of E110 alloy inhydrogen-steam mixtures with 20, 28, and 36 vol.% hydrogen at 900, 1 000, and 1 100°C [66]. The
experiments were conducted in a tube furnace with the sample being pushed in and out of the heatedzone of the tube at the beginning and end of the experiment respectively. The oxidation wasdetermined from the weight gain of the samples. The figure presented in the paper by E. Perez-Feró et172

al. indicates a relatively large spread in the results and that there was no difference in oxidation
behaviour within the range of hydrogen concentrations used. However, the best fit to the results
showed that the oxidation rate in the hydrogen-steam mixtures was about 60% of the rate calculated
from a best fit of oxidation rates of E110 in steam.
6.1.10 High-temperature oxidation of zirconium alloys in high pressure steam
The majority of measurements on the oxidation of Zircaloy in steam have been carried out inambient pressure steam. For parabolic oxidation, the rate controlling process is diffusion of oxygenanion species. Theories of parabolic oxidation based on diffusion predict rates independent of pressure.
Pawel et al. [67] have measured the oxidation of Zircaloy in steam at pressures up to 10.34 MPa(1 500 lb/in2) and at temperatures of 900 and 1 100°C for times up to 2 500 and 500 s respectively.
Measurements of the oxide and α-phase thickness showed that at 1 100°C there was no effect ofpressure, but at 900°C increase in steam pressure tended to increase the thickness of the oxide phase.
The authors were unable to postulate a mechanism for the observed effect but suggested that theformation of fine cracks in the outer layer of oxide may enhance oxidation at high pressure.
An alternative explanation of enhanced oxide formation during oxidation at 900°C at highpressure may be the increased transformation of the oxide to the more stable tetragonal oxide in which
oxygen transport is greater than in the lower temperature monoclinic form [68].
Other studies have also indicated that there is a reduced influence of steam pressure on oxidation
kinetics with an increase in temperature. The effect observed at 900°C is reduced at 1 000°C and at
1 100°C no effect is observed [69-70].
Vrtilkova et al. [70] and Bibilashvili et al. [18] have reported the effect of steam pressure on thehigh-temperature steam oxidation of E110 (Zr1%Nb). At 700°C, the oxidation increases with a factor
of about 2 when the pressure is increased from ambient to 2-4 MPa [18]. The effect of pressure on theoxidation of both Zircaloy-4 and Zr1%Nb is shown in Figure 6.32 [70].
Figure 6.32 Effect of steam pressure on the oxidation of Zircaloy-4 and Zr1%Nb at 850°C [70]6.1.11 Effect of deformation on zirconium alloy oxidation
Cladding may undergo simultaneous deformation and oxidation during a LOCA until the cladding
ruptures. The deformation increases the available surface for oxidation hence increases the volume ofoxide formed. Since deformation generally occurs at lower temperatures than at temperatures of173

significant oxidation, little work has been done to measure explicitly the enhancement of oxidation in
Zircaloy arising from simultaneous deformation and oxidation.
Knights and Perkins [71] reported that under certain conditions i.e. at >400°C and an oxide film
thicker than ~2 µm, an applied tensile stress in the creep range increased the oxidation of Zircaloy-2 insteam and in wet oxygen but not in pure oxygen, up to 475°C. The enhancement of the oxidation ratevaried between 1.2 to 2.0 and was attributed to a stress induced inhibition of the parabolic to cubic
kinetic transition.
Bradhurst and Heuer [72] compressed Zircaloy rings in flowing steam at 700-1 300°C. It was
concluded that deformation imposed during high-temperature oxidation could significantly increase theamount of oxidation. However, in such inhomogeneously strained specimens the effects of deformation
were local and overall weight gain was only slightly influenced. The enhanced oxidation takes the formof increased local penetration beneath oxide cracks, and for similar time, temperature exposures theeffect was more pronounced at a slow strain rate than at a fast strain rate. The maximum enhancement
factor observed was about two.
Simultaneous oxidation and creep at 900°C was investigated by Leistikow and Kraft [73] who
pressurised sections of sealed cladding at various pressures and exposed them to either argon or steam
for up to 30 min. The strain to failure was found to be dependent on strain rate and was lower for tubes
ruptured in steam due to the strengthening effect of the oxide film. A comparison of oxide thickness on
strained and unstrained tubes showed that the amount of oxidation increased with increasing stress.
The enhancement was attributed to oxide cracking and the provision of new surface for oxidation rather
than any influence of deformation on the basic oxygen transport mechanisms through the oxide film.
Furuta and Kawasaki [74] studied the oxidation of axially strained to failure tensile specimens
simultaneously oxidized in steam at temperatures between 700-1 000°C and a strain rate of ~2.8×10-2s-1.
An increased oxide thickness was observed in deformed specimens, the enhancement being greater withincreasing strain but decreased with increasing temperature. The maximum enhancement factor was~1.3 in the ruptured area at 700°C and after 300 s exposure. No observations on oxide morphology or
the nature of the oxidation enhancement were reported.
More recently Parsons and Hand [75] conducted oxidation tests in flowing steam on pressurised
Zircaloy-4 cladding at ~710°C and ~150 lb/in2g and ~800°C and ~80 lb/in2g. The oxidizing cladding
simultaneously deformed (swelled). Tube samples were withdrawn from the furnace at various
intervals with diametral strains ranging from ~5% to ~30% overall but up to 80% local strain at theperforation. At ~710°C, unpressurised control cladding oxidized initially at a cubic rate before atransition to an approximately linear rate. The deforming cladding very quickly oxidized at a nearlinear rate with an enhanced weight gain which increased with increasing strain giving a weight gain
~2-2.5 times greater than unpressurised cladding after this exposure. At 800°C unpressurised cladding
continued to oxidize at a cubic rate up to 7 hours but pressurised cladding exhibited a transition to anear linear rate after ~5 hours after which the weight gain was enhanced by ~2.5-3 times compared tounpressurised controls.
The oxide thickness was also measured and showed the same general enhancement as the weightgain. The oxide was extensively cracked at strains greater than ~10% at ~710°C and ~5% at ~800°C andbeneath the cracks there was an increased penetration of α-Zr(O). The increase in total oxidation is inpart due to the increased surface area on deformed (swollen) cladding but the increase in oxide thickness
relative to the undeformed cladding suggests that the enhanced oxidation is also a consequence ofincreased access of oxidant to the underlying metal by virtue of cracking of normally protective oxide.

174

6.1.12 Stress and dimensional changes in oxidized zirconium alloys
Since the molar volume of ZrO2 is appreciably greater than that of zirconium (i.e. the PillingBedworth ratio is ~1.5-1.6), significant compressive stresses may be generated in the growing oxide
scale. These stresses and tensile strains generated in the metal from dilation by oxygen solution can
result in significant tensile stresses on the metal substrate. Although various mechanisms may relieve
the induced stresses e.g. oxide plasticity, oxide cracking, and metal plasticity the net result will bedimensional changes in the oxide-metal composite Zircaloy material. Oxidation-induced deformationof 0.7 mm thickness Zircaloy-2 sheet has been measured by Donaldson and Evans [76] in Zircaloy
oxidized in steam in the range 800-1 210°C. Typical strains were about 1%, the maximum strain being~3% after 300 mins at 900°C. It was established that the dilation produced by oxygen solution in α-Zr
has a large effect on stress distribution in the metal substrate and hence influences the average stresses
within the oxide. The tensile deformation at high temperatures is attributed to the hydrostatic
compressive stresses brought about by dilation due to oxygen solution rather than the stresses
produced by oxide growth, the latter being accommodated almost wholly by outward growth.
For short times at lower temperatures, oxygen solution and associated stresses are small, thus net
compressive stresses from the oxide (~1 300 MPa) result in deformation of the metal substrate. With
increased temperature and time the oxygen-solute-induced stresses grow and eventually dominate theoverall stress, exerting a net tensile stress on the oxide of the magnitude of ~200, 300 and 150 MPa at
800, 900, and 1 210°C respectively. Further oxidation allows relaxation and the stress eventually
becomes compressive and the metal substrate deforms by creep at lower stress levels, typically 100
and 10 MPa at 900 and 1 210°C. The authors also report that the stress levels generated in the oxide
are not sufficient to influence the basic oxygen transport mechanisms in the oxide scale.
Hammad et al. [77] measured the deformation of Zircaloy-4 tubes oxidized in air at temperatures
up to 900°C. Hoop and axial stresses are generated in oxidizing tubes and both radial and axial
deformation was observed. The time dependence of strain was initially parabolic later becoming linear
coincident with the onset of breakaway oxidation. The radial strain varied from ~1.5% after longexposure at 650°C to ~7% after ~10 hours at 750°C. The axial strain tended to follow the same trend
as radial strain but was smaller in magnitude.
However oxidation of Zircaloy in air has only limited comparability to that in steam, Leistikow etal. [51] showed that the oxidation characteristics of Zircaloy in air and steam were similar attemperatures up to 800°C. However at 1 000°C in air, the formation of brittle zirconium nitride
accompanied by a high volume expansion, substantially altered the morphology, kinetics and stresses
generated in the oxide film. Thus at temperatures above ~800°C the oxide scales were cracked and thesimultaneous reaction of nitriding induced much faster rates of oxidation.
Aly [15] measured the radial and axial strain in Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes oxidized in steam in therange 1 350-1 600°C. The time dependance of radial strain showed an initial non-uniform rate
followed by a linear rate. Both the radial and axial strains increased with time and temperature. The
time dependence of both strains at 1 350°C is shown in Figure 6.33
Comparative studies of the oxidation behaviour of Zircaloy-4 and austenitic 15 Cr-15 Ni steel by
Leistikow [78] have included the measurement of oxidation-induced dimensional changes. Oxidationfor 6 h at 1 200 to 1 308°C resulted in an increase of the outer diameter of tube sections of 12% forZircaloy-4 compared with 10% for the steel. The inner diameter increased by 8% for Zircaloy-4 anddecreased by 10% for the steel. The measured increase of wall thickness was 30-60% for Zircaloy-4
compared with 120% for the steel.

175

Figure 6.33 Time dependence of oxidation induced strains at 1 350°C [15]6.2 Embrittlement of zirconium alloy fuel cladding
A brief description of the fundamental metallurgy of zirconium alloy embrittlement in connection
with LOCA type transients can be found in Section 1.2.2 “Background to the safety criteria”. Some of
the information will be repeated in this section following the text of the 1986 State-of-the-art report by
Parsons et al. [37]. In many instances where the word Zircaloy is used the statement also applies toother cladding alloys.
Oxidation of Zircaloy above the α/β transformation temperature results in the formation of
inherently brittle phases, zirconia and α-phase with a high oxygen content. The latter phase comes in
two varieties: oxygen stabilised α and transformed β-phase (or more commonly referred to as prior β).
The former is always brittle while the brittleness at low temperature of the prior β will depend on its
oxygen content and how much β there is left. The oxygen content will depend on oxidation temperatureand time while the amount of β left primarily depends on oxidation time.
When sufficiently embrittled, fuel cladding may fracture on cooling and break up into pieces thus
losing a coolable geometry. The action of re-wetting involves the collapse of the vapour film andnucleate boiling commences. This event takes place at a more or less constant temperature, theLeidenfrost point and for Zircaloy rewetted by water, Chung and Kassner [61] report that rewetting
occurs in the range 475-600°C. The change in heat transfer conditions induces large thermal shockstresses which fracture the cladding if sufficiently embrittled by oxidation.
The extent of oxidation necessary to embrittle fuel cladding such that it fragments during
rewetting has been determined experimentally by a number of workers for a range of cladding
dimensions. Early work resulted in the formulation of criteria defining the onset of embrittlement interms of total extent of oxidation and maximum temperature of oxidation. Subsequent work has shownthat the embrittlement of Zircaloy cladding after transient oxidation in LOCA conditions is moreaccurately described in terms of the distribution of oxygen in the oxidized cladding.
The external pressure on cladding is reduced to near ambient during a large break loss-of-coolant
accident and the cladding initially expands away from the fuel. In pressurised transients the cladding isheated under coolant pressure and contacts the UO2 fuel. The UO2 is reduced by Zircaloy and theoxygen diffuses into Zircaloy where it forms α-Zr(O) and also diffuses into the β-phase. Thus inpressurised transients oxidation of the Zircaloy cladding occurs on both i.d. and o.d. and bothcontribute to the embrittling of the cladding.

176

If oxidized cladding remains intact after rewetting, there is the further possibility that seismic
forces or the hydraulic forces during reflood and quenching or the forces associated with fuel handlingand transport could fragment the cladding. The response of oxidized cladding to such loadings at lower
temperatures than that of thermal shock has also been considered and a criterion for predicting failure
has been proposed.
6.2.1 Current embrittlement criteria
The current criteria and their background have been described in Section 1.2. They are summarisedin the following five points:
•
•

•

•
•

Peak cladding temperature − the calculated maximum fuel element cladding temperatureshall not exceed 1 204°C.
Maximum cladding oxidation − the calculated total oxidation of the cladding shall nowhere
exceed 0.17 times the total cladding thickness before oxidation. The term equivalent cladding
reacted (ECR) including oxygen dissolved in the rest of the cladding is used frequently forthis measure of cladding oxidation.
Maximum hydrogen generation − the calculated total amount of hydrogen generated from thechemical reaction of the cladding with water or steam shall not exceed 0.01 times the
hypothetical amount that would be generated if all the metal in the cladding cylinders
surrounding the fuel, excluding the cladding surrounding the plenum volume, were to react.
Coolable geometry − calculated changes in the core geometry shall be such that the coreremains amenable to cooling.
Long-term cooling − after any calculated successful initial operation of the ECCS, thecalculated core temperature shall be maintained at an acceptably low value and decay heatremoved for the extended period of time required by the long-lived radioactivity remaining
in the core.

The experimental work on which these criteria is based, has been reviewed and extended by
Parsons [79] and by Chung and Kassner [61]. Typical experiments were to heat Zircaloy tubes insteam either isothermally or through a pre-defined transient and at the appropriate time to quench
either by spraying or by bottom flooding with cold water. The extent of oxidation was expressed as thefractional wall thickness of Zircaloy which would be converted to stoichiometric zirconia if all theoxygen taken up were combined with Zircaloy to form ZrO2 i.e., a measure of the total Zr reacted or
total oxygen uptake without regard to the detailed reactions and oxygen distribution in the clad wall.
The equivalent metal reacted, as described above for the limited number of tests performed was foundto correlate well with survival or failure of the cladding in the thermal shock of rewetting. The
correlation is shown in Figure 6.34 which contains both the original US data and data derived at
Springfields Nuclear Laboratories on SGHWR sized cladding. The US data shows a clear division
between fractured and intact cladding above and below 17% equivalent cladding reacted and hence
17% ECR was adopted as the embrittlement criterion.
An additional criterion was also imposed, that the maximum temperature should not exceed
2 200°F (1 204°C). The condition arose from the work of Hobson and Rittenhouse on the oxidationand embrittlement of standard Zircaloy-4 cladding. Hobson and Rittenhouse [80] showed that thegrowth of the oxide plus α-Zr(O) phases, ξ, (brittle phases) accelerated above 2 200°F (1 204°C).
Hobson [81] also investigated the effect of the extent of oxidation expressed as Fw, the fractional
thickness of the prior β-phase layer (i.e., thickness of prior β divided by as-oxized wall thickness),
with the deformation response of rings cut from oxidized tubes and tested (flattened) in compression athigh (0.25 in/min) and low (0.1 in/min) strain rates. For a given Fw, the specimens exhibited less
177

Figure 6.34 Clad embrittlement data from the United States of America and the United Kingdom
compiled by Parsons [79]ductility as the temperature of the deformation test decreased. The temperature at which the specimens
broke in brittle fashion (i.e. zero ductility), the temperature of the ductile to brittle transition, wasdefined as the zero ductility temperature (ZDT). The Zircaloy tubes were oxidized on both sides forvarious times in the range 1 700-2 500°F (927-1 371°C), and for the specimens tested at the higher
strain rate, there was a good correlation between Fw and ZDT. For specimens tested at the slower strain
rate there was a good correlation for specimens previously oxidized up to 2 200°F (1 204°C) but
specimens oxidized at 2 400°F (1 316°C) were brittle at all values of Fw. Hobson concluded that theembrittlement of Zircaloy cladding is determined by the concentration and distribution of oxygen in
the β-phase which is influenced to some extent by the degree of formation of α-incursions.
178

Further evidence [79] that the embrittlement of Zircaloy is not uniquely dependent on total
oxidation was obtained with SGHWR cladding with pre-formed nodular oxidation which survived
quenching even though the equivalent cladding reacted was 20%. The oxide and α-Zr(O) phases are
extremely brittle at post-quench temperatures, therefore, the ability of cladding to resist the thermal
shock depends on the ability of the prior β-phase to remain intact, which in turn depends on the profile
of diffused oxygen in the β-phase.
The particular character of a transient i.e. the parameters of time at temperature during a LOCA,
determine the eventual location of the oxide and α-Zr(O) phase boundaries and also the amount anddistribution of oxygen in the β-phase. Hence, the resultant mechanical properties of the cladding dependon the details of the transient i.e. rates of heating and cooling as well as time at maximum temperature.
Since the total extent of reaction is a measure of oxidation which does not necessarily reflect the above
consideration, it was necessary to determine fracture behaviour in terms of the oxygen distribution.
The above discussion refers to the response of cladding to fracture from the thermal shock forcesof re-wetting at the temperature of the Leidenfrost point. The post-quench ability of cladding to remain
intact when subject to the forces of seismic, hydraulic and handling loads at ambient temperature, after
a LOCA is a separate but related issue.
6.2.2 Embrittlement and distribution of oxygen in the cladding wall
Pawel [82] used ideal models of diffusion to calculate the oxygen concentration profiles, thefractional saturation and the mean oxygen content in the β-phase of the oxidized specimens used by
Hobson [81]. The observed embrittlement was correlated with the calculated oxygen in the β-phaseand it was suggested that the critical criteria for the onset of room temperature brittleness was 0.7 wt %average oxygen or 95% saturation in the β-phase.
Sawatzky [83] measured the temperature dependence of the tensile properties of oxidized
Zircaloy-4 as a function of oxygen concentration, cooling rate, maximum test temperature and oxygen
distribution. It was found that at temperatures up to 800°C, the tensile properties were essentiallyindependent of maximum cladding temperature and cooling rate but were dependent on oxygen
distribution through the cladding wall. On the basis of the results obtained, an interim oxygen
embrittlement criterion was proposed that the oxygen content should not exceed 0.7 wt % over at least
half the cladding thickness. This criterion is consistent with the previously mentioned suggested
criteria and applies to all cladding thicknesses.
The relationship between various parameters which can be considered to express the extent ofoxidation of Zircaloy and the fracture behaviour of Zircaloy has been comprehensively studied by
Chung and Kassner [61]. Lengths of Zircaloy cladding (200 mm) containing alumina pellets andpressurised with helium were heated isothermally in a flow of steam. The cladding was cooled to
below the α/β transformation (i.e. to ~800°C) at a controlled cooling rate and then quenched bybottom flooding with water. The widths of the oxide and α-Zr(O) phases were measured and usedalong with a model of oxidation as data for a computer code calculation of oxygen profile across thewall of the clad. Several parameters describing oxidation were computed, e.g. equivalent cladding
reacted (ECR), fractional saturation of the β-phase (FB), fractional thickness of the β-phase (Fw), andthickness of the β-phase containing less than a specified amount of oxygen (LCγ). The mechanicalresponse of the quenched tubes was correlated with the above parameters and presented as a series offailure maps which are reproduced as Figures 6.35 to 6.38.

179

Figure 6.35 Thermal-shock failure map for Zircaloy-4 cladding(bottom flooded with water at the oxidation temperature) relative to the ECR parameter and maximum oxidation
temperature after rupture in steam. The best-estimate failure boundary for cladding that was slow cooled through the
β→α’ before flooding with water and the data of Hesson et al. [84] and Scatena [85] are shown for comparison [61]Figure 6.37 Failure map for Zircaloy-4
cladding by thermal shock relative to fractional

Figure 6.36 Failure map for Zircaloy-4 cladding
saturation of β-phase and oxidation temperature after
by thermal shock relative to fractional thickness of previous β-phase layer rupture in steam and flooding with water at oxidationand oxidation temperature after rupture in steam
temperature. The failure boundary for cladding thatand flooding with water at oxidation temperature. Cooling rate through thewas slow cooled (~5 K/s) through the phase
β → α’ transformation was ~100 K/s [61]transformation is shown for comparison [61]180Figure 6.38 Failure map fo Zircaloy-4 cladding by thermal shock relative to the wall thickness
with ≤0.9 wt % oxygen after isothermal oxidation and flooding with water at the oxidation
temperature. Cooling rate through the β→α’ transformation was ~100 K/s [61]The cladding was cooled through the α/β transformation temperature either slowly (5 K/s) or
quickly (~100 K/s) by direct quenching from the isothermal oxidation temperature and the cooling rate
modified the metallurgical structure of the cladding which produced slightly different mechanicalbehaviour.
The correlation of fracture behaviour and equivalent metal reacted (ECR) in Figure 6.35 shows that
fast-cooled cladding is more brittle than slow cooled cladding and that at lower maximum temperaturesof oxidation (i.e. at <1 400°C) the 17% ECR criterion is very conservative. A single valued criterion is
not apparent from the correlation of the fractional thickness of β-phase (Fw) or from the fractional
saturation of the β-phase (FB) as shown in Figures 6.36 and 6.37. Chung and Kassner concluded that thebest correlation was in terms of a residual width of β-phase containing less than a specified calculated
concentration of oxygen (LCγ) as shown in Figure 6.38. Cladding with less than a calculated 0.1 mm of βphase with oxygen concentration ≤0.9 wt % (fast cooled) or ≤1.0 wt % oxygen (slow cooled) failed on
rewetting. This criterion was obeyed irrespective of the wall thickness, overall oxidation or maximum
temperature of the oxidation exposure. The authors also report that the location of fracture with respect tothe perforation of the fuel tube was temperature dependent. For tubes oxidized above ~1 330°C thefracture occurred in the ballooned region whereas at lower temperature a fin-cooling effect reduced theeffective oxidation of this area and fracture occurred away from the perforation.
Kassner and Chung [86] also assessed the margin of performance of ECCS’s in LWR against
embrittlement criteria based on total oxidation and on oxygen distributions. During blowdown,
ballooning and rupture of the clad can occur which results in wall thinning of the clad and the resultant
oxidation of the clad will be a function of not only the time at temperature in steam but also the natureof the wall thinning. Hence embrittlement of the cladding will be influenced by wall thinning. They
calculated the wall thinning for the peak temperature nodes and rupture nodes from double-ended181

guillotine breaks in two PWRs from data on circumferential straining of clad in single pin and multirod burst tests. The influence of wall thickness ratio on the embrittlement criteria, equivalent cladding
reacted (ECR), thickness of transformed β-phase with <0.9 wt % oxygen (LCγ) was calculated for the
peak temperature and rupture nodes and the two types of transient considered during single- anddouble-sided oxidation. The results are summarised in Table 6.3 and show significant conservatism inthe criterion based on total oxidation in transients not exceeding ~1 200°C. That is for an average
circumferential strain of ~38% and two-sided oxidation of the cladding at the peak temperature node,
the ECR parameter is 26% and 22.5% i.e. failure and the LCγ parameters is 0.25 mm and 0.28 mm
therefore no failure is predicted in either of the transients. For one-sided oxidation neither criterionindicates failure.
6.2.3 Embrittlement below thermal shock temperatures
During quenching thermal shock, the maximum loading occurs in the range 475-600°C [61]. At
these temperatures and for the cooling rates associated with quenching, hydrogen is in solution and has
little effect on the fracture resistance of oxidized Zircaloy. The ductility necessary to withstand hydraulic,seismic and handling forces, essentially impact forces which may be imposed at lower temperatures e.g.
100-200°C, are usually termed the post-quench-ductility (PQD). In this temperature range dissolvedhydrogen or precipitated zirconium hydride ZrHx (for the most common hydride, the δ hydride, × ~1.6)
may influence the fracture characteristics of oxidized cladding. The volume fraction of hydride
precipitated is strongly influenced by the cooling rate. In consideration of possible fragmentation fromsuch forces, Chung and Kassner [61] measured the impact, diametral tube compression, and tensile
properties at ambient temperature of undeformed and deformed and ruptured oxidized cladding which had
survived the quenching thermal shock. The combined effects of wall thinning, oxidation and hydrogen
uptake are represented in the mechanical property measurements. Within the β-phase, as the Zircaloy
cools through the β → α and β→α+ZrHx transformation, oxygen tends to concentrate in the centre of
α−Zr(O) grains and hydrogen precipitates or diffuses to the oxygen depleted regions of the α-phase.
It was found that oxygen distribution in the β-phase and hydrogen content of the cladding were
the greatest influences on the impact failure properties (note that after exposure to high temperature,practically all hydrogen atoms end up dissolved in the β phase, and after quenching in the prior β). The
resistance to fracture is determined by the amount of low oxygen β-phase and its ductility which inturn is influenced by the hydrogen content. Data on the combined effect of oxygen and hydrogen on
the impact properties of Zircaloy was not available, thus Chung and Kassner [61] correlated thesusceptibility to impact with the β-phase thickness, the hydrogen content and the calculated centreline
oxygen content of the β-layer. The capability of oxidized cladding to withstand an impact energy of
0.3 J at ambient temperature was found to be best correlated in terms of the β-phase thickness
containing < 0.7 wt % oxygen as shown in Figure 6.39. The hydrogen concentration in the specimens
used for this correlation did not contain > 2 200 wppm hydrogen. However the influence of oxygenand hydrogen on the Charpy impact properties of homogeneous Zircaloy containing a range of oxygenand hydrogen contents were measured and these and other data were used to conclude that hydrogenconcentration >2 000 wppm along with oxygen would not cause a significant change in ambient
impact failure characteristics.
Although the magnitudes of hydraulic, seismic and fuel handling loads have not been accurately
estimated, Chung and Kassner consider the magnitude of the 0.3 J impact loading as a reasonableapproximation to such post-LOCA low-temperature loadings. Furthermore, the authors showed that all
specimens that survived the quenching thermal shock survived at least 0.03-J impact at room
temperature. Therefore, the threshold impact energy of 0.3 J was considered to be equivalent to
10 times of the threshold energy that is sufficient to survive the quenching thermal shock.

182

183

a
b

1.0 DECLG

CF

PCT

PCT
RUP
PCT

PCT

Node

325
-

275

17% ECR
s

475

475
100
500

500

tf
s

11.5

22.5
4.0
13.5

26.0

ECR
%

0.35

0.28
0.30
0.34

0.25

L(0.7)mm

Values computed from the oxidation model reported in ANL-79-48, NUREG/CR-1344.
Values of ≥ 1 indicates performance limit is met.

0.8 DEGPLD

1.0 DECLG

CFOS

0.8 DEGPLD

Design basis
accidentOS

Two-side oxidation

Reactor plant

Clad oxidation parameters

a

0.35

0.28
0.30
0.34

0.25

L(0.9)mm

Evaluation of ECCS margin of performance

1-48

0.75
4.20
1.26

0.65

Total oxidation
17% ECR

1-17

0.93
1.00
1.10

0.83

0.3 Joule
ImpactL(0.7)/0.3

Performance limits

Table 6.3 Summary of cladding oxidation parameters and performance limits
for the ECCs in two PWRs for a double-ended guillotine break in the pump discharge leg (from [86])

b

3-5

2.8
3.0
3.4

2.5

Thermal shock
L(0.9)/0.1

However, until a sufficiently accurate and quantitative assessment of the lower temperature impact
loadings are available and since impact failure data and measured and calculated properties from thediametral compression tests in general are essentially an indication of material toughness or ductility fora given mode of loading, the low-temperature impact criterion is cited as an interim criterion.
In conclusion Chung and Kassner recommend two embrittlement criteria:1.

2.

For cladding to have the capability to withstand thermal shock during reflood − thecalculated thickness of the cladding with ≤0.9 wt % oxygen based on the average wall
thickness at any axial location shall be greater than 0.1 mm.
For cladding to have the capability to withstand fuel handling transport and storage − thecalculated thickness of the cladding with ≤0.7 wt % oxygen based on average wall thicknessof any axial location shall be greater than 0.3 mm.

Figure 6.39 Capability of Zircaloy-4 cladding to withstand an impact energy of 0.3 J at 300 K relative
to the thickness of β-phase layer containing <0.7 wt % oxygen and the hydrogen content of thecladding. The above criteria are applicable irrespective of the oxidation temperature, the initial cladding wall
thickness and the wall thickness that results from ballooning and deformation.
0,6

Thickness of beta-phase kayer containing < 0.7wt% oxygen

FailedSurvived
0,5

0,4

0,3

0,2

0,1

0
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Hydrogen content (w t. ppm )It should be emphasised that the suggested criteria are based on oxygen profiles calculated for theisothermal oxidation of the experimental cladding assuming equilibrium oxygen concentrations at thephase boundaries and using a moving-boundary diffusion model of oxygen [BSF-11 Code] rather thanon experimental measurements of actual oxygen profiles in the residual transformed β-phase ofoxidized cladding.
Kawasaki, Furuta and Uetsuka [55-57,87] have investigated the fracture of cladding oxidized andruptured in flowing steam in which hydrogen uptake accompanied oxidation. After isothermaloxidation, slow ring-compression tests were conducted at 100°C. The ductility of the cladding was
significantly degraded by the hydrogen. In the experiments alumina pellet filled tubes were subjected
to combined pressure-temperature transients in an infrared heating furnace. Due to the pressure thetubes were perforated during the experiment and oxide formed on the inside surface near the burst
opening. The inside surface oxidation was accompanied by a significant pickup of hydrogen.
184

Figure 6.40 shows the distribution of the hydrogen and its effect on the cladding ductility. It is clearthat two strong maxima in hydrogen content are formed about 30-40 mm from the rupture opening. At
these locations large amounts of hydrogen gas, produced during the rapid oxidation near the opening,are present at the same time as there is little steam present as evidenced by the reduced oxidation at a
distance from the opening. Under the heating condition of Kawasaki et al., the axial temperature
distribution near the burst is significantly more uniform than in the self-resistance-heating condition of
Chung and Kassner [61].
Figure 6.40 Correlation between distributions of inner surface oxide layer thicknes,
ring-compression deflection, and absorbed hydrogen content

The ring compression results show that the hydrogen has a strong embrittling effect on thecladding. Furuta et al. also performed ring compression tests on specimens oxidized without any
deformation [87]. The results from the two series of tests are compared in Figure 6.41. The samples
from the rod-burst tests lie below the 15% oxidation line calculated with the Baker-Just relation. The
use of 15% reflects the oxidation limit of the Japanese embrittlement criteria.
Figure 6.42 shows the relationship between the time-temperature parameters of the oxidation andthe associated integrated energies obtained from the load-deflection curves to the point of maximum
load (i.e. initial cracking) above and below 0.3 J. These were obtained from diametral tube tests atambient temperature by Chung and Kassner [61] and from ring specimens compressed at 100°C by
Kawasaki et al. The 100°C-tested ring specimens show a significantly lower failure boundary, in termsof time at temperature to achieve failure, than that of Chung and Kassner. However, Chung and Kassner
point out that the different experimental techniques of heating, direct resistance (Chung and Kassner)
vs, furnace heating (Kawasaki et al.) result in large temperature differences in the ruptured region by fin
cooling of resistance heated tubes and such regions have lower oxygen and hydrogen uptake. If the
failure characteristics are evaluated in terms of the material parameters i.e. the oxygen distribution andhydrogen uptake instead of time at an apparent temperature, the failure boundaries are similar.

185

Figure 6.41 Iso-deflection curves obtained on segments of burst cladding and tubes oxidized insteam as functions of oxidation temperature and time

Figure 6.42 Time-temperature oxidation conditions resulting in integrated energies to maximum
load above and below 0.3 J from load-vs-deflection curves during slow diametral compressionof tube and ring specimens [60] at 300 and 373 K respectively [64]186

6.2.4 Comparison of embrittlement in-reactor and out-of-reactor
The embrittlement of in-reactor-oxidized and quenched-cladding has been studied in the
Irradiation Experiments (IE series) and the Power Coolant Mismatch (PCM series) fuel tests in-the
PBF reactor at INEL by Hobbins and his coworkers [88-89]. The fuel rods were subject to cycles offilm boiling operation at full coolant pressure and subsequent quenching at a cooling rate of ~100 K/s.
Some failures were observed after quenching whilst other failures occurred on post-quench handling.
The cladding was oxidized on the outer surface by steam and on the inner surface by UO2. The natureand kinetics of oxidation of Zircaloy by UO2 have been investigated by Hofmann et al. [90] andParsons et al. [3]. Oxygen embrittlement of the inner surface is considered approximately equivalent
to that occurring from steam oxidation on the outer surface. In-reactor equivalent isothermal film
boiling temperatures were calculated using observed post-test phase thicknesses and an ideal diffusionoxidation code COBILD (Section 6.3.2). The various oxidation related embrittlement criteriapreviously considered were determined and Haggag [88] compared the data obtained with the out-ofreactor embrittlement data obtained by Chung and Kassner [61] for cladding quenched at a similarcooling rate i.e. ~100 K/s.
Haggag concluded that the Fw ≤0.5 and the ECR ≤17% criteria poorly predict thermal shock
failure and do not predict handling failure at all. The in-reactor thermal shock failure was predicted by
the Chung and Kassner criterion of 0.1 mm of β-phase with <0.9 wt % oxygen. The handling failures
resulting from the in reactor tests were confined to two rods in which the cladding experienced film
boiling in the breached condition and the handling failure of these rods was not predicted by any
criterion. These rods were considered to be embrittled to a greater extent than intact rods oxidized withsimilar time temperature parameters. Hydride platelets were observed in the microstructure of theserods and it is suggested [91] that hydrogen influenced the fracture resistance. Chung [92] however
pointed out that the calculation of the β-phase oxygen concentration gradient cannot be carried out
very accurately for Zircaloy experiencing cycles of non-isothermal film boiling transients and thus
comparisons are difficult. It was also noted that Pawel’s criteria of 95% saturation and 0.7 wt %oxygen in β-phase accounted for all failures except the PBF handling failure and one ANL handlingtype failure but did not distinguish between the two phenomena. Haggag finally recommended that theChung and Kassner criteria should be used for predicting failure either by thermal shock or handlingfor severe fuel damage experiments i.e. beyond design basis LOCA.
A comparison of the in-reactor and out-of-reactor data for the embrittlement criterion forhandling is shown in Figure 6.43. It is seen that it did not work for the rods IE-019 and A-0021.
Hobbins et al. reported hydrogen contents of 1 000 wppm and 340 wppm respectively for those tworods [89]. This is well above the limit of 50 to 100 wppm necessary to embrittle breached Zircaloy
cladding reported by Homma [60].
A different analysis of the failure behaviour of the rods IE-019 and A-0021 has been given
recently by Chung [21]. The oxidation temperatures of the four cladding segments, i.e., ≈1 262°C (fromRod IE019), ≈1 327°C (from Rod IE019), 1 420°C (from Rod IE019), and ≈1 307°C (from Rod A0021)
were determined by Haggag [88] on the basis of measured thicknesses of the outer-surface oxide layers.
These temperatures are, therefore, kind of averaged-out “metallographic foot-print” temperatures. As
such, maximum temperatures actually reached by the failed segments were probably somewhat higher.
Even if Haggag’s estimated temperatures were accurate, Zircaloy-oxygen phase diagram predicts thatoxygen concentrations in the β in all four segments were higher than ~0.7 wt %. Furthermore,considering that the large hydrogen content of 340-1 000 wppm increases the solubility of oxygen
significantly, it is almost certain that actual oxygen concentrations in all four β layers were higher than
~0.7 wt %. Therefore, the β layer thicknesses containing <0.7 wt % oxygen at such high temperaturesof fast diffusion were most likely zero or very small.
187

Figure 6.43 Failure map for Zircaloy-4 cladding due to handling
relative to wall thickness with <0.7 wt % oxygen

Chung also compared the failure-survival behaviour of 33 segments from the PBF tests and from102 segments from the 0.3-J impact tests performed at room temperature. The failure-survival behaviour
was plotted in terms of measured maximum oxidation temperature and equivalent cladding reacted
which was determined based on measured thicknesses of phase layers. All of the PBF- and impact-tested
segments that had ECR <17% and maximum oxidation temperature of <1 204°C did not fail.
A limited in-pile study has been presented by Katanishi et al. [93]. It was performed with test fuelrods in a capsule in the driver core of the NSRR reactor. The test rods were heated by thermal heaters
up to about 800°C after which nuclear heating started. The environment was steam. Each test was
terminated by bottom flooding. In one of the tests, the cladding surface temperature reached 1 025°C
and the rod ruptured after ballooning. The oxidation was about 10% and the rod survived thequenching. In the other test, the maximum temperature was 1 260°C and this rod fragmented at thelocations of highest temperature on quenching with 35% of the cladding thickness oxidized. These
results are clearly in agreement with current embrittlement criteria. The experiments were analysedwith the SCDAP computer code. The SCDAP calculations agreed well with the test results.
6.2.5 The effect of constraint during quenching
Kawasaki, Uetsuka, and Fureta have reported results of quenching after rod burst experiments insteam [55-57,87]. The experiment is described in Section 5.2.3. Segments (500 mm long) of pressurised
Zircaloy fuel rods were exposed to steam at isothermal temperatures within the range of 900 to
1 300°C. The fuel rods burst during the exposure. The experiment was terminated by bottom flooding at
the oxidation temperature or at 500°C. One end of the rod was tightly fixed while the other wasconnected to the cross head of a tensile test machine. With the cross head fixed the specimen wasconstrained and the load cell of the test machine could record the resulting load during quench.
The rationale for the experiment is that during a LOCA the rods may be constrained between
spacer grids. The design of the PWR fuel bundle is such that the control rod guide tubes are fixed tothe spacer grids while the fuel rods are contacting the grid via spacer spring forces. During quenching,188

it is expected that the hotter fuel rods will shrink more than the guide tubes so that tensile forces will
occur in the fuel rods and compressive forces in the guide tubes. Nagase and Fuketa [94] have
performed compressive buckling tests on guide tubes oxidized to ECR values from 13 to 24%
according to the Baker-Just correlation. They found that the buckling force is always less than 2000 N.
With 11 fuel rods per guide tube, it can be estimated that the maximum tensile force in a fuel rod mustbe less than 190 N during quenching.
Figure 6.44 Results from quenching experiments on burst fuel rods
The results to the left are from unconstrained specimens and the results
to the right are from constrained specimens.

Figure 6.44 shows a comparison between the results from quenching of unconstrained andconstrained specimens. The results from unconstrained specimens are in general agreement with theresults of Chung and Kassner [61]. The failure boundaries in the maps are calculated as ECR by the
Baker-Just equation. At temperature above 1 050°C, the failure boundary is about 38% BJ-ECR while,
at lower temperatures, it is about 30%. For constrained specimens, the failure boundary is estimated to
be about 20%. As indicated in Figure 6.44, the temperature of start of bottom flooding did not play
any significant role for the failure. However, the cooling rates through the β→α transformation werevery different, about 300 K/s with bottom flooding at the oxidation temperature and 4 K/s with bottom
flooding at 500°C. The location of failure was about 50 mm from the rupture location and did notcoincide with the maximum hydrogen content. The hydrogen distribution around the rupture wassimilar to those observed in the rod burst tests with two maxima located at about 60 mm from the burst
centre. Evaluation of remaining β-phase showed that it was smaller at the perforation and increased
continuously away from the perforation. Therefore, it is speculated that the location of fracture during
the quench is a combination of β thickness, oxygen content in β and hydrogen content (note thelocation of failure did not coincide with maximum hydrogen content). The fracture loads of thespecimens that failed on quenching were always below 1.5 kN whereas those that survived quenching
and fractured by tension tests always had failure loads exceeding 1.5 kN. Similar experiments havesubsequently been performed on pre-hydrided cladding and high burn-up cladding (Section 6.2.6).

189

6.2.6 Quench embrittlement of pre-hydrided or high burn-up Zircaloy cladding
At high burn-up, especially in a PWR, thick oxide scales are formed. This oxidation is associatedwith significant hydrogen pickup. An 80 µm thick oxide scale will result in a hydrogen content of
about 600 wppm at the hydrogen pickup fraction of 15% which is a representative value. Therefore, it
has been considered necessary to perform oxidation and embrittlement tests on pre-hydrided cladding
in order to understand LOCA behaviour of high burn-up cladding. To a limited extent it has also beenpossible to perform confirmatory tests on spent fuel cladding after high burn-up. Nagase and coworkers have reported extensively on quench embrittlement tests on pre-hydrided Zircaloy-4 cladding[48,94-101]. The test equipment was an infrared furnace in which a simulated fuel rod, Zircaloy-4
cladding tube filled with alumina pellets, was enclosed in a quartz tube. In the bottom of the quartz
tube, there was a steam inlet for oxidation and a water inlet for bottom flooding. One end of the tube
was fixed to the frame of a tensile test machine and in the other end to the mobile cross head of themachine. Testing has been performed in three different modes, totally unrestrained, fixed ends withrecording of tensile force during quenching and tests with constant tensile force.
In the tests reported in [94,101], the specimens were filled to a pressure of 5 MPa with Ar.
Hydrogen contents studied were 100 to 1200 wppm. Some of the cladding tubes were mechanicallythinned 10% to simulate the effect of wall thickness reduction due to oxidation before the transient. The
cladding used was low-tin Zircaloy-4 for 17×17 fuel bundles with 9.5 mm outer diameter and 0.57 mm
wall thickness or 0.513 mm after the 10% reduction. The whole LOCA sequence with heat-up, rod
burst, oxidation in steam and quench by flooding of water was simulated. The heat-up rate was 10 K/s
up to the isothermal oxidation temperature of 1 000 to 1 250°C for times between 120 to 5 500 s. Rod
burst took place at temperatures from 750 to 800°C during the heat-up. At the end of oxidation, thefurnace was turned off and the restraint was applied. The rod was quenched with water from the bottom
after slow cooling to about 800°C. The reflooding rate was 30 to 40 mm/s.
Over 200 tests were performed and 95 cladding failures were observed during quenching.
Figure 6.45 shows the records of load from four different tests.
Figure 6.45 Load histories during quench under various conditions of constraint [94,99]

Most failed cladding tubes split into two parts with circumferntial cracking, while fragmentation
due to severe embrittlement was observed only in tubes oxidized to very high ECR at hightemperatures. Typical appearances of failed rods are shown in Figure 6.46.
Type (a) failure occurred in 82 of the 95 failures while type (b) was observed only in a few high
ECR tests. This is different from the earlier tests on 14×14 cladding (10.7 mm outer diameter) which
tended to fail away from the rupture position as discussed in Section 6.2.5 However, hydrogen
analyses showed that also in this thinner cladding the hydrogen distribution had two maxima about 2550 mm from the burst opening.

190

Figure 6.46 Typical post-failure appearances of failed cladding

The amount of oxidation, the ECR value, was calculated with the Baker-Just equation. Bothreduction in cladding wall thickness due to ballooning and double-sided oxidation after cladding
rupture were taken into account in the calculation. The data in Figure 6.47 (a) agrees very well withprevious data on 14×14 cladding from ref. [57]. On the other hand, the failure threshold decreases toabout 10% ECR-BJ for pre-hydrided cladding tubes as can be seen in (b). The results shown in (c)demonstrate that the failure threshold is unchanged for the thinned cladding simulating loss of wall
thickness due to pre-oxidation. If a failure map is plotted in a diagram of oxidation as a function of
inverse temperature, the shift of the failure boundary for fully restrained tubes is about 100 K for prehydrided tubes in comparison with non-hydrided. For unrestrained tubes, the difference was smaller.
The failure boundary for as-received cladding was 46% ECR-BJ while it was 40% for pre-hydrided
tubes.
Figure 6.47 Failure maps of cladding tubes tested under fully restrained conditions(a) as-received, (b) pre-hydrided tubes(c) pre-hydrided with reduced wall thickness

Under full restraint conditions, the pre-hydrided and thinned cladding had fracture loads between
800 and 1800 N. It was judged that realistic restraint conditions probably lies between the nonrestrained and fully restrained conditions. Therefore the load levels of 390, 540 and 735 N werechosen for the tests with constant axial loads applied during quenching. Figure 6.48 shows failure
maps in terms of ECR-BJ and hydride content for the four different conditions of constraints used inthis type of tests.
An important conclusion of the work, illustrated in Figure 6.48, is that when the restraint load is<535 N, the fracture threshold is higher than 20% ECR-BJ, which is sufficiently higher than the 15%
ECR-BJ limit in the Japanese ECCS acceptance criteria, irrespective of the hydrogen concentration.
This load is also well below the estimated maximum restraint load of 190 N which is estimated basedon the buckling load of oxidized guide tubes [94].
191Nagase et al. have also reported tests on spent high burn-up fuel cladding [95-97,102-104]. The
test method is basically the same as for the unirradiated cladding but the length of specimen is reduced
to 190 mm. After defueling, the specimens were filled with alumina pellets to simulate the heat
capacity of UO2 pellets. The irradiated cladding segment was tested with a restraint force of about
540 N which corresponds to 30 to 35 MPa based on initial metal cross section. Figure 6.49 shows theresults for 6 irradiated specimens from two PWR Zircaloy-4 clad fuel rods irradiated to burn-ups from39 to 44 MWd/kg compared to unirradiated test results.
Figure 6.48 Failure maps in terms of ECR and hydrogen content
for the four restrained conditions(a) 390 N, (b) 535 N, (c) 735 N, and (d) fully restrained [99]Figure 6.49 Fracture map in terms of oxidation and initial hydrogen concentration
for irradiated and unirradiated cladding with a restraint force of 540 N [95]Figure 6.49 shows that there is no significant difference between the irradiated and unirradiatedcladding in terms of embrittlement. The irradiated cladding had a relatively low initial hydrogencontent, 120-210 wppm estimated from oxide thickness, but picked up a considerable amount after
rupture in the LOCA test just like unirradiated cladding.
In a subsequent series of experiments, Nagase et al. tested various cladding alloys from fuel rods
irradiated to burn-ups from 66 to 77 MWd/kg [102-103]. The tested specimens are summarised inTable 6.4.
192

Table 6.4 List of the cladding specimens
Sample ID
MDA-1R
MDA-2R
ZIR-2R
ZIR-3R
MFI-1
MFI-2
NDA-1
ZRT-1
ZRT-2
a
b
c

Burn-up(MWd/kg)
76
76
71
77
66
66
69
66
73

ReactorVandellos 2

Ringhals
McGuire / R2
Leibstadt

Cladding alloy
MDA a
ZIRLOTM
M5®
NDAb
Zircaloy-2 / LK3c

Corrosion layer
(μm)
51
62
51
79
6
7
33
30
25

Hydrogen content
(ppm)
720
838
496
764
73
69
214
297
182

Mitsubishi Developed Alloy (Zr-0.8Sn-0.2Fe-0.1Cr-0.5Nb) developed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
New Developed corrosion resistance Alloy (Zr-1.0Sn-0.27Fe-0.16Cr-0.1Nb-0.01Ni) was developed by
Nuclear Fuel Industries, Ltd. and Sumitomo Metal Industries, Ltd.
Cladding material of Westinghouse Electric Sweden AB [105].

The rod is heated up at a rate of 3 to 10 K/s. Steam introduction is started prior to the heat-up, andthe steam flow is maintained at a supply rate of about 40 mg/s during the oxidation. The cladding
specimen balloons and ruptures during the heat-up, with both an increase in rod internal pressure and adecrease in cladding strength. The rod is isothermally oxidized after the rupture. After the isothermaloxidation, the rod is cooled in the steam flow to about 970 K and is finally quenched with water
flooding from the bottom (Section 5.2.3).
The results of the tests are summarised in Table 6.5. As can be seen in the table, only one
specimen failed during the quench after oxidation, MDA-2R. The probable cause of failure is thehigher oxidation level in this specimen compared to the others. This leads to a higher hydrogenconcentration at the rupture position compared to the other rods with a lower ECR value. Somewhat
mysteriously no rupture during the heatup could be observed for the rod
Table 6.5 Summary of LOCA-simulated experiments
Sample ID
MDA-1R
MDA-2R
ZIR-2R
ZIR-3R
MFI-1
MFI-2
NDA-1
ZRT-1
ZRT-2
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Rupture Circumferential Oxidation Oxidation Oxidation amount Restraint
ECR (%) c
Load (N)temp. (K) increase (%) temp. (K) a time (s)
988
945
949
1 053
1 035
988
1 036
1 051

9.9
6.1
28.0
20.6
20.1
19.2
8.9
17.7
20.6

1 480
1 463 b
1 473
1 459
1 470
1 469
1 467
1 468
1 467

131
719
228
153
151
229
280
222
232

18.3
38.0
27.3
20.2
19.5
23.6
22.5
21.2
22.0

(16.4)(35.6)(20.8)(16.4)(15.9)(19.5)(20.4)(17.7)(17.9)

<350
530
518
519
<400
0d
518
519
0e

Fracture /No-fracture
N.F.
F.
N.F.
N.F.
N.F.
N.F.
N.F.
N.F.
N.F.

Oxidation temperature at rupture position except for MDA-2R.
Oxidation temperature at fracture position.
Calculated with the Baker-Just equation with oxidation temperature and time, for reduced metallic thickness after
ballooning. The value in parenthesis is ECR for the initial metallic thickness before ballooning.
Accidentally not restrained due to failure of specimen fixing.
Intentionally not restrained considering the construction of the BWR fuel bundle.

MDA-2R. However metallographic examination of the rod showed oxidation on the inside so asmall rupture opening must have been present.
193

Metallographic examination of the oxide layers showed that the preformed oxide has a protective
effect on the high-temperature oxidation in steam. However, the preformed oxide cracks during theinitial ballooning and steam penetrates through the cracks. Therefore, the extent of high-temperatureoxidation is equivalent at the outer and inner surface after a longer period. Hydrogen distributions inthe specimens were similar to those observed in unirradiated specimens with maxima located about
20 mm from the rupture openings.
Figure 6.50 shows a fracture/no fracture map over the results. The dashed line for unirradiatedmaterial shows how pre-hydriding reduces the fracture boundary for unirradiated cladding. The fractureof the MDA-2R rod is consistent with the fracture criteria of the unirradiated cladding with similarhydrogen concentration. From the results of the other specimens oxidized to 18.2-27.2% ECR, it isconcluded that the fracture threshold is not reduced significantly by high burn-up or use of new alloys
at this burn-up level, though the restraint load was lower than planned in some of the tests. The mostimportant conclusion from these tests on high burn-up cladding is that the fracture boundary of the highburn-up cladding is sufficiently higher than the 15% limit in the Japanese ECCS acceptance criteria.
Figure 6.50 Fracture/no-fracture conditions, relevant to ECR value
and initial hydrogen concentration

Oxidation (%ECR)

50
40
30

66-77GWd/t
Fracture

MDA-2RNo-fracture

ZIR-2R Fracture boundary of
unirradiated Zry-4

MFI-2
(0N)

20

ZIR-3RZRT-2 ZRT-1
MFI-1 (0N)

MDA-1R

10 (<400N)
00(<350N)

200

400

600

Safety limit(15%ECR)

800

1000

Initial hydrogen concentration (ppm)

Nagase and Fuketa have discussed the mechanism of embrittlement that causes cladding failure atquenching [99]. As discussed previously, it is the properties of the prior β-phase which controls theductility. In this part of the microstructure there are no hydride platelets present like those present after
irradiation. Uetsuka et al. [106] have determined by TEM examination and X-ray analysis that thehydride is present as fine δ-zirconium hydrides smaller than 1 µm on the α’ grain boundaries. Nagase
and Fuketa therefore conclude that similar fine δ hydrides are densely distributed in the prior β-phaseregion in the pre-hydrided claddings and that the density of hydrides and the extent of embrittlement ishigher in the cladding with a higher hydrogen concentration. Another important factor is the effect ofhydrogen on the α/(α+β) and (α+β)/β−πηασε boundaries. Observations show that the phaseboundaries are shifted to lower temperatures when hydrogen is added to the Zr-O binary system. This
would lead to a higher oxygen content in the β-phase and thus increase the embrittlement when the βtransforms to α. Some support for this idea comes from observations of fracture surfaces of embrittled
cladding with different levels of hydrogen concentrations. On the cladding with higher hydrogenconcentration, there are more glossy surfaces of fractured α’ than on the cladding with much lesshydrogen concentration.
Kim et al. have also studied the effect of restraint [107]. A cladding tube of 350 mm in length
was heated by an electric current and oxidized isothermally in steam. At the end of oxidation thetemperature was reduced to 700°C where a hold time of 100 s was applied before the specimen was194quenched by bottom flooding with room temperature water. Experiments were conducted without any
restraint and with a full restraint in which the length of the specimen was kept constant throughout the
test. In one test series, a partial restraint was applied. The specimens were allowed to deform freely
during the isothermal oxidation but a restraint was applied before start of cooling to 700°C and thesubsequent quench. Figure 6.51 shows the result of the tests in a failure map where it has been noted
whether or not the specimen failed during the quench. The straight lines represent ECR-BJ levels
calculated according to the Baker-Just correlation. The results show that both for unrestrained andpartially restrained specimens there is a sufficient margin to the 17% limit according to the Baker-Justcorrelation. For the fully restrained specimens, a few failures have occurred below the 17% limit. The
relevance of the fully restrained test is however in some doubt, although the condition could be close
to a limiting situation where spacer grids may completely lock up the fuel rod or when oxide build-up
near the spacer grids may prevent the rod to elongate, e.g., at high burn-up. During the oxidation phaseof a ballooned, burst, and bent PWR cladding in a LOCA, the rod may elongate significantly without
further bending. Since elongation was hindered in the test of Kim et al., the specimens bent duringoxidation which may have resulted in non-uniform deformations and also extra stresses due to bending
moments in the quench phase of the experiment.
Figure 6.51 Quench survival/failure of isothermally oxidized Zircaloy-4
Diamonds = unrestrained tests, Squares = partially restrained tests,
Triangles = fully restrained tests. Filled symbols represent failures [107] [25,108]
100000

20 %

17 %
10 %

Oxidation time (sec)

10000

1000

100

10
0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1000/T

6.2.7 Recent post-quench ductility tests of Zircaloy, ZIRLO and M5 cladding
In the last several years there has been considerable testing of the post-quench ductility of current
cladding alloys. In the case of Zircaloy, the objective has been to determine the effects of the changes
in fuel rods associated with high-burn-up operation, such as, thick corrosion layer, high hydrogenconcentration, and pellet-cladding bonding. M5 and ZIRLO are relatively new alloys and data on their
LOCA behaviour at all levels of burn-up are needed for safety assessment of fuel fabricated from thisnew class of cladding.
At Argonne National Laboratory, specimens of all three alloys have been tested in the sameequipment which makes the results intercomparable with regard to the performance of the different
alloys [109-116]. During the course of that work, it was recognised that measured oxidation (weight
195

gain) is not a good parameter for characterising embrittlement. It is well known that embrittlement iscaused by the diffusion of oxygen into the metal underneath the surface oxide rather than by the surface
oxide itself. In other words, the time required to accumulate, say 17%, oxidation on the surface is just a
measure of time required to diffuse enough oxygen into the underlying metal to embrittle it. Thus amore direct time-related parameter is better than a measured value of oxidation, particularly when theactual oxidation or weight gain is affected by breakaway or spalling that would not affect oxygen
diffusion in the metal. Hence in all recent embrittlement work at Argonne, a calculated oxidation value
has been used rather than a measured value. The Cathcart-Pawel (CP) correlation [47] was chosen forthat calculation, and equivalent-cladding-reacted oxidation values (ECR) are given as CP-ECR.
One of the first discoveries in that research was that the embrittlement threshold for unirradiatedZircaloy (Zr-1.4%Sn) is not fixed at exactly 17% as assumed in U.S. regulations. This can be seen in
Table 6.6, which shows test results for a number of cladding materials, including three different
manufacturing quantities of Zircaloy-4 that exhibit thresholds from 15.6 to 19%. The cladding types
M5 and E110 are also nominally the same alloy (Zr-1%Nb), yet they too exhibit very different
embrittlement thresholds (see next section). Although multiple batches of Zircaloy-2 and ZIRLO were
not examined, these two different alloys showed embrittlement thresholds (19%) that are very similar
to the other modern cladding materials that are manufactured with similar techniques. The variations
in embrittlement threshold are thus seen to result mainly from manufacturing differences rather thanfrom specific alloy composition.
Table 6.6 Variation of embrittlement threshold (percent equivalent cladding reacted)
for unirradiated zirconium-alloy cladding materials oxidized in steam at 1 200°C
Alloy and Geometry

Manufacturer

VintageThreshold (CP-ECR)

Zircaloy-4, 15×15

Siemens

Old, H. B. Robinson

15.6

Zircaloy-4, 17×17

Westinghouse

Current, low tin

17

Zircaloy-4, 15×15

Areva

Current, low tin

19

Zircaloy-2, 10×10

Global Nuclear Fuel

Current, Zr liner

19

ZIRLO, 17×17

Westinghouse

Current, standard tin

19

M5, 17×17

Areva

Current

20

Additional tests were performed at Argonne with unirradiated samples that had been charged
with hydrogen, the so-called prehydrided specimens. Results from these tests show a strong effect ofhydrogen concentration as seen in Figure 6.52 for Zircaloy-4 cladding. Although oxygen diffusion into
the metal is still responsible for embrittlement, hydrogen accelerates the diffusion rate, increases thesolubility of oxygen in the β phase, and speeds up the embrittlement process. A cooling-rate effect wasalso seen that was absent in fresh cladding that contained no hydrogen.
Similar tests were then performed on irradiated cladding taken from high-burn-up fuel rods with
Zircaloy-4, ZIRLO, and M5 cladding. As expected, the embrittlement thresholds in the irradiatedmaterials were also found at substantially lower oxidation levels as seen in Figure 6.53 for theZircaloy-4 cladding. Because the hydrogen that is absorbed during normal operation comes from thedissociation of water during corrosion, cladding materials that corrode more readily tend to embrittle
more readily. Hydrogen pickup fractions vary from one material to another, however, such that theeffect is characterised more precisely by hydrogen concentration than by CP-ECR as shown. Testing
has also shown that the effectiveness of the hydrogen in irradiated material is also altered by thecooling rate at the end of a LOCA transient.

196

Figure 6.52 Embrittlement threshold at 135°C

Embrittlement CP-ECR (%)

as a function of hydrogen content for prehydrided unirradiated Zircaloy-4 oxidized
at 1 200°C and either quenched at 800°C or cooled without quench
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

15x15 Zry-4 Quenched at 800ºC
17x17 Zry-4 Quenched at 800ºC
15x15 Zry-4 Cooled witout Quench

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Hydrogen Content (wppm)

Figure 6.53 Ductility at 135°C after oxidation in steam at 1 200°C andcooled slowly for irradiated and unirradiated Zircaloy-4 cladding70
High-Burnup Zry-4 (75 ìm ZrO2)

60

Fresh Zry-4

Ductility (%)

50
40
30
20
10
0
0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

CP-Predicted ECR (%)

Another conclusion for high-burn-up fuel from the Argonne work was that oxygen can diffuse into
the cladding metal from the inside diameter (ID) as well as from the outside diameter (OD), even whenno steam oxidation is occurring on the ID. This can be seen in Figure 6.54, where an ID α layer isclearly visible in a specimen that was oxidized only on the OD. The ID oxygen diffusion phenomenon
was discovered in the United State of America in 1977 [89], confirmed by tests in Germany in 1979[117], and seen in the Argonne results. Oxygen diffusion has always been associated with ID oxidationin the ballooned region where steam enters the rupture opening. In high-burn-up fuel, however, there
will usually be a zirconium oxide layer on the cladding ID even far away from the balloon as the resultof bonding between the UO2 fuel pellets and the cladding. This oxygen source can be just as effective
as a steam-oxidation layer in providing oxygen for diffusion into the cladding metal. Thus, two-sided
oxygen diffusion has to be accounted for in some cases to accurately predict the onset of embrittlement.

197

Figure 6.54 High-oxygen α layer on the ID resulting from oxygen diffusionfrom the ZrO2 fuel-to-cladding bond following OD steam oxidation at 1 200°C

In other tests at Argonne with high-burn-up fuel rods (cladding and fuel pellets), enhancedhydrogen absorption was observed near the cladding balloon as seen in Figure 6.55. This observation
confirms the work of others in the 1980s (Sections 6.2.3 and 6.2.6). Hydrogen from dissociating water
is trapped inside the balloon and is then absorbed in the metal. Just as with breakaway oxidation, thishydrogen results in rapid embrittlement, but embrittlement in this case is localised near the balloon.
Thus the balloon may not retain ductility even when two-sided oxygen diffusion is limited as, forexample, by the U.S. regulations. Although it does not appear that ductility could be assured in aballoon with reasonable criteria, there are extenuating circumstances. Based on the work at ANL,
fragmentation has never been observed in the ballooned region in quench tests; fracturing in theballooned region has not been observed in quench tests without externally applied loads; and theballooned region is generally only a few inches long such that a fractured rod would still retain most of
the UO2 fuel pellets (a major objective of safety regulations).
Figure 6.55 Measured hydrogen and oxygen content in in-cell (ICL) tests
on high-burn-up BWR Zircaloy-2 fuel rods

French work on the post-quench ductility of low-tin Zircaloy-4 and M5 alloy and to a lesser
extent on the M4 alloy has been reported by Brachet et al. [41], Portier et al. [24], Mardon and
Waeckel [23], Mardon et al. [22] and most recently by Mardon and Dunn [118] and Brachet et al.
[49].

198

Brachet et al. [41] oxidized 150 mm long specimens on the outside in the DEZIROX facility. Thisis a tube furnace in which the specimen hangs on a wire. The oxidation can be terminated by letting thespecimen fall into a bowl of water, a method of direct quenching without simulation of slow cooling. It
is arranged so that spalled oxide can be collected and weighed together with the specimen. The
oxidation was done in steam at a temperature of 1 100°C to various weight gains up to ~17% ECR. It
was noted that no failure occurred in this range of ECR during the quench. After the quench, specimens
were prepared for ring compression tests, three-point bend tests, and impact tests. Hydrogen analyses
showed that only a small amount of hydrogen pickup had occurred during oxidation.
Figure 6.56 shows the results of ring compression tests. Unfortunately the “residual ductility
parameter” is not defined in the paper and does not agree with the definition discussed in Section
5.1.4.1. Since it contains the elastic deflection, the curve is not directly comparable to the corresponding
results from Argonne National Laboratory. A comparison would also necessitate translation of theweight gain to ECR. For translation of weight gain (Wg), Billone [109] has given the following
formulae where h is tube wall thickness and D outer diameter of tube:●●

Outer surface oxidation: ECR = (0.4385Wg/h)/(1-h/D).
Double-sided oxidation: ECR = 0.8769Wg/h.
Figure 6.56 Residual ductility parameter derived from the ring compression test
as a function of weight gain at 1 100°C

Since M5 and Zircaloy-4 have different wall thicknesses [24], there will be a small relative
movement of points if Figure 6.55 is expressed in terms of ECR. Approximately 10 mg/cm2
corresponds to 8.2% ECR.
The three-point bend tests which results in a sharper defined failure point than the ring
compression test (Section 5.1.4.3) did not reveal any differences between M5 and Zircaloy-4.
However the impact tests revealed a small difference in ductility between M5 and Zircaloy-4 at aweight gain of about 13 mg/cm2. A similar small difference can be seen at the same weight gain in thering compression test (Figure 6.55) with Zircaloy having the lower ductility. Brachet et al. [41]performed a very thorough metallographic examination with microprobe analysis of different
microstructural features. In particular they found that the prior β-phase in Zircaloy-4 contained 5 5006 000 ppm of oxygen and had a hardness of 330-370 HV(50g). M5 oxidized at the same temperature,
1 100°C, and for about the same time, 3 600 s compared to 3 000 s had an oxygen content of 2 0004 000 ppm and a hardness of 260-300 HV(50g). This can explain the somewhat better ductility of M5
compared to Zircaloy-4 in the room temperature tests. Note that the oxygen concentrations include an
unknown amount due to the presence of a thin oxide film on the specimens used for analysis.
199

Subsequent to the previous work, the electron microprobe technique has been improved and it isestimated that the data obtained for oxygen concentrations in later work have an uncertainty of -500 to+1 000 ppm [49].
The results of Brachet et al. [41] was extended to other oxidation temperatures, 1 000 and
1 200°C and to pre-hydrided material by Portier et al. [24] using the same techniques. Figure 6.57
shows the results of ring-compression tests at room temperature on specimens oxidized at 1 200°C.
Figure 6.57 Room temperature ring compression tests on as-received andpre-hydrided M5 and low-tin Zircaloy-4 after oxidation and quench at 1 200°C

Basically similar resultes were obtained in the three-point bend test. The effect of pre-hydriding
is very clear. The hydrogen levels chosen correspond well with actual hydride contents found in highburn-up cladding used by Portier et al. in clad deformation tests [24]. In the case of Zircaloy-4, thehydrogen content was measured to 433±120 ppm after 5 cycles while M5 had a hydrogen content of
58-63 ppm after 6 cycles.
Figure 6.58 shows examples of the fractography of Charpy impact tested materials. The
fractography concerns the prior β-phase since both oxide and α-phase were completely brittle in theexperiments. At low weight gains, the oxygen had not had time to diffuse into the β phase and theresultant fracture is a ductile dimple fracture. At higher weight gains, the fracture is quasi-brittle in boththe as-received materials and in the pre-hydrided materials. In order to gain a better understanding of
the fracture behaviour, Portier et al. performed oxygen analyses and hardness testing on the priorβ-phase. In order to avoid the problem with oxygen contamination of the surface discussed by Brachet
et al. [41], Portier et al. used nuclear reaction analysis (NRA) with ions accelerated in a Van de Graaf
accelerator. Deuteron ions are accelerated into the target where the 16O(d,p)17O reaction takes place.
The number of detected protons permits calculation of the bulk oxygen content.
Further French work has been aimed at elucidating the effect of dissolved hydrogen as reported
recently by Brachet and coworkers [119]. Two other questions have also been studied:• The influence of a pre-existing OD (and ID) zirconia layer on the transient HT oxidation
kinetics (Section 6.1.7) and the post-quench mechanical behaviour.
• The influence of the final cooling scenario and in particular the effect of cooling rate fromthe high-temperature oxidation phase to the quench temperature.
200

Figure 6.58 Typical fractographs of the internal prior β-phase layer of Charpy impact
tested as-received and pre-hydrided material

In order to obtain basic embrittlement data impact tests (Section 5.1.4.4, Figure 5.20) were
performed on Zircaloy-4 and M5 specimens oxidized at 1 250°C for two different times. At the shorter
time, 120 s, the fracture surface of the prior β phase was divided in one brittle part and one ductile part.
At the longer time, 300 s, the whole fracture surface of the prior β phase was brittle with the exceptionof a thin layer on the inside surface of the M5 specimen. EPMA analys of the oxygen concentration
over the prior β layer showed that the transition to brittle behaviour occurred at 0.3-0.4 wt % O.
201

This is in good agreement with results of Stern et al. [120] who oxidized sheet specimens ofZircaloy-4 and M5 and subsequently homogenised the material in order to determine the mechanicalproperties of prior β-phase with different oxygen contents. For oxygen contents of 0.25 wt % andhigher the material showed a brittle-ductile transition in tension testing. The transition temperature
increased with increasing oxygen content, from -50°C at 0.25 wt % oxygen to 100°C with 0.9 wt %oxygen. For high oxygen contents typical of oxygen stabilised α-phase, ~>2.4 wt %, the material wasbrittle at all tested temperatures. There was no significant difference between Zircaloy-4 and M5 withrespect to the influence of oxygen on the mechanical properties of prior β-phase.
Brachet et al. [49] also characterised the prior β phase with regard to microhardness andconfirmed the previously known quasi-linear relationship between microhardness and oxygen
concentration in the α phase. These relations can then be used to estimate oxygen content by
microhardness measurements. The critical Vickers microhardness for brittle behaviour in the RT
impact test was determined to be ~350 ± 25 for Zircaloy-4 and ~325 ± 25 for M5, both values
corresponding to ~0.3 wt % O.
RT impact test results on materials oxidized at 1 100, 1 200, and 1 250°C to ECR levels ranging
from ~3 to ~20% were analysed with regard to thickness of prior β layer as determined by SEM BSE
imaging and to the average prior β−πηασε layer average oxygen content as determined by EPMA or
microhardness measurments. The result could be expressed as a correlation parameter K given by Eq. 6-6:

K = 0.4% - [O]prior-β·Xprior-β/X0(6-6)

where [O]prior-β is the average oxygen concentration in the prior β layer, Xprior-β its
thickness, and X0 the initial clad wall thickness. Figure 6.59 shows the measured
impact energy as a function of the correlation parameter K. An energy of 0.1 J/mm2
or less is regarded as brittle behaviour.

Figure 6.59 Impact energy vs the correlation parameter K defined in Eq. 6-6

Previous work had shown that hydrogen increased the oxygen solubility in the β phase [24]. The
effect was verified by thermodynamic calculations with the Thermo-Calc software [121] using a
specially prepared database for zirconium alloys, “Zircobase”, [122]. The calculations indicated an
oxygen solubility increase at 1 200°C of ~3 000-3 500 ppm due to hydrogen. The effect of hydrogenon the post-quench ductility of pre-hydrided zirconium alloys is thus two-fold: (1) the direct effect due
to embrittling hydride platelets, and (2) the increased oxygen content in the prior β-phase.
Brachet et al. [49] determined what they called the intrinsic hydrogen effect by carrying out shortoxidation treatments at 1 000°C followed by a quench to room temperature. In that way, the influence202

of oxidation, <0.5% ECR, on the impact test result will be negligible and the ductility only dependent
on the hydrogen content of the prior β phase. For hydrogen contents up to ~600 ppm they found thatthe post-quench impact energy, KCV, depended on hydrogen concentration as:

KCV ~0.4exp(-0.003[H])(6-7)

where [H] is the hydrogen concentration in ppm. The mechanism behind theembrittlement is uncertain since the microstructure contains no hydrides visible by
LOM or SEM. It is thought that small hydride plates only visible by TEM lie behindthe embrittlement, a hypothesis which still has to be confirmed by TEM examinations.

The effect of hydrogen on oxygen solubility has consequences of almost autocatalytic character.
The first fact to take into account is that under normal high-temperature steam oxidation conditions
little hydrogen is picked up or lost from the cladding material. Due to the β stabilising character ofhydrogen, almost all hydrogen will accumulate in the β phase. When the β is consumed by growth of
α phase, the hydrogen concentration increases in the β phase. The increased hydrogen concentration
leads to a higher oxygen concentration in the β phase at the α/β-phase boundary and thus to a more
rapid diffusion of oxygen into the β phase due to the increased concentration gradient. Figure 6.60
shows how the average oxygen concentration in the prior β phase varies with weight gain at varioushydrogen contents [49].
Figure 6.60 Evolution of prior β phase oxygen content (mean value)of as-received and prehydrided Zircaloy-4(a) and M5 (b) alloys vs. the weight gain after oxidation at 1 200°C [49]On the basis of these results a new correlation parameter for the impact test results on as-received
and pre-hydrided cladding was defined. The new parameter K’ which combines the intrinsic hydrogeneffect with the hydrogen effect on oxygen solubility is defined as:

K’=K·0.4·0.4exp(-0.003[H]β)(6-8)

where K is the parameter defined in eq. (6-6) and [H]β is the final hydrogenconcentration in the β phase. Taking into account that all initial hydrogen is locatedin the residual β phase [H]β is given by[H]β = [H]0 - X0/(1/2Xα+β+Xβ)(6-9)

where [H]0 is the initial hydrogen content, X0 the initial wall thickness, Xα+β thethickness of the two-phase layer (small in Zircaloy-4, bigger in M5), and Xβ thethickness of the residual β−πηασε layer. Figure 6.61 shows the full correlation
between the impact energy and K’ for specimens oxidized at 1 100-1 250°C to arange of ECR from ~3% up to ~17-20%.

203

Figure 6.61 Full correlation between the impact energy, the oxygen and hydrogen contents,
and the correlation parameter K’ [49]The study of the effect of pre-oxidation to ~5 and ~15 µm thickness showed that this preoxidation had no effect on the post-quench ductility despite the fact that the weight gain during thetransient was reduced considerably compared to as-received cladding. The absence of the effect isrelatively easy to understand. It is the oxygen diffusion into the cladding which controls the ductility.
What happens is that in the initial stages of the transient the thermodynamically unstable (in relation tooxygen deficient α phase) pre-oxide dissolves at the oxide/α interface and works as an oxygen source.
Thus the oxygen stabilised α layer thickness and the consequent diffusion of oxygen into β is more orless unchanged in comparison with as-received cladding with similar hydrogen content.
Brachet et al. also performed a study on the post-quench ductility effect of cooling scenario on
pre-hydrided cladding from oxidation at 1 200°C. They used a direct quench, and a quench after
furnace cooling in the DEZIROX facility to 800, 700, and 600°C. They also included a specimen
furnace cooled to room temperature. Figure 6.62 shows the results of ring compression tests on
specimens subjected to these scenarios.
Figure 6.62 Results of ring compression tests at 135°C after various cooling scenarios

The figure shows that the cladding has the highest ductility after cooling to 700 and 600°C before
quench. Direct quench or quench from 800°C results in relatively brittle behaviour and furnace
cooling to room temperature leads to more brittle behaviour than quench from 700 and 600°C.
Microstructural studies have shown that the oxygen concentration in the prior β phase is quite uniform
for the directly quenched specimens and that a separation between α and prior β has occurred in thespecimen cooled from 800°C. In the specimens quenched from 700 and 600°C the oxygen
concentration is again more uniform but a precipitation of iron and chromium rich particles has
204occurred in subgrain boundaries. In the specimen furnace cooled to room temperature relatively large
hydride plates have precipitated which probably explains its embrittlement relative to the specimens
furnace cooled to 700 and 600°C.
These microstructural observations do not explain the differences in embrittlement with the
exception of the RT specimen. However, ~40 randomly located microhardness measurements on theprior β phase in each specimen revealed that in the directly quenched specimen as well as in thespecimen quenched from 800°C all values were above 300 HV quite close to the critical limit alreadydiscussed. In the other specimens the microhardness values ranged from 160 HV to 460 HV with the
majority of the values below 300 HV. Further work is planned in order to gain a better understandingof these phenomena.
6.2.8 The post-quench embrittlement of E110 cladding
The results presented in the preceding section showed that the Zr-1%Nb alloy M5 had similar
post-quench ductility properties to Zircaloy-4. From a practical point of view M5 is expected to bebetter than Zircaloy-4 since it has a lower oxidation and less hydrogen pickup at high burn-up. The
case is, however, very different for Zr-1%Nb alloy E110. In 1993, Böhmert et al. presented acomparative study of high-temperature corrosion in E110 and Zircaloy-4 [123]. They studied doublesided oxidation of short tube segments in flowing steam in a tube furnace. 20-mm long specimens
were studied for weight gain, 8-mm long specimens for ring compression tests and 5-mm-longspecimens for metallography. The observed oxidation kinetics was very similar for the two alloys andthe results for Zircaloy-4 agreed well with other published results. However, the oxide scales on theE110 alloy had a very heterogeneous appearance with a multilayer character which tended to flake.
This appearance was also associated with a high hydrogen pickup fraction, 15-70% in the temperature
range 900-1 050°C where the corresponding value in Zircaloy-4 was ~2-5%. Ring compression tests
showed that the E110 alloy had lost its ductility at about 6% ECR while the ductility of Zircaloy-4 was
gradually reduced to zero at about 18% ECR as can be seen in Figure 6.63.
Figure 6.63 Relative displacement at failure in ring compression tests
as a function of ECR for E110 and Zircaloy-4

Microhardness measurements on the prior β-phase layer showed that the hardness was generally
higher in E110 for equivalent oxidation conditions. As discussed in previous sections there is a direct
correlation between hardness and oxygen content. The higher hardness of E110 was thus interpreted asa result of the β stabilising effect of the Nb in E110 which is expected to increase the oxygen solubility
in the β-phase.
Another important observation was that the hardness was relatively uniform in the E110 alloy while
it varied considerably in Zircaloy-4 with low hardness in the prior β-phase matrix and hardness maxima
205

in α inclusions and in α that precipitated during cooling. The authors suggest that the ductility of
Zircaloy-4 is controlled by the low hardness part of the prior β-phase which serve as a crack stopper forcracks formed in the harder and more brittle parts of the material, whereas the low ductility of the E110
alloy is caused by the higher oxygen content in the prior β-phase. No mention was made of any effect ofhydrogen uptake on ductility despite the observation of high hydrogen pickups in the E110 alloy.
Bibilashvili et al. report that the E110 alloy generally survives a quench from the oxidation
temperature to room temperature after oxidation within the Russian criteria, <18% ECR and <1 200°C[25]. In post-quench impact tests they regard the E110 alloy as at least as good as Zircaloy-4 and M5,
based on the results from a comparative study shown in Figure 6.64.
Figure 6.64 The impact behaviour of oxidized cladding vs. oxidation ECR [25]The impact elasticity in the figure is defined as the absorbed energy divided by the specimen
cross sectional area under the 0.5-mm-deep notch.
The results from ring compression tests are shown in Figure 6.65.
Figure 6.65 Deformation vs ECR in 20°C ring compression tests of E110 alloy [25]206The authors define a specimen as brittle if the deformation at failure is <0.1%, as having low
ductility if deformation <4.0% and otherwise as having partial ductility. Figure 6.64 shows thatspecimens oxidized at 1 000 and 1 100°C have low ductility at all values of ECR while specimens
oxidized at 1 200°C have low ductility only for ECR>14%. This is a clear indication that the relativelyhydrogen uptake plays a major role for the low ductility of E110 alloy since the oxygen content in theprior β-phase is higher for material oxidized at 1 200°C as long as hydrogen concentration is low orinsignificant in the beta. Note that breakaway oxidation that leads to a large hydrogen uptake in E110
occurs at 1 000°C and 1 100°C but does not occur at 1 200°C. Similar data have been reported by
Sokolov et al. with some additional data concerning the E635 alloy [108].
Work by Vrtilková and coworkers at the UJP institute on E110 alloy predates the results reported
by Böhmert et al. but it was published much later together with results from later work by the samegroup [124-126]. The UJP work started in 1985 to verify the 17% oxidation criterion for E110-clad
fuels. It was soon observed that oxide on the E110 alloy spalled during high-temperature transientswith an accompanying high hydrogen pickup. The oxidation kinetics was parabolic and the oxidation
rate slightly lower than for Zircaloy-4. However, ductility loss in the ring compression test occurred at
ECR as low as 5%. It was also noted that when the oxide was adherent the hydrogen content was low
and the ductility comparable to Zircaloy-4.
These results led to the conclusion that hydrogen contained in the alloy has a strong influence on
the mechanical properties after transients and that it is, therefore, possible that cladding tubes of otheralloys could exhibit similar behaviour due to hydrogen pickup during reactor operation. Vrtilková andcoworkers, therefore, performed an extensive program of tests on cladding tubes after pre-oxidation.
The pre-oxidations was conducted through long-term corrosion in steam at 425°C or in water at 360°C(with VVER-1000 chemical additions). In this way, they obtained samples with oxide thicknesses of
2, 10, 30 and 50 µm and hydrogen contents up to 1 200 wppm. Preoxidized samples were compared to
non-oxidized samples. The samples were subjected to isothermal high-temperature exposure in steam
and quenched in ice water at the end of transient. Weight gains, hydrogen contents, thickness ofreaction layers, microhardness of prior β phase and residual ductility in 20°C ring compression tests
were determined. In this way an extensive data base of E110, ZIRLO and Zircaloy-4 properties wasproduced which was subsequently used to propose a new LOCA criterion as discussed in Section 6.4.
Hózer et al. have reported Hungarian tests on E110 cladding [127]. Ring compression tests onoxidized E110 and Zircaloy-4 cladding produced results very similar to those reported by Böhmert(Figure 6.62). Quench tests confirmed the results by Bibilahsvili et al. Oxidized E110 tubes survived
direct quench (i.e. dropping of 5-cm long specimen into cold water from the oxidation temperature) if
the oxidation conditions are within the embrittlement criteria, that is, 18% ECR and 1 200°C.
To better understand the post-quench embrittlement of the E110 alloy, Hózer et al. performed astudy on the effect of hydrogen content on the embrittlement of zirconium alloys [29]. They studied
E110 and Zircaloy-4 oxidized in both steam at 900 to 1 200°C and in an argon-oxygen mixture at
800°C. Hydriding was carried out at 900°C where controlled amounts could be added from acalibrated volume. Figure 6.66 summarises results on materials oxidized in argon-oxygen with welldefined hydrogen contents. It can be seen that at low hydrogen contents, <100 ppm, Zircaloy-4 isslightly more brittle than E110. At higher contents, the behaviour is practically identical. For
specimens oxidized in steam, the results of the ring compression tests are very similar to thoseobserved by Böhmert et al. (Figure 6.63). Hydrogen analyses of oxidized specimens showed that
especially at low temperature 900 to 1 000°C the hydrogen pickup increased rapidly with ECR in
E110. At 1 100 and 1 200°C, the hydrogen pickup levelled off at about 800 ppm. In Zircaloy-4, there
was no hydrogen pickup except at 900°C where breakaway oxidation occurred.

207

Figure 6.66 Relative deformation to failure (first crack) of E110 and Zircaloy samples
as a function of oxidation ratio (ECR) and hydrogen content [29]Figure 6.67 shows the effect of hydrogen content on the relative deformation in the ring
compression test. The authors conclude that hydrogen seems to play a more important role thanoxygen in the post-quench embrittlement of zirconium alloys. They also conclude that the combined
effect of high hydrogen and oxygen contents leads to a faster degradation of ductility than the separate
effects of hydrogen and oxygen.
Figure 6.67 Relative deformation as function of hydrogen content
for E110 and Zircaloy-4 samples oxidized in steam [29]Perhaps, the most extensive investigation of the post-quench embrittlement of E110 alloy and its
causes has been performed by Yegorova et al. [20,128-129]. They demonstrate rather conclusively
that the embrittlement is caused by hydrogen pickup during oxidation of E110 alloy. The hydrogen
pickup is in turn caused by the start of breakaway oxidation of the E110 alloy. At 1 100°C for instancebreakaway oxidation starts at around ~7% ECR. Cladding ductility disappears at ~8% ECR andhydrogen content is increased from nearly zero to about 1 200 ppm in the range of 7.5 to 9% ECR.
The breakaway is associated with lateral cracks in the oxide and subsequent spalling of the oxide.
Böhmert et al. [123] have suggested that steam gets ingressed in the lateral cracks leading to asituation of steam starvation and high hydrogen concentration in the steam. Japanese experiments have208

demonstrated that hydrogen pickup will occur under such conditions [54,59,106]. Apart from theoxidation breakaway, the microstructure in E110 and its development with oxide growth are similar tothat of M5 described in Section 6.1.6.2.
All these data indicate that the cause behind the post-quench embrittlement of E110 is thebreakaway oxidation and the associated hydrogen pickup. E110 is manufactured from a misture ofiodide zirconium and electrolytic zirconium which leads to a lower content of oxygen than in the M5
alloy. M5 is manufactured from sponge zirconium. As a first step in finding the cause of breakaway,
Yegorova et al. manufactured E110 in which high oxygen scrap had been added so that the oxygen
content was similar to that of M5. However, this alloy denoted as E110K behaved similarly tostandard E110 with regard to breakaway and had the same zero ductility threshold. The difference
between E110 and M5 is thus not simply an effect of the difference in oxygen content.
Yegorova et al. also studied the properties of E110 alloy produced from sponge zirconium [20].
This led to a significant improvement in oxidation properties compared to standard E110 and almost
identical properties compared to M5. Chung [30] has explained this improvement in terms ofimportant impurities in sponge zirconium as described in Section 6.1.3. However, at 1 200°C despite
the absence of visual indications of breakaway oxidation up to 23% ECR, a significant hydrogen
pickup was detected already at 8% ECR in the specimens tested by Yegorova.
Oxidation and embrittlement of E110 was also studied at Argonne National Laboratory [110].
Billone et al. discovered that surface treatment was very important and that polished surfaces provide
a substrate for oxide growth that suppresses breakaway. This is shown graphically in Figure 6.68. Thiseffect was subsequently confirmed by Yegorova et al. [20].
Figure 6.68 Hybrid E110 sample following oxidation at 1 000°C for 290 seconds
Machined-and-polished section is lustrous black, while as-fabricated E110 section is in breakaway oxidation

The low ductility of E110 made from sponge zirconium (8% ECR at 1 200°C) as reported byYegorova can thus be explained. First, the sponge zirconium specimen used by Yegorova did not havepolished surfaces and breakaway was thus not suppressed as much as in the M5 specimens which had
polished surfaces. Second, this result corresponds to ring-compression tests performed at 20°C rather
than at 135°C as for the M5 tests performed at Argonne, and the lower test temperature will give asignificantly lower ductility. Third, the material used for these tests (specimen #120) was not madefrom pure sponge zirconium, but also had iodide zirconium and recycled scrap in the ingot. And
fourth, the 8% ECR value was a measured ECR value, and measured values of oxidation are not well
suited for characterising embrittlement as described at the beginning of this section. All of thesefactors led to the low reported ductility of 8% and may be the reasons why the ductility was notcomparable to the M5 ductility measured at Argonne.
A recent study by Nikulin et al. indicates that the ductility of the E110 alloy is not simply afunction of its hydrogen pickup during oxidation but also to some extent dependent on the impurity
content [130]. The total impurity contents were 140, 70, and 35 ppm. Fe is not included in the209impurities although the heats contained 80-100, 350-380, and 400-450 wppm Fe, respectively. The
alloys were oxidized in steam to ECR levels of 10 and 18% at 1 100°C and to 17% at 1 200°C. The
time to reach the ECR values differed between the alloys but did not correlate with impurity content.
The Widmanstätten structures formed when the β-phase transformes to α can have twomorphologies, the parallell plate structure when practically all Widmanstätten plates in the prior β
grain have the same orientation, or the basketweave structure when plates of different orientations
cross each other in the same prior β-grain [131]. In as-received Zircaloy-4, the latter type forms at a
certain range of medium cooling rate. It is thought that the formation of the latter type of structure is
promoted by the presence of some particles which facilitate nucleation of the β plates. Nikulin et al.
found that the volume fraction of basketweave structure increased with impurity content. They also
observed a plate-like, still unidentified dark phase which also increased in number with the impurity
content. Tests on material oxidized at 1 100°C showed that ductility increased with decreased impurity
content. However, for material oxidized at 1 200°C, there were no differences in ductility among thethree tested heats.
6.3 Calculation of transient oxidation, hydrogen generation and embrittlement
The consequences of high-temperature oxidation of cladding are hydrogen generation, heat ofreaction, and embrittlement of cladding. The hydrogen generated in a large break loss-of-coolant
accident from the zirconium-steam reaction is, in the first few hours, the most significant quantity ofhydrogen produced. In design basis accidents in which steam is unlimited, the hydrogen generated andthe heat evolved can be calculated for transient oxidation by application of the isothermal parabolic
rate constants for total extent of reaction. In steam limited conditions such as in severe-fuel-damage
accident situations, the calculation would be conservative.
The equivalent metal reacted may be calculated similarly to assess the embrittlement of thecladding with respect to the 17% ECR criterion, although transient ECR calculation for some type ofhigh-burn-up fuel (e.g., Zircaloy-4 fuel) is not so straightforward. However, for the calculation of thedetailed distribution of the oxygen in the β-phase for the assessment of embrittlement in terms of theChung and Kassner criteria, it is necessary to use more sophisticated techniques and more fundamental
oxygen transport data under moving-phase-boundary conditions. Transient total oxidation may becomputed using isothermal oxidation data by approximating the transient to a series of small
isothermal steps, the sum of the isothermal oxidations representing the total oxidation of the transient.
6.3.1 Calculation of hydrogen generation
The hydrogen released when Zircaloy is oxidized in steam is directly proportional to the oxygen
consumed or Zircaloy reacted. Thus for each mol of zirconium reacted two mols of hydrogen gas areproduced, hence for each kilogram of zirconium reacted 0.044 kg or 0.491 m3 (STP) hydrogen are
produced and the amount of hydrogen produced at any time is expressed as:

WH 2 = 2 ⋅
where

M H2
M Zr

⋅ (Kpt )1/ 2(6-10)WH 2 = mass (mg) of H2 produced per unit (cm2) of Zr surface

M H 2 = mol.wt of H2 (2.016) mg/mg mol

M Zr = mol.wt of Zr (91.22) mg/mg molt = time seconds
Kp = parabolic rate constant (mg Zr/cm2)2 s-1
210

Thus the calculation of hydrogen generated as a function of time in a transient or the integratedhydrogen may be calculated using parabolic rates of reaction which are available over a very wide
range of temperature from ~700°C up to the melting point of Zry-4, as described in Section 6.1. The
data are scattered due to difficulties in measuring temperature and different experimental andevaluation methods. Ocken [132] has suggested that external and internal heating of specimens resultsin parabolic rate constants with different pre-exponential factors and activation energies due to thedifferent temperature gradients across the cladding wall. It is suggested that the correlation forinternally heated specimens most closely represents the in-reactor fuel temperature gradients. The
ANS Standard for Containment Hydrogen Control [133] suggests use of the above correlation below
1 205°C and the Baker-Just correlation above 1 205°C. The latter correlation is shown in Figures 6.2
to 6.4 to be the conservative data. Overall, the data promotes an acceptable basis for the calculation ofhydrogen generated provided the steam availability is maintained and that the oxidation does notdeviate significantly from a parabolic rate.

Kp = 3.33 ⋅ 10 5 exp(− 140600 / RT )(6-11)

The conditions of possible steam limitation have been described previously (Section 6.1.9). The
deviation from parabolic oxidation has been observed by some workers at temperatures below~1 000°C but oxidation in this temperature range is low and the deviation is not considered significant
for LOCA calculations. Pawel and Campbell [33] have pointed out that significant filling of the βphase with oxygen influences the kinetics of oxide and α-phase growth but the overall effect is not
significant for design basis LOCA calculations of total oxidation. The time for which the initialparabolic rate constants measured in the temperature range 750-1 600°C for times up to 25 hours areapplicable after including specimen geometry and breakaway oxidation effects, has been determined
by Leistikow et al. [16,28] e.g. Figure 6.5. At very high temperatures, above the melting point of
Zircaloy there were no reported data on the oxidation rate of liquid Zircaloy at the time of the previous
state-of-the-art report [37] although work on this topic was reported to be in progress [134]. It has notbeen possible to locate any publication of this work or any other systematic experimental work on
oxidation of liquid zirconium alloys. A theoretical study by Olander [135] shows that chemical
thinning of the oxide layer by dissolution in the molten metal can be significant if the metal is far fromsaturation with respect to oxygen when it melts. However, as long as steam is present part of the oxide
layer will remain. Olander states that the method of analysing oxidation of liquid Zircaloy is basicallyno different from the theoretical technique applied to oxidation of the solid metal.
The calculation of oxidation or hydrogen generated using total oxidation parabolic rate constants
has been assembled into computer codes examples of which are BILD5 [50] COBILD [88] andTRANS [5], SIMTRAN [136], and ECR-17 [61]. Using the kinetic data of Pawel et a1. [8] a simple
calculation has been performed by Sherman et al. [137] to illustrate the rate of hydrogen generationfrom the oxidation of a Zircaloy surface area such as in the core of TMI-2, the time to generate 100 kg
of hydrogen is shown in Table 6.7.
Table 6.7 H2 generation from the Zr/H2O reaction from [137]Temp (K)WH 2 / t (kg/s)

Time to produce 100 kg of H2 (s)

800
1 000
1 200
1 400
1 600
1 800
2 000
2 200

0.012
0.15
0.83
2.8
6.8
13.9
24.1
37.0

6.5×107 (2 years)
4.4×105 (5 days)
1.5×104 (4 hours)
1.3×103 (21 mins)
216
52
17
7.3

211

6.3.2 Calculation of oxygen distribution
The calculational techniques generally used to predict the distribution of oxygen in unstressed,
isothermally or transiently oxidized cladding can be generalised into two types of computer code thatdiffer in the method of calculating the oxygen distribution in the oxide and α phases. In the firstsimpler type, the position of the oxide/α and α/β boundaries are estimated by application of theexperimentally determined parabolic growth rate constants for the oxide and α phases, and hence, only
apply if semi-infinite parabolic oxidation is maintained.
The oxygen concentration profile in the β-phase is calculated by considering the diffusion ofoxygen through the β-phase using a finite difference technique. Examples of such codes are BILD5 and
COBILD. The latter code is a development of BILD5 and also includes the calculation of oxidation on
the inner surface by contact with UO2. For calculation of the critical β thickness to survive thermal
shock, it is necessary to use a method in which the effects of saturation of the α or β phases anddeviation from parabolic behaviour are accounted for.
More complex codes are also available which are based on finite-difference solutions to thefundamental oxygen transport process, i.e. diffusion. Such codes also account in principle, for changes
in the parabolic rates due to the approach to saturation. Examples of these codes include
SIMTRAN/MULTRAN [136,138], ZORO [139] and PRECIP II [140].
The basic data for these calculations are isothermal oxygen diffusion coefficients in each phaseand equilibrium interface oxygen concentrations. The diffusion coefficients for oxygen in α and β
Zircaloy have been determined [82,141-142] and for zirconia, which were deduced from oxidation
experiments and previously established values of DαOx and DβOx. The interface solubilities foroxygen in zirconium [143] and Zircaloy [143,144] have also been published. More recent evaluationsof the Zr-O systems can be found in “Zircobase” [122] from which estimates of the effect of alloying
elements on the interface concentrations can be calculated with a software like the Thermo-Calc
system [121].
Calculations based on ideal models of diffusion assume that the diffusion coefficient is constantin the material with an oxygen concentration gradient and that the concentration of oxygen at thephase boundaries is that of equilibrium conditions even in transient temperature-time oxidation. Theseassumptions are not strictly valid and their use gives rise to erroneous predictions. Attempts have been
made to replace equilibrium oxygen concentrations at phase boundaries by empirically determined
oxygen concentrations.
For a limited range of transients the codes predict oxygen concentration distribution withreasonable accuracy but for less simple transients certain aspects of the oxidation process are notaccounted for by either a parabolic rate constant or an ideal diffusion model. Examples of departurefrom the ideal model are the formation of α-incursions ahead of the α-boundary [33] and anomalous
two-peak oxidation in certain transients with two temperature maxima [4,145]. In such transients theoxide has been observed to be thinner on Zircaloy directly heated to a higher temperature. Pawel [145]postulated that the effect was due to the hysteresis in the monoclinic/tetragonal phase transformation
over the temperature range of 900-1 200°C and concluded that insufficient data were available topermit modelling of the phenomenon although the conditions of such anomalous oxidation occurs
were well defined.
The SIMTRAN code developed in ORNL and KfK [136] solves simultaneously the diffusion andheat conduction equations in order to determine the oxygen and temperature profiles in the cladding
wall. The most recent version of SIMTRAN contains material properties extending to 1800 K [138]; it212

models the non-equilibrium concentration at the interfaces during transients and calculates the fueltemperature. The code has a particular application for beyond-design-basis accidents, i.e. severe
accidents where the influence of oxidation exothermic heat induces large temperature gradients in thecladding and its influence on fuel behaviour is significant. In most design basis LOCAs, thetemperature gradients across the cladding are smaller and average temperatures are used for oxidation
calculations. The MULTRAN [138] code was derived from SIMTRAN for design-basis-oxidationcalculations by removing the heat transfer calculations. For further simplicity, cylindrical geometry is
also replaced by slab geometry. Malang and Neitzel [138] also suggest that the oxygen profile in βphase after cooldown is best approximated by the profile existing just before fast cooldown. A limited
amount of code validation has been published. Cathcart et al. [50] concluded that both the earlyversion of SIMTRAN and the BILD5 codes adequately predict the thickness of oxide to within 10%
except for the anomalous oxidation observed in certain two peak temperature LOCAs. However if
equilibrium oxygen solubilities are maintained, the α-phase thickness is overpredicted during rapid
cooling. Malang and Schanz [146] reported good agreement between oxide and α thicknesses
calculated by a later version of SIMTRAN with a non-equilibrium model and experimental transientoxidations. Malang and Neitzel [138] reported the use of the most recent version of SIMTRAN in
predicting oxygen distribution in electrically heated fuel rod simulators that were heated in simulationsof severe accidents to ~2 000°C. Future development of the code will include modelling of the heatand mass transfer between oxidized cladding and steam. This model will also address theconcentration profiles of hydrogen and steam near the cladding surface to allow modelling of steam
starvation and hydrogen blanketing.
Suzuki and Kawasaki [140] have used the SIMTRAN code as a basis for improving andextending the prediction of oxidation parameters in LOCA conditions. The code PRECIP-II wasdeveloped by improving the treatment of the boundary conditions during the cooling phase. In thecode, as the temperature falls, the diffusivity of oxygen in the β-phase is reduced by a factor which is afunction of the local supersaturation. Additionally, to obtain good correlation with measured oxidation
parameters on transiently exposed samples, the temperature dependence of the oxygen solubility inthe α-phase at the oxide-α boundary was modified, the diffusivity in the oxide and the β phases werealso modified slightly with respect to values previously used in the SIMTRAN code. Under these
conditions the measured and calculated data for weight gain, oxide and α phases were within ±10% forZircaloy that was exposed to transients similar to those postulated in a LOCA.
Biederman et al. [4] also made comparisons for the TRANS and ZORO codes and foundreasonable agreement except for the anomalous two peak LOCAs.
The various codes and investigations described above refer to oxidation calculation for asreceived cladding without pre-existing oxide.
Transient oxidation of virgin and pre-oxidized Zircaloy has also been studied by Leistikow et al.
[44]. Variables such as blowdown peak temperature, heating and cooling rates were considered. The
authors reported that there is a large variation in oxidation response from pre-oxidized Zircaloy thatwas subsequently oxidized in transients. It is postulated that the detailed reactor operating history
determines localised oxidation phenomena, therefore, subsequent high-temperature oxidation mustnecessarily reflect the varied starting conditions of low temperature pre-corroded oxide. At transient
temperatures less than 1 200°C preoxidation was generally protective but above 1 200°C thesubsequent oxidation was greater than that measured on initially unoxidized metal. The authors
conclude that although high-temperature transient oxidation on virgin metal is amenable to calculation
it is difficult to define parameters which would enable acceptable calculations to be made for initially
oxidized cladding in a wide range of transients.

213

A moving boundary model of oxidation named FROM (Full Range Oxidation Model) has also
been developed [147] at Chalk River and comparisons with experimental data are reported assatisfactory for both isothermal and transient heating [148].
At KfK, the modelling has been extended to Zircaloy-UO2 interactions observed during highpressure transients [149]. The model PECLOX predicts the combined external and internal oxidationof the cladding due to the reaction with steam on the outside and with the UO2 fuel on the insidesurfaces. It describes the formation, growth, and disappearance of the various interaction layers andthe corresponding oxygen profiles as functions of temperature and time.
Ignat et al. have developed a computer code based on the analytical solution to the oxygen
diffusion equations in the three phases [150]. Transient oxidation is handled by separating the transient
into small isothermal steps. For each step, an equivalent time can be defined so that the transient in
effect is converted to a constant temperature. The structure of the resulting computer code OXCON ismuch simpler than the more common finite-difference codes. A comparison between OXCON and thetwo finite-difference codes FROM and and PRECIP II showed that they give very similar results.
6.4 Discussions on embrittlement criteriaHigh burn-up cladding is expected to contain significant amounts of hydrogen. A vast body ofexperiments have shown that cladding with hydrogen contents above about 100 ppm does not conformto the current LOCA embrittlement criteria. These observations together with results of work on alloys
other than Zircaloy-4 make it necessary to modify and/or complement the current criteria.
6.4.1 Regulatory analysis(Contributed by NRC, extract from conference paper by R.O. Meyer [151])
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has recognised that experimental results on fuelbehaviour under LOCA conditions have shown strong alloy and burn-up effects, or more precisely
strong materials and corrosion effects [20,152]. Zirconium containing niobium oxidizes more slowly
than zirconium containing tin under operating and transient conditions. Niobium does not go into
complete solution in zirconium metal as tin does, affecting the alloy’s microstructure. Under somecircumstances, Zr-Nb alloys also seem to be more susceptible to breakaway oxidation. Surface
roughness of the cladding also makes the oxide more susceptible to breakaway oxidation. Corrosion,on the other hand, is accompanied by significant hydrogen absorption, and this always enhances
oxygen embrittlement of the metal. Several mechanisms, which are related to these effects, are now
known to affect cladding embrittlement under LOCA conditions.
6.4.1.1 Beta-layer embrittlement by oxygen
As temperature increases during a LOCA transient, the amount of oxygen that a zirconium alloy’s
β phase can hold also increases. Above about 1 473 K (1 200°C), oxygen solubility becomes highenough in these cladding alloys that, after cooling, the prior-β region will be brittle. This mechanism
was understood in 1973. Based on data available at that time, the 1477 K (1 204°C, 2 200°F)
temperature limit in NRC regulation was thought to preclude such embrittlement, but the data only
covered unirradiated Zircaloy [153].
6.4.1.2 Beta-layer thinningWith time, diffusion of oxygen into the metal will convert more and more of the β phase to anoxygen-rich α phase, the α layer grows and the β region shrinks. For long times at high temperature,214

the β region becomes so thin that the macroscopic specimen exhibits brittle behaviour when it iscooled. This mechanism was also understood in 1973 and was thought to be accommodated by the
17% oxidation limit in NRC’s regulation, but again the data only covered unirradiated Zircaloy [153].
6.4.1.3 Localised hydrogen-induced embrittlement in the balloon
Steam that enters through a rupture in a balloon causes oxidation inside the cladding. Hydrogenthat is freed during this reaction is not swept away as it is on the outside of the cladding, but is rapidly
absorbed, resulting in enhanced embrittlement near the burst location. This effect, which is neither
burn-up nor alloy dependent, was discovered earlier [153] and has been confirmed in the present
research programme. The localised nature of this effect and the clean fractures that occur whenstressed to failure do not suggest a safety issue.
6.4.1.4 Hydrogen-enhanced β-layer embrittlement by oxygen
Some hydrogen from the outside cladding corrosion process is also absorbed in the cladding
metal during normal operation. When that cladding is exposed to high-temperature LOCA conditions,the elevated hydrogen levels increase the solubility of oxygen in the β phase. Thus, even for LOCA
temperatures below about 1 473 K (1 200°C), embrittlement can occur for times corresponding to lessthan 17% oxidation, as seen in Figure 6.69. This burn-up effect was discovered in the current research
program and can be accounted for by reducing the time permitted for oxidation at high temperatures inproportion to the amount of corrosion.
Figure 6.69 Ductility as a function of calculated oxidation at 1 473 K (1 200°C)
for irradiated and unirradiated Zircaloy-4 (rough surface), tested at 408 K (135°C)

6.4.1.5 General hydrogen-induced embrittlement from breakaway oxidation
Zirconium dioxide can exist in several crystallographic forms (allotropes). The normal tetragonaloxide that develops under LOCA conditions is adherent and protective. There are, however, conditions
that promote a monoclinic “breakaway” form that is not adherent and permits rapid hydrogen ingress,
as seen in a specimen in Figure 6.70. One of the conditions is cladding surface roughness (beltpolishing is beneficial) and another is the impurity content of the zirconium starting material (sponge
zirconium is beneficial). Hydrogen that enters in this manner during a LOCA transient has the same
effect on embrittlement as hydrogen from the normal burn-up process. Although breakaway oxidation
was known in 1973, the connection to embrittlement and the factors affecting it were discovered only
recently in NRC programmes.

215

Figure 6.70 Specimen of E110 cladding that exhibited severe breakaway oxidation
after 1 400 seconds at 1 000°C

6.4.1.6 Oxygen pickup from the cladding inside diameter (ID)At high burn-up, there will be a corrosion layer on the outside diameter (OD) and there can be abonding layer on the inside diameter (ID) between the UO2 fuel and the cladding. The corrosion layer
and the bonding layer are both largely ZrO2, and they can provide oxygen for diffusion into the metal.
This situation is like a multilayer diffusion couple as illustrated in Figure 6.71. The actual thicknessesof the OD oxygen source and of the ID oxygen source are relatively unimportant because theygenerally contain much more oxygen than will diffuse into the metal (see Hofmann and Politis [117]).
Figure 6.71 Diffusion couple character of oxygen sources and cladding metal

6.4.1.7 Embrittlement criteria
No change is foreseen in NRC’s 1 477 K (2 200°F) temperature limit. For temperatures belowthat limit, cladding embrittlement, including burn-up and alloy effects, has been characterised withlimits on time spent at high temperatures from relatively simple measurements. One time limit was
obtained from ring-compression tests on unirradiated cladding, oxidized at about 1 477 K (2 200°F), in
combination with the known corrosion thickness for that type of cladding at the burn-up of interest.
The amount of oxidation at the onset of embrittlement in the tests was reduced by the corrosion
thickness, and that reduced amount of oxidation was related to the time limit by the Cathcart-Pawel
equation [50]. The other time limit was obtained from tests on unirradiated cladding specimens thatwere oxidized at various temperatures to determine the time at which rapid hydrogen absorption began
as a consequence of breakaway oxidation. That time was used as the limit when it was less than the216

one mentioned above. These oxidation-related time limits are similar in form to the current oxidation
limit in the regulations. Although NRC’s research has found these criteria to be effective, they have
not yet been subjected to public comment or adopted in regulations.
6.4.1.8 Summary of U.S. regulatory analysis
Based on results of this research, revisions to NRC’s regulatory criteria for LOCA are underway.
Although current criteria can be non-conservative under certain conditions, the criteria have been
applied in an overall conservative way such that U.S. plants operate with adequate safety margins.
6.4.2 Discussions on impact of recent results on criteria
As discussed in the section on regulatory analysis, recent results on (mostly simulated) high burnup cladding, new zirconium alloys, and an increased awareness of the consequences of breakaway
oxidation in both pre-LOCA and during a LOCA transient has led to the conclusion that current
regulation concerning LOCA to some extent is inadequate. As a consequence a number of workers in
the field have proposed changes in the LOCA criteria. Four examples of these proposals will be givenin the present section.
6.4.2.1 Billone’s proposal
A set of alternative criteria based on the recent experiments at Argonne National Laboratory and
CEA have been discussed at length by Billone [109]. An important feature of the alternative criteria isthat they are based on the Cathcart-Pawel (CP) oxidation correlation which has proved to be very
reliable in predicting oxidation in high-temperature steam tests. Based on their extensive work [110],
Billone writes that:“ANL post-quench ductility data are summarised for: as-fabricated 17×17 Zry-4, ZIRLO and M5oxidized to Cathcart-Pawel-calculated ECR (CP-ECR) values of ≤20% at 1 000°C, 1 100°C and
1200°C; unirradiated prehydrided 17×17 Zry-4 oxidized at 1 200°C to CP-ECR values of 7.5%
and 10% and prehydrided 15×15 Zry-4 oxidized at 1 200°C to CP-ECR values of 5% and 7.5%;
and irradiated high-burn-up Zry-4 (800 wppm H) oxidized at ≈1 200°C to a measured ECR valueof ≈5.5%. Also presented are post-oxidation ductility results for high-burn-up Zry-4 (550 wppmH) oxidized at ≈1 200°C to measured ECR values of ≈5.5% and ≈7.5%. Ductile-to-brittle
transition CP-ECR values vs. H-content are determined for Zry-4 oxidized at ≈1 200°C: 5% CPECR and ≈600 wppm H, 7.5% CP-ECR and ≈400 wppm H, and 10% CP-ECR and ≈300 wppm H.
These transition ECR values are dependent on the oxidation heating rate. The ECR values would
be lower for higher heating rates as oxidation at 1 200°C is more embrittling than oxidation atlower temperatures during the ramp to 1 200°C. The high-burn-up Zry-4 results are consistent withthe prehydrided Zry-4 results when the comparison is made in terms of measured ECR.
ANL and CEA data, as well as other data sets, clearly show three serious limitations informulating post-quench-ductility criteria in terms of a fixed ECR. First, ECR is independent ofhydrogen content, while embrittlement is a very strong function of hydrogen content. Second,
ECR integrated over a LOCA or experimental temperature history does not distinguish time spentat high-vs.-low oxidation temperatures, while embrittlement is a strong function of oxidation
temperature. Third, some alloys exhibit a low ECR rate (e.g., M5 at 1 000°C) although theyembrittle at the same rate as Zry-4, even though their measured or best-estimated ECR value may
be low after long times at temperature.
An embrittlement correlation, which accounts for hydrogen content and high-temperatureoxidation, is proposed. There are three parts to the proposed correlation: a critical oxygen content(Ccrit in wt %) in the prior-β layer at the ductile-to-brittle transition; a β-layer oxygen solubility
217limit (So in wt %), which is a function of temperature and hydrogen content; and a rate equation
for determining the time-dependent average oxygen content (Co in wt %) in the β layer, which isa function of So, ECR and the weight-gain rate constant K = K(T). For non-irradiated cladding,
the rate equation is expressed in terms of CP-ECR and the CP rate constant K. For irradiatedcladding the correlation is based on measured ECR. Using Zry-4 data, an initial set of correlation
parameters has been chosen. Also, the initial estimate for Ccrit is 0.57 wt %. A methodology is
described for refining correlation parameters and validating the correlation and Ccrit. Following
the correlation validation to prehydrided and high-burn-up Zry-4 data, prehydrided and highburn-up M5 and ZIRLO data will be used to determine alloy-dependent parameters.
Two additional limits are imposed to prohibit embrittlement at high ECR values due to excessive
thinning of the β layer and to prohibit breakaway oxidation at lower oxidation temperatures: CPECR≤18% and time ≤1 h at T > 800°C. The 18% CP-ECR limit is needed to ensure continuity incorrelation predictions for 1 150-1 204°C and to prevent excessive thinning of the β layer for
1 050-1 150°C. The time limit is needed to prevent breakaway oxidation and enhanced
embrittlement for 800-1 050°C. Also, as the data base is limited to ≤1 204°C-oxidation
temperatures, and the embrittlement rate is very high for >1 204°C, 1 204°C is retained as thePCT.”
6.4.2.2 Vrtilková’s criterionWith support from their extensive data base of post-quench ductility tests on E110, ZIRLO andstandard and low tin Zircaloy-4, Vrtilková and coworkers have taken a more empirical approach to acriterion which applies to all alloys and all practical levels of pre-oxidation [124]. To understand thecriterion we first note that Equation 6-3, assuming c = 0, can be written:

w2t=exp(Q / RT )2A

(6-12)⎛ w2 ⎞⎟⎟ + Q / R ⋅ 1 / T
log(t ) = log⎜⎜⎝ 2A ⎠(6-13)or in logarithmic form

For a given value of w2, for instance corresponding to 17% ECR we get a straightline in a diagram of log(t) versus 1/T. If we use Q and A according to the BakerJust correlation we get the line corresponding to the current embrittlement criterion.

Vrtilková and coworkers plotted their post-quench ductility test results in a log(t) versus 1/T
diagram and examined if the specimen exhibited a non-ductile behaviour or not. An example is shownin Figure 6.72. The upper yellow line is the current 17% ECR criterion calculated with the Baker-Just
equation. It is clear that many of the specimens that do not violate the 17% ECR-BJ limit exhibited
zero residual ductility. Therefore Vrtilková and coworkers formulated a new criterion in the form oflines which separate well their database with inadequate or adequate post-quench ductility. The lines
were formulated in terms of a ductility parameter K which is calculated from:

K = A exp(− B / T ) ⋅ τ

where T[K] and τ[s], A = 3800, B = 14170
The significance of the ductility parameter is:
K < 1: residual ductility is preserved.
K = 1: residual ductility > 0, but does not exceed 1%.
K > 1: specimens may be brittle.
218(6-14)

The lower red line is calculated for K=1. From actual experience this threshold limit of K can beeven higher, approximately K=1.2. For non-isothermal temperature transients, K is calculated bynumerical integration of the derivative of the squared version of eq. 6-14.
Figure 6.72 Post-quench ductility results at RT for isothermally exposed E110 specimens [124]Ac is the residual ductility.

Zr1 Nb (E110)

6.4.2.3 The proposal by Vitanza and Hrehor
An alternative way of formulating a ductility criterion has been proposed by Vitanza and Hrehor[154]. They start by noting that the ductility data of Hobson and Rittenhouse [80] can be separated into
brittle and non-brittle behaviour by the 17% ECR Baker-Just line in a log(time) versus 1/T diagram.
The position of the line is dependent on the wall thickness W. For the unirradiated Zircaloy-4 used by
Hobson and Rittenhouse the equation of the straight line is expressed by:

Tk =

11500
4.64 − 2.3 log W − 1.15 log t(6-15)The term 4.64 = ln(1762) - ln(17) so the 17% oxidation limit is implicitly contained in thecriterion. Vitanza and Hrehor then define the temperature threshold T300s = 1 188°C as a characteristic
property of the Hobson-Rittenhouse cladding. It is anticipated that T300s will depend on both alloy typeand burn-up as well as on cladding thickness. The advantage with this criterion is that it is easy to
express various margins. It is for instance possible to quantify the effect of cladding thickness in termsof the change in T300s. It is also possible to compare two alloys or one alloy at different burn-ups interms of the difference in T300s. Figure 6.73 shows a comparison between Zircaloy-4 and E110 alloy
which shows that Zircaloy-4 has ~100 K advantage over E110.

219

Figure 6.73 Results of Hungarian ring compression tests of specimens subjected
to isothermal high-temperature steam oxidation [155]For a given transient like those shown in Figure 6.74, an effective time and temperature must be
calculated.
Figure 6.74 Maximum calculated cladding temperaturesin a simulated 200% cold-leg LBLOCA in the PAKS NPP

The definition of the effective temperature is somewhat arbitrary. Vitanza and Hrehor suggest thefollowing definition of an effective temperature:Te =∫ T ( ECR)dECR(6-16)ECR F

where ECRF is the final value of ECR. For a given transient one can calculate ECR asa function of time and then perform the numerical integration necessary to calculate
Te. The effective time is then calculated as the time needed to reach ECRF at thetemperature Te. This is the procedure used for converting the hottest transient in
Figure 6.73 to the square in Figure 6.72 with the 200 K margin to the brittlenesscriterion for E110.

220

The criterion changes with burn-up due to two effects: the reduction in wall thickness due tooxidation and the hydrogen pickup caused by corrosion. The first effect is taken into account by areduction of W and the latter by reducing the 17% limit by a factor dependent on oxide thickness before
the transient on the assumption that a certain oxide thickness results in a certain hydrogen content.
Figure 6.75 shows how T300s changes with burn-up for the three alloys Zircaloy-4, E110 and M5.
Figure 6.75 The burn-up dependence of T300s Zircaloy-4, E110 and M5 [154]It is interesting to note that at high burn-up T300s for E110 is higher than for Zircaloy-4. This is aconsequence of the good long term corrosion properties of the Zr-1Nb alloys in comparison with
Zircaloy-4. In a more recent paper, Vitanza has proposed a modified form of this criterion [156].
6.4.2.4 Criteria proposed by Chung (contributed by Dr. H.M. Chung)In a recent paper, Chung proposed tandem criteria, i.e., (a) calculated peak cladding temperatureshall be no higher than 1 204°C (unchanged from the current limit); and (b) calculated thickness of βlayer containing oxygen concentration of less than 0.7 wt % shall be greater than 0.3 mm (hereinafterreferred to as L<0.7wt% >0.3 mm) [21].
The tandem criteria, slightly modified from the two criteria proposed in [61] (i.e., a criterion forquenching thermal shock and a criterion for post-quench forces), are based on the following
observations, which are documented in the reference:
1.

Satisfying the L<0.7wt% >0.3 mm criterion was sufficient to withstand 0.3-J impact at 23°C.
This limit was shown to be ≈10 times greater than the threshold impact energy required towithstand quenching thermal shock without an applied tensile load.

2.

L<0.7wt% > 0.3 mm was sufficient to avoid zero ductility at 23°C for as-received Zircaloy-4
cladding that was oxidized in steam on both sides at <1 204°C. Such samples typicallycontained only low contents of hydrogen of about <50 wppm. Non-zero ductility from slow
ring-compression tests was confirmed in terms of non-zero plastic deformation to the first
cracking, sufficient level of total deflection to fragmentation, and maximum load to the first
cracking of >11 kg. The first and the second definitions of non-zero ductility are consistent
with that of Hobson and Rittenhouse [80] and Hobson [81], and the third definition isconsistent with that of K. Komatsu [157-158].

221

3.

Ductility at 135°C is higher than the ductility at 23°C. Therefore, non-zero ductility
threshold at 135°C has more margin than that at 23°C. L<0.7wt% > 0.3 mm was sufficient towithstand three-point-fixed 0.3-J impact at 23°C for cladding tubes that were ballooned,
burst, oxidized, slow-cooled, quenched, and contained hydrogen contents of 20-2230 wppm.
Under the LOCA-like test conditions, virtually all hydrogen atoms are confined in the priorβ layer.

4.

The failure/survival behaviour of Zircaloy-4 fuel rods tested in PBF (failed level local
oxidation temperatures ≈1 262°C, ≈1 307°C, ≈1 327°C, and ≈1 420°C; failed level local
hydrogen contents 340-1 000 wppm) was consistent with the L<0.7wt% > 0.3 mm criterion.

5.

The L<0.7wt% > 0.3 mm criterion for survival of 0.3-J impact at 23°C was valid for oxidation
temperatures of 800-1400°C, hydrogen contents of 20-2230 wppm, and for various degree ofwall thinning due to ballooning and burst.

At 1 204°C, the solubility limit of oxygen in β is 0.57 wt % at low hydrogen contents (e.g.,<50 wppm). In this case, L<0.7wt% is equal to the β-layer thickness. Therefore, for peak oxidation
temperatures ≤1 204°C, it is not necessary to calculate the distribution of oxygen in the β layer.
For burn-up-related higher hydrogen contents, it is necessary to calculate hydrogen-induced
increase in the oxygen solubility in β even for ≤1 204°C. An interim method of this calculation wasgiven in [21], which was based on: (1) temperature-dependent solubility limit of oxygen in β for as
fabricated Zircaloy-4 (reported in [144]), (2) oxygen solubility data for Zircaloy-4 that contains highhydrogen contents of 320-730 wppm that were reported by CEA investigators, and (3) an expression
developed on the basis of the CEA data by Billone which gives oxygen solubility in β as function oftemperature and hydrogen content [109]. The CEA data indicate that at 1 200°C, the hydrogen effectsaturates at a hydrogen content near ≈600 wppm.
It is desirable that more comprehensive database on the effect of hydrogen on the oxygen
solubility in β phase will be obtained, for not only Zircaloy but also other classes of alloy, andhopefully accompanied by a calibration with independent technique(s). This could be achieved withina reasonably short period of time using unirradiated prehydrided specimens. Such database is believedto play an important role in analysing and predicting burn-up-related effects on post-quench
embrittlement behaviour.
For a given burn-up level for a given class of cladding alloy, it is relatively straightforward to locate
the initial oxide/α phase boundary before α-to-β phase transformation starts to occur, e.g., at ≈812°C for
Zircaloy-4. From thereon, it is necessary to calculate α-layer growth on top of either α +β layer up to≈975°C or β layer at about >975°C. As described in Section 6.3 in this report, numerous computer codes
have already been developed for this purpose for as-fabricated cladding under LOCA situations. These
codes can be modified to handle the moving-boundary problem for a high-burn-up fuel.
However, the rate of α-layer growth in some high-burn-up cladding, e.g., Zircaloy-4 that iscovered with thick corrosion layer, could differ from that of as-fabricated material. Further
metallographic analyses on some type of specimens could be very helpful for a better quantification ofthis difference, i.e., metallography on the high-burn-up fuel tested in ANL and the low-temperatureprecorroded claddings tested in UJP.
For high-burn-up cladding, it is not clear yet if the Cathcart-Pawel correlation works well for
LOCA-like transients. Therefore, it may be easier and relatively more accurate to predict the change inthe thickness of β layer alone than to calculate all moving phase boundaries, total oxidation, and obtaina good correlation between the total oxidation and the thickness of remaining β.

222

6.5 Conclusions
6.5.1 General conclusions on oxidation and hydrogen generation
In a postulated loss of coolant accident, the zirconium-steam reaction is potentially the mostsignificant source of hydrogen. However, if the ECCS functions according to the design basis, thehydrogen production from other sources such as radiolysis of water or containment metal corrosion
reactions, generated over a longer post-LOCA time period at high temperature could predominate.
For fresh or low-burn-up cladding oxidation, hydrogen and exothermic heat generation can beadequately calculated for transients typical of hypothetical design-basis transients, using the available
kinetic data on the isothermal oxidation of zirconium alloys in unlimited steam. Such data are
available over a wide range of temperature, from low temperatures ~700°C where oxidation rates are
low, up to the melting point of zirconium. In the temperature range of ~700- ~1 500°C there is somescatter in the data. This is generally accepted as being due to difficulties in accurate temperature
measurement combined with differences in heating technique which produce different temperature
gradients across the specimen thickness. However, the Baker-Just correlation is conservative between~1 000-1 500°C increasingly so at higher temperatures.
The behaviour and kinetics of LOCA-like-transient oxidation in high-burn-up fuel cladding thatis characterised by thick corrosion layer and a large hydrogen uptake, such as some Zircaloy-4
cladding at high burn-up, are not well understood. There are indications that such thick corrosion layer
plays a significantly protective role that slows down the high-temperature oxidation. Further
investigation is needed to better understand this behaviour.
Other variables having a possible influence on the zirconium alloy oxidation rate, such as steampressure, preoxidation of cladding, deformation during oxidation, ionizing radiation and anomalousoxidation from certain two-temperature-peak-transients are not well characterised but are not thought tohave significant effects on calculations of hydrogen generated from the transient Zircaloy-steam reactionin postulated design-basis loss-of-coolant accidents.
Above ~1 500°C, temperature measurement is increasingly difficult and the tendency of zirconia
to transform from the tetragonal to the cubic polymorph introduces additional uncertainty inmeasurements of oxidation rates. For calculations in hypothetical more severe accidents in whichcladding temperatures may exceed ~1 500°C, the data is sparse and scattered. Although the Baker-Justcorrelation is still conservative, it has been shown to be possibly less so than at lower temperatures.
Above the melting point of zirconium, there is as yet, no data on oxidation in steam, although
theoretical arguments suggest that the same kinetics apply as for the solid phase when the liquid issaturated with regard to oxygen.
If the availability of steam is limited, as postulated in some severe-fuel-damage accidents, thehydrogen fraction of the steam may become significant. In high hydrogen/steam ratios the oxidation
rate of Zircaloy has been shown to decrease. More data are required on the effects of hydrogen in
steam on the oxidation and hydrogen pick-up of Zircaloy for the accurate modelling of the core heatup at the high temperatures and in the limited steam conditions of more severe postulated accidents.
6.5.2 General conclusions on embrittlement
For the prediction of intact survival or fragmentation of fuel cladding in thermal shock due to rewetting, the embrittlement criterion based on the total oxidation (equivalent cladding reacted) has beenshown to be conservative, particularly at low maximum oxidation temperatures and also if significant
223

wall thinning occurs. Embrittlement as defined by the total oxidation criterion can be calculated fordesign-basis loss-of-coolant accidents by application of the available parabolic rate constants for thezirconium alloy-steam reaction.
An embrittlement criterion based on the distribution of oxygen through the cladding wall has
been proposed which adequately defines out-of-reactor and in-reactor embrittlement for thermal shockof cladding. Unless excessive, hydrogen uptake does not significantly influence the susceptibility totherma-shock failure. A similar criterion also adequately defines resistance to ambient impact of 0.3 J,
thought to be a reasonable approximation to post-quench ambient impact loads. The criteria based on
oxygen distribution are independent of the maximum oxidation temperature, the initial cladding
thickness and the wall thinning that resuls from ballooning deformation. Better definition of impact
forces likely to arise during quenching at the axial level of ballooned, burst, and bent claddings in fuelassembly, as well as impact forces from reflood, handling, storage, transport and seismic events would
improve confidence in the above criterion. Oxidation under a realistic condition of an in-reactor
transient is influenced by the mechanical restraint imposed by the fuel stack and the build up ofhydrogen in the bore of the burst cladding. These effects have been shown to result in deviations ofoxidation rate from those measured on small unrestrained specimens in unlimited steam in laboratory
conditions [61].
The effect of hydrogen on oxygen solubility in the β-phase has a significant impact on the postquench ductility of high burn-up cladding and on post-quench ductility of ballooned cladding whichhave absorbed hydrogen in the oxidation reaction on the inside surface of the cladding. Similar effects
may also arise in long term transients at about 1 000°C when breakaway oxidation leads to significant
hydrogen pickup. These effects are not addressed by the present embrittlement criteria and there is aneed for new revised criteria.
6.6 References
1.

Pettersson, K. and Haag, Y., “Deformation and failure of Zircaloy cladding in a LOCA. Effects
of preoxidation and fission products on deformation and fracture behaviour. SKI project B23/78”,
Studsvik Energiteknik AB, STUDSVIK/K4-80/13, March 1980.

2.

Baker, L. and Just, L.C., “Studies of metal-water reactions at high temperatures. III. Experimental
and theoretical studies of the zirconium-water reaction”, Argonne National Laboratory, ANL
6548, May 1962.

3.

Parsons, P.D. and Miller, W.N., “The oxidation kinetics of zirconium alloys applicable to loss-ofcoolant accidents. A review of published data”, UKAEA Report ND-R-7(S), October 1977.

4.

Biederman, R.R., Ballinger, R.G., and Dobson, W.G., “A study of Zircaloy-4 steam oxidation
reaction kinetics”, EPRI NP-225 Final Report, September 1976.

5.

Biederman, R.R., et al., “A study of Zircaloy-4 - steam oxidation kinetics”, EPRI NP-734 Finalreport, April 1978.

6.

Westerman, R.E. and Hesson, G.M., “Zircaloy cladding i.d./o.d. oxidation studies”, EPRI NP-525
Final report, November 1977.

7.

Leistikow, S., Schantz, G., and Berg, H.V., “Kinetics and morphology of isothermal steam
oxidation of Zircaloy-4 at 700-1300 C”, KFK 2587, March 1978.

8.

Pawel, R.E., Cathcart, J.V., and McKee, R.A., “The kinetics of oxidation of Zircaloy-4 in steam
at high temperatures”, Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 126(1979), pp. 1105-1111.

224

9.

Kawasaki, S., Furuta, T., and Suzuki, M., “Oxidation of Zircaloy-4 under high temperature steam
atmosphere and its effect on ductility of cladding”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology,
15(1978), pp. 589-596.

10. Brown, A.F. and Healey, T., “The kinetics of total oxygen uptake in steam-oxidized Zircaloy-2 inthe range 1273-1673 K”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 88(1980), pp. 1-6.
11. Urbanic, V.F. and Heidrick, T.R., “High-temperature oxidation of Zircaloy-2 and Zircaloy-4 insteam”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 75(1978), pp. 251-261.
12. Sagat, S., “Deformation and failure of Zircaloy fuel sheath under LOCA conditions”, AECL7754, October 1982.
13. Sagat, S., Sills, H.E., and Walsworth, J.A., “Deformation and failure of Zircaloy fuel sheaths
under LOCA conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Sixth International Symposium,
1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 709-733.
14. Pawel, R.E. and Campbell, J.J., “A comparison of the high-temperature oxidation behavior of
Zircaloy-4 and pure zirconium”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry; Fifth Conference, 1980,
Boston, USA, ASTM STP 754, ASTM, pp. 370-389.
15. Aly, A.E., “Oxidation of Zircaloy-4 tubing in steam at 1350 to 1600 C”, KFK 3358, May 1982.
16. Leistikow, S., et al., “Comprehensive presentation of extended Zircaloy-4 steam oxidation results(600-1600 C)”, OECD-NEA-CSNI/IAEA Specialists Meeting on Water Reactor Fuel Safety and
Fission Product Release in Off-Normal and Accident Conditions, 1983, Risö.
17. Chung, H.M. and Thomas, G.R., “Zircaloy oxidation and hydrogen generation rates in degradedcore accident conditions”, International Workshop on the Impact of Hydrogen on Water Reactor
Safety, 1982, Albuquerque.
18. Bibilashvili, Y.K., et al., “High temperature interaction of fuel rod cladding material (Zr1%Nb
alloy) with oxygen containing mediums”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Behaviour of
LWR Core Materials under Accident Conditions, 1995, Dimitrovgrad, Russia., IAEA, pp. 117-128.
19. Urbanic, V.F., “Oxidation of zirconium alloys in steam at 1000 to 1850 C”, Zirconium in the
Nuclear Industry, 1976, Quebec, Canada, ASTM STP 633, ASTM, pp. 168-181.
20. Yegorova, L., et al., “Experimental study of embrittlement of Zr-1%Nb VVER cladding under
LOCA-relevant conditions”, NUREG/IA-0211, IRSN 2005-194, NSI RRC KI 3188, March 2005.
21. Chung, H.M., “Fuel behavior under loss-of-coolant-accident situations”, Nuclear Engineering andTechnology, 37(2005), pp. 327.
22. Mardon, J.-P., et al., “Recent data on M5 alloy under RIA and LOCA conditions”, 2004
International Meeting on Light Water Reactor Fuel Performance, 2004, Orlando, Florida,
American Nuclear Society, pp. 507-515.
23. Mardon, J.-P. and Waeckel, N., “Recent data on M5 alloy under LOCA conditions”, 2003
Nuclear Safety Research Conference, 2003, Washington DC, Nuclear Regualtory Commission,
pp. 141-160.
24. Portier, L., et al., “Influence of long service exposures on the thermal-mechanical behavior of Zy4 and M5 alloys in LOCA conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: FourteenthInternational Symposium, 2004, Stockholm, ASTM STP 1467, ASTM, pp. 896-920.
25. Bibilashvili, Y.K., et al., “Thermomechanical properties of zirconium-based alloys oxidized
claddings in LOCA simulating conditions”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Fuelbehaviour under transient and LOCA conditions, 2001, Halden, Norway, IAEA, pp. 186-208.
225

26. Leech, W.J., “Ductility testing of Zircaloy-4 and ZIRLO cladding after high temperatureoxidation in steam”, Topical Meeting on LOCA Fuel Safety Criteria, 2001, Aix-en-Provence,
OECD/NEA, pp. 135-143.
27. Cox, B., “Oxidation of Zirconium and its alloys. Advances in Corrosion Science andTechnology”, 1976: Plenum Press.
28. Schantz, G. and Leistikow, S., “ZrO2-scale degradation during Zircaloy-4 high temperature steam
exposure, microstructural mechanisms and consequences for PWR safety analysis”, ANS/ENS
Topical Meeting on Reactor Safety Aspects of Fuel Behaviour, 1981, Sun Valley, ANS.
29. Hózer, Z., et al., “Effect of hydrogen content on the embrittlemen of Zr alloys”, IAEA TechnicalCommittee Meeting on Fuel behaviour under transient and LOCA conditions, 2001, Halden,
Norway, IAEA, pp. 159-168.
30. Chung, H.M., “The effects of aliovalent elements on nodular oxidation of Zr-base alloys”, 2003
Nuclear Safety Research Conference, 2003, Washington DC, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
pp. 283-298.
31. Cox, B., “Some thoughts on the mechanisms of in-reactor corrosion of zirconium alloys”, Journalof Nuclear Materials, 336(2005), pp. 331-368.
32. Asher, R.C., “The effect of radiation on the aqueous corrosion of Zircaloy. A survey of world
experience”, UKAEA, UKAEA report AERE-R-7454, 1973.
33. Pawel, R.E. and Campbell, J.J., “The observation of effects of finite specimen geometry on theoxidation kinetics of Zircaloy-4”, Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 127(1980), pp. 21882194.
34. Miquet, A. and Charquet, D., “Solid state phase equilibria of Zircaloy-4 in the temperature range
750-1050 C”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 105(1982), pp. 132-141.
35. Vandersande, J.B. and Bement, A.L., “An investigation of second phase particles in Zircaloy-4
alloys”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 52(1974), pp. 115-118.
36. Versaci, R.A. and Ipohorski, M., “Polytype structure of intermetallic precipitates in zircaloy-4
alloys”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 80(1979), pp. 180-183.
37. Parsons, P.D., Hindle, E.D., and Mann, C.A., “PWR fuel behaviour in design basis accident
conditions. A State-of-the-Art Report by the Task Group on Fuel Behaviour of CSNI Principal
Working Group No 2”, Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear Energy
Agency, CSNI Report 129.
38. Jerlerud Pérez, R., et al., “The Sn-Zr binary system: experiments and thermodynamic
assessment”, Journal of Phase Equilibria (submitted), (2006).
39. Yurek, G.J., Cathcart, J.V., and Pawel, R.E., “Microstructures of the scales formed on Zircaloy-4
in steam at elevated temperatures”, Oxidation of Metals, 10(1976), pp. 225.
40. Gambini, M., et al., “Bahaviour of alloying elements in high temperature (1600°C-1800°C)
transient oxidation of Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 115(1983), pp.
343-346.
41. Brachet, J.-C., et al., “Mechanical behaviour at room temperature and metallurgical study of low
tin Zy-4 and M5 (Zr-Nb) alloys after oxidation at 1100 C and quenching”, IAEA TechnicalCommittee Meeting on Fuel behaviour under transient and LOCA conditions, 2001, Halden,
Norway, IAEA, pp. 139-158.

226

42. Cheng, B., Gilmore, P.M., and Klepfer, H.H., “PWR Zircaloy fuel cladding corrosion
performance, mechanisms and modelling”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: EleventhInternational Symposium, 1995, Stockholm, ASTM ASTM STP 1295, ASTM, pp. 137-160.
43. Garzarolli, F., Stehle, H., and Steinberg, E., “Behavior and properties of Zircaloys in powerreactors: A short review of pertinent aspects in LWR fuels”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry:
Eleventh International Symposium, 1995, Stockholm, ASTM ASTM STP 1295, ASTM, pp. 12-32.
44. Leistikow, S., Schantz, G., and Berg, H.V., “Investigations into the temperature transient steam
oxidation of Zircaloy-4 cladding material under hypothetical PWR loss-of-coolant conditions”,
KFK-2810, April 1979.
45. Iglesias, F.C., Unpublished work, AECL.
46. Ozawa, M., et al., “Behavior of irradiated Zircaloy-4 fuel cladding under simulated LOCA
conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Twelth International Symposium, 1998, Toronto,
ASTM STP 1354, ASTM, pp. 279-299.
47. Kido, T., et al., “PWR Zircaloy cladding corrosion behavior. Quantitative analyses”, Journal of
Nuclear Materials, 248 (1997), pp. 281-287.
48. Nagase, F., et al., “Experiments on high burn-up fuel behavior under LOCA conditions at
JAERI”, 2000 International Topical Meeting on Light Water Reactor Fuel Performance, 2000,
Park City, Utah, American Nuclear Society.
49. Brachet, J.-C., et al., “Hydrogen content, pre-oxidation and cooling scenario effects on postquench microstructure and mechanical properties of Zircaloy-4 and M5 alloys in LOCA
conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: 15th International Symposium, Sun River, USA,
Journal of ASTM International, 5(2008).
50. Cathcart, J.V., et al., “Zirconium metal-water reaction kinetics. IV. Reaction rate studies”,
ORNL/NUREG-17.
51. Leistikow, S., Kraft, R., and Pott, E., “Is air a suitable environment for simulation of Zircaloysteam high temperature oxidation within engineering experiments”, EUR 6984.
52. Westerman, R.E., “High temperature oxidation of zirconium and Zircaloy-2 in oxygen or water
vapour”, HW-73511.
53. Furuta, T., et al., “Deformation and inner oxidation of the fuel rod in a loss-of-coolant accident
condition”, JAERI-M-6339 NRC Translation NR-tr-005.
54. Furuta, T., et al., “Zircaloy clad fuel rod burst behaviour under simulated loss of coolant
conditions in PWRs”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 15(1978), pp. 736-744.
55. Furuta, T., et al., “Ductility loss of Zircaloy cladding by inner surface oxidation during hightemperature transients”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 18(1981), pp. 802-810.
56. Kawasaki, S., et al., “Inner surface oxidation of Zircaloy cladding in a loss of coolant accident”,
Sixth US NRC Water Reactor Safety Research Information Meeting, 1978, Gaithersburg.
57. Uetsuka, H., et al., “Zircaloy-4 cladding embrittlement due to inner surface oxidation undersimulated loss of coolant conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 18(1981), pp.
705-717.
58. Karb, E.H., et al., “LWR fuel rod behaviour in the FR2 in-pile tests simulating the heatup phaseof a LOCA”, KfK 3346, March 1983.
59. Furuta, T., et al., “Reaction behaviour of Zircaloy-4 in steam hydrogen mixtures at hightemperature”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 105(1982), pp. 1119-1131.
227

60. Homma, “Behaviour of the Zircaloy cladding tube in a mixed gas of hydrogen and steam”,
JAERI M7131. NRC translation NUREG/TR-0021.
61. Chung, H.M. and Kassner, T.F., “Embrittlement Criteria for Zircaloy Fuel Cladding Applicableto Accident Situations in Light-Water Reactors. Summary Report”, NUREG/CR-1344, January
1980.
62. Chung, H.M. and Thomas, G.R., “Rate limiting effects of gaseous hydrogen on Zircaloy
oxidation”, NRC Workshop on the Impact of Hydrogen on Water Reactor Safety, 1981,
Albuquerque, NM.
63. Chung, H.M. and Thomas, G.R., “High temperature oxidation of Zircaloy in hydrogen steam
mixtures”, Sixth International Symposium on Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1982,
Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 793-809.
64. Chung, H.M. and Thomas, G.R., “Some new aspects of core degradation during a PWR small
break LOCA”, ANS Winter Meeting, 1981, San Fransisco.
65. Prater, J.T. and Courtwright, E.L., “Oxidation of Zircaloy-4 in steam at 1300 to 2400 C”,
Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Seventh International Symposium, 1985, Strasbourg, France,
ASTM, pp. 489-503.
66. Perez-Feró, E., et al., “Experimental database of E110 cladding oxidized in hydrogen richsteam”, TopFuel 2006, 2006, Salamanca, Spain, pp. 605-609.
67. Pawel, R.E., Cathcart, J.V., and Campbell, J.J., “The oxidation of Zircaloy-4 at 900 and 1100 C
in high pressure steam”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 82(1982), pp. 129-139.
68. Grain, C.F. and Garvie, R.C., “Mechanism of the monoclinic to tetragonal transformation of
zirconium dioxide”, Bureau of Mines Report, BM-RI-6619.
69. Bramwell, I., et al., “An experimental investigation into the oxidation of zircaloy-4 at elevatedpressure in the temperature range 750-1000 C”, UKAEA, AEA-RS-5438.
70. Vrtilkova, V., Valach, M., and Molin, L., “Oxiding and hydriding properties of Zr-1Nb alloy
cladding material in comparison with Zircaloys”, Technical Committee Meeting on Influence ofWater Chemistry on Fuel Cladding Behaviour, 1993, Rez, Czech Republic, IAEA, pp. 227-251.
71. Knights, C.N. and Perkins, K., “The effect of applied tensile stress on the corrosion behaviour of
Zircaloy-2 in steam and oxygen”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 36(1970), pp. 180-188.
72. Bradhurst, D.H. and Heuer, P.M., “The effects of deformation on the high temperature steam
oxidation of Zircaloy-2”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 55(1975), pp. 311-326.
73. Leistikow, S. and Kraft, R., “Creep rupture testing of Zircaloy-4 tubing under superimposed hightemperature steam oxidation at 900°C”, Sixth European Congress on Metallic Corrosion, 1977,
London.
74. Furuta, T. and Kawasaki, S., “ Acceleration of Zircaloy-steam reaction rate by deformation
under high temperature transient”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 17(1980), pp.
243-245.
75. Parsons, P.D. and Hand, K., Unpublished work.
76. Donaldson, A.T. and Evans, H.E., “Oxidation induced creep in Zircaloy-2. I, II, III”, Journal of
Nuclear Materials, 99(1981), pp. 38-65.
77. Hammad, F.H., Aly, A.E., and El-Raghy, S.M., “Oxidation induced dimensional changes in
Zircaloy cladding tubes”, 1981.

228

78. Leistikow, S., “Comparison of high-temperature steam oxidation kinetics under LWR accident
conditions: Zircaloy-4 versus austenitic stainless steel 1.4970”, Zirconium in the Nuclear
Industry: Sixth International Symposium, 1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM,
pp. 763-779.
79. Parsons, P.D., “Zircaloy cladding embrittlement in a loss-of-coolant accident”, 6th Water Reactor
Safety Information Meeting, 1978, Gaithersburg, Md, USA.
80. Hobson, D.O. and Rittenhouse, P.L., “Embrittlement of Zircaloy Clad Fuel Rods by SteamDuring LOCA Transients”, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ORNL-4758, January 1972.
81. Hobson, D.O., “Ductile-brittle behavior of Zircaloy fuel cladding”, ANS Topical Meeting on
Water Reactor Safety, 1973, Salt Lake City, pp. 274-288.
82. Pawel, R.E., “Oxygen diffusion in beta Zircaloy during steam oxidation”, Journal of Nuclear
Materials, 50(1974), pp. 247-258.
83. Sawatsky, A., Ledoux, G.A., and Jones, S., “Oxidation of zirconium during a high-temperaturetransient”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1976, Quebec, Canada, ASTM STP 633, ASTM,
pp. 134-149.
84. Hesson, J.C., et al., “Laboratory Simulations of Cladding-Steam Reactions Following Loss-ofCoolant Accidents in Water-Cooled Power Reactors”, Argonne National Laboratory, ANL-7609,
January 1970.
85. Scatena, G.J., “Fuel cladding embrittlement during a loss-of-coolant accident”, General ElectricCompany, Report NEDO-10674, October 1972.
86. Kassner, T.F. and Chung, H.M., “Clad embrittlement criteria - application to and assessment of
the margin of performance of ECCS’s in LWRs”, 8th Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting,1980, Gaithersburg, Md.
87. Furuta, T., Uetsuka, H., and Kawasaki, S., “Estimation of conservatism of present embrittlement
criteria for Zircaloy fuel cladding under LOCA”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Sixth
International Symposium, 1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 734-746.
88. Haggag, F.M., “Zircaloy cladding embrittlement criteria: Comparison of in-pile and out-of-pileresults”, NUREG/CR-2757, July 1982.
89. Hobbins, R.R., Smolik, G., and Gibson, G., “Zircaloy cladding behaviour during irradiation tests
under power-cooling-mismatch conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry, 1978, Quebec,
ASTM STP 681, ASTM, pp. 586-599.
90. Hofmann, P. and Kerwin-Peck, D.K., “UO2/Zircaloy-4 chemical interactions and reaction
kinetics from 1000-1700°C under isothermal conditions”, KfK-3552, November 1983.
91. Seiffert, S.L., “The effect of hydrogen on the oxygen embrittlement of beta-quenched Zircaloy
fuel cladding”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Fifth Conference, 1982, Boston, ASTM STP
754, ASTM, pp. 302-328.
92. Chung, H.M., “Materials reactions accompanying degraded core accidents”, Faculty Institute at
the LWR degraded core cooling division of educational programme, 1981.
93. Katanishi, S., Sobajima, M., and Fujishoro, T., “Quenching degradation in-pile experiment on anoxidized fuel rod in the temperature range of 1000 to 1260 C”, Nuclear Engineering and Design,
132(1991), pp. 239-251.

229

94. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Study of high burn-up fuel behaviour under a LOCA conditions at
JAERI: Hydrogen effects on the failure-bearing capability of cladding tubes”, 29th Nuclear Safety
Research Conference, 2001, Washington, USA, NRC.
95. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Results from studies on high burn-up fuel behavior under LOCA
conditions”, 2004 Nuclear Safety Research Conference, 2004, Washington DC, NRC, pp. 224-230.
96. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Results from Simulated LOCA Experiments with High Burn-up PWR
Fuel Claddings”, 2004 International Meeting on Light Water Reactor Fuel Performance, 2004,
Orlando, Florida, American Nuclear Society.
97. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Recent results from LOCA study at JAERI”, 2003 Nuclear Safety
Research Conference, 2003, Washington, USA, NRC.
98. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Effect of Pre-Hydriding on Thermal Shock Resistance of Zircaloy-4
Cladding under Simulated Loss-of-Coolant Accident Conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Scienceand Technology, 41(2004), pp. 723-730.
99. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Behavior of Pre-Hydrided Zircaloy-4 Cladding under Simulated
Loss-of-Coolant Accident Conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 42(2005),
pp. 209-218.
100. Nagase, F., Otomo, T., and Uetsuka, H., “Oxidation kinetics of low-Sn Zircaloy-4 at thetemperature range from 773 to 1573 K”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 40(2003),
pp. 213-219.
101. Nagase, F., Tanimoto, M., and Fuketa, T., “Study on high burn-up fuel behaviour under a LOCA
condition at JAERI”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Fuel behaviour under transient andLOCA conditions, 2001, Halden, Norway, IAEA.
102. Nagase, F., Chuto, T., and Fuketa, T., “Fracture resistance of high burn-up PWR fuel cladding
under simulated LOCA conditions”, 2008 Water Reactor Fuel Performance Meeting, 2008,
Seoul, Korea, Paper No. 8103.
103. Nagase, F., Chuto, T., and Fuketa, T., “Behavior of 66 to 77 MWd/kg fuel cladding under LOCA
conditions”, International Conference on the Physics of Reactors “Nuclear Power: A Sustainable
Resource”, 2008, Interlaken, Switzerland.
104. Nagase, F. and Fuketa, T., “Fracture behavior of irradiated Zircaloy-4 cladding under Simulated
LOCA conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 43(2006), pp. 1114-1119.
105. Ledergerber, G., et al., “Characterization of high burn-up fuel for safety related fuel testing”,
Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 43(2006), pp. 1006-1014.
106. Uetsuka, H., Furuta, T., and Kawasaki, S., “Embrittlement of Zircaloy-4 due to oxidation inenvironment of stagnant steam”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 19(1982), pp. 158-165.
107. Kim, J.H., et al., “Embrittlement behavior of Zircaloy-4 cladding during oxidation and waterquench”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 235(2005), pp. 67-75.
108. Sokolov, N.B., et al., “Thermomechanical behaviour of zirconium-based alloys claddings under
LOCA conditions”, Fontevraud 5 International Symosium, 2002, Fontevraud, France, pp. Paper 93.
109. Billone, M., “LOCA embrittlement correlation”, Argonne National Laboratory, April 2005
(available at www.nrc.gov in NRC’s public document system, ADAMS, as ML051010265)
110. Billone, M., Yan, Y., and Burtseva, T.A., “Cladding embrittlement during postulated loss-ofcoolant accidents”, Argonne National Laboratory, NUREG/CR-XXX, 2008 (to be pubsihed draft available at www.nrc.gov in NRC’s public document system, ADAMS, as ML070110130).
230

111. Meyer, R.O., Research Information Letter 080×, “Technical Basis for Revision of Embrittlement
criteria in 10 CFR 50.46”, NRC memorandum from B. Sheron to J Dyer and R. Borchardt, 2008.
112. Yan, Y., Burtseva, T., and Billone, M.C., “Post-quench ductility at 135 C for 17×17 M5 cladding
oxidized at 1 200 C, slow cooled to 800 C and quenched”, Argonne National Laboratory,(available at www.nrc.gov in NRC’s public document system, ADAMS, as ML051920385)
113. Yan, Y., Burtseva, T., and Billone, M.C., “Post-quench ductility results for Zry-4 and ZIRLO
oxidized at 1000 C and 1 100 C”, Argonne National Laboratory, (available at www.nrc.gov in
NRC’s public document system, ADAMS, as ML041420178).
114. Yan, Y., Burtseva, T., and Billone, M.C., “Post-quench ductility at 135 C for 17×17 Zry-4
cladding oxidized at 1 200 C, slow cooled to 800 C and quenched”, Argonne National Laboratory,(available at www.nrc.gov in NRC’s public document system, ADAMS, as ML051920397).
115. Yan, Y., Burtseva, T., and Billone, M.C., “Post-quench ductility at 135 C for 17×17 ZIRLO
cladding oxidized at 1 200 C, slow cooled to 800 C and quenched”, Argonne National Laboratory,
available at www.nrc.gov in NRC’s public document system, ADAMS, as ML051920392).
116. Yan, Y., Burtseva, T., and Billone, M.C., “Post-quench ductility results for Zry-4 and M5oxidized at 1 000 C and 1 100 C”, Argonne National Laboratory, (available at www.nrc.gov in
NRC’s public document system, ADAMS, as ML041420185).
117. Hofmann, P. and Politis, C., “Chemical interaction between uranium oxide and Zircaloy-4 in thetemperature range 900-1 500 C”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: (Fourth Conference), 1978,
Stratford-upon-Avon, ASTM STP 681, ASTM, pp. 537-560.
118. Mardon, J.-P. and Dunn, B., “Overview of the M5 alloy behavior under RIA and LOCA
conditions”, 2007 LWR Fuel Performance Meeting/TopFuel, 2007, San Fransisco, USA,
American Nuclear Society, pp. 496-514.
119. Brachet, J.-C., et al., “Hydrogen content, pre-oxidation and cooling scenario effects on postquench microstructure and mechanical properties of Zircaloy-4 and M5 alloys in LOCA
conditions” and “Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: 15th International Symposium, Sun River”,
USA, Journal of ASTM International, 5(2007).
120. Stern, A., et al., “Investigations of the microstructure and mechanical properties of prior βstructure as a function of the oxygen content in two zirconium alloys”, Zirconium in the Nuclear
Industry: 15th International Symposium, 2007, Sun River, USA, ASTM.
121. Sundman, B., Jansson, B., and Andersson, J.-O., “The Thermo-Calc Databank System”, Calphad,9(1985), pp. 153–190.
122. Dupin, et al., “A thermodynamic database for zirconium alloys”, Journal of Nuclear Materials,
275(1999), pp. 287-295.
123. Böhmert, J., Dietrich, M., and Linek, J., “Comparative studies on high-temperature corrosion of
ZrNb1 and Zircaloy-4”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 147(1993), pp. 53-62.
124. Vrtilkova, V., “An approach to the alternative LOCA embrittlement criterion”, SEGFSM Topical
Meeting on LOCA Issues, 2004, Argonne, USA.
125. Vrtilkova, V., et al., “Practical illustration of the traditional vers. alternative LOCA embrittlement
criteria”, Nuclear Energy for New Europe 2005, 2005, Bled, Slovenia.
126. Vrtilkova, V., et al., “Influence of preoxidation in thermomechanical properties of Zr-alloys
cladding tubes after LOCA temperature transients”, Stav a perspectívy palivových cyklov
jadrových elektrární VVER 440, 2006, Smolenice, Slovakia.

231127. Hózer, Z., et al., “Experiments with VVER fuels to confirm safety criteria”, ENS Top Fuel 2001,
2001, Stockholm, European Nuclear Society, pp. Paper P2-14.
128. Yegorova, L., et al., “LOCA behaviour of E110 alloy”, 2003 Nuclear Safety Research
Conference, 2003, Washington DC, Nuclear Regualtory Commission, pp. 123-139.
129. Asmolov, V., et al., “Understanding LOCA-related ductility in E110 cladding”, 2002 Nuclear
Safety Research Conference, 2002, Washingtion D.C., U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, pp.
109-125.
130. Nikulin, S.A., et al., “Influence of structure changes in E110 alloy claddings on ductility loss
under LOCA conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: 15th International Symposium,
2007, Sun River, USA, ASTM.
131. Holt, R.A., “The beta to alpha phase transformation in Zircaloy-4”, Journal of Nuclear Materials,
35(1970), pp. 322-334.
132. Ocken, H., “An improved evaluation model for Zirclaloy oxidation”, Nuclear Technology,
47(1980), pp. 243.
133. ANSI/ANS-56.1-1982: Containment hydrogen control. Proposed draft standard. 1982, American
Nuclear Society.
134. Courtwright, E.L., BNWL, Richland, Private communication, 1986.
135. Olander, D.R., “Oxidation of liquid Zircaloy by steam”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 119(1983),
pp. 245-250.
136. Malang, S., “SIMTRAN-1L A computer code for the simultaneous calculation of oxygen
distribution and temperature profiles in Zircaloy during exposure to high temperature oxidising
environments”, ORNL-5083, November 1975.
137. Parsons, P.D., et al., “The chemical and physical degradation of PWR fuel rods in severe accident
conditions”, OECD-NEA-CSNI/IAEA Specialists Meeting on Water Reactor Fuel Safety and
Fission Product Release in Off-Normal and Accident Conditions, 1983, Risö.
138. Malang, S. and Neitzel, H.J., “Modelling of Zircaloy-steam-oxidation under severe fuel damage
conditions”, OECD-NEA CSNI/IAEA Specialists meeting in water reactor fuel safety and fission
product release in off-normal and accident conditions, 1983, Risö, Denmark,.
139. Dobson, W.G. and Biederman, R.R., “ZORO-1: A finite difference computer code for Zircaloy-4oxidation in steam”, EPRI-NP-347, December 1976.
140. Suzuki, M. and Kawasaki, S., “Development of computer code PRECIP-II for calculation of Zr
steam reaction”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 17(1980), pp. 291-300.
141. Parsons, P.D., “A review of the diffusion coefficients of oxygen in a and b zirconium alloys inthe temperature range 675-1800 C”, UKAEA report TRG Report 2882(S), Jan. 1977
142. Pawel, R.E., “Oxygen diffusion in the oxide and alpha phases during reaction of Zircaloy-4 withsteam from 1 000 C to 1 500 C”, Journal of the Electrochemical Society, 126(1979), pp. 1111-1118.
143. Gebhardt, E., Seghezzi, H.D., and Duerrschnabel, W., “ Research on the system zirconiumoxygen. Part 2. Research on the kinetics of the reaction between zirconium and oxygen and also
the constitution of the system zirconium-oxygen”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 4(1961), pp.
225-268.
144. Chung, H.M. and Kassner, T.F., „Pseudobinary Zircaloy-oxygen phase diagram”, Journal of
Nuclear Materials, 84(1979), pp. 327-339.

232145. Pawel, R.E., Cathcart, J.V., and McKee, R.A., “Anomalous’ oxide growth during transient
temperature oxidation of Zircaloy-4”, Oxidation of Metals, 14(1980), pp. 1-13.
146. Malang, S. and Schanz, C., “Description and verification of SIMTRAN-1 - A computer code forthe calculation of high temperature steam oxidation of Zircaloy”, Specialist Meeting on WR Fuel
Elements under accident conditions, 1976, Spaatind, Norway, OECD/NEA.
147. Duncan, D.B., “Moving boundaries in heat conduction and mass diffusion problems”, AECL
8185.
148. Iglesias, F.C., et al., “ Verifacation of the FROM model for Zircaloy oxidation during hightemperature transients”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 130(1985), pp. 36-44.
149. Hofmann, P. and Neitzel, H.J., “Experimental and theoretical results of cladding oxidation under
severe fuel damage conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Seventh International
Symposium, 1985, Strasbourg, France, ASTM STP 939, ASTM, pp. 504-538.
150. Ignat, M., Ciocan, E., and Ion, S., “Method for describing the Zircaloy-4 oxidation using theanalytical solution of the oxygen diffusion equations”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 240(1997),
pp. 154-160.
151. Meyer, R.O., “The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s research on fuel behaviour under
accident conditions”, TopFuel 2006, 2006, Salamanca, Spain, pp. 284-290.
152. Billone, M., Yan, Y., and Burtseva, T.A., “Cladding embrittlement during postulated loss-ofcoolant accidents”, Argonne National Laboratory, NUREG/CR-6967.
153. Hache, G. and Chung, H.M., “The History of the LOCA embrittlement criteria”, Topical Meetingon LOCA Fuel Safety Criteria., 2001, Aix-en-Provence, Nuclear Energy Agency, pp. 37-64.
154. Vitanza, C. and Hrehor, M., “Considerations on LOCA criteria including high burn-up effect”,
SEGFSM Topical Meeting on LOCA Issues, 2004, Argonne, USA.
155. Hózer, Z. and Györy, C., “Derivation of a LOCA ductility limit from AEKI ring compression
tests”, SEGFSM Topical Meeting on LOCA Issues, 2004, Argonne, USA,156. Vitanza, C., “RIA failure thresholds and LOCA limits at high burn-up”, Journal of Nuclear
Science and Technology, 43(2006), pp. 1074-1079.
157. Komatsu, K., “The Effects of Oxidation Temperature and Slow Cooldown on Ductile-Brittle
Behavior of Zircaloy Fuel Cladding”, CSNI Specialists Meeting on the Behavior of Water
Reactor Fuel Elements under Accident Conditions, 1976, Spaatind, Norway.
158. Komatsu, K., et al., “Load-Bearing Capability in Deformed and Oxidized Zircaloy Cladding”,
CSNI Specialists Meeting on Safety Aspects of Fuel Behavior in Off-Normal and Accident
Conditions, 1980, Espoo, Finland.

233

7. PLASTIC DEFORMATION OF CLADDING

7.1 The problem
If the external coolant pressure falls to a low value, the tensile stress which is produced in thecladding by the internal gas pressure is sufficient to cause plastic distension. The creep strength ofzirconium alloys falls rapidly with temperature so that at 700°C strain rates can be up to 1% s-1.
Furthermore, the ductility of the alloys is high so that strains of 50% or more are possible in principle.
The spacing of PWR fuel rods is such that adjacent rods straining by 32% will touch; the key questionis thus whether strains of this magnitude or greater can occur in practice in adjacent rods at the samelevel in the assembly. The associated question of how coolability is affected by large strain leading toprogressive blockage of the coolant sub-channels is not addressed here (Section 4.2).
7.1.1 Internal pressures of fuel rods
The fuel rod is internally pressurised with helium during manufacture, and this pressure isaugmented during irradiation by the release of gaseous fission products. Helium is added to improve
thermal conductivity at the pellet-cladding interface [1], and to reduce mechanical interaction between
pellet and cladding during service [2]. A usual filling pressure for PWR fuel is of the order of 2 MPa;
this is increased by the higher temperature during operation and further by fission product release. The
temperature transient occurring in an accident also increases the pressure, but there should be little
further release of fission products [3]. Any distension of the cladding reduces the internal pressure byincreasing the free space volume.
7.2 Factors controlling deformation and rupture of cladding
The basic parameters controlling deformation in a LOCA are stress, temperature and creep
strength, the latter being affected by oxidation, grain size and anisotropy. When the temperature of astressed tube is uniform, deformation is unstable, i.e. if the tube increases in diameter at any one axial
position, the increased stress resulting from the larger diameter and reduced wall thickness will lead,by positive feedback, to a runaway deformation to rupture. In an assembly of rods at a uniform
temperature, these local ruptures would occur adventitiously depending on local variations in material
properties or dimensions. In this situation, a large blockage would be highly improbable. In a coolingenvironment, however, it is possible for a thermal stabilizing process to lead to extended deformation[4]. That is if a local region of cladding is swelling preferentially, it will be cooled to a greater extent
than neighbouring regions, reducing its creep rate relative to theirs. This negative feedback effect has
been found [5] to operate over a range of heat transfer conditions for tubing which is heated ohmicallyso that the power is generated directly in the cladding. When the heat source is internal to the cladding,as in an actual fuel rod, a further negative feedback effect is possible, from the thermal resistanceinterposed between pellet stack and cladding by the gas gap opened by distension. The conditions ofexternal heat transfer obtaining in a fuel assembly following a LOCA, with a large component of
convective cooling by uprising steam, will tend to produce axial temperature gradients in the fuel rods,
so that distension, if it occurs, will vary along the rods. Adjacent rods, however, will tend to deform
similarly though not identically.
235

A temperature transient which produces significant strains is quite likely to strain the cladding torupture. This will stop distension by releasing the pressure differential stressing the cladding. Since theinherent ductility of zirconium alloys is high, early rupture, at low overall strain, will occur only when
the ductility of the material is exhausted locally by non-uniform straining. A prime cause of nonuniformity is circumferential variation in temperature around the cladding [6-8], since the creep-strengthof zirconium is highly temperature-sensitive, and the cladding will strain preferentially in the hottest
region. Such temperature non-uniformity is caused, for example, by the fuel pellet stack not remaining
co-axial with the cladding as the latter distends. The strong effect of circumferential temperature nonuniformity (or, more commonly referred to as azimuthal temperature variation) on rod deformation wasinvestigated extensively in late 1970s [5-7]; it was found to be the key factor that controls the potential
for and the degree of coplanar flow channel blockage. A good review of this topic is given in [8].
Apart from non-uniformity in heat transfer, either internally from an eccentric pellet stack or
externally from, for example, inhomogeneous coolant flow, a further mechanism for introducing
circumferential temperature variation in a rod follows from the anisotropic properties of the cladding.
Fuel cladding manufacture imposes large reductions in wall thickness to avoid the formation ofradially oriented hydride platelets [9] during service, this results in the (0001) poles being aligned
close to the radial direction with a texture that resists wall thinning under the biaxial tension generated
by an internal pressure. When the cladding distends, the deformation tends to be accommodated bymaterial flowing axially into the region of distension (Appendix A). This results in axial contraction,
particularly noticeable in axially unrestrained burst tests [6,10]. If wall thinning occurs preferentiallyat one side of a tube as a result of a local temperature increase, caused for example by contact with aninternal heater rod or a fuel pellet, then only that side will shorten and the tube will bow against theheat source (Figure 7.1).
Figure 7.1 Schematic representation of strain anisotropy in zirconium alloy tubing
resulting in the “hot side straight” effectThis ensures that deformation continues at one side − the “hot-side straight” effect. Since only apart of the circumference is thinning, the total circumferential strain potential of the tube is notachieved. Direct evidence for this has been produced at KfK by a cine-film of X-ray images from a
specimen and its heater during bulging [11]. Strain anisotropy is at a maximum in the temperature
range 725-775°C, but declines rapidly in the two-phase region [4]. If the combined circumferential
strains of neighbouring rods exceed 65%, they will touch. After touching, the radii of curvature of thesections of cladding not in contact will decrease, reducing the hoop stresses in them. Deformation may
continue above and below the contacting region if rupture did not occur; there the deformation would
continue as before only if the temperature rose. Time to rupture is likely to be longer when mechanicalinteraction occurs.
Zircaloy-4 fuel cladding under normal service conditions is in the cold-worked and stressrelieved condition, the structure consisting of distorted lenticular grains. This structure recrystallises
above 700°C in the order of 10 s [12]. Thus following a LOCA the defects introduced by irradiation
236

would be removed rapidly as the boundaries of the recrystallizing structure swept through the lattice.
For cladding used in the recrystallized state, other annealing processes will remove radiation damageat about the same rate. The ease of plastic deformation would also prevent the build-up of internal
stresses during deformation, suppressing crack formation. This effect, coupled with the fact that the
texture resists wall thinning, can produce a diffuse neck, possibly leading to high circumferential
strains during deformation in the range 700-800°C.
Above about 800-820°C the transformation to the β phase begins in Zircaloy. The presence of βphase in the α matrix reduces the strength considerably, while the amount of β is very temperaturedependent. The net effect is that in the mixed-phase region the influence of circumferential
temperature variation in reducing the total strain at rupture is greater than in the single-phase region.
Ductility remains high, but large strains do not usually occur unless strain rates are low.
7.2.1 Measurement of blockage
In the following descriptions of experimental data, the term “blockage” will appear frequently.
The generally accepted definition of blockage (or coolant channel restriction) is given below andshown schematically in Figure 7.2.
Figure 7.2 General definition of coolant channel blockage

B% = 100 ×difference in cross section between swollen and unswollen rod
original coolant channel cross − sectional area

This definition gives B=0% for no deformation and B=100% if all the rods deform into squaresof side p, where p is the rod pitch (Figure 7.3a and Figure 7.3b).
Figure 7.3 Examples of blockage

The extreme case of 100% blockage is not obtainable experimentally. However, at reasonably
high rod strains the situation depicted in Figure 7.3c can be obtained, i.e. where swollen rods extend
beyond the boundaries defined by the rod pitch. This situation is observed when the rods are not
restrained by neighbours or a surrounding shroud and the strain is greater than 33%, or where the rod
has moved from its original position in the bundle.
237

In this situation two options can be exercised in the evaluation of final rod area:
1.
2.

Total area method. Measure the area of each rod in the deformed bundle. Then use theblockage definition shown in Figure 7.2.
Mask method. Assume that the blockage should be evaluated only within the area defined by
the original coolant channel area, see Figure 7.4. Then use the blockage definition shown in
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.4 Mask method for measurement of blockage

The first method, “total area method”, makes no allowances for movement of the rods. Thus anarray of swollen rods, each of which has moved, leaving an “open lattice”, has exactly the same
numerical blockage value as an array in which the individual rods have deformed to the same extent
but have not moved, when obviously there is a difference in coolant flow area (Figure 7.5a). In
addition, “local” blockage values of >100% are perfectly feasible (Figure 7.5b), if the rods swell
beyond their lattice spacings. Also if the outer rods of a highly deformed bundle swell beyond theoriginal lattice dimensions, total blockages >100% can be obtained e.g. as reported [13] for the MT-4
bundle (Section 7.3.1.5). In both these situations, the results although mathematically correct cantherefore be misleading since 100% blockage cannot be coolable and a blockage of >100% is not
physically meaningful.
Figure 7.5 Deficiencies of the total area method

Both give the same blockage value
using total area method but flow areas
are obviously different.

The second method, the “mask method” cannot produce total blockage values greater than 100%.
However unless the deformation in each rod at the same plane is uniform, which in practice it is not, it
does not provide an adequate description of the change in individual coolant channels e.g. the general
blockage “mask” value for the cross-section shown in Figure 7.71 is about 85% (UKAEA Springfields,
unpublished work [14]), whereas the individual channels are reduced by 96-98%. Similarly the PHEBUS
array (Figure 7.28) has an overall blockage ratio of 48% but the area of one sub-channel has been
reduced to 80% of the original (UKAEA Springfields, unpublished work [14]). What is required for heattransfer calculations is a measure of how much of the original coolant channel area remains between four238

rods when they have distended to form either a closed or open sub-channel, because it is this which has amajor effect on the temperature of the cladding surfaces in that sub-channel. It is also important to know
the perimeter of sub-channels and the extent to which they are closed.
A mathematical description of sub-channel blockage, sub-channel perimeters and rod gaps is
given in Figure 7.6. Proposals for dealing with the various types of sub-channels and burst openings
are given in Figure 7.7.
Figure 7.6 Definition of sub-channel blockage (left) and sub-channel perimeters and rod gaps (right)

Figure 7.7 Proposals for dealing with the various types of sub-channels and burst openings

7.3 Experimental data
Relevant experiments may be divided into three classes:
1.

Materials properties tests to determine creep strength, effects of anisotropy etc. These may or
may not utilise actual cladding specimens. This type of experiment is presented in Section 5.1.1
together with relevant results.
239

2.
3.

Determination of oxidation and embrittlement. These have been described in a Chapter 6.
Determination of deformation under internal pressure.

The last class of tests may be divided into single-rod and multi-rod tests, by type of heating(ohmic, internal, furnace, or nuclear heating) and according to the degree of realistic simulation of theirexternal heat transfer conditions. Single-rod tests performed out-of-reactor form the bulk of publishedresults [15] and these have largely served to elucidate the controlling factors described in the preceding
section. The actual strains found in single-rod tests, however, cannot be taken as representative of thoseoccurring in an assembly, since the effects of neighbouring rods, direct or indirect, are not present.
The main series of multi-rod out-of-reactor tests have been conducted at ORNL [16], KfK [11]and JAERI [17]. The ORNL tests on 4×4 and 8×8 assemblies were performed with conservatively low
steam flows, and consequently very low heat transfer coefficients, to provide data for evaluating
specific requirements for the US Federal Regulation 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix K. (An analysis by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the cladding deformation question is presented in [18].) The test
conditions were conducive to significant deformation and were selected to provide a reasonableestimate of the upper limit of the amount of deformation that could be expected under Appendix K
conditions. In addition, the tests point out the differences between the behaviour of rods singly and inassemblies and between small and large assemblies. The tests cannot however be used directly to infer
fuel assembly behaviour in accidents with reflood. A similar comment applies to the tests on 7×7
assemblies at JAERI. The tests in the REBEKA series at KfK have been the most realistic performed
up to 1986 out-of-reactor, with simulated top or bottom reflood. Significant co-planar strains, but
acceptable restriction of sub-channels, have been produced.
In-reactor tests have been performed on single rods in Germany in the FR-2 reactor and in the
USA in PBF. Extended deformation occurred in both these series. The only sources of multi-rod inreactor data are the series of experiments in the NRU reactor at AECL Chalk River [19] and the
PHEBUS series at Cadarache [20-23]. A recent review of in-reactor and out-of-reactor bundle tests
has been presented by Grandjean [24]. Some of his material has been included in the present review.
The experimental programmes referred to are discussed in more detail in the rest of this section.
7.3.1 In-reactor tests
7.3.1.1 Single rod tests in the FR2 reactor
A series of in-reactor experiments using PWR-type single rods (active fuel length 50 cm,
enrichment 4.7%) both unirradiated and irradiated (2 500-3 5000 MWd/t) and simulating the second
heat-up phase of a cold leg break has been carried out in the DK loop of the FR-2 reactor at
Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe (KfK) West Germany. Also for comparison, tests were carried out inthe in-reactor loop under identical conditions except that internal electrically heated fuel rod simulators
were used. The test programme is summarised in Table 7.1 [3].
The main parameter was burn-up which was achieved in the FR-2 reactor with fuel centre
temperatures of 100-250 K lower than in commercial PWR fuel and a coolant pressure of only 3 bar. The
rating was slightly above the peak rating of a commercial PWR. The secondary parameter was the rodinternal pressure which ranged from 25-125 bar. The desired initial pressure for each test was produced
by additional pressurizing with helium, just prior to the transient testing, to augment, where necessary,
the fission gas generated during the previous irradiation, but there was no pressure control during testing.
The transients which the rods experienced were initiated by interrupting the loop coolant flow ofsuperheated steam at 300°C, 60 bar, and simultaneously depressurizing the test section of the loop. The

240

test rod power was kept constant at about 4 kW/m until the cladding temperature reached approximately
937°C, then reduced by reactor scram. The procedure resulted in heat-up rates in the range 6-20 K/s andrupture of all the pressurised rods during the heat-up phase. A typical transient test is shown in
Figure 7.8. The effect of “cladding lift-off” can be seen in thermocouples 131 and 132 which were in
the region of major deformation. These show a pronounced drop in temperature as the size of the fuelcladding gap increases as indicated by the fall in pressure.
Table 7.1 FR-2 in-pile tests on fuel behaviour, test matrix
TestseriesNumber ofirradiated rods

Numberof tests

Target burn-up(GWd/tU)

A

−

5

−

Range of internal pressure
at steady state temperature(bar)
25 - 100

B

−

9

0

55 - 90

Irradiated rods
(main parameter:burn-up)

C
E
F
G1
G2/G3

6
6
6
6
6

5
5
5
5
5

2.5
8
20
35
35

25 - 110
25 - 120
45 - 85
50 - 90
60 - 125

Electrically heated fuelrod simulators(main parameter:internal pressure)

BSS

−

8

−

20 - 110Types of tests
Calibration, scoping
Unirradiated rods (mainparameter: internalpressure)

Figure 7.8 Typical temperature and pressure histories for the FR-2 tests
Measured data of test B3.1

The burst temperatures quoted are considered to be those at the burst location at the time of burst
and were obtained by extrapolation from the nearest cladding thermocouple reading to the burst.
The burst pressure was that measured at the start of the fast pressure drop signifying rupture. The
pertinent time after initiation of the transient is called the burst time.
The pressurised rods exhibited circumferential straining over their entire heated length. The axial
deformation profile was in general influenced by the power profile and locally by thermocouples, themaximum strain and burst occurring at or near the peak power position. Figure 7.9 shows the strain
profiles for unirradiated rods (a, b) and for irradiated rods (c, d).
241

Figure 7.9 Relative increase of total void volume
vs maximum circumferential elongation (a) and deformation profiles for tests below the average (b),above the average (c), and tests F1 through F5 representing the average (d)In Test E5, the reactor was scrammed at the onset of ballooning in contrast with the other tests sothat the cladding temperature decreased whilst the major part of the deformation was occurring. Thisrod deformed to the limit of 67% where it contacted the shroud over an axial length of 10 cm.
Presumably ,the trapping of the bulge by the shroud caused the deformation to extend axially. The
post-test neutron radiograph is shown in Figure 7.10.
The burst strains of irradiated, unirradiated and electrically heated rods are shown in Figure 7.11.
There was no influence of irradiation damage, iodine or other fission products on the deformation andrupture. Low ductility failures due to iodine stress-corrosion cracking are not likely at temperatures
above 700°C even if it is assumed that there is complete release of iodine from the high burn-up fuel[25]. Also the effects of irradiation damage on the cladding are annealed out when the temperature
exceeds 700°C [12].
242Figure 7.10 Posttest neutron radiographof test E5 fuel rod

Figure 7.11 Maximum circumferential strain
vs burst temperature

There was essentially no additional cracking of the irradiated fuel pellets during the transient
tests. The mean fragment size was about 3 mm. Only a small additional amount of fission gas was
released during testing.
Neutron radiographs of the rods after testing showed that in the regions of major deformation the
UO2 fuel pellets had completely fragmented and the fragments relocated outward and downward
filling the space in the fuel rod created by the diametral expansion of the cladding. There areindications from three thermocouples placed in the upper end region of the fuel stack that collapse of
the fuel column occurred at the time of burst, since the temperature monitored by these fell
dramatically at burst whilst others mounted lower down the fuel rod behaved normally.
The filling ratio of the free space resulting from the clad ballooning depends on the granulometryof the fuel fragments. The analysis of the fuel particle size distribution for the rods of each tests seriesshows very similar distributions for the burn-ups in the range 2.5 to 35 GWd/tU with 2 peaks near
2 mm and 3.15 mm in particle size; the average particle size, calculated over the whole of theirradiated rods, is 2.78 mm. The measurement of the local fuel mass per unit rod internal volume in thesamples used for the particle size analysis has also provided an estimate of the filling ratio for thesesamples. Figure 7.12 shows, for most of the samples, a decrease in the fuel mass per unit rod volume
corresponding to the increase of volume without fuel relocation; in fact, this evaluation concerns only
the samples with minor circumferential elongation (<30%); the two samples that lay apart the previous
trend were taken from test E5 with elongations of 48% and 67.5% respectively, where the measured
fuel mass per unit volume corresponds to a filling ratio of 55.5% and 61.5% respectively.

243

Figure 7.12 Fuel mass per unit volume of deformed cladding tube
after relocation during LOCA burst test

7.3.1.2 Single rod tests in the PBF
The LOC series [26] of large break LOCA simulation experiments were carried out in the Power
Burst Facility (PBF) at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) in the United States ofAmerica.
The test programme was designed to investigate the two major parameters determining cladding
circumferential strain during ballooning, i.e. cladding temperature and differential pressure, using both
unirradiated and irradiated rods. In each PBF LOCA test, there were four separated 15×15 type PWR testrods 0.91 m long, two of which were internally pressurised to values representative of PWR rods at startof life and two which were pressurised to values representative of high burn-up rods. The plenum
volume was scaled in proportion to the active length compared to that of a full length rod. One of eachtype of pressurised rod had been previously irradiated in the Saxton PWR, under conditions typical ofcommercial power reactors. The fuel rod and shroud design along with details of the instrumentation andtest system are given in [26]. Peak cladding temperatures of 797, 917 and 1 077°C were planned to beattained in the tests by varying the rod power history and time of critical heat flux (CHF). Thesetemperatures correspond respectively to the region where maximum ductility occurs in α-phase Zircaloy,
the strain-rate-dependent ductility trough in the transition region from α to β phase, and the region of
maximum ductility in the β phase under oxidizing conditions.
Each test with four single rods consisted of a pre-blow-down power calibration and decay heatbuild-up, blow-down (depressurisation of the coolant) and test termination by rapid quenching. During
depressurisation, the normally sub-cooled water surrounding each test rod flashed to steam as thecoolant was released through the cold leg and the cladding temperature increased.
The axial power profile along the fuel rods was shaped to flatten the power in the centre third of
the active fuel length to simulate conditions typical of the central region of a PWR core. The reactor
power was controlled during blow-down by the PBF transient rods and programmed to follow thepower function, determined in pre-test calculations, necessary for additional heating of the test rods sothat they might reach and maintain the desired test temperatures.
Out of the thirteen rods tested in the LOC series, nine ballooned and ruptured, two did not burst
and two failed to achieve the planned transient owing to malfunction of the equipment. The thermal andmechanical behaviour data for the eleven rods which were satisfactorily tested are given in Table 7.2
244

The cladding strain was generally concentrated within the axial zone of uniform temperature, i.e.
between 0.2 and 0.5 m from the bottom of the fuel stack and failure generally occurred between 0.2
and 0.4 m.
The circumferential strain at the burst elevation and over the axial zone of uniform temperature
was greater in the rods previously irradiated in Saxton PWR than in the unirradiated rods for both tests
which burst in the high α region (~800°C) and the α+β region (~840°C) (Figures 7.13 and 7.14).
Metallographic examination showed that the wall thinning was primarily concentrated in the
burst region of the cladding of the unirradiated rod, whereas in the case of the previously irradiated rod
the wall thinning was more uniformly distributed around the circumference.
This difference is likely to be associated with a more uniform temperature around the circumference
as the cladding creep is very dependent on temperature. This encouraged uniform “lift-off” of thecladding from the fuel; thus avoiding or substantially delaying operation of the “hot-side straight”
effect which limits circumferential strain. A possible cause of more uniform temperature around thecircumference is more intimate contact between the cladding of the previously power-reactorirradiated rods and the fuel compared with fresh fuel rods where the pellet-clad gap can vary around apellet and along the rod. Further supporting evidence for this effect can be obtained by comparing thedeformation of Rods 7A and 7B. Since fresh rod 7B suffered extensive cladding collapse onto the fuelstack during test LOC-5B and then was ballooned and ruptured during test LOC-5C, whilst theidentical fresh rod 7A ballooned and ruptured during LOC-5A which had nearly identical thermal
hydraulic conditions with test LOC-5C, the only difference should be the effect of a morecircumferentially uniform gap conductance.
A comparison of the axial strain profiles of rods 7A and B is given in Figure 7.15. Rod 7A, which
was undeformed prior to blow-down, burst with a circumferential strain of 19% whereas thepreviously collapsed cladding of Rod 7B ruptured with a strain of 48%, although the maximum strain(about 56%) was found elsewhere on the rod. It is suggested that sufficient negative feedback effects[5] halted the strain at the maximum region and that the changing thermal hydraulics then shifted the
maximum temperature region above 0.2 m where failure eventually occurred.
Figure 7.13 Comparisons of the axial profiles of cladding circumferential strain
in the high pressure fresh and irradiated rods, rods 11 and 12, which burst in the α phase(LOC tests in PBF, [26])245Table 7.2 Summary of cladding deformation data from Tests LOC-3, LOC-5 and LOC-6
Test
LOC-3

LOC-5

LOC-6

Rod
Number
1
2
3
4
6
7A
7B
9
10
11
12

Initial Pressure
(Mpa)
2.45
2.38
4.92
4.75
2.41
4.83
4.83
2.41
2.41
4.74d
4.83

Burn-up(MWd/t)
0
15960
0
16620
17660
0
0
0
10800
0
10800

Maximum Circumferential
Elongation (%)
29
40
20
41.6
35
19
48
<1
13.6
31
74

Axial Extent ofDeformation >5% (m)0.2
to 0.60.5
to 0.60.15 to 0.6
0.10 to 0.65
0.13 to 0.65
0.10 to 0.60
0.10 to 0.60−c0.25 to 0.56
0.25 to 0.43
0.22 to 0.52

a. Temperature in parentheses is the best estimate within the range estimated from the cladding microstructure.
b. This is the heating rate from the cladding surface thermocouples at 0.625 m above the bottom of the fuel.
c. Cladding did not fail.
d. The initial internal pressure was probably about 12 Mpa, due to a coolant leak and subsequent formation of
steam.

Figure 7.14 Comparisons of the axial profiles of cladding circumferential strain in the highpressure fresh and irradiated rods, rods 3 and 4, which burst in the α+β transition(LOC tests in PBF, [26])246Table 7.2 Summary of cladding deformation data from Tests LOC-3, LOC-5 and LOC-6
Location of Cladding
Failure (m)
0.257
0.543
0.244
0.320
0.507
0.258
0.305
−c
−c
0.374
0.360

FailureTime (s)
15.0
7.9
10.1
13.1
10.5
2.75
7.8
−
−
5.2
18.2

Cladding Burst
Temperaturea (K)1 140 to 1 200 (1 190)
1 300 to 1 350 (1 300)
1 105 to 1 130 (1 110)
1 110 to 1 140 (1 120)
1 300 to 1 400 (1 350)
1 130 to 1 230 (1 160)
1 300 to 1 900 (1 350)−−
1 010 to 1 105 (1 098)
1 010 to 1 105 (1 066)

Heating
Rateb (K/s)
4.3
20.0
15.0
15.0
0
100.0
70.0
−
−
100.0
0

Burst Pressure
(Mpa)
1.6
1.0
5.1
4.8
0.6
3.5
0.7
−
−
14.0
5.3

Test
LOC-3

LOC-5

LOC-6

a. Temperature in parentheses is the best estimate within the range estimated from the cladding microstructure.
b. This is the heating rate from the cladding surface thermocouples at 0.625 m above the bottom of the fuel.
c. Cladding did not fail.
d. The initial internal pressure was probably about 12 Mpa, due to a coolant leak and subsequent formation of
steam.

Figure 7.15 Comparisons of the axial profiles of cladding circumferential strain
on the unirradiated high pressure rods, rods 7A and 7B
with initially undeformed and collapsed cladding (LOC tests in PBF, [26])7.3.1.3 Single rod tests in the ESSOR reactor
Six tests were performed in the EOLO-JR facility in the ESSOR reactor Ispra, Italy to study theballooning behaviour of PWR-KWU type fresh fuel rods in a simulated LOCA transient [27].
The test specimens contained a 1 m long stack of natural UO2 pellets 9.10 mm o.d. inside
Zircaloy-4 cladding (10.75 mm o.d. 9.3 mm i.d.). They were pressurised cold to about 4.8 MPa via a
gas line to the rod plenum. A pressure transducer which was outside the reactor core was connected
into this line to record the change in pressure during the test and indicate rupture.
The external heat transfer medium was a helium +5% oxygen mixture [28] and simulated spacer
grids were placed at 0.25 and 0.75 m elevations.
247

The tests were carried out by adjusting the reactor until the rod developed the prescribed power
the clad temperature being controlled at 550°C by adjusting the gas circulation. This temperature washeld for about two hours to allow detailed measurements of the initial state of the rod. After these had
been made the coolant flow was reduced to allow the test rod to increase in temperature at about 3 K/s
to the desired value in the range 700-810°C for the particular test. This temperature was maintained bycontrol of the gas flow until the cladding had deformed and ruptured. The reactor was then scrammed
to cool the specimen. This sequence is shown schematically in Figure 7.16.
The first test was devoted to calibrating the instrumentation. In the subsequent five tests, the rods
bulged and ruptured at five different control temperatures in the high α phase region (724-807°C).
Figure 7.16 Test procedure for EOLO tests

Table 7.3 Summary of the main measurements in the EOLO tests

Details of the main measurements made during these tests are given in Table 7.3 and in
Figure 7.17 the axial strain profiles, azimuthal temperature measurements and position of bursts are
given. The latter occurred very close to the measured maximum temperature in all cases.
248

Figure 7.17 Post-irradiation diametral metrology of the five burst claddingsin the EOLO experiments [27]The rod pressure and clad temperature during the test EOLO 2 are shown in Figure 7.18 and theclad temperature and neutron flux profiles in Figure 7.19. In four of the tests the burst occurred at theelevation 0.65 m which is close to the estimated position of the peak clad temperature, but in EOLO 3
the burst elevation was 0.45 m. This test had the highest clad temperature and at the end of thetemperature ramp, the coolant flow had to be reduced to zero to achieve this. The effect was todisplace the peak temperature elevation.
Figure 7.18 EOLO 2 evolution of the cladding temperature at the level 0.65 m,
coolant flow and rod fill gas pressure during the test [27]249The results showed that significant axial and circumferential temperature gradients developed
during the test indicating the operation of the stabilising strain-cooling effect [5] and the “hot sidestraight” effect, which tends to keep clad in contact with the fuel at one side.
Figure 7.19 EOLO-2 clad temperature and neutron flux axial profiles during the test

7.3.1.4 Single rod tests in the SILOE reactor
Experiments have been carried out in the FLASH loop in the SILOE reactor, using single
300 mm long rods [29]. The primary aim of the programme was to study fission product release during
a LOCA, but data have also been obtained on cladding deformation and oxidation and on fuel stack
behaviour. The loop was blown down with residual fission power simulating decay heating, and wasthen reflooded. In the FLASH-1 to FLASH-4 experiments which were performed on fresh fuel rods
preconditioned to low burn-ups at about 35 to 40 kW/m, peak strains of 18-62% were recorded. These
data have been applied to validation of the CUPIDON code [30]. The amount of released gases
corresponded roughly to the available gas inventory in the rod free volume and the fission productrelease to the quench water was very low.
The FLASH-5 experiment [31] was performed on a rod refabricated from a 4 cycle PWR fuel rod
with a burn-up of 50.3 MWd/kgU. Before the transient it was irradiated a few weeks in the SILOE
reactor in order to refresh the short-lived fission products adding 1.4 MWd/kg to the burn-up. The rod
reached a temperature of 1 350°C in the transient and a strain of 16%. The low rupture strain is
explained by the large azimuthal temperature differences of the rod which exceeded 110 K at the timeof burst. In the FLASH-5 experiment, a fine fuel fragmentation was observed near the maximum flux
level as well as a significant displacement of fuel fragments at the rupture level despite the low rupturestrain (Figure 7.20).
In the FLASH-5 experiment, the amount of released gases was an order of magnitude larger thanin the experiments on fresh rods and even larger for the fission product release to the water. However,this result was attributed mostly to oxidation of fuel by steam after clad rupture.

250

Figure 7.20 Appearance of fuel at rupture plane in the FLASH-5 experiment7.3.1.5 Multi-rod tests in the NRU reactor
Multi-rod tests in a test loop of the NRU reactor at Chalk River, Canada, have been carried out onbehalf of the US NRC and the UKAEA. These tests used full length PWR fuel rods of the 17×17 type,which are about two feet longer than the core of the reactor so that the bottom one and a half intergrid
lengths and the top one half of an intergrid length are not in the neutron flux. In tests MT-1 to 4, amaximum of 12 rods were pressurised so that they could bulge and rupture. These were arranged in a
cruciform shape and surrounded by guard rods which did not deform. The guard rods were spaced at
the standard pitch of the pressurised rods so that the latter needed to strain over 60% before there wassufficient contact with the guard rods for the bulges to be restrained.
The tests were carried out using fresh UO2 fuel “conditioned” by briefly raising to full power
three times just prior to the experiment. Post irradiation examination [32] showed that this treatment
cracked the fuel pellets in a similar manner to fuel in a power reactor; however no other irradiation
effects can be simulated by this treatment. In the tests proper the reactor power was raised to a level
equivalent to decay heat and the assembly cooled by flowing steam. The transient was initiated by
shutting off the steam flow and allowing the assembly to heat up under adiabatic conditions achieving
a temperature increase of about 8 K/s.
The transient could then be terminated by tripping the reactor. Alternatively two-phase coolingconditions could be created by admitting water to the bottom of the test section. This reflooding waterproduced enhanced cooling which checked the temperature ramp, producing a flat-topped transient,and ultimately quenched the assembly. In three of the tests, MT-1, 2 and 4, the deformation occurred
during the ramp part of the transient in steam whereas in MT-3 the major deformation occurred during
the flat-topped portion of the transient under two-phase cooling conditions. The distribution of strain
along the rods in the MT series is shown in Figures 7.21 to 7.24. It is evident that substantial co-planar
deformations were produced and that the grids had a major influence in restraining the deformation
locally. In MT-3, the grids also had a significant effect on the axial shape of the balloons. This resultsfrom de-superheating of the steam by water droplets when the two-phase coolant experiences
turbulence as it encounters and passes through the grid structures. Thus the onset of significant strain
occurs in the top end of the intergrid space and is terminated by the downstream grid (Figure 7.23)
producing the characteristic “carrot” shaped balloon.
In MT-1, 2 and particularly MT-4, there were two peaks in the deformation in between grids. The
reason for this is unknown.

251Figure 7.21 Axial distribution of strain
in NRU MT-1 test

Figure 7.22 Axial distribution of strain
in the NRU MT-2 test

Figure 7.23 Axial distribution of strain
in the NRU MT-3 test

Figure 7.24 Axial distribution of strain
in the NRU MT-4 test

In MT-2, the ruptures occurred early in the transient. In this test, it is likely that the fragmented
fuel slumped into the bulged regions when the rods suffered the shock of bursting as in the case of the
FR-2 tests described in Section 7.3.1.1. Thus, during the remainder of the transient where two-phaseflow conditions existed for 80 s, whilst the ruptured regions were above 777°C [33], the conditions
existed for generating local excessive cladding temperatures by increased volume of fuel in theballooned regions as suggested in an analytical study by Bergquist [34]. This mechanism has also beenreviewed by Broughton et al. [35]. However, there was no evidence of excessive temperatures being
achieved in those regions. The surfaces of the ballooned regions appeared similar to the other parts of
the rods, and no evidence of embrittlement emerged during PIE.
Post irradiation examination of the rods from the MT series 1-4 showed that except for the actual
burst positions or where they were dented by the impact of adjacent bursts, the bulges remained
circular [36]. This indicates that the conditions for mechanical restraint from rod to rod interaction as
seen in tests with a greater number of pressurised rods (Sections 7.3.2.3, 7.3.2.4 and 7.3.2.7) were notpresent. Haste [37] has modelled the effect of there being more pressurised rods and deduced that theirpresence would result in a reduction of the “total” coolant flow area from 55% as measured to 70%.
These calculations do not include any effect of clad denting owing to non-simultaneous bursts.
A further test MT-6A was carried out with all the 21 rods of a 5×5 array minus the corner rods,pressurised. All the rods ruptured during the ramp part of the transient in near adiabatic conditions.
252

Preliminary examination of the bundle has been carried out by cutting holes in the shroud. This
showed that all the ruptures occurred in the inward looking direction and complete rod-to-rod
interaction was observed at one elevation. Grandjean notes that this test is never mentioned in the PNL
summary reports and speculates that the validity of this test has been deemed insufficient and theresults have therefore not been retained in the data base of the experiments [24].
7.3.1.6 Multi-rod tests in the PHEBUS loop
The CEA has been carrying out a programme in the PHEBUS loop, which is installed in a pooltype reactor, to study the behaviour of 5×5 fuel rod bundles in a simulated PWR large break LOCA
[21-23]. The rods have an active length of 800 mm and are of the 17×17 PWR type. The first seriesconsisting of eight thermal hydraulic experiments using unpressurised rods and one test withpressurised rods [20] was started in 1980 and completed in 1982. These experiments were carried out
with the fuel rod bundle contained within an unheated shroud. In the burst test (215P), twenty-one of
the rods were initially pressurised to 4 MPa to cause them to burst in the high α-phase region, theremainder i.e. rods 2, 4, 6 and 16 did not deform owing to their low internal pressure. The plenum
volume was 3.2 cm3.
The pressurised rods burst within 14 s of one another at the top of the ramp position of thetransient at about 843°C in steam, just prior to reflooding (Figure 7.25). The scatter in burst times is
considered to have resulted from non-uniform rewetting which affected clad deformation byemphasising circumferential temperature gradients [20]. Examination of the bundle showed the claddeformations to be carrot shaped and co-planar (Figure 7.26) with strains greater than 33% over about
80 mm in those rods in the central 3×2 array which had not been affected by the non-uniform rewetting i.e. rods 7, 8, 9, 12, 13 and 14.
The strains in the peripheral rods were appreciably lower, 15-35%, compared with those in thecentral 3×2 array, 43-53%. This is an expected consequence arising from the steep circumferential
temperature gradients induced by the unheated shroud [20]. Nine of the 21 pressurised rods had strains
greater than or equal to the maximum strain of 24% seen in the three central rods 17, 18 and 19
affected by non-uniform rewetting.
Figure 7.25 PHEBUS test 215P. History of clad temperatures measured between two grid spacers

253

Figure 7.26 PHEBUS test 215P. Axial deformation profile between interior spacer grids
and flow area restriction vs distance from bottom of fuel stack

The four tie rods (Figure 7.27) provided sufficient mechanical restraint to induce the balloons in
the 3×2 array to interact and the central rod adopted an almost square shape i.e. similar to those seen inout of reactor tests where there had been restraint [38-40] (Figure 7.28). The average flow restriction
for the central 3×3 array i.e. including the three rods with low strains was 65% [20]. However, thegreatest individual flow channel reduction was approximately 80%.
Compared to the NRU-MT3 test − keeping apart the very large deformation of one rod in MT-3 –the behaviour of the central rods in PHEBUS 215-P looks similar to that of the central rods in NRU
with respect to the coplanarity of the ruptures and to the corresponding flow blockage ratio.
A second test series was started in 1983 and completed in 1984 [24,41]. Ten tests were
performed. Of these tests, six were performed with pressurised rods to obtain thermomechanical data.
In two of the tests, no reliable data was obtained due to experimental malfunctions.
Figure 7.27 PHEBUS test 215-P. Comparison of maximum burst strains with radial position(Low pressure in rods 2, 4 and 6)

254

Figure 7.28 PHEBUS test 215-P. Metallographic coss sections
at elevations 285 and 252 mm from fuel bottom

Due to the disturbances on the thermohydraulics in the 215-P test, the transient characteristics ofthat test have significantly deviated from those of the target transient. The 215-P test was thus
followed by a series of tests that aimed at solving the encountered problems, particularly the early
rewet of the bundle. This series was concluded by the performance of the 215-R test, which satisfies
most of the features of the reference transient:••••First peak near 12 s, at 850-730°C on central and outer rods respectively.
Temperature drop of 150 to 250°C after about 15 s.
Heat-up ramp at 10°C/s towards a plateau temperature at 1050°C maintained for about 35 s.
Progressive reflooding.

Figure 7.29 shows the temperature histories on fuel and cladding at mid-plane elevation of a nonpressurised rod. It should be noted that, in test 215-R, 3 rods (nr 2, 4 and 6) were not or slightly
pressurised (1 or 5 bar in cold conditions) and that the rods nr 10, 15 and 18 appeared to have lost theirinitial pressurisation. Finally, only 19 rods have experienced a clad ballooning and rupture during the test
transient.
Figure 7.29 PHEBUS test 215-R. Histories of clad and fuel temperatures on Rod 6255

All ruptures of the pressurised rods have occurred after 24 s in the adiabatic heat-up phase. For
inner rods, it can be noticed that the lowest strains correspond to the earliest ruptures, which indicatesthat the rupture conditions have been met under high temperature ramp rate (~25 K/s) without leaving
much time for the development of large strains. For outer rods, the lower temperature level leads tolater ruptures, under a bit slower ramp rate, that should potentially lead to higher burst strains. The
measured rupture strains, actually lower than on central rods, may be explained by the effect of
azimuthal temperature gradients around the cladding, which appeared to be more important on outerrods, located between the hot central rods and the cold shroud and peripheral structures.
The orientation of the ruptures showed a clear trend of rupture orientations towards the hot
regions which are borne on the non-pressurised rods 10 and 18. A comparison of the axial locations ofruptures and ballooned regions between 215-P and 215-R showed that these locations were below theplane of max power for 215-P and above this level for 215-R. A slightly larger extent of the ballooned
regions in 215-R is the result of a flatter axial temperature profile in this test.
In consideration of the 215-P and 215-R tests results, it was chosen, for the following tests, toraise the 1st peak temperature to a higher value in order to investigate the influence of the phasetransformation of Zircaloy, during that temperature excursion, on the deformation and rupture
behaviour of the cladding. Thus test 216 was characterised by temperature levels higher than in thereference case: at 1st peak (920 to 1 000°C on central rods, 800 to 900°C on outer rods) as well as at
plateau temperature following adiabatic heat-up (1 350°C).
The high ramp rate up to the 1st temperature peak has resulted in early ruptures with limited burst
strains, ranging from 15 to 30% for all of the central or outer rods.
The high temperature at the plateau has resulted in a significant oxidation of the Zircaloy
cladding (75 and 62 µm oxide thickness on outer and inner face, respectively, for Rod 9), leading to an
important embrittlement of the cladding which experienced some fractures upon quenching.
The temperature transient in Test 218 followed approximately the target objectives, with:••••

A first temperature peak around 14 s, reaching 930 to 980°C, thus a bit higher than the target
temperature.
A subsequent temperature drop, by 100 to 150°C, thus a bit lower than expected.
A subsequent rise at 12 K/s up to a plateau temperature around 1 200°C, overshot on someTC measurements.
A final slow cooling down to 700°C followed by quenching.

The initial internal pressure of the rods was 3.35 MPa, except for rods 16 and 21 that were
initially pressurised at 0.5 MPa, and rods 8 and 19 with low initial pressure.
For the pressurised central rods, the cladding bursts occurred at the 1st temperature peak or
during the subsequent drop, whereas most of outer rods burst later, around 23 s, during the so-called“adiabatic” heat-up. Thus, burst strains appeared rather low on central rods (11 to 27%), and larger onouter rods (12 to 36%), in spite of the azimuthal temperature gradients being larger on the latter. Burstelevations spread axially over 60 mm for the central rods and over 80 mm for outer rods.
Metallographic examinations performed after the test have shown an average orientation of bursts
towards the bundle center, as displayed on Figure 7.30. The maximum flow blockage ratio, located at
the experimental level + 316 mm from bottom of fuel, reaches 24% for the central rods subgroup and
38% for the outer rods ring.
The post-test examination of the test bundle on 10 transversal cuts, concentrated over 214 mm
and covering notably all the burst elevations, has allowed to determine the azimuthal distribution of256

the clad oxidation at different axial levels and to observe the oxidation microstructures obtained at
different temperature levels. As a function of temperature, measured by available thermocouples, a fairconsistency is observed on the measurements of zirconia thickness on rods in equivalent positions. On
the undeformed Rod 8, the oxide thickness measured on outer side reaches 80 µm at hot level(+314 mm), consistent with the plateau temperature having reached 1 360°C. It has also been observedon this rod, at the same level, the development of a UO2/Zr solid/solid interaction between fuel andclad, leading to the formation of an internal α-Zr layer. A spalling of the outer oxide layer has been
observed on several rods at different locations, which indicates that the oxide layer formed on thecentral Rod 13 at the hottest level should have exceeded 90 µm since the thickness of the inner oxide
layer reaches 83 µm on the measurements at this level.
Figure 7.30 PHEBUS test 218. View of burst strains of rods as projected in a same plane

The measurement of microhardness radial profiles on some rod claddings, as well as of a profile
of oxygen content by microprobe analysis, have confirmed and complemented the visual
microstructural observations obtained from metallographic examinations.
Test 218 has been chosen as the OECD International Standard Problem ISP-19 [42].
In order to avoid the early ruptures that occurred at 1st temperature peak in test 218, the test 219
differed from the previous test by a lower internal pressure of rods (3 MPa versus 3.35 MPa in test
218). Among 25 rods, 21 were pressurised; the 4 corner rods (Rod 1, 5, 20 and 25) were not.
The test objective was to reproduce a temperature transient consistent with the reference scenario,
with the following typical periods:
•
•
•
•
•

A first temperature peak around 930°C.
A subsequent temperature drop to 800°C.
An “adiabatic” heat-up with clad ruptures around 890°C in the α+β metallurgical state.
A temperature plateau at 1 200°C maximum, with a duration allowing to reach 17% averageoxidation on central rods.
A prototypical reflooding phase: slow cooling down to 700°C and final quenching.
257

The actual scenario of the test meets correctly the target objectives, with a 1st temperature peak at
930 ± 20°C, followed by a temperature drop to 800 ± 30°C and a subsequent heat-up towards thetemperature plateau; this plateau phase has been disturbed by an unexpected reactor scram, which
induced a partial cooling; the maximum temperature during that phase reached 1 330°C.
The time of rupture can have been directly determined only on rods instrumented with a pressure
sensor and/or a TC in the plenum. Rupture was observed to occur between 23.8 and 25.4 s on central
rods (except for Rod 19, at 35.8 s) and at 36.6 and 37.1 on outer rods number 24 and 3. No rupture
was thus detected at 1st temperature peak (15 s).
The metallographic examinations that were carried out on a set of transversal cuts of the bundle
show that the rupture elevations spread over 80 mm for the central rods and only over 20 mm for theouter rods. The maximum strains that were measured in these examinations range between 18.6% and46.2% for the central rods, and between 14.5% and 26.4% for the outer rods. This confirms theobservation made in tests 215-P and 215-R of an average strain lower on outer rods than on central
ones, under the influence of larger azimuthal temperature gradients. The flow blockage ratio, notspecified in the analysis report, should have remained limited since the maximum value of the central
rods average strain does not exceed 25%.
Thanks to the high degree of available instrumentation in the test 219, it has been possible toperform a refined study linking the rupture strains on central rods with the azimuthal temperature
differences as derived from different TC measurements. Over the 22-25 s time interval, corresponding
to the main phase of rod deformation, an average temperature difference ΔT has been determined forthe rods number 7, 9, 12, 14 and 19, then correlated with the maximum strain measured on these rods
(Figure 7.31). The resulting correlation between rupture strain and azimuthal temperature difference
has then been successfully applied to different rods of tests 215-R and 218: for Rod 3 of test 218(outer rod that ruptured during adiabatic heat-up) the calculated value of rupture strain is thus 25%, fora measured value at 27%.
The metallograhic examinations performed on a set of transversal cuts of the rod bundle haverevealed an unusual transversal displacement of the rods, as well as a loss of integrity on the clad of
two rods (Rod 8 over about 80 mm and Rod 18 over 60 mm) which may have occurred in regions
embrittled by oxidation.
The measurements of oxide and α layer thickness at hot level, indicate values of the externaloxide thickness ranging from 23 to 72 µm in bounding values for the central rods, with average values
per rod ranging from 31 to 55 µm; the alpha layer thicknesses, always a little larger than the oxide
thicknesses, follow the same distribution. It is notable that the central rods 12 and 13, which remained
intact, are more oxidized than Rods 8 and 18: the evaluation of the oxidation rate with the averageoxide thickness alone leads indeed to values of 18 to 20% for Rods 12 and 13, and only 16 and 13%
for Rods 8 and 18.
A summary of the temperature transients experienced in the five PHEBUS tests described in theprevious section is shown in Figure 7.32. On each temperature curve, black dots indicate the time
range during which ruptures occurred.
Table 7.4 summarises the main thermomechanical results regarding the rod ruptures and strainsobserved in these tests. From this table, the inner rods and outer rods exhibit a distinct overall behaviour;which is reflected by the small standard deviation on the rupture strain for each group of rods.

258

Figure 7.31 PHEBUS test 219. Burst strain vs average azimuthal temperature differencein the 22-25 s time interval of the transient

Figure 7.32 Temperature histories in the PHEBUS LOCA tests

259

Table 7.4 Thermomechanics of the PHEBUS LOCA tests
Test number(Rod pressure)215-P(40 bar)215-R(40 bar)216(40 bar)218(40 bar)219(40 bar)

Burst
time (s)Rod group
Inner 50 – 66
outer 65 – 150
Inner 20 – 25
outer 25 – 30
Inner 14.6 – 17
outer 18.5 – 26.4
Inner 11.5 – 13
outer 15 – 26
Inner 21 – 34
outer 33 ? 36

Burst
temperature(°C)

Orientationof ruptures840? – 830
800 – 860
760 – 830
920 – 1 000
800 – 860
900 – 1 000
820 – 900
850 – 950
820 ? 880

centercentercenterhot pins
centercentercentercentercenter?

Burst strain
Range Mean Std. Dev
(%)
(%)
38
13
20 – 54
15 – 3826.6
6
389
20 – 50
15 – 35
29.6
5.5
20 ? 30
16 – 3123.6
520
5
14 – 27
15 – 3826628
919 – 46
14 – 27
20
4

T at first
peak
(°C)

Mechanicalinteraction

No

Yes

800 – 860
760 – 830
930 – 1 000
760 – 830
930 – 980
860 – 930
910 – 950
850 – 910

Yes
No
No
No

For the inner rods, the ruptures have occurred in the α-phase domain for tests 215-P and 215-R
and in the mixed α+β phase domain for tests 216, 218 and 219. The rupture strains are thus
significantly higher in tests 215-P and 215-R than in the other tests. They are however very close inthese two tests despite the significant difference in temperature ramp rates at the time of ballooning(7 K/s compared to 20 K/s respectively). This can be explained by the fact that strains have been
limited by the large azimuthal temperature differences in test 215-P, whereas the limiting effect in
215-R was mainly the rapidity of the temperature ramp. For the three following tests, where theruptures of central rods have occurred in the mixed phase domain, different adverse effects act
simultaneously on the strain level:••

An increase in β-phase content limits the rupture strain.
A rapid temperature rise also limits, by itself, the rupture strain but also delays the α→βphase transformation, thereby reducing the β-phase content which acts in opposite way.

The application of phase change kinetics models to the three Tests 216, 218 and 219 shows thatsignificant departure from equilibrium phase fractions has been obtained in these tests, ranging fromalmost no α→β transformation at rupture in Tests 216 and 218 to a maximum of 25% phasetransformation in test 219. Owing to the effect of β phase fraction alone, lower strains could have been
expected for the test 219 rods; the observation of an opposite result leads one to conclude that the effectof the temperature ramp rate (lowest in test 219, compared to test 216 and 218) is the dominant factor.
For the outer rods, lower burst strains are generally observed with respect to that of the central
rods. This result has been mainly attributed to the effect of azimuthal temperature difference, larger onouter rods owing to the influence of cold outer structures, particularly in tests 215-P and 215-R wherethese temperature differences were more pronounced. This effect is consistent with the orientations of
the ruptures, which were found to be directed either towards the centre of the bundle (215-P, 216, and218) or towards some hotter non-pressurised rods (215-R and 219). These orientations underline theimportance of radiative transfers between rods and structures on the appearance of “hot spots” thatwill limit the deformation by “hot side straight effect”. In the particular case of test 218, the very rapid
temperature ramp has led to rupture of the central rods at the 1st temperature peak with low burst
strains, whereas the outer rods, which have ruptured later, exhibit a larger mean burst strain.
In summary, the rod thermomechanical behaviour in the PHEBUS tests appeared to be influenced
by different phenomena that may be classified according to their relative order of importance:a)Kinetics of temperature transient.

260

b)
c)

Azimuthal temperature differences.
Kinetics of α→β phase change.

The efficiency of the analysis of such test results will thus highly depend on the capability of thecomputer codes used in these analyses to represent, more or less accurately, the above phenomena.
7.3.1.7 LOCA tests in the Halden reactor
The OECD Halden Reactor Project is a series of in-pile experiments performed in the Halden
Boiling Water reactor, a heavy water cooled and moderated reactor. The project is sponsored by about
twenty organisations from different countries and it is operated by the Norwegian Institutt forEnergiteknikk. The experiments in the Halden reactor are assigned IFA numbers where IFA stands for
Instrumented Fuel Assembly. However, IFA numbered experiments are not limited to fuel assemblies
but can also be structural materials experiments.
There have been two former LOCA programmes in the Halden reactor, the IFA-511.X and IFA-54X
experiments in the early 1980s and the currently running experiment IFA-650.X.
7.3.1.7.1 The IFA-511.X and IFA 54X programme
For a description of the experiments, see Section 5.3.1.4.1. The main objectives of the experiments
were [43]:
1.

2.

3.

To study the thermalhydraulics of emergency core cooling situations, in both the blowdown
and reflood phases, including the rewetting of the fuel rods at various reflood rates, average
linear heat generation rates, and times to reflood (i.e., the start of injection of cold liquid into
the test section).
To compare the behaviour of nuclear fuel rods to that of electrically heated rod of different
types in identical environments, also to serve as reference for laboratories that can perform
experiments only with electrically heated rods.
To overheat nuclear and electrically heated rods to deformation and burst (ballooning) of thecladding tubes.

The results of the thermohydraulic tests will not be described in any detail in the present report.
In summary and conclusion the tests showed that [43] two different temperature responses wereobserved: the sudden drop in temperature close to the saturation value typical of quenching bysubmersion and a progressive decrease in temperature that should indicate precursory cooling. Thisphenomenon was observed in the uppermost and sometimes in the lowest level where the thermal flux
is lower. In many tests premature quenching was observed near the location of spacers.
The quenching response was very much affected by the surface conditions of the cladding tubes.
The presence of a layer of oxide on the cladding surface noticeably improved the heat transfer conditions
during reflooding. Quenching behaviour of the rods thus is dependent on previous test histories.
The quenching times seem not to be influenced by the time to reflood or by the peak temperaturesof the rods but only by the reflood flow rate. There is no definite quenching temperature, but it follows
the peak temperature. Higher peak temperatures lead to higher quenching temperatures.
In the test with electric rigs, the Semiscale heaters (solid type) show delayed quenching at any
reflood rate in comparison with the nuclear rods, whereas REBEKA heaters (simulating pellet-to-cladgap) have a thermal response similar to that of nuclear rods. Quenching times can differ up to a factorof 2 between nuclear and electric rods, the boundary and initial conditions being the same.
261

The IFA-54X experiments have been summarised and analysed by Haste [44]. From Haste’s
perspective the objectives of the test series were:(a) To compare the behaviour of multi-rod nuclear and electrically heated assemblies inotherwise identical thermal hydraulic conditions broadly representative of blowdown andreflood in a PWR.
(b) To undertake several experiments of each type to test the reproducibility of the results.
(c) To aim for conditions which would promote balloons large enough to give significant
interaction between neighbouring rods.
Five ballooning experiments were carried out, three being nuclear heated, IFA-543, IFA-545 andIFA-547, while the other two were electrically heated, IFA-544 and IFA-546. A further nuclear heatedassembly, IFA-541 with unpressurised fuel rods, was used at the start of and during the test series in a
number of tests designed to aid understanding of the thermal hydraulic performance of the assemblies
and to set the conditions for the ballooning tests. The results of the tests have been summarised inTable 7.5.
Before testing the pellets in the nuclear heated tests were preconditioned by ramping to linear
heat ratings of 13, 20 and 28 kW/m for IFA-543, 545 and 547 respectively. Figure 7.33 shows atypical temperature record from one of the ballooning tests.
The other two temperature transients for the nuclear heated tests were similar while the time inthe electrically heated test IFA-544 was much shorter. This was caused by the attempt to match theheating rate in IFA-543. However, since the thermal capacity of the electric heaters was higher thanfor the UO2 fuel, this led to an increased stored energy and a temperature overshoot of about 30 K at
the end of the heat up phase with a consequent much shorter time to rupture. An attempt to use lower
power in the second electric test, IFA-546, led to results which were judged to be unsuitable for crosscomparisons and no further evaluations were done on that experiment.
Table 7.5 Summary of rod burst strains in IFA-54X
Rod
number

Mid-rupture location
above bottom of
fuelled section, mm

Azimuthal orientation
clockwise looking
from assembly top

Rupture hoopstrain, %Fitted constant eccentricity
MABEL-2D

SWEM

IFA-5431
2
2
3
5
Mean(±1 σ)

880
805
730
680
865

335
135
30
140
190

33
25
29
26
39
30.4 ± 5.7

0.36
0.71
0.50
0.65
0.21

0.66
1.00
0.82
1.00
0.43

IFA-5451
2
2
3
5
Mean(±1 σ)

1 087
727
820
774
1 116

~335
~13
270
20
95

26
28
27
30
32
28.6 ± 2.4

0.65
0.55
0.60
0.46
0.39

−
−
−
−
−

262

Table 7.5 Summary of rod burst strains in IFA-54X (Cont’d)Rodnumber

Mid-rupture location
above bottom of
fuelled section, mm

Azimuthal orientation
clockwise looking
from assembly top

IFA-5471
2
2
3
5
Mean(±1 σ)

831
706
757
708
789

~320
~350
340
10
135

Rupture hoopstrain, %

35
22
34
25
31
29.4 ± 5.7

Fitted constant eccentricity

0.30
0.92
0.33
0.71
0.42

−
−
−
−
−

IFA-544
1
727
245
23
0.84
1.00
2
759
280
26
0.65
0.96
2
794
145
25
0.71
1.00#
3
793
0
21
1.00
1.00#
5
808
90
24
0.82
1.00#
23.8 ± 1.9
Mean(±1 σ)
Mean rupture strain, nuclear heating = 29.5 ± 4.5%
Mean rupture strain, electric heating = 23.8 ± 1.9%#: “Hot spot factor” invoked to indicate assumed departure from cosine azimuthal temperature distribution at
low strains

The deformation times in the tests were estimated from pressure readings and confirmed in somecases by CANSWEL-2 [45] and BALLOON [46] code calculations as being 100-150 s in the nuclear
test and about 30 s in the electrical test. This was in the design range for the nuclear tests whereas theelectrical time was ~20 s too short. However in all tests ballooning took place under two-phase flow
conditions with high heat transfer from cladding to coolant as intended in the specification.
Figure 7.33 Temperature transient a cladding level 4 in the IFA-543 ballooning test

263

Extensive post-irradiation examinations of the ballooned bundles were carried out by CEGB staff
working at AEE Winfrith including detailed mensuration, γ scanning and pellet fragmentation studies.
Rod burst strains and rupture orientations are listed in Table 7.5. The results are mainly presented ininternal CEGB documents with the exception of one conference presentation [47]. The key observations
were:(a) The strains in the nuclear heated experiments are consistent amongst each other, despitedetailed differences in the transients and in the degree of pre-conditioning experienced by thefuel pellets.
(b) The strains in the electrical test are lower than those in the nuclear tests, the figures for mean
rupture strain are 23.8 ± 1.9% and 29.5 ± 4.5% respectively.
(c) The rupture sites are randomly orientated. This implies that the direction of rupture was not
dominated by the surroundings i.e. by the presence of unheated outer shroud or downcomers.
These structures did lead to overall lower temperatures on the outer rods, giving longer
rupture times, but did not generate azimuthal temperature gradients comparable with thosegenerated internally by the heat source/cladding asymmetry.
A notable feature of the Halden tests was that the rupture strains were low compared to all othercontemporary bundle calculations. Haste discusses how this observation could be explained by
calculations with the code MABEL-2D [44]. An important input parameter to the calculations is thefuel pellet eccentricity, e. It is defined as the ratio between the offset between fuel and cladding
centres and the fuel cladding gap. Thus e=1 implies that fuel and cladding are in contact along a
generatrix of the cylindrical surfaces and e=0 implies that the gap is constant around the pellet. Pellet
eccentricity e need not be constant during deformation but was assumed to be so in the calculations.
Table 7.5 shows the e-values needed to fit the calculations with the experimental results for MABEL2D calculations by Haste and calculations with the code SWEM by NNC staff [44]. The effect of
eccentricity on rupture strain can be seen in Figure 7.34.
Figure 7.34 Comparison of predictions of rupture strain as a function of pellet excentricity
for MT-3 and IFA-54X

Another possible cause of the low rupture strains could be initial wall thickness variations.
Therefore the post-irradiation examination included detailed measurements of azimuthal wall
thickness variations at different axial positions for rods from IFA-543, 544 and 545. The experimental
264

work was supported by BALLOON code calculations to show how different combinations ofazimuthal temperature variations and initial wall thickness variations affect the azimuthal wall
thickness variation at various strains up to rupture.
The experimental wall thickness data showed that strain localisation increases as strain increases.
The azimuthal location of the wall thickness minimum varies systematically with axial location so thatthe locus of the minimum traces out a helix on the cladding surface. In contrast, very little rotation wasobserved in the electrically heated IFA-544 specimens, the minimum wall thickness is independent ofaxial location. The pattern of wall thickness variation in the nuclear rods is similar to that found in the
NRU MT-3 experiment and suggests that the pellet stack adopts a helical configuration as claddeformation proceeds, thereby leading to azimuthal temperature and wall thickness variations resulting
eventually in cladding rupture. The helical configuration can also be seen in Figure 7.10 from the FR-2
tests.
Haste notes that the KfK report [3] describing the results of the FR-2 tests argued that there were
no differences in the ballooning response of nuclear and electrically heated rods (Figure 7.11). The tests
were carried out by ramping single rods in an unheated shroud with the intervening space filled byflowing steam. The KfK test programme however was less sensitive to the difference between heating
methods than the Halden series because: (i) there were fewer tests (only 3) in the alpha-phase region
where the anisotropy of Zircaloy creep lead to relative heater/clad bowing and (ii) the heat transfer
conditions were poorer so that azimuthal temperature gradients for a given eccentricity and strain werelower and burst strains were therefore higher. Differences due to the different heating methods werediluted by other strain-reducing effects such as initial non-uniformities in wall thickness, which canlead to strains down to ~60% for an initial ±2% variation. The Halden tests, with their high heat fluxes
across the pellet/cladding gap during ballooning, are much more sensitive to differences resulting fromthe heating method used.
This good heat transfer in the ballooning phase of the Halden tests led to low rod strains so thatthe third objective of achieving mechanical interaction between rods could not be met. However, theimproved understanding of ballooning achieved from analysis of the test series and other multi-rod
experiments suggests that the objective was not really achievable given the limitations imposed by thetest section design.
7.3.1.7.2 The IFA-650.X programme
The currently (2003-) ongoing Halden experiments numbered IFA-650.X are single pin tests andfocus on effects that are different from those studied in out-of-reactor tests. A prototypical bounding
LOCA transient does not exist, and Halden project participants recommended that the test conditions
be selected to meet the following primary objectives:(a) To maximise the balloon size to promote fuel relocation, and to evaluate its possible effecton cladding temperature and oxidation.
(b) To investigate the extent (if any) of − “secondary transient hydriding at high temperature” −on the inner side of the cladding around the burst region in presence of pellet-cladding
bonding layer.
Target peak clad temperatures (PCT) for the pre-irradiated rods have been set at 800°C and1 100°C for high and medium burn-ups. The new Halden experiments were deemed necessary because
industry trends to high burn-up fuel design and introduction of new cladding materials have generated
a need to re-examine and verify the validity of the safety criteria for loss of coolant accidents. Highburn-up fuel rods irradiated in commercial reactors will be used in this series of tests.
265

The first series of LOCA test runs of the IFA-650 test series [48] were performed in the Halden
reactor using a fresh unpressurised and small-gap PWR rod with low-tin Zr-4 cladding. A total of six
test runs were performed. The target PCTs of ~800 and ~1 100°C were achieved.
The cladding temperature was controlled by the power of the fuel and the outside heater. The
measured temperatures reacted consistently to the power changes during the test runs. It was observedthat the total LHR (fuel + heater) is the major factor that determines the clad temperature transient.
The water spray was successfully tested in two test runs. The effect of the spray is local and only seenon the thermocouples located in the upper part of the fuel rod. Its main purpose is to ensure the correct
conditions for oxidation. No fuel failure occurred during the test. Also technically the rig, the loop,
and all the instrumentation and data collection systems worked well. The first LOCA test series
provided thus a good basis for further experiments planned for pressurised and irradiated fuel rods.
Several pre-test code calculations were performed by outside laboratories as well as by theHalden Project. FRAPTRAN/GENFLO (VTT) and TRAC-BF1 (PSI) calculations were made by theoutside laboratories and FTEMP3, SCTEMP and ALGOR calculations by the Halden Project. The
code calculations gave good simulations of the measured clad temperatures and they will be continued
in the future.
The second trial LOCA test in IFA-650.2 was carried out in May 2004. Before the LOCA test,
two power ramps were performed to pre-crack the fuel pellets. The fuel rod was irradiated for 1.5 days
to accumulate fission products. The test consisted of a blow down phase, heat-up, hold at PCT, andtermination by a reactor scram. The target for peak cladding temperature was 1 050°C. In order toachieve this target, the heat rates of the fuel rod and heater were adjusted to 22 and 17 W/cm,
respectively. These parameters were chosen on the basis of earlier experience obtained during the firsttrial tests in IFA-650.1.
Figure 7.35 Measured clad (TTC1-4) and heater (TCH1-2) temperatures, linear heat rate ofheater (QH) and readings of Co neutron detector (Cobalt ND5) during the LOCA test run

Some results from the LOCA test are graphically shown in Figure 7.35. The cladding
thermocouples showed that the target PCT of 1 050°C was successfully achieved. The peripheral
temperature variation was negligible, i.e. within ±3°C as measured by the upper three thermocouples.
The observed average increase rate of the cladding temperature was 7.8°C/s up to the time of rod
266failure. Failure of the fuel rod (i.e. cladding burst) was detected at a cladding temperature of ~800°C
by means of cladding elongation and rod pressure measurements. The rod pressure rapidly dropped to
58 bar. This is due to the pressure monitoring technique − the bellows expansion is stopped
mechanically. In reality the rod pressure will soon reach the rig pressure (2-3 bar) after ballooning andburst. The hoop stress at failure was calculated to be ~55 MPa on the basis of measured rod pressure.
The rod failure was also detected, after some delay, by the γ monitor mounted on the blow down line.
Several activity peaks of released fission products were also observed shortly after the reactor scramand use of the spray system.
The hold time above 900°C was about 6.5 minutes. In order to provide conditions for oxidationof the cladding, the water spay was intermittently applied during the hold at PCT. Spraying was started
above 900°C and the readings of the clad upper thermocouples (TCC2, TCC3 and TCC4) began todeviate from that of thermocouple TCC1 at the lower end. The duration of each spraying pulse wasabout 1 second and the intervals between the pulses varied from 20 to 40 s. When the spray was used,temperatures of TCC2-4 started to decrease slightly. However, at the same time the heater power was
reduced from about 18 W/cm to 7-8 W/cm in order to keep its temperature below 950°C and hence
this is the main contributor to the decrease in cladding temperature as recorded by TCC2-4.
An extensive post irradiation examination has been performed and presented at a LOCA
workshop meeting in 2005 [49]. Figure 7.36 shows the balloon with relocated fuel pellets. However, itis thought that the relocation mainly occurred due to transport and handling since the in-pile
instrumentation did not reveal any clear indications of fuel relocation. The actual burst was a totally
ductile failure. However, close to the burst location a more brittle crack through the cladding wasobserved (Figure 7.37). Such cracks could be the result of hydriding but hydrogen analyses of the rod
did not show more than about 100 ppm hydrogen near the balloon.
Figure 7.36 Ballooned region with relocated fuel in the Halden IFA-650.2 test

Figure 7.37 Through wall cracks with brittle appearance. Halden IFA-650.2 test

267

IFA-650.3, the first test with pre-irradiated fuel in the Halden Project LOCA test series, wasconducted on April 30, 2005 [50]. The fuel was provided by Framatome ANP and had been irradiatedin a commercial PWR to a high burn-up, 82 MWd/kgU. The experimental arrangements of the third
test were similar to the preceding LOCA tests. The target temperature (800°C) was achieved and a rod
burst occurred at ~780°C in the lower TCC weld area.
The target cladding temperature of 800°C was reached, and the hold time was ~6 min (from burst
to scram). Cladding failure occurred ~266 s after blow-down at ~780°C as evidenced by rod elongation,pressure and cladding temperature measurements as well as the γ monitor on the blow-down line to thedump tank. The average temperature increase rate prior to the burst was 2.4 K/s.
Spraying with short pulses was applied after the burst. The cooling effect of the spray could be seenon the upper cladding thermocouples. The heater power was reduced when approaching the target
temperature, which also explains the slightly decreasing temperatures after reaching the peak cladding
temperature (PCT). The test was terminated by a reactor scram. At the end of the cooling, one longer
spray pulse was applied to enhance the cooling. After the test was finished, the rig was filled with helium.
The first results from the PIE indicate that no large ballooning occurred and the cladding failure
occurred close to the lower TCC weld. Small local ballooning had, however, started also in the middle of
the rod. The rod experienced some uniform cladding deformation (7%). Bowing was also observed in therod. However, no fuel relocation could be detected in-pile, and the PIE results also indicate that no fuelrelocation occurred. The detailed results of the complete PIE of IFA 650.3 are not yet available.
IFA-650.4, a repeat of the first test with pre-irradiated fuel, IFA-650.3, was conducted on
25 April 2006 [51]. The fuel was provided by Framatome ANP and had been irradiated in acommercial PWR to a high burn-up, 92.3 MWd/kgU. The experimental arrangements of the fourth test
were similar to the previous LOCA tests, especially to IFA-650.3. The target temperature (800°C) was
achieved and a cladding burst with fuel relocation occurred.
In the IFA-650.4 test one pre-irradiated fuel rod was located in a standard high-pressure flask,
which was connected to a heavy water loop and a blowdown system. Heating was provided from thefuel and from the heater surrounding the fuel rod. The heater was used for simulating the isothermalboundary conditions. The axial power distribution was measured with three self-powered vanadium
neutron detectors (ND). Rapid power changes were monitored using two fast responding cobalt NDs.
Other rig instrumentation consisted of two cladding surface thermocouples at the upper part of the fuelstack and two above the fuel stack, a cladding extensometer, a pressure sensor at the rod upper end,
two heater thermocouples, and inlet and outlet coolant thermocouples. The power profile wassymmetric and slightly peaked in the middle (axial peak to average power factor ~1.05).
The test was run as planned. The target cladding temperature of 800°C was reached, and the holdtime was ~5 minutes (from burst to scram). Rod overpressure at hot conditions was ~65 bar. Cladding
failure occurred ~336 s after the blowdown at ~785°C, as evidenced by rod elongation, pressure, neutron
detector, and cladding and heater temperature measurements as well as the γ monitor on the blowdown
line to the dump tank. The average temperature increase rate prior to the burst was 1.9 K/s.
Spraying was started 230 s after the burst. The first spray pulse was longer (12 s) than planned(0.5 s pulses every 20 s) and the cooling effect of the spray could be seen as an unfortunate
temperature drop on the cladding and heater thermocouples. The heater power was kept constantthroughout the test and reduced once ~150 s after the burst. The heater was switched off 35 s after
starting the spray. Soon (15 s) after this, the test was terminated by a reactor scram. At the end of thecooling period, one longer spray pulse was applied to enhance the cooling. After the test was finished,
the rig was filled with helium.
268

The results from the post-test γ scanning indicate that a large ballooning in the middle of the rod
and burst with fuel relocation occurred. The ballooning, burst, and fuel relocation were detected inpile and were verified by the γ scanning performed at Halden. The PIE of IFA-650.4 is still in progress
and the detailed results are thus not yet available
7.3.2 Out-of-reactor tests
7.3.2.1 The REBEKA programme at Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe (KfK)This programme [7] used single and multi-rod geometries to investigate the deformation of
Zircaloy fuel cladding during the refilling and reflooding phases of a LOCA (Section 5.3.2.1). The
REBEKA test philosophy and objectives are given in Figure 7.38 [52-53].
Many single rod tests have been carried out from which two important features of deformation
have been identified. The first is the so-called “hot-side straight” effect. The second feature is direct
experimental evidence of the influence of azimuthal temperature variations on the total circumferential
strain (Figure 7.39). The test series has also yielded extensive knowledge of the effects of temperatureand heating rate on circumferential burst strain from 970 to 1 400 K (Figure 7.40).
Four multi-rod tests R1 to R4 with hypothetical reactor LOCA conditions, have been carried out
using a 3×3 array of deforming rods surrounded at the same rod pitch by an outer row of unpressurised
guard heaters clad with Inconel. Thus the outer row of deforming rods has to strain about 65% before
bulges can be restrained from bursting by being trapped by two or more rods. The possibility of thisparticular aspect of multi-rod behaviour was investigated in a materials test [54] in stagnant steam andunder reflooding conditions in R5 and R6 which utilised arrays of 7×7 pressurised rods (Figure 7.38)
restrained by a shroud placed at one half a rod pitch from the centres of the outer rods. The conditions
for the first four tests were peak rod power 20 W/cm, internal pressure 70 bar, system pressure 4.5 bar
cold flooding rate ~3 cm/s and heat up rate during the initial temperature ramp about 7 K/s. The
materials test was carried out with reduced power to the rods.
Tests R1 [11], R3 [7], R4 [52, 53], and R5 [55] represent the behaviour of medium-rated
assemblies in the KWU PWR, which for a LOCA are calculated to reach 660-680°C by the time thereflooding water contacts the bottom of their heated length, whilst test R2 represents the behaviour ofa highly rated assembly which is calculated to have reached 850°C at this time.
R-5 was the first test with a 7×7 array, all rods pressurised. The reflooding rate and rod powers
were similar to those used in R-3 but the internal pressure was higher.
The R-6 test [56] had the objective of examining the influence of coolant flow direction on the
deformation thus no reversal of flow direction occurred between the single and two-phase flow
regimes, unlike the previous tests, R1 to R5. This test was selected for analysis using computermodels, as a German Standard Problem (DSP7) and simultaneously as an International Standard
Problem (ISP14).
In R1 [11] there was a small malfunction which caused an additional slug of cooling water to be
introduced at the start of reflooding; this caused the initial temperature drop (Figure 7.41). However,the cladding which had started to deform in the steam phase at the top of the ramp continued to do sofor about 100 s until rupture occurred during the period of two-phase flow. The combination of theincreased surface area owing to clad deformation and the external cooling balanced the heat input sothat the clad temperature remained reasonably constant for over 100 s producing a “flat-topped”
transient (Figure 7.41). The maximum cladding strain was 32% and the maximum coolant channel
blockage ratio 25%. The position of the maximum strain in the rods tended to be between the centre of269

the inter-grid spacing and the next higher grid, i.e. shifted from the centre in the direction of coolant
flow (Figure 7.42). This is a consequence of two phase flow in the presence of spacer grids.
Thermodynamic non-equilibrium results in steam temperatures up to about 870 K within the twophase mixture of superheated steam and saturated water droplets. The turbulence and the break-up ofwater droplets induced by the spacer grids results in desuperheating of the steam and better heattransfer which lowers the temperature of the cladding downstream of each spacer. But superheating
redevelops as the mixture flows along to the next spacer producing an axial temperature gradient of up
to 50 K between two spacer grids at the time of burst (Figure 7.43). This results in an axial shift of the
maximum strains in the rods towards the upstream spacer and enhances the formation of co-planar
deformation, while limiting its axial extent.
Figure 7.38 REBEKA test philosophy and test objectives [52-53]: 325 mm fuel rod simulator: steam atmosphere

Single rod tests– cladding deformation mechanism– influence of circumferential cladding
Separate effect tests

temperature difference on burst strain
burst criterion: 3 900 mm fuel rod simulators: forced flooding

5×5 bundle tests– interaction between thermohydraulics andcladding deformation– influence of spacer grids on cladding deformation– influence of control rod guide thimbles
on cladding deformation: 3 900 mm fuel rod simulators: forced flooding

7×7 bundle tests

Integral tests– rod to rod interaction and failure propagation– influence of coolant flow direction
flow blockage– flow blockage ratio▼
SSYST fuel rod behaviour code270

Figure 7.39 Burst strain vs azimuthal temperature difference in REBEKA out-of-pile tests

Figure 7.40 Burst strain vs burst temperature of Zircaloy claddings [7]271Figure 7.41 First bundle test REBEKA, Test data and test procedure
Starting temperature was 520°C

Figure 7.42 Circumferential strain of the 9 Zircaloy claddings and fuel blockagein the REBEKA 1 experiment [11]In test R-2 [57] the reflooding was delayed to allow the rods to reach 1120 K and in this case all
the deformation occurred rapidly during the heat up phase in superheated steam which was flowing
down the test section simulating the effect of hot leg injection (Figure 7.43). The deformation was
shifted in the direction of the steam coolant flow and large deformation occurred over two intergrid
spaces (Figure 7.44). The bulges tended to be more coplanar than those produced during two-phaseflow i.e. R1, R3, R4. (Compare Figures 7.42, 7.44 and 7.45). The maximum circumferential strain was
64% and the maximum flow blockage 60%.
R-3 [7] was essentially a repeat of R-1 but avoiding the malfunction which produced the
additional cooling. The overall results were similar but the deformation was greater; the strains in tworods exceeded 60% and the maximum flow blockage was 52% (Table 7.6).
272

Figure 7.43 The temperature history at two axial locations in REBEKA 2

Figure 7.44 Circumferential strain of the 9 Zircaloy claddings and fuel blockagein the REBEKA 2 experiment
Axial distribution of rating in fuel simulator

R-4 was a similar reflooding experiment to R-3 but one of the pressurised rods was replaced by a(cooled) simulated control rod guide tube to investigate if the presence of such a tube would result in
lower deformation in the multi-rod array. This rod did cause pronounced azimuthal temperature
differences in adjacent rods but surprisingly the deformation of the array was not only similar to thatof R-3 but maximum strain was greater than in R-3, where there had been identical thermalhydraulicconditions but no “control rod guide tube”. The maximum circumferential strain was 79% and theflow blockage 55%. The deformation and blockage in R-3 and R-4 are compared in Figure 7.45. The
ruptures in R-3 were axially distributed (Figure 7.45) and a similar distribution was seen in R-4.
The cladding deformation characteristics in R-5 were similar to those in R-3 i.e. the regions ofmaximum strain were axially distributed over the intergrid region (Figure 7.46). Thus although thecircumferential strains tended to be higher in R-5 the maximum blockage in both R-3 and R-5 was273

52%. The axial distribution of maximum strains was sufficiently spread so that significant rod to rod
interaction did not occur even though the potential for such interaction was increased by virtue of thelarger number of pressurised rods.
Figure 7.45 Circumferential strain of the 9 Zircaloy claddings and fuel blockagein the REBEKA 3 and REBEKA 4 experiments [7, 52, 53]

In R-6 the rods were pressurised to 60 bar whilst steam at 150°C flowed through the rig. Then apower of about 7.8 kW was applied to each fuel rod simulator causing the bundle to ramp at about
7°C/s to 765°C. The power was reduced to 6.6 kW at this time and reflooding (3 cm/s cold refloodingrate) was initiated.
The maximum internal pressure in the inner 18 rods which behaved in a satisfactory manner was
76.6 bar. The first burst in this group of rods occurred 20.5 s after reflood was initiated and the lastafter 37.7 s. Their axial strain profiles (Figure 7.47) tend to be coplanar and the regions of maximum
strain were shifted in the direction of two-phase coolant flow i.e. away from the downstream grid as in
the MT-3 test (Figure 7.23). The burst strains ranged from about 25 to 65%. The maximum channel
blockage of 60% was very localised, but 50% blockage extended for 10 cm (Figure 7.47).
The main features of the five 5×5 REBEKA tests, the 7×7 tests R-5, R7, and the Standard
Problem Test R-6 are given in Table 7.6274

Table 7.6 Summary of the test program in the REBEKA rig

7a - steam<1b - reflood

1

Reversed

30…
685
100

810

60

Remarks

Reference(c)Max. flow blockage (%)

Intergrid distribution of bursts (mm)Circumferential strain (%)

Pressure (bar)Best-estimate burst temperature (C°)

Temperature measured nearest
to burst at time of burst

Burst data (averaged)

Heat transfer coeff. (W/m2/K)

Flow direction

Coolant flow

Heating rate (K/s)

Bundle size

Test number

Thermal-hydraulics during
cladding deformation- Inner 3×3 pressurised[72]
25 - Only 2 rods burst- High reflood rate at

28

start of burst
2

7

a

steam

a

3

5×5

7
<1b

- steam
7a - reflood
<1b

4

Uni30
870
directional
30…
Reversed
808
100
Reversed95

60- Inner 3×3 pressurised [73]

830

51

44

203

52

- 3×3 pressurised

830

53

46

242

55

- 3×3 pressurised- Control rod guide tube [75][74]

in centre
754

70

63

28

30…
775
100

800

68

49

242

52

- All pressurised

[71]

7a
-4b

- steam
Uni30…
765
directional
100- reflood

790

62

42

140

60

- 2 rods unpressurised- Instrument tube in

[70]

7a
-9b

Uni30…
755
directional 100

790

5

7a
0b

Reversed

7

54

754

0

7×7

55

- 1 W/cm
84 - Inner 3×3 pressurised [76]- 2 rods leakedQuasi
stagnant
steam

M

6

30…
795
100

870

<10

centre57

55

200

66 All pressurised

Common tests conditions:
Heated length: 3 900 mm; decay heat at midpoint: 20 W/cm; axial peaking factor: 1.19; axial power
profile: 7 axial steps (5×5 tests), cosine-shaped (7×7 tests); system pressure: 4 bar; coolant flow: 2 m/s
steam, ~3 cm/s forced flooding from bottom; Zircaloy-4 claddings: 10.75×0.72 mm, stress relieved.
Notes:aDuring heatup.

b

During reflood in the time period of high plastic deformation before burst.

cin Erbacher, F.J. and Leistikow, S., “Zircaloy Fuel Cladding Behavior in a LOCA: A Review”,
Zirc. In the Nucl. Ind.: 7th Int. Symp; ASTM STP P39, pp. 451-488.

275

Figure 7.46 REBEKA-5. Circumferential cladding strain and flow blockage under reversed flow276

Figure 7.47 REBEKA-6. Circumferential cladding strain and flow blockage
under unidirectional flow

7.3.2.2 Single and multi-rod testing at KWU, Erlangen
The KWU (Kraftwerk Union) programme [58-62] consisted of three major phases:
1.
23

Cladding tube material behaviour.
Fuel rod behaviour in single rod geometry.
Fuel rod behaviour in multi-rod geometry.

The test parameters used for studying the above are shown in Figures 7.48 and in Table 7.7277

Figure 7.48 Controlled temperature transient test (left) and creep rupture test
(simulation of 2nd peak, right) in the KWU programme

Table 7.7 Test parameters of single and multirod investigations by KWUTest parameters
Initial pressure

Single rod tests
20-150 bar

Initial temperature
Initial free volume
Temperature range
Heating rate
Holding time
External atmosphere

350°C
40 cm3700-1 000°C
2-28 K/s≤90 s
Air/forced steam(5 kg/h)HeliumPressurizing medium

Multi rod tests
50/65/80 bar (Constant pressure for tests
with convective cooling)
320°C
40 cm3 (tests with forced cooling)
700-900°C
6-25 K/s≤90 s
Air/forced air
10-60 W/m2K
Helium

1. In the material behaviour work KWU compared standard cold worked and stress relieved
cladding with cladding modified as shown below:(a) Recrystallized: 2 h at 610°C in vacuum.
(b) β-quenched from 1 050°C at 50-60 K/s.
(c) Oxidized: layers up to about 40 microns produced by heating at 400-420°C for up to 9 000 h.
(d) Varying wall thickness.
The results of the above investigation are shown in Figures 7.49, 7.50 and 7.51.
Figure 7.49 Burst temperature vs pressure from single rod tests under idealised conditions
Comparison of different initial cladding conditions

278

Figure 7.50 Burst strain vs burst temperature from single rod tests under idealised conditions
Comparison of different cladding materials

Figure 7.51 Burst strain vs wall thickness variation from single rod creep rupture tests
under idealised conditions

The stress and temperature dependence of the strain rate of the cladding tube diameter wasdetermined for the KWU cold-worked and stress-relieved cladding. Experimental values of the stressexponent n and the apparent activation energy Q in the Norton creep equation were obtained [61].
2.

The aspects of fuel rod behaviour in single rod geometry which were examined were:(a) Influence of azimuthal temperature variation on burst strain. Results, Figure 7.52 weresimilar to those of other workers, (KfK, SNL). The degree of tube bending resulting from
azimuthal temperature is plotted in Figure 7.53.
(b) Tube bending which is a characteristic feature of Zircaloy cladding deformation in the alphaphase region. In this study the test specimens were standard KWU cladding. They weredirectly heated to 800°C and caused to deform by internal gas pressure firstly without andsecondly with the influence of imposed circumferential temperature differences produced by
an external heating and cooling device. The upper and lower ends of the tube were restrained
from moving laterally whilst the lower end was free from axial restraint.
The 1st type of experiments showed that axial contraction increased with increasing tangential
strain (Figure 7.54) confirming the findings of similar studies. In the 2nd type of tests, theaverage axial contraction in the ballooned region was measured simultaneously on the hot and279

cold side of the cladding and preferential contraction on the hot side was found (Figure 7.55).
The amount of tube bending was evaluated from the ruptured samples for those tests with anon homogeneous azimuthal temperature distribution. Tube bending increases rapidly withincreasing azimuthal temperature difference (Figure 7.56).
(c) Influence of steam cooling on ductility and axial profile profile of circumferential strain. No
significant deviation could be found when the results of tests in steam were compared withthose produced in air. However the steam flow in the test section shifted the maximum strain
region in the flow direction (Figure 7.57) as has been seen by other workers.
Figure 7.52 Burst strain vs mean normalised azimuthal temperature difference
from single rod creep rupture tests under idealised conditions

Figure 7.53 Tube bending vs normalised azimuthal temperature differencein single rod creep rupture test in air

280

Figure 7.54 Local axial strain vs tangential strain in the plane of maximum deformation

Figure 7.55 Axial strain vs tangential strain for creep rupture tests
with nonhomogeneous temperature distribution on the circumference281

Figure 7.56 Bow vs azimuthal temperature difference

Figure 7.57 Axial profile of circumferential strain for transient test (5 K/s, 50 bar)in air and flowing steam

3. The multi-rod tests were carried out to “investigate whether the results of single rod tests are
influenced by the geometrical and thermal conditions in a multi-rod geometry”, under conditions “wherehigh circumferential strains are expected in order to reach mutual touching of rods”. However in the 3x4
array of rods only the two interior rods could be pressurised and the rod spacings were such that the
deforming rods would need to strain about 65% before contacting the other rods. The tests were carriedout by first heating to 350°C and pressurizing with helium, then after about 20 minutes the rods were
ramped at 10-20 K/s to about 800°C and held until 90 s had elapsed or the central rod(s) burst. The
temperature of the guard rods was kept constant by controlling the power to the internal heaters.
The first series had convective air cooling and the main findings were:●

From tests in which only one of the two central rods was pressurised and the temperature of
the guard rods was either higher or lower it was concluded that: “At a lower temperaturelevel of the surrounding rods the central rod shows the same burst behaviour as in a single
rod test, as was expected. Burst strain and location of burst rupture are not influenced by thesurrounding rods (Figure 7.58). At a higher temperature level of the surrounding rods the282

burst behaviour is influenced in such a way that the burst rupture opening is directed towards
the hottest rod in the neighbourhood. The locally hottest spot of the cladding determines the
rupture behaviour (Figure 7.59).”
Figure 7.58 Indirectly heated multirod test (3×4)
with one isobarically pressurised sample (65 bar) [60]Figure 7.59 Indirectly heated multirod test (3×4)
with one isobarically pressurised sample (65 bar) [60]●

From tests in which both central rods were pressurised and the temperature distribution in
the bundle was rather homogeneous it was concluded that: “With different as well as withequal internal pressure of both central rods no mutual influence on burst behaviour history
and location and size of the ballooning was observed. With different internal pressure therods burst in temporal sequence, with equal internal pressure the rods burst nearly in thesame moment.”

In the second series air was forced through the test section, this caused a “downstream” shift ofaxial temperature and strain maxima, comparable to observations in single rod tests in flowing steam,Figure 7.60. This effect was enhanced if air velocity and thus heat transfer coefficient was increased
otherwise the results were similar to those in the first series. The maximum strain achieved in themultirod tests was intermediate between that of the directly heated creep rupture tests and the fuel rod
simulation tests. This can be seen from Figure 7.61 which summarises the burst strain data from thewhole of the KWU investigations and includes for comparison multi-rod data from the ORNL and
REBEKA tests.
283

Figure 7.60 Axial temperature and strain profile from KWU multirod test with forced air cooling

7.3.2.3 Single and multi-rod testing at the Japanese Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI)
The rod size used in the JAERI tests, which have 7×7 arrays, represents those used in a 15×15
type of PWR fuel assembly.
The first series of tests, summarised in Table 7.8, with the W-3% Re wire heaters and a closefitting unheated shroud, examined the effect of burst temperature in the high α and α+β-phase regions
i.e. 740-920°C on deformation with ramp rates of about 7 K/s. A typical test history is given in
Figure 7.62. There was a slight temperature gradient across the assembly presumably as a result of theunheated shroud which reduced the ramp rate in the outer rows by 1.6 K/s.

284

Figure 7.61 Burst strain vs burst temperature from single rod and multi rod tests (schematically)
Multi rod tests:
Internal pressure ≤ 65 bar
A: Convective air cooling(Sample temp. ≤ surr. Temp.)
B: Convective air cooling(Sample temp. > Surr. Temp.)
C: Forced air cooling(Sample temp.≥ Surr. Temp.)
Single rod tests:
D: Internal heating
Internal pressure ≤ 90 bar)
E: Direct heating (Envelope)Internal pressure ≤ 65 bar)

Figure 7.62 Histories of cladding temperatures and internal pressure in JAERI test 7805

Figure 7.63 shows the axial profile of ballooning in the four tests, where one may observe, as
expected, the highest burst strains for the tests that ruptured in the high α region (test 7, ass. No. 7807)
or in the low α+β region (test 5, ass. No. 7805).

285

Table 7.8 JAERI test matrix of bundle burst tests using W-Re wire heaters
and a close fitting unheated shroud
Bundle N° Steam Flow Rate(g/cm2 min)Heating Rate(°C/s)

Initial Internal
Maximum Internal Burst Temperature
Pressure (kg/cm2) Pressure (kg/cm2)
(°C)

7805

0.44

6.6-8.7(500-860°C)

50

64-70

805-860

7806

0.40

7.3-9.0(500-900°C)

20

26-29

870-920

7807

0.40

5.9-7.2(430-830°C)

70

87-93

750-790

7808

0.44

5.9-7.9(500-890°C)

35

45-48

870-880

Figure 7.63 Axial distribution of ballooning in the JAERI 7×7 multirod tests

Figure 7.64 gives a failure map for test No. 5, showing the axial position of bursts in relation to
the axial temperature profile and the axial extent of circumferential strains greater than 34% (value
corresponding to the contact between two similarly deformed neighbour rods): there appears a clear
trend for a more axially extended deformation on the interior rods than on the peripheral ones, inagreement with the MRBT B5 (Section 7.3.2.4) test results.
In the next series of Tests 9-14, the unheated shroud was replaced by an outer ring of 32 heated
but unpressurised rods. In this series (9-14), the test conditions have been taken similar to those of test
No. 5 which had led to highest deformations: initial internal pressure = 50 bar, temperature ramp rate
= 7 K/s (except in test no. 13). The presence of an outer guard ring of heaters reduced the temperature
gradient between center and periphery of the 7×7 array; this resulted in a greater axial extension of thedeformations that also affects the peripheral rods (Figure 7.65).

286

Figure 7.64 Axial locations of burst position and ballooned region in assembly No. 7805

Figure 7.65 Axial locations of burst position and ballooned region in assembly No. 7910

In test No.10, all the 49 rods were heated. In test No.11, the central rod was not heated, simulating
a control rod guide tube; the deformations were not as axially extended as in test no.10, but remained
mostly coplanar (Figure 7.66). Test 13, as already mentioned, was run with a very low ramp rate(<1 K/s) and the rupture of rods in the range 765-800°C (high α domain) have led to extensive
deformations, significantly coplanar, with a maximum flow channel restriction reaching 87.6%.
In the tests 12 and 14, four rods were unheated, simulating in some extent the presence of guidetubes. Despite the azimuthal temperature differences induced by these unheated rods, significant andaxially extended deformations (> 34% over more than 20 cm) were observed in some rods adjacent to287

unheated rods (Figure 7.67). Although the conditions in tests 12 and 14 were quasi identical, a detailed
examination of the results in Figure 7.67 reveals a different behaviour, in these two tests, of the rods
adjacent to unheated rods (other than for 2 rods aligned and in between 2 unheated ones, as inpositions C3, C4, D5 or E5), behaviour that resulted in longer balloons in test 14.
In a deeper analysis of these tests, Kawasaki [38] has suggested that the deformation on a heatedrod adjacent to a non heated one was also highly influenced by the temperature difference with theother neighbours. This proposal was supported by a specific investigation in which analytical tests
were performed on a 3×3 heated rods array, the central rod being pressurised and surrounded by 8
unpressurised rods [63]. The results of these tests, schematised on Figure 7.68, have allowed thefollowing understanding:•

When the central rod temperature is lower than those of adjacent rods, the deformation
remains limited, the rupture occurring before or just at the instant of contact with aneighbour; a local hot spot, where the straining will initiate, will indeed become accentuatedby the closeness of the hotter neighbour, and will lead to a localised burst.

•

When the central rod temperature is greater than, or equal to, those of adjacent rods, adeformation starting on a local hot spot will be counteracted and stopped while the closenessand possible contact of the deforming portion with the colder neighbour, thus resulting in aradial, then axial, carry over and extension of the straining process (“long ballooning”), thisas much as the temperature difference with cold neighbours is high. Ruptures are thus
observed at the points of maximum stress where curvature reverses between concave
portions contacting the neighbour rods and the bulging that develop in the interval between
two adjacent rods. In one particular test with 2 peripheral rods unheated, it was observed thata 50 K azimuthal temperature difference was not sufficient to induce a localised strainingthat could lead to early rupture before contact with neighbours.

Figure 7.66 Axial locations of burst position and ballooned region in assembly No. 7911

288

Figure 7.67 Portions of tubes with greater than 34% strain in assembly 7912

This particular investigation led to the conclusion that the deformation behaviour of a cladding ina multi-rod array is not only influenced by the temperature gradients on that cladding but also by thetemperature differences with the facing areas in adjacent rods.

289

Figure 7.68 Illustrated deformation mechanism of a rod surrounded by external heater

In the final test series (15-24), a shroud was introduced around the 7×7 central bundle and wasbacked by an outer ring of guard sub-heaters; the clearance with the bundle outer rods was 9 mm intests 15 and 16, and at 3.7 mm thereafter. According to the shroud positioning in test 17 to 24,
simulating the outer rods in a large assembly, the main objective of this part of the program was toinvestigate an upper bounding value of the flow restriction in the bundle with the differential impact ofthe presence of control rod guide tubes. To this end, in tests 21 to 24, four control rod guide tubes were
substituted for pressurised rods and the test conditions are duplicated from tests 18-21. The initialpressure of heated rods was 50 bar as in previous tests and two heating rates were used, 1 K/s and 7 K/s.
The results of this test series have provided unexpected findings:●

In all tests with guide tubes, the ballooning behaviour of rods neighbouring a guide tube was
not different from other rods, despite the larger azimuthal temperature gradient expected inthese rods.

●

The maximum flow blockage ratio in a bundle with control rod guide tubes was almost thesame as that without guide tubes, and the axial extent of the highly restricted portion waseven higher in tests with guide tubes (Figure 7.69) in agreement with the result of the test
REBEKA-4 (Section 7.3.2.1).

290

Figure 7.69 Axial locations of burst position and ballooned region in tests No. 20 and 21
W/O CONT. ROD●

WITH CONT. RODS

There was little effect of the heating rate on the degree and extent of flow blockage: 91%
maximum restriction for 1 K/s, and 87% for 7 K/s, see Figure 7.70.
Figure 7.70 Axial locations of channel blockage in tests No. 19 and 21, 20 and 23

In considering the 7 K/s ramp rate as more realistic and in limiting the cross-sectional area of aruptured cladding at that of a circumference of same length as the clad length at rupture, the authors
have evaluated more realistically an upper bound of flow restriction near 80% [39]. However, it
should be noted that local flow blockage ratios higher than 95% have been determined in the area of
maximum flow restriction in test 24 under 7 K/s heating rate (Figure 7.71).

291

Figure 7.71 Cross-section of maximum blockage in test No. 24 [24]The following conclusions for the JAERI multi-rod tests are due to C. Grandjean [24]. He firstnotes that the tests were carried out under similar thermalhydraulic conditions to those in MRBT tests
B3 and B5 and that they show results consistent with those of MRBT tests, see next section. The
common feature of all these tests is the axial extension of the deformation, which develops after
contact without rupture between adjacent rods.
The important result provided by JAERI multi-rod tests is related to the influence of the presenceof control rod guide tubes: not only the deformation on rods adjacent to a guide tube is, in most cases,
not lower than on other rods, despite the azimuthal temperature gradients induced by the cold guidetube, but the flow blockage ratio in the bundle section is even slightly increased and axially more
extended. This surprising result supports the result of test REBEKA-4 (carried out however in morefavourable thermal hydraulic conditions) and can be explained by the effect of the mechanicalinteraction between a rod and an adjacent guide tube: due to the larger diameter of the latter, thecontact of a deforming neighbour rod occurs with a moderate strain (~20%) before burst. This early
contact leads to a transfer of straining on other portions of the rod circumference, which homogenises
the azimuthal temperature field, then to an axial extension of the deformation.
To summarise, it appears that, in a rod bundle, the mechanical interaction between rods, and moreparticularly with a guide tube, may lead to an increase of the burst strains and of the flow blockage:•

On one hand as a result of a mechanical interruption of the “hot side straight effect” process(the importance of which on the limitation of burst strain has been evidenced in single rod
tests).

•On the other hand, as a result of the re-homogenizing of the azimuthal temperature
distribution.

It may thus be concluded that, under conditions conducive to significant mechanical interactions
between rods, the spatial distribution of burst strains and of the resulting flow blockage, cannot berealistically evaluated on the basis of single rod tests alone.

292

7.3.2.4 The single and multi-rod burst test (MRBT) programme at Oak Ridge National Laboratory(ORNL)A series of tests at ORNL sponsored by the US NRC started in 1975 and had the following
objectives: effects of rod to rod interaction on failure behaviour, magnitude and geometry of resulting
blockage patterns, rupture temperature-pressure inter-relationships, flow resistance coefficients as afunction of flow blockage and to provide an internally consistent data set that is amenable to statisticalanalysis. A description of the experimental facilities is given in Section 5.2.2.3.
The single rod test series PS (preliminary tests) were scoping and development tests for the SR
series which followed [64]. These were carried out by heating the rod and test chamber, in which there
was a small downward flow of super-heated steam, to 350°C using external heating only, i.e. simulator
power zero. The rod helium pressure was next adjusted to the desired value and power was thenapplied to the simulator to initiate the transient of 28 K/s. The pressure in a rod was not controlled androse slowly as the gas temperature increased, reached a maximum, and then decreased at an increasing
rate, as the internal volume increased because of cladding strain, until rupture occurred. The rate ofincrease in temperature of the cladding near the rupture levelled off and in some cases diminished justprior to rupture, indicating strain cooling [65]. The variation of circumferential strain with burst
temperature in the above tests is given in Figure 7.72. Also there are results from tests in argon which
are similar at temperatures ≤950°C (i.e. where oxidation effects at this heating rate are minimal) but
show greater strains above this level. In two tests the gas volume of the specimens was increased to
160 cm3 i.e. 4 times the normal value without apparently any effect. This may have been an attempt tojustify the use of 2.5 times larger volume in the standard ORNL test specimens compared to that usedin American PWR fuel rods.
Figure 7.73 gives the axial length changes of the specimens as a result of testing. The effect ofstrain anisotropy causing the tubes to decrease in length in the alpha phase region is clearly
demonstrated. In addition to the ramp tests at 28 K/s four creep rupture tests [66] were carried out insteam at about 760°C with internal gas volumes of about 51 cm3. The times to rupture at 760°C varied
from 49 to 250 s and the strains from 23 to 32%. Two of these fuel simulators were then used fortransient tests at 28 K/s which burst at 760-770°C, with strains of 20 and 23%. Ramp tests were alsodone at 5 and 10 K/s. The strains in all these tests were not significantly different from those ramped at
28 K/s, [66] (Figure 7.74) but there was a tendency for greater volume increase with decreasing ramp
rate (Figure 7.75).
The first multi-rod test [67] (B-1) was carried out in 1977 using a 4×4 array of heated andpressurised rods in the test assembly shown in Figure 5.53. The two centre grids are 56 cm apart, aspacing which is similar to that in reactor fuel assemblies. The 4×4 array of rods was surrounded by adirect resistance heated shroud. To avoid electrical shorting between the test rods and the shroud there
was a gap of 16 mm in between them. There was thus no restraint on the outer row of rods. The rods in
B-1 were ramped, at 29.5 K/s and the shroud at 20 K/s, in flowing steam (about 4.2 kg/h, Reynolds
number 250) from 350°C until the rods ruptured at about 850-880°C all within about a time span of
about half a second.

293

Figure 7.72 Average rupture strain from single-rod tests heated at 28 K/s [64]Figure 7.73 Change in Zircaloy heated length in single-rod tests [64]294Figure 7.74 Comparison of burst strain in creep rupture and low heating rate tests
with data for 28 K/s tests [66]Figure 7.75 Comparison of tube volume increase (qualitatively equivalent to average tube strain)
in creep rupture and low heating rate tests with data for 28 K/s tests [66]The circumferential strains in the burst region were 32-59% which is significantly greater thanachieved in the single rod tests at nominally the same conditions (Figure 7.76). The rods had moved
outwards from their centre-line position, reflecting the lack of restraint. The maximum flow blockage
was 49%.
295

Figure 7.76 Comparison of burst strains in B-1, B-2 and B-3 tests with single rod tests data

The second multi-rod test B-2 [68], ramped at 28.5 K/s, steam flow Reynolds number 290, wasdone with nominally the same conditions as B-1 except that the shroud was not heated. The results
were similar, burst strains 34-58% [69] see Figure 7.76, flow blockage 54% except that there wasgreater bowing of the peripheral rods which was attributed to the larger circumferential temperature
gradients resulting from the presence of an unheated shroud.
The primary objective of the next multi-rod test, B-3 [70] was to “investigate bundle deformation
under test conditions believed by some to be more realistic of PWR LOCA parameters” i.e. thetemperature ramp rate was reduced to about 9.5 K/s with the initial pressures adjusted to cause rupture
at about 760°C. This test was done with a heated shroud (ramp rate 7.1 K/s) and the internal volumes
ranged from 49-51.5 cm3. The steam flow was the same as used in B-1 i.e. about 4.5 kg/h and the
Reynolds number was 263. The rods in B-3 failed at about 764°C wholly in the alpha-phase region. The
maximum strain was 77% and six rods had strains greater than the maximum of either B-1 (59%) or
B-2 (52%) (Figure 7.76) and much greater than single rods heated at 10 K/s (Figure 7.77). There wasgreater overall deformation with many portions of the assembly straining greater than 32%(Figure 7.78). The maximum flow blockage was about 77%. The ruptures all occurred within the mainintergrid region [69] unlike B-1 and B-2 where bursts occurred in both intergrid regions. The same fuelsimulators were used in B-1 and B-3 in exactly the same orientation and position so a direct comparison
can be made between these two tests (Figure 7.79). There are known hot spots in the internal heaters
and these can be correlated with burst positions, presumably in B-3. The heat transfer-strain/rate
combination was such as to suppress the effects of hot spots in the upper part of the fuel simulators.

296

Figure 7.77 Comparison of B-3 bundle burst data with ORNL and KfK single-rod datafor heating rate of ~10 K/s

Figure 7.78 Portions of tubes with greater than 32% strain in B-3 test

The effect of steam flow was investigated further in two single rod tests [69] with grids attached,using the heater fuel rod number 4 in bundle test B-2. The first test, SR-39, had the steam flow297

normally used in single-rod tests i.e. Reynolds number 800 and in the second, SR-40 the steam flow
(Reynolds number 180) was lower than that used in the B-2 bundle test (Reynolds number 290). The
results (Figure 7.80) showed that at the low steam flow (Reynolds 180) the fuel simulator caused theZircaloy cladding to burst in the same position as did the cladding in the multi-rod test B-2 (Reynolds
290) whereas with the higher steam flow the position of burst was shifted along the rod in the directionof steam flow. Further evidence for this effect is shown in Figure 7.81.
Figure 7.79 Axial distribution of bursts in multi-rod burst tests B-1 and B-3 [69]Note: The same fuel simulators were used for both tests, in the same positions and orientations.

The maximum strain produced by the same fuel simulator in the multi-rod test B-2 was about
42% whereas in the single rod test it was about 28%. This indicated that radiation from surroundingrods may be influencing the strain so a series of single rod tests using heated shrouds was carried out[16]. This showed that at ramp rates of 28 K/s, the strains were not much greater than in tests withunheated shrouds (Figure 7.82). However, heated shroud tests carried out at KfK did show greater
strains at high ramp rates, 24-30 K/s, which were equivalent to those produced in the ORNL multi-rod
tests B-1 and B-2 ramped at about 29 K/s (Figure 7.82).
The strains in single rods ramped at 10 K/s, at ORNL and KfK with heated shrouds were similar
to those achieved in the B-3 multi-rod test with a 9.5 K/s ramp (Figure 7.77).
The target conditions for the next multi-rod test B-4 [71] with a 6×6 array were ramping at 5 K/s,
i.e. to about 800°C, but malfunction of the equipment with bursting in the peak ductility region foralpha phase prevented the rods from achieving this and the maximum strain reached before the test
was terminated was only about 20%.

298

Figure 7.80 Burst location can be displaced by change in steam flow [69]Figure 7.81 Deformation agrees with axial temperature distribution

Test B-5 [72] was conducted under conditions close to B-3 (4×4) 10 K/s, but with an 8×8 array ofheated and pressurised rods surrounded by an unheated shroud spaced at one half of the coolant
channel distance from the outer rod surfaces, i.e. much closer than in previous tests, to obtain
information on the effect of test array size on deformation and rod-to-rod interactions. The shroud wasconstructed from stainless steel (0.1 mm thick) backed by insulating material and a strong structure towithstand any radial forces from expansion of the fuel rod simulators. The shroud could not be directly
electrically heated because of the close proximity of the fuel rod simulators so the inner surface wasgold plated and polished to reflect radiant heat back to the test array; even so its temperature increased
significantly. The rods in the 8×8 array were pressurised after holding at 336°C to achieve thermal
equilibrium, but one rod in the outer ring failed to hold pressure and the test was conducted with thisrod heated but unpressurised. All rods except this one burst within 6 s at about 775°C.
299

Figure 7.82 Comparison of B-1 and B-2 bundle data with ORNL and KfK single-rod datafor heating rate of ~ 28 K/s

The superheated (355°C) steam flowed downwards at about the same mass flow as in B-3, about
288 g/s/m2, a Reynolds Number of 140 as it entered the test array through a single side nozzle.
Unfortunately, under those conditions a uniform steam distribution could not be established, unlike
previous tests with 4×4 and 6×6 arrays, resulting in a gradient across the bundle of 24°C at the top
reducing to 2°C at the bottom. (Note the steam distribution system was since modified to avoid thiseffect.)
The non-uniformity of the steam flow had an effect on the cladding temperature during the test inthat there was a 20°C gradient at the 5 cm level, also the rods on the north side had an initial average
axial temperature gradient of 11°C whilst those on the south side had a gradient of 2-3°C. Figure 7.83
shows that the average temperature of the outer ring of fuel simulators was lower than those in theinterior and also demonstrates the north-to-south and east-to-west gradients. Figure 7.84 shows thetemperature differences between interior groups of rods.

300

Figure 7.83 Radial temperature distribution base on row- and column-averaged data 43 s
after power-on for B-5 rods [40]Visual examination after testing showed that cladding deformation was greater on the north facethan the south face. However, the gaps between all the outer rods in both faces were completely closed
in places for axial distances of 5-10 cm. None of the bursts on the exterior rods were directed towards
the cooler shroud and most of the interior bursts were towards the coolant channel (Figure 7.85).
Examination of the cross-section [73] from the bundle showed evidence of rod-to-rod interaction
producing trapping of the bulges causing them to become square (Figure 7.86).
Some of the strains of the individual rods are given on Figure 7.86, the others can be estimated bycomparing their dimensions with the outer row rod which did not strain, and the scale.
301

Figure 7.84 Simulator average temperature 43 s after power-on in B-5 test

Figure 7.85 Approximate orientation of bursts in the B-5 test
The figure shows a predominance of bursts towards the flow channel and the N.E. corner [73]302Figure 7.86 Sections from highly deformed regions of B5 and B3 bundles
showing effects of confinement
Small unconstrained bundles do not produce the same deformation pattern
as large constrained bundles for same test conditions [73]Thus the cladding strains in the rods which formed “square” cross-section are in the range ofabout 50-75%, whilst others which are still reasonably circular but are trapped between two or morerods have strains in the range of about 25-40%. The trapping of bulging rods appears to have caused
the deformation to extend axially resulting in a greater volume increase (Figure 7.87) and greater flow
restriction (Figures 7.88 and 7.89), than had been seen in the B-3 test with similar maximum strains(Figures 7.86 and 7.90). Thus the authors conclude that flow area restriction in large arrays may beunderestimated by small unconstrained arrays and that two rows of deforming “guard” specimens arenecessary around the deforming array under investigation to simulate the radial temperature andmechanical boundary conditions which would be present in a large array of rods such as a fuelassembly. The extent to which this applies in conditions of high heat transfer has been argued to besmall, however [56].
In the concluding B-6 [72] test in the ORNL programme, carried out in December 1981, an 8×8
array with a closely fitting, unheated, shroud was ramped at 3 to 4 K/sec to fail in the region of 930°C,
i.e. well into the α+β phase region, to ascertain if the typically smaller strains seen in single rods burst
under these conditions persist in large arrays. The results [72] showed this to be so, the burst strains
ranging from 22 to 56% with an average of 30% consistent with an average of 36% for three single
rods tested under similar conditions. The coolant channel flow area reduction was modest: 39% for thewhole 8×8 array, 44% for the inner 6×6 and 46% for the central 4×4 array.
The following conclusions for the ORNL MRBT tests are due to C. Grandjean [24]. It can first be
noted that the main objective of the MRBT tests was to investigate the influence of the bundle size andof the thermal and mechanical boundary conditions on the burst strain and flow blockage, underthermal heat transfer conditions that did however favour large deformations to occur.

303

Figure 7.87 Tube dilatation greater in B-5 interior simulators than in exterior simulatorsand greater than in comparable B-3 (4×4) test [73]Figure 7.88 Subdivision of B-5 data show interior subarrays
have greater coolant flow area restriction [40]304Figure 7.89 Preliminary B-5 data show inner 4×4 array has greater flow restriction
than B-3 (4×4) array [40]Figure 7.90 ORNL-MRBT. Burst strains of B5 tubes
B3 (4×4) data are shown for comparison with inner 4×4 array of B-5.

305

The main results, as provided by the comparison of the B-3 and B-5 data, indicate that in a large
array the straining of inner rods lead to mechanical interactions between neighbour rods that, althoughof limited impact on burst temperature and elongation, will modify significantly the spatial
development of deformation until rupture. Notably, the trapping of bulging rods has appeared to cause
the deformation to extend axially, resulting in a larger volume expansion and a greater axial extent ofblocked regions. This also results in a deviation from the rupture temperature/pressure curve deduced
from single-rod heated-shroud-tests data.
Thus the authors concluded that the flow area restriction in large arrays may be underestimatedby tests results on small unconstrained arrays and that at least two rows of deforming "guard" rods arenecessary around the central deforming array to properly simulate representative conditions which
would be present in reactor fuel assembly.
The presentation of these results, in particular at the 6th Symposium “Zircaloy in the Nuclear
Industry” by Chapman [73], has raised keen criticisms from the authors of the REBEKA program who
made rather different observations. F.J. Erbacher thus claimed that the thermalhydraulic conditions in
MRBT tests (slow steam cooling) are atypical of a LOCA and therefore the results are specific to thesetests only. It was however replied that the two-phase cooling conditions used in REBEKA tests, underwhich the deformation did not appear sensitive to bundle size, were also specific of the German PWR
and may not be applicable to US-designed PWRs.
It can finally be mentioned that only tests B-1 to B-3 were included in the data base that was used
for the derivation of the clad swelling and rupture models described in the NUREG-630 report [18]These three tests have in particular been used for the derivation of a coefficient relating the averageburst strain to the average strain in the plane of maximum flow blockage, so as to allow the derivationof the maximum flow blockage as a function of burst temperature. It may be thought that, based onthese three tests results only, the proposed correlation in the earlier year remains rather uncertain.
7.3.2.5 Single and multi-rod testing at Westinghouse Electric Corporation
These tests [74] were carried out using standard Westinghouse fuel rod cladding, 15×15 size
Zircaloy 4 tubing for the multi-rod tests and both 15×15 and 17×17 sizes for the single rod tests.
The single rod tests were carried out in air and flowing steam using specimens filled with alumina
pellets and heated externally in a radiant heater furnace which produced a uniform hot zone at various
heating rates in the range 2.8 to 111 K/s.
The results (Figure 7.91) show that the burst strains of the specimens heated at 2.8 and 14 K/s,
with internal pressures typical of those “at power” in the current PWR fuel rod design, i.e. 9001 200 lb/in2 (62-80 bar) are in the range 40-110%. These heating rates are the closest in this test series
to the rate of about 8.3 K/s which is calculated to occur during adiabatic heat-up following a large
break LOCA.
The 4×4 multi-rod tests used direct resistance heating of the cladding which had been coated with
ZrO2 in an attempt to prevent electrical arcing between rods. Unfortunately, post-test examinations
revealed localised cladding melting, implying that the ZrO2 coatings had cracked during swelling.
Only two internal pressures were used, 200 and 2 250 lb/in2 (14 and 155 bar) of which the former
would cause the cladding to burst in the α+β phase region and the latter would produce very highstrain rates. Neither of these conditions is conducive to developing the maximum strain potential of theZircaloy cladding as can be clearly seen from the single rod results (Figure 7.91). The maximum
blockages resulting from the multi-rod (4×4) tests are about 50% (Figure 7.92).
306

Figure 7.91 Burst strain vs internal pressure in Westinghouse single rod burst tests [74]Figure 7.92 Westinghouse multi-rod burst test results [74]7.3.2.6 Single rod testing at Saclay − CEA
The EDGAR experiments are separate effects tests on cladding mechanical behaviour in the
stress-temperature domain of a large break LOCA. The original Zircaloy-4 base tests were performedby CEA in Saclay during the 1980s [41]. A new facility (EDGAR-2, Section 5.2.1) is still currently inuse for the testing of advanced clad material and cladding properties at high burn-up [75,76].
The first objective of this programme has been to verify the actual behaviour of Zircaloy cladding
under conservative calculated large break LOCA two-peak transient conditions, such as thoseconsidered in the French 900 MW(e) PWR standard safety reports. The interpretation of the Zircaloy
behaviour has shown that the recrystallized material is slightly more creep resistant than the stressrelieved material.
307

The second objective of the EDGAR programme has been to supply experimental data for thedevelopment of a deformation model and a burst criterion, which constitute a part of the data basis of
the former CUPIDON code [30], and later the fuel model of CATHARE [24]. The experimental data
used for this modelling are retrieved from more than 500 individual tests either with constant pressure
and constant heating rate (0.2 to 100°C/s) or with constant temperature and constant pressure rate
(0.01 to 0.2 MPa/s) or creep tests. Some specific tests have been added to take into account the effectof a thermal spike into the α+β or β phase on the subsequent mechanical behaviour of the cladding
during the two-peak transient.
The analysis of creep tests has allowed to correlate the secondary creep velocity with a Nortontype equation in each of the phase transformation domains (α, α+β, β) of the Zircaloy material:dε θc / dt = Ai exp(− Qi / T )σ θni(7-1)

where ε θ is the circumferential creep strain, σ θ the hoop stress and Ai ,Qi ,ni theccoefficients of the Norton-type laws. A continuous strain homogenisation model isused to evaluate the deformation rate in the domain transition ranges.

In temperature and pressure ramp tests it has been shown that under ramp conditions the strain
rate may be correctly predicted by creep test laws if a model for phase transformation kinetics has
been introduced as will be shown in more detail later.
In the typical transient tests it has been observed that there is an influence on strain rate of thethermal treatment with transient temperature “first peak” within the α+β domain (Figure 7.93). This
influence can be taken into account in the modelling by evaluating the α-phase fraction that results ofthe phase transformation during transient heat treatment.
Figure 7.93 Effect of previous heat treatment of the claddingin the two phase domain on reduced creep rates308

As defined in Section 5.2.2, the deformation in the EDGAR tests has been characterised by two
parameters: the uniform elongation Ar and the total elongation At. Figures 7.94 and 7.95 show theuniform and total elongations that were obtained in thermal ramp tests as function of the rupture
temperature and ramp rate. The large deformations (> 100%) obtained in the high α domain reflect theuniformity of the temperature field , in axial and azimuthal direction, as a result of the heating method,electric current through cladding, used in these tests.
Figure 7.94 Uniform elongation vs modified burst temperature in EDGAR tests

Figure 7.95 Total elongation vs modified burst temperature in EDGAR tests

One of the original objectives of the EDGAR tests was to study the influence of irradiation on themechanical behaviour of Zircaloy. For that purpose an EDGAR rig was set up in a hot cell in Saclay.
309

The first transient tests performed with spent fuel cladding resulted in higher creep rates in theirradiated material for the first 10 s of the two-peak transient. Moreover, the ultimate hoop stress of theirradiated cladding decreases at burst in the 800-950°C range from 15-20% compared with freshmaterial [30]. Réocreux and Scott de Martinville mentions that irradiation effects have been found in
the EDGAR tests but that they were not well understood [41]. Grandjean also notes that experimental
difficulties, mainly related to defueling of the irradiated rods, have not allowed the initially planned
programme to be completed [24].
The more recent work with the EDGAR-2 facility has been performed in order to gain knowledge
on the LOCA behaviour of the new alloys M4 and M5 and to determine how these alloys andZircaloy-4 behave at high burn-ups. The basic creep properties of the M4 and M5 and the comparison
with Zircaloy-4 were determined in creep tests at constant pressure and temperature [76]. A precise
determination of the creep laws required about 70 to 90 EDGAR creep tests. The investigation covered
temperatures between 600 and 1 000°C. Tests were performed in 50 K steps in the single phasedomain and in 25 K steps in the two phase domain. The influence of stress was determined by using
three different internal pressures chosen so that the rupture time would be between 10 and 1 000 s.
When the oxidation was moderate during the tests the results were easily analysed by the model
for uniform expansion of a cylinder (Eq. 5-1 to 5-7). In particular, if a Norton type creep law applies,
Eq. 5-7 predicts that time to rupture will be inversly proportional to σ 0n where σ0 is the initial hoop
stress and n the stress exponent in the Norton creep law. This correlation can be seen in Figure 7.96
where the results of the creep tests have been plotted as the time to rupture versus initial hoop stress.
At 700°C the alloys are all in the α phase. M4 and Zircaloy-4 have a similar behaviour while M5
exhibits a somewhat better creep resistance. At 800°C the slope of the σ0 versus tR correlation for M5
is lower than at 700°C indicating a two-phase metallurgical state. For M4 and Zircaloy-4 the common
slope, similar to that at 700°C indicates that the structure still is single phase α. At 900°C the slopes
indicate similar behaviour for M5 and Zircaloy-4 while phase transformation studies have shown thatat this temperature M5 is almost completely transformed while the transformation of Zircaloy-4 isincomplete. The creep properties of the almost completely transformed M4 are different from theothers at 900°C.
Figure 7.96 Time-to-rupture vs stress for EDGAR creep tests of Zircaloy-4, M4 and M5

310

The total elongations (for a definition, see Section 5.2.2), At, for the three alloys are plottedversus the test temperature in Figure 7.97.
Figure 7.97 Total elongation as a function of test temperature
for the alloys M4, M5 and Zircaloy-4

Upper and lower bounds were drawn for the three alloys. The upper bound is considered as thehighest value of the ductility of the material that can be reached only in steady-state conditions with anegligible azimuthal temperature gradient and a moderate internal pressure. The lower-bound curve
corresponds to short-term tests (~10 to 20 s) performed with the highest internal pressure at the test
temperature. The position of the ductility peak corresponds for the three alloys to the onset of the
α→α+β transformation (about 10 to 20% β phase formed). A rapid decrease of the ductility wasobserved in the two-phase domain up to about 95% β formed. The increase of ductility in the β domain
was not observed due to rapid oxidation with consequent cracking of the oxide layer and localised
plastic deformation under the cracks. The second ductility peak was only observed in thermal ramp
tests. As can be seen in Figure 7.97 the alloys have similar ductility boundaries.
Thermal ramp tests were performed under constant internal pressure with a constant heating rate
between 350°C and the burst temperature. Tests were performed on the M4 and M5 alloys with heating
rates from 2 to 100 K/s and internal gas pressures from 10 to 130 bar. Under those conditions the burst
temperatures varied from 650 to 1 175°C. Results for the M5 alloy are plotted in Figure 7.98.
For each heating rate a third- or fourth-order polynomial fit has been drawn and one can see thecomplex influence of heating rate on the ductility. For the 5 K/s heating rate the ductility results arewithin the creep boundary limits but in the lower part. The maximum total elongation obtained with75 bar internal pressure is around 90% which is half the value observed under conditions of creep. For
higher heating rates and burst temperatures lower than 880°C the ductilities are observed to be below
the lower creep boundary and to decrease with the burst temperature. These tests correspond tointernal pressures higher than the highest pressure in the creep tests with the corresponding burst
temperature. For each heating rate, a minimum ductility of about 40% is observed in the 800 to 900°C
burst temperature range, possibly associated with the phase transformation. For higher burst
temperatures the increase in the ductility in the β-phase domain is shown for burst temperatures above
900°C.
311

Figure 7.98 Influence of heating rate on total elongationin EDGAR thermal ramp tests for the M5 alloy

The EDGAR results indicate that the ductility in LOCA conditions also depends on themechanical stress state. An influence of the mechanical stress on the phase equilibria and incubation
kinetics cannot be excluded.
A comparison with previous results for Zircaloy-4 shows that the M5 alloy is somwhat better
than Zircaloy-4 in terms of burst temperature while the M4 alloy is similar to Zircaloy-4 [76]. In termsof total elongation, the picture is quite complex but in most pressure ranges Zircaloy-4 has a better
ductility than M5. However, such differences may be reduced significantly in bundle tests due to an
azimuthal temperature gradient that prevents the uniform swelling up to burst characteristic of the
EDGAR facility.
The main effect of a high burn-up is the hydrogen pickup caused by cladding corrosion.
Figure 7.99 (a) shows the effect of hydrogen content on the thermal ramp behaviour in an EDGAR testof Zircaloy-4 cladding [75].
The figure clearly shows the effect of hydrogen on the mechanical behaviour. It reduces the creep
resistance and the post-mortem ductility. In Figure 7.99 (b), the β phase fraction has been calculated
according to the methods described in Section 5.1.2. As can be seen in the Figure the transformation toβ controls much of the creep behaviour. For unhydrided Zircaloy, the maximum in ductility generally
takes place at the onset of the α→α + β transformation and rapidly drops down in the two phasedomain. In hydrided samples, the deformation starts at the formation of β and thus rupture occurs wellinto the two phase domain with a consequent reduction in ductility.
312Figure 7.99 (a) Deformation of as-received and hydrided Zircaloy-4 in a thermal ramp test.
(b) Calculated β phase fraction in as-received and hydrided Zircaloy-4

Hydrogen is also expected to have an intrinsic effect on the creep rates, as has been observed atlower temperatures, 350 to 400°C [77]. Therefore, creep tests were performed under steady temperatureand pressure conditions on Zircaloy-4 hydrided to 600 and 1 000 ppm and compared to results of asreceived Zircaloy-4. The results are shown in Figure 7.100.
Figure 7.100 Time-to-rupture vs stress for EDGAR creep tests performedon as-received and hydrided Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes [75]The slopes of the lines fitted to the isothermal creep results give the stress exponent, n, in the
Norton type creep law, which is strongly dependent on the α/β transformation event. The hydrided313

samples exhibit lower creep resistance for all temperatures with the greatest effect at the highesthydrogen content. The sequence of slopes from the lowest temperature to the highest shows a high n insingle phase α, a low n in the two phase domain and again a high n for single phase β. The transitions
are moved to lower temperature by the hydrogen. A comparison between as-received Zircaloy-4 and
600 ppm hydrided Zircaloy-4 at 700°C where both is single phase α shows the intrinsic hydrogeneffect as a lower creep resistance for the hydrided material but the same stress exponent. A
corresponding difference at 850°C is best explained by the higher β phase fraction formed in the
hydrided material.
The results on Zircaloy-4 can also be compared to the corresponding results on as-received andhydrided M5 shown in Figure 7.101. The sequence of slope changes in the time-to-rupture versus
hoop stress lines is slightly different than for Zircaloy-4 because of the earlier transformation to β in
the Nb-containing M5 material. Both at 600, 700 and 850°C the lower creep resistance of hydrided M5compared to as-received M5 but with the same Norton slope indicates the intrinsic hydrogen effect on
the creep resistance. A comparison between Figures 7.100 and 7.101 also shows that the hydrogeneffect on creep resistance seems to be slightly higher in M5 than for Zircaloy-4.
As discussed above hydrided specimens will tend to have a lower ductility than as-received
specimens because they fail well into the two phase domain. Figure 7.102 shows a summary of howhydrogen affects the ductility of Zircaloy-4 in EDGAR creep tests.
Figure 7.101 Time-to-rupture vs stress for EDGAR creep tests performedon as-received and M5 cladding tubes [75]314Figure 7.102 Total elongation measured after EDGAR creep tests vs test temperature
for as-received and hydrided (~600 and ~1 000 ppm) Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes

Modelling of the cladding behaviour based on the EDGAR tests and accompanying tests of the α
to β phase transformation is termed the EDGAR methodology [75-76]. It is based on a set of four
equations. The first equation expresses the mechanical equilibrium:σ θ = σ θ0 (1 + ε θ )20
where σ θ = p (D0 − h ) / 2h the initial hoop stressε θ = the circumferential strain(7-2)

p = the internal pressure.
D0 = initial external diameter.
h = the initial wall thickness.

The second equation is a phase transformation model:[

df α / dt = function ( f α , T , Teq ( f α )

]

(7-3)

where fα = the α-phase volume fraction.

The third equation is the Norton type creep law:dε θ / dt = Ai exp(− Qi / T )σ θni(7-4)

where subscript i represents the current phase transformation domain defined asfollows: (i=α if fα = 1, i = α + β if 0.9> fα > 0.1, i = β if fα ≤ 0.01) andT = cladding temperature.
Ai, Qi, ni = material parameters.

The fourth relation needed to model cladding behaviour is a burst criterion:σ θ = σ B ( f α , T ) = σ Bfαα ⋅ σ 1B−α fασ θ = σ θ0 (1 + Ar )2
σ B = k i exp(− qi T )

(7-5)

i

Where Ar = the uniform elongation and ki, qi constants characteristic of the α or β phase.

315

The constants ki and qi must be determined from the results of the EDGAR experiments.
Figure 7.103 shows a comparison between the burst criterion for as-received and hydrided to 600 ppm
Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes [75].
Figure 7.103 Comparison between the burst criterion for as-received and hydride(at 600 ppm) Zircaloy-4 cladding tubes [75]

Ideally the constants should be determined from creep tests. However in the case of hydrided
Zircaloy-4 no creep test data was available in the β domain and results of thermal ramp tests were used
to determine the burst criterion [75].
The success and development of the EDGAR methodology is illustrated in Figure 7.104. It shows
a comparison between calculated and experimental time to rupture for EDGAR experiments.
Figure 7.104 Comparison between experimental and simulated time
to rupture of Zircaloy-4 hydrided to 600 ppm using two different models(a) a model based on experiments with as-received Zircaloy-4 [76], dashed line, and (b) a new model based on
experiments with hydrided Zircaloy-4 and taking into account the effect of hydrogen on the α/β phasetransformation [75]316The dashed line shows the results of using a previous model based on creep laws determined on
as-received Zircaloy-4 and without taking into account the effect of hydrogen on the α→β phasetransformation. The more recent model uses creep laws based on experiments with hydrided Zircaloy-4
and also takes into account the effect of hydrogen on the phase transformation temperatures.
For determination of the creep properties of irradiated cladding under LOCA conditions auniaxial tensile test method has been used [78]. For comparison tests with the same method have also
been performed on as-received and hydrided cladding. The tests are carried out on a dynamic tensile
device. Specific double-leg tensile sampleshave been designed in order to minimise the temperature
gradient along the sample (Figure 7.105).
Figure 7.105 Evolution of a sample during a thermal ramp test under uniaxial stress loading [78]The samples are 90 mm long and have 2 legs of 48 mm in gauge length. The specimens weremachined by spark erosion (after mechanical abrading of the outer zirconia layer of irradiatedsamples). The width (~4 mm) and thickness of each leg is measured to calculate the axial stressapplied during a test.
To obtain rapid heating rates, direct Joule effect heating was adopted. During the test, the axial
load is first applied and then the temperature transient starts. The temperature is increased up to
350°C, stabilised during 2 minutes and then starts the heating ramp up to rupture. On-line monitoringof the following parameters is carried out during the test:(a) The sample axial elongation by a LVDT captor.
(b) The axial load.
(c) The sample temperature, with a K-type thermocouple spot-welded on the middle of one legof the sample.
Taking into account the rapid temperature increase (25 and 100 K/s) and the thermal inertia of thethermocouple, the temperature measured by the thermocouple is under-estimated and systematic
corrections based on pyrometer measurements have to be applied after the tests. Post mortem
measurements are conducted in order to evaluate the total axial elongation that cannot be directlydeduced from the on-line axial measurements.
317

The experiments have demonstrated fairly conclusively that the main effect of irradiation is thehydrogen pickup due to corrosion during reactor operation. Figure 7.106 shows a typical result for asreceived, hydrided and irradiated Zircaloy-4. The behaviour of unirradiated cladding hydrided to
450 ppm is very similar to the behaviour of irradiated Zircaloy-4 with a measured hydrogen content of
about 430 ppm.
Figure 7.106 Influence of irradiation and hydrogen content on the axial strainof Zircaloy-4 samples during a thermal ramp test under uniaxial loading (80 MPa)
upon heating with 100 K/s [78]Similar tests on irradiated M5 showed that they behave in a manner similar to that of as-received
M5 as a result of the low corrosion and hydrogen pickup of M5 during irradiation [78].
7.3.2.7 Single and multiple rod testing in the United Kingdom
A test series [79] was carried out at the Springfields Nuclear Laboratories on short internallypressurised Zircaloy tube specimens heated by direct resistance heating to investigate deformation
behaviour in steam and inert atmospheres. This work showed the dramatic effect of oxygen pick-up on
mechanical behaviour above about 1150 K with oxide and stabilised α-phase layers contributing
mainly to the increased strength and resulting in reduced circumferential strain owing to localised
straining at cracks in these layers. Very small amounts of oxidation were also found to influence thecharacter and extent of deformation at about 1020 K. Following on from this work, tests on larger
specimens showed up the phenomenon of axially extended deformation under both mainly radiative
cooling conditions [65] and mainly convective cooling [80] (see Figure 7.107). This was investigatedin depth and supported by similar studies at Berkeley Nuclear Laboratories [81] The basic process
responsible is that of local cooling of the straining region combined with the high temperaturedependence of secondary creep in Zircaloy; however, other factors can come into play as shown in
Figure 7.108.

318

Figure 7.107 Results of stylised transient testing of Zircaloy-4 PWR cladding
with mainly convective cooling [4]Figure 7.108 Processes controlling strain and its stabilisation [14]319Tests were carried out using internal heaters with a reflective but unheated shroud and similar
results have been obtained except that the circumferential strains tend to be lower [14]. However,when heated shrouds are used, the strains are equivalent [82].
The full range of internal pressures which could be used in PWR fuel rods has been investigatedand, depending upon the temperatures reached, extended deformation occurs over the whole pressure
range. A tendency for super-plastic deformation in the two-phase region has also been observed withpressures of about 2 MPa (300 lb/in2). Cladding strained in this region, under fast heating (and hence
strain) rates greater than 5-10 K/s, exhibits a ductility trough; however this is a strain-rate-dependent
phenomenon (Figure 7.109) and strains of 200% have been produced in this region in a test lasting
200 s [83].
Figure 7.109 Variation of tube rupture strain with rupture temperature during isothermal tests
at Springfields Nuclear Laboratories [83]Stainless steel cladding as used in PWRs i.e. Type 304 has also been investigated [14]. This
material is strong enough to resist the internal pressure at temperatures up to about 950°C so that
deformation is negligible. Ultimately at higher temperatures it will deform but the inherent ductility issuch that the maximum strains are 25-30%, insufficient to allow mutual support of columnar bulges,
so that coolant flow channel restriction would be very limited.
At the Windscale Nuclear Laboratories, 450 mm lengths cut from commercial PWR fuel rods
irradiated to 20 GWd/tU (rod average) have been internally pressurised and subjected to temperaturetransients to simulate LOCA conditions [84]. The primary purpose of the work was to examine themechanical stability of the fuel column when the cladding has bulged away from it under internalpressurisation and to evaluate the extent of fuel fragmentation and re-location that occurs. However,data on the ductility of cladding which has experienced actual reactor service has also been produced.

320

In the fuel re-location tests, carried out at 973 to 1 073 K, the cladding deformation was stopped
upon reaching approximately 40% diametral strain by a reduction in temperature and, after cooling,
the fuel was fixed in position by introduction of epoxy resin through a spark-machined hole in thecladding [84]. The spatial distribution of fuel was then determined by X-radiography, γ scanning andoptical examination of sections.
The lower section approximately 100 mm below the section of cracked fuel stack, was shown tohave remained in the form of intact pellets, although the fuel column had moved laterally to touch the
cladding. Above this region, the pellet fragments had separated, often quite considerably, but ingeneral, only a relatively small amount (less than 5%) of fuel axial relocation had taken place. Thus,
the positions of pellet-pellet interfaces were still visible on axial sections.
The deformation of the cladding in these tests was quite comparable the behaviour of axiallyextended bulging that was observed during direct electrical heating tests on unirradiated Zircaloy
tubing at the Springfields Laboratories [65,83]. The results confirmed that no significant difference instrain behaviour exists between unirradiated and low burn-up irradiated cladding, even though thelatter presumably has an additional thin oxide layer resulting from reactor exposure.
The multi-rod test programme at the Springfields Nuclear Laboratories included a materials test inwhich a 4×4 array contained in a shroud was heated to about 700°C in argon in a muffle furnace. Steamwas then introduced and the rods pressurised to 7.9 MPa. Examination showed that they had bulged andtended to adopt a square cross-section as a result of rod-to-rod interaction (Figure 7.110). The object of
this test was to study mechanical interaction of balloons to assist code development [85-88].
Figure 7.110 Mechanical restraint by deformable neighbours. CANSWEL-2 idealisation (a)compared with (b) Springfields 4×4 cladding deformation rig cross sections

The use of high and low helium filling pressures in alternate fuel rods in an assembly has been
proposed as a means of reducing the probability of a high degree of co-planar blockage [89].
Computer modelling [90] of the deformation of such an assembly has shown that for this concept not
to be effective, 80% overall strain would be required in the straining rods. This requires the individual
cladding temperatures all to be uniform to within 4°C. The evidence from the MT-3 test [32] andanalysis [91] of irradiated PWR fuel rod ballooning tests indicate that such temperature uniformity isunattainable in nuclear heated rods ballooned under reflood conditions.

321

7.3.2.8 Experiments in PARAMETR-M and TEFSAI-19 facilities in Russia
A description of the PARAMETR-M and TEFSAI-19 facilities can be found in Section 5.3.2.4.
Variables studied in the experiments are heating rate, max fuel rod cladding temperature, steam flow
rate, quench conditions and fuel rod cladding material [92].
The objectives of the experiments and post-test examinations were to investigate:•••

Temperature-force loading parameters, corresponding to various thermohydraulic LB-LOCA
scenarios, influence on the assemblies damage characteristics.
Deformation behaviour of the fuel rod simulator claddings gathered in an assembly and theirdepressurisation parameters (temperature, pressure, deformations and coordinates of placesof rupture).
Distribution of assembly flow channel blockage and cladding ballooning along the assembly
height.

The results reported by Bibilashvili et al. in 2001 [92] are summarised in Table 7.9.
The temperature conditions of tests with the assemblies No. 1, 2, 4, and 6 exceed the conditionsof the second LOCA stage for fuel rods with maximum calculated linear heat rating, while the tests
No. 3, 5, and 7 (maximum cladding temperature about 900°C) correspond to an accident scenario for agroup of fuel rods with linear heat rating above the average.
A typical example of temperature and pressure records is shown in Figure 7.111. The temperatureand pressure records allow an estimate of the time for cladding depressurisation. By taking into
account the delay in thermocouple indications (up to 50 K, depending on the heating rate) and lack ofcoincidence in the axial locations of ruptures and thermocouples rupture temperatures were estimatedto lie in the interval of 800-900°C.
The steam flow and mass flow rate through the assembly cross section influences the extension of
the ballooning area (Figure 7.112 for tests No. 1, 2 and 3). At greater mass flow rates the balloonings
are more likely to be found in the upper part of the assembly.
Cladding heating rate has a significant influence on the cladding rupture strain. In Figure 7.112,
test No. 1 with a heating rate of 2 K/s can be compared to test No. 3 with a heating rate of 0.2 K/s. The
expected cladding heating rate in a LOCA transient is about 2-4 K/s due to residual heat release in thefuel. The maximum cross section blockage for the 7 inner simulators in test No. 3 was 70% (Table 7.9)
compared to 27% for test No. 1. All tubes ruptured.
Tests on two 19-element assemblies with Zr1%Nb and E635 claddings (No.2 and No. 4) insimilar conditions revealed higher ductility of E635 claddings (Table 7.9). Maximum cross-section
blockage for the bundle of the 7 inner simulators of E635 assembly No. 4 did not exceed 69%. In teston assembly No. 6 with E635 claddings with excess inner pressure (simulation of burn-up effects)
lower rupture deformation and cross-section blockage values were observed than in case of assembly
No. 4 (Table 7.9).
In the tests No. 1, 2, 4, and 6 with the highest cladding temperatures, 1 100 to 1 150°C all rods
ruptured.
Tests on two 37-element assemblies with Zr1%Nb and E635 claddings (No. 5 and No. 7) werecarried out under conditions typical of the second stage of the accident (heating due to residual heat322

release in fuel) for the representative group of heat-stressed fuel rods. The distinctive feature of theseassemblies construction is the presence of passive fuel rods (1 central + 12 fuel rods of the third row).
The cladding temperature of the passive simulators in the hot area was substantially lower(approximately 100 K), than that of the electro-heated fuel rods. In the experiment with assembly
No. 7 (Zr1%Nb) all, but three claddings ruptured. In the experiment with assembly No.5 (E635) noneof the passive fuel rods lost tightness.
Figure 7.111 Cladding temperature (A) and pressure records (B)for test No. 1 (Zr1%Nb alloy) [92]323Table 7.9 The main test parameters and results of VVER type assemblies
under LOCA conditions in electroheated facility
Characteristics

Assembly
No. 1

Facility
PARAMETR
Test time
1999
Cladding material
ZR1%NB
Simulators quantity
19
Active part height,
800 mmSimulators free vol.
26 cm3
Initial He pressure
2 MPa
Initial temperature
450°C
Steam flow rate per FA
4 g/s
Heating rate up to
2 K/scladdings rupture
Maximum temperature
1 150°C
Ballooning height590-740 mm
coordinates
Hoop strain in places of
19.2%/32.2%
rupture, (average/max)
Downsizing of theassemblies’ cross
22%/27%section (19 element/
7 central fuel rods)

Assembly
No. 2

Assembly
No. 3

Assembly
No. 4

Assembly
No. 5

Assembly
No. 6

Assembly
No. 7

TEFSAI-19
1999
ZR1%NB19
1 000 mm
21 cm3
2 MPa
450°C
2 g/s

PARAMETR
1999
ZR1%NB
19
800 mm
26 cm3
2 MPa
450°C
4 g/s

TEFSAI-19
2000
E635
19
1 000 mm
25 cm3
2 MPa
450°C
2 g/s

PARAMETR-M
2001
E635
37
1 250 mm
33 cm3
2 MPa
450°C
6 g/s

TEFSAI-19
2001
E635
19
1 000 mm
25 cm3
4 MPa
450°C
3 g/s

PARAMETR-M
2001
ZR1%NB37
1 250 mm
33 cm3
2 MPa
450°C
6 g/s

1 K/s

0.2 K/s

1 K/s

2.5 K/s

1 K/s

2.5 K/s

1 150°C

900°C

1 100°C

900°C

1 100°C

520-840 mm

700-800 mm

550-850 mm 1 000-1 200 mm 550-850 mm

900°C
Research iscontinued.

24.1%/40%

40%/70%41%/77%.

15.3%/48.6%

20%/32%

27%/39%50%/70%42%./69%

31%/52%-/35%

Figure 7.112 Axial cladding strain distributions in tests No. 1, 2 and 3324

Figure 7.112 Axial cladding strain distributions in tests No. 1, 2 and 3 (Cont’d)

All the assemblies kept the integrity after the tests, despite that in the test they were quenchedwith cold water (except assembly No. 1). The simulator claddings survived disassembly and kept the
integrity. The microhardness axial distribution along the simulator 2.1 of assembly No. 1 is shown in
Figure 7.113. This assembly was tested at maximum temperature of 1 150°C.
Figure 7.113 Microhardness distribution along the simulator 2.1 of test No. 1

The appearances of fuel rod simulators claddings of E635 and Zr1%Nb alloys, assemblies No. 5
and No. 7, tested at maximum temperature of 900°C, are presented in Figure 7.114.
Figure 7.114 Post-test appearance of E635 and Zr1%Nb alloyA) Assembly No. 5, E635 alloyB) Assembly No. 7, Zr1%Nb alloy325

7.3.2.9 Ballooning of E110 cladding in comparison with Zircaloy-4
Hózer et al. have performed extensive ballooning experiments on the E110 alloy [93]. They
performed isothermal experiments on short lengths, 50 mm, of E110 and Zircaloy-4 cladding withdifferent pressurisation rates. The experiments were performed in an Ar atmosphere but in order todetermine the influence of oxidation, some of the E110 specimens had been pre-oxidized at 900°C tooxide thicknesses up to 56 µm. A few specimen had also been pre-exposed to iodine but no effect of
the iodine was observed. In a second test series longer specimens of E110 were tested, three of them ina steam atmosphere. These experiments used either constant temperature with different pressurisation
rate or constant initial pressure with different heating rates. In a third test series, they studied
ballooning in a 7 rods array with the VVER hexagonal geometry. The tests were carried out both in an
inert atmosphere and in steam.
In general, they observed a relatively large scatter in burst pressure and in maximum
circumferential burst strain. However, the main trends followed the behaviour of Zircaloy-4 with animportant exception. As shown in Figure 7.115, there is a clear effect of the earlier start oftransformation to β phase for the Nb alloyed E110 which leads to a reduction of burst pressure in thetemperature interval 800-1 000°C.
The inserted pictures in Figure 7.115 illustrate the general difference in burst strains between
E110 and Zircaloy-4.
Figure 7.115 Burst pressure vs burst temperature of E110 and Zircaloy-4 claddings
tested under similar conditions

The influence of pre-oxidation on burst pressure and deformation is shown in Figure 7.116. It
shows that the burst pressure first increases up to a maximum and then decreases with increasing oxide
thickness. The decrease in burst pressure with increasing oxide thickness is probably because of theeffect of increasing hydrogen content which decreases the α→β transformation temperature. The
reduction in ductility can be due to cracking in the α layer which grows under the pre-oxide similar toeffects observed in slow LOCA transient tests on fresh cladding.

326

Similar effects were also observed in the tests in steam compared to the tests in an inert
environment. In particular, the multi-rod tests showed clearly that failure strains were lower in thesteam environment and the flow blockage was reduced from 57-76% in argon to 33-57% in steam.
Figure 7.116 Burst pressure an maximum deformation vs oxide layer thickness of E110 cladding

In the isothermal ballooning tests, there was a significant effect of the pressurisation rate on burst
pressure, as can be seen in Figure 7.117.
Figure 7.117 Burst pressure vs pressurisation rate for E110 alloy

Pressurisation rate (bar/s)

This effect can actually be derived from equations 5-1 to 5-4. If the pressurisation rate is dp/dt,
the burst pressure pf is approximately given by:⎛ dp ⎞
p f = C⎜ ⎟⎝ dt ⎠

1 / n +1

(7-6)

where n is the exponent in the Norton creep law. The slopes in Figure 7.117
indicate an n-value of about 6-7.5. No effect of heating rate at constant initialpressure was observed.

327

7.4 References
1.

Ferrari, H.M., “Pressurisation improves fuel rod reliability”, Nuclear Engineering International,
15(1970), pp. 623-625.

2.

Brzoska, B., et al., “Parameter study in the influence of prepressurisation on PWR fuel rod
behaviour during normal operating and hypothetical LOCA”, Nuclear Technology, 46(1979), pp.
205-212.

3.

Karb, E.H., et al., ”LWR fuel rod behaviour in the FR2 in-pile tests simulating the heatup phaseof a LOCA”, KfK 3346, March 1983.

4.

Hindle, E.D. and Mann, C.A., “An experimental study of the deformation of Zircaloy PWR fuelrod cladding under mainly convective cooling”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry; Fifth
Conference, 1980, Boston, USA, ASTM STP 754, ASTM, pp. 284-302.

5.

Rose, K.M., Mann, C.A., and Hindle, E.D., “The axial distribution of deformation in the claddingof pressurized water reactor fuel rods in a loss-of-coolant accident”, Nuclear Technology,
46(1979), pp. 220-227.

6.

Chung, H.M. and Kassner, T.F., “Embrittlement Criteria for Zircaloy Fuel Cladding Applicableto Accident Situations in Light-Water Reactors. Summary Report”, NUREG/CR-1344, Jan. 1980.

7.

Erbacher, F.J., “LWR fuel cladding deformation in a LOCA and its interaction with the
emergency core cooling”, ANS/ENS Topical Meeting on Reactor Safety Aspects of Fuel
Behaviour, 1981, Sun Valley, USA.

8.

Parsons, P.D., Hindle, E.D., and Mann, C.A., “The deformation, oxidation and embrittlement of
PWR fuel cladding in a loss-of-coolant accident”, UKAEA Springfield Nuclear Power
Development Laboratories, ND-R-1351, September 1986.

9.

Hindle, E.D. and Slattery, G.F., “The influence of processing variables on the grain structure andhydride orientations in Zircaloy-2 tubing”, Journal of the Institute of Metals, 94(1966), pp. 245-249.

10. Hardy, D.G., “High temperature expansion and rupture behaviour of Zircaloy tubing”, Topical
Meeting on Water Reactor Safety, 1973, Salt Lake City, USA, pp. 254-273.
11. Erbacher, F.J., Neitzel, H.J., and Wiehr, K., “Studies of Zircaloy clad ballooning in a loss-ofcoolant accident – results of burst tests with indirectly heated fuel rod simulators”, Zirconium in
the Nuclear Industry (Fourth Conference), 1978, Stratford-on-Avon, United Kingdom, ASTM
STP 681, ASTM, pp. 429-446.
12. Hindle, E.D., “Annealing studies of Zircaloy cladding at 580-850 C”, UKAEA report NDR38(S), May 1978.
13. Mohr, C.L. and Hesson, G.M., “LOCA rupture strains and coolability of full length PWR fuelbundles”, 7th SMIRT Conference, 1983, Chicago, United States of America.
14. Parsons, P.D., Hindle, E.D., and Mann, C.A., “PWR fuel behaviour in design basis accident
conditions. A State-of-the-Art Report by the Task Group on Fuel Behaviour of CSNI Principal
Working Group No 2”, Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear Energy
Agency, CSNI Report 129.
15. Hindle, E.D. and Mann, C.A., “Deformation of PWR cladding following a loss-of-coolant
accident”, UKAEA report ND-R-362(S), July 1979.
16. Chapman, R.H., et al., “Multi-rod burst test program. Progress report for July-Dec 1979”,
NUREG/CR-1450, Aug. 1980.

328

17. Kawasaki, S., “Transient burst tests of multi-rod”, 6th Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting,1978, Gaithersburg, USA.
18. Powers, D.A. and Meyer, R.O., “Cladding swelling and rupture models for LOCA analysis”,
NUREG-0630, April 1980.
19. Russcher, G.E., et al., “Experiment operations plan for a loss-of-coolant accident simulation in
the NRU reactor”, NUREG/CR 1735, April 1981.
20. Adroguer, B., Hueber, C., and Trotabas, M., “Behavior of PWR fuel in LOCA conditions –PHEBUS Test 215P”, OECD/NEA CSNI/IAEA Specialists meeting in water reactor fuel safety
and fission product release in off-normal and accident conditions., 1983, Risö, Denmark.
21. Del Negro, R., et al., “Phebus program – First results”, International Meeting on Thermal Reactor
Safety, 1982, Chicago, USA.
22. Hueber, C., et al., “Le programme experimental PHEBUS”, International Colloquium on
Irradiation Tests for Reactor Safety Programs, 1979, Petten, Netherlands.
23. Manin, A., Del Negro, R., and Reocreux, M., Specialist Meeting on Safety Aspects of Fuel
Behaviour in Off Normal and Accident Conditions, 1980, Espoo, Finland.
24. Grandjean, C., “A state-of-the-art review of past programs devoted to fuel behaviour under
LOCA conditions: 1st Part: Clad swelling and rupture, assembly flow blockage”, IRSN, Technical
Report DPAM/SEMCA 2005/313, December 2005.
25. Hofmann, P. and Spino, J., “Can we expect a low ductility failure of Zircaloy tubing due toiodine-induced stress corrosion cracking in a LOCA transient”, ANS/ENS Topical Meeting on
Reactor Safety Aspects of Fuel Behaviour, 1981, Sun Valley, USA.
26. Broughton, J.M., et al., “PBF LOCA test LOC-6 fuel behavior report”, NUREG/CR-3184, April
1983.
27. Jones, P., et al., “EOLO-JR: A single rod burst test programme in the ESSOR reactor”, IAEA
Specialists meeting on water reactor fuel element performance computer modelling, 1982,
Preston, United Kingdom.
28. Jones, P.M. and Crichton, D., “Creep-rupture tests on Zircaloy-4 tubes in various atmospheres”,
UKAEA Report ND-R-376(S), 1980.
29. Bruet, M. and Janvier, J.C., “FLASH experiments in SILOE reactor; fuel rod behaviour during
LOCA tests”, OECD/NEA CSNI/IAEA Specialists meeting in water reactor fuel safety andfission product release in off-normal and accident conditions., 1983, Risö, Denmark.
30. Houdaille, B., Fillatre, A., and Morize, P., “Development and qualification of the LOCA analysis
system CUPIDON-DEMETER”, OECD/NEA CSNI/IAEA Specialists meeting in water reactor
fuel safety and fission product release in off-normal and accident conditions., 1983, Risö, Denmark.
31. Bruet, M., et al., “High burn-up fuel behaviour during a LOCA type accident: the FLASH 5
experiment”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Behavior of Core Materials and Fission
Product Release in Accident Conditions in LWR’s, 1992, Cadarache, France.
32. Mohr, C.L., et al., “LOCA simulation in the National Research Universal Reactor Program: Data
report MT-3”, NUREG/CR-2528, PNL-4166, April 1983.
33. Wilson, C.L., et al., “LOCA simulation in the NRU program: Data Report MT-4”, NUREG/CR3272 PNL 4669, July 1983.
34. Bergquist, P., et al., “Impact of the calculated peak clad temperature of a redistribution of the fuelafter fuel swelling and rupture”, AB Fjärrvärme, FV-78-0010/01.
329

35. Broughton, J.M., et al., “Effect of fuel re-distribution on cladding temperatures during a large
break LOCA and impact on NRC licensing requirements”, CSNI Meeting, 1982, Tokai Mura.
36. Mohr, C.L. and Hesson, G.M., “Balloning and flow blockage for high α LOCA conditions. Paper19”, IAEA Specialists meeting on water reactor fuel element performance computer modelling,
1982, Preston, United Kingdom.
37. Haste, T.J., “Modelling the effect of different mechanical restraint conditions on PWR fuel rod
deformation under conditions relevant to the NRU MT-3 experiment, using the MABEL 2-D
code”, UKAEA Report ND-R-988(S).
38. Kawasaki, S., et al., “Effect of non-heated rods on the ballooning behaviour in a fuel assembly
under a loss-of-coolant condition”, ANS/ENS Topical Meeting on Reactor Safety Aspects of Fuel
Behaviour, 1981, Sun Valley, USA.
39. Kawasaki, S., Vetsuka, H., and Furuta, T., “Mulit-rod burst tests under loss of coolant
conditions”, OECD-NEA CSNI/IAEA Specialists meeting in water reactor fuel safety and fission
product release in off-normal and accident conditions., 1983, Risö, Denmark.
40. Longest, A.W., “Multi-rod burst test program. Progress report Jan-June 1981”, NUREG/CR-2366Vol. 1 ORNL/NUREG/TM-8058, Dec. 1981.
41. Réocreux, M. and Scott de Martinville, E.F., “A study of fuel behavior in PWR design basis
accident: an analysis of results from the PHEBUS and EDGAR experiments”, Nuclear
Engineering and Design, 124(1990), pp. 363-378.
42. Scott de Martinville, E.F. and Pignard, M., “International standard problem ISP-19 - Behaviourof a fuel rod bundle during a large break LOCA transient with a two peak temperature history(PHEBUS experiment)”, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, CSNI Report 131, 1987.
43. Svanholm, K., et al., “Halden Reactors IFA-511.2 and IFA-54X: Experimental series underadverse cooling conditions”, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 11(1995).
44. Haste, T.J., “Conclusions from the IFA-54X series to compare the ballooning response of nuclear
and electrically heated PWR fuel rods in the Halden reactor”, Halden Project Seminar on HighBurn-up Fuel Performance Topics, 1987, Fredrikstad, Norway, Halden Reactor Project.
45. Haste, T.J., “CANSWEL-2: A computer model of the creep deformation of Zircaloy cladding
under loss-of-coolant accident conditions; Part 1, Model description”, ND-R-814(S), July 1982.
46. Donaldson, A.T., Horwood, R.A., and Healey, T., “Pre-test prediction and post-test analysis of
PWR fuel rod ballooning in the MT-3 in-pile LOCA simulation experiment in the NRU reactor”,
IAEA Specialists meeting on water reactor fuel element performance computer modelling., 1982,
Preston, UK, Applied Science Publishers, pp. 367-391.
47. Healey, T., et al., “Ballooning response of nuclear and electrically heated PWR fuel rods tested in
the Halden reactor and under laboratory simulation conditions”, Conference of Nuclear Fuel
Performance., 1985, Stratford-on-Avon, UK, British Nuclear Energy Society.
48. Lestinen, V., Kolstad, E., and Wiesenack, W., “LOCA testing at Halden, trial runs in IFA-650”,
2003 Nuclear Safety Research Conference, 2003, Washington, DC, USA, NRC, pp. 299-309.
49. Ek, M., “Minutes of the LOCA Workshop Meeting”, LOCA Workshop Meeting, 2005, Halden,
Norway.
50. Ek, M., “LOCA testing at Halden, the third experiment IFA-650.3”, OECD Halden Reactor
Project, HWR-785, October 2005.

330

51. Kekkonen, L., “LOCA testing at Halden, the fourth experiment IFA-650.4”, OECD Halden
Reactor Project, HWR-838, November 2005.
52. Wiehr, K., Erbacher, F.J., and Neitzel, H.J., “Influence of cold control rod guide thimble on theballooning behaviour of Zircaloy claddings in a LOCA”, CSNI Specialist Meeting on Safety
Aspects of Fuel Behaviour in Off-Normal and Accident Conditions, 1980, Espoo, Finland,OECD, pp. 141-154.
53. Wiehr, K., Erbacher, F.J., and Neitzel, H.J., “Influence of thermohydraulics on fuel rod behaviour
in a LOCA”, CSNI Specialist Meeting on Safety Aspects of Fuel Behaviour in Off-Normal and
Accident Conditions, 1980, Espoo, Finland, OECD, pp. 59-73.
54. Erbacher, F.J., “REBEKA test results”, 9th Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting, 1981,
Gaithersburg, USA, NRC.
55. Rininsland, H., et al., “Stand der Reaktorsicherheitsforschung in Projekt Nukleare Sicherheit”,
KfK Jahrescolloquium, 1982.
56. Erbacher, F.J., Neitzel, H.J., and Wiehr, K., “Effects of thermohydraulics on clad ballooning,
flow blockage and coolability in a LOCA”, OECD-NEA-CSNI/IAEA Specialists’ Meeting on
Water Reactor Fuel Safety and Fission Product Release in Off-Normal and Accident Conditions.,
1983, Risö, Denmark.
57. Erbacher, F.J., Neitzel, H.J., and Wiehr, K., “Interactions between thermohydraulics and fuel cladballooning in a LOCA - results of REBEKA multi-rod burst tests with flooding”, 6th Water
Reactor Safety Information Meeting, 1978, Gaithersburg, USA, NRC.
58. Weidinger, H.W., et al., “LOCA - fuel rod behaviour of KWU-pressurized water reactors”, CSNI
Specialist Meeting on the Behaviour of Water Reactor Fuel Elements under Accident Conditions,
1976, Spaatind, Norway, OECD.
59. Ortlieb, E., Cheliotis, G., and Weidinger, H.W., “Influence of mechanical anisotropy on the
LOCA deformation behaviour of Zircaloy cladding”International Meeting on Thermal Nuclear
Reactor Safety, 1982, Chicago, USA.
60. Cheliotis, G., Romeiser, H., J., and Weidinger, H.W., “Multi-rod burst tests - investigations of
LOCA behaviour of PWR fuel assemblies”, Atomkernenergi Kerntechnik, 34(1979), pp. 255-257.
61. Cheliotis, G., Ortlieb, E., and Weidinger, H.W., “Single and multi rod investigations for theexperimental and theoretical verification of LOCA fuel behaviour”, ANS/ENS Topical Meetingon Reactor Safety Aspects of Fuel Behaviour, 1981, Sun Valley, USA.
62. Cheliotis, G., et al., “Verification of LOCA clad ballooning behaviour in mulit rod tests by meansof single rod investigations”, CSNI Specialist Meeting on Safety Aspects of Fuel Behaviour in
Off-Normal and Accident Conditions, 1980, Espoo, Finland, OECD.
63. Suzuki, M., “Simulation test on interactions of Zircaloy claddings deforming in fuel assembly
under LOCA conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 20(1983), pp. 475-490.
64. Chapman, R.H., et al., “Status of Zircaloy deformation and oxidation research at Oak Ridge
National Laboratory”, Specialist Meeting on WR Fuel Elements under accident conditions, 1976,
Spaatind, Norway, OECD/NEA.
65. Hindle, E.D., “Zircaloy fuel clad ballooning tests ar 900-1070 K in steam”, UKAEA Report NDR-6(S), June 1977.
66. Chapman, R.H., et al., “Effect of creep time and heating rate on deformation of Zircaloy-4 tubes
tested in steam with internal heaters”, NUREG/CR-0343, ORNL/NUREG/TM-245, Oct. 1978.

331

67. Chapman, R.H., et al., “Bundle B-1 test data”, ORNL/NUREG/TM-322, June 1979.
68. Chapman, R.H., et al., “Bundle B-2 test data”, ORNL/NUREG/TM-337, August 1979.
69. Chapman, R.H., “Preliminary multi-rod burst test program results and implications of interest toreactor safety evaluations”, 6th Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting, 1978, Gaithersburg,
USA, NRC.
70. Chapman, R.H., et al., “Multi-rod
ORNL/NUREG/TM-360, Jan. 1980.

burst

test

program.

BundleB-3

testdata”,

71. Longest, A.W., Crowley, J.L., and Chapman, R.H., “Experiment data report for multirod burst
test (MRBT) bundle B-4”, NUREG/CR-2968, Dec. 1982.
72. Chapman, R.H., Longest, A.W., and Crowley, J.L., “Experiment data report for multirod burst
test (MRBT) B-6”, NUREG/CR-3460, July 1984.
73. Chapman, R.H., Crowley, J.L., and Longest, A.W., “Effect of bundle size on cladding
deformation in LOCA simulation tests”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Sixth International
Symposium, 1982, Vancouver, Canada, ASTM STP 824, ASTM, pp. 693-708.
74. Burman, D.L., et al., “Comparison of Westinghouse LOCA burst test results with ORNL andother program results”, CSNI Specialist Meeting on Safety Aspects of Fuel Behaviour in OffNormal and Accident Conditions, 1980, Espoo, Finland, OECD, pp. 251-284.
75. Brachet, J.-C., et al., “Influence of hydrogen content on the alpha/beta phase transformation
temperatures and the thermal-mechanical behavior of Zy-4, M4 (ZrSnFeV), and M5 (ZrNbO)
alloys during the first phase of a LOCA transient”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: ThirteenthInternational Symposium, 2001, Annecy, ASTM STP 1423, ASTM, pp. 673-701.
76. Forgeron, T., et al., “Experiment and modeling of advanced fuel rod cladding behavior under
LOCA conditions: Alpha-Beta phase transformation kinetics and EDGAR methodology”,
Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Twelth International Symposium, 1998, Toronto, ASTM STP
1354, ASTM, pp. 256-278.
77. Bouffioux, P. and Rupa, N., “Impact of hydrogen on plasticity and creep of unirradiated Zircaloy4 cladding tubes”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: Twelth International Symposium, 1998,
Toronto, ASTM STP 1354, ASTM, pp. 399-422.
78. Portier, L., et al., “Influence of long service exposures on the thermal-mechanical behavior of Zy4 and M5 alloys in LOCA conditions”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: FourteenthInternational Symposium, 2004, Stockholm, ASTM STP 1467, ASTM, pp. 896-920.
79. Hindle, E.D. and Mowat, J.A.S., “Swelling behaviour of SGHWR fuel cladding in steam inlaboratory tests simulating LOCA involving temperatures above 900 C”, Specialist Meeting on
WR Fuel Elements under accident conditions, 1976, Spaatind, Norway, OECD/NEA.
80. Hindle, E.D. and Mann, C.A., “Zircaloy PWR fuel cladding deformation tests under mainly
convective cooling conditions”, UKAEA report ND-R-364(S), Jan. 1980.
81. Healey, T., Clay, B.D., and Duffey, R.B., “Analysis of the axial ballooning behaviour of directly
heated Zircaloy tubes”, CEGB RD/B/N4145, Sept. 1977.
82. Hindle, E.D., Mann, C.A., and Reynolds, A.E., “Simulation of Zircaloy cladding deformation
under accident conditions derived from analysis of data from Three Mile Island-2”, CSNI
Specialist Meeting on Safety Aspects of Fuel Behaviour in Off-Normal and Accident Conditions,
1980, Espoo, Finland, OECD, pp. 155-157.

332

83. Hindle, E.D., “Zircaloy fuel clad ballooning tests at 900-1070K in steam. Further results at 8901150K”, UKAEA report ND-R-6(S) 1st supplement, Oct. 1977.
84. Garlick, A. and Hindmarch, P., “Cladding elongation and fuel stack mechanical stability during
internal pressurization tests on irradiated PWR fuel”, UKAEA Report ND-R628(W), March 1983.
85. Bowring, R.W., et al., “MABEL-2: A code to analyse cladding deformation in a loss-of-coolant
accident. Part 4”, UKAEA Report AEEW-R-1532.
86. Bowring, R.W., et al., “MABEL-2: A code to analyse cladding deformation in a loss-of-coolant
accident. Part 3”, UKAEA Report AEEW-R-1531.
87. Bowring, R.W., et al., “MABEL-2: A code to analyse cladding deformation in a loss-of-coolant
accident. Part 2”, UKAEA Report AEEW-R-1530.
88. Bowring, R.W., et al., “MABEL-2: A code to analyse cladding deformation in a loss-of-coolant
accident. Part 1”, UKAEA Report AEEW-R-1529.
89. Hindle, E.D., European patent application No. 81 302280.3, 1981.
90. Haste, T.J., “Modelling the mechanical constraint of the deformation of Zircaloy cladding in a
non-uniform environment, using the CANSWEL-2 code”, IAEA Specialists meeting on water
reactor fuel element performance computer modelling, 1982, Preston, United Kingdom.
91. Jackson, P.A. and Palmer, I.D., “The influence of fuel pellet fragmentation on predicte azimuthal
temperature variations in ballooning cladding”, OECD/NEA/CSNI-IAEA Specialists Meeting on
Water Reactor Fuel Safety and Fission Product Release in Off-Normal and Accident Conditions,
1983, Risö.
92. Bibilashvili, Y.K., et al., “WWER-1000 type fuel assembly tests on electroheated facilities in
LOCA simulating conditions”, IAEA Technical Committee Meeting on Fuel behaviour undertransient and LOCA conditions., 2001, Halden, Norway, IAEA, pp. 169-185.
93. Hózer, Z., et al., “Ballooning experiments with VVER cladding”, Nuclear Technology,152(2005), pp. 273-285.

333

8. PREDICTIVE COMPUTER CODES

8.1 Some general comments on computer codes
Workers in several countries have developed codes aimed at predicting the behaviour of a fuelassembly in a LOCA. In general, these codes attempt to predict the deformation of a fuel rod, thetermination of deformation by rupture, the temperature reached by the cladding, oxidation of cladding,and in some codes, the interaction between neighbouring rods. A code typically draws input informationon coolant condition from a thermal-hydraulic code, and data on fuel from a steady-state code, while arange of sub-codes calculate fission gas release, deformation etc. Leading examples are consideredbelow.
As will be seen later many of the computer codes used today are the same as or developments ofcodes that were used at the time of writing of the previous LOCA state-of-the-art report in 1986 [1].
However, there has been a dramatic change in the computing environment. In 1986, one of the fastest
computers, Cray X-MP, had a computing power of 500-1 000 MFlops1 depending on configuration.
Normally, however, computer codes for LOCA analysis would be run on a less powerful mainframe
computer. In 2007, a computer code would typically be run on a desktop PC with one or more
microprocessors each with a computing power of perhaps 30 GFlops assisted by a graphics processor
operating with perhaps 500 GFlops. The cost of computing power has been reduced accordingly, fromseveral 100 000 USD/GFlops to a few USD/GFlops. Many of the computer codes are not adjusted tothis new environment, input and output procedures are frequently similar to the procedures used forbatch processing in mainframe computers. However, there exist a number of new codes which takefull account of a modern computer environment with an advanced graphics based user interface.
8.1.1 Types of computer codes
In order to model a LOCA or an experiment simulating a LOCA or a subset of a LOCA event
three categories of codes are needed:•••

Reactor physics codes.
Fuel behaviour codes.
Thermohydraulics codes.

The reactor physics codes provide the starting condition for a LOCA event. Recent developments
have included a more advanced graphics user-interface and the merger of reactor physics codes withsystem thermohydraulics codes [2].
The fuel behaviour codes can be separated into steady state codes and transient codes. The steadystate codes describe the normal operation of the fuel and may contain submodels which calculate fission
gas release, restructuring of fuel with burn-up, any deformation occurring etc. The steady-state code
then provides the starting conditions for the transient code which calculates cladding deformation and
1.

Flops = floating point operations per second.

335

fracture during the transient. Fuel behaviour codes tend to be design specific and are typically used byregulatory and industry groups in the country of origin. The transient codes used for accident conditions
may contain modelling options for both conservative and best estimate calculations [2].
System thermohydraulic codes are typically less design specific and are applied to a wider variety
of designs and conditions. A limited number of these codes are widely used around the world byregulatory, research and industry organisations. The codes developed by regulatory bodies are
typically used as best estimate codes and do not contain specific models for conservative analysis.
However, many of the industry supported codes contain models for conservative and best estimate
analyses. These thermohydraulic codes are characterised by mechanistic models for two fluid, nonequilibrium hydrodynamics, point and multi-dimensional reactor kinetics, control systems and othersystem components such as pumps, valves and accumulators. These codes can typically be used tomodel a wide range of configurations for single pipes, experimental facilities and full plants and, inmany cases, have been applied to most reactor designs around the world.
In later sections, we shall use the categorisation, single rod codes, assembly/channel codes, andsystem codes. The latter are of course more or less synonymous with thermohydraulics codes.
8.1.2 Documentation
The following text is a direct quote from Reference 1.
“Each computer code needs to be adequately documented to facilitate review of the models andcorrelations employed, and to ensure that the models for important phenomena are appropriate and are
not applied outside their range of validity. The documentation would also provide a description of theuncertainties of important models and the overall code for typical applications. The code documentation
would also include user guidelines and input descriptions to ensure that the user can use the software
properly. Although the guidance may vary depending on the complexity of the codes and the modellingparameters available to the user, the user guidelines or validation documentation need to give the user
some guidance on the influence of important modelling parameters, recommendations for typicalapplications of the code, the type of nodalization to be used and the important trends to be expected.
Typically, a complete set of documentation would include:
•
•
•
•
•

An abstract of the programme.
A theory manual.
A user’s manual and description of the inputs.
A programmer’s manual.
A validation report.

The scope of documentation may vary depending on the complexity of the code and on theapplications to which it is applied. In the most comprehensive examples, multiple volumes may benecessary to describe the design and implementation of code models and correlations. In some cases,
separate manuals may be provided in which the models and correlations used in individual codes are
discussed. For example, the models and correlations document for each code:(a) May provide information on its original source and its database.
(b) May describe how it is implemented in the code.
(c) May describe the expected accuracy of the models, including an assessment of any effects
were the code to be used outside its basis of data, the effects of the specific manner in which
the model is implemented in the code and the effects of any unique numerical features
necessary to overcome computational difficulties.
(d) May provide information on the applicability of the model to the analysis of reactor systems.
336

In general terms, the documentation for internationally recognised codes is quite extensive and in
most cases includes descriptions of the key phenomenological models, user’s manuals and results ofassessment calculations. The system thermohydraulic codes typically have the most comprehensive
documentation since these codes have extensive manuals prepared by the code developers in addition
to a number of contributors of different nationalities who have provided independent reports on the
results of the code assessment and validation. The documentation for the codes for accident conditions
beyond the design basis is more diverse, with nearly all codes having some form of user’s manual andmanuals describing the theory of the model. Some of the codes also include manuals for material
properties, code developer’s assessment and validation, and user guidelines. Some codes also have
manuals available in electronic form or through the Internet.”
8.1.3 Code verification
Code verification can be defined as a comparison of the source coding with its description in the
documentation. It has not been applied consistently to many of the codes used around the world. Sinceline by line verification of these large codes is a time consuming and expensive process, this process islimited to those codes which are relatively static and not subject to continual change. In particular,
many industry sponsored codes have been subjected to stringent verification procedures as aconsequence of the regulatory licensing process.
8.1.4 Code validation
There is normally [2] a regulatory requirement that codes be assessed (validated) in relation to
relevant experimental data for the major phenomena expected to occur. The validation relates to theconfidence that can be placed on the accuracy of the values predicted by the code. Three sources of data
are generally used to validate these codes: phenomenological data, data on separate effects (component
data), and integral data.
For validation, certain quantities are selected for the comparison of calculations with experimental
data. These quantities serve as “indicators” for determining whether or not a code provides satisfactory
results; i.e. indicators that can be used to measure the “level of validation” of a code. The identificationor choice of indicators is, therefore, a crucial step in the validation. The quantification of the validation
can be expressed in terms of the accuracy with which a code predicts an indicator, and it must relate to
the agreement between the values of the indicators as predicted and as measured experimentally. The
indicators are directly related to the physical driving phenomena of the response to the accident andare usually those code output quantities which are compared with acceptance criteria in accident
analysis.
Historically, the validation of many codes has included the formulation of a model (orhypothesis), design of validation experiments, collection of experimental data, analysis of these data,comparison of experimental data with code predictions and reformulation (if necessary) of the model.
The need for the reformulation of the model and reiteration depends on whether or not the code isjudged to have met the validation goals or criteria. Currently, since many experimental programmes
are run independently of the activities for code development and validation, the design of experiments,
collection of data and analysis of the data may be performed separately. In addition, since many of theexperimental programmes have been completed, validation of new models and codes may rely very
heavily on archival data sources. However, it remains important to validate the code against at least
some of the experiments which have not been used directly to support the models in individual codes.
A code can sometimes predict a set of data with a high degree of accuracy and still be extremely
inaccurate for other data sets. This has led to the need to develop a “validation matrix” for each code
through which different types of experimental facilities and different sets of conditions in the samefacility are used for code validation [2-4].
337

Most internationally recognised codes have been subjected to systematic validation procedures
through a number of international programmes, with system thermohydraulic codes receiving the mostattention. Other types of codes have also been systematically validated, but to a lesser extent. The system
thermohydraulic codes maintained by regulatory and research organisations are still the subject of a highlevel of effort in this area as a result of the work of the code developers and of other international
activities. Under these programmes, which include those of the IAEA, the OECD/CSNI, extensive
experimental matrices for code validation have been established and the codes have been assessed inrelation to many of the experiments that are included in those matrices. The validation exercises havealso included comparisons with relevant data from plant operations and participation in international
standard problems [5-6].
8.1.5 The accuracy of codes
The following text is an edited version of a corresponding section in Reference 1.
“Although the primary objective of the code validation process is to help define the accuracy ofcodes, such accuracy may be defined in qualitative rather than quantitative terms owing to the timeand expense associated with estimation of the uncertainties in predicted behaviour for wide ranges of
LOCA conditions and designs. The assessment of the accuracy of individual codes typically includes aseries of steps:(a) Identifying the important trends in the supporting experimental data and expected fuelbehaviour.
(b) Estimating the uncertainties in the overall code results associated with the fundamental
numerical approaches used.
(c) Estimating uncertainties in key models and overall code results.
(d) Establishing sensitivities in important processes.
A number of different techniques are used with code to data comparisons, the preferred techniquewhen an adequate basis of data exists. Code to code comparisons, model to model comparisons andengineering judgement are also important techniques. The identification of important trends in the
supporting experimental data and in the expected fuel behaviour is an important step for several
reasons. It allows analysts to select the proper models and codes to be used for a particular analysis
and to evaluate the overall performance of the computer codes being used.
Although the documentation of the codes needs to provide some description of the limits ofapplicability of the codes, such descriptions provide only rough guidelines to the analyst. The estimationof the uncertainties arising from the numerical approaches used in each code serves a number of primaryneeds. The uncertainties associated with the numerics of individual codes or models can arise fromseveral sources. First, since many of the processes being modelled are non-linear, uncertainties can arise
from the discretization of the equations used. Sensitivities to time step and nodalization are primeexamples. Second, uncertainties can arise from differences in computer architecture, operating systems
and compilers due to differences in machine accuracy, errors introduced by optimisation of the compiler
and installation errors. Although many code developers assess the numerical accuracy of their codes fordifferent machines, and provide guidelines on time step and nodalization, it is impossible for developers
to evaluate all possible computer configurations for a complete range of code applications. From theperspective of code developers, the estimation of these uncertainties is important to ensure that thecontributions from the numerical approaches used are negligibly small compared with the overallmodelling uncertainties, and that convergence in terms of time steps and nodalization can be obtained.
From the perspective of analysts, this estimation is important to ensure that the proper user guidelines forsuch parameters as time step control and nodalization are followed and are appropriate to the problems
being analysed. It is also important to ensure that the codes have been installed properly and that the338

influence of operating system errors and compiler errors on their computers has been minimised. As aconsequence, it is important that analysts evaluate the impact of these uncertainties through convergencestudies and comparison with developer supplied test problems.
The estimation of model uncertainties and code uncertainties has been formalised using a rangeof methods. Fundamental to all methods is the adequacy of the supporting experimental data and thescalability of that basis of data to full plant conditions. The experimental data can be used in a variety
of ways, with direct comparisons between the results of measurements and those of calculations being
one of the most common approaches. Code to code comparisons, particularly the benchmarking ofparametric codes and models against more mechanistic codes, are also important checks on the overall
uncertainties in the codes. Assessment of codes with respect to fundamental problems, for whichanalytical solutions or other independent sources of results are available, is also valuable.
The estimation of uncertainties in the model or the code needs also to include the effects ofimportant model input parameters. Although defaults for model input parameters have to be set by codedevelopers to reflect the central or best estimate value of the uncertainty bands, this is not always done.
In particular, in some parametric codes the model input parameters can be varied for each code to dataor code to code comparison to minimise the variations in such comparisons. In this case analysts need
to be aware of the influence of these parameters and to set them to reflect best estimate values on thebasis of their own code to data or code to code comparisons appropriate to their applications. Recent
efforts to automate the generation of uncertainty estimates through options such as the propagation oferrors in the calculated results may help analysts. Sensitivity studies can also be useful in gaining an
understanding of the influence of important modelling parameters. Code developers need to provide
users with some guidance on usage, including nodalization guidelines, recommended modellingparameters, and estimates of the overall trends and uncertainties in typical code calculations. However,
it is also important for analysts to assess the applicability of the codes for their particular application, toestablish an adequate level of nodalization, to determine the impact of important modelling parameters,
and to assess the trends and accuracy of the calculations in relation to their applications.”
8.2 Single rod codes
8.2.1 Steady-state codes
For the purpose of LOCA analysis it is necessary to first use a computer code which defines thestate of the fuel rod at the start of the transient. This type of code is usually called steady-state codes incontrast to the codes used for the transient behaviour of the fuel rods. However, the steady-state codes
can normally handle power transients within normal operating conditions of power reactor fuel so theterm steady-state is slightly misleading.
There are a large number of steady-state codes. As with most codes, they are named with someacronym with the addition of a number which defines the version of the code. A typical example is the
FRAP family of programs where FRAP simply means “fuel rod analysis package”. By adding a suffix
S or T as in FRAP-TX, it is specified that the code calculates steady state or transient behaviour andthat it is version X of the code.
The following list of steady-state codes has been compiled from different sources but the main
source is a recent code survey performed by the CSNI Special Expert Group on Fuel Safety Margins.
It is not within the scope of the present report to discuss in detail what the different codes canaccomplish. In general, many of them produce relatively accurate results for instance in regard to fission
gas release.
339

Code

User/Owner

CodeUser/Owner

FRAPCON
TRANSURANUS
RAPTA-5
COPERNIC3FALCONMETEORCARONRC
FZK Karlsruhe
VNIIM
AREVA
EPRI
CEA
Siemens

ENIGMAFEMAXI-X
ELESTRESTOUTATIS
ALCYONE
STAV-XFOXFIRE

Westinghouse (BNFL)
JAEA
AECL/COG
CEA
CEA
Westinghouse (Sweden)
Westinghouse

While many of the codes are relatively old a few modern codes like COPERNIC3 [7-8] andFOXFIRE [9] fully utilise a modern graphics user interface and hierarchical data structures. Since bothare developed within organisations created by company mergers they contain models from many of theolder codes listed above. The objective of COPERNIC3 is said to be to accurately predict fuel behaviour
under steady-state, transient and storage conditions. However, the descriptions available do not mention
any modelling of LOCA transients.
8.2.2 Transient codes
As an example of a transient codes, we can take FRAPTRAN-1.3, a descendent of the previous
FRAP-TX codes. The code calculates the transient response of a single fuel rod under a range ofaccidents ranging from operational transients to LOCA and reactivity insertion accidents. It is a
modular code comprising several sub-codes which interactively calculate the effects of fuel, cladding
and plenum temperatures, fuel and cladding deformation and rod internal pressure, including fission
gas release. A flowchart of the code is shown in Figure 8.1.
Figure 8.1 Flowchart for the code FRAPTRAN-1.3 [10]340

FRAPTRAN-1.3 is basically a one-dimensional code but a submodel of the code, BALON2, cancalculate the shape of the balloon after that the code has established that plastic instability has been reached.
As for steady-state codes there exists a large number of codes which handles transient behaviourof fuel. The following list shows codes used for LOCA analysis.
Code
FRAP-TX
FRAPTRAN
FRAS-LOCA
ELOCA
TRACE
FREY
RANNS

User/Owner
NRC
NRC
NRI
AECL
PSI
EPRI
JAEA

Code
MABEL
CUPIDONCARATEBETHY
BART-A1TESPA
CATHACOMB

User/Owner
UK
CEA
Siemens
Siemens
NNC
GRS
CEA

There are several more codes, some of them obsolete, some of them incorporated into new codes
under another name to some extent due to the restructuring of the nuclear industry in the last few years.
In a recent publication van Uffelen et al. present how the steady state code TRANSURANUS has
been extended to use under design basis accident conditions [11].
8.3 Assembly/channel codes
The purpose of an assembly/channel code is to describe what happens to a fuel assembly during a
LOCA event, how the different fuel rods interact and to get an idea of how the channel may beblocked by ballooned fuel rods. For determination of the temperature transient, most thermohydrauliccodes can be used since they are easily adapted to small systems as well as complete reactor systems.
Codes which calculate fuel rod behaviour in whole assemblies including rod-to-rod interactions
are relatively rare. One such code is the Japanese FRETA-B code [12]. FRETA-B is described as
being specialised in two-dimensional analysis in the transverse direction [13]. Axially the rods are
divided into essentially independent segments. For modelling of a fuel bundle, each fuel rod is divided
into four azimuthal sectors for the thermal calculation. One coolant subchannel with four surrounding
fuel rod sectors constitutes the basic unit of geometry. For the ballooning calculation, a cladding
circumference i represented by 20 nodes, and local cladding temperature is derived by cosineinterpolation from the four sector temperatures.
The ballooning model takes anisotropy into account. Rod-rod contact is monitored at every node,
and when a node is found to be covered by another rod the strain increment there is set to zero. A rod isdetermined to have ruptured when a local hoop strain has exceeded a threshold value. This is slightly
unrealistic because fracture strains are often very high, but the shell model for ballooning cannot follow
such extreme strain localisations. Figure 8.2 shows the result of calculations of deformations in the
MT-1 experiment (Section 7.3.1.5) with FRETA-B [13].
S. Sunder has contributed the following brief description of ELOCA 2.2, a CANDU safety
analysis code which calculates the thermo-mechanical response of a CANDU fuel element (including
fuel failure) under the high temperature transient conditions representative of CANDU reactor
loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) scenarios.
Understanding the behaviour of nuclear fuel pins under accident conditions is a key facet of
CANDU safety analysis. A change in fuel element power output, or a change in heat transfer
characteristics, will cause an immediate change in the temperature distribution in a fuel element. The
temperature distribution change will be accompanied by concomitant changes in fuel and fuel sheath341

material properties and the internal gas pressure within the element. In turn, the contact pressure
between the fuel and the sheath may be affected, causing a further change in the fuel temperatures.
Because of this potentially large feedback mechanism, CANDU fuel codes, such as ELOCA, must not
only be capable of modelling the heat generation and thermal conductance within the fuel, but also thecomplex mechanical interactions between the fuel and the fuel sheath during LOCA.
Figure 8.2 Deformation pattern at level 15 of the MT-1 experiment as calculated by FRETA-B

Under the extremes of temperature, typical of an accident, sheath failure may occur due tointernal pressurization of the fuel pin, by oxidation from the external environment, or by a
combination of the two. ELOCA-IST 2.2 code contains the following six mechanisms to determine
sheath failure in a CANDU fuel element during LOCA:•

Sheath failure due to overstrain: The sheath is typically assumed to fail when the sheathstrain, averaged along the length of the fuel pin reaches 5%.

•

Low ductility sheath failure: At low temperature and high stress, cold-worked Zircaloy tubes
have large strain-rate sensitivity with a small temperature dependency leading to potential
sheath failure at low strains (<0.5%).

•

Sheath failure by beryllium-assisted crack penetration: At the elevated temperatures of an
accident transient (>1 000 K) and under large hoop stresses, the Zircaloy pads and spacers(beryllium-brazed onto the sheath surface) can assist in crack penetration of the sheaththrough liquid metal embrittlement.

•

Sheath failure by oxygen embrittlement: The presence of dissolved oxygen in the Zircaloy
sheath, at concentrations between 0.5 and 1.0 wt %, sufficiently embrittles the sheath at low
temperatures (<600 K) that it can no longer withstand the hydraulic forces and thermal shockassociated with rapid quenching; the sheath may fail on re-wet following a loss-of-coolant
accident.
342

•

Sheath failure by overstrain under oxide cracks: The oxide formed on the outside of a
Zircaloy fuel sheath is brittle, and cracks may form in the oxide at low strains. Once a crack
has started, the stress concentration at the crack tip can lead to propagation of the crack into
the sheath wall. The reduced sheath thickness under the crack tip results in localised strainsthat are higher than the average values for the sheath and may result in sheath failure.

•

Sheath failure due to high strain rate: At high strain rates, the fuel sheath can fail before thelocal sheath failure criterion has been reached. The high strain rate criterion determines
sheath failure based on the current sheath strain rate.

A code currently under development at IRSN is called DRACCAR. The purpose of the code is tosimulate the thermo-mechanical behaviour of a rod bundle under LOCA with a 3D multi-rod
description as illustrated in Figure 8.3.
Figure 8.3 Example of DRACCAR calculation in a bundle geometry
with rod deformation as the result of a LOCA type transient [14]It is anticipated that this tool will allow a consistent analysis of the existing experimental database both for single rod and bundle tests. It will also be used to evaluate complementary researchneeds for the behaviour of reactor assemblies and to perform reference calculations on well defined
configurations with evaluation of related uncertainties.
8.4 System codes
System thermohydraulic codes describe the behaviour of the reactor systems, includinghydrodynamics, heat transfer, reactor kinetics, control systems and other system components. Examples
of codes in this category include RELAPX [15], TRAC-P/B (PWR/BWR)[15] and COBRA-TRAC [15](United States of America), CATHARE [16] (France), ATHLET [17] (Germany), DINAMIKA [18](Russian Federation), SMABRE [19] and APROS [20] (Finland), and CATHENA [21] (Canada).
8.5 References
1.

Parsons, P.D., Hindle, E.D., and Mann, C.A., “PWR fuel behaviour in design basis accident
conditions. A State-of-the-Art Report by the Task Group on Fuel Behaviour of CSNI Principal
Working Group No 2”, Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear Energy
Agency, CSNI Report 129.
343

2.
3.

4.

5.
6.

7.
8.

9.
10.
11.
12.

13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

19.

20.
21.

Accident analysis for nuclear power plants, International Atomic Energy Agency, Safety Report
Series No. 23, 2002.
CSNI integral test facility validation matrix for the assessment of thermal-hydraulic codes for
LWR LOCA and transients, Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear
Energy Agency, OCDE/GD(97)12, July 1996.
Aksan, N., et al., “Separate effects tests matrix for thermal-hydraulic code validation”, Vol. I:
Phenomena characterization and selection of facilities and tests, Vol. II: Facility and experimentcharacteristics, Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency,
CSNI Report, OECD/NEA/GD (94)/82, 1994.
CSNI International Standard Problems (ISP), brief descriptions (1975-1999), Committee on the
Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, NEA/CSNI/R(2000)S, Feb. 2000.
Contribution from twenty-two years of CSNI International Standard Problems, Committee on the
Safety of Nuclear Installations, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, NEA/CSNI/R(97)29, March
1998.
Garnier, C., et al., “Recent modelling features in the COPERNIC3 AREVA NP fuel rod
performance code”, TopFuel 2006, 2006, Salamanca, Spain, pp. 538-542.
Garnier, C., et al., “The COPERNIC3 project: How AREVA is successfully developing an
advanced global fuel rod performance code”, 2007 LWR Fuel Performance Meeting/TopFuel,
2007, San Fransisco, USA, American Nuclear Society, pp. 603-612.
Sutharshan, B., et al., “New developments in fuel performance modelling”, TopFuel 2006, 2006,
Salamanca, Spain, pp. 112-116.
Manngård, T., “Evaluation of the FRAPTRAN-1.3 computer code”, SKI, SKI Report 2007:15,
March 2007.
Van Uffelen, P., et al., “Extending the application range of a fuel performance code from normal
operating to design basis accident conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Materials (in press), (2008).
Uchida, M., Nakamura, J., and Otsubu, N., “FRETA-B: a computer code for the analysis of fuelrod bundle behaviors under accident conditions”, Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute,
JAERI-M 9485, 1981.
Uchida, M., “Application of a two-dimensional ballooning model to out-pile and in-pilesimulation experiments”, Nuclear Engineering and Design, 77(1984), pp. 37-47.
Papin, J., et al., “IRSN R&D studies on high burn-up fuel behaviour under RIA and LOCA
conditions”, TopFuel 2006, 2006, Salamanca, Spain, pp. 274-278.
Compendium of ECCS research for realistic LOCA analysis, NRC, NUREG-1230, Dec. 1988.
Fasrvacque, M., “Users’ manual of CATHARE 2 V1.3 E.”, STR/LML/EM/91-61.
Lerchl, G. and Austregesilo, O.H., “ATHLET MOD 1.1, Cycle C, Users’ Manual”, Gesellschaft
fuer Anlagen- und Reaktorsicherheit, 1995.
Computer code: Calculation of transient regimes of power plants with VVER reactors:
DINAMIKA 5M, Tchnical Specifications No. 8624606.00311-019101-LU, GKAE-OKB. 1987,
Moscow, Russia: Gidropress.
Miettinen, J. and Hämäläinen, A., “Development and validation of the fast runningthermohydraulic model SMABRE for simulator purposes”, 8th International Conference on
Nuclear Engineering (ICONE-8), 2000, Baltimore, Maryland, ASME, pp. ICONE-8188.
Puska, E.K., et al., “APROS simulation system for nuclear power plant analysis”, 3rd
JSME/ASME Joint International Conference on Nuclear Engineering., 1995, Phoenix, USA.
Hanna, B.N., “CATHENA: A thermohydraulic code for CANDU analysis”, Nuclear Engineeringand Design, 180(1997), pp. 113-131.
344

9. ENERGY AND CORE DAMAGE DISTRIBUTION ASSESSMENT:METHODOLOGIES AND RESULTS

Energy and damage distribution calculations of reactor core damage in a LOCA are necessary inorder to assess the radiological consequences of a LOCA as discussed to some extent in Section 4.3 ofthe present report. The extent of fuel cladding rupture during a large break LOCA is dependent on anumber of factors. Foremost is the number of rods in the core that achieve high cladding temperaturesduring the transient. This is a function of the rod power census and the ECCS design capability.
Another important factor is the cladding pressure differential for the various rods, which is affected by
the initial helium fill pressure, the fission gas generation and fission gas release from the fuel with burnup, the fuel rod power and the coolant pressure.
9.1 A review of core damage assessment practices in Europe
In 2000, the European Commission issued a report with the slightly misleading title “Fuel cladding
failure criteria” [1-2]. The report presents the results of a collaborative exercise concerned with thecalculation of the extent of fuel clad failure following a large loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) in lightwater reactors. The partners in the collaborative study were Tractebel (Belgium), IPSN and EdF(France), Siemens and GRS (Germany), NRG (Netherlands), IBERDROLA (Spain), ERI (Switzerland)and NNC (UK). The objectives of the exercise were to:•••

Review the existing clad failure criteria and licensing approaches in each participant’s country.
Form a consensus view on clad failure criteria.
Determine the effect of the clad failure criteria on the extent of clad failure for a reference
design in each participant’s country.

The report describes in great detail the methodologies used by the different organisations of how
fuel rods are calculated to fail. There are basically two types of failure criteria: the empirical failure
criterion based on NUREG-0630 [3] or a more mechanistic failure criterion based on knowledge of
creep properties and expected azimuthal temperature differences for the rods in a fuel assembly.
The mechanistic model applies best-estimate creep models for each specific cladding material
under consideration. The knowledge of rod power, burn-up and the thermo-hydraulic events during the
LOCA is taken as a basis for the failure calculation. All these calculations rely on computer codes as
described in Chapter 8. A typical flow chart for a deterministic calculation of fuel failure rates isshown in Figure 9.1.
In contrast to that, the empirical NUREG-0630 model ignores the cladding creep. It provides asimple relation between the mechanical load on the undeformed cladding and the rupture temperatureof the cladding.
The NUREG-0630 correlation is:

TR = 3960 −

20.4σ
8.51 × 106 × σ−
1 + H 100(1 + H ) + 2790σ
345

(9-1)

where

σ =

TR =
σ =
H=

dΔP
2t

where

rupture temperature (°C)
hoop stress (kpsi)
ramp rate ratio (°C/s to 28 °C/s)

d = undeformed cladding mid-wall diameter (inches)t = undeformed cladding thickness (inches)
ΔP = differential pressure across the cladding wall at the time ofrupture (kpsi)

As an alternative to the deterministic analysis, probabilistic analyses are made. These analyses
also use the deterministic codes for the production of statistical data based on statistical distributionsof the input data. However, it may be quite cumbersome to run through a code for each randomly
selected set of input parameters. Therefore, a subset of the input data is run with the code to produce aso called response surface which establishes a regressional relationship between the input and output
data sets. This response surface is subsequently used for calculating the output data from random input
data. Figure 9.2 shows the probability of fuel rod failure as a function of rod power for different burnups. It is clear that the failure probability increases steeply with burn-up. With the knowledge of the
failure probabilities or alternatively a deterministically established failure threshold as a function ofburn-up overviews of core damage due to a LOCA can be constructed as can be seen in Figure 9.3.
For the particular case calculated in Figure 9.3 only a few rods at a burn-up of 10-15 MWd/kg exceeds
the failure threshold.
A comparison of the results of the different participants led to the following conclusions:•

Mechanistic and the non-mechanistic NUREG-0630 fuel failure models can be used toevaluate best estimate fuel failure fraction because they are in good agreement withexperimental data. The NUREG-0630 model provides a conservative approximation of thefuel rod burst compared to the mechanistic model, because the mechanistic model allows theconsideration of the fuel rod ballooning which is a consequence of the cladding creep understress and temperature.

•

Of the parameters that cause fuel clad failures, the clad temperature is certainly one of themost important. It is thus not surprising that failures happen primarily in the hot rods.

•

The other important parameter is the rod internal pressure. The lower value of internalpressure in BWR rods causes fewer fuel failures in comparison with a PWR. The internal rod
pressure can also be influenced by modifying the volume of the gas plenum of the fuel rods.
As a consequence, the fuel design is of importance. For a given design, the internal pressure
increases with the burn-up. In contrast, the expected peak linear power decreases with burnup much faster than the threshold value of fuel failure.

•

The performed calculations show that the combination of both effects causes rods to fail at aburn-up lower than 35 GWd/te, except for MOX rods, which could fail at higher burn-ups.

346

Figure 9.1 Determination of fuel failure rate after LOCA with deterministic method (Siemens)
1
Neutronics
SAV• Reload Strategy• Power/Burn-up Histories of Fuel Rods
2
Fuel Design
CARO• Steady State of Fuel Rods
• Stored Energy, Gas Pressure
3
LOCA Plant Analysis
RELAP5• Plant Behaviour during LOCA
• Thermal Hydraulic Boundary Conditions in Core
4
LOCA Fuel Analysis
BETHY• Failure Threshold as a Function of Power and Burn-up
5
Neutronics
SAV• Cycle Specific Power/Burn-up Distribution at Limitation• Failure Rate in Core
Figure 9.2 Probability for fuel rod failure as a function of rod power at different burn-ups (Siemens)

Despite the fact that all participants used different models and codes, there was agreement withregard to the best-estimate result of the number of failed rods, no failures at all as can be seen in Table 9.1.

347

Figure 9.3 Power and burn-up distribution in a core with failure threshold
Each number gives the number of fuel rods at the particular power-burn-up combination (Siemens)

Burn-up (MWd/kg)
Table 9.1 Best estimate analyses of percentage of fuel rod failures [1]Participants
NNC
EdF
EdF
IBERINCO
GRS (UO2)
Siemens
Siemens
NRG

Boundary conditions
Best Estimate
Cons./B.E.
Cons./B.E.
Conservative
Conservative
Best Estimate
Best Estimate
Best Estimate

Rupture criterion
NUREG-0630 B.E.
NUREG-0630 B.E.
EDGAR bundle
NUREG-0630 B.E.
NUREG-0630 B.E.
Mechanistic B.E.
NUREG-0630 B.E.
NUREG-0630 B.E.

Failed fuel fraction (%)
0
0
0
0
3.2
0
0
0

When judging the results mentioned above one should keep in mind that the results reported in[1] and [2] have generic character only. That is, the underlying thermal hydraulic transient, thecladding material investigated (fresh Zry-4, no hydrogen up-take in cladding, etc.) and the fuel rod
design are arbitrarily chosen.
348

From the common licensing practice in Germany, it is known that the failed fuel fraction sometimes
reaches values close to the licensing limit of 10%. This is the case if conservative thermal-hydraulicboundary conditions and conservative assumptions for the operation mode of the reactor are combinedwith realistic power histories of the fuel rods in the normal operation phase before the LOCA event.
The latest trend in proofing the licensing limit in Germany is to account for the power history ofeach fuel rod in the core in order to keep closest track on the best-estimate fuel rod internal pressure.
This development of the licensing procedure is the consequence of the enhanced utilisation of MOX
fuel, of cores loaded with power up-rated fuel rods and the permanent increase of the discharge fuelburn-up. An example of such a calculation is given in Section 9.3.
9.2 Damage assessments for a Westinghouse PWR
A common practice in USA for assessment of the radiological consequences of a LOCA is to
assume that 100% of the rods in the core fail. On the other hand it may be instructive to consider whata realistic failure fraction might be under more representative conditions. One such study has beenreported by Nissley et al. for a 4-loop Westinghouse PWR [4]. The study was done in two parts. The
first part dealt with a 3 600 MWt reactor with 17×17 fuel assemblies and used deterministic
calculations. The other part concerned a 3 216 MWt reactor with 15×15 fuel assemblies and used astatistical analysis.
In the first analysis, it was assumed that a full train of ECCS was lost in order to ensure somecladding rupture. It was also assumed that peaking factors were 15% higher than the maximum expectedvalues. On this basis, cladding temperature response was calculated with the code WCOBRA/TRAC. A
few examples are shown in Figure 9.4. On the basis of cladding temperature distributions, the internalpressure was calculated and compared to an empirically determined burst temperature versus hoop stresscurve for the Zirlo cladding used. With the core loading assumed, the fraction of assemblies withruptured rods was about 10%.
This assessment of a conservatively assumed base load power distribution was compared todesign basis results using an NRC-approved uncertainty methodology. The comparison showed thatthe realistic assessment resulted in a peak cladding temperature of 944°C compared to 1 140°C for thedesign basis calculations. The ECRs at burst locations were 1.4% and 12% respectively and in nonburst rods 0.8% and 6%.
Figure 9.4 Peak cladding temperature response for deterministic assessment of extent of rupture

349

The statistical study used a sampling of 59 separate large break LOCA transients, each with its
own combination of randomly sampled uncertainty parameters. According to the statistical theory, themost limiting of the 59 cases will bound at least 95% of the actual PCT distribution, with 95%
confidence. The goal of the assessment was to examine the extent of local oxidation within and awayfrom the ballooned region for the most limiting cases, and assess to what degree the limiting PCT
elevation and the cladding rupture elevation were coincidental. Table 9.2 shows the results for all of
the cases above 925°C.
Table 9.2 Cases of peak clad temperature (PCT) above 925°C
Case
PCT (°C)
ECR (Burst), %ECR (Non Burst)
PCT @ Burst?
Burst Strain (%)
Packing Fraction*
*

1
1 037
2.1
1.0
No
40
0.66

2
1 035
1.6
1.0
No
44
0.78

3
995
1.0
1.7
No
47
0.65

4
973
1.4
0.7
No
44
0.75

5
964
1.2
0.6
No
38
0.62

6
959
1.3
1.2
No
48
0.67

7
933
1.4
1.3
No
60
0.71

8
928
1.0
0.5
No
39
0.69

9
925
1.0
0.6
No
24
0.67

Fraction of the available volume at the rupture elevation that contains pellet fragments following relocation.

Below this threshold, oxidation levels are very low. The most limiting PCT case (1 037°C) isseen to also correspond to the maximum local oxidation case (2.1%). The maximum local oxidation
occurred at the rupture elevation in this case, but the PCT did not.
Nissley et al. summarise with the following observations and conclusions:
•

•

•
•

The extent of core-wide fuel cladding rupture which would actually be expected in a large
break LOCA is far less than the 100% assumed by many US licensees in their radiologicaldose calculations. Even assuming the worst single failure and a conservative normal
operating power shape with linear heat rates 15% higher than predicted, less than 10% of therods in the core were estimated to have cladding failures.
Significant margins exist between realistic estimates of PCT and ECR, and those resulting
from design basis analyses. Even assuming the worst single failure and a conservative
normal operating power shape with linear heat rates 15% higher than predicted, the PCT was
reduced by ~200°C, and the ECR was reduced to negligible amounts compared to the designbasis analysis results.
The rupture location tends to have the maximum ECR, due to thinning of the cladding anddouble-sided oxidation.
PCT frequently occurs away from the rupture location, for plants that have a certain LOCA
transient response (e.g., 4-loop plants with large dry containment designs).

Finally Nissley et al. notes that the information presented in these large break LOCA assessments
should be interpreted as illustrative and representative. Extent of rupture and degree of oxidation arehighly dependent on the transient conditions, which are highly dependent on plant-specific parameterssuch as core power, nuclear peaking factors, ECCS capacity and other factors.
9.3 A German example of core damage extent analysis
In a recent presentation Heins has outlined the current procedure to calculate core damage extent
in German reactors [5]. The German requirements for LOCA analyses differ from most othercountries. In addition to the common LOCA criteria it is also necessary to show that less than 10% of
the fuel rods rupture during a LOCA in order to secure that the radiological consequences will belimited. For each PWR, this requirement must be met in each fuel cycle. The analysis must be350performed both at the beginning and end of the fuel cycle. According to Heins, future analyses will be
performed with a statistical approach as shown in Figure 9.5. This can be compared to the flow chart
shown in Figure 9.1. The result of a core damage extent analysis is shown in Figure 9.6.
Figure 9.5 Flow chart over statistical damage assessment for German PWRs

Figure 9.6 Map over core damage extent in German PWR after a large break LOCA

A further alternative, recently introduced in Germany, is a deterministic calculation of the
lifetime of each individual fuel rod of the core and a subsequent LOCA-transient. Such calculations
use the material and geometrical data and the power history of the individual fuel rods. Based on thecalculated actual strain and stress values, the failure/non failure is derived according to the mechanistic
failure criterion implemented in the code. Performed for all fuel rods of the core of a specific reload351

this procedure provides the number of failed fuel rods (respective failure rate) in a core through a
LOCA transient (Figure 9.7).
Figure 9.7 Number of failed fuel rods/failure rate during LOCA

9.4 References
1.

Fuel cladding failure criteria, European Commission, EUR 19256EN, September 1999.

2.

Bratby, P.A.W., Dutton, L.M.C., and Sutherland, L., “Fuel cladding failures following a large
LOCA”, NNC Report C5665/TR/006, Issue 01, May 1999.

3.

Powers, D.A. and Meyer, R.O., “Cladding swelling and rupture models for LOCA analysis”,
NUREG-0630, April 1980.

4.

Nissley, M.E., Frepoli, C., and Ohkawa, K., “Realistic assessment of fuel rod behavior underlarge-break LOCA conditions”, 2004 Nuclear Safety Research Conference, 2004, Washington
DC, NRC, pp. 258-273.

5.

Heins, L., “Core damage extent analysis to fulfil an additional LOCA criterion”, SEGFSM
Topical Meeting on LOCA Issues, 2004, Argonne, USA.

352

10. CONCLUSIONSIn 1986, a Working Group of the Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations (CSNI) issued
a state-of-the-art report (SOAR) on water reactor fuel behaviour in design basis accident (DBA)
conditions. The 1986 report was limited to the oxidation, embrittlement and deformation of PWR fuelin a loss of coolant accident. The current state-of-the-art report on fuel behaviour in LOCA conditions
is an updated version that describes phenomena of importance in the loss-of-coolant-accident (LOCA).
New information has been produced concerning these phenomena. Older cladding materials have been
replaced by newer alloys that may behave differently under postulated accident conditions. There isalso a clear need to include discussions on accident issues for other water cooled reactor types. This isespecially important now when the Eastern European countries have joined the discussion on nuclear
safety issues.
LOCA methodology and criteria
In the design of nuclear power plants, the consequences of hypothetical accidents are analysed sothat suitable mitigating systems can be devised. For design basis accidents, a fundamental acceptancecriterion is that there should be no or very limited radiological consequences to the public. In order tofulfil this criterion, derivative acceptance criteria have been formulated for the safety systems of thereactor.
For the pressurised water reactor, a design basis loss-of-coolant-accident involves the break of
one of the large coolant pipes between the reactor vessel and the main circulation pump. In order tomitigate the consequences of this break, it is necessary to design the emergency core cooling systems
so that the fuel is cooled efficiently during all phases of the accident. This requirement naturally leads
to a criterion that the fuel must maintain its coolable geometry throughout the whole LOCA sequenceand that the structural integrity of the fuel rods is maintained.
The requirement of coolable geometry and structural integrity has turned out to be a very
complex issue due to the particular properties of the zirconium alloys used as cladding for the fuel.
During the event, the cladding heats up to temperatures over 1 000°C. When the temperature reaches
about 800°C, zirconium starts to transform from α to the β phase. Oxygen dissolves in the metal andembrittles the α phase. Therefore, there must be a limit on the oxygen-stabilised α phase, since theload bearing prior β layer must not be too thin in order to ensure structural integrity of the fuel during
the quench phase of the LOCA.
There are many other issues which also must be taken into account. When the fuel rods heat up
during the LOCA and the external pressure is lost, the rod internal pressure is large enough to cause
plastic deformation of the cladding which leads to ballooning and burst. The ballooning canpotentially be detrimental to cooling of the fuel assemblies and the burst of a rod also leads to cladding
oxidation from the inside. In addition, a significant amount of hydrogen is picked up by the cladding.
Hydrogen pickup significantly exacerbates cladding embrittlement, especially after the quenchingphase. Finally, at elevated temperatures, the rate of steam-cladding oxidation may become so high thatthe heat can no longer be adequately dissipated by cooling, and eventually lead to autocatalyticoxidation. If not arrested, cladding metal and reactor core can melt.
353

Most fuel safety criteria are based on the criteria applied by the United States Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (USNRC). These are found in Title 10 of the United States Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 50 (10 CFR 50).
There are three specific points that are the focus of the current NRC criteria:•••

The calculated maximum fuel element cladding temperature shall not exceed 2 200°F(1 204°C).
The calculated total oxidation of the cladding shall nowhere exceed 0.17 times the total
cladding thickness before oxidation.
The rate of energy release, hydrogen generation, and cladding oxidation from themetal/water reaction shall be calculated using the Baker-Just equation.

The purpose of the first two criteria, regarding maximum cladding temperature and total
oxidation, was to ensure that the cladding shall remain sufficiently ductile so that it does not break up
and fragment during and after the quench phase of the LOCA transient. Another important purpose of
the 2 200°F limit was to ensure that fuel cladding does not enter the regime of runaway oxidation anduncontrollable heat-up.
These criteria require a thorough understanding of zirconium properties and behaviour.
Beginning only in the early 1970s, it was understood that embrittlement of zirconium-based cladding
is caused by the diffusion of oxygen into the metal underneath the surface oxide rather than by thesurface oxide itself. That is, cladding structural integrity is really controlled by the small fraction ofoxygen atoms that are dissolved in the remaining metallic zirconium layer. In calculating oxygen
distribution in the metallic layers, the NRC regulations used the time required to accumulate 17%oxidation as a surrogate measure of the time required to diffuse enough oxygen into the underlying
metal to embrittle it.
Many countries have adopted the US NRC criteria. The exceptions include Japan, which has
adopted a maximum oxidation value of 15% instead of the usual 17%. The Japanese criteria on
cladding embrittlement, 15% and 1 200°C, are not based on the concept of zero ductility of cladding,but on the failure threshold value determined in the integral thermal shock tests under restrained
conditions.
The Czech Republic uses a value of 18% for VVER 440 reactors but retains the 17% value for
VVER 1000 reactors. The 18% ECR-value is also applied in Russia. However, this value is based on
quench test results rather than on ring compression tests, which are judged to be more restrictive. Most
countries have adopted the US NRC peak cladding temperature limit of 2 200°F (~1 200°C).
In Canada, there is no formalised cladding oxidation or peak cladding temperature limits. In
Germany, in addition to the maximum temperature and oxidation limits, an additional requirement is
imposed that the fraction of burst fuel rods shall not exceed 10% of the total rods in the core. The
purpose of this requirement is to limit fission gas release due to cladding burst.
A comprehensive description of loss-of-coolant accident scenarios begins with the pressurised
water reactor (PWR). The design basis accident in the PWR is a double-ended guillotine break in acold leg between the reactor coolant pump and the reactor vessel.
In this event, a short blow-down period occurs as a result of the break through which the primarycoolant is rapidly expelled. The core voids and negative void reactivity rapidly shuts down the reactor.
The primary system pressure decreases and the high-pressure safety and accumulator injection begin,354

but most of this flow is lost out of the break. As the blowdown progresses, the lower plenum begins tofill with accumulator water. While the lower plenum is refilling, the core heats up due to decay heat.
Some fuel rods balloon and burst.
When the lower plenum has filled, core refill begins. The lower elevations quench first as thequench front moves upward through the core. As the front advances, the fuel rod upper elevations arecooled by a two-phase mixture of superheated steam and entrained droplets. Eventually, there issufficient cooling to terminate the increase in cladding temperature.
For smaller breaks, the primary system depressurises to the high-pressure safety injection set
point and high pressure safety injection begins. Smaller breaks do not depressurise the reactor coolant
system because the reactor charging flow can replace the lost inventory. The limiting small-break
LOCA is one that is large enough that the high-pressure safety injection system cannot make-up themass loss from the reactor system but small enough that the reactor system does not quickly
depressurise to the accumulator set point.
In the BWR/6 boiling water reactor, the design basis accident is a double-ended break in thesuction-side of the recirculation line. Shortly after the break, the reactor scrams, typically on drive
flow pressure. Because of the large flow reductions caused by this event, there is a large increase in
the core average void fraction. The negative void reactivity rapidly shuts down the reactor.
With the loss of core flow, cladding temperatures rapidly increase. Blow-down peak cladding
temperature is dominated by the stored energy in the fuel. As depressurisation continues, there is alarge amount of flashing of the fluid in the lower plenum. This causes an increase in the coolant flow
through the core, quenching the fuel, and temporarily returning the core to saturation temperature.
Depressurisation continues, and the level inside the core region decreases. The flow into the coreis limited and the core uncovery leads to a second boiling transition. High pressure core spray system
begins to deliver coolant to the top of the core. The low-pressure injection begins when the systempressure drops below the shutoff head for the pumps. The core refills before the lower plenum. The
refilling and reflooding processes restore the liquid inventory in the core and quench the core.
The BWR/4 is similar, but core reflood takes somewhat longer than in a BWR/6. The BWR/2 isthe older-generation BWR without jet pumps. The core cannot be reflooded. The peak cladding
temperature is controlled by a balance between decay heat and the core spray heat transfer. Typically,
the peak cladding temperature occurs late in the transient and quenching of the fuel rods is very slow.
In 2004, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission stated that the NRC staff should determine anappropriate risk-informed alternative break size and that breaks larger than this size should be
removed from the design basis event category.
Based on the above Commission guidance, the staff prepared a proposed rule that containedalternative evaluation requirements. The proposed rule would divide the current spectrum of LOCA
break sizes into two regions. The division between the two regions is determined by a “transition
break size” (TBS). The first region includes small breaks up to and including the TBS. The second
region includes breaks larger than the TBS up to and including the double-ended guillotine break of
the largest reactor coolant system pipe.
Pipe breaks in the smaller break size region are considered much more likely than pipe breaks in
the larger region. Consequently, each region would be subject to requirements commensurate with therelative likelihood of breaks in that region. LOCAs in the smaller region would continue to be “designbasis accidents” and would continue to be analysed by current methods, assumptions, and criteria.
355

LOCAs in the larger region, up to and including a break of the largest reactor coolant system pipe,
must be mitigated but the analysis may be more realistic. This rule remains under consideration.
In a CANDU reactor, the fuel is loaded into horizontal pressure tubes, and is cooled by the flowof pressurised heavy water. The moderator is heavy water contained in a calandria vessel. The pressure
tubes pass through the calandria vessel and are separated from the moderator by a calandria tube and a
CO2 filled annulus. Coolant is supplied to the pressure tubes via a system of large headers and smaller
feeder pipes.
In broad terms, a LOCA in a CANDU follows a similar sequence to that described for a PWR. A
break in the heat transport system initiates reactor shut down. There is an initial period of blowdown
as the pressurised coolant vents from the system. As the coolant pressure drops, cooling is degraded
and the fuel under goes a temperature transient. Initiation of emergency core cooling system re-floods
the reactor core, cooling the fuel and terminating the accident.
Despite these similarities with the PWR LOCA sequence, the horizontal pressure tube design andheavy water moderator mean that the details of the accident progression are quite different. The
presence of the moderator around the fuel channels also plays an important role as a heat sink during
the accident. Hence the determination of the pressure tube behaviour plays an important role in
CANDU safety analysis.
The VVER is a pressurised water reactor, and the VVER-1000 design is equipped with emergency
core cooling and containment spray systems with similar design basis and basic configuration. Thesesystems are redundant with the exception of the ECCS water storage tank, which is common to all
subsystems.
Phenomena that need to be addressed by experiments and modeling
The extended operational exposure that accompanies high burn-up causes changes to the fuel andcladding that may affect the fuel rod’s ability to withstand the accident without losing its integrity.
These changes, which occur gradually over the life of the fuel rod, can be considered as initialconditions for the accident.
There are many changes that occur to the fuel and cladding as a result of prolonged exposure to
the irradiation field present in a reactor core, and to the corroding environment and to hightemperature. The combination of high temperature, radiation damage, transmutations, mechanicalstresses and chemical reactions causes the microstructure of cladding and fuel to evolve considerably
during reactor exposure. These changes in microstructure, microchemistry, and macroscopic
characteristics of pellet and cladding are responsible for the changes in material behaviour observed athigh burn-up. These changes are very complex and difficult to predict in a mechanistic fashion. Of themany changes to the fuel and cladding, it is important to discern which are of greatest importance todetermining fuel rod behaviour during LOCA. Some of the more important material degradation
phenomena are listed below.
Fission products. During normal operation, solid and gaseous fission products are generated
within the UO2 fuel pellet. Whereas the solid fission products generally remain at the birth site, thegaseous fission products are more mobile and distribute widely.
Rim formation. Because of 238U resonance neutron capture near the UO2 pellet surface, theamount of Pu formed in the fuel is greater at the edge of the pellet than in the centre. This causes thefission rate near the pellet surface to slowly increase with burn-up while the fission rate in the bulk of
the pellet decreases.

356

Fuel restructuring and macrocracking. During the initial rise to power, the thermal stresses causedby the pellet radial temperature gradient cause the pellet to crack. Cracked pellet segments relocate
outwards toward the cladding. The combined effects of pellet relocation, fuel irradiation swelling, andcladding creepdown result in a closed pellet-cladding gap.
Pellet-cladding interface. With the onset of pellet-cladding contact, a bond layer develops
between the fuel pellet and the cladding. Pellet-cladding bonding is thought to progress as oxygen
atoms diffuse between UO2 or (U,Pu)O2 and ZrO2, which is formed under irradiation.
A significant increase of the gas volume inside pores and bubbles at the grain boundaries occurs
in the rim zone of high burn-up UO2 fuel and in the (U,Pu)O2 clusters of some mixed-oxide (MOX)
fuels. The grain boundary gas inventory is probably one of the more relevant parameters to predict thehigh burn-up fuel behaviour during accidental events, since it may contribute significantly to transientfuel swelling and gas release.
The difference in operating temperature between reactor types has a significant effect on the stateof cladding. The main degradation mechanisms to PWR cladding include uniform waterside corrosion,
hydriding and radiation damage.
The main concerns associated with excessive corrosion in PWR cladding are: potential for oxide
spalling, degradation of heat transfer, non-uniform or overall wall thinning, and excessive hydrogen
uptake and hydriding.
The primary effects of BWR operation on cladding are also waterside corrosion, hydriding, andradiation damage. BWR cladding corrosion thicknesses (as opposed to build-up of other cladding
surface deposits) may be significantly less than observed in the PWR. For modern BWR cladding, theprimary corrosion-related effects are wall thinning, decreased heat transfer, and hydrogen pickup.
Generally, lower hydrogen concentration is observed in BWR fuel cladding than PWR.
For light water reactors, the primary considerations relative to cladding radiation damage areradiation hardening and the corresponding impact on mechanical properties, and deformation causedby irradiation-induced growth and creep.
Although normal nominal burn-up in CANDU reactors is lower than that in light water reactors
considerable work has been carried out to study the behaviour of CANDU fuel at higher burn-ups.
Fission-gas release is a key performance parameter at extended burn-up. Fuel microstructural changes
follow a similar trend.
The different phenomena involved in the heat-up, cool down and quench during a LOCA are
more complex than one might think. This complexity results from the changes of properties of thezirconium cladding alloys that occur during the transient. These changes in the fuel and cladding aremost easily identified by the sequence in which they occur during the transient.
Typically a LOCA will start with the fuel under normal operating conditions. The cladding thenhas a temperature slightly above 300°C. At the pellet cladding interface, the temperature is about
400°C with higher temperatures within the pellet. At the centre of the pellet, the temperature isperhaps 1 200-2 000°C depending on the local power level. At the start of the LOCA, the fission
process ceases due to the loss of moderator and insertion of control rods. With the loss of coolant, thecladding will start to heat-up. The stored energy in the pellet redistributes towards a flatter radial
temperature profile but heat-up still will occur due the decay heat. The initial heat-up of the cladding is
mainly due to the stored energy of the pellet, but in the longer term, it is the decay heat which is
responsible for the heating of the cladding.

357

During the transient, pressure inside the cladding will increase due to heat-up of the mixture of
the fill gas and released fission gases. At the same time, the strength of the cladding is reduced and it
will eventually start to deform plastically. It is thus necessary to know the properties of zirconium
alloys, which may be very anisotropic, and how they depend on alloy composition.
Another complication is the phase transformation which takes place at temperatures around
800°C and above. Pure zirconium transforms from the hexagonal closed packed phase alpha to thebody centred cubic β phase at ~860°C. Quite clearly a number of different phenomena must be
mastered in order to predict the instance of rupture.
The basic parameters controlling deformation in a LOCA are stress, temperature and creep
strength, the latter being affected by oxidation, grain size and anisotropy. A temperature transientwhich produces significant strains is quite likely to strain the cladding to rupture. Since the inherent
ductility of zirconium alloys is high, early rupture, at low overall strain, will occur only when theductility of the material is exhausted locally by non-uniform straining. A prime cause of nonuniformity is circumferential variation in temperature around the cladding, which is the key factor that
controls the potential for and the degree of coplanar flow channel blockage.
Deformation under internal pressure was studied in single-rod and multi-rod tests. The mainseries of multi-rod out-of-reactor tests have been conducted at ORNL, KfK and JAERI. In-reactor tests
have been performed on single rods in Germany in the FR-2, Italy in EOLO-JR facility in the ESSOR
reactor, France in the FLASH loop in the SILOE reactor and in the United States of America in PBF.
The only sources of multi-rod in-reactor data are the series of experiments in the NRU reactor at
AECL Chalk River and the PHEBUS series at Cadarache.
The main source of embrittlement, which follows rupture, is the absorption of oxygen into thecladding. The dissolved oxygen embrittles the alpha phase. In addition, significant heat is released
when the zirconium oxidizes. At high temperatures, oxidation may be rapid, and the heat from thisoxidation can be significant.
Following a LOCA, impaired coolability could result from plastic deformation of the cladding,leading to constriction of the sub-channels between rods, or from fragmentation of the cladding
through oxidation and embrittlement. The coolability of a deformed assembly is a key question
following the event and has thus been subject to extensive research.
If the external coolant pressure falls to a low value the tensile stress which is produced in thecladding by the internal gas pressure is sufficient to cause plastic distension. The creep strength ofzirconium alloys falls rapidly with temperature so that at 700°C and since the ductility of the alloys ishigh, strains of 50% or more are possible. The spacing (pitch/diameter) of PWR fuel rods is such thatadjacent rods straining by 32% will be in contact each to other, and a key question is whether strainsof this magnitude or greater can occur in practice in adjacent rods at the same level in the assembly,
thus causing water flow blockage.
The cladding plastic straining on the consequent ballooning may also favour the relocation of fuelfragments from above into the ballooning region. This may in turn cause a greater heat generation
locally, and thus higher cladding temperature.
The FEBA (Flooding Experiments with Blocked Arrays) program involved performing separate
effects tests under different reflood conditions. The main FEBA test result was that temperature in theblockage generally was lower than in the by-pass even with 90% blockage. In cases without by-pass,
the coolability was significantly increased.

358

The SEFLEX (Fuel Rod Simulator Effects in Flooding Experiments) program was designed toevaluate the sensitivity of FEBA-type reflood test results on fuel rod and blockage simulation
technologies. The SEFLEX programme results illustrate that better cooldown and significantly earlier
cladding rewetting occur within and downstream from the blockage in comparison to the by-pass orduring a blockage-free test.
The THETIS program, carried out by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, involved aset of thermo-hydraulic tests on an assembly containing 49 full-length fuel rod simulators with asevere blockage of 80 or 90% over a length of 20 cm. Results of these tests indicated that with a
3 cm/s reflood rate, the blockage was found to be coolable. The THETIS test results seem to imply
that a long 90 percent blockage may no longer be coolable at a constant reflood rate below 2 to 3 cm/s.
The FLECHT SEASET program (Full Length Emergency Cooling Heat Transfer – Separate
Effects and System Effects Tests) was an extensive programme that was launched in 1977 incooperation between USNRC, EPRI and Westinghouse. For the non-coplanar blockages, thetemperatures were generally lower in the blocked region compared to the unblocked configuration,with the exception of the short balloons for which there was little difference between the temperatures.
In conclusion, blockages of significant ratios (90 percent) but of moderate lengths (<10 cm) do notcreate any particular problems in terms of coolability. However, it should not be assumed, that a 90%
blockage is always coolable. It has also been demonstrated that the maximum blockage ratio of 90%
does not necessarily represent the most penalising case in terms of coolability for axially extended
deformations. Furthermore, the significant difference between comparable test results seems to indicatethat significant thermal coupling between the heat source and the ballooned cladding – as may exist in aclad balloon full of relocated fuel fragments – is susceptible of significantly hindering the coolability ofa blockage with such balloons, in comparison to a case where fuel relocation does not occur.
The OECD Halden Reactor Project is a series of in-pile experiments performed in the Halden
Boiling Water reactor, a heavy water cooled and moderated reactor. The goals were:(a) To maximise the balloon size to promote fuel relocation, and to evaluate its possible effecton cladding temperature and oxidation.
(b) To investigate the extent (if any) of − “secondary transient hydriding at high temperature” −on the inner side of the cladding around the burst region in presence of pellet-cladding
bonding layer.
In the frame of those tests the first test with pre-irradiated fuel in the Halden Project LOCA test
series, was conducted. The results indicate that a large ballooning in the middle of the rod and burst with
fuel relocation occurred in one case. However, more experimental evidence and analyses are needed inorder to assess the applicability of the results of this particular test to actual power plant situations.
The test with the Russian cladding alloys were performed in PARAMETR-M and TEFSAI-19
facilities in Russia. The test on ballooning carried out in KFKI found the general difference in burst
strains between E110 and Zircaloy-4.
Following a successfully terminated large break LOCA, a number of fuel rods will have failed.
Large amounts of radioactivity will have reached the containment in the form of gases or particulate
aerosols. From a regulatory point of view some of this radioactivity will leak out of the containmentand reach the environment outside the nuclear plant where it will cause a dose burden to the public.
The inventory of fission products is distributed unevenly in the fuel rods and not all of them areavailable for release. The distribution is also strongly burn-up dependent. The part of the inventory359

most readily released is the gap inventory consisting noble gases and volatile iodine compounds. In the
gap there may also be water soluble fission products like cesium species. The fission products lessreadily available for release can be slowly leached out from the fuel matrix. The rates of release will
depend on the fragmentation of the fuel which may be highly burn-up dependent. With knowledge offission product distributions and reliable estimates of the number of failed fuel rods, it would (inprinciple) be possible to reach reasonably realistic numbers for the in-containment source term.
The most complex part of the containment source term problem is the retention in thecontainment since it also determines the time dependence of the source term. The retention of iodine in
the containment and the effect of pH in the sump water may be considered. Other phenomena thatshould be considered include aerosol CsI removal, radiolysis in the water phase, other reactions in thewater phase, reactions in the gas phase, mass transfer from sump to the gas phase, deposition on wall
surfaces in the gas phase and formation of organic iodine.
Overview of LOCA testing methodology and the tests results
LOCA testing methodology comprises different techniques. The methodology is classified into
the following three groups; separate effects tests aimed at elucidating specific phenomena, tests withmoderate integration in which the interaction between two or more phenomena is studied, andintegrated tests on rod or fuel bundles in or out of reactor.
The creep properties of cladding alloys are central for modelling the deformation and failure ofcladding tubes during a LOCA. Therefore, separate tests for the creep properties have been performed
for Zircaloy and Zr-Nb cladding tubes. As a result, information regarding creep equations has beenobtained experimentally. However, it is noted that deformation behaviour of the cladding during a
LOCA is very complex, and caution is needed in the interpretation of the simulation tests performed
under simplified conditions.
High temperature oxidation tests have been conducted to determine oxidation kinetics of thecladding since early 1970s. Temperature measurement technique has been improved and many
investigations have been made with different heating methods using resistance furnace, radiantinfrared heater, induction heating and internal heating element.
Modelling of the growth of the oxide layer and the oxygen stabilised α layer requires knowledge
on the diffusion coefficients of oxygen in the two phases. In addition, the diffusion coefficient in the βlayer is necessary for calculating how fast the α grows into the β phase. To fulfil this requirement, afew experiments have been conducted to determine appropriate diffusion constants.
In zirconium cladding alloys, the α phase transforms to the α + β and β phases as temperature
increases during a LOCA. The resulting cladding behaviour depends strongly on the phase structure.
Therefore, tests have been performed for the basic Zr-O binary system and the Zircaloy-O pseudobinary system. Tests have additionally been performed because of the recent interest in the α to βtransformation due to the increased use of Nb containing alloys and the expected high hydrogenconcentration in high burn-up fuel.
Ductility tests are necessary for determining cladding embrittlement after a LOCA simulation,
which is very important to safety. The ring compression test technique has been the most widely used
ductility test because it is very straightforward to perform, requires a minimum of specimen
preparation and is appropriate when there is a limited amount of material to be tested. However, there
seems to be no common definition of an acceptable level of ductility in ring compression tests, thoughsome definitions, based on offset displacement and strain energy, have been proposed and adopted.
360

Tests with moderate integration have been performed in Canada, France, Japan, Korea, Russia,
and the United Kingdom to examine steam oxidation, cladding deformation or ballooning in steam,and constrained deformation or ballooning in steam with or without quench. Some of the tests are stillused to investigate high burn-up effect on the cladding deformation and fracture during a LOCA.
Fully integrated tests were performed at FR-2 (Germany), PBF (United States of America),
PHEBUS (France). Those tests provided valuable data base for understanding fuel behaviour in thebundle geometry under more realistic LOCA conditions and validation of computer codes in thiscategory. The test series recently performed at the Halden reactor is a very unique program, where theprimary objective is to assess the extent and effect of axial relocation of fuel fragments into theballooning volume. These tests were performed with high burn-up fuels, taking advantage of various
in-pile measurement techniques at the Halden reactor.
Zirconium alloy fuel cladding is reactive in steam. The reaction is generally believed to becontrolled by the rate of diffusion of oxygen anions in the anion deficient zirconia film. Diffusion
controlled solid state processes are characterised by a parabolic rate law. Extensive investigations havebeen performed mainly with Zircaloy to obtain the parabolic rate law constants for weight gain andoxide layer growth. The oxidation kinetics data of the Zircaloy are available over a wide temperature
range from 700 to 1 500°C. Some scatter in the data can be attributed to difficulties in accurate
temperature measurement combined with differences in heating technique which produce different
temperature gradients across the specimen thickness. The Baker-Just correlation is found to beconservative between ~1 000-1 500°C increasingly so at higher temperatures. Oxidation tests havebeen also performed with the E110 alloy for VVER and advanced cladding alloys including M5 andZIRLO for PWR. The results show that E110 oxidizes slightly slower than Zircaloy-4 underconditions of steady scale growth. However, E110 is prone to oxide spalling and may exhibittransition to linear growth kinetics. The oxidation kinetics of M5 appears to be generally very similar
or slightly smaller than the kinetics of the Zircaloy-4.
The oxidation of the zirconium alloy cladding changes to linear kinetics with time. The“breakaway” occurs in specific temperature ranges, for example, 850-950 and 1 000-1 050°C in
Zircaloy. The breakaway oxidation has been identified as a major problem for the cladding LOCA
performance since it is associated with a significant hydrogen pickup which degrades post-quench
properties. Therefore, careful examinations are required also for advanced high corrosion-resistancecladding alloys to examine the temperature-time range where the breakaway oxidation occurs.
Virgin cladding was used in most performed oxidation tests. Data have been accumulated to a certain
extent on effects of irradiation, alloying elements, pre-oxidizing and pre-hydriding of the cladding, steam
purity (addition of nitrogen or air), and high atmospheric pressure. However, more investigations may berequired to better understand the oxidation behaviour of the high burn-up fuel cladding.
Current embrittlement criteria limit the maximum cladding temperature and maximum cladding
oxidation (fractional cladding thickness which would be converted to zirconia). The criteria were
established long ago based on the experimental data that were available at that time mostly on asfabricated Zircaloy.
In the recent years, there has been considerable testing of the post-quench ductility of current
cladding alloys in the United States of America, France, Russia, and Hungary. In the case of Zircaloy,
the objective has been to determine the effects of the changes in fuel rods associated with high-burnup operation, such as due to thick corrosion layer, high hydrogen concentration in the cladding, andpellet-cladding bonding. M5 and ZIRLO are relatively new alloys and data on their LOCA behaviourat all levels of burn-up are needed for safety assessment of fuel fabricated from this new class of
cladding. Results show that the embrittlement threshold for, e.g. unirradiated Zircaloy (Zr-Sn) or for361

cladding types like M5 and E110 exhibit different embrittlement thresholds. The variations inembrittlement threshold appear to result mainly from manufacturing differences rather than from
specific alloy composition. Tests with the so-called pre-hydrided specimens showed a strong effect ofhydrogen concentration for Zircaloy-4 cladding. A cooling-rate effect was also seen that was absent infresh cladding that contained no hydrogen.
Similar tests were then performed on irradiated cladding taken from high burn-up fuel rods with
Zircaloy-4, ZIRLO, and M5 cladding. As expected, the embrittlement thresholds in the irradiatedmaterials were found at substantially lower oxidation levels as compared with as fabricated materials.
The effect of hydrogen on oxygen solubility in the β-phase has a significant impact on the postquench ductility of high burn-up cladding and on post-quench ductility of ballooned cladding whichhave absorbed hydrogen in the oxidation reaction on the inside surface of the cladding. Similareffects may also arise in long-term transients at about 1 000°C when breakaway oxidation leads tosignificant hydrogen pickup. These effects are not addressed by the present regulatory criteria andhence there is a need to revise criteria.
As discussed in the section on regulatory analysis, recent results on (mostly simulated) high burnup cladding, new zirconium alloys, and an increased awareness of the consequences of breakaway
oxidation in both pre-LOCA and during a LOCA transient has led to the conclusion that current
regulation concerning LOCA is somewhat inadequate. As a consequence, a number of workers in thefield have proposed changes in the LOCA criteria. Four examples of these proposals are given in thepresent report.
Oxidation and quenching after rod burst experiments have been performed in Japan to investigate
cladding embrittlement and fracture during the quench. The test rods are cooled and quenched underrestrained conditions, considering possible loading in the bundle geometry. Data are currently
accumulated on the fracture conditions of the high burn-up fuel cladding including M5 and ZIRLO.
Although some moderate burn-up effect can be discerned, there is no evidence that the current (15% or
17% ECR) limit need to be lowered at high burn-up, based on the outcome obtained so far by these
Japanese tests.
Additional remarks
Codes aimed at predicting the behaviour of a fuel assembly in a LOCA have been developed inseveral countries. Many of the computer codes used today are the same as or developments of codesthat were used at the time of writing of the previous LOCA State-of-the-Art Report in 1986. However
there has been a dramatic change in the computing environment. In order to model a LOCA or an
experiment simulating a LOCA or a subset of a LOCA event three categories of codes are needed:• Reactor physics codes.
• Fuel behaviour codes.
• Thermohydraulics codes.
The reactor physics codes provide the starting condition for a LOCA event. Recent developments
have included a more advanced graphics user-interface and the merge of reactor physics codes withsystem thermohydraulics codes.
The fuel behaviour codes can be separated into steady state codes and transient codes. System
thermohydraulic codes are typically less design specific and are applied to a wider variety of designs
and conditions. A limited number of these codes are widely used around the world by regulatory,
research and industry organisations. These codes can typically be used to model a wide range ofconfigurations for single pipes, experimental facilities and full plants and, in many cases, have been
applied to most reactor designs around the world.
362

The documentation requirements on the codes did not change substantially during the last 20
years. Code verification and validation are part of those documents. There is normally a regulatory
requirement that codes are validated in relation to relevant experimental data for the major phenomena
expected to occur. Three sources of data are generally used to validate these codes: phenomenological
data, data on separate effects, and integral data. As a code can sometimes predict a set of data with ahigh degree of accuracy and still be extremely inaccurate for other data sets a “validation matrix” hasbeen developed for each code through which different types of experimental facilities and different
sets of conditions in the same facility are used for code validation. The validation exercises have also
included comparisons with relevant data from plant operations and participation in international
standard problems.
The uncertainties associated with the algorithms of individual codes or models can arise fromseveral sources, as discretisation, nodalisation, differences in computer architecture, operating systems
and numerical accuracy. The estimation of model uncertainties and code uncertainties has beenformalised using a range of methods. Fundamental to all methods is the adequacy of the supporting
experimental data and the scalability of that basis of data to full plant conditions. Sensitivity studies
can also be useful in gaining an understanding of the influence of important modelling parameters.
Representatives of the single rod codes for steady state condition and transients, assembly/
channel codes and system hydraulic codes are listed in the report.
Energy and damage distribution calculations of reactor core damage in a LOCA are necessary inorder to assess the radiological consequences of a LOCA. The extent of fuel cladding rupture during alarge break LOCA is dependent on a number of factors. Foremost is the number of rods in the corethat achieve high cladding temperatures during the transient.
The report of EU with title “Fuel cladding failure criteria” [EUR 19256EN] describes in great
detail the methodologies used by the different organisations of how fuel rods are calculated to fail.
A common practice in USA for assessment of the radiological consequences of a LOCA is to
assume that 100% of the rods in the core fail but a study taking into account more representative
condition shows that it is an overly conservative assumption.
In comparison to others the German requirements for LOCA analyses differ from most othercountries. In addition to the common LOCA criteria it is also necessary to show that less than 10% of
the fuel rods rupture during a LOCA in order to secure that the radiological consequences will belimited. In the future will be this analysis performed with a statistical approach.
Recommendations
WGFS concludes that CSNI and CNRA should consider the following future activities to further
refine the nuclear community’s understanding of the key aspects of the water reactor fuel behaviour in
LOCA conditions:•

To update the CSNI State-of-the-Art Report on water reactor fuel behaviour in LOCA
conditions in suitable intervals, to provide a useful reference for workers in this area.

•

Ductility-based LOCA criteria derived from ring compression tests of double-side oxidized
specimens, and fracture-based LOCA criteria derived from integral rod testing result in quite
different burn-up effect on the derived safety limit. There are thus a number of open
questions about the different results and the two different methodologies, which have to befurther discussed and assessed.

363

•

The breakaway oxidation, which occurs in specific temperature ranges, has been identified asa major problem for the cladding LOCA performance since it is associated with a significant
hydrogen pickup which degrades post-quench properties. Therefore, careful examinations are
required also for advanced high corrosion-resistance cladding alloys to examine thetemperature-time range where the breakaway oxidation occurs.

•

As-fabricated cladding was used in the most performed oxidation tests. Data have been
accumulated to a certain extent on effects of irradiation, alloying elements, pre-oxidizing andpre-hydriding of the cladding, steam purity (addition of nitrogen or air), and highatmospheric pressure. However, more investigations may be required to better understandthe oxidation behaviour of the high burn-up fuel cladding.

364

Appendix A
TAKING ACCOUNT OF ANISOTROPY IN CREEP CALCULATIONS

A1.1 Introduction
In the following a cylindrical coordinate system will be used with axes r, θ, and z corresponding
respectively to the through thickness (radial), circumferential and axial directions of a cladding tube.
For a multiaxial state of stress where the principal stress axes coincide with the coordinate axes
yielding or creep is controlled by an effective stress which can be written:((σ − σ ) + (σ − σ ) + (σ − σ ) ) =2= (0.5(σ − σ ) + 0.5(σ − σ ) + 0.5(σ − σ ) )
1

σe =

2

θ

z

r

2

θ

z

2 1/ 22zθr

2 1/ 2

2

z

r

r

θ

(A-1)

for an isotropic material. For an anisotropic material like Zircaloy the effective stress can be modified
according to the following equation proposed by Hill [1]:(σ e = F (σ θ − σ z )2 + G (σ z − σ r )2 + H (σ r − σ θ )2

)

1/ 2

(A-2)

Many studies of the anisotropy of zirconium alloys have shown that it is actually more complex
than the simple ellipsoid yield surface defined by eq. A-2 [2]. However eq. A-2 and its associated flow
rule have been widely used for treating the anisotropy of zirconium alloys and it takes the mainfeatures of the anisotropy into account much better than the effective stress for an isotropic material.
Figure A-1 shows a schematic picture of the main grain orientations in a zirconium alloy cladding
tube.
Figure A-1 A schematic picture of the main grain orientations in a zirconium alloy cladding tube

The hexagonal zirconium crystal can deform by many deformation systems, both slip systems
and twinning systems [2]. However the by far lowest critical shear stress applies to slip in the< 11 2 0 > direction on the {1 1 00} prism planes. Therefore for the texture shown in Figure A-1 wewould expect the yield strength to be lowest in the z-direction, higher in the θ-direction and highest in365the r-direction. Normally it is very difficult to test for the yield strength in the radial directions.
However the high yield strength is manifested by small reductions in wall thickness when the cladding
tube material is subjected to uniaxial tension tests in either of the circumferential or axial directions.
A1.2 The strain increments for the anisotropic material
The requirement that the strain vector is perpendicular to the yield surface leads to the following
equations for the plastic strain increments for a state of stress where the principal stress axes coincidewith the coordinate axes which are also axes of the anisotropy:dε r= (G + H )σ r − Gσ z − Hσ θdλdε θ= (F + H )σ θ − Fσ z − Hσ r
dλ

(A-3)

dε z
= (F + G )σ z − Fσ θ − Gσ rdλdλ is a common factor which contains the ratio dσe/σe.
A1.3 Determination of the anisotropy constants
The simplest way to determine the anisotropy constants F, G, and H is to perform uniaxial tensile
tests in the circumferential and axial directions and determine the ratios between the strains in the
directions perpendicular to the tensile direction. For a test in the circumferential direction we get:R zr =

εz F
=
εr H

(A-4)

and for a test in the axial direction we get

Rθr =

εθ F
=
εr G

(A-5)

Let us as an example assume that we have determined Rzr = 5 and Rθr = 4. Then G = 0.25 F and H= 0.2 F. If these values are inserted in A-2 we can note that σe is proportional to F1/2. This means thatthe magnitude of F is arbitrary since it will work as a scale factor for the yield strength we use forcomparison with a calculated effective stress. In a case of creep deformation a change of F will give a
corresponding change in the proportionality factor in the creep law.
One way to remove the arbitrariness of one of the anisotropy constants is to look at the second
formulation of the isotropic yield criterion A-1. We can then note that the sum of the coefficients on
the squared differences between the principal stresses is 1.5. It is then some logic in prescribing that:F + G + H = 1.5(A-6)

With our previous example we then get F = 1.034, G = 0.259, and H = 0.207. For an applied
uniaxial stress of 100 MPa the corresponding effective stresses for the different directions are for the rdirection σe = 69 MPa, for the θ direction 111 MPa and for the z direction 114 MPa. Thus the yieldstrength in the r direction will be more than 60 % higher than in the other two directions.
366

A 1.4 Application to a case of creep
As an example of how the anisotropy model of Hill is applied to creep we can take a modelling
effort by Rosinger who started with uniaxial creep data in the axial direction which was then applied
to the diametral creep of cladding stressed by an internal pressure [3]. For the creep in the axial
direction, Rosinger found that:ε& z = Az exp(− Q / RT )σ zn(A-7)

This implies that the effective creep rate as a function of effective stress can be written

ε&e = Ae exp(− Q / RT )σ en(A-8)

The energy expended in the creep process per unit of volume can be written:

W& = σ r ε& r + σ θ ε&θ + σ z ε& z = σ e ε&e(A-9)

where the right hand side constitutes the definition of an effective creep rate. For thecase of uniaxial creep in the z direction (A-9) reduces to:σ z ε& z = (F + G )1 / 2 σ z ε&e(A-10)If (A-10) is combined with (A-8) and (A-9) we find that:

Ae = Az (F + G )− ( n +1) / 2(A-11)For the case of creep with an internal pressure we have σz = 1/2σθ and the creep law we want to
use is:ε&θ = Aθ exp(− Q / RT )σ θn(A-12)A relationship between Aθ and Ae can be found by using (A-8) and (A-9). The latter equation get
the following form for diametral expansion with an internal pressure:

G−F
W& = σ θ ε&θ + σ z ε& z = σ θ ε&θ + 0.5
σ θ ε&θ =F + 2H
2 H + 0.5(F + G )=σ θ ε&θ = σ e ε&e = (H + 1 / 4(F + G ))1 / 2 σ θ ε&e
F + 2H(A-13)
Combining this result with (A-8) and (A-12) gives:Ae =1( H + 0.25(F + G ))n −1
2

(H + 0.5F )Aθ
(A-14)(A-14) combined with (A-11) give us as a final result that:n −1(H + 0.5F )(H + 0.25(F + G )) 2 A
Aθ =
z
n +1
(F + G ) 2
367(A-15)

For the anisotropy constants used before and an n-value of 5 we get Aθ = 0.094Az. Thus the creep
in the hoop direction is only one tenth of the creep rate in the axial direction at the same applied stress.
For an isotropic material we would get Aθ = 0.49 Az since the effective stress is lower than σθ in thecase of expansion with internal pressure.
A1.5 The true stress in a constant pressure creep test of tubing
If the tube is expanded with an internal pressure p the axial and circumferential stresses are:

pDi
4h
pDi
σθ =
2h

σz =

(A-16)

where Di and h are current values of inner diameter and wall thickness respectively. These
parameters can be related through equations A-3:

dε r
⎞ pDi
⎛G
= −⎜ + H ⎟
dλ
⎠ 2h
⎝2
dε θ ⎛ F⎞ pDi=⎜ +H⎟dλ ⎝ 2⎠ 2h(A-17)

Noting that dh/h = dεr and dDi/Di = dεθ we get:dDdh
G / 2 + H dDi=−= −A ih
F / 2 + H Di
Di

A-18)

which can be integrated to:h ⎛ Di ⎞⎟=⎜h0 ⎜⎝ Di 0 ⎟⎠−A

(A-19)

where h0 and Di0 are the initial values for wall thickness and diameter. If we use these values inthe equation for σθ we get:

pDi 0 ⎛ Di ⎞⎜⎟σθ =h0 ⎜⎝ Di 0 ⎟⎠A+1

(A-20)

This relation can be expressed in terms of initial stress and engineering strain e in the
curcumferential direction:σ θ = σ θ 0 (1 + e ) A+1 = σ θ 0 exp(( A + 1)ε θ )(A-21)

This relation can be compared to equations 5-4 and 5-5. With the anisotropy constants used as an
example above, A = 0.46. Thus the true stress in a zirconium alloy tube will increase significantly
slower with strain than in an isotropic material. This is an effect in addition to the relative
strengthening expressed by equation A-15.
368

A1.6 References1.

Hill, R., Plasticity. 1950, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

2.

Tenckhoff, E., “Review of deformation mechanisms, texture, and mechanical anisotropy inzirconium and zirconium base alloys”, Zirconium in the Nuclear Industry: FourteenthInternational Symposium, 2004, Stockholm, ASTM STP 1467, ASTM, pp. 25-50.

3.

Rosinger, H. E., “A model to predict the failure of Zircaloy-4 fuel sheathing during postulated
LOCA conditions”, Journal of Nuclear Materials, 120(1984), pp. 41-54.

369

Appendix B
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

The list below does not contain acronyms of computer codes.
ACR
ADS
AEC
AECL
ANL
ANS
AOO
AVN
BOC
BOL
BSE
BTF
BWR
CANDU
CE
CEA
CEGB
CFR
CHF
CNRA
COG
CP-ECR
CSNI
DBA
DSP
ECCS
ECR
ECR-BJ
EdF
EOC
EPMA
EPRI
FEBA
FGR
FLECHT
Flops
GB
GDC
GRS

Advanced CANDU Reactor
Automatic depressurization system
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
Argonne National Laboratory
American Nuclear Society
Anticipated operational occurrences
Association Vinçotte-Nucléaire,
Beginning-of-cycle
Beginning-of-life
Back scattered electron
Blowdown Test Facility
Boiling Water Reactor
Canadian deuterium uranium (reactor)
Combustion Engineering
Commissariat à l'énergie atomiqueCentral Electricity Generating Board
Code of Federal Regulations
Critical heat flux
Committee on Nuclear Regulatory Activities
CANDU Owners Group
Equivalent cladding reacted calculated with the Cathcart-Pawel correlation
Committee on the Safety on Nuclear Installations
Design basis accident
German Standard Problem
Emergency core cooling system
Equivalent cladding reacted
Equivalent cladding reacted calculated with the Baker-Just correlation
Electricité de France
End-of-cycle
Electron probe microanalysis
Electric Power Research Institute
Flooding experiments with blocked arrays
Fission gas release
Full length emergency cooling heat transfer
Floating point operations per second
Grain boundary
General Design Criterion
Gesellschaft für Reaktorsicherheit371

Gwd/MTU
GWd/t
HBS
HPSI
IAEA
IE
IFA

Gigawattdays per metric ton uranium
Gigawattdays per ton
High burn-up structureHigh-pressure safety injection
International Atomic Energy Agency
Irradiation Experiments
Instrumented fuel assembly

INEL
IPSN
ISP
JAERI
KfK
KWU
LB
LHGR
LHR
LOCA
LOM
LPCI
LVDT
LWR
MDA
MOX
MRBT
MWd/kg
MWd/t
MWh/kg HE
ND
NDA
NEI
NNC
NRC
NRU
OD
OECD
OM
OPG
ORNL
PBF
PCM
PCT
PIE
PIRT
PQD
PWR
RBMK
RCS
RIA
RRS
RT

Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (now Idaho National Laboratory)
Institut de protection et de sûreté nucléaire
International Standard Problem
Japanese Atomic Energy Research Institute (now Japan Atomic Energy Agency)
Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe (now Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe)
Kraftwerk Union
Large breakLinear heat generation rate
Linear heat rate
Loss-of-coolant-accident
Light optical microscopy (microscope)
Low-pressure coolant injection
Linear variable differential transformer
Light water reactor
Mitsubishi Developed Alloy
Mixed oxide
Multi-rod burst test
Megawattdays per kilogram
Megawattdays per ton
Megawatthours per kilogram heavy element
Neutron detector
New Developed corrosion resistance Alloy
Nuclear Energy InstituteNational Nuclear Corporation
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
National Research Universal reactor
Outer diameter
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
Optical microscopy
Ontario Power Generation
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Power Burst Facility
Power Coolant Mismatch
Peak cladding temperature
Post-irradiation-examination
Phenomenon Identification and Ranking Tables
Post-quench-ductility
Pressurized water reactor
High power boiling reactor with pressurized channels (Russian design)
Reactor coolant system
Reactivity initiated accident
Reactor regulating system
Room temperature
372

SB
SEASET
SEFLEX
SEM
SGHWR
SNL
SOAR
SPERT-CDC
STP
TBS
TEM
TGA
TREAT
UKAEA
USD
USNRC
VVER
WWER
ZDT
Zr
Zr-4
Zy-4

Small break
Separate effects and system effects tests
Fuel rod simulator effects in flooding experiments
Scanning electron microscopy (microscope)
Steam Generating Heavy Water Reactor
Springfields Nuclear Laboratories
State-of-the-art-report
Special Power Excursion Reactor Tests-Capsule Driver Core
Standard temperature and pressure
Transition break size
Transmission electron microscopy (microscope)
Thermogravimetric analysis (analyzer)
Transient test reactor
United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority
United States dollar
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Water moderated, water cooled power reactor (Russian design)
Water moderated, water cooled power reactor (Russian design)
Zero-ductility temperature
Zirconium
Zircaloy-4
Zircaloy-4373

OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2 rue André-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16
Printed in France.