3 - - " GELEASED FOR ANNOUNCEMENT . CIS IN BUCLEAR SCIENCE ABSTRA ABSTRACT OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY operated by UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION NUCLEAR DIVISION for the U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION ORNL- TM-497 COPY NO. - {f DATE - August 16, 1966 ANALYSIS OF FILLING ACCIDENTS IN MSRE J. R. Engel, P, N. Haubenreich, and S. J. Ball CFsTI PRICTS SV i e ——— HC, $¢;Lév; MN ,éfio Whenever the MSRE is shut down, the fuel salt is drained from the core. Then, during a normal startup, the graphite and the fuel are preheated and the control rods are positioned so that the reactor remains suberitical while it is being filled. Certain abnormal circumstances could result in criticality and a power excursion in the partially filled core. Various postulated incidents were surveyed and the worst case was ana- lyzed in detail. This case involved selective freezing in the drain tanks to concentrate the uranium in the molten salt fraction. TPhysical restrictions on the fill rate and safety actions of control rods and gas control valves limited the calculated power and temperature excursions so that any damage to the reactor would be prevented. NOTICE This document contains information of o preliminary nature and was prepared primarily for internal use at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. It is subject to revision or correction and therefore does not represent a final report. e oy e = e e —~ Lecnumnce This report was pupcrod os an account of Govommcm :ponsorod work., Neither the Unhed S!a!u, _ nor-the Commission, nor any person acting en behalf of the Commission: A, Makes any warranty or representation,’ uprus-d or implied, with respect to the cecum:y, h complflonus, or usefulness of the ln!ormcfloa cmtctned in this report, or that the use of any information, epporatus, mflrod or prccou disclosed in this report may not infringe ptivately owned rights; or ' -B. Assumes any licbilities with nspoct h Ihc use of, or for domages nnulflng from the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report. As’ vsed in the above, “person acting on behalf of the Commission® includes any cmployu or contractor of the Commission, or employes of such contractor, to the extent that such employes . or contracter of the Commission, or employee “of such contractor prepares, disuminuies, or “provides acceas to, any information pursuant to llll omplflymm or contract whh the Commlulon, or his amployment with such contractor. Lo PREFACE . The analysi written ea . s described Publishingflihln 196k, Althizr; was done in 196 part of the Ms;ETGPOTt is being there has been 3 énd the report analysis. Well safety Circuii Lesued as Writtean inordinate delwas able to assess over two year ry was based on n because a si 'ay in ss the credibilit s have now pass n the results of gnificant y of some of thee:’ and now we aret:is ssumptions invol etter ved. We Pla.n + o do th. ig ag a, . critical revi lew Of the s afet y syste bt ’m. RELEA ) SED : FC . MENT IN NU ICLEAR SCIENCE ABST TRACTS LEG Thnis ¥ O P red 28 8% aocount of Gwemmen gpon 1ates, e jpaiof any PeT on acting naif e Mak rranty repres® on, eXP e8 or p\*.ed, ih resp® 1o th racys &° ple a8, ©F ueefud a of the iniormation ine report {hat the use of any ifoT ati appar L0, ethod oT 58 108€ thi report ¥ not nfringe private‘nj owned vightBs B. AsS y i jlitied pect use of mages resulting {rom h ase of 39 info’ mations pparat Lnods pro 88 diecio® in this £, g use o above ¢ acting 1f of W miseion" inciuded y ployee or 5 the CO jon, OF mploye® of n comtT Ah at that guch em loye nirac ommlest , ot e loyee guc a repared: cnssem‘ma rovides c y informa parsud pie € b cont:a.ct {th e jon, OF toyme g wit! ontractor CONTENTS Introduction. Mechanics of Filling . 2.1 General Description . . . 2.2 System Volumes 2.3 Drain Tank Pressure During a Fill. 2.L Amount of Gas in Tank During a Fill . 2.5 Gas Supply. 2.6 Course of a Normal Fill 2.7 Coast-Up of Fuel Level . Nuelear Considerations . . . . 3.1 Effect of Fuel ILevel on Reactlivity . 3.2 Control Rods 3.3 Temperature Coefficients of Reactivity . Survey of Possible Filling Accidents . 4.1 Filling with Control Rods Withdrawn . h,2 Filling with Fuel at Low Temperature . 4,3 Filling with Concentrated Fuel . Analysis of Maximum Filling Accident . 5.1 ©Specification of Accident. 5.2 Preliminary Digital Calculations . 5.3 Detailed Analog Simulation . 5.4 Discussion « o« ¢ ¢ o 0 0 0 . o Conclusions .« o« v v o o o o o o o O O &= & F o . 11 Fig. No. = w 10 11 12 13 1k LIST OF FIGURES Title System Used in Filling Fuel ILoop . . . Calculated Volume Calibration of Fuel Loop . Calculated Volume Calibration of Fuel Drain Tank . Drain Tank Pressure vs Liquid Ievel in Fuel Loop at Various Salt Fill Rates . . . « . . . . . . . . Amount of Gas Required in Drain Tank vs Salt Ievel in Loop at Several Fill Rates Salt ILevel in Fuel Loop During Normal Fill. Coast-Up After Gas Addition is Stopped vs Fill Rate at Several Initial Fuel Ievels . e s e e e . Effect of Fuel Level on Reactivity . Contrcl Rod Worth vs Position . . . . . Liquid Composition Resulting from Selective Freezing of Fuel Salt "A" in Drain Tank . Bilock Diagram of Mathematical Model for Fill Accident Simulation . . . . . . ¢ . 4 . . . .. Cross Section of Typical Graphite Stringer with Adjacent Fuel Stringers. « + o + o &+ o o o0 o o o « & Net Reactivity Inserted During Maximum Filling Accident. Power and Temperature During Maximum Filling Accident. .10 .12 . 1h . 15 . 21 25 26 . 29 . 30 ANATYSTIS OF FILLING ACCIDENTS IN MSRE J. R. Engel, P. N. Haubenreich, and 5. J. Ball 1. INTRODUCTION One of the features of the MSRE (and fluid-fuel reactors in general) is that it can be positively shut down by draining the fuel out of the core. The control rods provide a small shutdown margin to take the re- actor subcritical whenever desired, but for any shutdown in which the reactor is to be cooled dowh, the fuel must be drained. Draining and re- filling the core is therefore an coperation which will probably be done many times. The normal procedure for a startup requires that the reactor and the fuel be heated by electric heaters to near operating temperature before the fuel 1s transferred from the drain tank to the core. The rods normally are partially inserted so that the reactor 1s just sub- critical at the fill temperature when the fuel fills the core. Criti- cality is attained by withdrawing the rods after the fuel and cooclant loops are filled and circulation has been started. Tt is conceivable that criticality could be attained during a fill before the core is completely full. This could result from one or more of the following abnormal conditions: 1) the control rods are withdrawn too far, 2) the temperature of the fuel and/or the core graphite is too low, and 3) the uranium concentration of the fuel was increased (or the poison concentration was decreased) while the fuel salt was in the drain tank., If criticality is reached prematurely, the nuclear power will rise, possibly causing damaging temperatures in the partially filled core. As soon as the onset of such an undesirable situation is detected, the rocds are inserted, the fill is stopped and the fuel returned to the drain tank. Supplementing the effects of these actions will be the reactivity feed- back from any changes in the fuel and graphite temperatures. In order to evaluate the severity and consequences of various postu- lated fiiling accidents it is necessary to have certain guantitative infor- mation. This includes: 1) the filling rate (fuel level ve time), 10 2) the relation of kepp to fuel level for the particular abnormal situation — being considered, 3) rod worth and the speed with which they can act in the partially filled core, 4) how rapidly the fill can be stopped (level ve time after action is taken to stop the fill}, and 5) temperature coef- ficients of reactivity appropriate for this abnormal situation. This information has been developed for a variety of cases and is presented in Sections 2 and 3. The relative severity of a number of postulated accidents is sur- veyed in Section 4. In Section 5, the most severe of the postulated accidents is analyzed in considerable detail. Conclusions are summarized in Section 6. 2. MECHANICS OF FILLING 2.1 General Description Figure 1 is a simplified flowsheet of the reactor fill, drain, and vent systems showing only those features which are essential to a de- " scription of the normal fill and drain procedures. All valves are shown in the normal positions for filling the reactor from fuel drain tank No. 1 (FD-1). The reactor is filled by admitting helium, from a supply at 40 psig, to the drain tanks to force the fuel salt up through the reactor drain line into the primary loop. The fill rate is limited by a restriction in the gas supply line and the maximum level in the loop is set by limit- ing the pressure with PIC-517. Helium displaced from the loop by the incoming fuel is vented from the pump bowl, at the high pcint in the loop, through the auxiliary charcoal bed to the stack. (This vent route by- passes the main charcoal beds to avoid the elution and release of xenon and krypton which may be in those beds.) When the fill is complete, salt is frozen in the drain line at FV-103. The pump-bowl vent is switched to the main charcoal beds and, after the drain-tank pressure has been vented through the auxiliary char- coal bed, the pump-bowl and drain-tank gas spaces are connected through HCV-54L. The system is now in readiness for operation, with the only action required to drain being to thaw FV-103. FHX 1l ORNL-~DWG 63-7320 £ < s FP PCv-522 533 XD o P TO FILTER, @ Y/ FAN, AND STACK L\ ‘~ \/ \/ 2\ A FFT REACTOR FD-2 AUXILIARY CHARCOAL FFT BED [} FD-2 Fvoos FFT r 5 FD-2 HCV- HCV-573 544 A~ “ .y HCV-8T72 - [><] 7 Z % 50-psig £ DISK Fo-2 () e 3 X [ PCV 517 40- psig HELIUM SUPPLY Fig. 1. GSystem Used in Filling Fuel Loop. 12 2.2 System Volumes The relation between the volume of salt transferred from the drain tank and the liquid level in the fuel loop is shown in Fig. 2. The datum level is the bottom of the reactor vessel {elevation 826.92 ft). The midplane of the 65-in.-high graphite matrix in the core is at 3.75 ft and the operating level in the pump bowl is &t 13.4 ft. The first 1.5 £t~ of salt transferred from the drain tank is required to fill the drain line. The liquid volume-level relation in a fuel drain tank is shown in Fig. 3. The volume of the tank above the salt level is the difference between 80.5 £t° (the total volume of the tank) and the liguid volume. The datum plane for Fig. 3 is 12.1 ft below that for Fig. 2 (81k4.82 tt). 2.3 Drain Tank Pressure During a Fill The pressure difference between the drain tank and the pump bowl is determined primarily by the fuel-salt density and the difference in the levels in the loop and in the tank., Pressure drop in the fill line adds to this pressure difference when fuel is flowing. The pressure in the pump bowl is normally above atmospheric pressure because of pressure drop in the gas vent from the pump bowl to the stack. (The pressure approaches 1 psig at zero flow because of a check valve in the vent line.) Figure 4 shows the relation between the actual pressure in the drain tank and the level in the fuel loop during a fill. This figure is based on a total salt inventory of 73.2 ft® and a salt demsity of 130 1b/ft>. The increased pressures at salt fill rates of 1 and 2 ft3/min refiect the pressure drop in the fill and vent lines. 2.4k Amount of Gas in Tank During a Fill The amount of gas in the drain tank is a function of the temperature, the pressure and the volume in the tank above the liquid. Figure 5 shows the amount of gas in the tank (volume of gas at 32°F, 1L.7 psia) as a function of loop liquid level for varicus salt fill rates. (The gas in the tank was assumed to be at 1200°F. The pressure and the actual volume were obtained from the information already discussed.) 13 ORNL DWG 66=7767 Tend ut T3Ad] Salt Volume (ft3) * " Fuel Loop ibration of Calculated Volume Cal . 2. Fig 14 ORNL DWG 66-7768 (c33) susy uTsag wp sumrop 3Tsg Salt Ievel in Drain Tank (ft) Tank. in f Fuel Drai 1611 © alculated Volume Calibrati C 3 ig. E 15 URNL TWG €6-7767 i ~FILL RATE {ctm) ...... e e 1k 10 (81sd) UNSSTUI MNVI NIvEd SALT IEVEL IN PRIMARY IOOP (ft) Drain Tank Pressure vs Liquid Level in Fuel Loop at Variocus Fig. 4. Salt Fill Rates. 16 ORNL DWO 66="7710 14 . O ) ' ! s . T, M ¢ . -4 | : ; . . ) . : \ . el e Ll Lol i 1 ! B e i ! I : i “ .......... b i . 4 - . -8 - . i : i . . T ooy i : ! | ! . LTI Lo oo R —— |) 1445 134.5 ibe,7 Temp. Coeff. of Reactivity (°F~ 1) Fuel -3.0 x 10" -5,0 x 10™°® =3.3 x 107° Graphite -3.4 x 1075 -4,9 x 107 -3.7 x 107° %99.9926% 147 with its attendant decrease in fuel density, raises the fuel level and increases the effective height of the core. This is in contrast to a full core in which a reduction in density expels fuel without changing the core size. The coefficients are also affected by any difference in fuel concentrations between the normal and abnormal situations. The fuel temperature coefficient of reactivity for the partially filled core was evaluated by comparing Kepe calculated for two cases, each with Fuel B concentrated by selective freezing of 39% of the salt.* Tn the first case, H/L was 0.60 and the fuel density was proper for 1200°F. " * See pp 20 - 21 for discussion of selective freezing. *¥ This choice of salt type and H/L will be expiained later. 26 In the second, H/L was 0.6l and the fuel density was reduced to keep the same total mass of fuel in the core., Neutron microscopic cross sections were evaulated at 1200°F in both cases and the graphite density was un- changed. These two cases simulated a rise in fuel temperature from 1200°F to 1341°F in a time so short that the graphite temperature does not rise appreciably. Use of constant microscopic cross sections implies that the fuel temperature has no effect on the thermal neutroun energy distribution when, in fact, it does. Results of these calculations gave a 8k/k of 0.061%, equivalent to a fuel temperature coefficient of -0.43 x 1075 °F 1, L., SURVEY OF FILLING ACCITENTS The relative severity of filling accidents can be described, quali- tatively, in terms of the amount of excess reactivity available for ad- dition to the core and the rate at which it can be added, particularly in the vicinity of keep = 1. The amount of excess reactivity available depends primarily on the circumstances postulated for the accident and the composition of the fuel mixture. Three sets of circumstances which can produce filling accidents have been considered; these are discussed under separate headings below. The influence of fuel composition waes examined for each type of accident. The rate of reactivity addition involves, 1in addition to the factors mentioned above, the rate of fuel addition. In order to restrict the most severe accident to & tolerable level, it was necessary to 1imit the salt addition rate under normal circumstances to 0.4 £t°/min. The normal helium supply pressure to the drain tanks is 40 psig with an ultimate 1imit at 50 psig imposed by a rupture disc. The physical restrictions which establish the normal fill rate limit the maximum rate tc 0.5 £1t°/min with the salt level in the main portion of the core. All of the filling accldents were examined on the basis of the 0.5 f£t°/min rate. L.1 PFilling With Control Rods Withdrawn The amount of excess reactivity that can be added in the MSRE by filling the core with the contrcol rods withdrawn is limited to the amount required in the fuel for normal, full-power operation. Although this 27 requirement varies somewhat with the fuel mixture it is not expected to exceed 4% in any case and administrative control will be exercised to keep the reactivity at or below this value. If the fuel were loaded with sufficient uranium for 4% excess reactivity and all three rods were fully withdrawn, the core would be critical at T4% of full. At this level, the salt addition rate of 0.5 £t®/min corresponds to a reactivity ramp of 0.01% Bk/k per sec. Dropping the control rods after the power reaches the normal scram level (150% of full power or 15 Mw) checks the excursion pro- duced by such a ramp with no significant rise in fuel temperature. KEven if only two control rods are dropped, sufficient negative reactivity is inserted to prevent criticality from being attained again if the core is completely filled. 4,2 Filling With Fuel at Low Temperature In this accident it is postulated that the graphite has been pre- heated to the normal startup temperature of 1200°F and fuel salt is added at a significantly lower temperature. The amount of excess reac- tivity available depends on the temperature coefficient of reactivity of the fuel in the full reactor (see Table 1) and the degree of subcooling of the salt. The heat capacity of the graphite in the core is 3.53 Mw- sec/°F while that of the salt in the graphite-bearing regions is only 1.45 Mw-sec/°F. Therefore, if the fuel and graphite are allowed to come to thermal equilibrium, the temperature rise of the salt is 2.4 times the decrease in graphite temperature. Since the ratio of the graphite to the fuel temperature coefficient is less than 2.4, heat transfer from the graphite to the salt reduces the excess reactivity. | The liquidus temperature of Fuel B, the salt with the largeét nega- tive temperature coefficient of reactivity, is about 810°F. If salt at this temperature were added to the reactor and heat transfer from the graphite were neglected, the maximum amount of excess reactivity would be 1.9%. This is well below the 3.2% shutdown margin provided by the con- trol rods. 28 4.3 Filling with Concentrated Fuel The crystallization paths of all three salt mixtures being considered for use ag MSRE fuel are such that large quantities of salt can be solidified, under equilibrium conditions, before any uranium (or thorium) appears in the solid phase. Selective freezing, therefore, provides one means by which the uranium concentration in the liquid salt can be in- creased significantly while the salt is in the drain tank. Since the re- actor vessel is the first major component of the fuel loop that fills on salt addition, approximately LO% of the salt mixture can be frozen in the drain tank before it becomes impossible to completely fill the core. The changes in liquid composition as selective freezing proceeds depend upon the initial composition and the conditions of freezing. Figure 10 shows the composition of the remaining melt for Fuel A as a function of the fraction of salt frozen. The curves are based on the assumption that only the equilibrium primery solid phase, 6 LiF+