| by Harry
Hutchinson, Executive Editor |
Nuclear reactors can generate heat in all kinds
of ways. And that's the problem. They're efficient, and
the electricity they produce is cheap, and very profitable. On the other
hand, they breed a sort of waste whose hazards have no historical precedent.
So, of course, there are those who are for nuclear power and those against.
Arguments on both sides can range from the economic to the political,
moral, and ecological.
But put all arguments aside, and one thing remains: More than 100 nuclear
reactors in the United States produce about 20 percent of the country's
electricity. So no one can afford to turn them off any time soon.
Companies like Framatome ANP and Westinghouse, which design and service
nuclear plants, continually tweak hardware, including fuel assemblies,
to make reactors more efficient. And before they put their new ideas into
service, the companies submit them to high-power tests.
Columbia University's Heat Transfer Research Facility has been
the only place to go for key safety testing. Since the days of the Atoms
for Peace program during the Eisenhower years, the lab has tested generations
of nuclear reactor fuel assemblies.
The NRC Stamp of Approval
According to the lab, its clients over the years have included all the
designers of pressurized water reactors in the United States and others
from much of the world. There is no lab quite like it in the U.S. and
few anywhere. It is the only one the Nuclear Regulatory Commission recognizes
as qualified to perform such qualification programs.
But this summer, everyone will have to turn somewhere else. Columbia University
has said it will close the lab at the end of June.
The lab's previous director has already left, and the winding down of
operations is being overseen by an acting director, Carlos Fighetti, a
chemical engineer who has worked at the test facility since 1968. "What
we're doing is not the mission of the university anymore," he said.
When the lab opened in 1950, there were no national laboratories, and
the research center worked for the Atomic Energy Commission.
Four
engineers and two technicians may put in an extra 25 hours in a week to
monitor a test of a fuel assembly. Power will be inched up to find the
point of critical heat flux at a given pressure and flow.
As Fighetti sees it, one of the lab's liabilities is its size. It takes
up several floors of very valuable real estate.
Many at the lab point out that it has paid for itself. According to Victor
Carrano, senior engineer at the site, the laboratory can bring in as much
as $2 million for perhaps six to eight tests in a good year.
But as Fighetti pointed out, "The measure of research is dollars
per square foot." Large testing labs like the Heat Transfer Research
Facility, in Columbia's Prentis Building on West 125th Street, and many
others like it, are "dying elephants," Fighetti said.
Testing the Grid
The tests are primarily concerned with one small, but significant feature
of a reactor core.
A core contains as many as 3,000 fuel assemblies, bundles of long, slender
rods containing enriched uranium. Controlled fission among the bundles
heats water to begin the series of heat-transfer cycles that send steam
to the turbines that will drive generators.
An area of the assembly that is often a target of redesign is the spacer
grid. The grids, placed every foot and a half or so along each bundle,
make sure the rods keep their proper distance from each other. The spacer
grids also influence the flow of water around the rods. Even small changes
in the design of the spacer can make a difference in the efficiency of
a reactor.
In a pressurized water reactor, the reactor coolant system stream reaches
about 590°F, or more than 310°Cfar past the boiling point
in atmospheric conditions. To avoid boiling, other than for circulation
of minor bubbles, the reactor coolant system is pressurized to more than
2,000 pounds per square inch, about 150 times the pressure of a standard
atmosphere.
The superheated water flows in a closed loop to heat another stream of
water. When it has transferred much of its heat, the reactor coolant heads
back toward the reactor vessel.
The more efficiently the water flows among the rods, the more efficient
the plant will be in converting the heat of fission eventually to electricity.
As senior advising engineer for thermohydraulics at Framatome ANP in Lynchburg,
Va., Dave Farnsworth has been a long-time customer of the lab. Framatome
sends fuel assemblies there to be tested for safety and reliability before
they ever receive pellets of fissionable fuel.
The lab subjects test bundles to massive doses of direct current under
simulated reactor conditions. Then, its staff watches and records what
happens.
Spacer grids are designed to give the coolant a swirling motion around
the rods and promote the transfer of heat.
The one thing no one wants is the formation of a small layer of steam
on the surface of a rod, Farnsworth said. That is the point of critical
heat flux, which will stop, or at least sharply cut down, the transfer
of heat to the coolant. The condition can cause the temperature of a rod
to spike by 1,000°F, he said. The rod is made of a heat-resistant
alloy, but an almost instantaneous heat rise of that magnitude can burn
the metal and release radioactive material into the reactor coolant system.
It is this point that the lab is particularly looking for. Safe margin
of operation for a plant will be 20 to 30 percent below that maximum power
level.
Wired
to stand the heat, a test bundle is in place for a test at Columbia's
heat-transfer lab. The cables will carry so much current that testing
can be done only during off-peak hours.
In a reactor, a single fuel assembly may consist of 225 rods arranged
in a grid 15-by-15 square. For heat-transfer testing, a representative
bundle of five by five will serve. The bundles are heavily wired to the
direct current and then sealed in what look like sewer pipes. They are
actually small-scale closed systems where test water will circulate under
pressure, approximating the reactor coolant system in a power plant.
A test can take 20 to 25 hours during the course of a week and will capture
80 to 100 data points. A data point records the system's reaction to a
specific combination of variables, chiefly flow, temperature, pressure,
and power.
According to Carrano, the tests begin at a power level considerably below
the expected critical heat flux point. "We take power up gradually
until the thermocouples begin to react sharply, then back off," he
said.
The process water gets so hot that it cannot be released directly into
the city sewer system.
When you reach the basement of the building, you can hear the current
of water running behind the cellar wall. It is an artesian well that provides
water that will cool down the test water system.
The lab currently keeps five motor-generator sets: four from General Electric,
each with a 2,100-horsepower motor driving a 1,500-kilowatt generator,
and an Allis Chalmers setup with one 5,000-hp motor driving two generators
that together produce a total of 3,500 kW.
The lab has two 13,000-volt feeders coming in to power the generator sets.
There is another 13,000-volt line for the rest of the building's needs.
The lab has done some testing for boiling water reactors in the past,
and it was for one of those several years ago that it set its record for
power applied in a test, 12.5 megawatts.
Easing the Current Drain
Because it puts such a drain on the electricity grid, the heat-transfer
lab can run the generator sets only during off-peak demand hours, at night
and on weekends. According to Carrano, a typical test will be set up and
perhaps yield a few data points one night during a week, sometime between
10 p.m. and 8 a.m., and the rest of the work will be done on the following
Saturday and Sunday by a team of four engineers and two technicians.
"We joke about a second shift coming in," Carrano said. There
is no overtime pay for the engineers.
Although the actual data capture can take less than a week, preparations
begin nine months to a year in advance for a new bundle. For instance,
there is usually a six-month wait for the specialized tubing, Carrano
said.
The rods are packed with precision-machined ceramic cylinders, which provide
the mechanical backup that allows the rods to withstand the high pressures.
Then, up to seven thermocouples are installed in the ceramics in precise
locations. The ceramics are thermal conductors and electrical insulators
for the thermocouples. The rods stretch about a half-inch as they heat
up during testing.
Complicating the process is the geometry of the test rod. The interior
diameter increases toward the center of each assembled rod to simulate
the higher neutron activity at the center of a fuel assembly.
According to Carrano, "We receive the tubes in halves from the supplier.
We then send them to the ceramic guy who has to fit each ceramic by hand
in the half tube. This is because of the variable wall thickness. Each
successive ceramic (they are about 1 1/2 inches long) must have a slightly
different taper, so it fits snugly against the changing inner wall. The
tubes are sent back to us with all the ceramics and our people then put
the rods together. The customer tells us where to locate the thermocouples
and we install them with the ceramics and weld the tube halves together,
as well as attaching the top and bottom electrodes, which are nickel-plated
copper."
Although they may be used more than once, the rods will wear out from
stress. Thermocouples also fail eventually and when they do, the entire
rod has to be replaced.
"There are basically two types of testsuniform wall thickness
and non-uniform" Carrano said. "It is the non-uniform that is
the challenging one and the type for which we have the NRC seal of approval."
According to Farnsworth at Framatome, the test data from the lab has been
vital to the nuclear industry. "For almost all reactors in the U.S.,"
he said, "safety analysis developed from research done at Columbia."
One
of four General Electric motor-generator sets that power the lab's tests.
Each set consists of a 2,100-horsepower motor driving a 1,500-kilowatt
dc generator.
Now that the lab in New York is closing, Framatome, which has its world
headquarters in Paris, is working on a research site of its own. According
to Farnsworth, the company "is developing expertise to test PWR spacer
grids" at a facility in Karlstein, Germany.
For the safety data to be applicable in the United States, the new Karlstein
site will have to be cleared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "My
job will be to prepare the report to the NRC asking for approval of the
new lab," Farnsworth said.
The lab is full of vintage equipment with no place to go. According to
Carrano, there have been inquiries from various placescompanies,
universities, and national labsabout collecting the hardware, but
so far there have been no takers.
"I'm sure the university would be willing to let someone just take
it," Carrano said. Columbia has to clear the space to make room for
whatever it has in mind for the Prentis Building. "It would be a
shame to see it cut up," he said. "These are my babies."
Beyond confirming that it has decided to shut the lab, the university
isn't commenting on its plans.
The motor-generator sets also can still be used for high-power testing.
Engineers at the lab argue that the power of the dc generator is better
suited to their kind of testing than is the output of a rectifier, which
has become the more common lab tool for applications requiring direct
current.
According to Carrano, for instance, "The rectifier output has ac
components in it, which are not representative of nuclear heating."
William Begell, the ASME Fellow who heads Begell House, the technical
book publisher in New York, was director of the lab in the late 1950s.
He said, "The lab has had a tremendous amount of experience in doing
research." Then he added: "Maybe someone could restore it."
During a tour of the facility, one could see how Begell values his old
workplace. There was a pile of used test
assemblies stacked against a wall. He called it "a history of the
nuclear power industry."
home
| features | news
update | marketplace
| departments | about
ME | back issues |
ASME | site
search
© 2003 by The American Society
of Mechanical Engineers
|