Welcome Stranger to OCC!Login | Register

New Cladding Material for Nuclear Fuel-Rods Being Investigated

Category: Science & Technology
Posted: 10:10AM

Nuclear reactors are among the most powerful and efficient energy sources known to man, but like anything dealing with large amounts of energy, failures can be catastrophic. For decades researchers and engineers have been working to minimize the likelihood of these failures, most especially after an incident, such as the one in 2011 at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. Now a safety measure that has been considered for years is being more closely examined by researchers at MIT, to determine just how effective it may be.

Nuclear fission reactors operate by placing enough uranium close together that the natural emission of neutrons from one atom stimulates neutrons in other atoms to also be emitted. This chain reaction releases a great deal of heat, which is used to boil water into steam and turn a turbine. The uranium is actually in small pellets not much larger than a pencil eraser or two, and these pellets are stacked together in tubes of zirconium alloy, or zircalloy. While zircalloy does its job pretty well during normal operation, if systems fail and the reaction heats it too much, it will react with the water to create hydrogen gas, a potential explosive.

For some time researchers have been suggesting silicon carbide, a ceramic, be used to replace zircalloy, as it is a thousand times less reactive with water. The MIT researchers are the first to perform the necessary and extensive tests needed before the industry can adopt it. So far the results are promising, with the ceramic holding up very well at normal operating temperatures, and the more stressful conditions that would occur during an accident. Being a ceramic though, it presents two issues. First, how ceramics fail is not as well understood as how metals fail, and second, you cannot weld ceramics to place caps on the rods. Both of these issues will have to be dealt with for silicon carbide to ever be used.

Source: MIT

Register as a member to subscribe comments.
masterbinky on August 1, 2013 06:45AM
They've also had better designs for decades including fail safe designs(that have the sensible trade-off that they aren't the most efficient designs). It's not realistic to just build another one every time you get a better design and phase out old plants. The investment into the plants is so high that you need them to run their full life span. Ironically people don't support new ones with the better designs being built because they rightfully dislike many of the old designs their risk. What that does though is keeps them stuck with the old plants that have already been approved instead of allowing a new safer more efficient(than the old design) plants be built.

This news has comment postings disabled because it is now archived.

© 2001-2018 Overclockers Club ® Privacy Policy
Elapsed: 0.0872330666   (xlweb1)