Effect of radiation embrittlement to reactor pressure ...
Transcript of Effect of radiation embrittlement to reactor pressure ...
Effect of radiation embrittlement to reactor pressure vessel steels p
and its surveillance
Luigi DebarberisLuigi DebarberisInstitute for Energy (IE)Petten, The Netherlands,
http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu
T i t A il 2009T i t A il 2009
1
Trieste, April 2009Trieste, April 2009
CONTENTCONTENTEC JRC IE- EC-JRC-IE
- AGEING NPPs in the EU- RPV Embrittlement- MATERIAL ISSUES- Modeling / Assessment- Surveillance of RPV- Towards GEN IV - CONCLUSIONS
2
CONCLUSIONS
JRC - Joint Research Centre7 Institutes in 5 Member States:
JRC Joint Research Centre
IE - Petten The Netherlands- Institute for EnergyIRMM G l B l iIRMM - Geel Belgium- Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements
ITU - Karlsruhe Germany- Institute for Transuranium elements- Institute for Transuranium elements
IPSC - IHCP - IES - Ispra Italy- Institute for the Protection and the Security of the Citizen- Institute for Health and Consumer Protection- Institute for Environment and Sustainability
IPTS - Seville Spain- Institute for Prospective Technological Studies
3
Institute for Energy
44
Petten site
AGEING NPPs in the EUNuclear Safety- Cross-national issue Factors/issues:
D l ti
G G s t e U- Public concern- Needs for EU guidelines
- Best-practices
- Deregulation- Probabilistic approaches- Economical/cost savingp
- Deterministic & risk-based - National standards
5
AGEING NPPs in the EU
PWR, BWR, VVER VVER, RBMK,CANDUCANDU,MAGNOX, AGR AGR, HTR,FR
6
FR
EvolutionGEN IV
Future reactorsEPRGEN III
Advanced LWRGEN II
Commercial reactorsGEN I
Commercial reactors
Early prototypes
50s-60s (devel. 90s)70s-80s7
50s-60sNote: GEN III expected till 2015-2020
(devel. 90s)70s-80s
Present generationLWR PWR, BWR, VVER, RBMKHW CANDUHW CANDUGCR MAGNOX, AGRGCR MAGNOX, AGRLM FR
708090
100> 20 years> 30 years
• >100 NPPS• >30% electricity• ageing! 20
30405060
8
• ageing!01020
2000 2005 2010
Ageing mechanisms of RPV & RVIAgeing mechanisms of RPV & RVI
Irradiation hardeningIrradiation hardeningIrradiation embrittlement Irradiation embrittlement
loss of work hardening capabilityloss of work hardening capability-- loss of work hardening capabilityloss of work hardening capabilityThermal embrittlementThermal embrittlementSwelling Swelling -- incl. void induced embrittlementincl. void induced embrittlementincl. void induced embrittlementincl. void induced embrittlementIrradiation creep Irradiation creep -- incl. creepincl. creep--swelling interactionswelling interactionStress relaxationStress relaxation
h lh l-- thermalthermal-- radiation assistedradiation assistedFatigue Fatigue (vibration or/and environment)(vibration or/and environment)CorrosionCorrosion –– SCCSCC -- IASCCIASCC
WWER-440
Corrosion Corrosion SCC SCC IASCCIASCCPittingPittingWearWear
S iS i
9
WWER 440 SynergismsSynergisms
embrittlementembrittlement
Use of the Semi-Mechanistic Analytical Model to Analyse Radiation Embrittlement of M.A.: Cu and P Effects - Debarberis, Kryukov, Gillemot, Valo, Morozov, Brumovsky et al. International Journal of Problems of Strengths, ISSN 0556-171X, 2004, No.3
10
Semi-mechanistic analytical model for radiation embrittlement/re-embrittlement Debarberis et al., International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, Vol. 82, 2005
RPV materialsRussian design Western design
low Cr: 0.1-0.14 %Cr: 2-3 % - V
Mn Ni MoC M V & C Ni M V
A302BWWER-440C 0 16 %C 0 10 %
Low Ni
Mn-Ni-MoCr-Mo-V & Cr-Ni-Mo-V
Cu: 0.16 %P: 0.011 %
Cu: 0.10 %P: 0.02 %
P: 0.007 %P: 0.009 %
High Ni A533B Ni~0.6%
A508Bcl3 Ni~0.7%VVER-1000 weld seams:up to Ni ~ 1.9%
High Ni
11
16MND512KhMFA, 15A2MFA,15Kh2NMFAA
Embrittlement
- neutron fluence (matrix damage)
impurities (late 60s: Cu & later P L E- impurities (late 60s: Cu & later P - L.E. Steele and co-workers at ONRL)
- alloying elements
- Ni identified ~10 y later
- Today, indications on Mn, etc.y, ,- thermal ageing, etc.
-Prediction models & formulas
- Surveillance programmes
Radiation Embrittlement Understanding for PLIM Activities at EC-JRC-IEDebarberis Sevini Acosta Pirfo Bieth Weisshaeupl Törrönen Kryukov & Valo
12
Debarberis, Sevini, Acosta, Pirfo, Bieth, Weisshaeupl, Törrönen, Kryukov & ValoInternational Journal Strength of Materials, ISSN 0556-171X, No. 1 (367) 2004
Radiation-induced micro-structure and micro-chemistryyMicro-chemistry evolution
At grain boundary
dpa Freely Migrating Defects
Re-combination/annihilation
At matrix sink
Micro-structural evolution
13direct MATRIX DAMAGE
TSH
IFT,
°C TRadiation-induced Cu precipitation
C C
MD
Fluence
DB
TT Cu precipitation
Fluence
T, °C
DB
TTSH
IFT
T
Effect of irradiation temperature in PWR RPV materials and its inclusion in Fluence
D
PRE
14
ff f psemi-mechanistic model - Debarberis et. al, - Scripta Materialia, Vol. 53, 2005
Reactor Pressure Vessel Materials
15
C C
Cu
P
16
”Comparison of Nickel Effects on Embrittlement Mechanisms in Prototypic WWER-1000 and A533B Steels"; R.K. Nanstad, M.A. Sokolov, M.K. Miller, and G.R. Odette - ORNL - UCSB
Atom Maps Reveal Irradiation-Induced Precipitates Enriched in Cu, Mn, Ni, P, and Si in the KS-01 Weld
(M.Miller, ORNL, USA)Neutron irradiation produces an extremelyproduces an extremely high number densityNv = 3 x 1024 m-3
of nanoscale copper-of nanoscale copper , manganese-, nickel-, phosphorus- and silicon-enriched precipitates.
The number density is
Cu Ni Mn Si P Cr NEach dot is an atom.
Box is 19 x 19 x 110 nm
significantly higher than other RPV steels irradiated to similar or hi h fl
17
Box is 19 x 19 x 110 nm and contains 1.5M ions. higher fluences.
18
”Comparison of Nickel Effects on Embrittlement Mechanisms in Prototypic WWER-1000 and A533B Steels"; R.K. Nanstad, M.A. Sokolov, M.K. Miller, and G.R. Odette - ORNL - UCSB
Schematic Embrittlement Process
C P Ni tUlt fiUltrafine
precipitatesCu, P, Ni, etc.
PP
UltrafinePrecipitates
Cu, etc.
precipitatesCu, etc.
PNi
PP
P
PP
PGrain
boundary PP P
PsegregationP, Mn, etc..
V i i t ti i l
Grain boundary
ti Vacancies, intersticials, transmutacion prod.
segregationP, Mn, etc.
19
Prediction formulas
∆RT [17 3+1537*(P 0 008)+238*(C 0 08)+191*Ni2*C ]* Φ 0 35FIM (PWR)
∆RTNDT = [17.3+1537*(P-0.008)+238*(Cu-0.08)+191*Ni2*Cu]* ΦFIM0.35
∆RTNDT = 800*(P+0.07*Cu)*ΦPNAE1/3
PNAE (VVER)
P, Cu concentrations in wt% , Ni, %ΦFIM neutron fluence (1019 cm-2 s-1, E>1 MeV)
,
ΦPNAE neutron fluence (1018 cm-2 s-1, E>0.5 MeV)
20
EMBRITTLEMENT SURVEILLANCE
Neutron embrittlement
21
MARGIN
KI, KIC
KI
KIC
I
TinitialRTNDT
Material propertiesLoads evolution
transients
22
degradation
MARGIN
KI, KIC
KI
KIC
I
TinitialRTNDT
Material propertiesLoads evolution
transients
23
degradation
MARGIN
KI, KIC
KI
KIC
I
TinitialRTNDT RTNDT
Material propertiesLoads evolution
transients
24
degradation
Different prediction formulas
paccepted by Regulators
Elements considered
Country Fluence power exponent
Remarks
Cu, P USA Reg.Guide 1.99 Rev.1
0.5 No cross factors – Thresholds
Cu, Ni USA Reg.Guide 1.99 Rev.2
0.28-0.10Logφ Cross factor Ni-Cu - No thresholds
Cu, P Germany KTA Not given No cross factors – Thresholds Cu, P Russia PNAE 0.33 No cross factors - No thresholdsCu, P Russia PNAE 0.33 No cross factors No thresholds Cu, P, Ni France FIS, FIM 0.35 Cross factor Ni-Cu – Thresholds Cu, P, Ni France Miannay et al. 0.7 Cross factor Ni-Cu – Thresholds Cu, P, Ni Japan JEPE BASE 0.29-0.04Logφ Cross factor Ni-Cu - No thresholds Cu P Ni Si Japan JEPE WELD 0 25 0 10Logφ Cross factor Ni Cu No thresholdsCu, P, Ni, Si Japan JEPE WELD 0.25-0.10Logφ Cross factor Ni-Cu - No thresholds
25
Different prediction formulas
paccepted by Regulators
Elements considered
Country Fluence power exponent
Remarks
Cu, P USA Reg.Guide 1.99 Rev.1
0.5 No cross factors – Thresholds
Cu, Ni USA Reg.Guide 1.99 Rev.2
0.28-0.10Logφ Cross factor Ni-Cu - No thresholds
Cu, P Germany KTA Not given No cross factors – Thresholds Cu, P Russia PNAE 0.33 No cross factors - No thresholdsCu, P Russia PNAE 0.33 No cross factors No thresholds Cu, P, Ni France FIS, FIM 0.35 Cross factor Ni-Cu – Thresholds Cu, P, Ni France Miannay et al. 0.7 Cross factor Ni-Cu – Thresholds Cu, P, Ni Japan JEPE BASE 0.29-0.04Logφ Cross factor Ni-Cu - No thresholds Cu P Ni Si Japan JEPE WELD 0 25 0 10Logφ Cross factor Ni Cu No thresholdsCu, P, Ni, Si Japan JEPE WELD 0.25-0.10Logφ Cross factor Ni-Cu - No thresholds
26
Schematic Embrittlement Process
C P Ni tUlt fiUltrafine
precipitatesCu, P, Ni, etc.
PP
UltrafinePrecipitates
Cu, etc.
precipitatesCu, etc.
PNi
PP
P
PP
PGrain
boundary PP P
PsegregationP, Mn, etc..
V i i t ti i l
Grain boundary
ti Vacancies, intersticials, transmutacion prod.
segregationP, Mn, etc.
27
Damage = (MD PRE SEG )∑MD(Φ,T,Ni) PRE(Φ,Cu,T,Ni, Φrate,Mn)SEG(Φ,T,P,Ni, Φrate)Damage = (MD, PRE, SEG, …)∑ SEG(Φ,T,P,Ni, Φrate)
180200
FT, °
C
120140160
TOTAL
- linear summation- quadratic option- synergisms
TT S
HIF
6080
100
Precipitation (Cu))
DB
T
02040 segregation (P)
Direct matrix damage
Fluence, n cm-21.00E+18 5.10E+19 1.01E+20 1.51E+20 2.01E+20
Semi mechanistic analytical model for radiation embrittlement and
28
Semi-mechanistic analytical model for radiation embrittlement andre-embrittlement data analysis- Debarberis, Kryukov, Gillemot, Acosta and Sevini International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, Volume 82, Issue 3, March 2005, 195-200
400
low Ni model alloys – HFR-LYRA + KOLAVVER 440VVER 440
300
400
TT S
hift
, °C
180
210
240
, Co
63 points – Welds; 10KhMFT
VVER 440VVER 440
100
200
Kola – MA low Nieasu
red
DB
T
90
120
150
180
∆T k
,as
ured
0
0 100 200 300 400
Kola MA low NiLYRA-HFR; low NiM
e
30
60
90
Mea
Calculated DBTT Shift , °C
E l ti f WWER440 di ti b ittl t d t i th i h i ti d l
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 2400
∆Tk, CoCalculated
Evaluation of WWER440 radiation embrittlement data using the semi-mechanistic modelZhurko, Krasikov, Kryukov, DebarberisIAEA Specialist Meeting on Radiation Embrittlement, Gus, Russia, May 2004
Advanced method for WWER RPV embrittlement assessment
29
Advanced method for WWER RPV embrittlement assessment, L. Debarberis et al., International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, Vol. 81, 2004
HFR KOLA
Extended analysis of VVER-1000 surveillance data, Kryukov, Debarberis et al., International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, Vol. 79, 2002
model alloys400
Ni=1.2 wt %
HFR KOLA
Ni200
300hi
ft, °
C
Cu= 0.4 wt%, P=0.009 wt%
Ni100
200
DB
TT S
h
Ni 0 004 t %
00 20 40 60
Ni=0.004 wt %Cu= 0.41 wt%, P=0.012 wt%
0 20 40 60
fluence value, 1018 n cm-2 (E>0.5 MeV)
Ni inclusion in semi-mechanistic analytical model for Radiation embrittlement of d l ll d bi d ff t ith C d P
30
model alloys and combined effects with Cu and PDebarberis, Kryukov, Gillemot, Valo, Nikolaev, Brumovsky, Acosta & Sevini, Specialist Meeting, Gus, Russia, May 2004
Nickel inclusion
Cu Ni Mn Si P
[ ] ⎥⎦
⎤⎢⎣
⎡⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛ Φ−Φ
+⋅+−⋅+Φ⋅= ΦΦ−
dcebaDBTT start
shiftsat tanh5.05.01 /5.0
Cu Ni Mn Si P
b = b1*Cu c = c1*Pf(Ni)
[ ] ⎥⎦
⎢⎣ ⎠⎝ df
31
Role of nickel in a semi-mechanistic analytical model for radiation embrittlement of model alloysJournal of Nuclear Materials, Volume 336, Issues 2-3, February 2005, Pages 210-216 Debarberis, Acosta, Sevini, Kryukov, Gillemot, Valo, Nikolaev, Brumovsky
Temperature effect
, °C
, °C
DB
TTSH
IFT, T
DB
TTSH
IFT,
T
Fluence
D MD
Fluence
D
PRE
Lower density of small precipitates –4 Lower density of small precipitates –less effective for damage (recovery properties)
2.5
3
3.5
Fact
or T
F
ABCDE ⎤⎡
⎥⎤
⎢⎡
F0.5
1
1.5
2
Tem
pera
ture
EFGHIK
( )⎥⎥⎥
⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎢
⎣
⎡⋅=
⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛ −
T
TkEshiftshift
e
FDBTTDBTT
Effect of irradiation temperature in PWR RPV materials and its inclusion in semi mechanistic
⎥⎥⎥
⎦⎢⎢⎢
⎣
=⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛ −
TkE
e
FTF00 100 200 300 400 500 600
Temperature, oC
32
Effect of irradiation temperature in PWR RPV materials and its inclusion in semi-mechanistic model Debarberis, Acosta, Zeman, Sevini, Ballesteros, Kryukov, Gillemot, BrumovskyScripta Materialia, Volume 53, Issue 6, September 2005, Pages 769-773
Irradiation Temperature monitoring
melting alloys
33
Fluence rate effect°C
Diffusion & precipitation are time dependent ⇒ less time to complete the processes
FFDBTTDBTT HFshift
LFshift +=
BTT
SHIF
T,
Φrate50
60Cu content:
0,2 w t%
shiftshift
Fluence
D
20
30
40
50
FF, o C
0,15 w t%
0,1 w t%
0,05 w t%
0
10
20
0 2 4 6 8 10[ ]LFsat
HFsat eebFF ΦΦ−ΦΦ− −⋅⋅= //
1 Cu
When ΦstartLF ≈ Φstart
HF
Fluence rate effect semi-mechanistic modelling on WWER-type RPV welds
Fluence, 1019 n cm-2
[ ]1
34
Journal of Nuclear Materials, Volume 350, Issue 1, March 2006, Pages89-95Debarberis, Acosta, Sevini, Chernovaeva, Kryukov
FOLLOWFOLLOW--UPUPFOLLOWFOLLOW--UPUP• Refinements/verifications
- Data on realistic materials- Recent available results- Realistic welds
M d l t l (Ni M Si C )
• Refinements/verifications• Temperature effect -Different proportion contributions to DBTTshift - Model steels (Ni-Mn-Si-Cr)
- Surveillance data- Re-evaluation, etc.• Elements influence
contributions to DBTTshift• Fluence rate - Mn effect
- Mechanistic interpretation• Elements influence• High Cu & and High P• Verify Cr, Si….
Apply the semi-mechanistic model ?
High Ni
ncre
ase
inld
Str
engt
h
Apply the semi mechanistic model to New Gen. materials!- Higher doses, SS (SFT), Swelling-Voids,
Gas Irradiation creep etc ?
?
Neutron DoseIn
Yiel
35
- Gas, Irradiation creep, etc.?
Analysis of WWER-440 and PWR RPV welds surveillance data to compare irradiation damage evolution, L. Debarberis et al., Journal of Nuclear Materials, Volume 350, 2006
150
175
200
250
75
100
125
DB
TTsh
ift, o C
200
250
K
0
25
50
D
PWR data
WWER-440 data 100
150
ured
DB
TT s
hift,
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Fluence, 10 18 n cm -2 E>1 MeV
0
50
0 50 100 150 200 250m
easu higher Cr welds
Evidence for Chromium stabilisation of irradiation damage in RPV weld metals
0 50 100 150 200 250
predicted DBTT shift, K
36
gL. Debarberis, H. Hein, in press, International Journal of Pressure vessel and Piping, 2006
PERFECTRadiation Damage of MaterialsRadiation Damage of MaterialsRadiation Damage of MaterialsRadiation Damage of Materials
Multi-scale Mechanical ModellingMesoscopic scale: DD Crystalline aggregateMesoscopic scale: DD Crystalline aggregate
Mechanics ModelingRVE mechanics
Physics modeling
Irrad. microstructure
5 m 100 m10 nm 5 µm• Disloc. interaction • plastic flow• grain boundary ?
100 µm• Complex loading • rotation-equilibrium• grain boundary ?
37
• grain boundary ?
Homogenization micro-meso Homogenization micro-macro Homogenization
• grain boundary ?
Radiation Damage of Materials: MultiRadiation Damage of Materials: Multi--scale (spacescale (space--time)time)
Displacement cascade Defect Migration,Clusters, Nucleation, Growth
Primary Damage
Stage
MacroscopicProperty Change
Collisions Recombination
Neutron /PKA /Primary Collisions
Diffusion &Cascade
Acc m lationMicrostructural
ChangesFailure:MaterialAccumulation g
RelaxationDislocation/
Defect InteractionEnhanced Creep
MaterialLifetime
10-15 10-13 10-12 10-8 100 101 10310-11 10-9
Enhanced Creep
104 107 108 109
Time-scale in seconds
Molecular Dynamics
(QuantumMechanics)
Kinetic Monte Carlo
DislocationsDynamics
ElasticityPlasticity
38
Theories & models
Manuel Perlado, University of Madrid
39
CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONSEC JRC IE- EC-JRC-IE
- AGEING NPPs in the EU- RPV Embrittlement- MATERIAL ISSUES- Modeling / Assessment- Surveillance of RPV- Towards GEN IV - CONCLUSIONS
40
CONCLUSIONS
RESERVES
41
Segregation term saturation
80.00
P = 0.03 wt. %
50 00
60.00
70.00
ion,
°C
P 0.03 wt. %
30.00
40.00
50.00
shift
P-c
ontr
ibut
i
P = 0 01 wt %
10.00
20.00DB
TTs P 0.01 wt. %
0.000 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Dose, mdpa
42
At high irradiation doses…M t i d h ld ’t i till i fi it ⇒ t ti f th dMatrix damage shouldn’t increase till infinite ⇒ saturation of the damage
800
900
1000
[ ]
21_ Φ⋅= aDBTT matrixshift7.0
DBTTYS
∆=∆σ
500
600
700
YS, M
Pa
[ ] 21_ 1 oeaDBTT matrixshift
ΦΦ−−⋅=
200
300
400∆σ
Y
PWR clean440 clean
0
100
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000Dose mdpa
MA cleanEUROFER
43
Dose, mdpa
1 4
1.6
1.8
R2 > 93%STEAM vs TRANSITION TEMPERATURE
0 8
1
1.2
1.4
EAM
, µV/
o C
0 2
0.4
0.6
0.8
∆ST
E
GRETE0
0.2
0 50 100 150 200 250 300∆TT 09, o C
GRETE
0.3
0.2
0.25
µ V/ o C
irradiated 3.7E+19
4,5E+19 - annealed 3,5E+19 - annealed - 4E+19
STEAM vs TRANSITION TEMPERATURE
0.05
0.1
0.15
Shift
STE
AM
Annealed
5,5E+19 - annealed - 7,5E+19 - annealed
44
00 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Transition Temperature Shift oC
Fresh
And at low temperatures?A “s-type” function for TF is required to fit the dataA s-type function for TF is required to fit the data
⎥⎦
⎤⎢⎣
⎡⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛ −
+⋅=90
240tanh185.2)( TTTF
3.5
4AB
⎦⎣ ⎠⎝
2.5
3
Fact
or T
F
CDEF
1
1.5
2
Tem
pera
ture
GHIK
0
0.5
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
LMN
45
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Temperature, oC
Fabrication configuration of BWR beltline shells
46