Engineering topics

Gougar, Hans David

Publications and source records attributed to Gougar, Hans David.

7 records

DOE OSTI2017

Advanced Demonstration and Test Reactor Options Study

Global efforts to address climate change will require large-scale decarbonization of energy production in the United States and elsewhere. Nuclear power already provides 20% of electricity production in the United States (U.S.) and is increasing in countries undergoing rapid growth around the world. Because reliable, grid-stabilizing, low emission electricity generation, energy security, and energy resource diversity will be increasingly valued, nuclear power’s share of electricity production has a potential to grow. In addition, there are non electricity applications (e.g., process heat, desalination, hydrogen production) that could be better served by advanced nuclear systems. Thus, the timely development, demonstration, and commercialization of advanced nuclear reactors could diversify the nuclear technologies available and offer attractive technology options to expand the impact of nuclear energy for electricity generation and non-electricity missions. The purpose of this planning study is to provide transparent and defensible technology options for a test and/or demonstration reactor(s) to be built to support public policy, innovation and long term commercialization within the context of the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) broader commitment to pursuing an “all of the above” clean energy strategy and associated time lines. This planning study includes identification of the key features and timing needed for advanced test or demonstration reactors to support research, development, and technology demonstration leading to the commercialization of power plants built upon these advanced reactor platforms. This planning study is consistent with the Congressional language contained within the fiscal year 2015 appropriation that directed the DOE to conduct a planning study to evaluate “advanced reactor technology options, capabilities, and requirements within the context of national needs and public policy to support innovation in nuclear energy”. Advanced reactors are defined in this study as reactors that use coolants other than water. Advanced reactor technologies have the potential to expand the energy applications, enhance the competitiveness, and improve the sustainability of nuclear energy.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2016

The Nuclear Energy Knowledge and Validation Center Summary of Activities Conducted in FY16

The Nuclear Energy Knowledge and Validation Center (NEKVaC) is a new initiative by the Department of Energy (DOE) and Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to coordinate and focus the resources and expertise that exist with the DOE toward solving issues in modern nuclear code validation and knowledge management. In time, code owners, users, and developers will view the NEKVaC as a partner and essential resource for acquiring the best practices and latest techniques for validating codes, providing guidance in planning and executing experiments, facilitating access to and maximizing the usefulness of existing data, and preserving knowledge for continual use by nuclear professionals and organizations for their own validation needs. The scope of the NEKVaC covers many interrelated activities that will need to be cultivated carefully in the near term and managed properly once the NEKVaC is fully functional. Three areas comprise the principal mission: (1) identify and prioritize projects that extend the field of validation science and its application to modern codes, (2) develop and disseminate best practices and guidelines for high-fidelity multiphysics/multiscale analysis code development and associated experiment design, and (3) define protocols for data acquisition and knowledge preservation and provide a portal for access to databases currently scattered among numerous organizations. These mission areas, while each having a unique focus, are interdependent and complementary. Likewise, all activities supported by the NEKVaC, both near term and long term, must possess elements supporting all three areas. This cross cutting nature is essential to ensuring that activities and supporting personnel do not become “stove piped” (i.e., focused a specific function that the activity itself becomes the objective rather than achieving the larger vision). This report begins with a description of the mission areas; specifically, the role played by each major committee and the types of activities for which they are responsible. It then lists and describes the proposed near term tasks upon which future efforts can build.

##CAI suggestions##↗

DOE OSTI2016

The Nuclear Energy Knowledge and Validation Center – Summary of Activities Conducted in FY15

The Nuclear Energy Knowledge and Validation Center (NEKVaC) is a new initiative by the Department of Energy and the Idaho National Laboratory to coordinate and focus the resources and expertise that exist with the DOE Complex toward solving issues in modern nuclear code validation. In time, code owners, users, and developers will view the Center as a partner and essential resource for acquiring the best practices and latest techniques for validating codes, for guidance in planning and executing experiments, for facilitating access to, and maximizing the usefulness of, existing data, and for preserving knowledge for continual use by nuclear professionals and organizations for their own validation needs. The scope of the center covers many inter-related activities which will need to be cultivated carefully in the near-term and managed properly once the Center is fully functional. Three areas comprise the principal mission: 1) identification and prioritization of projects that extend the field of validation science and its application to modern codes, 2) adapt or develop best practices and guidelines for high fidelity multiphysics/multiscale analysis code development and associated experiment design, and 3) define protocols for data acquisition and knowledge preservation and provide a portal for access to databases currently scattered among numerous organizations. These mission areas, while each having a unique focus, are inter-dependent and complementary. Likewise, all activities supported by the NEKVaC, both near-term and long-term), must possess elements supporting all three. This cross-cutting nature is essential to ensuring that activities and supporting personnel do not become ‘stove-piped’, i.e. focused so much on a specific function that the activity itself becomes the objective rather than the achieving the larger vision. Achieving the broader vision will require a healthy and accountable level of activity in each of the areas. This will take time and significant DOE support. Growing too fast (budget-wise) will not allow ideas to mature, lessons to be learned, and taxpayer money to be spent responsibly. The process should be initiated with a small set of tasks, executed over a short but reasonable term, that will exercise most if not all aspects of the Center’s potential operation. The initial activities described in this report have a high potential for near-term success in demonstrating Center objectives but also to work out some of the issues in task execution, communication between functional elements, and the ability to raise awareness of the Center and cement stakeholder buy-in. This report begins with a description of the Mission areas; specifically the role played by each and the types of activities for which they are responsible. It then lists and describes the proposed near-term tasks upon which future efforts can build.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2016

High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Test Reactor Point Design

A point design has been developed for a 200 MW high-temperature gas-cooled test reactor. The point design concept uses standard prismatic blocks and 15.5% enriched UCO fuel. Reactor physics and thermal-hydraulics simulations have been performed to characterize the capabilities of the design. In addition to the technical data, overviews are provided on the technological readiness level, licensing approach and costs.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2016

High Temperature Gas-Cooled Test Reactor Point Design: Summary Report

A point design has been developed for a 200-MW high-temperature gas-cooled test reactor. The point design concept uses standard prismatic blocks and 15.5% enriched uranium oxycarbide fuel. Reactor physics and thermal-hydraulics simulations have been performed to characterize the capabilities of the design. In addition to the technical data, overviews are provided on the technology readiness level, licensing approach, and costs of the test reactor point design.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2016

High Temperature Gas-Cooled Test Reactor Point Design: Summary Report

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2015

Assessment of the Technical Maturity of Generation IV Concepts for Test or Demonstration Reactor Applications, Revision 2

The United States Department of Energy (DOE) commissioned a study the suitability of different advanced reactor concepts to support materials irradiations (i.e. a test reactor) or to demonstrate an advanced power plant/fuel cycle concept (demonstration reactor). As part of the study, an assessment of the technical maturity of the individual concepts was undertaken to see which, if any, can support near-term deployment. A Working Group composed of the authors of this document performed the maturity assessment using the Technical Readiness Levels as defined in DOE’s Technology Readiness Guide . One representative design was selected for assessment from of each of the six Generation-IV reactor types: gas-cooled fast reactor (GFR), lead-cooled fast reactor (LFR), molten salt reactor (MSR), supercritical water-cooled reactor (SCWR), sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR), and very high temperature reactor (VHTR). Background information was obtained from previous detailed evaluations such as the Generation-IV Roadmap but other technical references were also used including consultations with concept proponents and subject matter experts. Outside of Generation IV activity in which the US is a party, non-U.S. experience or data sources were generally not factored into the evaluations as one cannot assume that this data is easily available or of sufficient quality to be used for licensing a US facility. The Working Group established the scope of the assessment (which systems and subsystems needed to be considered), adapted a specific technology readiness scale, and scored each system through discussions designed to achieve internal consistency across concepts. In general, the Working Group sought to determine which of the reactor options have sufficient maturity to serve either the test or demonstration reactor missions.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗