Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “INTERNAL ENERGY”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 469 records · Page 26
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Enhancing the Useability of the IAEA's Physical Model: An Analysis of User Feedback

This study presents the results of Physical Model user interviews conducted with 12 people who have International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards experience. The goal of this report is to provide additional context for policy makers when prioritizing the needs of the IAEA regarding support for enhancements to the Physical Model. The interviews covered the general usability of the Physical Model, its effectiveness as a technical reference, and the scope and utility of the Physical Model's indicators and content. The key conclusions from these interviews are as follows: 1) The Physical Model is difficult to find and not well advertised. 2) The Physical Model can be difficult to use due to its format, which makes searching for information difficult, and lack of visual content. Therefore, the Physical Model should be supported in multiple formats (print, PDF, web) to maximize its usability for different stakeholders. 3) The scope of the Physical Model's content and indicators is likely sufficient, and translating indicators into other languages is unlikely to be worth the effort. 4) Despite its inefficiencies and other issues, the Physical Model in its current form is a vital (albeit under-utilized) resource for key stakeholders. 5) Despite its broad use case the Physical Model is not a catch-all tool and force-fitting the Physical Model into functions for which it has not been designed for would likely diminish its value. 6) It can be difficult to disentangle challenges related to the Physical Model and its usability from broader challenges at the Agency, such as general issues with communication and coordination. Based on these conclusions and considering the results of past studies on the Physical Model funded by NA-241, the analysis team developed a list of recommendations and associated actions for IAEA consideration. These recommendations are prioritized based on the assessed level of difficulty for the IAEA to implement a recommendation, emphasizing low hanging fruit then building to more ambitious changes to the Physical Model's format and content.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Autonomous Inspection of Geologic Repositories: Current State of the Art and Future Directions

Geological repositories for nuclear waste, including spent nuclear fuel, present a significant challenge for traditional International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards tools due to their inaccessibility and demanding operational conditions. The IAEA has been working closely with Member State organizations currently involved in repository construction and planning, including Euratom, the Finnish and Swedish regulatory authorities, and relevant facility operators. However, the verification challenge remains unsolved, and there persists an out- standing need for tools and approaches that will help the IAEA verify that no nuclear material is diverted from a repository environment. The challenge is also not static. Activities must encompass verification of the design, prior to and during the construction/operation phase, and post backfill. Throughout these various phases, it is imperative that the IAEA maintains a continuity of knowledge (CoK) of all material including information on material inventory and flow. This paper highlights these challenges and outlines how they might be addressed by using remote or autonomous vehicles. Specifically, we discuss the current state of the art in robotic autonomy for known or partially known environment mapping and patrolling, as well as shared autonomy, where humans collaborate with closed loop autonomation to complete tasks. We explore the feasibility of using rovers for these verification tasks, along with the challenges associated with system implementation. Hardware and software suggestions are provided based on the adoption of similar technologies in other comparable areas and ability to close technical gaps. Lastly, human-robotic interactions are considered based on the challenges of the environment of the repository and effective deployment and continued operation of the robot system.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Laboratory Analysis for Radiological Events

Presentation for an International Atomic Energy Agency sponsored workshop on Consequence Management (virtual). Presentation sponsored by DOE NA-81

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
DOE OSTI2021

Turbo FRMAC Implementation of IAEA Radiological Assessment Methodologies for Nuclear and Radiological Emergencies: Ingestion Pathway and Skin and Thyroid Monitoring

This report documents the findings of an assessment of the Turbo FRMAC© software’s ability to implement International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidance for calculating operational intervention levels (OIL) for nuclear and radiological emergencies. This assessment is a continuation of previous work that considered IAEA OIL1 and OIL2 for evacuation and relocation protective actions. The IAEA OIL and U.S. Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) derived response and intervention level methodologies were compared for ingestion and skin and thyroid monitoring pathways. This comparison revealed significant differences in IAEA versus FRMAC handling of these pathways, which precluded an assessment of Turbo FRMAC’s ability to implement the IAEA approach.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Additively Manufactured Tamper Evident Container (TEC)

The protection of sensitive data, proprietary information, and physical assets from adversarial disclosure is a high priority in today’s environment of government and industrial espionage. Furthermore, knowledge of the security history and monitoring for potential acquisition or disclosure of the protected assets from oppositional sources is equally important. In 2016, as part of an LANL Institute for Materials Science (IMS) rapid response research initiative, the investigators of this technology demonstration project developed the concept of an additively manufactured tamper resistant container that possessed tamper evident features. Tamper evident seals and detection technologies have a long history in protecting consumers from product tampering, recording the installation and activation of mechanical safety panels and fasteners on dangerous electro-mechanical systems, and serving as a warranty void indicator on expensive electronic equipment. Examples of such tamper evident seals range from “no-tech” versions, e.g., the paper seals under medicine caps, to “high-tech” seals that are radio frequency-active and include encryption capabilities used by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to monitor stored nuclear materials in support of safeguards missions. The tamper evident container (TEC) technology would have many uses.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

NWAL Validation Report for U Assay by Potentiometric Titration (Modified Davies and Gray Technique) and U and PU Assay by Isotope Dilution Mass Spectrometry

SRNL Sensing & Metrology, previously Analytical Laboratory, is a member of the IAEA Network of Analytical Laboratories for Nuclear Material Measurement that is qualified to provide Uranium and Plutonium isotopic analysis of nuclear materials by Thermal Ionization Mass Spectrometry. As part of the membership, SRNL participated in the 2019 Nuclear Material Round Robin to maintain the qualification to provide isotopic analysis. SRNL also participated with the additional intent to qualify Uranium Assay by Potentiometric Titration (Davies and Gray method) and Uranium and Plutonium Isotope Dilution by Thermal Ionization Mass Spectrometry as part of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Network of Analytical Laboratories. The proficiency test exercise was conducted by the Office of Safeguards Analytical Services, Department of Safeguards.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

SAS4A/SASSYS-1 Validation with the FFTF LOFWOS Tests #10-12

The FFTF liquid sodium cooled test reactor was built to assist the development and testing of advanced fuels and material for fast reactors. The goals of the FFTF Passive Safety Testing program included confirming the safety margins of FFTF as a liquid metal reactor, providing data for computer code validation, and demonstrating the inherent and passive safety benefits of its specific design features. The program included thirteen unprotected loss of flow without scram tests. The results of modeling and simulation of LOFWOS Tests #10, #11, and #12 are presented in this report to support validation of Argonne’s SAS4A/SASSYS-1 fast reactor safety analysis code. These three tests did not use the primary loop pony motors and thus transitioned to natural circulation flow rates from varying initial power levels. This validation activity leverages modeling and simulation efforts that originated under an International Atomic Energy Agency Coordinated Research Project (CRP) for benchmark analysis of the FFTF LOFWOS Test #13. The SAS4A/SASSYS-1 model originally developed for the CRP has been extended to include LOFWOS Tests #10-12 and modernized to utilize new code features and modeling practices. Predicted results from SAS4A/SASSYS-1 were compared to measured test data and differences were investigated. Overall, it was concluded that, for LOFWOS Tests #10-12, there was good agreement between the flow, power, and temperature predictions and the measured data.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Nuclear Power Plant Physical Protection Recommendation Document

This document is aimed at providing guidance to the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) Office of International Nuclear Security’s (INS) country and regional teams for implementing effective physical protection systems (PPSs) for nuclear power plants (NPPs) to prevent the radiological consequences of sabotage. This recommendation document includes input from the Physical Protection Functional Team (PPFT), the Response Functional Team (RFT), and the Sabotage Functional Team (SFT) under INS. Specifically, this document provides insights into increasing and sustaining physical protection capabilities at INS partner countries’ NPP sites. Nuclear power plants should consider that the intent of this document is to provide a historical context as well as technologies and methodologies that may be applied to improve physical protection capabilities. It also refers to relevant guidance from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

SAS4A/SASSYS-1 Validation with EBR-II Tests Performed During the SHRT Testing Program

The EBR-II sodium-cooled fast reactor supported a wide range of fast reactor research activities. The final fifteen years of operations at EBR-II were used for experiments and tests to demonstrate the importance of passive safety in liquid metal reactors and the capability of such systems to provide strong passive responses during off-normal conditions. The Shutdown Heat Removal Test program at EBR-II provided test data supporting the validation of computer codes for design, licensing, and operation of LMRs, among other objectives. The program included nearly sixty tests, most of which were protected and unprotected loss of flow and loss of heat sink tests run at various initial powers and flow rates. This report documents the results of modeling and simulation of tests from the Shutdown Heat Removal Test program to support validation of Argonne’s SAS4A/SASSYS-1 fast reactor safety analysis code. SHRT-17 was a protected loss of flow test where a loss of electrical power to all sodium coolant pumps was simulated to demonstrate the effectiveness of natural circulation cooling characteristics. SHRT-45R was an unprotected loss of flow test where the control rod scram function of the plant protection system was disabled to demonstrate the effectiveness of EBR-II’s passive reactivity feedbacks. BOP-301 and BOP-302R were unprotected loss of heat sink tests that demonstrated how reactivity feedback effects driven by changes to the core inlet temperature can shut down the fission process. This validation activity leverages modeling and simulation efforts that originated under an International Atomic Energy Agency Coordinated Research Project for benchmark analysis of the EBR-II Shutdown Heat Removal Tests. The SAS4A/SASSYS-1 models originally developed for the CRP have been modernized to utilize new code features and modeling practices. Differences between the predicted and measured test data were explored and the causes of these differences were identified as being due to modeling approximations, uncertainty in transient component behavior, and instrumentation uncertainties. Overall, it was concluded that for SHRT-17, SHRT-45R, BOP-301, and BOP-302R there was good agreement between the flow, power, and temperature predictions and the measured data.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Knowledge Transfer and Training in Safeguards for Decommissioned Nuclear Facilities (Project Final Report for FY2022)

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) applies safeguards to nuclear facilities that are not operating, including those undergoing decommissioning, and the IAEA’s effort in this area is both considerable and increasing. Specifically, the IAEA Department of Safeguards’ Division of Concepts and Planning (SGCP-003: Safeguards Approaches) identified an R&D need to “Develop safeguards implementation guidelines for facilities under decommissioning and safeguards concepts for post-accident facilities under decommissioning”. Nuclear facilities undergoing decommissioning are not exempt from safeguards agreements between the IAEA and Host State, and, accordingly, the requirement for verification of no diversion of nuclear material and detection of undeclared activities at decommissioned facilities remain even after facility shutdown. However, the effort required to meet safeguards objectives diminishes as nuclear material and essential equipment are removed during the decommissioning process which shifts the emphasis from verification of ever-diminishing fissile or source material inventories to verification of changes in facility design and equipment operability.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2022

Inspecta Annual Technical Report

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) is designing and developing an Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enabled smart digital assistant (SDA), Inspecta (International Nuclear Safeguards Personal Examination and Containment Tracking Assistant). The goal is to provide inspectors an in-field digital assistant that can perform tasks identified as tedious, challenging, or prone to human error. During 2021, we defined the requirements for Inspecta based on reviews of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) publications and interviews with former IAEA inspectors. We then mapped the requirements to current commercial or open-source technical capabilities to provide a development path for an initial Inspecta prototype while highlighting potential research and development tasks. We selected a highimpact inspection task that could be performed by an early Inspecta prototype and are developing the initial architecture, including hardware platform. This paper describes the methodology for selecting an initial task scenario, the first set of Inspecta skills needed to assist with that task scenario and finally the design and development of Inspecta’s architecture and platform.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Characterization of Safeguards Implementation Schedules for Advanced Reactors

Advanced reactor designs differ from the traditional light-water reactor designs and operational requirements in nearly every facet, including the heat transfer fluids, operating temperatures and pressures, and fuel cycle requirements. To account for these differences, significant effort will be required to ensure appropriate safeguards implementation for US-based reactors intended for global deployment. This is the second in a series of three reports that examine facets of this issue. The first paper (ORNL/TM-2021/2142) examines potential construction schedules for advanced reactors to create a baseline understanding of the timeframes involved. This second report characterizes International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards implementation schedules for potential advanced reactors. Finally, the third report (ORNL/TM-2021/2208) examines existing gaps for safeguards implementation at advanced reactors.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Keeping LANL at the forefront of list mode capability for safeguards and MC&A [Slides]

Neutron based detection forms key capability to enable and support international and domestic nuclear safeguards and non-proliferation missions. Key stakeholders include International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM), regional safeguards inspectorates, domestic stakeholders. LANL has been historically a leader in development of Non-destructive Assay (NDA) instruments and associated data acquisition hardware and software.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2023

Workshop on Establishing and Operating a National Nuclear Security Support Centre Hypothetical Scenario: "Republic of Centralia Nuclear Security Support Centre Feasibility Report"

[This is part of a hypothetical, scenario-based exercise for workshop participants, based on the fictitious country "Centralia."] This report serves as official record of the coordinated process completed by competent authorities and other organizations with nuclear security responsibilities in the Republic of Centralia to determine the feasibility of establishing and operating a national nuclear security support centre (NSSC). The report summarizes all sustainability needs and available resources identified during the feasibility determination process, including consideration of possible NSSC institutional models, in line with the systematic approach recommended by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Centralia Nuclear Regulatory Authority (CNRA), as the designated lead organization for coordinating the feasibility determination process, has prepared this report in collaboration with members of the Committee on Nuclear Security (CNS) and based on input gathered among relevant national stakeholders. The report has been presented to the National Security Advisor (NSA), for final review and decision-making as to whether Centralia should proceed with establishing an NSSC.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Workshop on Establishing and Operating a National Nuclear Security Support Centre Hypothetical Scenario: “Centralia Nuclear Security Support Centre Strategy Implementation Plan”

[This is part of a hypothetical scenario-based exercise for workshop participants, based on the fictitious country "Centralia."] In prior years, as a part of efforts to strengthen and better sustain nuclear security within the State, Centralia requested through the Integrated Nuclear Security Support Plan (INSSP) framework that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) conduct an expert mission on establishing and operating a national nuclear security support centre (NSSC). After the IAEA conducted the NSSC expert mission, members of the Centralia Committee on Nuclear Security (CNS) agreed to initiate the feasibility determination phase of establishing an NSSC, in line with the systematic process recommended by the IAEA. Centralia Nuclear Regulatory Authority (CNRA), as the designated lead organization for coordinating the feasibility determination process, prepared a Feasibility Report in collaboration with members of the CNS and based on input gathered among relevant national stakeholders. The report was presented to the National Security Advisor (NSA), who reviewed and approved the proposal for Centralia to proceed with establishing an NSSC. After Centralia moved into the planning phase for the Centralia Nuclear Security Support Centre (CNSSC), per REF, the primary stakeholders of the centre jointly developed this strategy implementation plan, which provides an outline of the organizational structure, needs analysis, programme objectives, financial and project management, risk management, and other key aspects of the centre. This document will be reviewed and updated as necessary on a semi-annual basis during the project implementation period of establishing CNSSC.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

SAS4A/SASSYS-1 Validation with EBR-II Tests Performed During the SHRT Testing Program (Rev. 2)

The EBR-II sodium-cooled fast reactor supported a wide range of fast reactor research activities. The final fifteen years of operations at EBR-II were used for experiments and tests to demonstrate the importance of passive safety in liquid metal reactors and the capability of such systems to provide strong passive responses during off-normal conditions. The Shutdown Heat Removal Test program at EBR-II provided test data supporting the validation of computer codes for design, licensing, and operation of LMRs, among other objectives. The program included nearly sixty tests, most of which were protected and unprotected loss of flow and loss of heat sink tests run at various initial powers and flow rates. This report documents the results of modeling and simulation of tests from the Shutdown Heat Removal Test program to support validation of Argonne’s SAS4A/SASSYS-1 fast reactor safety analysis code. SHRT-17 and SHRT-6 were protected loss of flow tests where a loss of electrical power to all sodium coolant pumps was simulated to demonstrate the effectiveness of natural circulation cooling characteristics. SHRT-45R, SHRT-39, and SHRT-43R were unprotected loss of flow tests where the control rod scram function of the plant protection system was disabled to demonstrate the effectiveness of EBR-II’s passive reactivity feedbacks. BOP-301 and BOP-302R were unprotected loss of heat sink tests that demonstrated how reactivity feedback effects driven by changes to the core inlet temperature can shut down the fission process. PICT-5/6 demonstrated how core power could be increased and decreased via changes in the intermediate sodium and feedwater flow rates. This validation activity leverages modeling and simulation efforts that originated under an International Atomic Energy Agency Coordinated Research Project for benchmark analysis of the EBR-II Shutdown Heat Removal Tests. The SAS4A/SASSYS-1 models originally developed for the CRP have been modernized to utilize new code features and modeling practices. Differences between the predicted and measured test data were explored and the causes of these differences were identified as being due to modeling approximations, uncertainty in transient component behavior, and instrumentation uncertainties. Overall, it was concluded that for all tests simulated there was good agreement between the flow, power, and temperature predictions and the measured data.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Plan for Development and Application of Risk Assessment Approach for Transportation Package Approval of an MNPP for Domestic Highway Shipment

For nuclear reactors, Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) has been conducted since the 1970s [e.g., see WASH-1400 (NRC 1975), NUREG-1150 (NRC 1990), and NUREG-1935 (Chang et al. 2012)]. PRA has also been used to assess a dry cask storage system at a nuclear power plant [see NUREG-1864 (NRC 2007)]. PRA techniques have also been applied to the transportation of spent nuclear fuel, most notably in NUREG/CR-4829 (Fischer et al. 1987), NUREG/CR-6672 (Sprung et al. 2000), and NUREG-2125 (NRC 2014). Additional guidance is provided in International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) IAEA-TECDOC-1346 (2003). Transportation PRA was also used in the evaluations of transportation impacts in reports such as the Repository Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE 2002) and the Repository Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DOE 2008).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗