Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “FLOWSHEETS”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Evaluation of Changes to the MTR Fuel Dissolution Flowsheet to Increase the Number of L-Bundles Charged to a Dissolver

Material Test Reactor (MTR) fuels are dissolved in the H-Canyon facility using a Hg-catalyzed, HNO₃ dissolution flowsheet. The flowsheet is based on experimental work in which laboratory-scale experiments were used to provide bounding values for both offgas and H₂ generation rates. The generation of H₂ gas, primarily from the dissolution of Al, is controlled by limiting the surface area exposed to the solution. The number of L-Bundles charged and their submergence level defines the exposed surface area which is directly proportional to the H₂ generation rate. For the MTR fuel dissolution flowsheet, the maximum number of L-Bundles which can be charged to a dissolver was specified as a function of the Al concentration in the solution and the submergence level of the bundle. The MTR fuels are currently dissolved in the 6.1D dissolver. To reach the desired terminal Al concentration, a total of 12 L-Bundles of fuel are dissolved per batch. Depending on the submergence level being used in the dissolver, the 12 bundles are dissolved in three charges of four bundles per charge or in a sequence of three, four, and five bundles. However, if six L-Bundles could be dissolved in the initial charge, a dissolver batch could be completed in two dissolutions instead of three. To assess the feasibility of dissolving six bundles in the first charge, the Savannah River National Laboratory evaluated changes to the MTR flowsheet which increase the number of bundles which can be charged to a dissolver. Since the development of the existing MTR fuel dissolution flowsheet, improved offgas measurement methods have been developed to more accurately calculate the offgas composition and generation rate during laboratory-scale dissolutions. In the first part of this study, improvements in the calibration model for the Raman spectrometer (used for offgas characterization) and a more effective data smoothing routine were applied to existing data. The uncertainty in the offgas composition data used to define the MTR fuel dissolution flowsheet were subsequently re-evaluated which resulted in an approximate 50% reduction in the uncertainty of the H₂ gas concentration measurements. The reduced uncertainty was used in new calculations to define the maximum number of L-Bundles which can be charged to either the 6.1D or 6.4D dissolver as a function of the Al concentration. With the reduced uncertainty in the H₂ concentration measurements, a flowsheet was defined which supported initially charging 6 bundles to a dissolver. This flowsheet is based on the use of 0.002 M Hg, an L-Bundle immersion depth of 54 in., an air sparge/purge flowrate of 40 scfm, an iodine reactor operating temperature of 200 °C, and not exceeding 60% of the H₂ LFL in the dissolver offgas. In the second phase of this study, calculations were performed to assess the impact of changing various operating parameters to increase the number of L-Bundles charged to an H-Canyon dissolver. Applying the improved offgas measurement techniques including the reduced uncertainty in the H₂ concentration measurements to the existing data, the number of bundles of MTR fuel which can be charged to either the 6.1D or 6.4D dissolver were calculated based on varying the bundle immersion depth (44-60 in.), air sparge/purge flowrate (40-60 scfm), iodine reactor operating temperature (150-200 °C), and the percentage of the H₂ LFL which must not be exceeded (60-76%). Qualitatively, the percentage of the LFL had the largest influence on the maximum number of bundles which can be charged to a dissolver followed by the air sparge/purge flowrate, L-Bundle immersion depth, and the iodine reactor operating temperature. During the evaluation of each variable, the other variables were held at the baseline flowsheet conditions.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Iodine Flowsheet Status Report

A simplified flowsheet was developed to evaluate the impact of varied assumptions of I-129 decontamination factors on the overall I-129 material balance in the Direct Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) facility. The flowsheet allows inputs for I-129 feed and Decontamination Factors (DFs) for multiple DFLAW unit operations and provides information on I-129 partitioning to output streams. A series of 6 DFs were evaluated, including baseline DFs from a prior Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) study and refined values based on a Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) review. The Microsoft Excel flowsheet spreadsheet will be provided to WRPS to allow further evaluation of the impact of DF assumptions on output streams. The spreadsheet is not specific to iodine, the partitioning of any species can be estimated by entering the assumed DFs for each unit operation. Flowsheet outputs matched results from the prior WTP study and show that different assumptions for the DFs can greatly impact iodine partitioning to primary and secondary waste streams. Results from SRNL's baseline DF values suggest less than 50% of I-129 would be retained in glass versus the 96% when using the BNI DF values. In addition, the flowsheet demonstrated that more than 5 DFLAW operational cycles are required to achieve a steady-state of I-129 to the primary waste stream. It is not possible with the data available to determine whether the BNI approach or the approach taken in this study will be a better match for the iodine partitioning once the LAW facility begins operation.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Radioactive Waste Sludge Washing and Demonstration of the Nitric-Glycolic Acid Flowsheet for Sludge Batch 10 Qualification

For each sludge batch that is processed in the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF), the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) performs qualification testing to demonstrate that the sludge batch (SB) is processible. During processing of SB9, DWPF will be transitioning from the Nitric-Formic Acid (NFA) flowsheet to the Nitric-Glycolic Acid (NGA) flowsheet. Thus, the qualification of SB10 was requested to only be performed using the NGA flowsheet. In order to qualify the batch for the NGA flowsheet, Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) and Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) cycles, designated SC-19, were performed using SB10 Tank 51 sample material. SRNL received Tank 51 material in the midst of Tank Farm washing. SRNL continued the washing in the SRNL Shielded Cells. The SRNL process included the addition of Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE) material from H Canyon, simulating the transfer of SRE from H Canyon to Tank 51 during Tank Farm washing. The washed SB10 Tank 51 material, with SRE, was characterized prior to flowsheet qualification testing.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Refining the Approach to Process Flowsheet Development and Maturation at Hanford - 20049

Rigorous process flowsheet management strategies form the basis of an enduring approach to refining the River Protection Project Integrated Process Flowsheet. Incorporation of lessons learned, recognizing upstream and downstream impacts and understanding barriers to implementation of process flowsheets from the outset of the decision-making process will help future revisions to the River Protection Project Integrated Process Flowsheet be more robust, technically defensible, cost effective, and time efficient, ultimately leading to an improved environmental stewardship of the Hanford site. (authors)

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

Flowsheet Evaluation of Dissolving Used Nuclear Fuel in PUREX Solvent

This study explores the potential benefit to the used nuclear fuel actinide recovery flowsheet of a process simplification and establish the experimental work needed to develop the simplified flowsheet. The simplification is based on replacing acid dissolution of used nuclear fuel with dissolution in the tri-butyl phosphate solvent used in the industrially mature Plutonium Uranium Reduction Extraction flowsheet. Though characterized by considerable uncertainty, simplified flowsheets appear feasible and potentially offer significant reductions in process complexity, nitrate inventory, secondary liquid effluent generation and plant footprint. Initial development of the technology should focus on key fission product and actinide dissolution as a function of process conditions and understanding the fundamental chemistry of tri-butyl phosphate solvent chemistry. Development of ancillary technologies for minor actinide separations and fuel pretreatment for tritium management is also recommended.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Dissolution Flowsheet for Skull Oxide Generated during U-Mo Alloy Casting for High Performance Research Reactor Fuel

The Savannah River National Laboratory was requested to develop dissolution flowsheets for high assay low enriched U scrap generated during the fabrication of high performance research reactor fuel. The scrap streams include U-10Mo and U-10Mo-Zr foils, rejected Al-clad fuel plates, and skull oxide from casting molds. Flowsheets for the dissolution of the U-10Mo-Zr foils and Al-clad U-10Mo-Zr mini-plates received from BWX Technologies, Inc were developed and demonstrated in the first phase of this project. In the second phase (this work), the skull oxide from a U-10Mo casting mold was obtained from the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) and small-scale experiments were performed to demonstrate dissolution flowsheets.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Flowsheet Development for the University of Tokyo YAYOI (UTY) Fuel

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested by H-Canyon Engineering to determine the flowsheet parameters needed to dissolve and store the YAYOI Material Test Reactor (MTR) uranium fuel safely and efficiently. In response to this request, a literature review of existing SRNL MTR dissolution flowsheets and general fuel dissolution literature in the nuclear fuel processing industry was performed to evaluate chemical dissolution parameters required to dissolve the YAYOI fuel and the tin-plated carbon steel product cans (PC). Based on past dissolutions of similar fuel in the H-Canyon and open literature reviews on chemical dissolution of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), the following conclusions and flowsheet recommendations were made.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Comparison of Industrialized Late 20th Century Flowsheets for Reprocessing Used Nuclear Fuel

This study identified and compared three flowsheets for reprocessing used nuclear fuel (UNF) industrialized in plants in the United Kingdom (the Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant), France (UP2-800/UP3) and Japan (the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant). The study also identified the major implications for a plant in the United States if it were initiated. All flowsheets employed the established Plutonium Uranium Reduction Extraction (PUREX) solvent extraction technology to separate uranium and plutonium from UNF dissolved in nitric acid. However, differences in the approaches to managing iodine-129, tritium and technetium were identified in the flowsheets. A US plant would also need to separate krypton-85 as well as iodine-129 and tritium for immobilization and disposal.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRS1969

Computer program developed for flowsheet calculations and process data reduction

Computer program PACER-65, is used for flowsheet calculations and easily adapted to process data reduction. Each unit, vessel, meter, and processing operation in the overall flowsheet is represented by a separate subroutine, which the program calls in the order required to complete an overall flowsheet calculation.

Alfredson, P. G.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Molar Absorptivities of U(VI), U(IV), and Pu(III) in Nitric Acid Solutions of Various Concentrations Relevant to Developing Nuclear Fuel Recycling Flowsheets

Testing of a co-decontamination (CoDCon) tributyl phosphate (TBP) based solvent extraction flowsheet is being performed to optimize conditions for achieving a target U/Pu ratio in the Pu-containing product. The flowsheet is designed to directly produce a mixture of U and Pu with a U/Pu mass ratio of 7/3. The system is monitored in real time using optical spectroscopy, which allows for control of the U/Pu ratio in the aqueous U/Pu nitrate product. On-line spectrophotometric monitoring of the aqueous stream at the reductive stripping step involves determination of U(VI), U(IV) and Pu(III) concentrations and relies on molar absorptivities of these species in nitric acid at a number of wavelengths corresponding to their peaks’ maxima. The magnitudes of these molar absorptivities are a sensitive function of nitric acid concentration and have to be determined as precisely as possible using an off-line spectrophotometry under well controlled conditions. This step (called training set acquisition) is typically performed not in a high contamination area of radiological glovebox where flow-through cells and other on-line equipment are installed but in a less aggressive environment of a radiological fume hood with much better control of stock solutions quality, dilution factors, optical absorbance scale calibration, etc. This is followed by the calibration transfer between the off-line instrument and the instrument deployed during extraction and stripping runs. This paper reports values of molar absorptivities of U(VI), U(IV), and Pu(III) in nitric acid solution of 0.5 M to 4 M concentration and compares them with available technical literature data. Results of off-line spectrophotometric analysis of selected aqueous grab samples from one of CoDCon runs show satisfactory agreement with total uranium and plutonium concentrations determined in the same samples by ICP-MS.

Sinkov, Sergey I.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Defense Waste Processing Facility Nitric-Glycolic Flowsheet Chemical Process Cell Chemistry: Part 2

The conversions of nitrite to nitrate, the destruction of glycolate, and the conversion of glycolate to formate and oxalate were modeled for the Nitric-Glycolic flowsheet using data from Chemical Process Cell (CPC) simulant runs conducted by Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) from 2011 to 2016. The goal of this work was to develop empirical correlation models to predict these values from measurable variables from the chemical process so that these quantities could be predicted a-priori from the sludge or simulant composition and measurable processing variables. The need for these predictions arises from the need to predict the REDuction/OXidation (REDOX) state of the glass from the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) melter. This report summarizes the work on these correlations based on the aforementioned data. Previous work on these correlations was documented in a technical report covering data from 2011-2015. This current report supersedes this previous report. Further refinement of the models as additional data are collected is recommended. The glass REDOX depends on the concentrations of nitrate and manganese (oxidants), and of glycolate, formate, oxalate, carbon, and antifoam (reductants) in the melter feed. The waste sludge contains nitrite, nitrate, manganese (Mn), and oxalate. Virtually all of the nitrite is converted to nitrate or NO+NO 2 +N 2 O gases in the CPC. The portion of the nitrite converted to nitrate increases the amount of nitrate in the sludge. The amount of glycolate in the final melter feed depends on the amount of the glycolic acid feed that is destroyed. Similarly, the amounts of formate and oxalate formed during the decomposition of glycolic acid are required. The material balance on carbon was found to not close in most cases. Generally, there was less carbon at the end of testing compared to the inputs. The most uncertain product variable was glycolate, so material balances were performed where the glycolate concentration was adjusted, usually upward, to close the balance. Correlation versus the original, as-measured, data was generally poor, but correlation against the material balance adjusted values was greatly improved. It was also shown that the correlation of the measured REDOX versus the predicted REDOX was much better when the material balance adjusted glycolate values were used. Three data series were primarily used during the regressions of the data; these series were 1) Sludge Batch 9 NG flowsheet simulant runs NG51-62 (SB9-NG); 2) Scaled Runs + Bounding Hydrogen Runs (SR+BH); and 3) Runs GN43-50 and 57 (43-50,57). The glycolate destruction was found to correlate with acid stoichiometry (AS), percent reducing acid (PRA), and for some data series, headspace to simulant volume ratio (HSV), mercury (Hg), and nitrate. Although glycolate destruction for pairs of data series (e.g., [SB9-NG] and [SR+BH]) were found to depend on HSV, the combination of all three data series was not found to have significant dependence on this variable. The best model for glycolate destruction depended on AS, nitrate, and Hg. This model predicted the product glycolate compositions of the data to within 92-106%. The conversion of glycolate to formate was high when noble metals and Hg were not present, with values up to 100%. When noble metals and Hg were present, this conversion ranged from zero to 7%, and was dependent on AS. Lower AS gave higher conversions to formate. The conversion to oxalate was found to depend on the AS and the initial concentration of nitrite. An alternative fit versus AS and the form of ruthenium (Ru) used is a possible alternative. This fit was somewhat less statistically significant. This second model predicts that more oxalate is formed when Ru-nitrosyl nitrate is used rather than Ru chloride. The conversion of glycolate to oxalate ranged from zero to 6%. The conversion of nitrite to nitrate depended primarily on AS and PRA, with HSV and Hg being significant when these variables were varied. For multiple series of data, nitrite was also needed to SRNL-STI-2017-00172 5HYLVLRQ viL distinguish between data series, and the effect of HSV became insignificant. The best model for nitrite to nitrate conversion depended on AS, PRA, nitrite, and Hg. The 95% confidence intervals on the predicted values of glycolate destruction, glycolate to oxalate conversion, and nitrite to nitrate conversion were used to determine the uncertainty in the predicted REDOX when starting with only the composition of the sludge, AS, and PRA. Using the 95% confidences on an individual value (that is the confidence in getting a particular value for one single test as opposed to what the mean would be for multiple tests), the uncertainty in the predicted REDOX was calculated. The uncertainty in the actual product composition glycolate, oxalate, formate, and nitrate concentrations translated to an uncertainty in the REDOX value of ±0.1,which is approximately the uncertainty claimed in the REDOX model itself.

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

Flowsheet Design for the Purification of Mo-99 and Uranium Target Recovery by Solvent Extraction

New production and purification methods are sought to meet the increasing demand of 99 Mo but without the use of highly enriched uranium (HEU). To this end, larger quantities of low-enriched uranium (LEU) or even natural uranium (NU) are being leveraged to maintain high production capacities of 99 Mo. Solvent extraction is widely used to treat bulk quantities of uranium and to separate out trace quantities of fission products. This report describes the calculation of AMUSE-generated flowsheets to process irradiated uranium targets to recover 99 Mo by solvent extraction. Flowsheets are presented and discussed along with a number of advantages and disadvantages.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Dissolution Flowsheet for Non-Aluminum Spent Nuclear Fuel Campaign 1

As part of the Accelerated Basin De-inventory (ABD) program, H Canyon plans to dissolve non-aluminum spent nuclear fuel (NASNF) in the 6.3D electrolytic dissolver. NASNF Campaign 1 plans to electrolytically dissolve 68 bundles of fuel assemblies from the Carolinas-Virginia Tube Reactor (CVTR), Heavy Water Components Test Reactor (HWCTR), and Experimental Boiling Water Reactor (EBWR). The fuel assemblies are intact Zircaloy or stainless steel (SS) clad UO 2 rods, tubes, and plates. The H Canyon electrolytic dissolver previously dissolved a variety of UO 2 core fuel types in SS, Zircaloy, Nichrome, or Incoloy cladding from 1969 to 1980. The objective of this study was to identify flowsheet conditions through literature review and laboratory experimentation to safely dissolve NASNF Campaign 1 bundles in the H Canyon electrolytic dissolver. Bench-scale electrolytic dissolution tests were performed to demonstrate a flowsheet for NASNF Campaign 1 bundles. The outer bundles are composed of SS or Al alloy, Al 6061-T6, and contain intact Zircaloy or SS clad UO 2 fuel assemblies. The key objectives of these tests were to determine bounding dissolver chemistries and the sparge requirement to ensure H 2 concentration remain less than 60 vol % of the lower flammability limit (LFL) during dissolution. The impact of HNO 3 concentration and the addition of fluoride on the dissolution efficiency of Zircaloy, 304L SS, Al 6061-T6, and Inconel 625 were examined. While SS, Al, and Inconel 625 readily dissolve utilizing electrolytic dissolution, Zircaloy disintegrated anodically; the surface of Zircaloy oxidized and the oxide layer spalled off and settled at the bottom of the dissolver as an insoluble material. The black flakes were identified as ZrO 2 and 85% of the Zr processed was converted to black ZrO 2 flakes when Zr was anodically disintegrated in 9.5 M HNO 3 .

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Hanford 200 West Area Flowsheet Data to Support Waste Treatment and Disposal Request for Proposal

This report documents the 200 West Area (200W) flowsheet supplemental data needed to support the Request for Proposal (RFP) to procure onsite and/or offsite treatment and disposal capabilities for West Area pretreated1 tank waste (PTW). The data provided in this document is based on the results of a 200W flowsheet model run evaluating single-shell tank (SST) retrievals for all S, SX, and U Farms, except for Tank S-112, which was retrieved in March of 2007 (HNF-EP-0182, Waste Tank Summary Report for Month End August 31, 2024). The evaluation also includes the waste inventory in double-shell tanks (DSTs) in SY Farm.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Considerations on Managing Flowsheet and Technology for DFLAW Production

This report evaluates best practices for flowsheet and technology (F&T) management and makes recommendations for Hanford tank waste treatment operations initially for Direct Feed Low Activity Waste (DFLAW). Establishing practicing F&T management operations prior to hot commissioning the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant is desirable to ensure focused F&T leadership and F&T capabilities and competencies are immediately ready to sustain DFLAW production operations. Management of F&T is characterized by the five programmatic elements important to sustained operations and leads to recommendations for Hanford tank waste treatment operations:

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Development of Process Flowsheets for the Recovery of Metals by Solvent Extraction to Recycle Battery Materials: Evaluation of Application of AMUSE Code. Final CRADA Report

RSR Technologies (RSRT) wished to investigate the use of the AMUSE solvent extraction code, housed at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) to evaluate the recycling of battery cells for the reclamation of metal values. The modeling studies were undertaken by the group at ANL to evaluate several separation schemes for battery metals using solvent extraction. These studies would develop a framework to be experimentally validated at RSRT at its facility in Dallas, TX. The AMUSE code modeling work would speed the development of recovery flowsheets for spent batteries.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Flowsheet for Conversion of Anion Resin from Nitrate to Sulfate Form for Disposal

Nitrate form anion exchange resins are specifically prohibited for disposal in TRU waste. At some DOE sites, spent resin was mixed with cement to immobilize the resin in a monolith with varying success. At SRS starting in the 1980s, spent anion resin has generally been converted to a more chemically stable form or it was digested with permanganate and transferred as a slurry to the HLW tank farm. In the early years of the site it is reported that over 20 metric tons of organic resin were transferred directly to the tank farm without any attempt to digest it. It appears that in the future conversion to a stable sulfate form could well be the favored disposal path for spent nitrate-form anion resin. This report will document the site history of converting between ionic forms (nitrate to sulfate) and will document process flowsheet conditions for performing that conversion.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Analysis of Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) Condensate Samples and Evaluation of the Glycolate Destruction Process during Nitric-Glycolic flowsheet Transition

Glycolate concentrations were measured by the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) in Slurry Mix Evaporator Condensate Tank (SMECT) and Recycle Collection Tank (RCT) samples retrieved after implementation of the Nitric-Glycolic Acid flowsheet at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF). No glycolate has been detected in any sample using Ion Chromatography (IC) with a detection limit of 8 mg/L, and no glycolate has been detected using either IC or Proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy ( 1 HNMR) after a permanganate strike was performed in the RCT.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗