Accounting for environmental effects in fatigue has long been a necessity in Finland. This requirement was placed into the national regulatory guides in 2002 and the regulatory body, Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) required the license holders of operating reactors to respond by 2004. At that time, the international state-of-the-art was reviewed and found not mature. However, reasonable approaches for accounting environmental effects were developed and adopted by both utilities, Fortum and TVO. Adoption of the proposed new design curves was considered impractical and calculation of Fen factors was preferred. This placed the Finnish utilities among the first industries, who brought environment assisted fatigue (EAF) into practice. At the same time, fatigue design of the new EPR design (OL3) was also subject of the requirement. The experimental work and approaches developed by Areva have been widely discussed in previous PVP Conferences. A high number of PVP papers in these ‘ENVIRONMENTAL FATIGUE ISSUES’ sessions reveals that work remains to be done before the state-of-the-art in EAF is mature and an international consensus can be reached. Follow-up of evolving state-of-the-art is a part of the safety culture for Finnish utilities and regulator. Therefore, we encourage the researchers and engineers together to find solutions, which can be justified by sound arguments and brought into practice to reduce confusion and bias in fatigue management.
This paper introduces and discusses the commonly used methods for calculating environmental penalty factors (Fen) to be used in fatigue assessment of stainless reactor components. Three alternative methods for determining Fen factors are introduced and instructed in the JSME S NF1-2009 Code in a language providing a designer the guidance needed for reliable and repeatable EAF assessment. Following these instructions together with the equations and parameters given in the NUREG/CR-6909 it is possible to obtain same Fen factors as by careful reading of the NUREG/CR-6909 alone. The NUREG/CR-6909, Rev. 1 contains notable amounts of valuable information, but instructions for application can be ambiguous or conflicting. An example related to the modified strain rate approach for determining Fen factors is provided.
All international codes used for design, operation and inspection of NPP primary circuit pressure boundaries are rooted to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Nuclear Vessels, 1963. Article 4, N-415 “Analysis for cyclic operation” instructed calculation of stress intensities for fatigue transients and provided two design curves for basic material types. Different codes such as ASME, RCC-M, KTA, PNAE and JSME have much in common, but partial deviations exist. In 2007 the US NRC Regulatory Guide 1.207 endorsed a methodology for accounting the environmental effects. It was mainly based on extensive work in Japan and the Argonne National Laboratory. The final report of ANL, NUREG/CR-6909 became a major reference and subject of criticism. However, the first approach for environment assisted fatigue (EAF) written in ‘code language’ was published in Japan and a regulatory requirement for consideration of EAF both for operating reactors and new designs appeared first in Finland. This paper discusses challenges in management of fatigue and the evolving state-of-the-art in different codes, standards, rules and assumptions. The roots and current status of fatigue curves and design criteria applied in Finnish NPP’s are explained.
The design fatigue curves applied for safety class 1 components in NPP’s are based on an experimentally determined strain-life fatigue data, the resulting ε-N reference curves and transferability margins. To account for detrimental effects of coolant water environment, penalty factors (Fen) are obtained by comparing fatigue lives in air and environment. To avoid bias in comparison, the same fatigue testing procedures according to ASTM E606 would be preferred in both environments. However, modified EAF test procedures were developed when direct control of strain in the specimen gauge section was not possible. This paper introduces and discusses commonly used experimental approaches for conducting (directly or remotely) strain-controlled fatigue tests in simulated LWR coolant water environments. At or near gauge section remotely controlled and tubular specimens have been successfully used to determine penalty factors for fatigue usage in environment, but variation and uncertainties related to experimental methods used for collecting the data cannot be completely excluded. The challenges and solutions adopted during latest 20 years in Finland are explained.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.