Final report of experimental laboratory-scale brittle fracture studies of glasses and ceramics

Abstract

Pyrex and SRL 131 Glass Specimens as Function of Impact Test Energy Density 29 14. Variation of Two Lognormal Parameters, Dg and og, with Energy Density of Specimens 30 15. Cumulative Volume Fractions of Particles, Replotted on Lognormal Coordinates 32 LIST OF FIGURES (contd) No._ Title Pagt 16. Diametral Impact in ANL Impact Chamber of 1.3-cm-OD x 1.3-cm-Long Specimens at 141 J/cm 3 of SYNROC, SRL 131 Simulated Waste Glass, and a Pyrex Standard 33 17. Measured BET Surface Areas _vs Impact Energy for 25-mm-OD x 25-mm-Long Specimens of Various Materials 38 18. Measured BET Surface Areas vs_ Impact Energy for Pyrex Specimen of Sizes Indicated ........ 39 19. Measured BET Surface Areas vs_ Impact Energy for Two Different Sizes of Pyrex and SRL 131 Glass Specimens 40 20. Cumulative Volume Fractions and Surface Area Fractions for Axial and Diametral Impacts at 10 J/cm 3 of 25-mm x 25-mm Pyrex Specimens 42 21. Particle Size Distributions for 10 J/cm 3 Axial Impacts of Pyrex with and without a Mechanical Stop 43 22. Cumulative Volume Percentages Based on Specific Sample Size Used by Vendors to Determine Size Distribution of Impact Fragments of SRL 131 Glass ........ 49 23. Particle Size Distributions of Impact Fragments Determined by Six Measurements Normalized to the Initial Volume of 25-mm-OD x 25-mm-Long Impacted SRL 131 Glass Specimens 50 24. Fragments of SRL 131 Glass from 10 J/cm 3 Impact Tests, Showing Small Particles Attached to Larger Particles • 51 25. Flow Diagram for Preparation of Scanning Electron Microscope Specimens of Impact-Produced Glass Fragments, after [THAUL0W] 53 26a. Typical SEM Photograph of Pyrex Fragments for Sample AR-1 after Treatment by the Dispersion Procedures Described in Text.-80 mesh at X135 magnification 56 26b. Typical SEM Photograph of Pyrex Fragments for Sample AR-1 after Treatment by the Dispersion Procedures Described in Text.-400 mesh at X1080 magnification 57 vi LIST OF FIGURES (contd) No. Title Page 26c. Typical SEM Photograph of Pyrex Fragments for Sample AR-1 after Treatment by the Dispersion Procedures Described in Text.-400 mesh at X1080 magnification 58 26d. Typical SEM Photograph of Pyrex Fragments for Sample AR-1 after Treatment by the Dispersion Procedures Described in Text.-400 mesh at X1080 magnification 59 27a. Typical Optical Microscope Photograph of Fragments >175 urn for Specimen AR-1 at 17.5X magnification 60 27b. Typical Optical Microscope Photograph of Fragments >175 \im for Specimen AR-2 at 17.5X magnification 61 28. Histograms of Form Factor for Particles in Each Fraction 66 29. Histograms of Max Diameter/Min Diameter Ratio for Particles in Each Fraction 67 30. Plots of Max Diameter/Min Diameter Ratio Against Form Factor for Particles in Each Fraction 69

Commercial SNF Accident Release Fractions

“…This is supported, albeit for a different brittle material, by a simple test showing that a 160-g glass cylinder bounces off a steel plate in a 10-m drop, rather than fracturing as would have been predicted by a similar correlation (Jardine et al 1982, Section 8 of Appendix D). This reveals the largest deficiency potentially associated with the use of these test data in the determination of ARF and RF for large masses of commercial SNF: can the physical phenomena associated with damage produced by dropping a weight on an unclad fuel pellet be equated to the damage produced by dropping a fuel assembly onto a potentially unyielding surface?…”

“…26, 34, and 35, and Table 2) and ANL-82-39 (Jardine et al 1982) provide data that may be applicable to failed fuel damaged by a drop or impact event that involves fuel pulverization. The ARFs and RFs produced from these experiments involve unconfined (i.e., no cladding) glass and UOZ ceramic specimens impacted by a dropping weight.…”

“…30 to 35). The linearity of the correlation with respect to fall height is not based on data for U02, but is based on impaction tests for Pyrex and SRL 131 (Savannah River Site glass frit) over the range of energy densities of 1.2 to 10 J/cm3 (Jardine et al 1982, Figure 13 and pp. 28 to 31).…”

“…The only data considered in this analysis that have a standard deviation greater than 4.5 is the pulverization data for brittle materials (Mecham et al 1981;Jardine et al 1982). These data are not used in the calculation of the RFs for commercial SNF or crud aerosols.…”

“…These tests characterized the size distribution and the RF of the fragments generated (Mecham et al 1981;Jardine et al 1982).…”