Nuclear Power Reactors

P1: GPA Final Pages Qu: 00, 00, 00, 00
Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology EN010M-495 July 18, 2001 2:59
Nuclear Power Reactors
Ronald A. Knief
XE Corporation
I. Overview
II. Design and Operating Requirements
III. Reactor Types
IV. Safety Features
V. Regulations
GLOSSARY
Blanket Region surrounding the fuel core of a breeder
reactor that contains fertile material to increase pro-
duction of new fuel.
Breeder Reactor that produces new fuel from fertile ma-
terial at a faster rate than it burns fuel for energy
production.
Converter Reactor that produces less new fuel from fer-
tile material than it burns for energy production.
Coolant Liquid or gaseous medium used to remove s-
sion heat energy from reactor fuel.
Core Region within a reactor occupied by the nuclear fuel
that supports the ssion chain reaction.
Critical Condition where a ssion chain reaction is stable
with neutron production balancing losses at a nonzero
level.
Fast neutrons Neutrons of highenergy, particularlythose
produced directly by the ssion reaction.
Fertile Material, not itself ssile, capable of being con-
verted to ssile material following absorption of a
neutron.
Fissile Material capable of sustaining a ssion chain
reaction.
Fission Process in which a heavy nucleus splits into
two or more large fragments and releases kinetic
energy.
Moderator Material of low atomic mass included in
a reactor for the purpose of reducing the energy of
neutrons.
Multiplication Ratio of neutron production rate to neu-
tron loss rate; value is unity for a critical system.
Reactivity Fractional change in neutron multiplication
referenced to the critical condition; value is zero for
a critical system.
Reactor Combination of ssile and other materials in a
geometric arrangement designed to support a neutron
chain reaction.
Steamcycle Methodusedtoconvert ssionheat energyto
steamand hence electricity [often described in terms of
a primary coolant loop and, as appropriate, secondary
heat transfer loop(s)].
Thermal neutrons Low-energy neutrons in thermal
equilibriumwith their surroundings, produced by slow-
ing down or moderating the fast neutrons from nuclear
reactions such as ssion.
COMMERCIAL POWER production with nuclear en-
ergy relies on a sustained neutron chain reaction from the
739
P1: GPA Final Pages
740 Nuclear Power Reactors
ssion process. Reactors produce electricity from ssion,
employing a variety of fuel forms, coolants, moderators,
and other materials.
I. OVERVIEW
Nuclear power reactors have many similarities to conven-
tional fossil-powered systems. All of their unique design
features and operating modes result directly or indirectly
fromthe nature of the ssion chain reaction that produces
the energy. These characteristics lead to several classica-
tions appropriate for reactors. (The other major reaction
for nuclear energy production, fusion, offers the prospect
as a future energy source.)
A. Fission Process
When a neutron strikes a nucleus of
235
U, a ssion reaction
may occur in which the nucleus splits into two or more
ssion fragments, releases radiation and kinetic energy,
and emits neutrons. The energy release, over 50 million
times as great as from the reaction involved in burning
a carbon atom with oxygen, is one major advantage of
ssion as an energy source. Another is the presence of
extra neutrons, which present the possibility of a sustained
chain reaction and steady energy production.
The disadvantages of the ssion reaction are the partic-
ulate and electromagnetic radiations emitted at the time
of ssion and the radioactivity (i.e., emission of radia-
tions over time) of the ssion fragments and their prod-
ucts. These features lead to requirements for shielding and
containment, respectively.
When the chain reaction exactly balances the rates of
neutron production from ssion with absorption and leak-
age, the system is steady and said to be critical. When
production exceeds losses, it is supercritical and increases
in power. When losses exceed production, it is subcriti-
cal and decreases in power, up to and including being shut
down. All three states of criticality are necessary to nuclear
power reactor operation. This status is often quantied in
terms of the multiplication factor k, dened as
k =
production
absorption +leakage
,
or by reactivity dened as
= (k 1)/k.
Thus, k =1 or =0 constitutes the critical condition.
A material capable of sustaining a chain reaction by
itself is said to be ssile. Alternatively, ssile material
can be ssioned by neutrons of any energy. Fissionable
and fertile materials can contribute to the chain reaction.
Nuclei that are ssionable canbe ssionedbyneutrons, but
not necessarily neutrons of any energy (particularly, some
cannot be ssioned by low-energy or thermal neutrons).
Fertile materials on absorbing a neutron are converted to
ssile nuclei.
B. Reactor Classications
Nuclear reactors are designed to achieve a self-sustained
chain reaction with a combination of ssile, fertile, and
other materials. Common characteristics useful for clas-
sication purposes are
1. Coolantprinciple heat removal medium.
2. Steam cyclenumber of separate coolant loops.
3. Moderatormaterial (if any) used to slow down
the neutrons produced by ssion.
4. Neutron energygeneral energy range for the neu-
trons that cause most of the ssions.
5. Fuel productionsystem is referred to as a breeder
if it produces (i.e., changes fromfertile to ssile) more fuel
than it consumes; it is said to be a converter otherwise.
The rst two features relate to the current practice of con-
verting ssion energy rst to heat and then to electrical
energy by employing a steamcycle. Coolants include wa-
ter, heavy water, gases, and liquid metal. The steamcycles
may employ from one to three separate loops, including
one for primary coolant circulation and one (not necessar-
ily separate) for steam generation.
Neutrons are emitted from ssion at high energy. How-
ever, very-low-energy neutrons have a higher likelihood of
causing additional ssion reactions. Thus, many systems
employ a moderator to slow down these neutrons. The
best moderators are of low mass, allowing maximum en-
ergy transfer through neutron collisions (e.g., the limiting
case of potentially total energy transfer between a mov-
ing cue ball and a stationary billiard ball of equal mass).
Typical materials used for this purpose are hydrogen, deu-
terium(heavy hydrogen), and carbon. The moderator and
coolant may be the same (e.g., water) or may be separate
materials (e.g., gaseous coolant and solid graphite mod-
erator). Neutrons with low enough energies to be roughly
in thermal equilibriumwith the surrounding materials are
said to be thermal neutrons. Neutrons at or near ssion
energies are fast neutrons. Fast reactors avoid the use of
moderators, such as with a metal coolant like sodium,
instead of one of the moderating materials identied
above.
Any reactor that contains fertile species
232
Th,
238
U, or
240
Pu produces some amount of new ssile fuel. Breeder
reactors actually produce more fuel than they consume.
Converter reactors produce lesser amounts of new fuel.
P1: GPA Final Pages
Nuclear Power Reactors 741
The worlds six major reactor types are
1. boiling water reactor (BWR)
2. pressurized water reactor (PWR), including several
similar western designs and the unique Russian VVER
PWR
3. heavy-water-moderated reactor (HWR), including
the pressurized heavy-water reactor (PHWR)
4. gas-cooled reactor (GCR), including the high-
temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR)
5. light-water cooled graphite moderated reactor
(LGR), including the Russian RBMK pressure-tube
graphite reactor (PTGR)
6. breeder reactor, including the liquid-metal fast-
breeder reactor (LMFBR)
Data for representative nuclear steam supply systems
(NSSS) (i.e., the portions related specically to the use of
nuclear ssion as the energy source) for the six of these re-
actor types (including two PWRa Westinghouse system
representative of the western units and a Russian VVER)
are provided in Table I. The section labeled general de-
scribes the reactor types in terms of the ve classications
identied at the beginning of this section (e.g., the PTGR
is a single-loop, light-water-cooled, graphite-moderated,
thermal, converter reactor.)
The world-wide nuclear electric generating capacity for
each country by reactor type is shown in Table II.
II. DESIGN AND OPERATING
REQUIREMENTS
Nuclear power reactors are complex systems whose de-
sign represents a balance among conicting requirements.
Principal among these requirements are nuclear design,
materials, thermal hydraulics, economics, and control and
safety.
The nuclear design seeks to match ssile and fertile
constituents with appropriate coolants and moderator (if
any) to optimize the neutron economy of the chain reac-
tion and production of newfuel. Materials concerns focus
on chemical compatibility of components, thermal and
radiation stability, and overall mechanical strength. One
especially important requirement is that the fuel main-
tain its structural integrity throughout 4 years or more of
in-place ssion chain reaction, since unlike other energy
production cycles, the fuel is not literally burned up.
Thermal-hydraulic goals include spatially uniform
power density distributions and appropriate match of
coolant conditions to energy generation. Economics fo-
cus on minimizing overall costs (i.e., initial capital out-
lay, operating and maintenance costs, and fuel charges),
including attention to reliability and thermal conversion
efciency.
Control and safety considerations include some inter-
action with each of the previous areas. Power reactors
must maintain the critical condition, increase and decrease
power, and adjust to long-term changes such as the con-
icting effects frombreeding new fuel, depleting existing
fuel, and building in waste products. The desired neutron
balance is maintained predominately by adjusting neutron
absorption, (by using materials designed to remove neu-
trons from, or poison, the chain reaction), although some
designs also change neutron production by on-line fuel ex-
change. Absorption may depend on a combination of solid
moveable control rods, soluble poisons in the coolant or
moderator, and xed burnable poisons designed to deplete
or be burned out by the continuing neutron population.
Routine control strives to make the power density as
uniformas possible, while allowing for power changes. In
most designs, control-rod movement is used with groups
selected for symmetry to maintain uniformpower distribu-
tion. Measures are instituted to restrict the speed of move-
ment and reactivity worth of individual rods or groups
of rods to prevent excessively rapid power increase. Sim-
ilarly, the design intends to minimize the likelihood of
inadvertent control rod withdrawal.
Safety concerns are addressed through a protective sys-
temwhereby the control rods may be inserted quickly; that
is, they scramor trip through gravity drop or gas pressure,
when certain predetermined parameter limits (e.g., on
pressure, temperature, ow, or power levels) are exceeded.
Overall design with negative feedback mechanisms, so
that power increases tend to be self-terminating, is another
important goal. Fuel temperature and coolant/moderator
temperature effects are examples when a power increase
drives up temperatures and the temperatures in turn cause
the reaction to slow somewhat.
Another important safety feature is multiple-barrier
containment of ssion products. As may be observed for
each reactor type described in the remainder of this arti-
cle, these barriers include the fuel particles, surrounding
cladding, the coolant systemboundary, and a containment
structure.
One important example of tradeoffs among the design
goals is seen in thermal-reactor fuel assemblies whose pin
arrangement determines the characteristics of the chain re-
action, economics, and heat removal. The chain reaction
is enhanced by optimum spacing of the fuel in lumps
with moderator interspersed so that neutrons from ssion
will undergo a number of scattering collisions for slowing
down prior to reentering the fuel; too little and too much
spacing can both be detrimental. The extent of slowing
down also determines the amount of conversion of fer-
tile material and the overall energy production possible
P1: GPA Final Pages
TABLE I Characteristics for Seven Representative Nuclear Steam Supply Systems
a
VVER
BWR PWR PWR PHWR HTGR
b
PTGR LMFBR
Reference design
Manufacturer General Electric Westinghouse (Former Soviet Atomic Energy of General Atomic (Former Soviet Novatome
Union) Canada, Ltd. Union)
System (station) BWR/6 (Sequoyah/ VVER-1000 CANDU-600 (Fulton) RBMK-1000 (Superphenix)
SNUPPS)
General
Steam cycle
Loops 1 2 2 2 2 1 3
Primary coolant H
2
O H
2
O H
2
O D
2
O He H
2
O Liquid Na
Secondary H
2
O H
2
O H
2
O H
2
O Liquid Na/H
2
O
coolant
Moderator H
2
O H
2
O H
2
O D
2
O Graphite Graphite
Neutron energy Thermal Thermal Thermal Thermal Thermal Thermal Fast
Fuel production Converter Converter Converter Converter Converter Converter Breeder
Energy conversion
Gross thermal 3579 3411 3200 2180 3000 3200 3000
power, MW(th)
Net electrical 1178 1150 953 638 1160 1000 1200
power, MW(e)
Efciency, % 32.9 33.7 33.3 29.3 38.7 31.2 40
Heat transport
Primary loops and 2 4 4 2 6 2/8 4
pumps
Intermediate loops 4 8
Steam generators 4 4 6 8
Steam gen. type -tube Horizontal -tube Helical coil Helical coil
Fuel
Particles Short, cyl. Short, cyl. Short, cyl. Short, cyl. Coated Short, cyl. Short, cyl.
pellets pellets pellets pellets micro-spheres pellets pellets
Chemical form UO
2
UO
2
UO
2
UO
2
UC/ThC UO
2
Mixed UO
2
/PUO
2
Fissile 25 wt. %
235
U 25 wt. %
235
U 25 wt. %
235
U Natural uranium 93 wt.
235
U % 1.12.4 wt.%
235
U 1518 wt. % Pu
(core)
Fertile
238
U
238
U
238
U
238
U Thorium
238
U
238
U (core +
blanket)
Pins Pellet stacks in Pellet stacks in Pellet stacks in Pellet stacks in Microspheres in Pellet stacks in Pellet stacks in
Zralloy tubes Zralloy tubes Zralloy tubes Zralloy tubes graphite sticks Zralloy tubes stainless steel
tubes
Assembly 8 8 Square 17 17 Square 331 Hexagonal 37-Pin Hexagonal 2 18 pin 271-Pin hexagonal
pin array pin array pin array cylindrical array graphite cylindrical array array
block
b
Core
Axis Vertical Vertical Vertical Horizontal Vertical Vertical Vertical
Assemblies on 1 1 1 12 8 2 1
axis
Assemblies 748 193 151 380 493 1661 364 (core), 233
radially (blanket)
Performance
Equil. burnup, 27,500 27,500 2541,000 7500 95,000 18,500 100,000
MWD/T
Refueling sequence
1
4
/yr
1
3
/yr
c
Continuous, online
1
4
/yr
b
on-line Variable
Thermal hydraulics
Primary system
Pressure, MPa 7.17 15.5 16.5 10.0 4.90 7.2 0.1
Inlet temp.,

C 278 292 290 267 318 270 395
Average outlet 288 325 322 310 741 284 545
temp.,

C
continues
P1: GPA Final Pages
TABLE I (Continued)
VVER
BWR PWR PWR PHWR HTGR
b
PTGR LMFBR
Core ow, Mg/sec 13.1 18.0 21.1 7.6 1.42 10.4 16.4
Volume, 1 3.36 10
5
1.20 10
5
(9550 kg) (3200 Mg)
Secondary system Na/H
2
O
Pressure, MPa 6.89 6.4 4.7 17.2 0.1/17.7
Inlet temp.,
C 227 289 187 188 345/235

Outlet temp.,
C 285 322 260 513 525/487

Power density
Core ave., kW/l 54.1 105 111 12 8.4 280
Fuel ave., kW/l 54.1 105 60 44 280
Linear heat rate
Core ave., kW/m 19.0 17.8 17.6 25.7 7.87 29
Core max., kW/m 44.0 42.7 44.1 23.0 29 45
Design peaking factors
Radial 1.4 1.21
(Total) (2.5) (2.9) (1.55)
Axial 1.6 1.41
Moderator Same as Same as Same as D
2
O Graphite blocks
b
Graphite
primary primary primary
coolant coolant coolant
Volume, 1 2.17 10
6
Inlet temp.,
C 43
Outlet temp.,
C 71
Reactivity control
Control rods
Geometry Cruciform Rod clusters Rods Rods Rod pairs Rods Hexagonal pin
bundles
Absorber material B
4
C AgInCd Boron Various B
4
C/graphite B
4
C
Burnable poison Gd in fuel pellets Borosilicate BZr B
4
C/graphite
glass
Other systems Voids in coolant Soluble boron H
2
O/Various Reserve shutdown 3-Bundle secondary
Reactor vessel
Inside dimensions, m 6.05D 21.6H 4.83D 13.4H 7.6D 4L 11.3D 14.4H 0.088 8H 21D 19.5H
tubes
Wall thickness, mm 152 224 28.6 (4.72 m minimum) 4 25
Material Stainless-steel- Stainless-steel- Stainless steel Prestressed Zr/Nb alloy Stainless steel
clad carbon clad carbon concrete
steel steel
Other features Pressure tubes Steel liners Pressure tubes Pool-type
a
Data summarized from Knief, R. A. (1992). Nuclear Engineering, Hemisphere, Washington, DC.
b
Parameters are for a large conceptual design; the smaller German THTR, or pebble-bed reactor, uses fuel microspheres in 6-cm-diameter graphite
spheres with on-line refueling strategy.
c
Design values; most reactors currently moving from 12 mo. to 1B or 24 mo. refueling cycles.
from a given amount of fuel. Spacing and coolant ow
rate establish heat-removal characteristics (including tem-
perature effects on the fuels multiplication factor). Final
dimensions generally represent a best-estimate balance
among these and other competing concerns.
III. REACTOR TYPES
The major reactor types are identied in Section I with
representative data provided in Table I. General descrip-
tions of these systems follow. The principal focus is on
the steam cycle, fuel assemblies, reactivity control, and
the protective system. General safety-related functions are
summarized separately in the next section.
A. Light-Water Reactors
Two light-water reactor (LWR) systemsboiling-water
reactor (BWR) and pressurized-water reactor (PWR)
employ ordinary (light) water as coolant and moder-
ator. The former design produces steam through a di-
rect cycle (Fig. 1), while the latter uses an intermediate
steam-generator heat exchanger to maintain an all-liquid
P1: GPA Final Pages
TABLE II Worldwide Nuclear Generating Capacity by Reactor Type and Summary of Reactor Electrical Performance
a,b,c
1990 reactor 1998 reactor
performance performance
Percent of Percent of
TWe-hr electrical TWe-hr electrical
Reactors under Reactors reasonably
Reactors operable construction rmly planned
Country No. MWe No. MWe No. MWe
Argentina 7.3 16.9 6.9 10.0
PHWR 2 1005 1 745
Armenia 211.5
d
12.2
d
1.42 24.7
VVER 1 408
Belgium 40.4 60.2 43.9 55.2
PWR 7 5836
Brazil 2.1 1.0 3.3 1.1
PWR 1 657 1 1309
Bulgaria 13.5 35.7 15.5 41.5
VVER 6 3760
Canada 67.1 14.4 67.5 12.4
PHWR 14 10,915
China 13.5 1.2
PWR 3 2268 4 3200
PHWR 2 1400
VVER 2 2000
6 4600
Cuba
PWR 2 880
Czech Republic 24.6
e
28.5
e
28.5 20.5
VVER 4 1752 2 1962
Finland 18.1 35.0 21.0 27.4
VVER 2 1020
BWR 2 1630
4 2650
France 298.0 75.0 368.4 75.8
PWR 57 64080 1 1516
FBR 1 250
58 64330
Germany 139.1 33.1 145.2 28.3
PWR 13 15,426
BWR 6 6,643
19 22,069
Hungary 13.7 50.0 13.1 35.6
VVER 4 1840
India 6.2 2.4 10.2 2.5
BWR 2 320
PHWR 8 1520 6 1880 6 1880
VVER 2 2000 2 2000
10 1840 8 3880 8 3880
Iran
VVER 2 2000
Japan 186.4 27.1 306.9 35.9
PWR 23 19,366
BWR 28 25,551 2 1925 4 4875
continues
P1: GPA Final Pages
TABLE II (Continued)
FBR 1 280
Other 1 165
53 35,362
Kazakhstan 211.5
d
12.2
d
0.1 0.2
FBR 1 150
Korea, North
PWR 2 2000
Korea, South 52.9 49.1 85.2 41.4
PWR 11 9995 3 3050 10 11,200
HWR 3 2094 1 700
Other/unknown 2 1,000
14 12,089 4 3750 12 12,200
Lithuania 211.5
d
12.2
d
12.3 77.2
RBMK 2 2600
Mexico 2.3 4.1 8.8 5.4
BWR 2 1329
Netherlands 3.3 4.9 3.6 4.1
PWR 1 481
BWR 1 58
2 539
Pakistan 0.4 1.1 0.3 0.7
HWR 1 137
PWR 1 325
Poland ?? ??
VVER [4] [1860]
Romania ?? ?? 4.9 10.4
HWR 1 706
Russian Federation 211.5
d
12.2
d
95.4 13.1
VVER 13 9,594 3 2630 2 1260
RBMK 11 11,000 1 1000
FBR 4 48 2 1600
Other/unknown 1 600 1 70
29 21,242 4 3630 5 2930
Slovakia 24.6
e
28.5
e
11.4 43.8
VVER 5 2200 1 440
Slovenia 4.4
f
5.4
f
4.8 38.3
PWR 1 652
South Africa 8.5 12.4 13.6 7.25
PWR 2 1930
Spain 54.3 35.7 56.7 31.7
PWR 7 5950
BWR 2 1450
9 7400
continues
P1: GPA Final Pages
TABLE II (Continued)
Sweden 65.3 46.0 70.0 45.8
PWR 3 2,835
BWR 9 7,603
12 10,438
Switzerland 22.3 42.6 24.4 41.1
PWR 3 1772
BWR 2 1507
Unknown 5 3279
Taiwan 31.5 38.3 ?? ??
PWR 2 1902
BWR 4 3242 2 2700
6 5144
Turkey
Unknown 2 2000
Ukraine 211.5
d
12.2
d
70.6 45.4
VVER 13 11,808 2 2000
RBMK 1 1,000
14 12,808
United Kingdom 60.8 20.0 91.1 27.1
PWR 1 1,258
Magnox 20 3,786
AGR 14 9,164
35 15,208
United States 576.8 20.6 673.7 18.7
PWR 69 68,577
BWR 35 33,156
104 101,733
Totals
Reactor type
PWR 204 202,985 12 11,400 10 11,200
VVER PWR 48 32,382 10 9,032 6 5,260
BWR 92 82,431 4 4,625 4 4,875
PHWR 29 16,377 11 5,431 6 1,880
Magnox 20 3,786
AGR 14 9,164
RBMK 14 14,600 1 1,000
FBR 4 1,280 2 1,600
Other/unknown 5 213 5 3,070
Total 430 363,218 38 31,488 33 27,885
a
From Nuclear Engineering International World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1999, November 1998.
b
Operable status as of end of 1997, under-construction and planned status as of end of 1998.
c
Key: BWR, boiling water reactor; FBR, fast-breeder reactor; Magnox and AGR, gas-cooled reactors; [P]HWR, heavy-water reactor; RBMK,
light-water-cooled, graphite moderated reactor; and PWR and VVER, pressurized water reactors.
d
Values for Russia, which in 1990 included Armenia, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Russia, and the Ukraine.
e
Value for Yugoslavia, which in 1990 included Slovenia.
f
Value for Czechoslavakia, which in 1990 included the Czech Republic and Slovakia.
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 1 Steam cycle for boiling water reactor (BWR). [Courtesy of Atomic Industrial Forum.]
primary loop and produce steam in a separate secondary
loop (Fig. 2).
The nature of the water coolant/moderator results in
similarities between the two LWR designs. The fuel is 2
5 wt. %enriched
235
Uin uraniumdioxide fuel pellets clad
in sealed zirconium-alloy tubes. Fuel assemblies consist
of rectangular arrays of fuel pins with regular spacing.
Since the LWR designs rely on liquid water for mod-
erating neutrons, maximum operating temperatures must
remain well belowthe 706
F (374
C) critical temperature
at which pressure increases dramatically and liquid cannot
FIGURE 2 Steam cycle for pressurized water reactor (PWR). [Courtesy of Atomic Industrial Forum.]
exist. Modern steam conditions nominally at 1000
F
(540
C), typical of fossil-fueled plants, thus are not

available; special wetsteam turbines must be employed.
1. Boiling-Water Reactors
The direct-cycle boiling-water reactors (BWR) are man-
ufactured by General Electric Company in the United
States. ABB-Atom in Sweden, AEG in the United
Kingdom, Kraftwerk Union in West Germany, and Hitachi
and Toshiba in Japan. Employing the cycle shown in
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 3 Typical steam cycle schematic diagram for boiling water reactor (BWR). [Courtesy of General Electric
Company.]
concept by Fig. 1 and in more detail in Fig. 3, feedwa-
ter enters the steel reactor vessel, is heated by the ssion
chain reaction occurring in the fuel pins, and leaves the
vessel as steam. The high- and low-pressure turbine stages
are employed in concert with the multiple heaters and con-
denser to enhance energy-conversion efciency. The more
recent BWR designs use jet pumps to recirculate a fraction
of the feedwater ow for better control.
Fuel bundles for the BWR appear as shown in Fig. 4.
The 7 7 to 9 9 square array of fuel pins is surrounded
by a metal fuel channel, which prevents the water/steam
mixture from moving between bundles (and potentially
resulting in too little liquid in some). Fuel bundles may
contain pins of several different enrichments (Fig. 5). The
reactor fuel core consists of up to 800 fuel bundles.
Reactivity control for routine operation is implemented
through a combination of control rods and coolant ow
adjustment. The bottom-mounted control rods (indicated
below the reactor vessel in Fig. 3) are made of long boron
carbide lled pins in a cruciform (cross) shape that ts
between four fuel assemblies as shown in Fig. 5.
Flow adjustment can provide another effective control
method, since the water changes density with tempera-
ture. At low temperature, the dense water is very effec-
tive at moderating neutrons, and thereby encourages s-
sion. With increased temperature, the density decreases
(or, equivalently, void content increases as steam is being
produced), causing a reduction in moderation and ssion
rate. Thus, if ow rate is increased, energy removal can
be increased without a net change in coolant temperature
with a resulting increase in power generation. In practice,
power-level changes of up to 40% may be accomplished
by ow control.
Longer-term reactivity control is accomplished using
burnable poisons (e.g., curtains of boron between fuel
assemblies or gadolinium poisons fabricated into the fuel
itself) andgradual withdrawal of insertedcontrol rods over
core lifetime. Reactor scram or trip is accomplished by
using gas pressure to insert all of the bottom-mounted
control rods into the core.
2. Pressurized-Water Reactor
The two-loop pressurized-water reactors (PWR) have
been manufactured by Westinghouse, ABB Combustion
Engineering, and Babcock & Wilcox in the United States;
Framatome in France; Brown Boveri, Kraftwerk Union,
and Seimens in Germany: Mitsubishi in Japan; and Atom-
mash in the USSR (now Russia). Water in the primary loop
(Fig. 2) is maintained as liquid by using high pressure.
Water enters the reactor vessel (Fig. 6) at the inlet nozzle,
ows downward along the inner vessel wall, is distributed
at the lower vessel plate, ows up through the fuel assem-
blies gaining heat energy, and exits at the outlet nozzle.
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 4 Typical fuel assembly for boiling water reactor. [Courtesy of General Electric Company.]
Energy from the primary loop is extracted and converted
to steam by two to four U-tube (Fig. 7), once-through
(B&W), or horizontal (Russian VVER) steam genera-
tors. Multiple turbine stages, heaters, and a condenser are
employed as for the BWR (Fig. 3). A pressurizer with
a steamwater interface is used to maintain the sensi-
tive pressure/temperature balance in the primary system
by using heaters to make more steam and increase pres-
sure or spraying cool water to condense steam and reduce
pressure.
Fuel assemblies for the PWR are of 14 14 to 17 17
square fuel pin arrays (Fig. 8) or a hexagonal array of up to
331 pins (Russian VVER). They are not enclosed in a fuel
channel (in part because the single-phase primary uid is
better behaved than the BWRs boiling coolant). These
assemblies also have unoccupied pin locations, which can
accommodate control rods, burnable poisons, or instru-
ments. The large PWR reactor cores consist of from 150
up to 200 or more fuel bundles.
Reactivity control is accomplished mainly with solu-
ble poison in the form of boric acid assisted by control
rods. The boron concentration is adjusted to match general
changes from fuel burnup, conversion of fertile material,
and depletion of burnable poisons. Control-rod assemblies
consist of ve to 24 ngers, made of boron carbide or of
a silverindiumcadmium mixture, which move in chan-
nels within the fuel assemblies (e.g., as shown in Fig. 8).
A small symmetric group of rods is generally inserted a
short distance into the fuel and then moved as needed to
compensate for routine power uctuations.
Scram or trip is accomplished by dropping the top-
mounted rods (Fig. 6) into the core under the inuence
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 5 Core fuel module (a) and control rod pattern (b) for typical boiling water reactor. [Courtesy of General
Electric Company.]
of gravity. The rods are mounted to their drives by
electromagnets so that interruption of the current (from
power failure or a designated indication that parameters
are outside of accepted limits) causes the rods to fall.
B. Heavy-Water Reactors
Ordinary hydrogen in the form of water is the most ef-
fective material for reducing neutron energy, but it also
absorbs some of the neutrons that could otherwise par-
ticipate in the chain reaction. Thus, deuterium as heavy
water, which requires more collisions for a given energy
change but exhibits much less absorption, is also a useful
reactor moderator. Deuterium, existing in nature in a ratio
of 1:400 with ordinary hydrogen, requires isotopic enrich-
ment prior to use (as does
235
U in uranium for many of the
reactor applications).
Heavy-water reactors (HWR) have been manufactured
by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) and in
the United Kingdom, West Germany, India and Japan.
Pressure-vessel designs (similar to the PWR) employ the
same heavy water as coolant and moderator. Pressure-
tube designs use heavy water in a moderating volume
with a separate coolant, which could be heavy water, or-
dinary water, or an organic liquid. The pressurized heavy-
water reactor (PHWR) in the form of the popular Cana-
dian deuterium uranium (CANDU) system is considered
below.
The steam cycle is two-loop (Fig. 9), like the PWR, with
the primarypressurizedheavy-water looptransferringheat
energy to a loop of ordinary water for steam production.
A major difference, however, is that the primary uid is
distributed among several hundred pressure tubes which
pass through a large calandria vessel (Fig. 10) containing
separate heavy-water moderator. The coolant is actually
collected in two separate loops, with adjacent tubes being
part of different loops.
The fuel assemblies consist of natural (i.e., 0.711 wt.%
235
U) uranium dioxide fuel pellets in zirconium clad, sim-
ilar to LWR fuel. However, short, cylindrical bundles of
fuel pins (Fig. 11) allow a unique on-line fueling scheme
whereby a machine attaches to each end of a single coolant
tube and inserts one fuel bundle while removing another.
A major portion of the reactivity control is accompl-
ished by on-line fueling, which is required to compen-
sate for the low reactivity inherent in the natural uranium
fuel. Routine operating adjustments and power shaping
are accomplished with poison control rods or introduc-
tion of ordinary water (which absorbs more neutrons than
heavy water) into special chambers. Other control rods
are available for reactor trip. The separation of the coolant
and moderator volumes also provides the possibility for
moderator dumping as an emergency shutdown method.
C. Gas-Cooled Reactors
The worlds rst research reactor used natural uranium,
graphite moderator, and natural-circulation air cooling.
Subsequent systems have also used graphite with natural
or enriched uranium and with carbon dioxide or helium
coolant. Various commercial gas-cooled reactors (GCR)
have operated in France, the United Kingdom, the United
States, and West Germany. The U.K. still has a number
of CO
2
-based gas-cooled reactors, split between Magnox
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 6 Reactor pressure vessel for a typical pressurized-water reactor. [Courtesy of Westinghouse Electric
Company.]
(natural uranium fuel) and Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR)
(slightly enriched uranium fuel) designs. Two versions
of the helium-cooled high temperature gas-cooled reactor
(HTGR) developed by the United States and Germany are
described below.
The HTGR steam cycle (Fig. 12) employs a primary
loop of helium, heat exchangers, and pumps contained
within a prestressed concrete reactor vessel (PCRV) (two
versions of which are shown in Fig. 13), and a steam loop.
Since the coolant is single-phase gas, no pressurizer is re-
quired (in contrast to the two-loop water-cooled designs).
The nature of the coolant also provides the prospect for
direct conversion through a gas turbine.
Fuel for the HTGR consists of small microspheres of
uranium or thorium carbide (UC/ThC) with coatings of
graphite and/or silicon carbide [Fig. 14(a)]. The uranium
microspheres, enriched to 2093 wt.%, may be mixed with
separate thorium microspheres to an effective ssile en-
richment of about 5 wt.%.
In the United States prismatic HTGR system, the
microsphere mixture is formed into roughly nger-
sized sticks with a carbon-resin binder. The sticks are
then loaded into large hexagonal graphite blocks with
interspersed coolant holes [Fig. 14(b)]. The blocks are
stacked several high and in a roughly cylindrical arrange-
ment to form the reactor core [Fig. 13 (a)].
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 7 Four U-tube steam-generator primary loop congura-
tion for a pressurized-water reactor. [Courtesy of Westinghouse
Electric Company.]
Another version of the HTGR, the German thorium
high-temperature reactor (THTR), forms the microspheres
into a spherical shape and coats them with hard, thick
graphite layers [Fig. 14(c)]. The core is then formed by
loading the spheres into a hopper in a PCRV [Fig. 13(b)],
fromwhichfuelinganddefuelingcanbe accomplishedon-
FIGURE 8 Typical fuel assembly for a pressurized-water reactor. [Courtesy of Combustion Engineering, Inc.]
line. This design feature has led to the designation pebble
bed reactor.
Reactivity control in the prismatic design depends on
control rods for routine and shutdown functions. Burnable
poisons may be used for long-term reactivity control. A re-
serve shutdown system consisting of small boron carbide
balls backs up the primary systems.
The THTR has minimal excess reactivity due to its abil-
ity to change fuel on-line. Control rods provide the means
for routine operational adjustments.
D. Light-Water Graphite Reactors
Light-water-cooled graphite-moderated reactors (LGR)
were among the rst systems used for purposes of re-
search, fuel conversion, and power production. A small
Soviet unit of this type is credited with generating the rst
commercial electricity. Current commercial use is lim-
ited to the Soviet RBMK pressure-tube graphite reactors
(PTGR). The Chernobyl reactorthe site of the serious
1986 accidentwas of this type.
The PTGR uses a direct steamcycle with boiling-water
coolant like the BWR (Fig. 1). Its pressure-tube design
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 9 Steam cycle for CANDU pressurized heavy-water reactor.
with separate coolant and moderator, however, also has
similarities to the CANDU (Fig. 9).
Cylindrical fuel assemblies (Fig. 15) each contain two
stacked sub-assemblies of 18 zirconium-clad fuel pins
of UO
2
enriched to 1.8 wt.% in
235
U. Water enters the
coolant inlet, ows downward through a central tube, re-
distributes in the lower head, travels upward among the
fuel pins, and exits as a steamwater mixture. The reac-
tor core (Fig. 16) consists of nearly 1700 fuel assemblies
distributed through a graphite cylinder of roughly 12-m
diameter and 7-m height.
The PTGR fuel assemblies can be exchanged on-line to
maintain the general reactivity balance. Control rods are
moved for routine power adjustment and fully inserted for
shutdown.
E. Breeder Reactors
The breeder-reactor design concept is predicated on max-
imizing new fuel production in breeding more fuel than
usedtosustainthe neutronchainreaction. For this purpose,
ssile plutonium and fertile
238
U fuel with fast neutrons
have been found to be the most efcient.
The liquid-metal fast-breeder reactor (LMFBR) keeps
neutron energy high by using liquid sodium as a coolant,
and thereby specically avoiding the presence of moderat-
ing material. The liquid sodium, although not the heaviest
coolant available, is not too light, has favorable heat-
transfer properties, and is not an excessively strong ab-
sorber of neutrons compared to other choices.
Although experimental fast-breeder reactors have been
operated in the United States since the late 1950s, the most
recent intense focus on LMFBR systems had been in West-
ern Europe, the Russia, Japan, and India. With shutdown
of the major western European systems located in France
and Germany, (which were funded by consortia that
also include Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, and the United
Kingdom), the future of this reactor type is in doubt.
The steam cycle is a three-loop system (Fig. 17) with
the rst two of sodium and the third of water. The interme-
diate loop is present to isolate the primary from possible
contact with water in the steam generator. The primary
sodium becomes radioactive from neutron absorption and
also can pick up ssion-product radionuclides from the
fuel. If this sodium were to come in contact with water,
it would lead to an exothermic reaction that also would
spread contamination.
Fuel for the LMFBR consists of mixed-oxide fuel pel-
lets, which combine about 1030 wt.% plutonium with
natural or depleted (0.20.35 wt.%
235
U) uraniumthe
byproduct of the enrichment process. The slender pel-
lets are loaded into thin stainless-steel cladding tubes, and
hence into hexagonal array subassemblies [Fig. 18(a)].
Breeding is optimized by surrounding the mixed-oxide
core witha blanket of depleteduranium. The axial blankets
above and below the core are created by loading pellets
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 10 Calandria vessel and pressure tube of CANDU pressurized heavy-water reactor. [Courtesy of Atomic
Energy of Canada Limited.]
of natural or depleted uranium at either end of the core
fuel pins. The surrounding radial blanket consists of sepa-
rate subassemblies [Fig. 18(b)] of natural or depleted ura-
nium, where the pins may be of larger diameter because
the power density in the blanket is much lower than it is
in the core.
Reactivity control is accomplished through use of poi-
son control rods. Since the breeder produces more fuel
than it uses, however, the multiplication does not decrease
with ssile burnup and ssion product buildup as dramat-
ically as in the converter reactors described previously.
Shutdown, also using control rods, generally depends on
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 11 Fuel assembly for CANDU pressurized heavy-water reactor. [Courtesy of Atomic Energy of Canada
Limited.]
FIGURE 12 Steam cycle for high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR). [Courtesy of Atomic Industrial Forum.]
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 13 Prestressed concrete reactor vessels (PCRV) for (a)
prismatic high-temperature gas-cooled reactor and (b) thorium
high-temperature (pebble-bed) reactor. [Courtesy of Oak Ridge
National Laboratory.]
two redundant sets of rods. Each set operates on a different
physical principle and either set, by itself, can shut down
the chain reaction.
F. Other Reactor Concepts
Althoughthe previous designs are the most popular, a wide
variety of other possibilities have been built for power
production or research purposes. Still others have been
researched on paper. The major approach is to look at
viable combinations of fuel, coolant, and moderator. A
few examples are identied below.
CANDU reactors could also be operated with fuel as-
semblies of enriched uranium, plutonium,
233
U/thorium,
or a mixture thereof. Potential coolants other than heavy
water include light water and organic liquid.
The gas-cooled fast breeder reactor (GCFBR) uses
helium coolant and plutonium fuel in a concept similar
to the HTGR, except with no graphite moderator. The
molten-salt breeder reactor (MSBR) concept includes
liquid fuel that circulates through a graphite-block core
region in a closed primary loop. The fuel is processed
online to remove ssion products and
233
U bred from
thorium in the salt.
Several other novel designs that stress enhanced safety
have also been proposed. Three such concepts are intro-
duced in the next section.
IV. SAFETY FEATURES
Each reactor design incorporates features to respond to
anticipated system upsets and to unlikely, but not incredi-
ble, serious accidents. The major concerns are the poten-
FIGURE 14 Fuel assembly components for high-temperature
gas-cooled reactors: (a) microspheres, (b) prismatic fuel block
[courtesy of GA Technologies], and (c) Fuel sphere (pebble).
[Knief, R. A. (1992). Nuclear Engineering: Theory and Technol-
ogy of Commercial Nuclear Power, 2nd ed., Taylor & Francis/
Hemisphere, New York.]
tial release of radioactive ssion and transuranic-element
products to the environment.
A. Fundamentals
Since dispersal of radioactive products requires energy,
reactor safety is equivalent to reducing and controlling
the energy source. Energy stored in the systems coolant
and fuel as a result of temperatures and pressures during
routine power operation must be accomodated without
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 15 Fuel assembly for a Soviet RBMK pressure-tube
graphite reactor (PTGR). [From, NUREG-1250 (1987).]
causing damage. The unique nuclear energy source, the
ssion chain reaction, must be terminated. Then, the
decay-heat byproduct of ssion product radioactive decay
must be controlled to prevent overheating. If these rst
three energy sources are controlled, the next concern
chemical reactions, primarily between the coolant and
claddingwill also be accommodated. External events,
such as earthquake or tornado, have the potential for initi-
ating an accident, and thus must be incorporated into the
design basis.
Each reactor has design-basis accidents that determine
acceptability in terms of potential radioactive product re-
lease. These are classied roughly in terms of:
1. Reactivity transientsneutron poison changes that
lead to unplanned power increases.
2. Overcoolingexcessive heat removal from steam
withdrawal, perhaps through steam-generator overfeeding
or a steamline break.
3. Loss of coolingfailure of core heat removal ability
through loss of coolant ow, up to and including loss of the
coolant inventory itself [called, respectively, loss of ow
accident (LOFA) and loss of coolant accident (LOCA)].
4. Steam-generator tube rupture.
5. Spent-fuel drops or waste handling spills.
6. External events.
More severe accidents, sometimes referred to as beyond-
design-basis accidents, where multiple safety systems fail
to function, are sometimes considered to evaluate overall
responses.
Safety systems, although often highly design-depen-
dent (e.g., based on design and operational differences
among use of water, gaseous, and liquid sodium coolants),
have as their goal prevention of overheating, fuel melting,
and the subsequent large-scale dispersal of ssion prod-
ucts. Reliability is enhanced through redundancy in sub-
system function and location.
B. Safety Systems
The basic safety systems may be classied according to
function as:
1. reactor trip (RT)
2. emergency core cooling (ECC)
3. postaccident heat removal (PAHR)
4. postaccident radioactivity removal (PARR)
5. containment integrity (CI)
Their basic functions are summarized by Fig. 19 for light-
water reactors. The same basic functions apply to all re-
actor systems, even if in somewhat different form.
1. Reactor Trip
Each of the reactor types described previously includes
neutron poison control rods, which can be inserted rapidly
into the fuel core to shut down the ssion chain reaction.
These rods may be supplemented by secondary means
such as reserve shutdown spheres (HTGR); a redundant,
independent set of rods (LMFBR); or injection of soluble
boric acid poison (LWRs).
2. Emergency Core Cooling
Emergency core cooling for the light-water reactors is
primarily based on injection of (borated) water into the
coolant-starvedcore regionfollowinga LOCAevent. Mul-
tiple trains of separate systems typically can inject water at
high, intermediate, or low pressure to coincide with vari-
ous needs during the time-history and/or magnitude of the
event. Recirculation of coolant that collects in the reactor
building sump provides a long-term coolant supply after
the initial inventories have been exhausted.
The CANDU system also has injection capabilities, al-
though grouping the pressure tubes (Fig. 10) into two sep-
arate ow circuits means that a given break will remove
cooling capability fromonly half of the fuel. The large sep-
arate moderator volume in the calandria vessel provides
additional sink for energy removal.
Emergency cooling in the HTGR design depends pri-
marily on helium retention by the concrete vessel and the
heat capacity of graphite. The LMFBR uses natural cir-
culation of the low-pressure liquid sodiumcoolant, which
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 16 Sectional view of a Soviet pressure-tube graphite reactor (PTGR). [From IAEA Bull. 25(2).]
due to its high boiling temperature would not automati-
cally leave the primary system if a leak were to occur.
3. Postaccident Heat Removal
Removal of postaccident energy consists of two aspects
coolant temperature reduction, and containment-building
pressure control. The rst is accomplished through heat
exchangers for ECC water recirculation in the water reac-
tors. For the gas or liquid-sodium reactors, continued use
of the steam generators can serve a similar function in the
primary coolant loops.
Containment pressure control may be accomplished by
using air coolers or, in water reactors, through water sprays
to condense steam.
4. Postaccident Radioactivity Removal
Radioactive ssion products, primarily chemically ac-
tive iodine and aerosol/particulate constituents, may
be removed by ltration. Noble gases can only be
contained.
Water reactors have provision for containment sprays
to remove radioactivity. Although the water sprays used
for pressure reduction naturally remove some radioactive
material, additives suchas sodiumhydroxide or thiosulfate
increase removal, especially of elemental iodine.
5. Containment Integrity
The last line of defense against ssion product release is
the integrity of the containment structure or building. If
the other systems have functioned as intended, pressure
buildup should not threaten the containment.
A common denominator of containments is a leak-tight
steel liner. In several of the designs, the liner is surrounded
by thick reinforced concrete [including, for example, that
for the pressurized water reactor in Fig. 20 and the struc-
ture of the HTGRs reactor vessel (Fig. 13)]. The lack of
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 17 Steam cycle for liquid metal fast breeder reactor (LMFBR). [Courtesy of Atomic Industrial Forum.]
such a leak-tight containment structure at the Chernobyl
PTGRwas a major contributor tothe serious consequences
of the 1986 accident there.
The other major element of containment integrity is
the ability to isolate penetrations using remotely operated
valves or other means. These typically actuate on prede-
FIGURE 18 Fuel assembly for a typical liquid-metal fast-breeder
reactor. [Courtesy Nuclear Engineering International.] (a) Fuel as-
sembly: 1, pin cladding; 2, slugs of depleted uranium; 3, fuel pel-
lets; 4, wire-wrapped pin; 5, fuel-assembly head; 6, fuel-pin as-
sembly; 7, stem. (b) Radial blanket assembly: 1, pin cladding; 2,
wire-wrapped n; 3, depleted uranium; 4, blanket assembly stem;
5, blanket pin assembly; 6, blanket assembly head.
termined indication of excessive pressure, radiation level,
or other related parameter.
C. Advanced Reactors
Interest inreducingthe riskof serious reactor accidents has
led to consideration of several advanced reactor designs.
Each of the concepts described next includes enhanced
negative power feedback mechanisms (to cause inherent
shutdown) and passive postaccident/postshutdown cool-
ing mechanisms.
The Westinghouse AP600 PWR, featuring large water
tanks above the core, is capable of providing emergency
FIGURE 19 Functions of safety systems for light-water reactors.
[Adapted from WASH-1400, courtesy of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.]
P1: GPA Final Pages
FIGURE 20 Containment structure for typical pressurized water reactor. [Courtesy of Westinghouse Electric
Company.]
cooling water without pumps or electric power. Heat can
be removed fromthe steel containment shell by a gravity-
fed water spray and natural circulation of air.
The process-inherent ultimate safety (PIUS) reactor
concept fromSwedens ASEA-Atomis essentially a PWR
submerged in a large pool of borated water and surrounded
by a massive concrete and steel containment structure. The
hydraulic connection between the primary-loop and pool
coolant volumes prevents intermixing during normal op-
eration. Under accident conditions, however, the borated
pool water enters the primary to assure both shutdown of
the chain reaction and long-term cooling.
GA Technologies modular high-temperature gas-
cooled reactor [MHTGR] has a low-power-density graph-
ite core that provides a large inherent heat sink and is
very slow to overheat. The steel vessel and steam genera-
tor are enclosed in an underground silo cooled by natural
air circulation and, if necessary, direct heat loss to the
ground.
The power reactor inherently safe module [PRISM] is a
small LMFBR being developed by General Electric. Fuel
assemblies are made of a pyrometallurgical alloy used in
the integrated fast reactor (IFR) concept. The IFR fuel
has been tested at the Experimental Breeder Reactor 2
(EBR-2) in Idaho, where feedback alone shut down the
core and natural circulation of the liquid-sodium coolant
provided sufcient decay-heat removal. The PRISM
system is placed in an underground concrete silo where
P1: GPA Final Pages
air can circulate freely to remove core decay heat, if
necessary.
V. REGULATIONS
The inherent hazard associated with the radioactive ma-
terial in reactor systems has led to the industry being
the most regulated in the world. Through regulatory
bodies such as the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion (NRC), French Commissariat ` a lEnergie Atomique
(CEA), Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB) of Canada,
and the United Kingdom Nuclear Installations Inspec-
torate (NII), requirements for reactor design and opera-
tion are established and implementation is evaluated and
monitored. Regulations with the force of law, licenses, or
other methods are developed for reactor operation by such
bodies, often with signicant political and/or public input
to the process.
One increasingly important element of the regulatory
process is quality assurance (QA), focusing on methods
and procedures to assure proper design, construction, and
operation of safety-related components and subsystems.
Another important feature is establishment of acceptable
radiation exposures and identication of design-basis ac-
cidents whose analysis must show them to have conse-
quences within the pre-established limits.
The accident at the Three Mile Island Unit-2 (TMI-2)
PWR in 1979 has led to many changes in the regula-
tory process in the United States and elsewhere in the
world. Some of these changes relate to the design, qual-
ity assurance, and inspection of modications to plant
safety systems; development and use of preapproved
procedures for operation, maintenance, and other activ-
ities; administration, including stafng, training, and doc-
umentation; emergency planning; technical support, in-
cluding accident and root-cause analysis; and support
services such as radiological controls, chemistry, and
maintenance.
The extremely serious 1986 accident at the Chernobyl
Unit 4 occurred in a system not used elsewhere in the
world. However, it did serve to reinforce many of the de-
sign, operations, and management lessons fromthe earlier
TMI-2 accident. It also provided unprecedented insights
into severe-accident behavior and served as a catalyst for
signicantly enhanced international cooperation and col-
laboration in research initiatives and nuclear-power-plant
operation and management.
SEE ALSO THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES
ENERGY RESOURCES AND RESERVES FISSION REAC-
TOR PHYSICS NUCLEAR ENERGY, RISK ANALYSIS NU-
CLEAR FUEL CYCLES NUCLEAR FUSION POWER NU-
CLEAR REACTOR MATERIALS AND FUELS NUCLEAR RE-
ACTOR THEORY NUCLEAR SAFEGUARDS RADIOAC-
TIVE WASTES THERMIONIC ENERGY CONVERSION
URANIUM
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agnew, H. M. (1981). Gas-cooled nuclear power reactors, Sci. Am.
244, 5563.
Catron, J. (1989). Newinterest inpassive reactor designs, EPRI Journal
14(3), 413.
Douglas, J. (1994). Reopening the nuclear option, EPRI J. 19, 617.
Fishetti, M. A. (1987). Inherently safe reactors: Theyd work if wed let
them, IEEE Spectrum 24(4), 2833.
Framatome (1992). P4: The 1300 MWe PWRSeries, Paris, France, April.
Glasstone, S., and Sesonske, A. (1994). Nuclear Reactor Engineering
(Volume 1: Reactor Design Basics & Volume 2: Reactor Systems
Engineering), 4th ed., Chapman & Hall, New York.
Golay, M. W., andTodreas, N. E. (1990). Advancedlight water reactors,
Sci. Am. 262, 8289.
Knief, R. A. (1992). Nuclear Engineering: Theory and Technology of
Commercial Nuclear Power, 2nd ed., Taylor & Francis/Hemisphere,
New York.
Lewis, H. W. (1980). The safety of ssion reactors, Sci. Am. 242, 53
65.
Lish, K. C. (1972). Nuclear Power Plant Systems and Equipment,
Industrial Press, New York.
Marshall, W. (ed.) (1983). Nuclear Power Technology, Volumes 1, 2,
and 3. Clarendon Press, Oxford, England.
McIntyre, M. C. (1975). Natural uranium heavy-water reactors, Sci.
Am. 233, 1727.
Murray, R. L. (1993). Nuclear Energy, 4th ed., Pergamon Press,
Elmsford, NY.
Nero, A. V., Jr. (1979). A Guidebook to Nuclear Reactors, University
of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Nuclear Engineering International (published monthly in the United
Kingdom; includes annual World Nuclear Handbook).
Nuclear Engineering International Special Publications (1989). French
PWR Technology.
(1992). Special section: The new reactors, Nuclear News 35, 6590.
Rahn, F. J., et al. (1984). AGuide to Nuclear Power Technology, Wiley-
Interscience, New York.
Reactor Safety Study: An Assessment of Risks in U.S. Commercial
Nuclear Power Plants. (1975). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
WASH-1400 (NUREG-74/014), Washington, DC.
Sesonske, A. (1973). Nuclear Power Plant Design Analysis, U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission, TID-26241, Washington, DC.
Severe Accident Risks: An Assessment for Five U.S. Nuclear Plants
(1989). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1150,
Washington, DC.
Todreas, N. E., and Kazimi, M. S. (1990). Nuclear Systems (Vol. 1:
Thermal Hydraulic Fundamentals and Vol. 2: Elements of Thermal
Hydraulic Design), Taylor & Francis/Hemisphere, New York.
U.S. Department of Energy (1987). Overall Plant design descriptions
VVER Water-Cooled, Water-Moderated Energy Reactor, DOE/NE-
0084, Rev. 1, October.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1987). Report on the Accident at
the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station, NUREG-1250, Rev. 1.
Vendryes, G. A. (1977). Superphenix: Afull-scale breeder reactor, Sci.
Am. 236, 2635.

Nuclear Power Reactors

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Nuclear Power Reactors

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

P1: GPA Final Pages Qu: 00, 00, 00, 00

C 227 289 187 188 345/235

C 285 322 260 513 525/487

C), typical of fossil-fueled plants, thus are not

Вам также может понравиться