Fundamentals of Nuclear Power Generation. Basics of VVER Technology

Rosatom State Atomic Energy Coproration & National Research Nuclear University “MEPhI”
Course:
Fundamentals of Modern Russian designed
NPP with VVER 1200 power reactor
Module 2: Engineering fundamentals of nuclear power generation.

Basics of VVER technology
Prepared by: Anton Diachenko

Reviewed by: Vladimir Artisyuk
Based on materials prepared by: Rosatom Technical Academy (RosatomTech)
May, 2019
NPP with VVER 1200 power reactor > 2. Engineering fundamentals of nuclear power generation. Basics of VVER technology

NPP with VVER 1200 power reactor
2. Engineering fundamentals of nuclear power generation. Basics of VVER technology
The terminal training objectives of the second part of the course are as follows: first, the
physical aspects of nuclear fuel burnup are discussed—this is one of the main character-
istics of reactor performance from the viewpoint of economic efficiency and many other
factors. Second, main specific features of VVER technology are described in comparison
with the western type reactor (PWR).
The corresponding enabling training objec- The following topics are covered in this part of the course:
tives are:
1. structural materials of nuclear power reactors;
t o describe the mechanism of nuclear
2. the concept of fuel burnup;
fuel burnup;
3. plutonium accumulation in nuclear power reactor;
t o identify the contribution of urani-
um and plutonium to energy release 4. basics of safe operation of nuclear power reactors:
in a power reactor; relativity effects;
t o describe the reactivity coefficients 5.
comparison of specific characteristics of VVER technolo-
and their relation to safety; gy versus pressurized water reactors (PWR) technology;
t o list distinguishing features of 6. advanced nuclear fuel types for nuclear power reactors
VVER technology vs PWR technology. in Russia.
2
2.1. Structural materials of nuclear power reactors
There is a great variety of nuclear power reactors (NPR), but it is not dif-
ficult to classify them, because, as mentioned in the previous section of
the course, the main components of reactors are moderators and fuel. So,
the classification of NPRs is based on the combination of the quality of
moderator and quality of the fuel. These combinations are presented in
Table 2.1.1.
Characteristics
Characteristics of fuel
of moderator
Low neutron capture Natural uranium U-235:
(heavy water D2O) content 0.7%
Medium neutron capture
Enriched uranium U-235: content 2%
(graphite)
High neutron capture
Enriched uranium U-235: content 3-5%
(light water H2O)
Table 2.1.1. Combinations of fuel and moderator.
3
As mentioned in section 1.5, heavy water (deu-

terium oxide) has the lowest neutron capture
cross-section. Since neutron capture in heavy wa-
ter is not so intensive, natural uranium could be
used as fuel. The combination of heavy water and
natural uranium with uranium-235 content of
about 0.7% is implemented in the Canadian-type
reactor CANDU (Canada Deuterium Uranium).
The second combination of moderator and fuel
uses graphite, which has medium neutron capture
cross-section. Medium cross-section means that
the content of uranium-235 has to be increased,
or in other words, uranium has to be enriched.
For medium neutron capture graphite moder-
ation, the enrichment of uranium is usually ex-
pected to reach the level of several percent (about
2%). This combination was implemented in
RBMK-type reactors, which are used in Russia.
The most popular type of reactor uses general wa-
ter as moderator—PWR (pressurized water reac-
tor); VVER (or WWER: water-cooled water-moder-
ated energy reactor) is among them. High neutron
capture of general water requires an increase of
the uranium-235 content to about 3-5%.
This is the whole spectrum of possible reactors
which are commercially used in the world, de-
pending on the quality of moderator and as a con-
sequence, the quality of fuel in terms of enrich-
ment. Figure 2.1.1. Heterogeneous reactor:
fuel is separated from moderator.
4
On selection of fuel form (radiation induced swelling) es. The change of the structure might lead to destruction
of the material, in which case there is a possibility for
radioactive materials and fission products to escape nu-
clear reactor and to move into the environment. This is
why structural materials of the reactor are very import-
ant from the viewpoint of technology. Physics of NPRs is
clear and simple, but not many countries, even possess-
ing the knowledge of nuclear physics, can implement the
technology. There are only six nuclear technology ven-
dors in the world. So, technology, and the form of struc-
tural materials in particular, is of high importance.
Figure 2.1.2. Irradiation-induced growth of a uranium rod:

upper rod – after irradiation, lower – before. (From A. N. Holden,
Physical Metallurgy of Uranium, © 1958, Addison-Wesley, Reading,
Massachusetts, Fig.11-1. Reprinted with permission.)
Figure 2.1.2 illustrates uranium fuel in two conditions.

The lower rod has a clean cylindrical shape: this is ura-
nium metal before irradiation. The upper rod is shaped
drastically differently from the lower: it is the same fuel
rod but after irradiation in the reactor. The form and the
volume of the fuel element has changed.
Metal uranium has to be treated very carefully in the re-
actor. If the volume changes, the whole structure chang- Figure 2.1.3. A diagram of the fission process.
5
Main structural elements of NPRs The structure of a reactor is shown in Figure 2.1.4.
Fuel pellet is the heart of energy release. In modern
reactors, for example in pressurized water reactors
(PWRs) and VVERs, uranium pellets are made not
from metallic uranium but from uranium dioxide,
which has been experimentally and technologically
proven to be a more suitable form of uranium fuel. A
fuel pellet is about 1 cm high and 1 cm in diameter.
Fuel pellets are put in a so-called fuel rod, fuel rods
are combined into a fuel assembly (fuel element in
Figure 2.1.4), fuel assemblies are combined to form
a reactor core. The reactor core is then placed into
a reactor vessel, which is the vital center of nuclear
power plants. Fuel pellet, fuel rod, fuel assembly (el-
ement), reactor core, and reactor vessel are the main
components of the reactor structure.
Figure 2.1.5. Fresh fuel pellets.

Figure 2.1.4. Main structural elements of NPR.
6
2.2. Concept of fuel burnup

Fuel burnup
Fuel burnup is the main process influencing the reactor eco-

nomic efficiency and waste management technology. The basic
diagram of the process is presented in Figure 2.2.1.
Figure 2.2.1. The process of fuel burnup.

At first, there is a fresh fuel pellet before irradiation. The sec-
ond fuel pellet has two flashes marked in yellow illustrating
Figure 2.1.6. Fuel pellets after irradiation. two fission reactions. The third pellet has different yellow
flashes—these are fission reactions propagated in the chain
Figures 2.1.5 and 2.1.6 illustrate the effect of reaction—and several blue flashes in the places where fission
irradiation on fuel pellets. During and after reaction has already occurred. Finally, the spent fuel pellet has
irradiation, the structure of the fuel pellet many blue flashes, which means it has been irradiated in the
is dramatically changed: both shown pellets reactor, and fission reaction occurred inside.
have fissures and the one on the left has a hole
inside. This structural change should not af-
fect the fuel element coating (cladding). Oth- E = 200 MeV/fission
erwise, radioactive material might move into
reactor moderator, then into reactor coolant, The energy release from the fuel can be easily estimated con-
and finally into the environment. sidering the fact that one fission produces about 200 MeV.
7
As discussed in section 2.1, fuel rods can change their shapes

during and after irradiation. The same process occurs in fuel
pellets, illustrated in Figure 2.2.2. The goal is to prevent
1 Wt ≈ 3.1 × 1010 fissions/sec the interaction of the swelling fuel pellet with the coat-
ing (cladding). Initially, solid fission products have density
E = P × t, where E denotes energy, p – power, t – time. lower than uranium, which inevitably leads to the process of
swelling. During irradiation, gas (Xe – xenon, Kr – krypton)
fission products are produced beside solid fission products,
, which increases pressure inside the fuel. The combination
where HM denotes heavy metals (fuel). of swelling and gas pressure in the fuel is the main techno-
logical parameter that needs to be controlled to prevent ra-
In continuously irradiated fuel, the energy release might be dioactivity release in the moderator and into environment.
expressed in megawatts (MWt) times days divided by kilo- The higher the fuel burnup, the higher the fuel swelling and
grams of heavy metals, which is exactly fuel burnup—how the higher the probability of fuel-cladding interaction.
much energy can be extracted from a unit of fuel material.
The higher the fuel burnup, 1) the more energy is produced
from the fuel, 2) the more plutonium is produced in the
fuel (plutonium production is discussed later), and 3) the
more radioactive the spent fuel is. Highly radioactive spent
fuel is more difficult to operate with.
Fuel swelling
Figure 2.2.3. Trends in fuel burnup for different types of reactors.
Fuel burnup is different from reactor to reactor. Figure 2.2.3

is originally taken from Nuclear Technology Review, the doc-
Figure 2.2.2. Fuel-cladding contact, where Bcr denotes ument which is annually published in the International Atom
the critical level of fuel burnup.
8
ic Energy Agency (IAEA). The graph illustrates the evolution

of fuel burnup characteristics starting from 1970s until 2005.
The general trend for pressurized water reactors (PWR), boil-
ing water reactors (BWR), and VVER is to increase fuel burnup.
The higher the burnup, the more energy can be extracted and
the more cost-effective the energy production is. The general
numbers for the burnup are: in PWR the reasonably achieved
level of fuel burnup is about 40 gigawatt-day per tonne of
heavy metal (GWD/t). For BWR, the level is slightly lower than
for PWR. VVER has again a slightly lower level of burnup. The
level of burnup in other types of reactors, like CANDU (PHWR)
and RBMK, is distinctly lower.
Composition of spent fuel
Figure 2.2.5. Minor actinides production.
The burnup also influences the composition of the fuel. When

fresh fuel is put in the reactor, it consists—in terms of heavy
metals—only of uranium, uranium-238 and uranium-235.
The uranium-235 fraction is roughly several percent. After
irradiation, the portion of uranium-235 in the spent fuel is
less than initial, because it is the most fissionable material
in the reactor. Due to neutron capture in uranium-238, there
is accumulation of heavy nuclides, such as plutonium (Pu),
and minor actinides (MA); fission products (FP) are produced
as a result. So, in the spent fuel, the main components are:
uranium with reduced fraction of uranium-235, accumulated
plutonium, minor actinides, and fission products. Figure 2.2.5
presents a scheme of minor actinides production through
Figure 2.2.4. Composition of the fresh and the spent fuel. neutron capture.
9
2.3. Plutonium accumulation in nuclear reactor Plutonium accumulation as a function of burnup
Plutonium
Figure 2.3.2. Plutonium accumulation as a function of fuel burnup.

Figure 2.3.1. Cross-sections of plutonium-239 and uranium-235; fissile prop-
erties of plutonium-239 are superior compared to uranium-235.
Plutonium is accumulated and fissioned in the reac-
Apart from being used for weapons manufacturing, proverbial tor. It is interesting to note that composition of plu-
plutonium is also accumulated in reactors. It is worth com- tonium in spent fuel is: plutonium-238 – about 1.5%,
paring plutonium-239 with uranium-235. In Figure 2.3.1, plutonium-239 – about 60%, and other plutonium
two basic characteristics of these nuclides are shown: fission isotopes (Pu-240, Pu-241, Pu-242). Remarkably, only
cross-section and capture cross-section. For both plutoni- one isotope of plutonium is used in nuclear weap-
um-239 and uranium-235, fission cross-section dominates ons—plutonium-239. Nuclear reactor, however, pro-
capture cross-section over the whole energy range. Plutoni- duces a composition of isotopes. These isotopes (plu-
um-239 is an excellent fissile material. Importantly, the differ- tonium-238, plutonium-240) drastically decrease the
ence between fission cross-section and capture cross-section attractiveness of the produced plutonium for nuclear
in high energies for plutonium-239 is preferable to the same weapon technology. Which means that civil plutoni-
characteristic for uranium-235 from the viewpoint of propaga- um accumulated in nuclear reactors is not so danger-
tion of chain reaction. So, fissile properties of plutonium-239 ous in terms of proliferation of nuclear materials. It
are superior compared to uranium-235. Accumulated plutoni- can be used, and it is used, for energy release inside
um in the reactor undergoes fission inside the reactor itself. the reactor.
10
2.4. Basics of safe operation of nuclear power Next, nuclear properties of the fuel which affect safety are
discussed. The main characteristic for the safety assessment
reactors: reactivity effects of a reactor is the neutron multiplication factor (NMF), which
was covered in section 1.5. If NMF is higher than unity, chain
reaction intensifies; special care should be taken to control it.
Reactor stability is achieved at the level when NMF is equal
to unity. So, the difference between NMF and unity (k – 1)—
called excess multiplication—has special meaning.
Fractional excess multiplication is excess multiplication divided
by MNF: (k – 1)/k. The same parameter could be called reactiv-
ity, which might be more intuitively understandable. Reactiv-
ity is a dimensionless quantity that characterizes propagation
of fission chain reaction in the reactor core.
ρ = (k – 1) / k = k / k
The higher the reactivity, the more intensive the fission reac-
tion is in the reactor. If the reactivity is lower, the reactor could
be shut down. All safety parameters are affected by reactivity.
Figure 2.4.1. Neutron multiplication factor and chain reaction. Figure 2.4.2. Modes of reactor operation in terms of reactivity.
11
If the reactor is in stable operation, NMF is equal to unity, Figure 2.4.3 illustrates the resonance in capture cross-sec-
reactivity at this moment is zero. If the level power in the tion of uranium-238. Temperature T1 is sharply peaked. If
reactor is increased, NMF exceeds unity and reactivity be- the temperature is increased, the form is changed, and the
comes positive. If the reactor is shut down, NMF is reduced area below the curve becomes larger. The larger the area,
to a level less than unity and reactivity is negative. In terms the more neutrons are to be captured. In other words, the
of safety, positive reactivity is dangerous, zero reactivity is temperature is increased in the fuel, neutron capture in
optimal, and negative reactivity is an indicator of reactor uranium-238 is increased, and the reactivity is decreased.
shutdown. Importantly, DC should be negative in order for the reactor
to be operated in safe and stable manner.
Doppler coefficient (DC) To summarize, temperature increases, neutron capture in-
creases, reactivity decreases. If something uncontrolled
Safety of reactors is estimated in terms of reactivity effects, happens in the reactor, increased temperature presents the
the most important of which are discussed in the following most danger. If the temperature increases, there is a prob-
sections. The first reactivity effect is the Doppler coefficient ability of the fuel melting and of radioactivity release in the
(DC). DC influences reactivity due to the temperature effect environment. But the reactor works in the opposite man-
on neutron capture. DC is the change in reactivity per de- ner: if the temperature increases, neutron capture increas-
gree change in fuel temperature: es, and the reactor shuts down by itself. This phenomenon
is called inherent safety: the reactor shuts down by itself
where T2 > T1 and T denotes fuel temperature. due to Doppler effect.
Moderator temperature coefficient (MTC)
Another important characteristic for safety of the reactor is

the moderator temperature coefficient (MTC). This effect is
again explained in terms of cross-section.
where T denotes moderator tempera-

ture.
Moderator temperature coefficient (MTC) is the change in
reactivity per degree change in moderator temperature. It
Figure 2.4.3. Capture cross-section of uranium-238. should be negative.
12
the water leads to a drastic increase in pressure. This fact

should be taken into account when choosing structure
materials.
Figure 4.2.4. MTC effect explained via cross-section.

As seen in Figure 4.2.4, the higher the temperature, the Figure 4.2.5. Change of the void volume in the reactor.
higher velocity of neutrons in moderator. If a neutron Reactor void coefficient (VC) in terms of reactivity is de-
increases its energy and velocity, fission cross-section fined as the change of reactivity for two different densi-
is reduced. Moderator temperature increasesmoder- ties per percent change in void volume:
ator density decreases moderator efficiency decreas-
esneutron energy increases the number of fissions
drops. So, reactivity decreases and the reactor is again in where γ denotes atom
a stable condition. Nuclear power reactor is rather dif- density, the number atoms per unit volume.
ferent from nuclear weapon: it can shut down by itself if Importantly, when the void fraction is increased, the
something uncontrolled happens inside. number of atoms per unit of volume of moderator is de-
creased, the moderation effect is reduced, and all phe-
nomena mentioned above affecting the chain reaction
Void coefficient (VC) propagation are in favor of reactor shutdown.
As mentioned before, an unexpected temperature in- Values of reactivity coefficients (fresh fuel)
crease presents the most danger during reactor opera-
tion. If, due to some effect, water from the reactor comes Typical values of the reactivity coefficients for fresh fuel
out of the reactor, the temperature of rest of the water in (UO2 fuel with 5% of uranium-238) in the Russian reac-
the reactor increases, and the water might boil. Boiling of tor VVER-1000 are shown below.
13
2.5. Comparison of specific characteristics

of VVER vs PWR
In this section, the main differences between Russian (VVER)

and western PWR technology are discussed. Table 2.5.1 pres-
ents general characteristics for a variety of reactors. At the bot-
tom of the table, there is a comparison between PWR (western
type) and VVER (Russian type).
The numbers are the same for the AES-2006 de- Reactor Fuel Fuel rod Typical
sign. Doppler coefficient is negative, moderator Enrichment
type material cladding1 assembly
temperature coefficient is negative, void coeffi-
cient is negative. All effects of reactivity are re- Circular ar-
Stainless ray of pins
quired to be not positive by the safety standards AGR UO2 2-4%
steel in graphite
of the International Atomic Energy Agency. They sleeve
are negative in the case of VVER, which is a good
inherent safety parameter of VVER technology. BWR UO2 Zircaloy-2 Square array Up to 4.95%
Magnox U metal Magnox alloy - Natural
RBMK UO2 E110, E635 Circular array Up to 2.8%
Circular
PHWR UO2 Zircaloy-4 Natural
bundle
PWR UO2 Zircaloy-4 Square array Up to 4.95%
Hexagonal
VVER UO2 E110, E635 Up to 4.95%
array
Table 2.5.1. General characteristics of various reactors.

Source: Nuclear Technology Review published in 2007 by the International
Atomic Energy Agency.
1 Z
ircaloy-2 and -4 are alloys of zirconium with about 1.5% tin as the main alloying
element. Magnox alloy is magnesium with about 1% aluminium or zirconium.
Both E110 and E635 are alloys of zirconium with about 1% niobium.
14
The difference is mostly terminological—the physics swelling of the fuel pellet occurs, the resulting pressure
is the same in both types. Uranium, structural materi- moves fuel material inside the pellet. So, fuel pellets
als, neutrons are the same and have no nationality. Fuel play the role of stabilizer of the swelling from a certain
material is uranium dioxide in both reactors. Fuel rod point of view. There is another reason: since the tem-
cladding in western-type reactor is Zircaloy; in Russian perature maximum is reached in the center of fuel pellets
type reactor, it is E110, E635. Another difference is in during the unfavorable transient condition of the reactor,
the typical assembly arrangement: a square array in the the probability of fuel melting is lower for the Russian
western-type reactor and a hexagonal array in the Rus- type of fuel than for the western type. Russian engineers
sian-type. Enrichment is the same, up to 4.95%. So, the were focused on safety from the very beginning of reac-
difference between two technologies is in the choice and tor technology development. As was mentioned in section
selection of structural materials. 2.2, fuel burnup is the most important reactor character-
istic from the viewpoint of economic efficiency. PWRs are
preferable if only fuel burnup is considered: their level of
burnup is higher. In Russian-type reactors, fuel burnup is
lower because there is less fuel in fuel pellets. On the one
hand, holes in fuel pellets reduce fuel mass and conse-
quently, fuel burnup—but improve safety characteristics
on the other hand. The balance of safety and economic ef-
ficiency should always be considered very carefully. Rus-
sian engineers give fuel safety larger weight in this case.
Figure 2.5.1. Fuel pellets in VVER vs PWR.

Figures 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 illustrate these differences. Figure
2.5.1 shows the specifics of fuel pellets: in Russian-type
reactors, there is a central hole in the pellet, while in the
western-type there is no hole. The reason for the hole
in the design of Russian fuel pellets is as follows. When Figure 2.5.2. Specifics of fuel assemblies.
15
Figure 2.5.2 illustrates another difference between the re- is water in a cooling pool near the reactor. Special care
actors: the western-type square arrangement of the fuel should be taken with the purity of the water. From the
element on the right side and the Russian-type hexagonal viewpoint of resistance to corrosion, Russian-type reac-
arrangement on the left side. Also pictured are VVER fuel tors are preferable. This technological feature of spent
pellets with a hole inside. fuel management in Russian-type reactors is advanta-
geous, especially for potential newcomer countries.
Specifics of VVER cladding
Test
Specimen Material Mechanical test
Zirconium is the main component in the fuel coating ma- temperature
terial for both PWR and VVER. This material has a very low 1 Zr-1%Nb-O Internal 350ОС
neutron capture. The cladding is made from either Zir- pressure
caloy for PWR or Russian types of alloys (E110, E635) for 2 Zy-4 350ОС
VVER. Figure 2.5.3 and Table 2.5.2 present the results of Internal
experimental investigation of these materials, published 3 M5TM pressure 350ОС
in an American journal in 2005, which demonstrate that
Internal
zirconium-niobium alloy (Zr-1%Nb-O) in VVER is more
pressure
resistant to oxidation than Zircaloy in PWR. After irra-
diation, spent fuel is taken from the reactor and put in C Zr-1%Nb-O Internal 350ОС
some substance in order to cool it. Usually, the substance pressure
D Zy-4 350ОС
Internal
H M5TM pressure 350ОС
Internal
pressure (stress
relaxation at E =
0.8%)
Table 2.5.2. Mechanical strain test conditions for different types of al-
loys. Source: F. Onimus et al. Plastic deformation of irradiated Zirco-
nium alloys: TEM Investigations and Micro-Mechanical Modelling, J.
of ASTM International, Vol. 2, 2005.
Extensive tests and over 20 years of experience proved the safe
Figure 2.5.3. Mechanical strain test results for different types operation of cladding made of 1%Nb zirconium alloy E110 at
of alloys. Denotation available in Table 2.5.2. temperatures below 350 ºC. It has been detected that this val
16
ue is the lowest temperature for structural changes in ma-

terial. Below 350 ºC there is no evidence of plastic defor-
mation or any other mechanical phenomena. To improve
plastic deformation resistance, the E635 alloy (1% Nb,
1.5% Sn, 0.5% Fe) was introduced in 2000.
Evolution of VVER fuel. Three major leaps
Figure 2.5.5. Fuel assembly evolution.

Figure 2.5.5 shows that recent levels of fuel burnup in
VVER reach 68 MW-day per kg of fuel inside the element.
That is a high value and Russian fuel manufacturers are
Figure 2.5.4. Evolution of VVER fuel. proud of it.
Figure 2.5.4 shows the evolution of the Russian type of
fuel used in VVER. There were three major steps in the de- Specifics of reactor vessel
velopment of the Russian fuel assemblies. TVS-A, which
was recently introduced by Afrikantov OKBM company, Another interesting point in the comparison of Russian
has more fuel inside the fuel element, resulting in more and western technology is the reactor vessel differences.
fuel inside the fuel assembly and consequently, higher Table 2.5.3 summarizes fuel vessel parameters of various
fuel burnup. So, step by step Russian technology, espe- designs: AP1000, VVER-1200 (AES-2006), APR-1400,
cially fuel fabrication technology, approaches the high EPR-1600.
values of fuel burnup.
17
Parameters AP1000 VVER- APR- EPR- As could be seen in Table 2.5.3, reactor vessels have different
1200 1400 1600 weights, masses, and heights. One of the most important char-
acteristics, however, is the specific weight of the reactor, i.e.
the mass of the material divided by the installed power capac-
ity. The Russian design has the lowest, and best, value of this
Total height, 11,185 characteristic. It is an achievement of Russian material science
12,056 14,800 13,083 which is actually a technological necessity. In western coun-
inside, mm (outside)
tries, nuclear power plants are usually constructed on the sea-
Inner diam- shore, so reactor vessel is transported to the place of construc-
eter of cylin- tion by sea. This type of transportation is not restricted by the
4,039 4,250 4,655 4,870
drical shell, reactor size. In Russia, NPPs are mostly built inland, because
mm population density on the shore is not so high. Reactor vessel
Wall thick- has to be transported by railroad, which imposes limitations
ness of cy- on reactor size. This is the reason why Russian engineers con-
203 197.5 284 250 centrated on high quality materials and achieved best results in
lindrical
shell, mm terms of material arrangement for reactor vessels.
Design Factors influencing reactor vessel design include: neutron flu-
pressure, 17.2 17.6 17.2 17.6 ence, mechanical and thermo-mechanical load, long-term ex-
MPa posure of the base material to high temperatures.
Design
temperature, 343.3 350 343.3 351
°C
Transport
340 330 573 520
weight, t
Specific
weight, t/ 0.34 0.28 0.41 0.32
MW
Table 2.5.3. Main parameters of reactor vessels.

Source: Markov S.I., JSC “RPA “CNIITMASH”.
Steel grades 15Kh2NMFA, 15Kh2NMFA, 15Kh2NMFA-A Figure 2.5.6. Reactor pressure vessel shell of VVER. Base material:
Class 1 for reactor VVER-TOI. Steel 15H2NMFA mod.cl.1. Source: www.nuclear.ru/news/96219/.
18
Specifics of design (vertical vs horizontal steam generator)
Figure 2.5.7. Vertical vs horizontal steam generators.
Another distinguishing point of VVER technology is the arrangement of steam generator. Figure 2.5.7 illustrates
the layouts of EPR, APR, and VVER reactors. As seen in the diagrams, VVER steam generators have horizontal ar-
rangement. In EPR and APR, the arrangement is vertical. From the viewpoint of neutronics and nuclear physics,
it does not make any difference; technologically, the difference is huge.
19
Reactor Vessel Head

NPP Country Supplier Connection to Grid SG Replacement
Replacement
Switzerland
BEZNAU-1, 2 WH 1969, 1971 2007, - 1993, 1999
USA
R.E. GINNA WH 1969 2003 1996
Japan
MIHAMA-1, 2 WH 1970, 1972 2001, 2000 1996, 1994
USA
POINT BEACH-1, 2 WH 1970, 1972 2005, 2005 1983, 1996,
USA
H.B. ROBINSON-2 WH 1970 2005 1984
USA
PALISADES CE 1971 Never 1990
Russia
NOVOVORONEZH-3, 4 Gidropress 1971, 1972 Never Never
USA
TURKEY POINT-3, 4 WH 1972, 1973 2004, 2005 1981, 1982
USA
SURRY-1, 2 WH 1972, 1973 2003, 2003 1981, 1980
USA
OCONEE-1, 2, 3 B&W 1973, 1973, 1974 2003, 2004, 2003 2003, 2004, 2005
USA
FORT CALHOUN-1 CE 1973 2006 2006
Table 2.5.4. Oldest NPPs with PWR (connection to the grid 1969 to 1975). The issue of steam generators. Source: www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1337_web.pdf
20
Reactor Vessel Head

NPP Country Supplier Connection to Grid SG Replacement
Replacement
Netherlands
BORSSELE S/KWU 1973 Never Never
USA
PRAIRIE ISLAND-1, 2 WH 1973, 1974 2007, 2005 2004, 2013
Russia
KOLA-1, 2 Gidropress 1973, 1974 Never Never
USA
KEWAUNEE WH 1974 2004 2001
USA
INDIAN POINT-2 WH 1973 - 2000
USA
THREE MILE ISLAND-1 B&W 1974 2003 2009
Japan
TAKAHAMA-1 WH/MHI 1974 1996 1996
USA
ARKANSAS ONE-1 B&W 1974 2005 2005
Belgium
DOEL-1 ACECOWEN 1974 - 2009
Germany
BIBLIS-A (KWB A) KWU 1974 Never Never
Sweden
RINGHALS-2 WH 1974 1996 1989
Table 2.5.4. Oldest NPPs with PWR (connection to the grid 1969 to 1975). The issue of steam generators. Source: www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1337_web.pdf
21
Table 2.5.4 presents statistical information about the oldest The main distinguishing features between VVER and PWR
nuclear power plants with PWRs and VVERs installed, connect- technology are summarized in Figure 2.5.8. In particular:
ed to the grid between 1969 and 1975. The majority of NPPs
suffered from the very expensive operation of steam generator
1. Fuel
element cladding (Zr-Nb alloy) is more re-
replacement. Steam generators are extremely vulnerable ele-
sistant to oxidation in VVER technology.
ments of NPPs. So, the majority of them were replaced—ex-
cept for steam generators in the Novovoronezh and Kola NPPs 2. Central
holes in VVER fuel pellets make them
(Russia) and ones in Germany and Netherlands. The results more stable during beyond design-basis acci-
are qualitatively clear: Russian steam generators are prefera- dents (BDBA).
ble compared to PWRs in terms of replacement frequency.
3. Hexagonal
fuel assembly arrangement in VVER
leads to uniformity of neutronics parameters.
Main distinguishing features
4. Material
for VVER reactor pressure vessel has
low specific weight, which is preferable from the
viewpoint of transportation.
5. Horizontal
steam generators have larger coolant
inventory, better natural circulation, and very
good economic efficiency characteristics.
Remarkably, the first in the world core catcher—

special equipment for controlling severe accidents—
was installed in a Russian-type NPP built in China.
The equipment for localization of corium (ELC) has
been developed to ensure safety control in case of
low-probable severe core melt accidents. The first
NPPs to install this equipment were: Tianwan NPP in
China and Kudankulam NPP in India, which is being
constructed. Currently, many countries consider core
catcher a critical element for ensuring safe perfor-
mance of NPP. But the first one was installed in the
Figure 2.5.8. Main distinguishing features of VVER vs PWR. Russian-type NPP.
22
2.6. Advanced nuclear fuel types for nuclear

power reactors in Russia
Fuel based on reprocessed materials
Section 2.5 covered the main differences between the Rus-

sian-type and western-type technology in terms of materi-
al arrangement. Section 2.6 concerns another distinguishing
characteristic of the Russian approach to potential markets.
A lot of attention is paid to developing new types of fuel by
Russian physicists and engineers, which led to successful use
of not only reprocessed uranium, but new REMIX fuel. Repro-
cessed uranium (RepU) is uranium extracted from spent nu-
clear fuel (SNF) during radiochemical processing, mixed with a
portion of enriched uranium, and returned back to the fuel cy-
cle to save the uranium resources. This technology is currently
used in Russia: reprocessed uranium is taken from VVERs and
used in RBMK-type reactors.
Figure 2.5.9. A scheme of the corium localization equipment Figure 2.6.1. Nuclear fuel cycles based on reprocessed materials:
and its installation at Taiwan NPP. enriched reprocessed uranium (ERU) cycle vs REMIX cycle.
23
REMIX fuel is a non-separated mixture of uranium and

plutonium from LWR (light water reactors) SNF repro-
cessing, with addition of enriched uranium (natural or
reprocessed).
Recently, Russian scientists succeeded in experimen-

tal use of so-called REMIX fuel, which is a regenerated
mixture of uranium and plutonium accumulated in the
reactor. REMIX fuel utilizes advantageous properties of
plutonium-239, which is accumulated and fissioned in
the reactor. Importantly, the portion of plutonium-238
in the new fuel is increased compared to conventional
fuel. And plutonium-238 is very difficult to separate from
plutonium-239. It is absolutely impossible to make a nu-
clear weapon from this kind of reactor-grade plutonium.
Russia is considering entering new markets, especially
in newcomer countries, with this type of advanced fuel. Figure 2.6.2. Comparison of LEU, MOX, and REMIX nuclear fuels.
Reactivity Beginning of cycle End of cycle

coefficients UOX MOX REMIX UOX MOX REMIX
DC, pcm -1.831 -2.520 -2.603 -1.042 -1.745 -1.300
MTC, pcm -14.510 -22.76 -15.44 -2.154 -0.778 -1.898
VC, pcm/% -173.608 -135.583 -234.537 -149.665 -82.889 -131.69
Table 2.6.1. Reactivity coefficients of UOX, MOX, and REMIX fuels in VVER.
Table 2.6.1 presents reactivity coefficients, which are very important for reactor safety performance. The Doppler coefficient (DC),
moderator temperature coefficient (MTC), and void coefficient (VC) are calculated for three types of fuel: uranium dioxide con-
ventional type (UOX), a mixture of plutonium oxide and uranium dioxide (MOX), and REMIX fuel. In the beginning and in the end
of the irradiation cycle, all reactivity coefficients are negative. Therefore, reactor operation is considered to be safe.
24
History of implementation
Figure 2.6.3 illustrates the

evolution of VVER technology.
It started in 1964 in Novovo-
ronezh NPP in Russia. After
Russia, eastern Germany was
interested in using VVER—it
was the second country to im-
plement VVER technology. And
step by step, we have reached
the new AES-2006 design,
which is considered to be ref-
erence technology for many
international customers, in-
cluding newcomer countries.
25

Fundamentals of Nuclear Power Generation. Basics of VVER Technology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fundamentals of Nuclear Power Generation. Basics of VVER Technology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fundamentals of Nuclear Power Generation. Basics of VVER Technology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rosatom State Atomic Energy Coproration & National Research Nuclear University “MEPhI”

Module 2: Engineering fundamentals of nuclear power generation.

Prepared by: Anton Diachenko

Fundamentals of Modern Russian designed

2.1. Structural materials of nuclear power reactors

Table 2.1.1. Combinations of fuel and moderator.

As mentioned in section 1.5, heavy water (deu-

Figure 2.1.2. Irradiation-induced growth of a uranium rod:

Figure 2.1.2 illustrates uranium fuel in two conditions.

Figure 2.1.5. Fresh fuel pellets.

2.2. Concept of fuel burnup

Fuel burnup is the main process influencing the reactor eco-

Figure 2.2.1. The process of fuel burnup.

As discussed in section 2.1, fuel rods can change their shapes

Figure 2.2.3. Trends in fuel burnup for different types of reactors.

Fuel burnup is different from reactor to reactor. Figure 2.2.3

ic Energy Agency (IAEA). The graph illustrates the evolution

Composition of spent fuel

Figure 2.2.5. Minor actinides production.

The burnup also influences the composition of the fuel. When

2.3. Plutonium accumulation in nuclear reactor Plutonium accumulation as a function of burnup

Figure 2.3.2. Plutonium accumulation as a function of fuel burnup.

Moderator temperature coefficient (MTC)

Another important characteristic for safety of the reactor is

where T denotes moderator tempera-

the water leads to a drastic increase in pressure. This fact

Figure 4.2.4. MTC effect explained via cross-section.

2.5. Comparison of specific characteristics

In this section, the main differences between Russian (VVER)

Table 2.5.1. General characteristics of various reactors.

Figure 2.5.1. Fuel pellets in VVER vs PWR.

ue is the lowest temperature for structural changes in ma-

Evolution of VVER fuel. Three major leaps

Figure 2.5.5. Fuel assembly evolution.

Table 2.5.3. Main parameters of reactor vessels.

Specifics of design (vertical vs horizontal steam generator)

Figure 2.5.7. Vertical vs horizontal steam generators.

Reactor Vessel Head

Reactor Vessel Head

Remarkably, the first in the world core catcher—

2.6. Advanced nuclear fuel types for nuclear

Fuel based on reprocessed materials

Section 2.5 covered the main differences between the Rus-

REMIX fuel is a non-separated mixture of uranium and

Recently, Russian scientists succeeded in experimen-

Reactivity Beginning of cycle End of cycle

Figure 2.6.3 illustrates the

You might also like

Module 2: Engineering fundamentals of nuclear power generation.

2.1. Structural materials of nuclear power reactors

2.5. Comparison of specific characteristics

2.6. Advanced nuclear fuel types for nuclear