Integrity control of an RBMK-1500 fuel rod locally oxidized under a bounding reactivity-initiated accident

  • Hamid BoucheritEmail author
  • Algirdas Kaliatka
  • Azzedine Lounis


In 2007, the license for the second reactor unit of the Ignalina nuclear power plant was renewed considering the safety-related modifications introduced in this reactor. The Safety Analysis Report for this reactor unit was prepared with more strict criteria. The bounding reactivity-initiated accident (RIA) performed by the Lithuanian Energy Institute could be mentioned as an example. The performed analysis demonstrated that even when the worst initial conditions and possible uncertainties are considered, the fuel cladding remains intact. However, the analysis was performed assuming a fresh fuel assembly. In this study, an analysis of the fuel rod cladding behavior in the RBMK-1500 reactor following a bounding RIA is performed using the computational codes FEMAXI-6 and RELAP5. The analysis is extended by modeling an oxide layer (nodular corrosion) on the external surface cladding. An uncertainty and sensitivity analysis was performed using a method developed by the Society for Plant and Reactor Safety, employing the Software for Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analyses, in order to evaluate the effect of the oxide layer on the inside and outside fuel rod temperatures. The results of the thermo-mechanical analysis (stress, strain, and enthalpy) for a local oxide layer with a thickness of 70 μm show that despite the exceeded limit of allowed linear power density, the fuel rod is under acceptable safety conditions.


Safety Reactivity-initiated accident Corrosion RBMK-1500 FEMAXI-6 RELAP5 Software for Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analyses (SUSA) 


  1. 1.
    T.R. Allen, R.J.M. Konings, A.T. Motta, Corrosion of zirconium alloys. Comp. Nucl. Mater. 5, 49–68 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Pabarcius, A. Kaliatka, A. Marao, Analysis of fuel rod behaviour during limiting RIA in RBMK plants. J. Kerntechnik 75, 329–336 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    IAEA, Deterministic Safety Analysis for Nuclear Power Plants. Specific Safety Guide No. SSG-2 (Vienna, 2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    M. Suzuki, H. Saitou, Light Water Reactor Fuel Analysis Code FEMAXI-6 (Ver.1), detailed structure and user’s Manual. JAEA-Data/Code 2005-003 (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    C.D. Fletcher, R.R. Schult, RELAP5/MOD3 Code Manual, User’s Guidelines, NUREG/CR-5535, INEL-95/0174, Vol. 5, Rev. 1 (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    IAEA, Accident analysis for nuclear power plants with graphite moderated boiling water RBMK reactors. Safety Reports Series No. 43 (Vienna, 2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. Pabarčius, A. Tonkūnas, Definition of conservative conditions for RIA analysis in the modernized RBMK reactor core. J. Kerntechnik 75, 178–184 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. Lunde, Special features of external corrosion of fuel cladding in boiling water reactors. Nucl. Eng. Des. 33, 178–195 (1975). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Marao, T. Kaliatka, E. Ušpuras, Analysis of processes in RBMK-1500 fuel assemblies during normal operation cycle. J. ENERGETIKA 56, 8–18 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    W.G. Luscher, K.J. Geelhood, Material Property Correlations: Comparisons between FRAPCON- 3.5, FRAPTRAN-1.5, and MATPRO. NUREG/CR-7024 Rev.1 PNNL-19417 Rev.1 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Gomes, A. Teixeira, Angra1 high burnup fuel behavior under reactivity initiated accident conditions. In: 2011 International Nuclear Atlantic Conference. Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, October 24–28 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Vitanza, U. Graziani, N.T. Fordestrommen, K.O. Vilpponen, Fission Gas Release from in-pile measurements. Report HPR-221.10, OECD Halden Reactor Project, (1978).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C. Vitanza, E. Kolstad, C. Graziani, Fission gas release from UO2 pellet at high burnup, Topical Meeting on Light Water Reactor Fuel Performance (American NuclearSociety, Portland, 1979)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development—Nuclear Energy Agency, Nuclear Fuel Safety Criteria Technical Review,64 p Paris (France) (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    H. Glaser, GRS Method for Uncertainty and Sensitivity Evaluation of Code Results and Applications. Sci.Tech. of Nucl. Installations, Vol. 2008, Article ID 798901, p 7 (2008).
  17. 17.
    M.Kloos, E.Hofer, SUSA Version 3.5. User’s guide and tutorial. GRS, Garching, (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    K.J. Geelhood, W.G. Luscher, C.E. Beyer and al. Predictive bias and Sensitivity in NRC fuel performance codes. NUREG/CR-7001,PNNL-17644 (2009). NRC Job Code N6326Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. L. Hagrman, G. A. Reymann, MATPRO-version 11. A handbook of materials properties for use in the analysis of light water reactor fuel rod behaviour. Technical report, NUREG/CR-0497, TREE-1280 (1979)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    IAEA-TECDOC-1496, Thermophysical properties database of materials for light water reactors and heavy water reactors. Final report of a coordinated research project (1999–2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© China Science Publishing & Media Ltd. (Science Press), Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chinese Nuclear Society and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hamid Boucherit
    • 1
    Email author
  • Algirdas Kaliatka
    • 2
  • Azzedine Lounis
    • 3
  1. 1.Division of Fuel TechnologyNuclear Research Center of DrariaAlgiersAlgeria
  2. 2.Lithuanian Energy InstituteKaunasLithuania
  3. 3.Science and Materials Engineering LaboratoryUniversity of Sciences and Technology Houari BoumedieneAlgiersAlgeria

Personalised recommendations