ebook img

ORNL Aircraft nuclear power plant designs PDF

108 Pages·2006·9.78 MB·English
by  
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview ORNL Aircraft nuclear power plant designs

ORNL-1721 This docultlent consists of 107 pages. Copy 7 z o f 231 copies. Series A. Contract No. W-7405-eng-26 AlRCRAFT REACTOR ENGINEERING DIVISION QRNL AIRCRAFT NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DESlGNS A. P. Fraas A. W. Savolainen May 1954 DATE ISSUED OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY Operated by CARBIDE AND CARBON CHEMICALS COMPANY A Division of Union Corbide and Corbon Corparotion Port Office Box P Oak Ridge, Tennessee ORNL-1721 Special INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION 1. A. A. Abbatiello 30. K. Z. Morgan 2. R. M. Batch 31. E. J. Murphy 3. G. E. Boyd 32. J, P. Murray 4. R. W. Bussard 33. W, G. Piper 5. D. 'N . Cardwell 34. H. F. Poppendiek 6. C. E. Center 35. Pa M. Reyling 7. R. A. Charpie 36, h. W. Savage 8. G. H. Clewett 37. A. W. Savolainen 9. W. B. Cottrell 38. R. D. Schultheiss 10. D. D. Cowen 39. E. D. Shipley 1 1 . S . J. Cromer 40. M, J. Sk i'n ner 12. F. L. Culler 41. A. W. Snell 13. L. B. Emlet 42. R. I . Strough 14. A. P. Fraas 43. J. A. Swartout 15. H, C. Gray 44. E. ti. Taylor 16. W. R. Grimes 45. D. B. Trauger 17. A. Hollaender 46. J. B. Trice 18. A. S. Householder 47. F. 6. VonderLage 19. W. ti. Jordan 48. A. M. Weinberg 20. C. P. Keirn 49. G. C. Wil l iams 21. M. T. Kelley SO. C. E. Winters 22. J. A. Lane 51-60. X-10 Document Reference Library (Y-12) 23. C. E. Larson 61. Biology Library 24. M. E. LaVerne 62-67. Laboratory Recards Department 25. R. S. Livingston 68. Laboratory Records, ORNL R.C. 26. W. D. Manly 69. Health Physics Library 27. F. R. McQuilken 78. Metallurgy Library 28. J. L. Meem 71, Reactor Experimental Engineering Library 29. A. 9. Miller 72-73. Central Research Library EXTERNAL DlSTRlBUTlON 74. Air Force Engineering Office, Oak Ridge 75. Air Force Plant Representative, Burbank 76. Air Force Plant Representative, Seattle 77. Air Force Plant Representative, Wood-Ridge 78. American Machine and Foundry Company 79. ANP Project Office, Fort Worth 80-9 1. Argonne National Laboratory (1 copy to Kermit Anderson) 92. Armed Forces Special Weapons Project (Sandia) 93. Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, Washington (Gertrude Camp) 94-98. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington (Lt. Col. T. A. Redfield) 99. Babcock and Wilcox Company 100. Battel le Memoria I lnst itute 101" Bend ix Aviation Corporation 102. Boeing Airplane Company 103-105. Brookhaven National Laboratory 106. Bureau of Aeronautics (Grant) 107. Bureau of Ships 108. Chicago Patent Group 109. Chief of Naval Research 110. Commonwealth Edison Company 11 1. Convair, Son Diego (C. H. Helms) 112. Curtiss-Wright Corporation, Wright Aeronautical Division (K. Campbell) 113. Depaement of the Navy - Op362 114. Detroit Edison Conipony 115-1 19. duPont Company, Augusta 120. duPont Company, Wilmington 121. Duquesne Light Company 122. Foster Wheeler Corporation 123-125. General Electric Company, ANPD 126. General Electric Company, APS 127-13 4. Genera I Electric Company, Richl and 135. Glenn L. Martin Company (T. F. Nagey) 136. Hanford Operations Office 137. Iowa State College 138-139. Kirtland Air Force Base 140-143. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory 144-145. Lockland Area Office 146-147. Los Alarnos Scientific Laboratory 148. Materials Laboratory (WADC) (Col. P. L. H i l l ) 149. Nuclear Metals, Inc. 150. Monsanto Chemical Company 151. Mound Laboratory 152-155. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Cleveland (A. Silverstein) 156. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington 157-158. Naval Research Laboratory 159. Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company 160. New 'fork Operations Office 161-162. North American Aviation, Inc. 163-165. Nuclear Development Associates, lnc. 166. Patent Branch, Washington 167-173. Phil l ips Petroleum Company (NRTS) 174-175. Powerplant Laboratory (WADC) (A. M. Nelson) 176-185. Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Division (Fox Project) 186-187. Rand Corporation (1 copy to V. G. Henning) 188. San Francisco F ie ld Office 189. Sylvania Electric Products, Inc. 190. Tennessee Valley Authority (Dean) 191. USAF Headquarters 192. U. S. Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory 193-194. University of California Radiation Laboratory, Berkeley. 195- 196. University of California Radiation L ab oratosy, b ivermore 197. Walter Kidde Nuclear Laboratories, Inc, 198-203. Westinghouse Electric Corporation 204-215. Wright Air Development Center (WCSNS, Col. John R. Mood, Jr.) 216-230. Technical Information Service, Oak Ridge 231. Division of Research and Medicine, AEC, O R 0 I V FOREWORD Formal Air Force interest in nuclear propulsion far aircraft dates from October 1944, when the head of the Power Plant Laboratory (WPAFB), Col. D. 9. Keirn, approached Dr. Vannevar Bush on the subiect. Subsequent to that and other discussions, the NEPA group was formed i n 1946. The NEPA group moved to Oak Ridge in 1947, and by 1948, ORNL had begun to provide assistance in research and testing. The ORNL effort gradu- a l l y expanded, and the ORNL-ANP General Design Group was formed i n the spring of 1950 to help guide the program and to evaluate and make use of the information being obtained. Four years of work at ORNL on the design of aircraft nuclear power plants have dis- closed much of interest. In a project so complex and so varied i t i s inevitable that many of these points should escape the attention of nearly a l l but those immediately concerned or be forgotten i n the welter of information produced. Some of this material i s buried in ANP quarterly reports, and much has never been formally reported. Many reactor designs have been prepared, but each design has represented an isolated design study, and the issues have been much confused by variations in the assumptions made i n the course of each reactor design. This report is intended to provide a c r i t i ca l evaluation of the more promising reactors on the basis of a common, reasonable set of design conditions and assumptions. V - CONTENTS FOREWORD .......................................................... v SUMMARY ........................................................... 1 PART I . DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS MILITARY REQUIREMENTS ............................................... 2 PROPULSION SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS .................................... 2 Vapor-Cycle Compressor-Jet ............................................. 3 Gas-CycleCompressor-Jet .............................................. 3 Turboiet .......................................................... 3 Specific Thrust and Specific Heat Consumption ................................ 4 Chemical Fuel as a Supplementary Heat Source ................................ 4 REACTORTYPES ...................................................... 4 AIRCRAFTPERFORMANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Effects of Reactor Design on Aircraft Gross Weight .............................. 6 Effect of Chemical Fuel Augrnientation ...................................... 11 SHIELDING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Units of Radiation Dose Measurements ...................................... 16 Permissible Dose Rate for Crew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 7 Radiation Damage t o Organic Materials and Activation of Structure .................... 17 Ground-Handling and Maintenance Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 8 Shield Weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 NUCLEARPROPERTIES ................................................. 33 Mocjemting and Reflecting Materials ........................................ 35 Effect of Moderating Material on Design .................................... 36 ReflectorModerated Reactor ............................................. 38 REACTORCONTROL ................................................... 39 MATERIALS . ......................................................... 30 I SirIJtcture . ......................................................... 41 Solid Fuel Elements . ................................................. 42 High-Temperature Liquid Coolants and Fuel Carriers ............................. 48 HEATREMOVAL . ..................................................... 51 TEMPERATURE GRADIENTS AND THERMAL STRESSES ............................ 55 TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION IN CIRCULATING-FUEL REACTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 PART II. REACTOR STUDIES COMPARISONOFREACTORANDCYCLETYPES ................................ 63 REACTOR. HEAT EXCHANGER. AHD SHIELD ARRANGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Shield and Heat Exchanger Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 7 Reactor Core Configurations ............................................. 76 vi i DETAILED DESIGNS OF REACTORS ......................................... 79 Sodium-Cooled Solid-Fuel-E lement Reactor ................................... 79 Circulating-Fuel Aircraft Reactor Experiment .................................. 83 Fluid-Moderated Circulating-Fuel Reactor .................................... 83 Reflector-Moderated Circulating-Fuel Reactor .................................. 87 SECONDARYFLUIDSYSTEM .............................................. 93 MAJORDEVELOPMENT PROBLEMS ......................................... 96 ... V l l l QRNL AIRCRAFT NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DESIGNS A. P. Fraas A. W. Savolainen The detai led design o f an aircraft nuclear power on the size, shape, and composition of the reactor plant poses an extraordinarily d i f f i cu l t set of core are presented, and in the l ight of the preceding problem^.'^^*^ I t w i l l be found impl ic i t i n th is presentation, possible combinations of materi a1 s report that the problems are so int imately inter- and the l imitat ions on the materials are discussed. related that no one problem can be considered The effects of the physical properties o f several independently of the others; yet each problem i s representative coolants on the maximum power suf f ic ient ly complex in i t se l f to be confusing. In density obtainable from a given solid-fuel-element an effort to correlate the work that has been done, structure i s determined on the basis of a consistent a tentat ive set o f mi l i tary requirements for nuciear- set o f assumptions. Design l imitat ions imposed by powered aircraf i i s presented f i rs t and accepted temperature distr ibution and thermal stress are as axiomatic. The types o f propulsion system that also examined. might be used are discussed next, and the turbojet From the data presented in the section on air- engine i s shown to be the most promising. Aircraft craft performance and in the sections on nuclear performance considerations are then presented on materials and heat removal Considerations, it i s the basis o f a representative power plant, and the shown that the reactor types having the most shield data used are validated i n a section on promising development potential and the greatest shielding. It i s shown in these sections that the adaptabi l i ty to meet the wide variety o f mi l i tary reactor should be capable o f a power density in requirements are those in which a l iquid removes the reactor core o f at least 1 kw/cm3 and, prefer- heat from the reactor core at temperatures of ably, 5 kw/cm3, and it should operate at a suf- 1500°F or higher. Designs for several high-temper- f ic ient ly high temperature to provide a turbine air ature reactors ure presented, and their advantages in let temperature of ut least 114OO"F for the turbojet and disadvantages are discussed. engines. The effects o f nuclear considerations The problems involved are too complex to permit anything approaching an Aristotel ian proof to support a choice o f reactor type, but i t i s hoped that th is report w i l l convey something more than 'The Lexington Proiect, Nuclear-Pawered Fliyhf, LEXP-1 (Sept. 30, 1948). an appreciation for the various decisions and 2Report of the Technical Advisory Boord to the Tech- compromises that led f i rs t to the circulat ing- nical Committee of the ANP Program, ANP-52 (Aug. 4, fluoride-fuel reactor and then to the design of: the 1950). reflector-moderated reactor type recently chosen 3T. A. Sirns, Fino1 Stotus Report of the Fairchild NEPA Project, NEPA-1830 (na date). a5 the main l ine of deveiopment at ORNL.

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.