ORNL Aircraft nuclear power plant designs

108 Pages·2006·9.78 MB·English

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.