Skip to main content

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a variety of techniques. One simple one is replacing some metal parts every few years.

But materials scientists at the Nebraska Center for Energy Sciences Research, at the University of Nebraska in Lincoln, are working on a variety of “radiation-tolerant” materials that are self-healing. These would improve the durability of the metal parts, which would be helpful for the current fleet and more important for advanced reactors still in the design phase. Fuel elements in existing reactors are replaced after a few years, but some of the new designs would leave metal parts in place for far longer. And better materials can improve the reliability of any industry.

The researchers are working with the fact that a different class of materials, called “amorphous materials,” do not suffer damage when bombarded with neutrons. Amorphous materials, which are already in common use, do not suffer the same kind of damage. The atoms in an amorphous material are not arranged in a repeated pattern. Polymers and gels are two kinds of amorphous solids.

What the Nebraska researchers have discovered, in work partly funded by the Nebraska Public Power District and the Department of Energy's office of Nuclear Energy, is that if crystalline materials are sandwiched with amorphous materials, the flaws in the crystalline materials --- both the voids and the areas with extra density --- migrate toward the border of the two. And when they meet, they annihilate each other.

The researchers use a particle accelerator rather than a reactor, to create the damage, and then study it with powerful microscopes. They work with layers a few microns thick.

Bai Cui, an assistant professor of mechanical and materials engineering, said that at the boundary, the two flaws neutralize each other quickly. The atoms are vibrating at a rate of about 130 trillion times per second (ten to the 13th), and the flaws locate each other in about 100 cycles – that is, on the order of a trillionth of a second.

Jian Wang, an associate professor at the center, pointed out that some advanced reactor designs would have operating temperatures of over 200 degrees C and would use corrosive coolants, like molten salt or supercritical water, and are intended to run for 80 years or more. Micro-layers of amorphous materials could work well in that environment, he said.
The center is also working on nano-materials that can be mixed into steel to attract and neutralize flaws. The material can be used in a weld, and is then mixed in using “laser peening.” Generally, peening means shooting particles at a target at high velocity, often to strip off the top layer of the target. But in laser peening, the pressure of light distributes the nano-materials within the steel.

The center is directed by Dr. Michael Nastasi, a research scientist formerly at the Energy Department’s Los Alamos National Laboratory. The cutting-edge nuclear research here is not its only focus; this being Nebraska, it also conducts research on wind turbines, biofuels, crop irrigation and other areas.

Comments

Martin Burkle said…
"Jian Wang, an associate professor at the center, pointed out that some advanced reactor designs would have operating temperatures of over 200 degrees C and would use corrosive coolants, like molten salt or supercritical water, and are intended to run for 80 years or more."

I find the 200 degrees C puzzling. I think all advanced reactors operate above 200 C.
molten salt 600 C to 700 C
supercritical water greater than 374 C
sodium-cooled 550 C
lead-cooled 500 C
even out current PWR reactors run just above 300 C

Maybe change to "All advanced reactors run above 374 degrees C"

Popular posts from this blog

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…