Dynamic Response Testing in an Electrically Heated Reactor Test Facility

Abstract

Non‐nuclear testing can be a valuable tool in the development of a space nuclear power or propulsion system. In a non‐nuclear test bed, electric heaters are used to simulate the heat from nuclear fuel. Standard testing allows one to fully assess thermal, heat transfer, and stress related attributes of a given system, but fails to demonstrate the dynamic response that would be present in an integrated, fueled reactor system. The integration of thermal hydraulic hardware tests with simulated neutronic response provides a bridge between electrically heated testing and fueled nuclear testing. By implementing a neutronic response model to simulate the dynamic response that would be expected in a fueled reactor system, one can better understand system integration issues, characterize integrated system response times and response characteristics, and assess potential design improvements at a relatively small fiscal investment. Initial system dynamic response testing was demonstrated on the integrated SAFE‐100a heat pipe (HP) cooled, electrically heated reactor and heat exchanger hardware, utilizing a one‐group solution to the point kinetics equations to simulate the expected neutronic response of the system. Reactivity feedback calculations were then based on a bulk reactivity feedback coefficient and measured average core temperature. This paper presents preliminary results from similar dynamic testing of a direct drive gas cooled reactor system (DDG), demonstrating the applicability of the testing methodology to any reactor type and demonstrating the variation in system response characteristics in different reactor concepts. Although the HP and DDG designs both utilize a fast spectrum reactor, the method of cooling the reactor differs significantly, leading to a variable system response that can be demonstrated and assessed in a non‐nuclear test facility. Planned system upgrades to allow implementation of higher fidelity dynamic testing are also discussed. Proposed DDG testing will utilize a higher fidelity point kinetics model to control core power transients, and reactivity feedback will be based on localized feedback coefficients and several independent temperature measurements taken within the core block. This paper presents preliminary test results and discusses the methodology that will be implemented in follow‐on DDG testing and the additional instrumentation required to implement high fidelity dynamic testing.