vanesch said:
Ah, so the oxide thickness is taken as a kind of rough measure of hydrogen absorption (which embrittles zirconium, I know). It is not the oxide layer itself which is the main difficulty, but rather the (more difficult to measure) hydrogen intake, but as both are correlated, we put a limit on the easiest observable one, is that it ?
Correct. One can measure the oxide thickness non-destructively, usually with an
eddy-current liftoff probe, which is correlated to oxide thickness, as opposed to destructive testing where hydrogen is measured by metallography or hot-extraction (e.g. LECO test).
Eddy-current liftoff measurements must be corrected for the magnetic susceptibility Ipermeability) of the crud on the oxide layer. This has been an issue in plants which use Zn-injection in the primary cooling system. It was first noticed in BWRs, but now that PWRs are using Zn-injection, it is also an issue there.
Helmut Fischer GmbH makes thickness probes -
http://www.helmut-fischer.com/indexCountry.asp?CountryID=29&LanguageID=6
There is also the loss of the metal (structure). ZrO
2/Zr has a Pilling-Bedworth ratio of about 1.56, so there is that issue to consider in conjunction with the hydrogen.
In high burnup fuel, one may find hydrogen accumulation in the outer surface of the cladding wall, particularly in the region of the cladding adjacent to the pellet-pellet interfaces. It is the localization of hydrogen that is of concern, since that potentially may be the weakest point.
This might be of use (it's dated but informative) -
Waterside Corrosion of Zirconium Alloys in Nuclear Power Plants
IAEA TECDOC Series No. 996
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_996_web.pdf (22.3 MB - use 'save target as')
1998.