Liquid Sodium Cooling Loop Piping Material

AI Thread Summary
Liquid sodium cooling loops primarily use stainless steel for piping and heat exchangers due to its non-reactivity with sodium, which is a key advantage over water. Materials like SS 316L, HT-9, and D9-C1 are selected to minimize swelling and growth, with SS 321 also being favored in certain designs. Standard piping steel with a stainless steel inner liner is often employed to reduce costs. The heat exchanger poses challenges, particularly in fast reactors, as it must effectively transfer heat between sodium and water in a steam Rankine cycle. Gas-cooled fast reactors using a Brayton cycle eliminate water, offering a simpler system, while combined Brayton-Rankine cycles provide higher thermodynamic efficiency but are more complex.
Andronicus1717
Messages
32
Reaction score
1
What materials can be used for the piping in liquid sodium cooling loops (primary and secondary) and for the heat exchanger?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Generally stainless steel, metals don't react with Sodium that's one of the reasons for prefering it to water.
 
mgb_phys said:
Generally stainless steel, metals don't react with Sodium that's one of the reasons for prefering it to water.

Doesn't liqiuid sodium alloy with the metal in piping?
 
Paulanddiw said:
Doesn't liqiuid sodium alloy with the metal in piping?
No. That is why stainless steels are selected for the in-reactor materials including the fuel cladding and structure. SS 316L is one material, and HT-9 and D9-C1 were also candidates in order to reduce swelling and growth. The Brits favored SS 321 (similar to Russian 12Cr18Ni10Ti) in the Dounreay FR.

Piping would normally be a standard piping steel with a stainless steel inner liner to keep the cost down.

The tricky part for fast reactors would be the heat exchanger between sodium and water, since water would be the working fluid in a steam Rankine cycle.

The attractive feature of a gas cooled fast reactor using a Brayton cycle is the elimination of water as a working fluid. On the other hand, a Brayton-Rankine combined cycle plant offers greater thermodynamic efficient, but at the cost of a more complicated and challenging system.
 
Last edited:
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...
Back
Top