4.6 Article

Fabrication and characterization of SiC sandwich material for Flow Channel Inserts in HT-DCLL blanket by gel casting

Journal

NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND ENERGY
Volume 30, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.nme.2022.101124

Keywords

Flow channel insert (FCI); Porous SiC; Corrosion by PbLi; Dual-coolant leadlithium (DCLL) blanket; Gel casting

Funding

  1. Euratom research and training program [633053]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper studies the use of SiC-sandwich material for Flow Channel Inserts (FCIs) in the high temperature DCLL blanket concept, and the results show promising reductions in MHD pressure drop and compatibility between SiC and PbLi under high temperature and magnetic field conditions.
Flow Channel Inserts (FCIs) are key elements in the high temperature DCLL blanket concept since they provide the required thermal insulation between the He-cooled structural steel and the hot PbLi flowing at a maximum temperature of 700 ?, and the necessary electrical insulation to minimize magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) effects. In this paper, the use of SiC-sandwich material for FCIs consisting of a porous SiC core (thermal and electrical insulator) covered by a dense Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) SiC layer (protection against PbLi infiltration) has been studied. Lab-scale FCI prototypes were produced by the gel casting method and characterized in terms of thermal and electrical conductivities (the latter before and after exposure to ionizing radiation) and flexural strength. Corrosion tests under flowing PbLi at 500-700 degrees C in presence of a magnetic field up to 5 T were performed obtaining promising results regarding the reduction of MHD pressure drop and the compatibility of SiC and PbLi under dynamic conditions. Additionally, thermomechanical finite elements simulations were performed in a 3D channel geometry to identify black spots regarding thermal stresses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available