View
219
Download
3
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
US Nuclear Science User Facilities (NSUF)
Overview
J. Rory Kennedy, Ph.D.Director, NSUF
Idaho National Laboratory
NSUF Partner Facilities Working Group MeetingIdaho Falls, ID
May 24-25, 2017
3
NSUF Historical
Established 2007 as DOE Office of Nuclear Energy first and
only user facility
• Energy Policy Act of 2005
• Secretary of Energy should consider establishing user
facility at INL
• First founded as Advanced Test Reactor National
Scientific User Facility (ATR-NSUF)
• Expansion to facilities outside INL initiated in 2008
• Name changed to Nuclear Science User Facilities in 2014
• Idaho National Laboratory is lead and primary
institution
• Irradiation effects in nuclear fuels and materials
• Provide access to capabilities and expertise at no cost
to user
• Support design, fabrication, transport, irradiation, PIE,
disposition
• Link intellectual capital with nuclear research
infrastructure to fulfill mission of DOE-NE
4
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2016 2017
Under review
nExpanded
capabilities Need for
additional
capabilities
outside INL
recognized
early
Partner
facilities
program
established in
2008
nPartner Facilities to date 8 Universities + 3
Universities in CAES
(University of Idaho, Boise
State University, Idaho
State University)
(3 currently expressed
interest)
6 National Laboratories (2
expressed interest)
1 Industrial
NSUF – A consortiumA group formed to undertake an enterprise beyond the resources of any one member
6
NSUF Support Structure
and Technical Expertise
NSUF Staff (INL)
Dr. J. Rory Kennedy
Mr. Dan Ogden
Dr. Brenden Heidrich
Dr. John Jackson
Mr. Jeff Benson
Mr. Collin Knight
Ms. Laura Scheele
Ms. Kelly Cunningham
Mr. Jonathan Kirkham
Ms. Lindy Bean
Ms. Renae Soelberg
Neutron Irradiation
Dr. Lin-Wen Hu (MIT)
Dr. Gordon Kohse (MIT)
Prof. Ayman Hawari (NCSU)
Mr. Kory Linton (ORNL)
Mr. Dave Schoonen (INL)
Ms. Debra Utterbeck (INL)
Mr. Kevin Clayton (INL)
Ms. Misti Lillo (INL)
Dr. Paul Murray (INL)
Dr. Joseph Nielson (INL)
Mr. Brian Durtschi (INL)
Dr. Keith Jewell (INL)
Dr. Donna Guillen (INL)
Mr. Tom Maddock (INL)
Dr. Sven Van den Berghe (BNRC)
Synchrotron
Dr. Jeff Terry (IIT)
Dr. Lynne Ecker (BNL)
Examinations
Dr. Kurt Terrani (ORNL)
Mr. Kory Linton (ORNL)
Dr. Yaqiao Wu (CAES)
Ms. Joanna Taylor (CAES)
Dr. Andrew Casella (PNNL)
Dr. David Senor (PNNL)
Prof. Ahmed Hassanein (Purdue)
Dr. Peter Hoseman (UCB)
Dr. Paula Freyer (Westinghouse)
Dr. Thomas Hartmann (UNLV)
Dr. Mitch Meyer (INL)
Ms. Katelyn Wachs (INL)
Dr. Jian Gan (INL)
Dr. Brandon Miller (INL)
Dr. Sebastien Teysseyre (INL)
Mr. Mike Heighes (INL)
Dr. Sven Van den Berghe (BNRC)
And many more scientists, engineers and technical staff at all partner facilities to help get things done
Ion Beams
Prof. Gary Was (UM)
Prof. Kumar Sridharan (UW)
Dr. Meimei Li (IVEM, ANL)
Dr. Khalid Hattar (SNL)
DOE
Mr. Shane Johnson
Mr. Mike Worley
Mr. Tom Miller
Ms. Alison Hahn
Mr. Brooks Weingartner
7
NSUF Solicitations
n Generally select projects through open competitive proposal processes
Consolidated Innovative Nuclear Research (CINR FOA, 1 call/year)
– Irradiation + PIE ($1.0M - $4.0M, up to 7 years)
– PIE only (~$500K, up to 3 years)
– Irradiation only ($500K - $3.5M)
– Beamlines at other user facilities
Rapid Turnaround Experiments (RTE, 3 calls/year, limited $$, executed within 9 months)
Proposals welcome from University, National Laboratory, Industry, Small Business, International
n International PI applicants need US collaborator
n All projects fully forward funded
Requires accurate cost estimate and schedule
Requires project scope to be reasonable
Requires early contact and negotiations with facilities
n Letters of Intent – initiate the process
n Pre-proposals
Evaluated for feasibility
Evaluated for relevancy to NE mission
Evaluated for technical and scientific merit
n Invited full proposals
Evaluated for feasibility (final cost estimate and schedule required)
Evaluated for relevancy to NE mission
Evaluated for technical and scientific merit
8
NSUF General
Capabilities
n Neutron Irradiations
ATR (loop, rabbit), ATRC, HFIR (rabbit), MITR (loop), PULSTAR, NRAD, BR2 – SCK-CEN (Belgium)
n Ion Irradiations
Tandem Accelerator Ion Beam (U. Wisc), Michigan Ion Beam Lab (U. Mich), IVEM (ANL), Sandia Ion Beam Lab (Under review: TAMU, LLNL)
n Hot Cells
INL(HFEF, FCF, AL, IASCC), ORNL (IFEL, IMET, REDC), PNNL (RPL), U. Mich (IMC), Westinghouse (MCOE), (awaiting MOU: LANL)
n High radiation level measurements/instrumentation
Neutron radiography, elemental & isotopic analyses, gas sampling and analyses, profilometry, gamma scanning, mechanical testing, electron and optical microscopy, thermal analyses, eddy current, IASCC, EPMA, AES, XPS, SIMS, focused ion beam (FIB)
n Low radiation level measurements/instrumentation
SEM, TEM, APT, FIB, hardness, micro- & nano-indentation, tensile, thermal analyses, XRD, XPS, AES, SIMS, NMR, PAS
n Beamlines
X-ray (ANL APS: MRCAT, IIT; BNL NSLS-II: XPD, NST Dept)
Neutron, positron (PULSTAR, NCSU)
n High Performance Computing
FALCON machine
Moose-Bison-Marmot
n Visit nsuf.inl.gov under Research Capabilities tab for details at individual facilities
9
High Impact Nuclear R&D
Project portfolio spans a variety of research
objectives that are ultimately focused on both near
and long-term technology development goals
n Understanding atomic level phenomena in fuels that
affect thermal transport, elemental migration/diffusion,
interface interaction, etc. as complex microstructures
develop under irradiation
ceramic, metallic, TRISO, ATFUnderstanding fundamental defect evolution in irradiated structural materials
across multiple length scales as they affect mechanical properties.
• RPV, austenitic, F/M, Zr alloys, ATF
Development of innovative radiation resistant materials for advanced reactor systems
Development of radiation resistant sensors for collecting high fidelity on-line irradiation test data
Development of materials from advanced manufacturing techniques
Providing fundamental actinide nuclear data that can help inform advanced reactor and fuel cycle modeling and simulation campaign. J. Cole contributed to content of
slide
10
NSUF MetricsFacility Utilization
n Recently opened partner facility researchers to apply to own capabilities. Result: increased
number of apps.
n Poor metric: large portion of application from internal researchers.
Facility Requested
Total
Requests Awarded
ATR 88 17
CAES 158 107
INL 28 12
IIT 35 16
IVEM 44 21
MIT 14 6
NCSU 8 3
ORNL 65 31
PNNL 10 3
Purdue 1 0
UC - Berkeley 11 7
UM 25 16
UNLV 0 1
UW 8 6
Westinghouse 1 1
Grand Total 496 247
11
nRapid Turnaround Experiments (FY 2016 3 rounds)
75 proposals submitted from 24 institutions
– 16 US Universities
– 5 National Laboratories
– 2 Foreign Institutions
– 1 Industry
39 experiments accepted from 18 institutions
– 11 US Universities
– 5 National Laboratories
– 2 Foreign Institutions (UK Universities)
8 NSUF facilities performed experiments
– 17 CAES/MaCS
– 9 ORNL LAMDA
– 3 IVEM
– 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
– 2 North Carolina State University
– 2 University California, Berkeley
– 3 Idaho National Laboratory
– 2 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory11
Facility Utilization
12
n Rapid Turnaround Experiments (FY 2017 – 2 rounds)
105 proposals submitted from 36 institutions
– 22 US Universities
– 6 National Laboratories
– 6 Foreign Institutions
– 2 Industry
57 experiments accepted from 28 institutions
– 17 US Universities
– 6 National Laboratories
– 3 Foreign Institutions
– 2 Industry
8 NSUF facilities performed experiments
– 9 CAES/MaCS
– 17 ORNL LAMDA
– 17 IVEM
– 1 University of Wisconsin
– 3 University of Michigan
– 3 University California, Berkeley
– 6 Idaho National Laboratory
– 1 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 12
Facility Utilization
13
Outcome of FY2016 CINR
n Effects of High Dose on Laser Welded, Irradiated AISI 304SS (NEET CTD)• Boise State University
• $613K, PIE only
• MFC (INL), MCE (Westinghouse)
n Understand the phase transformation of thermally aged and neutron
irradiated duplex stainless steels used in LWRs (NEET CTD)• University of Florida
• $579K, Beamline
• MRCAT (IIT, APS)
n Enhancing Irradiation Tolerance of Steels via Nano-structuring by
Innovative Manufacturing Techniques (NEET CTD)• Idaho State University
• $2459K, Irradiation + PIE
• ATR, MFC (INL)
n Irradiation Performance Testing of Specimens Produced by Commercially
Available Additive Manufacturing Techniques (NEET CTD)• Colorado School of Mines
• $2030K, Irradiation +PIE
• ATR, MFC (INL)1
3
14
n Feasibility of Combined Ion-Neutron Irradiation for Accessing High Dose
Levels (Nuclear Reactor Technologies)• University of Michigan
• $187K, Irradiation + PIE
• MIBL (U Mich), LAMDA (ORNL)
n Radial Heat Flux – Irradiation Synergism in SiC ATF Cladding (Fuel Cycle
R&D)• Oak Ridge National Laboratory
• $843K, Irradiation + PIE
• HFIR, LAMDA (ORNL)
n Fission Product Transport in TRISO Fuel (Advanced Reactor Technologies)• University of Michigan
• $22K, Irradiation
• MIBL (U Mich)
n Radiation Enhanced Diffusion of Ag, Ag-Pd, Eu and Sr in Neutron Irradiated
PyC/SiC Diffusion Couples (Advanced Reactor Technologies)• Oak Ridge National Laboratory
• $518K, Irradiation + PIE
• MIBL (U Mich), HFIR, LAMDA (ORNL)1
4
Outcome of FY2016 CINR
15
n Irradiation Testing of LWR Additively Manufactured Materials (NSUF Only)• GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy
• $1982K, Irradiation +PIE
• ATR, MFC (INL)
n Effect of Gamma Irradiation on the Microstructure and Mechanical
Properties of Nano-modified Concrete (NSUF Only)• Vanderbilt University
• $185K, Irradiation
• HFIR Gamma (ORNL)
n Correlative Atom Probe and Electron Microscopy Study of Radiation
Induced Segregation at Low and High Angle Grain Boundaries in Steels
(NSUF Only)• Oak Ridge National Laboratory
• $150K, PIE only
• LAMDA (ORNL)
n Role of Minor Alloying Elements on Long Range Ordering in Ni-Cr Alloys
(NSUF Only)• Oregon State University
• $90K, Irradiation
• TAIB (U Wisc) 1
5
Outcome of FY2016 CINR
16
NSUF Metrics
Facility Utilization
n CAES MaCS is a partner facility but not
included in CINR analysis since
supported on annual basis.
n CINR percentages and total partner
funding higher in FY 2015 and FY 2016
than historical.
n CINR percentage lower in FY 2016 than
FY 2015 but funding amount increased.
n Reason CINR percentage lower in FY
2016 – irradiation tests are expensive.
Number of CINR partner awards
increased from FY 2015 to FY 2016 from
two to five.
n RTEs analyzed by number of awards.
CAES MaCS included.
n Through FY 2015, RTEs at partner
facilities about steady. FY 2016 shows
large increase. Why? Internal partner
facility applications?
17
NSUF Metrics
Facility Utilization
n Recently opened partner facility researchers to apply to own
capabilities. Result: increased number of apps.
n Poor metric: large portion of application from internal researchers.
Total NSUF Facility Requests
External
Requests
385
Internal
Requests
110
Facility Requested
Total
Requests
Internal
Requests
ATR 88 2
CAES 158 27
INL 28 7
IIT 35 13
IVEM 44 4
MIT 14 8
NCSU 8 5
ORNL 65 30
PNNL 10 8
Purdue 1 0
UC - Berkeley 11 3
UM 25 2
UNLV 0 0
UW 8 1
Westinghouse 1 0
Grand Total 496 110
n Partner facilities need to control number of internal applications and engage external users.
n Requests using “own” materials: consider adding to NFML.
n Issue: R&D funds must be identified and independent of NSUF support.
n Issue: NSUF work scope can not be part of ongoing program/project work scope.
18
NSUF Metrics
Publications
1
8
n Beginning to see results from early irradiation tests
n Increase in RTE awards.
n Journal of Nuclear Materials is by far the most published in journal.
19
Historical and Projected Growth
n CINR type projects support FY 2014 – $400K, 8 full proposals, 3 awards
FY 2015 – $4.1M, 41 LOIs, 31 pre-proposals, 17 full proposals, 5 awards
FY 2016 – $10M, 80 LOIs, 67 pre-proposals, 32 full proposals, 13 awards
FY 2017 - $10M - $12M, 124 LOIs, 108 pre-proposals, 50 full proposals, ~15 awards
105
57
20
DOE-NE / NSUF / INL and SCK-CEN / BR2 / LHMA
• In-kind contributions
• CRADA with four tasks
• Reactor Performance and Thermal Modeling Benchmarking Using SiC
Temperature Monitors.
• Disc Irradiation for Separate Effects Testing with Control of Temperature
(DISECT)
• Accident Tolerant fuel Test for the Interaction of Coolant with Uranium Silicide
(ATTICUS) at BR2.
• Cooperative In-Pile Instrumentation Development
International
DOE-NE / NSUF and UK / NNUF • UK National Nuclear User facility (NNUF)
• National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL)
• Dalton Nuclear Institute (U. Manchester)
• Culham Centre for Fusion Energy
• Initial area of mutual user facility interest and cooperation• Nuclear Fuels and Materials Library (Archive)
• NSUF to allow access through NNUF• Agreement in early stages of development
21
Infrastructure
Management Program
nUsed for analyses to identify needs, redundancies,
efficiencies, distributions, etc., to best understand the utility
of DOE-NE’s available infrastructure, inform the content of
infrastructure calls, and provide information to NSUF users.
n Infrastructure information collected can be combined with
information on R&D needs as part of infrastructure gap
analysis
n NSUF created a searchable and interactive database of all
pertinent infrastructure supported by, or related to, the DOE
Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE).
n Database known as the Nuclear Energy Infrastructure
Database (NEID) and is located at nsuf-infrastructure.inl.gov
(public launch Nov 2015)
n
22
n US Domestic Infrastructure / Capabilities – 80% of
NEID Over 140 institutions operating over 450 facilities housing over 960 instruments
Current NEID users include researchers from 75 Federal Government and National Laboratories, 38 Universities and NGOs, and 25 Industry organizations.
Infrastructure
Management Program
Test and research reactors
Hot cells
Ion beams
Support infrastructure (shipping casks, test fabrication, etc.)
State-of-the-Art instrumentation & Expertise
23
Nuclear Fuels and
Materials Library (NFML)
INL Legacy
materials
Volunteered materials
from outside the INL
Supporting documentation
related to samples
n Provides irradiated samples for users to access for experimentation through
one of the competitively reviewed proposal processes.
n Critical to reducing costs and taking advantage of new ideas and future
analysis techniques and equipment.
n The library includes over 3500 specimens as part of the NSUF awarded
research. 6K – 7K additional specimens by year end.
n Most materials in NFML neutron irradiated with small number
ion irradiated.
n SAM irradiation series to stock library moving forwardn Effort to consolidate materials into easily
accessible locations to reduce costs of
retrieval.
n Web-based searchable database through
nsuf.inl.gov (public launch Sept 14, 2016).
n Interest in collaboration on international efforts.
n Materials Include:
• Steels
• Other alloys
• Ceramics
• Pure materials
• Actinides
• Fission products
24
1. We can connect facilities and instruments as parts of a process
to accomplish a research method or process, such as:
Microstructural characterization of irradiated fuel.
Irradiation experiment (through design, fabrication,
irradiation, etc.)
2. We can include fuels and materials:
Nuclear Fuels and Materials Library
Link to facilities utilized
Link to researchers
3. We can connect research:
Subject matter
Facilities utilized
PIs & collaborators
4. We can include expertise:
Future Initiatives:
Integrating Databases
Materials
Research
Capabilities Expertise
25
SAMPLE LIBRARY
Temperature
Dose (DPA)
Flux [x1014 ]
Fluence [x1020]
Environment
PLANNED
Temperature
Actual Dose (DPA)
Flux [x1014 ]
Fluence [x1020]
Environment
AS RUN
PROJECT NAME
Storage FACILITY
Notes
# of Samples
Samples Remaining
Specimen Availability
Certification
Certification Code
Availability Date
Capsule
Packet
Material Name
Material Description
Dimensions
KGT #
Sample ID Code
Material Code
Specimen Type
REACTOR
REACTOR POSITION
Project ID
CINR #
RTE #
NSUF Call
Award Date
Start Date
End Date
PI Name
Tech Lead
Facility Tech Lead
Collaborators Related Documents
Project Type
INSTITUTION
FACILITY
Research Area
Material TypeProposal
PROJECT DATABASEPROJECT NAME
REACTOR
REACTOR POSITION
FACILITY
INSTITUTION
NEID DATABASE
SME DATABASE
INSTITUTION
PI Name
Subject Matter
Databases Design
27
Topics of Discussion
n Memorandum of Understanding• All Partner Facilities must sign
• Non-binding and negotiable
• Intended to ensure institution’s administration or management aware of arrangement
• Should help facility with support from institution
• Defines capabilities offered through NSUF, terms and conditions of use, etc.
n Non-Proprietary User Agreements• Agreement between BEA and the Awardee (Institution)
• Adapted from Office of Science NPUA
• Standard agreement for Universities and Industry
• Bi-lateral agreement for National Laboratories
• Agreement is controlled by DOE
• Contents of Interest
• Implicit title transfer (material for irradiation)
• Exclusive research rights for three years
• Indemnity and Liability
• Patent Rights
• Rights of Government
• Attachments
• Scope of Work
• Funding Statement
28
Topics of Discussion
RTE Rules
All proposals must achieve a scientific outcome at the NSUF facility. Therefore, proposals
requesting only sample preparation and/or shipping will not be accepted
A proposal may request use of only ONE institution. This excludes shipping and initial sample
preparation that cannot be performed at the requested institution (e.g., sample preparation at
INL for examination at IVEM is acceptable).
NSUF will only support activities/shipping at or between NSUF facilities.
Only one PI is allowed per proposal.
A PI may submit no more than two proposals per call.
A PI may have only three active RTE/beamline experiments. Additional proposals will not be
considered.
Proposals involving the examination of only non-irradiated structural or cladding materials will
not be accepted.
Proposals requiring more than nine months, from date of award, to complete work will not be
accepted.
Proposals are open to PIs affiliated with a U.S. university, national laboratory, domestic entity or
foreign entity incorporated in the U.S. In addition, proposals from PIs not from a U.S. entity will
be accepted as long as the proposal contains a collaborator who is from a U.S. university,
national laboratory, domestic entity, or foreign entity incorporated in the U.S and who has a
significant role in the experiment or project that supports the RTE.
Proposers must identify the specific source of R&D funding that will support the RTE access.
Proposals must include all publications that the PI and co-PIs have produced as a result of any
and all NSUF (RTE, beamline, and CINR) provided experiments or projects.
The proposed work should not duplicate any currently funded DOE program or project
29
Topics of Discussion
RTE Guidelines
n Founding RTE Principle
“Cost less than $50K and take less than a month to complete”
n Current guidelines (excluding IVEM, MRCAT and HPC)
Aid the PI in writing a feasible proposal
About three weeks and $25K at MACS
$25K available for sample preparation and shipment
Also driven by scheduling limitations
Extended to other partner facility instruments
n Proposed Guidelines
Facility and Instrument Specific
Keep the guidelines very simple (3 weeks at MACS, one instrument/day)
Keep instrument access costs below $40K
Address facility availability or other concerns
Input needed by June 30 in order to open the next RTE call
Focus on high demand instruments – add more for future calls
30
Topics of Discussion
n Periodic Facility Reviews / Ongoing Facility Interactions
• Review performance including milestones
• Review utilization
• Review engagement
• Review improvements
• Establish criteria
• If negative review – probation period
n Committees – what would they do?
• Executive Committee (5-10 members?, rotating membership?)
• Infrastructure Committee
• New Facility Application Review Committee (Teams?)
• Science/Technology Focus Committee
• Technical Readiness Level Evaluation Committee (Teams?)
Recommended