Publications

Abstract not provided.

Engineers performing safety analyses throughout the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex rely heavily on the information provided in the DOE Handbook, DOE-HDBK-3010, Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, to determine radionuclide source terms from postulated accident scenarios. In calculating source terms, analysts tend to use the DOE Handbook's bounding values on airborne release fractions (ARFs) and respirable fractions (RFs) for various categories of insults (representing potential accident release categories). This is typically due to both time constraints and the avoidance of regulatory critique. Limited experimental data on fragmentation of solids, such as ceramic pellets (i.e., PuO2), and container breach due to mechanical insults (i.e., explosion-induced fragmentation, drop and forklift impact), can be supplemented by modeling and simulation using high fidelity computational tools. This paper presents the use of Sandia National Laboratories' SIERRA Solid Mechanics (SIERRA/SM) finite element code to investigate the behavior of two widely utilized waste containers (Standard Waste Box and 7A Drum) subject to a range of free fall impact and puncture scenarios. The resulting behavior of the containers is assessed, and a methodology is presented for calculating bounding airborne release fractions from calculated breach areas for the various accident conditions considered. The paper also describes a novel multi-scale constitutive model recently implemented in SIERRA/SM that can simulate the fracture of brittle materials such as PuO2 and determining the amount of hazardous respirable particles generated during the fracture process. Comparisons are made between model predictions and simple bench-top experiments.

This user's guide documents capabilities in Sierra/SolidMechanics which remain "in-development" and thus are not tested and hardened to the standards of capabilities listed in Sierra/SM 4.52 User's Guide. Capabilities documented herein are available in Sierra/SM for experimental use only until their official release. These capabilities include, but are not limited to, novel discretization approaches such as peridynamics and the reproducing kernel particle method (RKPM), numerical fracture and failure modeling aids such as the extended finite element method (XFEM) and J-integral, explicit time step control techniques, dynamic mesh rebalancing, as well as a variety of new material models and finite element formulations.

This is an addendum to the Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.52 User's Guide that documents additional capabilities available only in alternate versions of the Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) code. These alternate versions are enhanced to provide capabilities that are regulated under the U.S. Department of State's International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) export control rules. The ITAR regulated codes are only distributed to entities that comply with the ITAR export control requirements. The ITAR enhancements to Sierra/SM include material models with an energy-dependent pressure response (appropriate for very large deformations and strain rates) and capabilities for blast modeling. This document is an addendum only; the standard Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.52 User's Guide should be referenced for most general descriptions of code capability and use.

Safety basis analysts throughout the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex rely heavily on the information provided in the DOE Handbook, DOE-HDBK-3010,Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, to determine radionuclide source terms from postulated accident scenarios. In calculating source terms, analysts tend to use the DOE Handbook's bounding values on airborne release fractions (ARFs) and respirable fractions (RFs) for various categories of insults (representing potential accident release categories). This is typically due to both time constraints and the avoidance of regulatory critique. Unfortunately, these bounding ARFs/RFs represent extremely conservative values. Moreover, they were derived from very limited small-scale bench/laboratory experiments and/or from engineered judgment.Thus, the basis for the data may not be representative of the actual unique accident conditions and configurations being evaluated.

Accurate and efficient constitutive modeling remains a cornerstone issue for solid mechanics analysis. Over the years, the LAME advanced material model library has grown to address this challenge by implement- ing models capable of describing material systems spanning soft polymers to stiff ceramics including both isotropic and anisotropic responses. Inelastic behaviors including (visco)plasticity, damage, and fracture have all incorporated for use in various analyses. This multitude of options and flexibility, however, comes at the cost of many capabilities, features, and responses and the ensuing complexity in the resulting imple- mentation. Therefore, to enhance confidence and enable the utilization of the LAME library in application, this effort seeks to document and verify the various models in the LAME library. Specifically, the broader strategy, organization, and interface of the library itself is first presented. The physical theory, numerical implementation, and user guide for a large set of models is then discussed. Importantly, a number of verifi- cation tests are performed with each model to not only have confidence in the model itself but also highlight some important response characteristics and features that may be of interest to end-users. Finally, in looking ahead to the future, approaches to add material models to this library and further expand the capabilities are presented.

Presented in this document is a small portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) verification test suite. Most of these tests are run nightly with the Sierra/SM code suite, and the results of the test are checked versus the correct analytical result. For each of the tests presented in this document, the test setup, a description of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SM code results to the analytic solution is provided. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

Presented in this document are the theoretical aspects of capabilities contained in the Sierra / SM code. This manuscript serves as an ideal starting point for understanding the theoretical foundations of the code. For a comprehensive study of these capabilities, the reader is encouraged to explore the many references to scientific articles and textbooks contained in this manual. It is important to point out that some capabilities are still in development and may not be presented in this document. Further updates to this manuscript will be made as these capabilities come closer to production level.

Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) is a Lagrangian, three-dimensional code for finite element analysis of solids and structures. It provides capabilities for explicit dynamic, implicit quasistatic and dynamic analyses. The explicit dynamics capabilities allow for the efficient and robust solution of models with extensive contact subjected to large, suddenly applied loads. For implicit problems, Sierra/SM uses a multi-level iterative solver, which enables it to effectively solve problems with large deformations, nonlinear material behavior, and contact. Sierra/SM has a versatile library of continuum and structural elements, and a large library of material models. The code is written for parallel computing environments enabling scalable solutions of extremely large problems for both implicit and explicit analyses. It is built on the SIERRA Framework, which facilitates coupling with other SIERRA mechanics codes. This document describes the functionality and input syntax for Sierra/SM.

Presented in this document is a small portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra / SolidMechanics (Sierra / SM) verification test suite. Most of these tests are run nightly with the Sierra / SM code suite, and the results of the test are checked versus the correct analytical result. For each of the tests presented in this document, the test setup, a description of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra / SM code results to the analytic solution is provided. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra / SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra / SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

Presented in this document are tests that exist in the Sierra/SolidMechanics example problem suite, which is a subset of the Sierra/SM regression and performance test suite. These examples showcase common and advanced code capabilities. A wide variety of other regression and verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite that are not included in this manual.

This document is a user's guide for capabilities that are not considered mature but are available in Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) for early adopters. The determination of maturity of a capability is determined by many aspects: having regression and verification level testing, documentation of functionality and syntax, and usability are such considerations. Capabilities in this document are lacking in one or many of these aspects.

Accurate and efficient constitutive modeling remains a cornerstone issues for solid mechanics analysis. Over the years, the LAME advanced material model library has grown to address this challenge by implement- ing models capable of describing material systems spanning soft polymers to stiff ceramics including both isotropic and anisotropic responses. Inelastic behaviors including (visco)plasticity, damage, and fracture have all incorporated for use in various analyses. This multitude of options and flexibility, however, comes at the cost of many capabilities, features, and responses and the ensuing complexity in the resulting imple- mentation. Therefore, to enhance confidence and enable the utilization of the LAME library in application, this effort seeks to document and verify the various models in the LAME library. Specifically, the broader strategy, organization, and interface of the library itself is first presented. The physical theory, numerical implementation, and user guide for a large set of models is then discussed. Importantly, a number of verifi- cation tests are performed with each model to not only have confidence in the model itself but also highlight some important response characteristics and features that may be of interest to end-users. Finally, in looking ahead to the future, approaches to add material models to this library and further expand the capabilities are presented.

This document covers Sierra/SolidMechanics capabilities specific to Goodyear use cases. Some information may be duplicated directly from the Sierra/SolidMechanics User's Guide but is reproduced here to provide context for Goodyear-specific options.

This is an addendum to the Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.48 User's Guide that documents additional capabilities available only in alternate versions of the Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) code. These alternate versions are enhanced to provide capabilities that are regulated under the U.S. Department of State's International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) export-control rules. The ITAR regulated codes are only distributed to entities that comply with the ITAR export-control requirements. The ITAR enhancements to Sierra/SM in- clude material models with an energy-dependent pressure response (appropriate for very large deformations and strain rates) and capabilities for blast modeling. Since this is an addendum to the standard Sierra/SM user's guide, please refer to that document first for general descriptions of code capability and use.

Accurate and efficient constitutive modeling remains a cornerstone issues for solid mechanics analysis. Over the years, the LAME advanced material model library has grown to address this challenge by implementing models capable of describing material systems spanning soft polymers to s ti ff ceramics including both isotropic and anisotropic responses. Inelastic behaviors including (visco) plasticity, damage, and fracture have all incorporated for use in various analyses. This multitude of options and flexibility, however, comes at the cost of many capabilities, features, and responses and the ensuing complexity in the resulting implementation. Therefore, to enhance confidence and enable the utilization of the LAME library in application, this effort seeks to document and verify the various models in the LAME library. Specifically, the broader strategy, organization, and interface of the library itself is first presented. The physical theory, numerical implementation, and user guide for a large set of models is then discussed. Importantly, a number of verification tests are performed with each model to not only have confidence in the model itself but also highlight some important response characteristics and features that may be of interest to end-users. Finally, in looking ahead to the future, approaches to add material models to this library and further expand the capabilities are presented.

Safety basis analysts throughout the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex rely heavily on the information provided in the DOE Handbook, DOE - HDBK - 3010, Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, to determine radionuclide source terms. In calculating source terms, analysts tend to use the DOE Handbook's bounding values on airborne release fractions (ARFs) and respirable fractions (RFs) for various categories of insults (representing potential accident release categories). This is typically due to both time constraints and the avoidance of regulatory critique. Unfortunately, these bounding ARFs/RFs represent extremely conservative values. Moreover, they were derived from very limited small-scale bench/laboratory experiments and/or from engineered judgment. Thus, the basis for the data may not be representative of the actual unique accident conditions and configurations being evaluated. The goal of this research is to develop a more accurate and defensible method to determine bounding values for the DOE Handbook using state-of-art multi-physics-based computer codes. This enables us to better understand the fundamental physics and phenomena associated with the types of accidents in the handbook. In this year, this research included improvements of the high-fidelity codes to model particle resuspension and multi-component evaporation for fire scenarios. We also began to model ceramic fragmentation experiments, and to reanalyze the liquid fire and powder release experiments that were done last year. The results show that the added physics better describes the fragmentation phenomena. Thus, this work provides a low-cost method to establish physics-justified safety bounds by taking into account specific geometries and conditions that may not have been previously measured and/or are too costly to perform.

Abstract not provided.

In the summer of 2020, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) plans to launch a spacecraft as part of the Mars 2020 mission. One option for the rover on the proposed spacecraft uses a Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) to provide continuous electrical and thermal power for the mission. NASA has prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The EIS includes information on the risks of mission accidents to the general public and on-site workers at the launch complex. The Nuclear Risk Assessment (NRA) addresses the responses of the MMRTG option to potential accident and abort conditions during the launch opportunity for the Mars 2020 mission and the associated consequences. This information provides the technical basis for the radiological risks of the MMRTG option for the EIS. This paper provides a summary of the methods and results used in the NRA.

Abstract not provided.

In the summer of 2020, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) plans to launch a spacecraft as part of the Mars 2020 mission. One option for the rover on the proposed spacecraft uses a Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (MMRTG) to provide continuous electrical and thermal power for the mission. An alternative option being considered is a set of solar panels for electrical power with up to 80 Light-Weight Radioisotope Heater Units (LWRHUs) for local component heating. Both the MMRTG and the LWRHUs use radioactive plutonium dioxide. NASA is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The EIS will include information on the risks of mission accidents to the general public and on-site workers at the launch complex. This Nuclear Risk Assessment (NRA) addresses the responses of the MMRTG or LWRHU options to potential accident and abort conditions during the launch opportunity for the Mars 2020 mission and the associated consequences. This information provides the technical basis for the radiological risks of both options for the EIS.