Experimental Study on Laser Cutting Process of Simulated Fast Reactor Fuel Rods

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4699562/v1

Download PDF

Article

Experimental Study on Laser Cutting Process of Simulated Fast Reactor Fuel Rods

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4699562/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

The cladding of fast reactor fuel rod is fabricated using stainless steel, which, owing to its ductility, presents challenges such as increased tool wear and diminished cut quality when mechanically sheared. In light of technological advancements, laser cutting has emerged as a superior method due to its flexibility and high efficiency. The quality of laser-cut fuel rod significantly influences subsequent processing of short segments. This study systematically analyzes the impact of various laser cutting parameters on the cutting quality of simulated fast reactor fuel rod. Optimization of cutting speed, focal position, power, and gas pressure has substantially improved cutting effectiveness. Experimental findings indicate that a combination of 1 m/min cutting speed, focal position ranging from − 20 mm to -25 mm, power between 7200 W and 9600 W, and 10 MPa gas pressure achieves the optimal balance between efficiency and quality, providing crucial insights for the efficient cutting of fast reactor fuel rod.

Physical sciences/Engineering/Mechanical engineering

Physical sciences/Energy science and technology/Nuclear energy/Nuclear fuel

Physical sciences/Energy science and technology/Nuclear energy/Nuclear fusion and fission

Physical sciences/Energy science and technology/Nuclear energy/Nuclear waste

Fuel rod

Laser cutting

Cutting quality

Fast reactor technology represents a crucial step in maximizing the efficient utilization of uranium resources. One of its essential processes involves the reprocessing of spent fast reactor fuel ^[1–6], where irradiated fuel is treated to extract and purify unburned uranium and newly formed plutonium for recycling ^[7–9]. This ensures effective fuel reutilization. However, a significant difference exists between fast reactors and pressurized water reactors in the fuel rod cutting process. Fuel rods are elongated cylindrical structures, typically 1.5m to 3m in length and 10mm to 15mm in diameter ^{[10, 11]}, encased in stainless steel with an additional 1mm to 2mm thick stainless steel wire wrapping. Due to the ductile nature of stainless steel, mechanical cutting methods lead to increased tool wear and reduced clean segment rates ^{[6, 12, 13]}.

With technological advancements, laser cutting has emerged as a focal point of global research ^[14–18]. It offers numerous advantages, including high cutting speeds, minimal secondary waste generation, absence of surface deformation or residual stress, suitability for high-radioactive and difficult-to-access areas via fiber optic delivery, extended tool lifespan through non-contact cutting, and applicability to complex and high-precision tasks ^[19–22]. Laser technology is pivotal for the future of fast reactor fuel rod cutting, with countries like India, the United States, and Japan leading in its development for spent fuel components ^{[23, 24]}.

The requirements for cutting fast reactor fuel rods include achieving minimal kerf width to maximize fuel recovery, minimizing slag deposition on cut surfaces, and ensuring smoothness for efficient transportation of short segments ^{[19, 25–29]}. These challenges underscore the importance of laser cutting processes, which involve intricate interactions among material properties, laser beam characteristics, and cutting auxiliary gases ^[30–32]. Parameters such as material type, thickness, surface condition, laser mode, power, cutting speed, assist gas type, pressure, focal position, and nozzle dimensions significantly impact cutting quality ^[33–35].

This study employs a self-developed laser cutting platform to investigate how varying parameters—cutting speed, focal position, power, gas pressure, and assist gas type—affect the cutting performance of simulated fuel rod components. Through methods such as photographic observation, optical microscopy, and roughness measurements, the study analyzes and characterizes cutting outcomes under different conditions to identify optimal process parameters.

2.1 Cutting Objects

The fast reactor assembly is comprised of a large stainless steel hexagonal tube that encloses a varying number of aligned, slender fuel rod components. In this laser cutting experiment, the focus is on aligned rows of simulated fast reactor fuel rod components. Each fuel rod is wrapped with a stainless steel wire measuring 1-2mm in diameter, with an overall diameter of approximately 12mm. The stainless steel cladding of the fuel rod is about 1mm thick, and its interior is filled with aluminum oxide ceramic to simulate UO₂ fuel. Figure 1 provides a schematic diagram illustrating the stainless steel assembly and the configuration of the fuel rod components.

2.2 Experimental Facilities

The experiment utilized a cutting table measuring approximately 3 meters in length and 2 meters in height, equipped with functions for rotating, cutting, and retracting stainless steel components. The laser cutting head employed can withstand up to 15000 watts of power and includes capacitive focus positioning capability. The laser system utilized is the YMM-12000 model, a 12000-watt laser customized by Guozhi Laser, complete with a water chiller, gas cylinder set, control cabinet, and other necessary components. The primary equipment utilized in the experiment is depicted in Fig. 2.

2.3 Analytical Method

The analysis and testing in this study encompass three main components. Firstly, photographic and visual inspection is used to evaluate the damage to the fuel rod and its wrapping wire. Secondly, a Vernier caliper is employed to measure the width of the kerf. Thirdly, an optical microscope is utilized for photography and to measure the length of slag deposits. Additionally, a surface roughness tester is used to quantify the roughness of the cut surfaces.

Optical microscope: Wan Hao Imaging, model VMS-4030

Surface roughness tester: Wenzhou Jingcheng Measurement Equipment Co., Ltd., model TR100

2.4 Experimental Process

The key focus in cutting fuel rod components is on minimizing the width of the kerf, as narrower kerfs result in less damage to the fuel. Attention is also directed towards evaluating the damage to the cut surfaces and the amount of slag deposition. These surfaces will serve as future contact points for dissolution reactions and may affect the transportation of fuel segments. Therefore, before each cutting operation, precise experimental parameters are established and assigned unique experiment numbers. Each experiment involves making two cuts under identical parameters: the first cut slices halfway through a fuel rod component for measuring the kerf width (as shown in Fig. 3), while the second cut completely severs the entire fuel rod for surface characterization (including measuring roughness and inspecting slag deposits under an optical microscope).

The cutting process begins with the cutting head moving laterally across the fuel rod components in the first step, halting upon completion of the cut. In the second step, the cutting head repeats the lateral movement to simultaneously sever all rows of fuel rods and their wrapping wires, as illustrated in Fig. 4.

2.5 Experiment Parameter

This experiment focuses on examining the impact of cutting speed, focal position, power, type of assist gas, and gas pressure on cutting quality. Parameters such as the ratio of cutting head lenses and fiber core diameter are kept constant throughout. Table 1 lists all the parameters that remain unchanged. The experiment's identification number and parameters can be found in Fig. 2.

Table 1

Fixed Parameters for this Experiment
Fixed Parameters	Value
Cutting head lens ratio	1:2
Fiber core diameter (µm)	100
Height of cutting (mm)	10
Diameter of cutting nozzle (mm)	3
Duty ratio (%)	50
Impulse frequency(Hz)	4000

Table 2

Experiment Numbers and Parameters for this Experiment
Experiment Numbers	Cutting speed(m/min)	Focal position (mm)	Power(W)	Gaseous medium	Gas pressure(Mpa)
1	0.7	-20	9600	Air	15
2	1	-20	9600	Air	15
3	0.3	-20	9600	Air	15
4	0.7	-25	9600	Air	15
5	0.7	-15	9600	Air	15
6	0.7	-20	12000	Air	15
7	0.7	-20	7200	Air	15
8	0.7	-20	9600	Air	18
9	0.7	-20	9600	Air	10
10	0.7	-20	9600	Nitrogen	15
11	1	-20	9600	Nitrogen	15
12	0.3	-20	9600	Nitrogen	15
13	0.7	-25	9600	Nitrogen	15
14	0.7	-15	9600	Nitrogen	15
15	0.7	-20	12000	Nitrogen	15
16	0.7	-20	7200	Nitrogen	15
17	0.7	-20	9600	Nitrogen	18
18	0.7	-20	9600	Nitrogen	10

In this experiment, rows of components were cut using various cutting parameters, followed by photographing and observing the resulting damage. The observed damage primarily includes cutting marks and the condition of the cross-section on both the fuel rod components and the stainless steel wire wraps. Table 2 details the specific parameters used for each experiment, such as cutting speed, focal position, power, type of assist gas, and gas pressure. Images demonstrating the cutting outcomes under different parameters are shown in Fig. 5.

Cutting speed is a critical parameter directly influencing the interaction time between the laser and the material. Higher cutting speeds typically reduce exposure time, potentially leading to incomplete cuts and rougher edges. Conversely, lower speeds increase interaction time, which can result in excessive melting and rough cuts .Images 1, 2, 4, 5 (0.7–1.0 m/min): These images demonstrate that lower cutting speeds produce relatively clean cuts, especially noticeable in Fig. 5 where the focal position is -15mm. However, slightly increased edge roughness can be observed at higher speeds within this range. Image 3 (0.3 m/min): The cut in this image appears excessively melted, indicating that too low a speed results in excessive energy input and significant molten residue.

The focal position influences how concentrated the laser beam is on the material surface. Adjusting the focal position significantly affects cutting precision and depth. Images 4, 13 (-25 mm focal position): A deeper focal position concentrates energy more precisely at the cutting point, resulting in precise cuts with narrower kerfs. However, without optimization, it may increase molten residue. Images 5, 14 (-15 mm focal position): These images show that a shallower focal position slightly increases kerf width but reduces the risk of excessive molten residue, particularly evident in Fig. 5 where minimal residue is observed.

Laser power determines the beam's intensity, impacting material melting and removal efficiency. Image 6 (12000 W): Higher power results in more effective cutting, despite slightly increased heat input and molten residue, maintaining clean cuts. Image 7 (7200 W): Lower power settings lead to incomplete cuts with visible roughness and uncut sections, indicating inadequate energy to penetrate the material.

The type and pressure of assist gas play crucial roles in cooling, removing molten residue, and preventing oxidation. Images 10, 11, 13 (Nitrogen, 15 MPa): Moderate-pressure nitrogen facilitates clean cutting with minimal oxidation due to its inert properties. Images 17, 18 (Nitrogen, 18 MPa): Increasing nitrogen pressure to 18 MPa slightly reduces molten residue length and improves cutting quality, although excessively high pressure may cause material dispersion issues.

Figure 6 illustrates the kerf widths under various cutting parameters. Figure 6(a) displays the kerf widths at different cutting speeds, showing a significant impact of speed on kerf width. Higher cutting speeds (1 m/min) reduce the kerf width, especially when using air as the assist gas, likely due to the shorter interaction time between the laser and the material, which reduces the kerf width. Lower cutting speeds (0.3 m/min) increase the kerf width, particularly with nitrogen as the assist gas, indicating prolonged laser-material interaction results in wider kerfs.

Figure 6(b) presents the kerf widths at different focal positions. It reveals a significant influence of focal position on kerf width. Deeper focal positions (-25 mm) increase the kerf width, especially with air as the assist gas, possibly because deeper focal positions concentrate more laser energy inside the material, leading to increased material melting and wider kerfs. Shallower focal positions (-15 mm) also increase the kerf width, although the impact on kerf width is relatively minor when using nitrogen.

Figure 6(c) shows the kerf widths at different laser powers, highlighting a substantial effect of laser power on kerf width. Higher power (12000 W) increases the kerf width, evident with both air and nitrogen. This could be attributed to higher power levels causing increased material melting and wider kerfs. Conversely, lower power (7200 W) significantly reduces the kerf width under nitrogen conditions, indicating that moderate power settings better control cutting quality and prevent excessive melting.

Figure 6(d) depicts the kerf widths at different gas pressures, demonstrating a notable impact of pressure on kerf width. When using air as the assist gas, higher pressure (18 MPa) increases the kerf width, suggesting that high pressure may lead to incomplete material ejection during cutting and widen the kerf. Lower pressure (10 MPa) reduces the kerf width, indicating that moderate pressure enhances cutting quality. The influence of nitrogen on kerf width is relatively minor across different pressures, indicating effective control of kerf width regardless of pressure.

Figure 7 illustrates surface roughness under various cutting parameters. Figure 7(a) shows how surface roughness varies with different cutting speeds, highlighting a significant impact of speed. Higher cutting speeds (1 m/min) notably reduce roughness, possibly due to shorter laser-material interaction times that minimize the heat-affected zone, especially evident with air as the assist gas. Conversely, lower cutting speeds (0.3 m/min) increase roughness, likely due to prolonged laser exposure leading to excessive melting and oxidation, particularly noticeable with nitrogen as the assist gas.

Figure 7(b) demonstrates the effect of focal position on surface roughness. A deeper focal position (-25 mm) results in the lowest roughness, indicating better concentration of laser energy within the material, reducing roughness. In contrast, a shallower focal position (-15 mm) increases roughness, potentially due to uneven distribution of laser energy, impacting surface quality less noticeably when using nitrogen.

Figure 7(c) shows how laser power influences surface roughness. Higher power (12000 W) significantly increases roughness, particularly noticeable with both air and nitrogen assist gases, likely due to increased material melting. Lower power (7200 W) substantially reduces roughness under nitrogen conditions, indicating optimal power settings improve cutting quality without excessive melting.

Figure 7(d) displays the impact of gas pressure on surface roughness. With air as the assist gas, higher pressure (18 MPa) reduces roughness by effectively removing molten material, contrasting sharply with increased roughness at lower pressures (10 MPa) due to inadequate slag removal. When using nitrogen, higher pressures also reduce roughness, but excessive pressure (18 MPa) may increase roughness due to uneven material dispersion.

Figure 8 illustrates magnified views of cut surfaces under various cutting conditions. Cutting speed is a critical parameter influencing cutting quality. Experiments 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, and 12 demonstrate surfaces at different cutting speeds. Experiment 1 (0.7 m/min, air 15 MPa): The surface is rough with noticeable residual slag, indicating that lower cutting speeds result in prolonged laser-material interaction, leading to excessive melting. Experiment 2 (1 m/min, air 15 MPa): Surface quality improves slightly but still exhibits some slag, suggesting moderate increases in cutting speed can reduce slag formation. Experiment 3 (0.3 m/min, air 15 MPa): The surface is extremely rough with significant slag, illustrating that excessively low speeds cause severe overheating and melting. Experiment 10 (0.7 m/min, nitrogen 15 MPa): The surface is smoother with less slag, demonstrating that using nitrogen can effectively reduce oxidation and slag even at the same speed. Experiment 11 (1 m/min, nitrogen 15 MPa): Surface quality further improves, appearing smoother, indicating better results with higher cutting speeds combined with nitrogen. Experiment 12 (0.3 m/min, nitrogen 15 MPa): The surface remains rough with visible slag, showing that even with nitrogen, excessively low speeds do not significantly improve cutting quality.

Focal position is another critical factor influencing laser cutting accuracy and melt depth. Experiments 4, 5, 13, and 14 depict surfaces at different focal positions. Experiment 4 (-25 mm, air 15 MPa): The surface is relatively smooth with slight edge slag, indicating that deeper focal positions can concentrate energy but may generate excessive heat. Experiment 5 (-15 mm, air 15 MPa): The surface is rough with noticeable slag, showing that shallower focal positions disperse energy unevenly, adversely affecting cutting quality. Experiment 13 (-25 mm, nitrogen 15 MPa): The surface is smooth with minimal slag, indicating optimal cutting results with deeper focal positions and nitrogen assist. Experiment 14 (-15 mm, nitrogen 15 MPa): Surface quality is moderate with some slag, suggesting slight improvement with nitrogen assist at shallow focal positions, though not ideal.

Laser power directly influences material melting. Experiments 6, 7, 15, and 16 display surfaces at different power levels. Experiment 6 (12000 W, air 15 MPa): The surface is rough with severe slag, indicating excessive power leads to over-melting. Experiment 7 (7200 W, air 15 MPa): The surface is smoother with less slag, showing that moderate power effectively controls melting. Experiment 15 (12000 W, nitrogen 15 MPa): Surface quality improves somewhat but still shows some slag, suggesting nitrogen assist mitigates negative effects of high power to some extent. Experiment 16 (7200 W, nitrogen 15 MPa): The surface is smooth with almost no slag, demonstrating optimal results with moderate power combined with nitrogen.

Gas pressure affects cooling and slag removal during laser cutting. Experiments 8, 9, 17, and 18 exhibit surfaces at different pressures. Experiment 8 (air 18 MPa): The surface is smoother with less slag, indicating higher pressure aids in slag removal. Experiment 9 (air 10 MPa): The surface is rough with severe slag, illustrating that too low pressure cannot effectively remove slag. Experiment 17 (nitrogen 18 MPa): The surface is smooth with minimal slag, showing significant improvement in cutting quality with high pressure and nitrogen combination. Experiment 18 (nitrogen 10 MPa): Surface quality is moderate with some slag, indicating nitrogen is still preferable to air at lower pressures.

Figure 9 illustrates the dross length under different cutting parameters. Figure 9(a) presents the variation in dross length at different cutting speeds. It is evident from the graph that cutting speed significantly influences dross length. Higher cutting speeds (1 m/min) notably reduce dross length, especially when using air as the assist gas. This reduction is likely due to the shorter interaction time between the laser and the material, minimizing the formation of dross. Conversely, lower cutting speeds (0.3 m/min) increase dross length, particularly when using nitrogen as the assist gas, indicating prolonged laser-material interaction leading to increased dross formation.

Figure 9(b) illustrates the effect of focal position on dross length. It is clear that focal position has a significant impact. A deeper focal position (-25 mm) reduces dross length, especially when using nitrogen as the assist gas, possibly because the deeper focus concentrates laser energy more within the material, thereby reducing surface dross formation. In contrast, a shallower focal position (-15 mm) increases dross length, suggesting that shallow focal positions lead to energy dispersion and increased dross generation.

Figure 9(c) shows the impact of laser power on dross length. The graph indicates that laser power has a significant effect. Moderate powers (9600 W and 12000 W) result in lower dross lengths under both air and nitrogen conditions, indicating effective control of dross formation at moderate power levels. Lower power (7200 W) significantly increases dross length under air conditions, indicating insufficient material melting and removal, whereas moderate power (7200 W) under nitrogen conditions notably reduces dross length.

Figure 9(d) demonstrates the influence of gas pressure on dross length. The graph reveals that gas pressure has a notable effect. When using air as the assist gas, lower pressure (10 MPa) notably reduces dross length, likely due to easier dross removal. Higher pressure (18 MPa) increases dross length, suggesting incomplete dross removal during cutting. With nitrogen as the assist gas, the impact of pressure is relatively minor, though lower pressure (10 MPa) still reduces dross length.

This study employed laser cutting to investigate the cutting of simulated fuel rod bundles under various parameters, systematically exploring their effects on cutting quality. The main parameters studied included cutting speed, focal position, power, and gas pressure, with evaluation metrics focusing on surface roughness, kerf width, and dross length. Below is a summary and analysis of the experimental results:

(1) Cutting Speed: Cutting speed significantly influences cutting quality. Higher speeds (e.g., 1 m/min) reduce surface roughness and dross length while minimizing kerf width. This is attributed to reduced laser-material contact time, mitigating excessive melting and oxidation. Conversely, lower speeds (e.g., 0.3 m/min) result in overheating and increased dross length and surface roughness. Therefore, a cutting speed of 1 m/min strikes the optimal balance between efficiency and quality.

(2) Focal Position: Focal position has a notable effect on surface quality and kerf width. Deeper focal positions (e.g., -25 mm) concentrate laser energy, reducing surface roughness and dross length while slightly increasing kerf width. Conversely, shallow focal positions (e.g., -15 mm) disperse energy, increasing surface roughness and dross length. Focal positions ranging from − 20 mm to -25 mm are considered more ideal.

(3) Laser Power: Laser power exhibits a complex influence on cutting quality. Moderate powers (e.g., 7200 W to 9600 W) effectively control the cutting process, reducing surface roughness and dross length while maintaining a smaller kerf width. Higher powers (e.g., 12000 W) accelerate cutting speed but also increase surface roughness and dross length due to excessive melting. Hence, selecting moderate laser power is crucial for optimizing cutting quality.

(4) Gas Pressure: Gas pressure significantly affects cutting quality. Lower pressures (e.g., 10 MPa) with air as the assist gas notably reduce dross length, facilitating easier removal. Higher pressures (e.g., 18 MPa) increase dross length, indicating incomplete removal during cutting. When using nitrogen, pressure's influence is less pronounced, though lower pressures (e.g., 10 MPa) still effectively reduce dross length.

This study demonstrates that optimizing laser cutting parameters can significantly enhance the cutting quality of simulated fuel rod bundles. Specifically, a cutting speed of 1 m/min, focal positions from − 20 mm to -25 mm, laser powers between 7200 W and 9600 W, and a gas pressure of 10 MPa provide the best balance between efficiency and quality. These findings offer valuable insights for practical applications of laser cutting in fast reactor fuel rod fabrication.

Future Outlook: With the development of nuclear energy technology, laser cutting has shown tremendous potential in the dismantling and processing of fast reactor fuel rod bundles. Looking ahead, optimizing laser cutting parameters such as cutting speed, focal position, power, and gas pressure will enhance cutting precision and efficiency, while reducing slag and surface roughness. Furthermore, advancements in laser technology, including ultrafast lasers and intelligent control systems, promise to further improve cutting quality and minimize the need for subsequent processing. Moreover, the increasing application of laser cutting technology in highly radioactive environments, facilitated by remote operation and automated systems, will enhance operational safety and control. These advancements will provide robust technological support for the efficient reprocessing and recycling of nuclear fuel resources.

Funding:

National Key R&D Program of China (2022YFB4603000).

Author Contribution

Yuzhou Ming , Fang Liu , Taihong Yan , Gaoyang Mi , Weifang Zheng has carried on the design of experimentsTianchi Li, Zengliang Mo, Qi Chen, Jia Zhou, Zhi Cao, Jianhua Guo, Zhongyuan Yang，Chunwei Tang， Hongmei Zhang, Tao Xiaoprocured, assembled, debugged the experimental setup, conducted experiments, and analyzed the data.Tianchi Li, Zengliang Mo, Qi Chen Wrote the initial draft of the manuscript.Wensi Li Scientifically polished the language of the manuscript.Taihong Yan and Weifang Zheng Proofread the final manuscript。

Data Availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request

Wang, M. et al. The role of advanced reactors technologies in China in achieving carbon neutral goals. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Nuclear Engineering (ICONE), 1933–1940 (2023).
Ochoa, R., Jimenez, G., & Perez-Martin, S. Analysis of a Spanish energy scenario with Generation IV nuclear reactors. Energy Convers. Manage. 75, 389–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.06.038 (2013).
Zou, J., Zhao, J., Gudowski, W., & Chmielarz, B. Study of minor actinides transmutation in a lead-cooled fast reactor. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Nuclear Engineering (ICONE), 1479–1491 (2019).
Banerjee, S., & Gupta, H. The evolution of the Indian nuclear power programme. Prog. Nucl. Energy 101, 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2017.02.008 (2017).
Niwa, H., Aoto, K., & Morishita, M. Current status and perspective of advanced loop type fast reactor in fast reactor cycle technology development project (American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, 2007).
Li, T., Liu, F., Jia, Z., Luo, F., Yan, T., & Zheng, W. Dissolution of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel in nitric acid: A review. Heliyon 10(6), E27502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27502 (2024).
Ion, S. Reaction: recycling and generation IV systems. Chem 1(5), 663–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chempr.2016.10.008 (2016).
Adamov, E. et al. Spent nuclear fuel reprocessing and nuclear materials recycling in two-component nuclear energy. Atom. Energy 130(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10512-021-00769-w (2021).
Xian, L., Tian, G., Beavers, C.M., Teat, S.J., & Shuh, D.K. Glutarimidedioxime: a complexing and reducing reagent for plutonium recovery from spent nuclear fuel reprocessing. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 55(15), 4671–4673. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201510712 (2016).
Ren, F.Y., & Zhou, Z.X. Foreign nuclear fuel reprocessing (Atomic Energy Press, Beijing, 2006).
Zhang, Z.F., Wang, J.F., & Zhang, T.X. Power reactor nuclear fuel reprocessing technology (Atomic Energy Press, Beijing, 2013).
Satish, K.V. et al. Vibration Analysis and Diagnostics of a High Speed Centrifuge for Fast Reactor Fuel Reprocessing Applications. Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn. 23(19), 2350184. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219455423501845 (2023).
He, L.Y. et al. Effect of reprocessing on neutrons of a molten chloride salt fast reactor. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 34(3), 46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-023-01186-3 (2023).
Hidetoshi, H. et al. ICONE19-43720 Engineering Scale Tests of Mechanical Disassembly and Short Stroke Shearing Systems for FBR Fuel Assembly. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, 19–35 (2011).
Birely, J., Cartwright, D., & Marinuzzi, J. Application of high power lasers to problems in the nuclear fuel cycle. In Ultra High Power Lasers for Practicable Applications, 124–131 (1976).
Kongiang, S., Rojananan, S., & Thipprakmas, S. Cut surface characteristics of aluminum alloy sheet in cryogenic shearing process. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. E J. Process Mech. Eng.. https://doi.org/10.1177/09544089231221529 (2024).
He, Y. et al. Laser cutting technologies and corresponding pollution control strategy. Processes 10(4), 732. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10040732 (2022).
Liu, S. et al. A state-of-the-art review of radioactive decontamination technologies: facing the upcoming wave of decommissioning and dismantling of nuclear facilities. Sustainability 14(7), 4021. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074021 (2022).
Oh, S., Lee, I., Park, Y.B., & Ki, H. Investigation of cut quality in fiber laser cutting of CFRP. Opt. Laser Technol. 113, 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2018.12.018 (2019).
Dodds, J.M., & Rawcliffe, J. Radionuclide distribution during ytterbium doped fibre laser cutting for nuclear decommissioning. Prog. Nucl. Energy 118, 103122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2019.103122 (2020).
Sharma, A.K., Xu, R., Ahmed, Z., Miwa, S., Suzuki, S., & Kosuge, A. Investigation of aerosol generation through laser cleaning of various surfaces and optimization of mist & spray scavenging. J. Aerosol Sci. 177, 106329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2023.106329 (2024).
Takahashi, K., Watanabe, T., & Kurosawa, K. Development of thick plate cutting technology with fiber-delivered high power Nd: YAG laser beam. In International Congress on Applications of Lasers & Electro-Optics, 229–237 (2001).
Daguin, P. et al. LD-SAFE Project: Laser Dismantling Environmental and Safety Assessment-Laser Cutting Demonstration for Nuclear Power Reactors Dismantling. In International Conference on Radioactive Waste Management and Environmental Remediation, 1–8 (2023).
Shin, J.S., Oh, S.Y., Park, S.K., Kim, T.S., Park, H., & Lee, J. Underwater laser cutting of thick stainless steel in various cutting directions for application to nuclear decommissioning. J. Nucl. Fuel Cycle Waste Technol. 19(3), 279–287. https://doi.org/10.7733/jnfcwt.2021.19.3.279 (2021).
Wu, Z. et al. Effect of Laser Cutting Process Parameters on the Cutting Quality of AZ31B Magnesium Alloy. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 32(11), 5201–5210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-022-07459-z (2023).
Liu, Y., & Zhang, S. Improving the cutting process and quality of thick plates with high-power fiber laser. Opt. Fiber Technol. 83, 103684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yofte.2024.103684 (2024).
Singh, T., Arab, J., & Chen, S.C. Improvement on surface quality of Inconel-718 slits via laser cutting and wire electrochemical machining processes. Opt. Laser Technol. 167, 109637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2023.109637 (2023).
Kim, K., Song, M.K., Kim, J.D., Lee, S.J., Shin, D., & Cho, D.W. Effect of assist gas pressure on cutting quality in underwater cutting of stainless steel using high-power fiber laser. Mod. Phys. Lett. B 36(16), 2242012. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021798492242012X (2022).
Keles, O., & Yilbas, B.S. Laser cutting of 2024 aluminium alloy and cutting quality assessment. Adv. Mater. Process. Technol. 1(1–2), 164–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/2374068X.2015.1116284 (2015).
Li, M., Han, H., Jiang, X., Zhang, X., & Chen, Y. Surface morphology and defect characterization during high-power fiber laser cutting of SiC particles reinforced aluminum metal matrix composite. Opt. Laser Technol. 155, 108419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2022.108419 (2022).
Kovalev, O., & Zaitsev, A. Modeling the Problems of Conjugate Heat and Mass Transfer in Processes of Gas-Laser Cutting of Materials. Heat Transfer Res. 36(7), 601–614. https://doi.org/10.1615/HeatTransRes.v36.i7.60 (2005).
Yilbas, B. A role of lasers in energy materials and future perspectives. Int. J. Energy Res. 42(2), 325–328. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.3857 (2018).
Liao, W., Wang, G., Zhong, L., Chen, Y., & Wang, J. Feasibility analysis and cutting process research on laser cutting medium-thick 20CrNiMo steel plates using a high-power fiber laser without assisted blowing. J. Manuf. Processes 111, 130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2024.01.020 (2024).
Kanyilmaz, A. The problematic nature of steel hollow section joint fabrication, and a remedy using laser cutting technology: A review of research, applications, opportunities. Eng. Struct. 183, 1027–1048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.12.080 (2019).
Angelova, Y.P. Factors influencing the laser treatment of textile materials: An overview. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 15, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558925020952803 (2020).

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Reviewers agreed at journal
09 Sep, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
09 Sep, 2024
Reviewers invited by journal
09 Sep, 2024
Editor assigned by journal
09 Sep, 2024
Editor invited by journal
11 Jul, 2024
Submission checks completed at journal
11 Jul, 2024
First submitted to journal
07 Jul, 2024

You are reading this latest preprint version

Experimental Study on Laser Cutting Process of Simulated Fast Reactor Fuel Rods

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1 Introduction

2 Experimental Methods and Materials

2.1 Cutting Objects

2.2 Experimental Facilities

2.3 Analytical Method

2.4 Experimental Process

2.5 Experiment Parameter

3 Results and Discussion

4 Summary and future outlook

Declarations

Funding:

Author Contribution

Data Availability

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1