Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:04:19.047Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stochastic Simulation of Pitting Degradation of Multi-Barrier Waste Container in the Potential Repository at Yucca Mountain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

J. H. Lee ,
J. E. Atkins  and
R. W. Andrews
J. H. Lee
Affiliation:
INTERA, Inc./CRWMS M&O 101 convention Center Drive, Suite P-i 10, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89109, USA
J. E. Atkins
Affiliation:
INTERA, Inc./CRWMS M&O 101 convention Center Drive, Suite P-i 10, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89109, USA
R. W. Andrews
Affiliation:
INTERA, Inc./CRWMS M&O 101 convention Center Drive, Suite P-i 10, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89109, USA
Get access

Abstract

A detailed stochastic waste package degradation simulation model was developed incorporating the humid-air and aqueous general and pitting corrosion models for the carbon steel corrosion-allowance outer barrier and aqueous pitting corrosion model for the Alloy 825 corrosion-resistant inner barrier. The uncertainties in the individual corrosion models were also incorporated to capture the variability in the corrosion degradation among waste packages and among pits in the same waste package. Within the scope of assumptions employed in the simulations, the corrosion modes considered, and the near-field conditions from the drift-scale thermohydrologic model, the results of the waste package performance analyses show that the current waste package design appears to meet the ‘controlled design assumption’ requirement of waste package performance, which is currently defined as having less than 1% of waste packages breached at 1,000 years [1]. It was shown that, except for the waste packages that fail early, pitting corrosion of the corrosion-resistant inner barrier has a greater control on the failure of waste packages and their subsequent degradation than the outer barrier. Further improvement and substantiation of the inner barrier pitting model (currently based on an elicitation) is necessary in future waste package performance simulation model.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 412: Symposium V – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XIX , 1995 , 603
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. CRWMS M&O, Total System Performance Assessment-1995: An Evaluation of the Potential Yucca Mountain Repository, B00000000–01717–2200–00136, Rev. 01, Nov. 1995.Google Scholar
3. Lee, J.H., Atkins, J.E., and Andrews, R.W., this volume.Google Scholar
4. Andrews, R.W., Dale, T.F., and McNeish, J.A., Total System Performance Assessment- 1993: An Evaluation of the Potential Yucca Mountain Repository, CRWMS M&O Report, B00000000–01717–2200–00099, Rev. 01, Las Vegas, NV, March 1995.Google Scholar
5. Vernon, W.H., Trans. Electrochem. Soc., 64, p. 31 (1933).Google Scholar
6. Phipps, P.B., and Rice, D.W., in Corrosion Chemisty, edited by Brubaker, G.R., and Phipps, P.B., ACS Symp. Ser. 89, Am. Chem. Soc., 1979, p. 235.Google Scholar
7. Haynie, F.H., Spence, J.W., and Upham, J.B., in Atmospheric Factors Affecting the Corrosion of Engineering Metals, ASTM STP 646, edited by Cobum, S.K., ASTM, 1978, p. 30.Google Scholar
8. Beavers, J.A. and Durr, C.L., Immersion Studies on Candidate Container Alloys for the Tuff Reposity, NUREG/CR-5598, Cortest Columbus Technologies, Columbus, OH, 1991.Google Scholar
9. Fyfe, D., in Corrosion: Vol.1-Metal/Environment Reactions, 3rd Ed., edited by Shreir, L.L., Jarman, R.A., and Burstein, G.T., Butterworth-Heinemann, p. 231 (1994).Google Scholar
10. Marsh, G.P., and Taylor, K.J., Corrosion Science, 28, p. 289 (1988).Google Scholar
11. Marsh, G.P., Taylor, K.J., and Sooi, Z., SKB Technical Report 88–09 (Feb. 1988).Google Scholar
12. Strutt, J.E., Nichols, J.R., and Barbier, B., Corrosion Science, 25, p. 305 (1985).Google Scholar
13. Lingineni, S., Reeves, M., and Mishra, S., Hydrothermal Analyses at the Waste Package/Drift Scale. A Benchmarking Study with FEHM and TOUGH2, CRWMS M&O Report, BBA000000–01717–0200–00001, Las Vegas, NV, 1994.Google Scholar
14. Farmer, J.C., Van Konynenburg, R.A., McCright, R.D., and Bullen, D.B., Suvyo Degradation Modes of Candidate Materials for High-Level Radioactive-Waste Disposal Containers. Volume 3: Localized Corrosion and Stress Corrosion Cracking of Austenitic Alloys, UCID-21362 Vol.3, Lawrence Livemore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 1988.Google Scholar
15. Farmer, J.C., and McCright, R.D., in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XII, edited by Lutze, W. and Ewing, R.C., Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. Vol.127, Pittsburg, PA, 1989, p. 359.Google Scholar