Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T09:33:15.648Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

First-principles design of next-generation nuclear fuels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 March 2011

Younsuk Yun
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Reactor Physics and Systems Behaviour, Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland; younsuk.yun@psi.ch
Peter M. Oppeneer
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Sweden; peter.oppeneer@fysik.uu.se

Abstract

The behavior of nuclear fuel in a reactor is a complex phenomenon that is influenced by a large number of materials properties, which include thermomechanical strength, chemical stability, microstructure, and defects. As a consequence, a comprehensive understanding of the fuel material behavior presents a significant modeling challenge, which must be mastered to improve the efficiency and reliability of current nuclear reactors. It is also essential to the development of advanced fuel materials for next-generation reactors. Over the last two decades, the use of density functional theory (DFT) has greatly contributed to our understanding by providing profound information on nuclear fuel materials, ranging from fundamental properties of f-electron systems to thermomechanical materials properties. This article briefly summarizes the main achievements of this first-principles computational methodology as it applies to nuclear fuel materials. Also, the current status of first-principles modeling is discussed, considering existing limitations and drawbacks such as size limitation and the added complexity associated with high temperature analysis. Finally, the future role of DFT modeling in the nuclear fuels industry is put into perspective.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2011
Figure 0

Figure 1. (a) Spin up and (b) spin down m-orbital decomposed partial electron density of states (PDOS) of the uranium 5f electrons in UO2. (c) Sketch of the seven 5f orbitals.31 The first-principles calculations provide detailed information on the chemical bonding between uranium and oxygen.

Figure 1

Figure 2. (a) Oxygen sublattice of a 2 × 2 × 2 supercell of actinide dioxides; (b) the migration of an oxygen vacancy VO between two adjacent lattice sites; (c) the migration of an actinide vacancy VM (M = U or Th); (d) the migration of an actinide vacancy VM’ due to the effective movement of a joint vacancy, VMO. OIS, octahedral interstitial site; a0, lattice parameter.

Figure 2

Table I. Calculated and experimental formation energies in eV of intrinsic defects in UO2.

Figure 3

Table II. Computed12,15 and experimental33 migration energies Em in eV.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Electron charge distribution of Xe-VMO complex obtained through atomic relaxation in (a) UO2 and (b) ThO2. The magnitude of the electron density is indicated by a color grading, where red is used for the highest electron density and blue for the lowest one. Xe moves from the initial position at VU to the center of VUO when a VO is created at the nearest lattice site, while in (b), it remains at the initial position of VTh, despite the creation of a new VO nearby. These processes are schematically explained in the right-hand panel.

Figure 5

Figure 4. (a) Structure of a Xe-trivacancy complex, (b) dissociation of VO from a Xe-trivacancy with binding energy of about 1.4 eV, (c) combination of a new VO with the migration energy of 0.63 eV, (d) migration of VU with the help of the nearest VO with a migration energy of 2.19 eV, (e) formation of a new Xe-trivacancy complex by the spontaneous movement of Xe due to strain energy in the UO2 lattice.9

Figure 6

Table III. Computational details for self-consistent field (SCF) calculations of antiferromagnetic UO2 using the VASP (Vienna ab initio simulation package) code.45