Atomic Accidents, page 27
The Sodium Reactor Experiment ran with a graphite moderator at very high temperature, giving an efficient means to make high-pressure steam. The coolant was liquid sodium, which would never boil away, could operate at atmospheric pressure, and would never react chemically with the graphite. It was a sound concept, but the problems of dealing with a flowing liquid metal that reacts explosively with water have plagued reactors with sodium-based coolants.
There was another good reason to use sodium instead of water as the coolant. In water-cooled graphite reactors, such as the plutonium production reactors at Hanford, the unintended loss of coolant in the reactor always improves the neutron population, and the reactivity of the pile increases. The power starts going up without human intention. Graphite is a near-perfect moderator material, and any action that reduces the amount of non-graphite in a reactor, including the formation of steam bubbles, is fission-favorable. There was no such worry if sodium, with a boiling point of 1,621°F, were used instead of water. With an intended coolant outlet temperature of 650°F at full power, bubble formation in the reactor was hardly a concern, and the reactor could operate at an ideal temperature for external steam production while running under no pressure at all.
It was early in the history of power reactor development, and there were few successful plans to draw on, so there were novelties in the SRE embodiment. At least one aspect of the plan, the sodium pumps, seemed sub-optimal. The EBR-I sodium-cooled breeder reactor in Idaho had been built back in 1951 using exceedingly clever magnetic induction pumps for the coolant. A sodium pump in this system was simply a modified section of pipe, having a copper electrode on either side of the inner channel. A direct current was applied to the electrodes with a static magnetic field running vertically through the pipe, and the electrically conductive liquid metal was dragged along through the pipe by the same induced force that turns the starter motor on a car. The pump had no moving parts. EBR-I reported no problems using induction pumps, but the EBR-I was producing a scant 200 kilowatts of electricity.
For the SRE, hot oil pumps used in gasoline refineries were used to push the sodium.139 A large electric motor, capable of moving molten sodium at 1,480 gallons per minute up a vertical pipe 60 feet high, turned a long steel shaft, ending in a turbo impeller in a tightly sealed metal case. A single, liquid-cooled ball bearing supported the working end of the shaft. The problem of keeping liquid sodium from leaking past the impeller and into the bearing was solved by modifying the end of the pump. The shaft was sealed with a ring of sodium, frozen solid in place by a separate cooling system. The coolant to be pumped into the seal could not, of course, be water, which would react enthusiastically with the sodium. It had to be a liquid that had zero trouble being next to sodium. Tetralin was chosen.
1,2,3,4-tetradhydronapthalene, or “tetralin,” is a solvent, similar to paint thinner you would buy at the hardware store, first synthesized by Auguste George Darzens in 1926. Its molecule is ten carbon atoms and a dozen hydrogens, looking like two benzene rings stuck together. It has no particular problem with sodium, and it evaporates at about 403°F. The tetralin was circulated through the sodium seal, keeping it solidified, in a continuous loop using two parallel evaporation coolers to shed the heat from the seal. Electrically driven pumps kept it moving, with a gasoline engine for a backup in case of an electrical failure. It was a complicated sub-system in a complicated power plant, requiring pipes, valves, pumps, wiring, instrumentation, tanks, and coolers, just to keep the sodium off the pump bearings. The fact that it had to be backed up was ominous. It is always a better system when if everything fails, the wreckage reduces to an inert, safe condition.
The cooling system used three closed loops. The primary loop was liquid sodium running through the reactor. The natural sodium was constantly being activated into radioactive sodium-24 by contact with the neutrons in the reactor. To eliminate the potential accident of radioactive sodium leaking into the steam system, a second sodium loop took the heat from the first loop and took it outside the reactor building, where it was used to generate steam for the turbo-generator in a water loop. For low-power experiments in which electrical power was not generated, the water loop was diverted into an air-blast heat exchanger, dumping all the power into the atmosphere. There was no danger of broken or melted fuel leaking radioactive fission products into the surroundings, as the second sodium loop was a well-designed buffer. No expensive containment structure was needed for the reactor, because there was no chance of a radiation-scattering steam explosion in the building. The steam was generated out in the yard, and it was not connected directly to the reactor.
Radioactive gases produced by fission, such as vaporized iodine-131 and xenon-135, were controlled in the stainless steel reactor tank by a bellows structure at the top, giving the tightly sealed system room to expand. Helium was kept over the reactor core to prevent air from leaking in and reacting with the sodium. The fission gases were piped off and compressed into holding tanks for controlled release into the environment after having been held long enough for the radioactivity to have decayed away. There were outer space reactors, rocket engines, and military systems being developed at Santa Susana, and all had their considerations of performance, weight, and reliability, but this SRE was to be a prototype civilian power plant. As such, the prevention of harm to the public was a primary and noble design consideration.
All newly designed sub-systems were actively tested at Santa Susana before they were integrated into this new type of power reactor. It was an experimental setup stacked with many unknowns, and there was a lot to learn about graphite-moderated, sodium-cooled reactors. The operation log shows that almost immediately there was trouble with the sodium pumps. Hours after the first power startup on April 25, 1957, the shaft seal on the main primary pump failed. A few weeks later, tetralin was leaking from an auxiliary secondary pump. A week later, the main secondary pump was replaced. In August, the sodium was found to be contaminated with tetralin. In November, the cold trap was clogged with sodium oxide. Air was getting in somewhere. In January 1958, sodium smoke filled the high bay, and men had to go in with oxygen masks to find the leaking bellows valves. In May the shaft seal on an auxiliary primary pump failed, and out of a main primary pump they could smell the strong odor of tetralin. Two months later all the pumps were taken apart and the ball bearings were replaced. The entire main primary pump was replaced with a spare. A month later, the electromagnetic pump clogged with sodium oxide again, and in September the main secondary pump was leaking tetralin. By April 1959 the main primary pump was leaking tetralin from the sodium seal, and the entire unit had to be replaced. A month later, a tetralin fire was extinguished without causing reportable damage.140
So, pumping sodium around in a nuclear reactor was not as easy as it seemed on paper, and the SRE was being taken apart and worked on all the time. That is the life of an experimental reactor, and Rickover’s insistence on no sodium in his precious Nautilus seemed to make sense if you were outside looking in. Every time a component from the reactor tank or the primary coolant loop was removed for repair or examination, the sodium frozen to it had to be cleaned off. For this purpose, the pump or the fuel assembly was moved to the wash cell, a special setup behind an atmospherically sealed hot-cell window. Using remote arms, a technician would hose down the sodium coating with warm water. It would instantly turn into hot sodium hydroxide and wash down the drain at the bottom of the stainless steel hot-cell chamber, leaving the once-contaminated piece bright and sparkling clean.
Real trouble did not start until RUN 13, from May 27, 1959 to June 3, 1959. The crew was supposed to run the coolant outlet temperature up to 1,000°F to see if the system could stand to work at higher power. They hoped to log 150 megawatt days. All was well until two days after startup at 11:24 a.m., when the reactor scrammed due to an abnormal sodium flow rate. Not hesitating to contemplate why the flow rate was wrong, the operating crew restarted the reactor immediately and ran it back up to power. There it stayed until 9:00 the next morning, May 30. At that point, the reactor system went squirrelly.
First, the reactor inlet temperature began to rise slowly over three days. On June 1, the temperature difference across the heat exchanger rose sharply, indicating that something wasn’t working. The thermocouple in one fuel assembly, number 67, showed a temperature increase from a normal 860°F to 945°F. The temperature in the graphite abruptly jumped by 30°F, also on May 30, and the thermocouple in fuel assembly number 16 showed a similar increase in temperature. They did not notice it at the time, but the automatic control-rod positioner was compensating for a slow increase in reactivity in the reactor. Obviously, something had occurred that was impairing the coolant flow, and by June 2 the main primary pump casing was reeking of leaking tetralin. The reactor was shut down on June 3 to examine the fuel and repair the coolant pump.
As the pump was being torn down, fuel assembly number 56 was removed using the impressive automatic fuel-removal machine and transferred to the wash cell for examination. To quote the accident report exactly, “During the washing operation a pressure excursion occurred of sufficient magnitude to sever the fuel hanger rod and lift the shield plug out of the wash cell.” Translation: The damned thing exploded and put the wash cell out of commission for a year. Nobody was killed, thanks to the three-foot-thick window and aggressive ventilation.141
Retrospective analysis would find that the vent at the bottom of the fuel assembly, where coolant was supposed to flow in and past the hot fuel rods, had been blocked by a substance technically referred to as “black stuff,” and this left a large remainder of sodium in the bottom of the assembly. When the technician aimed the hose into the top of the assembly, the big sodium wad went off like a hand grenade. This was not noted at the time, and number 56 was put back in the reactor. Damage to the wash cell diverted attention from further identification of the black stuff, but a working explanation was that it was residue from tetralin decomposed in the hot coolant. There was not supposed to be any tetralin in the coolant, but three pints of it were found in the cold trap plus a couple of quarts of naphthalene crystals, or tetralin with the extra hydrogens stripped off. No connection in particular was seen between these contaminations and the strange behavior at the end of RUN 13. The troublesome tetralin-cooled seal on one pump, the main primary, was replaced with a nack-cooled sodium seal, and the reactor was ready for RUN 14.142
RUN 14 was started on July 12, 1959. The experimenters expected some trouble with the fuel-channel outlet temperature, but they were not sure why. Perhaps if they could intensify the effect, the cause would snap into focus. The reactor was brought smoothly to criticality at 6:50 a.m. At 8:35 they increased the power level to a modest 500 kilowatts, and the graphite temperature started to flop around wildly, running up and down by about 10°F, and various fuel-channel temperatures started to diverge by 200°F. Not seeing this as a problem, they kept going until 11:42 when the reactor, hinting that something was amiss, scrammed due to a loss of sodium flow in the primary loop.
At this point I must find fault with the way they were operating the SRE. Something about the reactor was not working, and yet they kept restarting it without knowing why. Today, this disregard of trouble signs would be unheard of, I hope. You would never restart a reactor without knowing exactly why it scrammed. There would be inquiries, hearings, lost licenses, and firings, but apparently not in 1959, when the screws of bureaucracy weren’t tightened as they seem now. Start her up again and let’s see if that was just a fluke. By 12:15 they had SRE back up to power and were increasing the power and the outlet temperature. At 1.5 megawatts the temperature was fluctuating inexplicably by 30°F.
At 3:30 P.M., both air-radiation monitors in the reactor building indicated a sharp rise in activity. By 5:00 P.M., radioactive air was going up the exhaust stack and into the atmosphere, and the radiation level over coolant channel seven was extremely high, at 25 roentgens per hour. Something had obviously broken, but for some reason it did not occur to the experimenters that radioactive products that would cause such an indication are produced in the fuel, and the fuel is welded up tight in stainless steel tubes. If all the fuel is intact, then nothing radioactive should be leaking into a coolant channel, and certainly not through the gas-tight reactor vessel and into the air in the room. By 8:57 P.M. they had shut down the reactor. They fixed the problem of leaking radioisotopes by replacing the sodium-level indicator over channel seven with a shield plug, and they restarted the reactor at 4:40 a.m. the next day, July 13.
By 1:30 that afternoon, they noticed that the graphite temperature was not going down when they increased the coolant flow. They knew not why. At 5:28 P.M., they were running at 1.6 megawatts and commenced a controlled power increase. The power seemed to increase faster than one would expect up to 4.2 megawatts, but then the reactor went suddenly subcritical and the power was dropping away. They started pulling controls to bring it back, and by 6:21 P.M. they had managed to coax it to run at 3.0 megawatts.
Up to this point, the reactor had been recalcitrant and unusual, but now it went rogue. Power started to run away. Control-rod motion was quickly turned around, sending them back into the reactor to soak up neutrons and stop the power increase. Instead, the power rise speeded up. By 6:25 P.M., the power was on a 7.5-second period, or increasing by a factor of 2.7 every 7.5 seconds. The fission process was out of control, and a glance at the power meter showed 24 megawatts and climbing.
Deducing that if this trend continued, then in a few minutes the reactor would be a gurgling puddle in the floor, the operator palmed the scram button, throwing in all the controls in the reactor at once and bringing the errant fissions to a stop.
As the reactor cooled down, only one question came up: Why was there not an automatic scram when the reactor period, spiraling down out of control, passed 10 seconds? The period recorder, which leaves a blue-line-on-paper graph of period versus time for posterity, had a switch that was supposed to be tripped when the pen hit 10 seconds on the horizontal recorder scale. This switch was supposed to trigger an automatic scram.143 Testing found that the switch would have worked, but only if the period had been falling slowly. The trip-cam was modified so that the switch would operate even when a scram was most needed, with the period falling rapidly.
Seeing nothing else to fix, the operating staff brought the reactor back to criticality at 7:55 P.M. and proceeded to increase the power. By 7:00 a.m. the next morning, July 14, they were running hot, straight, and normal at 4.0 megawatts. Two hours later, the radioactivity in the reactor building was reading at 14,000 counts per minute on the air monitors. Technicians put duct tape over places where fission products were found escaping. There was only one other automatic scram for the whole rest of the day, when workers setting up a test of the main primary sodium pump accidentally short-circuited something.
On July 15, it was seen as pointless to be trying to run the electrical generator while trying to test at high temperature, so the staff drained out the secondary coolant loop and switched to the air-blast heat exchanger. The next day, at 7:04 a.m., the SRE was made critical once more. On July 18, the motor-generator set, which was supposed to prevent power surges into the control room instruments, failed. The operators switched power to unstabilized house current and continued operation. At 2:10 a.m. on July 21, the reactor scrammed suddenly, having picked up another fast power rise. The scram was attributed to the unstabilized power, and the reactor was restarted 15 minutes later. One more scram at 9:45 a.m.
The next day, July 22, channel 55 was giving trouble. This assembly contained various experimental fuels, and the temperature was fluctuating in the 1,100 to 1,200°F range. There was only one automatic scram on July 23, probably just a fluke, but by 1:00 P.M. the temperature in channel 55 was up to an eyebrow-raising 1,465°F. Operation continued. In the early morning on July 24, eight hours were spent trying to dislodge some apparent debris stuck in the fuel channels by jiggling the assemblies. It was noted in passing that four of the fuel modules seemed jammed and stuck firmly in place. There were two annoying automatic scrams later that day.
At 11:20 a.m., the Sodium Reactor Experiment RUN 14 was terminated, and the long-suffering machinery was allowed to rest quietly while the experimenters poked around in the core with a television camera. To their surprise, they found that the core of a nuclear reactor that had been acting oddly for six weeks, subjected to overheating and temperature fluctuations, many automatic scrams, pump seal coolant failures, oxidizing sodium, radiation leakage, and a power runaway, was wrecked. Of the 43 sealed, stainless-steel fuel rods in the core, 13 had fallen apart, scattering loose fuel into the bottom of the reactor vessel. How the thing had managed to run at all under this condition was an amazement in itself. Attempts to remove the fuel rods came to an end when the contents of channel 12 became firmly jammed in the fuel handling cask. An investigation of the damage and its cause was started immediately.
The interim report, “SRE Fuel Element Damage,” was issued on November 15, 1959. It was found that tetralin had been leaking into the sodium coolant through the frozen sodium seals in the pumps. In the high-temperature environment of the active reactor core, the solvent had decomposed into a hard, black substance, which would tend to stick in the lower inlet nozzles of the graphite/fuel modules and prevent coolant from flowing. In the blocked coolant channels, the sodium vaporized, which had been thought unlikely, and denied coolant to the fuel. The stainless steel covering the cylindrical fuel slugs melted, and structural integrity of the fuel assemblies was lost. Naked uranium fuel, having fissioned for hundreds of megawatt-hours, was able to mix with the coolant. Gaseous fission products presumably escaped the sealed reactor vessel, probably through the same leakpoint that allowed the sodium to oxidize, and other fission waste dissolved in the coolant, making the primary loop radioactive.
