1 / 39

Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions

Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions. Guy PILOT IRSN (Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire). G. PILOT, IRSN, chapter 6.4. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions.

tuwa
Download Presentation

Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions Guy PILOT IRSN (Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire) G. PILOT, IRSN, chapter 6.4

  2. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Assessment of resuspension coefficients due to the use of dismantling cutting tools

  3. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • General term : Resuspension coefficient

  4. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Resuspension factor • Resuspension fraction

  5. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Resuspension rate • Resuspension flux

  6. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Radioactive cutting

  7. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Non radioactive cutting

  8. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Innovative prefiltration devices • Acoustic declogging of an electrostatic filter • Cartridge filter with pleated metallic media

  9. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Acoustic horn characteristics (Manufacturer’s specifications)

  10. Expected consequences Protection techniques considered Capture at source associated with secondary cleaning network . Increased visibility . Reduced deposits on tool on the walls of cell LEVEL A Prefiltration upstream of the general ventilation Exhaust network . Reduction of deposits in general ventilation exhaust network LEVEL B Prefiltration Immediately Upstream of the HEPA filters . Increase lifetime of HEPA filters LEVEL C Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Levels of protection and expected consequences

  11. CELL 2 1 HEPA Filter 4 Cutting tool 3 Exhaust network Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions Blower network

  12. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Electrostatic filter efficiency during comparative tests of cutting tools for dismantling (1/2)

  13. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Electrostatic filter efficiency during comparative tests of cutting tools for dismantling (2/2)

  14. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Filter cleaning test results * Efficiency for recoverable particle mass (i.e particles deposited on ionizer and collector only) ** Calculated value *** Measured value

  15. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions DECOMMISSIONING DISMANTLING WASTES CONTAINERS DIMENSIONS CUTTING SECONDARY EMISSIONS PROTECTION DEVICES ex. PREFILTRATION CHARACTERIZATION

  16. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Identical working conditions (same cell at scale 1) • Same steel and thickness • Same measuring devices • Same cutting parameters (except cutting speed and power)

  17. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Tools • Reciprocating saw (5 – 10 – 30 – 50 mm) • Grinder (5 – 10 – 30 mm) • Plasma torch 50 A (5 – 10 mm) • Plasma torch 200 A (10 – 30 – 50 mm) • Arc-air (5 – 10 – 30 – 50 mm) • Arc saw (5 – 10 – 30 – 50 mm) • Nd-YAG Laser ( 2 – 5 – 10 mm) • LSI (10 – 30 – 50 – 100 – 150* - 200* mm) (LSI: Lichtbogen Sauerstoff Impulsschneiden – Lost wire pulsed oxycutting tool) *mild steel

  18. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • The cutting performances of the tools : • Maximal thickness to be cut • Cutting speed • Wear of the tool

  19. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • The secondary emissions • Distribution: • Sedimented dross • Attached slag • Deposits on the cell walls • Aerosols in the exhaust duct • Measurments: • Mass concentration • Size distribution

  20. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Grinder - trademark: bosch - energy: electric - wheel trademark: barcut - wheel diameter: 300 mm - wheel thickness: 4 mm - rotation speed: 5000 r.p.m. - equivalent input: 2200 W - equivalent output: 1550 W - weight: 6 kg - cutting position: gravity position

  21. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Plasma torch - trademark: saf - type: nertajet 200 - working voltage: 120 V - working intensity: 200 A - plasma gas: Argon - flow rate of gas: 60 l.min-1 - nozzle diameter: 2 mm - working standd-off: 7 mm - working position: gravity position

  22. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Arc air - working voltage: 40 V - working intensity: 450 A - electrode nature: carbon - electrode diameter: 6.35 mm - working standd-off: 1 mm - working position: gravity position

  23. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Alternating saw - trademark: fein - blade length: 400 mm - teeth number per cm: 6 - tooth height: 1 mm - blade nature: stainless steel - rate: 2.5 blows/s - working counterweight: 5 kg - working angle with the piece: 45°

  24. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Arc saw - origin: prototype - working voltage: 44 – 60 V - working intensity: 200 – 1200 A - wheel nature: fluginox 130 - wheel diameter: 320 mm - wheel thickness: 5 mm - rotation speed: 250 – 300 r.p.m.

  25. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Nd-YAG LASER - power on plate: 1 kw - frequency: 10 Hz - pulse energy: 100 J - focal point position: on the plate - assistant gas: without - stand-off: 1 m - optical fiber: 1=50m d=1mm

  26. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • LSI - electrode : steel d=1.6 mm or 2.4 mm - working voltage: 28-35 V - working intensity: 250-500 A - stand-off: 5 to 40 mm - oxygen pressure: 10 bar - oxygen consumption: 70 m3/h - wire consumption: 4-17 m/min

  27. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Three tools : • Plasma torch • Consumable electrode • Contact arc metal cutting

  28. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Non radioactive experiments: PLASMA TORCH STAINLESS STEEL CONSUMABLE ELECTRODE e=80 mm C A M C • Radioactive experiments: MILD STEEL PLASMA TORCH e=16*2 mm C A M C

  29. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Radioactive plates (e=16 mm) 60Co 61 +/- 13 Bq/g 137Cs 1.5 +/- 1 Bq/g

  30. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Objectives • Balance of solid emissions sedimented dross suspended particles aerosols • Gaseous emissions: NO, NOx, O3, CO2, H2

  31. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Characterization SEDIMENTED DROSS (size distribution) SUSPENDED PARTICLES (size distribution, chemical analysis, suspension/solution) AEROSOLS (size distribution, chemical analysis)

  32. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Plasma torch • - nozzle diameter: 6 mm • - stand-off: 18 mm • - pilot gas: argon, 60 l/min, 7 bar • - cutting gas: argon, 150 l/min, 7 bar • - voltage: 190 V • - current: 950 – 1100 A

  33. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Contact arc metal cutting • - electrode dimensions: L=150 – 170 mm • l=100 mm • e=8 mm • - voltage: 52 V average • - current: 1800 A average • - water pressure jet: 15 bar

  34. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Consumable electrode • - wire diameter: 3 mm • - nozzle diameter: 3.2 mm • - voltage: 63 V average • - current: 2000 A average • - water pressure jet: 17.5 bar

  35. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Main Features of the Experiments (1/2)

  36. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Main Features of the Experiments (2/2)

  37. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions CONS.ELECT. CAMC PLASMA Sedimented dross 99.5% 93.4% 99% Suspended particles 0.5% 6.6% 1% Aerosols 0.0005% 0.04% 0.006%

  38. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Aerosol size distribution

  39. Comparison of different dismantling cutting tools in the same experimental conditions • Distribution of the 60Co and 137Cs in experiments n° 7, 8 and 9

More Related