General Design Rules and

Analysis Methods in
RCC-MRx
Jagannath Mishra
Safety Research Institute, AERB
 Outline of Presentation
 Introduction
 Necessity of RCC-MRx Codes
 RCC-MRx and its Organisation
 Comparison of RCC-MRx and ASME
 Chemical Composition and material properties

 Design evaluation procedures

 Summary
 Fast Reactors
Few Milestones in Fast Reactor
 1958- First proposal for experimental fast reactor, RAPSODIE.
 1962- Construction of Rapsodie commenced.
 1967- Criticality achieved
 1970- Reached 40 MWth (after core redesign)
 1980- Power reduced to 22 MWth
(to minimize the thermal stresses thought to be the source of cracks in
the reactor vessel)
 1983- Shut down permanently

Rapsodie Basic Features:

Fuel: 30% PuO2and 70%UO2 Burn-up -102,000 MWd/t (max)
 Fast Reactors
Phénix, Marcoule
1968- Construction begins for 250 MWe (563 MWt) Phénix
reactor.
1973- Criticality Achieved.
1990- Till this date, Phénix had a remarkable operational
record.
SuperPhénix, Creys-Malville (First Commercial FBR)
1977- Construction begins for 250 MWe (563 MWt) Phénix
reactor.
1985 – Criticality Achieved.
 Fast Reactors
Broad Rules Followed While Designing Fast Reactors:
 Major Rule:
Reactor part should be of Austenitic Alloy, if it is contact with
sodium
 Minor Rule:
 Normal situations for major class-1 Components , main vessel, core
supporting structure should be “cold”.
 Structures which guides sodium flow should be made up of Austenitic
Alloys-18-10 steels with or without Molybdenum (Mo) depending on
temperature.
 There is no need for fracture mechanics analysis, because of
the use of very ductile materials.
 Primary stresses are generally low, but the secondary and peak stresses
of thermal origin can be very high due to large temperature differences.
 Buckling effect, which is practically ignored for high pressure vessels, is
important as components have broad surfaces and a limited thickness.
 RCC-MR → RCC−MRx
• CEA, EDF and NOVATOME in 1978 decided to develop a design and
construction code
• For future LMFBR commercial projects of the Phenix and Superphenix breed

RCC-MRx genesis
Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor

PFBR Safety Vessel

Major Projects using RCC-MRx
 RCC-MRx Organizations
 Section I: General provisions
 Section II: Additional requirements and special provisions
 Section III: Rules for nuclear installation mechanical components
 Tome 1: Design and construction rules
 Subsection A - general provisions of Section III
 Subsection B - Class N1Rx reactor components, its auxiliary systems and supports
 Subsection C - Class N2Rx reactor components, its auxiliary systems and supports
 Subsection D - Class N3Rx reactor components, its auxiliary systems and supports
 Subsection K - Examination, handling or drive mechanisms
 Subsection L - Irradiation devices
 Subsection Z - Technical appendices
 Tome 2: Materials-part and product procurement
 Tome 3: Examination methods,
 Tome 4: Welding
 Tome 5: manufacturing operations other than welding.
 Tome 6: Probationary Phase Rules
RCC-MRx Organizations
Broad Contours of Comparison of
ASME vs RCC-MRx

Material specifications

Design Methods
Technical Scopes
 Availability of Material Data
ASME Sec-III Div-5 ASME Sec-III Div-
RCC-MRx Appendix A3
(HBB-I-14) / ASME 1 (ASME Sec-II
Sec III-NH (NH-I- 14) Part-D)
Material Properties
Available for Available for
Available for SS304, SS304L, SS304 and SS316LN up to 700⁰C,
SS304 and SS316 SS304LN,SS316, SS304L up to 650⁰C.
upto 800⁰C. SS316L, SS316LN SS316L up to 600⁰C.
upto 450⁰C. 20% CW SS316L up to 600⁰C
Creep Data
Available for
Available for SS316LN, SS304,
SS304, SS316
-- SS304L, SS316L, 20%CW SS316L
steel up to
steel up to 3,00,000 h
3,00,000 h
Specification for SS316LN
Specification for SS316L
Specification for SS304 and SS316
(ASME Sec-III Div-5)
 Mechanical properties of SS316

Comparison of yield strength of

austenitic stainless steel 316

Comparison of tensile strength of

austenitic stainless steel 316
 Mechanical properties of SS316

Comparison of design stress intensity

of austenitic stainless steel 316

Comparison of Modulus of elasticity

of austenitic stainless steel 316
 Mech. & Physical properties of SS316

Comparison of fatigue strength of

austenitic stainless steel 316

Comparison of thermal expansion

coefficient of austenitic stainless steel 316
 Mechanical properties of Gr. 91
Code ASME RCC-MRx
X10CrMoVNb9-1
Grade Gr.91
(Gr.91)
C 0.06–0.15 0.080–0.120
Mn 0.25–0.66 0.30–0.60
P 0.025 ≤0.02
S 0.012 ≤0.005
Si 0.18–0.56 0.20–0.50
Cr 7.90–9.60 8.00–9.50
Ni 0.43 ≤0.2
Mo 0.80–1.10 0.85–1.05
Comparison of tensile strength of
N 0.025–0.080 0.03–0.07 Gr.91 steel

Nb -- 0.06–0.10
Other Al 0.02 Al. ≤0.040
 Mechanical properties of Gr. 91

Comparison of yield strength of Gr.91

steel

Comparison of design stress intensity of

Gr.91 steel
 Mech. & Physical properties of Gr. 91

Comparison of thermal expansion

coefficient of Gr.91 steel

Comparison of fatigue strength of Gr.91

steel

Comparison of thermal conductivity of

Gr.91 steel
 Creep Rupture Strength of SS316 & Gr.91

Comparison of creep rupture strength of

austenitic stainless steel 316

Comparison of creep rupture strength of

Gr.91 steel
 Design code principles
ASME Sec- ASME Sec-III ASME Sec-III RCC-MRx
III Div-5 NH Div- 1
Class A Class-1 Class-1 Class-1
Class B Class-2 Class-2
Class-3 Class-3
 In ASME Sec III Div-5, Class 1 and Class 2 have been re-designated as
Class A and Class B respectively.

 Rules for both insignificant creep and significant creep have been
provided for Class A and Class B components.

 RCC-MRx stipulates that the rules for Class 3 components for only
negligible creep conditions.
 Design code principles
Loading ≤ Loading corresponding to Damage
Stress or strain ≤ Limit corresponding to damage / margin
Flow Chart for Design Evaluation in ASME
Flow Chart for Design Evaluation in RCC-MRx
 Damages considered in RCC-MRx
Damages (RB 3120)
 Type P damages (RB 3121)
 Immediate excessive deformation RB 3121.1
 Immediate plastic instability (RB 3121.2)
 Time-dependent excessive deformation (creep) (RB 3121.3)
 Time-dependent plastic instability (RB 3121.4)
 Time-dependent fracture (RB 3121.5)
 Elastic or elasto-plastic instability (RB 3121.6)

 Type S damages (RB 3122)

 Progressive deformation (or ratcheting) (RB 3122.1)
 Fatigue (progressive cracking) (RB 3122.2)

 Buckling damages (RB 3123)

 Fast fracture damages (non-ductile damage modes) (RB 3124)

 Criteria Levels (RB 3150)
 Criteria of Level-A
 Type P Damage
o Excessive deformation
o Plastic instability/failure
o Fracture
 Type S Damage
o Progressive deformation
o Fatigue
 Elastic and elasto-plastic instability
 Criteria of Level-C
 Type P Damage
o Excessive deformation
o Plastic instability/failure
 Elastic and elasto-plastic instability
 Criteria of Level-D
 Type P Damage
o Plastic instability/failure
 Elastic and elasto-plastic instability
Design Stress Limits for Class – 1 Components
Design Stress Limits (cont.)
Design Stress Limits (cont.)
 Broad Comparison of Design Rules
Determination of the inelastic strain and creep strain
• RCC-MRx uses creep law (directly)
• ASME-NH uses isochronous curves

Schematic of isochronous curves Isochronous curves of 316SS

Note: Isochronous curves are based on uni-axial and monotonic stress–strain
relationshipand are known to be very conservative.
 Broad Comparison of Design Rules
Elastic follow-up
 Elastic follow-up (EFU) is considered in ASME-NH
implicitly in such a way that secondary stresses with
elastic follow-up (i.e., pressure-induced membrane and
bending stresses and thermal induced membrane
stresses) are classified as primary stresses,
 In RCC-MRx, elastic follow-up is explicitly taken into
account with a default value of ‘3’.
 Broad Comparison of Design Rules
Creep–Fatigue Damage Envelope

Creep–Fatigue Damage Envelope Creep-fatigue damage envelopes

ASME Sec-III Div.5 for Gr.91 steel
 Broad Comparison of Design Rules
Effect of Irradiation on Material Properties
 Grid plate experiences significant irradiation during service.
Further, for life extension studies, it may be necessary to
account for the effects of irradiation on the component.

 Availability of data in design code, considering the effects of

irradiation is needed.

 In RCC-MRx (2012), design rules are available for the case of

significant irradiation in SS 316LN, SS 316L and 20% work
hardened SS316L.

 Furthermore, modified values are provided for allowable

stresses in irradiated components.

 In contrast, ASME III Div-5 and ASME III-NH do not provide

specific rules related to irradiation.
 Broad Comparison of Design Rules

Applicable Rules (RB 3216)

Negligible creep tests (RB 3216.1)

Negligible irradiation test (RB 3216.2)
 Broad Comparison of Design Rules
ASME-Div-5 /
Parameter RCC-MRx
ASME-NH
1% (membrane)
2% (membrane+bending) 1% (membrane)
Strain Limits 5% (peak) 2% (membrane+bending)
(HBB-T-1310, (RB 3261.1212)
NH-T-1310)

Decomposition not
Peak term in Complicated procedures for
required since peak stress
strain decomposition of peak strain required
intensity is used
calculation (Appendix HBB-T / Appendix NH-T)
(RB 3227)

Modified Bree Diagram

Ratcheting Efficiency Index
approach
rule approach (RB 3261)
(HBB-T-1320, NH-T-1320)

Creep damage through

Creep damage at a point
Creep the section
(RB 3226.1)
(HBB-T-1332, NH-T-1332)
 Broad Comparison of Design Rules
ASME-V /
Parameter RCC-MRx
ASME-NH
Calculation of
Isochronous curves used Creep laws used directly
total strain range
and creep damage (HBB-T-1800, NH-T-1800) (RB 3226.1)

Implicitly considered Explicitly considered

Elastic follow-up
(HBB-T-1331, NH-T-1331 (RB 3261.1113)
Linear Elastic Fracture Elastic-Plastic Fracture
Mechanics approach is Mechanics approach is
Fracture
used used
(G-1000) (RB 3251.111)
Creep-fatigue SS316LN,SS304,
SS304, SS316, Gr.91,
damage envelope SS316L, 20%CW SS316L
Alloy 800
intersection point (A3.1S.55, A3.2S.55,
(Df, Dc) (HBB-T-1400, NH-T-1400)
A3.3S.55, A3.7S.55)
 Technical Scope: RCC-MRx vs. ASME Sec-III
Material:
Sensitivity to IGSCC:
RCC-MR permits use of only very low carbon stainless steels
with nitrogen limits. ASME Section III leaves material selection
and IGSC concerns to the Owner or Fabricator.
Qualification:
ASME uses generic pre-qualification/ RCC-MR uses prototype
qualification.
Tensile test requirements:
RCC-MR requires elevated-temperature tensile testing (base
metal, weld metal, procedure qualifications) to confirm the
elevated-temperature tensile and yield strengths for each
heat/lot and welding procedure. ASME relies on properties
from representative heats to establish allowable stresses at
elevated temperatures. Design factors compensate for
unknowns and variations.
 Technical Scope (cont.)
Impact Testing:
RCC-MR requires impact testing with little regard for material
composition or experience. For many materials like austenitic
stainless steel filler metal, due to their inherent high
toughness, these tests not required by ASME Section III

Design:
Fatigue Analysis
Fatigue at Discontinuities -Same basic approach in both Codes,
but RCC-MR has added new detailed conditions of use of fatigue
curves.

Reinforced Opening:
For class 1 Vessels - Same design approach, but RCC-M requires
full stress analysis of openings, in addition to reinforcement
calculations.
 Technical Scope (cont.)
Non-pressure-retaining Items:
 RCC-M specifies some requirements for non-pressure-retaining
items, such as pump shafts and impellers which are exempted
from the ASME Section III requirements because they do not
affect pressure boundary integrity.
Welding Qualification and Examination
Undercut:
RCC-M permits no undercut. ASME Section III permits 1/32
in. (1mm). ASME considers that undercut has not been
associated with weld failure.

Welding qualification:
RCC-M requires production weld test coupons. ASME Section
III does not require such coupons.
 Summary
 Chemical compositions and mechanical properties of specified
materials in RCC-MRx and ASME Sec-III have significant differences.
The chemical compositions in RCC-MRx were restricted more
tightly and were expected to have a better creep strength
 For ratcheting, RCC-MRx follows the Efficiency Index approach
while ASME follows the Modified Bree Diagram approach.
 Creep- rupture damage envelope in the ASME is more stringent for
some of the material (Gr.91) than RCC-MRx
 RCC-MRx code provides rules for limit analysis in the creep regime.
However, ASME Sec-III provides rules for limit analysis but only for
components not operating in the creep regime.
 In RCC-MRx, specific rules are available for the case of significant
irradiation. In contrast, the ASME code contains no specific rules
related to irradiation
 In technical scope they are equivalent but not identical. There are
many differences between these codes.
 Specification for SS 316, 316L, 316LN
Code/
ASME RCC-MRx
Test
(Sec. III-NH) Sec.II-part-A
Grade 316SS 316LN 316L 316LN 316L

C 0.04–0.06 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03

Mn 1.0–2.0 2 2 1.6–2.0 2
P 0.03 0.045 0.045 0.03 0.03
S 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.015 0.015
Si 0.6 0.75 0.75 0.5 1

Cr 17.0–18.0 16.0–18.0 16.0–18.0 17.0–18.0 16.5–18.5

Ni 11.0–12.5 10.0–14.0 10.0–14.0 12.0–12.5 10.5–13.0

Mo 2.5–3.0 2.0–3.0 2.0–3.0 2.3–2.7 2.5–3.0

N 0.04–0.07 0.10–0.16 0.1 0.06–0.08 60.11

B 0.003
Other Al 0.05
 Welding Qualification and Examination: RCC-M requires the welding procedure qualification test
coupon to be examined in accordance with the production weld joint NDE requirements and tomeet
the applicable acceptance criteria. ASME Section III does not require this examination. ASME
considers tahtexamination of the production joint proves weld quality.RCC-M permits no undercut.
ASME Section III permits 1/32 in. (1 mm). ASME considers that undercut has not been associated
with weld failure.
 11Examination: RCC-M requires liquid penetrant examination of all Class 1 weld preparation surfaces
prior to welding. In addition, the root pass of all welds not requiring final volumetric examination
(e.g., fillet or partial-penetration welds) is to be examined using the liquid penetrantmethod. These
examinations are not required by ASME Section III. ASME considers that absence of such exams has
not been associated with weld failure.
 12Examination: the RCC-M Code requires radiographic and surface examination of piping butt welds
in all Classes. ASME Section III requires the same for Class 1, but less examination for Class 2 and 3
piping butt welds. ASME considers that higher design factor for Classes 2 and 3 compensates the
reduced examination requirements.
 13Non-pressure-retaining Items: RCC-M specifies some requirements for non-pressure-retaining
items, such as pump shafts and impellers, which are exempted from the ASME Section III
requirements because they do not affect pressure boundary integrity. ASME considers that
examination of these items have to be specified by the Owner or designer.
RCC-MR → RCC−MRx