Computer-aided sensitivity analysis of a multicriteria decision-making methodology for the evaluation of materials requirements stringency in the nuclear components manufacturing
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October, 2019
Computer-aided sensitivity analysis of a multicriteria decision-making methodology for the evaluation of materials requirements stringency in the nuclear components manufacturing
A methodology developed specifically for the evaluation of requirements of materials intended to high-demanding applications is the stringency levels methodology. The objective of this work is to perform a sensitivity analysis of the methodology of multicriteria stringency levels for the evaluation of technological requirements of materials, creating a new methodology that provides a final results studying variability that let us make an objective decision. The case study has been the evaluation of steels used in the manufacture of components housed in the primary loop of a nuclear power plant. To ease the calculation of the stringency levels, the algorithm has been computed in Labview®. Considering the dispersion that can generate the numerical weighting process, the analysis has shown that the variability in calculated values is not significant. The analysis proposed with this methodology could be used, in the future, for the selection of materials for innovative manufacturing processes.
Vaziri J, Jahan A, Borhani E, et al. Evaluating promising applications of a new nanomaterial produced by accumulative roll bonding process: a preliminary multiple criteria decision-making approach. Proc IMechE, Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications. Epub ahead of print 19 November 2016. DOI: 10.1177/1464420716674037.
2.
Berman AF, Maltugueva GS and Yurin AY. Application of case-based reasoning and multi-criteria decision-making methods for material selection in petrochemistry. Proc IMechE, Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications 2018; 232: 204–212.
3.
AthawaleVMChakrabortyS. Material selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods: a comparative study. Proc IMechE, Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications2012; 226: 266–285.
4.
GiessMMcMahonCBookerJD, et al.Application of faceted classification in the support of manufacturing process selection. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2009; 223: 597–608.
5.
ChauhanAVaishRBowenC. Piezoelectric material selection for ultrasonic transducer and actuator applications. Proc IMechE Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications2015; 229: 3–12.
6.
Genovese A, Russo M and Strano S., Mechanical characterization and modeling of an innovative composite material for railway applications. Proc IMechE, Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications 2017; 231: 122–130.
7.
Rodríguez-Prieto A. Analysis of regulated requirements of materials and its influence on reactor pressure-vessels manufacturing for the nuclear industry (Análisis de requisitos tecnológicos de materiales especificados en normativas reguladas y su repercusión sobre la fabricación de recipientes especiales para la industria nuclear). PhD Dissertation, UNED, Madrid, Spain, 2014.
8.
Rodríguez-PrietoACamachoAMSebastiánMA. Evaluation method for pressure vessel manufacturing codes: influence of ASME unit conversion. Int J Mater Prod Technol2017; 54: 259–274.
9.
FordN. Westinghouse to install first 3D-printed reactor fuel part in 2018, London, UK: Nuclear Energy Insider, 2017.
10.
NEI. Printing nuclear parts. Vienna, Austria: Nuclear Energy International publications, 2017.
11.
Rodríguez-PrietoACamachoAMSebastiánMA. Materials selection criteria for nuclear power applications: a decision algorithm. JOM2016; 68: 496–506.
12.
EvansGW. An overview of techniques for solving multiobjective mathematical problems. Manage Sci1984; 30: 1268–1282.
13.
FreyHCPatilSR. Identification and review of sensitivity analysis methods. Risk Anal2002; 22: 553–578.
SrinivasanGBhaduriAKShankarV. The weldability assessment of modified E316-15 stainless steel welding electrodes. Int J Nucl Energy Sci Technol2009; 4: 232–242.
16.
PorterLF. Materials in nuclear applications. ASTM STP1981; 276: 147–160. .
17.
Kangilaski M. The effects of neutron irradiation on structural materials. Columbus, USA: Battelle Memorial Institute Publications, 1967.
18.
Odette GR, Lucas G, Wirth B, et al. Current understanding of the effects of environmental and irradiation variables on RPV embrittlement. In: Proceedings of the 24th water reactor safety information meeting, Bethesda, Maryland, 1996, p.443. Washington, DC: WRSI.
NikolaevaANikolaevYKrjoikovA. The contribution of grain boundary effects to low-alloy steel irradiation embrittlement. J Nucl Mater1994; 218: 85–93.
21.
AmayevADKryukovAMSokolovMA. Radiation embrittlement of nuclear reactor pressure vessels steels: an international review. ASTM STP1993; 1170: 369–379.
22.
Rodríguez-PrietoACamachoAMSebastiánMA. Development of a computer tool to support the teaching of materials technology. Mater Sci Forum2017; 903: 17–23.
23.
BarrW. The fracture of metals, London: Institution of Metallurgists, 1950.
24.
Irvine KJ. Strong tough structural steel. In: Proceedings of the joint conference organized by the British Iron and Steel Research Association and the Iron and Steel Institute, 1967, pp.11–22. North Yorkshire: Iron and Steel Institute.
25.
Pickering FB and Gladman T. Metallurgical developments in carbon steels-special report. London: Iron and Steel Institute, 1963.
26.
Leyensetter A. Tecnología de los oficios metalúrgicos (original tittle in German language: Fachkunde für metallverarbeitende). Barcelona: Reverté, 2006.
27.
HawthorneJR. Significance of selected residual elements to the radiation sensitivity of steels. Nucl Technol1982; 59: 440–455.
28.
LarreaJA. Niobio: un análisis de la situación del mercado nacional e internacional. Revista Siderurgia1980; 4: 253–254.
29.
KalpakjianSSchmidSR. Manufacturing engineering and technology, New York, USA: Pearson Inc., 2013.
30.
RosarioSVillacortaH. Desarrollo de un proceso y procedimiento de reparación por soldadura del acero HY – 80. Revista del instituto de investigación de la facultad de ingeniería geológica, minera, metalúrgica y geográfica (UNMSM)1999; 2: 1–2.
31.
Nisbett EG. Steel forgings: design, production, selection, testing and application. Philadelphia, USA: American Society for Testings and Materials, 2005.
32.
CSN. Nuclear physics and technology (in Spanish: Física y tecnología nucleares). Madrid: Publications of Spanish nuclear-regulatory council, 2016.
33.
De Garmo EP, Black JT and Kohser RA. Materials and processes in manufacturing. Hoboken, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.
34.
YoungIM. Effect of carbide precipitation on the strength and charpy impact properties of low carbon MnNiMo steels. J Nucl Mater2001; 297: 38–148.
35.
Chung HM, Perry DL and Shack WJ. Sulphur in austenitic stainless steel and irradiation assisted stress corrosion cracking. Houston, USA: NACE International, 2003.
36.
ThomasRD. Crack sensitivity of chromium-nickel stainless weld metal. Metal Prog1946; 50: 474–479.
37.
BorlandJCYoungerRN. Some aspects of cracking in welded Cr-Ni austenitic steels. Br Weld J1960; 7: 22–59.
38.
LundinCDChouCPDSullivanCJ. Hot cracking resistance of austenitic stainless steel weld metals. Weld J1980; 59: 226–232.
39.
KTA 3201.1:1998. Components of the reactor coolant pressure boundary of light water reactors, part 1: materials and product forms. Salzgitter, Germany: Nuclear Safety Standards Commission (KTA), 1998.
40.
Welding handbook: materials and applications, part 2. Volume 4. 9th ed. Miami, USA: American Welding Society (AWS) Publications, 2014.
41.
ASME B&PV Code. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2015.
42.
KTA Safety Standard 3201.3. Components of the reactor coolant pressure boundary of light water reactors – part 3: manufacture. Salzgitter, Germany: Nuclear Safety Standards Commission (KTA), 2007.
43.
Rodríguez-PrietoACamachoAMMerayoD, et al.An educational software to reinforce the comprehensive learning of materials selection. Comput Appl Eng Educ2018; 26: 125–140.
44.
BringasJE. Handbook of comparative world steel standards, Philadelphia: American Society for Testings and Materials, 2002.
45.
Stahlschlüssel software (Key to steel). Berlin: Verlag, 2013.
46.
KTA Safety Standard 3203. Surveillance of the irradiation behaviour of reactor pressure vessel materials of LWR facilities. Salzgitter, Germany: Nuclear Safety Standards Commission (KTA), 2001.
47.
RodríguezACamachoAMSebastiánMA. Prediction of the mechanical behaviour of cladding materials for nuclear reactor pressure–vessels based on the analysis of technological requirements. Procedia Eng2015; 100: 1301–1308.
48.
BrooksAThompsonW. Microstructural development and solidification cracking susceptibility of austenitic stainless steel welds. Int Mater Rev1991; 36: 16–44.
49.
Rodríguez-Prieto A, Camacho AM and Sebastián MA 2016. Desarrollo de una herramienta informática de apoyo a la docencia en Tecnología de Materiales. In: 24 Congreso universitario de innovación educativa en las enseñanzas técnicas, Cádiz, Spain, 21–23 September 2016.
50.
DalkeyNCHelmerO. An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts'. Manage Sci1963; 9: 458–467.
51.
LandetaJ. Delphi method, Barcelona: Ariel, 2002.
52.
Rodríguez-Prieto A, Camacho AM and Sebastián MA. Novel computer-aided methodology for selecting materials for the nuclear industry. In: Proceedings of the 20th international congress of project management and engineering, Cartagena, Spain, 2016.
53.
YazdaniMZavadskasEKIgnatiusJ, et al.Sensitivity analysis in MADM methods: application of material selection. Inzinerine Ekonomika (Eng Econ)2016; 27: 382–391.
