NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND DESIGN 10 (1969) 259-307.

NORTH-HOLLAND PUBLISHING COMPANY, AMSTERDAM

STEELS F O R COMMERCIAL N U C L E A R POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS

R. H. STERNE, Jr.
Lukens Steel Company, Coatesville, Pennsylvania, USA

and
L. E. STEELE
Reactor Materials Branch, Metallurgy Division,
Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C., USA

Received 2 June 1969

The properties of carbon and low alloy steels currently used in the USA for commercial nuclear power reactor
pressure vessel construction are examined in reference to higher strength-higher alloy steels having potential for
advanced reactor service. Emphasis is placed upon the characteristics of selected vessel steels which are critical to
the intended service function and the influence of fabrication and the service environment in changing important
mechanical properties. Recent developments for assessing these properties after simulated nuclear service are re-
viewed along with techniques for minimizing the effects of radiation. The review places much emphasis upon im-
proved properties for steels which show strong potential for future nuclear structural application. Engineering con-
siderations are cited only to highlight the descriptive review of pressure vessel steels, current and future, and their
capacity for meeting the critical functions required of a reactor primary containment vessel.

Contents 4.2. Radiation embrittlement and the approach to its study

4.3. Notch ductility properties
1. INTRODUCTION 4.3.1. Notch toughness
1.1. Background 4.3.2. Fracture toughness
1.2. Size increases 4.4. Major factors in assessing radiation embrittlement
1.3. Fabrication practices 4.4.1. Nuclear environment
4.4.2. The steel
2. CHARACTERIZATION OF MATERIALS 4.4.3. Temperature
2.1. Specification review 4.5. Other properties
2.2. Cost considerations 4.5.1. Tensile properties
2.3. Strength considerations 4.5.2. Fatigue
2.4. Toughness considerations 4.5.3. Applied stress effects
2.4.1. Notch toughness limits 4.5.4. Hydrogen embrittlement in irradiated steels
2.4.2. Thickness effects 4.6. Minimizing radiation effects
2.5. Microstructure 4.6.1. Postirradiation heat treatment
2.5.1. Effect of composition 4.6.2. Operational limits
2.5.2. Effect of heat treatment 4.6.3. Control of radiation embrittlement sensitivity
2.5.3. Effect of deoxidation practice
5. OTttER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
3. FABRICATION 5.1. Elevated temperature properties
3.1. Shop fabrication 5.2. Aging
3.2. Inspection and testing during fabrication 5.3. Hydrogen embrittlement
3.3. Field fabrication 5.4. Corrosion

4. IRRADIATION EFFECTS ACKNOWLEDGMENT

4.1. Background REFERENCES
260 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEEIE

1. Introduction
1.1. Background
The purpose of this report is to describe and char-
acterize the carbon and low-alloy steels which have
been used or are anticipated for use in nuclear reactor
pressure vessels. The scope is purposely limited to ma-
terials and environmental influences upon the proper-
ties of these materials. Though the data are oriented
toward the reactor pressure vessel, much of the infor-
mation is applicable to auxiliary components such as
steam generators and pressurizers. Engineering con-
siderations are referenced only in the interest of fur-
thering the basic aim of materials characterization.
The majority of nuclear power reactors in opera-
tion or under construction in the United States are of
the light-water-cooled type, of either the boiling water
reactor (BWR) or pressurized water reactor (PWR) de-
sign. Carbon and low-alloy steel pressure vessels have
been used almost exclusively for these reactor designs.
Although gas-cooled reactors have been designed
and operated with steel vessels, the trend in these re-
actors is toward higher temperatures, larger systems,
and prestressed concrete vessels. A third reactor type,
the liquid-metal-cooled breeder reactor, is becoming
increasingly important in the U.S. reactor development
program. This reactor type, although perhaps ten
years away from significant commercial use, will likely
use stainless steel reactor vessels to withstand the high-
temperature, corrosive environment. Thus, primary
utilization of carbon and low-alloy steel pressure
vessels until at least the late 1970's will continue to
be for light-water reactors.
The primary purpose of a nuclear reactor pressure
vessel is to contain the coolant. Depending upon the
reactor type, the coolant may be pressurized from
less than 100 psi to as high as 2500 psi. The vessel
must remain structurally reliable in spite of the em-
brittling effect of radiation [1 ] and the possible de-
grading corrosive environment of the coolant. The
critical parts of a reactor vessel include the vessel
shell, the top and bottom heads, flanges (usually at

-60

-50

I] ~ C O N T R O L ROD
r'ER

-40 ~p~ - - ~ F U P P E R HEAD

~ ' ~ FLANGEBOLT
OUTLET ~ ~ HEADFLANGE
NOZZLExx ~'l[~ A~ ~11
- 50 NOZZLE

VESSEL S
- 20

THERMAL S
-ATION
COREREE
INLET SUPPORT
-I0

BOTTOM H
-0

PRESSURIZED WATER REACTOR BOILING WATER REACTOR

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of light water reactors.

 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEARPOWER REACTOR PRESSUREVESSELS
the top head only), nozzles and head bolts and nuts.
The relative size, shape, and orientation of these parts
are shown schematically in fig. 1.
Many early U.S. reactor vessels used American So-
ciety for Testing and Materials (ASTM) designation
A212 Grade B carbon steel (similar to the newer A515
Grade 70 analysis), a 70,000-psi tensile strength steel.
The 80,000-psi tensile ASTM Type A302 Grade B steel,
often modified with nickel additions (similar to the
newer A533 Grades A, B, C), has been used for the
subsequent larger reactors. Such low-alloy steels gen-
erally have higher strength (which permits greater
allowable stresses) and better notch toughness than
the unalloyed carbon steels. In most cases, the carbon
and low-alloy steels that have been used in reactor
pressure vessels to date have been internally clad with
either stainless steel or Inconel, primarily the former.
1.2. Size increases
The original pressure vessels used for reactor prim-
ary containment were only several feet in diameter
and had walls less than 3 in. thick [2]. The pressure
vessels used for commercial reactors built since the
1957 Shippingport PWR, both prototype and full-
scale, have been cylindrical shells with hemispherical
or elliptical heads. Inside diameters have varied from
about 5 to as much as 21 ft, and vessel heights have
ranged from about 18 to as much as 70 ft (fig. 2). For
the largest PWR vessels, plates up to 12 in. thick have
been used in the nozzle reinforcing ring section. For
applications requiring thicknesses over 12 in., gener-
ally forgings have been used. The range of plate thick-
nesses in use today for both PWR and BWR reactors
is between 3 and 12 inches.
For early gas reactors in the United Kingdom, some
24 steel pressure vessels were constructed ranging in
diameter from 21 to 70 ft and in wall thicknesses
from 2 to 4~- in. [3].
1.3. Fabrication practices
Of all the primary pressure vessels operating in the
U.S. through the first half of 1968, some 15 systems
[4] were fabricated in the manufacturer's facility, i.e.,
"shop fabricated". Heavy steel plate is hot formed,
heat treated, and welded to form cylinders. The cylin-
ders are then welded together, nozzles and other pene-
trations provided, and heads joined to complete the
vessel. One head is usually designed to be bolted to a
261
forged flange which is welded to the shell. Interme-
diate stress relieving is employed to remove mechani-
cal strains as well as to soften the weld metal and
reduce cracking susceptibility of welds and weld heat-
affected zones [5].
An obvious difficulty is that of handling the weights
and sizes of such vessels within a fabricating shop.
Although some of the earlier reactor vessels weighed
less than a hundred tons, the vessel for the Oyster
Creek BWR weighed 615 tons, and reactor vessels for
the 1000-MW reactors now on order by the utilities
have weights approaching 900 tons.
Until 1964, nuclear vessels were designed to meet
the American Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section
VIII, Unfired Pressure Vessels [6]. Upon the adop-
tion of Section III, Nuclear Vessels, in 1964 (revised
in 1968) [7], the design basis for vessels changed.
Allowable stresses for the design of cylindrical shells
increased from a- to ~- of the ultimate tensile strength,
reducing the plate thickness required, as well as the
fabrication costs. (This Code change, however, re-
quired designers to perform more exhaustive stress
analysis of the vessel.) Without this Code change, it
would have been impractical to build some of the
larger vessels under construction today.
An alternative approach to shop fabrication is to
weld and stress relieve performed segments which
have been mechanically formed to size in the shop
[8], and to assemble the vessel at the reactor site.
With this approach, the weight and size limitation
problems may be readily overcome; however, there
are added quality control and stress relief heat treat-
ing problems in the manufacture of such vessels in the
field. The first reactor vessel to be erected on-site in
the U.S. is for the Monticello BWR of the Northern
States Power Company, located in Minnesota and
scheduled for operation in 1970.
2. Characterization of materials
2.1. Specification review
Table 1 [9] summarizes the materials specified for
a number of light water reactor vessels by specific
component. For reference purposes, a cross index of
new and old ASTM designations for commonly used
vessel plate steels are provided in table 2 [9]. ASME
262 R.I I.STERNI~, Jr. and L.E.STI~ELE

Table l. Materials specified for light-water

Course and
Reactor name Plate flange forgings Nozzle forgings Bolting

Shippingport PWR A 302 grade B

Dresden-I BWR A 302 grade B SA 336 grade F-I SA 336 grade F-1 SA 193 grade B14
Yankee PWR A 302 grade B A 105 grade modified A 182 modified to SA 193 grade B16
modified A 302 grade B
Saxton PWR A 212 grade B A 350-58T A 350-58T AISI 4340
Indian Point-1 PWR A 212 grade B
Big Rock Point BWR A 302 grade B SA 336 modified SA 193 meeting
AISI 4340
Elk River BWR A 302 grade B A 105 grade 2 A 105 grade 2, SA 193 grade 7
A 182 F 304
tlumboldt Bay BWR A 302 grade B SA 336 modified SA 336 modified SA 193 grade B16
BONUS BWR A 212 grade B A 105 grade II A 182 F22 SA 193 grade 7

Pail:finder BWR A 212 grade B A 105 grade II, A 437

A 335 grade P22
LaCrosse BWR A 302 grade B A 336 modified, A 182 A 336 modified A 437 grade B4
TP F 304

San Onofre PWR A 302 grade B SA 336 SA 336 SA 193 meeting

AISI 4340
Connecticut Yankee PWR A 302 grade B SA 336 modified SA 336 modified SA 320 grade L43
Oyster Creek BWR A 302 grade B SA 336 modified, SA 336 modified, A 193 grade AISI
Code Case 1236-1 ** Code Case 1236-1 ** 4340

Nine-Mile Point BWR A 302 grade B SA 336 modified, SA 336 modified, A 193 grade
Code Case 1236-1 ** Code Case 1236-1 ** AISI 4340

Drcsden-2 BWR A 302 grade B A 336 modified A 182-F304, A 336 F8, A 193 grade B16,
modified F8m, A 105 grade I1 A 320 grade
L43 modified
Carolina PWR A 302 grade A SA 336 modified SA 336 modified SA 320 grade L43
Millstone Point-1 PWR A 302 grade B A 508 class 2 A 508 class 2 A 540 grade B24

Ginna PWR A 302 grade B A 508 class 2, SA 336 modified SA 320 grade L43
SA 336 modified class 3
Indian Point-2 PWR A 302 grade B SA 336 modified SA 336 modified SA 320 grade L43
Palisades PWR A 302 grade B A 508 class 2 A 508 Alloy steel
A 540, B24

Turkey Point-3 PWR A 302 grade B A 508 class 2 A 508 class 2 SA 320 grade L43
class 3
TVA Browns Ferry BWR SA 302 grade B SA 336 modified SA 336 modified A 193 grade B7

* Later construction involved some of these same materials but under revised ASTM Specification numbers; for example: A302-B
became A533-A, A302-B modified became A533-B.
** ('ode cases describe permissible or required changes to existing specifications.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 263

reactor vessels * (from ref. 191).

Nuts Supports Pipe Weld rod Cladding

Stainless
SA 193 grade 3 SA 212 grade B Clad E 308 L Stainless
AISI 4340 A 212 grade B A 106C Clad 308 L SA 240 grade S
Ispot-welded sheet)
AISI 4340 A 212 grade B A 376 TP 316 Clad 308 1, Stainless
Stainless
SA 194 meeting Type 304 (internal) Clad 308, 309, lnconel A 264-44T grade 3,
AISI 4340 type 304
B 167 1" 7016 clad A 371, SA 264-3
type 308 L, 309
SA 193 grade BI6 SA 302 grade B A 213, B 167 Type 304
SA 194-2H A 212 grade B A 240-304, A 312-304, B, E 7016 clasA 371, Type 304
A 106 B,A 376 TP 304 type 308 L, 309
A437 A 155 grade KC70 Type 304 1_

A 194 grade 4 A 302 grade B, B 166, B 167, Clad 308 L Type 304 L
B 166, A 276 A 312 TP 304
TP 304
SA 194 meeting A 302 grade B A 376 TP 316 Clad 308, 309 Stainless
AIS1 4340
SA 320 L43 SA 336 modified A 376 TP 316 Clad 308, 309
A 193 grade SA 312 grade B, A 213, A 249, A 312, A 376 Clad E 308 Type 304
AISI 4340 SA 336 modified TP 304, 316
Code Case 1236-1 **
A 193 grade SA 212 grade B, A 213, A 249, A 312, A 376 Clad E 308 Type 304
AISI 4340 SA 336 modified, TP 304, 316
Code Case 1236-1 **
A 193 grade 2H A 276 TP 304, A 213, A 249, A 312, A 376 A 233, A 298, A 316 Type 304
A 240TP 304 TP 304,316 clad A 371, ER 308 L.
I-R 309
SA 320 L43 SA 336 modified A 376 TP 316 Clad 308, 309 Type 304
A 540 grade B24 A 508 class 2, A 240 TP 304, A 312 TP 304 Clad I", 308 Type 304
A 516 grade 70 A 212 grade B, A 106 grade B
SA 320 L43 SA 212 grade B, A 376 TP 316 ('lad 308 1_ Type 304
class 3 SA 336 modified
SA 320 L43 SA 336 modified A 376 TP 316 Clad 308, 309 Type 304
Alloy steel A 336 SA 212 grade B FR 308, ER 309, 1.18018-('3, Type 3114
A 540, B24 A316, A 298, A371,
Into 182, A 233
SA 320 L43 SA 336 modified A 376 TP 316 Clad 308 k Type 304
class 3
A 194 grade 211 A 276 TP 304, A 213, A 249, A 312, A 376 A 233, A 298. A 316, Type 304
A 240 TP 304 TP 304,316 or A 240 TP 304 A 37 I, I'R 308 L, I.R 309
264 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

Table 2
Cross index of designations of pressure vessel steels

Minimum yield strength

Current ASTM and commercial
Composition Condition or point
ASTM Grade designations
type
designation previously used
ksi kg/mm 2

A515 55 A 201 or A 212 C-Si Hot rolled or normalized 30 21

60 C-Si Hot roiled or normalized 32 23
65 C-Si Hot rolled or normalized 35 25
70 C-Si Hot rolled or normalized 38 27
A516 55 A 201 or A 212 C-Si Hot roiled or normalized 30 21
60 C-Si Hot rolled or normalized 32 23
65 C-Si Hot rolled or normalized 35 25
70 C-Si Hot rolled or normalized 38 27
A 533 A A 302 C-Mn-Mo Quenched and tempered 50 (C1 1) 35
70 (C1 2) 49
B A 302 (Ni-Mod) C-Mn-Mo-Ni Quenched and tempered 50 (C1 1) 35
(0.40-0.70 Ni) 70 (C1 2) 49
C A 302 (Ni-Mod) Mn-Mo-Ni Quenched and tempered 50 (C1 1) 35
(0.70-1.00 Ni) 70 (CI 2) 49
A537 A 212 normalized Mn-Si Normalized 50 35
A 212 quenched and Mn-Si Quenched and tempered 60 42
tempered
A 542 A 387D quenched and Cr-Mo Quenched and. tempered 85 (CI 1) 60
tempered 100 (C1 2) 70
2¼ C r - 1 Mo
A543 HY-80;HY-100 Ni-Cr-Mo Quenched and tempered 85 (CI 1) 60
100 (C1 2) 70

Table 3
ASME Section Ill specification for plate, forgings, and bolting materials

Carbon steel plate Carbon steel forgings

SA515, Grade 55, 60, 65 and 70 (Code Case 1346) SA105, Grade I and II (Code Case 1332)
SA516, Grade 55, 60, 65 and 70 (Code Case 1347) SA266, Grade I, II and III
SA442, Grade 55 and 60 SA350, LF-1 (Code Case 1332)

Low alloy steel forgings

Low alloy steel plate SA182, Type F-l, F-22
SA204, Grade A, B and C SA336, Type F-l, F-22 modified (Code Case 1236)
SA302, Grade A and B SA508, Class l, II and llI (Code Case 1332)
SA387, Grade A, B, C, D and E (1964 version) SA508, Class IV (Code Case 1359)
SA533, Grade A, B and C; Class I (Code Case 1339)
SA533, Grade A, B and C; Class II (Code Case 1396) Low alloy bolting materials
SA543, Class I (Code Case 1358) SA193, Grade B7, B14, B16, B8, B8C, B8M, B8T
SA353, SA553 SA320, Grade L43
 Table 4
Chemical compositions of reactor vessel materials * (reprinted from ref. [ 9 ] ).

Chemical composition (wt %)

Material designation
C Cr Ni Fe Mo Mn P S Si Other elements

Carbon steel plate

A 212 grade B firebox to A 300 0.31 Balance 0.85-1.20 0.035 0.040 0.15-0.30
A 515 grade 70 t'rrebox 0.35 Balance 0.90 0.035 0.040 0.15-0.30
Low-alloy steel plate
A 302 grade B firebox 0.25 Balance 0.45-0.60 1.15-1.50 0,035 0,040 0.15-0.30
A 302 grade B firebox modified b 0.25 0.4-1.0 Balance 0.45-0.60 1.15-1.50 0.035 0.040 0.15-0.30 oq
A 533 grade B 0.25 .-q
0.40-0.70 Balance 0.45-0.60 1.15-1.50 0.035 0.040 0.15-0.30 ©
A 533 grade C 0.25 0.70-1.00 Balance 0.45-0.60 1.15-1.50 0.035 0.040 0.15-0.30
A 542 0.15 2.00-2.50 Balance 0.90-1.10 0.30-0.60 0.035 0.035 0.15-0.30
A 543 c 0.23 1.50-2.00 3.00-4.00 Balance 0.45-0.60 0.40 0.02 0.02 0.20-0.35 0.03 V ©
High-alloy steel plate
A 240 type 304 d 0.08 18.00- 20.00 8.00-12.00 Balance 2.00 0.045 0.030 1.00
A 240 type 304 L 0.03 18.00-20.00 8.00-12.00 Balance 2.00 0,045 0.030 1.00
A 240 type 316 e 0.03 16.00-18.00 10.00-14.00 Balance 2.00-3.00 2.00 0.045 0.030 1.00
Welded or seamless carbon steel pipe
A 106 grade B 0.30 Balance 0.29-1.06 0.048 0.058 0.10 rain Z
A 106 grade C 0.35 Balance 0.29-1.06 0.048 0.058 0.10 rain
A 155 grade KCT0 0.31 r-
Balance 0.85-1.20 0.035 0.40 0.15-0.30
Seamless low-alloy pipe
~V
A 335 grade P22 0.15 1.90-2.60 Balance 0.87-1.13 0.30-0.60 0.030 0.030 0.50
Welded or seamless high-alloy pipe ©
and tebing e
A 213 grade TP 304 0.08 18.00-20.00 8.00-11.00 Balance 2,00 0.040 0.030 0.75
A 213 grade TP 316 0.08 16.00-18.00 11.00-14.00 Balance 2.00-3.00 2.00 0.030 0.030 0.75
A 249 grade TP 304 0.08 18.00-20.00 8.00-11.00 Balance 2.00 0.040 0.030 0.75
A 249 grade TP 316 0.08 16.00-18.00 11.00-14.00 Balance 2.00-3.00 2.00 0.040 0.030 0.75
A 312 grade TP 304 0.08 18.00-20.00 8.00-11.00 Balance 2.00 0.040 0.030 0.75
A 312 grade TP 316 0.08 16.00-18.00 11.00-14.00 Balance 2.00-3.00 2.00 0.040 0.030 0.75 O
~V
A 376 grade TP 304 0.08 18.00-20.00 8.00-11.00 Balance 2.00 0.030 0.030 0.75
A 376 grade TP 316 0.08 16.00-18.00 11.00-14.00 Balance 2.00-3.00 2.00 0.030 0.030 0.75
t'~
Nickel-chromium-iron seamless pipe
or tubing
B 167-- 0.15 14.0 -17.0 72.0 min 6.0-10.0 1.0 0.015 0.5 0.5 Cu
Carbon steel forgings <
A 105 grade II 0.35 Balance 0.90 0.05 0.05 0.35
A 105 grade 11, modified chemistry 0.30 Balance 0.90 0.035 0,040 0.35
A 350 grade LF-I modified g 0.30 2.0 Balance 1.35 0.040 0.050 t"
c/3
Low-alloy steel forgings
A 182 grade F1 0.30 Balance 0A5-0.60 1.15-1.50 0.035 0.040 0.15-0.30
A 182 grade FI modified to meet

a All single value entries are a maximum unless otherwise noted; only ladle values are given; all plate values are for 4-in. or greater thickness.
b Modified by ASME Code Case 1339, paragraph 1.
c Supplemental requirements added to A 541 and A 543 to restrict phosphorus and mlfur contents for Code Case 1358.
d Used for structural suppo~ and as cladding conforming to ASTM A 264.
e Solution heat treated.
f Modified by ASME Code Case 1336. L~
g Modified by ASME Code Case 1332.
 Table 4 (continued)
o~
Chemical composition (wt %)
Material designation
C Cr Ni Fe Mo Mn P S Si Other elements

Low-alloy steel forgings (continued)

A 182 grade F22 0.15 2.00 2.50 Balance 0.87-1.13 0.30-0.60 0.040 0.040 0.050
A 336 modified g 0.27 0.25-0.45 0.50-0.90 Balance 0.55-0.70 0.50-0.80 0.040 0.050 0.15-0.35
A 508 class 2, A 541 c class 2 0.27 0.25-0.45 0.50-0.90 Balance 0.55-0.70 0.50-0.80 0.025 0.025 0.15-0.35 0.06 V
A 541 c class 7 0.15 2.00-2.50 Balance 0.90-1.10 0.30-0.60 0.02 0.02 0.50
A 541 c class 8, A 508 class 4 0.23 1.25-2.00 2.75-3.90 Balance 0.40-0.60 0.20-0.40 0.02 0.02 0.30 0.03 V
High-alioy steel forgings
182 F 31M 0.08 18.00-20.00 8.00-11.00 Balance 2.00 0.040 0.030 1.00
A 182 F 31M L 0.035 18.00-20.00 8.00-13.00 Balance 2.00 0.040 0.030 1.00
A 336 class F8 0.08 18.00-20.00 8 00-11.00 Balance 2.00 0.040 0.030 1.00
A 336 class F8m 0.08 16.00-18.00 10.00-14.00 Balance 2.00-3.00 2.00 0.040 0.030 1.00
Low-alloy steel castings
A 356 grade 10 h' 0.20 2.00-2.75 Balance 0.90 1.20 0.50-0.80 0.05 0.05 0.60
Alloy steel bolting
7~
A 193 grade B16 0.36-0.44 0.80 1.15 Balance 0.50-0.65 0.45-0.70 0.04 0.04 0.20-0.35 0.25-0.35 V
A 193 meeting AISI 4340 0.38-0.43 0 . 7 0 - 0 . 9 0 1.65-2.00 Balance 0.20-0.30 0.60-0.80 0.040 0.040 0.20-0.35
A 320 grade L43 i 0.38-0.43 0.70-0.90 1.65-2.00 Balance 0.20-0.30 0.60-0.85 0.040 0.040 0.20-0.35
A 437 grades B4B, B4C 0.20-0.25 11.00-12.50 0.40-0.80 Balance 0.90-1.25 0.40-0.80 0.025 0.025 0.20 0.50 0 . 2 0 - 0 . 3 0 V,
0.90-1.25 W, Z
0.05 AI, 0.05
Ti, 0.04 Sn
A 540 grade B24 0.37-0.44 0.70-0.95 1.65-2.00 Balance 0.30-0.40 0.70-0.90 0.025 0.025 0.20-0.35 0.40 V
Ferritic and alloy steel nuts
A 194 grade 4 0.40-0.50 Balance 0.20 min 0.50-0.95 0.04 0.05 0.15 rain
A 194 meeting AISI 4340 0.38-0.43 0.70-0.90 1.65-2.00 Balance 0.20-0.30 0.60-0.80 0.040 0.040 0.20-0.35
A 194 grade 8 0.08 18.00-20.0.0 8.00-12.00 Balance 2.00 0.045 0.030 1.00
Nonferrous and higl~-alloy steel bat
A 276 type 304 J 0.08 18.00-20.00 8.00-12.00 Balance 2.00 0.045 0.030 1.00
B 166 f 0.15 14.00-17.00 72.00 min 6.00-10.00 1.00 0.015 0.5 0.5 Cu
Welding electrodes and filler materials
A 316 class E8018-C3 0.12 0.80-1.10 Balance 1.00 0.04 0.80
Elec~oslag fiUez Balance 0.5 2.00
A 316 class EgoI8-B3 0.12 2.00-2.50 Balance 0.9-1.20 0.90 0.04 0.80
A 298 class E 308 k 0.08 18.00-21.00 9.00-11.00 Balance 2.50 0.04 0.03 0.90
A 298 class E 309 k 0.15 22.0-25.0 12.00 14.00 Balance 2.50 0.04 0.03 0.90
A 371 class ER 308 k 0.08 19.5 - 2 2 . 0 9.0 - 1 ! 0 Balance 1.0-2.5 0.03 0.03 0.25 - 0 . 6 0
A 371 class ER 309 k 0.12 23.0 25.0 12.0 - 1 4 . 0 Balance 1.0-2.5 0.03 0.03 0.25 0.60
Inconel 82 0.10 18.0 22.0 67 min 3.0 2.5-3.5 0.015 0.50 0.50 Cu,
2.00-3.00 Cb,
0.30 Ta,
0.75 Ti
Inconel 182 0.10 15.0 Balance 8.0 7.5 0.015 1.00
Inconel 92 0.10 14.0 17.0 67 min 10.0 2.00-2.75 0.015 0.35 2.5--3.5 Ti

h Modified by ASME Code Case 1333.

! Modified by ASME Code Case 1335, paragraph 4.
J Modified by ASME Code Case 1334.
k Also 308 L and electrodes of 308 and 309 selected for low carbon content.
 Table 5
Required mechanical properties of reactor vessel materials a (from ref. [9]).

Charpy V-notch Maximum

impact value c hardness
Yield b Elonga- Elonga- Raduc- (ft-lb) number
Tensile strength strength tion tion tion
Material designation
(psi) (psi) in 8 in. in 2 in. of area
(%) (%) (%) Average One Rock-
for three Brinell
specimens specimen well B L~

Carbon steel plate t"

A 212 grade B firebox 70,000-85,000 38,000 19 22 20 15 Lt2
A 515 grade 70 firebox 70,000-85,000 38,000 19 23 20 15 ©
Low-alloy steel plate
A 302 grade B firebox 80,000-100,000 50,000 17 20 30 25 ©
A 302 grade B firebox modified d 80,000-100,000 50,000 17 20 30 25
A 533 grades B and C, class 2 90,000-115,000 70,000 18.0 30 25
A 542, class 2 115,000 100,000 15 35 30
A 543, class 1 105,000 85,000 16 35 30
A 543, class2 115,000 I00,000 16 35 30
High-alloy steel plate
A 240 type 304 75,000 30,000 40.0 202 88 Z
A 240 type 304 L 70,000 25,000 40.0 202 88
A 240 type 316 75,000 30,000 40.0 217 95
>
Welded or seamless carbon steel pipe
A 106 grade B 60,000 35,000 22 longitudinal 15 10
12 transverse • ©
A 106 grade C 70,000 40,000 20 longitudinal 20 15
12 transverse e m
A 155 grade KC70 70,000-85,000 38,000 19 22 20 15
Seamless low-alloy pipe >
A 335 grade P22 60,000 30,000 22 longitudinal 15 10
14 transverse e
©
Welded or seamless high-alloy pipe
A 213 grade TP 304,316 75,000 30,000 35
A 249 grade TP 304, 316 75,000 30,000 35 m
A 312 grade TP 304, 316 75,000 30,000 35
A 376 grade TP 304,316 75,000 30,000 35
Nickel-chromium-iron seamless pipe
B 167 f 80,000 30,000 rain- 30-35 <
35,000 rain
Carbon steel forgings t'n
A 105 grade II 70,000 36,000 22 30 20 15
A 350 grade LF-1 modified g 60,000 30",000
Low-alloy steel forgings
A 182 grade F 1 70,000 40,000 25.0 35.0 20 15 201
A 182 grade F22 70,000 40,000 20.0 30.0 20 15 201

a All single e~tries are minimum values unless otherwise noted. d Modified by ASME Code Case 1339, paragiaph 1.
b Yield defined as 0.2% offset value. e Tabulated values are for standard round 2-in. gage length test specimen.
c Chaxpy impact values are those required by paragraph N-330 of Section Ill f Modified by ASME Code Case 1336.
of the ASME Code. g Modified by ASME Code Case 1332.
 268 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

Table 6
Plate specification for potential nuclear reactor vessel steels

Mechanical properties and heat treatment

Ultimate
0.2% yield tensile % elongation Charpy V-notch Heat treatment
Steel specification strength (rain.) Values
(rain.) strength required
(ksi) in 2 in. Ave. 3

A538-A 200-235 210 min. 8 not established solution treat and aged
A538-B (Maraging) 230-260 240 rain. 6 not established solution treat and aged
HY-130 (T) 130 rain. 15 50 (°F) Q&T
HP 9-4-20 CrMo 170 min. - 15 35 (°F) Q&T
12-5-3 Maraging 180 min. - - solution treat and aged

Chemical analysis (%) (Ladle)

C Mn P S Si Ni Cr Mo Other

A538-A 0.03 max 0.10 max 0.010 max 0.010 max 0.10 max 17.0 to - 4-4.5 l'C° - 7-8.5+
A538-B (Maraging) 0.03 max 0.10 max 0.010 max 0.010 max 0.10max 19.0 - 4.6-5.1 ~Ti + A1
HY-130 (T) 0.12 max 0.60-0.90 0.010max 0.010max 0.20 to 4.75 to 0.40 to 0.30 to V - 0.05-0.10
0.35 5.25 0.70 0.65
HP 9-4-20 C r M o 0.17-0.23 0.20-0.35 0.010 max 0.010 max 0.10max 8.50 to 0.65 to 0.90 to JV - 0.06-0.10
9.50 0,85 1.10 ~Cu - 4.25-4.75
12-5-3 (Maraging) 0.025 0.20-0.35 0.010 max 0.010 max - 12.0 4.75 3.0 AI - 0,3
typical typical Ti - 0,25

specifications for the most commonly used vessel
steels are shown in table 3. The compositions of these
and other reactor vessel materials are listed in table 4
[9] while mechanical properties are provided in
table 5 [9].
All plate steels used in nuclear pressure vessels must
first be described in an ASTM specification and subse-
quently be adopted by ASME, either directly into
Section III [7] of the ASME Pressure Vessel Code or
through an individual Code Case *
The carbon and alloy grades of steel specifically
approved for nuclear use are indicated in table 4. This
group is much more restricted than that allowed for
general pressure vessel construction.
As of late 1968, ASTM A537 and A542 (table 2)
were under consideration for nuclear code use. A537
was approved in November 1966 for use in unfired
pressure vessels (Code Case 1381) [10].
* See footnote to table 1.
In spite of the availability of the large number of
steels listed in tables 1 and 2, the majority of reactor
vessels constructed in the late 1960's are made o f A 5 3 3
(formerly A-302) Grade B plate, A508 Class 2 forging,
and A 193 or A320 Grade L43 bolting. All of these
materials have reasonably good initial notch toughness
and have been proven in service.
Looking far ahead, a number of high strength steels
show promise for pressure vessel construction. Plate
specifications for some of these steels are shown in
table 6.
Over and above the normal pressure vessel require-
ments (typically ASME Section VIII), ASME Section
III requires that all materials for vessel forgings.or
plate meet certain minimum notch impact require-
ments based upon either the Drop Weight Test (ASTM
No. 208-66T) [ 11 ] or the Charpy V-notch impact (Cv)
(ASTM A370) [ 12] tests. Charpy-V requirements are
shown in table 5. These values are based upon provi-
sions of tables N421 and N422 of the ASME Section
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 269

III [7a]. Bolting materials are qualified by Cv only. 2.2. Cost considerations
The drop weight test defined nil ductility transition Table 7 shows cost data for a number of carbon
(NDT) temperature has the advantage of providing a and alloy grade steels. Though the high-strength steels
single initial temperature describing a critical proper- HY 130 and Maraging 200 are not yet available com-
ty of the vessel steel at a temperature not a range of mercially in the heavy gages required for large nuclear
temperatures. vessels, they are included for comparison. It is expect-
Test results are acceptable if met at temperatures ed, however, that steels of over 140-ksi tensile strength
60°F below the lower of the vessel hydrotest tempera- will be finding significant use in special applications
ture or the lowest service metal temperature. The only by the late 1970's.
drop weight test is an accepted alternative when used
in accordance with ASTM E208-66T to provide "no Table 7
break" performance in two specimens under the same Cost comparison. Current versus possible future plate steels
temperature limitations as above. (January 1968)
In practice, plates which will be in the active core
Adjusted Relative
region usually are qualified at +10°F by assuring that Approx. Tensile cost
Material cost cost
the minimum CV energy requirements in table 5 are ($/lb) strength (cents/lb) (%).
met at this temperature. For non-core region plates, 104 psi
+40°F is often used as a qualification temperature.
SA515-70 0.12 70,000 1.71 100
Cognizance of potential radiation embrittlement dur- SA533-B 0.18 80,000 2.25 130
ing service has strengthened the case of pressure vessel SA543-C11 0.26 105,000 2.48 145
steels with very low (below - 5 0 ° F as fabricated) HY-130 0.60 150,000 4.00 230
initial NDT temperatures. (5Ni-Cr-Mo-V)
Extensive nondestructive testing is specified in Maraging 200 2 . 0 0 2 1 0 , 0 0 0 9.51 550
(18 Ni)
Article 3 (Materials) of ASME Section III, including A542Class 1 0.23 105,000 2.19 128
ultrasonic inspection of plate, forgings, and castings
as well as liquid penetrant, magnetic particle, and * Using adjusted cost of A515-70 = 100%.
radiographic inspections [7b]. Nondestructive testing
is required in all phases of manufacture: at the steel The last column in table 7 represents relative ma-
mill, in the fabrication shop, and at the site. terial cost, adjusted to compensate for variations in
The required testing procedures and sizes of mech- strength. For instance, substituting Maraging 200 steel
anical test specimens are also defined. The tests involve (assuming it could be obtained in the required plate
small specimens heat treated in electronically con- sizes and toughness) for a A533-B steel would increase
trolled furnaces to simulate heating and cooling cycles the cost of the steel by a factor of about 4 for an
that plates or forgings would encounter during fabri- equivalent vessel.
cation.
It should be noted that the ASME Code stipulates 2.3. Strength considerations
minimum standards for quality assurance. Individual The pressure vessel for the first large demonstra-
designers of nuclear pressure vessels often require tion reactor (Shippingport) was constructed from a
more restrictive specifications than those of the Code. material still widely used, A302 Grade B steel [9].
Surveillance specimens are usually employed to Since early design codes limited the principal stress to
1
monitor the effect of neutron irradiation on the prop- ¥ the tensile strength, wall thicknesses were consider-
erties (particularly notch toughness) of the pressure able for vessels in the early, relatively low output
vessel. These are usually made from pieces which have power reactors. Although permissible stresses have
undergone the entire fabrication cycle. Minimum re- increased, the larger sizes of modern and future PWR's
commended standards for reactor component sur- and BWR's have dictated the need for heavier and
veillance have been published by ASTM [ 13]. heavier vessel walls, as indicated above in figs. 2 and 3.
270 R.tI.STERNE, Jr. and LE.STEELE

I2---

IO
~
AsID;7°
OI-B

A516-70

g A533CI1
08
A,533C12~

F--
LO
O6
A542',,,~/"
A543 Cic
bJ
> L
~17.7 FT~ ~ 32FT ,,-4,0 4
[
I

o g 02,

DRESDEN I OYSTER C R E E K
\7_A EXPERIMENTAL
L_~
15000 20000 25000 30000
"PROJECTED

35000 40000
20OMwe 600 Mwe 3000 Mwe
1959 1967 1973 (?l (I/3 OF 70*F ULTIMATE TENSILE STRENGTH
GAGE5 IN. GAGE101/2 IN. GAGE12IN. ASME SECTION III CRITERIA)

Fig. 2. Typical reactor vessel dimensions based on use of Fig. 4. Effect of steel strength on required plate thickness of
ASTM A533 Class 1 plate. PWR and BWR pressure vessels.

Fig. 4 shows how the required wall thickness of a ves-

sel decreases with increasing strength of the steel used.
Research efforts will undoubtedly add other candidate
steels of even higher strength to the ones shown in
A 302 - B AND
A 5 5 3 - B, C ( I fig. 4.
16
Since vessel fabricating costs increase at a very high
15 rate as wall thicknesses are increased, the relatively
w ~ 14
lw
S lower fabrication costs for vessels made of high-strength
Ui---
z ~ 13 / steels may overshadow the higher raw material cost -
~'N iz ¢" /
d especially for larger pressure vessels.
Increased strength may also contribute to the fea-
~u.f II
~ ,o
i / sibility of construction. It is not possible to maintain
the 30 ft-lb at +I0°F toughness requirements of A533
~ 9
i / Grade B, Class 1 steel if its thickness is over about
PRESSUR,ZE~ I /
WATER A / 12 in., but modern reactors may require plate sections
REACTORS or / BO,L,NG heavier than this. Use of the higher strength A533
.....-- - WATER
_-~- """" / REACTORS Class 2 or A543 Class 1 steel would reduce the thick-
o-"
I
ness to a level where both strength and toughness re-
5 quirements can be met.
O"-" " ' ' - " "
1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I Naturally, the use of a high-strength steel permits
1955 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 75 75 77 79
YEAR IN SERVICE a reduction in vessel weight. Few fabricating shops
can lift pressure vessels that weigh over 500 tons, and
Fig. 3. Chronological increase in reactor wall thickness of light specification of a high-strength steel may be the only
water reactors. way to satisfy this limitation.
 STEELS F O R COMMERCIAL N U C L E A R POWER R E A C T O R PRESSURE VESSELS 271

Unfortunately, the use of high-strength steels poses

STEELS TENSILEPROPERTIES
several inherent problems. The high-deposition-rate ASTM ~ YS UTS (KSIt
CI A515-7'0 51 76
welding processes which must be used in practical pres- 0 A516-70 49 79
0,8.-~37-A 46 72
sure vessel construction are not broadly adaptable to 125 I~ A537-B 60 79 /-/ira,-
the high-strength steels. Some progress has been made []////// A557A
[ 14] toward developing appropriate steels and weld- CHEMISTRY(%) U / --
C MN / /
ments in the 130 to 200-ksi yield strength range. How- -IOO
ever, before these high-strength materials can be used
extensively in heavy-wall pressure vessel applications,
>-
C9
n."
bJ
Z
2,;'t
-.,, ,.,, / ;A// o
welding processes will have to be developed for join- " ' 75 m I
"I'-
ing them economically and reliably.
Present design criteria for reactor vessels assume
that all carbon and low-alloy steels exhibit a discrete
Z
A557B
,"2' / / //t"
f-A516-70
>- 50
ductile-to-brittle transition temperature, indicated by Q..
<[
the Charpy V-notch test or by the Naval Research -'r
¢J
Laboratory drop-weight test [15]. This is not true for
25
steels of over about 130-ksi tensile strength. Thus,
before such high-strength materials can be used, Code j
.o" ..~
./
_..~,,.,.j~.
.j~ TESTSI/4TAT
authorities must agree on some other test and stan- 0 i I I [ I
dards for the notch toughness. -150 -I00 -50 0 50 I00
Another potential problem with high-strength TEMPERATURE (°F)
steels is that they may be more sensitive to small flaws
Fig. 5. Charpy V-notch transition temperature behavior of
encountered in fabrication than currently used lower carbon steel plates. Plate heat treatment: 1650°F - air cooled:
strength steels. 1650°F - water quenched, and 1200°F - air cooled.
Offsetting some of these drawbacks, high-strength
steels of the type listed in table 1 under "potential
future alloy steels" are relatively insensitive to radia-
tion damage [16]. ASTM ~ STEEL (0.751N. PLATE)
ON NORMIU_IZED
125 0 0 T - QUENCHED& TEMPERED
2.4. Toughnessconsiderations
2.4.1. Notch toughness limits
A
,Q
A nuclear pressure vessel is unlike any other kind i I00
of pressure vessel in operation. Unusually good initial .F.=
notch toughness is needed not only to avoid failure in =.
tAJ
hydrostatic testing, but also to prevent serious neutron 75
irradiation embrittlement during operation.
To insure against brittle fracture, the vessel temper-
ature must be maintained well above the NDT temper- 50
ature of the steel. Special startup and shutdown pro-
/ "~/ N .15 I.i9 .24
cedures might be required if surveillance were to indi- /i / OT it~, 1.20.23
cate an increase in NDT temperature to near the boil- .,~ // T__ENSILE PROPERTIES
25
ing point of water at atmospheric pressure. One pro- / ~ YS, U.T¢. ~EI.-21N
i/ N 51ksi T/k=i ~4%
cedure for alleviating vessel embrittlement is to give QT 67k= E r r ~ i 28=/.
the vessel a postirradiation heat treatment above its
usual operating temperature in order to correct some
TEMPERATURE PF)
of the radiation embrittlement. This method was used
with apparent success in the Army SM-1A reactor at Fig. 6. Effect o f heat t r e a t m e n t u p o n the Charpy V-notch
Fort Greely, Alaska [17]. toughness properties o f ASTM A537 steel.
 272 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

,=-
uJ
,..,..
5ol A 5 3 3 GR B, CLASS I, 2

--~ _ ~ / ~/ m/m
/,,°T
/ f f / Z T (AVERAGE) ASTM A543-B CL t STEEL
(11 in PLATE)
I.'- ,I./--- o
TENSILE PROPERTIES
a::
taJ 0
=E - o Ys(,,,) r b
tO UTS(ksi) 1150 1152 1198
I-- EL-2m(%) 24 24 22
RA(%) 7'0 67 66 i- ~ ~"¢' . . . . . v I/4T
0 I ,o7 .~/-'~'~ . . ~ . ~ S
~- - 5 0 -

/ S - SURFACE - - _ _ •

--I00 1/4T - THICKNESS . . . .

.J I/2 T-- THICKNESS
p-
0
2O
_1
z - I 50 - -

-2oo -,~ -,ao -~o ~ ~o ,oo -

0 I/2 THICKNESS TEMPERATURE (*F)

-200 I 1 I I1 I I II
0.5 I 2 ] 4 5 7 I0 15 20
PLATE THICKNESS CINCHES)

Fig. 7. NDT values for ASTM A533-B Class 1 and 2 steels at
various thickness locations and for plates of different thick-
nesses.
Fig. 9. Charpy V-notch ductility characteristics of ASTM
A543-B Class 1 Plate (11") showing variation with plate
thickness location. Heat treatment: 1650°F - 11 hr, water
dip quenched; 1150°F - 11 hr, air cooled; 1050°F - I 1 hr,
air cooled.

~TM A~ C, 2
ASTM A533-B STl~lp. (6in PLATE)
( 8in PLATE)
I001 TENSILE PROPERTIES
IO0 TENSILEPROPERTIES fS S I/4T _1/21"SPECIFIED S
YS.(kli) 103.7 102.9 105.8 IO0.OIIiN ~ . -~~, i, "~/ / ~ i II4T
',r.
/ ~o u.T~kli) 119.4 120~ 1232 1IS.0MIN / " 7 ~ ....
UTS(ksi) 914 896 897 80 EL-2in(~) 23 22 22 15.0MIN .//V , 7
EL- 2in(%) 26 2:6 26 /' RA(%) 71
RA(%} 67 64 , ~I/4T

~J 6C
N~T /~ ~/" ~T" / "
z @ SURFACE T / / Y "

IJc'y" -@!~T a
~/ I./2T S-SURF~,CE &-----AVE

°06- -,;o -,;o 40 ; 5o ,~o 0

-zoo
i
-i50 -too
i i
-5o 0
i i
50 ~00
{

TEMPERATURE('F)
TEMPERATUREpF)

Fig. 8. Charpy V-notch ductility characteristics of ASTM Fig. I0. Charpy V-notch ductility characteristics of ASTM
A533-B quenched and tempered plate (8") showing variation A542 Class 2 plate (6") showing variation with plate thickness
with plate thickness location. location. Heat treatment: 1725°F - 6 hr, water dip quenched;
1100°F - 6 hr, air cooled; 1150°F - 12 hr, air cooled.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEARPOWER REACTOR PRESSUREVESSELS
Composition, deoxidation practice, and heat treat-
ment are the main factors governing the NDT temper-
ature. Manganese and nickel are useful alloying ele-
ments for improving toughness; also, a reduction in
carbon content is beneficial. Deoxidation practices
which result in fine grain structures are effective also
in improving notch toughness. In general, too,
quenched and tempered steels are superior in tough-
ness to normalized steels.
Fig. 5 shows impact energies for several Code-
approved carbon steels. Note that the highest tough-
ness steel (A537) contains the most manganese and
the least carbon. As can be seen in fig. 6, quenched
and tempered A537 plate has a substantially lower
(by about 50°F) transition temperature than the same
steel in the normalized condition.
Tensile and impact specimens taken from different
locations across the thickness of a plate give different
test results, and thin plates (e.g., 2 or 3 in.) of a given
steel are substantially tougher on the average than
thick plates (e.g., 10 to 12 in.) of the same material.
These effects are apparent in figs. 7 and 8 for the
commonly used A533 (formerly A302) low-alloy
steel plate, and in figs. 9 and 10 for A543 and A542
plate, respectively. Note the relative uniformity of
toughness and the high Charpy-V notch energy values
even at - 1 2 0 ° F through the 11-in.-thick A543 Class 1
plate in fig. 9.
The chemistry of the A542 steel is designed to pro-
vide high resistance to creep at 800 to 1000°F. In the
quenched and tempered condition at slightly over
100-ksi yield strength, it has moderate-to-good tough-
ness (fig. 10), with transition temperatures ranging
from about - 4 0 ° F to low ambient temperatures.
Factors such as thickness, dynamic versus static
loading, the size and geometry of flaws, metallurgical
condition of the material at the flaw tip, etc., are
critical to the understanding of the fracture of reactor
pressure vessels. Further, radiation damage is such
that it may result in significant influences on most of
these factors but especially upon the metallurgical
condition of the vessel steel at a flaw tip. The extreme
difficulty of analyzing quantitatively tl'e potential
failure condition of a reactor vessel is related to the
difficulty of applying meaningful quantities to these
several interrelated factors. Ultimately, it will be done,
but the best current approach involves the use of ap-
plied fracture mechanics based upon relatively easily
273
conducted structural prototype tests to establish ves-
sel operating limits and a conservative interpretation
of these limits which is required by the critical service
function of the vessel.
2.4.2. Thickness effects
A critically important factor in toughness deter-
mination is the assessment of possible thickness effects
upon the fracture toughness of thick pressure vessel
steels over the transition temperature range. Such a
study was accomplished on two A533 heats, one
A533-B class 2 plate of 6-in. thickness and one A533-B
class 1 plate of 12-in. thickness. This critical experi-
ment was performed [18,19] using the NRL dynamic
tear (DT) tests and the Westinghouse fracture mech-
anics (Klc) tests [20]. The DT specimens ranged in
thickness from ~- in. to 12-in. and the Klc tests from
1 to 12 inches.
The results of the DT tests [21] for both 6-in. and
12-in. plates indicate a sharp transition in fracture
toughness evolving for all specimen sizes within a
180°F interval above the nil ductility transition (NDT)
temperature.
Size effects were defined by normalization of DT
energy from different size specimens according to the
respective upper shelf values. This comparison per-
mitted the definition of a size effect at the 50% DT
shelf energy level of +60°F between thinner speci-
mens, ~ and 1 in., and the 3, 6, and 12-in. specimens.
The transition pattern traced by the three thicker
specimens is defined by the right curve of fig. I 1. This
curve is considered a limiting transition temperature in
view of the applied dynamic loads to a highly con-
strained large flaw fracture region. The upper shelf
was estimated since it was not possible to completely
break the 12-in. specimen with the available 760,000
ft-lbs of energy imposed by a falling weight. The tran-
sition curve is divided into three sections, the first,
the plane strain fracture limit region, the second, the
transition region, and the third, the plastic enclave
(ductile tearing only) region.
The static Kic results (up to 12 in.) trace a sharp
upward rise at about the NDT temperature. This
region of the Kit curve corresponds approximately to
the sharp transition exhibited by the ~--s and 1-in. DT
specimens. Dynamic Kid results are not expected to
extend the region of validity for linear elastic fracture
mechanics beyond the region defined by the dashed
bracket limits of region 1.
274 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

000 000

ESTIMATEFOR
,-. FULLBREAK
12-IN. A 5 3 3 - B PLATE
800 000

'E
cn
_J
6 0 0 0 0 0 ~L
I ii
I
STATIC PLANE >-
STRAIN_~_.LtMIT $ E~] c9
rK
....... ~ FT W
t6C Z
SAME COURSE AS w
4 0 0 0 0 0 F-
C~

A 1 2 0 -- P ........

so
200 000
STATIC KIc
4O

-2 - I00 0 I00 200

TEMPERATURE (OF)
Fig. 11. Heavy section (to 12") dynamic tear (DT) test results defining a limiting transition temperature for 12" A533-B plate steel
compared with comparable thickness static plane strain fracture toughness values (Klc). The sharp rise in Klc at about the NDT
temperature traces the data from DT specimens of 5/8 and 1 inch thickness. Fracture appearance is indicated by photographic
inserts.

The important conclusion indicated by these stud-
ies (fig. 11) is that a limiting transition temperature
(LTT), based upon very severe fracture conditions has
been defined by DT tests and verified by large Klc
tests. This limit in turn defines a temperature about
120 to 160°F above NDT above which failure in steels
of the quality of A533 could be caused only by large
flaws and gross plastic loading, conditions which are
not expected in operating reactors. This conclusion
may be invalidated by severe radiation exposure which
might lower the upper energy shelf to a point where
plane strain fracture might again occur.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 275

ASTM A533-B ASTM A542 ASTM A543

Class 1 Class 2 Class 1
15 in. plate 61A in. plate 11 in. plate

a a a

b b b

c c c

Fig. 12. Typical microstructures of A533, A543, and A543 pressure vessel steels in heavy section plate.
(a) Surface, (b) Quarter line, (c) Center line. Nital etch (500 ×) used on ASTM A533-B and A543,
picral etch (500 ×) used on ASTM A542.
276 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

2.5. Microstructure these three steels in heavy sections. Occasionally,

The microstructure of both carbon and alloy steels
is strongly influenced by the same factors which gov-
ern notch toughness, namely, chemical composition
(which determines hardenability), heat treatment, and
deoxidation practice (which determines grain size).
2.5.1. Effect of composition on microstructure
Addition of elements such as Cr, Mo, Ni, and Mn
increases the hardenability of steel. The element
which has the greatest potency in this regard, though,
is carbon. However, raising the carbon level over
about 0.30 wt % increases the tendency toward quench
cracking, makes the steel more difficult to weld, and
decreases its notch toughness. Thus, only enough car-
bon is used to produce the desired level of harden-
ability (ability to develop uniform hardness in heavy
sections). This should not be confused with hardness
itself, which is determined primarily by carbon con-
tent and cooling rate.
For the alloy steels A533, A542, and A543, the
hardenability is controlled to produce a primarily
bainite microstructure after quenching and tempering.
Fig. 12 shows the uniformity of microstructure for
small percentages of ferrite or martensite may be
present.
Carbon steels used for reactor vessel construction
are either ferrite-pearlite aggregates or have largely
bainite microstructure, depending upon the thickness
and heat treatment. Bainite is a more desirable micro-
constituent, since it has a lower ductile-brittle transi-
tion temperature.
Increasing the manganese content of carbon steel
from about 0.50 wt % to 1.25 wt % has the effect of
increasing the volume fraction of pearlite after nor-
malizing, or if quenching is used, forming a bainite
instead of ferrite-pearlite microstructure (fig. 13).
2.5.2. Effect of heat treatment on microstructure
The cooling rate after austenitizing has a major
effect on the microstructure of both carbon and alloy
steels. Fig. 14 shows the difference between micro-
structures produced by air cooling and water quench-
ing of A537 steel. The major effect of quenching is to
allow the allotropic phase changes from the face-
centered cubic (austenitic) structure to the body-
centered structures (ferrite, martensite, bainite) to

(a) (b)

Fig. 13. Effect of manganese content in the microstructure of a carbon steel. (a) 0.15 C-0.58 Mn-0.23 Si; (b) 0.15 C-1.33 Mn-
0.23 Si; both (a) and (b) normalized at 1650°F and air cooled. Dark areas - pearlite; light areas - ferrite. 375 X, nital etch.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 277

Fig. 14. Effect of heat treatment, air cooling (top) versus water quenching (bottom) from austenitizing temperature (1650°F) and
subsequent tempering treatment on microstructure of A537 steel. Water quenching produced largely bainitic structure (X 250)
 278 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.ILSTH':LE

1600

1500
j I I
J I
Ac~l~op
AR3 15100F
l l
[i
I
I

1400

1300
CHEM,STRY = \ OF (I I'L"', ~ , t,F,E~,~'TE~H - ==~-;~L"'t
.42MN \ ~'
E 1200
hi
O'3P
.018S
i °X/ lily \
liD0
:3
I'Y
216CR
I ,,\ . . . . . . ~ ~, I

hi I000 i~io 011 ~,,, ,

n , I., ~ ~ £1STENITE+I~BAINI~Ei Ill
900 ~) "~,11 \ I~.~ I
I--
800 Ms II / / / ~ I g] 1~> ~l C~T~LLEDCOOLING
.... IL. _1 ___J. _ . J . Z .L___.L_~_ .I~L_.LL "RATE TO SIMULATE
700 740*F / / ] r! I ~ I, ~ T I 6" PLATE
I / | I \
600

500
IO I00 I000 I0000 I00000
TIME-SECONDS

Fig. 15. Time-temperature-transformation diagram for A542 (2¼% Cr-1% Mo) steel.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L / / i
PEARLITE
1'500 ~ ~ ~--~.,.~-~-------% START__

1400 I "L 1'4 ~HICKNESS~ ~\ THICKNESS

'
IFERRITE- "~ L~--I \ I

moo / \.LJRFACE/ , \ I

,,, I l O 0
*" RATE
~
0
1000
900
/
(
~ t
`50% TRANSFORMATION.%_. TO4OOOF Jr- . . . . .
,'-F~%~E
I ~,,..,...-70°F/MIN

\+ FE'~,TE+ CARB,DE
I ~',~
-'~"~----
\1\
p PLATE SIZE -- 7'5 X\'.~'5 X 1'5 I \. ] 1 \[ I [ (~\
8OO - THE~OCOUPLES> ~ 11/2TFR~ ~ | I ~ COOLING RATE IL,~
PLATE EDGE I1 / ] / ~ I ,5"F/MIN ~""'I~ \ I
7"oo M,, I I 1~/ / | I IX ~mo,oo'~ ~\1
r I I / -- \

600
~SUR~,CEI "
0 I/4 THICKNESS I
/\/ h,,I
\ I ~ i
! \\1
I \\ /
0 I/2 THICKNESS REF. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i END OF" ~ ~ I

400
2 :5 ,5 7" tO 20 `50 I00 200 `500 I000 2000 4000
TIME-SECONDS

l, ig. 16. Cooling rate for a water quenched 15" thick plate of A533-B steel superimposed on the time-temperature-transformation
diagram.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 279

microstructure is shown in fig. 18. Here, specimens of

the same heat of A533 steel were cooled at rates rep-
A533- A STEEL resenting the water quenching of 1-in. and 10-in.-thick
I00
(15in. PLATE) plate. Note the differences in microstructure and grain
size.
NSILE PROPERTIES(TRANSVERSE) In qualifying plate and forging material for use in a
eo YS U'I'S EL-21N.
SURFACE - 71.0 93.0 24
reactor vessel, these cooling rate effects must be taken
I/4.THICKNESS-68.5 90.5 24 into consideration. Much plate material is prequalified
,~T,,:K,Ess-~o, ,5o ,8 .~r"~.:-
by the steel manufacturer to insure that the specified
l/J 7 /
a: 60 mechanical properties can be met in the completed
/ o//"/
o CHEMISTRYW,J // // / / 1/4T pressure vessel.
C -.25 / / Such plates are not usually heat treated by the
>- MN-I.50 / /0 /'///
40 P - .Ol2 / manufacturer and, hence, qualification must be per-
S - .019 formed on small test specimens. To avoid inapprop-
u SI - .28 / //
NI - .05 / riate cooling rates, several alternate qualification meth-
- .47 0
ods are permitted by ASME Section II1 (paragraph

°t/e
20
I I I I
-K)O -50 0 50
TEMPERATURE (*F)
Fig. 17. Charpy V-notch ductility characteristics of ASTM
A533-A plate (15") showing variation with plate thickness
location. Heat treatment: 1750°F - water quenched; 1150°F
- 15 hr, air cooled.
begin at a lower temperature.
Fig. 15 shows a time-temperature transformation
diagram for A542 steel with cooling curves super-
imposed upon it. Faster cooling rates (corresponding
to thinner plates) result in transformation at lower
temperatures. Extreme quenching rates for this steel
will produce martensite; less extreme cooling rates will
generally allow bainitic transformation to occur. Only
under extremely slow cooling rates, such as in a fur-
nace, can a ferrite-pearlite structure form.
Because thick sections of steel cool at different
rates throughout their thickness, it is important to use
materials with hardenability compatible with the sec-
tion thickness. Fig. 16 shows the difference between
cooling rate at surface, ¼ thickness, and mid-thickness
for a 15-in.-thick A533 plate, as well as the phases
resulting from the heat treatment. The surface of the
plate has superior toughness, while the Charpy V-
notch energy absorption is noticeably lower at ¼ thick-
ness and mid-thickness (fig. 17).
A further example of the effect of cooling rate on
N313) [7c]. The use of large specimens _,~"x 3 T x T
(where T is the plate thickness) was originally the only
method permitted. Now techniques which duplicate
I
I00 the cooling rate from austenitizing which the plate
will experience, within 25°F and 20 sec at all temper-
atures, are permitted [7c].
All plate and forging steels used in a reactor vessel
require intermediate stress relief during fabrication.
The nuclear Code imposes slow cooling rates after
stress relief in order to minimize thermal stresses. The
materials which are currently used, or most likely to
be used, vary considerably in their response to stress
relief and subsequent slow cooling.
A533. Straining, followed by aging at stress reliev-
ing temperatures (1150°F) shows some effect on duc-
tile-brittle transition temperature. However, in the
absence of pre-strain, long-time exposure over a range
of temperatures (500,700, and 1150°F) causes little
embrittlement [22].
A542. This material has shown little tendency to
embrittle when slow cooled after being stress relieved,
however, no data are available for assessing the effect
of stress relief upon this steel in the quenched and
tempered condition.
A543. Significant embrittlement after stress reliev-
ing, followed by slow cooling, has been observed for
this steel. Fig. 19 shows the effect of several heat
treatments on the + 10°F and - 5 0 ° F Charpy V-notch
properties at various locations within the plate thick-
ness, for an 11-in.-thick A543 plate. Note that al-
though toughness decreases after multiple stress-
relieving cycles, it still remains superior to the tough-
280 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

500X 100×

500X 100X

Fig. 18. Effect of increased cooling rate on the microstructure of A533 steel.
Top: 1 in. plate quarterline, bottom: 10 in. plate quarterline.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 281

Long.--Surface Long.--Quarterline Long.-Centerline Deoxidation practices which result in fine grains

100 raise the grain-coarsening temperature of steels - that
+ 80 m temperature at which very rapid growth of existing
7O austenitic grains can proceed. This is desirable since it
J 5o allows both steel producer and fabricator more latitude

HEAT
o

TR~TMFNT
to

SR SR
MSR
r __- !
SR SR
MSR
r
SR SR
MSR
in processing.
Vacuum degassing has become common practice
for plate and forgings. Besides removing dissolved
gases (hydrogen, some nitrogen, and oxygen), degass-
ing homogenizes the steel in liquid form and allows
nonmetallic impurities to rise to the surface. Hence,
vacuum degassed steel is cleaner and is capable of
100
~o meeting more stringent specification criteria.
I 80
Deoxidation under vacuum has several advantages

I1
over the same process in air:
1. The steel is cleaner since the deoxidizers are added
40
30 after the gases and oxygen is removed by the reac-
| ,o tion of carbon with oxygen to form carbon dioxide.
10
0 This minimizes contamination by solid products of
HEAT
TREATMENT $R SR
9 N
deoxidation,primarily A120 3 and SiO 2.
$a s a
MSR MSR
2. Better control can be exercised over chemical anal-
Fig. 19. Charpy V-notch impact values for A543 steel at + 10° ysis through alloy additions into the degassing unit.
and -50°F after various heat treatment cycles. N: normalized; 3. Precise control of the amount of deoxidizers can
SR: stress relief (11 hr at 1050°F) plus air cooling; MSR: be maintained.
multiple (4 cycles) stress relief (total 44 hr at 1050°F), fur-
naee cooling; Q: quench, 1650°F, 11 hr; T: temperature,
l150°F, 11 hr.
3. Fabrication

ness shown by either A533 or A542 steel. Air cooling
after stress relieving did not produce a marked tough-
ness decrease in A543 plate. The heat treatment se-
quence of fig. 19 is similar to that which is anticipated
when vessels are constructed of A543 steel.
As indicated in fig. 20, nuclear reactors are large
and are steadily increasing in size. The procedures used
for their fabrication had their origin in the earlier
pressure vessels for fossil-fueled power boilers and in
the petroleum industry.

2.5.3. Effect of deoxidation practice on microstructure 3.1. Shop fabrication

The method by which the steel ingot is treated with
deoxidizers while in the liquid state has a pronounced
effect on the microstructure. Additions of such ele-
ments as AI, V, Ti, Zr, and others, either singly or in
combination, are used t.o grain refine the steel after it
has solidified. These deoxidizers act as nucleating points
in the austenite during heat treatment, allowing the
formation of many small grains. In the absence of
such deoxidizers, grains form less rapidly and are larg-
er in size. (An exception to this is the A542, chrom-
ium-molybdenum steel, where the undissolved Fe-Cr
carbides act as nucleating sites for fine-grained struc-
ture.) Fine grain size and good notch toughness go
hand in hand.
Up to 1967, all water-cooled reactor vessels in the
U.S. were built in shops. Advantages of shop fabrica-
tion over field fabrication include ease of heat treat-
ment, a.,ailability of better inspection equipment, and
ability to control the environment [5,23,24]. The
primary disadvantage of shop fabrication is the diffi-
culty of transporting a massive vessel (perhaps as
heavy as 1000 tons) to the erection site. All of the
major nuclear fabricating facilities in the U.S. are
located on navigable waterways, and pressure vessels
are usually shipped by barge to the site.
The first step in fabrication is the forming of plates
into cylinders usually by hot forming. Occasionally,
cold or warm forming is used, particularly for plates
282 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

SCALE 1=288
. (ALL DIMENSIONS
48 I APPROXIMATE)

36
PRESSURIZED
WATER
RE ACTOR
12

- - 4 5 0 M we - - 8 5 0 M we --I I 0 0 M we

72 I I
60
BOILING
48
WATER
REACTOR t,-

24
12
0
~500Mwe ~800Mwe --IlOOMwe

Fig. 20. Comparison of PWR and BWR vessel size.

Fig, 21, A533 plate (15" thick) shown after experimental forming on press brake (courtesy of Combustion Engineering Inc.).
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 283

Fig. 22. Nuclear reactor shell plate being formed on horizontal plate bending rolls
(courtesy of Babcock and Wilcox Company).

less than 4 in. in thickness. Alloy steel plates are gen-
erally preheated to at least 700°F before being curved,
if they have not been previously heat treated after be-
ing rolled or forged in the steel mill. Hot forming is
accomplished in the 1700 to 2000°F temperature
range. Either pinch-type bending rolls or a press may
be used to form complete cylinders or cylindrical ves-
sel segments (figs. 21 and 22). Following hot forming,
the alloy steel plate sections are heat treated, usually
by water quenching (fig. 23) and tempering, to de-
velop the optimum balance of strength and notch
toughness,
In some cases, cylindrical shell segments are joined
by submerged-arc welding after heat treatment. In
other cases, the segments are joined by electroslag
welding prior to heat treatment. It is necessary to
heat treat all electroslag weldments, either by normal-
izing or quenching, to refine the coarse, columnar
grain structure developed by this high-heat-input
process and to restore notch toughness. Fig. 24 illus-
trates the grain refinement and homogenization of
microstructure achieved by heat treating an electro-
slag-welded steel.
After this joining process, a corrosion-resistant
layer of austenitic stainless steel (nominal 18Cr-8Ni)
is deposited by weld overlay cladding on all vessel
surfaces, as well as on forged nozzles and flanges [25],
using the submerged-arc process. Nozzles also may be
explosively clad. Shell sections are then usually welded
together with a circumferential, submerged-arc, multi-
pass techzaique. Nondestructive testing is used contin-
uously in the fal~rication process to assure sound weld-
284 R.tf.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

Fig. 23. A533-B plate (240" X 120" × 12") being water quenched at Lukens Steel Company.
Man in foreground is holding thermocouple leads used to measure heating and cooling rate.

ments, as well as to insure the integrity of the base
metal, plate, or forgings. Inconel cladding may be
used in some areas of the reactor.
Head closures are manufactured similarly, using
hot-formed plates. These are heat treated as described
before, joined by multipass submerged-arc welding,
and clad by weld overlay. Quality control procedures
similar to those applied in welding of plate sections
are maintained.
Welding procedures, especially the filler metal com-
position, the heat input, and the preheat and postheat
conditions, are varied to produce the strength and
toughness required [26]. Such procedures are often
proprietary to the manufacturer of the reactor pres-
sure vessel and vary from one manufacturer to an-
other.
Mechanical properties of weld metal and heat-
affected zone are just as critical as those of plate and
forging material. Choice of appropriate filler metal to
match the base-material properties after heat treat-
ment is important. Heat input for submerged-arc
welds is also critical, since excessive heat input can
result in poor notch toughness.
Strength, ductility, and notch toughness of the
welds and heat-affected zone should, in the finished
vessel, be equivalent to or better than the correspond-
ing properties of the base metal. A number of pub-
lished papers provide more detail on the procedures
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS
(a)
(b)
(c)
Fig. 24. Electroslag weld nugget in HY-80 steel
(etchant: nitric, acetic, alcohol).
(a) As-welded condition. Note concentric coarse-grained solid-
ification pattern in weld and dark heat-affected zones.
(b) After heat treatment condition (1650°F water quenched,
1260°F water quenched). Note that heat-affected zones
have been eliminated by this heat treatment.
(c) After cycling and heat treatment. Note grain refinement
in weld and elimination of the heat-affected zones.
285
used for submerged-arc and electroslag welding [5,24,
26,27,28].
3.2. Inspection and testing during fabrication
Magnetic particle inspection is used in conjunction
with visual inspection to discover edge defects. After
the reactor pressure vessel is complete, a final mag-
netic particle inspection insures freedom from surface
flaws. Dye penetrant testing is used to discover flaws
in welds and heat-affected zones.
Ultrasonic inspection is used by both material pro-
ducers and fabricators. Plates (ASME Code Case
1338-3) and forgings (ASME Code Case 1359-1) are
inspected by this method prior to assembly. Ultrasonic
testing also has been used to inspect completed weld-
ments.
Radiography is the most widely used method for
inspection of weldments. Standards for acceptance are
outlined in the ASME Section III.
Mechanical properties evaluation is performed on
fully heat-treated plates and forgings. In the former
case, specimens usually are taken from prolongations *
or nozzle dropouts **. Tensile tests and Charpy V-
notch tests are used to assure that the plate material
meets customer and Code requirements. Drop weight
tests to establish the NDT temperature of the plate
are often used to supplement Charpy results.
Forgings are qualified by the supplier to meet
mechanical properties specifications since, in most
cases, they are supplied in the fully heat-treated con-
dition. Specimens used for testing and qualification
are given a simulated postweld heat treatment identi-
cal to that which the reactor pressure vessel will
receive during fabrication. Forgings also are usually
given ultrasonic and magnetic particle inspections by
the manufacturer.
Following fabrication and testing, the reactor pres-
sure vessel is hydrostatically tested at 1.25 times de-
sign pressure.
3.3. Field fabrication
Field fabrication, or, more correctly, site assembly,
solves one of the most difficult problems in reactor
construction - how to move the reactor pressure
* Excess material cropped prior to assembly.
** Disks cut out of plate to form nozzle communication with
vessel interior.
286 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and I_.E.SIEIiLI.~
vessel to the plant site. Use of site assembly allows
utilities more latitude in choosing plant locations. It
also will allow construction of reactor vessels so large
that even water transportation would be impractical
[81.
Early gas-cooled nuclear reactors of British design
were field erected from plates up to 4 g1 in. thick. A
large hydrocracker reactor in Pennsylvania has been
field assembled from ~4 "~± Cr-1 Mo steel plate 7¼ in.
thick. This pressure vessel, operating at over 800°F
and several thousand psi, weighs nearly 600 tons.
Two 550-MWe BWR vessels were purchased in
1966 to be field fabricated. Quality control proce-
dures now used in shop fabrication will be adapted
for site assembly.
For these two vessels, quenched and tempered
plate was furnished by the steel supplier. Shell and
head sections will be cold formed, joined by welding,
weld clad with stainless steel and shipped to the site
for assembly. Forged flanges will be manufactured in
the supplier's shop and shipped directly to the site.
At the plant location, preformed subassemblies will
be fitted together, preheated, and welded. Postweld
stress relieving will be accomplished in a furnace to be
constructed at the site. Radiography and ultrasonic
inspection of welds will follow this operation, using
portable equipment. Machining of flanges and drilling
of stud holes for the top head also will be done at the
site with special portable equipment [29].
4. Irradiation effects
4.1. Background
Neutron radiation, through mechanisms not yet well
understood, increases the yield and ultimate tensile
strength as well as hardness while reducing the ductil-
ity (especially the notch ductility) of the typical reac-
tor pressure vessel steels. This problem of radiation
damage of reactor pressure vessel steels cannot be de-
fined in reference to one reactor environment or to
one type of a "typical" pressure vessel steel. On the
contrary, each reactor vessel must be treated individ-
ually for assessing neutron irradiation effects, espec-
ially embrittlement.
The unfamiliar environmental factor, induced radio-
activity, further complicates the evaluation of the
properties of pressure vessels after neutron exposure.
The complicating questions include: the nature and
extent of the physical and transmutation-induced
changes; the influence of the neutron energy distribu-
tion or spectrum on these changes: the role of the flux
rate in the damage process: the correlation of test re-
sults obtained in one environment (e.g., the operating
power reactor); and the interrelationship among simul-
taneous environmental effects such as radiation, heat,
and corrosion.
In addition to these questions relative to the inter-
pretation and application of radiation-effects data, there
is the practical problem of induced radioactivity in
steel which seriously complicates the process of eval-
uating the properties. In spite of these factors and the
individuality in behavior of irradiated steels, better
knowledge of radiation effects and the implications
to the reliability of reactor pressure vessel steels in
service is imperative.
4.2. Radiation embrittlement and the approach to its
study
The major question created by this new and com-
plex environment is radiation embrittlement and~the
associated chance of brittle fracture. Experience with
brittle fracture of nonnuclear steel structures has led
to an empirically derived approach to fracture analysis
and failure prevention [30]. This concept depends
upon the rapidly rising stress requirement for failure
above a definable critical point such as the nil-ductility
transition (NDT) temperature. Thus, knowledge of
the radiation-induced increase in transition tempera-
ture and the fracture characteristics generally are im-
portant in assessing critical radiation-induced changes
in notch ductility. Such data have usually included
the NDT temperature as determined by the standard
drop weight test (ASTM Method E208) [11] or by
correlation to an energy value from the Charpy V-
notch impact results and upon the full Charpy V-
notch data curve.
When a vessel steel is evaluated in terms of both
tile Charpy V-notch (Cv) and the Drop Weight
(DW-NDT) tests, a basis for projecting embrittlement
during nuclear service is established (see Section 2,
Characterization of Materials). Of course, assurance is
needed that the as-fabricated NDT temperature for
full-thickness welded vessels is conservatively indicat-
ed by the established value and that the integrity of
the vessel during anticipated service life is beyond
question.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS
The following review is intended to outline the
state of knowledge of radiation effects on pressure
vessel steels, the implication of these effects in terms
of the service environment, and ways in which these
effects can and will be minimized in the future.
4.3. Notch ductility properties
4.3.1. Notch toughness
As noted, this property is not only most important
but most affected by neutron exposure. Measurement
is usually accomplished through Charpy V-notch im-
pact tests which, when properly correlated, provide a
reference NDT temperature value. Minimum Charpy-V
notch energy values or NDT limits for individual steels
to be used in nuclear vessel construction are provided
in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. More
detailed notch toughness requirements have been sug-
gested in AEC supplementary criteria [31 ] (distribut-
ed for industry comment) for nuclear pressure vessels.
For comparison, a qualitative presentation of typical
Charpy-V curves before and after irradiation is given
in fig. 25 [32]. The shaded region at the left indicates
the usual energy range in which the measured NDT
occurs relative to the Charpy-V curve for typical
nuclear pressure vessel steels such as A212-B, A302-B,
and the heavy section version, A533-B. This range of
from 15 to 35 ft-lb is usual but by no means absolute
(also see figs. 8 and 11). Usually, however, the more
recently produced heats of A302-B and A533-B will
show Cv-NDT correlation at 30 ft-lb or higher (some
3
T
LU / ~
RANGEFOR USUAL /
DW-Cv T / /
CORRE?ION(~ DW--~NOT
O "
Fig. 25. Schematic representation of the transition temperature approach to irradiation embrittlement of typical reactor-vessel steels.
287
much higher), thereby possibly indicating a mislead-
ingly low reference temperature if the Charpy-V 30
ft-lb (common practice) is accepted as NDT. Thus,
great care must be taken in any attempt to use a given
correlation value as a measure of an absolute NDT
temperature unless a pertinent drop-weight Charpy-V
correlation value has been determined.
When properly correlated with the NDT tempera-
ture, Charpy-V impact data may be used with confi-
dence to define a specific neutron-induced increase in
the NDT temperature for a particular steel. Correla-
tion has been demonstrated [33] between the radia-
tion-induced increase in Charpy-V and NDT tempera-
ture values over a range of neutron fluences up to
~ 3 x 1019 n/cm 2 (> 1 MeV). This correlation of val-
ues permits the determination of irradiated NDT tem-
perature values by proxy through the irradiation and
impact testing of a series of the much smaller Charpy-V
specimens. The term "transition temperature increase"
where it appears in this section refers to the NDT
temperature increase derived from Charpy-V data on
irradiated and unirradiated specimens.
With irradiation, the whole Charpy curve (and
NDT) move to a higher temperature level. After a
very high neutron fluence ( > 5 × 1019 n/cm 2) some
steels may show a drop in fracture energy (fig. 25) to
a point (< 30 ft-lb) that will permit low energy shear
fracture, which is potentially as serious as brittle frac-
ture. At this point, temperature becomes much less
significant as a contributor to fracture resistance. The
Charpy-V data define this radiation-induced drop in
UNIRRADIATED
TYPICAL
~ IRRADIATED
~:~-~
flNTERMEDIATE FLUENCE
/ LOW ENERGYTEARI~-GION /
= / V = ~' (<3Oft-lb) t
TEMPERATURE,*F
288' R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

expected at the vessel walls of most large commercial

' '"'"1 ' ' '~''''1 , ,,I,,,,I ' '"'"~ reactors. However, as indicated by the projected life-
-1
WESTINGHOUSE REFERENCE CURVES --7
time fluences and anticipated maximum NDT tempera-
(°F) [*C)
tures for typical water reactors (table 8) [9], such
500 N__RR Z78
kid G.
changes must be considered. Fig. 26 [34] presents
t,i
some typical results on A302-B steel irradiated below
ar b.
450°F, at 550°F, and at ~ 585°F in the Big Rock
z 400 -- C. 222
Point Reactor, which is closer to power reactor service
uJ
n- v! conditions. The shaded area encompasses data for ten
,q steels * irradiated at temperatures below 450°F, a
i
a:
w 300 _A d 167 range in which temperature plays only a minor role in
n
~E o , embrittlement behavior.
I.t.I
I- Impact specimens are commonly prepared so that
el
z
the fracture occurs across the longitudinal or primary
ft.
o
2oo III
(strong) rolling direction. Though plates for nuclear
Z
pressure vessels are usually heavily cross rolled to
n..
1- equalize the notch toughness in both directions, prop-
I00 56
erties of such plates in the transverse (weak) direction
are still usually poorer. This fact must be taken into
account in the design of vessels which are expected to
be exposed to high neutron fluences. Neutron exposure
01017 1018 1019 I 0 z°
may reduce the full shear fracture energy of transverse
NEUTRON FLUENCE, n/cm2(>lMeV)
specimens to a critical level. An extreme example of
Fig. 26. Radiation embrittlement of A302-B steel irradiated this effect for 6-in. A302-B plate is shown in fig. 27 ~f.
in various reactors and accepted data trends for embrittlement
at irradiation temperatures to 550°F. • Plate: A212-B, A302-B, A201-B, HY-80, T-l, A353,
A350-LF1 (Modified)
Forging: A350-LF3, A336, 17-4PH
energy absorption in the so-called ductile region above Weld Metal: A212-B, A302-B.
the transition range. The very high fluence values re- 1" Except where specifically defined differently, all neutron
fluence values are based upon an assumed fission spectrum
quired to increase the NDT temperature and reduce in which the activation cross section of 68 mb is used for
the energy to such critical levels are far beyond those the primary dosimetry reaction, S4Fe(n,p)S4Mn.

6-IN A302-B PLATE

J
i
I00

80--
~ t

UNIRRADIATED

I.- LONGITUDINAL {L) iRRADIATED

60 - ~- <280°F, I.I xlO~n/cmZ>l MeV
~" 68mb FISSION
~ 40 '~ , ~L)

~ 20 . . . . . o(T)

0 j [ J I ~ I t I I I I J s
240
1 I I I } 320 400
i I
480
, i ~
560
*f -80 0 80 160
TEMPERATURE
Fig. 27. Charpy-V notch ductility characteristics of A302-B steel in the unirradiated and irradiated conditions showing the radia-
tion response in the longitudinal and transverse directions.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 289

Table 8
Data for estimation of radiation damage to pressure vessels in power reactors [ 9].

Calculated inte-
Estimated maxi-
Assumed grated flux over Belt line
Type Reactor Assumed mum NDT tem-
thermal reactor life at initial NDT
Reactor name of life plant perature at belt
reactor (years) power factor vessel inner sur- temperature line at end of
(MW) face at belt line, (°F)
reactor life(°F) a
n/cm 2 (>1.0 MeV)

Shippingport b PWR 20 225 6.0 X 1019 38 438

Dresden-1 b BWR 40 626 0.8 2.5 X 1019 60 220
Yankee PWR 30 600 0.85 2.5 X 1019 ~10 315
Saxton PWR 5 23 0.60 2.0 X 1019 25 250
IndianPoint-1 PWR 40 615 0.80 7.5 X 1018 -30 290
Big Rock Point BWR 40 157 1.0 3.63 X 1018 ~ 10 60
Elk River BWR 20 51 0.80 1.9 X 1019 30 340
Humboldt Bay BWR 20 163 1.0 3.4 X 10 Is <~10 7O
BONUS BWR 20 50 1.0 1.65 X 10 is e <~ 10 270
Pathfinder BWR 20 200 1.14 X 1018 10 90
LaCrosse BWR 20 0.80 9.5 X 1018
San Onofre PWR 30 1347 0.9 6.1 X 1019 +10 330
ConnectieutYankee PWR 30 1473 0.9 2.5 X 1019 +10 255
Oys ";r Creek BWR 40 1860 1.0 9.2 X 1017f ~10 8O
Nine-Mile Point BWR 1846 1.0 7.26 X 1017 f ~ 10 7O
Dresden-2 BWR 40 2467 1.0 2.4 X 1017 f ~40 6O
Millstone Point BWR 1727 c 1.0 4.1 X 1017 f +10 5O
2011 d 1.0 4.9 X 1017f ~40 80
Brookwood BWR 40 1300 0.8 2.2 X 1019 +100 e 333
Indian Point-2 PWR 40 2758 0.8 0.9 X 1019 +10 178
Palisades PWR 40 2450 0.80 9.4 × 1018 e 40 215
Turkey Point-3 PWR 40 2300 0.8 2.6 X 1019 +10 260
TVA Browns Ferry BWR 40 3293 1.0 3.5 X 1017f ~40 80
Dresden-3 BWR 40 2467 1.0 1.0 X 1019e ~40 60
QuadCities-1 BWR 40 2527 1.0 2.4 X 1017 f ~40 60
Monticello BWR 40 1674 1.0 5.4 X 1017f <~40 90
Vermont Yankee BWR 40 1593 1.0 1.0 X 1017 f ~40 40

a Method for estimating maximum NDT shift varies. d Guaranteed.

b In all cases except Shippingport and Dresden, calculated spectrum method used. e Maximum.
c Initial. f Estimated.

Thus, while the primary c o n c e r n inherent in the tran- 4.3.2. F r a c t u r e toughness

sition-temperature a p p r o a c h to reactor vessel reliabil-
ity is to preserve d u c t i l i t y at the lowest anticipated
service t e m p e r a t u r e , serious a t t e n t i o n m u s t be given
also to any radiation-induced r e d u c t i o n in fracture
energy. This requires an applied linear-elastic fracture
m e c h a n i c s analysis to augment the results o f struc-
tural p r o t o t y p e tests.
The linear elastic fracture m e c h a n i c s a p p r o a c h to
the fracture analysis o f irradiated steels has b e e n init-
iated on pressure vessel steels, b u t o n l y l i m i t e d results
have b e e n o b t a i n e d [35]. This is largely because o f
questions regarding the critical factors involved and
the best specimen for determining a valid crack stress
290 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

Table 9
Effect of neutron irradiation on NDT temperature and fracture toughness of selected steels (from ref. [ 36 ] ).

NDT Change in stress

Fluence Irradiation temperature intensity factor Change in
Steel (n/cm 2) temperature increase a at instability yield stress
(> 1 MeV) (°F) (OF) (Klc) (ksix/T~.) (ksi)

A212-B ) 1020 <350 615 b -32 +36

A350-LF3 ) 102o 450 390 k_ _

a Temperature for CV notch energy of 20 ft-lb.

b Largest radiation-induced increase ever recorded in U.S. studies.

intensity factor at instability (Klc) * for vessel steels

which may be classified generally as having relatively
low strength and high toughness. After exposure to
high neutron fluences, however, the steels are more
amenable to fracture mechanics evaluation as a result
of radiation-induced increases in hardness and strength.
Table 9 shows changes in fracture toughness
produced by irradiation of two steels at lower than
usual pressure vessel service temperatures [36]. It is
difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from these
data, but it appears that: (1) serious irradiation em-
brittlement is evidenced by the drastic reduction of
Klc, (2) the mathematical approach for defining the
plastic zone size (a critical parameter in fracture
mechanics) does not hold well for irradiated steels,
(3) while a correlation Of Klc and the strain hardening
exponent was possible for the irradiated steel, the
extremely small size of the latter casts doubts on the
meaning of the correlation, and (4) much work re-
mains to be done before the full meaning o f fracture
mechanics values for irradiated steels can be under-
stood and applied.
The use of fracture mechanics for reactor vessel
steels depend upon: (1) the acceptance and utilization
Of Klc in terms of yield strength **, (2) better defini- Fig. 28. PM-2A reactor vessel immediately after fracture [37]
tion of the effects of dynamic versus static loading (courtesy of Westinghouse Electric Corp.).
(high strain rates have been shown to depress Kic val-
ues), and (3) the validity of extrapolating data from very small specimens tested at any low temperature
to predict vessel behavior at some service temperature.
A preliminary scale model of the 2~--in.-thick
* Kic = o(1.2 lrrac/qc)1/2, where a is gross strain (ksi); a c is PM-2A reactor vessel, which was designed o f high
critical crack depth (in.), and qc is dimensionless flaw- strength-high NDT steel to simulate irradiation, failed
shape parameter.
** Pellini and associates 118] contend that the ratio ofKie/ay s under a pressure only 6% above that which produced
provides the only meaningful basis for practical application a stress resulting in the calculated failure Kic value.
of the plane strain crack stress intensity factor. The actual vessel failure is illustrated in fig. 28 [37].
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS
Fig. 29. Controlled stress corrosion crack in PM-2A reactor
vessel steel (laboratory test) (ref. [37 ])
(courtesy of Westinghouse Electric Corp.).
In contrast, the complex test sequence for the actual
PM-2A vessel yielded a failure Klc value almost 50%
above the calculated failure Klc of 58 ksix/~. This is
indicative of the complexities of the fracture mech-
anics approach. Uncertainties in the following items
were apparently responsible for a gross miscalculation
of the PM-2A failure conditions: (1) irradiation level
(neutron fluence); (2) local applied stress; (3) uniform-
ity, depth, and sharpness of the stress-corrosion crack
(fig. 29); (4) actual wall and cladding dimensions at
the flawed location; and (5) difference in fracture
toughness of a corrosion-produced notch and of the
usual fatigue crack.
In spite of such difficulties, the best hope for ass-
essment of fracture safety of nuclear reactor vessels
291
involves the complementary use of the best of fracture
mechanics and structural prototype testing. Recogni-
tion of the necessity of this development is implicit
in the USAEC's supplementary vessel criteria [31 ]
which, under the heading "Fracture Mechanics
Analyses", read in part:
"An analysis shall be performed to estimate the
margin between the crack size as a result of growth
under design cyclic loads and the critical crack size
for brittle fracture in the welds of the vessel shell
material which directly surrounds the reactor core
region. The analysis shall be based on the growth
rate of anticipated flaws under design cyclic loads
and on material properties at a temperature 60°F
above the nil-ductility transition temperature ....
The analysis shall demonstrate that the estimated
fatigue crack size at any time in the vessel servi~'e
life will be significantly less than the critical crack
size for brittle fracture." [31 ]
4.4. Major factors in assessing radiation embrittlement
Three factors are critical in determining the extent
of radiation effects: the nuclear environment (flux,
fluence, and spectrum); the steel (composition and
microstructure), and the temperature.
4.4.1. Nuclear environment
Though it might be expected that very different
neutron flux rates could cause large differences in
irradiation effects for a given total neutron fluence, it
has been demonstrated [38,39] that rate variations of
more than two orders of magnitude (~ 3 x 1011 to
3 × 1013 n/cm2-sec) make little difference. The
studies involved low neutron fluence (maximum of
4.6 x 1018 n/cm 2 > 1 MeV), so that the observed
changes in properties were small and variations diffi-
cult to detect. Nevertheless, they generally indicate
no flux-rate effect over a realistic range of flux rates
for reactor-vessel service.
When irradiations are conducted in similar facilities,
changes as a function of neutron fluence (n/cm 2) pro-
vide a meaningful basis for comparing notch ductility
results. Further, for irradiation conducted in similar
facilities, changes as a function of neutron fluence
(n/cm 2) provide a meaningful basis for comparing
notch ductility results. Further, for irradiations con-
ducted at < 450°F, there is little or no discernable
292 R.tt.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEEI, t,

temperature effect, hence trends of NDT temperature 500 - - - 1 I ~ 2 7 8

increase with neutron fluence can be drawn as a basis " TREND ENVELOP FOR
MANY STEELS ( A )
for assessing the relative changes from steel to steel ------NRL TREND BOUNDARY
or heat to heat. The shaded area in fig. 26 describes 2o FOR TEN S T E E L S (B)
---- TREND LINE FOR MANY
the trend of results for a number of steels irradiated 40C HEATS OF A 3 0 2 - B STEEL 222
Ld
at temperatures below 450°F by investigators at 03 (DESIGNATED "SENSITIVE
<l
TO RADIATION) (C}
W
NRL [40]. Evidence of embrittlement saturation in rY ( I R R A D I A T I O N TEMPERATURE
C)
one heat of A302-B steel is provided by the change of Z 4500F1

slope of the dashed curve at the highest fluences. W

n,"
3OC 167
Such trends are useful for projecting vessel embrittle-
<[ (°C)
ment to later periods of vessel life, but, unless the rr
W
specific pressure vessel steel is fitted into the pattern, (3-

a conservative interpretation o f the results is required 200

F-
for a given reactor. Accepted conservative limits for Z
O
500 and 550°F embrittlement of A302-B steel as de-
vised by Westinghouse [41] are included in fig. 26,

~
Z
along with the trends developed by NRL specifically or" I00 56
I--
for the reference A302-B steel.
i

O'
I0 'T lO'e I 0 ~9 10 20
400 NEUTRON FLUENCE (n/cmZ>lMeV)
6-IN. A 30:::'-B PLATE

Fig. 31. Maximum radiation embrittlement as a function of

IRRADIATED AT
<[ 300 TEMPERATURES fluence based upon three independent surveys of data from
BELOW 2 5 0 =' F irradiations below 450°F (curve A: ref. [9], curve B: ref. [ 11,
curve C: ref. [42]).
200

n/cm 2 and subsequent indications of saturation have

~oc
S
z most severe being the embrittlement extreme for
I I I essentially all recorded transition temperature data
I x I018 5 I x I0 i9 2 6
NEUTRON FLUENCE n/cm 2 MeV)
l:ig. 30. Increases in NDT temperature of A302-B reference
steel irradiated to various neutron fluences at temperatures
below 250°F (ref. [401).
A more precise indication of neutron fluence effects
in the absence of temperature or materials influences
is presented in the linear plot in fig. 30 [40]. The data
points at fluences of 5 x 1019 and higher are the same
as those in fig. 26, but restricted to irradiations car-
ried out below 250°F. The data in the low fluence
range are from an experiment for simulating the con-
ditions of neutron embrittlement through the wall of
a reactor vessel. The rapid embrittlement to ~ 1 x 1019
important implications.
Fig. 31 represents three trend limits [1,9,42], the
(through 1967), and the least severe the trend (fitted
curve) for so-called "sensitive" heats of A302-B steel.
The close correspondence of these limit trends, con-
sidering the large number o f steels involved, is sur-
prising and encouraging. However, it should be noted
that these represent the highest embrittlement sensi-
tivity, and considerable scatter to the right of these
limits (lower sensitivity) is found when data from
many steels are compared. The good agreement, even
for the most severely embrittled steels, confirms that
for low irradiation temperatures embrittlement de-
pends primarily upon neutron fluence. Nevertheless,
under some conditions the influence of composition,
neutron spectrum, and irradiation temperature may
be quite important.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 293

4.4.2. The steel brittlement sensitivity between the plate and weld
The wide spread of radiation embrittlement data metal [45], as can be seen in fig. 33.
[9,42] represented by the shaded area in fig. 32 is There is strong evidence that steels produced with
attributed primarily to differences in composition and vacuum degassing and good control over interstitial
metallurgical condition of the 19 steels tested. These and residual element content are superior to early
steels were irradiated at temperatures below 450°F, a commercial steels for reactor pressure vessels. For
range in which temperature effects are minimized. example, when specimens of five different heats of
A302-B steel and a reference weld heat-affected zone
were irradiated simultaneously at 550°F to about
600 3 x 1019 n/cm 2 (> 1 MeV), the heats with closely con-
_--=' ',RRAO,ATED.2,..S.EELS
'1"19' I'"IIII"" t ' '""1'"'
trolled chemistry showed transition temperature in-
creases of only 120 to 140°F, while the less pure steels
A302B
increased in transition temperature by as much as
5OO
200°F [34]. Similarly, the high-quality LaCrosse Boil-
- A285
A201 ~ ~ 1
o -- A3OIB ing Water Reactor (LACBWR) vessel plate, weld, and
W -~ A350 LF I
o'3 - A350 LF 3 weld heat-affected zone specimens showed remarkably
A353
400 small increases in transition temperature when irra-
C) --- A587D diated to 2.3 x 1019 n/cm 2 (> I MeV) [44]. Increases
Z - SA336
W -- HY-80 ranged from 30°F for 4-in. NP1057 plate to 1 IO°F
- HY-90
_- HY.150 for NP1056 weld metal, as contrasted to about 150°F
- CARRILOYT-I
'~
nF 500 for the earlier production heat of 6-in.-thick ASTM
,,i
71/2 Ni- Cr- Mo j
_ 5 N i -Cr-Mo-V reference plate depicted in fig. 26. Because of the
hl _~ SSS-IO0 ~// large variation from best plate to weld composition,
I--

Z the weld metal must be used as the reference for

oI-- 200
Z the LACBWR vessel.
rF
I--
I00
0 application of a growing body of data on its causes.
i017 I0 'a I0 I~ I0 z°
NEUTRON FLUENCE (n/cm2>lMev)
Fig. 32. Envelope of radiation embrittlement data based upon
surveys of most U.S. data to 1968 (refs. [9,42]).
Significant differences have been found in irradia-
tion embrittlement sensitivity of plate and weld metal
for a given steel. For example, vessel plate specimens
exposed at the Big Rock Point Reactor vessel [43,44]
showed no increase in transition temperature, while
companion weld specimens exhibited increases of
about 50°F following irradiation conditions which
were not at all severe, ~ 550°F to a fluence of 2 x 1018
n/cm 2 ( > 1 MeV). Similarly, irradiated A543 (3~-% N i -
Cr-Mo) (not yet used in reactor vessels but ASME
Code approved) showed gross discrepancies in em-
establishing or projecting radiation embrittlement in
It has been demonstrated [45] that steels essentially
insensitive to radiation at service temperatures (~550°F)
can be produced. Thus, there is strong promise for
minimizing or completely avoiding the problem of var-
iable radiation embrittlement sensitivity through the
4.4.3. Temperature
Higher irradiation temperatures generally reduce
the extent of embrittlement. The degree of benefit in
terms of lower transition temperature is suggested by
fig. 26, which indicates that the transition temperature
for A302-B steel irradiated at 550°F is at least 100°F
lower than that for < 450°F irradiation to fluences
above 1 x 1019 n/cm 2 (> 1 MeV). Data for 750°F
irradiations show a further reduction in transition
temperature of about IO0°F, a point where embrittle-
ment is no longer serious.
Different heats of a given steel may show different
embrittlement behavior as a function of temperature.
For example, the Yankee vessel steel from both sur-
veillance in the vessel and from accelerated irradiation
 294 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

I 4 - I N 3 ~I% N l - C r - M o WELDMENT
BASE PLATE

,ooL'-I I , U.,RRAO,A E
| i ~'~. --- I /'T /~ - ~ IRRADIATED
~, 80 L4 i t //.~'0- ~ - 5 5 0 oF, 3.4xlOlSn/cm2>lMev *
L,,,T ,,,// o. - - - ooo 2.L xlOISn/cm2>lMev*

6o

, Mn54, ~- 68 rob,FISSION

20 - ~ - .e < / i -- • •

WELD METAL

120 -

IO0 --
•IRRADIATED
,,N • _~ 2 0 0 °F, 2.1 x I0 t9 n/cm 2 >IMev*
8o
o ~ 550OF, 3 4 x t019 n/cm 2 > IMev*
o

* Mn 54, E 68 mb,FISSION

,z, 4(? /.11/

NRL //='~'/ ~ ~ 0 ~ / i 0 6 O i~ O[3
<..-'- ,/ ~-390 ° ~ --~ n~/"
\~ ~ -~440° _ _o-~>-- . -.

-200
oi , ~__Z
t60
2__
120
I
80 - 40
.
0
~_ I
40
I
80
~ I
120
,
160 200
I
240
, F , I , I
280
~
320
] ,
360
!
400 440
, I
480
, .±
520
,
560
TEMPERATURE (°F)

Fig. 33. Notch ductility performance of 4-in. 3½ Ni-Cr-Mo (A543) plate and weld
after irradiation at 200 and at 550°F (ref. [ 4 5 ] ) .

shows more sensitivity than other A302-B steels [46]. clearly shows the benefits of higher irradiation tem-
On the other hand, accelerated surveillance data from perature as well as (for the plate and weld heat-affected
the Big Rock Point Reactor (BRPR) (fig. 26) suggest zone) the superiority of steels produced in more re-
that irradiation at about 575°F results in very little cent years [43].
embrittlement of the specimens of the plate material. Thermal correction of embrittlement has also been
Even the BRPR weld Letal, which has been singled demonstrated on steels embrittled by irradiation at a
out as rather sensitive to irradiation embrittlement, relatively low temperature (e.g., < 450°F) and subse-
shows less embrittlement than that observed for the quently held at some higher temperature. This tech-
reference plate irradiated in the Low Intensity Test nique, called "annealing" is demonstrated in fig. 34
Reactor (LITR) at 550°F. The BRPR surveillance data [40]. The net result of extending annealing of em-
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS
140
- _3} IN. A 3 5 0 - L F I PLATE
120 UNIRRADIAT~,/" ,,,-~0" F
I00
g 6o
4O
2O
I I t ] I I I I L [
-140 -I00 -60 -20 +20 60
Fig. 34. Effects of various annealing treatments on notch ductility characteristics of irradiated A350-LF1 steel (ref. 140]).
brittled material is remarkably similar to that of irra-
diation at the elevated temperature of annealing [40].
In fact, it was found feasible to restore ductility in the
vessels of the Army SM-1A reactor by simply increas-
ing the operating temperature by about 150°F [17].
Such observations suggest that lower embrittlement
may be expected for reactors in which vessel tempera-
tures are routinely at or above 550°F.
One practice in the operation of power reactors
that will have to be considered in the design of vessels
for long life (high total fluence) is that of allowing the
operating temperature of the reactor to drop off near
the end of a core life in order to extend that life. For
example the cold-leg temperature in the Yankee
Atomic Reactor was decreased gradually from over
500°F to about 440°F over the last month of opera-
tion of Cores II, III, and IV [46]. This cyclic tailing
off in temperature could produce serious embrittle-
ment, but in the Yankee case the effects were amelior-
ated by a concurrent reduction in power level and, of
course, by the annealing which occurred when the
new core was brought up to full operating tempera-
ture.
4.5. Other properties
4.5.1. Tensile properties
At the temperature typical of reactor service,
changes in the tensile properties of reactor pressure
295
POSTIRRADIATION
ANNEAL
168HR
IRRADIATED
430*F, 3.1 x 1019rtt;m2
(> IMev )
- - --440*--- . . . . . . . . . .
t [ t ] I I I I I t III 111
I00 140 180 220 260 300 540 380 420 460 500 540 580
TEMPERATURE (*F)
vessel steels are relatively small. However, as with the
notch toughness characteristics, large variations due
to the steel composition and microstructure and to
the irradiation temperature are observed [9,47-51].
Studies have shown that radiation increases the
yield and tensile strength and reduces the uniform
strain, the strain hardening exponent, the YS/TS
ratio, the elongation (total and uniform), and reduc-
tion of area. Irradiation at low temperatures produces
the most severe change in tensile properties as illus-
trated by the stress-strain behavior for irradiated
A212-B steel in fig. 35 [52]. The reduction-of-area
curves in fig. 36 [51 ] show the radiation-induced loss
of ductility observed in A302-B steel (especially at
high stresses) after irradiation at temperatures below
250°F. Table 10 summarizes the changes in room-
temperature tensile properties of seven different
pressure-vessel steels following low-temperature expo-
sures to fast neutrons [51]. Note the drastic changes
which result from the higher fluences and low tem-
peratures. Much of this damage could be corrected by
thermal annealing, either by raising the irradiation
temperature or by a post-irradiation heat treatment.
Tensile data for A302-B steel irradiated at < 250°F
and tested at various temperatures are summarized in
fig. 37. Fig. 38 [9] shows how increasing the anneal-
ing temperature of A212-B steel following irradiation
at 100°F causes the room-temperature stress-strain
curve to approach that of unirradiated material. Pre-
 296 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

~20

I _1
_1 ,o f I I 1 I
/Cm (>1 MeV)

I00 - -

80 - - UNIRRADIATEO

&

6o --
m

40 --

20 --

0
I 1 I I I 1 I
0 0.05 0 t0 0.t5 0.20 025 0 30 0.35 0.40
STRAIN ( i n / i n . )

Fig. 35. Room-temperature stress-strain behavior of ASTM A212-B carbon-silicon steel plate irradiated at < 200°F ( t e l [9]).
IO5[ 150
[ [A 302-B PLAT,EJ [6-IN A302-B PLATE I
140[~ C20 125 OPENSYMBOLS-
A• 9.5x 1019n/cm2 > IMeVf Mn 131 YIEI.~0 STRENGTH
~%•aA f s, 2~ FILLED SYMBOLS-
TENSILESTRENGTH
,2o~2~. ,O"n.~'.,M.~, ;o;~ IOC
l 0 ~ N, 120
I [:jr-~'~.. c, ,r r • ¢

~ I00 I ~T5
35 50 _ _

~ Ro
F-<t u 50
- 0-------

31z
ca<

z 60 ~ ~ 32'I' 25

i) o - OeS =IOIgI~/¢m2~IMLM~

$-~$ el • o - 23 xlOIgn/¢m 2

41~ * NOOFSPECIMENSrESTED 1 • & - 9 f i xlOF~./Cm z

• * MAXUNIFORMSTRAIN I • ~ 6 S ~ b . Mn $4, FISSION 0

t~ 68 mb, Mn54, FISSION 0 ----- i

L5
__~. _ ~ _ 1
. . . . L I ...... J I
O IO 20 30 40 50 60 70
o
REDUCTION OF AREA (%)
0
Fig. 36. Comparative nominal stress-reduction of area :E .J
curves for A302-B steel after indicated neutron radia-
tion exposures at < 250°F (ref. [ 51 ] ). Z 05

I I I ~ !j~._,- -~ L
Fig. 37. Tensile properties of A302-B steel tested up to 0
0 IOO 200 300 400 SOD 600 7OO 800
750°F following irradiation at < 250°F (ref. [51 }). TEMPERATURE (°F)
t I I I
Leo 200 30O
TEMPERATURE ('C)
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL N U C L E A R POWER R E A C T O R PRESSURE VESSELS 297

Table 10
Effect o f irradiation at ~ 2 5 0 ° F on room-temperature tensile properties of selected pressure vessel steels (ref. [ 51 ]).

Yield Ultimate
Fluence, Ratio Elonga- Reduction Ratio Ratio ,-,:~tio
Steel 1019 n/cm 2 point strength yp tion in area YP (irr.) US (irr.) RA (irr.)
( > 1 MeV) (YP) (US) US (%) (RA) (%) YP (unirr.) US (unirr.) RA (unirr.)
(ksi) (ksi)

T-I a 0 108.0 118.0 0.83 18.7 59.9 1.0 1.0 1.0

T-1 2.3 148.9 149.5 0.99 - 48.3 1.3 1.3 0.8
T-1 9.6 163.4 164.1 0.99 - 44.0 1.5 1.4 0.7
A353 b 0 96.2 112.1 0.85 29.2 65.6 1.0 1.0 1.0
A353 2.35 141.3 144.5 0.97 17.8 55.5 1.5 1.3 0.8
A353 9.5 157.0 168.9 0.92 -- 16.7 1.6 1.5 0.3
HY-80 b 0 88.3 104.0 0.85 27.8 70.6 1.0 1.0 1.0
ttY-80 2.3 141.3 142.0 0.99 - 62.8 1.6 1.4 0.9
1tY-80 9.0 163.3 164.3 0.99 - 12.3 1.8 1.6 0.2
A302-B a 0 71.4 94.6 0.75 28.0 64.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
A302-B 2.3 120.3 120.4 1.0 c 50.0 1.7 1.3 0.8
A302-B 9.6 134.2 134.4 1.0 c 45.0 1.9 1.4 0.7
A350-LF3 b 0 58.6 82.2 0.71 33.0 68.6 1.0 1.0 1.0
A350-LF3 2.3 125.2 125.3 0.99 - 55.0 2.1 1.5 0.8
A350-LF3 9.6 136.9 139.0 0.98 - 11.6 2.3 1.7 0.2
A212-B a 0 45.6 75.2 0.60 35.5 61.7 1.0 1.0 1.0
A212-B 2.35 99.8 98.9 1.0 - 54.5 2.2 1.3 0.9
A212-B 9.6 112.2 113.9 0.99 - 44.0 2.5 1.5 0.7
A350-LF1 (mod.) b 0 47.1 64.6 0.73 36.0 79.2 1.0 1.0 1.0
A350-1F 1 (rood.) 2.35 104.7 105.4 0.99 - 56.6 2.2 1.6 0.7
A350-LF 1 (mod.) 9.6 120.4 122.2 0.90 - 11.8 2.6 1.9 0.2

a Low-nickel steel b Nickel steel c Broke outside gage length

Table 11
Effect of irradiation on room-temperature tensile properties o f A302-B steel (ref. [ 511).

0.2% Natural
Number Irradiation Exposure Tensile ilardness Elonga- Reduction strain at
of temperature 1019 n/cm 2 yield strength Rockwell tion in area
strength minimum
specimens (°F) ( ~ 1 MeV) (ksi) (ksi) B (%) (%) load

10 - 0 71.4 94.6 - 28.0 64.0 0.12

1 240 2.0 114.8 116.7 103 11.3 52.6 -

2 240 2.3 120.3 120.4 - - 50.0 ~0.02
2 250 2.2 113.5 115.4 103 - 46.0 0.02
2 250 7.0 118.7 118.6 102 3.0 - , ( 0.02
2 200 9.6 134.2 134.4 - - 45.0 "(0.~2
2 600 to 5.7 99.5 115.0 103 - 47.0 0.12
298 R . H . S T E R N E , Jr. and L E . S T E E L E

one mechanism that must be considered in reactor de-

!10 I sign, since straining will occur as a function of both
thermal cycling and internal pressurization. It is stip-
ANNEALING TEMPERATURE
OO ulated that the total number of cycles during the life
~2~X,,,~o F ~ 550OF
of a reactor will be less than 10,000 [53] due to the
9O
combined cyclic loading caused by startup, shutdown,
80 scram, and load changes. Thus, reactor vessels must be
designed to withstand low-cycle (strain controlled)
7O fatigue rather than high-cycle (stress controlled) con-
: " ditions.
60i
RRADIATED The ASME Code for Nuclear Vessels [7] stipulates
50 that fatigue be considered in the design of vessels
subjected to cyclic loading. A generalized fatigue curve
~-
u) 40 for pressure vessel steels is provided. Compliance to
this experimentally derived curve must be shown by
30
the designer in the most critical areas. This may be
20 I done experimentally in model tests on unirradiated
material.
10 Some experimental work has been done [35,54,55]
to establish the fatigue properties of irradiated com-
© 5 10 15 mon pressure vessel steels, such as A302-B (A533-A)
ELONGATION (%)
and A212-B (AS 15-70). Results indicate that although
Fig. 38. Effect of postirradiation annealing on room-tempera- all steels tested do not meet the "best fit" failure data
ture stress-strain curves for an ASTM A212-B steel (ref. [9]). curve from ASME Section lII, all do have fatigue per-
formance superior to that required by the design
diction of the combined effects of temperature, neu- fatigue curve, as illustrated in fig. 39 [55]. For this
tron irradiation, and postirradiation heat treatment case, "pre-post' tests were used, i.e., the steels were
poses a complex problem. irradiated in the reactor at temperatures of 450 to
Data for A302-B steel in table 11 show that irradia- 470°F, then tested in fatigue at room temperature
tion at 600°F has essentially no effect on the uniform outside the reactor.
strain, while irradiation at 250°F or below results in a Fig. 40 [54,55] presents fatigue results from simul-
drastic reduction in uniform strain. These results are taneous strain cycling and irradiation, along with
encouraging, since the drastic reduction in elongation roughly comparable pre-post data. These results, to-
is considered most detrimental to the structural in- gether with those shown in fig. 39, suggest that there
tegrity of the vessel. is reasonable correlation between data for in-reactor
Against the most optimistic observations made on fatigue and pre post fatigue data, and that the ASME
steels irradiated at elevated temperatures must be design values are reasonable, and conservative. How-
placed the observation [50] that the uniform strain ever, the presence of crack or flaw in the material
for tube specimens under equal, positive biaxial stress could change the results significantly. Unfortunately,
conditions was greatly reduced from that measured in no data are available for irradiated, notched fatigue
a solid tensile bar in both irradiated and unirradiated specimens. There is a need for studies of crack propa-
conditions. This implies a large uncertainty in using gation in steels in nuclear versus non-nuclear environ-
simple tensile data to predict properties under com- ments.
plicated stress conditions. As is the case with plates and forgings, low cycle
fatigue is also of interest for the specification of bolt-
4.5.2. Fatigue ing steels. Extensive investigation of bolting materials
All reactor vessels are subjected to thermal cycling at elevated temperatures [56] has led to the conclu-
during their operating lifetimes. Failure by fatigue is sion that ASME Section II1 design rules for bolting
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REAVTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 299

4" A30~'--B
92-- \ CONTROL
106 (~) 450 F IRRAD
• ~ o,I 5" A212--B
8.8 J • CONTROL
[] 450F IRRAD
NON IRRADIATED -- T R E N D / 6" A'~02 -- B
IRRADIATED CONDITION A (~) 8 4 ~'-LINE - - • CONTROL
IRRADIATED CONDITION B E) 0 5OOF IN-REACT
80 i

DII~• 7.6
"BEST FIT" CARBON STEEL
•FAILURE CURVE FROM 7.2
o
CRITERIA OF ASME tTr x
6.8
<3
w
Q 6.4 • \\ 9OXlO~Sn/cm2
~105 P- ~ II 'x°'~
nlcm 2
[] /~ i \ mAo- 5;
6.0
,<
_z 5 6
w 0E ®
er 0\ I
CARBONI~ ALLOY STEEL~ I I ~\~"~ 52
DESIGN FATIGUEC U R V E - ~ I \ I
ASME m (ADJUSTED FOB ~ ADJUSTED FOR 4.8
MEAN STRESS) I ~ MEAN STRESS \\ ®

i "-% 4.4

4.0
NOTE(~) CONDITIONA-A302=TXiOlen/cm 2 (>IM'eV
A2 2 =4XIOI~l
CONDT ON B-A302,6X otgl3/cm 2 (>1MeV) 36 l ~ I ! O=
A212= IXlO19
i0 4 3 2 14 ~
I0 z I03 i04 i05 IO 105 I06
Nf (CYCLES TO FAILURE) CYCLE TO FAILURE
(LOG N)
Fig. 39. ASME Nuclear Pressure Vessel Code fatigue criteria Fig. 40. Effect o f strain range on low cycle fatigue of irradiat-
and fatigue properties o f A212-B and A302-B steels before ed pressure vessel steels (refs. [ 54,55 ] ).
and after irradiation (ref. [ 55 ]).

IO6

~. ~ PROPOSEDBOLTING FATIGUE
i05, ~ DESIGNCURVE

.J

104 ASME SECTION ~

BOLTING FATIGUE CURVE
CORRECTED FOR THE MAXIMUM
EFFECT OF MEAN STRESS
E = 30 x IO6 PSI
I03 , , , Su=I65KSI Sy= 150KSI Kf=40 i
~=~,==11 i = = l l ~ = * , l l l , , , , I L , l ,J! , , , , , ~ , ~ , , L ~ L J = I t = L =

I01 102 103 104 ~05 I06

NUMBER OF CYCLES,N
Fig. 41. Comparison of proposed design fatigue curve with present ASME Nuclear Pressure Vessel Code curve for bolting steels
(refs. [7,56]).
300 R.It.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELI!
fatigue are excessively conservative. The new design
curve shown in fig. 41 has been proposed. This curve
is based on data from full-size fatigue tests in the ab-
sence of radiation. The likelihood of brittle fracture
was not considered.
4.5.3. Applied stress effects
Limited data from three investigations [49,57,58]
suggest that steels will undergo the same radiation-
induced changes in mechanical properties whether
they are stressed or unstressed during the irradiation.
Additional studies that more closely simulate the
stresses, temperatures, and fluences which might be
experienced in a reactor should be conducted to con-
firm this.
4.5.4. Hydrogen embrittlement in irradiated steels
Available experimental information [59,60] sug-
gests that hydrogen embrittlement should not be a
problem in current reactor pressure vessel service;
however, projections of anticipated future materials
and their vulnerability to hydrogen plus radiation
embrittlement must be considered (see section 5.3,
Hydrogen Embrittlement below).
4.6. Minimizing radiation effects
Surveillance of early water reactor pressure vessels
for irradiation damage has provided some verification
of experimentally observed irradiation effects and has
also revealed cases of accentuated embrittlement. For
example, the Yankee steel when irradiated with a
reference A302-B steel in the Yankee (Rowe, Massa-
chusetts) plant showed greater embrittlement than the
reference steel [43]. Similarly, the specimens repre-
senting the weld metal of the Big Rock Point reactor
vessel were embrittled more than the base plate
(fig. 26) [43]. The U.S. Army's compact SM-IA pres-
Table 12
Results from cyclic 430°F irradiation and 585°F/168 hr annealing experiment using A350-LI:l modified steel (refs. [61,62]).
Cycle l:luence Charpy-V 30 ft-lb transition temperature
number (n/cm 2 > 1 MeV) Initial As irradiated
1 2.12 X 1019 - 80 255
2 1.78 X 1019 5 280
Cumulative 3.90 × 1019 -80 280
surized water reactor demonstrated a detrimental com-
bination of factors for enhancing embrittlement: high
fluence on the vessel, radiation-embrittlement-sensitive
steel, and low operating temperature [32].
Thus, neutron radiation effects in operating plants
may be sufficient to require specific steps toward
minimizing radiation embrittlement. The approaches
considered include: postirradiation annealing, opera-
tional controls or stress-temperature limiting proce-
dures, and, for tile future, the selection or develop-
ment of steels having relative insensitivity to radiation
embrittlement.
4.6.1. Postirradiation heat treatment
Studies to determine the extent of neutron-embrit-
tlement correction possible by heat treatment or "an-
nealing" show that the amount of embrittlement relief
is dependent primarily upon: (1) the type of steel,
(2) the irradiation temperature, and (3) the annealing
condition, especially temperature and duration. For
example, for the SM-IA reactor steel [62] (type
A350-LF 1 Modified by addition of nickel), essentially
complete ductility recovery could be obtained through
annealing at 750°F for one week and 70 to 80% re-
covery through annealing for one week at 585°F (cf.
fig. 33), thereby making it feasible to use nuclear
heating (low power level operation) to produce the
required ductility correction.
The question arose as to the possibility that second
or third annealing cycles, if required, might not be as
effective as the initial treatment. A test reactor exper-
iment was designed to closely simulate the actual pres-
sure vessel irradiation and annealing conditions for
two complete cycles and to permit an accurate deter-
mination of the material 30 ft-lb transition tempera-
ture following each operation. The results of this
experiment are summarized in table 12. The results
Recovery
AT As annealed °F %
355 5 250 75
275 70 210 76
360 70 21(I 58
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 301

imply that a second or repeat annealing operation fol- temperature-stress limitations in accordance with the
lowing a single anneal is equally effective although the accepted criterion.
cumulative recovery is decreased as would be expected.
The actual annealing of the SM-1A pressure vessel was 4.6.3. Control of radiation embrittlement sensitivity
conducted in the summer of 1967 by raising the plant The data of fig. 32 show a wide variation in the
operating temperature from 430°F (normal) to 572°F embrittlement sensitivity of different steels. In fact,
and maintaining this temperature for approximately broad differences occur even between heats of the
one week. Results from surveillance specimens anneal- same steel. Such variability suggests that it should be
ed within the pressure vessel indicated that a recovery possible by control of composition and microstructure
of 70 to 75% was, in fact, achieved. to minimize radiation effects. Fig. 42 [34] demon-
strates the variation in irradiation embrittlement be-
4.6.2. Operational limits tween early production heats of three different steels.
In those cases where embrittlement is noted but is Note that the steel with the lowest initial transition
not so serious as that indicated for the SM-1A, temperature also suffered the smallest radiation-
operational procedures may be used to avoid ap- induced increase.
proaching a potentially critical stress-temperature Comparison of data for the commercial A302-B
condition. A good example of this approach is pro- plate in fig. 42 with data for a specially prepared
vided in the SM-1A reactor situation [32] before it A302-B plate (fig. 43) reveals rather conclusively that
became sufficiently embrittled to require in-service certain impurity elements not only tend to raise the
annealing. transition temperature of the unirradiated steel, but
The criterion accepted for establishing operating also are largely responsible for its susceptibility to
limits (considered very conservative) involves keeping radiation-induced embrittlement [44,47]. By purpose-
total stresses in the high fluence region of the vessel ly adding such elements one at a time to low-residual
below 18% of the yield stress of the unirradiated steel laboratory heats of A302-B steel and impact testing
when its temperature reaches NDT + 60°F or less. unirradiated and irradiated specimens from each heat,
This implies knowledge of the degree of embrittle- it was found [44,45,62] that phosphorus, copper,
ment of the vessel steel at any point in time as well as and vanadium are particularly undesirable. The pro-
the pattern of stresses and temperatures in the vessel duction of laboratory heats of steels with controlled
wall. Since it is not possible to know in detail these compositions should be amenable to scale-up, so that
three factors at once, conservative projections are commercial-size heats of steels that are highly resistant
made and operational procedures and plant modifica- to radiation embrittlement can be turned out.
tions devised to avoid any critical point by assuring Additional evidence of the importance of composi-

120
_1

LI.. I 0 0 - ~ - UNIRRADIATEDCONDITION
IF-IRRADIATED (550~'. 3.8 x 1019n/cruZ >1MeV)
{~ 6-IN. A 5 0 2 - 8 P L A T E
)- • tx 8-IN. 3 "~" N i - C r - M o P L A T E 3½ Ni-Cr-Mo A302-a
80- • o I-IN. 7 ½ Ni-Cr-Mo PLATE
I.iJ
Z
U.I
-r. 6 0 -
cO
I,-
40-

F
20--
i
I , I ~' I , L ~'L ~ I L L ~ I ,II ~ L , L L I ~ [ , I , I
U _o-~2o j - 240 -160 - 80 0 80 160 240 ' 3?0
TEMPERATURE (*F)

Fig. 42. Charpy V-notch ductility characteristics of three steels of different strength levels after simultaneous irradiation at 550°F
(ref. [341).
302 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE

120

6-IN. A302-B PLATE

I00 COMMERCIAL HEAT

UNIRRADIATED

8O IRRADIATED
J
/ 5 5 0 * F, ~ 3 x 1019 n/cm 2 >1 Mev*
h

>- 6 0 o
(.9
0
LIJ
Z
LU
40

O 160 °
.//°
20--

* ~" 68 rob, Mn54,FISSlON

0 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I
120
I/2"IN. A 3 0 2 - B PLATE 0
300LB AIR INDUCTION' HEAT
I O0 - - 0 0

80
nn
d

U_

>-
60
,,y
w
z
Ld
o UNIRRADIATED
40
• IRRADIATED
550* F,~3 x I019 n/crn2> I Mev
( ~ 68 rnb, Mn54, FISSION)
20

o I ,1 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I J I I I I I 1
-80 -40 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320
TEMPERATURE (OF)

[:ig. 43. Charpy V-notch ductility behavior o f a commercial heat and a low impurity (P, S, Cu, Sn, Sb, etc.) c o n t e n t 300-1b labora-
tory air-induction heat o f { in. A302-B steel plate before and after irradiation to ~ 3 × 1019 n/cm 2 ( ~ 1 MeV) at 5 5 0 ° F (ref. [45] ).
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIALNUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS 303

A-543 STEEL
2 - IN. SUB. ARC W E L D M E N T ( LINDE - I 0 0 F I L L E R )
--- 8 - I N . REFERENCE PLATE
IO0

UNIRRADIATED

60
>- IRRADIATED*
~ ," (PLATE) (WELD)
~
tlJ
4o i / / i /
Z ,,, 535 °
w 20 /

LI tl IltlJ I i l t I I÷,l]'lT; llti

I - IN. MANUAL METAL ARC WELDMENT
(WELD METAL COMPOSITION 19:56)
IOO

=J IRRADIATED*
i 8o
F-
~ 60
>-
_-
(.9
~ 4o
Z "=" -.3 ",,45 * 5 5 0 " F "~ 3.4 x I O l l n / c m 2 > M •
hi
6 8 mb Mn $4, FISSION
2O _- ./K ,'g ,./"

0 IIL~'II i I i II llIil , I, Ii I, I ill l,lt Iil i l l i l l l l l

-200 -120 -40 40 120 200 280 360 440 520 600
TEMPERATURE (OF)
Fig. 44. Effect of weld-metal composition on embrittlement of submerged arc welds in A543 steel plate irradiated at 550°F to a
fluence of ~3.4 X 1019 n/cm 2 (> 1 MeV) (ref. [45]).

tion has been produced in special weld wire composi-
tions for welding of the higher strength A543 steel.
Especially high sensitivity to radiation embrittlement
was noted for commercial weldments of this steel.
This sensitivity was eliminated, however, when a low-
copper weld wire was produced [45]. Fig. 44 shows
the contrast between the commercial and special com-
position weldments. The sensitive weld contained
0.42% copper versus only 0.02% for the low sensitivity
composition 1936. The A543 plate steel has consist-
ently shown relatively low sensitivity to radiation as
well as very good initial notch ductility. Thus, if low
sensitivity in the weld metal can be assured through
compositional control, the use of A543 steel gives
promise of avoiding the critical radiation embrittle-
ment problem in reactor vessels [45].
5. Other environmental effects
5.1. Elevated temperature properties
All reactor systems of the boiling and pressurized
light water variety operate between about 430 and
700°F. High-temperature gas-cooled reactors may
experience coolant temperatures as high as 1300°F,
although the pressure vessel probably would operate
at much lower temperatures. The Calder Hall class
of gas-cooled, magnox-clad-fuel reactor operates at
over 700 to 800°F. Future fast breeders will operate
at over 800°F, necessitating close scrutiny of the
high-temperature properties of any carbon and alloy
steels used in their containment vessels.
Of the current list of potential pressure vessel
steels, A542 has the best elevated temperature prop-
304 R.tI.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELI,~

Table 13
Stress-rupture data for selected reactor vessel steels ~ -Z~ ~ ~
O~ O~
(refs. [22,631). +160 Ll 0 0 ~
|
o o o ~ o0o oo0. oo~@z
oooo
~o~
0
Oqo
8o~_
0 0
OO
~oo~
qqoo
~oo~
J qqoo
[ ~oo ~oo ~o ~ o ~T T
0 T0 T l ~T T
0 T0 T
TTTT
u_
TTTT TTT TTT
~ - Y ,u- , , ~- .u. . . . . .
D.u. ~- ~- l.L u. ~_ I~ ,
Stress to rupture, ~0 000 0~ 0 0O OoO0~0 000 OO0
+SOl 00~ o0~
psi in 10,000 hours _ I i
Material
at 900°F at IO00°F o

• I I
A542 75,000 23,000 I

A543 - 12,000
A533 40,000 11,000
A515-70 11,000 5,000 - - Bo$1 ~ronsill~ Tempetoture

erties [22,63]. The 10,000-hr rupture strength of sev-

eral steels at 900 and lO00°F are given in table 13. Fig. 45. Influence of elevated temperature exposure on the
At temperatures below the creep range (about toughness of selected pressure vessel steels (ref. [22]).
700°F for carbon steel and 800°F for alloy steels),
the short-time elevated temperature properties deter-
mine the allowable design stresses. These are well de- +16C I.L la. ~ I.l.
. . . .
I~ ~ U.I.i. LI. I,L el. LL ~ U-I.L ~

fined by the values in table N421 of ASME Section

11I [7a]. +8C

5.2. Aging
Both thermal aging and strain aging occur to some
degree in all the carbon and low alloy steels used for N -80
nuclear pressure vessels. Fig. 45 [22] shows the effects
of aging at various temperatures and times on tough- ~. 46¢ K ~--Ir~rlell D,~ing ~ i n Q
ness of several pressure vessel steels. Note that neither Tsm~foture

A212 nor A533 is markedly affected by prolonged ~-240 Thin Thick Thin ThKk Thin Thick
aging at 500,700, or 900°F, but both steels experience Secti~e Secfloe Section Sq~oe
A212B A553A ASITF A543
20 to 30°F increases in Charpy-V notch transition
temperature after 100 hrs at 1150°F. A517-F, a Fig. 46. Influence of 5% strain and 1 hr elevated temperature
proprietary, complex low alloy steel, shows marked exposure on the toughness of selected pressure vessel steels
reduction in toughness upon aging in the 700 to (ref. [22]).
1200°F range. Both A517 and A543 are subject to
temper embrittlemenI; A543 shows its greatest loss controlled by adding elements like titanium and
in ductility upon aging at 700°F. aluminum to the steel during manufacture to tie up
An apparent accelerated thermal aging embrittle- the interstitial elements, carbon and nitrogen. As an
ment has been noted for A543 following fast-neutron example, low carbon steels used for deep drawing
irradiation at 750°F. As discussed earlier, radiation applications are aluminum killed to retard strain
embrittlement is generally minimal when the exposure aging.
temperature is as high as 750°F. The greater embrit- Only limited strain aging data applicable to nuclear
tlement (NDT increase) observed [1] for the A543 pressure vessel steels are available. Fig. 46 shows infor-
steel specimens irradiated at 750°F than for those at mation on four steels strained 5% and aged one hour
550°F is very likely the result of enhanced aging at 500 to 1200°F. All steels tested showed some
embrittlement at the higher temperature. toughness deterioration at both 500 and 700°F, and
Strain aging in carbon and low alloy steels can be all except A517-F showed little effect of strain aging
at the higher temperatures.
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS
5.3. Hydrogen embrittlement
For the carbon and low alloy steels used in water-
cooled nuclear reactors, hydrogen embrittlement is
not a problem [9,59]. The major source o f hydrogen
in a water reactor operating at 500 to 600°F appears
to be the corrosion reaction between the coolant and
the steel in the pressure vessel.
Delayed fracture results from the presence of
hydrogen in steels much higher in strength than those
normally used in pressure vessels [64]. Also, this re-
quires hydrogen concentrations much higher than
those normally found in reactor pressure vessel steels.
Commonly, hydrogen enters the steel during welding.
In the application of bolting steel (the only really
high-strength steel in a light-water reactor), no weld-
ing is encountered.
There are indications [60] that, at least in A212-B
steel, the radiation-increased tensile strength is not
accompanied by an increased susceptibility toward
hydrogen embrittlement. Though this phenomenon
may become noticeable in the higher strength steels
now being applied in reactor vessel service, it appears
that delayed failure as a result of hydrogen produc-
tion in pressure vessel steels will not become a serious
problem. However, the combined effects o f radiation
and hydrogen embrittlement should be studied fur-
ther.
5.4. Corrosion
Steels used for pressure vessels in nuclear systems
must be generally resistant to corrosion when in con-
tact with the coolant. F o r this reason, all ferritic steel
surfaces in PWR and BWR primary coolant systems
are protected with stainless steel, either deposited by
weld overlay or clad by roll bonding.
Early reactors were constructed o f stainless-clad
steel manufactured by the roll bonding process. These
included Shippingport, Dresden I, Pathfinder, and
LaCrosse. Today, all of the primary reactors are lined
with stainless steel by the weld overlay process,
although explosive bonded cladding is being consid-
ered.
Acknowledgement
This report reflects the research conducted at a
number o f institutions. These are acknowledged here
305
and are referenced fully. Noteworthy are the works of
the American Society for Mechanical Engineers
through its pressure vessel codes, the Oak Ridge Na-
tional Laboratory through its report on steel pressure
vessel technology, and the Naval Research Laboratory
through numerous reports on the fracture and radia-
tion damage of steels. The latter studies were support-
ed in large measure by the U.S. Office of Naval Re-
search and the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
References
[ 1 ] L.E.Steele and J.R.Hawthorne, Neutron embrittlement
of reactor pressure vessel steels, NRL Report 5984, 22
October 1963; also Materials and Fuels lbr High Tem-
perature Nuclear Energy Applications (MIT Press, Cam-
bridge, Mass., 1964) Chapter 16, pp. 366-409.
[2] Combustion, Babcock tooling up for 1500-MWe reactor
vessels, Nucleonics 22, No. 11 (1964) 24-25.
[3] A.Cowan and R.W.Nichols, Assessment of steels for nu-
clear reactor pressure vessels, Trans. ASME, J. Eng.
Power, Series A, 86 (1964) 393-402.
[4] Nucleonics Week 4, No. 12 (23 March 1967).
[5] R.W.Lorentz and M.W.Davis, Fabrication of high
strength, heavy wall pressure vessels, Midwest Welding
Conference, 1 February 1966.
[6 ] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section VIlI,
Unfired Pressure Vessels (1964).
[7] ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section Ill,
Nuclear Vessels (1965) and as revised in 1968)
a. Tables N421 and N422
b. Paragraphs N321-326
c. Paragraph N313
[ 8 ] T.L.Cramer, Site assembly - A new approach for U.S.
reactor vessels, Nucleonics 24, No. 11 (1966) 58-61.
[9] G.D.Whitman, G.C.Robinson, Jr. and A.W.Savolainen
(editors), Technology of Steel Pressure Vessels for
Water-Cooled Nuclear Reactors, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, ORNL-NSIC-21 (December 1967).
[ 10] Interpretations of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
('ode (1968), Code Case 1381, pp. 263-265.
[ 11J Physical and Mechanical Testing of Metals; Nondestruc-
tive Tests, 1967, Book of ASTM Standards, Part 31,
pp. 673-691, ASTM Tentative Method E208-66T,
American Society for Testing and Materials (1967).
[ 12] Ibid., pp. 9-56, ASTM Standard Method 370.
[13] Ibid., pp, 638-645, ASTM Recommended Practice
E185.
[ 14] J.H.Gross et al., Development of a high toughness alloy
steel plate with a minimum yield strength of 140 ksi,
Welding J. 43 (1964) 514s-520s.
[ 15 ] W.S.Pellini and P.P.Puzak, Procedures for NRL drop
weight test, NRL Memorandum Report 316 (June
1964).
306 R.H.STERNE, Jr. and L.E.STEELE
[ 161 L.E.Steele et al., Irradiation effects on reactor structural
materials, Quarterly Progress Report, 1 May-31 July
1966, NRL Memorandum Report 1719 (15 August 1966).
[ 17] U.Potapovs et al., Notch ductility properties of SM-1A
reactor pressure vessel following the in-place annealing
operation, NRL Report 6721 (21 May 1968).
[ 18] W.S.Pellini, Advances in fracture toughness characteriza-
tions procedures and in quantitative interpretations to
fracture-safe design for structural steels, NRL Report
6713 (3 April 1968).
[ 19] F.J.Loss and W.S.Pellini, Dynamic tear test definition of
the temperature transition from linear elastic to gross
strain fracture conditions, NRL Report 6787 (29 No-
vember 1968); also ASME J. Basic Eng., pending publi-
cation.
[20] E.T.Wessel, Linear elastic fracture mechanics for welded
steel pressure vessels: material property considerations,
Symposium on Fracture Toughness Concepts for Weld-
able Structural Steels, Culcheth, England, pending pu-
blication.
[21] F.J.Loss, Heavy section steel toughness characterization,
Progress Report ending 28 February 1969, NRL Memo-
randum Report 1988 (March 1969).
[22] R.D.Stout and A.W.Pense, Characterization of heat
treated pressure vessel steels for elevated temperature
service, Symposium on Heat Treated Steels for Elevated
Temperature Service, ASME, New York, September
1967.
[23] D.R.Loper, J.R.Cunningham and O.R.Carpenter, De-
sign of smooth shell isomax process reactors, American
Petroleum Institute, Midyear Division of Refining
Meeting, 11 May 1966.
[24] O.R.Carpenter, Electroslag welding - evaluating pres-
sure vessel applications, ASME Design Engineering Con-
ference, 15 May 1967, paper 67-DE-42.
[25] R.D.Wylie, J.McDonald and A.L.Lowenberg, Weld de-
posited cladding of pressure vessels, 19th Petroleum
Mechanical Engineering Conference, 20 Sept. 1964.
[26] W.D.Doty, Welding of quenched and tempered steels,
Welding J. 44 (1965) 289s-309s.
[27 ] R.S.Rose, Investigation of the properties of electroslag
welds in various steels, Welding J. 43 (1965) 4 2 1 - 4 2 6 .
[28] R.D.Wylie and W.J.McGonnagle, Quality Control in
Fabrication of Nuclear Pressure Vessels, AEC Mono-
graph Series on Metallurgy in Nuclear Technology, Am.
Soc. Metals (Rowman and Littlefield, New York, 1964).
[29] J.T.Dunn, Large steel nuclear vessels, Nuclex Confer-
ence, Basel, Switzerland, September 1966.
[30] W.S.Pellini et al., Analysis of engineering and basic re-
search aspects of neutron embrittlement of steels, NRL
Report 5780 (17 April 1962); also Radiation Damage
in Solids, vol. I1 (International Atomic Energy Agency,
Vienna, Austria, 1962) pp. 113-151.
[31 ] Tentative Regulatory Supplementary Criteria for ASME
Code-Constructed Nuclear Pressure Vessels, U.S. Atomic
Energy Commission (23 August 1967), Paragraph 1.25,
Ductile-Brittle Transition Properties, pp. 2 0 - 2 3 .
1321 L.E.Steele, G.W.Knighton and U.Potapovs, Radiation
embrittlement of pressure vessels and procedures for
limiting this effect in power reactors, Nucl. Applications
4 (1968) 230.
[ 33 ] J.R.ltawthorne, Studies of radiation effects and recovery
of notch ductility of pressure vessel steels, in: Steels for
Reactor Pressure Circuits, The Iron and Steel Institute
Special Report 69, London, England, pp. 343 369.
[34] L.E.Steele, J.R.Hawthorne and R.A.Gray, Jr., Neutron
irradiation embrittlement of several higher strength
steels, NRL Report 6419 (7 September 1966); also
Radiation Effects on Structural Metals, ASTM STP 426
(1967) 346-370.
[35 ] J.R.Hawthorne and F.J.Loss, Availability of data on
irradiated materials as related to design requirements
for water cooled reactor pressure vessels, NRL Report
6625 (1 August 1967).
[36] A.M.Sullivan, Fracture mechanics and radiation embrit-
tlement, in: Proceedings of the First International Con-
ference on Fracture, Sendai, Japan, 1965 (The Japanese
Society for Strength and Fracture of Metals).
[37] J.M.Monahan and T.J.Walker, PM-2A reactor vessel
test Description of testing and failure conditions,
WAPD-TM-640, Westinghouse Atomic Power Division
(January 1967).
[38] D.R.Harries, P.J.Barton and S.B.Wright, Effects of neu-
tron spectrum and dose rate on radiation hardening and
embrittlement in steels, J. Brit. Nucl. Energy 2 (1963)
398-406.
[39] N.E.Hinkle et al., Dose, rate, annealing, and stress-
~'elaxation study of radiation hardening in iron, in: Effects
of Radiation on Structural Materials, ASTM STP 426
(1967) 573-591.
[40] L.E.Steele and J.R.Hawthorne, New information on
neutron embrittlement and embrittlement reflief of
reactor pressure vessel steels, NRL Report 6160 (6 Oc-
tober 1964); ih: Symposium on Flow and Fracture Be-
havior of Metals and Alloys in Nuclear Environment,
ASTM STP 380 (1965) 283-311.
[41 ] E.A.Landerman, Yankee reactor vessel surveillance pro-
gram material property data, PA-PV-177-1, Westinghouse
Atomic Power Division (11 August 1966).
[42] G.F.Carpenter, N.R.Knopf and E.S.Byron, Anomalous
embrittling effects observed during irradiation studies
on pressure vessel steels, Nucl. Sci. Eng. 19 (1964) 18
38.
[43] C.Z.Serpan, Jr., L.E.Steele and J.R.Hawthorne, Radia-
tion damage surveillance of power reactor pressure ves-
sels, NRL Report 6349 (31 January 1966); also Trans.
ASME, J. Basic Eng., Series D, 89 (1967) 221-232.
[44] J.R.Hawthorne et al., Irradiation effects on reactor
structural materials, Quarterly Progress Report, 1 Aug-
31 Oct 1967, NRL Memorandum'Report 1833
(15 November 1967) 29-36.
[45] U.Potapovs and J.R.Hawthorne, The effect of residual
elements on 550°F irradiation response of selected pres-
sure vessel steels and weldments, Nucl. Applications 6
(1969) 2 7 - 4 6 ; also NRL Report 6803 (22 Nov. 1968).
 STEELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR PRESSURE VESSELS
[46] C.Z.Serpan, Jr. and J.R.Hawthorne, Yankee reactor
pressure-vessel surveillance: notch ductility performance
of vessel steel and maximum service fluence determined
from exposure during cores II, III, and IV, NRL Report
6616 (29 September 1967); Trans. ASME, J. Basic Eng.,
Series D, 89 (1967) 8 9 7 - 9 1 0 .
[47] L.P.Trudeau, Radiation Effects on Toughness of Ferritic
Steels for Reactor Vessels, AEC Monograph Series, Am.
Soc. Metals (Rowman and Littlefield, Inc., New York,
1964).
[48] M.Kangilaski, The effects of neutron radiation on struc-
tural materials, REIC Report No. 45 (30 June 1967),
Radiation Effects Information Center, fig. 32, p. 66.
[49] R.W.Nichols and D.R.Harries, Brittle fracture and irra-
diation effects in ferritic pressure vessel steels, Sympo-
sium on Radiation Effects on Metals and Neutron Dosi-
metry, ASTM STP 341 (1963) 162-198.
[50] T.A.Trozera and P.W.Flynn, Effects of irradiation on
A302-B steel subjected to a multiaxial stress distribu-
tion, Symposium on Flow and Fracture of Metals and
Alloys in Nuclear Environments, ASTM STP 380 (1965)
337-349.
[51] E.P.Klier, J.R.Hawthorne and L.E.Steele, The tensile
properties of selected steels for use in nuclear reactor
pressure vessels, NRL Report 6649 (23 December 1967).
[52] R.G.Berggren, Neutron irradiation effects in steels:
studied at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Proceedings
of Symposium on Steels for Reactor Pressure Circuits,
Long, 1960, Iron and Steel Institute Special Report No.
69 (1961) 370-381.
[53] D.W.McLaughlin, Properties of irradiated materials
needed for the design of reactor vessels, Symposium on
the Effects of Radiation of Structural Metals, ASTM
STP 426 (1967) 391-407.
[54] J.R.Hawthorne and L.E.Steele, In-reactor studies of low
cycle fatigue properties of a nuclear pressure vessel
steel, NRL Report 6127 (27 July 1964).
307
[55] W.G.Gibbons, A.E.Mikoleit and W.J.O'Donnell, Fatigue
properties of irradiated pressure vessel steels, WAPD-T-
1864, Symposium on the Effects of Radiation on Struc-
tural Metals, ASTM STP 427 (1967) 4 0 8 - 4 3 9 .
[56] A.L.Snow and B.F.Langer, Low cycle fatigue of large
diameter bolts, ASME Petroleum Mechanical Engineer-
ing Conference, Paper No. 66-Pet-8, 18 September 1966.
[57] J.R.Hawthorne and F.J.Loss The effects of coupling
nuclear radiation with static and cyclic service stresses
and of periodic proof testing on pressure vessel ma-
terial behavior, NRL Report 6620 (1 August 1967).
[58] M.B.Reynolds, The effect of stress on the radiation sta-
bility of ASTM A302 Grade B pressure vessel steel,
Materials Res. Standards 3 (1963) 6 4 4 - 6 4 5 .
[59] D.R.Harries and G.H.Broomfield, Hydrogen embrittle-
ment of steel pressure vessels in pressurized water reac-
tor systems, J. Nucl. Materials 9 (1963) 327-338.
[60] A.D.Rossin, T.H.Blewitt and A.R.Troiano, Hydrogen
embrittlement in irradiated steels, Nucl. Eng. Design 4
(1966) 4 4 6 - 4 5 8 .
[61] U.Potapovs, G.W.Knighton and A.L.Denton, Critique of
in-place annealing of SM-1A nuclear reactor vessel, Nucl.
Eng. Design 8 (1968) 3 9 - 4 7 .
[62] J.R.Hawthome, U.Potapovs and C.Z.Serpan, Jr., Irradia-
tion effects on reactor structural materials, Quarterly
Progress Report, 1 Nov 1967-31 Jan 1968, NRL Me-
morandum Report 1853 (15 February 1968).
[63] E.L.Fogleman and R.H.Sterne, Jr., Effect of heat treat-
ment on the mechanical properties of 21/4%Cr-1% Mo
steel plate, ASME Petroleum Mechanical Engineering
Conference, September 1965.
[64] G.Sachs and W.Beck, Survey of low-alloy aircraft steels
heat treated to high strength levels, Part 1: Hydrogen
embrittlement, WADC-TR-53-254, Syracuse University
for Wright Air Development Center, December 1963.