CBP Toolbox Version 3.0 ???Beta Testing??? Performance Evaluation

Smith, III, F. G.¹ 

[1]Savannah River Site (SRS), Aiken, SC (United States). Savannah River National Lab. (SRNL)

关键词: concrete;    modeling;    cementitious barriers;   

DOI  :  10.2172/1305133
RP-ID  :  SRNL-STI--2016-00158
PID  :  OSTI ID: 1305133

学科分类：数学（综合）

美国|英语

来源: SciTech Connect

【 摘 要 】

One function of the Cementitious Barriers Partnership (CBP) is to assess available models of cement degradation and to assemble suitable models into a ???Toolbox??? that would be made available to members of the partnership, as well as the DOE Complex. To this end, SRNL and Vanderbilt University collaborated to develop an interface using the GoldSim software to the STADIUM^@ code developed by SIMCO Technologies, Inc. and LeachXS/ORCHESTRA developed by Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN). Release of Version 3.0 of the CBP Toolbox is planned in the near future. As a part of this release, an increased level of quality assurance for the partner codes and the GoldSim interface has been developed. This report documents results from evaluation testing of the ability of CBP Toolbox 3.0 to perform simulations of concrete degradation applicable to performance assessment of waste disposal facilities. Simulations of the behavior of Savannah River Saltstone Vault 2 and Vault 1/4 concrete subject to sulfate attack and carbonation over a 500- to 1000-year time period were run using a new and upgraded version of the STADIUM^@ code and the version of LeachXS/ORCHESTRA released in Version 2.0 of the CBP Toolbox. Running both codes allowed comparison of results from two models which take very different approaches to simulating cement degradation. In addition, simulations of chloride attack on the two concretes were made using the STADIUM^@ code. The evaluation sought to demonstrate that: 1) the codes are capable of running extended realistic simulations in a reasonable amount of time; 2) the codes produce ???reasonable??? results; the code developers have provided validation test results as part of their code QA documentation; and 3) the two codes produce results that are consistent with one another. Results of the evaluation testing showed that the three criteria listed above were met by the CBP partner codes. Therefore, it is concluded that the codes can be used to support performance assessment. This conclusion takes into account the QA documentation produced for the partner codes and for the CBP Toolbox.