Mid-Year Client ReviewNovember 30, 2010

Joseph SeegmillerAlan Chatterton

Doug SmithWalter Taresh

Apparatus for the

Removal of

Cadmium

1

AGENDA

• BACKGROUND• PROJECT GOAL• SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW• CLEANING PROCESS REVIEW• MOCK-UP• CADMIUM BUILD-UP SIMULATION• MATERIAL REMOVAL METHODS

2

MARK IV ELECTROREFINER

3

BUILD-UP ON ANODE SHAFT

4

ELECTRO MECHANICAL MANIPULATOR

5

PROJECT GOAL

• Design of a semi-automated system capable of removing cadmium buildup from the electrode assembly shaft of the Mark IV Electrorefiner to prevent electrical shorting between the electrode and vessel.

6

SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW• Incorporation without interference with existing operations• Cleaning cycle time of 2 hours• Apparatus life of 100 cleaning cycles• Operate in high radiation environment• Capture majority of removed cadmium• Setup and operation with Master-Slave Manipulators (MSM)• 15 Pound force limit for MSM• No petroleum-based lubricants• Vertical load limit 200 pounds• Remote replacement defective parts/subassemblies• Shaft capable of rotation and up and down motion

7

CLEANING PROCESS REVIEW

Electrode assembly removed from chamber

Assembly brought to handling station

8

Lower part of assembly removed

Heat shield is removed, shaft is exposed

9

Cadmium removed using files, scrapers, etc.

10

EXPLODED DRAWING FOR MOCKUP

11

MOCKUP STATUS• CURRENT STATE

Mill Attachment Point Original Component

Added LengthBearing Retaining Sleeve

12

MOCKUP STATUS• STILL TO MACHINE

13

Drill and tap

Machine part

Choose material and machine

SHAFT MOUNTED IN MILL

14

CADMIUM BUILD-UP SIMULATION• SURRAGATE MATERIALS

• Brass – soft, comparable to cadmium

• Aluminum – harder than cadmium, but still relatively soft

• Silver Solder – soft, though difficult to solder to SS

• Wax – much softer, though easy to work with

• Spray foam – hardens to solid, easy to use

15

SILVER SOLDER ON SS ROD

16

• Benefits• Similar to Cadmium

• Difficulties• Will not lay down thick

MATERIAL REMOVAL METHODS

• FINE, COURSE AND MILLED TOOTH FILES

• Fine file - gummed easily, removed 0.006” from diameter in 2 minutes*

• Course file - did not gum as easily, removed 0.040” from diameter in 2 minutes

• Milled Tooth file - did not gum, removed 0.100” in 1-2 minutes

*Amount of material for one file blade width (app. 1.25”)

17

FINE TOOTH FILE

18

• Gummed easily, removed 0.006” from diameter in 2 minutes

COURSE DOUBLE-CUT FILE

19

• Did not gum as easily, removed 0.040” from diameter in 2 minutes

MILLED TOOTH FILE

20

• Did not gum, removed 0.100” from diameter in 1-2 minutes

SINGLE POINT TOOL BIT

21

• More rugged than three point insert

THREE POINT INSERT TOOL BIT

22

• Three separate cutting teeth for potential ease of tool replacement.

23

WORK PLAN• By December 17th:

• Finish machining the mockup

• Provide mid-year report detailing current status

• Choose best material removal method

• Spring semester:

• January 12th: Begin system-level design with best cutting method

• February 21st: Interim report outlining system-level design

• April 4th: Completion of prototype

• April 29th: Demonstrate apparatus at Design Expo

24

QUESTIONS?

25