Fig. 1. Fouling curves 26

Fig. 2. Fouling processes 31

Fig. 3. Atomic charge of PAA calculated by using HyperChem™ with PM3 mode 37

Fig. 4. Molecular formula of PAA 38

Fig. 5. Ionization of PAA at pH25℃ of 9.5 in a NPP secondary water chemistry system(이미지참조) 39

Fig. 6. Log mean iron removal efficiency vs. PAA concentration in freewater 40

Fig. 7. Time-dependent PAA decomposition type 42

Fig. 8. A thermal decomposition mechanism of PAA 43

Fig. 9. Time-dependent CO₂ production type from PAA 45

Fig. 10. Decomposition of morpholine 47

Fig. 11. Organic acid production from 50 ppm PAA 49

Fig. 12. Total organic carbon vs. ETA during ANO-2 STT 50

Fig. 13. Total iron vs. moisture separator PHT(97℃)(이미지참조) 51

Fig. 14. A schematic of reactor for preliminary test using cylindrical vessel 54

Fig. 15. Test equipment for deposition using wire heating 57

Fig. 16. Geometry and boundary conditions 59

Fig. 17. Schematic drawing of fouling test loop at KAERI 62

Fig. 18. Fouling test loop 63

Fig. 19. Schematic drawing of the test section for fouling with a low flow velocity 66

Fig. 20. Temperature change on the surface of specimen at the T/C 2 after thermal input by an internal cartridge heater 69

Fig. 21. Location of A1 specimens for surface analysis 70

Fig. 22. Multiple Light Scattering Phenomena and Theory 78

Fig. 23. Transmittance (a) and back scattering rate (b) for Turbiscan analysis 79

Fig. 24. Test device for resuspension 85

Fig. 25. Formation and its size of bubbles depending on the temperature of specimen surface 88

Fig. 26. Internal temperature distribution of solution depending on flow rate 89

Fig. 27. SEM and EDS analysis (test 1) 90

Fig. 28. SEM and EDS analysis (test 2) 91

Fig. 29. SEM analysis (test 3) 92

Fig. 30. SEM analysis of the cross section after test 1 93

Fig. 31. SEM analysis (test 1) 97

Fig. 32. SEM analysis (test 3) 98

Fig. 33. SEM analysis (test 2) 99

Fig. 34. SEM analysis (test 4) 100

Fig. 35. SEM analysis (test 5) 101

Fig. 36. SEM analysis (test 6) 102

Fig. 37. SEM analysis (test 7) 103

Fig. 38. SEM analysis (test 8) 104

Fig. 39. SEM and EDS analysis of the cross section after test 7 105

Fig. 40. SIMS analysis of test 7 106

Fig. 41. Bubble volume fraction depending on heat flux changes 109

Fig. 42. Void fraction 110

Fig. 43. Void fraction and coolant temperature distribution in fuel cladding of a real plant 112

Fig. 44. Effect of Ni and Fe nitrate concentration on surface deposit by ICP-AES after 5 day tests in solutions containing 1.5 ppm Li as LiOH... 117

Fig. 45. Photographs of the specimen after A1 test for 5 days 118

Fig. 46. Surfaces with SNB of A1-3 and without SNB of A1-1 by SEM after 5 day test 119

Fig. 47. EDS analysis of the deposit on a tape for A1-3 specimen 120

Fig. 48. SIMS analysis on deposit of external surface for A1-3 specimen 121

Fig. 49. Effect of exposure time on surface deposit measured by ICP-AES for A2-3 and A3-3 specimens 122

Fig. 50. SEM and EDS analysis (A5) 127

Fig. 51. Cross Section of the specimen (A5) 128

Fig. 52. SEM and EDS analysis (A11) 129

Fig. 53. SEM and EDS analysis (A8) 130

Fig. 54. SEM and EDS analysis (A6) 131

Fig. 55. SEM and EDS analysis (A10) 132

Fig. 56. SEM and EDS analysis (A9) 133

Fig. 57. SEM and EDS analysis (A7) 134

Fig. 58. SEM and EDS analysis (A4) 135

Fig. 59. ICP-AES results on surface deposit for specimens after 14 day tests in solutions containing... 136

Fig. 60. Deposit of Ni and Fe on AX-3 of Zirlo cladding by ICP-AES after 14 day tests in the solution containing... 137

Fig. 61. SEM and EDS analysis (A12) 141

Fig. 62. SEM and EDS analysis (A13) 142

Fig. 63. SEM and EDS analysis (A14) 143

Fig. 64. Effect of H₂ concentration on deposit of Fe and Ni after 14 day tests 144

Fig. 65. Surface image by SEM after 14 day test 146

Fig. 66. SEM image and EDS analysis at different point. Values are expressed as atomic % 147

Fig. 67. The surface morphologies of the fuel cladding 151

Fig. 68. Oxide layer of nuclear fuel rod withdrawn from Plant A and Plant B 152

Fig. 69. SEM micrographs of taping samples of nuclear fuel rod withdrawn from Plant A and Plant B 153

Fig. 70. SEM micrograph of taping samples of nuclear fuel rod withdrawn (from bottom 3320-3520 mm) from Plant B 154

Fig. 71. Settling test results depending on magnetite concentrations 157

Fig. 72. Settling test results depending on PAA concentrations 158

Fig. 73. Settling test results depending on PAA concentrations (Magnetite 50 ppm, 7 days after dispersion) 159

Fig. 74. State of dispersion of the magnetite depending on time (Fe 10ppm, Dispersant 10 ppm) 162

Fig. 75. State of dispersion of the magnetite depending on time (Fe 1000ppm, Dispersant 10 ppm) 163

Fig. 76. State of dispersion of the magnetite depending on time (Fe 100ppm, Dispersant 100 ppm) 164

Fig. 77. State of dispersion of the magnetite depending on time (Fe 10000ppm, Dispersant 100 ppm) 165

Fig. 78. Comparison of dispersion capability among the dispersing agents (Fe 10 ppm, Dispersant 10 ppm) 168

Fig. 79. Comparison of dispersion capability among the dispersing agents (Fe 1000 ppm, Dispersant 10 ppm) 169

Fig. 80. Comparison of dispersion capability among the dispersing agents (Fe 100 ppm, Dispersant 100 ppm) 170

Fig. 81. Comparison of dispersion capability among the dispersing agents (Fe 10000 ppm, Dispersant 100 ppm) 171

Fig. 82. Transmittance comparison of candidate dispersants (after 24 hours) 172

Fig. 83. Transmittance depending on PAA concentrations (Fe 10 ppm) 173

Fig. 84. Comparison of dispersion capability depending on PAA concentrations (Fe 100 ppm) 174

Fig. 85. Comparison of dispersion capability depending on PAA concentrations (Fe 1000 ppm) 175

Fig. 86. Transmittance comparison depending on Fe and PAA concentrations (after 24 hours) 176

Fig. 87. Amounts of non-adherent oxides from specimens of SA106 Gr.B material in solution with/without dispersant... 180

Fig. 88. Amounts of adherent oxides from specimens of SA106 Gr.B material in solution with/without dispersant... 181

Fig. 89. Corrosion rate from specimens of SA106 Gr.B material in solution with/without dispersant (after 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 180 days) 182

Fig. 90. State of the specimen before and after descaling 185

Fig. 91. General corrosion result (40℃, SA 106Gr.B) 187

Fig. 92. General corrosion result (65℃, SA 106Gr.B) 189

Fig. 93. General corrosion result (93℃, SA 106Gr.B) 191

Fig. 94. General corrosion result (93℃, SA 106Gr.B) 192

Fig. 95. Corrosion rate of SA 106 Gr.B material depending on temperature and dispersant concentrations 194

Fig. 96. General corrosion result (65℃, SA 516) 195

Fig. 97. Corrosion rate of SA 516 material depending on dispersant concentrations (65℃) 197

Fig. 98. Surface of SA106 Gr.B specimen after test (93℃, PAA 10 ppm) 199

Fig. 99. Crosss-section of SA106 Gr.B specimen after test (93℃, PAA 10 ppm) 200

Fig. 100. Surface of SA106 Gr.B specimen after test (93℃, PAA 100 ppm) 201

Fig. 101. Crosss-section of SA106 Gr.B specimen after test (93℃, PAA 100 ppm) 202

Fig. 102. EDS result of cross-section of SA106 Gr.B specimen after test (40℃, PAA 10ppm) 203

Fig. 103. EDS result of cross-section of SA106 Gr.B specimen after test (93℃, PAA 10ppm) 204

Fig. 104. EDS result of cross-section of SA106 Gr.B specimen after test (93℃, PAA 100ppm) 205

Fig. 105. Disc before and after resuspension without PAA 207

Fig. 106. Changes of PAA concentrations and Fe concentrations depending on time 210

Fig. 107. Total Fe contents depending on changes of PAA concentrations 211