Analyzing Design Considerations for Disassembly of Spent Nuclear Fuel during Head-End Process of Pyroprocessing

Table 3

Analysis of cutting methods according to various criteria (merits: M, faults: F).

Criteria	Cutting	Shearing	Wire cut	Grinding	Laser
Durability	Low: F	High: M	Low: F	Low: F	Low: F
Structure	Scattering, cooling: F	Simple: M	Complex: F	Simple: M	Complex: F
Required time	Requires cutting time: F	Quick with high productivity: M	Requires cutting time: F	Requires cutting time: F	Requires cutting time: F
Function	Dust scattering: F	Piston cycle, simple: M	Complex shape processing: M	Dust scattering: F	Complex shape processing: M
Handling	Good: M	Good: M	Difficult: F	Good: M	Difficult: F
Maintenance	Easy: M	Easy: M	Difficult: F	Easy: M	Difficult: F
Radiation resistance	Good: M	Good: M	Weak: F	Good: M	Weak: F
Operation	Easy: M	Easy: M	Difficult: F	Easy: M	Difficult: F
Size of device	Lightweight possible: M	Big device: F	Big utility part: F	Lightweight possible: M	Big utility part: F
Power	Electricity: M	Hydraulic: F	Electricity: M	Electricity: M	Electricity: M
Cutting degree	Good cutting: M	Blunt cross section: F	Good cutting: M	Blunt cross section: F	Good cutting: M
	Easy curve and straight line process: M	Fragility destruction,	For high hardness: M		High precision processing: M
	Precise; M	Rough: F	High precision processing: M
Required power	Small: M (pneumatic)	Large: F (hydraulics)	Small: M	Small: M	Small: M
Considerations	Generation of fine particles	No generation of fine particles	Electron release cutting method	Need dust collection device	No dust generation
	Cutting section: Good	Shearing section: Deformation	Nuclear fuel dust accumulation	Consideration for use of lubricant	Considerations for material, thickness, speed, and power consumption
	Need dust collection system	Consideration for use of lubricant