FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR

REPOSITORIES WITH TEMPERATURE DEPENDENT ROCK PROPERTIES

T. CHAKRABORTY 1 and K.G. SHARMA 2
1

PhD Student, Geotechnical Engineering, Purdue University, USA

(tanusree.chakraborty@gmail.com)

Professor and Head, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
(e-mail of corresponding author:kgsharma@civil.iitd.ernet.in)

The design of a nuclear waste repository involves modeling a system of physical mechanisms operating over a
long period of time. In case of a nuclear repository structure, temperature of rock increases with time and
ultimately it reaches steady state condition. With increasing temperature, rock properties change considerably.
With increasing temperature, modulus of elasticity (E) of rock first increases upto about 1000C and then decreases
by a large amount. All other rock properties like density (), cohesion (c), angle of internal friction (), thermal
conductivity (k) and Poissons ratio () decrease with increasing temperature of rock while coefficient of thermal
expansion () of rock increases with increasing temperature. Therefore, considering temperature dependent rock
properties in analysis is of major importance. In this paper the steady state elastoplastic thermomechanical analysis
of a KBS3 type nuclear repository structure located at great depth has been carried out using temperature
dependent rock properties and results have been compared with those using temperature independent rock
properties. Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion has been used to simulate rock behaviour. Finite element code
ABAQUS has been used for analysis. An overall increase of stress, displacement and plastic strain has been
observed in temperature dependent case as compared to temperature independent case.
Keywords: nuclear repository, temperature dependent; elastoplasticity; thermomechanical .

1.

Introduction

1.1.

Back Ground

Safe disposal of nuclear waste without affecting the environment is a crying need of these days.
Nuclear wastes consist of radionuclides that are having extremely long half life and heat
generation capacity. Therefore, long-term performance is very important for the host material of
repository structure.
Different countries are following different storage concepts according to in-situ stress
characteristics, rock structure, tectonic settings and ground water flow conditions. These concepts
for high-level waste disposal are summarized below (Pusch, 1994)

KBS3 Concept
VLH (Very Long Hole) Concept
VDH (Very Deep Hole) Concept
Selvadurai & Naguyen (1996) utilized the concept of a rock as a single porosity continuum.
They considered a domain R with boundary B where the stress-strain relationships and heat
transfer mechanisms were
Plane isoparametric eight-noded elements for intact rock mass, detailed description of which
was given by Smith & Griffiths (1988)

Six-noded very thin joint elements to simulate discontinuities in rock mass such as joints,
fracture zones and fault zones, as given by Zienkiewicz et al. (1970); Ghaboussi et al. (1973).
Konietzky et.al. (1999) analysed a repository structure using Mohr-Coulomb criterion with
the non-associated flow-rule for rockmass. For thermal calculations, isotropic heat conduction was
assumed. Plain strain conditions were used. Rosohoff (2000) conducted two-dimensional linear
elastic finite element analysis on a model containing 1083 elements and 1150 nodes. The
excavation was simulated in three stages. They performed rock support interaction analysis also.
For doing the thermal analysis, Kumar & Singh (1989) have described the numerical model for a
circular opening of radius R with lining thickness 0.1R. They also considered FEM model with
eight-noded isoparametric quadrilateral finite elements, five-noded infinite elements and six-noded
interface elements. These elements were used to simulate near-field, far-field and rock-lining
interface respectively. The stiffness properties of these elements were evaluated by GaussLegendre numerical integration of orders 3x3, 2x2 and 3x3 respectively. The numerical model was
analysed in a plain strain formulation and finite element formulation for thermal load was taken
from Hinton & Owen (1977).
In this study, a KBS3 nuclear repository has been considered in tuff. Excavation, thermal and
thermomechanical analyses have been carried out in both elastic and elastoplastic rock conditions
using the finite element code ABAQUS using temperature dependent and also temperature
independent rock properties. Results have been compared to study the effect of temperature
dependence of rock properties on stresses, deformations and plastic strains. The analyses are
steady state. The temperature independent case with a canister temperature of 2000C has been
considered as reference case.

1.2. Objectives
The objectives of this study are Steady state elastoplastic thermomechanical analysis of nuclear repository structure considering
temperature dependent rock properties and thermal properties of rock.
Comparing the results of above analysis with those using temperature independent rock
properties (reference case).
2.

Model Description

A KBS3 type nuclear repository in an infinite medium has been considered. Crown of the tunnel is
considered at a depth of 500m from ground level. For reference case the model geometry has been
described in Figures 1(a) and (b). Model size has been taken as 24mx50m with one half of
deposition tunnel (width 4m and height 6m) and a deposition hole (hole depth 8m and width 2m).
A copper canister has been placed in the deposition hole.The height of the canister is 5m and
width 1m. In the model half portion of the canister has been taken. In between canister and
deposition hole wall, 0.5m thick bentonite has been placed. Below the canister, 1m thick bentonite
and above canister, 2m thick bentonite have been provided. The repository structure is considered
in tuff. Table 1 shows the material properties taken for analysis.
Rock properties have been taken from Lama & Vutukuri (1978). Bentonite properties have
been taken from Rutqvist et al. (2001) and canister properties from Timoshenko & Goodier
(1959). Ambient temperature of rock is fixed at 400C as per geothermal gradient and canister
temperature has been taken as 2000C as the reference case.

481
500

50

19

531

11 MPa

17

16.5 MPa

24
(a)
(dimensions are in m)

(b)
(dimensions are in m)

Fig. 1(a) and (b) Illustration of problem for analysis (Drawing not to scale)
Table 1. Reference Material Properties
Rock

Bentonite

Copper Canister

Density () (kg/m )

2340

1600

8913

Modulus of elasticity (E) (GPa)

20.0

0.1

105

Poissons ratio ()

0.25

Thermal conductivity (k) (W/M/0C)

2.0

Coefficient of thermal exp. ()x10-5 (/0C)

1.00

1.50

Cohesion (c) (MPa)

3.

0.30
0.5

0.36
390.0
1.75

10.00

0.04

Angle of internal friction ()

30o

10o

Angle of dilation ()

30o

0o

Numerical Analysis

The problem has been analyzed using finite element software ABAQUS. For discretization, 8noded isoparametric quadrilateral elements have been used, Fig. 2 (Chakraborty, 2004). Total
number of elements is 2309. There are 100 elements in the canister portion. The bentonite part is
discretized into 252 elements. Rock part is having 1957 elements. Total number of nodes is 6550.
The model has been considered as axisymmetric and there is a line of symmetry at left boundary,
which is providing fixity against lateral movement in x-direction. Bottom boundary of the model
has been provided with roller support, i.e., it is free to move in x-direction and fixed in y-direction.
All other boundaries have been kept free. In-situ stresses of 11 MPa and 16.5 MPa have been
applied as vertical and horizontal stresses on top and right boundaries respectively as shown in
Figure 2. Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion has been used to simulate rock behaviour. The material
has been considered linear elastic perfectly plastic in the analysis. Rate independent plasticity has

been incorporated in this analysis. The equivalent plastic strain (PEEQ) has been used here to
measure the yield condition of rock. At the end of analysis, when we are plotting PEEQ, it means,
it is the cumulative octahedral plastic shear strain. In the plasticity theory,

PEEQ=
. p

2 . p . p . p . p . p . p
1 2 + 2 3 + 3 1
=
9

oct
. p

(1)

. p

where 1 , 2 , 3 are major principal plastic strain rates .

In case of thermal analysis, steady state analysis has been performed. For all types of
analyses, results are tabulated for the points shown in Figure 3.
11 MPa
1

2
D e p o s itio n T u n n e l

11

16.5 MPa

5
6

12
3

10

C a n ti s t e r
D e p o s itio n H o le
C o m p a c t e d B e n to n ite

Fig. 2 Mesh structure, boundary conditions and loading of the m odel

3.1.

Fig. 3 Points for which results have been tabulated

Analysis Using Temperature Dependent Rock Properties

With increasing temperature, rock properties change considerably. With increasing

temperature, modulus of elasticity (E) of rock first increases upto about 1000C and then decreases
by a large amount (Cristescu and Hunsche, 1998 and Demirci et.al., 2004). All other rock
properties like density (), cohesion (c), angle of internal friction (), thermal conductivity (k) and
Poissons ratio () decrease with increasing temperature of rock while coefficient of thermal
expansion () of rock increases with increasing temperature (Heuze, 1983 and Hudson, 1993). In
case of thermal and thermomechanical analysis of a nuclear repository, temperature of rock
increases with time and ultimately it reaches steady state condition. With this temperature
increase, rock properties also vary. Therefore, considering temperature dependent rock properties
in the analysis is of major importance and properties used have been tabulated in Table 2 (Heuze,
1983).

Table 2. Temperature dependent rock properties

(T) (0C)

E (GPa)

c (MPa)

(/0C)

40

20

0.25

10.00

30.0

1.00

2.00

2340.0

k (w/m/0C)

(kg/m3)

80

22

0.25

9.95

28.5

1.14

1.92

2328.5

120

16

0.25

9.90

27.0

1.28

1.83

2316.6

160

15

0.24

9.85

25.5

1.42

1.75

2304.9

200

14

0.24

9.80

24.0

1.56

1.67

2293.2

The steady state elastoplastic thermomechanical analysis has been carried out using
temperature dependent rock properties and results have been compared with the reference case
(canister temperature 200oC) of the same analysis using temperature independent rock properties.
4.

Results

Table 3 summarises the results for both temperature dependent and temperature independent types
of analyses. The results have also been plotted in Figs. 4 to 7. All results have been tabulated and
plotted for steady state elastoplastic thermomechanical analysis. Results for analysis with
temperature independent rock properties and 2000C canister temperature have been included for
comparison purpose.
From Table 3, comparisons can be made for both the cases. A stress increase of 8% at point 1,
4% at point 4, 12% at point 8, 20% at point 10, 8% at point 11 and 8% at point 12 were observed.
Points 7 and 9 showed much more plastic behaviour and stress reduced by 6% and 4%
respectively. The equivalent plastic strain at point 9 was 0.2205% in case of temperature
independent case which increased by almost 82% to 0.4089% in temperature dependent case.
Figs. 4(a) and (b) show the major and minor principal stress plots for paths 7-8 and 9-10
respectively. Stress increase is clearly visible from temperature independent to temperature
dependent analysis. In case of path 9-10, the zone of plasticity is 0.15m and 0.25m with peak
stresses 45 MPa and 50 MPa for temperature independent and temperature dependent cases
respectively. Thus, both the values are increasing in the second case. Path 7-8 has not shown any
plasticity in case of temperature independent analysis while in case of temperature dependent
analysis, about 0.2 m plastic zone is observed. Figs. 5(a) and 5(b) show x and y displacement plots
for the same paths. Here also displacement values increase with temperature dependent rock
properties.
Total equivalent plastic strains have been plotted in Fig. 6. Plastic strain has increased for
temperature dependent case as compared to temperature independent case which is clearly visible
from graphs. Temperature distribution plot is shown in Fig. 7 which has not shown much variation
in two cases.

Table 3. Comparison of results of elastoplastic thermomechanical analysis in case of temperature dependent and

Properties
Properties

Temperature Independent Rock

Elastoplastic Thermomechanical Analysis

Temperature Dependent Rock

Equivalent Plastic

(0C)

Temperature

29.6179

1.0625

0.0000

0.8539

45.08

63.1686

18.6217

-0.0710

0.7884

61.11

33.7359

-0.0354

-0.1044

0.9180

67.44

0.0365

-0.0015

-0.0200

0.0000

2.8102

74.01

0.1489

0.1247

0.0208

0.0000

2.6741

77.51

0.6417

35.0064

0.4728

-0.1436

0.8483

68.89

0.1519

30.0905

9.1951

-0.0700

0.7800

64.06

35.5524

0.8505

-0.1793

0.6833

96.51

10

40.5147

13.0828

-0.0826

0.6797

84.20

11

31.4643

0.1385

-0.1535

0.7804

54.46

12

23.1329

10.4050

-0.0684

0.7880

53.56

27.5536

0.9674

0.0000

0.7563

45.12

55.8583

16.3978

-0.0715

0.7009

61.08

32.4016

-0.1396

-0.1046

0.8110

67.27

0.0002

0.0003

-0.0040

0.0000

2.6473

73.78

0.1222

0.0188

0.0000

2.5119

77.26

0.6286

37.0806

1.0406

-0.1318

0.7502

68.70

0.0218

26.8449

4.5509

-0.0699

0.6932

63.99

36.8651

0.7415

-0.1441

0.6071

95.44

0.2205

10

33.8610

11.5965

-0.0771

0.6055

83.65

11

29.0161

0.1364

-0.1470

0.6941

54.50

12

21.3814

9.7381

-0.0655

0.7013

53.60

50

60
Temperature dependent 1

Temperature dependent 1

Temperature independent 1

Temperature independent 1

50

Temperature dependent 3

40

Temperature dependent 2

Temperature independent 3

Temperature independent 2
Principal stresses in MPa

Principal stresses in MPa

(cm)

y-

displacement

(cm)

x-

displacement

Displacements
stress(MPa)

Minor

Principal

Principal

stress(MPa)

Major

Points

Principal Stresses

30

20

40

30

20

10
10

0
0.0

0.5

Strain rate (%)

temperature independent rock properties

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Distance in meter along path 7-8

Fig 4: (a) Principal stress plot along path 7-8

0
0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Distance in meter along path 9-10

(b) Principal stress plot along path 9-10

1.4

1.2

Temperature dependent y displacement

Temperature independent y displacement
Temperature dependent x displacement
Temperature independent x displacement

1.2
1.0

Temperature dependent y displacement

Temperature independent y displacement
Temperature dependent x displacement
Temperature independent x displacement

1.0

Displacement in cm

Displacement in cm

0.8

0.8
0.6
0.4

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.0

0.0
-0.2
0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

-0.2
0.0

2.5

0.5

Distance in meter along path 7-8

Fig 5: (a) Displacement plot along path 7-8

1.5

2.0

2.5

(b) Displacement plot along path 9-10

120

0.005
Temperature dependent path 9-10
Temperature independent path 9-10
Temperature dependent path 7-8
Temperature independent path 7-8

Temperature dependent path 9-10

Temperature independent path 9-10
Temperature dependent path 7-8
Temperature independent path 7-8

100

Temperature in C

0.004
Equivalent plastic strain

1.0

Distance along path 9-10 in meter

0.003

0.002

80

60
0.001

0.000
0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

Distance in meter

Fig 6: Equivalent plastic strain plot

5.

0.8

40
0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Distance in meter

Fig 7: Temperature distribution plot

Summary and conclusions

The steady state elastoplastic thermomechanical analysis has been carried out using temperature
dependent rock properties and results have been compared with the same analysis using
temperature independent rock properties.
A stress increase of 8% at point 1, 7% at point 2, 4% at point 4, 12% at point 8, 20% at point
10, 8% at point 11 and 8% at point 12 were observed in temperature dependent case. Point 7 and
point 9 showed much more plastic behaviour and stress reduced by 6% and 4% respectively. The
equivalent plastic strain at point 9 was 0.2205% in case of temperature independent case which
increased by almost 82% to 0.4089 % in temperature dependent case.
Further analysis can be performed in this field using transient temperature distribution
analysis. Advanced constitutive model to capture rock behaviour can be used along with
simulating strain strain softening behaviour of rock.

References
Chakraborty, T. (2004). "Finite element analysis of underground nuclear repositories , " MTech
thesis, Dept. of Civil Engrg., Indian Inst. of Tech. Delhi, India.
Cristescu, N. D. and Hunsche, U. (1998), Time Effects in Rock Mechanics Materials Modelling
& computation, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, USA.
Demirci, A. Grgl, K. and Durutrk, Y.S. (2004), Thermal conductivity of rocks and its
variation with uniaxial and triaxial stress, Intl. Journal of Rock Mech. And Min. Sci., Vol.
41, pp 1133-1138
Ghaboussi, J. Wilson, E.L. and Isenberg, J., (1973), Finite elements for rock joints and
interfaces., J. Soil Mech. Fdn. Div. ASCE, Vol. 99, pp 833-848.
Heuze, F.E., (1983) High temperature Mechanical, Physical and Thermal properties of Granitic
rocks-A Review, Intl. Journal of Rock Mech. And Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr., Vol.20,
pp3-10.Hibbet, Karlsson, and Sorensen Inc. ABAQUS Standard User's Manuals, V6.4.
Pawtucket, RI, USA, 2003
Hinton, E. and Owen, D. R. J. (1977), Finite Element Programming, Academic Press, London.
Hudson, J. A. (1993), Comprehensive Rock Engineering and Engineering practices Permagon
Press, New York
Konietzky, H. and Kamp, L. (1999), Thermomechanical coupled scoping calculations for
tunnels, FLAC and numkerical modeling in Geomechanics, Balkema, Rotterdam
Kumar, P. and Singh, B. (1989), Thermal stress analysis of underground openings, Intl. Journal
for numerical and analytical methods in Geomech., Vol. 13, pp 411-425.
Lama, R.D. and Vutukuri, V.S. (1978), Handbook on Mechanical Properties of Rocks, Transtech Publications.
Pusch, R. (1994), Waste disposal in rock, Elsevier, New York.
Rosohoff, K. (2000), CLAB-an intermediate storage for spent nuclear fuel in Sweden, Key
Questions in Rock Mechanics, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 429-439
Rutqvist, J. L. Borgesson, M. Chijimatsu, A. Kobayashi, L. Jing, T. S. Nguyen, J. Noorishad, and
C.-F. Tsang. (2001), Thermodynamics of partially saturated geologic media: governing
equations and formulation of four finite element models, Intl. Journal of Rock Mechanics &
Mining Sciences, Vol. 38, pp 105127.
Selvadurai, A. P. S. and Nguyen, T.S. (1996), Scoping analysis of the coupled thermalhydrological-mechanical behaviour of the rock mass around a nuclear fuel waste repository,
Engineering Geology, Vol. 47, pp. 151-159.
Smith, I. M. and Griffiths, D. V. (1988), Programming the Finite Element Method, John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., New York.
Timoshenko, S. and Goodier, J. N. (1951), Theory of Elasticity, 2nd Edition, McGraw Hill Book
Co., Chap. 14.
Zienkiewicz, O. C. and Cheung, Y. K. (1970), Application of the finite element method in rock
mechanics. Proc. 1st Congr. Intl. Soc. Rock Mech., Lisbon, Vol.3, pp. 661-666.