[en] The Studsvik SUPER-RAMP Project, an internationally sponsored research project, investigated the failure propensity of typical LWR fuel in the form of test rods when subjected to power ramps, after base irradiation to high burn-up. The following information summarizing the project is abstracted from the Final Report of the SUPER-RAMP project (STSR-32). The Project power ramped 28 individual PWR rods and 16 BWR rods. The PWR rods were all tested using high ramp rates. Due to different objectives for the BWR subprogramme, one set of the BWR rods was tested using a high ramp rate, and another set were tested with a very slow ramp rate. All rods underwent a thorough examination programme, comprising characterisation prior to base irradiation, examination between base and ramp irradiation and examination after ramp irradiation. This consisted of 6 groups of rods with variations in design and material parameters. The rods were base irradiated in a power reactor environment KK Obrigheim or BR-3 at time averaged heat ratings mainly in the range 14-26 kW/m to peak burn-ups in the range 33-45 MWd/kgU and were subsequently ramp tested in the research reactor R2 at Studsvik, Sweden. The result can be summarized as follows: In this document some calculations are made on the PK2 group fuel rods. The rods were standard rods manufactured by Kraftwerk Union AG/Combustion Engineering (KWU/CE). All these rods sustained ramping to power levels in the range 41 to 49 kW/m and power changes 16-24 kW/m without failure, in spite of large deformations, fuel restructuring and fission gas release particularly for the PK2 rods. Though the results of this paper seem to be based on the incomplete dataset (ambiguity in power raise rates, undefined fuel pellet and cladding surface roughness), we think that START-3 Zircalloy-4 model requires further improvements. In order to do them, we kindly ask IAEA to provide us with more detailed irradiation histories (more than 3 axial zones, power increase and decrease rates, fast neutron fluxes during the ramp) and other experimental data (measured diameter profiles before and after ramp and elongations during ramp), mentioned as available in the STSR-32 report, but not provided in the PK2 case. Fission gas release model shows satisfactory results despite all the difficulties with input data and other parts of the code. (author)