0
Research Papers

RELAP5/MOD3.3 Analyses for Prevention Strategy of Extended Station Blackout

[+] Author and Article Information
Andrej Prošek

Jožef Stefan Institute,
Jamova Cesta 39, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
e-mail: andrej.prosek@ijs.si

Andrija Volkanovski

Jožef Stefan Institute,
Jamova Cesta 39, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
e-mail: andrija.volkanovski@ijs.si

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received March 16, 2015; final manuscript received June 9, 2015; published online September 3, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Leon Cizelj.

ASME J of Nuclear Rad Sci 1(4), 041016 (Sep 03, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: NERS-15-1028; doi: 10.1115/1.4030834 History: Received March 16, 2015; Accepted June 12, 2015; Online September 16, 2015

The purpose of the study was to investigate the application of deterministic safety analysis for a prevention strategy of the extended station blackout (SBO). A method for the assessment of portable pump flow rates for a steam generator (SG) makeup is proposed. The RELAP5/MOD3.3 computer code and input model of a two-loop pressurized water reactor (PWR) is used for analyses, assuming different injection start times, flow rates, and reactor coolant system (RCS) losses. The calculated results show the effectiveness of the proposed extended SBO prevention strategy. The results demonstrate the need for mitigation of the common cause failure (CCF) potential of the on-site and off-site power sources.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Volkanovski, A., 2013, “On-Site Power System Reliability of a Nuclear Power Plant After the Earthquake,” Kerntechnik, 78(2), pp. 99–112. 10.3139/124.110332
ENSREG, 2012, “Stress Tests Performed on European Nuclear Power Plants—Peer Review Report,” European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group, Stress Test Peer Review Board, http://www.ensreg.eu/sites/default/files/EU%20Stress%20Test%20Peer%20Review%20Final%20Report_0.pdf.
NEI, 2012, “Diverse and Flexible Coping Strategies (FLEX) Implementation Guide,” Nuclear Energy Institute, Washington.
Jelinek, T., 2014, “Fundamental Design Bases for Independent Core Cooling in Swedish Nuclear Power Reactors,” CSNI International Workshop on Robustness of Electrical Systems of NPPs in Light of the Fukushima Daiichi Accident, Paris, France, OECD/NEA.
Lee, S.-W., Hong, T. H., Seo, M.-R., Lee, Y.-S., and Kim, H.-T., 2014, “Extended Station Blackout Coping Capabilities of APR1400,” Sci. Technol. Nucl. Install., 2014, p. 10. 10.1155/2014/980418
Prošek, A., and Mavko, B., 2011, “Animation Model of Krško Nuclear Power Plant for RELAP5 Calculations,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 241(4), pp. 1034–1046. 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2010.04.029
Volkanovski, A., and Prošek, A., 2013, “Extension of Station Blackout Coping Capability and Implications on Nuclear Safety,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 255, pp. 16–27. 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2012.09.031
U.S. NRC, 2012, “Standard Technical Specifications Westinghouse Plants,” NUREG-1431, Rev. 4.
Krajnc, B., Glaser, B., Jalovec, R., and Špalj, S., 2011, “MAAP Station Blackout Analyses as a Support for the NPP Krško STORE (Safety Terms of Reference) Actions,” Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Nuclear Energy for New Europe, I. Jenčič, ed., Nuclear Society of Slovenia, Ljubljana.
Imbro, E. V., and Lanning, W. D., 1980, “AEOD Observations and Recommendations Concerning the Problem of Steam Generator Overfill and Combined Primary and Secondary Side Blowdown,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington.
U.S. NRC, 2005, “Reevaluation of Station Blackout Risk at Nuclear Power Plants,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, NUREG/CR 6890.
U.S. NRC, 1998, “Guidelines on Modeling Common-Cause Failures in Probabilistic Risk Assessment,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
U.S. NRC, 1988, “Procedures for Treating Common Cause Failures in Safety and Reliability Studies,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
TEPCO, 2011, “Overview of the Earthquake and Tsunami and Nuclear Accident, the Great East Japan Earthquake and Current Status of Nuclear Power Stations,” http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/images/f12np-gaiyou_e_1.pdf.
OECD/NEA, 2009, “Defence in Depth of Electrical Systems and Grid Interaction,” Final DiDELSYS Task Group Report, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/Nuclear Energy Agency, Report NEA/CSNI/R(2009)10, http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=NEA/CSNI/R(2009)10&docLanguage=En.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

RELAP5 hydraulics components view of two-loop PWR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Main plant parameters to support the FLEX strategy: NO_LOCA, S_LOCA, and SLD_LOCA base cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Main parameters for preparing prevention strategy without plant instrumentation: NO_LOCA, S_LOCA, and SLD_LOCA base cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Assessment of the flow rates of the portable pump for the SLD_LOCA_t05f0 case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Comparison of the SLD_LOCA_f0 cases with different injection delay times

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of the SL_LOCA_f0 cases with different injection delay times

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of the S_LOCA_f0 cases with different injection delay times

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of the NO_LOCA_f0 cases with different injection delay times

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

LOOP probability of exceedance versus duration curve

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Probability of exceedance versus duration curve

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In