0
Research Papers

A Space–Time-Dependent Study of Control Rods Withdrawal in a Large-Size Pressurized Water Reactor

[+] Author and Article Information
Sanjeev Kumar

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Uttar Pradesh 208016, India
e-mail: sanjeevk@iitk.ac.in, sanjeev683@gmail.com

K. Obaidurrahman

Atomic Energy Regulatory Board,
Anushakti Nagar, Niyamak Bhavan, Mumbai 400094, India
e-mail: obaid@aerb.gov.in

Om Pal Singh

Visiting Professor
Nuclear Engineering and Technology Programme, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Uttar Pradesh 208016, India
e-mail: singhompal@yahoo.com

Prabhat Munshi

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Nuclear Engineering and Technology Programme, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Uttar Pradesh 208016, India
e-mail: pmunshi@iitk.ac.in

Manuscript received January 25, 2016; final manuscript received August 6, 2016; published online December 20, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Masaki Morishita.

ASME J of Nuclear Rad Sci 3(1), 011015 (Dec 20, 2016) (8 pages) Paper No: NERS-16-1007; doi: 10.1115/1.4034478 History: Received January 25, 2016; Accepted August 06, 2016

This work focuses on the safety analysis of a typical pressurized water reactor (PWR) for reactivity-initiated transients. These transients result from withdrawal of six sets of groups of control rods that may occur under control systems or other faults. NEA/OECD PWR benchmark is considered for the study. A 3D space–time kinetics code, “TRIKIN” (neutronic and thermal-hydraulics coupled code) is used to account for local changes in the neutron flux. These local changes in the neutron flux affect the total reactivity, local power, and temperature distribution. The safety parameters are the usual 3D radial power distribution, flux tilt, axial heat flux for the peak channel, and radial peak central line temperature profiles over the horizontal plane. These safety parameters studied in the incident progression up to reactor SCRAM level. The minimum departure from the nucleate boiling ratio (MDNBR) has been investigated quantitatively for all six cases. The case that gives maximum drop in MDNBR at SCRAM level is identified and its consequences are discussed. The study is of high importance in revealing the importance of grouping of control rods’ configurations, providing insight in developing strategy for designing the configuration and reactivity worth of groups of control rods and local/global reactor control systems for large-size PWRs.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Perez, R., and Golbabai, M., 1995, .
Lee, J. K., and Han, B. S., 1998, “Modeling of Core Protection and Monitoring System for PWR Nuclear Power Plant Simulator,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 25(7), pp. 409–420. 10.1016/S0306-4549(97)00075-3
Kim, H. C., and Chang, S. H., 1997, “Development of a Back Propagation Network for One-Step Transient DNBR Calculations,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 24(17), pp. 1437–1446. 10.1016/S0306-4549(97)00051-0
Lee, G. C., and Chang, S. H., 2003, “Radial Basis Function Networks Applied to DNBR Calculation in Digital Core Protection Systems,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 30, pp. 1561–1572. 10.1016/S0306-4549(03)00099-9
Chang, S. H., and Baek, W. P., 2003, “Understanding, Predicting and Enhancing Critical Heat Flux,” 10th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Reactor Thermal Hydraulics (NURETH-10), Seoul, Korea.
Yang, S. H., Chung, Y. J., and Kim, H. C., 2005, “Assessment of the MDNBR Enhancement Methodologies for the SMART Control Rods Banks Withdrawal Event,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 32, pp. 1567–1583. 10.1016/j.anucene.2005.04.009
Yasinsky, J. B., and Henry, A. F., 1965, “Some Numerical Experiments Concerning Space-Time Reactor Kinetics Behavior,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 22, pp. 171–181.
Stacy, W. M., 1968, “A Variational Multichannel Space-Time Synthesis Method for Nonseparable Reactor Transients,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 34(1), pp. 45–56.
Adams, C. H., and Stacy, W. M., 1967, “RAUMZEIT: A Program to Solve Coupled Time Dependent Diffusion Equations in One Space Dimension,” .
Fuller, E. L., Meneley, D. A., and Hetrick, D. L., 1970, “Weighted Residual Methods in Space Dependent Reactor Dynamics,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 40(2), pp. 206–223.
Ott, K. O., and Meneley, D. A., 1969, “Accuracy of the Quasistatic Treatment of Spatial Reactor Kinetics,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 36(3), pp. 402–411. 10.13182/NSE36-402
Meneley, D. A., Ott, K. O., and Wiener, E. S., 1967, “Space Time Kinetics,” .
Diamond, D. J., et al. , 2001, “Intercomparison of Results for a PWR Rod Ejection Accident,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 208, pp. 181–189. [CrossRef]
Nakajima, T., 2002, “Realistic Analysis of RIA in PWR and BWR,” Proceedings of the Topical Meeting on RIA, Aix-en-Provence, France.
Riverola, J., Nunez, T., and Vicente, J., 2004, “RIA Analysis for PWR at Both HZP and HFP Operation and All Cycle Fuel Exposure with 3D Techniques,” Proceedings of the 2004 International Meeting on LWR Fuel Performance, Orlando, FL.
Kozlowski, T., and Downar, T. J., 2007, “PWR MOX/UO2 Core Transient Benchmark,” OECD/NEA No. 6048, NEA/NSC/DOC(2006)20.
Grgic, D., Bencik, V., and Sadek, S., 2013, “Coupled Code Calculation of Rod Withdrawal at Power Accident,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 261, pp. 285–305. 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2012.10.026
Gensler, A., Kuhnel, K., and Kuch, S., 2015, “PWR Core Safety Analysis with 3-Dimensional Methods,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 84, pp. 131–139. 10.1016/j.anucene.2014.11.006
Turinsky, P. J., Al-Chalabi, R. M. K., Engrand, P., Sarsour, H. N., Faure, F. X., and Guo, W., 1994, “NESTLE: Few-Group Neutron Diffusion Equation Solver Utilizing the Nodal Expansion Method for Eigenvalue, Adjoint, Fixed-Source Steady State and Transient Problems,” Electric Power Research Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
Grundmann, U., and Rohde, U., 1996, “DYN3D—3-Dimensional Core Model for Steady-State and Transient Analyses of Thermal Reactors,” International Conference on the Physics of Reactors PHYSOR 96, Mito, Ibaraki, Japan.
Ivanov, K. N., Macian-Juan, R., Irani, A., and Baratta, A. J., 1999, “Features and Performance of a Coupled Three-Dimensional Thermal-hydraulic/Kinetics TRAC-PF1/NEM PWR Analysis Code,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 26, pp. 1407–1417. 10.1016/S0306-4549(99)00017-1
Downar, T., Lee, D., Xu, Y., and Kozlowski, T., 2004, “PARC v2.6: U.S. NRC Core Neutronics Simulator, Theory Manual,” Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Kereszturi, A., et al. , 2003, “Development and Validation of the Three-Dimensional Dynamic Code KIKO3-D,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 30, pp. 93–120. 10.1016/S0306-4549(02)00043-9
Obaidurrahman, K., Doshi, J. B., Jain, R. P., and Jagannathan, V., 2010, “Development and Validation of Coupled Dynamics Code TRIKIN for VVER Reactors,” Nucl. Eng. Technol., 42(3), pp. 259–270. 10.5516/NET.2010.42.3.259
Fraikin, R., and Finnemann, H., 1993, “NEA-NSC 3-D/1-D PWR Core Transient Benchmark: Uncontrolled Withdrawal of Control Rods at Zero Power, Final Specifications,” .
Jagannathan, V., Singh, T., Pal, U., Karthikeyan, R., and Sundaram, G., 2006, “Validation of Finite Difference Core Diffusion Calculation Methods with FEM and NEM for VVER-1000 MWe Reactor,” PHYSOR-2006, ANS Topical Meeting on Reactor Physics, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Sanchez, J., 1989, “On the Numerical Solution of the Point Reactor Equations by Generalized Runge-Kutta Methods,” Nucl. Sci. Eng., 103(1), pp. 94–99.
Obaidurrahman, K., 2011, “Spatial Instability Analysis in Large Light Water Reactors,” Ph.D. thesis, Department of Energy Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India.
Jain, R. P., and Obaidurrahman, K., 2012, “Validation of 3D Kinetics Code TRIKIN Using OECD PWR Core Transient Benchmark,” Int. J. Nucl. Energy Sci. Technol., 7(2), pp. 131–142. 10.1504/IJNEST.2012.048814
Tong, L. S., 1967, “Heat Transfer in Water-Cooled Nuclear Reactors,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 6, pp. 301–324. 10.1016/0029-5493(67)90111-2
Todreas, N. E., and Kazimi, M. S., 1990, Nuclear Systems-I: Thermal Hydraulic Fundamentals, Hemisphere Publishing, New York.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

CA banks’ distribution in the core

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Variation of (a) total power and (b) total reactivity with time in different cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Contour plots of relative radial power distribution at the 3rd axial node (≈19.2  cm from core bottom) in different cases at SCRAM level (110% of FP)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Surface plots of relative radial power distribution at the 3rd axial node (≈19.2  cm from core bottom) in different cases at SCRAM level (110% of FP)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Axial heat flux profiles at peak positions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Radial temperature profiles at peak central line temperature locations

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