Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

TREATING UNCERTAINTIES IN A NUCLEAR SEISMIC PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT BY MEANS OF THE DEMPSTER-SHAFER THEORY OF EVIDENCE

  • Lo, Chung-Kung (Chair on Systems Science and the Energetic Challenge, European Foundation for New Energy - Electricite de France, at Ecole Centrale Paris) ;
  • Pedroni, N. (Department of Energy, Politecnico di Milano) ;
  • Zio, E. (Chair on Systems Science and the Energetic Challenge, European Foundation for New Energy - Electricite de France, at Ecole Centrale Paris)
  • Received : 2014.01.10
  • Published : 2014.02.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The analyses carried out within the Seismic Probabilistic Risk Assessments (SPRAs) of Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) are affected by significant aleatory and epistemic uncertainties. These uncertainties have to be represented and quantified coherently with the data, information and knowledge available, to provide reasonable assurance that related decisions can be taken robustly and with confidence. The amount of data, information and knowledge available for seismic risk assessment is typically limited, so that the analysis must strongly rely on expert judgments. In this paper, a Dempster-Shafer Theory (DST) framework for handling uncertainties in NPP SPRAs is proposed and applied to an example case study. The main contributions of this paper are two: (i) applying the complete DST framework to SPRA models, showing how to build the Dempster-Shafer structures of the uncertainty parameters based on industry generic data, and (ii) embedding Bayesian updating based on plant specific data into the framework. The results of the application to a case study show that the approach is feasible and effective in (i) describing and jointly propagating aleatory and epistemic uncertainties in SPRA models and (ii) providing 'conservative' bounds on the safety quantities of interest (i.e. Core Damage Frequency, CDF) that reflect the (limited) state of knowledge of the experts about the system of interest.

Keywords

References

  1. EPRI, "Seismic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Implementation Guide," EPRI-1002989, Electric Power Research Institute (2003).
  2. S.A. Eide, T.E. Wierman, C.D. Gentillon, D.M. Rasmuson and C.L. Atwood, "Industry-Average Performance for Components and Initiating Events at U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plant," NUREG/CR-6928, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (2007).
  3. C. Baudrit, I. Couso and D. Dubois, "Joint Propagation of Probability and Possibility in Risk Analysis: Towards a Formal Framework," International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, vol. 45, pp. 82-105 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2006.07.001
  4. R.K. Durga, H. Hushwaha, A. Verma and A. Srividya, "Quantification of Epistemic and Aleatory Uncertainties in Level-1 Probabilistic Safety Assessment Studies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, vol. 92, pp. 947-956 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2006.07.002
  5. G. Shafer and G. Logan, "Implementing Dempster's Rule for Hierarchical Evidence," Artificial Intelligence, vol. 33, pp. 271-298 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(87)90040-3
  6. S. Le Hegarat-Mascle, D. Richard and C. Ottle, "Multi- Scale Fusion Using Dempster-Shafer Evidence Theory," Integrated Computer-Aided Engineering, vol. 10, pp. 9-22 (2003).
  7. T.D. Le Duy, L. Dieulle, D. Vasseur, C. Berenguer and M. Couplet, "An Alternative Framework Using Belief Functions for Parameter and Model Uncertainty Analysis in Nuclear Probabilistic Risk Assessment Applications," Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Journal of Risk and Reliability (2013).
  8. SSHAC, "Recommendations for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis: Guidance on Uncertainty and Use of Experts," NUREG/CR-6372, USNRC, Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (1997).
  9. EPRI, "Methodology for Developing Seismic Fragilities," EPRI-TR-103959, Electric Power Research Institute (1994).
  10. G. Shafer, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton University Press (1976).
  11. A. Dempster, "Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by a Multivalued Mapping," Annuals of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 38, pp. 325-339 (1967). https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177698950
  12. S. Ferson, L. Ginzburg, V Kreinovich, D. Myers and K. Sentz, "Constructing Probability Boxes and Dempster- Shafer Structures," SAND2002-4015, Sandia National Laboratories (2003).
  13. S. Destercke, D. Dubois and E. Chojnacki, "Unifying Practical Uncertainty Representations: I. Generalized PBoxes," International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, vol. 49, pp. 649-663 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2008.07.003
  14. C.K. Lo, N. Pedroni and E. Zio, "Bayesian Probabilistic Analysis of a Nuclear Power Plant Small Loss of Coolant Event Tree Model with Possibilistic Parameters," European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2013), Amsterdam, Netherland, Sep. 30 - Oct. 2, 2013.
  15. D. Dubois and H. Prade, Fundamentals of Fuzzy Sets, Kluwer Academic Publication (2000)
  16. D. Dubois and H. Prade, "When Upper Probabilities Are Possibility Measures," Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 49, pp. 65-74 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(92)90110-P
  17. S. Lapointe and B. Bobee, "Revision of Possibility Distributions: A Bayesian Inference Pattern," Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 116, pp. 119-140 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(98)00367-4
  18. C. Baudrit and D. Dubois, "Practical Representations of Incomplete Probabilistic Knowledge," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, vol. 51(1), pp. 86-108 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2006.02.009
  19. C.H. Loh and K. L. Wen, "Seismic Hazard Re-Analysis of Taiwan Power Company's Nuclear Power Plant No. 4 at Yenliao Site," National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering, 92B0600019 (2004)
  20. C.C. Chao and M.C. Chen, "The Development of Seismic PRA Model for Lungmen Nuclear Power Plant," Taiwan Power Company, NED-PRA-98A16815-REP-002-01 (2011)
  21. INER, "PRA Model and Data Update for Kuosheng Nuclear Power Plant," Institute of Nuclear Energy Research, (2004)
  22. ANS, "American National Standard: External Events PRA Methodology," ANSI/ANS 58.21 (2003).
  23. USNRC, "Seismic Safety Margins Research Program, Phase I Final Report, SMACS - Seismic Methodology Analysis Chain with Statistics (Project VIII)," NUREG/CR-2015 (1981).

Cited by

  1. Evidential uncertainty quantification of the Park–Ang damage model in performance based design vol.35, pp.7, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1108/EC-11-2017-0466