Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Multi-unit Level 1 probabilistic safety assessment: Approaches and their application to a six-unit nuclear power plant site

  • Received : 2017.09.22
  • Accepted : 2018.01.09
  • Published : 2018.12.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Following a surge of interest in multi-unit risk in the last few years, many recent studies have suggested methods for multi-unit probabilistic safety assessment (MUPSA) and addressed several related aspects. Most of the existing studies though focused on two-unit nuclear power plant (NPP) sites or used rather simplified probabilistic safety assessment (PSA) models to demonstrate the proposed approaches. When considering an NPP site with three or more units, some approaches are inapplicable or yield very conservative results. Since the number of such sites is increasing, there is a strong need to develop and validate practical approaches to the related MUPSA. This article provides several detailed approaches that are applicable to multi-unit Level 1 PSA for sites with up to six or more reactor units. To validate the approaches, a multi-unit Level 1 PSA model is developed and the site core damage frequency is estimated for each of four representative multi-unit initiators, as well as for the case of a simultaneous occurrence of independent single-unit initiators in multiple units. For this purpose, an NPP site with six identical OPR-1000 units is considered, with full-scale Level 1 PSA models for a specific OPR-1000 plant used as the base single-unit models.

Keywords

References

  1. M.A. Stutzke, Scoping estimates of multi-unit accident risk, in: Proceedings of Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM 12), Honolulu, Hawaii, 2014.
  2. Pickard Lowe and Garrick, Inc, in: Seabrook Station Probabilistic Safety Assessment - Section 13.3 Risk of Two Unit Station, Prepared for Public Service Company of New Hampshire, PLG-0300, 1983.
  3. K.N. Fleming, On the issues of integrated riskda PRA practitioners perspective, in: Proceedings of the ANS International Topical Meeting on Probabilistic Safety Analysis, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2005.
  4. K.N. Fleming, On the risk significance of seismically induced multi-unit accidents, in: Proceedings of the ANS International Topical Meeting on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Analysis, ID, USA, 2015.
  5. S. Samaddar, K. Hibino, O. Coman, Technical approach for safety assessment of multi-unit NPP sites subject to external events, in: Proceedings of Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM 12), Honolulu, Hawaii, 2014.
  6. K. Ebisawa, T. Teragaki, S. Nomura, H. Abe, M. Shigemori, M. Shimomoto, Concept and methodology for evaluating core damage frequency considering failure correlation at multi units and sites and its application, Nucl. Eng. Des. 288 (2015) 82-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2015.01.002
  7. C.S. Kumar, V. Hassija, K. Velusamy, V. Balasubramaniyan, Integrated risk assessment for multi-unit NPP sites - a comparison, Nucl. Eng. Des. 293 (2015) 53-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2015.06.025
  8. T.D. Le Duy, D. Vasseur, E. Serdet, Probabilistic safety assessment of twin-unit nuclear sites: methodological elements, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 145 (2016) 250-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2015.07.014
  9. S. Zhang, J. Tong, J. Zhao, An integrated modeling approach for event sequence development in multi-unit probabilistic risk assessment, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 155 (2016) 147-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2016.07.008
  10. M. Modarres, T. Zhou, M. Massoud, Advances in multi-unit nuclear power plant probabilistic risk assessment, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 157 (2017) 87-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2016.08.005
  11. IAEA. Nuclear Power Reactors in the World, Reference Data Series No. 2, 2017 Edition, International Atomic Energy Agency, 2017.
  12. H.-G. Lim, D.-S. Kim, S.H. Han, J.-E. Yang, Development of logical structure for multi-unit probabilistic safety assessment, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 50 (2018) 1210-1216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.10.012
  13. S.H. Han, K. Oh, H.-G. Lim, J.-E. Yang, AIMS-MUPSA software package for multi-unit PSA, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 50 (2018) 1255-1265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.06.012
  14. J. Cho, S.H. Han, D.-S. Kim, H.-G. Lim, Multi-unit Level 2 probabilistic safety assessment: Approaches and their application to a six-unit nuclear power plant site, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 50 (2018) 1234-1245.
  15. S.-Y. Kim, Y.H. Jung, S.H. Han, S.-J. Han, H.-G. Lim, Multi-unit Level 3 probabilistic safety assessment: Approaches and their application to a six-unit nuclear power plant site, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 50 (2018) 1246-1254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.09.019
  16. D.S. Kim, J.H. Park, H.G. Lim, Multi-unit initiating event analysis for a singleunit internal events Level 1 PSA, in: Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Spring Meeting, Jeju, Korea, 2016.
  17. S.H. Han, H.G. Lim, S.C. Jang, J.E. Yang, AIMS-PSA: a software for integrated PSA, in: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM 13), Seoul, Korea, 2016.
  18. W.S. Jung, S.H. Han, J. Ha, A fast BDD algorithm for large coherent fault trees analysis, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 83 (2004) 369-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2003.10.009
  19. ASME/ANS, Addenda to ASME/ANS RA-S-2008, standard for level 1/large early release frequency probabilistic risk assessment for nuclear power plant applications, in: ASME/ANS RA-sb-2013, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers & American Nuclear Society, New York, U.S, 2013.
  20. S.H. Han, H.G. Lim, Fault tree modeling of AAC power source in multi-unit nuclear power plant PSA, in: Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Fall Meeting, Gyeongju, Korea, 2015.
  21. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, CCF Parameter Estimations (2007 Update), http://nrcoe.inl.gov/results/CCF/ParamEst2007/ccfparamest.htm, September 2008.
  22. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Guidelines on Modeling Common-Cause Failures in Probabilistic Safety Assessment (NUREG/CR-5485), Washington, D.C, 1998.
  23. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Reevaluation of Station Blackout Risk at Nuclear Power Plants - Analysis of Loss of Offsite Power Events: 1986-2004 (NUREG/CR-6890), 1, 2005. Washington, D.C.
  24. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, CCF Parameter Estimations (2012 Update), http://nrcoe.inl.gov/results/CCF/ParamEst2012/ccfparamest.htm, November 2013.
  25. KAERI, Development of Site Risk Assessment and Management Technology Including Extreme External Events, KAERI/RR-4225/2016, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2017.
  26. EPRI, Seismic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Implementation Guide, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, 2013, 3002000709.
  27. J.H. Kim, I.K. Choi, Evaluation of failure probability considering seismic correlation for probabilistic safety assessment, in: Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Spring Meeting, Jeju, Korea, 2012.
  28. IAEA, Attributes of Full Scope Level 1 Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) for Applications in Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA-TECDOC-1804, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 2016.
  29. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Common-Cause Failure Database and Analysis Systems: Event Data Collection, Classification, and Coding (NUREG/CR-6268), Rev. 1, Washington, D.C, 2007.

Cited by

  1. Multi-unit Level 2 probabilistic safety assessment: Approaches and their application to a six-unit nuclear power plant site vol.50, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.04.005
  2. AIMS-MUPSA software package for multi-unit PSA vol.50, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.06.012
  3. Multi-unit risk assessment of nuclear power plants: Current status and issues vol.50, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.09.010
  4. Multi-unit Level 3 probabilistic safety assessment: Approaches and their application to a six-unit nuclear power plant site vol.50, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.09.019
  5. Development of logical structure for multi-unit probabilistic safety assessment vol.50, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.10.012
  6. Analysis of human-induced initiating events in a multi-unit loss of offsite power scenario vol.57, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2019.1661305
  7. Methodology of seismic-response-correlation-coefficient calculation for seismic probabilistic safety assessment of multi-unit nuclear power plants vol.53, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.07.032
  8. A Method to Avoid Underestimated Risks in Seismic SUPSA and MUPSA for Nuclear Power Plants Caused by Partitioning Events vol.14, pp.8, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14082150
  9. Probability subtraction method for accurate quantification of seismic multi-unit probabilistic safety assessment vol.53, pp.4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.09.022
  10. Sensitivity Study on the Correlation Level of Seismic Failures in Seismic Probabilistic Safety Assessments vol.14, pp.10, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14102955
  11. Application of Dynamic Fault Tree Analysis to Prioritize Electric Power Systems in Nuclear Power Plants vol.14, pp.14, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14144119
  12. A preliminary site risk assessment vol.58, pp.7, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2021.1879687
  13. Development of Dependence Indexes for Multi-Unit Risk Assessment and its Estimation Using Copula vol.213, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107652