Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development and verification of PWR core transient coupling calculation software

  • Li, Zhigang (Nuclear Power Institute of China) ;
  • An, Ping (Nuclear Power Institute of China) ;
  • Zhao, Wenbo (Nuclear Power Institute of China) ;
  • Liu, Wei (Nuclear Power Institute of China) ;
  • He, Tao (Nuclear Power Institute of China) ;
  • Lu, Wei (Nuclear Power Institute of China) ;
  • Li, Qing (Nuclear Power Institute of China)
  • Received : 2021.03.10
  • Accepted : 2021.05.16
  • Published : 2021.11.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In PWR three-dimensional transient coupling calculation software CORCA-K, the nodal Green's function method and diagonal implicit Runge Kutta method are used to solve the spatiotemporal neutron dynamic diffusion equation, and the single-phase closed channel model and one-dimensional cylindrical heat conduction transient model are used to calculate the coolant temperature and fuel temperature. The LMW, NEACRP and PWR MOX/UO2 benchmarks and FangJiaShan (FJS) nuclear power plant (NPP) transient control rod move cases are used to verify the CORCA-K. The effects of burnup, fuel effective temperature and ejection rate on the control rod ejection process of PWR are analyzed. The conclusions are as follows: (1) core relative power and fuel Doppler temperature are in good agreement with the results of benchmark and ADPRES, and the deviation between with the reference results is within 3.0% in LMW and NEACRP benchmarks; 2) the variation trend of FJS NPP core transient parameters is consistent with the results of SMART and ADPRES. And the core relative power is in better agreement with the SMART when weighting coefficient is 0.7. Compared with SMART, the maximum deviation is -5.08% in the rod ejection condition and while -5.09% in the control rod complex movement condition.

Keywords

References

  1. P. Girieud, L. Daudin, C. Garat, et al., SCIENCE Version 2: the Most Recent Capabilities of the Framatome 3D Nuclear Code Package, 1997.
  2. H.C. Wu, L.Z. Cao, Y.Q. Zheng, et al., Development and application of NECP code package of deterministic nuclear reactor physics code system[J], Atomic Energy Sci. Technol. 53 (10) (2019) 1833-1841.
  3. Y.Z. Li, T. He, B.N. Liang, et al., Development and verification of PWR-core nuclear design code system NECP-Bamboo: Part III: bamboo-Transient[J], Nucl. Eng. Des. 359 (2020) 1-11.
  4. Y.H. Yang, Y.X. Chen, H. Zhang, et al., Requirement analysis and primary design of COSINE code[J], Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc. (106) (2012) 1020-1023.
  5. W.B. Zhang, C.L. Zhu, X. Wang, et al., Validation and evaluation of COSINE based on gen III passive PWR low power physical test[J], Nucl. Power Eng. 42 (1) (2021) 61-64.
  6. H. Lu, K. Mo, W. Li, et al., Development and preliminary verification of the 3D core neutronic code: COCO[C], in: Proceedings of PHYSOR 2012 Knoxville, Tennessee, USA, 2012. April 15-20.
  7. X.L. Tu, J.J. Pan, X.M. Chai, et al., Research and development of visual graphic modeling advanced neutron transport lattice code KYLIN-II[J], Nucl. Power Eng. 38 (3) (2017) 126-131.
  8. P. An, Y.Q. Ma, P. Xiao, et al., Development and validation of reactor nuclear design code CORCA-3D[J], Nuclear Engineering and Technology 51 (7) (2019) 1721-1728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.05.015
  9. P. An, Y.Q. Ma, F.C. Guo, et al., Development and validation of critical boron concentration and burnup calculation of software CORCA-3D[J], Nucl. Power Eng. 4 (2019) 161-165.
  10. T.M. Sutton, B.N. Aviles, Diffusion theory methods for spatial kinetics calculations[J], Prog. Nucl. Energy 30 (2) (1995) 119-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-1970(95)00082-U
  11. H. Finnemann, H. Bauer, A. Galati, NEACRP 3-D LWR Core Transient Benchmarks, NEA/NSC/DOC, 1993 (93)25[R]. [s.1.]: OECD/NEA.
  12. K. Tomasz, J.D. Thomas, Pressurised Water Reactor MOX/UO2 Core Transient Benchmark Final Report, NEA/NSC/DOC, 2006, 20[R]. NEA.
  13. M. Imron, Development and verification of open reactor simulator ADPRES[J], Ann. Nucl. Energy 133 (2019) 580-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2019.06.049
  14. W.B. Zhao, Study on Transient Nodal Green's Function Method and Coupled Method with Thermal-Hydraulic[D], Tsinghua University, Beijing, 2012.
  15. K. Okumura, MORSA-light: High Speed Three-Dimensional Nodal Diffusion Code for Vector Computers[R]. JAERI-Data/Code 98-025, Department of Nuclear Energy System, Tokai Research Establishment, 1998.
  16. V.G. Zimin, H. Ninokata, L.R. Pogosbekyan, Polynomial and semi-analytic nodal methods for nonlinear iteration procedure[C], in: Proc. Of the Int. Conf. On the Physical of Nuclear Science and Technology (PHYSOR-98) vol. 2, American Nuclear Society, Long Island, New York, October 5-8, 1998, pp. 994-1002.
  17. G. Yu, J.F. Yao, W. Li, et al., Research on pin power reconstruction of fuel assembly[J], Atomic Energy Sci. Technol. 51 (1) (2017) 95-99.
  18. T.J. Downar, H.G. Joo, D.A. Barber, et al., PARCS: A Multi-Dimensional Two-Group Reactor Kinetics Code Based on the Nonlinear Analytic Nodal method [R], PURDUE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING, 1998. PU/NE-98-26.
  19. M.P. Kinght, P. Bryce, Derivation of a refined PANTHER solution to the NEACRP PWR rod-ejection transient[C], Proceedings of the Joint International Conference on Mathematical Method Applications, Saratoga Springs 1 (1997) 302-313.
  20. L. Deokjung, K. Tomasz, J.D. Thomas, Multi-group SP3 approximation for simulation of a three-dimensional PWR rod ejection accident[J], Ann. Nucl. Energy 77 (2015) 94-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2014.10.019