Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제56권11호
  • /
  • Pages.4587-4600
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

MUPSA-based evaluation of portable equipment utilization for risk reduction in nuclear power plants: Framework and case study

  • 투고 : 2024.01.18
  • 심사 : 2024.06.15
  • 발행 : 2024.11.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Based on the lessons from the Fukushima accident, new strategies to mitigate the spread of accidents in nuclear power plants have been established that consider portable equipment. The diverse and flexible coping strategies (FLEX) and multi-barrier accident coping strategy (MACST) based on the utilization of portable equipment are being adopted in case of an extended loss of all AC power and loss of ultimate heat sink. In this context, the establishment of specific strategies for utilizing portable equipment has emerged as an important issue. This study proposes a multi-unit probabilistic safety assessment (MUPSA)-based evaluation framework consisting of several steps to quantitatively assess the reduction in risk from the use of portable equipment at a multi-unit site, which can provide a basis for establishing optimal portable equipment strategies. According to the framework, after first defining the scope of the evaluation, risk-significant types of portable equipment are selected and the scenarios are analyzed. Risk reduction is then evaluated using modified MUPSA models according to the deployment of the portable equipment. A case study was conducted for an internal loss of off-site power (LOOP) and seismic LOOP focusing on how to evaluate the effectiveness of portable equipment through the developed framework.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by the Korea Institute of Energy Technol ogy Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) and the Ministry of Trade, In dustry and Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea (No. 20224B10200050).

참고문헌

  1. Nuclear Energy Institute, Diverse and Flexible Coping Strategies (FLEX) Implementation Guide, 2016. NEI 12-06 [Rev 4].
  2. M. Wittas, M. Powell, Lessons learned from incorporating temporary equipment into the Palo Verde configuration risk management program using NEI 16-06, in: Proceedings of the PSA 2017, September, 2017, pp. 24-28. Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  3. A. Prosek, A. Volkanovski, RELAP5/MOD3.3 analyses for prevention strategy of extended station blackout, J. Nucl. Eng. Radiat. Sci. 1 (2015).
  4. B. Kuzmanov, Modeling and analysis of portable diesel-pump mitigation strategy implemented as a post-fukushima safety measure, in: Proceedings of BgNS International Conference: Nuclear Energy for the People, Sveti Vlas, 2018. Bulgaria, 10-13 September.
  5. Z. Tabadar, G.R. Ansarifar, A. Pirouzmand, Thermal-hydraulic modeling for deterministic safety analysis of portable equipment application in the VVER-1000 nuclear reactor during loss of ultimate heat sink accident using RELAP5/MOD3.2 code, Ann. Nucl. Energy 127 (2019) 53-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.11.046
  6. M.M. Rahman, M.B. Shohag, FLEX strategy to cope with extended SBO for APR1400, Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol. 5 (10) (2016) 577-581.
  7. M. R.-Zapatero, R. Bocanegra, C. Queral, FLEX strategy implementation for LOCA sequences in PWR-westinghouse, in: Proceedings of 26th International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe (NENE), Bled, Slovenia, 2017.
  8. S. Alketbi, A. Diab, Using artificial intelligence to identify the success window of FLEX strategy under an extended station blackout, Nucl. Eng. Des. 382 (2021) 111368.
  9. H.K. Lim, A conceptual comparative study of FLEX strategies to cope with Extended Station Blackout (SBO), in: Proceedings of Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM) 14, September, 2018, pp. 16-21. Los Angeles, CA, USA.
  10. B. Gjorgiev, A. Volkanovski, G. Sansavini, Improving nuclear power plant safety through independent water storage systems, Nucl. Eng. Des. 323 (2017) 8-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2017.07.039
  11. S. Courtin, C. Queral, M. Cabezas, A. G.-Hernanz, J. H.-Otero, Application of FLEX strategies to cope with a station blackout (SBO) situation, in: Proceedings of 31th International Conference Nuclear Energy for New Europe (NENE), 2022. Portoroz, Slovenia.
  12. Z. Tabadar, G.R. Ansarifar, A. Pirouzmand, Probabilistic safety assessment of portable equipment applied in VVER-1000/V446 nuclear reactor during loss of ultimate heat sink accident for stress test program development, Progress in Nuclear Engergy 117 (2019) 103101.
  13. S. Courtin, C. Queral, A. G.-Hernanz, Risk reduction by means of FLEX strategies in pressurized water reactors, Nucl. Eng. Des. 414 (2023) 112656.
  14. A. Hakobyan, C. Nierode, Implementation of FLEX strategies in surry pra, in: Proceedings of the PSA 2017, September, 2017, pp. 24-28. Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  15. A.U.A. Shah, R. Christian, J. Kim, J. Kim, J. Park, H.G. Kang, Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment based response surface approach for FLEX and accident tolerant fuels for medium break LOCA spectrum, Energies 14 (2021) 2490.
  16. A.U.A. Shah, J. Kim, R. Christian, H.G. Kang, Sensitivity analysis of effectiveness of FLEX strategies using a CDF-based importance measure under accident conditions, Nucl. Sci. Eng. 197 (11) (2023) 2818-2829. https://doi.org/10.1080/00295639.2023.2194460
  17. C. Paris, C. Queral, J. Mula, J. G.-Magan, M. S.-Perea, E. Melendez, J. Gil, Quantitative risk reduction by means of recovery strategies, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 182 (2019).
  18. Hong Xu, Baorui Zhang, A review of the FLEX strategy for nuclear safety, Nucl. Eng. Des. 382 (2021) 111396.
  19. Hong Xu, Baorui Zhang, Diverse and flexible coping strategy for nuclear safety: opportunities and challenges, Energies 15 (2022) 6275, 2022.
  20. P. Chandran, D.L. Moore, J. Reddington, Implementation of FLEX operator actions in PRA models, in: Proceedings of the PSA 2017, September, 2017, pp. 24-28. Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  21. M.T. Hasan, S. Sengee, S.N. Pamungkas, M.B. Baba, L. H.-Kyu, HEPs Calculation for FLEX Strategies in Response to APR1400 Extended SBO for Risk-Informed Decision Making, Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Autumn Meeting, Yeosu, Korea, 25-26 October, 2018.
  22. Y. Kim, J. Kim, J. Park, S.M. Shin, J.W. Park, Estimating the performance time of FLEX implementation based on staffing level considering multi-unit accidents, in: Proceedings of the 33rd European Safety and Reliability Conference, ESREL 2023, Southampton, United Kingdom, 3-7 September, 2023.
  23. I.S. Kim, M. Jang, S.R. Kim, Holistic approach to multi-unit site risk assessment: status and issues, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 49 (2017) 286-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2017.01.003
  24. T. Zhou, M. Modarres, E.L. Droguett, Multi-unit nuclear power plant probabilistic risk assessment: a comprehensive survey, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 213 (2019) 107782.
  25. D.-S. Kim, J.H. Park, A pragmatic approach to modeling combinations of plant operational states in multi-unit nuclear power plant probabilistic safety assessment, Appl. Sci. 12 (2022) 11486.
  26. IAEA, Multi-Unit Probabilistic Safety Assessment, Safety Reports Series No. 110, Final Draft Version, IAEA, Vienna, 2021.
  27. S. Zhang, Z. Ma, Incorporating FLEX strategies in multi-unit probabilistic risk assessment, in: Proceedings of the 2020 28th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering Joint with the ASME 2020 Power Conference ICONE28-Power2020, Anaheim, California, USA, 2020, pp. 2-6 August.
  28. S.-W. Lee, T.H. Hong, M.-R. Seo, Y.-S. Lee, H.-T. Kim, Extended station blackout coping capabilities of APR1400, Sci. Technol. Nuclear Instal. 2014 (2014) 980418.
  29. S.-Y. Park, K.-I. Ahn, Evaluation of an accident management strategy of emergency water injection using fire engines in a typical pressurized water reactor, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 47 (2015) 719-728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2015.06.010
  30. C.H. Kim, S. Kim, B.S. Choo, J.K. Song, Assessment of plant response capability in the event of loss of electrical power and loss of ultimate heat sink, Ann. Nucl. Energy 175 (2022) 209223.
  31. C.G. Lee, J.M. Park, H.B. Yim, C.E. Park, G.C. Lee, Development of operation strategy and recovery guideline during extended station blackout for OPR1000 and APR1400, in: Proceedings of the 18th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Reactor Thermal Hydraulics (NURETH-18), August, 2019, pp. 18-23. Portland, Oregon, USA.
  32. J. Kim, W. Jung, J. Park, Human Reliability Analysis of the FLEX/MACST Actions Deploying Portable Equipment, Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Autumn Meeting, Yeosu, Korea, 25-26 October, 2018.
  33. Y.A. Suh, J. Kim, S.Y. Park, Time uncertainty analysis method for level 2 human reliability analysis of severe accident management strategies, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 53 (2021) 484-497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.07.028
  34. V. Yadav, J. Biersdorf, Utilizing FLEX equipment for operations and maintenance cost reduction in nuclear power plants, INL/EXT-19-55445 Rev.0, United States. (2019), https://doi.org/10.2172/1559041.
  35. G. Schumock, S. Zhang, P. Farshadmanesh, J.G. Owens, N. Kasza, J. Stearns, T. Sakurahara, Z. Mohaghegh, Integrated Risk-Informed Design (I-RID) methodological framework and computational application for FLEX equipment storage buildings of Nuclear Power Plants, Prog. Nucl. Energy 120 (2020) 103186.
  36. S. Zhang, Z. Ma, H. Zhang, C.L. Smith, Multicriterion benefit evaluation methodology for safety enhancements in nuclear power plants and application for FLEX strategies, Nucl. Eng. Des. 376 (2021) 111135.
  37. ASME/ANS, Revision and Redesignation of ASME/ANS RA-S-2008, Standard for Level 1/Large Early Release Frequency Probabilistic Risk Assessment for Nuclear Power Plant Applications, ASME/ANS RA-S-1.1-2022, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers and American Nuclear Society, 2022.
  38. S.H. Han, K. Oh, H.-G. Lim, J.-E. Yang, AIMS-MUPSA software package for multiunit PSA, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 50 (2018) 1255-1265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2018.06.012
  39. D.-S. Kim, S.H. Han, J.H. Park, H.-.G. Lim, J.H. Kim, Multi-unit Level 1 probabilistic safety assessment: approaches and their application to a six-unit nuclear power plant site, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 50 (2018).
  40. S.A. Eide, T.E. Wierman, C.D. Gentillon, D.M. Rasmuson, C.L. Atwood, Industry-average Performance for Components and Initiating Events at U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2007. NUREG/CR-6928.
  41. EPRI, Seismic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Implementation Guide, Final Report, 2013, 2013 Technical Report, 3002000709.
  42. A. Mosleh, D.M. Rasmuson, F.M. Marshall, Guidelines on Modeling Common-Cause Failure in Probabilistic Risk Assessment, NUREG/CR-5485, INEEL/EXT-97-01327, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1998.