Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory SCWR Preliminary Safety Considerations Cliff Davis, Jacopo Buongiorno, INEEL Luca Oriani, Westinghouse.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Generic Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR): Safety Systems Overview
Advertisements

ACADs (08-006) Covered Keywords Defense-in-depth, reactor protection system, solid state protection system, reactor trips, Engineered Safety Feature System.
Three Mile Island (TMI-2)
2008 RELAP5 Users Seminar, Nov, Idaho Falls, USA 1 Coupled Thermal-hydraulic and Neutronic Model for the Ascó NPP using RELAP5- 3D/NESTLE L. Batet,
Lesson 17 HEAT GENERATION
Author: Cliff B. Davis Evaluation of Fluid Conduction and Mixing Within a Subassembly of the Actinide Burner Test Reactor.
GENERATION III AND III+ NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DESIGNS ACR-1000 (Advanced CANDU Reactor) Dr. Şule Ergün Hacettepe University Department of Nuclear Engineering.
Safety analysis of supercritical-pressure light-water cooled reactor with water rods Yoshiaki Oka April 2003, GIF SCWR Mtg. at Madison.
EUROTRANS – DM1 RELAP5 Model Evaluation with SIMMER-III Code and Preliminary Transient Analysis for EFIT Reactor WP5.1 Progress Meeting KTH / Stockholm,
LEADER Project: Task 5.4 Analysis of Representative DBC Events of the ETDR with RELAP5 G. Bandini - ENEA/Bologna LEADER 5 th WP5 Meeting JRC-IET, Petten,
LEADER Project: Task 5.4 Analysis of Representative DBC Events of the ETDR with CATHARE G. Geffraye, D. Kadri – CEA/Grenoble G. Bandini - ENEA/Bologna.
1 ACPR Advanced, cost competitive, proven technology, and reliable The Third Generation Nuclear Reactor.
HTTF Analyses Using RELAP5-3D Paul D. Bayless RELAP5 International Users Seminar September 2010.
Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Results of a Seismically-Induced Loss of Coolant Accident Involving Experiment Out-of-Pile Loop Piping at the Idaho.
Accidents Happen But Nuclear Accidents Require Special Skill!
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Two Tube Failure Event for the Helium Cooled Blanket Lee Cadwallader and Brad Merrill INEEL Fusion.
EUROTRANS - Helium cooled EFIT Probabilistic assessment of different DHR designs Karlsruhe, November Sophie EHSTER, Laurent VINCON.
POWER PLANT.
Cogeneration.
Nuclear Plant Systems ACADs (08-006) Covered Keywords
Nuclear Power Station Lecture No 5. A generating station in which nuclear energy is converted into electrical energy is known as a Nuclear power station.
Nuclear Fundamentals Part II Harnessing the Power of the Atom.
Investigation into the Viability of a Passively Active Decay Heat Removal System In ALLEGRO Laura Carroll, Graduate Physicist Physics & Licensing Team,
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Analysis of the SCWR Core with Water Rods Cliff Davis, Jacopo Buongiorno, INEEL Larry Conway, Westinghouse.
Overview of Conventional 2-loop PWR Simulator. PCTRAN Dr
1 OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE at JAPANESE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS in 2005 October 12, 2006 Shigeyuki Wada Safety Information Division Japan Nuclear Energy Safety.
Argonne National Laboratory 2007 RELAP5 International User’s Seminar
Thermal Hydraulic Simulation of a SuperCritical-Water-Cooled Reactor Core Using Flownex F.A.Mngomezulu, P.G.Rousseau, V.Naicker School of Mechanical and.
Types of reactors.
Generation Aino Ahonen CABABILITY OF APROS IN THE ANALYSES OF DIESEL LOADING SEQUENCES E. Raiko, H.Kontio, K.Porkholm, presented by A. Ahonen.
Westinghouse Operational Experience and Prospects for New Build
4/2003 Rev 2 I.4.7 – slide 1 of 48 Session I.4.7 Part I Review of Fundamentals Module 4Sources of Radiation Session 7Nuclear Reactors IAEA Post Graduate.
Kevin Burgee Janiqua Melton Alexander Basterash
Nuclear Power Generation In The United States. 103 Nuclear Power Reactors.
Nuclear Thermal Hydraulic System Experiment
Development of a RELAP5-3D thermal-hydraulic model for a Gas Cooled Fast Reactor D. Castelliti, C. Parisi, G. M. Galassi, N. Cerullo (San Piero A Grado.
1 Kaspar Kööp, Marti Jeltsov Division of Nuclear Power Safety Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) Stockholm, Sweden LEADER 4 th WP5 MEETING, Karlsruhe.
Building a CANDU reactor
Nuclear Power Plant Orientation
LEADER Project Analysis of Representative DBC Events of the ETDR with RELAP5 and CATHARE Giacomino Bandini - ENEA/Bologna Genevieve Geffraye – CEA/Grenoble.
Page 1 Petten 27 – Feb ALFRED and ELFR Secondary System and Plant Layout.
Analysis of Representative DEC Events of the ETDR with RELAP5 LEADER Project: Task 5.5 G. Bandini - ENEA/Bologna LEADER 5 th WP5 Meeting JRC-IET, Petten,
Natural Convection as a Passive Safety Design in Nuclear Reactors
Modeling a Steam Generator (SG)
СRCD NSC KIPT DiFis 2.0 – 3D Finite Element Neutron Kinetic Code A.I. Zhukov and A.M. Abdullayev NSC Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology September.
I & C.
Nuclear Power Reactors
LOW PRESSURE REACTORS. Muhammad Umair Bukhari
Nuclear Battery Battery.  Reactor –Core Metallic fuel core (U-10%Zr) –Reactivity control Movable reflectors –Shutdown system Shutdown rod and reflectors.
NUCLEAR REACTORS G. HETSRONI Emeritus Danciger Professor of Engineering Technion – Haifa – Israel.
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING MENB INTRODUCTION TO NUCLEAR ENGINEERING GROUP ASSIGNMENT GROUP MEMBERS: MOHD DZAFIR.
Nuclear power plant Performed by Zhuk A.D.. Purpose of this presentation is to show importance and danger of nuclear power plant. My opinion: I think.
Gas Turbine Power Plant
- Condensate pump and feed pump trip!
EP4P03 Nuclear Plant Systems and Operation
Thermodynamics Thermal Hydraulics.
Thermodynamics Cycles.
Date of download: 11/7/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
Collaborative Research in
POWER PLANT THERMAL POWER STATION.
Analysis of Reactivity Insertion Accidents for the NIST Research Reactor Before and After Fuel Conversion J.S. Baek, A. Cuadra, L-Y. Cheng, A.L. Hanson,
SCWR Thermal-Hydraulic Instability Analysis
Data transfer between codes
Session Name: Lessons Learned from Mega Projects
- Condensate pump and feed pump trip!
R. B. Vilim Argonne National Laboratory
BASIC PROFESSIONAL TRAINING COURSE Module VII Probabilistic Safety Assessment Case Studies Version 1.0, July 2015 This material was prepared.
THE ROLE OF PASSIVE SYSTEMS IN ENHANCING SAFETY AND PREVENTING ACCIDENTS IN ADVANCED REACTORS Moustafa Aziz Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority.
Fission Simple diagram of nuclear fission. In the first frame, a neutron is about to collide with the nucleus of a U-235 atom. In the second frame, the.
Egyptian Atomic Energy Authority (EAEA), Egypt
Presentation transcript:

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory SCWR Preliminary Safety Considerations Cliff Davis, Jacopo Buongiorno, INEEL Luca Oriani, Westinghouse Electric Co. April 29, 2003 Madison, Wisconsin

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Introduction Safety concept and classification of the events Parametric thermal-hydraulic calculations of the SCWR during loss-of-feedwater and turbine-trip transients to determine the required response time and capacities of safety systems Calculations used the RELAP5 computer code, which has been recently improved for SCWR applications Analysis was performed for a design with solid moderator rods, but the results are expected to be more generally applicable Transient cladding temperature limit of 840  C was used to evaluate the thermal-hydraulic response

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Safety Concept Active, non-safety systems have passive, safety-related back-up to perform nuclear safety functions –Safety functions automatically actuated, no reliance on operator action –Passive features actuated by stored energy (batteries, compressed air) –Once actuated, their continued operation relies only on natural forces (gravity, natural circulation) with no motors, fans, diesels, etc. Common approach with the most advanced LWR concept proposed by the main NSSS vendors: –Westinghouse AP600/AP1000, IRIS and System 80+ –Framatome-ANP SWR-1000 –GE ESBWR and ABWR Design Goal: Achieve a degree of safety at least comparable to the more advanced plant concepts being currently proposed.

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory ANS Classification of Events Classification of Accident events per ANSI N (industry standard based on ANS committee) Condition I: Normal operation and operational transients Condition II: Faults of moderate frequency Condition III: Infrequent faults Condition IV: Limiting faults Classification according to expected frequency of occurrence Less frequent events may have more severe consequences

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory The loss-of-feedwater and turbine-trip transients were evaluated because SCWR is a once-through direct cycle without coolant recirculation in the reactor vessel –Loss of feedwater is important because It results in rapid undercooling of the core It is a Condition II event that must not result in any significant damage to the fuel Average coolant density is low in the SCWR core and pressurization events result in significant positive reactivity insertion –Turbine trip without steam bypass has the potential to cause a significant increase in reactor power

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Parametric calculations for loss of feedwater investigated the effects of Main feedwater (MFW) coastdown time (0 to 10 s) Scram (with and without) Auxiliary feedwater (AFW) flow rate (10-30% of rated feedwater) Steam relief (20-100% capacity) Step changes in MFW flow rate (25-100%) Coolant density reactivity feedback (nominal and high)

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Transient temperature limit met when AFW flow exceeded 15% 5-s MFW coastdown Scram Constant pressure

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Temperature limit met for 50% step change in MFW flow No scram No AFW

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Fast-opening 100%-capacity turbine bypass system helps significantly 5-s MFW coastdown Scram No AFW

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Higher coolant density reactivity feedback lowers cladding temperature 5-s MFW coastdown Scram No AFW

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Parametric calculations of a turbine trip without steam bypass investigated the effects of Scram Safety relief valve (SRV) capacity (0 - 90%)

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Pressure response following a turbine trip is acceptable Instant control valve closure Continued MFW at rated flow

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Small increase in reactor power following turbine trip Instant control valve closure Continued MFW

Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Conclusions SCWR with solid moderator rods can tolerate a 50% step change in MFW flow without scram Transient temperature limit can be met following a total loss of MFW if AFW flow exceeds 15% of initial MFW flow AFW flow requirements can be reduced by –Fast-opening 100%-capacity turbine bypass –Higher feedback coefficients typical of designs with water rods Acceptable pressure response following turbine trip without steam bypass if the SRV capacity is greater than 90% Power increase following turbine trip without steam bypass and with full MFW flow is much smaller than in comparable BWRs