KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
(1) Die Kooperation von Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH und Universität Karlsruhe (TH) 0 | Transient Analysis for the EFIT 3-Zone Core P. Liu, X.-N. Chen,
Advertisements

Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Technik und Umwelt IRS /FzK W.M.SchikorrEUROTRANS WP1.5 Safety Meeting : Bologna, May 28-29, EFIT-Pb Transient Analysis.
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Technik und Umwelt IRS /FzK W.M.SchikorrEUROTRANS WP1.5 Safety Meeting : Madrid, Nov EFIT Design and Transient.
Generic Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR): Safety Systems Overview
Lesson 17 HEAT GENERATION
Relevant Thermal-Hydraulic Aspects in the Design of the RRR A. Doval, C. Mazufri F.P. Moreno Bariloche, Rio Negro, Argentina.
ACADs (08-006) Covered Keywords Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR), Boiling Water Reactor (BWR), primary loop, reactivity, reactivity control, reactivity.
Safety analysis of supercritical-pressure light-water cooled reactor with water rods Yoshiaki Oka April 2003, GIF SCWR Mtg. at Madison.
Thermal-Hydraulic Transient Analysis of the Missouri University Research Reactor (MURR) TRTR Annual Meeting September 17-20, 2007 Dr. Robert C. Nelson1,
Safety Approach, Safety Issues and Provisions
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,
LFR plant assessment against a Fukushima-like scenario Technical Workshop to Review Safety and Design Aspects of European LFR Demonstrator (ALFRED), European.
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.
HTTF Analyses Using RELAP5-3D Paul D. Bayless RELAP5 International Users Seminar September 2010.
EUROTRANS WP 1.5 Meeting FZK – Karlsruhe, November 27-28, 2008 FPN-FISNUC / Bologna EUROTRANS – DM1 EFIT Transients Analysis with RELAP5, SIMMER-III and.
AREVA NP EUROTRANS WP1.5 Technical Meeting Task – ETD Safety approach Safety approach for EFIT: Deliverable 1.21 Lyon, October Sophie.
Framatome ANP IP-EUROTRANS Meeting WP 1.5 Progress in safety approach development TEE, March Sophie EHSTER.
Transmutation and ADS Safety Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Transient Analysis for EFIT (ENEA 384MWth 3-Zone core) Safety and.
May 22nd & 23rd 2007 Stockholm EUROTRANS: WP 1.5 Task Containment Assessment IP-EUROTRANS DOMAIN 1 Design WP 1.5 Safety Assessment of the Transmutation.
AREVA NP EUROTRANS WP1.5 Technical Meeting Task – Safety approach Madrid, November Sophie EHSTER.
EUROTRANS – DM1 Preliminary Transient Analysis for EFIT with RELAP5 and RELAP/PARCS Codes WP5.1 Progress Meeting Empresarios Agrupados - Madrid, November.
EUROTRANS: WP1.5 Technical meeting, Karlsruhe, November 27 – 28, XT-ADS DHR Conceptual Design L. Mansani
Transmutation and ADS Safety Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft EUROTRANS DM1-WP1.5 Mtg. Stockholm, May 22-23, 2007 Some Recent.
AREVA NP EUROTRANS WP1.5 Technical Meeting Task – ETD Safety approach Safety approach for XT-ADS: Deliverable 1.20 Lyon, October Sophie.
“Design and safety analysis of ALFRED”
1 Safety studies for MYRRHA B. Arien, S. Heusdains, H. Aït Abderrahim on behalf of the MYRRHA Team and Support IP-Eurotrans Workshop DM1-WP1.5Brussels,
EUROTRANS - Helium cooled EFIT Probabilistic assessment of different DHR designs Karlsruhe, November Sophie EHSTER, Laurent VINCON.
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Technik und Umwelt IRS /FzK W.M.SchikorrEUROTRANS WP1.5 Safety Meeting : Karlsruhe, Nov 27-28, EFIT-Pb Transient Analysis.
AREVA NP EUROTRANS WP1.5 Technical Meeting Task – ETD Safety approach Safety approach for EFIT: Deliverable 1.21 Stockholm, May Sophie.
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Technik und Umwelt IRS /FzK W.M.SchikorrEUROTRANS WP1.5 Safety Meeting : Madrid, Nov XT-ADS Transient Analysis.
WP 1.5 Progress Meeting ENEA – Bologna, Italy, May 28-30, 2008 FPN-FISNUC / Bologna EUROTRANS – DM1 Analysis of EFIT Unprotected Accidental Transients.
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,
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
Thermal hydraulic analysis of ALFRED by RELAP5 code & by SIMMER code G. Barone, N. Forgione, A. Pesetti, R. Lo Frano CIRTEN Consorzio Interuniversitario.
EUROPEAN LEAD FAST REACTOR The LEADER project aims to define an European Lead Fast Reactor configuration for an industrial-sized (600 MWe, the ELFR) reactor,
17th Symposium of AER, Yalta, Crimea, Ukraine, Sept , 2007.
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
LEADER, Task 5.5 ETDR Transient Analyses with SPECTRA Code LEADER Project JRC, Petten, February 26, 2013 M.M. Stempniewicz NRG-22694/
Analyses of representative DEC events of the ETDR
LBE-Water interaction in LIFUS V facility under different operating conditions A. Ciampichetti, D. Bernardi - ENEA T. Cadiou - CEA N. Forgione – Università.
LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Workshop: Petten February 2013 IRSN presentation on its document “ Overview of Generation IV (Gen-IV) reactor designs Safety.
ALFRED System Configuration Luigi Mansani
Nuclear Thermal Hydraulic System Experiment
ALFRED and ELFR design overview Technical Workshop to Review Safety and Design Aspects of European LFR Demonstrator (ALFRED), European LFR Industrial Plant.
EUROTRANS – DM1 ENEA Activities on EFIT Safety Analysis ENEA – FIS/NUC Bologna - Italy WP5.1 Progress Meeting Tractebel / Brussels, March 17, 2006 G. Bandini,
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
IAEA Meeting on INPRO Collaborative Project “Performance Assessment of Passive Gaseous Provisions (PGAP)” December, 2011, Vienna A.K. Nayak, PhD.
Safety Analysis Results of the DEC Transients of ALFRED LEADER Lead-cooled European Advanced DEmonstration Reactor G. Bandini (ENEA), E. Bubelis, M. Schikorr.
1 Kaspar Kööp, Marti Jeltsov Division of Nuclear Power Safety Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) Stockholm, Sweden LEADER 4 th WP5 MEETING, Karlsruhe.
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
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
Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Environment Advanced Physics Technology Division Via Martiri di Monte Sole 4, Bologna, Italy.
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
EUROTRANS – DM1 Preliminary Transient Analysis for EFIT Design WP5.1 Progress Meeting AREVA / Lyon, October 10-11, 2006 G. Bandini, P. Meloni, M. Polidori.
Nuclear Battery Battery.  Reactor –Core Metallic fuel core (U-10%Zr) –Reactivity control Movable reflectors –Shutdown system Shutdown rod and reflectors.
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING MENB INTRODUCTION TO NUCLEAR ENGINEERING GROUP ASSIGNMENT GROUP MEMBERS: MOHD DZAFIR.
(NURETH-16)-Chicago, Illinois
Thermodynamics Thermal Hydraulics.
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,
Session Name: Lessons Learned from Mega Projects
Group 1 Best Group.
Egyptian Atomic Energy Authority (EAEA), Egypt
Presentation transcript:

KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology Safety analysis results of the DBC and DEC transients for ELFR Main results and final conclusions E. Bubelis, M. Schikorr, G. Bandini, Y. Zhang, K. Mikityuk, N. Forgione, E. Semeraro, R. Lo Frano

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten DBC & DEC transients analyzed for ELFR T-1 : PLOF, DHR-1 or DHR-2 available, reactor trip T-2 : ULOF, SCS in forced convection T-3 : ULOHS, PPs active, DHR-1 or DHR-2 available T-4 : UTOP, study max possible reactivity insertion w/o core melting T-5 : ULOF+ULOHS, DHR-1 or DHR-2 available T-6 : OVC, FW temp drop from 335 o C to 200 o C in 1 sec, reactor trip T-7 : SLB, reactor trip T-8 : SA blockage, determine max acceptable SA flow reduction factor T-9 : SGTR (limited scope, low priority, based on experiments)

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten Protected transients: T-1, 6, 7 – PLOF, OVC, SLB The automatic reactor shutdown activated by different reactor scram signals is able to rapidly bring the ELFR plant to safe plant conditions. The consequent isolation of the secondary circuits and start up of decay heat removal system is able to maintain the plant in safe conditions in the medium and long term. In all transients, the potential of Pb-freezing in the coldest point of the primary cooling system is reached after several hours into the transient, assuring sufficient grace time for manual, corrective operator action.

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten T-2 : ULOF, SCS in forced convection Due to the enhanced natural convection capability in the primary circuit, in case of ULOF the maximum temperatures reached in the primary system are low enough to assure the integrity of the clad and the vessel in the short term, providing sufficient grace time for corrective operator action. PSI TRACE results

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten T-3 : ULOHS, PPs active, DHR-1 or DHR-2 available The main potential safety issue is the maximum reactor vessel wall temperature that might exceed 700 °C within ~12 min. The integrity of the clad and the vessel seems not guaranteed in the medium/long term, because of the high temperatures reached in the primary cooling system. ENEA RELAP results

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten T-5 : ULOF+ULOHS, DHR-1 or DHR-2 available The main potential safety issue is the maximum reactor vessel wall temperature that might exceed 700 °C within ~22 min. The integrity of the clad and the vessel seems not guaranteed in the medium/long term, because of the high temperatures reached in the primary cooling system. ENEA RELAP results

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten T-4 : UTOP, study max possible reactivity insertion w/o core melting For reactivity insertion of 200 pcm in 10 sec time interval at EOC conditions, peak fuel pin cladding survives and fuel melting is not observed, even in the center of the peak power fuel pins (pellets). Case: 200 pcm in 10 sec KIT SIM-LFR results

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten T-4 : UTOP, study max possible reactivity insertion w/o core melting For reactivity insertion of 260 pcm in 10 sec time interval at EOC conditions, peak fuel pin cladding survives, however fuel melting should be expected in the center of the peak power fuel pins (pellets). Case: 260 pcm in 10 sec KIT SIM-LFR results

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten T-8 : SA blockage, determine max acceptable SA flow reduction factor As a result of the SA blockage, the flow rate will initially decrease to ~ 14 % nominal, gradually recovering to about 24% flow rate at ~50 sec into the transient due to changing SA pressure conditions. The power remains at 100% nominal throughout the transient. Peak pin will fail ~93 sec into the transient as the cladding temperature will reach 1015 °C, with a peak pin fission gas pressure of ~41 bar. Extreme case: Flow in the hottest SA blocked 97.5%; w/o radial heat transfer; EOC KIT SIM-LFR results

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten T-8 : SA blockage, determine max acceptable SA flow reduction factor For flow blockages of < 75%, no pin failures nor fuel melting is expected, even under unprotected conditions. For flow blockages of > 75%, peak power pins clad failure has to be expected, but fuel melting is not expected even for a flow blockage of 97.5%. Case: Flow in the hottest SA blocked 20 – 97.5 %; w/o radial heat transfer KIT SIM-LFR results

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten T-9 : SGTR (limited scope, low priority, based on experiments) Without any eng. safeguards or limiting mechanisms, the pressures induced by LWI, in case of instantaneous vaporization, could be severe enough to lead to structural damage for the SG itself, while it poses no likely threat for the integrity of the in-vessel structures. Vapour bubbles, generated during the LWI, have difficulty in reaching the core inlet section, as confirmed by the KALLA experimental data. inside the lead region close to the rupture pressure impulse on the upper plate water mass flow rate UNIPI (CIRTEN) SIMMER results

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten Conclusions Unprotected transients (ULOF; ULOHS and ULOF + ULOHS): Due to the enhanced natural convection capability in the primary circuit, in case of ULOF the maximum temperatures reached in the primary cooling system are low enough to assure the integrity of the clad and the vessel in the short term, providing sufficient grace time for corrective operator action. The main potential safety issue is the maximum reactor vessel wall temperature that might exceed 700 °C within ~12 min. The integrity of the clad and the vessel seems not guaranteed in the medium/long term, because of the high temperatures reached in the primary system. An optimization of the neutronic core design, in order to reduce the positive coolant expansion reactivity feedback could provide additional grace time.

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten Conclusions (continued) Reactivity insertion: These transients envelope positive reactivity insertions of the Design Basis events such as fuel handling errors, control rods withdrawal or seismic core compaction. For reactivity insertion of 200 pcm in 10 sec time interval at EOC conditions, peak fuel pin cladding survives and fuel melting is not observed, even in the center of the peak power fuel pins (pellets). For reactivity insertion of 260 pcm in 10 sec time interval at EOC conditions, peak fuel pin cladding survives, however fuel melting should be expected in the center of the peak power fuel pins (pellets).

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten Conclusions (continued) FA flow blockage: For flow blockages of < 75%, no pin failures nor fuel melting is expected, even under unprotected conditions. For flow blockages > 75%, peak power pins clad failure shall be expected, but fuel melting is not expected even for a flow blockage of 97.5%. However there is time (several hundreds seconds) to detect the flow blockage occurrence, by means of temperature measuring devices installed at each FA outlet.

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten Conclusions (continued) SGTR accident: Several limiting mechanisms and potentially important effects have been analyzed and suggest that: (i)the initial pressure shock wave poses no likely threat to in-vessel structures, except to few adjacent heat exchanger tubes; (ii)the sloshing-related fluid motion is well bounded in a domain beyond the heat exchanger; and yet (iii)the steam/water entrainment is expected to be comparatively limited due to the very large difference of density between steam and lead. The potential gradual pressurization of the vessel after SGTR due to inflow of the steam is limited by rupture disks, relieving the resulting over-pressure. Moreover, a Venturi nozzle placed inside each spiral tube, mitigates the severity of SGTR interaction and reduces potential LWI effects on the entire reactor system. A dedicated scaled facility should be foreseen to experimentally analyze in depth the SGTR phenomena further as part of the future R&D activities.

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten Conclusions (continued) Pb freezing issue: Important issue for the critical ELFR is a tight and continuous operational control of the secondary coolant conditions (feedwater inlet temperature, feedwater flowrate) in order to assure prevention of freezing of the lead coolant at the coldest location of the primary loop, namely at the outlet of the primary side of the main heat exchanger. The same is true for the operation of the DHR systems – decay heat removal should be strictly controlled at any time during plant decay heat removal conditions.

Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR) E. Bubelis et.al. – LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Review Workshop, Petten Conclusions (continued) General: The safety analysis performed for the lead-cooled ELFR design demonstrated the forgiving nature of this plant design, ascribable to the inherently, large thermal inertia of the lead-cooled primary system and optimization of safety relevant control, safety systems and components.