1. 2015 FRAPCON AND FRAPTRAN USER GROUP MEETNG
THE comparison between FRAPTRAN-1.4 and FRAPTRAN-1.5 on a station blackout analysis
Wan-Yun LI1, Jong-Rong WANG1, HAO-TZU LIN2, Shao-Wen CHEN1, CHUNKUAN SHIH1
After the FRAPTRAN 1.5 release , we do the study to compare the 1.4 and 1.5, in this study we chose the spent fuel pool in Station Blackout case, I will introduce the study flow chart, and introduce the FRAPTRAN model of the Spent fuel pool ,finally is
Speaker: Wan-Yun LI
1 Institute of Nuclear Engineering and Science, NTHU, Taiwan
2 Institute of Nuclear Energy Research, Taiwan

2. Outline CONCLUSION Introduction Model description
Analysis Flow Chart
TRACE Model
FRAPTRAN Model
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
Let’s start with my outline, first, I’ll Introduce the study, and the Model description, then illustrate the analysis conditions, finally present the result and make conclusion

3. Introduction
After Fukushima event, the safety analysis of the SPF for Chinshan NPP was performed by using TRACE and FRAPTRAN during the station blackout.
In this study, we used FRAPTRAN-1.4 and FRAPTRAN-1.5 to simulate the blackout analysis case, and to compare two version.

4. Model description

5. Model description Flow chart
First , finish the trace analysis ,then we have the Power history, Coolant conditions history, Cladding surface heat transfer coefficients history. And take those result as the boundary conditions in FRAPTRAN, besides, FRAPTRAN deck needs to input the fuel rod condition by user. After the FRAPTRAN analysis, the results are shown as follow.

6. Model description The TRACE model of the Spent fuel pool
Spent fuel pool size：
12.17 m × 7.87 m × m
Initial condition：
60 C / × 105 Pa
This is The TRACE model of the Spent fuel pool , the figure shows the fire water injection location of Spent fuel pool in TRACE model .

7. Model description The Fuel rod model of FRAPTRAN
This is Fuel rod model of FRAPTRAN. The axial fuel length from bottom to top was divided into 23 nodes, and the table shows the detail of fuel rod parameter.

8. RESULTs AND DISCUSSION

9. cladding inside temperature
FRAPTRAN-1.4
FRAPTRAN-1.5
The result didn’t show the cladding failure yet, so we extend the time to see the fod fuel

10. cladding inside temperature
FRAPTRAN-1.4
FRAPTRAN-1.5

11. cladding hoop strain
FRAPTRAN-1.4
FRAPTRAN-1.5

12. cladding hoop stress
FRAPTRAN-1.4
FRAPTRAN-1.5

13. structural radial gap
FRAPTRAN-1.4
FRAPTRAN-1.5

14. CONCLUSION
In the results of FRAPTRAN-1.5, the cladding temperature increase slowly than the results of FRAPTRAN-1.4, so the cladding rupture time is slowly than the FRAPTRAN-1.4 result.
The cladding thickness calculation model is improved in FRAPTRAN-1.5, so from the gap results, the FRAPTRAN-1.5 is smaller than FRAPTRAN-1.4.

15. Thank you of your attention.