AREVA NP EUROTRANS WP1.5 Technical Meeting Task 1.5.1 – ETD Safety approach Safety approach for EFIT: Deliverable 1.21 Stockholm, May 22-23 2007 Sophie.

Slides:



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

1 KRB-A (Grundremmingen, Germany). 2 Type:Boiling Water Reactor Power: 250 MW(e) Started in 1966, shut down in 1977 First commercial power reactor in.
GENERATION III AND III+ NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DESIGNS ACR-1000 (Advanced CANDU Reactor) Dr. Şule Ergün Hacettepe University Department of Nuclear Engineering.
Issues Associated with the Development of Severe Accident Management Guidelines for CANDU Reactors Keith Dinnie Director, Risk Management Nuclear Safety.
Basic Principles of Operation of nuclear power plants Special Topic 2014 Exam Craft mock 2014.
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,
Accidents Happen But Nuclear Accidents Require Special Skill!
Lindy Hughes Fleet Fire Protection Program Engineer Southern Nuclear Operating Company June 4, 2013 Fire Protection.
School for drafting regulations Nuclear Safety Decommissioning Vienna, 2-7 December 2012 Tea Bilic Zabric.
Sheet 0 November 13 th -14 th, 2007, Madrid Task Containment Assessment IP-EUROTRANS DOMAIN 1 Design WP 1.5 Safety Assessment of the Transmutation.
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.
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
AREVA NP EUROTRANS WP1.5 Technical Meeting Task – ETD Safety approach Safety approach for XT-ADS: Deliverable 1.20 Lyon, October Sophie.
EUROTRANS - Helium cooled EFIT Probabilistic assessment of different DHR designs Karlsruhe, November Sophie EHSTER, Laurent VINCON.
Title slide PIPELINE QRA SEMINAR. PIPELINE RISK ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION TO RISK IDENTIFICATION 2.
Title slide PIPELINE QRA SEMINAR. PIPELINE RISK ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION TO HAZID 2.
PART IX: EMERGENCY EXPOSURE SITUATIONS Module IX.1: Generic requirements for emergency exposure situations Lesson IX.1-2: General Requirements Lecture.
Basics of Fault Tree and Event Tree Analysis Supplement to Fire Hazard Assessment for Nuclear Engineering Professionals Icove and Ruggles (2011) Funded.
 A nuclear reactor produces and controls the release of energy from splitting the atoms of certain elements. In a nuclear power reactor, the energy released.
Pipeline Qra Seminar Title slide Title slide.
Risk Assessment and Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Mario. H. Fontana PhD.,PE Research Professor Arthur E. Ruggles PhD Professor The University of.
Cologne, Topical Conference Improving Nuclear Safety through Operating Experience Feedback.
Analyses of representative DEC events of the ETDR
Bulatom Annual Forum, Bulgaria, Varna - Riviera, 2-4 June 2011 LICENSING PROCESS FOR BELENE NPP: CURRENT STATUS AND NEXT STEPS Tinko Ganchev Head of Department.
INPRO Assessment of Safety of Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycle Facilities INPRO Assessment of Safety of Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel.
LEADER/ELECTRA Safety Workshop: Petten February 2013 IRSN presentation on its document “ Overview of Generation IV (Gen-IV) reactor designs Safety.
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant Event Summary and FPL/DAEC Actions.
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.
Main Requirements on Different Stages of the Licensing Process for New Nuclear Facilities Module 4.5/1 Design Geoff Vaughan University of Central Lancashire,
1 Kaspar Kööp, Marti Jeltsov Division of Nuclear Power Safety Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) Stockholm, Sweden LEADER 4 th WP5 MEETING, Karlsruhe.
March 11, 2011 to Present. Presentation Overview Reactor Design and FeaturesChronology of EventsCurrent Status of Each ReactorRecovery Actions Kashiwazaki-Kariwa.
INPRO Assessment of Safety of Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles INPRO Assessment of Safety of Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles Y.
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.
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
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
Task 2.1: Review of ELSY and Conceptual design & neutronic characterization of the ELFR Industrial Plant Kamil Tuček on behalf of Task 2.1 contributors.
1 Safety factors for periodic safety review for research reactors Group A: SF1 – SF4.
IAEA Training Course on Safety Assessment of NPPs to Assist Decision Making Diablo Canyon NPP Probabilistic Risk Assessment Program Workshop Information.
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
Low Power and Shutdown PSA IAEA Training Course on Safety Assessment of NPPs to Assist Decision Making Workshop Information IAEA Workshop City, Country.
1DEN/CAD/DTN/DIR Genova 2010 April 22nd LEADER WP6 Task 6.3 Assessment, validation and adaptation of oxygen control and purification strategy (CEA-5, ENEA-1,
Nuclear Power Plant How A Nuclear Reactor Works. Pressurized Water Reactor - Nuclear Power Plant.
November 19th 2010, Bologna LEADER 1 1st LEADER PCC MEETING WP4 PLANT OPERATION, INSTRUMENTATION, CONTROL AND PROTECTION SYSTEM DESIGN.
Nuclear Battery Battery.  Reactor –Core Metallic fuel core (U-10%Zr) –Reactivity control Movable reflectors –Shutdown system Shutdown rod and reflectors.
Workshop on Risk informed decision making on nuclear power plant safety January 2011 SNRC, Kyiv, Ukraine Benefits and limitations of RIDM by Géza.
KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor.
Version 1.0, May 2015 SHORT COURSE BASIC PROFESSIONAL TRAINING COURSE Module V Safety classification of structures, systems and components This material.
Approaches and measures aimed at ensuring safety, preventing severe accidents in new RF NPP designs Gutsalov N.A. 10/03/2016.
Flooding Walkdown Guidance
Approach to Practical Elimination in Finland
Complementarity of deterministic and probabilistic approaches
Diversity analysis for advanced reactor design
Regulatory Oversight of HOF in Finland
BASIC PROFESSIONAL TRAINING COURSE Module V Safety classification of structures, systems and components Version 1.0, May 2015 This material was.
Session Name: Lessons Learned from Mega Projects
IAEA – Safety Demonstration of Advanced Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants Session: Digital I&C Systems Topic: Defence in Depth & Diversity – Challenges.
HAZOP Guidewords Base Set
ESS Per Nilsson CFD Specialist
Version 1.0, May 2015 SHORT COURSE
Preliminary Hazard Analysis of Bunker
Approaches and measures aimed at ensuring safety, preventing severe accidents in new RF NPP designs Gutsalov N.A. 10/03/2016.
Mikael Olsson Control Engineer
Presentation transcript:

AREVA NP EUROTRANS WP1.5 Technical Meeting Task – ETD Safety approach Safety approach for EFIT: Deliverable 1.21 Stockholm, May Sophie EHSTER

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP Contents  D 1.21 progress  Main safety objectives  Consideration of safety objectives in the design  "Dealt with" events  "Excluded" events

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP D 1.21 Progress  First draft issued in February 2007:  Based on D1.20 (XT-ADS)  w/o internal review in AREVA  Second draft issued in April 2007:  Internal review in AREVA,  Interactions with ANS on EFIT design  Review from W. Mascheck  Third draft issued mid May 2007:  Final comments are welcome by end of May  Final issue in June 2007

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP Main safety objectives - 1  Application of defense in depth principle: prevention and mitigation of severe core damage are considered  Elimination of the technical necessity of off site emergency response (Generation IV objective)  EFIT is provided with a core loaded with minor actinides:  Potential consequences of severe core damage (i.e. large degradation of the core) are expected larger as the amount of minor actinides in the core increases (e.g., lower fraction of delayed neutrons, lower Doppler effect, lower critical mass).  Impact on prevention and mitigation of severe core damage

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP Main safety objectives - 2  Definition of the sub-criticality level: core shall remain sub- critical in any event. This concerns severe core damage, for which there is a smaller margin between criticality and prompt criticality (except if consequences are demonstrated acceptable),  Prevention of severe core damage: sequences leading to severe core damage shall be extremely rare. The confidence in the prevention provisions must be very high. This concerns also local melting due to the total blockage of a sub-assembly, for which design provisions have to be implemented in order to avoid the generalised core melting. The demonstration should benefit from XT-ADS operational feedback, in particular concerning corrosion and inspection issues,

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP Main safety objectives - 3  Severe core damage mitigation: has to be considered. In particular, criticality has to be excluded. This could lead to the limitation of content of minor actinides and/or to a lowering of the sub-criticality level. At the pre-conceptual design phase of EFIT, studies associated with severe core damage should focus on the determination of the main phenomena (e.g., in vessel phenomena as the impact of freezing steel on decay heat removal (paths), fuel debris floating/settling, decay heat source distribution and possible out of vessel phenomena), relevant risks and possible design provisions (core and mitigating systems),  Regarding severe core damage situations which are not mitigated by severe core damage provisions (not possible or without a sufficient confidence level), they must result from a limited number of sequences and their exclusion justified with practices similar as the ones implemented for future nuclear plants such as EPR at least.

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP Main safety objectives - 4  The demonstration that the objectives related to severe core damage prevention are met can be performed by means of Probabilistic Risk Assessment. The cumulative severe core damage frequency should be lower than per reactor year.  At the early stages of EFIT, the Line Of Defense (LOD) method can be used to provide adequate prevention of severe core damage : at least two "strong" lines of defense plus one "medium" LOD are requested for each sequence  Unique EFIT safety issues have to be considered such as the potential radiological impact on the public due to minor actinides and spallation products and such as the protection of workers with respect to target, accelerator and lead coolant.

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP Consideration of safety objectives in the design - 1  Safety functions are reviewed in the document and related issues are provided.  Focus on:  Reactivity control function: Core sub-critical in any situation (including core melting) Absorbing system during shutdown conditions Measurement of sub-criticality level in shutdown conditions  Power control function: High reliability of proton beam trip (2a +b), in particular provision of sufficient grace period for manual trip or diverse passive means Adequate instrumentation (in particular, for local fault detection)  Decay heat removal function: High reliability of function is requested: diversity of DRC system Need for reliability study? Risk of freezing Emergency core unloading Severe core damage mitigation

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP Consideration of safety objectives in the design - 2  Confinement function: Design strategy with regard to radiological releases management is not yet defined - Normal operation - Gas, steam, DRC secondary coolant leakage - Severe core damage - Hazards Spallation target and accelerator confinement system  Core support function: Demonstration of exclusion of large failure: - Development of methodologies considering corrosion and associated technical means: control of oxide layer, detection of corrosion, leakage - ISI with lead (opacity, temperatures, density) Capability of severe core damage provision if prevention is not sufficient

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP "Dealt with" events - 1  "Dealt with" events:  Their consequences are considered in the design  A list of initiating faults and associated sequences to be studied has been determined  Preliminary qualitative criteria on the barriers have been defined  Water ingress: Steam Generatorleakage : DBC2 Steam Generator tube rupture: DBC3 Rupture of one tube to the rupture of all Steam Generator tubes: DBC3 except if it can be demonstrated that the rupture of neighbouring tubes can be limited (loadings assessment, consideration of a possible corrosion). In this case, the rupture of all tubes is analysed as a DBC4 Steam Generator tube failure in case of thermal transients in the primary circuit: the design objective is to avoid tube failure during DBC2 and DBC3 transients

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP "Dealt with" events - 2  "Dealt with" events:  Risks associated with water ingress: Mechanical transient due to the depressurisation into the reactor vessel Water/steam interaction with primary coolant and its consequences (e.g. core compaction, structures failure) Reactivity insertion (e.g., voiding effect, moderator effect, core compaction) Draining of the primary coolant outside the reactor vessel Pressurisation of the primary building Overcooling and subsequent freezing due to steam generator overflow

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP "Dealt with" events - 3  "Dealt with" events:  List of limiting events: Leakage of main and safety vessels Excessive cooling leading to large lead freezing Large internal failure due to corrosion (depending on the consequences and the possible mitigating provisions, might be analysed as a severe core damage) Large reactor vessel failure due to corrosion (depending on the consequences and the possible mitigating provisions, might be analysed as a severe core damage) Total Instantaneous Blockage

Task D1.21 Safety approach for EFIT – May AREVA NP "Excluded" events  "Excluded" events: their consequences are not addressed in the design  The exclusion has to be justified:  Physically impossible  “Practical elimination” by adequate design and operating provision  Preliminary list:  Large reactivity insertion due to: Core support failure (including corrosion as initiator) Core compaction capable to approach criticality Voiding capable to approach criticality (e.g., caused by large gas or steam ingress) Large fuel loading error  Primary system damage due to large load drop (e.g. during handling operations)  Large water ingress in the primary circuit (if consequences cannot be mitigated)  DBC combined with complete and timely unlimited loss of decay heat removal function (i.e. Secondary Cooling System, DRC)