Quantitative dynamic reliability evaluation of AP1000 passive safety systems by using FMEA and GO-FLOW methodology

被引：35

作者：

Hashim, Muhammad ^{[1
]}

Yoshikawa, Hidekazu ^{[1
]}

Matsuoka, Takeshi ^{[1
,2
]}

Yang, Ming ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Harbin Engn Univ, Coll Nucl Sci & Technol, Harbin 150001, Heilongjiang, Peoples R China

[2] Utsunomiya Univ, Dept Engn, Utsunomiya, Tochigi 3218585, Japan

来源：

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY | 2014年 / 51卷 / 04期

基金：

中国国家自然科学基金;

关键词：

dynamic reliability analysis; passive core cooling system; passive containment cooling system; AP1000; large break LOCA; active safety system; passive safety system; failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA); GO-FLOW methodology; UNCERTAINTIES; PERFORMANCE;

D O I：

10.1080/00223131.2014.881727

中图分类号：

TL [原子能技术]; O571 [原子核物理学];

学科分类号：

0827 ; 082701 ;

摘要：

The passive safety systems utilized in advanced pressurized water reactor (PWR) design such as AP1000 should be more reliable than that of active safety systems of conventional PWR by less possible opportunities of hardware failures and human errors (less human intervention). The objectives of present study are to evaluate the dynamic reliability of AP1000 plant in order to check the effectiveness of passive safety systems by comparing the reliability-related issues with that of active safety systems in the event of the big accidents. How should the dynamic reliability of passive safety systems properly evaluated? And then what will be the comparison of reliability results of AP1000 passive safety systems with the active safety systems of conventional PWR.For this purpose, a single loop model of AP1000 passive core cooling system (PXS) and passive containment cooling system (PCCS) are assumed separately for quantitative reliability evaluation. The transient behaviors of these passive safety systems are taken under the large break loss-of-coolant accident in the cold leg. The analysis is made by utilizing the qualitative method failure mode and effect analysis in order to identify the potential failure mode and success-oriented reliability analysis tool called GO-FLOW for quantitative reliability evaluation. The GO-FLOW analysis has been conducted separately for PXS and PCCS systems under the same accident. The analysis results show that reliability of AP1000 passive safety systems (PXS and PCCS) is increased due to redundancies and diversity of passive safety subsystems and components, and four stages automatic depressurization system is the key subsystem for successful actuation of PXS and PCCS system. The reliability results of PCCS system of AP1000 are more reliable than that of the containment spray system of conventional PWR. And also GO-FLOW method can be utilized for reliability evaluation of passive safety systems.

引用

页码：526 / 542

页数：17

共 19 条

[1] Ahmed W, 2012, NUCL POWER PRACTICAL, P23
[2] Evaluation of uncertainties related to passive systems performance
Burgazzi, L
[J]. NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND DESIGN, 2004, 230 (1-3) : 93 - 106
[3] Passive system reliability analysis: A study on the isolation condenser
Burgazzi, L
[J]. NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY, 2002, 139 (01) : 3 - 9
[4] David ML, FAILURE MODES EFFECT
[5] Hashim M, 2013, INT J NUCL SAF SIMUL, V4, P147
[6] Hashim M, 2013, INT J NUCL ENERGY SC, V8, P21
[7] HASHIM M., 2012, INT J NUCL SAFETY SI, V3, P164
[8] International Atomic Energy Agency, 1991, TECDOC626 INT AT EN
[9] Jiyong O, 2008, THESIS MIT CAMBRIDGE
[10] Kemper R. M., 1992, Transactions of the American Nuclear Society, V66, P601

← 1 2 →