Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제52권4호
  • /
  • Pages.764-775
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Risk-informed approach to the safety improvement of the reactor protection system of the AGN-201K research reactor

  • Ahmed, Ibrahim (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Zio, Enrico (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Heo, Gyunyoung (Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University)
  • 투고 : 2019.06.17
  • 심사 : 2019.09.27
  • 발행 : 2020.04.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Periodic safety reviews (PSRs) are conducted on operating nuclear power plants (NPPs) and have been mandated also for research reactors in Korea, in response to the Fukushima accident. One safety review tool, the probabilistic safety assessment (PSA), aims to identify weaknesses in the design and operation of the research reactor, and to evaluate and compare possible safety improvements. However, the PSA for research reactors is difficult due to scarce data availability. An important element in the analysis of research reactors is the reactor protection system (RPS), with its functionality and importance. In this view, we consider that of the AGN-201K, a zero-power reactor without forced decay heat removal systems, to demonstrate a risk-informed safety improvement study. By incorporating risk- and safety-significance importance measures, and sensitivity and uncertainty analyses, the proposed method identifies critical components in the RPS reliability model, systematically proposes potential safety improvements and ranks them to assist in the decision-making process.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. International Atomic Energy Agency, Periodic Safety Review for Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA Safety Standards, Specific Safety Guide No. SSG-25, Vienna, Austria, 2013.
  2. US Nuclear Regulatory Commision, PRA Procedures Guide: A Guide to the Performance of Probabilistic Risk Assessments for Nuclear, Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-2300, 1983.
  3. T.L. Chu, G. Martinez-Guridi, M. Yue, J. Lehner, P. Samanta, Traditional Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methods for Digital Systems, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-6962, 2008.
  4. T.D. Le Duy, D. Vasseur, A practical methodology for modeling and estimation of common cause failure parameters in multi-unit nuclear PSA model, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 170 (2018) 159-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.10.018
  5. T. Hakata, Seismic PSA method for multiple nuclear power plants in a site, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 92 (2007) 883-894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2006.04.022
  6. H. Kim, J.T. Kim, G. Heo, Failure rate updates using condition-based prognostics in probabilistic safety assessments, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 175 (2018) 225-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2018.03.022
  7. W.E. Vesely, Principles of resource-effectiveness and regulatory-effectiveness for risk-informed applications: reducing burdens by improving effectiveness, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 63 (1999) 283-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(98)00044-1
  8. M.J. Delaney, G.E. Apostolakis, M.J. Driscoll, Risk-informed design guidance for future reactor systems, Nucl. Eng. Des. 235 (2005) 1537-1556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2005.01.004
  9. W.E. Vesely, G.E. Apostalakis, Developments in risk-informed decision-making for nuclear power plants, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 63 (1999) 223-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(98)00036-2
  10. Y. Mizuno, H. Ninokata, D.J. Finnicum, Risk-informed design of IRIS using a level-1 probabilistic risk assessment from its conceptual design phase, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 87 (2005) 201-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2004.04.018
  11. K.N. Fleming, Issues and Recommendations for Advancement of PRA Technology in Risk-Informed Decision Making, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-6813, 2003.
  12. J.Y. Oh, S.W. Hwang, Risk-informed approach for design optimization during low power and shutdown operation, Ann. Nucl. Energy 130 (2019) 293-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2019.02.039
  13. R. Khalil Ur, G. Heo, Risk informed design of I&C architecture for research reactors, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 62 (2015) 293-299. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2014.2375361
  14. International Atomic Energy Agency, Safety of Research Reactors, IAEA Safety Standards Series: Specific Safety Requirements No. SSR-3, 2016. Vienna, Austria.
  15. International Atomic Energy Agency, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design, IAEA Safety Standards Series: Specific Safety Requirements No. SSR-2/1 (Rev. 1), 2016. Vienna, Austria.
  16. K.U. Rahman, K. Jin, G. Heo, Risk-informed design of hybrid I&C architectures for research reactors, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 63 (2016) 351-358. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2015.2499779
  17. M.-H. Kim, Utilization of AGN-201K for education and research in Korea, in: Res. React. Fuel Manag. Trans., 2011. Rome, Italy.
  18. Z.W. Birnbaum, On the importance of different components in a multicomponent system, Multivar. Anal. 2 (1968).
  19. W.E. Vesely, T.C. Davis, R.S. Denning, N. Saltos, Measures of risk importance and their applications, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR (United States. Nucl. Regul. Comm.) 3385 (1983).
  20. M.C. Cheok, G.W. Parry, R.R. Sherry, Use of importance measures in riskinformed regulatory applications, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 60 (1998) 213-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00144-0
  21. J.G. Cho, B.J. Yum, Development and evaluation of an uncertainty importance measure in fault tree analysis, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 57 (1997) 143-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00024-0
  22. M. Van Der Borst, H. Schoonakker, An overview of PSA importance measures, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 72 (2001) 241-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(01)00007-2
  23. M. Modarres, M. Agarwal, Consideration of probabilistic uncertainty in riskbased importance ranking, in: Proc. PSA '96, ANS, 1996.
  24. S.H. Han, H.-G. Lim, S.-C. Jang, J.-E. Yang, AIMS-psa: a software for integrated PSA, in: 13th Int. Conf. Probabilistic Saf. Assess. Manag., PSAM 13), Seoul, Korea, 2016.
  25. M.-H. Kim, Reactor upgrade of AGN-201 in KHU, Korea, in: Res. React. Fuel Manag. Trans., 2008. Hamburg, Germany.
  26. International Atomic Energy Agency, Manual on Reliability Data Collection for Research Reactor PSAs, IAEA-TECDOC-636, Vienna, Austria, 1992.
  27. I. Ahmed, G. Heo, Preliminary unavailability analysis OF shutdown system for AGN-201K research reactor, in: Res. React. Fuel Manag. Trans., Dead-Sea, Jordan, 2019.
  28. International Atomic Energy Agency, Generic Component Reliability Data for Research Reactor PSA, IAEA-TECDOC-930, Vienna, Austria, 1997.
  29. B.J. Garrick, W.C. Gekler, L. Goldfisher, R.H. Karcher, B. Shimizu, J.H. Wilson, Reliability Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Protective Systems, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, NH-190, 1967.
  30. N.A. Walter, P.M. Watson, Component Failure Rates and Their Role in Reliability Prediction, Technical report TR-71-31, 1971.
  31. International Atomic Energy Agency, Component Reliability Data for Use in Probabilistic Safety Assessment, IAEA-TECDOC-478, Vienna, Austria, 1988.
  32. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, CCF parameter estimations, 2015 update. http://nrcoe.inel.gov/resultsdb/ParamEstSpar/, 2016.
  33. A.D. Swain, Accident Sequence Evaluation Program: Human Reliability Analysis Procedure, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-4772, 1987.
  34. A.D. Sawin, H.E. Guttmann, Handbook of Human Reliability Analysis With Emphasis on Nuclear Power Plant Applications, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR (United States. Nucl. Regul. Comm.)1278, 1983.
  35. Exida, IEC 61508 Overview Report: A Summary of the Iec 61508 Standard For Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety-Related Systems, Exida, Sellersville, PA 18960, USA, 2006. http://www.win.tue.nl/-mvdbrand/courses/sse/1213/iec61508_overview.pdf. (Accessed 5 May 2019).
  36. J.L. Bergstrom, An Overview of ISA 84 Standard for Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) and the Safety Life Cycle, Process Eng. Assoc. LLC, 2015, in: http://www.processengr.com/ppt_presentations/safety_lifecycle_training_2015.pdf. (Accessed 5 May 2019).
  37. J.C. Whitaker, Power Vacuum Tubes Handbook, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, New York, 1994.
  38. J.-K. Lee, K.-I. Jeong, G.-O. Park, K.-Y. Sohn, A Quantitative reliability analysis of FPGA-based controller for applying to nuclear instrumentation and control system, J. Korea Inst. Electron. Commun. Sci. 9 (2014) 1117-1123. https://doi.org/10.13067/JKIECS.2014.9.10.1117