Journal of Nuclear Science, Engineering and Technology (JONSAT)
In cooperation with the Iranian Nuclear Society

Development of a Qualified MELCOR Model for IR-360 NPP Using SNAP Software

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

F Yousefpour
A Zarnooshe Farahani
M RahGoshay
S. M Hoseyni
Abstract
Development of a qualified thermal-hydraulics and the severe accident model of nuclear power plants (NPPs) is of crucial importance in their design, optimization and safety evaluation. This is also the first step in the safety analysis of the IR-360 NPP for which its design is domestically in process. Without an approved and “qualified" model, deterministic safety analysis (DSA) results are not reliable. In fact, the quality of the developed model should be assessed to ensure the reliability of the analysis results. This study attempts to develop a qualified MELCOR model for the IR-360 nuclear power plant in the SNAP nuclear analysis software. By selecting the appropriate nodalization of the problem and their proper connections, the most important thermo-hydraulics parameters such as pressure and temperature of the fluid, mass flow rate, direction and magnitude of the flow in the primary loop, etc are calculated. A comparison is made between the design parameters and calculated values to obtain the deviation of the model values from the design data. The calculated deviations shown to be below the acceptable limits, specified by the DSA practice including the suggestions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This confirms the qualification of the developed model for the safety analysis of the plant in the next steps.

Keywords

Pressurized Nuclear Power Plant
Primary Loop
Modeling
MELCOR Code
SNAP Software
Nodalization
[1] IAEA, IAEA SSG-2, Deterministic Safety Analysis for Nuclear Power Plants, (2009).
 [2] A. Petruzzi, F. D’Auria, W. Giannotti, Description of the procedure to qualify the nodalization and to analyze the code results, University of Pisa, DIMNP NT. 557(05) (2005).
 [3] B. Clement, T. Haste, Thematic network for a Phebus FPT1 international standard problem (THENPHEBISP), Nucl. Eng. Des. 235 (2005) 347-357.
 [4] R. Ashley, M. EL- Shanawany, F. Eltawila, F. D’Auria, Good Practices for User Effect Reduction, NEA/CSNI/R(98)22 (1999).
 [5] R.O. Gauntt, M.T. Leonard, K. Ross, K.C. Wagner, State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses Project, MELCOR Best Modeling Practices, NUREG-1935 (2010).
 
[6] INRA, Regulation for Licensing of IR-360 Nuclear Power Plant, INRA-NS-RE-052-10/1-1 (2007).
 
[7] Dino Alfonso Arano, Realization of a Methodology for the Assessment of Best estimate codes for the analysis of the nuclear systems (2008).
 
[8] IAEA, Accident Analysis for Nuclear Power Plant, IAEA-SRS-No.023 (2002).
 
[9] Lars Nilsson, Development of an Input Model to MELCOR 1.8.5 for the Ringhals 3 PWR, SKI Repot,2004:55 (2004).
[10] Lars Nilsson, Development of an Input Model to MELCOR 1.8.5 for Oskarshamn 3 BWR,SKI Repot,2007:05 (2007).
 
[11] J. Jafari, M. Boroushaki, F. D’Auria, S. Shahedi, Development of a qualified nodalization for small-break LOCA transient analysis in PSB-VVER integral test facility by RELAP5 system code, Nucl. Eng. Des. 240 (2010) 3309-3320.
 
[12] M, Saghafi, M.B. Ghofrani, Development and qualification of a Thermal-hydraulic Nodalization for modeling Station Blackout Accident in PSB-VVER Test Facility, Nucl. Eng. Des. 303 (2016) 109-121.
 
[13] V. Martinez-Quiroga, F. Reventos, The Use of System Codes in Scaling Studies: Relevant Techniques for Qualifying NPP Nodalizations, Sci. Technol. Nucl. Installations 138745 (2014) 1-16.
 
[14] R.O. Gaunt, Fukushima Accident Study Using MELCOR, SANDIA Report2012-6173, (2013).
 
[15] T. Sevon, Fukushima Daiichi Unit 2 Accident Analysis with MELCOR 2.1, SANDIA Report (2016).
 
[16] USNRC, State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses (SOARCA) Report, Washington D.C., NUREG-1935 (2012).
 
[17] US NRC, Severe Accident Risks: An Assessment for Five U.S. Nuclear Power Plants (1990).
[18] US NRC, State of the Art Reactor Consequence Analyses Project, 2 volumes, NUREG CR-7110 (2013).
 
[19] A. Prosek, F. D'Auria, B. Mavko, Review of quantitative accuracy assessments with fast fourier transform based method (FFTBM), Nucl. Eng. Des. 217 (2002) 179-206.
 
[20] F. Yousefpour, F. Shokri, H. Soltani, IR-360 nuclear power plant safety functions and component classification, Nucl. Eng. Des. 240 (2010) 2847-2861.
 
[21] SURENA, IR-360 Detail Design Documents (2016).
 
[22] SURENA, Verification & Validation of the MELCOR code for IR-360 Success Criteria Analysis (2013).
[23] R.O. Gaunt, J.E. Cash, R.K. Cole, C.M. Erickson, L.L. Humphries, B.R. Rodrigez, M.F. Young, MELCOR 1.8.6 Computer Code Manuals, 2 Volumes,SANDIA Lab. (2005).
 
[24] SURENA, IR-360 Technical Specification, (2016).
 
[25] J. Birchley, T.J. Haste, M. Richner, Accident Management following loss of residual heat removal during mid-loop operation of Westinghouse 2-loop PWR, Nucl. Eng. Des. 238 (2008) 2173-2181.
 
[26] A. Petruzzi, F. D'Auria, Thermal-Hydraulics System Codes in Nuclear Reactor Safety and Qualification Procedure, Sci. Technol. Nucl. Installations. DOI:10.1115/2008/460795 (2008) 1-16.

Home