Abstract

One of the key elements in probabilistic risk assessment is the identification and characterization of uncertainties. This paper suggests a procedure to identify influencing factors for uncertainty in source term evaluation, which are important to risk of public dose. We propose the following six steps for the identification in a systematic manner in terms of completeness and transparency of the results using both a logic diagram based on basic equations and expert opinions: (1) identification of uncertainty factors based on engineering knowledge of accident scenario analysis; (2) derivation of factors at the level of physical phenomena and variable parameters by expansion of dynamic equation for the system and scenario to be investigated, (3) extraction of uncertainties in variable parameters; (4) selection of important factors based on sensitivity study results and engineering knowledge; (5) identification of important factors for uncertainty analysis using expert opinions; and (6) integration of selected factors in the aforementioned steps. The proposed approach is tested with a case study for a risk-dominant accident scenario in direct cycle high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) plant. We use this approach for evaluating the fuel temperature in terms of reactor dynamics and thermal hydraulic characteristics during a depressurized loss-of-forced circulation (DLOFC) accident with the failure of mitigation systems such as control rod systems (CRS) in a representative HTGR plan. In total, six important factors and 16 influencing factors were successfully identified by the proposed method in the case study. The selected influencing factors can be used as input parameters in uncertainty propagation analysis.

References

1.
Strydom
,
G.
,
2011
, “PEBBED Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis of the CRP-5 PBMR DLOFC Transient Benchmark With the SUSA Code,” Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID, Report No.
INL/EXT-10-20531
.https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:42048254
2.
DOE
,
1987
, “Probabilistic Risk Assessment for the Standard Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor,” Department of Energy, Washington, DC, Standard No.
DOE-HTGR-86-011
.https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1113/ML111310342.pdf
3.
Kunitomi
,
K.
,
Katanishi
,
S.
, and
Takada
,
S.
,
2004
, “
Japan's Future HTR–the GTHTR300
,”
Nucl. Eng. Des.
,
233
(
1–3
), pp.
309
327
.
4.
AESJ
,
2009
, “A Standard for Procedures of Probabilistic Safety Assessment of Nuclear Power Plant During Power Operation (Level 2 PSA): 2008,” Atomic Energy Society of Japan, Tokyo, Japan, Standard No. AESJ-SC-S001.
5.
The RELAP5-3D© code Development Team
,
2005
, “RELAP5-3D© Code Manual,” Idaho Natioanl Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID, Report No.
INEEL-EXT-98-00834
. http://www4vip.inl.gov/relap5/r5manuals/ver_2_3/rv1.pdf
6.
Sato
,
H.
,
Yan
,
X.
,
Tachibana
,
Y.
,
Kazuhiko
,
K.
, and
Kato
,
Y.
,
2013
, “
Transient Analysis of Depressurized Loss-of-Forced-Circulation Accident Without Scram in High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor
,”
Nucl. Technol.
,
185
(
3
), pp.
227
238
.
7.
Sato
,
H.
,
Ohashi
,
H.
,
Nakagawa
,
S.
,
Tachibana
,
Y.
, and
Kunitomi
,
K.
,
2014
, “
Validation and Application of Thermal Hydraulic System Code for Analysis of Helically Coiled Heat Exchanger in High-Temperature Environment
,”
J. Nucl. Sci. Technol.
,
51
(
11–12
), pp.
1324
1335
.
8.
Sato
,
H.
,
Nakagawa
,
S.
, and
Ohashi
,
H.
,
2016
, “Selection of Design Basis Event for Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor,” Japan Atomic Energy Agency Institute, Ibaraki, Kapan, Report No.
JAEA-Technology-2016-014
. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:48014742
9.
James
,
J. D.
, and
Louis
,
J. H.
,
1976
,
Nuclear Reactor Analysis
,
Wiley
,
Hoboken, NJ
, p.
650
.
10.
Kunitomi
,
K.
,
Nakagawa
,
S.
, and
Itakura
,
H.
,
1991
, “Thermal Transient Analyses During a Depressurization Accident in the High Temperature Engineering Test Reactor (HTTR),” Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, Ibaraki, Kapan, Report No.
JAERI-M 91-163
. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:23028236
11.
Saito
,
S.
,
Tanaka
,
T.
,
Sudo
,
Y.
,
Baba
,
O.
,
Shindo
,
M.
,
Shiozawa
,
S.
,
Mogi
,
H.
,
Okubo
,
M.
,
Ito
,
N.
,
Shindo
,
R.
,
Kobayashi
,
N.
,
Kurihara
,
R.
,
Hayashi
,
K.
,
Hada
,
K.
,
Kurata
,
Y.
,
Yamashita
,
K.
,
Kawasaki
,
K.
,
Iyoku
,
T.
,
Kunitomi
,
K.
,
Maruyama
,
S.
,
Ishihara
,
M.
,
Sawa
,
K.
,
Fujimoto
,
N.
,
Murata
,
I.
,
Nakagawa
,
S.
,
Tachibana
,
Y.
,
Nishihara
,
T.
,
Oshita
,
S.
,
Shinozaki
,
M.
,
Takeda
,
T.
,
Sakaba
,
S.
,
Saikusa
,
A.
,
Tazawa
,
Y.
,
Fukaya
,
Y.
,
Nagahori
,
H.
,
Kikuchi
,
T.
,
Kawaji
,
S.
,
Isozaki
,
M.
,
Matsuzaki
,
S.
,
Sakama
,
I.
,
Hara
,
K.
,
Ueda
,
N.
, and
Kokusen
,
S.
,
1994
, “Design of High Temperature Engineering Test Reactor (HTTR),” Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, Ibaraki, Kapan, Report No.
JAERI 1332
. http://jolissrch-inter.tokai-sc.jaea.go.jp/search/servlet/search?2074267&language=1
12.
U.S. NRC
,
2008
, “Next Generation Nuclear Plant Phenomena Identification and Ranking Table (PIRTs),” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC, Report No.
NUREG/CR-6944
. https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/contract/cr6944/
You do not currently have access to this content.