0
Special Section Papers

Development of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methodology Against Volcanic Eruption for Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors

[+] Author and Article Information
Hidemasa Yamano

Advanced Fast Reactor Cycle R&D Center,
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA),
4002 Narita-cho,
Oarai 311-1393, Ibaraki, Japan
e-mail: yamano.hidemasa@jaea.go.jp

Hiroyuki Nishino

Advanced Fast Reactor Cycle R&D Center,
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA),
4002 Narita-cho,
Oarai 311-1393, Ibaraki, Japan
e-mail: nishino.hiroyuki@jaea.go.jp

Kenichi Kurisaka

Advanced Fast Reactor Cycle R&D Center,
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA),
4002 Narita-cho,
Oarai 311-1393, Ibaraki, Japan
e-mail: kurisaka.kennichi@jaea.go.jp

Takahiro Yamamoto

Geological Survey of Japan,
National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science
and Technology (AIST),
1-1-1 Higashi,
Tsukuba 305-8567, Ibaraki, Japan
e-mail: t-yamamoto@aist.go.jp

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received October 28, 2016; final manuscript received April 14, 2017; published online December 5, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Mohammad Pourgol-Mohammad.

ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Part B 4(3), 030902 (Dec 05, 2017) (9 pages) Paper No: RISK-16-1136; doi: 10.1115/1.4037877 History: Received October 28, 2016; Revised April 14, 2017

The objective of this paper is to develop a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methodology against volcanic eruption for decay heat removal function of sodium-cooled fast reactors (SFRs). In the volcanic PRA methodology development, only the effect of volcanic tephra (pulverized magma) is taken into account, because there is a great distance between a plant site assumed in this study and volcanoes. The volcanic tephra (ash) could potentially clog air filters of air-intakes that are essential for the decay heat removal. The degree of filter clogging can be calculated by atmospheric concentration of ash and tephra fallout duration and also suction flow rate of each component. This study evaluated a volcanic hazard using a combination of tephra fragment size, layer thickness, and duration. In this paper, functional failure probability of each component is defined as a failure probability of filter replacement obtained by using a grace period to filter failure. Finally, based on an event tree, a core damage frequency has been estimated by multiplying discrete hazard frequencies by conditional decay heat removal failure probabilities. A dominant sequence has been identified as well. In addition, sensitivity analyses have investigated the effects of a tephra arrival reduction factor and prefilter covering.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

AESJ, 2007, “ Implementation Standard of Seismic Probabilistic Safety Assessment for Nuclear Power Plants: 2007,” Atomic Energy Society of Japan, Tokyo, Japan, Standard No. AESJ-SC-P006:2007.
AESJ, 2012, “ Implementation Standard Concerning the Tsunami Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Nuclear Power Plants: 2011,” Atomic Energy Society of Japan, Tokyo, Japan, Standard No. AESJ-SC-RK004E:2011.
AESJ, 2014, “ Implementation Standard Concerning the Selection of Risk Assessment Methodology: 2014,” Atomic Energy Society of Japan, Tokyo, Japan, Standard No. AESJ-SC-RK008:2014.
ASME and ANS, 2013, “ Standard for Level 1/Large Early Release Frequency Probabilistic Risk Assessment for Nuclear Power Plant Applications,” American Society of Mechanical Engineers/American Nuclear Society, New York, Standard No. ASME/ANS Standard RA-Sb-2013.
NRC, 1991, “ Procedural and Submittal Guidance for Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) for Severe Accident Vulnerabilities,” Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Rockville, MD, Report No. NUREG-1407. https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1407/
IAEA, 1995, “ Treatment of External Hazards in Probabilistic Safety Assessment for Nuclear Power Plants. A Safety Practice,” International Atomic Agency, Vienna, Austria, IAEA-Safety Series No. 50-P-7. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:26041556
OECD and NEA, 2014, “ Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) of Natural External Hazards Including Earthquakes,” Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, and Nuclear Energy Agency, Paris, France, Report No. NEA/CNRA/R(2014)9. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:46027267
ENSREG, 2012, “ Stress Tests Performed on European Nuclear Power Plants,” European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group, Brussels, Belgium, Report No. 2012-04-25.
Yamano, H. , Nishino, H. , Kurisaka, K. , Sakai, T. , Yamamoto, T. , Ishizuka, Y. , Geshi, N. , Furukawa, R. , Nanayama, F. , and Takata, T. , 2014, “ Development of Margin Assessment Methodology of Decay Heat Removal Function Against External Hazards—Project Overview and Preliminary Risk Assessment Against Snow,” 12th Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference (PSAM 12), Honolulu, HI, June 22–27, p. 44. http://jolissrch-inter.tokai-sc.jaea.go.jp/search/servlet/search?5045434&language=1
IAEA, 2012, “ Volcanic Hazards in Site Evaluation for Nuclear Installations,” Specific Safety Guide, International Atomic Agency, Vienna, Austria, Series No. SSG-21. http://www-pub.iaea.org/books/IAEABooks/8774/Volcanic-Hazards-in-Site-Evaluation-for-Nuclear-Installations
IAEA, 2016, “ Volcanic Hazard Assessments for Nuclear Installations: Methods and Examples in Site Evaluation,” International Atomic Agency, Vienna, Austria, IAEA TECDOC No. 1795. http://www-pub.iaea.org/books/IAEABooks/11063/Volcanic-Hazard-Assessments-for-Nuclear-Installations-Methods-and-Examples-in-Site-Evaluation
Bonadonna, C. , 2006, “ Probabilistic Modelling of Tephra Dispersion,” Statistics in Volcanology, International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth's Interior (IAVCEI), GeoScienceWorld, McLean, VA, pp. 243–259.
Connor, C. B. , Hill, B. E. , Winfrey, B. , Franklin, N. M. , and La Femina, P. C. , 2001, “ Estimation of Volcanic Hazards From Tephra Fallout,” Nat. Hazards Rev., 2(1), pp. 33–42. [CrossRef]
De La Cruz-Reyna, S. , 1991, “ Poisson-Distributed Patterns of Explosive Eruptive Activity,” Bull. Vocanol., 54(1), pp. 57–67. [CrossRef]
Yamamoto, T. , Ishizuka, Y. , Geshi, N. , Furukawa, R. , and Nanayama, F. , 2013, “ Research and Development of Margin Assessment Methodology of Decay Heat Removal Function Against External Hazards (2) Development of External Hazard Assessment Methodology for Volcanic Eruption,” Fall Meeting 2013 of Atomic Energy Society of Japan, Hachinohe, Japan, Sep. 3–5, p. G45.
Connor, L. , and Connor, C. , 2011, “ Tephra2 Users Manual,” University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, accessed Sept. 24, 2017, https://vhub.org/resources/756/download/Tephra2_Users_Manual.pdf
Takahiro Yamamoto, 2016, “ Numerical Simulation for the Daisen-Kurayoshi Tephra, Japan,” Geological Survey of Japan, AIST, Ibaraki, Japan, Report No. 635.
Yamamoto, T. , Ishizuka, Y. , Geshi, N. , Furukawa, R. , and Nanayama, F. , 2015, “ Research and Development of Margin Assessment Methodology of Decay Heat Removal Function Against External Hazards (11) Development of External Hazard Assessment Methodology for Volcanic Eruption,” Fall Meeting 2015 of Atomic Energy Society of Japan, Shizuoka, Japan, Sep. 9–11, p. E48.
Morikawa, T. , 1979, “ Fluid-Solid Two-Phase Flow—Aerodyanamic and Hydraulic Transport,” Nikkan Kogyo Simbun Ltd., Tokyo, Japan.
Yamamoto, T. , Furukawa, R. , and Okayama, K. , 2016, “ Dust-Loading Tests for Air Filters With Volcanic Ash,” Geological Survey of Japan, AIST, Ibaraki, Japan, Report No. 629, pp. 1–26.
AESJ, 2009, “ Implementation Standard Concerning the Probabilistic Safety Assessment of Nuclear Power Plants Under Full-Power Operation (Level-1 PSA Edition): 2008,” Atomic Energy Society of Japan, Tokyo, Japan, Standard No. AESJ-SC-P008: 2008.
U.S. NRC, 1983, “ Handbook of Human Reliability Probability With Emphasis on Nuclear Power Plant Applications,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C, Standard No. NUREG/CR-1278. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0712/ML071210299.pdf
Yamano, H. , Nishino, H. , and Kurisaka, K. , 2016, “ Development of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methodology Against Extreme Snow for Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 308(11), pp. 86–95. [CrossRef]
Yamano, H. , Nishino, H. , Kurisaka, K. , Okano, Y. , Sakai, T. , Yamamoto, T. , Ishizuka, Y. , Geshi, N. , Furukawa, R. , Nanayama, F. , Takata, T. , and Azuma, E. , 2015, “ Development of Risk Assessment Methodology Against External Hazards for Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors: Project Overview and Strong Wind PRA Methodology,” International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP), Nice, France, May 3–6, Paper No. 15031.
Nishino, H. , Kurisaka, K. , and Yamano, H. , 2014, “ Development of Margin Assessment Methodology of Decay Heat Removal Function Against External Hazards (2) Tornado PRA Methodology,” Tenth International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Thermal-Hydraulics, Operation and Safety (NUTHOS-10), Okinawa, Japan, Dec. 14–18, Paper No. NUTHOS10-1068. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:47068869

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Tephra fallout simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Annual frequency of exceedance of tephra fallout thickness

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Diameter distribution of tephra

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Probability of exceedance of tephra fallout duration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Event tree in volcanic PRA

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Atmospheric concentration of tephra with 0.1 mm in diameter

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Air filter adhesion rate as a function of atmospheric concentration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Amount of air filter adhesion in atmospheric concentration of 10−4 kg/m3

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Grace period to air filter failure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Failure probability against grace period

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Failure probabilities of air filter replacement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Failure probability of EDG

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Failure probability of ACS (NC)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Core damage frequency by the sequence

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Heat removal failure probability by hazard category (tephra layer thickness)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Heat removal failure probability by hazard category (tephra fragment diameter)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Heat removal failure probability by hazard category (tephra fallout duration)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Core damage frequency by hazard category (tephra layer thickness)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Core damage frequency by hazard category (tephra fragment diameter)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Core damage frequency by hazard category (tephra fallout duration)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Comparison of core damage frequency in sensitivity analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Core damage frequency by sequence without prefilter

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Core damage frequency by sequence with 0.5 of tephra arrival reduction factor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Core damage frequency by sequence with 1.0 of tephra arrival reduction factor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Core damage frequency by sequence with 0.1 of tephra arrival reduction factor

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Articles from Part A: Civil Engineering
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In