Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Byong Guk Jeon, Yeon-Sik Cho, Hwang Bae, Yeon-Sik Kim, Sung-Uk Ryu, Jae-
Seung Suh, Sung-Jae Yi & Hyun-Sik Park
To cite this article: Byong Guk Jeon, Yeon-Sik Cho, Hwang Bae, Yeon-Sik Kim, Sung-Uk Ryu,
Jae-Seung Suh, Sung-Jae Yi & Hyun-Sik Park (2016): Code validation on a passive safety
system test with the SMART-ITL facility, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, DOI:
10.1080/00223131.2016.1262797
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223131.2016.1262797
Article views: 25
ARTICLE
Code validation on a passive safety system test with the SMART-ITL facility
Byong Guk Jeona, Yeon-Sik Chob, Hwang Baea, Yeon-Sik Kima, Sung-Uk Ryua, Jae-Seung Suhb, Sung-Jae Yia
and Hyun-Sik Parka
a
Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, - Daedeokdaero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, - , Korea; bSystem Engineering and
Technology Co. Ltd., Venture Town , , Sinildong-ro, Daedeok-gu, Daejeon, , Korea
Break -
LPP set-point PZR pressure= PLPP
LPP reactor trip signal
– FW stop, RCP coast down LPP + . s
– CMTAS (CMT actuation signal) triggering
Control rod insert LPP + . s
Main steam high pressure set-point LPP + . s
PRHR actuation signal (PRHRAS) MSHP+ . s = ( LPP + . s)
PRHRS isolation valve open, feedwater isolation valve close PRHRAS+ . s
Main steam isolation valve close PRHRAS + . s
CMT injection start CMTAS+ . s
SIT actuation signal (SITAS) PZR pressure=P SITAS
SIT injection start SITAS+ . s
ADS # open CMT level < %
Test end –
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 3
Figure . Comparison of CMT flow rate between experimentand Figure . Comparison of CMT water level between experimentand
simulation. simulation.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Research Founda-
tion of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government
(MSIP) [grant number 2016M2C6A1004894].
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Nomenclature
ADS automatic depressurization system
CMT core makeup tank
Figure . Comparison of SIT flow rate between experiment and ECT emergency cooldown tank
simulation. PBL pressure balance line
PRHRS passive residual heat removal system
PSIS passive safety injection system
SIT safety injection tank
UDC upper downcomer
References
[1] IAEA. Advances in small modular reactor technology
developments. Vienna: IAEA; 2014.
[2] Marcel CP, Furci HF, Delmastro DF, et al. Phe-
nomenology involved in self-pressurized, natural cir-
culation, low thermo-dynamic quality, nuclear reactors:
the thermal–hydraulics of the CAREM-25 reactor. Nucl
Eng Des. 2013;254:218–227.
[3] Reyes JN. Nuscale plant safety in response to extreme
events. Nucl Technol. 2012;178:1–11.
Figure . Comparison of SIT water level between experimentand [4] Petrovic B, Rocotti M, Monti S, et al. Pioneering role of
simulation. IRIS in the resurgence of small modular reactors. Nucl
Technol. 2012;178:126–152.
[5] Yi SJ, Song CH, Park HS. PX- an innovative safety
concept for an unmanned reactor. Nucl Eng Technol.
5. Conclusion 2016;48:268–273.
[6] Kim KK, Lee WJ, Choi S, et al. SMART: the first licensed
SMART-ITL is an integral test loop for SMART, and advanced integral reactor. J Energy P Eng. 2014;8:94–
a series of tests have been conducted to evaluate its 102.
passive safety systems: PRHRS, CMT, SIT, and ADS. [7] IAEA. Passive safety systems and natural circulation in
For one test, S108, a calculation was made using a water cooled nuclear power plants. Vienna: IAEA; 2009.
best estimate system code, MARS-KS, for a SBLOCA (IAEA-TECDOC-1624).
[8] Sutharshan B, Mutyala M, Vijuk RP, et al. The
scenario. Nodalization of the SMART-ITL was made
AP1000TM Reactor: passive safety and modular
based on the geometrical and material information of design. Energy Procedia. 2011;7:293–302.
the facility. The steady-state condition was precisely [9] Stosic ZV, Brettschuh W, Stoll U. Boiling water reac-
reproduced. Starting with the break, the sequence and tor with innovative safety concept: the generation III+
logic of events were followed. The overall pressure, SWR-1000. Nucl Eng Des. 2008;238:1863–1901.
break flow rate, collapsed RV water level, circulation [10] Friend MT, Wright RF, Hundal R, et al. Simu-
lated AP600 response to small-break loss-of-coolant-
of a secondary loop, and injection flow rates from accident and non-loss-of-coolant accident events: anal-
the CMT and SIT were well predicted. However, in ysis of SPES-2 integral test results. Nucl Technol.
the input preparation, three-dimensional phenomena 1998;122:19–42.
inside the UDC were carefully considered for a reason- [11] Kukita Y, Yonomoto T, Asaka H, et al. ROSA/AP600
able representation of the break flow rate, or RV water testing: facility modifications and initial test results. J
level. Furthermore, the issue of condensation inside the Nucl Sci Technol. 1996;33(3):259–265.
[12] Yonomoto T, Konda M, Kukita Y, et al. Core Makeup
CMT and SIT affecting the injection flow rates was tank behavior observed during the ROSA-AP600
identified. experiments. Nucl Technol. 1997;119:112–122.
8 B. G. JEON ET AL.
[13] Tuunanen J, Riikonen V, Kouhia J, et al. Analyses of [19] KAERI. MARS code manual volume I: code structure,
PACTEL passive safety injection experiments GDE-21 system models and solution methods. Daejeon: KAERI;
through GDE-25. Nucl Eng Des. 1998;180:67–91. 2009. (KAERI/TR-2812).
[14] Park HS, Min BY, Jung YG, et al. Design of the VISTA- [20] Kim YS, Choi KY, Cho S, et al. Second ATLAS domestic
ITL test facility for an integral type reactor of SMART standard problem (DSP-02) for a code assessment. Nucl
and a post-test simulation of a SBLOCA test. Sci Tech- Eng Technol. 2013;45(7):871–894.
nol Nucl Ins. 2014;2014:1–12. Article ID: 840109. [21] Cho YJ, Kim S, Bae BU, et al. Assessment of condensa-
[15] Park HS, Yi SJ, Song CH. SMR accident simulation in tion heat transfer model to evaluate performance of the
experimental test loop. Nucl Eng Int. 2013;58(712):12– passive auxiliary feedwater system. Nucl Eng Techonol.
15. 2013;45(6):759–766.
[16] Bae H, Kim DE, Yi SJ, et al. Test facility design for the [22] Yang SY, Kim SH, Chung YJ, et al. Experimental
validation of SMART passive safety system. Paper pre- validation of the helical steam generator model in
sented at: Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society the TASS/SMR code. Ann Nucl Energy. 2008;35(1):
Spring Meeting; 2013 May 30–31; Gwangju. 49–59.
[17] Park HS, Bae H, Ryu SU, et al. Major results from 1- [23] Kim YS, Park HS. An overall investigation of break sim-
train passive safety system tests for the SMART design ulators for LOCA scenarios in integral effect tests. J
with the SMART-TIL facility. Paper presented at: Trans- Energy Eng. 2014;23(4):73–87.
actions of the Korean Nuclear Society Spring Meeting; [24] Watanabe T, Lee GJ, Iseki T, et al. A mechanistic
2015 May 7–8; Jeju. model for the analysis of flashing phenomena. Ann
[18] Fletcher CD, Bayless PD, Davis CB, et al. Adequacy Nucl Energy. 1996;23(10):801–811.
evaluation of RELAP5/MOD3, version 3.2.1.2 for sim- [25] Jeon BG, Bae H, Ryu SU, et al. Analysis of thermal-
ulating AP600 small break loss-of-coolant accidents. hydraulic behavior of CMT in the SMART-ITL facility.
Idaho Falls (ID): Idaho National Engineering and Envi- Paper presented at: Transactions of the Korean Nuclear
ronmental Laboratory; 1997. (non-proprietary ver- Society Autumn Meeting; 2015 Oct 29–30; Gyeongju.
sion). (INEL-96/0400).