0
Research Papers: Codes and Standards

Probabilistic Pressurized Thermal Shock Analysis for a Reactor Pressure Vessel Considering Plume Cooling Effect

[+] Author and Article Information
Guian Qian

Laboratory for Nuclear Materials,
Nuclear Energy and Safety Department,
Paul Scherrer Institute,
Villigen PSI 5232, Switzerland
e-mail: guian.qian@psi.ch

V. F. González-Albuixech

Laboratory for Nuclear Materials,
Nuclear Energy and Safety Department,
Paul Scherrer Institute,
Villigen PSI 5232, Switzerland
e-mail: vicente.gonzalez@psi.ch

Markus Niffenegger

Laboratory for Nuclear Materials,
Nuclear Energy and Safety Department,
Paul Scherrer Institute,
Villigen PSI 5232, Switzerland
e-mail: markus.niffenegger@psi.ch

Medhat Sharabi

Laboratory for Thermal Hydraulics,
Nuclear Energy and Safety Department,
Paul Scherrer Institute,
Villigen PSI 5232, Switzerland;
Mechanical Power Engineering Department,
Mansoura University,
Mansoura 35516, Egypt
e-mail: medhat.sharabi@psi.ch

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received August 4, 2015; final manuscript received November 27, 2015; published online April 28, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Allen C. Smith.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 138(4), 041204 (Apr 28, 2016) (8 pages) Paper No: PVT-15-1177; doi: 10.1115/1.4032197 History: Received August 04, 2015; Revised November 27, 2015

The inner surface of a reactor pressure vessel (RPV) is assumed to be subjected to pressurized thermal shocks (PTSs) caused by the injection of emergency cooling water. The downstream is not homogeneous but typically in a plume shape coming from the inlet nozzles. In this paper, both deterministic and probabilistic methods are used to assess the integrity of a model RPV subjected to PTS. The favor code is used to calculate the probabilities for crack initiation and failure of the RPV considering crack distributions based on cracks observed in the Shoreham and PVRUF RPVs. The study shows that peak KI of the cracks inside the plume increases about 33% compared with that outside. The conditional probability inside the plume is more than eight orders of magnitude higher than outside the plume. In order to be conservative, it is necessary to consider the plume effect in the integrity assessment.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Cut-view description of the CFD computational domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Temperature distribution inside, at the border, and outside of the plume at ti = 534 s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

von Mises stress distributions inside, at the border, and outside of the plume at ti = 534 s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

One-dimensional crack model in weight function method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Enrichment method in XFEM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Overview of the mesh and crack details for axial crack using XFEM

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

(a) Deterministic assessment of the RPV with surface cracks by considering plume cooling, KIC according to ASME. (b) Deterministic assessment of the RPV by considering plume cooling, KIC according to master curve.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

(a) KI of embedded cracks located inside, at the border, and outside of the plume. (b) Comparison of KI calculated by favor and XFEM.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Flowchart in favor to perform probabilistic analysis

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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
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