Lower head integrity under steam explosion loads

Theofanous, T.G.; Yuen, W. W.; Angelini, S.; Sienicki, James J.; Freeman, K. C.; Chen, X.; Salmassi, T.

doi:10.1016/s0029-5493(99)00028-x

Cited by 15 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This was done in the ESPROSE.m code, as noted above, and consistent interpretations of 1D experiments in the KROTOS facility were possible, for both weak propagations obtained with tin, as well as with strong supercritical detonations with aluminum oxide melt (Hohmann et al, 1993). Together with proper treatment of wave dynamics, this opens the way to a priori predictions of 2D and 3D explosions (Theofanous et al, 1998b), as de®nitely needed in practical geometries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

On the existence of multiphase thermal detonations

Yuen

Theofanous

1999

International Journal of Multiphase Flow

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

On the existence of multiphase thermal detonations

Yuen

Theofanous

1999

International Journal of Multiphase Flow

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a severe accident in a nuclear power plant, the ERVC (External Reactor Vessel Cooling) concept has been proposed as a effective severe accident mitigation strategy and adopted in nuclear power plants of AP1400 [1], AP600 [2], and AP1000 [3]. The major objective of the ERVC strategy is to retain the molten corium within a reactor vessel and maintain the integrity of the reactor vessel.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Loop analysis of a natural circulation two-phase flow under an external reactor vessel cooling

Kim

Park

et al. 2008

International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In recent years, mechanistic steam explosion models were developed and used for reactor scale assessments. [2][3][4][5] Mostly, mechanistic codes were used in a limited manner to give some results for typical or bounding cases for a support of assessments by probabilistic approaches. However, Zuchuat et al 2) applied a 1D steam explosion code TEXAS 6) directly as a physics model in a probabilistic approach to quantify the uncertainty of the conditional containment failure probability (CCFP) due to ex-vessel steam explosions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Containment Failure Probability by Ex-Vessel Steam Explosion in Japanese LWR Plants

Moriyama

TAKAGI

Muramatsu

et al. 2006

Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The containment failure probability due to ex-vessel steam explosions was evaluated for Japanese BWR and PWR model plants. A stratified Monte Carlo technique (Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS)) was applied for the evaluation of steam explosion loads, in which a steam explosion simulation code JASMINE was used as a physics model. The evaluation was made for three scenarios: a steam explosion in the pedestal area or in the suppression pool of a BWR model plant with a Mark-II containment, and in the reactor cavity of a PWR model plant. The scenario connecting the generation of steam explosion loads and the containment failure was assumed to be displacement of the reactor vessel and pipings, and failure at the penetration in the containment boundary. We evaluated the conditional containment failure probability (CCFP) based on the preconditions of failure of molten core retention within the reactor vessel, relocation of the core melt into the water pool without significant interference, and a strong triggering at the time of maximum premixed mass. The obtained mean and median values of the CCPF were 6:4Â10 À2 (mean) and 3:9Â10 À2 (median) for the BWR suppression pool case, 2:2Â10 À3 (mean) and 2:8Â10 À10 (median) for the BWR pedestal case, and 6:8Â10 À2 (mean) and 1:4Â10 À2 (median) for the PWR cavity case. The evaluation of CCFPs on the basis of core damage needs consideration of probabilities for the above-mentioned preconditions. Thus, the CCFPs per core damage should be lower than the values given above. The specific values of the probability were most dependent on the assumed range of melt flow rate and fragility curve that involved conservatism and uncertainty due to simplified scenarios and limited information.

show abstract

Lower head integrity under steam explosion loads

Cited by 15 publications

References 26 publications

On the existence of multiphase thermal detonations

On the existence of multiphase thermal detonations

Loop analysis of a natural circulation two-phase flow under an external reactor vessel cooling

Evaluation of Containment Failure Probability by Ex-Vessel Steam Explosion in Japanese LWR Plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About