华电技术 ›› 2016, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (12): 18-20.

• 研究与开发 • 上一篇    下一篇

AP1000非能动余热排出系统共因失效研究

  

  1. 1.南华大学 核科学技术学院,湖南衡阳〓421001;2. 华北电力大学核科学与工程学院,北京〓102206
  • 出版日期:2016-12-25 发布日期:2017-02-04

AP1000 passive residual heat removal system common case failure study

  1. 1.University of South China, Hengyang 421001, China; 2.School of Nuclear Science and Engineering, North China Electrical Power University,Beijing 102206,China
  • Online:2016-12-25 Published:2017-02-04

摘要:

摘要:采用多希腊字母(MGL)模型,借助Risk Spectrum软件对AP1000非能动余热排出系统(PRHRS)进行共因失效影响分析。针对是否考虑共因失效(CCF)分别进行计算,得出不考虑CCF时PRHRS的失效概率为9.559×10-6,而考虑CCF时PRHRS的失效概率为2.008×10-4。对比可知,PRHRS的失效模式在是否考虑CCF时是不同的,且考虑CCF时PRHRS的失效概率比不考虑CCF时大2个数量级。PRHRS失效不考虑CCF时,热交换器泄漏和安全壳内置换料水箱(IRWST)水箱失效对整个PRHRS影响最大;考虑CCF后,气动阀CCF成为PRHRS失效的主要影响因素。

关键词:

Abstract:

Abstract:Based on risk spectrum software, impact analysis of common case failure (CCF) of AP1000 passive residual heat removal system (PRHRS) was carried out by applying multiple Greek letter model (MGL). Situation with and without CCF were both calculated. Without CCF, the PRHRS failure probability is 9.559×10-6. With CCF, the PRHRS failure probability is 2.008×10-4. In this comparison, we can find that, without considering CCF, the PRHRS is mainly effected by heat exchanger leakage and IRWST failure. And, with considering CCF, the main cause of PRHRS failure is pneumatic valve CCF.

Key words: