Uncertainty research of fuel rod design verification based on Dakota
-
摘要: 燃料棒设计验证是评价燃料棒在反应堆内运行时安全性能的过程，其中输入参数的不确定度对评价结果有非常重要的影响。为了系统研究燃料棒设计验证的不确定度，使用Dakota中蒙特卡罗与拉丁超立方的非参数抽样方法，结合燃料棒性能分析软件开展了燃料棒设计验证计算，并与传统的不确定度计算方法进行了比较。结果表明，传统方法未充分考虑输入参数的不确定度，导致内压准则在正常运行条件下容易受到挑战，统计性的抽样方法弥补了这一缺陷，获得了较大的安全裕量，为燃料棒安全性以及经济性的提升提供了理论依据；同时，2种抽样方法所获得的燃料温度计算结果较传统方法更加具有参考意义；对于包壳腐蚀准则以及包壳应变准则，由于不确定度输入参数选取得当，抽样方法与传统方法的计算结果无明显区别。因此，基于非参数抽样的统计法对于评价燃料棒在反应堆内的安全性能更加具有实用性。Abstract: Fuel rod design verification is the evaluation process of fuel rod safety performance during operation in reactor, in which the uncertainty of input parameters has important effect on evaluation results. To study the uncertainty systematically, fuel rod performance analysis software has been coupled with Dakota software to carry out fuel rod design verification, the results of nonparametric Monte Carlo and Latin Hypercube Sampling have been compared with those of traditional method. It turns out that the fuel rod inner pressure criterion is vulnerable to be under challenge for the reason of input uncertainty under consideration by traditional method. The defects can be made up by statistical nonparametric sampling, by which a larger safety margin is obtained, and a theoretical basis for fuel rod safety and economic performance enhancement is provided. Meanwhile, the temperature calculation result obtained by two sampling methods can be more referential compared with traditional method. For the cladding corrosion and strain criterion, the results of sampling methods and traditional method show no significant difference, for the reason that the uncertain input parameters are selected suitably. In conclusion, the statistical method based on nonparametric sampling can be more practically significant for safety performance evaluation of fuel rod in operation.
-
Key words:
- fuel rod /
- uncertainty /
- nonparametric sampling /
- Monte Carlo sampling /
- Latin Hypercube Sampling /
- Dakota software
-
图 1 燃料棒性能分析软件计算流程框图
Figure 1. Calculation flow of fuel rod performance analysis software
图 2 Dakota与燃料棒性能分析软件之间的耦合关系
Figure 2. Coupling relationship between Dakota and fuel rod performance analysis software
图 5 MC抽样法与LHS方法燃料棒设计验证计算结果
Figure 5. Results of fuel rod design verification by MC sampling and LHS
表 1 输入输出偏相关系数
Table 1. Partial correlation between input and output
item partial correlation coefficient fuel rod pressure pellet temperature cladding corrosion cladding strain change MC LHS MC LHS MC LHS MC LHS fuel OD −0.957 −0.961 −0.365 −0.348 0.054 0.090 0.291 0.253 fuel porosity 0.996 0.996 0.999 0.999 0.059 0.019 0.403 0.411 cladding OD 0.071 0.015 0.025 0.040 −0.403 −0.104 0.022 −0.040 cladding ID 0.185 0.018 −0.013 −0.037 0.053 0.040 −0.035 0.037 plenum length −0.262 −0.041 0.028 −0.024 −0.025 0.036 0.024 −0.001 235U enrichment 0.120 0.083 0.407 0.462 0.096 0.007 −0.037 0.013 fuel column length 0.034 −0.004 0.030 −0.024 −0.053 0.029 0.024 −0.001 fuel conductivity − − −0.999 −0.999 −0.024 −0.041 −0.419 −0.415 density change by resintering −0.987 −0.987 −0.996 −0.996 −0.053 −0.056 −0.422 −0.466 cladding corrosion model 0.458 0.459 0.646 0.690 1.000 1.000 −0.022 0.067 fuel solid swell model 0.240 0.177 −0.294 −0.323 0.033 −0.003 0.116 0.102 cladding creep model −0.367 −0.450 −0.017 0.038 0.055 0.016 0.366 0.351 
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 王璐, 张林, 徐腾, 等. 燃料棒设计关键参数敏感性分析[J]. 应用科技, 2019, 46(6):69-72. (Wang Lu, Zhang Lin, Xu Teng, et al. Sensitivity analysis of key parameters in fuel rod design[J]. Applied Science and Technology, 2019, 46(6): 69-72 [2] 周勤. 压水堆燃料棒设计参数不确定性研究[J]. 原子能科学技术, 2003, 37(s1):5-9. (Zhou Qin. Research on uncertainty of design parameters for PWR fuel rod[J]. Atomic Energy Science and Technology, 2003, 37(s1): 5-9 [3] International Atomic Energy Agency. Best estimate safety analysis for nuclear power plants: uncertainty evaluation[R]. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency, 2008. [4] Briggs L L. Uncertainty quantification approaches for advanced reactor analyses[R]. Chicago: Argonne National Laboratory, 2008. [5] Prošek A, Mavko B. The state-of-the-art theory and applications of best-estimate plus uncertainty methods[J]. Nuclear Technology, 2007, 158(1): 69-79. doi: 10.13182/NT07-1 [6] 陈炼, 房芳芳, 邓程程, 等. 核电站最佳估算安全分析中的不确定度评估方法分析[J]. 原子能科学技术, 2015, 49(7):1237-1242. (Chen Lian, Fang Fangfang, Deng Chengcheng, et al. Analysis on uncertainty evaluation method in best estimate safety analysis of nuclear power plant[J]. Atomic Energy Science and Technology, 2015, 49(7): 1237-1242 doi: 10.7538/yzk.2015.49.07.1237 [7] Wensauer A, Distler I, Heins L. Probabilistic uncertainty analysis applied to fuel rod design[M]//Spitzer C, Schmocker U, Dang V N. Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management. London: Springer, 2004: 2791-2796. [8] Boulore A. Importance of uncertainty quantification in unclear fuel behavior modeling and simulation[C]//Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty International Conference. Lucca, 2018. [9] Bratton R N, Jessee M A, Wieselquist W A, et al. Rod internal pressure distribution and uncertainty analysis using FRAPCON[J]. Nuclear Technology, 2017, 197(1): 47-63. doi: 10.13182/NT16-75 [10] Hernandez-Solis A, Ekberg C, Jensen A O, et al. Statistical uncertainty analyses of void fraction predictions using two different sampling strategies: Latin hypercube and simple random sampling[C]//Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering. Xi’an, China: ASNE, 2010: 1059-1068. [11] Ikonen T, Tulkki V. The importance of input interactions in the uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of nuclear fuel behavior[J]. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 2014, 275: 229-241. doi: 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2014.05.015 [12] 王国栋, 王喆, 扈本学, 等. 应用DAKOTA程序耦合WGOTHIC程序进行安全壳压力响应敏感性分析[J]. 原子能科学技术, 2015, 49(12):2176-2180. (Wang Guodong, Wang Zhe, Hu Benxue, et al. Sensitivity analysis on containment pressure response using coupled DAKOTA and WGOTHIC codes[J]. Atomic Energy Science and Technology, 2015, 49(12): 2176-2180 doi: 10.7538/yzk.2015.49.12.2176 [13] Wang J R, Tsai C W, Lin H T, et al. Performing uncertainty analysis of IIST facility SBLOCA by TRACE and DAKOTA[R]. Washington DC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2013. [14] 高新力, 靖剑平, 温爽, 等. DAKOTA-RELAP不确定性分析方法在大破口事故中的应用[J]. 核安全, 2016, 15(1):66-70. (Gao Xinli, Jing Jianping, Wen Shuang, et al. Application of DAKOTA-RELAP method in the uncertainty analysis of LB-LOCA[J]. Nuclear Safety, 2016, 15(1): 66-70 [15] 兰兵, 潘昕怿, 石兴伟, 等. DAKOTA法量化AP1000堆芯物理不确定性[J]. 核电子学与探测技术, 2019, 39(6):668-672. (Lan Bing, Pan Xinyi, Shi Xingwei, et al. Application of DAKOTA method in AP1000 core physics uncertainty quantization[J]. Nuclear Electronics & Detection Technology, 2019, 39(6): 668-672 [16] 孙山泽. 非参数统计讲义[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2020: 147-150Sun Shanze. Nonparametric statistics handout[M]. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2020: 147-150) -
点击查看大图
图(5) / 表(1)
计量
- 文章访问数: 662
- HTML全文浏览量: 247
- PDF下载量: 33
- 被引次数: 0
