Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Department of Nuclear Engineering, College of Engineering, Kyung Hee University Seocheon-dong, Giheung-gu, Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-do 446-701, South Korea
Department of Physics, Comsats Institute of Information Technology, Check Shahzad, Park Road, 44000 Islamabad, Pakistan
c
Center of Excellence in Science and Applied Technology (CEAST), 46000 Islamabad, Pakistan
b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 22 May 2014
Received in revised form 24 July 2014
Accepted 23 August 2014
Available online 16 September 2014
Keywords:
LOCA
Pressurized water reactor
Source term
Severe accident
Fission product activity
Iodine
a b s t r a c t
The aim of this work is the modeling and simulation of in-containment ssion products (FPs) quantication and behavior under loss of coolant accident (LOCA) in terms of NUREG-1465 key aspects. For this
purpose, a kinetic model has been developed to determine the quantication and behavior of in-containment source term after loss of coolant accident for typical 1000 MWe PWR. A more realistic approach of
continuous release of ssion products from damaged core has been implemented with coolant retention.
The simulation for in-containment ssion product quantication inuenced by containment atmosphere
and containment system response has been carried out. Dramatic results have been obtained upon comparison study of ssion product behaviors with different computational values. Moreover a contradiction
in mixing rate (wx) value has been observed with a factor of 10 in comparison with Saeed et al. (2012).
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The detailed analysis of response of a nuclear power plant (NPP)
under severe accident is needed to access the safety and risk margins of a NPP. The potential source term under reactor hypothetical
severe accident is highly inuenced by quantication of ssion
products release inside the reactor containment building. The
source term have great importance in safety assessment, e.g., control room radiological assessment (USNRC, 2003), radiological consequences of severe accidents (Haste et al., 2006) and for
emergency zone estimation (Wu et al., 2006), etc. The NUREG1465 report (USNRC, 1995) was the major report for providing
the most realistic estimation of in-containment source term during
reactor severe core damage scenarios. Several in pile and out of pile
experiments have been conducted to estimate the ssion product
behavior in reactor containment building (Mehboob et al.,
2012a). The Phbus-FP program (Schwarz et al., 1999) was the
most ambitious project ever launched to study the ssion product
behavior in the area of reactor severe accidents. The aim of this
project was to reduce the uncertainty in evaluation of source term
Corresponding author at: Department of Nuclear Engineering, College of
Engineering, Kyung Hee University Seocheon-dong, Giheung-gu, Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-do 446-701, South Korea. Tel.: +82 031 201 3654; fax: +82 031 202 2410.
E-mail addresses: khurramhrbeu@gmail.com (K. Mehboob), kpark@khu.ac.kr (K.
Park).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2014.08.056
0306-4549/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
366
2. Methodology
The in-containment airborne radioactivity is major source of
release in case of leakage. If there is a leakage in containment, then
there is a possibility of maximum release of airborne in-containment activity into environment (Lee and Ko, 2008). Therefore, incontainment airborne activity is needed to quantify for safety
assessment. In this study, a more realistic model for in-containment
airborne activity is developed with more realistic approach, e.g.,
continuous source of activity from molten/damaged fuel into coolant then coolant to containment air. The modeling and simulation
have been carried out in MATLAB. For this purpose, a two-stage
methodology has been adopted (a) evaluate the activity in the core
just before the accident. (b) Kinetic quantication of airborne activity under conned conditions. The core activity has been evaluated
at depletion of fuel (37.25 months) in order to get maximum core
activity. A 1000 MWe conventional PWR with single can type
containment is selected for this study having a large free volume
over the plant. The airborne activity has been quantied for loss
of coolant accident (LOCA) under NUREG-1465 (USNRC, 1995)
and regulatory guide 1.183 (USNRC, 2000) assumptions.
3. Reactor description
A conventional pressurized water reactor (PWR) has been
selected as the reference reactor because it is one of the common
types of reactor installed in major countries. The reference plant
is a conventional typical two loops PWR with two stem generations
installed at the radial sides of core. Reactor uses light water as its
coolant and moderator. The core design power is 1000 MWe with
average fuel enrichment of 2.5 wt% of uranium. The equilibrium
reactor core is composed of 177 fuel assemblies and 69 control
rod assemblies. Each assembly has 208 fuel rods. The core height
is 12.42 m with active core length of 3.66 m having total water volume of 113.55 m3. Core power is controlled by 1104 control rods.
The control rod material is composed of Ag (85%), In (10%) and
Cd (5%). The pitch of control rod is 1.443 cm and fuel rod outer
diameter is 1.092 cm. Reactor uses UO2 as its fuel. The overall
physical dimensions of fuel are same as those for standard fuel elements. The schematic diagram of the core cross section is shown in
Fig. 1. The primary coolant ow is controlled by four reactor coolant pumps (Henry, 2007; Jak, 1981). The design parameters of
1000 MW reactor are enlisted in Table 1.
The reference reactor has can type containment. The plant
containment has volume of 57,600 m3; free surface area is almost
34,374 m2 (Mehboob et al., 2013) and dome height is 46.7 m. Since,
containment is a large dry containment type it has large capacity to
sustain high pressure. The large dry containment design can sustain 376 kPa pressure (Thadani, 1993). The containment spray system is installed at the elevation of 40.0 m. The design activation
pressure for spray system is 515 kPa (Thadani, 1993). Two ventilation trains are installed in the containment system one with
4.7 m3/s ow rate (emergency ow), and other has 14.1 m3/s ow
rate (normal ow) (FSAR 6.5., 2011; Mehboob et al., 2013). Large
dry containment is leaked tight having 1% leakage of containment
volume per day, which is 0.007 m3/s. A purging system is installed
in the containment for air ltration through recirculation. The
recirculation ow rate is 4.179 m3/s.
High efciency particulate air lters (HEPA) in conjunction with
activated charcoal lters and heaters are employed within the containment ventilation system. The reactor containment building is
provided with air supply system that brings the outside air into
the building, and releases back thought lters. In accident situations, reactor trips to emergency or isolation state to prevent the
release of activity into atmosphere and starts purging and cleaning
367
Fig. 1. Top view of 100 MWe PWR core (B&W Design) (Henry, 2007).
Table 1
Design parameters of typical 1000 MW reactor.a
Parameter
Value
Reactor
Fuel type
Average fuel enrichment (wt%)
Specic power (MWth/kg U)
Power density (MWth/m3)
System pressure (MPa)
Reactor coolant system pressure (MPa)
Reactor coolant ow (kg/s)
Core height (m)
Core active region height (m)
Core diameter (m2)
No. of fuel assemblies
No. of control rod assemblies
Cladding material
Fuel rod outer diameter (cm)
Rod pitch (cm)
Fuel assembly matrix
Coolent inlet temperature k
Coolent outlet temperature k
Control rods
Control rod material
PWR
UO2
2.4%
33.3
66.6
15.166
14.96
17387.7
12.41
3.65
3.81
177
69
Zircaloy
1.092
1.443
15 15
564.81
592.98
1104
Ag (80%)In (15%)Cd (5%)
auxiliary feed water resulting in coolant loss and core depressurization. Only 45% core damage was deported in this accident
(Wolf et al., 1994). The TMI-2 containment was kept under the
design pressure to mitigate the environmental release.
A nominal fraction of core could be damaged even with worst
LOCA if emergency core cooling system (ECCS), high pressure injection system (HPIS), low pressure injection system (LPIS) accumulator injection and reood water storage are available. If these
systems are unavailable or malfunctions with human errors or core
is over depressurized under LOCA, then there is a probability of a
signicant ratio of core damage. The probability of such an accident is ranged from 8 106 to 4 106 per year (USNRC, 1975).
In this work, we have considered LOCA with unavailability of ECCS,
HPIS, LPIS, accumulator injections and re-ooding. Only containment heat removal system is available to maintain the containment integrity. In this condition, it is close to damage the core
from 10% to 50%. The containment integrity is assumed to maintain
by keeping the containment under design pressure. The switching
from normal to emergency and isolation of contaminant is available with 10% recirculation lter efciency.
5. Analytical modeling
The kinetic study of the in-containment source term has been
evaluated using two stage methodology. (a) Core inventory measurements at the time of initiation of the accident, (b) the evaluation of in-containment volumetric activity using the single
containment model for PWRs. In (USNRC, 1975) single containment model was used for PWRs and BWRs. Later, (IAEA, 1986,
2008) used the single containment model for the research reactors.
However, in 2000, the single containment model is characterized
for PWRs in NUREG-1465 (USNRC, 1995) and is re-characterized
in Regulatory Guide 1.183 (2000) with more reliable and realistic
assumptions. The single containment model is based on simple
balance equation of rate of change of volumetric activity equal to
rate of gain in volumetric activity minus rate of loss in volumetric
activity. The gain terms are based on continuous source from molten corium and suspension of isotopes from free surfaces. The loss
terms are based on recirculation ltration, natural decay, leakage
from containment, removal by spray system and deposition in
368
dqv t
S
F
g
kqv t ut qv t a qv t Rres rc qv t
dt
V
V
V
Lr
S
qv t r qs t Q t
V
V
(
HEi
Iodine
3hEa
2d
Solid FPs
The rst term on the right hand side is decay of isotope. The 2nd
term is the deposition of isotopes on the containment surfaces S
(m2) with deposition velocity ut (m/s). The 3rd term is the removal
of isotopes by containment spray system having F (m3/s) spray
ow rate and a is the collection parameter for iodine and solid ssion products. The 4th term is the removal term via recirculation
ltration, which have recirculation rate Rres (m3/s) and grc is the
recirculation collection efciency. The 5th term is volumetric leakage rate through containment exhaust, and Lr (m3/s) is exhaust
rate. The 6th term is the time dependent gain in volumetric activity
Q(t) from the molten corium and debris in Bq/m3. Where qv (t) is
volumetric activity (Bq/m3); ut is deposition velocity (m/s); k is
decay constant (s1); S is free surface area of containment (m2);
V is total volume of containment (m3); F is containment spray ow
rate (m3/s); H is partition coefcient; Ei is droplet collection efciency for elemental iodine; h is containment height (m); Ea is
droplet collection efciency for aerosols; d is droplet diameter
(m); Rres is recirculation rate (m3/s); grc is ltration collection efciency; r is re-suspension rate (s1); qs (t) is the activity on surfaces
of containment (Bq/m2); and Q(t) is time dependent source of volumetric airborne activity from molten corium (Bq.m3/s). The values of these parameters used for PWR are listed in Table 2.
The balance equation for the activity on free surfaces also has
the gain term and loss term. If we consider qs (t) as the
surface activity, then the balance equation for surface activity is
as follows.
dqs t
ut qv t rqs t
dt
Table 2
Important parameters used in the single containment model (USNRC, 1991; Mehboob
et al., 2013).
Parameter
Symbol
Value
V (m3)
S (m2)
Lr (m3/s)
fc (%)
ff (%)
fp (%)
Recirculation rate
Recirculation ltration efciency
Exhaust lter efciency
Fraction of activity released immediately released
Mixing rate
Spray ow rate
Droplet size
Rres (m3/s)
gres (%)
gex (%)
Fx (%)
wx (s1)
F (m3/s)
d (micron)
57,600
34,374
1.015.0
1050
104102
0.1
0.0001
15
1090%
9098
1070
0.11.0
0.11.0
100
369
Groups
Elements
Gap release
Early in-vessel
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Noble gases
Halogens
Alkali metals
Tellurium group
Barium, strontium
Noble metals
Cerium group
Lanthanides
Xe, Kr
I, Br
Cs, Rb
Te, Sb, Se
Ba, Sr
Ru, Rh, Pd, Mo, Tc, Co
Ce, Pu, Np
La, Zr, Nd, Eu, Nb, Pm, Pr, Sm, Y
0.05
0.05
0.05
0
0
0
0
0
0.95
0.35
0.25
0.05
0.02
0.0025
0.0005
0.0002
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.05
0.02
0.0025
0.0005
0.0002
Q t 1 f x Ac f f f p f c
K wx t
e
V
Ac f x Ac 1 f x Ac K
ewx t dt
wx wx =T
wx wx =T
6. Computational technique
In this work, we have developed a program in-containment ssion product activity (ICFPA) to quantify and study the ssion
product activity behavior inside the containment building under
LOCA. The ow chart of the program is shown in Fig. 3. First, reactor is operated for normal routine for several months, and depletion calculation has been performed. The core inventory has been
estimated by using BURNUP computer program (Mehboob and
Xinrong, 2012b). The BURNUP core inventory estimation has
already been validated and veried with ORIGEN2 computer program (Mehboob et al., 2013).
The program read the input le containing plant data, accident
type, and isotopes input data and runs four loops to compute incontainment activity. The inner most loop (Fig. 3) determine the
function of containment engineering safety features (ESFs) or the
containment ESFs are determined to operate or malfunction at
time interval t. The second loop (Fig. 3) computes coolant and containment activity for ith isotope as function of time when initial
conditions and input data for reactor, and ith isotope is given. In
2nd loop the containment ESFs operation conditions and parameters are implemented at time interval t through loop 1. Then query
for next time step is asked if the answer is yes the 2nd loop (Fig. 3)
continue to compute the coolant and containment activity with
time increment Nt. If the answer is no, then results of ith isotope
are stored in a le 1 and third loop is called for operation. The third
loop (Fig. 3) asks for next isotope and reads the isotope parameters,
and data from input le then whole process is repeated. The program stores the date for all isotopes with time interval ti to tf in le
2 at the end of third loop. The fourth loop (Fig. 3) asks for next accident type if the answer is no, then program is terminated and an
excel le containing computed results is generated.
After release from fuel to coolant, substantial quantities of ssion product may be deposited in the reactor coolant system
(RCS) correspondingly reducing in-containment source term. The
plate out is dominant retention mode in case of LOCA (Lewis,
1988). NUREG-1150 estimates the amount of RCS retention for
variety of accidents for recent PWRs and BWRs. 100% of coolant
release for noble gases has been suggested by NUREG-1150 and
NUREG-1465 (USNRC, 1995). Whereas, NUREG-1150 estimates
the coolant retention for iodine, cesium and low volatile ssion
products as 7090%, 7595% and 9097%, respectively. On the
other hand experimental results from LACE (Rahn et al., 1988;
NORD, 1990), severe fuel damage (SFD) Test (Petti et al., 1989)
and LOFT-FP-2 (Hobbins and McPherson, 1991) has the coolant
retention from 70% to 90% for iodine and for cesium it is ranged
from 60% to 90%. Due to these high retentions, we have suggested
70% coolant retention for iodine and cesium, 80% coolant retention
for semi volatile aerosols and 9098% coolant retention for others.
370
Start
Initialization of variables
The program ICFPA has four loops as shown in Fig. 3. The computer program ICFPA uses BURNUP computer program (Mehboob
and Xinrong, 2012b) as sub routine program which determines
the activity inside core at the time of initiation of accident. The
BURNUP evaluates the core activity at depletion of fuel for almost
end of fuel cycle (3 years). Table 5 depicts the activity in core at
fuel depletion time along with activities already published in
USNRC (1975) for 1000 MWe reactor. The decay constant and
activity of Xe, Kr, I, Cs, Te, Ba, Sr, Rh and Ru are listed in Table 5.
A close approximation has been found between BURNUP and literature listed activities. The differences may attribute due to the difference in power operation, end of fuel cycle, power history, crosssection libraries and their weighting factors.
Parametric ESF
increment
ON
Containment
ESFs operation
ON/OFF
OFF
Yes
Time step
Store Results
in File 1 at t
+t
Yes
Next
Isotope
Store Results in file 2
for ith isotope at att
+t
Yes
Next
Accident
Noble gases deliver whole-body dose and became rapidly airborne in containment. The noble gases have a high tendency to
escape into outer environment even in isolation mode (Mehboob
and Xinrong, 2012b). While, iodine delivers lungs and thyroid dose
and can cause lungs and thyroid cancer. However, the retention of
coolant for iodine is relatively high enough that only 2530%
iodine could escape into containment air. Due to reactive in nature
iodine rapidly converted into CH3I, CH4I and CsI, which could also
reduce airborne iodine. Experimentally, only 57% of release iodine
have been observed in the form of CH3I and CH4I so far during core
damage accidents. While, other ssion products like Te, Cs, Ru, Rh,
and Sr deliver gamma and beta dose contributing in lungs dose and
whole-body dose. These ssion products mostly released in elemental forms and relatively experience high retention by coolant.
Such ssion products easily deposited on core shroud, and coolant
piping. The release fraction from fuel to coolant then coolant to
containment air for noble gases, iodine, cesium, rubidium and
other ssion products are listed in Table 3. Assuming 1050% core
damage the program computes in-containment airborne activity
for variable recirculation rate, mixing rate, spray ow rate at xed
efciency of recirculation lters. The containment inner surfaces
are considered as rough concrete surfaces, the deposition and resuspension rate for various isotopes are shown in Table 3.
No
Print Computed
Results in xls file for
all isotopes for ti to tf
Stop
371
Table 4
Fuel release fraction coolant releaser fraction and coolant retention factor for PWR under LOCA (Saeed et al., 2012; IAEA, 2008; Piskunov, 2009; USNRC, 1995; Papsteafanou,
2008).
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Radionuclides
ff
fp
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.23
0.01
0.01
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
CRF (%)
0.95
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.10.001
0.10.001
0.10.001
0.020.001
05
70
70
80
80
90
90
90
98.8
rs (s1)
ud (m/s)
6
<106
62.3 106
62.3 106
62.3 106
61.5 105
61.5 105
61.5 105
61.5 105
<1.0 105
<10
5.5 104
5.5 104
5.5 104
61.27 103
1.27 103
1.27 103
1.27 103
<103
Table 5
Comparison of results of BURNUP with 1000 MWe reactor.
Nuclide
Kr85
Kr85m
Kr87
Kr88
Kr89
Xe131m
Xe133
Xe133m
Xe135
Xe135m
Xe137
Xe138
I131
I132
I133
I134
I135
Cs134
Cs134m
2.05E-09
4.30E-05
1.51E-04
6.78E-05
3.64E-03
6.74E-07
1.53E-06
3.66E-06
2.12E-05
7.56E-04
3.02E-03
8.15E-04
9.98E-07
8.37E-05
9.26E-06
2.20E-04
2.91E-05
1.07E-08
6.64E-05
1.93E+03
1.82E+00
9.73E01
3.07E+00
6.80E02
9.19E+00
7.88E+02
1.05E+01
1.12E+01
3.34E01
3.57E01
1.20E+00
6.12E+02
1.05E+01
1.30E+02
6.01E+00
3.94E+01
1.24E+04
6.07E01
USNRC
(1975)
2.80E+16
5.53E+17
1.02E+18
1.43E+18
1.68E+18
2.85E+16
5.45E+18
1.74E+17
1.06E+18
1.13E+18
4.74E+18
4.28E+18
2.81E+18
4.01E+18
5.45E+18
5.93E+18
5.12E+18
5.93E+17
1.81E+17
2.07E+16
8.88E+17
1.74E+18
2.52E+18
6.29E+18
1.26E+18
3.15E+18
4.44E+18
6.29E+18
7.03E+18
5.55E+18
2.78E+17
Nuclide
Cs135
Cs135m
Cs136
Cs137
Ba140
Sr89
Sr90
Sr91
Sr92
Ru103
Ru105
Ru106
Rh105
Te127
Te127m
Te129
Te131
Te131m
Te132
Decay constant
(s1)
Inventory mass
(g)
USNRC
(1975)
9.55E-15
2.18E-04
6.12E-07
7.32E-10
6.27E-07
1.59E-07
7.54E-10
2.03E-05
7.11E-05
2.04E-07
4.34E-05
2.18E-08
5.45E-06
2.06E-05
7.36E-08
1.66E-04
4.62E-04
6.42E-06
2.46E-06
2.74E+04
1.38E-01
5.98E+01
1.08E+05
1.69E+03
1.80E+03
4.24E+04
1.87E+01
6.10E+00
4.04E+03
1.49E+01
1.75E+04
1.07E+02
3.53E+00
1.34E+02
1.23E+00
1.17E+00
1.42E+01
3.50E+02
1.17E+12
1.34E+17
1.62E+17
3.48E+17
4.56E+18
1.93E+18
2.14E+17
2.50E+18
2.84E+18
4.83E+18
3.70E+18
2.17E+18
3.34E+18
3.44E+17
4.67E+16
9.57E+17
2.48E+18
4.20E+17
3.93E+18
1.11E+17
1.74E+17
5.92E+18
3.48E+18
1.37E+17
4.07E+18
4.07E+18
2.66E+18
9.25E+17
1.81E+18
2.18E+17
4.07E+16
1.15E+18
4.81E+17
4.44E+18
release fraction, 134I has same magnitude as that of 88Kr with 100%
fuel release fraction and 95% coolant release fraction. The peak values of all the isotopes of iodine have been found at 260 s after the
accident. The major contribution to airborne in-containment activity is due to 134I while, the minimum contribution is due to 131I.
The peak value of 134I has been observed 1.115 1013 Bq/m3
(Fig. 6).
For elemental cesium, we have considered the release fractions;
deposition velocities and re-suspension rate similar to that for
iodine. While, the other conditions were kept same as for others
isotopes. The results of cesium isotope are depicted in Fig. 7. The
138
Cs peak activity has been found 10 times higher than 137Cs. All
isotopes gain their peak values at 180 s after the accident with
mixing rate wx = 0.1 s. 138Cs delivers highest contribution to incontainment activity with magnitude of 8.8 1012 Bq/m3 but it
decreases more exponentially compared to other cesium isotopes.
The negligible activity has been observed for 135Cs as compare to
138
Cs (Fig. 7).
The Te, Sr, and Ba isotopes release as ssion fragments and
serve as aerosols in containment air. The kinetic behavior of Te,
Sr, and Ba are shown in Figs. 8 and 9, respectively. 132Te remains
the dominant among other tellurium isotopes with peak value of
1.32 1012 Bq/m3 at peak time of 300 s after the accident
(Fig. 8). On the other hand (Fig. 9) 140Ba peak value is almost twice
of 92Sr with magnitude of 6.12 1010 Bq/m3 while 92Sr has been
observed with maximum contribution to in-containment activity
among Sr isotopes with magnitude of 3.46 1010 Bq/m3. The lowest contribution comes from 90Sr (Fig. 9), and the largest activity is
due to 140Ba as shown in Fig. 8. We also compute in-containment
372
Fig. 4. In-containment activity (Bq/m3) per unit volume for various isotopes of Kr
with fx = 20% and mixing rate wx = 0.1/s.
Fig. 5. In-containment activity (Bq/m3) per unit volume for various isotopes of Xe
with fx = 20% and mixing rate wx = 0.1/s.
Fig. 6. In-containment activity (Bq/m3) per unit volume for various isotopes of
iodine with fx = 20% and mixing rate wx = 0.1/s.
Fig. 7. In-containment activity (Bq/m3) per unit volume for various isotopes of
cesium with fx = 20% and mixing rate wx = 0.1/s.
Fig. 8. In-containment activity (Bq/m3) per unit volume for various isotopes of Te
with fx = 20% and mixing rate wx = 0.1/s.
140
Ba and various
NPPs. A comparison of 137Xe and 87Kr is depicted in Fig. 10 for various values of core damage fraction. The results have been evaluated by keeping the constant recirculation collection efciency of
10% with normal re-circulation (4.179 m3/s) and exhaust rates
(15.6 m3/s). The parameters used for comparison are shown in
Tables 3 and 4. It has been seen from results (Fig. 10) with increase
in core damage fraction the magnitude of peak value of 137Xe
(Fig. 10, left) also increases. The increase in amplitude has been
87
Kr and
137
373
activity due to 87Kr decrease with lower slope but with higher core
damage ratio, it has been seen that the decrease in 87Kr volumetric
activity becomes steeper (Fig. 10, right).
137
Xe as function of
Fig. 12. In-containment activity per unit volume (Bq/m3) for 133I as function of time
(s) for various values of recirculation rate (Rr) at wx = 0.01/s.
374
89
Kr and
131
Fig. 14. In-containment volumetric activity (Bq/m3) for 105Rh as function of time (s)
at various values of Lr.
fraction of 0.01 and water release fraction equal to 0.01. The variation in volumetric in-containment activity is depicted in Fig. 14.
It has been seen from results, with the shift of exhaust rate
value from lower values towards higher ventilation rate the incontainment activity of 105Rh monotonically decreases with
decrease in the peak value. The volumetric leakage rate for normal
exhaust rate (15 m3/s) has been observed 0.06 MBq/m3s. While,
shifting the exhaust rate to emergency (5 m3/s) the leakage rate
has been found 27 KBq/m3s. The in-containment activity for
105
Rh has decreased signicantly with decrease in its peak value
corresponding to increase in leakage rate. The in-containment
atmosphere also shows tendency towards purging and cleaning
system. The leakage from exhaust through lters signicantly
reduces the volumetric activity. At higher leakage rate through lters not only reduce the containment pressure but also reduce the
considerable amount of airborne activity.
8. Conclusions
In this work, a time dependent model has been developed for
kinetic study and quantication of in-containment volumetric
activity for various isotopes. For this reason, in-containment ssion
product activity (ICFPA) program has been developed in MATLAB
to study the ssion products activity inside the containment air
of 1000 MWe reactor under loss of coolant accident (LOCA). The
375
term is function of time but we have seen from out results and discussion that the in-containment source term is inuence by the
atmosphere inside the containment. The recirculation via recirculation lters signicantly reduces the quantity of airborne activity.
However the leakage from cleaning and purging system affects the
air borne in containment activity in considerable amount. Since,
delayed source Q(t) is function of mixing rate (wx) swaying the volumetric activity. Overall the volumetric activity is signicantly
inclined towards atmosphere inside the containment caused by
recirculation, leakage and mixing rate. The uncertainties in values
of parameters are based on general available data in literature and
are implemented in the model, consequently, to judge the in-containment activity for consequences based on LOCA is limited. However, the developed model is applicable to other systems and also
capable of studying the actinides and activation product activity in
containment air. Moreover, in comparison with Saeed et al. (2012),
a contradiction in behavior of iodine and noble gases with mixing
rate (wx) has been found with factor of 10.
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by Korea Radiation Safety Foundation under the Project Number 1305030. Mehboob K. acknowledges the support of Khan R. (Center of Excellence in Science and
Applied Technology (CEAST), Pakistan) for computational support.
Mehboob K. also gratefully acknowledge the nancial support of
Prof. Park K. (Department of Nuclear Engineering, College of Engineering, Kyung Hee University, South Korea) in pursing the Post
Doc.
References
Ammirabile, L. et al., 2011. ASTEC V2.0 computational evaluation of source term and
its chemical forms under accidental conditions during mid-loop operation.
Prog. Nucl. Eng. 53 (4), 438448.
Croft, A.G., 1980. A Users Manual for the ORIGEN2 Computer Code Rep. ORNL/TM7175. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN.
El-Jaby et al., 2010. A general model for predicting coolant activity behaviour for
fuel-failure monitoring analysis. J. Nucl. Mater. 399, 87100.
European Nuclear Society (ENS), 2014. World Nuclear Power Plants Worldwide,
European Nuclear Society, European Nuclear Society Report, 2014, URL: http://
www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/n/nuclear-power-plant-worldwide.htm.
Eslinger, P.W. et al., 2014. Source term estimation of radioxenon released from the
Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear reactors using measured air concentrations and
atmospheric transport modeling. J. Environ. Radioact. 127, 127132.
FSAR 6.5., 2011. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Chapter 6, URL:
http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1116/ML11166A276.html.
Girault, N. et al., 2007. Towards a better understanding of iodine chemistry in RCS of
nuclear reactors. In: The 2nd European Review Meeting on Severe Accident
Research (ERMSAR-2007). Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH (FZK),
Germany, 1214 June 2007.
Haste, T. et al., 2006. MELCOR/MACCS simulation of the TMI-2 severe accident and
initial recovery phases, off-site ssion product release and consequences. Nucl.
Eng. Des. 236, 10991112.
Henry, R.E., 2007. TMI-2: a text book in severe accident management, MISD
Professional Development Workshop, ANS/ENS International Meeting.
Hobbins, R.R., McPherson, G.D., 1991. A summary of results from the LOFT LP-FP-2
test and their relationship to other studies at the power burst facility and of the
three mile island unit 2 accident. In: Proc. Open Forum on the OECD/LOFT
Project, Achievements and Signicant Results. Organization of Economic
Cooperation and Development, Madrid, Spain, May 911, 1990.
Huang, G.F. et al., 2010. Study on mitigation of in-vessel release of ssion products
in severe accidents of PWR. Nucl. Eng. Des. 240, 38883897.
Huang, G. et al., 2014. A simplied approach to evaluating severe accident source
term for PWR. Ann. Nucl. Energy 71, 352360.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), 1986. Probabilistic Safety Assessment
of Research Reactor. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Australia,
IAEA-TECDOC-400, 1986, (technical report).
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), 1999. A Simplied Approach to
Estimating Reference Source Terms for LWR Designs. International Atomic
Agency, Vienna, Austria.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), 2008. Derivation of Source Term and
Analysis of Radiological Consequences of Research Reactor. Safety Series Repot
No. 53. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Australia.
376
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), 2010. Nuclear Power Reactors in the
World, Reference Data Series No. 2, IAEA-RDS-2/30. International Atomic
Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria.
Iglesias, F.C. et al., 1999. Fission product release mechanisms during reactor
accident conditions. J. Nucl. Mater. 270, 2138.
Jak, K., 1981. Nuclear Power Plant Modeling and Steam Generator Stability Analysis
(Ph.D. thesis). The University of Michigan.
Lee, M., Ko, Y.C., 2008. Quantication of severe accident source terms of a
Westinghouse 3-loop plant. Nucl. Eng. Des. 238, 10801092.
Lewis, B.J., 1988. Fundamental aspects of defective nuclear fuel behavior and ssion
product release. J. Nucl. Mater. 160 (23), 201217.
Li, J.X. et al., 2012. Radiological consequence evaluation of DBAs with alternative
source term method for a Chinese PWR. Nucl. Eng. Des. 250, 260266.
Mehboob, K., Xinrong, C., 2012b. Source term evaluation of two loop PWR under
hypothetical severe accidents. Ann. Nucl. Energy 50, 271284.
Mehboob, K. et al., 2012a. Comprehensive review of source term analysis and
experimental programs. Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 4 (17), 31683181.
Mehboob, K. et al., 2013. Numerical simulation of radioisotopes dependency on
containment performance for large dry PWR containment under severe
accidents. Nucl. Eng. Des. 262, 435445.
Mehboob, K. et al., 2014. USNRC progress in source term evaluation. Int. J. Nucl. Eng.
Sci. Technol. 8 (1), 1220.
NORD, 1990. Aerosol transport in severe reactor accidents. Final Report of the NKA
Project AKTI-160. Nordic Liaison Committee for the Atomic Energy.
Pappas, C. et al., 2014. Derivation of the source term, dose results and associated
radiological consequences for the Greek Research Reactor 1. Nucl. Eng. Des.
274, 100117.
Papsteafanou, C., 2008. Radioactive aerosols, . 1st ed.. In: Baxter, M. (Ed.),
Radioactivity in the Environment 1st ed., vol. 12 Elsevier.Science, pp. 1158,
ISBN 13: 978-0-08-044075-0.
Petti, D.R. et al., 1989. PBF severe fuel damage scoping test 14 test results report.
Technical Report EG&G-2542. EG & G Idaho Report, NUREG/CR-5143, 1989.
Piskunov, V.N., 2009. Parameterization of aerosol dry deposition velocity on to
smooth and r surfaces. Aerosol Sci. 40, 664679.
Rahn, F.J. et al., 1988. Aerosols behaviour experiments on LWR primary systems.
Nucl. Technol. 81 (2), 158182.
Saeed, E.A. et al., 2012. Kinetic study of ssion product activity released inside the
containment under loss of coolant transient in a typical MTR system. Appl.
Radiat. Isot. 70, 27112719.
Schwarz, M. et al., 1999. PHEBUS FP: a severe accident research programme for
current and advanced light water reactors. Nucl. Eng. Des. 187, 4769.
TEPCO News, 2011. Amendments to the Estimate Value of the Core Damage Ratio of
Units 13 of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station Based on the
Measurement of the Containment Atmospheric Monitoring System Press
Release (27.04.11). URL: http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/
11042713-e.html.
Thadani, A.C., 1993. TMI-2 Containment Response. United Stated Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Memuemdum for Thomos E. Murley (director).
USNRC, 1975. Reactor safety study. An Assessment of Accident Risk in U.S.
Commercial Nuclear Power Plants, WASH-1400, United States Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
USNRC, 1991. MSIV leakage iodine transport analysis. J.E. Cline & Associates, Inc.,
contract nrc-03-87-029, task order 75, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
USNRC, 1995. Accident Source Term for Light Water Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG1465. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
USNRC, 2000. Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis
Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.183.
USNRC, 2003. Control Room Habitability at Light-water Nuclear Power Reactors,
Regulatory Guide 1.196.
Winiarek, V. et al., 2014. Estimation of the cesium-137 source term from the
Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant using a consistent joint assimilation of
air concentration and deposition observations. Atmos. Environ. 82, 268279.
Wolf, R.J. et al., 1994. TMI2 Vessel Investigation Integration Report. United States
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Wu, Jay et al., 2006. Reevaluation of the emergency planning zone for nuclear power
plants in Taiwan using MACCS2 code. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 64, 448454.
Yangmo, Z. et al., 2014. Simulation and dose analysis of a hypothetical accident in
Sanmen nuclear power plant. Ann. Nucl. Energy 65, 207213.