Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Bari, R

Publications and source records attributed to Bari, R.

Markov Model of Accident Progression at Fukushima Daiichi

On March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake followed by a tsunami caused loss of offsite power and disabled the emergency diesel generators, leading to a prolonged station blackout at the Fukushima Daiichi site. After successful reactor trip for all operating reactors, the inability to remove decay heat over an extended period led to boil-off of the water inventory and fuel uncovery in Units 1-3. A significant amount of metal-water reaction occurred, as evidenced by the quantities of hydrogen generated that led to hydrogen explosions in the auxiliary buildings of the Units 1 & 3, and in the de-fuelled Unit 4. Although it was assumed that extensive fuel damage, including fuel melting, slumping, and relocation was likely to have occurred in the core of the affected reactors, the status of the fuel, vessel, and drywell was uncertain. To understand the possible evolution of the accident conditions at Fukushima Daiichi, a Markov model of the likely state of one of the reactors was constructed and executed under different assumptions regarding system performance and reliability. The Markov approach was selected for several reasons: It is a probabilistic model that provides flexibility in scenario construction and incorporates time dependence of different model states. It also readily allows for sensitivity and uncertainty analyses of different failure and repair rates of cooling systems. While the analysis was motivated by a need to gain insight on the course of events for the damaged units at Fukushima Daiichi, the work reported here provides a more general analytical basis for studying and evaluating severe accident evolution over extended periods of time. This work was performed at the request of the U.S. Department of Energy to explore 'what-if' scenarios in the immediate aftermath of the accidents.

08 HYDROGEN↗

Challenges to Integration of Safety and Reliability with Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems

The optimization of a nuclear energy system's performance requires an integrated consideration of multiple design goals - sustainability, safety and reliability (S&R), proliferation resistance and physical protection (PR&PP), and economics - as well as careful evaluation of trade-offs for different system design and operating parameters. Design approaches motivated by each of the goal areas (in isolation from the other goal areas) may be mutually compatible or in conflict. However, no systematic methodology approach has yet been developed to identify and maximize synergies and optimally balance conflicts across the possible design configurations and operating modes of a nuclear energy system. Because most Generation IV systems are at an early stage of development, design, and assessment, designers and analysts are only beginning to identify synergies and conflicts between PR&PP, S&R, and economics goals. The close coupling between PR&PP and S&R goals has motivated early attention within the Generation IV International Forum to their integrated consideration to facilitate the optimization of their effects and the minimization of potential conflicts. This paper discusses the status of this work.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Study of Risk Assessment Programs at Federal Agencies and Commercial Industry Related to the Conduct or Regulation of High Hazard Operations

In the Department of Energy (DOE) Implementation Plan (IP) for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board's Recommendation 2009-1, the DOE committed to studying the use of quantitative risk assessment methodologies at government agencies and industry. This study consisted of document reviews and interviews of senior management and risk assessment staff at six organizations. Data were collected and analyzed on risk assessment applications, risk assessment tools, and controls and infrastructure supporting the correct usage of risk assessment and risk management tools. The study found that the agencies were in different degrees of maturity in the use of risk assessment to support the analysis of high hazard operations and to support decisions related to these operations. Agencies did not share a simple, 'one size fits all' approach to tools, controls, and infrastructure needs. The agencies recognized that flexibility was warranted to allow use of risk assessment tools in a manner that is commensurate with the complexity of the application. The study also found that, even with the lack of some data, agencies application of the risk analysis structured approach could provide useful insights such as potential system vulnerabilities. This study, in combination with a companion study of risk assessment programs in the DOE Offices involved in high hazard operations, is being used to determine the nature and type of controls and infrastructure needed to support risk assessments at the DOE.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Limiting Future Proliferation and Security Risks

A major new technical tool for evaluation of proliferation and security risks has emerged over the past decade as part the activities of the Generation IV International Forum. The tool has been developed by a consensus group from participating countries and organizations and is termed the Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection (PR&PP) Evaluation Methodology. The methodology defines a set of challenges, analyzes system response to these challenges, and assesses outcomes. The challenges are the threats posed by potential actors (proliferant states or sub-national adversaries). It is of paramount importance in an evaluation to establish the objectives, capabilities, resources, and strategies of the adversary as well as the design and protection contexts. Technical and institutional characteristics are both used to evaluate the response of the system and to determine its resistance against proliferation threats and robustness against sabotage and terrorism threats. The outcomes of the system response are expressed in terms of a set of measures, which thereby define the PR&PP characteristics of the system. This paper summarizes results of applications of the methodology to nuclear energy systems including reprocessing facilities and large and small modular reactors. The use of the methodology in the design phase a facility will be discussed as it applies to future safeguards concepts.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗