Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Presented by
Muneer. M.P
(Enrolment No. ENGG02201201014)
2
SCOPE & OBJECTIVE
Studies shows that SBO is a significant contributor to the
risk associated with operation of NPP (NUREG-6890)
Unreliability of EDG can significantly increase the SBO
risk and good reliability is to be ensured
EDGs qualified for NPPs are complex system consisting
many subsystems working in tandem
Current Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) uses
generic modelling of EDG
The objective of this work is to develop detailed reliability
models for EDG subsystems and evaluate reliability
3
OVERVIEW OF THE WORK
4
EDG SYSTEM
Generator
side
View of PFBR
DG Set
Engine Side
5
EDG SYSTEM
Electrical Power Output
Cooling Lub Oil Speed Sensing Generator
Governor
Water System Excitation
System System Sensing
DIESEL ELECTRICAL
ENGINE GENERATOR
Coupling
6
EDG RELIABILITY MODELING
7
Function Flow Diagram Preparation
8
Starting Air System
9
Fuel Oil System
10
Cooling water system
11
Lube oil system
12
Charge Air &
Exhaust Gas System
13
Governor system
14
Excitation system
15
Fault Tree Development
DG fail to function as top event and fail to start and fail to run
are sub events forms main tree
Main fault tree divided into sub trees each representing failure
of each subsystem
16
Fault Tree Development
DG
DG failed to
start
DG FS
Fuel oil sys Starting air cooling Charge air & Lube oil DG I&C
fail to start system FS water sys FS exhaust system FS logic system DG fail to
system FS FS run
fuel oil sys Cooling Lube oil sys Engine fail Governor Generator Excitation Control Charge &
fail to run water sys FR fail to run to run fail to run fail to run sys fail to logic sys exhaust sys
run fail to run FR
FUEL FR COOLING FR LUB SYS FR ENGINE FR GOV. FR GEN. FR EXC.FR CNTRL FR CHARGE FR
17
Basic Event Modeling
18
Basic Event Modeling
19
Incorporation of Common Cause
Failure (CCF)
20
Cooling water system
21
Component failure data
22
Cooling
water system
failed to run
COOLING FR
Fault tree
JW high DG S W
E T lev el temp. trip
low trip sys failed
JW T TR SW SYS FAIL
ET LOW TR
S O of JW
S O of E T E T failed S W P failed NRV -3 SWC failed
high temp.
low lev el to run failed to extract
switch
switch JW temp. heat
high
HTS SO SWP FR NRV-3
LS SO ET RP SWC
JW T HIGH r=5.5e-007
r=7.2e-007 r=1.82e-008 r=6.68e-005 r=2e-007
SW C No sec.
failed water
No JW JW C failed circulation
circulation to extract
heat
SWC BL SEC WAT
JW CIRC JWC
r=5.4e-006
NRV -1 NRV -2
failed failed S econdary Secondary
water inlet water outlet
closed closed
NRV-1 NRV-2
SEC W. IN SEC.W OU
r=2e-007 r=2e-007
23
RESULTS
24
RESULTS
SL No Failure rate
Subsystem
Fail to start (d-1) Fail to run (hr-1)
1 Fuel oil system 1.06E-05 4.14E-04
2 Starting air system 5.51E-04 --
3 Cooling water system 3.00E-05 1.15E-04
4 Charge and exhaust gas system 1.63E-05 1.17E-05
5 Lub oil system 2.00E-05 7.92E-05
6 Engine 2.02E-04* 1.14E-04
7 Governor 2.86E-04* 1.29E-05
8 Electrical generator 2.18E-05
5.38E-04*
9 Generator excitation system 1.86E-05
10 Control logics 6.15E-04 5.90E-06
Total 2.27E-03 7.93E-04
* Fail to start analysis of engine, governor and generator is not carried out in
component level. However overall subsystem level data is adopted from NRC
report
25
RESULTS – PIECE PART CONTRIBUTION
DG fail to start
Engine Governor Generator & excitation
9% 13% system
DG ‘fail to start’ is Lub oil 24%
mainly contributed by 1%
control logic system, Charge air
1%
starting air system, and Cooling
generator & excitation 1%
system
Control logics
Starting air 27%
24%
Fuel oil
26
RESULTS- COMPARISON
Fail to start
1.0E-03
Failure rate ( demand-1)
1.0E-06
Start air Cooling Charge Fuel oil Lub oil Control
water air logics
27
RESULTS – PIECE PART CONTRIBUTION
28
RESULTS - COMPARISON
Fail to run
1.0E-03
Failure rate ( hour-1)
1.0E-04
1.0E-06
29
DG MISSION TIME RELIABILITY
30
CONCLUSION
31
FUTURE SCOPE
32
PUBLICATIONS
34
REFERENCES
8. IAEA-TECDOC-478 “Component Reliability Data for Use in Probabilistic Safety
Assessment”, 1988
11. Evergreen Safety & Reliability Technologies, LLC “Historical Nuclear Power
Plant Component Failure Rate Data”
12. U.S. NRC, “Component Reliability Data Sheets Update 2010”, January 2012
14. U.S. NRC, “CCF Parameter Estimations Update 2010”, January 2012
35
THANKYOU
36