Introduction to P.

Dumaz lectures (12 hours)

In three parts, try to be as close as possible to the engineer know-how
Main objectives:
- Discussions, explanations & evaluation of main PWR design choices regarding TH :-
in particular the main core limutations (Critical Heat Flux …)
Be able to derive simple equations in support of this understanding : mainly mass &
energy balances (quite often using enthalpy), Calculations (estimation) of heat transfer flux and
coefficients, pressure drops … Determine main reactor parameters (flowrates, Saturation
margin …)
- Knowledge of the main cycles used to achieve the energy conversion, thermodynamic
basics required
Be able to calculate the thermodynamic efficiency of simplified cycles, to determine the
plant net efficiency
- Understanding of thermal and mechanical issues of nuclear luel design & operation
Be able to integrate the heat conduction equation in different geoemtry for different
boundary conditions in order to determine fuel temperatures (including mean temperature)

Example of the BWR problem given last year for the October exam: difficulties to
achieve the right enthalpy balance, to integrate the heat conduction equation (because
of the pellet central hole) …

1
 Introduction to P. Dumaz lectures (12 hours)
Some very limited basics:
- The energy balance for an “open system” or the thermodynamic first principle
.
m .[ hs 
Vs 2
 g.zs  (he 
Ve 2 .
 g.ze )]  Q  W
.
s
2 2 e
Variables ? Main assumptions to obtain it ? W Q
1000 "Supercritique"
- Use of water enthalpies
100
Liquide Point critique
hlsat and hvsat for liquid water at saturation and dry

Pression (bar)
10
steam at saturation
Courbe de

Solide
1
At thermodynamic equilibrium: Vaporisation
0,1 Vapeur
h = (1-x).hlsat + x.hvsat (x the thermodynamic quality)
0,01
Sucooled liquid: T < Tsat h < hlsat Point triple
Overheated steam: T > Tsat h > hvsat 0,001
-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Temperature (°C)

- Heat transfers
Use of the heat transfer coefficient : q’’(w/m2) = h.(Twall-Tbulk) (usually for convective heat
transfers)
Use of Fourier law for heat conduction: q’’ = - .grad(T)
Significant use of correlations, based on dimensionless numbers: Re, Nu, Pr …

2
 Design aspects of light water reactors
P. Dumaz, First lecrture,
CEA Energy Division (DES), IRESNE institute (Cadarache)
patrick.dumaz@cea.fr

Course content:
Main functions and main design constraints, the safety constraint
Main design options discussion: the coolant
Main characteristics of past & existing power reactors
LWR design, main characteristics to determine
PWR design, the core
BWR / PWR comparison
PWR design, other systems & components

Training goals:
Be able to discuss and explain main PWR design choices

3
Main functions and main design
constraints

4
 Main reactor functions
To “produce” and remove heat : the core
 solid fuel and primary coolant in a reactor core
(alternative options, liquid or gaseous fuels: case of MSR)

Additional functions for the core

Radioactive materials confinement: fuel cladding
Fission reaction control: neutron absorbers
Neutron slowing down (option): moderator
Fuel elements mechanical arrangement: sub-assembly
structures, core supporting
introduce and replace fuel: handling system

Basically in a reactor core, one has: Structures (Volume fraction

zSTR), fuel elements (zfuel) & coolant (zcoolant)
of course, zSTR + zfuel + zcoolant = 1

5
 Main reactor functions
Choices to make:
- Primary coolant, fuel materials, other in-core materials (for
neutronic, mechanical, thermal … reasons), Fuel element
geometry, Fuel assembly and core arrangement,
- Fuel/coolant/structures fractions,
- Core power, power density, temperatures, pressures, flowrates
- Core shape (H/D), horizontal, up or downward coolant flow
- Control rods & Control rods mechanisms
- Fuel handling system
- Core instrumentation & control

6
 Main reactor functions
To transfer heat
 primary circuit + intermediate circuit (if required, direct/indirect
cycle issue)
Additional functions
confine the primary coolant
maintain the coolant characteristics
Choices to make:
- Loop or integrated arrangements,
- Temperatures, pressures
- Pumping machines and Heat exchanger types and sizes, control
systems (physical & chemical conditions)

To produce electricity  energy conversion cycle

Choices to make: conversion cycle fluid, thermodynamic cycle
characteristics, heat sink type, main components types and sizes

7
 Main reactor functions
Constraint related to electricity : production – consumption
equilibrium, maintain voltage & frequency
Three cycles, annual, weekly & daily cycles, case of annual variations
(Pweek GW.h)

(Pweek GW.h)
2020 data, weekly mean
power (MW)

From RTE, “ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION IN FRANCE CHARACTERISTICS AND FORECAST METHOD” 8

 Main reactor functions
Weekly and daily variations (mean power in GW for each hour) :
case of Germany (last week of April 2017)

To be noted the variation of the residual demand (electricity demand - fatal

generation, so mainly the VRE : Variable Renewable Energy)
From : https://www.energy-charts.de/ 9
 Main reactor functions
Primary frequency control: from 95% to 100% of the maximum
authorized power
To be noted, secondary & tertiary frequency control
Load following: Minimum core power: about 30% of the nominal
power (ramps up to +- 5% NP / min)
Typical French NPP power variation (EDF data)

10
The safety requirements
What is safety ? A set of measures (design, construction,
exploitation & shutdown) aiming of protecting human life and
health and the environment
Essential notions:
Defense in Depth, DiD (IAEA)
Level 1 : Prevention of abnormal operation and failures ( good
design, construction & exploitation)
Level 2 : Control of abnormal operations, detection of failures
Level 3 : Control of accidents within the design basis (protection by
safety systems, accidental procedures )
Level 4 : Control of severe plant conditions, mitigation of the
consequences of severe accidents
Level 5 : Mitigation of radiological consequences of significant releases
of radioactive materials

11
The safety requirements
DiD concept is aimed to maintain the effectiveness of physical barriers
interposed between radioactive material and workers, the public or the
environment, during normal operation, incidents and accidents

Three physical barriers

The fuel cladding, the primary circuit, the containment

And three main safety functions

the control of reactivity, the core cooling, the confinement
of radionucleides

12
 Design constraints
Fuel and core:
keep the fuel integrity is here the main constraint (the fuel
cladding being the first barrier), graduation of the requirements in
function of the probability of the situations
Normal, incidents Accidental conditions, More unlikely conditions
> 10-2 per year 10-6 to 10-2 per year (DBC) (severe accidents, BDC or DEC)
Maintain the integrity of Loss of first barrier No significant FP release
the first barrier (no FP accepted but with a outside the reactor site
release) geometry allowing the
core heat removal
To keep the fuel integrity implies to control well the core cooling
and the core reactivity (two basic safety functions)

The thermal-hydraulic design is a compromise between the

maximization of the system performance (efficiency, operability)
and the required level of safety margins

13
 Design constraints
Primary circuit:
- to insure the primary coolant flow and its required
characteristics (from the chemical and the neutronic viewpoints)
- to do not loose the coolant (the primary circuit being the
second barrier)
- to be enough compact in order to be enclosed in a containment
building (the third barrier) To be noted for certain SMRs the idea to put
the nuclear island in a container !

Energy conversion cycle:

- to control alternator output in function of the electrical
dispatching
Two main possibilities :
- accept load variations to follow the electricity demand
- stay at a constant power (base load operating) other
production means being used to follow the consumption

14
Main design options discussion:
the coolant

15
Coolant
Choice of primary coolant: it must remove heat from the core
(in all situations) and transfer it to the energy conversion system
(normal conditions) or an emergency heat sink
(incidental/accidental conditions)
Possible additional functions: use the coolant in the
thermodynamic cycle (direct cycle) thermalize or avoid to
thermalize neutrons, cooling of other structures, neutron
absorbers
WTu

TURBINE ALTERNATOR

Core
BWR QC
TC CONDENSOR
Direct cycle
TF
th  1 WP QF

16
Coolant
Main constraints: low absorption of neutrons, low induced
radioactivity, stability (T, irradiation), compatibility with fuel &
secondary coolant, low corrosiveness, “reasonable cost”
Possible choices:
- light water, heavy water
- gas (CO2, helium, Argon …)
- liquid metals (sodium, lead, lead-bismuth …)
- molten salts
Thermal-hydraulic capacities, of course a key point in the
coolant choice (especially in a thermal-hydraulic course)

But the attractiveness to use slightly enriched uranium 

Moderator required  choice to combine coolant &
moderator functions by using water (light or heavy)

17
 Coolant
Thermal-hydraulic function achievement: high .Cp & 
“merit factors” calculations from pumping power Pp (w)
and Heat Transfer Coefficient, HTC or h (w/m2/K)
Computation results (see exercise)
factor dependant of fluid properties only With k=1, b=0, c=0 (laminar flows)
k
Pp  ( 3 k ) h  (1b) .Pr (c b) or k=0.25, b=0.8, c=0.4 (turbulent flows)
 .Cp
2

”merit factors” given for turbulent flows (Why ?)

Water CO2 He Ar Na
150 bar, 60 bar, 60 bar, 60 bar, 1 bar,
300°C 500°C 500°C 500°C 500°C
 kg/m3 725,53 40,86 3,7 37,29 857
Cp J/kg/K 5476 1182 5190 525 1262
 w/m/K 0,56 0,06 0,303 0,037 66,3
 10-5 Pa.s 8,83 3,33 3,73 4,54 24.3
1/Pp (normalized
to water) 1 6.10-5 2,8.10-5 5.10-6 0.02
HTC (normalized
to water) 1 0.7 0.99 0.65 21.
18
 Coolant

Good moderator; high scattering cross section with high

energy loss =ln(E1/E2) per collision , low absorption cross
section
Data in thermal spectrum

H2O D2O He

Absorption section 0.02 0.9.10-4 0

a cm-1 (thermal
spectrum)
Slowing down 1.53 0.37 About
Power s.  cm-1 10-5
H s.  / a 77 4111

19
 Coolant
Fission/capture U
Why moderation? versus neutron energy

Fission/capture U versus f U235

neutron energy
c U235

c U238
 . f

f  c f U238

U5 – U8 only, Enrichment E required , k=1

Thermal spectrum : E > 0.37%
Fast spectrum : E>9%
Pu9 – U8 only, Pu content E required , k=1
Thermal spectrum : E > 0.24%
Fast spectrum : E > 5.5 %

20
Coolant
Overview about the coolant choice:
- Use of natural uranium  D2O coolant
 moderator different than coolant (graphite, D2O)  coolant
compatible with the moderator (& fuel) & with low neutron
absorption  gas coolant (CO2 cheap but limited in temperature
about 600°C)
- High temperatures  He coolant or molten salts
- Use of direct conversion cycle  Boiling water or gas coolants
- Fast neutron spectrum  very low moderation required
(low absorption too)  Na or Pb liquid metals or gas coolants

Without major constraints/objectives, the light water seems good

compromise
Coolant + moderation almost determine the reactor type

21
Main characteristics of past &
existing commercial power
reactors

22
Main characteristics of past & existing power reactors
The IAEA classification (PRIS IAEA database) :
ABWR: Advanced boiling light water cooled and moderated reactor.
AGR: Advanced gas cooled graphite moderated reactor.
BWR: Boiling light water cooled and moderated reactor.
FBR: Fast breeder reactor.
GCR: Gas cooled graphite moderated reactor.
HTGR: High temperature gas cooled graphite moderated reactor.
HWGC: Heavy water moderated gas cooled reactor.
HWLWR: Heavy water moderated boiling light water cooled reactor.
LWGR: Light water cooled graphite moderated reactor.
PHWR: Pressurized heavy water moderated and cooled reactor.
PWR: Pressurized light water moderated and cooled reactor.

23
 Main characteristics of past & existing power reactors
Characteristics Fuel Moderator Coolant, power output Steam P,T
of P,T max MWe

GCR Nat. U Graphite CO2 40 bar, 540 35 bar, 390°C

UNGG Bugey1 400°C
AGR Enr. U Graphite CO2, 42 bar, 2*660 160 bar,
British AGR2 635°C 540°C
HTGR or HTR high Enr. Graphite He, 48 bar, 330 166 bar,
Fort St Vrain U (U,Th) 775°C 538°C
PWR Enr. U H2O H2O, 155 bar, 900 55 bar, 270°C
French CPY 320°C
BWR Enr. U H2O H2O, 70 bar, 1000 70 bar, 280°C
280°C
PHWR Nat. U D2O D2O, 100 bar, 700 47 bar, 260°C
CANDU6 310°C
LWGR Enr. U Graphite H2O, 70 bar, 1000 70 bar, 280°C
Russian RBMK 280°C
FBR Pu,U No Na, 1- 6 bar, 1200 180 bar,
French SPX 550°C 490°C

24
LWR design, main characteristics
to determine

25
 LWR design, main characteristics
Main areas:
- Core design:
A interdisciplinary job: Neutronics, mechanics, thermics, thermal-
hydraulics, basically one has to distribute core volume between coolant,
fuel and structures
of course fractions of coolant + fuel + structures = 100%
TH design basis: insure core flowrate, avoid boiling crisis, limit the
maximum fuel temperature, avoid hydrodynamic instabilities
- Primary circuit and secondary circuit (pipes, pumps, pressurizer,
Steam Generators)
- Auxiliary systems (especially safety systems)
One will discuss the choice of some very significant parameters of PWR
design

26
 LWR design, main characteristics
Choice of reactor power: a matter of “scale effect”, in France from
2700 MWth (CPY) to 4500 MWth (EPR)
specific cost ($/kWe) is  1/(Power)0.7

To be noted the huge size

of some components
(EPR vessel exceeds the current
France forging capabilities)

Other considerations:
- Core neutron balance
- Core power stability
- Safety approach (AP1000)
And
- Electrical network characteristics

27
 LWR design, main characteristics
Forged Shell Manufacturing (form DOOSAN Heavy industry brochure)

28
 LWR design, main characteristics
Choice of the main circuit arrangement A past SMR project,
Loop versus integrated PWR design: IRIS (335 MWe)

AP1000, loop type

Today SMR projects: Nuscale

in the US, Nuward in France
From “Status of advanced light water reactor designs, 2004” IAEA-TECDOC-1391
29
 LWR design, main characteristics
“Integrated” design,
The BWR case

30
 LWR design, main characteristics
The loop arrangement is usually chosen for PWR, itegrated
not suitable for large power output
 Choose the number of hot legs  number of SG
 Choose the number of cold legs
= number of primary pumps

EPR : 4 loops, 4 SG
& 4 primary pumps

APR-1400 : 2 hot legs,

2 SG, 4 cold legs

31
 LWR design, main characteristics
Primary pressure choice
 so a compromise between thermodynamic efficiency and cost
increase with pressure increase (components thickness)
 155 bar in commercial PWR (lower for submarine reactors)

Pres.prim variable / We.pp = cst

2,5 36%
masse spécifique t/MWe
rendement
2,3 34%

CEA study of a low 2,1 32%

operating pressure PWR

1,9 30%

1,7 28%

pression prim aire (bar)

1,5 26%
40 60 80 100 120 140 160

32
PWR design, the core

33
 PWR design, core case
PWR basic choices: use fuel rods (UO2 in Zr clad) in a reactor
vessel with a loop arrangement (3 or 4 loops with SGs)
Core parameters to determine: for given pressure & power Q
parameters Objectives/constraints Available relationships
U5 content (E) - Enrichment limitations Neutronics:
Nrods, Hfuel, Hfissil, - Fuel cycle length & Core criticality for the maximum burn-
Dfuel, eclad management up  (fissile content, Swater, Vcore)
- Produce & transfer heat to Power distribution  hot point
Swater  Vcore coolant Reactivity coefficients  safety
- Easy Operation & Thermics, Thermalhydraulics
Flow, Tin, Tout, Maintenance (handling, heat transfers  (Tmax.comb, Tmax.gaine)
repairing, …)
Pcoeur, lift-off force, fretting
- Fuel integrity in normal &
incidental conditions Mechanics, fuel behavior
- Core coolability in Fuel & STR stress, strains
accidental transients Swelling, FP release

This problem is not a closed problem, one has not enough

relationships, compromise to study

34
 PWR design, core case
Choice of the core water fraction (moderation ratio)
Demand of reactivity decrease with coolant loss
 a slightly “under-moderated” design is chosen
(but enough moderation to limit U5 content, 5%)

Vh2o/Vu ~ 2
Vu

Vh2o

Vh2o/Vu being chosen, the different fractions of “materials” in the core

are almost fixed, in PWR: 60% water, 30% fuel, 10% structures
Last important dimensional choice, the fuel element diameter
This choice must be made for the “hottest point” in the core
 determine the core power distribution, a (r,z) function

35
 PWR design, core case
Choice of primary coolant temperatures
Maximum temperature being fixed (margins to boiling for the
chosen pressure), the inlet core temperature results of a
compromise between :
- thermodynamic efficiency ( steam pressure)
- “good” fluid velocity in the core (CHF)
- limitation of pumping power and “force d envol”
- limitation of reactor vessel temperature

330
320
310
To be noted ; “pinch 300

point“ choice, a
Temperature

290
280
compromise between 270
260
efficiency and SG size 250 T primary
240
T secondary
230
220
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1

arbitrary length 36
 PWR design, core case
Core power distribution (design made for the “hot spot”):
Necessity to make the core design for the core hot point
with the diffusion approximation, one has
∆ φ + B2 φ = 0 with B2 = (ν∑f - ∑a) / D
In cylindrical case (R,H), for an unreflected, homogeneous
core:
φ(r, z) = φmax.J0(2,405. r / R). cos (π. z/H)
(use of extrapolated lengths for R and H)

Use of radial and axial power peaking factors

to characterize the power distribution
 Power peaking factor (from previous equation)
Fradial = 1.93, Faxial = 1.43 (for L/Lextrapolated = 0.9)
Typical BOC PWR factors: F = 1.5*1.5=2.25
The reactor core management try to minimize the global
peaking factor (in/out, out/in …) Now also vessel fluence
37
 PWR design, core case
Determination of “hot spot” design limits:
Heat flux (W/m2) and linear heat rate (W/m) limitations that must
be considered for the core most penalizing point (hot point)
Maximum Heat flux: the Critical Heat Flux (CHF) limitation

38
PWR design, core case

Part of fuel bundle after a Burn-out

event (experiment with electrical rods)

39
 PWR design, core case
Min (CHF / heat flux) = minimum DNBR or MCPR
CHF  with G (kg/m2/s)  with x (thermodyn. quality)  with P
in PWR conditions, a typical value of 4 MW/m2
16000

14000 X=-0,3, G=5000 kg/m2/s

12000

CHF kW/m2
10000

8000

7000 6000
160 bar, X=-0,3
4000
6000
2000
5000
0
CHF kW/m2

4000 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160

P (bar)
3000
9000
2000 8000 160 bar, G=5000 kg/m2/s
7000
1000
CHF kW/m2 6000
0 5000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 4000
G (kg/m2/s)
3000
From; “The 2006 CHF look-up table”; Nuclear Engineering and 2000
Design 237 (2007) 1909–1922 1000
0
-0,5 -0,4 -0,3 -0,2 -0,1 0 0,1
X 40
 PWR design, core case
A bit more complicated at high thermodynamic quality,
G
Fc

Xs

At low quality, if G  the HTC increase and

CHF increase

At high quality, if G  the liquid film on the wall is destabilized

CHF decrease

41
 PWR design, core case
Min (CHF / heat flux) = minimum DNBR or MCPR
Typical axial variation of the DNBR

DNBR or
CPR

42
 PWR design, core case
For category 1 and 2 of transients (> 10-2 per year, PCC 1 & 2), the
first barrier integrity (safety objective) is insured by a maximum
local heat flux lower than the CHF (DNBR > 1)
this is a conservative approach (max Tclad close to the
saturation temperature: 345°C at 155 bar) and simpler (LMFBR
determination of the maximum cladding temperature)

Typical statistical approach: to ensure with a probability of 95%

that DNB will not occur for PCC1 + 2 transients at a confidence
level of 95%.

2.5 is a classical minimum DNBR under nominal operating

conditions
with 4 MW/m2  about 1.5 MW/m2 for q’’max

43
 PWR design, core case
Linear heat rate: the maximum fuel temperature limitations
avoid UO2 melting, limit the energy stored in the fuel pellets
(accidental behavior)
q’ = 4..I.(Tcenterine-Tsurface)

q’ max = 420-430 W/cm

(margins accounted)

From : « Les Réacteurs nucléaires à eau ordinaire » (Eyrolles,

44
Collection du Commissariat à l'énergie atomique) by Guy Drevon
PWR design, core case
Determination of core parameters (for Q = 2700 MW)
Five unkowns: Dclad, Hfissil, Nrods, Dcore and F
Four equations:
Q/(Nrods.Hfissil).F = q’ max
Q/(Nrods..Dclad.Hfissil).F = q’’ max
already  Dclad about 9 mm
Vh2o/Vu = 2 (Here Dpellet to introduce)
Hfissil/Dcore = 1 (limit neutron leakage)
So we obtain Dclad=9 mm, And with F=2, one can determine
Dcore and Hfissil: about 3,1 m and Nrods = 41700

One can recall the parameters of 900 MWe core

17*17 fuel assembly: Dclad=9.5 mm, P=12.6 mm
Nrods = 41448 (=157*264)
Hfissil = 3,66 (12 feet) and Dcore  3 m

45
 PWR design, core case
Fuel in PWR exploitation, limit the variation of power and the
maximum power seen by the fuel,
Example of an EDF fuel rod irradiated five cycles (Out/In)

46
 PWR design, synthetic view
Conversion efficiency versus NSS cost
Economy of Choice of Primary Pressure
scale, grid
constraints Margin to Tsat(P)
Choice of Outlet vessel temperature
Core Power
Compromise between pumping
power & efficiency
“safe” reactivity Core flowrate, Outlet vessel temperature
coefficients,
Core power
limitation %U5
distribution
moderation
ratio choice Cladding Heat flux q’’max Nrods
& fuel limitation Hfissil
(CHF) D fuel
integrity H / Dcore
Linear heat q’max
rate limitation Mean core
power

47
 PWR design, core case
Recall of main core thermal parameters
Core power: Q (W )
Core power density: Q  Q V (W / m3 )
Fuel specific power: Q mass of heavy atoms (W / kg )
Fuel heat generation rate: q  r  (W / m3 )
Fuel/coolant surface heat flux: q  s  (W / m 2 )
Linear heat rate: q  z  (W / m )
Energy generation per rod: q (W )

For a fuel diameter Dp, cladding diameter Dc give the

relationships between q’, q’’ and q’’’

48
 PWR design, core case
Axial variation of the coolant temperature in the reactor channel
Using the previous power distribution, one has along the channel
axis (Le the extrapolated length > L the fissil length):
 z 
q  z   qmax
 cos   -L/2 < z < L/2
 Le 
Integrating along the channel of length L (first law of
thermodynamics or enthalpy balance):

q  z  dz  m  h  z   hin 
z
 L 2

Assuming single-phase flow with constant Cp:

q  z  dz  mc pL   z   in 
z

L 2

Therefore:
 Le   z
qmax L 
  z   in   sin  sin
mc pL   Le 2 Le 
49
 PWR design, core case
Temperature distribution of the coolant in a reactor channel
The exit temperature of the coolant is given by:
 2 Le
qmax L
 out  in    sin
mc pL  2 Le
 z 
 sin
 Le 
   z   in  1  
2  sin  L 
 
 2 Le 

When the neutronic extrapolation length can be approximated by

the physical core height:
  z
  z   in  1  sin 
2  L 
With:  L
2qmax
 out  in   
 mc pL
50
BWR / PWR comparison

51
BWR / PWR comparison
BWR/4 Vessel

52
 BWR / PWR comparison

7×7 BWR sub-assembly

PWR sub-assembly

53
 BWR / PWR comparison
PWR french CPY BWR/4

Core power (MWth) 2775 2381

Pressure (bar) 154 69
Vessel “inner D“ / H (m) 4 / 12 5,5 / 22
Core “equivalent D” / “fissile H” (m) 3 / 3.66 4 / 3.66
Number of control rods mechanisms 53 137
S/A number / rods per S/A 157 / 264 548 / 49
Rod array pitch / S/A size (mm) 12.6 / 214.2 18.745 / 138.1
External Clad / pellet diameters (mm) 9.5 / 8.27 14.3 / 12,3
Moderation ratio 1.95 2.59
Heavy metal inventory (tons) 73 107
Mean core power density (kW/l) 107 52
Mean linear heat rate (W/cm) 178 236
Mean heat flux (W/cm2) 60 53

54
PWR design, other systems &
components

55
 PWR design, other components & systems
Other important components and systems involved in the PWR
thermalhydraulic design:
- Primary circuit components: pump, pressuriser, steam
generator
- Secondary components, site heat sink
- auxiliary systems: coolant control (P,T, chemistry, boron, …)
- safety systems: accumulators, injection systems, Heat
exchangers
- Containment, containment systems

56
 PWR design, other components & systems
Case of safety systems
Function; Control of accidents within the design basis (protection
level in the DiD)
In principle these systems must allow to respect the safety objectives
associated with the classification of initiating events
Regarding thermalhydraulics, the Decay Heat Removal (DHR) is
the main issue (Of course systems dedicated to reactivity control)
Two main cases for DHR:
- Intact primary circuit  use of steam generators (EFWS or ASG)
at high pressure, HX in parallel of the primary circuit at low
pressure (RHRS or RRA) when SG not operational
- Break on the primary circuit  use of injection systems with
recirculation arrangement for long term cooling (SIS or RIS)
initially designed with the Large Break Loss Of Coolant Accident
Manage also small/intermediate breaks

57
 PWR design, safety systems
Classical PWR safety systems (Generation 2)

Piscine BR

Piscine BK

58
 PWR design, safety systems
From Generation 2 to Generation 3 design,
Case of SIS

59
 PWR design, safety systems
From Generation 2 to Generation 3 design,
Case of the Emergency FeedWater System EFWS
CPY
EPR

60
 PWR design, safety systems
A Generation 3 design quite different, the use of passive systems
for the AP1000

61
 PWR design, safety systems
Example of EPR safety systems, 4 independent trains (4
accumulators, 4 MPSI, 4 LPSI) wit IRWST (In-containment Re-
fuelling Water Storage Tank)

62
 PWR design, safety systems
Generation 3, corium strategy issue
EPR core catcher

WWER1200 core catcher

AP1000 IVR strategy

63
Some final remarks

Design of power reactor: a compromise between neutronic,

thermal-hydraulics & materials in order to maximize safety and
economic competitiveness

Thermal-hydraulic design of PWR,

Core: based on the moderation ratio, the linear heat rate
(avoid fuel melting & limit thermal energy storage) and fuel to
water heat flux (avoid burn-out or boiling crisis)

primary circuit: P, T in order to maximize the economic

competitiveness (for similar margins for core thermal-hydraulics)

Safety systems: insure “level 3” (protection) in the defense

in depth

64