1992Transactions of the American Nuclear SocietyRequires access

Comparison of effluent and inlet header breaks for an SRS reactor LOPA

Pran K. Paul, K.L. Barbour, D.T. Herman

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The loss-of-pumping accident (LOPA) is a design-basis accident for Savannah River Site (SRS) reactors. The LOPA is defined as a double-ended guillotine break in a secondary cooling water pipe. The secondary cooling line break is termed inlet or effluent depending on break location. Upon break detection, the emergency shutdown procedure begins, the reactor scrams, the secondary cooling pump motors trip, the primary cooling pump alternating-current motors switch off, and the direct-current motor drive engages. Secondary cooling gravity flow continues flooding the building after the secondary cooling pumps are off. The emergency cooling system (ECS) activates before the dc motors flood out. Break detection time, header flooding rate, and flooding locations are different for the inlet and effluent header breaks because of different break locations. Inlet and effluent header break primary coolant temperature transients differ because primary and secondary cooling pumps continue during a break detection and reactor scram time delay for the effluent header case, whereas the pumps trip off almost immediately for the inlet header case. Design-basis accident reactor core power limits are calculated for both the inlet and effluent header breaks.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The loss-of-pumping accident (LOPA) is a design-basis accident for Savannah River Site (SRS) reactors. The LOPA is defined as a double-ended guillotine break in a secondary cooling water pipe. The secondary cooling line break is termed inlet or effluent depending on break location. Upon break detection, the emergency shutdown procedure begins, the reactor scrams, the secondary cooling pump motors trip, the primary cooling pump alternating-current motors switch off, and the direct-current motor drive engages. Secondary cooling gravity flow continues flooding the building after the secondary cooling pumps are off. The emergency cooling system (ECS) activates before the dc motors flood out. Break detection time, header flooding rate, and flooding locations are different for the inlet and effluent header breaks because of different break locations. Inlet and effluent header break primary coolant temperature transients differ because primary and secondary cooling pumps continue during a break detection and reactor scram time delay for the effluent header case, whereas the pumps trip off almost immediately for the inlet header case. Design-basis accident reactor core power limits are calculated for both the inlet and effluent header breaks.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The loss-of-pumping accident (LOPA) is a design-basis accident for Savannah River Site (SRS) reactors. The LOPA is defined as a double-ended guillotine break in a secondary cooling water pipe. The secondary cooling line break is termed inlet or effluent depending on break location. Upon break detection, the emergency shutdown procedure begins, the reactor scrams, the secondary cooling pump motors trip, the primary cooling pump alternating-current motors switch off, and the direct-current motor drive engages. Secondary cooling gravity flow continues flooding the building after the secondary cooling pumps are off. The emergency cooling system (ECS) activates before the dc motors flood out. Break detection time, header flooding rate, and flooding locations are different for the inlet and effluent header breaks because of different break locations. Inlet and effluent header break primary coolant temperature transients differ because primary and secondary cooling pumps continue during a break detection and reactor scram time delay for the effluent header case, whereas the pumps trip off almost immediately for the inlet header case. Design-basis accident reactor core power limits are calculated for both the inlet and effluent header breaks.

Key concepts: Header, Inlet, Effluent, Scram, Engineering, Nuclear engineering, Flooding (psychology), Shutdown

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of effluent and inlet header breaks for an SRS reactor LOPA — Research Paper | ScholarLens