v v e r r b m k - jaif.or.jp · pdf file• pressurised light water used as moderator ......

R. S. CTU Prague WNU SI 2010 1

Current reactor technology, part III:

V V E RR B M K

Radek Škoda

Czech Technical University Prague

WNU SI 2010

Christ Church, Oxford


Overview1.Gen 1-2-3-4

2. Reactor technology: RBMK

3.Reactor technology: VVER

4.Which reactor is good then???


For those who have not seen this graph yet :-)


2. Reactor technology• RBMK – Former USSR: Lithuania, Ukraine, Russia = LWGR (graphite moderated, light water cooled)

• VVER – Former USSR + Czech R., Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Finland, East Germany, India, China, Iran, Turkey

= PWR (pressurised water reactor)


RBMK = containment? + void?Graphite moderator

Light water coolant

Boiling in channels

Low enrichment

Variable Pu vector


RBMK nuclear island from above...


RBMKcore:

11m x 7m high


Reactor hall


Mk 1


Mk 2


RBMK Mk 2


Key technical characteristics

Core parameters RBMK-1000

RBMK-1500

Power, MW:- Electric - Thermal

10003200

15004800

Number of fuel channels, pcs.

1693 1661

Coolant

Steam-water mixture

Steam-water mixture

Steam characteristics before the turbine: - pressure, MPa - Temperature ,°С

6,38 280

6,38 280

Coolant temperature:

- at the core inlet

270 270

- at the core outlet

284 284

Water flow through the reactor, t/h

37500 29020

FA characteristics

RBMK-1000 RBMK-1500

Max. power of the fuel channel with fuel assembly, MW

3 4,25

Service time, years

7 6

FA dimensions:- length, mm - diameter, mm

10014 79

10014 79

FA weight, kg

185 185

U-235 enrichment depending on design modification,%

2,6; 2,8 2,4; 2,6

Average fuel burn-up depending on enrichment, MW d/kg U

25,8 (2,6%)30 (2,8%)

20,5 (2,4%)26 (2,6%)

Max. fuel burn-up depending on enrichment, MW d/kg U

29,6 (2,6%)34,5 (2,8%)

23,5 (2,4%)30 (2,6%)

RBMK


RBMK 1500 IGNALINA


RBMK 1500 IGNALINA

More of this nice accent on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dZ4mD6gKjg

Now only 1 RBMK being built

R. S. CTU Prague WNU SI 2010


Many changes: may RBMK return?CURRENTLY:

Higher enrichment

Erbium burnable poison

Void coefficient negative now

New control rods

PROPOSAL:containment

CONTAINMENTs

D.I.Y.


• Thermal nuclear reactors

• Pressurised Light Water used as moderator

• Pressurised Light Water used as coolant

• Steam generator used to produce steam


3. VVER (WWER) reactors


NPP Shippingport-1

68 MWe

USA Submarine

SSN-571Nautilus

PWR = submarine technology

Russian Submarine

NPP Novovoroněž-1

210 MWe

Remember: PWR in the world


Remember where the PWR comes from

• First demoplants: PWR at Shippingport in USA: 1957 VVER-210 at USSR: 1964

• In USSR focused on RBMK reactors (LWGR) at that time, “eastern” PWR development initially in Eastern Germany !!

• 7 year technology gap


VVER reactor history


MOTTO: Build and ship around…


VVER reactor history

• Railroads were the limiting factor => “slender&high” R.P.V. => small core => higher enrichment

• Horizontal steam generators => large volume => initially no containment/confinement

• Faster development in fewer steps => robust and conservative approach


VVER typical featuresCore: triangular lattice => hexagonal fuel assemblies

fuel assembly with grid 12.6mm

small core size => higher enrichment

Small RPV diameter => neutron damage on RPV

(156 mm water for VVER440 (V-230),

263 mm for VVER1000 (V-320) between fuel and RPV)

=> “high” RPV (esp. for VVER440)

Primary circuit: more loops (6 for VVER440)=>more water

horizontal steam generators=>less sediments

Safety: VVER440 (V-230): LOCA: 32mm diameter, weak ECCS

From VVER440(V-213): LOCA: full rupture, standard ECCS


VVER typical featuresVVER 440: very efficient control rods

-different design than in other PWR

- effort of being robust and simple

- large worth, quick scram

-resulting in a ”long” RPV which also means a lot of water…

-unusual burnout of fuel attached to the control rod

-safety studies: control rod ejection is more dramatic than PWR

VVER 1000: standard approach to control rods, like PWR

Before I show you the reactors...


Q U I Z time! a/ VVERb/ BWRc/ RBMK

d/ CANDUe/ PWR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DogPLc0IzQM


VVER 440

Courtesy of Skoda-JS


NPP VVER 440 (V 230)


VVER 440 V-213


NPP VVER 440 (V 213)


VVER 440, reactor hall cross section


VVER 440 – primary circuit



VVER 440 – steam generator



VVER 440 – RPV cross section in 2 levels



VVER 440 – fuel pin and fuel assembly


VVER 440 Dukovany, Loviisa

Reactor type VVER 440 (V 213) VVER 1000 (V320)

Thermal power 1375 MW 3000 MW

RPV diameter 3.56 m 4.5 m

RPV height 11.8 m 10.9 m# of fuel assemblies 312 163Fuel load 42 t 92 t

Moderator/coolant H2O H2O

RPV pressure 12.25 MPa 15.7 MPaCoolant temperature 267 °C - 297 °C 290 °C - 320 °C


2 x 10004 x 440

VVER 440 x VVER 1000 comparison


VVER 1000 V320



Main parts:VVER 1000 reactor:


Mix: VVER1000 + Western technology

NPP Temelín

NPP Busehr



Currently building: AES-92 = VVER1000 V392 (Belene)

Primary circuit: Number of loops 4Coolant pressure 15.7 MPa

Core inlet temperature 291°C

Core outlet temperature 321°CFA number 163

# of control rods 121

Maximum FA burn-up >60 MWd/kgU


Currently building AES-2006 ~ VVER1200 ~ V491 (now also known as MIR-1200)

Primary circuit:

Number of loops 4Coolant pressure 16.2 MPa

Core inlet temperature 299°C

Core outlet temperature 330°CFA number 163

# of control rods 121

Maximum FA burn-up <70 MWd/kgU

All can be seen at the “cradle” of VVER reactors

R. S. CTU Prague WNU SI 2010NOVOVORONEZH


Planned: VVER640 (V407)

Primary circuit: Number of loops 4Coolant pressure 15.7 MpaCore inlet temperature 294°C

Core outlet temperature 322°CThermal power 1800 MW

Enrichment 3.6%Average FA burn-up 45MWd/kgU


Planned: VVER1500

Primary circuit: Number of loops 4Coolant pressure 15.7 MpaCore inlet temperature 299°C

Core outlet temperature 330°CThermal power 4250 MW

Enrichment 4.4%Average FA burn-up 45-55MWd/kgU


VVER-1200 a.k.a. MIR-1200 a.k.a. V-491 a.k.a. AES-2006.

Newest VVER type currently offered:


• VVER are PWR reactors, the physics is the same

• VVER440 – robust approach

• VVER1000 – very close to western PWR, with specific pros&cons

• Several dozens of units operational, many in construction phase, good operating record


VVER reactor specification


4. Which reactor is good / bad?Several PERFORMANCE indicators:

• Availibility factor• Load factor• Capacity factor• Operating factor...

Also: SAFETY + SECURITY indicators (WANO/INPO lectures to come)


IAEA website helps too! VVER440


IAEA website helps... VVER1000

Comparison of 4 LWRs: Gen III

R. S. CTU Prague WNU SI 2010 Courtesy of J. Misak: NRI Rez

Comparison of 4 PWRs: Gen III



THANK YOU

(15 BACK UP SLIDES READY AND ENCLOSED WITH DATA FOR EAGER READERS...)

Comparison of 4 PWRs: Gen III



VVER performance

Courtesy of D. Gilchrist, ENEL


VVER reactor history: “Voronezh” types PROTOTYPES

Power/ MWe

Place Start Decommissioned

VVER 210

210 Novovoronezh 1964 1988

VVER 70 70 Rheinsberg 1966 1990

VVER 365

365 Novovoronezh 1970 1990


VVER reactor history: “Voronezh” types VVER 440 (i.e. rated 440MWe) “1st

generation”Feature Place Start

V 170 Novovoronezh 1972

V 230 Kola 1973

V 270 seismic Armenia 1980

VVER for export, RBMK for home:

17 VVER440 units built, 13 out of Russia


VVER reactor history: “Voronezh” types VVER 440 “2nd generation” (i.e. project after`70)

Feature Place Commissioned

V 213 Kola 1982

V 213 Ice + containment Loviisa 1977

V 213 condenser Dukovany 1985Again for export: 18 units built, 16 out of Russia


VVER reactor history: “Voronezh” types VVER 1000 (i.e. power 1000MWe) “2nd generation”

Place Commissioned

V 178 Novovoronezh 1981

V 302 Nikolajev 1983

V 338 Kalinin 1985

V 320 Balakovo 1986

More than 20 units built, other still in construction..


VVER reactor history: “Voronezh” types

“3rd + 4th generation” (i.e. outlook)From the `80-ies many variants of VVER planned:

V318 (440MWe)

V428(1000MWe),

V407(640MWe),

V392(1000MWe)…

in different stages of planning and construction


VVER 1000 comparison – design parameters

V-320 V-320Temelín

V-428 V-466

Thermal Power, MW 3000 3000 3000 3000

Fuel cycle, years 3 4 3-4 3-4

Average burn out, MWd/kgU 40.2 43.3 43 47.2

Enrichment, % 4.4 3-3.8 3.9 4.28

Profiled fuel no yes ? ?

Annual load factor, hours 7000 7000 7000 8400

Planned lifetime, years 30 30-40 40 60

LBB (Leak Before Break) no yes yes yes

Probability of core melting 10Е-5 10Е-5 10Е-5 10Е-6

ATWS no yes yes yes

ECCS concept 3х100% 3х100% 4х100% 4х100%

Double containment no no yes yes

Core catcher no no yes yes


V-320 V-320Temelín

V-428 V-466

Pressure, MPa 15,7 15,7 15,7 15,7

Outlet temperature, [°C] 320 320 320 (321)*

320 (321)*

Inlet temperature, [°C] 289,7 289,7 289,7 (291)*

289,7 (291)*

Flow, [m3/h] 84800 84800 86000 86000

RPV – inner diameter, [mm]

4150 4150 4150 4195

RPV – thickness at the core level, [mm] 192,5 192,5 192,5 195

RPV - height, [mm] 10 885 10 885 11 185 11 185

VVER 1000 comparison – design parameters

Primary circuit


NPP Loviisa

VVER 440

Loviisa



VVER 440 V 213

AES-92: BELENE



LWR positive/negative void…


Void coefficient... in “my” reactor

v v e r r b m k - jaif.or.jp · pdf file• pressurised light water used as moderator ......

Documents