You are on page 1of 18

Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

www.elsevier.com/locate/pnucene

Loss of coolant accident analyses on Tehran research


reactor by RELAP5/MOD3.2 code
Afshin Hedayat a,b,*, Hadi Davilu a, Jalil Jafari b
a

Department of Nuclear Engineering and Physics, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic),
424 Hafez Avenue, P.O. Box 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran
b
Reactor & Accelerators Research and Development School, Nuclear Science and Technology Research Institute (NSTRI),
End of North Karegar Street, P.O. Box 14395-836, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
In this paper, a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) in Tehran research reactor (TRR) is analyzed. The following procedure consists
of three major parts. First, a RELAP5 nodalization of the core and the most important components of the primarily cooling system
are developed and steady state condition is simulated and compared with experimental data [SAR for TRR, October 2002. Safety
analysis report for Tehran research reactor. Nuclear Research Center of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Tehran] to validate
the nodalization. Then, two large break points are selected for design basis accident analyses. Finally, two main loss of coolant
accidents are simulated and developed to analyze LOCA in TRR. It can be concluded that TRR is safe against the LOCA. And
also RELAP5/MOD3.2 code can simulate research reactors at operating conditions well but it seems that this code cannot simulates
large transient phases of the research reactors accurately as steady state condition specially in low pressure two phase mixtures
(water and air).
2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: LOCA; RELAP5/MOD3.2; Research reactor; Steady state; Transient; TRR

1. Introduction
The loss of coolant accident (LOCA) is one of the most important design basis accidents. Although probability of
large break accident in research reactors is very low, once the accident occurs, it may cause core damages, so it must be
considered.
Extensive research activities have been performed to develop thermalehydraulic programs, such as RELAP5
(RELAP5/MOD3 code manual, 1999), ATHLET (Wolfert et al., 1989) and CATHARE (Micaelli et al., 1995) in
the past 20 years, which enable a more realistic simulation of nuclear reactor systems (Lin et al., 2005). The system
thermalehydraulic RELAP5 code has been developed for best estimate transient simulation of light water power reactor coolant systems during postulated accidents. So by taking the worst accident states or the largest breaks at the
most sensitive points, design basis accident simulation can be achievable. However, only limited work is performed to
* Corresponding author. Department of the Nuclear Engineering and Physics, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), 424
Hafez Avenue, P.O. Box 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran.
E-mail address: Af.Hedayat@yahoo.com (A. Hedayat).
0149-1970/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.pnucene.2007.07.009

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

512

Nomenclature
A
B
Cf
D
F
hL
K
L
P
q00
Re
x, z
r

cross-sectional area, constant number


constant number
constant number
junction diameter
total hot channel factor
head loss
loss factor
equivalent length
reactor power
heat flux per unit surface
Reynolds number
coordinate directions, hydrodynamic variable vectors
density

Subscripts
av average value
L
loss
max maximum value
turb turbulent flow
1, 2 vector indexes

study the reliability and capability of RELAP5 code for research reactor analysis in conditions such as low pressure,
low mass flow rates, low thermal power,. (Di Maro et al., 2003). It seems that the RELAP5/MOD3.2 provides
models capable to afford such limiting conditions (Davis, 2002; Hamidouche et al., 2004).
In the present work at first, a nodalization for the core and the most important components of the primarily cooling
system are developed. Steady state simulation is performed and compared with the experimental operating conditions
data registered in the SAR (SAR for TRR, 2002). After that, the break positions which could cause the worst conditions are chosen. And then the loss of coolant accident in Tehran research reactor is simulated.
2. Brief description of Tehran research reactor
Tehran research reactor (TRR) is a 5 MW pool type research reactor located in Tehran. This reactor consists of
MTR low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel type. The reactor core is cooled by downward forced flow of light water circulated by a primary cooling circuit pump during the normal operational stage. But during shutdown stage, the reactor
core is cooled by upward natural convection flow through a safety flapper valve. A general symbolic plan of TRR is
presented in Fig. 1.
Its main components are reactor core, control and safety systems, pool, holdup tank, pumps, heat exchanger, connecting pipes, check valves, gate valves and butterfly valves. Some of the main reactor data are outlined in Tables 1
and 2 and detailed specifications data are given in SAR for TRR (2002).
3. Steady state simulation
The nodalization used for simulation of TRR with RELAP5 is presented in Fig. 2. It represents both specifications
and modeling of TRR main components, and also includes all of the basic concepts for simulation. After the nodalization is constructed, actual simulation can be achieved because nodalization specifications are adapted by actual
gathered data.
The important parts are as follows.

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528


513

Fig. 1. The symbolic scheme of Tehran research reactor (SAR for TRR, 2002).

514

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

Table 1
Specifications and main operating conditions of Tehran research reactor
Core material
Coolant
Fuel element
Moderator
Nuclear fuel
Reflector

Light water
Plate-type clad in Al
Light water
MTR (LEU)
Graphite/light water

Thermo-hydraulics
Cladding thermal conductivity (W/m K)
Cooling method
Fuel thermal conductivity (W/m K)
Holdup tank water volume (m3)
Inlet coolant temperature ( C)
Pool water volume (m3)
Primary cooling loop mass flow rate (gpm)
Pump head (m)
Secondary cooling loop mass flow rate (gpm)
Total heat transfer surfaces (cm2) for standard fuel elements (SFE)
Total heat transfer surfaces (cm2) for control fuel elements (CFE)
Total power peaking factor (for codes)

167.0
Forced flow
10.0
37.417
37.8
477.8
2200
30.48
2300
14,022.0
10,332.0
3.0

Fuel element dimensions


Fuel height (cm)
Fuel length (cm)
Fuel width (cm)
Number of plates in standard fuel elements
Passing cooling water cross-section (cm2) at (CFE)
Passing cooling water cross-section (cm2) at (SFE)
Plate clad thickness (mm)
Plate clad height (cm)
Plate clad width (cm)
Plate meat (mm)
Water channel between plates (mm)

70.5
8.1
7.07
19
25.81
33.92
0.4
61.5
6.0
0.7
2.7

Fuel meat
235
U (%)
238
U (%)
O (%)
Al (%)

12.44
49.78
11.17
26.50

3.1. Plant nodalization


The main nodalization components are presented in Table 2.
It should be noted that the scalar properties of flow such as pressure and temperature are defined at control volume
centers (Table 3). These centers are called meshes. But the vector quantities such as velocities are defined on the control volume boundaries (RELAP5/MOD3 code manual, 1999).
Now a brief description of the most important parts of this nodalization is presented. The reactor pool of TRR consists of two parts which can be separated by an aluminum plate. In this nodalization, the pool is divided into six parts
which are modeled by P130, B200, P285 (1, 2, 3), P290 and three major channels for the core. The hot, average and
bypass channels sequentially are modeled by P201, P202 and P203, respectively. These channels are connected to
B200 at the top and to B205 at the bottom of themselves. B205 is the plenum located at the bottom of the core.
This volume is connected to the pool exit coolant pipe (P210) during normal operational state and connected to
the water surrounding the core at pool section (II), P290, by safety flapper valve (V206) during shutdown phase.
P290 is also connected to volume 1 of P285 and B200. Hence, the operation of pointed systems based on cross
and direct flow through these volumes can be similar to circulation at pool and core for both forced and natural circulation flows. TDV110 simulates the air enclosed in reactor containment at the top of the pool. The collection of
TDV100, V105 and their trip system models the operation of the makeup system. The primary circuit pipeline

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

515

Table 2
Main nodalization components and their relative reference code
Component

Reference code

Average channel
Hot channel
Bypass channel
Main coolant pump
Natural convection valve
Heat exchanger
Holdup tank
Reactor pool
Pool atmosphere simulator
Makeup system
Break one
Break two

P201
P202
P203
Pump 240
V206
P251eP260, (P, B)405e455
P220, TDV226
P130, B200, P285, P290
TDV110
TDV100, V105
V300, TDV315
V330, TDV33

between the pool and butterfly valve is modeled by P210 and V212. Remaining path up to holdup tank is considered as
P215 and P218 where a pit valve (V217) is located between them. The water logged volume of holdup tank during
normal operational state is presented by five volumes in P220 and also TDV226 which is a time dependent volume
that should be considered for upper empty part. The next important component after holdup tank is the primary circuit
main pump (Pump 240) connected to the holdup tank by P236. P240, V242, P244, J245, P246, V242, and P249 that are
a collection of pipes, elbows, junctions, check and gate valves which connect the pump outlet flow to inlet shell part of
heat exchanger. Final constituent of TRR is heat exchanger. To simulate this part (Atomic Energy Organization,
1990a,b), each section is chosen as a separate component connected to the others by thermodynamic conjunctions
and branches such as MJ250 at shell type parts and B415, B425, B435, B445 at tube type parts of the heat exchanger,
also the heat transfer phenomena are modeled between heat structure components associated with each other by
boundary conditions. Boundaries where heat can be transferred from them are specified by dashed lines at one
side of them. The shell parts of heat exchanger are connected to the primary cooling system modeled by P251,
P255 and P260. The other parts or tube type parts of that are connected to the secondary cooling system. Inlet and
outlet flows of tube parts of heat exchanger at secondary cooling system are simulated by two time dependent volumes
TDV400 and TDV460. Tubes at horizontal heat exchanger are classified into four separate parts. These tubes are modeled by P410, P420, P440, and P450 which are connected to each other by branches inside each shell and are connected to each other by P430 between the two primary shells. The remaining pipelines and valves from heat
exchanger outlet to pool section (I) inlet are P262, a gate valve (V263), P265, a butterfly (V270), and finally P285.
Usually, each pipe contains a number of volumes that have some special geometrical characteristics such as internal
junction flow area, horizontal angle, vertical angle and elevation change from the reference point. Hence, each pipe
such as P210 can have some elbows, straight pipes or abrupt area changes.
For LOCA analyses, two separate sections composed of valve and time dependent volumes should be considered.
V300 and TDV315 can be considered for large break analyses above the gird plate and also V330 and TDV335 are
connected to P210 for large break analyses below the gird plate.
Now, after the nodalization and its specifications are provided the simulation can be done.
3.2. Form loss calculations
The wall friction is determined based on volume flow regime map using DarcyeWeisbach friction factors. The wall
friction force terms include only wall shear effects.
Two different types of abrupt area changes are expansion and contraction. For flow expansion, the head loss factor
is obtained by BordaeCarnot formulation (Venard, 1965).

hL


2
1
A2
V22
1
2
A1

516

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

Fig. 2. RELAP nodalization for Tehran research reactor.

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

517

Table 3
Core channels partitions
Volume number

Elevation change
(from top of the core) (cm)

Mesh number

Elevation change
(from top of the core) (cm)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

10
20
30
40
50
60
70

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

5
15
25
35
45
55
65

Hence, the friction factor is:



2
A2
K 1
A1

And so the pressure drop is:


DPL rhL

In case of the contraction of flow, these factors similarly can be gained by mentioned correlations if only A2 is replaced by Ac or minimum cross-section of passing flow.
Other form losses created by valves, junctions and branches which are dependent on experimental values are obtained from mechanical references (Valves, Piping & Pipelines in Handbook, 1996). In RELAP5 code, user specified
form losses can be given in the following form:
kf Af Bf ReCf

In this simulation, because at the normal operational state of TRR the Reynolds number is higher than 10,000 and
pipes are smooth, the DarcyeWeisbach friction factor based on Reynolds number from Moody chart is calculated by
the following correlation:
fturb 0:0032

0:221
Re0:237

Afterwards, the form loss factors can be calculated by this correlation.


 
L
kf
D

f, L and D are Darcy factor, equivalent length (Valves, Piping & Pipelines in Handbook, 1996) and thermo-hydraulic
diameter, respectively.
3.3. Heat structure models
Heat structures are assumed to be represented by one-dimensional heat conduction in rectangular or cylindrical
geometry. Surface multipliers (RELAP5/MOD3 code manual, 1999) are used to convert the unit surface of onedimensional calculation to the actual surface of heat structure. A finite difference method is used to achieve the
heat conduction solutions. Each mesh interval contains a different mesh spacing, a different material or both.
For simulating the thermal power in the reactor, two different types of channels, average and hot channels, are considered. The average channel is responsible for general and almost all of the thermal operations of the reactor. A cosine
function is considered for both radial and axial heat generations of fuel plates. Hence, the power at average channel
can be approximated by correlation (7):
Px;zaverage-channel 7:5482cos

px pz
cos
a
L

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

518

In this method, the extrapolated length is omitted. Hence, a is the fuel plates width and L is the fuel plates height.
The hot channel is also calculated because of its importance for the safety analyses. The maximum heat flux at hot
channel is calculated by correlation (8) (El-Wakil, 1971):
q00max q00av F

In this correlation, q00max, q00av and F are maximum heat flux in hot channel, average heat flux in average channel and
overall hot spot factor, respectively. Now because of proportionality between heat flux and thermal power, similar correlation is obtained.
Pmax hot-channel Pav average-channel F

The overall hot spot factor or total hot channel factor for safety analyses done by thermalehydraulic codes should
be considered 3 (SAR for TRR, 2002). This value is higher than the real value. Similar to previous discussion, a cosine
distribution for both radial and axial heat flux in fuel plates is considered. Hence, the power at hot channel can be
approximated by correlation (10):
px pz
Px;yhot-channel 0:584cos
cos
10
a
L
For heat exchanger simulation, each separate part of it is taken as a specific heat structure with its boundary
conditions.
4. Steady state results and comparison
Important results of the steady state simulation and also a comparison between the results of RELAP5/MOD3.2
code and the average experimental values registered in safety analyses report of Tehran research reactor (SAR for
TRR, 2002) are presented in Figs. 3e8 and Table 4.
5. Discussion of steady state results
Table 4 shows a comparison between the results of simulation by RELAP5/MOD3.2 code and the experimental
data (SAR for TRR, 2002). It can be seen that presented data are very similar. But little differences between some
of them can be seen.
The reactor specifications reported at SAR (SAR for TRR, 2002) are the average experimental values. Hence, two
important points should be considered. The most important point is that research reactors work at low pressure and low
temperature and also some of the main reactor components transfer heat to their environment. For example, water that
is flowing through pool or holdup tank bounded by the enclosed air, or the shell type sides of heat exchanger transfer
some heat to the air in pump room. They have different temperatures at various seasons. The second problem is that
some details of reactor thermo-hydraulic quantities or heat structure data are not available from SAR (SAR for TRR,
2002), therefore standard values from reference books (Valves, Piping & Pipelines in Handbook, 1996) are used. Also
some of the data extracted from SAR are safety margin values, such as total hot channel factor which is above the real
value.
Because of all mentioned reasons and by comparison between the simulation results and SAR (SAR for TRR,
2002), the ability of RELAP5/MOD3.2 code has been demonstrated for research reactor applications.
6. Methodology for TRR LOCA analyses
Various incidents such as ruptures and leakages from pipes and valves which are located in primarily cooling system, ruptures of beam tubes, and breaks at the pool wall which are caused by severe accidents like strong earthquakes
can lead to the loss of coolant accident in TRR.
If the mass flow rate of the exiting coolant from rupture location is less than the mass flow rate of the makeup system which is 25 gpm or 95 l/min, pool water level will not change. But if exiting mass flow rate is more than 25 gpm,
the pool water level will be decreased. After decreasing about 1 ft (30.48 cm), the alarm system is activated and after

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

519

Fig. 3. Coolant temperatures in average channel.

a reduction of about 3 ft (91 cm) reactor is shut down. So in the present research, only large breaks and leakages which
can cause a noticeable reduction of pool water level will be considered.
All of the possible break incidents and leakages from primary cooling system are classified as two main groups.
The first group includes all of the large break accidents, which may be occurred above the gird plate of reactor
core. These accidents can occur in any of beam tubes. The second group includes all of the possible large break accidents that may occur below the reactor core gird plate. These accidents can occur in all of the pipelines and valves of
the primary cooling system.
Now, to analyze TRR safety against a large break accident, the design basis accident method is selected. Thus, the
break incidents should be considered where the affections of the accidents on the reactor operation have the worst effect.

Fig. 4. Coolant temperatures in hot channel.

520

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

Fig. 5. Coolant velocities in average channel.

To analyze LOCAs which are caused by breaks above the gird plate, the complete break of the 12 inches square
beam tube located near the pool wall should be selected because it has the greatest cross-sectional area and also has the
minimum relative height with respect to the core.
To analyze LOCAs which are caused by breaks below the gird plate, the complete break of the 10 inches outlet cooling
pipe where crossing the pool floor should be chosen because coolant flowing through any selected location in the primary
cooling system has a higher friction loss with respect to the initial selection. So coolant exits with less velocity than the
initial choice. Hence, the most dangerous state that should be studied to secure safety margins is the first selection.
The same RELAP5 nodalization as used for steady state condition is used to analyze the LOCA accident, except
that the safety flapper valve is taken closed to compare the results of the simulation with the THEAP-I code results

Fig. 6. Coolant velocities in hot channel.

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

521

Fig. 7. Maximum cladding temperature in average channel.

(SAR for TRR, 2002). Also, taking the safety valve to be closed in this situation may cause core cooling by natural
circulation harder after reactor scram. Hence studying this condition is more appropriate for safety assessments, which
are based on design basis accident.
In TRR, some rules are available for safety control systems which may result to reactor scram or emergency shutdown. In this research, two types of them are noted. The first, if the pool water level decreases about 91 cm and the
second, if the mass flow rate of the coolant flowing through the core reaches about 90% or 120% of the nominal value.
In the RELAP5/MOD3.2 simulation both of them are modeled by the control and trip systems and also choosing a suitable power distribution. But in the THEAP-I code simulation (SAR for TRR, 2002) only the first type was considered.

Fig. 8. Maximum cladding temperature in hot channel.

522

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

Table 4
A comparison between the results of simulation and the experimental data (SAR for TRR, 2002)
Thermo-hydraulic variables

Results of the
RELAP5 code

Data registered
at SAR (2002)

Hot channel outlet coolant temperature ( C)


Heat exchanger inlet primary coolant temperature ( C)
Heat exchanger outlet primary coolant temperature ( C)
Heat exchanger inlet secondary coolant temperature ( C)
Heat exchanger outlet secondary coolant temperature ( C)
Average velocity of coolant flowing through the core (m/s)
Average heat flux (W/cm2)
Maximum heat flux (W/cm2)
Maximum pool water temperature ( C)
Average channel outlet coolant temperature ( C)

58
45.5
38.9
30.6
38.7
1.36
13.84
42
38.9
48.76

e
46.5
37.8
30.6
38.9
1.36
13.4
40.1
37.8
e

7. LOCA simulation results and discussion


To model a loss of coolant accident, a time dependent volume is attached to the respective point of RELAP5 nodalization by a valve. In this LOCA simulation, after 100 s of steady state operation of TRR, LOCA begins by opening
of this valve. Then cooling flow expands to a time dependent volume. This flow expansion to the volume which contains air simulates the actual break conditions. So an implicit dynamic environment is gained to simulate LOCA. A
brief review of gained results is presented.

7.1. LOCA simulation caused by a large break incident in the 12 inches beam tube
To model a LOCA caused by a large break incident in the 12 inches beam tube which is located at the height of
1.66 m above the pool floor, near the core top, V300 and TDV315 could be selected. After 100 s steady state operation
of the reactor at 5 MW power, V300 is opened. Because of great and prompt expansion which occurred just near the
top of the reactor core, the reactor suddenly is shut down. Thus the thermal power of fuel assemblies is reduced to the
fission fragments heat decay. Also a major pump head loss is caused by large LOCA expansion. Thus this incident
prolongs pool water supplying by the coolant stored in the pipelines and the holdup tank. After the pool water level
has a decrease of about 30 cm, the makeup system which is not so effective in this situation is activated. The pool
water level decreased to the top of reactor core after about 28 min. The reactor core is completely empty after about
31.6 min. During this time, air is refilling the coolant channels. This phenomenon caused a great decrease in the heat
transfer factors. So fuel clad temperatures increase. These temperatures reach to the maximum values of 183.5  C in
the average channel and 343  C in the hot channel. The other maximum temperatures at different heights of the
average and hot channel claddings can be seen in Table 5.
Then, effective natural air convection through the hot, average, and bypass channels circulates. This circulating of
air causes an effective reduction of clad temperatures. So in this event, clad temperatures are remained below the
cladding (Al-T6061) melting point temperature which is about 587  C.
Table 5
Maximum cladding temperatures at various channel heights
Channel elevation
change (from the top) (cm)

Maximum clad temperatures


at the average channel ( C)

Maximum clad temperatures


at the hot channel ( C)

5
15
25
35
45
55
65

131.469
167.66
183.537
175.934
142.483
102.352
57.854

244.939
314.299
343.505
323.777
270.565
172.645
77.605

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

523

Fig. 9. Hot channel liquid phase temperatures.

Some results of this transient simulation which are more important due to safety margin assessments are presented
as graphs in Figs. 9e12. They are scaled by SI units.
7.2. LOCA simulation caused by a large break incident in the 10 inches outlet coolant pipe
To model a LOCA caused by a large break incident in the 10 inches outlet coolant pipe which is crossing the pool
floor, V330 and TDV335 could be considered. After 100 s steady state operation of the reactor at the 5 MW power,
V330 is opened. Because of great and prompt expansion which is occurred just after the core cooling outlet, mass flow
rate of the core increases. Thus the reactor is shut down a few seconds after the accident and then the thermal power of

Fig. 10. Average channel liquid phase temperatures.

524

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

Fig. 11. Maximum hot channel cladding temperature.

fuel assemblies is reduced to the fission fragments heat decay. Also a major pump head loss is caused by large LOCA
expansion. Thus this incident prolongs pool water supplying by the coolant which is stored in the pipelines and the
holdup tank. After the pool water level has a decrease of about 30 cm, the makeup system which is not so effective in
this situation is activated. The pool water decreases to the top of reactor core after about 42.6 min. Before this time,
because of exiting coolant from bottom of the core by gravity force and expansion phenomena, the coolant can have
a sufficient mass flow rate for preventing from other secondary local accidents such as LOFA. The reactor core is completely empty after about 48 min. During this time, air is refilling the coolant channels. This phenomenon caused
a great decrease in the heat transfer factors. So fuel clad temperatures increase. These temperatures reach to the

Fig. 12. Maximum average channel cladding temperature.

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

525

Table 6
Maximum cladding temperatures at various channel heights
Channel elevation
change (from the top) (cm)

Maximum clad temperatures


at the average channel ( C)

Maximum clad temperatures


at the hot channel ( C)

5
15
25
35
45
55
65

54.034
101.04
151.735
181.344
190.614
178.02
149.47

74.469
203.604
302.118
366.257
387.747
363.184
310.276

maximum values of 190.6  C in the average channel and 387  C in the hot channel. The other maximum temperatures
at different heights of the average and hot channel claddings are given in Table 6.
Finally, effective natural air convection through the hot, average, and bypass channels circulates. This circulating of
air causes an effective reduction of clad temperatures. So in this event, clad temperatures are remained below the cladding (Al-T6061) melting point temperature which is about 587  C.
Some results of this transient simulation which are more important due to safety margin assessments are presented
as graphs in Figs. 13e16. They are scaled by SI units.
7.3. A comparison between the results of RELAP5/MOD3.2 code and THEAP-I code simulations
This comparison is briefly presented in Tables 7 and 8. Then the most important reasons for differences between the
results of LOCA analyses done with RELAP5/MOD3.2 and THEAP-I codes are mentioned.
The most important differences between the results of the loss of coolant accident analyses gained by RELAP5/
MOD3.2 and THEAP-I codes can be consequences of the differences between the modeling methods used. Some
of them are presented here.
At simulation done with THEAP-I code, accident influences on the other components of the primarily cooling circuit were omitted. Especially, pressure losses due to large break incident that may have notable effects on the
thermo-hydraulic phenomena was not considered. These effects can be considerable, for example the accident can

Fig. 13. Hot channel liquid phase temperature.

526

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

Fig. 14. Average channel liquid phase temperature.

cause a great pump head loss. So the water stored in the holdup tank and pipelines can supply the pool water for a longer time than operational state.
Because of omitting the primary cooling system located between the pool inlet and outlet at THEAP-I code simulation, the effects of the friction and form losses which can cause a change in the transient calculations were not
considered.
At THEAP-I code simulation, the reactor scram is only activated by a reduction in the pool water level for about
1 ft, while at simulation done with RELAP5/MOD3.2 code the reactor scram is modeled by mass flow rate variations
of about 90% or 120% of the nominal value, too.

Fig. 15. Maximum hot channel cladding temperature.

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

527

Fig. 16. Maximum average channel cladding temperature.

8. Conclusions
With respect to the steady state results and also by comparison between the transient results and SAR (SAR for
TRR, 2002) which were briefly presented, the abilities of both RELAP5/MOD3.2 and presented nodalization are
proved to be used for research reactor applications.
After introducing an appropriate methodology for loss of coolant accident analyses on TRR, two major types of
LB-LOCAs were simulated. It can be seen that during loss of water coolant in the core, a natural convection of air
is circulating through the fuel assemblies which causes a suitable cooling which can prevent core melting after
core is completely empty. On the other hand, in the LOCA simulation which was caused by a large break in the
12 inches beam tube, after the hottest point reached a temperature of about 343  C, its temperature decreased to
a safe value. Also in the LOCA simulation caused by a large break in the 10 inches outlet coolant pipe, after hot channel clad temperature at the hottest axial section reached about 387  C, it was cooled to a safe temperature. In both
cases, the hottest temperatures at hot channel, by considering the hot channel factor to be 3 which is above the
real value, were remained under the cladding (AL, T6061) melting point which is about 587  C.
Table 8 shows that the shortest time, for core to get completely empty in an LB-LOCA, is about 28 min. On the
other hand, the core can be transported by a maximum safe velocity of 41.1 cm/min. The core should be transported
in a distance of about 5.6 m to the other pool section. Then it must be installed and isolated from the first section by the

Table 7
Similar inputs of the codes
Variables

Break height
related to the pool
floor (m)
Break cross-section
area (m2)
Break diameter (m)

A LOCA analysis on the 12 inches beam tube

A LOCA analysis on the 10 inches outlet coolant pipe

RELAP5/MOD3.2

THEAP-I code

RELAP5/MOD3.2

THEAP-I code

1.66

1.66

0.0

0.0

0.093

0.093

0.0507

0.0507

0.305

0.305

0.254

0.254

A. Hedayat et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 49 (2007) 511e528

528

Table 8
A comparison between results of the RELAP5/MOD3.2 and THEAP-I code simulations of TRR
Variables

Scram time
Time needed for pool
water depletion up to
the core top (min)
Core complete
depletion time (min)

Results of the LOCA analyses on the 12 inches


beam tube

Results of the LOCA analyses on the 10 inches


outlet coolant pipe

RELAP5/MOD3.2

THEAP-I code

RELAP5/MOD3.2

THEAP-I code

0.17 s
28

2.4 min
31.6

1.15 s
42.6

1.83 min
46.2

31.6

48

51

separating plate. All of this can be done in about 15 min (SAR for TRR, 2002). By considering a safety margin of 20%,
this time increases to about 18 min. Hence, in a large break accident, the core can be set up at the other pool section
and isolated from the first section before the pool water level decreased to the top of the core.
Finally, because of all the achieved results, it can be concluded that Tehran research reactor (TRR) is safe against
the loss of coolant accident (LOCA).
And although RELAP5/MOD3.2 code can simulate research reactors actually at operating conditions, it seems that
this code simulates large transient phases less accurately specially in low pressure two phase mixtures (water and air).
References
Atomic Energy Organization, 1990a. Construction Drawing, Demineralized Water Cooler. Suisio, Bergamo, Italy. IRN/342, 8504 (NUM. DIS.
DWG. NUM.9182).
Atomic Energy Organization, 1990b. Heat Exchangers. Document Front Sheet. Suisio, Bergamo, Italy. CALC/8504, IRN/342.
Davis, C.B., 2002. Applicability of RELAP5/MOD3.2 to research reactors. In: IAEA Regional Training Workshop on Safety Analysis Methodology and Computer Code Utilization. KINS, Daejeon, South Korea.
Di Maro, B., Pierro, F., Bousbia Salah, A., DAuria, F., May 2003. Analysis of a pump trip in a typical research reactor by RELAP5/MOD 3.3. In:
Proceedings of ICAPP03, Cordoba, Spain (paper 3215).
El-Wakil, M.M., 1971. Nuclear Heat Transport. International Textbook Company, Scranton.
Hamidouche, T., Bousbia-Salah, A., Adorni, M., DAuria, F., 2004. Dynamic calculations of the IAEA safety MTR research reactor benchmark
problem using RELAP5/3.2 code. Annals of Nuclear Energy 31, 1385e1402.
Lin, M., Su, Y., HU, R., Zhang, R., Yang, Y., March 2005. Development of a thermalehydraulic system code for simulators based on RELAP5
code. Nuclear Engineering and Design 235 (6), 925e936.
Micaelli, J.C., Barre, F., Bestion, D., 1995. CATHARE code development and assessment methodologies. In: Transactions of the ANS, Winter
Meeting San Francisco, October 29eNovember 2, vol. 73, pp. 509e510.
RELAP5/MOD3 code manual, June 1999. Code Structure, System Models, and Solution Methods, vols. IeV. Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory (NUREG/CR-5535).
SAR for TRR, October 2002. Safety analysis report for Tehran research reactor. Nuclear Research Center of the Atomic Energy Organization of
Iran, Tehran.
Valves, Piping & Pipelines in Handbook, second ed., 1996. Elsevier Advanced Technology, Kidlington, Oxford.
Venard, J.K., 1965. One-dimensional Flow. In: Streeter, V.L. (Ed.), Handbook of Fluid Dynamics, first ed. McGraw Hill, New York.
Wolfert, K., Teschendorff, V., Lerchl, G., Miro, J., Burwell, M.J., 1989. The thermalehydraulic code ATHLET for analysis of PWR and BWR
systems. In: Proceedings of NURETH-4, Karlsruhe, vol. II, pp. 1234e1239.

You might also like