About the Accuracy of Modeling Based on the Two-Zone Approach for Analyzing the Fire Safety of Nuclear Power Facilitie
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24160/1993-6982-2019-2-21-28Keywords:
two-zone modeling, safety of transportable nuclear power plants, fires at nuclear facilitiesAbstract
The possibility of using a two-zone model for simulating fires at nuclear power facilities in particular, at transportable nuclear power plants (TNPP), such as a floating nuclear power unit (FNPU), is considered.
For taking into account the uncertainty of parameters used in carrying out numerous calculations, and also when a fire breakout occurs, the specifics of a TNPP involves the need to perform fast assessment and produce correct recommendations to prevent the occurrence of hazardous effects. For this purpose, an express procedure is needed. The main characteristics of TNPPs are pointed out, namely, that they are accommodated in compact compartments, in which lack of ventilation is possible; that the plant components can be arranged at different height elevations, and that heat conduction between different compartments may play an essential role.
The fire modeling approaches existing around the world are analyzed, and a conclusion is drawn that the use of two-zone modeling can provide the required compromise between accuracy and speed of calculations. For practical purposes, it is proposed to adapt the existing experience with two-zone modeling based of developing the PABMT code (fires, safety analysis, and maritime transport). To estimate the code accuracy, the two-zone modeling results are compared with the results of experiments and calculations carried out using a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code. Cases close in characteristics to the TNPP conditions are considered: fire breakouts in a room, in a cylindrical compartment, and in the FNPU process compartments. For the accuracy estimation purposes, the following parameters were used: the hot gas upper layer temperature, pressure, and oxygen concentration. The obtained results show that the estimation of relative difference for the PABMT code is in good agreement with other studies, and that the code can be used as a basis for making express assessments of fire conditions at a TNPP.
References
2. Peacock R.D., Jones W.W., Reneke P.A., Forney G.P. CFAST — Consol-idated Model of Fire Growth and Smoke Transport (Version 7): Тech. Reference Guide // NIST Technical Note. 2016. V. 1.
3. Воробьев Ю.Б., Ганжинов А.М., Карнаухов В.Е., Уртенов Д.С., Устинов В.С. Опыт использования расчетных кодов для моделирования пожаров на объектах транспортных ядерных энергетических установок // Вестник МЭИ. 2016. № 5. С. 39—48.
4. Verification and Validation of Selected Fire Models for Nuclear Power Plant Applications. NUREG-1824. 2007. V. 1 — 7.
5. Peacock R.D., Forney G.P., Reneke P.A. CFAST — Consolidated Fire And Smoke Transport (Version 7): Verification and Validation Guide // NIST Technical Note. 2006. V 3.
6. Hoover J.B. Application of the CFAST Zone Model to Ships — Fire Specification Parameters // J. Fire Protection Eng. 2008. V. 18. Pp. 199—222.
7. Reneke P.A. e. a. A Comparison of CFAST Predictions to USCG Real-Scale Fire Tests // J. Fire Protection Eng. 2001. V. 11. Pp. 43—68.
8. Bhargab D., Apurba K. A Comparative Study on the Application of Simulation Techniques for Shipboard Fire Safety Analysis // Reliability, Risk and Safety: Theory and Appl. London: Taylor & Francis Group, 2010. Pp. 931—938.
9. ANSYS CFX-Solver Theory Guide. Release 14.0, 2011.
10. McGrattan K. e. a. Fire Dynamics Simulator User’s Guide. NIST Spe-cial Publ., 2013.
11. NFPA 204—2007. Standard for Smoke and Heat Venting.
---
Для цитирования: Воробьев Ю.Б., Уртенов Д.С., Карнаухов В.Е., Подгорный В.Н., Эйхорн Ю.Н., Лукашенко М.Л. Оценка точности моделирования на основе двухзонного подхода для анализа пожарной безопасности объектов ядерной энергетики // Вестник МЭИ. 2019. № 2. С. 21—28. DOI: 10.24160/1993-6982-2019-2-21-28.
#
1. Fire Dynamics Tools (FDT): Quantitative Fire Hazard Analysis Methods for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fire Protection Inspection Program. Final Rep. NUREG-1805, 2004;1;1—2.
2. Peacock R.D., Jones W.W., Reneke P.A., Forney G.P. CFAST — Consol-idated Model of Fire Growth and Smoke Transport (Version 7): Тech. Reference Guide. NIST Technical Note. 2016;1.
3. Vorob'ev Yu.B., Ganzhinov A.M., Karnauhov V.E., Urtenov D.S., Ustinov V.S. Opyt Ispol'zovaniya Ras- chetnyh Kodov dlya Modelirovaniya Pozharov na Ob'ektah Transportnyh Yadernyh Energeticheskih Ustanovok. Vestnik MEI. 2016;5:39—48. (in Russian).
4. Verification and Validation of Selected Fire Models for Nuclear Power Plant Applications. NUREG-1824. 2007;1 — 7.
5. Peacock R.D., Forney G.P., Reneke P.A. CFAST — Consolidated Fire And Smoke Transport (Version 7): Verification and Validation Guide. NIST Technical Note. 2006;3.
6. Hoover J.B. Application of the CFAST Zone Model to Ships — Fire Specification Parameters. J. Fire Protection Eng. 2008;18:199—222.
7. Reneke P.A. e. a. A Comparison of CFAST Predictions to USCG Real-Scale Fire Tests. J. Fire Protection Eng. 2001;11:43—68.
8. Bhargab D., Apurba K. A Comparative Study on the Application of Simulation Techniques for Shipboard Fire Safety Analysis. Reliability, Risk and Safety: Theory and Appl. London: Taylor & Francis Group, 2010: 931—938.
9. ANSYS CFX-Solver Theory Guide. Release 14.0, 2011.
10. McGrattan K. e. a. Fire Dynamics Simulator User’s Guide. NIST Spe-cial Publ., 2013.
11. NFPA 204—2007. Standard for Smoke and Heat Venting.
---
For citation: Vorobyev Yu.B., Urtenov D.S., Karnaukhov V.E., Podgornyi V.N., Eikhorn Yu.N., Lukashenko M.L. About the Accuracy of Modeling Based on the Two-Zone Approach for Analyzing the Fire Safety of Nuclear Power Facilities. Bulletin of MPEI. 2019;2:21—28. (in Russian). DOI: 10.24160/1993-6982-2019-2-21-28.
