Home Thermal-hydraulic and safety analysis of alternative ceramic fuels in next generation of VVER-1000 reactor
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Thermal-hydraulic and safety analysis of alternative ceramic fuels in next generation of VVER-1000 reactor

  • Ahmad Rahimi , Mohsen Kheradmand Saadi EMAIL logo , Ebrahim Heidari EMAIL logo and Kavoos Abbasi
Published/Copyright: November 14, 2024
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

The main aim of this study is the thermohydraulic and safety analysis of alternative UN and UC ceramic fuels in the next generation of VVER-1000/V446 reactor core. One of the advantages of these alternative fuels is their higher thermal conductivity and density relative to the UO2 conventional fuels. Thermohydraulic analysis has been performed under full power conditions. Also, the safety evaluation of alternative ceramic fuels has been researched by the Rod Ejection Accident (REA) scenario. RELAP5 Mod3.2 code is used for thermo-hydraulic analysis in both steady state and transient state in VVER-1000/V446 reactor. In addition, calculations of the fuel center temperature in mean and hot channels for steady state, the temperature of the hottest rod in the fuel assembly, the radial distribution of fuel temperature for both channels, and the maximum clad temperature during the reactivity injection have been performed. The results showed that in the steady state with full power, the fuel centreline temperature in UO2 is about twice the corresponding values for UN and UC alternative fuels which is very attractive from a safety point of view. In general, due to the large difference between the hot spot point and the melting point in alternative fuels, the thermal power and safety factors can be significantly increased in the next generation of VVER-1000/V446 reactors.


Corresponding authors: Mohsen Kheradmand Saadi, Department of Nuclear Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran, E-mail: ; and Ebrahim Heidari, Department of Sciences, Bushehr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Bushehr, Iran, E-mail:

  1. Research ethics: Not applicable.

  2. Informed consent: Not applicable.

  3. Author contributions: A. Rahimi: Methodology, Software, Investigation, Resources, Writing – Original Draft. M. Kheradmand Saadi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Writing – Review & Editing. E. Heidari: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing. K. Abbasi: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing.

  4. Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None declared.

  5. Conflict of interests: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  6. Research funding: None declared.

  7. Data availability: Data available upon request.

References

AEOI (2003). Final safety analysis Report (FSAR). Chapter 4.Search in Google Scholar

Al-Qasir, I., Gillette, V., and Qteish, A.J. (2019). Thermal neutron scattering kernels for uranium mono-nitride: a potential advanced tolerant fuel candidate for light water reactors. Ann. Nucl. Energy 127: 68–78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.11.047.Search in Google Scholar

Altaha, S.M. and Pazirandeh, A.J. (2011). REA analysis of the Iranian VVER-1000 core by modification of PRORIA code for annular pellets. Ann. Nucl. Energy 38: 1930–1938, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2011.05.003.Search in Google Scholar

Castro, L., Delgado, G., García, C., and Dominguez, D.S. (2019). Thermal analysis of ceramic nuclear fuels for the HPLWR. Ann. Nucl. Energy 127: 227–236, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.12.008.Search in Google Scholar

Rahimi, A., Heidari, E., Kheradmandsaadi, M., and Abbasi, K. (2023). Neutronic analysis of alternative ceramic fuels in the next generation of VVER-1000/V446 reactor. Phys. Scr. 98: 115301, https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/acf9cd.Search in Google Scholar

Saadi, M.K. and Bashiri, B. (2016). Neutronic and thermal-hydraulic analysis of alternative ceramic fuels in the next-generation of light water reactors. Prog. Nucl. Energy 87: 89–96, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PNUCENE.2015.11.002.Search in Google Scholar

Saadi, M.K., Shahriari, M., and Zolfaghari, A.R. (2010). Xenon transient simulation of the VVER-1000 nuclear reactor using adiabatic approximation. Ann. Nucl. Energy 37: 753–761, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2010.01.005.Search in Google Scholar

Tabadar, Z., Hadad, K., Nematollahi, M., Jabbari, M., Khaleghi, M., and Hashemi-Tilehnoee, M. (2012). Simulation of a control rod ejection accident in a VVER-1000/V446 using RELAP5/Mod3.2. Ann. Nucl. Energy 45: 106–114, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2012.02.018.Search in Google Scholar

Tikhonov, N. (2011). WWER-1000 reactor simulator. IAEA-training course at milano politechnico. Chapter 15.Search in Google Scholar

Toyama, M., Shimizu, S., Yoshizu, T., Naito, T., and Otsuka, S. (2009). Next-generation pressurized water reactor (PWR)-Development of environmentally-friendly, highly effective, economical, and 3S achievable autonomic type plant. Mitsubishi Heavy Ind. Technical Rev. 46, https://www.mhi.co.jp/technology/review/pdf/e464/e464001.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2024-07-11
Accepted: 2024-10-08
Published Online: 2024-11-14
Published in Print: 2024-12-17

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 28.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/kern-2024-0082/html
Scroll to top button