查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 風險告知應用於核一廠火災分析與防火包覆評估=Application of Risk-Informed Fire Analysis on Chinshan Nuclear Power Plant Cable Tray Wrapping |
---|---|
作者 | 林子仁; 羅崇功; 吳景輝; 高梓木; 陳勤榮; | 書刊名 | 台電工程月刊 |
卷期 | 660 2003.08[民92.08] |
頁次 | 頁28-41 |
分類號 | 449.8 |
關鍵詞 | 風險告知; 火災分析; 安全度評估; 防火包覆; 效益影響評估; Risk-Informed; Fire analysis; Probabilistic risk assessment; Fire wrapping; Value impact assessment; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 台電核安處與核能研究所合作計畫“核一、二、三廠火災、水災、圍阻體系統安 全度評估模式建立及維護、應用”,已於88年10月完成核一廠活態安全度評估火災分析模式 之建立,並在核能研究所及台電核發處共同出資之持下,於91年7月完成核一、二、三廠諼 率運轉及大修停機期活態安全度評估模式之同行審查。基於此,核一廠活態安全度評估火災 分析模式已可做為火災分析風險告知決策之基礎。 美國核管會(USNRC)目前聲明核能電廠消防法規之政策,任何電廠可選擇符合現閱消防 法規(1979年1月前已運轉之電廠適用10CFR50 Appendix R(以下簡稱Appendix R),以後 運轉者適用BPT CMEB 9.5-1)或採用所謂風險告知績效基準(Risk-Informed, Pertformance-Based, RI-PB)之火災分析,依據法規指引RG 1.174及RG 1.189之精神申請豁 免。 核一廠目前亦處於相同處境,如欲符合現行Appendix R法規,則成本太高且防火材料問 題不易解決,故本計畫之目的乃在研究以現行核能研究所與台電核安處發展之活態安全度評 估火災分析模式,依據RG 1.174及RG 1.189之精神,進行核一廠火災風險告知細部分析及災 災後安全停機功能分析,並經由效益影響評估結果,提出全廠Appendix R最佳替代方案,提 供核一廠未來申請Appendix R豁免或替代方案之技術基礎。 本文最後所提之全廠Appendix R最佳替代方案(92號),除在防火(分)區4I與2G有消防 改善,以及有電纜重新遷線之需求外,其餘7個防火(分)區均建議可保持現狀,不必包 覆。因此可幫核電廠獲得淨利(與現況相比)每機組約2.6千萬元(新台幣),且相對於 Appendix R之包覆方式,其淨利更可達每機組約2.56億元(新台幣)。並且針對防火(分) 區 4I、4D及2G之消防改善或遷線,其安全可得改善及確保,可謂達到管制與營運雙贏局 面。 |
英文摘要 | Nuclear Safety Department of Taipower Company and Institute of Nuclear Energy Research (INER)had accomplished a project entitled "Estabishment, Maintenance and Application of PRA Fire, Flood and Containment Analyses for Chinshan, Kuosheng and Maanshan NPPs'" in Oct. 1999. And all of the living PRA models for three NPPs in Taiwan were completed through PRA peer review process under the sponsorship of INER and Taipower in July 2002. In the previous project, the living Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) fire model of Chinshan Nuclear Power Plant was well-developed. It can be used as a technical basis for risk-informed decision-making fire analysis applications. Recently, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) declared a regulatory policy of fire protection programs for nuclear power plant. Each plant may have its option to adopt the Risk-Informed, Performance-Based (RI-PB) fire analysis by following the guidelines of RG 1.174 and RG 1.189 to apply future exemption requests, instead of just following the current regulatory guides (10CFR50 Appendix R for NPPs operated before January of 1979 or BTP CMEB 9.5-1 for those operated henceforth). The Chinshan NPP is under the similar situation now. It needs a lot of budget to meet the requirements of Appendix R. and it is difficult to find a suitable material of the current industry for cable tray wrapping. The objects of this study are to perform the risk-informed fire analysis, post-fire safety shutdown function analysis and assessment of cable tray wrapping for technical basis of future Appendix R exemption requests for Chinshan NPP. The living PRA fire model should be used and refined in detailed case studies, and the guidelines of RG 1.174 and RG 1.189 should be followed to perform the RI-PB fire analysis applications. The best alternative option for Appendix R chosen in this study is Option 92. All other seven fire zones, except for fire zones 4I, 4D and 2G, will remain unchanged. There are some fire protection system improvement requirements for fire zones 4I and 2G, and cable re-routing requirements for fire zone 4D. The net value for the best Appendix R alternative option, compared with the wrapping required by Appendix R, will cost more than 7 million U.S. dollars; meanwhile, the fire risk is reduced for each unit of Chinshan NPP. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。