查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 風險告知應用於核二、三廠火災分析與防火包覆評估=Application of Risk-Informed Fire Analysis of Cable Tray Wrapping on the Second and Third Nuclear Power Plant |
---|---|
作 者 | 陳得誠; 林子仁; 陳勤榮; | 書刊名 | 台電工程月刊 |
卷 期 | 697 民95.09 |
頁 次 | 頁28-38 |
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 | 2004年7月美國核管會修正其核能電廠消防法規10CFR50.48,任何電廠可選擇符合現行消防法規(1979年1月前已運轉之電廠適用10CFR50.48(b),即10CFR50 Appendix R (以下簡稱Appendix R),以後運轉者適用10CFR50.48(a),即BTP APCSB 9.5-1)或採用10CFR50.48(c),即所謂風險告知績效基準(Risk-Informed, Performance-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Appendix R豁免或替代方案。 核二、三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臺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,進行核二、三廠火災風險告知細部分析及火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,提供核二、三廠未來申請Appendix R豁免或替代方案之技術基礎。 核二廠之全廠Appendix R最佳替代方案為A017,其建議為執行提昇DC電池組容量並遷移防火分區138、14C、14D-E及219的部分電纜,至於現況已包覆之電纜則無須進行維護,未包覆者可豁免包覆。相較於Appendix R,可幫電廠獲得淨利約2.83億元(新臺幣)/每部機。改善後可避免較嚴重之火災造成喪失儀用空氣肇始事件,其安全獲得改善及確保,可謂達到管制與營運雙贏局面。 核三廠之全廠Appendix R最佳替代方案A001,除在防火(分)區1新增一道防火牆外,其餘11個防火(分)區均建議可保持現狀,不必包覆,或維護包覆。相較於Appendix R,可幫電廠獲得淨利約2.99億元(新臺幣)/每部機。改善後可避免火災造成喪失所有廠用海水系統之肇始事件,其安全獲得改善及確保,可謂達到管制與營運雙贏局面。 |
英文摘要 | In July, 2004, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) had amended 10CFR50.48, the regulatory policy of fire protection programs for unclear 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 (10CFR50.48(c)), instead of just following the current regulatory guides (10CFR50 Appendix R for NPPs operated before January of 1979 (10CFR50.48(b), or BTP APCSB 9.5-1 for those operated henceforth (10CFR50.48(a)). The Second and Third NPPs are 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 the Second and Third NPPs. The living PRA fire model should be used and refined in detialed 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 for Appendix R chosen in this study for the Second NPP is Option A017 which includes promoting the capacity of DC battery sets and re-routing partial cable of fire zone 138, 14C, 14D-E and 219 to prevent the fire scenarios that would result in loss of instrument air initiating event (TC). The net value for the Best Option A017, compared with the wrapping required by Appendix R, will be 8.1 million dollars meanwhile the fire risk is reduced for each unit of the Second NPP. The best alternative for Appendix R chosen in this study for the Third NPP is Option A001 which only required to add a fire wall between equipments of train A and train B within Fire Zone 1 to prevent the fire scenarios that would result in loss of all Nuclear Service Cooling Water (NSCW) initiating event (TC2). The net value for the Best Option A001, compared with the wrapping required by Appendix R, will be 8.5 million dollars meanwhile the fire risk is reduced for each uint of the Third NPP. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。