KR101988397B1 - Method and Equipment for an integrated response time evaluation for the plant protection system - Google Patents

Abstract

As a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the response time evaluating apparatus of the plant protection system includes a safety analysis step, a system design step, a response time analysis step, and a response time test A time t1 derived from the safety analysis step, a time t2 derived from the system design step, a time t3 derived from the response time analysis step, and a response time test step derived from the response time test step And an integrated evaluation unit for determining whether the response time evaluation is appropriate based on the time t4.

Description

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a method and an apparatus for evaluating the response time of a plant protection system,

The present invention is a method of applying an integrated evaluation to each process of safety analysis, system design, response time analysis, and response time test related to the response time requirements of a measurement control channel that performs a safety function of a nuclear power plant.

The safety of nuclear power plants directly linked to the lives and safety of the people is the most important consideration in the construction and operation of nuclear power plants. Especially, if the measurement control system channel that performs the safety function when the design criteria event occurs in the nuclear power plant does not satisfy the response time requirement determined through the safety analysis, the stability of the nuclear power plant can not be guaranteed.

Conventionally, since it is necessary to prove that the safety analysis response time requirement at the uppermost stage of the design process satisfies only the response time test, which is the lowest stage, it is impossible to evaluate the suitability of each design process.

IEEE Trans Nuclear Science, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 2120-2130, Aug. 2014, pp. [2] S H Yang, S H Kim, Y J Chung, S Q Zee, "Trip setpoint analysis for an advanced integral reactor," Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 34, no 4, pp 319-325, Apr 2007 [3] Robert J Dodson, Madeline Anne Feltus, "Low temperature overpressurization protection system setpoint analysis using RETRAN for Salem, Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol 23, no 6, pp 487-498, Apr 1996 [4] C R Tuley, Richard B Miller, "Westinghouse setpoint methodology for control and protection systems," IEEE trans Nuclear Science vol. 33, no 1, pp 684-687, Feb 1986 [5] KI Han, "OPΔT and OTΔT Trip Setpoint Generation Methodology," Journal of the Korean Nuclear Society, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 106-115, Jun 1984 [6] Guidance on Digital Computer Real-Time Performance, USNRC, NUREG 0800, SRP, BTP 7-21, 2007 [7] Performance Monitoring for Nuclear Safety-Related Instrument Channels in Nuclear Power Plants, ANSI / ISA-67061, 2002 [8] Periodic Testing of Electric Power and Protection Systems, USNRC Regulatory Guide 1118, Rev 3, Apr 1995 [9] IEEE Standard for Criteria for Periodic Surveillance Testing of Nuclear Power Generating Station Safety Systems, IEEE Std 338, Sep 10, 1987 [10] Measurement of Response Time and Detection of Pressure Sensor / Sensing Line systems, NUREG / CR-4526, 1985 [11] Effect of aging on response time on nuclear plant pressure sensors, NUREG / CR 5383, 1989 [12] B R. Upadhyaya, C. Mehta, D Bayram, "Integration of Time Series Modeling and Wavelet Transform for Monitoring Nuclear Plant Sensors," IEEE trans Nuclear Science, vol. 61, no 5, pp 2628-2635, 2014 [13] H Kleines, J Sarkadi, F Suxdorf, K Zwoll, "Measurement of real-time aspects of Simatic® PLC operation in the context of physics experiments," IEEE trans Nuclear Science, vol 51, no 3, pp 489-494 , 2004 Vol. 43, no. 1, pp. Xxx-xxx, 1996. [14] Y. Yasu, M Nomachi, Y. Nagasaka, R. Ball, Y. Tajima, C. Timmermans, "UNIDAQ, Real-time Response of the System, [15] C J Lee, S Han, J H Yun, S M Baek, "Response Time Evaluation for PPS Using a Combined Technique of Analysis and Test," Transactions of the Korean Nuclear Society Autumn Meeting, Oct 2015 [16] Setpoint for Safety-Related Instrumentation, USNRC Regulatory Guide 1105, Rev 3, Dec 1999 [17] Setpoints for Nuclear Safety-Related Instrumentation, ISA-S6704, Part I, Sep 1994 [18] Nuclear Power Plants-Instrumentation Important to Safety - Determination and Maintenance of Trip Setpoints, IEC-61888, Aug 2002 [19] Nuclear Power Systems (1974, Apr) CESEC Digital Simulation of a Combustion Engineering Nuclear Steam Supply System, CENPD-107, Combustion Engineering Inc, Windsor, CT

In one preferred embodiment of the present invention, the conventional problem of not applying the systematic response time evaluation method to the entire design process of the plant protection system is solved, and safety is secured in case of generating a nuclear plant design reference event.

In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, an integrated evaluation method is applied to each process of safety analysis, system design, response time analysis, and response time test related to response time requirements of a measurement control channel that performs a safety function of a nuclear power plant, In addition to identifying problems, we want to improve the safety of nuclear power plants.

As a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the response time evaluation apparatus of the plant protection system includes a safety analysis unit for measuring an analysis response time t1, which is a response time of a system performing a safety function, A response time analyzer for measuring an estimated response time t3 representing a response time quantitatively analyzed by each device constituting the power plant protection system; And a response time test section for dividing each device constituting the measurement control channel into n areas and measuring a measurement response time t4 representing a measured response time superposed among n areas, wherein t4 < t3 < t2 < t1, the integrated evaluation unit determines that a response time requirement is satisfied in each of the safety analysis unit, the system design unit, the response time analysis unit, and the response time testing unit. do.

In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the response time evaluating apparatus of the plant protection system sequentially checks whether t1 > t2 is met, t2 > t3 is satisfied or t3> t4 is satisfied.

In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the integrated evaluating unit calculates M1> 0, M2> 0, and M1> 0, where t1-t2 = M1, t2- 0, and a first condition of M3 &gt; 0 and a second condition of t1 = t4 + M1 + M2 + M3 are satisfied.

As a further preferred embodiment of the present invention, a method of performing response time evaluation in a response time evaluating apparatus of a plant protection system includes a safety analysis, a system design, and a design process related to response time requirements of each channel performing a safety function, Response time analysis and response time test; Measuring an analysis response time t1 which is a response time of the system performing the safety function in the safety analysis step; Measuring a design response time t2 indicative of a total sum of individual response times allocated to each device constituting the measurement control channel in the system design step; A response time analyzer for measuring an estimated response time t3 indicating a response time quantitatively analyzed in each device constituting the measurement control channel in the response time analysis step; Dividing each device constituting the measurement control channel into n regions, measuring a measurement response time t4 representing a measured response time superposed among n regions; M3> 0, M1 = 0, M2> 0, and M3> 0, when t1-t2 = M1, t2-t3 = M2 and t3- M2 + M3. &Lt; / RTI &gt;

In another preferred embodiment of the present invention, the response time evaluating apparatus of the plant protection system includes a safety analysis step, a system designing step, a response time analysis step, and a response time analysis step, which relate a response time requirement of each channel, A time t1 derived from the safety analysis step, a time t2 derived from the system design step, a time t3 derived from the response time analysis step, and a response time test step And an integrated evaluation unit for determining whether the response time evaluation is appropriate based on the time t4 derived from the response time evaluation unit.

The apparatus and method for estimating the response time of the plant protection system proposed in the present invention can sequentially and integrally evaluate the problems in the response time design process of the measurement control system channel performing the safety function, As a result, it is possible to prevent the unnecessary stopping of operation, thereby improving the economical efficiency of the nuclear power plant.

Fig. 1 shows an internal configuration diagram of a response time evaluating apparatus 100 of a plant protection system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
2 shows a flowchart for evaluating the response time of a plant protection system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.
3 is a preferred embodiment of the present invention, illustrating the relationship between safety limits and safety analysis.
4 to 6 show an example of evaluating the response time of the power plant protection system of the APR1400 nuclear power plant in the response time evaluating apparatus of the power plant protection system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Hereinafter, preferred embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings. It should be noted that the same components of the drawings are denoted by the same reference numerals and signs as possible even if they are shown on different drawings. In the following description of the present invention, a detailed description of known functions and configurations incorporated herein will be omitted when it may make the subject matter of the present invention rather unclear.

Fig. 1 shows an internal configuration diagram of a response time evaluating apparatus 100 of a plant protection system according to a preferred embodiment of the present invention.

As a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the response time evaluating apparatus 100 of the power plant protection system includes a measurement control system (not shown) for performing the safety functions of reactor shutdown and engineering safety equipment operation in Korea standard type nuclear power plant, OPR1000, APR1400 nuclear power plant, Channel response time design process, and various other nuclear plant design processes.

The plant protection system performs two safety functions: reactor shutdown and engineering safety facility operation. The instrumentation control channel for the reactor shutdown function consists of a transmitter, a signal converter, a plant protection system and a reactor shutdown circuit breaker. Instrumentation control channels for engineering safety facility operation functions consist of a transmitter, a signal converter, a plant protection system, an engineering safety equipment control system and a final drive. Each safety function shall have four multi-instrumentation control channels, and each channel shall be conformed to the response time requirement test requirements in accordance with the periodic inspection requirements of the Operating Technical Guidelines.

As a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the response time evaluating apparatus 100 of a plant protection system calculates a design process related to response time requirements of each channel performing a safety function through a classification unit (not shown) , Response time analysis and response time test. Each of the design processes is implemented in the safety analysis unit 110, the system design unit 120, the response time analysis unit 130, and the response time testing unit 140 do.

The safety analysis unit 110 measures the analysis response time t1, which is the response time of the system performing the safety function.

The system design section 120 measures the design response time t2 indicating the total sum of the individual response times allocated to the respective apparatuses constituting the measurement control channel. The design response time t2 is calculated as shown in Equation (1).

는 계측제어채널을 구성하는 i번째 기기에 할당된 응답시간을 나타낸다.In this case, i represents each device constituting the measurement control channel, m represents the total number of devices constituting the measurement control channel,

Represents the response time allocated to the i-th device constituting the measurement control channel.

The response time analyzer 130 measures the estimated response time t3, which represents the response time quantitatively analyzed by each device constituting the plant protection system. The estimated response time t3 is calculated as shown in Equation (2).

는 j번째 기기의 정량적으로 분석된 응답시간을 나타낸다.In this case, j represents each device constituting the plant protection system, n represents the total number of devices constituting the plant protection system,

Represents the quantitatively analyzed response time of the jth device.

The response time testing unit 140 divides each device constituting the measurement control channel into n regions, and measures a measurement response time t4, which is a superposition of n regions and indicates a measured response time. The measurement response time t4 is calculated as shown in Equation (3).

k denotes a region where each device constituting the measurement control channel is grouped, and o denotes the number of the grouped regions.

6, when the equipment constituting the measurement control channel is the transmitter 610, the signal processor 620, the power plant protection system 630 and the reactor shutdown circuit breaker 640, the transmitter 610 is divided into the first group, The signal processor 620 and the plant protection system 630 may be grouped into a second group and the reactor shutdown circuit breaker 640 into a third group. Then, the measurement response time t4 is calculated by summing the measured response times superimposed between the response time 610a of the first group, the response time 620a of the second group, and the response time 630a of the third group.

The response time evaluating apparatus 100 of the plant protection system includes a safety analyzing unit 110, a system designing unit 120, a response time analyzing unit 130, and a response time testing unit 140 And an integrated evaluating unit 150 for determining whether the response time requirements are satisfied in each of them. In one preferred embodiment of the present invention, the integrated evaluation unit 150 can be implemented in hardware through a processor or the like.

The integrated evaluation unit 150 sequentially confirms whether t1 > t2, t2 > t3 or t3> t4 is satisfied. M2, M3, and M3, respectively, when t1-t2 = M1 (S210), t2-t3 = M2 (S220), and t3- And the second condition (S240) of t1 = t4 + M1 + M2 + M3, the safety analysis unit 110, the systematic design unit 120, the response time analysis The response time testing unit 140 and the response time testing unit 140 sequentially satisfy the response time requirements.

If the condition of t1-t2 = M1 > 0 (S210) is not satisfied, the integrated evaluating unit corrects the design problem of the measurement control channel (S211). Next, if the condition t2-t3 = M2> 0 (S220) is not satisfied, the problem of the response time analysis is corrected (S221). If the condition t3-t4 = M3 > 0 (S230) is not satisfied, the test problem is corrected (S231).

In another preferred embodiment of the present invention, the integrated evaluating unit further determines whether or not the second condition (S240) is satisfied, whether or not the safety limit value requirement (S242) shown in FIG. 3 is satisfied (S250). The response time evaluating apparatus 100 of the plant protection system determines that the response time evaluation has passed if the second condition S240 and the safety limit value requirement S242 are satisfied.

FIG. 3 shows an example of the relationship between the safety limit value 310 and the safety analysis 320, which is a preferred embodiment of the present invention.

The safety limit value 310 is a value that assures the physical integrity of the apparatus that prevents leakage of radioactive material in the event of a nuclear power plant accident. The safety analysis 320 determines an analysis limit 330 and an analysis response time t1 340 that ensures that the process variable does not exceed the safety limit during a nuclear accident.

In one preferred embodiment of the present invention, the analysis limit value 330 determines the trip setting value 3310 in consideration of the uncertainty of the measurement control system channel from the analysis limitation based on the safety related measurement device set value determination methodology, ) Is defined as a limit value that can vary during the test period is determined by considering the period test error (332) in the trip setting.

As a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the analysis response time t1 340 is the highest requirement for the response time of the system performing the safety function. The design response time t2 (341) determined at the time of system design, Suitability is evaluated sequentially and integrally by the response time t3 342 and the measurement response time t4 343 determined in the grid test.

FIG. 4 shows an example of application of a response time evaluation apparatus for a plant protection system to an APR1400O nuclear power plant, which is a preferred embodiment of the present invention.

An example of obtaining the analysis response time t1 in the safety analysis section is as follows.

Steam generators at APR1400O nuclear reactors The most restrictive design basis events requiring low level reactor shutdown are the vacuum loss of the condenser and the water pipe breakage. In the case of the vacuum loss of the condenser, the safety analysis limit used in the safety analysis is 40.7%, and the analysis response time t1 is 1.25 seconds.

This means that reactor shutdown is initiated at a steam generator level of 40.7% if a condenser vacuum loss occurs and the reactor shutdown occurs after 1.25 seconds.

Also, in the case of water pipe breakage, the analytical limit used in the safety analysis is 28.4% and the analysis response time t1 is 1.25 seconds. This means that if a water pipe break occurs, the reactor shutdown starts at 28.4% of the steam generator level, and if the reactor is shut down after 1.25 seconds, the safety analysis limit criterion is met. Therefore, the analysis response time t1 of the steam generator low level reactor shutdown function at APR1400 is 1.25 seconds (401), which is the highest requirement for the plant protection system channel.

An example of obtaining the design response time t2 in the system design section is as follows.

4, the power plant protection system channel that performs the steam generator low-level reactor shutdown function of the APR1400 nuclear power plant is composed of a transmitter 410, a signal processor 420, a power plant protection system 430 and a reactor shutdown circuit 440 have. To ensure that the system design satisfying the analysis response time t1, 1.25 seconds has been performed, it is to be verified that the sum of the response times assigned to each component satisfies the analysis response time requirements. Design response time t2 is 1.055 seconds by confirming through the design specification that the response time assigned to each component is 0.2 second (410a), 0.05 second (420a), 0.705 second (430a) and 0.1 second (440a) It can be confirmed that the analysis response time t1, 1.25 sec. Therefore, it is confirmed that the system design satisfying the analysis response time t1 has been performed.

An example of obtaining the estimated response time t3 in the response time analysis unit is as follows.

Referring to FIG. 4, the estimated response time t3 by the response time analysis is a sum total of 0.2 second (410a) of the transmitter, 0.05 second (420a) of the signal processor, 0.705 second (430a) of the plant protection system, Is 0.992 seconds, which satisfies the design response time t2, 1.055 seconds. Therefore, it is confirmed through the response time analysis that the estimated response time t3 satisfies the design response time t2.

However, the plant protection system 430 of the APR1400 nuclear power plant includes a comparison logic processor 531 and a simultaneous logical processor 536 as shown in FIG. The comparison logic processor 531 and the simultaneous logic processor 536 are connected to a software processing unit (not shown) and other analog input units 532, a first control unit 523, a time delay unit 534, a second control unit 537, A digital output unit 538, a safety-grade communication link unit 535, and an interposing relay 539. Therefore, separate analysis is required as shown in Table 1.

Components Channel response time (seconds) The analog input unit 532 0.02 The first control unit 533, 0.058 The time delay unit 534 0.48 The safety grade communication linkage unit 535 0.013 The second control unit 537, 0.034 The digital output unit 538 0.012 Interpolation relays (539) 0.025  Total response time 0.642  Response Time Requirements 0.705

Other components (Figures 4, 410, 420, 440) do not perform separate analysis and ensure that each design requirement satisfies the response time through the device design and device manufacturer specifications.

The process of calculating the measurement response time t4 in the response time test section is as follows.

The response time test for the plant protection system channel that performs the steam generator low-level reactor shutdown function of the APR1400 nuclear reactor is performed by grouping the response time tests into three groups 610a, 620a, and 630a as shown in FIG. And checks whether the sum of the test results in each interval satisfies the estimated response time t3, which is the response time analysis result.

Tables 2 and 3 describe the response time test results for the first steam generator and the second steam generator by channels A, B, C, and D, respectively. It can be confirmed that the measurement response time t4 of each channel, which is the response time test result of each channel, satisfies the estimated response time t3.

Components Channel response time (seconds) Channel A Channel B Channel C Channel D The transmitter 610a 0.091 0.055 0.104 0.120 Signal processor and plant protection system (620a) 0.610 0.609 0.614 0.615 The reactor shutdown circuit breaker 630a 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 Measurement response time t4 0.785 0.748 0.802 0.819 Estimated response time t3 0.992 Design response time t2 1.055 Analysis response time t1 1.250

Components Channel response time (seconds) Channel A Channel B Channel C Channel D The transmitter 610a 0.066 0.064 0.076 0.075 Signal processor and plant protection system (620a) 0.603 0.620 0.618 0.619 The reactor shutdown circuit breaker 630a 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.084 Measurement response time t4 0.753 0.768 0.778 0.778 Estimated response time t3 0.992 Design response time t2 1.055 Analysis response time t1 1.250

Tables 1 to 3 show an example of applying the response time evaluation method of the present invention to the APR1400 nuclear power plant. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and the response of the measurement control system channel performing the safety function in the Korean standard nuclear reactor, OPR1000, The response time can be evaluated based on the analysis response time, design response time, estimated response time, and measurement response time of the time-related design process output.

The present invention can also be embodied as computer-readable codes on a computer-readable recording medium. A computer-readable recording medium includes all kinds of recording apparatuses in which data that can be read by a computer system is stored.

Examples of the computer-readable recording medium include ROM, RAM, CD-ROM, magnetic tape, floppy disk, optical data storage, and the like. The computer readable recording medium may also be distributed over a networked computer system so that computer readable code can be stored and executed in a distributed manner.

In the drawings and specification, there have been disclosed preferred embodiments. Although specific terms have been employed herein, they are used for purposes of illustration only and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention as defined in the claims or the claims.

Therefore, those skilled in the art will appreciate that various modifications and equivalent embodiments are possible without departing from the scope of the present invention. Accordingly, the true scope of the present invention should be determined by the technical idea of the appended claims.

Claims (13)

A safety analysis unit for measuring an analysis response time t1 which is a response time of the system performing the safety function;
A system designing unit for measuring a design response time t2 indicating a total sum of individual response times allocated for each device constituting the measurement control channel;
A response time analyzer for measuring an estimated response time t3 indicating a response time quantitatively analyzed by each device constituting the measurement control channel; And
And a response time test unit for dividing each device constituting the measurement control channel into n regions and measuring a measurement response time t4 that is a superposition of n regions and indicates a measured response time,
and an integrated evaluation unit for determining that a response time requirement is satisfied in each of the safety analysis unit, the system design unit, the response time analysis unit, and the response time test unit when all of t4 <t3 <t2 <t1 is satisfied And the response time of the power plant protection system is evaluated. The method according to claim 1,
whether or not t1> t2 is satisfied, t2> t3 is satisfied, and t3> t4 are satisfied. The method according to claim 1,
When t1-t2 = M1, t2-t3 = M2, and t3-t4 = M3,
Wherein the integrated evaluating unit evaluates the first condition of M1 > 0, M2 > 0, and M3 > 0,
t1 = t4 + M1 + M2 + M3. The apparatus for evaluating the response time of a plant protection system according to claim 1, 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the design response time t2 is
t2 =

Lt; / RTI &gt;
i denotes each device constituting the measurement control channel, m denotes the total number of devices constituting the measurement control channel,

Is a response time allocated to an i-th device constituting the measurement control channel. 5. The apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the apparatus constituting the measurement control channel
A transmitter, a signal processor, a plant protection system, and a reactor shutdown circuit breaker. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the estimated response time t3 is
t3 =

Lt; / RTI &gt;
j represents each device constituting the measurement control channel, n represents the total number of devices constituting the measurement control channel,

Wherein the response time of the jth device is a quantitatively analyzed response time of the jth device. The method according to claim 6,
Among the devices constituting the measurement control channel, the plant protection system
A comparison logic processor and a concurrent logical processor, wherein the comparison logic processor and the concurrent logical processor execute software. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the measurement response time t4 is
t4 =

Lt; / RTI &gt;
k denotes a region where each of the devices constituting the measurement control channel is grouped, and o denotes the number of the grouped regions. The system according to claim 8, wherein the transmitter, the signal processor, the power plant protection system, and the reactor shutdown circuit are divided into three grouped areas, and the first grouped area includes a transmitter, a second grouping Wherein one area is a signal processor, a plant protection system, and a third grouped area is a reactor shutdown circuit breaker. A method for performing a response time evaluation in a response time evaluation apparatus of a plant protection system,
Classifying the design process related to the response time requirements of each channel performing the safety function into four stages: safety analysis, system design, response time analysis, and response time test;
Measuring an analysis response time t1 which is a response time of the system performing the safety function in the safety analysis step;
Measuring a design response time t2 indicative of a total sum of individual response times allocated to each device constituting the measurement control channel in the system design step;
A response time analyzer for measuring an estimated response time t3 indicating a response time quantitatively analyzed in each device constituting the measurement control channel in the response time analysis step; And
Dividing each device constituting the measurement control channel into n regions and measuring a measurement response time t4 representing a measured response time superposed among n regions;
determining whether M1 > 0, M2 > 0, and M3 > 0 are satisfied sequentially, where t1-t2 = M1, t2-t3 = M2 and t3-t4 = M3;
determining whether t1 = t4 + M1 + M2 + M3 is satisfied. A method for performing a response time evaluation in a response time evaluation apparatus of a plant protection system,
Classifying the design process associated with the response time requirements of each channel performing the safety function into four stages: a safety analysis stage, a system design stage, a response time analysis stage, and a response time test stage;
The response time evaluation is appropriate based on the time t1 derived in the safety analysis step, the time t2 derived in the systematic design step, the time t3 derived in the response time analysis step, and the time t4 derived in the response time test step The method comprising the steps of: A classification section for classifying the design process related to the response time requirements of each channel performing the safety function into four stages: a safety analysis stage, a system design stage, a response time analysis stage, and a response time test stage;
The response time evaluation is appropriate based on the time t1 derived in the safety analysis step, the time t2 derived in the systematic design step, the time t3 derived in the response time analysis step, and the time t4 derived in the response time test step And an integrated evaluation unit for determining whether or not the power plant has a response time. 13. The method of claim 12,
When t1-t2 = M1, t2-t3 = M2, and t3-t4 = M3,
Wherein the integrated evaluating unit evaluates the first condition of M1 > 0, M2 > 0, and M3 > 0,
t1 = t4 + M1 + M2 + M3. The apparatus for evaluating the response time of a plant protection system according to claim 1,

Images