Аnalysis Catalytic Hydrogen Recombiner Capacity Calculation Taking into Account Conditions Inside Sealed Enclosure of Containment Safety System of Nuclear Power Plants with Water-Water Energetic Reactor

Localizing safety systems are provided to contain radioactive substances in an accident and attenuate ionizing radiation at a modern nuclear power plant. Together with radioactive substances, hydrogen is also retained, which is formed during the decomposition of the primary coolant. The accumulation of hydrogen in the presence of oxygen from the atmosphere in the accident localization zone carries the danger of the formation of flammable and explosive concentrations of these components. Nuclear power plant (NPP) deigns with water-water energetic reactor (WWER) provides for a hydrogen removal system including passive catalytic hydrogen recombiners. The device capacity  is confirmed experimentally under reference conditions (lean air-hydrogen mixture, pressure and temperature close to normal, no interference with gas exchange). Capacity is an important safety parameter. In the event of an accident, conditions inside the ealed enclosure of the localizing system of NPP with WWER can  differ from the reference  ones and affect the capacity.  On the basis of calculations, the operation of recombiners with lack of  oxygen  and with hindered  gas exchange has been investigated in the paper. The decrease in capacity with lack of oxygen reaches 50 %, which is mainly  caused by an increase in underburning. Compared to the reference conditions, the effect is more pronounced in the event of an accident – 60–70 %. The hindered gas exchange is modeled by a decrease in the height of recombiner traction channel. This case can be reduced to the placement of the device in cramped conditions and the effect of the atmosphere speed inside the enclosure. Regardless of the hydrogen concentration, the operating characteristic of the device remains linear, with a two-fold decrease in height leads to a decrease in capacity by 20 %. The results can be used to substantiate the safety of NPPs with WWER and to review on the safety subtantiation of power units.

1. NPP-2006 Project. Leningrad NPP-2. JSC “SPb Atomenergoproekt” (2009) St. Petersburg, Atomenergoproekt, 34 (in Russian).

2. AREVA Passive Autocatalytic Recombiner (2013) G-008-V3-13-ENGPB. Erlangen: AREVA GmbH, 4.

3. Dmitriev S. M., Gerasimov A. V., Dobrov A. A., Doronkov D. V., Pronin A. N., Ryazanov A. V., Solntsev D. N., Khrobostov A. E. (2020) Investigation of Coolant Local Hydrodynamics in the Mixed Core of the VVER Reactor. Energetika. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii i Energeticheskikh Ob’edinenii SNG = Energetika. Proceedings of the CIS Higher Education Institutions and Power Engineering Associations, 63 (2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.21122/1029-7448-2020-63-2-151-162 (in Russian).

4. Gupta S., Kanzleiter T., Poss G. (2015) Passive Autocatalytic Recombiners (PAR) Induced Ignition and the Resulting Hydrogen Deflagration Behaviour in LWR Containments. Nuclear Reactor Thermal Hydraulics (NURETH-16): Proc. International Topical Meeting Chicago (USA), 30 Aug. – 4 Sept. Chicago: American Nuclear Society, 1540–1553.

5. Gupta S. (2015) Experimental Investigations Relevant for Hydrogen and Fission Product Issues Raised by the Fukushima Accident. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 47 (1), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2015.01.002.

6. Sandeep K. C., Bhattacharyya R., Warghat C., Bhanja K., Mohan S. (2014) Experimental Investigation on the Kinetics of Catalytic Recombination of Hydrogen with Oxygen in Air. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 39 (31), 17906–17912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.08.148.

7. Lopez-Alonso E., Papini D., Jimenez G. (2017) Hydrogen Distribution and Passive Autocatalytic Recombiner (PAR) Mitigation in a PWR-KWU Containment Type. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 109 (11), 600–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2017.05.064.

8. Gharari R., Kazeminejad H., Mataji Kojouri N., Hedayat A. (2018) A Review on Hydrogen Generation, Explosion and Mitigation During Severe Accidents in Light Water Nuclear Reactors. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 43 (4), 1939–1965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.11.174.

9. Nuclear Energy Agency (2014) Status Report on Hydrogen Management and Related Computer Codes. NEA/CSNI/R(2014)8. Available at: https://www.oecd-nea.org/upload/docs/application/pdf/2020-01/csni-r2014-8.pdf.

10. Meynet N., Bentaïb A., Giovangigli V. (2014) Impact of Oxygen Starvation on Operation and Potential Gas-Phase Ignition of Passive Auto-Catalytic Recombiners. Combustion and Flame, 161 (8), 2192–2202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2014.02.001.

11. Freitag M., von Laufenberg B., Colombet M., Klauck M. (2020) Measurements of the Impact of Carbon Monoxide on the Performance of Passive Autocatalytic Recombiners at Containment-Typical Conditions in the THAI Facility. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 141, 107356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2020.107356.

12. Bentaib A., Meynet N., Bleyer A. (2015) Overview on Hydrogen Risk Research and Development Activities: Methodology and Open Issues. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 47 (1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2014.12.001.

13. Papini D., Andreani M., Steiner P., Ničeno B., Klügel J.-U., Prasser H.-M. (2019) Evaluation of the PAR Mitigation System in Swiss PWR Containment Using the GOTHIC Code. Nuclear Technology, 205 (1–2), 153–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2018.1505356.

14. Shukla V., Ganju S., Varma S., Sengupta S., Maheshwari N. K. (2019) Affect of Recombiner Location on its Performance in Closed Containment under Dry and Steam Conditions. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 44 (47), 25957–25973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.08.015.

15. Nuclear Energy Agency (2016) Safety Research Opportunities Post-Fukushima. Initial Report of the Senior Expert Group. NEA/CSNI/R(2016)19. Available at: https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_ 19758/safety-research-opportunities-post-fukushima-initial-report-of-the-senior-expert-group.

16. Keller V. D., Shebeko U. N., Shelepin V. A., Serkin M. A., Eremenko O. J., Dzisyak A. P., Shcherbakova M. V. (1991) Tests of Passive Catalytic Hydrogen Recombiner. Teploenergetika = Thermal Engineering, (3), 55–58 (in Russian).

17. Vorobyev V., Nemcev V., Sorokin V. Calculation of the Effect of Poisoning on the Performance of a Passive Catalytic Hydrogen Recombiner. Available at: http://www.gidropress.podolsk.ru/files/proceedings/mntk2017/documents/mntk2017-137.pdf (in Russian).

18. Kikoin I. K. (ed.). (1976) Tables of Physical Quantities: Reference Book. Moscow, Atomizdat Publ. 1008 (in Russian).

19. Benson S. W. (1960) The Foundations of Chemical Kinetics. NY, McGraw-Hill. 490.

20. Batchelor G. K. (1973) An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics. Cambridge, Cambridge Univ. Press. 615.

21. Jaluria Y. (1980) Natural Convection Heat and Mass Transfer. Oxford, Oxford Pergamon Press. 326.

22. Abramovich G. N. (2003) The Theory of Turbulent Jets. Cambridge, MIT Press. 671. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6781.001.0001.