GB/T 41583-2022 in English
VALIDMethod for core damage assessment of nuclear power plant
- Issued on:2022-07-11
- Implemented on:2023-02-01
- File Format:PDF
- Delivery:Via email within 1~3 business days
$233.00
| Standard No: | GB/T 41583-2022 |
| Document status: | VALID |
| Title in English: | Method for core damage assessment of nuclear power plant |
| Title in Chinese: | 核电厂堆芯损伤评价方法 |
| Language: | English |
| File Format: | Electronic (PDF) |
| Delivery: | Via email within 1~3 business days |
| Issued on: | 2022-07-11 |
| Implemented on: | 2023-02-01 |
| ICS Classification: | 27.120-Nuclear energy engineering |
| Chinese Classification: | F70-Radiation protection and monitoring in general |
| Professional Classification: | GB-National Standard |
| Related Topics: | nuclear power
damage nuclear power standards Core non-invasive heap Method Validation Evaluation Method Validation Evaluation Damage detection method GBT41583 GB/T 41583-2022 Coring machine manufacturers Assessment of mtDNA damage Damage detection method for high-voltage transmission lines Economic Evaluation of Nuclear Power Plants Battery evaluation Bulk density evaluation Bending core verification method China Nuclear Power Mitochondrial Damage Experimental Methods gb/t 41583-2022 |
《GB/T 41583-2022核电厂堆芯损伤评价方法》由TC58（全国核能标准化技术委员会）归口，TC58SC2（全国核能标准化技术委员会辐射防护分会）执行，主管部门为国家标准化管理委员会。
Introduction
Technological Evolution and Standard Positioning
The new standard fills the gap in the domestic nuclear safety field's quantitative evaluation system for damage. By integrating multi-source data such as core outlet thermocouple (CET) and xenon isotope activity detector, an intelligent evaluation framework is constructed. The localization proves that the accuracy deviation of the damage evolution model applicable to light water pressurized water reactors is maintained within the range of ±15%.
Analysis of Dual Evaluation Methods
| Dimensions | Instrument Monitoring Method | Water Quality Analysis Method |
|---|---|---|
| Timeliness | Real-time monitoring (updated every second) | Delay of 0.5~2 hours |
| Damage Resolution | 0.05% (must be combined with the calibration model) | 5%~10% (benchmark calculation) |
| Applicable Accident Stage | Full Cycle Damage Judgment | Termination Stage Review and Verification |
Four-level determination matrix for core status
Actual case: When the RCP pressure exceeded the RCP3 critical value during the Daya Bay unit drill:
- Visual warning of CET reading exceeding 41% of the CET2 threshold
- Active mercury concentration increased 200 times year-on-year to 2×10⁵kBq/g
- Start algorithm: calculate damage CF=72%×(Hcur/CH5)
Operation and maintenance guarantee system recommendations
- Establish a multi-signal interlock verification mechanism and regularly check the temperature-pressure-activity characteristic curve
- Operators need to pass the seventh-level assessment of the WANO international standard
- Save data snapshots in abnormal situations to form a case knowledge base
Loading PDF document...
Error loading PDF. Please make sure the file is valid and try again.
We also recommend
-
GB/T 41577-2022 in English
Operational intervention levels for nuclear power plant emergencies
2022-07-11 -
GB/T 41580-2022 in English
Exposure control for nuclear and radiological emergency response worker
2022-07-11
