4.6 Article

Assessment of the severe accident code MIDAC based on FROMA, QUENCH-06&16 experiments

Journal

NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 54, Issue 2, Pages 579-588

Publisher

KOREAN NUCLEAR SOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.net.2021.08.004

Keywords

MIDAC; Steam oxidation; Air oxidation; FROMA; QUENCH-06 & 16

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2019YFB1900700]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article introduces the MIDAC module developed and maintained by Xi'an Jiaotong University to meet the needs of domestic reactor severe accident analysis program. Three experiments were selected to evaluate the severe accident models of MIDAC, and the results show that MIDAC can better meet the needs of severe accident analysis.
In order to meet the needs of domestic reactor severe accident analysis program, a MIDAC (Module Invessel Degraded severe accident Analysis Code) is developed and maintained by Xi'an Jiaotong University. As the accuracy of the calculation results of the analysis program is of great significance for the formulation of severe accident mitigation measures, the article select three experiments to evaluate the updated severe accident models of MIDAC. Among them, QUENCH-06 is the international standard No.45, QUENCH-16 is a test for the analysis of air oxidation, and FROMA is an out-of-pile fuel rod melting experiment recently carried out by Xi'an Jiaotong University. The heating and melting model with lumped parameter method and the steam oxidation model with Cathcart-Pawel and Volchek-Zvonarev correlations combination in MIDAC could better meet the needs of severe accident analysis. Although the influence of nitrogen still need to be further improved, the air oxidation model with NUREG still has the ability to provide guiding significance for engineering practice. (c) 2021 Korean Nuclear Society, Published by Elsevier Korea LLC. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available