4.7 Article

Power-pressure coordinated control of modular high temperature gas-cooled reactors

期刊

ENERGY
卷 252, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.124042

关键词

High temperature gas-cooled reactor; Power-pressure coordinated control; Passivity

资金

  1. National S&T Major Project of China [ZX069]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [62173202]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Power Safety Monitoring Technology and Equipment [K-A2020.409]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A passivity-based power-pressure coordinated control method is proposed in this paper and applied to a six-modular high temperature gas-cooled reactor. The simulation results confirm its closed-loop stability and superior performance compared to traditional controllers.
Modular high temperature gas cooled reactor (mHTGR) adopts helium as coolant and graphite as both the moderator and structural material, whose fuel element is built by embedding thousands of TRISO coated particles into a graphite matrix. Since helium is an ideal gas, the dynamics of reactor coolant temperature is tightly coupled with that of primary pressure. To further improve the operation performance, it is meaningful to develop the coordinated control of power-level and primary pressure for mHTGRs. In this paper, a passivity-based power-pressure coordinated control is proposed for mHTGRs, and the sufficient condition for globally asymptotic closed-loop stability is given. This newly-built power pressure coordinated control law is applied to the mHTGR of six-modular high temperature gas-cooled reactor plant HTR-PM600, and simulation results in the case of power ramping decrease and increase as well as performance comparison not only verify the theoretical result about closed-loop stability but also illustrate the influence of control parameters as well as the stronger performance relative to the classical proportional integral/differential (PI/D) controller. (c) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据