Nuclear power plant metal pressure-bearing equipment structure integrity grading method, nuclear power plant metal pressure-bearing equipment structure safety evaluation method and related devices

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of nuclear power plants, in particular to a nuclear power plant metal pressure-bearing equipment structural integrity grading method, a nuclear power plant metal pressure-bearing equipment safety evaluation method and related devices. According to the structural integrity grading method for the metal pressure-bearing equipment of the nuclear power plant, a safety grading result and equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant need to be obtained firstly; determining the construction specification level of the nuclear power plant pressure-bearing metal equipment according to the safety grading result of the nuclear power plant pressure-bearing metal equipment; and determining a corresponding structural integrity level for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data. The structural integrity grading can be accurately carried out on the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. Furthermore, according to the nuclear power plant metal pressure-bearing equipment safety assessment method, the safety assessment result corresponding to the nuclear power plant pressure-bearing metal equipment is generated based on the structural integrity level, and safety assessment can be accurately carried out on the nuclear power plant pressure-bearing metal equipment.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of nuclear power plants, and in particular to a structural integrity grading method and safety assessment method for metal pressure-bearing equipment in nuclear power plants, and related devices. Background Art

[0002] The safety of nuclear power plants during normal operation, disasters, and accidents depends on the reliability of structures, systems, and components. In related technologies, the construction specification level of each item of nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment needs to be determined according to the safety classification to ensure that each item adopts appropriate design, manufacturing, construction, commissioning, and operation requirements to achieve safe operation during the life of the nuclear power plant. However, when actually conducting safety analysis on the pressure metal equipment of each nuclear power plant, the consequences of some equipment failures cannot be effectively protected or mitigated by engineering means, and the secondary effects caused by the failure of some equipment will have unacceptable impacts on the safety of the nuclear power plant.

[0003] In the relevant technology, using the established design and construction specifications to conduct structural integrity classification and safety assessment of nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment cannot fully verify the quality and reliability of the equipment, and it is difficult to accurately define whether the failure probability of nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment has reached the lowest possible level. Summary of the invention

[0004] The present application aims to solve at least one of the technical problems existing in the prior art. To this end, the present application proposes a structural integrity classification method and safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in nuclear power plants, and related devices, which can accurately classify the structural integrity and conduct safety assessment on pressure metal equipment in nuclear power plants, and help improve the safety level of nuclear power plant operation.

[0005] According to a first aspect of the present application, a method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant comprises:

[0006] Obtaining safety classification results and equipment safety data of pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant; wherein the safety classification results are used to reflect the safety classification corresponding to the equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety classification specification;

[0007] Determining the construction specification level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the safety classification result of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant;

[0008] A corresponding structural integrity level is determined for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data.

[0009] According to some embodiments provided by the present application, the equipment safety data includes protection measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, and determining the corresponding structural integrity level for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data includes:

[0010] For the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, determining the structural integrity determination condition of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing level corresponding to the structural integrity determination condition based on the construction specification level;

[0011] When the protective measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0012] According to some embodiments provided by the present application, after determining the structural integrity determination condition of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing level corresponding to the structural integrity determination condition based on the construction specification level for the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, the method further includes:

[0013] In the case that both the protective measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data do not meet the structural integrity determination condition, a reasonable feasibility assessment is performed on the equipment safety data to determine a first optimized protective measure suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant;

[0014] Based on the first optimization protection measure, performing a first optimization update on the device security data;

[0015] When the device safety data after the first optimization update meets the structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0016] According to some embodiments provided by the present application, after performing a first optimization update on the device security data based on the first optimization protection measure, the method further includes:

[0017] When the device security data after the first optimization and update still does not meet the structural integrity determination condition, selecting an alternative integrity level higher than the integrity pairing level from a plurality of preset alternative integrity levels, replacing the original integrity pairing level, and obtaining an updated integrity pairing level;

[0018] The updated integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0019] According to some embodiments provided by the present application, when the protective measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity determination condition, determining the corresponding integrity pairing level as the structural integrity level includes:

[0020] Determining direct and indirect consequences of the failure of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the failure mode sub-data;

[0021] When the direct impact consequences and the indirect impact consequences match the protective measure sub-data, the corresponding structural integrity determination condition is met, and the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0022] According to some embodiments provided by the present application, after determining the direct impact consequences and indirect impact consequences of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in a failure state according to the failure mode sub-data, the method further includes:

[0023] When the direct impact consequence matches the protective measure sub-data, and the indirect impact consequence cannot match the protective measure sub-data, a reasonable feasibility assessment is performed on the equipment safety data to determine a second optimized protective measure suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant;

[0024] Based on the second optimization protection measure, performing a second optimization update on the device security data;

[0025] updating the indirect impact consequence according to the device safety data after the second optimization update;

[0026] When the updated indirect impact consequence matches the protective measure sub-data and meets the corresponding structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0027] According to a second aspect of the present application, a method for safety assessment of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant comprises:

[0028] Determine the structural integrity level of pressure-bearing metal equipment in a nuclear power plant according to the structural integrity grading method described in any one of the embodiments of the first aspect of the present application;

[0029] Based on the structural integrity level, a safety assessment result corresponding to the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is generated.

[0030] According to a third aspect of the present application, a nuclear power plant metal pressure equipment structural integrity grading device comprises:

[0031] A safety classification module, used to obtain safety classification results and equipment safety data of pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant; wherein the safety classification results are used to reflect the safety classification corresponding to the equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety classification specification;

[0032] A construction specification level determination module, used to determine the construction specification level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the safety classification result of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant;

[0033] The structural integrity level determination module is used to determine the corresponding structural integrity level for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data.

[0034] According to the fourth aspect of the present application, a nuclear power plant metal pressure equipment safety assessment device includes:

[0035] The structural integrity grading device described in the third aspect of the embodiment of the present application is used to determine the structural integrity level of pressure-bearing metal equipment in a nuclear power plant;

[0036] A safety assessment module is used to generate a safety assessment result corresponding to the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant based on the structural integrity level.

[0037] In the fifth aspect, an embodiment of the present application provides a computer-readable storage medium, which stores a program, and the program is executed by a processor to implement a method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant as described in any one of the embodiments of the first aspect of the present application, or to implement a method for safety assessment of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant as described in any one of the embodiments of the second aspect of the present application.

[0038] According to the structural integrity classification method and safety assessment method of metal pressure equipment in nuclear power plants and related devices of the embodiments of the present application, there are at least the following beneficial effects:

[0039] The structural integrity grading method of metal pressure equipment of nuclear power plants of the present application needs to first obtain the safety grading results and equipment safety data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; wherein the safety grading results are used to reflect the safety grading corresponding to the equipment safety data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety grading specification; according to the safety grading results of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, the construction specification level of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is determined; according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data, the corresponding structural integrity level is determined for the corresponding pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. In this way, the structural integrity grading of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant can be carried out more accurately, which is helpful to improve the safety level of the operation of the nuclear power plant.

[0040] The safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment of nuclear power plants of the present application needs to first determine the structural integrity level of the pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants according to the structural integrity grading method of the present application; based on the structural integrity level, generate the safety assessment result corresponding to the pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants. In this way, the safety assessment of pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants can be carried out more accurately, which is helpful to improve the safety level of nuclear power plant operation.

[0041] Additional aspects and advantages of the present application will be given in part in the description below, and in part will become apparent from the description below, or will be learned through the practice of the present application. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0042] The above and / or additional aspects and advantages of the present application will become apparent and easily understood from the description of the embodiments in conjunction with the following drawings, in which:

[0043] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of a flow chart of a method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0044] Figure 2 A certain example diagram in the structural integrity classification method of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0045] Figure 3 Another schematic diagram of a process for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0046] Figure 4 Another schematic diagram of a process for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0047] Figure 5 Another schematic diagram of a process for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0048] Figure 6 Another schematic diagram of a process for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0049] Figure 7 Another schematic diagram of a process for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0050] Figure 8 A schematic diagram of a safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0051] Fig. 9 Another schematic diagram of a process for safety assessment of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0052] Fig.10 A schematic diagram of a specific process of a method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0053] Fig.11 Another specific flow chart of the method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0054] Fig.12 It is a schematic diagram of the hardware structure of the electronic device provided in the embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0055] The embodiments of the present application are described in detail below, and examples of the embodiments are shown in the accompanying drawings, wherein the same or similar reference numerals throughout represent the same or similar elements or elements having the same or similar functions. The embodiments described below with reference to the accompanying drawings are exemplary and are only used to explain the present application, and cannot be understood as limiting the present application.

[0056] In the description of this application, "several" means one or more, "more" means more than two, "greater than", "less than", "exceed", etc. are understood to exclude the number itself, and "above", "below", "within", etc. are understood to include the number itself. If there is a description of "first" or "second", it is only used for the purpose of distinguishing technical features, and cannot be understood as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly indicating the number of the indicated technical features or implicitly indicating the order of the indicated technical features.

[0057] In the description of the present application, it should be understood that descriptions involving orientation, such as up, down, left, right, front, back, etc., indicating orientations or positional relationships, are based on the orientations or positional relationships shown in the accompanying drawings, and are only for the convenience of describing the present application and simplifying the description, and do not indicate or imply that the device or element referred to must have a specific orientation, be constructed and operated in a specific orientation, and therefore should not be understood as a limitation on the present application.

[0058] In the description of this specification, the description with reference to the terms "one embodiment", "some embodiments", "illustrative embodiments", "examples", "specific examples", or "some examples" means that the specific features, structures, materials, or characteristics described in conjunction with the embodiment or example are included in at least one embodiment or example of the present application. In this specification, the schematic representation of the above terms does not necessarily refer to the same embodiment or example. Moreover, the specific features, structures, materials, or characteristics described may be combined in any one or more embodiments or examples in a suitable manner.

[0059] In the description of this application, it should be noted that, unless otherwise clearly defined, the terms such as setting, installing, connecting, etc. should be understood in a broad sense, and technicians in the relevant technical field can reasonably determine the specific meanings of the above terms in this application in combination with the specific content of the technical solution. In addition, the identification of specific steps below does not represent a limitation on the order of steps and execution logic. The execution order and execution logic between each step should be understood and inferred with reference to the contents described in the embodiment.

[0060] The meanings of the English abbreviations involved in this application can be found in Table 1:

[0061]

[0062] Table 1

[0063] The safety of nuclear power plants during normal operation, disasters, and accidents depends on the reliability of structures, systems, and components. At present, most related technologies use a mixed method of determinism and probability theory to classify the safety of structures, systems, and components, that is, to evaluate the importance of safety based on the probability of a certain safety function and the consequences of the failure of the safety function. Then, the construction specification level of each item is determined based on the safety classification to ensure that each item adopts appropriate design, manufacturing, construction, commissioning, and operation requirements to achieve safe operation during the life of the nuclear power plant.

[0064] However, when actually conducting safety analysis on various items in nuclear power plants, the consequences of failure of some equipment (such as reactor pressure vessels) cannot be effectively protected or mitigated by engineering means. There are also some secondary effects (dynamic effects, environmental effects) caused by the failure of some equipment that will have unacceptable impacts on the safety of nuclear power plants.

[0065] Pressure equipment in nuclear power plants refers to equipment used to withstand pressure in nuclear power plants. They are important components of nuclear power plants, including reactor pressure vessels, steam generators, main pumps, main pipelines, etc. These equipment play a vital role in nuclear power plants because they are directly related to the safe operation of nuclear power plants and the effective conversion of nuclear energy.

[0066] "Metal pressure equipment for nuclear power plants" is a more specific category, referring to nuclear power plant pressure equipment made of metal materials. Metal materials are widely used in nuclear power plants because they usually have good mechanical properties, high temperature and high pressure resistance, and corrosion resistance. The use of metal pressure equipment in nuclear power plants needs to meet strict safety standards and performance requirements to ensure reliability and stability under extreme conditions.

[0067] Normally, mechanical equipment in nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment is designed, built, tested, and operated in accordance with the highest safety level 1 components in general design and construction specifications (such as ASME, RCC-M, and RSE-M, etc.). However, with the advancement of technology, designing and building only to meet the requirements of safety level 1 components cannot fully verify the quality and reliability of the equipment, nor can it ensure that its failure probability is as low as possible.

[0068] The present application aims to solve at least one of the technical problems existing in the prior art. To this end, the present application proposes a structural integrity classification method and safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in nuclear power plants, and related devices, which can accurately classify the structural integrity and conduct safety assessment on pressure metal equipment in nuclear power plants, and help improve the safety level of nuclear power plant operation.

[0069] Reference Figure 1 According to the structural integrity grading method for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in an embodiment of the present application, the structural integrity grading method includes:

[0070] Step S101, obtaining the safety classification results and equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; wherein the safety classification results are used to reflect the safety classification corresponding to the equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety classification specification;

[0071] Step S102, determining the construction specification level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the safety classification result of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant;

[0072] Step S103, determining a corresponding structural integrity level for the corresponding nuclear power plant pressure-bearing metal equipment according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data.

[0073] The structural integrity grading method of metal pressure equipment of nuclear power plants of the present application shown through steps S101 to S103 needs to first obtain the safety grading results and equipment safety data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; wherein the safety grading results are used to reflect the safety grading corresponding to the equipment safety data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety grading specification; according to the safety grading results of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, the construction specification level of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is determined; according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data, the corresponding structural integrity level is determined for the corresponding pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. In this way, the structural integrity grading of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant can be carried out more accurately, which is helpful to improve the safety level of the operation of the nuclear power plant.

[0074] In some embodiments, step S101 is to obtain safety classification results and equipment safety data of pressure metal equipment in a nuclear power plant; wherein the safety classification results are used to reflect the safety classification corresponding to the equipment safety data of pressure metal equipment in the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety classification specification;

[0075] It should be noted that the nuclear safety classification specification of the embodiment of the present application refers to the classification specification that the equipment items in the nuclear power plant need to follow in terms of safety. If an equipment item does not meet the nuclear safety classification specification, then in order to ensure safety requirements, the equipment item should not become an equipment item installed in the nuclear power plant. Equipment pre-configuration information refers to information used to pre-configure equipment items in a nuclear power plant. It should be pointed out that the equipment pre-configuration information includes equipment safety data, each piece of equipment safety data corresponds to a pressure-bearing metal equipment in a nuclear power plant, and is used to describe the safety configuration corresponding to the equipment.

[0076] In some embodiments, the equipment preconfiguration information may include one or more equipment safety data, each equipment safety data corresponding to a nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment. Further, based on the nuclear safety classification specification, a safety classification is performed for each equipment safety data, thereby obtaining a safety classification result corresponding to the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment.

[0077] In some more specific embodiments, the nuclear safety classification specifications may include ASME NQA-1 nuclear quality assurance standards, RCC-M nuclear island mechanical equipment design and construction rules, RSE-M nuclear power plant nuclear island mechanical equipment in-service inspection rules, SSG-30 item safety classification scheme, etc.

[0078] In step S102 of some embodiments, the construction specification level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is determined according to the safety classification result of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant.

[0079] It should be noted that for the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment listed in the equipment pre-configuration information, the corresponding construction specification level needs to be determined based on the corresponding safety classification results, so as to determine in advance whether the nuclear power plant has appropriate design, manufacturing, construction, commissioning and operation requirements before configuring items in the nuclear power plant.

[0080] It should be made clear that the correlation between the safety classification results of nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment and the construction specification level is reflected in the requirements for the design, manufacture, inspection and supervision of the equipment.

[0081] The safety classification results are used to reflect the corresponding safety classification of the equipment safety data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety classification specifications. It should be pointed out that the safety classification results are divided according to the role and importance of the equipment in the safety of the nuclear power plant, and are usually divided into different levels, such as safety level 1, safety level 2 and safety level 3. Among them, safety level 1 equipment is extremely important to safety, and the safety requirements of safety level 2 and safety level 3 equipment are relatively low. This safety classification result directly affects the strictness of the corresponding construction specifications of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant.

[0082] The construction specification level refers to the standards and specifications that must be followed when designing and constructing nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment. It should be pointed out that the construction specification level can cover key links such as material selection, manufacturing process, quality control, non-destructive testing, and pressure resistance testing. For equipment whose safety classification results are reflected as a high safety level, the construction specifications will be more stringent to ensure the reliability and safety of the equipment during the operation of the nuclear power plant, and the corresponding construction specification level will be higher. For example, a safety level 1 device of a nuclear power plant's pressure metal equipment corresponds to a construction specification level of nuclear specification level 1, which means that the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant may need to use higher standard materials, more frequent inspections, and stricter manufacturing tolerances.

[0083] In practical applications, the association between safety classification results and construction specification levels ensures that the pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants can meet the requirements of nuclear safety regulations and maintain the required performance throughout the life cycle of the nuclear power plant. By determining the construction specification level of pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants according to the safety classification results, possible accidents can be prevented to a large extent and the safety of personnel, equipment and the environment can be protected.

[0084] In some embodiments, the construction specification level of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant can be determined according to the safety classification results. This process can include comparison of the design specifications, manufacturing specifications, inspection specifications, etc. of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. For equipment with a high safety level, such as safety level 1 equipment, the construction specifications will be more stringent to ensure the reliability and safety of the equipment during the operation of the nuclear power plant. This can include the use of higher standard materials, more frequent inspections, stricter manufacturing tolerances, and more comprehensive quality assurance procedures.

[0085] When determining the construction specification level, it is also possible to analyze the various operating conditions that the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant may face, including normal operation, expected operating events and accident conditions. The design specifications corresponding to the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant need to meet the safety requirements under these conditions to ensure that the equipment can maintain its function under various conditions. In addition, it is also necessary to consider the in-service testing, maintenance, inspection and monitoring measures of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant to ensure that its performance is maintained throughout its life cycle.

[0086] For example, for safety level 1 equipment, measures such as redundancy, diversity, physical separation and fail-safe design may be required to improve the reliability and safety of pressure metal equipment in nuclear power plants. These measures help prevent and mitigate possible failures and ensure that the equipment can still maintain its safety function in the event of a single failure.

[0087] It should be understood that the construction specification level of pressure metal equipment in nuclear power plants is determined according to its safety classification results, and its purpose is to ensure that pressure metal equipment in nuclear power plants can provide necessary safety functions under various working conditions to protect the safety of personnel, equipment and the environment.

[0088] In step S103 of some embodiments, a corresponding structural integrity level is determined for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data.

[0089] It should be noted that the equipment pre-configuration information includes equipment safety data, each of which corresponds to a nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment and is used to describe the safety configuration corresponding to the equipment. On this basis, safety classification can be performed for each equipment safety data based on the nuclear safety classification specification to obtain the safety classification result corresponding to the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment.

[0090] Figure 2 The safety classification results corresponding to the SSG-30 item safety classification scheme are shown. The safety function classification method (FC1, FC2, FC3) recommended by SSG-30 mainly considers the frequency and consequences of safety functions. Items that perform safety category 1 function (FC1) should be function level 1 items (F-SC1), items that perform safety category 2 function (FC2) should be function level 2 items (F-SC2), and items that perform safety category 3 function (FC3) should be function level 3 items (F-SC3); items used to achieve disaster protection goals have a minimum classification of function level 3 (F-SC3).

[0091] The classification of design precautions recommended by SSG-30 mainly considers whether there are corresponding design protection measures after the failure of the item. After the failure of the item, there is no protection measure or the protection measures are considered to cause "high" consequences (DPH), which is classified as Barrier Level 1 (B-SC1); it causes "medium" consequences (DPM), which is classified as Barrier Level 2 (B-SC2); it causes "low" consequences (DPL), which is classified as Barrier Level 3 (B-SC3); in disaster analysis, the items used to achieve disaster protection goals (DPZ) are classified as Disaster Protection Level 3 (Z-SC3) at the lowest.

[0092] It should be understood that there are many examples of nuclear safety classification standards and safety classification results, and they are not limited to the above examples.

[0093] In step S103 of some embodiments, the structural integrity level is determined for the corresponding pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and equipment safety data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. It should be noted that only after the construction specification level and equipment safety data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant are clarified, the structural integrity level can be further determined for these pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, so as to identify the equipment with serious consequences of failure and no protective measures. It should be noted that the structural integrity level, compared with the construction specification level in the nuclear safety classification specification, further focuses on the classification of pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants in terms of protective measures and the consequences of protection failure. It should be pointed out that the embodiment of the present application has made a further round of safety classification on the basis of a round of safety classification of pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants based on the nuclear safety classification specification.

[0094] In some more specific embodiments, the method for determining the structural integrity level can refer to Table 2:

[0095]

[0096] Table 2

[0097] Reference Figure 3 According to some embodiments provided by the present application, the equipment safety data may include protection measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. Step S103 determines the corresponding structural integrity level for the corresponding pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data, including:

[0098] Step S301, for the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, determining the structural integrity determination conditions of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing level corresponding to the structural integrity determination conditions based on the construction specification level;

[0099] Step S302: when the protection measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0100] In step S301 of some embodiments, for pressure metal equipment in a nuclear power plant, the structural integrity judgment conditions of the pressure metal equipment in the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing levels corresponding to the structural integrity judgment conditions are determined based on the construction specification level. It should be emphasized that the structural integrity level, compared with the construction specification level in the nuclear safety classification specification, further focuses on grading the pressure metal equipment in a nuclear power plant in terms of protection measures and the consequences of protection failure. Based on this, for pressure metal equipment in a nuclear power plant, the structural integrity judgment conditions of the pressure metal equipment in the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing levels corresponding to the structural integrity judgment conditions are determined based on the construction specification level. It should be noted that regarding the structural integrity judgment of equipment items in a nuclear power plant, different structural integrity judgment conditions and different integrity pairing levels are configured for different construction specification levels, which are used to define the structural integrity level of the pressure metal equipment in the current nuclear power plant.

[0101] In view of different situations of construction specification levels, in some more specific embodiments of the present application, three structural integrity determination conditions, namely, determination condition A, determination condition B and determination condition C, may be configured, and three integrity pairing levels, namely, structural integrity level 1, structural integrity level 2 and structural integrity level 3, may be configured. Among them, structural integrity determination condition A may be used to determine whether the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant meets the structural integrity level 1, structural integrity determination condition B may be used to determine whether the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant meets the structural integrity level 2, and structural integrity determination condition C may be used to determine whether the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant meets the structural integrity level 3.

[0102] In step S302 of some embodiments, when the protective measures sub-data and the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity determination conditions, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level. It should be noted that since the equipment safety data includes the protective measures sub-data and the failure mode sub-data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. The protective measures sub-data is used to reflect the protective measures configuration of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, and the failure mode sub-data is used to reflect the possible consequences caused by the failure of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. Based on this, after determining the structural integrity determination conditions of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing level corresponding to the structural integrity determination conditions according to the construction specification level corresponding to the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, it is necessary to judge whether the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant meets the structural integrity determination conditions according to the protective measures sub-data and the failure mode sub-data. When the protective measures sub-data and the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity determination conditions, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0103] According to the embodiment shown in step S301 to step S302, the corresponding structural integrity determination conditions (the structural integrity determination conditions match the integrity pairing level) can be allocated to the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant of different construction specification levels based on the construction specification level, and then the protection measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data in the equipment safety data are used as the reference to determine whether the structural integrity determination conditions are met. If they are met, the integrity pairing level corresponding to the structural integrity determination conditions is determined as the structural integrity level. The situation clearly classifies the structural integrity of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, with a high efficiency of structural integrity classification.

[0104] In some more specific embodiments of the present application, the corresponding construction specification level is determined for a certain nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment. If the construction specification level corresponding to the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is nuclear specification level 1, then among the three structural integrity determination conditions of determination conditions A, determination conditions B and determination conditions C, determination condition A is matched. Among them, if determination condition A is met, the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant can be marked as structural integrity level 1. Determination condition A requires that the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant has at least one protective measure, and requires that the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant may cause a small amount of core damage, a small amount of radioactive release outside the plant, and a large amount of radioactive release in the nuclear island after failure.

[0105] Further, the corresponding protection measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data can be obtained from the equipment safety data corresponding to the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. Based on the protection measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data corresponding to the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, it is determined whether the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant meets the above-mentioned determination condition A.

[0106] If the pressure metal equipment of a nuclear power plant meets the above-mentioned judgment condition A, that is, the protection measure sub-data includes at least one protection measure, and the failure mode sub-data reflects that the pressure metal equipment of this nuclear power plant meets the condition that it may cause a small amount of core damage, a small amount of radioactive release outside the plant, and a large amount of radioactive release in the nuclear island after failure. In this case, the integrity pairing level corresponding to judgment condition A can be determined as the structural integrity level of the pressure metal equipment of this nuclear power plant, that is, the structural integrity level of the pressure metal equipment of this nuclear power plant is determined to be structural integrity level 1. If the pressure metal equipment of a nuclear power plant does not meet judgment condition A, and it is still not satisfied after the reasonable feasibility assessment (ALARP), then the structural integrity level of the equipment needs to be upgraded to the highest level, that is, the high reliability level (HRC).

[0107] Reference Figure 4According to some embodiments provided by the present application, after determining the structural integrity determination conditions of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing levels corresponding to the structural integrity determination conditions based on the construction specification level for the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in step S301, the method further includes:

[0108] Step S401, when both the protection measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data do not meet the structural integrity judgment condition, a reasonable feasibility assessment is performed on the equipment safety data to determine a first optimized protection measure suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant;

[0109] Step S402: performing a first optimization update on the device security data based on the first optimization protection measure;

[0110] Step S403: when the first optimized and updated device safety data meets the structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0111] In steps S401 to S402 of some embodiments, when neither the protection measures sub-data nor the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity judgment conditions, a reasonable feasibility assessment is performed on the equipment safety data to determine a first optimized protection measure suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; based on the first optimized protection measure, a first optimized update is performed on the equipment safety data.

[0112] It should be noted that if the protection measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data do not meet the structural integrity judgment conditions, it means that the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant with a higher safety grade result is not ideal in terms of structural integrity, and it is difficult to play the due protective role when the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant fails. Based on this, it is necessary to change the equipment pre-configuration information. Specifically, it is necessary to conduct a reasonable feasibility assessment of the equipment safety data, determine the first optimized protection measures suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, and then, based on the first optimized protection measures, perform the first optimization update on the equipment safety data, aiming to make the pre-configured protection measures of the current nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment sufficient to cope with the safety impacts that may arise in the event of failure, which will help to further improve the structural integrity of the current pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant.

[0113] It should be made clear that the first optimization protection measures suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of nuclear power plants can be determined only after a reasonable feasibility assessment of the equipment safety data. Among them, the first optimization protection measures are intended to perform the first optimization update on the equipment safety data so that it can meet the structural integrity judgment conditions as much as possible after the first optimization update.

[0114] In step S403 of some embodiments, when the first optimized and updated device safety data meets the structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0115] It should be noted that if the equipment safety data after the first optimization update meets the corresponding structural integrity judgment conditions, it means that the pre-configured protection measures of the current nuclear power plant's pressure-bearing metal equipment are sufficient to deal with the safety impacts that may occur in the event of failure. At this time, the integrity pairing level corresponding to this structural integrity judgment condition can be determined as the structural integrity level.

[0116] Through the embodiment shown in step S401 to step S403, the first optimized and updated equipment safety data can further improve the structural integrity level of the corresponding nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment to the required level matching the construction specification level.

[0117] Reference Figure 5 According to some embodiments provided by the present application, after performing a first optimization update on the device security data based on the first optimization protection measure, the method further includes:

[0118] Step S501, when the device security data after the first optimization and update still does not meet the structural integrity determination condition, select an alternative integrity level higher than the integrity pairing level from a number of preset alternative integrity levels, replace the original integrity pairing level, and obtain an updated integrity pairing level;

[0119] Step S502: determine the updated integrity pairing level as the structural integrity level.

[0120] In some embodiments, in step S501 to step S502, when the equipment safety data after the first optimization and update still does not meet the structural integrity determination conditions, an alternative integrity level higher than the integrity pairing level is selected from a number of preset alternative integrity levels to replace the original integrity pairing level, and the updated integrity pairing level is obtained, and the updated integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level. It should be noted that if the equipment safety data after the first optimization and update still does not meet the structural integrity determination conditions, it means that the reasonable feasibility assessment is difficult to overcome the deficiencies of the previous equipment safety data. On this basis, it is necessary to select an alternative integrity level higher than the integrity pairing level from a number of preset alternative integrity levels to replace the original integrity pairing level, in order to mark the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment with a higher integrity pairing level, so as to focus on this nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment with reasonable feasibility in the design, construction, operation and maintenance, and take targeted measures to protect it, so as to minimize safety hazards.

[0121] In some more specific embodiments, an alternative integrity level higher than the integrity pairing level is selected from a plurality of preset alternative integrity levels to replace the original integrity pairing level. Specifically, an alternative integrity level one level higher than the original integrity pairing level is selected from a plurality of preset alternative integrity levels to replace the original integrity pairing level to obtain an updated integrity pairing level.

[0122] It should be pointed out that the structural integrity judgment conditions match the integrity pairing level. The integrity pairing level of the pressure metal equipment of a nuclear power plant can only be determined when the protection measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant meet the structural integrity judgment conditions.

[0123] For example, the alternative integrity levels include high reliability (HRC), structural integrity level 1, structural integrity level 2 and structural integrity level 3, high reliability (HRC) is higher than structural integrity level 1, structural integrity level 1 is higher than structural integrity level 2, and structural integrity level 2 is higher than structural integrity level 3. Among them, structural integrity determination condition A can be used to determine whether the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant meets structural integrity level 1, structural integrity determination condition B can be used to determine whether the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant meets structural integrity level 2, and structural integrity determination condition C can be used to determine whether the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant meets structural integrity level 3. For a certain pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant, if its corresponding construction specification is classified as nuclear specification level 2, then the integrity pairing level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of this nuclear power plant should be structural integrity level 2, and the structural integrity determination condition of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of this nuclear power plant should be structural integrity determination condition B.

[0124] However, if the protective measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data of the pressure metal equipment of this nuclear power plant do not meet the structural integrity judgment condition B, an alternative integrity level higher than the integrity pairing level can be selected from the two alternative integrity levels of high reliability (HRC) and structural integrity level 1. When the equipment meets the judgment condition A after the reasonable feasibility assessment (ALARP), that is, its structural integrity level should be structural integrity level 1, which will replace the original structural integrity level 2; when the equipment does not meet the judgment condition A after the reasonable feasibility assessment (ALARP), its structural integrity level needs to be upgraded to high reliability level (HRC).

[0125] In this way, the nuclear power plant's pressure-bearing metal equipment can be marked with a higher integrity pairing level, so that special attention can be paid to this reasonably feasible nuclear power plant pressure-bearing metal equipment during the design, construction, operation and maintenance stages, and targeted measures can be taken to protect it, so as to minimize safety hazards.

[0126] Reference Figure 6According to some embodiments provided by the present application, in step S302, when the protection measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level, including:

[0127] Step S601, determining the direct and indirect consequences of the failure of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the failure mode sub-data;

[0128] Step S602: When the direct impact consequences and the indirect impact consequences match the protective measures sub-data, the corresponding structural integrity determination conditions are met, and the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0129] In some embodiments, steps S601 to S602 determine the direct and indirect consequences of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the failure state according to the failure mode sub-data. When the direct and indirect consequences match the protection measures sub-data, the corresponding structural integrity determination conditions are met, and the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level. It should be noted that in addition to describing the direct consequences of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the failure state, the failure mode sub-data also provides the indirect consequences of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the failure state. Among them, if the protection measures reflected by the protection measures sub-data can match the direct and indirect consequences, and meet the corresponding structural integrity determination conditions, it means that the protection measures pre-configured for the pressure metal equipment of the current nuclear power plant are sufficient to cope with the safety impact that may occur in the event of failure. At this time, the integrity pairing level corresponding to the configuration of this structural integrity determination condition can be determined as the structural integrity level. Therefore, steps S601 to S602 further enhance the comprehensiveness of the structural integrity grading.

[0130] Reference Figure 7 According to some embodiments provided by the present application, after determining the direct and indirect consequences of the failure state of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the failure mode sub-data in step S601, the method further includes:

[0131] Step S701, when the direct impact consequence matches the protective measure sub-data, but the indirect impact consequence cannot match the protective measure sub-data, a reasonable feasibility assessment is performed on the equipment safety data to determine a second optimized protective measure suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant;

[0132] Step S702, performing a second optimization update on the device security data based on the second optimization protection measure;

[0133] Step S703, updating the indirect impact consequences according to the device safety data after the second optimization update;

[0134] Step S704: When the updated indirect impact consequence matches the protective measure sub-data and meets the corresponding structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0135] In steps S701 to S702 of some embodiments, when the direct impact consequences match the protective measures sub-data, but the indirect impact consequences cannot match the protective measures sub-data, a reasonable feasibility assessment is performed on the equipment safety data, a second optimized protective measure suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is determined, and based on the second optimized protective measure, a second optimized update is performed on the equipment safety data.

[0136] It should be noted that if the protective measures reflected by the protective measures sub-data can match the direct impact consequences, but cannot match the indirect impact consequences, it is necessary to change the equipment pre-configuration information, conduct a reasonable feasibility assessment on the equipment safety data, determine the second optimized protective measures suitable for the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment, and based on the second optimized protective measures, conduct a second optimization update on the equipment safety data. It should be pointed out that the reasonable feasibility assessment of the equipment safety data may include testing the reasonable feasibility contained in the equipment safety data, and may also include further adjusting the equipment safety data to eliminate the reasonable feasibility contained therein. By conducting a reasonable feasibility assessment on the equipment safety data, it is intended to make the pre-configured protective measures of the current nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment sufficient to cope with the safety impacts that may occur in the event of failure, which will help to further improve the structural integrity of the current nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment.

[0137] In some more specific embodiments, the reasonable feasibility assessment of equipment safety data can be performed by evaluating the equipment safety data according to the reasonable feasibility assessment (As Low As Reasonably Practical, ALARP). It should be noted that ALARP is used to guide the reasonable feasibility management of nuclear facility equipment. ALARP requires that when designing, building and operating nuclear facilities, efforts must be made to continuously improve reasonable feasibility until an acceptable level is reached. This criterion emphasizes the continuous improvement of reasonable feasibility rather than achieving a fixed standard at one time. Under ALARP, the cost-effectiveness of those equipment measures that improve reasonable feasibility needs to be evaluated. If the cost of improving reasonable feasibility is much higher than the safety benefit brought, then the equipment measure may not be selected. On the contrary, if the cost of those equipment measures that improve reasonable feasibility is relatively low and can significantly improve safety, then these equipment measures should be given priority.

[0138] The specific process of using ALARP argumentation to evaluate the reasonable feasibility of equipment safety data may include: evaluating the direct and indirect consequences of equipment failure, and considering improving reasonable feasibility through design changes, and then adding additional protection systems or equipment measures based on this. Among them, the cost-effectiveness of improving equipment measures by reasonable feasibility can also be evaluated, and it can be determined whether reasonable feasibility has been improved to an acceptable level.

[0139] In some more specific embodiments, the typical overall failure mode of the metal pressure-bearing equipment of the nuclear power plant can be determined first, such as the overall tearing of the longitudinal and circumferential welds of the container or pipeline. Further based on this typical failure mode, the direct failure consequences of the metal pressure-bearing equipment of the nuclear power plant when the overall failure occurs are targeted. After determining the specific aspects of the direct failure consequences of the equipment, such as core damage, reactivity safety caused by the loss of coolant, thermal safety, hydraulic mechanical load influence, etc., combined with the current design protection measures, ALARP demonstration and selection (that is, reasonable feasibility assessment) is carried out based on these direct failure consequences. After the evaluation, if the structural integrity judgment conditions of this level are not met, it is necessary to consider design optimization of the equipment, and use the principle of "elimination, reduction, isolation and control" to determine multiple new protection measures to resist the failure consequences, and optimize and update the equipment safety data. Then, based on the updated equipment safety data, ALARP demonstration and selection (that is, reasonable feasibility assessment) is carried out again, and it is judged again whether the failure consequences and their protection measures meet the structural integrity judgment conditions of this level.

[0140] It should be understood that there are various ways to implement reasonable feasibility assessment of device safety data, which are not limited to the above examples.

[0141] It is necessary to clarify that the second optimized protection measures suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of nuclear power plants can only be determined after a reasonable feasibility assessment of the equipment safety data. Among them, the second optimized protection measures are intended to perform a second optimized update on the equipment safety data so that, as far as possible, after the second optimized update, the corresponding indirect impact consequences can meet the structural integrity judgment conditions.

[0142] In step S703 of some embodiments, the indirect impact consequence is updated according to the device safety data after the second optimization update.

[0143] It should be noted that after the second optimization and update of the device safety data, the device safety data after the second optimization and update will produce different indirect impact consequences, so the indirect impact consequences need to be updated.

[0144] In step S704 of some embodiments, when the updated indirect impact consequence matches the protective measure sub-data and meets the corresponding structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

[0145] It should be noted that when the updated indirect impact consequences match the protective measures sub-data, the corresponding structural integrity judgment conditions are met, which means that the pre-configured protective measures of the current nuclear power plant's pressure-bearing metal equipment are sufficient to deal with the possible safety impacts in the event of failure. At this time, the integrity pairing level corresponding to this structural integrity judgment condition can be determined as the structural integrity level.

[0146] Through the embodiment shown in step S701 to step S703, by performing a reasonable feasibility assessment on the equipment safety data when the indirect impact consequence cannot match the protective measures sub-data, the adjusted equipment safety data can further improve the structural integrity level of the corresponding nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment to the level that should be corresponding to the safety classification result.

[0147] Reference Figure 8 The safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in accordance with the embodiment of the present application is a safety assessment process specifically for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant, which aims to ensure the safety and reliability of these key equipment during operation through a systematic approach. The safety assessment method includes:

[0148] Step S801, determining the structural integrity level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the structural integrity grading method of the embodiment of the present application;

[0149] Step S802: Generate safety assessment results of the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant based on the structural integrity level.

[0150] The safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment of nuclear power plants of the present application needs to first determine the structural integrity level of the pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants according to the structural integrity grading method of the present application; based on the structural integrity level, generate the safety assessment results of the corresponding pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants. In this way, the safety assessment of pressure metal equipment of nuclear power plants can be carried out more accurately, which is helpful to improve the safety level of nuclear power plant operation.

[0151] It should be noted that the purpose of generating the safety assessment results of the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant based on the structural integrity level is to further conduct a safety assessment of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant through the structural integrity level. Therefore, the embodiment of the present application provides a more comprehensive safety management strategy. Through this hierarchical management, it is possible to more accurately define that each component of the nuclear power plant has reached an appropriate safety level, thereby helping to ensure the safe operation of the entire nuclear power plant.

[0152] In step S801 of some embodiments, it is necessary to determine the structural integrity level of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment of the nuclear power plant of the embodiment of the present application. Structural integrity refers to the ability of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant to withstand the expected internal and external loads without damage or failure during the design, manufacturing and operation process. This grading process involves a comprehensive assessment of the design parameters, material properties, manufacturing quality, operating conditions and possible degradation mechanisms of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. Through this grading, the structural criticality and vulnerability of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant can be identified, thereby providing basic data and basis for subsequent safety assessments.

[0153] Step S802 of some embodiments is to further analyze and evaluate the risks and potential failure modes that may occur in the actual operation of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant on the basis of the structural integrity classification. The safety assessment results may include the safety performance indicators, risk levels, possible consequences of failure, and recommended maintenance and monitoring measures of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant. These results will provide important reference information for the operation and management of the nuclear power plant and help operators to formulate corresponding safety strategies and countermeasures. Therefore, the embodiments of the present application can more accurately evaluate the safety status of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, thereby providing protection for the safe operation of the nuclear power plant. In this way, the structural integrity classification method of the embodiments of the present application not only helps to timely discover and solve potential safety hazards, but also can improve the overall safety performance of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant through continuous monitoring and evaluation, and ensure that the nuclear power plant always maintains an acceptable safety level during the long-term operation.

[0154] Reference Fig. 9 According to some more specific embodiments provided in this application, the safety assessment of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant can be implemented according to the steps shown in the figure.

[0155] The safety assessment for equipment judged as high reliability level (HRC) is as follows:

[0156] The design, construction and operation and maintenance shall be carried out in strict accordance with the requirements of Nuclear Specification Level 1 (AMSE Level 1 or RCC-M Level 1 / RSE-M Level 1). It should be noted that the design and analysis need to meet the acceptance criteria of Nuclear Specification Level 1, the material selection needs to consider the aging degradation effect, and the structural design needs to consider good operation and maintenance and previous engineering experience; during the manufacturing period, quality control matching the specification level 1 needs to be adopted, non-destructive accessibility and inspectability assessments need to be conducted, and the acceptance criteria for in-plant non-destructive inspections of the specification level 1 need to be met; during the operation period, regular in-service inspections and tests need to be carried out to monitor potential leakage and transients in nuclear power plant operation, as well as to supervise the material degradation of key parts.

[0157] In addition, the following four assessments that exceed Nuclear Specification Level 1 are required: supplementary fracture toughness testing of key materials for HRC-grade equipment, elastic-plastic fracture mechanics analysis of key parts, target-based ultrasonic non-destructive testing assessment of key parts, and independent third-party inspection of the design and manufacture of HCR equipment.

[0158] By combining the above measures during design, manufacturing, safety commissioning and operation, the frequency of structural integrity safety failure of HRC-level equipment is minimized.

[0159] The safety assessment for equipment judged as Structural Integrity Level 1 (SI C-1) is:

[0160] The design, construction and operation and maintenance shall be carried out in strict accordance with the requirements of Nuclear Specification Level 1 (AMSE Level 1 or RCC-M Level 1 / RSE-M Level 1). It should be noted that the design and analysis need to meet the acceptance criteria of Nuclear Specification Level 1, the material selection needs to consider the aging degradation effect, and the structural design needs to consider good operation and maintenance and previous engineering experience; during the manufacturing period, quality control matching the specification level 1 needs to be adopted, non-destructive accessibility and inspectability assessments need to be conducted, and the acceptance criteria for in-plant non-destructive inspections of the specification level 1 need to be met; during the operation period, regular in-service inspections and tests need to be carried out to monitor potential leakage and transients in nuclear power plant operation, as well as to supervise the material degradation of key parts.

[0161] The safety assessment for equipment judged as Structural Integrity Level 2 (SI C-2) is:

[0162] The design, construction and operation and maintenance shall be carried out in strict accordance with the requirements of Nuclear Specification Level 2 (AMSE Level 2 or RCC-M Level 2 / RSE-M Level 2). It should be noted that the design and analysis need to meet the acceptance criteria of Nuclear Specification Level 2, the material selection needs to consider the aging degradation effect, and the structural design needs to consider good operation and maintenance and previous engineering experience; during the manufacturing period, quality control matching the specification level 2 needs to be adopted, non-destructive accessibility and inspectability assessments need to be conducted, and the acceptance criteria for in-plant non-destructive inspections of the specification level 2 need to be met; during the operation period, regular in-service inspections and tests need to be carried out to monitor potential leakage and transients in nuclear power plant operation, as well as to supervise the material degradation of key parts.

[0163] The safety assessment for equipment judged as Structural Integrity Level 3 (SIC-3) is as follows:

[0164] The design, construction and operation and maintenance shall be carried out in strict accordance with the requirements of Nuclear Specification Level 3 (AMSE Level 3 or RCC-M Level 3 / RSE-M Level 3). It should be noted that the design and analysis need to meet the acceptance criteria of Nuclear Specification Level 3, the material selection needs to consider the aging degradation effect, and the structural design needs to consider good operation and maintenance and previous engineering experience; during the manufacturing period, quality control matching the specification level 3 needs to be adopted, non-destructive accessibility and inspectability assessment needs to be carried out, and the acceptance criteria of non-destructive inspection in the plant of specification level 3 need to be met; during the operation period, regular in-service inspections and tests should be carried out to monitor potential leakage and transient operation of nuclear power plants, and supervise the material degradation of key parts.

[0165] In this way, based on the existing safety assessment, a more comprehensive structural safety assessment can be conducted for nuclear-grade pressure equipment with different structural integrity levels, and safety assessment results for the corresponding nuclear power plant equipment can be generated, further improving the safe operation level of the entire target nuclear power plant.

[0166] In summary, the safety assessment method for pressure metal equipment in nuclear power plants provided by this application provides a scientific and systematic methodology for the safety management of pressure metal equipment in nuclear power plants through structural integrity classification and safety assessment based on it. The application of this method will help improve the safe operation level of nuclear power plants and ensure the safe and efficient use of nuclear energy.

[0167] Reference Fig.10 In some embodiments, the basic relationship between the safety classification results of metal pressure equipment in nuclear power plants and the construction specification level, as well as the structural integrity classification process corresponding to each construction specification level are shown. It should be noted that Fig.10 The safety classification results in the paper are derived from the safety classification of metal pressure equipment in nuclear power plants in HAF J0066. "HAF J0066" is a safety classification standard in the safety analysis of nuclear power plants. It provides a systematic classification framework for pressure equipment in nuclear power plants. Under this framework, metal pressure equipment in nuclear power plants are divided into different safety levels according to their role and importance in the safety system. These levels are safety level 1 (SC-1), safety level 2 (SC-2) and safety level 3 (SC-3). The purpose of this classification is to ensure that the design, construction and operation of nuclear power plants can meet the corresponding safety requirements and can effectively manage and control possible risks. Among them, safety level 1 (SC-1) equipment is designed and constructed according to nuclear specification level 1; safety level 2 (SC-2) equipment is designed and constructed according to nuclear specification level 2; safety level 3 (SC-3) equipment is designed and constructed according to nuclear specification level 3. It should be pointed out that Nuclear Specification Level 1, Nuclear Specification Level 2 and Nuclear Specification Level 3 correspond to the construction specification levels of Safety Level 1 (SC-1), Safety Level 2 (SC-2) and Safety Level 3 (SC-3) respectively.

[0168] According to some more specific embodiments provided in this application, if the metal pressure equipment of a nuclear power plant does not have a safety classification and / or a standard classification, you can refer to Fig.10 The process obtains the safety classification and (or) specification classification of each equipment. In addition, it should be understood that there are many examples of nuclear safety classification methods, not limited to the above examples, but in the end, each pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant can be classified into nuclear specification level 1, nuclear specification level 2 and nuclear specification level 3.

[0169] The safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant provided in some embodiments of the present application can be carried out according to Fig.10 The steps shown in are implemented.

[0170] First, it is necessary to obtain the nuclear safety classification specifications and equipment pre-configuration information, and based on the nuclear safety classification specifications, perform safety classification for each equipment safety data to obtain the safety classification results corresponding to the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment. After the process starts, it is necessary to identify the safety functions of each item in the nuclear power plant (including the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment) under the operating state, and according to the safety function consequences corresponding to each item and the probability of occurrence of the safety function, combined with the nuclear safety classification specifications, perform safety classification for the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment corresponding to each equipment safety data, and obtain the safety classification results corresponding to the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment. Among them, the classification of safety classification results can include safety level 1 (SC-1), safety level 2 (SC-2) and safety level 3 (SC-3).

[0171] Further, according to the safety classification results of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, the construction specification level of the pressure metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is determined. The construction specification level may include nuclear specification level 1 corresponding to safety level 1 (SC-1), nuclear specification level 2 corresponding to safety level 2 (SC-2), and nuclear specification level 3 corresponding to safety level 3 (SC-3).

[0172] Furthermore, for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, the structural integrity judgment conditions of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing levels corresponding to the structural integrity judgment conditions are determined based on the construction specification level; wherein the optional integrity pairing levels include high reliability level, structural integrity level 1, structural integrity level 2 and structural integrity level 3.

[0173] The structural integrity criteria for determining the high reliability level are:

[0174] Protective measures: no protective measures; consequences of equipment failure: severe damage to the core, large-scale release of radioactivity outside the plant; if there are no protective measures for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant, or if the consequences of failure of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of this nuclear power plant include any of the following: severe damage to the core, large-scale release of radioactivity outside the plant, the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is judged to be of high reliability level. This means that the pressure-bearing metal equipment of such nuclear power plants needs to be designed, constructed, and operated and maintained with high reliability level specifications. Specifically, it can be designed, constructed, and operated and maintained in strict accordance with the requirements of Nuclear Specification Level 1 (AMSE Level 1 or RCCM Level 1 / RSEM Level 1).

[0175] The structural integrity criteria for determining structural integrity level 1 are:

[0176] Protection measures: at least one protection measure; consequences of equipment failure: minor damage to the core, minor radioactive release outside the plant, and major radioactive release inside the nuclear island; if a nuclear power plant's pressure-bearing metal equipment does not have any protection measures, and the consequences of failure of the pressure-bearing metal equipment in this nuclear power plant include any of the following: minor damage to the core, minor radioactive release outside the plant, and major radioactive release inside the nuclear island, the pressure-bearing metal equipment in the nuclear power plant is judged to not meet the structural integrity level 1. This means that the safety protection measures of such pressure-bearing metal equipment in nuclear power plants should be paid more attention to during the design, construction, and operation and maintenance. For example, the design, construction, and operation and maintenance of the pressure-bearing metal equipment in this nuclear power plant can be carried out in accordance with the requirements of nuclear specification level 1 (AMSE level 1 or RCCM level 1 / RSEM level 1), while taking into account the operating experience feedback of existing nuclear power plants.

[0177] The structural integrity criteria for determining structural integrity level 2 are:

[0178] Protection measures: two diversified protection measures; consequences of equipment failure: no core damage, a small amount of radioactive release outside the plant, and a small amount of radioactive release in the nuclear island; if a nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment lacks two diversified protection measures, and the consequences of failure of this nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment include any one of no core damage, a small amount of radioactive release outside the plant, and a small amount of radioactive release in the nuclear island, it is determined that the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment does not meet the structural integrity level 2. This means that such nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment has achieved a failure frequency as low as possible through good design, construction and functional testing, as well as failure warning during service, and is safer than nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment with structural integrity level 1. In some embodiments, such nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment can be designed, constructed, operated and maintained in accordance with the requirements of nuclear specification level 2 (AMSE level 2 or RCCM level 2 / RSEM level 1), while considering the operating experience feedback of existing nuclear power plants.

[0179] The structural integrity determination conditions for determining structural integrity level 3 are:

[0180] Protection measures: two diversified protection measures; consequences of equipment failure: no core damage, a small amount of radioactive release outside the plant, and a small amount of radioactive release inside the nuclear island. If the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant lacks two diversified protection measures, and the consequences of failure of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of this nuclear power plant include any one of no core damage, a small amount of radioactive release outside the plant, and a small amount of radioactive release inside the nuclear island, it is determined that the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant does not meet the structural integrity level 3. This means that the pressure-bearing metal equipment of this nuclear power plant is safer than the pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant with structural integrity level 2. In some embodiments, the design, construction, operation and maintenance can be carried out in accordance with the requirements of nuclear specification level 3 (AMSE level 3 or RCCM level 3 / RSEM level 1), while considering the operating experience feedback of existing nuclear power plants.

[0181] In this way, the safety assessment results of the corresponding nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment can be generated based on the structural integrity level, which can more accurately assess the safety of the nuclear power plant pressure metal equipment and help improve the safety level of nuclear power plant operation.

[0182] Reference Fig.11 For example, for a nuclear safety level 1 pressure-bearing equipment in a nuclear power plant, the corresponding construction specification level is nuclear specification level 1. Fig.10 , it should be transferred to judgment condition A (that is, there is a protective measure, and the equipment may cause a small amount of core damage, a small amount of radioactive release outside the plant, and a large amount of radioactive release in the nuclear island after failure) for structural integrity classification.

[0183] First, it is necessary to determine the overall failure mode of the equipment, and then conduct a direct consequence analysis based on the existing design protection measures. If it meets the judgment condition A, it will continue to flow to the indirect consequence analysis. If the direct consequence analysis based on the existing design protection measures does not meet the judgment condition A, it is necessary to consider design optimization of the equipment, and use the "elimination, reduction, isolation and control" principle to design multiple protection measures to resist the direct consequences of failure, and conduct ALARP evaluation on these protection measures, and again determine whether the failure consequences and their protection measures meet the judgment condition A. If it does, it will continue to flow to the indirect consequence analysis. If it still does not meet the requirements, it needs to be upgraded to a higher level of structural integrity conditions for judgment, that is, the construction specification level of the equipment needs to be classified as the highest structural integrity HRC level.

[0184] If the equipment meets the above judgment condition A after the indirect consequence analysis and its protective measures ALARP assessment, that is, the protective measures include at least one protective measure, and the equipment may cause a small amount of core damage, a small amount of radioactive release outside the plant, and a large amount of radioactive release in the nuclear island after failure. In this case, the integrity pairing level corresponding to judgment condition A can be determined as the structural integrity level of the nuclear power plant equipment, that is, the structural integrity level of the nuclear power plant equipment is determined as structural integrity level 1 (SIC-1). However, if the equipment still does not meet the above judgment condition A after the indirect consequence analysis and its protective measures ALARP assessment, it needs to be upgraded to a higher level of structural integrity conditions for judgment, that is, the equipment needs to be classified as the highest structural integrity HRC level.

[0185] Similarly, for a certain nuclear power plant equipment, if its corresponding safety classification result is nuclear code level 2, then the integrity pairing level of this nuclear power plant equipment should be structural integrity level 2 (SIC-2), and the structural integrity determination condition of this nuclear power plant equipment should be structural integrity determination condition B. The equipment will be structurally graded similarly to the above-mentioned nuclear code level 1 process. For equipment whose safety classification result corresponds to nuclear code level 3, it is similar and is determined and analyzed according to structural integrity determination condition C.

[0186] In this way, on the basis of the original safety classification, the pressure-bearing equipment of the nuclear power plant will be divided again from the perspective of the optimal balance between the consequences of failure and protective measures. This will further identify the equipment that has a significant impact on the structural integrity safety, so that these equipment can be focused on in the design, construction, operation and maintenance, and targeted measures can be taken to protect them, so as to minimize safety hazards.

[0187] According to the structural integrity grading device for metal pressure-bearing equipment in a nuclear power plant according to an embodiment of the present application, the structural integrity grading device includes:

[0188] The safety classification module is used to obtain the safety classification results and equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; wherein the safety classification results are used to reflect the safety classification corresponding to the equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety classification specification;

[0189] A construction specification level determination module is used to determine the construction specification level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the safety classification results of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant;

[0190] The structural integrity level determination module is used to determine the corresponding structural integrity level for the corresponding nuclear power plant pressure-bearing metal equipment according to the construction specification level and equipment safety data.

[0191] It can be seen that the contents in the above-mentioned embodiments of the method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant are all applicable to the embodiments of the device for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in this nuclear power plant. The functions specifically implemented by the embodiments of the device for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in this nuclear power plant are the same as those in the above-mentioned embodiments of the method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant, and the beneficial effects achieved are also the same as those achieved by the above-mentioned embodiments of the method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant.

[0192] According to the safety assessment device for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant according to an embodiment of the present application, the safety assessment device includes:

[0193] The structural integrity grading device provided in the embodiment of the present application is used to determine the structural integrity level of pressure-bearing metal equipment in a nuclear power plant;

[0194] The safety assessment module is used to generate safety assessment results for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant based on the structural integrity level.

[0195] It can be seen that the contents of the above-mentioned embodiments of the safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant are all applicable to the embodiments of the safety assessment device for metal pressure equipment in this nuclear power plant. The functions specifically implemented by the embodiments of the safety assessment device for metal pressure equipment in this nuclear power plant are the same as those in the above-mentioned embodiments of the safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant, and the beneficial effects achieved are also the same as those achieved by the above-mentioned embodiments of the safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant.

[0196] Reference Fig.12 , Fig.12 The hardware structure of an electronic device of another embodiment is illustrated. The electronic device may include:

[0197] The processor 1201 may be implemented by a general-purpose CPU (Central Processing Unit), a microprocessor, an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or one or more integrated circuits, and is used to execute relevant programs to implement the technical solutions provided in the embodiments of the present application;

[0198] The memory 1202 can be implemented in the form of a read-only memory (ROM), a static storage device, a dynamic storage device, or a random access memory (RAM). The memory 1202 can store an operating system and other application programs. When the technical solution provided in the embodiment of this specification is implemented by software or firmware, the relevant program code is stored in the memory 1202, and the processor 1201 calls and executes the nuclear power plant equipment safety assessment method of the embodiment of this application;

[0199] Input / output interface 1203, used to implement information input and output;

[0200] The communication interface 1204 is used to realize the communication interaction between the device and other devices. The communication can be realized through a wired manner (such as USB, network cable, etc.) or a wireless manner (such as mobile network, WI FI, Bluetooth, etc.);

[0201] A bus 1205 that transmits information between various components of the device (e.g., the processor 1201, the memory 1202, the input / output interface 1203, and the communication interface 1204);

[0202] The processor 1201 , the memory 1202 , the input / output interface 1203 and the communication interface 1204 are connected to each other in communication within the device via the bus 1205 .

[0203] The present application also provides a computer program product, which includes a computer program. The processor of the computer device reads and executes the computer program, so that the computer device performs the structural integrity classification of the metal pressure equipment of the nuclear power plant of the present application, or the safety assessment method of the metal pressure equipment of the nuclear power plant of the present application.

[0204] The terms "first", "second", "third", "fourth", etc. (if any) in the specification of the present disclosure and the above-mentioned drawings are used to distinguish similar objects, and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequence. It should be understood that the data used in this way can be interchangeable where appropriate, so that the embodiments of the present disclosure described herein can, for example, be implemented in an order other than those illustrated or described herein. In addition, the terms "comprises" and "comprising" and any variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusions, for example, a process, method, system, product or device that includes a series of steps or units is not necessarily limited to those steps or units that are clearly listed, but may include other steps or units that are not clearly listed or inherent to these processes, methods, products or devices.

[0205] It should be understood that in the present disclosure, "at least one (item)" means one or more, and "plurality" means two or more. "And / or" is used to describe the association relationship of associated objects, indicating that three relationships may exist. For example, "A and / or B" can mean: only A exists, only B exists, and A and B exist at the same time, where A and B can be singular or plural. The character " / " generally indicates that the objects associated before and after are in an "or" relationship. "At least one of the following items" or similar expressions refers to any combination of these items, which may include any combination of single items or plural items. For example, at least one of a, b or c can mean: a, b, c, "a and b", "a and c", "b and c", or "a and b and c", where a, b, c can be single or multiple.

[0206] It should be understood that in the description of the embodiments of the present application, the meaning of multiple (or multiple items) is more than two, greater than, less than, exceed, etc. are understood to not include the number, and above, below, within, etc. are understood to include the number.

[0207] In the several embodiments provided in the present disclosure, it should be understood that the disclosed systems, devices and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the device embodiments described above are only schematic. For example, the division of units is only a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation. For example, multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another system, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be an indirect coupling or communication connection through some interfaces, devices or units, which can be electrical, mechanical or other forms.

[0208] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed on multiple network units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0209] In addition, each functional unit in each embodiment of the present disclosure may be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit. The above-mentioned integrated unit may be implemented in the form of hardware or in the form of software functional units.

[0210] If the integrated unit is implemented in the form of a software functional unit and sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present disclosure, in essence, or the part that contributes to the prior art, or all or part of the technical solution can be embodied in the form of a software product, and the computer software product is stored in a storage medium, which may include several instructions to enable a computer device (which may be a personal computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to perform all or part of the steps of the various embodiments of the present disclosure. The aforementioned storage medium may include: U disk, mobile hard disk, read-only memory (Read-Only Memory, referred to as ROM), random access memory (Random Access Memory, referred to as RAM), disk or optical disk, etc. Various media that can store program codes.

[0211] It should also be understood that the various implementations provided in the embodiments of the present application can be combined arbitrarily to achieve different technical effects.

[0212] The above is a specific description of the implementation methods of the present disclosure, but the present disclosure is not limited to the above implementation methods. Technical personnel familiar with the art can also make various equivalent modifications or substitutions without violating the spirit of the present disclosure. These equivalent modifications or substitutions are all included in the scope defined by the claims of the present disclosure.

Claims

1. A method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant, characterized in that: The method comprises: Obtaining safety classification results and equipment safety data of pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant; wherein the safety classification results are used to reflect the safety classification corresponding to the equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety classification specification; Determining the construction specification level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the safety classification result of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; A corresponding structural integrity level is determined for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The equipment safety data includes the protection measures sub-data and failure mode sub-data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, and the determining of the corresponding structural integrity level for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data includes: For the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, determining the structural integrity determination condition of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing level corresponding to the structural integrity determination condition based on the construction specification level; When the protective measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that After determining the structural integrity determination condition of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant and the integrity pairing level corresponding to the structural integrity determination condition based on the construction specification level for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant, the method further includes: In the case that both the protective measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data do not meet the structural integrity determination condition, a reasonable feasibility assessment is performed on the equipment safety data to determine a first optimized protective measure suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; Based on the first optimization protection measure, performing a first optimization update on the device security data; When the device safety data after the first optimization update meets the structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that After performing a first optimization update on the device security data based on the first optimization protection measure, the method further includes: When the device security data after the first optimization and update still does not meet the structural integrity determination condition, selecting an alternative integrity level higher than the integrity pairing level from a plurality of preset alternative integrity levels, replacing the original integrity pairing level, and obtaining an updated integrity pairing level; The updated integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

5. The method according to any one of claims 2 to 4, characterized in that: When the protective measure sub-data and the failure mode sub-data meet the structural integrity determination condition, determining the corresponding integrity pairing level as the structural integrity level includes: Determining direct and indirect consequences of the failure of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the failure mode sub-data; When the direct impact consequences and the indirect impact consequences match the protective measure sub-data, the corresponding structural integrity determination condition is met, and the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that After determining the direct and indirect consequences of the failure of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the failure mode sub-data, the method further includes: When the direct impact consequence matches the protective measure sub-data, and the indirect impact consequence cannot match the protective measure sub-data, a reasonable feasibility assessment is performed on the equipment safety data to determine a second optimized protective measure suitable for the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; Based on the second optimization protection measure, performing a second optimization update on the device security data; updating the indirect impact consequence according to the device safety data after the second optimization update; When the updated indirect impact consequence matches the protective measure sub-data and meets the corresponding structural integrity determination condition, the corresponding integrity pairing level is determined as the structural integrity level.

7. A safety assessment method for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant, characterized in that: The method comprises: Determining the structural integrity level of pressure-bearing metal equipment in a nuclear power plant according to the structural integrity grading method according to any one of claims 1 to 6; Based on the structural integrity level, a safety assessment result corresponding to the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant is generated.

8. A structural integrity grading device for metal pressure-bearing equipment in a nuclear power plant, characterized in that: The device comprises: A safety classification module, used to obtain safety classification results and equipment safety data of pressure-bearing metal equipment of a nuclear power plant; wherein the safety classification results are used to reflect the safety classification corresponding to the equipment safety data of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant in the nuclear safety classification specification; A construction specification level determination module, used to determine the construction specification level of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the safety classification result of the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant; The structural integrity level determination module is used to determine the corresponding structural integrity level for the corresponding pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant according to the construction specification level and the equipment safety data.

9. A safety assessment device for metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant, characterized in that: include: The structural integrity grading device as claimed in claim 8 is used to determine the structural integrity level of pressure-bearing metal equipment in a nuclear power plant; A safety assessment module is used to generate a safety assessment result corresponding to the pressure-bearing metal equipment of the nuclear power plant based on the structural integrity level.

10. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, wherein when the computer program is executed by a processor, the method for grading the structural integrity of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant as described in any one of claims 1 to 6 is implemented, or the method for safety assessment of metal pressure equipment in a nuclear power plant as described in claim 7 is implemented.

Images