Nuclear power plant emergency disposal strategy effectiveness evaluation method and device

Abstract

The invention discloses a nuclear power plant emergency disposal strategy effectiveness evaluation method and device, and the method comprises the following steps: S1, obtaining safety systems related to a to-be-evaluated emergency disposal strategy, and sorting an equipment list related to each safety system; s2, establishing an evaluation model for each type of equipment in the equipment list, collecting associated data of the equipment, and evaluating the state of the equipment based on the evaluation model and the associated data; s3, evaluating the state of the corresponding safety system by integrating the states of all the devices in the device list; and S4, evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency disposal strategy by integrating the states of the safety systems. The effectiveness of the emergency disposal strategy can be ensured.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of nuclear power emergency disposal, and in particular to a method and device for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency disposal strategies of nuclear power plants. Background Art

[0002] Severe Accident Management Guidelines, or SAMG for short, are used to guide power plants to mitigate the consequences of accidents and limit radioactive releases when an beyond-design basis accident with core damage occurs. The Severe Accident Management Guidelines contain several emergency response strategies. We need to always maintain the effectiveness of each emergency response strategy so that the emergency response strategy can play its due role when an emergency occurs. However, each emergency response strategy may involve multiple systems, each system consists of several devices, and the effectiveness of each device is related to a large amount of unit information. Therefore, the information associated with the effective implementation of an emergency response strategy is very complex. How to always ensure the effectiveness of each emergency response strategy in the Severe Accident Management Guidelines has become an urgent problem to be solved. Summary of the invention

[0003] In view of this, it is necessary to provide a method and device for evaluating the effectiveness of nuclear power plant emergency response strategies, so as to effectively solve the technical problem that the effectiveness of nuclear power plant emergency response cannot be guaranteed.

[0004] The present invention provides a method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants, comprising the following steps:

[0005] Step S1: Obtain the safety systems involved in the emergency response strategy to be evaluated, and sort out the equipment list related to each of the safety systems;

[0006] Step S2: establishing an evaluation model for each device in the device list, collecting associated data of the device, and evaluating the status of the device based on the evaluation model and the associated data;

[0007] Step S3, evaluating the status of the corresponding safety system by comprehensively evaluating the status of all equipment in the equipment list;

[0008] Step S4: Evaluate the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy based on the status of each of the safety systems.

[0009] Preferably, in step S1, the equipment list related to each of the security systems is sorted out, specifically:

[0010] Compile a list of equipment related to each safety system mentioned in accordance with the severe accident management guidelines.

[0011] Preferably, in step S2, an evaluation model is established for each device in the device list, specifically:

[0012] The devices in the equipment list are classified according to their functions and power sources, and the influencing factors of the unavailability of each type of equipment are analyzed separately. The logical block diagram of the corresponding category of equipment is obtained by comprehensively considering different influencing factors; based on the logical block diagram, corresponding availability evaluation block diagrams are constructed for different devices in each category of equipment.

[0013] Preferably, a corresponding usability evaluation block diagram is constructed for different devices in each type of device, specifically:

[0014] Based on the influencing factors in the logic block diagram of the corresponding category of equipment, corresponding availability evaluation block diagrams are set for different influencing factors, and the availability evaluation block diagrams of different influencing factors are combined to obtain the availability evaluation block diagram.

[0015] Preferably, the associated data of the collected device in step S2 is specifically:

[0016] Consider running the digital twin data middle platform database to collect related data; alternatively, the related data is unit data or simulator data, and a selection switch is set to select unit data or simulator data as the related data through the selection switch.

[0017] Preferably, in step S2, the status of the device is evaluated based on the evaluation model and the associated data, specifically:

[0018] The associated data is input into the evaluation model, an evaluation conclusion is output, and the usable status of the equipment is obtained.

[0019] Preferably, the step S3 is specifically:

[0020] Performing functional analysis on the security system based on the flowchart of the security system, sorting out implementation paths of different functions of the security system, and setting an evaluation scheme for the security system based on the implementation paths of different functions;

[0021] The available status of the equipment required for the implementation paths of different functions is input into the evaluation scheme to obtain the status of the safety system.

[0022] Preferably, the step S3 further includes:

[0023] The status of the safety system is graded, and different evaluation schemes are set for each level.

[0024] Preferably, the step S4 is specifically:

[0025] It is determined whether each of the safety systems is in a normal state. If so, the emergency response strategy is effective; otherwise, the emergency response strategy is invalid.

[0026] The present invention also provides a nuclear power plant emergency response strategy effectiveness evaluation device, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by the processor, the nuclear power plant emergency response strategy effectiveness evaluation method is implemented.

[0027] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects: the method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants provided by the present invention can inspect and evaluate emergency response strategies, and ensure the effectiveness of emergency response strategies when no accidents occur; once an accident occurs, the emergency response strategies can play their due role and effectively alleviate the impact of the accident. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0028] The drawings described herein are used to provide a further understanding of the present invention and constitute a part of this application. The exemplary embodiments of the present invention and their descriptions are used to explain the present invention and do not constitute an improper limitation of the present invention. In the drawings:

[0029] Figure 1 A flow chart of an embodiment of a method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants provided by the present invention;

[0030] Figure 2a yes Figure 1 The pneumatic valve logic block diagram of the first embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy of a nuclear power plant in the embodiment shown;

[0031] Figure 2b yes Figure 1 A block diagram of the availability assessment of the pneumatic valve GCT131VV in the embodiment of the effectiveness assessment method for emergency response strategy of a nuclear power plant shown in the embodiment;

[0032] Figure 3a yes Figure 1 The electric valve logic block diagram of the first embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency disposal strategy of a nuclear power plant in the embodiment shown;

[0033] Figure 3b yes Figure 1 A block diagram of the availability assessment of the electric valve RRA001VP in the embodiment of the effectiveness assessment method for the emergency response strategy of a nuclear power plant shown in the embodiment;

[0034] Figure 4 yes Figure 1 The solenoid valve logic block diagram of the first embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency disposal strategy of a nuclear power plant in the embodiment shown;

[0035] Figure 5 yes Figure 1 A manual valve logic block diagram of an embodiment of a method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies in a nuclear power plant in the embodiment shown;

[0036] Figure 6 is Figure 1 The logic block diagram of the pilot-operated safety valve in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0037] Figure 7a is Figure 1 The logic block diagram of the motor pump in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0038] Figure 7b is Figure 1 The availability assessment block diagram of the motor pump ASG003PO in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0039] Figure 8a is Figure 1 The logic block diagram of the steam-driven pump in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0040] Figure 8b is Figure 1 The availability assessment block diagram of the steam-driven pump ASG003PO in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0041] Figure 9a is Figure 1 The logic block diagram of the fan in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0042] Figure 9b is Figure 1 The availability assessment block diagram of the fan DVN001ZV in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0043] Fig.10a is Figure 1 The logic block diagram of the water tank in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0044] Fig.10b is Figure 1 The availability assessment block diagram of the water tank PTR001BA in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0045] Fig.11 is Figure 1 The logic block diagram of the pipeline in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0046] Fig.12a is Figure 1 The simplified process diagram of the containment spray system in an embodiment of the method for evaluating the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy in a nuclear power plant shown in the figure;

[0047] Figure 12b yes Figure 1 The illustrated embodiment is a logic diagram of the containment spray system of an embodiment of a method for evaluating the effectiveness of an emergency response strategy for a nuclear power plant. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0048] The preferred embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein the accompanying drawings constitute a part of this application and are used together with the embodiments of the present invention to illustrate the principles of the present invention, but are not used to limit the scope of the present invention.

[0049] For example, see Figure 1 In this embodiment, a method for evaluating the effectiveness of a nuclear power plant emergency response strategy includes the following steps:

[0050] Step S1: Obtain the safety systems involved in the emergency response strategy to be evaluated, and sort out the equipment list related to each of the safety systems;

[0051] Step S2: establishing an evaluation model for each device in the device list, collecting associated data of the device, and evaluating the status of the device based on the evaluation model and the associated data;

[0052] Step S3, evaluating the status of the corresponding safety system by comprehensively evaluating the status of all equipment in the equipment list;

[0053] Step S4: Evaluate the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy based on the status of each of the safety systems.

[0054] This method is mainly used to assist in the implementation of the severe accident management guidelines of nuclear power plants. The severe accident management guidelines contain several emergency response strategies. Each emergency response strategy may involve multiple systems. Therefore, it is necessary to judge the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy based on the effective state of the system. Each system is composed of several devices, such as electric valves, pneumatic valves, electric pumps, pneumatic pumps, pipelines, etc. Therefore, it is necessary to first judge the effectiveness of each device to judge the effectiveness of the system; the effectiveness of each device is judged by obtaining unit information and using an evaluation model. Therefore, firstly, we sort out the emergency response strategies, safety systems and equipment layer by layer, establish the evaluation model of each device, and the evaluation logic of each system, and finally form the effectiveness evaluation model of the emergency response strategy to realize the effectiveness evaluation of the emergency response strategy and ensure the effectiveness of the severe accident management guidelines.

[0055] Furthermore, in step S1, the equipment list related to each of the security systems is sorted out, specifically:

[0056] Compile a list of equipment related to each safety system mentioned in accordance with the severe accident management guidelines.

[0057] According to the severe accident management guidelines, a list of equipment that needs to be evaluated for its status is compiled. The scope of the equipment status evaluation includes but is not limited to important equipment that needs to be used under accident conditions, such as injection pumps, spray pumps, auxiliary water pumps, charging pumps and other equipment required to perform important safety functions, such as valves in important flow channels.

[0058] Furthermore, in step S2, an evaluation model is established for each device in the device list, specifically:

[0059] The devices in the equipment list are classified according to their functions and power sources, and the influencing factors of the unavailability of each type of equipment are analyzed separately. The logical block diagram of the corresponding category of equipment is obtained by comprehensively considering different influencing factors; based on the logical block diagram, corresponding availability evaluation block diagrams are constructed for different devices in each category of equipment.

[0060] According to the severe accident management guidelines, the equipment types are sorted out, and according to the power sources of pumps, valves, and fans, an availability assessment block diagram for this category is built. The equipment classification table is shown in Table 1.

[0061] Table 1. Equipment classification table

[0062] After classifying the devices, build a corresponding usability evaluation framework diagram for each specific device.

[0063] Furthermore, a corresponding usability evaluation diagram is built for different devices in each type of device, specifically:

[0064] Based on the influencing factors in the logic block diagram of the corresponding category of equipment, corresponding availability evaluation block diagrams are set for different influencing factors, and the availability evaluation block diagrams of different influencing factors are combined to obtain the availability evaluation block diagram.

[0065] Based on the working principle of the equipment, the influencing factors related to the equipment status are analyzed. The influencing factors of valve equipment mainly include: mode, air source, power supply, maintenance status, pressure, valve position, etc. The influencing factors of pump equipment mainly include: mode, power supply, air source, etc. The influencing factors of fan equipment mainly include: mode, power supply, etc. The influencing factors of water tank equipment mainly include: mode, water level, water temperature, etc. The influencing factors of pipeline equipment mainly include: mode, maintenance status, etc.

[0066] Corresponding usability evaluation block diagrams are set according to different influencing factors. The following takes different types of different devices as examples to illustrate the specific setting process of the logic block diagram and the usability evaluation block diagram.

[0067] 1. Pneumatic valve: The main components of a pneumatic valve are the pneumatic head and the valve body. When the air source is supplied, the air cavity is inflated, the shaft is lifted and the spring is compressed, and the valve stem moves upward through the shaft connection until the rear valve disc contacts the rear valve seat. At this time, the valve is fully open; when the air is lost, the spring returns to its original state, the valve disc seats, and the valve is fully closed. At the same time, a certain seating force is provided to prevent internal leakage when there is a medium. Figure 2a As shown, the factors affecting the status of the pneumatic valve include mode, power supply and gas source. The logical mode for judging the availability of the pneumatic valve includes manual and automatic modes. If manual is selected, the user directly assigns the value; if automatic is selected, the availability of the pneumatic valve is determined by the power supply and gas source of the pneumatic valve. If the gas source is abnormal or the power supply is abnormal, the pneumatic valve is automatically determined to be in an unavailable state. Taking the atmospheric discharge valve GCT131VV of the M310 unit as an example, for the mode, the availability evaluation block diagram is set as: manual / automatic selection and manual setting; for power supply abnormality, the availability evaluation block diagram is set as: 220V AC power supply ≤176V & LNE360CR distribution box power failure; for gas source abnormality, the availability evaluation block diagram is set as: SAR016BA gas supply failure & SAP system failure. Combining the three influencing factors, the availability evaluation block diagram of the GCT131VV pneumatic valve is as follows Figure 2b shown.

[0068] 2. Electric valve: The electric valve uses electrical energy as power and realizes the opening and closing of the valve through an electric actuator. Compared with the solenoid valve, its opening can be controlled to control the flow of the medium in the pipeline. Figure 3a The following is a typical electric valve logic block diagram. The electric valve availability judgment logic mode has two modes to choose from: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the user directly assigns the value; if automatic is selected, the availability of the electric valve is determined by the power supply of the electric valve. If the power supply is abnormal, the electric valve is automatically determined to be unavailable. Taking the electric valve RRA001VP of the M310 unit as an example, the availability evaluation block diagram of the electric valve RRA001VP is as follows Figure 3b shown.

[0069] 3. Solenoid valve. The solenoid valve consists of an electromagnet and a valve body structure. The electromagnet is excited by electric current to generate a magnetic field to control the opening and closing of the valve. Figure 4 The following is a typical solenoid valve logic block diagram. The logic mode of solenoid valve availability judgment has two modes to choose from: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the user directly assigns the value; if automatic is selected, the availability of the solenoid valve is determined by the power supply of the solenoid valve. If the power supply is abnormal, the solenoid valve is automatically determined to be unavailable.

[0070] 4. Manual valve: The manual valve uses a handwheel, handle, lever, or chain to manipulate the valve movement by manpower. Compared with pneumatic valves, electric valves, and solenoid valves, the logic block diagram of the manual valve is relatively simple, and the availability is directly reported by maintenance personnel. Figure 5 This is a manual valve logic block diagram. There are two logic modes for manual valve availability judgment: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the user directly assigns the value; if automatic is selected, the availability of the manual valve is directly judged by the maintenance data of the maintenance personnel, and the default is available.

[0071] 5. Special valves: After the pneumatic valves, electric valves, solenoid valves and manual valves are classified, there are valves outside the categories involved in the serious accident guidelines. For example, the main steam isolation valve VVP001VV adopts a gas-liquid linkage drive device; the regulator pilot safety valve RCP020VP belongs to the automatic valve category.

[0072] The pilot-operated safety valve consists of a main valve and a pilot valve. The main valve is controlled by the pilot valve. The system's own medium pressure is used to achieve a self-tightening seal of the main valve, and a highly sensitive small-diameter pilot valve is used to control the opening and closing of the main valve. Figure 6 This is the logic block diagram of the RCP020VP pilot safety valve. The logic mode of availability judgment has two modes to choose from: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the user will assign the value directly; if automatic is selected, the availability of RCP020 is determined by the power supply signal, system pressure signal, and valve position signal of the safety valve. If the power supply signal is abnormal or the pressure of the first circuit is lower than 15.9MPa.g and the valve is not closed, or the pressure of the first circuit is higher than 16.5MPa.g and the valve is not opened, the pilot safety valve is automatically determined to be in an unavailable state.

[0073] 6. Electric pump: The electric pump is driven by an electric motor and is mainly composed of a pump body, a water lifting pipe, a pump seat, a motor and a starting protection device. Figure 7a The following is a typical electric pump logic block diagram. The electric pump availability judgment logic mode has two modes to choose from: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the user directly assigns the value; if automatic is selected, the availability of the electric pump is determined by the power supply of the electric pump. If the power supply is abnormal, the electric valve is automatically determined to be unavailable. Taking the electric pump EAS001PO of the M310 unit as an example, the availability evaluation block diagram is as follows Figure 7b shown.

[0074] 7. Steam-driven pump: The steam-driven pump is driven by a single-stage impulse steam turbine. The steam enters the nozzle chamber of the cylinder head and converts the potential energy of the high-pressure steam into kinetic energy through the nozzle on the annular nozzle plate, driving the turbine rotor blades to rotate at high speed. Figure 8a The following is a typical pneumatic pump logic block diagram. The pneumatic pump availability judgment logic mode has two modes to choose from: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the user directly assigns the value; if automatic is selected, the availability of the pneumatic pump is determined by the steam source of the electric pump. If the steam source is abnormal, the pneumatic valve is automatically determined to be unavailable. Taking the auxiliary feedwater pump ASG003PO of the M310 unit as an example, the availability evaluation block diagram is as follows Figure 8b shown.

[0075] 8. Fans: Fans increase gas pressure and discharge gas through input mechanical energy. They provide air delivery power for the water level ventilation and air conditioning systems of various buildings and different working areas of nuclear power plants. For fans, whether they are ventilators or compressors, the power supply controls their availability, so ventilators and compressors are classified into one category. The logic block diagram is as follows: Figure 9a As shown. The logic mode of fan availability judgment has two modes to choose from: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the user directly assigns the value; if automatic is selected, the availability of the pneumatic pump is determined by the power supply of the fan pump. If the power supply is abnormal, the fan is automatically judged to be unavailable. Taking the DVN001ZV blower of the M310 unit as an example, the availability evaluation block diagram is shown in Figure 9b shown.

[0076] 9. Water tanks. The water sources of nuclear power plants are mostly in the form of water tanks. Fig.10a The logic block diagram of the water tank is shown in Figure 2. The logic mode of water tank availability judgment has two modes to choose from: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the value is directly assigned by the user; if automatic is selected, the availability of the water tank is determined by the water level and water temperature of the water tank. If the water level or water temperature is abnormal, the water tank is automatically judged to be unavailable. Taking the PTR001BA of the M310 unit as an example, the availability evaluation block diagram is shown in Figure 2. Fig.10b shown.

[0077] 10. Pipeline. The logic block diagram of the pipeline is relatively simple, and the availability is directly reported by maintenance personnel. Fig.11 It is a pipeline logic block diagram. There are two logical modes for pipeline availability judgment: manual and automatic. If manual is selected, the user directly assigns the value; if automatic is selected, the pipeline availability is directly judged by the maintenance data of the maintenance personnel, and the default is available.

[0078] Furthermore, the associated data of the collected device in step S2 is specifically:

[0079] Consider running the digital twin data middle platform database to collect related data; alternatively, the related data is unit data or simulator data, and a selection switch is set to select unit data or simulator data as the related data through the selection switch.

[0080] By collecting the associated data of the equipment, such as power supply status, circuit breaker / bus status, current / voltage, temperature, pressure, vibration signal, flow rate, etc., as well as the changing trends of certain signals, the status of the equipment is comprehensively evaluated. This part of the work mainly includes: using unit data or simulator data as input, using deterministic logic design to evaluate the availability of the equipment, and automatically judging whether the equipment is currently in an available state; it can also track equipment status changes through intelligent retrieval of the running digital twin data middle platform database, consider running the digital twin data middle platform database, and input data. For unit data and simulator data input, set a selection switch and manually switch to select one.

[0081] Furthermore, in step S2, the status of the device is evaluated based on the evaluation model and the associated data, specifically:

[0082] The associated data is input into the evaluation model, an evaluation conclusion is output, and the usable status of the equipment is obtained.

[0083] Furthermore, the step S3 is specifically:

[0084] Performing functional analysis on the security system based on the flowchart of the security system, sorting out implementation paths of different functions of the security system, and setting an evaluation scheme for the security system based on the implementation paths of different functions;

[0085] The available status of the equipment required for the implementation paths of different functions is input into the evaluation scheme to obtain the status of the safety system.

[0086] Based on the collected data and equipment availability evaluation results, the unit safety system status is given, and the functional status of the safety system status is displayed in an appropriate manner. The scope of the system status evaluation is determined according to the scope involved in the severe accident management guidelines. Its functions are implemented as follows: The safety system status evaluation is carried out through the functional analysis of the system, the availability of the core equipment, the implementation path of different functions of the system, combined with the equipment availability required to implement the path, considering the redundancy of the equipment required to implement the same function, and based on the final evaluation results of the system status.

[0087] Furthermore, the step S3 further includes:

[0088] The status of the safety system is graded, and different evaluation schemes are set for each level.

[0089] This embodiment displays the system status in a hierarchical manner, including normal, limited function, and unavailable status, thereby providing clear and intuitive information to the decision-making layer. The required data input mainly includes: equipment operation status evaluation results, including equipment availability, redundancy, etc.

[0090] The boundary of the system availability evaluation is the equipment involved in the severe accident management guidelines. This embodiment takes the containment spray system of the M310 unit as an example. The equipment mentioned in the guidelines for the containment spray system of the M310 unit include pump EAS001PO, pump EAS002PO, PTR water tank, containment pit, valve EAS013VB, valve EAS014VB, valve EAS007VB, valve EAS009VB, valve EAS008VB, valve EAS010VB and spray ring pipe. This embodiment conducts system evaluation and analysis based on these equipment. Fig.12a The containment spray system process diagram is shown in Figure 1. The containment spray system is referred to as the EAS system. Fig.12a As shown in the figure, the EAS system consists of A and B columns, each of which contains a pit, a spray pump, a chemical additive injector, a heat exchanger, two sets of spray ring pipes at different heights under the containment dome, a spray pump test pipeline, and related valves, pipelines, and instruments. The common parts of the two series are the chemical additive system, the chemical additive injector test pipeline connected to the refueling water tank RWST, and the refueling water tank RWST; the main equipment of the chemical additive system is a chemical additive storage tank and a mixing pump.

[0091] If both columns A and B using the PTR water tank as the water source are available or columns A and B using the containment pit as the water source are available, the EAS system is judged to be functioning normally; if both columns A and B using the PTR water tank as the water source are available or columns A and B using the containment pit as the water source are unavailable, the EAS system is judged to be functioning ineffectively; if one of the columns A and B using the PTR water tank as the water source fails or one of the columns A and B using the containment pit as the water source fails, the EAS system is judged to be functioning limitedly. Based on this, an example of the containment spray system evaluation scheme is determined as shown in Table 2, and then a logical judgment block diagram of the containment spray system is constructed as shown in Figure 12b shown.

[0092] Table 2. Containment spray system evaluation plan

[0093] By inputting the status assessment results of the relevant equipment into the logic judgment block diagram class of the containment spray system, the assessment results of the containment spray system can be obtained.

[0094] Furthermore, the step S4 is specifically as follows:

[0095] It is determined whether each of the safety systems is in a normal state. If so, the emergency response strategy is effective; otherwise, the emergency response strategy is invalid.

[0096] Embodiment 2: This embodiment provides a device for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies of nuclear power plants, including a memory and a processor, wherein a computer program is stored in the memory, and when the computer program is executed by the processor, the method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies of nuclear power plants described in embodiment 1 is implemented.

[0097] The nuclear power plant emergency response strategy effectiveness evaluation device provided in this embodiment is used to implement the nuclear power plant emergency response strategy effectiveness evaluation method. Therefore, the technical effects possessed by the nuclear power plant emergency response strategy effectiveness evaluation method are also possessed by the nuclear power plant emergency response strategy effectiveness evaluation device, which will not be repeated here.

[0098] The above description is only a preferred specific implementation manner of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any changes or substitutions that can be easily conceived by any technician familiar with the technical field within the technical scope disclosed in the present invention should be covered by the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: Step S1: Obtain the safety systems involved in the emergency response strategy to be evaluated, and sort out the equipment list related to each of the safety systems; Step S2: establishing an evaluation model for each device in the device list, collecting associated data of the device, and evaluating the status of the device based on the evaluation model and the associated data; Step S3, evaluating the status of the corresponding safety system by comprehensively evaluating the status of all equipment in the equipment list; Step S4: comprehensively evaluating the status of each of the safety systems to determine the effectiveness of the emergency response strategy.

2. The method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S1, a list of equipment related to each of the security systems is sorted out, specifically: Compile a list of equipment related to each safety system mentioned in accordance with the severe accident management guidelines.

3. The method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S2, an evaluation model is established for each device in the device list, specifically: The devices in the equipment list are classified according to their functions and power sources, and the influencing factors of the unavailability of each type of equipment are analyzed separately. The logical block diagram of the corresponding category of equipment is obtained by comprehensively considering different influencing factors; based on the logical block diagram, corresponding availability evaluation block diagrams are constructed for different devices in each category of equipment.

4. The method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants according to claim 3, characterized in that: Build corresponding usability evaluation diagrams for different devices in each type of device, specifically: Based on the influencing factors in the logic block diagram of the corresponding category of equipment, corresponding availability evaluation block diagrams are set for different influencing factors, and the availability evaluation block diagrams of different influencing factors are combined to obtain the availability evaluation block diagram.

5. The method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that: The associated data of the collected device in step S2 is specifically: Consider running the digital twin data middle platform database to collect related data; alternatively, the related data is unit data or simulator data, and a selection switch is set to select unit data or simulator data as the related data through the selection switch.

6. The method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S2, the status of the device is evaluated based on the evaluation model and the associated data, specifically: The associated data is input into the evaluation model, an evaluation conclusion is output, and the usable status of the equipment is obtained.

7. The method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that: The step S3 is specifically: Performing functional analysis on the security system based on the flowchart of the security system, sorting out implementation paths of different functions of the security system, and setting an evaluation scheme for the security system based on the implementation paths of different functions; The available status of the equipment required for the implementation paths of different functions is input into the evaluation scheme to obtain the status of the safety system.

8. The method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that: The step S3 further includes: The status of the safety system is graded, and different evaluation schemes are set for each level.

9. The method for evaluating the effectiveness of emergency response strategies for nuclear power plants according to claim 1, characterized in that: The step S4 is specifically: It is determined whether each of the safety systems is in a normal state. If so, the emergency response strategy is effective; otherwise, the emergency response strategy is invalid.

10. A nuclear power plant emergency response strategy effectiveness evaluation device, characterized in that: It comprises a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by the processor, the effectiveness evaluation of the emergency disposal strategy of a nuclear power plant as described in any one of claims 1 to 9 is implemented.

Images