Development of a code-agnostic computational infrastructure for the dynamic generation of accident progression event trees

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 95, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 278-294

  Catalyurek, Umit ^a   Rutt, Benjamin ^a   Metzroth, Kyle ^a   Hakobyan, Aram ^a   Aldemir, Tunc ^a   Denning, Richard ^a   Dunagan, Sean ^b   Kunsman, David ^b  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Accident progression event trees; Dynamic event trees; Melcor; Probabilistic risk assessment

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL EFFORT; COMPUTATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE; DYNAMIC EVENTS; DYNAMIC GENERATION; DYNAMIC PROCESS; EVENT TREES; EXPLICIT MODELING; LEVEL 2; PARALLEL PROCESSING; PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT; PROTOTYPE IMPLEMENTATIONS; SCENARIO MANAGEMENT; SIMULATION CODE; STATION BLACKOUT; SYSTEM SIMULATIONS;

ACCIDENTS; DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; NUCLEAR ENERGY; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS; PRESSURIZED WATER REACTORS; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOFTWARE PROTOTYPING;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 73649129865     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2009.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Commission, U.S.N.R. Reactor safety study-an assessment of accident risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants (1975), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
2. Commission, U.S.N.R. Severe accident risks: an assessment for five U.S. Nuclear Power Plants (1990), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
3. Hakobyan A., et al. Dynamic generation of accident progression event trees. Nuclear Engineering and Design 238 (2008) 3457-3467
4. Acosta, C. and N. Siu Dynamic event trees in accident sequence analysis: application to steam generator tube rupture.
5. Kae-Sheng H., and Mosleh A. The development and application of the accident dynamic simulator for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of nuclear power plants (1996) p. 297-314
6. Cacciabue P.C., Amendola. A., and Cojazzi G. Dynamic logical analytical methodology versus fault tree: the case of auxiliary feedwater system of a nuclear power plant. Nuclear Technology 74 (1986) 195-208
7. Izquierdo J.M., et al. Automatic generation of dynamic event trees: a tool for integrated safety assessment. In: Aldemir T., et al. (Ed). Reliability and safety assessment of dynamic process systems (1994), Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg 135-150
8. Kloos M., Hofer E., et al. Dynamic event trees for probabilistic safety analysis (2004), GRS, Garsching, Germany
9. Munoz R., et al. DENDROS: a second generation scheduler for dynamic event trees (1999), Senda Editorial, S.A., Madrid, Spain
10. Narayanan, S., et al.Applying database support for large scale data driven science in distributed environments. In: Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on grid computing (Grid 2003), 2003, Phoenix, Arizona.
11. Narayanan S., et al. Database support for data-driven scientific applications in the grid. Parallel Processing Letters 13 2 (2003) 245-271
12. Gauntt R.O., et al. MELCOR computer code manuals (1997), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
13. Buck B.R., and Hollingsworth J.K. An API for runtime code patching. The Journal of High Performance Computing Applications 14 4 (2000) 317-329
14. Gu W., et al. Falcon: on-line monitoring for steering parallel programs. Concurrency-Practice and Experience 10 9 (1998) 699-736
15. Vadhiyar S.S., and Dongarra J. SRS: a framework for developing malleable and migratable parallel applications for distributed systems. Parallel Processing Letters 13 2 (2003) 291-312
16. Plank J.S., et al. Memory exclusion: optimizing the performance of checkpointing systems. Software Practice & Experience 29 2 (1999) 125-142
17. Hastings S., et al. Distributed data management and integration framework: The Mobius Project. Proceedings of the Global Grid Forum 11 (GGF11) semantic grid applications workshop (2004) p. 20-38
18. Langella, S., et al., A distributed data management middleware for data-driven application systems. In: Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE international conference on cluster computing (Cluster 2004), 2004. p. 267-76.
19. Ibarra O.H., and Kim C.E. Heuristic algorithms for scheduling independent tasks on nonindentical processors. Journal of the ACM 24 2 (1977) 280-289
20. Kwok Y.K., and Ahmad I. Static scheduling algorithms for allocating directed task graphs to multiprocessors. ACM Computing Surveys 31 4 (1999) 406-471
21. Srinivasan S., et al. Characterization of backfilling strategies for parallel job scheduling (2002)
22. Kaya K., and Aykanat C. Iterative-improvement-based heuristics for adaptive scheduling of tasks sharing files on heterogeneous master-slave environments. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 17 (2006) 8
23. Vydyanathan, N., et al., Scheduling of tasks with batch-shared I/O on heterogeneous systems, in: Proceedings of 20th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS). 2006: Proceedings of the 20th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS). The 15th Heterogeneous Computing Workshop (HCW 2006), Rhodes, Greece.
24. Casanova H., et al. Heuristics for scheduling parameter sweep applications in grid environments (2000), IEEE Computer Society
25. Cooper K., et al. New grid scheduling and rescheduling methods in the GrADS Project (2004), IEEE Computer Society
26. Blythe J., et al. Task scheduling strategies workflow-based applications in grids (2005), IEEE Press
27. Yu J., and Buyya. R. A novel architecture for realizing grid workflow using tuple spaces (2004), IEEE Computer Society
28. Deelman E., et al. Pegasus: mapping scientific workflows onto the grid (2004), Springer
29. Kondo D., Chien A.A., and Casanova. H. Resource management for rapid application turnaround on enterprise desktop grids (2004), IEEE Computer Society
30. Raadt K., v.d. Y., Yang, and Casanova H. Practical divisible load scheduling on grid platforms with APST-DV (2005), IEEE Computer Society
31. Veeravalli B., Ghose D., and Robertazzi T.G. Divisible load theory: a new paradigm for load scheduling in distributed systems. Cluster Computing 6 1 (2003) 7-17
32. Casanova H., et al. The AppLeS parameter sweep template: user-level middleware for the grid. Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Supercomputing Conference (SC2000) (2000), ACM Press/IEEE Computer Society Press
33. Giersch, A., Y. Robert, and F. Vivien. Scheduling tasks sharing files from distributed repositories. 2004.
34. Giersch A., Robert Y., and Vivien. F. Scheduling tasks sharing files on heterogeneous master-slave platforms (2004), IEEE Computer Society Press
35. Khanna G., et al. A hypergraph partitioning based approach for scheduling of tasks with batch-shared I/O (2005)
36. Fletcher C.D., and Schultz R.R. RELAP5/MOD3 user guidelines (1992), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
37. MySQL Database, 〈http://www.mysql.com/〉.
38. Hakobyan A. Severe accident analysis using dynamic accident progression event trees (2006), The Ohio State University
39. Vierow K., et al. Severe accident analysis of a PWR station blackout with the MELCOR, MAAP4, and SCDAP/RELAP5 codes. Nuclear Engineering and Design 234 (2004) 129-145
40. Hakobyan, A., et al. A methodology for generating dynamic accident progression event trees for level 2 PRA. In: PHYSOR 2006.
41. Hakobyan A., et al. Treatment of uncertainties in modeling the failure of major RCS components in severe accident analysis. Transactions of the American Nuclear Society 94 (2006) 177-179
42. Liao Y., and Vierow K. MELCOR analysis of steam generator tube creep rupture in station blackout severe accident. Nuclear Technology 152 3 (2005) 302-313
43. Majumdar S. Prediction of structural integrity of steam generator tubes under severe accident conditions. Nuclear Engineering and Design 194 (1999) 31-55
44. Larson F.R., and Miller J. A time temperature relationship for rupture and creep stress. Transactions of the ASME (1952) 765-775
45. Eride, S.A., et al., Reevaluation of station blackout risks at nuclear power plants, analysis of loss of offsite power events: 1986-2004, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
46. Raughley W.S., and Lanik G.F. Operating experience assessment-effects of grid events on nuclear power plant performance (2003), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
47. Henrie J.O., and Postma A.K. Lessons learned from hydrogen generation and burning during TMI-2 event (1987), Rockwell International, Rockwell Hanford Operations
48. Kumar, R.K., et al., Carbon monoxide-hydrogen combustion characteristics in severe accident containment conditions. 2000, Nuclear Energy Agency
49. Le Chatelier H., and Boudouard O. On the flammable limits of gas mixtures. Bulletin de la Societe Chimique (1898)
50. Coward, H.F. and G.W. Jones, Limits of flammability of gases and vapors. 1952, Bulletin 503, Bureau of Mines.
51. Bradfute J.O., and Paulsen M.P. Hydrogen flammability model based on present data. Proceedings of the workshop on the impact of hydrogen on water reactor safety vol. III (1981)
52. 2-air-steam mixtures (1993), Sandia National Laboratories
53. Pratt, W.T., et al. An approach for estimating the frequencies of various containment failure modes and bypass events. U.S. NRC report, 2004
54. Koundy V., et al. Simplified modeling of a PWR reactor pressure vessel head lower head failure in the case of a severe accident. Nuclear Engineering and Design (2005) 835-843
55. Pilch M.M., Yan H., and Theofanous T.G. The probability of containment failure by direct containment heating in Zion. Nuclear Engineering and Design (1996) 1-36
56. 2 with water using TROI facility. Nuclear Engineering and Design (2002) 97-110
57. 2 with water using TROI facility. 213 (2002) 97-110
58. Mitchell D.E., Corradini M.L., and Tarbell W.W. . Intermidiate scale steam explosion phenomena: experiments and analysis, Sandia National Laboratories.
59. Klein R., et al. Models and criteria for prediction of deflagration-to-detonation transition (DDT) in hydrogen-air-steam systems under severe accident conditions (2000), Research Center Jülich, Germany
60. Studer E., and Galon P. Hydrogen combustion loads-PLEXUS calculations. Nuclear Engineering and Design (1997) 119-134
61. Breitung W., and REdlinger R. Containment pressure loads from hydrogen combustion in unmitigated severe accidents. Nuclear Technology 111 (1995) 395-419
62. Pilch M.M., Allen M.D., and Klamerus E.W. Resolution of the Direct Containment Heating Issue for All Westinghouse Plants With Large Dry Containments or 211 Subatmospheric Containments, NUREG/CR6338 (1996), Nuclear Regulatory Commission
63. SCDAP/RELAP5-3D Code Manual (2003), Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory