PEBBED Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis of the CRP-5 PBMR DLOFC Transient Benchmark with the SUSA Code

Abstract

The need for a defendable and systematic uncertainty and sensitivity approach that conforms to the Code Scaling, Applicability, and Uncertainty (CSAU) process, and that could be used for a wide variety of software codes, was defined in 2008. The GRS (Gesellschaft für Anlagen und Reaktorsicherheit) company of Germany has developed one type of CSAU approach that is particularly well suited for legacy coupled core analysis codes, and a trial version of their commercial software product SUSA (Software for Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analyses) was acquired on May 12, 2010. This report summarized the results of the initial investigations performed with SUSA, utilizing a typical High Temperature Reactor benchmark (the IAEA CRP-5 PBMR 400MW Exercise 2) and the PEBBED-THERMIX suite of codes. The following steps were performed as part of the uncertainty and sensitivity analysis: 1. Eight PEBBED-THERMIX model input parameters were selected for inclusion in the uncertainty study: the total reactor power, inlet gas temperature, decay heat, and the specific heat capability and thermal conductivity of the fuel, pebble bed and reflector graphite. 2. The input parameters variations and probability density functions were specified, and a total of 800 PEBBED-THERMIX model calculations were performed, divided into 4 sets of 100 and 2 sets of 200 Steady State and Depressurized Loss of Forced Cooling (DLOFC) transient calculations each. 3. The steady state and DLOFC maximum fuel temperature, as well as the daily pebble fuel load rate data, were supplied to SUSA as model output parameters of interest. The 6 data sets were statistically analyzed to determine the 5% and 95% percentile values for each of the 3 output parameters with a 95% confidence level, and typical statistical indictors were also generated (e.g. Kendall, Pearson and Spearman coefficients). 4. A SUSA sensitivity study was performed to obtain correlation data between the input and output parameters, and to identify the primary contributors to the output data uncertainties. It was found that the uncertainties in the decay heat, pebble bed and reflector thermal conductivities were responsible for the bulk of the propagated uncertainty in the DLOFC maximum fuel temperature. It was also determined that the two standard deviation (2s) uncertainty on the maximum fuel temperature was between ±58oC (3.6%) and ±76oC (4.7%) on a mean value of 1604 oC. These values mostly depended on the selection of the distributions types, and not on the number of model calculations above the required Wilks criteria (a (95%,95%) statement would usually require 93 model runs).