0% found this document useful (0 votes)
13 views1 page

Deuterium Extraction Insights for NPCIL

The document contains a list of technical and operational questions related to NPCIL, including details about manpower, reactor design criteria, and incidents involving Instrumented Relief Valves (IRV). It also addresses emergency cooling systems, fuel management, and future planning for NPCIL. The questions indicate a focus on safety, efficiency, and operational integrity in nuclear reactor management.

Uploaded by

vikasyadav100
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
13 views1 page

Deuterium Extraction Insights for NPCIL

The document contains a list of technical and operational questions related to NPCIL, including details about manpower, reactor design criteria, and incidents involving Instrumented Relief Valves (IRV). It also addresses emergency cooling systems, fuel management, and future planning for NPCIL. The questions indicate a focus on safety, efficiency, and operational integrity in nuclear reactor management.

Uploaded by

vikasyadav100
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Name – Abhishek Kumar Gupta

1- What is the current sanctioned strength of NPCIL-HQs?


2- What is the total manpower of NPCIL?
3- Comparison of MWe to manpower between NPCIL and NTPC.
4- Why is an IRV (Instrumented Relief Valve) required?
5- What provisions exist to avoid over-pressurization in LWR or VVER-type
reactors?
6- What are the design criteria of the IRV?
7- What are the boxed-up logic conditions for the BCD (Bleed Condenser)?
8- Why was the boxed-up logic at 30 Kg/cm² BCD pressure provided in 220 MWe
reactors? Was this part of the initial BCD design?
9- Explain the Narora (220 MWe) light water injection incident during IRV
failure/malfunction.
10- What changes were made in BCD outlet temperature boxed-up sensing after
the KAPS event? What was the reason?
11- What is the set point of the BCD Relief Valve (RV)?
12- Why are there two different set points for the same Relief Valve (RV)?
13- What is the major reason for IRV malfunction?
14- What corrective actions have been taken to prevent this in 220 MWe
reactors?
15- Have there been any changes in the IRV design for 700 MWe reactors?
16- What are the ECCS (Emergency Core Cooling System) design acceptance
criteria?
17- What is meant by “coolable geometry” of the core?
18-
19- What corrective action should be taken if the ECCS TK-2 purge valve starts
passing during ECCS testing?
20- What will happen if NRV-13 of the D2O injection line starts passing during
ECCS testing?
21- What will happen if passing (leakage) is very high?
22- Is the pipeline between NRV-13 and ECCS TK-1 qualified for PHT pressure and
temperature?
23- What is the RV set point of ECCS TK-2?
24- What is the discharge burnup of a VVER-type reactor, and what is its average
enrichment?
25- What is the average enrichment of spent fuel discharged from a VVER
reactor?
26- Can this spent fuel be used in PHWR-type reactors?
27- How can we manage the excess reactivity in the same design of a PHWR-type
reactor? (Use of Boron in Moderator or burnable poison in fuel)
28- Suppose we use 1% enriched fuel in a PHWR — what will be the expected
discharge burnup (13–14K MWD/Tn-U)?
29- Why are we achieving higher discharge burnup compared to LWR-type
reactors in terms of enrichment to discharge burnup?
30- In PHWR-type reactors, what is the contribution of plutonium (Pu) to the total
energy produced in an equilibrium core?
31- Some other questions were also asked from Recruitment, future target and
Succession planning of NPCIL from my recommendation.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Having two different set points for the same Relief Valve (RV) allows for a tiered pressure relief strategy. This ensures gradual pressure management and provides a secondary safety mechanism should the primary set point fail or be insufficient. The primary set point is typically for standard operation conditions to relieve unexpected pressure increases, while the secondary set point acts as a safeguard to protect system integrity in more extreme scenarios .

To avoid over-pressurization in Light Water Reactors (LWR) or VVER-type reactors, several provisions are integrated. These include relief valves, like the Instrumented Relief Valve (IRV), which activate to release excess pressure. Additionally, control rod systems and emergency cooling systems are part of the safety protocols to manage pressure by maintaining core temperature within safe limits. These systems ensure the reactor operates within its design parameters, thereby preventing dangerous pressure build-ups .

Using 1% enriched fuel in a Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor (PHWR) would increase discharge burnup due to the higher initial content of fissile material. This results in more efficient fuel utilization and potentially higher energy extraction over the fuel's lifetime. A high discharge burnup translates to reduced fuel costs and waste generation per unit of energy produced. However, it also requires careful management to ensure reactor stability and safety throughout the fuel cycle .

Excess reactivity in a PHWR can be effectively managed by incorporating boron in the moderator, which absorbs neutrons and thus decreases reactivity. Alternatively, burnable poisons like gadolinium can be used in fuel to moderate reactivity over the fuel life by absorbing neutrons. These methods ensure the reactor remains critical and stable throughout the fuel cycle, preventing power fluctuations and improving operational safety .

Achieving higher discharge burnup in PHWRs compared to LWRs offers several benefits, including improved fuel efficiency and reduced waste per unit of energy generated. This is due to the high utilization of fissile material in the reactor. However, potential issues may arise concerning fuel integrity and the need for careful management to prevent reactor instability. Additionally, higher burnup challenges fuel reprocessing and waste management infrastructures due to the increased radiation hazard and heat generation .

The design criteria for an Instrumented Relief Valve (IRV) include its ability to open at sufficiently low pressure points to prevent overpressurization and facilitate testing during normal operation. The IRV must be reliable, with sufficient redundancy to ensure it performs as intended without failure. It is also important for the IRV to integrate with control systems to ensure its operation is adequately monitored. This is important because an IRV acts as a safety component that prevents the build-up of excessive pressure in the reactor, thereby averting potential accidents .

If the ECCS TK-2 purge valve starts passing during testing, immediate corrective actions include shutting down the test to prevent potential system imbalance or damage. Investigation of the valve integrity is necessary to determine any leaks or malfunctions. Repairs or replacement should be conducted to ensure the valve effectively seals during normal and emergency operations. Verifying the performance of associated control systems is also recommended to prevent future occurrences .

'Coolable geometry' refers to the physical arrangement and condition of the reactor core, such that it remains amenable to effective cooling even in accident scenarios. This concept ensures that, during adverse situations, the reactor geometry allows for sufficient coolant flow to prevent overheating and potential core damage. Maintaining a coolable geometry is critical to prevent severe outcomes such as core meltdown, ensuring reactor safety and reliability .

If the Non-Return Valve (NRV-13) of the D2O injection line starts passing during ECCS testing, there could be unintended mixing of heavy water with other reactor systems or environments. This could affect the integrity and effectiveness of the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) as designed and lead to potential safety concerns due to loss of heavy water, which is critical for reactor control and cooling. Immediate investigation and corrective measures are necessary to prevent operational disruptions and maintain safety standards .

After the KAPS event, changes in the Bleed Condenser (BCD) outlet temperature boxed-up sensing were implemented to enhance safety and reliability. These modifications involved adjusting the set points and improving the monitoring systems to ensure proper safety valve operation and early detection of abnormal temperature trends. The rationale was to prevent incidents arising from temperature deviations, ensuring the condensers function correctly under varying operational conditions .

You might also like