Fluoride-Cooled High-Temperature Pebble-Bed Reactor Reference Plant Model Updates
This work presents the latest improvements to, and investigations performed with, the Fluoride-Cooled High-Temperature Pebble-Bed Reactor reference plant models for the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. These models, developed with the Comprehensive Reactor Analysis Bundle, or BlueCRAB, serve as the foundation for the future development of detailed design evaluation models based on license applications. BlueCRAB is the code suite proposed for non-light-water reactor systems safety analyses, and it incorporates various simulation tools developed by the Nuclear Energy Advance Modeling and Simulation program, including the Griffin code for reactor physics, the Pronghorn and SAM codes for core thermal fluids, the BISON code for solid conduction and fuel performance, and the SAM code for system analysis. The primary objective of this work is to assess the level of readiness of BlueCRAB for modeling fluoride-cooled high-temperature pebble-bed reactors. We first developed numerical models in BlueCRAB that include the key physics for this technology, ensuring an adequate level of fidelity for modeling the core performance during accident scenarios. This was followed by simulation of transient scenarios, two loss-of-forced-cooling events (one protected and one unprotected), and two control rod withdrawal events (one delayed and one prompt supercritical reactivity insertion). The analysis includes comparisons between the 2-D thermal fluid porous media models in Pronghorn and SAM, comparisons between coupled Pronghorn-Griffin and coupled SAM-Griffin models for two loss-of-forced cooling events and one control rod withdrawal event, and comparisons between SAM single-solve and domain-overlapping approaches for multi-scale thermal fluid coupling. In addition, we performed comparisons between 3-D, 2-D, and 0-D neutronic models for the two control rod withdrawal scenarios with Pronghorn-Griffin. The results show that the BlueCRAB models led to physically intuitive solutions for the scenarios examined. The changes in the various scalar and vector fields such as the neutron flux, power, temperatures, densities, pressures, and velocities are all within the expected ranges, and their distributions can be explained from the system response of the transients and the geometric and material variations. Several comparisons suggest that the porous media models in Pronghorn and SAM can lead to similar solutions, even though they are based on different methodologies. The simulations demonstrate that there are differences between the various levels of fidelity, and it is advisable to have flexible tools that can cover the breadth and depth of needs that may arise in future technical evaluations. We believe that BlueCRAB’s capabilities represent a significant asset for confirmatory analyses aimed at resolving important safety questions.