Main outcomes of the Phebus FPT1 uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in the EU-MUSA project
- Autori: Mascari F.; Bersano A.; Massone M.; Agnello G.; Coindreau O.; Beck S.; Tiborcz L.; Paci S.; Angelucci M.; Herranz L.E.; Bocanegra R.; Pontillon Y.; Berdai M.; Cherednichenko O.; Iskra A.; Nudi M.; Groudev P.; Petrova P.; Kretzschmar F.; Gabrielli F.; Kanglong Z.; Vileiniskis V.; Kaliatka T.; Kalilainen J.; Malicki M.; Gumenyuk D.; Vorobyov Y.; Kotsuba O.; Dejardin P.; Di Giuli M.; Thomas R.; Ivanov I.V.; Giannetti F.; D'Onorio M.; Caruso G.; Salay M.; Sevon T.
- Anno di pubblicazione: 2024
- Tipologia: Articolo in rivista
- OA Link: http://hdl.handle.net/10447/620551
Abstract
The Management and Uncertainties of Severe Accidents (MUSA) project was funded in HORIZON 2020 and is coordinated by CIEMAT (Spain). The project aims at consolidating a harmonized approach for the analysis of uncertainties and sensitivities associated with Severe Accidents (SAs) analysis, focusing on source term figures of merit. The Application of Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) Methods against Integral Experiments (AUQMIE – Work Package 4 (WP4)), led by ENEA (Italy), was devoted to apply and test UQ methodologies adopting the internationally recognized PHEBUS FPT1 test. FPT1 was chosen to test UQ methodologies because, even though it is a simplified SA scenario, it was representative of the in-vessel phase of a severe accident initiated by a break in the cold leg of a PWR primary circuit. WP4 served as a platform to identify and discuss the issues encountered in the application of UQ methodol ogies to SA analyses (e.g. discuss the UQ methodology, perform the coupling between the SA codes and the UQ tools, define the results post-processing methods, etc.). The purpose of this paper is to describe the MUSA PHEBUS FPT1 uncertainty application exercise with the related specifications and the methodologies used by the partners to perform the UQ exercise. The main outcomes and lessons learned of the analysis are: scripting was in general needed for the SA code and uncertainty tool coupling and to have more flexibility; particular attention should be devoted to the proper choice of the input uncertain parameters; outlier values of figures of merit should be carefully analyzed; the computational time is a key element to perform UQ in SA; the large number of uncertain input parameters may complicate the interpretation of correlation or sensitivity analysis; there is the need for a statistically solid handling of failed calculations.