AP1000与传统压水堆物项分级的比较与分析
详细信息 本馆镜像全文    |  推荐本文 | | 获取馆网全文
摘要
通过对AP1000技术与传统压水堆物项的安全分级、抗震分类、规范等级和质量保证分级4种分级的方法、依据、参考标准和适用范围等进行比较分析,得出AP1000各种分级既保证安全,又经济合理,而且提出AP1000技术国产化过程中,应制定符合国情的质量保证分级方法和相应的质量保证要求。
The comparison and analysis for the safety classification,seismic category,code classification and QA classification between AP1000 and traditional PWR were presented.The safety could be guaranteed and the construction and manufacture costs could be cut down since all sorts of AP1000 classifications. It is suggested that the QA classification and the QA requirements correspond to the national conditions should be drafted in the process of AP1000 domestication.
引文
[1]国家核安全局.核电厂设计安全规定,HAF102.1991.
    [2]American Nuclear Society.Nuclear Safety Criteria for the Design of Stationary Pressurized Water Reactor Plants.1988.
    [3]American Nuclear Society.Risk-informed Categorization and Treatment of Structures,Systems and Components for Nuclear Power Reactors,10CFR50.69.2002.
    [4]白晋华.确定论分析方法和概率安全评价方法的比较.核工程研究与设计,2004(51):23-26.
    [5]国家地震局.GB 50267—97核电厂抗震设计规范.1997.
    [6]U.S.NRC.Seismic Design Classification,Regulatory Guide 1. 29-2007.2007.
    [7]U.S.NRC.Earthquake Engineering Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants,10CFR50 Appendix S.1998.
    [8]U.S.NRC.Quality Group Classification and Standards for WaterStream and Radioactive-Waste-Containing Components of Nuclear Power Plants,RG1.26.2007.
    [9]国家核安全局.核电厂质量保证安全规定,HAF003.1991.
    [10]国家核安全局.核电厂质量保证大纲的制定,HAD003/ 01.1986.
    [11]ASME.Rules for Construction of Nuclear Facility Components, BPVC-Ⅲ.2004.

版权所有:© 2023 中国地质图书馆 中国地质调查局地学文献中心