Proposal of uncertainty analysis methodology for L1PRA using Markov state-transition model

References

• Nuclear Regulation Authority, Operational guidelines for Enhancing the safety of practical Power Reactors, Mar. 2020. [in Japanese]
   Google Scholar
• Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation (NUPEC). “The report of establishment of Level 1 PSA method of ABWR plant at Power operation (1998), Japan: Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation; 1999. INS/M98–26. [in Japanese]
   Google Scholar
• Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization (JNES). “The report of establishment of Level 1 PSA method for PWR plants at Power operation = 3-loop PWR plant with/without accident Management Countermeasures=,” Japan: Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization; 2009, JNES/SAE08–013. [in Japanese]
   Google Scholar
• U.S.NRC. Dynamic reliability modeling of digital Instrumentation and control systems for Nuclear reactor probabilistic risk assessments (NUREG/CR-6942). U.S.NRC; Oct 2007.
   Google Scholar
• U.S.NRC. Traditional probabilistic risk Assessment methods for digital systems (NUREG/CR-6962). U.S.NRC; Oct 2008.
   Google Scholar
• U.S.NRC, A benchmark implementation of two dynamic methodologies for the reliability modeling of digital Instrumentation and control systems (NUREG/CR-6985), Sept. 2009.
   Google Scholar
• U.S.NRC. Development of a statistical testing approach for quantifying safety-related digital system on demand failure probability (NUREG/CR-7234). U.S.NRC; Dec 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Torkey H, Saber AS, Shaat MK, et al. Bayesian belief-based model for reliability improvement of the digital reactor protection system. Nucl Sci Tech. 2020 [Oct. 2020];31(10):101. doi: 10.1007/s41365-020-00814-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S.NRC. Developing a Bayesian belief network model for quantifying the probability of software failure of a protection system (NUREG/CR-7233). U.S.NRC; Jan 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Seop Son K, Kim DH, Kim CH, et al. Study on the systematic approach of Markov modeling for dependability analysis of complex fault-tolerant features with voting logics. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2016 [Feb. 2016];150:44–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulba Y, et al. Classification and research of the reactor protection instrumentation and control system functional safety Markov models in anormal operation Mode . Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on ICT in Education, Research and Industrial Applications: Integration, Harmonization and Knowledge Transfer; 2016 June 21-24; Kyiv: Ukraine.
   Google Scholar
• Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation (NUPEC). “The report of establishment of Level 1 PSA method of ABWR plant at Power operation (1999),” Japan: Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation; 2000, INS/M99–29. [in Japanese]
   Google Scholar
• Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation (NUPEC). “The report of establishment of Level 1 PSA method for internal events at Power operation = reliability analysis of digital reactor protection system = (2002) Japan: Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation; INS/M02–29. [in Japanese]
   Google Scholar
• Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization (JNES). “The report of establishment of Level 1 PSA method for internal events at Power operation = improvement of reliability analysis of digital reactor protection system (PWR) =,” Japan: Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization; 2007, JNES/SAE07–029. [in Japanese]
   Google Scholar
• Authen S, Holmberg JE. Reliability analysis of digital systems in a probabilistic risk analysis for Nuclear Power plants. Nucl Eng Technol. 2012 June;44(5):471–482. doi: 10.5516/NET.03.2012.707
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piljugin E, Authén S, Holmberg JE. “Proposal for the taxonomy of failure modes of digital system hardware for PSA,” 11th International Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference & The Annual European Safety and Reliability Conference; 2012 June; Helsinki, Finland. [ CD-ROM]
   Google Scholar
• Chu TL, Yue M, Postma W. “A Summary of taxonomies of digital system failure modes provided by the DigRel task group.” 11th International Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference & The Annual European Safety and Reliability Conference; 2012 June; Helsinki, Finland. [ CD-ROM]
   Google Scholar
• Muta H, Muramatsu K. Quantitative modeling of digital reactor protection system using Markov state-transition model. J Nucl Sci Technol. 2014;51(9):1073–1086. doi: 10.1080/00223131.2014.906331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muta H. Application of Markov state-transition model to reliability analysis of 2-out-of-4 reactor trip system. Trans At Energy Soc Jpn. 2015;14(1):25–39. doi: 10.3327/taesj.J14.011
   Google Scholar
• MUTA H, FURUYA O, MURAMATSU K. Proposal of PRA methodology considering state transitions and time-dependent failure rates of components. Transactions Of The Atomic Energy Society Of Japan. 2016;15(2):70–83. doi: 10.3327/taesj.J15.004
   Google Scholar
• HARUHARA M, MUTA H, Ohtori Y et al. Proposal of quantification method of dynamic system reliability model of digital RPS using Markov state-transition model. Journal Of Nuclear Science And Technology. 2023 Feb;60(9):1154–1167. doi: 10.1080/00223131.2023.2169379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S.NRC. Guidance on the Treatment of uncertainties associated with PRAs in risk-informed decision making, final report (NUREG-1855, revision 1). U.S.NRC; Mar 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Atomic Energy Society of Japan. A standard for Procedures of probabilistic safety Assessment of Nuclear Power plants during Power operation. Japanese: AESJ; 2022.
   Google Scholar
• OECD/NEA/CSNI Failure modes taxonomy for reliability Assessment of digital Instrumentation and control systems for probabilistic Risk analysis. OECD/NEA/CSNI/R; 2014.
   Google Scholar