Engineering Safety Through Partnership: Curtiss- Wright’s Approach to Reactor Protection Systems
As the global nuclear sector advances new reactor designs and next-generation power plants, the importance of robust safety systems remains paramount. For Curtiss- Wright, supporting these programs means more than simply supplying hardware, it involves working closely with reactor developers to design and integrate critical protection technologies from the earliest stages of plant development.
Among the most important systems in a nuclear plant are the Reactor Protection Systems, typically Primary and Secondary systems with diverse technologies. Together, they form key backbone of a nuclear plant’s defense-in-depth safety
architecture, providing
automatic protective actions during design-basis events, initiating responses such as reactor shutdown, emergency core cooling, and system isolation when required.
Curtiss-Wright’s role in developing such systems typically begins during the early requirements and concept design phases of a nuclear program. At this stage, the company works with customers to define system architectures, capture technical requirements, and ensure that safety platforms align with the wider plant design and regulatory expectations.
A key aspect of our approach is the use of proven, in- service technology. By drawing on established, safety platforms from our operational portfolio, Curtiss-Wright aims to deliver highly reliable protection systems while reducing development
risk. These platforms
incorporate sensor measurement devices, logic solvers, actuators, and reactor trip mechanisms designed to support the demanding performance requirements of nuclear safety applications.
In typical implementations, our platform is configured as a Class 1 safety system, responsible for initiating
automatic protective actions when plant parameters move outside defined operating limits. Our platform is modular so the same base hardware can be deployed in lower class applications, such as accident management or balance of plant systems, simplifying maintenance, support operational familiarity, and reduce through-life costs.
What distinguishes Curtiss-Wright’s involvement in these programs is the collaborative model it adopts with reactor developers. Rather than operating within a traditional supplier relationship, the company works as part of an integrated engineering team alongside its customers.
This partnership model emphasizes early engagement and shared technical responsibility. Cross-functional teams from both organizations work together to evaluate design options, understand system-level implications, and resolve engineering challenges as the program evolves. Such early collaboration helps identify potential issues sooner and supports more efficient design decisions.
Digital collaboration also plays an important role. Shared engineering environments allow teams to access common requirements sets, design models, interface documentation, and verification evidence. By maintaining a single authoritative dataset across organizations, program teams can streamline design reviews and simplify regulatory interactions.
Structured governance further supports these
partnerships. Joint working groups and program oversight mechanisms help coordinate engineering, commercial, and program management activities while ensuring that decisions remain aligned with both technical objectives and project milestones.
Through this collaborative approach, Curtiss-Wright aims to provide reactor developers with a reliable foundation for the protection and accident management systems that underpin safe and resilient nuclear power plant operation.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
