Left:


The Borssele nuclear power plant has already seen its life extended Photo credit: EPZ


The case for lifetime extension focuses on the operator evidencing that they have identified and are safely managing any ageing effects in systems, structures, and components. Furthermore, it should confirm that the operational, structural and environmental parameters and conditions have not deteriorated and that risks to individuals and the environment have not increased. Safety sits at the heart of any lifetime extension plan and within their revised Safety Case, operators should consider any new or escalated levels of risk, hazard, or new standards that have been introduced. It is also important to consider that the Safety Case will be constantly evolving as equipment is replaced after reaching the end of its original design life. In establishing a safety case nuclear plant operators have


to consider several areas while establishing the evidential case for extending the lifespan of their nuclear plant operations.


Among these considerations, the role of modelling, simulation and seismic walkdowns to support nuclear risk assessments are important factors. For instance, by using Finite Element Analysis (FEA), the behaviour of structures, plants and equipment can be studied when subjected to both normal operating (day-to-day) design loadings and extreme hazards such as seismic, weather impact and blast loads. These include linear and non-linear approaches and analysis methodologies. Seismic walkdowns are also invaluable in this


assessment process, providing a real time review of the facility, its infrastructure and the plant and equipment in its current condition and location. This is important as it can take account of any variations from concept, design or installation drawings or references and assesses the true condition, including material degradation and damage. Additionally, the seismic walkdown review enables the identification and consideration of potential interactions with adjacent plants and equipment that could occur during seismic events, which might not be considered by a desktop-based assessment.


Seismic walkdown Both FEA and seismic walkdown processes can be used to look at new Installations where operators should provide detailed design analysis and assessments for any new structures, cranes or plant and equipment. It is important to demonstrate that existing structures and plants have been assessed for the potential impact of new hazards or loadings that could impact the safety case.


Operators should therefore consider structural


assessment and substantiation against static and dynamic load cases, including blast, seismic and other natural hazards, such as climate change impacts. In addition, the design of structural elements,


connections and retrofit solutions to mitigate structural vulnerabilities should also be assessed along with the production of engineering substantiation calculations with technical specifications and drawings. Furthermore, the impact of new installations with respect


to existing structures, plant and equipment should also be assessed as well as an Independent Technical Assessment (ITA).


New and existing mechanical plant and equipment should be assessed against normal operations or extreme load cases as part of engineering substantiation. Review


areas should include: ● Facility walkdown assessments. ● Engineering calculations to substantiate equipment and support systems


● Design of retrofit solutions packages ● Stress and fatigue analysis of pipe systems. ● Analysis of pressurised systems ● Analysis of electrical supplies ● Equipment qualification utilising the Seismic


Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) Generic Implementation Procedure (GIP) ● Crane analysis and design review


Considering cranes in particular, operators should understand the potential vulnerabilities associated with their cranes by quantifying associated risks, reducing potential safety and operational impacts. By considering variances in loading conditions, a detailed analysis can take place to understand the integrity of the structure. Review


areas should include: ● Structural / mechanical stress analysis ● Seismic assessment with coupled structural assessment ● Dynamic loading ● Structural plastic deformation. ● Fatigue and stress condition analysis ● Design review against international codes of practice


Stating the Safety Case for extending the lifespan of a nuclear facility involves multiple complex processes involving every operational aspect of a plant. For those looking to extend the lifetime expectancy of a plant, having a clear, thought through plan utilising FEA and Seismic Walkdown methodologies, can be greatly beneficial. ■


www.neimagazine.com | July 2024 | 31


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