Safety margin determination of the nuclear power plant reactor pressure vessel with taking into account warm pre-stress effect


  • Mykola Kryshchuk National Technical University of Ukraine «Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute», Ukraine
  • Oleksii Ishchenko LLC "IPP-Centre", Ukraine



Warm pre-stress (WPS), brittle strength, nuclear accidents, extension of NPP service life, finite element model, stress intensity factor


In case for nuclear power plants long-term service operation over their design life, it is necessary to calculate reactor pressure vessel (RPV) strength and durability acknowledgment (static strength, strength under cyclic and seismic loads, brittle fracture resistance (BFR) include) the as one of the most important NPP structure. Usually, according to the brittle strength assessment, RPV resource is determined, that is, time of its subsequent safe operation. The purpose of this work is assessed BFR RPV at potential emergency accidents (EA) using the Ukrainian warm pre-stress approach. The calculated thermohydrodynamic parameters at EA were used to calculate the stress-strain state of the developed reactor finite element (FE) model. For researching, the most indicative scenarios were selected: where reactor is cooled at a high pressure. In RPV FE model cracks are modeled at the most dangerous places - welds and nozzle. Stress intensity factor (SIF) distribution along crack front and temperature for the most dangerous accidents in terms of BFR are presented in figures. Brittle strength condition is ensured during the nuclear power plants service operation for up to 60 years, which is more than 1.5 times more than the oldest Ukrainian power plant with VVER-1000. For some emergency accidents, warm pre-stress really significantly increased RPV safety margin, but for the most dangerous accidents, the results are the same as without taking into account WPS.

Author Biography

Oleksii Ishchenko, LLC "IPP-Centre"

Аспірант Інженер-механік 2 категорії


  1. No. SSG-25. Periodic safety review for nuclear power plants: specific safety guide, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vien-na, 2012, 106 p.
  2. PNAE G-7-002-86. Standarts of strength calculation for equipment and pipelines of nuclear power plants (in Russian). Moscow: Energoatomizdat, 1989, 524 p.
  3. V. Popov, V. Mileikovskyi and O. Tryhub, " Expert express assessment of the impact of heat and mass transfer processes on the residual life of the WWER-1000 reactor vessel due to metal embrittlement", Ventilation, Illumination and Heat Gas Supply, vol. 41, pp. 39–49, 2022. doi: 10.32347/2409-2606.2022.41.39-49.
  4. G. Qian et al., “Effect of non-uniform reactor cooling on fracture and constraint of a reactor pressure vessel”, Fatigue and Frac-ture of Engineering vessel, vol. 41(7), pp. 1559–1575, 2018. doi:
  5. M. Kryshchuk and A. Oryniak, “Temperature margin estimation of brittle fracture for reactor pressure vessel during emergency mode”, Mechanics and Advanced Technologies, vol. 3(75), pp. 56–63, 2015.
  6. L.N. Nedelchev et al., “VVER-1000 reactor pressure vessel lifetime assessment according to criteria of brittle fracture using results of surveillance specimens tests”, (in Russian), Questions of atomic science and technology. series: physics of nuclear reactors, vol. 3, pp. 69–78, 2018.
  7. M. Zarazovskii et al., “Impact of the Outer Surface Air Cooling and WPS Approaches on the Brittle Fracture Margin of WWER RPV”, ASME 2020 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference, vol. 6, 2020. doi: 10.1115/PVP2020-21736
  8. M. Zarazovskii et al., “Comprehensive analysis of the WPS effect perfomed for the purposes of RPV long-term operation”, SMiRT-26 26th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, July 10-15 2022.
  9. IAEA-TECDOC-1627. Pressurized Thermal Shock in Nuclear Power Plants: Good Practices for Assessment: Deterministic Evaluation for the Integrity of Reactor Pressure Vessel, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 2010, 217 p.
  10. NUREG/CR-5535, RELAP5/MOD3 Code Manual, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, vol. 5, rev. 1, 293 p., 1995.
  11. IAEA-EBP-WWER-08. “Guidelines on pressurized thermal shock analysis for WWER Nuclear Power Plants”, International Atomic Energy Agency Vienna International Centre, Vienna, 2006.
  12. IAEA-EBP-WWER-08. “IAEA-TECDOC-1627. Pressurized Thermal Shock in Nuclear Power Plants: Good Practices for As-sessment. Deterministic Evaluation for the Integrity of Reactor Pressure Vessel”, International Atomic Energy Agency Vienna International Centre, Vienna, 2010.
  13. SOU NAEK 158:2020 Ensuring technical safety. Technical requirements for the installation and safe operation of equipment and pipelines of nuclear power plants with VVER reactors, NAEC “ENERGOATOM”, 2020.
  14. Ansys 2018 Mechanical, Release 18.0, Help System, Coupled Field Analysis Guide, ANSYS, Inc.
  15. VERLIFE-2008. Unified Procedure for Lifetime Assessment of Components and Piping in WWER NPPs, “VERLIFE” Version 2008, Project co-funded by the European Commission under the Euratom Research and Training Programme on Nuclear En-ergy within the Sixth Framework Programme, vol. 42 2008.
  16. A.Ya. Krasovskii et al., “Strength assessment of the NPP pipelines with account for its actual state by the computer complex 3D PipeMaster,” in: Service Life and Safety of Components, Structures, and Machines”, Project Paton Electric Welding Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, pp. 171–177, Kyiv 2006.
  17. I.V. Orinyak et al., “Appointment of a stress-strained mill at the pipeline crossing at the end of repair work”, Strength of materi-als, vol. 5, 2009.



How to Cite

M. Kryshchuk and O. Ishchenko, “Safety margin determination of the nuclear power plant reactor pressure vessel with taking into account warm pre-stress effect”, Mech. Adv. Technol., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 246–253, Dec. 2022.