This paper proposes a methodology for applying a multiobjective optimization to risk-based inservice testing with robustness. The multiobjective optimization is applied to solve the tradeoff between maintenance costs and unavailability of a standby system and then assist in determining the robust solution. In order to obtain the most robust solution, a decision-making method for the multiobjective optimization in the viewpoint of robustness is proposed. The risk ranking and revising risk-ranking processes are then used to assist in finding the most optimal surveillance test interval based on risk management. The applicability of the proposed methodology is confirmed by case studies for a standby system of a simplified high-pressure injection system in a nuclear power plant’s pressurized water reactor. The results showed that the proposed methodology provides an effective scheme to achieve the most optimal surveillance test interval based on risk and robustness.

Keywords:
nuclear reactor maintenance, testing, fission reactor design, nuclear power stations, risk analysis, pressure vessels, optimisation, Risk-Based Inservice Testing, Multiobjective Optimization, Surveillance Test Interval, Unavailability, Maintenance Costs, Probabilistic Risk Analysis
Topics:
Pareto optimization, Risk, In-service testing, Surveillance, Maintenance
1.
USNRC, 1998, “Regulatory Guide 1.177—An Approach for Plant-Specific, Risk-Informed Decision Making,” Technical Specifications.
2.
Martorell
,
S.
,
Carlos
,
S.
,
Sanchez
,
A.
, and
Serradell
,
V.
,
2000
, “
Constrained Optimization of Test Intervals Using Steady-State Genetic Algorithm
,”
Reliability Eng. Sys. Safety
,
67
(
3
), pp.
215
–
232
.
3.
Munoz
,
A.
,
Martorell
,
S.
, and
Serradell
,
V.
,
1997
, “
Genetic Algorithms in Optimizing Surveillance and Maintenance of Components
,”
Reliability Eng. Sys. Safety
,
57
(
2
), pp.
107
–
120
.
4.
Vaurio
,
J. K.
,
1995
, “
Optimization of Test and Maintenance Intervals Based on Risk and Cost
,”
Reliability Eng. Sys. Safety
,
49
(
1
), pp.
23
–
36
.
5.
Deb, K., 2001, Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms, Wiley, New York.
6.
American Petroleum Institute (API), 2000, “Risk-Based Inspection Base Resource Document,” API 581, API publications.
7.
An ASME Research Report, 1991, “Risk-Based Inspection—Development of Guidelines: Volume 1, General Document,” CTRD-Vol-20-1, The American Society of Mechanical Engineer (ASME).
8.
Duthie
,
J. C.
,
Robertson
,
M. I.
,
Clayton
,
A. M.
, and
Lidbury
,
D. P. G.
,
1998
, “
Risk-Based Approaches to Ageing and Maintenance Management
,”
Nucl. Eng. Des.
,
184
(
1
), pp.
27
–
38
.
9.
Khan
,
F. I.
, and
Haddara
,
M. M.
,
2003
, “
Risk-Based Maintenance (RBM): A Quantitative Approach for Maintenance/Inspection Scheduling and Planning
,”
J. Loss Prev. Process Ind.
,
16
(
6
), pp.
561
–
573
.
10.
Nilsson
,
F.
,
2003
, “
Risk-Based Approach to Plant Life Management
,”
Nucl. Eng. Des.
,
221
(
1–3
), pp.
293
–
300
.
11.
Stewart
,
M. G.
,
2001
, “
Reliability-Based Assessment of Ageing Bridges Using Risk Ranking and Life Cycle Cost Decision Analyses
,”
Reliability Eng. Sys. Safety
,
74
(
3
), pp.
263
–
273
.
12.
An ASME Research Report, 1996, “Risk Based Inservice Testing, Development of Guidelines: Light Water Reactor (Lwr) Nuclear Power Plant Components,” ASME International.
13.
Balkey
,
K. R.
,
Art
,
R. J.
, and
Bosnak
,
R. J.
,
1998
, “
ASME Risk Based Inservice Inspection and Testing: An Outlook to the Future
,”
Risk Anal
,
18
(
4
), pp.
407
–
421
.
14.
Van der Borst
,
M.
, and
Schoonakker
,
H.
,
2001
, “
An Overview of PSA Importance Measures
,”
Reliability Eng. Sys. Safety
,
72
(
3
), pp.
241
–
245
.
15.
Harunuzzaman
,
M.
, and
Aldemir
,
T.
,
1995
, “
Optimization of Standby Safety System Maintenance Schedules in Nuclear Power Plants
,”
Nucl. Technol.
,
113
, pp.
354
–
367
.
Copyright © 2005
 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.