In this Mater thesis the main task is to create a typical design decisions for the low power nuclear station with RU RITM-200 inside, for 4 different locations. The basic points for the research were given by Rosatom Company during the internship. The general parameters for determination location were evaluated. The weight of importance of each parameter for choosing location and the relevance of the topic was defined by expert’s assessment method. The suggestion of 4 different design decisions were developed and performed for further implementation into Rosatom’s project work.

В данной работе основной задачей является создание архитектурного решения для атомной станции малой мощности с реакторной установкой РУ РИТМ-200 для 4 различных местоположения. Основные данные для исследования были получены во время стажировки в компании Росатом. Были выявлены главные параметры для выбора местоположения станции. Благодаря применению метода экспертных оценок была найдена степень важности каждого критерия при определении местоположения и актуальность исследования. В заключении предложены 4 варианта дизайна для атомной станции малой мощности в разных климатических зонах для дальнейшего внедрения в проекты компании Росатом.

• Introduction
• Chapter 1
  • 1.1 Common statements about SMR
  • 1.2 Overview of previous researches in nuclear plants architectural design experience
  • 1.3 Overview of nuclear regulations
  • 1.4 Overview of Rosatom project baseline
    • 1.4.5 Operating panel building:
    • 1.4.6 Transport airlock and storage building:
    • 1.4.7 Turbine compartment:
    • 1.4.8 Unit and standby diesel power plants (further on: SDPP):
    • 1.4.9 Metal clad switchgear
    • 1.4.10 Cooling towers
    • 1.4.11 Checkpoints and vehicular checkpoints
    • 1.4.12 SMR enclosure with RU RITM-200
    • 1.4.13 SMR territory with RU RITM-200
  • /
  • Chapter summary
• Chapter 2
  • 2.1 Steps of the research work on Architectural design of SMR's nuclear station
• /
  • 2.2 Location of SMR. Experimental method
  • 2.3 Expert assessment method for determination the position of SMR among all energy sources
  • 2.4 Expert assessment method for determination of criteria's importance for the SMR's architectural design
  • 2.5 Main characteristics of the areas for future SMR implementation
  • Chapter summary
• 3. Results
  • 3.1 Analytical results of the evaluation of Rosatom expert's assessment
    • 3.1.1 Results of the SMR’s and NPP’s assessments
    • 3.1.2 Results of the SMR’s and other energy source’s assessments
    • 3.1.3 Results of the weight of parameters of SMR’s architectural design
  • 3.2 Graphical results on the research of the SMR's architectural design
• 
  
• 
  (1)
• Conclusions
• References
• ANNEX 1
• ANNEX 2
• ANNEX 3
• ANNEX 4
• ANNEX 5
• 4. RISK ANALYSIS
  • 4.1 Terrorism
    • 1.1.1. Vulnerability of nuclear plants to attack
    • 1.1.2. Threat of terrorist attacks
• 6. CIVIL STRUCTURES
  • 6.1Foundation Types
  • 6.1.2 Piled Foundation
    • 6.1.3 Seismic isolated foundations
• 7. CIVIL STRUCTURE VISUALIZATION
  • 7.1 Machine and mechanisms visualization
  • 7.2 Decorative design
• ANNEX 6
• 2. CLIMATIC DEMANDS
• 3. REGULATION FOR COLOMBIA
  • 4.3. SEISMIC/ GROUND FAULTS
  • 4.4. HURRICANE / TSUNAMI
  • 4.5. AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT
  • 4.6. AIR AND WATER POLLUTION
• 5. LOGISTICS.
  • 5.1. ACCESS TO SMR LOCATION.
• ANNEX 7
• 1. LOCATION
• 2. CLIMATIC DEMANDS CHILE
• 3. REGULATION FOR CHILE
• 4. HAZARDS CHILE
  • a. SAFETY / TERRORISM
  • b. FLOODS
  • c. SEISMIC
  • d. HURRICANE
  • e. GROUND FAULTS / VOLCANOES
  • f. AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT
  • g. AIR AND WATER POLLUTION
• 5. LOGISTICS. (1)
• 6. SOIL AND GROUND PARAMETERS
• 7. FOUNDATION TYPES
• 8. TYPICAL STRUCTURES
• ANNEX 8