Details zur Publikation |
| Kategorie | Textpublikation |
| Referenztyp | Zeitschriften |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2026.106509 |
Lizenz ![]() |
|
| Titel (primär) | Comparative analysis of uncertainty quantification methods in safety assessments for high-level nuclear waste disposal systems |
| Autor | Bjorge, M.; Chaudhry, A.A.; Kurgyis, K.; Rühaak, W.; Nagel, T. |
| Quelle | International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences |
| Erscheinungsjahr | 2026 |
| Department | ENVINF |
| Band/Volume | 202 |
| Seite von | art. 106509 |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Topic | T5 Future Landscapes |
| Keywords | Uncertainties; Uncertainty quantification; Nuclear waste disposal; Safety assessments |
| Abstract | When
establishing a safety case for a high-level nuclear waste repository,
coupled thermal, hydraulic, mechanical and chemical (THMC) processes are
modelled to assess radionuclide transport and the integrity of
barriers. Modelling these processes requires numerous parameters, which
are all subject to uncertainty. However, complex and extensive
uncertainty quantification (UQ) methods can come at great computational
cost, especially when performed on multi-parametric problems. Therefore,
UQ methods are sought with manageable computational effort while still
capturing the relevant information to allow a meaningful interpretation
of the results. The
aim of this study is the comparison of three different UQ methods with
different levels of complexity and computational cost in terms of their
results. Radionuclide transport and THM-calculations are performed by
employing these methods to the French Callovo-Oxfordian claystone as a
reference material. The three methods include: (1) a UQ method based on
the complete sampling of input parameter distributions by a Monte Carlo
approach, (2) a UQ method based on a minimal number of data points, by
sampling quantiles of the input parameter distributions, as well as the
bounds of the distributions’ intervals, and (3) a UQ method that
involves a first-order second-moment reliability approach. The
results depict the different limitations and benefits of the UQ methods
analysed while highlighting that a comprehensive understanding of
parameter sensitivity and modelling approach are key to choosing the
appropriate UQ method. |
| Bjorge, M., Chaudhry, A.A., Kurgyis, K., Rühaak, W., Nagel, T. (2026): Comparative analysis of uncertainty quantification methods in safety assessments for high-level nuclear waste disposal systems Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 202 , art. 106509 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2026.106509 |
|
