Username   Password       Forgot your password?  Forgot your username? 


Detector Layout and Detection Probability Analysis for Physical Protection Systems of Nuclear Power Plants in Virtual Environments

Volume 15, Number 4, April 2019, pp. 1255-1262
DOI: 10.23940/ijpe.19.04.p21.12551262

Junbo Wanga, Ming Yangb, and Yuxin Zhanga

aCollege of Nuclear Science and Technology, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin, 150001, China
bSchool of Electric Power, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510000, China

(Submitted on December 21, 2018; Revised on January 23, 2019; Accepted on February 20, 2019)


Based on the nuclear power plant environment and virtual reality engine Unreal Engine4, a simulation platform for physical protection systems is built in this paper. The virtual reality simulation method is used to simulate the layout of the detection and defense devices of the physical protection system of the nuclear power plant under the condition of the closest real environment. In order to improve the defense level of the physical protection system, the security system designer can be assisted to identify the weak links of the detection device layout scheme by analysing the effectiveness of the detection device.


References: 14

    1. D. L. Siazon Jr, “The Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material,” IAEA BULLETIN, Vol. 22, No. 3-4, pp. 57-62, 1980
    2. “Nuclear Security Recommendations on Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities,” International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Vienna, 2010
    3. C. L. Smith, “Understanding Concepts in the Defence in Depth Strategy,” in Proceedings of IEEE 37th Annual 2003 International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology, pp. 8-16, October 2003
    4. V. R. Nunes, L. Steven, and J. Ciuk, “A More Rigorous Framework for Security-in-Depth,” Journal of Applied Security Research, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 372-393, 2011
    5. M. Coole, J. Corkill, and A. Woodward, “Defence in Depth, Protection in Depth and Security in Depth: A Comparative Analysis Towards a Common Usage Language,” in Proceedings of Australian Security and Intelligence Conference, pp. 27-35, 2012
    6. M. L. Garcia, “Vulnerability Assessment of Physical Protection Systems,” Elsevier, 2005
    7. H. A. Bennett, “EASI Approach to Physical Security Evaluation,” Sandia Lab. Albuquerque, NM, USA, Tech. Rep. SAND-76-0500, 1977
    8. R. A. AI-Ayat, T. D. Cousins, and E. R. Hoover, “ASSESS Update–Current Status and Future Developments,” Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1990
    9. M. J. Hicks, M. S. Snell, J. S. Sandoval, and C. S. Potter, “Physical Protection Systems-Cost and Performance Analysis: A Case Study,” IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 9-13, April 1999
    10. S. S. Jang, S. W. Kwak, H. S. Yoo, J. S. Kim, and W. K. Yoon, “The Tile-Map based Vulnerability Assessment Code of a Physical Protection System: SAPE (Systematic Analysis of Protection Effectiveness),” 2008
    11. Z. Bowen, “Research on the Effectiveness Analysis Technology of Nuclear Power Plant Physical Protection System in Virtual Environment,” Harbin Engineering University, Harbin, 2018
    12. P. Byrne, “Application Firewalls in a Defence-in-Depth Design,” Network Security, Vol. 2006, No. 9, pp. 9-11, 2006
    13. R. Nunes-Vaz, S. Lord, and J. Ciuk, “A More Rigorous Framework for Security-in-Depth,” Journal of Applied Security Research, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 372-393, 2011
    14. P. U. Union, “Monitoring for Radioactive Material in International Mail Transported by Public Postal Operators,” Reference Manual, 2006


    Please note : You will need Adobe Acrobat viewer to view the full articles.Get Free Adobe Reader

    This site uses encryption for transmitting your passwords.