ML083250085
| ML083250085 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 10/31/2008 |
| From: | Teske M Continuum Dynamics |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Purchase Order 00053157, TS-418, TS-431 CDI 08-14NP | |
| Download: ML083250085 (127) | |
Text
ENCLOSURE3 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT (BFN)
UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (TS) CHANGES TS-431 AND TS-418 EXTENDED POWER UPRATE (EPU)
CDI REPORT NO. 08-14NP, "FLOW-INDUCED VIBRATION IN THE MAIN STEAM LINES AT BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR UNITS 1 AND 2, WITH AND WITHOUT ACOUSTIC SIDE BRANCHES, AND RESULTING STEAM DRYER LOADS" (NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION)
Attached is the non-proprietary version of CDI Report No. 08-14, "Flow-Induced Vibration in the Main Steam Lines at Browns Ferry Nuclear Units 1 and 2, With and Without Acoustic Side Branches, and Resulting Steam Dryer Loads."
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information C.D.I. Report No. 08-14NP Flw-Induced Vibration in the Main Steam Lines at Browns Ferry Nuclear Units 1 and 2, With and Without Acoustic Side Branches, and Resulting Steam Dryer Loads Revision 0 Prepared by Continuum Dynamics, Inc.
34 Lexington Avenue Ewing, NJ 08618 Prepared under Purchase Order No. 00053157 for TVA / Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Nuclear Plant Road, P. 0. Box 2000 PAB-2M Decatur, AL 35609 Approved by Alan J. Bilanin Prepared by Milton E. Teske October 2008
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Executive Summary As part of the engineering effort in support of power uprate at Browns Ferry Nuclear Units 1 and 2 (BFN1 and BFN2, respectively), Continuum Dynamics, Inc. (C.D.I.) undertook a subscale examination of the standpipe/valve geometry on two of the four main steam lines (one at a time), in an effort to validate the onset power at which flow-induced vibration, resulting from standpipe/valve flow resonance, could potentially result in steam dryer loads. In this study C.D.I. constructed a nominal one-fifth scale model of main steam lines A and B at BFN1, from the steam dome to just downstream of the standpipes, then tested the as-built configuration of standpipes and Target Rock valves. The one-fifth scale test results indicate that at Extended Power Uprate (EPU) conditions the standpipes and Target Rock valves will have a low level of excitation, and that this loading should receive further evaluation.
To support these results, C.D.I. then constructed a nominal one-eighth scale model of the complete steam line system at BFN1 and BFN2, from the steam dome to the turbine, with the objective of determining whether the existing standpipe/valves have an acceptable level of excitation. The subscale tests described herein (1) confirm that the existing standpipes begin excitation near EPU conditions; (2) demonstrate the effect of adding acoustic side branches to the standpipes; and (3) determine main steam line pressure fluctuations in the frequency range 0 to 250 Hz at Current Licensed Thermal Power (CLTP) and EPU conditions. This effort provides TVA with a series of subscale tests that quantify the level of excitation to be expected at BFNl and BFN2 at EPU conditions and can be used to develop bump-up factors to scale CLTP in-plant data to EPU conditions.
1
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table of Contents Section Page E xecutive Sum m ary..................................................................
i T able of C ontents.....................................................................
ii
- 1. In trod uction............................................................................
1 2. O bjectives.............................................................................
2
- 3.
Theoretical, A pproach................................................................
3 3.1 Side Branch Excitation Mechanism........................................
3 3.2 Scaling L aw s..................................................................
4 3.3 Acoustic Side Branches......................................................
6
- 4. T est A pproach.......................................................................
8
- 5.
Test Apparatus and Instrumentation...............................................
26 5.1 Experimental Facility..........................................................
26 5.2 Evaluation of Mach Number at the Standpipes..........................
26 5.3 Instrumentation and Data Acquisition....................................
28
- 6. T est M atrices..........................................................................
31
- 7. T est Procedure.......................................................................
36 7.1 D ata C ollection...............................................................
36 7.2 D ata R eduction................................................................
36
- 8. R esults and D iscussion..............................................................
38 8.1 Excitation Frequency.........................................................
38 8.2 M ach N um ber.................................................................
39 8.3 O nset V elocity.................................................................
39 8.4 Main Steam Line / Steam Dryer............................................
40 8.5 ASB Configurations..........................................................
40 8.6 Dead-Headed Legs............................................................
40 8.7 Strouhal N um ber...............................................................
40
- 9. Bump-Up Factors for As-Built Standpipes/Valves..............................
68
- 10. C onclusions...........................................................
............... 7 1
- 11.
R eferences.............................................................................
72 Appendix: PSD Results 74 ii
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 1. Introduction As part of its effort in support of power uprate at Browns Ferry Nuclear Unit I and 2 (BFNl and BFN2, respectively), Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) contracted with Continuum Dynamics, Inc. (C.D.I.) to evaluate existing main steam line data (collected upstream of the standpipes) to estimate the pressure loads expected on the steam dryer at CLTP conditions.
These results [1], coupled with a finite element analysis of the resulting loads [2], suggested that the steam dryer stresses are acceptable at Current Licensed Thermal Power (CLTP) conditions.
To go to higher power levels (Extended Power Uprate, EPU), TVA requested that C.D.I.
evaluate the potential for flow-induced vibration (FIV) in the main steam lines as a result of resonance of the as-built standpipe/valve combination. Similar studies conducted by Exelon for Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 suggested that excitation of the standpipe/valves should be explored, as this mechanism was most responsible for the pressure loading experienced on the Quad Cities steam dryers [3].
Such a study has also been undertaken for Hope Creek, beginning with a one-fifth scale analysis [4] and continuing with one-eighth scale results [5]. Those findings suggested that the as-built Hope Creek configuration, at EPU conditions, should receive further evaluation [6].
Consistent with the Hope Creek approach, C.D.I. constructed a nominal one-fifth scale model of main steam lines A and B at BFN1, from the steam dome to downstream of the standpipes, then tested the as-built configuration of standpipes and Target Rock valves. The one-fifth scale test results [7] indicate that at EPU conditions the standpipes and Target Rock valves will have a low level of excitation, and that mitigation of this excitation should be explored.
The frequencies associated with FIV are known to correspond to a resonance associated with the inlet standpipes connected to safety valves, and have been the source of problems in several power plants in recent years [8 - 11]. Specifically, in [11], C.D.I. conducted a series of tests in support of damage observed on Columbia's main steam line safety valves. These tests concluded that the geometry of the Columbia standpipes and safety valve-inlets, with flow conditions of approximately 60% to 70% of licensed power, resulted in a resonance at approximately 1050 Hz in a scaled facility (corresponding to approximately 204 Hz in the plant).
The observation was made that properly scaled tests could provide data that could be used for design.
At the request of TVA, C.D.I. applied the insights gained from the study on Columbia, and previous work for Exelon and Hope Creek, to the BFN1 and BFN2 standpipe/valve configuration. This report summarizes the test results on a nominal one-eighth scale model of the two plants with four main steam lines.
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 2. Objectives Construction of a high Reynolds number subscale test facility, simulating the BFN1 and BFN2 steam delivery systems, was done so as to achieve the following goals:
- 1. Measure the excitation frequency and amplitudes of the as-built standpipe/valve configuration (encompassing all four main steam lines) at BFN1 and BFN2, and determine the behavior of the two systems at CLTP and EPU conditions.
- 2.
Explore the impact of the addition of acoustic side branches to the existing standpipe/valves at BFN 1 and BFN2.
- 3. Provide subscale main steam line pressure data to develop a bump-up factor relating unsteady steam dryer loads at CLTP conditions to those anticipated at EPU conditions, to be used with the acoustic circuit model. The bump-up factor would then be applied to the full-scale CLTP strain gage data collected on the BFN1 and BFN2 main steam lines to obtain an estimate of the full-scale EPU strain gage data. The EPU strain gage data would then be used to estimate steam dryer stresses at full power.
2
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 3. Theoretical Approach A one-eighth test facility is proposed as a means of measuring the effect of standpipes on the anticipated acoustic signal to the steam dome. A description of the phenomenon at work, analytical tools used, and scaling laws justifying the subscale tests are given here.
3.1 Side Branch Excitation Mechanism The phenomenon of flow-excited acoustic resonance of closed side branches has been examined for many years (see as early as [12] and [13]). In this situation acoustic resonance of the side branch is caused by feedback from the acoustic velocity of the resonant standing wave in the side branch itself. Figure 3.1 illustrates the typical geometry used here and in the standpipes at BFN1 and BFN2. The main steam line flow velocity U approaches an open side branch of diameter d and length L. Pressure p as a function of time t can be measured at the closed end of the branch. The flow velocity induces perturbations in the shear layer at the upstream separation location in the main steam line. As these perturbations are amplified and convected downstream, they interact with the acoustic field and produce acoustic energy which reinforces the resonance of the acoustic mode. Ziada has studied this effect extensively [ 14 - 16], and has shown that the flow velocity of first onset of instability Uon corresponds to a typical Strouhal number of St =
0.55, where St is defined as St = f(d + r)
Uon (3.1) where r is the radius of the inlet chamfer and f is the first mode of acoustic oscillation in the pipe system. A design chart that more accurately infers St, based on d and the diameter D of the main steam line, may be found in [14].
U L
p(t' Figure 3.1. Schematic of the side branch geometry.
3
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Solving for Uo 0
in Equation 3.1, it may be seen that the onset velocity is linearly proportional to the standpipe diameter, so long as that diameter does not change the first acoustic mode frequency of the standpipe.
The implications of this side branch excitation frequency may be seen by examining the behavior of the pressure response as a function of Strouhal number St (Figure 3.2). For large Strouhal numbers (beginning on the right side of the figure), the root mean square (RMS) pressure PRMS begins increasing (at a specific onset Strouhal number and flow velocity Uon, depending on acoustic speed a, pipe diameter d, and pipe length L), reaches a peak value, then decreases. Flow velocity increases from right to left in this figure, where it may then be seen that this phenomenon - if it occurs in a standpipe/valve configuration - will occur at a low power level, reach a peak effect, then diminish and disappear at sufficiently high power levels.
0,6 0.5 (b)
Increasing 0.4 r/d PRMS/q 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 Strouhal No.. St Figure 3.2. Strouhal number behavior, where q is the dynamic pressure (VpU2) and p is the fluid density [17].
Initially, it may be anticipated that the first mode frequency f, can be approximated by the quarter-standing wave frequency of the standpipe/valve combination f, = a (3.2) 4L Since the standpipe/valve combination changes area as a function of distance from the main steam line to the valve disk, a more accurate estimate of fl may be generated by including these area change effects. The combination of an accurate excitation frequency f, and subsequent calculation of onset velocity Uo, with the appropriate Strouhal number then characterizes the behavior of the standpipe/valve combination considered.
3.2 Scaling Laws (3.3)
(3)))
4
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
[1 (3.4)
(3.5)
(3.6)
(3)))1 5
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3.7)
(3)))
3.3 Acoustic Side Branches (3.8)
(3)))
6
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 1[
(3.9)
(3) ))
7
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 4. Test Approach The purpose of the testing effort is to measure the excitation frequency and amplitudes of the as-built standpipe/valve configuration and the modified standpipe/valve configuration with the addition of an acoustic side branch, and determine the behavior of both configurations at CLTP and EPU conditions. To do so, a one-eighth scale test facility was constructed that represents the BFNl and BFN2 steam delivery systems.
(3)))
8
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
Figure 4.1. ((
(3)))
9
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 4.1. Centerline subscale location summary from elbow and tee to standpipes at BFN 1 and BFN2. An asterisk (*) denotes instrumented standpipe/valves.
STANDPIPES IN FLOW PATH:
Main Steam Type Unit 1 Length Unit 2 Length Line (in)
(in)
A Standpipe/Valve 4.1 4.1 A
Blank Standpipe 7.8 7.9 A
Blank Standpipe 14.9 15.0 A
Standpipe/Valve 19.4
- 19.5 A
Blank Standpipe 28.4 28.3 A
Blank Standpipe 32.9 32.8 A
Standpipe/Valve 37.3 37.3
- B Standpipe/Valve 9.5
- 9.4
- B Standpipe/Valve 14.4 14.2 C
Standpipe/Valve 14.1
- 12.9
- D Standpipe/Valve 4.7 4.1 D
Blank Standpipe 8.5 8.0 D
Blank Standpipe 15.6 15.0 D
Standpipe/Valve 20.0 19.4
- D Blank Standpipe 28.7 28.3 D
Blank Standpipe 33.3 32.7 D
Standpipe/Valve 37.6
- 37.1 STANDPIPES ON DEAD-HEADED LEGS:
Main Steam Type Unit 1 Length Unit 2 Length Line (in)
(in)
B Blank Standpipe 5.3 4.7 B
Blank Standpipe 12.5 12.3 B
Standpipe/Valve 30.5 30.4 B
Standpipe/Valve 35.2 35.8 C
Blank Standpipe 5.0 3.4 C
Blank Standpipe 12.2 10.7 C
Standpipe/Valve 30.8 28.5 C
Standpipe/Valve 35.7 33.4 10
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Unit I dimensions AMSL SR Elbow 2,6.
464.958' 4
3.125'-
6.250' 1, 4 3.167' b 4 3.080' D MSL SR Elbow Figure 4.2. Schematic of the four main steam lines at BFN1.
11
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)]
Figure 4.3. Subscale dryer schematic. The steam dam is not shown in this schematic, but was incorporated for testing.
12
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information I-----I I
I I
I I
I.
I I
I I
Steam Dome I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 1
12 D-Ring 2
10 9
Main Steam Stop Valve 13 Valve Exit 3
4 5
6 8
7 Figure 4.4. Schematic of main steam line geometry. Segments 2, 3, 4, and 5 are replaced to switch between plants. Tables 4.2 and 4.3 summarize the piping connections.
13
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 4.2. Summary of subscale main steam line piping lengths and fittings for the BFN1 one-eighth scale model. Segments are identified in Figure 4.4.
SEGMENT LENGTHS:
Segment No.
MSL A (in)
MSL B (in)
MSL C (in)
MSL D in 1 (1) 9.5 9.3 9.5 9.5 2 (2) 51.2 50.5 49.5 50.9 3 (2) 17.8 16.2 17.2 17.8 4 (2) 47.9 24.5 23.6 47.8 5(2) 37.8 38.2 6
24.2 24.3 24.2 24.3 7
3.6 3.1 8
153.6 157.1 156.0 154.2 9
52.2 52.2 52.2 52.2 10 [D-Ring]
15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 11 14.4 14.4 14.4 14.4 12 (3) 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 13 125.8 105.9 105.9
.125.8 (1) Denotes metal pipe segments mating PVC to tank; Segment 2 includes flanges connecting metal piping to PVC piping (2) Segments 2, 3, 4, and 5 are of slightly different lengths for BFN2, as seen in Table 4.3.
(3) Indicates that the four main steam lines are mutually connected at the identified location by minimum length piping segments CONNECTIONS:
Connection No.
MSL A MSL B MSL C MSL D Segment 1 to 2 900 Elbow 900 Elbow 90' Elbow 900 Elbow Segment 2 to 3 30' Elbow 150 Elbow 150 Elbow 300 Elbow Segment 3 to 4, 5 900 Elbow 900 Tee 900 Tee 900 Elbow Segment 4 to 6 900 Elbow 900 Elbow 900 Elbow 900 Elbow Segment 6 to 8 900 Elbow 900 Elbow Segment 6 to 7 900 Elbow 900 Elbow Segment 7 to 8 450 Elbow 450 Elbow Segment 8 to 9 900 Elbow 900 Elbow 900 Elbow 900 Elbow Segment 9 to 10 D-Ring D-Ring D-Ring D-Ring Segment 10 to 11 D-Ring D-Ring D-Ring D-Ring Segment 11 to 12 900 Elbow 900 Elbow 900 Elbow 900 Elbow Segment 12 to 13 Valve/Equalizer Valve/Equalizer Valve/Equalizer Valve/Equalizer 14
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 4.3. Summary of substituted subscale main steam line piping lengths for the BFN2 one-eighth scale models. Segments are identified in Figure 4.4.
SUBSTITUTED BFN2 SEGMENT LENGTHS:
Segment No.
MSL A (in)
MSL B (in)
MSL C (in)
MSL D (in) 1 9.3 9.7 9.2 9.5 2
50.7 50.2 48.8 50.4 3
18.6 14.0 18.3 18.6 4
47.7 24.7 23.7 47.5 5
39.8 35.8 15
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 4.5. Photographs of the steam delivery system at nominal one-eighth scale.
16
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 4.6. Additional photographs of the steam delivery system at nominal one-eighth scale.
17
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Inforn (3)]
Figure 4.7.
Scale drawing of the four as-built standpipe/valve models positioned on the dead-headed legs on main steam lines B and C. The valve cap (near the end of the 0.716 diameter bore) has a curved surface that represents the actual geometry of the Target Rock valve.
18
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 4.8. Scale drawing of the twelve as-built blank standpipe models.
19
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 4.9. Standpipe end cap.
20
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 4.10. Blank standpipe end cap with insert.
21
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 4.11. Scale drawing of the nine standpipe/valve models with acoustic side branches.
22
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 4.12. Scale drawing of the nine standpipe/valve models with acoustic side branches.
23
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 4.13. Acoustic side branch end cap.
24
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
Figure 4.14. Wagon wheel insert into acoustic side branch.
25
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 5. Test Apparatus and Instrumentation Test apparatus for the one-eighth scale test program consists of a pressure tank, a system of PVC piping to model full-scale steam lines, two sets of interchangeable model pressure relief valves, eight ball valves, and a set of interchangeable orifices.
(5.1)
(3)))
26
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (5.2)
(3)))
27
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 5.1. Plant power and average inlet Mach numbers, where the CLTP Mach number = 0.087 and the EPU (1.15 x CLTP) Mach number = 0.1. Each orifice diameter is tested twice in each configuration; the Average Inlet Mach Number averages the test values; the Relative Standard Deviation (RSD) divides the standard deviation of the Mach Number data by the Average Inlet Mach Number.
(3)))
28
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
29
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information IT (3)))
30
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 6. Test Matrices Table 6.1. BFN1 Four-Line Test Matrix with Filled ASBs.
Test Test Orifice Mach Comments Designation Date Diameter (in)
Number bl -f491-99 08/22/08 1.287 0.0980 bl-f491-100 08/22/08 1.287 0.0999 Repeat of bl-f491-99 bl-f491-101 08/22/08 1.202 0.0887 b 1-f491-102 08/25/08 1.202 0.0839 Repeat ofbl-f491-101 bl-f491-103 08/25/08 1.153 0.0809 bl-f491-104 08/25/08 1.153 0.0796 Repeat of bl-f491-103 bl-f491-105 08/25/08 1.253 0.0904 bl-f491-106 08/25/08 1.253 0.0918 Repeat of bl-f491-105 bl-f491-107 08/25/08 1.287 0.0989 Repeat ofbl-f491-99 bl-f491-108 08/25/08 1.287 0.0996 Repeat ofbl-f491-99 bl-f491-109 08/25/08 1.340 0.1037 bl-f491-110 08/25/08 1.340 0.1037 Repeat ofbl-f491-109 bl-f491-111 08/25/08 1.408 0.1163 bl-f491-112 08/25/08 1.408 0.1172 Repeat of bl-f491-111 bl-f491-113 08/26/08 1.515 0.1262 bl-f491-114 08/26/08 1.515 0.1269 Repeat ofbl-f491-113 bl-f491-115 08/26/08 1.737 0.1596 bl-f491-116 08/26/08 1.737 0.1610 Repeat ofbl-f491-115 b 1-f491-117 08/26/08 1.300 0.1001 bl-f491-118 08/26/08 1.300 0.1002 Repeat ofbl-f491-117 bl-f491-119 08/26/08 1.190 0.0857 bl-f491-120 08/26/08 1.190 0.0870 Repeat ofbl-f491-119 31
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 6.2. BFN2 Four-Line Test Matrix with Filled ASBs.
Test Test Orifice Mach Comments Designation Date Diameter (in)
Number b2-f491-46 05/30/08 1.101 0.0718 b2-f491-47 06/02/08 1.101 0.0704 Repeat of b2-f491-46 b2-f491-48 06/02/08 1.202 0.0870 b2-f491-49 06/03/08 1.202 0.0867 Repeat of b2-f491-48 b2-f491-50 06/03/08 1.287 0.0985 b2-f491-51 06/03/08 1.287 0.0979 Repeat of b2-f491-50 b2-f491-52 06/03/08 1.408 0.1145 b2-f491-53 06/03/08 1.408 0.1157 Repeat of b2-f491-52 b2-f491-54 06/03/08 1.515 0.1281 b2-f491-55 06/03/08 1.515 0.1267 Repeat ofb2-f491-54 b2-f491-56 06/03/08 1.607 0.1402 b2-f491-57 06/04/08 1.607 0.1400 Repeat ofb2-f491-56 b2-f491-58 06/04/08 1.737 0.1583 b2-f491-59 06/04/08 1.737 0.1578 Repeat of b2-f491-58 b2-f491-60 06/04/08 1.888 0.1802 b2-f491-61 06/04/08 1.888 0.1837 Repeat ofb2-f491-60 b2-f491-62 06/04/08 1.966 0.1912 b2-f491-63 06/04/08 1.966 0.1915 Repeat of b2-f491-62 b2-f491-64 06/05/08 1.340 0.1018 b2-f491-65 06/05/08 1.340 0.1016 Repeat of b2-f491-64 b2-f491-66 06/05/08 1.253 0.0897 b2-f491-67 06/05/08 1.253 0.0899 Repeat of b2-f491-66 b2-f491-68 06/05/08 1.153 0.0792 b2-f491-69 06/05/08 1.153 0.0805 Repeat of b2-f491-68 b2-f491-70 06/05/08 1.318 0.1019 b2-f49 1-71 06/05/08 1.318 0.1016 Repeat of b2-f491-70 b2-f491-72 06/06/08 1.300 0.0996 b2-f491-73 06/06/08 1.300 0.0997 Repeat of b2-f491-72 32
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 6.3. BFN1 Four-Line Test Matrix with Plugged ASBs.
Test Test Orifice Mach Comments Designation Date Diameter (in)
Number bl-f491-121 08/27/08 1.190 0.0837 bl-f491-122 08/27/08 1.190 0.0843 Repeat of bl-f491-121 bl-f491-123 08/27/08 1.153 0.0792 bl-f491-124 08/27/08 1.153 0.0815 Repeat of b l-f491-123 bl-f491-125 08/27/08 1.202 0.0875 bl-f491-126 08/27/08 1.202 0.0886 Repeat ofbl-f491-125 bl-f491-127 08/27/08 1.253 0.0905 bl-f491-128 08/27/08 1.253 0.0903 Repeat of bl-f491-127 bl-f491-129 08/27/08 1.287 0.0991 bl-f491-130 08/27/08 1.287 0.1000 Repeat of bl-f491-129 bl-f491-131 08/28/08 1.300 0.1004 bl-f491-132 08/28/08 1.300 0.0982 Repeat ofbl-f491-131 bl-f491-133 08/28/08 1.340 0.1028 bl-f491-134 08/28/08 1.340 0.1027 Repeat ofbl-f491-133 bl-f491-135 08/28/08 1.408 0.1160 bl-f491-136 08/28/08 1.408 0.1176 Repeat ofbl-f491-135 bl-f491-137 08/28/08 1.515 0.1290 bl-f491-138 08/28/08 1.515 0.1279 Repeat of bl-f491-137 bl-f491-139 08/28/08 1.737 0.1601 bl-f491-140 08/28/08 1.737 0.1602 Repeat of bl-f491-139 33
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 6.4. BFN2 Four-Line Test Matrix with Plugged ASBs.
Test Test Orifice Mach Comments Designation Date Diameter (in)
Number b2-f491-126 08/29/08 1.737 0.1591 b2-f491-127 08/29/08 1.737 0.1595 Repeat ofb2-f491-126 b2-f491-128 08/29/08 1.153 0.0779 b2-f491-129 08/29/08 1.153 0.0808 Repeat ofb2-f491-128 b2-f491-130 09/02/08 1.202 0.0863 b2-f491-131 09/02/08 1.202 0.0888 Repeat ofb2-f491-130 b2-f491-132 09/02/08 1.253 0.0910 b2-f491-133 09/02/08 1.253 0.0925 Repeat of b2-f491-132 b2-f491-134 09/02/08 1.287 0.0986 b2-f491-135 09/02/08 1.287 0.0985 Repeat of b2-f491-134 b2-f491-136 09/02/08 1.300 0.0996 b2-f491-137 09/02/08 1.300 0.1011 Repeat ofb2-f491-136 b2-f491-138 09/02/08 1.340 0.1031 b2-f491-139 09/02/08 1.340 0.1047 Repeat ofb2-f491-138 b2-f491-140 09/02/08 1.408 0.1175 b2-f491-141 09/02/08 1.408 0.1165 Repeat ofb2-f491-140 b2-f491-142 09/03/08 1.515 0.1269 b2-f491-143 09/03/08 1.515 0.1268 Repeat ofb2-f491-142 b2-f491-144 09/03/08 1.190 0.0847 b2-f49 1-145 09/03/08 1.190 0.0845 Repeat of b2-f491 144 34
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 6.5. BFN2 Four-Line Test Matrix with Empty ASBs.
Test Test Orifice Mach Comments Designation Date Diameter (in)
Number b2-f491-74 06/09/08 1.101 0.0720 b2-f491-75 06/09/08 1.101 0.0736 Repeat of b2-f491-74 b2-f491-76 06/09/08 1.153 0.0815 b2-f491-77 06/09/08 1.153 0.0816 Repeat of b2-f491-76 b2-f491-78 06/09/08 1.202 0.0893 b2-f491-79 06/09/08 1.202 0.0881 Repeat of b2-f491-78 b2-f491-80 06/09/08 1.253 0.0920 b2-f491-81 06/09/08 1.253 0.0933 Repeat ofb2-f491-80 b2-f491-82 06/10/08 1.287 0.0996 b2-f491-83 06/10/08 1.287 0.1002 Repeat of b2-f491-82 b2-f491-84 06/10/08 1.340 0.1033 b2-f491-85 06/10/08 1.340 0.1045 Repeat of b2-f491-84 b2-f491-86 06/10/08 1.408 0.1172 b2-f491-87 06/10/08 1.408 0.1170 Repeat of b2-f491-86 b2-f491-88 06/10/08 1.515 0.1301 b2-f491-89 06/10/08 1.515 0.1315 Repeat of b2-f491-88 b2-f491-90 06/10/08 1.607 0.1443 b2-f491-91 06/10/08 1.607 0.1457 Repeat of b2-f491-90 b2-f491-92 06/11/08 1.737 0.1611 b2-f491-93 06/11/08 1.737 0.1614 Repeat of b2-f491-92 b2-f491-94 06/11/08 1.888 0.1862 b2-f491-95 06/11/08 1.888 0.1853 Repeat of b2-f491-94 b2-f491-96 06/11/08 1.966 0.1946 b2-f491-97 06/11/08 1.966 0.1954 Repeat of b2-f491-96 b2-f491-98 06/11/08 1.190 0.0866 b2-f491-99 06/11/08 1.190 0.0865 Repeat of b2-f491-98
\\
35
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 7. Test Procedure 7.1 Data Collection
((I (3)))
7.2 Data Reduction
[E (3)))
36
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 7. 1. Typical stagnation pressure time history.
37
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 8. Results and Discussion One purpose of the subscale test program was to characterize the behavior of the standpipe/valves at the two plants with inserts in the blank standpipes. A second purpose was to determine the effects of acoustic side branches at the plants. A third purpose was to obtain main steam line pressure data at CLTP and EPU conditions to develop a bump-up factor for BFNl and BFN2.
The results of the test program may be examined with regard to excitation frequency and RMS pressure as a function of power level, and comparison of PSDs.
8.1 Excitation Frequency
[(3 38
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 8.2 Mach Number The PSD results shown in the Appendix provide an indication of frequencies which contribute significantly to the pressure signal for standpipe/valve flow-induced vibration at specific Mach numbers. However, a better indication of this effect is the root mean square (RMS) of the recorded signal. This parameter was determined by integrating the PSD from 200 to 1000 Hz, then taking the square root to obtain the RMS pressure level over this frequency range. These results will now be examined for the pressure transducer measurements at the ends of the four standpipe/valves on the main steam lines.
The subscale tests swept Mach number by changing orifice size (increasing orifice size to increase Mach number as seen in Figure 5.1). The effect of Mach number on normalized RMS pressure may be seen in Figures 8.1 and 8.2, which plot RMS pressure behavior on the four main steam lines at the end of the standpipe/valves identified in the title of the plots and also shown in Figure 8.3. These curves compare the RMS pressure results from plugged ASBs (tests from Tables 6.3 and 6.4) with filled ASBs (tests from Tables 6.1 and 6.2). It may be seen that the installation of ASBs suggests, in the range of interest (Mach number between 0.087 and 0.1), the following conclusions:
(3)]
8.3 Onset Velocity (3)))
39
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Table 8.2. Comparison between predicted and average measured onset velocities for the as-built configurations tested at BFN1 and BFN2.
(3)))
8.4 Main Steam Line / Steam Dryer The effect of Mach number on normalized RMS pressure in the main steam lines and on the dryer may be seen in Figures 8.4 and 8.5. Again, it may be seen that the installation of ASBs suggests, in the Mach number range between 0.087 (CLTP conditions) and 0.1 (EPU conditions),
the following conclusions:
(3)))
8.5 ASB Configurations
((
(3)))
8.6 Dead-Headed Legs The RMS pressures measured on main steam lines B and C (which contain the dead-headed legs, Figure 8.3) were determined by integrating the PSD from 60 to 110 Hz, then taking the square root to obtain the RMS pressure level over this frequency range. Figure 8.7 plots the results of these calculations, for the four pressure transducer locations. It may be seen that the quadratic curve-fits are more accurate with data taken at the upper strain gage locations.
8.7 Strouhal Number Equation 3.1 may be used to compute the onset Strouhal number for the standpipe/valves.
With the information provided in Tables 8.1 and 8.3, and the drawings supplied by TVA [19], it may be shown that the average Stouhal number at onset of the standpipe/valves is ((
(3)))
40
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8. la. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN1 for the pressure transducers at the ends of the second standpipe/valve on main steam line A (top) and the third standpipe/valve on main steam line D (bottom): as-built (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
Figure 8.3a identifies the instrumented standpipe/valves for BFN1.
41
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)1))
Figure 8. lb. Normalized RMS pressure for BFNl for the pressure transducers at the ends of the first standpipe/valve on main steam line B (top) and the standpipe/valve on main steam line C (bottom): as-built (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots). Figure 8.3a identifies the instrumented standpipe/valves for BFN 1.
42
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)]
Figure 8.2a. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 for the pressure transducers at the ends of the second standpipe/valve on main steam line A (top) and the third standpipe/valve on main steam line D (bottom): as-built (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
Figure 8.3b identifies the instrumented standpipe/valves for BFN2.
43
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((I (3)]
Figure 8.2b. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 for the pressure transducers at the ends of the first standpipe/valve on main steam line B (top) and the standpipe/valve on main steam line C (bottom): as-built (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots). Figure 8.3b identifies the instrumented standpipe/valves for BFN2.
44
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Unit I dimensions A MSL SR Elbow SRV1 BF1 BF2 BF3 BF4 SRV3 1*-,3.167_
-4 3.080' C MSL Dead Log 5.0 3.708' SRV 9 ~
- 6 I
A4-17' 1"* fl' g.875' 3 417' 13 0' 9.. 875' 26"od 0 24" id I L
Figure 8.3a. Schematic of the four main steam lines at BFN1 [19]. Instrumented standpipe/valve locations are identified by red boxes around the locations: the second SRV on MSL A, the first SRV on MSL B, the SRV on MSL C, and the third SRV on MSL D. Note that the blank standpipes are identified as BF1, BF2, etc.
45
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Unit I dimensions A MSL SR Elbow SRVI BF1 BF2 SRV2 BF3 BF4 4
4.4 jb.4958' 3.125' d 6.250' b -
3.167' Figure 8.3b. Schematic of the four main steam lines at BFN2 [19]. Instrumented standpipe/valve locations are identified by red boxes around the locations: the third SRV on MSL A, the first SRV on MSL B, the SRV on MSL C, and the second SRV on MSL D. Note that the blank standpipes are identified as BF1, BF2, etc. Dimensions are for BFN1.
46
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
Figure 8.4a. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN I on main steam line A at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): as-built (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
47
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
Figure 8.4b. Normalized RMS pressure for BFNl on main steam line B at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): as-built (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
48
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8.4c. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN1 on main steam line C at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): as-built (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
49
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8.4d. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN1 on main steam line D at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): as-built (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
50
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)]
Figure 8.4e. Normalized RMS pressure for BFNl on the dryer opposite main steam line A (top) and on the dryer opposite main steam line C (bottom): as-built (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
51
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8.5a. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on main steam line A at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): as-built (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
52
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8.5b. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on main steam line B at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): as-built (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
53
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((I (3)]
Figure 8.5c. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on main steam line C at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): as-built (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
54
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Figure 8.5d. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on main steam line D at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): as-built (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
55
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((I (3)))
Figure 8.5e. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on the dryer opposite main steam line A (top) and on the dryer opposite main steam line C (bottom): as-built (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
56
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information I((
(3)]
Figure 8.6a. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 for the pressure transducers at the ends of the second standpipe/valve on main steam line A (top) and the third standpipe/valve on main steam line D (bottom): empty ASBs (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots). Figure 8.3b identifies the instrumented standpipe/valves for BFN2.
57
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8.6b. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 for the pressure transducers at the ends of the first standpipe/valve on main steam line B (top) and the standpipe/valve on main steam line C (bottom): empty ASBs (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
Figure 8.3b identifies the instrumented standpipe/valves for BFN2.
58
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)]
Figure 8.6c. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on main steam line A at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): empty ASBs (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
59
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((I (3)))
Figure 8.6d. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on main steam line B at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): empty ASBs (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
60
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8.6e. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on main steam line C at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): empty ASBs (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
61
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8.6f. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on main steam line D at the upper strain gage location (top) and at the lower strain gage location (bottom): empty ASBs (black dots); with ASBs installed (red dots).
62
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((I (3)]
Figure 8.6g. Normalized RMS pressure for BFN2 on the dryer opposite main steam line A (top) and on the dryer opposite main steam line C (bottom): empty ASBs (black dots);
with ASBs installed (red dots).
63
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)]
Figure 8.7a. Normalized RMS pressure around 15 Hz full-scale for BFN1 on main steam lines B (top) and C (bottom) with ASBs installed: upper strain gage locations (black dots);
lower strain gage locations (red dots). Curve-fits to the data (RMS = A x M2, for Normalized RMS Pressure RMS and Mach Number M) give A = 6.17 (R' = 0.862) for B Upper, A = 8.14 (R2 = 0.568) for B Lower, A = 8.42 (R2 = 0.971) for C Upper, and A = 6.21 (R2 = 0.294) for C Lower.
64
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
Figure 8.7b. Normalized RMS pressure around 15 Hz full-scale for BFN2 on main steam lines B (top) and C (bottom) with ASBs installed: upper strain gage locations (black dots);
2 lower strain gage locations (red dots). Curve-fits to the data (RMS = A x M, for Normalized RMS Pressure RMS and Mach Number M) give A = 5.63 (R2 = 0.926) for B Upper, A = 6.53 (R2 = 0.809) for B Lower, A = 9.52 (R2 = 0.926) for C Upper, and A = 6.44 (R2 = 0.0) for C Lower.
65
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((I (3)]
Figure 8.7c. Normalized RMS pressure around 15 Hz full-scale for BFNl on main steam lines B (top) and C (bottom) as-built: upper strain gage locations (black dots); lower strain gage locations (red dots). Curve-fits to the data (RMS = A X M 2, for Normalized RMS Pressure RMS and Mach Number M) give A = 6.41 (R2 = 0.930) for B Upper, A = 7.84 (R2 = 0.750) for B Lower, A = 9.25 (R2 = 0.971) for C Upper, and A =
6.18 (R2 = 0.076) for C Lower.
66
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)1))
Figure 8.7d. Normalized RMS pressure around 15 Hz full-scale for BFN2 on main steam lines B (top) and C (bottom) as-built: upper strain gage locations (black dots); lower strain 2
gage locations (red dots). Curve-fits to the data (RMS = A x M, for Normalized RMS Pressure RMS and Mach Number M) give A = 6.50 (R2 = 0.887) for B Upper, A = 7.57 (R2 = 0.783) for B Lower, A = 9.30 (R2 = 0-853) for C Upper, and A =
7.46 (R2 = 0.0) for C Lower.
67
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 9. Bump-Up Factors for As-Built Standpipe/Valves (9.1) 68
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information based on anticipated and actual in-plant flow rate at BFNl and BFN2, is used. The resulting bump-up factors are plotted in Figure 9.1.
R[
69
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((I (3)]
Figure 9.1.
Bump-up factors developed from BFN 1 (top) and BFN2 (bottom) subscale data.
The eight locations are shown by the eight pressure transducer identifiers.
70
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 10. Conclusions One-eighth scale tests measured the excitation frequency and amplitudes of the as-built steam delivery system (encompassing all four main steam lines) at BFN1 and BFN2, as a function of entrance Mach number, and determined the behavior of the system at CLTP and EPU conditions. The results suggest that the as-built design would see a slight onset of FIV from the safety valves at EPU power. The installation of acoustic side branches as a mitigating device at EPU conditions in the Browns Ferry units does not demonstrate the relief observed at Quad Cities at EPU conditions, when the Quad Cities plants were operating at near peak resonance conditions.
71
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 11. References
- 1. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2008. Acoustic and Low Frequency Hydrodynamic Loads at CLTP Power Level on Browns Ferry Nuclear Unit 1 Steam Dryer to 250 Hz. C.D.I. Report No. 08-04.
- 2. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2008. Stress Assessment of Browns Ferry Nuclear Unit 1 Steam Dryer. C.D.I. Report No. 08-06.
- 3. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2006. Mitigation of Pressure Oscillations in the Quad Cities Unit 2 Steam Delivery System: A Subscale Four Main Steam Line Investigation of Standpipe Behavior. C.D.I. Report No. 06-08.
- 4. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2005. Onset of High Frequency Flow Induced Vibration in the Main Steam Lines at Hope Creek Unit 1: A Subscale Investigation of Standpipe Behavior.
C.D.I. Report No. 05-31.
- 5.
Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2006. Estimating High Frequency Flow Induced Vibration in the Main Steam Lines at Hope Creek Unit 1: A Subscale Four Line Investigation of Standpipe Behavior. C.D.I. Report No. 06-16.
- 6. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2007. EPU Conditions in the Main Steam Lines at Hope Creek Unit 1: Additional Subscale Four Line Tests. C.D.I. Technical Note No. 07-01.
- 7. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2008. Onset of Flow-Induced Vibration in the Main Steam Lines at Browns Ferry Unit 1: A Subscale Investigation of Standpipe Behavior. C.D.I. Report No.
08-01.
- 8. Webb, M. and P. Ellenberger. 1995. Piping Retrofit Reduces Valve-Damaging Flow Vibration.
Power Engineering 99(1): 27-29.
- 9. Bernstein, M. D. and Bloomfield, W. J. 1989. Malfunction of Safety Valves Due to Flow Induced Vibration. Flow-Induced Vibrations 1989 (ed: M. K. Au-Yang, S. S. Chen, S. Kaneko and R. Chilukuri) PVP 154: 155-164. New York: ASME.
- 10. Coffman, J. T. and Bernstein, M. D. 1980. Failure of Safety Valves Due to Flow-Induced Vibration. Transactions oftheASMiE 102(1): 112-118.
- 11. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2002. Mechanisms Resulting in Leakage from Main Steam Safety Valves. C.D.I. Technical Note No. 02-16.
- 12. Chen, Y. N. and D. Florjancic. 1975. Vortex-Induced Resonance in a Pipe System due to Branching. Proceedings of International Conference on Vibration and Noise in Pump, Fan and Compressor Installations 79-86. University of Southampton, England.
72
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
- 13. Baldwin, R. M. and H. R. Simmons. 1986. Flow-Induced Vibration in Safety Relief Valves.
ASME Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 108: 267-272.
- 14. Ziada, S. and Shine, S. 1999. Strouhal Numbers of Flow-Excited Acoustic Resonance of Closed Side Branches. Journal of Fluids and Structures 13: 127-142.
- 15. Ziada, S. 1994. A Flow Visualization Study of Flow Acoustic Coupling at the Mouth of a Resonant Side-Branch. Journals of Fluids and Structures 8: 391-416.
- 16. Graf, H. R. and S. Ziada. 1992. Flow-Induced Acoustic Resonance in Closed Side Branches:
An Experimental Determination of the Excitation Source. Proceedings of ASME International Symposium on Flow-Induced Vibration and Noise, Vol. 7: Fundamental Aspects of Fluid-Structure Interactions (ed: M. P. Paidoussis, T. Akylas and P. B. Abraham). AMD 51: 63-80.
New York: ASME.
- 17. Weaver, D. S. and MacLeod, G. 0. 1999. Entrance Port Rounding Effects on Acoustic Resonance in Safety Relief Valves. Flow-Induced Vibration: The 1999 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference. 291-298.
- 18. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2004. Plant Unique Steam Dryer Loads to Support I&E Guidelines. C.D.I. Technical Memorandum No. 04-14.
- 19. Browns Ferry Drawings No. NI-101-3R, NI-101-2RB, NI-101-4R, NI-101-IRA, 2-47C400-1-4, 2-47C400-1-2, 2-47C400-1-5, 2-47C400-1-1, E-24771C-1, 1-47W400-5, E-2477-9, 1-47W400-1, 1-736E338, and 736E338; File Entitled "Comparison of Ul, 2, 3 MS Geometries GCN Format R4.xls."
- 20. Shapiro, A. H. 1953. The Dynamics and Thermodynamics of Compressible Fluid Flow.
Volume I. John Wiley and Sons: New York, NY. Chapter 4.
- 21. Kayser, J. C. and R. L. Shambaugh. 1991. Discharge Coefficients for Compressible Flow through Small-Diameter Orifices and Convergent Nozzles. Chemical Engineering Science 46: 1697-1711.
- 22. Continuum Dynamics, Inc. 2008. Acoustic and Low Frequency Hydrodynamic Loads at CLTP Power Level on Browns Ferry Nuclear Unit 2 Steam Dryer to 250 Hz. C.D.I. Report No. 08-05.
73
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information Appendix: PSD Results This Appendix provides the normalized PSDs for the main steam line and steam dryer pressure transducers in Figures Al to A14. Here, normalized PSD is obtained by normalizing the pressure trace by the dynamic pressure at CLTP, then constructing the PSD from the Fast Fourier transform.
The test matrices are found in Tables 6.1 to 6.5. The transducer designations are shown in Table Al and include the four pressure transducers located on the ends of the standpipe/valves on the main steam lines, as illustrated in Figure 8.3.
Table Al. Pressure Transducer Designations Pressure Plot Pressure Transducer Curve Transducer Number Identifier Location PD 1 A US MSL A upstream strain gage location PD2 A DS MSL A downstream strain gage location PD3 B US MSL B upstream strain gage location PD4 B DS MSL B downstream strain gage location PD5 C US MSL C upstream strain gage location PD6 C DS MSL C downstream strain gage location PD7 D US MSL D upstream strain gage location PD8 D DS MSL D downstream strain gage location PD9 A Valve End of second standpipe/valve on MSL A (BFN1); end of third standpipe/valve on MSL A (BFN2)
PDlO B Valve End of first standpipe/valve on MSL B PD 11 C Valve End of standpipe/valve on MSL C PD12 D Valve End of third standpipe/valve on MSL D (BFNl); end of second standpipe/valve on MSL D (BFN2)
PD 13 Dryer A Steam dryer location opposite MSL A PD14 Dryer C Steam dryer location opposite MSL C 74
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
75
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
76
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
77
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
78
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
79
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
80
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
81
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
82
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
83
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
[1 (3)))
84
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
[1 (3)))
85
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
86
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
87
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
88
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
89
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
90
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
91
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3) ))
92
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
93
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
94
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
95
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
96
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
97
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
98
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
99
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
100
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
101
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
102
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
103
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
104
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information lI (3)))
105
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
106
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
107
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))1 108
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information (3)))
109
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
110
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 1[
(3)))
III
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
112
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))
113
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
[1 (3)))
114
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((L (3)))
115
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
116
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
117
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information lI (3)))
118
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information
((
(3)))1 119
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
120
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
121
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
122
This Document Does Not Contain Continuum Dynamics, Inc. Proprietary Information 11 (3)))
123