NL-15-169, NEDO-33824, Revision 0, Engineering Report, Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Stress Analysis.
Text
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy NEDO-33824 Revision 0 August 2015 Non-Proprietary Informa tion - Class I (Public)
Engineering Report Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Stress AnalysisCopyright 2015 GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas LLC All Rights Reserved NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) ii INFORMATION NOTICE This is a non-proprietary version of the document NEDC-33824P, Revision 0, which has the proprietary information removed. Portions of the document that have been removed are indicated by an open and closed bracket as shown here [[ ]].
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT Please Read Carefully The design, engineering, and other, information contained in this document is furnished for the purpose of supporting the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) license amendment request for an extended power uprate in proceedings before the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The only undertakings of with respect to information in this document are contained in contracts between GEH and Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), and nothing contained in this document shall be construed as changing those contracts. The use of this information by anyone for any purpose other than that for which it is intended is not authorized; and with respect to any unauthorized use, GEH makes no representation or warranty, and assumes no liability as to the completeness, accuracy, or usefulness of the information contained in this document.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) iii REVISION HISTORY Revision Date Changes 0 August 2015 Initial issue.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary .........................................................................................................
.................... 1-1 2.0 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Analysis Overview ............................................................ 2-1 2.1 Analysis Process Overview ................................................................................................. 2-1 3.0 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Design ................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 BWR/4 Replacement Steam Dryer Design ......................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Modifications Made for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ......................................................... 3-4 3.2.1 Functional Modifications Facilitating RPV Interface ....................................................... 3-4 3.2.2 Design Improvements to the BWR/4 Prototype Design ................................................... 3-5 4.0 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Fatigue Evaluation ............................................................. 4-1 4.1 Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) Design Load Definition ..................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 [[ ]] Acoustic Loads Measurements .................................................... 4-1 4.1.2 PBLE02 Acoustic Load Definition ................................................................................... 4-8 4.1.3 [[ ]] ........................................... 4-23 4.1.4 SRV Acoustic Load Definition ...................................................................................... 4-36 4.1.5 Reactor Operating Condition Effects .............................................................................. 4-73 4.1.6 Scaling Factors for EPU Conditions ([[
]]) ............................... 4-79 4.1.7 Browns Ferry Comparison to BWR/4 Prototype (Geometric, Acoustic Properties, and Load) ...................................................................................................... 4-81 4.1.8 Comparison of Browns Ferry Projected Loads with Industry Data ............................. 4-101 4.2 Steam Dryer High Cycle Fatigue Stress Analysis........................................................... 4-105 4.2.1 Steam Dryer Finite Element Model ............................................................................. 4-106 4.2.2 Mesh Convergence Studies ........................................................................................... 4-120 4.2.3 Vibration Analysis Approach ....................................................................................... 4-124 4.2.4 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Functional RPV Interface Attachments ..................................................................................................................
4-134 4.2.5 Bias and Uncertainty Adjustment to Stresses ............................................................... 4-140 4.3 Acceptance Criteria ......................................................................................................... 4
-149 4.4 Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) St ress Intensity Results .................................................. 4-150
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) v 5.0 Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant RSD Primary Stress Evaluation ............................................................. 5-1 5.1 Design Criteria ...............................................................................................................
..... 5-1 5.1.1 Material Properties ............................................................................................................ 5-1 5.1.2 ASME Code Stress Limits for Load Combinations ......................................................... 5-2 5.1.3 Design Load Combinations .............................................................................................. 5-4 5.2 Analysis Approach .............................................................................................................. 5-6 5.2.1 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer FEM ................................................................ 5-6 5.2.2 Loads for Design Primary Stress Evaluation .................................................................... 5-7 5.2.3 Design Load Combination Analysis ............................................................................... 5-15 5.3 Design Load Combination Primary Stress Evaluation Results ......................................... 5-15 6.0 Monitoring During Power Ascension and Final Assessment at EPU .................................................. 6-1 6.1 Regulatory Guide 1.20 Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program ........................... 6-1 6.1.1 Classification ................................................................................................................
.... 6-1 6.1.2 Vibration and Stress Analysis Program ............................................................................ 6-2 6.1.3 Vibration and Stress Measurement Program .................................................................... 6-2 6.1.4 Inspection Program ...........................................................................................................
6-3 6.2 Power Ascension Test Plan (PATP) ................................................................................... 6-3 6.3 Limit Curve Adjustment ..................................................................................................... 6-4 7.0 References ................................................................................................................
............................ 7-1 Appendix A BWR Replacement Steam Dryer Structural Evaluation General Methodology... ....... A-1 Appendix B Steam Dryer Plant Based Load Evaluation Methodology PBLE01 Model.
Description ................................................................................................................... B-1 Appendix C Steam Dryer Plant Based Lo ad Evaluation Methodology PBLE02 Model Description ................................................................................................................... C-1 Appendix D Supplemental Information---------------------. ....... D-1 Appendix E Power Ascension Test Plan Limit Curves (On-Dryer & MSL Based)----.. ....... E-1
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) vi LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1-1: Replacement Steam Dryer Component Nomenclature ........................................................ 3-2 Table 4.1-1: [[
]] ........................................................................... 4-5 Table 4.1-2: Browns Ferry Inputs .............................................................................................
.............. 4-24 Table 4.1-3: Browns Ferry [[ ]] .......................................................................... 4-24 Table 4.1-4: Browns Ferry [[ ]] .................................................................. 4-25 Table 4.1-5: Predicted and Measured Resonant Frequencies ................................................................. 4-5 1 Table 4.1-6: Strouhal Numbers for Potential SRV Acoustic Resonances from BFN [[ ]] ....................................................................................................................... 4-52 Table 4.1-7: SRV [[ ]] .................................................................................................. 4-54 Table 4.1-8: Comparison with Available SRV Resonance Measurements ............................................ 4-57 Table 4.1-9: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Region Definitions ........................................... 4-58 Table 4.1-10: [[ ]] Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
......... 4-61 Table 4.1-11: [[ ]] ............................................................................................ 4-66 Table 4.1-12: [[ ]] .......................................................................................... 4-66 Table 4.1-13: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... 4-66 Table 4.1-14: Browns Ferry and [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.................. 4-68 Table 4.1-15: Extracted and Corrected Browns Ferry Region RMS Pressures ...................................... 4-69 Table 4.1-16: Extracted Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads from [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
... 4-70 Table 4.1-17: Browns Ferry [[ ]]SRV EPU Scaling Factors ................................................. 4-70 Table 4.1-18: [[ ]] SRV Resonance Load Adder Bias and Uncertainties ................................... 4-73 Table 4.1-19: Core Flow Adjustment Factors....................................................................................
..... 4-76 Table 4.1-20: Statistics of VPF Contribution to Strain Gauge Measurements in BWR/4 Benchmark Steam Dryer .........................................................................................................
..... 4-78 Table 4.1-21: [[ ]] .................................................................................. 4-83 Table 4.1-22: [[ ]] .......................................................................... 4-86 Table 4.1-23: [[ ]] ................................................................ 4-88
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) vii Table 4.1-24: [[ ]] .......................................................................... 4-89 Table 4.1-25: Browns Ferry [[ ]] vs. BWR/4 Prototype Inputs ..................................................... 4-94 Table 4.1-26: Browns Ferry [[
]] ........................................... 4-95 Table 4.2-1: Steam Dryer Stress Scoping Groups ................................................................................ 4-108 Table 4.2-2: Calculated Mesh Convergence Factor by Component ..................................................... 4-123 Table 4.2-3: Raw Stress Table [[ ]] .................................................................. 4-130 Table 4.2-4: Raw Stress Table [[ ]] .................................................................. 4-132 Table 4.2-5: Attachment Point Component Stress Summary ............................................................... 4-138 Table 4.2-6: Attachment Point Component Fatigue Summary ............................................................. 4-140 Table 4.2-7: Final Stress Adjustment Terms ...................................................................................
..... 4-141 Table 4.4-1: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Final FIV Peak Stress Table for the Projected EPU Condition .......................................................................................................
.... 4-152 Table 5.1-1: Material Properties .............................................................................................
.................. 5-2 Table 5.1-2: ASME Code Stress Limits .........................................................................................
.......... 5-3 Table 5.1-3: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Design Load Combinations ................................ 5-5 Table 5.1-4: [[ ]] ....................................................................... 5-6 Table 5.2-1: Faulted Condition DPs ...........................................................................................
.............. 5-9 Table 5.2-2: MSLB A1 & MSLB A2 and MSLB A hot standby Peak Normalized Acoustic Loads for MSLB ..........................................................................................................................
................. 5-10 Table 5.2-3: Peak Normalized Acoustic Loads for TSV A ...................................................................... 5-11 Table 5.2-4: Zero Period Acceleration ........................................................................................
............ 5-15 Table 5.3-1: BFN Replacement Steam Dryer EPU Design Load Combination Results for Normal, Upset, Emergency and Faulted Conditions ................................................................... 5-17
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1-1: Steam Dryer Analysis Methodology Overview .................................................................. 2-3 Figure 3.1-1: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Replacement Steam Dryer Design ........................................ 3-3 Figure 3.2-1: [[
]]................................................... 3-7 Figure 3.2-2: [[ ]] .............................................................. 3-7 Figure 3.2-3: [[ ]] .................................................... 3-8 Figure 3.2-4: [[ ]] .......................... 3-8 Figure 3.2-5: [[ ]] ....................................................... 3-9 Figure 3.2-6: [[ ]] ............................................... 3-9 Figure 3.2-7: [[ ]] ................................ 3-10 Figure 4.1-1: [[ ]] .......................... 4-3 Figure 4.1-2: [[ ]] ................................................................ 4-4 Figure 4.1-3: [[ ]] ....................................................... 4-7 Figure 4.1-4: [[ ]] ....................................................... 4-7 Figure 4.1-5: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic Model (3D Mesh Cross Section)........................................ 4-9 Figure 4.1-6: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic Model ...............................................................................
4-10 Figure 4.1-7: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic Model ...............................................................................
4-11 Figure 4.1-8: Browns Ferry Acoustic Steam Dryer [[ ]] Locations .................................. 4-12 Figure 4.1-9: Browns Ferry Acoustic Differential FRFs ........................................................................
4-12 Figure 4.1-10: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic FRFs Pressure Distribution ............................................ 4-13 Figure 4.1-11: Browns Ferry [ ]] ......................................... 4-14 Figure 4.1-12: [[ ]] ........................ 4-15 Figure 4.1-13: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ......................... 4-16 Figure 4.1-14: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ......................... 4-19 Figure 4.1-15: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ....................... 4-20 Figure 4.1-16: Browns Ferry [[
]] ........................... 4-22 Figure 4.1-17: Browns Ferry [[
]] ........................... 4-23 Figure 4.1-18: [[ ]] ............................................................................. 4-25 Figure 4.1-19: Browns Ferry CLTP All Units - [[ ]] ................. 4-27 Figure 4.1-20: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ............................ 4-29
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) ix Figure 4.1-21: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................. 4-30 Figure 4.1-22: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................. 4-31 Figure 4.1-23: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................. 4-32 Figure 4.1-24: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................. 4-33 Figure 4.1-25: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................................................ 4-36 Figure 4.1-26: Browns Ferry SRV and Branch Line Layout .................................................................. 4-44 Figure 4.1-27: Single SRV [[ ]] .................................................................................................... 4-45 Figure 4.1-28: Browns Ferry MSL [[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL A at [[ ]] .......... 4-46 Figure 4.1-29: Browns Ferry MSL [[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL A at [[ ]] .......... 4-47 Figure 4.1-30: Browns Ferry MSL [[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL B at [[ ]] .......... 4-47 Figure 4.1-31: Browns Ferry MSL [[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL B at [[ ]]. ......... 4-48 Figure 4.1-32: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ........................................... 4-49 Figure 4.1-33: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................ 4-50 Figure 4.1-34: Sensitivity Study for SRV Acoustic Loads [[ ]] Hz .......................... 4-54 Figure 4.1-35: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ......................................... 4-55 Figure 4.1-36: Definition of Browns Ferry [[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset .........................................................................................................................
................... 4-59 Figure 4.1-37: [[
]] Browns Ferry [[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset Curve ....... 4-60 Figure 4.1-38: Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads Trending Range............................................................ 4-60 Figure 4.1-39: [[ ]] Projected [[ ]] SRV Resonance Loads ................. 4-62 Figure 4.1-40: [[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset ............................................. 4-62 Figure 4.1-41: Comparison of Browns Ferry and [[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset ........................ 4-63 Figure 4.1-42: [[ ]] SRV EPU Loads Trending Range and Test Condition .............................. 4-63 Figure 4.1-43: Projected Browns Ferry SRV Loads at EPU .................................................................. 4-64 Figure 4.1-44: Comparison of Browns Ferry [[ ]] SRV EPU loads ........................................ 4-72 Figure 4.1-45: CLTP Loads a nd EPU SRV Design Loads, [[ ]] ................. 4-81 Figure 4.1-46: Browns Ferry U123 MSL Piping Outline ....................................................................... 4-84 Figure 4.1-47: [[ ]] ..................................................................... 4-85 Figure 4.1-48: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic [[ ]] ......................... 4-91 Figure 4.1-49: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic [[ ]] ................................ 4-92
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) x Figure 4.1-50: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic [[ ]] ................................ 4-93 Figure 4.1-51: [[ ]] ..................................................... 4-97 Figure 4.1-52: [[ ]] ..................................................... 4-98 Figure 4.1-53: [[ ]] ..................................................... 4-99 Figure 4.1-54: [[ ]] ................................................... 4-100 Figure 4.1-55: [[ ]] ................................................. 4-101 Figure 4.1-56: Browns Ferry [[ ]] PSD Loads to Industry Data ........................... 4-104 Figure 4.1-57: Browns Ferry [[ ]] PSD Loads to Industry Data ........................... 4-105 Figure 4.2-1: FIV Fatigue Analysis Process ...................................................................................
...... 4-106 Figure 4.2-2: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Finite Element Model ................................... 4-107 Figure 4.2-3: Typical Perforated Plate Design for Center Bank Inlet .................................................. 4-110 Figure 4.2-4: Typical Perforated Plate Design for Center Bank Inlet .................................................. 4-111 Figure 4.2-5: Top View of Steam Dryer FEM showing the Vane Bundle Designations ..................... 4-112 Figure 4.2-6: Typical Vane Bundle FEM and Master DOF Setup ....................................................... 4-113 Figure 4.2-7: Views of the Splices for the Lower Support Ring Superelement FEMs ........................ 4-114 Figure 4.2-8: Lower Skirt Ring Splice Superelement Master Nodes ................................................... 4-115 Figure 4.2-9: An Illustration of the Water Modeling Due to Lateral Translation of the FEM ............. 4-116 Figure 4.2-10: [[ ]] ....................... 4-117 Figure 4.2-11: [[ ]] ................................................. 4-118 Figure 4.2-12: [[ ]] ....................................................................................... 4-119 Figure 4.2-13: Support Ring Boundary Constraints .............................................................................
4-120 Figure 4.2-14: Example sub model; ([[ ]]) ............................. 4-121 Figure 4.2-15: Stress Contour Comparison of [[ ]] ............................................... 4-121 Figure 4.2-16: Convergence Stress Trending ...................................................................................
.... 4-122 Figure 4.2-17: [[ ]] .................................... 4-125 Figure 4.2-18: Pressure Load Mapping for [[ ]] Load Step ......................................................... 4-126 Figure 4.2-19: Seismic Block Design ..........................................................................................
......... 4-135 Figure 4.2-20: Jack Bolt and Latch Mechanism Design ....................................................................... 4-136 Figure 4.2-21: Overview of Final Stress Adjustment Process .............................................................. 4-14 2 Figure 4.2-22: Basic Outline for Benchmark [[ ]] Bias and Uncertainty Process .......... 4-146
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) xi Figure 4.2-23: BWR/4 Prototype [[
]] Bias and Uncertainty ...................................................................................................................
.............. 4-148 Figure 4.2-24: BWR/4 Prototype [[ ]] ................................................. 4-149 Figure 5.2-1: Components and Pr essure Loads Applied for DP N ............................................................. 5-8 Figure 5.2-2: Components for MSLB Acoustic Pressure Loads ............................................................ 5-10 Figure 5.2-3: Components in Steam Dryer FEM for TSV A Pressure Load ............................................ 5-12 Figure 5.2-4: Components in Steam Dryer FEM for TSV F Pressure Load ............................................ 5-12 Figure 5.2-5: Horizontal Seismic Model .......................................................................................
......... 5-13 Figure 5.2-6: SSE Seismic Acceleration Response Spectra ................................................................... 5-14 Figure 5.2-7: OBE Seismic Acceleration Response Spectra .................................................................. 5-1 4 Figure 6.3-1: Generic Process for Updating Limit Curves ....................................................................... 6-7 NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) xii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Description 1D One-dimensional 2D Two-dimensional 3D Three-dimensional Micro Strain (10
-6 length/length) ASR Alternating Stress Ratio APDL ANSYS Parametric Design Language ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers AVS Acoustic Vibration Suppressor B&U Bias and Uncertainty Browns Ferry Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BFN Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BWR Boiling Water Reactor CLTP Current Licensed Thermal Power CP Current Power DAS Data Acquisition System DoE Design of Experiments DoF Degree of Freedom EPU Extended Power Uprate FSRF Fatigue Strength Reduction Factor FE Finite Element FEA Finite Element Analysis FEM Finite Element Model FIV Flow-Induced Vibration FFT Fast Fourier Transform FRF Frequency Response Function FF Full Frequency, or Full Frequency Spectrum GEH GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy HCF High Cycle Fatigue NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) xiii Term Description
[[
]] HPCI High Presure Coolant Injection Hz Hertz [[
]] MASR Minimum Alternating Stress Ratio Mlbs/hr Millions pounds per hour MPC Multi Point Constraint MSIV Main Steam Isolation Valve MSL Main Steam Line MSLB Main Steam Line Break Outside Containment MW th Megawatt Thermal NP Next Power Level NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission OBE Operating Basis Earthquake OE Operating Experience OLTP Original Licensed Thermal Power Pa Pascal PATP Power Ascension Test Plan PBLE Plant Based Load Evaluation PBLE01 PBLE Input [[
]] PBLE02 PBLE Input [[
]] PSD Power Spectral Density psi Pounds per square inch psia Pounds per square inch absolute psid Pounds per square inch differential PT Penetrant Test PTF Plate Thickness Factor RCIC Reactor Core Isolation Cooling RFO Refueling Outage RMS Root-Mean-Squared NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) xiv Term Description RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel RSD Replacement Steam Dryer SDAR Steam Dryer Analysis Report SCF Stress Concentration Factor SF Singularity Factor SG Strain Gauge SRV Safety Relief Valve SSE Safe Shutdown Earthquake TC Test Condition TSV Turbine Stop Valve TVA Tennessee Valley Authority VFD Variable Frequency Drive VPF Vane Passing Frequency ZPA Zero Period Acceleration NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 1-1 1.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This report documents the stress analyses for the replacement steam dryer (RSDs) for each of the three Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) units. The focus of these analyses is to demonstrate that the RSD will maintain structural integrity during normal plant operation and under transient and accident conditions. Fatigue analyses were performed for flow-induced vibration (FIV) and hydrodynamic loads during normal operation at extended power uprate (EPU) power levels. Primary stress evaluations were performed for normal, upset, emergency and faulted loading conditions at EPU power levels. [[ ]]. The BFN RSD design incorporates the replacement steam dryer design features that were developed to accommodate the high FIV acoustic loads that led to the fa ilure of the original BWR/3 dryers at EPU operating conditions. The prototype for the BFN RSDs is the curved hood RSD installed in a BWR/4 plant with operating conditions that are similar to those for BFN. A later version of the prototype dryer was installed in a BWR/6. The prototype RSD dryer design has operated successfully in both of these plants. As part of the BFN RSD design, additional iterative design analyses were performed to redistribute the loads throughout the structure and reduce the peak dryer stresses.
Successful operation of th e prototype RSD design at full EPU power levels in the previous plants, along with the additional design refinement, provide assurance that the BFN RSDs will maintain structural integrity during normal operation. For the fatigue analyses, the GE Hitachi Nucl ear Energy (GEH) Plant Based Load Evaluation (PBLE) methodology was [[ ]]. To account for uncertainties in the steam dryer structural freq uency response between the idealized FEM and the as-built dryer, [[
]] The stresses from these analyses form the basis of the fatigue assessment.
The overall uncertainties associat ed with the load definition and structural response methodology
[[ ]] Additional adjustment factors were developed to address load effects that may not be accounted for in the [[ ]] acoustic pressure measurements (e.g., loading generated by the recirculation pump vane passing pulsations). [[
]] data taken during the power ascension were used NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 1-2 to develop [[
]] EPU scaling factors to project the FEM stress results to EPU conditions.
The [[ ]] B&U values and the other adjustment factors were applied to the stress results of the FEM analyses, and then projected to the EPU power level conditions to determine the peak dryer stresses at EPU. When compared to the fatigue acceptanc e criteria, the stress margins for all dryer components exceed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) recommended minimum alternating stress ratio (M ASR) greater than 2.0. The results of these fatigue evaluations confirm that each BFN RSD is structurally adequate to accommodate the expected FIV loads at EPU conditions.
Primary stress analyses were performed for the design load combinations for normal, upset, emergency and faulted conditions. The methodologies used for the primary stress analyses are the same as those used for the original steam dryer design analyses. The results of these analyses demonstrate that at EPU conditions, the steam dryer will maintain structural integrity during normal operation as well as for tr ansient and accident conditions.
A Power Ascension Test Plan (PATP) for the initial cycle of EPU operation at all three BFN units is presented. Th e BFN RSD design is [[
]] however, the RSD for the [[ ]] The plan includes [[ ]] The test program describes the [[ ]] locations and methodology for developing fatigue stress acceptance limit criteria used to assure that the dryer stresses remain acceptable during the power ascension. Upon reaching full EPU power, fatigue stress evaluations will be performed based on plant measurements at EPU to confirm that the RSD st resses are acceptable for long-term operation of the RSD dryers.
The structural analyses and power ascension monitoring program assure that the BFN RSDs will maintain structural integrity during normal operation and under transien t and accident conditions for the design life of each RSD.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 2-1 2.0 BROWNS FERRY REPLACEMENT STEAM DRYER ANALYSIS OVERVIEW 2.1 Analysis Process Overview The BFN RSD design is based on the BWR/4 prot otype RSD design that has been used in two BWR/4 units and one BWR/6 unit operating at EPU conditions.
The prototype design has been improved to incorporate lessons learned from the BWR/4 RSD Operating Experience (OE), design refinements incorporated during the BWR/6 RSD project, and further refinements from BFN RSD stress studies to ensure that the BFN RSD would meet the NRC recommended 2.0 MASR margin to the fatigue a cceptance criterion (Reference 1). The BFN units are very similar to the BWR/4 protot ype plant, in particular with respect to the plant geometry and operating conditions that determine the acousti c pressure load ing acting on the steam dryer. These plants are the GEH BWR/4 design with 251-inch diameter reactor
pressure vessels (RPVs) and operate at virtually the same power level and steam flow velocity conditions (see data provided in Table 4.1-23).
The BFN units and the BWR/4 prototype plant have stagnant branch lines (dead-legs) on the MSLs. The FIV loading on the BFN RSDs is
[[ ]] as the loads measured on the BWR/4 prototype.
The three BFN units are virtually identical, with only minor geometrical differences that may slightly impact the characteristics of the acoustic resonances that are expected to develop in the standpipes for the SRVs. The main difference between the original steam dryers for the three units is the hold-down rod location. [[ ]] This is further discussed in Section 3.2.1, Functional Modifications. [[
]] Figure 2.1-1 provides a high level ov erview of the analysis process. The steam dryer acoustic pressure loads for the BFN FIV anal ysis were devel oped from BFN [[
]] using the PBLE02 methodology (Appendix C of this report). [[ ]] Based on an evaluation of the SRV standpipe geometry, MSL flow velocities, and the [[ ]] acoustic pressure measurements from the three units, [[
]] Because there are no BFN MSL measurements at EPU flow conditions, [[
]] The resonance frequencies were determined from [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 2-2 ]] which is the most appropriate SRV acoustic re sonance load to use in synthesizing the BFN SRV resonance loads. In the fatigue stress evaluation of the BFN RSD, the stresses for steam dryer components were first calculated by FEA at BFN CLTP conditions, and then extrapolated to full EPU conditions based on BFN specific scaling factors developed from trending of the power ascension data. The steam dryer component stresses accounted fo r stress intensificati on due to welds and [[
]] These stresses were adjusted w ith a set of bias and uncertainty (B&U) terms, including [[ ]] B&U from the BWR/4 prototype RSD benchmarking predictions compared to on-dryer strain measurements; the bias factor for [[ ]] The adjusted stress results at EPU condition meets the NRC-recommended MASR criteria of 2.0 to the Ameri can Society of Mechanic al Engineers (ASME) Code endurance limit of 13,600 pounds per square inch (psi).
Primary stress analyses for specified load combinations compared to ASME stress limits demonstrated that the RSD will maintain structural integrity (i.e., no generation of loose parts) during normal operation as well as for transient and accident conditions.
For the [[ ]] steam dryer, [[ ]] will be instrumented. Power ascension limit curves were developed for the [[
]] Measurements will be taken during power ascension and the steam dryer stresses will be projected to the current power level, the next power level, and to full EPU condition in order to assure that the stresses will not exceed the fatigue limit during power ascension and will remain below the fatigue acceptance criterion at full EPU. Once [[ ]] reaches the full EPU power level, a confirmatory stress analysis will be performed to demonstrate that the fatigue stresses are acceptable for long term steam dryer operation.
For the [[ ]] Once at full EPU power, confirmatory evaluations will be performed for each [[ ]] to demonstrate that the fatigue stresses are acceptable for long term steam dryer operation.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 2-3 [[ ]] Figure 2.1-1: Steam Dryer Analysis Methodology Overview NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-1 3.0 BROWNS FERRY REPLACEMENT STEAM DRYER DESIGN 3.1 BWR/4 Replacement Steam Dryer Design In accordance with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.20 (Reference 2), the BFN RSD for the lead unit is classified as [[
]] The BFN RSD is based on a field tested design of a curved hood six-bank RSD used in a BWR/4 reactor that has completed its comprehensive vibration assessment program at EPU conditions. This BWR/4 RSD serves as the "valid prototype" for the BFN RSD. In order to maintain the structural integrity at the EPU loading conditions, the BWR/4 RSD design uses [[
]]. In addition, the use of [[
]] as discussed in Section 3.2.2. This steam dryer also uses [[ ]] to improve the stress distribution and move the welds away from the stress concentration at these panel junctions. The RSD also uses an improved [[
]]. As a result, the baseline BWR/4 prototype RSD design is significantly more robust than the original steam dryer it replaced. The same holds true for the RSD design for BFN Units 1, 2, and 3. Both the BFN reactor vessel and the BWR/4 reactor vessel where the BWR/4 prototype RSD was installed have the same internal diameter; thus, in essence, the BFN RSD design envelope remains essentially unchanged from the BWR/4 prototype RSD.
In order to validate that the BFN RSD is similar to the prototype BWR/4 RSD, a study was conducted by placing the prototype BWR/4 design load onto the BFN RSD design. The results indicate that dynamic response remained relatively unchanged between the BWR/4 prototype and the BFN design. This study provides additional assurance that the changes implemented to improve the prototype baseline design do not i nvalidate the classifica tion of the baseline BWR/4 design as a "valid prototype" in accordance with US NRC Regulatory Guide 1.20 (Reference 2), [[
]] Figure 3.1-1, with nomenclature provided in Table 3.1-1, provides an overview of the BFN RSD and the steam dryer component nomenclature.
Differences between the prototype BWR/4 steam dryer and the BFN RSD are discussed in Section 3.2 below.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-2 Table 3.1-1: Replacement Steam Dryer Component Nomenclature
[[` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-3 NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-4 3.2 Modifications Made for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant The BFN Units 1, 2, and 3 RSDs are very similar to the BWR/4 prototype steam dryer design. In general, some design modifications were incorporated to accommodate the RPV design differences (functional modifications) and others to improve the performance of the steam dryer because of lessons learned or to increase the fatigue margin (design improvements). One additional difference to note is the [[
]]. GEH has conducted testing on the [[
]] and has concluded that there is no change in steam dryer performance. The [[ ]] was updated based on the new design. 3.2.1 Functional Modifications Facilitating RPV Interface The functional modifications encompass design changes required to effectively install and maintain the steam dryer given that the BFN RPV design differs slightly from the RPV where the prototype was installed. In addition, the design changes facilitate the need for only one RSD design to fit all three BFN reactor units because there are minor differences where the steam dryer hold down brackets are located in the vessel head and in the locations and sizes of the steam dryer brackets.
The BFN original steam dryers used lifting rods that protruded upward from the steam dryer to interface with the RPV hold-down brackets. The major design change to the prototype regarding functionality is [[ ]] For the prototype installation, [[ ]] For the BFN RSD design, [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-5 A steam dryer global interference study for BFN was conducted as pa rt of the standard design practice. This study specifically evaluates all key RPV to steam dryer interfaces, orthogonally and radially. The purpose of this design study is to assure adequate cl earance and design target overlaps are maintained. Specific consideration for thermal expansion dur ing vessel heat up is also taken into account. This study concludes th at the clearances are adeq uate at both operating temperature and cold shutdown.
3.2.2 Design Improvements to th e BWR/4 Prototype Design As previously mentioned, the design improveme nts to the prototype design were implemented in the [[ ]] and BFN RSD designs for two reasons: to address lessons learned due to manufacturing or operating experience, and to increase fatigue margin to meet recommended fatigue acceptance criteria w ith a MASR greater than 2.0.
3.2.2.1 Design Improvements Due to Lessons Learned Based on operating experience for the prototype BWR/4 RSD, the BFN RSD incorporated
[[ ]] design modifications as follows:
[[
]] 3.2.2.2 Design Improvements to Increase Fatigue Margin Additional design changes were required to improve the fatigue life of the BFN RSD to resist the FIV pressure loading and postulated SRV res onance loading. These modifications provide a more robust steam dryer design and are listed as follows:
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-6
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-7
[[ ]] Figure 3.2-1:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-8 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-3:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-9 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-5:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 3-10 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-7:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-1 4.0 BROWNS FERRY REPLACEMENT STEAM DRYER FATIGUE EVALUATION This section describes the FIV stress analysis for the BFN RSDs. The purpose of this analysis is to demonstrate that the alternating stresses during normal operation at EPU conditions remain within the design fatigue acceptance criterion with the factor of 2.0 margin recommended by the NRC in Reference 1. Section 4.1 documents the developm ent of the design load definitions for the FIV analysis. Section 4.2 provides the de tails of the structural analyses.
4.1 Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) Design Load Definition The following sections describe the design load definition for the FIV analysis. The acoustic load definition was developed from acoustic load measurements taken [[
]] The [[ ]] measurements taken during power ascension were used to develop scaling factors for projecting the CLTP analysis results to full EPU conditions. Based on analyses of the SRV standpipe geometry and main steam line flow velocity conditions, an SRV acoustic resonance is anticipated to initiate and grow as the plant moves into the EPU operating range. Because the resonance does not exist at the current power operating conditions, [[
]]. Reactor operating conditions and non-acoustic loads also affect the vibratory response of the steam dryer during normal operation. [[
]] 4.1.1 [[ ]] Acoustic Loads Measurements The acoustic load definition for the BFN RSDs was developed from acoustic load measurements taken [[ ]] This section provides a summary of the following topics:
- [[
]]
- Data Acquisition System (DAS),
- Data Acquisition Summary, and
- Data Filtering and Scaling. The methodology used to [[ ]] for the steam dryer load evaluation is described in mo re detail in Appendix C.
4.1.1.1 [[ ]] [[
]] where [[ ]] is used to define the fluctuating pressure loads on the steam dryer.
For [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-2
]] [[ ]] [[ ]] The resulting signal from [[
]] The process for determining [[
]] The PBLE model was run [[ ]] This assessment uses [[ ]]. The figure shows [[
]]. Unit 1 is presented here [[
]]. This selection process is discussed later in Section 4.1.3.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-3 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-1: Browns Ferry Unit 1
[[
]] 4.1.1.2 Data Acquisition System The DAS equipment used to gather [[ ]] at BFN from 2007 through 2011 was a
[[ ]] This system meets criteria for dynamic measurements as outlined in Appendix C. This DAS is a computer-based system capable of acquiring and [[ ]] This system is suitable for dynamic measurem ents for a frequency bandwidth of at least
[[ ]]. It is sensitive enough to detect and measure [[
]] The DAS has an option to set the br idge excitation to zero volts. [[ ]] Figure 4.1-2 shows a comparison of [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-4
]] It is not possible to completely shield the cables and strain gauges from electrical noise in the plant. More discussion on Figure 4.1-2 is in Secti on 4.1.1.4 for data filtering.
[[ ]] [[
]] Figure 4.1-2:
[[
]] 4.1.1.3 Data Acquisition Summary
[[ ]] acoustic measurements have been taken at each of the BFN units. Data was taken in 2007 and 2008 at Unit 1, in 2010 at Unit 3, a nd in 2011 at Unit 2. Th e installation at each unit consisted of [[ ]]. During each time period a data acquisition test pr ogram was conducted to collect pow er ascension data. The presented 10V data trace represents the Active SG signal with 10 volts of excitation applied to the SG when recording the strain data. The 0V trace is the recorded data when no excitation voltage is applied to the SG. This is done in order to identify electrical noise that may be present at the time when the data is recorded.
This acquired test data serves as input to RSD design basis acoustic load definition using the PBLE02 methodology described in Appendix C.
A more detailed summary of these test campaigns can be found in Appendix D. The collection of
[[ ]] data to support steam dryer limit curve monitoring during the EPU power ascension test program is described in Section 6.0.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-5 4.1.1.4 Data Filtering and Scaling The first step in the filtering process for BFN was to [[
]] Figure 4.1-2 is an example of a PSD used for [[
]] Table 4.1-1 lists the freque ncies that were judged [[
]] Table 4.1-1:
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
]] The electrical noise was filtered using [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-6
]] The result is [[
]] Figure 4.1-3 shows an example of the filtering [[ ]] Figure 4.1-4 shows the same filtered data for [[
]] The filtered [[
]] is discussed in more detail in Appendix C.
[[
]] The PBLE02 load definition development is described in Section 4.1.2.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-7 [[ ]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-3:
[[
]] [[ ]] [[
]] Figure 4.1-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-8 4.1.2 PBLE02 Acoustic Load Definition The acoustic pressure load definition used for the BFN RSD design and structural analyses was developed with the PBLE02 acoustic load methodology using the [[ ]] taken at each of the three units.
4.1.2.1 Steam Dryer Fluctuating Load Definition The RSD FIV response analysis uses the [[ ]] to develop the pressure load. The PBLE02 methodology used in th e present work is described in Appendix C [[
]] A 3D acoustic FEM of the Browns Fe rry RSD and RPV was constructed [[
]] [[ ]] regions with different steam properties are defined in the RPV/steam dryer acoustic model as shown in Figure 4.1-5:
- [[
]] The following acoustic boundary conditions are applied to the acoustic model as shown in Figure 4.1-6: [[
]] Additional input [[ ]]. Table 4.1-21 and Table 4.2-24 NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-9 show these parameters for the Browns Ferry acoustic FEM. [[
]] (Figure 4.1-5).
The acoustic FRFs are calculated by [[
]] For the Browns Ferry acoustic model, the [[
]]. [[ ]] Figure 4.1-5: Browns Ferry PBLE Acou stic Model (3D Mesh Cross Section)
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-10
[[
]]
[[
]] Figure 4.1-6: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic Model with Applied Bottom Boundary Conditions NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-11 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-7: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic Model
[[ ]] [[
]] Only the steam dryer is shown in the figures.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-12 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-8: Browns Ferry Acoustic Steam Dryer
[[
]] Locations
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-9: Browns Ferry Acoustic Differential FRFs
[[
]] Points NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-13
[[
]]
Figure 4.1-10: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic FRFs Pressure Distribution
([[
]]) [[
]] The [[ ]] are used to reconstruct the wave field in the [[
]] It should be noted that the CLTP [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-14
]] (see Table 4.1-2).
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-11: Browns Ferry
[[
]] The nozzle acoustic velocities are then used to excite the RPV/steam dryer acoustic FEM. The relationship between [[ ]] The TransMatrix also includes internal [[ ]]. The [[ ]] represent the acoustic effects of the [[
]]. [[
]] pressure loads are then calculated and recorded at all nodes on the acoustic model that are adjacent, or coincident with, nodes on the surface of the structural FEM. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-15 Browns Ferry [[ ]] PBLE02 on-dryer acoustic differential pressure loads are calculated on all steam dryer surface nodes. [[ ]] is presented here as it was the [[
]] Figure 4.1-12 presents an example of differential pressure PSD, which is based on the Sum PSD of the [[ ]] on the steam dryer [[
]] The [[
]] pressure PSD plot points to several amplitude peaks, which represent the interaction of the [[ ]] input pressure and RPV acousti c FRFs. Figure 4.1-13 presents several [[
]] pressure distribution pl ots (3D contour plots) at several peak frequencies
[[
]]. For clarity only the steam dryer is displayed in the figures.
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-12:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-16
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-13: Browns Ferry
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-17 A [[
]] pressure loads (i.e., [[ ]]) from the adjacent acoustic model nodes are mapped to the surface of the structural FEM. These mapped [[
]] pressure loads were used to perform the FIV structural analyses. This process is performed [[
]] 4.1.2.2 [[ ]]
The [[ ]] data acquisition for each Browns Ferry power ascension TC consisted of data sets [[
]] Dividing [[
]] acoustic loads.
A [[
]] acoustic loads. The length [[
]] to capture the peak structural response. The [[ ]] from the PBLE02 calculated on-dryer
[[ ]] pressure loads at [[
]] (Figure 4.1-8). [[ ]] provide inputs to the FIV analyses that are representative of the highest expected lo ads with good frequency content in each frequency band, [[
]] PBLE loads definitions used in the Browns Ferry steam dryer FIV stress analyses.
The steps in [[
]] process are:
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-18
]] The above process for [[ ]] FIV analyses is illustrated below using the Browns Ferry [[ ]] data. Figure 4.1-14 and Figure 4.1-15 show respectively [[
]] PBLE02 [[
]] The pressure load for [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-19 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-14: Browns Ferry
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-20 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-15: Browns Ferry
[[
]] An additional [[
]] Acoustic pressure load distributions are generated and mapped onto the structural model for a total of [[
]]. Figure 4.1-16 a nd Figure 4.1-17 present examples of PBLE02 calculated [[ ]] pressure load distributions (3D contour plots) at [[ ]] used in the FIV analyses.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-21 It should be noted that the respective [[
]] FIV stresses [[
]] In summary, [[
]] for use the in Browns Ferry steam dryer FIV stress analyses. [[ ]] good frequency content to ensure that all the structural modes are well excited. Also, [[ ]] are included in the final Browns Ferry stress adjustment
[[
]].
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-22
[[
]] Figure 4.1-16: Browns Ferry [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-23
[[
]] Figure 4.1-17: Browns Ferry
[[
]] 4.1.3 [[ ]]
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-24
]] 4.1.3.1 Browns Ferry [[ ]] Pressure PSD Comparison Each unit's CLTP MSL data was pre-processed (filtered, [[
]] and converted to internal pressure) and then processed using PBLE02 methodology (Appendix C) to develop acoustic pressure load sets. Table 4.1-2 presents the CLTP test condition characteristics for the three units, [[
]] A discussion on the recirculation pump VPF is covered later [[
]] Table 4.1-2: Browns Ferry Inputs Unit Power Level Test Condition Data Recording Date [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
Unit 1 CLTP (99.0%) Dec. 2008 Unit 2 CLTP (100.0%) April 2011 Unit 3 CLTP (99.9%) April 2010
]] Table 4.1-3: Browns Ferry
[[
]] Unit / MSL
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-25 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-18:
[[
]] Table 4.1-4: Browns Ferry
[[
]] Unit [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 ]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-26 Appendix D presents the Browns Ferry CLTP measured [[ ]] To summarize the comparisons, Figure 4.1-19 shows
[[ ]]). The PSD represents [[
]] Because the purpose of this project is the structural evaluation of the RSDs, a better and more illustrative comparison between the three units is made using [[ ]] (this comparison is presented in Section 4.1.3.2). However, Figure 4.1-19 provides a direct comparison of the measured [[
]] As seen in Figure 4.1-19, the three units have overall similar frequency content. The highest [[ ]] pressure amplitude is at [[
]] The three units are virtually identical with respect to the plant geometry relevant to the pressure loading on the steam dryer and with resp ect to the reactor operating conditions. [[ ]] Given that the geometry and operating conditions are essentially the same for the three units, [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-27
]] Because it is not possible [[
]]. [[ ]] Figure 4.1-19: Browns Ferry CLTP All Units -
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-28 4.1.3.2 Browns Ferry [[
]] Pressure Loads Comparison Using each unit's CLTP measured [[ ]] data and the PBLE02 methodology described in Appendix C; the [[
]] pressure acoustic lo ads are developed for the three Browns Ferry units. For comparison purposes, the loads are calculated for [[ ]] (Figure 4.1-8). The [[
]] The comparisons [[ ]] for the three units are presented in several ways in the following sections:
[[
]] 4.1.3.2.1 [[ ]] PSD Comparison Figure 4.1-20 presents the three Browns Ferry Units, PBLE02 [[ ]] The comparisons are based on the [[
]] As seen in this figure, the three units have similar frequency content. [[
]] Overall, [[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-29
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-20: Browns Ferry
[[
]] 4.1.3.2.2 [[
]] Pressure Load Comparison Figure 4.1-21 presents, for each of the three Browns Ferry units, the PBLE02 [[
]]. The comparison is based on the [[ ]] pressure loads of the [[ ]]. The pressure load represents the [[
]]. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-30 The three units' [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-21: Browns Ferry
[[
]] 4.1.3.2.3 [[ ]] Pressure Load Comparison Figure 4.1-22 presents, for each of the three Browns Ferry units, PBLE02 [[ ]] The comparison is based on the [[ ]] pressure loads of the [[ ]]. The pressure load represents [[ ]]. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-31 As seen in these [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-22: Browns Ferry
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-32 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-23: Browns Ferry
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-33 4.1.3.2.4 [[ ]] Pressure Load Comparison Figure 4.1-24 presents, for each of the three Browns Ferry units, PBLE02 [[ ]] The comparison is based on the Sum of the [[ ]]. The pressure load represents the [[
]] After [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-24: Browns Ferry
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-34 4.1.3.3 Browns Ferry Unit Selection and Units Bounding Scaling Factors Following the three units' pressure load comparison in the previous section, [[ ]] Given that the geometry and operating conditions are practically the same for the three units, [[
]] From equations [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-35
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-36 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-25: Browns Ferry
[[
]] 4.1.4 SRV Acoustic Load Definition Regulatory Guide 1.20, Revision 3 (R eference 2), Section C 2.0 indica tes studies of past failures have determined that flow-excited acoustic resonances within the va lves, stand-off pipes and branch lines in the MSLs of BWRs can pl ay a significant role in producing mid- to high-frequency pressure fluctuations and vibration that can damage MSL valves, the steam dryer and other RPV internals and steam system components. Th e SRV standpipe acoustic resonances are the main contributor to the mid- to high-frequency pressure fluctuations. Therefore, the potential for these SRV resonance loads is reviewed and, if needed, the SRV resonance loads are modeled in the load definition and analysis.
4.1.4.1 SRV Acoustic Load Synthesis To analyze the SRV resonance loads, the Browns Ferry [[ ]] gauge data from all three units were first screened to identify exis ting acoustic sources up to CLTP conditions. [[ ]] Strouhal calculations for the potential resonance frequencies are used to confirm existing sources and to determine potential acoustic sources between CLTP and EPU conditions. [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-37
]] Details of the above processes are described in this section. The SRV load process includes the development of SRV resonance load adders that are used in the base load for performing the structural analysis. For a plant with multiple SRV valves in each MSL with similar geometry, a band of potential frequency responses can be predicted for each line. The exact frequency response, location of prevailing acoustic source, and phase relationship between the acoustic source and the MSL mode at increased steam flow [[
]] The methodology and approach used for Browns Ferry was to [[
]]
[[
]],
- The evaluation of the acoustic load sensitivity [[
]],
- The [[ ]] for the structural FEA. 4.1.4.1.1 Identification of Potential SRV Resonance Frequencies
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-38
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-39
]] 4.1.4.1.2 SRV Resonance Load Generation
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-40
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-41 4.1.4.1.3 SRV Resonance Amplitudes fo r Structural Analyses
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-42
]] 4.1.4.2 Identification of Potential SRV Resonance Frequencies
[[
]] Browns Ferry has the typi cal four MSL configurations where the steam line nozzles are offset +/- 18 o from the 90-270
° line. Browns Ferry uses a common SRV acoustic standpipe configuration for all of the SRV branches. There are three SRV layouts in the MSL configuration, with MSLs A and B being mirror images of MSLs C and D; however, MSL C has one less SRV than MSL B. Lines A and D have three SRVs, as shown in Figure 4.1-26 and Figure 4.1-28. Line B has four SRVs and line C has three SRVs, on opposite sides of the MSL piping from the vessel. There is a Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) line below the SRV on MSL C and a High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) steam supply line below a dead-leg SRV on MSL B. There is a Reactor Vent line on MSL C, 44 inches below the centerline of the no zzle, as shown in Figure 4.1-26. It should be noted that previous testing and analysis has indicated that HPCI, RCIC, and vent lines are not significant contributors to acoustic signal content.
MSLs B and C each have a dead-leg section to accommodate SRVs. Because there is no steam flow in the stagnant dead-leg branches, there is no flow mechanism for exciting the standpipes in the dead-leg section. Therefore, it is not necessary to address potential acoustic resonance frequencies associated with the standpipes in the dead-leg branches.
MSL acoustic data taken on Unit 2 in 2006 (and on Unit 1 in 2007) indicated the presence of a resonance frequency at approximately [[
]] associated with the blind flange standpipes without SRVs in the main steam flow path for MSLs A and D. Modifications have been performed to install acoustic vibration suppressor (AVS) inserts in place of the blind flanges on these standpipes for all three BFN units. The AVS inserts we re not used in the blin d flange standpipes in the stagnant dead-legs on MSLs B and C. The locations of the AVS inse rts are shown in Figure 4.1-26. The AVS inserts reduce the depth of the standpipe cavity, shifting the fundamental resonance frequency from approximately [[ ]] for the blind flange to approximately
[[ ]] with the AVS. Subsequent to the modifications to install the AVSs, additional MSL acoustic data has been taken on all three BFN units that show the AVS inserts eliminated the [[
]] acoustic resonances that were occurring in the standpipes with blind flanges at CLTP power level. The MSL acoustic data for each BFN unit used in the stress analyses for the RSDs were taken with the AVSs installed.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-43 The [[ ]] fundamental frequency for the standpip es with AVS inserts is well above the frequency range of interest for the steam dryer structural analyses.
Also, at the higher fundamental frequency, the steam line flow velocity necessar y to induce an acoustic resonance in the AVS-equipped standpipes is well above the EPU operating range. Therefore, it is not necessary to address potential acoustic resonance frequencies associated with the standpipes with AVS inserts in the acoustic load definition.
Acoustic [[ ]] analyses have been performed [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-44 Figure 4.1-26: Browns Ferry SRV and Branch Line Layout NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-45 4.1.4.2.1 SRV Resonance Fundamental Frequency A detailed [[
]] of a single SRV standpipe and valve cavity was built and analyzed following the methodology described in Section 4.1.4.1.1. [[ ]] analysis of the single SRV indicates [[ ]] is approximately
[[
]]. Figure 4.1-27 shows the [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-27: Single SRV
[[ ]] 4.1.4.2.2 MSL Acoustic Mode Interactions The SRV standpipe and MSL acoustics will interact and the combined system may resonate at frequencies different from that of the single valve standpipe fundamental frequency. The frequency of the combined system resonance has been observed in plant measurements to usually be within [[
]] of the standpipe fundamental frequency. For that reason, [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-46 ]] Typical SRV/MSL resonance mode shapes for MSL A and MSL B are shown in Figure 4.1-28 to Figure 4.1-31. Table 4.1-5 shows the results of the evaluation, with several prominent modes from [[ ]]. The predicted SRV resonance frequencies in Table 4.1-6 are candida tes for modeling in the design acoustic load definition.
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-28: Browns Ferry MSL
[[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL A at
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-47 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-29: Browns Ferry MSL
[[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL A at
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-30: Browns Ferry MSL
[[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL B at
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-48 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-31: Browns Ferry MSL
[[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL B at
[[
]]. 4.1.4.2.3 Comparison with Browns Ferry MSL Measurements The candidate SRV resonance frequencies in Table 4.1-6 were then compared against the MSL measurements taken during power ascension to CLTP in each of the three Browns Ferry units. These comparisons, supplemented with Strouhal calculations, are used to determine the final SRV resonance frequencies that will be synthesized in the design acoustic load definition. The Browns Ferry MSL strain gauge data from all three units were first screened to identify potential existing
acoustic sources up to CLTP conditions. [[
]] Figure 4.1-32 shows the MSL acoustic pressure measurements taken in [[
]] during the power ascension to CLTP. In Figure 4.1-33, an SRV acoustic resonance at approximately [[ ]] can be seen to initiate somewhere between the [[
]]. The amplitude of the signal peaks at the [[ ]] power level and has decreased by the time the power level reaches [[ ]] CLTP. At [[ ]] power, the [[ ]] is also approximately
[[
]] and the [[ ]] signal may be [[
]] As described in Section 4.1.5.4, it is not know n if the apparent [[ ]] acoustic content in the MSL strain gauge measurements is a result [[
]] For the purpose of the design acoustic load definition, the [[ ]] acoustic pressure measurements at the VPF are being [[ ]] Therefore, the peak NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-49 amplitude of the [[ ]] signal at [[ ]] power will be conservatively assumed to be the peak of the SRV acoustic resonance.
No other SRV acoustic resonances are apparent in the MSL acoustic pressure measurements.
Based on the Strouhal calculations discussed later in this section, there is the potential for SRV resonances at about [[ ]] (the SRV standpipe fundame ntal frequency) and in the
[[ ]] range initiating near the [[ ]] CLTP power level. Close review of the individual MSL pressure measurements s hows no sign of resonance onset in the [[ ]]. In the [[ ]], there may be some initial indications in the [[
]] power level measurements; however, the acoustic signal at [[ ]] power is masked [[ ]], making the review inconclusive.
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-32: Browns Ferry
[[
]] Further insights into the potential SRV acoustic resonance frequencie s can be obtained by comparing the predicted MSL/SRV acoustic frequencies from the [[ ]] with the frequency content measured in the MSL acousti c pressures. Figure 4.1-33 shows PSDs of the
[[ ]] The main steam system is excited by broadband turbulent flow pressure fluctuations; the peaks in the PSD NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-50 curves show where the acoustic modes in the steam system are being excited by the turbulent pressure fluctuations. The resonance in the SRV standpipe must acoustic ally couple through the acoustic modes in the steam system in order for the resonance to project an acoustic load on the steam dryer.
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-33: Browns Ferry
[[
]] In the [[
]]. A comparison of the measured versus predicted modes is presented in Table 4.1-5. The predicted acoustic modes are close to the measured modes, given the uncertainties introduced by the tolerances in the as-built MSL and SRV geometry measurements and the simplifying assumptions necessary when modelling the MSL piping system.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-51 Table 4.1-5: Predicted and Measured Resonant Frequencies Predicted Frequencies (Hz) Browns Ferry Measured Frequencies (Hz)
[[
]] Strouhal calculations were performed to determine the expected amount of resonance growth for the postulated SRV resonance frequencies. The results are shown in Table 4.1-6. It should be noted that these Strouhal calculations are approximate in that they assume the average MSL flow velocity for the four steam lines and do not take into consideration the local flow velocity distributions within the pipe that are induced by upstream elbows and curves in the pipe. Therefore, the Strouhal numbers at the resonance onset will differ somewhat from the theoretical range. The onset for the observed [[
]] is above [[ ]] Using the [[
]] should initiate at about [[
]] power and the [[
]] should initiate at about [[ ]] CLTP. A flow velocity increase of about [[ ]] is typically needed to grow the resonance from onset to th e peak resonance amplitude. [[ ]] the [[ ]] should be reaching peak amplitude just above
[[ ]] CLTP power and should be significantly diminished at full EPU power. For the [[
]], the peak resonance amplitudes are expected to occur at about full EPU power.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-52 Table 4.1-6: Strouhal Numbers for Potential SRV Acoustic Resonances from BFN
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ]] Based on the MSL measurements and the Strouha l calculations, there are three potential SRV resonance frequencies that may be expected to initiate at about the [[ ]] power level and increase in amplitude, peaking at or near the full EPU power level: [[ ]]. A review of the acoustic mode shapes shows that modeling the SRV resonance frequency at [[ ]] will tend to maximize the pressure loading on the steam dryer. When considering the uncertainties in predicting the exact frequency of the resonance, assuming the design resonance frequency at [[ ]] allows the
[[
]] From the combined acoustic [[ ]] measurements, the selected frequencies for the steam dryer analysis are [[
]]. The [[
]] resonance is shown in the MSL measurements to be decreasing at [[ ]] power and is expected to be significantly diminished when the plant reaches full EPU power. To be conservative, the [[ ]] is included in the CLTP and EPU load definition with the peak amplitude measured at [[ ]] power, which will bound this resonance at all power levels.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-53 4.1.4.3 SRV Adders for Design Acoustic Load Definition In the previous section, two SRV resonance frequencies [[
]] were selected to be included in the Browns Ferry structural analysis. [[
]] The SRV Scale Factors described in the next section are then used to scale the stresses from the structural analysis to the final amplitudes for the EPU and CLTP load cases.
As discussed in section 4.1.4.1.2, the [[ ]] on the steam dryer. In order to accomplish this, the solution in section 4.1.4.1.2 was executed [[
]]. The results demonstrated that [[
]] Therefore a method was developed to define the simulated SRV loads [[
]]. To evaluate the acoustic load sensitivity to the phasing, [[ ]] As can be seen, there is a [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-54 Table 4.1-7: SRV
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[ ]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-34: Sensitivity Study for SRV Acoustic Loads
[[
]] Hz NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-55 [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-35: Browns Ferry
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-56 [[ ]] The resulting steam dryer pressure loads are shown in Figure 4.1-12. This figure shows that the [[ ]]. 4.1.4.4 Projecting Simulated SRV Loading to EPU Section 4.1.4.1 of this document discusses the development of SRV resonance load adders that were used to develop the base load for performing the structural analysis. This section discusses the development of scaling factors that are desi gned to project potential SRV loading up to EPU conditions. [[
]] The Browns Ferry MSL piping is similar to the BWR/4 prototype plant used for the RSD design and the MSL strain gauge acoustic loads for the prototype plant show similar frequency content as Browns Ferry. However, the SRV standpipe dimensions and valves [[
]] Table 4.1-8 presents a comparison of the Brow ns Ferry SRV characteristics with the SRV characteristics for which SRV resonance loads have been measured on instrumented RSDs. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-57 Table 4.1-8: Comparison with A vailable SRV Resonance Measurements
[[` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-58 ]] shown in Figure 4.1-8.
[[
]], as shown in Table 4.1-9 below: Table 4.1-9: Browns Ferry Replacem ent Steam Dryer Region Definitions
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[ ]]. 4.1.4.4.1 Browns Ferry SRV Resonance Onset and EPU Loads Trending Range First a parameter must be defined for the identification and definition of the SRV resonance onset that will significantly affect the SRV EPU loads trending. The mean of [[ ]] are used in the definition of SRV resonance onset for both Browns Ferry and the reference plants (the red dashed curve of Figure 4.1-36 below). The sharp tu rning point of the SRV resonan ce curve is defined as the SRV resonance onset shown in Figure 4.1-36. [[ ]] In reality, the steam dryer or main steam line pressures will be a smooth function of the main steam line flow velocity. To improve the accuracy in SRV resonance onset definition and extraction, [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-59
]] Figure 4.1-38 below illustrates the relation of Browns Ferry SRV resonance onset and EPU loads trending range.
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-36: Definition of Browns Ferry
[[
]] SRV Resonance Onset
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-60
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-37:
[[
]] Browns Ferry
[[
]] SRV Resonance Onset Curve
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-38: Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads Trending Range NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-61 Calculation of BWR/3 SRV Resonance Onset and Trending Range
[[
]] shown in Figure 4.1-42. Table 4.1-10 pr ovides the projected Browns Ferry SRV resonance loads at EPU. Figure 4.1-43 illustrates the trended Br owns Ferry SRV resonance loads curves. Table 4.1-10:
[[
[[ ]] [[` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-62 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-39:
[[
]] Projected
[[
]] SRV Resonance Loads
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-40:
[[
]] SRV Resonance Onset NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-63
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-41: Comparison of Browns Ferry and
[[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-42:
[[
]] SRV EPU Loads Trending Range and Test Condition NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-64
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-43: Projected Brow ns Ferry SRV Loads at EPU 4.1.4.4.2 Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads Adjustment
[[ ]] provided in Table 4.1-10 above.
[[
]] BWR/3 PBLE Loads Bias The projected [[ ]] PBLE loads, defined using [[ ]], are used in the SRV EPU loads tre nding as discussed above. [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-65
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-66 Table 4.1-11:
[[
]] [[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ]] Table 4.1-12:
[[
]] [[
]] [[` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]Table 4.1-13:
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ]][[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-67 Browns Ferry and BWR/3 Steam Dryer Acoustic Mode Shape Scaling
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-68
]] Table 4.1-14: Browns Ferry and
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-69 Table 4.1-15: Extracted and Corrected Browns Ferry Region RMS Pressures
[[` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ]] [[
]] 4.1.4.4.3 Calculation of Browns Ferry [[ ]] Region RMS Pressure with SRV Adders at CLTP [[
]] The final adjusted Browns Ferry SRV EPU loads, [[
]] given in Equation 4.1-14 above. Table 4.1-16 gives the [[
]] Browns Ferry [[ ]] of the [[ ]] with SRV adders at CLTP condition.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-70 Table 4.1-16: Extracted Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads from
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ]] [[
]] 4.1.4.4.4 Combination and Calculation of BFN EPU Scaling Factors Calculation of BFN SRV EPU Loads Scaling Factors The SRV EPU scaling factors are [[
]] given in Equation 4.1-22 above. The steps used for the calculation of BFN SRV EPU loads scaling factors are given below:
[[
]] Table 4.1-17 provides the Browns Ferry [[
]] SRV EPU scaling factors calculated using the methodology discussed above. Table 4.1-17: Browns Ferry
[[
]]SRV EPU Scaling Factors
[[` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` `
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-71 Combination of BFN EPU Scaling Factors
[[
]] 4.1.4.4.5 Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads Validation
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-72
[[
]] Figure 4.1-44: Comparison of Browns Ferry
[[
[[
]] 4.1.4.5 Projecting Simulated SRV Loading to CLTP
[[
]] The CLTP B&U is then expressed [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-73
]] Table 4.1-18:
[[ ]] SRV Resonance Load Adder Bias and Uncertainties
[[ ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] 4.1.5 Reactor Operating Condition Effects
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-74 These reactor operating condition effects are discussed further in the following sections.
4.1.5.1 Reactor Dome Pressure
[[
]] 4.1.5.2 RPV Water Level
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-75 4.1.5.3 Core Flow Effect Power ascension testing of an instrumented RSD showed a well-co rrelated relationship between the reactor core flow and the steam dryer structural response. [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-76
]] Table 4.1-19: Core Flow Adjustment Factors
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] 4.1.5.4 Recirculation Pump Vane Passing Frequency The industry has observed containment noise and vibration driven by recirculation pump VPF pulsations. See Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Informati on Notice 95-16 (Reference 3) and GE SIL 600 (Reference 4). [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-77
]] In preparation for the EPU project, the Browns Ferry [[
]] recirculation piping was instrumented and testing was performed to confirm that the structural res ponse of the recirculation piping would be acceptable at EPU conditions when excited by the VPF pulsations. [[
]] The Browns Ferry [[
]] as are the recirculation pum p design and plant operating conditions. [[ ]] The recirculation discharge piping manifold and risers were replaced in [[ ]] The geometry of the replacement piping is different than the original piping in [[
]] Based on the piping configurations and historical evidence (observations by plant personnel), the [[
]] configurations [[
]] An analysis of results for the maximum VPF response for the BWR/4 prototype benchmark steam dryer provides a means to estimate the increase in vibrational stress amplitude due to the VPF effect in the Browns Ferry RSD stress analysis. The following procedure was uti lized to develop upper and lower steam dryer scale factors for the final stress adjustment to account for maximum VPF vibration:
[[
]] This process was performed for both the BWR/4 prototype benchmark plant RSD [[ ]] to find the largest impac t; and as reported above, [[ ]] The statistics for the NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-78 percentage contribution for [[ ]] of the BWR/4 prototype RSD are tabu lated below in Table 4.1-20.
Table 4.1-20: Statistics of VPF Contribution to Strain Gauge Measurements in BWR/4 Benchmark Steam Dryer
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] In the final stress adjustment calculation, the mean over Strain Gauges (%) and the Standard Deviation over Strain Gauges (%) [[ ]] to develop a "VPF Scale Factor" [[ ]] Thus, the final peak stresses for [[ ]] steam dryer [[ ]] to account for the potential VPF vibratory stresses at final EPU conditions for the Browns Ferry steam dryer; while the final peak stresses for [[
]] steam dryer are [[ ]]. Several transmission paths for the VPF exc itation have been postulated; however, [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-79 4.1.6 Scaling Factors for EPU Conditions ([[
]]) Trending is performed to characterize the increase in FIV load [[
]] project the load to EPU conditions. The EPU scaling factor [[
]] The [[ ]] loads grow in relation to
[[ ]] The EPU scaling factor for the Browns Ferry SRV resonance at [[ ]] was discussed in Section 4.1.4.4.
Section 4.1.1 and Appendix C discuss [[ ]] for the RSD design analysis. [[
]] The [[
]] trending factor was calculated based on the [[ ]] The three units are virtually identical with respect to the plant geometry relative to pressure loading on the steam dryer and with respect to the other reactor operating conditions. Therefore the trending observed in [[
]] Projecting power ascension data as pressure loads on the steam dryer provides a direct assessment of the change in steam dryer load as a function of power [[
]] To derive the [[ ]] EPU scaling factors, the load was characterized [[ ]]. These loads were calculated in [[ ]]. For all frequency bands trend lines were fit through pressure load data [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-80
]] Figure 4.1-45 depicts the CLTP PSD curve (green) and the EPU projection curve (pink) for [[ ]] steam dryer. [[
]] as discussed in Section 4.1.4. Additional information on [[
]] trending and projection is included in Appendix A, Section 6.3.4 and Appendix C. Additional regional steam dryer group plots related to trending are presented in Appendix D Section 5.0.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-81 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-45: CLTP Loads a nd EPU SRV Design Loads, [[
]] 4.1.7 Browns Ferry Comparison to BWR/4 Prototype (Geometric, Acoustic Properties, and Load) The Browns Ferry plants are quite similar to the BWR/4 prototype plant. Both BWR/4 plants have 251-inch RPVs and dead-legs on the MSLs; and operate at virtually the same power level, reactor pressure and steam flow conditions. The FIV loading on the Browns Ferry RSDs is expected to be approximately the same as that measured on the BW R/4 prototype, as discussed in this section and in Section 4.1.8. Therefore, the BWR/4 prototype [[
]] are appropriate for validating the Browns Ferry FIV load definition for the RSD design. While the comparisons of primary interest are those with the BWR/4 prototype because of the similarities between the two plants, comparisons with the [[
]] (Section 4.1.8.2) are also provided to document the operating experience of the [[
]] being used in Browns Ferry. The following sections provide comparisons between Browns Ferry and the BWR/4 prototype plant of the plant geometry, steam dryer geometry, reac tor operating conditions, and acoustic loading on the steam dryer.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-82 4.1.7.1 Plant Geometry Comparison The BWR plant design evolution has resulted in similar reactor vessel, steam dryer, and MSL geometrical configurations, as well as similar plant operating conditi ons. As a result, the range of plant-to-plant variations that affect the steam dryer pressure loading is small. A consequence of this relatively small envelope of steam dryer conditions is that the prototype steam dryer experience can be applied to the Browns Ferry RSD. Table 4.1-22 provides a comparison of plant geometry between Browns Ferry and th e BWR/4 prototype plant.
The geometric parameters may have an effect on the acoustic mode shapes within the vessel. The vessel and steam dome volumes are similar between the two plants. Therefore, differences in acoustic mode response are minimal as exhibited by the comparison of the acoustic properties and characteristics discussed in Section 4.1.7.3. The RSD design load definition ba sed on Browns Ferry specific [[ ]] and the plant-specific FIV fatigue analysis address the minor differences in plant geometry and operating conditions between Browns Ferry and the BWR/4 prototype plant.
The Browns Ferry and BWR/4 Prototype [[ ]] outlines are shown in Figure 4.1-46 and Figure 4.1-47, respectively.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-83 Table 4.1-21:
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-84 Figure 4.1-46: Browns Ferry U123 MSL Piping Outline NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-85 Figure 4.1-47:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-86 4.1.7.2 Browns Ferry Steam Dryer Geometric Comparison to BWR/4 Prototype Table 4.1-21 and Table 4.1-22 are comparisons of important dimensions for the steam dryer geometry. The comparison in Table 4.1-22 direc tly supports the design basis discussion by showing how similar the prototype steam dryer is compared to the design basis of the Browns Ferry RSD. Table 4.1-22:
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-87 Table 4.1-22:
EPU, the steam mass flows through the steam dryer are similar. The steam flow velocity in the MSL inner diameters resulting in similar flow velocities. Therefore, the fluctuating pressure loads acting on the steam dryer are also similar. [[
]] Appendices B and C describe the important acoustic properties [[
]] with respect to the PBLE acoustic modeling methodologies. The purpose of this section NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-88 is to compare the plant operating conditions that determine these acoustic properties between the BWR/4 prototype plant used for the benchmark analyses and Browns Ferry. Table 4.1-23 provides a comparison of the basic reactor operating conditions and Table 4.1-24 provides a comparison of the resu lting acoustic properties that are used as inputs to the PBLE methodology. [[
]] Table 4.1-23: [[ ]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-89 Table 4.1-24:
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
]] 4.1.7.4 Acoustic Loads Comparison This section presents the acoustic pressure loads comparison between the plant analysis (Browns Ferry U1) and the BWR/4 prototype or benchmarking plant (BWR/4). As described in Sections 4.1.7.1 and 4.1.7.2, the Browns Ferry and BWR/4 prototype steam dome and steam dryer geometries are very similar. Also, the ope rating conditions described in Section 4.1.7.3 are comparable. Because the acoustic properties, geometries, and operating conditions are comparable, the vessel acoustic FRFs are similar between the two plants. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-90 The acoustic loads comparison consists of:
[[
]] a) Browns Ferry [[ ]] vs. BWR/4 Prototype [[ ]] Comparison Using the PBLE methodology as described in Appendix B, [[ ]]. Details on the [[
]] calculation are presented in Section 4.1.2.1 for Browns Ferry plant and in Appendix B for the BWR/4 prototype plant.
[[
]] Figure 4.1-48 presents the [[
]] As seen in Figure 4.1-48, the two plants [[
]] Some differences [[ ]] Figure 4.1-49 and Figu re 4.1-50 present [[
]]. For clarity, only the steam dryer is displayed in the figures. Overall, large similarity is seen in these 3D plots.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-91 The overall similarity [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-48: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic
[[
]])
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-92
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-49: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-93
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-50: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic
[[
]] b) Browns Ferry [[ ]] vs. BWR/4 Prototype [[ ]] Comparison
[[ ]] Table 4.1-25 presents for Browns Ferry [[ ]] and BWR/4 prototype, [[
]] The test conditions for the two plants yield approximately the same [[
]] The vane passing freque ncies for both recirculation pumps (A & B) are also presented. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-94 Table 4.1-25: Browns Ferry
[[ ]] vs. BWR/4 Prototype Inputs
[[` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-95 Table 4.1-26: Browns Ferry
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.1-51 shows the measured [[
]] To summarize the comparisons for all [[
]] Figure 4.1-52 presents the [[
]] pressure PSD [[ ]] As seen in Figure 4.1-51 and Figur e 4.1-52, the two plants have overall similar frequency content.
The highest [[ ]] is at [[ ]] for the two plants.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-96 Physically, the two plants are similar with respect to the plant geometry relevant to the pressure loading on the steam dryer and with resp ect to the reactor operating conditions. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-97 [[ ]] (a) [[
]] [[ ]] (b) [[
]] Figure 4.1-51: [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-98 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-52:
[[
]] c) Browns Ferry [[ ]] vs. BWR/4 Prototype PBLE02 On-Dryer Differential Pressure Comparison Using Browns Ferry Unit 1 CLTP and the BWR/4 prototype Original Licensed Thermal Power (OLTP) [[
]] The loads are calculated on [[ ]] on the steam dryer (Figure 4.1-8).
4.1.7.4.1 [[ ]]
Figure 4.1-53 presents Browns Ferry [[ ]] and the BWR/4 prototype PBLE02 [[ ]] PSD comparison. The comparison is based on the PSD [[ ]] on the steam dryer. The PSD represents [[ ]]. As seen in Figure 4.1-53, the two plants ha ve similar frequency content. Overall, [[ ]] The highest peak in the frequency spectrum is at [[ ]] (dead-leg), [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-99 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-53:
[[
]] 4.1.7.4.2 [[ ]]
Figure 4.1-54 presents Browns Ferry [[ ]] and the BWR/4 prototype PBLE02 [[ ]] comparison, which represent the [[
]]. The comparison is based on [[ ]] points on the steam dryer. The pressure loads represent the means of [[
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-100 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-54:
[[
]] 4.1.7.4.3 [[ ]]
Figure 4.1-55 presents Browns Ferry [[ ]] and the BWR/4 prototype PBLE02 [[ ]] comparison. The comparison is based on the PSD [[ ]] The pressure load represents the mean of [[ ]]. [[ ]].
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-101 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-55:
[[
]] d) Browns Ferry [[ ]] vs. BWR/4 Prototype Loads Comparison Conclusion There are strong similarities between Browns Ferry and BWR/4 Prototype plants in their:
[[
]] 4.1.8 Comparison of Browns Ferry Projected Loads with Industry Data This section presents a review of the limiting Browns Ferry loads with the available industry data. The key purpose of this section is to compare steam dryer loads from other plants and demonstrate the validity of the synthesized SRV loads in the loads definition.
Industry data from the BWR/4 prototype plant, [[ ]] plant with similar steam dryer design and a [[ ]] steam NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-102 dryer plant with strong SRV resona nce content is used in the differential pressure PSD comparisons that follow. These comparisons demonstrate that the Browns Ferry SRV resonance load is reasonable design load fo r RSD EPU evaluation. The previous sub-sections within this report have described the process to develop the limiting Browns Ferry steam dryer loads. This includes scaling acoustic data to EPU projected steam flow rates and adding synthesized signals for observed and potential SRV resonance at: [[ ]]. These SRV resonance frequencies are observe d in Browns Ferry test data, and the signal amplitudes at these frequencies are expected to [[
]]. The steam dryer loads from all th e four plants are developed [[
]] The comparison plots of the Browns Ferry projected loads with industry data from 3 plants are presented in Figure 4.1-56 and Figure 4.1-57 [[ ]] steam dryer [[
]] respectively. [[
]] The Browns Ferry loads used in these comparisons are the projected loads at EPU condition used in the stress evaluation of the RSD. [[
]] (Sections 4.1.4 and 4.1.6). The next sections briefly discuss each of the industry plants.
4.1.8.1 Comparison with BWR/4 Prototype Steam Dryer Plant Data: The BWR/4 prototype plant has operated at EPU and has obtained [[ ]] at a steam velocity approximately [[ ]] of the Browns Ferry at EPU. The BWR/4 prototype plant loads used in these comparisons are the projected loads at full EPU condition. The loads are developed using [[ ]] In general, the BWR/4 prototype and Browns Ferry steam dryer loads have similar frequency content. The maximum peak load in the BWR/4 prototype is at [[
]] The BWR/4 prototype SRV resonance [[
]] about [[ ]] at EPU condition. The Browns Ferry maximum acoustic load amplitude over the full spectrum is at the [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-103 The [[ ]] Thus, the potential effect of the VPF peak will be captured during FEA when [[ ]]. 4.1.8.2 Comparison with [[ ]] Steam Dryer Plant Data:
The [[
]] design was also installed in a [[ ]] plant. That plant with a similar RSD design has operated at EPU and has obtained [[ ]] at a steam velocity equivalent to Browns Ferry at EPU.
The [[ ]] plant loads are the projected loads at EPU condition. The loads are developed using [[
]] The Browns Ferry design load at SRV resonance is compared to the [[ ]] SRV resonance peaks at approximately [[
]]. Although the Browns Ferry data does not specifically include a peak at these frequencies, the comparison of the synthesized Browns Ferry SRV load at [[
]] vs. [[ ]] resonances shows that the synthesized load is roughly the same overall amplitude as the SRV resonance loads for
[[ ]] with [[
]] The [[ ]] load content is dominated by the Browns Ferry [[ ]] The amplitude of the [[ ]] is much [[
]] 4.1.8.3 Comparison with [[ ]] Steam Dryer Plant Data: As discussed in Section 4.1.4, the [[ ]] resonance is the most appropriate SRV acoustic resonance load to use in synthe sizing the Browns Ferry SRV res onance loads becaus e both are first shear layer mode resonances. In addition, the [[ ]] plant experienced [[
]] SRV resonance at about [[
]]. The [[ ]] SRV resonance load measurements from the [[
]] steam dryer are used for developing the design SRV resonance load amplitude at [[
]] for the Browns Ferry acoustic load definition (Section 4.1.4).
The [[ ]] plant loads used in these comparisons are the projected loads at a MSL flow velocity equivalent to the Browns Ferry at EPU condition ([[
]]). The equivalent
[[
]] is the one used in the development of Browns Ferry SRV amplitude at [[
]]. The [[ ]] loads are adjusted [[
]] In general, the Browns Ferry loads have [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-104 [[
]] The comparison plots demonstrate the reasonableness of the simulated SRV resonant load in comparison with the BWR/3 maximum response.
4.1.8.4 Summary of Browns Ferry Loads to Industry In summary, the loads comparisons show that th e projected Browns Ferry loading at EPU is consistent with the steam dryer loads for the BWR/4 prototype, [[ ]] plants at the similar MSL flow velocity. This provides an overall confirmation that the Browns Ferry design loads are reasonable. The comparisons also show that the Browns Ferry synthesized SRV resonance load at [[
]] is a reasonable design load.
[[ ]] Figure 4.1-56: Browns Ferry
[[
]] PSD Loads to Industry Data Comparison
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-105 [[ ]] Figure 4.1-57: Browns Ferry
[[
]] PSD Loads to Industry Data Comparison
[[
]] 4.2 Steam Dryer High Cycle Fatigue Stress Analysis A typical steam dryer has been described in Se ction 3.0 above. The various components of the steam dryer (e.g., hoods, plates, skirt) are included in the full steam dryer FEM and are described later in this section. The commercial finite element software ANSYS 14.0 is used for the dynamic analysis. A flow diagram showing the FIV Hi gh Cycle Fatigue (HCF) analysis algorithm is provided as Figure 4.2-1.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-106 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-1: FIV Fatigue Analysis Process 4.2.1 Steam Dryer Finite Element Model The FEM for the Browns Ferry RSD is based on the BWR/4 prototype steam dryer model. The Browns Ferry RSD FE "global" model is shown in Figure 4.2-2. Nominal dimensions are used at all locations. The global FEM in cludes all the structurally significant components of the steam dryer. The Browns Ferry replacement dryer FEM incorporates all of the steam dryer design modifications and structural improvements from Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-107 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-2: Browns Ferry Replacemen t Steam Dryer Finite Element Model 4.2.1.1 Steam Dryer FE Model Components The entire steam dryer is broken into components for ease of navigation and to facilitate the stress scoping process. Table 4.2-1 provides a listing of all the stress scoping components. In essence, all of the like parts of the steam dryer assembly are grouped into a specific compone nt to facilitate post processing.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-108 Table 4.2-1: Steam Dryer Stress Scoping Groups GRP # Description GRP # Description
[[
FE models.
4.2.1.2 Finite Element Model Properties The RSD design is primarily comprised of stainless steel plates formed and welded together. Because in most regions the plate thicknesses are much smaller than the surface dimensions, the FEM of the RSD is well represented using shell elements.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-109 4.2.1.2.1 Element Types The element selection follows the element description in Section 5.1.1 of Appendix A. The FEM of the RSD contains [[
]] element type is used. [[ ]] In the Browns Ferry RSD FEM, [[ ]] elements are used where the local base plate is connected to support ring area, wh ere the local inner hood is connected to outle t end plate area, and where the drain channel support beams are connected to the skirt and drain channel. In these locations, [[
]]. Additional element types include the [[ ]] element type used for trough spacers and the tie rods located inside the vane modules, the [[ ]] element type used to represent the steam dryer bracket interface locations and also used as a mechanism to establish vanes-to-top cap connections; and the [[ ]] element type used for the support ring, lifting rods and tie bar ends. In addition to the [[ ]] are used to model the details of the lower ring splices (discussed further in Section 4.2.1.3.2). [[ ]] are also used to provide a mass and stiffness representation of the vane bundles inside the steam dryer banks.
4.2.1.2.2 Material Properties The RSD FEM consists of two main materials, [[ ]]. Additional material pr operties are defined for the perforated plate shell elements and imbedded moment transfer shell elements as discussed below. Temperature dependent material prop erties are input for the stainle ss steel parts so that analyses other than operating temperature can be performed wit hout modifying the FEM.
Material Group G of Table TM-1 from the ASME BPVC Code,Section II, Part D (Reference 5) is used. [[ ]] This material is used for a vast majority of the structural FEM.
The water surrounding the skirt and drain channels contain a large number of [[
]] rising from the reactor core and steam separators. The properties of the [[
]] are calculated using equations defined in the process discussed in Section 5.1.3 of Appendix A. [[ ]] Shell elements are used in some places to tie the structural shell moments to the solid support ring element's nodes (discussed further in Section 4.2.1.6.1). For these elements, [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-110 The vane bundles are enclosed by perforated plates on each side. The small holes in the perforated plates distribute the steam uniformly over the height of the vane bank. A typical perforated plate for the RSD design is shown for an inlet panel in Figure 4.2-3. A larg e perforated plate attached to one side of a steam dryer bank consists of multiple regions with different hole spacing and/or hole diameters resulting in a different volume fr action of the holes in these regions. [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.2-3: Typical Perforated Pl ate Design for Center Bank Inlet NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-111 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-4: Typical Perforated Pl ate Design for Center Bank Inlet 4.2.1.3 Substructuring Substructuring is a method to model a part of a larger model in more detail without adding a large number of degrees of freedom (DOFs) to the global FEM. In ANSYS, this is accomplished by generating so-called superelements ([[ ]]). For the Browns Ferry RSD structural FEM, [[
]] 4.2.1.3.1 Vane Bundle Superelements An overall description of the steam dryer vane bank is provided in Section 5.1.2 of Appendix A. The mass, stiffness and damping distributions of the numerous vanes are modeled to account for their inertia and stiffness effect on the steam dryer in the FIV analys is. The vane bundles represent components that need to be supported within the steam dryer structur e, but they do not bear loads like the other steam dryer structural components. Furthermore, millions of elements would be required if the vane bundles were to be explicitly modeled in detail. The resulting FEM would be too large to be practical. Therefore, the modeling of the vane bundles is simplified in the global FEM. [[
]] A vane bundle is a collection of vanes, hooks, and tie rods between end plates and divider plates.
There are a total of 22 vane bundles in the Browns Ferry RSD. Figure 4.2-5 shows the vane bundle positioning. The modeling of each of the vane bundles is described in more detail in Section 5.1.2 of Appendix A.
[[ ]] the same as the RSD. The density of the material was used to adjust the weight of the individual vane bundles to the known vane bundle design weight
. Master DOFs are defined at interface locations where, per the hardware design, certain vane bundle nodes in a superelement are interfacing with corresponding nodes of steam dryer components that are in the global model. These master DOFs are known as external master nodes.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-112 In addition to the external master DOFs, internal nodes are also defined as master DOFs Internal master DOFs, are defined in the vane bundle models to properly capture the structure's dynamic behavior. The internal master DOFs are chosen to be consistent with the BWR/4 prototype steam dryer analysis benchmark FEM. Figure 4.2-6 shows the shell-dominant FEM of a vane bundle illustrating the interface points and master DOF setup. A super-element generation pass creates the vane bundle super-element files from the detailed vane bundle models. The super-element files condense the ordinary DOFs from the regular ANSYS mesh into a stiffness, mass, and damping matrix relating the master DOFs to one another for each vane bundle. These [[
]]. [[ ]] Figure 4.2-5: Top View of Steam Dryer FEM showing the Vane Bundle Designations NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-113 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-6: Typical Vane Bundle FEM and Master DOF Setup 4.2.1.3.2 Lower Skirt Ring Splice Superelements When designing [[ ]] The Browns Ferry RSD lower skirt ring design requires four splices, two at 0 O and 180 O azimuths and two at 94 O and 274 O azimuths. The 0 O and 180 O lower ring splices serve two purposes, [[
]] Stress predictions within the vane bundle superelements are not needed in the overall steam dryer structural evaluation; in contrast, the stress output within the lower ring splice superelements are required (these elements bear loads within the structure). Therefore, the lower ring splice meshes
are well refined as is seen in Figure 4.2-7. The [[
]] functions greatly enhancing the accuracy of the stress predictions from them. The shell elements that interface with the global model are attached to the solid splice mesh using
[[
]] (discussed further in Section 4.2.1.6.3). As with the vane bundle superelement FEMs, Mast er nodes are defined so that the lower support ring splice FEMs interf ace with the Global FEM co rrectly. Figure 4.2-8 provi des an illustration of the master node selection for the lower ring splice superelements. Unlike the vane bundle models, the lower ring splice models have only external master nodes because the distribution of the external master nodes is adequate for resolution of the dynamic mode shapes as is evident in Figure 4.2-8.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-114 Stress scoping is performed via an expansion pass.
The expansion pass uses the reduced solution to calculate the results at all degrees of freedom within the superelement model. Once the results are expanded, the remainder of the stress scoping process is identical to the global model (see Section 4.2.3.4).
[[ ]] Figure 4.2-7: Views of the Splices for the Lower Support Ring Superelement FEMs
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-115 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-8: Lower Skirt Ring Splice Superelement Master Nodes (0 O and 180 O splices on top and 94 O and 274 O splices on Bottom) 4.2.1.4 Water Modeling The skirt and drain channel of the steam dryer are partially submerged in the [[ ]] water.
In order to treat this interface and for the fluid structure interaction in submerged regions, the fluid is modeled with [[ ]]. The water volume is contained on the outside diameter by the RPV wall and on the inside by the steam separators. The bottom is selected well below the steam dryer lowe r skirt ring. The fluid elements represent the thermodynamic properties of the steam water mixture. As mentioned above, [[ ]] as described in section 5.1.3 of Appendix A. The inside and outside water levels are determined by a steam dryer hydraulic performance calculation. [[ ]] that is submerged. [[ ]] transmit the water resistance against the structural vibration [[
]] Figure 4.2-9 shows the inst antaneous deflection of the water due to a lateral translation of the steam dryer FEM using a static analysis.
The plot shows that the water behaves correctly as the various NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-116 compartments (i.e., the water between the skirt and steam separators, the water within the drain channels, and the water outside the skirt and drain channels) interact with the steam dryer metal and deform as expected. (e.g., if the distance between the skirt and the RPV wall (modeled as displacement boundary conditions) is decreased, the water height increases due to an instantaneous deflection).
[[ ]] Figure 4.2-9: An Illustration of the Water Modeling Due to Lateral Translation of the FEM 4.2.1.5 Element Mesh Density The Browns Ferry RSD model element mesh density is consistent with the BWR/4 prototype FEM. This ensures that the benchmark analysis results are derived on the same basis as the current Browns Ferry RSD analysis. However, a separate mesh refinement study was performed on the RSD FEM to determine appropriate mesh bias factors as discussed in Section 4.2.2.
4.2.1.6 Connections between Shell Nodes-to-Solid Nodes When 3D shell finite elements interface with 3D solid finite elements, a degree of freedom mismatch exists at the nodal interface. The shell element nodes possess six degrees of freedom (X, Y, and Z translations and rotations), and the solid element node s possess only three (X, Y, and Z translations only). Without a method to account for this mismatch, a hinge would be produced. GEH recognizes three acceptable methods to tie the shell nodal rotations to the solid element nodes:
[[ ]] All methods are used in th e Browns Ferry RSD FEM and are discussed further below.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-117 4.2.1.6.1 [[ ]]
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.2-10:
[[
]] 4.2.1.6.2 [[ ]]
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-118
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.2-11:
[[
]] 4.2.1.6.3 [[ ]]
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-119 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-12:
[[
]] 4.2.1.7 Boundary Constraints The steam dryer is held in place within the RPV by steam dryer support brackets that are steel blocks (lugs) that are welded to the RPV wall. These steam dryer s upport brackets are located nominally at 4 O , 94 O , 184 O , and 274 O azimuths. [[
]] The 4 O and 184 O locations utilize seismic blocks that straddle the brackets constraining [[ ]] The lateral motion at the 94 O and 274 O [[
]] The steam dryer FEM is constructed such that f our nodes are placed at the steam dryer interface location with the brackets. [[
]] The additional boundary constraints are applied to the water elements as described above in Section 4.2.1.4.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-120 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-13: Support Ring Boundary Constraints 4.2.2 Mesh Convergence Studies The objective of the Browns Ferry convergence study was to evalua te the Browns Ferry FEM and determine an appropriate converg ence factor for use in the final stress adjustment. The convergence factor adjusts global FIV analysis stresses for trends in stress as the FEM mesh size is decreased. The evaluation focused on high stress components from both the FEA primary stress evaluation and the final adjusted stress calculation. [[
]] An example submodel can be reviewed in Figure 4.2-14.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-121
[[ ]] Figure 4.2-14: Example sub model; ([[
]]) Simulated FIV loading was applied through displacement boundary conditions or surface pressure as necessary to reproduce stress contours from the global FIV analysis. Stress values were extracted at locations of high stress. See Figure 4.2-15 for a comparison of stress contours from the hood tee submodel simulated FIV pressure loading and the globa l FIV analysis.
[[ ]] Figure 4.2-15: Stress Contour Comparison of
[[
]] (Left) Convergence Study Sub model -Stress Contour (Right) Global FIV Analysis - Maximum Stress The magnitude of stress in the submodel, shown in Figure 4.2-15, [[
]] See an example of trending stress values in Figure 4.2-16.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-122 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-16: Convergence Stress Trending The maximum calculated convergence factor from the Browns Ferry FEM submodels was [[ ]] A summary of calculated convergence factors can be reviewed in Table 4.2-2.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-123 Table 4.2-2: Calculated Mesh Convergence Factor by Component
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] An additional qualitative evaluation was performed [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-124
]] 4.2.3 Vibration Analysis Approach This section describes the process used to perform the FIV structural analysis. The commercial finite element software ANSYS is used in the solution. For the flow-induced vibration of steam dryers, [[
]] Displacement boundary conditions are applied to the steam dryer mount point locations in the steam dryer model at the steam dryer support brackets as discussed in Section 4.2.1.7. Displacement boundary conditions are also used to contain the fluid as discussed in Section 4.2.1.4. The support ring rests on four steam dryer s upport brackets that are welded attachments to the RPV wall. The motion of the steam dryer in the [[
]] The acoustic loads and boundary conditions are mappe d onto the steam dryer mesh for each time step of the acoustic load set generating [[
]]. This process is known as load step mapping. Once the pressure loads are mapped onto the steam dryer, [[ ]] The solution is processed [[
]] After solution processing is NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-125 completed, the FEA results are screened for the maximum stress intensity for each steam dryer component (see Table 4.2-1) by a peak-hold scop ing process as discussed in Section 4.2.3.4. The stress maxima determine the steam dryer locations that are further processed with B&U to determine the final stress intensity for each steam dryer component. The further processing includes performing FFT calculation s, applying appropriate Fati gue Strength Reduction Factors (FSRF) as discussed in Section 4.2.3.5, and applying [[
]] trending and B&U multipliers to the stresses as discussed in Section 4.2.5.
4.2.3.1 Damping [[ ]] damping is used in al l of the analyses. [[
]]. Then, using Equation 6.1-3 of Appendix A, [[
]] are calculated for input in to the structural analysis. Figure 4.2-17 represents [[
]] analyses for the steam dryer FEA. [[ ]] Figure 4.2-17:
[[
]] 4.2.3.2 Uncertainty in Structural Modes There is an uncertainty in the predicted structural mode frequencies and dynamic response of steam dryers because of the approximations in the structural model and variations in the as-built steam dryer as compared to the nominal design dimensions (Section 6.3 of Appendix A). The modal uncertainty in the structural FEM is addressed [[ ]]. This is accomplished by [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-126 ]] In addition to the nominal load case, [[
]]. 4.2.3.3 Acoustic Load Mapping The load mapping process generates the load step files for solution processing. While the acoustic mesh is refined enough to adequately resolves the acoustic modes, it is much coarser then the structural FEM mesh. Using ANSYS internal matrix mapping functi ons and other ANSYS Parametric Design Language (APDL) algorithms, the differential pressure time history output from PBLE is converted to forces that are applied to th e nodes that experience this pressure loading. The acoustic load surfaces encompass all of the structure above the water line [[ ]] Figure 4.2-18 shows pressure contour plots for the same load step for the acoustic FEM (left) and the structural FEM (right). These contour plots show that the loads are correctly mapped onto the structural FEM.
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.2-18: Pressure Load Mapping for
[[ ]] Load Step NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-127 4.2.3.4 Stress Scoping After processing the transient solution, the results are screened for the [[
]] This process is known as results scoping. In general, APDL algorithms are written with [[
]] and other pertinent information at the [[
]] In ANSYS, multiple stress values are output at a given node. The stress scoping [[
]] 4.2.3.4.1 Primary Scoping The primary scoping process is straightforward. This process extracts the [[
]] After looping th rough all of the time steps, [[ ]] The resulting data is output to text files [[
]] 4.2.3.4.2 Weld Scoping Unlike the primary scoping process, the weld scoping process [[
]] as discussed in Section 4.2.3.5. Like the primary scoping that wa s described in Section 4.2.3.4, [[ ]] All elements from the FEM that are bordering on the weld lines are identified. Each weld location may join together two or more different steam dryer components.
The results are scoped for the [[ ]] in the initial fatigue assessmen t process discussed in Section 4.2.3.7.
4.2.3.5 Fatigue Strength Reduction Factors (FSRF) The FSRF is a key component of the peak stress cal culation at a specific location, namely the weld locations. In general, welds are relatively small compared to plates in the steam dryer and are not NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-128 explicitly modeled in the global steam dryer FEM due to the plate construction. The welded connections are located where plates come together in the global FEM, [[
]]. Stress concentrations due to welds are handled
[[ ]]. The weld types of relevance for the steam dryer stress analysis [[
]] Figure 4.2-1 of Appendix A shows the flow diagram for the calculation of fatigue stress with appropriate FSRFs.
[[
]] 4.2.3.5.1 Weld Quality Factor
[[ ]], as well as the use of qualified weld processes [[ ]], are used [[ ]] for new steam dryer analyses (Section 4.3 of Appendix A).
4.2.3.6 Plate Thickness Factors The plate thickness factor (PTF) is applied to the stress at locations where the FEM lacks resolution to provide a detailed representation of the weld connection thickness. For instance, [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-129
]] 4.2.3.7 Initial Fatigue Assessment In performing the fatigue evaluation for steam dryers under FIV loading, the maximum calculated stress intensity for each steam dryer component is determined as discussed in Section 4.2.3.4 for the primary and weld scoping. For the weld scoping st ress intensities, the appropriate FSRF and/or PTF is applied as discussed in Sections 4.2.3.5 and 4.2.3.6. [[ ]] Table 4.2-3 and Table 4.2-4 [[
]] as discussed in Section 4.2.5 below.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-130 Table 4.2-3: Raw Stress Table
[[
]] [[ ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-131 [[ ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-132 Table 4.2-4: Raw Stress Table
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-133 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-134 4.2.4 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Functional RPV Interface Attachments The Browns Ferry RSD is attached to the RPV at four locations. As di scussed in Section 4.2.1.7, [[ ]] Therefore, the analyses for these connections are performed separately, but in conjunction with the global model analyses. Two distinct attachment designs are used in the Browns Ferry RSD design; seismic blocks and jack bolt/latch mechanisms. The following sections discuss these designs as well as associated qualification criteria for FIV fatigue and primary stress analyses.
4.2.4.1 Attachment Point Forces The scoping components [[
]] For the FIV fatigue analysis, [[
]] Therefore, using the raw and adjusted stress information, the maximum fatigue forces are scaled to include the EPU factors as well as all applicable bias and uncertainties.
The reaction forces at the attachment locations for determining the seismic block and jack bolt/ latch primary stresses are extracted in steam dryer design primary stress analyses discussed in Section 5.0. The primary membrane, bending, a nd shear stresses are calculated using these extracted reaction forces and then combined per Browns Ferry RSD load combinations described in Section 5.0. A summary of stress and fatigue values as compared to applicable limits is provided in Section 4.2.4.4.
4.2.4.2 Seismic Block Design and Analysis Similar to the BWR/4 prototype RSD, the Browns Ferry RSD seismic blocks [[ ]] of the steam dryer at the 4 and 184 azimuth locations. Unlike the BWR/4 prototype design, [[ ]] Section 3.2.2.2.
In addition, the weld length [[ ]] Figure 4.2-19 is an illustration of the seismic block design. The seismic block is comprised of type 316 stainless steel. The modification of material in the design increases ultimate strength from 57,400 ps i for 304L stainless steel to 71,800 psi for 316 stainless steel and results in proportional incr eases to certain faulted condition stress limit (i.e. average shear stress). A comparison of design stress intensity, Sm, yield strength, Sy, and ultimate strength, Su, for type 304L and type 316 stainless steel is shown in Table 5.1-1.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-135 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-19: Seismic Block Design The capability of the seismic block design to withstand the FIV loads is evaluated by performing the stress analysis using closed form solution methods for the ex tracted reaction forces at the attachment locations from the global model. Calculations are performed at the top of the seismic block ear (i.e., smallest cross section) in addition to calculating the fatigue stress in the weld. The nominal stress in the weld [[ ]] as discussed in Section 4.2.3.5 to obtain the peak fatigue stress.
The final peak alternating stress intensity for EPU is [[
]] as shown in Table 4.2-6. Primary membrane, bending, and shear stresses are calculated for the steam dryer service level load combinations (see Table 5.1-3) using a closed form solution (i.e., the applicable mechanics formula). As shown in Table 4.2-5 the most limiting normal or upset service level load combination is B-3 (operating basis earthquake load combination). The calculated primary membrane plus bending stress intensity is [[ ]]. The most limiting seismic block stress for the emergency service level [[
]]. The most limiting stress for the faulted service level occurs in the D5 load case. The seismic block ear is loaded in shear for which the allowable stress is [[
]]. The average shear on the seismic block ear for the D5 load case is [[
]].
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-136 4.2.4.3 Jack Bolt and Latch Mechanism Design and Analysis The jack bolt and latch mechanism is a functional modification to the prototype steam dryer design at the 94 and 274 azimuth locations. This assembly (illustration shown in Figure 4.2-20) performs three functions, balancing the steam dryer dead weight load, holding down the steam dryer from lifting off the brackets (a redundant feature considering the hold downs), and impeding lateral motion.
[[ ]] Figure 4.2-20: Jack Bolt and Latch Mechanism Design The jack bolt part of the assembly is used to balance the steam dryer dead weight load during installation. The jack bolt levelling procedure is also intended to prevent motion (i.e. rocking) during operation. The installation specification designates an instal lation torque such that each jack bolt carries [[ ]] The steam dryer will therefore maintain contact with each steam dryer support bracket under normal operation and prevent steam dryer rocking. The latch mechanism serves as the function of steam dryer hold down during faulte d events whereby the upward lifting pressure load overcomes the steam dryer dead weight load. This function was previously performed by lifting rods interfacing with hold down brackets in the reactor vessel head. [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-137 The latch mechanism also serves the same function as the seismic blocks. The lateral motion at the 94 and 274 azimuth locations [[
]] The jack bolt and latch mechanism are comprised of [[ ]] The allowable stress differs from the 304L stainless steel. [[
]] As with the seismic blocks, the stress analysis is performed using closed form solution methods considering the reaction forces calculated in the global FEA. In th e FEA the appropriate boundary condition due to uplift scenarios at the seismic blocks/latch/jack bolts are appropriately considered. The jack bolt and latch mechanism is purely mechanical (i.e., no welds); therefore, FSRFs do not apply. However, for the FIV fatigue analysis, [[ ]] is applied at the thread root in accordance with ASME BPVC Code,Section II, Part D (Reference 5). [[
]] Therefore, the jack bolt/latch mechanism assembly exceeds the recommended FIV MASR of 2.0. Primary stress calculations are performed on the jack bolt and latch mechanism for all primary stress load combinations (see Table 5.1-3) at multiple locations within the assembly using closed form solution and forces as discussed in Section 4.2.4.1. In addition to the primary stress intensities, thread shear and bearing stresses were also calculated. The most limiting normal or upset service level load combination is B-3 (operating based earthquake). [[
]] The calculated primary membrane pl us bending stress intensity is [[ ]] which is less than the allowable [[ ]] For the support ring thread, the most limiting normal or upset service level load combination is B-3 with the shear stress of [[
]]. Relative thermal expansion of the jack bolt with the stainless steel ring was considered in the evaluation. The limiting stress intensity due to combined mechanical and thermal loading is [[ ]] Relative thermal expansion of the jack bolt and support ring slip fit is in the range of the slip fit tolerance. Therefore, the jack bolt/latch mechanism is suitable for service based on the requirements of ASME BPVC Code,Section III (Reference 6).
4.2.4.4 Seismic Block, Jack Bolt and La tch Stress and Fatigue Summary A summary of critical stress and fatigue values for the attachment point components are provided in Table 4.2-5 and Table 4.2-6.
These values consider basic stress limits, special stress limits, and stress limits for threaded structural fasteners as applicable.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-138 Table 4.2-5: Attachment Point Component Stress Summary
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-139 ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-140 Table 4.2-6: Attachment Poin t Component Fatigue Summary
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] 4.2.5 Bias and Uncertainty Adjustment to Stresses The final stress adjustment is the process for co nverting the raw stresses as calculated based on
[[ ]] Note that the [[
]] For the initial calculations in this report before the power ascension, [[ ]] This same process is utilized for both the application Browns Ferry and the benchmark plant used to get the [[ ]] B&U (note that the benchmark stress adjustment only accounted for the EPU projection and did not attempt to correct for bias or uncertainty, as this is the process to determine those quantities).
As stated previously, the raw stre ss table has the peak vibratory [[
]] stress for each component and weld based on FIV re sults and weld factor. The final stress adjustment starts with these raw stress values and then accounts for terms listed in Table 4.2-7. The more detailed overview of the process is shown in Figure 4.2-21, which is very similar to the process for the benchmark (see Figure 4.2-22), with obvious elimina tion of the later part of the process for comparing projections to measuremen ts. In this portion of the process for final application stress adjustment, as previously stated, the B&U terms calculated in the benchmark are utilized to adjust the peak stress values using [[ ]] methodology as detailed in Appendix A Section 6.3.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-141 Table 4.2-7: Final Stress Adjustment Terms Term Name How it is applied
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-142 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-21: Overview of Final Stress Adjustment Process As can be seen in Figure 4.2-21 and Table 4.2-7 a number of terms are applied to the final peak stress value for each component and weld in order to account for known B&U, as well as other items such as anticipated SRV resonances or other impacts anticipated for EPU from items such as higher steam velocities. The bias terms and stress factors are applied as [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-143
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-144
]] ANSYS predicted sensor res ponse can be developed in the same way as the stress [[
]] The predicted sensor response can then be compared to measured sensor response per Figure 4.2-22 to develop [[ ]] B&U values. These results can then be used for the application case to project pre-EPU data to any number of other conditions. The design calculation will be run at EPU with the [[
]] SRV resonance at peak measured value and the [[
]] SRV resonance at pe ak predicted value.
4.2.5.1 [[ ]] Benchmark Bias and Uncertainty The [[ ]] B&U that is utilized to account for steam dryer analysis B&U for application to the Browns Ferry RSD was developed by performing a benchmark analysis on a similar plant (BWR/4 prototype) to the Browns Ferry design to capture the overall B&U of the analysis process. This includes using the same process for developing pr e-EPU equivalent loads and projecting them to EPU conditions. This approach captures the combined impact of acoustic modeling and structural modeling accuracy, as well as addressing other measurement related bias and uncertainties, including instrument uncertainty. This comparison considers a plant very similar to the application plant in order to best capture the inherent modeling bias and uncertainties associated with modeling that plant type's basic geometry under comparable loading. This process compares strain predictions to on-dryer strain measurements at the highest projected power level available.
[[
]] 4.2.5.2 Benchmark Case The benchmark plant that was utilized to develop [[ ]] B&U values to be applied to the Browns Ferry steam dryer analysis is very close in design to the Browns Ferry plant; both units are BWR/4 Designs with 251-inch vessel diameters. In addition, the benchmark plant was NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-145 analyzed for similar operational conditions and projections were made over the same general percentage power increase (see Section 4.1.7.4 for a discussion of the full comparison). Due to the similarities in the overall steam dryer geometry, acoustic FRFs, loads and plant operational parameters (See Section 4.1.7), the pred iction for Browns Ferry is expected to be consistent with the benchmark utilized to develop the [[ ]] B&U. It follows that the biases and uncertainties based on the benchmarks are applicable to Browns Ferry.
As can be seen in Figure 4.1-53, the Browns Ferry and benchmark plant are very similar in most regards. In addition, Figure 4.1-52 shows, as would be expected due to similarities in the piping systems, that the signal content for the MSL strain gauge data is similar for CLTP conditions for both Browns Ferry and the benchmark plant.
4.2.5.3 Benchmark Process Figure 4.2-22 below presents the process for calculating the [[ ]] B&U. The benchmark utilizes a high level process that is very similar to that outlined above in Figure 4.2-21. As previously stated, the in tent is to follow exactly the same process for the benchmark case as the application. This will allow a full characterization of the process to predict stress/strain on a frequency basis.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-146 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-22: Basic Outline for Benchmark
[[
]] Bias and Uncertainty Process As can be seen, the basic benchmark process involves processing pre-EPU [[ ]] (the goal is for benchmark power increase to match that of baseline applicati on) exactly like the pre-EPU [[
]] for the Browns Ferry application. [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-147
]] 4.2.5.4 Benchmark Results The BWR/4 prototype benchmark results show that in general the [[
]] projections for EPU conditions over-predict the strains when projections are compared to measured EPU on-dryer strains. Figur e 4.2-23 and Figure 4.2-24 pr esent the results for [[ ]] B&U over [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-148 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-23: BWR/4 Prototype
[[
]] Bias and Uncertainty
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-149 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-24: BWR/4 Prototype
[[
]] Bias and Uncertainty 4.3 Acceptance Criteria The steam dryer, including the steam dryer units, is a nonsafety-related item and is classified as an Internal Structure as defined in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III (Reference 6), Subsection NG Paragraph NG-1122. The steam dryer is not a component governed by ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, however the design will comply with stress and fatigue criteria for co re support structures defined in ASME Code Subsection NG-3000, [[
]] as discussed in Subsection 4.2.3.5. The other exception to Subsection NG-3000 is that no temperature adjustment for the modulus of elasticity is performed when comparing the calculated alternating stress intensity against the fatigue acceptance criterion. This is discussed further in Section 4.1 of Appendix A. Steam dryers are subjected to FIV caused by cyclic acoustic pressures during normal operation. They may experience on the order of 10 11 stress cycles during a steam dryer's typical 40-60 year life span. Therefore, HCF contributes a majority of the steam dryer fati gue usage. The steam dryer FIV fatigue evaluation described in this section is consistent with the ASME BPVC Section III requirements. Other cyclic loads associated with normal and upset design events, NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-150 including pressure, transient loads, and thermal cycling, have not been significant contributors to fatigue damage and with the heavier RSD are considered to add minimal fatigue usage. Therefore, the HCF life is the major design consideration. The steam dryer structural analyses are performed assuming that the steam dryer will be operated for 40 to 60 years. The alternating stress intensity amplitudes caused by FIV are expected to be well within the elastic range during normal operation. In performing the fatigue eval uation for steam dryers under FIV loading, the maximum stress intensity in each steam dryer component is found from the FIV stress analyses described in Section 4.2.3.7. The maximum stress intensities are then adjusted as necessary by the appropriate FSRFs defined in Section 4.2.3.5. In support of the Browns Ferry EPU project, the peak stress intensities are scaled to the projec ted power levels and flow rates using frequency dependent EPU trending factors. In addition, S ection 4.2.5 discusses the biases and uncertainties and other factors incorporated into the results.
The design fatigue curves and curve selection criteria for Austenitic Ni-Cr stainless steel are given in the ASME BPVC Secti on III, Division 1, Appendix I, Figure I-9.2.2 and Figure I-9.2.3 (Reference 6). These figures provid e curves that relate the allowable alternating stress amplitude to the number of fatigue cycl es (a.k.a. S-N curves) for determining fatigue usage. The alternating stress limit is dependent on mean stress including primary, secondary, and residual stresses that are typically present near weld locations. Curve C is the most conservative of the three curves in Figure I-9.2.2 because it includes margin to accommodate the maximum allowable mean stress and may be used at or near the weld locations where higher residual stresses are typically present.
In addition, Curve C is not dependent on the primary plus
secondary stress range. [[
]] The NRC recommendation for acceptance of a RSD component is that the maximum stress intensity amplitude be less than half of the allowable alternating stress intensity amplitude (Reference 7). Therefore, the acceptance criterion for the Browns Ferry RSD is half of the allowable alternating stress intensity amplitude, or 6,800 psi. GEH calculates the MASR as: Equation 4.3-1 For each unique steam dryer component in Table 4.2-1, a final ASR is calculated. The RSD MASR is defined as the lowest ASR value of all the listed steam dryer components, refer to Table 4.4-1. The NRC recommendation guidance on acceptance criteria when evaluating all RSD components for power uprate is a MASR of 2.0 in accordance with Reference 1.
4.4 Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) Stress Intensity Results Final FIV stress results at EPU, including B&U and non-acoustic loads (i.e., core flow and VPF) is provided as Table 4.4-1.
The predicted ASR is greater than 2.0 for all components at EPU plant conditions [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-151
]]. Therefore, based on the acceptance criteria discussed in Section 4.3, the Browns Ferry RSD is acceptable for EPU operation.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-152 Table 4.4-1: Browns Ferry Replacement Stea m Dryer Final FIV Peak Stress Table for the Projected EPU Condition STEAM DRYER COMPONENT EPU Peak Alternating Stress Intensity (psi) Alternating Stress Ratio (ASR) [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 4-153 STEAM DRYER COMPONENT EPU Peak Alternating Stress Intensity (psi) Alternating Stress Ratio (ASR)
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-1 5.0 BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT RSD PRIMARY STRESS EVALUATION The steam dryer is a nonsafety-related component and performs no active safety function; however, the steam dryer must maintain structural integrity during normal, transient and accident conditions and not generate loose parts that may in terfere with the operation of safety systems.
Section 4 of this report describes the fatigue evaluation and demonstrates that the steam dryer alternating stresses are sufficiently low to precl ude the initiation of high cycle fatigue cracking during normal plant operation under EPU condition. This section provides the primary structural stress assessment under the design load combinations for all steam dryer components excluding seismic blocks and jack bolts/latches during Normal (Service Leve l A), Upset (Service Level B), Emergency (Service Level C), and Faulted (Service Level D) conditions at EPU power level. The analysis and results for seismic blocks and jack bolts/latches are discussed in Section 4.2.4. The primary structural stress assessment under the design load combinations and demonstrates that the steam dryer will maintain structur al integrity during all modes of operation.
5.1 Design Criteria The steam dryer, including the steam dryer units, is a nonsafety-related item and is classified as an Internal Structure as defined in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III (Reference 6), Subsection NG Paragraph NG-1122. The steam dryer is not a component governed by ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, however the design will comply with stress and fatigue criteria for co re support structures defined in ASME Code Subsection NG-3000, [[
]] as discussed in Subsection 4.2.3.5. The other exception to Subsection NG-3000 is that no temperature adjustment for the modulus of elasticity is performed when comparing the calculated alternating stress intensity against the fatigue acceptance criterion. This is discussed further in Section 4.1 of Appendix A.
5.1.1 Material Properties The steam dryer assembly is designed to be manufactured of ASME SA-240 Type 304L Stainless Steel, with the exception of the Seismi c Blocks, which are Type 316 Stainless Steel, as well as the Jack Bolts and Latch Mechanism, which are both X-750, conforming to the requirements of the material and fabrication specifications. ASME material properties from ASME BPVC Code,Section II, Part D (Reference 5) are used for the steam dryer design evaluation. The applicable properties are summarized in Table 5.1-1.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-2 Table 5.1-1: Material Properties
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
]] 5.1.2 ASME Code Stress Limits for Load Combinations The ASME Code, Subsection NG stress limits for the steam dryer primary structural stress assessment are listed in Table 5.1-2. Stress limits for Service Leve ls A, B and C are according to NG-3220; and for Service Level D are in accordan ce with ASME Code S ection III Appendix F, Paragraph F 1331.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-3 Table 5.1-2: ASME Code Stre ss Limits for SA-240 Type 304L
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
Service Level Stress Category Stress Limit ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
Design and Service Levels A & B P m S m P m+P b 1.5S m Service Level C P m 1.5 S m P m+P b 2.25 S m Service Level D P m Min(.7S u or 2.4 S m) P l + P b 1.5(Pm Allowable) ]][[
]] Legend: P m: General primary membrane stress intensity P l: Local primary membrane stress intensity P b: Primary bending stress intensity S m: ASME Code stress intensity limit S u: Tensile strength
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-4 5.1.3 Design Load Combinations The recommended design load combinations for replacement stream dryer primary stress evaluations for Mark I Plants are provided in Reference 8 and listed in Table 5.1-3. The load term definitions in Table 5.1-4 define the terms used in Table 5.1-3. For faulted (Service Level D) load conditions, the MSLB outside containment acoustic load (MSLBA hot standby) and differential pressure load (MSLBDP hot standby) under the hot standby condition may result in more limiting load combination compared to using t hose loads under interlock condition (low core power/high core flow). Therefore, two additional load combinations under the hot standby condition, DW + MSLBDP hot standby (D-4) and DW + MSLBA hot standby (D-5), are added into Table 5.1-3. These combinations are addressed in the GEH steam dryer evaluation process in addition to those in BWRVIP-181A (Reference 8). The load combination of DW + MSLB DP2 is bounded by DW + MSLB DP for hot standby; therefore, only DW + MSLBDP hot standby is analyzed in the Browns Ferry steam dryer design load combination primary stress evaluation.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-5 Table 5.1-3: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Design Load Combinations
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-6 Table 5.1-4:
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] 5.2 Analysis Approach 5.2.1 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer FEM The FEM described in Section 4.2.1 is used for the Browns Ferry RSD primary structural stress assessment. [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-7
]] 5.2.2 Loads for Design Primary Stress Evaluation 5.2.2.1.1 Steady State, Upset Transient, Emergency and Faulted Condition Pressure Loads The pressure differentials across the steam dryer are calculated for four categories of events: normal, upset, emergency and faulted conditions. Normal conditions correspond to the plant steady-state operating conditions. Upset conditions address anticipated transient events. Emergency conditions are within the reactor internals design basis and are defined by the rapid vessel depressurization via operation of the automatic depressurization system relief valves. Faulted conditions correspond to the design basis accident events (e.g., MSL break).
5.2.2.1.2 Normal and Upset DP N & DP U The normal and upset differential pressure loads are determined based on the methods defined in Appendix A, Section 8.1.3.1.3. The stat ic pressure is divided into two general regions, which are an outer hood region that includes the higher pressure drop of the nozzle region and the rest of the steam dryer region. The static pressure drop across the steam dryer outer hood is determined by the pressure drop through the vane banks plus the static pressure drop along the steam dryer
hoods at the analyzed hood elevation. The differential pressure loads for the components (other than the steam dryer outer hood) are conservatively estimated to be the same as the pressure drop through all the vane banks. For perforated plates , an equivalent pressure drop is applied and estimated as:
[[
]] The fractions of closed area for Browns Ferry RSD are [[ ]] The differential pressure loads are based on Browns Ferry EPU conditions.
Figure 5.2-1 presents the pressure load applied on the steam dryer components.
As discussed in Sectio n 8.1.3.1.3 of Appendix A, DP U, the pressure differential load for the steam dryer for upset operation is determined based on DP N and the upset multiplier. The upset multiplier used to define P U is [[ ]].
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-8 [[ ]] Figure 5.2-1: Components and Pressure Loads Applied for DP N 5.2.2.1.3 Differential Pressure Load during Emergency and Faulted Conditions For emergency and faulted conditions, the pressure differentials across the steam dryer components are calculated using a nodalized blow-down LAMB model of the reactor vessel as discussed in Section 8.1.3.2.4 of Appendix A. The limiting event for the emergency condition is the rapid RPV depressurization by actuation of the automatic depressurization system valves when the reactor is at high power. For EPU conditions, the differential pressure load during emergency operation (DP E) is [[
]] for the steam dryer vane bank. The differential pressure loads for the components other than steam dryer outer hood are conservatively estimated to be the same as the pressure drop through the steam dryer vane banks
[[
]] and for the perforated plates an e quivalent pressure drop is applied. For the faulted condition, the limiting event is the instantaneous circumferential break of one of the MSLs. Three reactor conditions are analyzed for this event as described in Section 8.1.3.2.4 of Appendix A, which are High Power, Interlock and Hot Standby. For EPU conditions, the differential pressure loads for the steam dryer outer hood and the steam dryer vane bank under these three conditions are liste d in Table 5.2-1. The differential pressure loads for the components other than the steam dr yer outer hood are conservatively estimated to be the same as the pressure drop through the stea m dryer vane banks and for perf orated plates an equivalent pressure drop is applied.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-9 The differential pressure loads for components in the steam dryer FEM for emergency operation DP E, High Power MSLB DP1 , Interlock MSLBDP2 , and Hot Standby MSLB DP are the same as those shown in Figure 5.2-1 for DP N. Table 5.2-1: Faulted Condition DPs
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
]] 5.2.2.2 Main Steam Line Break Event Acoustic Loads The acoustic load on the face of the steam dryer hood during a MSLB event consists of two components, a load multiplier P 0 and normalized load distribution. The load multiplier determining the wave strength is based on the initial thermal hydraulic pr operties and transient characteristics (e.g., break time). The normalized load is the magnitude and distribution of the load based on the geometry and configurati on of the dryer hood and steam lines. The methodology for determining the acoustic loads on the steam dryer hoods is described in Section 8.1.3.2.5 of Appendix A. Per this methodology the peak normalized acoustic load distribution on the face of the steam dryer hood for Browns Ferry steam dryer is determined, as well as the load multiplier P
- 0. The acoustic load is calcul ated at three reactor operating conditions defined by the load combination table. The peak normalized acoustic load distribution fo r the three operating conditions is provided in Table 5.2-2. The multiplier P 0 is determined to be [[ ]]. The maximum acoustic loads (MSLB A1 , MSLB A2 and MSLB A hot standby) on the steam dryer hood due to the MSLB are obtained by applying the corresponding acoustic load multiplier, P 0, to the peak normalized distribution load. The components in the steam dryer FE M for these acoustic pressure loads (MSLB A1 , MSLB A2 and MSLB A hot standby) are shown in Figure 5.2-2.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-10 Table 5.2-2: MSLB A1 & MSLB A2 and MSLB A hot standby Peak Normalized Acoustic Loads for MSLB [[
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[ ]] Figure 5.2-2: Components for MSLB Acoustic Pressure Loads
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-11 5.2.2.3 Turbine Stop Valve (TSV) Closure Event Loads (TSV A/TSV F) The Turbine Stop Valve (TSV) closure event produces two loads on the steam dryer. The first (TSV A) is due to the impact of the acoustic wave cr eated by the valve clos ure. The second load (TSV F) is caused by the inertial impact of the flow reversal in the steam lines. The methodology for determining these loads is similar to the methodology for determining the acoustic loads due to the MSLB and is described in Section 8.1.3.2.2 of Appendix A. The peak normalized load distribution is shown in Table 5.2-3. For EPU conditions, the multiplier, P0, for the TSV A condition, is [[ ]]. The maximum load on the steam dryer hood is obtained by applying the corresponding load multiplier P0 to the peak normalized load distribution. The TSV F pressure differential is [[ ]]. This pressure differential load is applied on the steam dryer face that is directly opposite from steam line nozzle and is applied to the projected area of the steam line nozzle on to the steam dryer face. The components in the steam dryer FEM for TSV A and TSV F pressure loads are shown in Figure 5.2-3 and Figure 5.2-4. Table 5.2-3: Peak Normalized Acoustic Loads for TSV A [[
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-12 [[ ]] Figure 5.2-3: Components in Steam Dryer FEM for TSV A Pressure Load
[[ ]] Figure 5.2-4: Components in Steam Dryer FEM for TSV F Pressure Load 5.2.2.4 Seismic Loads Seismic events transmit loads to the steam dryer through the vessel support brackets. Horizontal loads due to a seismic event are [[
]] as shown in Figure 5.2-5. The vertical response spectra were [[
]]. Figure 5.2-6 shows the SSE NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-13 acceleration response spectra for the Browns Ferry steam dryer in the horizontal North-South (N-S), East-West (E-W) and vertical directions used for steam dryer seismic spectral analysis. Figure 5.2-7 shows the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) acceleration response spectra, which are calculated as half of the SSE values. Structural damping of [[ ]] is applied to the response spectra.
[[ ]] Figure 5.2-5: Horizontal Seismic Model
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-14
[[ ]] Figure 5.2-6: SSE Seismic Acce leration Response Spectra
[[ ]] Figure 5.2-7: OBE Seismic Acceleration Response Spectra NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-15 5.2.2.5 Zero Period Acceleration (ZPA) The static structure analyses were performed us ing Zero Period Accelerations (2PAs) for seismic loads when frequency exceeds the ZPA frequency. The ZPAs applied in the design structural analysis are listed in Table 5.2-4. Table 5.2-4: Zero Period Acceleration
[[ ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] 5.2.2.6 Metal and Water Weight Load (DW) The stresses caused by metal weight are obtaine d by applying G loading to the Browns Ferry replacement dryer FEM.
5.2.2.7 FIV Stresses The FIV analysis for the Browns Ferry RSD during normal operation was documented in Section 4. The FIV final adjusted maximum stresses and maximum membrane stresses (including B&U) for each steam dryer component are conservatively taken [[ ]] Because the design load combination stress analysis is the primary structural assessment, [[
]]. These stresses will be applied [[
]]. 5.2.3 Design Load Combination Analysis The structural responses of the steam dryer to the design load combinations are evaluated using the ANSYS finite element code. The results of the individual load analyses are then combined for each load combination as specified in Table 5.1-3. The type of finite element structural analysis for each load type is identified in Section 8.1.4 of Appendix A. The analyses are performed assuming a normal reactor operating temperature.
5.3 Design Load Combination Prim ary Stress Evaluation Results The Browns Ferry RSD was analyzed for the design load combinations (primary stresses) using the FEM as described in Section 4.2.1. The results of these analyses are used to assess steam dryer component primary stresses versus ASME design criteria for a total of eleven load combinations as described in Section 5.1.3 under normal, upset, emergency and faulted operation conditions at EPU power level. The summary of the primary structural stress assessment results for all steam dryer components excluding seismic bl ocks and jack bolts/latches is presented in NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-16 Table 5.3-1. The acceptance criteria used for these evaluations are the same as those used for safety-related components. The results in Table 5.3-1 and Sections 4.2.4.2 and 4.2.4.3 indicate that the stresses for all structural components are below the ASME Code allowable limits at EPU operating conditions for Normal, Upset and Emergency service levels. All components meet the requirements for the Faulted service levels. The design load combination results provided in Table 5.3-1 in conjunction with the discussion in Sections 4.2.4.2 and 4.2.4.3 demonstrate the acceptability of the Browns Ferry RSD design at EPU operating conditions.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 5-17 Table 5.3-1: BFN Replacement Steam Dryer EP U Design Load Combination Results for Norm al, Upset, Emergency and Faulted Conditio ns [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 6-1 6.0 MONITORING DURING POWER ASCENSION AND FINAL ASSESSMENT AT EPU The series of steps outlined in Section 2.0 descri be the high level analysis and test related tasks that represent the GEH implementation of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.20 requirements for the RSD. The focus of this report is the structural FIV analysis and test (i.e., measurement) requirements, which make up two of the three main elements of the comprehensive vibration assessment program described in the guide (the third element is inspection). This section describes the RG requirements as they relate to the RSD.
6.1 Regulatory Guide 1.20 Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program As discussed in Section 2.0, the RSD is subject to predictive analyses and verification through instrumentation during power ascen sion at initial startup. For th e analysis, the fatigue stress amplitude acceptance limit is [[ ]]. For additional conservatism in the design basis predictive analysis, the analysis stress results will meet a recommended MASR of 2.0 between the analysis results and the fatigue acceptance limit. The power ascension monitoring then uses the fatigue limit stress amplitude of [[ ]] with a MASR of 1.0 as the basis for acceptance limits for the on-dryer instrument measurements during power ascension. A confirmatory stress analysis is performed based on the on-dryer measurements after reaching the full EPU power level.
This Steam Dryer Analysis Report (SDAR) and its appendices present the RSD analysis results and methodology, respectively. Appe ndix A (Table 10.1-1) provides a RG 1.20 compliance table which details how the methodology meets the recommendations specified in RG 1.20. 6.1.1 Classification The [[ ]] RSD for Browns Ferry is classified [[
]] The "valid prototype" for the Browns Ferry RSD design is the BWR/
4 RSD described in Section 3.0. The [[
]] classification is based on the comparisons to the "valid prototype" BWR/4 steam dryer provided in Section 3.1 and the changes that have been made in the Browns Ferry RSD design subseque nt to the prototype design as described in Section 3.2. [[ ]] classification is also based on the similarities in the pressure loads acting on the steam dryers for the Browns Ferry and the BWR/4 prototype plants as shown in the comparisons between the two plants in Section 4.1.7. The RSDs for the [[
]] Browns Ferry units are classified as [[
]] referencing the lead Browns Ferry unit design, testing and confirmatory analysis that will be performed as part of the EPU power ascension testing. The Browns Ferry RSD design is common to all three Browns Ferry units. The operating conditions and relevant plant geometry for the three Browns Ferr y units are virtually identical. Therefore, the vibratory and stress response for the [[
]] dryers are expected to be substantially the same as the lead unit.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 6-2 6.1.2 Vibration and Stress Analysis Program The design vibration and stress analysis for the Browns Ferry RSDs is common for all three units. The scope and detail of the analysis are the same as that used for a prototype steam dryer. The PBLE pressure load definition used in the analysis is based [[
]] measurements taken at each of the three units [[ ]] This approach ensures that the nominal design differences between [[
]] Following power ascension to full EPU, a confirmatory analysis will be performed for the
[[ ]] unit RSD. This analysis will include a final load definition and stress reanalysis of the steam dryer using the [[ ]] biases and uncertainties determined at EPU conditions and a comparison of predicted and measured pressures and strains on the RSD.
The [[ ]] unit confirmatory analysis will provide the basis for the test acceptance criteria for the follow-on units. Power ascension monitoring for the [[ ]] units will be performed using [[ ]] the RSDs for the follow-on units will not be instrumented. Confirmatory evaluations will be performed for each of the follow-on units using the MSL measurements at EPU and the Br owns Ferry specific biases and uncertainties developed from the [[ ]] confirmatory analysis. [[
]] 6.1.3 Vibration and Stress Measurement Program The power ascension for the Browns Ferry [[ ]] unit will be monitored using [[ ]] The instrumentation design ensures that there is sufficient and appropriate instrumentation to define the vibratory and stress response for those components in the Browns Ferry RSD that have been modified relative to the "valid prototype" BWR/4 steam dryer. In addition to the [[
]] Test acceptance criteria for the [[ ]] unit will be provided through limit curves for [[
]] The [[ ]] unit confirmatory analysis will provide the basis for the test acceptance criteria for the [[ ]] Power ascension monitoring for the [[ ]] will be performed [[
]] Test acceptance criteria for the [[
]] will be provided through limit curves for [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 6-3 6.1.4 Inspection Program During the first two scheduled Refueling Outages (RFO)s after reaching full EPU power conditions, a visual inspection of the RSD will be conducted fo r each unit. The inspection plan will be consistent with the industry guidance provided in References 9 and 10. The inspection plan will include an accessible exterior and interior critical locations identified in the vibration and stress analyses for the Browns Ferry RSDs.
6.2 Power Ascension Test Plan (PATP) The primary objectives of the PATP are as follows:
- [[
]]
- Confirm the steam dryer analyses performed for the EPU conditions.
The Browns Ferry [[ ]] steam dryer to obtain data during power ascension. The [[ ]] are then compared with the [[ ]] limit curves. [[
]] Note that the [[ ]] B&U analyses are accounted for in the development of the acceptance limits as described in Section 4.2.5.
The Browns Ferry [[ ]] will use [[
]] The [[
]] Demonstrating that the steam dryer pressure loads remain within the allowable pressure loads confirms that the steam dryer alternating stresses remain within the structural analysis basis in the [[ ]] unit confirmatory analysis.
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 6-4
]] Monitoring of various plant parameters potentially indicative of steam dryer/system failure will be continued after reaching EPU conditions. Moisture carryover, strain gauge monitoring and inspections results will be made available to the NRC Staff. Once EPU conditions are obtained and data collected at EPU conditions, a final stress analysis will be performed and submitted to the NRC.
6.3 Limit Curve Adjustment
[[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 6-5
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 6-6
]]
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 6-7 [[ ]] Figure 6.3-1: Generic Process for Updating Limit Curves
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 7-1
7.0 REFERENCES
- 1. MFN 11-230, Letter from Robert A. Nelson (NRC) to Jerald G. Head (GEH), "Clarification of Intent on Methodologies for Demonstrating Steam Dryer Integrity for Power Uprate - GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy," September 14, 2011.
- 2. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.20, "Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program for Reactor Internals During Preoperational and Initial Startup Testing," Revision 3, March 2007.
- 3. NRC Information Notice No. 95-16, Information Notice No. 95-16, "Vibration Caused by Increased Recirculation Flow in a Boiling Water Reactor," March 9, 1995.
- 4. GE Service Information Letter (SIL) No. 600, "Increased Containment Noise and Vibration at Increased Recirculation Pump Speed," May 15, 1996.
- 5. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section II, Part D, 1995 Edition with Addenda through 1996.
- 6. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, 1989 Edition with no Addenda.
- 7. "Effective Elastic Constants for Bending of Thin Perforated Plates with Triangular and Square Penetration Patterns," by W.J. O'Donnell, February 1973, ASME Journal of Engineering Industry 95: 121-128.
- 8. Electric Power Research Institute (EPR I) Technical Report (TR), BWRVIP-181A, "BWR Vessel and Internal s Project, (BWRVIP-181A)".
Revision 2.
- 10. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Technical Report (TR) 1011463, BWRVIP-139A, "BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Steam Dryer Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines (BWRVIP-139A)".
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-1
Appendix A
BWR Replacement Steam Dryer Structural Evaluation General Methodology
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ..............................................................................................................
........................... A-8 2.0 Steam Dryer Design and Operating Environment ............................................................................ A
-11 2.1 Physical Description ......................................................................................................
................. A-11 2.2 BWR RSD Plant Operating Conditions for Steam Dryer Design Basis Analyses ......................... A-11 2.2.1 Reactor Power ...........................................................................................................
............. A-11 2.2.2 Reactor Dome Pressure ...................................................................................................
....... A-12 2.2.3 RPV Water Level .........................................................................................................
.......... A-12 2.2.4 Reactor Core Flow .......................................................................................................
.......... A-13 2.2.5 Core Flow Variation over the Fuel Cycle .............................................................................. A-13 3.0 Material Properties .......................................................................................................
..................... A-15 4.0 Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................
....................... A-16 4.1 Fatigue Criteria ..........................................................................................................
..................... A-16 4.2 Fatigue Strength Reduction Factors ........................................................................................
....... A-17 4.3 Weld Quality Factor .......................................................................................................
................ A-22 5.0 Steam Dryer Finite Element Model and Applied Loads ................................................................... A-23 5.1 Full Steam Dryer Shell Finite Element Model ............................................................................... A-23 5.1.1 Elements and Model Simplification ....................................................................................... A-23 5.1.2 Substructuring ..........................................................................................................
.............. A-27 5.1.3 Water Modeling ..........................................................................................................
........... A-30 5.1.4 Perforated Plate ........................................................................................................
.............. A-35 5.1.5 Shell-Solid Element Connections .......................................................................................... A-37 5.1.6 Global FEM Convergence ..................................................................................................
.... A-40 5.1.7 FE Submodel Convergence .................................................................................................
... A-41 5.2 Dynamic Pressure Loads ....................................................................................................
............ A-44 5.2.1 Load Development ........................................................................................................
......... A-44 5.2.2 SRV Acoustic Sources ....................................................................................................
....... A-44 5.2.3 Design Basis FIV Loads ..................................................................................................
....... A-46 5.2.4 Power Ascension FIV Loads ...............................................................................................
... A-46 5.2.5 Full Power FIV Loads ....................................................................................................
........ A-47 5.3 Acoustic Load Mapping .....................................................................................................
............ A-47 6.0 Vibration Analysis and Predicted Component Stresses .................................................................... A-49 6.1 Dynamic Analysis Approach .................................................................................................
......... A-49 6.1.1 Dynamic FIV Analysis ....................................................................................................
....... A-49 6.1.2 Structural Damping ......................................................................................................
.......... A-51 6.1.3 Stress Recovery from the Global Results ............................................................................... A
-52 NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-3 6.2 Submodel Analysis and Local Stress ........................................................................................
..... A-54 6.3 Adjustments to the Steam Dryer FIV Stress .................................................................................
.. A-58 6.3.1 Methodology Bias and Uncertainty........................................................................................
A-61 6.3.2 FEM Bias and Uncertainty ................................................................................................
..... A-62 6.3.3 Maximum Response for FIV Assessment .............................................................................. A-62 6.3.4 Scaling Factors for EPU Conditions ([[ ]]) ...................................... A-67 6.3.5 Instrumentation Bias and Uncertainty ....................................................................................
A-68 7.0 Fatigue Prediction ........................................................................................................
..................... A-69 7.1 Analysis 1 - [[ ]] ..................................................................................... A-69 7.2 Analysis 2 - [[ ]] ...................................................................... A-69 7.3 Analysis 3 - [[ ]] ........................................................... A-69 7.4 Analysis 4 - [[ ]] ................................................................ A-70 8.0 Primary Stress Evaluation .................................................................................................
................ A-71 8.1 ASME Approach for the RSDs ................................................................................................
...... A-71 8.1.1 Description of Design Conditions ........................................................................................
.. A-71 8.1.2 ASME Load Case for the Steam Dryer .................................................................................. A-7 1 8.1.3 Individual Load Term Definition and Source ........................................................................ A-73 8.1.4 Analysis Approach .......................................................................................................
.......... A-88
8.1.5 ASME Load Case Stress Results ...........................................................................................
A-89 9.0 Startup Test Design and Analysis ..........................................................................................
........... A-90 9.1 Instrumentation for Monitoring Steam Dryer Response ................................................................ A-90 9.2 Startup Testing Acceptance Criteria .......................................................................................
........ A-91 10.0 Compreshensive Vibration Assessment Program for the Replacement Steam Dryer ..................... A-93 10.1 RSD Vibration and Stress Analysis Program ...............................................................................
A-94 10.2 RSD Power Ascension Monitoring Program ............................................................................. A-107 10.2.1 Power Ascension Test Plan ..............................................................................................
.. A-108 10.3 RSD Inspection Program ...................................................................................................
......... A-111 11.0 Conclusions ..............................................................................................................
..................... A-112 12.0 References ...............................................................................................................
...................... A-113
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-4 LIST OF TABLES Table 6.3-1: [[ ]] ................................................................................ A-60 Table 6.3-2: Typical Time Domain Strain Gauge Data Statistics .......................................................... A-64 Table 8.1-1: Typical Steam Dryer Load Combinations for Plants ......................................................... A-72 Table 8.1-2: Peak Normalized Load Distribution for [[ ]] .................................. A-81 Table 8.1-3: Typical Peak Normalized Acoustic Loads for MSLB ....................................................... A-87 Table 8.1-4: Type of Analysis for the Load Terms in ASME Load Combinations ............................... A-88 Table 8.1-5: ASME Code Stress Limits for the Steam Dryer ................................................................ A-89 Table 10.1-1: RG 1.20 Requirement Conformance Table ..................................................................... A-96
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.2-1: Typical Steam Dryer Installed in RPV ...........................................................................
.. A-14 Figure 4.2-1: Weld Fatigue Strength Reduction Factor Flow Diagram ................................................. A-20 Figure 4.2-2: Schematic of Weld Joint Showing Geometric Nomenclature .......................................... A-21 Figure 5.1-1: An Example of Steam Dryer Finite Element Model ........................................................ A-25 Figure 5.1-2: Example of Stress Recovery Components for the Steam Dryer FEM ............................. A-26 Figure 5.1-3: Vane Bundle Construction .......................................................................................
........ A-29 Figure 5.1-4: Typical Vane Bundle FEM showing Master DOFs ......................................................... A-29 Figure 5.1-5: Modeling Water .................................................................................................
.............. A-32 Figure 5.1-6: Schematics of Bubbly Water and Steam ..........................................................................
A-33 Figure 5.1-7: Speed of sound [[ ]] ..................... A-34 Figure 5.1-8: Modeling Perforated Plates .....................................................................................
......... A-36 Figure 5.1-9: Moment Transfer Shells used in the RSD FEM ............................................................... A-38 Figure 5.1-10: Shell-to-Solid Connection within the Tie Bars .............................................................. A-39 Figure 5.1-11: Lower Ring Splice MPCs ........................................................................................
....... A-40 Figure 5.1-12: Global Model Mesh Converged ...................................................................................
.. A-42 Figure 5.1-13: Mesh Convergence in Refinement Study ....................................................................... A-43 Figure 5.1-14: Mesh Convergence by Extrapolation Method ................................................................ A-43 Figure 5.2-1: [[ ]] Predicted versus Measured Loads............................................ A-45 Figure 5.2-2: [[ ]] Predicted versus Measured Loads............................................ A-46 Figure 5.3-1: Pressure Surfaces for Which to Map the Acoustic Pressure Loads ................................. A-48 Figure 5.3-2: Pressure Load Mapping Input (Left) and Output (Right) ................................................. A-48 Figure 6.1-1: [[ ]] ................................. A-52 Figure 6.1-2: Stress Intensity Contour at Max Stress Intensity (SI) Time Step [[ ]] ...... A-54 Figure 6.2-1: Illustration of a Submodel [[ ]] ............................................ A-56 Figure 6.2-2: Boundary Conditions of a Submodel [[ ]] ............................. A-57 Figure 6.2-3: Calculation of Fillet Weld Nominal Stress [[ ]] ................................ A-58 Figure 6.3-1: Overview of Final Stress Adjustment Process ................................................................. A-61 Figure 8.1-1: Pressure Drop Distribution on Perforated Plate Used for BWR 4/5 Original Steam Dryer Design ..................................................................................................................
................. A-74 Figure 8.1-2: Typical TSV Closure Characteristics ............................................................................
... A-77 Figure 8.1-3: Typical Turbine Valve Schematic ................................................................................
.... A-78 Figure 8.1-4: [[ ]] ............................................................. A-79 Figure 8.1-5: Finite Element Model Component for [[ ]] Pressure Load .................................. A-81 Figure 8.1-6: Projected [[ ]]) .................................................................. A-83
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-6 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Description ABWR Advanced Boiling Water Reactor ADS Automatic Depressurization System AOO Anticipated Operation Occurances ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers BWR Boiling Water Reactor CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics CLTP Current Licensed Thermal Power DOF Degrees of Freedom DP Delta (or differential) Pressure DW Dead Weight ECCS Emergency Core Cooling System EPU Extended Power Uprate FE Finite Element FEA Finite Element Analysis FEM Finite Element Model FIV Flow Induced Vibration FRF Frequency Response Function FSAR Final Safety Analysis Report FSRF Fatigue Strength Reduction Factor GEH GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy
[[
]] ISCOR Program used for developing ASME loads LAMB Program used in ECCS-LOCA applications LBL Large Break LOCA LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident
[[
]] MASR Minimum Alternating Stress Ratio MPC Multi-Point Constraint NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-7 Term Description MSL Main Steam Line MSLB Main Steam Line Break NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer OLTP Original Licensed Thermal Power PATP Power Ascension Test Plan PBLE Plant Based Load Evaluation PBLE01 PBLE solution with [[
]] PBLE02 PBLE solution with [[
]] PS Power Spectrum PSD Power Spectral Density PTF Plate Thickness Factor RG Regulatory Guide RIPD Reactor Internal Pressure Differences RMS Root Mean Square RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel RSD Replacement Steam Dryer SDAR Steam Dryer Analysis Report SER Safety Evaluation Report SRSS Square Root Sum of the Squares SRF Stress Ratio Factor SRV Safety Relief Valve SSE Safe Shutdown Earthquake TSV Turbine Stop Valve NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-8
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As a result of steam dryer fatigue issues at operating Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs) following the implementation of Extended Power Uprate (EPU), the United States (US) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (N RC) has issued revised guidance concerning the evaluation of steam dryers (References A.1 and A.2) for flow-induced vibrations. It must be demonstrated that the dryer will maintain its structural integrity when subjected to acoustic and hydrodynamic fluctuating pressure loads during normal plant operation. This demonstration of steam dryer structural integrity comes in three steps:
- 1. Predict the fluctuating pressure loads acti ng on the dryer and perform a structural analysis to qualify the steam dryer design, 2. Implement a startup test program for confirming the steam dryer design analysis results as part of the plant power ascension.
- 3. Implement an inspection program to inspect the critical high stress locations. The approach used for the BWR Replacement Steam Dryer (RSD) structural evaluation includes the following:
I. Design a. Analyze the steam dryer design with design loads developed from [[
]] using the Plant Based Load Evaluation ([[
]]) methodology. [[ ]] bias and uncertainty developed from an instrumented prototype steam dryer is applied to the design basis. [[
]] b. Demonstrate that the fatigue analysis results for the as-designed steam dryer maximum calculated alternating stress intensity meet or exceed a recommended Minimum Alternating Stress Ratio (MASR) of 2.0 to the allowable alternating stress intensity of 13,600 psi.
- c. Demonstrate that the primary stress results for the as-designed steam dryer meet the acceptance criteria for the normal, upset, emergency, and faulted load combinations.
- d. If needed, revise steam dryer design in high stress areas to meet criteria in I.b and I.c
above. II. As-built Steam Dryer
- a. Address any changes between the as-designed and as-built steam dryer.
- b. For a prototype dryer, perform dynamic testing, "frequency response testing", of the fabricated steam dryer to compare the predicted versus measured frequency response. Define [[
]] Dynamic testing of the as-built dryer is not necessary if the RSD design is similar to NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-9 prototypic designs or designs that have been dynamically tested. The [[ ]] bias and uncertainty from the prototype dryer benchmarking and
[[ ]] previously performed in the analyses are sufficient to address the difference in stru ctural response between the analytical model and the as-built dryer.
- c. Verify that the fatigue analysis results for the as-built steam dryer maximum calculated alternating stress intensity meet or exceed an MASR of 2.0 to the allowable alternating stress intensity of 13,600 psi.
- d. Verify that the primary stress results for the as-built steam dryer meet the acceptance criteria for the normal, upset, emerge ncy, and faulted load combinations.
- e. Identify on-dryer instrumentation sens or specifications, sensor locations, [[
]], and bias and uncertainties of sensors and data acquisition system.
- f. Define steam dryer instrument acceptance limits that maintain peak alternating stress amplitude of 13,600 psi for the steam dryer.
III. [[
]] Power Ascension Monitoring and Inspection
- a. Develop a steam dryer power ascension monitoring and inspection program that reflects industry experience with the performance of steam dryer power ascension testing. b. Instrument and monitor the steam dryer during power ascension to [[ ]] to assure that adequate steam dryer fatigue margin is maintained.
- c. Perform a confirmatory stru ctural analysis based [[ ]] and benchmarked against the structural m easurements to confirm that the dryer will maintain structural integr ity over its design life.
IV. [[
]] Power ascension testing of [[ ]] will follow the same flow-induced vibration (FIV) monitoring process using [[
]] incorporating lessons learned from power ascension of previous BWR RSD plants as applicable. The power ascension acceptance limits for [[
]] are based on assuring that the stresses remain less than 13,600 psi. Limits are based on [[ ]] The limit curve factor is determined based on the ratio of 13,600 psi over the projected peak stress on [[ ]] steam dryer after adjustment for bias and uncertainty. Confirmatory structural evaluations [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-10 V. Inspections Conduct steam dryer inspections during the first two refueling outages and develop a long-term steam dryer inspection program based on the results of those steam dryer inspections.
The overall structural evaluation methodology and power ascensi on testing for the BWR RSD is presented in this report, and is not plant-specific. This methodology has been successfully used in previous RSD projects. A detailed FEM is used to perform the structural dynamic analyses in order to predict the steam dryer's susceptibility to fatigue under FIV during normal operation. The same FEM is used to predict the stresses resulting from transient and accident events. When EPU power is obtained, the resu lts of these analyses are confirmed by updating the projected peak stress projections using the EPU power test data. This overall methodology description is sup ported by other append ices. The supporting appendix list is below:
- Appendix A - BWR RSD Structural Evaluation: General Methodology (the present document).
- Appendix B - Plant Based Load Evaluation Methodology - PBLE01 Model Description.
o [[
]]
- Appendix C - Plant Based Load Evaluation Methodology - PBLE02 Model Description.
o [[
]]
- Appendix D - Browns Ferry RSD FIV Supplemental Information.
- Appendix E - Power Ascension Test Plan.
o [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-11 2.0 STEAM DRYER DESIGN AND OPERATING ENVIRONMENT 2.1 Physical Description The BWR RSD consists of an upper support ring with dryer banks on top and a skirt below to make up the steam dryer assembly. A typical steam dryer is shown in Figure 2.2-1. The steam dryer units, made up of steam dryer vanes and perforated plates, are arranged in six parallel rows called dryer banks. The support ring is suppor ted by reactor pressure vessel (RPV) support brackets. The steam dryer assembly does not physically connect to the steam separator assembly. The cylindrical skirt attaches to the support ring and projects downward to form a water seal around the array of steam separators. Normal operating water level, approximately mid-height on the steam dryer skirt, is provided as input to the analysis. During normal refueling outages, the BWR RSD is supported from the floor of the equipment pool by the lower skirt ring that is located at the bottom edge of the skirt. The steam dryer is installed and removed from the RPV by the reactor building overhead crane. A steam dryer lifting device, which attaches to four steam dryer lifting rod eyes, is used for lifting the steam dryer. Guide rods in the RPV are used to aid steam dryer installation and removal. Upper and lower guides on the steam dryer assembly are used to interface with the guide rods.
2.2 BWR RSD Plant Operating Conditions for Steam Dryer Design Basis Analyses This section defines the plan t operating conditions that will be assumed for the BWR RSD design basis analyses. The relevant plant parameters that determine the operating conditions for the steam dryer structural analyses are the reactor power, the RPV pressure, the RPV water level and reactor core flow. These parameters are interrelated and have both primary and secondary effects that influence the steam dryer structural response. The BWR is a forced circulation plant and there is active control of the core flow. The core power level can be changed wit hout moving control rods by cha nging recirculation flow. The BWR RSD structural analyses will assume the maximum steam generation rate at 100% rated EPU power as described in the rated reactor heat balance. [[
]] The bases for the assumed operating conditions are provided in the following sections.
2.2.1 Reactor Power The FIV and acoustic pressure loading conditions are governed by the reactor steam generation rate and steam flow velocities in the main steam system. [[ ]] There is a range of core NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-12 recirculation values over which full power operation is licensed. The BWR RSD structural analyses will assume the maximum steam generation rate at full rated power. [[
]] discussed in detail in the next section. 2.2.2 Reactor Dome Pressure The reactor dome pressure determines the steam density and, therefore, the steam flow velocities at a given steam generation rate. [[ ]] This effect was observed in dryer response measurements taken during power ascension testing of an instrumented RSD when [[
]] The reactor dome pressure will vary during normal operation for two reasons: the pressure fluctuations during steady-state operation and the allowed tolerance for the pressure regulator setpoint. The pressure fluctuations during normal operation are small (typically less than +/-2 psi) which will have only a small effect on the steam flow velocities and dryer pressure loading.
[[
]] There is an allowed tolerance in the turbine inlet pressure regulator setpoint with respect to the reactor system pressure. Under normal circumstances, the pressure regulator setpoint is adjusted early in the reactor system pressurization so that the reactor will be at nominal pressure when full power is achieved and is not readjusted during the cycle. In addition, the plant thermal efficiency (electrical generation as a function of thermal power) is maximized by operating the reactor system at the high end of the allowable pressure range.
[[ ]] 2.2.3 RPV Water Level The RPV water level [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-13 ]] Similar to the reactor dome pressure, the vessel water level will vary during normal operation for two reasons: the level fluctuations during steady-state operation and the allowed tolerance for the level controller setpoint. [[
]] in the next section.
2.2.4 Reactor Core Flow Power ascension testing of an instrumented RSD showed [[
]] The BWR is a forced circulation plant and there is active control of the core flow. The effects of those core flow variations on the steam dryer structural response are discussed below. 2.2.5 Core Flow Variation over the Fuel Cycle The rated reactor heat balance for 100% EPU power provides a core flow range for plant operation. This range does not consider both the un certainties in the predicted core flow and the effect of core exposure over the cycle. Therefore, [[
]] As described in Section 10.2, the final dryer stress analysis predictions will be benchmarked at full power operation against on-dryer measuremen ts taken over the range of steady state plant operating conditions during th e prototype plant startup.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-14
[[
]] Figure 2.2-1: Typical Steam Dryer Installed in RPV
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-15 3.0 MATERIAL PROPERTIES The steam dryer will be manufactured from [[
]] stainless steel
[[ ]] stainless steel castings conforming to the requirements of GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) material and fabrication specifications. Typical material properties that are used in the analysis are modulus of elasticit y, density, and poisson's ratio. Specific material properties at operating temperature will be used (Reference A.3). Specifics of how material properties are used in the FEM are discussed in Section 5.0.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-16 4.0 DESIGN CRITERIA The steam dryer, including the steam dryer units, is a nonsafety-related item and is classified as an Internal Structure as defined in the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III (Reference A.4) Subsection NG, Paragraph NG-1122. The steam dryer is not a component governed by ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, however the design will comply with stress and fatigue criteria for core support structures defined in ASME Code Subsection NG-3000, [[ ]] as discussed in Subsections 4.2 and 4.3. The other exception to Subsection NG-3000 is that no temperature adjustment for the modulus of elasticity is performed when comparing the calculated alternating stress intensity against the fatigue acceptance criterion. This is discusse d further in Section 4.1.
4.1 Fatigue Criteria The steam dryer fatigue evaluation consists of cal culating the alternating stress intensity from FIV loading at all locations in the steam dryer structure and comparing it with the allowable design fatigue threshold stress intensity limits. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-17
]] 4.2 Fatigue Strength Reduction Factors
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-18
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-19
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-20
[[ ]] Figure 4.2-1: Weld Fatigue Strength Reduction Factor Flow Diagram
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-21 [[ ]] Figure 4.2-2: Schematic of Weld Joint Showing Geometric Nomenclature
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-22 4.3 Weld Quality Factor For the case of the steam dr yer, which is not a core support structure, it was [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-23 5.0 STEAM DRYER FINITE ELEMEN T MODEL AND A PPLIED LOADS 5.1 Full Steam Dryer Shell Finite Element Model
[[ ]] 5.1.1 Elements and Model Simplification
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-24
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-25 [[ ]] Figure 5.1-1: An Example of Steam Dryer Finite Element Model (element edges not shown for clarity)
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-26
[[ ]] Figure 5.1-2: Example of Stress Recovery Components for the Steam Dryer FEM
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-27 5.1.2 Substructuring
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-28
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-29 [[ ]] Figure 5.1-3: Vane Bundle Construction
[[ ]] Figure 5.1-4: Typical Vane Bundle FEM showing Master DOFs NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-30 5.1.3 Water Modeling
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-31
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-32
]] [[ ]] Figure 5.1-5: Modeling Water
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-33 [[ ]] Figure 5.1-6: Schematics of Bubbly Water and Steam
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-34 [[ ]] Figure 5.1-7: Speed of sound in
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-35 5.1.4 Perforated Plate
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-36
[[ ]] Figure 5.1-8: Modeling Perforated Plates
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-37 5.1.5 Shell-Solid Element Connections
[[
]] 5.1.5.1 Moment Transfer Shell Elements
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-38 [[ ]] Figure 5.1-9: Moment Transfer Shells used in the RSD FEM (support ring is translucent to better show the imbedded shells) 5.1.5.2 General Constraint Equations
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-39 [[ ]] Figure 5.1-10: Shell-to-Solid Connection within the Tie Bars 5.1.5.3 Multi-Point Cons traint Algorithm
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-40 [[ ]] Figure 5.1-11: Lower Ring Splice MPCs 5.1.6 Global FEM Convergence
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-41
]] 5.1.7 FE Submodel Convergence
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-42
]] [[ ]] Figure 5.1-12: Global Model Mesh Converged
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-43 [[ ]] Figure 5.1-13: Mesh Convergen ce in Refinement Study
[[ ]] Figure 5.1-14: Mesh Convergence by Extrapolation Method NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-44 5.2 Dynamic Pressure Loads
[[
]] 5.2.1 Load Development The plant measurements ([[ ]]) are sufficient for capturing the plant-specific frequency and amplitude content for use in developi ng PBLE load definitions (See Appendices B and C) for the pow er levels at which the measurements were taken. [[
]] This section briefly describes the methodology for load definition. 5.2.2 SRV Acoustic Sources Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.20, Revision 3, Section C 2.0 (Reference A.1) indicates studies of past failures have determined that flow-excited acoustic resonances within th e valves, stand pipes and branch lines in the MSLs of BWRs can play a significant role in producing mid- to high-frequency pressure fluctuations and vibration that can damage MSL valves, the steam dryer and other reactor pressure vessel (RPV) internals and steam system components. The SRV sidebranch acoustic resonances are the main contributor to the mid- to high-frequency pressure fluctuations. Therefore, these SRV resonance loads are modeled in the load definition and analysis.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-45 [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 5.2-1:
[[
]] Predicted versus Measured Loads
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-46 [[ ]] Figure 5.2-2:
[[
]] Predicted versus Measured Loads 5.2.3 Design Basis FIV Loads
[[ ]] The design basis FIV loading time history and any necessary loading scale factors are taken from Appendix C. [[
]] 5.2.4 Power Ascension FIV Loads For the [[ ]], the pressure loading on the face of the steam dryer will be measured [[
]] during power ascension. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-47 ]] These loads will be used to adjust the predicted structural model responses [[ ]] Section 6 provides additional details on the application of bias and uncertainty.
For [[
]] The models will use [[ ]] bias and uncertainties developed from the [[
]] 5.2.5 Full Power FIV Loads For the [[ ]], following completion of the power ascension program, a set of full power BWR RSD-specific FIV loads will be developed [[
]] These full power loads will be used to perform a structural evaluation [[ ]] will be applied to the structural model predictions to determine the fi nal peak stress values for the RSD at full power conditions.
Section 6 provides additional details on th e application of bias and uncertainty.
[[
]] The models will use [[ ]] 5.3 Acoustic Load Mapping The load mapping process generates the load step files for so lution processing. [[
]] Figure 5.3-1 shows the structural FE mesh for which acoustic pressure loading is typically applied. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-48
]] Figure 5.3-2 shows pressure contour plots for the acoustic FEM (left) and the structural FEM (right). These contour plots show the input and output of the load mapping process.
[[ ]] Figure 5.3-1: Pressure Surfaces for Whic h to Map the Acoustic Pressure Loads
[[ ]] Figure 5.3-2: Pressure Load Mappin g Input (Left) and Output (Right)
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-49 6.0 VIBRATION ANALYSIS AND PR EDICTED COMPONENT STRESSES This section describes the process used to perform the FIV structural analysis. The commercial finite element software ANSYS is used in the solution. For the flow-induced vibration of steam dryers, GEH applies the ANSYS [[
]] 6.1 Dynamic Analysis Approach 6.1.1 Dynamic FIV Analysis
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-50
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-51 6.1.2 Structural Damping
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-52
]] [[ ]] Figure 6.1-1:
[[
]] 6.1.3 Stress Recovery from the Global Results
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-53
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-54 [[ ]] Figure 6.1-2: Stress Intensity Contour at Max Stress Intensity (SI) Time Step
[[
]] 6.2 Submodel Analysis and Local Stress Submodeling is a finite element technique to obtain more accurate results in a particular region of a larger model. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-55
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-56 [[ ]] Figure 6.2-1: Illustration of a Submodel
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-57 [[ ]] Figure 6.2-2: Boundary Conditions of a Submodel
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-58 [[ ]] Figure 6.2-3: Calculation of Fillet Weld Nominal Stress
[[
]] 6.3 Adjustments to the Steam Dryer FIV Stress To provide an adequately bounding stress analysis and to account for uncertainties in the overall methodology, a series of bias and uncertainties and adjustments are applied to the predicted peak stress. The following sections summarize the high level methodology for making bias and uncertainty adjustments. Section 6.3.1 defines how these values are applied to the dryer structural response to determine the sensor response and peak stress.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-59 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-60 Table 6.3-1:
[[
]] Term Name How it is Applied
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-61 [[ ]] Figure 6.3-1: Overview of Fina l Stress Adjustment Process As can be seen in Figure 6.3-1 and Table 6.3-1, a number of terms are applied to the final peak stress value for each component and weld in order to account for known bias and uncertainty, as well as other items like anticipated SRV resonances or other impacts anticipated for EPU from items like higher steam velocities. 6.3.1 Methodology Bias and Uncertainty Methodology bias and uncertainty is described in more detail in [[
]] In general both load methodologies predict the loads, and biases/uncer tainties are developed by benchmarking the process to measured data. [[ ]] These references also provide an example implementation of the methodology.
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-62 ]] 6.3.2 FEM Bias and Uncertainty
[[ ]] 6.3.3 Maximum Response for FIV Assessment The FIV loading used in the FE stress analysis considers highest stress intensities that occur at frequencies as low as approxima tely 1 cycle per 100 seconds. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-63
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-64 Table 6.3-2: Typical Time Domain Strain Gauge Data Statistics
[[ ]] Assume that [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-65
]] The BiasFactor in Equation 6.3-7 is a [[
]] Therefore, it is assumed the same relation follows [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-66
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-67
]] 6.3.4 Scaling Factors for EPU Conditions ([[
]]) [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-68
]] 6.3.5 Instrumentation Bias and Uncertainty The instrumentation bias and uncertainty is accounted for in the methodology when comparing predictions to measured values and also when establishing limits. The instrumentation bias and uncertainty addresses the overall accuracy of the total measurement system which includes [[ ]] Instrumentation bias and uncertainty is determined [[
]] Each sensor signal goes through several devices, so for a given sensor sensitivity, [[
]] For strain gauges, additional factors are included in the overall measurement accuracy [[
]] The overall random instrumentation uncertainty is determined from [[
]] For more discussion, refer to Appendix C.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-69 7.0 FATIGUE PREDICTION
[[ ]] These stresses will then be compared to the criteria from Section 4.1.
[[
]] 7.1 Analysis 1 -
[[
]] [[
]] 7.2 Analysis 2 -
[[
]] [[
]] 7.3 Analysis 3 -
[[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-70
]] 7.4 Analysis 4 -
[[
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-71 8.0 PRIMARY STRESS EVALUATION 8.1 ASME Approach for the RSDs The steam dryer is a nonsafety-related component and performs no active safety function; however, the dryer must maintain structural integrity during normal, transient and accident conditions and not generate loose parts that may interfere with the operation of safety systems. Sections 6 and 7 of this appendix describe the fatigue evaluation process used to demonstrate that the dryer alternating stresses are sufficiently low to preclude the initiation of high cycle fatigue cracking during normal plant operation. This section describes the input loads and load combinations used to evaluate the primary stresses during normal, transient and accident conditions and demonstrate that the dryer will maintain structural integrity during all modes of operation. 8.1.1 Description of Design Conditions Plant operating conditions are defined in Chapter 15 of a plant's Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). These operating conditions are categorized and re flect varying probabilities of conditions, which are then compared against appropriate acceptance criteria. The main design conditions are defined as: Normal Normal steady-state operation Upset Anticipated operational transients (e.
g., turbine trip, stuck open relief valve) Emergency Infrequent operational transients (e.g., inadvertent opening of Automatic Depressurization System (ADS) valves) Faulted Accident and rare transients (e.g., Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA), Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE)) The limiting design basis condition for the steam dryer is the double-ended guillotine break of the MSL outside containment. For this event, the steam dryer must maintain its structural integrity and not generate loose parts that may interfere with the closure of the main steam isolation valves.
8.1.2 ASME Load Case for the Steam Dryer The load combinations are plant-specific and are defined in the plant's design basis. These combinations are specified in a plant's steam dryer design specification and the analyses are performed over a range of conditions that support the licensed operating domain. The ASME load combinations for a typical plant are shown in Table 8.1-1. Definitions of the individual loads and calculation methodology are specified in the following section. Loads from independent dynamic events are combined by the square root sum of squares (SRSS) method per NUREG-0484. The dryer is at uniform temperature at normal and transient conditions, and therefore the thermal expansion stress is assumed zero. There is no radial constraint of the dryer, and differential expansion is accommodated by slippage.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-72 Table 8.1-1: Typical Steam Dryer Load Combinations for Plants Load Case Service Conditions Load Combination A Normal [[` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` B-1 Upset B-2 Upset B-3 Upset B-4 Upset C-1 Emergency ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` D-1 Faulted ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` D-2 Faulted ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
D-3 Faulted ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` D-4 Faulted ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` D-5 Faulted ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
D-6 Faulted ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ]]Definition of Load Acronyms:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-73 8.1.3 Individual Load Term Definition and Source 8.1.3.1 Static Loads The following loads are considered to be static loads that are app lied during steady-state operating conditions.
8.1.3.1.1 Dead Weight (DW) The stresses caused by the steam dryer we igth are obtained by applying gravity (G) loading to the steam dryer FEM.
8.1.3.1.2 Thermal Expansion The steam and water temperatures at each dryer component are the same at saturated pressure/temperature conditions. The RPV transient temperature changes for all operating events are mild in the steam space where the dryer is located. The materials for the steam dryer components are of the same type of stainless steel and, therefore, have the same thermal expansion coefficient. Alt hough the RPV is carbon steel and has a lower thermal expansion coefficient, the dryer support ring is not radia lly constrained by the RPV and therefore the loads due to thermal expansion effects on the dryer ar e negligible and do not need to be analyzed. 8.1.3.1.3 Differential Pressure Loads (DP N, DP U) The operating pressure differentials across each dryer component are based on Reactor Internal Pressure Differences (RIPD) calculated for the applicable plant operating conditions. The DP loads assumed in the analysis depend on the service condition and event being analyzed. At normal conditions, the calculation of steady stat e pressure drops thr ough the vane banks is performed using the "ISCOR" computer program. This method has been applied to the BWRs to calculate the Normal condition reactor internal pressure differentials (RIPD) (e.g., steam dryer, top guide, shroud). [[
]] The static pressure drop across the steam dryer outer hoods is determined by the pressure drop through the vane banks plus the static pressure drop (DPouter hood) along the steam dryer hoods at analyzed hood elevation. The pressure drop acr oss the dryer outer hoods has generally been determined for BWRs at OLTP conditions. Fo r operation at higher steam flows experienced during EPU, the increased steam flow will increase the pressure drop along the steam dryer hoods. [[
]] [[
]] Equation 8.1-1 Where, NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-74 [[
]] The differential pressure loads for the components other than dryer outer hood are conservatively estimated to be the same as the pressure drop th rough the vane banks. For perforated plates, an equivalent pressure drop can be estimated as:
An equivalent pressure = [[
]] The distribution of pressure drop has been provided for [[ ]] design as shown in Figure 8.1-1. It is proportional to the pre ssure drops thro ugh the vane banks. [[ ]] The perforated plate designs for RSD are very similar to the BWR original steam dryer. Therefore, the pr essure drop distribution factors for perforated plate used for OEM dryer could be used to estimate the pressure drop for RSD.
[[ ]] Figure 8.1-1: Pressure Drop Distribution on Perforated Plate Used for BWR 4/5 Original Steam Dryer Design NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-75 The pressure drop resulting from Anticipated Operational Occurrences (AOO), or Upset Conditions, [[
]] The stuck opening of a safety relief valve (one of the Upset events) can also result in loads on the steam dryer directly through the resulting pressure effects in the steamline. [[
]] did not consider the case of one stuck open relief valve and this must be evaluated separately to confirm or replace the generic increment factor. The one stuck open SRV event methodology develops [[
Equation 8.1-2
]] For accidents, or Faulted conditions, the pressure differentials across the steam dryer components
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-76
]] 8.1.3.2 Dynamic Loads Dynamic loads result from various off-normal operating conditions for the plant. The most basic dynamic load is the result of FIV where small varia tions in the pressure field of the steam flow are caused by turbulence, acoustic resonances and other sources. Other dynamic loads are the result of plant operational transient and accident conditions. The following sections provide a discussion of the various dynamic loads and the methodology for calculation of the steam dryer loading. 8.1.3.2.1 Flow-Induced Vibration (FIV N , FIV U) The primary concern for the steam dryer structure is fatigue failure of the components from the FIV loading during normal operation. There are two primary sources of flow-induced vibration loads on the dryer. The first load is an acoustic pressure loading caused by the steam flow through the steam piping system. Based on in-plant measurements, the acoustic pressure loading is the dominant FIV load on the steam dryer. The second load is turbulent buffeting caused by the steam flow through and across the steam dryer structure. The veloci ties through the dryer are low; therefore, the contribution of the buffeting load to the total FIV load is negligible. The detailed methodologies for determining the FIV loads for the steam dryer are outlined in Appendices B and C. The FIV primary bending stresses and maximum primary membrane stresses for different components of the steam dryer are calculated with considerat ion for biases and uncertainties as discussed in Section 6 of this Appendix. Because the ASME Code load combination stress analysis is the primary structural stress assessment, the weld factor effect is not included in the final FIV loading (FIV N). The FIV load for the Upset Condition (FIV U), [[
]] 8.1.3.2.2 Turbine Stop Valve Loads ([[
]]) A Turbine Stop Valve (TSV) closure produces [[ ]] loads on the steam dryer. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-77 ]] The [[ ]] TSV loads are well separated in time and are therefore applied separately. The key assumptions of the methodology are summarized as follows;
[[
]] The TSV and Turbine Control Valves (TCVs) are ba sically in series, with connecting headers to equalize the pressure both in front and behind the TSVs. The Turbine Bypass Valves (TBVs) are on a header that connects to the MSLs in a manner similar to that shown in Figure 8.1-3.
[[ ]] Figure 8.1-2: Typical TSV Closure Characteristics
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-78 [[ ]] Figure 8.1-3: Typical Turbine Valve Schematic The rate of steam flow decrea se during a valve closure event depends on the relative closing speeds and delay (if any) of the valves. If one valve closes faster than the other, the faster valve will control the flow. TBVs open after a delay time, and usually do not become effective until the flow to the turbine is almost shut off by TSVs or TCVs. [[
]] 8.1.3.2.2.1
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-79
]]
[[ ]] Figure 8.1-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-80 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-81 Table 8.1-2: Peak Normalized Load Distribution for
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[ ]] Figure 8.1-5: Finite Element Model Component for
[[ ]] Pressure Load 8.1.3.2.2.2
[[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-82
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-83 [[ ]] Figure 8.1-6: Projected
[[
]]) 8.1.3.2.3 Seismic Loads ([[
]]) Seismic events transmit loads to the dryer through the vessel support brackets. Seismic loads for the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) and Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) in the form of Amplified Response Spectra (ARS) at the reactor dryer support elevation are used in accordance with the data documented in plant design basis seismic loads evaluations. The horizontal seismic loads are selected from the horizontal seismic model at the appropriate node representing the dryer elevation. Vertical loads are selected per the vertical seismic mode l at the closest node to the steam dryer. Appropriate structural damping is applied to the response spectra. Spectral analyses are performed for the seismic loads. Seismic anchor motion effects do not need to be considered because they are negligible inside the RPV. 8.1.3.2.4 Differential Pressure Load during Emergency and Faulted Conditions A general class of postulated reactor events are those where depressurization of the RPV is the limiting phenomenon. The rapid depressurization causes water in the RPV to flash into steam. The resulting two-phase level swell impacts the underside of the steam dryer, producing a transient differential pressure loading across the steam dryer. [[ ]] The Reactor Internals Pressure Differential (RIPD) calculations determine analytically the differential pressures during these conditions. For Emergency and Faulted conditions, the pressure differentials across the steam dryer components are specific ally calculated [[ ]] This blow-down can be the result of a postulated recirculation line, steam line, or feed water line break or depressurization through the primary system relief valves. [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-84 8.1.3.2.4.1 Differential Pressure Load during Emergency Operation (DPE) The limiting event for the Emergency condition [[ ]] The additional 2% power is assumed per RG 1.49. The NRC withdrew this RG in April 2008. [[ ]] The blow-down LAMB model is used to calculate the RIPDs for the steam dryer hood and vane banks during the postulated event. 8.1.3.2.4.2 Differential Pressure Load during Faulted Condition ([[
]]) The Faulted category addresses accidents or limiting faults, which are postulated as part of the plant's design basis. For the steam dryer, the design basis Faulted event is the [[ ]] The steam dryer must be shown to maintain structural integrity and not generate loose parts that may interfere with the closure of the main steam isolation valves. Three reactor operating conditions are analyzed for this event:
[[
]] The blow-down model is used to calculate the RIPDs for the steam dryer hood and vane banks during the postulated event.
8.1.3.2.5 Acoustic Loads due to MSLB Outside Containment ([[ ]]) The flow transient produced by rapid opening of the break generates a decompression wave in the MSL that impacts the steam dryer. The methodology for calculating the acoustic loads on
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-85 the steam dryer outer hood [[
]] was modified to determine the acoustic loads on the steam dryer oute r hood due to the faulted MSLB outside containment event because the acoustic wave imposing the load on the outer hood is similar for both events.
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-86
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-87 Table 8.1-3: Typical Peak Normalized Acoustic Loads for MSLB
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-88 8.1.4 Analysis Approach The structural responses of the steam dryer to the ASME load combinations will be evaluated using the ANSYS finite element code. The results of the individual load analyses are then combined for each event as specified in Table 8.1-1. The type of finite element structural analysis for each load type is identified in Table 8.1-4. The analyses are performed assuming normal reactor operating temperature. Table 8.1-4: Type of Analysis for the Load Terms in ASME Load Combinations Load Term Description Type of Analysis for the Load
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-89 8.1.5 ASME Load Case Stress Results The results of the individual load analyses are then combined for each event as specified in Table 8.1-1. The resulting stresses are then compared to the ASME Code stress limits from Subsection NG (Reference A.4). These criteria are presented in Table 8.1-5. For each RSD component and load combination, the maximum primary stress values and minimum stress margins are calculated and then tabulated.
Table 8.1-5: ASME Code Stre ss Limits for the Steam Dryer Service Level Stress CategoryCore Support Structures Stress limits (NG)Service Levels A&B P m S m P m + P b 1.5 S m Service Levels C P m 1.5 S m P m + P b 2.25 S m Service Level D P m Min(.7 S u or 2.4 S m) P l + P b 1.5(P m Allowable)
Legend: P m: General primary membra ne stress intensity P b: Primary bending stress intensity P l: Local primary membrane stress intensity S m: ASME Code Design Stress Intensity S u: Ultimate strength Note: Service Level Limits for Service Leve ls A, B and C are according to NG-3220 and Appendix F Paragraph F-1331 for Level D. Upset condition stress limits are increased by 10% above the limits shown in this table per NG-3223(a).
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-90 9.0 STARTUP TEST DESIGN AND ANALYSIS 9.1 Instrumentation for Monitoring Steam Dryer Response The lead unit RSD is instrumented with tempor ary vibration sensors to obtain FIV data during power operation. The primary function of this vibration measurement program is to verify that the steam dryer can adequately withstand stresses from FIV pressure fluctuations for the design life of the steam dryer. Strain gauges and accelerometers are used to monitor the structural response during power ascension a nd to validate the fatigue stre ss predictions in Section 7.0 for normal operation. Accelerometers are also used to identify potential rocking and to measure the accelerations resulting from support and vessel movements.
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-91
]] In addition [[ ]] 9.2 Startup Testing Acceptance Criteria The structural analysis performed for the steam dryer design consists of a dynamic FEA. [[
]] For one-dimensional (uni-axial) structural responses, the determination of strain measurement acceptance criteria would be:
()/=E Equation 9.2-1 where = highest stress intensity allowable limit E = Young's Modulus, 1.78 x 10 5 MPa (25.8 x 10 6 psi) at 288°C (550°F) for steam dryer material. With a highest stress intensity allowable limit of 13,600 psi, the strain acceptance limit with the strain gauge at the maximum stress location, is calculated as follows: = /(E) = 527 (zero-peak) or 1054 (peak-peak)
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-92
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-93 10.0 COMPREHENSIVE VIBRATION ASSESSMENT PROGRAM FOR THE REPLACEMENT STEAM DRYER The series of steps outlined in Section 1.0 describe the high level analysis and test related tasks that represent the GEH implementation of RG 1.20 requirements for the RSD. The focus of this report is the structural FIV analysis and test (i.e., measurement) requirements, which make up two of the three main elements of the comprehensive vibration assessment program described in the guide (the third element is inspection). This section describes the RG requirements as they relate to the RSD. As discussed in Section 1.0, each RSD is subject to predictive analyses and verification through instrumentation during power ascension at initial startup. For the analysis, the acceptance limits are 13,600 psi. For additional conservatism in the design basis predictive analysis, the analysis stress results will meet a recomm ended MASR of 2.0 between the analysis results and the fatigue acceptance limit. The startup testing then uses the fatigue limit stress amplitude of 13,600 psi with a MASR of 1.0 as the basis for acceptance limits for the on-dryer instrument measurements during power ascension. A confirmatory stress analysis is performed based on the on-dryer measurements following startup testing. The lead unit RSD will be classified per RG 1.20 (Reference A.1). Because of the evolutionary nature of the dryer design, a RSD is typically similar to a previous valid prototype design, leading to a non-prototype designation. However, if the changes to the steam dryer design are significant, this can lead to a prototype designation. Once a prototype RSD design has been validated, subsequent applications of that RSD design are classified as Non-prototype Class I referencing the valid prototype design. The following regulatory positions of RG 1.20 (Reference A.1) for prototype steam dryers address the program elements applicable to the BWR RSDs:
- Position 2.1 provides a description of the vibration and stress analysis program, including specific items that should be included in the vibration and stress analysis submittal prior to implementation of the vibration measurement program.
- Position 2.2 provides a description of the vibration and stress measurement program, which is to verify the structural integrity of reactor internals, determine the margin of safety, and confirm results of the vibration analysis.
- Position 2.3 describes the inspection program for inspection both prior to and following plant operation.
- Position 2.4 describes documentation of results of the program.
- Position 2.5 describes the schedule for conducting the vibration assessment program. The following sections describe the analyses, reporting requirements, and conformance associated with the first three RG 1.20 positions above:
- 1) Vibration and stress analysis program
- 2) Vibration and stress monitoring program NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-94 3) Inspection program Again, typically a RSD will be designed similar to previous plant designs, leading to a non-prototype designation. The following section discusses how the RSD methodology meets the RG 1.20 requirements. 10.1 RSD Vibration and Stress Analysis Program The elements that are to be included in a Steam Dryer Design Analysis Report (SDAR) are as follows, per RG 1.20 (Reference A.1):
- a. Describe the theoretical structural and hydraulic models and analytical formulations or scaling laws and scale models used in th e analysis, including all bias errors and uncertainties for reactor internals that, based on past experience, are not adversely affected by the flow-excited acoustic re sonances and flow-induced vibrations. When following this RG, licensees of operating nuclear power plan ts should obtain plant-specific data to confirm the scale testing and analysis results for pressure fluctuations and vibration prior to submitt ing a power uprate request.
- b. Describe the structural and hydraulic system natural frequencies and associated mode shapes that may be excited during steady-state and anticipated tr ansient operation, for reactor internals that, based on past experience, are not adversely affected by the flow-excited acoustic resonances and flow-induced vibrations.
- c. Describe the estimated random and determin istic forcing functions , including any very-low-frequency components, for steady-state and anticipated transient operation for reactor internals that, based on past experience, are not adversely affected by the flow-excited acoustic resonances and flow-induced vibrations.
- d. Summarize the calculated structural and hydrau lic responses for operation under steady-state and anticipated transient conditions for reactor internals that, based on past experience, are not adversely affected by the flow-excited acoustic resonances and flow-induced vibrations. This summary should identify the random, deterministic, and overall integrated maximum response, any very-low-frequency components of response, and the level of cumulative fatigue damage.
- e. Summarize the calculated struct ural and hydraulic responses fo r preoperational and initial startup testing conditions, compared to those for normal operation. This summary should address the adequacy of the test simulation to normal operating conditions.
- f. Identify the anticipated structural or hydraulic vibratory response [defined in terms of frequency, amplitude (displacement, acceleration, and/or strain), and modal contributions] that is appropriate to each of the sensor locations for steady-state and anticipated transient preoperational and startup test conditions.
- g. Specify the test acceptance criteria with permissible deviations and the bases for the criteria. The criteria should be established in terms of maximum allowable response NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-95 levels in the structure, and presented in terms of maximum allowable response levels at sensor locations.
The SDAR report and the Appendi ces cover the following as desc ribed in Section 1.0 of this Appendix, which is in compliance with RG 1.20 (Reference A.1):
- a. Describe the as-designed BWR RSD dryer, dryer loading, and dryer stress analysis results. b. Provide a definition of the methodology in cluding previous application results.
- c. Describe the bias and uncertainty application methodology that ha s been successfully used in the previous RSD projects.
- d. Describe how the alternating peak stress intensities at the high stress locations are calculated and tabulate the predicted alternating peak stress intensities.
- e. Demonstrate that compared to the fatigue acceptance criteria, the stress margins for all dryer components exceed the NRC-recommended MASR of 2.0.
- f. Include spectra and cumulative stress plots for the top five stress locations.
- g. Describe a dryer startup test plan including sensor locations sufficient to extract important resonances, with regional frequency response functions sufficiently resolved to establish regional bias and uncer tainty for frequencies up to [[
]]. These regional biases and uncertainties will then be combined into biases and uncertainties for the upper and lower dryer region, consistent with the [[ ]] bias and uncertainties used in the as-designed structural analyses.
- h. Incorporate lessons learned from power as cension of previous BWR RSD plants, as applicable.
Table 10.1-1 provides the conformance of the SDAR and its Appendices to the requirements contained in Section 2.1 of RG 1.20 Revision 3 (Reference A.1). As can be seen in the table, the methodology addresses and conforms to all applicable RG 1.20 requirements. Note that the requirements below are for a "prototype" design, as specified in RG 1.20, Section 2. Being conservative, the methodology and reports meet all of these requirements, even if the RSD design is classified as a "non-prototype."
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-96 Table 10.1-1: RG 1.20 Requirement Conformance Table RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(1)(a) Determine the pre ssure fluctuations and vibration in the applicable plant systems under flow conditions up to and including
the full operating power level. Such
pressure fluctuations and vibration can result from hydrodynamic effects and acoustic resonances under the plant system
fluid flow conditions. Acceptable - The PBLE method is applicable up to the full power level of the plant. Benchmarking
results contained in Appendix B and C show that the method is capable of accurately determining
pressure fluctuations from both
hydrodynamic and acoustic
resonance sources under flow
conditions up to the plant full
operating power level. 2.1.(1)(b) Justify the method for determining pressure fluctuations, vibration, and resultant cyclic stress in plant systems. Based on past experience, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analyses might not provide sufficient quantitative information regarding high-
frequency pressure loading without supplemental analyses. Scale testing can be
applied for the high-frequency acoustic
pressure loading and for verifying the pressure loading results from CFD analyses and the supplemental analyses, where the bias error and random uncertainties are
properly addressed. Acceptable -The justification that the PBLE method is acceptable is based on the benchmarking
shown in each PBLE Appendix.
Biases and uncertainties are also quantified for both PBLE methods. CFD modeling is not applicable to the PBLE method.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-97 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(1)(c) Address significant acoustic resonances that have the potential to damage plant piping and components including steam dryers, and perform modifications to reduce those
acoustic resonances, as necessary, based on the analysis.
Acceptable - The SDAR determines conservative values of
acoustic resonances that may be detrimental to the steam dryer
based on theoretical analysis and measured plant values and includes them in the load definition PBLE02 method.
PBLE01 method measures
acoustic resonances directly.
Modifications for reducing
acoustic resonances are beyond
the scope of this analysis. 2.1.(1) Scale Model Testing N/A - PBLE methodology uses real plant data from a prototype
plant in place of a detailed scale model. Also, it may be noted that
initial understanding of MSL phenomena was developed using scale model data. 2.1.(1) Computational Fluid Dynamic Modeling N/A - Simple acoustic modeling of MSL and the SRV cavity is utilized to determine SRV
resonant frequencies in combination with historic past benchmark plant SRV resonance behavior. This level of modeling
with available data sets has shown
in past work that sufficient approximations for SRV resonance phenomena can be
developed and used to apply
conservative FIV dryer loads.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-98 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(2) Describe the st ructural and hydraulic system natural frequencies and associated mode shapes that may be excited during
steady-state and anticipated transient
operation, for reactor internals that, based
on past experience, are not adversely
affected by the flow-excited acoustic
resonances and flow-induced vibrations.
Additional analyses should be performed on those systems and components, such as steam dryers and main steam system components in BWRs and steam generator internals in Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs) that may potentially be adversely
affected by the flow-excited acoustic
resonances and flow-induced vibrations.
These additional analyses are summarized
below. Acceptable - The PBLE method is capable of determining the acoustic mode shapes within the reactor steam dome. It will simulate the acoustic response of the steam dome from the
significant excitation sources. 2.1.(2) Determine the damping of the excited mode shapes, and the FRFs (i.e., vibration
induced by unit loads or pressures, and
stresses induced by unit loads or pressures),
including all bias errors and uncertainties.
Acceptable - FRFs are developed by PBLE. Bias errors and
uncertainties have been addressed
in the PBLE Appendices.
Structural damping and FRFs are discussed in the main SDAR and the Appendices; biases and
uncertainties are included.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-99 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(3) Describe the estimated random and deterministic forcing functions, including any very-low-frequency components, for
steady-state and anticipated transient
operation for reactor internals that, based on past experience, are not adversely affected
by the flow-excited acoustic resonances and flow-induced vibrations. Additional analyses should be performed on those systems and components, such as steam dryers and main steam system components in BWRs and steam generator internals in PWRs that may potentially be adversely
affected by the flow-excited acoustic
resonances and flow-induced vibrations.
These additional analyses are summarized
below. Acceptable - PBLE method is capable of determining the forcing functions in the frequency range important to BWR dryers. 2.1.(3) Evaluate any forcing functions that may be amplified by lock-in with an acoustic and/or structural resonance (sometimes called self-excitation mechanisms). A lock-in of a
forcing function with a resonance strengthens the resonance amplitude. The resulting amplitudes of the forcing function
and resonance respons e can therefore be significantly higher than the amplitudes associated with non-lock-in conditions. N/A - Lock in assessment is not
required for PBLE02 loads
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-100 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(3) The applicant/licensee should determine the design load definition for all reactor internals, including the steam dryer in
BWRs up to the full licensed power level, and should validate the method used to determine the load definitions based on scale model or plant data. BWR applicants should include instrumentation on the steam dryer to measure pressure loading, strain, and acceleration to confirm the scale model testing and analysis results. BWR licensees
should obtain plant data at current licensed power conditions for use in confirming the results of the scale model testing and analysis for the steam dryer load definition prior to submitting a power uprate request.
Acceptable - The PBLE uses
plant data, [[ ]], for the determination of the steam dryer load definition.
Scale model data is not used in
the PBLE methodology. Load definitions are validated by benchmarks and bias/uncertainties comparing predictions to on-dryer measured plant data (typically
strain, acceleration and pressure).
Previous measured plant data is used to predict all load conditions from CLTP to EPU.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-101 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(3) In recent BWR EPU requests, some licensees have employed a model to compute fluctuating pressures within the
RPV and on BWR steam dryers that are inferred from measurements of fluctuating pressures within the MSLs connected to the RPV. Applicants shou ld clearly define all uncertainties and bias errors associated with the MSL pressure measurements and modeling parameters. The bases for the
uncertainties and bias errors, such as any experimental evaluation of modeling
software, should be clearly presented.
There are many approaches for measuring MSL pressures and computing fluctuating
pressures within the RPV and the MSLs.
Although some approaches reduce bias and
uncertainty, they still have a finite bias and
uncertainty, which should be reported.
Based on historical experience, the
following guidance is offered regarding approaches that minimize uncertainty and
bias error: Acceptable -The PBLE methodology in the appendices demonstrates the methodology to determine bias errors and uncertainties associated with the PBLE methodology. 2.1.(3)(a) At least two measurement locations should be employed on each MSL in a BWR.
However, using three measurement locations on each MSL improves input data to the model, particularly if the locations are spaced logarithmically. This will reduce the uncertainty in describing the waves coming out of and going into the RPV. Regardless of whether two or three measurement locations are used, no acoustic sources should exist between any of the measurement locations, unless justified.
Acceptable - The PBLE02 methodology described in the
Appendix requires the use of at least [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-102 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(3)(b) Strain gauges (a t least four gauges, circumferentially spaced and oriented) may be used to relate the hoop strain in the MSL to the internal pressure. Strain gauges
should be calibrated according to the MSL dimensions (diameter, thickness, and static
pressure). Alternatively, pressure measurements made with transducers flush-mounted against the MSL internal surface may be used. The effects of flow
turbulence on any direct pressure measurements should be accounted for in a bias error and uncertainty estimate.
Acceptable - The PBLE02
Appendix describes [[
]] Bias and uncertainty associated with the
[[ ]] system is described. 2.1.(3)(c) The speed of sound used in any acoustic models should not be changed from plant to
plant, but rather should be a function of temperature and steam quality.
Acceptable - The speed of sound
used in the analyses is a function of the steam fluid conditions
[[ ]]. 2.1.(3)(d) Reflection coeffi cients at any boundary between steam and water should be based
on rigorous modeling or direct measurement. The uncertainty of the reflection coefficients should be clearly defined. Note that simply assuming
100-percent reflection coefficient is not
necessarily conservative.
Acceptable - The reflection
coefficients are based on the fluid conditions of the steam water
interface. The associated
uncertainty is developed for the PBLE02 method. 2.1.(3)(e) Any sound attenuation coefficients should be a function of steam quality (variable between the steam dryer and reactor dome),
rather than constant throughout a steam volume (such as the volume within the RPV). Acceptable - The PBLE method formulation uses the steam quality in the reactor steam dome, within
[[ ]] to determine the sound attenuation coefficients in those
regions.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-103 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(3)(f) Once validated, the same speed of sound, attenuation coefficient, and reflection coefficient should be used in other plants.
However, different flow conditions (temperature, pressure, quality factor) may dictate adjustments of these parameters. Acceptable - The formulations
for the speed of sound and damping used in the PBLE are not
changed between plant applications. The plant-specific values for these parameters are
based on the plant-specific thermodynamic properties of steam [[
]]. 2.1.(4) The calculated responses should include vibrations for components that have maximum vibration limits, as well as stresses for components that have maximum stress criteria (such as the fatigue stress limits specified in Section III of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Reference A.3). The margins against
violating the criteria should be reported.
Based on the uncertainti es and bias errors identified in items 1-3 above, an end-to-end
uncertainty and bias error should be
reported, along with a clear explanation of
how the individual uncertainties and bias errors have been combined. Acceptable -Limit curves, margins, and biases, uncertainties, and [[
]] biases and uncertainties are reported. The FIV load is benchmarked against previously instrumented dryer
data. Methods have a description
of all biases, uncertainties, and their combinatorial methodology.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-104 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(4) Since the transfer functions (or FRFs) described in item 2, and forcing functions described in item 3, have an uncertainty associated with the frequencies of the
response peaks attributable to resonant
modes, the vibration and stress calculations
should address those uncertainties by shifting either the FRFs or forcing functions in frequency to span the uncertainty in the
response peak frequencies-.
- the worst case vibration or stress should be reported, since the frequency uncertainty
leads to a negative (non- conservative) bias
in the vibration and stress when any modal peaks are misaligned with any forcing
function peaks. Acceptable - Methodology calculates time/frequency shift of
structural response and reports the
worst case vibration or stress. 2.1.(5) Summarize the calcu lated structural and hydraulic responses for preoperational and initial startup testing conditions, compared to those for normal operation. This
summary should address the adequacy of the test simulation to normal operating
conditions.
Acceptable - Methodology predicts response at a variety of conditions, and the limiting condition is used. Limit curves and margins are reported. 2.1.(6) Identify the anticipated structural or hydraulic vibratory response [defined in terms of frequency, amplitude (displacement, acceleration, and/or strain),
and modal contributions] that is appropriate to each of the sensor locations for steady-state and anticipated transient
preoperational and star tup test conditions.
Acceptable - Methodology predicts response at a variety of conditions, and the limiting condition is used. Limit curves and margins are reported.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-105 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(7) Specify the test acceptance criteria with permissible deviations and the bases for the criteria. The criteria should be established in terms of maximum allowable response
levels in the structure, and presented in terms of maximum allowable response
levels at sensor locations.
Acceptable -Power Ascension Test Plan is provided with limit curves and margins. 2.1.(7) Based on steam dryer and MSL valve failures that have occurred in BWR plants
operating at EPU conditions, the following test acceptance criteria are provided for future BWR license applications. After developing a steam dryer load definition, an
applicant for the construction and operation
of a BWR nuclear power plant (or a licensee using this regulatory guide in planning a power uprate for an operating
BWR nuclear power plant) should apply the
load definitions to vibration and stress models to determine the vibrations of the
valves and stresses within the steam dryer, with justified damping assumptions and applicable weld factors and stress intensities. After including applicable bias errors and random uncertainties, the applicant/licensee should compare valve vibrations against applicable limits, and peak stresses at critical steam dryer locations to the fatigue limits in the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code (Reference A.3).
Acceptable - Peak stresses at critical steam dryer locations, are compared to the fatigue limits in the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code. These values are
reported in the SDAR.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-106 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(7) The applicant/licensee should also compare stresses, at any locations that might have
experienced fatigue cracking, with the ASME Code fatigue limits to validate the stress model. The applicant/licensee should also compare the primary and secondary stresses that the steam dryer may experience as a result of plant transients to the applicable ASME Code service level limits. The BWR applicant/licensee should also implement modifications to the BWR steam dryer based on the design stress margin or to any components responsible for high excitation to reduce that excitation, so that none of the resulting stresses exceed the Code allowable limits.
Acceptable - Methodology outlined in Section 8.0 in
Appendix A as well as the results
in Section 4.2.4 and 5.0 in the SDAR show that the stresses for all structural components are
below the ASME Code allowable limits at EPU operating conditions for Normal, Upset and Emergency service levels. All components meet the requirements for the Faulted service levels with the exception of the seismic blocks. The justification for acceptance of seismic blocks is provided in
Section 4.2.4.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-107 RG 1.20 Section Criteria SDAR Conformance 2.1.(7) The BWR applicant/licensee should also develop a vibration limit curve for valves and a stress limit curve for the steam dryer
for power ascension to provide assurance that the valve vibrati ons and stress in the individual steam dryer components will not exceed the ASME Code fatigue limits. The limit curves, while including the bias errors and uncertainties from the end-to-end
vibration and stress analyses, should also include those associated with the vibration and stress measurement program (in
particular, those associated with the data acquisition systems and instrumentation). The BWR applicant/licensee should also develop a method for collecting plant data
during power ascension and full licensed
power conditions that can be used to calculate the valve vibrations steam dryer
stress, including approp riate bias errors and random uncertainties. As the steam dryer is not a Code component, the applicant/licensee may justify different stress acceptance criteria.
Acceptable -The Power Ascension Test Plan (PATP) is provided with limit curves and margins. The method for
collecting plant data during power ascension is summarized in the
SDAR and Appendix A, and the PATP will have the specifics of
the data collection during power ascension. 10.2 RSD Power Ascension Monitoring Program The FIV PATP describes the planned course of action for monitoring, evaluating, and taking prompt action in response to potential adverse flow effects as a result of power uprate operation on the RSD during power ascension testing and operation from the current licensed thermal power to the full EPU level. The PATP covers power ascension up to the full EPU condition to verify acceptable structural performance and steam dryer integrity. Through the establishment of acceptance limits, data collection and analysis, and any subsequent actions, the PATP will ensure that the integrity of the steam dryer will be maintained. An important element of the plan during the power ascension to the previous licensed thermal power is the benchmarking of the PBLE load definition and structural analysis methodology at CLTP using plant-specific measured data. The plan includes specific hold points and durations during power ascension above CLTP, activities to be accomplished during hold points, data to be collected, data evaluation methods, NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-108 and acceptance criteria for monitoring and trending plant parameters. Detailed procedures are developed to implement this plan. The vibration and stress monitoring may be accomplished using [[
]] The sensors will be calibrated and have associated biases and uncertainties included in the m onitoring and stress analyses. The basic components of the the vibration and stress measurement program are describe here. The test plan itself is plant-specific and requires integration with the overall plant power ascension test plan and, therefore, is not included here as it is beyond the scope of this document. 10.2.1 Power Ascension Test Plan The power ascension test plan describes the monitoring that will be performed to assure that the dryer stresses will remain within the acceptance criteria during plant operation. The PAT plans are different [[
]] The PAT plan will include the following:
- Level 1 and Level 2 acceptance limits for instrumentation measurements.
- Specific hold points and their duration during power ascension.
- Activities to be accomplished during hold points.
- Plant parameters to be monitored.
- Actions to be taken if acceptance criteria are not satisfied.
- Verification of the completion of commitments and planned actions.
10.2.1.1
[[
]] Power Ascension Test Plan Power ascension monitoring for [[
]] At the initial hold point during the power ascension (i.e., CLTP power level): a. Record pressures, strains, and/or accelerations from the available instrumentation. Process/evaluate the data and compare to acceptance limits.
- b. Develop a Plant Based Load Evaluation (PBLE)-based FIV load definition based on available instruments. Using appropriate methods, [[ ]] and the above PBLE-based RSD load definition; predict the steam dryer strain and accelerat ion response at this condition.
- c. Compare the predicted steam dryer strain and acceleration against the measured data and determine [[
]] bias and uncertainty values.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-109 Adjust the predicted strain and acceleration responses using the [[
]] bias and uncertainty values.
- d. Define [[
]]
- e. Update [[
]] f. Trend [[
]] g. Monitor [[
]] h. Make available to the NRC the RSD analysis summary, updated stress analysis results (including [[ ]] bias and uncertainty), limit curves, and data projections for higher power levels. Power ascension above initial hold point will proceed in increments of no more than [[ ]] The data will be evaluated, including comparison of measured dryer strains and accelerations to acceptance limits. Power will remain steady during this evaluation to determine if any actions need to be taken before proceeding to the next assessment point. If a Level 1 limit curve is exceeded, the power will be reduced to a previous power level where Level 1 is not exceeded and the limit curves will be reassessed. If necessary, a stress analysis will be performed to develop new limit curves.
After full EPU power has been achieved, a report for confirmatory stress analysis will be provided to the NRC within 90 days of reaching the EPU power level. The report will include the minimum stress ratio and the final dryer load definition using steam dryer instrumentation, and associated bias errors and uncertainties, to demonstrate that the steam dryer will maintain its structural integrity over its design life.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-110 10.2.1.2 Power Ascension Test Plan
[[
]] The power ascension for the [[ ]]. The [[ ]] curves will be developed as follows:
- 1. Develop the [[
]] These limit curves are made using the same 2 minute time record as the confirmatory analysis load definition. [[
]] 2. If needed, develop and implement an additional [[
]] 3. Develop a total pressure limit value to accommodate [[
]] [[ ]] At the initial hold point during the power ascension (i.e., CLTP power level):
- a. Record [[
]] and develop on-dryer loads. b. Compare [[
]] c. Trend the [[
]] d. Calculate adjusted stresses based [[
]] e. If necessary, update [[
]] f. Make available to the NRC the RSD analysis summary, updated stress analysis results, limit curves, and data pr ojections for higher power levels. Power ascension above initial hold point will proceed in increments of no more than [[ ]] The data will be evaluated, including comparison of dryer loads to acceptance limits. Power will remain steady during this evaluation to determine if any actions need to be taken before proceeding to the next assessment point. If a Level 1 limit curve is exceeded, the power will be reduced to a previous power level where Level 1 is not exceeded and the limit curves will be reassessed. If necessary, a stress analysis will be performed to develop new limit curves.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-111 After full EPU power has been achieved, a report for confirmatory stress analysis will be provided to the NRC within 90 days of reaching the EPU power level. The report will include the minimum stress ratio and the final dryer load definition [[ ]] to demonstrate that the steam dryer will maintain its structural integr ity over its design life.
10.3 RSD Inspection Program A periodic steam dryer inspection program will be implemented with the following key elements:
- 1. During the first two scheduled refueling outages after reaching full power conditions, a visual inspection will be conducted of all accessible areas and susceptible locations of the steam dryer in accordance with accepted industry guidance on steam dryer inspections.
The results of these baseline inspections wi ll be provided to the NRC within 60 days following startup after each outage.
- 2. At the end of the second refueling outag e following full power operation, an updated steam dryer monitoring program (SDMP) reflecting a long-term inspection plan based on plant-specific and industry operating experience will be provided to the NRC within 180 days following startup from the second refueling outage.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-112
11.0 CONCLUSION
S This report describes the generic GEH RSD analysis methodology that will be used to evaluate the structural response to demonstrate that the RSD will maintain structural integrity during normal plant operation and under transient, and accident conditions. The analyses must show that the dryer will maintain its structural integrity (and not generate loose parts) when subjected to acoustic and hydrodynamic fluctuating pressure loads during normal operation. This report also provides the overall dryer analysis framework, which includes the PBLE01 and PBLE02 load definition method; the structural analyses including the application of bias and uncertainty, and design margin; and the power ascension test program. The structural analysis follows a staged or phased approach, which leverages information that will be made available as the design process progresses (especially through the power ascension test program). The culmination of the analysis and test program will be a validated design, supported by a benchmark as a basis for bias and uncertainty. The PBLE Method 1, Method 2 and structural analysis approach have been applied to a RSD under power uprate conditions as an example of a successful implementation of the GEH methodology. This methodology satisfies RG 1.20 (Reference A.1). The structural analysis approach, design criteria, and integrated power ascension test program provide adequate assurance that the RSD will maintain its structural integrity and not generate loose parts under normal, transient, and accident conditions.
NEDO-33824, Appendix A, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
A-113
12.0 REFERENCES
A.1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.20, "Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program for Reactor Internals During Preoperational and Initial Startup Testing," Revision 3, March 2007. A.2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0800, Revi sion 3, March 2007, Section 3.9.2, "Dynamic Testing and Analysis of Systems, Structures, and Components." A.3 American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section II Part D, 2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda. A.4 American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, 2001 Edition, 2003 Addenda. A.5 H. B. Karplus, "Propagation of Pressure Waves in a Mixture of Water and Steam," Armour Research Foundation of Illinois Institute of Technology, United States Atomic Energy Commission Contract No.
AT (11-1) 528, ARF No. D132A13, 1961. A.6 ANSYS Release 14.0, Ansy s Incorporated, 2011.
A.7 Hardayal S. Mehta and Sampath Ranganath, "An Examination of the Role of the Assumed Young's Modulus Value at the High Cycle End of ASME Code Fatigue Curve for Stainless Steels," Proceedings of the 2015 Pressure Vessels & Piping Conference, Paper No. PVP2015-45619.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-1
Appendix B
Steam Dryer Plant Based Load Evaluation Methodology PBLE01 Model Description
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ..............................................................................................................
..............B-9 2.0 Model Description .........................................................................................................
......B-10 2.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................
.............. B-10 2.2 Dome Acoustic Model ...........................................................................................................
.... B-11 Acoustic Modeling Principles ............................................................................................. B-11 2.2.1 Geometry Modeling ............................................................................................................
B-12 2.2.2 Finite Element Model ..........................................................................................................
B-14 2.2.3 Fluid Properties and Boundary Conditions ......................................................................... B-17 2.2.4 2.3 PBLE01 from [[ ]] ................................................................................... B-18 Solution Formulation ........................................................................................................... B-18 2.3.1 Singularity Factor ............................................................................................................
.... B-20 2.3.2 2.4 Steam and Water Acoustic Properties ........................................................................................ B-22 Wave Propagation in Wet Steam ......................................................................................... B-22 2.4.1 Vane Upstream Droplet Wetness Correlation ..................................................................... B-26 2.4.2 Steam-Water Interface .........................................................................................................
B-27 2.4.33.0 Model Qualification: BWR Plant Validation ......................................................................B-30 3.1 BWR/4 RPV - Steam Dryer Acoustic Model ............................................................................ B-30 3.2 Steam Dryer Instrumentation ...................................................................................................
.. B-30 3.3 PBLE01 Benchmark Process .....................................................................................................
B-32 3.4 PBLE01 Benchmark Bias and Uncertainty Results ................................................................... B-34 3.5 PBLE01 Validation Conclusions ............................................................................................... B
-37 4.0 Application Methodology ....................................................................................................B-38 4.1 Scope of Application and Licensing Requirements ................................................................... B-38 Scope of Application ........................................................................................................... B-38 4.1.1 Specific Licensing Requirements ........................................................................................ B-38 4.1.2 4.2 Proposed Application Methodology .......................................................................................... B-3 8 Conformance with RG 1.20 Revision 3 .............................................................................. B-38 4.2.1 4.3 Range of Application ..........................................................................................................
....... B-38 4.4 Plant-Specific Application Methodology................................................................................... B-39 Vessel Model Inputs ............................................................................................................ B-39 4.4.1 Plant Input Measurements ................................................................................................... B-40 4.4.2 Plant Specific Load Definition ............................................................................................ B-4 2 4.4.3 4.5 Example Implementation of Methodology ................................................................................ B-42 Structural Model ..............................................................................................................
.... B-43 4.5.1 FIV Analysis ..................................................................................................................
..... B-44 4.5.2 End-to-End Bias and Uncertainties ..................................................................................... B-45 4.5.35.0 Conclusions ...............................................................................................................
...........B-48 6.0 References ................................................................................................................
............B-49 Appendix B1 BWR/4 Steam Dryer Instrumentation Locations ....................................B-50 Appendix B2 [[
]] .........................................B-55 Appendix B3 [[
]] ............................B-64 Appendix B4 [[
]] .........................................B-73 Appendix B5 [[
]] ..............................................................................................B-84 Appendix B6 [[
]] ...........................................B-90 Appendix B7 Acoustic Finite Element ........................................................................B-100 NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-3 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.2-1: Example of First Ten RPV Acoustic Modes .........................................................B-14 Table 2.4-1: Variables in Equations 2.4-1 through 2.4-8 ..........................................................B-23 Table 2.4-2: Impedances in a T ypical BWR RPV Environment ...............................................B-28 Table 3.2-1: BWR/4 Test Conditions Associated with Steam Dryer Benchmark Cases ...........B-31 Table 4.4-1: Parameters in the Computation of FRFs ...............................................................B-40
Table B1-1: [[
]] ..............................................................B-50 Table B4-1: [[
]] .......................................................B-73 Table B6-1: [[
]] ..........................B-90
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1-1: PBLE01 Process Flow .........................................................................................B-10 Figure 2.2-1: Modeled Steam Region (left) and Details of Typical Vessel Meshes (right) ......B-13 Figure 2.2-2: [[
]] ..........................................................B-14 Figure 2.2-3: [[
]] ...............................................B-15 Figure 2.2-4: [[
]] ..................................................................B-16 Figure 2.2-5: [[ ]] .............B-17 Figure 2.2-6: [[
]] ...................B-18 Figure 2.3-1: [[
]] .............................B-21 Figure 2.4-1: [[
]] ............................................................B-26 Figure 2.4-2: [[
]] .......................................B-27 Figure 2.4-3: Steam-Water Interfaces ........................................................................................B-28 Figure 2.4-4: Speed of Sound in [[ ]] (Figure 5 in Karplus (Reference B.9)) ....B-29 Figure 3.2-1: [[
]] .................................B-32 Figure 3.4-1: [[
]] ....................B-36 Figure 3.4-2: [[
]] .....................B-36 Figure 4.5-1: [[
]] ....................................................B-44 Figure 4.5-2: [[
]] ..................B-46 Figure 4.5-3: [[
]] ..................B-47 Figure B1-1: [[
]] ..........................................B-51 Figure B1-2: [[
]] ..................................B-52 Figure B1-3: [[
]] .................................B-53 Figure B1-4: [[
]] ...............................B-54 Figure B2-1: [[
]] ..................................................................................................................B-56 Figure B2-2: [[
]] .......................................................B-56 Figure B2-3: [[
]] .......................................................B-57 Figure B2-4: [[
]] .......................................................B-57 Figure B2-5: [[
]] .........................................................B-58 Figure B2-6: [[
]] ..........................................B-58 Figure B2-7: [[
]] .......................................................B-59 Figure B2-8: [[
]] .......................................................B-59 NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-5 Figure B2-9: [[
]] .......................................................B-60 Figure B2-10: [[
]] ....................................................B-60 Figure B2-11: [[
]] ....................................................B-61 Figure B2-12: [[
]] ....................................................B-61 Figure B2-13: [[
]] ....................................................B-62 Figure B2-14: [[
]] ....................................................B-62 Figure B2-15: [[
]] ....................................................B-63 Figure B3-1: [[
]] ..................................................................................................................B-65 Figure B3-2: [[
]] ...................................................B-65 Figure B3-3: [[
]] ...................................................B-66 Figure B3-4: [[
]] ...................................................B-66 Figure B3-5: [[
]] ....................................................B-67 Figure B3-6: [[
]] ....................................B-67 Figure B3-7: [[
]] ...................................................B-68 Figure B3-8: [[
]] ...................................................B-68 Figure B3-9: [[
]] ...................................................B-69 Figure B3-10: [[
]] ...............................................B-69 Figure B3-11: [[
]] ........................................B-70 Figure B3-12: [[
]] ...............................................B-70 Figure B3-13: [[
]] ...............................................B-71 Figure B3-14: [[
]] ...............................................B-71 Figure B3-15: [[
]] ...............................................B-72 Figure B5-1: [[
]] ..........................B-85 Figure B5-2: [[
]] ..........................B-85 Figure B5-3: [[
]] ..........................B-86 Figure B5-4: [[
]] ..........................B-86 Figure B5-5: [[
]] ..........................B-87 Figure B5-6: [[
]] ..........................B-87 Figure B5-7: [[
]] ..........................B-88 Figure B5-8: [[
]] ..........................B-88 Figure B5-9: [[
]] ..........................B-89 Figure B5-10: [[
]] ........................B-89 NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-6 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Description 3D Three Dimensional ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers BFNP Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BWR Boiling Water Reactor CAD Computer-Aided Design CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics CFR Code of Federal Regulations CLTP Current Licensed Thermal Power E2E End to End EPU Extended Power Uprate FE / FEM Finite Elements / Finite Element Method / Finite Element Model FIV Flow Induced Vibration FRF Frequency Response Function GDC General Design Criteria GEH GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy
[[
]] Hz Hertz [[
]] MSL Main Steam Line NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission OLTP Original Licensed Thermal Power PBLE Plant Based Load Evaluation PBLE01 Plant Based Load Evaluation Method 01 ([[
]]) PBLE02 Plant Based Load Evaluation Method 02 ([[
]])
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-7 Term Description PSD Power Spectral Density PT Pressure Transducer RG Regulatory Guide RMS Root Mean Square RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel SF Singularity Factor SG Strain Gauge SRV Safety / Relief Valve U Unit VPF Vane Passing Frequency
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-8 ABSTRACT A methodology, termed Plant Based Load Evaluation (PBLE01), is presented for defining the fluctuating loads that are imposed upon the boiling water reactor (BWR) steam dryer. The PBLE01 load definition can be applied to a structural finite element model of the steam dryer in order to determine the steam dryer alternating stresses. The overall steam dryer methodology is applied to an operating BWR replacement steam dryer as an example of the successful implementation of the methodology.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-9
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As a result of steam dryer issues at operating Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs), the United States (US) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued revised guidance concerning the evaluation of steam dryers (Reference B.1). Analysis must show that the dryer will maintain its structural integrity during plan t operation due to acoustic and hydrodynamic fluctuating pressure loads. This demonstration of steam dryer structural integrity comes in three steps: Predict the fluctuating pressure loads on the dryer, Use these fluctuating pressure loads in a structur al analysis to qualify the steam dryer design, and Implement a startup test program for confirming the steam dryer design analysis results as the plant performs power ascension.
The PBLE (Plant Based Load Evaluation) is an analytical tool developed by GEH to perform the prediction of fluctuating pressure loads on the steam dryer. [[
]] This report provides the theoretical basis of PBLE01 that will be applied for determining the fluctuating loads on the Browns Ferry steam dryer, describes the PBLE01 analytical model, determines the biases and uncertainties of the PBLE01 formulation, and de scribes the application of the PBLE01 method to the evaluation of the steam dryer. This report also provides an example implementation of the Flow-Induced Vibration (FIV) analysis methodology. The overall structural evaluation for the Browns Ferry steam dryer is described in Appendix A of this document.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-10 2.0 MODEL DESCRIPTION 2.1 Overview [[ ]] Figure 2.1-1: PBLE01 Process Flow The PBLE01 [[ ]] This is the methodology to be used in the Browns Ferry power asce nsion evaluation and is described in this report. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-11 PBLE01 is built on the commercial software packages Matlab (Reference B.2) and Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise (Reference B.3). Matlab is a software package designed for engineering computations. The general architecture of the PBLE01 scripts makes use of the Matlab programming language and graphical interface.
The vessel acoustic response is calculated with Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise software. Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise is a program for modeli ng acoustic wave behavior in fluids, using implementations of the finite element and boundary element methods. In the PBLE01 context, Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise calculates how sound waves propagate through a FEM model of the RPV dome steam volumes. This 3D acoustic model is described in detail in Section 2.2 below.
Alternate Finite Element (FE) programs as de scribed in Appendix B7 can also be used.
2.2 Dome Acoustic Model Acoustic Modeling Principles 2.2.1Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise (Reference B.3) models acoustics as a wave-phenomenon. The modeling is carried out in the frequency domain, thus using the so-called Helmholtz form of the wave equation (see e.g., References B.4 and B.5). [[
]] The following linear system of equations is solved:
[]{}{}AFpMCiK=+2 Equation 2.2-1 Where F A is the vector of nodal acoustic forces a nd is proportional to th e normal velocity boundary conditions imposed on the faces of the mesh. The stiffness [K], damping [C] and mass
[M] matrices are computed at each frequency. The system of equations is thus set up and solved to obtain the pressure distribution {p}. The velocity field is obtai ned by differentiation of the pressure field at the Gauss points of the elements and then extrapolation and averaging at the nodes.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-12 Geometry Modeling 2.2.2The dome FE mesh (Figure 2.2-1) comprises all RPV steam volumes [[
]] In all GEH BWRs, there are two steam zones with different steam qualities, upstream and downstream of the dryer. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-13 [[ ]] Figure 2.2-1: Modeled Steam Region (left) an d Details of Typical Vessel Meshes (right)
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-14
[[ ]] Figure 2.2-2:
[[
]] Table 2.2-1: Example of First Ten RPV Acoustic Modes Mode No. Modal Frequency (Hz) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Finite Element Model 2.2.3[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-15
]]
[[ ]] Figure 2.2-3:
[[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-16
]] [[ ]] Figure 2.2-4:
[[
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-17
[[ ]] Figure 2.2-5:
[[
]] Fluid Properties and Boundary Conditions 2.2.4[[
]] Steam and water properties including impedance boundary conditions are de scribed in detail in Section 2.4.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-18
[[ ]] Figure 2.2-6:
[[
]] 2.3 PBLE01 from
[[
]] Solution Formulation 2.3.1 The pressure at any dryer point P [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-19
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-20
]] These considerations make PBLE01 [[
]] a quite powerful tool.
Singularity Factor 2.3.2 The Singularity Factor (SF) is a tool to understand the mathematical limitations in PBLE01. It is calculated as:
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-21
]] [[ ]] [[
]] Figure 2.3-1:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-22 2.4 Steam and Water Acoustic Properties This section describes all steam and water charac teristic properties used in PBLE01 models:
[[
]] Dry steam properties, including speed of sound and density, are readily known from standard steam tables published by the International Asso ciation for the Properties of Water and Steam (Reference B.7). Petr (Reference B.8) developed the wet steam model used in PBLE01.
[[
]] by Karplus (Reference B.9).
Wave Propagation in Wet Steam 2.4.1The following summary follows the description given in Section 2 of Reference B.8. The variable nomenclature for this section is in Table 2.4-1.
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-23 Table 2.4-1: Variables in Equations 2.4-1 through 2.4-8
[[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-24
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-25
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-26 [[ ]] Figure 2.4-1:
[[
]] Vane Upstream Droplet Wetness Correlation 2.4.2During development of PBLE01, [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-27 [[ ]] Figure 2.4-2:
[[
]] Steam-Water Interface 2.4.3[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-28 [[ ]] Figure 2.4-3: Steam-Water Interfaces Table 2.4-2: Impedances in a Typical BWR RPV Environment
[[` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-29 [[ ]] Figure 2.4-4: Speed of Sound in
[[
]] (Figure 5 in Karplus (Reference B.9))
The solution that was adopted for the PBLE01 is to model [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-30 3.0 MODEL QUALIFICATION: BWR PLANT VALIDATION A BWR/4 replacement steam dryer, installed in 2008, was instrumented [[ ]]. This section presents the steam dryer fluctuating load definitions obtained with the PBLE01 method using the BWR/4 benchmark plant data.
3.1 BWR/4 RPV - Steam Dryer Acoustic Model
[[
]] 3.2 Steam Dryer Instrumentation To monitor the steam dryer pressure loads, the BWR/4 steam dryer was instrumented with [[ ]] (Figure 3.2-1). [[
]] The locations of the PTs are described in Figure 3.2-1. The regional layout of the BWR/4 PT sensors is also shown in Appendix B1. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-31
]] The PBLE01 benchmark reported in this report was performed at several power levels. Four test conditions are reported (Table 3.2-1):
These conditions were selected to sp an the range of steam flows from [[
]] Table 3.2-1: BWR/4 Test Conditions Associated with Steam Dryer Benchmark Cases Test Condition Power [MWth] Power [% OLTP*]Power [% EPU*] Steam Flow [Mlbs/hr] Core Flow [Mlbs/hr][[
]]
The on-dryer pressure transducer data was then used with th e acoustic model described above and the methodology defined in Section 2.0 to predict acoustic loads on the steam dryer.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-32
[[ ]] Figure 3.2-1:
[[
]] 3.3 PBLE01 Benchmark Process For each PBLE01 benchmark case, [[
]] Pressure PSD Comparison: Measured vs. PBLE01 Projected The comparisons of the measured and projected PSDs for each individual dryer pressure sensor for [[ ]] are plotted in Appendices B2 and B3 for [[ ]] (Table 3.2-1) respectively. Also is included the PSD comparison for the differential pressure benchmark [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-33
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-34
]] 3.4 PBLE01 Benchmark Bias and Uncertainty Results
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-35
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-36 [[ ]] Figure 3.4-1:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.4-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-37 3.5 PBLE01 Validation Conclusions PBLE01 [[ ]] is formulated under the assumption that [[ ]] The objective of PBLE01 is to produce [[ ]] that best explain the measurements given the vessel acoustic environment. [[
]] Overall, PBLE01 from [[ ]] emerges as a viable tool for developing dryer load definitions. The comparison plots in Appendices B2 and B3 demonstrate that the PBLE01 methodology is capable of adequately capturing the frequency content across the dryer.
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-38 4.0 APPLICATION METHODOLOGY 4.1 Scope of Application and Licensing Requirements Scope of Application 4.1.1The scope of the application for the PBLE engineering report is to provide a methodology for determining the fluctuating pressure loads that the Browns Ferry steam dryer will experience during Extended Power Uprate (EPU) operation. This fluctuating load definition can then be applied to a FE model of the Browns Ferry steam dryer in order to determine the structural qualification of the dryer.
Specific Licensing Requirements 4.1.2Plant components, such as the steam dryer in a BWR nuclear power plant, perform no safety function but must retain their structural integrity to avoid the generation of loose parts that might adversely impact the capability of other plant equipment to perform their safety function.
Potential adverse flow effects must be evaluated for the steam dryer to meet the requirements of GDC 1 and 4 in Appendix A of 10 CFR 50. Section 3 of the Standard Review Plan (Reference B.10) requires that the dynamic responses of structural components with the reactor vessel caused by steady-state and operational flow transient conditions should be analyzed for prototype (first of a design) reactors. The analytical assessment of the vibration behavior of the steam dryer includes the definition of the input-forcing function including bias errors and uncertainty. Reference B.10 and Reference B.11 contain specific acceptance criteria related to formulating forcing functions for vibration prediction. Reference B.1 provides guidance on acceptable methods for formulating the forcing functions for vibration prediction.
4.2 Proposed Application Methodology The PBLE01 method for formulating the forcing f unction for vibration prediction for the steam dryer is in conformance with the guidance contained in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.20 Revision 3 (Reference B.1).
Conformance with RG 1.20 Revision 3 4.2.1The PBLE01 load definition methodology was developed to satisfy the analysis and vibration program recommendations identified in RG 1.20 Revision 3 (Reference B.1). A detailed assessment of the comprehensive vibration assessment program for the replacement steam dryer which includes PBLE01 with respect to the RG 1.20 recommendations is provided in Section 10 of Appendix A.
4.3 Range of Application The PBLE01 method described in this report is capable of determining the vibratory forcing function for the entire operating range of the BWR steam dryer.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-39 4.4 Plant-Specific Application Methodology Vessel Model Inputs 4.4.1The vessel [[
]] Acoustic Finite Element Model Mesh A FE model of the [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-40
]] Table 4.4-1: Parameters in the Computation of FRFs Phenomena Parameter [[
]] Plant Input Measurements 4.4.2 Sensor Type and Location For PBLE01 [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-41
]] Error in Measured Dryer Pressures This error, [[
]] In addition, for the on-dryer instrumentation, the strain gauge ma nufacturer will be involved to ensure proper installation and calibration of the strain gauges used in the measurement program during plant startup testing, including a "pipe and beam" calibration effort, as applicable. If instrumentation is similar to strain gauges used in the past, [[ ]] Uncertainties will be evaluated for the sp ecific strain gauges and will be accounted for in the final assessment. The installation and data acquisition procedures for the on-dryer instrumentation will follow the procedures used at the latest BWR/6 replacement dryer, to the extent applicable to the specific gauges, and will incorporate operating experience from those measurement sessions. To the extent applicable to the type and model of strain gauges used in the measurements, [[
]] The installation procedure, data acquisition procedure, instrumentation acceptance criteria, and instrumentation startup report from the previous work will be updated as part of the implementation of the RG 1.20 comprehensive vibration assessment program.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-42 Plant Specific Load Definition 4.4.3 The following steps are involved in the calcu lation of dryer loads with PBLE01:
[[
]] 4.5 Example Implementation of Methodology The Browns Ferry steam dryer methodology using PBLE01 has been applied to a BWR/4 replacement steam dryer at EPU conditions as an example of the successful implementation of the methodology to satisfy RG 1.20. This example implementation includes the fatigue analysis, the development of end-to-end defined bias and uncertainties as well as consideration of lessons learned from issues identified during th e analysis of the steam dryer data.
At a high level, the steam dryer fatigue analysis consists of four steps: (1) Input signal processing, where a time segment or sample of [[ ]] data is selected for input into the acoustic model; (2) An acoustic load definition where fluctuating pressures are determined from an acoustic FEM of the reactor steam dome containing the dryer; (3) A dynamic structural evaluation of the dryer, driven from the acoustic loads (i.e., the global model analysis using an ANSYS model; (4) Post-processing of stress, strain or acceleration results. In the post-processing step, [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-43
]] [[ ]] These results are referred to as the projected data at each dryer location (e.g., location of peak stress or location of on-dryer sensor).
The following sections discuss the details of the fatigue evaluations for the BWR/4 replacement steam dryer at EPU conditions as an example implementation of the BWR steam dryer methodology and in particular, the determination and application of the methodology's end-to-end bias and uncertainties.
Structural Model 4.5.1The BWR/4 replacement steam dryer structural FE model was developed in accordance with the guidelines defined in Appendix A. The three-dimensional shell FE model of the BWR/4 replacement dryer was constructed from the replacement dryer design drawings using the ANSYS finite element analysis code. [[
]] The full FE model of the BWR/4 replacement dryer is illustrated in Figure 4.5-1, [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-44 [[ ]] Figure 4.5-1:
[[
]] FIV Analysis 4.5.2 The ANSYS FE code was used to obtain the structural responses of the steam dryer to the FIV loads at the plant conditions where measured data was obtained. The dynamic analysis was performed [[ ]] To achieve better
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-45 End-to-End Bias and Uncertainties 4.5.3The final test condition performed during the BWR/4 EPU power ascension is defined as [[
]] (Table 3.2-1). [[ ]] As discussed above, pressure loads were generated for this test condition using the PBLE01 Method I based on [[ ]] data at that test condition. These loads were then used to drive the ANSYS FE model to produce the structural response of the steam dryer and the projected strain or acceleration at each on-dryer sensor location. To monitor the dryer dynamic response [[
]] were installed. [[
]] The accelerometers and strain gaug e locations were selected to monitor the global response of
[[
]] The strain and acceleration instruments are well distributed over different dryer regions. Wh ere possible, locations were selected where the sensor would see [[ ]] The regional layout of the BWR/4 accelerometers and strain gauge sensors is summarized in Appendix B1. [[
]] For the same time segment selected for the generation of the steam dryer loads data was obtained for the on-dryer strain gauges and accelerometers (measured data). The end-to-end bias values are based on the comparison of the measured PSD data over the projected PSD data at each of the on-dryer sensor locations. For each instrument, [[ ]] seconds of measured PSD data in [[
]] are compared with the ANSYS-predicted st rain and acceleration PSD results based on [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-46 Figure 4.5-2 and Figure 4.5-3 show plots of the end to end mean bias and uncertainty [[ ]]. PSD comparisons of the ANSYS predictions from the BWR/4 [[ ]] and the measured data for the analysis time interval are included in Appendix B5 for each se nsor. Tabular values of the [[
]] end-to-end bias and uncertainty are provided in Appendix B6 as a function of frequency. The comparison plots in Appendix B5 demonstrate that the PBLE01 loads applied to the structural model are capable of adequately capturing the frequenc y content across the dryer. [[
]] (Figure 4.5-2 and 4.5-3). It should be noted that in the present benchmark, [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.5-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-47 [[ ]] Figure 4.5-3:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-48
5.0 CONCLUSION
S The PBLE methodology [[
]] is available to predict steam dryer pressure loads and their associated uncertainty.
The PBLE01 technique is validat ed by the BWR/4 application case. From comparison between measurements and projections, PB LE01 predicts good frequency content and spatial distribution.
The SRV resonances are well captured. The methodology has been benchmarked by applying the PBLE01 generated loads to an ANSYS finite element model and comparing the predicted strains and accelerations to measured values for on-dryer strain gauges and accelerometers.
The PBLE01 addresses a wide range of load cases:
- MSL valve resonance (SRV/branch line) or broadband excitations (venturi)
- Sources in the vicinity of nozzles
- Hydrodynamic loading (pseudo-pressures) The effects from the last two types of sources can be advantageously modeled by [[ ]]; for this reason PBLE01 from [[ ]] is adequate to predict fluctuating dryer loads at any BWR plant. The BWR steam dryer methodology using PBLE01 has been applied to the BWR/4 replacement steam dryer at EPU conditions as an example of the successful implementation of the methodology to satisfy RG 1.20. This example implementation includes the fatigue analysis to develop the end-to-end bias and uncertainties as well as consider ation of lessons learned from issues identified during the analysis of the steam dryer data.
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-49
6.0 REFERENCES
B.1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, RG 1.20, "Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program for Reactor Internals During Preoperational and Initial Startup Testing," Revision 3, March 2007. B.2 MATLAB , Copyright 1984-2014, The MathWorks, Inc. B.3 Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise Revision 11 SL1, Siemens, LMS International, 2012. B.4 P.M. Morse and K.U. Ingard, "Theoretical Acoustics," McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968, p.519. B.5 L.E. Kinsler, A.R. Frey, A.B. Coppens, J.V. Sanders, "Fundamentals of Acoustics," Fourth Edition, John Wiley and Sons, 2000. B.6 S.H. Jang and J.G. Ih, "On the Multiple Microphone Method for Measuring In-Duct Acoustic Properties in the Presence of Mean Flow," J. Acous. Soc. Am., Vol. 103, No.
3, March 1998. B.7 W. Wagner et al., "The IAPWS Industrial Formulation 1997 for the Thermodynamic Properties of Water and Steam," ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines and Power, 122, 150-
182 (2000). B.8 V. Petr, "Wave propagation in Wet Steam," Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs Vol 218 Part C 2004, p 871-882. B.9 H. B. Karplus, "Propagation of Pressure Waves in a Mixture of Water and Steam," Armour Research Foundation of Illinois Institute of Technology, United States Atomic Energy Commission Contract No.
AT (11-1) 528, ARF No. D132A13, 1961. B.10 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0800, Revision 3, March 2007, Section 3.9.2, "Dynamic Testing and Analysis of Systems, Structures and Components." B.11 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0800, Revision 3, March 2007, Section 3.9.5, "Reactor Pressure Vessel Internals."
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-50 APPENDIX B1: BWR/4 STEAM DRYER INSTRUMENTATION LOCATIONS Table B1-1:
[[
]] [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-51 [[ ]] Figure B1-1:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-52 [[ ]] Figure B1-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-53 [[ ]] Figure B1-3:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-54 [[ ]] Figure B1-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-55 APPENDIX B2:
[[
]] Figure # PT Location
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-56 [[ ]] Figure B2-1:
[[ ]] [[ ]] Figure B2-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-57 [[ ]] Figure B2-3:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B2-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-58 [[ ]] Figure B2-5:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B2-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-59 [[ ]] Figure B2-7:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B2-8:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-60 [[ ]] Figure B2-9:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B2-10:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-61 [[ ]] Figure B2-11:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B2-12:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-62 [[ ]] Figure B2-13:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B2-14:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-63 [[ ]] Figure B2-15:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-64 APPENDIX B3:
[[
]] Figure # PT Location
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-65 [[ ]] Figure B3-1:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B3-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-66 [[ ]] Figure B3-3:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B3-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-67 [[ ]] Figure B3-5:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B3-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-68 [[ ]] Figure B3-7:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B3-8: [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-69 [[ ]] Figure B3-9:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B3-10:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-70 [[ ]] Figure B3-11:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B3-12:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-71 [[ ]] Figure B3-13:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B3-14:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-72 [[ ]] Figure B3-15:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-73 APPENDIX B4:
[[
]] Table B4-1:
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-74 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-75 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-76 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-77 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-78 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-79 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-80 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-81 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-82 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-83 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-84 APPENDIX B5:
[[
]] Figure # PT Location
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-85 [[ ]] Figure B5-1:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B5-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-86 [[ ]] Figure B5-3:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B5-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-87 [[ ]] Figure B5-5:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B5-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-88 [[ ]] Figure B5-7:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B5-8:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-89 [[ ]] Figure B5-9:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure B5-10:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-90 APPENDIX B6:
[[
]] Table B6-1:
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-91 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-92 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-93 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-94 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-95 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-96 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-97 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-98 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-99 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix B, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
B-100 APPENDIX B7: ACOUSTIC FINITE ELEMENT PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS FOR PBLE ACOUSTIC FRF
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-1
Appendix C
Steam Dryer Plant Based Load Evaluation Methodology PBLE02 Model Description
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................
................... C-10 2.0 Model Description .............................................................................................................
.............. C-11 2.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................
.............. C-11 2.2 Dome Acoustic Model ...........................................................................................................
.... C-15 2.3 PBLE From [[ ]] ........................................................................................... C-19 2.3.1 [[ ]] Equations .................................................................................................. C-19 2.3.2 [[ ]] with RPV ................................................................... C-22 2.3.3 [[ ]] ...................................................................................................
............ C-25 2.3.4 Singularity Factor ............................................................................................................
... C-34 2.4 Steam Acoustic Properties .....................................................................................................
.... C-36 2.4.1 [[
]]............................................................ C-36 2.4.2 [[ ]] .................................................................................................. C-38 3.0 Model Qualification: BWR Plant Validation .................................................................................. C-43 3.1 Procedure for Benchmark Cases ................................................................................................
C-43 3.1.1 Instrumentation at [[ ]] ............................................................... C-43 3.1.2 [[ ]] ..................................... C-46 3.1.3 Procedure for
[[ ]] ................................................ C-48 3.2 [[ ]] and PBLE02 Benchmark Results .................................................................. C-48 3.2.1 [[ ]] ................................................................................................ C-48 3.2.2 PBLE02 Pressure Loading Results .................................................................................... C-53 3.3 PBLE02 Validation Conclusions ............................................................................................... C
-57 4.0 Application Methodology .......................................................................................................
........ C-58 4.1 Scope of Application and Licensing Requirements ................................................................... C-58 4.1.1 Scope of Application ..........................................................................................................
C-58 4.1.2 Specific Licensing Requirements ....................................................................................... C-58 4.2 Application Methodology .......................................................................................................
... C-58 4.2.1 Conformance with Regulatory Guide 1.20 Rev 3 .............................................................. C-58 4.3 Range of Application ..........................................................................................................
....... C-59 4.4 Plant-Specific Application Methodology................................................................................... C-59 4.4.1 Plant Input Measurements .................................................................................................. C-5 9 4.4.2 Plant-Specific Load Definition .......................................................................................... C-61 4.5 [[ ]] Benchmark .................................................................................................... C-64 4.5.1 FIV Analysis ..................................................................................................................
.... C-64 4.5.2 [[ ]] Bias and Uncertainties ......................................................................... C-65 5.0 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................
.................. C-67 6.0 References ....................................................................................................................
................... C-68 Appendix C1 [[ ]] Sensor Location Figures ....................................................................... C-70 Appendix C2 [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.. C-79 Appendix C3 [[ ]] ...................................................................... C-95 Appendix C4 [[
]] .............................................................................................................. C-107 Appendix C5 [[
]] ......................................................................................... C-113 Appendix C6 Correlation of Strain Gauge Data to Acoustic Pressure Experimental Testing .......................................................................................................................
.............. C-125 Appendix C7 Strain to Pressure Conversion ....................................................................................
C-158 Appendix C8 Strain Gauge Accuracy Test .......................................................................................
C-160 NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-3 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.4-1: Variables Used to Describe Steam Acoustic Properties ....................................... C-37 Table 3.1-1: Datasets Used in Benchmarks .............................................................................. C-45 Table 3.1-2: Plant Conditions Associated with Dryer Benchmark Cases ................................ C-45 Table 4.4-1: Input parameters to the PBLE02 .......................................................................... C-63 Table C3-1: [[ ]] .................................... C-95 Table C5-1: [[ ]] .................................... C-113 Table C6-1: Pipe Thickness as a Function of Azimuth, for Both Strain Gauge Locations. ... C-131 Table C6-2: Modulus of Elasticity of A106 GrB Pipe ........................................................... C-131 Table C6-3: Calculation of Pressure to Strain Ratio ............................................................... C-131 Table C6-4: Test Cases ........................................................................................................
... C-133 Table C6-5: Summary of Error for all Frequency and Time Intervals ................................... C-145 Table C6-6: Strain Gauges Combinations Used in Strain Gauge Combination Study ........... C-151 Table C6-7: [[ ]] ............. C-153 Table C7-1: [[ ]] .................................... C-159 Table C8-1: Table of Mean and Standard Deviation [[ ]] ............................................................................................. C-162
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1-1: PBLE Process Flow................................................................................................
........... C-12 Figure 2.2-1: [[ ]] ............................................................................ C-16 Figure 2.2-2: Modeled Steam Region (on left) and Details of Typical Vessel Meshes (on right) ......... C-17 Figure 2.2-3: [[ ]] ........................................................................................................ C-18 Figure 2.3-1: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
......... C-35 Figure 2.4-1: [[ ]] .................................................. C-42 Figure 3.2-1: [[ ]] ........................................................................ C-49 Figure 3.2-2: [[ ]] ................................................................................. C-50 Figure 3.2-3: [[ ]] ................................................................................. C-50 Figure 3.2-4: [[ ]] ................................................................................. C-51 Figure 3.2-5: [[ ]] ................................................................................. C-51 Figure 3.2-6: [[ ]] ................................................................................. C-52 Figure 3.2-7: [[ ]] ................................................................................. C-52 Figure 3.2-8: [[ ]] ......................................................... C-54 Figure 3.2-9: [[ ]] ......................................................... C-54 Figure 3.2-10: [[ ]] ....................................................... C-55 Figure 3.2-11: [[ ]] ....................................................... C-55 Figure 3.2-12: [[ ]] ....................................................... C-56 Figure 3.2-13: [[ ]] ....................................................... C-56 Figure 4.5-1: [[ ]] ............................... C-66 Figure 4.5-2: [[ ]] ............................... C-66 Figure C1-1-[[ ]] ................................................ C-70 Figure C1-2-[[ ]] .................................................... C-71 Figure C1-3-[[ ]] ................................................................. C-72 Figure C1-4-[[ ]] ..................................... C-73 Figure C1-5-[[ ]] .................................................. C-74 Figure C1-6-[[ ]] ................................................ C-75 Figure C1-7-[[ ]] .................................................. C-76 Figure C1-8-[[ ]] ............................................................... C-77 Figure C1-9-[[ ]] .............................................................................. C-78 Figure C2-1-[[ ]] ................................................................................................................ C-80 Figure C2-2-[[ ]] .................................................................. C-80 Figure C2-3-[[ ]] ................................................................. C-81 Figure C2-4-[[ ]] ................................................................ C-81 Figure C2-5-[[ ]] .............................................................. C-82 Figure C2-6-[[ ]] ................................ C-82 Figure C2-7-[[ ]] ............................................................. C-83 Figure C2-8-[[ ]] ............................................................. C-83 Figure C2-9-[[ ]] .............................................................. C-84 Figure C2-10-[[ ]] ........................................................ C-84 Figure C2-11-[[ ]] ....................................................... C-85
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-5 Figure C2-12-[[
]] ....................................................... C-85 Figure C2-13-[[
]] ...................................................... C-86 Figure C2-14-[[
]] ....................................................... C-86 Figure C2-15-[[
]] ...................................................... C-87 Figure C2-16-[[
]] ............................................................................................... C-87 Figure C2-17-[[
]] ............................................................. C-88 Figure C2-18-[[
]] ............................................................... C-88 Figure C2-19-[[
]] ............................................................... C-89 Figure C2-20-[[
]] ............................................................. C-89 Figure C2-21-[[
]] ................................ C-90 Figure C2-22-[[
]] ............................................................. C-90 Figure C2-23-[[
]] ............................................................. C-91 Figure C2-24-[[
]] ............................................................. C-91 Figure C2-25-[[
]] ........................................................... C-92 Figure C2-26-[[
]] ........................................................... C-92 Figure C2-27-[[
]] ........................................................... C-93 Figure C2-28-[[
]] ........................................................... C-93 Figure C2-29-[[
]] ........................................................... C-94 Figure C2-30-[[
]] ........................................................... C-94 Figure C3-1-[[
]] .................... C-106 Figure C3-2-[[
]] .................... C-106 Figure C4-1-[[
]] ....................................................... C-108 Figure C4-2-[[
]] ....................................................... C-108 Figure C4-3-[[
]] ......................................................... C-109 Figure C4-4-[[
]] ....................................................... C-109 Figure C4-5-[[
]] .................................................... C-110 Figure C4-6-[[
]] ....................................................... C-110 Figure C4-7-[[
]] ....................................................... C-111 Figure C4-8-[[
]] ......... C Figure C4-9-[[
]] ....................................................... C-112 Figure C4-10-[[
]] ............................................... C-112 Figure C6-1: Photograph of Test Section .......................................................................................
...... C-125 Figure C6-2: Schematic of Experimental Setup for Strain Gauge/Acoustic Pressure Test .................. C-126 Figure C6-3: Drawing Dimensions for Test Article. ............................................................................
C-127 Figure C6-4: Strain Gauge Orientation and Numbering ....................................................................... C-1 27 Figure C6-5: Piping Layout and Supports .......................................................................................
..... C-128
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-6 Figure C6-6: Flow as a Function of Time for the Three Tests .............................................................. C-13 4 Figure C6-7: Pressure as a Function of Time for the Three Tests ........................................................ C-134 Figure C6-8: Temperature as a Function of Time for the Three Tests ................................................. C-135 Figure C6-9: SG1 Location, Individual Strain Gauge Signals Case 1 .................................................. C-136 Figure C6-10: SG2 Location, Individual Strain Gauge Signals Case 1 ................................................ C-136 Figure C6-11: PT and SG ([[ ]]) PSD and Coherence Data (Case 1) ................................. C-138 Figure C6-12: PT1, PT2, PT3 PSDs and Coherence Data (Case 1)...................................................... C-139 Figure C6-13: Comparison of PT and SG ([[ ]]) PSD and Coherence Data ....................... C-140 Figure C6-14: [[ ]] ...................... C-141 Figure C6-15: [[
]] ......................................................................................................................... C-142 Figure C6-16: Pressure Based on [[
]] ........................................................................................................................ C-1 43 Figure C6-17: Pressure Based on PT Sensor [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
C-144 Figure C6-18: Test Case 1: Error in Peak Pressure Response from SG Versus PT .............................. C-145 Figure C6-19: Test Case 1: Error in RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response
[[ ]] ..................................................................................................... C-146 Figure C6-20: Case 1: Error in RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response from
[[ ]] ...................................................................................................................... C-147 Figure C6-21: Test Case 1: Average RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response
[[ ]] ....................................................................................................................... C-14 7 Figure C6-22: Test Case 2: Error in RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response
[[ ]] ....................................................................................................................... C-14 8 Figure C6-23: Test Case 2: Average RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response
[[ ]] ....................................................................................................................... C-14 8 Figure C6-24: Test Case 3: Error in RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response
[[ ]] ....................................................................................................................... C-14 9 Figure C6-25: Test Case 3: Average RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response
[[ ]] ....................................................................................................................... C-14 9 Figure C6-26: Error in Peak Response as a Function of SG [[ ]] (All Frequency and Time Intervals) .................................................................................................
.... C-152 Figure C6-27: 8 Strain Gauge [[ ]] ................. C-154 Figure C6-28: 4 Strain Gauge [[ ]] .................................... C-154 Figure C6-29: 2 Strain Gauge [[ ]] ................................................ C-155 Figure C6-30: Frequency Band [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.... C-155 Figure C6-31: Frequency Band [[ ]] .......................................................................................................................... C
-156 Figure C6-32: Frequency Band [[ ]] ............... C-156 Figure C8 Beam 2 Results for Different Gauge Types [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
....... C-161 Figure C8 Picture of Strain Gauges on Beam for Testing ................................................................ C-16 3
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-7 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Description 1D One Dimensional 3D Three Dimensional BFN Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BWR Boiling Water Reactor BWR/3 Boiling Water Reactor Version 3 BWR/4 Boiling Water Reactor Version 4 CAD Computer-Aided Design CLTP Current Licensed Thermal Power CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics CFR Code of Federal Regulations DAS Data Acquisition System DOE Design of Experiments EPU Extended Power Uprate FE / FEM Finite Element / Finite Element Method / Finite Element Model FIV Flow Induced Vibration FRF Frequency Response Function GDC General Design Criteria GEH GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy
[[
]] Hz Hertz ID Inside Diameter
[[
]] LTR Licensing Topical Report MSIV Main Steam Isolation Valve MSL Main Steam Line NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission PBLE Plant Based Load Evaluation PBLE01 Plant Based Load Evaluation [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-8 Term Description PBLE02 Plant Based Load Evaluation [[
]] PSD Power Spectral Density PT Pressure Transducer / Pressure Sensor RG Regulatory Guide RMS Root Mean Squared RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel SF Singularity Factor SG Strain Gauge SRSS Square Root of the Sum of the Squares SRV Safety / Relief Valve StDev Standard Deviation TMM Two Microphone Method TVA Tennessee Valley Authority VPF Vane Passing Frequency
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-9 Abstract NEDC-33824P, Browns Ferry Nuclear Steam Dryer Analysis Report , provides the results and methodology for the Steam Dryer Analysis related to the Browns Ferry power uprate. This appendix describes methodology and provides benchmark results for what is termed Plant Based Load Evaluation (PBLE02) for defining the fluctuating pressure loads on replacement steam dryers [[
]] This supplement provides additional benchmarking results for the PBLE against data taken during startup testing of an instrumented replacement steam dryer at a ([[
]]), where [[ ]] data is used to predict strain measured during EPU Power Ascension [[ ]] This supplement also provides a detailed description of the related modeling and methodology used to develop loads with PBLE02.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-10
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As a result of steam dryer issues at operating Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs), the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (N RC) has issued revised guidance concerning the evaluation of steam dryers (Reference C.1). As part of that guidance, the analysis must demonstrate that the dryer will maintain its structural integrity without failing due to fatigue during normal plant operation when subjected to the vibrations resulting from acoustic and hydrodynamic fluctuating pressure loads. This demonstration of steam dryer structural integrity requires three steps:
- Prediction of the fluctuating pr essure loads on the dryer,
- Application of the fluctuating pressure loads in a structural analysis to qualify the steam dryer design
- Implementation of a startup test program for confirming the steam dryer design as the plant performs power ascension.
The Plant Based Load Evaluation (PBLE) is an an alytical tool developed by GEH to perform the prediction of fluctuating pressure loads on the steam dryer. PBLE01 provides the theoretical basis of the PBLE method that will be applied for determining the fluctuating loads on the Browns Ferry steam dryer, describes the PBLE analytical model, and provides benchmark results of the PBLE with [[
]] pressure data. This report is a separate supplement from th e PBLE01 description, found in Appendix B. The PBLE01 appendix focuses on a load solution that [[
]] This appendix for PBLE02 describes the load solution obtained from [[
]] In addition, this supplement provides the results of benchmarking studies of the PBLE against measured [[
]] pressure data taken during power ascension testing of a replacement steam dryer installed at a [[ ]]. In summary, PBLE is a methodology to predict acoustic pressu re loading on BWR Nuclear Power Plant Steam Dryers for use in predicting vibratory stress for comparison against fatigue limits. This can be done based on either pressure data [[
]] This section specifically covers the use of PBLE02 with [[
]] to analyze the Browns Ferry Steam Dryer and discusses related benchmark work that includes comparing the use of [[
]] from a [[ ]] Benchmark Plant utilized [[ ]] In particular, this section presents [[
]] bias and uncertainty results based on using [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-11 2.0 MODEL DESCRIPTION Section 2.1 provides a brief overview of the PBLE model (with process flow depicted in Figure 2.1-1). Section 2.2 provides a summary of the steam dome acoustic model presented in detail in the [[ ]] PBLE01 Appendix B. The steam dome acoustic model [[
]]. Section 2.3 develops the methodology for the [[ ]] formulation for PBLE02.
2.1 Overview The PBLE methodology can be [[ ]]. This is the methodology to be used when [[ ]] data is availiable and is described in Appendix B. [[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-12
[[ ]] Figure 2.1-1: PBLE Process Flow NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-13 In comparison to [[ ]] measurements, [[ ]] PBLE02 provides a [[ ]] so as to ensure that the dryer has sufficient margin to fatigue limits prior to the confirmatory phase, where instrumented steam dryer data is used during the initial Power Ascension Test (PAT). The [[ ]] system has an associated high cost for design and installation since the [[ ]]. The instrumentation used for the [[ ]] has better long-term reliability than the [[ ]]. The operating lifetime of [[
]] also provides a backup for the [[ ]] for the lead plant applications in case there is an extended power ascension test period. Therefore, an additional formulation of the PBLE methodology that uses [[ ]] measurements is provided in this licensing supplement. The lower chart in Figure 2.1-1 outlines th e PBLE02 solution path when using the [[
]]. The PBLE02 from [[ ]] has two main components:
- An acoustic finite element model (3D) representing [[
]] as described in Appendix B).
- A [[
]]. Referring to the lower chart in Figure 2.1-1, on the top left corner, [[ ]]. These [[ ]]. This is the [[ ]] component of the PBLE shown in Figure 2.1-1 and is described in further detail in Section 2.3.1. The [[ ]]. This is the [[ ]] component of the PBLE shown in Figure 2.1-1, and described in further detail in Section 2.2.
The [[
]]. (Section 2.3.2). [[ ]] - see Section 2.3.3). Additional [[
]] (Section 2.3.3).
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-14 Both the PBLE from [[ ]] solution paths are developed based on the commercial software packages MATLAB and Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise. MATLAB is a software package designed for engineering computations and is used for performing the [[ ]] in the PBLE. The general architecture of the PBLE scripts makes use of the MATLAB programming language and graphical interface. The [[ ]] is also implemented in MATLAB (Section 203.1). The vessel acoustic response is calculated with Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise. Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise is a program for modeling acoustic wave behavior in fluids, using implementations of the finite element and boundary element methods. In the PBLE application, Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise is used to calculate the sound wave propa gation through an acoustic finite element model of the steam regions in the reactor. The general 3D acoustic model is described in detail in Section 2 of Appendix B. Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise models acoustics as a wave-phenomenon. The modeling is carried out in the frequency domain, thus using the so-called Helmholtz form of the wave equation (see e.g.
Reference C.2 and Reference C.3). [[
]] As stated, the PBLE02 Finite Element Method us es a direct response frequency analysis (as opposed to a solution using modal superposition, wh ich is inadequate when there is frequency-dependent damping and boundary conditions as is the case here). The following system of equations is solved:
[]{}{}AFpMCiK=+2 Equation 2-1 Where FA is the vector of nodal acoustic forces, proportional to the normal velocity boundary conditions imposed on the faces of the mesh. The stiffness [K], damping [C] and mass
[M] matrices are computed at each frequency. The system of equations is thus set up and solved to obtain the pressure distribution {p}. The velocity field is obtained by differentiation of the pressure field at the gauss points of the elements and then extrapolation and averaging at the nodes.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-15 2.2 Dome Acoustic Model The dome acoustic model is described in detail in the PBLE01 report in Appendix B. This section summarizes the key aspects of the dome model. The dome FE mesh (Figure 2.2-2) comprises all RPV steam volumes [[ ]]. The Virtual.Lab/Sysnoise program was used to generate the models and benchmarking provided here. In all GEH BWRs, there are two basic steam zones with different steam qualities; upstream of the dryer [[
]]. Validation for the use of [[ ]] is performed through the benchmarking process in Section 3.0 of this appendix and confirms this assumption. The PBLE02 method is formulated under the [[ ]]. Validation of the [[ ]] is performed through the benchmarking process in Section 3.0 and confir ms this location.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-16
[[ ]] Figure 2.2-1: [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-17
[[
]] Figure 2.2-2
- Modeled Steam Region (on left) and Details of Typical Vessel Meshes (on right)
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-18 [[ ]] Figure 2.2-3: [[
]] [[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-19 2.3 PBLE From
[[
]] The PBLE model described in Appendix B used [[ ]]. This section describes the PBLE modeling used to determine the [[
]]. 2.3.1 [[
]] Equations
[[
]], which was initially described by Seybert and Ross (Reference C.2) and Chung and Blaser (Reference C.4). The more recent
[[ ]] are Jones and Stiede (Reference C.5), Jones and Parrott (Reference C.6), and Chu (Reference C.7).
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-20
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-21
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-22
]]. 2.3.2 [[
]] with RPV The approach in the previous section describes [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-23
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-24
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-25
]]. 2.3.3 [[
]] [[
]] 2.3.3.1 General Formulation of
[[
]] , Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-29
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-30
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-31
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-32
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-33
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-34
]] 2.3.4 Singularity Factor The Singularity Factor (SF) is a tool to understand the mathematical limitations in the PBLE. It is calculated as: [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-35
]] This is one of the considerations when choosing MSL strain gauge locations. In addition, this is a consideration for utilizing a coupled PBLE solution to lessen the singularities in each of the individual uncoupled MSLs. The impact of this mathematical constraint on the PBLE solution can be seen in Figure 2.3-1.
[[ ]] Figure 2.3-1:
[[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-36
]] 2.4 Steam Acoustic Properties The steam and water characteristic prope rties used in PBLE models are:
- [[
]] Properties for the vessel model are described in detail in the PBLE01 documentation from Appendix B. [[
]]. [[
]]. This section first addresses these [[
]]. 2.4.1 [[
]] The variable nomenclature for this section is in Table 2.4-1.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-37 Table 2.4-1: Variables Used to Describe Steam Acoustic Properties
[[
]] Ingard and Singhal (Reference C.10) propose a model for [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-38
]]. 2.4.2 [[
]] The dryer is designed to remove large moisture droplets from the steam. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-39
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-40
]] The four resulting points are plotted in (Figure 2.4-1) as asterisks. The relation [[
]] As NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-41 shown in Figure 2.4-1, [[
]] The red curve in Figure 2.4-1 is a [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-42
[[ ]] Figure 2.4-1: [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-43 3.0 MODEL QUALIFICATION: BWR PLANT VALIDATION
[[ ]] GEH BWR units went through steam EPU steam dryer replacement programs in the recent years:
[[
]] The replacement dryers were each instrumented with [[
]] The units were also equipped with [[
]] These data sets were utilized for two primary purposes in developing the preliminary vibratory stress analysis for Browns Ferry ap plication. In particular, the existing data sets were utilized in the overall processes to develop:
[[
]] 3.1 Procedure for Benchmark Cases 3.1.1 Instrumentation at
[[
]] The [[ ]] dryer instrumentation comprised [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-44
]] The [[ ]] dryer instrumentation had [[
]] The [[ ]] dryer was instrumented with [[
]] The [[ ]] MSLs were instrumented [[
]] The [[ ]] dataset comprises [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-45 Table 3.1-1: Datasets Used in Benchmarks Plant Instruments Date Data Source
[[
]] Table 3.1-2: Plant Conditions Associated with Dryer Benchmark Cases Test Condition Power MWTH Steam Flow Mlbs/hr Steam Velocity*Ft/sec Core Flow Mlbs/hr [[
]] [[ ]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-46 3.1.1.1 MSL Data Processing The [[ ]] data is processed prior to being utilized as a [[
]] in PBLE02 [[
]]. Before being used in PBLE02 [[
]] 3.1.2 [[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-47
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-48
]] 3.1.3 Procedure for
[[
]] In addition to the pressure benchmark, the [[
]] was utilized to develop pressure loads for input to the FIV Finite Element model. This was done to characterize the ability of the overall methodology to project dryer response. [[ ]] The load cases were analyzed to determine the predicted strain for the instrumented strain gauges on the dryer. [[
]] 3.2 [[
]] and PBLE02 Benchmark Results This section reviews the [[
]] This includes showing
[[
]] 3.2.1 [[
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-49 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-1:
[[
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-50 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-2:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-3:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-51 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-4:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-5:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-52 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-6:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-7:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-53 3.2.2 PBLE02 Pressure Loading Results The comparisons of the measured and projected RMS Pressure [[
]] are plotted in Appendix C2 for the [[
]] [[
]] Figure 3.2-8 to Figure 3.2-13 show specific [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-54 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-8:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-9:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-55 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-10:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-11:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-56 [[ ]] Figure 3.2-12:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 3.2-13:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-57 3.3 PBLE02 Validation Conclusions Overall the benchmarks indicate that PBLE technology, and the related methodology to be applied to Browns Ferry for projecting loads [[
]] In the [[ ]] PBLE / FE stress analysis benchmark with the [[ ]], the regional PBLE load combined with the GEH finite element model provides a conservative es timate of dryer response and stress as evidenced by the [[
]] bias and uncertainty values provided in Table C5-1 in Appendix C-5. This comparison indicates that the GEH FE model st ructural response predic tions are conservative when based on PBLE-defined loads. The loads adjusted [[
]] with frequency based [[
]] bias and uncertainty provided a conservative projection of the dryer stru ctural response (See Section 4.5 below). To assure that the PBLE methodology is applied rigorously GEH will apply [[ ]] These values will be applied with other adjustment terms per section 4.2.5 of the main document. A sample of predicted versus measured sensor response [[
]] is shown in Appendix C4.
If a dryer [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-58 4.0 APPLICATION METHODOLOGY 4.1 Scope of Application and Licensing Requirements 4.1.1 Scope of Application The purpose of the Plant Based Load Evaluation and PBLE02 specificall y is to provide a methodology for [[ ]] to determine the fluctuating pressure loads that the TVA Browns Ferry steam dryers will experience after reaching EPU conditions. The fluctuating loads developed using this methodology are applied to a finite element model, in this case the Browns Ferry steam dryer, in order to determine the structural qualification of the replacement steam dryer. This section describes the methodology that is used in applying
PBLE02 to [[
]] to develop the dryer load definition for both the [[ ]] and the Browns Ferry steam dryer stress analysis EPU qualification.
4.1.2 Specific Licensing Requirements Plant components such as the steam dryer in a BWR nuclear power plant perform no safety function but must retain their structural integrity to avoid the generation of loose parts that might adversely impact the capability of other plant equipment to perform their safety function.
Potential adverse flow effects must be evaluated for the steam dryer to meet the requirements of GDC 1 and 4 in Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 50. Standard Review Plan (Reference C.13), Section 3 requires that the dynamic responses of structural components with th e reactor vessel caused by steady state and operational flow transient conditions should be analyzed for prototype (first of a design) reactors. Similarly, Standard Review Plan (Reference C.14), Appendix A requires rigorous assessments of the potential for adverse flow effects for minor modifications to components susceptible to flow-excited acoustic and structural resonances in non-prototype plants. The analytical assessment of the vibration behavior of the steam dryer includes the definition of the input-forcing function including bias errors and uncertainty. The Standard Review Plan (Reference C.13 and Reference C.14) contains specific acceptance criteria related to formulating forcing functions for vibration prediction. RG 1.20 (Reference C.1) provides guidance on acceptable methods for formulating the forcing functi ons for vibration prediction.
4.2 Application Methodology The PBLE02 method for formulating the forcing function for vibration prediction for the steam dryer is in conformance with the guidance contained in Regulatory Guide 1.20 Revision 3 (Reference C.1).
4.2.1 Conformance with Regulatory Guide 1.20 Rev 3 The PBLE02 load definition methodology was devel oped to satisfy the analysis and vibration program recommendations identified in RG 1.20 Revision 3 (Reference C.1). A detailed assessment of the comprehensive vibration assessment program for the replacement steam dryer which includes PBLE02 with respect to the RG 1.20 recommendations is provided
in Section 10 of Appendix A (Reference C.1).
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-59 4.3 Range of Application The PBLE method described in this report is capable of determining the vibratory forcing function for the entire operating range of the Browns Ferry steam dryer.
4.4 Plant-Specific Application Methodology
[[
]] Further information on the vessel model is provided in Appendix B.
4.4.1 Plant Input Measurements 4.4.1.1 Sensor Type and Location MSL Instrumentation The [[ ]]. Parameters for this model are listed in Reference C.15. All the input pa rameters identified in Referen ce C.15 are specified in the PBLE script input file. The PBLE scripts assemble the [[
]]. [[
]] This information and benchmarking shall be submitted to the NRC staff for approval before implementation.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-60 [[ ]]. Further information on the conversion of strain to pressure and strain gauge accuracy is presented in Appendix C6.
[[ ]]. The distance between [[
]]. [[ ]] Instrumentation
[[
]] in Appendix B. From previous benchmarks found in Appendix B, it was concluded that [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-61
]] 4.4.1.2 Plant Measurement Uncertainty The PBLE uses [[
]] as input to the steam dryer pressure load predictions. Uncertainties in these inputs will be propagate d through the PBLE calculations, resulting in uncertainties in the pressure load predictions or the resulti ng structural vibration predictions. Uncertainties in
[[
]] The [[
]] pressures (used for [[
]]) have errors due to: [[
]]. [[ ]]. 4.4.1.3 Uncertainties in Measured
[[
]] In practice, [[
]] This error is evaluated in Appendix C6 and C8.
4.4.2 Plant-Specific Load Definition The following steps are involved in the cal culation of dryer lo ads with the PBLE [[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-62
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-63
]] the PBLE MATLAB scripts are run and dryer loads are obtained
. The above is a basic overview of the process for developing loads using PBLE02. The particulars for developing these loads for Browns Ferry and applying them to the FIV model are found in the main body of this document and other Appendices as referenced in the main body. The PBLE model needs a number of inputs, such as listed in Table 4.4-1. Table 4.4 Input parameters to the PBLE02
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-64 4.5 [[
]] Benchmark The ability to predict [[
]] Structural Model The [[ ]] replacement steam dryer structural FE model was developed in accordance with the guidelines in Appendix A. The three-dimensional shell FE model of the [[ ]] replacement dryer was constructed from the replacement dryer design drawings using the ANSYS finite element analysis code.
[[
]] 4.5.1 FIV Analysis The ANSYS FE code was used to obtain the structural responses of the steam dryer to the FIV loads at the plant conditions where measured data was obtained. The dynamic analysis was performed [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-65
]] For the final Browns Ferry analysis, the maximum stress intensity was extracted on every component for each dynamic solution. The maximum values of stress intensity [[ ]] The maximum stress intensity results from [[
]] 4.5.2 [[
]] Bias and Uncertainties The [[ ]] load benchmark analyses are based on comparisons of the [[
]] Figure 4.5-1 and Figure 4.5-2 display the graphs that summarize the bias and uncertainty terms that were calculated by using the equations below:
[[
]] Appendix C4 displays plots of the FIV predicted strains and accelerations [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-66 [[ ]] Figure 4.5-1:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 4.5-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-67
5.0 CONCLUSION
S The Plant Based Load Evaluation methodology for plants with either [[ ]] is available to predict dryer pressure loads and their associated bias and uncertainty. The PBLE incorporates a [[
]]. The PBLE02 technique for determ ining dryer loading with [[ ]]. This case involved the full application of Pre-EPU [[ ]] From comparison between measurements and projecti ons, the PBLE with FEM predicts frequency content and spatial distribution adequately for use to predict EPU dryer responses. The SRV valve resonances are covered by [[
]] The PBLE methodology presented in this report has two strengths:
valve whistling (SRV/branch line) and broadband excitations (venturi, MSIV turbulence);
- Modeling of vessel hydrodynamic phenomena through [[
]]. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-68
6.0 REFERENCES
C.1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.20, "Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program for Reactor Internals During Preoperational and Initial Startup Testing,"
Revision 3, March 2007. C.2 A.F. Seybert and D.F. Ross, Experimental Determination of Acoustic Properties Using a Two-Microphone Random-Excitation Technique, J. Acous. Soc. Am., Vol 61, No. 5, May 1977. C.3 M.L. Munjal, Acoustics of Ducts And Mufflers with Application to Exhaust and Ventilation System Design, John Wiley and Sons, 1945, 1987 Edition. C.4 J.Y. Chung and D.A. Blaser, Transfer Function Method of Measuring In-Duct Acoustic Properties, I. Theory, J. Acous. Soc. Am., Vol. 68, No. 3, September 1980. C.5 M.G. Jones and P.E. Stiede, Comparison of Methods for Determining Specific Acoustic Impedance, J. Acous. Soc. Am., Vol. 101, No. 5, May 1997. C.6 M.G. Jones and T.L. Parrott, Evaluation of a Multi-Point Method for Determining Acoustic Impedance , Mech. Syst. Signal Proc. 3, 15-35, 1989. C.7 W.T. Chu, Impedance Tube Measurements - A Comparative Study of Current Practices , Noise Control Eng. J.37, 37-44, 1991. C.8 P.M. Morse and K.U. Ingard, Theoretical Acoustics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968, p.519. C.9 S.H. Jang and J.G. Ih, On the Multiple Microphone Method for Measuring In-Duct Acoustic Properties in the Presence Of Mean Flow, J. Acous. Soc. Am., Vol. 103, No. 3, March 1998. C.10 U. Ingard and V.K. Singhal, Sound Attenuation in Turbulent Pipe Flow , J. Acous. Soc. Am., Vol. 55, No. 3, March 1974. C.11 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Nomenclature for Hydraulics , 1962, or any fluid dynamics textbook. C.12 Haaland, SE (1983), "Simple and Explicit Formulas for the Friction Factor in Turbulent Flow," Transactions ASVIE, Journal of Fluids Engineering 103: p 89-90. C.13 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm ission, NUREG-0800, Revision 3, March 2007, Section 3.9.2, "Dynamic Testing and Analysis of Systems, Structures and Components." C.14 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm ission, NUREG-0800, Revision 3, March 2007, Section 3.9.5, "Reactor Pressure Vessel Internals." C.15 V. Petr, Wave propagation in Wet Steam , Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs Vol 218 Part C 2004, p 871-882.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-69 C.16 L.E. Kinsler, A.R. Frey, A.B. Coppens, J.V. Sanders, Fundamentals of Acoustics, Fourth Edition, John Wiley and Sons, 2000. C.17 W. Wagner et al., The IAPWS Industrial Fo rmulation 1997 for the Thermodynamic Properties of Water and Steam, ASME J. Eng. Gas Turbines and Power, 122, 150-182 (2000). C.18 H. B. Karplus, Propagation of Pressure Waves in a Mixture of Water and Steam , Armour Research Foundation of Illinois Institute of Technology, United States Atomic Energy Commission contract No. AT (11-1) 528, ARF No. D132A13, 1961. C.19 Wylie, Streeter, and Suo, Fluid Transients in Systems, Prentice Hall, 1993.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-70 Appendix C1:
[[
]] Sensor Location Figures
[[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-71 [[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-72 [[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-73
[[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-74
[[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-75
[[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-76
[[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-77 [[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-78 [[ ]] Figure C1 [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-79 Appendix C2:
[[
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-80 [[ ]] Figure C2-1-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-2-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-81 [[ ]] Figure C2-3-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-4-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-82 [[ ]] Figure C2-5-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-6-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-83 [[ ]] Figure C2-7-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-8-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-84 [[ ]] Figure C2-9-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-10-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-85 [[ ]] Figure C2-11-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-12-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-86 [[ ]] Figure C2-13-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-14-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-87 [[ ]] Figure C2-15-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-16-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-88 [[ ]] Figure C2-17-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-18-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-89 [[ ]] Figure C2-19-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-20-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-90 [[ ]] Figure C2-21-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-22-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-91 [[ ]] Figure C2-23-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-24-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-92 [[ ]] Figure C2-25-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-26-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-93 [[ ]] Figure C2-27-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-28-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-94 [[ ]] Figure C2-29-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C2-30-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-95 Appendix C3:
[[
]] Table C3 [[
]] [[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-96 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-97 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-98 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-99 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-100 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-101 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-102 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-103 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-104 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
`
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-105 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-106 [[ ]] Figure C3-1-[[ ]] [[ ]] Figure C3-2-[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-107 Appendix C4:
[[ ]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-108 [[ ]] Figure C4-1-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C4-2-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-109 [[ ]] Figure C4-3-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C4-4-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-110 [[ ]] Figure C4-5-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C4-6-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-111 [[ ]] Figure C4-7-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C4-7-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-112 [[ ]] Figure C4-9-[[
]] [[ ]] Figure C4-10-[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-113 Appendix C5 -
[[
]] Table C5 [[ ]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-114 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-115 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-116 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-117 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-118 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-119 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-120 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-121 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-122 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-123 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-124 [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-125 Appendix C6: Correlation of Strain Gauge Data to Acoustic Pressure Experimental Testing C6.1 Introduction This section summarizes the analysis of strain gauge and pressure transducer data from the GEH test performed in January 2008. The GEH test used high-pressure air to test the [[ ]] to measure the acoustic pressure inside the pipe. [[
]] C6.2 Experimental Setup
[[ ]] Figure C6-1: Photograph of Test Section
[[ ]] as seen in Figure C6-1 with the drawing dimensions presented in Figure C6-3. Each station consists of 8 strain gauges orientated in the hoop direction equally spaced circumferentially around the pipe as shown in Figure C6-5. There was a corresponding pressure transducer mounted [[
]]. A photograph of the test section and the downstream piping system, with associated schematic, is presented in Figure C6-5. [[
]]. [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-126 ]]. A more technical explanation is included below.
[[ ]] Figure C6-2: Schematic of Experimental Setup for Strain Gauge/Acoustic Pressure Test
[[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-127 [[ ]] Figure C6-3: Drawing Dimensions for Test Article.
[[ ]] Figure C6-4: Strain Gauge Orientation and Numbering
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-128 [[ ]] [[ ]] Figure C6-5: Piping Layout and Supports
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-129 C6.3 Conversion of Strain Ga uge data to Pressure Data
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-130
]] The modulus of elasticity for the pipe as a function of temperature is presented in Table C6-2. The strain to pressure conversions (Table C6-3) are performed with the [[ ]] from each location.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-131 Table C6-1: Pipe Thickness as a Function of Azimuth, for Both Strain Gauge Locations.
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] Table C6-2: Modulus of Elasticity of A106 GrB Pipe E: Modulus of Elasticity of A106 GrB Pipe Temp (Deg F) -100 70 200 300 Modulus (psi) 3.02E+07 2.95E+07 2.88E+07 2.83E+07 Table C6-3: Calculation of Pressure to Strain Ratio
[[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-132 C6.4 Description of Test Equipment and Data Sets The main focus of the testing was for evaluating [[
]] over the suite of test runs.
There were three data acquisition systems used,
[[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-133 C6.5 Description of Test Data Out of the [[ ]], there were three test cases (Table C6-4) that included temporal strain pressure and accelerometer data necessary for assessing strain gauge performance. The three test cases were: Table C6-4: Test Cases SG Test Name Test Name Case 1 t31nt2s1 Case 2 t31r2t2s3 Case 3 t8b180tr1 The following three figures depict the transient flow (Figure C1-6), pressure (Figure C1-7) and temperature (Figure C1-8) data during these tests. Each test included a slow up and down ramp in flow velocity. [[
]]. An accumulator was used as the air source for the test.
The air was passed through a heat exchanger to provide temperature mode ration. Due to the large volume air used during the test there was still a decrease in temper ature over the period of each test. Flow control valves upstream and downstream of the test assemblies were adjusted to maintain a system pressure of approximately 300 psia and to provide the desired flow ramps.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-134 [[ ]] Figure C6-6: Flow as a Function of Time for the Three Tests
[[ ]] Figure C6-7: Pressure as a Function of Time for the Three Tests
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-135 [[ ]] Figure C6-8: Temperature as a Function of Time for the Three Tests The air pressure and flow variations noted in Figure C1-6 and Figure C1-7 will have [[ ]]. The air temperature in the pipe dropped less than 40°F during the tests. The room temperature remained constant at approximately 70°F. [[
]]. C6.6 Analysis of Results Figure C6-9 and Figure C6-10 depi ct the individual stra in gauge signals and the averaged signals at each location. The strain has been converted to pressure using the conversion factors shown in Table C6-3. In these plots, strain gauges on opposite sides of the pipe are plotted in the same color in dashed and solid lines. [[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-136 [[ ]] Figure C6-9: SG1 Location, Individual Strain Gauge Signals Case 1
[[ ]] Figure C6-10: SG2 Location, Individual Strain Gauge Signals Case 1
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-137
]]. For Case 1, Figure C6-11 provides a power spectral density plot for PT1, PT2, and coherence between PT1 and PT2. Figure C6-11 also provides the PSDs for SG1, SG2, and coherence between SG1 and SG2 for the same time interval. [[ ]]. Figure C6-12 include PSD plots and coherence data for PT1, PT2, and PT3. This data indicates that two of the three transmitters have good coherence at acoustic peaks.
[[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-138 [[ ]] Figure C6-11: PT and SG ([[
]]) PSD and Coherence Data (Case 1)
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-139 [[ ]] Figure C6-12: PT1, PT2, PT3 PSDs and Coherence Data (Case 1)
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-140 Figure C6-13 provides a comparison of the PSD data for the strain gauge and adjacent pressure transmitter. [[
]]. Therefore the maximum normalized value is 1. The coherence shown is between the SG and adjacent PT. In general there is good coherence between the SG and adjacent PT at acoustic peaks. [[
]]. [[ ]] Figure C6-13: Comparison of PT and SG ([[
]]) PSD and Coherence Data NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-141 [[
]] Figure C6-14: [[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-142 ]] plot in Figure C6-15.
[[ ]] Figure C6-15: [[
]] Figure C6-16 represents a comparison of the [[ ]]. Figure C6-17 represents a comparison of the PT data compared with the [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-143
]] [[]] Figure C6-16: Pressure Based on [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-144 [[ ]] Figure C6-17: Pressure Based on PT Sensor [[
]] [[
]] are identified in Figure C6-18.
[[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-145 If all frequency bands are combined, the resulting errors for all frequency and time intervals are as shown in Table C6-5 below. Table C6-5: Summary of Error for all Frequency and Time Intervals Test Case No. Mean Error STD Error 1 5% 38% 2 15% 35% 3 0% 33% [[ ]] Figure C6-18: Test Case 1: Error in Peak Pressure Response from SG Versus PT Figure C6-19 provides a plot of the error associated with the PT data. In this figure, the RMS value for the PT1 and PT2 is compared with the RMS value based on the [[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-146 [[ ]] Figure C6-19: Test Case 1: Error in RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response [[
]] Figure C6-20 and Figure C6-21 compare the RMS response of pressure from the [[
]]. Figure C6-22 through Figure C6-25 provides these same plots for test Cases 2 and 3. For all frequenc y intervals of Cases 1, 2, and 3 (Figure C6-20, Figure C6-22, and Figure C6-24), the [[
]].
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-147 [[ ]] Figure C6-20: Case 1: Error in RMS as a F unction of Frequency Band Pressure Response from [[
]] [[ ]] Figure C6-21: Test Case 1: Average RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-148 [[]] Figure C6-22: Test Case 2: Error in RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response [[
]] [[ ]] Figure C6-23: Test Case 2: Average RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-149 [[ ]] Figure C6-24: Test Case 3: Error in RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response [[
]] [[ ]] Figure C6-25: Test Case 3: Average RMS as a Function of Frequency Band Pressure Response [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-150 C6.7 PBLE Dryer Loads Bias Using SG Signals for Unsteady MSL Pressure
[[ ]]. C6.8 Predicted Response as Function Circumferential SGs Used in Averaging The error assessments done to this point have been performed using the [[
]] from the 8 strain gauges at location SG1 and SG2. [[
]]. There were 19 combinations of [[ ]] used in this investigation. These are summarized in Table C6-6.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-151 Table C6-6: Strain Gauges Combinations Used in Strain Gauge Combination Study SG1comb1=[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8]; SG2comb1=[9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16]; SG1comb2=[1 3 5 6 7 8]; SG2comb2=[9 11 13 14 15 16]; SG1comb3=[1 3 5 7]; SG2comb3=[9 11 13 15]; SG1comb4=[2 4 6 8]; SG2comb4=[10 12 14 16]; SG1comb5=[1 3]; SG2comb5=[9 11]; SG1comb6=[1 2 3 4 5 6 7]; SG2comb6=[9 10 11 12 13 14 15]; SG1comb7=[1 2 3 4 5 6]; SG2comb7=[9 10 11 12 13 14]; SG1comb8=[1 2 3 4 5]; SG2comb8=[9 10 11 12 13]; SG1comb9=[1 2 3 4]; SG2comb9=[9 10 11 12]; SG1comb10=[1 2 3]; SG2comb10=[9 10 11]; SG1comb11=[1 2]; SG2comb11=[9 10]; SG1comb12=[1]; SG2comb12=[9]; SG1comb13=[2]; SG2comb13=[10]; SG1comb14=[3]; SG2comb14=[11]; SG1comb15=[4]; SG2comb15=[12]; SG1comb16=[5]; SG2comb16=[13]; SG1comb17=[6]; SG2comb17=[14]; SG1comb18=[7]; SG2comb18=[15]; SG1comb19=[8]; SG2comb19=[16];
Figure C6-26 summarize the error in peak response in [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-152
]] [[ ]] Figure C6-26: Error in Peak Response as a Function of SG [[
]] (All Frequency and Time Intervals)
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-153 Table C6-7:
[[ ]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
]] Note: [[ ]]. Figure C6-27 through Figure C6-29 provide PSD comparisons of pressure calculated using
[[ ]]. This is also reflected in Figure C6-30 through Figure C6-32 that provide the [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-154 [[ ]] Figure C6-27: 8 Strain Gauge [[
]] [[ ]] Figure C6-28: 4 Strain Gauge [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-155 [[ ]] Figure C6-29: 2 Strain Gauge [[
]] [[ ]] Figure C6-30: Frequency Band [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-156 [[ ]] Figure C6-31: Frequency Band [[ ]] [[ ]] Figure C6-32: Frequency Band [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-157 C6.9 Stain Gauge Arrangement and the Impact to PBLE Loads In calculating acoustic pressure [[
]] provides pressure predicti ons commensurate [[
]] There is a substantial increase in error [[
]] C6.10 References C6.1 Advanced Strength and Applied Elasticity, by Ugural and Fenster, Elsevier, 1975 C6.2 Theory and Design of Modern Pressure Vessels, Second Edition, by John F. Harvey, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1974 C6.3 A.D. Piece: Acoustics. An Introduction to Its Physical Principles and Applications Acoustic Society of America. 1994.
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-158 Appendix C7: Strain to Pressure Conversion The Browns Ferry strain gauge data was processed using the same process and routines that were utilized [[ ]] This process includes notch filtering of electrical noise ([[ ]]) and adjusting measured strain per Equation C7-1.
[[ ]] The strain gauges were tested with three different DAS packages and different bridges. [[
]] Strain gauges utilized to measure acoustic pressures in the [[ ]] The Browns Ferry strain gauges are of the same design as those previously utilized by [[
]] These strain gauges were previously tested and after review of [[
]] The final equation for convert ing strain gauge data to pipe pressure data is:
[[
]] The strain gauge data was filtered using a standard routine to notch filter targeted frequencies for
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-159
]] Table C7-1:
[[
]] Station Adjustment Factor Station Adjustment Factor Station Adjustment Factor [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-160 Appendix C8: Strain Gauge Accuracy Test It has been established through i ndustry experience and direct tes ting that strain gauges welded to main steam line piping result in measurement values that are a repeatable fraction of calculated values. This testing estabilished that welding of the strain gauges, and in particular
[[ ]] This testing included using both [[ ]] to correlate measurement bias to theoretically expected values. This report also compares noted bias va lues to those seen during in [[
]] Finally, these tests included comparing both [[
]] in order to determine any impact this variable may have on results and any bias between [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-161 [[ ]] Figure C8 Beam 2 Results for Different Gauge Types
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-162
]] A picure of strain gauges can be seen in Figure C8-2 Picture of Strain Gauges on Beam for Testing. This shows the general layout and a comparison of the basic strain gauge sizes.
Table C8-1: Table of Mean and Standard Deviation
[[ ]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix C, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
C-163 [[ ]] Figure C8 Picture of Strain Gauges on Beam for Testing As noted, work was done at the manufacturer site using their weld procedure to ensure that beam and pipe testing were done with th e appropriate weld procedure. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-1
Appendix D
Supplemental Information
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary .........................................................................................................
..... D-8 2.0 Browns Ferry Plant General Information ............................................................................. D-9 3.0 Browns Ferry Strain Gauge (SG) Installation Information ................................................. D-10 3.1 Browns Ferry Plant Data Set Tables ............................................................................. D-10 4.0 Browns Ferry MSL Data Plot Series .................................................................................. D-16 5.0 Supplementary Trending Plots ............................................................................................ D
-30 6.0 Browns Ferry Top Five High Stress Components from FIV analysis ................................ D-48 6.1 [[ ]] .............................................................. D-50 6.2 [[ ]] .......................................................................................... D-54 6.3 [[
]] ........................................................................ D-58 6.4 [[ ]] .................................................................................... D-62 6.5 [[ ]] ............................................................................. D-66
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-3 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: [[ ]] .................................................... D-9 Table 3-1: [[ ]] ............................................ D-10 Table 3-2: [[ ]] ............................................ D-12 Table 3-3: [[ ]] ............................................ D-14 Table 5-1: Test Condition [[ ]] ........................................ D-30 Table 6-1: [[ ]] ..................................................................................................................... D-48
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4-1: [[ ]] ................ D-17 Figure 4-2: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
......... D-18 Figure 4-3: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
......... D-19 Figure 4-4: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
....... D-20 Figure 4-5: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
....... D-21 Figure 4-6: [[
]] ....................................................................................................... D-22 Figure 4-7: [[
]] ....................................................................................................... D-23 Figure 4-8: [[
]] ......................................................................................................... D-24 Figure 4-9: [[
]] ....................................................................................................... D-25 Figure 4-10: [[ ]] .................. D-26 Figure 4-11: [[ ]] .............. D-27 Figure 4-12: [[ ]] ............................................................................................................................
..... D-28 Figure 4-13: [[ ]] ......... D-29 Figure 5-1: [[ ]] ...................................................... D-31 Figure 5-2: [[ ]] ...................................................... D-31 Figure 5-3: [[ ]] .................................................... D-32 Figure 5-4: [[ ]] ................................................... D-32 Figure 5-5: [[ ]] ................................................... D-33 Figure 5-6: [[ ]] ................................................... D-33 Figure 5-7: [[ ]] ........ D-34 Figure 5-8: [[ ]] ........ D-35 Figure 5-9: [[ ]] ........ D-36 Figure 5-10: [[ ]] ........................................................................................................................ D-3 7 Figure 5-11: [[
]] ........................................................................................................................ D-3 8 Figure 5-12: [[
]] ........................................................................................................................ D-3 9 Figure 5-13: [[
]] ........................................................................................................................ D-4 0 Figure 5-14: [[
]] ........................................................................................................................ D-4 1 Figure 5-15: [[ ]] ........................................................................................................................ D-4 2
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-5 Figure 5-16: [[ ]] ........................................................................................................................ D-4 3 Figure 5-17: [[ ]] ........................................................................................................................ D-4 4 Figure 5-18: [[ ]] ......................................................................................................................... D-45 Figure 5-19: [[ ]] ..................... D-46 Figure 5-20: [[ ]] ..................... D-47 Figure 6-1: [[ ]] ....................... D-50 Figure 6-2: [[
]] .......................................................................... D-51 Figure 6-3: [[
]] ..................................................................................... D-52 Figure 6-4: [[
]] ..................................................................................... D-53 Figure 6-5: [[ ]] ................................................................. D-54 Figure 6-6: [[
]] .................................................................................................................... D-55 Figure 6-7: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.... D-56 Figure 6-8: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.... D-57 Figure 6-9: [[ ]] ............................................ D-58 Figure 6-10: [[
]] ............................................................................................ D-59 Figure 6-11: [[
]] ....................................................................................................... D-60 Figure 6-12: [[
]] ....................................................................................................... D-61 Figure 6-13: [[ ]] .............................................................................................. D-62 Figure 6-14: [[
]] .................................................................................................. D-63 Figure 6-15: [[
]] ......................................................................................................................... D-64 Figure 6-16: [[
]] ......................................................................................................................... D-65 Figure 6-17: [[ ]] .................................................. D-66 Figure 6-18: [[
]] ...................................................................................................... D-67 Figure 6-19: [[
]] ................................................................................................................... D-68 Figure 6-20: [[
]] ................................................................................................................... D-69
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-6 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Description Micro Strain (10
-6 length/length) Browns Ferry Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BFN Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BWR Boiling Water Reactor CLTP Current Licensed Thermal Power DAS Data Acquisition System DIR Design Input Request EPU Extended Power Uprate FEM Finite Element Model FIV Flow Induced Vibration FRF Frequency Response Function FF Full Frequency Spectrum GEH GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy
[[
]] Hz Hertz [[
]] MASR Minimum alternating stress ratio Mlbs/hr Millions pounds per hour MSIV Main Steam Isolation Valve MSL Main Steam Line MW t Megawatt Thermal NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission OLTP Original Licensed Thermal Power OOS Out of Service Pa Pascal PATP Power Ascension Test Program PBLE Plant Based Load Evaluation PBLE01 PBLE Input [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-7 Term Description PBLE02 PBLE Input [[
]] PSD Power Spectral Density psi Pounds per square inch psia Pounds per square inch absolute psid Pounds per square inch differential RMS Root-Mean-Squared RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel RSD Replacement Steam Dryer SDAR Steam Dryer Analysis Report SF Singularity Factor SG Strain Gauge SRV Safety Relief Valve TC Test Condition VFD Variable Frequency Drive VPF Vane Passing Frequency
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-8 1.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The scope of this appendix is to document additional supplementary information. The supplementary information consists of analysis inputs and plot series that were output from the analysis calculations.
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-9 2.0 BROWNS FERRY PLANT GENERAL INFORMATION This section is intended to provide a quick reference of Browns Ferry information. Most of this section comes directly from Browns Ferry Design Input Requests (DIRs). Summary Table 2-1 provides [[
]] Table 2-1:
[[
]] Power, MWth
% CLTP [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-10 3.0 BROWNS FERRY STRAIN GAUGE (SG) INSTALLATION INFORMATION 3.1 Browns Ferry Plant Data Set Tables Table 3-1:
[[
]] Power (%) Dome Pressure (psig) FW Temp (F) Total Steam Flow (Mlb/hr) Core Flow (Mlb/hr)Recirc Loop Recirc Flow A/B (Mlb/hr) VFD Frequency A/B (Hz) Recirc Pump Speed A/B (rpm) VPF (Hz) [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-11 Power (%) Dome Pressure (psig) FW Temp (F) Total Steam Flow (Mlb/hr) Core Flow (Mlb/hr)Recirc Loop Recirc Flow A/B (Mlb/hr) VFD Frequency A/B (Hz) Recirc Pump Speed A/B (rpm) VPF (Hz) [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-12 Table 3-2:
[[
]] Power (%) Dome Pressure (psig) FW Temp (F) Total Steam Flow (Mlb/hr) Core Flow (Mlb/hr)Recirc Loop Recirc Flow A/B (Mlb/hr) VFD Frequency A/B (Hz) Recirc Pump Speed A/B (rpm) VPF (Hz) [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-13 Power (%) Dome Pressure (psig) FW Temp (F) Total Steam Flow (Mlb/hr) Core Flow (Mlb/hr)Recirc Loop Recirc Flow A/B (Mlb/hr) VFD Frequency A/B (Hz) Recirc Pump Speed A/B (rpm) VPF (Hz) [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-14 Table 3-3:
[[
]] Power (%) Dome Pressure (psig) FW Temp (F)Total Steam Flow (Mlb/hr) Core Flow (Mlb/hr)Recirc Loop Recirc Flow A/B (Mlb/hr) VFD Frequency A/B (Hz) Recirc Pump Speed A/B (rpm) VPF (Hz) [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-15 Power (%) Dome Pressure (psig) FW Temp (F)Total Steam Flow (Mlb/hr) Core Flow (Mlb/hr)Recirc Loop Recirc Flow A/B (Mlb/hr) VFD Frequency A/B (Hz) Recirc Pump Speed A/B (rpm) VPF (Hz) [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-16 4.0 BROWNS FERRY MSL DATA PLOT SERIES The following plot series (Figure 4-1 through Figure 4-13) is a complete presentation of the available plots generated to support the Steam Dryer Analysis Report (SDAR), Main Report Section 4.1.3. For all the plots in this section, [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-17
[[ ]] Figure 4-1:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-18
[[ ]] Figure 4-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-19
[[ ]] Figure 4-3:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-20
[[ ]] Figure 4-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-21
[[ ]] Figure 4-5:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-22
[[ ]] Figure 4-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-23
[[ ]] Figure 4-7:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-24
[[ ]] Figure 4-8:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-25
[[ ]] Figure 4-9:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-26
[[ ]] Figure 4-10:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-27
[[ ]] Figure 4-11:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-28
[[ ]] Figure 4-12:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-29
[[ ]] Figure 4-13:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-30 5.0 SUPPLEMENTARY TRENDING PLOTS The following section presents supplementary information supporting SDAR Main Report
[[
]] as well as Appendix A [[
]] Table 5-1 summarizes the Test Conditions (TCs) used in the trending calculation. It is then followed by a series of plots (F igure 5-1 through Figure 5-20) th at illustrates the trending [[ ]] Then lastly a plot series that presents [[
]] Table 5-1: Test Condition
[[
]] Test Condition Mass Flow (Mlbs/hr) MSL Velocity (ft/sec)
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-31 [[ ]] Figure 5-1:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 5-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-32 [[ ]] Figure 5-3:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 5-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-33 [[ ]] Figure 5-5:
[[
]] [[ ]] Figure 5-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-34
[[ ]] Figure 5-7:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-35
[[ ]] Figure 5-8:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-36
[[ ]] Figure 5-9:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-37
[[ ]] Figure 5-10:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-38
[[ ]] Figure 5-11:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-39
[[ ]] Figure 5-12:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-40
[[ ]] Figure 5-13:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-41
[[ ]] Figure 5-14:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-42
[[ ]] Figure 5-15:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-43
[[ ]] Figure 5-16:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-44
[[ ]] Figure 5-17:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-45
[[ ]] Figure 5-18:
[[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-46
[[ ]] Figure 5-19:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-47
[[ ]] Figure 5-20:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-48 6.0 BROWNS FERRY TOP FIVE HIGH STRESS COMPONENTS FROM FIV ANALYSIS The following section illustrates the [[ ]] high stress components from ANSYS FIV analysis, as summarized in Table 6-1. Additional plot information presented [[
]] Table 6-1:
[[ ]] FEM Group #
Component Combined LF & HF (psi) MASR [[
]] [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-49
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-50 6.1 [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 6-1:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-51 [[ ]] Figure 6-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-52 [[ ]] Figure 6-3:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-53 [[ ]] Figure 6-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-54 6.2 [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 6-5:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-55 [[ ]] Figure 6-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-56 [[ ]] Figure 6-7:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-57 [[ ]] Figure 6-8:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-58 6.3 [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 6-9:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-59 [[ ]] Figure 6-10:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-60 [[ ]] Figure 6-11:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-61 [[ ]] Figure 6-12:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-62 6.4 [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 6-13:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-63 [[ ]] Figure 6-14:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-64 [[ ]] Figure 6-15:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-65 [[ ]] Figure 6-16:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-66 6.5 [[
]] [[ ]] Figure 6-17:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-67 [[ ]] Figure 6-18:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-68 [[ ]] Figure 6-19:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix D, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
D-69 [[ ]] Figure 6-20:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-1 Appendix E Power Ascension Test Plan Limit Curves (On-Dryer & MSL Based)
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ..............................................................................................................
.............. E-8 2.0 Power Ascension Test Plan (PATP) Scope ........................................................................... E-9 3.0 Monitoring and Analysis....................................................................................................
.. E-10 3.1 Reactor Parameter Monitoring ....................................................................................... E-11 3.2 [[ ]] ...................................................... E-11 3.3 Regulatory Reporting ..................................................................................................... E-12 4.0 Replacement Steam Dryer Instrumentation ......................................................................... E-17 4.1 Instrument Description ................................................................................................... E-17 4.2 Location of [[ ]] ....................................... E-17 4.3 Location of [[ ]] ......................................................... E-19 4.4 Location of [[ ]] ............................................................................. E-20 5.0 Replacement Steamdryer [[ ]] Acceptance Limits ................................. E-23 5.1 Raw Unadjusted Predicted [[ ]] ......................................... E-23 5.2 Projected Strain Amplitude at [[ ]] .......................... E-26 5.3 [[ ]] Acceptance Limits ........................................................................... E-29 5.4 [[ ]] Acceptance Limit Curves ........................................................ E-31 5.5 Determination of [[
]] Bias and Uncertainty at CLTP .............................. E-35 5.6 Adjustment of the Acceptance Limits during Power Ascension to EPU ....................... E-35 6.0 Replacement Steamdryer [[ ]] Acceptance Limit Curves ................................ E-37 6.1 Background ....................................................................................................................
E-37 6.2 Methodology for Development of Acceptance Limits ................................................... E-38 6.3 Acceptance Limits for Operation above CLTP .............................................................. E-41 6.4 Requirements for Defining [[
]] .................................................................................................................. E-45 6.5 Determine Margin for Continued Power Ascension ...................................................... E-45 6.6 Update Acceptance Limits ............................................................................................. E-46 6.6.1 Prepare Steam Dryer [[ ]] ........................................................................ E-46 6.6.2 Determine Adjusted Stress with Bias and Uncertainty ............................................... E-46 6.6.3 Updated Acceptance Limits ........................................................................................ E-46 7.0 References ................................................................................................................
............ E-47 Appendix E1 Browns Ferry [[ ]] ........................... E-48 Appendix E2 Browns Ferry [[ ]] .................................... E-61
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-3 LIST OF TABLES Table 4.4-1: Browns Ferry Units [[ ]] ........................................ E-22 Table 5.1-1: [[ ]] ..................................... E-24 Table 5.1-2: [[ ]] ..................................... E-25 Table 5.2-1: Applicable Bias and Uncertainty [[ ]] ........... E-27 Table 5.2-2: Adjusted Predicted [[
]] ................. E-28 Table 5.3-1: RSD [[ ]] ................. E-30 Table 6.3-1: [[
]] ......................................................................................................... E-44
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.2-1: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ..................................... E-13 Figure 3.2-2: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ........................... E-15 Figure 4.2-1: Browns Ferry [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........... E-19 Figure 4.3-1: Browns Ferry [[ ]] .... E-20 Figure 4.4-1: [[ ]] .................................................. E-21 Figure 5.4-1: Browns Ferry [[
]] .......................................... E-32 Figure 5.4-2: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........... E-33 Figure 5.4-3: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ............................................................................................................................
........ E-34 Figure 6.2-1: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ............................................................ E-38 Figure 6.2-2: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ............................................................................................................................
........... E-39 Figure 6.3-1: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ............................. E-43 Figure E.1-1: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-49 Figure E.1-2: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-50 Figure E.1-3: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-51 Figure E.1-4: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-52 Figure E.1-5: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-53 Figure E.1-6: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-54 Figure E.1-7: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-55 Figure E.1-8: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-56 Figure E.1-9: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.......... E-57 Figure E.1-10: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........ E-58
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-5 Figure E.1-11: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........ E-59 Figure E.1-12: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........ E-60 Figure E.2-1: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........ E-62 Figure E.2-2: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........ E-63 Figure E.2-3: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........ E-64 Figure E.2-4: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
........ E-65 Figure E.2-5: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... E-66 Figure E.2-6: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... E-67 Figure E.2-7: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... E-68 Figure E.2-8: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... E-69 Figure E.2-9: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... E-70 Figure E.2-10: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... E-71 Figure E.2-11: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... E-72 Figure E.2-12: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... E-73 NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-6 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Description Micro Strain (10
-6 length/length) ASR Alternating Stress Ratio Browns Ferry Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BFN Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant B&U Bias and Uncertainty BWR Boiling Water Reactor CLTP Current Licensed Thermal Power DAS Data Acquisition System EPU Extended Power Uprate FEA Finite Element Analysis FIV Flow Induced Vibration FRF Frequency Response Function GEH GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy
[[
]] Hz Hertz LCF Limit Curve Factor
[[
]] MASR Minimum alternating stress ratio MSL Main Steam Line MW t Megawatt Thermal NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission OLTP Original Licensed Thermal Power Pa Pascal PATP Power Ascension Test Program PBLE Plant Based Load Evaluation PBLE01 PBLE Input [[
]] PBLE02 PBLE Input [[
]] PSD Power Spectral Density NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-7 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Description psi Pounds per square inch RFO Refueling Outage RMS Root-Mean-Squared RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel RSD Replacement Steam Dryer SDAR Steam Dryer Analysis Report SRV Safety Relief Valve VPF Vane Passing Frequency
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-8
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Power Ascension Test Plan (PATP) assesses the replacement steam dryer (RSD) structural performance for the Browns Ferry Extended Power Uprate (EPU) power ascension process. The power ascension will occur in two phases. [[
]] The Browns Ferry EPU Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) PATP describes the planned course of action for monitoring, evaluating, and taking prompt action in response to potential adverse flow effects as a result of power uprate operation on plant structures, systems, and components such as the RSD during power ascension testing and op eration from CLTP to the EPU plant condition power level. The PATP covers power ascension up to the full EPU condition to verify acceptable structural performance and RSD integrity. Through the establishment of acceptance limits, data collection and analysis, and any subsequent actions, the PATP will ensure that the integrity of the RSD will be maintained. An important element of the PATP during the power ascension to the CLTP plant condition [[ ]]. During the Refueling Outage (RFO), to prepare for EPU power ascension monitoring and data collection, [[
]]. [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
]] The PATP in this appendix includes general ho ld points (plateaus) an d durations during power ascension above CLTP, activities to be accomplished during hold points, data to be collected, data evaluation methods, and acceptance limits criteria for monitoring and trending plant parameters. Detailed procedures are developed for implementation during power ascension.
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-9 2.0 POWER ASCENSION TEST PLAN (PATP) SCOPE This PATP assesses the steam dryer structural performance for the Browns Ferry EPU start-up power ascension process. The main steps for the power ascension testing include:
[[
]]. The power ascension will occur in two phases. [[
]] There are three main elements of the first phase PATP, up to and includ ing CLTP test points:
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-10
]] There are four main elements of the second phase PATP, EPU test points:
[[
]] 3.0 MONITORING AND ANALYSIS The assessment of the RSD structural integrity for [[ ]] will be completed through the analysis of the measured [[ ]]. The assessment of the RSD structural integrity for [[ ]] will be completed through the analysis of the
[[ ]]. Reactor parameters that have been indicative of past dryer structural failures will also be monito red during power ascension.
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-11 The detailed power ascension process for the [[
]]. The power ascension process [[ ]]. During power ascension above CLTP, Browns Ferry will limit the EPU power ascension to test increments that do not exceed [[
]]. [[
]] The time duration for holding at a power ascension test plateau will be determined by the time required to obtain the specified data, completion of data evaluation, and determination of the acceptability to continue with the power ascension.
3.1 Reactor Parameter Monitoring The reactor parameters identified in GEH SI L 644 Rev. 2 (Reference E
.1) that have been indicative of past dryer structural failures will be monitored and trended during power ascension. These reactor parameters are [[ ]]. These parameters will be trended and the trends reviewed to ensure that the individual values maintain [[ ]] relative to each other. Deviations from [[ ]] will be evaluated. The enhanced monitoring of selected plant paramete rs will be controlled by test procedure.
[[ ]] data will be obtained at the NRC review hold points 1 over [[ ]] and compared against the predetermined acceptance criteria. [[
]] data collection will be performed via the implementation of existing station operating procedures. The subject acceptance criterion and the required action is:
[[
]] 3.2 [[
]] During power ascension to EPU for [[
]].
1 [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-12 At full EPU power, the core flow will be varied over the licensed core flow operating flow range
[[ ]]. Data will be taken at several core flows [[ ]]. The data collected in these measurements will be evaluated as part of the confirmatory stress analyses performed after the EPU power ascension is complete.
3.3 Regulatory Reporting Browns Ferry will establish hold points for Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) review of power ascension data, in increments [[
]]. Browns Ferry will not increase power above each hold point until [[ ]] after the NRC confirms receipt of the evaluations, unless notified by the NRC that the NRC staff has no objections to the
continuation of power ascension. Once full EPU power is reached for [[ ]] stress analysis of the replacement dryer will be performed using [[ ]]. The results of this evaluation, including a recommended resolution of any identified issues and a demonstration of dryer integrity at EPU conditions, shall be provided to the NRC prior to return to EPU conditions.
Once full EPU power is reached [[
]]. Should the results of this stress evaluation indicate the allowable stress in any part of the dryer is exceeded, TVA shall reduce power to a level at which the allowable stress is met, evaluate the dryer in tegrity, and resolve the discrepancy. The results of this evaluation, including a recommended re solution of any identified issues and a demonstration of dryer integrity at EPU conditions, shall be provided to the NRC prior to return to EPU conditions.
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-13 (continued on next page)
Figure 3.2-1: Browns Ferry
[[
]] [[ ]] [[ ]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-14 Figure 3.2-1: Browns Ferry
[[
]] (continued)
[[
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-15 (continued on next page)
Figure 3.2-2: Browns Ferry
[[
]] [[
]] [[ ]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-16 Figure 3.2-2: Browns Ferry
[[
]] (continued)
[[
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-17 4.0 REPLACEMENT STEAM DRYER INSTRUMENTATION 4.1 Instrument Description The RSD instruments [[
]] 4.2 Location of
[[
]] To monitor the RSD dynamic response [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-18
]] These evaluations will be performed as part of the confirmatory stress analyses that will be performed after reaching full EPU power level.
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-19
[[ ]] Figure 4.2-1: Browns Ferry
[[ ]] 4.3 Location of
[[
]] To monitor [[
]] This layout was selected to be [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-20
[[ ]] Figure 4.3-1: Browns Ferry
[[
]] 4.4 Location of
[[
]] In the three Browns Ferry units, [[
]] The location of [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-21 [[ ]] Figure 4.4-1:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-22 Table 4.4-1: Browns Ferry Units
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-23 5.0 REPLACEMENT STEAM DRYER
[[
]] ACCEPTANCE LIMITS Applicability of [[
]] 5.1 Raw Unadjusted Predicted
[[
]] [[ ]] from the ANSYS structural model. [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-24 Table 5.1-1:
[[
]] ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` [[` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-25 Table 5.1-2:
[[
]] ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` [[` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-26 5.2 Projected Strain Amplitude at
[[
]] The finite element analysis (FEA) predicted [[ ]]. The B&U is applied to the FEA predicted [[
]] The B&U factors used to adjust the predicted [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-27 Table 5.2-1: Applicable Bias and Uncertainty
[[
]] Term Name How it is applied to the projected sensor response
[[
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-28 Term Name How it is applied to the projected sensor response
]] Table 5.2-2: Adjusted Predicted
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]][[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-29 5.3 [[
]] Acceptance Limits The acceptance limits are calcu lated separately for [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-30 Table 5.3-1: RSD
[[
]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-31 5.4 [[
]] Acceptance Limit Curves
[[ ]] from the ANSYS structural m odel was used to develop power spectral density (PSD) plots [[
]] To define the projected PSD curve for each plant condition, [[
]] To define the acceptance limit curves, each of the projected PSD curves [[
]] To determine the L1 acceptance limit curve, [[
]] The FEA projections at [[
]] The PSD of the measured [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-32 ]] With the acceptance limits on [[
]] will demonstrate that the analysis is providing a sound basis for [[ ]] acceptance limits further assuring that the dryer stresses resulting from FIV loading remain below the 13,600 psi threshold.
[[ ]] Figure 5.4-1: Browns Ferry
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-33 [[ ]] Figure 5.4-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-34 [[ ]] Figure 5.4-3: Browns Ferry [[
]] [[ ]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-35 5.5 Determination of
[[
]] Bias and Uncertainty at CLTP
[[ ]] will be compared against the measured data for the respective [[
]] Using the entire time record, [[
]]The B&U for calculated [[ ]] The B&U for calculated stresses [[
]] The trending assessment will be updated with the [[
]] 5.6 Adjustment of the Acceptance Limits during Power Ascension to EPU Based on trending [[ ]], revised projections will be made to [[ ]]. This will be done in the same manner as described in the SDAR Appendix A for trending and projecting resonance and turbulence driven FIV loads. Based on the current measured data, the adjusted stresses at the current power level will be recalculated. With revised projections for the adjusted stress for current power level, the NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-36 expected stress [[ ]] will be recalculated as described in SDAR Appendix A.
The [[ ]] B&U will be revaluated at each test plateau and updated as required.
Using revised adjusted stress projections [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-37 6.0 REPLACEMENT STEAM DRYER
[[
]] ACCEPTANCE LIMIT CURVES The monitoring of projected FIV lo ads experienced by the RSD based [[
]] is described in the present section.
[[
]] 6.1 Background The Browns Ferry RSD was analyzed for PBLE loads at approximate CLTP power conditions projected to EPU condition based on [[
]] As discussed [[
]] Following the methodology outlined in Browns Ferry Appendix A, design basis stress analyses were performed using the Browns Ferry plant specific [[ ]] The acceptance limit curves developed in the present section are applicable [[
]] The [[ ]] limit curve limit curve methodology presented in this Section is the same as the methodology described in the [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-38
]] from Section 4.1.3 of the main SDAR report.
6.2 Methodology for Development of Acceptance Limits During power ascension above CLTP, [[
]]
[[ ]] Figure 6.2-1: Browns Ferry
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-39
[[ ]] Figure 6.2-2: Browns Ferry
[[ ]] [[
]] [[ ]] Maintaining these [[ ]] acceptance limits will assure the RSD peak stress amplitude remains below 13,600 psi, the ASME Curve C endurance limit for the RSD material.
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-40 The projected stresses at EPU plant condition are summarized in [[ ]]. The projected stress includes [[
]] as described [[
]] The Level 1 acceptance limit curve is established by factoring the projected EPU plant condition design load spectra by a Limit Curve Factor (LCF). [[
]] The Level 1 acceptance limit is depicted as the upper red curve[[ ]]. If a Level 1 limit is exceeded, power will be reduced to a level where the acceptance limits are satisfied. The goal during power accession is to maintain the RSD FIV [[ ]] acceptance limits. During power ascension to EPU plant condition, [[
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-41
]] Maintaining the [[ ]] below the acceptance limits will assure that the FIV peak stress amplitude on the Browns Ferry replacement RSD will remain below the ASME Code endurance limit. 6.3 Acceptance Limits for Operation above CLTP The limits provided in this section shall be evaluated at all defined power ascension plateaus or hold points while the reactor steam flow and core thermal power ar e essentially constant. If a Level 1 limit is exceeded, power will be reduced to a level where the limit criteria are satisfied.
The goal during the PAT is to not exceed the Level 1 limit.
[[
]] monitored and trended. The trends s hould be used to extrapolate the [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-42 At CLTP and during the EPU power ascension above CLTP the following acceptance limits shall be maintained:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-43 [[ ]] Figure 6.3-1: Browns Ferry [[
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-44 Table 6.3-1:
[[ ]] [[ ]] [[` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` `
` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` `
]] [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-45 6.4 Requirements for Defining
[[ ]] [[
]] 6.5 Determine Margin for Continued Power Ascension At each power ascension plateau, the data trending [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-46 6.6 Update Acceptance Limits Prepare Steam Dryer
[[
]] 6.6.1 Based on trending data and [[
]] Determine Adjusted Stress with Bias and Uncertainty 6.6.2With the revised current power and EPU load projections, [[ ]] Updated Acceptance Limits 6.6.3 Using the updated [[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-47
7.0 REFERENCES
E.1 GEH Service Information Letter (SIL), BWR Steam Dryer Integrity, No. 644, Rev. 2, 2006.
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-48 APPENDIX E.1 BROWNS FERRY RSD
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-49 [[ ]] Figure E.1-1:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-50 [[ ]] Figure E.1-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-51 [[ ]] Figure E.1-3:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-52 [[ ]] Figure E.1-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-53 [[ ]] Figure E.1-5:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-54 [[ ]] Figure E.1-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-55 [[ ]] Figure E.1-7:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-56 [[ ]] Figure E.1-8:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-57 [[ ]] Figure E.1-9:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-58 [[ ]] Figure E.1-10:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-59 [[ ]] Figure E.1-11:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-60 [[ ]] Figure E.1-12:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-61 APPENDIX E.2 BROWNS FERRY RSD
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-62 [[ ]] Figure E.2-1:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-63 [[ ]] Figure E.2-2:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-64 [[ ]] Figure E.2-3:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-65 [[ ]] Figure E.2-4:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-66 [[ ]] Figure E.2-5:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-67 [[ ]] Figure E.2-6:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-68 [[ ]] Figure E.2-7:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-69 [[ ]] Figure E.2-8:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-70 [[ ]] Figure E.2-9:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-71 [[ ]] Figure E.2-10:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-72 [[ ]] Figure E.2-11:
[[
]]
NEDO-33824, Appendix E, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)
E-73 [[ ]] Figure E.2-12:
[[
]]
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy NEDO-33824 Revision 0 August 2015 Non-Proprietary Informa tion - Class I (Public)
Engineering Report Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Stress AnalysisCopyright 2015 GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas LLC All Rights Reserved NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) ii INFORMATION NOTICE This is a non-proprietary version of the document NEDC-33824P, Revision 0, which has the proprietary information removed. Portions of the document that have been removed are indicated by an open and closed bracket as shown here [[ ]].
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT Please Read Carefully The design, engineering, and other, information contained in this document is furnished for the purpose of supporting the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) license amendment request for an extended power uprate in proceedings before the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The only undertakings of with respect to information in this document are contained in contracts between GEH and Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), and nothing contained in this document shall be construed as changing those contracts. The use of this information by anyone for any purpose other than that for which it is intended is not authorized; and with respect to any unauthorized use, GEH makes no representation or warranty, and assumes no liability as to the completeness, accuracy, or usefulness of the information contained in this document.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) iii REVISION HISTORY Revision Date Changes 0 August 2015 Initial issue.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary .........................................................................................................
.................... 1-1 2.0 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Analysis Overview ............................................................ 2-1 2.1 Analysis Process Overview ................................................................................................. 2-1 3.0 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Design ................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 BWR/4 Replacement Steam Dryer Design ......................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Modifications Made for Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant ......................................................... 3-4 3.2.1 Functional Modifications Facilitating RPV Interface ....................................................... 3-4 3.2.2 Design Improvements to the BWR/4 Prototype Design ................................................... 3-5 4.0 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Fatigue Evaluation ............................................................. 4-1 4.1 Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) Design Load Definition ..................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 [[ ]] Acoustic Loads Measurements .................................................... 4-1 4.1.2 PBLE02 Acoustic Load Definition ................................................................................... 4-8 4.1.3 [[ ]] ........................................... 4-23 4.1.4 SRV Acoustic Load Definition ...................................................................................... 4-36 4.1.5 Reactor Operating Condition Effects .............................................................................. 4-73 4.1.6 Scaling Factors for EPU Conditions ([[
]]) ............................... 4-79 4.1.7 Browns Ferry Comparison to BWR/4 Prototype (Geometric, Acoustic Properties, and Load) ...................................................................................................... 4-81 4.1.8 Comparison of Browns Ferry Projected Loads with Industry Data ............................. 4-101 4.2 Steam Dryer High Cycle Fatigue Stress Analysis........................................................... 4-105 4.2.1 Steam Dryer Finite Element Model ............................................................................. 4-106 4.2.2 Mesh Convergence Studies ........................................................................................... 4-120 4.2.3 Vibration Analysis Approach ....................................................................................... 4-124 4.2.4 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Functional RPV Interface Attachments ..................................................................................................................
4-134 4.2.5 Bias and Uncertainty Adjustment to Stresses ............................................................... 4-140 4.3 Acceptance Criteria ......................................................................................................... 4
-149 4.4 Flow Induced Vibration (FIV) St ress Intensity Results .................................................. 4-150
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) v 5.0 Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant RSD Primary Stress Evaluation ............................................................. 5-1 5.1 Design Criteria ...............................................................................................................
..... 5-1 5.1.1 Material Properties ............................................................................................................ 5-1 5.1.2 ASME Code Stress Limits for Load Combinations ......................................................... 5-2 5.1.3 Design Load Combinations .............................................................................................. 5-4 5.2 Analysis Approach .............................................................................................................. 5-6 5.2.1 Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer FEM ................................................................ 5-6 5.2.2 Loads for Design Primary Stress Evaluation .................................................................... 5-7 5.2.3 Design Load Combination Analysis ............................................................................... 5-15 5.3 Design Load Combination Primary Stress Evaluation Results ......................................... 5-15 6.0 Monitoring During Power Ascension and Final Assessment at EPU .................................................. 6-1 6.1 Regulatory Guide 1.20 Comprehensive Vibration Assessment Program ........................... 6-1 6.1.1 Classification ................................................................................................................
.... 6-1 6.1.2 Vibration and Stress Analysis Program ............................................................................ 6-2 6.1.3 Vibration and Stress Measurement Program .................................................................... 6-2 6.1.4 Inspection Program ...........................................................................................................
6-3 6.2 Power Ascension Test Plan (PATP) ................................................................................... 6-3 6.3 Limit Curve Adjustment ..................................................................................................... 6-4 7.0 References ................................................................................................................
............................ 7-1 Appendix A BWR Replacement Steam Dryer Structural Evaluation General Methodology... ....... A-1 Appendix B Steam Dryer Plant Based Load Evaluation Methodology PBLE01 Model.
Description ................................................................................................................... B-1 Appendix C Steam Dryer Plant Based Lo ad Evaluation Methodology PBLE02 Model Description ................................................................................................................... C-1 Appendix D Supplemental Information---------------------. ....... D-1 Appendix E Power Ascension Test Plan Limit Curves (On-Dryer & MSL Based)----.. ....... E-1
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) vi LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1-1: Replacement Steam Dryer Component Nomenclature ........................................................ 3-2 Table 4.1-1: [[
]] ........................................................................... 4-5 Table 4.1-2: Browns Ferry Inputs .............................................................................................
.............. 4-24 Table 4.1-3: Browns Ferry [[ ]] .......................................................................... 4-24 Table 4.1-4: Browns Ferry [[ ]] .................................................................. 4-25 Table 4.1-5: Predicted and Measured Resonant Frequencies ................................................................. 4-5 1 Table 4.1-6: Strouhal Numbers for Potential SRV Acoustic Resonances from BFN [[ ]] ....................................................................................................................... 4-52 Table 4.1-7: SRV [[ ]] .................................................................................................. 4-54 Table 4.1-8: Comparison with Available SRV Resonance Measurements ............................................ 4-57 Table 4.1-9: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Region Definitions ........................................... 4-58 Table 4.1-10: [[ ]] Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
......... 4-61 Table 4.1-11: [[ ]] ............................................................................................ 4-66 Table 4.1-12: [[ ]] .......................................................................................... 4-66 Table 4.1-13: [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
..... 4-66 Table 4.1-14: Browns Ferry and [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
.................. 4-68 Table 4.1-15: Extracted and Corrected Browns Ferry Region RMS Pressures ...................................... 4-69 Table 4.1-16: Extracted Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads from [[
]] ............................................................................................................................
... 4-70 Table 4.1-17: Browns Ferry [[ ]]SRV EPU Scaling Factors ................................................. 4-70 Table 4.1-18: [[ ]] SRV Resonance Load Adder Bias and Uncertainties ................................... 4-73 Table 4.1-19: Core Flow Adjustment Factors....................................................................................
..... 4-76 Table 4.1-20: Statistics of VPF Contribution to Strain Gauge Measurements in BWR/4 Benchmark Steam Dryer .........................................................................................................
..... 4-78 Table 4.1-21: [[ ]] .................................................................................. 4-83 Table 4.1-22: [[ ]] .......................................................................... 4-86 Table 4.1-23: [[ ]] ................................................................ 4-88
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) vii Table 4.1-24: [[ ]] .......................................................................... 4-89 Table 4.1-25: Browns Ferry [[ ]] vs. BWR/4 Prototype Inputs ..................................................... 4-94 Table 4.1-26: Browns Ferry [[
]] ........................................... 4-95 Table 4.2-1: Steam Dryer Stress Scoping Groups ................................................................................ 4-108 Table 4.2-2: Calculated Mesh Convergence Factor by Component ..................................................... 4-123 Table 4.2-3: Raw Stress Table [[ ]] .................................................................. 4-130 Table 4.2-4: Raw Stress Table [[ ]] .................................................................. 4-132 Table 4.2-5: Attachment Point Component Stress Summary ............................................................... 4-138 Table 4.2-6: Attachment Point Component Fatigue Summary ............................................................. 4-140 Table 4.2-7: Final Stress Adjustment Terms ...................................................................................
..... 4-141 Table 4.4-1: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Final FIV Peak Stress Table for the Projected EPU Condition .......................................................................................................
.... 4-152 Table 5.1-1: Material Properties .............................................................................................
.................. 5-2 Table 5.1-2: ASME Code Stress Limits .........................................................................................
.......... 5-3 Table 5.1-3: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Design Load Combinations ................................ 5-5 Table 5.1-4: [[ ]] ....................................................................... 5-6 Table 5.2-1: Faulted Condition DPs ...........................................................................................
.............. 5-9 Table 5.2-2: MSLB A1 & MSLB A2 and MSLB A hot standby Peak Normalized Acoustic Loads for MSLB ..........................................................................................................................
................. 5-10 Table 5.2-3: Peak Normalized Acoustic Loads for TSV A ...................................................................... 5-11 Table 5.2-4: Zero Period Acceleration ........................................................................................
............ 5-15 Table 5.3-1: BFN Replacement Steam Dryer EPU Design Load Combination Results for Normal, Upset, Emergency and Faulted Conditions ................................................................... 5-17
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1-1: Steam Dryer Analysis Methodology Overview .................................................................. 2-3 Figure 3.1-1: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Replacement Steam Dryer Design ........................................ 3-3 Figure 3.2-1: [[
]]................................................... 3-7 Figure 3.2-2: [[ ]] .............................................................. 3-7 Figure 3.2-3: [[ ]] .................................................... 3-8 Figure 3.2-4: [[ ]] .......................... 3-8 Figure 3.2-5: [[ ]] ....................................................... 3-9 Figure 3.2-6: [[ ]] ............................................... 3-9 Figure 3.2-7: [[ ]] ................................ 3-10 Figure 4.1-1: [[ ]] .......................... 4-3 Figure 4.1-2: [[ ]] ................................................................ 4-4 Figure 4.1-3: [[ ]] ....................................................... 4-7 Figure 4.1-4: [[ ]] ....................................................... 4-7 Figure 4.1-5: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic Model (3D Mesh Cross Section)........................................ 4-9 Figure 4.1-6: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic Model ...............................................................................
4-10 Figure 4.1-7: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic Model ...............................................................................
4-11 Figure 4.1-8: Browns Ferry Acoustic Steam Dryer [[ ]] Locations .................................. 4-12 Figure 4.1-9: Browns Ferry Acoustic Differential FRFs ........................................................................
4-12 Figure 4.1-10: Browns Ferry PBLE Acoustic FRFs Pressure Distribution ............................................ 4-13 Figure 4.1-11: Browns Ferry [ ]] ......................................... 4-14 Figure 4.1-12: [[ ]] ........................ 4-15 Figure 4.1-13: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ......................... 4-16 Figure 4.1-14: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ......................... 4-19 Figure 4.1-15: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ....................... 4-20 Figure 4.1-16: Browns Ferry [[
]] ........................... 4-22 Figure 4.1-17: Browns Ferry [[
]] ........................... 4-23 Figure 4.1-18: [[ ]] ............................................................................. 4-25 Figure 4.1-19: Browns Ferry CLTP All Units - [[ ]] ................. 4-27 Figure 4.1-20: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ............................ 4-29
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) ix Figure 4.1-21: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................. 4-30 Figure 4.1-22: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................. 4-31 Figure 4.1-23: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................. 4-32 Figure 4.1-24: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................. 4-33 Figure 4.1-25: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................................................ 4-36 Figure 4.1-26: Browns Ferry SRV and Branch Line Layout .................................................................. 4-44 Figure 4.1-27: Single SRV [[ ]] .................................................................................................... 4-45 Figure 4.1-28: Browns Ferry MSL [[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL A at [[ ]] .......... 4-46 Figure 4.1-29: Browns Ferry MSL [[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL A at [[ ]] .......... 4-47 Figure 4.1-30: Browns Ferry MSL [[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL B at [[ ]] .......... 4-47 Figure 4.1-31: Browns Ferry MSL [[ ]] and SRV Resonance of MSL B at [[ ]]. ......... 4-48 Figure 4.1-32: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ........................................... 4-49 Figure 4.1-33: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ................................ 4-50 Figure 4.1-34: Sensitivity Study for SRV Acoustic Loads [[ ]] Hz .......................... 4-54 Figure 4.1-35: Browns Ferry [[ ]] ......................................... 4-55 Figure 4.1-36: Definition of Browns Ferry [[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset .........................................................................................................................
................... 4-59 Figure 4.1-37: [[
]] Browns Ferry [[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset Curve ....... 4-60 Figure 4.1-38: Browns Ferry SRV EPU Loads Trending Range............................................................ 4-60 Figure 4.1-39: [[ ]] Projected [[ ]] SRV Resonance Loads ................. 4-62 Figure 4.1-40: [[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset ............................................. 4-62 Figure 4.1-41: Comparison of Browns Ferry and [[ ]] SRV Resonance Onset ........................ 4-63 Figure 4.1-42: [[ ]] SRV EPU Loads Trending Range and Test Condition .............................. 4-63 Figure 4.1-43: Projected Browns Ferry SRV Loads at EPU .................................................................. 4-64 Figure 4.1-44: Comparison of Browns Ferry [[ ]] SRV EPU loads ........................................ 4-72 Figure 4.1-45: CLTP Loads a nd EPU SRV Design Loads, [[ ]] ................. 4-81 Figure 4.1-46: Browns Ferry U123 MSL Piping Outline ....................................................................... 4-84 Figure 4.1-47: [[ ]] ..................................................................... 4-85 Figure 4.1-48: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic [[ ]] ......................... 4-91 Figure 4.1-49: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic [[ ]] ................................ 4-92
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) x Figure 4.1-50: Browns Ferry vs. BWR/4 Prototype Acoustic [[ ]] ................................ 4-93 Figure 4.1-51: [[ ]] ..................................................... 4-97 Figure 4.1-52: [[ ]] ..................................................... 4-98 Figure 4.1-53: [[ ]] ..................................................... 4-99 Figure 4.1-54: [[ ]] ................................................... 4-100 Figure 4.1-55: [[ ]] ................................................. 4-101 Figure 4.1-56: Browns Ferry [[ ]] PSD Loads to Industry Data ........................... 4-104 Figure 4.1-57: Browns Ferry [[ ]] PSD Loads to Industry Data ........................... 4-105 Figure 4.2-1: FIV Fatigue Analysis Process ...................................................................................
...... 4-106 Figure 4.2-2: Browns Ferry Replacement Steam Dryer Finite Element Model ................................... 4-107 Figure 4.2-3: Typical Perforated Plate Design for Center Bank Inlet .................................................. 4-110 Figure 4.2-4: Typical Perforated Plate Design for Center Bank Inlet .................................................. 4-111 Figure 4.2-5: Top View of Steam Dryer FEM showing the Vane Bundle Designations ..................... 4-112 Figure 4.2-6: Typical Vane Bundle FEM and Master DOF Setup ....................................................... 4-113 Figure 4.2-7: Views of the Splices for the Lower Support Ring Superelement FEMs ........................ 4-114 Figure 4.2-8: Lower Skirt Ring Splice Superelement Master Nodes ................................................... 4-115 Figure 4.2-9: An Illustration of the Water Modeling Due to Lateral Translation of the FEM ............. 4-116 Figure 4.2-10: [[ ]] ....................... 4-117 Figure 4.2-11: [[ ]] ................................................. 4-118 Figure 4.2-12: [[ ]] ....................................................................................... 4-119 Figure 4.2-13: Support Ring Boundary Constraints .............................................................................
4-120 Figure 4.2-14: Example sub model; ([[ ]]) ............................. 4-121 Figure 4.2-15: Stress Contour Comparison of [[ ]] ............................................... 4-121 Figure 4.2-16: Convergence Stress Trending ...................................................................................
.... 4-122 Figure 4.2-17: [[ ]] .................................... 4-125 Figure 4.2-18: Pressure Load Mapping for [[ ]] Load Step ......................................................... 4-126 Figure 4.2-19: Seismic Block Design ..........................................................................................
......... 4-135 Figure 4.2-20: Jack Bolt and Latch Mechanism Design ....................................................................... 4-136 Figure 4.2-21: Overview of Final Stress Adjustment Process .............................................................. 4-14 2 Figure 4.2-22: Basic Outline for Benchmark [[ ]] Bias and Uncertainty Process .......... 4-146
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) xi Figure 4.2-23: BWR/4 Prototype [[
]] Bias and Uncertainty ...................................................................................................................
.............. 4-148 Figure 4.2-24: BWR/4 Prototype [[ ]] ................................................. 4-149 Figure 5.2-1: Components and Pr essure Loads Applied for DP N ............................................................. 5-8 Figure 5.2-2: Components for MSLB Acoustic Pressure Loads ............................................................ 5-10 Figure 5.2-3: Components in Steam Dryer FEM for TSV A Pressure Load ............................................ 5-12 Figure 5.2-4: Components in Steam Dryer FEM for TSV F Pressure Load ............................................ 5-12 Figure 5.2-5: Horizontal Seismic Model .......................................................................................
......... 5-13 Figure 5.2-6: SSE Seismic Acceleration Response Spectra ................................................................... 5-14 Figure 5.2-7: OBE Seismic Acceleration Response Spectra .................................................................. 5-1 4 Figure 6.3-1: Generic Process for Updating Limit Curves ....................................................................... 6-7 NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) xii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Description 1D One-dimensional 2D Two-dimensional 3D Three-dimensional Micro Strain (10
-6 length/length) ASR Alternating Stress Ratio APDL ANSYS Parametric Design Language ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers AVS Acoustic Vibration Suppressor B&U Bias and Uncertainty Browns Ferry Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BFN Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant BWR Boiling Water Reactor CLTP Current Licensed Thermal Power CP Current Power DAS Data Acquisition System DoE Design of Experiments DoF Degree of Freedom EPU Extended Power Uprate FSRF Fatigue Strength Reduction Factor FE Finite Element FEA Finite Element Analysis FEM Finite Element Model FIV Flow-Induced Vibration FFT Fast Fourier Transform FRF Frequency Response Function FF Full Frequency, or Full Frequency Spectrum GEH GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy HCF High Cycle Fatigue NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) xiii Term Description
[[
]] HPCI High Presure Coolant Injection Hz Hertz [[
]] MASR Minimum Alternating Stress Ratio Mlbs/hr Millions pounds per hour MPC Multi Point Constraint MSIV Main Steam Isolation Valve MSL Main Steam Line MSLB Main Steam Line Break Outside Containment MW th Megawatt Thermal NP Next Power Level NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission OBE Operating Basis Earthquake OE Operating Experience OLTP Original Licensed Thermal Power Pa Pascal PATP Power Ascension Test Plan PBLE Plant Based Load Evaluation PBLE01 PBLE Input [[
]] PBLE02 PBLE Input [[
]] PSD Power Spectral Density psi Pounds per square inch psia Pounds per square inch absolute psid Pounds per square inch differential PT Penetrant Test PTF Plate Thickness Factor RCIC Reactor Core Isolation Cooling RFO Refueling Outage RMS Root-Mean-Squared NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) xiv Term Description RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel RSD Replacement Steam Dryer SDAR Steam Dryer Analysis Report SCF Stress Concentration Factor SF Singularity Factor SG Strain Gauge SRV Safety Relief Valve SSE Safe Shutdown Earthquake TC Test Condition TSV Turbine Stop Valve TVA Tennessee Valley Authority VFD Variable Frequency Drive VPF Vane Passing Frequency ZPA Zero Period Acceleration NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 1-1 1.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This report documents the stress analyses for the replacement steam dryer (RSDs) for each of the three Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) units. The focus of these analyses is to demonstrate that the RSD will maintain structural integrity during normal plant operation and under transient and accident conditions. Fatigue analyses were performed for flow-induced vibration (FIV) and hydrodynamic loads during normal operation at extended power uprate (EPU) power levels. Primary stress evaluations were performed for normal, upset, emergency and faulted loading conditions at EPU power levels. [[ ]]. The BFN RSD design incorporates the replacement steam dryer design features that were developed to accommodate the high FIV acoustic loads that led to the fa ilure of the original BWR/3 dryers at EPU operating conditions. The prototype for the BFN RSDs is the curved hood RSD installed in a BWR/4 plant with operating conditions that are similar to those for BFN. A later version of the prototype dryer was installed in a BWR/6. The prototype RSD dryer design has operated successfully in both of these plants. As part of the BFN RSD design, additional iterative design analyses were performed to redistribute the loads throughout the structure and reduce the peak dryer stresses.
Successful operation of th e prototype RSD design at full EPU power levels in the previous plants, along with the additional design refinement, provide assurance that the BFN RSDs will maintain structural integrity during normal operation. For the fatigue analyses, the GE Hitachi Nucl ear Energy (GEH) Plant Based Load Evaluation (PBLE) methodology was [[ ]]. To account for uncertainties in the steam dryer structural freq uency response between the idealized FEM and the as-built dryer, [[
]] The stresses from these analyses form the basis of the fatigue assessment.
The overall uncertainties associat ed with the load definition and structural response methodology
[[ ]] Additional adjustment factors were developed to address load effects that may not be accounted for in the [[ ]] acoustic pressure measurements (e.g., loading generated by the recirculation pump vane passing pulsations). [[
]] data taken during the power ascension were used NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 1-2 to develop [[
]] EPU scaling factors to project the FEM stress results to EPU conditions.
The [[ ]] B&U values and the other adjustment factors were applied to the stress results of the FEM analyses, and then projected to the EPU power level conditions to determine the peak dryer stresses at EPU. When compared to the fatigue acceptanc e criteria, the stress margins for all dryer components exceed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) recommended minimum alternating stress ratio (M ASR) greater than 2.0. The results of these fatigue evaluations confirm that each BFN RSD is structurally adequate to accommodate the expected FIV loads at EPU conditions.
Primary stress analyses were performed for the design load combinations for normal, upset, emergency and faulted conditions. The methodologies used for the primary stress analyses are the same as those used for the original steam dryer design analyses. The results of these analyses demonstrate that at EPU conditions, the steam dryer will maintain structural integrity during normal operation as well as for tr ansient and accident conditions.
A Power Ascension Test Plan (PATP) for the initial cycle of EPU operation at all three BFN units is presented. Th e BFN RSD design is [[
]] however, the RSD for the [[ ]] The plan includes [[ ]] The test program describes the [[ ]] locations and methodology for developing fatigue stress acceptance limit criteria used to assure that the dryer stresses remain acceptable during the power ascension. Upon reaching full EPU power, fatigue stress evaluations will be performed based on plant measurements at EPU to confirm that the RSD st resses are acceptable for long-term operation of the RSD dryers.
The structural analyses and power ascension monitoring program assure that the BFN RSDs will maintain structural integrity during normal operation and under transien t and accident conditions for the design life of each RSD.
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 2-1 2.0 BROWNS FERRY REPLACEMENT STEAM DRYER ANALYSIS OVERVIEW 2.1 Analysis Process Overview The BFN RSD design is based on the BWR/4 prot otype RSD design that has been used in two BWR/4 units and one BWR/6 unit operating at EPU conditions.
The prototype design has been improved to incorporate lessons learned from the BWR/4 RSD Operating Experience (OE), design refinements incorporated during the BWR/6 RSD project, and further refinements from BFN RSD stress studies to ensure that the BFN RSD would meet the NRC recommended 2.0 MASR margin to the fatigue a cceptance criterion (Reference 1). The BFN units are very similar to the BWR/4 protot ype plant, in particular with respect to the plant geometry and operating conditions that determine the acousti c pressure load ing acting on the steam dryer. These plants are the GEH BWR/4 design with 251-inch diameter reactor
pressure vessels (RPVs) and operate at virtually the same power level and steam flow velocity conditions (see data provided in Table 4.1-23).
The BFN units and the BWR/4 prototype plant have stagnant branch lines (dead-legs) on the MSLs. The FIV loading on the BFN RSDs is
[[ ]] as the loads measured on the BWR/4 prototype.
The three BFN units are virtually identical, with only minor geometrical differences that may slightly impact the characteristics of the acoustic resonances that are expected to develop in the standpipes for the SRVs. The main difference between the original steam dryers for the three units is the hold-down rod location. [[ ]] This is further discussed in Section 3.2.1, Functional Modifications. [[
]] Figure 2.1-1 provides a high level ov erview of the analysis process. The steam dryer acoustic pressure loads for the BFN FIV anal ysis were devel oped from BFN [[
]] using the PBLE02 methodology (Appendix C of this report). [[ ]] Based on an evaluation of the SRV standpipe geometry, MSL flow velocities, and the [[ ]] acoustic pressure measurements from the three units, [[
]] Because there are no BFN MSL measurements at EPU flow conditions, [[
]] The resonance frequencies were determined from [[
NEDO-33824, Revision 0 Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public) 2-2 ]] which is the most appropriate SRV acoustic re sonance load to use in synthesizing the BFN SRV resonance loads. In the fatigue stress evaluation of the BFN RSD, the stresses for steam dryer components were first calculated by FEA at BFN CLTP conditions, and then extrapolated to full EPU conditions based on BFN specific scaling factors developed from trending of the power ascension data. The steam dryer component stresses accounted fo r stress intensificati on due to welds and [[
]] These stresses were adjusted w ith a set of bias and uncertainty (B&U) terms, including [[ ]] B&U from the BWR/4 prototype RSD benchmarking predictions compared to on-dryer strain measurements; the bias factor for [[ ]] The adjusted stress results at EPU condition meets the NRC-recommended MASR criteria of 2.0 to the Ameri can Society of Mechanic al Engineers (ASME) Code endurance limit of 13,600 pounds per square inch (psi).
Primary stress analyses for specified load combinations compared to ASME stress limits demonstrated that the RSD will maintain structural integrity (i.e., no generation of loose parts) during normal operation as well as for transient and accident conditions.
For the [[ ]] steam dryer, [[ ]] will be instrumented. Power ascension limit curves were developed for