ML17320A972

Forwards First Round Questions on Exxon Plant Transient Code,Based on Review of Proprietary Rept, Description of Exxon Nuclear Plant Transient Simulation Model for Pwrs.

ML17320A972
Person / Time
Site:	Cook, 05000000
Issue date:	09/30/1983
From:	Abramson P, Wei T ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY
To:	Guttmann J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17320A970	List: ML17320A971 ML17320A972 ML17320A973 ML17320A974
References
CON-FIN-A-2311 NUDOCS 8404040309
Download: ML17320A972 (9)

Text

XRCONNE NATlONALWBORATORY

'700 SouT4 Ms Avc~Aacov z, llliNois 60439 TElEp40w 312/972-September 30, 1983 Mr. Jack Guttmann Reactor Systems Branch Division of Systems Integration Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear .Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Review of PTSPMR2 Under Task I.A of FIN A2311

Dear Mr. Guttmann:

Enclosed're first round questions on the Exxon plant transient code PTSPMR2 based on our review of the following Exxon draft report:

1. XN-74-5 (P) Revision 2, "Description of the Exxon Nuclear Plant Transient Simulation Model for Pressurized Water Reactors (PTS-PWR)," D. M. Turner, et al. (received June, 1983).

It should be noted that although typographical errors were encountered the emphasis has only been on those which could lead to significant ambiguities.

The following additional supplement has recently been received from Exxon:

XN-74-5 (P) Revision 2, Supplement 1, "PTSPWR2 Modifications for St. Lucie Unit 1," M. T. Nutt, et al . (Received September 23, 1983) .

It is unclear to ANL how this supplement should be treated in the generic review of the code models under FIN A2311. Please advise us.

Furthermore we have not yet received the qualification material, the method-ology report or the description of code model modifications for CE plants and four loop W plants which Exxon agreed to submit by September 1 at the June 16 ANL meet-ing . This delay may impact the FIN A2311 schedules accordingly.

If further clarification is required, please contac us.

Sincerely, P. . Abramson, Manager Light Water Reactor Systems Analysis Reactorpnalysis. an8 Safety Division s

T. Y. C'.-Wef 8404040309 8403ih Light Water Reactor Systems Anal ysi s

. PDR ADOCK 05000316 P PDR

1 I

l II

Hr. Jack Gu.tmann September 30, 1983 PBA:TYCHO:kr Enclosure Distribution:

R. Mattson, Director, Division of Systems Integration, NRC/NRR B. Sheron, Chief, Reactor Systems Branch, NRC/NRR S. M. Boyd, NRC/NRR J. Carter, NRC/NRR B. L. Grenier, NRC/NRR M. Jensen, NRC/NRR N. Lauben, NRC/NRR L. W. Deitrich, RAS R. Avery, RAS LWR Systems Analysis Section RAS Files: 8M627, A15

-PTSPMR2: FIRST ROUND CUESTIONS The applicant is requested to verify that the errors identified as typographical errors are indeed typographical errors and were not carried further into the program statements.

Section 1.0

1) How's metal heat transfer modelled?

2) Is there a boron transport model? If so, provide a discussion of the model.

3) For the fixed nodalization used (as shown in Fig. 1.1) justify (a) the connection of the pressurizer to the upper plenum.

(b) the absence of resistance in the surge line.

4) Detail the steam separator model used.

5) Provide a summary of the numerical scheme employed and the time step selection algorithms available.

Section 2.1

~

6) Show how the prompt term in the power equation is consistent with the prompt term in the precursor equation of the point kinetics equation set, eq. (2-1).

7) Present the derivation for the prompt jump aoproximation equation, eq. (2-3).

Sec.ion 2.2

8) Correct the typographical error for Rf3.

9) Demonstrate that the one axial node approximation for the core has insignificant effects for the core heat transfer and the reactivity feedback.

Section 2.2.2

10) Justify the quasi static approach for the coolant enthalpy distribu-tion.

Section 2.3

11) Define f used in the pump equation and provide justification for its functional form.

12) Provide derivations for the gravity heads in eqs. (2-26e), (2-27),

and (2-28).

13) How are the friction coefficients K determined?

14) (a) Define FDECAY ( } used in eq. (2-32) for the hot leg.

(b) Detail the model for the cold leg.

15) Present the derivation for eq. (2-37).

Section 2.3.3

16) Show the control volume for which the mass balance eq. (2-38) is written and identify the different flow terms.

Sec.ion 2.4

}7) Oefine hf used in eq. (2-5) for the case of pressurizer outsurge.

18) Regarding the pressurizer insurge analysi s:

(a) Explain why, while the analytical equations give an indetermi-nate answer the numerical algorithm described gives a unique solution.

(b) Justify the neglection of bulk condensation interregion mass transfer in the mass equations, eqs. ( 2-1) and ( 2-2) .

19) Oiscuss the pressurizer outsurge model in more detail; in parti-cular, the calculation of the flashing rate.

20) Provide the equations for the empty pressurizer model.

Section 3.0

21) ..List the criterion used to differentiate between the steam, boiling and nonboiling regions of the steam generator model.

Section 3.1

22) Clarify and summarize the primary side equations used for the steam generator model in the case of reverse flow (Eqs. (3-3), (3-5),

(3-7) (3-9) (3-ll ) ~ ~ .) ~

the expression for (aTMl ).

23) (a) Show how arrived at.

il used in Eq. (3-2) is (b) Justify the quasistatic approach which neglects the steam generator tube heat capacity.

2<) Give a physical interpretation o eq. (3-6) for the U-bend region.

25) Discuss the modelling when one or more regions disappears or reap-pears.

26) Is Usteam always set to zero?

27) Define the temperature used in Eq. (3-13).

28) On the secondary side of the steam generator model, (a) Explain why the specific volume in eq. (3-14) is'evaluated at subcooled conditions when the nonboiling region is assumed to be at saturation.

(b) Justify the modulus signs in eq. (3-14) for the nonboiling length.

29) (a) Present the derivation for eq. (3-19) for the steam region.

(b) Justify the expression used for V1sST.

(c) Define CFsg1T

30) (a) Define Acs used in eq. (3-18).

(b) Define ~ used in eq. (3-21).

31) Justify the numerical value used for the fouling factor f.

Section 3.2

32) Provide derivations for the gravity head terms in Eq . (3-32) and

( 3-36) and state which of the two equations is actually used.

33) How is Wuptdl determined?

'34) Justify the use of eq. (3-52) forI the top of the downcomer when the level changes.

35) Present the derivation for eq. (3-55) which determines the pressure at the bottom of the downcomer.

36) Provide the functional form of FDECAY .

Section 4.0 f

37) Correct the typographical errors in Eqs. (4-3) and (4-4).

38) Justify the modulus signs in (a) eq. (4-6) for the recoverable acceleration head (b) the flow acceleration term in eq. (4-21).

39) Does the steam line model only apply for saturation conditions?

Section 5.1

40) Correct the typographi cal error in Eq. (5-1) .

Section 5.2

41) Compare the valve flow model against the Murdock and Bauman corre-lation for single phase steam flow and agains the Moody correlation for two phase mixture flow.

42) Present justification for the valve flow modifier, eq. (5.3).

Section 5.8

43) Describe the model which converts rod speed into reactivity inser-ti on/del et i on.

Section 6.0

44) Correct the typographical error in the M-3 correlation, eq. (6-8).

I Section 8.0

45) Give references for the thermodynamic and transport water properties used and compare against steam table data (or an equivalent refer-ence) .

46) Give references for the default pump curve.

47) Submit a copy of reference 3 and compare the decay heat model des-,

cribed therein with the ANS standards.

Section 8.2

48) Provide a reference for the default delayed neutron parameters used and compare against the RELAPS set.

Section 8.3

49) Detail the initialization procedure used in the steam line and the pressurizer.