ML18051A255
| ML18051A255 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1982 |
| From: | Ballard M, Shears G, Strange P EDS NUCLEAR, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18051A254 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-2.D.1, TASK-TM 02-040-1124, 02-0540-1124-V01-R00, 2-40-1124, 2-540-1124-V1-R, NUDOCS 8301060176 | |
| Download: ML18051A255 (43) | |
Text
8301060176 821230 PDR ADOCK 05000255 P
PDR EVALUATION OF PALISADES SAFETY AND RELIEF VALVE DISCHARGE PIPING Volume 1 Prepared for Consumers Power Company by EDS Nuclear Inc.
2333 Waukegan Road Bannockburn, Illinois 60015 November 1982 EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0
EDS NUCLEAR INC.
REPORT APPROVAL COVER SHEET Client: Consumers Power Company Project: Palisades SRV Evaluation Evaluation of Palisades Job :Number: 0540-006 Report
Title:
Safety and Belief Valve n; srharge Piping Report Number:
02-0540-1124 Rev. O ------
The work described in this Report was performed in accordance with the EDS Nuclear Quality Assurance Program. The signatures below verify fue accuracy of this Report and its complianc "th applicable quality assurance requirements.
Prepared By:
nate:
I 1. ;o. q'2.
Reviewed By:
Approved By:
REVISION RECORD Rev.
Appro\\*al No.
Prepared -
Reviev.1ed Approved Date Revision
\\.
I i
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY TABLE OF CONTENTS
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General
- 1. 2 Work Performed 1.3 Conclusions 2.0 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 2.1.General 2.2 Piping System 2.3 Operating Conditions 3.0 PALISADES EVALUATION 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Thermal-Hydraulics Analysis 3.3 Piping Evaluation 4.0 RESULTS REFERENCES EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 1
3 5
15 APPENDIX A:
DESCRIPTION OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS APPENDIX B:
REF~RC FORCE TIME-HISTORIES (see Volume 2)
APPENDIX C:
REFERENCES FOR PIPING SYSTEM DATA APPENDIX D:
SUPERPIPE MODELS APPENDIX E:
DETAILED STRESS AND SUPPORT LOAD SUMMARIES
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 1 EDS Nuclear has completed an evaluation of the Palisades Nuclear Station safety and relief valve as-built discharge piping.
This evaluation was performed for Consumers Power Company in accordance with the recommendations of NUREG-0578, Section 2.1.2, clarified by NUREG-0737, Item II.D.l, and by the NRC's letter of September 29, 1981.
This report summarizes the evaluation
- 1.2 Work Performed The principal objective of the evaluation was to determine the piping's response to the shock loading induced by rapid opening of the power-operated relief and/or safety valves.
However, other types of loading which could act concurrently with this shock loading were also considered.
Two thermal-hydraulic analyses were performed to calculate the bounding dynamic loading induced on the piping by postulated combinations of rapid valve actuation.
The computer program RELAP5/M0Dll was used, together with the post-processor REF0RC.2 These analyses are described in Section 3.2.
Piping analyses were performed for these thermal-hydraulic load cases.
Analyses were also performed for gravit3, thermal, and pressure loads.
The computer program SUPERPIPE was used.
These analyses are described in Section 3.3.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY 1.3 Conclusions EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 2 The calculated pipe stresses have been compared to the conservative, Code of Record allowable stresses.
Dpstream of the pressure retaining valves, these code-allowable stresses are met.
At the safety valve outlet flanges and at certain points of the non-pressure retaining, non-seismic class discharge piping, code-allowable stresses for valve actuation loading are exceeded.
However, for the bounding system transient with the plant in its current configuration, at no point do the combined, factored valve actuation and sustained pipe stresses exceed the faulted allowables. (The faulted allowable is 2.4Sh).
Computed support loads have been compared to the loads for which each support was evaluated in the recent 79-14 reevaluation effort.
The valve actuation induced support loads generally exceed these loads.
However, the actual capacity of each support may, of course, considerably exceed these 79-14 loads.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY 2.0 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 2.1 General EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 3 Palisades is a single-unit plant.
The nuclear steam supply system is a Combustion Engineering PWR, rated at 798 Mw net capacity.
The pressurizer relief piping system is a closed system designed for overpressure protection and transient pressure control of the pressurizer.
The system includes:
three spring-loaded safety valves two gate-type block valves two power-operated relief valves (PORV'S) associated inlet and outlet piping Figure 2-1 is a sketch of the system layout.
The inlet piping to the PORV's has been omitted for clarity.
Also, only supports active under dynamic loading are shown.
Details of the safety and power-operated relief valves are included in Tables 2-1 and 2-2.
The outlet piping culminates in a common header which discharges into the quench tank.
The inlet and outlet piping is described in Section 2.2.
Currently, the plant is operated with the block valves closed.
This renders the PORV's inactiv~.
For completeness, both this condition and the condition in which the block valves are open during operation (and thus the PORV's are active) were considered.
In the event of an abnormal transient which causes a pressure rise exceeding the control capacity of the pressurizer spray system, the valves may be actuated.
If the PORV's are active, they will open first.
Then, if the pressure continues to rise, the lowest-set safety valve will open.
Further rise in pressure would open one or both of the remaining safety valves.
The most severe transient analyzed indicates that, even with the. PORV's inactive, only the lowest-set safety valve may open.
I CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 4 2.2 Piping System 2.3 Each safety valve is directly connected to its own pressurizer outlet nozzle by a short, straight stub of 3-inch diameter piping.
Each also has its own, 6-inch discharge {or tail) pipe.
These tail pipes run, in turn, into a common 10-inch header pipe.
The two PORV's share one pressurizer outlet nozzle, A 4-inch pipe from this outlet branches into two 2-1/2 inch pipes, one for each PORV.
The block valves are in series with (and upstream of) the PORV's.
Each PORV has a 4-inch discharge (or tail) pipe.
These run into the common 10-inch header pipe.
The header pipe discharges into the quench tank through a short, 10-inch branch pipe at its midpoint.
Operating Conditions The most severe reactor coolant system overpressure condition would occur following a loss-of-load event.~,5 Transient analysis has been performed for this loss-of-load event for the two operating modes considered in this evaluation:
- a.
- b.
PORV's not active (block valves closed - current Palisades configuration)
PORV's active For case a, the transient analysis shows one safety valve may lift to provide reactor coolant system overpressure protection.
The peak pressurizer pressure for this case is 2,520 psia, with a pressure ramp rate of 45 psi/sec.
When the PORV's are active {case b), the peak pressurizer pressure is 2,450 psia with a pressure ramp rate of 20 psi/sec.
For this case, the PORV's may open but no safety valves will lift.
The fluid condition for each case is saturated steam.
Solid water discharge due to extended high pressure injection is not postulated since the HPSI pump shutoff head is below the safety valve and PORV set pressures.
l.*
F:
F.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY 3.0 PALISADES EVALUATION 3.1 Introduction EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 5
.The evaluation was performed in two parts.
First, thermal-hydraulics analyses were performed to determine the bounding Jorces imposed on the piping by postulated combinations of valve actuation.
Actuation of a valve allows the discharge of high-pressure steam from the pressurizer into the discharge piping, inducing pressure and momentum transients.
Until steady-state is achieved,. these transients create significant, time-varying, unbalanced forces on each straight run of the piping.
Secondly, dynamic piping analyses were performed to determine the response of the piping to these (and other relevant) loads.
From these analyses, upper-bound stresses on the piping and upper-bound loads on the supports were calculated.
These analyses are described below.
3.2 Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis 3.2.l Description of Load Cases To determine the transient loads' on the discharge piping, two separate load cases were analyzed:
- 1.
The two lower-set safety valves (RV-1040 and RV-1041) lift, each at its own set-point.
- 2.
The two PORV's lift, followed by the upper-set safety valve (RV-1039).
Again, each valve lifts at its own set-point
- These load cases were selected to evaluate the piping for the following operating modes:
- a.
the current operating mode, in which the PORV's are isolated and inactive
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 6
- b.
the mode in which the PORV's may open The selection of these load cases was based on the following considerations.
Both conservatively provide more relieving capacity than is required to mitigate the loss-of-load event.
The principal load on each safety valve "tail-pipe" (the discharge piping for each valve, from valve to header) is due to that safety valve lifting.
Similarly, the principal load on the PORV's tail-pipe is due to their lifting.
Therefore, at a minimum, each tail-pipe should be evaluated for its associated valve(s} lifting.
The header should be evaluated for bounding combinations of valves lifting.
The maximum load on the common header is due to the combined effect of the valves lifting.
The header load is dominated by the faster-acting safety valves.
Given the limiting transient and considering the above, these load cases are clearly bounding.
In both cases, the pressure ramp-rate was artificially increased until the last valve in the sequence lifts.
This has no significant impact on the system's response.
3.2.2 Thermal-Hydraulic Model The thermal-hydraulic analysis was performed using the computer program RELAP5/M0Dl, which is described in Appendix A.
The RELAP5/M0Dl thermal-hydraulic model consists of a number of fluid control volumes connected by flow paths or junctions.
These volumes extend through the piping system from the pressurizer to the quench tank, and through the rupture disc to the containment.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 7 The model contains 232 control volumes and 242 interconnecting junctions (Load Case 2 used a slightly expanded model).
The pressurizer is modeled as a time-dependent volume so that the pressure of the saturated steam can be varied as a function of time.
In accordance with Reference 6, the piping nodalization was selected to provide an accurate calculation of hydrodynamic forces.
The short pipe segments (less than 5 feet) immediately downstream of the valves include eight to ten control volumes to avoid underestimation of the hydrodynamic loads.
Farther down the linef where the hydrodynamic loads are smaller, the nodalization is coarser to minimize the computer model size.
An abbreviated form of the overall nodalization scheme is shown on Figure 3-1.
Table 3-1 summarizes the model properties
- The initial conditions for components upstream of the safety and power-operated relief valves were assumed to be those of the pressurizer.
The pressurizer was assumed to contain saturated steam.
The initial conditions for downstream components were assumed to be those of the quench tank.
The normal operating pressure of the quench tank is 17.7 psia.
Initially, it contains water and nitrogen at this pressure.
To model each valve, a valve area, opening time, and loss coefficient were input.
The critical flow correlations built into the code determine the valve flow rate based on these input parameters and the inlet pressure.
Thus, to achieve the required flow through the valves, the area which will allow the desired flow rate was calculated and used.
3.2.3 Parameters and Assumptioni for Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis This section defines (and describes the basis for) key assumptions and parameters for the thermal-hydraulic analysis.
Safety Valve Parameters The Palisades plant has three safety valves mounted on the pressurizer.
Pertinent safety valve data are given in Table 2-1.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
~
EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 8 Flow Rate - the rated capacity of each Palisades safety valve is 230,000 lb/hr.S Experience has shown that the actual capacity is greater than this rated value.
Specific flow rates for relevant EPRI tests and calculated flow rates were considered together to determine an appropriate flow rate for this analysis.
The flow rate for this valve (at full lift) was calculated to be 347,480 lbm/hr, based on the Napier correlation with the discharge coefficient and pressure correction factor applied as
- recommended in Reference 8.
However, for the Palisades valves, the lift is limited to 0.35 inches (or 78 percent of the rated lift).
Assuming the critical flow area is linear with lift, the flow rate can be reduced by the ratio of.35/.45.
This results in a maximum Palisades safety valve flow rate of 270,200 lbm/hr.
This is based upon a valve inlet pressure of 2,520 ~sia, which is the peak pressure following a loss-of-load event.
A review of the CE test matrix for this valve shows test 1104a most closely resembles the Palisades configuration.
Test 1104a conditions were:?
2550 psia pressure at valve opening 316 psi/sec pressure ramp rate 600 psia peak backpressure 0.013 sec. valve opening (pop) time 77 percent lift, 107 percent rated steam flow (318,690 lbm/hr) at 3 percent accumulation (based on tank pressure)
The measured flow at 77 percent lift is higher than the calculated flow using the Napier equation.
Based on comparison of the EPRI test data to the calculated flow rate, the higher flow rate from test 1104a (318,690 lbm/hr or 88.5 lbm/sec) was used in the analysis to estimate the safety valve flow area.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 9 Valve Opening Time - valve opening (pop) time was based on this model valve achieving full lift in 12 msec.
This is the minimum time measured during the steam tests (12 msec. was measured for tests 316 and 326).7 Since the lift for the Palisades valve is only 0.35 inches (as opposed to 0.45 inches for the tested valve), the opening time was reduced by the ratio.35/.45.
The opening time used in the analysis was thu~
9.33 msec.
PORV Parameters The two PORV's are attached to the pressurizer through a common nozzle.
Pertinent PORV data are given in Table 2-2.
Flow Rate -
The rated capacity for each Palisades PORV. is 153,000 lbm/hr.5 A calculated flow rate for this valve is 160,210 lbm/hr, based on the Napier correlation.a Flow rates were measured in the Dresser PORV tests.
Therefore, no direct correlation between the calculated flow and the test can be made.
The Marshall steam tests measured a flow of 155,000 lbm/hr under conditions similar to Palisades (that is, high back pressure and.2435 psia at the valve inlet).7 This value of 155,000 lbm/hr was increased by the ratio of the valve areas (1.48/1.35) to determine the final value used, 170,000 lbm/hr.
This "area-corrected" m~asured f l9w rate is greater than the flow rate calculated with the Napier correlation.
Therefore, a flow rate of 170,000 lbm/hr (or 47.2 lbm/sec) was used to estimate the PORV flow area.
Opening Time - measured opening times from the EPRI test program are given in Table 3-2.
An opening time of.0.17 seconds was used.
This is an average value of the measured valve opening times.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 10 3.2.4 Analysis Results and Discussion Valve Flow Rates Table 3-3 lists the analyzed steady-state flow rates, backpressures, and pressure conditions for the valves.
A typical plot of backpressure is shown in Figure 3-2.
Note that the safety valve and PORV flow rates calculated by RELAPS/M~Dl are slightly lower than the target values.
This lower flow rate does not significantly affect th~ magnitude of the transient force loadings.
Moreover, the flow rates from the EPRI tests were based upon higher pressure conditions than are postulated at Palisades following a loss-of-load event.
Load Case 1 Safety valves RV-1040 and RV-1041 are postulated to lift for this case; RV-1039 and the two PORV's remain closed.
RV-1041 has the lower setpoint and opens first.
The transient loads on the "dead" legs from the pressurizer to the inlet of the PORV's are very small since no flow occurs in these lines.
Therefore, the acceleration or wave force term and the portion of the blowdown force term which is flow-dependent is very small.
The peak forces are only pressure and pipe area dependent.
The maximum force (14.5 kips) on the active piping sections (the RV-1040 and 1041 tailpipes) occurs at the first elbow.
The forces decrease at each elbow dowri the pipe to about 10 kips at the last elbow before the pipe enters the commrin header.
Loads for the t~o tailpipes are similar.
Forces also occur on the tailpipes of the inactive valves.
These forces are a result of steam backflow from the common header.
Their magnitude is much less than for the corresponding locations on the active tailpipes.
Load Case 2 Both PORV's and safety valve RV-1039 are postulated to open.
RV-1040 and 1041 remain closed.
The PORV's begin opening first
- however, due to their slower opening time compared to the safety valves (170 msec versus 9.33 msec), RV-1039 reaches its full open position first.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 11 The force loadings on the RV-1039 tailpipe are similar to those for RV-1040 and 1041 for Load Case 1.
The absolute magnitude of the forces on the PORV inlet piping for Load Case 2 are comparable to those for Load Case *i.
However, the opening of the PORV's creates a pressure transient which results in higher unbalanced forces on each piping segment.
Therefore, Load Case 2 is the bounding case for the piping attached to the PORV's.
All forcing functions were calculated over the entire transient duration using a time step of 1.0 x lo-3 sec.
Typical force time-histories are included in Appendix B.
3.3 Piping Evaluation 3.3.1 Jurisdictional Limits The piping evaluated extends from the welds on the flanges upstream of the three safety valves and the weld at the PORV pressurizer nozzle, to the weld at the quench tank nozzle.
Loads on valves, nozzles, and flanges were determined, but no evaluation of the adequacy of these components was performed.
3.3.2 Mathematical Model The piping system was idealized as SUPERPIPE mathematical models.
These consist of concentrated masses connected by massless elastic members.
The concentrated masses were so located as to adequately represent the dynamic and elastic properties of the piping system.
The stiffness of elbows and bends was reduced in accordance with the requirements of the Code of Record.
Two models were developed.
The first includes the two PORV's and the two block valves.
The second includes the three safety valves, their tailpipes, the 10-inch header, and the connection to the quench tank.
The two models are structurally divided by in-line anchors H877.l and H877.1A.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No.
02-0540~1124 Revision 0 Page 12 The piping layout, valve locations, and other relevant data related to the system were taken from the references listed in Appendix C.
Support stiffnesses were included in the models.
3.3.3 Description of Analyses EDS Nuclear's computer program SUPERPIPE was used for all analyses.
SUPERPIPE performs static, dynamic response spectra, and transient dynamic analysis, and performs the required load combinations, code verification, and support load summaries.
A description of SUPERPIPE is given in Appendix A.
Deadweight Analysis The weight of the piping, components, and contained water (as appropriate) was applied.
Since the* spring hangers and constant load vertical supports are in-place, their actual design loads were applied as upward loads to the pipe.
Thermal Expansion Analysis For the calculation of secondary stresses due to thermal expansion, the following temperatures were used:
Piping upstream of safety valves and PORV's -
6S0°F Balance* of piping -
479°F The pressurizer was also assumed to be at 6500F.
The stress-free temperature for the analysis was taken as 70°F.
Neither spring hangers nor constant load supports were included in the thermal analysis.
Valve Discharge -Time History Analysis Thermal-hydraulic force time histories of load at changes in flow direction and flow area calculated for each load case by REF¢RC were applied
- CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 13 The direct integration solution method was used.
SUPERPIPE allows the system dynamic characteristics to be written as a set of differential equations of the form:
Mu + Cu + Ku = P where M, C, and K represent the mass, damping, and stiffness of the system, u is the time-dependent displacement, and P is the applied load.
This set* of equations is solved in coupled format by generating the response of the system as a function of the response at the previous time step.
By assuming that the damping matrix is a linear combination of the mass and stiffness matrices, two unique frequency damping ratio pairs can be selected.
These values were taken as one percent of critical damping at both the fundamental structural frequency and at the highest significant mode considered in the analysis (150 cycles/sec.}.
The frequencies of interest - that* is, those between these limits - are conservatively underdamped.
The integration time step for the time history analysis was selected to provide accurate response of the higher frequencies of the system.
Based on sensitivity studies, a value of.001 seconds was used.
The event durations were taken as 0.75 and a.so seconds for Load Cases 1 and 2, respectively.
Stresses were determined using the maximum of each moment component.
Load Combinations Load combinations (Tables 3-4 and 3-5} were based on Reference
- s.
For all pipe support combinations, the loads were maximized (maximum positive and maximum negative} by considering the line both hot (thermal loads included} and cold (th~rmal loads not included} *
~
J.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY 3.3.4 Code Evaluation EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 14 A code evaluation was performed for the pipe stresses.
The Code of Record is USAS B31.l (1967)~
For purposes of calculating stresses, the primary stress incorporates a.75i factor, as introduced into ANSI B31.l (1973) and ASME Code Section III, Subsection NC (1974).
In addition, the qualification criteria includes an allowable of 2.4Su or l.lSy (whichever is greater), for the primary stresses caused by normal loads and the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE).
The design, operating and peak pressures were taken as:
Piping upstream of safety valves and PORV's -
2485 psig Balance of piping -
582 psig
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page 15 4.0 RESULTS 4.1 Piping Stresses 4.2 4.3 For full computer summaries, see Appendix E.
Maximum stresses for each load combination are given in Tables 4-1 and 4-2.
Table 4-1 includes the PORV section piping.
Table 4-2 includes the remaining piping.
Nozzle and Valve Flange Loads Summaries of nozzle loads are included in the Appendix E summaries.
Table 4-3 gives the maximum components of load on each nozzle.
Valve Accelerations Approximate maximum horizontal and vertical safety valve accelerations for each valve actuation load case are given in Table 4-4.
4.4 Support Loads For full support load summaries, see Appendix E.
The supports' adequacy for seismic loading has been verified in accordance with IE Bulletin 79-14..
Maximum support loads from load combination 3 of Table 3-5 are compared with these 79-14 loads in Table 4-5.
It should be noted that the supports' capacity may be considerably greater than the 79-14 loads.
4.5 Discussion of Results Piping Stresses The response of the piping upstream of the anchors in the PORV section meets the allowables specified in the Code of Record.
.e CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-054Q....,.Tl2'4-Revision 0 Page 16 The remaining p1p1ng - specifically the safety valve tailpipes and their connection to the common header, and the connection between the header and the quench tank -
shows stresses in excess of the allowables specified in the Code of Record.
This exceedance of the Code of Record allowable stresses is due to the thermal-hydraulic, valve actuation loads.
Support Loads Many support loads exceed the loads to which these supports were evaluated in the 79-14 program.
This is due to the thermal-hydraulic, valve actuation loads.
However, the actual capacity of these supports may be considerably greater than these 79-14 loads
- CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No.
02-0540~1124 Revision 0 Page 17 REFERENCES
- 1.
RELAPS/M~Dl Code Manual, NUREG/CR-1826.
- 2.
REF~RC V.2A:
A Computer Program for Calculating Fluid Forces Based on RELAP5 Results, User's Manual, Rev. 1, dated June, 1982.
- 3.
SUPERPIPE Users Manual, EDS Nuclear, Version 15C, June 25, 1982.
- 4.
EPRI Report No. NP-2318-LD, "Valve Inlet Fluid Conditions for Pressurizer Safety and Relief Valves in Combustion Engineering
-Designed Plants," Interim Report, April, 1982.
- 5.
Palisades Final Safety Analysis Report.
- 6.
"Application of RELAP5/M~Dl for Calculation of Safety and Relief Valve Discharge Piping Hydrodynamic loads,"
Interrnountain Technologies Inc.
- 7.
EPRI Report, Safety and Relief Valve Test Report (Interim),
dated April, 1982
- 8.
Critical Flow Predictions Through Safety and Relief Valves, prepared by s. Levy, Inc. for EPRI, dated June, 1982
- 341E
i EDS Report No.
02-0540~ll24 Revision 0 Table 2-1:
Safety Valve Parameters Number of Valves 3
Manufacturer Dresser, Model No. 31739A Type Spring-loaded nozzle type relief valve Steam Flow Capacity Design Pressure and Temperature Set Pressure 318, 69 0 lbm/hr.
2500 psig 700 OF RV-1039:
RV-1040:
RV-1041:
2565 psig 2525 psig 2485 psig
EDS Report No.
02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Table 2-2:
Power-Operated Relief Valve Parameters Number of Valves Manufacturer Type Steam Flow Capacity Design Pressure and Temperature Set Pressure (Note 1) 2 Dresser, Model No. 31533VX Globe valves 170,000 lbm/hr.
2500 psia 700 OF PRV-1042B:
PRV-1043B:
2400 psig 2400 psig Note 1:
Palisades is currently operated with the power-operated relief valves inactive
- t_
I Item
~
Pressurizer
?"
Nozzle leading to RV 1039 Nozzle leading to RV 1040 Nozzle leading to RV 1041 Nozzle leading to.PORVs RV1039 line to the header RV1040 line to the header RV1041 line to the header Line from the nozzle to first tee before the PORVs Line from PORV1042 to header Line from PORV1043 to header
~*
Main header, with the line going to the Quench Tank The 9uench Tank, and through the rupture disc to containment Table 3-1:
- RELAP5/Mj21Dl Model Properties Component Modeled As Numbers Time-dependent 1,2,3 volume, and branch volume Pipe 10,11 Pipe 20,22 Pipe 30,33 Pipe 40 Pipe, single 100,101,-136 branch volume, and valve Pipe, single 200,201,-230 branch volume, and valve Pipe, single 300,301,-340 branch volume, and valve Pipe, single 400,401,-420 and branch volume Pipe, single 500,501,-548 volume, branch volume, and valve Pipe, single 600,601,-658 volume, branch volume, and valve
-Pipe, single 700, 701-712 volume, branch volume Single volume, 800,801,803
.time-dependent 804 volume, and valve (for rupture disc)
EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124
~vision 0 No.of No.of Control Junct.
Volumes 5
2 1
1 3
3 3
3 0
1 26 25 50 49 54 53 15 12 37 36 36 35 10 9
2 3
I_ J I..
EDS Report No.
02-0540~1124 Revision 0 Table 3-2:
Dresser Power-Operated Relief Valve Test Data Steam Test No.
Opening Time (sec)
Marshall 1
.19 Marshall 2
.17 Marshall 3
.19 Marshall 4
.19 Marshall 5
.19 Marshall 6
.18 Marshall 7
.23 Marshall 8
.17 Marshall 9
.18 Marshall 10
.17 Marshall 11
.19 Wyle Phase II DR-1-S
.15 Wyle Phase II 10-DR-lS
.11 Wyle Phase III 20-DR-lS
.17 Wyle Phase III 23-DR-lS
.13
- _. ~ *"..
~'
r..oad case 1 Valve Press.
Inlet valve Pressurel Press.
RV-1039 RV-1040 2560.0 2487.o RV-1041 2560.0 2487.o PRV-1042B PRV-1043B Notes:
- 1.
All pressures in psia
- 2.
Steady-state backpressure Table 3-3:
Pressures and Flow Rates for each Load Case Load valve Valve Outlet Flow Rate Press.
Inlet Press. 2 (lbm/sec)
Pressure Press.
2589.Q 2514.1 344.0 87.4 355.3 87.4 2589.0 2245.l 2589.0 2278.0
~........
EDS Report No.
02-0540-1124 Revision O Case 2 Valve Outlet Flow Rate Press.2 (lbm/sec) 355.0 87.l 438.8 44.1 451.9 44.9 e
e
EDS Report No.
02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Table 3-4:
Piping Load Combinations Load Combination Load Allowable Number Combination Stresses (Note 1
(Sustained) p + DW l.OSh 2
(Occasional-Note 2) p + DW + OBE l.2Sh 3
(Occasional) p + DW + F l.2Sh (Note 4
(Faulted-Note 2) p + DW + SSE 2.4Sh (Note Sa (Thermal)
TE SA Sb (Thermal + Sustained)
TE + P + DW SA + sh Table 3-5:
Pipe Support Load Combinations Definitions:
P = Pressure DW = Gravity Load Combination Number 1 (Sustained) 2 (Occasional-Note 2) 3 (Occasional) 4 (Faulted-Note 2)
TE = Thermal Expansion OBE = Design Earthquake F = System Operating Transient (Valve Actuation)
SSE = Hypothetical Earthquake Notes:
- 1.
Load Combination DW + TE DW + TE + OBE DW + TE + F DW + TE + SSE
- 1)
- 3)
- 4)
- * ~:
As per B31.l (1967) -
Code of Record Not included in this evaluation Per ASME Code, corresponds to upset allowable -
emergency allowable is l.8Sh But not less than l.lSy (Reference 5)
- 4.
I I
I i
EDS Report; No.
0 2-0 540-".1124 Revision 0 Table 4-1:
Pipe Stresses -
PORV Section Load Maximum Combination
- Stress, Number Joint Name/TyEe ESi 1
(Sustained) 480C/Elbow 7444 3
(Occasional-F) 529/Fillet Weld 11795 Sa (Thermal) 508/Fillet Weld 15498 Table 4-2:
Pipe Stresses of Piping (SV Load Maximum Combination
- Stress, Number Joint Name/TyEe2 ESi 1
(Sustained) 115/Tee 9242 3
(Occasional-F) 135/Tee 29811 Sa (Thermal) 150/Tee 20549 Notes:
- 1.
Per B31.l (1967) - Code of Record -
and Reference 5
- 2.
For joint name location, see Figure 2-1
- Allowablel
- Stress, ESi 12789 12780 26332
- Balance Section)
Allowable!
- Stress, ESi 11579 13894 26332 Ratio 0.58 0.92 0.59 Ratio 0.80 2.15 0.78
EDS Report No.
02~0540-1124 Revision 0 Table 4-3:
Nozzle Loads Nozzle RV-1039 press. and valve inlet
-at face of flange RV-1039 valve outlet
-at face of flange RV 1040 press. and valve inlet
-at face of
- flange Load Case Gravity Thermal Load Case 1 Load Case 2 Gravity Thermal Load Case 1 Load Case 2 Gravity Thermal Load Case 1 Load Case 2 RV-1040 Gravity valve outlet Thermal
-at face of Load Case 1 flange Load Case 2 RV 1041 press. and valve inlet
-at face of flange Gravity Thermal Load Case 1 Load Case 2 RV-1041 Gravity valve outlet Thermal
-at face of Load Case 1 flange Load Case 2 Quench Tank at face of nozzle PORV Nozzle at interface of press.
nozzle and PORV inlet piping Gravity Thermal Load Case 1 Load Case 2 Gravity Thermal Load Case Load Case 1 (Note 2
Note 1:
Bounded by Load Case 2 Axial Load lbs 693 11 984 4534 14 37 3945 10245 717 1
4612 1803 14 186 10397 3679 690 16 3717 1833 78 6
10520 3554 537 198 12770 11659 155 208
- 1) 1680 Resultant Shear lbs 15 76 3300 8519 172 66 699 3240 91 186 8380 3280 215 5
4047 761 83 94 8092 3001 171 95 3672 798 159 5884 3599 3756 1
103 357 Torsional Moment ft-lbs 95 129 1647 5350 164 705 387 961 605 35 3059 2461 36 226 522 268 380 138 6670 2764 311 916 2171 663 772 109 2636 3429 11 320 491 Resultant Bending Mome1 ft-lbs 1279 744 4750 13608 1071 390 2179 10286 1013 1202 16343 4230 950 1330 11624 2494 718 842 14535 3944 643 69 11598 3292 1335 6344 4735 5008 73 616 1497
Safety Valve RV-1039 RV-1040 RV-1041 Note 1:
EDS Report* No.
02-0540~1124 Revision 0 Table 4-4:
Safety Valve Accelerations Load Case 1 Load Case 2 Hor iz.Accel.
Vert. Accel.
Horiz.Accel.
Vert.Accel.
0.52 0.03 2.22 0.28 2.53 2.20 0.59 0.36
- 1. 80
- 1. 38 0.54
- 0. 4 2 All accelerations are in units of gravity (g's), and are given at the valve's center of gravity.
Table 4-5:
Support Mark No.l Support (Joint No.)
Type Load PORV Section Rl Anchor Fx (480)
Fy Fz Mx My Mz R2 Anchor Fx
( 69 5)
Fy Fz Mx My Mz
- R864.2 Rigid Fy (53 0)
H875.l Rigid Fz
( 48 5)
R876.l Rigid Fx (462)
Fz R866.l Rigid Fx (67 5)
Fz H877.l Anchor Fx (4 3 5)
Fy Fz Mx My Mz H877.1A Anchor Fx (64 0)
Fy Fz Mx My Mz EDS Report No.. 02-0540-ll24 *.
Revision 0 Support Loads 79-14 Loads Calculated Comb.2 Comb.4 Load, Comb.
404 547 1413 372 448 4050 975 1187 2151 1081 1214 1197 560 673 1107 740 1031 935 240 321 1285 326 387 3802 352 436 1510 546 634 485 498 658 1457 450 646 266 320 414 815 736 1200 4630 556 463 543 1937 248 280 406 713 726 1236 265 323 894 478 556 10,096 759 854 460 4136 5267 2172 1442 1828 1326 589 966 4363 99 141 790 513 569 9614 585 764 249 3514 5226 1276 1533 2103 971 1149 1452 4333
l*"
I EDS Report No.
02-0540-1124 ie Support Mark No. 1 (Joint No.)
Balance of Piping (SRV Section)
H878.l (417)
H869.l
( 615)
H858.l (35)
H858.2
( 35)
R860.l
( 65).
H862 (8 5)
R854.l (24 0)
S850.l (355)
S850.2 (350)
R857.l (130)
R880.l (170}
Notes:
1:
2:
3:
Table 4-5:
Support Support Type Load Rigid Fz Rigid Fz Snubber Snubber Rigid Fx Fy Rigid Fy Rigid Fx Fz Snubber Snubber Rigid Fx Rigid Fx Revision 0 Loads (continued) 79-14 Loads Comb.2 Comb.4 238 466 238 466 399 798 156 311 127 212 302 343 263 414 197 329 540 979 271 541 364 727 3681 4131 3506 3795 79-14 Qualification 79-14 Qualification For support location, see Figure 2-1.
Comb. 2 is TE + DW + OBE Load used in Comb. 4 is TE + DW + SSE -
Load used in Comb. 3 is TE + DW + F 4:
Definitions:
TE = Thermal Expansion DW = Gravity QBE = Design Earthquake SSE = Hypothetical Earthquake F = System Operating Transient (Valve Actuation)
Calculated Load, Comb.:
172 233 2257 2753 1621 2091 499 1800 1615.
3754 5896 6876 2980
l':J 1039 H8~8.I I
I I
I I
e8'57. /
I I
H871./
FIGURE 2-1 System Layout EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124...
Revision 0 eet..te>. /
10438 10428
~--
,e2 y
L*
EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 t\\J tt\\
~
t1\\
I(\\
~
~.
(\\J I
t\\i I
~--
~
~
t'1'\\
I\\:)'
\\)
I\\:)
~
t'(\\
<:::J"'
~
.eV/04-/
,ev1o#J Do-- t1A..IOe. ~&6H£1JT "5 G.PA EA 1 Ole.
TH~ ~o
'~ I, Z, ~.**
~
~
,4ee ;?.LAP t!.OHPCAl£A.Jr NVH6~!:':;
HOl043A 1,2, ~
FIGURE 3-1 Palisades RELAPS/M~Dl Model CV/04-EB 110104-ZA
~-- ----- ------------------------------------
200 100 0
0
.I
_z EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0
.4 Et..APtt5£.0 TIH&.rRCH Y/IL-VE AC.T/YAllO/l/
( tG C. CA/OS)
FIGURE 3-2 Typical Safety Valve Backpressure
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No.
02-0540~1124 Revision 0 Page A-1 of A-3 APPENDIX A:
DESCRIPTION OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS SUPERPIPE SUPERPIPE is a comprehensive computer program developed by EDS for the structural analysis and design checking of piping systems.
Analysis may be carried out in accordance with the requirements of any one of several standard piping codes.
SUPERPIPE executes in distinct phases; namely, specification of system geometry, static analysis, determination of dynamic characteristics, response spectrum or time history analysis, and design checking against code requirements.
Appropriate combinations of these phases may be executed during any specific computer run.
SUPERPIPE can generate its own finite element mesh, lumped masses being automatically positioned along the pipe.
- Supports may be specified to be active or inactive depending on the type of loading.
Support participation can be changed from one analysis to the next within the same computer run.
Output from SUPERPIPE includes a detailed summary of stresses and displacements.
Results of analyses can be saved permanently on problem data files and recalled for use in subsequent computer runs.
A code compliance summary based on any of several standard piping codes built into the program is output.
Nozzle and penetration summaries are also available.
SUPERPIPE features a number of post processors and plotting routines.
The SUPERPIPE program h~s been extensively benchmarked against several other piping analysis programs and has been found to be both accurate and cost-effective
- CONSUMERS POWEH COMPANY RELAPS/~Dl EDS Report No.
02~os40~1124: **
Revision 0 Page A-2 of A-3 RELAP5/M¢Dl was originally developed to calculate PWR thermal-hydraulic loads induced by a loss-of-coolant accident
- Recently, it has been benchmarked against the EPRI Safety and Relief Valve Test Program.
The basic parameters used in modeling the hydraulic network are control volumes and connecting junctions.
RELAP5/M¢Dl solves the Conservation of momentum, energy, and mass equations for the resulting network of control volumes and junctions.
The program calculates thermal-hydraulic transients with a complete two-fluid, two-velocity, two-temperature description.
A set of five equations (two mass, two momentum, one energy) describes the two fluids.
The need for a second energy equation has been eliminated by assuming that the least-massive phase is at saturated conditions.
Two-velocity phenomena such as entrainment and slip are calculated by simultaneous solution of separate phasic mass and momentum equations.
Interphase friction correlations are flow regime dependent, and there is no reliance on direct empirical correlations for slip velocity, flooding rate, or entrainment fraction.
Thermal nonequilibrium of either phase is accounted for in RELAP5/M¢Dl.
Calculations of evaporation/condensation determine the rate at which the two fluids reach equilibrium.
One phase in each control volume is assumed to be at its saturated condition.
Thus, both subcooled water and superheated steam can be treated simultaneously in an overall model, but not within an individual control volume.
For liquid discharge, the critical flow rate is calculated in RELAP5/M¢Dl by. application of a modified Bernoulli equation between the upstream fluid volume and the choking plane.
Nonequilibrium is accounted for by allowing the pressure at the choking plane to undershoot the local saturation'pressure based, on the Alamgir-Leinhard-Jones correlation.
For two-phase discharges, the critical flow rate is calculated from a characteristic analysis of the conservation equations.
For vapor discharge, the critical flow rate is calculated based on the local fluid-sonic velocity
- CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY REF¢ RC EDS Report No~ 02-0540-1124 Revision O Page A-3 of A-3 REF~RC was developed as part of the EPRI Safety/Relief Valve Test Program.
It calculates the fluid forces acting on a piping network by application of Newton's Second Law on Motion.
The method of force-history generation is to develop the total forces in the axial direction at opposing components (such as bends or tees) according to the following equation:
F = Fw + Fcs Fw is the wave force due to the fluid acceleration and Fcs is the blowdown force due to the pressure and momentum at the control surface normal to the direction of F.
Total forces *are calculated in this fashion at variations in flow areas and/or changes in flow direction *
.e CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page B-1 of B-1 APPENDIX B:
REF¢RC FORCE TIME-HISTORIES Representative force time-histories are shown on Figures B-2 to B-120.
All forces are in global co-ordinates.
A key to identify force locations is shown on Figure B-1.
For these figures, see Volume 2 of this report *
!v ie CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page C -1 of C-3 APPENDIX C:
REFERENCES FOR PIPING SYSTEM DATA The following references were used to determine piping system data.
0 0
Bechtel Palisades Plant Drawings Consumers Power Company GWO 6786 Pressurizer Safety and Relief Valve Discharge Drawing No. 03375 Stress Isometric Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet 1
2 3
4 5
6 of 6 (Q) Rev.
of 6 (Q) Rev.
of 6 (Q) Rev.
of 6 (Q) Rev.
of 6 (Q) Rev.
of 6 (Q) Rev.
Equipment Location - Reactor Building Plan at El. 607' 6" Dwg. No
- M-3 Rev. 10 Equipment Location - Reactor Building Plan at El. 602' O" Dwg. No. M-9 Rev. 6 Combustion Engineering Inc. Drawings Chattanooga Division Pressurizer Outline for Consumers Power Pressurizer Dwg. No. 231-980-5 0
2 0
0 0
0 Top Head Forming and Welding for Consumers Power Pressurizer Dwg. No. 231-983-6 Nozzle Details for Consumers Power Pressurizer Dwg. No. 231-986-5 o
Dresser Industrial Valve & Instrument Division Drawings Alexandria, Louisianna ASME Section III Maxif low Safety Valve Flanged Inlet 2500 psig Class, Through Bushing Dwg. No. 2 l/2-31739A-l X6-XFA1-XOS122 Rev. 0 ASME Section III 2-l/2-31533VX Consolidated Electromatic Relief Valve 2500 lh Class (Non-Bellows)
Dwg. No. 3CP-1687 Rev. 5
- ~*
I. <
~..
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 0
0 Alpha Tank and Metals Mfg. Co. Drawings S t. Louis, Mo
- 114 Inch O.D. Pressurizer Quench Tank Combustion Engineering Inc.
Consumers Power Company Dwg. No. D-7284 Southwest Fabrication and Weld Co. Drawings Houston, Texas Spool Piece Drawings Drawings No. s.o.
7453 Sheet No. 660 7453 Sheet No. 661 7453 Sheet No. 662 7453 Sheet No
- 664 7453 Sheet No. 665 7453 Sheet No. 666 7453 Sheet No. 667 7453 Sheet No. 668F 7453 Sheet No. 669 7453 Sheet No. 670 7453 Sheet No. 671 7453 Sheet No. 672F 7453 Sheet No. 673 7453 Sheet No. 674 7453 Sheet No. 675 7453 Sheet No. 676F 7453 Sheet No. 677 7453 Sheet No. 678 7453 Sheet No. 679 7453 Sheet No. 681 7453 Sheet No. 683 Fabrication Isometrics Drawing Nos. s.o. 12447-033 !so No. 132 133 134 135 136 137 Page C-2 of C-3 Rev. 5 Rev. 4 Rev. 4 Rev. 4 Rev. 4 Rev
- 4
- i.
i..
I
}
- e.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-'1124 Revision 0 o
Bechtel Support Designs and Calculations Bechtel Stress Package No. 03375 File No. 03375-1 through 03375-43 o
EDS Calculation Index Palisades Nuclear Station SRV Discharge Piping Reevaluation EDS Job No. 0540-006-641 o
Consumers Power Palisades Nuclear Station Final Safety Analysis Report Page C-3 of C-3
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Report No. 02-0540-1124 Revi~ion.0 Page D-1 of D~l
- APPENDIX D:
SUPERPIPE MODELS EDS Drawing No. 0540-006-01 Rev. 0 (two sheets) shows the mathematical models used for analysis of this system.
This drawing is held under separate cover *
'l'J
! _ (
re
' 5.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY EDS Repprt No. 02-0540-1124 Revision 0 Page E-1 of E-1 APPENDIX E:
DETAILED STRESS AND SUPPORT LOAD SUMMARIES Detailed computer listings of the pipe stress and support load summaries are held under separate cover
- 344E J