ML18052A874
| ML18052A874 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/1987 |
| From: | Kuemin J CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703030137 | |
| Download: ML18052A874 (28) | |
Text
'
'.J consumers Power POW ERi Nii NllCHlliAN'S PROliRESS General Offices: 1945 West Parnell Road, Jackson, Ml 49201 * (517) 788-0550 February 25, 1987 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 DOCKET 50-255 - LICENSE DPR PALISADES PLANT -
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON SERVICE WATER SYSTEM TO SUPPORT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS CHANGE REQUESTS Consumers Power Company submitted Technical Specifications Change Requests on October 20, 1986, entitled "Removal of Containment Air Cooler Fan V4A," and December 2, 1986, entitled "Diesel Fire Pump *operability and Service Water Temperature."
The earlier change was supplemented by letter dated November 21, 1986.
Our letter of January 28, 1987, provided further informa-tion (in Attachment 5) on the service water system as part of the response to the NRG request for additional information dated December 23, 1986.
In this latest letter, several service water system issues were left open,*pending further system flow testing and evaluation.
The service water system flow balance testing has been completed.
The test results are provided in Table 1.
The testing followed modifications to the service water pump impellers resulting in additional flow and modifications of system valves such that system flows can be balanced to ensure adequate flow to critical components during design basis accident (DBA) conditions.
Along with providing adequate flow, determination of the maximum allowable service water temperature for the available service water flow condition was performed to ensure the design heat removal capacity of the components.
The methodologies for determination of the allowable service water temperature, for the critical components, have been described in our earlier January 28, 1987, letter, Attachment 5, Item 1, except for the engineered safeguards room.
No changes to the earlier evaluations are necessary.
The results of the new flow balance testing for the critical components in Table 1 correspond to higher flows than obtained previously.
The new testing was conducted with a different service water system configuration, with modified service water pumps and after flow orifices and test gauges were installed for the critical flow parameters.
The previous testing of the service water system used installed plant instrumentation which did not have the required accuracy and was not calibrated before and after the test.
Table 1 data was obtained using all applicable Quality Assurance requirements for test equipment and verifica-tions.
Except for the engineered safeguards room, the results of the previous evalua-tions for the critical components justified operation at service water temper-atures" above the 53°F Technical Specification Change Request limit.
Those I
OC028;7-0014A-NL02 8703030137 870225'
~DR.. *ADOCK 0.5000255 PDB __ : * "
I
\\.
-~
Fl Nuclear Regulatory Commission Palisades Plant Additional Info Service Water System February 25, 1987 result~ were 1) for the component cooling water heat exchangers 70.8°F based on 3130 gpm service water flow to the heat exchanger; 2) for the control room coolers 62°F based on a differential pressure of 8 psid across the coolers;
- 3) for the diesel generators 61°F based on. inlet pressure of 15 psig; and
- 4) for the containment air coolers 75°F based on the 4875 gpm service water flow (no flow is required when operating with one service water pump).
These values were based on the previous service water flow test results and are still valid, since the flow parameters from the latest testing have exceeded those from the previous test.
2 The calculation for determining the service water system required inlet tem-perature in the post-DBA condition for the engineered safeguards room is described in Attachment 1, Item 1.
The results indicate that for the worst case flow, of 109 gpm, (Table 1) to the west engineered safeguards room cooler a service water temperature of less than 58°F is required to keep the room below its 135°F equipment qualification limit.
Our intent is tq operate with the service water containment outlet valve throttled and therefore, the minimum flow to the cooler will be 142 gpm.
The calculation at the lower flow rate and the resultant 58°F provides additional margin. to the 53°F Technical Specification Change Request service water temperature limit.
This calcula-tion is a complete revision of a previous calculation which had originally provided the basis for December 2, 1986, Technical Specifications Change Request.
It should be noted that this new calculation contains several very conservative assumptions which were made to expedite the evaluation.
Future calculations will contain more realistic assumptions.
The flow to the component cooling water (CCW) heat exchangers in Table 1 with one service water pump operating and the containment isolation valve closed is 3,130 gpm and 3,150 gpm.
These values meet the previous cooling capacity acceptance criteria for 70.8°F service water temperature and are the basis for justification for operation of the CCW heat exchangers above the 53°F change request limit.
An inlet pressure of 15 psig for the diesel generator from previous testing corresponded to its previously evaluated 61°F service water temperature operating limit and was the basis for justification of operation of the diesel generators.
During the latest balancing test, the pressure at the diesel was 22 psig when run in a similar configuration to the previous test.
The inlet pressure to the diesel was above that for the previous test since the service water pump impellers were backfiled, which raised the pump head versus flow significantly, and the component cooling water heat exchanger temperature control valves were closed.
Since the increase in inlet pressure to the diesel generators is not directly related to increased flow, a temporary orifice to measure flow was installed for the latest tests.
The flow through the 1-1 diesel generator was measured at 389 gpm and 383 gpm for the 1-2 diesel generator (Table 1).
The diesel vendor was provided the flow through the diesel and has confirmed that the diesel.is capable of operation in this configuration for 30 minutes at a corresponding inlet temperature of 80°F.
For continuous operation at 80°F, a flow of 490 gpm is required according to the vendor.
Twenty minutes is OC0287-0014A-NL02
(',.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Palisades Plant Additional Info Service Water System February.25, 1987 assumed as the operator action time to close the service water containment outlet valve.*
The vendor documentation provides further justification for operation of the diesel generators.
3 Previous service water flow balance testing of the control room coolers resulted in a differential pressure of 8 psid across the unit.
For'the control room cooler, a relation between differential pressure and service water temperature was derived as described in our January 28, 1987 letter,*Item 1.
This relationship was determined using a conservative linear correlation of flow vs*temperature values of 110 gpm at 75°F and 11 gpm at 35°F obtained from Bechtel design documents.
This same correlation would require 78 gpm for 62°F service water which was the temperature derived using the previously measured 8 psid which was the basis provided for justification for operation of the control room coolers.
The measured differential pressure for the latest flow balancing test was 16 paid, which using the previous derived relationship corresponds to a temperature of 76°F which provides additional margin for justification for operation of the coolers.
The flow alignment at the control room coolers was the same as the previous test.
As was noted above, the service water system flow balance testing followed
.modifications to several componen~s. These modifications were described in
'our January 28, 1987, letter, Attachment*5, Item 11.
They include 1) a modification to the service water air operated temperature control valve on the component cooling water (CCW) heat exchanger to close on a recirculation
.actuation signal (RAS); 2) backfiling impellers for the three service water pumps to the original design, to provide additional flow; and 3) adding*
nitrogen backup supplies to the service water control valves to containment to ensure valve operability during a transient.
These valves are remotely operated from the control room.
The effect of these modifications is that operation of the service water system in the post-DBA condition with loss of offsite power and 1-2 diesel generator failure will be different from that described in our previous correspondence.
Instead of requiring that the diesel fire pumps be aligned to the service water system, we will n~w require operator action to close the service water containment outlet valve.
Service water to the containment air coolers is not required if the 1-2 diesel gener-ator is lost.
A revision to the previous Technical Specification Change Request is not necessary to incorporate requirements for the service water containment outlet valve operability as the present Technical Specification, Section 3.4.4, applies to the valves directly associated with the service water pumps and requires they meet the same requirements as the service water pumps.
Also, since the portion of Technical Specification Change Request requiring diesel fire pump operability is not now requir~d for plant operation with service water at or below 53°F, we request withdrawal of our December 2, 1986, commitment to operate the plant by incorporating the diesel fire pump operability proposed change request as an administrative control.
We will, in the near future, evaluate the tested service water system flow rates to critical components to justify operation at a higher service water tempera-ture.
At that time, we will determine whether the additional flow provided by a diesel fire pump is required to ensure the DBA heat load requirements for the service water system are met for the higher service water temperatures.
OC0287-0014A-NL02
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Palisades Plant Additional Info Service Water System February 25, 1987 to this letter provides information that Consumers Power had committed to providing in our January 28; 1986, letter to support the October 20, 1986, and December 2, 1986, Technical Specifications Change Requests. provides a summary of the operability of the VHX-4 containment air cooler following removal of one of its seven cooling coils and is perti-nent to a commitment made in our October 20, 1986, Technical Specification Change Request to maintain the cooler operable.
Consumers Power also formally withdraws our request to have our November 24, 1980, Technical Specifications Change Request approved at this time.
We had asked for approval along with our December 2, 1986 change request since this change also impacted the same section of the Technical Specification. It is understood that additional informa_tion is required to support this change request.
4 Clarifications to the December 2, 1986, Technical Specification Change are requested.
In that submittal, we requested existing Section 3.4.lc be deleted and a new 3.4.lc be added.
Our discussion of the removal of the old Section 3.4.lc was that it was " ** an editorial revision.
The same require-ments are included in Section 3.4.4." The discussion should have also referenced Sections 3.3.le and 3.3.lg.
In addition, this final paragraph of the Basis, Section 3.4, Page 3-36, should be revised to reference the CCW and shutdown heat exchangers operability as follows:
Operability of the component cooling and shutdown heat exchangers is specified by Technical Specification 3.3.le. Limitations have been imposed on the Service Water System inlet tempera~ure. These limi-tations are required to ensure adequate heat removal occurs for critical service water loads when only one diesel generator is operating.
~uemin Staff Licensing Engineer CC Administrator, Region III, NRC NRC Resident Inspector - Palisades Attachments OC0287-0014A-NL02
OC0287-0014B-NL04 TABLE 1 Consumers Power Company Palisades Plant Docket 50-255 Additional Information of SWS To Support Technical Specifications Change Requests Results of Service Water Flow Verification Test No T-216 Completed February 3, 1987
1 SWP CONT VLV ISOLATED Control Room Coolers VC-10 91 VC-11 91 ES Room Coolers East Room VHX-27A 166 West Room VHX-27B 214 Diesel Generators Coolers DG 1-1 601 DG 1-2 621 CCW Heat Exchangers E-54A 3,150 E-54B 3,130 Containment Air Coolers VHX-4 0
VHX-1,2,3
_o Pump Discharge Press (psig)
P7B:52 Cumulative Flows 8,064 OC0287-0014B-NL04 TABLE 1 FLOWS IN GPM 1 SWP 1 SWP 1 SWP, lFP CONT VLV CONT VLV CONT VLV.
OPEN THROTTLED ISOLATED 49 49 108 59 38 101 96 117 203 109 142 250 366 389
>699*
356 383
>699*
2,360 2,400 3,520 2,040 2,100 3,700 0
0 0
3,862 3,609 0
- 699
.,. Limit of Instrument Range P7B:33 P7B:34 9,297 9,227 P7B:65 P9B:64
>9,280 1 SWP, lFP CONT VLV OPEN 68 68 135 160 486 471 2, 720 2,500 0
4,626 P7B:42 P9B:38 11, 234 2 SWP CONT VLV THROTTLED 100 98 196 243
>699*
>699*
3,520 3,560 0
5,578 P7A:64.5 P7C:65
>14,695 3 SWP CONT VLV OPEN 119 114 223 269
>699*
>699*
3,800 4,040 0
6,234 P7A:74.5 P7B:75 P7C:76
>16,199 t
~:
OC0287-0014C-NL04 ATTACHMENT 1 Consumers Power Company Palisades Plant Docket 50-255 Additional Information on SWS To Support Technical Specifications Change Requests Update to Items 1, 2, 3, 8, 10 and 11
.. Of Consumers Power Company's January 28, 1987 Letter, Attachment 5 February 25, 1987 5 Pages
~
~
ATTACHMENT 1 Additional Information for Item 1 Consumers Power committed to providing the following information:
0 The revised calculation for determining the required inlet tempera-ture to the engineered safeguards room coolers in the post-DBA condition.
Refer to Appendix A of this Attachment.
Additional Information for Item 2 Consumers Power committed to providing the following information:
0 0
0 0
Service water pump data to ensure (when operating a single service water pump) the pump is operating within its capacity.
Determine flow contribution of the diesel fire pumps.
Diesel fire pump discharge pressure and flows for justifying sustained operation in the postulated conditions.
Results of the additional service water system flow tests.
The *service water pump was run beyond its design flow (8000 gpm) for approxi-mately 50 minutes during the flow balance testing of the service water system.
The pump motor showed no signs of stress as the amperage readings were normal.
The pump showed no signs of cavitation~* ie, no vibration or noise or loss of head, during the flow balancing test.
The highest flow during the test was.
approximately 9300 gpm.
With the service water system operation such that isolation of containment will be operator initiated following the DBA and loss of diesel generator 1-2, the pump will be required to operate at the higher flow rate for only 20 minutes.
Twenty minutes is assumed for operator action time to recognize the low service wat~r flow condition and actuate valve closure from the control room.
Subsequent to the flow balance testing, the pump head vs flow values have been obtained.
These values plotted as a head curve correlate with the head curve taken prior to conducting the.flow balancing.
This substantiates that the pump was not degraded whe~ operating at the higher flow.
The contribution of the diesel fire pumps with 53°F service water is not necessary.
Our intent is to not require the fire pumps be aligned to the service water system as they are not required to attain the flow necessary to provide adequate cooling to the required heat loads.
Therefore, no require-ments will be placed in the diesel fire pump to operate in a condition which is beyond their design capacity.
- The results of the additional service water flow testing are provided in Table 1 and described in the body of this letter.
OC0287-0014C-NL04
- ~**'
"'i:.)
I.*'.,:"'
2 Additional Information For Item 3 Consumers Power committed to the following information:
0 Verify the diesel fire pump setpoint is above the service water discharge pressure.
Again, the fire pumps will not be required to operate in this condition to justify operation with 53°F service water.
Additional Information For Item 8 Consumers Power committed to the following information:
0 If diesel generator 1-2 fails during the recirculation phase of the post-LOCA response, describe the corrective actions required and the time restraints involved to prevent elevated temperatures in the engineered safeguards room from damaging essential equipment.
No response was provided in our January 28, 1987, letter.
This comment assumes that the previously proposed alignment of the diesel fire pumps to the service water system was necessary to maintain the west engineered safeguards room below 135°F, the equipment design operating temper-ature limit.
However, the modification of service water pump impellers have, along with the modified system operating configuration, resulted in enough flow to the engineered safeguards room cooler from a single service water pump using the revised methodology for calculating the room heat loads, to justify operating with a service water temperature below 58°F (see Item 1).
There-fore, it is of no consequence to the safeguards room equipment if failure of the 1-2 diesel generator occurs because the room temperature will be main-tained below 135°F with one service water pump operating.
Additional Information For Item 10 Consumers Power committed to the following:
0 0
Determine the cause of the apparent inconsistencies for measured pressure changes across parallel components (0 -
17 psi).
Determine the cause of the apparent inconsistency in flow measured to the containment air coolers (1222 gpm vs 300 gpm).
The previous service water flow test results showed some apparent inconsisten-cies in the flow data.
As a result, additional instrumentation was added for the most recent testing.
The inconsistency in the containment air coo.ler data was not borne out in the latest test.
We conclude the diesel generator pressure difference was due to the pressure drop in the "A" and "B" service water headers.
The same system configuration was not tested because of the modifications made to the service water components and the dependence upon closure of the service water containment outlet valve instead of the diesel fire pump alignment.
However, we believe the inconsistency noted by the Staff to have resulted from a data recording error in the case of the 1222 gpm listed flow difference for the containment air coolers. The 0-17 psi pressure OC0287-0014C-NL04
3 difference between the pressures at the two diesel generators correlates with the 8-22 psi pressure difference obtained in the latest test using calibrated instruments, with the modified service water pump impellers and modified system operating configuration.
The pressure difference in the headers is due to the flow differences in the "A" and "B" service water headers.
The "A" header with the component cooling water heat exchanger and the 1-2 diesel generator consistently has had higher flow rates and lower pressure at the 1-2 diesel generator than the "B" header with the 1-1 diesel generator.
Therefore, although the "A" and "B" service water headers are connected upstream of the piping branches to the diesel*
generators, the flow rates and the pressure head in*the headers are not the same.
Because of the system configuration, these components should not be considered to be parallel components.
We have reviewed the results of the service water tests and also the component cooling water flow balancing and noted. another apparent inconsistency.
Differences exist between the old and new service water test data for the engineered safeguards room coolers.
In the original testing, the flow data to the east. room cooler, VHX-27A, was consistently higher than the west room cooler, VHX-276, data.
Just the opposite is true for the latest test data.
For comparable service water pump "discharge pressures during both tests, the flow data for the east room cooler is very similar.
However, for the west room, the new data consistently exceeds.the old data.
A repeat test* of the west safeguards room cooler produced comparable results in the new system configuration.
We are very confident *of these latest t.est results.
The new test data, as identified earlier, was taken with calibrated test instruments
~cross installed flow ~rifices. The original test~ used installed ~lant instrumentation which, in this case, were neither pre-test nor post-test calibrated.
Additional Information For Item 11 Consumers Power committed to the following:
0 Provide update on completion of modifications and future plans and schedules.
Noted earlier in this letter were the three modifications to service water system components that were described previously in our January 28, 1987 letter.
They are 1) modification to the service water air operated tempera-ture control valves on the component cooling water heat exchangers; 2) back-filing the service water pump impellers; and 3) adding nitrogen backup to the service water containment isolation valves.
These were the short term actions to attain a higher service water system operating temperature.
Additional information on our long term plans and schedules for both the service water and component cooling water systems did not contain any specific actions.
There remain no proposals which have been completely scoped, cost estimated, approved and scheduled, however, several alternatives are bei~g pursued.
These are 1) insulating piping in the engineered safeguards rooms; 2) increas-ing the engineered safeguards room cooler fan capacity; 3) automatic isolation of the service water containment outlet valve; 4) replacing the containment air cooling coils; and S) addition of a third component cooling water heat OC0287-0014C-NL04
4 exchanger.
As specified in our January 28, 1987, letter, we will keep the staff informed of our plans and schedules as they are finalized.
OC0287-0014C-NL04
APPENDIX A Engineered Safeguards Room Coolers Maximum Allowable Service Water System Inlet Temperature Revision 1 15 Pages OC0287-0014E-NL04
- e.
APPENDIX A Introduction A previous calculation (Revision 0) completed in November and used as support for the December 2, 1986, Technical Specifications Change Request determined that the 110 gpm service water flow to the west engineered safeguards room cooler (VHX-27B) provided for 55°F maximum allowable service water temperature.
The calculation was based on:
- 1.
Flow of 110 gpm obtained from data from Special Test Procedure T-216, Revision O.
- 2.
Previous calculations (References 2 and 3) of convective and radiative heat transfer.
- 3.
Safety injection system piping temperature pf 241°F and 200°F assumed in heat transfer calculations.
- 4.
Total west engineered safeguards room post-recirculation heat load of 998,085 Btu/hr.
This *calculation (Revision 1) is based on different inputs and determines that a 109 gpm service water flow to VHX-27B provides for a 58°F maximum allowable service water temperature.
This calculation was based on:
- 1.
Flow of 109 gpm obtained from Special Test Procedure T-216, Revision 2.
- 2.
New methodology for calculating piping radiative heat transfer.
- 3.
Inclusion of CCW piping leaving the shutdown heat exchangers E-60A and B.
- 4.
Piping temperatures of 223°F~ 147°F, and 144°F assumed in heat transfer calculations.
- 5.
- Total west engineered safeguards room post-recirculation heat load of 955,754 Btu/hr.
The major differences in the two analyses is in the method of calculating convective and radiative heat transfer.
The convective heat transfer calculated in Revision 1 differs from the previous calculation in the following specific areas.
- 1.
Safety injection system water enters E-50A and Bat 223°F vs 241°F.
Reference 9 provides the basis of.the revised value while 241°F had been from the heat exchanger data sheet and is not based on the analyzed value.
- 2.
Safety injection system water leaves E-50A and B at 144°F (per Reference 9) vs 200°F conservatively assumed in the previous calculation.
- 3.
The component cooling water piping leaves E-50A and B at 147°F (per Reference 9).
This piping was previously neglected.
OC0287-0014E-NL04
2 Appendix A
- 4.
The average west engineered safeguards room air temperature of 100°F assumed except air surrounding piping in direct path of the cooler fan discharge is assumed to be at 70°F.
The previous calculation assumed 100°F and 84°F per the cooler specification which was based on 75°F service water temperature.* The reduction of the temperature from 84 °F to 70°F.is conservative because it increases the calculated heat load.
The radiative heat transfer differences are:
- 1.
The concrete surface is heated to 135°F and all pipe radiative heat transfer to concrete is transmitted to the air.. Previously for wall heat-up (in Reference 3) in ten hours, the temperature was calculated to be less than 135°F and after this time, the total radiative heat transfer was assumed as 184,917 Btu/hr.
Thus, for the first ten hours, radiative heat load was neglected.
- 2.
A stainless steel emissivity value of 0.85 vs 1.0 is assumed.
- 3.
Air absorptivity of 0.2 and concrete absorptivity values of 0.8 assumed.
Previously, these were not considered.
OC0287-0014E-NL04
3 Appendix A Determin~ Palisades Engineering Safeguards room air *cooler maximum allowable Service Water inlet temperature to prevent room ai~ temperature from exceeding 135F.
fhe equipment in the ESG rooms is qualified for an air.
temperature of 135F. The temperature in each room is maintained by air coolers, VHX-27A for the east room and VHX-27B for the west room. The coolers are controlled by wall mounted thermostats.
rhe greatest demand placed on the ESG room air coolers is in response to a LOCA. *rhe largest heat load for this accident is during the recirculation phase <post-RAS> when SIS piping circulates hot containment sump water through the rooms.
Each room cooler consists of two fan/motor assemblies operating in parallel to draw air through the cooler coils.
One fan in each room is powered.by Diesel Generator-CD/G) 1-1 and the other by 1-2, therefor~ if one DIG fails, one fan in each room is required to maintaih room air *temperature at or below 135F.
The heat.load in the ESG rooms includes pump motor, lighting~
fan motor, and piping heat._ The heat load in the west room has been determined to be much greater than that of the east room due to the Shutdown Cooling Heat Exchangers, larger -amount of SIS piping and_additional number of pumps operating<2,3>.
Therefore, this room presents the limiting heat load for VHX-27A or VHX-27B. The worst single failure for this analysis is loss of DIG 1-2, leaving only one SWS pump<P-7B> operable.
SWS "flow testing<6J has determined the west room post-RAS one pump flows_ to be 109 gpm (containment open) and 214 gpm (containment isolated>~ No credit will be taken for room heat sinks, room air exchange, or manual action of opening cross-ties between SWS and two diesel driven fire water pumps.
Consequently, this analysis will focus on a hypothetical LOCA concurrent with LOOP and failure cf D/G 1-2 with post-RAS heat load to the west room. DIG 1-1 loads include P-7B, P-548/C,
- p~67B <automatically deactivated on RAS>, P-668, and P-8C
<formerly P-66CJ. All except P-78 are located in the west ESG robm.
Thi~ presents the bounding case for heat load demand placed on either VHX-27A or VHX-278~
Rev 01
4 fhe west ESG room heat loads were determined to be:
QHPSI = Q<P-66B,P-8C> = 88,570 B~u/hr<2>
QCSP = Q(54B/C) = 55,230 Btu/hr<~>
Qlights = 6,800 Btu/hr<2>
Q *
~79 4'a<a> +
~~~ 1<->6(b) p1 pe -
~*
""'"~~' -
= 601,544 Btu/hr Qfan = 59,810 Btu/hr<3>
Appendix A After RAS, P-668, P-8C; P-548/C, lights, and 1 fan <loss of D/G 1-2> are operating plus piping heat gives Qtotal = 2QHPSI + 2QcsP + Qiight + 1Qfan + Qpipe
= 2(88,570) + 2<55,230) + 6,800 + 59,810 + 601,544
= ~~~iZ~~-~~YLb~
The methodology of Referen~e 1 will be used to solve for the maximum allowable VHX-278 inlet water temperature. As described in Re+erence 1 Section 6.2, the overall heat transfer coefficient can be modified to account for Reference 6
- sws flows by the following relation~hips eqn la U2 = [1/LJ1
+
<A~ I At > < l / h t 2 eqn lb U3 = El/U1 + <Af/Ai.> <llh~3 where U = Overall heat transfer coefficient A*
l
= Total face area
= 30 ft2
<Ref 5>
= Total internal coil space
= 331 ft2
<Ref 1>
= Internal film coefficient 1 /h "'
) ]-1' 1/h* ) ]-1 j.'.
Subscripts 1, 2, and 3 represent SWS flows of 175gpm<Ref 1>,
214 gpm, and 109 gpm, respectively.
(a) Pipe con~ective heat transfer <see Table 1). Air heat-up was calculated assuming the air is at lOOF or less, and the piping is at 223F <SIS entering E-60A/BJ, 147F <CCW leaving E-60A/BJ, and 144F <SIS leaving E-60A/BJ.
Cb) Pipe radiative heat transfer <see Table 2). Air heat-up was calculated assuming air and piping temperatures as for convective heat transfer and the concrete is at 135F. All the radiative heat is assumed to be absorbed by the air.
Rev 01
\\
5
,'..Appe*ndix A The Dittus-Boelter relation for turbulent flow in smooth tubes with moderate temperature differences between wall and fluid conditions is eqn 2 where Kw = Conduc*ti vi ty of water Pr = Prandtl number for water
= CpwulKw Cpw = Heat capacity of water u = Viscosit_y of water Re = Renolds number
= ~vd/u f = Density of water d = Tube inside diameter.
= 0.0439 ft
<Ref 1>
v = Velocity of water, ft/se~
= <GPM/48 circuits> <1160 sec> <0.1337ft3/galJ <110.00151ft2>
= 0.0307<GPMJ GPM = SWS flow in gpm 48 circuits= C2coils><12tubes/row/coilJ ClOrows deep>x
<lcircuit/5tube passes)
<Ref 1)
Properties for hi1 will be evaluated at 80F, where
.Kw = 0.353 Btu/hrxftxF u = 5.78E-4 lbm/ftxsec Cpw = 0.998 Btu/lbmxF Pr= 0.998x5.78E-4x3600/0.353 = 5.88
~ = 62. 2 lbm/ft3 v1 = 0.0307<175> = 5.380 ft/sec Rei = 62.2x0.0439x5.380/5.78E-4 = 25,417 Eqn 2 gives
= <0.353x0.023/0.0439J <25,417)0.8(5.88)0.4
= 1£~~-~~~Ln~~!~=~E Rev 01
6' Properties for hi2 and hi3 will be evaluated at 65F, where Kw = 0.343 Btu/hrxftxF u = 7.lE-4 lbm/ftxsec Cpw = 0.998 Btu/lbmxF Pr= 0.998x7.1E-4x3600/0.343 = 7.44
~= 62.3 lbm/ft3 v2 = 0.0307<214} = 6.570 ft/sec v3 = 0.0307(109}* = 3.346 ft/sec Re2 = 62.3x0.0439x6.570/7.1E-4 = 25,308 Re3 = 62.3x0.0439x3.684/7.1E-4 = 12,890 Eqn 2 gives
(( -:r4-:r.-
-,.,~/( -4 7 9) ('"'5 -:r-9)0.8(7 44)0.4 J.~ ~xu.u~~ J.u ~
~,~u 1 335 Btu/hrxft2xF
-~----------------
h* 2 =
1
=
h*
1.3 =
=
Appendix A A BASIC program has been developed to solve for heat transfer through a heat exchanger based on solving the following three eqns.
Total heat transfer throµgh a heat exchanger eqn 3 Air side heat transfer eqn 4 Water side heat transfer eqn 5
.where SCFM = Cooler entering air flow, corrected to 0.075 lb~/ft3 flTm =[(To..~.-
T~> -
<Ta.o -
T\\.U\\.)J/ln[<To.\\. -
Tw0 >1<To.,0 -*TIU~)J Cpa = Heat capacity of air Cpg = Heat capacity of water vapor Rev 01
7 Appendix A W = Humidity ratio
= 0.165 <15% RH at 135F>
Cpw = Heat capacity of wa.ter Subscript a,w,i, and o represent air, water, in, and out, respectively.
U~ will be determined from eqn 3 using Reference 1 Section 7.2 temperatures, Q, and Af.
~Tm= ((135 -
- 84) -
<83.4 -
75)/ln(135 - 84)/(83.4 -
75)]
= 23.62F eqn 3A U1 = Q/AfxhTm
= 780,000/30x23.62
= !!QQ_~~~Lbc~ft~~E Substituting values into eqn la and lb gives Let Cpa Cpw
= (1/1100 + <30/331) (1/1355
= !!Qg_~~~Lb~~ft~~E
= (1/1100 + (30/331) (1/778
= !Q1§_~~~Lb~~ft~~E 1/1255)]-1 1/1255)]-1
= Cpa + Cp W,
evaluated at 100F
+ 8.489x0.0165 = 0.248 Btu/lbmxF
= 0.240
= Cpw '
evaluated at 65F 0.998 Btu/lbm>:F converting units gives
= 0.248x60min/hrx0.075lbm/ft3
= 1.116 Btuxmin/hrxft3xF Cpw = 0.998x0.1337ft3/galx60min/hrx62.3lbm/ft3
=*498.8 Btuxmin/galxhrxF Now input U2, Cpa' Cpw, Dtotal' and VHX-278 SWS flow and ai~ flow <Reference 1 Section 7.2> into the BASIC program to solve for rwi2 and Twi3
<Attachment A>
<Attachment B>
Rev 01
8 AppeaA.t'.tx A For a hypothetical LOCA with LOOP and faiiure of D/G 1-2, the maximum al.lowable SWS inlet water temperature to the ESG room coolers is 58.BF with 109 gpm SWS flow to VHX-278 <containment open> or 62.2F with 214 gpm to VHX-278 <containment isolated>~
Rev 01
I) 9 Apf>endix A
<1> l<eith Canazzi, "Performance Analysis of Engineered Safeguard Cooler Units for Consumers Power Company Palisades Plant, Keith Canazzi, Report ER-1074, Buffalo Forge Co., March 31, 1983.
<2> CPCo Internal Report, WGBrigger, Analysis for E-PAL-83-30, March 3, 1983.
(3) CPCo Intern~! Report, WGBrigger, Additional *Information for Analysis for E-PAL-83-30, February 28, 1984.
C4> Deleted (5) "Cooling Coil Thermal and Structural Capacity Evaluation for the Palisades Plant of Consumers Power Company",
- Report RS-1003, American Air Fi_lter Co, November_2, 1967~
<6> Palisades SWS Special Test T-216, Rev. 02, February 1987.
(7) Deleted (8) W.H.McAdams, "Heat Transfer", 1954.
(9) CE Report,"Final Report Rev 02 to CPCo for Phase 1 Analysis to Determine the Palisades Plant Containment Response to LOCAs and SOC System Performance, Task 601634, November 26, 1986, JOB = AL2QVTZ, JSN = AVPC.
Rev 01
Table I - Sheet l Post-RAS Pipe Convective Heat Load for. One Fan Operation Or-.:;1,1ing numbo:;,r'*
( :i.* '
H -** f.
A *- 6 A -- 5 A -* E.
Fl -
6 A - :i.
A - 5 A -* 7 A - "
Pipe OD, ft (b)
- 0. 71'3 0.. f'.:96
- 1. 17 0.719 o*. 8'36 L 17 2
0.719 0.8%
Pipe L.e:ngth, ft
- 31. 3
- 11. 4
- 46. 1
~~7.. 5 64.6 ljf:I. 7 44.5
- 19. l 51.5 P1pe Hr-*e.:;, ft;;-;:2 <b) 70.?00?f. 32. 08'355 lt.9.44El4 t.Z~. l l ?'2B 181. 840t3 3;~6. 0521 279.6024 43. 14327 144. 9659 fl i,- Speed, f.p1n (c:.1 1300 1300 l:-:\\00 150 150 1!.:iO 150 150 150 Re1::1ro0Jds n1_Jfr1t1e1-(d)
"860?4. ff~; 107264.3 14006t.. 1
- ~1931. 712 12376.. t.~i 16161.47 :g626.45 9931. 712 12376.f.5 HTC -
n (e) 0.805 0.1]05 o.eo5 0.61EI 0.6lt:
0.618 0.618 0.618 0.6l8 HTC -
E: (e)
- 0. 02:3'3
- 0. CC39 0.023':'.I
- 0. 174
- o. 1?'4
- 0. 1?4
- 0. 174
- o. 174
- 0. 174 HTC, Btu/h1**:,.:ft**b*:F i:: f)
.. 5.. 149064 4.932?64 4. 68~~6 76 1. l?t:El68 1. 083812' o. sq:37t38 0.797521 1. 17886B 1. 0838L2 Air-T12ir1per-.::ib-ln::, F ( *::J '
.70
?O
?O 100 100 100 100 100 100 Pipe Temper atun;;, F (h) 223
~~23 223 223
?"")7 223 223 144 144 Heat Tr* an sf er-, El tu/hr ( i )
55698.54 24218.. 40 L"'.'.1401.2 900?.054 24:~40. '3S1 39251. ~;o 2742?.62 223?.850 6913. 099
- ~)
(b)
A -
- from Reference 2, CCh From CPCo Drawing 950Wl-Ml01-sh2842-0, and E-60A/8 from CE Drawing C0-15080.
Area= 3.141Gx0Dxlength
- .1::...
(d)
(1-2)
(f)
(q::.
p.~f E:!~**~~nce. :;
1 Re= Oenz1t4xAirSpeedxOO/Viscosit.4, Der1si~d = 0.071 lbrn/ft*30::100F), Viscosity = i.285E:5 lbm/ftxsec(lOOFJ Re n
- e -*
~eference 8 )able 10-3, Air flow normal to cylinder 40 - 4,000 0.466 0.615 4,000 - 40,000 0.618 0.174 4G,OOO - 250,000 0.805
. 0.0239 HTC*= CTMerrnaiConductivityxB/00)[(Re)**nl, ThermalConductivity = 0.0165 8tu/hrxftxF(l35F)
Reference 8 ~qr 10-2 C1.:onser-*.... at1velq.:>s:=:umed al:~ 515 pipin*j in dir-ect p.:~t.h of c*:.ooler-disch.3r-ge O::Pef. :* Fig A. l) t.r-ansfe1-s heat:
to 70F air. Ail other air at LOOF.
(h) Conservat~vel4 assumed all SIS piping is at a constant 223F except for piping leaving E-60A/B which is at 144F. CCW ~iping leavi11g E-60A/8 at 147F. All pipe temperatures from Reference 9.
o'.".1) Hi:;;at. Tr-an sf er :: HTC:":Ar--E:a:.. : 0:: !=* i pe t.e1r1p -
Air-t.emp)
Table 1 ~ S~eet 1 Post-RAS P~pe Convective Heat Load for One Fan Operation Orawing number (a)
H -
8 A -
8 P1pe 1)[1, ft (b) 0.5~i2 0./19 P1pe LenJth, ft (b) 31.7 27.l Pipe Area,
~t**2 (b) 54.97297 61.2137b Air Speed, fpm {c) 150 150 Reynolds ~~mber (J) 7624.902 9931.712 HTC -
n (e) p.618 0.618 HTC -
E; Ce)
- 0. 1 7 4
- 0. 1 ? 4
- HTC, Btu/~*or:w:H.**2:,.:f= (fl
- 1. :K*4 l l ~'. 1.. 17::t868 Air Temperature, F (g) 100 100 Pipe Temperature, F (h) 223 223 Heat Transfer, Btu/hr Ci) 8817.982 8876.042 TOlAL HEAT TRANSFER 379437.9 BTU/HR A *-* 9 0.. 29.2
- 3!;'1. 3
- 1:'.. "3:3235 150 4C*33.. 463 0.6H3
- 0. 174 1.. 663257 100 223 6624. £1(12 t1 -
'3
- 0. 37~i 42.3 49.83363 150
~q 7":1. 961 0.618
- 0. 174 1.511665 100 223
".'.1265. 808 f1 -
13 0.?1g
- 25. '3
- 58. ?:i03 l 8 150
'3'331 71~'
- o. 611::
- 0. 17*1 1. l?Bat.:::
100 22~;
84ff'.:;. 007' CC~*'
1.5 23.. 77 1 1 ;;:~. 0137 1!:10 20719.134 0.618
- 0. 174 0.890161 100 147 4686.385 cc~
E-t.0F11B 1
- 3. 75 39 46.9375 122.53 552.9706 150 150 13813.22 51799.61 0.618 0.618 0.174 0.174 1.039287 0.627271 100 '*
100 147 147 5985.162 16302.55
(.,.)
Cb:)
( t::)
(d)
R -
- from Reference 2, CCW from CPCo Drawing 950Hl-Ml01-sh2842-0, and E-60A/8 from CE Drawing C0-1~80.
Area= 3.1416x0Dxlength (e)
(q)
Ref en:.c~nce 2
- Re= OensityxHirSpeedxOO/Uiscosity, Density = 0.071 lbm/fl*3(100F), Viscosity= 1.285E75 lbm/ftx~ec(l00Fl Re n
8 Reference 8 Table*l0-3, Air flow normal to cylinder 40 - 4' 000
- 0. 466.
- 0. 61~5 4,000 - 40,000 0.618 0.174 4G,ooo - 25b,ooo o.805 0.0239 HTC= lThermalConduct1vit4x8/00)[(Rel**nl, ThermalConduct1vity = 0.0165 Btu/hrxftxF(l35F)
Reference 8 Eq~ 10-2 Conser-vat 'l ve l *d.:.ssumed a 11 5 I'.:; pip i rn:1 1 n direct path of coo:1 l er** di sch.:.r~ge ( J;~ef :::: Fig t1.. 1) tr**ansf er~:. he.:.t to ?OF air. All other air at 100~.
C:onser-.... *at i ve 11,~ assumed al.l. 5 IS pi r:. i rn~ is.::1t.3. con~::t.:.n*t ::::23F e:,,:cept for-piping l i:;:av i n*3 E -60fl/8 t,oh i ch is at 144F. CCW piping leaving E-60A/B at 147F. Hll pipe temperatures from Reference 9.
Heat Transfer = HTCxAreax(Pipe temp - Rir temp)
(@
consumers Power company
-UCLEAR OPERATIONS DEPART~T Engineering Analysis Work Sheet EA-'-----
Sheet of
Performed by References -r°'-'oQe 1 Te~pe.c~wces s? ro rtf..
Date 2 l 3 /8-:f-Review Method by:
D Alternate Calculatio~s o...\\J'\\6 B'eQ...s D Detailed Review D Qualification Test Technical Review by Date
~,~e.
' °" \\\\
~V'{'..\\e.~
Ar-eo...
\\-\\e.a. t -r-,-°'-IAS~~o..
(°F)
(_ c ~)
(o\\=)
.C~t-z.)
l.8~0 I kr)
'2-C.3
-=ro C-1-3 l t) 000 2"25
\\35
~-;-3 29)'2.C\\O 2-C.. 3
\\00
\\ \\01-3 9) 3-:f 5
- c c.3
\\35
\\\\O-=t-ll9)-=t-t.o°'
i I
\\ L\\ y
\\00 t
\\ ~ ()
\\ )*c:'.\\ \\" ~-
l y L\\
\\35 I.°'*() '
\\)-=t\\L\\
~
\\ ~--t
\\ 00 0\\\\5
. ~) <1L\\<6
\\ \\..\\ + '
\\35 c, \\ s
\\ l) 09 s
(_ 3-' ~5 (o \\) 21..\\<0 A.,r (o)
~
~ )
l f.D0 2 ~SS C~V\\c..le Q -=~~ E.\\i (°Tp -
~)\\>.)
'-\\
C.~2-} Ob ~obJL
~ =
O. \\--:;. \\ 3 'J,, IO ~ \\3t0/h.r
- R * ';-t..."'2..
\\:}....= o..bscrp-h1 -.J'-td-) ~ 1.r- ::: o. ""2..
) ~61~... cr-e~/
Pr:_*~""-:1::. =..
e.:: e"-"sS1\\J1tR) s~'"'-_Q.ess s-ue..Q.=o.85.
A =-. ? ' ~ e o.. (""e
\\ ( R) -::: L\\ 5Ci. -=t -t-T( ~')
Form 3119 3-83 14
~ -
~.,,..
l_IST 10
'PROGRAM NAME -
ESG.BAS' 15 PRINT -
25 F='RINT
- .o F'R INT
~SS HJF'UT
" EST I MATED SL.J INLET TEMPERATURE -
", T2 40 F'RINT 45 PRINT 50 MSW=214!
60 MAF*== 13590 !
70 U=1106!
75 A=30' 80 T:3=135 !
85 CF'SW=498. 8
- io CPAF== 1
- 116 9~i Q= 955754 !
100 NN=O 105 PRINT MSW,MAF,U,A,Q 110 PRINT 115 T4=T3-Q/MAF/CPAF 125 T1=Q/MSW/CPSW+T2 l.30 TM= <T3-Tl-T4+T2):/LOG ( <T3-Tl) I C1"4-T2))
1 :::;.5 QP==U*A* TM 140 DIF=1 1 -t::-iF*/Q 145 IF ABS<DIF><*.0001 THEN END 150 T2=T2-DIF*5,
1.55 NN=NN+1 160 PRINT NN,T1,T2,T3,T4 1 TM,DIF 165 IF NN<lO GOTO 125 170 END 0
F<UN ESTIMATED SW INLET TEMPERATURE -
62.2 0
214 l
28.82023 28.81675 3
28.8140}
4 2~3. 812 2F3. 81041 28.80919 7
2f:3. 8c)825 13590
- 71. 153T7
-5. 245209E--04
--4. o::::;6427E-O*t
- 71. 15841
- --::::.. 1o*:.o1 BE*-04 71.15996
- --2. 38657E--04 71.16116
-* 1. 8:3582::::.E--04 71.16208 1106 62.20262 62.20464
- 62. 20619
- 62. 20T::'.:9
- 62. 208~51 t.2.20901
-1.410246E-04 ~
71 16 ~-s-
- ~ ?n°~6*
..;.../
b..:..*~-7-.J
-1.084805E-04 1 7c-.-
- ~*....J 1 ~55 135 955754 71..98231 71.98231
- 71. 982:31
- 71. 98T:Ol
LIST 10
'PROGRAM NAME -
ESB.BAS' 15 PRINT 25 F'RINT 30 PRINT
- ,5 INPUT 40 PRINT 4.5 PRINT II EST I MATED SW INLET TEMPERATURE --
II' T2 50 MSW==109!
60 MAF= 13!:'590 !
7Q U=1048!
75 A==30 I 80 T:3= 1."55 !
85 CPS~1J=498. 8 90 CF'AF=l.116 95 O= 955754 1 100 NN=O 105 PRINT MSW,MAF,U,A,Q
-110 F'R I NT 115 T4=T3-Q/MAF/CPAF 125 T1=0/MSW/CF'SW+T2 130 TM=<T3-T1-T4+T2)/LOG<<T3-T1)/(~4-T2))
1 35
- QF'=U*lf-A *TM 140 DIF=l ! -C!F'/C!
145 IF ABSCDIF><.0001 THEN END 150 T2=T2-*-D I F*5 15~3 NN==NN+ 1 160 PRINT NN,T1,T2,T3,T4,TM,DIF 165 IF NN<lO GOTO 125 170 END 0
f(LJl'J ESTIMATED*sw INLET TEMPERATURE= 58.83 0
1 ()9 1
- 30. 4144,~.
2
.-.::.o. 41147 3
- .o. 40907 4
30.40714 5
- o. 40559 6
."JO. 404::::.s 7
- 30. 40."535 8
- 30. 40255 13590 1048 76.40896 58.8325
- -4. C(8771 7E**-04 76.41146 58.8345
..:.4.003048E-04 76.41346
-:3. 21269E--(JL~
.58.83611 76.41506 58.8374
-2.578497E-04 76.41635 58.83843
-2. 0694 T3E*-04 7 6. 41 TJ9 5°8. s::::826
-1. 660585E--04 76.41822 58.83993
--1
- 331568E-04 r;;;, 7
- )
- 76. 41888.
~- 840v
--1. 068115E-04 135 1
-:ri:=
._*.,,__1 135.
l
~r-*
..:: *. :::i 1
-:~c:
- -*...J 1 *-:rc:
-.:*...J
- 71. 98T:.1
- 71. 98T!;1 71.982:31 71.98231 71.98231
- 71. 98'.?31.
71.98231 71.98231
(I,, *
"'°')
OC0287-0014D-NL04 ATTACHMENT 2 Consumers Power Company Palisades Plant Docket 50-255 INFORMATION ON VHX-4 CONTAINMENT AIR COOLER '
February 25, 1987 2 Pages
In our October 20, 1986, Technical Specification Change Request, Consumers Power stated our intention to maintain the environmental qualification of VHX-4 Containment Air Cooler and keep the unit in an operational condition, even though the operabiiity of this cooler was not considered in any accident analysis.
Pursuant to this objective, we have contracted Westinghouse to determine the heat removal capacity of the cooler, based upon actual operating parameters and with one of the eight sets of cooling coils removed due to excessive leakage.
A comparison of the original bases and the current analytical model follows:
WESTINGHOUSE WESTINGHOUSE CORRECTED FSAR ANALYSIS ANALYSIS*
Containment Air Flow (CFM) 30,000 38,125 38,125 Number of Cooling Coils 8
7 7
Service Water Flow (GPM) 1,625 1,422 1,422 Heat Removal (E + 06 Btu/hr) 76.6 73.4 76.0
- The vendor's analysis was compared to the heat removal calculated by Westing-house for 8 coils and found to differ by 3.6%.
This percentage was applied to Westinghouse's calculated heat removal rate for 7 coils to arrive at 76.04 E + 06 Btu/hr.
These values are viewed as sufficiently close not to warrant any system or equipment changes to claim unit operability.
The Westinghouse analysis used a larger air flow than the FSAR value.
The larger value is based on recent testing of the cooling fans.
The service water flow of 1422 gpm is based on removal of one-eighth of the coils resulting in a direct loss of one-eighth of the flow.
A cooling coil was removed for metallurgical analysis to help determine the cause of leakage.
The leakage*was attributed to the joint configuration and
- age of the cooling units.
The coolers have all been repaired and all the repairs have met the leakage acceptance criter~a.
Procurement and replacement of all the VHX-4 coils is presently being planned for the next refueling outage.
However, as noted in.Attachment 1, Item 11, this replacement has not been approved.
OC0287-0014D-NL04