ML19058A287
| ML19058A287 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07201004, 07201042 |
| Issue date: | 02/19/2019 |
| From: | Orano USA, TN Americas LLC |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19058A410 | List: |
| References | |
| E-53166 | |
| Download: ML19058A287 (26) | |
Text
Enclosure 10 to TN E-53166 Coe 1004 UFSAR Revision 16 Appendix P, Chapter 6, Section D
sufficient to offset the increase in reactivity, within statistical uncertainty, due to the presence of CCs.
The maximum keff for each class of fuel assembly and the corresponding dry keff (normal condition for storage) is shown in Table P.6-27. KENO model plots of the worst cases for each fuel assembly class are shown in Figure P.6-13 through Figure P.6-23.
D. Determination of the Most Reactive Damaged Fuel Configuration There are several mechanisms by which a fuel rod may be breached. These mechanisms may occur while the fuel is loaded in the reactor core, in the spent fuel pool, during transfer, while in temporary dry storage, and while in permanent dry storage. In addition, the type and extent of fuel rod breach can be broken down into several categories. For this calculation, the method by which the fuel rod is breached is not as important as the extent of the resultant damage. The, worst case gross damage resulting from a cask-drop accident is assumed to be either a single-ended or double-ended rod shear with moderator intrusion. The bent or bowed fuel rod cases assume that the fuel is intact but not in its nominal fuel rod pitch. It is possible that the fuel rods may be crashed inwards or bowed outwards to a certain degree. Therefore, this will be evaluated by varying the fuel rod pitch from a minimum pitch (based on clad OD) to a maximum based on the fuel compartment tube size for each fuel assembly class. All pitch variations assume a uniform rod pitch throughout the entire fuel matrix.
The single-ended fuel rod shear cases assume that a fuel rod shears in one place and is.displaced to a new location. The fuel pellets are assumed to remain in the fuel rod. This case will be evaluated by displacing one row of rods from the base fuel assembly matrix at small increments towards the side of the fuel compartment tube. The base fuel assembly matrix will be at nominal pitch and positioned in the "inward" position within the 24PTH-DSC to maximize the separation distance between the fuel array and the sheared row of fuel rods. A smaller rod pitch for the base fuel assembly matrix was not chosen because it has been shown from the pitch cases that decreasing the rod pitch decreases reactivity. Increasing the base fuel assembly rod pitch will increase reactivity, however, the resulting model is similar to and is bounded by the rod pitch varying cases presented above and therefore will not be duplicated here. The single shear cases are analyzed for all fuel assembly classes.
The double-ended fuel rod shear cases assume that the fuel rod shears in two places and the intact fuel rod piece is separated from the parent fuel rod. Three resulting conditions are exhibited by the occurrence of a double-ended rod shear. These are, the fuel rod piece can remain in place, it can be displaced in the same plane, or it can be displaced to a different plane.
The "remain in place" situation results in no deviation from the base fuel assembly matrix, and is therefore considered trivial and will not be evaluated separately. The fuel rod piece displaced in the same plane is equivalent to the single-ended rod shear case discussed above and will not be reevaluated in these cases. The fuel rod piece displaced in a different plane results in two possibilities: an added rod or a removed rod. As in the single-ended shear cases, the base fuel assembly matrix will be positioned in the "inward" position of the 24PTH-DSC to allow room for a row of displaced fuel rods. One row of fuel rods of different lengths will be removed from a section of the assembly and added to another to determin~ if the system exhibits any trends.
The nominal rod pitch is used for the base fuel matrix just as in the single-ended shear rod cases.
NUH-003 Revision 12 PageP.6-18 February 2012 I
Due to the size of the B&W 15xl5 fuel assembly relative to the fuel compartment tube, the double-ended rod shear case will not be analyzed since the minimum size of the postulated 15x16 fuel assembly exceeds the fuel compartment tube size. However, all the other fuel assembly classes are analyzed for the double-ended shear configuration.
The first step is to determine the most reactive damaged fuel assembly geometry. This was completed using limiting fixed poison loading, soluble boron concentration and assembly emichment for the various fuel assembly classes. The limiting parameters used for this study are shown in Table P.6-28 and are based on selecting the highest permissible initial enrichment of 5.00 w/o U-235 for all fuel assembly classes. All 24 assembly locations were filled with damaged fuel assemblies. The intent of these calculations is to determine the most reactive geometry, not to meet the USL. The following is a breakdown of runs made in this analysis:
Optimum Rod Pitch Study (for fuel assemblies and rod storage baskets) including enough missing fuel rods in an assembly to demonstrate that the worst case fuel geometry has been determined.
Single-ended Shear Study.
Double-ended Shear Study.
Shifting of fuel assemblies beyond ( 6 inches above) the poison sheet height.
The canister/cask model for this evaluation differs from the actual design in the following ways:
The boron 10 content is 10% lower than the minimum required in the B-Al poison plates and 25% lower than the minimum required in the Boral plates, The neutron shield and the neutron shieldjackaet (outer skin) of the cask are conservatively replaced with water between the casks, and The worst case material conditions, as determined in the previous Section above, are modeled.
The "egg-crate" section length is modeled as 23.23 inches long (21.48" basket section+
- 1. 75" steel insert plate). The actual design for the 24PTH-S has an "egg-crate" section length of23.145 inches (20.77" basket section+ 2.375" steel insert plate).
With the selection of the most reactive damaged fuel assembly geometry, the next set of analyses determined the maximum kerr for various damaged fuel assembly loading configurations in the NUHOMS 24PTH-DSC. The most reactive damaged fuel assembly geometry for each fuel assembly class thus determined will be bounding on all other damaged fuel geometries for the corresponding fuel assembly classes. Cases are then run to determine soluble boron loading for selected initial U235 emichments for loading up to12 damaged fuel assemblies around the outside assembly locations. Cases are analyzed for all the configurations described in Table P.6-4.
NUH-003 Revision 9 Page P.6-19 January 2006
D. l Effect o(Rod Pitch and Number of Fuel Rods The first set of damaged fuel analyses involved a study on the effect of the fuel rod pitch on system reactivity. KENO models with rod pitches ranging from a minimum corresponding to the clad OD to a maximum limited by the fuel compartment tube size are developed for each fuel assembly class. The results of the rod pitch study are shown in Table P.6-29. These results indicate that for nearly all the fuel assembly classes, the largest pitch (limited by the fuel compartment tube size) resulted in the most reactive configuration.
Once the most reactive pitch was determined, a series of calculations were performed that added or subtracted fuel rods from the base assembly to ensure that the limiting fuel assembly geometry was determined. The removal of fuel rods was restricted to those in the interior locations of the fuel assembly lattices to ensure that neutron communication is maintained. The selection of the rod loading patterns is aimed at maximizing the reactivity and those that are investigated are representative. All combinations of fuel rod positions are not investigated here for the sheer enormity of the task. It is expected that the reactivities of other cases (not investigated) with the same number of rods but with different loading patterns are within statistical uncertainty. Due to the presence of soluble boron in the moderator, it is expected that the maximum reactivity would occur when empty rod locations are replaced by fuel rods. These calculations are repeated for all classes of fuel assemblies at the optimum pitch value and the optimum moderator density.
However, for the most reactive configuration, the moderator density is varied to determine the maximum value ofkerr. These results are shown in Table P.6-30. The results indicate that the most reactive configuration occurs when the fuel rods are at an optimum pitch with all the empty locations (guide tube and instrument tube) are replaced with fuel rods.
D.2 Single Ended Shear Study The next sets of analyses performed are for the Single-ended rod shear studies. The Single-ended Rod Shear Study depicts the fuel assembly with its last row of rods tom away from the rest of the assembly. The displacement of the sheared row of rods varies radially from fuel assembly up to a maximum that is governed by the fuel assembly width and the fuel compartment tube size. To model this in KENO, the base case was slightly modified. First, the inward arrangement of fuel assemblies was modeled using only 4 units in KENO -- 201,204, 211 and 214 instead of 24 units ( one for each assembly position). Also, for a given fuel lattice, the fuel assemblies are modeled as a XX by (XX-1) array where XX corresponds to the fuel assembly class. For example, the B&W 15x15 fuel assembly is modeled as a 15x14 array. Unit 200 is a XX by 1 array comprising of the single sheared row of rods. The units 201,204,211 and 214, therefore comprise of two arrays, the array describing the truncated fuel assembly and the sheared row of fuel rods. The displaced row of rod array is then shifted (separation distance is "d") towards the top or bottom end of the fuel compartment tube ( or away from the fuel assembly). The amount of fuel remains the same, i.e. no new fuel is added to the system.
Nominal rod pitch for all of the fuel assembly classes is used for the base XX by (XX-1) fuel assembly. In the cask drop accident scenarios, even though highly unlikely the fuel assembly is assumed to be crushed as a result of the drop and therefore it may cause local decreases in the rod pitch of the assembly. However, the rod pitch studies outlined above show that a decrease in the fuel rod pitch results in a decrease in system reactivity, therefore for the single-ended rod NUH-003 Revision 14 Page P.6-20 September 2014 I w
shear study runs, rod pitch is modeled at nominal value. The study is repeated for all fuel assembly classes and at varying moderator density for important separation distances.
At minimum shear distance, the results of this evaluation are compared to those given in Table P.6-29 to determine whether two different KENO models of the same geometry result in statistically insignificant differences. An example model plot of a single ended shear configuration with WE I4x14 fuel assembly is shown in Figure P.6-20. The results of this evaluation are shown in Table P.6-31. The results indicate that the differences in KENO models are statistically insignificant and that there exists an optimum shear row separation distance for each class of fuel assembly where the reactivity is highest.
D.3 Double Ended Shear Study The three Double-ended Rod Shear cases model a row (XX by I array) of dislocated rods severed at different sections axially and then displacing to other sections of the DSC in order to define a conservative bounding condition for fuel rod location subsequent to a double-ended rod shear. To model this in KENO, the base case was accordingly modified. First, the inward arrangement of fuel assemblies was modeled using only 4 units in KENO -- 201,204,211 and 214 instead of 24 units ( one for each assembly position). A new KENO unit, UNIT 11 forms one axial section of the basket that models the un-sheared fuel assemblies. The sheared fuel assemblies depleted by one row of fuel rods are modeled as a XX by (XX-I) array where XX corresponds to the fuel assembly class. The corresponding KENO units for the fuel assembly positions are 301, 304, 311 and 314. The unit 12 forms the axial section of the basket that models this depleted array of fuel assemblies. The fuel assemblies that contain the sheared-migrated row of fuel rods are modeled as a XX by (XX+ I) array where XX corresponds to the fuel assembly class. The corresponding KENO units for the fuel assembly positions are 401,404,411 and 414.
The unit 13 forms the axial section of the basket that models this depleted array of fuel assemblies. Depending on the fraction of double shear, the array 11 (an axial array of units 11, 12 and 13) is constructed to calculate the reactivity effect. Due to the height of a single axial segment (23.23"), the total axial height of the model for these studies is 139.38" (23.23*6).
However, periodic axial boundary conditions are applied making the model essentially infinite.
The same rod pitch assumptions made for the Single-ended Shear runs also apply here. Basically three types of double ended shear studies are evaluated. The first is a (1/2) shear where the sheared row breaks into two equal sections resulting in one-half of the fuel assembly that is defined by a rod array containing an extra row of fuel rods while the other half that is defined by an array depleted by one row of fuel rods. The second is a (1/3) shear where the sheared row breaks into two unequal sections measuring a third of the fuel assembly length and two-thirds of the fuel assembly length respectively. Therefore, the fuel assembly can be defined by three equal axial sections, one with a regular array of fuel rods, one with an extra row of fuel rods and the other with a depleted row of fuel rods. The same mechanism can be extended to other shear ratios but the effect on reactivity is expected to reduce with reduction in the shear ratio. The (1/4) shear is also analyzed in this study. Due to the size of the B&W I5x15 fuel assembly relative to the fuel compartment tube internal dimension, a double ended shear break is not credible.
Therefore, this study is performed for all classes of fuel assemblies except the B&W I5x15 class.
The internal moderator density is varied to determine the kerr at optimum density.
NUH-003 Revision 9 Page P.6-21 January 2006
At the no-shear simulation, the results of this evaluation are compared to those given in Table P.6-29 to determine whether two different KENO models of the same geometry result in statistically insignificant differences. An example plot of a double ended shear configuration with CE 16xl6 fuel assembly is shown in Figure P.6-21. A sample input.file for the CE 15xl 5 assembly with double shear is provided in Section P.6.6.2. The results of this evaluation for CE fuel assemblies are shown Table P.6-32. Results of the Double-ended rod shear study show that the movement of one exterior row of 1/2 of the fuel assembly length is the most reactive.
D.4 Shifting o(Fuel Beyond Fixed Poison This study analyzes the effect of shifting of loose rods beyond the height of the poison plates.
The calculational model assumes that a six-inch axial section of the entire fuel assembly shifts beyond the poison plates. This assumption conservatively bounds all the cases associaJed with the shifting of loose rods like sliding of a single rod, sliding of a row of single sheared rods etc.
To model this in KENO, the base case was accordingly modified. First, the inward arrangement of fuel assemblies was modeled using only 4 units in KENO -- 201,204,211 and 214 instead of 24 units ( one for each assembly position). A new KENO unit, UNIT 11 forms one axial section of the basket that models the fuel assemblies covered with poison. A six-inch axial section of the fuel assemblies containing the uncovered fuel assemblies are modeled with the KENO units 301, 304,311 and 314. The unit 12 forms the axial section of the basket that models this uncovered section of fuel assemblies. Finally, the array 11 ( an axial array of units 11 and 12) is constructed to calculate the reactivity effect. Periodic axial boundary conditions are utilized to make this model essentially infinite in length. This study is performed for all fuel assembly classes with varying moderator density.
The results of this evaluation are shown in Table P.6-33.
E. Most Reactive Damaged Configuration and Danco-ff Factors The fuel-loading configuration of the canister/cask affects the reactivity of the package. Several series of analyses performed in the previous section evaluated the various damaged assembly configurations. A comparison of the maximum keff due to the various damaged assembly configurations is shown in Table P.6-34. The most reactive damaged assembly configuration is based on the one with optimum pitch with the empty locations replaced with fuel rods. This configuration is the design basis configuration for all fuel assembly classes. This configuration will be utilized to determine the keff of the NUHOMS 24PTH DSC containing damaged fuel assemblies.
For the configurations with both intact and damaged fuel assemblies loaded in a single DSC, modifications in the KENO input files are necessary to represent both the fuel lattices accurately.
The fuel lattice data for the damaged fuel assemblies are provided through the "more data" card while those for the intact fuel assemblies are provided through the usual "squarepitch" card. This is due to the limitation of KENO to handle only one "squarepitch" card. The "more data" card requires the input of a Danco ff factor that represents the resonance absorption details in the damaged fuel lattice. The dancoff factor for the damaged fuel is obtained from a previously run KENO output containing a single fuel type. The Dancoff factor varies with moderator density NUH-003 Revision 14 Page P.6-22 September 2014 I
and to some extent with soluble boron concentration. Therefore, in order to utilize two fuel types in the same KENO model, the Dancoff factors for the various conditions listed in Table P. 6-35 are obtained from separate KENO calculations. The results for the Dancofffactor KENO outputs that are required to be input to the final calculations are shown in Table P.6-35. For the dry computer cases (moderator density= 0.01 %), a conservative Dancoff factor of 0.99999 is used.
F. Determination of the Damaged Fuel Loading Configuration for each Fuel Class The most reactive damaged fuel configuration as determined above is with the fuel assembly defined by the fuel rods at optimum pitch and the empty guide tube and instrument tube locations replaced with fuel rods. The following analysis uses this configuration for the damaged fuel assemblies to determine the maximum allowed initial enrichment as a function of poison plate loading and soluble boron concentration for each assembly class. The design basis damaged assembly and the most reactive intact assembly type (from Table P.6-3) for each assembly class is used for each evaluation. Only the fuel assembly type, the number of damaged fuel assemblies per DSC and the fixed and soluble poison loading is changed for each model. In addition, for each case the internal moderator density is varied to determine the peak reactivity for the specific configuration. For these analyses, the moderator in the cask-canister annulus is treated as internal moderator except that it is not borated water ( density of the water in the annulus changes with that of the borated water). The maximum initial enrichment for each assembly class as a function of soluble boron concentration and poison plate loading is documented in Table P.6-4.
The canister/cask model for this evaluation differs from the actual design in the following ways:
the boron 10 content in the poison plates is 10% lower than the minimum required, the neutron shield and the neutron shieldjackaet (outer skin) of the cask are conservatively replaced with water between the casks, and the worst case material conditions, as determined Section P.6.4.2 for intact fuel, are modeled.
The "egg-crate" section length is modeled as 23.23 inches long (21.48" basket section+
- 1. 75" steel insert plate). The actual design for the 24PTH-S has an "egg-crate" section length of23.145 inches (20.77" basket section+ 2.375" steel insert plate).
The soluble boron concentration credited in this analysis is varied from 2100 ppm to a maximum of2750 ppm. The maximum analyzed initial enrichment is 5.0 wt.% U-235. The DSC is loaded with a maximum of 12 damaged fuel assemblies at the outermost positions. A sample input file is included in Section P.6.6.2.
NUH-003 Revision 14 Page P.6-23 September 2014 I
Table P.6-28 Key Parameters Utilized in the Damaged/Failed Assembly Calculations Fuel Assembly Class NUH-003 Revision 14 B&W 15x15 CE 14x14 CE 15x15 CE 16x16 WE 14x14 WE 15x15 WE 17x17 Enrichment (Wt. % U-235) 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Page P.6-148 Basket Type Minimum Soluble Boron (ppm boron)
IC or2C 2700 1B or 2B 2400 IC or 2C 2600 1B or2B 2500 1B or 2B 2400 IC or 2C 2500 IC or 2C 2600 September 2014 I w
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-29 Rod Pitch Study Results Model Description kKENO lo-B&W 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron= 2700 oom, Type lC or 2C Basket Pitch= 0.4300", IMD=60%
0.6749 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4300", IMD=80%
0.6843 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4300", IMD=100%
0.7073 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=60%
0.7212 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=80%
0.7375 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=100%
0.7584 0.0009 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=60%
0.7763 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=80%
0.7975 0.0012 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=l00%
0.8102 0.0011 Pitch = 0.5000", IMD=60%
0.8288 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=80%
0.8470 0.0012 Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=l00%
0.8571 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5250", IMD=60%
0.8723 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5250", IMD=80%
0.8903 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5250", IMD=l00%
0.8911 0.0011 Pitch = 0.5500", IMD=60%
0.9007 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5500", IMD=80%
0.9211 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5500", IMD=100%
0.9194 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5680", IMD=60%
0.9156 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5680", IMD=80%
0.9327 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5680", IMD=l00%
0.9283 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=60%
0.9210 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=70%
0.9309 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=80%
0.9366 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=90%
0.9356 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=l00%
0.9298 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=60%
0.9256 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=70%
0.9369 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=80%
0.9390 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=90%
0.9338 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=l00%
0.9258 0.0009 Page P.6-149 kerr 0.6769 0.6863 0.7095 0.7234 0.7395 0.7602 0.7783 0.7999 0.8124 0.8310 0.8494 0.8591 0.8741 0.8921 0.8933 0.9027 0.9229 0.9214 0.9176 0.9345 0.9303 0.9230 0.9327 0.9386 0.9374 0.9318 0.9276 0.9389 0.9410 0.9354 0.9276 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-29 Rod Pitch Study Results
( Continued)
Model Description kKENO lcr CE I4xl4 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2400 oom, Type 1B or 2B Basket Pitch= 0.4600", IMD=80%
0.6713 0.0009 Pitch= 0.4600", IMD=80%
0.7202 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=80%
0.8037 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5400", IMD=80%
0.8677 0.0012 Pitch= 0.5800", IMD=80%
0.9145 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=50%
0.9244 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=60%
0.9387 0.0008 Pitch= 0.6200", 1MD=70%
0.9360 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=80%
0.9349 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=90%
0.9236 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=l00%
0.9135 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=50%
0.9277 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=60%
0.9366 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6260". IMD=70%
0.9374 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=80%
0.9326 0.0008 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=90%
0.9222 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=l00%
0.9090 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=50%
0.9300 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=60%
0.9381 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=70%
0.9375 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=80%
0.9301 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=90%
0.9165 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=100%
0.9021 0.0008 CE 15x15 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2600 nnm, Type IC or 2C Basket Pitch= 0.4180", IMD=60%
0.6399 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4180", IMD=80%
0.6476 0.0009 Pitch= 0.4180", IMD=l00%
0.6640 0.0011 Pitch = 0.4500", IMD=60%
0.7162 0.0010 Pitch = 0.4500", IMD=80%
0.7325 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=l00%
0.7523 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=60%
0.7725 0.0009 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=80%
0.7910 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=100%
0.8094 0.0012 Page P.6-150 k..rr 0.6731 0.7224 0.8059 0.8701 0.9163 0.9264 0.9403 0.9380 0.9367 0.9256 0.9155 0.9297 0.9386 0.9392 0.9342 0.9240 0.9110 0.9318 0.9399 0.9393 0.9319 0.9183 0.9037 0.6419 0.6494 0.6662 0.7182 0.7347 0.7543 0.7743 0.7930 0.8118 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-29 Rod Pitch Study Results
( Continued)
Model Description kKENO lcr CE 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2600 nnm, Type IC or 2C Basket Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=60%
0.8227 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=80%
0.8424 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=100%
0.8552 0.0010 Pitcb = 0.5250", IMD=60%
0.8640 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5250", IMD=80%
0.8876 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5250", IMD=100%
0.8946 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5500", IMD=60%
0.8971 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5500", IMD=80%
0.9169 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5500", IMD=100%
0.9212 O.OOll Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=60%
0.9169 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=70%
0.9302 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=80%
0.9361 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=90%
0.9369 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=100%
0.9332 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=60%
0.9259 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=70%
0.9372 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=80%
0.9391 0.0009 Pitch = 0.5750", IMD=90%
0.9369 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=100%
0.9311 0.0011 CE 16x16 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron = 2500 unm, Type 1B or 2B Basket Pitch =0.3820", IMD=80%
0.6680 0.0009 Pitch= 0.4200", IMD=80%
0.7672 0.0012 Pitch= 0.4600", IMD=80%
0.8486 0.0013 Pitch= 0.5060", IMD=80%
0.9155 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5400", IMD=50%
0.9249 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5400", IMD=60%
0.9375 0.0009 Pitch = 0.5400", IMD=70%
0.9391 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5400", IMD=80%
0.9363 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5400", IMD=90%
0.9279 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5400", IMD=100%
0.9169 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5478", IMD=50%
0.9265 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5478", IMD=60%
0.9373 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5478", IMD=70%
0.9404 0.0009 Page P.6-151 k..rr 0.8247 0.8446 0.8572 0.8662 0.8898 0.8966 0.8989 0.9189 0.9234 0.9187 0.9322 0.9379 0.9387 0.9352 0.9281 0.9394 0.9409 0.9389 0.9333 0.6698 0.7696 0.8512 0.9175 0.9267 0.9393 0.9409 0.9379 0.9295 0.9185 0.9283 0.9391 0.9422 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-29 Rod Pitch Study Results
( Continued)
Model Description kKENO lcr CE 16xl6 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2500 oom, Type 1B or 2B Basket Pitch= 0.5478", IMD=80%
0.9355 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5478", IMD=90%
0.9257 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5478", IMD=100%
0.9147 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5580", IMD=50%
0.9285 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5580", IMD=60%
0.9384 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5580", IMD=70%
0.9389 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5580", IMD=80%
0.9332 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5580", 1MD=90%
0.9221 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5580", IMD=100%
0.9080 0.0010 WE 14x14 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron= 2400 onm, Tvoe 1B or 2B Basket Pitch= 0.4220", IMD=80%
0.6674 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4600". IMD=80%
0.7539 0.0010 Pitch= 0.500011, IMD=80%
0.8273 0.0012 Pitch= 0.5400", IMD=80%
0.8841 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5560", IMD=80%
0.9015 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5800", IMD=80%
0.9240 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=50%
0.9306 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=60%
0.9420 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=70%
0.9428 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=80%
0.9363 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=90%
0.9258 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6200", IMD=100%
0.9112 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=50%
0.9341 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=60%
0.9415 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=70%
0.9421 0.0011 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=80%
0.9357 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=90%
0.9269 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6260", IMD=l00%
0.9104 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=50%
0.9356 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=60%
0.9434 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=70%
0.9419 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=80%
0.9321 0.0010 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=90%
0.9194 0.0009 Pitch= 0.6400", IMD=100%
0.9020 0.0010 Page P.6-152 k..rr 0.9377 0.9273 0.9165 0.9305 0.9400 0.9409 0.9350 0.9237 0.9100 0.6696 0.7559 0.8297 0.8863 0.9033 0.9260 0.9324 0.9440 0.9448 0.9381 0.9276 0.9132 0.9359 0.9433 0.9443 0.9375 0.9287 0.9122 0.9374 0.9452 0.9439 0.9341 0.9212 0.9040 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-29 Rod Pitch Study Results
( Continued)
Model Description kKENo 10' WE 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enriclunent = 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2500 ppm, Type IC or 2C Basket Pitch= 0.4220", IMD=60%
0.6699 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4220", IMD=80%
0.6845 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4220", IMD=l00%
0.7089 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=60%
0.7361 0.0009 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=80%
0.7532 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=100%
0.7770 0.0012 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=60%
0.7888 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=80%
0.8080 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=l00%
0.8271 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=60%
0.8370 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=80%
0.8592 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5000", IMD=l00%
0.8662 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5250", IMD=60%
0.8766 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5250", IMD=80%
0.8966 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5250", IMD=l00%
0.8984 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5500", IMD=60%
0.9068 0.0011 Pitch= 0.5500", IMD=80%
0.9236 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5500", IMD=100%
0.9206 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5630", IMD=60%
0.9167 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5630", IMD=80%
0.9332 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5630", IMD=l00%
0.9263 O.OOll Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=60%
0.9228 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=70%
0.9335 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=80%
0.9376 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=90%
0.9343 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5750", IMD=IOO%
0.9275 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=60%
0.9268 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=70%
0.9350 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=80%
0.9379 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=90%
0.9308 O.OOll Pitch= 0.5950", IMD=100%
0.9210 0.0008 Pitch= 0.5959", IMD=60%
0.9308 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5959", IMD=70%
0.9370 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5959", IMD=80%
0.9367 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5959", IMD=90%
0.9310 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5959", IMD=100%
0.9232 0.0008 Page P.6-153 kerr 0.6721 0.6865 0.7109 0.7379 0.7552 0.7794 0.7908 0.8102 0.8291 0.8388 0.8614 0.8682 0.8784 0.8988 0.9004 0.9090 0.9254 0.9226 0.9185 0.9350 0.9285 0.9248 0.9353 0.9394 0.9361 0.9295 0.9288 0.9366 0.9399 0.9330 0.9226 0.9326 0.9388 0.9385 0.9328 0.9248 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-29 Rod Pitch Study Results.
( Concluded)
Model Description kKENO lcr WE l 7xl 7 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron 2600 = ppm, Type 1 C or 2C Basket Pitch= 0.3740", IMD=60%
0.6675 0.0010 Pitch= 0.3740", IMD=80%
0.6792 0.0011 Pitch= 0.3740", IMD=100%
0.7034 0.0013 Pitch= 0.4000", IMD=60%
0.7357 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4000", IMD=80%
0.7550 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4000", IMD=100%
0.7757 0.0013 Pitch= 0.4250", IMD=60%
0.7975 0.0009 Pitch= 0.4250", IMD=80%
0.8184 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4250", IMD=l00%
0.8317 0.0013 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=60%
0.8502 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=80%
0.8709 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4500", IMD=100%
0.8746 0.0011 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=60%
0.8911 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=80%
0.9106 0.0012 Pitch= 0.4750", IMD=100%
0.9108 0.0010 Pitch= 0.4960", IMD=60%
0.9135 0.0012 Pitch= 0.4960", IMD=80%
0.9323 0.0008 Pitch= 0.4960", IMD=100%
0.9285 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5100", IMD=60%
0.9205 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5100", IMD=70%
0.9311 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5100", IMD=80%
0.9370 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5100", IMD=90%
0.9354 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5100", IMD=100%
0.9300 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5400", IMD=60%
0.9264 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5240", IMD=70%
0.9363 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5240", IMD=80%
0.9380 0.0010 Pitch= 0.5240", IMD=90%
0.9334 0.0009 Pitch= 0.5240", IMD=100%
0.9256 0.0009 Page P.6-154 kerr 0.6695 0.6814 0.7060 0.7377 0.7572 0.7783 0.7993 0.8206 0.8343 0.8524 0.8729 0.8768 0.8931 0.9130 0.9128 0.9159 0.9339 0.9303 0.9223 0.9331 0.9390 0.9374 0.9320 0.9284 0.9381 0.9400 0.9352 0.9274 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-30 Optimum Rod Pitch with Addition and Deletion of Rods Model Description kKENO 10' kerr B&W 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2700 nnm. Type 1 C or 2C Basket, pitch= 0.5950" Add 00 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9390 0.0010 0.9410 Add 01 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9374 0.0009 0.9392 Add 04 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9428 0.0009 0.9446 Add 05 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9455 0.0011 0.9477 Add 09 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9493 0.0010 0.9513 Add 13 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9554 0.0009 0.9572 Add 17 Rods, IMD=50%
0.9094 0.0010 0.9114 Add 17 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9347 0.0009 0.9365 Add 17 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9502 0.0011 0.9524 Add 17 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9585 0.0011 0.9607 Add 17 Rods, IMD=90%
0.9611 0.0008 0.9627 Add 17 Rods, IMD= 100%
0.9584 0.0009 0.9602 Remove 02 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9334 0.0008 0.9350 Remove 04 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9314 0.0009 0.9332 Remove 08 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9262 0.0008 0.9278 Remove 12 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9194 0.0008 0.9210 Remove 16 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9129 0.0009 0.9147 Remove 20 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9074 0.0009 0.9092 Remove 24 Rods, IMD=80%
0.8987 0.0009 0.9005 CE 14xl4 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2400 ppm, Type 1B or 2B Basket, pitch= 0.6200" Add 00 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9387 0.0008 0.9403 Add 04 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9414 0.0010 0.9434 Add 08 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9468 0.0010 0.9488 Add 12 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9559 0.0011 0.9581 Add 16 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9588 0.0010 0.9608 Add 20 Rods, IMD=50%
0.9358 0.0010 0.9378 Add 20 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9600 0.0009 0.9618 Add 20 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9732 0.0009 0.9750 Add 20 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9768 0.0012 0.9792 Add 20 Rods, IMD=90%
0.9790 0.0010 0.9810 Add 20 Rods, IMD= 100%
0.9748 0.0008 0.9764 Remove 02 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9346 0.0008 0.9362 Remove 04 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9316 0.0009 0.9334 Remove 08 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9246 0.0011 0.9268 Remove 12 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9188 0.0010 0.9208 Remove 16 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9163 0.0009 0.9181 Remove 20 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9085 0.0009 0.9103 Remove 24 Rods, IMD=60%
0.8995 0.0010 0.9015 Page P.6-155 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-30 Optimum Rod Pitch with Addition and Deletion of Rods
( Continued)
Model Description kKENO 1cr kerr CE 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron= 2600 oom Type 1 C or 2C Basket, oitch = 0.5750" Add 00 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9391 0.0009 0.9409 Add 01 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9428 0.0009 0.9446 Add 05 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9466 0.0008 0.9482 Add 09 Rods, IMD=50%
0.9120 0.0010 0.9140 Add 09 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9354 0.0009 0.9372 Add 09 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9466 0.0010 0.9486 Add 09 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9540 0.0009 0.9558 Add 09 Rods, IMD=90%
0.9529 0.0009 0.9547 Add 09 Rods, IMD= 100%
0.9490 0.0010 0.9510 Remove 02 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9388 0.0009 0.9406 Remove 04 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9336 0.0008 0.9352 Remove 08 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9281 0.0010 0.9301 Remove 12 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9228 0.0009 0.9246 Remove 16 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9169 0.0009 0.9187 Remove 20 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9099 0.0011 0.9121 Remove 24 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9035 0.0009 0.9053 CE 16xl6 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt: %
Soluble Boron= 2500 uum Type 1B or 2B Basket, pitch= 0.5478" Add 00 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9404 0.0009 0.9422 Add 04 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9454 0.0009 0.9472 Add 08 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9525 0.0010 0.9545 Add 12 Rods IMD=70%
0.9583 0.0010 0.9603 Add 16 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9639 0.0010 0.9659 Add 20 Rods, IMD=50%
0.9368 0.0009 0.9386 Add 20 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9549 0.0009 0.9567 Add 20 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9654 0.0009 0.9672 Add 20 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9687 0.0009 0.9705 Add 20 Rods, IMD=90%
0.9688 0.0009 0.9706 Add 20 Rods, IMD=l00%
0.9622 0.0010 0.9642 Remove 02 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9370 0.0009 0.9388 Remove 04 Rods IMD=70%
0.9363 0.0009 0.9381 Remove 08 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9310 0.0009 0.9328 Remove 12 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9245 0.0009 0.9263 Remove 16 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9187 0.0010 0.9207 Remove 20 Rods IMD=70%
0.9141 0.0008 0.9157 Remove 24 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9057 0.0010 0.9077 Page P.6-156 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-30 Optimum Rod Pitch with Addition and Deletion of Rods
( Continued)
Model Description kKENO lcr k..rr WE 14xl4 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2400 nnm, Tvoe 1B or 2B Basket pitch= 0.6400" Add 00 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9434 0.0009 0.9452 Add 01 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9447 0.0009 0.9465 Add 05 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9502 0.0009 0.9520 Add 09 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9540 0.0010 0.9560 Add 13 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9566 0.0010 0.9586 Add 17 Rods, Il\\ID=50%
0.9498 0.0010 0.9518 Add 17 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9648 O.OOll 0.9670 Add 17 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9703 0.0010 0.9723 Add 17 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9668 0.0010 0.9688 Add 17 Rods, Il\\ID=90%
0.9599 0.0010 0.9619 Add 17 Rods, Il\\ID= 100%
0.9508 0.0009 0.9526 Remove 02 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9400 0.0010 0.9420 Remove 04 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9372 O.OOll 0.9394 Remove 08 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9293 0.0008 0.9309 Remove 12 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9217 0.0009 0.9235 Remove 16 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9170 0.0010 0.9190 Remove 20 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9074 0.0010 0.9094 WE 15x15 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2500 nnm, Tvoe IC or 2C Basket, pitch= 0.5950" Add 00 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9379 0.0010 0.9399 Add O 1 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9384 0.0009 0.9402 Add 04 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9426 0.0009 0.9444 Add 05 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9463 0.0009 0.9481 Add 09 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9486 0.0008 0.9502 Add 13 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9534 0.0010 0.9554 Add 17 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9597 0.0009 0.9615 Add 21 Rods, Il\\ID=50%
0.9145 0.0010 0.9165 Add 21 Rods, Il\\ID=60%
0.9403 0.0010 0.9423 Add 21 Rods, I1vID=70%
0.9561 0.0010 0.9581 Add 21 Rods, I1vID=80%
0.9636 0.0010 0.9656 Add 21 Rods, IMD=90%
0.9659 0.0010 0.9679 Add 21 Rods, Il\\ID= 100%
0.9648 0.0010 0.9668 Remove 02 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9341 0.0008 0.9357 Remove 04 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9314 0.0009 0.9332 Remove 08 Rods. Il\\ID=80%
0.9235 0.0009 0.9253 Remove 12 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9157 0.0009 0.9175 Remove 16 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.9107 0.0009 0.9125 Remove 20 Rods. Il\\ID=80%
0.9107 0.0009 0.9125 Remove 24 Rods, Il\\ID=80%
0.8959 0.0009 0.8977 Page P.6-157 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-30 Optimum Rod Pitch with Addition and Deletion of Rods (Concluded)
Model Description kKENO lcr kerr WE l 7xl 7 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2600 nnm, Type IC or 2C Basket, pitch= 0.5240" Add 00 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9380 0.0010 0.9400 Add 01 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9383 0.0009 0.9401 Add 04 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9402 0.0010 0.9422 Add 05 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9426 0.0009 0.9444 Add 09 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9466 0.0009 0.9484 Add 13 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9500 0.0009 0.9518 Add 17 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9531 0.0009 0.9549 Add 21 Rods, lMD=80%
0.9551 0.0010 0.9571 Add 25 Rods, IMD=50%
0.9100 0.0010 0.9120 Add 25 Rods, IMD=60%
0.9328 0.0010 0.9348 Add 25 Rods, IMD=70%
0.9516 0.0009 0.9534 Add 25 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9612 0.0010 0.9632 Add 25 Rods, IMD=90%
0.9644 0.0011 0.9666 Add 25 Rods, IMD=100%
0.9625 0.0009 0.9643 Remove 02 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9343 0.0009 0.9361 Remove 04 Rods IMD=80%
0.9326 0.0009 0.9344 Remove 08 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9281 0.0009 0.9299 Remove 12 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9251 0.0010 0.9271 Remove 16 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9181 0.0011 0.9203 Remove 20 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9150 0.0009 0.9168 Remove 24 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9087 0.0008 0.9103 Remove 28 Rods, IMD=80%
0.9045 0.0008 0.9061 Page P.6-158 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-31 Single Ended Shear Evaluation Results Model Description kKENO lo-B&W 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2700 nnm, Type lC or 2C Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9327 0.0009 SS Model, d=0.00", IMD 80%
0.9338 0.0009 d=0.20", IMD=80%
0.9340 0.0009 d=0.30", IMD=60%
0.9165 0.0010 d=0.30", IMD=70%
0.9289 0.0009 d=0.30", IMD=80%
0.9352 0.0008 d=0.30", IMD=90%
0.9337 0.0010 d=0.40", IMD=60%
0.9194 0.0008 d=0.40", IMD=70%
0.9291 0.0011 d=0.40", IMD=80%
0.9354 0.0010 d=0.40", IMD=90%
0.9329 0.0010 d=0.50", IMD=60%
0.9172 0.0010 d=0.50", IMD=70%
0.9316 0.0010 d=0.50", IMD=80%
0.9345 0.0009 d=0.50", IMD=90%
0.9339 0.0011 d=0.622", Il\\ID=60%
0.9167 0.0011 d=0.622", IMD=70%
0.9293 0.0009 d=0.622", Il\\ID=80%
0.9353 0.0010 d=0.622", IMD=90%
0.9341 0.0011 CE 14x14 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2400 ppm, Tvoe 1B or 2B Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9145 0.0009 SS Model, d=0.00", IMD 80%
0.9167 0.0010 d=0.20", IMD=80%
0.9190 0.0009 d=0.40", IMD=60%
0.9155 0.0010 d=0.40", IMD=70%
0.9219 0.0011 d=0.40", IMD=80%
0.9219 0.0010 d=0.40", IMD=90%
0.9161 0.0012 d=0.80", IMD=60%
0.9181 0.0009 d=0.80", IMD=70%
0.9238 0.0009 d=0.80", IMD=80%
0.9221 0.0009 d=0.80", IMD=90%
0.9166 0.0009 d=l.20", IMD 60%
0.9192 0.0009 d=l.20", IMD 70%
0.9244 0.0009 d=l.20", IMD=80%
0.9214 0.0010 d=l.30", IMD=90%
0.9144 0.0008 d=l.50", IMD=80%
0.9208 0.0011 d=l.638", IMD=80%
0.9189 0.0010 Page P.6-159 kerr 0.9345 0.9356 0.9358 0.9185 0.9307 0.9368 0.9357 0.9210 0.9313 0.9374 0.9349 0.9192 0.9336 0.9363 0.9361 0.9189 0.9311 0.9373 0.9363 0.9163 0.9187 0.9208 0.9175 0.9241 0.9239 0.9185 0.9199 0.9256 0.9239 0.9184 0.9210 0.9262 0.9234 0.9160 0.9230 0.9209 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-31 Single Ended Shear Evaluation Results
( Continued)
Model Description kKENO 10' CE 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2600 ppm, Type 1 C or 2C Basket Base KENO Model, Th1D 80%
0.9169 0.0010 SS Model, d=0.00", Th1D 80%
0.9178 0.0010 d=0.20", Th1D=80%
0.9209 0.0011 d=0.40", Th1D=60%
0.8986 0.0010 d=0.40", Th1D=70%
0.9131 0.0011 d=0.40", Th1D=80%
0.9226 0.0009 d=0.40", Th1D=90%
0.9239 0.0009 d=0.70", IMD=60%
0.9011 0.0010 d=0.70", Th1D=70%
0.9155 0.0010 d=0.70", Th1D=80%
0.9221 0.0011 d=0.70", Th1D=90%
0.9249 0.0009 d=I.00", Th1D 60%
0.9026 0.0010 d=l.00", Th1D 70%
0.9159 0.0010 d=l.00", Th1D=80%
0.9233 0.0011 d=l.00", Th1D=90%
0.9242 0.0009 d=l.308", Th1D=80%
0.9207 0.0010 CE 16xI6 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2500 nnm, Tvoe 1B or 2B Basket Base KENO Model, Th1D 80%
0.9155 0.0010 SS Model, d=0.00", Th1D 80%
0.9178 0.0009 d=0.20", Th1D=80%
0.9187 0.0009 d=0.40" Th1D=60%
0.9161 0.0009 d=0.40", Th1D=70%
0.9210 0.0009 d=0.40", Th1D=80%
0.9216 0.0009 d=0.40", Th1D=90%
0.9165 0.0010 d=0.80", Th1D=60%
0.9171 0.0009 d=0.80", Th1D=70%
0.9225 0.0009 d=0.80", Th1D=80%
0.9220 0.0009 d=0.80", Th1D=90%
0.9173 0.0010 d=l.20", Th1D 60%
0.9185 0.0009 d=l.20", Th1D 70%
0.9242 0.0010 d=l.20", Th1D=80%
0.9233 0.0009 d=l.20", Th1D=90%
0.9162 0.0010 d=l.50", Th1D=80%
0.9198 0.0009 d=l.699" Th1D=80%
0.9184 0.0010 Page P.6-160 kerr 0.9189 0.9198 0.9231 0.9006 0.9153 0.9244 0.9257 0.9031 0.9175 0.9243 0.9267 0.9046 0.9179 0.9255 0.9260 0.9227 0.9175 0.9196 0.9205 0.9179 0.9228 0.9234 0.9185 0.9189 0.9243 0.9238 0.9193 0.9203 0.9262 0.9251 0.9182 0.9216 0.9204 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-31 Single Ended Shear Evaluation Results
( Continued)
Model Description kKENO lcr WE 14xl4 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron= 2400 nnm, Type 1B or 2B Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9015 0.0009 SS Model, d=0.00", IMD 80%
0.9010 0.0012 d=0.20", IMD=80%
0.9048 0.0012 d=0.40", IMD=80%
0.9078 0.0010 d=0.60", IMD=80%
0.9094 0.0009 d=l.00", IMD=60%
0.9081 0.0011 d=l.00", IMD=70%
0.9132 0.0011 d=l.00", IMD=80%
0.9115 O.OOll d=l.00", IMD=90%
0.9067 0.0009 d=l.50", IMD 60%
0.9080 0.0010 d=l.50", IMD 70%
0.9139 0.0011 d=l.50", IMD=80%
0.9124 0.0010 d=l.50", IMD=90%
0.9060 0.0008 d=2.00", IMD=80%
0.9093 0.0009 d=2.492", IMD=80%
0.9032 0.0010 WE 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2500 nnm, Type IC or 2C Basket Base KENO Model. IMD 80%
0.9332 0.0009 SS Model, d=0.00", IMD 80%
0.9318 0.0011 d=0.20", IMD=80%
0.9336 0.0010
- d=0.30", IMD=80%
0.9339 0.0010 d=0.50", IMD=60%
0.9203 0.0010 d=0.50", IMD=70%
0.9312 0.0010 d=0.50", IMD=80%
0.9346 0.0009 d=0.50", IMD=90%
0.9342 0.0010 d=0.70 11
, IMD 60%
0.9189 0.0009 d=0.70 11
, IMD 70%
0.9293 0.0011 d=0.70", IMD=80%
0.9347 0.0009 d=O. 70", IMD=90%
0.9325 0.0010 d=0.813", IMD 60%
0.9170 0.0010 d=0.813 11
, IMD 70%
0.9286 0.0010 d=0.813 ", IMD=80%
0.9357 0.0008 d=0.813 11
, IMD=90%
0.9332 0.0010 Page P.6-161 k..rr 0.9033 0.9034 0.9072 0.9098 0.9112 0.9103 0.9154 0.9137 0.9085 0.9100 0.9161 0.9144 0.9076 0.9111 0.9052 0.9350 0.9340 0.9356 0.9359 0.9223 0.9332 0.9364 0.9362 0.9207 0.9315 0.9365 0.9345 0.9190 0.9306 0.9373 0.9352 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-31 Single Ended Shear Evaluation Results (Concluded)
Model Description kKENO 10" WE l 7xl 7 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment = 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2600 1,om, Type 1 C or 2C Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9323 0.0008 SS Model, d=0.00", IMD 80%
0.9314 0.0009 d=0.20", IMD=80%
0.9321 0.0010 d=0.30", IMD=80%
0.9317 0.0009 d=0.50", IMD=60%
0.9147 0.0010 d=0.50", IMD=70%
0.9278 0.0010 d=0.50", IMD=80%
0.9334 0.0011 d=0.50", IMD=90%
0.9314 0.0010 d=0.70", 1MD 60%
0.9157 0.0010 d=0.70", IMD 70%
0.9262 0.0010 d=0.70", IMD=80%
0.9346 0.0009 d=0.70", IMD=90%
0.9327 0.0010 d=0.846", IMD 60%
0.9144 0.0011 d=0.846", IMD 70%
0.9288 0.0010 d=0.846", IMD=80%
0.9329 0.0010 d=0.846", IMD=90%
0.9318 0.0009 Page P.6-162 kerr 0.9339 0.9332 0.9341 0.9335 0.9167 0.9298 0.9356 0.9334 0.9177 0.9282 0.9364 0.9347 0.9166
- 0.9308 0.9349 0.9336 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-32 Double Ended Shear Break Evaluation Results Model Description kKENO lo-CE 14xl4 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2400 nmn, Type 1B or 2B Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9145 0.0009 DS Model, No Shear, IMD 80%
0.9139 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=60%
0.9218 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=70%
0.9288 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9285 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=90%
0.9270 0.0012 1/2 Shear, IMD=100%
0.9146 0.0012 1/3 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9250 0.0011 1/4 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9207 0.0012 CE 15x15 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2600 ppm, Type 1 C or 2C Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9169 0.0010 DS Model, No Shear, IMD 80%
0.9179 0.0009 1/2 Shear, IMD=60%
0.9028 0.0009 1/2 Shear, IMD=70%
0.9186 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9291 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=90%
0.9340 0.0012 1/2 Shear, IMD=100%
0.9340 0.0011 1/3 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9272 0.0012 1/4 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9222 0.0010 CE 16x16 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron = 2500 11pm, Type 1B or 2B Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9155 0.0010 DS Model, No Shear, IMD 80%
0.9162 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=60%
0.9190 0.0009 1/2 Shear, IMD=70%
0.9278 0.0009 1/2 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9283 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=90%
0.9251 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=l00%
0.9189 0.0011 1/3 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9267 0.0008 1/4 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9191 0.0010 Page P.6-163 kerr 0.9163 0.9161 0.9238 0.9310 0.9307 0.9294 0.9170 0.9272 0.9231 0.9189 0.9197 0.9046 0.9206 0.9311 0.9364 0.9362 0.9296 0.9242 0.9175 0.9182 0.9208 0.9296 0.9303 0.9273 0.9211 0.9283 0.9211 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-32 Double Ended Shear Break Evaluation Results (Concluded)
Model Description kKENO 1cr WE 14xl4 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron= 2400 ppm, Type 1B or 2B Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9015 0.0009 DS Model, No Shear, IMD 80%
0.9019 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=60%
0.9112 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=70%
0.9165 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9166 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=90%
0.9186 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=100%
0.9114 0.0012 1/3 Shear, lMD=80%
0.9147 0.0010 1/4 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9088 0.0013 WE 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt %,
Soluble Boron= 2500 porn, Type IC or 2C Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9332 0.0009 DS Model. No Shear. IMD 80%
0.9319 0.0009 1/2 Shear, IMD=60%
0.9185 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=70%
0.9330 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9393 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=90%
0.9375 0.0011 1/2 Shear, IMD=l00%
0.9364 0.0010 1/3 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9379 0.0010 1/4 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9351 0.0011 WE l 7xl 7 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2600 nnm, Type 1 C or 2C Basket Base KENO Model, IMD 80%
0.9323 0.0008 DS Model, No Shear, IMD 80%
0.9311 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=60%
0.9172 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=70%
0.9295 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9360 0.0012 1/2 Shear, IMD=90%
0.9387 0.0010 1/2 Shear, IMD=l00%
0.9351 0.0011 1/3 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9331 0.0013 1/4 Shear, IMD=80%
0.9329 0.0010 Page P.6-164 k..rr 0.9033 0.9039 0.9134 0.9185 0.9188 0.9208 0.9138 0.9167 0.9114 0.9350 0.9337 0.9205 0.9352 0.9413 0.9397 0.9384 0.9399 0.9373 0.9339 0.9331 0.9192 0.9315 0.9384 0.9407 0.9373 0.9357 0.9349 January 2006
NUH-003 Revision 14 Table P.6-33 Evaluation of Shifting of Fuel Rods beyond Poison (Damaged Fuel)
Model Description kKENO lo' kerr B&W 15x15 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2700 1 nm, Tvoe IC or 2C Basket 6
11 Shift, IMD=60%
0.9309 0.0010 0.9329 6
11 Shift, IMD=70%
0.9403 0.0010 0.9423 6" Shift, IMD=80%
0.9471 0.0009 0.9489 6
11 Shift, IMD=90%
0.9461 0.0010 0.9481 6
11 Shift, IMD=100%
0.9402 0.0009 0.9420 CE 14x14 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2400 110m, Type 1B or 2B Basket 6" Shift, IMD=60%
0.9214 0.0009 0.9232 6
11 Shift, IMD=70%
0.9242 0.0009 0.9260 6" Shift. IMD=80%
0;9249 0.0010 0.9269 6
11 Shift, IMD=90%
0.9171 0.0009 0.9189 6
11 Shift, IMD= 100%
0.9050 0.0010 0.9070 CE 15x15 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2600 nnm, Tvoe IC or 2C Basket 6
11 Shift, IMD=60%
0.9151 0.0011 0.9173 6
11 Shift, IMD=70%
0.9257 0.0011 0.9279 6
11 Shift, IMD=80%
0.9310 0.0011 0.9332 6" Shift, IMD=90%
0.9328 0.0014 0.9356 6" Shift, IMD=I00%
0.9316 0.0011 0.9338 CE 16xl6 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2500 nnm, Tvoe 1B or 2B Basket 6
11 Shift, IMD=60%
0.9211 0.0010 0.9231 6" Shift. IMD=70%
0.9254 0.0010 0.9274 6
11 Shift, IMD=80%
0.9240 0.0009 0.9258 6
11 Shift, IMD=90%
0.9171 0.0012 0.9195 6
11 Shift, IMD=100%
0.9110 0.0010 0.9130 WE 14xl4 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5:00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2400 unm, Type 1B or 2B Basket 6
11 Shift, IMD=60%
0.9078 0.0011 0.9100 6" Shift, IMD=70%
0.9108 0.0011 0.9130 6
11 Shift, IMD=80%
0.9103 0.0010 0.9123 6
11 Shift, IMD=90%
0.9051 0.0009 0.9069 6
11 Shift, IMD=100%
0.8979 0.0013 0.9005 WE 15x15 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron= 2500 t>nm, Tvoe IC or 2C Basket 6
11 Shift, IMD=60%
0.9301 0.0012 0.9325 6
11 Shift, IMD=70%
0.9437 0.0009 0.9455 6" Shift, IMD=80%
0.9450 0.0009 0.9468 6
11 Shift, IMD=90%
0.9428 0.0010 0.9448 6" Shift, IMD=l00%
0.9365 0.0011 0.9387 WE 17xl7 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron = 2600 nnm, Tvoe 1 C or 2C Basket 6" Shift, IMD=60%
0.9265 0.0012 0.9289 6
11 Shift, IMD=70%
0.9402 O.OOll 0.9424 6" Shift. IMD=80%
0.9414 0.0010 0.9434 6
11 Shift, IMD=90%
0.94ll 0.0010 0.9431 6
11 Shift, IMD=I00%
0.9367 0.0009 0.9385 Page P.6-165 September 2014 I
NUH-003 Revision 9 Table P.6-34 Comparison of Various Damaged Assembly Configurations Model Description kKENO 1u kerr B&W 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2700 oom, Type lC or 2C Basket Optimum Pitch 0.9390 0.0010 0.9410 Add 17Rods 0.9611 0.0008 0.9627 Single Shear 0.9354 0.0010 0.9374 Double Shear
-NA-
-NA-
-NA-6" Shift 0.9471 0.0009 0.9489 CE 14x14 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron = 2400 nnm, Tvoe 1B or 2B Basket Optimum Pitch 0.9387 0.0008 0.9403 Add20Rods 0.9790 0.0010 0.9810 Single Shear 0.9244 0.0009 0.9262 Double Shear 0.9288 0.0011 0.9310 6" Shift 0.9249 0.0010 0.9269 CE 15xl5 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron 2600 nnm, Tvoe 1 C or 2C Basket Optimum Pitch 0.9391 0.0009 0.9409 Add09Rods 0.9540 0.0009 0.9558 Single Shear 0.9249 0.0009 0.9267 Double Shear 0.9340 0.0012 0.9364 6
11 Shift 0.9328 0.0014 0.9356 CE 16x16 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron = 2500 nnm, Tvoe 1B or 2B Basket Optimum Pilch 0.9404 0.0009 0.9422 Add20Rods 0.9688 0.0009 0.9706 Single Shear 0.9242 0.0010 0.9262 Double Shear 0.9283 0.0010 0.9303 6" Shift 0.9254 0.0010 0.9274 WE 14x14 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt.%,
Soluble Boron= 2400 oom, Tvoe 1B or 2B Basket Ontimum Pitch 0.9434 0.0009 0.9452 Add 17Rods 0.9703 0.0010 0.9723 Single Shear 0.9139 0.0011 0.9161 Double Shear 0.9186 0.0011 0.9208 6" Shift 0.9108 0.0011 0.9130 WE 15x15 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2500 nnm, Tvoe 1 C or 2C Basket Optimum Pitch 0.9379 0.0010 0.9399 Add21 Rods 0.9659 0.0010 0.9679 Single Shear 0.9357 0.0008 0.9373 Double Shear 0.9393 0.0010 0.9413 6" Shill 0.9450 0.0009 0.9468 WE 17xl 7 Fuel Assembly, Enrichment= 5.00 wt. %,
Soluble Boron= 2600 nnm, Type IC or 2C Basket Ootimum Pitch 0.9380 0.0010 0.9400 Add25Rods 0.9644 0.0011 0.9666 Single Shear
- 0.9346 0.0009 0.9364 Double Shear 0.9387 0.0010 0.9407 6" Shift 0.9414 0.0010 0.9434 Page P.6-166 January 2006