Text

Hydrodynamics of Vortex Suppression in Reactor Bldg Sump Decay Heat Removal Sys
	ML19206A326
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	02/28/1977
From:	Churchill R, Durgin W, Hecker G, Neale L; Alden Research Laboratory, Burns & Roe, General Public Utilities Corp, Metropolitan Edison Co, Worcester Polytechnic Institute
To:	;
References
	46-77-M202FF, NUDOCS 7904190315
	Download: ML19206A326 (54)
	v • d • e

,I 2 -

g W?U f.QK a Nt}&

.A,riaN a

[hdd.,

hWdd ts2 t.i 5,

? p.g

%n w - W 2'~

dh[

T, n

u tn Y

n r.b l

. lE 01

+4

('e;.,~

iTA*,TTCSICfu=

M[tsk

X SUPPF ESSION IN THE f

REACTOR BUILDING SUh'P uq.a PY DECAY HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM

,,d,,b[

n

'f THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION Iijg UNIT 2 gs'4*1 g..u,,Ig BURNS AND ROE, INC.

p~ ' M GENERAL PUELIC UTILITIES

ikf'O Cry.w e..u - p R$;p R w.x a

e m

64t7 e %>+e&$ r t-t q

L

\\%

N

^..-

's, 9t E

/

A X:~

),.

p%

~

[i$

. ~. *

%*J)?

~

(pg[Q

. ALDEN. RESEARCH LABORATORIES D

' r#

.n a-8

' February, 1977 p;W1

, 's J-

. Dec'ut 5 5&32.0

'~

C hi#17/320002.

~~

D2*!_A6 If77ef De:sm'6

~

_-J

, ~

s$j?

e C"""*Y avFT FLE

~

~'^

.a k;

sh l

~ QL:--l. _

-~~l 1 "; 1;' ' '3:

(

.: % ;[N-

._: ^ ' ' s

f,7 p (~ {

gy L-6e lm 9

+

b

..w _,.

, _ a_. -__

'2304130 9/f

9 HYDRODYNA.\\fICS OF VORTEX SUPPRESS!ON in the REACTOR BUILDING SU11P DECAY HEAT RE110 VAL SYSTElf THREE.\\ FILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 BURNS AND ROE, INC.

GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES William W. Durgin Lawrence C. Neale Richard L. Churchill George E. Hecker, Director ALDEN RESEARCH LABORATORIES WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE HOLDEN, ifASSACHUSETTS 01520 February, 1977 e,-

.,L

=

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.

TABLE OF CONTENTS i

ACKNOWLEDGEh!ENTS ii ABSTRACT iii INTRODUCTION 1

1 PROTOTYPE DESCRIPTION 1

SIhfILITUDE 2

h10 DEL DESCRIPTICN AND INSTRUhiENTATION 6

TEST PROCEDURES ANL CONDITIONS 8

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIO!'

9 Scheme Development 9

Loss Coefficient 11 Test of Proposed Design, Scheme 12 12 CONCLUSIONS 16 REFERENCES 17 APPENDIX A PHOTOGRAPHS FIGURES 53-2C3

A W

W 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Not long after a final report on a research project is completed, the conditions pre / ailing at the time are quickly forgotten. In this case, the concluding experiments and this repc rt on the findings were performed and prepared under a greatly shortened schedule, and we would like to take this opportunitf to express our gratitud<e to those responsible for meeting that schedule.

Thanks to Wayne Parmenter, Bryan Hmura and James UshLurnis, for their work on the drawings and photographs. Nancy Vacca, for her patience in typing and ret'fping the text, and Diane Gramer and Richard Van Leeuwen for their help in editing and final testing.

O

iii ABSTRACT General Public Utilities contracted Burns and Roe, Ir.c. to design the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2, located on the Suscuehanna River near.\\iiddietown, Pennsylvania. To establish the outflow characteristics of the reactar sump for the decay heat removal system, the Alden Research Laborateries was authorized to construct and test a hydraulic model of the reactor sump and surrounding area.

The main purpose of the study was to verify that the reactor sump would properly drain the emergency cooling water without the development of free surface vortices or other flow irregularities which might adversei Mfluence the operation of the decay heat removal system. In the event that u., desirable flow conditions occurred, means of improving flow patterns were to be d+veloped.

Tests of the 1: 3 scale mocel showed that the original design could be improved with respect to free surface vort:ces. Considering the prototype operating conditions and possible scale effects on modeling vortices, it seemed desirable to improve the flow characteristics. Various changes to the screens were made, and grids were installed over the sump to attenuate flow rotation. Tests at increased model flow rate and water temperatures were conducted to investigate possible scale effects on vortices, and the resulting data indicated that the recommended prototype installation will operate satisfactorily, us.. w.+J

INTRODUCTION Burns and Roe, Inc. was contracted by General Public Utilities to design the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2.

As usual, the plant is provided with an emergency flow system to cool the shut-down reactor in the unlikely event of a loss of coolant accident. Water from the reactor coolant system, and from emergency core cooling system storage tanks, will be released within the containment building, ulumately draining to the reactor building decay removal sump. When the external supplies of water are depleted, the suction of the decay heat removal and reactor building spray pumps will be automatically transferred from the storage tanks to the decay heat removal sump, to provide a continuouc supply of water for emergency core cooling and the building spray header in the reactor containment building dome. For proper operation of the decay heat removal system, the sump geometry must induce flow patterns which are free of air drawing vortices and minimize energy losses, particularly at the pipe entrances.

Alden Research Laboratories (APL) was commissioned to construct and test a model of a portion of the reactor centainment building and the entire sump to determine flow characteristics. Potent;al problem areas investigated were free surface vortex formation, other undesirable flow patterns, and energy losses. Various means of improving the flow characteristics were investigated. Special attention was given to potential scale effects of free surface vortices by operating the model at elevated temperatures and higher than scaled flow rates.

This report presents a description of the prototype and model, and summari:es model construction, instrumentation, and test procedures. Appropriate test results and a recommended final design are included.

PROTOTYPE DESCRIPTION The reactor building sump is part of the decay heat removal system. The sump is Iccated in a compartment between the secondary shield wall and the containment wall, as shown in Figure 1. The sump is basically a rectangular pit in the reactor buildinst floor about 6 ft deep. Two 18 inch lines, Figure 2, connect the sump to

r

.Q f ' C t

Li t.

.LO

2 the decay heat removal system pumps, which provide flow to heat exchangers and a spray system. Various floor gratings and screens are proposed to preve nt debris from entering the two lines.

The sump floor is at elevation 276.5 it and the reactor building floor is at elevation 282.5 ft. The water level in the reactor buildhtg resulting from a loss of coolant accident (LOCA) will be between elevation 286.0 ft and 289.0 ft. The total flow to the sump area will not exceed 12,000 gpm, and approach the sump either fully from the east wing of the reactor building, fully from the west wing, or from both sides of the buildir.g in any proportion. Each of the two 18 inch diameter sump outlet pipes is designed for a maximum capacity of approximately 6,000 gpm, and one or both outlet pipes may be in operation at any given time.

During the recirculation mode of emergency operation, the pressure and tempera-ture in the reactor building would range from atmospheric to 7 psi gauge, and 60F to 230F, respectively. The indicated range of pressures will not affect the flow patterns. However, the changes in water densit*/ and viscosity resulting from the temperature variation were considered in designing the model and in developing the teat program.

SIMILITUDE To properly simulate the kinematics and dynamics of the fluid flow field, an undis-torted geometric model was required. In addition, gravitational and inertial forces dominated the flow processes involved, so that basic similarity of the fluid mechanics was achieved through Froude scaling. The Froude number, representing the ratio of inertia to gravitational force,

F = u/ M (1) where u = average pipe velocity g = gravitanonal acceleration s = submergence

3 was made equalin model as in prototype

F "

F

=

1 (2) r F

P where m, p, r, are model, prototype, and ratio between model and prototyce, resp eenv ely. Velocity, flow rate, and time, u, Q, t, respectively, can be expressed in terms of the chosen geometric scale 1

1

" - 1/3 r

1 P

where 1 refers to length. By use of Equations 1 and 2 with g = 1, 12 u

=1

= 1/1.73 r

r 5/2 Q

=1

= 1/15.6 r

r 1/2 t

=1

= 1/1.73 The flow field also depends on viscous and possibly surface tension effects. The relative magnitudes of these forces to fluid inertia are reflected in the dimensionless groups called Reynolds number and Weber number, respectively:

E = u d/v (3)

W = p u"s/o (4) where d = pipe diameter v = kinematic visensity p = density o = surface tension s = submergence Q

4 For models under Froude scaling, these groups generally cannot have the same values as they do in the prototype. Any deviation in similitude of the flows attri-butable to viscous and surface tension forces was called scale effect. Surface tension effects only became important when there was stron;; surface curvature.

In a situation where a strong vortex was unacceptable, the free surface was essentially flat. and surface tension scale effects were not important. Vortex severity. S, was, therefore, predominantly a function of Froude number, possibly with some Reynolds namber scale effect S(7, R)

(5)

S

=

If the reduchon in model Reynolds number compared to the prototype could result in significant scale effects, some type of prediction technique was necessary (1).

Free vortices can be classified according to visually differentiable types, and Figure 3 shows a reasonable delineation from a swirl, Type 1 to a continuous air entraining vortex, Type 6.

It was necessary to establish how a part:cular vortex strength in the model can be transferred to the prototype.

Figure 4 illustrates a proper method of projecting model results to the prototype.

The ordinate was the ratio of model to prototfpe Froude number, and this para-meter would be unity for model operation under Froude scaling, while the abscissa was the Reynolds number. Assuming that the model was operating at Froude scaling at point a, the effect of increasing the discharge in the model (at constant y

temperature) was to increase both F and R. to point a.,. Assuming that the forma-r non of some vortex strength, Type N, was of interest, the discharge should be in-creased until that vortex was observed, say at point a. The model Reynolds 4

number can also be changed by varying the kinematic viscosity, as with tempera-ture, and similar tests performed to locate b ' "" * *# P "* "

3 Type N vornees. Extrapolation of the line of constant vortex strength can be made to a prototype Reynolds number at the preper Freude number (7, = 1),

point p. For large prototype R, point p3, greater asymptotic behavior will be y

expected, in keeping with trends of other fluid mechanic phenomena.

53-2CS t

5 The locus could also be of :.ny other expedient measure of vortex severity. The inlet loss coefficient (alternatively the coefficient of discharge) was shown to be dependent on circulation (2) and may form a measure of vortex severity.

Additionally, angular momenmm of the flow was approximately conserved through the inlet since tangential shesr was small (3). The angle of indicated swirl was

-1 a = tan x n d/u (4), where n equals angular velocity as measured by a crossed vane vortimeter. Provided the velocity profiles in the pipe were reasonable, that is, there was not a concentrated vortex core in the region of the meter, the vorti-meter angular velocity was a measure of angular momentum of the flow, and hence of vortex severity (5). Thus, in addition to visual observations as the primary classification of vortex t'fpe, both loss coefficients and vortimeter angular velocity can reflect vortex severity Model velocities were increased up to 70% above Froude scaled values to aid projec-tion to prototype operation. Additionally, both model and prototfpe could operate at elevated temperatures, giving rise to a Reynolds number range in each case.

TABLE I Range of Prototype and Model R Prototvoe 6,000 gnm Each Line 6

T=

60oF R

=

1.1 x 10 6

T = 230oF R

3.9 x 10

=

Model IF 1

F

= 1.5 F = 1.7

=

r r

r 5

5 T=

60oF R = 2.0 x 10 R = 3. 0 x 10 R = 3. 4 x 10 T= 160oF R= 5.1 x 10' R =

7. 6 x 10' R = 3. 7 x 10' Gf*1-~9:1 eg-(

G

6 For an intake head loss, h, the loss coefficient y

hI K=

u/2g was an Euler number dependent on the other non-dimensional groups, that is K = K (7, R).

The sump and intake head loss was computed by subtracting the velocity head from the static head change, ah, between the free water surface and the pipeline pressure gradient extrapolated to the inlet.

h1 = ah - u'/2g MODEL DESCRIPTION AND INSTRUMENTATION A physical model, Figure 5, of the reactor building sump, and a portion of the sump approach area, was constructed to a uniform scale of approximately 1: 3 on an elevated platform. A portion of the outlet piping was also modeled. The overall size of the model was approximately 41 ft long,15 ft wide, and 5 ft high, and it was located in ene of ARL's buildings.

The reactor building portion of the model was constructed of 1/4 inch steel, and painted with a rust inhibiting paint. The sump walls and ficor, shown in Photo-graph 1, were constructed of 1/2 inch thick plexiglass in a steel frame to allow observation of the flow patterns and provide access for necessary data collection and documentation through photography. Clear acrylic outflow pipes were installed for visual observation of flow patterns.

or.

.. r

7 In modeling the reactor 'oeilding sump room, all piping, pumps, motors, and electrical devices were scaled and inctalled, as shown in Photograph 2.

The area approaching the sump room also included the scaling and installation of ca'oinets,

pumps, support columns, tanks, and miscellaneous ecuipment that could have an influence on the flow patterns, Photographs 3, 4, 5, and 6.

A vortimeter was used for detecting and counting swirl conditions in the outflow pipes, Photograph 7.

The vortimeter was inc!alled in outflow line 1, as shown in Figure 6.

ASME standard orifice meters were used to determine 9ow rates in each outlet pipe, and measurement of the differential pressure across the orifice plate established flow rates. The head needed to achieve the gravity driven flow was provided by constructing the model on an elevated platform. Flow was supplied to the model by 24 inch line from a vertical pump, and the supply line entered the floor of a

the model behind the simulated secondary shield wall. An adjustable overflow weir was provided to balance the inflow and outflow and regulate water depth.

Preliminary data for head loss were recorded at one and four diameters on both outflow pipes. For the final configuration, pressure measurements were taken at each diameter along the outfall line 2 so that the hydraulic gradeline could be well establis hed. The pressure tap arrangement is shown in Figure 6 and Photograph 3.

Pressures were read with a manometer to 0.001 ft.

The elevated temperatures were obtained by using a 50 HP boiler to heat water in the reservoir of the building. Two inch thick sheets of styrofoam insulation were floated on the water surface of the building reservoir to prevent heat loss. The model, with the exception of the reactor building sump room, was also enclosed with polyethylene sheeting. A dial thermometer was installed in each of the outflow lines downstream of the orifice meter for observing the water temperature during a The system was capable of maintaining a water temperature of approximately test.

150-170cF-U7-{ O ?

e

9 t

8 TEST PROCEDURE AND CONDITIONS Tests were conducted in two phases. Phase 1 tests consisted of setting up and observing many selected modifications utilizing baffles, now straighteners, and screen designs. Phase 2 tests consisted of a detailed study of the propcsed final design, particularly for potential scale effects related to free surface vortices.

A test was initiated by filling the model with water and purging air from the outlet pipes and manometer lines. The manometer was checked for zero deflection at zero flow. Water temperatures were then measured and recorded, and the mano-meter deflection corresponding to the desired flow rate was set for the given tr*perature conditions. The water level in the model was adjusted by the overflow weir in the reactor containment portion of the model. At least fifteen minutes was allowed for the flow in the model to reach steady state conditions.

Overall flow patterns were recorded photographically using tufts of yarn on a grid parallel to the floor of the sump at an elevation of 280.1 ft. The two inch tufts of yarn were mounted at the in'ersect:on of a fine wire grid at four inch by four inch spacing., as shown in Photograph 8.

Vortimeter rotations were recorded for all tests of tha Cc 1 design. When flow conditions were considered stable, a dne mesh screen was used to -emove all surface debris, and also any debris buildup on the screen for tests of unbbched screens. Three sets of readings with an automatic counter were taken, eaci.

reading being preset so that the revolutions per one hundred seconds was obtained.

While the revolutions were being counted, the direction of rotation was observed whi;e looking downstream, and recorded as being clockwise or counter-clockwise.

Observations were also recorded as to the type of vertex, according to the vortex strength scale of Figure 3.

Photographs were taken of dye injected at pertinent points on the water surface.

Pressure readings were read anc recorded at taps 1 through 10 diameters down-stream of the entrance of the outflow line 2 on all Phase 2 tests.

7 r19 >7 *',v L

9 The model tests were conducted at room temperature for the basic test program and check tests were run a; elevated temperatures (140-170 F) during Phase 2.

Test conditions simulated maximum design flow per pipe, partial flow per pipe, maxi-mum and minimum water depths in the containment, grating and screen bicekage, and the direction of approach flow to the reactor building sump.

Appendix A lists the tests and operating conditions, while Figures 7 to 10 illustrate the basic schemes examined.

Early in the program, many suggested schemes were evaluated. These are called Schemes 1-11 and comprise Phase 1 of the test program. Schcme 12, the final design configuration, w s used exclusively in Phase 2 testing, with the exception of the removal of the gratings (vor:ex suppressors) during some comparison tests.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Scheme Development Figures 7 through 10 show the various schemes which were tested to minimi:e swirl and potential vortex activit/ in the sump. In developing the schemes, visual free surface observations, the string grid, and dye injection were used as indicators of vortex activity and flow patterns.

Scheme 1, shown on Figure 6, had 1 inch by 4 inch engine grating at the east and west access doors, and an elevated platform that provided access to an over-head valve. The platform legs shed vor+ ices of sufficient intensity to reject this arrangement.

Scheme 2, Figure 7, had e nly the engine grating at the east and west access doors.

The shedding of vertices from the piping of the waste section of the sump was sufficient to discourage further testing.

Scheme 3 had the 1 inch oy ; Mch engine grating at the east and west access decr<

with a divider wall, as shown in Figure 7. Vortex sneccing :roin the piping of the waste section of the sump remained objectionable.

~.3

10 Scheme 4 Figure 7, was the same as Scheme 2 except for the addition of a 15 inch H beam as a flow deflector. This beam was installed in an attempt to prevent the shedding of the vortices from the piping. The arrangement did not attenuate swirl to acceptable limits.

Scheme 5, Figure 8, had the 1 inch by 4 inch engine gratings at the access doors and a screen with frame encompassing the entire sump. This reduced the effect of vortex shedding from the piping, but not sufficiently to alleviate all concerns.

Scheme 6, Figure 8, incorporated the same screen and engine grating arrangement as Scheme 5, with the addition of a 45o inclined baffle, wi'.h the bottom at elevation 284.0 ft.

This arrangement was effective for a particular water depth, but could not eliminate vortex activity at all water depths.

Scheme 7, Figure 8, utilized the same screen and engine grating arrangement as Scheme 5, with a hori:ontal baffle at elevation 285.5 ft. Similar depth sensitivity results as with Scheme 6 were found.

Scheme S, Figure 9, had the engine grating at both east and west access doors, with a screen and frame system 7.0 ft high, and covering only the 4.5 ft by 7.5 ft rectangular decay heat removal section of the sump. The 7.5 ft section of screen was at an angle of 10 with the vertical to avoid interference with valves in the waste removal section of the sump. Vort:ces were shed from the corner post of the screen support system.

Scheme 9. Figure 9, had the same engine grating and sump screen design as Scheme 5, with the addition of a vertex suppressor grating at elevation 285.5 ft.

The grat:ng had a 4.5 inch by 4.5 inch square grid, and a 6.0 inch depth. This scheme produced good performance and minimized vortices.

Scheme 10, Figure 9, had the engine gratings at the east and west access doors, with a sump screen 4.5 ft by 11.5 ft by 6.75 ft in height and using 1/4 inch center-line #10 wire screen =esh. This scheme had satisfactory results in minimizing vortex activity t

G r.

11 Scheme ll, Figure o, had the same engine grating and sump screen as Scheme 10.

In addition, the vortex suppressor grating design ci Scheme o was installed at elevation 285. 5 ft.

This scheme eliminated vortex activity in Se area of concern under normal operating conditions. However, when the east access door was totally blocked, the free water surface in the sump room dropped below the eleva-tion of the vortex suppressor, eliminating its attenuating effect on swirl.

Scheme 12, Figure 10, utill:ed a large cage of engine grating at the east doorway, Photographs 10 and 11, in order to increase the surface area for maintaining sufficient Cow in case of bicckage by debris. An additional vortex suppressor was installed at elevation 282.5 ft to eliminate any potential for vortex formation at low water levels, which could be caused by nearly total blockage of de east doorway. Flow patterns in the sump, as indicated by the string grid, were favorable inasmuch as no areas of separation or reverse flow were observed.

The two horizontal vortex suppressors at elevation 285.5 ft and 232.5 ft were designed as scuare grids with 0.375 ft by 0.375 ft openings and a depth of 0.5 ft in an " egg crate' arrangement. The dimensions of the upper grat'.ng were 10.75 ft by 3.04 ft and the lower was 7.0 ft by 3.75 ft. The gratings A ere enclosed within the re ctangular sump screening, which consisted of two p anels 11.5 ft and 4.5 ft each 6.75 ft high. The screen support frame scaled 4 inch by 4 inch steel angles, bolted to the sump room floors and walls, Figure 11. The screen, with 1/4 inch centerline #10 wire mesh, was mounted on the frame shown in Photograph 12. The west access door had 1 inch by 4 inch engine grating as a trash rack for stopping debris from entering the sump room, as shown in Photograph 5, while the east access door also ha 2 engine grating, as shown in Photograph 3.

Loss Coefficients Figure 12 shows the variation of entrance loss coefficients for both sump withdrawal lines with Reynolds number, for the indicated schemes. K is the loss coefficient y

for the south line, and K repre ents the north line. For each scheme, the values 2

of K were higher than K., by about 25% at corresponding Reynolds numbers. It 7

m m' e r) br ?.

O 12 was noted that the intake for line 1 was more confined geometrically than line 2 and that generally greater vortex activity was present than at line 2. The data sea.tter are due to the preliminary pressure readings, as compared to the sub-secuent refined piezometric gradeline extrapolation to the intake of the final scheme. The trend with Reynolds number was similar for each coefficient with values of K and K., increasing with increasing Reynolds number and showing a 7

6

~

tendency to level off at approximately R = 10.

For the final design, Scheme 12, loss cHficients were only obtained for line 2 because the vortimeter was installed in line 1.

A continuous length of plastic pipe was used to establish the pressure gradeline and values of K were ir m tests 2

taken at temperatures ranging from 60eF to 170oF. Figure 13 shows that as the Reynolds number increased, values of K also increased.

2 The trend of loss coefficient with E was unusual in that intake loss coefficients usually decrease with increasing Reynolds number. With swirl present, however, the coetficient can increase with increasing Reynolds number (2).

Tests of Frocosed Design, Scheme 12 A comprehensive series of tests was run for the proposed final design, Scheme 12, and the test conditions are s 2mmarized in Table II. The basic variables were water elevation, flow, and temper ature, and the Froude and Reynolds numbers were thus varied over limited range i. The vortex t'fpe and vortimeter rotation were the experimentally measured quantities. In addition to the main test series, for which the suppressors were in place, both lines were running, and the flow assumed its natural division between the approach paths, tests were also conducted without the vortex suppressors in place, with the discharge lines running individually, and with flow approaching the sump room with the doorways alternately blocked.

i g

sjr

^

0 v

. 13 TABLE 4 TEST RESULTS - SCHEME 12 LEVEL FLOW TEMPERATURE VO R TE X ANGU LA R FT GPM F

SUP9 R E SSO R F,

R = 10-5 VCRTEX TYPE vtLCCITY TEST NO 296 6.000 65 N

10 19 2

0 46 32 007 286 6.000 60 N

13 19 1.2 3 48 02 003 286 6.000 159 N

13 5.2 4

0 44 32 021 Q*45 -02=2 3 40 02 029 286 9 300 60 N

15 23 1

286 6000 50 Y

10 16 0

0 20 32 004 236 6000 60 Y

10 19 3

1.12 1201 236 6000 60 Y

10 19 0

3 20 32 005 258 6.000 80 Y

10 2.4 3

0 18 02010 286 6.300 90 Y

1.0

2. 7 1

0 16 02 011 236 6.300 100 Y

10 30 1

0.15 02012 I?6 6 000 100 Y

10 3.1 1

0 18' 01 07 256 6.000 110 Y

13 34 1

0.20 32 013 236 6.000 120 Y

13 38 1

9 18 02414 286 6 000 120 Y

10 40 7 22 32 015 236 6 000 140 Y

10 44

2 0 23 0108 286 6.000 140 Y

10 44 1

024 02 016 236 6000 150 Y

10 46 1

0 15 02417 286 6.000 173 Y

10 5.5 1.2 0.14 01-09 286 6.300 170 Y

1.0 5.5 1.2 0.10*

21w 236 6.000 60 Y

10 1.9 TURSUL F t'*

0 30 02 001 G, ONL 286 9 000 60 Y

15 2.8 1

0.30*

02 022 236 9.000 172 Y

.11, 8.2 1.2 0.11 01 10 236 6 000 60 Y

10 1.9 3

3.08*

1202 Q CNLY E

2?6 6.000 60 Y

10 19 1

025*

0141 Q ONLY i

256 S 000 60 Y

10 1.9 0

0.00 0142 02 CNLf 286 6.000 70 INOUCEO VORTEX 10 2.1 6

0.40 02 009 286 2.500 60 Y

04 38 3

0 03 31 03 286 2.500 62 Y

0.4 3.8 0

0.10' 31 34 09 ONLY IS6 2 500 62 04 08 0

3.00 0145 C; CNLY 226 6 000 62 Y

10 19 3

05 01-06 "

299 6000 60 N

13 19 2

0 46 12 027 299 9.000 60 N

15 2.8 01 - 4. $

0; = 3. 4 0 67 02025 229 9 000 155 N

15 7.1 3.4 0 62 02 020 289 10.400 60 N

17

3. 4 0i = 4. 5 -02=3.4 0.68 32 026 239 10.400 155 N

17 82 4.5 0 59 02019 239 6.000 60 Y

10 19 1

0.22 02-002 239 6.000 166 Y

10 5.1 1

3.27 31 12 289 9.000 60 Y

1.5 18 2

0.16 32 024 299 9000 165 Y

15 76 1.2 3 27 31 *1 289 10.400 155 Y

1.7 82 1

3 09 02 018 289 10.400 60 Y

1.7 3.4 1.2 022 32 023

'CCYs RU T ATION "bP9ER 50% CF SUMP SCREEN BLOCKED f4 g -1/-

g

14 Figure 14 shows the vortimeter angular velocity and observed vortex type versus Reynolds number, with the water surface at elevation 286 ft and at a Froude number ratio of one (i.e., the prototype Froude number). With the vortex suppressors in

-1 place, the angular velocity was always between 0.10 and 0.30 sec and showed no 0

tendency to increase with Reynolds number in the rar.ge of 1.6 x 10 to 5. 5 x 10

~1 Without the suppressors, the angular velocity was between 0.4 and 0.5 sec A

Type 6 vortex was intentionally induced using two boards, with the suppressors

-1 removed, also producing an angular velocity of 0.4 sec This indicated that the angular velocity of the vortimeter was not a sensitive indicator of strong vortices with small coherent cores. Furthermore, due to the weak relation between vortex type and angular velocity, particularly with the vortex suppressors in place, primary emphasis was placed on the vortex strength observations.

The vortex strength increased with Reynolds number, with and without suppr-ssors.

5 With suppressors, the severity increased from Type 0 to Type 1 and 2 for 1.6 x 10 g 5

R < 5. 5 x 10. To extend these trends to the prototype operating range, it is necessary to refer to changes in swirl intensity with Reynolds number. Figures 12 and 13 showed that the entrance loss coefficient became independent of Reynolds number at about 6

E = 10. Since only swirl affects the loss coefficient in this range of R (2), it may 6

be concluded that swirl intensity would not increase above R = 1 x 10 Ther efore,

no vertices stronger than Type 3 seem possible in the prototyce.

Figures 15 through 18 show the test results in the Froude number ratio versus Reynolds number plane. For each data point, the vortimeter angular velocity (sec-1) and the observed vortex severity in the sump was indicated in parenthesis.

A summary of each figure is provided below.

Figure 15 - W.S. c'L 286 ft - Without Suppresscrs Angular veloce.y did not vary with Froude number ratio or Reynolds number, over the indicated range. Vortex severity increased with both Froude number ratio and Reynolds number.

O br:

.._I,.h)

15 Figure 16 - W.S. EL 286 ft - With Suppressors Minimal change in angular velocit'f or vortex strength with Reynolds number or Froude number.

Figure 17 - W.S. EL 289 ft - Without Suppressors Angular velocity tended to increase with Froude number ratio but not with Reynolds number. Severtty increased with Froude number ratio, but essentially no variation with Reynolds number.

Figure 18 - W.S. EL 2899 ft - With Suppressors Angular velocity showed some tendency to increase with Froude number ratio and Reynolds number. Little tendency for vortex severity to increase with Freude number ratio or with Reynolds numb er.

In general, vortex severity as measured by the vortimeter angular velocity and vortex type, tended to increase slightly with Froude number and with Reynolds number, as was expected from scaling considerations. With the suppressors in place, the worst t'fpe of vortex observed was Type 2. The shape of the vortex strength loci, as shown conceptionally in Figure 4, was evidently nearly hori-zontal with the suppressors in place, Figures 16 and 18. These plots indicate, therefore, that only Type 2 or lesser vortices would occur in the protot'fpe.

None of the tests simulating fully or partially blocked doorways, gratings, or sump screens, produced How patterns which had any stronger potential for vertices than was the case without blockage. Similarly, blockage of the upper 503 of the screens did not produce serious vortex activity. Complete blockage of the east doorway resulted in very low water levels in the sump room, along with very turbulent f'ow in the sump, thereby suppressing any vortex activity. Operating with either single line did not produce any more adverse How patterns than occurred with both lines operating. Since the most critical flow patterns relative to vortex formation occurred with no blockage and both lines cperating, most testing was directed towards characteri::ing vortex activity for those conditions.

t 5; n A

x O' F.

16 CONCLUSIONS The combination of gratings, screens, and vortex suppressors comprising Scheme 12 produced satisfactory results in the model with respect to vortex severity. Pyo-jection to prototype conditions based on the model vortex valiation with Froude number ratio and Reynolds number, indicated that satisfactory flow conditions should be obtained in the protot'fpe. More specifically, no v.rtices stronger than Type 3 seem possible under prototype operating conditions.

The associated intake loss coefficients were shown to increase with Reynolds number 6

up to approximately 2 = 10, probably due to the effect of increasing swirl. The prototfpe intake loss coefficient will probably be 0.9 to 1.0 for line 2, and abcut 25%

higher for line 1.

Single line operation did not appear to be more severe than with operation of both lines. Bloc < age of the west door, to simulate accumulated trash, was not critical to the flow co 2ditions. Blockage of the east door also did not produce undesirable vortex activity, but did produce extremely turbulent flow patterns. Similarly,

blockage of the upper 50% of the sump screen did not result in increased vortex ac tivity.

J r.

_% L.c.11 L

17 REFERENCES 1.

Young, Donald F., " Basic Principles and Concepts of Mcdel Analysis,'

Experimental Mechanics, July 1971.

2.

Daggett, L.L. and Keulegan, G.H., " Similitude in Free-Surface Vortex Formations," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, November 1974.

3.

Reddy, Y.R. and Pickford, J., " Vortex Suppression in Stilling Pond Overflow, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, November 1974.

4.

Hattersley, Ralph T., " Hydraulic Design of Pump Intakes," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, March 1965.

5.

Lee, Hsiao-Lien " Swirling Flcw in Inlets," M.S. Thesis, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, October 1975.

9

^

APPENDIX A TEST PROGRAM

[$

U T.

~ $.%

A i

w 2

N N

N Om E

w Ct 3*

O 3

5 T3 H

C U

U U

e e

o a

o o

C o

g e

C 0

0 C

C o

o C

O O

C O

7 y

u.

C

~

a m

a a

a m

a a

a m

3 y

H y

a a

m o

a m

m a

a m

o a

e m

.4 a

.x

.x a

.x x

e a

.x a

e

.;g a

u U

U U

U V

U U

2 2

a2 5

5 5

5 C

D m

m a

m m

a m

m m

a n

m e

w w

W W

W H

w w

W W

4 J

W W

a Q

w a

0 D

r D

W <

C C

o o

c c

o o

e o

l

( w=

u.

N N

N d

d d

m m'

2 2

e e

3 <

g w c:

u H C o

M o I

> c:

=

e c,.

W 2m h.,

H Cw X

X X

4 D

C3

"- u a

e a r o

e-O

$w$

X X

W W

O s r 8

8 8

8 C

o o

8 8

8 o

m-c.

a.

8 c.

c.

o.

e.

c.

a e

e e

e n

N N

n e

0 3

z O

o c

c c

8 el o o

c o

o 8

a w

u o

e c

w C

" c~

e-e-

C C-N-

E-n-

C.

g c

C C

C c:

e M

N e

I C

2 W

O H

e2 9

9 e

q c

q q

e q

c e

o e

e e

e a>

m a

e e

=

a e

e

=

a N

N N

N W

l m

e e

W N

N N

N w

N N

N g.

N N

n n

n N

N C

N M

M M

c C

C C

c c

o o

N N

N s,

e e

e a

a c3

=

a e

a a

e i

C, N

M v

e e

N m

e to e

N cc O

C C

c O

c c

c O

c E

8 8

e e

p

I T ;1 B E E MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR PLANT EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM - MODEL SUMP STUDY TEST PROGRAM 1

WATEH l

W.S.

FLOW GPM DlftECTIOrJ TEMPEHATUllE CCNFIGURATIOrJ SCHEME TEST NO.

DATE ELEVATION 0,

0 EAST WEST "F

2 09-09 9/07/76 286.0 0

6,000 X

X 63.0 Trash racks at r'

.ns 2

09-10 9/08/76 286.0 6,000 0

X X

63.0 Trash racks at doors 2

ARL screen design 09-11 9/22/76 286.0 6,000 0

X X

63.0 Trash racks at doors 5

ARL screen design 09-12 9/22/76 286.0 6,000 0

X 63.0 Trash racks at doors E

AHL screen des!an 09-13 9/22/76 286.0 6,000 0

X 63.0 Trash racks at doors S

AHL screen design 09-14 9/22/76 286.0 6,000 0

X X

63.0 Trash racks at doors, Scheme 1 6

AH L scree,a design 09-15 9/22/76 286.0 6,000 0

X 63.0 frash racks at doors, Scheme 1 6

AHL screen desiun 09-16 9/22/76 286.0 6,000 0

X 63.0 Trash racks at doors, Scheme 1 6

l ARL screen design 09-17 9/23/76 286.0 6,000 0

X X

63.0 Trash racks at doors, Scheine 2 7

AHL screen design 09-18 9/23/76 286.0 6,000 0

X 63.0 Trash racks at doors, Scheme 2 7

ARL screen design 09-19 9/24/76 286.0 6,000 0

X 62.0 frash racks at doors, Scheme 2 7

C p,3 Burns & Roe screen design 09-20 9/24/76 286.0 6,000 0

X X

62.0 frash racks at doors 8

N Btuns & Roc screen design N

09-21 9/24/76 286.0 0

6,000 X

X 62.0 frash recks at doors 8

Burns & Roe screen design

[ 09-22 9/24/76 286.0 6,000 6,000 X

X 62.0 Trash racks at doors 3

db b

4 F

~

w 2

~

w N

N N

N O

N N

N 3

e e

e UM e

z 8

C C

La w

H E t

_J

ca 2

C 5 ^v

~w C

4 O

Z c

c c

c' ~

C C

O D

o a

e a

a a

e o

=-

=

a m

o

=

J g

a m

o a

o G

's

G -

'G

G

'G

'G L

U Y

Y Y

N N

N Y Y

Y N

Y Y

m

.E'_

_u E

3 3

.=

.E 3

3 3*

3 3

=

.=.

.h

.~

c D

u.

u u.

u.

.A

u. c A

u.

(n

. J-y L

n W

W 4

O W

I O

C I

I i

Q s

D l

D W <

i e

m c r l

i l

cw C

C C

O O!

O C

C O

C C

C 2

2 hj*

C' C

C C

Li N

O C

C' N

d d

c c

c

c. ;

4 O

c c

e N

N c

c y <

2 w C y

i

& C I

C m O t

y 2

m E Zd C H OW X

X X

a z m

- 3 M

- W "U

J H O

$+

o

- u, y

c3 X

X X

X W

W C

l l

J O

a C

C-C O

C C

O C

2 C

C C

C y

c. g O.

C.

e.

4 C.

C.

2 g

(C (O

C N

N (o

C (D

c c) c)

(c y

U 3

3 2

C C

W C

C C

C w

W O

C C,

C.

C, c,

c, C,

C, C,

C C

C (D

N N

c (c

(c c

C 0)

(c y

W C

2 l

=

z H

-C vi <

C C

q q

C C

g>

e e

c (o

e e

e)

C W

CC CO CO CO CC CC CO CJ CO CC CC CC Co a

N N

d (D

N N

.u N

N N

h.

N N

4 CO C3 M

M M

v v

tn C

CO e

C N

N C

C C

C

-w w

N N

A4 N

N M

v to (O

N CO c)

C N

C C.

C.

C C.

C.

C C

C, C,

w i

i i

a i

N N

g e

C C

u.-

p "e

h.

e s1e. -.

.L.)

7 1

w 1

w N

N N

N Ue w

w u

v 5

e

=

0

.=

c C

o o

e G

C

~

=

r e

e

=

o

+

=

c

=

y 1

.=

D O

C 3

3 3

2 0

=

c c

=

O d

d C

C d

O O

O' d

C' d

C C

C D

Q O

7 C

C

=

a O

r C

=

C O

C W

H v

's

'G

'a

's

'G

's

3

'G

'a L

U N

N Y

N N

Y Y

N Y

c.

m 3

3 4

3 3

3

. =.

.=

C C

1 LL 1

W W

W U.

1 W

LL.

W U.

LL.

1 m

_J W

W y

C W

Q C

U 2

=3 W

D H =< u.

1 C

-7 C

C La C

C C

2 2

W

C C5 C

C C5 C

C el Lti C

C C

C' C

3=

N C

(C C

La La c

c rc N

N CO r.a C

.-e a

w C w

& C C

m C

> C 2

m c.

W Ce

$m H

CW X

X X

X

s i

J I

- W U

M J &

o eb Xl h

c<

X X

X' X

X X

i W

W C

J Q

n C

C C

C Q

C C

C y

2g C

C C

C v

C C

C c

C C

C d

d d

d 2

ya 3

Z C

C C

a w

C g

C C

C W

G

"" O C.

O.

C.

O.

g'.

O.

C.

C (D

C C

(C (D

(D C

(C (O

(c (C

(D fc (C

W W

C 2"

=

C O

H W

Ui <

O O

s>

c e

cc C

e e

e (o

e e

e (o

e e

>W CC CO CC CC CO CC CC CO CC CC CC CO C

CO I

N N

y N

N N

W N

N N

f%

N N

H N

N N

N 4

C N

N N

9 C

C bi O

CS C1 O

O N

N C

C C

D C

C C

C N

N N

N w

w N

N N

N "1

1 N

M

?

LO (O

N CC Cb C

N C--

M v

C C

i i

d.

C.

C C

C C.

C C

p.

i N

04 N

N N

N 04 04 N

N g

C C

w I

Or;e n ~'. b

.,/

E M

E 2

2 2

2 i

l 1

1 1

1 C

S g

g g

N O

g g

g in i

it n

n n

n g

g I

n n

n t

t a

a a

T i

i i

r r

r it i

t A

a t

t t

a a

g g

g a

a r

r r

r T

R g

g g

r U

h h

h g

g t

t t

N G

o o

o i

i i

o o

Y I

n n

n w

w w

n n

F A

D N

n, n,

n, n

n n

L U

O g

is is is is ig ig is ig ig ig ia f

fe g

u g

g g

T C

is s

s s

is ig P

S e

e e

f f

d le e

f f

f s

e e

e f

f f

a f

(

a d

a

(

P l

l l

l M

a a

n n

n F

i i

i n

i i

i n

n n

R U

i F

F F

Fi F

F F

i F

in i

S F

i F

F A

L E

E L

D E

l O

l C

M R U T

U E A T

l F

0 0

Al "

0 0

0 2

5 5

9 0

0 0

N M

WP E

1 2

3 4

5 5

5 6

6 6

M A M

1 1

1 E R E

T G T

D S O Y R N

S P T

A NS G T OL L

N S I

W X

X X

X T

I E

C S

L T

O E

l T

l I

O i S C

DA X

X X

X E

E E

R L

O y

0 0

i C

M O 0

0 0

0 P

M G

0, 0,

0 4,

4, 0,

0, 0,

4, 0,

0, 4,

Y 6

6 6

0 C

W 1

0 0

6 0

0 0

9 0

1 1

N O

1 L

0 0

E 0

0 0

0 F

g E

G O

0, 0,

0 4,

4, 0,

0, 0,

4, 0,

0, 4,

R 6

6 6

0 0

0 6

9 0

0 0

0 E

E 1

1 1

1 D

M E

l N

i O

T I

.T 5

A S. V 0

0 0

5 2

0 0

0 W

6 6

6 9

9 9

6 6

9 9

E 8

8 8

8 L

2 2

E 7

7 7

7 E

7 7

T

/

A 9

9 9

4 4

4 D

J 0

0 0

0 1

1 1

/

2 2

O 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

0 1

2 3

4 5

6 N

1 1

1 2

2 2

0 0

T 0

0 0

0 S

2 2

E 0

0 0

0

_ iN r;'6 0

T C,_

T A

W E

W N

N U

W 2

C" C

O

=

q 2

2 H

c C

C D

n 2

0_

9 y

a n

a e

e a

J t--

O

'G

'G A

M 0

"J E

b b

=

a I

ir m

_J W

W J

Q w

C C

O 2

- eD a

W <

C C

l

_w

< Co C

C 2

e 2 <

C C

4 w C w

}--

C H

C M C

> c:

,s O a Z f.h C H CW X

X J

_Z m

-3 w

HC M

J p

C y&

O

_m a

= w<

X X

W W

C d

C n

C C

e 52 O

go

-C w

2 C

d 6

y 0

3 2

3 e

C W

C m -

C C,,

C, W

C C

C y

W C

2 W

2 C

H vi <

C C,

d' >

C C

'w I

C3 J

N N

w l

I s

s w

m s

H N

N 4

T T

C s

s N

N N

00 O,

N m

~

C C

b h

NC a

cf

'.]- ~' y vs.

e PHOTOGRAPHS W

sJ 0 9..

e

d y.1.y.g.n w- '

s<r '

W

~ t,u:.+WO '

. y,1 f f w } s #.f_._ s -/y?:<;GLVf

(

.;a.,L

.e-q 5,'.

.y '7: "p J'

Q,

-' - '.:.a,J

- 4. psf

.. ; G f)?' g *

f. n J4 C

I I

h M:f,y~~G.a % A2...%p)e 1NUEAl. b er.,s. -'.

}1 u,1 s u '.. :.,

L, N+

4 4

.s.,,_,..

p~ "*

NDW f sw4N ~.

}g.h e

h3 4,,- (fdbl;V%MCIid? '\\ ~ ? s 'u'i7*331;

' 91; ' h= :4

- g,

@p'A p

L3 1 P-4'd M1 g&-

5 v.xw.m.?:1

< =-

rm Y'

VL, ma wsi.t E.'ca p

D74 d lYTt.d4.7pM fl

'I 4,1,. 3 ~ ". c, m' f. i} '

h

-W.

0 N

hhh) M, Tsd{1W,'.g'J' k $

A i gn:

M ( 9 )p u.<

r..<

bj.'N

)U-m" kb2}

h MN g gf..J,.g $e f yi~.lc d 4 %.. T,*.",.!' '

{f gy, j

j4.

,/p4 f.

. _ - - - - - ^

-],---

,3 j,

t

,,r-

.c

)

M fEtOY5 W 5&# d YS PhTN ETTra'E=,4'PJ/M TJE Photograph 1 Reactor Building Sump - %!odel

^

f%ify:, _ ) f,

.? ? k k

i^fh,",$$O,: ? }I'QWi%.'L.

p u$,; w~ J. i,s es&s-

e.

e 4

,?

'g:.

.2'*

b

~

.-pi,9

,' " [' ~' '.,

!,,... - 1

%?!);

v r

.<m, c q ;. ?,

(.s t

to4_ A,.

Q p-y n., c.-; [

, :. -----a j, ---',pp.t@%:f

[..

s

. (q.

v..

\\$',"y "D-

'.,n hse ~ $k~

$fbk h.,4 lW yh!..afw&T.

Mmtst t'

M~ tun -

. M' 1:

hW#$

T:'

i M '.4$%,. %W 'g+2., ' igm 3 4g.~

o::

r.

. r

^~

--~nr s '

,% + r(~

g gg

< n>..,

hgh&gg

. i9i hi '

"I}

" ~

< C(s mL

'.s@

T M~~-, M %w g e.

yd

RT W:g.;.-

av:

w-

'hn?:M 3 : aw.-u p.3

~

W W

.. m ylc, M>?;g~g

~,g y-4w ce 0

, e z.:w;:g_ r

<..e-

+

P,rtVM..n.i h?.n96;% Wg,ff wQgW.

m.~

r

~w

~. m n--

,n Photogranh 2 Reactor Building Sump Room e.- *. u {J F

4

]'n.:...C:.t;

~

..,...,e+,f,g A de y

~

' al.,b',Il; j,-r@'.;

p.:" j? ! Q G Q J Q ~"~

,-7*' ':

1 :,%l%: 9 V' A Mr wak.~pWsck1Q Lw. m,ky;u.

5;I

,y

:]

/

'%;@'?

ylw),g

.,r.:W.2;.".,Tyr G,.ir, =

,h,,y I { - ",i : ;

p%.

r

,.l.%?q$j :

er.

. f.$ jy,!. c s ?p&

hok%

S '%di m-W ~ %>

e.

!ks-si x J.s

~ b.,.mn.,wun-%w*m 3%, '"h.$ '.,

h&...g54 i?

k. lkh a-

-~ ~

.g,. y

- te. y

- ~

4 gr 4

9,x,,c.f *;:~. M '.3..-m,; Ql

4,m. Yd j y-

[*

f ' %.

t

gM *

[I s " "

e.

.w

'lT -

"J 3

?&

.Y..'

,, ;, '.. t..>,' p. {p,

0 l'

g4 sj' a.-

~

n wsyp: $ v.+: 7. s e =~

e

,y<

(..

< -j w-2 1 g - g_e C

% f;',', M g... -

" %.a r*

s.

cw

.~

,w

. f...V, ';,,n

,4 &

. 7 4-M '-f D.,, $,6Q *','

tY d Fd_sbil

'h I

/

Lj,Y,f:

-w',12, s..' da --

~

+

t

(.;

2 s,. -

1

?

.Q :

'W f J[_ ~, h [2

- k.g Ic' ;,h f j

m ew

_.5 4

Mytw

'r-

-fw A yLA.& 4 1.

w m w ft gg

~

Photograph 3 East Sump Room Doorway

~ aw

" ^ "M 9

./ *.

a--

a-m y

==-

%[,~>

Ea Y b b~d M g[s v

-hI je 3,9 N'M. P j @' &

+-

j.

q q.

4 p < --

cm. -; -

+

.. k

p u,,-.

{ [.

M

\\

Ja%s, w{,

-).

3:-

e p

>p

-um 1

/

. I

/]

Kh' 5

of t

_ jf)ppwy y

% gI-t.?

3ghy f..

.J;.__,.d,p.

4

!j

MQ4HE, C

4 4.. g:

f p,yses q

.mc-m-

m

.a Photograph -t View of Model from the East 4

.4 g

hg LE el, d A.

,7 m s.s,a. x : y s.'.3c;:,7 y m m.. u. n pre %%. -., -:3m,

y. u -

-; e - m,,.

2.t.w?/*l &

S t.Vf. y Q

^ ' Q1*:$.Q :6C $w

.e~-'

en Mi W.

h

-}

n a r > n o n,rs< e q -y) s,,

2-N

..,,,st m.

p4i TT;t. Mf;C'?-+*k..u 4 ":q.v 1:r.w.w.?

f.C%n '~p,,;~.' ' hy,m.,. -

.. --* '.,, ll, '. r e t

- '?;n*

". *-llllllllll,-lll,; ~; ;1

.. - v,.

.5 1::

'. " ' '- i r.

r v -

N.,~.:M,.% A".

r,; Y

.%...> i Ce4N' M.p'c:. J':,

lW %; ;;. h.. n. s r%, :~'.:;,n. vo: w. -f-

..E. *T..-s. s.>:y,~. b:*I

- - ~

w.

^

g..C.g%p.., y.. m., t

.M.. -

~M

&-7: %

c.,e r ~,'. c:- G.y;

,.. a.

r.

g

.3.

~K w:*D, t

u->:i 4 "*, ~ : : ~.'. : ' ' '=" ':..-~.-n.;. -

QW,h.R.ss -% [*$. =..> ;;Yf.rh4 y;.s.n }@,,. *,'j?

'~

-g.

4l,,;)7.q

V u A-cy.,u.d.kr.,. %;,E CtES.r? -,uMLg y.$o.-%;.-- u.f=_ r-;# iM

.t=

- = =.

ya,

k V:=1f.wsr= h w %,%' -1

,w&'nL,,u

% p r w " %. W.s w.L v.. ;,~.4 3..-: g.

.m w

KWJg;cm

-- =r f%y.vp';f e:>

M4W ;.' ^ u n

Q

,gw.TO e ---* % ;.'J A y a,..,y[,-

7 N4 7 ' '.". [

j-

,}. t,*

.7 p._

w-7

- r s %s...

s

..J g.g,; e n

n

< T :e. w.1 r;.

w c

y. k.

e-

,, c.

v.,.,

j j.'

I f.. Cd$./$.gG 1.Q,6)1

+-A aa3.

t 7, 41:?

3

..w %

?

L W y a. W.=

, I'

!4%&,E$w

=

.. Va. ff

Wif8hr 4/#Yh

> : E s % e d2 W M L W @h y.gyf;;z,.W$ <:.M,

$ $ k h(p$: h $ ? ~

,,m.

r s'!i a n,.0 ', t..

y.dc

.,*+y

.x-,.,e.,

. 94 c-

,r:. u-

.. w w,,'. e.,.

2..

we.. < >

o2.t.u.,4 y.

,, p.,, > - r,.

r.

,.,s.Q

.y4 N

[Y k, a..E*

y-m w.'.

[

. ~.,,w. j# \\

5 % T.. n.. m/.

(

s

.. r.s.

.m- -e +i. *,

gN 15 b.'* Yi:.;.s. p? $,.., -W?'Nh" - --

^=B%@5 g

G. '

Photograph 5 West Sump Room Doorway

. y v.w.c.w.-- m - -

v,,_.~-

s. v., f_.

,o-yq :.,.

'A+ '- 4.^m.v'Ag.*t Ac ga g o,., p%@. '*k.

.rA. n/'rw.

e A.

W.d@iE:

f?~tAl$x.p't %$Q iQvmm tv: W.h & y& m& Q. &+. m[ p p h'C v t<.:a ;~mp?fM&; pm@pmdf..e*s*:-gy, m% _.W.,1,.,;

r xch -.

%. h.s

. > s-

..2.;g.

Cq'*:

' Y,:

p;

+

.c f:NM,& G-WM hi.MQ%M i

&w nrGw?.b.etww-nq-t:b32fl=C.;% :.

Me ~~

E'%I45 N5di

$$$YA~'&

0 b $ $ ~~ ;

war,j,hEd.9,+."*'M'.' ;[GSg:q'

-f D- %"*c gk pma YS.M{

CM:

2 f.

i

h. u%.,

..%. m, --w v,., wg.

m.,

a e,r. h:.,

s +

, t c

p-uw thw-o

{

s.

a_..-@ M ), [.. 'M".ER.T8. M-ibp e

4i M. a. +(

i d

c-

_ _I r

4.;

v

^ t

' Im

.ab.

e a

p

,4 m#W;js W..mn w. M3 V, p,,,j. ~

p'$ n.f - % _._. ycp*:.f 4

g*

$$g.,-${omm e

m O

Yhh.eY

$ EU hY'-&"

w-.dW-Tf' *q/*.'~~ :)$% $WTMureb46,5.^*1*Tw.

f MA

%1

>g rp M "32f4 h,7 7 / ( w n p b h T h-r w a r..

4MN

?'

[hkv.h.,%c y pb~NhkY5 h k.b.'S.

an r

? N.J._h7._

WX*)Yc.Q @e.gJ...&c"%.m,s< wL w-%* M-;.g-,%w,:%s;,.4 -n ~w.,G ' *

. %. % ~ye,* - "*>

q h~..

Pm_ M~ V,4,;Wm%.@r. e

-~

rlRQ t

,; Gk:m 'r% ?.

r-nur

_Q+ d. 2s a..*o ' M.p',?, e,7.,;. r_., u _,.A u*- ^

~

m.

Photograph 6 View from Electrical Conduit Trench Towards West Doorway w **... u,G

n

et

'I bN h

I i

%%9N' WMM@%,

kW!m'4G4 M &K W #:

ws% < d$$

%tua$6y

&. 2 h%WA&L2.'iG.' Wet;s @

p%gg?g;g?sy%g;mhtfM:k 'g%e %,upfh:5l.~;.w&mm r wS a~w ueiw w

%.yL -

%T u

M q,a p

&ym&w%%g$$$w.k,h;c4%. e.$WN=&A-- W.nm,s W,u-,7 n.n.s m?

s e

m h-Mc

' &.y' f

'[.)$,lWbW$v se S

v-E

-?

$Xhgpiti".I,,drkNrd$yag*%?Qf;TQ[

JejK $

= u a. wfg.f & ~ @.9.9 M +

Wu

>+ftg&.pQ W 'N %m m$$

by 5_My

.'Q,.:'h M

t w.u

< a %g.s%n!&iT'? Wf]ia

.~ n.-

fA'}n+B w;w ye ~mk:Xfi4hE%'M

-QL. w 3~

. am y&

I'A, w,. 5 n w ~;E w

e m.,%'L R d y'*-fr s'

svr M 1E e

%'gy in " ':

f.,3-@g5 @y,g4' WJ V

Q G M d k,,(L[ Q' h 3 p h'G" d'Q 45 W

2h

%'# W4p5Mkg?

e rM in A

M Q '3 -

f

??

\\

9 A m gywf3

'

TrWg..

w:

4 t

g g,.

--,' 8,:6" f m. + ~% d w - % >c +

4 @ 5,73, gq h%M!3(fyg%d,8.s,x

,+

t.

. de PM_$ni

%/h %q o'fR*>>9? T EM %s;h.t&id3fd E5h e$9

' " /El

/ bas.SA:Cct w v EM.we 5d sswkMis eu %+ ~-

Photograph 7 Vortimeter 1l"'yik..msawar 3 w wge&T wmqE,g3:.*jg'g o

~ $.e. :

V&

Y yg wk.m QMS w

"r gc.:p a,. W )t w

, ' ~

2%,;,

h"s"' T%

L

., L3K'"p. da *. NN.

,I b

n? O

~

'd h,y%.__,

w'.

hx-b..

-%,P

/.

4,7E %d%

~

DEA A kf

.,/ Egg,di+F.e go,

>u hx C %

[

k

+.*r T

1 - -. @-t M p.

/ge g f q: g.

.w!sg 4

.i

'W":4it;ff, y

g

~.

A:

. rg3,44

-p

'p.-

^

. --L' g..; g J

t

v-tr,.-

%J]!.kJy y

(

.a

.u

,9:m -e

.c

. (f,;t[.,QJf.,.*.-.,

'y Y k.,, -

s

,.s

,.r..,i,',r-5

. r,Tp), v,,r.

& $7?.,y;; 4%

c"..

-9 c%z.ffHs!-

s e

JAW r

Photograph S Intake Lines with Piezometers f-

... u' d8 g

~

d

=.. -..., _,,

,7

~w

,3

..Ly

.. -:,; 3.1 u

. ;y,, f

- if. # ' 'j.

z.[

.4

~. - -

.,a w

..,o.-s.

c., ;

/

-(

, M '.)

3 s

1'

,s

..s,.

j

, g.

4 s

,=4

f

>t

? :i, '

v wQ \\

d;

/

?>

ti: L,

u4

.:^.

Pi i f:f 11 5 _,

p 3:l 73

?.p3

.y -.

y ;t,

-!,j+:~.

.y-:

. - :z yf-i1.{I: O

,j

-s,

eS.

f-?~f yNy- *

' M';y n.=h n

[,', [.: .

L; k"w'l,. Q'%

Qsl

-'1 D

.n r.

y te s t 09 ~ 22 *)LQ't '

Sh; o-%

O

-?7 pk;&hgj: +WAYgN

. - -;, h,~

. 9

.y

-55 :n g,. f. u.W c+-

mv. ,.,

4 4,- W b L_

> p,g

.TC,, -

..)

,-Q 4 s

_m vt _

u,u w,_

m Photograph 9 Yarn Grid Showing Flow with Both Lines Operating E'(f-MEWS.;r.t

-'. x= uer.:= = = = &

.T a

K.: - R

~M 4

VPffis r'%v?*,1=522825$2W=h__

4 w?s ? b^ * %

,m

= = = = = =

=.

,O

. pvt =,=====5 3 Ti ' "

T p'::a 4m

~ L.,

.:=1 - :p--

1 -_

w-n,7>

q

(;

3iesww===5pmm P[,,.[.e :j i

I h>

%P 4*"' - a m 1

Rg;p r,

t'

7. -17e FMq Qit{

y t: ). hl.h 5

h bkN

},,

. 'Ml ~ ' *',} h ;f q

^

.k

-kN

.h n,$lh'-

E

..m

{f.

R*j y

i Yf f,

,im m

eggy.;

of.amaa h

rQG KMNr?

W 'v-~3i.hl Y{

h 6,1i

}

.! e Aw -

M g i ;Qi.x x-bg u

+-

Mg'}

' ' ' = '

W

~ '= ' t l Y $ [ $, k.ma,ti e,2.. h.4-~

g

- k 'i,$f I

m

,' o, n v-n Fe -

yp q.

+

. a_.i

[,

m._ = 4 3,

y s

s r

ML #d t. j.

ti h /*3audeGes C C,0d d.

I.4

,A E d W

l'hotogra ph 10 Vortex Suppressor - : ow er Level b73^?[M

I r

'** d p

g ; 7 gry[I,4 s

gA-i is

'h

'\\ W,y' DA ' *

'N

' K ',P 2

i k

,'y A

% t N

\\s, ~ 4(g

'-~%N ed 1

,os

-f

(!

N

- t%@

f%,,,,

W C

-R, k ' t,,' i NSp@

r 4 Nb / ' '

s s

h/,A.cd,5 ' '3 s

ob

.(* '.

, N.".f,;?,*,g%

e. /. 5,,F' s

syn 4

s.

r y

4A

\\.N Y

.V g-;..,,<

- y.:

at 7.-

'\\.

- y '

, (J- ;% 'g,;El (

L

3.,.,'

?,

_1 3

l w

g; r

?p:~~Q c-yn/,~ ;/, y;

.a -

e u:

,dg u

m

-, ff. ns,:.l,5 W.

'.~Q&:e p-

-?

r 4+.%

6,,..

sc;r$$kk.-

-10$

v

~1'O h $, D A M A.

\\\\ ~ N '

%)k '1

.k't#st:fr$'-

\\

3 fg g, s\\ gNYy

-?. f

'.h.

a i b;

'h h-i s

Photograph 11 Vortex Suppressors - Upper and Lower Levels i.' a i n o g_

^

N-

. [. 4;.)

e e

FIGURES 4

4

FIGURE 1 F

/

' -REACTOR BUILDING Q 11

\\

REACTOR Q

/

SECONDARY SHIELD WALL

\\

l

\\

k

/

,\\

s r

t EAST WING

" SUMP

/

WEST WING l

I CCNTAINMENT WALL PLAN AT EL 282.5*

O 10 20 SCALE - FEET REACTOR BUILDING SUMP AREA UI5 ~? ')

/Rf21=

2 O

C 33 m

MAXIMllM W.L. EL 289 0' LNGINE Gil A I E

-1/2" PUMP BASE PLATE

.S=-

=

WlHE MESil ATTACllLD MINIMUM W.L. L L 286 0' UNDE f t GHATING 11 l

LL 282.5*

a I

a rT.LanJ.nuJ.t.

f A

]

A

+-

I SCitEEN I

I 7'0" (INSIDE) j b

l N

(

8, hip i

'" It ADWASl E

- F t.OW l

_ _, k-

- F LO'N '

COLLECTION g,,,

l

~L

~

i t

r n

n f i n

n E L 2 76.S*

8'0" 40" 4'0"

+

=

4 9

PLAN SECTION A-A CI' C

id)

SUMP WITH ORIGINAL GRATE AND SCREENS M

m

FIGURE 3 O

NO ACTIVITY 1

SURFACE SWIRL SURFACE DIMPLE 2

v DYE CORE 3

y 7

VCRTEX PULLING Y

TRASH BUT NOT AIR e,

TRASH g

VORTEX PULLING 5

?

AIR BU3BLES 0,

AIR suseLES U

ORTEX PULLING 6

V AI A CONTINUOUSLY VORTEX STRENGTH SCALE FOR INTAKE STUDY cn <~ ~

t} r. ~ l. r.. o

[;,G,

.J

O FIGURE 4 I

i 3

i l

I LOCUS. TYPE N l

i F,= [F I

2 P

84 i

83 lb3 82 b2 i

I b

I a

[j j

~-

P P

1 2

I I

l 0

E DEPENDENCE OF VORTEX SEVERITY ON FROUDE A.N D REYNOLDS NUMBERS i

htGL

ADJtJSTABLE WElH f - StJPPLY

/ /

SUMPq

's

/\\

i v

s E

+--

X

__.-_-_-'~____Z_ ~~:

1 LINE 1 w

's s

LINE 2 - V

\\- --- _ ~- - Z -_ ~ Z Z ;T 1

W

\\_ h OE -+-

IlE ACTO R La CONTAINMENT k

WALL y

e' 3 MODEL SCAT F

( tNLET OllGil WATEH ONLY) 0 6

e

OVERALL PLAN VIEW N

SCALE - FEET 2!

MODEL REACTOR BUILDING SUMP AREA

@w m

W

GW 6 3-1/2 DIAMETERS VORTIMETER \\ l

\\

^

j t

L_L

.,_ A L_ _L f

LINE 2 r-r 7-r-- r a

4 i

f l~ 1 DIA.

~

\\L PIEZCMETE95 (20)

a: :,

,w.:t p'

. S.....

(p.,. t.

,,2...

f.., *.... "

-.'s**..

2. g o

t...

..s.2 t.. o, o j

'. e.4..

.I.' o.

' * #.m h.o f,*, ',. * *. o' o -

Il' *,c' N

[ o * 'o 2

s..

7'6"

-l l

SUMP l

l I

/- TH ER MCM ETER 3 7..

t i

27'10" 5'

/

(

T y

t

/

3 VALVE

/

r FLCW METER -

3' VORTIMETER AND PIEZOMETER INSTALLATION

_ ~.. a3 y a.

s.} r.

a m

W g

FIGURE 7

_ _ _! __ _ _F A

I I

E g

__7_--n g

g

_ _ 7 - =_ -

n

__7__-

__7-9 l

Wm N

\\

\\ PLATFORM E

\\

SCHEME 1 SCHEME 2 "H" BE AM -

1___.'n N

_ _ b _ _._

f

_- __ y _ _.7 g

__y

__.?

_ _ 7___.J l

[:.NDf3' G

N b DIVIDER WALL

'N

\\

SCHEME 3 SCHEME 4 VORTEX SUPPRESSION SCH EMES INVESTIGATED PHASE I KS=

u..

.: ::3

2 O

C m

m ca

]

r___.

I I

1 r_.

J j

o

$ 1 I

s.

\\

45" BAFFLE

- 00* UAFFLE h-

- EL 286.0' S

-r h-0EL 2f14.0' EL 285.S*

- E L 282.S' 2

M-s t-

',1 t

SCitE M E 5 SCllEME 6

.O SCitE ME 7 n' '4 VORTEX SUPPitESSION SCilEMES INVESTIGATED Pil ASE 1

h FIGURE 9

- VORTEX SUPPR ESSOR GRATING

/

__4___.h l

_ _ 4 _ _ _....

~

j

_1__...

c

=

__h__.

i 9

3 m

a 5

E

\\

SCHEME 8 SCHEME 9 VORTEX r

SUPP R ESSO R GRATING

_ _ f. _ _ _

s G

i

.4

__t____]

s a

g

__L___

s

__A__ _.

e-g

__' __ _]

s

_ _ 1_ _ _.h 5

i

_~.

t n

\\

SCHEME 10 SCHEME 11 VORTEX SUPPRESSION SCHEMES INVESTIGATED PHASE I g

4

FIGURE 10

- SUMP I

l r

M

~ - -

FLOW

~

ENGINE GRATE

==

-- FLOW

=--.--=;

A 4

B ~ - -* B A

P4g U

k n

A E

VORTEX 9

SUPPRESSOR A

4 ENGINE GRATE VORTEX SCREEN

/-

SUPP R ESSO RS '

/

f.

'.j; *, ~..,*- - ;

e, g

EL 2S9.0'- '..*,- f.*. o - e

,,.,.o..

r.,

. - o.,*

~

..o.

./*,*.

'=

1 e......

'o * *.l. 7.,

~. *. *

as

e, o.,,o-EL 286.0' -;,: .. *

., * * *

o *a.

2 r.o *,.

N

g o.,a ;

-:. o 0 *o *. *,

EL

.,85.5,

...,e.

4

. o 4,,

l oo. 6

. o. *.o..

-O

, o. 6'e t

: o.

.a v -: EL 282.5'

... ~ o-

.. _ *.... ;.., + ;.

1,:*

... a n....

.a..,.....,....~.o,,,.p*.........y..

+

= o * *, ;;

f,,

e' ooae,*of,o=o,,

,.o.,,.o.,,

.o

. o

- - - - )

* : ' 0.* *,., *

c:.,

SuuP

..,.........a.o..,....a.

a..o.

.*..a.

.c

..........e.

a.

,..,..o.a... o,..

o..w.a..

c 1

o

,o T $ *.*.'a** I *,*.:.

y?.;09.};.;..:.::.

_, M :.

m.... ; a-., a ga..a f.. *.. *

a,*. %. e.

.....=,=o.

?.

o

o. oa.a..

a *,

a o,

a... o. o* aa

a... a a.,.-

. o.

..=..

.c

. =_. :.... o.

e a..o

....o a

...oa,...a..... * *......:.. *.a ;..=a

,*0 "a.

.a o

o.

s SCHEM E 12 - PROPOSED FINAL DESIGN

~*

/

4 S r94

.'s s)

~

FIGURE 11 SCREEN SUPPORT FRAME t'

1'8" SCREEN FRAME 289.25' m

, -- 289.2 5, 4

T g g

(("'s 2'3" 2'3" l

SCREEN MESH l

u l,

1/4" No.10 WIRE a

-C7 2'3" i

-4"-

2'3 "

1/4" x 2" i

L 4 x 3 (TYP) i BAR (TYP) i n

_J 4

-(

3"

-i,

-,s i

2'3" 3".

2'3" i

I s

a ry i t

21/2"

,7 J 21/2" I

.',${fN.([l'282.5' t

282'5'

' * '. *. '. ].',' '. 7.

g o...

o -

' ' ',i..,. = ',,

o. e

.....,e

,0.... ,. g ;..,,.,.'.

+,

s e s.....oo.

.$',*.,oi*g,..

3...

L.

.* l. '.....

,. 3(; p.,*

3

....(% *og.

27/8" 3 1/2" J 2" 1/2"

- 1 1/2" SECTION A-A SECTION B-B SUMP SCREEN DETAll

~

FIGURE 12 9

1.2 i

d K l

j l

i O K 2

'l t

l j

j l

i 1.0 i

i l

l

! l!

i i

I 4

I 1

I l

I if'\\lI

\\

I 0.8 a

i i

r f

l

'O f

l

!';A ij l

l l

l\\

i l

a i O l

i

^

O.s -

A

^l e

0 ll a

r x"

A O

z i

2 o -

l l

l 0.4 O, tt l

I 1

i l

I l

l l

I i

i i

l o.,

j i

l' i

i I

j i

l i

i 0

5 0

10 10 b

COMPARISON OF LOSS COEFFICIENTS' VARIATION WITH REYNOLDS NUMBER (SCHEME 2) br$ ~

Nd

FIGURE 13 1.2 l

i i

I I

l l

l 1.0 i

l t

i i,

i i

I I

f I

0.3 I

'O l

!l' l

@l I

i i

i l

\\

o i

il I

l O.6 I

I I

i l

l l

K i

I i

i 2

i, f

I l

l I

i 0.4 i

l i

I l

l 0.2 l

l l

f f

0 5

6 10 10 VARIATION OF LOSS COEFFICIENT WITH REYNOLOS NUMBER, FINAL DESIGN (SCHEME 12) h b

.o

<)

en c e.

4.

FIGURE 14 i

l !

l

!l ll l

l i

l l

l lN

!l l

l I !

d 2

'l

\\

i 1

x i

i t

,l; l

[

s l

I i

j i

i i

l i : 1Ii I

O W

0.6 I

I e ARTIFICIALLY INDUCED VORTEX (TYPE 6 - WITHOUT SUPPRESSORS) g gj Q WITHOUT SUPPRESSORS dS 0.4 -

l O CLOCKWISE WITH SUPPRESSORS Ce I

{]

}

j A COUNTER-CLOCKWISE WITH l

SUPPR EMO RS i

3(

Ol F, = 1

's G goj EL 286

.2 gg g

c g

a r1 i l l!

5 C

O Ql l

PROTOTYPd l!

OPERATING 9ANGE jAl i !

i l

0 5

0 10 10 8

VORTIMETER ANGULAR VELOCITY AND VORTEX TYPE VERSUS REYNOLDS. NUMBER '

SCHEME 12 r;r.n. to MM u

uJ

9 2@Im $

W b

~

E M

- GN N

l ErA Yl TO G T IN OT S

E R fl A P

P R E

Y E

B P

T 0

O M

X U F

E N 06 6

T 1

7 9

RE

/

O D i

/

V U T

O

)

DR 4

2 NF

/

4 1

A 4

0 D E GN M

(

!(

N A E

IDS H F

0 C

AD S 6

E L

=

RO T

N RY E E G

T R E

)

MS 5

I U

4, T S RR

/0 D

OE 4

VV 0

(

'h

'/ 6 4

. 0 0

5 0

1 5

0 5

O 2

2 1

1 0

r I'

l}

',4

(

I s

e FIGURE 16 l

o l

e z

C w<

r c.,

Q h

a r e 3d C Z 5h bN J) a =:

c<

r 0-w3 1 :

w w

M c h

b 2

m l

XD 3

g 6

w2 l

o

~

c

-w m

\\

l 1

i aC

~

>a

l N4 i

i

_N 3.3 I OC 2 u-m n

\\2 -l i

<c" s

D

\\ M'.

I C Z W

~

V I

24d o

a w

,8i l

CM 2 3

l A

l

< CU o

w

.J M

O

= o Q

Z

= >

ww C

6 C

=

0 mm

-D l

>= m

.en

==

CW 9

/,s Oc ['

k

.O 35 v n-ES OC I

I k

~

l I

ib I

I=n a

d O

O O

4 O

N N

4 C

E D

[

O e

Y *~

.N si

e B

FIGURE 17 4

l m

w

=

C C

I Z w

w<

N hC e=

- e e r-Oz "3

$G m

ao w e W

EC A

w w

3 W

'M m

9 2

l O

x c

i m

E.

}

wZ b

S.

n' ee ew s

m S~h l

l Q C 1

i Ao i

l l

O=

z u. m l

N I

<a" l

l

\\l l

EEE a

m "O

l Qm I

<C w a b5' cO 2

C:" >

3 ww a'

=r w

a

_s e 9

Z' D=

e W

~

-c Q

Cw c

S C'e TS I

d I

i l

l l

1 O

d O

d a

m n

.=

M t*

7 _. *J r; i.*

.s L4

'e

e O

FIGURE 18 i

i W

=

m w

un o

DY b$

5*

>t r/)

r w

=

W a ::::

O (

g 1

f* =

W y a

L

& =

C af:

X 3 1

y

[

wz 8

c R

l c

~,

O

=W 4

-Ns I

i cC h

h\\ l l

A I

l C2 a u. m 5-N.

I I

a C

O<*

M8 l

Z 4

a

-2 n

w I

y w

a e

O 0

l CM I l

R l

< CO waM ns

= C w

2 a%

l C >

ww

- =

g w

2M Q

- 7 n

e N

H M e

==

-e~

D Cw

_L C

n N

9 eO I

1 i

l I

I l

l l

i I

N O

d C

N N

A e

E d P.,V ry ~ s[w o -

a,*

ML19206A326

Text

= = = = = =

Navigation menu

Search