ML19241C081
| ML19241C081 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/10/1979 |
| From: | Weimer J BABCOCK & WILCOX CO. |
| To: | Meyer G BABCOCK & WILCOX CO. |
| References | |
| THE-79-194, NUDOCS 7907260567 | |
| Download: ML19241C081 (3) | |
Text
.
'lLE.3 A3GCCK & WI LCOX COMP A!1Y v,/l(/G-9
'0WER GEt: ERAT 10:1 GROUP o
l G. A. MEYER, MANAGER, T-il ENGINEERING UNIT THE-79-194
,yph !~20) cca w
" 5 **
'5 J. A. WEIMER, T-H ENGINEERING UNIT, EXT. 3236 filC No-ust. TMI-2 c,- R e f.
u bj.
Date INCORE THERLICCCUPLE ERROR EVALUATION APRIL 10, 1979 ja......,......,..........,.........,......r.
AN ANALYSIS WAS DCNE TO DETERM!NE THE MAGNITUDE OF INCCRE THERMCCCUPLE ERRORS FOR TMI-2 PRIOR TO MARC'I 23, 1979.
THIS ANALYSIS NAS 3ASED CN A TEMPERATURE AND PC11ER DISTRI2UTION AT 94i AND 15% FULL POWER.
THIS NORR ASSUMES THAT THE INLET AND OUTLET RTD.(RESISTA::CE TEMPEPATURE DETECTCR) TEMPERATURES AND ?C'VER DISTRIBUTIONS '15:LE CCRRECT, AND INADDITICN, ASSUMED A CCNSERVATIVE O
+ S F DIFFERENCE 3ETWEEN THE CORE CUTLET AND '/ESSEL CUT'.ET TEMPEPJTURE 93's POWER.
THIS RESULTS IN A 0.50 F DIFFERENCE AT 16*, PCNER.
'0RE 0
0 REALISTIC TEMPERATURE DIFFERENCES (IE.
2 F AT 9Si FP AND.2 7 AT 16% FP) WCULD INCREASE THE PREDICTED T-C ERRORS SLIGHTLY.
THE METHOD USED FOR THIS ANALYSIS WAS 3ASED ON A KNONN EUNDLE DELTA ENT9ALPY, AND FLOW RATES (FROM CNLINE COMPUTER (OLC)) FOR AN AVERAGE PCNER 3UNDLE (RELATIVE PCNER = 1.0).
THE EQUATICN USED FOR THIS ANALYSIS IS:
9 2k=1
(" CUT N)
IN N
^
CUT l
1 1
2 A9140 790726o567 s,
P
\\ d G. A. MEYER APRIL 10, 1979 FAGE 2 WHERE
~
Q
= RELATIVE FOWER OF SUNDLE FOR EACH CALCULATION (FROM 2
OLC)
Q
= RELATIVE PCWER OF 3UNDLE FOR AN RFD CF 1.0 1
Q
= 1.0 1
Wy = 3UNDLE FLCW FOR AN RFD OF 1.0 (FRCM OLC)
W2 = BUNDLE FLOW OF SUNDLE FOR EACH CALCULATION (FROM CLC)
H H
= DELTA ENTHALFY FOR AN RFD CF 1.0 0U.
IN 4 1 1
RFD = RELATIVE FCWER DIFFERENCE (NORMALIZED TO AVERAGE ASSEMBLY FONER)
H
^
^
"^
~
~
~
OUT 2 H
IS THEN CONVERTED TO TCu AND COMPARED TO THE MEASURED TO L.i
- OU4, i
(T-C READINC).
THIS ANALYSIS (AT 931 AND 16% FF) NAS EXTRAFOLATED TO lt FF.
ANY INHERENT ERRORS ON THE OLC FLOW AND RFD CALCULATIONS ARE ELIMINATED 3Y THIS RATICING METHOD.
THEREFORE, THE ONLY REAL -
UNCERTAINTY IS IN THE H AND H MEASUREMENTS.
THESE WERE CUT IN 1
1 ASSUMED CORRECT FOR THIS ANALYSIS.
THE RESULTS OF THIS ANALYSIS INDICATE AN AVER.tGE + 7.94 0 F ERROR AT 93t, AND A + 5.590F ERROR AT 15% F0WER.
THIS EXTRAPOLATES TO A - 5.150 F ERROR AT 11 PONER.
,s
{ -'
4,
L 0
g
e G. A. MEYER APRIL 10, 1979 PAGE 3 t
ASSUMING NO DMtAGE CCCURRED TO THE T-C'S EURING THE TPANSIENT OF MARCH 23, 1979 AT TMI-2 THESE RESULTS WCULD APPLY TO THE PRESENT T-C READINGS, THUS IT.IS POSS!3LE THAT T!!E INCORE T!!ER'10CCUPLE READINGS PRESENTLY EEING OBTAINED ARE HICli 3Y AN AVERAGE OF 53 F.
FINALLY, THE AVERAGE T-C ERRORS 1lERE CALCULATED AS A FUNCTICN OF DIFFERENT POSITIONS IN THE CORE.
THE RESULTS SI!Ot1 NO INHERENT CORE REGION DEPENDENCY.
i JAW /SGH QA:
THE METHCD AND CALCULATIONS
. CC:
FE UNIT MANAGERS WERE REVIENED AND FOUND TO 3E J. S. TULENKO CORE HOT SPOT TASK FORCE CORRECT AND CONSISTENT WITH THE STATED ASSUMPTIONS.
f k
/
/
/
v19142 B
=e-
.e