ML19318D164
| ML19318D164 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1980 |
| From: | Biddle C HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO. |
| To: | Doherty J DOHERTY, J.F. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19318D162 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007080015 | |
| Download: ML19318D164 (1) | |
Text
e yb
Response
NEDO-10527 has been reviewed and approved by NRC.
Applicant is unfamiliar with any attempt to revise the rod drop analysis into a three dimensional analysis.
2.
Does the General Electric code description (4-11 of SER) consider outlying regions (more than 1 migration path) from a local perturbation?
Response
Yes.
3.
Can it be shown that the WIGLE code yields a correct result on a control rod drop accident where the core is more than several migration lengths in diameter and the control rod drop is near the center of the core?
If so, where is this shown to be so?
Response
GE does not use the WIGLE code for rod drop analysis and cannot comment on its performance.
4.
According to R. L. Crowther of General Electric
(. Transactions of the American Nuclear Society 32, June 3, 1979, p. 724) thermal hydraulic representations in steady-state and transient conditions are the most difficult feedback to represent in the BWR core simulator, a.
What causes the most difficulty?
b.
What areas do you believe represent the most danger to the reactor system if incor-rectly represented?
c.
What steps are being taken toward de-creasing this difficulty?
Response
a.
This feedback is difficult to represent because of the large number of variables and the large amount of data required.
b.
None of the representations is so difficult that it bears on the conversatism in safety analyses.
c.
GE compares operating reactor data with analytical models and results on a continuous basis.
5.
Can delayed neutron contribution be neglected in WIGLE reactor excursion calculations?
Response
See response to 3 above. -80070800\\S i
l
<