ML19345B628
| ML19345B628 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/17/1980 |
| From: | Feit R NRC - FIRE PROTECTION REVIEW GROUP |
| To: | Harrison G, Notley D, Vaughn Thomas NRC - FIRE PROTECTION REVIEW GROUP |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012020246 | |
| Download: ML19345B628 (6) | |
Text
%.
.h
~
J ' Q.
PDL AEF&l' #4DFI AE soa ss7 -
DISTR 130 TION LIST FOR MEMORANDUM DATED:
NOV 171980 p;
FIRE PROTECTION:
g D. Notley, SD
)
"1 r>
G. Harrison, DSS ) REVIEW GROUP 9
Ek V. Thomas, IE
)
fy 2
$l0 g'2 F. Rosa, DSS
[j,1)j j) m R. Satterfield, DSS FJ M
ism D. Fischer, DSS 5
"' 9 ro H. Rutherford, IE Q
m J. Stone, IE N
F. Shemanski, D0R D. Sullivan, SD T. Dunning, D0R S. Hudson, NRR A. Ungaro, DSS W. Haass, DPM R. Ferguson, NRR M. Taylor, RES S. Ha.muer, DSS V. Benaroya, NRR H. Wilber, IE S. Ebneter, IE-1 W. Miller, IE-II NRC PORL(2)* File'i41-23 C. Morris, SD R. Silver, ORB 2 Others B. Christian, UL L. Klamerus, Sandia L. Hunter, APL L. Przybyla, UL W. VonRiesemann, Sandia J. Wills, TVA R. Thompson, TVA R. Porterfield, UE&C bO1202ogyg i
y g.
/ p aneau (0, UNITED STATES
[
'g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON W ASHINGTON, D. C. 205%5 r,,
j o,
a
%,.../
NOV 171980 MEMORANDUM FOR: Those on Attached List FROM:
Ronald Feit, Chairman Fire Protection Review Group DEVELOPMENT OF AN IN-PLACE TEST FOR EARLY
SUBJECT:
WARNING FIRE DETECTION SYSTEMS The attached report summarizes a meeting that RES sponsored on October 28, 1980 concerning the development of an in-place test for early warning fire detection systems. As you know, RES is considering Your coments en a program such as outlined in the meeting report.
the concepts that were discussed at the meeting would be appreciated.
I am particularly ir,terested in your evaluation of the recent SFs It is my mapping program coaducted at one of the operating plants.
understanding that NRR has received a copy of the report from NuTech.
Ronald Feit, Chairman Fire Protection Review Group
Enclosure:
As stated 2
W ACCEPTANCE AND VERIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT EARLY WARNING FIRE DETECTION SYSTEMS MEETING REPORT NAME OF A'JTHOR: John Boccio DATE & PLACE : October 28, 1980, NBS, Gaithersburg, Maryland PURPOSE
- Discussion of Current State-of-the Art in Test Methods and Siting Criteria for Early Warning Fire Detection Systems Representatives from NBS, U.S. Bureau of Mines, U.L, Environment /0ne Corporation, Factory Mutual Research Corporation, Johns Hopkins University, Sandia Labs, NRC and BNL met on October 28, 1980, at the Center for Fire Re-search, (NBS) to discuss, in broad terms, ways for establishing credit or ac-ceptance of fire detection systems and test procedures for assuring adequate and timely response of installed detector systems within nuclear power plant facilities.
The meeting was organized and conducted on a very infonnal basis. After a broad overview was given on the role of the NRC in nuclear plant fire safety, its related defense-in-depth posture of prevention, detection, sup-pression and confinement, and its programs aimed at providing confirmatory data for safe operation of systems under various design basis fire encounters, the meeting was open to discussion critiquing test methods for early warning fire detection system appraisal currently being proposed or investigated.
Specifically, two in situ test approaches were discussed. One involves the use of a controlled release of a tracer gas (SF ) and related instru-6 mentation to map out potential smoke movement in large, heavily congested, highly ventilated rooms. The other considers the use of controlled release of submicron particles in conjunction with readily available, ultra-sensitive incipient fire-detection (IFD) systems as an alternate means of determining smoke movement.
It is the consensus of the group that both schemes, with proper execution and data collection, can, in principle, simulate the gross advective and diffusive patterns of a real fire in its incipient stages. In fact, one of the participants reported that reasonable success in mapping smoke movement in some areas within a nuclear power plant, using a tracer gas as a surrogate, was achieved after several improvements on testing methodology were implemented.
It had been presumed by some that the use of instrumenta-tion responsive to particle concentration, in lieu of instrumentation that is responsive to gas concentration, would be better suited for appraising in-stalled detector response time. However, the advantages of one method over the other were not clearly established.
In any event, it was suggested that large scale experimental tests be conducted comparing the actual movement of smoke with similar tests using the tracer gas and submicron particle tech-nique. Both would, however, require an extensive scaled experimental program for gathering additional-base line data.to corrolate the measurements made in the field, viz, timewise variation of either tracer gas or particle concentra-tion, with the actual quantity of smoke that will cause detector alarm.
m However, in this regard, it must be emphasized as I see it, that the ex-igencies placed upon nuclear reactor facilities by the Nuclear Regulatory Com-mission on acceptance and verification procedurer. for early warning detection systems is one in which neither the utility nor the canmission are obligated to pursue a course directed toward advancing the state-of-the art but both, indeed, advocate the need for research in fire detection technology and siting criteria, and are willing to help support such programs. As such, the im-mediate concern as it pertains to this aspect of nuclear plant safety, are programs dich directly address the gross effects of smoke and smoke movement on assessing detector threshold response, and not those specifically designed to also investigate the subtle nuances of the actual aerosol on detector alarm.
Accordingly, only first-order effects such as combustible material, ex-ternally applied heat flux, smoke production rate and smoke dilution should be the parameters varied and initially investigated in experimental effort for obtaining corrolative baseline data.
It is expected that such data, in con-jection with in situ tests involving a surrogate smoke, can resolve with a sufficient degree of accuracy some of the concerns stressed by NRC for vali-dating early warning detection systems.
At present, none of the various agencies represented at the meeting is engaged in this particular area of endeavor. Of course, each expressed a willingness to cooperate in this project and some are willing to undertak.
such an investigation if funding is made available.
An experimental program had been discussed by the FMRC representative.
The approach consists of the following overall steps:
(1)
Field surveys with the SF6 tracer gas allows one, by plotting the timewise variation of SF6 buildup (scaled to the concentration at the source), to map the dilution factor at several locations within the room as a result of fires originating at discrete locations.
(2)
Existing burn facilities and flammat,ility test apparati can be modified wherein a given detector's performance can be assessed as a function of smoke concentration at the source, smoke concentration at the detector location, fire size or heat release rate of various combustibles and dilution factor (achieved by varying the excess air within the flow sys-tem). Effects of smoke aging and other environmental factors such as humidity and ambient temperature may also be investigated.
(3)
It is expected that from the measured data a series of curves which, for a given combustible and detector, show the variation of smoke con-centration at the detector location raticed with the smoke concentration at the source as a function of dilution factor, with heat release rate (or. fire size) as a parameter and detector response points highlighted.
(4)
Thus, knowing the dilution factor at a given location from the field surveys, the above plots can give some idea of the size of the fire initiated at a given location within the room that is required to trig-ger an alarm for a ' detector installed at this measuring station.
=
,w
(5)
Knowledge of the timewise variation in heat release rate and the measured SF6 transit time can provide information on the time for de-tector response.
It was also apparent among the group that a similar experimental program could be undertaken for obtaining baseline data, together with a field survey mapping program using a submicron source generator along with instc>mants sensitive to particle number concentration such as those developed by Environment /0ne Corporation or U.S. Bureau of Mines, and commonly referred to as incipient fire detectors (IFD). As a fire detector device, the Environment /0ne model is U.L. listed and FM approved and has found wide application in both fire detection and basic aerosol studies.
In addition, by direct comparison of the sensitivity of the 790 device with the output from aerosol detectors installed at a given utility using an experimental facility briefly described above, and fuels common to the plant, additional insight into the response time of the in situ detectors can be made.
A possible suggestion was to test both devices within a typical UL-268 Standards test apparatus.
In conclusion, this meeting has shown that indeed there appears a common basis for cooperation in this project, that the course of action presently being pursued by NRC is favorable, that other agencies are not presently en-gaged in this course of endeavor, that both in situ test schemes should be actively and concurrently investigated and that both the private and govern-ment sectors represented are willing to undertake such a program if sufficient funding is made available.
s J
ATTENDEES-Mr. Frank W. Van Luik Dr. William J. Christian Environment /One Corporation Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.
2773 Balltcwn Road 333 Pfingsten Road Schenectady, New York 12309 Northbrock, Illinois 60062 Dr. Martin Hertzberg Mr. Leo Klamerus U.S. Bureau of Mines LWR Safety Department 4800 Forbes Avenue Sandia Laboratories Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 Dr. Charles D. Litton Dr. Michael A. Delichatsios U.S. Bureau of Mines Factory Mutual Research Corp.
4800 Forbes Avenue 1151 Boston-Provi.dence Turnpike Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 Norwood, Massachusetts 02062 Mr. Richard W. Bukowski Mr. Ronald Feit National Bureau of Standards Reactor Safety Research Center for Fire Research Mail Stop 1130-55 Washington, D. C.
20234 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm.
Washington, D. C.
20555 Dr. Thomas Lee National Bureau of Standards Mr. Robert E. Hall Center for Fire Research Dept. of Nuclear Energy Washington, D. C.
20234 Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, New York 11973 Dr. Lawrence W. Hunter John.s Hopkins University Dr. John L. Boccio Applied Physics Laboratory Dept. of Nuclear Energy Johns Hopkins Road Brookhaven National Laboratary Laurel, Maryland Upton, New York 11973 9
m w,
no
-y-,,y-
- *, -, ~,,
~,-'g,.r, m w e- ~w e- < p,~