ML20033A552
| ML20033A552 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1981 |
| From: | DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20033A548 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8111250561 | |
| Download: ML20033A552 (57) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:L E E [ [ Evaluation of Selected Control [ Panel Components Subjected [ to a Postulated Exposure Fire [ Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 2 [ Docket No. 50-341 [ [ [ November 1981 The Detroit Edison Co. 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 k 8$A2 888R2S$$$$21 0 F PDR
r L Contents e I 1.0 Introduction....... I R e fe re nces............................................... 3 2.0 Oven Test.. 6 2.1 Procedure......... 6 2.2 Results. 9 9 2.3 Conclusions... 3.0 Plume Calculations.. 12 12 3.1 Analysis.... I 3.2 Results 19 26 3.3 Conclusions. 27 References............. 4.0 Conclusions......... 28 Appendix A Calibration of Data Logger Used in the Oven Test of the CNIC and Pushbutton Switches. 29 Appendix B Plume Equations....... 40 Appendix C Switch Radiation Niodel.. 43 45 Appendix D Numerical Solution... 48 Appendix E Panel Heatup... Appendix F Convection. . Si i i i I i I ii f.
[ [ List of Figures l-1 Layout of Control Panels - Fermi 2 Control Room...................... 4 { l-2 Closeup of Control Panel 601 - Fermi 2 Control Room................... 5 2-1 hietal Enclosure and hiounting of Ch1C and Pushbutton Switches for 6000F Oven Temperature Test 7 2-2 Locatior, of Thermocouples on ChtC Switch During Elevated Temperature Test of 6000F.... 8 2-3 Temperature Profile of Temperature-htonitoring Positions During 6000F Oven Test. 10 3-1 Vertical Cross Section of Control Panel and N1odel Exposure Fire........ 13 3-2 Cross Section of the "A" Surface of the Control Panel Showing the Positions at Which Test Switch Temperatures were Calculated....... 15 3-3 Assumed lieptane hiass Loss (Burn) Rate as a Function of Time........ 17 [ [ [ [ ( iii [ [.
1I lI l List of Tables ~ l 2-1 Summary of Temperatures Measured During Oven Test 1I 3-1 Fire Cha racteristics........................................... 16 3-2 Centerline Temperatures Above the Fire...... 20 ( 3-3 Temperatures as a Function of Distance from the Fire Axis at Ileights Above the Stavrianidis Critical lieight. ...................21 3-4 Normalized Temperatures as a Function of Distance from the Fire Axis at Heights Above the Stavrianidis Critical lleight....... 22 I j 3-5 Switch Temperature due to Radiation at the End of the Intense Portion l of the Fire 23 3-6 Control Panel Temperatures as a Function of Time and Radial ' l Distance from the Panel Edge in the Fire 24 3 7 Control Panel Temperatures as a Function of Time u.d Radial Distance from the Panel Edge in the Fire Assuming Flame Impmgerr. nt Ileat 2 Flux Three Times Calculated (60 kW/m ). 25 I I I ( iv l l
4 I Introduction I 1.0 Introduction The Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 2(Fermi 2) was designed and built before the promulgation of the fire protection requirements embodied in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Appendix R (10 CFR 50, Appendix R). In several I areas, the requirements of Appendix R are more conservative than the previously accepted design criteria of the Fermi 2 plant. During the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff's review of the Fermi 2 plant in light of Appendix R, the I Detroit Edison Company made a commitment to install additional fire protection features. These commitments are documented in Detroit Edison correspondence with the NRC (Colbert,1981a-1981g) and in the NRC's Safety Evaluation Report (SER) related to the operation of Fermi 2 (N RC,1981). For the postulated exposure Gre in the control room, Detroit Edison believes that a consideration of the plant-unique features is needed when addressing the requirements of Appendix R. Because the control room is continuously occupied, an exposure fire in the control room was considered highly improbable and beyond the original design basis. Any exposure fire in the control room would be discovered and extinguished quickly, I and damage would be limited to one divisional panel. Therefore, the remote-shutdown features of the Fermi 2 plant were designed to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendi.t A, General Design Criterion 19, which required an evacuation of the control I room and the use of the remote-shutdown panel, but did not postulate damage of the circuits in the control panels. Tht s, the remote-shutdown features of the Fermi 2 plant v.ere not required to be electrically isolable from the circuits in the control panels. I To help demonstrate that circuits in the control panels at Fermi 2 would remain intact during an exposure Gre in the control room and thereby to demonstrate that the remote-shutdown features of the Fermi 2 plant meet the intent of Appendix R. Detroit I Edison ran a test in June 1981. The details of the test procedure were discussed and cleared with the NRC staff before the test was run. The test procedure and results are documented in Detroit Edison's report to the NRC (Colbert,1981g) and the NRC consultant's report (Behn,1981) and are not repeated here. The test consisted of buming 'I I gallon of a flammable liquid (heptane)in front of a simulated control panel and showed that switches and circuits on the control panel remained intact and did not malfunction. In the Fermi 2 SER, the NRC reported that its consultant had identified the I following four deficiencies with the test (Behn,1981):
- 1. The mock-up pa nels did not simulate the plastic components mounted on the control room panels.
- 2. The fire configuration was altered during the test because of the distortion of the fuel pan.
- 3. The mock-up panels did not simulate the control room panel ventilation system, which had not yet been designed.
- 4. The effects of fire suppressants on the components were not demonstrated.
1 I t
[ Introduction [ Detroit Edison addressed and responded to these four items in its final report on the control panel fire test (Colbert,1981g). After reviewing this information, the NRC [ advised Detroit Edison that three questions temained. One concerned the control panel ventilation and two concerned plastics used in the control panel components. In response to the NRC staff's concern that flames from an exposure fire in the control room might be drawn into the control panels through the grills on the lowest face, Detroit Edison agreed to install Marimte board on the inside of the grilled face to seal and insulate that surface. Ilowever, this modification also required tt.at the control panels be supplied with forced ventilation. In the fire test report, Detroit Edison described thc forced ventilation it planned to provide to the control panels. This consisted of vertical feeds to the " hardened" control panels from the overhead duct of the p control center ventilation system. After reviewing this description, the NRC was con-L cerned tht a fire in one divisional panel might be able to enter the other divisional panel through the common overhead duct supplying the panels. Detroit Edison plans to install fusible-link-operated dampers on each panel's sentilation duct discharge to prevent the spread of a fire from one panel to another. The first of the NRC's two concerns about plastics in the control panels was that the plastic windows used in the annunciators mounted on the uppermost face of the control panel might distort or melt in the postulated exposure fire. This might result in the plastic falling onto the lower surfaces of the control panel and, perhaps, damaging the switches on those surfaces. Detroit Edison agreed to replace the plastic windows with glass windows on the annunciators to resolve the concern. This was discussed with the NRC in telephone conversations on September 16* and 17t,1981. The ;econd of the NRC's two concerns about plastics on the control panels was that the plastic switches mounted on the control panels might distort or melt in the exposure fire. If this occurred, the switches might fall through the panel surface and, perhaps, short or operate sf uriously. This did not occur during the panel fire test. Ilowever, the NRC felt that further experimental and theoretical verification of the earlier fire test results was needed. In the telephone conversations of September 16 and 17, the NRC and Detroit Edison agreed on the 2-pronged approach to be taken by Detroit Edison to resolve the NRC's remaining concern. Detroit Edison agreed to run an oven test exposing a simulated panel front with the switches mounted on it to an oven temperature consersatively specified by the NRC to be 6000F for a period of 8 minutes, bounding the conditions of the actual panel fire test run by Detroit Edison, to confirm [ that the switches would remain intact and would not malfunction in the postulated exposure fire. I)etroit Edison also agreed to calculate the panel surface temperatures .[
- Telephone conversation between V. Benaroya. NRC. and W. F. Colbert, Detroit Edison.
September 16.1981. [ tTelephone consersation between W. Johnston. NRC. and W. F. Colbert, Detroit Edison, Septe.nber 17,1981. 2
E i E Introduction l theoretically expected in the postulated fire to confirm that they would be less than the test temperature of 6000F and similar to those measured in the fire test. Part of this report documents the tests and calculations performed by Detroit Edison to resolve 6e NRC's second concern. Section 2 of this report describes the oven test of the controi switches, Section 3 summarizes the calculations done to confirm the panel fire test results, and Section 4 presents Detroit Edison's conclusions from the oven test and the confirmatory calculations. Figures 1-1 and I-2 are photographs of the control panels and a closeup of panel 601 installed in the Fermi 2 control room. These will aid the reader's understanding of the material presented in Sections 2 and 3 of this report. The photographs also illustrate that the Fermi 2 control room is essentially complete at this time. Detrcit Edison believes ihat the information presented in this report is sufficient to resolve the NRC's remaining concern. Detroit Edison has concluded that the panel fire test, the oven test, and the calculations confirm its position that the design of the Fermi 2 control room provides adequate protection of the public health and safety and meets the intent of the NRC's requirements for alternate shutdown independent of the control room. References Behe., J. D., Gage-Babcock & Associates, Inc.1981. " Fermi 2 Control Room Fire Test." Letter 7917-4 to V. Benaroya, NRC, June 24. E Colbert, W. F., Detroit Edison.198 la. "Prosision of I-II R Barriers in Cont rol Room." Letter E F2-53462 to L. L. Kintner, NRC, June 16. Colbert, W. F.. D:'ioit Edison.1981 b. " Fire Protection Commitments." Letter E F2-53791 :o L. L. Kintner, NRC June 18. Colbert. W. F., Detroit Edison.198 lc. " Fire Protection Commitments." t.etter EF2-53818 to L. L. Kintner, NRC, June 19. Colbert, W. F.. Detroit Edison.198 td. " Fire Protection Resiew." Letter EF2-53897 to L. L. Kintner N RC, June 29. I Colbert, W. F, Detroit t tison.1981e. " Response to Q 021.32 Fire Protection." l etter EF2-53899 to L. L. Kin:ner, N RC, June 29. Colbert, W. F., Detroit Edison.198lf. "Transmittel of the l'pdated Fire liaiard Analysis, FSAR Appen-dix 9B." Letter EF254202 'o L. L. Kintner. N'IC, July 31. l Colbert, W F., Detroit Edison.1981g " Control Panel Fire Test."I.etter E F2-54205 to L. L. Kintner, N RC, July.n. N RC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).1981. Safety Evaluation Report RelateJto the operatior: of Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit No. 2. NUREG-0798. I 3 1
8 l I Introduction Figure 1-1.1.ayout of control panels - Fermi 2 control room.
- 8
,- c. ws, -- 99 e s f (! N, s - fj de g i
== d.,, j .ch (7,k ?ti g:,y 6 w3= 9 l at, - ao
- f
, g l, i.. .q e. <-a < ); I b fj .h,;.-: l [h: pg ..m _y ay ' age. y l a c l 4
1 I Introduction E m.,.
- 2. e,s.,, _,,,,i -,.
.,=.,m u _,,,,,, _. gij 'M O,h; 8 g _.. _, ,M.. uy l M 20 l ,,e..- l j,.- p>_;i d 4 M E .ahiift:5 'I . 13 3 a i
- ~4 I
...'i a. I e, a o.sipa, I h D I pp :k',g p g,,q :.. %. c. a f y) ['lh%sj;Ix. fi ] y
- "[
. ;.f; u .,e ; _l 3 *gi,;., ~ j Ait 84 a 2%z 'A' y8'8E6g(qi q , S65- @ -I g @ [ !! '
- mm a El M '6 fv er
] )Mk g ',s 2 41 t
- s
?l -axeq )..' + 1 - 'I 5
I I Oven Test I 2.0 Oven Test lI On October 15,1981, the Engineering Research Department of Detroit Edison conducted a test on two types of switches used in the control panels of the Fermi 2 control room. The test was performed to determine whether the coordinated manual control i (Ch1C) switches and the pushbutton switches would remain intact and would continue f to function when exposed to a temperature of 600oF for 8 minutes. The temprature and time specified were regarded by Detroit Edison to be extremely conservative and intended by the NRC to bound the conditions to y hich these switches were exposed during the control panel fire test of June 11,1981. This section describes the pcocedure for and the results of the test. l 2.1 Procedure I A metal box was built to simulate the angle of the control panel surface in which the pushbutton and ChtC switches are installed at Fermi 2. The box formed a complete enclosure for inserting into the oven and completely sealing the oven door opening. The back of the box consisted of a removable plate, and the front was insulated *ith h1arinite board, which Detroit Edison has made a commitment to install on the panels in the Fermi 2 control room. This box is illustrated in Figure 2-1. One Chf C switch and one pushbutton switch were installed on the metal box; the mounting of these switches is shown in Figure 2-1. Four thermocouples were I attached to the Ch1C switch to monitor temperatures of various parts of the switch throughout the test. It was impractical to attach thermocouples to the pushbutton switch because ofits relatively small size. Thermocouples were installed between switches te measure the surface temperature of the switch enclosure and the air temperature 2 inches I above the switch enclosure. The thermocouple locations are shown in Figure 2-2. The operating electrical contacts of the switches were wired and monitored during the test. The "normally closed" contacts of the Ch1C switch were wired in series and the I "normally open'cortacts were wired in parallel. The pushbutton switch was wired in the "normally open" position. The test was conducted in a 54-kilowatt Lindberg Hevi-Duty electric-circulating I oven, type 73-EC-484872-8, S/ N 22626. The oven temperature was maintained at 600oF during the entire test. The metal enclosure, with the switches, their instrumentation, and wiring installed, was inserted into the oven door opening, completely sealing the door opening. The temperatures and switch-contact conditions were monitored every 10 seconds during the test with a Fluke Niodel 2240B data logger. The enclosure was removed after 8 minutes of exposure to the oven temperature of 6000F,and the switches I were then inspected for deformation and operation. The results of this inspection are discussed in Section 2.2. I 6 I I
I I l l Osen Test 1 Figure 2-1. Metal enclosure and mounting of CMC switch and pushbutton switch for I 600*F oven temperature test. E 3 CMC switch l E I l '"2Yt ,) { / / __ - _. / i ?/ 5%in. 11%in. / g / g u k,, / / W 11 in. = I 9%in. 1 \\ N Inserted into oven to this point 11%in. 7 l l
I I Owen Test .c. w I Figure 2-2. Location of thermocouples on CMC switch during elevated temperature test of 600 F. I '8 I 'x s y 3 Off l 'l cset g x
- 16 Trippeg w
I N4 is 14 13 I TCl1 - Air temperature 2 inches above switch enclosure and between switches I TCl2 - Surface temperature of switch enclosure between switches TCl3 - Inserted in surface of plastic actuator display cover plate TCl4 - % inch inside and between junction of white lamp housing and black cam housing I TCis - % inch inside and between junction of cam housing and lamp transformer housing TC16 - % inch inside and between switch contact blocks Key: TC = thermocouple. I I 4, 8 I I
lI Osen Test l An overall calibration of the data logger, including a sample of the thermocouple l wire used and the isothermal connecting block, was madejust after the test. The results l are shown in the calibration certificates in Appendix A of this r. port. l 2.2 Results Visual inspection showed that the actuator display cover panel of the CMC I switch and the actuator knob, which are above the control panel surface, were deformed, but intact and supporting the switch. The operating sections of the switch located inside the enclosure showed no damage or deformation from the elevated temperature. The I indicating lights and switch contacts were unharmed and were operational during and after the test. No deformation or damage could be found on the pushbutton switch, and it functioned normally during and after the test. I Figure 2-3 shows the temperatures measured as a function of time during the oven test; refer to Figure 2 -2 for the location of the thermocouples. The peak tempera-tures recorded are summarized in Table 2-1. 2.3 Conclusions Both switches remained intact and functional during this test. They would be expected to remain in place on the control panel surface in the postulated control room exposure fire, and would not be expected to malfunction. I I I I I I I 9 I l I
_M C*$ H ._M I. amgc2 cg: a bal Eoa=C"! 3 hm* m.e A moo,m n @ Nh l;;g 03 = g "3p ._M ~ ~ m i Mg~ 4s6 I i 1 8 I = i s I 7 e I s 7 ,._I _.M 6 M ~ I 5 I M f / ) s e tu .m _M I ~ m / / I 4 ( e m i l 3 T ta r / / e r o -.W I e h u m r e p m t ~ f o t n e rioi n t _._.W aE ai l [ a eT c s o l 2 r i hF o ~- e f
- t. f 2
t d - f. s W t d tef 2 e t e a r h u n g l ig e inh Fi p. t i p r s e u 1 s u a e o e ._.W t Dw S c o p. N l. 2 tr e a 7 t l l il-lI l ll S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 6 5 4 3 2 I* s!$ _W ~o ._W '.lIi f i! !aiI l<i)Ii i.lijIjl!lli i i<1 j j.ll,J:l;.l
- 1ii 1!i1
i I I Oien Test I Table 2-1. Summary of Temperatures Measured During Oven Test l Maximum g Temperature g Measured Time Location (oF) (minutes into test) Oven air 600 Duration of test Air temperature j 2 inches above su switches (thermocouple 11) 600.5 0.66 Metal surface temperature between switches I (thermocouple 12) 266 8 Surface temperature I of plastic cover plate of actuator display of CMC switch (thermocouple 13) 485 8 Body of CMC switch I between white plastic lamp housing and black plastic cam housing I (thermocouple 14) 146.7 8 Body of CMC switch between plastic cam housing and lamp transformer housing (thermocouple 15) 132.4 8 Body of CMC switch I between switch contact blocks (thermocouple 16) 96.4 8 I ll I
I I Plume Calculations 3.0 Plume Calculations This section describes the mathematical analysis of the panel temperature pro-files resulting from a 1-gallon heptane fire contained within a 2-foot-square pan located
- g adjacent to the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) operating panels in the Fermi 2
'W control room. The model, analysis, and results are presented here, and the basis for these calculations was described briefly in Section 1. The analytical results confirm the panel fire test data recorded by Detroit Edison (Colbert,1981). 3.1 Analysis For any calculational procedure, the assumptions and the general approach followed may have significant impact on the final result. This modelis no exception. Wherever possible, the model used in these calculations is based on conservative assump-I tions in order to ensure that the results obtained were bounding. As stated above, the fire postulated in this modelinvolves I gallon of heptane confined within a 2-foot-square pan. It is assumed that there is enough ventilation to fuel I. the fire with an adequate supply of oxygen without taking credit for the removal of gases and combustion products from the immediate vicinity of the fire. The result of this assumption leads to assurance that the modeled fire bounds the ccnditions of an actual I fire in a typical c;; ventilated control room. The location of the postulated fire was taken to be beneath the lower section of a typical control panel in the Fermi 2 control room (Figure 3-1). Tests conducted by Detroit Edison of a similar fire indicated that such a location would tend to deflect the fire plume away from the benchboard (Colbert,1981). Despite this observed condition, the model fire plume was assumed both to impact the lower panel and to clear the edge of the benchboard and rise vertically (Figure 3-1). This assumption leads to panel heatup attributable to both direct flame impingement and conduction and at the same time results in the worst-case radiation-field incident on the switches located on the bench-I board itself. The target switches are assumed to be the CM C-type switches, which are usually associated with safety-related control functions and were successfully tested in the B Detroit Edison control room fire test (Colbert,1981). Although the switch is normally mounted on the benchboard portion of the control panel at a 20-degree angle (Figure 3-1), the switch face for the fire model was conservatively assumed to be rotated I to the upright position to allow for the maximum switch plate surface area to be normal to the fire. This assumption maximizes the radiant heat flux viewed by the switch face. Furthermore, the effects of thermallag associated with the switch body were ignored and only the mass of the switch plate was considered in the model. Although the switch face is generally light and even reflective,its radiation absorption characteristics were assumed to be equivalent to a gray body with an absorptivity of 95 percent and an emissivity of only 10 percent. Thus, switch heatup was related solely to the conditions on the switch I face without any credit for internal-panel cooling effects and minimum reradiation. 12
I Plume Calculations I Figure 3-1. Vertical cross section of control panel and model exposure fire. I ~ \\ / Gaussian / f' , temperature I distribution off centerline g I /"kig
- xN li: !! 5fip.,
f l? ;*f:? 677, 5.63 ft , C ,i (critical height) .l!!! !!!i!!! }. 't I Control ,$l N 5ll !ll. yi panel i:!: Radiant
- 3^i:; !i. g heag ij:
f3 I A
- i source i
w " -I- - - - - - - 2 5 i n. - I-lame impingement i i 2 x 2 ft pan containing heptane j. t I I I 13
I I Plume Calculations n.... The switch temperature was analyzed at panel locations on the fire centerplane at I / 2-inch intervals from the par-1 edge (Figure 3-2). This edge w as assumed to be within the fire for the entire duration of the fire. The panel itself was assumed to have an absorptivity of 95 percent with no reradiation. Panel thickness was assumed to be 3/16 inch. Three processes are considered to affect the heating of the control panel: convective heating from the fire plume, radiation from the hot gases and luminous soot of the plume, and conduction up through the benchboard panel. The model treats these processes in one dimension along the fire centerplane, ignoring the heat sinks provided by the floor and in the horizontal direction. Thus, energy deposited anywhere on the I panel must move up and away from the fire with minimal credit taken for cooling. Convective heating that results from a turbulent buoyant diffusion olume is analyzed by using a model by Stavrianidis (1980). This model was developed fro.n data that were obtainee from experiments involving three different liquid hydrocarbons in I fires up to 2.4 meters in diameter. Stavrianidis' work extents the applicability of earlier work done by Rouse, Yih, and Humphreys (1952) and Zeldovich (1937), prcviding statistically meaningful correlations of mean plume vertical velocity vector and fire I plume temperatures down into the flame front. Conditions off the centerline are pre-dicted in the Stavrianidis model from a Gaussian distribution as a function of distance and elevation based on Batchelor (1954). Values for the mean centerline temperature I were calculated for the heptane fire model and compared with a semiempirical relation attributed to Yokoi(1960)and Lie (1972). See also Pinkel(1978)and Campbell (1979). A more complete discussion is provided in Appendix B. Fire conditions below the Stavrianidis flame height we.e used in the radiation calculations. The radiation model is taken from Hottel and Sarofim (1967) and was solved by using a Runge-Kutta algorithm for gray-gas radiation accounting for emission by carbon dioxide, water, and soot particles in the flame. Gas temperature within the flame was assumed to be 1763oF (Stavrianidis,1980; Klamerus,1978) and was conserva-tively modeled as a right cylinder defined by the effective radius and the Stavrianidis flame height (Figure 3-1). A more complete development of the switch radiation model is provided in Appendix C. The thermal conduction in the steel panel was predicted by combining the effects of radiation and conduction in a one-dimensional model that ignores ccoling in the second dimension of the panel surface and to the floor. This is accomplished by a modification of the Poisson equation using continuously distributed internal energy sources to account for the radiation effects (f1-Wakil,1971). Numerical solution was achieved through the use of an explicit finite-difference scheme that accounted for the variable boundary conditions (see Appendix D). The thermophysical characteristics of the postulated heptane fire were derived from Tewarson, Lee, and Piou (1979), Tewarson (1980), and Blinov and Khudiakov (1961). Conservative values were assumed for the heats of combustion as described in the references so as to ensure that no credit was taken for less than efficient combustion. 14 l
I il Plume Calculations 1g Figure 3-2. Cross section of the "A" surface of the control panel showing the positions jg at which the test switch temperatures were calculated. !I lI b %in. ~ w (, h I "j:j "odel M / / [ // lojo,'
- p^j;j}
/ [if ( s x /z t i I I I I 15 I I
I Plume Calculations Table 3-1. Fire Characteristics Parameter Value Heat release rate 2 Total 2150 kW/m. Convective 1150 kW/m2 Heat of combustion Total 43 kJ/g* Convective 23 kJ/g* 'I Mass loss rate 50 g/m2-sec* Flame temperature 1763oF (1235 K)? Emissivity Gas 0.2 Soot 0.1 Total 0.3
- From Tewarson, lac, and Piou (1979), Tewarson (1980), and Blinov and Khudiakov (1961).
tFrom Stavrianidis (1980). !From Hottel and Sarofim (1967). Table 3-1 summarizes the values used in the analysis. With a conservative mass loss rate 2 of 50 g/m -sec, total combustion of I gallon of heptane in a 4-square-foot fire would be predicted to occur within 139 seconds, a duration supported by Pinkel(1978). I Despite predicted fuel exhaustion and self-extinguishment of a 1-gallon heptane fire at the end of such an intense burn, the burn time was conservatively extended to 5 minutes at a lower mass loss rate of approximately 23 g/ m2-sec(Figure 3-3). This has I the effect of providing additional fuel to the postulated 1-gallon fire. Thus, although an efficient combustion of I gallon of heptane was modeled to burn within 139 seconds, a total quantity in excess of I gallon was actually considered to conservatively predict the I thermal effects of a 5-minute fire on the benchboard and typical switches. A fmal element of the analysis is related to the effects of flame impingement on the underside of the panel. Such impingement contributes to panel heatup as a result of conduction up along the panel. Flame impingement is conservatively taken to be full and I direct. Using a model taken from Rohsenow and Choi (1961), an analysis of both realistic and artificially higher values of heat flux were considered. This,in turn, led to an exponential heatup of the panel's edge with time constants of 902 and 275 seconds for the I realistic and worst cases, respectively. This aspect of the model is discussed in Appendix E. I 16 I
F L Plume calculations C Figure 3-3. Assumed heptane mass loss (burn) rate as a function of time. [ 2 Model's assumption 50 /tuninnnnityjjj / // u 7 Estimate of actual 5 Detroit Edison l25 control room test ,l, fire conditions o l 0 139 300 Time (seconds) 17 hem i i -
I I Plume Calculations n~ w c, c., .x.. .. ~,~ 4. In addition to the above-mentioned heating effects, three cooling effects are noted involving reradiation, convective cooling, and conduction to the heat sink at infinity. Each process was treated conservatively to ensure that the model adequately bounds the conditions on the panel. As was previously discussed, despite the assumption that the upright switch and i the control panel itself were treated as gray bodies with absorptivity of 95 percent, emissivity was taken to be only 10 percent. Thus, reradiation contributes only minimal cooling to the test switch and panel. Conduction to an ultimate heat sink at 70oF was also postulated in order to provide a necessary boundary condition for the analysis. This condition was assumed to I occur at an infinite distance and, therefore, was effectively removed as a cooling mechanism. Convective heat transfer from the hot panel to the air space internal to the panel I was considered for the sake of completeness. Simultar.cously with fire initiation, total failure of any ventilation into that space was conservatively postulated for the purposes of analysis. Internal-panel air temperatures were assumed to be a uniform 2000F in the calculation of natural convection inside the panel. Credit was not taken for convective cooling to the control room air outside the panel. Appendix F discusses the turbulent free convection processes used in the model. The assumptions used in the analysis as discussed above ar.d in the appendixes I are both bounding of substantiated data and conservative. A summary of some of the more limiting assumptions and considerations for the control room exposure fire model is provided below:
- 1. Panel and switches are treated as almost black bodies; essentially ignores reradiation.
- 2. The most intense (efficient) flame is assumed.
- 3. A fire of lower intensity (at lesser efficiency) is artificially extended to 5 minutes of burn (equivalent to a larger fuel volume).
I
- 4. The switch face is assumed to be perpendicular to the flame and assumed to have an unobstructed view of the entire fire.
- 5. The conduction model is one dimensional, ignoring radiation and lateral I
coohng effects.
- 6. Radiation and convection effects are assumed to be for an undisturbed free-burning vertical fire.
I
- 7. Enough oxygen to most efficiently fuel the fire is assumed, and the cooling effects of such ventilation are ignored.
- 8. Peak theoretical convective heat release rates are assumed.
g
- 9. The only cooling credited is by turbulent natural convection to air inside the F;
panel assumed to be maintained at a uniform temperature of 200oF. 18 I
Plume calculations g 3.2 Results The results of calculations for the most severe exposure fire involving in excess of I gallon of heptane in a conf ~med 2-foot-square pan include the following:
- 1. Centerline temperatures above the fire (Table 3-2).
- 2. Temperatures out from the fire axis above the Stavrianidis critical height (Table 3-3).
- 3. Temperatures out from the fire axis above the 5tavrianidis critical height using normalized distance from the fire axis (Table 3-4).
I
- 4. Switch temperature at the end of the intense portion of the fire due to radiation (Table 3-5).
- 5. " Realistic" worst-case control panel temperatures as a function of time and radial distance from the point of contact of the panel edge with the fire (Table 3-6).
- 6. " Con:ervative" worst-case control panel temperatures as a function of time and radial distance from the panel edge assuming arbitrarily a heat flux three
.I times the calculated effects of flame impingement (Table 3-7). The nature of these results is especially illuininating from the perspective of the effects of convective heating. Centerline temperatures using both the Stavrianidis and the Yokoi models are presented in Table 3-2. Yokoi presented two models: Yokoi-Tamb and Yokoi-Tgasc. The Yokoi-Tamb model correctly calculates centerline temperatures without modifying air density or specific heat as discussed in Pinkel (1978) and Lie (1972). The Yokoi-Tgasc model demonstrates a calculation as performed by Campbell (1979) for the NRC. It is provided to demonstrate the consistency of the Yokoi-Tamb model with the Stavrianidis model and to compare it with the Gage-Babcock calcula-tional procedure, which appears to overestimate the magnitude of the risk of pool fires. The Yokoi-Tamb model predicts thermal conditions consistent with the Stavri-anidis model until the flame height is approached; at t his point, the Stavrianidis model is more conservative in predicting higher temperatures. The Yokoi calculations are carried into the flame for comparison although this violates Yokoi's assumptions and invalidates !I the model. The Campbell (Gage-Babcock) approach becomes unstable at that point because of the attempt to modify the Yokoi parameter, and 50000F is linearly projected at the point of instability. In Tables 3-3 and 3-4, air temperatures from convective heating away from the fire axis (centerline) are presented. Above the Stavrianidis critical height, such heating must be considered in the analysis due to the divergence of the plume from the j pan geometry. Below this height, however, the entrainment effects of the fire result in an l5 air velocity component directed inward toward the fire axis, ir.hibiting any convective heating adjacent to the fire. Thus, below the critical height (5.63 feet) for the 1-gallon j heptane fire analyzed, convective heat transfer need not be considered outside the fire gas j plume. 19
Plume Calculations Table 3-2. Centerline Temperatures Above the Fire I I Ob W a I 4-W L E W I ~ =G E W N.. = m.. m N a m. n N. M. - O m m M. = O. N O.. - W n e. n W m m - - m m o.......... m -.m==.St WO-6.WNW~... O W o m e b. b m W W. N m W... O b = W ~. m m W r4_.mM,mW.m.mbm Wme.mmmmmm.......... O. m W M. - O m e.. b. N. ~, m M O m t4 0 .N .We b E , M~~M 4 4 .o-m mmb NM 00000000000000000000000000000000000000.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0. Whh wu= I ~
- o. m 4
oo O. >k O m, a b m m m m m. W W W W W W W W W e b b b b 6 6.... m m m O O m a u, W m.......... W --__=_=H. =O4 > oma I = Osw I g>> O >90 W Wm E M4 =O W U I U
- O W N b - b = M
- m N m m m m m m W N M m b g m e m M N o m s b e t4 W M W O O O O O O O O O O W
U G. N. m. m. e. n. M. M. W. W. W. m. m. W. 9. M. G. a. m. m. m. =. C. a. t4 6. m. m. W. b. m. W. 9. m. b. m. m. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W J ~4 4 QQa WNm9mO*OmmMcMmbbenMm=NeomWMNemWhemm=NWOOOOOOOOOO 3 ukh N e m b m N e h m N W W - M W m t # W e w m e m e ti o m m O M m e b ts e m o W O O O O O O O O O O Oww w w w w e m o m m W k W 6 b b b e a m m m O O = t4 M M g W 6 m o t4 m m ta m W o o O O O O C O C O E >U
==w*
te te te r4 M M e m m m m m m m m m e = m 3 4C l N a m e e N m m b O M 9 ta m W m N o m W h
- S G N W g tS M O W M S M M e g W e W e b e b m M a m W r4 E
e =. 0. m. n. O. t.a =. W. N. m. e. te. m. M. e. m. W. t.o 3. O. M. W. 4D. 6. w. to. t o e. 4. m. o. =. W. M. M. N. to. m. o. b. . to e. g. m. tt M. O. E 3 =4 Oka
O m m O - M m m m m O O = t4 g h - m-b w M M m m e - = * -- m m a w b o s M te - ta e W e m m wwk MWwebSmOwMg W 6 m m O = M 9 W b m = M O S O M W m M S - 69 f e m m e n e m W h 9 0== b e QUw MMMMMMM9wegwe99mmmmmmmWWWWbbbb m e m 03 O O a ta m e m b m t4 W e
I
=
4 O
kW
= = - - = = = = - t e r4 M M g m
d N
e W> m 4
=
mommmmmmmmMoo=O--ComM s a ta m N M m w a ta m b ~* C000000000000 W m. W. 6. M. O. M b m. B. W. M. =. O. t.4 G. O. O. O. r.e a. m. O. =. W. 9. M. 4. M. O. M. M. O. b. r4. C. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. C. C. O.
a O
I mu e
W 2Wa O h m M N w w a t4 e b au N m 6 m o g o m O W m m b te g m W o m m o g M M M M M M M M M M M M M e
44h b b e m O = N M g m W e m a to w e m = g W O M S - W e s e n M M M W rv o u m W W W W W W
w=====~ww-~~~w w w e = =-
J W
4 R
W I
4 W
h-I R
M to G
. W N B e M N W m te b (4 ED 9 t6 N N e bN m e c w t o M e e M ys e e e m o N W W O Ep p m C s.a m. m. m. m. m W. W W. W. b. t.a m F te W O w O m.* 03 to n., S t a m o b O t. Di M ED m-MmbOt W
% las N M g W b W O - M m b m 01
- t4 e m t%
. b. b. B. E m. m. m. O. a. . t e. n. g e. b. m. a. M. P. =. b. b. G. 4999999 m= a= =2h M. M. M. M. M. M. + + OOW M h a~E O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O u C O M O O O O = = = =- ~ = = = N N N M M 9 m 4 004 >WR %%%%%%NNNN% % %%%%%% NN%% %%% % % %%% NN N N% 3. s % %%% %%%%%% laf R4 M M M M M M M M M M M N t'4 N f4 N N N t4 to N N ti N N ta f a H t e f4 N rd re t a f 4 f a to f a e s N t 4 t o e a N N N N -. I = N k 2 E = 0 IO e C008000000000000000000000000080 0 0 0 6. o. c. O. 6. C. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. c. COOOnOOcMOOOOOOOOO T 8W S O. O. o.
- 0. o. O. O. O. o. O. O. O. O. O. o. O. O. O. O. O. O. O. c. O. O. O. Q. c.
e m = =. - O W F4 e e O W N ED
- O W N e g O to N to e O to te to e o to es in e O W te g e o t,p to e g O to to e g OWN
>h m W 4 2 ommWWebbWWWmmegg M M t4 te t e = a O O O m m m m e b b W W W O n g g g M M t4 N N = = g SW-N=========wwwa===wwww===ww 3 4 W>w W JO 4 e We k 4 4 W W E t l > = l W b ,U ~'
.I t l i lI Plume Calculatiom l Table 3-3. Temperatures as a Function of Distance frem the Fire Axis at lleights Above the Stavrianidis Critical Height ..... e............. b ONgnb90=NM99g#eM=mbg. I OWO*bowNMMMemb w mmm m m m OO O O O O OO O O O m mm m e mbm W pg MNa o m e
= = = = = N N N N t4 N N N t4 N N = = = = = = = = = w w = = =
NONewmONMmWWWmommWWg.. GMb=MemmeNOmW W. S O O O O O a m a = a = = ~ t4 = = = = = =- O O m m e b *, p w M N o m =
N N N N t4 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N t4 N t1 * =
- a w a = = =
l = .. e .... e e.. ............ e e... e....mem eMMMOb40W mbONmeOMMbmwMOWSWWSWmt O O = = * - N t4 N N N M M M M M M M M M M M t4 N === O m== =m p N t4 N N te N te N N N 4 N N to f4 te N 84 N to t4 f4 N f4 N N f4 *. e b p g M a NMW=eboobOMWmagmemOOOmkomMWShg.=pMN e. I = et N N N N N t1N N to N F4 N N f4 f 4 f4 f4 to N t4 N F4 N to te N te te te== m e. = w a N N N M M M W
- g e n p o m p W W W m p o w e M f4 = O m b=.
e....... e.. e e. e....... e, e.. . e e. eNWmMb=neNWO* mane *MphmbWeOmbe.WMWWW. M=
- NN N M M g e g mO W WWb b b e me m m m m em b ue9 F a m o t4 f1 te N N N N N t
- f 4 N N to f 4 N te f4 N te t o N f4 N te t e f4 te (4 t4 N h N== =
I = ....... e.......................... N m m M O N W - m O O O m m g m e m e m N p e = N r4 = e M W h o m = m N f4 fi M e 9 m A 40 46 6 h b G W m m O O =* N to N f 4 = = 0 m W W M to N tg N N t4 N N f4 (4 t1 N N te te te N t4 M f"I fi fi M fi M t7 M M M (9 (4 N N N f4 = NW=pOmoWabMen-beO6MmponOMcWmNWhomo M m e g n m W e b b e m m C O = t4 te M M g poWWWWWWpwM=m I = N N N N P4 N 4 4 f 4 N te te t4 e4 f*l M M f5 f1 ti M M fi ti t7 M f7 si M M N ti M (9 N WMWMeeOWNmWMO...................... M 9 e m n W b b G (D 01 O b o m a m e m m M - m W M m.. N e M o t.=4 0 N O= = f 4 t7 9 9 m W 6 m m m O w t4 F4 to te Om f4 N N 04 N N t4 ti t4 te N M M M M f7 f7 ti f7 M t1 q=4 fi M g 9 g g g g g g g M I ................... n 9. m O = t4 M M = G N t4 W S m e m W O W N m W M O W W e n ts t4 N N M g. tsemehmmmOOmm egeWWbbMmOO=NM9mWhmMO N t4 N N te N te f4 N M M M M M M M M M M M g 99994g499pme9 ..... e............................. W m m = b M O b o t4 =m e G W m O = 9 W O e e g e W M m W te m = M C M g e m m b m W m o a a t4 M g e h e m o t4 M g W 3 m = te e m b m C - = N N to N N (4 f 4 N M ti fi M f7 f7 M ti M fi g g e e g e e p o e o m O 4D EO W I We b O W M v b O M = C O O a te
- W O W m m r4 0 m m o t4 W O O O W O 9 9.
M W W h e m m O = t4 M e n e h m O = N e to m m = e W E - M W e = M p f4 N N N t4 t4 N f7 M 17 f7 ti M (*t M M e 9 e g w w 9 m n O o 40 t.9 W LD b b b = W e m m e n M = O m m m o t e g e te h m o m e m te W r 4 C O N W M a
- M e b
n W h b e m O -- t4 M e W h e O
- M e m m O M m e - g b o g e rd W O I
NNNNNt4MMMMMMMMMg9999 g MMnOWWWbbbMGM W = W Z
- * * = * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *=OgNg*CNW m
NmpMambbebemNpOmtsmem=m*OOW * * * * * *
- s WWbgmmO=f4Mg pbmowMgWQmMWmtemmMbtebMmp 4
(4 N N N t ; t4 M M M M M M M M g g g g g eoppOWWWbbmemmo I = e, MNeb. U = = b g p M N te f4 M o b O O C b g M g b = g b m e m p f 4 M M g = M p u W b b W m Q - te M e O W G m = N gWWOMOGdOAMmMmmM=O f4 N N to N fi M M M ti M fi ti M 9 4 g4 9 m O tra e W 40 W b t' e a m O = f4=== W = 3 0 2 n W W h W o m b e. D W e m o a b W m M a g. .... e... .................. tem r M O b a m e =-M met 40mb. I = W ww== q W6mmmO-NMgW b e c a m m b m t4 9 b o # G t4 6 f 4 W p M a = M W t o te ts N N M M M M M M M M g g g W e o p p M W W W b b 5 5 m O = 4 4 M x = X ............... e... e... ( = 4. WWW.N O m m er c r a g. y ... e e... e N e N e g N NM u ta m O M -N a m e n W e M m e W = W ebemOO=NeOWbmoregWWOmpmfeWOg F O re m e W m m t = ti t4 N t4 M M M M M M M M M e 9 9 9 g e m m m W W h b b W m m O w t e gw=ww = b. = g I k E b . *. * = * *.. e M a g ts b e b b a n o m* O e E
- OmmMN===4wt*
e O= O m = m W e s te m ba b R 6 6 S m O = N M 9 0 W W Cs a te e W m - i m m M b = W = b ged a te e m e k N N t4 f 4 M M M M M M M M M g g g g g m m m m W W b b e e m o w t4 M g b
=
3 6 W O 1 U. W 2 ......... e......... 40 - e W e N t4 = r-4 M m W = W r e m e m o g O m - m m m b te g e b o c c a I W = >- bbemowNMemWWm t4g e m = g W O M b = W re m e M M g W es W W b J = NNr4NMMMMMMMMMegg g 4 m m m W W W b b W e m O m t4 M O t I W
==w=w 3 G 4 4 k U W = >=.................................. ,4=-_SSS
======-==_4_w-
WWG WW M 4 O W W.
--=
11 ~ " 21 I ll
4, .f af 5 d i J 4 s i .i .I ) Plume Calculations 1 i ,f f 5 Y l Table 3-4. Normalized Temperate.es as a Function of Distance from the Fire Axis 4 ) at Heights Above the Stavrianidis Critical Height 4, 4 4 f 9 l ??RRRRRRRRR???RR?????RRRRRRR?????? i O l 1 g N q M. 00000000000000000000000000====-=== p bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb 4 O 1 O M. 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = N N N t4 N. b66666666b66666666666b6666b6666bbb O e j N. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = N N N t4 N N N N t4 M M M M e g g m e. t 6666666b66666666b66b66b66666666bbb a o i e f N. N N N t4 N t4 N N N N N M M M M M M M e g 99mppWWbbemO=N bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb bbbbbeme e I' g N. M M g g e e 9 9 M p p m m W W W h b b m e m m O - t4 M e m W m o re g bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbecamemammmm r 0 l h l (4 i N. WbbbbmemmmoOO=NNMg9mWham-Ng WmwemNb. i SbbbbbbbbbmammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmeOCC== l O
=
l I O N. NNMM99POWSbemO=NMOWhm=MMm=g mNWreemp m a a m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m o C o o = = = t4 4 M M g n o
==
I e =. o=NNMemWbmO-MgWmONebomb=nonNebWhom memWemmmmmOOOoCO*===NNNMMg enmWbmC= 0
===================wa=t4N W aMWe ..............m a t* W = W N e O M t8 to
- b to O.
W
- 9 g n tr 3 m =. M. *. ta e t4 te to to M M M e w n o W W 6 m m o = to e to e O.
I =. 3OOOoo.. =*
=
e- * = = = = = = = = = a ~ ~ a = = =.* ** f 4 N N t o t o te M O g ................ e.... e... e.. e. e... O te e W S O M p e = 9 6 = m m 9 m g o b 4 N w o = M b M C O g ~ M a N t-4 N. N t.4. M M M. m e. g g e n m. W. W. h a. m m. o - t4 M g pbO=MWmm O =. =. ..... NNNNt H rd e4 e4 M M M 9 = w to ......... e e.. e... e.. e e. e o e e....... N e m o g b O 9 m N b ri b M M M M = O m O = 9 m M w = M m e = = b N k g e..o. m e n. W.* W. W b b. m e m m t4 N N N R4 N e4 e4 t o M c1 M M M g ..==. =m O=NMMpubscragWenemMm I O ggmn G = WZ O =. D N W c e m w e g O m n o m b W W W m-n-a m e M o o r e me m M I = S
- ........... *... * =..... =.. **......
J W b b W. e e m m. N F4 N f4 to' f4 N N N N (4 M M M M #7 M g 9 9 m e p W b b =. = = =. o=-NeMenWbmO=MeWe=gNog meom 4 O u W= Om m - O. b t4 k N m M c W M a m a b b m O M h te m b b m e te n e b N o M ts e = u k B O O = - te t4 M e n n W h m m - N M m m e o te n e - g mMag-mm 40 t4 94 N N N t4 t4 N f4 F4 f4 N te it f4 M t1 M M M 4 4 g eMpOWWbmaG W W I = WO N N r4 N N N t4 N N N M M M M M M M M 9 9 4 e m m m m e b b e m m O = O J e WW E N O. M a b M o b M M a = O = M o m m m e g e b -m e ts o M w W m = W m g a NMMgonWSGMOwNMeebm=MmeCMb-mom-mbbm a =
== M X 4 3 e a = W O. mWhobW9949We=p=bMpWCWgmOmMNhommemm. W w k" O N N t4 N N t4 N M M M Ii M M M M 9 9 9 9 9 m n M W W W b b a m o - f4 M k enWbbemO=NMg W h m o t4 4 W m = g h a w e w m W M - = ts u I = b k
==
= b o e oN e t o. MNCbWmWWpbmMbrsebbatabmWOmom=N=Fwbt4o k W h e m m o = ta n g e b m O
- M m b o te n e rs o O g C W M o o o m s k
a O e4 eite to t4 M M M M M ti M ra e g e*eomnmWWboeamO W
=t4 ti e
3 > u O I 2 .... +..................... +.=..... I O 40 W = >Oe bbemC=NMgpWem= Neem =9 WOMB ~WhmmMMg WN m
m W g N N = N M m e = W t4 m e m o g o m = W o m b N e m b O c m
W W t 1 =O te N t4 t4 M M M M M M M M m e e g e g n o m W W W h b e s m o = ta M M 3 e 4 w
=
4 4 k u 3= W = W2 O W N e
- O m re m
- 0 W N e w c W N e g o s ta m o O W N e w C W r4 m.
k E J= OmemmebbWWWomeg g M M t4 N ta= oc = W = Ww 3 (4 - = = = = = = - = = = = = = = = = = = = === =., o m m m m e h b W 'I > u t )) 'I I
l 'l il I 2E3R. O!n E o3#
- i. mW G te I J. @$".nW H. *CeMmeCm CCN *MC ga% % C3 mc "g4 M3L Cm
- awe ME @m$
a o L o e = m t TCN.O3 CM*We Ym.*8 0 0 0 2 0 8 1 5 1 3 5 6 3 0 9 5 9 1 3 0 4 S 7 8 9 9 5 0 9 1 3 3 1 5 l 0 e 6 8 E. E B 4 = TI 0 M 7 3 5 8 6 R 1 41 N U 2 5 B 0 4 T 7 7 2 I s 4 T V I 0 9 S 4 4 .S 7 7 3 GE 0 I 4 I F EM D 5 0 EL 3 0 5 A 6 6 8 4 MI 7 RE 1 f 4 CR 0 FT 5 5 6, A SM E 6 0 5 E R CD U 1 4 NN T AA A 5 5 8 T R 1 6 SS E 9 N P IDO M 3 4 I STI T 9 0 7 2 UI OS S 5 9 8 IO A RP G 1 4 AVS F 5 0 U M 5 G T O A 0 9 AI L 4 R F 0 EA CV 0 9 A 2 3 FR 4 1 1 RO 5 UF 2 S 8 1. ER I 5 1 3 N N LU 3 2 OB 0 5 S 2 NF 3 0 S OO 4 2 C D 3 t 5 3 ON = 5 T E 2 N T 8 OT H 5 A G 3 7. E I 2 4 7 GE E 5 DT H 2 EA 0 1 G L E 9 E P M OM I A 2 5 o V L b BC E F 2 AT wN 9 EWI 2E 35 3 3 IC IN1 7 RS TR 4 H 6 F I F. A E0 1 9 SF E 2 MT / N G 8 OS 8S I D1 9 RA E 8 0 6 F L FE E 2 P OR X G 7 M UF SE 2 O5 2 LO TD R 5 5 F0 2 4 F INN = E 7 T R UI E 3 AU R C E T IMS E N0 4 MA E T A 7 0 R R E T0 9 4 7 NE XU M S OP UT A I 3 I M LA I D T E FR D AT E S0 TP E D S1 IDD AM I IM0 R A A N EE R A NT F G E J a,. tt
I Plume Calculations I Table 3-6. Control Panel Temperatures as a Function of Time and Radial Distance from the Panel Edge in the Fire O. O W M O W W W W..... M. M N. ~..= = O O o m m m m m m m.. m.... WWbbbbb WW.. Ob=W-m....m. m ....bbbbbbbbbbbbbb-666666666666666 W. = = = N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N t4 N N N N N N N N N t4 N N N N N N N .} O.
- m. O b n N O = C o o m m W b b W W m m e w w w 9 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N N N N N = = = = O f
96=W=WemmmameWWWBSemWBemmemWWWWGemmemmememamememmage a8 O = = N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N e N N N N #4 N N N N N N N t4 N N N t4 N N N N N N N iq O
- I
= O......................................... bbbWWWWM s = O eb m e s o m e w MNN =OO m m m m m e W e s t,m e s mm m m m e m a me m eb t. mew =W = W m m m mm m mm m m m W S S SW B W G M J55mWSWremesWESWWWeememmes W = a N te N N N N N N N N N e4 N N te N N N to N F4 Cd N (4 te N N F4 N f a te N N N N to N N N te te (4 N N t1 N N N E j
- m. O m m m W a O O m S W W W m m e W M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N N N N N = = = O e....................
1j 2 Wh=W=WOOOmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm t = = to te n M M N N N N N N N N N f4 to N t1 N te N N to N te N e4 N N N N N N to to to N N N f4 N N N t4 ti te N N 3 e O. O = = N M W m p 9 M N N = O m m S S W e m W W W W e m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m W W W b b b W W m
- ............................................=....
9bhbNbOOOOOOOOOmpmemmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm .e te N (" M M M n M M M M N te N e4 t1 N(4 te N to N f4 N (4 N N N N N f4 N f4 f 4 N to N t4 O f4 t4 f 4 N f4 N N N N J
- m. O ~.
nb=OCm bWn ......nMMMnMM. nemmenemnennnme ...MnMNn== O. bbhbNba= =00000000C00000000000000000000 00000000000000
== N NMM MMM M M M MMM M M M MM M M MM M M M M MM M M M M M M MMM M M M MMM MM M M M I = O. O M W m N S W m e M N = O m m m m m m m m O O O = = = N N N N N N N N N N N = = = = O O m m m m e b e M W b bbNbNewn
======00000000~~==~~~~~~~~~===*====~~OOOOOcc e
== N NM M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M t, M M W -3 g
- m. O
- E m b N N = m e b m p e e w e g n m W W b e m e m m m m m m m m m m m m a g e b b M W n n e w M..N.
e.................................................. 3 WbhbMar4NN==========-=====*--ww===~~=== ====-~~~~w=m eI k 4
==NNMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMnMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM k e W O O n a b N W h W OM N C o m m O O a N M M
- m m W W b b b b b b b b b b O W W m m g
- M f4 N = = O m e f'
L ................. =.. =........ *. *.... = =........... E N to W O W b f4 3 M m f 4 N F4 N N N N N = = (4 to N N N N N N to ti to f a N N N N ta f 4 N N N e4to N N to N f 4 t$ f a to N N te U > m
==NNMMMMMMMMMMMMnnMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM9MMnnMMMMM 4 }'I s W k 4 o me.. e.b. ..e ............. e....... e.... e.............. E New i N k W 2
==~NnMnnnnnnnnnnMnnnnnnMMMMMnnnnnnMnMnnMnnMnnnnnMn W E 4 J e > O J m2
- 0. O W o n M a m o m M = O O = M e W b m O = N M *
- m p e o p m m * *
- F M N = a O m e m b W e g W
h 20 MN. b5 kM$bMMSMbMMSMMM MMMMMbnM MMMbMbMbn MbS$$$ O M MMM UW W f Od >O WW lI E3
- m. O O o m e b p N m b W W 6 m - M W e m - te m w m o m e n m e m o g M M f e - ~ C e. m b e n w M N = O m e 2m
=2 2 ebMmeOgg wmMMMMmeg ewwmenemommpmennnnemonn gegg wegeg Mr 02 = E JO W
==NMMMnnMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMnMnnMMMMMMMMnMMMMM CU O. 3W WZ O O = M 9 m M O W M w = N e m a g S m = M e m W W 6 b b W W W p w e n t4 = O C m e W p w M N a o m b W e...... W i 00 M hk 1 k Z> = NbMM WO MM M M M M 1 -I E2 a 2 O> WW m.... ............. = =..... =.... =... =.. +.............. t W JJ - O M W S O m e O b e b O m o e m - m m m e m m m m m m m e b W e = M N = C m e s m q M - O p g W n g e. h2 O 03 MbMenNnoneewepWWWW66bbbheW bbbbbbbbbbbbWWWWWWWWtionnen O Q We
==N MMM M MM M M n MM M M M M MM M M MM M M M M MM M M M M M M MMM M MM M M M M M M M M
- =
W 24 'l WW D3 UU W y> 0 *......................... *...-...... -............. O M M M II my . m mo 4 I o kW W
- m. O W N W e n W g g m W W p N b a g.d b S M S W b b W D f4 a c e b n g t# O m b o
..ts o m b e g ra O m b...... Q = I Nm 4 S =N MMMMM .999 9 9 9 9# MM MMM MMMM M M O 2 Wm3 =W W XMuk 2 O. O S e e m p W m - O N W h e m N e p W W W p 4 M N o m b. W* g N O M b p M = m b p m - m b W e N o m W m. i RO a = 4 ............=**..*=*.***.........=.*=. *......... (Q 1 W 3W 4 EeW> N b M O EO. N W n o CD b W m O = N e4 to N t.e F4 e4 ta to t.o f a. =e. = = 0 C O. O O m m m m m e e to e e e b b b ~~t MnnnnMMMg e.ggeg g o.. w
- .g 4.
.ennMMnnnnnnnnMM II = 4 -m WW JW 2 45 W bc O O W o o am................................................... i; R K 8 0 0 3 : * ~ 0 C. A 2 ". 0. " *. " 0.. "..~ a. R R R. ~ n R. C " R
- 2 5 ". E S E E,- 8 8 2 8 " 3 2 W
3 0 .g w r ~NNnMMMnn. g gg.... e.g g nMnnnnnnM = I > 2 W .J3= OJb = l to Q l em 2mg W O. O m N N O = M e O M m m m m e = O m b n M = m W e - e W M - e n M O m n M O m m M O e W m c ............................................. mWwNO a4 = =2 2 W> 2 'I Ok 3 Q a b M O W N m m W m = M c W W b b b W W W W W o m m m
- 9 9 g M M M M fe ta f 4 t# = = = = O.O C o m m m m e W
=NNMMMMmeegg gewe.weg g eweeeweeg wwvegeweg wee ggMMMMM Em O. U 4 0 i WO W Wo >4 W WWZ E e = * * *..... =......*..=... *.. = * **... =. e a N> J O m. O m = n b e b m f a m e - - e b r. N m W M o b M o b e = S e = e n N e be-memobpNobMNCE= t ..... *.. = *.. =. W 3 OkO kObMmpoMnemmemO.Cmmmmmmmmb66 W W W p m o w e n M M M t4 te ra te -- ~ ~ O O. O O m JW k e2O i On 4 e4Wu
==NMnMMgg e g e vi e g g eage=weee egweegevoeg egg eg geweg g en @= k E W I 2h W kWWW U 2 O. O m m = = m W ee W e m .. *.. *.. = *.... *. ** * *. *. *... * * * *.... O E WICJ 4 ... * *... *.
- m
- C M O W N b M m e = b M c' W N e o - W s== e n' N m W M o b. = m W M m e r.
r WO E >420 WJ.=m >0bNbMeN6N.W O e. e in M. M. m n o= n O c m m m. m e 6 t 6 W W W e n. e e.9 e M. M. M. M N t.e r e== ** O. C 2 W ti t e WW W wh=U =
==~NMM au 2 m em.. g g... gg.g e. .g... >= - FR 4 EO Q =Q J QO e i mm O WJ W-tria "a Ra 22:20R 8882EE22 2.R 82 8 82,8 22 R8ES 8?a 2?R SE388EE.SE R.E I if T mWWWWhL6 .mmmmOCC=.-m=NONnnn . O O =.= J O -=
===NNnMnnng...
===. N ,I > v u .a
===-~~~~~~ l sw II I
1 I
- 11
!ll 4 i Plume Calculatiom .!ll Table 3-7. Control Panel Temperatures as a Function of Time and Radial Ditance [ from the Panel Edge in the Fire Assuming Flame Impingement flest j Flux Three Times Calculated (60 kW/m2) e
- I
= NN t t P4Nt4Ne NN t4 M MM O. O W M O W W W a p p m w 9 9 4 m p W S e m = N g W e m = M m W S O = M e m b e m O = N M 9 9 m m W W h.. ...... e.... e. e.............. e.................... j bbbbbbbbM 4 MM M M i W p............... mbm=MeSm=Mmbe=MeWomO=NMgeRWWhMb5 ( O. .ObmNO==OOmememOO-N9.... m b = W a W m m 9 m e m e m m m m m m m m m m O C O O O * = = = " N te t4 N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M f. O = = N N N N N N t4 N t4 N t4 N N N N N te t4 t4 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M O 4 M j O..... ........ e................ 't b e.... e..,..... e e.... eb eM M w W W mmmmme m 00 W
==NN~N~NNN~NNNNNMnMnnnnMMMMMnMMnnnnnnnMMnMMnnMMnMM f' = p..................... w............................. E 4 b t . O m e m e = C o m m m O C = N e W e = M W m te m e = g W m = M W e m = M e p 6 m m m O = = = N N N N N i. bNMMM Mbbbb Mb N M M MM M M M 3 e O................................................... = O a = N M W e m o m m W h e O M m e N o m t4 M m es m m m e b m w M m b m O = N M g g e p W W W W W W m + ebNbhbOOOOOOOOC===-NNNNMMe g gemmeWWWWWbbbb6666666b666 l = = t4 N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M e9 M f 4 g M. O N e m m = = = = = t# M e b O M W O W.... m M b - m m N W m a g W e a t4 e m b e m m C O = = = = = = = 0 0.. t O. b b N b N b = = = = = = = = = t o t4 N M M M *4 mmmWWWbbNbememememmmmmmmmmmmm = = N N M M M M M M
- M M M M MM M M M M n n M M n M M M n M M n M M M M M M M m m n tin M n M M M 4
M W j b= O. O M W m N b b b k e m = = b = O O n o m e n m e m - m S = 9 m m O N M W e @ b b 5 W m 3 5 b b b e n p s j b b h b N W a = = = = ~ t4 ta N M M e g e M W W W b b emememmOCCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO = 9 = = te t4 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M n n M M M M M M 9 e e t g g e g e g g g e g e g g g g W. m.OemmbMMMes s-p omOWMe mOWOmm M6C........................ 3 W b N b M W N N f I to te f 4 fi M e 4 e e ta W b e m $ m m O O -. M m m e = N e p p W W e b M W W m m e M N N = I g E .= =
- N #4 N ta te to f4 te N to to N N N N N te N N 4
= = t4 N n M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M g g e e 9 9 g e v o e g g g g eggg geggegg k W i W y O. O n - b M e o - M W m M m p N e b e - 5 9 0 m O e m a g h m = M g m W h o b b b b M W m w M N = O m b.. l K m ] W W b W b t4 W M m t4 M M M M M g g m W W h a m M O = = t4 N t e M M M M e w e e gwg weg e49egeweeMM u b N = = N t4 M M M M M M M M M M M M M m m e g g g g egggg wegggggegg eegg ggegegg 4 J' w e 4 mob 9-mbSOMbNSWgmfammbp=bMWNWmag.Wh. 3 O 4 W m b r4 W o m M M w w w m e m b e m C o ate M M w e m e n W W W W W W b b b b b b W W W W W W W W o m m e mmOOOOCOmebWm9NamWWm W 2
==Nt4MMMMMMMMMMMW99 4 99g94 4 49 94 g ggg g99994 4994 49 994eg W E 4 J 4 O J m2
- 0. O m b e m m b = W t4 m e m e m O - O m W M m m e M W m - M e n W W N.
W k 20 WWeeMee=OmWmmambem 2 O= mbNeoovemeWehemONMeg nWWbbmemmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmememobb6 O uk
==NMMMMMMMMMMeggeg g9.seeg eg ggg 4 ggg ewggge9g44 egegg gg uW u I J Wy QO ~2 Es
- m. O O O O N e m W = O O N m m ta m W W m M O M Q 4 W O N 9. m W W W W p W M N C m b m. M a m W e a m b 9
- e.................. e...............................
2W O2 >0 2 96MmoaepWb(dmo-Neetob e m O J = = = e4 N t' e4 e4 O r 4 e4 r4 to N e4 ta -. -0OOOmmmm JO u ~ ~ t4 M M n M M M n e g e e w *
- g g e s e> m e m o m m m m m m m m e n e m o m m m m m m m e g og Gu O.
3W W2 O. 0 = M W = b g N eg e e M o b t4 W e e b n = W O M W b e m e m m e b m M N m b e t4 9 h m te m W M O b e = w 00 M km Q3 g (E e b M 3 m t4 W h m m C = M m W W m O = P. M e. m m m e n n o m m m m m m m m m m m m m m e m p p e m e= m= = gemmmmmmmmmmmmegg e 9 e M m MtJN Nta WO W w a ri n M M M M e g e w e genomer n I Z> EZ e 2 OF WW m. .gambb+=..esb-wWb... W .d J =OmbmMMMeemmeg.. e m b W m M w e b w N m W M m W M m m es m p N m e = .. :...... *... * * = * * *. =....- 62 c 03 MbMmWnemo-Mobm=Mg mW EemmmmmmmmmmmmmmWbbbWWWomeg weMMM O Q MS = = f4 M M M g 4 9 ggt emm mm% m m m mmm m m m m m m mm m mmm m mm mmmm m m mm m et mm W 2R We D3 uu W uk O o............ -............................ =.. = *....' 23 p = M m e b M M e m p o - m m e t# m e b e = N = = m b m M o b w o b M m m a b n m p
- W N e g C M *-
SO O I MSM JbgC=Mmbetembm O - te t#M M 9 4 e e e M M M M M ee h ta = = c o c e m e m e b b W W W o m I >2 e O m N N M g e e g g e n o m m W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W o m m m es O m m m m m m WO 4. O =u o > pm W
- m. O b S h o t4 0 N m m m = W O W m @ e m = M M N = m W M O W N e g o m O p = W = W - W = W = W a b te h h
.........................n O = G O. F 4 N b M O W h M o h m t4 m m = w e e b e m e m m m m e m e m b b W W W r m g g M M rs N = = C o m m e m b e I Nm m2 W 34 Z = NW - te t4 M w e 9 4 p p m W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W J W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W e e m m m F O 2 Wm3 =W W IMuk 30 g = e4 2 O. O O O W
- m M 9 0 G W M - w w M m h M M ts C b M m e o p m e M N b = m m M b a m m e m t# W = m O w m W==
40 X W I >W 4 K eOk (d b 9 74 C O W m t4 W m n b O N M 9 g m p m o m e w M M M ra - = O O m m m 6 b W W e g g M M te te = = O m F h 4 Wm = N M e g g e m m W W b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W m W. >W JW 2 (> m ku O O W Q u =. m. O W W O M S = g o b e g e M a m W m es m e m e m - m e n .................. **==.......*...**........**..* We W We g W m tam e O M m m te m m t4 m m ta W O M b a m a4 a W 2 = b g M e w O m g e M 6 m to t e e a t e N = 0 0 En 01 m b ts to e g
- r1 to f a - O m m W b b to m m o e M te N =
3 Q WXE 40 0 .OJ> = -NMgenpWWbbbSGSWmWWEESbbbbbbbbbbbbbbdWWWWWWWWWWWWW >2 W J3= = W O. O m = W O N C F W r4 W e m e e ra m te m W O - M e n W b m m O = ta e m b S O N 9 W W O M W E
- g b O W F k=
Imh 0 .................... +........ =... + = =.. *.. * * =... * *. I 2 =2 2 W> C.u40 & 4 Ob 3 Q=bmbmOGMWWo m m O = = - C o m @ @ b e m e M te = O C r e b W e geMN*ComtbF Wmmem Em W =NMmmW Wh e m e m m mm mm m m m m m m m m e e s e b bb b bb o b b b b b WW W W WW W WW WO m WQ >4 W bWZ I ... * =........ =...*. * +........ a k R NS J Op . =.. *=. * **.**=*****.= W 3 OkO e. O W M M e m b a ts m e s m M e g w *e - F b e, M ea O m b W m g e MM m M w e en W W e m = M m b m a g W m JW m2O h O b m N M S W M a m e O t4 N eo - O m W b m gM t4 - O m b W e g M te-O m a h W p e e N N = O m m e b W e Ok 4 e4Wu -M e MWS S W m O O O O O O p m m m m m m m m m m m e e W 9W e b b b b b b b b b b b W W W W W W m= 3 I W
==
2h W kWWW u I O WECJ 2 0. O e N M m to M e to m e e m W b e==
- b - en C m c W N e r N m b vi m - O m e e e e e e e O = N g e. b m -
4 =... =.. -.................. =. *...... *..... *. * *..... uO E >420 2 W WJam > Obgog W e e b e re m b m n a m e W e M - O m b m e h - O m e u n e M - O m m b e m e g M t4 = O m e @ WW W -g=U =m NenWhamOwa >= > Eh&2
=============== = = = O O O O O O O m m m m m m m W W Gm e me m b b b b b b b b b b b W W W at 4 KO O -n J 00 /............................... mm O WJ W- ........e Eu e WWE4 .E =O0000000000000000000000000000000COCOOOOO^COOOOOOOOC
- tt M W e te p B = 9 6 O M W m f4 s m a e b O M W m t e ti e. e b O M W @ f 4 m = = 4 6 b M W m (8 D S**bC 42 2
eE4u to O
=JO b
===NeeNMMMMgg g eo m Wa W W W W h b b e @ m m m m m C O O = = = N f4 t4 N m M' M e g g e I yu u gygJ
=wa=www
9~5 I I
E Pluue Calculations I 1 The radiation model results for the test sw itch are shown in Table 3-5. As may be seen from the results, switch temperatures do not exceed 600oF past 2 inch:s from the fire lI panel-edge interface. These temperatures indicate that a switch may be exposed to a worst-case heptane fire for short durations with little chance for significant damage. Table 3-6 shows the effects of radiation and conduction through the 3/16-inch steel plate. The results show that panel temperatures do not exceed 6000F past 3.5 inches from the fire panel-edge interface. At the time of fire self-extinguishment, radiation and conduction effects on the panel are consistent with the effects of radiation to the switch at the same location. The model in postulating only minimal cooling highlights the redistri-bution of energy through the panel resulting in a transient temperature effect. Table 3-6 presents realistic, worst-case results that indicate that the radiation effects of the fire dominate the effects of flame impingement on the panel underside. This may be seen in the lower console temperatures beneath the switch, a condition that results from the conduction processes redistributing energy away from the fire. Thus, although isolated switch temperatures are predicted to be higher, in reality switch temperatures may be expected to approach the underlying console temperatures. I In Table 3-7,3e effects of flame impingement are arbitrarily and conservatively b increased threefold. The principal impact of thi; assumption is that switch and panel temperatures at fire extinguishment are closer. At in the case of Table 3-6, panel and I switch cooling is essentially ignored and the subsequent thermal transient resulting from energy redistribution from the panel edge is evident after the fire self-extinguishes at 300 seconds. In reality, the magnitude of this thermal transient would be expected to be significantly less. One reason is that thermal energy redistribution is conservatively forced up the panel because of the one-dimensional nature of the model, and lateral heat sinks are ignored. Another reason for an expected lower thermal transient after I 300 seconds is relr.ted to the fact that natural convection in one direction only to an ambient gas at 2000F is assumed for the duration of the model. Thus, the effects of control room ventilation and the normal room temperature of 700F are entirely ignored. The postulated fire,in effect, is allowed to burn for 5 minutes without any intervention by operating personnel. The combined effects of these conservative assumptions lead to panel-edge temperatures of 406oF and 68 IoF for the realistic and the threefold heat flux cases, respectively,20 minutes after tbe fire self-extinguishes. In reality, one would expect significantly lower temperatures, indicating the conservative nature of the cooldown portion of Tables 3-6 and 3-7. I 3.3 Conclusions The analysis of the effects of exposure fires adjacent to the control panels inside the control room has been previously discussed. These results indicate that peak temper-atures may be determined both at fire extinguishment and subsequent transient peaks resulting from the conduction of energy from then panel's edge. These temperatures are conservative for heatup and in the resultant cooldown. 26 I i 6
- c ;,;
e c.: : ,, x..... .. n
- n..,..,.
I I Plume Calculations 'e! P In the worst-case 1-gallon heptane fire in a control room, console switches I located approximately 3 to.3.5 inches from the panel edge may be expected to survive intact with any such fire that is immediately adjacent. These conclusions should be viewed as bounding due to the conservatisms taken I in the modeling process. In order to confirm that the model is indeed bounding, the conclusions may be reviewed against the actual experimental data obtained from the Detroit Edison control room fire test (Colbert,1981). A review of the photographs indicates that paint on the control panels was not blackened at distances beyond approximately I to 2 inches from the panel edge in contact with the fire. On this basis, and from a review of the thermocouple data, it is apparent that panel temperatures of 6000F were not exceeded at distances greater than 2 inches and that temperatures were around 4000 Fat I inch, Furthermore, thermocouple data indicate that at approximately 4 inches from the panel edge, the temperature of the test-switch body never exceeded 'I 125.SoF. The analytical model conservatively represents the worst-case conditions of t he postulated I-gallon heptane fire and confirms experimental evidence indicating the survivability of control panel switches in the Fermi 2 control room. I References e 'I Batchelor, G. K.1954. "IIeat Comection and Buoyancy Effects in Fluids." Quarterly /ournalof the Royal Meteorologic Society, Vol. 80, pp. 339-358. Blinov, V. I., and G. N. K hudiakov.1961. Diffusion Burning of Liquids. Research Information Service, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Deselopment Laboratory Fort Behoir, Va. I Campbell, J. A., Gage-Babcock & Associates, Inc.1979. " Fire Protection for Colocated Elements of Redundant Divisions."(Preliminary). Letter to liarrison. NRC, August. Colbert, W. F., Detroit Edison.1981. " Control Panel Fire Test." Letter EF2-54205 to L. L. Kintner, NRC, July 31. El-Wakil, N1. N1.1971. Nuclear // ear Transport. International Textbook Company, Scranton, Penn. Ilottel, II. C., and A. F. Sarofim.1967. Radiative 7'ransfer. NicGraw-liill. Klamerus, L 3.1978. A Preliminary Report on Fir.* Protection Research Program Fire Barriers and I Suppression (September 15. 1978 Test). NUREG/CR-0596, SAND 78-2238 Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, N.N!. Lie. T. T.1972. Fire and Buildings.,.pplied Science Publishers. Ltd., Essex. Pinkel, I. l. ;978. Estimating Fire Ha:ards Wuthin Enclosed Structures av Related to Nuclear Pouer I Stations. BNL-NUREG-23892, Brookhasen National Laboratory, Upton, N.Y. j Rohsenow, W. N1., and II. Choi.1961. Ilear. Moss and Momentum Tranifer. Prentice-liali. Inc., Engle-l wood Cliffs, N.J. I Rouse, N1., C. S. Yih nd II. W. Ilumphreys.1942. ' Gravitational Comection from a Boundary Source." Tellus Vol. 4, pp. 201-210. I Stasrianidis, P.1980. 7he Behavior of Plumes Above Pool Fires. ~Ihesis. Depa-' ment o. Niechanical l Engineering, Northeastern Unisersity, Boston..* 1 ass. I Tewarson, A.1980. "licat Release Rate in Fircs." Fire and Materials, Vol. 4, Issue 4. Tewarson, A.,J. L. I ec,and R. F. Piou.1979. Fire Behavior of Transformer Dielectric fluids. DOT-TSC- } 1703, U.S. Department of Transportation, Cambridge, Alass. Yokoi, S.1960. Studr on the Prevention of Fire Spread Causedby flor Upn aid Current. Building Research Institute, Niinistry of Construction No. 34. Tokyo. Zeldosich, Y. B.1937. "I imiting Laws for T urbulent Flows in Free Consection." Zh. Eshp. Teoret. Fir., Vol.12. 77 I I
!il 1 i l Conclusions 4.0 Conclusions iI e j Throughout the NRC's review of the fire protection features of the Fermi 2,3 plant, Detroit Edison has agreed to implement those modifications required by the N RC l that could reasonably be incorporated at this late stage in the construction of the plant. j Detroit Edison is convinced that the Fermi 2 fire protection features ensure adequate- ) protection of the public health and safety. The control panel fire test reported earlier an'd .) the oven test and calculaticos presented here confirm the validity of Detroit Edison's position and confirm the adequacy of the remote-shutdown capabilities of the Fermi 2 plant.
- I
' +:; ( 1 i I .--m !E I v I + + k I 28 I I~
E e' Appendix A l F i l L Calibration of Data Logger / Used in the Oven Test of 51y the CMC and Pushbutton B Switches i r* A
1 a Appendix A CERTIFICATE NUMBER JOHN FLUKE MFG. CO., INC. 6618 h) CENTRAL REGION N, <g cent it ca c* cea".. T.ca en . ceans teca c" centre teca en j i 4x w.a.., Rc.o or t v a... A., sosa 54x H.o Ro i nss r., .,,,on Ro.,, a f. 73 c.n.t re... meo w~mo., e ss4:o Romeg v..oc.. in uxxe L,,o.. w,ca.ge sais4 %
- p 6to an4 4m mn nesaco p
3 CERTIFICATE OF CAllBRATION w S
- j Detrelt Edisoa Q
pp Atta: Seh PItaen SUBMITTED BY: U "* W8 M " N 'I y Detroit. MI 44210 g U ~ b w o a. -{ gg ggy
- j WANUF ACTURE R WODEL f
w 9 N ~ g 2 W 9 i> 2 m f a wTmm TOLERANCE EIOPERATIONAL FAILURE !EWITMsN TOLERA!.CE D RECALL DArE $ RECEIVED a SCHEDULE RfC,ALL G PHYS # CAL DAwAGE RETURNED N a L etto O our or TottRANct C OTMEm 23, C 40 =_ B C l w m w 2 9 ES 9 d The John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc. does hereby certify the above listed instrument Y N g raeets or exceeds all published specifications and has been calibrated using c 1 [ standards whui, accuracies are traceable to the National Bureau of Standards g within the limitations of tfr Bureau's Calibration Services, or have been derived N o . from accepted values of natural physical constants, or have been derived by the M s cs o A y ratio h;pe of selftalibration techniques. Our "Oatibration System h Requirements" satisfy MIL-C 45662A. [ ^ w 2 Applicable NBS Test Report Numbers t w D DC Voltage 216868 WM 10/24/78 W AC Voltage 807675 ^ M F.esistance 214691 C TIFIED BY DATE N Temperature 211875 lah [ [ N ~ Inductance N 6 Capacitance SFF.' ICE fiAANAGER Q y Frequency VMBB VLF TRANSMISS!ON W 2 w o L L 29 i n M
I Appendix A I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE iI (**" ** / National Bureau of Standards Wash.ngton, o C. 20234 April 15, 1980 l l In reply refer to: 522/222456 i I Detroit Edison Company Engineering Research 019 I 7940 Livernois, Building !!-100 Detroit, Michigan 48210 Attention: Bob Pitman Subject Tharmomutric Test Order No: E 016408 Gentlemen: Enclosed are results of the test which you requested in the above reference. Please refer to the above file number in any later communication, and if you have any questions concerning this test, contact h'illiam R. Bigge, telephone number (301) 921-2757. Sincerely yours, // -f s, J es F. Schooley lef, Temperature Measurements and Standards Division Center for Absolute Physical Quantities Material tested: 1 Platinum Resistance Thermometer
Enclosures:
1 Report of Calibratton 1 Notes to Supplement Resistance Thermometer Reports 30 I
r P Appendis A l 'L U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL RUREAU OF STANDARDS T NATIONAL MEASUREMENT LABORnTORY I WASHINGTON D.C. 2C239 HEPORT OF CALIBRATION PLATINUM RESISTANCE THERMOMETER w SERIAL NO. 1875628 SUBMITTED BY DETROIT EDISON COMPANY, ENGINEERING RESEARCH DIVISION l DETROIT. MICHIGAN THIS THERM 0METEN WAS CALIONATLD FOR USE WITH CONTINUOUS CURRENT OF 10 MA. THROUGH THE THERMOMETER. l THE FOLLOWING VALUES WERE FOUND FON THE CUNSTANTS IN ThE IP-TERNATIONAL PRACTICAL TEMPERATURE SCALLIl968) FORMULASI I e ALPHA 3 926237-03 A9 2 700-07 = DELTA
1 996288 eC4
2 659-19 THE PERTINENT INTERNATIONAL PRACTICAL TEMPEHATURE FORMULAS f ARE GIVEN IN THE DISCUSSION ON T iiE FOLL0wlNG PAGES. lI THE RESISTANCE AT O DEGREES C WAS FOUND TO BE 25.5535 ABSO-LUTE OHMS. DURING CALIBRATION, THIS RESISTANCE CHANGE 0 BY THE EQUIVALENT OF.0009 DEG C. THIS THERMOMETER IS SATISFACTORY AS A DEFINING STANDARD IN ACCORDANCE wlTH TME TEXT OF THE INTERNATIONAL PRACTICAL TEMP-ERATURE SCALE OF 1968.
- THIS VALUE WAS ASSUMED.
ll ~ FOR THE DIRECTOR. NAT NAL MEA U E NT LABORATORY / w W /HIEF J MES F. SCH00 LEY e TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS I AND STANDARDS DIVISION CENTER FOR ABSOLUTE PHYSICAL QUANTITIES TEST NO. 222456 I COMPUTED 8 APRIL 1960 JLR/UNIVAC I m
I lI Appendix A THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY CERTIFICATE OF TEST June 26, 1980 l TEST M ADE FOR Engineering Research THEIR ORDER NO. L & N S067 Mueller Bridge Apparatus muueER 1011421 R ATING TEST: Th s inservaent kes been tested unde conditions end with results as fellows: Decade Corrections Step 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001 I O +.00005 1 +.0002 +.0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 2 .0002 +.0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 3 .0002 +.0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 4 .0003 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 5 .0004 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 I 6 .0006 .0000 .0000 .0000 .0000 7 .0006 .0001 .0000 .0000 .0000 6 .0006 .0001 .0001 .0000 .0000 l .0000 .0000 .0000 9 .0006 .0002 X .0004 .0004 .0000 .0000 .0000 C Resintors C10 .0008 C40 .0021 C70 .0022 C20 .0015 C50 .0020 C25 +.0001 C30 .0021 C60 .0016 C25.5 +.0005 et F08M ME lst 7-s 4 REMARKS Traceable to National Bureau of Standards through Standard Resistors Se rial 838,035 and 1,805,636 'I METER DEPARTMENT B.121 WARREN SERVICE CENTER WS/ma ia ca ..s er es o, 32
l l Appendix A I Detroit reseamo amanen-t aipy3 4 l ELEC'luCAL EQUIPMENr i ISOn cAuBRATION CERTIFICATE a mstavWruiArion Fluke 22403 Data 1.orger ,3, yw Fermi 'l CMC Switch Test (at 600 F) ua m 800n08 T. Booke r/J. Sah r.an __In-16-81 visu ac u.n a s a., sar+ n r., r 0-4V ',n anac;c m r,r r _ saw Platinum Res. Mueller Corrected i Standard Data Logger The rmwne t e r Fridge Corr. Resistance ! Teemorature Tetterat' ire Cerrection M3942 ohms j-0.0029ohmg 34,9963 oh e_ 01.P8 F n!,11 r .ng7 p i ,1 I i -+ f 42.7922 chms I -0.0024Jn 2.7898 ohmt_345,.LF M4htt0 F (+L]Q_f_ _ l i I I 50.7087 ohms i-0.0022 ob g 50.7065 obey 445.28 F I 442.73 F +2,15 e I I i i i l i 7 I + j l 8 + +-- 1 L___ i I t _4, _ _ _ _ __ _ f._ 1 _ l _ -_ _a _ a l l y_ _ 1 l ACD CCAPECTOM ALGEBRatC Ait y TO M*AUVENT RE ADiNG 3 T. ~ ~ Eihi 2 E E:._Md.: -iiHdE ni.:
- i :
y !!l!! IIf!$b$!!Ei :19E I!![ !!i!!' !!l!!E II f ~[:T. ... M I 'O l' .. [p. ~
- ::1::
- }.
- .-p
- n::
ntn:. .f ~ .:Z:' '~ ~ iii:2 ^^' i fi:: -1 ii'lii
- I
+ dj; ;
- 3 hli!
- ij.'
} gjjjj ~ 1.i "jg ij] + - - . !!!..73. i:l!! iiHLi fi@ :.ii}il ...iili: i:H! !:{ 2 ~
- '[h ' j:ljl
.. ijijjj" "jjjjji! ~ j'((jjil57
- hj ijj;.j nn
- ~
+ 200F 300F scan nt arm 400/ 500F TEMP. Property of ERD m en tvs o rwn ____L&N R067 Puel:er firi<*ge, SN 1011421; L&N Platinun Resista.ce Thermom ter EN1675678; Thermotrol Constant Temperature (Oil) Bath Model 130P SN1142) vayow, m t, u Overall Calibration of Fluke Data logger., Thermoccupl_e Wj re (Type F. Premium .y,y7 l GraJc), ar.d Isot herma,1 Block. .[ mcaumrom si taurmorciso 33 I
l Appendit A I MrOil ENGWEERWG Rf SE.RCH. Edison catisaation contiricate E.L ECTRIC AL f 0. VIP,0~ ENT WSTRu ~1 1 Fluke 2240 B Dat a Logger I c o wn'm t.+ nc w Fermi II CMC Switch Test gg S/N R00008 T. Booker 10-16-81 vaw acnar a s n c 4, w.., 3 % g,3 __(( 0-4V tm an.v., s p < n u,e c... t, , Input ! Output t i + channel i In My ! In av Icorr. (W) l I o !Io,000 ._4_,0 8 3 _ n n t7 + m 1 } p,M1 4_+0,018 a 2 2.9 M 0 _1_+A om L_ 3 ! 4.981 ! +0,019 j 4 _ __ i l9.460 l+0,020 l_ _. I 9dRI _LM.019 h 1_9.981 ! +0a19 .7 i_9.9f0 i f+0.010 I R _9 da y 9_p,n}g l L991 .L + 0M 9 b_ l a i i y 4 o l2n. con
- 19,ogt g+p,019
_J1L9 31___ _4_t o J19 1 t ? l19. 92fL ! _+ 0.D2? 1 l 119.933 1 +0.012_._ __ i__ 4_ __ L___ J19aB4 L+0 015 I i ++0.01fi [ I L s . __wt9 A S4 I 0,3_il 7 J J 6_ _ ___._j l 9 M3 7 t. _J1L 963 _+ 0.n17 B _ __ _4thM 3 + 0_.D 11 o _il% 412 +N03 8 1 I _.______._.___L________ 1 _1 i ._i_ ___. l ADO COARECT&6 At GE BAA'C At tv TO MfPuvtNT RE ADP(, i Eli I' !i ~ !I!!! 1-c.-:.
- im
= i;gi 2 f%
- j:.-
.:r Uh M M:2 = f iil ; c 9.
- M;ci["i i
~ ..iitiiiili!
- t. -
- W:""
M.M,' Ef =
- . {.. ;
=
- . h.
- 1.
- h..
I ~ h .m m
- p Efif:i li{;:
"filif ='
- ++ t
- t M i
-:: i illi! NC at F Af ADYs ne ct in o r n, y Property of ERD L&N K-5 1745012 g,w.m.., v., o cf,,,w.,,,_ Calibration of Indiviiual Channeln k w + 34 I I
I Appendix A M'D:g y - ENGINEERING RESE AP ;H-ELECTRIC AL EOutPWENT ISOn cAllBRATION CERTIFICATE 5 '*5'RuwENTAroi Fluke 22,MB Data Logger CAlenavm OF n e so Fermi 11 CMC Switch Test g S M 800008 T. Booker 10-16-81 u=~ur aCvwe a s m c, L,,,, g,, 0-4V nasnr ,,yog,, o,, _ g, 7 I Input l Output j Corr. j Channel i In MV i In MV i In MV I I 1_ i 10 10.000 i 9.481 4 +0.019 i 11 4.482 ! +0.018 12 9.9RI ! +0.014 i 13 L 4.482 i +0.01R i I 14 9.4R1 j +0.014 15 i 9.980 ! +0.020 16 i 4.981 I +0.010 17 j __ _ ! %QR1 i +0,019 18 I I 9.481 ! +0.019 19 i 9.981 i +0.019 1 i i 10 U O.000 14.4R3 i +0.017 l 11 10,081 I +0.019 l'
- 1. It o al I_+0.019 3
i_19283 +D.D17 13 14 I _L9J83 +0.217 15 Log e2 +0 018 I 16 a 19 o21 + 0J10 i m 17 l 4_19J 92 W D.019 l 1R i i 19dE3_ +0.017 19 I 19_982 +0.01R I i ADO CGARECTiONS ALGEBA AiC ALLY TO INL7RUVENT RE ADING + i N f -- -fi f IE i[' .i ? r = tan iiiiii ;=ilirt i;ign a.r = - s i-3 !!IN-i Hi! E'lilii-- EIN ~ ~ !!i!! i' E f N455 ~~ 1 ~ ;p:.p jpl. :ijijji j!!!j i i i = - Si fiiJ Hiitiin s E i- ... - !gi. 4 . a iiis mi-=g =
- gy!;
";gis !iSh ~ Fii m:- 1 !!FIHi iu: iini!!^ idii bkb ibbi iii !.bbk kkki.h { yI{ {
- :}
ii 5C At F pr 40*% uttemt.mov Property of ERD L&N K-5 1745012 r asonat s ust o 4 cm ses Calibration of Individual Channels a 81D75 I PF cneirm rue 04't.._.._ t mm a c' %o 35
._= ) i Appendix A i f i Detroit cuo,~r ,~o,ese A.c~_ { piSOn CAUBRATION CERTIFICATE 'O$fu'dt UU5"' Fluke 2240B Data Logger l caveaA*oN cv Md II N Mtd Mt I usto ron i S/N 80000R T. Booker 10-16<81 c ase me r. 9, 3,,, was.:'unt a s w [/(( 0-4 V vm ,p,% p, g., pan 2 j Input Output j l lCeri. - (VV) I I Ch anne l ' In MV In MV 20 10.000 93 81 +0.019 - - ~~ 21 i 4.981 i +0.019 22 i 4.9 87 ' +0.018 23 l 9.461 +0.014 24 9.981 +0.019 25 o.4P2 +0.018 4 j 26 j 4.983 +0.020 1 27 I 1 4.981 + 0. 0_19 j 28 j LO. 9_81 +0.019 j i 29 l l 4.981 l +0.019 l l I I i 20 1 20.000 l 19.482 +0.01R ! 14.479 +0.021 21 22 1 I 14.978 , +0.022 19A $3 4+0.017 23 j 14 0.018 j 24 l t _8 2 4 I' +0 018 l 25 _!_lL 4 A2 + 26 ! 14_,982_ l+0.018 8 27 ! IL983
- +0A17_
28 ! 14.9F2 i +0J18 I 29 _i_19.983 +L Q17_ __ I l i I l i i ADO COARECTrONS ALGEBRA'CALLY TO !NSTRtA*E NT PE ADNG !!NfENN!!NN !!!NN!! NNfIl-nUiN55IhNN !55f!5 !E!!EFI ENb!i:.. l!f5$5I !5$d!!E5!fNi! IIiff!5ii ~iiniE EMEE imin===E= si:r d =.- :w'EEiirinEi.HiiFi "=fH= "r sii1E!! 7 "= 5 l!!N:I ^~NI$EISNE i' 555 5 !-ifIi'INIEEiiN I' !E I i'2!!I!NE Nf!!I IIIIf[! : niini:: i nn : g N5I='IdI!IEI EII '~ I'E5 II -A i2T iUFiUi- !!1I! ) { n2- '~;~ ~; 2% - i t t I i --f ::
- n: :=L.
.... m: ...:~: . d...g nin I
- nn:
~ Hi! 4: "E fili-E jjf!.!. i. 213 iii:.i.i._i$..i.i.E i.c..i.HH i.i.i.t.i.!. n..,".. -." " M i. ". ' i 55 ~ 55!fi - IIf!!5!l.ni!Ei :iN!![! ih!!i:ii "E{ii
- if!!
!!Nl!!.. 8- :- .i CNii..
=='E -liiMi silE Eli!- -!!~!N sisiL!9 =114 ~"F iWiiiih =N!!! E u== v.n.n. p.t ct n t o rac,v Property of ERD l L&N K-5 1745012 3,..c no3 vy g Calibration of Individual Char nels crem vs nrcausacc w cet t ao paa.rce r.o 81D75-4 36 ~,. - -.. -. - -.
I I Appendix A M OR rNciurraimo arstaaCH- 'S, On CAllBRATION CERTiriCATE ELECratCAL EOUfPUENT I a instauururmos Fluke 2240B Data Logger c AUBRAQ OF A C NO Fermi 11 CPC Switch Test w ro, @ MMM T. Booker Ib1H1 wwpacTunt a s No _ c at.nna t o a, g),,, mmos,_ d h.[ naNot 0-4V tm g3 / Input Output i Channel In PV in PV Corr. (MV) I j l 30 i 10.000 ! 9.977 +0.023 31 i ! 4.475 +0.025 i j 32 i j 9.975 + 0. 0I5 33 i t 9.975 1 +0]i25 I +- 34 ! 9.976 i +0.024 3' i 4.976 i +0.02T 36 L i 0.976 I +0.024 J7 = ! _9.976 i +0.024 38 i 4 476 ! + 0_. 0 2 4 4 39 976 +0.024 30 ! 20.000 !14.477 +0.023 i 31 i i 19.976 ' +0.024 j i 32 i 14.475 j+0.025 33 l l 14.177 1+042 3 i 3 34 j 19 9_77 2 0.023 35 i ! 10.477 i +0.02 3 i 36 l19.978 +0.032 i ~~ 17 M 9.978 _L+_9 u}2 2 i 39 > 19.977 +M2 3 lo !l9m97_7 +0 423 I l l i ADO CORPECT:OM A'_GE RR AiC ALLY TO IN590 VENT PE ADiNG
- Iii!-
55!N!i-5!!!i!!NIN5fi! I-Ei!lNN-NII}}N!' E![ijNii[i}!! !54L=ilj:13
- Ilfd lie![n : [ijii.
E ii-fi EE-i.jffiji EijjjE Eiiiii-ggj;- iiijj=.i i=jj;ip- ! Ei iiHEe *= BEE L iE 'jjjj 5IiNf!5ETNf!!UfN!I!ESi'f!!NE 55li iN5l55E !!ili N!i! 55 5 !E!! NfUNi i'hi mE:itipi!; tim [iij'.. - ii I y c EE-is:!a se til!===imi E!ggsm !=a i EEt i!; eq f i Jiiifnsiis-ali:E==Hr ids- ~siti= :3 r Ei: si.i
- E; {
Hyim :. i. rhu an nn- _:. p 3: n uh r: .J .= I ..;33.punj;g..:3
- pi..
E=llli"Elijli iijjjg. EHi liijH E- ~... -!::M
- ! E': :niLEi!EF i= 'i -
ESEi4 Ei-55N;E EF!isEE !!E HEIsi IE!fii= EElE5i* "" EMilj~Ejih! sc ma nr 4:w. necsartsaan Property of ERD L&N K-5 1745012 3r. c,acs usro Calibration of Indivicual Channels cwt r, BIO 75 At C AoFJiah0N Dur t,4'E .__ _ _ _ _ _ _.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i w; rw,j ( t *g) __ n I
Appendix A DetrcAt tuc.ti..o. st..c _ Edson causnarion ERTIFICATE 'I'Mv"a*u'ddiaIS"' Fluke 2240B Data Logger a c 80 c,,,g Fermi II CMC Switch Test m, S/N 800008 T. Booker 10-16-R1 3,,, waw acitn = s so c,,.g o g, 0-4 V t <pf rPrw m av _ ca *t pa.c.t jInput j output j i in MV Corr. (MV) 1 Channel IIn MV 40 10,000 9m977 +0.023 41 9 976 +0.024 42 9.9f5 +0.025 43 ! 9.976 +0.024 44 ! 9.976 +0.024 45 l ! 9.976 +0.024 46 4 9.976 . +0.024 47 _L176 ! +0.024 48 i 9.976 I +0J)24 j 49 9J 76 ! +0.02.4 _ 40 20.000 19.976 +0.024 41 19.975 +0.075 ? 42 . 19.975 +0.0?5 43 1 l19.92]____ , +n_nti I 44 L19.378. I 0.0?? 45 139327 (+tiln?t I 46 i ' 19J22 ! to nti 47 lJLU8 WLM2 48 ! 19.121L D Q.022 ! 19,977 i +0.02) 49 E i I i i l i ADO COAAECTONS ALGE RA A'CALiv TO NS'RUVENT RE AOrNG E5h!!- ^ '!iii '!!!535 iiE ! ENI !!E HE!.IESf5;N!!Iif!N! iiN!III i!!hI! 5 Efi :n[5!fNN 4 nntun n};3.._ ;,., -. "-*t.... ... :.nj.. g. t::r nn .: nn nt
- nt..n nnin=
n::d:.n: E
- EI'il':
!!iEE SEif5E i I' kNE 555I EN[5 I I'" I;i? HE 35$ :- ni E 'i'jiiii n:ijii@ iij; jjj:]
- gt.
! 5lfri ESIli E5-!!!E ii; Ei 55fiiFE5 i~ 'IF i I EE}}E " Sn .g 2: P i=MitMi E difi5i-it'B i EE EiiEi Hiit:5 ' = I 1 25Eiini E[i~i hi-Fli"I - 55 E5 !NIf55:~ "[ iiElI! ~' ii}!; Mi II@! !i!E Celi 5i i$;:!5-iiEl5i !$ E5f!!" II5!53 !!5:5Eliil!!! ~ ~ I sus ne scu-c I Property of ERD ar ctm n r.ov 1.6N K-5 1745012 3,,,c.m g Calibration of Individual Channels cr-wc s 81D75 ascamato out cart _ t as wc, u 38
I L Appendix A I Detroit ENCINEERING PESEARCH-Ed.is,,on CAllBRATION CERTIFICATE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT a INSTRUMENT ATION ,,z. Fluke 2240B Data Logger CWA'ON O, acNo Fermi 11 CMC Switch Test usf o roa S/N 800008 T. Booker 10-16-81 v=Nurac' var a s so c,.,c g g,.g 0-4 V 7, yg ,,,,n,, g,w RANGE Channel - Input ! LNtput t i j t 7., vf In My corr. (vv) l I 50 1n.000 4.476 +0.n24 i 51 9.075 +0.025 52 j 9.976 L.+0 024 t 53 I o.477 i +n.023 54 4.977 i +n.623 i 55 i 4.477 ! +0.023 i 4.977 i +0.023 56 _L_4.9 7 7 ! +QM 1 57 i l I 58 i I 9.977 +n,023 __l 1 +0.023 i 59 4.977 i I i i 20.00n I_10,977 l +0.023 I 50 ! JL176 ! +n.o?4 s1 [QQo?s s? 19.37s 5 'l !_10379 t0 02? 54 d_19.918 1_+fLO 2 2 I 55 lL919 1_+0.Q?1 i I sA ! 14.911 +n.n?? 7 97 i ._13.9 R_ _. 4QL 38 i ! 14,974 ! +nA71 3 I t 19,478 +n_y 2 l 59 I t b l +- i l i i I I ADD CONNECTIONS ALGE Ph A!C 2 u't TO iW AUYENT EE ACING 55 5NI Nf!!. _!!!!53 @!!-!!!!f!!i!!!iU !!!!! Nii '55-55 5!f!!N- :!!fE i!N!!- !!fl? Ijijj[ 25i'iiii.; . g; EE Eiijijjjjji3;j. ; gj'jji-j Uij ri Hjijj-iF ii'.jiji - gj - ylll~ 1 !!!!PI-E!!I!! 15liN! li !!!' Si!bi E!!ji35 iij" 20 4 [ iihi^ zi E" filisi}!:liiili Elii iHE !!I!! !!M T h 5!!II ![f!I 55 !!~l ^ i" iHi! '!!f!!, .,,. l':.. + c., .:q:: 31 ; -- -t
- ;;;g
- _.. t..
- jg
- 4... :
g;;g ..t..
- q;
!!!Ii . iiiii EI!!E' i i!Iii' ~ Sil! iiiiin nik::.. :: h :-. E + 4 Ept; iri: 'i ~igh ~ jjijj j ~ NE!!!- 'n' 'jjfjj iEjiij j.%.f!! !!' Y i ? sc a4 6 a sw. aEcon o mw Property of ERD L&M K-3 1745012 stasrancs uw o Calibration of Individual channels cows's 81D75 I ne c san c e.. ;o s< w ma n v, 39
I 1 I Appendix B I I Plume Equations I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Appendix B Buoyant diffusion plumes are caused by gravitational forces acting on the difference in density between the source fluid and its ambient environment. Batchelor (1954) proposed that turbulent buoyant plumes may be described by Uo = (Fa3 Z-3 f ) (r/Z) i g' = (Fata Z-5'3 f )(r/Z) 2 Fa = 27r fo" Uog'rdt O# g' = g bpa Rouse, Yih, and Humphrey (1952) conducted a series of experiments that indicated that both mean temperature and velocity profiles were essentially Gaussian. ,I l l Uo = 4.7 Fa '3 Z-8'3exp(-96 r /Z2) t 2 g' = 11 Fa '3 Z-5'3exp(- 71 r /Z2) 1 2 Stavrianidis (1980) modified the plume laws and obtained meaningful and generalized correlations of experimental data from three different fuels for the mean temperature and velocity profiles and the actual convective heat release rates. This work led to the rewriting of the plume laws as follows: ATo = 0.092 Q2'3(Z - Zo)-se3 and Uo = 1.20 Of3 (Z - Zo)-2'3 I The critical height, that is, the height where divergence from the correlation is noted, is given by Z - Zo e = 0.13 Finally, Stavrianidis developed a flame height correlation to observed, videotaped flames with a basis derived from Heskestad (1980). This relation is given by in S3 2'5 2 Zr - = 7.54 F D a II D5 c c 40 I
I Appendix B From this, the virtual source height (the height at which the fire is equivalently derived from) is described by I 2 m 33 s Zo = 7.54 F3'5 - 0.15 Q2 5 C C The modeling of th6 source fire requires that several conservative assumptions be con-sidered. As discussed ia Tewarson (1980), the convective heat release rat:is strongly influenced by the fuel's mass loss rate and stoichiometric fuel-to-air ratio. These parameters will in turn affect both the combustion efficiency and the actual heat of combustion. For the purposes of modeling, the maximum values for the heat of combustion of heptane were used. These values were taken from experimental data reported in Tewarson (1980), Figures 3(a) and 3(b). These values are as I follows: Total heat of combustion is 43 kJ/g. Convective heat of combustion is 23 kJ/g. Tewarson reports on experimental data discussed by Blinov and Khudiakov (1961), where the maximum mass loss rate of 50 g/m2-see was used. With this information, the virtual source height was calculated as follows: Q233 ses Zo = 7.54 F2'5(a 113 - 0.15 Of5 3 E where F- - 21.73 2 pg Oc = convective heat release rate 2 2 = (1150 kW/m )(0.3716 m ) = 427 kW Q* Q'. 427 a* = - - = = 0.51 = Qh mil (50)(0.3716)(45.1) t e S = stochiometric ratio g air -- 15.16 g fuel II = 45.1 kJ/g c 41 I I
Appendix B Substituting into the original expression, Zo = 9.88 in. Knowing the virtual source height, the critical fire height is given by Z - Zo = 0.13 Q75 e which yields Z = 1.717 m = 5.63 ft e References Batchelor, G. K.1954. "licat Convection and Buoyancy Effects in Fluids." Quarterly Journalofshe RoyalMeteorologic Society, Vol. 80, pp. 339-358. Blinov, N. I., and G. N. Khudiakov.1961. Diffusion Burning of Liquids. Research Information Service, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Deselopment Laboratory Fort Behoir, Va. lieskestad, G.1980. Peak Gas Velocities and Flame 11 eights of Buoyancy-Controlled Turbulent Duffusion Flames. Presented at the Eighteenth International Symposium on Combustion. Rouse, M., C. S. Yih, and 11. W. Ilumphreys.1952. -Gravitational Convection from a Boundary Source." Tellus, Vol. 4, I pp.201-210. Stavrianidis, P.1980. The Behavior of Plumes Above Pool Fires. Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston. Tewarson, A.1980. "licat Release Rate in Fires." Fire and Materials, Vol. 4. Issue 4. I I
.'I i Appendix C { Switch Radiation Model l lI i i !I l [ I. l I I I I
I Appendix C The test switch that was analyzed was composed of a polymeric body and plate. The body contained within the panel was ignored for the purposes of analysis and only that portion located above the console was considered. The model effectively rotated the switch to the vertical position so that the full face viewed the entire fire. The properties of the switch were considered to be composed primarily of bakelite with values derived from Rohsenow and Choi(1961). As a gray body, absorptivity was taken to be 0.95 with the emissivity assumed to be only 0.10. The model used a right cylinder defined by the critical height and assumed the following form: dT 1 c p6(d'"- cot ) 4 -= dt p where c = 0.38 B/lbm F (Rohsenow and Choi,1961) p p = 0.046 lbm/in.3 (Rohsenow and Choi,1961) e = 0.10 o = Boltzmann Constant = 3.3044 X 10-'S B/sec in.2.R4 This equation was solved using a Runge-Kutta integration where T i = T + (1/6)(Ki + 2K2 + 2K3+K) n n 4 c p6(d"- co(T )4 ) K = i n p at c p6[d"-co(T + 1/2 K )4 ) K = 2 n i y at c p6[d," - co (Tn + 1/2 K )* l K = 2 3 p at c p6[d"- co(T + K )* l K = n 3 4 p i,"is taken to be a gray gas. Emissivity is taken to be that associated with scat, carbon dioxide, and water. 1 I 43 I
il Appendix C e,,, = 10(-0.I 807 - 2.341 X 10-4 T,,,) e,oo t = 0.10 o = 3.3044 X 10~'5 B/sec in.2.R4 Therefore, d," = configuration factor - (e,, + e,oo,) o T*,, g g where T,,, = 1763 F = 2223 R (Stavrianidis,1980) At the cylinder surface, the configuration factor equals 1. Therefore I d," = 1(0.2 + 0.1)(0.0807) d," = 0.02413 B/sec in.2 Burn time for the radiation model may be caLulated from 'he most intensive burn in order I to maximize the impact of radiation. Such an assumption corresponds with a mass loss rate of 50 g/m2-sec. A 4-ft2 fire area is equivalent to 0.3716 m2 yielding a mass loss rate of 2 2 (50 g/m.sec)(0.3716 m ) = 18.58 g/sec With a density of 68 g/cm3, the burn time is given by 3 3 (0.68 g/cm )(l gal)(3785.4 cm / gal) = 138.5 sec 18.58 g/sec The radiation flux sisible to the switch at any point is partially obscured by the panel. With a critkal height of 68 in.and a panel height of 25 in.,the unobstructed component of the cylinderis, I therefore,43 in. clearly visible to the switch. References Rohseno v. W. M..and 11. Choi.1961. Heat. Mass and Momentum Tramfer. Prentice-Ilall. Inc., Englewood Cliffs. N.J. Stasrianit'is. P.1980. The Behavior of l'lumes Above Pool Fires. Thesis. Department of Mechanical Engineering. Northcastern Unisersity, Boston 44
I i I Appendix D I I Numerical Solution I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I i I
Appendix D l alcite-difference methods for solving differential equations provide numerical solutions for l problems that may not be easily treated analytically. A typical problem from mathematical physics that may be successfully approached in such a manner is Poisson's equation: 326 324 _ 34 4 8x2 2 3y at An analytical solution to this equation may be demonstrated for the Direchlet Problem, where the equation assumes the form of the Laplacian (ac/at -+ 0) and where boundary conditions are stated (X,0) = & (X,b) = & (0,y) = 0 & (a,y) = f(y) In this case, an analytical solution may be obtained through a separation of variables technique and a Fourier series representation c(x,y) = {1 @n(x,y) = [ C, sinh "#* sin "*Y b b n= n=i 4(a,y) = f(y) = C sin E sin "*Y n b b n=1 ff f(y) sin { dy C I b sin 7 = n . na A finite-difference solution may be derived as follows: B24 32 @ (@n + a x - @n ) - (@n - @n-a x ) + (4n+ ay - Cn ) - (4n - @n-ay ) I 3y (3x)2 (gy)2 ax2 2 For Ax = Ay I hn + A x + hn-a x + hn + A y + hn-A y (Ax)2 I hn + A x + hn-A x + hn + A y + hn-a y 4(Ax)2 45 I
l Appendix D i Finite-difference algorithms are extremely useful where eqraticrc, assume complex forms or where boundary conditions impose difficult conditions. For the problem relating to console temperatures, finite-difference methods seemed appropriate. The console panel was considered as a one-dimensional problem in order to effectively bound the outcome. The following two processes were assumed to occur simultaneously:
- 1. Radiative flux that varied with position.
- 2. Conduction of energy deposited on the console underside as a result of direct flame impingement.
These two processes may be visualized as follows: Radiative flux } h n o u u u Thickness = I i hx, t) _ Conductive I flux 0 Based on a similar development in El-Wakil(1971) BT 82 T a4"a, c + l at a* ax2 kS where a = thermal diffusivity = 0.01808 c a, = radiation absorptivity = 0.95 (for pointed steel, Rohsenow and Choi,1961) S = 0.1875 in. Transposing into a finite-difference form, T,,,-T, '{T(ii), - T,)-(T, -- T(i-1 ),) la a,) 4r,,i i i i i c +l = a' (Ax)2 ( p3 j at I 46 \\
I l l Appendix D With Fourier modules " CAT Fo _ (Ax)2 and temperature increment due to radiation absorption is (AX)* dr~i a, AT'i = 2KS T,, = (1 - 2Fo) T, + Fo (T(i_i), + T(i 3 ),) + 2Fo AT,, i i .I where Fo < l/2 for stability, or t < IO*) 2a References El-Wakil, M M.1971. Nuclear #cas Transport. International Textbook Company, Scrar. ton, Penn. Rohsenow, W. M., and H. Choi.1961. Heat, Mass and Momentum Transfer. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ. I I I I .I 'I 47 I
I I Appendix E I Panel Heatup I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
l I j Appendix E A significant contribution to console heatup is provided by flame impingement on the underside portion of the control panel. The heat-flux incident on the control panel leads to an exponential heatup of the panel edge and subsequent conduction toward cooler regions of the control panel. Because of the intense nature of the effects of flame impingernent, this phenomenon has the potential of being a dominant contributor to the heating of components in proximity to an exposure fire. The a pproach followed in the model treats the process of flame impingement essentially as a convective heat transfer problem. The mechanism for heat transfer in this case is turbulent forced convection of hot fire gases in direct and continuous contact with a 3/16-in. steel plate. Since the panel underside makes approximately a 20 degree angle with the s ertical axis, stagnation of the fire plume leading to the development of a completely horizontal jet is not assumed. This view is supported by the Detroit Edison control room fire test (Colbert,1981), which clearly demonstrates I partially deflected flames without eviderx of stagnation. From Rohsenow and Choi (1961), the film heat transfer coefficient along a plate with predominantly parallel turbulent flow is given by Pr'3h = 0.0296 lf v F5 2 c pV (LV l p j for air at approximately 5000F where 500oF air is conservatively assumed to be representative of the Newton film temperature adjacent to the plate. I V = vertical component of the fire gas velocity vector p = plate density = 0.0413 lbm/ft3 (air) c = plate specific heat = 0.248 B/lbm oF (air) p Pr = Prandtl number = 0.68 (steel) (air) 2 v = kinematic viscosity = 1.63 ft /hr L = length along the plate The above-listed thermophysical properties were taken from Rohsenow and Choi(1961). I The vertical velocity component is given by the Stavrianidis (1980) critical velocity as follows: = 1.20 Ql'3 (z -z rM uo c o = 1.20(427 kW)(1.717 m - 0.251 m)-" uo a== 7.954 m/sec = 26.1 ft/see u To artificially and conservatively increase the effect of heating, the vertical gas velocity used in this I analysis was reduced to 25 ft/sec. I 48 )
- lI i
Appendix E The plate length is conservatively taken to be the veitical height of the panel itself, a distance of approximately 25 in. With these assumptions, the film heat transfer coefficient is solved as follows: I f p lus c pV p h = 0.02961 I uN/ Pr:3 2 2 h = 3.43 B/hr ft. F = 0.01082 kW/m.op For the fire gas temperature of 17630F and assuming the panel to be initially at 70oF, the maximum convection heat flux at model fire initiation is given by (1 cony,c g3, = 0.01082(1763 F - 70'F) = 18.32 kW/m 2 Assuming uniform panel temperatures from the floor to the panel edge and complete I insulation to the floor and in either direction off the fire centerline, edge heatup may be calculated as follows: d T age f I i f i e -T (c pS;j h lT,3, =l edge l dt ( ) p 48. -dT -h edge = f,t di ,I' gas - Iedge PC 6 amb p t T age = T,,, - (T,, - Tamb)e T e g where r= I h A best-estimate calculation using these conservative assumptions yields a r = 902 see with the one-dimensional panel temperature results documented in Table 3-6. To be even more conservative, an additional assumption is arbitrarily made whereby the flame impingement heat 2 flux is increased by a S tor of 3 to 60 kW/m. The new time constant is given as follows: f 60 kW/m2 (3.431 = 11.23 B/hr ft.op 3 2 h=j 2 (18.32 kW/m j ) j which yields 7 - P - 2*75 sec h 49 I I
I Appendix E l.-, I The results of arbitrarily increasing the incident flame impingement heat flux to 60 kW/m2, a factor of 3 higher than the heat flux calculated with conservative assumptions, are shown in Table 3-7. References Colbert, W. F., Detroit Edison.1921. "Contrci Panel Fire Test." Letter EF2-54205 to L L. Kintner, NRC, July 31. Rohsenow. W. M., and 11. Chol.1961. Heat, Mast und Momentum Transfer. Prentice-Ilall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Stavrianidis, P.1980. Behavior of Plumes Above Pool Fires. Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering. North-eastern Unisersity, Boston. I I I I I I I I 50
p !l Appendix F g 7 ,~ Convection 4 I 1 I i a I ~' I i l I <I
I ( Appedis F in the course of the postulated fire, both the console and tiie switch continuously receive energy through crmduction and radiation. A constant emissivity of C.19 is assumed for the switch I - for the purpose of reradiation. although both the switch and the conso'c are consYered to be gray bodies in terms of absorption (95 percent). The only other mechatasm for cooling which the medel l takes credit for is that associated with turbulent convection. The approach followed is taken from Kreith (1973). The cons' ole is assumed for cooling purposes to.have,a rectangular face 2 by 2 ft in size. Convection is provided as :cIlows: hL e Nut 0.14(Gr Pr)" o k where convect!un is assumed to occur with air at a uniform temperature of 2000F, and where 'E ~ L = 2 ft % = 0.2122 (T-200)" B/f:2.hr F k = 0.018 B/ft hr F j }. Pr = Prandtl number = 0.694 6 -Grt = 688 X 106 (T - 200) The resultam comdown process assumes a., exponential form that may be characterized by a time constant. dT fh if ) e ge pSj) IT - 200 ) -=-I dt ( j p dT \\ fh i c 'J - 1(c p6)Jdt T -- t f. f 200/ T p I. T = 200 + (To - 200)expl p6,l fhti _e Wp c pS 3093.5 p 4' defining 7 - sec h h e e a efCTence ~: Kreith. F.1973. Principles of # car Transfer. Intext Preu, Inc. New York. n 51 I ,u - - - - -}}