ML20033B161
| ML20033B161 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1981 |
| From: | Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Rich Smith VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8111300488 | |
| Download: ML20033B161 (4) | |
Text
7 hc. lok M PMB - Cl(e vember 10, 1981 No Docket No. 50-271
. - QQ v, hs Mr. Robert L. Smith Licensing Engineer E $03 L
[
Vermont Yankee Nuclear-2 p
7 Power Corporation p
cP
-l 1671 Worcester Road
~/
Framingham, MA 01701 5/
b C
Dear Mr. Smith:
gg l
We have identified the enclosed additional infomation as being required so that we can complete our evaluation of the Reload 8 Licensing submittal you provided us by letter dated September 2,1981 and the use of the steady state core flow distribution code FIBWR in support of the reload submittal.
Please provide us this information as soon as possible so that our review may proceed in a timely manner. We have already discussed the need for this information with you by telephone.
i OtB clearance is not required for this request since it is being transmitted to nine or fewer addressees.
Sincerely, original Signed by T. A. Ippohto Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Request for Distribution:
Additional Infomation Docket File /
NRC PDR cc: w/ enclosure Local PDR See next page D. Eisenhut ORB #2 Reading 0 ELD IE (3)
V. Rooney S. Norris NSIC TERA ACRS (10)
J. lieltemes Gray File n
5""s /hl ORB #2
/
ORB #2 ORB y,,,,,,,,,,,,...........
. - - -. - - ~ ~ ~
~~~"~"""""""
E....M.TT717'70'"T'"""
"'TT7/@'*/M~~
"Viii~
be
.umMe >
.... e1113o0488 811130 "Tl7JJ761.......
PDR A DOCK O 5 000271,,,..................
{
-our>.~....I-~~-
P PDR
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~..................
.~.
wnc roHM 3tS (10@) NHCM ONO OFFICIAL RECORD COPY - y usammi-me
,Mr. R6bert L. Smith cc:
Mr. W. F. Conway Public Service Board President & Chief Operating Officer State of Vermont
~
V rmont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.
120 State Street 411 Western Avenue Montpelier, Vermont 05602 Drawer 2 W:st Brattleboro, Vermont 05301 W. P. Murphy, Plant Superintendent Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.
Mr. Louis H. Heider, V.P.
P.O. Box 157 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corpo.
Vernon, Vermont 05354 25 Research Drive Westboro, Massachusetts 01581 Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Alliance John A. Ritscher, Esquire 5 State Street Rope & Gray Box 1117 226 Frankline Street Montpelier, Vennont 05602 Boston, Massachusetts 02110 Brooks Memorial Library Honorable John J. Easton 224 Main Street Attorney General Brattleboro, Vermont 05301 State of Vermont 109 State Street Resident Inspector Montpelier, Vermont 05602 c/o. U.S. NRC P.O. Box 176 Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Vernon, Vermont 05453 Alliance 53 Frost Street Brattleboro, Vermont 05301 Mr. E. W. Jackson Manager of Operations Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.
411 Western Avenue Drawer 2 West Brattleboro, Vermont 05301
~
Raymond N. McCandless Vermont Division of Occupational
& Radiological Health Administration Building 10 Baldwin Street Montpelier, Vermont 05602 New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution Hill and Dale Farm R.D. 2 Box 223 Putney, Vermont 05346
f
=
5 fh'/
1
,,r e, '.
NOV 4.1981
~
j
~
~
Questions on FIBWR Code e
x f
1.
Equation 2-3, spatial acceleratiori pressure ~ change in single-phase f
unheated region, on page 7 of the FIBWR topical (Ref.-1),is not
/'
/
complete.
Please specify the-location where the flow area 'is used to calculate the mass velocity G.
2.
The single-phase fricticn factor is calculated by the Blasius
. formula with the constants A = 0.1892 and B = 0.2041. 'ltis seems to i-j assume a smooth surface in the flow path.
^
a.
What are the surface roughness.and re1ative roughne'ss of Vermont Yankee fuel cladding and other flow path surfaces?
'/
What are the friction fa' tors using the Blasius corfelation p
b.
c compared to those using the Moody correlation in the operating r
flow range?
y
~
How do you justify, the, assumption of. the smooth surface?
c.
3.
The FIBWR topical indicates that a modified Baroczy two-phase friction multiplier is reconsnended for Vermont Yankee design analysis. '
Please specify the numerical expression of the modified Baroczy correlation including the mass + flux correction factor as functions of property index.
How does the; two-phase multiplier prediction compare to the Baroczy correlation?
~
a.
In local pressure drop calculations, a modified homogeneous two-phase local loss multiplier is used.
Is the empirical constant 8 equal to 1.2 used in the design a.
/
analysis as the value is used in the comparison with the FRIGG eJ Loop data shown in Figure 3-11?
b.
In Figure 3-11, the comparison is made only for the bulk boiling region.
Is the two-phase multiplier also used in the subcooled boiling region? How does it compare with data?
c.
Why are the homogeneous void relationship and two-phase local loss multiplier used in water tube flow calculations?
5.
A simplified EPRI void fraction model is used but not explicitly described in the FIBWR topical.
However, the model is described in the EPRI-FIBWR (Ref. 2) report, a.
Describe how the equation 4-2 (Ref. 2) is de ived to calculate the coolant temperature, Tdeparture, at which the subcooled boiling begins.
p
m.w
+
=
b.
Does the void departure temperature correspond to the onset of wall voidage or detached voidage?
c.
How do you prove the correctness of the EPRI model prediction of the onset of subcooled boiling since no data is presented?
6.
In the EPRI void-quality model, the distribution parameter, Co, is calculated by the modified Bankoff-Jones correlation.
Provide a figure showing the distribution parameter as a function
.a.
of void fraction and pressure.
b.
How does the modified Bankoff-Jones model compare to the Bankoff-Jones and the Dix model?
Is,there an error in the^ expression of L on page 4-6 of Reference 27 c.
N 7.
In the'EPRI void model the drift velocity, Vgj, is expressed by equat1En 4-8, Reference 2.
a.
Provide a figure showing the drift velocity as a function of peessure and void fraction.
,1 b.
How does the result compare to the terminal rise velocity with~
-the coefficient K3 = 2.9?
S.
Page 20 of Reference 1 states that based on Figure 3-4 showing void fraction as a function of equilibrium quality from FRIGG Loop data, "it' appears that the two qualities (flow and equilibrium qualities) are equal above 5 percent quality." Justify this statement about f,f thqrmal equilibrium above 5 percent quality s
9.
The EPRI void model is only verified against FRIGG Loop data above I,5 percent quality.
It has not been verified for the subcooled
,bo,iEing region.
How do you justify the validity of the model?
I 10.'jn aa FIEkR and COBRA IIIC Comparison, the same conservation eduations and constitutive equations are.used. With the only
, ', 7 difference being the steam tables, explain why the pressure drops predicted by the two codes can be different by as much as 10 percent.
If the difference is solely due to the difference in water property
,s
(
calculations, is there any proof that the water property program
'W used in FIBWR is correct?
f
")
9 s
j.
[f [
References:
1.
YAEC-1234, " Methods for the Analysis of Boiling Water Reactors s
Steady State Core Flow Distributiert Code (FIBWR)," Yankee Atomic
,'l Electric Company..
t j/." "
2.
EPRI NP-1924-CCM', Project 1754-1, "FIBWR: A steady-State Core Flow
'/s ' '
Distribution Code /for Boiling Water Reactors, Computer Code User's
_,M Manua'i,.." EPRI, dated July 1981.
4
/
,n y+
~,
M,..,....
.., ~.