ML20034F575

Forwards Draft of New App 3L, Procedure for Evaluation of Postulated Ruptures in High Energy Lines & SSAR Markups for Subsections 3.6-1 & 3.6-2,to Support Accelerated Advanced BWR Review Schedule

ML20034F575
Person / Time
Site:	05200001
Issue date:	02/25/1993
From:	Fox J GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:	Poslusny C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 9303040018
Download: ML20034F575 (17)

Text

..

l

{

GE Nuclear Energy.

l 27{ W:tT: A. Yos+ Sw.

.rq LA [L ?!s l

v February 26,1993 Docket No. STN 52-001 i

4 Chet Posiusny, Senior Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Associate Directorate for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of the Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Subject:

Submittal Supporting Accelerated ABWR Review Schedule - SSAR Section 3.6 i

Dear Chet:

i Enclosed is a draft of the new Appendix 31," Procedure fo-Evaluation of Postulated Ruptures in High Energy Pipes" and SSAR markups for Subsections 3.6-1 and 3.6-2.

The balance of the SSAR markup wiu be transmitted by March 2, '993.

Sincerely, l

Y9 i

ek Fox i

Advanced Reactor Programs ec Paul Chen (ETEC) j Norman Fletcher (DOE)

Maryann Herzog(GE)

Shou Hou (NRC) l JIN3-40 9303040018 930225 PDR ADOCK 05200001 4

.]

A PDR

l Respon se to :

SM cyen Ih'm 3.t,1 -1 APPENDIX 3X l-PROCEDURE FOR EVALUATION OF POSTULATED RUPTURES IN HIGH ENERGY PIPES.

3 1 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE The criteria for locations where pipe ruptures must be postulated and the criteria for defming An evaluation of the dynamic effects of fluid the configuration of the pipe rupture are defined dynamic forces resulting from postulated ruptures in Subsection 3.6.2 of this SSAR. Also def~med in in high energy piping systems is required by SRP SSAR Subsection 3.6.2 are: (1) the fluid forces 3.6.1 and 3.6.2. The crit:ria for performing this acting st the rupture k) cation and in the various evaluation is defined in Sections 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 segments of the ruptured pipe, (2) the jet of this SSAR and in the Standard Review Plans and impingement effects including jet shape and ANS 58.2 w hich are referenced in the SSAR.

direction and jet impingement load.

This Appendit defines an acceptable procedure The high energy fluid systems are defined in i

for performing these evaluations. The procedure is Subsection 3.6.2.1.1 and identified in Tables 3.6-3 based on use of analytical methodology, computer and 3.6-4. Essential systems, components and programs and pipe whip restraints used by GE, but equipments, or portions thereof, specified in it is intended to be applicable to other computer Tables 3.6-1 and 3.6-2 are to be protected from programs and to pipe whip restraints of alternate pipe break effects which would impair their design. Applicability of alternate programs will ability to facilitate safe shutdown of the plant.

be justifed by the COL The informstion contained in Subsections The evaluation is performed in four major 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 and in the SRP's and ANS 58.2 is steps:

not repeated in this Appendix.

L (1) Identify the location of the postulated 3%y2 IDENTIFICATION OF rupture and whether the rupture is postulated as circumferential or longitudinal.

RUPTURE LOCATIONS AND RUPTURE GEOMETRY (2) Select the type and location of the pipe l-whip restraints.

3 ".2.1 Ruptures in Containment Penetration Area.

(3) Perform a complete system dynamic analysis or a simplified dynamic analysis of Postulation of pipe ruptures in the portion of the ruptured pipe and its pipe whip restraints piping in the containment penetration area is not to determine the total movement of the allowed. This includes the piping between the ruptured pipe, the loads on the pipe, strains inner and outer isolation valves. Therefore, in the pipe whip restraint, and the stresses examine the final stress analysis of the piping in the penetration pipe, system and confirm that, for all piping in containment penetration areas, the design stress (4) Evaluate safety related equipment that and fatigue limits specified in Subsection may be impacted by tifr" ruptured pipe or the 3.6.2.1.4.2 are not exceeded.

target of the pipe rupture jet impingement.

I i

L l

enewd Appenda 3X-1 l

1

L L

30.2 Ruptures in Areas other than Containment 3X3.2 Prrparr Simplified Computer Model of Penetration.

Piping Pipe % hip Restraint System.

(1) Postulate breaks in Class 1 piping in Prepare a sirnplified computer model of accordance with Subsection 3.6.2.1.4.3.

piping system as described in 3X.4.2.1 and as shown in Figures 5-2, 5-3 and 5-4.

Critical (2) Postulate breakr in Classes 2 and 3 variables are length of pipe, type of end piping in accordance with Subsection condition, distance of pipe from structure and 3.6.2.1.4.4.

location of the pipe whip restraint. Locate the pipe whip restraint as near as practical to the (3) Postulate breaks in seismically analyzed ruptured end of the pipe but er tablish location to t

non ASME Class piping in accordance with the minimize interference to Inser ice Inspection.

l above requirements for Classes 2 and 3 piping.

L L

3f.3.3 Run ' Pipe Dynamic Analysis"(PDA) l 3X.2.3 Determine the Type of Pipe Break Run the PDA computer program using Determine whether the high energy line break the following input:

is longitudinal or circumferential in accordance with Subsection 3.6.2.1.6.1.

1.

The information from the simplified piping model, including pipe length, diameter, L

wall thickness and pipe whip restraint 3Y.3 DESIGN AND SELECTION OF PIPE location.

WHIP RESTRAINTS L,

2. Piping information such as pipe material 3X.3.1 Make Preliminary Selection of Pipe Whip type, stress / strain curve and pipe material Restraint mechanical properties.

c The load carrying capability of the GE U-Bar 3.

Pipe whip restraint properties such as pipe whip restraint is determined by the number, force-deflection data and clastic plastic size, bend radius and the straight length of the displacements.

4 U-bars. The pipe whip restraint must resist the thrust force at the pipe rupture location and the

4. Force time history of the thrust at the pipe impact force of the pipe. The magnitude of these rupture location.

forces is a function of the pipe size, fluid, and L

operating pressure.

3X.3.4 Select Pipe Whip Restraint for Pipe Whip Restraint Analysis.

A preliminary selection of one of the standard GE pipe whip restraints is made by matching the PDA provides displacements of pipe and pipe thrust force at the rupture location with a pipe whip restraint, pipe whip U-bar strains, pipe whip restraint capable of resisting this thrust forces and moments at fixed end, time at peak force. This is done by access to the large data load and lapsed time to achieve steady state i

base contained in the GE REDEP computer file.

using thrust load and pipe characteristics.

This file correlates the pipe size and the resulting thrust force at the pipe rupture with Check displacements at pipe broken end and the U-bar pipe whip restraints designed to carry at pipe whip restraint and compare loads on the the thrust force. REDEP then supplies the piping and strains of pipe whip restraint U-bars force / deflection data for each pipe whip with allowable loads and strains. If not satisfied restraint.

with output results rerun PDA with different pipe whip restraint parameters.

en. pod App,.aa 3X-2

T i

1 0

L n

3X'4 PIPE RUPTURE EVALUATION t

moment-angular deflection relationships for

%{

end DE) for any deflection for the case of a 1.

3X'.4.1 GENERAL APPROACil built-in end. This equivalent force is 2

subtracted from the applied thrust force when There are several analytical approaches that 1 calculating the net energy.

{ See Figures 5-2,5-3 and 5-4 for the model may be used in analyzing the pipe / pipe whip restraint system for the effects of pipe rupture.

This procedure defines two acceptable approaches.

g described above.

E (1) Dynamic Time-Illstory Analysis With.E (2) Dynamic Time-liistory Analysis with Simplified Model: A dynamic time history j Detailed Piping Model. In many cases it is analysis of a portion of a piping system may 8 necessary to calculate stresses in the ruptured be performed in lieu of a complete system pipe at locations remote from the pipe whip analysis when it can be shown to be y restraint location. For example, the pipe in conservative by test data or by comparison -w the containment penetration area raust meet with a more complete system analysis. For.5 the limits of SRP 3.6.2. In these cases it is example, in those cases where pipe stressesi required the rupturr.d piping, the pipe

]

need not be calculated, it is acceptable to supports, and the pipe whip restraints be model only a portion of the piping system as a modeled in sufficient detail to reflect its 1

simple cantilever with fixed or pinned end or dynamic characteristics. A time-history as a beam with fixed ends.

analysis using the fluid forcing functions at the point of rupture and the fluid forcing When a circumferential break is postulated, functions of each pipe segment is performed the pipe system is modeled as a simple to determine deflections, strains, loads to eantilever, the thrust Ioad is applied structure and equipment and pipe stresses.

opposite the fixed (or pinned) end and the pipe whip restraint acts between the fixed end L.

and thrust load. It is then assumed that all 3 X'4.2 PROCEDURE FOR DYNAMIC deflection of the pipe is in one planc. As the TIM E-IlISTO RY AN ALYSIS WITil pipe moves a resisting bending moment in the SIMPLIFIED MODEL pipe is created and later a restraining force L

i at the pipe whip restraint. Pipe movement 3X.4.2.1 Modeling of Piping System:

stops when the resisting moments about the i

fixed (or pinned) cod exceed the applied For many piping systems, all required thrust moment, information on their response to a postulated pipe rupture can be determined by modeling a When a longitudinal break is postulated, the portion of the piping system as a cantilever with pipe system has both ends supported. To either a fixed or pinned end, as shown in Figures analyze this case, two simplifications are 5-2, 5-3 and 5-4, based on the piping i

made to allow the use of the cantilever model configuration. The pipe whip restraint is described above. First, an equivalent point modeled as two components acting in series; the mass is assumed to exist at D (See Fig 5-4) restraint itself and the structure to which the instead of pipe length DE. The inertia restraint is attached. The restraint and piping 1

characteristics of this mass, as it rotates behave as determined by an experimentally or about point B, are calculated to be identical analytically determined force-deflection to those of pipe length DE, as it rotates relationship. The structure deflects as a simple about point E. Second, an equivalent resisting linear spring of representative spring constant.

force is calculated (from the bending L.

3T-3 rn,pmapp,.ain

The model must account for the maximum 3.733 of the SSAR. The piping, pipe supports clearance between the restraint and the piping.

and pipe whip restraints are modeled in The clearance is equal to the maximum distance sufficient detail to reflect their dynamic from the pipe during normal operation to the characteristics. Inertia and stiffness effects of the position of the pipe when the pipe whip restraint system and gaps between piping and the starts picking up the rupture load. This rer.traints must be included.

simplified model is not used if the piping has snubbers or restraints strong enough to affect the If the snubbers or other seismic restraints are pipe movement following a postulated rupture.

included in the piping model they should be modeled with the same stiffness used in the L

seismic analysis of the pipe. However, credit for 3X4.2.2 Dynamic Analysis of Simplified Piping seismic restraints cannot be taken if the applied Model.

load exceeds the level D rating.

sesection When the thrust force (as defined in Pa.e4 The pipe whip restraints are modeled the 4

3.6.2.2.1) is applied at the end of the pipe, same as for the simplified model described in rotational acceleration will occur about the fixed 3X.4.2.1. For piping designed with the GE (or pinned) end. As the pipe moves, the net U-Bar pipe whip restraints, the selected size and g

rotational acceleration will be reduced by the dimensions, and the resulting force-deflection i

resisting bending moment at the fixed end and by and clastic / plastic stiffness is first determined the application of the restraining forec at the according to the procedure previously defined in pipe whip restraint. The kinetic energy will be Paragraph 3X3.

absorbed by the deflection of the restraint and the bending of the pipe. Movement will continue L

until equilibrium is reached. The primary 3K.43.2 Dynamic Analysis using Detail Piping l

acceptance criteria is the pipe whip restraint Model.

i i

deflection or strain must not exceed the design strain limit of 50% of the restraint material The pipe break nonlinear time-history ultimate uniform strain capacity.

analysis can be performed by the ANSYS, or i

other NRC approved non-linear computer The analysis may be performed by a general

' programs. The force time histories acting at the l

purpose computer program with capability for break location and in each of the segments of the nonlinear time. history analysis such as ANSYS, or ruptured pipe are determir.ed according to the by a special purpose computer program especially criteria defined in ANS $8.2. He time step used l

written for pipe rupture analysis such as the GE in the analysis must be sufficiently short to obtain 1

computer program," Pipe Dynamic Analysis"(PDA).

convergence of the solution. (GE has shown that i

for a rupture of the main steam pipe a time step i

L of.001 seconds is adequate for convergence.)

3X.4.3 PROCEDURE F0R DYNAMIC The analysis must not stop until the peak of the TIME lilSTORY ANALYSIS USING DETAILED dynam'c load and the pipe response are over.

PIPING MODEL L

The primary acceptance criteria are: (1) The 3X43.1 Modeling of Piping System:

piping stresses between the primary containment isolation valves are within the allowable limits In general, the rules for modeling Ihe specified in SRP 3.6.2, and MEB 31, Rev. 2. (2) ruptured piping system are the same as the the pipe whip restraint loads and displacements modeling rules followed when performing due to the por.tulated break are within the design seismic / dynamic analysis of Seismic Category 1 limits, and (3) specified allowable loads on safety piping. These rules are outlined in Subsection related valves or equipment to which the ruptured piping is attached are not exceeded.

i rn.c upp%

3X-4 b

w

L 3f.5 'J ET I M P I N G E M E N T O N ESSENTIAL PIPING Postulated pipe ruptures result in a jet of i

fluid emanating from the rupture point. Safety related systems and components require protection if they are not designed to withstand the results of the impingement of this jet. Subsection 3.6.2.3.1 of this SSAR provide the criteria and procedure for: (1) defining the jet shape and direction, (2) defining the jet impingement load, temperature and impingement location and (3) analysis to determine effects of jet impingement on safety related equipment.

The paragraphs below provide some additional criteria and procedure for the analysis required to determine the effects of jet impingement on piping.

(1) Jet impingement is a faulted load and the primary stresses it produces in the piping must be combined with stresses caused by SSE to meet the faulted stress limits for the designated ASME Class of piping.

(2) If a pipe is subjected to more than one jet impingement load, each jet impingement load is applied independently to the piping system and the load which supplies the largest bending moment at each node is used for evaluation.

t (3) A jet impingement load may be characterized as a two part load applied to the piping system - a dynamic portion when the 4

applied force varies with time and a static portion which is considered steady state.

For the dynamic load portion, when static analysis methods are used, apply a dynamic load factor of 2. Snubbers are assumed to be activated. Stresses produced by the dynamic load portion are combined by SPSS with primary i

stresses produced by SSE.

For the static load portion, snubbers are not activated and stresses are combined with SSE stresses by absolute sum.

L 3Y-5 rncond Appendix 1

~

)

SIMPLIFIED PIPING MODELS i

F tti 3

c-ammawt 1

escotLKD as pin 1r

?,,

bD

/

Ys e

c--

6nud"> a r iu<e ustoy aps H.

a.sw a. mason a so m m e e

$^

74d 9P P

c-=

mastnawr pk

_. _ a.

d 1r O

A a

c..

ll 6 n w or p )1 4 v g ( F E E Rfi h Assnesammam W p.mme.sna pee Apwe 64.

~..

s a

2 j

2 j

+ =.

g 2

e

=

4 p%

j h

f

= -.,

1 g

N A

s l

4 2

+

~

v LT kg

~Y er.

g,

, y,+g

-~

16,<d Apwo u neswesenesman pee seen aam Enas u e u

P8SPowd Appendix

I r

't&S nuwCAE i

arv s

. Standard Plant 3.6 PROTECTION AGAINST DYNAMIC EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE Subsection 3.6.3 and Appendix 3E describe the POSTULATED RUPTL*RE OF PIPING implementation of the leak before. break (LBB) i evaluation procedures as permitted by the broad l l

scope amendment to General Design Criterion 4 This Section deals with the structures. sys-tems, components and equipment in the ABWR (GDC-4) published in Reference 1. It is antici-l Standard Plant.

pated, as mentioned in Subsection 3.6.4.2, that i

a COL applicant will apply to the NRC for Subsections 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 describe the approval of LBB qualification of selected piping i

design bases and protectise measures which ensure by submitting a technical justification report.

that the containment; essential systems, compo-The approved piping, referred to in this SSAR as cents and equipment; and other essential struc-the LBB piping, will be excluded from pipe tures are :dequately protected from the conse-breaks, which are required to be postulated by quences associated with a postulated rupture of Subsection 3.6.1 and 3.6.2, for design against theie potenval dynamic effects. However, such high energy piping or crack of moderate. energy piping both inside and outside the containment.

pipir.g are i'icluded in postulation of pipe cracks for their effects as described in 1

Before delineating the criteria and assump-Subsections 3.6.1.3.1, 3.6 M 1.5 a n d 4-tions used to evaluate the consequences of pip-3.6.2.1.6.2.

It is emphasized that an LBB t

ing failures inside and outside of containment, qualification submittal is not a mandatory it is necessary to de6ne a pipe break event and requirement; a COL applicant has an option to select from none to all technically feasible a postulated piping failure:

piping systems for the benefits of the LBB Pipe brcak event: Acy single postulated approach. He decision may be made based upon a piping failure occurring during normal plant cost-benefit evaluation (Reference 6).

operation and any subsequent piping failure and/or equipment failure that occurs as a direct 3.6.1 Postulated Piping Failures consequence of the postulated piping failure.

In Fluid Systems Inside and Outside of Containment Postulated Piping Failure: Longitudinal or circumferential break or rupture postulated in This subsection sets forth the design bases.

high-energy fluid system piping or throughwall description, and safety evaluation for determin-leakage crack postulated in moderate-energy fluid ing the effects of postulated piping failures in system piping. The terms used in this definition fluid systems both inside and outside the con-are explained in Subsection 3.6.2.

tainment, and for including necessary protective measures.

Structures, systems, components and equipment that are required to shut.down the reactor and 311.1 Design Bases mitigate the consequences of a postulated piping failure, without offsite power, are defined as 311.1.1 Critaria essential and are designed to Seismic Category I Pipe break event protection conforms to requirements.

10CFR50 Appendix A, General Design Criteria 4 Environmental and Missile Design Bases.

The dynam.ic effects that may result from a The design bases for this protection is in postulated rupture of high energy piping include compilance with NRC Branch Technical enissile generation; pipe whipping; pipe break Positions (BTP) ASB 31 and MEB 3-1 included reaction forces; jet impingement forces; compart-In Subsection 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 respectively, i

ment, subcompartment and cavity pressuritationsl of NUREG-800 (Standard Review Plan) except decompression waves within the ruptured for the following:

pipes and loads identified with loss of coolant accident (LOCA) on Table 3.9.2.

~

Amencment 3

$b#

f

i MM UA61MAE Standard Plant REV B (a) MEB 31, B.I b.(1).(a) Footnote 2 should read, "For those loads and conditions in which Level A and Lesel B stress limits have been specified in the Design Specification (excluding earthquake loads).

(b) MEB 31, B.1.b.(1).(d) should read, A

"The maximum stress as calculated by the sum of Eqs. (9) and (10) in Paragraph NC 3652, ASME Code,Section III, considering those loads and conditions thereof for which Level A and Level B stress limits have been specified in the system's Design Specification (i.e., sustained loads, occasional loads, and thermal expansion) excluding carthquake loads should not exceed 0.8(1.8 Sh+

S) e M66 3-l B.l,G.(l). h 5bo If j

(c) Me-dJ.... wousmru sa st - :w 2 3 g 99,,,Ag(g );g MEB 31 describes an acceptable basis for y mum 3 f ( g g (g;trupg *d s C # /C H /8 I

selecting the design locations and orientations y[ gT g g3

> gg gg

/

of postulated breaks and cracks in fluid systems ga/cu/4fr/ fy eifher piping. Standard Review Plan Sections 3.6.1 and Syggy3 (a gg g,,,

J

/

3.6.2 describe acceptable measures that could be E{,bl N OT 6{.6 C in Par *3<,72 taken for protection against the breaks and cracks and for restraint against pipe whip that g

g, g g may result from breaks.

The design of the containment structure, com-ponent arrangement, pipe runs, pipe whip re-straints and compartmentalization are done in d

3.6-i.t i

Amenderwat 2t

i 1

. ABWR u-Standard Plant prv n surge which in turn trips the main breaker),

plastic hinge and rotating provided its then a loss of offsite power occurs in a movement can be defined and evaluated.

mechanistic time sequence with a SACF.

Otherwise, offsite power is assumed available (11) The fluid internal energy associated with with a SACF.

the pipe break reaction can take into account any line restrictions (e.g., flow (7) Pipe whip shall be considered capable of limiter) between the pressure source and causing circumferential and longitudinal break location and absence of energy breaks, individually, in impacted pipes of reservoirs, as applicable.

smaller nominal pipe size, irrespective of pipe wall thickness, and developing 3.6.1.1.4 Approach through-wall cracks in equal or larger nominal pipe sizes with equal or thinner To comply with the objectives previously wall thickness. Analytical or experimental described, the essential systems, components, data, or both, for the expected range of and equipment are identified. The essential impact energies may be used to demonstrate systems, components, and equipment, or portions the capability to withstand the impact thereof, are identified in Table 3.6-1 for pip-without rupture; however, loss of function ing failures postulated inside the containment due to reduced flow in the impacted pipe and in Table 3.6-2 for outside the containment.

should be considered.

3.6.1.2 Description h 64f q bM ME

,d M b

(8) All available systems, including those ac-

/

n Hghe m g) p-tuated by opr.rator actions, are available to Subsection 3.6.2.1.g*are listed in Table 3.6-3 mhc lim. c-a mitigate the consequences of a postulated 1

piping failure. In judging the availability for inside the containment and in Table 3.6-4 of systems, account is taken of the postu-for outside the containment. Moderate-en y/w am lated failure and its direct consequences defined in Subsection 3.6.2.1.2-is listed ed %

such as unit trip and loss of offsite power, in Table 3.6-6 for outside the containment.

and of the assumed SACF and its direct con-Pressure response analyses are performed for the sequences. The feasibility of carrying out subcompartments containing high. energy piping.

operator actions are judged on the ba;is of. A detailed discussion of the line breaks ample time and adequate access to equipment ( selected, vent paths, room volumes, analytical being available for the propcsed actions.

) methods, pressure results, etc., is provided in

[ win RCic. c.opaWy)

Section 6.2 f or primary containment Although a pipe break event outside the subcompartments.

containment may require cold shutdown, up to

%rMt. 3. kf [o f hfidt. N'.#W"d#)~#'

M eight hours in hot standb, 's allowed in order The effects of pipe whip, jet impingemert.

for plant personnel to assess the situation spraying, and flooding on required function of and make repairs.

essential systems, coruponents, and equipment, or portions thereof, inside and outside the (10) Pipe whip, with rapid motion of a pipe containment are cor,sidered.

resulting from a postulated pipe break, occurs in the planc determined by the piping W. A., A.c..; - ' W.% iina geometry and causes movement in the - N r"9 - QAs such, there are no direction of the jet reaction. If unre- (citects upon the hatntability of the control strained, a whipping pipe with a constant j room by a piping failure in the control building energy source forms a plastic hinge and or elsewh:re either from pipe whip, jet impinge-rotates about the nearest rigid restraint, ment, or transport of steam. Further discussion anchor, or wall penetration. If unre-on control room habitability systems is provided strained, a whipping pipe without a constant lin Section 6.4.

energy source (i.e., a break at a closed valve with only one side subject to g ' 3 Safety Evaluation pressure) is not capable of forming a 3.6.1.3.1 General gog h bM gg, MfClbl.

C 363 Amendment U h0m Nf EFL

ABWR umme Staridard Plant arv a systems are evaluated for the effects of pipe therefore, is the basic protective measure whip, jet impingement, flooding, room pressuri-incorporated in the design to protect against zation, and other environmental effects such as the dynamic effects of postulated pipe failures.

temperature. Pipe break events involving moderate-energy fluid systems are evaluated for Due to the complexities of several divisions wetting from spray, flooding, and other environ-being adjacent to high-energy lines in the dry-mental effects.

well and reactor building steam tunnel, speci-fic break locations are determined in accordance By means of the design features such as with Subsection 3.6.2.1,4.3 for possible spatial separation, barriers, and pipe whip restraints, a separation. Care is taken to avoid concentra-discussion of which follows, adequate protection ting essential equipment in the break exclusion is provided agai,st the effects of pipe break zone allowed per Subsection 3.6.2.1.4.2.

If events for essential items to an extent that spatial separation requirements (distance and/or their ability to shut down the plant safely or arrangement to prevent damage) cannot be met mitigate the consequences of the postulated pipe based on the postulation of specific breaks, failure would not be impaired.

barriers, enclosures, shields, or restrsints are provided. These methods of protection are dis-3.6.1.3.2 Protection Methods cussed on Subsections 3.6.1.3.2.3 a n d 3.6.1.3.2.4 3.6.1.3.2.1 Gent ral

-(M accordme MS Igg lb 2U For other areas where physical separation is The direct effects associated with a particu-not practical, the following high-energy line-lar postulated break or crack must be mechanis-separation analysis (HELSA) evaluation is done tically consistent with the failure. Thus, actu-to determine which high-energy lines meet the al pipe dimensions, piping layouts, material pro-spatial separation requirement and which lines pertiest and equipment arrangerrents are consider-require further protection:

ed in defining the following speciric measure for protection against actual pipe movemect and other (1) For the HELSA evaluation, no particular associated conseqacoces of postulated failures.

break points are identified. Cubicles or areas through which the high-energy lines (1) Protection against the dynamic effects of pass are examined in total. Breaks are pos-pipe failures is provided in the form of tulated at any point in the piping system.

pipe whip re,traints, equipment shields, and physical separation of piping, equipment, (2) Essential systems, components, and equipment and instrumentation, at a distance greater than thirty feet from any high energy piping are considered as (2) The precise method chosen depends largely meeting spatial separation requirements. No upon limitations placed on the designer such damage is assumed to occur due to jet im-as accessibility, maintenance, and proximity pingement since the impingement force be-to other pipes.

comes negligible beyond 30 feet. Likewise, a 30 ft evaluation zone is established for 3.6.1.3.2.2 Separation pipe breaks to assure protection against potential damage from a whipping pipe. As-The plant arrangement provides physical surance that 30 feet represents the maximum sepnation to the extent practicable to maintain free length is made in the piping layout.

the independence of redundant essential systems (including their auxiliaries) in order to prevent (3) Essential systems, components, and equipment j

the loss of safety function due to any single at a distance less than 30 feet from any postulated event. Redundant trains (e.g., A and high-energy piping are evaluated to see if B trains) and divisions are located in separate damage could occur to more than one compartments to the extent possible. Physical essential division, preventing safe sl.utdown separation between redundant essential systems of the plant. If damage occurred to only with their related auxiliary supporting features, one division of a redundant system, the 3b4 Amendment 7

l I

23A61004E l

Standard Plant arv n l

(7) Separation is provided to preserve the (6) Perform one dimensional wave propagatio independence of the low. pressure flooder Iculation to find the time history thr t i

(LPFL) systems.

Ioa of each pipe segment (limited o5 segmtuits in one model) beyond t e first I

(8) Protection for the IMRD scram insert lines one.

is not required since the motor operation of the MACRD can adequately insert the control (7) Model a piping, apply thrup and retrain f

rods even with a complete loss of insert the pipe movement by using'PWR as selected j

lines (See Subsection 3.6.2.1.6.1).

in step 3.

N N

i I

(9) The escape of steam, water, combustible (8) Use ANSYS or equir - t program with input corrosive fluids, gases, and heat i f

preparation (step'7)'

event of a pipe rupture do not prect

f. ;

N

((9) Check disp ents at broke end and PWR; (a)

Accessibility to any areas requ stresses in/ oly pipe against ME Code, cope with the postulated pip ection Ill, Equation 9 (NB3650) with 2.25 i

7S lim {tation.

1 (b)

Habitability of the control roo N10) C eck operability of MSi'v using limita 'on I

(c)

The a bi1it y of e entiaI

[of bonnet flange bolt load and limits instrumentation, electric power acceleration.

supplies, components, and controls to

\\

perform their safety-related function.

3.6.2 Determination of Break locations and Dynamic Effects 3.6.1.4 Ssk Locutloa and Pipe Whip Restraint Associated with the Postulated

\\

Rupture of Piping #Ag Yj#

i

'The procedure of determining a break locatiin

/fg. i and' sizing a pipe whip restraint is as follows:

Information concerning break and crack

\\

location criteria and methods of analysis for 3l.

l (1) U'sc break criteria in SRP 3.6.2 to ind the dynamic effeets is presented in this break location.

Subsection / The location criteria and methods i

\\

of analysis are needed to evaluate the dynamic (2) Use ANS 58.2 Appendix B ajrd break type effects associated with postulated breaks and (logitudinal or circumfe ential; full or cracks in high-and moderate-energy fluid system limited separation) to g the thrust load piping inside and outside of primary i

of the broken pipe.

containment. This information provides the

\\

basis for the requirements foi, se protection of (3) Use GE pipe whipres int (PWR) data (REDEP essential structures, systems, and components file) to seleb(

pplicable rod size, defined in introduction of Section 3.6.

T deflection, cle' ara {aight length, force and quality, bend,y ce, clastic and plastic 3.6.2.1 Criteria Used to Define Break and displaceme

s. Use other PWR design and Crack Location and Configuration I

character' tics as r uired for the cale-f ulation The following subsections establish the criteria for the location and configuration of l

I (4) Us pipe stress /stra'n curve, pipe postulated breaks and eracks.

'hanical properties and p{pe dimensions r piping rnodel.

\\

3.6.2.1.1 Definition of High-Energy Fluid

\\

Systems Use PDA computation program and a joystick model to confirm the adequate shiection of High-energy fluid systems are defined to be i

PWR in capacity, displacement, tim'e. at peak those systems or portions of systems that.

/

[

load and lapsed time toward static state.

during normal plant conditions (as defined in

\\

\\

3M

[

Amendmen 23

-t 4

I ABM usuooxe Standard Plant nev, n j

t 5

Subsectics 3.6.1.1.3(1)),are either in operation or are maintained pressurized under conditions where either or both of the following are met:

(1) maxjmum operating temperature exceeds 200 F, or N

(2) maximum operating pressure exceeds 275 psig.

~ _ _..

j

~

-~

3.6.2.1.2 Definition of Moderate Energy Fluid 1

l j{ }5 hekfjbenty i '

Systems.

9f,jg 3,f 3 3

Moderate-energy fluid systems are defined to lidt3 145/d Gddridf*1f M

j be those systems or portions of systerns that. [ gg g g g g /p

' gne/

during normal plant conditions (as defined in i

Subsection 3. 6.1.1. 3. ( 1 ) ), are either in

//g ggjg. mM'ngen[

l t

operation or are maintamed pressurized (above atmospheric pressure) under conditions where both of the following are met:

8 I

(1) maximum operating temperature is 200 F or less, and l

(2) maximum operating pressure is 275 psig or

}

less.

I Piping systems are classified as j

moderate-energy systems when they operate as j

i high-energy piping for only short operational periods in performing their system function but, l

for the major operational period, qualify as moderate-energy fluid svstems. An operational period is considered short if the total fraction i

of time that the system operates within the pressure-temperature conditions specified for high energy fluid systems is less than two percent of the total time that the system j

operates as a moderate-energy fluid system.

+-

NM bra. :

\\

\\'

3.6.2.1.3 Postulated Pipe Breaks and Cracks Q }g 3d llS l

i mogegag mej ggg,y jggjyg A postulated pipe break is defined as a sudden fMYdlMmen/} 'p[g h/g 3,6-[

l gross failure of the pressure boundary either in l

the form of a complete circumferential severance (guillotine break) or a sudden longitudinal split f

without pipe severance, and is postulated for pg g ggg pgf y

[

l moderate-energy fluid system, pipe failures are

/jM3 OphiME conknmeg'j

[

high-energy fluid systems only. For i

l limited to postulation of cracks in piping and i

branch runs. These cracks affect the surrounding environmental conditions only and. do I

M1 Amendment 23 -

am-m.

a p--

-<-m>

4

.AB M 22mmie

. Standard Plant prv s (c)

The assemblies are subjected to a single As a result of piping re-analysis due to pressure test at a pressure not less differences between the design configuration i

than its design pressure.

and the as-built configuration, the highest stress or cumulative usage factor locations (d)

The assemblies do not prevent the access may be shifted; however, the initially required a conduct the inservice determined intermediate break locations need examination specified in item (7),

not be changed unless one of the following conditions exists:

(7) A 100% volumetric inservice examination of all pipe welds would be conducted during (i) The dynamic effects from the new each inspection interval as defined in (as-built) in'ermediate break locations IWA-2400, ASME Code,Section XI.

are not mitigated by the originet pipe whip restraints and jet shields.

3.6.2.1.4.3 ADIE Code Section Class 1 Piping in Areas Other Than Containment (ii) A change is required in pipe parameters Penetration gj c c) such as major differences in pipe size, wall thickness, and routing.

r With the exception of those portions of piping identified in Subsection 3.6.2.1.4.2, breaks in 1 3.6.2.1.4.4 ASME Code Section til Class 2 and ASME Code,Section III, Class 1 piping ar.gJ 3 Piping in Areas Other Than Containment postulated at the fuhm locationsdn each Penetration piping and branch runa Ea<h loads oft en. laded from %) ae)parc.

(c).

With the exception of those portions of (a)

At terminal ends' piping indentified in Subsection 3.6.2.1.4.2, breaks in ASME Codes, Secdon lit, Class 2 and 3 (b)

At intermediate locations where the piping are postulated at the following locations maximum stress range as calculated by in those portions of each piping and branch run:

Eq. (10) exceeds 2.4 Sm, ed (a) At terminal ends (see Subsection P-!' 4: ::!:!d -,

.,a=

m;:-

3.6.2.1.4.3, Paragrapb (a))

l

.h1400) a:'- 2 ' % the stress f

range calculated byg Eq.(12)M (b) At intermediate locations selected by one ofde g-Eq413) m Paragraph NB-3653 de M r"

the fd!n 5; criteriar" lovJ. Ea4y

' ' ". 4 2.4 Sm.

loadi Me exdad (fom (<dericdi).

EV4ced5 (i) At each pipe '" sting (e.g., elbow, tee, (c)

At intermediate locations where the cross, flangr.. and nonstandard cumulative usage factor exceeds 0.1.

fitting), welded attachment, and valve. Where the piping contains no fittings, welded attachments, or

• Extremities of piping runs that connect to valves, at one location at each extreme structures, components (e.g., vessels, pumps, of the piping run adjacent to the valves), or pipe anchors that act as rigid protective structure.

constraints to piping motion and thermal expansion. A branch connection to a main (ii) At each location where stresses calcu-piping run is a terminal end of the branch lated (see Subsection 3.6.2.1.4.2, run, except where the branch run is classified Paragraph (1)(d)) by the sum of Eqs.

as part of a main run in the stress analysis (9) nnd (10)in NC/ND-3653, ASME Code, and is shown to have a significant effect on Section 111, exceed 0.8 times the sum the main run behavior. In piping rs.ns which of the stress limits given in NC/ND-3653.

are maintained pressurized during normalplant conditions for only a portion of the run (i.e., up to the first normally closed valve)

As a result of piping re analysis due a terminal end of such runs is the piping to differences between the design connection to this closed valve.

configuration and the as built configuration, the highest stress 3 tr9 Amendment 23

c-w,

~

'W S e ck

3. 6. Z,2-3

-v sr W 3.6.2.2 Analytical Methods to Define Blowdown When thogipe rupture'hnalysis is performed by a sitaplified 'analyshith a portiollqf the pipe syst defi'ned in Paragrap'h 6.)2 of ANS' 58.2, t Forcing Functions and Response Models, thrust 3.6.2.2.1 Analytical Methods to define Blowdown time-hlstoriecdcting a%he breaVlo'batio ' may'bc Forcing Functions.

talculated'ndgally i:%' mpliancthith (3) o ve.

The rupture of a pressurized pipe causes 3.6.2.2.2 Pipe Whip Dynamic Response Analyses Q.T the flow characteristics of the system to 4

change, creating reaction forces which can An analysis shall be conducted of the postulated dynamically excite the piping system. The ruptured piping and pipe whip restraint system response h.E reaction forces are a function of time and space to the fluid dynamic forces specified in Subsection and depend upon fluid state within the pipe 3.6.2.2.1 in accordance with the requirements of &

,o prior to rupture, break flow area, frictional Paragraph 63 of ANS 58.2. The analysis shall be in U $

A O losses, plant system characteristics, piping sufficient detail to evaluate the potential for pipe whip, system and other fac: ors.

determine potential jet impingement targets, establish { M{

the pipe whip restraint and associated structural loads The thrust time-histories ac:ing at the and demonstrate that following the dynamic event the M break location and on the segments of the system would be capable of supporting fluid forces at ruptured piping system shall be as defined steady state flow conditions.

E The alternative analytical approaches des according to the following-(1) Pipe segment forces are defined by the c4 Paragraphs 6.3.1 through 6.3.5 of ANS 58.2 are acceptable approaches for piping response calcu generalized equations in Paragraph 6.2 and

{

Appendix A of ANS 58.2.

Criteria for an acceptable design are: (1) The pipingq.g (2) Pipe segment forces are further defined stresses between the isolation valves ar

'V the Q

according to the methods and procedures in allowable limits specified in SRP 3.6, (2) the pipe whip The Thermal-Hydraulics of a Boiling Water restraint loads and displacements due to the postula e Nuclear Reactor," by R.T. Lahey, Jr. an bre k are within the W "4 and (3) speep FJ. Moody.

gen {of loads ed safety related valv$s or equipment to which tif8%e/

suptured piping is attachrd do not exceedEwhe -/Ae (3) Thrust forces acting at the rupture q9 mi:E-Eil:xf:n. _'L.

2:n..

d operability 7 /imiYI fjefe)[ied M point are determined according to the

~y dSec"/)on 3.9. I.

endix B St simplified methods contained in App / /D Appendix 3G provides an acceptable procedure for of ANS 58.2 and are AIfuMet j

occw at /02 7, poWCf.

evaluation of the piping-pipe whip restraint system due When the pipe rupture analysis requires a to the dynamic effect of fluid forces resulting from complete system dynamic analysis, as defined in postulated pipe ruptures. The procedure in Appendix Paragraph 63.1 of ANS 58.2, the pip 3 segment 3G covers the analytical approach for (1) a complete time. histories are calculated by a GINomputer system dynamic analysis as defined in Paragraph 63.1 of MGFM ANS 58.2 using the ANSYS computer program, and (2) program (1 a) in compliance with (1) and (2) 3 g gg_ggg a simplified dynamic analysis as defined in Paragraph above.

63.2 of ANS 58.2 using the PDA computer program.

All thrust time-history calculations shall be based on the postulated rupture descriptions contained in Paragraph 4.2 of ANS 58.2,,

3.6-13

.. t ABM 2mi=*e i

? Standard Plant REV B I

5 l

Table 3.6-/--

IH MODERATE-ENERGY PIPING OUFSIDE CONTAINMENT

~j

.i I

+1___

,e _s t r.._ m. n

....9e,,-_-

/

w

_ n._ s f

-- g-

3. _, __, wwywasu '_-" -

1-

- - T---==.--j i

l g sy s a mean s we w s ewvenus.u; w.-

{

r.

_t-

_J _...

e s_

ys aym - ;-- - - _ - = r_--- --_-- s on.w;

}

..c._. _,_ g g

,s eT__f_.*___so,__*___-

==

3 et i

,c, _.. _ v._ _ r i_

.p fwi.=

e___

n'

__>.t._._gt.__-___

r y _=*- - - - - -,

r

__.*._v

+ __ t__ s g

_7 w.,.._,.....,7.-s

- _- Mams n fut *.

-_--m-s r o -r s -- r -

, s

-, c-

,._..o r-w-

__j y__

w

- -_i 4-

_ _.:_._i. s r..,-.,-,--_,.

-. :., ~_ _,1 r_ i. -,, _ _ _ _

- wy _ g

. w e,y,..

_,______2 _-_

____.__..:__._,.._3, s,___

y b

n ww. n..., e a,-..i e-,.... e,... -

a - -. _ _ _ _

g Radioactive Waste System en _.. _ ; :. _i..:,.__ i. 1 -S s,---

/

Instrument /, Service Air System

_s.__.

,r.

_ _ _ _ _ =...,.

HVAC Cooling Water System

_,,_,__._ u,..

_c.__ _ fr __2____..s

)

y_

Reactor Building Cooling Water System j

t k

t

_n

__t.__.__,,.

+

-a.,,--.-

3 a.

. __t e e.

a r--_.,_...e-__

l

^i g-,_1'_- ___m 1---%

rm -

_ - -, s

\\

i i

)

r 1

i

-1 i

1 N

Amendment 10 -

3.G-33 s

'1 J

t

,-e n

e

i DOCKET: 52-001 o/93 DATE:

NOTE TO: Document Control Desk i

FROM: Chester Poslusny, PM, NRR

SUBJECT:

DOCKETING OE ABWR INFORMATION RELATED TO DESIGN CERTiflCAT REVIEW 1

Oh Document Date:

C i

Subject:

3J d/d dcoloJ bd Author U. fog i

(by ?,ls.

Distribution: 1 copy to REG file-i i

/

j (y)

ACRS-15

((y)-

NRR/ADAR/PDST.

K A-

)

HRR/00RS/0TSB 1

-(x)'

NRR/DE/ECGB

~1-()

NRR/DE/EELB 1

(>Q NRR/DSSA/SPLB.-

1 1

()

f4RR/DSSA/SRXB 1

()

NRR/DSSA/SCSB 1

()

NRR/DSSA/SPSB 1

()

HRR/DRIL/RPEB 1

i

()

NRR/DRCH/HICB 1

()

NRR/DRCH/HHfB 1

1

()

liRR/DRSS/PEPB 1

i

()

NRR/DRSS/PRPB 1

()

NRR/DRSS/PSGB 1

.l

-(x)

NRC PDR 1

(V-)

PNL-Stegbauer, E l

i

(/)

HRR/lLPB/Suh, G.

I-i P

03008G i

i y

1 'bb/d T

hqii fb

-