ML20054D411

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Analysis of Equipment Heating During Hydrogen Burn in Reactor Containment Compartment
ML20054D411
Person / Time
Site: Mcguire, McGuire, 05000000
Issue date: 07/02/1981
From:
LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY
To:
NRC
Shared Package
ML19247E371 List:
References
FOIA-82-96 NUDOCS 8204220681
Download: ML20054D411 (23)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:. LOS ALAMOS ANALYSIS OF EQUIPMENT HEATING DURING HYDROGEN BURN IN A REACTOR CONTAINMENT C0f9ARTMENT EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

A Los Alamos National Laboratory analysis, based on the information pro-vided in a Nuclear Regulatory Commission memorandum, indicates that the maximum probable temperature of typical essential equipment after a hydrogen burn in a dead-ended compartment of a reactor containment building will be less than the characteristic qualification temperature of 340*F. However, there are uncer-tainties' in the analysis arising from the use of the CLASIX code result for input, the assumed sequence of events and steps for heat trSnsfer to the equipment, and general uncertainties in the entire analysis. A significant reduction in the calculated maximum temperature of 335*F would probably result from a more rigorous analysis including identification of the effects of the basic assumptions and reduction of tne uncertainties in heat transfer from the hydrogen flame source to the equipment in question and improved modeling and analysis of'the equipment thermal behavior during the time periods of interest. i 8204220681 820304 PDR FOIA PHILIPSB2-96 PDR t 1 . s-

l LOS ALAMOS ANALYSIS 0F EQUIPMENT HEATING. DURING HYDROGEN BURN IN A REACTOR CONTAINMENT COMPARTMENT by H. S. Cullingford, D. L. Hanson, R. G. Gido, and F. C. Prenger e ABSTRACT A scoping analysis of essential equipment heating caused by multiple hydrogen burns for a dead-ended compartment in the McGuire Station containment, building was performed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. The analysis was based on one done for the Puclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) described in a memo frcm K. I. Parczewshi to Victor Benaroya.1 For this analysis, an instrument transmitter covered by a casing was assumed to be a typical example of essentia1 equipcent. An engineering analysis showed that the equipment is weakly coupled to the gas in the compartment in which the nultiple hydrogen burns occur. The ultimate temperature attained is dominated by the compartment walls on which the equipment is mounted. After 10 burns, the temperatures of the instrument transmitter and the casing were conservatively estimated to be 335 and 379'F, respectively. A reduction in these temperature estimates is possible if a less. conservative approach in analysis were taken. Additional I analysis methods and computer modeling to improve the calculation are discussed. The major conclusion of the study is that the maximum probable temperature of the equipment in question is less than the characteristic qualification temperature of 340*F. e 2 u

INTRODUCTION At thb suggesti,on of the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Office of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Los Alamos National Laboratory performed an engineering analysis of equipment heating resulting from a hydrogen burn in a The basis for the dead-ended compartment of a reactor containment building. Los Alamos analysis was an NRC memorandum from K. I. Parczewski to Victor Benaroya. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM An instrument transmitter in a dead-ended compartment is considered to be typical essential equipment in the containment building of the McGuire Station.1 An estimate of the maximum probable temperature reached by the equipment resulting from a hydrogen burn is desired. (The characteristic qualification temperature is specified as 340*F in Ref. 2). The dead-ended compartment is a cubical room, 26 f t* on a side, con-structed of 0.5-in.-thick steel plates thermally insulated on their outer (that is, outside the compartment) surf aces (Fig.1). The instrument transmitter is represented by a 4-in. cube having half the density and specific heat of steel. It is mounted on a vertical wall at the geometrical center and is covered with a rectangular box (the " casing") made of 0.25-in.-thick steel' plates. The dimensions of the box are such as to provide uniform 3-in. air gaps between parallel,'f acing surf aces of the instrument transmitter and its casing. The compartment is assumed to initially contain a mixture of air with The enti're system is in thermal equilibrium at a temperature of 10 vol% H. 2 160*F. A plane ccmbustion wave is initiated at the opposite wall from the one on which the equipment is f astened. The flame then propagates toward the instru-ment at an assumed velocity of 1.7 ft/s. Af ter 220 s from the initiation of hydrogen combustion, the compartment is assumed to have been flushed and refilled with air containing' 10% H, and 2 a second burn initiated. This process is repeated 9 times, for a total of 10 burns.

  • English units were used in the NRC analysis, and we have retained them in this work to f acilitate any further discussions with NRC on this subject.

3

DESCR]PT]DN OF THE NRC AN.fSIS The input to the NRC analysis is a temperature-time curve provided by Duke Power Company for the gas in the dead-ended compartment of the McGuire Station (Fig. 2) (Ref. 1). The curve was produced using the CLASIX computer code (developed by Offshore Power Systems). A block diagram for the CLASIX code is shown in Fig. 3 (Ref. 3), k'e presurie that the steam and hydrogen quantities used in the calculations were obtained by the MARCH

  • code simula of steam production, reactor core corrosion, and release of these products into The CLASIX calculations appar-the containment building from a broken pipe.

ently did not account for heat transfer to the steel walls of the compartment. .Thus, an " adjustment" in the gas temperatures produced by CLASIX is an essen-tial element of the NRC analysis. The strategy of the NRC analysis consists of assessing the thermal input to the instrument transmitter through its cover and the 3-in. air gap from the hot gas in the compartment af ter " adjusting" the gas temperature downward to

However, account for heat transfer from the gas to the compartment walls.

this reduction in gas temperature was impir. anted af ter the combustion wave traveled the lengta of the compartment. During this initial transient (so-called Phase I), heat was transferred from the flame front by radiation from a source temperature of 2053*F, as well as by convection from the " cold gas" Af ter arrival of the flame front at the equipment, the ahead of the front. maximum gas temperature was 950*F (see Fig. 2). In calculating the heat transfer from the casing to the instrument trans-mitter, radiation and conduction through the air gap were evaluated, but con-vection was not considered. Also, the thermal coupling between the instrument and the steel compartment wall was ignored. The major The results of the NRC analysis are shown in Figs. 4 and 5. conclusion was that the temperature of the surf aces of the instrument trans-mitter would not exceed 320*F.I DISCUSSION OF THE NRC ANALYSIS There are several points on which the NRC ' analysis may be questioned. These points relate to the major NRC assumptions numbered 4, 6, 8, and 9, to the analytical approach taken by NRC. They are discussed below.

  • Developed by Battelle Columbus Laboratories.

4

e Only the equipment casing was heated in the compartment by radiation from the hot-flame. Even though this approach in the NRC analysis appears con-servative for equipment heating, it neglects a Icng-term thermal source for heat transfer to the equipment from the steel wall. Actually, the ultimate temperature attained by the equipment will be dominated by heat exchange with the compartment walls. e Convective heat transfer inside the casing is expected to rank as high in importance as radiation and be far more important than conduction.

Also, the thermal by-pass from the steel compartment wall is important at all times as discussed in the first point.

Table I lists, for comparison, the thermal resistance in various parallel paths as calculated by los Alamos. Assumption of 2053*F for the temperature of a nonluminous flame is unreal-e istic when the maximum gas temperature is 950*F. The 2053*F value appears to have been derived by adding the temperature rise corresponding to the adiabatic flame temperature for an air-10% H2 mixture initially at 32*F (that is, 1520 - 32 s 1488*F) to the minimum gas temperature (560*F, see ~ Fig. 2). Such an, increase could be the case in Fig. 6 shown for the Sequoyah Plant.2. The temperature spikes from combustion appear to have been mitigated in the CLASIX analysis leading to Fig. 2. The CLASIX code can account for passive heatsinks (according to Ref. 2), but we have followed the NRC assumption that the temoerature-mitigating processes do not include heat ' transfer to the compartment walls. (If this assumption is wrong, the temperature reducing-by " adjustment" would have been made twice.) e In adjusting the temperature of the compartment gas, a factor, N, is defined as "the fraction of heat removed from the gas in the compartment" and by Eq. (15) of Ref. 1. However, the expression for N given on the right-hand side of Eq. (15) represents-1-N, rather than N. e The physical and thermal' property data used in the NRC analysis may not be accurate for the actual conditions. Also, the sensitivity of the results to variations in these properties should be studied. For example, the 3 3 density of steel is taken to be 439 lb/ft ; we h~ ave used 490 lb/ft, Similarly, the specific heat of steel is given as 0.14 or 0.4 Stu/lb

  • F.

N (The latter value is probably a typographical error.) k'e have used 0.11 Btu /lb *F. In addition, emissivities of the flame and the gas may have values in the range of 0.01 to 0.5 instead of 0.6 (Ref. 4 and 5). ~ Thus, a parametric analysis is required to identify the loser and upper bounds for results. 5

RESULTS OF LOS ~ ALAMOS ANALYSIS Several supporting calculations were performed for a quick engineering The results are discussed in the f ollowing sections. analysis. General. The maximum probable temperature of the instrument transmitter was estimated as 335'F by a conservative analysis discussed below. Thermal coupling resistances between the major elements of this problem These values were estimated and the resulting values are presented in Table I. show, for example, that when convection occurs inside the casing, the resulti The omission of heat transfer by the gas would be increased by a f actor of 5. convective heat transfer in the NRC analysis would not lead to serious errors

however, because the dominant mode of heat transfer in this area is radiation.

the results are not conservative. The importance of ccupling the compartment The very small resistance wall to the equipnent is evident also in this table. to heat transfer from the compartment gas to the walls should also be noted. The thermal capacitances of the main elements of this problem are presented It is clear from these values that the steel walls of the com-in Table II. partment represent the dominant heatsink. The values of resistance and capacitance given in Table I and II can be combined as resistance-capacitance (RC) time constants that provide a great ~ deal of insight into the transient thermal behavior of this system (see For example, it is obv.ious from the 0.48-h tine constant for the Table III). instrument transmitter that 10 burns in 2200 s (0.61 h) would not ally felt by the instrument. The RC time constant for the " standard" configuration (Fig. 7) corresponds This can be represented as in to the case of an infinite source of energy. Fig. 8 by a charged capacitor, C, suddenly discharging through a resistor y into a second capacitor, C, with the first (source) capacitance taken to be 2 I infinite.' In this case, the potential on the second capacitor, e ' iS 9 V"" 2 by (l) C > = 2 - E, [1-exp (-t/RC )3

  • lim e 2

3 o 6

represents the steady source potential (corresponding to source where E For the case of a finite capacitance providing g temperature) and t is time. the source energy, the potential e2 is given by E r 1 1i (2) + t 2"c exP(- 1-e 27*1 i 1 This response is clearly similar to that represented by Eq. (1), but the time constant is a composite of two simple RC products. Representative values for In the particularly important various time constants are given in Table Ill. case of coupling the compartment gas to the compartment walls, the time con-stant is. drastically reducep (for the same coupling resistance and wall' c itance) b'ecause the driving gas has a much smaller capacitance than that of Therefore, the ultimate wall temperature will be attained much the wall. sooner if heating is caused by a small heat source; the driving temperature starts high and drops rapidly to the equilibrium value as the source is ex-pended. The ultimate wall temperature [T, (=)] for a gas heat source initially at 950*F (the maximum temperature shown in Fig. 2) is obtained by adding the initial wall temperature (160*F) to the value obtained from Eq. (2). T, (= ) =160+9h0 182*F. 9 260 Furthermore, we know from Eq. (2) and the time constant given in Table III that af ter O.04 h the itall temperature [T, (0.04)] will be T, (0.04) 160 + (0.63) (22) - 174*F. i For other times, we resort to evaluation of Eq. (2). -For example, at t - 22'00/10 s - 0.06 h (the assumed period between burns for the NRC analysis the wall temperature at 0.06 h after the first burn [T, (0.06)] is 7

T, (0.06) 160 + 22 [1 - exp-(0.06/0.04)] = 177*F. Ten such burn pulses would then bring, the wall temperature to 335'F. Thus, the upper bound temperature of the instrument transmitter is estimated to be 335'F. The corresponding temperature for t;he casing is 379'F. The procedure overestimates the wall temperature because it does not account for heat loss by mass transport to and from the compartment, except through the small value of maximum gas temperature provided by the CLASIX code. This f act, together with'the long time constant for the instrument transmitter (which prevents overshoot because the casing is thinner than the compartment walls) means the instrument temperature will below the' wall temperature. Code Modeling. Previous sections provided a conservative estimate of the maximum probable equipment temperature and a discussion of transient casing heating under radiative and convective surface heat transfer. The problem is new discussed Figure 9 shows the RC equivalent network to be solved. more realistically. A computational model was implemented by using the MITAS code.6 This model contains 13 nodes and 45 resistances (both linear and nonlinear). Because of time and resource limitations, infiltration by mass transport was only modeled by reducing the energy input per burn pulse. Using 10 combustion mixture each and no temperature mitigation from infiltra-pulses of a 10% H2 tion, the results presented in the up, er portion of Fig.10 were obtained. o The lower porti,on of Fig.10 (note the ordinate scale change) is the re-sult of 10 pulses whose total energy corresponds to that contained in one room f ull of gas hav.ing a temperature-time curve represented by Fig. 2 (that is, a mean. gas temperature of 668'F). The upper set of curves in Fig.10 ovecesti-mates the equipment temperatures (570 and 510*F for the casing and the trans-mitter, respectively) and the lower set probably underestimates these tempera-tures (177 and 172*F, respectively). The lower set of curves in Fig.10 are reproduced on a larger scale in These Fig.11 together with temperatures for the casing and the driving gas. curves illustrate two points mentioned earlier, but here the effects are quan-First, the highly pulsed nature of the driving gas temperature is tified. effectively filtered by the long time constant for the instrument trans'mitter 8

And second, the casing temperature tends to overshoot contained in the casing. its final value.because of.its smaller thickness compared with the compartment wall, but this effect is not transmitted to the instrument. The monotenic increase in average gas temperature exhibited in Fig.11 during the pulsed input time period is an artif act of the omission of mass The correction to'the MITAS transport per se to and from the compartment. model required to improve it in this respect is straightforward, but would have required more time and e'ffort than were available for this exercise. DISCUSSION OF LOS ALAMOS ANALYSIS Our review was brief and was primarily an attempt to assess the assump-We did not check the parameter value de-tions and approach used by the NRC. The major conclusion of tails, which should be done for a thorough review. the study is that the maximam probable temperature of the equipment.is less If further work than the characteristic qualification temperature of 340*F. is undertaken, we would recommend completion of the MITAS model, review of the CLASIX input to this problem, and a parametric sensitivity analysis. Although there are several points on which we may disagree with the NRC analysis method, their cumulative effects appear to be unimportant to the answer obtained for the given input conditions. The only note of caution lies in Fig.10, from which it is clear that mass transport (infiltration) is important to survival of the equipment. A deficiency in the NRC analysis is the lack of an evaluation of the We therefore recommend sensitivity of the results to the assumptions made. ~ that assumed parameters be varied over their possible range of values to determine the probable range of variation in the calculated results; thus, If the resulting determining the importance or sensitivity of the assumption. range of calculated temperatures are unacceptable, the identification of important assumptions would have indicated which assumptions require concen-trated critical review. ,Important assumptions that might be varied to determine their importance on the calculated results include the following. l The amount of steel heatsink. 1. The direction and ' location of the flame; for example, the flame could start 2. at the instrument and proceed to the opposite side of the compartment. f 9

3. The convective heat transfer between the compartment environment and the casing because the gas circulation may be turbulent, especially.if the flame starts at 'the casing. 4. The heat transfer between the casin'g and the internals including natural circulat' ion and possible leakage. 5. The pressure of steam because the steam would result in condensation heat transfer to the casing and internals, which would provide an initially rapid heating to the saturation temperature followed by heating from con-vection and radiation.. 6. The flame speed during Phase I. 7. The effect of gas dynamics in the compartment on the survivability of the equipment. 4 o 9 4 e t e

S REFERENCES K. I. Parczewski, " Determination of Temperatures Reached by Equipment During Hydrogen Burn in McGuire Plant," Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1. memorandum (to Victor Benaroya), March 3,1981. "IEEE Standard for Qualifying Class 1E Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating Stations," The Institute of Electrical and Electronics 2. 323-1974 (1974). Engineers, Inc., publication IEEE Std G. M. Fuls, " Containment Pressure Response to Hydrogen Combustion," Proceedings of Workshop on the Impact of Hydrogen on Water Reactor 3. 26-28, 1981. Albuquerque, New Mexico, January B. Rosen, V. H. Dayan, and R. L. Profitt, " Hydrogen Leak and Fire Detection," National Aeronautics and Space Administration report NASA 4. SP-5092 (1970). E. R. G. Eckert and Robert M. Drake, Jr., Heat and Mass Transfer 5 (McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1959). Gary E. Holmstead, Compiler, " Martin Marietta Interactive Thermal A System-Version 2.0 (MITAS-II) User's Manual," Martin Marietta Corp 6. technical manual M-76-2 (May 1976). ( l e k e 11

'////////////////])/ f f lNITI AL P O SITION f OF HYDROGEN / { 3,- AIR G AP / / FL AIAE IN ST RUME NT Mj ( / d~ l g' T R A N S TAIT T E R g 4, / /l/ ^ f / a,

)

l / ~ / f f [h" STEEL LINER

  • ~

/ (secondary / /s k C ASING heat sink) ~i~ I ////////////////fl / - 2E'- = y Fig. 1. Geometry of the instrument heatup problem (from Ref. 1.). 4 --~-_ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ z

\\ i l r;.*D-ICED Crd'T AF.;rINT TI.$pIUTU;.E CLAsIX OuAyd i i J E - 21 cog; _ i I u.m a ....._j y,~- <. r:..-. t..s,. ..i e... 3 s r.,, r m.- ~l . m. .m u ~. ~ riv,. _i .- r . t. r 3 o a 3..,, .a

r.. _a n... c..

1. .......1 ._,r. iii.4... .. c. 4 J .;jn..,M..,.. 3 i. ...m.. n.: ,..ci...... 3 i. rr.............,..., m,,. n -t i i, e ............. 3 i....

r..

r a v.. .-/ 1 ..o... m 7-, ,.i.. b.. C-u. 1: <.7 _. ua. ,..m. . 4..... r 3 o, m ii.y .i i...., ..,....,.m,, _ rgo p i

i..

7 3.c o, g t 3 i i .c .,,m ,m r 3 ..... t.. o. m g ,,.ri g,.i., r .m. s. i. .....,i..........

3. 7 y

i .g .g i g ..............i. .g. .s,... ...,j ....Z 7, a ................7 .......e ......a .............a . y=,.................,........77........a ,.........s..._3 i .g 7 ....o.s p". e... ~r1. ~.m.. .....,,.........e...,..a.... .T ........"'T~.4 .....~i y i.i 3 e_. . c-..... #............. ---)-. .... ~4 ^ ....a

._..., ]." ~. 7...............

4 s.. .....i........ .g "......... A. i,..,...... e..o..... ...7.. m ~~.........C a a. n, .e - M.. d. m h'.7 c. ."T". g. -~~~... m.. a.,,.."", iT.[ ] 4......s-i. ._s .a ~T, ") 1 a 1 l Cut e d I.7 ~~ I TicJ -"1" t W 4 ca.J .y _ i,ish J te Y 3 *C e EC."Js"5 3 Temperature-time curve produced by Du ) Fig. 2. 13

4 VENT VOLUME l I i 3 UPPE R COMP ARTME NT ^# l l 2 ICE CO'. DENSE R p 1 t ' e LO'.'.'E R COMP ARTMENT h 6 5 7 FRE55UR:2EE DEAD ST E AM V O:.U'.* E ENDED GENERATOR VOLUME VOLUME l I C 'Ri 1 hsic CL ASIX Model Block diagram for the CLA51X code (from Ref. 2). Fig. 3. 14

VijliU Vl.9I '., 41T7 14 '; 7T R Ul =T " T T it Yv v.. f 1g, J. l- ~J ii c r '..,T..~~i. ".j.l N "~~ "i. i l' I...,t, W ". 1 .l l> J .. l... .:. ;.;. r.j.j n'] t, j p u si .i . i.,. i.r t,t i 1 .i l .I i l

e. L

.l .l.' t.. l..; }. } n .u u f. ...I. I i lI 1 l1 e,, . er s ..i t.. ..i.. j.i.,1 :1 i 1 ,i r i i I ii I. '.l : i gy

1.:!.*.

i.l.1 1 T*' ' ' ' l i l.'. .i i i .i i i ' i;:i lilj

L.1 1-I 1

t..[. l Il .Ii -I .j l ii i. o I,...;, 1 ..,. I. ..I .p. c. . l. N M..., ;..i.;l.~ ..ad 4.}..). .l ...[. .i o .i. ..a J.I .l l. ....L./.. e l; l. i . i. i. a. J j... . t.j.. ...+. it lIl .X d+.g. ! ', ;_ Hj.. . a'It I:t j 'tl. I,__ -te i. .t 1 ,i,I _ _ _I ...__.l.. I i .+ v ...i.. e ,i.... r ....il..<l . jt i. . i.

'f 's.".1 !

..1: (.:;j(._.. .u l.[,$. g g Q ).j k i {. ,i.h . -li $j: g. l e I. . J. ~. l s ..g s... e I* ..l [ .i ; .r 4 8 ~. L. F. 4.L I ...LJ. 4 4.a.a 4. .e s i.e. .:J.A.

.l.1.i.]

. '.f I. y_ o .. u. f..a1h.h. 1-p --{. y, -l -in_ - g[ 1 , -j, h gl.{ .l. I P.4.... 2. I..l- !.'. .5 g 3 e {.j., j .i s.. .. i i. .J.i.J.. ;. ..l

i I

.I' 9.i. ,.s. q. ' 4.j g. .. g..../.j..{ p. .. s... a + n.: l, g.

g. _33

_ g,. 3 "l. n_+ .. 9. y L. .I .l. .l. N.d..t 1 .l J. .a. .a w . u. 4 e.l l ;.. 1 q.,..y. g_... ..L T g .,.i.,,..s. 5 .i l... . l l.. ;

l. - l.l.

_..l l 1. l. , I.: i.. l l. .ll .l.l ..I 1 si i s J. e to:..i..,... r 1 m i. . i I. i. I.+. l',

i. ;

i. ..Ilt - tl 4.s 3 ., r .. ;1 i+.- -% M :- + l1 l+i it e J .t 4. 1 h' I t. p[' ' - it [ [h'ihg. 1 I.' f .,..J. M ' 7 'I l. f a.i. ..,.. i. gs _.s{., 'd. ..:,a .i 'h:rd8'lcii.

  • I..D. 'f U.f.' j_

.T T c ~ 7!

  • I ;P'

'*i! ! ! I l' l-lL l __h l 1 'l 8 i. 1J 1 .1 -1 ' -i r ' 7 _} ' i.'I ' ll8 F w '..' I l -I ji1' 4 l 1

.I.,.I ;i

.8 '.. i i .i0 i:il i, .f i l _L. i ....soe .i ..t 2_1 i 1 ...a. . : 2 I l y ]. l l l..i i ... T i .1 {c .j.. li ~ l I .i,,x, le ai 1 ;. lt i r; n .j.:. c i o 8. l.I 1 $k - p,.i.,, i_

.i 1 a., --1..

.A.. e-t-u._ _ _J. . w I.i ,J a 4, bW. 8 i 'k. ~ 4. r I. II x n i .l ,, i.u'. p l i i. l ~ ] l-,] [ '. .l g [, gy {.lg.'" 3 n.s-

n. -.

y. et

i.]

t . 'l l l ~ l l 2 . l. 'l' ,lI l l '. l~.} }i "I" l Ih f Ti :t, '"i.. l y, i j.: l .d i I ill i;I!! l.!!! llIll I '. l 1, ',l 1 .I l l ,a go, go O D '" 8*** in. me e no. 3 u, 3 n,. b TN t., 'fi c. t u, Fig. 4 Compartment wall (heatsink) temocrature-time curve obtained in the N'lC analysis (Ref.1).

4_'"".".* 3 _.l...I._,_ -{.. _ .g _. f. ~, ..~,~~]__.,;.... g .y _. ~.. .s

s...,

/ _- 9. y,, _. _7, _ _ _ . _..~..,. .g. - _.. o_ .~~ l' -.. - %' * ~

  • * * ' '....,._..~.~..~.1.,-..

- t $"."..g..-.'- j T.......... _.__ '"~~~

i. _

3-m..._. 4 o 7y. _- u.. ., 3. _q m. q_ +.. - - ;,..-_.l___._,. .l._ fb.-_ - j _ -....- ._ ~___ -q 3. .s, .__7._."".3",._ _-.4

q _..t.__.

._..1 a g ._.g,.. _ *. - -f- _O. j ~ g_ . -3 .{ .i.. i - _3_... w,..... ..i. g J _ -...b -S /*- ~ s ..). 3. _,, -.1 i 3 .r 3 .3.-. h_., %. s. -4 ....i ~ _ _...

3.,

-,.,_._.____s, _.7_. ..c,.3 _, __ - a,. _ m.._.4 ..,h. _.__. r - d.. z ,. ' _ _. _ _.4 .-,_-7,.____,.

{,, _..,

e _y ._-f, ,. d._ _ -. e- ..g_..- y g ..i. 1 t.... - 4. , m _. . _.:.), P g-y __:.c. '.___'{.-. .._i _... _.b_a. 3,._. = 6; ' ___ _.4_ _ G.. _ _ _ q __, e _p g-. __._,,3 .__3_...,- _._./.-.s.._.. y, to -y- .y._-r, _...+, -..__.m..__. _.1s;

.____. _ q

. m. c,. _____ 3- - ]t_ .__q.___...__ q.. __ _ x. 7 -,,-.3._,__.-,_.____._,w -.. ~~W-l,..[ u '(* 3 ~"-4 ., a,.., _.. s_ .l.,.., ~ p __ q - _.. A l...._ .j..._ _..._ N_ 7 m...~........,. u... - ., _.r ._.__.3 _.. _. _ _ _ -- +

3....

i.. .-4 :. _- ..._e. _7- .r _s v s___-_.. __.L.._ .r. 4_ ... y _ _3__..

  • * " " * ~

-H' '~~ ~ " """__~_ h-" "."5 _. 'l *** - __.~,.--c i

    • - 7
. _._,._.A

,..c.---r- - -i-i T"~" .,,w ~ '..:.. _- 4 Y. --i - -... ~ """_-"#'.'".".%""-'.",_73._*._".,.!. s i '*. .._.J. .t 4._-- _.. - + - - ,-i+ _--i.s_1 4 e y..3, _.,., _.., _. _. _.. - Tg

9. _a+..

._.. _...x _. .J. d -+' s r -.. v _q._. _ J. a

g. _

.._.j..,._..,...,._ _ _ A:., J. [_.{. '2 ___,,~"l., -.a_ .f .p.. .. F. 3- . _ - ---%--"-"_"1 y ,i., M g,. - q. J.R.h-- .9.. ? _ s, E..L,M._- .g.3 7yp 4... _ 3 J.... _. .8 .b '** M -- . 7..[. M{-. g ).J ' '.' i.

  • I'

'..*'L ..LL. .g

,., s,. s _ _

J. A .f.42,.* _..,.$.g: s. n.L,_,$3-. .)..'. :_u_ -.s ..'. m.. L . "L. L_- .. J' ..:.e. .. ) y 3,. _ _ g.., r,,..... _.' ~_ .' 3 4 . J.4 .L. .... f ...( _J ..g.., L. e .{L .3 J.'. !. ...,..l .'4 4 .c _ _p_ p., .v,,,.,., _s _. .? .*r%.,,. ._r,. ...m_-- i rA. I .3.j -. s.a- ... _. n.._ -.. .H.. -,. v .:, i. vr ?.s._ Tvrr n..._ ___ e .3 i.-.. n_. in.... iir i.. i,ri++,rk 6 .. mi m.-. h im..r .. 3 +, .. 4_,.. 4 3 _ s -

4. j_,, - +.

.t., _ _ _as. .x O _, v. u,. -...r a i A e=- ") J M l'ip J ) ND1 j 7 e

TABLE I THERMAL RESISTAtiCES Resistance, UT h/ETs Path Compartment gas-to-walls 3.0 x 10~' Convection 2.4 x 10 ' Raciation -4 1.4 x 10 Contined Compartment gas-to-casing 0.47 Convection 0.23 Radiation 0.16 Contined Casing-to-instrument transmitter 10.3 ~ Concsttion 2.0 Convection and Condsction 0.64 Ra:iation 0.45 Contined (Rac.

  • Cor.d. + Conv.)

0.92 Back wall shunt across casing to-instrudent gap 1 6 e e i 17 _x

g. _7 7 T, _'~ - Q.. '.' 7-i 5 2T 8 _z g7 ,L.- J_ .._ q. f ) J. J 8 ) .I I i t i \\ \\ l y 1 ,,I II .) j i I l l, _ ' l i ( I l -- f~ -- i f i i ,i iii - - l ) l l) 1 ) 1-v 3r.e I i 1 i ( ) T J.; i i 4 il i (

l l

It ( l' I ,i) i ' I, I p 7 p I I ll_.j, i I I l-'l l l,' j Illill V llill1 I i i bl i '} ~l~ } L lllill J. o 7 llilil ll f l i, illil,l_zocc r Fli ll T f [ } l j. _l l,i. lli Jll 1. 'l .. { , 1.a 6 l I l l l - _.i si.l..u_. ,,),... _i I l i , i l'T. 11 li ? ~. j j l, Iill -lI' Il.. 1 ..I-. I,i__ __ Tl I t _i I I i I 1 l ' hi si 1 !If l l l l l l l 3-L J_. I .1 .il i l i li! I i ! l ss1 r _i i if f _.I 'l8'...._I .,.l 1 i I l ii l I l l i" l .d .t i.l.'l T _' t 'IIl$Iil l ( ) ),, J'..' --I ll ,1 I I I~l- ).. ' r)[J l Ii' jjl l. I /. 'i I I!l II Tl l~ I ,l I'L.l I f '4'.j 'lI!I ,, le 1 l T t' l \\- ,1l I{l ll l Jl laI' I s~l. ,,6,.T' lT1 l ,llTi ]l, . (I _.' l! i .l i y 01

tn el l

l ll-l-lI l 11 E - f I j. _i i ~l , i t i l l_L. l D i JJ J.1. l I_ ii< '11 i i lit;) 11; t I, IT l .l , 31, ex a zn e es sn e ee w3 13'T t R.75;4 i e F Ps 1 341

  • pag t M* CJ.M 3 i f ar. I tx., m tw K1 t.1 s e to Temperature-time curve produced by Offshore Power Systems using the CLASIX code, f~or the Sequoyah

' Fig. 6. Plant (from Ref. 2). ' O e l I l i i@

I TABLE 11 THERMAL CAPACITANCE 5 Capacitance, STU/ F Element 260 r Ccmpartment 9103 Gas 3.0 Walls 1.0 Casing Instru.cnt TAELE Ill TIME C0:.5T At.75 Time Cte st a".0, h Process 1.2 Infinite source gas (rad. and cond.) to compartment walls 0.0' Finite gas source to compartnent walls (raa. and cond.) 0.46 Infinite source gas to casing (rad. and cond.) ~ Infinite casing to instrument 0.65 Radiation ano conduction only 0.4:- P.adiation, conduction, and convection 19

.i i a l i R E / ~ Og m 1 C i 4 %.~ ~~ 4 Fig. 7. Standard RC network element, corresponding to infinite sotirce capacitance. i t i i J 1 i e. e R / l., [ 4 C-C) i L ] Fig. 8. Two-capacitance coupled RC network element. i e 6 4 20 . 3

.R q / /. %v E, 22 c, g& c, Fig. 9. The equivalent RC network for the problem. e e S e 4 e 9 . 21

- i _ :. .r 9M!,= a UnMarn. w orn. u.a:_ I O i ~-~ l a i i

fNptig Ej)_ 50 0 1 Ak m Y.sts l

l l wncA u Y Tmq cAs E o c.5 S.C..L sX..E. _EI415.5 i LII T ..= 0. 8 l N IC A TEI M S. l'1 @ SQ i ....._i j l i l

4....'

} . __h .i I. 1 l ....-5 W = i i Szo g _..__i..... i ? .Qc q t 6 b ..._... :_....l.. { O p t ......./ b .h. HEAT /AsFJ~ 57.21, x O' 5'7U u 3w N No trJFIL72A~/QJ E f (CDM FLt**c Hz Ccm */J5 nwJ) i 74o 'u >c. g g- _.. / .'.....I. HEAT trJPUT l.h>S Y1 5 5 PJ An ASA 7Y G % TTMf' = MS 'Y I 19.) - gp.b ! j d \\% VL @@gsct = i D O, 2 I O.Y. i .4l o,5 ID

l. 7-i l

.".....Tl/4 6 (h)l } l i i .j.....{ 7.. l ...3.... l l ,1 I ,a j, I .). l Fi g. 10. Temperature-time curves obtained in Los Alamos. Upper set: total conbastion Lower set: total energy energy input, no infiltration loss, ten pulses.en_ tem 3erature in Fig. 4, ten puls m

McGuraE 3renad 'rHFt Mpt McoQ Hv'ORoqEA/ B07.11 A F1 A LpI.5 ~ E d a q Y t u.ca sE I.66xio btu j AptASAT1c. GA5 71anP = Gl.s 'F- - i.. W C A lt.Y THCh;" G A$ G c 0. 5 ' * ., g% Ek/ CL csOCE E M tsid e n' a 0,8 ^ \\ l } ALL nATER.ress m:Lo 611El. l .j ~ ~ " --j 260 l l ....m L eta EM D : T*Et 4PE L'4TURE S i W ~@ ~ ~ .MA/M CotoPitETxENT 'd A5 i . _. l O @vLIC PLATE' l \\ -Q M& \\uAU. l . 3.. p A s a, T R/u]S M oTTE R. t l iE I x l uo <f.o P li ~ ( ... L )a.lne I '~ ~ ' i r 1 -- ' r LCO s% ID..,.'9 -4 e s s s l e i e 4 l 8 ,...?

  • & & # A a

i a 4 ( a 8

  • g

',.,go - { t; l. o,! o,7. o.5/ o.6, 6.S /. o I . _. f _.}. 1.. 1 .1 .t. t-t..L... ! T/t4E (1 ), l i e i i fig. 11. Expanded scale for lower curves of Fig.10 with gas and casing temperatures added. 23 _}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20054D411&oldid=4498226"