ML20065H767
| ML20065H767 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200003 |
| Issue date: | 03/21/1994 |
| From: | Liparulo N WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | Borchardt R NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19304B972 | List: |
| References | |
| AW-94-604, NUDOCS 9404150145 | |
| Download: ML20065H767 (76) | |
Text
,, .- . , . . . -
-n_* , , .,
7 ,
3 p -
(A ~
LWestinghouse Energy Systems Ba 355 . . 1 Pittst'ur,Vi ??Maylvania 15230 0355 !
p; , Electric Corporation AW-94-604 March 21,1994 - ;
Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- .] Washington, D.C. 20555 ATTENTION
- MR. R. W. BORCHARDT APPLICATION FOR WITHHOLDING PROPRIETARY INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE .,
SUBJECT:
PRESENTATION MATERIALS FROM THE MARCH 17,1994 MEETING ON AP600 PASSIVE CONTAINMENT COOLING SYSTEM DESIGN BASIS ANATHSES . ,
Dear Mr. Borchardt:
The application for withholding is submitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse")
pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(1) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations. It contains commercial strategic information proprietary to Westinghouse and customarily held in' confidence.
The proprietary material for which withholding is being requested is identified in the proprietary version of the subject report. In conformance with 10CFR Section 2.790, Affidavit AW-94-604' , -
accompanies this application for withholding setting forth the basis on which the identified proprietary information may be withheld from public disclosure.
n Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the subject information which is proprietary to Westinghouse be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10CFR Section 2.79Q of the Commission's regulations. ,
Correspondence with respect to this application for withholding or the accompanying affidavit' rhould : ,
. reference AW-94-604 and should be addressed to the undersigned.- .
3 Very truly yours, g
UDbk.)- .-&
N. J. Liparulo, Man' ger 1 j 4"
Nuclear Safety And Regulatory Activities .;
/nja ec: Kevin Bohrr NRC 12H5 l t
our 9404150145 940321 ~
+
{ )
AW-94-GJ4 p
AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
ss COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY:
Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Brian A. McIntyre, who, being by me duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is authorized to execute this Affidavit on behalf of Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse") and that the averments of fact set forth in this Affidavit are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief:
L A# /
Brian A. McIntyre, Manager Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Sworn to and subscribed before me this MI day of
- 1994 v
fM]
Notary Public towM seat j RoeAMartePapa NotaryPutic ,
MonrmvAo Boro,/Je /Eny County My Commdan Expre;s Nov.4.1996 1 l
Momter, Pontnytvain Assoustaan of Nounuu ,
ISR9A
~
k AW-94-604 ,
4 (1) I am Manager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing, in the Advanced Technology Business Area, of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation and as such, I have been specifically delegated the function of reviewing the proprietary information sought to be withheld from public disclosure in connection with nuclear power plant licensing and rulemaking proceedings, and am authorized to apply for its withholding on behalf of the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit.
(2) I am making this Affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations and in conjunction with the Westinghouse application for l withholding accompanying this Affidasit.
(3) I have personal knowledge of the criteria and procedures utilized by the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit in designating information as a trade secret, privileged or as confidential commercial or financial information.
(4) Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(4) of Section 2.790 of the Commission't regulations, the following is furnished for consideration by the Commission in determining whether the information sought to be withheld from public disclosure should be withheld.
(i) The information sought to be withheld from public disclosure is owned and has been held in confidence by Westinghouse.
(ii) The information is of a type customarily held in confidence by Westinghouse and not customarily disclosed to the public. Westinghouse has a rational basis for determining '
the types of information customarily held in confidence by it and, in that connection, utilizes a system to determine when and whether to hold certain types of information in confidence. The application of that system and the substance of that system i
constitutes Westinghouse policy and provides the rational basis required.
l Under that system, information is held in confidence if it falls in one or more of h several types, the release of which might result in the loss of an existing or potential competitive advantage, as follows:
us9A
- j. r-
AW-94-604 (a) The information reveals the distinguishing aspects of a process (or component,.
structure, tool, method, etc.) where prevention of its use by any of Westinghouse's competitors without license from Westinghouse constitutes a .
competitive economic advantage over other companies.
(b) It consists of supporting data, including test data, relative to a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.), the application of which data secures a competitive economic advantage, e.g., by optimization or improved marketability.
t (c) Its use by a competitor would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing a siinitar product.
(d) It reveals cost or price information, production capacities, budget levels, or commercial strategies of Westinghouse, its customers or supplicts.
(c) - 11 reveals aspects of past, present, or future Westinghouse or customer funded development plans and programs of potential commercial value to Westinghouse.
(f) It contains patentable ideas, for which patent protection may be desirable.
There are sound policy reasons behind the Westinghouse system which include the following:
(a) The use of such information by Westinghouse gives Westieghouse a competitive advantage over its competitors. It is, therefore, wn:hheld from disclosure to protect the Westinghouse competitive position.
(b) It is information which is marketable in many ways. The extent to which such .
information is available to competitors diminishes the Westinghouse ability to sell products and services involving the use of the information. ,
15*9A
AW-94-604 (c) Use by our competitor would put Westinghouse at a competitive disadvantage -
by reducing his expenditure of resources at our expense.
(d) Each component of proprietary information pertinent to a particular competitive advantage is potentially as valuable as the total competitive l
advantage. If competitors acquire components of proprietary infonnation, any one compment may be the key to the "ntire punic, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage.
(c) Um stricted disclosure would jeopardize the position of prominence of -
Westinghouse in the world market, and therchy give a market advantage to the competition of those countries.
l 1
(f) The Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upm the success in obtaining and maintaining a :
1 competitive advantage.
l (iii) The information is being transmitted to the Commission in confidence and, under the provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790, it is to be received in confidence by the Commission.
(iv) The information sought to be protected is not available in public sources or available i 1
information has not been previously employed in the same original manner or method I to the best of our knowledge and belief. l i
(v) Enclosed is letter NTD-NRC-94 4083, March 21,1994, being transmitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (E letter and Application for Withholding proprietary Information from Public Disclosure, N. J. Liparuto (B, to q Mr. R. W. Borchanit, Office of NRR. The proprietary information as submitted for .
m by Westinghouse Electric Corporation is in response to questions concerning the _'
AP600 plant and the associated design certification application and is expected to be' applicable in other licensee submittals in respo..a to certain NRC requirements for I
justification of licensing advanced nuclear power plant designs.
.1 mn
( +
AW.94-604 This information is part of that which will enable Westinghouse to:
(a) Demonstrate the design and safety of the AP600 Passive Safety Systems.
(b) Establish applicable verification testing methods.
(c) Design Advanced Nuclear Power Plants that meet NRC requirements.
(d) Establish technical and licensing approaches for the AP600 that will ultimately result in a certified design.
(c) Assist customers in obtaining NRC approval for future plants.
Further this information has substantial commercial value as follows:
(a) Westinghouse plans to sell the use of similar information to its customers for .
purposes of meeting NRC requirements for advanced plant licenses.
(b) Westinghouse can sell support and defense of the technology to its customers in the licensing process.
Public disclosure of this proprietary information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Westinghouse because it would enhance the ability of competitors to provide similar advanced nuclear power designs and licensing defense i services for commercial power reactors without commensurate expenses. Also, public disclosure of the information would enable others to use the information to meet NRC -
requirements for licensing documentation without purchasing the right to use the information. .
1 I
l The development of the tecnnology described in part by the information is the result of l applying the results of many years of experience in an intensive Westinghouse effort ani the expenditure of a considerable sum of money.
15HA i
9 AW-94-604 in order for competitors of Westinghouse to duplicate this information, similar technical programs would have to be performed and a significant manpower effort, having the requisite talent and experience, would have to be expended for developing analytical methods and receiving NRC approval for those methods.
Further the deponent sayeth not.
9 e
f i
l u
'1
'1 .
'I 1569A
Attachment 2 to Westinghouse Letter NTD NRC-94.4083 .j J
Special NRC/ Westinghouse Meeting.
NRC' Draft Safety Evaluation Report !
m Information Needs- "
For Design Basis. Analysis I
March 17,1994 i
4 I
- e e, . ..
4
'l Agenda Proposed Goals of DSER Info Exchange DSER Information Exchange Schedule Draft AP600 Design Basis Analysis Codes & Methods AP600 WGOTHIC Model Sensitivities PCCS Large Scale Test WGOTHIC Sensitivities j Content of June 30,1994 Westinghouse Letter Report to NRC .
Agreement on schedule for DBA DSER-information 1
2 l
.i la j
u
-l l
l
Proposed Goals of DSER info Exchange- i Show SSAR Rev. O containment response is conservative
- LOCA M&E ;
- SLB M&E (PCCS has little impact <600 seconds)
- Containment response B.C.'s and I.C.'s l
- Heat & Mass transfer correlations are conservative
- Show effect of overmixing non-condensibles Show sensitivities in containment response models to support NRC decision making
- Identify which issues are less important effects for DBA .
- Show no " cliffs" in models
- Show WGOTHIC behaves as expected and reasonably Provide other information that supports NRC DSER needs
- Discuss NRC schedule to identify those needs Show that subsequent model changes do not adversely impact conclusion that SSAR Rev. O containment DBA is conservative
- Improvements lead to increased understanding of PCCS performance under postulated conditions L
Proposed NRC / Westinghouse information Exchange Schedule to Support NRC Safety Evaluation Report Needs.
NRC issues RAl's Through April 1995 ',
if If 'I 'f if 't if if 1! 1! if
e NRC Compteto
. -NRC e - - - Assues
- - - - - RAl's e DSER on NRC issues DSER '
to Sg,DSER l Containment on Containment l NRC issues FSER l NRC If if 9 U if Actons Aug 30 Dec 30 ?
1994 _ L1995 Westinghouse Mar 17 Jun 30 Sep 9 Jan 31 Feb 28 May 30 Actions a h a n L n NRC/ WMeeting: Document NRC / W Meeting: NRC / W Meeting: Issue WGOTHIC Summary of SSAR Rev. O Status of LST Blind Test WCAP Rev.1 SSAR Rev. 0 Conservatisms Phase 2 Stago 3
- Sases amiModel and Sensitivities WGOTHIC Calc (if Required) Bitnd Test Retx>ri Sensitivities and + (Mid-Stage 2)
Conservatisms Document Net RAl's Needed by .
+ Margin Relative Feb 28 to be Asi::T 3t on to Current Model included in DSER information + WGOTHIC Schedule Address issues
^ **
trom 2/23-24 Meetings
- a a a n a a n -n n a
v:
Planned-Information Exchange Process Westinghouse to address NRC DSER needs: :
Meet with~ NRC to address concerns raised on l Feb 23-24 1
- March'17 - SSAR conservatisms and sensitivities
- TBD - Phenomena questions -
Provide letter report by June 30 to document .
presentations of March 17 and "TBD" Westinghouse to provide updated information as soon as it is available:- .
Phenomenological reports as they.are completed ~
- April 4 through December 31,1994 Meet with NRC in September 1994 to discuss Status of LST Phase 2 WGOTHIC calculations (Mid Stage 2)
Meet with NRC about January 1995.to discuss :
Blind Test results (Stage 3) -- optional --
RAI responses within 90 days of receipt WGOTHIC WCAP Rev.1 - May 1995 WGOTHIC Blind Test Report - May 1995
c.
AP600 Design Basis Analysis Codes, Methods, & Conservatisms General Model Description Short Term M&E Releases Subcompartment Pressurization '
Long Term LOCA M&E Releases Steamline Break M&E Releases Containment Pressure & Temperature Response Calculation LOCA Steamline Break 4
1 1
l l
A?600
@1 !
l e
PASSIVE CO\~~A \MEl\T ; ;. . . , 7, ,
COO _ ,\G SYSTEV -- 1
- 9. .;. c. s - l
.., ...e
{
y ,.,p \ 's p :: . . , . v :..a ..
/ 3 7 \,(~
///, . ' '-
/'
, l ^ {w / ;A' l ggb.M'N -N
,// : .:es .-
/
/,/ . =s (
< ~
~N)' , , a.. ..*t w / %' '#
r .g.. t n r .. >
\s i u
%~
... e 2.s . i 5
8'.** ft.IJf-7 m
x ,
-p a =xa, re n -ev lt
_ ; N -N - f 'l
l e a :ma h. ..r e7 g"'ly n". g ,
'_ L hm -r;
. n,.,.... / G ; c:ase r E . F e *'"'" '
l!
g rg i[
' .L . .. .>.n2.L"L". *?% . %a* .. l 1 .
. . . 4 -
l :. w ,,, , .A<
{ l ,' '
l u.
i
=MP &
,u,.,....,,,.-
.. m.,,,. !':
q
,, (*4 'f CMlasLA j /*** **-
, ,3m ,
j i
.l /
, .j as s;mc. .au , l
, j '
r i * /
I Ni+
li Il t:1Y .N : bb .,,
. P'h
.......2.._ , ,
- g l '.
- u. ., . ~ ,,,., l _ _
'- , == L__ '
-/
T-
'! '.t:r, '
b , m.,' L \" . . i. . / ..
, [
1
\ ; / h 4 -- q
- . .. L p ,
,~
g
, 3
,w . .. .. . . s. f rl j,
.. 3 m i\ .
i
~., ;
1
,.,6 7 i
\""'/
l _ !
14 i i : R.?.. :
lq a. ..s g
j
/pa}
12
_/ \ ti
.- g A - t 8
i - i f.
y l MS,S - i ii y
==c s ;
. A/ -
j g. 'I.
~ju g
%y nn:
- ne.
- # 4)
V
~N " vs. W l ' Ql.
- +
Arsuw -.
f.
2.u *05t f tu ., 1 1 ,
r i U: ,
l
, se e t i '
n ' ' 4._ ,
', n u ...
r , . . ,
j
1 L (0,C).
l I
h i
i
{ l I
I FIGURE 1 WGOTHIC REPRESENTATION OF CONTAINMENT SHELL (SSAR Model Half Symmetry)
WGOTHIC CORRELATIONS USED IN WCAP-13246, REV. 0 1.0 Convective Heat Transfer 1.1 External McAdams turbulent free convection :
Nu x ,f,,= 0 .13 ( Gr,Pr ) 'I and Colburn turbulent forced convection:
Nud, torc =
0.023Re$l*Pr/
1 1.2 Internal McAdams turbulent free convection :
Nux , g,, = 0 .13 ( Gr,Pr) 'I and Colburn turbulent. forced convection:
Nud, forc =
0 023Re$I*Pr1 /
4 WGOTHIC CORRELATIONS USED IN WCAP-13246, REV. 0 (cont.)
1.3 User had to choose between free and forced convection 2.0 Mass Transfer - Using heat and mass transfer analogy The analogy based on McAdams turbulent free convection is:
Sh = 0.13 (GrxSc) /3 and analogy based on Colburn turbulent forced convection is :
Sh = 0 . 02 3 Rej/SSc/3 l
3.0 Liquid Film Heat Transfer The Chun and Seban correlation for wavy laminar films:
Nu = 0. 822Re .22
' T2/3 h v 2 p Nu - and Re = 4 k(gsin0 ; p
WGOTHIC CORRELATIONS USED.IN WCAP-13246, REV. 0 (cont.)
.4.0' Liquid Film Enthalpy Transport - This model was not in Rev.0 of WCAP--
13246. In the LST WGOTHIC model (in Rev. O of WCAP-13246) the subcooling.
of the applied liquid film was simulated. -i
~
5.0 Entrance Effect - This model was not included in Rev. O of WCAP
>,n
.t lSEli;j
- 11. SELECT MODELS Fw W Ge- Nwm A i h' 1.0 Convective Heat Transfer 1.1 EXTERNAL 1.2 INTERNAL The McAdams"3 turbulent free convection heat The McAdams turbulent free convection heat transfer correlation: transfer correlation:
(I) Nu,,,, = 0. I 3(Gr,Pr)" D)
Nu,,,, = 0.13(Gr Pr)*
and the Colburntri turbulent forced convection heat and the smooth flat plate"3 turbulent forced transfer correlation: convection heat transfer correlation:
(1) Nu,, = 0.02%Re,*Pr * (4i Nug, = 0.023Re?Pr
- are used for the external convective heat transfer to are used for the internal convective heat transfer to or from the surfaces. or from the surfaces.
1.3 COMBINED FREE AND FORCED The correlations for combined free and forced convection heat transfer from Churchill"3 are, for turbulent opposed free and forced convection:
Nu = (Nuj,,+Nu ' ,)* (SI and for assisting free and forced convection, h,is the larger of the following three expressions:
l abs (Nu),,-N[,)* ; 0.75Nu,, ; 0.75Num (6f The lower limit in the latter equation, which prevents the value of Nu, from going to zero when Nu,,,, and Nu,m l
are equal, comes from Eckert and Diaguila"3
( ' Models which differ from those used for the SSAR analyses.
3!s6/94 ACHS Page 26 l
II. SELECT MODELS (continued) R w\c cxe s <, 3 % o Q. ; .\ _
2.0 Mass Transfer The mass transfer correlation is derived from the heat transfer correlallon using the heat and mass transfer analogy:
Sh = Nu '_sc
_ _ " (7)
?>
The resulting mass transfer coefficient, h , from the Sherwood number definition:
~
Sh = (K)
D, is multiplied by a correction factor,0", to account for the effect of mass transfer. (The mass transfer correction is discussed in Part 2).
3.0 Liquid Fdm Heat hansfer The Chun and Seban" correlation for wavy laminar films was selected for use in the WGOTHIC code. The _
dimensionless correlation for the film Nusselt number is:
Nu = 0.822 Re - 22 W) where f hl)
'3 (10)
Nu = b and Re = $-
A gsiri(0), p 3t1694 ACHS Page 27
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . - - _ = _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ - . _ _ _ _ _ - . - - _ - _
e IL SELECT MODELS (continued) \ ce Qq g> . s x, a m . (f. , ( . .
l l
4.0 Liquid Film Enthalpy Transport t
The liquid film enthalpy transport model solves the transient energy equation at a point at the center of the liquid film for each clime:
BT hT' , ,a'T yg(
pc
'X,,E, 32^
where x is normal to the surface and z is parallel to the surface. The energy equation is coupled to the wall and the liquid film surface by the equations:
BT BT
- "a?_.,"'""BTa?_.., "'
- ~ a " "' * " ' **'
5.0 Entrance Effect The average value of h(x) between x, and x3 is:
h.,,g ~
g' d(x,' x,*) (13) h_ L 3(x,-x,)
The multipliers F, are the coefficients recommended by Boelter, Young and Iverson I'3 to account for the entrance effect:
h" = 1 + F, _g (14)
- h. L 3/ttW94 ACRS Page 28
O s
SHORT TERM MASS & ENERGY I
Methodology o Leak-Before-Break (LBB) approach utilized o Eliminates consideration of dynamic effects for all breaks ,
greater than/ equal to 4 inches o 3 inch DEG break size is analyzed for RCS' hot and' cold' legs o Mass releases. calculated using modified Zaloudek -
correlation (WCAP-8264) for critical mass flux .
. o Conservative enthalpies . applied to mass release's to -
determine energy release rates o Releases held constant at initial full power steady state conditions for duration of event
+
RESULTS o Releases used in subcompartment analysis
SUBCOMPARTMENT ANALYSIS Methodology o TMD code (WCAP-8077)- used to calculate . the .
subcompartment wall differential pressures o Uses short tenn mass & energy releases described' .
previously o 3 inch DEG mpture of RCS hot or cold leg ;
o 10% margin applied to the releases o Break postulated in a steam.,,swater compartment.
o No break postulated for reactor cavityL(all piping qualified! ;
to LBB) o Design can accomodates 40% margin to account for.. o uncertainty between as-built configuration and the - .
configuration modeled-1 l
1 l
,l 1
l
)
RESULTS o- Peak differential pressure (including 40% margin) is 1.51-L psi for the cold leg break, and 1.47 psi for the hot leg break-o Structures are designed to accomodate these results
)
h t
i r
~
f L
iii- -l+- _ . . . . . . . . . . .
_______________,,____m____ _____a
SUBCOMPARTMENT PRESSURIZATION CONCLUSIONS Conservative calculation of subcompartment mass and energy releases TMD approved model and methods used for conservative subcompartment delta P calculation 40% margin retained per SRP guidance for plant at construction permit stage SSAR Rev. O demonstrates sufficient margin to subcompartment acceptance limits.
l
LONG TERM MASS.&~ ENERGY. ,
Methodology o SATAN-VI code -(WCAP-10325) used to calculate blowdown releases o Refill period conservatively neglected o Post-blowdown -phase considers the following energy sources for the long term transient
. 'y Decay heat 1
- Core stored energy
- RCS fluid and metal energy.
- SG fluid and metal energy- :
- Accumulators, CMTs, and IRWST o i
'i
. -1
~
1
. i
+
l o Analysis uses conservative assumptions .to maximize containment response m Maximum expected operating temperature Allowance in initial temperature and pressure for-instrument error and dendhand Margin in volume plus allowance for thermal expansion 100% full power operation Allowance for calorimetric error
- Alowance .in core stored energy for effect of. fuel ?
densification j
'1 u
Margin in core stored energy - !
l Margin in SG mass inventory J
y
.l
.i l
l
2
">('
- o No single failure assumed in the mass and energy release calculations, since.there are no active systems involved. The mass and energy releases have been conservatively maximized.
o No additional energy due to metal-water reaction due to low fuel temperatures o Decay heat calculated using 1979 ANS standard plus 2 sigma RESULTS o Releases used in containme.nt integrity analysis (LOCA)
. m .. . .,
l LONG TERM M&E CONCLUSION Long term mass and energy releases contain significant conservatisms to maximize containment pressure and temperature response.
.a .
- ~.[
4
)
t
)'.
t f
f
y ,..
e-
, g;
, '"{;j .--,}
u
~
h
}
- ~
+
Steam Line Break Mass and Energy Release- '
to Containment Analysis Methodology 1 Summary 1 r
.t t
.+.' - . _ _ '_
}
- L w
Methodology. Basis:
SRP-Section 6.2.1.4 (NUREG-0800? 1 WCAP L8822, " Mass and Energy Releases Following a Steam Line Rupture" ;
Code Used: ,
Modified Version of LOFTRAN. Core Makeup Tank
.(CMT? and- Passive Residual Heat- Removal Model (PRHR):were added ,
l ..
l l.
l '
~n ,ew-- - , - <m v e e nos v v v + m - -
cu- -w- -, , . + . r--,a
1 Cases Analyzed:
5 Power Levels - 102%, 70%, 30% & HZP Breaks -
Full Double Ended Ruptures Spectrum of Small Double Ended Ruptures Split Ruptures (Largest split rupture whichlwill not generate a low steam pressure steam line isolation signal.?
. _ . . . 2 :, ..., - .. , -. _ ___- . . . - .. . _ - .
g m . - ---
4 E
F Break Model:
Break is assumed to be between the steam generator and the MSIV Dry Steam Blowdown Moody Critical Flow Model Super. heating of Steam as tube bundle is uncovered was assumed.
4
_____'__.________._______________ __ _ . , - ,,. - - , ~
E 9
i "
Safety Features Assumed For Mitigation:
Reactor Trip Most Reactive RCCA is assumed to stick CMT's 2 CMT's assumed operable. CMT data which would' result in minimum CMT boration capability is
~
assumedli.e. max temperature, min boron concentration, max line resistances, etc.). CMT-injection'line resistance. assumes a failure of one train of isolation valves to open. ;
PRHR Only 1 PRHR assumed operable. Assumptions for minimum heat removal capability assumed (max line resistance, max IRWST temperature, min heat transfer coefficients, etc.?
o i
-..=a...--
- _ . _ _ _ .. -_.. ___._u---_--.__--_._.____.--- .---_.------w__ - . - - _ -.-. __=-__.-__.__---_:_._.,_n . -.__.
___. - - - _ - - ---------- - e --- _ = _ _ _ _ a - - _ - -__-w
-- a, _ . - -
~
Safety Features Assumed For Mitigation: }
Main Steam Isolation Valves (MSIV)*
Main Feedwater Isolation Valves LMFWlV?*
Startup Feedwater Isolation Valves (SFWlV)*
Max closure time assumed. No credit assumed for valve as it is closing, closure is assumed to be a step. .
Single Failures Postulated:
Main Steam Isolation Valve Failure-Main Feedwater Isolation Valve Failure 1
., v vy, , -
.m . ,w. - - , - = ._
. & .4-- _ _ __~- _ - - - -- m_m -_ _ . _1 .___-s
I' 9
Secondary Side inventory:
SG level assumed at maximum programmed value plus 1 uncertainties. 10% uncertainty added to initial mass.
Unisolatable steam in steam lines included in the
. model and is assumed to blowdown.
Prior to feed line isolation,. maximum main feedwater flow' considering a depressurizing steam generator is ,
assumed.
F.ollowing.feedwater isolation, unisolatable fluid in j feed lines which may flash and enter the steam
- generator is accounted for in the model.
t Maximum startup feedwater capacity assumed. l s,
Decay Heat Model: 1979 ANS + 2 sigma
-1 Latent Energy Sources: .
RCS. Metal Mass Considered ;
Intact Steam Generator Inventory (Reverse heat
' transfer:L t Core Kinetics:
End of Cycle.(i;e. maximum reactivity feedback: L i i
e i I
_u .- - - - .-- - -m* -
- r e- ,r-- - -* we+
~-
2 e
~
Conclusion:
AP600 SSAR steam line break M&E release analysis-was. performed with methodology consistent with . 1 requirementsuof SRP 6.2.1.4 and:WCAP'8822. -
The;SSAR steam line break analysis includes the same level of conservatism as. calculations performed for
. other operating plants.
b
[ ,
i.
t i ,
. ~ , ._ _-
.= ;j
'i u
CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY Methodology .
o WGOTHIC code (WCAP-13246) used for calculating LOCA and MSLB containment response o Containment design basis remains the full double-ended guillotine rupture of a reactor coolant pipe or secondary side pipe o Postulated single failure is a failure of one of the valves controlling the cooling water flow, results in reducpd cooling flow for PCS operation o Conservative initial conditions were chosen to maximize containment pressure / temperature o Assumptions used in creating the plant deck:
both wet and dry portions.of the containment shell were modeled in the WGOTHIC analysis t
- 40% coverage -on the top of de dome to 70%
coverage on the side walls-8 Conduction from dry to wet sections were not considered, although cales show this to be a benefit e
,,E- - - - w -
Representative external cooling water flowrates, which includes the effects of the single failure, were used for the wet sections External cooling water is not initiated until 11' minutes into the transient Air leakage flowpaths are included to simulate the effects of air leaking through the baffle o For the LOCA event, two RCS pipe ruptures are analyzed (DEG breaks of either the hot leg or coki leg) g i
o For the MSLB event, a representative pipe break specth3m is analyzed, consisting of various power levels, break sizes, and failure assumptions l
o Passive internal containment : heat sinks include- both' l concrete and metallic structures 21 J
i s
y- i , , , - . - - - - ,
. , o y __a ---__- __.m e- e- _ . -_
CONTAINMENTINTEGRITY Methodology (continued) o Forced convection was chosen on the inner and outer containment sections based on Velocities along wall were in range ,
showing forced convection dominates
- LST indications that results are conservative with respect to. tests .
o Noding was based on the LST model. Noding-in the vertical direction and radial direction used in-the.LST was retained in the AP600 (above the operating deck).
This noding has been shown to overmix non-condensibles in containment based on LST.
The effect of overmixing will be presented in the June 30 letter report.
9
RESULTS o For the LOCA events, the DEHLG gives the highest-blowdown peak pressure of 38.6 psig, while the DECLG' gives the highest post-blowdown peak pressure of 39.5 psig -
(Design pressure is 45 psig) o Pressure at the end of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> is 10.4 psig o The DEHLG case peak temperature is 353 T (localized effect), while the DECLG peak temperature is 283 T -j o For the MSLB events, the 1388 ft*, Full DER, 30% power, MSIV failure case gives the highest containment peak pressure of 41.4 psig l 1
o The 1.388 ft2, Full DER,102% power, MSIV' failure case gives a containment temperature of 320.2 T 1
i 9
l 1
l 1
Containment Pressure for DEHLG l 1
8 8* I L
, /
7 3 o ,- '
/
$ vw Q k /
3 L e L i
oF
, c. n-e m
I r
i I ;
I or ,
I
~
0 5 to h5 b 'b' h 35 I
- m. <m I . .
=
Containment Pressure for DECLG e
n o* ,s /
.a -- -
/ x
_ s q
- - s, G
\
o e .- g S v- , ,
e - \
\
3 -
/ ,
m ..
$ or / s a m -/ :
-/ t 4 f r ,
o ,- i
' i N-l_
e ,.
f e.
or
.- e. -i 111 e i,,ini , , , , , , , ,
1 10 100 1000 tow 1em i I
Time (sec) #
I.
N
i I
i 1
Containment Pressure,1.388 ft2 DER SLB,102% Power o
W
- WIP sup O'
4-
/
Sill 8 f
'h m
- 3 v- -
e -
5 -
g _,
5 SE_.
t a$n N
} *A b I Or
~ . . ! , , ! , , ! ' . , , i 0 100 200 300 400 500 Time (sec) ,
i
E... ?
CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY ANALYSIS CONCLUSIONS The SSAR Rev. O Containment Pressure and Temperature calculations include margins sufficient to demonstrate that AP600 meets containment :ntegrity acceptance criteria using:
- conservative mass and energy releases
- conservative containment response calc
- inherent conservatism in containment models based on LST comparisons
AP600 WGOTHIC Model Sensitivities
/
Following study:
- Uses SSAR Rev. O AP600 model as base case.
- Varies single parameters over a range sufficient to :
demonstrate WGOTHIC behaves appropriately and there !
are no " cliffs" for relevant parameters. l Parameters covered are:
1
- Wetted fraction coverage
- PCCS water flow rate .
- Wetting initiation time
- Inlet air blockage
- Outlet air blockage
- Internal. heat sink exposed area
- Chimney height
- Mass and energy, mass flow rate
- Air baffle loss coefficient
- Air baffle bypass leakage
WETTED FRACTION COVERAGE SENSITIVITY WETTED PEAK DELTA FRACTION PRESSURE PRESSURE (psig) -~ (ps i g )
SSAR 40% DOME 39.5 70% SIDEWALLS CASE 2 20% DOME 42.2 2.7 40% SIDEWALLS
~
Cane 3 s _
kx s 8 \
- : N
\
I
\
o -
- ~~
SSAM r s C
D 3
D a i t iai I 8 I * ' I LA
- j s a a a a a ad 4
- g. . . . . iJ .
TllRe(Sec)
f
,)
PCCS WATER FLOW RATE 1
b PEAK. : DELTA f.LOWRATE PRESSURE PRESSURE (r.) (psia)- (psia)
SSAR 100' 54.03 HALF (LFIM) 50 57.76 3.73 s
t INTERNAL PRESSURE
.70 . . i...., .....i . . . ...., . .
.i...i 60 -
=i
/s
. s s -
. g -
N -
50 -
-\ :
. g-
. u 40 - N -
N T -
s_
a :
30 '- f -
n 20 -- -
l.
10 - '
AP6 tf1N'
. BASE CASE. .;
0' '
. 0 ' 2
- 10 3 '
10' ' 108 10 10' 10 time [s] ;
- ^
+ . . .- . . . , .,
k WETTING' INITIATION TIME L
STARTUP PEAK DELTA ,
TIME PRESSURE PRESSURE (min) (psia) (psia)
R)PID(.IM) 1 52.62 -1.41' SSAR 11 54.03 >
SLOW (ccLD L) .31 59.74 .5.71 J
INTERNAL PRESSURE 60 ,
.i4 "i . .>i> "i i"
i s' 'i"i .
/ .
~
/ .. >
~~ \ -
l ~
50 - / \ \ .
\ .
. \
\
40 -
\
- \ [
~
'$ 30 -
a :
~
20 .
~
~
10 - - AP6 COLD _L ..
AP6_1W .. o BASE CASE -
,i,,mi ...i,c.i ...i....I . .1. "I '"' .- ;
.0 10 8
- 10 2 '
10 3 '
10' ' 10s 10*
time [s]
INLET AIR BAFFLE BLOCKAGE (4 inlets total)
- INLETS # INLETS PEAK DELTA 50% BLOCK 100% BLOCK PRESSURE PRESSURE (psia) (psia)
SSAR 0 0 54.03 CASE A1 0 1 54.19 0.16 CASE A2 0 2 55.48 1.45 CASE B1 1 0 53.99 -0.04 CASE B2 2 0 53.99 -0.04 CASE PBI 4 0 54.00 -0.03 INTERNAL PRESSURE 60 ,
,,,,,, ,4 ,, , ,
3-
~
- ~s s .
50 - ,
40 -
3 30 -
a :
20 -
- AP6_PBI -
- AP6_B2 ~
AP6_B1 -
10 -
AP6_A2 ~
AP6 Al Bast cast :
0 '
10 10' 10 2
- 10 3
- 10' ' 10 5 time [s]
T
, 0UTLET AIR BAFFLE BLOCKAGE OUTLET PEAK OELTA BLOCKAGE PRESSURE PRESSURE-(psia) (psia)
SSAR 0% 54.03 CASE PB0 50% 53.99' -0.04 INTERNAL PRESSURE . .
60 ,
50 - -
40 -
. 1 i
q .
'a 30 -
- c. -
N 20 -
~
. 1 i
10 -
~
AP6 P90
~
BASE CASE ..
. . -1 l
0 -
10 10' 10 2 s 10 3 '
10' ' 10s time (s)
T Igrerm At.
, HEAT SINK - *? EXPOSED. AREA EXPOSED PEAK. DELTA- ,
. AREA PRESSURE PRESSURE
( *.' ) (psia) (psia).
SSAR -100 54.03 CASE HS 50 61.37 7.34 .
CASE HS1 150 49.53 -4.50 INTERNAL PRESSURE 70 ,
, /'-s 60 - - +
, \ .
s -
' \ : .
50
/,
s
.\' .- -
s ,
s
\ -
s
- v- -
\ :
40 - .s g. --
\ '
.9 a
. s\ .
S . N 's .
30 -
20 - -
F 10 1 - - - - AP6._H$1 AP6._HS . . -j gg. - e 0
10 -' ' 10' - 10 '
10 3
10*- '
10 8 1 time [s]
3 5
_r- w w -+v g-
Y f
1
', CHIMNEY HEIGHT-PEAK- DELTA HEIGHT PRESSURE - PRESSURE (r.) -(psia) (psia). ;
SSAR 100 54.03 CASE CHN 200 53.98 -0.05'
+
INTERNAL PRESSURE 60 . , , i . .
. ....i . . . ...., . . . .
. ...i i
. a.
. 50 -
40 -
m ~
- $ 30 -
- a. . < .
w -
~
- 20 -
10 -
-- APS CHN .
"_ th1iE CASE .
t
. I ' ' I I I I i8 I I I I I I II g' g i kg jt1 ib I i1 I& E
- 3 '
10' 10'
.10 8
._10 10'- . 10s time [s]
4
- i t
'" Y
c
, MASS & ENERGY RELEASE 8-POST-BLOWOOWN PEAK. DELTA MASS FLOW PRESSURE PRESSURE (r.) (psia) (psta)
SSAR 100 54.03 CASE ME 75 51.27 -2.76 CASE ME1 125 59.89 5.86 L
INTERNAL PRESSURE . L' 60 , , , , . . . , .
, g
. / \ . <
50 -
,- s
/ - g
. g
\\ -
\ '\
40 - I iL i<
Ng t -
.g . ..
g : A :
's 30 - -
4i 3 .
20 - -
~
10 -
_ . . pe_wi 5
no n
- sa cm : ,
. . . ....i . . . i....i . . . . ....i . . ....i . . . i...:
o .
' ' 8
- 3 10' 10' 10 10 10' ' 10s.
time [s]
n
. 2 AIR BAFFLE LOSS COEFFICIENT PRESSURE LOSS PEAX DELTA COEFFICIENT PRESSURE PRESSURE
(%) (psia) (psia)
SSAR 100 54.03 CASE LC. 200 54.11 0.08 CASE LC3 300 54.17 0.14 CA'SE LC4 400 54.25 0.22
,1 ,
INTERNAL PRESSURE 60 . .
i
.. i...., . . . ....i . . i:...i .i.
T :
50
-- b ,
- {. -
t.,s ,
40 -
V -
t :
- i i
- N ,
~
N. .
~ '
'$ 30 -- 's -
a . s; 20 -
e s_Lc4 ';
- -- es_tc3 10 -
__ . as_tc - [
Bast Cast ' .
I I III '
l t [ t it I iI I I E EI I E 3 ' ' s 10 10' 10 2 e
10 10' 10 time (s) o
-j h y .
- i. p a.
AIR BAFFLE BYPASS LEAKAGE LEAKAGE 'EAK DELTA-AREA & '1!)_RE PRESSURE
(%) (psia) (psia).,
SSAR 100 54.03 CASE LK1 1000 53.96 -0.07 CASE LK2 10000 53.91 -0.12 v '
INTERNAL PRESSURE ,
60 ,
50 - -
40 - -
g .
- \\ :
7 .
3 30 - g _
- o. . w .
o 20
. . . psE2 -
I 10 - - - -
esEt -
BASE CASE . 6, u ,
0 ' '' ''' ' ' '"' ' ' '"' ' ' ' ' ' " ' '
R
- ' 2 *
- 10' 10 10 103 10' 10s time [s] .j i
.f.g 8 ,. <
1 AP600 WGOTHIC MODEL SENSITIVITIES CONCLUSIONS l
Sensitivity calculations with WGOTHIC show that there are no " cliffs" in models. !
- Behavior of code for AP600 produces reasonable and 1 consistent results for a range of parameters for DBA '
.n PCCS performance.
External flow resistances and/or moderate changes i to external annulus are self correcting.. .
External flow parameters thus have a wesk impact.on a
i internal containment pressure 1.
'g ,
h ft i
k .
,q_>
t 4 f
- 3. :.
f
)
PCCS Large Scale Test WGOTHIC Sensitivities .
Role of LST in WGOTHIC validation LST sensitivities ;
F Conclusions :
)
)
r b
~'.
s b
7 e
F h
4 f
'l
Role of LST in WGOTHIC Validation 1
- I C
Referring to steps outlined at Feb 23-24,1994.
meeting with NRC, the' LST is used.in the following..
- ways
WGOTHIC modelling: ,
Examines the code capability to model flow fields and their influence on heat and mass transfer through the containment vessel.
^
Proves the ability of the code to model overall-system interactions, listed as follows:
- steam delivery and buoyant plume
- mixed convection driven flow field
- non-condensibles effects on H&MT ;
- influence of short and long term' heat sinks H
- effects of dead-ended and open compartments- ')
- condensation on inner surface I
- conduction through vessel
- sensible and evaporation heat removal
- radiative heat removal
- annulus air flow rate determination.
Thus, the LST is used to demonstrate that the-code can appropriately model the heat removal mechanisms of the AP600 containment.
y , . , v mv,. - .- - -
.e-.- ,c. . . ,
Role of LST in WGOTHIC Validation (cont.)
WGOTHIC uses the following as input boundary conditions:
- steam flow rate (e.g. mass and energy releases)
- environment temperature outside the shield building
- PCCS water total flow rate
- PCCS water coverage fraction LST measured at hot conditions Water Distribution Tests l
l I
i l
'l
.'4' I LST SENSITIVITIES PRESENTED IN WCAP-13246,. REV. 0
=
. Base Case (LST-Baseline Test with no internals)
- External wetting (67%)
Both wet and dry portions of the containment shell were modeled Conduction from dry to wet sections was not considered
- Internal forced convection heat transfer-above operating deck
-Internal free convection heat transfer below operating deck
- External forced convection-heat transfer (fan on)
- Simulate-subcooling-of the . applied external water e by using the Uchida correlation to model condensation inside the vessel and by specifying the outer: surface temperature of the~ vessel to be equal to the.
- measured outer surface wall temperature. The inner surface temperature is
i iforced/to be equal to-the measured inner surface temperature ~ by multiplying the; Uchida correlation.(calculated by GOTHIC)- by a-constant. Heat is:not transferred tof the annulus in theLsubcooled region. . At the . point:where .
subcooling ends ^and evaporation begins, determined from the measured test:
u L results, the WGOTHIC mechanistic correlations are used to model the internal and: external heat transfer. -
.g
- ....,,-c.,;.._ . - - _ , - . -. .L.. - - . s , _ , . ~ .a
LST SENSITIVITIES PRESENTED IN WCAP-13246, REV. O Sensitivities to the Base Case
. Use internal free convection heat transfer above and below operating deck
. Do not simulate subcooling effect
. Decrease external forced convection heat and mass transfer each by 15% by increasing Dn by a factor of 2:
1 1 h~ h~ m Dj.2 Dj 2
u WCAP 13246 (a,b)
- Figure 39 Measured and Predicted Vessel Surface Temperamuss with Forced Convectice Celari= fa innamal Heat Transfer, Test R11L
'l
'l
WCAP 13244 (a,b)
-k 1
Figure 40 Measured and Predicted Vessel Surface Teniperannes with Free Convection
~ Conelation for hiernal Hess Td, Test R11L P
127
- _ . . ~ ,
b:p
'WCAP 1324 -
~
(a,b) -
4 Figme 30 Measured and Predicsod WaselInner Surface Temperasures Without Modeling -
- SeWlag for LST R11L e k aus "7
7e e dit.k 6 % % u e c : 5 7. 7 ' y 5. N 3 W8E!!ngh0000 ye, . _
-i 1
1 J
1 WCAP 13244 I
~
i
, (a,b) i 3
F Figme 42 Wet Axial Wall Temperamuss and Vessel Pressmes fw Pnharw4 Extemal Heat
- Transfer 13 i
LST SENSITIVITY RESULTS
. Internal convective. heat transfer
- Both free and forced convection over predict vessel pressure. Forced convection gives more accurate predictions.
. Simulation of subcooling
- By modelling subcooling effect, vessel pressure and dome wall temperatures are more similar to the measured results. WGOTHIC heat and mass transfer can be validated while accounting for subcooling.
External forced convection heat and mass transfer
- Decreasing both the external heat and mass transfer by 15 % results in a small effect on vessel wall temperatures and less than 2% effect on vessel pressure.
4-g
~
~
ADDITIONAL SENSITIVITY IN WCAP-13246, REV. O.
- Base . Case - SST -
External wetting-(100%)
- - internal free convection heat transfer
- External forced. convection' heat-transfer (fan on)
Simulate subcooling of the applied external water- .
-- Sensitivities to the. base case-Do not simulate subc'ooling effect
, , , - ies* * - - v- 3 --
w-.- e ,
WCAP 13244
~
~
(a,b) f
- Figues 33 Measured and Findicted Vessel Inner Surface Teenparatures vs. Vessel ~ -
Insegrused Assa ihr Test 117c-15e M ege ,e6 9 c.sse - c = W\ D p %fA.
p fh,- g-ch b sne-c :. % 2.Io P ^ W Wesdnghouse lo.s, das <_.
WCAP 13244
~ (a,b)
I
- Figure 31 Predicend and Messened VesselInner Snefar= Tempersenres Wahow Modeling Subcooling for SST 117c-15e NCO.%ut e d Oc55 ort, s %\.3 7 ps sa yy, 7t-e_ch c Ydd 9 ec % .c = M .\ g y %
SUMMARY
OF SST SENSITIVITY Result is consistent.with the same sensitivity performed on the LST: .
. Simulation of subcooling .
By modelling subcooling effect, vessel pressure and dome wall temperatures are more similar to the measured results. WGOTHIC heat and mass trdnsfer can be validated while accounting'for subcooling. -
f
.4 l
4 r * ' . *
- w r - * +- ~ = . - + - - =- " - - -< *E--
WCAP 13244 120 .-
9
/
/
e ,/
/
/ . .. ..
100 -- - * - - - -- - - .,
/,
./
./
~
,b
/
_ .o _ .......... .. ............... ..... ......... .......... ......< . ........... . .. ...... .
/
7
- /
./
- / 1 I
eo _ ............. ................
g.......... -
8
[I >
-M /
1 _ .............
..............f
/
./
A./
/
_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . , l.5............
/
/
./
/ '
/ ' ' ' ' ' '
O O.O - ,0.0 40.0 80.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 Measured Pressure (psia)
E Ideal Dry SST Dry LST Wet SST Wet LST A 0 O
- Figese 46 Preeceed vs. Measured Wesel Pressaes 133 l
')
SUMMARY
OF INTEGRAL TESTS IN WCAP-13246, REV. O Test Model Description Result .
Dry SST - -
L.hiernal Water Vessel Pressure Predicted Accurately
~
Free Internal Heat Transfer -
Free Extemal Heat Transfer (No Fan)
Dry LST - No External Water Vessel Pressure over predicted by ~20%. The 3
- Free Internal Heat Transfer mixed convective heat transfer correlation and
- Free Extemal Heat Transfer new mass transfer correlation are expected to 4 ,
(No Fan) improve prediction.
Wet SST . External Water (subcooling Vessel Pressure over predicted because the :
simulated) vessel is in the mixed convection regime and ~
- Free' internal Heat Transfer free was chosen for internal walls.
- Forced External Heat Transfer. *
(Fan On)
Wet LST - External Water (subcooling Vessel Pressure Predicted Accurately simulated)-
- Forced intemal Heat Transfer Above Deck, Free intemal Heat Transfer Below Deck-
- Forced External Heat ; Transfer (Fan On) _
i a
_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _____m_____.i. _ . _ _ . ..__._m____.__l._ _r _ _.___ _ _.
1 1!
\
LST Sensitivity Conclusions i
The tests themselves vary the most significant parameters and thus provide an indication of sensitivities to real parameters independent of code calculations.
WGOTHIC will be used to calculate LST results and thus it will be verified to appropriately model parametric sensitivity in an integral system.
Sensitivity calculations with WGOTHIC show that there are no " cliffs" in models.
l e,
- s 1
)
y
Documentation to be issued by-June 30,1994-Document results presented in March 17 and "TBD"'
meetings Demonstrate effect of phenomenological model changes' on net margin relative to SSAR Rev. 0
- based on LST and SSAR cases
- show net effect of phenomena models 1
Discuss effect of WGOTHIC modelling changes. ,
j
- subdivided (distributed paranieter)
- better representation of dynamic stratification 4
L Discussion leading to de'fensible' conclusion that SSAR Rev. O is conservative.and that AP600 meets containment integrity acceptance criteria.
I E