ML20072A012

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests That Proprietary Presentation Matls from 940726-28 Meetings on AP600 Passive Containment Cooling Sys Analysis Be Withheld from Public Disclosure Per 10CFR2.790
ML20072A012
Person / Time
Site: 05200003
Issue date: 07/29/1994
From: Liparulo N
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To: Borchardt R
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML19304C489 List:
References
AW-94-693, NUDOCS 9408120103
Download: ML20072A012 (139)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:' Westinghouse Energy Systems Bm 355

  • E" """"S Y""' '523 355 Electric Corporation AW-94-693 July 29,1994 Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ATTENTION:

MR. R. W. BORCHARDT l APPLICATION FOR WITHHOLDING PROPRIETARY INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE

SUBJECT:

PRESENTATION MATERIAIJS FROM THE JULY 26-JULY 28,1994 MEETINGS ON AP600 PASSIVE CONTAINMENT COOLING SYSTEM ANALYSES

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-94-693 accompanies this application for withholding setting forth the basis on which the identified proprietary information may be withheld from public disclosure. Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the subject information which is proprietary to Westinghouse be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations. Correspondence with respect to this application for withholding or the accompanying affidavit should reference AW-94-693 and should be addressed to the undersigned. Very truly yours, k j /Q N. J. Liparuto, Manager Nuclear Safety Regulatc,ry And Licensing Activities ~ /nja cc: Kevin Bohrer NRC 12H5 9408120103 940729 m2A i {DR ADOCK 05200003 PDR

1 AW-94-693 AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: sa COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY: Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appear (d 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: 0 Y/ ,/ # Brian A. McIntyre, Manager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing Sworn to and subscribed before me this Ne[ day of Qalu .1994 L aa d / V ( Notary Public NowialGr3 Fcso Marie Pcy ;<>, T P py Pl!,0 Mortw4e Ihu,,twjwy County My Convason Expiras Nov.4.1976 }Aerter, PomeyMna Ancavid h 1976A

e AW-94-693 (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 witnne! ding 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 withholding accompanying this Affidavit. (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's 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. 1 (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 constitutes Westinghouse policy and provides the rational basis required. Under that system, information is held in confidence if it falls in one or more of several types, the release of which might result in the loss of an existing or potential competitive advantage, as follows: 197M

\\ l AW-94-693 1 (a) The information reveals the distinguishing aspects of a process (or component, structure, tool, method, u:.) 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. hnling test data, relative to a process (or component, structure, tool, melnod, etc.), the application of which data secures a competitive economic advantage, e.g., by opti.mization or improved marketability. (c) Its use by a competitor would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installatio.2, assurance of quality, or licensing a similar product. (d) It reveals cost or price information, production capacities, budget levels, or commercial strategies of Westinghouse, its customers or suppliers. (c) It 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 Westinghouse a competitive advantage over its competitors. It is, therefore, withheld 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. ma

AW-94-693 (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 advantage. If competitors acquire components of proprietary information, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage. (e) Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position of prominence of Westinghouse in the world market, and thereby give a market advantage to the competition of those countries. (f) The Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success in obtaining and maintaining a competitive advantage. (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 information has not been previously employed in the same original manner or method to the best of our knowledge and belief. (v) Enclosed is Letter NTD-NRC-94-4241, July 29,1994, being transmitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (E letter and Application for Withholding Proprietary Information from Public Disclosure, N. J. Liparulo (E, to Mr. R. W. Borchardt, Office of NRR. The proprietary information as submitted for use 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 response to certain NRC requirements for justification oflicensing advanced nuclear power plant designs. 19%A

AW-94-693 This information is part of that which will enable Westinghouse to: i (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. i 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 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. The development of the technology described in part by the information is the result of applying the results of many years of experience in an intensive Westinghouse effort and the expenditure of a considerable sum of money. i i 1976A i .J

4 AW-94-693 la order for competitors of Westinghouse to duplicate this information, simikr 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. i l 1 ] l ) l l l 1976A

V'$ WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION J.;,,. i PRESENTATION TO UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION D s i AP600 Passive Containment Cooling System (PCS) 3 Scaling - Iteration 1 Report Review Kickoff Meeting k c MONROEVILLE, PA JULY 26,1994 t

l l y-il j l AGENDA

y... l WESTINGHOUSE /NRC MEETING AP600 PCS Scaling - SASM lteration 1 Report Review Kickoff 8:30 Introduction J. Butler 8:45 Review of Westinghouse PCS Model Development and Scaling J. Woodcock Overview of PCS Scaling and WGOTHIC Validation Review of Information Exchange Schedule in Support of Review Phenomenological Report Status and Schedule Scaling Report Schedule and Review Process 9:15 Method for Determining Film Flow Coverage for the AP600 PCCS R. Wright 10:15 BREAK 10:30 NRC Phenomenological Report Review Status / Comments NRC 11:00 Preliminary Report on AP600 Scaling D. Spencer 12:00 LUNCH 1:00 Preliminary Report on AP600 Scaling (continued)

D. Spencer 3:00 NRC AP600 PCS Scaling Status NRC 3:30 Meeting Wrapup, Action items All

A Pe io) INTRODUCTION J.C. BUTLER ADVANCED PLANT SAFETY AND LICENSING P

i ag,... l l REVIEW OF AP600 PCS MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND SCALING J. WOODCOCK CONTA NMENT AND RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS i

Fil OUTLINE u.~ Overview of PCS scaling and WGOTHIC validation process Review of "Information Exchange Schedule in Support of AP600 PCS Review," Revision 1 Schedule status - Phenomenologica reports - PCS scaling report

A. Scaling / \\ PIRT FI Groups

Phenomena models Compare LST

-Separate effects thermal-hydraulics to i tests AP600 -Select & validate Identify any distortions correlations -small -Identify impacts of -can be factored any local model into AP600 distortions i analysis Y WGOTHIC development Y WGOTHIC modelling of integral test (LST) I code Matches LST T / / / / Contributions of all WGOTHIC can Firm basis relevant important be used to exists to phenomena are extrapolate extend test understood tests to AP600 results to AP600 /

Scaling Application Examplo Objectives Sca ing / 3T FI Grou as Phenomena models Compare LST -Separate effects thermal-hydraulics to l tests AP600 -Select & validate Identify any distortions correlations -small -Identify impacts of ~ -can be factored into any local model distortions AP600 analysis v Y ( Outcome is phenomena ( Ratio of FI groups from 3 3 o reports, such as test to AP600 defines -liquid film heat " distortions" transfer model . Simple correlation -fog in the annulus models can be used to assess LST to AP600 j comparisons, such as buoyant jet behaviour J

WGOTHIC Development / Distributed Parameter Modeling ~ r 3 WGOTHIC Version 1.2 Configured and Used in j SSAR DBA Bases Report L J \\ l WGOTHIC development + WGOTHIC modelling of g 3 integral test (LST) Distributed parameter with I sufficient nodes closes the code '$ l P on NUREG/CR-5809 Matches Process J LST i ( 3 Preliminary results will be .* presented on July 27 J

Example Applications of Building Blocks / / / / Contributions of all WGOTHIC can Firm basis relevant important be used to exists to phenomena are extrapolate extend test understood tests to AP600 results to i AP600 l / T (WGOTHIC Design 3 Basis Analyses ( ) i V ( 3 . Develop noding requirements from LST . Assess effects of using simplified lumped parameter noding using LST model . LST sensitivities apply to plant - parametric tests -WGOTHIC LST model sensitivities J

pr,qj CONCLUSIONS ,p,.,, The role of the LST in code validation has been defined The basis for using distributed parameter WGOTHIC model of LST has been defined The approach to develop simplified lumped parameter WGOTHIC noding based on LST models and comparison to distributed parameter model has been provided A framework has been identified in which to address all significant issues raised to date The PCS information exchange process is on schedule s

pr,y A F' 'i> Method for Determining Film Flow Coverage for the AP600. Passive Containment Cooling System RICK WRIGHT CONTAINMENT AND RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

pr,g OVERVIEW a v. NRC Request for Additional Information, Question 480.17 Status of Work to Date Response to the RAI Conclusions and Recommendation

NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Question 480.17 External Film PatternAVater Distribution Tests Provide additional informauon on the external film / water distribution that is expected for the AP600 The Waltz Mill tests were done using a steel shell at ambient temperature. Will the film pattern be affected by heanag of the shell? Is there a difference in the film behavior in the large scale test facility in cases where the shell is not heated, versus cases where the shell is heated?

Response

The SS AR contamment analyses assumed the contamment wettmg increased from 40% at the top to 70% over the outet poruons of the dome and the side walls. These wetung fractions were determmed from the Water Distribution System Test - Phase 2'. Reference 2, attached, presents the results of calculanons with WGOTHIC which sh pressures within contamment remain within acceptable hmits for a case with wetun fem 20% on the dome.y t ur40% on the side walls. y /y 2 The full scale (cold) Phase 3 wetung tests at Waltz mill and the 1/8 scale heared tests are both ongoing. After complenon of these tests, additional information for the hot AP600 coverage and the acceptance limits for coverage will be provided to the NRC in a revised RAI in August,1994. References 1. Letter, N. J. Liparulo to R. W. Borchardt (NRC), "AP600 Design and Design Certification Test Program Overviev, Table 3 Revision 3. August 13, 1993.

2. M. E. Wills, D. L. Paulsen, V. Notmi, G. Invernali, "Effecuveness of External Cooling and Associated Studies on W AP600 Passive Plant" INC Conference, Toronto, October 1993.

W Westinghouse

STATUS OF WORK TO DATE Water Distribution Tests - Full scale section of AP600 dome - for determining coverage - Un-heated - Prototypic flow rates - Phase 2 tests resulted with early weir design resulted in: 40% Coverage for Dome 70% Coverage for Vertical Wall for initial full flow r Recently completed Phsse 3 tests - Much more uniform flow on dome - 100% coverage for design flow l - Observed flow splitting for low flow rates l

1 t FHij' STATUS OF WORK TO DATE (continued) u, 1 1 Large Scale Tests - Heated t - Water distributien system not uniform l - Observed varyc.g degrees of coverage depending on water flow and heat flux i WGOTHIC Coverage Sensitivity Study' Analysis shows that a large variation in coverage fraction results in a small change in the containment pressure (i.e. coverage fractions reduced from 40%-70% to 20%-40% resulted in an increase of 2 psia in the peak containment pressure) ' Wills l\\l.l!. et.al.. "I!llettiscitess of listeinal Cooling anil Aws taleil Stuilies on Westingliouse Al%INI l' awn e I'lant". INC ('ontesens e. 'I osouto. Oui... ( h-toher 199 4

Y] RESPONSE TO THE RAI o,.. Develop a model to predict coverage in AP600 Validate model against available test data Show applicability to the AP600 containment Predict AP600 coverage fractions for expected accident conditions Assess the impact (if any) on containment response due to changes in coverage

l l l l V] COVERAGE MODEL DEVELOPMENT or.... i i Local film thickness model - Film is applied at the center of the dome at a given flow rate - Film thins as the water flows radially outward over the dome due to the surface area change and evaporation - Film thins as the water flows down the vertical wall section due to evaporation th' I', = Film flow rate over dome 2nri m,, q "i AA, Evaporation loss m = f h,g

lfT ,,f COVERAGE MODEL DEVELOPMENT Search of applicable film stability models 2 Zuber-Staub model-minimum film thickness for stable flow - Force balance on the liquid interface - Modified to include changing angle of inclination - Vapor thrust term is negligible - low heat flux and high flow Momentum + Static Pressure = Surface Tension + Thermocapillary Force P g sin p P-64 + pgcosp 6 _ 00 -cos0), do q"cos0 15 p. 2 5 dT k 'l 3 I"la E 6= Minimum Film Thickness 9 p' g

  • )

) l

yrq COVERAGE MODEL DEVELOPMENT o.., To determine the local minimum stable film thickness, must know - Fluid properties: p, p, o - Surface orientation, p - Film thickness, S (or F) - Heat Flux - Contact wetting angle for the surface,0 Define the ratio between the minimum film thickness, r

min, and the local film thickness, F E

R= Emin The Zuber-Staub model for a smooth surface determined that for R>1.0, the film would remain stable

V] DETERMINATION OF THE CONTACT WETTING ANGLE a r...m No information available from paint vendor Wetting angle measured using an optical comparator - Heated and unheated surface - Weathered and unweathered surface All measurements indicate that a contact wetting angle ranging from >e 0= should be used in the film stability analysis

V] CONTACT WETTING ANGLE y...; TEST RESULTS Description Contact Angle Contact Angle of Weathered Unweathered Test Sample Sample

2. Room Temperature, T=80 F

~ ~ 'O

3. Heated, T=110 F
4. Heated, T=180 F t=0 sec.

t=15 sec. t=30 sec. t=60 sec.

u t-ginig l COVERAGE MODEL DEVELOPMENT m. i Two modifications to the Zuber-Staub model are proposed 1. Determine the value of R where the flow becomes unstable i for a non-smooth surface with local variations in roughness resulting in local flow maldistribution, R,,,. 2. Develop a method for adjusting the flow coverage if the local value of R is less than R,,, For unstable films: hl R, hl+1 ref Thus for an unstable evaporating film, the coverage fraction decreases continually 1 16 Large Scale Heat Transfer Tests are predicted using various values of R,,, . ca,c) R,,,= conservatively predicts the LST coverage results i

IPl AP600 LARGE SCALE AND WATER DISTRIBUTION TESTS o,.. Key Parameters Parameter Large Scale AP600 Water Tests Distribution Dome Major Axis (a) ~ '9 Dome Minor Axis (b) Vertical Wall Beneath Dome ~ Water Flow Rate initial Water Temperature ~ Contact Wetting Angle Peak Heat Flux Heat Flux Distribution p=0 (Top) p=24 p=48 p=72 p=90 Vertical

=

== e

1 Predictions of L.ST Water Coverage Zuber-Staub, Vanying Reference R Value 1.5 1.4-- r +--- e i 1.3-- -i o i i i 2 1.2-- ? r 3 o i o U) cc j,j - ..........O__..___,. }_....___.......__. e 1- = n m = e B 0.9-- - - * - - -

0 D B

? 3 -i, F z @0.8-z3r l-2 -( ? x i i 0.7- - - + -

--------=--

m 0.6- - L-g

3---------

0.5 l l i i s 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Measured Value of Water Coverage (%). o '- _ g,< f _ Ac-. _ . *, e a x L L

F"1 ANALYTICAL PREDICTIONS OF AP600 PCS TEST RESULTS y..., Large Scale Tests (Heated) Test Description Predicted Coverage Measured Coverage R9L Pressure = 10 psig '9 R10L Pressure = 30 psig R8L Pressure = 43 psig R17AL Pressure = 10 psig R34L Pressure = 31 psig R27L Pressure = 40 psig R24L Pressure = 30 psig R23L Pressure = 30 psig R26L Pressure = 30 psig R21L Pressuie = 31 psig R22L Pressure = 31 psig R28AL Pressure = 40 psig R28L Pressure = 40 psig AP600 Water Distribut eated) WDT14 Flow = 55 GPM ~ WDT10 Flow = 100 GPM WDT9 Flow = 220 GPM WDT11 Flow = 280 GPM - a

i Bi 1 I l 1 i 6 I 1

gr,ig APPLICABILITY TO AP600 ,y.... l Proposed model depends on localparameters to determine stability Film spreading and evaporation models valid for any size containment structure Model is applicable for Large Scale Test and AP600

O AP600 WATER COVERAGE UNDER ACCIDENT CONDITIONS .g..., The model can be used to calculate the AP600 water coverage expected during a postulated accident - Use water flow and heat flux from WGOTHIC analysis - Determine the water coverage for each mass flow and heat flux pair for each position along the dome and down the cylinder wall These values will be compared to those assumed in the SSAR analysis l l B

S: O~ 0, 1 -b_ 4 l i ) 1 L I

i f] COVERAGE FRACTIONS FOR DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT .g.., Time Flow q" Dome (%) Cylinder (%) Hr ibm /s Btu Top Mid Bot Top Mid Mid Bot Exit 2 s-ft Top Bot 0.183 30.4 .99C '9 2.167 29.7 .728 5.167 28.7 .473 5.667 15.7 .473 9.167 15.3 .393 15.17 14.7 .331 21.17 14.1 .301 26.17 11.8 .288 j

J Br V e l I l J

-m V, E. h U l I l 1 L. i l

a o$ I \\ O W i i i l

I l gny l CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS J7 A model has been developed to predict the onset of film flow i instability, and to predict water coverage The model has been validated against test data The model has been used to predict water coverage for the AP600 during postulated accident conditions 1 Coverage values, while different from what's used in the SSAR analysis, are adequate to limit the containment pressure and temperature - WGOTHIC water coverage sensitivity study 1 - Subsequent analysis with new coverage values confirms this to be true L ..__e

yng 1 NRC PHENOMENOLOGICAL REPORT REVIEW STATUS / COMMENTS t t NRC l l l

~l A PRELIMINARY REPORT ON AP600 SCALING D.R. SPENCER CONTAINMENT AND RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

l lIr1 A V* s. Scaling Analysis Approach Part 1. Perform a scaling analysis of the AP600 PCS following the procedure specified in NUREG/CR-5809. I. Safety Issue Accident Specification and Phenomena Evaluation. II. Perform Top-Down Scaling Analysis. III. Perform Bottom-Up Scaling Analysis IV. Develop Closure Relationships. V. Calculate Scaling Group Values Part 2. Ongoing Scaling activities: 1. Develop an independent computer model and compare to AP600 MGOTiliC) and to selected large scale tests. II. Apply the results of the scaling analysis to the large scale tests to assess the extent to which they support the prototype.

Part 1: 1. Safety Issue Accident Specification and Phenomena Evaluation

1. Issue and Success Criteria A group of design basis accidents known as high energy line breaks have the potential to challenge the design pressure or nuclear reactor containment. With no other active heat removal systems operational, the AP600 passive containment cooling system will:

Prevent the peak containment pressure from excet u: its design pressure, and 4 Reduce the peak pressure at 24 hours to less than h the design pressure.

2. Event Scenario A high energy line, either a reactor cooling system line, or a steam line, breaks releasing steam and water to containment.
3. Nuclear Power Plant The plant is the 2-loop Westinghouse AP600 with a passive containment cooling system. A schematic of the PCS is presented in Figure 1.
4. Accident Path With the reactor at rated power a double-ended cold leg guillotine rupture occurs in a steam generator compartment. No active containment cooling systems are operational. The RCS blows down. followed by the direct injection into the reactor of water stored in the accumulators, the core makeup tanks and the IRWST.

SU LU NN A T K r E N 4 e T L E t A e E F 4 A N L F t T N A 1 AP E I B AC G r TT A e A R NT R O m S I OO T i A A CD S sC R E E o m GG T e NA A N 1 e ILH E I A W E t OC S n s OS C C y CI P s S D G g T N n NR l i EI e W l d A o A o iD ~ R C r AE TT D \\ NA t OE T n CH N e [r E m M n E ia G t N n A o R C R A ev i S s C s P a P 0 0 0 0 6 6 P P A A f o p1_ _ o_ 3 ~ gn 7 0 i w 3 L c a E r 9 D 2 c 3 i t 1 a L m E e hc S i er ug i F

5. Phenomena identification and Ranking Table (PIRT)

The PCS is partitioned spatially and temporally to facilitate identification of important phenomena. Spatial partitions separate the inside and outside of containment. Inside containment may be further partitioned into regions and/or compartments. Outside containment can be partitioned into the downcomer and riser. Each spatial partition can be characterized by phenomena specified for a " module" in Figure 2. Temporal partitions include the time before external wetting, during which the inside of containment responds almost as though the outside surface of containment was adiabatic, and the blowdown phase during which mass and energy releases are at least two orders of magnitude greater than post-blowdown. The PIRT is presented in Table 1. l

Module l l l l Constituent Air / Vapor Water Solids I l l I I I I I I l Phase Stratified floundary jeis I,iquid jteel Concrete Fluid I.ayers l I I I I I I l I I I I i i i l i l i I I Geometry l l l Pools Films Plate Plate i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i l I hl E N151 i N1 E h!1 1 N1 E E E Field i I I I I I I M E MM M E M = mass E = energy MM = momentum Figure 2 Module Decomposition and Architecture

Table I PCS Phenonsena Idesatificathm and Ranking Tame Consp Phenimiena Illow Post-lllow/ Pre-Wet Pint-Wet I inter inter riser dwn inter riser dwn ~ Miulule Two component compressible volume gas Jets Ruoyant plumes Wall plumes Stratificathm Jet-plume minissy/entrainment Steam source superheating Flow field stability Meulule I.iegukt film heat transfer surface I.kguid film stability I.kguid film subcooling t Free cimvecthm heat transfer 11 = liigh importance Forced convectkm heat M = Maulerate importance transfer I, = 1.ow importance Radiation heat traemfer Free convection mass transfer Forced cimvection mass transfer l Jet impingement t i)pe-1) transient comducthm i MMule heat tramfer l sulkis Two or I hree-l) conductkm Convectiem Inter. Conducthm Mewtule Form and friction huses i

Part 1: II. Perform Top-Down Scaling Analysis

1. General Characteristics There is a single source of mass and energy into containment. All mass input from the break remains inside containment; there is no mass transfer out. The liquid mass contributes little to containment pressure. The steam mass pressurizes containment, except for the condensed portion.

i All energy is assumed to enter containment at the saturation temperature. The liquid energy contributes little to containment pressure. The gas portion energy has little effect on pressure beyond that due to the mass of gas. The energy absorbed by the internal structures and containment shell causes condensation of vapor, or vapor space mass removal. Energy absorption by structures is significant in terms of reducing containment pressure from the end of blowdown until well beyond the initiation of external cooling water. The total mass and energy rates are given; the steam / water fractions and the steam density were determined by assuming the pressure-temperature history shown in Figure 3 from the SSAR. The mass flow rate, volume flow rate and energy flow rates of water and steam are presented in Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6. 9 v -' - + - - -

i l! 1ll l g.-@gE ? C i E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 4 2 0 8 6 4 2 0 8 60 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 a 0 g Jj ~ gMi1gN}sh PN. a g gw 0 n i g :,.d4%y .w 0 r 1 u dyN:.d* % p: f,.,w 0 d fi.e M-C t .ni l l D%g J i t

  • 0 c.

i T J 0 O J %ar 4 <e,. p r 0 G ~lm .. *s ) 1 v V ? 7 *- e

~

~~- r y u b 3 3 t i 4. t

  • T d

s e ~ o, 0 p t ~ 0 )s m c - 0d e d i - w-T e o. 1 n r o P

  • : =$ 2 c

} s e e ~ 4-s i l' r b ( 4 -. wk-1 T k o 0m e e t s i I 0i I , ? ib.h gy e i P r u t - 9 *- ar y~ kfz. p e r _w~}~- - 0 e -l m T 1 N. ~ d r _~ k nR a A .p" 1 e rS ~-

  • l*

uS . A ((s s r s0 e0 r6 PP 5 0 gg3 5 0 5 0 5 0 A 5 5 3 2 2 1 1 3 e s.gv E* eh rt u gm iF or f 4

i t e l i h i O NAN' 7,~gu.. j'..;c'

  • cpi w? " t.s.z; A'Vt@"t,L. ' "-

3 K L pg a m 6 e-

p.. qq.& & ^-

'4 74%? - Wg f = 3ev v c NN[1f hk5bbkh7 i'. Jhk kI'"5If% h N 56W@hi@!ARMtI$"E, $ a W =;T F a2:murt;n~ er:nu =n m g

.yggggg

~:pg gggh!- - J'- 2 ? 5 ii 'i n LiEsi s2 =# 2,. . 3_}M_ _M ~ "it:xl '; -N i I m .,.aa n-c t*, T n =., n b a' u r,; n - -. = = + = a 1-- u - gl 3 bgg =, B i - I-e .6 su.--~# w 4

        • ' 5E g

l M re-i q i i a gewe40 em 8 l E*in = aq=. o. 7 u, +- c ;-- --_- = w m _.-w a.,, .r ,7+ W M+f;4 ' ' g __4 3 _ v ..:2. 5 = m

  • t N

N 1 k M IbE $I g _...Y N$, f a o v= u y w V a M) ND N N .c$

== 1 =_. 1 l (00SEv4) 0188 Mold oulewnpAJeleM 3 .u., a,.....@.k,A'1[i*- Q 8 5 8,- ,O O O o \\ 1 n M' M P *w 3 d.N ~'% M "~$;P*M " et, S 5! b t* = Jh ?r3 5

  • C 2L L

~.~ 4&w!!biht1*%%7.$. ,[ 4 k., '

1h 3

d T

v4 w ; W 4 M W wm g

$+itra WeC 9 7 ~;d 2. . wp

sm::

5 w a e en m:1, E A

  • uG E -

E - - 6 3f sain e*tE= ! ug ht:: = g '^h42 x g; g; 3 = Alg g 3 14 % g QM,= dix = :. s m' g fib?; r $.(at,iM R'$ m = p [ s a tt:, . e, -=

sen m

q t =v- =a L / 'M S" ^ -g

== - a+ ) @g+g -3Fpfhii4= 3: o

a. >

.m 7

== = m m a g g -- a an sew c ~ d 'MdII::Sj} I o v 1-i i g -ng _. p. _-. g l pa g "%* c - _ = 2+ = 'a** r ~~ g , -ew 4"s; 3, b :..,,, P y ? h b l V -=..

== = =. -{' s i I jEfj$555-M435::=.b B y-EE4 g- = = - m- ; O u =

== -- m_ y hN IN E Y_ Ei MSM N i =- =

== _- = : - _= w Mi' h k4-. ' 3 h Cf h M4j. E f a -- = __ NIT '_r. _- -;-c a h i " E k?MI l' ggy S_= m. + . g-, umgif -g _ p"., j =:_n =:

- M
= =.;

a 8_ o, g a G M Ya* ' w v. ] e isz l 1 I 1 l l i l I

fiCC Fi.. 9 mas W TiW25%EE.5 i-MRi? 2ER:E5%Tl-S n

Of/[ y = u ::hliE 23/8 MJhi$$ 9 03,6;4 E 4

.;2.w n. :.~ ,. aaq IM?d E curestsg= n w3 a = p @ Sir Mm. a p8 '? q--

m ;= r,-

u t .= ~-

s :; w w e y,5. m j

- *ca m t b?'"k@r:[:p yx.=w~ 2-2:w... T isED'if -.31**g..,' n 't *L t CC*d' r ~d LM s + ~ tn %=:b"a f:5HFe = w %n=. C;=.s ygs g Pi 5 '" g .~ r _. -y

      • W

'**32 ..e _ M' E g

car?y 34 p!

@7~1::'] M*** ? UI!$LT1:%1 tr;n, T 2df n _t ..i.Fs3 f IT M FiS*1 . m.,q gnet F-2 ' ' ~~;g... tT:t .s Qwb$** g $h .bh l 5 W~ nasa ej 4 .n v E _33I$ds# m__ _N_ __~ @N i dflilIY55II Zd g-4g [' - ++m* e-6 = - M - ,x - wim m e, m h ~e 3-p _ _J h.g g .8 T i ~*VM M~% Q_g M +4 w ~psc ...j aw 4 "!T -[ E j ,C 5$i

g v

~ - 4.,..,. E 4*H M unaus l n J u p u' N

    • f}Z

.u' . g5 M g - w ;;;. d 4,vLe i w m w;xa-: M 2 =a E +# W ,Z "E32 u y {# [ r'~ 'i d2 Wf ~4 l5 eel J e KWW ut p n.s E m as== a e n e =ua = a8 4 T=" T"" y s :. o t= be p-l l

.?

2. Control Volume Equations The control volume equations for the gas, the liquid pools and films, and the structures were developed, and the scaling groups were derived. The derivation and application of the condrol volume equations for mass, momentum, and energy are available from introductory level Huid mechanics texts' and are further demonstrated in NUREG/CR-5809. The following example will illustrate the process for a control volume 2

around the gas wall boundary layer. The wall boundary layer is shown in Figure 7. Conservation of Mass Conservation of mass for a control volume can he stated as: "the net emux rate of mass through the control surface equals the rate of decrease of mass inside the control volume." If density and selocity can he represented by average values, the equation for conservation of mass in a control volume can he written: (p, F, A,) = (p V) III Terms are required to represent the air and steam entrained into the boundary layer, the steam condensed out of the boundary layer on the liquid film, and the now of steam and air out the bottom of the houndary layer. Using the nomenclature of the scaling report: i (V )u = Qu,,,9 ^ k,A NI,,,,(l*4, -l'y,,) - (Q,,,plu (2) P 4 uq Equation 2 can he made nondimensional with the following substitutions: (ot, C ) i e em 9 m m m-

-- (a, c) The resulting dimensionless equation is: (a4 (3) 4,0 Disiding the dimensionIe~ss equation by the{ntrainment flux term gives: 1 1 (4) where the time constant is: -- (a,c) (5) the pi groups are: (6) (7) and the dimensionless pressure is (N) m e

\\\\ @i9 The group is not independent of the others and is not normally evaluated. L j Conservation of Energy. The equations and scaling groups can be developed for conservation of energy applied to the boundary la; control volume similar to the development for the mass equation. The energy equation will inclun, additional terms for convective heat transfer, and if we choose, for pressure. (The energy stored inside the control volume is given by the internal energy, or alternately by the relationship between internal energy and enthalpy: u = h + p/p). The energy equation is: (a,c) (9) Making the energy equation nondimensional as was done for the mass conservation equation a d dividing by the entrained energy term gives: (d.C ) (10) where the time constant is: _@,c) (II) m = r-.-

W the pi groups are: (a,c ) (12) (13) (14) (IS) and the dimensionless pressure and temperature are: - 6.c) (16) (17) As for corservalioa el mass, the group ~ ~ is not independent and is not evaIuated. (* *'I

b-l j r=._ 5 i W I = 3 ~i =5 d i E .5 O. ? I b h x W-2 ,e . [l n E Of. s o i e sg[ I s o a a / \\ v I \\ Iz \\ 26 e .e :- = 5 14 h bD .= = g 5 di 3 o5 'L E5 E$

4 E 4 Part 1: III. Perform Hottom-Up Scaling Analysis The top-down development of equations was described in Part 1: II. The development of equations at a higher hierarchical level is described in the following. A single equation representing the gas interaction with pools and structures is desired, so the pressure and temperature of containment can he calculated. Constituent level gas equations can he developed by summing the three individual phase level equations for the wall boundary layer, the huoyant jet, and the stratified fluid. The resulting equations are, for the gas mixture mass: 1) (18) ami for the gas mixture energy * -49 (19) (20)

w and the energy equation: F ~ The gas volume, V,,is not a constant; it reduces due to displacement by the addition of liquid water from the break and leads to pressurization of containment according to Equation (22). '4 wever, the total water added to the control volume (not just moved around within the control volume) is only 13,400 ft' out of 1,786,300 ft' (0.7%) and can be neglected. @.c) ?

E - (a.c) Comparison of Equations (21) and (25) shows that while a quantity of heat represented by h,- h,is deposited in the structure, the quantity h, is removed from the atmosphere. The difference, h,, is added to the containment liquid inventory by a negligible volume of liquid. Thus the pressure effect on the containment gas of depositing h,- h, in the structure is equivalent to removing h, from the atmosphere. The constituent level gas time constant and dimensionless groups are presented in Table III. The constituent level groups are normalized to the{ } (a,c) -m ..u

Table II Distribution of Steel and Concrete Inside Containment Compartment Concretc/ Liner Steel Steel Steel Shel! Steel Thickness: 2/.042 <.015 015.051 .051.255 0.1345 >.255 Above Deck Area 2200 28200 15700 54116 407 Volume 4400/92 230 2033 7328 136 llelow Deck Area 50422 16200 68828 23270 1379 Subtotal Volume 100843/2101 361 2624 2941 629 Containment Area 52622 44400 63828 38970 54116 1786 Total Volume 105243/2193 591 2624 4974 7328 765 m.

C-c* I i f b i N w ens et 7=C U tl'm) b

  • ll",

m E N 0 i.] 9 ax i e ,I. % 6 I .H. I 8.L 4 ~ ~- g =E. E A "U a I D ll a 9 e H 1 E2 V .I I l

Part 1: IV. Develop Closure Relationships Closure relationships are required to evaluate the pi groups and time constants for conservation equations. Such relationship were presented for the wall boundary layer, buoyant jet and stratified Guid in the gas volume by Peterson*, and Peterson, Schrock and Grief *. The wall boundary layer, huoyant jet and i stratified Ruid are shown in Figure 7. Additional relationships are required to evaluate the convective heat transfer and convective mass transfer rates. The McAdams free convection heat transfer correlation is used: Nu = 0.13 Gr Pr (M) and the heat and mass transfer analogy is used to get a mass transfer coefficient from the heat transfer coefficient: r vn Sh = Nu _yg (35) Pr ( Detailed partial pressure and partial density inferraation is required to evaluate the common dimensionless groups (Richardson, Grashof, etc.) appearing in the Hux ratios and the mass nux equation. A number of . simplifying assumptions were made to facilitate the calculation of required properties, the key assumptions being: Air and steam are ideal gasses. - 4.c) N .m m

E Part 1: V. Calculate Scaling Group Values A spreadsheet calculation was performed to quantify the magnitude of the time constants and flux groups for the gas, liquid and structures inside containment. Although the spreadsheet did not include external heat rejection or concrete heat sinks, the results are valid for all internal heat sinks for all time, and are valid for the containment shell for time less than approximately 1000 seconds. The results presented in Table IV show that: The thermal interaction between the gas atmosphere and the pool is negligible until approximately 10,000 seconds, when it may become significant. The thermal interaction between the gas atmosphere and the IRWST is negligible. The values for the IRWST were much less than for the pool and are not shown in Table IV. Ileat absorption by the structures is a dominant process from the end of blowdown to after the application of external water. Convective heat transfer into structures is negligible in comparison to mass transfer. Convective heat transfer out of structures (negative pi values) is only by convection (no mass transfer).

P Table IV AP600 Time Constant and Transport Ratios for Gas Constituent Level Time Constant Time into Transient (seconds) and Transport Ratios 5 25 100 500 1000 10,000 100,000 i - GN c)

== M N

Part 2: 1. Develop Independent Computer Model A simple, independent computer model of AP600 is under development to facilitate the scaling analysis and maintain independence from WGOTillC. The model includes the internal steel and concrete heat sinks, and external heat rejection by radiation, convection and evaporation. Preliminary results for containment pressure are shown in Figure 8, and agree well with WGOTillC calculations. The magnitude of heat removal by the steel and concrete structures is shown in Figure 9. The combined heat removal by all structures and external heat losses are shown in Figure 10. Part 2: IL Scale the Large Scale Test i Future work willinclude a scaling comparison of the large scale test and AP600, and validation of important phenomena by modeling AP600 and selected large scale tests with the independent computer model. This work will be reported in second scaling iteration report. References 1.L 11. Shames, Mechanics of Fluids, McGraw-flill Book Company,1%2.

2. NUREG/CR-5809 EGG-2659, "An Integrated Structure and Scaling Methodology for Severe Accident Technical issue Resolution", INEL, EG&G Idaho, Inc.
3. NTD-NRC-94-4100 (Docket No. STN-52-003) Letter, N. J. Liparulo (Westinghouse) to R. W. Horchardt (NRC), "AP600 Passive Containment Cooling System Letter Reports."
4. P. F. Peterson, " Scaling and Analysis of Mixing in large stratified Volumes", InternationalJournal of fleur and Mass Transfer, Vol 37, Suppl. I, pp. 97-196,1994.
5. P. F. Peterson, V. E. Schrock, R. Greif, " Scaling for integral Simulation in Large, Stratified Volumes",

NURETil 6, Sixth International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Thermal flydraulics, October 5-N,1993, Grenoble, France. aw-n< u a-

k=. = p" ".;;;;..._ ene vm man' se== tad Co m ,.h..h.<. i$,I. ' :. yc.* 3 v., ,,,.2 i'l'.$ . i+b < b Nd &Mfi: $v'3N. asuun I.;c.. h3 4

Ni N,.,- k h W h:h.. h.s x h

^ em x> ,, ~....

sM:~&.

'y ~~.$4,x. s.y V iSt& 4o. ..x s giti; f < g .,. wvy. WM ' ;;eV $bY,v <,,...,Y %. n. v Y$AE.Y?x ^ M. :k.$h,h w.'$$N(SE5hb?

ig),r 4'f'k'Y
  • ^

+: 4j ::;p;) " +'- - y.;y y 'F -J: + w.x [f@%.

g tW % /##it '...,.:, tw x-W;:: <.. g y m. e# e.x.'n..;<. y;s v..

Ms: fy x., f.:d;a~.:f #.Ms.y.:eMg sun y t.;.&.s;N*u: <-9tp /

x m <p:

v :.. m -ve. y. per..::q;^+ep' qws?:.y:yg ?s.:.: x.g{y4:%. x.':tN9;w x.+.s:srvwg.M g.g l5 53 q.-y. F .e

  1. .J. s>l.M 94.-:S !$j :* :

9 /q;9 ';4e S. )i:$ w' .yfsgy@;p. y v ;, v 4 akan y. 3::j$$ sg.j ' h'x5H: $ -: " <.%g,.s..N;.pMf.g a.p$:0 .g 4c ?

d. t '<*.

3 M5y

g. gg.f[4'%g?.f>;te:j.'$
.y.y. ? '^.. 'a

..u.n.s N V -W"^ .sxg. r.d:3fg' / 'y:+fi.rgy $yp;v xi g ,4 a.::n!a9. :.pg:jjgy..5,;;( givg:::y >.,.. <{- ^ .<W 4-Mv f :, ;.y"a.#d@f^ S$%+y.vs.' '; l;q. y.s '. v.v.:q s,<egn s.a.,ct :.g..:- u ;.,..! ::K.t..>.,.,- ".'g' fx.: q.yx :ep:N. /xM.9 - -

.g y

g 5,25MM ? NE?:Wi%( tXS$9:RNcGRgr4x6@+9;g:w?'s. c.a. e <c.o c. g (+1/$;45.b4"Cw(: s ..s y y, 3. ..,e -M: Mf6 iW: 1.M.%^ N:fA.4 : . ON*A 4 :-' @'r %.w dfM:l?' "'*}W;&.:@%>?$9).<M 2 ?.M@F@'6 ~3 '..u: S'&,M'MS%iit siG i%?5:0S t >I ungs 4 #w:h si:Lu%tm::qm.9'?X+i ,.~ w.m;p': ,.<.q::.z g4,VsN..p.?i?o5/.+gsW.:..;p: .WV4 <^Mn.4 k '#

k K'9-'

y 4li:' A:g+3y. e,%s.:?usgg

gy q.m s v> %W$(s:M

<we p.I4p; -;::xMtgh.;,g;P.:< :py:4' ~ ni

6% g M

p susse 9 p gog;. e v rgg2 t14: v w m;p w sm ssM.s99

~

M.w'9<.,. yp74$4'Od. IN Q < %p$h ' w,i? i,!8.y;:.{2v<l.J MEP9. %SE@C "~~ h:!Z%E' ::#i. 't%-$5.765;s4.hseh5 Ss 4 igg::+w#.$!%;.;c&M' g,p![nm..j (jf I s.w'f'[1 9?$-e.w. ve<d 458. ):Ro. f+MM.6 4:,pp :w v..-Aw w.s-nn.< :xmy'+5: s

x j jfp ^~ 3:W #A eyn:-:.s viehb1 :x2'+:f5f
  • "8

^ D@;.[!)N [,8%[jj [$.[dli$.M'@hMM!NMYiY3MD.W,]MM:':; N'" N@Jkbxy T'" 'p O: h' r O U '4:tdjfy:. 8"Q"" W b;mt>jj$(.y. m: y >$ 4.<x.rg;.Je%f ' qdy.,..g ss,4.:y.,g. g ;;;4;:#q ;..:: rex.:; ps4 gj., h.y.j;ls;.:iR '.gt.g fx;%5f ', g:if:jg:!. iff

6. E Sw
Mh

<:SX:5 Jcqg4., j . ',', pe.g' ng$g4(jfn p.g' g.:s. 3g:.i$ f 4 p e ; : @[f.Q:.:: @*.i(j:!W ^'MN.Qf4.ifig:ise ' @g.sg(:%, m:s.pi;sMs. '.9.c *.4%,y yp4s % F;j:$,. p$$ 4+;>;5 (:.34M w.:Upx., mil ' g,,.< 3n)g#> Q$vy.i,#lt4., $m8 %:v ) .+,+,u.<.;p,6.;.' a;%;x C 3 +nv-sy s.p%. v..W:. f.o.x 7...% s ,y g Q 4 .. >:g;(.M r..sh.g?< aug maue .tx y,:.&

  • M.jyy,,:i3&,.%,s yg..:y yn,.go;;,sasw.y:4;m.y.ysi.R:.qs::pg g[.,gg:g.pggg.e.

< h. 9 s:.<sA?:an:: y e :- nr2 .ww ;:n .. W 'N I ^ - vg w:g'.u-d.p:ss.; :qqp.p,,.e. = ~.g $2 - y.xg6: c x;s;;. - g.:.gr:. x +: m. ..l+%.e%pl.. $yswas <g ',.....,_ c t.g.. h.,... CignWQf'k'%Kf' %;: .y ..f...p: dv"$*io @ O X%.f+. ' M - M .[q.. *',1?;it!!$?jp8:$lfdD' : V+%. ggidy*f 9'fi' .i v.ws +;W. ecA.3.&$4. :;p$2&.%.e)..T.S,%s:i3M:.wv :.s.v.F.vw$. 4'.,f yegM'.;;jfp.:.,gy.4/.4 M&..y.4y :..jhi?x.' g:!jggW@e%Mgf.9:p:ag. ' t isWSZ:M d.W M;L gi e s y ] <j.j] g -.g ?'<.png:.ysin:9i4 yy#:$$w: . w : < 4?.:.$V?iW'^':!:$.: $lPM :pv 4.;-'..f,,g.4-war .j*.;:: T M93. S 7.; f: f - di.y s .x -3 ., xqge..xy -.. : :.,- <<. c w V w.#.,5.f%.f,8y;+3.h.3,. %.,j.'09f4 47.6.:.?f9,p/.fP:v'.:B$t.g;p 'y3:. s. vi . yJ..f vQsgJW o.g;^ ; $i+9+v9l-),,.4.5:bf@r6us tW?$ sky *M%$p s m 4 0.. i*'. g :,+3;4 AX jJ;e,v/6.v, : v/.,j,s s95gf.: x <g' g ,;,gg.w:,.v. 4w s E: c; o g ;w g, sig s 9

g-gy y.;,
-6.um:!d:;f'v ~;fy4.N d

'x.'j9&a&b 35WJflap.x'.p'dpg ggs$4.:

  1. . c.:c. q +

4

e y e-A 4

w 3.M,. .5; %$.r p Ago )$%.+4f:$$:

4. Wqw
N#:. 4;4 y

.q* 2:W-J$ DPI .., q&fgi. $-Y;..$7.#.y:ljj 3 'it:.yM%$ ;:fep?$dyx;t p':::&.'. femag v.,p+g3F.:.we +'W <$ 2Mgn.%p.u. %.,w.sy,q;p$.%g.:xx, d:ky,:q:sps+t-:t;pfvvx

w$. EW/$44%a< : c.w :ym.wucyh:s+

+. y'. :. -ir idM.$g T O ^ y . :4 pg /,F4:@-PA ' US,w'-v fyps p gj WN. jp;g;(+o.:e.y;. t:we.m R.y,. . w:+?

2. #

q ::d20:g FO.4-fErj> :y... ..f+w. v. .., pm.: cow: v s p;h'W.h$M3iijii$3f[ h;.,,.*:22.>y g'A;.?g.%[h.T" .y

e. 4: 1.

.p .- p gj w.:( .;3.fjkMy:+1 IT^<p ((*l. 9:jji#M ji$ '$#.'hShk-k' MfiTh.hfgsjg y ib h6. <63iW .id 4$i2A'f 4; ' f $f;,5 k Q syj.

s$DM ks%(($SM

'N @.$$$$$d% %h;7'4 *W5M'i#: d$NEhNh"';:ss4,wc, fh$MM.@.y!'iQ; $5 +v.v.%'!*?% $AM ~$: C V#% ?m:M5ih W::GM4 Come . f, A%. s3.4p;xQ....fy;pf!.;$...g!q['. c- ..-0:.y 4g[x ::q'p # n6s ' usay/.: OM: y. j'[+ 7. :f):4. fJ[$.70r..i:v.3: $. !)S96 g,y ..y.w @: e..f.gx s' ? ^^ y r s;pw.g.aw>.F:pd.,,;,.;...<+.*t::4'YM.<;.;$j. :g.pyd. <.45 6 ..w<be.s s 9 '< - v q,:st: m. Wis::g, n WifMuttessi&925s.tygrW,.vyn h@p(3l,:4.. #'h.,<.,h.v o a;y:h A.M pD'& '('$g ' y.; ' %v*gew;.c c M.;.. ? i@ h Y,.< t@s

  • pgO:

rp; ;M .g( wy .g sy w.q +:. v PRvM 34is-N:e" ..s 9%# d W5: E 8 95 .6s $k.k Z tem %ki(#W:E $$)'f j DiMA$5I{y"M.:g;<',( ijh@y.j.g:...j92[7a..yy,.M <b %?p:q.sb.2'%< k.yJff.i39)jsRJ%k'::$45 d%'$.p$'N ' 8Nw25 s $.iSp%(' ^: M M M [ f43Or'3*$tijg:g!'M.y jiMNEM ' C E g 0Q" ^ ' ' ! F.9:h.w v}'}.%r :ye) pQ.'.f.;}, k%g.,.pd.:g;'l4j%.g w x[e.$, m g gtv .v.- peg Q<z y+;Sfgw Ke:.?. < c,;?:o 9v c.w::pp:,.4+;q,: g..gy., w.::ss,.9 f y: -<of.m..

w. :+

' rc p s;,y:4 cjy h;;Slp.948;;. .e^ A Q<y t W y. . Nf. ;.qgso;;g.pg-- <,. :

l$2.:5;8%. :<x

<..;s 4 ev 9'.c4?.::%4 y <:skli$ik gW::s> WN.< <w%. w$:M$( $kb35dsb!hA 'gg V ^ :qf +$W-Md 75Y ;.y '.. NWW.j.j[f.. : .%. p.. af s:w r.wa c O /- V Q gs v:445. :,nyx >xw s.O;e anu :::Q $i. ep'v ..{hjh, 8N8MiY'2UF*1 5 T M M g r AM M p @p @m %'SNh::cagg @ d[ N 6 LM ga W $FW = ggMMMag se esskamm u -aw +u. nn%~u.ma,pspme;+s. %sw,2.yh63. %e.rv; w:ms y ~ m.,g e., jip?. v w _. _ tys+ ym 'y MM& WWiMx$M@[M,7;t 'Md:f-Q[eWA$dji ._y.,.. >ia;:ggrT;3ivi':74

fh b

QPS$dyd%M]iWO4:;. [$.% Q>; ; 3:iIfc.; ",5745gfb;r:M44.f.. Zh! b L %.4: N M WWW;5 MMie%m%jXWsW aW .E_ y JM1 m "u!)s $ w:p p..,gj.v~ ssp.~,..i% e& W mp0M Ja,r W 9m2 M_ Ws.m W9 +Uh m xTv Q a.. mmmWuw a n %eW sn .C M W S Ps A M M!@ M Wi W O.:uswersy?;* n:g h;v&@$..- 4Muk M _ J.,ane.0

c sgy 5 e>4 g

..tigw.i.amwoas+ s::tw.Sr = wamp%p.s4 gm. w x 'M 'tQi'a[p. w y.w%,. ~:$ , a:n%s?:m:c@Qv,. 's. di - h 7 m.m,sJ.lMyl m.r:s 54in%p ' 9i 13 5 a :v.-w. ,.c sa gmu c ,x,.;; ; >, es. gnn bi Nf _ l N?!! M r. . 'b f q;;c^ e seg s:4_ <g:4 m a^.

i. les; j;'%

6 $3. nco.s;g x A< > ~p, ;: v.;. p. gjysy.c hi.: i' s v ' g , x%q ~ ' '.rn,x.,' ,,egE--:,, h]:j ', ',.I;. s,.:iy. ' kykg ;[* :,kE'.g: } vs.g m +v mus yb >w. Z g 4 MS. ,,. s.: e.,+ m;+q e, a". n; <:.<a ..y ,6,= g *C c.w -

y

...f < x m> se.g ( p.v,:3, m.... ~1:gn. :s v aJ vm ~ p .nw eg m:< < a.:y, ee q " m ^ m# % m.rp 77 L.: ...,..,W L,,... g l y. - 2 , m.;. . v :2.mu.vmw.sem;;uwe . me.

u y 888@

8 8 !0 8 W 9 =5 \\ (e!sd) eJnsseJd EE i m sen U Om i i i

C, \\ I b5 I I

ge= i m -.a>e = P$.*N"%g $.sy%$% 2#3f%wg:hlq"??f*g4Q%gd%s ~ q "h4fm - M XfTyftt d -- tW# wyGM f+lg,4+ tyM")?.*TY*nP%ne,w.%,fLxsM7m~W,e[adind] s~ 5 L-w <:'r 2 ae ;49 Ch i[i&g)ifsP*s) aw ka e M n._ 3*W.sm, %a;w-w 6 M( b "?!sd%w@2 hg; + ~En 2 'ef 'e - - im 5

tu u k @s % m 1

an ~ $. Ml 3.4%. n k=h

aliMPgpaw-dirRP.,

1 = r 2 y4ho,. wedge . nwm A w.:as W xw p4mW M rM,y T" ys ..m e yse dis.s,y B&gg$e[SpinWY 'g'- h . ~

ri A +

e E

Eg.

c g ? g4vggF% y D dN 4 5 ~ 3 r$ p an&qn.mqgw ;A md p 4 n+# $'? r : #-.." w x sn %e%,#M ' w h*5%R@?{C@lNkk hdIMf$$ k/[c@J . D 5 rhtdHM e"em an W-r = st? - 49 g

  • 3 gg g=

m. g# y htq$ftl O J ( "#dg@sMidaMLa#W,_&J Qg il i 5 ij$[h 14 t ggt t ! F8E8f f !E J sg .x. M 4 m. 'hk $NK7iffEMFRO@MO*W@ z w o _. w ag g,gJe $pa 8er#gej.

  1. m!-

p .c gggk 5 gg w. 3 g y @'g.#e 3 .-gggq .3 o. v m a uup tyjpdf "%a L de r ,4.3 g I o r s"1 qm:ctptgg 1g5$- g u =.y gh .1. hg. %gf{;;Mi

M 5

itiMg,f %+ 'n ' u 5W~ I $n%aa@n%A%5AktM4 5 r m.wn(mc i r s xman dE nN.g) 3 g y E. N '. 8 I8E!MIM3 g pggy.u..y g EliKf*f E 4msf y%ygits - 4hin d h aga A} B B adiE9s,_- +. - u. iEB$$i' y= zu .= n g T* 9. C u (ces/nia)eleu mol3 TeeH 2 e L. 3 52

=- A F' + *j NRC AP600 PCS SCALING STATUS NRC l

gry MEETING ACTION ITEMS m,,..,, DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBLITY DUE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

V1 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION np,,,. f PRESENTATION TO UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AP600 Passive Containment Cooling System (PCS) Computer Code Validation (Mid Stage 2) Meeting i MONROEVILLE, PA JULY 27,1994 l

yn AGENDA s.,, WESTINGHOUSE /NRC MEETING AP600 PCS Computer Code Validation (Mid Stage 2) 8:30 Introduction J. Butler 8:45 LST WGOTHIC Modelling Plans M. Kennedy 9:00 NRC WGOTHIC Review Status NRC 9:30 WGOTHIC Lumped Parameter LST Results Summary M. Kennedy BREAK 10:30 WGOTHIC Validation Results and Status M. Kennedy Input and Modelling Methodology Comparison to LST 212.1 LUNCH 1:30 NRC CONTAIN Validation Results and Status NRC - Input and Modeling Methodology Comparison to LST 212.1 ,'c 3:30 NRC Data Needs Discussion All 4:00 Meeting Wrapup, Action items All

A V *.'re I d INTRODUCTION J.C. BUTLER ADVANCED PLANT SAFETY AND LICENSING

  • r

F7 A Ve - '. r LST WGOTHIC MODELING PLANS 1 CONTAINMENT A D RAD OLOGICAL ANALYSIS \\

REVIEW OF WGOTHIC LST MODELLING PLANS LST TASKS and OBJECTIVES ~ Task Node Type Test Code Version Objective r A Lumped Baseline Version 1.0 V&V WCAP-13246, Rev. O B Lumped Baseline Version 4 1.2 Support DSER and show net effect of new (version 4 1.2) models. It will justify the acceptability of the SSAR Rev 0 models with respect to the correlation upgrades. C Subdivided Phase 2/3 Version 1.2 Show phenomena are modelled correctly and all the important phenomena are modelled. (Two tests will be run and detailed local comparisons made.) D Lumped Phase 2/3 Version 1.2 Show effect of noding and momentum equation on pressure. Demonstrate that using lumped model is acceptable for vessel pressure and temperature response by comparison to C and to measured data E Lumped Blind Version 1.2 Add confidence to our modelling techniques by performing blind prediction. F Lumped Ph=0 2/3 Vercien 1.0 Sh0= not 0"00t of vorcion 1.2 med2.00 0=t:0tc 0000ptObiFty Of the SSAR Rev 0 m0d2 with r00p00t to the 007:0!ction upgr0dec. 0 Note: Task F will be removed since version 1.2 was used in Task B which was reported in PCS-GSR-001 submitted to the U.S. NRC on June 30,1994.

l VA P' SUT A T S W E IVE C R R N C IHTO GW CRN J. f

  • S

s I WGOTHIC LUMPED PARAMETER LST RESULTS

SUMMARY

=[ M. KENNEDY CONTAINMENT AND RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

p Co, c- ) i l l 1 ~ I' _J Figure 9 Plan View of Model Below Operating Deck p,,

WGOTHIC LUMPED PARAMETER LST RESULTS

SUMMARY

FROM "AP600 PCS DBA MODEL AND MARGIN ASSESSMENT " REPORT v OVERVIEW: Relevant test conditions for baseline LST . Results of test using WGOTHIC Version 1.0 with and without simulating subcooling (Reported in WCAP-13246, Rev. 0) Vessel pressure results with Version 1.0 (P.eported in WCAP-13246, Rev. 0) Code and input changes made from version 1.0 to version 1.2 f . Results of test using WGOTHIC Version 1.2 (Reported in PCS-GSR-001, "AP600 PCCS DBA Model and Margin Assessment",6/30/94) . Vessel pressure results with Version 1.2 (Reported in PCS-GSR-001) Conclusions e =

Relevant Measured Baseline LST Conditions i Test Number Vessel Steam Flow Vessel External Pressure Rate (Ib/hr) Wetted % Film Water (psia) Temperature R7L 92.9 658 0% N/A R11L 42.8 3610 67 % 86 F R12L 43.7 -3976 71 % 66 F R9L 23.4 1304 100% 50 F

300 280 - ~ - -O 260 ~, 3; :.:Ag.:: = =:.g :: = :: :.::g::=:=:.g: n.- ta T, ,...m.. ,..E.. - 240 -~~- -~ ~~--- -~t-- / .R i ..... g i Q220 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~" - W* G~m :

q = =.;2-l

- ~-- "~ - w ~ ~ h e c'p' N 8.200 -l - - - ~ ~ - - -~ ~ ~ - - 5 g A O' = 1 y180 - -l ~ ~ - " -~ - ~~ -~~- ~ ~ - d iso 140 ~~-~ ~~ -~~~~ ~~~~ ~~- 120 ---~~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - - ~---- ~ ~ ~ -

~ ~

- ~~ 100 ',100. i 0.0 110.0 220.0 330.0 440.0 550.0 660.0 770.0 880.0 990.0 1 integrated Vessel Area (ft^2) Measured Wet Predicted Wet __o__ l Measured Dry Predicted Dry _ _. e--- Measured Pressure = 42.79 psia Predicted Pressure = 57.8 psia Figure 1 Measured and Predicted Vessel Inner Surface Temperatures Using Version 1.0 Without Simulating Subcooling for LST R11L (Reference Figure 30 p.117 WCAP 13246)

l \\ 300 280 ~* - 260 ~- ... u. ...g -.5 - 240 gy- .... n -,,j---& - ,g-G- - = - .. _..g. /,g !b.220 -E"

  • -.. n,- - -

l 9-~~~ -O~~ W . g _. -- N 8{,200 -O e A ~ -O~ Y = y180 8 160 140 120 100 O.0 110.0 220.0 330.0 440.0 550.0 660.0 770.0 880.0 990.0 1,100.0 Integrated Vessel Area (ft^2) Measured Wet Predicted Wet e _ _.o _. Measured Dry Predicted Dry ....g... g.._ Measured Pressure = 42.79 psia Predicted Pressure = 44.1 psia Figure 2 Measured and Predicted Vessel Inner Surface Temperatures Using Version 1.0 Simulating Subcooling for Test R11L (Reference Figure 39 p.126 WCAP-13246) P/

120 / / / O / / / 100 -/- - / ./ / ./ / / gg e / wa. /: au / 2 m / (n / o> 60 O"_ - - - - - - ~ -- / / u q) ./ -.o +/ D / e +' a- /- 40 / / / /. / 20 / / / / / 0' 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 i Measured Pressure (psia) e Dry LST Wet LST o Figure 3 Large Scale Test WGOTHIC Version 1.0 Predicted Versus Measured Vessel Pressure (Reference Figure 46 p.133 WCAP-13246) 8

  • 4 e

w .g r i

Code Programming Changes from Version 1.0 to 1.2 . Entrance effects multiplier on heat and mass transfer coefficients primarily to model separate effects tests i . Addition of a log-mean noncondensable pressure term to the boundary layer mass transfer correlation . Liquid film enthalpy transport to directly account for convective heat transport in liquid film . Mixed convection correlation i r e. i

input Changes Made from Version 1.0 to 1.2 . Heat and mass transfer multipliers to account for entrance effects in the annulus were calculated and applied to the lower volumes of the annulus. r ^ ~#1 M,n = 1 + C'(y2-rd . The annulus hydraulic diameter was changed to standard definition to be consistent with entrance effect multipliers applied. Dn=4 . Inner vessel wall heat transfer multipliers were computed and applied to the inside surface of the containment to convert from the Colburn correlation to the flat plate correlation. f 3 .2 "L = 0. 0 29 6 D3 M

  1. 1 h

0.023 tl co

input Changes Made from Version 1.0 to 1.2 (continued) . Mixed convection chosen. t . The annulus flow path inertia lengths were modified to balance the steady state volume average velocity with the corresponding flow path velocity. . Simulation of subcooling no longer needed. Mechanistic correlations used to model subcooling on the dome since liquid film enthalpy transport model is available. l l i "f \\

300 280 -~ 260

.,,::~""g.~. ~ :.:.:-C

- '&m"-NI- ~-

~ ~ - -

-W 240 "... -E, .......n ...g- ?" u, 220 - - ~ ~ - - ~ ~ '-~ ~ <D-- G ~~ 8,200 ~& ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - -~ ~- - -~~ 7"- - ~~ ~~ ~~ g w O _,,_,_-e e- =N 380 .. ~... ~ ~...; 3 .~. ... ~.. ~~-- . ~.. ~. 160 - ~ ~ - ~'-- -~ - ~ - - ~~~- 140 ~ ~ ~ ~~'- 120 - ~~ --~~ -""~ - ~~ - i ~ i l i 100 0.0 110.0 220.0 330.0 440.0 550.0 660.0 770.0 880.0 990.0 1,100.- Integrated Vessel Area (ft^2) l Measured Wet Predicted Wet l c . _.o. _. Measured Dry Predicted Dry ....m... ..- e--- i Measured Pressure = 42.79 psia Predicted Pressure = 46.2 psia Figure 4 Measured and Predicted Vessel Inner Surface Temperature with Version 1.2 for test R11L (Reference Figure 3 p.14 of PCS GSR-001) 4 ~e -.. ~

120 1 ../ i \\ ../ / / / / 0-.A-100 ../ / l .-./ / /

/

gg .G / ../ w CL v / e ../ u 3 w / w / 60 u. i a_ / B / ~ + .O / 'O %/ m a". / A-- 40 .../ / ./ / ,/ 20 -/ / / / / / 0' 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Measured Pressure (psia) Dry LST Wet LST l l o 4 Figure 5 Large Scale Test WGOTHIC Version 1.2 Predicted Versus Measured Vessel Pressures (Reference Figure 6 p.17 PCS-GSR-001) ,e ~ ,e

Conclusions Lumped parameter Version 1.2 results in good agreement with the large scale test data and further supports the conclusions made in WCAP-13246 that: . WGOTHIC gives a conservative pressure response WGOTHIC is an acceptable code for containment analyses 1 l l e, l I l l l

F1 A Ps J 't WGOTHIC VALIDAT!ON RESULTS AND STATUS M. KENNEDY CONTAINMENT AND RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS N

WGOTHIC LST VALIDATION RESULTS AND STATUS BASED ON DISTRIBUTED PARAMETER MODELLING OVERVIEW: . Objective . Data comparison formats per May 25,1994 meeting . Noding Methodology . Boundary-and initial conditions for test 212.1 A . Preliminary steady state comparisons for test 212.1 A Preliminary transient comparisons for test 212.1 A . Conclusions I .g N t 1 s m.

Objectives of Distributed Parameter LST Show all the important phenomena are modelled correctly and that we understand their impact on pressure predictions. r Serve as basis for comparison to demonstrate WGOTHIC lumped parameter SSAR models are conservative. i I l

Sugges:ec _ST Data Comaarison Format (per May 25,1994 NRC Meeting) Westinghouse Plans Lumped Parameter Runs (To be presented at future meeting) Pmeas vs Ppredict to show conservative underestimate of total heat removal Subdivided (Preliminary Results to be presented today) Detailed comparisons to test data will be made to demonstrate agreement with test data to meet stated objectives Attached format shows information on code results that will be presented at this meeting. i i b'

Steacy State Data Comaarisons Tout (degF) Measured h Calculated ) Mevap, total (Ibm /hr) Meas'ured Calculated i Pvessel (psia) Measured ~ w Calculated Vannulus (ft/sec) r Measured Calculated 1 i Boundary Conditions Steam Flow Ibm /sec Steam Temp deg F Steam press psia Pambient psia Axial Distributions Tin (ambient) deg F Humidity 9'o Measured vs Calculated Water flow Ibm /hr Plots of: Water temp deg F Water coverage frac T(z), wall T(z), internal node Other input Pair at mep'i;rement Kloss locations

Transien:s Ptotal Time Velocity l Time Pair Time E '.*

4 Noding Methodology for Subdivided LST Model General Guidelines Followed: -%3 4 h

Noding Determination-for Subdivided LST Model Other Considerations: co,y r M i of = r-mg e w

. ca,c ) l I 1 l Figure 7 Noding Diagram of Subdivided LST P/

Boundary and initial Conditions for Test 212.1 A (at 9.7728 hours or 6600 seconds into transient) L- - %) I e

l Preliminary Steady State Comparisons for Test 212.1 A l (at 9.7728 hours or 6600 seconds into transient) l' - %63 l r m h

Preliminary Steady State Comparisons for Test 212.1 A (at 9.7728 hours or 6600 seconds into transient) ~ (*,e) es .4

Preliminary Axial Temperature Distribution Comparisons for Test 212.1 A Local measured and predicted vessel inner surface wall temperatures t . Local internal vessel fluid temperatures - Above operating deck, fluid temperatures shown are measured 1" from inner surface of vessel wall - Below deck, fluid temperatures shown are measured inside the compartment because there are no measurements 1" from inner wall - All temperature predictions shown are for the node along the wall l

c (a,0 E 5 t I a 1 Measured 90 Measured 270 Predicted Predicted O O G -- --g-Predicted: Above 90-135.270-225:45-90.270-315 Predicted: Below 90-167.193-270;45-90.270-315 Figure 10 Measured and Predicted Vessel inner Surface Temperature at Locations 90 and 270

  • s s

o. ,--e e

~ ~ (a, @ l V CSSC1 GCig!!L (IL) Measured 0 Measured 330 Measured 30 Predicted O O A Predicted: Above Deck 0-45.315 360 Predicted: Below Deck 0-45.315-360 Figure 11 Measured and Predicted Vessel Inner Surface Temperature at Locations 0, 30, 330 U'

C r- - (gv) i i i J l1 Measured 180 Predicted O --9 -- Predicted: Above Deck 167-180.180-193 Predicted: Below Deck 167-180,180-193 i Figure 12 Measured and Predicted Vessel Inner Surface Temperature at Location 180 P*

@M j i \\ l Measured 210 Measured 150 Predicted O O o-Predicted: Above Deck 135-157.5,202.5-225 Predicted: Below Deck 90-167,270-193 Figure 13 Measured and Predicted Vessel Inner Surf ace Temperature at Locations 150 and 210

, (" Y') ~ i t t k Measured 120 Measured 240 Predicted O 'O 4-- Predicted: Above Deck %135,270-225 i Predicted: Below Deck 90-167.193-270 Figure 14 Measured and Predicted Vessel Inner Surface Temperature at Locations 120 and 240

Ca}d Measured 60 Measured 300 Predicted i O O G-Predicted: Above Deck 45-90,270-315 Predicted: Below Deck 45 90. 270-315 Figure 15 Measured and Predicted Vessel Inner Surface Temperature at Locations 60 and 300 <~ '

-(a,b) ~ p 4 Measured 90 Measured 270 Predicted Predicted O O O- - Predicted: Above 90-135,107-115; 45-90,270-315 Predicted: Below 90-167,193-270; 45-90.270-315 Figure 16 Measured and Predicted Internal Fluid Temperature at Locations 90 and 270 V,-

c(aM '~ T b i 1 I I i i and Measured 0 Measured 30 Predicted O O -O-Predicted: Above Deck 0-45,315-360 Predi:ted: Below Deck 0-45.315-360 Figure 17 Measured and Predicted Internal Fluid Temperature at Locations 0,30 ,e

(a,b) t i ) i i ? .______....s.., ~ Measured 180 Pmdicted O ---4 -- Predicted: Above Deck 167-180,180-193 Predicted: Below Deck 167-180,180-193 Figure 18 Measured and Predicted Internal Fluid Temperature at Location 180 I 8

.i -, (a 3 s P Y 1 J J Measured 210 Measured 150 Predicted O O ....g.... Predicted: Above Deck 135-157.5,202.5-225 Predicted: Below Deck 90-167,193-270 Figure 19 Measured and Predicted Internal Fluid Temperature at Locations 150 and 210 P.,*

240 ,,0 9.00 n g .e... = ~ Eo C1. ,8 160 e- .t =

  • 140 o

.V m C v,120 mo> 100( 80 60 0 5 10 15 20 Vessel Height (ft) Predicted n V Predicted: Above Deck 90-135. 225-270 Predicted: Below Deck 90-167.193 270 Figure 20 Predicted Internal Fluid Temperature at Locations 120 and 240 Note: There was no measurement at these locations I r

i .l l 240 )

o.,. 0 1

1 n v w v I " 180 i z <-*eu u CL. 8 160 - - - - ~ ~ H .z o E 140 -- --- ~ ~- - - - ~ ~ - - - - ~~ - - -- o .V m c 8 120 m U> i i { g 80 -~~-~~- - ~ ~ - - - - - - 60 0 5 10 15 20 Vessel Height (ft) Predicted n v Predicted: Above Deck 45-90,270-315 Predicted: Below Deck 45-90,270-315 Figure 21 Predicted Internal Fluid Temperature at Locations 60 and 300" Note: There was no measurement at these locations g 9 M 1 j l J

- (c., @ v i Figure 22 Preliminary Measured and Predicted Vessel Pressure for Test 212.1 A k g i

Noncondensable Measurements Air partial pressure was measured at two locations for Test 212.1 A: I Dome-90 -63"-3" . F-0 -6" The measurements (taken from Figure 4.1-2, p.40 of QLR) are presented on the following figures as air pressure ratio to be consistent with WGOTHIC output. Air pressure ratio is defined as the air partial pressure divided by the total vessel pressure. 6 1

i i , (a [ - I t i i ? i i 1 i 1 Figure 23 Measured and Predicted Air Pressure Rat'o at Location Dome-90 -63"-3" - i 1

Figure 24 Measured and Predicted Air Pressure Ratio at Location F-0 -6" (Below Operating Deck) W 6 y -,

Velocity Meters 4 Give indication of velocity and flow direction parallel to the vessel wall. . Hontzsch meters have an integral directional output. . Pacer velocity meters have no integral directional output. Pacer meters were not as reliable as the German meters. The Pacer meters located at elevations D and E did not function for a majority of the tests. . For the velocity meters located in the dome there is an uncertainty introduced i as to their specific orientation relative to the wall. . The type of meter at each location and the direction of flow indicated by each meter for test 212.1 is given below. i Locations Tvoe Direction Dome-42"-165 -1.5" Hontzsch Up A-90 -1.5" Hontzsch Down-i Dome-42"-345 -1.5" Pacer No direction D-180 -2" Pacer No output E-30 -2" Pacer No output

Wh J, Measured Predicted O .-g_. Figure 25 Measured and Predicted Internal Velocity at Location Dome-42-165 -1.5" (German meter and WGOTHIC have up flow) l ',*

D . - (a h 1 J Measured Predicted (45-90) Predicted (90-135) 0 --4-- A-Figure 26 Measured and Predicted Internal Velocity at Location A-90 (German meter and WGOTHIC have down flow) I'.'

_, (a h J t s De 8-Measured Predicted - O --4-- Figure 27 Measured and Predicted Internal Velocity at Location Dome-42"-345-1.5" (Pacer meter has no direction indication) U..'

Subdivided LST Results Summary and Conclusions . Conservative more raaid predicted pressurization is believed to be a result of using the conservative Jchida correlation for internal heat sinks. r . Predicted pressure reaches accurate pressure plateau. . Accurate prediction of temperature rise through air annulus. . The cause for the difference (of less than 20%) between the measured and predicted evaporation flow rate needs to be further investigated. It may be remedied by taking a predicted time averaged evaporation rate like was done for the measurements. . Axial wall temperature distribution prediction agrees very well with measurements. WGOTHIC accurately models noncondensible distribution. . Internal velocity predictions consistent with available data. . The data is taken from QLR which is preliminary. Final results will use data ll from' final test report.

prq o.... e NRC CONTAIN VALIDATION RESULTS AND STATUS NRC 4D 1

a A Pe 's ; i f NRC DATA NEEDS DISCUSSION 9 ALL l

MEETING ACTION ITEMS DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBLITY DUE' 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

  • ~

6 8.

El WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION n g m.,. f PRESENTATION TO UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AP600 Passive Containment Cooling System (PCS) Blind Test - Baseline input Definition Meeting MONROEVILLE, PA 6 JULY 28,1994

r'1 AGENDA o,,,, WESTINGHOUSE /NRC MEETING ^ AP600 PCS Blind Test - Baseline Input Definition 8:30 Introduction J. Butler 8:45 PCS Blind Test Basis M. Kennedy Basis for Blind Test Lumped Parameter Model Nodalization Basis 9:30 Basis and Assumptions for WGOTHIC BlindTest input M. Kennedy Baseline Table of WGOTHIC Input, Revision 0 Discussion Mechanisms for freezing data and changing input assumptions 12:00 Meeting Wrapup, Action items All .~

VM A Pe ' 'i I INTRODUCTION J.C. BUTLER ADVANCED PLANT SAFETY AND LICENSING Eb

prq t PCS BLIND TEST BASIS M. KENNEDY CONTAINMENT AND RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS m

Basis for Blind Test Lumped Parameter Model . Lumped parameter is consistent with SSAR and WCAP modelling techniques. . Lumped parameter noding is easier to set up for complex AP600 geometry. . The comparisons to test data thus far show that lumped parameter is adequate for design basis accidents. The blind test model will use lumped parameter model to maintain consistency with. AP600 modelling methods: - to show it is conservative with respect to pressure - to build confidence in our current design basis modelling techniques. l 1 I 0,. i ~, . ~.. - -... - -.. +.,.. -~

..,an-3' I i ~ @O& VC W w O w @Q (o (U CD C O

  • G CU N

(O V O Z i t.. ' r

I 9, M q mu e le do M TSL dna 006PA n e e w t e B se i t ira l i m iS N e .f 1 l l i

Differences Between AP600 and LST Model - (9,cj r a l l em N e

ea. k P1 A Y' f i BASES AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR WGOTHIC BLIND TEST INPUT [' M. KENNEDY CONTAINMENT AND RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

Categories of WGOTHIC Input Volumes I Flow paths . Thermal Conductors g Boundary Conditions y . Initial Conditions . Control Parameters .-Climes

  • o e

.}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20072A012&oldid=4413743"