|
|---|
Category:GENERAL EXTERNAL TECHNICAL REPORTS
MONTHYEARML20248F3341989-03-31031 March 1989
Design Certification Licensing Review Basis
ML20246M1121988-12-31031 December 1988
Vol Viii to Resolution of Outstanding Nuclear Fission Product Aerosol Transport & Deposition Issues Wbs 3.4.2
ML20151G1141988-07-15015 July 1988
Design Certification Licensing Review Bases
LD-88-049, Flow Distribution & Tube Vibration:Evaluation of Sys 80 Steam Generator Tube Lane/Economizer Corner Region1988-07-0101 July 1988
Flow Distribution & Tube Vibration:Evaluation of Sys 80 Steam Generator Tube Lane/Economizer Corner Region
LD-88-015, Nonproprietary Base Line Level 1 PRA for Sys 80R NSSS Design1988-01-31031 January 1988
Nonproprietary Base Line Level 1 PRA for Sys 80R NSSS Design
ML20235G9941987-09-30030 September 1987
Response to NRC Evaluation of CEN-315 for Sys 80R
ML20234D7241987-07-0101 July 1987
Draft Sys 80R Design Certification Licensing Basis Agreement
ML20137H1491985-06-28028 June 1985
Amend 10 to C-E Std Sar.W/Two Oversize Figures
ML20101B4791984-11-30030 November 1984
Summary Rept on Design Basis of Shutdown Cooling Sys Relief Valves for CESSAR Sys 80
ML20101B4931984-11-30030 November 1984
Summary of Rept on Operability of Shutdown Cooling Sys Relief Valves for Palo Verde Units 1,2 & 3
ML20087G6341984-02-29029 February 1984
Amend 9 to C-E Std SAR
ML20024E3921983-08-31031 August 1983
Nonproprietary Info on Sys 80 Bypass Flow.
ML20076D2681983-08-31031 August 1983
Encl 2-NP to LD-83-010,Rev 1, Statistical Combination of Uncertainties Part III - Uncertainty Analysis of Limiting Conditions for Operation C-E Sys 80 Nsss
ML20023B9501983-04-30030 April 1983
Nonproprietary Response to NRC Questions on CESSAR-F Statistical Combination of Uncertainties in Thermal Margin Analysis for Sys 80, (SER Item 7)
ML20073D8791983-04-30030 April 1983
Nonproprietary Response to NRC 830131 Questions Re Sys 80 Core Protection Calculators & Reactor Power Cutback Sys
ML20073Q3041983-04-30030 April 1983
Nonproprietary Version of, CESSAR Fuel & Control Element Assembly Design Evaluation Summary Rept
ML20069L7871983-04-30030 April 1983
Sys 80 CESSAR Fsar,Responses to Questions on Steam Line Break Method
LD-83-020, Nonproprietary Response to NRC Questions for CESSAR-F Statistical Combination of Uncertainty in Thermal Margin Analysis for Sys 801983-03-31031 March 1983
Nonproprietary Response to NRC Questions for CESSAR-F Statistical Combination of Uncertainty in Thermal Margin Analysis for Sys 80
ML20079N3581983-01-31031 January 1983
Nonproprietary Statistical Combination of Uncertainties Part Ii,Uncertainty Analysis of Limiting Safety Sys Settings C-E Sys 80 Nsss,Part II
ML20079N3761983-01-31031 January 1983
Nonproprietary Statistical Combination of Uncertainties Part Iii,Uncertainty Analysis of Limiting Conditions for Operation C-E Sys 80 Nsss,Part III
ML20027C3381982-09-30030 September 1982
Statistical Combination of Uncertainties,Part II, Uncertainty Analysis of Limiting Safety Sys Settings for C-E Sys 80 Nsss.
ML20027C3411982-09-30030 September 1982
Statistical Combination of Uncertainties,Part III, Uncertainty Analysis of Limiting Conditions for Operation for C-E Sys 80 Nsss.
ML20063M1831982-09-0808 September 1982
Natural Circulation Cooldown of C-E Sys 80 Nsss
ML20063A4771982-08-31031 August 1982
Long-Term Iodine Control in Reactor Containment Bldgs Using C-E Iodine Removal Sys
ML20050A9351982-03-31031 March 1982
Nonproprietary Safety Evaluation of Reactor Power Cutback Sys.
ML20050A9361982-03-31031 March 1982
Nonproprietary Cpc/Ceac Software Mods for Sys 80.
ML20041D7751982-03-0404 March 1982
Review of Depressurization & Decay Heat Removal Capabilities for C-E Sys 80 NSSS
ML20040E1211982-01-31031 January 1982
Response to Round One Question 440.40 on Cessar Fsar. Nonproprietary Version
1989-03-31
[Table view]
Category:TEXT-SAFETY REPORT
MONTHYEARML20042E9171990-04-30030 April 1990
Amend G to C-E SAR Design Certification
ML20011D5171989-12-15015 December 1989
Amend F to C-E Std SAR - Design Certification (CESSAR-DC).
ML19324B6831989-10-31031 October 1989
QA Program:Description of Nuclear Power Businesses QA Program, Rev 5
NUREG-0852, Sser Supporting Vendor Responses to Confirmatory Issue 2, Steam Generator Tube Rupture. Calculated Radiological Consequences of Postulated Steam Generator Tube Rupture Accident Meets 10CFR100.11 Dose Ref Values1989-08-0404 August 1989
Sser Supporting Vendor Responses to Confirmatory Issue 2, Steam Generator Tube Rupture. Calculated Radiological Consequences of Postulated Steam Generator Tube Rupture Accident Meets 10CFR100.11 Dose Ref Values
NUREG-1044, Sser Supporting Vendor Responses to Confirmatory Item 1, Shutdown Cooling Sys1989-08-0404 August 1989
Sser Supporting Vendor Responses to Confirmatory Item 1, Shutdown Cooling Sys
ML20246A2321989-04-28028 April 1989
Sser Re CESSAR Sys 80 Concerning Steam Generator Tube Vibration
ML20248F3341989-03-31031 March 1989
Design Certification Licensing Review Basis
ML20248B0021989-03-30030 March 1989
App 3A, Discussion of Finite Difference Analysis for Analysis of Pipe Whip, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H4531989-03-30030 March 1989
App 15C, Analysis Methods for Steam Line Breaks, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H4701989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 16, Tech Specs, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H4781989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 17, QA Program, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247J0591989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 18, Human Factors Engineering, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247G9891989-03-30030 March 1989
App 5C, Structural Evaluation of Feedwater Line Break for Steam Generator Internals, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20248C3801989-03-30030 March 1989
App 3.11A, Environ Qualification for Structures & Components, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20248C3921989-03-30030 March 1989
App 3.11B, Identification & Location of Mechanical & Electrical Safety-Related Sys Components, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H2911989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 7, Instrumentation & Controls, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H0331989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 6, Esfs, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design.W/One Oversize Encl
ML20247H4431989-03-30030 March 1989
App 15B, Methods for Analysis of Loss of Feedwater Inventory Events, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Sys Design
ML20247H4271989-03-30030 March 1989
App 15A, Loss of Primary Coolant Flow Methodology Description, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H4171989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 15, Accident Analyses, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H4031989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 14, Initial Test Program, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H3971989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 13, Conduct of Operators, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H3941989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 12, Radiation Protection, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Desing
ML20247H3601989-03-30030 March 1989
App 11A, Core Residence Times, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H3531989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 11, Radwaste Mgt, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247H3361989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 10, Steam & Power Conversion Sys, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design.W/One Oversize Encl
ML20247H3161989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 9, Auxiliary Sys, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design. W/Four Oversize Encls
ML20247H3081989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 8, Electric Power, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247G9831989-03-30030 March 1989
App 5B, Structural Evaluation of Steam Line Break for Steam Generator Internals, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247G6661989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 1, Introduction & General Plant Description, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design.W/One Oversize Encl
ML20247G6781989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 2, Site Envelope Characteristics, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247G7141989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 3, Design of Structures,Components,Equipment & Sys, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247G8511989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 4, Reactor, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247G8621989-03-30030 March 1989
App 4A Sys 80 Reactor Flow Model Test Program, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20247G8681989-03-30030 March 1989
App 4B, Hot Loop Flow Testing of Sys 80 Fuel & Control Element Assembly Components, to CESSAR 80+ Std Design
ML20247G9131989-03-30030 March 1989
Chapter 5, RCS & Connected Sys, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design.W/Two Oversize Encls
ML20247G9281989-03-30030 March 1989
App 5A, Overpressure Protection for C-E Sys 80 Pwrs, to CESSAR Sys 80+ Std Design
ML20246M1121988-12-31031 December 1988
Vol Viii to Resolution of Outstanding Nuclear Fission Product Aerosol Transport & Deposition Issues Wbs 3.4.2
ML20206C7791988-09-30030 September 1988
QA Program
ML20151G1141988-07-15015 July 1988
Design Certification Licensing Review Bases
LD-88-049, Flow Distribution & Tube Vibration:Evaluation of Sys 80 Steam Generator Tube Lane/Economizer Corner Region1988-07-0101 July 1988
Flow Distribution & Tube Vibration:Evaluation of Sys 80 Steam Generator Tube Lane/Economizer Corner Region
ML20150B8181988-06-30030 June 1988
Amend C to CESSAR-DC
ML20151H8191988-04-11011 April 1988
CESSAR-DC Submittal Group B - Revs to Chapters 1,4,5 & 9
LD-88-015, Nonproprietary Base Line Level 1 PRA for Sys 80R NSSS Design1988-01-31031 January 1988
Nonproprietary Base Line Level 1 PRA for Sys 80R NSSS Design
LD-88-005, Draft C-E Sys 80+TM Std Design, Design Certification Licensing Review Bases.Response to NRC Comments on Licensing Document Encl1988-01-18018 January 1988
Draft C-E Sys 80+TM Std Design, Design Certification Licensing Review Bases.Response to NRC Comments on Licensing Document Encl
ML20234C6451987-12-31031 December 1987
Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Final Design of the Standard Nuclear Steam Supply Reference System.Cessar System 80.Docket No. 50-470.(Combustion Engineering,Incorporated)
ML20235G9941987-09-30030 September 1987
Response to NRC Evaluation of CEN-315 for Sys 80R
ML20236W0531987-09-11011 September 1987
Amend 12 to CESSAR-F
ML20234D7241987-07-0101 July 1987
Draft Sys 80R Design Certification Licensing Basis Agreement
ML20137H1491985-06-28028 June 1985
Amend 10 to C-E Std Sar.W/Two Oversize Figures
1990-04-30
[Table view] |
Text
.
x
l CESSAR FUEL AND CEA DESIGN EVALUATION
SUMMARY
REPORT i
NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS DIVISION APRIL, 1983 e
8304290020 830426 PDR ADOCK 05000 '
- i. ' POWER g g g CCMSUSTICN ENGINEERING. INC.
4 LEGAL NOTICE THIS REPORT EY COMBUSTION WAS PREPARED ENGINEERING, INC. AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORE NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON ITS BEHALF:NEITHER COM8USTIO A.
MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION, EXPRESS OR llWWED INCLUDING THE WARRANTIES OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICU C PURPOSE OR MERCHANTA81UTY, WITH RESPECT TO THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR USEFULNESS OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS 7.1 PORT, OR THAT THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, OR PROCESS OWNED RIGHTS;OR DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT MAY NOT INFRINGE PR
- 3. ASSUMES ANY UA51UTIES WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF,.OR FOR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE USE OF, ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOO OR PROCESS DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT.
1 6
r l.
1 I
l i
l
% l 1
Design Evaluation The fue'l assembly, fuel rod, burnable' poison rod, and CEA designs satisfy the design criteria and limits specified in Section 4.2.1. The analytical methods employed to calculate stresses, straire , fatigue usage, growth,-and holddown force are consistent with accepted conventional engineering practices- All .
calculations are subjected to formal review procedures in accordance with Combustion Engineering's Quality Assurance of Design Manual for safety related components. l
. The following paragraphs highlight the analytical results of a portion of the
- fuel system design calculatians presently designated as requiring applicant-
, specific information by the CESSAR Safety Evaluation Report.-
Stress Stress evaluations of the fuel assembly, fuel rod, burnable poison rod, and CEA are based upon conventional equations recommended by Seely and Smith (Advanced
-Mechanics of Materials, 2 nd Editien), Timoskenko and Young (Engineering (
Mechanics, 4th Editior), Roark (Formulas for Stress and Strain, 4th Edition),
McAdams (Haat Transmission, 3rd Edition), etc. The stresses are calculated considering the appropriate loading parameters as specified in Subsection 4.2.1, and in accordance with the ASME General Guidelines for evaluating primary and secondary stresses. The results of the evaluations verify that all calculated stresses are within their appropriate design stress criteria. Table 1 summarizes the limiting normal operating stress conditions for the fuel assembly structure, fuel rod, burnable' poison rod, and the control element assembly. The limiting stress. condition is defined as the analytical result showing the minimum stress margin (allowable stress minus calculated stress).
TABLE 1 ITEM COMPONENT CALCULATED ALLOWABLE STRESS (PSI) STRESS (PSI)
~ ' ~
~
Fuel Assembly [ ]
Structure . .
Fuel Rod [ ]
Poison Rod [ ] ]
. . J l
~
Control Element ~ [ ] [ ] [ ]
Assembly
.l .
The calculated stresses for the fuel assembly structure, fuel rods, and poison rod are applicable for 3 cycles of operation
- and the control element assembly stress is applicable for 10 years. The fuel assembly structure includes all the components shown in Figure 4.2-6 with the exception of fuel and poison rods.
- All reference in this report to 3 cycles of operation refers to 38,127 MWD /T core average burnup.
~
- ~ - --n. , - - + - , . .-,,,-,,,,r -e
- - - , - - - - - -----r-,
, ---,--,m.n ,--enw--,m ---,-,_,-,,-,w---- - - , - -
~ S' train The strain design basis for. evaluating the fuel rod, poison rod, and control rod cladding is that the net unrecoverable circumferential strain shall not exceed one percent as predicted by computations considering cladding creep and pellet swelling. In regard to the fuel assembly structure, there are no uniform plastic strains predicted.for normal operating conditions since all stresses are within the unirradiated yield strength.
The individual models used to analytically describe the cladding creepdown and pellet swelling that result in fuel rod cladding strain are documented in Report
- CENPD-139-P, " Fuel Evaluation Model" July,1974 with its revisions -and supple-
, ' ments. Analysis of the fuel rod predicts that the maximum unrecoverable
, circumferential cladding strain is [ ] for the peak local rod after
[ ] of operation.
The analysis of the poison rod cladding predicts that a radial gap between the pellets and the cladding remains after 3 cycles of operation. Therefore, the circumferential t strain is essentially zero. The analytical models used to describe poison pellet.
swelling and thermal expansion are based on data presented in subsection 4.2.1.3.2.
- The cladding characteristics are the same as described for the fuel eladding.
The limiting CEA case regarding circumferential plastic strain is based on the maximum predicted B4C pellet burnup for a 10 year lifetime. The analysis method evaluates pellet swelling, pellet thermal growth, and worst case pellet and cladd-ing dimensions. The result of this analysis predicts that there is no net un-recoverable circumferential cladding strain.
6 Strain Fatigue The cumulative fatigue usage factor limit of 0.8 and-tho design curve for the relationship between cycles and strain (Figure 4.2-2) are the design bases for fuel rod cladding strain fatigue analysis. The same methodology used to predict cladding strain is used for predicting strain fatigue, with the cumulative effective strain range evaluated after preselected intervais to establish a total usage
- factor for the appr.oproate burnup conditions. Analysis predicts a maximum
. cumulative cladding damage factor of [ ] for three cycles of operation, which is less than the limit of 0.8.
The . fuel assembly structure cumulative fatigue dacage factor is essentially zero since all the stresses are within the respective material endurance limits and/or the stress duty. cycles are limited to preclude any apprectable damage factor.
t e *
=
9 9
e e
CEA Axial Growth
- A minimum axial clearance of [ ] between the bottom of the CEA finger and the fuel assembly guide tube represents the limiting design condition.
This clearance has been calculated on the basis of worst-case dimensional toler-ances. The use of inconel and stainless steel materials in the CEA does not result in any significant radiation induced axial growth. There is no significant axial increase anticipated for the control rod due to the design features of the control rod tip region and the limited axial exposure to the active core environ-ment.
, Adequate clearance margin is anticipated'for the CEA to perform its function for its inte'nded lifetime. On-going CEA surveillance will provide additional assur-ance that axial growth is not a design concern.
l f
a
+
k I
i i
l !
l
. Fuel Assembly Holddown The total fuel asse'mbly holddown-force is the sum of the holddown spring forces and the assembly wet weight. The fuel assembly holddown springs are designed such that sufficient downward force will be maintained tc counteract hydraulic forces on.the assembly.
The. minimum combined spring' force and assembly wet weight is [
.] .
This; compares to a maximum upward hydraulic force of [ ].
9 d
J e
e em 2
1
- _ . . . - _ _ . . , . - - - , . - . - . _ _ _ . _ _ - - , . . _ _ . . . - , _ - . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ ,_ - . _ - - - _ - _ _ _ , - . - , - . - . . - _ . , _ . . _ - - .