ML20082S746
| ML20082S746 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1991 |
| From: | Beczak P, Morrison R, Rich Smith WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19302F145 | List: |
| References | |
| WCAP-13065, NUDOCS 9109170268 | |
| Download: ML20082S746 (44) | |
Text
WCAP 13065 J. M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 RESPONSE TO NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON STEAM GENERA 10R FLOW AREA REDUCTION DUE TO COMBINED 10CA AND SSE LOADS P. E. Beczak R. E. Smith R. J. Morrison August 1991 5
i Westinghouse Electric Corporation l Nuclear and Advanded Technology Divison l P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 l
- 1991 Westinghouse Electric Corporation All rights reserved bk kfih hh O' 49 p PDR l ,
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 TABLE Of CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE
1.1 BACKGROUND
2.0 TUBE DEFORMATION / COLLAPSE CONSIDERATION (SSE + LOCA) 2.1 OVERVIEW 2.2 LOCA ANALYSIS 2.3 SEISHIC ANALYSIS 2.4 COMBINED PLATE LOADS 2.5 FLOW AREA REDUCTION CALCULATIONS 2.6
SUMMARY
3.0 LOCA PCT PfNALTY EVALUATION
3.1 REFERENCES
i 7ARLEY:AJM/082891 1
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 1.0 PURPOSE
- This report has been prepared in response to the Nuclear Regulatory Comission request for additional information concerning the Vantage-5 fuel design amendment for the J.H. Farley Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 (Dockets 50-348,
+ 50-364) dated August 8, 1991.
Included in this report is a description of the methodologies used to derive the initial large break LOCA (LBLOCA) PCT penalty of 500F and the methodologies used to reduce the value to 60 F for the combined effect of LOCA/ seismic forces on steam generator flow area reduction. The 6 0F PCT penalty was included as part of the J. M. Farley Vantage-5 fuel amendment request dated July 15, 1991.
1.1 Background
In. Regulatory Guide 1.121, the NRC provided guidance on the process for demonstrating compliance with the General Design Criteria (GDC) 14 and 31 for the steam generator tubes. The GDC requires demonstration of an extremely low probability of abnormal leakage or gross rupture of the RCS pressure boundary, in the Regulatory Guide, the staff required analytical and experimental
. evidence that steam generator tube integrity would be maintained under design basis conditions such as a loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) in combination with a Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE).
The Regulatory Guide 1.121 analyses provide the basis for establishing criteria for removing from service tubes which had experienced significant degradation.
Combining the most severe LOCA loads with the plant specific SSE spectra, generally showed that the combined loads led to some tube deformation. Tubes calculated to deform could then collapse as a result of the the primary side depressurization during the postulated LOCA. This tube collapse reduces the resistance through-the steam generator to the flow of steam from the core i- during a LOCA.-which potentially could increase the calculated PCT.
FARLtvatJN/08289b2
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 At the time that the initial analyses were performed, the calculated level of tube deformation did not significantly affect the consequences, in terms of PCT, of the most severe load LOCA, which was the double ended break at the steam generator outlet. This conclusion was based on Westinghouse sensitivity studies documented with the NRC which demonstrate that a LOCA at the steam
- enerator outlet results in substantially lower calculated PCT than a LOCA in the cold leg. Since cold leg LOCA's result in lower loads, little, if any tube deformation was expected to occur for a hypothesized cold leg LOCA.
Subsequent to this evaluation, some Regulatory Guide 1.121 analyses showed a small level of tube deformation due to SSL alone. Thus tube deformation and the resulting flow area reduction would then be present in all LOCA's, including the cold leg LOCA, if the LOCA was assumed to occur in combination with the SSE. For the J. M. Farley Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, the potential tube deformation was not taken into account in the ECCS analysis.
Consequently, an assessment was performed to conservatively estimate the effect of the potential tube deformation on the ECCS analysis results.
WCAPs 12659 and 12694 were prepared to document the acceptability of increased steam generator tube plugging (15%) for the Farley Units. Tube plugging to this level has been approved by the NRC for both Farley Units. In the WCAPs, a 0
LBLOCA PCT penalty of 50 F was assessed for the flow area reduction of the steam generators due to the combined effect of LOCA/ seismic loads. As explained in detail in the subsequent sections, the 50 F 0 penalty was considered a conservative assessment based on the generic information available. This is referred to as the first set of calculations addressed in Section 2 & 3 of this WCAP.
Subsequent Farley specific work was completed and the conservative 50 0F penalty was reduced to 60F. This is substantiated by the second set of calculations referred to in this WCAP.
i FARLEY:# # /Os2891 3
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 2.0 TUBE DEFORMATION / COLLAPSE CONSIDERATIONS (SSE + LOCA) 2.1 Overview for the combined S!E + LOCA loading condition, the notential exists for yielding of the TSP in the vicinity of the wedge grot.os, followed by collapse of deformed tubes and subsequent loss of flow area, in addition to tubes that may collapse following a SSE + LOCA event, there will be a number of tubes that will undergo a limited amount of permanent deformation. This de'ormation may also lead to loss of flow area. The area reduction considers '.ne combined effects of these two types of deformation.
Two sets of calculations have been performed to estimate the flow area reduction under combined LOCA plus SSE loads. For the first set of calculations, the plate loads that would result from LOCA and SSE loads for a Series 51 steam generator, as well as the inelastic plate response for large in-plane loads, was conservatively estimated. Due to the similarity in plate geometries (in terms of penetration patterns and plate material), analysis results for the Model D steam generators are used as a basis in calculating the plate loads and the inelastic plate response. The analysis considers several key parameters in approximating the response of the farley steam generators.
There parameters include the seismic spectra, LOCA loads, gaps that develop between the shell/ wrapper /T3P, and the stiffness of the Series 51 plates relative to the Model D plates.
For the second set of calculations, plant specific LOCA loads are developed for farley for five different pipe break locations. These included three primary pipe breaks and two minor pipe breaks. The primary pipe break locations include the steam generator inlet and outlet lines, and the
, reactor coolant pump outlet line, while the minor pipe breaks include the pressurizer surge line and the accumulator line. Additionally, in the second
. set of calculations a more rigorous approach is taken to predict the inelastic
~
response of the TSP and the corresponding tube deformation and collapse, as well as using plant specific seismic spectra (in the first set uf calculations a generic spectra for Series 51 steam generators is used).
FARLif:tJM/OS2891 4
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 Based on the analysis results for the first set of calculations, the estimated flow area loss for combined LOCA + SSE loads is 5.0%. A summary of the analysis results for the second set of calculations is provided in Table 2-1 for the loop experiencing the LOCA. These results show the limiting break location to be the steam generator inlet line, which is only slightly worse than the steam generator outlet break in terms of flow area reductior,. The results show the number of tubes that would collapse under the post-LOCA secondary-to-primary AP, as well as the total flow area reduction which includes distorted, but uncollapsed, tubes. The combined flow area reduction for the limiting pipe break for the loop experiencing the LOCA is 0.39%. For the unbroken loops, there is no flow area reduction at the top TSP. However, at TSP 6 there is a minimal, 0.01%, flow area reduction due to the smaller wedge group size. Thus the total flow area reduction for the plant is 0.41%.
2.2 LOCA Analysis for a LOCA event, the tubes are subject to both a rarefaction pressure wave that travels through the tube bundle, and to loads resulting from shaking of the overall steam generator. The rarefact.on wave results in a hot leg to cold leg pressure differential that causes a lateral load to be imposed on the tube U-bend, lhe lateral load is reacted by the TSP through wedges that bear against the wrapper and shell wall. The lateral load varies from row to rcw both in amplitude and period due to the different bend radii. Integrating this load over the entire bundle may result in a significant load on the TSP.
The LOCA shaking and the SSE event also result in lateral motions of the bundle and subsequent TSP loads. Typically, the LOCA shaking loads are small compared to LOCA rarefaction, but the SSE loads may be significant, altnough generally less than the LOCA rarefaction loads. For the LOCA rarefaction loading, the top TSP reacts the majority of the load. Seismic and LOCA shaking loads affect all of the TSP's to a varying degree, depending on the frequency content of the loading versus the system response characteristics. For the loop experiencing the LOCA event, the top TSP is clearly the limiting location.
FAtttYttJu/082891 5
BESTINGHOUSE PROPRitTARY CLASS 3 2.2.1 LOCA Rarefaction Wave Analysis The principal tube loading during a LOCA is caused by the rarefaction wave in the primary fluid. This wave initiates at the postulated break location and travels around the tube U-bends. A differential pressure is created across the two legs of the tube which causes an in-plane horizontal motion of the U-bend.
This differential pressure, in turn, induces significant lateral loads on the tubes.
The pressure-time histories to be input in the structural analysis are obtained from transient thermal-hydraulic (T/H) analyses using the HULTIFLEX computer code, ieference (1). A break opening time of 1.0 msee to full flow area (that is, instantaneous double-ended rupture) is assumed to obtain conservative hydraulic loads. A plot of the tube model for a typical T/H model for determining LOCA pressure time histories for the tubes is shown in figure 2-1.
Pressure time histories are determined for -
tubes. For the structural evaluation, the pressures of concern occur at the hot and cold leg U-bend tangent points.
Plots of the hot-to-cold leg pressure drops for the steam generator inlet break, and for the accumulator line break are provided in figures 2-2 and 2-3 for each of the three tubes considered. These results show that significantly higher pressure drops occur for the primary pipe break than for the minor pipe break, for the raref action wave induced loadings, the predominant motion of the U-bends is in the plane of the U-bend. Thus, the individual tube motions are notcoupled[ ] Also, only the U-bend region is subjected to high bending loads. Therefore, the structural analysis is performed using single tube models -
]aThe LOCA rarefaction pressure wave imposes a time varying loaoing condiiion on the tubes. The tubes are evaluated using the time history analysis capability of the WECAN computer progra[, Reference (2).
The structural tube model consists of ,
] elements. The mass inertia is input as effective material density and includes the weight of the tube as well as the weight of the primary fluid inside the tube, and the hydrodynamic mass effects of the secondary fluid. The geometry of the[
tube models used for the f arley analysis are shown in Figure 2-4, with the node
[
nwnbers identified.
i FAtttVatJM/OS2891 6
WESTINGil0VSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 a.
2.2.1.1 LOCA Rarefaction Loads - First Analysis The hot to cold leg dP resulting from a LOCA pipe break is strongly dependent
[
] When LOCA rarefaction analyses were first performed, the divider plate was modeled
[Later analyses accounted for[ '
'IndasignificantreductioninthehottocoldlegdPresulted.
In estimating TSP loads, results from three prior evaluations are used. They generatorwith[areforaModelDsteamgeneratorwith[ ]ModelD3 steam ids
]n eries 51 steam generator with
]aIn each case, the p essure drops are for[ ]a' tube.
The resulting pressure drops for the two cases of a rigid divider plate are $28.6 psi for the Series 51 and 502.6 psi for the Model D. These results show that the two model steam generators respond in a similar manner to the rarefaction wave. For the Model 03
]Ipressuredropof 182.0 psi is calculated.
- (Thisshowsthedropin,hottocoldlegAPthat occurs when ,
, is considered.) Based on these results, it is concluded that if a LOCA analysis for the Series 51 steam generatorsisperfort..edwith[ . a.
then the resultingdP would be similar to the Model 03.
fARLEY:RJN/082891 T l
_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - ~
WESTlf4GHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 An estimate of the resulting plate load can be obtairied by scaling the area over which the pressure acts.
The exposect area corresponds to(
]Ihebundle. Calculations for the resulting areas show the Model D to have a larger exposed area than the Series 51. Thus the Model D LOCA plate loads arc concluded to envelope the Series 51. The resulting TSP loads for the top TSP (seventh) and for the first TSP down from the top (sixth) are 169.0 kips and 48.0 kips, respectively.
2.2.1.2 LOCA Rarefaction loads - Second Analysis As discassed above, for the second set of calculations, five dif ferent pipe break locations are analyzed specific to the farley operating conditions. In each of these analyses, .
] tubes.
Using the pressure time histories from the T/H analyses, lateral loads tre calculated for each tube length at each time point and the dynamic response of the tube is calculated. The load distribution on the tube at any point in time is based on the following algoritnms, where FX is in the plane of the U-bend, and FY is vertical.
. O.
nem FARLEY:tJu/052891 6
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY Ct. ASS 3 Theanal{sisshowsthe[ ,
TSP loads for the ] tubes. Forthe[
., 3 tube, the jisfoundtobemostrepresentativeduetoits
~
increased flexibility and higher tube rotations at the top TSP. Each of the dynamic solutions results in a force time history acting on the TSP. The time history response shows the peak responses do not occur at the same time. For the Farley analysis, however, it is conservatively assumed that the maximum reaction forces occur simultaneously. Usingtheresultsforthese[ ] ubes, a TSP load corresponding to the overall bundle is then calculated.
Summaries of the resulting TSP forces for the Inlet break and the Accumulator line break are shown in Table 2-2. Based on the plots shown in Table 2-2, a bi-linear representation is assumed for the peak amplitudes as a function of tube radius. Summaries of the overall TSP forces are provided in Tables 2-3 and 2-4 for the top TSP for the Steam Generator Inlet and Accumulator line breaks respectively. Note that for tube rows 1-6, the peak response is assumed to be constant and equal to the Row 6 response. Shown in Figure 2-5 is the distribution of TSP load for the inlet break for the top TSP. A summary of the resulting TSP loads for each of the breaks for the top TSP and for the first TSP down from the top (6) is provided in Table 2-5.
2.2.2 LOCA Shaking Lnads Concurrent with the rarefaction wave loading during a LOCA, the tuce bundle is subjected to additional bending loads due to the shaking of the steam generator caused by the break hydraulics and reactor coolant loop motion. However, the resulting tube stresses from this motion are small compared to those due to the rarefaction wave induced motion.
To obtain the LOCA induced hydraulic forcing functions, a dynamic blowdown analysis is performed to obtain the system hydraulic forcing functions a:;suming an instantaneous (1.0 msec break opening time) double-ended guillotine break.
The hydraulic forcing functions are then applied, along with the displacement time-history of the reactor pressure vessel (obtained from a separate reactor vessel blowdown analysis), to a system structural model, which includes the FARLL htJM/082891 9
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3
[ ]a.1his analysis yields the time history dispiacements of the steam generator at its upper lateral and lower support nodes. These time-history displacements formulate the forcing functions for obtaining the tube stresses due to LOCA shaking of the steam generator.
Past experience has shown that LOCA shaking loads are small when compared to
, LOCA rarefaction loads, for thir analysis, these loads are obtained from the results of a prior analysis for a Model D steam generator. To evaluate the steam generator response to LOCA shaking loads, the computer code WECAN, Reference (2), is used. The same model is used as for the seismic analysis (discussed in Section 2.3). The steam generator support elements [
hewever, because the LOCA system model accounts for their influence on the
~
input to the WECAN model is in the form of
]These[
~bheresultingLOCA shaking loadt used for the f arley analysis are 15.5 kips for the large break LOCA and 7.75 kips for the minor breaks. The small break loads are scaled from the large break loads based on a comparison of support ditplacements from system anM yses for the two types of breaks.
2.5 Seismic Analysis Seismic (SSE) loads are developed as a result of the motion of the ground during an earthquake. A nonlinear time-history analysis used to account for J.o.The seismic excitation defined for the steam generators is in the form of acceleration response spectra at the steam generator supports. In order to perform the non-linear time history analysis, it is necessary to convert the response spectrum input into acceleration time hi: tory input. Acceleration time-histories for the non-linear analysis are F AtLEY :tJu/05?B91 10
l WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 synthesized from El Centro Earthquake motions, using a frequency suppression / raising technique, such that each resulting spectrum closely envelopes the corresponding specified spectrum. The three orthogonal components of the earthquake are then applied simultaneously at each support to perform +he analysis.
The seismic analysis is performed using the WECAN computer program, Reference (2). The mathematical model consists of three-dimensional lumped mass, beam, and pipe elements as well as general matrix input to provide a plant specific representation of the steam generator and reactor coolant piping stiffnesses, in the nonlinear analysis, the TSP /shell, and wrapper /shell interactions are representedby[ ]Iynamic element, using[ ]$ampingto account for energy dissipation at these locations.
An exemple of the type of mathematical model which is used is shown in Figure 2-6 for a Model D steam generator. The tube bundle straight leg region on both thehot-legsideandcold-legsideismode1dby[]Iquivalentbeams. The U-bend region, however, is modeled as[ ]{ equivalent tubes of different bend radii, each equivalent
- - a.
tube representing a group of steam generator tubes. In addition, a , _
tube representing the outermost tube row is also modeled.
Continuity between the straight leg and U-bend tubes, as well as between the U-bend tubes themselves,
- a, is accomplished through appropriate nodal couplings.
Note that the equivalent tube groups are extended down[ ]n. support plates beforethe[ ]% tube representation begins. This allows dissipation of tube response differences due to the variation in U-bend stiffnesses.
2.3.1 Seismic Loads - First Analysis Results from a non-linear time history seismic analysis for Series 51 steam generators were not available. Therefore, the results from an analysis for a
. Model D steam generator are used, applying a scale factor to account forh
]If the Model D spectra versus the Series 51 spectra.
.' The spectra used for f arley in the first analysis corresponded to an umbrella spectra for a Series 51 steem generator, and the ratio of the two spectra is 3.04. Thus, the TSP load for the Model D analysis is scaled upward by a factor of 3.04. The initial analysis only considered flow area reduction at the top plate, and the resulting seismically induced TSP load is 227.77 kips.
FARLEY tJM/082891 11
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 2.3.2 Seismic Loads - Second Analysis for the second analysis, Farley plant specific spectra are used.
This resulted in a significant reduction in the SSE applied loads.
Aratio[
]for the generic Seriet 51 -pectra to the Farley plant specific spectra is 0.207.
The resulting seismically induced TSP loads are 46.21 kips for the top TSP and 46.89 kips for the TSP one down from the top.
2.4 Combined Plate loads In calculating a combined TSP load, the LOCA rarefaction and LOCA shaking are combined directly (summation), while the LOCA (tetal) and SSE loads are combined using the square root of the sum of the squarer..
The overall TSP load is transferred to the steam generator shell through wedge groups located at discrete locations around the plate circumference, for ghe Series 51 steam generators, there are[]bwedge groups located every
, )aroundtheplatecircumference(seeFigure2-7). The distribution af load among wedge groups is approximated as a cosine function among those groups reacting the load, which corresponds to half the wedge groups. Except for the bottom ISP, the wedge groups for each of the TSP's are located at the same angular location as for the top TSP. Thus, if TSP deformation occurs at the lower plates (except for the bottom TSP), the same tubes are affected as for the top TSP. b ForthetopTSP,however,thewedgegroupshavea[
b ] width, comparedtoa[ ]widthfortheotherplates.
This larger wedge group width distributes the load over a larger portion of the plate, resulting in less plate and tube deformation for a given load level. For the bottom T wedgegroupwidthis[ ] and the wedge groups are rotated [ ]gP, relative to the the other TSP's.
The distribution of load among the various wedge groups for the LOCA load, which can only act in the plane of the U-bend, is shown in Figure 2-8.
For seismic loads, which can have a random orientation, the maximum wedge load is 2/3 of the maximum TSP load.
FAtttY:tJu/052891 12
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~~--~~'-~~ ~~ ~ ~
BESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 2.4.1 Maximum Wedge loads - first Analysis for the first analysis to determine flow area reduction, it is con u rvatively assumed that the factor of 2/3 of the total TSP load applied to both the LOCA and seismic loads. Based on the analysis results discussed above, the combined LOCA loading is 184.5 kips (169.0 + 15.5), and the combined LOCA + SSE load using square root of the sum of the squares is 293.12 kips ((184.52 +
227.77t))]. Applying a factor of 2/3 to the combined loading gives a maximum wedge load of 195.41 kips.
2.4.2 Maximum Wedge loads - Second Analysis in the second analysis, several refinements are made in the approach, one being to account for the different wedge group width at the top plate, -b versus[ ] t tile other plates. Another rhange in the anaIysis approach
~
is to account for the load distribution among the wedge groups for the LOCA loads. A summary of the resulting ISP and wedge loads for the Inlet and Accumulator line breaks are summarized in Table 2-6.
2.5 flow Area Reduction Calculations i
n estimating the flow area reduction, ona of the key parameters is the force /
deflection characteristics of the TSP, For the two sets of calculations, the same basic approach is followed, but with some variation in terms of predicting the initial yield point of the plate. In both cases, the analyses use the force / deflection results fnr the Model O plates, ard extrapolate those values based on a geometrical comparison of the plates for the two model steam generators.
I AtLEY AJN/082891 13 l 1iiil r
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 2.5.1 Flow Area Reduction Calculations - First Analysis in the first analysis, a comparison of the relative plate stiffnesses for the Model D and Series 51 support plates is determined using the equivalent ,
}Afor the two plate geometries. Due to the square penetration patterns, different properties exist in the pitch and diagunal directions. The first step is to establish equivalent parameters for Young's modulus in the two directions (Ep*/E, Ed*/E), respectively, he equivalent ,
- ,for theoverallplateistakenas[ ]ofthepitchanddiagonal directions. Results of these calculations show the Model O plate to be significantly stiffer than the Series 51 plate. A ratio of the gives 0.643 (0.0675/0,105). ,
Results of the plate crush test for the Model 0 plates are summarized in Reference (3). A summary of force / deflection response for the Model D plate is shown plotted in figure 2-9. In order to approximate the force / deflection characteristics of the Series 51 plates, the yield point (departure from linearity in the Model D curve (28 kips) is scaled by the ratio of the equivalent ( [Thisgivesanapproximationoftheloadnecessary to cause yielding in the plate. The inelastic plate response is assumed to follow the same force / deflection characteristics as the Model O plate. A prediction of the Series 51 plate response is also shown in Figure 2-9.
As part of the Model D plate crush test, a summary is provided of the number of
.ubes that collapse at the maximum load achieved in the test. For the test results summarized in Figure 2-9, 28 tubes had post-test distortions (0.13 inch AD) great enough to cause subsequent collapse under the secondary to primary AP that exists following a LOCA event.
This same number of tubes is assumed to be affected for the Series 51 steam generators.
This is considered to be a conservative assumption due to the stronger tubes in the Series 51 steam generators (larger OD and increased wall thickness).
O FAR EY:AJM/082891 14
WESTlfiGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 The force / deflection results in figure 2-9, however, represent inelastic behavior of the plate and tubes. In order to make use of this data, an approximation must be made between the elastic analyses that determine the plate loads, and the inelastic crush test. This approximation is based on the
]o.forthecrushtestversusthe{
correspondingtotheelasticplateresponse[Comparingthe[ o. ]'fromthetwo sets ofa.calculations shows that the - are less than the
' except for the combined LOCA + SSE loads for the Series 51 steam generators. This indicates that the maximum plate load from the crush test umbrella the maximum wedge loads for seismic and LOCA alone, but that the test results must be extrapolated to higher loads to account for LOCA + SSE. Using these results, an estimate is made for the flow area reduction for the f arley steam generators. in estimating the flow area reduction, consideration is given to the different nature of the LOCA loading relative to the SSE loading.
While SSE is a random response that could affect any of the wedge groups, the LOCA l'ading, which is dominated by LOCA rarefaction, is uni-directional in that it acts in the plane of the U-bend only, for this analysis, although none of the wedge groups are located in line with the bundle U-bend, this is conservatively assumed that to be the case, resulting in a higher maximum wedge load.
b Asdiscussedabove,thereare[]wedgegroupsaroundtheplate. Based on the geometry for the Model D steam generator, in the first set of calculations it is assumed that the wedge groups are symmetric relative to the hot / cold legs, so any tubes that are affected on one side of the bundle would be the same tubes affected on the other side of the bundle. Thus, tubes could only be affected at [ ] edge groups at any one TSP. In performing the second set of calculations, it was determined that the wedge groups are not symmetric about thetubelane,butarerotated[ see Figure 2-8). However, as will be discussed later, a factor ofc2.0 is applied to the resulting flow area reduction as an additional conservatism, and this essentially accounts for the additional flow area reduction. Further for TSP's 2 thru 7, the wedges have the same circumferential location, such that the same tubes are affected from one TSP to another. The exception is at the first TSP, where the wedge groups are rotated relative to the plates above. However, the loads on 7ARLtV:RJM/082891 is
WESTlfiGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 the first TSP are quite small, and no significant f!;a area reduction would be predicted at this plate. Thus, for the affected ste ;t generator,[ ] edge group is subject to the combined LOCA + SSE loading, while[ ] other wedge groups are subject to the SSE loading only. For the wedges subject to the seismic loading only, it is conservatively assumed that the maximum number of tubes,(8,predictedtocollapsefromthecrushtestwouldbelostateachof the[ ] wedge locations. For the wedge subject to the combined LOCA + SSE loading, it was judged to be conservative to apply a factor of 2.0 to the number of tubes lost at yhis wedge location, giving 56 tubes. Combining the tubeslostatthe[ ] locations gives a total of 112 tubes out of a total of 3388, or a 3.31% loss in flow area.
For the steam generators in the unaffected loops, there are no lost tubes associated with LOCA, so the loss in flow area reduces to three times the loss dua to seismic alone, or 2.48% in each of the generators. This results in a total loss of 8.26% for the three steam generators, or an average loss of 2.75%
for the three steam generators. Applying a factor to account for analysis uncertainties, a final flow area reduction for Series 51 steam generators of 5.0% is estimated.
2 L 2 Flow Area Reduction Calculations - Second Analysis for the second set of calculations, the force / deflection characteristics of the Series 51 plates, and the force to cause initial tube contact in particular, are estimated using methodologies developed from prior TSP development programs. The methodology accounts for geometrical parameters [
3a.The results of these calculations provide a comparison of the initial force to cause contact for the Mode { D plate, as well as for the Series 51 plate for both a
~
7 wedge group size.
~$nd af for loads above the yield point, the increment in load and deflection is
, assumed to be the same as for the Model D plate. A comparison of the two force
/ deflection curves is shuwn in Figure 2-10. In the first set of calculations, it is assumed that the number of collapsed tubes (28) at the maximum load level FARLEYtRJM/082891 16
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 for the Series 51 steam generators would be same as f r the Model D. This is basedonachangeintubediameterof[ ]bbeing necessary to result in tube collapse under the post LOCA secondary to primary AP. However, based on a review of collapse test data for 7/8 inch diameter tubes (Reference (4)), the change in tube diameter that results in subsequent tube collapse under primary-togecondary4Pof1005 psi (thesecondarypressureathotshutdown)is
[ ] lhe tube collapse data from the Model D test thow that the number of tubes that would experience this amount of deformation at the maximum test load is 14. This is used as the number of tubes assumed to collapse at the maximum test load of 60 kips, in order to estimate the number of collapsed tubes at load levels less than the maximum test load of 60 kips, a relationship between load and number of collapsed tubes had to be developed. Such a relationship is developtd on the basisthat['
[Thusthenumberof collapsed tubes as a function of load is approximated by the scaling the number of tubes at the maximum load by the ratin of[
] o-atagivenloadingtothe[ ]ccA summary of the resulting number of collapsed tubes as a function of load is summarized in Table 2-7. Using this relationship, the number of collapsed tubes for each of the five LOCA breaks considered in the second set of calculations is estimated. A summary of these calculations for the steam generator inlet break is provided in Tables 2-8 and 2-9. Using a similar approach to the one used above for calculating the number of cellapsed tubes, an estimate of the flow area reduction due to distorted, but uncollapsed tubes, is made. In the Model O crush test the flow area reduction at the point of maximum load is 1.64 in2 Scaling the maximum flow area reduction using the same methods as for the collapsed tubas results in the flow area reductions summarized in Table 2-10 for the Series 51, 10 inch wedge. Note on these tables that an exponential 4
distribution, which follows the approximation using quite closely, is also shown. This distribution is used for those cases where the plate load is predicted to go above the maximum load tested. Contained in Tables 2-11 and 2-12 is a summary of the flow area loss at each of the TSP's reacting the LOCA load. Combining the results from the two contributions shows that the total flow area reduction to be 0.39% for the Inlet break and 0.01% for the Accumulator break.
FARLEY:tJu/082891 17
___ _ -_ - - ^
WESTINGHOUSL PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 2.6 Summary In summary, the initial sr' of calculations incorporated a significant level of conservatism to account fu the appropriate nature of th? calculations being performed, and resulted in a significant flow area reduction estimate of 5.0X.
For the second set of calculations, the most significant change involved the use less of plant than the specific loads for f arley, which are found to be significantly generic loads. Additionally, the second set of calculations utilized results from prior test programs and analyses to trore accurately predict the inelastic response of the series 51 tube support plates. The end result being a significant reduction in the estimated flow area reduction to less than 1%. In addition, the estimated flow area reduction for the Accumulator line break is considered negligible and is effectively zero.
2.7 References '
- l. Takeuchi, K., and Bhandari, D.,
"MVlilfLEX - A fortran-ly Cortputer Program for Analyzing Thermal-Hydraulic-Structural System Dynamics (!!) - Shell Model and Projector Method". WCAP-8920, Westinghouse Nuclear Energy Systems, Pittsburgh, PA., 1978. (Proprietary)
- 2. WECAN - Westinghouse Electric Computer Analysis User's Manual-Rev. X, Westinghouse R&D Center, Pittsburgh, PA., June, 1988. (Proprietary)
- 3. WIP-ENG-TN-81-004, "Model D Tube Support Plate Crush Tests", G. L. Adkins, 1/81.
- 4. WCAP-8429, " Analytical and Experimental Evaluation of the Mechanical Integrity of Steam Generater Tubing", C. W. P st, et.al., 6/81.
FARLEY:RJW/082891 18
_ _____ ____ _ --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' ~ -
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 3.0 LOCA PCT Penalty Evaluation Westinghouse initial efforts to estimate the potential ef fect on the peak cladding temperature of tube deformation resulting from the combination of SSE and LOCA loads was conservatively calculated. The effect on ECCS analysis may be treated as an increase in SG tube plugging. Historically, a conservative estimate of 10'fAPCT/%SG Tube Plugging has been used to bound the effect of increased steam generator tube plugging on the ECCS Evaluation Model results for all plant designs.
An initial conservative estimate of the amount of the potential steam generator tube deformation resulting from the combined SSE and LOCA loads for the J.H.f arley Nucicar Plant Units 1 and 2 was determined to be approximately 5%
(See Section 2.5.1). To conservatively estimate the potential effect on the peak cladding temperature, the conservative estimate of the sensitivity to increased steam generator tube plugging was linearly combined with the conservative estimate of the level of steam generator tube plugging based upon combined SSE and LOCA loads. This resulted in the initial estimated effect on the peak cladding temperature of 50*f.
In Reference 1, sensivitity studies for the effect of steam generator tube plugging for 2, 3 and 4 loop plants were determined based upon older, more conservative versions of the Westinghouse Evaluation Model. Based upon the information in Reference 1, it was determined that the effect of tube y deformation resulting from the cembined SSE and LOCA loads, equivalent to increased steam generator tube, was approximately 6*fAPCT/%SG Tube Plugging for 3-Loop Plants.
The estimated effect on the peak cladding temperature of 50'f was used to provide reasonable assurance that the limits of 10CfR50.46 would continue to be 7t for the J.H.farley Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 while the potential effects
. the steam generator tubes for the consideration of the combined SSE and LOCA
, ads was evaluated. This conservative estimate of the effect on the peak cladding temperature was reasonable considering that the maximum estimated tubo deformation for any plant based upon Westinghouse calculations was 7.5%
equivalent tube plugging. Combining the maximum tube plugging level with the F ARLEY R m/082091 19
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 peak cladding temperature effect for increased steam generator tube plugging provided in Reference 1 for 3-Loop Plants resulted in a value which was bounded by the conservative estimate of the effect on the peak cladding terperature of 50'f.
As the estimated level of steam generator tube deformation resulting from the combination of SSE and LOCA loads was refined to be less than 1% (See Section 2.5.2), the estimated effect on the ECCS analysis peak cladding temperature was conservatively refined to be 6'T based upon the methods described above.
While the value of 6*fAPCT/%SG Tube Plugging for 3-Loop Plants was determined based upon older Evaluation Models, the effect was judged to be conservative since the newer Evaluation Models demonstrated a reduced sensitivity to steam generator tube plugging by virtue of the better performance during the reflood transient. Consequently the estimated effect of 6'T of peak cladding temperature margin provides reasonable assurance that t the limits of 10CFRSO.46 would continue to be met.
3.1
References:
- 1) WCAP-8986, " Perturbation Technique for Calculating ECCS Cooling Performance," C. M. Thompson and V. J. Esposito, february 1977 FAklEY RJu/OS2891 20
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 m1rt.s.mmt;.x=rautmswum:=u.:v :ra-tra._.n.-mxxznusa.muzru;xi=~ruraura.twusew=,.am ==r.~a :.w:12:u::=:;
j oJToCOLD leo AP
, No CoLLPAsco: TOTAL AAEA .
! min Mto max , SPT FORCE TUBES RtDUctioN_
Bf;fEAy LOCATtoN ,,,_[jpsQ__]psQ_ (psQ_j;_(h!pQ _,_ No % ,.,,.._NQ ___,._ 1 _
~
STEAM GENERAToA lNLET
.t ] b18.58 10.00 j 0.30fj 13.13 0.39-SitAM GENER,LioR OUTLET
[ 117.29 , 10.00 l 0.301 13 07 0.39 1 d PUMP OUTLET h 109.18 ' 6.00 t 0.18 !l 8.72: 0 26 ;
PAtssVR:ZER SUPGE LINE d 32.58 0 001 0 001 ~ -
ACCUMULATCR LJNE 39 96 0.00' O 00 ti 0 481 0.01 TABLE 2
SUMMARY
Of FARLEY SPECIflC ANALYSIS RESULTS
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3
- , _ _ _ _ _ , _ - _ . - - _ _n
- Mu / min Foncts i PIPE .
TUBE BOUNDARY TUBE RADlus . Mu min l
~
B SEAK STIAM
~ 2L,_CggitjoN_jJg_g[_jpsl
~ ~
(q[sj 8 CONTINUOUS i 8613.5 j 10.2:
GENERATOR COtmNUOUSi 45.2I -37.64 t
INLET - CONTINUOUS I :-
! 72.9 81.7[
i Fi1ED ! I i 67.3 -70 4i
~ ~ ~ ~
ACCUMULATOR! i i " CONilNUOUS l 4 l G.i 1.2 -3.6i Continuous ! i 7.31 16.5 ii
> a
. - -* CONTINUOUS !
i - 23.7I 20.1 Fixt0
__smama-m . ms;_ -
?d 9 ! 21 5-
_ , rem::aww % vm l SYLAAT5tkiWFQTWJA i
1 60 p- , ,
i l _ ,MD !
l ,,i 1 i I l . ,-G i I
to I i
_... X l I l I
~
! l i, % ! !
0 .
.,, N_
- t rw ! ! 4 w
i ; i i ;
i j j
{ j j w ~.;-
I .0{
f 0 20 40 to ~
REAS . IW }.
g 30 !
I l l l, m 30 -
f
- - -4 l 1 A i
! l l ! !
,0 -
.. .,4 i.
0
- i i . .
j 1
I A l_' R J
.,0-i I l l !
._ i nl1 i l !
. l 1
~ ., !
1 l 1 ! i !
.o 1 0 20 0 .0 {
., i e
TABLE 2
SUMMARY
1
i WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 e
p- _ _
I
- No. TOTAL
' jNo. TOTAL t Row TUBES f1 94 RADlus 2.1875 FORCE 13.50 FOACE .
1209.00 Row iTueEs 31 70 RAoUs 40.6250 FOACEliFCACE_
50.73 2 94 3.4688 13.50 3550.75 [
1269.00 32 64 41.9063 51.83 3317.12 ;
3 94 4.7500 13.50 1269.00 33 64 43.1875 L' 94 3387.84 4 94 6.0313 13.50 1269.00 34 64 44.4688 54.04 3458.56 5 94 7.3125 13.50 1269.00 35 62 45.7500 55.15 3418.99 {
6 94 8.5938 M.50 1269.00 36 60 47.0313 56.25 7
8 94 92 9.8750 11.1563
% 08 16.37 1417.99 1533.64 i 37 38 58 48.3125 3375.00 lI 57.36 3326.59 i
54 49.5938 58.46 3156.e4 9 92 12.4375 18.26 1679.46 39 52 l
50.87SO 59.57 3097.38 10 92 13.7188 19.84 1825.28 40 48 52.1563 60.67 2912.16 11 92 15.0000 21.43 1971.10 41 44 53.4375 61.78 2718,10 12 92 16.2813 23.01 2116.92 42 40 54.7188 62.88 2515.20 13 90 17.5625 24.60 221'J.55 43 36 56.0000 63.99 2303.46 14 90 18.8438 26.18 2356.20 44 30 57.2813 65.09 1952.70 ,
15 90 20.1250 27.77 2498.85 45 24 58.5625 Oti ' 1588.68 ,
16 88 21.4063 29.35 2582.80 46 14 l 59.8438 67.30 S42.20 17 88 22.6875 [ 30.94 2722.28
' 18 86 23 9688 32.52 2796.72 [OVERALL TOTAL FORCE = 118578il T 19 86 25.2500 34.11 2933.03
/ 20 84 26.5313 35.69. 2997.96 - -
ct ,c.
21 84 27.8125 37.28 3131.10 REFERENCE FORCES.
1 22 62 29.0938 38.86 3186.52 23 82 30.3750 40.45 3316.49 _
, 24 80 31.6563 42.03 3362.40 - ~
l 25 80 32.9375 43.62 3489.20 Bi-l)NEAR REPRESENTATION: y = mX + b 26 78 34 2188 45.20 3525.60 (1) Row 1 - 26*
27 70 35.5000 46.31 3519.18 m= 1.24 28 76 36.7813 47.41 3603.16 b= 2.87
. 29 74 38.0625 48.52 3590.11 (2) Row 26 46 30 72 .39.3438 49.62 3572.64 m= 0.86
. b= 15.69
~ ~
TOTAL # TuBEt
- Rows 1 - 6. FOACE = CON 3 TANT TUBE PITCH = , _
TABLE 2
SUMMARY
OF TSP FORCES - TOP TSP-STEAM GENERATOR INLET BREAK t
1 WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 m- _
m__
j ;No. j l TOTAL , ;No. j j l Row 7uBES ' Radius FoACE' FonCE l TOTAL
~
Row :TueEs ! RAolus ' FoACE ' FCACE '
I 1 1 94 2.1875 3.60 338.40 31 70 40.6250 17.75 1242.50 2 94 34688 3.60 338.40 l 32 64 41.9063 18.00 1152.00 3 94 4.7500 3.60 338.40 33 64 43.1875 18.25 4 94 6.0313 3.60 338.40 34 64 1168.00 l 44.4688 18.50 1184.00 5 94 7.3125 3.60 338.40 ;l' 35 62 45.7500 18.75 1162.50 6 94 8.5938 3.60 338.40 l 36 60 I
47.0313 19.00 1140.00 7 ! 94 9.8750 4.25 399.03 37 58 48.3125 19.25 1116.50 I
B ! 92 11.1563 4.89 449.88 38 54 49.5938 19.50 1053.00 l 9 l 92 12.4375 5.54 509.22 39 52 50.8750 19.75 1027.00 10 92 13.7188 6.18 568.56 40 48 52.1563 20.00 960.00 11 92 15.0000 6.83 627.90 41 44 53.4375 20.25 891.00 ;
12 92 16.2813 7.47 687.24 42 40 54.7188 20.50 13 90 17.5625 8.12 730.35 43 38 820.00 l 50.0000 14 90 18.6438 8.76 20.75 l 747.00 788.40 44 30 57.2813 21.00 i M0.00 t l 15 90 20.1250 9.41 846.45 45 24 58.5625 21.25 510.00 1 16 88 . 21.4063 10.05 884.40 48 14 59.8438 21.50 301.00_j 17 BG i22.6875 10.70 941.16 j 18 b6 l 23.9688 11.34 975.24 [QVERAu. TOTAL FORCE = 39959ii 19 88 23.2500 11.99 1030.71 20 84 26.5313 12.63 1060.is2 21 84 27.8125 AL 13.28 1115.10 REFERENCE FoACES:
22 82 29.0938 13.92 1141.44 l 1
23 82 30.3750 14.57 1194.33 l
24 80 31.6563 15.21 1216.80 - -
25 80 32.9375 15.80 1268.40 BI-UNEAn REPRESENTATloN: y = mX + b l 26 78 34.2188 18.50 1287.00 (1) Row 1 26 {
27 76 35.5000 16.75 1273.00 m= 0.50 i 28 76 36.7813 17.00 1292.00 l b= -0.73 l 29 74 38.0625 17.25 1276.50 (2) Row 26 46 (30 72 39.3438 17.50 1260.00_ _ m= 0.20 b= 9.82
~ ~
ToTAt # TueE!
TuSE PITCH =
TABLE 2
SUMMARY
Or TCP FORCES-ACCUMULATOR BREAK
- _ _ _ - - - - _ - - . - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ---- ^ ~
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 Break Location TSP Overall Force Steam Generator Inlet Top 118,578. Ib.
6 34,861. Ib.
Steam Generator Outlet Top 117,287, lb.
6 25,426. Ib.
Pump Outlet Top 109,175. Ib.
6 21,603. Ib.
Pressurizer Top 32,575. Ib.
6 9,657. Ib.
Accumulator Top 39,959. lb.
6 11,118. Ib.
TABLE 2 OVERALL
SUMMARY
OF TSP FORCES cisc n sa
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3
__,;.,__m_..-._._.,c,m__mm._,_..__
. ANGLE LOAD INLET BAEAK LLQADjNo CpNDylON AccuM BREAK (
' LOCA Raref action
{DEOL__[ACIOR _MS[_ . __,I$Lr>SL__
j j j 118.58 39.96
' LOCA Shaking i 15.50 7.75
- Combined LOCA ,
! 134.08 47.71 j
) Seismic I 46.21 46.21 i .
i Combined LOCA + Seismic + [
i 141.82 66.42
- bi '
Wedge Load
- a. LOCA , ,
q ; ! 0.139 18.64 6.63 b '
0667 30.82 '
30.82 I a Seismic LOCA + Seismic I I
- l 4 36.02 t 31.53 l i !
[ Wedge Load j i ;
i a.LOCA > 0.634 '
85.01 '
j b. Seismic !
30.25 0.667 30.82 30.82 j a. LOCA + Seismic j l 90.41 43.1 9 i
Wedge Load j
- l a. LOCA "" ~ l { j i
0.496 i 66.50 23.66
!] b. Seismic 0.667 30.82 30.82 -
. a. LOCA + Seismic 1 73.30 j 38.86 m- _ _ _ _ ,
! l i
.-_m . - . _ _ --.,
TABLE 2
SUMMARY
LOCA PLUS SEISMIC LOADS TOP TSP: [ ]b WEDGE GROUP Of SK 79. FARE 2 06/23/91
WESTINGHOUSE PP.0PRIETARY CLASS 3
.r l
CUMULATIVE EJSTic . No oF No. OF FOACE AAEA FOACE_T_UBESN TUBE _S$
28.9- 1.6262 28.8; 0.00 0.00 J 29.93 3.0525 32.4i 0.08 0.09 j CRUSH TEST APPROXIMATIOR 31.9 2.7014 37.2 l 0.21 0.31 l max LOAD (kips) =
33.9- 3.5897 42.9 l 0.38 0.57 4 No. TUBES WITH OO ]gm50.9 14 35.9- 4.7065 49.1 l 0.59 0.88 D
> 37.9 > 6.0164 55.5 ! 0.84 1.25 38.9 6.7844 58.9i 0.99 1.47 f
39.9' 7.5724 62.2: 1.14 1.70 40.9' 8.5218 66.0i 1.32 1.95 1 I 41.9' 9.3912 69.3'i 1,49 2.23 )
l 42.9 l 10.3876 72.9 1.68 2.54 I
) 43.93 11.4292 76.5 1.86 2.57 l l 44.9! 12.6502 80.4 2.11 j 3.24 i i 45.9i 14.0122 84.7 2.37 3.64 i j 46.9 15.4042 88.8 j 47.9; 17.1343 2.64 ! 4.08 f I
93.6 2.97 4.56 j 48.9i 18 9977 98.6 3.33 5.08 49.9 i 20.8749 103.3 3.69 . 5.66 i
,i 50.9! 23.5713 109.8 4.20 l 6.29 J 51.9i 25.6273 114.5 4.60 I
6.97
~
~
! 52.9 l 29.2691 122.4 5.30 7.73 54.9 i 41.4236 ; 145.6 -7.63 9.45 50 0 56.9! 58.3333 ! 172.7 10.87 11.52 g I 58.9 l 74.6901 195.5 14.00 14.00 W '00 .
- i 60.0 l 83.6863 206.9 15.72 (C
3 15.57 $ l ! !
62.0i 100.0431 226.2 18.85 18.84 5 30 0
, 5 f 64.0 l 116.3998 244.0 21.99 22.77 ! IC l 66.01 132.7566 260.6 25.12 : 27.47 tI MO
[
} 68.0 l 149.1133 I
{
276.2 70.0I 165.4701 l 290.9 31.39 28.26 33.11 39.85 ;j ' O'O
[
72.0 ^ 181.8268 I 305.0 34.52
- 1 47.94 l 1 '
O.0 ;
- 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 Wroos Loao (kipe)
C Apra Are - Ee Ana TABLE 2 NUMBER OF COLLAPSED TUBES AS A FUNCTION OF LOAD SERIES 51 STEAM GENERATOR - [ ] WEDGE GROUP
r WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 s . - w.-- ---
, ANGLE ,
LCAD LCAD /
LOADING CONDmON __;_ (dog) FACTOn # TUBES LOCA Raref action i : 118.58 '
LOCA Shaking '
! 15.50
.. Combined LOCA ,
! i 134.08 n ,
i t
] I l
' Seismic i 46.21 i ..!
3
. Combined LOCA + Seismic i i 141.82 j '
. bi '!
l Wedge Load l a. LOCA 1
N '
! 0.139 18.64
' O. Seismic l 0.667 30.82 j j a. LOCA + Seismic ,
! 36.02 3
-b i l
LNo. OF TUBES WITH AD) ! !
~ ~
I a. LOCA _
l I 0.0
- b. Seismic i 1 0.0
- a. LOCA + Seismic l 0.0 LWedge Load ! I !
) a. LOCA l 0.634 85.01
!l b. Seismic l 0.667 30.82 l, it a. LOCA + Seismic i 90.42 l NO, OF TUDES WITH AD) b[ ,
l I !
- ~
- a. LOCA I 2.0 1
- b. Seismic 0.0 j
- a. LOCA + Seism!c 3.0 l 4 i
< Wedge Load j
"" ~
] a. LOCA 0.496 66.50 l
} b. Seismic , 0.667 30.82 !
- a.LOCA + Seismic l 73.30 -
I NO. OF TUBES WITH AD>'
-b I N l g j
- ~
- a. LOCA j l !
1.0
- b. Seismic j i 0.0 g
< a. LOCA + Seismic !
l 2.0 TABLE 2 NUMBER OF COLLAPSED TUBES PER WEDGE GROUP STEAM GENERATOR INLET BREAK I
UESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 0
o ANGLE ;
LOAD No CONDmON _ _ _ (d_o g) _ _ # TUBES
, -h l -
- bi No. or TUBES WiTH AD) '
i -- i !
] a. LOCA i
- 0.0 j b. Seismic l
, l 0.0 i a. LOCA + Seismic O.0
-b i
]
No. or TUBES WITH AD > ,
~~
- a. LOCA
[1 ;
2.0
- b. Seismic ; .
0.0 t
!! a. LOCA + Seismic i 3.0
- ! --b i'
,No. oF TUBES WrTH OD) ! ;
- a. LOCA ; 1.0 ,
~
- b. Seismic ~
! 0.0
- I 4 '
l 2.0 l
} a. LOCA + Seismic ; I +
i l i TOTAL NuungR OF COLLAPSED TUDES l l a. LOCA NUMBER '
6.0 I
l J PER CENT i- 0.18 j
- j' b. Seismic NUMBER O.0 4 PER CEMT 0.00 i
- a. LOCA + Seismic NUMBER l 10.0 PER CENT I 0.30 TOTAL NUMBER oF SERIES 51 TUBES = 3388 TABLE 2
SUMMARY
OF NUMBER OF COLLAPSED TUBES INLET BREAK STEAMGENERAT0gWEDGEGROUP TOP TSP - [ ]
l
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS-3 a
, CUWL.ADVE ; Et.ASDC NO. OF ; NO. OF i i FORCE AHEA- 1 FORCE TUBES (0 i TUBES @
' -f 28.91 28.8 1.13262 l - 0.00 l -0.00 l 4 29.9! 2.0525 32.4 0.03 1 0.06 ' crush TEST APPROXIMATION:
r 31.9 2.7014 37.2 0.07 0.19 max LOAD pips) = 58.9 i 33.9 3.fi897 42.9 .0.13 0.34 Flow AREA Loss (tubes) = 4.736
! 35.9 4,7065- 49.1 0.20 0.50 37.9 6.0164-. 55.5 0.28 0.69 f/-
t- 38.9, 6/7844 58.9 0.33 0.79 '
I 39.9i 7.)i724' 62.2 0.39 i 0.90
~
40.9i 8.3218 66.0 0.45 1.01-j- 41.9 9.3912 69.3 0.50 1,13 42.9 10.3876' 72.9 0.57 1.26-43.9 11.4292 - 76.5 : 0.64 - 1.39 -
.i 44.9 12.0502 80.4 0.71 1.54 j 45.9 14.0122 84.7 0.80 1.69
] 46.9 15.4042 88.8 0.89 1.85 uj- 47.9 17,1343 93.6 1.01 2.02-P 48.9 18.9977 - 98.6 1,13' 2.20 i 49.9 20.0749 103.3 -1.25 2.40 i 50.9 23.ti713 109.8 1.42 2.60 51.9 25.13273. 114.5 1.56 2.82
~~
52.9 [-29.2691 122.4 1,79- 3.04 j_ 54.9 ' 41.4236 145.6 2.58 3 54 12.0 g ;. i i ,;;;
4 56.9 58.3333 172.7 3.68 - 4,11 "0 t i i I;
) -- 58.9 -74.0901 j 60.0 83.13863 195.5 206.9 4.74-5.319 4.74 5.12
{ I ! ! 35 r l 62.0 100.0431 ~ 226.2 6.379 5.87 S
j 7.0 ; ;
{[
g*
}- 64.0 _116.3998 244.0 7.439 ' 6.72 . e.0 j g ,-
- i ,
~! .66.0 132.7566- 260.6 8.499 ~ 7.67-5.0 4.0
- ; j j
~ 68.0 l 149.1133 276.2 9.560 8.74 5 I ! ' ~-
3.o 70.0 h 165.4701 290.9 10.62 - 9.95 2.0 '
.I - 72.0 : 181.0268 305.0 11.68-l l 11.30 1.0 pg 4 - i 0.0 --
20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 Wroos LcAo - (kipe)
O A.w A Are
- ExP AP*
TABLE 2 FLOW AREA LOSS AS A FUNCTION OF LOAD SERIES 51 STEAM GENERATOR [ ]b-WEDGE GROUP I J
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 a
ANGLE >
LOAD LOAD / -_!
LOADING CONDmoN FACTOA (de))} . # TUBES L0CA Rarefaction i 39.96
j OSeismic 46.21 1 d
N Combined LOCA + Setsmic g 66.42 q - ,
.. Wedge Load i j t l
l a.LOCA I i 0.139 6.63
) b. Seismic ; ! 0.667 i 30.82
] a.LOCA + Seismic ! 31.53 J !
, , Flow AREA LOSS (tubes)
{
' a. LOCA 0.00 1
, b. Seismic 0.02
+
a.LOCA + Seismic 0.02 '
j, Wedge Load !
y a. LOCA 0.634 30.25 ,
- b. Seismic 0.667 30.82 !
- a. LOCA + Seismic 43.19 4
{
(Flow AAEA LOSS (tubes)
- y a. LOCA - 0.01
- b. Seismic 0.02 !
! a. LOCA + Seismic -!
0.13
>! l
[ Wedge Load
- a. LOCA - -
0.496 66.50
- b. Seismic 0.667 30.82
[ a.LOCA + Seismic 73.30
^
Flow AREA Loss (tubes)
)
d a.LOCA 1,0 i ll b. Seismic 0.0 j,
- l. a. LOCA + Seismic 2.0 I TABLE 2 FLOW AREA LOSS PER WEDGE GROUP STEAM GENERATOR INLET BREAK
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 o __
,j j ANGLE LOADING CONDmON !
(deg) # TUBES ll Flow AnEA Loss (tubes)
-b ;
q i
s
- a. LOCA i .
- b. Seismic 0.000 j a
0.015 *
] a. LOCA + Seismic i 0.021 I i
- l
! i
' i Flow AREA LOSS (tubes) i l
j a.LOCA '
j 0.011 J b. Seismic ,
[ 0.015
- a. LOCA + Seismic ]
! 0.131 l
- i
- i l
- Flow AAEA LOSS (tubes) l
- a. LOCA l j 0.000 j b. Seismic -
i j
- 0.015
- a. LOCA + Seismic i. i 0.087
- i 1
' Flow AREA LOSS (tubes)
- a. LOCA Il NUMBER 0.02 !!
PER CENT 0.00
- b. Seismic NUMBER 0.09
. . _,_ PER CENT i 0.00
- a. LOCA + Seismic NL,MBER j 0.48 Ij_.
PER CENT ! 0.01 TOTAL NUMBER OF SERIES 51 TUDES= 3388 TABLE 2
SUMMARY
OF FLOW AREA LOSS STEAMGENERAT0gINLETBREAK TOP TSP - [ ] WEDGE GROUP
__m_.__m._ ____________.____.____. - - - - - . .I
~
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 Y
a 11 10 m -
3 2 g ,
6 13 7
14 R
4 _ 'b i
> a. 6 U-Bend ~" l Tangent Pt.150 C -- 5"0 Top TSP o
1 6_ q --- _,
, _, 4 .
16
- b 04 i
)7 o 3 17 D
18 0 2
18 M
19 o I
19
-ol 2nd TSP 20 fS X u r
4-
.(Broken' Side) z 4 Node Element Numbers l Numbers
- _ _b (largest)
R) -
(average)
R2"_ _
i l
FIGURE 2 T/H TUBE MODEL FOR LOCA RAREFACTION 1
l
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3
-PLOT OF LOCA PRESSURES - S01 BREAK HOT-TO-COLO LEO PRESSURE O!FFERENTigL
, COMPARISONOF[ ]iUBES N
(\ l O
- h.,
tUnt
, i .
/T.
\ 1- .
A ll \ l \\ /
x
,\ \, [ -
I ; ;
y ,
3
- g '" J v
, bkv f v l l
lj l' l'" ;' I R] '
3 ITl i !
y i i.
I im t
.sn
- 3. .0 u
.se
) .45 .M .15 .88 .l* al# M *1
.o I FIGURE 2-2 i
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 PLOT OF LOCR PRESSURES - ACC BRERK HOT-TO-COLD LEG PRESSURE OlFFERENTI LL
,, COMPARISONOF{ ] TUBES I l l
- O Iu t O That
, f (
,, / .
t,n
, n E
k as
' ( \
i.
, < n
=. s s. e. .
l x \ '/\'
- :: N w
\\
\\
_=_
. .. . ,7 .. .., .i FIGURE 2-3 I
l
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS-3
- (4
.. ~'
FIGURE 2 FINITE ELEMENT MODELS FOR DYNAMIC LOCA ANALYSIS
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS ~3 -
TSP FONE (PER TUBE) VERSUS TUBE RADIUS 70.0 1 --
. 60.0-- .
I
. rii@T~
--W 3 50.0 .aEF h f ,
%=Y B 40.0 I e 9
h I ~~
e- 30 0
~*
20.0 - ~-
nmmm W -
10 0 t !
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 Tues RAtsus . Im.
TSP FONE (PER TUBE ROW) vS TUBE RADIUS 4.0 l
3.5 -mTt, --
3.0 3 ,.. p 3.-+
g$.
2.5 p"
2.0 1.5
.....-.+
1.0 o
0.5 ;
0.0 20.0 40.0 60,0 Tuns Reue.Im SUMMED TSP FORCE VEluJS TUBE RADaJs 120.0 - - _
1 0 -
90.0 ~
37 60.0 %
70.0 8~
g]. 00.0 m yf 50.0
-m
_,,~ i
. L 40.0 !
30.0 Y I I
~*
20.0 '
10 0 I 0.0
-s n W' " i l 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 Tuse RAaus. In.
FIGURE 2
SUMMARY
OF TSP FORCES - TOP TSP STEAM GENERATOR 4NLET BREAK
_ ,,n----.----'w WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3
- a,h c,e
)
G 9
a 4
_ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " - - - - - ' - ' - ' - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - -
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 b
1 s
~~
_b For TSP 1, Wedge Groups Rotated , j From Posr6ons Shown Above TSP 16: Wedge Group Width
. TSP 7: Wedge Group Wktth =
, FIGURE 2 WEDGE GROUP ORIENTATION LOOKING DONN ON TSP
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3
~
-.- - (4. , b T
4 48 FIGURE 2 CALCULATION OF WEDGE LOAD DISTRIBUT10f4
WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3
, ~ A,b C o n
N emme FIGURE 2 FORCE VERSUS DEFLECTION FOR TSP-FIRST ANALYSIS P
__ _ ___ __ _ _m _ __ __ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ -
I9 WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3
[ 4., bjC 9
FIGURE 2 FORCE VERSUS DEFLECTION FOR TSP-SECOND ANALYSIS a
u _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _