ML20101M564

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Allowable MUT-1 Indicated Overpressure Vs Indicated Level
ML20101M564
Person / Time
Site: Crystal River Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/12/1996
From: Clauson R
FLORIDA POWER CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20101M505 List:
References
M94-0053, M94-0053-R03, M94-53, M94-53-R3, NUDOCS 9604050443
Download: ML20101M564 (184)


Text

. .- - - . - - .-. - .. - . -

E<<ctosare it i g INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE j NUCLEAR OPERATIONS ENGINEERING NA1E 240-3358 coaeoa Ario= office MAC Telephone

{

SUBJECT:

Crystal River Unit 3 Quality Document Transmittal - Analysis / Calculation l -

Fle: CALC i l

To: Records Management - NR2A 1

1 I The following analysis / calculation package is submitted as the QA Record copy:

i como rec nna ==4 DENmcADON NUMem REV. SYSTEMM TUTA PAGES TRANSMITTED i M94-0053 3 MU 88 Tmz

! ALLOWABLE MUT 1 INDICATED OVERPRESSURE VS. INDICATED LEVEL i l

. I KWDS (IDENTFY MEYWOFOS FoA LATER ETREVAQ j MUT-1 OVERPRESSURE, MUP GAS ENTRAINMENT DXEF (REFEMNCES oR FE.ES UST PRMARr FLE FIRST) f

OP 103B, EOP-08, SP-300, OP-402, SP-162 THROUGH M964013.

I

< IN88-23, SP-169E,1914012, M93-0046, M914092 AP880, AP990, IOC OP96M0024 4W @6 SY PR90-0013,191-0002, M-6057. EOP-07 CS95-009, PR95-0232 l

, vaso avenom wAun venom oocuutuT muuses exReel sueesstoea oocuue=Ts exries) l FPC N/A l M94-0053 Rev. 2 l

i MUT 1 DHT 1 l BSP-1B  !

I j MUP 1 A l DHP-1A l l MUP-1B l DHP-1B l

N '

l ,88 MUP1C 0 BSP 1A [

t c o n.

4

! An 88 l \1

D' O .1 11

! c)* l l coWuENTS (USAGE RESTFeChoNS PHoPRET AM, ETc.)

CALCULATION Rev. 3 REPLACES ALL Rev.2

  • DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION
  • TEXT,
e O SAVE ALL ATTACHMENTS EXCEPT #3 WHICH IS DELETED, AND ADD NEW ATTACHMENT O&

I No. #12 (8 pages)

NOTE

Use Tag number only for valid tag numbers (i.e., RCV-8, SWV-34, DC-99), otherwise; use Part number field (i.e.,

j CSC14599, AC1459). If more space is required, write "See Attachment" and list on separate sheet.

otssc% pecy cATE VERI h0N ENGINEER DATE 5 pERVF 4 R ENG i ,.

, (/ WT /) h h, / .f

~

cc: MAR Office (if MAR Related) Oyes G Y ' Wia$$ument Review Required @ ves O No i MAR / Project File Supervisor, Nuclear Document Control w/ Plant Doc Rev.

j Mgr. Nucl. Config Mgt. Eval. and Analysis / Calc. Summary (if Plant Doc. Rev.,is Yes)

File (CALC) FPES "Or:ginal" w/ attach A/t crer--

Oyes @ No

i Mgr., Srte Nucl. Eng. Serv. w/ attach File (ENG 6) - w/o attach (If yes, Transmrt w/ attach)

+ G/s,Pye < llc V s /M' 4-RET: Ufo of Pteril RESP: Nuclear Engmeenag eco 628 Rev.11/94 l

FlOrlda '

s v, P we n C.o,,.,.u.r ANALYSIS / CALCULATION

SUMMARY

O DISCIPUNE CONTROL NO. EMSON LEVEL DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER M 94 4053 3 mtr. CtAS$iFiCATiON ecsECx ONE) j ALLOWABLE MUT 1 INDICATED OVERPRESSURE VS. INDICATED LEVEL E ses ty R ted )

O Non Safmy Rhud MAR /aP/CGWR/PEEPE 6 NR/ FILE SP944TI VENDOR DOCUMENT NUMSER l

mesa ress navisEn APPROVALS Design Engineer frTd,w Changes marked with ( l ) in Alternating margins.

Date 3 //z/9 1 Verification Engineer /)1fl.

j oste /uethoda siul 3/- e j supervisor -aksg#M ~~

om 24Ac.

NTION METHODS: R - Design Review; A - Alternate Calculation; T - Qualification Testing DESCRiSE BELOW IF WETHOO OF VERIFICATION W AS OTHER THAN DESIGN REviKW PuRrosE suuuAm THIS CALCULATION'S Rev. 3: SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGES REV. 2 BY CHANGING HEAD LOSS TERMS FOR FLOW SPLITTING TEES AND INCLUSION OF A VELOCITY HEAD REDUCTION TERM NOT INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL CALCULATION. THE ALLOWABLE OVERPRESSURE CURVE IS ABOVE THE EXISTING OP-1038 CURVE FROM M944053 Rev. 2. l RESULTS

SUMMARY

The S/O allowable curves do not need to be reduced to assure the maroin for MVP orotection is maintained.

Emeroency Boration from the BWST reaches a maximum RCS Loss Rate at about 63.36" in the MUT.

42 Reaulator set-ooint to aive 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> for coerator action is about 17 osia. (the Rec. is administrativelv isolated).

LPl and BS throttlino in orecaration for S/O must be comoteted by 9.4ft BWST indicated level.

net tu or own nEemi.-Ing.n ano em sa R.,. iifu

hE m ro.e,e.

CALCULATION REVIEW Page 1 of 2

(/ M94-0053 / Rev.3 PART I - DESIF.1 ASSUMPTION / INPUT REVIEW The following organizations have reviewed and concur with the design assumptions and inputs )

identifled for this calculation: l Nuclear Plant Technical Support System l000w 5,n,;.fo 3h/n Engr Nudear Plant Operations m

n.;.g f 2n -

] }dk '

- f L. Con. d pr Lc %- yp ,pdn Sena8w./ome. j sonetw./D

]

PART ll - RESULTS REVIEW j The following organizations have reviewed and concur with the results of this calculation and understand the actions which the organizations must take to implement the results.  ;

Nuclear Plant Technical Support System ((jh y[/S/p/

eor a.,- -

Nuclear Plant Operations / ~'

~

2/db P 'c J ~ L 'ftcczt *Wy p )l>!4 %""** /D'* '

Nuclear Plant Maintenance Yes X N/A Nudear Ucensed Operator Training Yes N/A

. Manager, Site Nuclear Services

[' yes X N/A i

Sr. Radiation Protection Engineer l g s.on. .,0.. .

OTHERS:

s,e w .;o..

+

b g/M E! W Of Platil EP. NWCbGf bigin 4AQ 1

. = --- . - . _ .

)

CALCULATION REVIEW Page 2 of 2 O ceTON NO.gEV.

M94@53 / Rev. 3 PART lil - CONFIGURATION CONTROL The following is a list of Nuclear Engineering and Plant procedures / lesson plans /other documents which require updating based on calculation results review:

Document Date Reautred Resoonsible Oraanization OP-402 TBD Operations LOC OP96-0025 ev21 f f' OP-103B TBD Operations IOC OP96-0025' o , z </ S l

l Upon completion, forward a copy to the Manager, Nuclear Licensing for tracking of actions if any items are identified in Part Ill.

PART IV - PLANT REVIEWS / APPROVALS FOR FIELD SETPOINT CHANGE PRC review is required if a full 10CFR50.59 Safety Evaluation is performed. DNPO approval is required if a setpoint is to be physically changed in the plant.

PRC Review Required Yes b No PRC Chairman /Date

) DNPO Review Required Yes N

Na N/ DNPO /Date CESON ENGINEER DATE [#

R. E. CLAUSON f[ , ' Ag uy 3// i / (.

new s/se NET: ue or P.ani nese. Nucw Engineeang

L

Mg INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

$ ggy c a . , o . u . a .,

NUCLEAR OPERATIONS ENGINEERING ottice MAc C21 231-4526 Telephone

Sua)ECT: Crystal River Unit 3
Quality Document Transmitta! - Analysis / Calculation l File: CALC I

! To: Records Management - NR2A l

j The following analysis / calculation package is submitted as the OA Record copy:

l DoCaso FPC DoCUMEW CDmFCAlloN NUMeEM nEV. SYSTEM (El TOTAL PAoES D l M944053 2 MU 141 1 N

! ALLOWABLE VifT ..

1 INDICATED OVERPRESSURE VS. INDICATED LEVEL i wwDs soomrv xEvwonos Fon taTEn nETaevaE i MUT 1 OVERPRESSUFE, MUP GAS 'dNTRA.!NMENT DxNF PEFERENCES oR FLES US;' 8W.Wrf Fia' F.4T)

OP-103B, EOP-06, SP-300, OP-402, SP-182 IN88-23, SP-169E 191-0012, M93-0046, M910092 AP880,AP990 l SY PR90-0013,1914002, M-6057, EOP-07 CS95409 vsNo gNoon N4ue l veNcoa oocuuEm Nuween exmo suecastoco orxuutma exan
FPC l N/A M944053 Rev. 0 & Rev.1

]

$ MUT-1 l DHT-1 BSP-1 B MUP-1A l DHP-1A l l MUP-1B l DHP-1B l MUP-1C h BSP-1A ll 1

l 0 I I j couucm3 ausaoe maracrioNs. enomcTam. Etc.:

THIS CALCULATION Rev. 2
Substantially changes Rev. O and Rev.1 Allowables and adds Rev.1 data to text.

j ADDS CALCULATIONS TO DETERMINE THE EFFECT OF MUT OVERPRESSURE ON BWST OUT FLOW FOR j RCS BORATION AND MUT H, REGULATOR SETPOINTS FOR APPENDIX "R*, AND ADDS NEW ATT. 7TH11.

,1 NOTE:

Use Tag number only for valid tag numbers (i.e., RCV-8, SWV-34, DC-99), otherwise; use Part number field (i.e.,

CSC14599, AC1459). If more space is required, write 'See Attachment" and list on separate sheet.

DLb8GN ENGaNEER -; QATE TON E%NEER oA'E vifef svPEg@ NucLf.AR ENG. DATE h oinu l 4i' S. (* IAI35 . N $kg cc: MAR Office (If MAR Relate Oyes @ No Plant Document Review Required 0Yes O No MAR / Project Rio Supervisor. Nuclear Document Control w/ Plant Doc. Rev.

Mgr. Nucl. Config. Mgt. Eval. and Analysis / Calc. Summary (If Plant Doc. Rev., is Yes)

File (CALC) - FPES ' Original" w/ attach A/E G/c! Oyes 0 No Mgr., Site Nuct. Eng. Serv. w/ attach Rio (ENG 6) w/o attach (If yes. Transmit w/ attach) n u iife4 NET: ue or ment nesp:Nuchner Engineermg900 628

,n m o

(' Power ANALYSIS / CALCULATION

SUMMARY

O oisceuwE cournot wo. esos LEvEt DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER M 94-0053 2 mtE ctasswCATON p(CK ONE)

ALLOWABLE MUT-1 INDICATED OVERPRESSURE VS. INDICATED LEVEL @ s v.ty Renew O Noa s v.era .i. w uAR/sP/oOWR/PEERE NuuSER/Ft1 SP94477 vEwoon occuuEwT wuweEn ITBAS REVISED APPQQVALS Design Engineer [ [ h nf c Changes marked with ( ! ) in Alternating margins.

Date b)hf/f f Verification Engineer d b f2. 4 Date/ Method

  • c. I 14 h 5 K Supervisor g k. AM

_ Date 6 lif 9f

_ MFICATION METHODS: R - Design Review; A - Attemate Calculation; T - Qualification Testing JESCRisE BELOW IF uETHOO OF VERIFICATION W AS OTHER THAN oESIGN REVIEW rueosE suuuAn THIS CALCULATION Rev. 2 Substantia!!v chanaes Rev. O and Rev.1 allowables and chances Rev.1 Attachmen to text AND ADDS CALCULATIONS TO DETERMINE: 1) THE EFFECT OF MUT OVERPRESSURE ON BWST OUT FLOW FOR EMERGENCY BORATION. 2) MIN. PRESS. LIMIT. 3) ACCEPTABLE HYDROGEN REGULATOR SETPOINTS FOR APPENDIX 'A' CONSIDERATIONS. AND 4) ADDS ATTACHMENT 7 ON EXPECTED TANK PRESS / LEVEL RESPONSE.

nEsutis suuurm Rev. O and 1 Allowable oress, are substantially reduced in Rev. 2 becase MUT temo is chanced from 120 to 135 'F Tank Minimum oressure limit will not be exceeded as lona as oositive oressure is maintained in the ooeratina ranae.

Emeroenev Boration from the BWST reaches a maximum of RCS Loss Rate at about 62.76" in the MUT bH2 Reaulator set ooint to oive 8 Hr for coerator action is about 17 osio, which is lower than the current 19 osia..

V However. if ooerator action within 30 min were acceotable the Set ooir.t could be as hiah as 50 osia a . n/ NET tn. e nun nEse New Enen ane am sa

F Page .[_ of j__

D 9 c.loridaPLANT DOCUMENT REVIEW EVALUATION Power

.e...o..

DOCUMENT rYPE / WMBER To BE EVAL.uATED fl 9 4 - 0 0 f 3 [c o, 2 PARTI INSTRUCTIONS: Calculations, Document Change Notices, and Plant Equipment Equivalency Replacements have the potential to stfect plant documents. The Originator of any of these documents is required to determine which,if any, plant organizations should review the subject document for impact. The Originator should use the best judgment to make this determination based on the nature of the changes. If in doubt sa to whether or not a plant organization should review a particular document, it is suggested that the subject organization be contacted.

The Originator is to check the appropriate boxes below and attach to the subject package na follows:

Calculations Insert behind Analysis / Calculation Transmittal DCNa Insert behind DCN page 1 PEEREs Insert behind PEERE page 3 CIDPs Insert behind CIDP page 1 The above referenced document must be distributed as follows:

O S.nior Radiation eroi.ction engin r B Oin.r(s>:

O uanag.r Sit. Nuci.ar S.rvie.s T4 c.a o Manager, Nuclear Maintenance k Supervisor, Operations Engineering & Support 7- CC*O 6 btd N eJC k Manager, Nuclear Plant Techrncal Support omoseAToR / CA a suPEfMSOR / OArE c' y - e: S $ g a

$ =W $ l g

V l Upon completion of Part 1, if applicable, attach to the subject document, check *Pfant Document Review Recuired* block. 'Yes.* and cive to Nuclear Encineerino Deoartment Suooort Soecialist for distribution.

CIDPe Dstribute with Attachments Calco Dstribute with Transmittal Memn. Summs'y - PEERE - Dstribute with Attachments - DCNe Distribute with Attachments and Drawings PARTla ,

l INSTRUCTIONS: Upon receipt of the subject document, the assigned Rwiewer enters the ' Reviewing Department

  • name below, reviews the subject docurner.: for impact on piard proodures, and completes the evaluation below.

CAUTION: # THE SUBJECT DOCUMEN'T STATES SPECIFIC PLANT PROCEDURES / DOCUMENTS MUST BE DEVELOPED O REVISED AND [T IS DETERMINED BY TH;r. REVIEWER NOT TO REVISE OR DEVELOP THOSE PROCEDURES / DOCUMENTS, THE ORIGINATOR MUST BE CONTACTED BY DIE REVIEWER.

REWWING DEPAMMENT PLANT REVIEW IMPACT EVALUATION: The above referenced document has been reviewed and evaluated as follows:

l No Action Required O Actaen Required: The below listed document (s) is affected and requires revision and/or other actions as indicate procedure, void a procedure, etc.)

DOCUMENTS / ACTIONS l

l

\

Q RWEWER / CA'E sLpgg,n3OR / OAq Upon complet4on, forward evaluation form 6 to Nuclear Document Control (NR2A)

  • If the Supervisor or designee acts as the Onginator or Reviewer, the applicable " Originator / Reviewer
  • block should be NA'd.

12/e4

_ - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _m_ . _. _ . . _ . _ _ . _ _

i l

Flda INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE ggy coaeoaaeio.

NUCLEAR OPERATIONS ENGINEERING office MAc C21 231-4526 Telephone

SUBJECT:

Crystal River Unit 3 l Quality Document Transmitta! - Analysis / Calculation j File: CALC To: Records Management - NR2A i

j The following analysis / calculation package is submitted as the OA Record copy-

oocwo rpe rm w oEmc4Tou m REv. sysrEum votAE Pu2Esimusurrno j j M94-0053 1 MU S l

'*8

.l ALLOWABLE MUT-1 INDICATED OVERPRESSURE VS. INDICATED LEVEL l

i l

l l uwoe poEnv arvwoRos FoR LATER RETreEvAta l MUT-1 OVERPRESSURE, MUP GAS ENTRAINMENT DMREF PEFEENCES oR FLES = UST PRiuARY FILE FIRST)

OP 103B, EOP-08, SP-300, OP-402, SP 162

} IN88-23, SP-169E,191-0012, M93-0046, M91-0092

SY PR904013,191-0002, M4057 l veno s woossauEi vEnooR occuutui suusta exREF) suetssEato rm = ~rs pamF3 l FPC N/A  ?^^ ':^2i %:. E-hlh

) TAG J ff 1 l MUT-1 DHT-1 BSP 1B MUP-1A l DHP 1 A l MUP-1B l DHP 1B l l

j MUP-1C 0 BSP-1 A h

O b l I N *GS pSAGE N&rFtCTioNS, PHoPFtETArW ETC.)

THIS REVISION ADDS ATTACHMENT 7.

~

NOTE:

! Use Tag number only for valid tag numbers (i.e., RCV-8 StW-34. DCH-99), otherwise; use Part number field (i.e.,

CSC14599, AC1459). If more space is required, write "See Attachment
  • and list,on separate, sheet.

DE s.o g Esc.,,su.r ATE TaoN Ev MH SuF A Nuc A .a vE RF TE 4

/ oATE

)Y[ ~

bw / p, W

(,./

I w p,bhj" j cc: MAR Office (if MAR Related) Oyes O No Plant Document Review Requi d Oyes No j MAR / Project File Supervisor, Nuclear Document Control w/ Plant Doc. Rev.

j Mgr. Nucl. Config Mgt. Eval. and Analysis / Calc. Summary (!f Plant Doc. Rev., is Yes)

File (CALC)- FPES 'Originar w/ attach A/E G /CI Cyes O No Mgr., Site Nucl Eng. Serv. w/ attach (if yes, Transmit w/ attach)

Rev.11/64 RET: Lpe of Plant RESP: NucJoet Engmeenne eco e2s

Flarida

@

  • Power *'*"**

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION

SUMMARY

DSCPUNE CONmOL NO, REVSON LEVEL CCCUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER y g4 0053 1 mtE cLAssscAriON p<cx ONE)

ALLOWABLE MUT-1 INDICATED OVERPRESSURE VS. INDICATED LEVEL @ safety a.iated l

O NOa s '.iy a.i.e d huA/aP/OQWR/PEEM NUMBER /FLE

SP94-077 vuMoOR occuuENT NuweER APPRQVALS Design Engineer /(([de ADD ATTACHMENT 7 AND REVISE PAGE 30 USTING OF Date ) / 7 /[9'[, ATTACHMENTS. ,

Verification Engineer Date/ Method * //J/[k[ b Supervisor kk '

Date n/p/g VERIFICATION METHODS: R - Design Review' A - Altemate Calculation; T - Qualification Testing DESCRISE SELOW IF METHOD OF VERIFICATION W AS OTHER THAN DESIGN REVIEW l

l 1

rumaeE suuwm THIS CALCULATION REVISION IS IN RESPONSE TO PR95@25. IT PROVIDES ALLOWABLE ,

l MUT OVERPRESSURE CURVE FOR OPERATING WITH A 0 FT BWST SWITCHOVER LEVEL ESULTS

SUMMARY

l RESULTS ARE PRESENTED ON ATTACHMENT 7.

M D)

OPERATION WITH THE 0' BWST S/O CURVE A1.LO"JE OPERATION OF TWO HPI PUMPS PER HEADER DOWN f0 A BWST LEVEL 25 .2hk Rev. u/e4 RET: ue of Pwe REsR Nuclear Engasenng 800 825

f Florida Page .f_ of b  !

9 coreoretion Power PLANT DOCUMENT REVIEW EVALUATION l OOCUMM TYPE / NUMBER To BE ENAtuATED -

"h W PARTI INSTRUCTIONS: Calculations Document Change Notices, and Plant Equipment Equivalency Replacements have the potentik to affect plant documents. The Originator of any of these documents is required to determine which,if any, plant organizations should review the subject document for impact. The Originator should use the best judgment to make this determination based on the nature of the l

changes. N in doubt as to whether or not a plant organization should review a particular document, it is suggested that the subject I organization be contacted.

The Originator is to check the appropriate boxes below and attach to the subject package as follows:

Calculations Insert behind Analysis / Calculation Transmittal DCNs insert behind DCN page 1 PEEREs Insert behind PEERE page 3 CIDPs - Insert behind CIDP page 1 The above referenced document must be distributed as follows:

Senior Radiation Protection Engineer O Otner:

Manager, Site Nuclear Services Manager, Nuclear Maintenance k Supervisor, Operations Engineering & Support

'EL 4, _ _ _"' r T- . .a Lm ;

Y#

Os

( j oRGNAToR bn E

I /3i kr d>hr J<? ~ SOR N/--.

Upon completion of Part 1, if applicable, attach to the subject document, check " Pts Document Peview Aeouired" block. "Yes.' and aive to Nuclear Enoineerino Department Sucoort Soecialist for distribution.

CIDPs - Dstribute with Attachments Calco - Distribute with Transmittal Memo Summary PEERE Distribute with Attachments - DCNs - Distribute with Attachments and Drawings PART11 INSTRUCTIONS: l#on receipt of the subject document, the assigned Reviewer enters the " Reviewing Department" name below, reviews the subject document for impact on plant procedures, and completes the evaluation below.

CAUTION: IF THE SUBJECT DOCUMENT STATES SPECIFIC PLANT PROCEDURES / DOCUMENTS MUST BE DEVELOPED OR ]

REVISED AND TT IS DETERMINED BY THE REVIEWER NOT TO REVISE OR DEVELOP THOSE PROCEDURES / DOCUMENTS, THE ORIGINATOR MUST BE CONTACTED BY THE REVIEWER.

NWwlNG DEPAMrWW PLANT REVIEW IMPACT EVALUATION: The above referenced document has been reviewed and evaluated as follows:

No Action Required O Action Required: Tn. beiow iisted document is anected and requires revision and/or etner actions as indicated (i e., generate a new procedure, void a procedure, etc.)

DOCUMENTS / ACTONS O

REWE*LR / QATE SJ'EWSOH / DATE ,

Upon completion, for*a.J evaluation form o& to Nuclear Document Control (NR2A)

  • N the Supervisor or desgnee acts as the Onginator or Reviewer, the applicable " Originator / Reviewer
  • block should be NA'd.

12/e4

i j M INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE f

ggy c o a e o a ae io.

NUCLEAR OPERATIONS ENGINEERING 0% MAC C2l 231-4526 Telephone l

4 i

SUBJECT:

Crystal River Unit 3

Quality Document Transmittal - Analysis / Calculation File
CALC i 1 1 l

TO: Records Management - NR2A

The following analysis / calculation package is submitted as the QA Record copy-j DOCNO lFPC DOCUMENT ODmFOATION NUMBEli EV. SYSTEM (4 TOTAL PAGES TRANSMITTED l M94-0053 0 MU 74 '

l I N l ALLOWABLE MUT 1 INDICATED OVERPRESSURE VS. INDICATED LEVEL I l i l

$ KWD6 lOENTIFY KEYWOF06 FOR LATER MTREVAL) l MUT-1 OVERPRESSURE, MUP GAS ENTRAINMENT DXN? PEFEFIENCES OR FILES UST PRMARY FILE FIRST)

OP-1038 EOP-08, SP-300, OP-402, SP-162 IN88-23, SP-169E,191-0012, M93-0046, M914092 1 SY PR90-0013,191-0002, M-6057
WENO (VENDOH NAME) VENOOH DOCUMENT NUMBER lDhrEF) $UPkHSEDED DOCUMLNT3 (DxHEF) j FPC N/A 190-0024 Rev. 5 i

j MUT 1 l DHT-1 4 BSP-1B f MUP 1 A l DHP-1 A l MVP-1B l DHP-1B l i

MUP-1C [ BSP 1A I b 1  : -

h

l . ,

l COMWLN18 (USAGE ALSTRICTONS, PfGVilETARY, ETC.)

ISSUANCE OF THIS CALCULATION VOIDS 190-0024 R[v."5 AND PREVIOUS REVISIONS IN THEIR i

i ENT!RETY.

1 1

1 NOTE:

) Use Tag number only for valid tag numbers (i.e., RCV-8 SWV 34, DCH-99), otherwise; use Part number field (i.c..

j CSC14599, AC1459). If more space is required, write 'See Attachment

  • and list on separate sheet.
., oatt vtw catoNEwiNsta carg 5;etsm , NuctEAs E% o4 t l Oq ENeNee

/ r , f t $f/L_ A *

  • t ( (

cc[ MAR Office (If MAR Aelated) Oyes @ No Plant Document Review Required G Yes C No MAR / Project File Supervisor, Nuclear Document Control w/ Plant Doc. Rev.

l l Mgr. Nuct. .*lonfig. Mgt. Eval. and Analysis / Calc Summary (tf Plant Doc. Rev.,is Yes)

{ File (CALC) FPES 'Originar w/ attach A/E G /Cl 0Yes G No Mgr., S4te Nuri j Eng. Sers, w/ attach (if yes, Transmit w/ attach) i Rev. I1/94 RET: Ufo of Ptart RESP: %cieer Engnwenng 900 s2s

Florida Power

    • ""~

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION

SUMMARY

OtSCIPUNE CONTROL NO. REVlasON LEWL COCUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER M 944053 0 inu ca.ASsacAfoN pecx ONE)

ALLOWABLE MUT-1 INDICATED OVERPRESSURE VS. INDICATED LEVEL @ safety Related O u a s.*.ir a.i=*=d MAR /SP/00WR/ PEEN NuuSER/Ft.E SP94477 vENoOR rm -NT NuueER REVISION ITEMS REVISED APPROVALS Design Engineer [,[Me y

Date //e& /W Verification Engineer OdRk '

Date/ Method

  • 8Is1SS R Supervisor 2 b. 4M Date gl 6 e MRIFICATION METHODS: R - Design Review; A - Altemate Calculation; T - Qualification Testing DESCRIBE BELOW IF METMOO OF VERIFICATION WAS OTHER THAN DESIGN REvlEW

i j

'1 PuseosE suuunm THIS CALCULATION SUPERSEDES CALCULATION 1904024 Rev. 5. THIS CALCULATION WAS NECESSARY TO CORRECTLY REFLECT SINGLE HPl PUMP ES TRAIN OPERATION. ECCS SWITCH OVER FROM  ;

.. 1 l

INJECTION TO RECIRCULATION BASED ON BWST LEVEL VS. RB SUMP LEVEL OF 1904024. INCORPORATING _.

.+ x; . m.:h CORRECTIONS FOR MUT: 1) WATER VAPOR PRESSURE AND 2) GASSES RELEASED FROM SOLUTION DURING DEPRESSURIZATION (HENRY'S LAW)

  • RESULTS

SUMMARY

THE NEW ALLOWABLE 5' S/O CURVE IS CONSISTENT WITH OUR CURRENT OPERATING PROCEDURES.

HOWEVER IT IS BELOW THE OP-1038 CURVE BY 0 85 osi @55' and 2 73 osi @ 86". THIS NEW ALLOWABLE 5' S/0 CURVE HAS A 2' WATER COLUMN MARGIN KEEPING GAS FROM THE MUP SUCTION AND WHEN

'HIS IS REMOVED THE ALLOWABLE PRESSURE IS ABOVE THE OLD CURVE BY .4 osi @ 86* AND 1.07 osi G 55' Ruw.11/N RET. Une of Plert RESP Nwcheer Engineering 300 825

Page .]_, of ,,l_

Florida PLANT DOCUMENT REVIEW EVALUATION g . ....

Power _ ..

I DOCuuENT TYPE / 6AMOER To BE EVALUATED A n t- ,x k a I,u la f. m M 9 4-on3 PART1 INSTRUCTIONS: Ca:culations, Document Change Notices, and Plant Equipment Equivalency Replacements have the potential to affect plant documents. The Originator of any of these documents is required to determine which, if any, plant organizations should review the subject document for impact. The Originator should use the best judgment to make this determination based on the nature of the changes. If in doubt as to whether of not a plant organization should review a particular document, it le suggested that the subject organization be contacted The Orup iv. L M check the appropriate boxes below and attach to the subject package as follows:

Calculations . Insert behind Analysis / Calculation Transmittal DCNs . Insert behind DCN page t PEEREs . Insert behind PEERE page 3 CIDPs . Insert behino CIDP page 1 The above referenced document must be distributed as follows:

O S.nior nadiation erotection Engin < Oin.r(s):

Manager, Site Nuclear Services Manager, Nuclear Maintenance O Supervisor, Operations Engineering & Support h Manager, Nuclear Plant Technical Support l l

l C

(V /

SUPERV:SOR / OATE l

//4/w A.t JtKNanAT/ DAT$b_ A J29 ' i %Mr Upd completion of Part 1, if applicable, attach to the subject document, check 'Ptant Document Review Recuired* block. "Yes? ard oive to Nuclear Encineerino Deoartment Sucoort Soecialist for distribution.

CIDPe . Dstribute with Attachments Cales . Distribute with Transmittal Memo, Summary . PEERE . Distribute with Attachments . DCNs . Distribute with Attachments and Drawings PARTH <

INSTRUCTIONS: Upon receipt of the subject document, the assigned Reviewer enters the "Reviewl'ng Department" name below, reviews the subject document for impact on plant procedures, and completes the evaluation below.

CAUTION: IF THE SUBJECT DOCUMENT STATES SPECIFIC PLANT PROCEDURES / DOCUMENTS MUST BE DEVELOPED OR REVISED AND IT IS DETERMINED BY THE REVIEWER NOT TO REYlSE OR DEVELOP THOSE PROCEDURES / DOCUMENTS, THE ORIGINATOR MUST BE CONTACTED BY THE REVIEWER. "N;s REVIEWING DEPARTMENT ,

y ,

~

E et; 3 -4 PLANT REVIEW IMPACT EVALUATION: The above referenced document has been reviewed and evafsated as follows: p

<. 's ! +

O No action Required Action Required: The below listed document (s) is affected and requires revision and/or other actions as indicated (i.e., generate a new procedure, void a procedure, etc )

DOCUMENTS / ACTIONS e

REVIEWER / DA'E SUPERv'5r.F / OA'E k

Upon completion, forward evaluation form o& to Nuclear Document Control (NR2A)

  • If the Supervisor or designee acts as the Originator or Reviewer, the apphcable ' Originator / Reviewer
  • block should be NA'd.

12/94

. _. . _ __ _ __ _ _ __._._..._.._____________._.-m . _ . _ _ _ _

i

l l g DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUl.ATION Crystal River UnN 3 i

Sheet 1 of _Zg, i oocuurm cemecno o. nrv.0,, .n,cownj, ,,,.uusen,ri.s )

5- SP94477 M94 OO53 3 j SECTION I - PURPOSE l This calculation determines the " Maximum Safe" and " Minimum Safe" initial gas i' overpressure for the Makeup Tank for LOCA Scenarios of drawing down the BWST with full Low Pressure injection, full Building Spray, only one HPI pump at full flow per suction l j header down to 15 ft (Indicated) in the BWST where LPI is reduced to 2386 gpm (including l l Instrument Error) and BS is reduced to 1305 gpm (including Instrument Error), with the l Makeup Tank also aligned to the same sucten header. The throttling of LPI and BS must l be completed before 7.4 ft (9.4 ft Indicated) in the BWST is reached. Because the suction l l 1 source from the Make-up Tank utilizes a locked open manual valve (MUV-64) to the l selected normal and backup MU pumps, gas entrainment in the common BWST suction to the MUPs could occur if the resulting gas pressure when the MUT tank and piping are ,

i empty is greater than the head of water from the BWST. In addition, the remote possibility l l of two (2) HPl pumps on a common header is evaluated for emergency conditions to i i determine the minimum BWST level for their operation.  !

These " safe" initial gas overpressures are determined from; 1) calculations of available l

BWST head pressure at the Tie-In point for various Emergency Core Cooling System

(ECCS) flow rates,2) calculations of MUT-1 volumes for gas expansion consideration, and o 3) calculations of dissolved gases released as MU Tank pressure decreases with tank level l j decrease. These calculations are at the end point conditions of the injection phase } l M because the BWST level is at its minimum and therefore lowest pressure at the tie-intwith  !

4 the MUT. 'I l

}

' The static pressure from the BWST at the tie-in point of the Make-Up Tank in the HPl i

Pump suction is determined for four possible BWST Switch-Over (S/0) Comoletion Levels (0 ft, 5 ft,10 ft, and 15 ft " Indicated"). The term "BWST (S/O) Level" as used in this l

^M calculation' refers to the BWST Level at which S/O from injection to Recirculation Aceident '

" WPhases'is'dompleted, the DHP's would then provide MUP suction pressure if still redsired. l Ui l 0 ' 9The O ft level is provided as a lower bound value to relate operating conditions'of *N ~

4 i

? 5N proceddies in effect from the time Switch-Over on BWST level was reinstated. iThe!51t' level W '

D P is the proposed limit because it is bounded by the 6.7ft Indicated (4.7ft Actual) level limit for j f' BWST Vortex prevention, the others are presented to demonstrate other covsf pas5 l pressures allowed with higher S/O Levels. THE APPLICATION OF THESE HIGHER SWITCH-OVER LEVEL PRESSURES CURVES ARE PROHIBITED BECAUSE EXISTING CALCULATIONS DO NOT COVER THEIR EFFECTS ON OTHER SYSTEM PARAMETERS The BWST pressure at the MUT Tie-in point is determined by the S/O level static head discussed above and the head loss due to the ECCS flow rates in the header. The various flow rates include the Large Break LOCA where maximum controlled flow rates are being l taken from the BWST with 1 HPI,1 LPI, and 1 BS Pumps running on a common suction l j train down to the reduced controlled flow rates in preparation of Switch-Over to l

DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION crystal mver unit a Sheet 2 of _Zg_

M94-0053 3 SP94477 l SECTION I - PURPOSE (Continued) l Recirculation (2HPI Case is not procedurally allowed but included for information only).

Both the "A" and "B" ES Train head loses are calculated to determine the worst case alignment for use in the allowable overpressure curve determination. The "B" ES Train l alignment (MUP-1B and MUP-1C aligned to MUT-1 and MUP-18 operating) provided the largest head loss values. These head loses are determined from DH and MU System piping take-offs used in Calculations M91-0092 and M93-0046 and applying CRANE l Technical Paper No. 410 (DI 5) and a British Paper on Pipe Losses (DI 20) to determine i "K" factors for head loss.

The calculated " Maximum Safe" initial gas overpressure curves for the Makeup Tank represent pressures that will assure a two foot water column will exist at the Makeup Pump's suction tie-point from the Makeup Tank when the BWST is at the S/O Level. Full l ECCS flow is assumed up to 15ft Indicated BWST level and LPI and BS are throttled for l preparation for S/O, the operating MUP must either be secured or aligned for piggy-back l operation before going below the 7ft Indicated BWST S/O point. Full ECCS flow is considered for this calculation to include only one HPl pump per train, a second HPl pump p l per train could be used for extreme emergencies as long as it is secured before reaching a v l BWST level of 30.2 ft (Indicated) when operating with the 5' S/O overpressure curve. The curves of " safe's overpressure values over the O to 100 inch range are generated using the perfect gas law to determine a total weight of gas in the tank and piping which would result l in a pressure equal to the BWST pressure when operating down to each S/O level. Using this weight the initial allowable overpressures are determined by soMng the perfect gas I equations for the initial gas pressures using the volumes of each increment of indicated level. This equation is also corrected for gases released from solution during depressurization and the vapor pressure of water in the tank. The curves are intended to be utilized as Design Basis limits to assure that initial gas overpressures on the Makeup Tank will preclude gas entrainment in the Makeup Pump's suctica without additional

operator intervention other than the Switch Over to Recirculation on BWST level. These y curves are calculated with worst case Instrument Errors of BWST Level, MUT Level, and i MUT Pressure Ind' ications included. 3j The " Minimum'bafe" initial gas overpressure curve is similar to the above curves, however, i l instrument errors are applied to MUT pressure and level to minimize final Tie-In Point ]

pressures and the effect of gases coming out of solution are not included in order to determine conservative limits for tank low pressure conditions. Two minimum tank pressure curves are provided, "lDEAL" and

  • REALISTIC". The "lDEAL" curve is based on Calculation M95-0001 Rev. 0 (Ref.13) minimum allowable pressure of -11.73 psig at the l Tie-In point (no 2 ft water column margin). The " REALISTIC" curve is based on maintaining p

v pressure indication over the normal operating range down to 55" with indicated pressure of 0 psig.

i m ,. noe

@ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 sheet 3 of_Is_

wum o a,cvwo,,,,0. = van, u m m wascu m, ,,o m ag u M94-0053 3 SP94477 SECTION I - PURPOSE (Continued):

Calculations for Appendix "R" considerations and Emergency Boration were added by Rev. l 2 because they are affected by the MUT operating Overpressure. The Appendix "R" l concern determines how quickly operator action would be required to preclude Gas Entrainment in the MUP Suction, and for Emergency Beration it is how soon Borated water can be drawn from the BWST to the MUP upon opening the BWST Isolation Valve.

Attachment 7 provides an explanation of observed tank pressure changes for various level changes that differed from the allowable curve's slope. The observed values were taken from REDAS data at the time of the evolution, and these compared with calculated expected responses using instrument error values and temperature changes to explain the observed deviations.

SECTION ll - DESIGN INPUTS

1. FPC-CR3 Improved Technical Specifications SR 3.5.4.2 (Amendment 150) l
2. FSAR SECTION 9.1 MAKEUP SYSTEM (Rev. 21)
3. FSAR SECTION 6.1.2.1.1 EMERGENCY CORE COOUNG, HIGH PRESSURE INJECTION (Rev. 21) l
4. EDBD SECTION 6/2 Rev. 4, MAKEUP SYSTEM
5. Crane 410,24th Ed.,1988 l
6. FPC-CR3 Surveillance Procedure SP-300, Revision 129.

.my ,

7. FPC-CR3 Surveillance Procedure SP-162, Revision 30.

7

8. FPC Calculation 190-00'24,.Rev. 5, "BWST Suction & MUT Suction Unes Tie-In Point Pressures" x
9. FPC-CR3 Operating Procedure OP-402, Revision 75, " Makeup and Purification System."
10. FPC-CR3 Surveillance Procedure SP-169E Revision 4, " Makeup System Instrumentation Calibration."
11. MARKS' Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, Eighth Edition.

i 12.

, RO 2981 (Rev.16) m

mcwua mercarc= ,o.

DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Crystei River Unit 3 mwoo. watcown/ma,se ,uavu Sheet 4 of_Zi_

M94-0053 3 SP94-077 i SECTION ll - DESIGN INPUTS (Continued)

13. FPC-CR3 Procedure EOP-08 Rev. 02.
14. OP-1038 Rev.12, MAXIMUM MAKEUP TANK OVERPRESSURE Page 31.
15. WATER CHEMISTRY MANUAL FOR 177FA PLANTS, B&W NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES BAW-1385, Rev. 6, December 1992.
16. EDBD SECTION 6/3, Rev. 5, ' DECAY HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM"
17. " Introduction to Nuclear Engineering", John R. Lamarsh,12/77, Table ll-3
18. FSAR Chapter 4 Tables 4-3 through 4-7 (Rev.11).
19. STEAM TABLES, KEENAN, KEYES, HILL, & MOORE (Copyright 1969) p l 20. "lNTERNAL FLOW SYSTEMS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE PREDICTION",

Ql l Second Edition, Donald S. Miller, Gulf Publishing, Houston (Air Science Company, Corning, N.Y.) (1990) (Att.12).

SECTION lli- ASSUMPTIONS .

1. The pressure losses in the BWST drawdown line to the MUT Tie-In Point are l determined for the worst case ECCS Flows of a Large Break LOCA . The flow rates l for each train of the ECCS pumps utilized are operational flow rates. Initially on ES l Actuation LPI and BS are automatically controlled to 3000gpm and 1500gpm and l upon reaching 15ft Indicated BWST level the automatic controls are manually l reduced to 2200gpm and 1200gpm in prepvation for S/O. The MUP flows are l manually controlled to 540gpm through out @.7, event. In,each case, the number of ECCS pumps on-line will be as shown in th'. fobowing TABLE F1 with their assumed l flow rate which is corrected for instrument error. This table also includes flow l conditions that differ from accident values in order to comlktre changes from Rev. 2 l to Rev. 3 in allowable overpressure and comparison of res'ults to outside consultants l and SP-630 results. t i O

V

l O@ occuuon conecano .o.

M94-0053 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit.3 e so.4 3

uns/co w eu miseso m y u SP94-0T7 Sheet 5 of _ZA.

l j

SECTION lli - ASSUMPTIONS (Continued)

TABLE F1 ]

A. SYSTEM FLOWS FOR VARIOUS PLANT ACCIDENT CONDITIONS l OPERATING PUMPS / HEADER FLOW / HEADER l OP COND LPI BS HPl HPl 14" PIPE 6" PIPE 4" PIPE l gpm gpm gpm gpm gpm gpm gpm l CASE 1 3250 1600 575 575 6000 1150 l CASE 2 3250 1600 575 0 5425 575 l j Case 2Org 3250 1600 540 0 5390 540 l CASE 3 0 0 575 0 575 575 l CASE 4 2386 1305 600 0 4291 600 l CASE 5 2336 1305 575 0 4266 575 l CASE "N" 2200 1200 540 0 3940 540 l SP-630* 3000 0 513 0 3513 513 513 l SP-630** 3000 0 504 0 3504 504 504 l Table F1 Notes: l CASE 1 Not automatic ECCS Flows with ES Actuation but included to demonstrate l worst case conditions if the Operator actuated the second HPl and throttled l them to less than 540gpm each. l CASE 2 Expected ECCS Flows initially with ES Actuation and Operator action to l throttle HPl to less than 540gpm. l CASE 2Org These flows are included to relate Rev. 2 Calculations and Existing OP-103B l Curve to Rev. 3 results. Head loss tables use this flow for " Case 2 Base R2" l l I

which is a duplication of the Rev. 2 Calc. values and "C5~se 2 Mod. R2" which l iTee l is the same as " Base" with the exception and inclusion of a velocity head loss factor at the Tie'-lri' point."

~

of K factors-forfl6w'

. _L .

splittin l

CASE 3 Not a limiting case but included to complete informitiorPo~h systemNssible l conditions. 3o'P l CASE 4 This Case included in order to compare Calculation Re{ults of MPR to this l calculation. l CASE 5 This Case is the Base for determining BWST's Pressure at the Tie-In Point l which is used for Allowable Pressure determination. l CASE N This Case is used to demonstrate the effect of using nominal values in the l determination of allowable overpressure. l p CASE 630s This is included to compare calc. to data from a plant test on 5/10/94, (* is l d the 513gpm HPI Nominal flow case for MUP-1B on the "A" side and ** is the l 504gpm HPI Nominal flow cases for MUP-1 A on the "A" side and MUP-C on l the "B" side, the DHP on each side is in recire, at 3000gpm, Nominal). l u

O 9 DOCUMLNT ODdTFCATION 84Q.

M94-OO53 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 f0/tBION 3

MAA/CGWM/ PEEfE/$P NUMBERjFLE SP94477 Sheet e of ll_

l I

SECTION lli - ASSUMPTIONS (Continued) 1 A. The pressure losses in the BWST drawdown line to the MUT Tie-In Point are also determined for the Normal Plant Conditions as well as losses in the MUT line to the Tie-In Point. 1 Determination of MU Rate required for various cooldown rates:

v = Speedic Volume @ Temp. and Press.

p = Density @ Temp. and Press = 1/ v RCS Voleme = 11478 ft' (Ref.16), (The FSAR Tables when added give a RCS total Volume of 11511 ft' at a Pressurizer Level of 220" Dl18, the lesser value was used and is still conservative because the pressurizer is not cooled down with the RCS)

MAKE UP FOR RCS COOLDOWN = ( pac 3 c w - pac 3 o,, ) X 11478 ft' / pm / 60

p. min. X 7.48 gal /ft' = (gpm).

V The below Density values are calculated from COMPRESSED LIQUID TABLE 4 interpolation, Steam Tables, (D119). i TABLE F2 .

Cooldown MU rate for "

l} _,

v Pressure Temperature psia deg.F p

lbm/ft3 Rate first hr.

l '

-ft3/lbm i l 0.022319 2169.7 579 44.80485 norm opp gpm -

l 0.022101 2169.7 573 45.24665 6 deg/hr 10.3 '

l 0.020781 2169.7 529 48.12038 50 deg/hr 77.2  !

l 0.019712 2169.7 479 50.73151 100 deg/hr 138 e l1 MUT opp

~

-0.016270 P SAT 135 61.46281

' lThe below table gives Makeup Flow Rates from Ref.14 Transient No. 8-Reactor Trip for.' #

Q iTransient Type as follows:

r TABLE F3 nr Transient Type Time / Flow Time / Flow Time / Flow Time / Flow Rate Rate Rate Rate Loss of-off Site O to 15 sec/ 15 to 30 sec/ 30 sec on/

Power 12 gpm 1.5 gpm 12 gpm l Turbine Trip 0 to 30sec/ 30sec to 7.5 min / 7.5 min on/

l 15gpm 110gpm 15gpm l Loss of FW Flow 0 to 3sec/ 3 to 52sec/ 52sec to 8 min / 8 min on/12gpm l 12gpm 1.5gpm 45gpm

.m u.m

n g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 7 of_Z3_

DOCUMENT C4NTWCATIObs 980. PT,,YSOrt MAR/ CGWTt/ PEEN /SP beUMBEA/ FILE M94-0053 3 CP94477 SECTION 111 - ASSUMPTIONS (Continued)

The below Operational CASES without sub (A) are initial conditions where all flow is from the MUT and CASES with Sub (A) are extensions of the CASE to when the BWST provides the Volume Loss portion of the CASE MUP flow. The MU System injection flow into the RCS are assumed values based on cooldown rates, RCS leakage, and Letdown l Disposition and appear reasonable when compared with the above B&W values..

TABLE F4 l

NORMAL MU SYSTEM FLOWS FROM MUP FOR NON RCS ACCIDENT PLANT CONDITIONS j OPERATING PUMF FLOW / HEADER OP COND in u1 14' PIPE 6' PIPE 4" PIPE l gpm gpm gpm gpm CASE 16A #168 12 12 156 l

s CASE 15A # 160.1 49.1 49.1 111 CASE 9A # 168 57 57 111 CASE 14A # 178.3 22.3 22.3 156 l CASE 13A # 200.2 89.2 89.2 111 j CASE 12A # 245.2 89.2 89.2 156 l CASE 11 A # 261 150 150 111 l CASE 10A # 306 150 150 156 l CASE 3A 575 0 0 575 l i CASE 9 **108 0 0 168 )

CASE 10 ** 306 0 0 306 l CASE -11 ** 261 0 0 261 CASE 12 ** 245.2 0 0 245.2 I CASE 13 ** 200.2 0 0 200.2 CASE 14 ** 178.3 0 0 178.3 CASE 15 ** 160.1 0 0 160.1 CASE 16 **168 0 0 168

  1. For these cases flow is split between the MUT and BWST
    • Throttled Values that correspond to the below table C

U

@ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Sheet a of ZIL om=,a a,evcca o. mwm m, comme -<as M94-0053 3 SP94 077 SECTION lli - ASSUMPTIONS (Continued)

TABLE F5 ESTIMATED MUP FLOWS (GPM) FROM MUT-1 FOR VARIOUS NON RCS ACCIDENT PLANT CONDITIONS CASE CASE CASE 14 CASE CASE CASE CASE CASE 9 16 15 13 12 11 10 Cooldown Rate R x C rit. 6 F/Hr 6 F/Hr 50 F/Hr 50 F/Hr 100 100 0 F/Hr F/Hr RCS Leakage 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 (gpm)

Cooldown Make- 0 10.3 10.3 77.2 77.2 138 138 45 to Up (gpm) RC BT gpm to Pz Lvl Cng 0 26.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total MUT Loss 12 49.1 22.3 89.2 89.2 150 150 57

= (gpm)

O MUT LVLCNG = 0.39 1.61 0.73 2.93 2.93 4.92 4.92 1.87

(-in/ min)

RCP Seal Ret 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 (gpm)

]

Letdown (gpm) 45 0 45 0 45 0 45 0 l MUP Recirc (gpm) 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 l Total Ret to 156 111 156 111 156 111 156 111 l MUT= (gpm) l MUP Recirc(gpm) 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 RCP Seal Inj 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 (gpm)

Inj Flow (gpm) 23 15.1 33.3 55.2 100.2 116 161 23 Total MUP 168 160.1 178.3 200.2 245.2 261 306 168 Flow = (gpm)

2. The pressure losses in 45 elbows will be equal to 1/2 of the 90 elbow value.

l 3. Total Gas Concentration of MUT water is assumed to be 100 cc/kg. This is

! conservative because @ 135 F and a max overpressure of 43.19 @ 100" the max Hydrogen concentration could only be 62.6 cc/kg (Dl15).

u .x r.

s O g DOC 4AsLNi CD6KAT10Be NO.

M94-0053 DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Crystal River Unit 3 MV5aON 3

h4AA/CGwHjPELM/SP hveMICR/ FILE SP94477 Sheet 9 of _Zj_

SECTION lli - ASSUMPTIONS (Continued)

4. The Calculation for Allowable Overpressure values considers only the top half (1/2) of the water volume in the MUT Tank to be the volume from which gas will come out of solution per Henry's Law during a pressure reduction. This is based upon the water leaving the tank not being effected by the pressure change, the pressure head of the top half of water above the bottom half of the water volume separating it from the gas space impeding gas release, and the gas solution not being able to reach equilibrium due to the short time for the tank to empty (i.e. to reach O' from 43.2" takes 17.2 min). It is also l noted that this pressure change per inch of level change is greatest at high levels and decreases as the level in the tank decreases. Further more, the uncertainty of this l assumption is compensated for by the 100 cc/kg value of assumption 3. l Actual MUT conditions during normal operating conditions and for Emergency Boration l Considerations have different degassing modes because Letdown, Recirculation, and Seal l Return are sprayed into the tank enhancing gas evolution out of, and,back into solution. l For this condition a 100% water volume consideration for gas evolving from solution l would be required because the water turnover exposes all the water to the pressure l change as it is sprayed. RCS Accident conditions do not have these normal MUT inputs l because they are isolated by ES Actuation and Appendix R events have a constant gas l pressure in the tank during drawdown. The Emergency Boration Consideration l Calculations assume MUT Pressure follows the Allowable curve because it includes worst l case instrument errors and the conservatism of the assummed 100 cc/kg, bounding l detailed calculations from the vast number of possible starting levels. l ,

s

5. The density of the water in the BWST and MUT-1 are insignificantly different and therefore assumed to be equal. The following is a typical comparison of Dl4, Dl16, and Dl2 data and water properties from Dl19 as used in the calculation to demonstrate this:

PARAMETER BWST MUT-1 l

. J l Temperature 40F to 100F 125F to 135F Calc Value (100F) (135F)

Specific Volume , 4 V = ft3/# 0.016130 0.016270 Boron 2277 ppm to 3000 ppm RCS Concentration Calc Value (2277) (1100)

From Dl10 the density of Boron is 144 LBM/ft3

(.002277 /144#/ft3)=1.58E 5 (.0011 / 144#/ft3) = 7.64E-6

(.997723 x 0.016130)=0.016093 (.9989 x 0.016270)=0.016252 Total V ft3/#

1.58E-5 + 0.016093 = (0.016109) 7.64E-6 + 0.016252 = (0.01626) n,,

2.x

@ g QESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 )

Sheet to of .2f_ ,

cxnawr ocmcaron no. acmos e coung u e wuueuv u  !

M94-OO53 3 SP94-077  ;

1 SECTION lli - ASSUMPTIONS (Continued) I l Level Error @ S/O with 6.864ft water and using reference value of water

@68F SVr = 0.016046 ft3/#.

l Calculated head from BWST @ 5ft S/O used for equalization determination is 6.864 ft and )

therefore used here for error determination.

l ERROR = 0.016046 X (6.864/0.016109 - 6.864/0.01626) = - 0.063 ft = 0.76"

6. Vortexing in the MUT is not included in the RCS Accident calculations because the flow from the MUT is insignificant after the MUT has emptied and the level is in the 4' piping.

This is due to the MUT Level following the BWST level decrease to equalize pressure at the tie-in point. The flow is mainly determined by the gal /in relationship in the MUT, with the water level in the pipe this goes from 30.84 gal /in to 0.06 gal /in.

Flow from the MUT to the MUPs is initially limited by this head loss, forcing it to be drawn from the BWST. With the BWST at a lower limit of 44.9 ft and using the "B" Train piping l head loss the tie-in pressures from the BWST and MUT are approximately equal at 43.21" in the MUT when operating on the 5' S/O curve and from then on the major MU System g flow is from the BWST. When the MUT reaches O' this corresponds to 25.17 ft (Nominal) in the BWST using the full Case 2 Head Loss for "B" Train. The average flow rate from l the MUT from 43.21" to 0" is approximately 77gpm (Calculated Section V.8) which would l result in a head loss of 0.18# or 5" water in 100' of 4" pipe (D15).

A Vortexing limits the allowable low levels in the MUT during Non-ES Actuation svents because significant flow continues through the tank. Critical Submergence Levels are 1 calculated for the various MUT flow rates using information from Attachments 9,10, and l

11. These Critical Submergence Levels are limiting for the Appendix R Concerns because the Emergency Boration Conditions do not continue on to low levels in the MUT. ,

, 7.. Isothermal expansion of MUT gas vapor mixture is conservatively as$umed. In reality, e o MUT temperature will fall due to losses to ambient when Seal Retum and' Recirculation flows are isolated following ES Actuation. ' -

8. : The use of the 5' Switch-Over Pressure Curve or below for MUT Operating pressures is conservative considering that recent operating guidance requires BWST isolation before l reaching 6.7' (Indicated) for Vortexing concern (Ref. 21). It is reiterated here that when operatino with the 5ft S/O MUT Overpressure Curve ontv one MUP can be coerated on a l l common suction header below 30.2 ft Und;cated) BWST Level and the remaining MUP l must either be secured or aligned to Diggy-back ooeration before going below the 7ft

/ (Indicated) BWST Level.

U 9. The Emergency Boration Calculation is provided to determine when BWST water will be injected into the RCS with various MU System Normal Flow Rates, in order to aid in determining the most appropriate Emergency Boration Method.

u.n -

s 9 g DOCUMLNT lDENTIFICATION NO.

M94-0053 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 REV11pON 3

MAA/COWR/PLERE/hP NUMBER / FILE SP94-077 sheet 11 of I3.

SECTION lli - ASSUMPTIONS (Continued)

10. The Appendix "R" Calculation is provided to determine the acceptable H2 Regulator Set- ,

Point with the assumed system flow rates. It is noted that the set-ooint allowina ~ 8 hr for l operatnr action is 17 osia. this is below the current 19.50sia value bemune the oriainal  ;

set-ooint determination did not include consideration of Vortex orevention.

SECTION IV - REFERENCES 1

1. FPC Drawings:
a. 305-858, Sht. 2, Rev. 0
  • b. 305-861, Sht. 2, Rev. 0 *
c. 305-816, Sht. 3, Rev. 0
  • d. 302-641, Sht.1, Rev. 55
e. 302-661, Sht. 4, Rev. 59 f. 305-860, Sht.1, Rev. O
g. 308-652, Rev.14 h, 305-814, Sht. 4, Rev. O
l. 308-665, Rev. 8 J. 310-641, Rev.1  !
k. 310-661, Rev. 2 1. 305-859, Sht. 2, Rev. O
m. 304-661, Sht.1 Rev.23 n. 304-661, Sht.1 Rev.1 l
o. 304-663, Rev. 20 p. CR3-P-347-MU-1.3 Rev. 4 l 1
q. CR3-P-3664-WD-1.5 Rev. 7 r. CR3-P-3909-MU-1.4 Rev.3 l
s. CR3-P-3913-MU-1.4 Rev. 2 l The drawings marked with an asterisk, represent piping routed with the most conservative path for the objective of using the maximum system head loss.
2. BWST Vendor Drawing, CB&l Co. Dwg. 70-7329, Rev. 2 (G/Cl #64-32)
3. " System Flows for Efnergency Diesel Generator Loading Evaluation", E91-0026 & 0027

-Rev.2

4. FPC Calculation 191-0012, Rev. O, "BWST Level Accuracy."
5. FPC Calculation M93-0046, Rev. O, "MU System L/D Values"
6. FPC Calculation M91-0092, Rev.1, "DH System L/D Values"
7. FPC Calculation 191-0002, Rev. O, "MU Tank Level Loop Accuracy"
8. Makeup Tank Drawing - Buffalo Tank Division Dwg. No. M-6057, Revision 8 (G/C Dwg.58-027) and SK-7348 Sh-2 Rev. 2 and SK-7348 Sh-3 Rev. 2. l
9. Buffalo Tank Catalog 2265-B, ASME Code Heads (6910, Printed U.S.A.)

I u nov

9 g coume.an coercanoe,,,o.

M94-0053 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 eso.

3 una,cowa,etta,se vueen, ritz SP94477 Sheet 12 of_If_

SECTION IV - REFERENCES (Continued)

10. Calibration Sheets for MUT-1 Pressure Instrumentation (MU-17-PT, MU-17-EB, MU-17-PIR

- All Rev. 0)(Att.1).

11. Telecon, J. K. Beil/R. E. Clauson, dated June 9,1992 (Att.1).

l 12. FPC Calculation M96-0008 Rev. O, " REQUIRED BWST VACUUM BREAKER RELIEF l CAPACITY" i

13. FPC Calculation M95-0001 Rev. O, " Maximum Permissible Make-Up Tank Vacuum '

Conditions . 1 l

14. NED95-0066, 2/3/95 and NED95-0071, 2/6/95 "EOP Change Justification" j
15. B&W " FUNCTIONAL CONTRACT SPECIFICATION REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM" Doc.

ID18-Serial No.1005812 Rev.02.

16. B&W Plant Limits & Precautions, Draft Procedure No. 110101, Rev. 2.
17. AP880 Rev. 8. i i
18. AP990 Rev.8.
19. NED95-0262, COMPUTER SOFTWARE NUMBER CS95-009 l l 20. MPR ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERS, " REVIEW OF CALCULATIONS OF MAXIMUM l ALLOWABLE MAKEUP TANK PRESSURE" CONSISTING OF THE FOLLOWING )

l CALCULATIONS: l l 1. MPR Calculation 102075DHH01, " Maximum Allowable Makeup Tank Pressure", FPC l l Calc. M96-0009.

l 2. MPR Calculation 102075DHH02, " Head Loss in BWST to Makeup Pump Flow", FPC  !

l Calc. M96-0010. l l 3. MPR Calculation 102075DHH03, " Makeup Tank Pressure", FPC Calc. M96-0011. l l 4. MPR Calculation 102075DHH04, " Combination of Makeup Tank Pressure and Level l Errors", FPC Calc. M96-0012.

l S. MPR Calculation 102075DHH05, " Potential Uncertainty in Total Head Loss from BWST l to Makeup Tank Tie-in", FPC Calc. M96-0013.

l l 21. FPC Calculation M95-0005 Rev. 2, " Minimum BWST Level to Prevent Vortexing During Drawdown".

l l 22. FPC Calculation 191-0001, Rev.1, "DH (LPI) Flow Indication and Control Loop Error l Calculation".

u -

@ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Sheet 13 oflf_

DOCUMENT OENTIFCATON NO. N@ SON MAHjCOWRjPEEHE/SP NUMBEHjf t.E l M94-0053 3 SP94477 l

SECTION IV - REFERENCES (Continued) l i 23. FPC Calculation 1904022, Rev. O, 'RB Spray Flow Instrumentation Error Calculation". l l

24. FPC Calculation 189-0037, Rev. 3, "Make-Up/HPl Flow Loop Accuracy - Low Range". l

, I l 25. FPC Calculation M90-0021, Rev. 6, ' Building Spray and Decay Heat Pump NPSH A/R". l )

I

26. MAR 95-01-07-02, "MUT-1 SETPOINT CHANGES". l O

l l

@ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 14 of _ZL occwtui ooce oro, m. mwoo. w,cc,*n,eumsse wur*.a, Fits M94 0053 3 SP94477 SECTION V - DETAILED CALCULATIONS V.1. MUT-1 VOLUME CALCULATION.

1 ASME CODE HEADS l

l

+--- 44.85"  ;

12.8E"Ha B 4.5* Hb

\ D

/ 1.s"sr

_, ,\ . ao 9 ,.,,.

centroid

, . 12.88" Ag11" g

' 41.44' ~

' 1 Rt 42.2s' -> <-. 5.2" ak ab2

[:

1. DATA FROM BUFFALO TANK DWG M-6057 Cylindrical Section OD 96" SHELL PL 123" by 300 7/8" X 3/8" THK HEAD 96" OD x 9/16" MIN THK ASME FLG 1 He S/S 304 90" DR,1.5" SF ASME KR
2. DATA FROM BUFFALO TANK CATALOG 2265-B, Page 20 (Ref.9).

ASME Code Heads Rk = Knuckle radius = 6 per cent of diameter Rd = Dish radius = 6 in. less than diameter Straight flange = 1.5 in

.w

@ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 15 of .lf_

DOGA8ENT OENTEaCATOpe peO. FEA90N uM./CGWRjPLEHL/SP PdVMBER/flLE M94-0053 3 SP94-077 V.1. MUT-1 VOLUME CALCULATION (CONTINUED).

3. Inside head dimensions calculated from above data.

Rd = DISH R = 90" - 9/16' = 89 7/16" Rd = DISH R = 89.4375" Dt = TANK HEAD ID = 96* - 9/16' - 9/16' = 94 7/8" Dt = TANK HEAD ID = 94.875' OR 7.90625' V.1. MUT-1 VOLUME CALCULATION (Step 3 Continued)

Rt = TANK HEAD IR = Dt / 2 = 47.4375" OR 3.953125' SF = STRAIGHT FLANGE = 1.5" l

Rk = .06 X 96 - 9/16 = 5.1975' Db2 = TANK HEAD ID - 2 Rk = 94.875 - (2 x 5.1975) = 84.48' Rb2 = Db2 / 2 = 42.24" Sin a = Rb2 / (Rd - RK) = 42.24 / (89.4375-5.1975) = 0.501425 Angle a = Sin ^(-1) 0.501425 = 30.09429 deg OR 0.525244 rad Angle b = 90 - angle a = 59.90571 deg OR 1.045552 rad .

Rb1 = Sin a x Rd = 0.501425 x 89.4375 = 44.84615" Hb = Sin b x Rk = Sin 59.9 x 5.1975 = 4.496884" 4 i

Hx = Cos a x (Rd-Rk) = Cos 30.09 x (89.4375 - 5.1975) = 72.88457'1 a:

Ha = Rd - Hb - Hx = 89.4375 - 4.496 - 72.88 = 12.05605"

4. Volume calculations, formulas from MARKS' Section 2 (Mathematics) and 3 (Mechanics of Solids)(Dl11)

Vol A = 1/6 x Pl x Ha x( Ha ^2 + 3 x Rb1 ^ 2)

Vol A = 1/6 x PI x 12.06 x ( 12.06^2 + 3 x 44.85^2 ) =39004.39in^3 OR 22.57198ft^3 O Vol B = 1/3 x Pl x Hb x (Rb1^2 + Rb1 x Rb2 + Rb2^2) l Vol B = 1/3 x Pl x 4.497 x (44.85^2 + 44.85 x 42.24 + 42.24^2) = 26793. Sin ^3 OR 15.5055ft^3 j j

OO g DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 16 of _Zg_

cocuw.,a oe.mcuo. ,o. wwsos mecom enme se eewa M94-0053 3 SP94 077 V.1 MUT-1 VOLUME CALCULATION (CONTINUED).

Vol C = Area of C x circumference of rotation through centroid Centroid location = 2/3 x Rk x Sin b / rad b = 2/3 x Sin 59.9 /

1.05 = 2.867311 "

Crr = Radius of rotation = Rb2 + Centroid location = 42.24 + 2.87 =.45.10731" Area of C = 1/2 x Rk ^ 2 x rad b = 1/2 x 5.197 ^ 2 x rad 59.9 =

14.12227in^2 Vol C = 14.12 x 2 x Pl x 45.11 = 4002.501 in^3 OR 2.316262 Ft^3 Vol D = Pl x 47.44^2 X Hd = Pl x 47.44^2 X 1.5 = 10604.37in^3 OR 6.136786ft^3 TOTAL HEAD VOLUME = Vol A + Vol B + Vol C + Vol D = 80404.75in^3 OR 46.53053ft^3

5. Tank volume, from above data:

Upper head Volume = 46.53 ft^3 h Cylindrical Volume V = 0.7854 x dia^2 x height Cylindrical Section ID = OD - 2 X THK = 8' - (2 x 3/8)/12 = 7.9375' Cylindrical Volume V = 0.7854 x 7.9375^2 x 10.25 ft = 507.2 ft^3 gal /in = 507.2 ft3 /10.25ft /12in/ft X 7.48 gal /ft3 = 30.84 gal /in Lower head Volume = 46.53 ft^3 Total 600.26 ft^3

6. Piping volume from tank to EL 106.75 ft Tank bottom is 120.5 ft EL Piping length is 120.5 - 106.75 = 13.75 ft

. r = 2.013" for Std. Wt. 4 in pipe j

' Volume is Pi x r^2 x L = Pi x 2.013^2 /144 x 13.75 = 1.22 ft^3.  !

gal /in = 1.22 ft3 /13.75ft /12in/ft X 7.48 gal /ft3 =

0.06 gal /in

7. Piping volume from tank to EL 104.75 ft Piping length is 101 ft per M93-0046 Volume is Pi x 2.013^2 /144 x 101 ft = 8.9929 ft^3 Note: The above piping volume of 1.22ft3 (Step 6) and a P2 l (expanded Gas pressure) reduction of 2ft are used in the calculation to assure conservatism.

h The piping volume within the 2ft water column margin is a horizontal 4" piping run of approximately 87ft which gives an additional 7.77ft3 (Step 7) for gas to expand into (for l Pressure Reduction) in addition to the 2ft water column pressure. l

- r.

2

i g

O@

DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 17 of_If_

OOCUMLNT CENTIFICATON 8e0, EvtSsON MAA/CGWR, PLE N/ SP NUMER, F LE M94-0053 3 SP94 077 l

8. DETERMINATION OF MUT CONNECTIONS IN THE GAS SPACE THAT WERE NOT l lNCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION: (Ref. 304-661 Sh1 & 2,304-663,308-665, CR3-P- l 3471, CR3-P-3664-WD-15, CR3-P-3909-MU-1, BUFFALO TANK DWGS; M6057, SK-7348 l i Sh 2,& 3,and CR3-3913-MU-1.4 l l

l DESCRIPTION OF CONNECTION Size Area (ft2) Length (ft) Volume (ft3) l Tank to MUV-134 1" Pipe 0.00499 24 0.11976 l Vent line to CE-118 Point 3/8" Tube 0.0003 126 0.0378 l Tank to MUV-141 & 143 3/4" Pipe 0.003 14 0.042 l Tank to MUV-180 1" Pipe 0.00499 18 0.08982 l MUV-180 to MU-17-PT 1/2" Tube 0.0007 9.5 0.00665 l MU-14-LT upper conn. 1.5" Pipe 0.01225 10.33 0.126543 l Tank to MUV-139 1" Pipe 0.00499 1 0.00499 l Inlet pipe support 10" pipe cap 10" Pipe 0.4989 0.29 0.144681 l Relief valve piping l ,

connected to tank inlet 4" Pipe 0.0884 8.8 0.77792 l l TOTAL ADDITIONAL INITIAL GAS VOLUME 1.350164ft l 9 Inlet piping that I

l would drain to tank 4" Pipe 0.0884 6.5 0.5746 l l 4 MANWAY IN WATER VOLUME NOT INCLUDED IN CALC l Approximate additional volume for gas to expand into is (23/12/2)^2 X PIO X 9/12 = 2.163936 l TOTAL ADDITIONAL FINAL GAS VOLUME 4.0887ft l TANK TANK Rev.2 EFECT l TANK GAS WATER ALOW OF VOL  % l IND. VOLUME VOLUME 5' S/O CHNG INC. IN l LEVEL W/ E W / F; PRESS ABOVE ALOW l in ft^3 ft^;-) psig psig psig l 100 146.07 454.19 43.19 43.58 0.91 l 55 331.63 265.63 12.08 12.25 1.42 l BASED ON THE INCREASE IN ALLOWABLE OVERPRESSURE AT THE TWO LEVELS ABOVE l THE OMISSION OF THE CONNECTED PIPING GAS AND WATER VOLUMES ARE A l SIMPLIFICATION WHICH IS JUSTIFIED BECAUSE OF IT'S CONSERVATISM. l C

Florida DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION g Of'l Crystal River Unit 3 V sheet is of 31 DOCOMt*di (ENnF CA TX.we NO. NVISOrd MAR /CGWR/ Fief (./SP NUMtstRjFILE M94-OO53 3 SP94477 V.2. DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR FLOW RATES FROM THE BWST AND MUT 14 in pipe ID is 13.25" and 6 in pipe ID is 6.065" (Ref 305-814, 816, 859, 861, &858)  !

K Factors from CRANE Technical Paper No. 410,1988 COMPONENT K Factor Square Edge Entrance Loss 0.5 Pipe f L/D l Elbow 90 14f I l Elbow 45 7f  :

Tee Branch 60f  !

l Tee Run 20f I

Gate Valve 8f CK Valve 50f l The following factors are used to equate 14"X14"X6" Reducing Branch Tee when not diverting l flow into two streams.

1 i 1/2 Tee Run in 14" Pipe .5 x 20 f @ 14" velocity l 1/2 Tee Branch in 6" Pipe .5 x 60f @ 6" velocity l 14" x 6" Reducer .5 x (1 - B^2) @ 6" velocity l

l CASES CASES l 14" Flow rate (gpm) 1200 6" Flow rate (gpm) 1200 );

l K 14" Tee Run .5 x 20f 1/2 6" Tee Branch .5 x 60f l 14" x 6" Reducer .5 x (1 - B^2) l l l l CASE 6 CASE 6 I l 14" Flow rate (gpm) 600 6" Flow rate (gpm) 600 l K 14" Tee Run .5 x 20f 1/2 6" Tee Branch .5 x 60f l 14" x 6" Reducer .5 x (1 - B^2) )

l Velocity Head Loss is accounted for by a K of 1. The "A" Train does not have this Velocity l Head Loss Term because flow is not through the Tee run at the MUT Tie-In as it is on the "B" l Train which has a Velocity Head Loss Term.

I O

l

S M94 0053 g... DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 3

SP94477 V.2. DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR FLOW RATES FROM THE BWST AND MUT l 1 (Continued) l The following factors are used to equate 14"X14"X6" Reducing Branch Tee when diverting flow l Into two streams using British Hydromechanics Research Association (Dl20 pages 35,36, & l 38). l CASE 1 CASE 2 CASE 2Org CASE 4 l 14" Flow rate (gpm) 6000 5425 5390 4291 l 6" Flow rate (gpm) 1150 575 540 600 l l A1/A3 = 28.89/137.88 = 0.20953 0.20953 0.20953 0.20953 l Q1/03 0.19 0.11 0.1 0.14 l K 31 (Att.12) 1.36 1.12 1.1 1.2 l l

CASE 5 CASE N SP-630* SP-630*

  • l 14" Flow rate (gpm) 4266 3940 3513 3.504 l 6" Flow rate (gpm) 575 540 513 504 l A1/A3 = 28.89/137.88 = 0.20953 0.20953 0.20953 0.20953 l p Q1/ 03 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.14  !

1.18 1.2 1.28 1.2 5V K 31 (Att.12) l l

l CASE 1 l 6" Flow rate in(gpm) 1200 l 6" Flow rate out (gpm) 600 l 01/O3 0.5 l K 32 (Att.12) 0.03 l l

l Half Tee Runs are used to equate 6" Tee Runs at actual flow rates / leg in suction header to l MUPs. l 1

Piping and Fitting quantities are from Calculations M91-0092 & M93-0046 (Ref. 5 & 6). l Differences in quantities are due to how 14" X 14" X 6" Reducing Branch Tee is incorporated l differently. l l

Reynolds Number determined per DID: l 1

Re = 50.6 x Row rate in gpm x density / (pipe ID x viscosity) (DID) l For water @ 100F density = 62#/ft3 and viscosity = 0.68cp l l

m-.

2 I

9 g.

COC1AIENT DENTIFICADON NO.

M94-OO53 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River. Unit 3 jctVSON l 3 hAAA/CGWH/ PEEHE/SP NueAGER/FILE SP94477 sheet 20 of .23 I V.2. DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR FLOW RATES FROM THE BWST AND MUT l (Continued) l FRICTION FACTORS (f) FOR 14 in PIPING FROM BWST TO HPl TEE I

l Re 14" @3513gpm = 50.6*3513*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.22E+06 l SP-630* f = 0.0138 l Re 14" @4291gpm = 50.6*4291*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.49E+06 l CASE 4 f = 0.0135 l Re 14" @4266 gpm = 50.6*4266*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.49E+06 i CASE 5 f = 0.0135 l Re 14" @3940 gpm = 50.6*3940*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.37E+06 l CASE N f = 0.0136 l Re 14" @5425 gpm = 50.6*5425*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.89E+06 l CASE 2 f = 0.0134 l Re 14" @6000 gpm = 50.6*6000*62/13.25/0.68 = 2.09E+06 l CASE 1 f = 0.0133 Re 14" @5390 gpm = 50.6*5390*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.88E+06 CASE 2Org f = 0.0134 i Re 14" @5.75 gpm = 50.6*575*62/13.25/0.68 = 2.00E+05  ;

1 CASE 3 } f = 0.0166 j l.. Re 14" @3.504 gpm = 50.6*3504*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.22E+06 g l  ;

SP-630*

  • f = 0.0138 't-i Re 14" @22.3gpm =50.6*22.3*62/13.25/0.68 = 7.76E+03 j l CASE 14A f = 0.0325 j Re 14" @49.1 gpm =50.6*49.1*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.71E+04 7 l CASE 15A f =0.0265 Re 14" @5,7 gpm =50.6*57*62/13.25/0.68 = 1.!6E+04 l .. CASE 94 f = 0.0258
Rei14" .@89.2 gpm =50.6*89.2*62/13.25/0.68 =3.11E+04 .Iii , >

'"l 9 ' CASE 13A & 12A f = 0.0233 E'

'Re 14" '@1'50 gpm =50.6*150*62/13.25/C.68 = 5.22E+04 @[ ' i

.: . l CASE 11% & 10A f = 0.0200 g

ll Re 14" @12 gpm = 50.6*12*62/ .6/0.68 = 4.18E+03 _

l CASE 16A f = 0.04

O@ oocuwm osmvcanon ec M94-0053 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal Rivw Unit 3 we 3

unsimwnietese,se suusen este SP94 077 Sheet 21 of .19.

i l

)

FRICTION FACTORS (f) FOR 6 in PIPING FROM BWST HPl TEE TO MUT-1 TIE-IN ,

i Re 6" @513 gpm = 50.6*513*62/6.065/0.68 = 3.90E+05 l l SP-630* f = 0.0166 l Re 6' @540 gpm = 50.6*540*62/6.065/0.68 = 4.11E+05 l CASE 2Org & N f = 0.0165 l .

Re 6' @575 gpm = 50.6*575*62/6.065/0.68 = 4.37E+05 [ i CASE 2,3, & 5 f = 0.0164 l Re 6' @1150 gpm = 50.6*1150*62/6.065/0.68 = 8.75E+05 l )

CASE 1 f = 0.0158 l )

Re 6' @504 gpm = 50.6*504*62/6.065/0.68 = 3.83E+05 l l SP-630*

  • f - 0.0166 l Re 6' @600 gpm = 50.6*600*62/6.065/0.68 = 4.56E +05 l CASE 4 f = 0.0163 l Re 6" @22.3 gpm =50.6*22.3*62/6.065/0.68 = 1.75+04 )

CASE 14A f = 0.0266 l R e 6' @49.1 gpm =50.6*49.1*62/6.065/0.G8 n 3.73E+04 O CASE 15A f = 0.0228 Re 6" @57 gpm =50.6*57*62/6.065/0.68 = 4.34E+04 l

CASE 9A 1 f = 0.0225 l fj Re 6" @89.2 gpm =50.6*89.2*62/6.065/0.68 = 6.79E+04  :'!

CASE 13A &J2A f = 0.'0207 l'.

Re 6' @150 gpm =50.6*150*62/6.065/0.68 = 1.14E+05 ~.

CASE 11 A & 10A f = 0.0192 l' t Re 6' @12 gpr6 =50.6*12*62/6.065/0.68 = 9.13E+03 i

~'

CASE 16A f = 0.031 l i

'\

4

'%, '

  • N ..

j'M. ", ', - h. .

y ;3

~r =

a ...al "1

i Las 1..

a

>j..

l ,y O

.9 g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 22 of Jg_

DOCUMD(T CENTIFICADON pa'). MMSION MAR /CGWyR/PEERE/SP NUMBER / FILE M94-0053 3 SP94477 V.2. DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR FLOW RATES FROM THE BWST AND MUT (Continued)

  • A* TRAIN HEAD LOSS TABLE A.1 l l l l CASE 1 CASE 2 CASE 4 14* flow rate (gprn) 6000 5425 4291 Friction factor 0.0133 0.0134 0.0135 Cc,.T.i.c,c.e. .; QTY K Eq Entrance Loes 1 0.5 0.500 0.500 0.500 14* Pipe (ft) 24.83 f X L/D 0.299 0.301 0.304 Obow 90 2 14f 0.372 0.375 0.378  !

l Obow 45 0 71 0.000 0.000 0.000 l Tee Run 0 20f 0.000 0.000 0.000 l Reducer T w/ Flow Split Miller 1.360 1.120 1.200 Reducer T Run 0 20f 0.000 0.000 0.000 Total K's 2.531 2.297 2.382 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe ID*4 7.658 5.679 3.685 l 6* Flow Rate (gprn) 1150 575 600

[N Reducer 6* Tee Branch Friction factor 0 60f 0.0158 0

0.0164 0

0.0163 0

l 14' x 6* Reducer > 0 0.5 x (1-B'2) 0 0 0 6* Pipe (ft) i 163.1 f X L/D 5.099 5.292 5.260 j l

l Obow 90 -4 9 14f 1.991 2.066 2.054 l i

l Tee Run 5 0.5 20f 0.158 0.164 0.163 l Tee Run Flow SplitI Miller 0.030 0.000 0.000 l Bbow 45 t 2 7f 0.221 0.230 0.228 .

l Gate Valve MUV-73 1 Bf 0.126 0.131 0.130 l CK Vane MUV 72 1 50f 0.790 0 820 0.815 l Tee Branch 1 60f 0.948 0.964 0.978

' 9.688 9.628 l Total K's 9.363 l Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe ID^4 23.702 6.131 6.635 l

  • 6* Flow Rate %pm) .' 575 575 600 l

r Friction factor- - 0.0164 0.0164 0.0163 6* Pipe (ft) y 12.4 f X L/D 0.402 0.402 0.400 Gate Valve MUV49 1 Bf 0.131 0.131 0.130 l Gate Valve MUV48 1 8f 0.131 0.131 0.130 l Tee Run 2x05 20f 0000 0.328 0.326 l Teo Run 05 20f 0.164 l Velocity Head Loss 0 0 0 0 l Total K's 0829 0 993 0 987 l Hd Loss (ft) = 0 00259 x k x flow'2 / Pipe ID"4 0524 0628 0680 Total Head Loss (ft) 31.485 12 439 11.000 l

V WJ 5 '7 g

pb @ g a DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 23 of 11.

DocuutNT oturyaCArlON NO. REvtecN n AACGWR /PEEN /MP NUMBERjFILE M94-0053 3 SP94-077

  • A* TRAIN HEAD LOSS TABLE A2 l [ l l CASE 5 SP-630* SP-630**

14* flow rate (9pm) 4266 3513 3504 Friction factor 0.0135 0.0136 0.0138 Component OTY K Eq Entrance toes 1 0.5 0.500 0.500 0.500 14" Pipe (ft) 24.83 f X L/D 0.304 0.310 0.310 Elbow 90 2 14f 0.378 0.386 0.386 l 0.000 0.000 0.000 Bbow 46 0 7f )

Too Ibn 0 20f 0.000 0.000 0.000 Reducer *T* w/ Flow Split Miller 1.180 1.200 1.200 Reducer *T* Run 0 20f 0.000 0.000 0.000 Total K's 2.362 2.477 2.397 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k n flow"2 / Pipe ID'4 3.611 2.566 2.473 6* Flow Rate (gom) 575 513 004 Friction factor 0.0164 0.0166 0.0166 Reducer 6* Tee Branch 0 00f 0 0 0 14* x 6* Reducer 0 0.5 x (1-B'2) 0 0 0 0s 6* Pipe (ft)

Elbow 90 163.1 9

f X L/D 14f 5 292 2.066 5.357 2.092 5.357 2.092 j

Tee Run 0.5 20f 0.164 0.166 0.166 Elbow 45 2 71 0.230 0.232 0.232 j Gate '/alve MW 73 1 Si 0.131 0.133 0.133  :

CK Valve MW 72 1 50f 0.820 0.830 0.830 Tee Branch 1 60f 0.964 0.996 0.996 Total iTs 9 688 9.806 9.806 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 4 k x flow"2 / Pipe 10^4 6.131 4.940 4.768 6' Flow Ante (gpm) 575 513 0 Faction factor { 0.0164 0.0166 0 6* Pipe (ft) 12.4 . f X L/D 0.402 O.407 0.000 Gate Valve MW49 1 * ^ 8f s ~ 0.131 0.133 0.000 Gate Valve MW48 1 >

8f 0131 0.133 0.000 Tee Run 2 x 0.5 " 20f 0.326 0.332 0.000 Velocity Head Loss '0 0 0 0 Total K's 0993 1.005 0.000 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow"2 / Pipe ID*4 0 628 0506 0 000 Total Head Loss (ft) 10.371 8.014 7.241 G

V 9 Fbrida Power occuutwi mme caroN No.

M94-0053

~

DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATIOR Crystal River Unit 3 avis.om 3

um/ cows /PuaisP Nuust.s/

SP94477 F u Sheet 24 of_Z9 l 'A' TRNN HEAD LOSS SP430 Rev. 2 K FACTORS TABLE A 3 Case 2 Case 2 l SP430* SP430" Base R2 Mod R2 14' flow rete (9pm) 3613 3604 5390 5300 Friction factor 0.0138 0.0138 0.0134 0.0134 ,

1 Component OTY K Eq )

Entrance Lose 1 0.5 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 1 14* Pipe (ft) 24.8 f X L/D 0.310 0.310 0.000 0.000 14' Pipe (ft) 28.25 f X L/D 0.000 0.000 0.319 0.319 Obow 90 2 lof 0.442 0 442 0.429 0.429 Obow 45 0 af 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 l Tee Run 0 20f 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 l Reducer "T" w/ Flow Split Miller 0 000 0.000 0.000 1.100 Reduoor "T" Run l 0.5 20f 0.138 0.138 0.134 0.000 Total K's 1.390 1.390 1.381 2.347 Hd Loes (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe ID"4 1.441 1.434 3.372 5.731 6* Flow Rate (gpm) 513 504 540 540 I Friction factor 0.0166 0.0166 0.0165 0.0165 ,

Reducer 6* Tee Branch 0.5 60f 0.498 0498 0.495 0 l 14' x 6* Reducer 1 0.5 x (1-B'2) 0.395239 0.395239 0.395239 0

~

l 6* Rpe (ft) 163.1 f X L/D 5.357 5.357 0.000 I 0.000 l 6* Pipe (ft) 196 f X L/D 0.000 0.000 6.399 6.399 l Bbow 90 9 18f 2.390 2.390 2.376 2.376 l Tee Run 0.5 20f 0.166 0.166 0.165 0.165 Obow 45 2 8f 0.266 0.266 0.264 0.264 Gate VaNo MUV-73 1 8f 0.133 0.133 0.132 0.132 l CK VaNo MUV.72 1 50f 0.830 0.830 0.825 0 825 l Tee Branch 1 60f 0996 0.996 0.990 0.990 Total K's 11.031 11.031' 12.041 i 11.151 Hd Lose (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow'2 / Pipe ID"4 5.557 5.364. - 6.721 -s

% 6.224 6* Flow Rate (gpm) 513 01 ~ ' ~ ~540 f 540 fl Friction factor 0.0166 0F ~0.0165

~

. 0.0165 l 6* Rpe (ft) 12.4 f X L/D 0.407 0.000" ~ 0.000 0.000 l 6' Pipe (ft) 10 f X L/D 0000 0.000 : ~ 0.326 0.326 l Gate VaNo MUV49 1 ef 0.133 0.000 0.132 0.132 l Gate VaNo MUV48 1 8f 0.133 0.000 0.132 0.132 l Tee Run 2x05 20f 0.332 0.000 0.330 0.330 l Velocity Head Loss 1 0 0 0.000 0 000 l Total K's 1.005 0 000 0 920 0.920 l Hd Loas (ft) = 0 00259 x k x flow'2 / Pipe ID'4 0 506 0.000 0.514 0.514

[ Total Head Loss (ft) 7.504 6 797 10 607 12 468 V

l wie. Dupiicate cornponeni ro s in in. tabie are used to dmerent. ate quant.t es or K factors used in eacn cases. (i e.. piping ien9tn of reev 2 inClyded f%ng lengtPs and in Res. 3 the fitting lengths were not included in p; ping length because K factors of fitt;ngs include this head loss) e x. c -

g DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Sheet 25 of _Zi_

oor uutur nuncAnow No. FEMSaON MAS /CGWH/ PMFt/69 NUWOLA /FE.E M94-0053 3 SP94477

  • B* TRAIN HEAD LOSS TABLE B 1 l l l l CASE 1 CASE 2 Case 2Q 14* flow rate (gprn) 0000 5425 5300 Friction factor 0.0133 0.0134 0.0134 Component OTY K Eq Entrance Lose 1 0.5 0.500 0.500 0.500 14" Pipe (ft) 30.56 f X L/D 0.368 0.371 0.371 Elbow 90 1 14f 0.186 0.188 0.188 Elbow 45 2 7f 0.186 0.180 0.188 TooFbn 1 20f 0.266 0.268 0.266 Reducer *T* w/ Row Split Minor 1.360 1.120 1.100 Reducer *T* Run 20f 0.000 0.000 0.000 l Total K's 2.866 2.634 2.614 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow"2 / Pipe 10^4 8.671 6.514 6.381 6' Row Rate (gptn) 1150 575 540 Friction factor 0.0158 0.0164 0.0165 Reducer 6" Tee Brancn 0 60f 0 0 0 14* x 6" Reducer 0 0.5 m (1-B^2) 0 0 0 0' 6" Pipe (ft)

Elbow 90 166 12 f X L/D 14f 5.189 2.654 5.386 2.755 5.419 2.772 .

Tee Run 0.5 20f 0.000 0.164 0.165 d Tee Run Flow Split Minor 0.030 0.000 0.000 C.

a Elbow 45 3 7f 0.332 0.344 0.347 .C I Gate Valve MW-58 1 Bf 0.126 0.131 0.132  :! .

l

- CK VaNo MW40 1 50f 0.790 0.820 0.825 .,

Tee Branch 1 60f 0.948 0.984 0.990 _  ?

Total K's 10.070 10.585 10.650 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.002$9 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe ID*4 25.492 6.699 5.944 6" Flow Rate (gpm) 575 575 540 , . _ . . _

l i'

Friction factor 0.0164 0.0164 0.0165

'.Tj

{ '~~i

^~

, 6' Pipe (ft) 12.6 f X L/D 0.409 0.400 0.411 pM  ;

.l$$

- -u  ! 3 Gate Vane MW42 1 Bf 0.131 0.131 0.132 3= _ _

q, If Gate vaNo MW43 1 8f 0.131 0.131 0.132 LE Ml$

Tee Run 2 x 0.5 20f 0000 0 328 0 330 ,, h 'j'

' ~

.. Tee Run 1 x 0.5 20f 0.164 0 000 0 000 f Velocity Head Loss 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 Total K's 1.835 1.999 2.005 Hd Loss (ft) = 0 00259 x k x flow'2 / Pipe ID'4 1.161 1.265 1.119 Total Head Loss (ft) 35 324 14 478 13 445

.s ME7

. - - . - - - ~~ _- . . - - - _ _ .

I l

~

I DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION l

(~g , Crystal River Unit 3 j l

Sheet 26 of 76 OOC 4.MLNT OENTIFCAnOh NO. NVSON MAR /COWM/PEEAE/SP NUMeEA/ Ft.E

, M94-0053 3 SP94-077 l

i l 'B' TRAJN HEAD LOSS TABLE B-2 '

j l l I I l CASE 4 CASE 5 CASE N l 14' flow rete (Sprn) 4291 4206 3040 l q

h

, Friction factor 0.0136 0.0135 0.0136 CGT,gs ra QTY K Eq Entrance Loos 1 0.5 0.500 0.500 0.500 14' Pipe (ft) 30.56 f X L/D 0.374 0.374 0.376  !

l l Elbow 90 1 14f  ? 9819 G.180 0.190

. l Elbow 46 2 7f ~o 3a's 0.180 0.100

) l Tee Run 1 20f 0.270 0.270 0.272 l Reducer T w/ Flow Split Miller 1.200 1.180 1.200

] l Reducer T Run 20f 0.000 0.000 0.000 j l Total K's 2.722 2.702 2.729 4

Hd Loes (ft) = 0.00250 x k x flow"2 / Pipe ID'4 4.211 4.131 3.560 l

6' Flow Rate (gpm) 600 575 540

, l Fric* ion factor 0.01fL3 0.0164 0.0165 l

l Reducer 6" Tee Branch 0 60f 0 0 0 I

l g' 14* x 6' Reducer 0 0.5 x (1-B"2) 0 0 0

, 6' Pipe (ft) 166 f X L/D 5.354 5.386 5.419 l 1

l -

Elbow 90 12 14f 2.738 2.755 2.772 l l -

Tee Run 0.5 20f 0.163 0.164 0.165 l l Elbow 45 3 7f 0.342 0.344 0.347

, l Gata varve 3UV.58 1 Of 0.130 0.131 0.132 l .J CK Valve MUV40 1 50f 0.815 0.820 0.825 l Tee Branch 1 60f 0.978 0.964 0.990 l Total K's 10.521 10 585 10.650 l Hd L9ss (N) = 0.00250 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe ID*4 7.250 6.609 5.944 l 6* Flow Rate (gpm) 600 575 540 I l -~-w -- Friction factor 0.0163 0.0164 0.0165 ;h l MAm1. 6' Pipe (ft) 2 12.6 f X L/D 0.406 0.449 0.411

,_M l _w Gate VaNo MUV42 1 Of 0.130 0.131 0.132 l _2-- ' Gate VaNo MUVM 1 8f 0.130 0.131 0.132 l 14 Tee Nn. 2 x 0.5 20f 0.326 0.328 0.330 S

'T Velocity Head Loss 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 . i';

Total K's 1993 1.999 2.005 l l Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow"2 / Pipe 10'4 1.373 1.265 1.119 l . Tota! Head Loss (ft) 12.834 12 096 10.624 1

11 Jr. m om

e i

g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River. Unit 3 Sheet 27 of _Z3_

DOCUMENT (.ENTIFIC.ATON NO. FD1 SON MAA/COwH /PLERE/SP NUMBER; FILL M94-0053 3 SP94-077

  • B' TRAIN HEAD LOSS TABLE B-3 l l l l SP430* CASE 3 Case 16A Case 15_A 14* flow rate (9prn) 3513 575 12 49.1 Friction factor 0.0138 0.0186 0.04 0.0265 Component OTY K Eq Entrance Loss 1 0.5 0.500 0.b00 0.500 0.500 14* Pipe (ft) 30.55 f X L/D 0.382 0 459 1.107 0.733 Elbow 90 1 14f 0.193 0.232 0.500 0.371 l Elbow 46 2 7f 0.193 0.232 0.500 0.371 l Tee Run 1 20f 0.276 0.332 0.800 0.530 j Reducer T w/ Flow Split Miller 1.280 0.000 0.000 0.000 l Reducer T Run l 0.5 20f 0.000 0.166 0.400 0.265 Total K's 2.824 1.756 3.527 2.505 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe ID"4 2.929 0.049 0.000 0.001 6* Flow Rate (gpm) 513 575 12 49.1 Friction faew 0.0166 0.0164 0.031 0.0228 Redu.sr 6* Tee Branch l 0.5 80f 0 0.492 0.93 0.684 l

[N 14' r. 6' Reducer _

1 0.5 x (1-B^2) 0 0.395239 0.395239 0.395239 6* P!;'s (P.) 166 f X L/D 5.452 5.386 10.182 7.488 l

Elbow 90 12 14f 2.789 2.755 5.208 3.830 j Tee Run 0.5 20f 0.166 0.164 0.310 0.228 Elbow 45 3 7f 0.349 0.344 0.651 0.479 Gate Valve MW-58 8f 0.133 0.131 0.248 0.182 1

l CK Valve MW-60 1 50f 0.830 0.820 1.550 1.140 Tee Branch 1 60f 0.996 0.964 1.860 1.368 Total K's 10.714 11.472 21.334 15.795 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x thw'2 / Pipe ID"4 5.397 7.261 0.006 0.073 6* Flow Rate (gpr't) 0 575 12 49.1 Friction factor- 0 0.0164 0.031 0.0228 6* Pipe (ft) 912.0_ j f X L/D. 0.000 0.400 0.773 0.568

" #f

  • 0.000 0.131 0.248 0.182 Gate Visive MW.62 ' 1 -

Gste Valve MW-63 4* i11 8f t-0.000 0.131 0.248 0.182

~

Tee Run ,

" 2 x 0.5 20f ' O.000 0.328 0.620 0 456 Velocity Head Loss - 1 0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Total K's 0 000 1.999 2.889 2.389 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe ID"4 0.000 1.265 0.001 0.011 Total Head Loss (ft) 8 326 8.575 0.007 0.084

i l

1 O 9 occoutut caucarooc M94 0053 g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 MWWON 3

WL/cGWRjPGM/SP NUMMAjFG SP94-077 Sheet 28 of ZA_

l 'B' TRAIN HEAD LOSS SP430 Rev. 2 K FACTORS TABLE B4 Case 2 Case 2 SP430* Base R2 Mod R2 14' flow rate (gprn) 3613 5300 5390 Friction factor 0.0138 0.0134 0.0134 Component OTY K Eq Entrance Loes 1 0.5 0.500 0.500 0.500 14* Pipe (ft) 30.6 f X L/D 0.382 0.000 0.000 14* Pipe (ft) 34 f X L/D 0.000 0.413 0.413 Bbow 90 1 18f 0.221 0.214 0.214 Bbow 45 2 8f 0.221 0.214 0.214 Tee Run 1 20f 0.276 0.268 0.268 Reducer T w/ Flow Split ulier 0.000 0.000 1.100 Reducer "T" Ibn l 0.5 20f 0.138 0.13e 0.000 1.738 1.743 2.709 I Total K's Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow"2 / Pipe 10^4 1.802 4.256 6 614 6' Flow Rate (gpm) 513 540 540 ll 8 Reducer 6* Tee Branch 14' x 6' Reducer Friction factor 0.5 1

60f 0.5 x (1-B'2) 0.0166 0.498 0.395239 0.0165 0.495 0.395239 0.0165 0

0 j

6* Pipe (ft) 166 f X L/D - 5.452 0.000 , 0.000 6* Pipe (ft) 179 f X L/D 0.000 5.844 5.844 ,

BDow 90 12 18f 3.187 3.168 3.168 TeeRun 0.5 20f 1 0.166 0.165 0.165 Obow 45 3 8f 0.398 0.396 0.396 l Gate VaNo MUV-58 1 af 0.133 0.132 0.132 l CK VaNo MUV-60 1 50f 0.830 0.825 0.825 l Tee Branch 1 60f 0.996 0.990 0.990 )

l Total K's , 12.056 12.410 11.520 l Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 m k x flow"2 / Pipe ID'4 . .i >. 6.0'73 J 6.927 6.430 6' Flow Rate (gpm) X " f_ d ~0 J 540 540 )

l Friction factor '

T' L- 0 0.0165 0.0165 l 6* Pipe (ft) 12.6 f X L/D c.-. 0.000 ~ 0.000 0.000 l 6" Pipe (ft) 9 f X L/D ~ 0.000 0.294 0294 l Gate vaNo MUV-62 1 ef 0.000 0.132 0.132 l Gate vane MUV-63 1 8f 0.000 0.132 0 132 l Tee Run 2 x 0.5 20f 0.000 0.330 0.330 l Velocety Head Loss 1 0.000 0 000 1.000 l Total K's 0.000 0 888 1.888 l Hd Loss (tt) = 0 00259 x k x flow'2 / Pipe ID"4 0.000 0 496 1.054 )

Total Head Loss (ft) 7.875 11 678 14 098 l Note: Duplicate Component rows in the tacie are used to citterentiate geantities or K factors used in ea:n Cases. O e , piping length of Rev 2 l included fitting lengths and in Rev. 3 the fitting lengths were not included in piping length boca.ase K factors of fangs include this head loss). !

mo

l 4

@ g DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Crystal River Unit 3

\

Sheet 29 of _Zl_

DOCUMENT OEMMCATON NO. 14MSON MAR /COWR/Pt.EHE/SP NUMBER /Ft.E M94-0053 3 SP94-077 i

  • B" TRAIN HEAD LOSS TABLE B-5 Case 12A Case 10A Case 9A Case 14A Case 13A Case 11 A 14' flow rate (gpm) 57 22.3 89.2 150 Fnction factor 0.0258 0.0325 0.0233 0.0206 Component OTY K Eq Entrance Loes 1 0.5 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 14' Mpe (ft) 30.6 f X t/D 0.715 0.901 0.646 0.571 Bbow 90 1 tw 0.361 0.455 0.326 0.288 Bbow 45 2 d 0.361 0.455 0.326 0.288 Tee Nn 1 20f 0.516 0.650 0.466 0.412 Reducer T w/ Flow Split Minor 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Reducer T Nn 0.5 20f 0.258 0.325 0.233 0.206 j l l Total K's 2.711 3.286 2.497 2.266 Hd Loos (ft) = 0.00250 x k x flow"2 / Pipe ID*4 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.004 6" Flow Rate (gpm) 57 22.3 89.2 150 Friction factor 0.0225 0.0266 0.0207 0.0192 g Reducer 6' Tee Branch 0.5 00f 0.675 0.796 0.621 0.576
14' x 6" Reducer 1 0.5 x (1 B'2) 0.395239 0.395239 0.395239 0.395239 6* Pipe (ft) 166 f X L/D 7.390 8.737 6.799 6.306 Bbow 90 12 14f 3.700 4.469 3.478 -

3.226 Tee Ibn 0.5 20f 0.225 0.266 . 0.207 0.192 Bbow 45 3 7f 0.473 0.559 1 0.435 C.403

~ 1 Gate VaNo MW-58 1 8f 0.180 0.213 't 0.166 0.154  !

CK VaNo NIW-60 1 50f 1.125 1.330 J 1.035 0.960 Tee Branch 1 60f 1.350 1.596~ 1.242 1.152 Toth! K's 15.593 18.362 14.377 13.364 Hd Loss (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow'2 / Pipe ID*4 0.097 0.017 0.219 0576

< t 6* Flow Rate (gpm) 57 22.3. 89.2 4 150 ,

4 Friction factor 0.0225 0.0266 M 0.0207 , O.0192 f -

6* Pipe (ft) 12.6 f X L/D 0.561 O.663]) 0.516 0.479

' n. .

Gate VaNo MW42 1 8f 0.180 3, 4.213 V 0.166..v, 0.154

. Gate Vans MW43 1 8f 0.180 T0.2137' O.166 "" 0.154 Tee Run 2 x 0.5 20f 0450 f0.532' 0414 *" 0.384 Velocity Head Loss 1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 ,

Total K's 2.371 2 621 2.261 2.170 I Hd Loss (ft) = 0 00259 x k x flow"2 / Pipe ID^4 0 015 0002 0 034 0.093 Total Head Loss (ft) 0.112 0 020 0 255 0.673 i l

C

- r.

9O ga DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 ,

l Sheet 30 of _Z$_

occuutNT ocurycaro. No. saysm u4aecown,ettatise uvuma,su M94-0053 3 SP94-077

  • B' TRAIN COMPARISON TO MPR's CALCULATED HEAD LOSS. TABLE B4 Calculation M94-0053 Rev. 3 CASE 4 MPR Check (Ref. 20.2) 14* flow rate (gprn) 4291 4291 Friction factor 0.0135 0.01384 Cornponent OTY K Eq OTY K Eq Entrance Loes 1 0.5 0.500 1 0.5 0.500 14' Mpe (ft) 30.55 f X L/D 0.374 35.4 f X L/D 0.444 Ekow 90 1 14f 0.189 1 13.15f 0.182 Elbow 46 2 7f 0.189 2 9.32f 0.258 l Tee Run 1 20f 0.270 1 2.89f 0.040 l Reducer T w/ Flow Split Miller 1.200 Miller 1.200 l Reducer T Run 0 20f 0.000 0 20f 0.000 .

l Total K's 2.722 2.624 l Hd Lose (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe ID*4 4.211 4.059 l 6* Flow Hate (gom) 000 000 l Friction factor 0.0163 0 01867 l Reducer 6* Tee Branch 0 60f 0.000 0 60f 0.000 e 14* x 6' Reducer 6* Pipe (ft)

Elbow 90 0

166 12 0.5 x (1.B^2) f X L/D 14f 0.000 5.354 2.738 0

167.3 12 0.5 x (1.B'2) f X L/D 12.6f 0.000 5.518 2 521 l

l Tee Run 0.5 20f 0.163 0 20f 0.000 4 Elbow 45 3 7f 0.342 3 8.94f 0.447 G 1 Gate VaNo MW.58 1 8f 0.130 1 7.2f 0.120 CK Valve MW-60 1 50f 0.815 1 54.59f 0.910 F Tee Branch 1 60f 0.978 1 67.79f 1.130 f 6* Pipe 12.6 f X L/D 0.406 11.5 f X L/D 0.379 Gate VaNo MW42 1 8f 0.130 1 7.2f 0.120 Gate VaNo MW43 1 8f 0.130 1 7.2f 0.120 I.'i Tee Run 2 x 0.5 20f 0.326 1.5 2.4f 0.000 a-

[ ._ Velocity Head Loss 1 1.000 1 1.000 m :. _ ah i

E Y. -'t  ! -

Total K's 12.514 12.325:n.I ~ (( E b*II; Hd Loes (ft) = 0.00259 x k x flow ^2 / Pipe 1D^4 8.623 8.493 E 'M 5$

s :w Total Head Loss (ft) 12.834 12.553 J.J '?=

s e

FA 5 "w

da DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3

@l Sheet 31 of ,Ig.,

aucuwtsi uuw m o wa m m.ou m mco.% m w uvuoty m )

M94-0053 3 SP94477 i T TRAIN HEAD LOSS COMPARISON Rev. 2 Base and Mod to Rev. 3 CASE POr9 TABLE B-7 l Case 2 Case 2 Case 2Org Rev2 Base Rev2 Mod Rev3 14* flow rate (opm) 5300 5300 5300 6* Flow Rate (opm) 540 540 540 14* Head Loes (ft) 4.256 6.614 6.381 8' Head Loss 1 (ft) 6.927 6.430 5.944 6* Hood Loss 2 (ft) 0.496 1.054 1.119 Total Head Loos (ft) 11.678 4.006 13.445

  • B* TRAIN HEAD LOSS FOR NON ACS ACCIDENT FLOWS TABLE B4 CASE 12A CASE 10A CASE 16A CASE 15A CASE 9A CASE 14A CASE 13A CASE 11A j 14* flow rate (gpm) 12 49.1 57 22.3 89.2 150 6* Flow Rate (ppm) 12 49.1 57 22.3 89.2 150 14' Head Loes (ft) 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.004 6' Head Loss 1 (ft) 0.006 0.073 0 097 0.017 0.219 0.576

(~N 6* Head Loss 2 (ft) 0.001 0.011 0.015 0.002 0.034 0.003 Total Head Loss (ft) 0.007 0.084 0.112 0.020 0 255 0.673 COMPARISON OF "A' AND "B" TRAIN HEAD LOSSES COMPARISON OF *A* AND *B* TRAIN HEAD LOSS FOR Rev 3 FACTORS TABLE AB-1

' CASE 1 CASE 2 CASE 4 CASE 5 l l ,

l l 14' FLOW RATE (gpm) 6000 5425 4291 4266 6* FLOW RATE (gpm) 1150 575 600 575

  • A* TRAIN 14" Head Loss (ft) 7.658 5.679 3.685 3.611
  • A* TRAjN 6* Head Loss 1 (ft) 23.302 ,t .131 6 635 6.131

'A' TRAJN 6' Head Loss 2 (ft) 0 524 0.628 0.680 0.628

  • A* TRAIN TOTAL HEAD LOSS (ft) 31.485 12.439 11.000 10.371 l

. B* TRAIN 14* Head Loss (ft) 6671 6.514 4.211 4.131 [

T TRAIN 6* Head Lost 1 (ft) 23.492 6 699 7.250 6.699 T TRAIN 6* Head Loes 2 (ft) 1.161 1.265 1.373 1.265 i' T TRA!N TOTAL HEAD LOSS (ft) 35.324 14.478 12.834 12.096 t l -

COMPARISON OF SP-630 DATA TO DEMONSTRATE THE CONSERVATISM OF HEAD LOSS CALCULATIONS VS ACTUAL MEASURED SYSTEM CONDITIONS. TWO CALCULATED HEAG l LOSS VALUES ARE PRESENTED TO COMPARE "K" FACTORS AND VELOCITY HEAD LOSS TERMS OF Rev.2 AND Rev.3.

O

DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION l n Crystal River Unit 3 V Sheet 32 of 1g_

occuutNT otNTecarm No. ww.m uAn c covm/P u m p muu e /F u ,

M94-0053 3 SP94 077 l 1

6' AND 4* PIPING TAKEOFF FROM MUP SUCTION HEADER TEE BRANCH CENTER TO MUP 1NLET (Ref 305458) l l l l l SP430 SP430 6' Flow rate (gpm) 513 504 Frk: tion factor from above 0.0166 0.0166 COMPONENT OTY K Eq.

Tee Run removal 0.5 20f 0.186 0.186 6' Pipe (ft) 11.79 f L/D 0.387233 0.367233 Gate Vahes MUV-59,66, 1 8f 0.1328 0.1328 l or 70  !

Tee Branch 1 60f 0.996 0.996 l Elbow 45 1 7f 0.1162 0.1162 l l Elbow 90 1 14f 0.2324 0.2324 l Velocity Head Loss 1 0 0 l Total Ks 1.698633 1.898633 l Hd Loss (ft) =0.00250*K* FLOW'2/ PIPE ID*4 0.8556'9 0.825918 I I I I Re4' @513 9pm = 50.6*513*62/4.026/0.68 = 5.88E + 05 f =0.0171 Re4" @504 9pm = 50.6*504*62/4.026/0 68 = 5.78 + 05 l f = 0.0171 l SP430 SP431 l 4' Flow rate (gpm) 513 504 l Friction factor from above 0.0171 0.0171 l COMPONENT OTY K Eq.

! 6' X 4' REDUCER 1 .5 x (1 B'2) 0.279679 0.279679 l ELBOW 90 1 14f 0.2394 0.2394 PUMP CASING (4 pipe) 0.5 fL/D 0.025484 C025484 (ft)

Velocity Head Loss 1 1 1 Total Ks ., ., 1.544563 1.544563 Hd Loss (ft) =0.00250*K* FLOW 2/ PIPE 1D^4 4.007238 3.867866 l SP-630 DATA COMPARISON TO CALC. 5/10/94 l PUMP r MUP-1A MUP.18 MUP1C l MUP Flow (gpm) . 504 513 513 l Flow through ES TRAIN Piping A A B l DHP in recirculation Flow (gom) 3000 3000 3000 l BWST Level (ft) 18 83 18 35 20.07 l SUCT. Pressure (psi9) 14.5 13 14 l BWST Vac. (ft)" Assumed" 1 1 1

[ Measured Head Loss (ft) 6.80 9 78 9.19 Calculated Head Loss (ft) 11.93 12 88 13 19 l Calculation over estimate (ft) 5 14 3 09 40

.m.

m

p@ DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 3 L of J i occuutut cm.uw ca ro. No. aviso. uARjcoWH, PELM/bP NupetR#t.E M94-0053 3 SP94-077 I

6* AND 4* P1 PING TAKE-OFF FROM COMMON MUP SUCTION HEADER TEE BRANCH CENTER TO MUP INLET USING Rev. 2 FACTORS (Ref. 306-858) l 1

l l l l SP430 SP430 6' Flow rate (gpm) 513 504 Frkson factor from above 0.0166 0.0166 COMPONENT OTY K Eq. j Too Fbn removal 0.5 20f -0.186 0.166 I

6* Pipe (ft) 11.79 fL/D 0.387233 0.387233 Gate Valves MUV-59,86, 1 8f 0.1328 0.1326 ,

or 70  ;

Tee Branch 1 60f 0.996 0.996 Elbow 45 1 af 0.1328 0.1328 Elbow 90 1 10f 0.2656 0.2656 Velocity Head Loss 1 0 0 Total Ks 1.748433 1.748433 Hd Loea (ft) =0.00259*K* FLOW'2/ PIPE ID"4 0.880765 0.850132 I I I I

p. Re4' @513 gpm =50.6*513*62/4.026/0.68 = 5.88E+05 )

i f =0 0171 = l Re4' @504 gpm = 50.6*504*62/4.026/0.68 = 5.78E + 05 f = 0.0171 I

- SP430 SP431 1 4* Row rate (gpm) 513 504 Friction factor from above 0.0171 0.0171 l

COMPONENT O1Y K Eq.

6' X 4' REDUCER 1 .5 x (1 B"2) 0.279679 0.279679 ELBOW 90 1 16f 0.2736 0.2736 PUMP CASING (4* pipe) 0.5 fL/D 0.025484 0.025484  !

(ft) l Velocity Head Loss 1 1 1 Total Ks -

- 1.578763 - > -1.578763 Hd Loss (ft) =0.00259*K* FLOW'2/ PIPE ID*4 ' < 4.095967 1 953500 SP430 DATA COMPARISON TO CALC.REV. 2 FACTORS PUMP MUP-1 A ' MVP1B MUP1C MVP Flow (gpm) 504 513 513 Flow through ES TRAIN Piping A A B DHP in recirculation Row (gpm) 3000 3000 3000 BWST Level (ft) 18.83 18 35 20 07 SUCT. Pressure (psig) 14.5 13 14 l BWST Vac. (ft) " Assumed

  • 1 1 1 l

/ Measured Head Loss (ft) 6 80 9 78 9 19 l d Calculated Head Loss (ft) 11.60 12.48 12.85 l Calculation over estimate (ft) 4 80 2 70 l 3 66 l n.z: -.

@ ga DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 m a u.a wo. ,o m- mevum, *vu M94 0053 3 SP94-077 V.2. DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR FLOW RATES FROM THE BWST AND MUT (Continued)

DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR VARIOUS FLOW RATES FROM THE MAKE-UP TANK (K) FACTORS FOR 4 in PIPING FROM MUT-1 TO BWST HPI TIE IN TEE MUT Water at 135F: Density = 61.46281 #/ft' and Viscosity = 0.48cp f = Values from CRANE 410, DI 5 4 in pipe ID is 4.026" (Ref 1.f, 305-860)

Reynolds Number = Re = 50.6 X Flow Rate (gpm) X Density (#/ft') / [ Pipe ID (") X Viscosity l (cp)] i Re 4" @160.1 gpm = 50.6*160.1*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 2.59E+05 l Case 15 f = 0.0183 Re 4" @168 gpm = 50.6*168*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 2.71E+05 l Case 9 & 16 f = 0.0182 Re 4" @178.3 gpm = 50.6*178.3*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 2.87E+05 l Case 14 f = 0.0180

(] Re 4" @200.2gpm = 50.6*200.2*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 3.22E+05

't A Case 13 f = 0.0179 Re 4" @245.2 gpm = 50.6*245.2*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 3.95E+05 1 l Case 12 f = 0.0177 Re 4" @261 gpm = 50.6*261*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 4.2E+05 3 l Case 11 f = 0.0176 4 Re 4" @306 gpm = 50.6*306*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 4.93E+05 l l Case 10 f = 0.0175 i l Re 4" @575 gpm = 50.6*575*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 9.26E+05 l Case 3A f = 0.0168 Re 4" @111 gpm = 50.6*111*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 1.79E+05

_ l Case 9A,11 A,13A, & 15A f = 0.0188 Re 4" @156 gpm = 50.6*156*61.5/4.026/0.48 = 2.51E+05 .; -

l - Case 10A,12A,14A, & 16A f = 0.0184 r e O

9 occuw.a a orcum.c M94-0053 g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River. Unit 3 eso.

3 w/cowaanasse viaagu SP94-077 Sheet 35 of .lf_

V.2. DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR FLOW RATES FROM THE BWST AND MUT (Continued)

TABLE M4 - MUT TO TIE-IN 4' PIPING TAKE-OFF:

DATA FROM CALC M936 Rev 0, Ref. 5 AND 305-860 Sh 1 OF 2 CASE 15 CASE 14 CASE 13 CASE 12 CASE 11 4" Flow rate (gpm) 160.1gpm 178.3gpm 200.2gpm 245.2gpm 261gpm l COMPONENT OTY K Eq. 0.0183 0.018 0.0179 0.0177 0.0176 Entr-Sharp Edge 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Pipe 91.25 f L/D 4.977273 4.895678 4.86848 4.814083 4.786885 l Tee-Branch 0.5 60' O.549 0.54 0.537 0.531 0.528 l

~

CK-SWNRT 1 50f 0.915 0.9 0.895 0.885 0.88 Tee-Run 1 20f 0.366 0.36 0.358 0.354 0.352 Elbow-L 90 5 14f 1.281 1.26 1.253 1.239 1.232 l VELOCITY HEAD 1 1 1 1 1 1 h Gate Elbow-L 45 1

2 8f 7f 0.1464 0.2562 0.144 0.252 0.1432 0.2506 0.1416 0.2478 0.1408 0.2464. l 4 TOTAL Ks 9.990873 9.851678 9.80528 9.712483 9.666085 l 7 Hd Loss 2.52459 3.087575 3.874296 5.756731 6.491369 l 7

=0.00259*K* FLOW ^2/ PIPE ID^4 1

4m f s .1 . 3 l, ,,. ,

.4 m ssi j

l V

9 g MOMNT OOdTWICATKM peQ.

M94-0053 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 M vt$ SON 3

MAA /CGWWR/ PEERE($P pel.AsfAH/ FILE SP94477 sheet as of _Z1_.

V.2. DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR FLOW RATES FROM THE BWST AND MUT (Continued)

TABLE M4 - MUT TO TIE-IN 4" PIPING TAKE-OFF:

DATA FROM CALC M93/ J046 Rev 0, Ref. 5 AND 305-860 Sh 1 OF 2 (Continued) l CASE 9A CASE 10A l CASE 10 CASE 16 CASE 3A CASE 11 A CASE 12A l CASE 9 CASE 13A CASE 14A I l CASE 15A CASE 16A l 4" Flow rate 306gpm 168gpm 575gpm 111gpm 156gpm (gpm)

COMPONENT OTY K Eq. 0.0175 0.0182 0.0168 0.0188 0.0184 Entr-Sharp Edge 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 l Pipe 91.25 f L/D 4.759687 4.950075 4.5693 5.113264 5.004471 l Tee-Branch 0.5 60f 0.525 0.546 0.504 0.564 0.552 CK-SW-VRT 1 50f 0.875 0.91 0.84 0.94 0.92

~

Tee-Run 1 20f 0.35 0.364 0.336 0.376 0.368 l Elbow-L 90 5 14f 1.225 1.274 1.176 1.316 1.288 l VELOCITY HEAD 1 1 1 1 1 1 Gate 1 8f 0.14 0.1456 0.1344 0.1504 0.1472 l Elbow-L 45 2 7f 0.245 0.2548 0.2352 0.2632 0.2576 l Total Ks 9.619687 9.944475 9.2949 10.22286 10.03727 l Hd Loss =0.00259*K* FLOW ^2/ PIPE 8.879908 2.766974 30.29598 1.241719 2.408072 ID^4 E l CASE 1* COVERS CASES OA,11 A,13A, & 15A FLOWS FROM MUT l CASE 2* COVE"S CASES 10A,12^,14A, & 1SA FLOWS FROM MUT

a -..

l g

DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 l

p l Sheet 37 of_ZA.

cm m e o m co o. o. i e=>. ecowews, vumu M94-0053 l 3 SP94-077 ,

V.2. DETERMINATION OF HEAD LOSSES FOR FLOW RATES FROM THE BWST AND MUT (Continued)

TABLE MT - HEAD LOSS (ft) FOR VARIOUS FLOWS FROM THE MAKE-UP TANK CASE CASE CASE 9 CASE CASE 13 CASE 12 16 15 14 MUP FL gpm 168 160.1 168 178.3 200.2 245.2 l Hd Loss ft 2.77 2.52 2.77 3.09 3.87 5.76 l MUT V loss gpm 12 49.1 57 22.3 89.2 89.2 CASE 9A CASE i l

CASE CASE CASE CASE 11 10A l 11 10 3A A CASE 12A l CASE 13 CASE 14A A CASE 16A CASE 15

)

MUP FL gpm 261 . 306 575 111 156 MUT l l l

MUT Hd Loss ft 6.49 8.88 30.3 1.24 2.41 l MUT V loss gpm 150 - 150 600 0 0 CASE 1* COVERS CASES OA,1< A,13A, & 15A FLOWS FROM MUT l CASE 2* COVERS CASES 10A,12^,1'A, & 1SA FLOWS FROM MUT l c

mm

p @ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 d OOCUMENT OEs(TFCADON NO. Ft vihaON MAA/CGWH,PEEfE SP

/ NUMEsERjFILE sheet as ofle_

M94-0053 3 SP94-077 i

V.3 DETERMINATION OF THE PRESSURE AT THE TIE-IN POINT FROM THE BWST (USING l

  • B" TRAIN PARAMETERS) WITH VARIOUS FLOW RATES AND INDICATED LEVELS.

THE ASSUMED LEVELS CORRESPOND TO PROPOSED COMPLETED SWITCH-OVER i LEVELS i

STATIC PRESSURE FROM BWST = LEVEL EL - VAC BREAKER SETPOINT - TIE-IN EL (Ref.2 &4) l BWST LEVEL El = Indication Strhg Errc' + Transmitter Elevation - String Calibration I l Off-Set = Ind -G-7 + 122 - 2.83 = Ind + 119.17 l NOTE: BWST LEVEL ELEVATION DOES NOT INCLUDE INSTRUMENT ERROR. i l Vac Breaker Set-Pt = 0.46ft Vac (Ref.12) l l

Tie-In EL = 104.75 ft TOTAL TIE-IN PRESS WHEN BWST AT S/O LEVEL (ft OF WATER) = STATIC HEAD OF BWST  !

@ S/O MINUS HEAD LOSS V TOTAL TIE-IN PRESS WHEN SWST AT S/O LEVEL, TABLE B-9 l CASE 1 CASE 2 Case 2Org CASE 4 CASE 5 CASE N l 14' FLOW RATE (gpm) 6000 5425 5390 4291 4266 3940 l 6" FLOW RATE (gpm) 1150 575 540 600 575 540 l TOTAL 'B' HEAD LOSS (ft) 35.324 14.478 13.445 12.834 12.096 10.624 l Oft -21.364 -0.518 0.515 1.126 1.864 3.336 l Sft -16.364 4.482 5.515 6.126 6.864 8.336 l 7ft -14.364 6.482 7.515 8.126 8.864 10.336 l 10ft -11.364 9.482 ,10.515 .11.126 11.864 13.336 l 15ft -6.364 14.482 15.515 -16.126 16.864 18.336 l Calculation M94-0053 Rev. 2 determined a Tie-In Pressure of 5.54ft which was used in i determining Allowable Overpressure Curve.

O

=

1 m utuunaro.wo.

DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION eso.

jv/Ncc.efeum/se wuueogu Sheet 39 of lt M94-0053 3 , SP94477 V.3 DETERMINATION OF THE PRESSURE AT THE TIE-IN POINT FROM THE BWST (USING "B" TRAIN PARAMETERS) WITH VARIOUS FLOW RATES AND INDICATED LEVELS.

THE ASSUMED LEVELS CORRESPOND TO PROPOSED COMPLETED SWITCH-OVER LEVELS (CONTINUED) l The above CASE 5 flows in "B" Train will be the basis for determining Allowable Make Up l Tank Overpressure Curves. The CASE 5 Accident values are chosen because it bounds l the existing Operating Alignment of MUPs (Operating Pump is also ES selected) as well l ;

as LPI and BS being throttled (15ft Indicated BWST Level) before switchover to l l recirculation. Case 2 has HPI, LPI, and BSP at Large Break LOCA values and is used to l l determine when throttling must be completed in order to preclude gas entrainment. The l l resulting Tie In pressures at each S/O Level will be Calculated using the ideal Gas Law to determine pressures at all levels of the indicated range (including Henry's Law effect of gases coming out of solution and accounting for water vapor pressure).

I O l h -d

; 1 i c w e. .

i e, go 9 en -

,nr

+ y w qp p

1 i

l O

i 9 g.. DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal RhNr Unit 3 1 O DOCUWENT OLNilFGTON NO. KVtSON MAA/ CGWFI/PLLM/$P NUMBER /FLL Sheet 40 of Z3_

M94-0053 3 SP94-077 V.4. DETERMINATION OF MINIMUM BWST LEVEL FOR MUP OPERATION WITH MUT OVERPRESSURE PER THE Oft,5ft,10ft, & 15ft S/O CURVES TO PAEVENT GAS l ENTRAINMENT. THIS IS ALSO THE LEVEL WHERE ACTION TO THROTTLE LPI AND j l

l BS MUST BE TAKEN WHEN GOING TO RECIRCULATION  !

l Minimum BWST Level = CASE ~

Tie-In Pressure Limit + Head Loss of CASE condition 1 - 119.17 + 104.75 + 0.46 {

l l MINIMUM BWST LEVEL FOR MUP OPP OR THROTTLING OF FLOW, TABLE B-10 l CASE 1 CASE 2 Case 2Org CASE 4 CASE 5 CASE N l 14" FLOW RATE (gpm) 6000 5425 5390 4291 4266 3940 l l 6" FLOW RATE (gpm) 1150 575 540 600 575 540 )

l TOTAL "B" HEAD LOSS (ft) 35.324 14.478 13.445 12.834 12.006 10.624 l l MUT OVERPRESSURE l CURVE j l 0 ft 23.229 2.383 1.349 0.738 0.000 -1.472 l 5 ft 28.229 7.383 6.349 5.738 5.000 3.528

() 11.349 10.738 10.000 8.528 l J 10 ft 33.229 12.383 l

", 15 ft 38.229 17.383 16.349 15.738 15.000 13.528 .

s

> .y l CASE 1 is the only 2 HPl pumps / header case .;

) Calculation 190-0024 Rev. 5 Allowable curve was based on 3.1 ft pressure at Tie-In Point; l with S/O based on RB Sump Level of 97'-7" Indicated (24.73ft) and Case 2Org Flows l .after reaching this level, (Only 1 HPl from this point).

l Calculation M94-0053 Rev. 2 Allowable curve is based on 6.54 ft pressure at Tie-In Point I ,with S/O on BWST Level of 5ft indicated and Case 2Org Flows after Reaching 25.5ft g "O ft" CURVE is not a operable condition but is provided as a lower bound value to

'V Mcover operating conditions of procedures in effect from the time Switch-Over on BWS ,

4 [

  • * . level was reinstated . . .

W4 f. C'j

.. p .

^'."' .

=

n 1 g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION O9 mem on a,ne m o. a M94-0053

,uso, 3

mcomuw SP94-077

=,u

, _ , , ,m  !

V.S. MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION, INCLUDING HENRY'S LAW EFFECTS j IDEAL GAS LAWS:

REFERENCES:

p' V = w R T = 144 P' V CRANE 410 (DIS) w = P' x V x (144/(R x T)) '

p' = press, in #/ft2 absolute V = volume in ft3 w = weight in #

R = individual gas constant, (for the MUT this is a combination of the concentration fraction of the individual gases present). ,

T = absolute temp. In degroes Rankine ( 460 + F) l P' = press in #/in2 absolute "

l CONVERSION FACTORS:

water @ 135 F is 61.46281 #/ft3 (Dl19)  ;

  1. relation to kg 2.205 #/kg CRANE 410 l ft relation to cm 30.48 cm/ft  ;

O ft3 relation to cc combining above for kg/cc 28316.847 cc/ft3 0.000988 kg/cc psi relation to ft water 0.432781 psi /ft l vapor press, of water @ 135 F is 2.54 psia TIE-IN PRESS. (P2) FROM BWST FOR VARIOUS SWITCH OVER (S/0) LEVELS AND CASE 5 FLOW RATE (1BSP,iLPI, AND 1 HPI PER HEADER). This includes 2 ft water column l margin (the piping volume within this 2ft margin includes 87ft of horizontal piping which is 7.77ft3 gas would have had to expand into) and changes pressure from ft water to psig, conversion is for reference value at 68F (Assumption 5).

b S/O level ~

Oft (1.864ft -2ft margin) x 0.43278 psi /ft = -0.05886 psig l 5 ft (6.864ft -2ft margin) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 2.105042 psig l 10 ft '(11.864ft -2ft margin) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 4.268942 psig l 15 ft (16.864ft -2ft margin) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 6.432842 psig l Rev 2,5 ft (6.54ft -2ft margin) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 1.964821psig l l

=

DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION -

i Crystal River Unit 3

" Sheet 42 of _Z$_

OOCUWENT OLNTFICAftON NO, FOWON MAA/COWR

/ PEEFE/SP N/ FILE M94-0053 3 SP94477 V.S. MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION, INCLUDING HENRY'S LAW EFFECTS (Continued)

REMOVING THE VAPOR PRESS OF THE WATER TO DETERMINE GAS PRESSURE ONLY, MUT water at 135F (Assumptions) j S/O level Oft -0.05886psig - 2.54 psia = -2.59886psig l l

l 5 ft 2.105042psig - 2.54 psia = -0.43496psig l 10 ft 4.268924psig - 2.54 psia = 1.728942psig l 15 ft 6.432842psig - 2.54 psia = 3.892842psig ,

l Rev2,5ft 1.964821psig - 2.54 psia = -0.57518psig l FROM THE ABOVE ALLOWABLE PRESSURE DETERMINE THE WElGHT OF GAS IN THE TANK AND PlPING VOLUME (601.48 ft3,from section V.1.) DOWN TO 106.75 ft EL THAT WOULD GIVE US THIS PRESSURE, USING THE IDEAL GAS FORMULA.

W = P'2 x V2 x (144/(R x T)) l S/O level l Oft w0 = 144 X (-2.59886 +14.7) X 601.48 / (R X T) = 7278.595X 144/ (R X T) l l 5 ft w5 = 144 X (-0.43496 +14.7) X 601.48 / (R X T) = 8580.137X 144/ (R X T) l 10 ft wi0 = 144X (1.728942+14.7) X 601.48 / (R X T) = 9881.68X 144/ (R X T) l 15 ft w15 = 144 X (3.892842 +14.7) X 601.48 / (R X T) = 11183.22X 144/ (R X T) '

l Rev2,5ft w5 = 144 X (-0.57518 +14.7)-X 601.48 / (R X T) = 8495.797X 144/ (R X T)

THE ALLOWABLE INITIAL OVERPRESSURE WILL BE DETERMINED USING THE IDEAL GAS LAW AND HENRY'S LAW DETERMINING GAS RELEASED FROM SOLUTION DUE TO THE l PRESS. DECREASE. THE 5' S/O CASE IS USED FOR FORMULA DEVELOPMENT.

w5(Resulting) = w(free gas) + w(gas from water) w(free gas) is the gas in the MUT over the water at a particular water level w(gas from water) is the gas released from the MUfwater as the tank water level is decreased from a particular water level down to the 106.75 ft EL.

w(free gas) = P1' X V1g X 144 / (R X T) w(gas from water) = 14.7(psia) X 100 (cc/kg) X ( 1. P2' / P1') X .000988 (kg/cc) X .5 X V1w X 144/(R X T)

! 14.7 is STP conditions press for gas concentration.

100 cc/kg is assumed value of total gas concentration in water, based on a upper bound RCS Coolant concentration value.

.m

g.._ _ DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 g

Sheet 43 of Zg_

mur uur, oms so. mu,, um cc,,n,*umise coas/ru M94-0053 3 SP94477 l

V.5. MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION, INCLUDING HENRY'S LAW EFFECTS (Continued) l

.000988 kg / cc is conversion developed above to determine ft3 of gas released. I (0.5 x V1w) is assumption of water volume from which the gas is evolved during the press reduction (Assumption 5). l i COMBINING EQUATIONS:

w5(allowable) = ws(Resuhing) = w(free gas) + w(gas from water)

) (-0.435+14.7) X 601.48 X 144 / (R X T) = P1' X V1g X 144 / (R X T) + 14.7 X 100 X ( 1- l

P2 '/ P1') X .000988 X .5 X V1w X 144 / (R X T)

The (144/RXT) terms cancel out because the accident condition assumes insignificant temperature change because the MUT inputs are isolated by ES Actuation and the water )

4 volume in the tank would tend to hold the gas temperature constant as the gas volume increased and the R should not change because the makeup of the gases would not l

' significantly change due to the gas coming out of solution. The 144/(R x T) terms l canceling give:  ;

(-0.435 +14.7) X 601.48 = P1' X V1g + 14.7 X 100 X (1.- P2' / P1') X .000988 X 0.5 X V1w l 1 y

. Simplifying the (1 - P2 '/P1') term to (P1' - P2') / P1'

(-0.435+14.7) X 601.48 = P1' X Vig + 14.7 X 100 X ((P1'- P2') / P1') X .000988 X 0.5 X l V1w Multiplying through with P1'

(-0.435 +14.7) X 601.48 X P1' = P1' X P1' X Vig + 14.7 X 100 X (P1' - P2') X .000988 X l i 0.5 X V1w t ".

p Combining 14.7 X 100 X .000988 = 1.452"

(-0.435 +14.7) X 601.48 X P1' = P1' X P1' X V1g + 1.45236 X P1' X 0.5 X V1w - 1.45236 l X P2' X 0.5 X V1w  :

Combining (-0.435 +14.7) X 601.48 = 8580.137  !

8580.137 X P1' = P1'^2 X V1g + 1.45236 X P1' X 0.5 X V1w - 1.45236 X P2' X 0.5 X l V1w 0 = - 8580.137 X P1' + P1'^2 X V1g + 1.45236 X P1' X 0.5 X V1w - 1.45236 X P2' X l 0.5 X V1w

@ g. ... . DESIGN ANALYSIS DOCUMENT OLNT6 aC.ATu]ft #sO. FIEvisapN

/CALCULATIO_N Crystal River Unit 3 MAA/ CQuvM/PLEM/SP peut #dLRjflLE Sheet 44 of _If._

M94-0053 3 SP94477 V.S. MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION, INCLUDING HENRY'S LAW EFFECTS (Continued)

Combining terms in Quadratic form (D111):

l 0 = (Vig) X P1'^2 + (1.45236 X 0.5 X V1w - 8580.137) X P1' + (- 1.45236 X P2' X 0.5 X V1w)

SOLVING FOR P1' PER QUADRATIC FORMULA:

ax^2 + bx + c = 0 x = (- b + /- (b^2 - 4ac)^.5)/2a a = Vig l b = 1.45236 X 0.5 X V1w - 8580.137 c = - 1.45236 X P2' X 0.5 X V1w Substituting into the quadratic formula:

l P1' = (-(1.45236 X 0.5 X V1w - 8580.137) + (( 1.45236 X 0.5 X V1w - 8580.137)^2 - 4 X Vig X ( - 1.45236 X P2' X 0.5 X V1w))^0.5) / (2 X V1g)

O SPREAD SHEET FORMULA WITH SUBSTITUTION OF P2' = -0.435 + 14.7:

P1 abs 5 = (-(1.45236*0.5*V1w - 8580.137)+ ((1.45236*0.5*V1w - 8580.137).^2 - 4*V1g*(-

l 1.45236 *(-0.435 + 14.7) *0.5*V1 w))^0.5)/(2 *V1 g) }

s; SPREAD SHEET FORMULA FOR O's/o (Data presented with Min. Press. Umit Table):

\ l P2' = -2.599 + 14.7 AND (-2.259+ 14.7) x 601.48 = 7278.595 (i l P1 abs 0 = (-(1.45236*0.5*V1w - 7278.595)+ ((1.45236*0.5*V1w - 7278.595)^2 - 4*Vig*(-

, l 1.45236 * (-2.599 + 14.7)*0.5 *V1 w))^0.5)/(2*V1 g)

SPREAD SHEET FORMULA FOR 10's/o:

4 l P2' = 1.729 + 14.7 AND (1.729 + 14.7) x 601.48 = 9881.68 ,

,E l P1 abs 10 = (-(1.45236*0.5*V1w - 9881.68)+ ((1.45236*0.5*V1w - 9881.68)^2 - 4*Vig*(-

R l 1:45236*(1.729 + 14.7)*0.5*V1w))^0.5)/(2*V1 g) K

[  ; y

. SPREAD SHEET FORMULA FOR 15's/o:  :

r!

P l P2' = 3.893 + 14.7 AND (3.893 + 14.7) x 601.48 = 11183.22 -l l P1 abs 15 = (-(1.45236*0.5*V1w - 11183.22)+ ((1.45236*0.5*V1w - 11183.22)2 - 4*V1g*(-

l 1.45236*(3.893 + 14.7)*0.5*V1w))^0.5)/(2*V1g)

SPREAD SHEET FORMULA FOR Rev.2, 5's/o:

l P2' = -0.57518 + 14.7 AND (-0.57518 + 14.7) x 601.48 = 8495.797 l P1 abs 15 = (-(1.45236*0.5*V1w - 8495.797)+ ((1.45236*0.5*V1w - 8495.797)^2 - 4*V1g*(-

1.45236*(-0.57518 + 14.7)*0.5*V1w))^0.5)/(2*V1g) m.

9 mm a amum .e M94-0053 g DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Crystal River Unit 3

,wo, 3

w, cow,uw omu SP94477

)

V.S. MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION, INCLUDING HENRY'S LAW EFFECTS (Continued)

ADDITIONAL SPREAD SHEET FORMULAS FOR ALL LEVELS:

Gas Volume at a specific tank level = Vig = Total tank volume - lower Head Volume -

)

Volume of water in cylindrical section including (- Level error) and distance from Lower j Head weld to Lower instrument tap (Dl7 & 8 and Section V.1.).  !

Vig = 600.26-46.53-(0.7854*7.9375^2*(((LEVEL-2.7)/12)+0.13))

0.7854 = PI / 4, this allows use of tank diameter for area determination Water Volume at a specific tank level = V1w = Lower Head Volume + Volume of water in cylindrical section including (- Level error Ref. 7) and distance from Lower Head weld to Lower instrument tap.

V1w = 46.53 + (0.7854*7.9375^2*(((LEVEL-2.7)/12) + 0.13))

Indicated pressure = Conversion to Gage pressure + inclusion of vapor pressure of water

- instrument string error of indication (Ref.11).

P1ind = P1 abs-14.7+ 2.54-1.12 f

L 6 i V i l"p{;4 d- y$ r; w

t

. _} j -

O 1

.U E*. stm o v

r 9 g.

OOCA>WL NT OLMTFICATION eso.

M94-0053 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River.. Unit 3 FE.'v4 SON 3

MAA/COUWH,PLERE/SP NUWtnRiflLE SP94477 Sheet 48 of .lf_

1 V.S. MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION RESULTS NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW NEW l TANK ALOW ALOW ALOW TANK ALOW ALOW ALOW TANK ALOW ALOW ALOW IND. S' S/O 10' S/O 15' S/O IND. S' S/O 10'S/O 15' S/O IND. S' S/O 10' S/O 15'S/O ,

LEVEL PRESS PRESS PRESS LEVEL PRESS PRESS PRESS LEVEL PRESS PRESS PRESS l In psig psig psig in psig psig poig in psig psig psig l l 100 43.77 52.67 61.58 66 16.28 20.83 25.37 32 6.75 9.81 12.86 l 90 42.23 50.89 59.56 65 15.87 20.35 24.83 31 6.57 9.59 12.61 l 98 40.78 49.21 57.64 64 15.47 19.89 24.31 30 6.38 9.38 12.37 l 97 39.40 47.61 55.82 63 15.09 19.44 23.80 29 6.20 9.17 12.13 l 96 38.09 46.09 54.10 62 14.71 19.01 23.31 28 6.02 8.96 11.90 l 95 36.84 44.65 52.46 61 14.34 18.58 22.82 27 5.85 8.76 11.67 l 94 35.66 43.28 50.89 60 13.99 18.17 22.35 25 5.68 8.56 11.45 l 93 34.53 41.97 49.41 59 13.64 17.77 21.90 25 5.51 8.37 11.22 l 92 33.45 40.72 47.99 58 13.30 17.38 21.45 24 5.34 8.17 11.01 32.42 39.53 46.63 57 12.97 16.99 21.02 23 5.18 7 799 10.79 1 Sl 91 ' l 4 7.80 (Q j 90 89 31.44 30.50 38.38 37.29 45.33 44.09 56 55 12.65 12.33 16.62 16.26 20.59 20.18 22 21 5.02 4.86 7.62 10.59 10.38 i

l 88 29.59 36.25 42.90 54 12.03 15.90 19.78 20 4.71 7.44 10.18 l

l 87 28.73 35.24 41.76 53 11.73 15.55 19.38 19 4.56 7.27 9.98 l 86 27.90 34.28 40.67 52 11.43 15.22 19.00 18 4.41 7.09 9.78 l 85 27.10 33.36 39.62 51 11.15 14.89 18.62 17 4.26 6.92 9.59 l 84 26.33 32.47 38.61 50 10.87 14.56 18.26 16 4.11 6.76 9.40 l 83 25.59 31.61 37.63 49 10.60 14.25 17.90 15 3.97 6.59 9.21 l 82 24.88 30.79 36.70 48 10.33 13.94 17.55 14 3.83 6.43 9.03 l 81 24.20 30.00 35.80 47 10.07 13.64 17.21 13 3.69 6.27 8.85 l 80 23.54 29.23 34.93 46 9.81 13.34 16.87 12 3.56 6.12 8.67 l

l 79 22.90 28.50 34.09 45 9.56 13.06 16.55 11 3.43 5.96 8.50 l

l 78 22.29 27.78 33.28 44 9.32 12.77 16.23 10 3.29 5.81 8.33 l l 77 21.69 27.1C 32.50 43 9.08 12.50 15.91 9 3.16 5.66 8.16 l 76 21.12 26.43 31.74 42 8.85 12.23 15.60 8 3.04 5.51 7.99 l l 75 20.56 25.79 31.01 41 8.62 11.96 15.30 7 2.91 5.37 7.83 l 74 20.03 25.16 30.30 40 8.39 11.70 15.01 6 2.79 5.23 7.66 73 19.51 24.56 29.62 39 8.18 11.45 14.72 5 2.66 5.08 7.50 l - ._

i

, 9, 10.96 14.16 3 2.43 4.81 7.19 nl 71 18.51 23.41 28.31 37 7.75 13.89 2 2.31 4.68 7.04 70 18.04 22.86 27.b9 36 7.54 10.72 69 17.58 22.33 27.08 35 7.34 10.48 13.62 1 2.19 4.54 6.89 l

68 17.13 21.81 26.50 34 7.14 10.25 13.36 0 2.08 4.41 6.74 l

l 67 16.70 21.31 25.93 33 6.94 10.03 13.11 l

.m 2

T l

l da DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Sheet 47 of_Zg cocwtm car,mm .c wws. %coww%se.wavu M94-0053 3 SP94477 V.6 THE FOLLOWING IS A COMPARISON OF THE44EW 5' S/O CURVE OF-To-TPM OP 103B Rew4GCURVE AND ADDED OVERPRESSURE ALLOWABLE DETERMINED FROM NOMINAL CONDITIONS AN Rev.3 Rev.2 190-TANK NOM. 0024 Rw 5 l $ ALOW ALOW ALOW ALOW Comp 7@S/ 5'S/O PRESS W/O 2ft 5'S/O W/O 2ft alarm ann alann PRESS PRESS MGN PRESS MGN PRESS PRESS in psig psig poig psig psig psig psig pong l 100 63.96 43.77 48.13 43.19 47.54 34.53 36.70 50.99 l 95 53.90 36.84 40.66 36.34 40.15 28.91 30.82 42.59 l 90 46.19 31.44 34.84 30.99 34.38 24.43 26.15 36.09 l 85 40.10 27.10 30.16 26.69 29.75 20.79 22.35 30.92 l 80 35.15 23.54 26.33 23.17 25.95 17.77 19.20 26.70 l 75 31.05 20.56 23.12 20.23 22.78 15.23 16.54 23.20 l 70 27.61 18.04 20.40 17.73 20.08 13.C5 14.27 20.24 l )

O 65 60 24.67 22.13 15.87 13.99 18.06 16.03 15.58 13.71 17.77 15.76 11.17 9.53 12.30 E59 17.71 15.53 l

l 55 19.91 12.33 14.25 12.08 13.99 8.08 9.08 13.62 l M94-0053 Rev. 3 SPREAD SHEET FORMulhS WITH 2 ft MARGIN l v

5 ft (6.864ft -2ft margin) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 2.105 psig l 5 ft 2.105psig - 2.54 psia = -0.435 l Ending gas volume is 600.26+1.22 = 601.48 ft^3 (SectionV.1.)

5 ft w5 144 X (-0.435+14.7) X 601.48 / (R X T) = 8580.137X 144/ (R X T) l P1 abs 5 = (-(1.45236* 0.5* V1w - 8580,1Q7)+((1.45236*0.5*V1w- 8580.137)^2 - 4*V1g* l

(-1.45236 '(-0.435 + 14.7)'*0.5*V1w))^0.5)/(2*Vig) l p(s

=

I l

g DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION i 4

O@

v DOCUMLNT IDENTIFICAflope PsO.

Crystal River Unit 3 REVISION MAA/CGWR/FtEHE/bP NUMtsER/ FILI Sheet 48 of _Zg_ j M94 0053 3 SP94-077 l M94-0053 Rev. 3 FORMULAS WITHOUT 2 ft MARGIN (W/O 2ft MGN) l 5 ft Without Conservatism (6.864ft ) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 2.971 psig l 5 ft Without Conservatism 2.971psig - 2.54 psia = 0.431 Without Conservatism ending gas volume is 600.26+8.993 = 609.253 ft^3 (Section v.1.)

Without Conservatism the allowable gas weight increases l 5 ft w5 = 144 X (0.431 +14.7) X 609.253 / (R X T) = 9218.365X 144/ (R X T) l P1 abs = (-(1.45236* 0.5* V1w - 9218.365)+ ((1.45236*0.5*V tw - 9218.365)^2 - 4*Vig*

i l (-1.45236*(0.431 + 14.7)'*0.5*V1 w))^0.5)/(2*V1 g) l M94-0053 Rev. 2 SPREAD SHEET FORMULAS WITH 2 ft MARGIN, AND BWST LEVEL ERROR l OF 0.7ft 5 ft (6.54ft -2ft margin) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 1.964821 psig 5 ft 1.96482psig - 2.54 psia = -0.57518 Ending gas volume is 600.26+1.22 = 601.48 ft^3 (SectionV.1.)

5 ft w5 = 144 X (-0.57518+14.7) X 601.48 / (R X T) = 8495.797X 144/ (R X T) w P1 abs 5 = (-(1.45236* 0.5* V1w - 8495.797)+((1.45236*0.5*V1w- 8495.797)^2 - 4*V1g*

(-1.45236 *(-0.57518 + 14.7)' *0.5*V1 w))^0.5)/(2 *V1 g) 7 l M94-0053 Rev. 2 SPREAD SHEET FORMULAS WITHOUT 2 ft MARGIN (W/O 2ft MGN), AND l BWST LEVEL ERROR OF 0.7ft 5 ft - Without Conservatism (6.54ft ) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 2.830381 psig 5 ft - Without Conservatism 2.830381psig - 2.54 psia = 0.290381 Without Conservatism ending gas volume is 600.20+8.993 = 609.253 ft^3 5 ft - Without Conservatism the allowable gas wight increases a 1

w5 = 144 X (0.290381 +14.7) X 609.253 / (R X T) = 9132.935'X 144/ (R X T) r .e,r P1 abs 5 = (-(-9132.935+ 1.45236* 0.5* V1w )+ ((- 9132.935+ 1.45236*0.5*V1w)^2 - 4*V1g*(-

~"

1.45236

  • P2' *0. 5 *V 1 w))^0. 5)/(2 *V 1 g) l FORMULAS FOR ANNUNCIATOR ALARM AND COMPUTER ALERT (Ref. 26) l Computer Alert = 7631.3 / (555 - 4 x Level ) - 14.7 l Annunciator Alarm = 7966.3 / (555 - 4 x Level ) - 14.7 190-0024 Rev. 5 SPREAD SHEET FORMULA ALLOWABLE OVERPRESSURE l P1 INDICATED = (((13.63 + 14.7)*326.01)/(590.16-(41.48 + ((0.7854)*(7.9375^2)*(((LEVEL-l 2.6)/12)+0.13)))))-14.7 l

i O9 g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River _ Unit 3 Sheet 49 of _Zj_

twmm we e sca un mva FORMULAS FOR ALLOWABLE OVERPRESSURE USING THE FLOWING NOMINAL SYSTEM l  !

CONDITIONS: l PARAMETER Nominal Value Error Value Worst Case l BWST LEVEL (ft) 7 2(Ref.4) 5 l ECCS FLOWS (gpm) l LPl 2200 185(Ref.22) 2386 l BS 1200 106(Ref.23) 1305 l HPl (6" flow) 540 30(Ref.24 & 25) 575 l TOTAL (14" flow) 3940 4266 l Hd Loss (ft) 10.624 12.096 l MUT Temperature (*F) 120 135 l Vapor pres (psi) 1.69 2.54 l MUT Level (in) 2.7(Ref.7) l MUT Pressure (psi) 1.12(Ref.11) l j MARGIN AT TIE-IN l

P2 (ft) 0 - -2 l 2 V2 (ft') 609 801.48 lj 1 NOTE
BS AND LPI FLOWS ARE THROTTLED VALUES IN PREPARATION FOR SWITCH-OVER ll V

TO RECIRCULATION AND BEFORE ACTUALLY TAKING SUCTION ON THE SUMP, (WHEN BS l i IS TAKING SUCTION ON THE SUMP AN ADDITIONAL 21gpm FLOW ERROR FOR WATER l TEMPERATURE IS REQUIRED). l

TIE-IN PRESS. (P2) FROM BWST S/O level p y , _

c j All Nominal @ 7ft (10.336ft -Oft margin) x 0.43278 psi /ft = 4.473214psig 4 <

fM REMOVING THE VAPOR PRESSURE OF THE WATER TO DETERMINE GAS' PRESSURE ONLY All Nominal @ 7ft 4.47psig - 1.696 psia = 2.77721psig All Nominal @ 7ft w5 = 144 X (2.78+14.7) X 609 / (R X T) = 10647.28X 144/ (R X T)

P1lnd. = (-(1.45236* 0.5* V1w - 10647.28)+ ((1.45236*0.5*V1w- 10647.28)^2 - 4*V1g*

(-1.45236*(2.783214 + 14.7)'*0.5*V1w))^0.5)/(2*V1g) - 14.7 + 1.69-0

g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION g .

m .a w e,c m ,,,.a == -y.m ,u , ,.u . ,u M94-0053 3 SP94-077 l l

l V.7. COMPARISON OF MUT 43.21" TO BWST 44.9' LEVELS ITEM V.7 AND V.8 COMPARISON OF MUT AND BWST LEVELS AT EQUAL TIE-IN POINT l PRESSURES  ;

l Pm, = 67 + 119.17 - 0.46 - 104.75 - HLmy Note: Inst. Error of - 0.7ft is not included in  ;

l the 119.17 value (Section V.3)

Pm = [ Pyo, + Inst. Error (1.12)] X 2.3106 + ( level - Inst. Error (2.7)) /12 + 122.58 -

104.75 (Ref. 7,8, &1a) l MUT Level of 43.21" has allowable press of 8.9psig from 5' S/O Curve l Converting to ft 23.18tt l MUT Level of 43.21" is a water column of l l Converting 21.2ft Head Loss from flow in 4" Piping from MUT -0 l TOTAL PRESSURE AT TIE-IN FROM MUT 44.38ft BWST Level of 44.9 ft has a static head of Converting 58.86ft Head loss for 5425gpm in 14" pipe and 575 gpm in 6" pipe hlll l TOTAL P.RESSURE AT TIE-IN FROM BWST

- 14.48ft 44.38ft 3

(

l This shows that with the BWST at 44.9ft nominal level and full ECCS flow (5425gpm / Train) the a l MUT will immediately drain to approximately 43.21" where level will follow BWST level decrease l to 0" at a rate of 77gpm 7 l

l s w-c .4 t ..g

,c- '

4  ;:? A ,

f,9 , } r,g i

! Nd' L: .:q 1

l O l s#,

lF L D J

F

@ g.2 ..

DESIGN. ANALYSIS /CALCU1ATION Crystal River Unit 3 O% Sheet 51 of_ZA, DOCUMENT ICAufwacAforg NO MvwoN MAR /CGWW54/MEHt/SP NUWhtR/FILE M94-0053 3 SP94-077 V.8. COMPARISON OF MUT 0" TO BWST 25.17' LEVELS l MUT Level of 0" has allowable press of 1.93psig from 5' S/O Curve, Converting to ft 7.05ft l (1.93psig (Allow Press) + 1.12 psi (Inst. Error)] x 2.3106 ft/ psi l MUT Level of 0" is a water column of Converting 17.6ft Head Loss from flow in 4" Piping from MUT -0 TOTAL PRESSURE AT TIE-IN FROM MUT 24.65ft l BWST Level of 25.17 ft has a static head of l Converting 39.13ft l Head loss for 5425gpm in 14" pipe and 575gpm l In 6" pipe - 14.48ft l TOTAL PRESSURE AT TIE-IN FROM BWST 24.65ft l V.9. DETERMINATION OF AVERAGE MUT OUTFLOW FOR MUT LEVEL CHANGE FROM l 43.215" TO 0" l MUT Volume is 30.84 gal /in (Section V.1)

BWST Volume is 9400 gal /ft, PI X 20ft^2(Ref. 2) X 7.48 gal / t Total ECCS flow from BWST is 5425gpm per Train or 1085f; gpm total lj MUT VOLUME CHANGE = (43.21 - 0[Section V.7 & V.8]) X 30.84 = 1332.596 gal l' BWST Volume Change = (44.9 - 25.17(Section V.7 & VIj) X 9400 = 185462 gal l Total Volume Change = 1332.596 +185462 = 186764.6 l Time for Volume Change = 186764.6 /10850 = 17.22 min l MUT Flow Rate = 1332.596 /17.22 = 77.4 gpm l V.10 CALCULATION OF MINIMUM MUT PRESSURES TO PRECLUDE EXCEEDING TANK CAPABlUT( OF -11.72 psig WHEN DRAINED DOWN TO THE TIE-IN POINT, (This condition is l not achievable because BWST Pressure at the Tie-In Point can not get this low). l (Ref.13, M95-0001 Rev.' 0)

Minimum Indicated Tank ~ Pressure include + 1.12 psi instrument error Tank Gas Volumes include +2.7 in Level Instrument error Total Gas Volume when Tank and Piping are empty down to Tie-In is 609.253 ft3 (no 2ft water column margin).

No credit for Dissolved gas Evolution (Henry's Law) is taken P1' X V1 = P2' X V2 P2' = -11.72 - 2.54 + 14.7 = 0.44 P1 = (P2' X V2 / V1) - 14.7 + 2.54 + 1.12 ACTUAL MINIMUM PRESSURE LIMIT SHOULD BE BASED ON MAINTAINING PRESS.

IND DOWN TO THE LOW LEVEL OF 55" .

Gas Volume at 55" is 309.37 ft3 P2' = 0 - 1.12 - 2.54 + 14.7 = 11.04 P1 = (P2' X V2 / V1) - 14.7 + 2.54 + 1.12 a m.:n.

@ g DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 52 of_Z3 UOCAJMENT OENTIFCATK.pe NO. MvissON MAA/GGwH/PLE%/hP NUMtsER,FM M94-0053 3 SP94-077 V.10. MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION RESULTS IDEAL Realistic ALOW IDEAL Realistic ALOW IDEAL Realistic ALOW TANK MIN MIN PRESS TANK MIN MIN PRESS TANK MIN MIN PRESS IND. ALOW ALOW O' S/O IND. ALOW ALOW O' S/O IND. ALOW ALOW O' S/O LEVEL PRESS PRESS LEVEL PRESS PRESS LEVEL PRESS PRESS in psig psig dig in psig psig psig in psig psig psig l 100 -8.87 16.55 34.86 66 -10.02 1.90 11.73 32 -10.38 -2.59 3.70 l 99 -8.94 15.66 33.57 65 10.04 1.70 11.39 31 10.38 -2.68 3.54 l 98 -9.01 14.82 32.34 64 10.06 1.51 11.05 30 -10.39 2.76 3.39 l 97 -9.07 14.04 31.18 63 -10.07 1.32 10.73 29 -10.40 2.84 3.23 l 96 -9.13 13.30 30.08 62 -10.08 1.14 10.41 28 -10.40 -2.92 3.08 l 95 -9.18 12.61 29.04 61 -10.10 0.96 10.10 27 -10.41 -3.00 2.94 l 94 -9.24 11.95 28.04 60 -10.11 0.79 9.80 26 -10.42 -3.08 2.79 l 93 -9.28 11.33 27.09 59 -10.12 0.62 9.51 25 -10.42 -3.15 2.65 l 92 -9.33 10.74 26.18 58 -10.14 0.46 9.22 24 10.43 -3.23 2.51 l 91 -9.37 10.19 25.32 57 -10.15 0.30 8.94 23 10.43 -3.30 2.37 l 90 -9.42 9.65 24.49 56 10.16 0.15 8.67 22 -10.44 -3.37 2.24 l 89 -9.46 9.15 23.70 55 10.17 0.00 8.41 21 -10.44 -3.44 2.10 l 88 -9.49 8.67 22.94 54 -10.18 -0.15 8.15 20 -10.45 -3.51 1.97 l 87 -9.53 8.21 22.21 53 -10.20 -0.29 7.90 19 -10.45 -3.58 1.84 l 86 -9.56 7.77 21.51 52 -10.21- -0.42 7.65 18 -10.46 -3.65 1.72 l 85 -9.60 7.36 20.84 51 -10.22 4.56 7.41 17 -10.46 -3.71 1.59 l 84 -9.63 6.96 20.20 50 -10.23 -0.69 7.17 16 -10.47 -3.78 1.47 l 83 -9.66 6.57 19.58 49 10.24 -0.82 6.94 15 -10.47 -3.84 1.35 l 82 -9.69 6.21 18.98 48 -10.25 -0.94 6.72 14 -10.48 -3.90 1.23 l 81 -9.71 5.86 18.40 47 -10.26 -1.06 6.50 13 -10.48 -3.96 1.12 l 80 -9.74 5.52 17.85 46 -10.27 -1.18 6.28 12 10.49 -4.02 1.00 l 79 -9.77 5.19 17.31 45 -10.28 -1.30 6.07 11 -10.49 -4.08 0.89 l 78 -9.79 4.88 16.79 44 -10.28 -1.41 5.87 10 -10.50 -4.14 0.78 l 77 -9.81 4.58 16.29 43 -10.29 -1.52 5.67 9 -10.50 -4.20 0.67 l 76 -9.84 4.29 15.81 42 -10.30 -1.63 5.47 8 10.51 -4.25 0.56 l 75 -9.86 4.01 15.34 41 -10.31 -1.74 5.28 7 -10.51 -4.31 0.45 l 74 -9.88 3.74 14.89 40 -10.32 -1.84 5.09 6 -10.52 -4.36 0.35 l 73 -9.90 3.49 14.45 39 -10.33 -1.94 4.90 5 -10.52 -4.42 0.24 l 72 -9.92 3.23 14.03 38 -10.33 -2.04 4.72 4 -10.52 -4.47 0.14 l 71 -9.94 2.99 13.62 37 -10.34 -2.14 4.54 3 -10.53 -4.52 0.04 l 70 -9.96 2.76 13.22 36 10.35 -2.23 4.37 2 -10.53 -4.57 0.06 l 69 -9.97 2.53 12.83 35 -10 36 -2.32 4.20 1 -10.54 -4.62 -0.15 l 68 -9.99 2.31 12.45 34 -10.36 -2.41 4.03 0 -10.54 -4.67 -0.25 l 67 -10.01 2.10 12.09 33 -10.37 -2.50 3.86 a -

.' DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION-l Crystal River Unit 3 )

9 DOCUMENT OENTFsCATIQ*e eso. HVGON MAR, CGS PLLH f 5P fvuMEstR,51LE Sheet 53 of _ZL i

M94-0053 3 SP94-077  !

\

V.11 EMERGENCY BORATION CONSIDERATIONS: .

This part of the calculation determines when flow will be drawn from the BWST if at 44.9' l (Nominal) (after the Isolation Valve is opened) for various flow rates (cases 16 through 9 and 3) and operating with MUT Overpressure per curves for 5'.10', and 15' S/O. The Row 'MUT L W/__' S/O all flow from MUT(in)" gives the MUT level at which flow would i just start from the BWST. The Row 'MUT L W/_' S/O Flow Split (in)" gives the MUT  ;

j level at which flow from the BWST reaches its maximum for that case (This corresponds  !

to "MUT V loss gpm' above because the recirculation flows to the MUT are considered to
continue as tabulated abe e). These levels are approximate because details of how the

! flow changes as the spi't develops and BWST level change during this scenario are not j modeled in this simplification.

STATIC TIE-IN PRESSURE FROM BWST WHEN AT 44.9' IND. = 44.9+119.17-104.75 -

0.46 = 58.86ft

' Term "MUT Total Press. necessary to = BWST @ 44.9' = (Head Loss all flow from MUT)

+ 58.86ft

Term "MUT Total Press, necessary W/FlowSplit to = BWST @ 44.9ft" = (Head Loss split i flow from MUT) + 58.82 ft - (Head loss split flow from BWST).

i 1

MUT LEVELS ARE DETERMINED FROM TABLES BELOW GIVING TOTAL TIE-IN '

I PRESS /MUT LEVEL l BWST AND MUT HEAD LOSSES ARE FROM SECTION V.2 I

i I  ;

4 1

4 WA0 V

g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3

-,a m,am- - - - - -

M94-0053 3 SP94-077 l CASE 3 & 3A COVER AN UNUSUAL EVENT WHERE ONLY HPl IS ACTUATED AND FLOW lNTO THE RCS IS MAXIMUM.

l MVP FL (gpm) 160.1 168 178.3 200.2 245.2 261 306 575 l l Hd Loss (ft) 2.52 2.77 3.08 3.86 5.74 6.46 8.85 30.30

~

l MUT V loss (9pm) 49.1 57 22.3 89.2 80.2 150 150 575 l ALL FLOW FROM THE MUT CASE 15 CASE 9 CASE 14 CASE 13 CASE 12 CASE 11 CASE 10 CASE 3A  ;

MUT TOTL PRES <

TO = BWST @ 44.9 61.38 61.63 61.95 62.73 64.62 65.35 67.74 89.16 I l MUT L W/5' S/O( in) 64.77 65.02 65.34 66.10 67.88 68.55 70.65 85.11 l MUT L W/10' S/O( in) 54.59 54.87 55.22 56.07 58.06 58.80 61.15 62.49 l MUT L W/15' S/O( in) 44.67 44.97 45.36 46.29 48.47 49.29 51.87 69.92 FLOW SPUT CONDITIONS CASE CASE 9A CASE CASE CASE CASE CASE CASE 3 15A 14A 13A 12A 11A 10A l MUTgpm 110.90 111.00 155.90 110.70 155.70 110.40 155.40 l Hloss it 1.2417 1.2417 2.4081 1.2417 2.4081 1.2417 2.4081 l BWSTgpm 49.10 57.00 22.30 89.20 89.20 150.00 150.00 575.00 ,

l Hloss ft 0.0845 0.1125 0.0201 0.2551 0.2551 0.6733 0.6733 8.5750 )

MUT TOTL PRES 60.02 59.99 61.25 59.85 61.01 59.43 60.59 50.29 W/FlowSpilt TO = BWST @ 44.9 .

l MUT L W/5' S/O (in) 63.39 63.36 64.64 63.21 64.40 62.77 63.97 51.88 l MUT L W/10' S/O(in) 53.05 53.01 54.44 52.85 54.18 52.36 53.70 40.33 l l MUT L W/15' S/O (in) 42.99 42.95 44.51 42.77 44.22 42.24 43.70 29.15 O

~

g @ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River. Unit 3 V ouawn cwscuo.e Sheet 55 _ of _ZA me eas m wa m % se w u ang u M94-OO53 3 SP94477 V.11 EMERGENCY BORATION CONSIDERATIONS (Continued):

The following tables use the allowable pressure calculation M94-0053 Rev. 2 curve to determine tank pressures in order to solve for MUT levels that would result in the above pressures using ' Goal Seek", ' Formula" in EXCEL The " tie-in press" column is normally the dependent variable to the " TANK IND. LEVEL" independent variable, in Goal Seek EXCEL changes the TANK IND. LEVEL until the tie-in press matches a selected value. The selected value is the MUT TOTL PRES Rows from the above table.

Formula for determining tie-in pressure ft of water:

P = ((Ind Level)-2.7)/12 + 122.58 - 104.75 + ((Alow Over Press) + 1.12)*2.3106 NOTE: Instrument errors are applied here in the same direction as the Alow. Press Calculation.

MUT W/5ft S/O ALL FLOW FROM MUT TANK TANK Rev.2 tie-in TANK GAS WATER ALOW press IND. VOLUME VOLUME 5' S/O LEVEL W/ E W/ E PRESS in ft^3 ft^3 psig ft water

( ) 64.77 291.34 308.92 15.49 61.38 65.02 290.31 309.95 15.59 61.63 65.34 289.01 311.25 15.72 61.95 66.10 285.87 314.39 16.03 62.73 67.88 278.51 321.75 16.78 64.62 68.55 275.77 324.49 17.07 65.35 70.65 267.11 333.15 18.03 67.74 85.11 207.48 392.78 26.78 89.16 MUT W/5ft S/O FLOW SPLIT BETWEEN MUT AND BWST TANK TANK Rev.2 tie-in TANK GAS WATER ALOW press IND. VOLUME VOLUME 5' S/O LEVEL W/ E W/ E PRESS in ft* ft* psig ft water 63.39 297.05 303.21 14.95 60.02 63.36 297.18 303.08 14.94 59.99 64.64 291.88 308.38 15.44 61.25 63.21 297.77 302.49 14.88 59.85 64.40 292.87 307.39 15.34 61.01

p. 62.77 299.59 300.67 14.72 59 43 h 63.97 294.63 305.63 15.18 60.59 51.88 344.49 255.77 11.15 50.29

\ l nm m.--

I

i l

@ g- DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet se of _Z3_

I

'"5F'sa*.a umacmm o aws.cn micr,*agua,se umagu M94-0053 3 SP94477 MUT L W/10ft S/O ALL FLOW FROM MUT l TANK TANK TANK Rev.2 tie-in j IND. GAS WATER ALOW press 1 LEVEL VOLUME VOLUME 10' S/O W/ E W/ E PRESS j l in ft^3 ft^3 psia ft water )

l 54.59 333.32 266.94 15.86 61.38 l 54.87 332.18 268.08 15.95 61.63 l 55.22 330.72 269.54 16.08 61.95 l 56.07 327.23 273.03 16.39 62.73 l 58.06 319.02 281.24 17.13 64.62 l l 58.80 315.95 284.31 17.42 65.35 I l 61.15 306.26 294.00 18.37 67.74 f l 62.49 300.75 299.51 18.94 69.16 l MUT L W/10ft S/O FLOW SPLIT BETWEEN MUT AND BWST TANK TANK Rev.2 tie-in TANK GAS WATER ALOW press IND. VOLUME VOLUME 10' S/O j ,

W/ E W/ E

~~

LEVEL PRESS j lf l 4 in 53.05 ft*

339.68 ft*

260.58 psig 15.32 ft water 60.02

.g

_g l y 53.01 339.82 260.44 15.31 59.99 gi l 54.44 333.92 266.34 15.81 61.25 l 52.85 340.49 259.77 15.26 59.85 l l 54.18 335.03 265.23 15.71 61.01 l "' , 52.36 342.50 257.76 15.09 59.43 1 jl, l 53.70 336.99 263.27 15.55 60.59 l , ;; h j . . . .,.

~

{

i y 40.33 392.14 208.'.2 11.57 50.29  ; %p i A l

l l

l l

rida DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 n\s Sheet 57 of.71 N' **XT CENTIF(.ATKA peQ.

SE A4 SON WAA/CGWH

/ PELftj $P NUMikR/FLE M94-0053 3 SP94 077 MUT L W/15ft S/O ALL FLOW FROM MUT TANK TANK Rev.2 tie-in TANK GAS WATER ALOW press IND. VOLUME VOLUME 15' S/O LEVEL W/ E W/ E PRESS in ft^3 ft^3 psia ft water 44.67 374.22 226.04 16.21 61.38 44.97 372.97 227.29 16.31 61.63 45.36 371.38 228.88 16.44 61.95 46.29 367.55 232.71 16.74 62.73 48.47 358.55 241.71 17.48 64.62 49.29 355.18 245.08 17.77 65.35 51.87 344.53 255.73 18.71 67.74 69.92 270.11 330.15 27.33 89.16 MUT L W/15ft S/O FLOW SPLIT BETWEEN MUT AND BWST D) TANK TANK GAS TANK WATER Rev.2 ALOW tie-in press

,; IND. VOLUME VOLUME 15'S/O LEVEL W/ E W/ E PRESS g in ft* ft* psig ft water 7, 42.99 381.17 219.09 15.69 60.02

., 42.95 381.33 218.93 15.67 59.99 h[ 44.51 374.88 225.38 16.16 61.25 42.77 382.06 218.20 15.62 59.85 44.22 376.09 224.17 16.07 61.01 00'c 42.24'3 384.26 216.00 15.46 59.43 1 d V" 43.70' 378.23 222.03 15.91 60.59 1

l. .

29.15-. 438.23 162.03 11.97 50.29 l w ,

1. (, 'Q Ca V

Fh D .

l l

,o V O g DOCVWD(f otNTIFICAhoN ho.

M94-0053 DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 A% VWOh 3

MAAjCONR/ PkkRE/$P NuuBERJai SP94477 Sheet 58 of 16.

4 V.12. APPENDIX "R" CONCERNS:

Appendix "R" requirements have dictated the allowable hydrogen regulator (MUV-491) set-point because of the potentia for Solenoid Valve (MUV-143) failing open because of a Fire, which then causes the MUT to be continuously pressurized at the regulator set-point. This constant pressure in the MUT, if high enough, could prevent water from being drawn from the BWST when MUV-58 is opened, allowing the MUT Level to drop to a point where gas could be entrained in the MUP suction. There are two fire scenarios that could cause this MUT pressurization with the potential for Gas Binding of the Operating MUP unless compensatory operator action is taken. This calculation section determines how much time is available for the operator actions with different regulator set-points and system operating conditions.

A fire in the Control Room or Cable Spreading Room is covered by AP-880 and may require Shutdown From Outside the Control Room which is then covered by AP-990 which requires Rx Trip and Isolation of Letdown. The make up control valve MUV-31 is considered to fail as is until the MU System is operated from the Remote Shutdown Panel, maintaining Pressurizer p) i Level and cooling the plant to cold shutdown conditions within 72 hr. This condition is similar to Case 15 & 15A in the Tables. The MUT will reauire Isolation from the MUPs or reduction of tank overoressure to orevent oas entrainment.

A fire in other areas of the plant is als6 covered by 'AP-880 but should require no Rx Trip or

~

I Isolation of Letdown, therefore, MU System operation is considered to continue relatively normally except for individual fire caused failures. There is the potential for MUV-143 opening and loss of MUT level Transmitters with their associated MUV-58 auto opening function which is compensated for by manual opening of MUV-58 from the MCB within 8 minutes per AP-880. The failure of MUV-31 concurrent with MUV-143 opening due to the fire

is not considered because of their locations in the$uxiliary Building. CASE 16 is applicable to this plant condition and shows that~there would'be more than 8 min to open MUV-58, however, additional action to isolate thWMOT
from the MUPs or reduce tank oressure would also be reauired to orevent cas'entrairimenF s an -

This section investigates three tarikleitels and the time segment required to reach them for various regulator set-points and system conditions. These levels are used to relate the three different flow conditions that could occur in the MU System during this event. The first level covers the time segment from when MUV -143 opens and all flow is from the MUT to time

- after MUV-58 is opened and flow would just start from the BWST. At this point the BWST is l assumed to be at a minimum of 44.9 ft (nominal) and the MUT level necessary to give this equal tie-in pressure is calculated. A level below 55" indicates the " volume loss flow" will Os come entirely from the MUT until that level is reached, this volume is calculated and from the

" volume loss flow" the time segment is determined. A level above 55" indicates the " volume loss flow" will immediately start from the BWST when MUV-58 is opened, which skips segment 1. The second level covers the time segment from when BWST flow just starts n .-

x 3 @ g- DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUUATION Crystal River Unit 3

~

Sheet 59 of ,2f_

oocuwm umcaro. o. es,o,. u4a,cowamus,w numag u M94-0053 3 SP94-077 APPENDIX "R" CONCERNS (CONTINUED):

until it reaches its maximum rate of " volume loss flow". At this time the MUT level is the segment 1 value or if greater than 55" it is V.12. assumed to be at 55" and the BWST level that would give a equal pressure at the tie-in is calculated. A level above d4.9' indicates that in the split flow condition the " volume loss flow" from the BWST could not ce reached until the MUT level / pressure were lower, which skips segment 2. A level below 44.9' indicates that the " volume loss flow" will come entirely from the BWST until that level is reached, this volume is caiculated and from the " volume loss flow" the time segment is determined. The third level covers the time segment from when the BWST flow reaches its maximum and the MUT reaches its critical submergence level. The MUT level is assumed to equal the critical submergence level for the applicable flow condition and a BWST level to give a equal pressure at the tie-in point is determined. A BWST level above 44.9 indicates all " volume loss flow" will come entirely from M MUT until that level is reached, this volume is calculated from 55" and if any volume from symnt 1 was calculated it is reduced by this amount, from the

" volume loss flow" the time segic nt is determined. A level below 44.9' indicates the " volume loss flow" would be split between tne BWST and MUT. The MUT Volume is calculated as n before and the BWST Volume is calculated from the level change with reduction of any tj previous segment 2 volume and these are combined and from the " volume loss flow" the time segment is determined. These time segments determine the times available for the operator to take compensatory action. These operator actions could be: 1) Open the BWST Suction Valve before reaching a MUT level of 18", 2) Close MUV-64 or Isolate H2 and Vent off the MUT before going below 0" Indicated Level, and 3) Close MUV-64 or Isolate H2 and Vent off the MUT before reaching the Critical Submergence level, which is below the indicated level. Isolation of the MUT by closing MUV-64 will also require periodic reopening because recirculation and seal return are maintained during these non-ES conditions.

VORTEX PREVENTION CONCERN:

Gas entrainment in a MUP Suction could occur as a result of the water level in the piping from the MUT dropping down to the tie-in point with the1BWST suct' ion line under accident conditions where inflow to the MUT is terminated.or in pon-accKient3 conditions with significant tank inflow if the MUT level dropped low:enough for Vortexing to occur. Using attachments 9,10, and 11 this section develops a formula to determine the critical submergence levels for a central located vertical tank outlet.

From Attachment 9:

The strength of the vortex depends on the velocity of flow and hence the Froude Number (Fr), which is determined by the relationship, Fr = v / (g x d)"

Where; p v = velocity of flow = ft / sec Q g = acceleration due to gravity = 32 ft / sec d = diameter of outlet pipe = in /12

-s M

g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 80 of11. i mcuuoa mercarm .c esa ecc.e, mm se ,.uuw u l M94-OO53 3 SP94 077 l

VORTEX PREVENTION CONCERN (CONTINUED):

From testing the Froude Number is related to the ratio of submergence (s, distance from water surface to top of discharge pipe) divided by the diameter of the discharge pipe (d).

l

! This paper addresses tanks or intakes with horizontal discharge pipe and determines l

those having Vortex prevention devices will have vortex-free operation with the relationship of s / d = Fr, and for tanks without Vortex prevention devices the relationship of s / d = 1 + Fr will give vortex-free operation.

For downward vertical discharge tanks like the MUT a critical submergence relationship like above is developed from Attachment 10:

The critical submergence in case of vertical downward pipe intakes is related to the  ;

circulation number, the Froude number and the viscosity parameter per the formula K X '

S, / d = 5.6 X Nr X Fr" .

Definition of terms: ,

K = viscous correction factor = 1 for N, 2 5 x 10' l S = Critical Submergence (in) d = inside diameter of discharge pipe (for MUT outlet) = 4.026 in

Nr = circulation parameter = r x S, / O = K' x tan 6 K' = 1/ (1 - n x t x sec 6 / n x D,_% m,) -

n = number of adjustable guide vanes y t = thickness of each vane t' D,_, u, = diameter of vane-ring assembly i The term " n x t x sec 6 / n x D, m," is assumed to be very small because the MUT has no vane rings.

Therefore, K' = 1 and Nr = tan 6 This is consistent with Attachment 11 equation (8) conclusion.

1 The Attachment 10 paper used 6 angles of 10*,30*, and 60*, howevet,10' is used t t d here because the MUT has very little flow induced Circulation around the center .of the "i- :q tank, thus the smaller angle of approach. In addition, the inlet water 181sparged.as.it

  1. ;qters the tank for improved gas exposure and thus flow onto the' water surface:.would tw :ertical and relatively uniform. '

hence Nr = tan 10' = 0.176327 Fr = Froude Number = v / (g x d)"

)"

~'19 g~ DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 (V Sheet 61 of 11.

DOCAAsENT OENTWCATON NO. %VibON MAA/COWRjPEEREj SP NUMBER F/ LE M94-OO53 3 SP94-077 VORTEX PREVENTION CONCERN (CONTINUED):

Ny= viscosity parameter = g" X d" / v  :

Values and conversions from DIS (p, B-3, A-3,1-3, & a4):  !

v = kinematic visc = / S x (conversion factor Centistokes to ft' / l sec) = (0.48 / 0.988728) X 0.00001076 = 5.24 x 10" l p = dynamic visc = 0.48 centipoise ,

S = Specific gravity = density H2 O @135'F / density H2 O @60*F = 61.5 /

62.4 = 0.985577 .,

l 5

N = 32.2" X (4.026/12)" / 5.24 x 10" = 2.1 x 10 y l Therefore, K = 1.

Substituting into equation:

K X S, / d = 5.6 X N/22 X Fr"  !

S,=5.6xN/'2 x Fr" x d / K S, = 5.6 x 0.176327u2 x ( v / (g x d)")" x d /1 l l

9 S, = 5.6 x 0.176327"2 x ( v, / ( 32.2 x 4.026 /12 )"')" x 4.026 /1 S, = 5.6 x 0.176327u2 x v" / ( 32.2 x 4.026 /12 )"5 x 4.026 S, = 5.999687 x v" .,

h l

2 v (ft/sec) = (gpm) / 60 (sec) / 7.48 (gal /ft3) / ( PI X d / 576) 'q l

( Conversion of diameter to radius and v= (gpm) X 0.408526 / d 2 in to ft = 4 X 12^2 = 576 i i j

g

\

S, = 5.999687 x ( __(gpm) X 0.408526 / d )u2 ) l S, = 5.999687 x ( (gpm) X 0.408526 )" / d S, = 5.999687 x ( (gpm) X 0.408526 )" / 4.026 p:, =. 0.9525 x (

(gpm))" j

, 4.n.

3 69'.61in i issanced from tank head bottom to lower level tap =16.55 + 1.5 + 0.13 x TEY *

'2 l

l[] (Sec' tion V.) and R8)

Level (in) = -19.62 + s(in) (, i e

= _

DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION O crystal never unit 3 Sheet 82 of _Zg.

cocuatm com caro. .e new w ,. uan,,ce,*n,euno,se wuas,,u M94 0053 3 SP94-077 VORTEX PREVENTION CONCERN (CONTINUED):

CRITICAL MUT SUBMERGENCE LEVELS FOR FLOW RATES l gpm v(ft/sec) Fr s/d s(in) s (in) Level l (in) l 160.1 4.035186 1.227692 2.993551 12.05204 12.05203 -7.57 l 111 2.797662 0.851179 2.492599 10.0352 10.0352 -9.58 l 168 4.234299 1.288271 3.066519 12.3458 12.3458 -7.27 l 178.3 4.493902 1.367255 3.159124 12.71863 12.71863 -6.90 l 156 3.931849 1.196252 2.954971 11.89671 11.89671 -7.72 l 200.2 5.045873 1.53519 3.347519 13.47711 13.47711 -6.14 l 245.2 6.18006 1.880263 3.704684 14.91506 14.91506 -4.70 l 261 6.578286 2.001421 3.822181 15.3881 15.3881 -4.23 l 306 7.712473 2.346494 4.138583 16.66194 16.66193 -2.96 FORMULAS FOR APPENDIX "R" TABLES:

1 l MUT LS=P W/O BWST F (in) = This is the MUT Level that results in a Tie-In Point Pressure l that equals the BWST Pressure with a 44.9ft Level and no tank out flow.

a: = (BWST STATICJHd+Hd Loss all MUT Flow -(Reg S-P)*2.3106 -

122.58 + 104.75)*11+ 2.7 2.3106ft / psi = conversion psi to ft water (DI5 p. B-11) 122.58ft = Plant Elevation of MUT Level Instrument Lower tap (Section V.7) 104.75ft = Plant Elevation of Tie-In Point (Section V.7) 2.7in = Level Instrumentation error (Section V.7) l (aal) from MUT startinh@ 55' = This is the volume from the MUT to reach [MUT L@=P l W/O BWST F (in)) wilen starting form 55" indicated.

a: = IF [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)) >55 = 0 b: =lF [MUT L@SP W/O BWST F (in)) - 2.7 > -3 = (55-[MUT L@= P W/O BWST F (in)))*30.84,- G 1 30.84 gal / in MUT Level = Conversion for in of MUT level to gal (Section V.1) I 2.7in = Level Instrumentation error (Section V.7) (

-3in = Distance below the MUT Level Instrument Lower tap to end of straight cylindrical part of tank G

V

=

g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 83 of_Ig_

COCUMENT OENTIFCATON NO. REWSON MAR,CGWHi PELHE/SP NUMBEH/F LE M94-OO53 3 SP94477 FORMULAS FOR APPENDIX 'R" TABLES (CONTINUED):

c; =lF [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)) - 2.7 >[ Vortex level all MUT f!ow(in)) =

1705.452+302 0.5*Pl0/3*((19.61 +[MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)]-2.7)/12)^2* (238.48-

[MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)]-2.7)/12*7.48 d; =lF [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)) - 2.7 < [ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)) =

1705.452+302-n/3*((19.61 +[ Vortex leyel all MUT flow (in)))/12)^2* (238.48-

[ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)))/12*7.48)))

This formula is the same as the preceding except that [ Vortex Level all MUT tiow(in)) is used in place of [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F(in)}

1705.452 gal = water in straight cylindrical part of tank from low level alarm less Instrument error times gal / in = (55-2.7-(-

3))*30.85 30.84 gal / in MUT Level = Conversion for in of MUT level to gal (Section V.1) 2.7in = Level Instrumentation error (Section V.7)

-3in = Distance below the MUT Level Instrument Lower tap to end of straight cylindrical part of tank S 302 gal = water in tank bottom head below the straight cylindrical section =

46.53*7.48-1.5*30.84 =i301.7844 46.53ft3 = total volume of tank head (Section V.1)

1. Sin = length of straightiflange (Section V.1) 7.4pl / ft3 = Conversion of ft3 to gal (DIS p. B-11) 30.tyal / in MUT Level = Conversion for in of MUT levei to gal (Section V.1)

Formula for volume of spherical cap from Dl11 (pg. 2-13) is (n x h^2) / 3 x (

3 x r - h). This is a approximation because the head is not a Sphere (Section V.1). ^^'

h = distance from sphere surface to cut plane = 19.61 + MUT L@=P W/O

'~

BWST F (in) 19.61in = distance frors tank head bottom to lower level tap

= 16.55 + 1.5+ 0.13'12T(Section V.1 and R8) r = radius of sphere = 89.44 in (Section V.1) volume = (n x ( 19.61 + MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in))^2 ) / 3 x ( 3x 89.44

- 19.61 - MUT L@ = P W/O BWST F (in))

l combining terms volume = n x ( 19.61 + MUT L@= P W/O BWST F (in/12))^2 ) / 3 x ( 248.71

- MUT L@= P W/O BWST F (in)/12 substituting -3 for MUT Level and converting from ft' to gal (7.49 gal / ft')

314.7938 = n*((19.61 +-3)/12)^2/3*(248.71--3)/12*7.48 9 B., C ~~w

DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION

@ Epadds DOCUMENT CENTIFICATON HQ.

N Crystal River Unit 3 HEVISON MAR /CGW54PELHE/ SP NUMtsER, FILf.

Sheet 64 of_Z9_

M94 0053 3 SP94-077 FORMULAS FOR APPENDIX "R" TABLES (CONTINUED):

Because this is an approximation a term is change to force the formula to return a head volume of 302 302 =n*((19.61 +-3)/12)^2/3*(238.48-3)/12*7.48 Therefore the formula used above is:

volume (gal) = n*((19.61 + MUT L@= P W/O BWST F (in))/12)^2/3*(238.48-MUT L@= P W/O BWST F (in))/12*7.48 l Time Seament 1(min) = This is the time required to reach [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)]

a; = [(gal) from MUT starting @ 55"] / [ Volume loss (gpm)]

l BWST L@ = P W/ BWST F (ft) = This is the BWST Level with flow from tank that results in a l Tie-In Point Pressure equaling the MUT Pressure at [(MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)].

a; = IF [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)]<55 = [(MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)] - 2.7) /12

-[MUT Flow Hd Loss]+[BWST Flow Hd Loss] + (Regulator S-P)

  • 2.3106 + 122.58 -

l 119.17 + 0.46 b; = iF [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)] > 55 = (55 - 2.7) /12 - [MUT Flow Hd Loss +

l BWST Flow Hd Loss) + (Regulator S-P)

  • 2 3106 + 122.58 - 119.17 +0.46 1 2.3106ft / psi = conversion psi to ft water (DIS p. B-11) 122.58ft = Plant Elevation of MUT Level Instrument Lower tap (Section V.7) 2.7in = Level Instrumentation error (Section,V.7) l 119.17ft = Conversion of BWST Level Instrument indication to Plant Elevation, including Instrument error. (Section V.3) g l 0.46 ft = Vac. Breaker set-pt l (gal) from BWST startino @ 44.9' =This is the volume from the BWST to reach [BWST L@ =

l P W/ BWST F (ft)] when starting from 44.9ft. . g a; =lF [BWST L@=P W/ BWST F (ft)]<44.9 = (44.9-[BWST L@=P W/ BWST F (ft))]*9400 f b; =lF [BWST L@=P W/ BWST F (ft)]>44.9 = 0 ~

p 9400 gal / ft BWST Level = Conversion for ft of BWST level to gal ection V.9) l Time Segment 2(min) = This is the time required to reach [BWST L@ = P W/ BWST F (ft)].

a; = [(gal) from BWST starting @ 44.9'] / [ Volume loss (gpm)]

l BWST L(ft)when@MUT L=Vtx L = This is the BWST Level that resulth in a T j Pressure equaling the MUT Pressure when the MUT is at its vortex level. There are two s l possible MUT vortex levels, one with all flow from the MUT and one for split flow from the l MUT and BWST.

I a; = IF [MUT L@ = P W/O SWST F (in)) - 2.7 < [ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)] = - 119.17 +

l 0.46 - [MUT Flow Hd Loss] + (Regulator S-P)

  • 2.3106 + [ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)]

/12 + 122.58 m.,

m

l i

0 g DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 65 of _Zi. ,

w m coacAnm oc.

ms,w m ico m i m m sen w s w s a M94-0053 3 SP94477 l

FORMULAS FOR APPENDIX "R" TABLES (CONTINUED):

b; = IF [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)) - 2.7 > [ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)) - 119.17 +

0.46 - MUT Flow Hd Loss + BWST Flow Hd Loss + (Regulator S-P)

  • 2.3106 + [ Vortex level (in) part BWST flow) / 12 + 122.58 2.3106ft / psi = conversion psi to ft water (DIS p. B-11) 122.58ft = Plant Elevation of MUT Level Instrument Lower tap (Section V.7) 119.17ft = Conversion of BWST Level Instrument indication to Plant Elevation, including instrument error. (Section V.3) 0.46 ft = Vac. Breaker set-pt l (cal) from BWST& MUTafter S 2 = This is the combined volume from the MUT and BWST to reach the MUT Vortex level after the first two time segments.

a; = IF [BWST L(ft)when@MUT L=Vtx L] < 44.9 = (44.9 - [BWST  ;

L(ft)when@MUT L=Vtx L])* 9400 - [(gal) from BWST starting @ 44.9'] + 1705.425 +

l 302 - n / 3 * ((19.61 + [ Vortex level (in) part BWST flow]) / 12)^2 * (238.48 - [ Vortex  !

level (in) part BWST flow]) /12 *7.48 - [(gal) from MUT starting @ 55"]

b; = IF [BWST L(ft)when@MUT L=Vtx L] > 44.9 = 0 + 1705.425 + 302 -n / 3 * (19.61 + ,

[ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)]) / 12)^2 * (238.48 - [ Vortex level all MUT* flow (in)]) /12 * '

l 7.48 - [(gal) from MUT starting @ 55"]

a) 9400 gal / ft BWST Level = Conversion for ft of BWST level to gal (Seh' tion V.9) 1 1705.452 gal = water in straight cylindrical part of tank from low level alarm less Instrument error times gal / in = (55-2.7-(-3))*30.85 9 Formula for volume in curved section of head developed above.

'l Time Seoment 3(min) = This is the time to reach the MUT vortex level after Time Segment 2 a; = [(gal) from BWST& MUTatter S 2) / Volume loss (gpm) "L ,

Tbtal time (min) = This is a summation of all time segments

~

'ai = [ Time Segment 1] + [ Time Segment 2] + [ Time Segment 3] 7

~

Total time (hr) = This is conversion of min to hr a; = [ Total time (min)) / 60 BWST L(ftiwhen@MUT L= 18 or O' = This determination is necessary for the 18" and 0" determination of operator action required.

a; = IF [MUT L@= P W/O BWST F (in)] - 2.7 < [ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)] = - 119.17 +

0.46 - [MUT Flow Hd Loss] + (Regulator S P)

  • 2.3106 + 18 or 0 /12 + 122.58 b; = IF [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)] - 2.7 > [ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)] - 119.17 +

0.46 - [MUT Flow Hd Loss ] + [BWST Flow Hd Loss] + (Regulator S-P)

  • 2.3106 + 13 l gr Q /12 + 122.58

g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION O@ DOCUMLNT OENTW CAf10N NO.

Crystal River Unit 3 HEWSON MAA/CGWRjPEERE/$P NUMhERjFILE Sheet so of_ZA.

M94-OO53 3 SP94 077 FORMULAS FOR APPENDIX "R" TABLES (CONTINUED):

l Time to 18" ooen BWST(min) = This is determination of operator action requirement, a; = IF [BWST L(ft)when@MUT L= 18"] > 44.9' = (55-18)*30.84)/ Volume loss (gpm) b; = IF [BWST L(ft)when@MUT L= 18" ]< 44.9' AND IF [MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)) -

l 2.7 > [ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)) = (( 44.9 119.17 + 0.46 - MUT Flow Hd Loss +

BWST Flow Hd Loss + (Regulator S-P)

  • 2.3106 + 18 /12 + 122.58 ) X 9400 + (55-18)*30.84)) / Volume loss (gpm) c; = IF [BWST L(ft)when@MUT L= 18" ]< 44.9' AND IF MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in) -

l 2.7 < Vortex level all MUT flow (in) = ( ( 44.9 - 119.17 + 0.46 - MUT Flow Hd Loss +

(Regulator S-P)

  • 2.3106 + 18 /12 + 122.58 ) X 9400 + (55-18)*30.84) ) / Volume loss (gpm) l Time to oreclude 0" MUT L (min) = This is determination of operator action requirement.

a; = IF [BWST L(ft)when@MUT L= 0"] > 44.9' = (55)*30.84)/ Volume loss (gpm) b; = IF [BWST L(ft)when@MUT L= 0" ]< 44,9' AND IF[ MUT L@=P W/O BWST F (in)) - s l 2.7 > [ Vortex level all MUT flow (in)] = [ ( 44.9 - 119.17 + 0.46 - [MUT Flow Hd Loss) +

[BWST Flow Hd Loss] + (Regulator S-P)

  • 2.3106 + 0 /12 + 122.58 ) X 9400 + .c (55)*30.84) ] / Volume loss (gpm) m a c; = IF [BWST L(ft)when@MUT L= 0"] < 44.9' AND IF [MUTL@=P W/O BWST F (in)) - 2.7 l < { Vortex level all MUT flow (in)] = [ ( 44.9 - 119.17 + 0.46 - [MUT Flow Hd Loss ]+ i  !

(Regulator S-P)

  • 2.3106 + 0 /12 + 122.58 ) X 9400 + (55)*30.84) ] / Volume loss (gpm)

~

isolate MUT &/or isolate and vent Gas = Total time (min) and (hr) p, ] ;g 73

__7 7 R.

@ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION

~n %,a a m o no Sheet 67 of _Zg_

o. =ws.0,. %wwmmm. uoma,,u M94-OO53 3 SP94-077 APPENDIX "R" TABLES:

SYSTEM FLOWS W / HEAD LOSSES AND VORTEX LEVELS ALL FLOW FROM CASE 15 CASE 9 CASE 14 CASE 13 CASE 12 CASE 11 CASE 10 CASE 16 MUT MUP FL(gpm) 160.1 168 178.3 200.2 245.2 261 306 168 Hd Loss (ft) 2.52 2.77 3.09 3.87 5.76 6.49 8.88 2.77 Vortex level all MUT -7.57 -7.27 -6.90 -6.14 -4.70 -4.23 -2.96 -7.27 flow (in)

FLOW SPLIT CASE 15A CASE 9A CASE 14A CASE 13A CASE 12A CASE 11 A CASE 10A CASE 16A MUT/BWST MUT FL(gpm) III 111 156 111 156 111 156 156 Hd Loss (ft) 1.24 1.24 2.41 1.24 2.41 1.24 2.41 2.41 BWST FL(gpm) 49.1 57 22.3 89.2 89.2 150 150 12 Hd Loss (ft) 0.084477 0.112457 0.02011 0.255071 0.255071 0.673289 0.673289 0.006677 Voetex level (in) part -9.58 -9.58 -7.72 -9.58 -7.72 -9.58 -7.72 -7.72 BWST flow Volume loss (gpm) 49.1 57 22.3 89.2 89.2 150 150 12

't ,

h

?

re

_y

-l he N O

DESIGN ANALYSIS /CALCUL.ATION '

  • N Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 68 of _Zf_

oocuwon amcco. o. aws& uwcowajeum,se e.uustaf e u M94-0053 3 SP94477  ;

APPENDIX "R" TABLES (Continuedh 16.5 psig REGULATOR SET-POINT CASE 15 l CASE 9 CASE 14 CASE 13 CASE 12 CASE 11 CASE 10 CASE 16 Reg SP(psig)l 16.5 (W/O LD) (LD to BT) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/LD)

MUT L@= P W/O 67.86 70.76 74.61 84.05 106.64 115.46 144.12 70.76 BWST F (in)

(gal) from MUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 starting @ 55" Time Segment 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (min) l CASE 15A CASE 9A CASE 14A CASE 13A CASE 12A CASE 11 A CASE 10A CASE 16A BWST L@= P W/ 45.20 45.22 43.97 45.37 44.20 45.78 44.62 43.95 BWST F (ft)

(gel) from BWST 0.00 0.00 8786.45 0.00 6577.82 0.00 2646.57 8912.73 starting @ 44.9' ,

Time Segment 2 0.00 0.00 394.01 0.00 73.74 0.00 17.64 742.73 (min)

BWSTLwhen@MUT 40.04 40.07 38.96 40.21 39 20 40.63 39.62 38.95 L=Vtx L(ft)

(gal) from BWST 47588.52 47325.50 48867.98 45984.92 48867.98 42053.68 48867.96 48867.98

& MUT Seg 3 Time Segment 3 969.22 830.27 2191.39 515.53 547.85 280.36 325.79 4072.33 (min)

Total time (min) 969.22 830.27 2585.40 515.53 621.59 280.36 343.43 4815.06 Total time (br) 16.15 13.84 43.09 8.59 10.36 4.67 5.72 80.25 OPERATOR ACTIONS REQUIRED Time to 18", open 513.79 437.97 1650.04 264.84 387.75 131.28 204.37 3076.84 BWST(min) ^

Time to preclude O' ' 812.27 695.07 2307.22 > 429.13 [ 552.04 228.98 302.07 4298.10 .

MUT L(min) l 1solate MUT 969.22 830.27 2585.40 515.53 'r 621.59 280.36 343.43 4815.06 i

&/or (min) 1:

Isolate and 16.15 13.84 43.09 8.59 10.36 4.67 5.72 80.25 (br) vent Gas 1

9 mm uim cuo. wo.

M94-0053 da DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 wwww.

3 wg cc,%eum,se muuas eu SP94477 Sheet 69 of lf_

APPENDIX "R" TABLES (Continued):

17 psig REGULATOR SET-POINT CASE 15 CASE 9 CASE 14 CASE 13 CASE 12 CASE 11 CASEt0 CASE 16 RegSP(psig)l 17 (W/O LD) (LD to BT) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/LD)

MUT L@= P W/O 67.86 70.76 74.61 84.05 106.64 115.46 144.12 70.76 BWST F(in)

(gal) from MUT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 starting @ 55' Time Segment 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (min)

CASE 15A CASE 9A CASE 14A CASE 13A CASE 12A CASE 11A CASE 10A CASE 16A BWST L@=P W/ 45.20 45.22 43.97 45.37 44.20 45.78 44.62 43.95 BWST F( ft)

(gel)from BWST 0.00 0.00 8786.45 0.00 6577.82 0.00 2646.57 8912.73 starting @ 44.9' Time Segment 2 0.00 0.00 394.01 0.00 73.74 0.00 17.64 742.73 (min) 4 BWST Lh@*@MUT L = '% Lyt) 41.19 41.22 40.12 41.36 40.35 41.78 40.77 40.11 (gal) from BWST 36728.70 36465.68 38008.16 35125.10 38008.16 31193.86 38008.16 38008.16

& MUT Seg 3 G 0 Time Segment 3 748.04 639.75 1704.40 393.78 426.10 207.96 255 39 3167.35 (min)

Total time (min) 748.04 639.75 2098.41 393.78 499.84 207.96 271.03 3910.07 Total time (br) 12.47 10.66 34.97 6.56 8.33 3.47 4.52 65.17 OPERATOR ACTIONS REQUIRED Time to 18*, open 292.61 247.44 1163.05 143.09 266.00 58.88 131.97 2171.86 BWST(min) 44 45, Time to preclude O' 591.09 504.55 1820.23 307.39 , . 430.30j ; ,156,58 229.68 3393.12

~ ' '

MUT L (rr!6)- !c rf 5 Isolate MUT (min) 748.04 639.75 2098.41 393.78 499.84 207,96 271.03 3910.07

&/or 'r isolate and (br) 12.47 10.66 34.97 6.56 8.33 3.47 4.52 65.17 vent Gas -

I em i

y m

  • :T-

@ g. DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 70 of 79 wcuutur ocuracarm so. stum u4a,cc.u,ettue,se suuatsj,,te M94-0053 3 SP94-077 APPENDIX 'R' TABLES (Continued):

18 psig REGULATOR SET POINT CASE 15 CASE 9 CASE 14 CASE 13 CASE 12 CASE 11 CASE 10 CASE 16 Reg SP(psig)l 18 (W/O LD) (LD to BT) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/LD)

MUT L@ = P W/O 23.57 26.47 30.32 39.76 62.35 71.17 99.83 26.47 BWST F (in) l (gal) from MUT 969.44 879.74 761.09 469.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 879.74 starting @ 55' I l

TimeSegmenti 19.74 15.43 34.13 5.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 73.31 (min)

CASE 15A CASE 9A CASE 14A CASE 13A CASE 12A CASE 11A CASE 10A CASE 16A BWST L@=P W/ 46.04 46.31 45.37 47.56 47.67 49.25 48.08 45.04 BWST F (ft)

(gal) from BWST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 starting @ 44.9' Time Segment 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 'O.00 0.00 ,

p (min) l C'

BWST L when @ 43.50 43.53 42.43 43.68 42.66 44.09 43.08 42.42

MUT L=Vtx L(ft) 4 9 (gal) from BWST 14039.62 13866.30 24313.87 12935.52 22866.33 9474.22 18935.09 24321.50 y & MUT Seg 3 is; M Time Segment 285.94 243.27 1090.31 145.02 256.35 63.16 '126.23 2026.79 i

, 3(min) '[

{T Total time (min) 305.68 258.70 1124.44 150.29 256.35 63.16 126.23 2100.10

, Total time (br) 5.09 4.31 18.74 2.50 4.27 1.05 !2.10 35.00 OPERATOR ACTIONS REQUIRED

g. Time to 18', open 23.24 20.02 189.08 12.79 22.51 7,61 y 7.61 361 89

' 3, BWST(min) C4

' i% o Time 2 preclude O' 148.73 123.50 846.26 63.89 186.80 11.79. L -.84'.882 ,1583.15

~

EN MUT L(min) 'ER Isolate MUT (min) 305.68 258.70 1124.44 150.29 256.35 63.16' 'o 126.23 2100J0 J &for lsolate and 4.27

+

1!

F] *

(br) 5.09 4.31 18.74 2.50 1.05 > >j 2.10 35.00 vent Gas O

yx U 7

77 @ g- DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 71 of_Zg_

~

CsOGJMLNT OENTIFICATION esO. HLMSKJN MASjCGWHjPiLAL/SP NUMBER Fn.E f

M94-0053 3 SP94477 APPENDIX "R" TABLES (Continuedh 19psig REGULATOR SET-POINT CASE 15 CASE 9 CASE 14 CASE 13 CASE 12 CASE 11 CASE 10 CASE 16 Reg SP(psig)l 19 (W/O LD) (LD to BT) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LDs (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/LD)

MUT L@= P W/O -1.46 1.45 5.29 14.73 37.32 46.14 74.00 1.45 BWST F (in)

(gal) from MUT 1750.78 1651.58 1532.93 1241.78 545.13 273.25 0.00 1651.58 starting @ 55" TimeSegmenti 35.66 28.98 68.74 13.92 6.11 1.82 0.00 137.63 (min)

CASE 15A CASE 9A CASE 14A CASE 13A CASE 12A CASE 11 A CASE 10A CASE 16A BWST L@=P W/ 46.27 46.54 45.60 47.79 48.50 50.82 50.39 45.27 BWST F (ft)

(gal) from BWST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 starting @ 44.9' TimeSegment2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (min)!

BWST L when @ 45.82 45.84 44.74 45.99 44.97 46.40 45.39 44.73 MUT L-Vti L(ft) l (gal) from BWST 94.91 186.33 1822.39 564.54 1217.40 1473.99 1703.95 1830.02_ I

& MUT Seg 3 TimeSegnient3 1.93 3.27 81.72 6.33 13.65 9.83 11.36 152.50 ,

(min)N j Total time (min) 37.59 32.24 150.46 20.25 19.76 11.65 11.36 290.13 Total time thr) 0.63 0.54 2.51 0.34 0.33 0.19 0.19 4.84 OPERATOR ACTIONS REQUIRED Time to 18'ropen 23.24 20.02 51.17 12.79 12.79 7.61 7.61 95.09 ; , I BWST(mio) q. l Time to preclude 9" -34.55 29.76 76.06 19.02 19.02 11.31 11.31 14L35.

MIR 1.( t%) ' "

'i# '

h[d,.

  • ]

lsolate MUTj (min) 37.59 32.24 150.46 20.25 19.76 11.65 11.36 290.13s

&for" ;;f ~T lsolalHnd} (br) 0.63 0.54 2.51 0.34 0.33 0.19 0.19 4.84 vent Gas I M

.,t5-M

g 9@

DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION i Crystal River Unit 3 ShanLZ2__ of _ZL

' occuuon encao. o. newso. m,co*a,etescise vuutaga.s i M94-0053 3 SP94477 APPENDIX 'R' TABLES (Continuedh 50 psig REGULATOR SET-POINT CASE 15 CASE 9 CASE 14 CASE 13 CASE 12 CASE 11 CASE 10 CASE 16 Reg SP(psig) l 50 (W/O LD) (LD to BT) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/O LD) (W/ LD) (W/LD)

WUT L@ VN L W/O 7.fi7 7.27 -6.90 -6.14 -4.70 -4.23 -2.96 7.27 BWST F M (gel) from MUT 1845.63 1837.90 1827.78 1806.32 1762.52 1747.24 1787.43 1837.90 starting @ 55' OPERATOR ACTIONS REQUIRED Time to 18*, open 23.24 20.02 51.17 12.79 12.79 7.61 7.61 95.09 BWST(min)

Time to O' MUT L 34.55 29.76 76.06 19.02 19.02 11.31 11.31 141.35 (min)

Isolate MUT (min) 37.57 32.16 81.50 20.01 19.26 11.30 10.86 152.74

'or Isolats and (br) 0.63 0.54 1.36 0.33 0.32 0.19 0.18 2.55 vent Gas SECTION VI- RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS The results of this Calculation Rev. 2 are presented for each section as follows: 1 T l Section V.11 ' Emergency Boration" Tables give MUT levels for the start of flow from the i BWST. CASE 9 & 9A appear to be close to anticipated plant conditions expected Post Rx l Trip with 45 gpm letdown to RC Bleed Tank to add BWST Borated Water to the RCS. For l CASE 9 & 9A water will start to flow from the BWST at 44.9' when the MUT is at 65.02" and l Maximum flow of 57 gpm will be reached by 63.36' MUT Level. Higher Letdown tiow to the RC Bleed Tank will result in _a lower MUT Level when at maximum flow, such as, Case 11 &

l 11A which is G2.77" for.150tpm. Vortexing could be a concern during Emergency Boration if the MUT level were to, goselow O' Indication, . l i M;rT

s --

1 1

Section V.12 "Appenh Concerns" The Tables give the time for operator action to ope, the BWST Isolation Valve and to Isolate the MUT from the MUPs or Isolate and vent the overpressure gas from the tank to prevent MUT from reaching the critical level for Vortexing to begin. The isolation of the MUT from the MUPs prevents gas from getting into the pumps but seal return and MUP recirculation will continue to fill the tank requiring the isolation valve to be periodically opened to drain the tank down. The isolation and venting of the MUT cover gas allows the BWST pressure to equal that of the MUT at higher levels and MUT 4 level decrease is then slower because it is following the BWST Level decrease. Flow Vortexing is a concern in this part of the calculation because relatively high flows continue through the tank because MUP recirculation and RCP Seal return are not isolated (no ES Signal). , t w

u r.

,- m Ns/

2 j

. ./

g. DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 73 of Ig_

O e n-.a a m ona.e M94 0053

=-

3

- .u m ,

SP94477

,, u SECTION VI - RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS (Continued)

Section V5 'MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION, INCLUDING HENRY'S LAW EFFECTS

  • and V10 " CALCULATION OF MINIMUM MUT PRESSURES TO PRECLUDE EXCEEDING TANK CAPABILITY OF -11.72 psig WHEN DRAINED DOWN TO THE TIE IN  ;

POINT' are presented on a EXCEL Graph, for maximum Indicated Overpressure as a l function of MUT Indicated Level for Four BWST Switch Over to RB Sump Recirculation Levels and minimum pressure to maintain press. Indication over the normal operating range.

70 00 i

r 80 00  !

[

, } l i 1

-+-1F BWST S/O LEVEL / g 2 00 -G-10 BWST S/O LEVEL / /

F BWST S/O LEVEL I I

-M-0 BWST S/O LEVEL  !

--W-REAUSTIC MINIMUM PRESSURE IA 3 f f jl

-+-IDEAL &#NIMUM PRESSURE i f / / I I

a[ /

/ f A l $ / / E

/ / / /

y on $ / / /

/ F / X l l x

/

/

J

/

J

/

y Af l )[ )

20 00 f / f,k I  ;

/!l ,/ ./

_2 AF

,f M

i d((/

l n

,,,,,n l}#

  1. l j#

/

/

y a @u.r-- 1717 /

W _~'" *. .

" AF

- /

ys V l r% s '

/

,r# i - r +,

gl"-T a_r -

-- i w &a je'&

"' r '

0 00,e d ^e

= * ,'.-v ar'e  !

l M--

"_+

I ,

J,

i i i i l i }i e .2 .h I

.t o to ,_.. _ . -

m .. . . .

2

. i i i i i ,. __.

mr==i. wn 4%%sy = = w> g M w, -

%.%6=-.*@

,V ,,

p i mm _

ij i.

0 10 20 30 40 50 00 70 80 90 100 Mt.TT 1 IND6CATED LEVEL pn) u mn l

1

{V &e mG}

DESIGN ANALYSIS./ CALCULATION NV) Crystal River Unit 3 i

Sheet 74 of ,2)_

em -m concenom m eso, m.cc.*vus,se wwu u Ca M94 0053 3 SP94477 1

SECTION VI- RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS (Continued)

Section V5 'MUT - 1 OVERPRESSURE DETERMINATION, INCLUDING HENRY'S LAW EFFECTS" and V10 " CALCULATION OF MINIMUM MUT PRESSURES TO PRECLUDE EXCEEDING TANK CAPABluTY OF -11.72 psig WHEN DRAINED DOWN TO THE TIE-IN POINT" are presented on a EXCEL Graph, for maximum Indicated Overpressure as a function of MUT Indicated Level for Four BWST Switch Over to RB Sump Recirculation Levels and minimum pressure to maintain press. Indication over the normal operating range 7e ao

~

eo ao 7 l

/ i

-~~

/ l

-E--15' BWST So LEVEL f '

~~~

~~~

-M-17 BWST SC LEVEL g 3

-*- 5' 8WST SC LEVEL r r 50.o0 ---- -e g BWST SC LEVEL  !  ! '

b ---

--$-REAUSTIC MIN. PRESS.

>/ /

Q [ [

m 4

l '

./

/

/

W/

, eco /

l / ,

/ .1 / / l e

,){ / / )l 3 / / /

30 00 < - -\il ,,,,-,

)f'/

g

/ ) (

j

/ l 4

i

{E _

, / / / '

/

I

, Af , s / ,

3f 3p f , ) t' ,

,o* N )

^

M 00! ' /# # s d'" /

s ' s / #

W~w (

p p/ , ,,,, *" ,,

,,,,, s T '

AF yf

# (( _.

10 00 AW- -

-f l#, #

I 3

Am O eTTi1 e .0 ; - i' 1 55 00 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 MUT 11NDIC ATED LEVEL (In) m.,

m ,

~

,m

/

r '?) DESIGN ANALYSIS./ CALCULATION

('% s l,/ Crystal River Unit 3 Q Sheet 75 ofJg_

Q/ occuute weeoro,e M94 OO53 v.so.

3 m com,m%,se we su SP94477 ,

1 I

SECTION VI - RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS (Continued) l Section V5 also compared the Rev. 2 and Rev. 3 Allowable Overpressers as well as an Allowable Overpressure based on using Nominal Parameters, the Annunciator Alarm and Computer Alert Curves are also shown below:

70.00

/.

~

60.00 / -

-+- ALL NOMINAL PARAMETERS /

-e- Rev. 3 .'/

ALLOWABLE /

--*- Rev. 2 /

50.00 ALLOWABLE /

-M-ANNUNCIATOR /

ALARM /

-e-COMPUTER /

Q $ / )

b 40.00 g w _f ./

k, b ./ W y I. S / / fy Y h / / //

'/ T 30.00  ! ' )  !

y

/ / /)f E

. dF Jf/

Jf .d A s/ Y b$ . a f , db W / 1

' .' . !!,: : '. J

20'00 "#

.j!h W A! # ar g.;/

A7 3 ;q i

J

(*p

.w ,

!. d" 4

  • hi! -

^'

lyd p

p[

  • .%F i

1 __..

l 10'00 r%A'b a- -

l

\ \

I i

! I i

] o oo .

I I;____

d 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 MUT-1 INDICATED LEVEL (in) i WW U '.,

~

n @ g DESIGN ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Crystal River Unit 3 Sheet 76 of.11.

DOCUMLNT IDENTVCAryON #80. FEVISION MM4/ COWH/PLLHL/SP NUMBERjFLE M94-0053 3 SP94477 SECTION Vil- ATTACHMENTS

1. Data extracted from Calculation 190-0024 Rev. 5, Sheets 1 through 18.
2. Data extracted from Calculation M930046 Rev. O. Sheet 1 through 4.

l 3. E Mc!! SGUTHERM tc RCL^.USON Octed 11/2/04 ,1 Shect.

4. EOP-08 Rev. 2 Sheet 1 and 2.
5. Data extracted from Calculation M91-0072 Rev.1, Sheet 1 through 5.
6. Data extracted from BAW -1385 Rev. 6, Dec 1992 Sheets 1 through 11.
7. EXCEL Spread Sheets 1 through 17, " Explanation of MUT Pressure Responses"
8. BWNT Letter FPC-95-020 Feb.1,1995, "BWNT Review of Calculation No. M94-0053, Rev.

O", Shest 1 through 4.

9. " Vortices at intakes in conventional sumps", Water Power, March 1972, Reddy and Pickford (2 sheets). 3
10. " VORTEX FORMATION AT VERTICAL PIPE INTAKES", JOURNAL OF THE HYDRAULICS DIVISION OCTOBER 1978, Akalank K, Jain, Kittur G. Ranga Raju, and Ramachandra J.  ;

Garde, M. ASCE, Sheets 1 through 10.

11. " WEAK VORTICES AT VERTICAL INTAKES", JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING, Vol.

113 No. 9 September,1987, John S. Gulliver, M. ASCE, and Alan J. Rinde!s, Sheets 1 through 9 . i ..

I f- -

-p l 12. " INTERNAL FLOW SYSTEMS DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE PREDICTION", Second Edition, -

l DonaldsS. Miller, Gulf Publishing, Houston (Air Science Company, Corning, N.Y.) (1990). .

jj l

4 V

3 FAsIN

O mummusumammuuuuus ANALYS F/ CALCULATION Doc to ,h.17&O0f3 y FIGURE 1 ATT#

REV 1 4 Z . S'452T / _op /7 BWST

-tw TANK

~

' N)

O rMw-1

( 14' MUV44 MUP-1C 14' g ,

i 6 x N X X MUV-58 MUV-60 MUV-82 MUV43 1

- TIE 4N l ,

POINT

-l ! i N 1 )

4I r_

MUP 1 A MUP-1B S'

x N >< >< l

""v '> ""v- ""v4' ""v-**

O --

1 ANALYS:S/ CALCULATION FIGURE 2 Doc to e M 9'/'0063 ATT # I REV 2 SHEET 1 OF lW Ak j

1 JL l __ A i

/

' 7.9375 ID m,

- 4 s

10.0' a

}- 13.42 o

10.25 i  !

j a _ _ _ .

r.

__1_.

i i

4 ( Ak - ik i

[' 0.13' l if l j 1r e

1 1 /k

( j j _

3.42 3r

+

o 2 3.29 f i, fI 4;

if

,l if

}- .,

.as .

MdT-1 Makeup Tank, I

L i

1 Physical Dimensions taken from Reference 19

)

i j

NOTE: Tank levels are measured from lower tank level Instru 1

1 k i j .

yQ5s95gk OZ go5i4?Sg 8 e b$Q

>M

  • o-n

%K 0

0 1

s i2 5

- 9

! Wum "

/ Cu 0 9

F(e -

E._w3-, 5 Ec t 2u .S; -

6 8 J O fs o .

F nw V.n E R

ec.,

/ T N (M u STe l-4ia PWm S

Em a y-T.

A c 0

8 M\

TVui i n D-L~

R F5j-A9- f , 5 7

Sn u -

/ Mw Y

l 0

7 Weuu

/ \

1(u

- 6 5

/ , 0

- 6 )

e r

u [l y 5 I

(

n s

s 3r p h>

e h

/

5 0

le v

e U Er ev t

' 73 L 5 L

r e

, RO R@M.t v

sS . 5 t a

O u aO 4 D

_/ W F E, Uk n 1 N

M- - 0 d R E T~

E-GT I

o PS Fs c H S T.A,I 3..~

lW a4 ._

- 4 t e

o c

Fp u 0 ,;

01 _

bh - - 5 id e TE 3 n k

a p I M

N _

- 3 0

/-

[ .

b . 5 2

. . /e ~

0

. .~

i

, 2

, 5

.a _ .,

1 s 0 1

' , 5

- , 0 l

o 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 4 3 6 5 g .

?e 2 gy .

g _.o b e 3 m O

TA 10 s 7 f3 ATT # / "A"IDG LOADS WITH "S" EDG FAILURE SHEET 1 OF 4 AT10I l AND EFIC FLOW UMITER INSTALLED iMM LONkQt) NCEWOD!

EFP1 SWP.1A RWP.2A 3 DHP1A 85P.1 A MUP1A FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW (GPM) (GPM) (GPM)

(GPM) (GPM)

(GPM)

TIME Large Break LOCA 14.4 Sq. f t. - 8500 15500 3250 1600 355 600 Auto Start Flows - 8500 15500 3250 1600 1M 600

- 8500 15500 3250 1600 3M 600 '

- 8500 15500 3250 1600 f 10 M 600

- 8500 15500 3250 1600 30 M 600

- 8500 15500

- 3250 1300 1HR Chg.To Recir. - 8500 15500

- 3250 1300 1 Day

- 8500 15500 17 Day - 3250 B5 Terminated Int. Break LOCA 0.5 Sq. ft. 8500 15500

- 1600 860 355 600 I I'uto start Flows 346 8500 15500

- 1600 1M 600 15500 h 600 100 1600

.,8500 .

2M 15500 1600

- 8500 600 100 3M 15500 1600

- 8500 4M 600 3250

- 8500 15500 3250 1600 10 M 600

- 8500 15500 3250 1600 30 M 600

- 8500 15500

- 3250 1300 Chg. To Redr!, 1HR 15500 f 3250 1300

- 8500 t .% i d 1 Day

.; Q y~1 jj - 3250

- - 500 1)500, t 7 Day ' '

[. l 55Termi'nated . .. .r

jj int. 8re ak'LOCA 0.07 Sq. f t.

- - 860.. [ 8500 15500

  • 355 600 Auto start Flows I 8500 15500

- 860 1M 600 8500 15500

- 1600 452 2M 600 8500 15500

- 1600 336 l 3M 600 8500 15500

- 1600 183 10 M 600 8500 15500

- 1600 183 30 M 600

- 8500 1550C

- 1600 1HR 600

EFP-1 Use EFP 2 - 8500 1550C 700 1300 3HR 600

- 8500 1550C-x IChg.To Chg. to DHR,85 Term Recir. 1 Day 3250 3250

- - 8500 155CC

ANALYS.S/ CALCULATION

~

DOC 10 e MiY-Nf3 ATT # l TA8'LII

  • REV._ 1 SHEET I OF ) [ "A EDG LOA 05'WITH ~5" EDG FelLURE SHEET 2 0F 4 f
  • vlTH LPt/EFW LOAD SEQUENCE MODIFICATTUN AND EFI' FLOW UMITER EFP.1 SWP1A ItNP 2/

MUP1A DHP.1 A 85'P 1 A FLOW ;

FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW (GPM) (GPM) (GPM) l (GPM) (GPM) (GPM)

TIME int. Break LOCA 0.04 Sq. Ft.

. . 860 8500 15500l 35 5 600 AutoStart Flows 8500 15500

. - 860 1M 600

. . 361 8500 15500 ,

3M 600

. 183 8500 15500 10 M 600

- 183 8500 15500 30 M 600 183 8500 15500 600 - 1600 33 M BSPLoaded - 8500 15500 600 - 1600 1HR Sec EFP-1 Use EFP.2 . 8500 15500 600 700 1300 l Chg.To Recir. 3.25 HR

. 8500 1 Day . 3250 1550C Chg.To DHR Small Break LOCA 0.01 Sq. Ft. 1550'

. 860 8500 355 600 , .

( iuto Start Flows 8500 1550

. - 860 1M 600

.s

. 860 8500 1550'-

2M 600 15$0 ;

. 765 8500 3M 600 f 8500 155b

. - 559 4M 600 8500 155C

. . 312 10 M 600 .

. 256 8500 155C 600 l: .  :

30 M

. . 8500 ISSC

' 1HR 600 . q,,

Sec EFP-1 O F2 .

- - 8500 .155Ci

. $ ,p 10.5 HR 600 700 10 7 :

Chg.To Recirg - - 8500 3#155'l

93 Chg.To'DHR: e 10ay - 3250

. 8500 1_

L 17 Day . 3250 i

O

4 -

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION DOCIDeM if-c04"7 ATT# l ne rn *, PUMP FL W5 TH EFP 2 FAILU SHEET 1OF3 A9grq$1ENd OUlbbin A'?D EFIC FLOW UM111RINSTALLED EFP 1 SWP1A RWP.2A MUP1A DHP1A 85P 1 A FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW (GPM) (GPM) (GPM)

(GPM) (GPM) (GPM)

TIME Large Break LOCA 14.4 Sq. Ft.

- 4400 8550 600 3250 1600 AutostartFlows 355

- 4400 8550 600 3250 1600 10 M

- 4400 8550

- 3250 1300 Chg.To Recir. 30 M

- 4400 8550

- 3250 1300 1HR

- 4400 8550

- 3250 1300 1 Day

- - 4400 8550 17 Day - 3250 ._

85 Terminated l Int. Break LOCA 0.5 Sq. Ft.

860 4400 8550 600 - 1600 Auto 5 tart Flows 355

- 4400 8550 600 100 1600 2M

- 4400 8550 .

600 3250 1600 4M

- 4400 8550 600 3250 1600 10 M

- 4400 8550 j

- 3250 1300 l To Retir. 30 M 4400 8550 1" HR

- 3250 1300 f

- 4400 8550 3250 1300 IDay -

4400 8550

- 3250 - -

l 85 ferminated 17 Day Int. Sreak LOCA 0.07 Sq. Ft.

- 860 4400 8550 I 355 600 Auto Start Flows 8550

- 1600 860 4400 85P Loaded 2N

. ... . L ;

600 ,

530 4400 8550 1600 4q,j' 600 l 4400 8550

- 1600 366 10NL 600

.J .

366 4400 8550 600 - 1600 By-Pass LPI ;30 M 366 4400 8550 600 700 1300 Chg. To Recir. 1.5 > R 366 4400 8550 600 700 1300 3HR

- - 4400 8550 1 Day - 3250 Chg. to DHR, B5 Term 8550

- - 4400 1-7 Day - 3250 O

(

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION

' TA8L64 DOC 10 o_A9Y-co(3 ATT # l '

. A' EDG PUMP FLOWS WITH EFP 2 FAILUR SHEET 2 OF 3

  • *14 bkI7t! EN6M 10N AND EFIC FLOW UMITER INSTALLED l

MUP1A DHP1A BSP 1 A EFP 1 SWP1A RWP2 FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW l

TIME (GPM) (GPM) (GPM) (GPM) (GPM) (G PM.

I I 1 Int. 8reak LOCA 0.04 Sq. Ft. l 600 - - 860 4400 8550 Auto 5 tart Flows 355 600 - 722 4400 855C 1 3M -

600 366 4400 4550

! 10 M - -

30 M 600 - - 366 4400 8550; j 1

' 8550 '

33 M 600 - 1600 366 4400 j 85P Loaded 1.8 HR 600 700 1300 366 4400 8550l i Chg.To Recir.

i

' 3 HR 600 700 1300 366 4400 8550 1

10ay - 3250 - - 4400 855C(

l Chg.To DHR, B5 Term

' 8550<

17 Day - 3250 - - 4400 Small Break LOCA 0.015q. Ft.

j O Auto Start Flows 355 600 - - 860 860 4400 4400 855C 855C

( 4M 600 , - -

624 4400 855C I 10M 600 - -

512 4400 855C 30 M 600 - -

! 512 4400 855C

) 1HR 600 - -

700 - 512 4400 855C Chg. To Recir. 5.25 HR 600 l

- 3250 - - 4400 855(

Chg. To DHR 1 Day 4

- - 4400 855C 17 Day -

{3250 l

Steamline 8reakinside R8 pl .l f

Auto Start Flows 355 600I -

,] - 860 4400 855(

no 860 4400 855 i

By-Pass HPl 10 M 295 t - -

l 4400 855; 30 M 295 - - 860

- 670 4400 855C 1HR 295 -

- 3250 - 670 4400 855' Chg. to DHR 1 Day

}

670 4400 855C 17 0ay - 3250 -

!O 4

k ..

9 ANALYS;S/ CALCULATION '

LAttE t

oc so (M9y.cor y ATT a / '8" E >G LOAD 5 WITH "A" EDG FAILURE 5 V /W 5HEET 10F 3 INSTALLED

'A55WLOANQtJfMCE9fhD181 CAT 100 "L

f ~

EFP1 SWP.18 Rwp.23 j

DHP 18 85R 18 MVP1C FLOW FLOW Flow l FLOW FLOW FLOW (GPM) (GPM) (GPM) i (GPM) (GPM)

TIME (GPM) -

i Large Sreek LOCA 14.14 Sq. f t. - 8500 15500 l l 3250 1600 355 600 Auto 5 tart Flows - 8500 15500 f 3250 1600 3M 600

- 8500 15500 3250 1600 10 h* 600

- 8500 15500

] 3250 1600 30 M 600

' 15500

- 8500

- 3250 1300 1HR Chg.To Recir. - 8500 15500

- 3250 1300 1 Day

- - f 8300 15500 3250 85 PumpTerminated 17 Day Int. Sreak LOCA 0.5 Sq. Ft. - 8500 15500

- 1600 355 600 I Auto Starts Flow - 8500 15500 100 1600 2M 600

- 8500 15500 100 1600 3M 600

.UP-4D Trip - 8500 15500

, 3250 1600 4M 600

(

- 8500 15500 3250 1600 10 M 600 '

- 8500 15500 3250 1600 30 M 600

- 8500 15500

- 3250 1300 1HR Chg.To Recir. - 8500 15500

- 3250 1300 1 Day  : - 8500 15500 17 Day - 3250 .

85 PumpTerminated j

Int. Sreok LOCA 0.07 Sq. Ft. 8500 15500 600

- !L .>.. -.

AutoStart Flows 355 i ' lit w cu

- 8500 15500

- 1 2M 600 D 8500 15500

. 1 3M 600 ,

- 8500 15500

- 1 10 M 600

- 8500 15500

- 1600 16 M 600

- 8500 15500

- 1600 30 M 600 By Pass LP1 - 8500 15500

- 1600 1HR 600

- 8500 15500 700 1300 3HR 600 Chg. To Recir. .. 8500 15500 1 Day

- 3250 N. To DHR, B5 Term - 8500 15500 17 Day - 3250 m

t i ANALYSIS / CALCULATION 74sts a 4

C10 M. N DO Q ATT , / *a" EDG LOADS WITH "A" EDG Fall SHEET 2 0F 3 ,

.m t ML E U40Se _ )NINSTAt. LED

RWP 28 85P 18 EFP 1 SWP18
MVP;1C DHP 18 FLOW '

FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW (GPM) (GPM) (GPM)

(GPM) (GPM)

' TIME (GPM) -

'f Int. 8reak LOCA 0.04 Sq. Ft.

- 8500 15500 l 355 600 - -

l Auto $ tart Flows - 8500 15500 1

3M 600

- - 8500 15500 10 M 600 8500 15500 l 30 M 600 - - -

f - 1600 - 8500 15500 33 M 600 8500 15500 l 1HR 600 - 1600 -

j - 8500 15500 600 700 1300 1

Chg To Re<ir. 3.25 HR j - - 8500 15500 i 1 Day

- 3250 1 Chg.To DHR,85 Term - 8500 15500 :

1 1-7 Day - 3250 2

1 Small Break LOCA 0.01 Sq. Ft. 15500

- - - 8500 355 600

Auto Start Flows - 8500 15500 i

3M 600

i

- - 8500 15500

10 M 600 1 { - - 'k500 15 00 f '

.O M 600 p 8500 15500 :

f 1HR 600 - - -

l - - .8500 15500'

600 700 Chg.To Retir. 10.5 HR l - - 8500 15500 1

1 Day - 3250

! Chg.To DHR - 8500 1550C .

17 Day - 3250

} ?J!

f . p, . ,t 51eamline Brealiinside R8 - - ; 1 00 15500 f 355 600 l y AutoStart Flh 7 jg8500 .1550(

o 3M 600 - -

.l? <

1550 l

10 M 295 -

if8500

- 8500 1550(

j -

30 M 295 j - 8500 1550C i 1HR 295 8500 1550-i - -

1 Day - 3250

Chg. To DHR - - 8500 1550-17 Day - 3250 i

i i I h,

^ '

5 h 4

i 3.3 E adequate subcooling margin does EQI exist, f

s M:

o Within 2 min, stop all RCPs, li  :

I o Raise OTSG 1evels to 95% using EFW, i o Start full HPl.

l \ /

3.11 RB WATER LEVEL indicates 2 2'2" 3.12 H transfer LPI suction to R8 sump l

6!!Q stablish HPI suction from LPI.

/

l \

3.17 E RCS ESS is > 2400 PSIG, /

THEN red e RC PRESS based on subcoping margin,

/ , e r i

\ O Q0O i

\

i 3.18 E HPI thrott e requirements e met,  ;

THEN throttle P1 flows as r quired. y. .

.o HPI must be rottle to maintain subcooling margin g -<

< 100*F when n RCP are operating.

) $m k n l

'E adequate sub oling margin exists based on incores

(

o

_ HEN HPI must e T rottled to maintain RCS PRESS and TEMP hW 2

'below NDT cu e. g ,,

l o HPI must e throttle to maintain HPI flow < 540 gpm/ pump. g *l l I i

o HPI sh Id be throttle to maintain PZR level 80" to 220' adequate subco ling margin exists based on 7I

~

l inc es. , \  !

I may be throttled when a quate subcooling margin l o-

! ki,s,ts; based on incores. 1

/ .

\

l  !

3.20 - RCPs are available, -:

' AND OTSGs are available, M start 1 RCP in each loop.

E RCPs are available, 3

MQ OTSGs are NOT available, THEN start 1 RCP.

o/s a ~

c'  % gbf-o V s a e- as c\ ~ am  ;

PAGE 42 of 63 ESA AP-380 REV 19

1 i

i I

FLORIDA POWER CORP.-CRYSTAL OVERPRESSURE RIVER UNIT 3 MAKEUP TANK (MUT-1 K LEVEL

- VERSUS INDICATED TM) f Initial Tank Overpressure 13.63 psig I

[At Low Tank Level)

ALLOWABLE MUT-1 INDICATED WATER Oy{RPR{SSURg,jPS{G[

f

!!!!!_!!N[,,,,,

l 0 2.00 2.13 m

o R>

1 2.26 < 5 2 2

3 2.38 2.52 PO* km 4 2.65 5 2.78 ._% 5

-4 s 6 2.92 7 ';C. O 8

3.06

$ g >

9 3.20 m  % F 3.35 10

!:n 938 13 3.80  %

x >5H 14 3.95 4.11 46 s g 15 4.27 e m

16 4.43 17 4.59 18 4.76 s 19 4.93 20 5.10 M 21 O 22 23 24 5.28 5.46 5.64 5.83 I 25 6.02 26 6.21 27 6.41 '

28 6.61 29 6.82 30 7.02 31 7.24 32 7.45 33 7.68 34 7.90 35 8.13 36 8.37 37 8.61 38 9.85 39 i ,

1..

i

  • 9.10 40 .

' 9.36 41 9.62 42 9.89 43 ,

10.16 44 10.44 45 10.72 46 11.02 47 11.31 48 11.62 49 11.93 50 NOTES: 1. The maximum instrument inches forerrorslevelforand tank

+1.2level psi andpre These errors are -2.7G/CI Calculation DC-b515-018-26.01-ME) on pressure.(Ref.

O 2.

The initial tank overpressure was the value determined to be the " safe" pressure in the calculation.

(- -

i e

I W FLORIDA POWER CORP.-CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3 MAKEUP TANK (MUT-1) OVERPRESSURE VERSUS INDICATED TMK LEVEL

' Initial Tank Overpressure 13.63 psig l [At Low Tank Level)

INDICATED WATER ALLOWABLE MUT-1

! OVERPRESSURE (PSIG)

  • LEVEL (IN)
51 12.25 l

52 12.58 I

53 12.92 54 13.26 I2 0 >

55 13.62 '

@ O Z>

j 56 13.98 57 14.35 _o Q

. 58 14.73 '

h* u) 59 15.12 I y3 60 15.53 61 62 15.94 16,37 16.80 m $s0>

i F

) 63 I g 1

64 17.25

  • O 17.71 Q C 65 18.19 66 18.68 ~

ha l 67 19.19 68 19.71 p >4 6 ,

69 20.24 , g 70 20.80 om 71 21.37 72 21.96 O

l 73 22.57 _

74 23.20 75 23.85 N

( 76 '

24.53 77 25.23 78 t~

25.95 79 26.70 80 27.48

  1. 81 28.29 82 29.13 83 30.01 84 30.92 85 31.87 86 32.85 87 33.89 88 34.96 89 90 ,
  • - ~}36.09
37.27
D 91 >27138.50 g ,,

92 93 ~

i39.80,*)if 41,16 94 s,3 , 4 2. 59 -T 95 44.09 96 45.67 97 47.35 98 49.11 99 50.99 100 NOTES: 1. The max.icum instrument errors for, tank level andpres inches for level anB +1.2 psi O These errors are G/CI on pressure.(Ref. -2.7 Calculation DC-b515-018-26.01-ME)

Q The initial tank overpressure was the value determined to be the " safe" pressure in the, calculation.

2.

( .

T .

1 l

MME W 6 ton TAOK ras 14 . LIRg Mt,-1 OESC AirTN)u _

s 0 SAFETYAELAft0 Tvre IPNNL Adb PRE.tLs0RE BEZoKDGK

/*

l llesTRUMENT AtlCM MARVAL

  1. l67A ***'8'"'***'V'** l toCATmm MCB FSA 6ectioG 4 nem o n ces.

70LcAANC: _

O.6 _g oprpas. *  :

d-e - Z'7 R- s ' '

atxAnas 6 x P o R.o "fdFDT Al 40% Z.2 4 Pids it+slZ- f'ofit __ '

bda g039 8 $K2 Md-l'7- PIR IditT *E ddr t-4-s fra 1+;E- FoA _ _

Md-p4 -LTRI c.ATed i oRY T.B_ ITEGMOC.Y 6 P-lG9E oesen CAusAAT1000 l3 causaAfion As POUNS cAusunom A4Luf RIMT Gdeed. T vnc. pse n.. . .a  % einen nunnic snano.

"I~dDICATidk e ~\D O cal.lB9AloeJ Sl u -6 26 l

" O 50 l

= +s si

'a ,+ 10 100l Oj wam' l3 EAR CAus4AT10el

% SPAN LAR CAuSAADOW As 1,877

% $ PAN As pcUese A( CAutAAfical

% 8186e afastas gtanoa

% V i* atiolles 7 86h ' -10 0l *,

.st>icuri,aq '

CAllBRATiod M -G 30'l -

$?. y a g

AN/,Li J/s ALCULATION Sb ~

, DOC lDo & Y.ppf3g33, j W 3

Yb '=

& $tEV-E SHEET l3 op iV .m,,,,,,,,.. , , , ,

if the **As Foun(* % ett is out of specification generste an NCOR If safe d2tV, W DA b'N -

PRNED BY 2-5-68 _

-DAM REVIEVdD SY 2-s-88_ l svetavisonb,k

~ ~ #+ '* ~ t"D ate~

" h oATt ' c" ' *

  • App <evedgy _

_ Oate i

1 Catit<ated sy

.O.

^

A e I6V O CAtlBRAfl0N DATA 5HC

' FLORIDA POWER CCAPORAfl0N ~ ' IJdDLCATIAJQ sT. raTEn$sunc. etonioA RECORDER l cEg3 $HEET 1- OF _l 4

raosECT ~

.. . . _ - . . - - - . - . . - . - _ _ _ -. =. . - . - _ -_-

adlP TAG Md-fl-EB NO.

DESCRIPTION t%x6 dP TAM

( ._

U SafetyRelatedl

. TYPE INSTRUMENT MANUAL t'49 Test Equip. Used LOCATION d d i 4 di- G CKT

  • l Item Due Date TOLERANCE +/- 0,1 % # 6 pad REMARKS _ BAILEY MET 6M co.

(o62%Io CAbte.: MdR N Drawing e TO9 -VlB sd. Z __

b8o3fo39 38.s i _

CALIBRATION INPUT DESIGN EO AS FOUND AS LEFT PERCENT gg W o -10 -10 0 4 -5.0 25 -$

50 0 00 5 50 h 75 fg  !.

100 lO 10 0 rj T

ANA _yt'S/ CALCULATION DOC D# N ["#f3 ATT# I RER I: SHEET lY op }W '

  • l b.?

d .,' .:

_ Date 7 95f i d A

;_a , N

^ ^ ~ Prepared By ~

_ Date 7/v/tf _

Reviewed By A -

Date I//6/f8 il

>iE'l .: Supervisor W.//HW " .e c h

,?? y 4 / FCN MAR No. '

Oate Calibrated By _ _ _ Date Approved By _ .

REV. O CALIBRATION DATA SHEET FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION INPUT BUFFER O ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA --

PROJECT CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3 2 }i h

  • I PRE %0Ar _ g, ,fwg. ,q py
  • DESCRIPfl0N fA%E UP TAMK NO O

X SAFETY AELATED TYPg PRE SSURE Ta At4Srvwr1-E R BW M VOL.18 Test Equimnt M

{ INSTRUMENTATION MANUAL Item Due Date tW EL. local LOCATION

  1. TOLERANCE ! ? SEE 8Ettml 5 0F SPAN J

REMARKS _ PAlt.E*s T9 FE KPl2*io 3 MobEt ~

var.o?.0 Drawl f F 6 - 3 o 2 ". G G t Tc.309 -C,65 i 0 .S is' (OPrtATg%

l

)

3r Tbtf t A4(f FOR 0-90 95tes #5 G A*/ r.E Wivsf fpJ o-50 Pelf. 14GN ALAarn 9.15 f51 i

l fodBANt( FoR5b-Ioo tSiro 110% .

i

! Psi 1 A FT. H2 O s 0. 48 5 m __ M / A WATER COLUMN _ _pggg A//A STATIC PRES $ _

Call 8 RATION CAtlBRATION AS LEFT DESH3N AS FOUND Call 8 RAT 10N AVG  % ERROR

% ERROA UP DOWN AVG

% $W 068 UP 00WW 8 0 -10 g

t'

' 25 .25 -S .-_

i p _

58 -50 0 .

7s 75 +5 l# 10 0 +10

% SPAN

% SPAN ERR ERR

) ANALYSIE /CALCOL6IlON I OOI* - IB_ FREQ. 24 MD.

Doclo, M7f-@fM ITT a /]"

R# _.

REV_ E SHEET / op / of specification. generate an NCORif safety related NCO

' M N f*= r~M" % art le out DATE 21-SS PREPARED BY dM!'.

DATE ~2-fl-(%

REVIEVED BY _ b g, 6. M. -

b c pl1.-%%

R8 R l' __

- Date o_. Date - Approved Br O

Catitrated By .

REV(0 ' CAllBRATION D AT A 5HEE 4

FLORIDA P0nn C0f<.PORATION g SY. PETC ASSURG. FLORID A cR& 3 '"

PROJECT _ __

, , artsca:PTON __ mAv.t. or we e orssiaC us to-t7-pT

%=

TYPg PRE ssuat tNbicAroA. M SAFETY Att.Affo "

' i 8001r. 48) vot . I 6 ,/ 641 6 llLST AUMENTAfl0N MANUAL T**4 Etv8pment Used I49' fL - t a f A L- ""

-[ LOCATEN 0" 0*le

- YOLEAANC8 i b N/A - E er SPAN REMARES_ 6a uTt . yPC kenSOB }

JMbv E oA WTEGW PART oF TRAN6mly Q Drawing a

  • W 5 loc AL. INbit.A~f0R 14 JMTENhEh AS A 60ME 0~

ANb its AczurAc4 wera vor coAR6sPowh To ittANImrtit ki rWERG pot.E " M/ A ."

M - DATE MI'OO i ,

lit [ PARED BY Arvitwt6By Et A b4 % ^ - Daft WIISS- --

ATE 2*I SUPEAVt504 -

I Ecn g_ -

.M NO. l Calf 8AATON CAUSAAfl0N DE52N ASFOUND AS LEFT CAU8AATON RfA0fMG  % ERACA

% d2TS VdYE RE ADING  % ERROR 8 'O O A ,,

u 2s 5' 50 3 50 is 75 > 75 its too 10 0

% SPAN ERA  % SPAN EAR ANALYSTS /hALCULATION 16 - FREQ. .. 2. 4...M. 9.*

i, MTEGORY-ooc 10,h19%,,g ) ATT ,. i / .

_ SHEET k op_ hf S n irw A. 7;;" u en is out of specifiestion, generate an NCOR If safety refaled NCOM f Oste

_ Cete -

A w eved 91 Calksted ny.

Og FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION BE h C AlltR ATION D AT A $ HEE 1 SIGNAL CONVEMER ST. PET ER5 BURG, f LORIDA 1 .

$HLET _ 0F #

PROJECT _ ~

9

._.. ~ - -.- _ - - .-- .- -- - -- . - - .- -- . -

1 1

Oneuiptie. VIRKE UP TRNK PRES $URE RLRRits fa,,gf g V NNI]

ICI Row _ T Slee  ? _

sp=

, saufutww: Isiler @ Othw Tag No. Flu-l?-P3 lastrumentation Manual En 7V B00X 't f Vol.18 Test Equipment used ITOEL ##.LLl3303fri j me%: ACC. 0.1S' % dF SPRN I

NR: 15 PSIS : -7 VDC. l(61 LR 3 F5f t, :: -1.4 YDC.} C6 b Orawint0 y 2of-b'll m3-47 T

D101183T M#-3 KRNCE -Ib Tb tIb VDC /D-IbDPSItu -

CMEGORY .. 2.8-.. FREQ. 31... ..

?e. '.

ga CAtisRailoN N 5Or [f

{ }

sipal Petarity: X Normal g . , , ,, ,4 . p y i

i Refsy operaties: y . De Enwgined e ersized <

5 tn y

& EIN at Trip @, r- '

' 8" '*I '"

EIN Dit rential

)4h*

l As As As As YOC Found Left Fevad Left j l

Mien -7 9I s

Lew - T.9

~

q s Calibrated By '" l " Date I ----- I r

~~

Approved By Date PREPARED BYJ /, gM DATE 7-F-fi REVIEVED BY . w h. fdt.- DATE~Ml 8 %

CHANCED BY MAR 27- 2-27-O( FC!ff 6dPg.fWt 5 oR. M 7'Ib i >

0

.k ' .- R6NI b FLORIDA POWEA CORPORATION Cede EM - 74. 74 Call 8AATION DATA SHEET CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3 Orit . Sipal Men.. Tri Stable 810 SYSTEM C e nts. Sheet I Of I a tsee . . . . .

GILB ERT / COMMONWE A LTH, INC.

TELEPHONE AND CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM .

DATE June 9.1992 BY: J. K. Bell WORK ORDER NO. 04-5520-092 TELEPHONE CALL X CONFERENCE WITH: R. E. Clausen COMPANY: Florida Power Corocration

SUBJECT:

Makeup Tank Pressure Instrument Accuracy t

In a conversation with Mr. Clauson, he stated that the Makeup Tank pressure instrument error shall be based on the Square Root Sum of the Squares (SRSS) of the maximum full-span tolerances for pressure instrumentation MU-17-PT, MU-17-EB, and MU-17-PIR. This value is + ~

1.12 psi as supplied in documentation by Mr. Clauson.

l( . t.

t J. K. Bell Nuclear Engineer I JKB/mjk cc: W. W. Nisula .! .

! l- R. T. Bowles

~'

ANALYSIS /CALCULATIOR' ' -

g DOCIDe D ## '

/

R. W. Adler REV 2- I T. C. Lutz SHEET I I; OF--

1 O

6 a L

(

PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE f 74 MU74 O ---- PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID PROPERTIES ---------

FLUID: WATER 4t 90 deg-F AATERIAL: SSTEEL density: 62.108 lbs/ft"3 SCHEDULI: 40 abs. roughness: .0018 in viscocity: 0.76 centipois l 1

NOMINAL SIZE: 6 in DESIGN Flow PkfE:

l inside di'amater: 6.065 in FLUIn W LOCITY : l PIPE LENGTH: 1 ft TOT 1L HEAD LOSS: l

~ ~ '

ELEVATION IN: P.dSSURE IN: l OUT: OUT: 1


------ VALVES AN6 F.'.TTINGS --------------------------- l V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 0.864 TURBULENT FFT: 0.015 K 0.745 2" cATE K 0.119 1= CK-SW-VRT l 3= K0 ANALYSIS / CALCULATION 00C ID stiT'/- opfJ ATT# 2 press P to START iUlT!T, ESCpHteT CANCE6p RINT READY PRINTER ... .

l PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE f 75 O ------ PIPE CHARACTERISTICS MU75


FLUID PROPERTIES l

~ i i WATER at 90 deg-F l MATERIAL: SSTEEL -_ FLUID:

SCHEDULE: 40 density: 62.108 lbs/ft*3 abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois

?

6 in DESIGN FLOW RATE: 7 d[. ' ,.. NOMINAL inside diameter: SIZE: 6.065 in

  • y FLUID VELOCITY :
Y ~~_ PIPE

'. LENGTH: 14 6.1 ?lf t TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

. Qn. ,: ,

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: E ,

4 d_la.;.OUT: ---------------------------

VALVES AND FITTINGS n-------------------- V&F TOTAL K-1.963 y TURBULENT FFT: 0.015 V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft

. ,: P w j 2=2
  • ELBOW-L, 45 deg K.0.295 1 = 18
  • ELBOW-L, 90.deg K 1.668 l 3= K0 .

READY PRINTER ... press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT PIPE # 76 PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT MU76 ---------


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID PROPERTIES k Js FLUID:. WATER at 90.deg-F MATERIAL: SSTEEL -- ,

density: 62.108 lbs/ f t!" 3 SCHEDULE: 40 viscosity: 0.76 centipois

- abs.-roughness : .'0018 in _ _.

e ,

NOMINAL SIZE: 6 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

inside diameter: 6.065 in FLUID VELOCITY :

PIPE LENGTH: 13.5 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

4 ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: OUT:

VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

~~------------------------

V&F HEAD IDSS: O ft V&F TOTAL K 0.536 TURBULENT FFT: 0.015 ,

K 0.298 i

1 = 2

  • GATE K 0.238 l 2- Trw-MM l

3= K0 ANALYSIS / CALCULATION l

DOC lD oP94-ooS5 m ,_ z l READY PRINTER ... press P to START M; (Esa$ ECD @ PRINT PIPELINE DESIGH REPORT PIPE i 78 MU78 ---------


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID PROPERTIES FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F l MATERIAL: SSTEEL

]

SCHEDULE: 40 density: 62.108 lbs/ft*3 abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois  ;

j l

I 6 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

p NOMINAL inside SIZE: diameter: 6.065 in J j

ELUID VEIDCITY :

'IPE LENGTH: 13.4 ft TOTAL HEAD IASS:

(

PRESSURE IN:

ELEVATION IN:

OUT: OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 0.238 TURBULENT FFT: 0.015 K 0.238 2= K0 1 = 2

  • GATE ,.

K0 3= K0 4=

K0 6= K0 5= ' i READY PRINTER ... press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE i 79 MU79 ---------


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS


FLUID PROPERTIES )

i FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F l MATERIAL: SSTEEL density: 62.108 lbs/ft'3 j SCHEDULE: 40 abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois j

\

DESIGN FLOW RATE:

O NOMINAL SIZE:

insido diameter:

6 in 6.065 in FLUID VELOC1TY : I 153 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

k/IPELENGTH:  !

IN: l PRESSURE ELEVATION IN: OUT:

OUT: .

V - .

we


VALVES AND FITTING ,

TURBULENT FFT: 0.015 V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 1.129 2-2 * 'fRnW-L. 45 deg K 0.295

( )' = 4

  • ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 0.834 l I

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION DOCID LM 9'/- 00i 3_g, g press P to STAR'I NIhn-- ESCJE8m ANQ#L RINT READY PRINTER ...

PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE i 80 MU80


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID PROPERTIES FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F MATERIAL: SSTEEL SCHEDULE: 40 density: 62.108 lbs/ft"3

.0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois abs. roughness:

NOMINAL SIZE: 6 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

inside diameter: 6.065 in FLUID VELOCITY :

PIPE LENGTH: 15.3 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSb:

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

TURBULENT FFT: 0.015 V&F HEAD I4SS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 1.37

',= TEE-BRANCH K 0.894 2= ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 0.209 l

= ELBOW-L, 45 deg K 0.148 4= GATE K 0.119 '

[

I READY PRINTER ... press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE f 81 l MU81 ---------


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID PROPERTIES l

~ .

FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F MATERIAL: SSTEEL SCHEDULE: 40 ,

density: 62.108 lbs/ft"3

.0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois abs. roughness:

NOMINAL SIZE: 4 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

inside diameter: 4.026 in

. FLUID VELOCITY :

PIPE LENGTH: .5 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

TURBULENT FFT: 0.016 V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 0.306 1 = ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 0.228 l 2= REDUCER < 6 0 5, K 0.078

PIPELINE DESIGH REPORT MU129 O


FLUID PROPERTIES


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F ATERIAL: SSTEEL density: 62.108 lbs/ f t' 3 SCHEDULE: 40 0.76 centipois abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity:

NOMINAL SIZE: 4 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

inside diameter: 4.026 in FLUID VEIACITY :

PIPE LENGTH: 101 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

i ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS l

VEF HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 4.511 4

TURBULENT FFT: 0.016 i

K 0.5 2 = 5

  • ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 1.139 i 1= ENTR-SHARP K 0.302 3= TEE-BRANCH K 0.977 4= ENLARGE l 6 l 6= GATE K 0.13 5= CK-SW-VRT K 0.814 K 0.323 j

TEE-RUN K 0.326 8 = 2

  • ELBOW-L, 45 deg
7=

READY PRINTER ... Press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE i 130 i

MU130 ---------


FLUID PROPERTIES PIPE CHARACTERISTICS FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F

( AATERIAL: SSTEEL density: 62.108 lbs/ft"3 SCHEDULE: 160 abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois NOMINAL SIZE: 4 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

inside diameter: 3.438 in FLUID VELOCITY :

PIPE LENGW: 9 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT:

OUT: ---------------------------


VALVES AND FITTINGS V&F HEAD IDSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 0.843 TURBULENT FFT: 0.017 ELUVW-L vu ucy " 0.236 K 0.337 1= TEE-RUN l 2nN

=ALYS!S7CALCUL,ATION 3 = 2

  • GATE K 0.27 DOCID# Mif-000 ATT # d press P to STA RTNT. ( S Ft7whrz-e1N, READY PRINTER ...

DESIGN REPORT PIPF # 131 PIPELINE O ------ PIPE CHARACTERISTICS HU131


FLUID PROPERTIES 1

FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F l ' MATE, RIAL: SSTEEL ,

density: 62.108 l'os/ft*3 SCHEDULE: 160 viscosity: 0.76 cantipois f' abs. roughness: .0018 in

.. . ::= . .=. .. .

.-. ..... = .. .= = . ... - .

l CALCULATION M94-0053 Rev. 3, ATTACHMENT 12, Page 1 0F 8 l INTERNAL FLOW SYSTEMS Design and Performance Prediction I

D. S. MTI I ER (Second Edition)

O l 8

Gulf Publishing Company Houston London. Paris, Zurich, Tokyo in h:rth Amerfca:

Air Scie .ce corepan, P.O. Box 143 O Caming, N.Y,14530 It'e:hana: 607452 5591 l

e l

A6 is m .--a _ 4 .-.-m:, - - - -_a a.-,-

s_- .= .- ,_ ~ _ =_.._ ; . .. .. _ . __ - ..

O O

V l CALCULATION M94-0053 Rev. 3, ATTACHMENT 12, Page 2 0F 8

13. DIVIDING AND COMBINING FLOW 13.1. INTRODUCTION in this chapter loss coemeients are given for dividing and combining junctions. The junction geometries considered are shown in Fig.13.1.1mportant geometrical parameters are the area  ;

I ratio, the angle between the legs and the chamfers or radii at the junction of the legs. '

The notation used for the junction legs is shown in Fig.13.1. A loss coemeient K,jis deSned as the ratio of the total head loss between legs i and j to the mean velocity head in the leg i carryi::g the total now. The leg canying the total Sow is always referred to as leg 3. In the (

case of T junctions leg 1 is the branch and leg 2 is the leg carrying the through Sow.

Symmetrical Y conSgurations have only one coc5cient, sece leg 2 can be substituted for

!cg 1 or vice versa. Loss coerTicients are:  ;

(~~)

'%/

Leg 2 Leg 3 _

_ Leg) 1 Le;I Through now Combined So* Combinednow { nroughDow

- l
  • a L

./N 7' -

/f

'v (a)CombiningT (c) Dividing T

?gk Leg 3 Leg 3

\-

Combined now Combined now [

}-

[/ .  ; .v._ . . .

W ls -

e ,

.N ___ _,

~

/ ,f (b) Combir.ing Y (d) Dniding Y

% N.

\

Fi5.13.1. Ceomett; cal pa a eters for comb n'.cg and dividing func0cns

(

i o

i 3 y

! (V i I CALCULATIONM94-0053Rev.3, ATTACHMENT 12,Page.,J.SFcL,d Combining Bow

~ U'; U,3  : U,'

K>= w h, (13.1) i

. 4 4 + h, ..

j4

'/U 12 U,3 l U,3 (13.2)

K23 = + h:

l

.sk k +h 3

.I,h Dividing Sow y,:

y'1 '

l y,2 (13.3)

.! 4 K33 - 3 4 +h i

. 4 +h K32 " +h 3 -

2

+h a (13 4)

/

The loss cocEcients apply tojunctions with inlet and outlet legs 30 or more diameters long.

Conditions are given under which the less coefficients can be applied to junctions with short inlet and outlet legs.

Chamfers or radii at junctions can reduce one or both of the junction loss coefficients.

Guidance is given e n where radii are usefulin reducing losses. Because of the marked effect of edge sharpness on Tjunctions and additionalinaccuracies introduced in having to measure Bow rates in two legs, scatter in experimental results is often quite high compared with other

'r% -

d components.

Loss coeScients of most practical ' sharp-edged" T juncuons. with sn.ooth Bow passages without discontinuities, are unlikely to exceed the loss coe5cients for sharp-edged T juncuens in this chapter. Screwed T junctions and other junctions with discontinuities can have

[ significaritly higher loss coc5cients - double that ofjunctions with smooth passages.

7 13.1.1. REYNOLD$ NUMBER EFFECTS (CIA 55 3)

- There are no reliable data from experiments on T junctions over a wide range of Reynolds .,.

'*" numbers. However, the limited data that exists indicate that the eficcts of Reynolds number y~,s

W on T junction loss coefficients follows the established trends for other components.

e

  • Additional complications arise with Tjunctions because they have three Reynolds numbEN ~ '

g - For instance, when the ratio of Sow from the branch into the main leg of a combining T iPP close to zero, Sow in the branch can be laminar with turbulent Bow in the other two lesi.9 In practice, provided the Reynolds number of the Bow in the leg carrying the combined How 2 is greater than 10',it is oflittle consequence that the Reynolds number may be in the laminar .

region in one of the other legs. This is because the contribution from Row in the leg with laminar Scw to the totaljunction energy loss is small.

In the absence of reliable data on Reyr. olds number effects it is suggested that the lost l

coefncients given be taken as basic coe5cients at a Rey no:ds number of 10' in the les carrying the combined Bow, and that these coeicients be conserted to apply to other combined How i

~ = v- - --

0 A

V l CALCULATION M94-0053 Rev. 3, ATTACHMENT 12, Page 4 0F 8 l Dividing ar ! combu:ir.; flow  %$

leg Reynolds numbers as follows.

1. For Reynolds numbers greater than 10', no correction.
2. For Reynolds numbers between 2 x 105 and 10', no correction.
3. For Reynolds numbers between 10' and 2 x 10s and loss coe5eien:s with vajues between 0 and 0.2 at a Reynolds number of 10', use the Reynolds number correction factors for r/d = 1 bends from Fig. 9.3.
4. For Reynolds numbers between 10' and 2 x lo sand loss coe5cients greater than 0.2 at a Reynolds number of 10', the loss coefficient Kg is given by K n=(loss coc2cient at 10'-0.2)+(0.2 x the correction factor for r/d= 1 bends from Fig. 9.3)
5. For loss cocmcients that are negative at Re= 105, assurne that the coeScients remain constant down to a combined Sow Reynolds number of los and then change linearly to zero by a Reynolds number of 10'. This is not likely to be the case for Ko for very low QdQ3 or for K33 with angled junctions with a high QdQ3 but, since in both cases only a srnall quantity of the total Sow is involved, errors in the prediction of energy requirements will not be signi$ cant.

!O 13.1.2. CROS5-5ECTIONAL SHAPE (CLASS 2)

The cross-sectional shape is usually not an important parameter, as regards pressure losses, provided the relevant non-dimensional geometrical parameters are used when comparing the performance ofjunctions with different cross sections. Except for Section 13.9 and 13.10, loss coemeients are from experiments on junctions with legs of circular cross section. These loss cocScients can be applied, usually without significant errors, to junctions with legs of rectangular cross section and to junctions having a branch leg of a cross sectional shape different from that of the other legs.

Loss coemeients vary' markedly with changes in the junction edge geometry, small radii or chamfers often markkily reducing the junction losses. If th geometry of a junction, with legs of different cross ssctional shapes, provides a more streemhned arrangement, then significantly lower losseiimay be obtain9d '

than for a junction with three circular cross-sectional legs and sharp junctio'n, edges. ~

S 13.1.3. FLOW STAB 10TY Combining Sow is a relatively stable process. Velocities increase through thejunction in many combining junctions.This aids !!ow stability by reducing the tendency for transient movement, growth and decay of Sow separation regions.

Dividing flows can lead to large flow instabilities that has e caused structural failures oflarge O symmetrical dividing T junctions. There are probably numerous situatior.s in indust.y where systems and processes are adsersely afected by dividing junction instabilities. These ir. stabilities are associated with changes in Sow patterns within juncdons with the size and O

- - - . . - - - - - - - - ~'

O

!D

'd l CALCULATION M94-0053 Re,v. 3, ATTACHMENT 12, Page 5 0F 8 l uwa.ng ar.d combuung pow 317 13.3.

SHARP EDGED DIVIDING Ts (CLASS 2)

Performance charts showing contours cTconstan t loss coeMeients, Kn , for flow leg 3, to the branch !cg 1, are given for-

1. 45' branch. Fig.13.19t;
2. 50' branch, Fig.13.20t;
3. 90* branch, Fig.13.21t;
4. 120' branch, Fig.13.22. 1 The through flow loss coemeient Kn,is virtually independent of the branch angle, junction radii and the area ratio. Kn is plotted in Fig.13.23 against i 3 the flow ratio Q l l

1 I

l l  !

l 1.0

0. 9 : --- L-0.6

/

/N'b c., l M

0.4 l l

(/ ////d // / /'19 I

0.3 - /

O.2

\

k # VfI,/X -

// l 0.1

! O_ '

l I O 0.1 02 0.3 0.4 0., 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 F'ow ratio, Qv03 Fig.13.19t. DMd.ng %w: bra c5 ang'e 45*. 'ess coehicet K u 6

- ~ . . . . _ . .

u  ::- - .

-~ -:: ..- :.. ..  : = = ... -

o i

V h CALCULATION M94-0053 Rev. 3, ATTACHMENT 12, Page 6 0F 8 l 318 Internal flow sys: ems "x =

1 W Ni t Y \' e ~

a

& \ \ hK \l\ -

1 AN N 'K \\! \ \ 5  : I

$N'N N N \\ \ \  : , .'.

.Ksi NNN.N\\\ \j \ ': 1 i l 1 ) i AN\\iN \ \i :ll A / 7 i 'K 'KNs\\l =~i

'"FI /

, \%\N *t

/ i NNN : 1 cd 4' NN  :'

=-

-e e  !

-e ========

%:v $

'iy

= \

~

NN N N:\ \' _.y:.j I

\ \ iNi\.\\\ .

1 NJNL\KN\\~il'!(-

N N 'i N X \\ :

A h 1N NN!%\ :?! +i 4W X \ \\\\ :

Nv S \\1

" i Mi W_,1AlYiEI .

M i: s

=

: : : = ====

=- e pY s y; v E O

-- : ::. . =- ..:.

0 (V l CALCULATION M94-0053 Rev. 3, ATTACHMENT 12, Page 7 0F 8 l owai .g ans coms,w.g jia. nz 1.0 09 - '

'// / / ! /: / / / h 0,! / / V / / V Y1 X /

0;. 1/ / / /i / N/F #1 0.

5 ge

//X//v?'>^Y 0'4 '

// \

I

'~

/ /

j',s ' y's ', s ,'a $ ". . . ' 3 =2 l e,f - - .- 1 j 1;o. l 38 0 ' I '

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Flow ratio, Qi/ 03 ,

Fig.13.22. Dividin6 Row branch angle 120*. loss coeMcient 4 0.5 0.4 5-90*

. '4

~

' # ~

0 . .'.  ??

0.1 e

/

  • h M l

_V

-0. !

O 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 O. Flowrntio Qi/03 F& 13.23. Devi(.cg 8:a: bra .c a acg'es c' 45 50'. Icss coefcer.t Q 4

e

/

U l CALCULATION M94-0053 Rev. 3, ATTACHMENT 12, Page 8 0F 8 l 320 Internal flow systerr.s

v. D 1.2 o (n.

. 4 _

30 - :

1I .  ;

j

/r -

= -

f UV & l Km 0.05

.g g

3U"

%l l

]f i 1 i

l

! /

g 0.10

' O 15 07 v

0.20 u

i . i H.e -

, y I

0..<

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.$ 0.6 H.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Flo* ristio. 0:<(h 0 5.11. 4(1). Or td ng fice 'cra ch ar g'es 90', A = % len coeSc e-:

3 13.5.1. INLET AND OUTLET CONDITIONS (CLASS 2) )

Prosided the outlet legs 1 and 2 are three or more diameters long, then the loss in leg 2 is unlikely to be underestimated if:

1. leg 3 is two or more diameters long if the upstream component is a bend of r/d> 1: or
2. leg 3 is four or more diameters long.

When leg 3 is less than 10 diameters long the negative values of K33 predicted in Fig.13.23 are unlikely to occur. Ifleg 3 is less than 10 diameters long and Qi/03 is less thi.s

"' o f O.4, a :oss of 0.10(Uj - U j)/2g can be assumed for K 3 :(class 3). lflegs 2 and 3 are of rectangular cross-section, obtr.in 33 K from Fig.13.41.

13.6. EFFECT OF ftADil ON COEFFICIENTS OF DIVIDING Ts The through Sow coemeients K3 , are virtually unaf!'ected by radii at the junction. Loss coe5:ients K33 continue to fall as a radius or chamfer is vaded from zero up to the equivalent of the branch diarneter.

Fipre 13.241)gis es loss coe5:ients K33 for 90' T. junctions v.ith A - A3and radii between 3 leg.s 1 and 3.

Less coe5eients for 90' juncticns with radii between legs 1 and 3 of 0.1D are given in p.d Fig.13.25' for K3 ,.

4

3.0 FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS (CONT'01 j

DETAILS ACTIONS

~

f 1_ Verify RB WATER level is 2 2.2' r 3.35 km_M BWST LEVEL is s 5',

JE B transfer LPI suction 2 _ Throttle LPI flow forLPI each train

, from BWST to RB sump. to = 2000 gpm using valves:

i I

Continue on in this procedure o DHV-5 o DHV-6 l

3 Ensure 1200 gpm and " LOCAL" are selected for:

o BSV-3 o BSV-4 ANAt.YSIS/ CALCULATION 4 _ Open RB sump outlet valves:

Doc 10 ,_M9 7- 0453 o OHV-42 o OHV-43 ATT< #/

REV 2 SHEET / _ op_ J. 5 ___. W._H_@ RB sump outlet valves are h'closeBWSToutletvalves:

o OHV-34 o OHV-35 Perform steps 6, 7 & 8 only 1E HPI

, pumps are running.

I 6 Establish HP1 suction from LPI by opening.

o OHV-11 o OHV.-12 7 _ 1E only 1 LPI pump is operating, JE G ensure MVP suction cross tie valves are open, o MUV-62 o MUV 69 M"

8 Close BWST suctions to HPI while observing for signs of i

cavitation:

o MUV-73 o MUV-58 i

l O =

{

LOCACD

'~

REV 02 PAGE 31 of 55 E0P 08

3.0 F0LLOW-UP ACTIONS (CONT'01 DETAILS ACTIONS

(

MU suction header separation:

3 .11 __ E 2 running MUPs are lined up to a single BWST suction path, o E MVP-1A @ MVP-18 are aligned to MUV-73, M prior to going below 25 ft BWST level, align M: -

the suction header to Open MUV-58 provide separate flow 1 Open MUV-62  :

2 paths. While observing MVP-1B for 3

signs of cavitation, Close MUV-69.

f l ' LYSIS / CALCULATION M

Tc io s M99-odf3m , // 0 hy (IB ANQ MUP-IC are aligned to REV Z ___ SHEET 4 OF A 1 Open MUV-73 2 Open MUV-69 3 While observing MVP-1B for signs of cavitation, Close O MUV-62.

i LPI - HPI piggyback operation:

E the MU suction header can !!QI be separated, o E MUV-73 is open, M establish LPI to HPI M establish the following lineup:

piggy-back operation.

1 Ensure open OHV-34 and DHV-110.

2 Start DHP-1A.

3 Open OHV-II.

4 Control HPI 1 540 GPM/ pump to prevent runout.

I' o ]E IMUV-58 is open, M establish the following lineup:

1 Ensure open DHV 35 and DHV-111.

2- Start DHP-18.

i 3_ Open DHV-12.

4 Control HPI < 540 GPM/ pump to j prevent runout.

PAGE 13 of 55 LOCACD E0P 08 REV 02

PIPELINE DESIGH REPORT PIPE f1 ,

l DH1


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS


FLUID PROPERTIES FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F MATERIAL: SSTEEL 62.108 lbs/ft*3 SCHEDULE: STD dens ty:  !

abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois l J

l NOMINAL SIZE: 14 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

inside diameter: 13.25 in FLUID VELOCITY :

l TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

PIPE LENGTH:' 26.25 f t PRESSURE IN:

ELEVATION IN:

OUT: OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

)

V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft, V&F TOTAL K 0.856 i TURBULENT FFT: 0.013 1= ENTR-SHARP K 0.5 l 2 = 2

  • ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 0.356 i

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION DOC 1D#Nfb##I3 ATT# [

READY PRINTER ... press P to STg PR: 2 gg g tb Cg CEL RIt iT PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE f 2 DH2 O-


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID PROPERTIES n

FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F MATERIAL: SSTEEL SCHEDULE: STD density: 62.108 lbs/ft'3

.0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois abs. roughness:

NOMINAL SIZE: 14 in DESIGN FIDW RATE:

inside diameter: 13.25 in ,

FLUID VELOCITY :

PIPE LENGTH: 26 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: - .

OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

' V& F TOTAL K 0. 862-TURBULENT FFT: 0.013 V&F HEAD LOSS: ~ Orft ~

4 ou 1= TEE-RUN K 0.254 l 2 = 2 *nELBOW-L, 90 deg K 0.356 3=2

  • ELBOW-L, 45 deg K 0.252 ,

READY PRINTER ... press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT DES IGH REPORT PIPE f3 PIPELINE O -- -- PIPE CHARACTERISTICS DH3


FLUID PROPERTIES L FLUID: . WATER at 90 deg-F MATERIAL: SSTEEL density: 62.108 lbs/ft'3 SCHEDULE: STD 0.76 centipois abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity:

i

PIPELINE DES IGN REPORT PIPE i 17 1 DH17 PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID PROPERTIES ---------

l MATERIAL: SSTEEL FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F SCHEDULE: 140 density: 62.108 lbs/ft"3 abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois NOMINAL SIZE: 10 in DESIGN FI4W RATE: l inside diameter: 8.75 in FLUID VEI4 CITY :

PIPE LENGTH: 18.5 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

PRESSURE IN: l ELEVATION IN:

OUT: OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

TURBULENT FFT: 0.014 V&F HEAD I4SS: 0 ft VGF TOTAL K 0.969 1= TEE-BRANCH K 0.828 l

= t.rs vuiGE < 12. 2 5 V n -141 A'NALYSIS/ CALCULATION

~

DOC ID

  • MW-00$ I ATT A 5~

READY PRINTER ... press P to ST)D PRTNT. ( $[CEL PRIN ['

PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE i 18 O -----

PIPE CHARACTERISTICS DH18


FLUID PROPERTIES ---------

MATERIAL: SSTEEL FLUID: WATER at, 90 deg-F SCHEDULE: 140 density: 62.108 1bs/ft"3 abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity: 0.76P centipois NOMINAL SIZE: 14 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

inside diameter: 11.5 in ,

FLUID VELOCITY :

PIPE LENGTH: 22.6 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: OUT: . , , ,

'.u ,


p------------


VALVES AND l'ITTINGS V&F TOTAL K 2.019 777 0 ft l

, TURBULENT FFT: 0.013 V&F HEAD LOSS:

1= CK-SW-VRT K 0.653 l 2=2

  • ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 0.366 c 3= EXIT K1 7 READY PRINTER ... press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT PI PELINE DES IGN REPORT PIPE # 19 O '

PIPE CHARACTERISTICS DH19


---- FLUID PROPERTIES

(. ,

m.' e-.e -

MATERIAL: SSTEEL FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F SCHEDULE: STD density: 62.108 lbs/ft"3 r 3 abs. roughness: .0018 in viscosity: 0.76 centipois V '

NOHINAL SIZE: 14 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:  :

inside diameter: 13.25 in FLUID VELOCITY :

PIPE LENGTH: 11.5 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

TURBULENT FFT: 0.013 V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 0.678 1d ENTR-SHARP K 0.5 l S = ELBOW-L, 9.0 deg K 0.178 ANALYSIS / CALCULATION DOcD#ffY-oa()ATTe f READY PRINTER ... press P to STA]SEPRTNT (SSDTto CA$EL PRINT I PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE f 20 DH2O PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ----------------

FLUID PROPERTIES ---------

MATERIAL: SSTEEL FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F p/

L SCHEDULE: STD abs. roughness: .0018 in density:

viscosity:

62.108 lbs/ft*3 0.76 centipois I i l NOMINAL SIZE: 14 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

inside diameter: 13.25 in FLUID VELOCITY :

PIPE LENGTH: 22.5 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN:

OUT: ,. OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS ---------------------------

TURBULENT FFT: 0.013 V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 0.506 1= TEE-RUN .

K O.254 l 2=2

  • ELBOW-L, 45 deg K 0.252 t- , , . ,

READY PRINTER ... press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT VALVE and FITTING DES IGN --- DH21 ---

1= TEE-RUN VALVE NUMBER: .. VALVE / FITTING : ........... 2 = ELBOW-L, 90 deg

((CR)=next, (ESC)=end) HOW MANY: .. 3=

c 4 =

( ELBOW / FIXED -- --- REDUCED SEAT DESIGN ---- 5=

6=

k ANGLE: ..... deg SEAT DIAMETER: ...... in 7=

FIX-K: ...... . APPROACH LENGTH: ...... in 8= .

'i 9=

10 = .

E ,h

._. - . _- - . - _ - . - - _. _ ~ . _ _ _ - . ._.

SCHEDULE: STD densit viscosity: 0.76 centipois abs. roughness: .0018 in NOMINAL SIZE: 10 in DESIGN FL4W RATE:

inside diameter: 10.02 in .

FLUID VELOCITY 4 1 PIPE LENGTH: 8.25 ft TCTAL HEAD LOSS: g. .

PRESSURE IN: $"

ELEVATION IN: -

OUT: l OUT:


VALVES AND FITTINGS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 0.457 a3 TURBULENT FFT: 0.013 . ,:. .

1= TEE-RUN K 0.269 l 2= ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 0.188 d.

. . s:.

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION ..: . ~ ~

DOC in e A14 8/-cof3 ATT# f~ -

nl b . y '

' press P to STNij@ 'enuiT , fggg Ito gCEgRIHT ,-

READY PRINTER ...

PIPELINI DESIGN REPORT PIPE f 37 DH37 ---------


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID PROPERTIES FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F MATERIAL: SSTEEL density: 62.108 lbs/f t"3 SCHEDULE: 99EP [% viscosity: 0.76 centipois

  • q abs. roughness: .0018 in b NOMINAL SIZE: 14 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

!i. I inside diameter: 13.25 in

( FLUID VELOCITY : 9$:t.- .;

PIPE LENGTH: 50.75 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS: ..'^* .

ELEVATION IN: PRESSURE IN: "$ '

~

OUT: OUT: -


VALVES AND FITTINGS V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 2.702 ,,

TURBULENT FFT: 0.013 K 1.067 2= EXIT K1 1, , ,

1 = 6

  • ELBOW-L, 90 deg l 3= CK-SW-VRT K 0.635 7

READY PRINTER . . .; _ press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT! ., .

PIPELINE DESIGN REPORT PIPE l'42.

DH42 y


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS ---------------- FLUID' PROPERTIES 4 FLUID: WATER at 90 deg-F MATERIAL: SSTEEL density: 62.108lbs/ft*3.,h.

SCHEDULE: 40 viscosity: 0.76 contipoisi %

O abs. roughness:

6 in

.0018 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

'A

[

NOMINAL SIZE: ^ ~,'

k inside diameter: 6.065 in .f . ]

FLUID VELOCITY : .

?

PIPE LENGTH: 43.25 ft TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

.y".'.

PRESSURE IN:

ELEVATION IN: OUT:

OUT: ---------------------------

O-------------------_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ./A LV E S AN D F I TTI N G0S ft V&F TOTAL K 4.089

' 'RBULENT FFT: 0.015 V&F HEAD LOSS:

2= REDUCER l 13.25 K 0.395

.=2

  • TEE-BRANCH K 1.787 4= CK-SW-VRT K 0.745
  • l 3= GATE K 0.119 5 = 5
  • ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 1.043 w:

READY PRINTER ...- press P to START PRINT, (ESC) to CANCEL PRINT

? .'.' .

DESIGN REPORT PIPE f 43 -

PIPELINE DH43

- - - - - - - l FLUID PROPERTIES


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS r ..

WATER at 90 deg-F N FLUID:

MATERIAL: SSTEEL density: 62.108 lbs/ft"3 *i'V SCHEDULE: 40 viscosity: 0.76 centipois

  • abs. roughness: .0018 in 6 in DESIGN FLOW RATE:

NOMINAL SIZE: .

inside diameter: 6.065 in FLUID VELOCITY :

TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

PIPE LENGTH: 31.5 ft

- I PRESSURE IN: l ELEVATION IN:

OUT: .

OUT: --------------------------- l O -------------------------

URBULENT FFT: 0.015 VALVES AND FITTINGS V&F HEAD IASS: 0 ft V&F TOTAL K 2.271 l l

2= REDUCER l 13.25 K 0.395 q. l 1= TEE-BRANCH K 0.894 ELBOW-L, 45 deg K 0.148 3=4

  • ELBOW-L, 90 deg K 0.834 4=

'; l ANALYSIS / CALCULATION r

h 9'l-cor 3 '

READY PRINTER ... press P to STAJtf N # , (ESC) to WANCEL PRIN7 REV J SHEET $~ op f~~ ,

REFvRI "IPE ! 44 ua.

PIPELINE DESIGN  %

DH44 - - - - -


----- . FLUID PROPERTIES


PIPE CHARACTERISTICS .

WATER at 90 deg FLUID: ,.

MATERIAL: SSTEEL

_ density: 62.108 lbs/ft'3 SCHEDULE: 40 _

viscosity: 0.76 centipois f, abs. roughness: .0018 in' .;

DESIGN FLOW RATE:

NOMINAL SIZE: 14 in .

inside diameter: 13.124 in FLUID VELOCITY TOTAL HEAD LOSS:

PIPE LENGTH: 31 ft Q.f4 PRESSURE IN. '

ELEVATION IN:  :#-

e OUT:

OUT: -----------------------. ,


VALVE 3 AND FITTINGS V&F TOTAL K O'.62 V&F HEAD LOSS: 0 ft 3RBULENT FFT: 0.013 9. .

( 2= ENTR-SHARP K~ Oii S 1= ELBOW-L, 45 deg K 0.126 l e

- +va

_ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ . _ .. __ - _ - - ~ . . _. _ _ . _

4 BAW-1385. Rev.6 O Drcernber 1992 WATER CHEMISTRY MANUAL FOR 177FA PLANTS B&W NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES Special Products & Integrated Services Division

. / LYO'3/C/.LCULATION Doc 10aM9Y-##I3 ATT# 0 REV A _. SHEET I OF II l

\

'!his revision of the BWNT Water Chemistry Manual provides revisions for Pans 1,9, l and 10. Part I revisions address the use of Lithium for pH control in the RCS, and guidelines for shutdown and layup. Revisions in Parts 9 and 10 address the use of Morpholine and alternate amines to control the pH of the steam plant. b addition versus concentration curves have been added for ethanolamine (ETA), 2 amino,2

'\

methylpropanol (AMP), and 3-methoxypropylamine (MPA). .

1 I

l i

g
/ / 7b

_/

Prepared by: .

/

DW Koch

- h^- -) _ Date: I 6 Reviewed by: ' ,

'LS Lamanna'

/ jf Ars Date: /~47 - U

[,E Gety,rter Approved by:r'

i I

O 1.1.16 Hydroren 1.1.12. :De hydrogen is i

Dissolved hydrogen is used in the reactor coolant asf thediscussed makeup tank. in sect indirectly maintained in the coolant with a hydrogen atmosphere in sater and seal return water enter the tank through ahspray Spraying n action helps Letdor:

hydrogen in the water. In some cases, such as degassing the re to remove the hydrogen from the entering water.

i ii l or when He hydrogen is effective in suppressing i the tinues dissolved even when the coreoxygen significant gamma radiation is being produced l 1 18.in the core (gamma rl J is producing decay heat). Hydrogen is a control parameter. Refer Table 1-18 Hydrogen Control val.UE PRIOR TO ACTION LEVELS ** CRmCALITY" SPECIFICATION 3 2

I Cold Shutdown *'

]

( _

~" -

l

  • Y -

_ 2.i 5 ]

i -

a _

criocat/ Power Opersoon -

1 15 15

< 25 > 50 I

25 50 i

  • A5 values are in usins of ec(STP)/Kg H:0 1

, u:Ith :

(a) MbM 'o( '

zI ,4,

- As swed is secnos 2.10. 0.1 cc H:tSTP)/Kg waar is suf5cient to pas a

' (b) radiochernical peducts when producing decay heat.h e operating modes to beb con l to have a res=&ialof hydrogenin the coolant duttng t es

" *N ,N L ' f.

.iNALYSIS/ CALCULATION Doc to s_MW-nf3 ATT # b

( REV 2 SHEET $l op //

l(

J

'b 5

n Tr 3

$153

(

l

f O Henry's Law states that the Mathematically, concentration of a gas in solution is this is expressed by:

the gas in the atmosphea to which it is in contact.

X, P, / Q ANALYSIS / CALCULATION DOC 10 # N@##f'3 ATT# b where.

REV._ Z SHEET 3 op H H, = Henry's Law Constant for gas A P, = Partial pressure of gas A in the gas phase X, = Mole fraction of gas A in the water phase i l be expressed by:

in order to simplify the unit conversion factors, t can a so S, - P, / H, or, Pa - Sa xQ p# '

's t #

A NA #

a:

where, g

$= Solubility of gas A in water phase, ce gas (STP)/Kg water.

4 .

H, = Heniy's Law constant for gas A. ~

j i

P, = Partial pressure of gas A in gas phase. psia. '?

? - . . , , 100150*F is 0.9245 ne Henry's. Law constant for hydrogen over the temperature range 9 ?of 8'

map y , _m M.

Kg psia /cc(STP). ;a For Henry's Law constants for the hydrog ;jz' w- j J,9 w nus, d((partial pressure for 25 50 cc H (STP)/Kg H 0 is 22-4 3 Henry's law is based on a static system and a dynamic l t ds situ in actual operations, the partial pressure required to maintain thej i

to deviate from Henry's law.

f f I

%J During criticality and power operations, the sample frequency tion (i.e. is sampling is recommended during operatiorts that may significandy feed and' bleed, purging of the pressurized vapor space, etc.) 3. ,

t-54

l

\

O operating limit. During startup, the sample frequency should be once During shutdown for refueling and similar maintenance, the sample fre (but may be discontinued when oxygen is determined to be present).

If the analysis shows that the hydrogen concentration is below the specified start to appear in the coolant. In this case the partial pressure of hydro should be checked. A deficiency of hydrogen in the gas space of the tank c gas with the manifold for the hydrogen supply cylinders. If the hydrogen However, if the concentration is considerably the specification range, no real problem should exist.

above the specified range, a gas problem may exist in the RC system. H An over-specification to the total gas in the coolant and is discussed further in section 1.1.17.

co'ocentration can be gradually reduced over a period of time by gradually venti gas in the raakeup tank to the WD system. When the RC system is to opening the system for maintenance or refueling, it is desirable to dega This action wUl prevent the evolution and spread of an excessive amount i h O* to the reactor buuding, ed thus, wul minimize the possibuity of explosion. During d hydrogen is vented to the WD system. The hydrogen can be reduced to I

15 cc/kg prior to shutdown (Start cooldown at .s.15 cc/kg, and then use hy 1 the remainder).

Henrv's Law Constants for Nitronen and Hydroren Table 1-19 H.

Temperature H. Kr Psia /ce(STP)

F Kr-Psia /ccf!R} -

0.949 63 re 0.843 1.221 0.923 100,,3 7 ~

1.483 0.926 6150 ~ 1.542 m 0.833 t200f 1.364 250 0.699 1 1.184 300 0.584 0.984 350 0.476 0.785 400 0.389 0.601 450 0.312 0.447 500 0.240 0.327 550 0.176 0.217 600 0.128 1

~

I sema AWNS Dxmm M It11005m ANALYSIS / CALCULATION S - r, n,%

  • H, = cocmu rw Nivogos . DOC 10 dfM_pg(3 ~ ATT A- /,

REV~ Z-- _SHEETj__og__ ,,

1.ss

I l

O Of specific interest, is the gas pocket formed in the reactor vessel head during the system. De vents on the pressure boundary housings for the control rod drives ar De same situation does not exist in the RC loops as the air to enter and displace the drained coolant.

loops have connections for using nitrogen to displace the drained water.

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION DOC lD #MN"Wd'3 ATT # $

1.1.17 Total Gas SHEET [ Op l}

REV 2 Note: De cc (STP)/Kg water max limit for total dissolved gas has been eliminated as it is very difficult to relate specific dissolved gas con-centrations to gas problems in the RCS (the pressure boundary housings for the control rod drives, in particular) for the range of pressure and '

temperature conditions that can exist. In place of a specification, minimum allowable pressure - temperature curves should be used as presented below. - )

i The total dissolved gas in the coolant will consist primarily of hydrog;en and nitrogen wi of argon and other gases. Hydrogen should be the major constituent because it is used t oxygen. Nitrogen should exist in significant quantities because it is used to blanket containing makeup water for the reactor coolant. Nitrogen may also be present as a re Dissolved gases in the and radiolytic decomposition of hydrazine after it has been used in the coolant.

coolant can come out of solution if there is a pressure ' reduction to the point where the total less than the sum of the partial pressures of the' dissolved gases and the partial pressure of th coolant. If such a condition exists, it may resultlme the formation of gas pockets in the press housings of de control rod drives where structual" damage may occur if a control rod Derefore, it is important to maintain the total pressure higher than the sum of the partial pressu specific location.

ne minimum pressure required to ensure that dissolved gues stay in solution is a direct O- following:

I l 1 54

O

  • Putlal pressure of gu to keep the gas in solution per Henry's Law
  • Partial (saturation) water vapor pressure
  • Pressure error due to temperature measurement error
  • Pressure error due to pressure measurement error Pressure difference between pressure tap location and point of m Or, stated muhematically (with atmospheric pressure converted from psia to P. = P. + P, + P, + P, + P, - 14.7 where, P

= Minimum pressure reading which assures gases will remain in s

= Partial (saturation) pressure of water, psia P.

P, = Sum of partial pressures of dissolved gases, psia

= Pressure error due temperature measurement error, psi P.

t P,

= Pressure error due to pressure measurement error, psi P,

= Pressure difTerence between pressure tap location and point of m in RCS 1

P, = Pg + P, + . . . .etc.

where, P, = Puttal pressure of dissolved gas No. I psia . . .

m  : ,.

P, = Partial pressure of dissolved gas No. 2 psia

""1 6 5 P, = Sp/Hg , P, = S,/H, , etc.

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION Doc to iMff-vaf3 ATT s 0 REV- b SHEET._h_op l/

t-57

__m _ . _ _ _ _ _- . _ _ . . _ _ . .___ _ _ _ - _ .

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION DOC 10# N I"##O ATT # d where.

REV b SHEET 7 OF II S,, = solubility of dissolved gas No. ,1, cc(STP)/Kg H 0' 3

S,3 = solubility of dissolved gas No. 2, cc(STP)/Kg H:0 H,, .= Henry's Law constant for dissolved gas No. I, cc/Kg in coolant H,3 = Henry's Law constant for dissolved gas No. 2, cc/Kg in coolant P,, P, and P, are characteristics of the RCS temperature and pressure instrume pumps, respectively.

Using the above relationships a minimum allowable pressure vs temperature graph sho Since P., P, and P, can be plant specific, it should be developed for each plant. An ex of minimum allowable pressure vs temperature is shown in Figure 19. In order to ensure tha not come out of solution, the pressure has to be maintained above or to the left of the curves.

I O Figure 1-9 is based on the following:

(! A total dissolved gas concentration of 100 cc (STP)/Kg water consisting of 70 cc 1 (1)

  • H (ST) ).'Kg water and 30 cc N,(STP)/Kg water which provides some co the ' ydroge specifikation range is 25-50 cc (STP)/Kg water F and nitrogen of 10-20 cc(STP)/Kg water may be present.

.t (2) Tae Henry's law constants for nitrogen and hydrogen are according to those lis Table 1-19.

(3) ' The plant has the following pressure instrumentation and actual measurement; 3;o instrument errors. -4y jy; 1,,- .

s a y:4 RCs wide range 0-2500 psig i 34 psi y w RCs low range 0-400 psig i 10 psi ,4

~

e,. '

.u 7 nr (4)

The plant has a wide range temperature instrument of 50-650'F w temperature error of i 10*F.

(5) P, with 4 pumps operating is 33 psi.

The most critical time when a ' gas-out' problem can exist is when a special operation is perfor nitrogen is used in the pressurizer to provide pressure to operate the RC purops. See P I information.

e i.5:

m U FIGURE l 9 Minimum Allowable Pressure for 100 std ec Gas (70 sta ec HJKn Water + 30 std ec NJKn Wa'* .

With four (4) RC Pumos Ooeratina 1700 -

1600 -

0 Low Range Pressure instrumentation  ;

and Wide Range Temperature instrumentation l 1500 - '

+ Wide Range Pressure Instrumentation -

1400 - I and Wide Range Temperature Instrumentation 1300 -

l t 200 -  !

I100 -

a rn a

1000 -

O 900 -

t h Id 800 -  ;

o.  !

700 - ,

500 -

I l

500 .

r 9 4009

Nr g f,' .d dj,j

.300 g

. :n 200 -

0 _

i i 1 i

100j[ i i i i 490 540 590 190 240 290 340 390 440 58 90 140 TEMPERATURE , F ANALYSIS / CALCULATION i

DOC 10 MM- 00 63 ATT # l.e

. REV Z- SHEET E _ op fl I 59 .

l

s t

iO l.1.18 Hydruine ne use of hydruine to scavenge oxygen is discussed in section 1.1.12. De chemical an reactions associated with the use of hydruine in the reactor coolant are:

(1) Normal oxygen scavenging reactions:

N3 R - 0,

  • 2%0 - N 2 Decomposition in a radiation field: ANALYSIS / CALCULATION (2)

OC IDM 4-OdQ ATT #- [

(a) In a deaerated solution:

Y l SHEET _ $ op jg (b) in an aerated solution:

NH*N:-2%

24 O (3) Dermal decomposition:

a 2 N2 %

  • 2 NH - N3 - M 3

T Except for water, the products of th'e above reactions are ammonia, hydrogen and n thermal decomposition reaction is the same as the radiochemical reaction in an aerated so The rer:uon between oxygen and l@razine in a radiation environment appears to be faster t a non radiation field. In early;phy plant operation experience, there were indications that high t

concentrations of hydruine aixl/ot aEmonia caused chloride releases from the purification However. these problems have diminished with the availability and use of " low chloride Under some circumstances, hydruine additions can be used as a way of adding dissolved hy When adding hydruine to scavenge the coolant as indicated by the above radiochemical reactions.

oxygen, it is suggested that the additions be made gradually in steps of 0.1-1.0 ppm amount of hydrazine required.

1

reactor coolant. Analyses for soditan are not required, but can be performed if

~~-

O '

Make Tank Gas Somos ,

ALCULATION 2.1.3 ,

Doc 10 sf{1y gg3 ' ATT L -

(s )

REV_ _Z~

2.1.3.1 M j SHEET d OF__ //

J ,

'1he makety tank's gas space is primarily monitored to detemine (1) the oxygen l buildup in the space, and (2) the percentage of hydrogen in the total gas, oxygen may tend to collect, even thou#1 the reactor coolant normally does not contain significant amounts of mygen. Althou$1 hy&.%i is the main constituent of the gas space, other gases may tend to collect. Monitoring the perantage of H2 is of particular interest when the reactor coolant for suds operations as refueling is dupsea4, and when the dissolved H2 in the coolant after refueling is re-established.

2.1.3.2 Oxvoen oxygen can build g in the makeup tank gas space through radiolytic dissociatice of water in the reactor and subsequent carryover of the oxygen into the letdown storage tank, or through fresh makeup added to the RC system.

'the buildte of oxygen in this tank should be very small, but could result in a

t flamable mixture being fonned if it approaches 4% d 2 by volume. A buildup 1 s '

of oxygen in the makeup tank gas space can be relieved by venting the gas spaa to the WD systen vent Wr.

2.1.3.3 Hviu.-n and Other caea I

( _ tty

.As Hydrogen should be the main gaseous con $b.tlient' inh makeup tank gas space, but other gases, such as ning,"diSkh bilect there. '1he hydrogen l concentratico is analyzed primarily to determine its relationship to the total gas in the gas space and for informational purpcses wtwn the reactor coolant is dogassed.

Accordirg to Henry's law, the partial pressure of hydrogen in the tank NR7 to prwide 25 tc 50 cc H /kg 2 H O 2 in the coolant is abxt 22 to 44

+.

2-5

_. ..~ _ .._..___ __ _ __.- ._ _ ._ _ . . . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _

psia or 10.3 to 29.3 psig. Of course, the true partial-presure requirments

' will deperd cm the actual characteristics of the systan. 'Ibo little hydrogan can be remedied by introducing the required amount of hydrugen into the gas space fran the hydrogen manifold. In the unlikely event that the hydrogen concentration is too high, venting to the wasta dispecal vent twdar will relieve the situation.

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION 2"1'4 M&*= Tank mter Soace DOCID# M '## O ATT# b 2.1.4.1 General REV. E SHEET ll OF- // l Owing to the short residence time of water in the tank, the itens that can be monitored with sagles of this water can be monitored equally as well with sa m les frta other sa g le points. 'Ihe possible exceptians are: (1) the l suspended matter which may be contributed to the wter circulating through the closed loop u ..idai to the RC punp seals on same plants; (2) possibly the efficiency of the purification filters in ruoving suspended material; and (3) the actual relationship between the partial pressure of H2 in the gas space to that in the water.

O

' 2.1.4.2 Susoended Solids ,

'Ib prevent possible damage to the RC punp seals, the particle size of the suspended solids in the water going to these maala must h cehulled. On ucst plants the suspended solids are controlled with filter (s) on the seal water lines to the punps. On other plants, the basic size of the susperded material in the locp used to supply water to these seals is governed by the purification filters downstream of the demineralizers. 'Ib quantify the suspended solids, a large volume of water must be run through a Mil 11 pore sustirans filter. 'Ibe ci frequency of this analysis is left to the discretion of the plant operators.

c i

2.1.4.3 Dissolved Hydrocen Durirg the early stages of initial plant operations, it is desirable to sa.ple ard arnlyze the tank vater spa for dissolved hydrogen to determine the true O

t

~ --

2-6

.s s

-mn.

9;m imNTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION M94-0053 REV.2, SHEET 1 cf 17

!!~ ~ Ei p %g a,,,i ~ -

PURPOSE /BACKGRO_UND: l l l l l l l 3 This at_tachm_ent provides explination of observed MUT pressure response to changes in level which dif fer from OP-1038 Allowable Curve shape. ,

l ...

RESULTS / CONCLUSIONS: '~

N 7~

The ma}or difference of observed response to allowable curve is due to instrument error in either level l

_.or pressure _rneasurement which differs from that used in developing the allowable curve. In addition, changes in gas and water temperatures during these observations further add to deviations from l

^

{the cu[e. T' eh maximum difference between the max. + E and the allowable curve is 1 psi over the 86" to 55"

! operating range and if the expected temperature deviation is 4 deg. F the pressure change is limited  !

to 0.5 psi from temperature for a total of 1.5 psi. This could be used as a basis of operating range.

_ ... .. . I l I l l l l l CHART _1 shows maximum error bands of calculated Maximum MUT Overpressure for Indicated Levels, l(A - Maximum errors for Ind. below ideal, B - Ideal or no Instrument Error, and C - Maximum error for ind. above ideall jCHART_1 also shows maximum error bands of Indicated Pressure when lowering level from 86 in. l

and starting with 29.14 psig Indicated, the OP-103 limit. (D - Maximum error for Ind. below ideal, E - Ideal or no

}lnstrum'ent Error, and F - Maximum error for Ind. above ideal)

_ ART _I G is a continuation of 1 for A. B,[ & E and new Expansion IDEAL. Both expansion plots sho l l l fCH _ . . _

, case instrument . error conditions the indication may not follow the allowable curve. This condition is not a Safety l Concern because the Calculated _ Max. allowable Pressure value includes worst case Instrument errors of both jLevel and Pressure Indication. The Expansion plots include a resulting Ind. pressure error of + 1.12 psi and level _ >

lerror of - 2.7 in. The ideal Expansion starts with the initial error of level and pressure but usies ideal resulting values.

f t he ideal expansion doesn't exceed the ideal Maximum MU_T Overpressure Limit , therefore, Gas Entrainment would ,

be prevented if an accident were to occur. l

_ _ L __ . - .- __ _ 1 . . .L _

CHART 2 shows REDAS data from a water add to the MUT and resulting pressure response with plots

~

of Maximum lns'trument error bands of indicated pressure for the compression. I i b_ l  ! I _)  ! __.

jCHART 3 shows REDAS data from a level reduction in the MUT and resulting pressure response t

with plots of Maximum Instrument error bands of indicated pressure for the expansion

.._b l l _

l l

{ CHART 4 shows CHART 2 data with a expected response corrected for measured temperatures and Maximum Instrument Errors to approach REDAS Data.

s .x_ I '# $ $l b > l l  ;

.,-CHART 5 shows' CHART 3 ddts with a exiiected respons'e corrected for measured temperature and Instrument errors of +-1' psi and -2.5 in level error because of low reference leg level.  !

[ l l l I I  !

094% r 1 ht R 4 "

ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION .A94-OO53 REV.2, SHEET 2 cf 17 T_AB_ LE_OF A_LLOWABLE MUT OVERPRESSURE FOR MAXIMUM (- ),0, AND ( + ) ERRORS (SEE CHART 1) i

~

5 ft 0 I72121 9005.431 ~

TANK -TANK NEW TANK

~

TANK NEW TANK TANK NEW ~

LEVEL VOLUME GAS _ WATE_R VOLUME OP-1038 51 ALOW VOLUME GAS WATER VOLUME OP-103B GAS 5* ALOW VOLUME WATER VOLUME OP-103B 5' ALOW DELTA

.] DELTA 1ndicated

. ._W/ E_ __

W'/ 5El (-) Error W/O E W/O E[ _ No Error WI + E W/ + E ( + ) Error (I) (+)

X - AXtS . PLOT A PLOT B PLOT C in ft 3 ft 3

"% 4ds@ ft 3 " ' ft*3 psig ft 3 ft'3 psig 4.971678_ . .. 5.380414

..t_

! _.86 203.80 I -396 4_6

':29.14 192.67 407.59, 32.70 181.53 418.73 36.56 -3.56 3.86 1 85 207.92 _ 3_92.34 28.30 196.79 403.4,7 31.76 185.66 414.60 35.51 -3.47 3.75 84j 212.05 .

388.21 27.49 200.91 399.35 30.86 189.78 410.48 34.50 -3.37 3.64 i 83) 21_6.1_7_ . _384.09, 205.04 395.22 30.00 193.90 406.36 33.54 -3.29 3.53 (26.71 82, 220.3_0 . _ 379.96 - * " 25'.97 209.16 391.10,. 29.17 198.03 402.23 32.61 -3.20 3.44 l

, 81 224.42 375.84 25.25 213.29 386.97 28.37 202.15 398.11 31.72 -3.13 3.35 80 228.54 371.72 24.55 217.41 382.85 27.61 206.27 393.99 30.87 -3.05 3.26 79 23.88 _ 221.53 26.87 210.40 389.86 30.05 -2 99 3.18 23'2.67] 67.59 378.75{

78 23G.79 363.47 23.24 225.66 374.60 26.16 214.52 385.74 29.26 -2.92 3.11 77 240.91 22.61 229.78 370.48 25.47 218.65 381.61 28.50 -2.86 3.03

_359.35 _ _ ._

76 245.04 355.22 22.01 ~ 233.90 366.36 24.81 222.77 377.49 27.77 -2.80 2.97 75 21.42 238.03 362.2{ 24.17 226.89 373.37 27.07 -2.74 2.90 249.16[ 351._10

-2.69 2.84 346.98 20.86 242.15 358.11 23.55 231.02 369.24 26.39 74[ _253.28 .

25.73 -2.64 2.78 731 257.41 342.85 20.31 246.27 353.99 22.95 235.14 365.12 261.53 19.78 250.40 349.86 22.37 239.26 361.00 25.10 -2.59 2.73 72! ._ 338.73 71 j . 265.65 334.61 19.27 254.52 345.74 21.81 243.39 356.87 24.49 -2.55 2.67 70 269.78,. 330_.48 _ 18.77 .

258.64 341.62 ._

21.27 247.51 352.75 23.89 -2.50 2.62 69, 273 90 326_.3_6 18.29 .

262.77 337.49 20.75 251.63 348.63 23.32 -2.46 2.58 278.03 _322.23 17.82 266.89 333.37 20.24 255.76 344.50 22.77 -2.42 2.53 68j _

22.23 -2.38 2.49 67j 282.15 31_8.11 __17.36 271.02 329._2_4. _

19.74 259.88 340.38 66! 286.27 313.99 16.92 275.14 325.12 ~~ 19.26 264.01 336.25 21.71 -2.35 2.45 65I 290.40 '309.86 16.49 279.26 321.00 18.80 268.13 332.13 21.21 -2.31 2.41 64 294.52 305.74 16.07 283.39 316.87 18.35 272.25 328.01 20.72 -2.28 2.37 63 15.66 287.51 312.75 17.91 276.38 323.88 20.24 -2.25 2.33

! 298 6_4 ._301.62 297.49 15.27 291.63 308.63 17.48 280.50 319.76 19.78 -2.21 2.30

_ _ _6 2 . _302.77 306.89 _._ _293.37 14.88 295.76 304.50 17.07 284.62 315.64 19.33 -2.19 2.27 61} -2.16 2.24 60 311.01 289.25 14.51 299.88 300.38 16.66 288.75 311.51 18.90 285.12 14.14 304.00 296.26 16.27 292.87 307.39 18.48 -2.13 2.21 59_ 31_5.1_4 58 319.26 281.00 13.78._ 308.13 292.13 15.89 296.99 303.27 18.06 -2.10 2.18 57 323.39 276.87 13.44 312.25 288.01 15.51 301.12 299.14 17.66 -2.08 2.15 56 157.li1 ~ 272.75 13.10 316.38 283.88"~

15.15 305.24 295.02 17.27 ~

-2.05 ~

2.12

-2.03 2.10

~

55f 351'~.63 ~268.63 12.77 320.50 279.76 14.80 309.37 290.89 16.89 2Ol d - _ _ _ - _ _ _ -

l O ATTACHMENT 7. CALCULATION .494-0053 REV.2, SHEET 3 of 17 O O TABLE OF MUT OVERPRESSURE EXPANDED FROM 29.14 psig AT 86' INDICATED WITH MAXIMUM (-),0, & ( + ) ERRORS ^ ~ ~ " ~

i (SEE CHART 1) [ _

'l GAS . _.

WATER Expn from GAS WATER Expn from GAS WATER Expn from DELTA DELTA LEVEL _ [ VOLUME _ VOLUME 29.14# VOLUME VOLUM E_ 29.14# VOLUME VOLUME 29.14# (+) (-I todicated W/ + E _ W/_+ E ( + ) Error _W/O E W/O E No Error W/-E W/ - E (-) Error X - AXIS I<A .

I<A PLOT D 1=A I=A . PLOT E I>A 1>A PLOT F in ft3._ ft 3 _

l < A,psig ft 3 ft 3 l = A,psig ft 3 ft 3 l > A,psig 418.73 29.14 192.67 407.59 29.14 203.80 396.46 29.14 0.00 0.00 86, 181.53, 85 18_S._66 _ 4_14.60 28.25 196.79 403.47 28.32 207.92 392.34 28.38 -0.07 0.06 84 189.78 , 41_0.48 27.39 _ 200.91 399.35 27.52 212.05 388.21 27.64 -0.13 0.12 83 193.90 26.56 205.04 395.2_2 26.76 216.17 384.09 26.93 -0.19 0.18

_1 98.03; . . 4_06.36

_82_7 402.23 25.77 ___ 209.16 391.10 26.02 220.30 379.96 26.24 -0.25 0.23 81 [ 20215!. 398.11 25.00 213.29 386.97 25.31 224.42 375.84 25.58 -0.30 0.28 24.26 217.41 382.85 24.62 228.54 371.72 24.94 -0.35 0.32 80L _206.2_7{ . 393.99. 389.86 79[, _210.40[_

123.85 221.53- 378.73 23.95 232.67 367.59 24.32 -0.40 0.37 78! 214.52' 185.74 .

22.87 225.66 374.60 23.31 236.79 363.47 23.72 -0.45 0.41 77l 218.65 381.61 22.20 229.78 370.48 22.69 240.91 359.35 23.14 -0.49 0.45 76[ _222.77 j 377.49 21.56 233.90 366.36 22.09 245.04 355.22 22.57 -0.53 0.48 75i 226.891 373.37 20.94 238.03 362.23 21.51- 249.16 351.10 22.03 -0.57 0.52 74; 231.02 36_9.24 20.34 242.15 358 11_. 20.94 253.28 346.98 21.50 -0.60 0.55 73[ 235.14 ,_._365.12 19.76 246.27 353.99 .

20.40 257.41 342.85 20.98 -0.63 0.58 721 239.26 361.00 19.20 250.40 349.86 19.87 261.53 338.73 20.48 -0.67 0.61 71i 243.39 356.87 18.66 254.52 345.74 19.36 265.65 334.61 20.00 -0.70 0.64 70, 247.51 .

352.75 18.13 258.64 341.62 18.86 _

269.78 330.48 19.52 -0.72 0.67 69 251.63 348.63 17.62 262.77 337.49 18.37 273.30 326.36 19.06 -0 75 0.69 68[ 255.76 344.50.

17.13 _

266.89 333.37 17.90 278.00 322.23 18.62 -0.78 0.72 67j 2_59.88] 340.38 16.65 271.02 329.24 17.45 282.15 318.11 18.18 -0.80 0.74 66 264.01 336.25 16.18 275.14 325.12 17.00 286.27 313.99 17.76 -0.82 0.76 65 268.13 332.13 15.72 279.26 321.00 16.57 290.40 309.86 17.35 -0.84 0.78 64 ~ ~27235 328.01 15.28 283.39 316.8I 16.15 294.52 305.74 16.95 -0.87 0.80 63 ~ 276'.38 323.88 14.85 287.51 312.75 15.74 298.64 301.62 16.oo -0.88 0.82

_62 _ 280.50; 319.76 14.44 291.63 308.63 15.34 302.77 297.49 16.18 -0.90 0.84 61 284.62 315.64 14.03 295.76 304.50 14.95 306.89 293.37 15.81 -0.92 0.86 60 288.75_ 311.51 13.64 299.88 300.38 14.57 311.01 289.25 15.45 -0.94 0.87 59 292.87 307.39 13.25 304.00 296.26 14.21 315.14 285.12 15.10 -0.95 0.89 58 296.99 303.27 12.88 308.13 292.13 13.85 319.26 281.00 14.75 -0.97 0.90 i 57 _ 30_1.12 299.14 12.51 312.25 288.01 .

13.50 323.39 276.87 14.41 -0.98 0.92 !

56 305.24 295.02 12.16 316.38 283.88 13.15 327.51 272.75 14.09 -1.00 0.93 55 309.37 290.89 11.81 320.50 279.76 12.82 331.63 268.63 13.77 -1.01 0.95 I

O O O ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION .A94-0053 REV.2, SHEET 4 cf 17 i

t I

TABLE OF MUT GAS COMPRESSION FROM 74" TO 78" EXPECTED PRESS ERROR BAND AND REDAS DATA (SEE CHART 2)

TANK Expected TANK TANK Expected TANK TANK Expected  ;

__ TA_NK GAS _ WATER Cmp from GAS WATER Cmp from GAS WATER Comp from X359 jiVOLUME_ VO_LUME 10.07# VOLUME 10.07# VOLUME VOLUME 10.07# 7:58 AM INCHES W/ + E ( + ) Error W/O E VOLUME W/O E __ _. No Error W/-E W/-E (-) Error X401  ;

f _W/ + E PLOT J 1=A PLOT H I>A I>A PLOT I X - AXIS 1. _I _ < A I<A PLOT G _l=A l> A, psig PSIG l < A,psig ft 3 ft 3 i = A, psig ft 3 ft'3 L

. .. .. ] _ ft 3 ft 3 4 242.27 357.99 10.07 253.41 346.85 10.07 10.07 i 73.971 231.14 _

33 2 -

10.07

363.26 10.54 248.13 352.13 10.50 10.33

'75.25 _ 225_.86 374.40 . :10.58 237,00 ,

354.03 10.65 10.42 75.71 376.29' ~ 10.77 235.10 365.16 10.71 246.23 i 22_3.97 76.37 221.24 11.05 232.38 367.88 10.96 243.51 356.75 10.88 10.59

__ 379.02_. ,

77.04 218.48 381.78 11.34 229.61 -370.65 11.22 240.75 359.51 11.12 10.82 77.63 21'6 05 j8d.~2i .11.60 ~ 327.18 373.08[ 11.46 238.32' 361.94 11.33 11.13 l 238.03 362.23 11.36 11.22 11.49

'77.7 215.76 384.50 11.63 226.89 373.37

\

-n. , w vw s

!- +- En ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION .494-0053 REV.2, SHEET 5 cf 17 t

[

I TABLE OF MUT GAS EXPANSION FROM 86* TO 55" EXPECTED PRESS ERROR BAND AND REDAS DATA. (SEE CHART 3)

Expected TANK TANK Expected TANK TANK Expected j

_.._. _ . _T[ANK _[ TANK Exp from .X401 X359 _ GAS. WATER Exp from GAS WATER Exp from GAS WATER  ;

l_NCHES _ VOLUME . VOLUME 32.38# VOLUME VOLUME 32.38# VOLUME VOLUME 32.38# PSIG I l . _

W/ + E W/ + E ( +) Error W/O E W/O E No Error W/ - E W/-E (-) Error -  :

X - AXIS 'I<A 'I < A PLOT K I=A I=A PLOT L I>A 1>A PLOT M PLOT N -

ft*3 ft 3 l < A, psig~ ft 3 ft 3 l = A, psig ft 3 ft 3 l> A, psig 8656I ~ 17932j 421.04 32.38 190.36 409.90 32.38 201.49 398.77 32.38 32.38 86.58 ,159[.1 421.12 32.40 190.28 409.98 32.40 201.41 398.85 32.40 32.36 j 86.52 179.39: 420.87 32.34 190.52 409.74 32.34 201.66 398.60 32.35 32.38  !

8G.43 _4 20.50 32.25 19_0.89 409.37 32.26 202.03 398.23 32.27 32.31  ;

179.76l 86,33 ._ 180_d l__ 420.09 32.15 191.31 408.95 32.17 202.44 397.82 32.19 32.27 84.9 '

186.07 414.19 30.78 197.20 403.06 30.90 ^ 208.34 391.92 31.01 31.36 29.69

~

. 82.56 195.72 404.54 28.70 206.85 393.41 28,97 217.99 382.27 29.21  !

80.24 205.29 ~

394.97 26.81 216.42 383.84 27.21 227.55 372.71 27.57 27.89 i

~ 78.U53 214MU ^ 385.86 25.16 225.53 374.73 25.66 236.67 363.59 -26.12 26.36  ;

75.87 223.U1 376.95 23.66 234.44 365.82 24.25 245.57 354.69 24.79 24.95 73568 T67.92 22.25 243.47 356.79 22.92 254.60 345.66 23.54 23.68 '

71.44 {241'.57'

~

232 34 358.69 20.91 252.71 347.55 21.65 263.84 336.42 22.34 22.42 69.1'4~~ 25i.06 349.20 19.63 '262.19 338.07 20.44 273.32 326.94 21.19 21.16 ,

. 66.82 260.62 339.64 18.42 271.76 328.50 19.29 282.89 317.37 20.09 20.05 64.51 270.15 330,11 317.30 281.28 318.98 18.22 292.42 307.84 19.07 19.03 279.68 290.81 17.22 301.94 298.32 18.12 18.04 w.t i. 62.2, 3 038 M~16.252 _ .f. 309.45 288.87 17.22 17.15 59.9_1 289 12 311j14 i rM~28- _ 300.25 AD300.01 16.28 311.39 57.66_ 298 40,.

301.86 ~ 14.37 309.53 290.73 .

15.42 320.66 279.60 16.39 16.28 55.47 "

307.43 292.83 13.55 ~ 318.56 281.70 14.62 329.69 270.57 15.62 15.51 53.66 314.89! ~285 57 12.89 326.02 274.2A 13.99 337.16 263.10 15.01 14.79

.us .. .n1 TvW t r

  • wmn oppm nga w J

O O O

.c

% @4 iATTACHMENT 7 CALCULATION .A94-0053 REV.2, SHEET 6 cf 17 The below REDAS data is frorti 2/15/95,0745 to 0805 and from Control Room Log 150 gal. was

~ ~~~

addedio~t_hQUT from the RC Ble6d Tank /?B". It is assbmMi the temperature of the Bleed Tank is 80 F. The level change is from 73.55" to 77.7" ,(4.15" change, @30.84 gai/in this  :

is approximately 128 gal added) from Minute 5 to 12, (7 min.). The tank water temperature drops

~

f[ron[1'I4 @I~nfin to 112.2 @ 16 min.'The flows going into the tank during the add are assumed to be 175 aprn for recire, le,tdown, and seal return at 114 F. The batch add is 150/7 for 21.4 opm @ 80 F.

Combining the MUT in flow temps. gives an approximate water temperature of 110 F.

~

l I(175 + 21.4 = 196.4,175/196.4 = 0.89, 21.4/196.4 = 0.11, h = 0.89X81.97 + 0.11 X48.4 = 78.27110F)

The gas temperature is estimated to change one deg. per min. to 110. I i This change in tank water temperature also effects the vapor pressure used in the calculation ,

~[130 F isl5927,114 F is 1.4299, and 110 F is 1.275 1 l Instrument error used in expected is -2.7 in (below indicated level) and - 1.12 psi (below indicated pressure)

(SEE CHART 4)

TANK TANK Expected

[~ _[ _

15 1995 7:45 to GAS WATER Cmp from DELTA

! 2 estimated 9.91# vapor Expected

.X359 ' 'R ~^

X208 X359 7:58 AM VOLUME ~

VOLUME INCHES DEG F INCHES X401 W/ E W/ E gas temp press (- REDAS

[ PSIG water Minute l psi

..__... __ , ft 3 ft 3 F psig psi  ;

{..___._.--  ! _ __ _

73.67 0 114.3 73.67 9.932 ~

l 73.67 1 113.7 73.67 9.996 73.62 3 2, _113.6 73.62 10.03 _.

73.55) 3: 113.5 73.55 9.968 73.511 4L 114 73.51 9.997 255.30 344.96 114 1.4299 , ,

73.55 j Sj _113.5 73.55 9.91' 255.14 345.12 113 9.91 1.3898 0.03 1 73.97, 6; 114.1 73.97 __

10.07 253.41 _

346.85 112 9.97 1.3505 -0.10 75.25 7i 113.5 75.25 10.33 248.13 352.13 111 10.32 1.3123 -0.01 75.71 4 _113.6 75.71_ 10.42 246.2_3_ 354.03 110 10.41 1.275 -041  ;

8l __ _

76.371 Si 113.6 76.37 10.59 243.51 356.75 110 10.64 1.275 0.05 77_.0_4 l 10j J 13.5 77.04 10.82 240.75 359.51 110 10.88 1.275 0.06 ,

77.63 _ _11.13 238.32 361.94 110 11.09 1.275 -0.04

_11 [ _112.8 77.63([

77.7 7 7.54,

_12[

112.6 77.7 77.54 11.22 11.32 238.03 362.23 110 11.12 1.275 -0.10

_ _ 13[ _112.7 _

77.55 __

14[ 112.6 77.55 12.1 77.88 15i 112.6 77.88 12.99 78.21 16 112)2 'f,ir J78.21 13.5 4T .

n ... 78._4, 17 njl2,4 i f ,. 3 4 _ 116+ r 78.37 18 112.9 ' % 78.37 'i3.67 "" '

78.2 19 113 78.2 i3.56 78.15 20 112.5 ~78.15 13.6 r

I

- ______ - _~L ____-_-_ - - _____ - _ _ - -__._ _ - _

O ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION .d94-0053 REV.2, SHEET 7 cf 17 O O Data from,REDAS taken on 9/7/94 0319 with letdown diverted to a RC Bleed Tank l l l The calculated expected values havel been corrected for low reference leg level of -2.5 in confirmed by WR NUO323185,

~

IAc'tual tielow indicatedi ~ Pressure' indication error used in expected is + 1 psi (indicated is below actuall l The_ estimate _d_ gas temperature is based on the maximum water temperature reading and ramping it in the first 4 min.

(SEE CHART 5)

'~

TANK TANK ~

GAS [ [ WATER _

j X359 VOLUME jVOLUME X208 EST . X401 INCHES W/- E W/- E ' WATER GAS PSIG expected vapor Redas (-)

DEG F press press expected

_ . g_ DEG F }

psi water _g

-- .__i_7 --ft 7 J _ ft' 3 _

1.5656_ psi 0 86.5G 200.67 399.59 117.2 117.2 _32.38 32.38 _

8G.58 200.58, _ 399.68 117.2 117.2 _

32.36 32.40 1.5656 -0.038 86.521 0 117.2 117.5 32.38 32.38 1.5788 -0.00139 200_.83!_ 399.43 -0.05291 399.06 1 117.2 118 32.31 32.36 1.6009 86.43 L .201.20{ _

201.6,2 398.64 2 117.1 120 32.27 32.53 1.6927 -0.25565 86.33!_

31.36 31.53 1.7891 -0.16951 84.9 '. 207.51 j _ 392.75 3 117.1 122 .

217.16;_ 383.10 4 117.3 123 29.69 29.74 1.839 -0.04861 82.56_ -0.0947 80.24 226.73! 373.53 5 117.4 123 27.89 27.98 1.839 117.6 123 26.36 26.44 1.839 -0.07624 78.03 j 235.84 __ 364.42 _6 ._

24.95 25.03 1.839 -0.07609 244.75;__ _3_55.51 7 117.9 12_3

, 75.87l _ _ _

123 23.68 23.69 1.839 -0.01025 253.781 346.48 8 118.1 73.68] 1.839 0.007694 71.44 263.02! 337.24 '9 118 123 22.42 22.41 69.14 272.50! 327.76 10 118 123 21.16 21.18 1.839 -0.0243 11 118.3 123 20.05 20.02 1.839 0.026084 66.82, 282 07L 318.19 .

64.51 j 12 118.7 123 19.03 18.94 1.839 0.090527 291.59! _308.67 17.92 1.839 0.120502 301.12 j 13 119 123 18.04

_62.2' _299.14 310.56 289.70 14 119.3 123 17.15 16.97 1.839 0.183509 59.91 "

12f 1.839 0.198187

~

5166 319.84 ~ 280.42 15 120.6 16.28 16.08 16 122.4 123 15.51 1 E. 27 1.839 0.243999 5517 _328.87{ 271.39 0.166987 53.66 336.33! 263.93 17 123.5 123 14.79 14.;2 1.839 i

.. -_ .__u__.______________

O ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION .494-0053 REV.2, SHEET 8 cf 17 O O TANK GAS VOLUME, ft 3 ] _l_ __ } j__ l

_. W/ (E. I < A - .. . Vo = 600.26-46.53-(0.7854 *7.9375'2 *(((LEVEL + 2.71/12) + 0.131)

W/O E, I = A - Vg = 600.26-46.53-(0.7854 *7.9375'2 *(((LEVEL + 01/12) + 0.13))

W/ - E, I > A - Vg = 600.26-46.53-(0.7854*7.9375 2*(((LEVEL-2.7)/12) + 0.131)

_. ._l_ _ _ . . .

I I f TANK WATER VOLUME, ft 3 (Error based on Vg) iVW ' 600.,26 - Vg__ _ ___

~~

Expected E pansion or ompression_from P1, Vg is per W/ + E, psig. Formula developed below. _

+

W/ + E,1 < A - 'P2 ,= .((P1 t 14.7-1.6927 + 1.12) 2 *Vg1 + 1.45236* 1 *Vw2 *(P1 + 14.7-1.6927 + 1.12))/((P1 + 14.7-1.692 7 + 1.12) *Vg2

} 1.45236* 1 *Vw2)*((T2 + 4601/(T1 + 460))-14.7 + 1.6927-1.12 l l l W/O E, I = A - P2 = ((Pl + 14.7-1.6927 + 0) 2 *Vg1 + 1.45236* 1 *Vw2*(P1 + 14.7-1.6927 + 0))/((Pl + 14.7-1.6927 + 0)*Vg2 +

[  ; [_ l1.45236*1 *Vw2)*((T2 + 4601/(T1 + 4601)-14.7 + 1.6927-0 l l l l W/ - E, I > A - P2 = ((P1 + 14.7-1.6927-1.12)'2

  • Vg1 + 1.45236* 1
  • Vw2 *(P1 + 14.7-1.6927-1.12))/((P1 + 14.7-1.6927-1.12)*Vg2 +

~

145236* 1 *Vw2)*((T2 + 4601/(T1 + 460))-14.7 + 1.6927 + 1.12

i . _ _ _ _ .. _ _ . . . __ _ . _ _ _ . _. . _ . _ ._ . _ . .

l  !

NEW OP-103B S*. psig. Formula developed in Calc M94-0053._ _ . ______ _ .

(G.5f t - 2f t maroin) X 0.43278 psilft - 1.6927 psia = 0.272121 '

~

(0.272121 + 14.7) X 601.48 = 9005.431 ._

l } _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _

W/ - E, I < A Press, I > A Vg - P1 = (-(-9005.431 + 1.45236*0.5*Vw1) + ((-9005.431 + 1.45236*0.5*Vw1)'2-4*Vg1 *(-1.45236*

' ~

[ _ _. } (0.27212T+ 14.7)*0.5*Vw1))"O.5)/(2 Vg11-14.7 A + 1.6927-1.12 l l l W/O E, I = A Press. I = A Vg - P1 = (-(-9005.431 + 1.45236*0.5*Vw1) + ((-9005.431 + 1.45236*0.5*Vw11 2-4*Vg1 *(-1.45236'

l. _ !__ (0.272121 + 14.7)*0.5*Vw11)"O.5)/(2*Vot)-14.7 + 1.6927-0 l l l W/ + E. I > A Press. I < A Vg ~ P1 = (-(-9005.431 + 1.45236*0.5*Vw1) + ((-9005.431 + 1.45236*0.5*Vw1) 2-4*Vg1 *(-1.45236*

(0.272121 + 14.7)*0.5*Vw11)*0.5)/(2*Vg1)-14.7 + 1.6927 + 1.12 [

l l i l l  !

O ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATIOi, .A94-0053 REV.2, SHEET 9 cf 17 O O FORMULA DEVEL_OP_M_.E..N._T.: _

IDEAL GAS LAW 5: CONVERSION FACTORS:

p' V = w R T = 144 P* V water @ 120 F is 61.7132 #/ft3 p' press. in #/ft2 absolute _, _ _ __

  1. relation to_k_g _

2.205 #/kg _

V = volume in f t3 ft relation to cm 30.48 cm/ft w = weight in # ft3 relation to cc 2.83E + 04 cc/ft3 R = individual gas coI$ tant, Air is 53.3 . combining above for kg/cc 9.88E-04 kg/cc T = absolut.e_ temp. in_ degrees Rankine ( 460 + F) psi relation to ft water l 0.432781 psi /ft P' = press in #/in2. absolute vapor press. of water @ 120 F is 1.6927 psia

~

P'2 = w2(Free ga_s) /pgTX (RT/144) w2(Free gas) = wl(Free gas) + w(gas from water) w(I'vec gas) = P' X Vg x (144 /RT) l ] _ [1 _

w(gas from water) = 14.7(psia) X 100(cc/kg) X it - P'2/P*1) X .000988 (kg/cc) X .5 X Vw X (144/RT)

[ l _ __ l l l l l l ,

P'2 = ( P'1 X Vg1 x (14_4_/_RT) + 14.7(psia) X 100(cc/kg) X (1 - P'2/P'1) X .000988 (kg/cc) X .5 X Vw X (144/RT)) )/ Vg2 X (RT/144)

P'2 = ( P'1 X Vg1 + 14.7(psia) X 100(cc/kg) X (1 - P'2/P 1) X .000988 (kg/cc) X .5 X Vw I )/ Vg2 P'2 = ( P 1 X Vg1 + 1.4_5236 X (1,- P'2/P'1) X .5 X Vw ) 1/ Vg2 P'2 - ( P'1 X Vg1 4 1.45236 X (P'1 - P'2)/P'1 X .5 X Vw ) 1/ Vg2 P'2 = ( P'1 X Vg1 + 1.45236 X (P'1 - P'21/P'1 X .5 X Vw ) 1/ Vg2 P'2 ( P'1 2 X Vg1 + 1.45236 X P'1' X .5 X Vw - P'2 X 1.45236 X .5 X Vw ) II (Vg2 X P'1)

P'2 X (Vg2 X P'1) + P'2 X 1.45236 X .5 X Vw =( P'1 2 X Vg1 + 1.45236 X P'1 X .5 X Vw P'2 =( P'1 2 X Vg1 + 1.4_5236 X P'1' X '.5 X Vw I / ( (Vg2 X P'll + 1.45236 X .5 X Vw)

P'1 = P1 + 14.7 - water vapor pressi+. Inst. Error

@120 F,' P'1 = PI' [ 14.7 - 1.6927 + 1.12 {

@120 F. P'2 = P2_ + 14.7 - 1.6927 + 1.12 and P2 = P'2 - 14.7 + 1.6927 - 1.12 P2 :- ( ( P1 + 14.7 - 1.6927 + 1.12)^2 X Vg1 + 1.45236 X ( P1 + 14.7 - 1.6927 + 1.12) X .5 X Vw I / ( (Vg2 X ( P1 + 14.7 -

l1.692f +~1.12)) + 1.45236 X .5 X Vw) - 14.7 + 1.6927 - 1.12 l l FOR NORMAL OPERATIONS 100% WATER VOLUME VS 50% C USED BECAUSE OF MUT RECIRCULATION <

l  ! l  ! I I l l <

r q ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION .. 94-0053 REV.2, SHEET 10 cf 17 v' 4fp i

t CHECK OF TEMPERATURE SENSITIVITY ON PRESSURE l l l l TEMPERATURESE55fTijlTY is checked at 86 in. and 55 in. and found to be approximately 0.13 psi /deg F.

GAS WATER SENS

~X3597VOLUMF. VOLUME EST DELTA P W /- E GAS _ expected vapor INCHES I ~W/-' i psi /deg F

.i ~

DEG F press press DELT T l _ ft 3 ft 3 psi water 86 202.98 397.28 117 32.38 1.5566 0 86 202.98 397.28 118 0.08 32.46 1.5566

~86'. 262I95' 397.28 117l 0.04 32.42 1.6009 86[.' ~ '26i.)5 .

397.28 397.28

(( 118) 1191 0.12 0.16 32.50 32.54 1.6009 1.5566 1 0.12493 8 61 202.98j ~ ~~

202.98t 357.28' 117 0.09 32.47 1.6463 86f O.25 32.63 1.6463 2 0.12548 86.t 202.98 _397.28 119'

,_ 20229,8 _ 397.28 120 0.38 32.76 1.6927 3 0.125996

_8G 397.28 121 0.51 32.89 1.7403 4 0.126555 86 4. _ 202.98 _

0.12713 86 ,202J8 _ _397.28 _

12_2_ O.64 33.02 1.7891 5 86 202.98 397.28 123 0.77 33.15 1.839 6 0.127696 86 202.98 397.28 124_. 0.90 33.28 1.8901 7 0.128273 8 0.128855 8G, 202.98 397.28 _

125 1.03 33.41 1.9424 55 330.81 269.45 117 32.38 1.5566 0

~

55 [ 118 0.08 32.46 1.5566 I

[ 330I81 _ 269.45 55; 33041 269.45 _. _

117 0.04 32.42 1.6009 55j 330.81 269.45 118 0.12 32.50 1.6009 1 0.12493 55 330.81 ' 269.45 ~ ~

119 0.16 - 32.54 1.5566 55' 330.81 269.45 117 0.09 32.47 1.6463 55 330.81 269.45 119 0.25 32.63 1.6463 2- O.12548 55 330.81 269.45 _ 120j O.38 32.76 1.6927 3 0.125996 55 330.81 269.45 m 121 0.51 32.89 1.7403 4 0.126555 269.45 122_ O.64 33.02 1.7891 5 0.12713

_55 33_0._81 ._ _

55 . _, 330._81 269.45 123 0.77 33.15 1.839 6 0.127696 55 330.81 269.45 124 0.90 33.28 1.8901 7 0.128273 55 330.81 269.45 125 1.03 33.41 1.9424 8 0.128855

(%  %

ATTACHMENT 7 CALCULATION .. 94-0053 REV.2, SHEET 11 of 17 CHART 1 {____j l - l l l l l l l PLOTS A, B, & C are calculations of allowable pressures determined from volume changes compressing the 5*

switchover pres _s_ur_e at the tie-in point. A is maximum negative result from Instrument error. 8 is ideal result or no _

instrument error. C is maximum positive result from Instrument error.

. ]__ I I l l

, PLOTS D E, & F are calculation of expanding volume from 86 in and 29.14 psig to each levelin one inch increments to

~

determine pres'sure. D is max. press per level change from Instrument error. E is ideal result or no Instrument error. j PLOT F is rnin. press. per level change from Instrument error. PLOT A is actual curve of OP-103 and PLOT E is essentially identical. The expansion equation considers all the water volume at the resulting level for gas releases for the pressure change while the compression equation of the first table only considered 1/2 the water volume. This is due to r.e.circu._lation and seal return spraying into the tank increasing gas evolution during normal operation.

CHART 2 .._ _. . _ . __

l [

PLOTS G, H, & l are_ calculation of compressing volume from_73.97 in and 10.07 psig to each level in one inch increments to determine _ pressure. _G is max. press. per level change _ from_ instrument error. H is ideal result or no Instrument error.l ~

PLOT I is min. press. per level change from Instrument error. PLOT J is data from REDAS (See Chart 4 Table) during

~

i a water add to the_MUT. _ __ _

t. - . _ - -

CHART 3 [. ._ ;

[ PLOTS K, L, & M are calculation of expanding volume from 86.56 in and 32.38 psig to each levelin one inch increments to

.d_e_termjne pressure. K is max. press. per level change from Instrument error. L is ideal result or no Instrument error. _

PLO.T M is _ min. press. per level change inom Instrument error. PLOT N is data from REDAS (See Chart 5 Table) during a_ Letdown diversion to,a RC Bleed Tank. j _. __ _ _

CHART 4 AND 5 -

These are plots of REDAS data (CEIARTS 2 and 3 Respectively) and expected responses with selective instrument error and temperature correction appliedto demonstrate how the observed response can be closely matched.

This is a full range of CHART 1 for A, B, E, & F. Both CHARTS show that under

.. worst c_ase instrument error conditions the indication may not follow the allowable curve. _

The ideal Expansion starts with actual values corresponding to error values and uses ideal values at condition 2

. _ _ __to_ determine pressure, no tables are provided for CHART 6 data.

'I I I l l

ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION M94 0053 REV. 2, SHEET 12 OF 17 CHART 1

'T y PLOT OF MUT OVERPRESSURES WITH MAXIMUM INSTRUMENT ERROR BANDS 38.00 - , '

I I l i j i j

-*- PLOT A, Allowable w/- Error 36.00 - /

f

+ PLOT B, Allowable w/o Error 34.00 -- f PLOT C, Allowable w/+

  • Error ,/ p 32.00 - PLOT D, Expansian w/+ ' , e d Error i i l /'

. , a t A

i / '

30.00 -- -*- PLOT E, Expan', ion w/o Error g

[ ,

I / / }

PLOT F, Expansion w/- Error ,

+ y 3 28.00 -- ' /

W t , .

l  ;

.O .

i '

,f l 26.00 -+

l ,  ; , ,h m  : .a w * ,

f  !  ! l i c' l i l I , I 4A,A/ii i

@ 24.00 *..

, -7 .

H I , ,- c, \ Ara. \  ;

l l,e _/

/h,Y z 22 00

~

,,/ s ,/

O

/. .:' i fs*z/

/ 'l 20.00 .-

^/* g 72 ;, y l ,

fpt ,:

f /'*/

l l i i

18.00 '/ ,,e -- --* #-

,/*,,* ld f / ;r* ,Y-gf fi c

l i

16.00 l ,c L"

E ,s*' y

/  !

I l i

A Vl 7Ai a se -,

. i,

/ ' ,hd

- /,

14.00 M! ,#', [ [;


+- - - - " -

T e' s'fi, /!

i e

O 12.00  ! ,

-- - -- - - ~ - -

55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 LEVEL (in)

m . _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . - _ _ . . . . _ . _ . _ . . . . . _ _ . . . . _ . . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _

ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION M94-0053 REV. 2, SHEET 13 OF 17 CHART 2 O

PLOT OF MUT OVERPRESSURES WITH MAXIMUM INSTRUMENT l ERROR BANDS FOR WATER ADD l

l 11.50

! 11.40 /

-*- PLOT G. Compression .

/

11.30 -- w/+ Error /

i

-h PLOT H, Compression

/ /

l  ?

11.20 -- '

I w/o Error /, j

/ / .

11.10 -  :- PLOT I, Compression 7 ',. ,. ,f w/- Error a .

/

~~ *- PLOT J, REDAS '

j ,f 10.90

(/ '/ / l '/

?

O, ym i

',/

4 ll 3 10.80 E

s I /d/ /f  ;

w 10.70 ,' j /-

l' i

g ,i ,* ,-

-' ' I m 10.60 I /p 10.50 , j, -, + n

t

! /)f, !_  !

10.40 l //-  ! '

l

/// / l ^

10.30

/H.c f

/ >

.b 10.20 ,"' ;- ,

&'t i i l l 10.10  ;

! i 10.00  ;

73.5 74 74.5 75 75.5 76 76.5 77 77.5 78 LEVEL (in)

ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION M94-0053 REV. 2, SHEET 14 OF 17 CHART 3 O

PLOT OF MUT OVERPRESSURES WITH MAXIMUM INSTRUMENT ERROR BANDS FOR LETDOWN DIVERTED TO RC BLEED TANK 33.00

/

31.00 A

29.00 -- W- PLOT K, Expansion / 'Y w/+ Error 27.00 --

+ PLOT L. Expansion w/o /

Error //"

PLOT M, Expansion w/- /cf/

s j

)

25.00 -- Error 0 '%

/l !

V g W PLOT N, REDAS / */

A ,/ /

E0'OO

/ f/'

$ '[ /

E 2i.00 j[,../ #

19.00

/ /

f[f/

,/ ,/ 7 7' 17.00 -

f l 15.00

//7 / ' '

i s I i . j '

!  ! +

13.00  !

55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 LEVEL (in)

C

O O O ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION wi94-0053 REV. 2 SHEET 15 OF 17 CHART 4 i WATER ADD REDAS VS EXPECTED W/ TEMP CORRECTION .

11.4 -

i 11.2 L- j

-*- REDAS DATA p 5U II C

/

EXPECTED PRESSURE W/ TEMP.

CORRECTION

- 10.8 - -

i

-E

a. /

LLJ cc 10.6 --

I S  ! /,-

a. 10.4 --t #

jr _ /

i f 10.2 - -

10 --

ar i

9.8 73.5 74 74.5 75 75.5 76 76.5 .77 77.5 78 LEVEL ( ki )  !

t I

l l

ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION M94-0053 REV. 2 SHEET 16 OF 17 CHART 5  ;

O  !

REDAS LEVEL DECREASE VS EXPECTED EXPANSION W/ TEMP.

CORRECTION  !

1 33  :

1

/ l 3

31  !

j/

( \

29 -- -*- REDAS DATA 7

/  ;

+ EXPECTED  ;;

EXPANSION W/ TEMP.

27 -- CORRECTION C Te g 25 /

f.

E 8 #

0 23

- i E l a;

W

)

21 7

/ '

19 "'

/ .-

Nf 4

[

m i

f m

p

. 17 / ,, .

l, l

,f~A ,

' ' l  !

s';'  !  !

15 f d - ---

55 57 55 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 ,

LEVEL ( in i

ATTACHMENT 7, CALCULATION M94-0053 REV. 2 SHEET 17 OF 17 CHART 6 O

V EXPANSION FROM 29.14 psig 35.00 7- p -

r- r-7-- 7 ~]  ; ,

I I i  !

s 30.00 .

1

-*- PLOT A, OP-1038 LIMIT

-h PLOT B, IDEAL LIMIT (NO ,

25.00 -- INST. ERROR) l , p 1

-*- PLOT F, WORST CASE i  ;

i ERRORS FOR PRESS FROM i  ? l EXP, (INDICATED)  ! [,[  !

  • PLOT E, IDEAL EXP. FROM <

l i /

p ; 20.00 ERROR VAL  ; ,

i dl j l

_.I, 1

i i

n.v 0 .a 3 i 4

.@ ic E j $'

w ,

i#"f *..

E 15.00 ' f M

  • I I

+f..'.  !

r[.'

' t

. i  !

5.'.. ,f

t ,

, , ! i i 10.00 i j i c 91 ,4-i

' I 4

)

a Ls~. $+ i* + ['.*

! ~ ' !,

5 y j .

G ,,,M i I t ?~ , ,

O- 0.00 - - - - - - - - - -- -

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 LEVEL ( in )

f t.t106im RECEIVED WNUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES 3315 OU Fnn Rood PO Box 10935 Lynchburg, VA 24506 0935 Telephone: 804-832 3000 Telecopy 804-832 3663 FPC-95-020 Mr. W. W. Nisula, C2I ANALYG!S/CALCULATICN Contract Manager Doc to e M9'f- ogen ATT #

Florida Power Corporation

. Y 320134th Street South REv 2 SHEET I op_ 4 Post Office Box 14042 St. Petersburg, FL 33733 Attention: Mr. R. E. Clauson

Subject:

Crystal River Unit 3 FPC Nuclear Enginering Small Accounts Request (SAR) NPM010AD, l WA #1, Request #21 Task 616 - Review FPC Analysis Calculation M94-00543, Rev. 0

Allowable MUT-1 Indicated Overpressure vs Indicated Level l Gentlemen:

1 BWNT has completed the review of'FPC Analysis / Calculation No. M94-0053, Rev. O, (

" Allowable MUT-1 Indicated Overpressure vs Indicated I2 vel" in accordance with Reference j

1. The scope of BWNT's review was to verify the assumptions (assume instrument errors i are correct), verify the calculation methods and spot check the calculation results. Based on l I

this review, BWNT concurs with the assumptions, calculation methods and calculation results of the various sections of the calculations and provides the following comments on each section of the calculation. N SECTION 1 - PURPOSE '*

1a  ;

The HPI System DBD, Rev'. 4, pg. 25 states the second HPI pump is secured at a 25

~

feet BWST level versus ti8 level of 25.5 ft. stated in this calculation.

SECTION II - DESIGN INPUT Design inputs were not verified by this review.

A U

3

".NALYS.'G/CRCULATION FPC-95-020 February 1,1995 Doc 10 s MN-e c6 I ATT i i -

Page 2 REV- 1 SHEET 2_ OF - 4 P

SECTION III - ASSUMPTIONS

, 1. The assumed flow rates came from Calculations E91-0026 and E91-0027 as design inputs. Although this review is not intended to verify design inputs, the following observations were made:

a. The RB Spray System DBD, Rev. 4, pg.14 states the RB Spray flow is throttled to 1500 - 1800 gpm by throttle valves for building spray pumps BSP-1 A rnd IB. The 1800 gpm value is larger than the 1600 gpm assumed in Gus cakw in.
b. The DHR System DBD, Rev. 5, pg. 30 states the LPI flow is throttled to 2800 - 3100 gpm by DHV-110 P.nc' DHV-111. The 3100 gpm is less the.n the 3250 gpm assumed in this calculation.

- c. The HPI System DBD, Rev. 4, pg. 27 states the maximum allowable l HPI flow is $45 gpm which is higher than the 540 gpm flow assumed O in this calculation.

2. No Comment
3. The assumption that the initial Makeup Tank (MUT) gas in solution is 100 l cc/kg is conservative because the maximum allowed initial MUT pressure is  !

45.83 psig (per detailed calculation 5) can only maintain about 65 cc/kg gas in ]

solution. l

4. Gas can come out of solution fairly quickly. Therefore, since the MUT absolute pressure initially decreases faster than the water volume one could postulate that gas can come out of solution from more than just the top half of the water volurne in the MUT. Ho' wever, the additional amount of gas is small compared to the total a nount of gas coming out of solution and when compared to the total MUT gas vohime is insignificant. The initial total gas in solution is less than 4% of the total MUT gas volume.
5. The calculation method provides a good app oximation of the density.

However, the actually density needs to be determined from test data.

6. No Comment
7. No Comment

l ANALYSIS /CALCULA7;og t

(q) FPC-95-020 DOCIOI O ~-ccc3 * #~b February 1,1995 j AEVd- SHEET 10F__ '1 Pay 3

--g SECTION IV - REFERENCES No Comment SECTION V - DETAILED CALCULATIONS

1. Volume Calculation No Comment
2. Determinatiors ;j,!;iead Losses for Flow Rates from the BWST No Comment

< 3. Determination of the Pressure at the Tie-In Point from the BWST (usine "B"

. Train Parameters) with Various Flow Rates and Indicated levels The calculation shows a delta pressure of 20.51 f between CASE 1 and CASE 2. Should this delta pressure be cor ,htr.ut with the'HPI System DBD, Rev. 4, pg. 25 which states the second pump esa be operathd down to 24.7 ft.

BWST level (which includes instrumentation enor)? .

p

4. Determination of Minimum BWSl_svel for MUT Operation mh MUT Overoressure oer the 5 ft. 10_r ,t and 15 ft. S/O Curves to Prevent Gas Treatment l No Comment

! a1 F 5. MUT-1 Overoressure Determination. Includine Heirv's Law Effects i' ,j 3- .

, by

~~

j

'c Refer to the comments on assumptions 3 and 4 above. ]f it i 6. Comoarison of the New 5' S/O Curve to the Old OP-Id$ Curve No Comment

7. Comparison of MUT "53 6" to BWST 44 9' Levels No Comment O

i

1 i

ANALY3;5/ CALCULATION Doc 10 < M 4Y-co.;3 g ,~

g .

~

v FPC-95-020 - - - - - -

REV 2. SHEET T February 1,1995 op_ 4 -

Page 4  ;

8. Comparison of MUT "0" to BWST 23.96' levels No Comment
9. Determination of Average MUT Outflow for MUT Level Change from 53.65" to 0" No Comment SECTION VI - RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS The HPI System DBD, Rev. 4, pg. 24 states the minimum allowed MUT water level is 18 inches. Perhaps the operating curve showing maximum indicated MUT i overpressure versus MUT indicated level should be limited to the range of 18 to 100  :

inches.

l .  :

r-)

NJ Should you have any questions or comments, please call me at (804) 832-2385.

l l Very truly yours. ,

l .,

t b Yw '

4 Robert L. Black . i ..e l Customer Service Manager Mail Code OF63 j l Plant Engineering Products n RLB/pmc q s y@ ,

.y0 ,.

~ Tft:y iRJ Filmin MR9 f % i'f ; M)

! . . .' Ti GW Christman TX74 EE drgan ^. ~f

@I"ip ~#

. 8,$2~ n OF54 ..c,,,. N,,., I

(

c s

#{

e.

r? Y ., T.

4 IECf I C4 terma at i2ternational level. Considt Wn cf long term wtrk did not, in the event, ..

This tpproach was less evident in the piomotisa of a produce a spe.cinc programme because currett demands on 7d

" Turbine SpeciA atiof, the it wuking groups were heavy ene:gh to defer addi. 3 The steps taken to unify the expertise of IEC/TC4 and tional undertakings. ,,

IEC/SC2D for the consideration of salient pole alternators After recognizing that working youps should scrutinize j .

l and motors in turbine and storage-pump testing in terms sponsored publications, their conr.itution-including ISO E i

IO g '

of losses, power output /in t, their measurement and tepresentation-was reviewed and modined where ap. '

allocation, seem justined. problems allied with propriate. 'j! ,

' electrical, friction, windage, thrust and other loues aw@ '

Although establishment of apparently effective IEC/ ISO M reconciliation, however. liaison should avoid delays and ensure consistency of $

There were few indications that the "Governe Guide codes sharing common ground it remains to be seen d i

Speci6 cation" would embrace frequency-response data whether successfulinitiation is maintained subsequently. 9 mentioned in the " Speed Governing System Test Code" The absence of Committee of Action references was a 5 (IEC Publication No. 308/1970). tribute to -SpecialistlUser" understanding of practical 1 Although upprnval of the Model Storage Pump Tot  ! l

, Code" under the Six Months Rule and the Geneva problems, especially and to the spirit prevat in, ling throughout the sessions ,,

release of Chapter XI on "Model Turbine Cavitation" These were presided over by Professor L. C. Neale, i (Publication No.193A) will complete difficult assignments USA, who succeeds Professor L. J. Hooper, USA.

and will (with the -Model Testing Standardtzstion" Professor Hooper now retires as Chairman of IEC/TC4, i report) embody valua',lc material, much remains to be in accordance with IEC rules, although he attended in a l l done. consultative capacity.

Tasks on " Scale Eff .ct Formulae" and " Turbine Model After expressing apprceistion for their services, as well Dimensional Verinertion" herald amendments 'o IEC as for BS! sid and NEL facilities, the meeting adjourted.

No.193,1965, and Ierhaps codification with the " Mode! It left the date and location of the next session to the l Storage Pump Test r; ode". Chairman's discretion, but favoured Munich in 1973. '

4 s

i mmmcucg, Vortices at intakes in

==2emSHEET- ArrI . e conventional sumps  !

REV- _ op_ 2 By Dr. Y. R. Reddy* and J. A. Pickford' This article describes the development of a design criterion to avoid vortices in pump sumps and at intakes .

from reservoirs a 3 f

THE FtNCDON of an intake is to Convey water from a

  • reservoir into the penstock in a hydroelectric power plant s or to supply water from a sump to a p, ump.

if the depth of water above the mtake i,s low air. #-- --- -- - - - - -

entraining vortices develop, and these adversely affect the efficiency of the hydraulic machinery by reducing flow rate and by giving extra swirl to the fluid,in addition to causmg vibration and noise. - '

A in shallow reservoirs wave action develops an unstable a boundary layer (depending on the wave length and * ' r-celerity) and this is genesally responsibic for the chan.ge in s ],---if 3 vorticity which, leads,tolthe formatiorg of str-entraming 3 Vortices. i " .. ; ~ --

The largest single factor contributing' to vottex forma- 1, ,

tion in pump inletsis the flow pattern within the sump, i .,

which in turn is governed by the entry conditions. All the tip. r. De/imtson sAetch o/ an sataAe  ;'

vorticity responsible'for vortex formation is generated at a flow boundary and this then diffuses into the flow.  !

Vortices also de. clop as a result of boundary disconti- f(s, d. r, p, p, A. 2, g) = 0 nunties, which is the ma,m reason for different critical (1) submergences fri the same intake diameter and selocity. where s is submergence abose the intake; dis the diameiet when the sump geometry is changed. of the intake; y a ihe selocity of flow through the mtake; Howeer. o*ly inlets where there is no induced swirl g and p are fluid viscouty and denuty, respectnely; h is due to art.hcsal boundary changes are considered here and the total aater depth. i n wee length; and g a the ac-it is thus anumed that the air entra nmg sortes m a con- ce!eraten due to grasitt

\_ sentional inlet (F'F 1)is only a function of the IcDoams Uung hucimgham U. theorem, Eq. (1) can te re&ced sariables; to the fodo*inFf orm of dmenuon'en nurt un.

ua .<.a,orTe m . , r .o. . ( .4. . i. , . .. . . u n. v(Tr. Rt.J J.J/h)= 0 (:)

106 Water Po er March tln

bl b

\ . si

' . '? 'E (V

as Several writers'-* have studied air entrainment but it is difficult to conclude from the individual experiments how h. Sw abe air entrainment varied with other parameters. 3,

_ e,J* 3.,

/

/- .

. g .-

l Some use submergence as a function of velocity head, ,.-

j [g

/

C, and others use submergence as a function of velocity l g

/

e itself.

gpA .e[ /,,/

~

I

,/.

in Eq. (2), Re (Reynolds' number) can safely be elimi- . .

nated from the field of the present problem, since vortex ). -

,3 g_ ,;p l

{, formation is a surface phenomenon. f #p /  :

4. &

', Hence the formation of a vortex depends on the Froude .

r. umber (Fr). critical submergence (s/d), and wave para.

toiJ j j yy me: cts (4h). Therefore: )

g j 'j =

2ld= f(Fr, k/h) ... (3) .

i,/ef f The strength of the vortex depends on the velocity of flow tr ,I-r #

I and hence on the Froude number. However, the inception //,, f of a vortex as a dimple formation depends on the fluctua. g _, f/ j f tion of vorticity, which again depends on the wave /

  • , *, e*

parameter. ANALYS!S/ CALCULATION

  1. 4 '- .

.Several types of baffles were suggested for vortex pre- DOC lD # #f f'/-opf3 g, vention' 8 and all reduce the wave parameter near the c{

l .-

intake, thus reducing the chrnge in vorticity and hence , . . . .

o o* oNEV ** 2 ** *$HEU $

'8 8' vortex formation. *d U"** L For shallow water A/h is a occisive parameter for vertex yy formation, but for deep water its influence will be neglig- ***'3'*"'*"

ible. However, th:re is no published experimental data available to r:orrelate critical submergence as a function = ma ai r.cuaouiar swae of wave Ekt(arneter.

in experiments at Loughborough University, UK',

- (Ret 2. fig. 4) rectangular semp h4 j vortex formation was reduced m a rectangular sump by

  • m* 88 f*d n=*a. =* art ca using vertical battles which suppressed the wave parameter . in n.m.

. me si c.cun,wis, .w near the intake.

e ,

Recently Gordon* showed the scale efrect by comparing field studies with the laboratory studies of Denny and Young'. The disparity between the two sets of results could have been narrowed if the results w re plotted at

, ,g 3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,, m , ,

fi8 f C"6' 8 88"""P'ar' d'A'ad'" *" I' "*'"b" the same wave parametu. Prevention the en. .tical submergence should always be .

In a conventional hydroelectric power plant the total greater than the Froude number.

depth, h, of water is generally large compared to the wave h5

  • net ,,

length, A, and Eq. (3) may be written: vortex formau. on tendency8ncePu is least whenns/d> 15Tr.Possible wh All the experimental results lie on a band, the lower line s/d-f(fr)= f[v/J(gd)] . . . (4) of which corresponds to s/d=fr, and the upper line s/d= l + Fr*

Gorden* found, by trial and error, a design equation for yo,,oy,r, it should be noted that the results of Denny enucal submergence, which was: and Young2are based on pipe diameter instead of inlet diameter, d, and the s/d curves should be lower than those

  1. " c# .

@ , shown in the figure. This analysis is correct only for the

. case of conventional inlets.

where the;value of c varied from 0 3 to 0 4. T ; . By using devices like vertical or horizontal baffles, or However, some of the results whictmenquoted from '

Swedish sources had e values of 01 ano G-23 It is re. son- k .9oating rafts, the critical s able, therefore, to assume that c is's funcon of shape 3ducing s/d requirements.

(geometry) of the intake. < ,. f in conclusion, when vortex prevention devices are used, For symmetrical and well-designed intakes, the value sof T /d= fr (otherwise s/d= 1 + fr) will give vortex-free c will be low and for complicated designs the value of e ' operation either in hydroelectric practice or pump su p can be higher. design.

If one anumes that Eq. (4) holds good for a general it is hoped that future research willindicate the influence case then: of the wase parameter on vortex formation.

s/d= vlJ(gd) or s= vd*fJg (6)

R ef ere ric e e Eq.161 red nes to the form (Eq 5) gnen by Gordon, with i. y,,oo, E .ns po,,, j A. t.penmenis on . ,mati porr, wm .et ..in pm.cutar reference io varies (omueons".

the d'c .:f c = 0176.and 0 314 un Bnn>h and SI unnt #S"'##'. D e inatunen of Mecm cat Ecameen, v o, l'O.

q,/ res pecta cly.

In Fig. 2. test rew ' are putted m non-derensier.si , ha( D F a.4 h. G A J "T*e presemen of worums form war. J J on the panis and Froude slumber [h s (gd,) ,,e 3. ,,i ,, r.e.. es , f,y,,,og s. I A u n hn Cceseen. L.nbori.

on the 2 21:5. up to a Froude number of 31. The resu! s 1,57. -

of Gorden* repreant mtakes wnh urtices, whereas all th{. 3 1.seu . H wiP"Savon Tr of emerame rea :remems ol 1 3 of h s%

other results represent entical submergence. , Q, ,fm y

a

,l,A , ,]l , ,,,, wg Except for t*o or three stray cases, all the results la 3 p.,c .,0.o 3 A .g p,ony, y n , -tnoene, or 6,me p%non on above the entical ime s/d= fr indicating that for wonet tune, uppress,on m a norm o et f.o."is.adeeg put4caisons f, tj g er1r f fn rus

  • w a+ vo ' .P '.' . M 4s ? S

ANALh.0/ CALCULATION l I

AU '

DOC 10-2 @ "'*3 CONTENTS ,

' OF_ io nev .l sueeT-L

  • Chamael Routlag by Flaite Difference Method

,37, AMERICAN SOCIETY by Yang H. Huang . . . . . . . . . , .

OF CIVIL ENGINEERS Alben W. Turseusk. Owecser. Teclitucet Control of Trameleets la Series Chamael with Gates 60 A. . DIRECTION Ins

' s,.ser,r ,,  %, g

  • by Williane E. Bodley and E. Bestfamin Wylie .

%**'\ G*bh* .

,y, .,

ComeerrTEE 03 PtlauCAftoess ,

AsalytlC 5thtkes for Cesaposer How Medet Testlag

$$'fw'egge, I409 e,eessene rsec, john H by Daniel R. Lynch and William G. Gray ....

yes,,3_Cuomen Jemme N. onean Wenior E. Sneeeey Monsed J. Drenevish Weil G. Moedel vco Franssionso Weihem W. Moore Dewed A.Newick Vertes Forisaties at Vertical Pipe Istakes Fredenca R Stown Ausun Meien.n Crencon s. Rose'* HTDRApuCs DRnesoft  ?

by Akalank K. Jain Kittur G.,Renga Raju. It:q g,,,,,,, em and Ramachandra J. Garde,. . ,.

Oneceere ** Ag_

Us%Y. D A sesT* ~4 " e f:" u. . -

oewge D. serne Jeme. W. Gmeep'n* w t  %,,,,,,,,,,,,

neaph Mher u , , , - ny . ~,

John A senea. Jr. James N. Glen Robert T. Law en ,,,,,, A,g,,,,,,, g % . . m g,,,,p

  • Edward A arveae Eugene R. McMaster  %%

TECHNICAL NOTES Jose L Casecote wed o. Madse Wumem J. Carren Frenene J. Connes Freakfan D. Meyers Ashassalone 8*^ Proc. Paper 14053 Dewed A. Movick John S. seen. Caisisease Jotwi J. Cueesk Rechard O. Vaughan Robert L Seces. vues Ches,n.e Ronald J. Ornevich Philip H. Sir.'96 Gertiord H. J6rke John H. Wiedeman Robert A.Clast Charles S. Martin Kenneth t. Densier Wdseeni A. Miller. Jr.

EXECUTWE OFFICERS Aueve R. Rehmeon Eugene zweyer, fe cuerve D. rector Dev.d R. Dewey Ralph R. Runie' latermal Freats In Two. Layer flow Edwwd HoNoy D. C. Woe l449 Leu e L Maser. Weehmosen Couness/Amerweat Carl John Huwel Of C. Eranenburg .. . . . . .

Secrosary John J. Caesady face. Cenins. Canesef Member ,

Wesesse N. Carey. Secretary Emensus 1 Wdamm H. Weself . Esecueve Derector Emensue PUSUCATIOtt SEInnCE16 DEPARTME81T Missiest N. Seago. Treasurer revi A Perten.Direceo Esme, e. iesen. Asessione rewourer l Tescuolena Pwhelmedene STAFF DWlECTOsts R*Che'd R. Terrones is not Gem W Menegene Daroesor for imoshy 0 De,ns e ausse Mar, - Cas.ne. ed 4 -

s,u d.es,esi.- es,s,s %.D.er,,ector e.,e der

^***

T A aw Jesnes T. Helsesst godereof Assesent Jessors. Cenemme, <

Ressisse A Case. Dweener, seucermn serwees Esuele Mensher he6eschen Id#r Jonassina r t seeseess Overeer. PseM Seawcee Richere C. - Orenamen  ;

Penen. Deresser, mew.cos on Serwcas e,,se,seeeies, seyeemme _ _ _ , , , , _ _ _ _ ,

Dsrecaer. Podicy. Mansne ,,,,g 3,,,,L g,,,,,

Den Tks Journalis published monthly by the Amencan Swiny uf Civd I nameen t*ut4% nimas

,ge,,y Jesnee M. h Disoceer. Puwsc office is at 345 East 47th Street.New York, N.Y. 40017. AJJress all ASCL sussesivndente Canuneneseens to the Editorial sad Generai Offices at 345 East 47th Sizees. New Yos h . N Y IWl 7.

Allow sia weeks for change of address to becnsne effective. Subs (npison pin e to memtwes is $12.00. Noamember subscriptions avadable; prices obtainable on seguns suonJ class postage paid at New York. N.Y. and at additionni madais ofreces. G T. It Y The Society is not responsible for any statement made or opinion cievened in sta publications.

iii

. O -

e _ _ _ _ -

Hv10 14104 OCTOBER 1978 _

1428 OCTOBER 1978 HY10 ParPoses. h one. dimensional sol:tions provide arn even simpler maans of mods!

vdcatma when the effects of friction, bathymetry or wind, ar all three are a ia== m -m4tacammaai pa - aive ae ada heaeni a a JOURNAL 0F THE i

=Manaa that is one-dimensional for analytic purposes but which is awo 4tseensional e-- M. n-DRAULICS DIVISIO wia -viiinear douwari- i- a.oda aat .ae can-ian coo,dioates. ., ~ "

Amamm.-amar.ica VORTEX FORMATION AT VERTICAL PIPE INI Ahl3 Jala Kittur G. Reage Raju.'

" " ' ' '" au n." y Akhak

' N e'2* r $ l,s.""A3CF Vo 03 o. f*"Pr ** ;sP I III* wwi of &

M*'" 1977 and R== a =dra J. Cude," M. ASCE pp. 295-310.

2. Brissa, D. A., and Madaea. O. S., " Analytical Models for One- and Tw@w "W' W ~'
  1. * * *a

'4I'INhD IEd %Ma % ^s~~*'

Systeens la Rectangular Basins." Part !! of haank--a.ncal Models of Maunchumeus Bay. Lab, La. ch==ana laatitute of T=g Casabndge. blau.. Aepas lennoouctiose r Iihgp

'A  ?.E'

3. Cooley.R. L., and Mola. S. A. ** Finite sh=' Solistaons of Samst.V **

Water for irrigation, domestic and industrial supply as well f or pow ce genes anson Jewaal e/ 4Ae #phe.Jic, a,daden. ASCE. Vol 102. No. HY6. Pr Pp $I3* lasakes l is normally drawn directly from rivers or from resen oars throug.h maakcs

' June,1976, pp. 739-773. w he n "Implacit Dynamic Routing of Floods and Surges in the Lower are usually more economical, casier to operate and draw leu scJiment l

  • b'**d .D. ,L,.,

' **" *P i U*i a Sprus they are located near the free surface. Ilowever, it has been Irequently obsessed Natsonal 'M'estin held at W onDC. that, when the water depth above an intake is small, strong sostnes are formed S " mat h= R. H., Liggett, J. A., and Chan, S. T. K., " Finite Element Shallow Lake which may lead to ak entrainment. htices hase Men omened hequen%

Circolauen Amalysia," Jewmel ef she #pdranslics &sisdea. ASCE, Vol. 99. No HY7* at many installations such as the !?irfanti Dam in Tu: key (Iit. the llanpeanget Proc. Papu 9855, July.1973 pp 1033.l096.

j

'- . Adrenced Cakades fer Appitcasdeas Prealice-Itall. Eaglewood Dem in Sweden (I), and the Kariba Dam in Zambia (1) On the bam of,a i perf rmance survey of 29 emisting hydroelectric intaLes, Goedun O) has sepone 7 IPPen. A. T., " Tidal Dynameca in Eaturies. Part 1: Estuaria of Rect alw Sec **

lhal troublesome vortices were encountered by four of these Pose 5 and lisu Chapter 10 of Essuary and ceass& ,, greedkamendcA A. T. Ippen, ed . McOsa 'u e

(ll) and others (1.2.3,12) have repo.ted up to 50% redustion m maakc Jew harge Book Co., Inc., New York. N.Y.,1966. I due to formation of vortices. Under such estreme a:onditions, a shati sp,Ilway

8. Kwizak. M.. and,Robat. A. J. "A Sean6.Imphcu tek"""* for Orid Point Atmospheric i* 'l" 8 ***" M*"8AF W888Aer Ad* dew. Vol 99. No. l. Jan.. meant to pass a certain flood discharge will hase tis dw.hargmg sapacity pp 32 36 *" " **" * "* I '"" " * "#'"E NY serious and undesirable t!fecta are empericaced when the soitnes entrain str.
9. Lamb. H., Nrhedymemka J.. " Aspects of 6th ed., Dover Publicataeas.

a Computational New York'riod d. 1945ua.h,.

Model for Long.Pe

, la Lasadernas, J; A8ad Mmeraadmas AM.3294-PA. Santa Monica, Cahf.,1967.Such vortices cause appreciable loss in the efficiency of h)deauhe machmesy pp.165.

3g, g,g ..

N O*O*"*83'*U"acsions. and produce vibtations and noise. Denny (4) has seporied Ihas a soeic s eniaamma M. be witz A '*# ***"

  • 888 8'd8 d 773d'd 1% (by volume) of air can cause as much as a 15% redussion m the ellwiency i i Mashemiesks Series Ne[JJ 'l966 '. 4 of a c888tifuSal Pump. He has further stated that, in entreme cases, oser 104
12. Reed. R. O. and todame. B. R.. "Numencal Model for Storsa Sur as in Galv of the flow entering the intake could consist of air, and >=ut angles of up

] 88Fl*"r"*' */ 8Ae W88erways and #arens modassa. ASCE, Vol 94* No W Pr Paper 5805. Feb.,1968. pp. 33-37 to 40* could be realized thereby resulting m di astrous eticsts I ustheimose.

  • #**d'**A */ M*84easadkal there is increased susceptibility to cavitation damage and the swahng Ilow sn Emacs .A g , # "* "' " 'l *" "d8 the pipollas causes increased energy loss. The problem of air.cnte.uung sostices A PPdded Me Aemnasies Sardas No. JJ.1966. pp. 303-53'6 assumes grealer sigd$ficance in tropical chmt.tes where, nowaids the end of
14. To E. and Davis, J. M., " Tidal Psopagation and b
  • in Enumia, he a sumaner season, the demand for water may be high or i the scscswo., kul l ' '" #I"dd*- Vel I. R. II. Gallasher. J. T. Odea. C. Taylor
  • and O C'

]. yiewicz. eda.. John Wiley and Soma. New York. N.Y.,1975 95.lig go

15. Wylie. C, R., Jr., Advaseced Engdaserdag M. '-es 3rd ed.$ kGraw-Hal Book Note.-Discussion open until March I.1979 To estead the slosing J4 e oa, savaih.

.. lac.. New Yost. N.Y.,1966. e written request must be filed wah the Editos of Teshnnal 1%htn4hons. AM t . Tbs 4

paper is part of the copyrighted Journal of the llydrauins then m. I%seedmsn of the American Socacey of Civd lias s aeers. Vol.104. No llV lu. Osi,.t.ii, let Menuu ng i

~~

was subanitted for review for posaable pubiacation un Apn. 6. tvis s

' Reader in Civ. Engsg., Government Coll. of Ena's. anJ Tesh . H ipus et P f. laJee

~

~

'N _! ' Prof. of Civ. Engrs. Univ. of Roorkes. Roorkee (U.P ). ladia

<- " Prof. of Civ. Easts., Univ. of Rooskee, Rooskee (U P 1, laJia

..3

kM7'g W W *er g 2 <

~

TX P .. )& ,

^ ~ ~ ' -

< L T. } __ o p y 9

mb t.

e

1430 OCTCBER1 8 HY10 HY10 ,v0ATEX FORMATION 1431 It la thus rpparut that intaks installations should be designed and oper:ted on vorta e rrvation hava not~ been completzly understood in :M absense of such that the formation of strong vortices is eliminated. Prototype inttk2 adequata kaceledst of the similarity conddions, prediction of protosypc perfosm-

==sattanla== bave such irregu!nr and complea approach boundanes that a There are mstantes theoretical prediction of the safe submergence is usually not possibis. As such, asce;asually),

on"r'ecord (1 bhere leads to er{6aco%

vortices sad inmisicadmg havitisen formed results the model. but not-in'the recourse has invariably to be taken to hydraulic model studies. In order to prototype lastallation. On the othet ;,and,%ortice.s have been obsersed in pump construct such a model and translate the results to the prototype, it is cascatial sumps (1) but a model study. based 'on the equahty of f roude number has that similarity laws governing the phenomenon be thoroughly known. Unfortt not indicated their presence. These cammples show that the umilanty traierion aately the similarity conditions for vortex formation at pipe intakes are not used la the modelinvestigation did not yield dynamic sumlarity, and there wcre well established. The object of the prescat investigation was, therefore, to other torces affecting the phenomenon which were omittcJ as bemg of neghgible Mablish experimentally the conditions of saadarity for the onset of ais. entraining importance, but affected the results.There is thus an urgent necd les a sy sicmatic vortices at vertical pipe intakes. study wherein the *-- ef-gee *styrviscosity and surface tenuoil anNosses formation are inveslignaed.;Tbc details of such a study, undertak en by the

  • rners.

Pensamt Status ce Samuruos as Voeres Fomenanos are presented hereiri. " '

,0C ID iff 7'/ N $ I' Vortex formation at intakes being a free surface piu nomenon, many hydraulic Emesammenvat Paoenae englasers argue that equality of Froade numberia asod.d and prototype is essential my 2 _ 9 L.i r 3 /C to ensure dynamic similarity. Contrary to this, based on a study of the behavior Two geometrical y similar anodils of cirsvlsuorteA tankucac uxdan each of vortices in model sumps Denny (4) found that for vortex similarity, the of which 4, S. Q. 6, y and a could be varied. Here d is the intake J ameser.

velocity in the model must be equal to the velocit) in the prototype and thus e is the angle of vane setting, and e is the surface tension of the hq .a To suggested the " equal-velocity" concept. Haindl(6) showed that commencement have a wide range of the governing parameters, the pape maakc was sonnested of air entrainment in a slowly drained reservoir is a function of the Reynolds to a centrifugal pump and pumped outflow used to provide mJepcodent sonisui number. Hatterley (7) as well as Iversen (9) investigated vortex similarity in over the discharge and the submergence. The vorten tank and the assouncJ pump sumps and concluded that a certain augacatation of velocity in the model, pipe system was made recirculatory so that the inflow equalled the outtlow.

above that required by the Froude law, is accessary. On the basis of his The discharge was measured by a calibrated orificemeter located on the Jehvesy investigation on free spiral vortex, Quick (12) suggested that dynamic similarity side.

will exist between geometrically similar systems when they are operated at The circulation in the approach flow was generated by means et an assembly identical Froude number. He however, added that the generation of swirl of adjustable guide vanes pinned at the top and the bonom to two uscular nar*==ary to produce a vortex is not always independent of Reynolds number rings as shown in Fig.1. The assembly of adjustable vanes =as plased consenanc and the use of too small a model may give misleading results. Daggett and with the vertical pipe intake and the vanes could be set at asiy Jcsised asigle Keulegan's investigation (3) on vortex flow through orifices shows that viscous with respect to the radial direction. Use of sufficient number of unes sesulted effects become unimportant for Q/w d = 2.5 x 10' and similarity is achieved in uniform and amisymmetric generation of circulation. Arvangement was made by equality of Froude number. Here Q is b *= charge; 4 is the diameter to provide for uniform distribution of inflow around the sonics tant To effect of the pipe; and y is the kinematic viscosity of fluid. However, since the velocity this, the main feeder pipe was branched off into awo by means of a tee. joint, was not independently varied in their experiments, theirTmdings need to be, and each branch feeder then fed half the circumference of .nc tank sia the substantiated by caperiments where the velocity is independent of submrigence. rectangular conduit and the distribution holes, see Fig. I i he scQangular ardet Anwar (2), basing his findings on experimental data, reported that similarity conduit was circular in plan and laid along the circu ntciense os the seines betweea different dimensions of a vortex with a narrow air-core doca nos depend tank. The top of the rectangular conduit was pr~;;ad woh suttiocni number on the radial Reynolds number for Q/, S = 10', whereas the formation of of smali diameter andesuitably staggercJ distr P ;on holes. t he spu e bcincen strong vortex with a large core depends very much on this number. Here S the tank wall and the outer screen and above the sectangulas sonduit was pasked is the depth of submergence. Amphlett (1) seests to have arbitrarily fixed Q/, by gravel so ns to destroy the kiegpc energy of the incoming flow I hn asiangement S = 3 x 10* as the limit for freedom from viscous effects in case of horizontal ofinflow distribution re'sulied inMuiet fr'ec surface at the mict and tige yosses intakes. Zielinski and Villemonte (14) also studied the effect of viscosity on formed was steady and cen'ra'ily t located.

vortex formation in orifice flows. Small and I.arge Vortes Tankav' The small sortea tank was an open ohnJn(al Daggett and Keulegan (3) reported that, within the range of their experiments, tank 2.5 ft (0.75 m) in diamelgt and 1.5 ft (0.45 m) high made et gahamred the surface tension did not affect vortex formation. On the contrary, purely iron (GI) sheet. A central' hole was cut in the tank bottom so as to admit from theoretical consideration, Hughes (8) contended that air entrainment in pipe ges of differealjif .ppipe intakes with bcIl mouthcd enir.anse vortea flow should depend on surface tension. ihad Saternal diameters df 0 in ,4.g phand 1.16 m (11 % mm, ## pum.

The foregoing review indscates that the eaa< luna =a of similarity have not been and 29.4 mm) and were usadou,t of^ perspen. The radius el suisaiuse of each thoroughly lavestigated aad the influsaces ofgravity, viscosity and surface tension of these 90* bellmouths was equal \4o, the radius of the pipe maake liash pipe

~

G --

e t

VORTEr: FORM ATION 1433 OCTOBER 1978 HY10 HY10

! 1432 intaks had a length of cight timas its dianneter and was placed coaccaric with lev; led using cement concreta plastered with cement monias so n to bems it in level with the bellmouth top. The adjustable guide vanc-anembly, wh.ch the taak bottom and its joint with the 01 sheet sealed carefully by using an had a diameter of 3.5 ft (1.067 m), had 67 vanes each bemg 4 m (800 mme adhesive. The adjustable vase ring assembly was then placed concentricauy wide 2.0 ft (710 mm) high made from 0.07-in. (1.75-mm) thatL alummium sheet

! with the intake ensuring that the vanes romaaned in the verical plane. The floor of the task was brought la level wi.h the bellmouth .op by spreading The guide vanes could be set at angles of 10*, 20*, 30*, 45 *, and e,o* with respect to the radial direction. A 12.4 hp (9.3 kW) centrifugal pump was useJ

+ a layer of was. The vane-ring assembly consasted of 64 sheminum vanes I.53 to obtain recirculation and tlEdesired range of div.harge.1:or 6ochng of the ts. (40 mm) in width,13.8 in. (350 mm) is height and 0.07 in. (1.75 mm) in eaPerissental liquid, a part of the 4-in. (l00 mm) pipchne wn entlosed m a

'M-=. Arrangement was provided to set the vases at 0". 20* 45* and 60* concentric pipe and cold water ran through the annhr space j with respect to k radial direction. The intake pipe was conaccted to a 12.4 ' " - - - " - ^^' IJealds.-To investigate the effects or s,woui, ana su,ta c j

hp (9.3 kW) centrifugal pump which drew the experisasatal liquid front the tension, liquids of different viscosity and surface tenuon, weic acquire.1 in tank and recirculated it back into the task. As adequate length of delivery huge quantities. Cost considerstions ruled out use of glycerol and othe .;.1m i

l A chemical additive with trade name "cepot"-its chemical name hemi; saerua y.

4 ,

methyl cellulose-was therefore selected, imco and used as an aJJ.u c wah f 6.* .c.,,,..

water to increase its viscosity. The kinematic viscosity of waies sepot wl.ane I /,/ e was measured using Redwood and Ostwald viscometess A n.cse o W aJaasoa f . .,

lh i of cepot in water increases its kinematic viscouty tu 14 4 = lu ' st'/ s a a14

{,

{ '

f i 7' l3 'o - p g x 10 ~* m*/s), an increase by a factor of 16.5. T he Newtonnan t% ha. sos ut g s the cepot solution was confirmed at a concentration of 9 5% :n a eeui.on s yhmtes l.

.,;h Q$

  • viscometer, this being the maximum value of the concemrainm psoposcJ to
be used. la order to investigate the effect of surface tenuon on the toimation

., Y ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, y 7 y d

, l J, of air-eatraining vortex, it was considered desirable to har : Nuid ot ditienent j l surface tension but of the sa:ne viscosity as that d water I or tha purpose.

j _ p f,,

(,

1 J .. < '

iso-amyl alcohol was uaed. a small percentage of which dessenca the suelece

~

M toastos of water. The surface tension was measured by a tosuon balance. It

  • [ O "* ~** :j
  • C ," *** '

bh$ l, ,': was found that a 2% solution of iso-amyl alcohol in water seduies the sueface tension to 0.0024 lb/ ft (0.036 N/m). i.e., a reduction of ahoui 5% . ihe Lmemata:

{

ig * *llg ;llll* a-a -f J.

  • I'****== i viscosityof b solution remaining the same as that of water. Suttisicais peccautam 1

N ,*""* """  % was taken to prevent evaporation of alcohol by covermg the open top of the

  • l **.*~*=a

'd d "f tank by a transparent plastic sheet,'at the,same time ensusing that atmosphcric

( ' pressure existed on the free surface. Water, water-cepoi sotuih.* and waies.

1

~J G isoamyl alcohol solutica were used in turn as the test hqusJs I ' *

.$ o s Precedere for Taklag Observations.-The tollowmg pn.scJme was adopicJ

' g* for determining the critical submergence (to hc def med taso n los pun maake.

l Y"."./.O.'"*

e ** * "Q Q {i liquid, discharge and circulation. The adjustable guide sanes m uc sei at the desired Q with respect tpe7adpl direction. The demed hquid was then Fla.1.-Omaats et tmoe venes Tank carefully fBled into hMk Md,the annqciated pipe sysicm t he tenanfugal 4

pump was started and the discharge gradually adjusicJ to the deuscJ salue.

The liquid reached the intake by spiraling around the em of wmmetry and pipe was provided in the forra of U-loops which were submerged in an open water tank for effective cochas of the recirculating liquid, a vortec formed on the free surface above the intake Sune cash sun =as staned with a large depth of submergence, the sorten msanatily happened to The large vorten tank was 2.5 times larger than b small tank and the two be a dimpic without any air-core in this case. The submergens e wo then reduced tasks were geometrically similar. The task was constructed of mild steel (MS) by draining some of the liquid, the discharge remainmg the same lhe hqu J sheet 1/8 in. (3.18 mm) in thickness and had an internal diameter of 5.7 ft surface was allowed to drop very gradually, and when it sea.hcd the acwed (I.87 sm) and a height of 3.0 ft (0.91 m). The bellmouth entrance was made level the draining operation was stopped. Upon attainment of sicaJe sondanma of alemanum casting turned to conform to the specified r.hape and size. The

' intakes were transparent pipes of perspex having internal diameter of 1.06 in., the liquid surface level was measured by a pomter gage and the type et sones formed was observed. With each subacquent lowermg of the hqu J mustace, 2.0 in., and 2.94 in. (27.0 mm, 50.0 man, and 74.6 ann) and length of 10 tienes the vorten gained in strength and its air-core became deepo Peoscedmg thu the diameter. The joints between the n-.u-.h and the tank bonosa and beween the * " mouth and the latake pipe were mMj esaled. The taak floor war way a stage was reached when the worten air-cose almosi s eas iir.: the meanc l

HY10 '.O*lTEX FO':MAllON 14H 1434 OCTOBER 1878 HY10 observisions r;rs repettwi to an accuracy of 8%. For she tore i.nh. ihe and tended to cetrain air i,stermittw.tly. The caset of air-estrainment could repeatability of observations was found to be within w ;. to: 4 lu* waac be seem through the transparent walls of the intake pipe. Fushr lowering of settang, whereas for a 20* setting it was t4%. Considering the n.ium of the the liquid surface resuhed is alanost continuous air entrainment, oftea producing Phesiomemos, the accuracy was consadered acceptable.

easily audible sucknas noise. Fig. 2 shows the vanous stages is b developassat '

of as air.estraantag vortex and Fig. 2(4) shows the critical ==Adi= under Dusenemant Anatveis which a vortex Just toads to entraia air. The corr::; "- submergsace will be designated as the critical submergence. The entire range of discharge was .

la puctice, it is desirable to know the safe submergence et the intake for ,

aianalarly investigated for a givea setting of k vanes and the critical submergence withdrawalat different rates so ba the schedulc of operation tould bc 4.sosdingly '

determined as shows in Fig. 3. Similar procedure was followed for each of i

i drawn up. The safe submergence ta generally taken as ih.n submergense si ,

which strong and objectionable vortices do not form; thn may be i.aken as

- the critical submergence defined earlier. In most cases ihn sutuncegense is i

n -

I

a. . , .. . n m.

" (

$_. _8 _ . 4 __ - - . _ l se _

l . =rw. .. ener. . s .a . ,i i

l . _ . . l 2

4

~"! P

  • llO * . w-i . e . ., .

l ,

r

. mar.tane r l y, 3 ,,

I ..=::. ,, . .:: ,_. . . r- -- .. = c:e.:.

i _ . ..

E= - * * = **** .39.==

  • f- .-  !

. n *. .-

- ~

. s s no ,'. . l g e. oors afm ' '

a. . l f

, I T s.

f

., /.d --

.,=~.. .w.

=

'a n

t J,.

. o ,s .

, I i

I .

^

lllo lllo ,5 7u -

4' j .3 i m,=,;::. :'.::::.r:r. *-= = .:x::: c ::v., T/- ,I L '

R q

4 -T ,

,, ^i Q

'*"'"*"*"# ,, __ I_ _ .f. .. . _

N I

os so as

[

} k o so ib

-.....~.

iu i.

c 1

, w,,

II , , , , , ,

FIG. 3. ':,etermination of Critical Submergence .

RG. 2-Vedeus Stages of L 7 7 et Air " *; Verses: Dioetiaege Q le to be obtaipd from inodel studies and to enable convession of sesuhs to the sine some la ese comes prototype, it is desirable to make the submergence as the dependent variable.

The dec.e,asional analysis presented herein, accordingly, conudeis various perti-the desired vane settings, intake sizes and experimental liquids. Eaperiments seat variables innuencing the critical submergence in vones now at a pipe were conducted on the small vortes taak as well as the large one.

intake locaid in a circular tank. The functional relationship can be weitten Since wortes fonaation is extremely sensative to samall disturbances, it was as shou $h t deessable to ascertain the repeatability of ruas in both the tanks. Further, g, fgo,p,,g,g,p,g,p,,,,,,y ,,,

. at was decided to check the repeatability at small sasles of vene setting-a condstaos at which ansaimaan errors may be empscted t-.u.= of the samall La which S, = critical submersence of the iniake; o - J..nments of sonic s circulateos la case of the amnell tank, c- ; ^ of variations of critical saak; D, = diameter of guiele vane. ring; A = radius of a wr' t.eilmouth enivante sehsergence with latake velocity (not shows hose) for 208 vene setting unde, of the intake; l' = initial circulation at radius D,/2 generated by suiJe sancs; siar' conditions het determined on two different ocessions showed that th- P = mass denshy; p = dynamic viscoalty; and 3 - acceleration due io stavisy.

e

  • O -..

HY10 VORTEX FORMallON lap OCTOgfR 1973 HY10 1433 is may be emph= =ned hera that for flow through a roservoir i:staks, tha discharg1 to rs: ult in a constant valus of the parameter for a gacu wumr .4 the p..Je vanes, and make is mdependent of flow condinons. On she umo n in. . o u.i. .on Q and the submergence S are i=dar ad-=* of each other. For instance, in case ..nd.u.m toe of hydroelectric intakes the head causing the flow may be many times greater parameter of Eq. 8 will hase different values for dif ferent th.*

than the intake submergence. With p, O and 4 as the repeating variables, the the same setting of the sancs.

M%=1 analysis of variables of Eq. I yields pQ'h h*"

  • U"'"

S* fD D. R Q id Q t.. . . . . . . . . (2)

_...f,I , ,

4 \d d ,d ud , Q ,d' O ,ed'J The critical submer8cntes at dillerent mtake ulouuo s... d.ii. .. .o muh sizes. vane-settings and hquids were deteanuned loitow mg ibs piou Jo.s men.acJ la the light of Daggett and Keulegans' (3) resuhs, it can be assumed that wbsa D/d > 16.5 and D,/4 > 9.0. these parameters would not affect vorten in Fig. 3. Observations made for vanuus siscs os muto n o.y .aici .nd j

formation. In the present inve4tigation D/4 > 25.0 and D,/d > 14.3. Further water-isoamyl alcohol solution were comp.arcJ io studs ihr sis.s i et sue t as c l tension on formation of air entraimngaertnes lis 4 sho. -nsh s. e.

A /d was held constant at 0.5 in all the experM - Thus one can write

  • " " 's. ,,,,,, , , . , 6 S, f Q rd Q p O' # ,

. . . . . . . . . . . . . (3 )

- - f,1 , ..... , , , ,,, ,, ,

q 4 \vd ,Q d' V gd ,. a d, >i . .

s..,

    • ***~ ~ l Rmairing that Q = Vsd'/4, one gets . a .o . .. .u i

~ ' * * ~ * * -

S' fYd rd V p V'd h

.(4) ' *- * " a*'a ~d"*s. I r.'

- - f,I 4 (w Q Yd3 o )

l......... ... ... '

'** 'N'k' I*'""".N l 'd * , 4

.Q Similar nondimensional parameters, as obtained in Eq 4, were obtained (10)

  1. (, ' ' i, i l 4

"g -

g (V

by suitable manipulation of the acadas *==.a..a form of Navier-Stokes equations of s.otaos including the surface tension ternt. By easitable regrouping of parasacters , j , , ,

l Eq. 4 may be written as )- g / ,

S.

f. ( \

f g "' d rS. V p V'd 3

!..... . . . . . . (5) i

( j'e.( T'] ..  ;

h 3

Q , 7gd m;

v a J p l , g

~

[' l U

The use of g"* d*'*/r sad FS,/Q, as agatast Vd/r and rd/Q, offer 1 i

' considerable advantage in the analysis of experunental data as shown herein. .

i The viscosity parameter g"*d"*/r remanna coastaat for all discharges for a j- ,

3i gives pipe intake and a givea liquid. The cire=I=siaa generated by the adjustable 'n

,s ,,o ,s ,o n ., . , , a' vases set at na angle g with respect to the radial direction is r - w D, V. . . ..... ............. ... . . . . (6) yng. 4_o.s.,mination of Ertect os surfac. Ten..on on cni.cai sut,m..g.n e e.,

Es2 in. @36 men) Diameter Batake is which V. is the tangcatial velocity at a radian of D,/2. From the continuity

! relationship. one can write the following r '-*' t-

  • for 4 = 0.82 in. (2035 mm) and 0 - 20*. 45*, and W i os rihei mut e sun TS, tan 9 a similar trend was obtamed. It is obvious isom l'ag 4 thM t hante m suolate

= ............. .. . .(7)

O g_

na sec e .. ..... tension has made no dif ference to the seloutpunn an wbmagem e plot Esamination of similar figures indicated th.it withm the s.mre e: % bu numbo i w D, l.2 x 10' < p V'J/., < 3 4 x 10*. the surlase tenuon den noi .. tics s u.no ,

7j , j formation, and accordmgly the Weber number can be Jmppsa esom tq s and -- . . ............. ..... .(8) The effect or viscouty on the critical submessense is show n m I y s lasisows Q as acc e S, I- the variation of entical submergence wah maake scloon so, b.pnas os siaeusm w D* kinematic viscosities, namely, water and the tepot soluurn t he hguic show s l

in which a = aumber of mijustable guide vases, and s = thickasas of each that an increase in the kmematic viscosity detreases the unnat submC'6CH'C-vane. The parameters a, s, a.ad D, are constant for a gives vase. ring assembly This may be attnbuted to the reduction in the wisength os susulanon m the am/ S adopted deflattles of circulation parasseter viz. Eq. 7, is thus seee region of wortes core when the liquid has a higher viscoui> .

O e

1438 OCTOBER 1978 HY10 HY10 VORTEX FORMATION 14}g Dropping the Weber number froan Eq. 5. one acts S K , = K,F,,, . ten S, d

- -f(N, N, . F ) . . . ...... . . . .(9) .W 4 in which K = f,(N,) . .w. . Itis Here N, = g "' d/i,: N, = I'S./Q: and F = V/ V gd. In accordance with K, = f,(N. ) 'N * '

ilJi j Eq. 9 plots were then prepared of S./d versus F for constant values of N' Deterinisation of Effect of Vissosity.-For each N. s .ilu e ilic s4ao os A

  • l and different N, values. (In this and many of the succeeding plots the value i of S, at any required velocity as obtained from a plot like Fig. 3 has been i ' - -- ..

)

used.) One such typical plot is shown in Fig. 6. It shows that the variat6on n.sgur L . . ~,...

l ,,s .m. . .

-w ._

,3 c - . w. .s..l g, ~..

! .**""'**">8 'i q x m. = f A* 1 ,p. l e : *

((*

} .o 8

p. ! , _ J _ ,L__
  • '4

. . . . . ' . . -.--. =

o i- e , .a

~

,c,  ;

y g,n-.q

., r .  :

i, .. c. ,

i f,y _ ;_ _

=

1 g

s.

. ,/,. ,,[, / M .. ', i

/./A',;,/;. .,.,p ./ ! . ' ,i

3

. _ _ /, ,% u.

._,1. > . =. .

,. ,. . /.. ,

/

-g ,/

~~. L i., ,

,/.'/, f '

J / .

Q;g. f . g ,

g L b3 so 3 , i

' ~~

-r ' - -'~

-~

~~I

.n g'

e g.

FIG. 6.-Variation of Sc/J with F and N. fos A , 0 387 i

. .,...,.,,i.,,..r .

..... v. l ,

l ,,i ..

'1 FIG. 5.-Determination el Effect el Viecoalty on Critical Submergence fos 1.18 in. * -

'#-b s (20.4 msn) Diameter lateine -.,,,

' .* y i w; -.

Q . ,' ' -

of S,/4 with F is a linear one on a double los paper and the following relationship . . . ;., '

can be written: . L 1.~,. i N s' '~- .. .

~

K, 4 = F " '" . . . ...... . . (10) .

.T =

'i  ! -

~.

j in which K =f(N., N, ) . . . .. . . . (11)

FIG. 7.-Vasiat6on of K , with N. and A ,

Further K, may be seen to attain a constant value at approx N, a 5 x 10*.

Plota similar to Fig. 6 for different value of N. were used to evaluate K,. for any value of N, to that for N, > 5 x 10' was f ound an 1 de,..gnaicd as Fig. 7 shows the variation of K, with N, and Nr. The double los plot shows K for the given N,. In a similar way K. values were descenoned toi att salue:.

that the lines of constant Nr are parallel and that K, becomes independent of #, and plotted against.their-respective N, See l'ag h t he l'6use shows of Nr at N, = 5 x 10* for all values of Mr. To separate out the effects that as the viscosity parameter ##2 increases, the value ot A deoc.aws and of ' mity and circulation. one can write becomes unity for N, a 5 x .30* thereby indicating liecdon- 'eom s owous O O a O ,

- --.._m . .,,_, _

t D VORTEX FORMATION '\ 1441 HY10 j I HY10 f

' s egen e 1440 OCTCBER 1978 relation. It is t3 be noted that in the foregoing anc. lysis, the tritiet i effects, This relationship may be seen to be unique for(11 v: lues o7y. . d o h u e Wh h Wu % e@ Aw Determlaation of Effect of Ciremissies.-Fig. 8 was used to ./ evaluate was t a viscous 9 which abows variation of KS/d with N F. The straight hoe correspondmg cettection factor K corresponding to the k'cownfigure valuehowingthe of N. and ria F to Eq.16 can be clearly seen to demarcate the air-entraining and nonair entraining.

' > plotted against the correspond vortices. From the known values of N.. N, and F. one an thus ascertairi of A S./d with a .( . ~- - he

12. ud plotsed against the correspon' din'glN; values (not shown icre). Sonne of the earlier investigations relate to the vortex tiow through orifice i , ,

e t  ! .

ta

.. a : .

'* *  %. w ,tu, 6

% L lj -f

^ % j l g  !.l'.- * . - -

m .

,, o o

3 e

y,y3:

xA. - c -

- m.

g.

l u .., m~ o 7

l -- ..

,a

.1 3; -

5 .

- ..-t . _,..

(0 h, .

, ,} , ;21. * ~ '4... -r ~ {* ,-- ,s. ; p'.'

FtG. g.-Verlation of K with N.

t's s, , ,s s -.c s ,

.- p-1 b ,

, g r

  • '  ! p . . .

H E

D ')

4 . . I 'll O' * *I #a /4 with F and R for N. - 0 387

  • . f ' { ',

-1 '3 '

/ $[$P .

l kV

y

_l -

g- -- g j

. g t . l l1, , r, ) . - . ,

.e - + - -

  • f b

l'

.. 6' ll .'"*>..; i 2 j. -<

,, _ ,,, ,,,,, m . -

y < ,, ; '[ - ,a 6

,4 l .. ... m . - x '

)  ! N

' ~~ '

D f

[.

%[, '.

~

3 ' ' '

/ '[ N ll ,

D ,

= .  ;,7 ,,,;g -.

% , N% g  % s j .I

p. ~ ' --
< :: $-;d-.exNx S:x nG. g.-c.ite,ie. tow,,. of vorie- ,

-x , , ,

folio.mg relationship representing the variation of K, with N, was obtained f rom such a plot: FIG 11 *--V8''3** 8"bmergence Corroetion Factor with Reynolds Numbai and

  • * * (15)

Frowde Number K, = 5 6 N"

  • i Eq.12 can c.,w be wvitten as outlets. Orifice flow Wing a special case of pipe flow. Daggett .md Krulegan's data (3)on vortea flow through orifice outlets was ound r to be m genera' agreement

.. (16)

K = $ 6 N"* *' F " '" = 5 6 ( N " " F )"

. with Eq.16. The line of demarcation between air-entrainmg and n. ;. air-entrainmg a # = -

vorticca for orifice outlets was located slightly lower (top tisan she <;orrespondmg Cr,terion for Type of Vereen.-Eq.. '16 ahows that if the data a pI ted on N,,m, F. a iinear reiatioa e, vias "a m% . a#am  % m,m _,_

m. m do, oie ies c. net" w.ih.xgpgg.in "d*"**'"T"""'"***d*'"*"*"'~"i*d"i*'*'"'"P'*"'h*''"'""

c'y ed Ie"*ei"' ,'N.'maIi .cade"for d.is i

[h[ c= e er M ana N< M

VORTEX FORMATION Ital HY10 HY10 OCTOBER 1933 w carried out r:t equel F m:y be constructed. For this purpose. the wbmergence for S /d in terms of Reynolds number. R = W/w. and Froude cumber F. correcatoa factor at any R is defined as the ratio of (S, /J1 les 4cio meous such plots uns was made of Fig. 8 and Eq.16. He viscosity influence to (S,/4) at any given value of R. both correspondmg to the urne To paranneter N,is, in fact. k ratio of the Reynolds and Froude numbers. Suitable Froude number. The prototype Reynolds number is usually so high a to be values of R. for which equal R lines are to be constructed. were selected. above the correspondinglimit of zero viscous influence. For z e ro s nsous mtlucace For each value of Nr, KS,/d was determined front Eq.16 for various values K, = I. and Eq. 39 can be written as of F. ne values of N, were then determined corresponding to each value of F and the arbitrarily selected values of R, and the correer-- values g* for zero viscous influence I of K read from Fig. 8. With K and K S,/d known, S,/d was readily determined 4 _ gui Fig.10 shows the variation of S,/d with F at constant values of R for Nr g,

= 0.337. The figure shows that for each value of F. there is a limit of R beyond -at any Reynolds number which viscous effects are negligibic. This is indeed a significaat conclusion d in the light of the view empressed frequently (l.2) that there is a limit of R thereby rendering the submergence corrector !acio. numerulls cqui to A l beyond which viscous effects are neghgible; in fact this limit is now seen to For each Froude number and different assumed values of RepwiJs numben.

be different at different F. Plots aimalar to Fig.10 were prepared for other the submergence correction factor was evaluated. and os usunon n sho.n N, also but are not shown here. plotted in Fig. II. The use of Fig. It is better illusiraicJ by n c ns os . iyp.s et example. l et the prototype intake be operating at a l' oude mimtm of u 71 Paoeceso Maynoo ros Pnessenne Paorovves Camcas Suomenesaca and the corresponding Reynolds number be 10' Vortes formasma msesogescJ 4

The foregoing analysis has shown that the surface tension does not affect ,,g 7 formation of air. entraining vortices in the Weber number rasse, l.2 x 10 < l.56 x 10'. Fig. Il shows that while the prototype obscrutmos .uc rice from t viscous influcoces since K = 1. the submergence cortcomo Iaoos m the moJcl p V'd/u < 3.4 x 10*. The critical subenergence is, however. gre .ly ,afluenced g by such parameters as N, Nr and F. Voites formaation at reservoir intakes g og g g being a free-surface phenoscaos, it stands to reason that ca-asaary of Froude j maanber in model and prototype needs to be ensured. But when the model is run aLequal Froude number. its Reynolds number is reduced by a factor cases where the prototype conditions indicate vincuus miluense on voete s of m Vm. m being the model scale. There aany thus be a distortion in the forssation (K, > l.0), the feregoing procedure can be suaably moJdicJ modeldue to reduction in the Reynolds number Mjertag Eq. 7. the circulation parameter may be written as N) M'"-

Nr = K *taa e . . . . . . . . . . . As a result of this experimedWI study, the following tonsluuom (oncetums in which K' = 1/(I - at sec 9/i D ). For a geoanetrically sinnitar madel ig men krmatsn at vertical ppe intahs may be drawn.

is seen from Eq.17 that the canannacy of Nr is ensured-and it has the same value as in the prototype. As such in a geometrically aimilar model run at I. There is no influence of surface tension on the c'mcal wbmcirense when the same Froude number as that in the prototype, the only distortion introduced the Weber number p V 4/o = 120.

la due to change in the Reynolds number. the effect of which is taken care 2. The critical submergence of by the viscous correction factor K. For such a esse. Eq.16 relates the i 08 M he m nhc6n; generally decreases with macne model and prototype critical submergence as vascosity. . -

3. The critical submergence in case of vertical downwaid pipe maakes a IK S, I IK S, I g . c. . c . . - (gg) u,i..L w.m,m... , 1- related to the circulation nuinber, the Froude numbes and the m(out) parameter

= .

e .

- ' by the relation s DOC;D#S/N 00 {l;g3; mf (j y s  !-

(S, 4 /, GV . . . . .2. . . S. H. E. i. T. . k. -.QF. / 4 (19) 4

~ I

=

from which X# '

in which K = f(N.) and attains a value of unay for N, -) w to*asshown

(.S:i d/-

l la Fig. 7. The relationship is valid for 1.1 s F s 20 O, O IN73 - A,s lM and N, a 5.3 x 10'.

K. and K, being the viscous correction factors la the model and prototype 4. The Reynolds number R at which viscous effects bcsome ncshpble is respectively, to be evaluated froan Fig. 8. A plot for the submergence correction dependent on the Frouda aumber F; the higher the Feoude numbci. the greater 8 to predict the prototype critical submergesco frees the model studia* 9 9

- - = - - ,,, -

m HY10 HY10 VORT EX FORMATION M45 t 1444 OCTOsER 1978 is the lianit of Reynolds smaaber for freedosa froan viscous lailuences. 4= diun of pipe inti.ks; f

5. It is proposed that for vortex studies a asemetrically saadar model be F = V/ = Froude number;  ! yM constructed and operated at the same Froude number as la the prototype. g K

=

=

acceleration due to gravity; viscous correction factor; i Y' Nl Stanitarity of riculatica repreassited by Nr is samured by geometric sinailarity. # - O A aebanersence correction factor has been evaluated to account for distortion K,. K = coefficients; ,

due to change in Reynolds number in such a case and its relation to Reynolds = = linear model scale; y, = g */24/w = viscosity parameter; "I j

and Froude numbers is shown in Fig. II. He prototype critical subsnergence  %

can be readily determined from this figure and the known data from model #r = TS,/Q = circulation parameter; l

l Q = volumetric discharge; j ,

studies.

i A = radius of curvature of bellmouth. { .

3 Ammout I.-Rarenascas R = Vd/w - Reynolds number;  ;

l S= depth of submergence of the intake. ~'

i I. Amphlett. M. B., " Alt.Eatrainias Vortices as a Honaostallatake." Aspers No. OD/7 S, = critical submergence; . ,

l >

Hydraulac Research Stauce. Wauiasford OmfardeWso. Faglead Apr. 1976. r = thickness of vane- .J

2. Anwar. H. O., " Formation of a Wed Vorten." Jemenet of #pdreadic Assearch, Vol. y , g ,
4. No. I.1966. pp.1-16. Ve = tangential velocity at a radius of D,/2, ,
3. Daggest. L. L.. and Keulogna. O. H.. " Similitude d'a=Au== in Free-Surface Vortes I' = wD, V, = circulation; f Formations." Jee.real of #pdreastics medeien. ASCE Vol.100. No. HYll. Proc.

9 - angle of vane setting measwed from radial ducAson '

/

Paper 10943. Nov.,1974, pp.1565-1581. ' - ~ ~

4. Deasy. D. F., "An Emperinnestal Study of Air-Eatraining Voruces at Pump Sumpe." = of hid*-

'  ? oceedings of she lasstranseem of Mechenkel Eng6aners. E a=An=. FagE==d. Vol.170 > = dpic Unematic Wein.ty vascosaM Mm.d;

! No. 2. 5956, pp.106-116. p = mass density of liquid; and .

,,( d ., y l S. Gordon. J. L., " Vortices at Isaake Structurea." Weser Feuer. No. 4. Apr.,1970 pp.137-138.

o = surface tension of liquid.' , k )'

,3,. . , . y;g.* .+

1 +.

6. Haindl. K., *-Coatnbution sa Air-Eatrainment by a Vones." Procesemas of she Ssh 1

( l Jt p.I t As Es.

Congress of she lasernesdemet Associssienfer #peaudic Jtesserch Montreal. Canada.

, , gO .

)

1959, Paper 16 D. f f. f

7. Hattersley. R. T., " Hydraulic Desisa of Pump latakes " Jeesrael of she #pdreadics L t_3 Iw g i

Ardaden. ASCE. Vol. 91. No. HY2, Proc. Paper 4276. March,1965, pp. 223-248. Jg M . ( p 1 " d

' ' * ' . ' ' (

) f.

8. Hughes R. L., M da= of "Sisailitude Misiana in Free. Surface Vorten Forma-tions." by Dessett. L. L. and Keulegaa. O. H., Jemrael of #pdreadics hvisdea, p"e (

~

.,c., ja nua a . m f ,et I e i. .b.i ' '/ f g,

ASCE Vol.101. No. HY9. Proc. Paper 18335. Sept. 1975, pp.1287-1288. 1

. c

9. Inverses. H. W.. "Studaea of Sut -- e,.s Reginaremert of High Specific Speed ' t Pusaps." Treasecsdeas. American Society of Ed=4==W Engineers. Vol. 75. 1953, "-~

p=

pp. 635-648. r f

30. Jain. A. K., " Vortex For=anam at Vestical Pipe latakes.** thesis presented to the i -

))

/ Umavessity of Roorkee, at Roorkee, ladia, in 1977. is partial fulfillmeat of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Phalosophy.

I1. Poesy. C. J.. and Hou. H., **How the Vorten Anecas Ordice Discharge," Engineering

\,f <

d.

M O.O ij 5 News Jtecord. Vol.144. March 9.1950, p. 30.

12. Quick. M. C., " Scale " ' v --i- between Osametrically similar Free Spiral Vortices." Cd ed Engdesordes andPhWie Wer&s Aesdows, Pt. l!.Oct. 1962. pp.1319-1320.

r-

\ "" { Q $ f O ) -

13. Weller.J. A., discussion of " Similitude a=Aaaa== in Free. Surface Vorten Formatios." '

e by Dessen L. L., and Keulessa. O. H Jeesrael of see #phensiks meistem. ASCE. (

Vol.101 No. HYII. Proc. Paper 1435. Nov. 1975, pp.144S-1453.

I4. Zaetaaski. P. B., and Villemente. J. R., " Erect of Viamaisy on Vortsu-Orifice Flow."

Jeesrael of she #phensides medsdea. Vol. 94. No. HY3. Proc. Paper 5956. May,1968. k

/ " f f[h*

pp.745-752.

. lr 0.D Ammets ll.-Noranc.

Defellomving symbols are used in this paper:

i h,&

D = diameter of vortex taak; D, - dia==sar of vame-ring assembly;

.w~m..,,,-. _ _ _ , , , , , , , _ _

9 e

Analysis and Simulation of Low Flow Hydr:ulica. Bar- WEAK VORTICES AT VERTICAL INTAKES bara A. Miller and Harry G. Wenzel. By Jeffery G. Whit- , ,

i taker. Closure by authors .............................

Wlocity Distribution Coefficients for Grase. Lined Chan- w,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,%,,,,,,,,,,,,,

nels. Darrel M. Temple. By Nicholas Kouwen. Closure by nei = doen d by the ar.t ob.ervance of a perei.eent dye core upon dye in.

..**.****}y} jaction. Disnensioniens , ' _.; describing free surface worte= flows are used

autflor ... ... .........................** In an @ of expertamental data. The espertaneraal resulu indicate that a large dinnensiostless " ,_ _ _- la to avedd weak vortaces at vertical intakes. hicot vertical tratakse will require some type of antiverten de.

l, ErAATA ...... . ..

....................**.*************}y7 vice W weak vertices are to be avoided. The required dirnensionless submer.

gence is also highly 2., ' ^ upon oppvoech flow angle armi headrace length /

width ratio.

lemt000CD0s8

- . j L +hi, o Intake vortices are a result of angular momentum conservation at the o

" " "" *" #"*' " d**"*"

ANALYSIS / CALCULATION crose.'.ectional area. Ihey occur My 'u"t free surface flows into dosed conduits, such as sinks or aathtub drams. In large closed conduit in-DOC ID eg'#v63 ATT# // takes, however, vortices are often a severe problem to be avoided. They have been found to cause flop meductions, vibrations, structural dam.

REV__.s,.__ __ SHEET l OF 9 agef siurgirig' due to vortei l'o r:datiori and dissipation, and a loss of ef-

- fidency in turbines or pumps. In'certaid' instances they have also been' a safety hazard.

W ** ~9 '

Pump and turbine performance is highly sensitive to swirlir.g Cow.

Hydnulic pumps and turbines are designed assuming that the ibw inic-the m.schine will be axial and uniform. An intake vortex can cause a swirling flow to enter the machine, resulting in off-design operation, a loss of enidency, and possibly cavitation, surging, and vibration. An air-entraining voan can also reduce the discharge into the intake. Swee-ney, et al. (1982) date that at pump intakes no organized or subsurface vortices equal to or greater than that visually represented by a coherent swirl into the intake (dye core vortices) can be allowed. Trash. pulling and air core vortices, therefore, should also be avoided. A similar en-terion is appropriate for hydroturbine intakes, since the flow through the hydromachine is similar!"One difference from a pump, however, is ,

that a turbine has guide vanes upstream of the runner that may chmi-nate a small swirl. Another difference is that wall friction in a long pen-stock may eliminate swirl before it reaches the turbine (Baker and Sayre 1974; Hecker and Larson 1983).

This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation de-signed to predict theformation of weak, free-surface vortices at s ertical intakes with a headrace channel. A weak vortex is defined as a coherent.

' Assoc. Prof., St. Anthony Fa!!s Hydr. Lab., Dept. of Civ. and Mineral Engrg ,

Univ. of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55414.

' Grad. Res. Asst., St. Antamy Fa!!s Hydr. Lab , Dept. of Civ, and Mineral En5rg., Univ. of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55414.

Note.-Discussion open until February 1,1988. To estend the closing date one month, a written sequest must be filed with the ASCE Manager of joumals.1bc manuscript for this p_ aper was submitted for review and possible publicatwn on February 18, 1986. This paper is part of the fournal of fivdremf.'c Engineenny, Vol 113, No. 9, September,1967. CASCE, ISSN 0733-9429/87/0M.1101/501.00.

Paper No. 21775.

3, 1101 O O O

f' persistent dye core entering the intake, o dass of vertien to be evoiceo 8**

at pump and turbine intakes. He primary cpplication of the results is [at 44( _(att [8I), y4 aga _3+ (gj $ hf-\,,4,2 in the preliminary design of vertically r.rr nged intakes for hydropower .

f

,3 ,p 3 ,3 f1cilities. The experiments emphasize c:ppecach flow cngle, intake sub- ,8 3 4 _ a'$ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~b~~ ~ ~ ~ g) p ar Q: + g _ . gqiggU gg , ,l(3j+ _D)*

y mergence, intake velocity, and the length / width ratio of the headrace. 3C\

a$ ar at ar ,S PanaaseTens benumcmo Vonvex Fomaanoes 4( 43 Trq4( Q , aq 8

aq [_D\Sj'g a(8, ne flow field in which latake vortices occur is highly three-dimen- 344 g 4342 3 gg 3 2 4 f 13P SD*

- - - - - - =l g sional, allowing only minimal simplification of the equations of motion MC.84 , M' 8E 89h+:- Y #4 % . A P 3: O' The dimensionless parameters that should be used to describe vortex ormation have been in debate for two decades, one example being the ,3 g343 gyyph - ggi  %

+ -

'I h, + Y h; Y . . }L- -9 D8C,

........ ,..... ... (4) work of Jain, et al. (1978), and following discussions (Amphlett 1979; O .

Blaisdell 1979; Hebaus 1979). Recently, Odgaard (1986) has used a Ran-kine vortex and an assumption on the definition of an air-entraining vor- where F,, P., and 9. = the'redial, axial, and angular velocity compo.

trx to theoretically develop an equation for the submergence required nents, respectively; r, z, and 0,= the radial, asial, and angular coordi-to avoid such a vortex. The applicability of Odgaard's work, especially notes; P = pressure; p = fluid density; g - the acceleration of gravity; v = kinematic viscosity of the fluid; S = submergence; D = intake throat to dye core vortices, has not been tested, however. s 6 diameter; Q = flow rate; and P. - the farfield values of 2w v.r (circu-he most desirable dimensional analysis involves normalization of the ' lation). Using S, rather than D, in the expression for C results in a rel-equations of motion, as was performed by Anwar (1966). The authors atively simple dimensionless expression for circulation, as will be shown have repeated Anwar's analysis, resulting in a slightly different set of * @ later. Eqs. 2,3, and 4 identify six dimensionless parameters which de-dimensionless parameters. The equations of motion for a steady incom-  % scribe the flow: Nr = Sr./Q, a circulation number; R = Q/vS, a Reynolds pressible flow with axial symmetry (Fig.1) may in expressed in terms hh -< N number; S/D, a dimensionless suh.e.ce; (r'/p)(aP/ar)(5'/Q ); (1/p)(aP/

of the dimensionless stream function, $, first defined by Lewellen (1962) .'j

.J M az)(SD*/Q'); and gSD'/Q'. (The latter three parameters will be converted 3 N $ to dimensionless vadables in Eqs. 9 and 10.) Dividing Eq. 2 by (S/D)*

Q 34 ........................ ~ ....... ~ . ~ ~ . (18)  %  !" would Isolate the circulation number identified by Anwar (1966), Dr./

v, = .

]' c ? di

' 3* . Q. This is at first appearance a more logical choice than Ni - Sr./Q, 0 g since the submergence, which is frequently a dependent parameter, is and v, = - - -

Q 34 r ar

........................................(llP) ,j g

,5 , g replaced by the intake diameter. De ration T./Q. however, may be re-duced to a form that is inversely dependent upon submergence, result.

m ing in a very sirnple relationship for Nr as defined herein.

and the dimensionless variables q = r/D; ( = z/S; and r = 23(p.r/r.) 9- ~

Consider the sketch of a vertical intake shown in Figs. I and 2. The

'O Bi h8g

<t o far-field circulation is the line integral of angular velocity times radius at r = R:

u-3.

l , - -

T. = Ro.de = 2ws.R = 2sRv, tan a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (5) s

  • where a = the angle between the approach velocity vector Y and the s

, vector normal to the control surface. In addition, the discharge through

  • , the cylindrical control surface of radius R and height S + M is Q = 2sRp,(S + M) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . .(6)

"""""""""" Then, our dimensionless circulation parameter becomes

]'""""'"""""""""' Sr. 2sv,RS tan a

-= =

tan a

' ' ''g FIG.1.-Definition Sketch for Verteblos and Parameters of Vorten Formation at Q 2sRp,(S + M)

  1. 5 f M""'

1;+ , , ,

vertical intake

'~ #

1102 g 9 _ m

_JF =VM m5 e w

~u.

priate relationship between S/D cod Froude number, however, can be

' '\ ' N 1 - seerprom is that when Eq.10 measured' be S'/Dor:S/D to values --f'of S/D ~ F' at!which a given#.

of vorteu The wnters e

ssmber, Fo = V/ , and a cir.

,. / '

occurs culationare plotted versue parameter, thea.

Nr

  • tan FQ' a fac better resolution of the data is
  1. i D 8"**

j ,'

8  % achieved. A comparison of S/D versus F = V/\/S and I'.D/Q = D tan 8 a/S could result in a cloudy resolution of the data because a dependent

, , verlable in the experimente, submergence, is contained in each of the g , three terms. Measurement errors in submergence would affect each of f ,-

the three vadables.

i h s R

/

f Reoucnow or Cincut.anow atomo HcADRACE CHANNEL

'-[ j A number of researchers have experimentally investigated free surface vortex formation at an outlet in the center of a tank floor with a given FIO. 2.-Plan Sketch of Verticat intake 9er Parameter and Verlebte Definition

circulation (Anwar 1966; Da6gett and Keufegan 1974; fain, et al.1978).

The circulation was controlled using vanes or using Jets issuing from the Since Ah/S is often small, the circulation parameter identified herein may, _

side of the tank (Chang 1976). The typical vertically arranged hydrotur-in certain cases, be expressed as '.;

C bine intake structure, schematically shown in Fig. 3, is far from a circular p.

'" t? tank, however. Althou the approach flow circulation (angle) may be

= = tan a ...... .. ................. . . . . (8) J ,

[ estimated, the effect o the structure near the antake on circulation is Nr =- Q ' Ah generally unknown and difficult to determine (Brochard 1920). Most hy-D  !?

1+7 'i y

' droturbine intakes also have an approach channel (headrace) that will I L significantly reduce the circulation in the approach flow. Nr at the up.

The circulation parameter given by Eq. 8 is similar to that used by Jain, et al. (1978) in the analysis of their experimental data because it O h '

stream end of the headrace will remain the same because l'. and Q are both reduced by the factor B/(2nR), where B = the headrace width.

' resulted in less auto-correlation between the independent parameters of 63 The primary reason a headrace will reduce circulation is the lateral their regression; e.g., submergence was not incorporated into the cir- g.;

y

, y

.: difference in energy grade line [h + V 2/(2g)] caused by the flow sepa.

I culation parameter. The equations developed herein give a theoretical i g

! ration around the leading edge of the channel walls. liigher velocities I basis for this decision. p .-

and possibly even a higher water surface elevation will occur on the left The two pressure gradient terms resulting from Eqs. 2 and 4 will in-

.2- g E a c wall (Fig. 3), looking toward the intake. The energy grade-line on the dicste the Froude numbers that govern the intake vortex flow. If we right wall will be less than that at the left wall, reducing the transverse

- assume that the pressure distribution is approximately hydrostatic, then flux of momentum. This reduction of circulation is a function only of aPfaz = pr', =ad aP/ar = pgaz/ar, where z = the distance from the water intake geometry (L/B) and flow approach angle.

surface. The pressua ;wadient and body force terms in Eq. 4 then be- Circulation will be reduced further by side wall friction. The process ,

. come is slow, however, requiring much larger L/B ratios than normally en-(g - pI az; aP,l-=0 ........................(9)

Q'SD, f-As long as the prewure distribution is close to Sydrostatic in the vertical W"7 , ^/ ,,,

' xtion, which is a good assumption for weak vortices, the gravity and me"

/ */ [

.sure gradient terms in Eq. 4 cancel. In addition, the pressure gra-dient and body force terms in Eq. 2 become ~

S* %' ..

('s .j

[S _. 6 g <*

r' aP S2 gS'D' , a( 16 (D/ aC 16 \D/

9, ag

... . . . (10) ,y y r

gr p-= 9 z " p p1 9' g " p pg '

m t ,. .

L where F = V/vg3; Fn = V/60; and V = mean inlet velocity = 4Q/ . . ? .i ta (nD'). Eq.10 indicates that the choice of a proper Froude number, given FIO. 3.-Definitten Shelch of Verticalintake with Headrece Channel 4 the circulation parameters of Eq. 8, is not straightforward. The appro.

1105 1104 9 9 e

i

~ Expenmewras. Facany ,

gl l

An experimental flume was built to investigste vorten formation in vertical intakes with a headrace channel. The fiume, shown in Figs. 5 I

- '/ * ," and 6, is 7 m (23 ft) long,1.4 m (5 ft) wide, and 1.2 m (4 ft) deep, p' ,

consisting of a stilling basin, a tranaltion section, and a test section. Flow River 'n a once-through mode with i

e i was supplied from the h81=lai l

' ' a 20-cm (8-in.) supply line to e stilling basin. Inflow was measured I

_a with an odfice meter calibrated inline and connected to a manometer

.*.i

    • ' with either mercury or Medam blue as indicator fluids. The stuling basin \'

was designed to produce a fairly straight uniform flow out of this sec-tion. This was achieved with a 20<m (8-in.) lateral dif fuser pipe shown l FIG. 4.-Control Votume for Momentum Theorem Application in Figs. 5 and 6 with 5 cm (2 in.) diameter hoies dnlled to stagger at l

+45' and -20* off horizontal, and directed at the rear wall. He flow i

, was further smoothed by flowing through a 15-cm (6-in.) thick rock crib, ountered in the field, since the wall boundary layer increases gradually i which consisted of rocks coarser than a 2.cm (3/4-in.) sieve. Finally, a vith distance. This phenomenon will be neglected here. transition zone of 2 m (7 ft) was used to dampen any large scale eddies.

{

{

Experiments were performed on an intake very similar to that of Fig. Velocity measurements after the rock crib indicated a relatively uniform t in order to desenbe the reduction of circulation along the headrace  ;

hannel, a number of dimensionless parameters using tan a, L/8, etc. velocity over the cross section (Rindels and Cultiver 19M3).

Visual observation was made possible by installation of two 1.2 m x .

I were tried without success. Finally, a very approximate momentum flux 1.4 m x 2 cm (4 ft x 8 ft x 3/4 in.) plexiglass walls at the side and end malysis was developed that proved successful. If we assume: (1) nat ,

4 the reduction in circulation is proportional to the reduction of the y- _ . ,,. 4 ....

component of momentum in the channel;(2) that the cross-sectional mean d

u-component of velocity V, may be used in the momentum theorem, '= "

" N M- ~0]

thus at x = 0, V, = V tan a; and (3) that the pressure difference between the left and right walls is proportional to the y-component velocity head,

',==' < ~ - ' ~ ~ "

r --

( 1 as follows (Fig. 4): g th

.l.2 - -

$ $; .7 f., & g j

p. ,l r s il_ F3 3 '

f l i P, - Pc = -- Sp V2 . .

1

..... .. ..................... ...... (11) 6 l H $r / *[- [

<. a- V i- I- 1 11.i .a u.s m.s - y m a.gn, -di ,wg i where P, = pressure on the right wall; Pt = pressure on the left wall; [J Q CN and 11 = a constant of proportionality on the order of one or two, then ym ,

. s.

the momentum theorem may be integrated between x = 0 and x = L.

3 in j to give O 9 D

[l FIO. 5.-Plan View of Experimental Facility

._I Z W

p-4 -

N,* =

Sr S

= tan a 1

...............................(12) p" g' a s j,,,,,,,,,,,. ,-- y, in g 1 + - - tan a ] { ,

9 i

yy i

3 , ,

GO M,

sme N = 5 + Ah, and 5 >> Ah in most applications, we will assign

!*. o 3 I*

o 1

i tan a

....................................(13) < a e m

4$, j g hF. -

.vr = .. u,-i 4

, . . . m... . . m , -

--unn i + ,2 8

- T a- La-

, , , MT' -

1 A l

2 I:q.13 will be used in an analysis of the experimental data presented in l- .,

the next section. Assumptions 1 and 2 are an extremely gross approxi- , , , , , , ,

i mztion of reality. The other option, however, is to attempt various com-binations of the relevant numbers at random, which certainly would not Flo. s.-Section View of Esperimental Test Factitty have produced the relation for NF given in Eq.13.

1107 e

i 1106

  • O

. - - - - - . _ _ _ _=.. - - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ __ _-----___ _

For o given experimental run, inflow discharge and water surface el-of the flume. The interior components of the test section w:re the mov- evition were continually monitored ovsr tim 2. Weter surf ce elevstion able he2drsce walls and the bellmouth intak1r. The variable length side- w s also recorded on c strip chart. Discharge into th-r bellmouth intake walls were produced using four plexiglass panela for cach wdl, which was found by adding inflow discharge to the product of water surface fscilitated large variations in length. The length of the headrace walls to time rate of chang- and water surface area. Water surface elevation was the back wall used in the experiment were the 0.9-m (3-ft),1.8-m (6-ft), allowed to drop slowly until a persistent dye core vortex formed, as de-end 2.9-m (9.5.ft) long combinations. The 1.8-m (6-ft) combination is termined visually by injectng dye through a syrin6e into the water. Water shown in Figs. 5 and 6. The bellmouth was centered 0.4 m (16 in.) from surface rate of change varied between a negligible value and 2 x 10-*

the rear sidewalls as shown in Figs. 5 and 6. m/s (0.6 x 10-* ft/sec) with no discernible impact on the measured value In order to control and predetermine the flow approach angle to the of critical submergence for dye core vortices (Rindels and Gulliver 1983) headrace, guide vanes were located 11 cm (4.5 in.) upstream of the mov. Other potential sources of experimental errors, aside from the water

-ble sidewalls. The 11 vanes were 21 cm (9 in.)in length with a thickness surface rate of change, were the approach flow angle. discharge mea-f 0.3 cm (0.12 in.) and a spacing of 11 cm (4.5 in.). Each vane had pivots surements, and mearurement of water / surface elevation. As stated pre-on the top and bottom in order to vary approach flow angle between g viously, it was documented that guide vane angle is a good represen-x 0-60*. Using a technique described by jain, et al. (1978), the vane angle ,

tation of approach flow angle, within 2%. Vane angle could tv set to and thickness were used to compute the angle of the flow leaving the _, d within 20.5 degrees; thus, the uncertainty in the vane angle is 2 7% at vanes. The maximum adjustment for vane thickness in computing the 7.5* and 22% at 30*.

[, ,. ;

angle of the flow was 2%. Guide une performance was eva;uated through An orifice meter, calibrated in place, was used to measure discharge photographs of dye streaklines taken at two depths and two values of ,- ..q The accuracy of the calibration is 0.5%. In addition, the discharge was i .

l fiume discharge (Rindles and Gulliver 1983). The streaklines indicated '

l unsteady for a number of reasons (Padmanabhan and liccker 1934) in-that the guide vanes performed their function well and that guide vane cluding leakage, unsteady inflow, and the drop in water surface eleva.

y(f l

, q tion over time. Thus; the uncertainty h
discharge measurement was

~

l angle is a good representation of approach flow angle. There was no 4 evidence of vorticity in the flow caused by the vanes. I w 0.006 cms 0.21 cfs), corresponding to an uncertainty in Froude num-An intake throat diameter of 0.15 m (6 in.) was chosen to avoid vis-cous impedance of vortex formation except at very low intake velocit' s, to fh ber, V/ g of 10.27. This is a significant source of error and could account for some of the scatter in the data.

although there is still uncertainty on the criteria. The throat diameter 1 ,

y3 d There were three sourtes of error in the stage measurements (water exceeded Jain, et al.'s (1978) criterion of g'#D'#/v > 5 x 10'. Dagget and ' ;o surface elevation). %e point gage used was accurate to 2 0.6 mm (2 C.002 Keulegan's (1974) criterion of Ro a VD/, s 3.2 x 10' to avoid viscous ft). In addition, the wood in the flume would swell and contract in con-J ,

effects indicate that viscous impedance of vortex formation is possible m c, g junction with successive periods of. drying and wetting. Tnis swelling s 0.17. This criterion is surpassed - and contraction caused the level 6f the top of the bcIlmouth to be slightly at V s 0.2 m/s (0.68 ft/sec) or at Fo , g-by virtually all of the data taken. Anwar's (1978) criterion of R = Q/(v5) off, estimated to be 10.3 rnm'(10.001 ft). There was also a human error 4 z 3 x 10' indicates that the ratio (S/D)/Fomust be less than five to avoid in measuring the water surface elevation, estimated to be :1,2 mm

' viscous effects at water temperatures near 20" C. Anwar's criterion is (20.004 ft). His caused the total uncertainty in measurement of stage

  • o surpassed by most of the data. Data presented in Tullis, et al. (1986) to be less than 21.4 mm (10.005 ft), which corresponds to an error of indicatu : criterion of R a 4 x 10' and a throat diameter, D z 5 in., 20.01 in the dimensionless submergence.

which are also surpassed by the data presented herein. Padmanabhan The definition of a persistent" dye core vortex is somewhat arbitrary and Hecker (1984) found no significant scale effects above R - 1.5 x 10'. and developed primaruy for the convenience of the experiments. Hecker Each of these criteria was developed for air-entrainmg vortices, with large (1981) has suggested using the percent of time a vortex is present as a i velocities near the air core. A similar criterion for weak vortices would criteria for hydraulle model studies where turbine and pump intakes logically be somewhat less restrictive. Tullis, et al. (1986), for example, should have dye core vortices present less than 50% of the time. The found no scale effects for dye core vortices down to an R - Q/(rS) of writers found this driterion somewhat less arbitrary but diffictdt to in-approximately 5,000. corporate into the measurements reported herein.-

> The difficulty in identifying critical submergence stems from the fact that vortex formation is a transition phenomenon from a purely radial MEASUREMENT TEcHwious flow to a swirling flow. The point of transition is not well-defined be-The measurements were designed to identify the submergence at which cause there is a range of flow conditions over which either a purely ra-a coherent, persistent dye core vortex forms, herein called critical sub. dial or a swirling flow can occur, similar to the well-known transition mergence. A coherent dye core vortex present for at least ten see was from laminar to turbulent boundary-layer flow. Just as a disturbance in 4

defined as persistent. Ten see was believed to be sufficiently long to the free stream over the boundary layer can cause a turbulent spot that avoid the flecting vortices that will pass through the flow field. The dye. later dissipates, a disturbance in the intake approach flow can cause a core vortex was chosen because it is the type of vortex that should be fleeting dye core vortex, which appears infrequently and will not sig-avoided in most pump and turbine intake designs.

1109 1 toe

nificzntly impact turbine or pump performance. This disturbance cculd

  • be dus for eumple, to a t:.mporary surge in the flow or a rar2 com- .

bination of tip vortices shedding from part of the hydraulic structure. ,. .e.

7*7 As in any transition phenomenon, the results of the experiments will show some scatter. Since the critical sub r .pr.s is found by reducing a

,., g

, **I,P d

i submergence until a persistent vortex forms, measurement errors will ,

  • p****

h;ve a bias towards lower submergence levels. The conservative ap-proach to submergence guidelines, therefore, is to place an envelope '

g*~.;. ' +"*

curve over the measured values of critical submergence, as suggested s/o

  • by llumphreys, et al. (1970). .

l f www . ,.

I

ATs J .

"p( , ,

,4- j The critical submergence at which persistent dye core vortices forra l

  • was measured over a range of intake Froude numbers from 0.25-2.2 at = -

.. f * .

N} O, 13 arrangements of headrace aspect ratio and approach flow angle. In e e ,, # .

all 491 individual measurements of critical submergence were made. he ,

c' ;

W 4 e. .l')th.

individual data are available as an addendum to Rindels and Gulliver (1983). The distance between the intake and the side walls was always g l .

e,%'*:b (?!;.

l

.c '

2.7 times the throat diameter. The walls did not greatly impede swirl

- ' hl '4 dQ, '

i development over the intake. %e data, therefore, should be seen as 6 .pj .g giving a maximum value of submergence that will assure no dye core

-) V gJ 4.-Critical Submergence Itsemurements and Emelope Curves of Eq.13 for vortices.

The measurements are plotted in Figs. 7,8, and 9 as S/D versus Fo gg 4 Heedrece I.ength of 1.42 m; L/5 = 1.75; Ni = M for the thirteen combinations of approach angle and aspect ratio. All j g u) m hIa p measurements were made with an intake throat diameter of 0.15 m (0.5 L ft) and a headrace width of 0.81 m (2 2/3 ft). The foUowing observations e ~

may be made:

' *h h' OS? E 1. All of the arrangements required a significant dimensionless sut>.

]

,g y *gs .

.e mergence to avoid dye core vortices, greater than 2.5

, 2. Fig. 7 shows the critical submergence at the shortest headrace length.

8 S. with L/B = 0.63, A great increase in the required submergence was ap-parent as the inflow angle changed from 15-.30*. nese short headrace

.  ;:, ,- gr. - and approach flow angles are similar to those of many hydropower fa.

+ a** 4 as 1

S' *

, cilities. Approach flow angle is thus an important parameter for these intakes..

3. he increase with approach flow angle is not as significant for an L/B ratio of 1.75, shown in Fig. 8, where an increase in a from 15-30*

i 8 resulted in a relatively sma'i (~ 0.7) incicase in required S/D.

f.*~ . g4 $t , 4. This increase in S/D with approach flow angle is reduced further

  • .a( ,; . -4* with the relatively large L/B ratio of 3.14. In fact, even the estreme flow
    • ..y _

approach angle of 60* Increased the required dimensionless submer-sa *). ,, _

... gence by only 0.8.

47.- 4!*. 5. The required submergence for a = 60' and L/B = 3.14 is approsi.

?, , ,

mately the same as for a = 30" and L/B = 1.75. Thus, the effect of the

  1. headrace length / width ratio upon reducing circulation is obvious.
6. The data are all rnughly the same for the three length / width ratios no. 7.-Crmcal Submergence Roseouvemente and Emelope Curves of Eq.13 fo, when a s 15*. His indicates that the approach angle into the channel m Length of 0.51 m (from Entrance to intehe Center Line); L/8 - 0.83; may not be of importance if it is less than 15*,

n ,. . g 1111 1110 O -

e -;

ysis with p = 2 gave acceptable results. These results will give an in-dic: tion of the maximum submergence required to avoid dye core vor-

. tices ct on intake with a heedrace channel. A manui.Ily produced flow .

  • ' net (Gulliver, et al.1986) may often be used to dettemine the engle of _

.. - the approach flow to the intake. Positioning the side walls closer to the

. j intake and the installation of antivortex devices will reduce the required g

- submergence significantly. Presently, a hydraube model study is the best

~

(and perhaps the only) meens of incorporating the various arrangements y into the intake design.

Em."

t I .' ,Eq.14 is most comparable <te the results M is;n. et al. (1978), who I measured the outrim,36.ce at which an air.er.tMeing vortex would form

.~ g at a vertical intake. Jain, et a(foynd that the relation:

, Q g  %, R%-

g = 5.6N f " F*o" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

. .. (15)

. 8_ g. .# ,,j 4 O s/o *

  • , { _ g Z O gave a good description of their data when viscous effects were en-

,s e p f

= - 8.. -

g.

1-- 4g cluded. The primary differences between Eq.15 and those developed herein is that Eq.14 has an intercept at S/D = 2.5 and a much stronger gg, - FI;. - ,',]  !

d'"' - %g. t .' dependence upon NF. Both differences are probably due to the oppos-4 *=* .3 O y ing criteria for critical submergence, e.g., dye core versus alt-entraining j @ ~t vortices. Dye core vortices are chosen as a criterion herein because they should be avoided in most turbine and pump intakes (Sweeney, et al.

(:

h ]4 N 1 1982).

e .

t g

lg* filjl Exassets Appucanon e+ 8 --* * -

0 The Rapidan hydroplant is a retrofit of an existing dam, with two 2.5-i e f93g

  1. , ,; g; ,. 0 1 l MW turbines, half the nurrber originally installed with a f;reater total

. g.;,, -

l, ' capacity. Intake vortices were one of a number of concerns with this 4* **"" , ,)

  • T . = + * * -

retrofit. The following data agply: S = 24.5 ft (7.47 m); D = 9.75 ft (2.97 m); Q = 620 cu ft/sec (17.6 m /s); V = 8.3 ft/sec (2.53 m/s); L/B = 1.33; v/AF Fo = 0.47; and S/D = 2.5.

An electric analog potential flow analysis was carried out on the intake no. s.-Criticat sut> mergence BAeeeunwnente and Envoiepe Curves of Eq.13 for (Gulliver, et al.1966) and could be used to determine the angle of ap-Headrece L.ength of 2.a9 m; L/B = 3.14; Nr' = N* proach flow. De five streamlines flowing into the right headrace were at the following angles (one headrace width away fron. the entrance):

40*,52*,65*,90*, and 90*. Dese are very poor approach conditions. The Also plotted in Figs. 7,8, and 9 is a best-fit envelope curve developed average of these streamline angles,61*, was used in determining that by considering all of the data simultaneously in linear regressions on N7 as 0.57. Eq.14 Indicates that with these conditions an S/D value of Eq.14, successively changing the power on the NT term, and attempti 10.7 would be requircd to avoid free surface vortices. The intake was three values of p (p = 1,2. and 3). he regression weighted the squa msiduals above the envelope curve ten times the squared residuals be- very close to the headrace ws!!s. and the required submergence is prob-e the envelope curve. The resulting equation is as follows: ably less, but this gives an indication that a hydraulic model study is

necessary, even with an S/D of 2.5.

The hydraulic model study that was cammissioned confirmed that there 5=2.5+i F3 i? + 4 0 NP . . . . . . . - . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (14 ) was a vortex problem at the intake. A strong air core vortex formed that D was difficult to eliminate, primarily because of the poor approach of the where Fo = V/\gD; y= velocity in the intake throat; yp .

b hW DAM tan a/[I + (L/B) tan a]. (i.e., p = 2); and L = distance from the hea race Svasasany ano Conctuosono entrance to intake center line. .w These equations are applicable for 0.2 s Fo s 2.5.The Fif' dependence Weak, free surface vortices,e d, g., fined b'y a coherent, persistent dye cor is that developed in Eq.10. The ability of Eq.14 to describe a range of subsequent to dye injection, have been studied for verticalintakes with

! configurations indicates that the ayy.Wrnate momentum theorem anal-

,n 1113 1112 mnt4Wik i

O O n.

I' r

Q*1W sk hLhM fillw yny-

. Aq 4Q

a herdrace channel. A circulation parameter has tlso been developed for Baker, D. W., tnd Sayre, C.1,., J . (1974)a".Decey of swishng turbulent kw of incom ible flukisin long pipes," He e its m, ass,e ent a.4 contrat m sc,,.c, ca. intike with a headrice channel. The circulation par: meter is a func- cad i ustry, Instrunwns Soctely of America, New York. N.Y., Vol. 2,301-312.

tion only of the angle at which the flow enters the headr<c2 (:pproach Blaisdell F. W. (1979) " Discussion of vortex formation at verticd pipe intnes."

flow angle) and the length to width ratio of the headrace. and' Hecker, C. E. (1913). " Analytic pre.

An experimental fiume was built to investigate vortex formation in B ard U. au mp dictions of circulation and vortices at intakes," Rmrt EM-2891. EIntric Power vertical intakes with a headrace channel. Submergence, discharge, ap- Research Institute, Palo Alto, Calif.

proach flow angle, and headrace geometry were varied to observe the '

tnang, E. (1976). " Review of literature on drain vortices in cylindrical tanks."

conditions under which a weak vortex would form. I TN 1342, BH2A, Bedford, U.K.

The criticial submergence for weak vottex formation was measured )*88'" I" I",, and Keulegan, C. H.I (1974). " Similitude in free-surface verte.

over a range of intake Froude numbers Fo from 0.25-2.2 with thirteen 7tangements of headrace aspect ratio and approach flow angle; 491 in- q y g[' ,"( *

)-

_ C %WWhw avoid free-surface vortices," int. water Poiwr anJ D.. C,astr., 3N9L 24-32.

%fual measurements of cntical submergence were made. Envelope Hebeus, C. G. (1979). Ducussion of vorten formation at vertical pipe intdes,"

curves were developed by considering all of the data simultaneously in th O f. Hydr. Drv., ASCE, 105(10,,1330-13M.

successive linear regressions gradually changing the nonlinear terms in .'

U

,'4 j Hecker, C. E. (1961). "Model-prototype comparison of free surface vortices." f.

the equation. H 107(10),1243-12$9.

The exP#rimental results indicate that a dimensionless submergence E2

  1. l'

% Ha(r. Div., ASCE,e, G. E, and Larson, J. (1983). " Turbine reaction to free surfa of 2.5-7 is required to avoid weak (dye core) vortices at vertica1 intakes. i ,7 f Report EM-3017. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto. Cahf.

'- Humphreys, H. W., Sigurdsson, C., and Owen, J. H. (1970). ~Model test results The dimensionless submergence required is also highly dependent upon D $

U ,, of circufar, square, and rectangular forms of drop-in!ct entrance to closed-con-headrace length / width and approach flow angle, if it is greater than a duit spillways," Report of inwstigstson 65,11hnois State Water Survey, Urbana.

certain value. Eq.14 should be viewed as providing the maximum sub- .f' b(q 0

L

  • lit.

mergence at an intake with a given headrace to avoid dye core vortices. ' . l Jain A. K., Ranga Raju, K. C., and Carde, R. l. (1978). "Vorten formation in 0* vertical pipe intakes," J. H r. Div., ASCE, 104(10), 1429-1441 Locatin8 the side and rear walls closer to the intake would reduce i, the 1 Iswellen, W. S. (1962). "A ution of threestimensional vortes flows wuh strong required submergence. This was not investigated. i (T circulation," 1. Truid MwA., 14(3), 420-432.

The results may also be used to qualitatively compare headrace geo- J O Odgaard, A. J. (1986). " Free-surface air core vortes," J. Hyir. Engg., ASCE, U 2(7),

metries, e.g., if the flow approach angle is less than 15*, if headrace c j 610-620.

length / width ratio is insignificant, and in designing headraces for hor- q 4 ,

Padmanabhan, M., and Hecker, C. E., (1984). " Scale effects in pump sump izontal and vertically inverted intakes, although these require much less u l models," f. Hydr. En!'I., ASCE, 110(11), 1540-1556.

submer8ence to avoid free-surface vortices (Gulliver, et al.1986; Pennino Pennino, B. J., and Hecker, G. E. (1980). "A sbnthesis ew York, of model data for p N.Y., 101-112.

and Hecker 1980). A headrace length / width ratio of 1.75 is recom- storage intakes," Proc. ASME Muifs Corf.,

Rindels, A. J., and Gulliver, J. S. (1983). "An experimental study of cntical sute mended for preliminary design if intake vortices are a possibility and mergence to avoid free-surface vortices at vertical intakes," Prernt Repet No the flow approach angle is greater than 15*. Thus, the study results can 224, St. Anthony Fa!!s Hydraulic Laboratory, Univ. of Minnesota. Mmneapolis.

be used in preliminary layout and conceptual design of intakes, with Minn.

details of the design and performance to be developed through a sub. Sweeney, C. E., Elder, R. A., and Duncan, 11. (1982). " Pump sump design es-perience: summary," f. Hyfr. Dip.. ASCE, 108(3), 361-378-s'9uent hYdraulic model studY ' Tullis, J. P., Galloway, K. D., Campbell, N. J., and Lindsey, S. D. (1986). 'Crt-

= teria or vortex modeling," Advancements in arrodyname(3, /hsad mnhanKs. and AcKNowLfoGMENTs hydraulics, ASCE, New York, N.Y., 783-790.

4 This research was supported by the Legislative Commission on Min- Ammoix IL-Nouvion nesota Resources, Minnesota State legislature. Karen Lindblom partic-ipated in the flume design and development. Martin Halverson, Judson The follorcing symlhls are used in this paper:

Noods, and James Millin assisted in experimental measurements and data reduction. Consultation of particular value was obtained from Fred 8 * (

Blaisdell, George Hebaus, and Joseph Wetzel. D - t @

F = V/\/g3 (a Froude number) '~

Fo = v/v gD (a Froude numbu);m ,

Amxoc. I.-REFERENCES g = accelerationB of raMW);

Amphlett, M. B (19'9). " Discussion of vorten format n at vertical pipe intakes,- h = depth of headrace channer(L)-

J Hydr. Dm., ASCE, 105(10), 1328-1330. Ah = distance between the bellmouth entrance and the floor (L);

Anwar, H. O. (1966). " Formation of a weak vortex," f. Hydr. Res. 4(1),1-16. L = length of headrace (L);

Anwar, H. O., Weller, J. A., and Amphlett, M. B. (1978). " Similarity of hee- = Sr./Q = a circulation number a tan a; vorten at horizontal intake " 1. Hydr. Res., 16(2),95-106. Nr U1s 1114

N' = tan a/[1 + (S/2)(L/B) tin ej = Nr; SOLUTIONS FOR 1,ATERAL INFLOW Nr -

Nr {

IN PERFORATED CONDUITS  :

P = pressure (FL);  !

d Q = discharge (L'T ); By Zbigniew SiwoA'  :

R = Q/(vS) = a Reynolds number; a R0 =

VD/r = a ReYnolds number *- ***"d'" d'"*3 **d'8 ' ' * *dF 'a'l** *'

  • N"'*"'* 'a-r = radius from center of intake (L); ***", **". *Sised to .'"inestaantet pipe perior.ted with circut. orifice. ."long ine i.e sen h i. n ia.a. g.pe,t.en.. .h., si p.,,,,.,ed pig. h..e S = submergence, distance from water surface to intake (L); a s=*r equivalent send sousham heishi of the w.it corne. red to nonree-5/D = a dimensionless submergence; ' '*8ed P4 P e At a art.in of the crifices, the D.rcy.Weish.ch friction V = 4Q/(wD') = mean inlet velocity (L/7); t.ctor dee.nd. .n th. nu.w .r w.ii per.c.sitay. .no wa ,ou h.isht. In ca e w hection t.cw in perro.. ca p.p,. w.. roun}hn= io de v, = radial velocity component (Fig.1) (LT~,); ses hasher ha in nonperiorewd ripes. The equ.non of motion tactode. both v= = axial velocity component (Fig.1) (LT-'); 'he e""' o' th* ' , o8 "=w .loas the rerfos.'ed P8P e .nd the effect

= angular velocity component (Fig.1) (LT-i),, es the i.eer innow ansie on h total enersy los. in the mala stre.m The t '. sn ismusn vesis et she cesseics.no wh z = asial (vertical) distance from water surface (L); .nd i. e.wer ehen the m sc.a .%..smo.kh de.cnbc. ihi. inrivence, i. o.77

..iue to.

a = angle between the approach velocity and a vector normal to the control surface; limecouctices p = a constant relating transverse kinetic energy to pressure dif-ference on the two walls of a headrace; 2nv.r/F. ; Feed-water inflow to a perforated pipe or a pipe system arises in many F =

far-field circulation (L'T"); practical applications and in a number of fields (e.g., in water distri-

['. =

bution and sewage d8sposal systems, in land amelioration, and in chem-( = z/S;

=

ical engineering design and practice). Since systems are designed to pro-q r/D; vide a uniform distribution of inflow rate along the entire leagth of j' e = angular coordinate (deg); perforated pipe, it is necessary to determine an adequate diameter and y = kinematic viscosity of fluid (L'7-'); and an appropriate specing and arrangement of inlet orifices. Most of the i p = fluid density (ML4 ). information in the literature (2-7,10,12,'.7) deals with the outflow of a fluid along the pipe length. These investigations use the one-dimen-1 sional equation of steady motion, generally a differential form of Ber-

/WALyOIS/ CALC'"dnON " ""I'* '"8Y '9"*""' ""d 'h' ' "'I""I'Y '9"*'I "~ U"III' 'h' '9"*'

tion of motion given in this paper (Eq. 7), Bernoulli's equation does not DOC 1D + M79-ep ATT e consider the energy loss associated with the inflow [the term p(V - V')

// dV).

jr'iEV 2. In the available literature, the experimental work was done for per-1 SHEET._d.___OF__9 _

forated pipes with war permeabilities, e, smaller than 0.01, and the niodels for energy loss assumed that: (1) The inflow (or outflow) of fluid 4

~

is continuous along the pipe length; (2) the friction factor of perforated

! pipe, f,, is identical to the friction factor of nonperforated pipe, f; and (3) the discharge coefficient at each perforation, , is constant along the i

path of the stream [thus the inflow (or outflow) rate is solely a function of the piezometric p erences, further ' -M"stions . ,,ressure werein made.

the pipe].Refs.In2 some of the and 4 fail available r to incor-

' porate the energy !c,a due to stream mass decrement along the flow.

Ref. 3 neglects energy losses resulting from linear friction resistance-and such an appi.T/h_h only valid as applied to very short pipes.

' Prot. Inst. of Enwh. Motection Engrg., Tech. Univ. of Wroclaw, WrocJaw, Poland.

Note.-Descussion open until February 1,1988. To extend the riosing date one nionth, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Joumals. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on March 24,1986. This paper is part of the feesanal e/ Ny4remlic Engineersag. Vol.

113, No. 9, 'r ' .,1987. 4bA sCE, ISSN 0733-9429/87/0009-11I7/$01.00. Pa-per No. 21776.

1114 1117

- - .. -. _ .. - . .. . -- .. . - - .- - - - -