ML20106D475
| ML20106D475 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1984 |
| From: | Wiesemann R WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19269A676 | List: |
| References | |
| CAW-84-8, NUDOCS 8410250174 | |
| Download: ML20106D475 (19) | |
Text
.,
~
Westinghouse WaterReactor ElectricCorporation Divisions Mclear TechmlogyDwision Box 355 PmsbtrgnPennsylvania15230 February 9,1984 CAW-84-8 Mr. Harold R. Denton U. S. Nuclear Regulatory ComissionOffice of Nucl Washington, D. C.
20555 APPLICATION FOR WITHHOLDING PRO INFORMATION FROM pUBLIC DISCLOSURE
SUBJECT:
17X17 XL Hydraulic Flow Testing - NRC Questi _
REF:
on 231.8
. Houston Lighting and Power Letter, Goldberg to
Dear Mr. Denton:
The proprietary material for which withholdi Westinghouse concerning the Westinghouse o ti The previous application for withholding reviously submitted by mized fuel assembly design.
p affidavit signed by the owner of the prop,rietar AW-78-23, was accompanied by an Electric Corporation.
y infonnation, Westinghouse The undersigned has reviewed the information notification of which was sent to the Secretary April 19,1976.
of Westinghouse, WRD, of the Commission on the information may be withheld from publiThe af e s forth the basis on which of Section 2.790 of the Comission's regulationsa c disclosure by the Comission sted in paragraph (b)(4)
Accordingly, it is respectfully requested th t 1
t is proprietary to Westinghoure be withheld f the subject information whi a
dance with 10 CFR Soction 2.790 of the Comi rom public discleture in accorch ssion's regulations.
i 8410250174 841018 m
i PDR ADOCK 05000498 A
PDR 1
i
r I
Mr. H. R. Denton February 9,1984 CAW-84-8
- Correspondence with respect to this application for to the undersigned. accompanying affidavit should referen o ding or the ould be addressed Very truly yours.
Robert A. Wiesemann, Manager Regulatory & Legislative Affairs
/bek cc:
E. C. Shomaker Esq.
Office of the Executive Legal Director, NRC
' Enclosure.4.
AW-78-23 AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
ss COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY:
Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Robert A. Wiesemann, who, being by me duly sworn according to deposes and says that he is authorized to execute this Affidavit o behalf of Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse" n
the averments of fact set forth in this Affidavit are t to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief:
! Ell /JIMAM4 Robert A. wiesraann, ManageF Licensing Pro:1ams Sworn to and subscribed before,me this /l day of l$dCck 1978.
L n
/
(da
/%scR
.Nc;2 j Pubiic i
-, b: C- ~ * -
I ' I L.
J
. :-)
~
~2 (1)
I am Manager, Licensing Program AW-78-23 Systems Division, of Westingho s, in the Pr I have been specifically delegat d use Electric Corporation and a or proprietary information sought to b the functio e
- such, in connection with nuclear po wer plant licensing o proceedings, and am authorized t behalf of the Westinghouse Water Reacto apply for its w or Divisions.
(2)
I am making this affidavit in co f 10 CFR Section 2.790 of the Commin ormance junction with the Westinghous ssion's regulations and in con accompanying this Affidavit. e application for withhold (3)
I have personal knowledge of the by Westinghouse Nuclear Energy S criteria and as a trade secret, privileged o ' asystems in designa financial information.
confidential comercial or n
(4)
Pursuant to the provisions of p of the Comission's regulations aragraph (b)(4) of Sec information sought to be withheld fco ermining whether the be withheld.
rom public disclosure should (1)
The information sought to be withh l is owned and has been held in confie d from public dence by Westinghcuse.
(ii) The information is of a typ by Westinghouse and not customarile customarily held Westinghouse has a rational basi y disclosed to the puolic.
of information customarily held in co fis fcr detemin that connection, utilizes a syst dence by it and, in n
L em to determine when and
\\
G
~
3-2 AW-78-23 whether to hold certain types of i f The application of that system n ormation in confidenc system rational basis required. constitutes Wes provides the Criteria and Standards Utilized In determining whether informati proprietary, the following criterion in a document or by Westinghou'se.
following are met: Information is proprietary y one of the (a)
The information reveals the disti a process (or component, structurenguishing asp where prevention of its use by any of W, to competitors'without license from We' sti estinghouse's a competitive economic advantage over nghou other companies.
(b)
It consists of supporting data relative to a process (or compo,nentincluding tes method, etc.), the application of whi hstructure
~
competitive economic advantage, e g data secures a c
improved marketability.
.., by op*timiza tion or (c)
Its use by a competitor would redu design, manufacture, shipmentreso o
osition in the quality, or licensing of a similar prodinstallation, a uct.
(d)
It reveals cost or price informati budget levels, or commercial strategion, produc its customers or supp' liers.
es cf Westinghouse, i
b
\\
.,9
- _.,, -.e.,.
,__ _,_,,,,,m,,,,_,,,..m__.,y....,_.m,._m..,
.ew-wm
,,._,,www,,,.,....
w_.-_,,~,,._.,,_e_
4
~
AW-78-23 (e)
It reveals aspects of past, present, or future Westing-house or customer funded development plans and programs of potential comercial value to Westinghouse.
(f)
It contains patentable ideas, for which patent protection may be desirable.
(g)
It is not the property of Westinghouse, but must be l
treated as proprietary by Westinghouse according to agreements with the cwner.
(iii) The information is being transmitted to the Commission in confidence and, under the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790, it is to be received in confidence by the Commission.
(iv) The infonnation is not available in public sources to the best of our knowledge and belief.
(v) The proprietary information sought to be withheld in this submitta' are the copies of slides utilized cy;Westinghous.e in its presentation to the NRC at the March 21, 197,8 meeting concerning the Westinghouse optimized fuel as.iembly. The letter and the copies of slides are being submitted in pre-liminary form to the Commission for review and comment on the l
Westinghouse optimized fuel assembly in advance of a formal
~ submittal for NRC approval.
1 l
Public disclosure of this infomation is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Westinghouse as it would reveal the description of the approved :Jesign, the comparison of the improved cesign with the star.dar:: design, l-the nature of the test's conducted, the test conditions, the l
test results and the conclusions of the testing program, l
6
-,,,.---e-<
.-,,_e
,,,-n,,
..-.-,,-,,m-,,,..-g,--,.--..,,m,,,--,,,_e,_n,_,,
,,,.,,,gy,--.w,
,--,n,,,w---.
,,n,.
,_-n,_--
g_
AW-78-23 T
all of which is recognized by the Staff to be of competitive value and because of the large amount of effort and money expended by Westinghouse over a period of several years in carrying out this particular development program.
Further, it would enable competitors to use the information for comercial purposes and also to meet NRC requirements for licensiitg documentation, each without purchasing the right from Westing-house to use the information.
Information regarding its development programs is valuable to Westinghouse because:
(a)
Information resulting from its development programs gives Westinghouse a competitive advantage over its competitors.
It is, therefore, withheld from disclosure to protect the Westinghouse competitive position.
(b)
It is information which is marketable in many ways.
The extent to which such infomation is available to compet-itors diminishes the Westinghouse ability to sell products and services involving the use of the ir.f'ormation.
(c) Use by our competitor would put Westinghouse at a com-petitive disadvantage by reducing his expenditure of resources at our expense.
(d)
Each component of proprie'tary informaticn pertinent to a particular competitive advantage is potentially as valuable as the total competitive advantage.
If ccm-petitors acquire components of proprietary information, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage.
,,_,._r____
___,_.,_,_.,_,_,_,__,_,,__._,.r..,._._m__.,_._.,,,.,,,,__-,,_m.,._,.
~
AW-78 -
(e) Tite Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success in obtaining and maintaining a competitive advantage.
Being an innovative concept, this information might not be discovered by the competitors of Westinghouse independently.
To duplicate this infor-mation, competitors would first have to be similarly inspired and would then have to expend an effort similar to that of Westingh'ouse to develop the design.
Further the deponent sayeth not.
4 f
e e
y Attachment 17x17 XL HYDRAULIC FLOW TESTING
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As a part of confirmatory tests of the Westinghouse 17x17 X design, full scale hydraulic flow tests using a prototype tes m y performed in the Westinghouse D-loop facility.
were reactor flow and temperature conditions.
Test conditions simulated Hydraulic tests on a 10 grid,17x17 XL assembly provided data to detemine assembly pressure drops
, lift forces and fuel rod wear.
Section 2 describes the test assembly and D-loop test facility
, Section 3
~ describe the instrumentation and test conditions, and Sectio L
test results and conclusions.
e 1
2.0 DESCRIPTION
OF TEST ASSBSLY AND D-LDOP FACILIT 2.1 17x17 XL TEST A5598LY l
The prototype 17 x 17 XL 10 grid test assembly tested in th is shown in Figure 1.
The assembly consisted of 10 Inconel grids, 264 dde fuel rods, 24 thimble tubes and 1 instrumentation tube, and a to nozzle.
The fuel rod cladding, thimble tubes, and instrumentation tu made of Zircaley-4, the same material to be used in the reactor.
1.
The dummy fuel rods contained 167.5 inches of 0.308 inch 0.D. l UO2 weight in fuel rods.
The density of the lead was approximately the same as the density of 95 percent dense UO.
2 The lead-filled fuel rods contained a fuel rod spring and were prepressurized with He.
The test assembly Inconel grids have the same design, spring forces and contact points on th rods as the Inconel grids to be used in the South Texas fuel assemblies 9
1.
i' The test assembly was dimensionally, structurally and hydraulically representative of assemblies to be used in the South Texas nuclear plant. A
~
rod clust'er control ' assembly inserted into the XL test assembly restricted the bypass flow to values encountered in reactor operation.
2.2 D-Loop Test Facility
-Tigure 2 is a schematic representation of the D-Loop Test Facility located at Forest Hills, Pa. The D-loop services a 24-inch ID x 40 foot long test vessel which contains the Reactor Evaluation Channel (Figure 3). This vessel can accommodate full scale models of large pressurized water reactor core components for operational studies. As shown in Figure 3, the D-loop flow moves up the Reactor Evaluation Channel which contains the instrumented prototype lh17 XL 10 grid test assembly.
The D-loop piping is designed for flow rates up to 4,500 gpm, a maximum operation pressure of 2,400 psig, and temperatures to 650*F. At 3,000 gpm, the canned motor pump is capable of developing a head of 270 feet of water.
All piping in the primary is stainless steel.
Loop pressure is automatically l
controlled by a constantly operating makeup and letdown system.
Loop temperature during steady-state operation is maintained by controlling a bypass steam through the loop coolers.
-3.0 INSTRUMENTATION AND TEST CONDITIONS 3.1 PRESSURE DROP MEASUREMENTS Static pressure taps were used to measure the test assembly pressure drops.
These were located on the baffle enclosure, which forms the boundaries of the test vessel reactor evaluation channel. Theupperpressuretapwas,ognch below the upper core plate, and the lower pressure tap wa's one inch be4e# the~
kcoreplate.
Each pressure measurement tap had a *. redundant tap located i
at the same elevation on a perpendicular baffle wall (90', apart).
A data acquisition system was used to collect and condition the data, which consisted of 12 to 36 Ap readings for each set of flow and temperature condition.
W W
~.. _.- _ ---_.-___- _,_ _ ___,_.-... _. _. _ -. _.. _ _ _ _. _ _ __ -
- 1 Test assembly pressure drop measurements were obtained at the following nominal test conditions:
Temperature (*F)
Pressure (psia)
Flow (apm) 96 1600 1285 103 1615 965 103 1630 1305 253 1615 g70 253 1615 1310 590 2050 965 590 2020 1310 590 2050 2400 3.2 TEST ASSBBLY LIFT FORCE Lift measurements were obtained by use of eight strain gages mounted on the bottom nozzle. The strain gages were weldable types with a built-in temperature correction. The gages on the bottom nozzle were temperature cycled from room temperature to 600*F until their readings stabilized, and the nozzle was then load and temperature cycled to obtain a calibration of load versus strain as a function of temperature. The nozzle was then attached to the test assembly which was installed.in the Reactor Evaluation Channel of the D-Loop Test Vessel. The test assembly was loaded and unloaded axially until the bottom nozzle strain gages gave consistent readings. Two LVDTs were installed into the lower core plate to monitor when fuel assembly lift-off occurs.
For measuring lift forces, the bottom nozzle strain gages were connected to a digital voltmeter / printer. The system scanned all eight strain gages in two seconds.
Calibration of the instrumentation was made by using a known micro-strain input to each channel. The strain measured is the sum of all eight gages and is linear and repeatable to + one percent..
~.
t '.
8 Strain data were taken at test assembly nominal conditions of 1000, 1300 and 2700 gpa flow occurring at 585'F and 2000 psi. The flow was increased until the LVDTs indicated test assembly lift-off.
3.3 Vibrational Amplitudes of Test Rods To determine rod vibration amplitudes during D-loop hydraulic testing of a g grid XL test assembly,16 strain gages were attached to four dung fuel rods at span locations 4 and 5 from the assembly bottom grid.
No strain gages were used on the 10 grid test assembly since their span lengths are shorter and vibration amplitudes would be less than a 9 grid assembly.
The stynamic signals from these gages were fed into a two channel fast fourier transformer analyzer, and ras strain values were determined. The signals also
[
were fed to an oscillograph and analyzed for maximum strains at the rod natural frequencies. The strain was transformed to an amplitude using calibration curves previously determined from single rod tests.
The data from these tests were conservatively used to predict fuel rod wear ir.
a 10 grid XL fuel assembly, as described in Section 4.3 of this report.
4.0 TEST RESULTS Alm CONCLUSIONS i
(
4.1 ASSBBLY PRESSURE DR0p Figure 4 presents the D-loop flow test results for the test assembly pressure drop versus assembly flow. The results were consistent with those expected based on the 17x17 standard 12 foot D-loop tests.
4.2 ASSEMBLY LIFT Figure 5 presents the D-loop flow test results for the test assembly lift forces versus assembly flow. Actual assembly lift-off occurred at approximately [
]* gym compared to expected lift-off of
[
]* gym.
(a,b,c; i
a
~
4.3 FUEL ROD u Fuel rod wear during reactor operation can be caused and a [
y flow induced vibrat life (approximately 27,000 effective full pow (a :
fuel rod vibration amplitude obtained from hydraulic t Using a conservath s.
during reactor life is determined as per the Figur ests, fuel rod wear Calculational inputs for wear used a ['
e 6 flow chart.
maximum test rod amplitude obtained from strain gage m
.]*(a,b,i grid hydraulic flow tests (See Section 3.3).
easurements during the obtained at span 4 of the assembly during the 3000 gp test conditions. " Vibrational amplitudes from a g ow and 585'F maximus larger amplitudes and a larger calculated wear thangrid as assembly test results.
would occur from 10 grid Usingthe[
]* fuel rod t-amplitude, the Westinghouse model (Figure 6) predicts f (a,b,c)
]*milsattheendoftheplannedreactor1tfeforth
[
rod wear depth of e
10 grid 17x17XL fuel assembly.
e South Texas (a,c)
This wear is considered [
]* wall thickness as a general guids for acceptable
-[
(a,c) clad wear.
aximum fuel rod (a,c),
i l
l i
a gT c.
3 E
1llllll11111111
' EEE '
r 111llllll11lllll1 i
i ibb15$555[0l h
k jl M M i
111lllll111lllllQ i
r_
g~g
!I lll1lll111111111
- fE 5hb ll3 7
glajajajgjj 3_L""",j'"a a
a a f
=
+
' M' 1111111lll1
[
jjjjj)
L 5
.g l.y
,,~N =)
hfD[2 i
11111111H11llllll 4;iP.
)in!I El5EEN ! -
)
7,_
'l1111111:1!!11111
]J[o$.
1 3
7
! f a
.i
! lilllllE ~:'ll!!!Q l,i
_~*- I 8
OtWiy'Wy W T i
m j[
L w09
_gg_
j l
hummme 1E f
9 m
f i
r l
l 1
(
==
l l
3 Staa, r., y,,, g,
i i
,,.~-,.,-,,.,,--,,,-----w-~
--w
" " ~ ~ ~ ~ * * *"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ^ ' ~ ~ ~ ' " ~
U
(
1
?
U.
=O f
, i
)
b 1
i 3
me i
I k
\\
a I
4 5
,., i e 1
t N
j-ev i
C
[
E D
J l
l l
I I
i
.I-.
e
- s-i
- {.
.)'
i j; v t
IS% '
(
.h 102 "
i 8
- 9
. (st g g._
? j ;, :
4' i
i s
o 2'
)
A E
! 't E
101 a'
[
i 9
3 l
' 'i
,t'
?
g
.; r.
1 4
)~$
1
-l i e
\\lJ.
e
)i.
2 a-e M 6 4
!> f 2
4 g
8 103 I.
2 4
8 4 104 FUEL ASSEMBLY FLOW GFM i
Figure 4 d, s 17 x 17 IL O-loop Flow Test Fuel Assembly aP vs. Assembly Flow s
l n'
i h
?
4
[
f d
- 5 e
t -
e
.--.___~m_-_.,___
-..._,m,
._,_-,-y,----,.,v.-%r
V 5
?.'.
+
l SSM4 21 I
I I
A E
E
)
8 g1-n-*
8
.I a#.{
m 5
1
=:
~
s e
i 3
1 a
e
=
M e
j 5
3aa m
s a
an,.o==u un -
4 a
n :
F 1
i 4
h t
1 i
1 i
5-Pleure 6 Flow Chart of Vitwasory Wear Calculation 9
'y^--
t-
--rwe
?
gy 9.y,wrer,--e+y-,---
y w
.r-yy--,-p---gyawwi.ey
=--,pwwi.----,-W-ewre e
e'
- eu--+we-'-N-**wm--vvveu---*TwPeN=*t'-'-r-Me**=ee=#MW-n W*'m--r" ' ' '
aw'w wwmtw"