ML20113D450
| ML20113D450 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1996 |
| From: | NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20113D390 | List: |
| References | |
| NEDC-96-001, NEDC-96-1, NUDOCS 9607030170 | |
| Download: ML20113D450 (3) | |
Text
-.~.. ~. -.. -
l
~
i l
APPENDIX A l
to NLS960122 NPPD Calculation NEDC 96-001 i
DETERMINATION OF DEAD LEG IiEAT TRANSFER IN PIPING ASSOCIATED WIT 1111PCI-MOV-MO58 AND RCIC-MOV-MO41 l
l l
l l
4 9607030170 960627 i
PDR ADOCK 05000298 P
PM t
N13%1194 Nsbraska Public Powcr District DESIGN CALCULATIONS COVER SHEET Title Determination of Dead Leo Heat Transfer in Pioina Calculation No. NEDC 96-001
(
Associated w/ HPCI-MOV-MO58 and RCIC-MOV-MO41 Task identification No.
I System / Structure HPCI. RCIC Design Change No.
Component HPCI-MOV MO58. RCIC-MOV-MO41 Discipline Mechanical Classification:
g Essential O Non-Essential Calc.
Description:
The purpose of this calculation is to study the heat transfer rate and temperature profile in the HPCI and RCIC suppression pool (torus) lines. This study will be used to establish criteria for dead leg piping l
length beyond which the temperature increases can be neglected for pressure locking susceptibility evalutions.
This information will be used to swiuate the susceptibility of HPCI-MOV-MO58 and RCIC-MOV-MO41 l
to liquid entrapment pressure locking. This calculation is being done in support of Generic Letter 95-07.
Conclusions i
I The results are shown on Page 9. ERIN's calculation No. C122-95-23.002 is acceptable.
References:
Attachments:
- 1. USAR Fiaure XIV-6-19 A.
Reference 3
- 2. TECH. SPECS.
B.
- 3. Consult. Calculation: ERIN C122-95-23.002 C.
I
- 4. NED Calculation:
D.
- 5. Computer Program:
E.
l
>n A/PM CoWasntcrhtmtaTo yy t;;24 C-.
I i
waa-e w ro-rn.
a,s MC.4;y
,.,,. u,
u 0
1 Original issue ERIN / 01/11/96 N/A i
Rev.
Status Revision Description Prepared Checked or Design Appr'oved No.
By/D6te Reviewed By/Date Verification /Date By/Date l
I Status Codes
- 1. As - Built
- 3. For Construction
- 2. Information only
- 4. Superseded or Deleted l
l l
N1534593 i
N braska Public Power District SheetlofJ DESIGN CALCULATION CROSS REFERENCE INDEX NEDC/DEDC 96-001 Prepared By: ERIN Checked / Reviewed By:
4//'/d4 Date: January 11 19 96 Date: Januarv 12 19 96 l
I
^
h SOURCE DOCUMENTS Rev.
AFFECTED DOCUMENTS Rev.
Tracking
-or-(Indicate A or D)
No.
(Indicate C, A or D)
No.
System *
- Rev.No.
D.
D.
Dwa. No. 2811-6 A
MQ5.
NONE CMDC 0
Dwo. No. 2621-1 A
HQ3.
CMDC USAR Fio. XIV-6-19 A
7/22/83 vse Su. VZ-5-2-2 A_ r/r$5
_ stone cow &
I l
i l
l C = Change A = Addition D = Deletion Use modification document (DC,MM, etc.) number when a calcult' ion is associated with a modification. Otherwise, the CMDC database is normally specified.
- - - - - _... _ _ -. ~
N1324904 Nebraska Public Power District DESIGN CALCULATIONS SHEET sner 3 c,
3 I
Calc No. NEDC 96-o01 Prepared By: ERIN Checked / Reviewed By-
- M Date:
Januarv 11 19,2.9,_,,,, Date:
January 12 19,,gg_
]
PURPOSE The purpose of this calculation is to determine the susceptibility of HPCI-MOV-MO58 and RCIC-MOV-MO41 to liquid entrapment (boiler effect) pressure locking due to suppression pool heating. The calculation evaluates the temperature profile in the HPCI and RCIC torus suction lines, and it was determined that the subject valves are not susceptible to liquid entrapment pressure locking.
DESIGN INPUTS Pipe parameters used in this calculation were found in NPPD isometric drawings as referenced in Page 9 of the ERIN calculation. The maximum post-accident torus temperature is 121"I 'f;= UCAR, C. N g
- efe;e;;ee as;;h; 5). ERIN used a conservative elevated torus temperature of 140*F in this calculation.
^,go;tr,ar e 0.1AA kr.1tt S-N),
ASSUMPTIONS 1.
One-dimensional steady-state heat transfer equations were used in the calculation. This assumption is conservative in that the temperature profile in the dead leg is maximized.
2.
No convection is assumed at the termination of the dead leg. This, too, is conservative because heat loss into the subject valve is assumed to be zero.
NN;g,M ((,Tyf,f'&'!AsW$r?E!$u+oerN.h
[,~~,"sY d
SEtte fgD7/,,$7[NE METHODOLOGY
'54's,Y )[ j $ a' ERIN used a finTte difference method to calculate the temperature profile along each pipe. In doing i
so, the dead leg piping was divided into a series of sequential nodes. The heat transfer equations were written for a reference node, and the boundary conditions were set to allow derivation of the equations to be used in calculating the temperature profile. The boundary conditions utilized in the derivation defined that, at the first node, the dead leg temperature was equal to the elevated maximum temperature. The second boundary condition was such that heat transfer, by conduction, was not allowed at the termination of'the dead leg.
Th3 derived equatbns were entered into a BASIC program which allows iteration along the length of the pipe. Throu different program runs were performed, and the most conservative was used in the conclusion. The test cases were "all steel", " composite", and "all water". In both the HPCI and RCIC program runs, the "all steel" run was found to be most restrictive.
MIENT OF REVIEW The methodology, equations, and derivations were checked. in addition, the program verification calculations were checked.
CONCLUSIONS ERIN's calculation No. C122-95-23.002, Revision 0 is acceptable, i
<