Text

Requests That Proprietary Info Re Presentation Matl from 950620-22 Meeting Be Withheld from Public Disclosure
	ML20116F453
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	08/02/1996
From:	Mcintyre B; WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To:	Quay T; NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
Shared Package
ML19311C167	List: ML20116F453; NSD-NRC-96-4785, Forwards Presentation Matl Used by Westinghouse at 950620-22 Meeting on Wgothic Computer Code.Proprietary Portion of Presentation Withheld Per 10CFR2.790;
References
	AW-96-995, NUDOCS 9608070021
	Download: ML20116F453 (128)
	v • d • e

_.

l Westinghouse Energy Systems Box 355 l

Electric Corporation Pmsburgh Pennsylvania 15230 0355 AW-96-995 August 2,1996 Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ATTENTION:

T.R. QUAY APPLICATION FOR WITHHOLDING PROPRIETARY INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC DIfCLOSURE

SUBJECT:

PRESENTATION MATERIAL FROM JUNE 20-22,1995 MEETING

Dear Mr. Quay:

The application for withholding is submitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse")

pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(1) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations. It contains commercial strategic information proprietary to Westinghouse and customarily held in confidence.

The proprietary material for which withholding is being requested is identified in the proprietary version of the subject report. In conformance with 10CFR Section 2.790, Affidavit AW-96-995 accompanies this application for withholding setting forth the basis on which the identified proprietary information may be withheld from public disclosure.

Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the subject information which is proprietary to

]

Westinghouse be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations.

Correspondence with respect to this application for withholding or the accompanying affidavit should reference AW-96-995 and should be addressed to the undersigned.

Very truly yours, K /Y Brian A. McIntyre, h anager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing i

l

/nja cc:

Kevin Bohrer NRC 12H5 l

9600070021 960802 PDR ADOCK 05200003 A

PDR 2867A

s AW-96-995 i

i i

AFFIDAVIT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:

s i

ss COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY:

Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Brian A. McIntyre, who, being by me duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is authorized to execute this Affidavit on behalf of Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse") and that the averments of fact set forth in this Affidavit are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief:

- x.Y$/

Brian A. McIntyre, Manager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing Sworn to and subscribed before me this I

day of

' f HM

,1996

/4C'>Ew Notary Public Notad Seal Rose M.t e Ptyne, N: fay PutSc d

tAywota Doro, A'ivgheny County My Comrimmon E:geres Nov.4,1996 Member.,%,^11w Amermann cd pggles S

AW-96-995 (1)

I am Manager, Advanced Plant Safety And Licensing, in the Advanced Technology Business Area, of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation and as such, I have been specifically delegated the function of reviewing the proprietary information sought to be withheld from public disclosure in connection with nuclear power plant licensing and rulemaking proceedings, and am authorized to apply for its withholding on behalf of the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit.

(2)

I am making this Affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations and in conjunction with the Westinghouse application for withholding accompanying this Affidavit.

(3)

I have personal knowledge of the criteria and procedures utilized by the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit in designating information as a trade secret, privileged or as confidential commercial or financial information.

(4)

Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(4) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, the following is furnished for consideration by the Commission in determining whether the information sought to be withheld from public disclosure should be withheld.

1 (i)

The information sought to be withheld from public disclosure is owned and has been held in confidence by Westinghouse.

(ii)

The information is of a type customarily held in confidence by Westinghouse and not customarily disclosed to the public. Westinghouse has a rational basis for determining the types of information customarily held in confidence by it and, in that connection, utilizes a system to determine when and whether to hold certain types of information in confidence. The application of that system and the substance of that system constitutes Westinghouse policy and provides the rational basis required.

Under that system, information is held in confidence if it falls in one or more of several types, the release of which might result in the loss of an existing or potential competitive advantage, as follows:

2868A

l AW-96-995 (a).

The information reveals the distinguishing aspects of a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.) where prevention of its use by any of I

Westinghouse's competitors without license from Westinghouse constitutes a

' competitive economic advantage over other companies.

l (b)

It consists of supporting data, including test data, relative to a process (or l

component, structure, tool, method, etc.), the application of which data l

secures a competitive economic advantage, e.g., by optimization or improved marketability.

(c)

Its use by a competitor would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing a similar product.

(d)

It reveals cost or price information, production capacities, budget levels, or commercial strategies of Westinghouse, its customers or suppliers.

i (e)

It reveals aspects of past, present, or future Westinghouse or customer funded development plans and programs of potential commercial value to Westinghouse.

(f)

It contains patentable ideas, for which patent protection may be desirable.

There are sound policy reasons behind the Westinghouse system which include the following:

(a)

The use of such information by Westinghouse 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 information is available to competitors diminishes the Westinghouse ability to sell products and services involving the use of the information.

2868A t

~

AW-96-995 (c)

Use by our competitor would put Westinghouse at a competitive disadvantage by reducing his expenditure of resources at our expense.

(d)

Each component of proprietary information pertinent to a particular competitive advantage is potentially as valuable as the total competitive advantage. If competitors acquire components of proprietary information, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage.

(e)

Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position of prominence of Westinghouse in the world market, and thereby give a market advantage to the competition of those countries.

(f)

The Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success in obtaining and maintaining a competitive advantage.

(iii)

The information is being transmitted to the Commission in confidence and, under the provisians of 10CFR Section 2.790, it is to be received in confidence by the Commission.

(iv)

The information sought to be protected is not available in public sources or available information has not been previously employed in the same original manner or method to the best of our knowledge and belief.

(v)

Enclosed is Letter NSD-NRC-96-4785, August 2,1996 being transmitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (E) letter and Application for Withholding Proprietary Information from Public Disclosure, Brian A. McIntyre (W) to Mr. T. R. Quay, Office of NRR. The proprietary information as submitted for use by Westinghouse Electric Corporation is in response to questions concerning the AP600 plant and the associated design certification application and is expected to be applicable in other licensee submittals in response to certain NRC requirements for justification of licensing advanced nuclear power plant designs.

286AA

AW-96-995 This information is part of that'which will enable Westinghouse to:

(a)

Demonstrate the design and safety of the AP600 Passive Safety Systems.

(b)

Establish applicable verification testing methods.

(c)

Design Advanced Nuclear Power Plants that meet NRC requirements.

(d)

Establish technical and licensing approaches for the AP600 that will ultimately result in a certified design.

(e)

Assist customers in obtaining NRC approval for future plants.

Further this information has substantial commercial value as follows:

(a)

Westinghouse plans to sell the use of similar information to its customers for purposes of meeting NRC requirements for advanced plant licenses.

(b)

Westinghouse can sell support and defense of the technology to its customers in the licensing process.

Public disclosure of this proprietary information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Westinghouse because it would enhance the ability of competitors to provide similar advanced nuclear power designs and licensing defense services for commercial power reactors without conunensurate expenses. Also, public disclosure of the information would enable others to use the information to meet NRC requirements for licensing documentation without purchasing the right to use the information.

2868A

1 AW-96-995 The development of the technology described in part by the information is the result of applying the results of many years of experience in an intensive Westinghouse effort and the expenditure of a considerable sum of money.

In order for competitors of Westinghouse to ' duplicate this information, similar technical programs would have to be performed and a significant manpower effort, having the requisite talent and experience, would have to be expended for developing analytical methods and receiving NRC approval for those methods.

Further the deponent sayeth not.

l t

4 2868A

OCESTINGHOUSE D WGOTHIC CODE STATUS Gothic 3.4c Code Package Purchased from NAl 28 December 1990

Preprocessor / Solver /Postprocessor Gothic 3.4c Code Package Dedicated 30 October 1991 WGothic 1.0 Code Package Configured 2 October 1992

Free / Forced Convection lleat & Mass Transfer e

Wall-to-Wall Radiation

Saturated Film Assumption WGothic_s 1.1 Code Configured 24 March 1994

Mixed Convection lleat & Mass Transfer N

25 October 1994 WGothic_s 1.2 Code Configured

Subcooled Film Enthalpy Model

Modification to Mixed Convection Limits 25 October 1994 WGothic_p 2.0 Code Configured

Incorporate CLIME models into Preprocessor 1 of 5 E

Statusof WGOTHIC h wwooveo P 20-22 June 1995

ODESTINGHO.USE O

~

HEAT / MASS TRANSFER MODEL'S Free Convection Component

McAdams Correlation Forced Convection Component

Colburn Correlation Mixed Convection

Assisting = Boundary & Bulk Flow in Same Direction

Opposing = Boundary & Bulk Flow in Opposite Directions 5$$$

($$

$$({

2 0t 5 a

Status at WGOTHeC NRC Presereasson L -. _ _. PA 2422 June 1995

ODESTINGHOUSE D AP600 WATER COVERAGE Duration of Transient Used to Select Coverage Fractions Dome Dome Dome Side Side Side Side

'Hme Top Mid Bot Top Mid Mid Bot (hr)

Top Bot

(%)

~

0.183 2.167 5.167 5.667 9.167 15.17 21.17 26.17 Coverage Fraction Held Constant for Duration of Transient 3 of 5 m

Status el WGOTHIC 2022 June 1995

-A

ODESTINGHOUSE O DESIGN REVIEW Gothic 3.4d was Reviewed All Issues from the Review were Fully Resolved Most of the Issues Raised were Related To Documentation

Ice Melt Energy Imbalance not an Issue for AP600 Three Recommendations were Provided 4of5 Status of WGOTHtC i

NRC PresorteNun Monroevee. PA 20 22 June 1995

ODESTINGHOUSE G

~

AP600 SENSITIVITY REP' ORT Application of Westinghouse-GOTHIC to the AP600 1.

Introduction II. Overview of W-GOTHIC 111. Timestep Sensitivity IV. Initial Conditions V.

PCS Effluent Recirculation and Shadowing VI. Noding Sensitivities Vll. Water Coverage Sensitivity Vill. Blowdown Sensitivity to PCS L

IX. PCS Water film flow rate sensitivity X.

Internal Heat Sinks L

XI. Mixing within Containment XII. Summary of Sensitivities and Results i

5 of 5 m

Status W WGOTHIC

" M"*,1" mum.s

WGOTHIC CODE UNCERTAINTY IYesentation to the USNRC June 21,1995 By D. R. Spencer

~ Westinghouse Electric Corporation Monroeville, Pa O

e e

m.

Comparison of Measured and WGOTHIC Predictions of LST Pressures with Lumped Parameter and Distributed Parameter Evaluation Models Large Lumped Parameter Predictions Distributed Parameter Predictions Scale Measured Test (psia)

Predicted Pred Pred-Meas Predicted Pred Pred-Meas (psia)

Meas Meas (psia)

Meas Meas 202.3 44.6 47.9 1.0740 0.0740 43.0 0.9641 0.0359 1.'513 0.1513 25.97 1.0426 0.0426 212.lA 24.91 28.68 1

212.lB 30.25 35.30 1.1669 0.1669 31.05 1.0264 0.0264 212.lC 37.54 44.95 1.1974 0.1974 38.88 1.0357 0.0357 213.lA 24.5 27.8 1.1347 0.1347 24.8 1.0122 0.0122 213.lB 29.7 35.3 1.1886 0.1886 30.7 1.0337 0.0337 214.lA 47.25 48.83 1.0334 0.0334 46.20 0.9778

-0.0222 i

214.lB 44.63 49.88 1.1176 0.1176 44.73 1.0022 0.0022 i

216.lA 31.45 34.88 1.1091 0.1091 30.79 0.9790

-0.0210 216.IB 49.71 59.28 1.1925 0.1925 50.09 1.0076 0.0076 217.lA 43.8 46.3 1.0571 0 0571 217.lB 51.3 67.9 1.3236 0.3236 218.I A 43.5 48.3 1.1103 0.1103 43.6 1.0023 0.0023 218.lB 50.4 59.8 1.1865 0.1865 53.1 1.0536 0.0536 219.lA 35.80 36.95 1.0321 0.0321 36.42 1.0173 0.0173 i

219.lB 42.66 45.46 1.0656 0.0656 44.70 1.0478 0.0478 219.lC 23.24 30.46 1.3107 0.3107 26.95 1.1596 0.1596 221.lA 20.4 25.0 1.2255 0.2255 22.5 1.1029 0.1029 221.lB 26.6 31.8 1.1955 0.1955 29.7 1.1165 0.1165 221.lC 64.3 65.7 1.0218 0.0218 222.1 33.43 39.50 1.1816 0.1816 35.26 1.0547 0.0547 224.1 45.8 57.3 1.2511 0.2511 224.2 56.4 69.8 1.2376 0.2376 60.1 1.0656 0.0656 k

k

4 STAT 1STICAL ANALYSIS OF INPUT DATA The analytical approach used to determine the code uncertainty for each evaluation model:

(I) l P,3, = F, PwcoTmc The normalized error for test i is:

P, - M' (2) e=

M, where:

f P, = the pressure predicted for test i by WG01111C and M, = the pressure measured in test i The sample variance is:

s = { (E -e )2 (3) n where n is the number of tests in the sample population and the bias is i=h.n (4)

The population variance is 02=s2 n

(g)

(n - 1)

The prediction multiplier is I

(6)

F* = (1 + 6) 1 where (7) 5 = E - 1.645 o Statistics on WGOTHIC Distributed Parameter Model Predictions of LST Mean (Bias) n s

a 1.6450 6

F, 0.0362 20 0.0469 0.0482 0.0792

-0.0430 1.045 Statistics on WGOTHIC Lumped Parameter Model Perdictions of LST Mean (Bias) n s

a 1.645o S

F, 0.1610 22 0.0800 0.0819 0.1347

+0.0264 0.974 n

4 4

.i j

i i

4 8

i 7

1 I

6"

- * - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~

~

l 5-

~ ~ ~ - -

- * ~ ~ - - -

j 2

I f.

i

{

u. 3-e 2

l 3

I e

0 i

i

-0.06

-0.02 0.02 0.06 0.1 0.14 0.18 Normalized Pressure Difference i

j Frequency Distribution for Distributed Parameter EGOTHIC Predictions for LST 1

1 l

t 1

i e

i i

4 i

i i

e 0.4 f

z l

0.3-

~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ - - -

i 1

Bias i

e y 0.2-

- - -~ ~ - - - - zo.v3sy-----~~~~~

~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - -

o b

0.1

o=

- ~ ~ - - -

U

- U

^

o.=.- -..co.....o--.A.-.

D.-..-

{

E

. c.-

Mean Predicbon

=

o.

o

-.. ~.. -. -.

o 4

i h

95% Probabikty Umrt g

- - ~~ - - -

i 2 -0.1 =

-~~

4I j

U -0.2

...1.h45.suna -

Nat %

3 (0.079)

( 0.043) l k

-0.3 3

0 10 2'O 30 4'O 5'O 6'O 70 Measured Pressure (psia) i l

EGOTHIC Distributed Parameter Model Predictions of LST Measured Pressures i

h

i t

i 4

I s,

1 I

I, l

(

t 8

4 l

7 6-

- - ~ ~ ~

y5-8 4 l

u. 3-'

i l

2 1

-0.025 0.025 0.075 0.125 0.175 0.225 0.275 0.325 0.Q75 I

Normalized Pressure Difference 4

s 1

i Frequency Distribution for WGOTHIC Lumped Parameter Predictions of LST i

I l

1 i

g 0.5 s

1.64 5 sW ~~ - -- - -- ~~~ -

0.4-

- ~~-- ---~~ -

-(0.135) g o

E

--~~~~~~-~~-C-~~--

i

~

- - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - -

h

.3-

-0

?

a

.-.----------------...a

- c. 5 0 o-.

0.2-Mean Prodction

?0.3

..........................E........o.................e..............................

95% Probabihty Lirrut d,.,

y g0.o...........................................................g....................................

Ey.o.3 Bias Not Error M

E (0.161)

(+0.026)

-0.2 0

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Measured Pressure (psia)

}1 GOTHIC Lumped Parameter Model Predictions of Measured LST Pressures

TIME STEP SIZE AND CONVERGENCE A design review group (DRG), comprised of nationally recognized nuclear thermal-hydraulic code experts, was convened by EPRI to review GOTHIC Version 3.4D. The expert review team concluded:

" Based on the DRG test cases, reports by users, and the technical review, the DRG concludes that the solution technique of GOTHIC _S is stable and convergent."

He effect of the time step on the predicted pressure was further examined by Westinghouse by halving the time step for LST 212.1 Comparisons of the distributed evaluation model prediction to the reference case showed the largest change during the transient ponion was less than 2%

Any errors due to time step size and convergence are already embodied in the pressure prediction uncertainties; so it is not necessary to include them again.

Convergere and~ stability do not comprise significant errors.

- m.

CODE UNCERTAINTY VALIDFFY RANGE Internal condensation on the evaporating and subcooled surface areas:

Gr "-'" ' op "" T

("E " ^'"

(8) w

In

,g' sc'*,p, T.

P.,

Q,...

and for external evaporation:

.,,, 0.023 T In(P,/P,,) y A, Sc " T.

R*2 Q,,,,,

inside containment 0.51 < Sc < 0.52 for tests without helium and Sc <= 0.72 with helium.

He temperature ratio is limited in range to 1.09 < T,,/T,,, < I.36 inside and 1.22 < Tff,,, < I A5 outside.

i n and C, correspond to the coefficient and exponent on the free convection correlation chosen.

De overall pressure uncertainty must account for individual pressure variations due to:

De deviation of the LST pressure measurement from the actual pressure, The LST nodalization, Test initial and boundary conditions, Phenomenological model uncertainiies, Velocity, temperature and gas species concentration fields The _WGOTHIC predictions and measurements embody all of these contributions to the pressure uncertainty.

6 e*

v r,

r a-m w

ase

O 7

7 8

7 7

5 0

9 9

6 6

5 0

6 8

2

)

i g

N 2

2 4

1 8

5 8

7 0

2 n

1 2

2 7

5 5

d

(

9 4

u 1

1 I

1 4

1 3

1 0

0 0

I q

Q 3

2 1

1 i.

I de l

m u

r e

e e

l l

l t

l 1

l 2

2 2

2 l

l u

1 l

l l

l c

e e

c e

e e

c e

t S

G 7

2 5

2 0

1 8

2 2

6 6

t 9

0 7

1 5

7 i

0 2

0 0

1 9

5 0

5 8

4 6

7 1

0 3

9 0

s k

2 3

5 2

3 5

3 8

6 7

2 2

4 5

1 1

e i

s t

r n

a te i

e m

t r

)

e a

4 8

0 9

5 4

5 1

4 3

6 5

1 2

1 7

2 8

1 6

4 0

3 9

9 1

r c

a P

4 0

1 5

4 2

3 1

3 9

n n

P i /,

5 6

7 5

6 8

9 3

9 8

9 9

2 3

2 7

2 4

U m

P 1

t

(

e u

l t

w a

e s

M ne d

d 5

7 5

5 d

o

/

0 5

0 i

0 0

2 2

7 1

8 6

6 61 0

4 2

3 e

n p

7 7

6 s

6 2

9 5

3 3

6 4

0 4

4 di A

3 3

4 3

4 4

4 0

2 C

p h

i s

b u

S 4

1 2

9 9

9 8

9 C

3 8

2 5

5 1

2 9

0 3

2 6

4 2

0 0

2 6

0 0

6 4

0 9

2 1

Q 0

2 4

3 7

4 6

3 5

6 6

6 3

2 3

1 9

6 3

2 4

2 1

5 4

l f

1 l

/

1 9

7 Q

1 I

r U

es G

i R

W 9

6 1

9 3

0 l

7 8

6 0

2 1

a i,

4 7

4 3

8 n

d k

0 1

0 r

7 3

2 6

7 6

8 3

2 5

y y

5 0

8 y

1 0

6 1

4 r

P l

3 3

3 1

o n

i /,

2 3

4 2

3 4

9 5

6 6

6 r

d 5

s i

P 0

0 0

s f

o t

(

r a

e r

te u

m la sa v

9 3

9 6

6 7

1 0

5 3

0 9

5 6

6 0

4 7

8 1

1 i

5 3

8 1

0 8

5 4

6 8

2 5

0 n

9 r

l e

0 8

7 5

8 6

0 1

8 a

2 3

5 4

2 8

8 4

1 8

5 1

8 6

5 5

2 P

R 9

5 2

2 e

2 4

2 2

2 1

2 8

0 8

9 3

2 2

2 1

3 3

3 p

g 3

3 3

3 2

2 3

3 3

2 3

3 3

n i

tarep 6

3 0

8 4

2 0

4 5

3 5

5 I

1 6

1 4

6 1

O Q

6 3

4 7

7 3

5 9

7 2

9 3

2 9

o 7

5 1

1 8

1 1

5 8

3 5

6 6

6 7

8 4

3 4

7 t

2 1

4 1

7 1

M Q

I tn d

e e

m r

2 2

I l

I 2

2 2

2 u

m a

l l

I i

i l

i t

l l

l s

a r

e e

c e

e e

e c

e e

e c

e e

e 9

5 e

tm M

i G

8 4

6 7

4 t

2 0

5 9

9 3

I 2

4 6

7 6

I C

2 9

9 2

8 5

0 5

8 8

7 7

I.

0 7

4 4

9 4

6 0

f 1

1 2

1 1

3 2

4 3

4 7

8 3

7 3

1 2

3 6

o e

d e

is g

n n

i a

M m

2 8

4 2

7 0

7 6

8 8

9 8

8 9

4 4

2 4

3 3

8

)

u P,

2 0

3 2

2 7

0 5

4 1

8 3

1 2

8 6

2 1

8 9

5 1

3 1

u i /,

4 5

6 4

5 6

7 0

7 7

1 1

I.

2 2

1 5

t n

0 0

0 5

n P

0 0

0 1

l ie

(

e m

b e

o u

C I'

p 6

5 0

9 2

2 1

5 2

1 1

4 2

2 1

5 9

4 3

6 0

/

0 3

6 0

3 7

4 7

8 9

7 7

9 5

7 9

5 6

2 p

2 2

0 0

0 1

0 0

2 1

2 a

0 0

0 C

A B

C A

B C

1 2

1 A

B c

A B

1 1

1 l

I I

l.

1 l.

l.

2 4

4 I

t t

I l.

l 1

e 2

2 2

1 1

1 9

9 9

1 I

1 2

2 2

s 3

3 3

6 6

7 7

8 8

1 1

1 2

2 2

2 T

1 2

2 2

1 1

2

=

Application of Pressure Uncertainty to AP600 Calculations The range of applicability of the code pressure uncertainties is limited to the code version, noding option, momentum equation form, and heat transfer models selected, as well as the dominant parameters characterizing the test. To calculate peak pressures for AP600 requires that any differences between AP600 and the test basis be identified, and for each difference any bias and uncertainty be evaluated and combined with the code uncertainty. Dese are:

Internal Scale - AP600 is approximately 8 times larger than the LST.

External Scale - De LST riser ikydraulic diameter is 1/3 that of AP600 while the vertical scale is 1/8 that of AP600.

Geometry - De LST had no flow communication between the simulated below-deck compartments and the steam generator compartment.

Dimensionless Groups - The AP600 internal Grashof number is approximately 8' times that of the LST.

De AP600 riser Reynolds number is 3.5 times the peak LST value.

De LST internal heat sinks have little effect on the steady-state pressure, while in AP600 the internal heat sinks are significant until a few thousand seconds into the LOCA transient.

e 4

C s

m.

Scaling Analysis Plan to Complete REVISE PIRT Identify specific transport phenomena p 1

Support all choices / rankings with quantitative basis such as PI values l

DERIVE CONTAINMENT RPC EQUATION Present derivation and assumptions W Terms representing fluxes, work, heat transfer, concentration c'hanges i PRESENT PI GROUPS IN CONVENTIONAL MANNER In terms of initial and boundary conditions To show characteristic lengths ($)

To emphasize independent dimensionless groups ($)

To define relative resistance to heat / mass transfer Parametrically evaluate effect of concentration (stratification) p indicates items that can be completed for July ACRS meeting. Parentheses indicates examples, rather than final work. All other items will be completed by Sept 30,1995.

t Condensation Pl Group for Energy Transport to Evaporating Fraction of Containment Surface The pi group based on mass transport for condensation is:

z"ud = C' Gr"""

Ap"a T* In P, (vg)" A a

(y)

Sc ' + ( p,

T.

P.,

O, Because the pi group can be written: x - on, and t - V,/O m m can be written:

mgl= C' Gr"4" 'Ap M"In (V9)"

(2) n S c -a p,

T, P,,

L i

where the length scale is given by:

1 _ A, _ f, A" (3).

L V,

V, Note that:

~

The Schmidt number inside containment is limited to 0.51 < Sc < 0.52 The absolute temperature ratio is limited to 1.1 < Ta < 1.4 The value of n is limited to 0.27 < n < 0.40 for free convection. Only values of n less than 1/3 decrease mass transfer, so n-1/3 < 0.06.

m.

s

N Evaporation Pl Group for Energy Transport to Evaporating Fraction of Containmerit Surface.

The pi group based on mass transport for evaporation is:

l T In(P,

/P,,y) v A.,

th., _ 0.023 w

rib,w Re 02 T Sc '

O.

u Because the pi group can be written: x = mt, and t - V,/O.w, m can be written:

I 0.023 T, in(P.2/P,) vd 5

Scmi3 T R o2 L

u where the length scale is given by 2 1 _ A., _ f., A.,

(6)

L V,

V, Note that The Schmidt number is limited to values 0.51 < Sc < 0.52 The absolute temperature ratio is limited to 1.2 < T < 1.4 n

The Reynolds number only appears to the power 0.2 6

e

-- -m

i f:

il

[

i t

8 te y

w d

r v

y i

t l

t s

s o

o y

r u

uD

)

7 9G9 5

e, n

0 C

0 J

3 R

3

(

0 1

0 3

9 1

0 2

72 ro f

042 gn i

0 p

1 2

pa 0

m 8

1 e

eg 05 a

1 r

e 0

v 2

o 1

c r

0 e

9 ta w

0 8

tne 0

i 3

sna r

0 T

&9 ew S

s-i I

Q l

4 CN*

S, i

i l

N

~

I 1

e W

e s

1 4

4 O

t 4

219.1 (RC057) TEST DATA Outside wall temperature (Az.0.El.2LC) c4, g l

t I

i i

1 4

I h

e e

e

4 CW&MM4-.

E Eh&.a..

A mugA

-E.

gwam k m

-4&4 4

.c%,

4-g M

O g

9

+e ee benee se e*gsee m e 9

219.1 (RC057) TEST DATA

,6 p

S d#

emmend e

4

,,s

,+5_J6em.a4 m.4G--M M.M 4X.h..

A

~M44

-s M.c.4 Aim.-4-4.4 4.m,AM-4

-1

-44

.E-

-R

.1..---J4.-.i4e

__A.u.

4

,_,NM

+

1 i

5 1

1 i

^

j 4

I e

y s

4 P-l 1

A i

i h

l l

l a

F<C Q-I W

uI nbD OO tr v

7 9.

E o

a IM 4a m O

\\

-O o

ty '

y

(

4 l

j 1

F<-

O F-W LU F-b o

O i

!OE i

v e

I cq 1

l s

1

\\.

S e

ge e

N M=

66 4

EMS e

e' f

\\

4 i

9 e

E p<

O Ln LJ bDO l

Ccr v

4 i

e I

e 4

-1

ae mW6 S

Sa D sp4 C'

l

\\-

)

i i

?

\\>

O-

' l-CD W

-N iO

'OO

[

I~

-,r i

v-

, OJ t

g I

\\

r

213.1 (RC050) TEST DATA.

Temperature stratification (q

ib) 4 I

i l.

I I

I

~

o

~

213.1 ('RC050) TEST DATA.

Temperature stratification (Rad. O in.)

(c

~

hy t

4 e

G e

g.

-- -a

219.1 (RC057) TEST DATA Axial temperature stratification (Rad. O in.)

(9

~

'b)

I l

l 1

l i

i t

4 Y

e

- - ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

)1 t

c-4 1

I s

I e

a f

h O

f I

O f.

+

4 e

4 6

J e

9 d

n i

J d

i i

d h

I f

4 S

e, e

e e eeup O

n 4

219.1 (RC057) TEST DATA 63 4

I

~

t I

e 9

e 4M e

9 9

...m

Some estimated LST time response values Test Stm.flo

% wetting P

T P

T w

ramp ramp resp.

resp.

time time l

(ib/sec)

(psi /hr)

(deg/hr)

(hr)

========== -

=====mmaeum=============--===---

QQS D

13 S O.34 100 0.436 0.485

-0.298 1.45 1.0 0.61 l

'O.49 87.4 0.664 0.664 4.17 1.51 1.0 d.61 213.1 0.72 52.3 1.42 0.450

-0.602 1.43 1.0 0.61 DOS Q

Bulk 0.12 0.0 0.607 1.56 1.60 1.41 9.2 5.8 219.1 l

0.12 99.5

-0.315

.110

-0.376

-0.766 1.4 1.4 l

008 D

0.15 96'- 99 0.450 0.343 4.2 221.1 0.15 0.0 1.72' O.297 4.2 D0D D

Bulk I

222.1 0.60 92-100 0.566 0.647 0.511 0.91 l

213.1 (RC050). TEST DATA i

Vessel pressure

' (9 f

l l

l r

O G

py

a.A4mE k.'M S

4-A,

.A e

_,_a

-s4

- 6

9**

6@*W PW w@wey age

,gg,p 213.1 (RC050)' TEST DATA

~

Vessel oressure

- (, 6 e

e 4

9 I

i 1

1 I

i I

k i

M

213.1 (RC050) TEST DATA A

qM Sb)

I s

4

?

t i

I l

1

~

I a

v O

'4-

-..&h p.

,m,,

t

-'=~-

l S

4 i

a i

d O 4 1

4 f

i 4

}

l

4 i H l

i 4 lO F-

. Cr)

. u.1

'i&

af88"%

'O Lt)

O O

CE v

s' l

T"".

b J

4 1

r-

Q. = Q.tm + On,+ 4 + Q.

[me,i:dT/dt iln,.

Q, - Q,1m

=

1

+ Ime,idT/dt:i],

l

+' [kACdT/dx i],

l f

f r

s i

l i

l l

I

\\

l c

6,S' l

.l i

pg o

e m

ATA e

D

+

T m

S S

E T.

e

)

~

7 50 CR

(

6 sn e

1 9

1 2

O gp 9

p.

3, W

<C Q

F--

Cn Ld F-mO DOO E

v v==

e N

O e

1 1

a

==..m--

c l

l T

F-<

Q F-(M L.J F-b LO OO i

Z v

e e

4 i

4 6

gesp e

-ee e e ee s1

\\ (7 s mm i

)

?

=

n 8

I t

a s

8 4

a I

1 t'

I

\\

s.

a 0

)

I

<W

<C Q

W (M

LD l--

mbDO O

i s

'i w

0 O

1 e

em

- ee 8

4 "Ne h

1 0

l I

I i

l 6

i I

e O

j e

l J

G

/

4 i

5 e

e

WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION PRESENTATION TO UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WGOTHIC ANALYSES OF LARGE-SCALE TESTS Marcia D. Kennedy June 22,1995

/

~

1 Topics of-Presentation j

. Large-Scale Test Distributed and Lumped Parameter Evaluation Model Development (WCAP-14382, Section 5.0) i

- WGOTHIC Distributed Parameter LST Noding Studies (WCAP-14382, '

f Section 5.2) i Local Noding Studies with Dry Baseline Tests Noding Convergence with Phase 2 LST

- WGOTHIC Lumped Parameter LST Model (WCAP-14382, Section 5.3 &

6.3)

. Application of LST Distributed and Lumped Parameter Evaluation Model's Noding to AP600 Evaluation Models (WCAP-14382, Section 6.4) 2

... _ =...

LST Noding Development Process i

Baseline LST Lumped Parameter, WCAP-13246 I

4 * * * * * -> => => => =+ => * => =+ => => =+ =+ => => => =+ => => => => => => => =,4 4

Baseline Dry LST Distributed Parameter Noding Studies', WCAP-14382, Section 5.2 4

i 4

4 4

l Phase 2 Detailed Distributed Parameter Model, WCAP-14382, Appendix A 4

i 4

4 I

4 4

t Phase 2 Distributed Parameter Evaluation Model', WCAP-14382, Sections 5.2,6.2 & 8.1 4

4 l

i Phase 2 and 3 Lumped Parameter Evaluation Model',

WCAP-14382, Sections 5.3, 6.3 & 8.2

^

To be discussed today D

s,

Noding Case Study Parameters 1

The effect on the following predicted parameters was assessed as the noding t

was changed:

Vessel Pressure

- is dependent on the heat and mass transfer and is a primary measure of l

code success Velocity Field

- affects local calculated heat and mass transfer rates

- affects,the mixing of steam and air within the vessel Axial Steam Gradient

- is an important parameter in calculating local internal mass transfer rates 9

Local Noding Studies with Dry Baseline LST

~

. Baseline Large-Scale Test Description

. Baseline Large-Scale Test WGOTHIC Model - Base Case

. Local Noding Case Studies

- Noding Along the Vessel Wall

- Noding Near Steam inlet

- Vertical Noding Throughout Vessel

. Local Noding Studies Conclusions

. Application of Local Noding Studies e

4 5

b Baseline'LST Description Measured Data Summary for Basejine Test 103.1_-

ase Case V

Steady State Conditions Ambient Temperature (F)

Ambient Pressure (in Hg)

Ambient Relative Humidity (%)

Vessel Internal Pressure (psia)

Steam inlet Temperature (F)

Condensate Flow Rate (ibm /hr)

Annulus Velocity (ft/s)

External Water Flow Rate i -

w 9

9 9

9

A k

c,m I

1 1

I.

i.

I Plexiglass Baf0e i.

l.

l I

I.

l

\\

l HOT LIGHT STEAM-RICH y

y I

i.

I l6l,d (I

i

\\!;

~

/

I COLD DENSE Operating l

AIR-RICH D ck Le el j

Pressure Vessel w

f l

Steam Supply Line l

Baseline LST Facility l

l:

l

Dry Baseline LST WGOTHIC Model

~

The vessel without representation of the full-scale plant internals is a relatively stringent test of the code's ability to predict axial stratification of air / steam

. The empty containment vessel makes it easier to vary the noding with minimal effort

. One quarter of the facility is modelled since the vessel is symmetrical about its center

. The simpler model has a short run time so that more cases can be run to contribute to understanding noding effects

. Applicable to tests with buoyant steam plume such as the AP600 Phase 2 tests e

y

a N.o Q

i I

Height (ft)

)

t 26 I

25 42

)

t

~

1 h

24 65 i

1/4 Symmetry J

i:

Boundary I

)

21

'Y.

i l

20 i

.p.

1986

.

l I

i. e. e.. L 1s 75

'44...

I l

17 50

.4......'....4...;....

.;4 4...

g

.,, b 16 25

..i.

l J

l l

a

....................... 4....;..;..h 13 38

.;4 4,.....

s l

to 52

.. 4. 4..

Baffle

....;........).

Wa v

v t

. l.

! SS l

j

),! Steam in 4,

4 78

.;, 4... i....... b........ >....... >...... 4.. 4. 4.. -

A.sr Annulus

[

j j.i.;... ;.......;........;........ ;........;... f. f... L., 4 2e 3.75 p..

, 2M

.t....p....

.......y.........;.......

. p' 9

Vessel

.l i

1 25 0. 4 4.... ;....

4...... 4....... 4....... 4... 4.

4..,

.l Wall o

1 n.

a-n.

.n Radius (ft) i Large-Scale Baseline Test EGOTHIC Model J

2 G

4 s

A<,b )

i d

+

2

)

i i

i 1

1 j

i 4

a d

I Vessel Height (ft)

Predicted Measured

....e....

1 I

.Inside Vessel Wall Temperature for Base Case 4

i e

D i

4 e

f Wall Center l

,%X\\

l

( -

l vi e

e--

o-pr j y g

i

\\

I l

f A

p Wf f F

g

?

t f

i l

11 ) I I

)

/

pt t t

A i l

/

f f

N 2

1 Il I i

}

i pg 1

l 1.69

/

f 4

ft/s I

k

\\

l Ift 1, h

t j

Ir1rl' h

14 ft/s

'/

s yh Operating Ded QI

~

i g'/

p.-

f-

\\

g t

v e

~

0.03tus f

Vmax =74.011500 (fys)

Tune = 3630.31 Channels = 16 27/

j Velocity Field for Baseline Base Case i

1 J

l i

P Baseline LST WGOTHIC Model Results

)

. The predicted vessel pressure is 25.4 psia, less than 5% overpredicted l

. There is agreement between the measured and predicted trend in axial wall temperature

. Noding sensitivities will be compared to the results from this base case roodel i

t l

t f.b

I.

4 m

L Local Noding Case Sensitivities - Aloncj Vessel-Wall i

Five sensitivities were made to the node size along the vertical vessel wall (cases a.1 through a.5) e

/ d 6

e 8

8 I

a g

8 3

g 8

8 0,

9 e

g 8 8 0

8 g

^g 8

8 9

I g

a g

8 I I

8 3

8 8 8

8 8

0 8

g 4

g 8

6 8

8 8

4 g

8 8 8

8 3

a g

f 8 8 0

8 8

8 4

g I

g 8

3 I

8 8 4

0 8

8 4

g 8

g 8 8 0

8 8

0 I

g 4

g 8

g 0

0 4

4 g

8 8 8.

8 3

4 g

8 8 9

I 8

0 8

e i

g 8

g 8 0 0

I I

t 8

e a

e 8

3 8

8 0

g I

g 8 8 8

I g

k 8 8 0

0 8

4 8

3 0

g 8

3 i O t

0 0

8 I

e 8

g 8

g 0

0 t

I g

a g

8 8 0

0 g

I I I I

e 8

8 I

e i

g 3

8 8 9

I I

e ee I

e e

g i

g e

i e

e i

9 e

3 l

ee e

i e

e e

i i

I i

e s

3 e

s e

g g

g ee 8

g l

I 6

g 4 I g

e i

ei e

i I

g 4

g 8 i 8

g 8

8 0

9 g

e 0 8 8

8 g

I 8

e e

g 9 1 g

9 3

0 8

g 4

g 8 9 3

0 g

8 9 3

0 0

g I

g a

g.

8

,3 1 I g

I e

9 3

0 g

8 g

O 9 3

5 8

3 4

e 5

g 8

3 I O g

8 9

3 4

e e

g 8

3 8 9 g

4 0

3 8

e t

9 g

8 8 g

6 8

g I

a e

8 g

t 8 g

9 6

g i

e e

g 9

g I

t g

i e

I 9 8 g

8 g

i I g

4 9

e 0

g 9

g 8

3 I

8 g

a a

t 9 g

a a

a 5.92 5.66 5.16 4.16 3.16 2.16 1.16 0.660.330 Rtulius (ft) 6.1 6.18 6.22 Local Noding Case Sensitivities Along the Vessel Wall - Base Case ll

e g

g 0

4 g

g 9

g 8

g 0

I 4

0 8

8 3

3 g

0

'g 8

0 0

I g

8 8

8 e

8 0

8 I

e 4

s 8

3 8

8 0

4 g

a g

8 8

0 g

0 8

8 0

0 a

g a

g 8

3 I

l 0

0 0

4 g

g g

8 3

8 0

0 0

0 8

e g

8 e

8 8

3 8

0 0

g 0

g 8

8 0

0 0

8 e

e g

8 e

8 0

0 I

e 0

g 4

g I

g O

I O

9 g

I g

I O

8 3

8 9

8 0

0 i

g I

g 8

e I

e 0

0 0

8 g

4 g

8 3

8 8

g 4

g 8

8 8

3 I

O I

I O

4 e

8 g

8 3

8 0

8 I

e t

g O

g 8

0 8

I e

0 g

8 0

8 3

8 4

4 a

g g

I O

4 g

I 6

g 8

g I

g 0

g 8

0 0

0 g

t g

8 3

0 8

0 4

g 4

g 8

8 8

g 8

0 0

8 8

I e

I g

I 3

8 0

I I

I 4

g

. 1 g

8 3

8 8

0 8

g I

g 8

0 0

8 g

8 3

0 I

9 g

8 g

I e

8 g

8 0

0 0

3 4

g 8

0 I

I 8

8 3

8 I

I g

8 3

6 8

g 4

e e

g 8

3 I

g 1

0 0

I g

i g

8 g

1 0

0 4

g 0

g a

8 3

8 g

I t

t 8

g I

g 9

g 4

8 3

0 8

g I

g i

8 g

4 g

I g

8 3

0 8

g 8

4 6

g 8

0 9

9 e

4 g

0 g

4 g

9 3

0 8

g a

a n

a a

5.92 5.66 5.16 4.16 3.16 2.16 1.16 0.660.330 Radius (ft) 6.1 6.:22 Local Noding Case Sensitivities Along the Vessel Wall - Case a.1

/de

- - m

..m m.

.m

.-m m

m

g g

g t

4 e

t 9

8 3

8 8

4 g

I 3

g 0

8 9

I a

8 9

t I

e 0

8 0

4 e

e g

9 I

3 8

8 4

g g

8 3

8 8

e e

t 4

8 e

9 8

8 0

e e

8 e

I I

8 I

8 g

i e

8 3

8 8

0 g

I g

8 3

t 8

0 0

i e

p I

e 8

8 0

0 8

a e

8 3

8 8

0 I

g g

9 e

I g

0 8

0 0

O e

e 8

8 8

g 8

8 0

g I

8 I

O g

9 8

e B

8 8

8 s

I e

a 9

0 0

8 s

8 3

I g

8 8

8 a

e 8

e 3

0 g

3 8

8 8

0 0

I e

t 8

g I

I e

8 e

0 8

3 0

e 8

8 8

8 6

8 i

i 5.92 5.66 5.16 4.16 3.16 2.16 1.16 0.660.330 Itt:(liut:3; (l't)

=

6.22 Local Noding Case Sensitivities Along the Vessel Wall - Case a.2

/6

g a

g 5.66 5.16 4.16 3.16 2.16 1.16 0.660.330 Radius (ft)

=

6.22 Local Noding Case Sensitivities Along the Vessel Wall - Case a.3

/ 7

+ - " - ' ' - * ---=

m.

i 1

i e

3 j

g g

e 4

g e

a o

e 4

g 4

g i

g 9

0 0

g 6

g 8

g 6

g 0

4 8

g I

e 8

8 0

I 4

4 g

4 e

8 3

a g

8 9

5 g

8 g

4 3

0 0

0 3

8 g

8 0

I e

1 0

8 3

0 g

I I

g 0

4 0

g 9

g 8

3 a

g 8

0 8

g 4

g 8

g

(

0 g

8 8

5 3

0 g

0 3

s g

8 8

6 3

4 e

8 3

0 g

0 0

8 g

6 g

8 3

I e

9 8

0 3

i g

I e

0 e

8 0

0 g

8 e

I a

8 g

0 0

0 g

0 3

8 3

0 g

4 0

g I

g 4

e I

g 6

8 0

g 0

g 8

3 I

g 9

9 9

3 O

g 8

3 i

g I

O O

g 9

e 8

e I

g 4

0 0

g 8

3 8

g I

t 8

g 4

e I

g 9

9 8

g 8

g I

e i

e I

t 9

g 8

e 9

3 8

g 1

0 8

g 8

g 0

3 0

g 0

4 4

3 4

3 i

3 8

g 8

0 g

i e

8 e

e g

0 g

i e

3 I

g 0

i e

i 8

g 0

g I

g 1

0 t

3 8

g 8

3 I

g 5

0 8

g I

g 8

g 0

0 0

g I

a 4

g 4

0 0

g 8

3 8

e 9

0 9

3 8

g 9

3 8

g l

8 0

4 g

4 3

8 g

i 1

O I

g e

e e

a 0

g 8

g 1

0 e

e g

0 e

i 8

0 e

g 9

0 9

g i

g a

g 0

e e

e a

a e

a s

5.66 5.16 4.16 3.16

-2.16 1.16 0.660.330 Radius (ft) 6.1 6.22 Local Noding Case Sensitivities Along the Vessel Wall - Case a.4

/9 e

m m

.m m

-.m-m

-m

I a

a a

a 5.92 5.16 4.16 3.16 2.16 1.16 0.660.330 lattitlitJs (l't)

=

6.22 Local Noding Case Sensitivities Along the Vessel Wall - Case a.5

d

3 s.

q i

~ =

, y =

= _

o f-t t..

y.

8 i

P

i. 4 8

6

' o 6

1 a v t

k i

i

\\

i w

i 5

t i{g i

V._,,

i s

/

O

.O Q

4 1

i i

p

/

=2 5

r\\s-3%.

6 i

IN i 42 O

/

JJj m.

3 U

I oS M

CUO uC CU S

w a

~.

-~

~

=

v;w *-

g t,

ca O

g i

t,

~

s i

,/-

E W

I t,

8 CU b

m i

~

a

/

I f

t}

t,

,4

,l t

t.

'g R._n s

=.

/

I\\

i$~

-+

-e.

G

'g s

n.

s--OA A

""~t*

~, f o

q S

-5

Summary of Node Size Along. Wall Sensitivities Case Vessel Maximum Steam P.R.

Steam P.R.

Pressure Wall Velocity in Dome Below Deck (psia)

(ft/s) base 25.4 1.69 0.33 0.11 a.1 26.54 1.16 0.35 0.07 a.2 26.2 0.9 0.34 0.10 a.3 25.23 0.68 0.33 0.04 a.4 25.74 1.59 0.34 0.08 a.5 26.35 0.92 0.34 0.03 3

i e

G 3/

Summary of Node Size Along Wall Sensitivities The overall flow field was essentially unchanged

. A significant increase in node width (a factor of 13) caused a relatively small decrease in velocity (60%)

. The magnitude of the predicted velocities along the vessel wall for all cases are so small that the heat and mass transfer to the vessel wall are dominatedl 9

by free convection f

t l

g&

1 L

Local Noding Case Sensitivities Near Ste.am Inlet Vertical Noding

- elevation boundary at 4.26 ft was removed (case b.1)

. Radial Noding

- the node adjacent to the steam inlet was increased in size (case b.2) l

- the steam inlet node was increased in size (case b.3)

I l

1 i

35 l

u-.

I rs S5

~

3 3

i s.

s 4 -

4-~

+--

& y *-= *--

\\

i s

i d

1 V

i t

~

j$

~'

r i

i l

l E'-

I i

g f

t' g

tI t

t e

t s

.o A

-@N.i

.T g

g~

g 4

t

\\

s.

s %,,_

p s -

~

\\l y

g

/\\ x 7

7 7

O - L --L '-s/f$

n y

7,s E

43 Q) u)

(U0

~

e,n,

81 1 1 1, 1

g

=

cc l p e-- *-

N t.

c o j_

i te u) s

~

/

E CD t

t.

8 O

~

e u) d t*g t

m e

s

}

l i

t ta i,..,

y i

t-E__m

/

s r\\

'j *

/

h s -.

g

- ']

3 W

1

~S

',A

3 3-S

i Summary of Node Size Vertical Variation Near Steam Injection Case Vessel Maximum Steam P.R.

Steam P.R.

Pressure Wall Velocity in Dome Below Deck (psia)

(ft/s) base 25.4 1.69

- 0.33 0.11

~

b.1 24.97 1.84 0.29 0.22

. In case b.1 the code entrains from a larger layer causing more mixing below the steam injection location

. Detailed axial noding just below the steam injection location is important for predicting the noncondensable axial stratification 6

O W

5.92 5.66 5.16 4.16 3.16 2.16 1.16 0.660.330 Radius (ft) 6.l 6.18 6.22 Base Case Local Noding Case Sensitivities x.

n

---+

u -

~.

._mm e

I e

e g

a 9

g 8

e e

,8 e

g 8

g e

e I

e g

t 0

g 4

,I g

8 9

9, g

8 8 e

g 9

g 8.

0 g

8 9,

g g

e 9,

9, g

?

a g

I g

e g

9 I

g 4

g 8,

g a

g g

0 8 g

g

.I g

e e g

t 9 9 8

g 1

5.92 5.66 5.16 '

4.16 3.16 2.16 1.16 0.33 0 Radius (ft) 6.1 6.18 6.22 Local Noding Case Sensitivities Near Steam inlet - Radial Noding - Case b.2 27

5.92 5.66 5.16 4.16 3.16 2.16 1.16 0

Radius (ft) 6.1 6.18 6.22 Local Noding Sensitivities Near Steam inlet - Radial Direction - Case b.3 4

- ---o

i I

C 3

5I l

l 1 m j

s,

,a ui y_

E 6

9'

,c

'O m

f9 i

i 4

tt D

t 4

4//

g Q) o W

i I {' It i

G

/

o i

6 v

r4

\\

6

~

k 4

4. g p,

.9).

,t xs

-n.

u.

~

-+

/

b, g

j.

s g

^_

.a r

4*:

7 3

dkm 'a O.-

)

M.k s _ _S

. -Q Ss cn

.C OZ s

ce5 s.

g j'r --

cc t.

[

o /__

\\

t.

a

~

"O r/

E C

8, ce t

t, s

e r

M I

h j

\\

i i

g/-

e g

(n cc t

'\\h 1,

m r

s i

t.

/

R~

s

\\

t J-

/

u,

,s s --

n, s_-

3 O

-.-e

,e._a $_ ', /

y ~D N. 4

e Summary of Node Size Radial Variation Near Steam Injection

~

Case Vessel Maximum Steam P.R. ' Steam P.R.

Pressure Wall Velocity in Dome Below Deck (psia)

(ft/s) base 25.4 1.69 0.33 0.11 b.2 25.30 1.65 0.34 0.08 b.3 25.23 1.83 0.32 0.09

. The steam inlet buoyant plume is entraining more fluid in cases b.2 and b.3 from its adjacent node than the base case, but the overall impact on noncondensible mixing is small, since it does not entrain additional flow from below the deck

. The internal velocity field is a weak function of the' radial noding near the plume within the ranges studied 30

I Local Noding Case Sensitivities - Vertical Noding Throughout Vessel The boundaries were removed at elevations i

0.042 ft.

i 2.5 ft.

l 10.52 ft.

f 17.5 ft.

19.86 ft.

i leaving a total of 9 elevations in the vessel for case c.1 t

i h

i t

n L

l

)

i i

3/

I

~

, _..... ~. -

d N

1 I

Height (ft)

> 2s I' 25 42 I

e i

24 65 i

1/4 Symmetry

!=

Boundary I

~

21 f

l 20 x

19 86 wn

.i; I

..>.4....L is 75

\\

I l

17 50 M

l 16 25 4...

< <.:. ;... t.....>..

l l

. ;.'.h...................)................k... $.. J.. h 13 30

'.1 n.

to 52 Baffle

<4.;......i.....

4.. 4.."

Wall l

c 7 IS

......k.. 5.. 5....

Q..

. } l. Steam in en 2

t At 4 78 4 4.',. ;... ;....... ;....... >.....;.......:... 4.

4..-

j i..p.v.... i.......;........p........ i........v.... f... f.. L 4 2s Annulus t

l 3 75 l

p W

t k *::

g..9...y...........y........y..................y...g..g..p

. 2 50 Vessel

.......L.. 4 4... l.

m_-

1 25

. 4 4..,...'..'...........;.......;......

Wall ll u,

0 o

is,.

i..

9,.

94 su on SM gu

. Radius (ft) e io

~

.n Large-Scale Baseline Test EGOTHIC Model

4 4

I g 4

}

~ ',

=

QV ~

4 _S k

b I"#

+--

/

i i

t l !o w

l

{

f f

t r-l l

\\

/

i 4

l f

f I

f r

I t

\\

f I

ig t,

/

O s

h

\\

I E

m O

L,n~

b l

s o

s

/

$~,

O f

c

--+-

N l

\\

" & b en e

k

,i E

7 r

w I

S CO O

O in CU

.O wo 5

T O

~

s.

53

=

l N

t.

v(

4 i

LL

[

i t.

e S

b i

s 8

'G i

t, e

.O b,-

O f

ij t

i i

s

,4 e -

if t

j t

s s

e

,j

\\

,k i

R_n

/

s j_*

r\\

/

h s -

,y n.

~r M

==L 1

5-5

Summary of Vertical Noding Variation Throughout Vessel Case Vessel Maximum Steam P.R.

Steam P.R.

Pressure Wall Velocity in Dome Below Deck (psia)

(ft/s) base 25.4 1.69 0.33 0.11 c.1 25.3 1.65 0.32 0.13 The velocity field of case c.1 approximates the base case flow field

. The predicted results are minimally affected I

b

.m

e Local Noding Studies Conclusions

. Noding sensitivities were performed to study the effect of noding in the following areas:

- Noding along the vessel wall

- Noding near the steam inlet

- Vertical noding throughout vessel

. The model was most sensitive to a change in the node height directly below the steam injection point

. The other noding modifications had a small impact on the predicted results I

e

=

Application of Local Noding Studies-to-LST Phase 2 Model~

. The baseline LST noding sensitivity studies are applicable to tests with a buoyant plume such as the AP600 LST Phase 2 tests

. The conclusions from the noding sensitivity studies on the baseline test were i

applied to develop the detailed distributed parameter Phase 2 test model

. The more complex internal geometry, a wider range of steam flow rates, and the external water applied to the vessel surface of the Phase 2 tests were taken into consideration when. developing the detailed distributed parameter phase 2 test model

. Since the Phase 2 LST is symmetrical about the 0-degree:180-degree line, r

the model is a 1/2 symmetry representation of the facility

. The detailed distributed parameter model and comparison to test results were discussed with the U.S. NRC at a meeting in Monroeville on April 11,1995.

It i

is also discussed in Appendix A of WCAP-14382.

i

Application of Local Noding Studies to LST 4

Phase 2 Model

. Noding Along the Vessel Wall

- not of extreme importance in the ranges of node sizes studied

- a node width of 3.5" along the vessel wall, and a l

node width of 9.5" adjacent to this was used (similar l

to Case a.5) l l

. Vertical Noding Near Steam inlet j

- important for predicting mixing l

- three small elevations were used below the steam injection location

. Radial Noding Near Steam Inlet

- insignificant effect due to increasing the width of.

the node into which the steam entered

- since the Phase 2 tests have a different steam inlet geometry due to the steam diffuser and the steam generator compartment, the node width for this test was modelled to be approximately'the same width as the steam diffuser

. Vertical Noding Throughout Vessel

- minimally affected the flow field and the mixing of noncondensible gas

~

- since the steam enters the containment at a higher elevation and it was necessary to model the heating and evaporation of the applied exterior water, noding in the vertical direction was not spared O

g

~

xm 1

l l

i l

Figure 519 Noding Diagram of Damaled Distributed Paramuter LST REvtsloN- 0

. m:6.co26..se.,( l6 06:4M 5 34

I N

"O t

l l

i i

I i

i h

t i

i l

Figure 5 20 Plan View Detailed Distributed Parameter Model Above Operating Deck Level 1

e RE% ISION O m o:$.eu:6. 9.,(in.uei a s 5 35 1

4 f

i 1

d I

1 i

i 9'

l.

I 4

h i

1 1

4 1

i i

t Figure 5 21 Plan View of Detailed Distributed Parasmeter Model at Operating Deck Level t

i i

4 REusios is m e w.:o:6. co:6. an. vis w es 5 36

i Noding Convergence with Phase 2 LST

~

. Base Case (Detailed Distributed Parameter Model, Test 212.1 A)

. Case Studies i

- Vertical Noding i

- Steam Generator Compartment Noding

- Open and Dead-Ended Compartment Noding

- Angular Noding

. Noding Studies Conclusions i

f

. Application of Noding Studies

-l f

i Noding Convergence Case Sensitivities - Vertical Noding Throughout Vessel i

The boundaries were removed at elevations i

1.1 ft.

2.3 ft.

10.9 ft.

18.4 ft.

19.0 ft.

l leaving a total of 11 elevations in the vessel for case d.1 1

l 92

rc, W

4 1

~

O v

Figure 519 Nading Diagram of Detailed Distributed Parameter LST RsvisioN: 0

.- m c0> 5b-Witains 5M

- _ =. -.

l 2

4 4

i i

e i

Y i

t

\\

d a

1 4

!I i.

W 1

i i,

i i

i Figure 512 Plane A A Through Steam Generator Break Location

. u.uoco:6.co:6..n.,r ibaias 5 37 RES 1510% 0

w.

~' s I

a

~' w

\\

~

e rkt j

f 1

0 d

~

\\

i. h

'l t

e sa d

o

)

U t

n ' \\\\

C s

y

\\

t(

/

0 2

d 4

2 75 026 n

1 53 90.

40s a

t

=5l=e

\\

n e

xa s n n a ts muh s

n VTC a

e C

C esa B

ro f

d l

e i

s g

F aW y

t i

c o

le V

(b /

r

+ - s

'/

f t

I

)

~

a j

W 6

\\

s I(

1 0

2 0

2 6

4046 1 11 50=

50s 5l I

=

e e

,\\

s=n e e n n a tn-e moh r

VTC e

l C

D Summary of Vertical Noding Sensitivity ~

Case Vessel Maximum Air P.R. at Air P.R. at Pressure Wall Velocity Dome-90 -63" F-0 (psia)

(ft/s) base 25.8 1.67 0.58 0.97 d.1 26 1.70 0.56 0.96 Flow field and noncondensible gradient were minimally affected c

I

~

'/6

Convergence Noding Case Sensitivities - Steam Generator Compartment

. It has been established in the local noding studies that vertical noding directly below the steam injection is important to predicting noncondensable concentration, therefore this noding was not modified

. Azimuthal noding was modified in and around the steam generator compartment 97

1

%D

)

n l

1 1

I f

i l

I i

4

)

d 4

Figure 5 24 Plas View of Model for Steam Generator Compartment Noding Sensitivity

+. _ _

--. QQ\\ *t shy _,4

d",

Wan Center q 1

Center d

L 1

r

~

k i

a f

f f

i 4

4

[

f f

7, L

a i

l l

t t

i n

il n

/

r 6

m n

t u

n L

J, Q

l;

\\

V

);

~

,f i

1 j

~

\\

i s

a m. s i m.ao m ig-gym gll= -l".'f,

- s is Velocity Field for base case and case e.1 yy

l Summary of Steam Generator Compartment Noding Case Vessel Maximum Air P.R.

Air. P.R.

l Pressure Wall at at F-0 (psia)'

Velocity Dome-(ft/s) 90 -63" base 25.8

'1.67 0.58 0.97 e.1 27.5 2.70 0.63 0.78 Significant differences between the base case and case e.1 velocity field and noncondensible gradient 50

e Convergence Noding Case Sensitivities - Open and Dead-Ended Compartment Open and Dead-ended compartments were each modelled as a single lumped parameter volume to create case f.1 4

4 e

51

2 5

~

I s

d I

I aW

~

r d

A

-A O

e N

/f t

t n

a lp n

l i

s

{

d nn i

i i

)s IW r

o

(

16=

0 f

N4s i

51 1

50 0

t 55 f

~\\

ae.

e n

ew n

mua s

n e

VTc C

ac dna es a

c e

6 s

s L

aW s

a B

f o

~

d le j

d i

F y

t i

c N

N

/ f i

1 o

l e

V i

o o

i 6

s

)

{

a o

s, 1

i s

y t(

w 0046 O4si iS0.

0 5.w 5

t

,\\

s e e

r n

te mo n

VT e

C

r-70

'd l

l l

l i

l l

1 i

I 1

Figure 5 28 Mame 5 8 nrough Open Compartment i

RENistoN O e aseotA2006 CO:6=.k e# (Wiet$

5 43

/

l' p

3

\\,

~

sa 1

w

\\

s

~

B B

a D

e en n

,N N na s

a p

l

~

O p

1

)

m f

W Tv 2

w43 e

o1 s

2 n0-0s a

s i

5. e c-

, g\\

en n

n emh brc

'd a

e t

n ne C

a e

s a

c e

s

\\

f p

p.

y a

s b

a w

i

\\

ro f

d s

l e

s i

F y

ia t

i D

c g

o nee l

r e

.N N e

p V

O i

M n M#3 z

2 1

0

~ \\ \\ s*

0s 1

5s

=e n me n e

en a muh t

YTc nec

Summary of Open and Dead-ended Compartment Noding Case Vessel Maximum Air P.R. at Air P.R. at l

Pressure Wall Velocity Dome-90 -63" F-0 (psia)

(ft/s) base 25.8 1.67 0.58 0.97 f.1 26.1 1.68 0.58 0.94 Minimal differences between base and case f.1 fI #J

.c

I l

f Convergence Noding Case Sensitivities - Angular Noding l

The node boundary at the 90-degree angle was removed, combining 2 planes l

in the base case into a single plane to create case g.1 l

l l

e SL

--- a

---a. ----

--J

4de-n t

l i

l 1

i e

k i

i 4

4 e

a

'l I-i t

I l

Figure 5 29 Plas View of Model for Angular Noding Sensitidy Rgygsgow 0 4 60 6=c006.k N I641**$

$.y

M l

[-

j gj l

' sJ i

e i

w-s s

~

C I

^

Z C O

a g

O

~

!s.

m g-cg O

y F~

i

~

E 5

T3 C

CO Om (UO O

I W

I CU

.O u

z O

.52 t

u 3

w,g

_O LL.

'r~~

e --.

h w

~

y e

$8 gv I

U t

m_.

O I

l r

'a

{

i

'l t

e e

g

?I CL l

t 5

.O

=

,1 D

~

d J

\\

/

o t

2 t'a

.E n

-y

__4 m.

5 u) v CUO tC CU QW (UQ r

r 2

g O

W 7

i gg

/ f a

t

~

Q)

I a

_o 1 -.-

1.L.

~

\\

I n

IR

l Q

G l

w-

)

r g

i

)

t i

l i

\\

4 G

t I

i l

CC g

31 E

u i

\\

/

t=

\\

u i

3

]*n n

e

-g

],

i

-4 f56 b

a g

v)

CUO uC CU G

s -

=

= z g

1 TY.

0 9

~

so m

6.

O b l E

u.

,s s

3O g

ilsRe S

I 4'

i 1

e O

Summary of Angular Noding Case Vessel Maximum Air P.R. at Air P.R. at Pressure Wall Velocity Dome-90 -63" F-0 (psia)

(ft/s) base 25.8 1.67 0.58 0.97 g.1 25.8 1.68 0.56 0.97

. The velocity field for the single plane is an average of the two planes that it replaced from the base case

. Noncondensible gradient essentially unaffected

(/

1 Convergence Noding Studies Conclusions

. Noding sensitivities were performed to study the effect of noding in the following areas:

- Vertical Noding

- Steam Generator Compartment Noding

- Open and Dead-Ended Compa~rtment Noding

- Angular Noding

. Only the change in the number of nodes in and around the steam generator compartment produced significant differences from the base case e

9 C2

l f

?/)o Appication of Convergence Noding Studies Noding study conclusions were applied to reduce the number of nodes in the detailed distributed parameter model to create the LST distributed parameter evaluation j

model

. Vertical Noding (case d.1)

- minimally affected the flow field and the mixing of noncondensible gas

- the number of elevations was reduced j

. Steam Generator Compartment Noding (case e.1)

- both vertical and azimuthal noding are important

- noding in and around the steam generator compartment was left unchanged

. Open and Dead-Ended Compartment Noding-(case f.1)

- modelling these compartments as lumped parameter had a minimal effect on base case results

- this is incoporated into evaluation model

. Angular Noding deleting the angular division at 90 had a negligible effect (case g.1)

- however, this division was le.ft in the final model primarily to provide a more consistent node size distribution throughout the vessel

Application of Convergence Noding Studies There were two additional changes made to the detailed distributed parameter model to create the LST evaluation model:

. Extended radial divisions at a radius of 2.6 ft. and 5.2 ft. through the entire i

vessel f

. Modeled the dome as a cylinder

~

i b

9 k,

180-

_ _ 7.4, Q

167*

7.1' O

157.5*

/

ff

_._ __ _ 6.3' p

A',, V '

_ _ _ s.a.

\\

/

12s-

/

/\\

/(

,',Y

\\

_ _ _ _ <.1

/

f f

\\

p. '

X,

/ \\g

/

6

/

\\/g

/

\\

./

)s

\\

_ -_ __ _ e.s>

f f

V-

/

\\

y\\

k

/

N/

\\

1 9,

/

\\

/

f fs

\\-

f

/Q I

I j

\\

y b\\\\

I I

\\

g I

sk

\\

I g __g_a__j _ _ _ _ o-so.

\\

/

\\

/

\\

\\ / 's

\\

,{\\

~~ - - - - 1.s-

\\

'g

\\

y s

\\

/\\

N

. _ _. _ a.6,

\\

/

\\

g )\\

\\

f g\\

s Y

s\\

N, _ __ _ _ 4.1, g

\\

N 45

\\

s N

N N '

., _ __ __ _ s.a-N N

s N

N N..

_ _._ 6.3-

= =, * -. _

_ _ 7.1-7.4-O' Figure 5 33 Pfaa View of Distributed Parameter Evaluation Model

V t9 3-t'r T-r T r-r - f - - -i- - - i -

r -

7 - - h _J _

_ L L J _ _ L _ _ l _ _ y _ _ _i_ _ _ a _ _ L _ _ 2 _ _

_ _ _ 17 2-I 1 I I

I I

i l

1 i

1 1 i

i i

l i

I i l I I I

I I

l l

l 1

l l l l l I

I I

I i

i l

l l

1 I

l l I I I

I I

i l

l l

l l 1 I I

I I

I I l l

I i

l l

l A_h.4-_4.__4__h___l;___3.___4______4__

_.._ _ __ t 4 3-I I

I i

i I 1 I I

I I

i l

l 1

i I I I I

I I

l l

l 1 I

I I

l l

l 1

l i I I I

I I

l l

l lll g

1 l

l l l

i I

l l

l 1 l

I

'l l

l 1

1 q - r q _ _ e _ _ 4 _ _ _i _ _ _l,_ _ _ 3 _ _ p _ 4 _ _. h l__1

_ _ _ _. t w r

l l

l 1

1 l

l l I

I l

i 1

l l

I I I I

I I

lll l

l l

l 1

I l

l I I

I l

l l l

l l

I 1

1 1 I

I I

l l

l I I I I I

I I

I

__1_______

__h

_ _ _ __ 7.6 I I l

l I

l l

l l 1 i

J._ L J - _ L _ _ l __ _ pl qL _ _ __ _. 6.4-

___l____

i

_ _( _ L _ _ _ __ s.9*

J _ L l _ _ L _ _ l _._ p _ _ _l_ _ _ _

J -. L J _ _ L - _ _i _ _ p _ _ _ p. - _ _

_ _4. _J. _ _ _ __ s.4-1 I I

I I

i

\\

/

I I

~ ~ ~ 4.e.

T~~

-- ~

_ _1_1 is. _ _ _ _ 4.3 s

_ _ _s

. g _,_ _. 7._ _ _s,_ _. _

I an i g

q

_ _I_ g.

._ _ __ 3.6-u__i..__L_

A I I 1

I I

l I

I l

i 1

7,4 7.4' l

g I

l I

6' 7.1' 7.1' ;

i I

s.y I

I3%

E l

.__.__0*

i l

g I

I I

I i

41' 2.6' I

I E

l'F 4

1.9' 0'

Figure 5 34 Distributed Parameter Axial Noding for Yessel

r j

l

_ _. 2 7 1 -

'N t

i g

i

_._ _ _ _ _ a e r t

_ _ _ ao.s-

_ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ i,y 1a.3,-

l e

_7__,_

___,___,__7__,_

_ _ __. t s.o 7__7__

p p

7 7._ _

72'

_ J _ _ L _ __.1_ _ y _ _ _i_ _ _.4

_ L _

1 -

r H i

i i

i I

I I

I l l I g

l l

l 1

11 I I

I I

i I I I I

I

'l i

i I

i l l i

l l

I I I I

I l

g l 1 1 I I

I I

l l

1 I

i l

l l I I I

I I

l l

Al - H.4

._ 4. _ _.4 _ _ 7 _ __ _;_ _ __ 9 _

4. _

4 _ _ 7 3 _ A.

_ __ 14.3*

g l l 1 I I

I i

l l

g g

l !

g l

l l

l 1 1

I I

g l l l

l l

l I i I

i I

l l i

l I

l I I I

I l

l l g

l l

I l

l l l l

l l

l l 1

1 I

t I

i l l l p.4

_+.__4__h___lg_

7

_p__q__

10.9'

_r g

l 1 g

i i

l i

I I I

I I

g l l g

l l

I I I

I I

g l l l

l l

l I I I

I I

l l l

l 1

1 I I I

I I

g l l l

l l

_h

_ _ h _ _

_ j l__ _. _ f h

__L

'g 7.6 i

l g

l i I I I

I l

l l I

I l

g i i J L J _ _1. _ _.1_ _ p;

_l qL

___w l

J L 1 _

L _ _.1 _

p

_l

. y._ L

_19' l

J L l_

L l_ _ p

_p._ _ _

- F _J.

14'

,lll l-l

--Hr _ _I_.1 l. r_ - _ :"

l s

q.

. g _3_ _ 7 _ _ _,_ _ _

_ _I_ 7 p - _ _ __ w u _ 2 _.

u _ _ A _._

l I I

I I

I.

l l

l i

g

4 I

7.4*

g g

g l

1 I

l I

1 7.1'

=

7.1* g l

I u' l l

I S.t' n

SE l

l 1

T '" "8~----------~--"

l l

i i

w 4.t' g,

i I *'

ly r

Fiaure 5 35 Distributed Parameter Axial Noding for Vessel and Annulus

i w'\\

i s

a s

~

_7f f

f s

/

le j

O L;

4 i

~

d

\\

o M

m n

a a

I i

i 1

o i"

r o

A, ma7 34 i

t 2

E.m -

a o

-. s. =-

u t

l 3

mro.

av a

E c

dna esa C

e i

MW s

a B

d le iF r

y t

ico l

n

^

V

_ ~

g e

.i f

}

i s

o l;

a \\\\

m o

.I' o.w c.s i

ii r,m.

s m1c te ne C

Sumrnary of Distributed Parameter Final Noding (Evaluation Model)

Case Vessel Maximum Air P.R. at Air P.R. at Pressure Wall Velocity Dome-90 -63" F-0 (psia)

(ft/s) base 25.8 1.67 0.58 0.97 final 26.0 2.49 0.61 0.87

. The flow pattern is essentially uneffected

. The maximum wall velocity is greater than the detailed distributed parameter model but is still within the. range of measured velocities of 1-3 ft/s (WCAP-14135, Test 212.1)

. Comparisons between measurements and the evaluation model for additional LST are given in WCAP-14382, Section 8.1 e

e 47

LST Lumped Parameter Evaluation Model

. The noding is derived from the baseline large scale test (with no internals) lumped parameter model in WCAP-13246

. the vessel internals that exist in the Phase 2 and 3 tests were taken into consideration O

e 7c

1 i

i N

k l

l l

~

l l

l I

1 I

l l

l 1

l l

\\

/

4 1

i i

I Figure 5 37 Elevation Noding Diagram of LST Lumped Parameter Model REvlsiov o awaeowo26.com.M.,aimbe, 5 52 m.

I i

i I

.s.

N l

r-I j

i l

l

'l l

1 1

l I

Figure 6 9 Plan View of LST Vesel Lumped Parameter Nedlag from Operating Deck (4J Feet) to Upper Internal Gutter (14J FeeO REvislov 0 w oh com 4 w.i m.ns 6 17

l s

4 Ti N

1 1

i 1

i J

l d

i 4

1 1

i 1

4 t

4

{

l 1

Figure 610 Mae View of LST Vessel Lumped Parameter Noding from Upper laternal Gutter (14.3 FeeO to Top of Yassel RIvlsios: 0 u w on m.4.,t.: wins 6-13

\\

.LST Lumped Parameter Evaluation Model-Results obtained by comparison to tests showed that the lumped parameter t

model results in two competing effects:

Over-mixing of noncondensables in the vessel which penalizes the heat and mass transfer rates

. Over-predicting the velocity in the vessel which enhances th.e heat and mass transfer rates. The predicted velocities were 5-8 ft/s. The measurements show the velocities are 1-3 ft/s along the vessel wall.

i O

e 74 m

m

=>

LST Lumped Parameter Evaluation Model These competing effects re.sulted in a slight over-prediction in vessel pressure as shown in the table below (case 1) for Test 212.1 A.

To eliminate the competing effect due to velocity, only free convection is used to model heat and mass transfer inside the vessel. This conservatively biases the results toward a higher predicted vessel pressure. The resulting predicted vessel pressure is tabulated in the table below for Test 212.1 A (case 2).

Test 212.1 A Vessel Pressures Vessel Pressure (Psia) measured 24.9 case 1 26.1 case 2 28.7 7,;

Application of LST Distributed and L. umped Parameter Evaluation Model's Noding to AP600 Evaluation Models i

(WCAP-14382, Section 6.4J Discussion of Section 6.4 handout

~

1 1

5 9

e 7L.

~

f i

1 k

b 6.4 Application of LST Vessel Noding to Full Scale Plant Modeling The noding charactensdes of U1e WGOTHIC LST distnbuted and lumped parameter evaluauon models prodde guidance for setung up the full scale'AP600 plant evaluation models.

6.4.1 Noding of the AP600 Distributed Parameter Evaluation Model The AP600 distnbuted parameter evaluadon model should have the following charactenstics consistent with the LST distnbuted parameter evaluadon model:

The LST analysis was based on a 1/2-symmetry model in order to decrease the mn dme; however, the endre AP600 will be modeled as full symmetry to account for the asymmetric plant layout.

The contlinment should be modeled by coupling distributed parameter above deck and lumped 4

l l

parameter below deck.

The upcomer downcomer, and chimney should be modeled using the lumped parameter formuladon of the code.

The elevation, radial, and uimuthat nodauzation should contspond with the LST distnbuted parameter evaluation moiel.

There should be the same number of elevations in the LST model and the AP600 mo upper dome should be modeled as a cylinder similar to the I ST model. The AP600 elevatio be de6ned by passing lines thmugh the same geometncallocanons as the LST model when possi The followins guidance is siven to determine elevasion hanadaries:

g 7

~.

l l

l E

l i

i I

i l

REvtslos: 0 l

capeam20a.cos..,f:lkosm5 6-6

1

!l (F4 The following should be used to determine the radial divisions for the AP600 model:

F

^A;

.c L

The following guidance is given for determining the azimuthal divisions in the AP600 distributed parameter evaluation model. For this discussion, the break is located at approximately the ISO degree 1

azimuthal location.

The asymmetry of plant must be accommodated in determining the azimushal boundaries, Since the entire vessel is modeled, the AP600 model will have approximasely twice the number of azimuthal locations of the LST model:

" kC) l i

612 Noding of the AMOS Lussped Parameter Evaluation Modal The AP600 lumped pur.r;n evaluation model should have the following characteristics:

The c0r.tainment vessel should be modeled using lumped parameter volumes.

The upcomer, downcomer, and chimney should be modeled using the lumped parameter formulation of the code.

SS REVIStoN: 0

)

JK The elevation. radial, and azimuthal nodalization should correspond with the LST lumped l

l parameter evaluation model.

l The same number of elevations in the LST fumped parameter model should be used in the AP600 l

lumped parameter model. The following AP600 lumped parameter elevation boundanes are recommended:

(

1"

[

1" l

(

j" i

[

1" l

[

1" 1"

l

[

The plan view of the modet between the operadng deck and the crane rail should look very similar to

'the LST lumped parameter model. There should be i.. '" radial rings and their boundary l

determmation should use the same basis as the LST lumped parameter model:

[

1" l

[

. ]"

l

(

l 1"

l l

l From the crane rail to the top of the vessel ' al" radial rings should be in the AP600 lumped oarameter model. ('

1" l

l Between the operating dock and the top of the vessel there should be b. 1" azimuthal sections.

Determmation of the azimuchal divisions for the AP600 should use the same basis as the LST lumped parameter tzdA (

}u i

1

-G c.0 REvistoN: 0 a

ML20116F453

Contents

Text

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Quay:

.

Navigation menu

ML20116F453

Text

SUBJECT:

Dear Mr. Quay:

.

Navigation menu

Search