ML20127L622
| ML20127L622 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 09/30/1984 |
| From: | WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES, LTD. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127L594 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8506280074 | |
| Download: ML20127L622 (80) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:# >s ,, . g WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. h gg pg
?
I j EORGIA POWER COMPANY FINAL REPORT HYDRAULIC MODEL STUDIES ALVIN W. VOGTLE NUCLEAR PLANT CONTAINMENT SUMP ECCS RECIRCULATION INTAKES FOR BECHTEL POWER CORPORATION i LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA BY WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. PORT COQUITLAM, B.C. SEPTEMBER, 1984 730II 1 8506280074 850326 PDR E ADOCK 05000424 pyg
e
* . '4 WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD I.
TABLE OF CONTENTS t Pooe No. l
- l. PURPOSE OF STUDY 2
- 2. INTRODUCTION 4
- 3.
SUMMARY
Ato CONCLUSIONS 6
- 4. DESCRIPTION OF CONTAINMENT SUMPS Ato INTAKES 6
4.1 General Flow Paths And Velocities 7 4.2 9 S. FACTORS AFFECTING ECCS RECIRCULATION PUMP PERFORMANCE Regulatory Guide No. l.82 Requirements 9 S.I S.2 Factors Cousing Increased Entrance I - 9 Factors Affecting Vortex Formation - 10 5.3 RATIONALE FOR MODEL COtFIGURATION AND TEST PROGRAM 12 6. i 6.1 Model Scale 12 6.2 Rotionale For Model Boundary Selection 12 6.3 Selection Of Single intake And Sump For Testing 15 TEST FACILITY 17 7. 7.1 General 17 7.2 Intake Description 17 7.3 Screen Blockage 18 7.4 Test Observations 18 7.S Test Measurements 19 7.6 1:7 Scale Model of Containment Floor 19
- 8. TEST PROGRAM 21 i
8.1 Objectives , 2I 8.2 Comparison Of Test Conditions With Plant Conditions 21 l ' l t dwm m.t Wir .. g-_- =* * + , _ erg - " 9e- wSm, egew*w==~*=m* _
*~ e-
I, ' ' '; WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD l TABLE OF CONTENTS
! Pooe No.
23 8.3 Determination Of Circulation knbers l 24 8.4 I:I Scale Model Test Proyan Tests With Free Serface Above intoke 24 8.4.1 Test With Groting Coge 24 8.4.2 Test With Trashrock And Groting Cages 24 8.4.3 Tests With Ambient Water Temperatures 25 8.4.4 . Trash Rock and Screen Blockage Tests 25 8.4.5 Augmented Flow Test 25 8.4.6 25 8.5 Test Procedure 27
- 9. TEST RESULTS 27 9.1 Phasei General 27 9.l.1 4 Unprotected intake 28 9.l.2 .
Intake with Grating Cage 28 9.1.3 , Intoke with 'Groting and Trashrock Screen Cages 29 9.1.4 Summary of Intake Head Loss 30 9.l.5 Phase II - Tests with Treieck-Screen Coge Blockage 31 9.2 31 9.2.1 General Experimental Blockage Tests without Grating Coge 31 9.2.2 Experimental Blockage Tests with Groting Cage 32 9.2.3 Augmented Discharge 33 9.2.4 34 9.3 Discussions of Test Results Vortex Action 34 9.3.1 Head Losses 34 9.3.2 l Reproducibility and Accuracy 35 l 9.4 l I l ! I u ., __ _
l
- WESTERN CANADA HYDR AULIC LABORATORIES LTD 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLES LIST OF SELECTED REFERENCES i FIGURES APPEFOlX A -SUPPORTNE TESTS l
I i i I. 6 4
-.n-,.-_- e--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - ~ - -
. O h' * ,* WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD.
e i LIST OF TABLES I.
SUMMARY
OF CIRCULATION
- 2. TEST PROGRAM
- 3. TEST RESULTS I
i I i I . t i 4 l 9 C. 1 1 I i . . -- :- . ~~,.m.- .. , __
l
', WESTERN CANADA HYDR AULfC LABORATORIES LTD LIST OF FIGURES I
I
- 1. PLAN OF CONTAINMENT FLOOR I
l 2. INTAKE SECTION
- 3. GRATING CAGE
- 4. TRASH RACK - SCREEN CAGE
, S. FLOW PATHS FOR TRAIN A OPERATION ONLY i
- 6. FLOW PATHS FOR TRAIN B OPERATION ONLY i 7. FLOW PATHS FOR TWO TRAIN OPERATION
- 8. PLAN OF TEST FACILITY
- 9. SECTION OF TEST FACILITY
- 10. INTAKE ASSEMBLY AND GUIDE VANES _
i1. FLOW DISTRIBUTION AND CONTROL
- 12. GRATING CAGE OUTSIDE MODEL j
- 13. TRASH RACK - SCREEN CAGE OUTSIDE MODEL
, 14. TRASH RACK BLOCKAGE SCHEME IS. BLOCKAGE CONFIGURATIONS STUDIED (1) ;
- 16. BLOCKAGE CONFIGURATIONS STUDIED (11)
- 17. BLOCKAGE CONFIGURATIONS STUDIED (Ill)
- 18. AIR CORE VORTEX ENTERING OPEN INTAKE i
- 19. SURFACE VORTEX ELIMINATION BY TRASH RACK - SCREEN AND l
GRATING CAGES l
- 20. INTERNAL VORTEX ELIMINATION BY GRATING CAGE [
l 9 l v l
[ ' ~- : WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. 1; l
- 1. PURPOSE OF STUDY l
The purpose of the hydroulic model studie: was to demonstrate that the ECCS sumps of the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant would not be subject to degrading hydraulic effects such as high intoke beod losses and/or vortex action which could lead to air ingestion. i f 1 I
=
a c i
"' ~ *-' ~ ~ ym m e , .._e-
- y,, , . . , .
- WESTERM CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD.
1 :
, 2. INTRODUCTION The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Regulatory Guide 1.79 Rev. l (Sept 1975) states the position that,"A comprehensive preoperational test program on the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) and its components should be performed to l i provide assurance that the ECCS will accomplish its intended function when required".
Furthermore, "the (preoperational) testing should include taking suction from the sump : I
; to verify vortex control and acceptable pressure drops across screening and suction lines and volves". And, "the testing should verify that the available net positive i suction head is greater than that required at occident i-mperoWres".
A satisfactory in-plant test of the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant containment sumps is not feasible due to logistical problems of flooding the containment and the lock of occess to the sump for observation to ensure proper vortex control. The alternative, os presented in this report, is to construct and test a model
! of one sump and intoke os on integral part of the required preoperational tests,-to verify vortex control and to determine the head loss ossociated with the trash rock -
I screen coge, the grating coge and the pipe inlet, including o 90 elbow and approximately 3 ft of intake pipe. The remainder of the ECCS system is to be tested in situ. l Tests for the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant recirculating intokes were corried out in a 1:1 scale model of a single 14 in diameter intoke and its containment > sump and associated trash rock-screen and grating coge structures at a water temperature of 155 F, equal to the post LOCA water temperature which was anticipated at the time of the study, with flow rates greater than maximum postulated values and at water depths equal to the minimum postulated levels. Flow circulation, greater than that measured for the most unfavorable prototype operating conditions in a previously examined I:7 scale model of the entire containment floor oreo, Table 1, was induced in the containment sump oreo. The containment geometry external to the trosh rock-screen coge was not modelled. Model tests undertaken for the Davis Besse, J.M. Forley, ANO-2, Midland and Son Onofre Nuclear Plants have demonstrated the offectiveness of grating in prevent-ing the development of odverse flow conditions which could leod to degrading effects 1 . [..____ ,,..
- g. .-- . - .. -_ . .. - - , , _ _
3 l'*,,
- WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD l
on pump performance. The efficacy for o similar grating coge over the Alvin W. l- Vogtle recirculating intake pipes was demonstrated during these tests. The rationale for the test program is presented in this report together with a description of the intakes, o discussion of effects which could degrade pump I performance, o description of the experimental facilities, test results and cm.ciusions. Subsequent to these tests, o revised maximum water temperature of 254 F has been postulated for the recirculating mode following a LOCA. This report was revised in September 1984 to compare the model test results with those conditions which would develop at the higher water temperature. The conservative test progrcm used in the model studies was found to cover the revised range of postulated operating Reynolds number conditions. I i
- r . _7_. . - .
~
WESTER % CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. f '. ' '
- 3.
SUMMARY
AfO CONCLUSIONS 3.1 The recirculation intokes for the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant were tested using a 1:1 scale model of a single intoke and pump. The intoke was tested for the following conditions: I i Postulated Following Tested Plant LOCA Minimum Water Depth above intake, it 2.67 2.67
. Maximum flow, gpm 4500 8272 Wcter Temperature, F 254 155 Circulation at 5 ft, ft 2/sec 5.3 5.6 6 6 Intake pipe Reynolds Number 4.37 x 10 2.46 to 4.52 x 10 Blockage of Screen oreo, percent 0 - 50 0 - 90 Conservctism was incorporated into the test program by imposing flow conditions on the model that were potentially more degrading on intoke performance than any conditions postulated for the plant.
l 3.2 The results of the tests on the single sump are opplicable to all four sumps and intokes because of their similar geometry and depths of submergence. Intoke I flows examined in the study were equal to or greater than the maximum postulated flows for all intakes. The range of flow conditions imposed on the sump exceeded all postulated conditions for any intoke following a LOCA and were more conducive to vortex formation and high intoke losses than any minor difference in geometry or opprooch flow conditions to be experienced at the plant. 3.3 The tests showed that without the grating coge in ploce, internal vortices
' could be generated from the walls and floor of the sump and the ceiling of the trash
! rock-screen cage by simulating trosh rock blockages in excess of 72 percent. No 1. l ; vortices developed at any of the tested blockage conditions when the intoke was protected by the grating coge. l l, ' l; 1 th
..-~,- _ _ _ . . .
~. .
- WESTERN CAMADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD 5 l
, 3.4 A maximum trosh rock-screen coge loss coefficient of 15.5 was measured 6
with 81 percent blockage conditions at a Reynolds number of 4.52 x 10 and intoke flow of 8272 gpm, Blockage ElI, Figure 17. 3.5 The maximum intoke loss coefficient measured for a 14 in, dicmeter RHR I intake with the trosh rock-screen and grating coges in place was 0.89 during tests with i 81 percent trosh rock-screen cage blockage, Blockage ElI, Figure 17. 3.6 The obove coefficients yield a maximum combined loss for a 50 percent trosh rock-screen coge, grating coge and intoke, including elbow and 3 ft pipe length, of 1.5
- f t for the maximum postulated RHR flow of 4500 gpm.
3.7 The maximum trash rock - screen cage grating cage and intoke loss of 1.5 ft leaves NP5H of 33.8 ft and 32.0 ft available of the RHR A and RHR B pumps respectively. These are 13.8 ft and 12.0 ft in excess of the 20.0 ft NP5H required for , normo! operation of the pumps. l 3.8 The spray pumps will draw a maximum of 2600 gpm through 12 in. diameter intokes. The maximum head losses through these intokes will be lower than the maximum losses through the RHR intakes due to the lower intoke velocities. The available NPSH of the spray pumps will be greater than 33.8 ft and will be considerably in excess of the 15 f t NP5H required for normal operation of the pumps. 3.9 The grating cage by itself, Figure 3, was sufficient to preclude formation of , cir-entraining vortices under circulation strengths and intoke discharges larger than postulated for the plant. 3.10 The effectiveness of the grating cage in providing vortex control could be
- demonstrated repeatedly.
C i e
f*' *, WESTERN CANADA MVDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD g t i
, 4. DESCRIPTION OF CONTAINMENT SUMPS AfO INTAKES f
i 4.1 General The Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant contains a total of four intakes for two 'I independently operated containment ECCS recirculating systems. The intokes are located in the southeast to west sector of the containment structure between the containment wall and the secondary shield wall, Figure 1. Intoke locations were 'l i determ'ned during a 1:7 scale hydraulic model study of flow conditions over the entire outer floor crea between the containment and secondary shield walls. The selected I locations minimized the possibility of debris being corried to the intokes and produced 1 the raost suitable intoke approach flow conditions consistent with structural and occess limitations. The Residual Heat Removal (RHR) pumps in the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant will withdraw 4500 USgpm during single train operation and 3550 gpm per pump during two train operation through 14 in. diameter intoke pipes. The containment spray sump (CSS) pumps will each withdraw 2600 USgpm through 12 in. diameter intake pipes during either single or two train operation. Each intake rises vertically to el 170.58 ft through the floor of a 4.33 ft square sump. The intoke pipes are ringed at their upper end by a 150 psi raised face weld-on flange. The top face of the flonges are 9 in. above the sump floors. The sump floors are constructed to el 169.83 ft and the containment floor is at el 171.75 ft. A 3 ft outside diameter octogonal grating cage of I-l/4 in by 3/16 in. steel bars set on 1-3/16 in. centres covers each intoke, Figure 2. The grating coges are 2 ft high with a grating floor at a height of 3 in. above the sump floors. Openings of 19 in. diameter, centrally located in the grating floor, permit the grating cages to be placed symmetrically over the vertical intake pipe, Figure 3. g Debris is prevented from reaching the intakes by 5 ft square trosh rock and screen coges surrounding the sumps. The coges are composed of two loyers of I-l/4 in. by 3/16 in. grating bars spaced vertically on 1-3/16 in. centres with wire cloth having 0.12 in. opening width sondwiched between, Figure 4. The bottom of the screen i 7... , - . . . - - __ ,,
. 7 WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD.
i cages are closed by a 6 in high by 1/4 in, thick solid steel plate. In the initial design phase of the project,,the top of the trosh rock-screen coge, el 174.08 ft, was to be closed with a solid cover plate over a centrol 5 ft long by 3 f t wide strip. The trosh rock-screen coge design allowed possoge of flow through I ft wide by S ft long areas along two opposite sides of the cage top, Figure 4. Subsequent to completion of this test program, the top of the trosh rock-screen coge was modified to o completely closed design. The minimum water level postulated in the reactor building following a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) is el 174.42 ft and the maximum level is el 181.25 ft. These correspond to minimum and maximum depths of submergence over the intakes of 3.84 ft and 10.67 f t respectively. The maximum postulated sump water temperature is 254'F during the recirc- l ulation mode. I 4.2 Flow Poths And Veloc.ities The postulated ECCS pump discharges are os follows for single and/or two train operation. Single Train Operatien Two Train Operation Pump Discharge,gpm intoke Velocity, Discharge,gpm Intake Velocity fps fps RHR A 4500 10.09 3550 7.96 Spray A 2600 7.38 2600 7.38 ( RHRB 4500 10.09 3550 7.96 Spray B 2600 7.38 2600 7.38 i ')
' ' ,' - ~ ~ ~ =
-o. _
m ~ *~ wm.pw enew oomm ~ ~ r
O
', WESTERN CANADA HVDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD.
f ', These discharges had been examined in the previously undertaken 1:7 scale model at both minimum and maximum operating water levels to determine the flow conditions leading to the intokes. The 1:7 model had shown that flow velocities opprooching the intakes were higher when the system was operated at low water level, with a water depth of 2.67 l ft, than when operated at higher water level with a flow depth of 5.33 f t. Flow paths to the intakes observed during the I:7 scale hydraulic model study for both single and two train operation at low water level are shown on Figures 5,6 and 7. These show that the maximum velocity measured around the trash rock-screen coges was 0.50 fps noted at RHR intoke A during two train operation. A maximum velocity of 0.49 fps I was measured at RHR intoke B during single train operation only. Flow velocities around RHR and Spray intakes A were subsequently measured on the I:7 scale model during single train operation to determine the magnitude of circulation which would develop around the intakes following a LOCA, Table 1. I
i
- j '
WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD I 5. FACTORS AFFECTING ECCS RECIRCULATION PUMP PERFORMANCE 5.1 Regulatory Guide No. l.82 Rev. O June 1974 Requirements Regulatory Guide 1.82 states the position that " Pump intoke locations in the sump should be carefully considered to prevent degrading effects such as vortexing on the pump performance". Two degrading actions are possible; ingestion of air ond/or i intoke entrance losses which con leod to the available NPSH of the pumps being less than required. i 5.2 Factors Cousing increased Entrance Losses intoke head losses are normally accounted for in the design of a pumping system by calculating the entrance loss based on published intoke loss coefficients for o porticular intake configuration. Such coefficients are normally based upon measure-ments taken with near ideal approach flow conditions. Intake head losses may be increased above design values by adverse flow conditions in the immediate vicinity of the intake, such as:
- a. increased opproach velocities,
- b. osymmetric approach flow,
- c. separated flow,
- d. strong circulation The highest intake flow velocities and highest intake head losses for the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant ECCS system will be incurred during 4500 gpm discharge through the RHR sump intokes during single train operation. Intake losses, including losses through the grating and trosh rock-screen coges were calculated for this operating condition as 1.3 ft using on intoke loss coefficient of 0.78, the maximum value os determined for o vertically upwards pointing intake pipe, plus bend and short length of straight pipe, in 1:1 scale hydraulic model studies for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant. A maximum intake loss of this magnitude would be relctively small compared to the total system heod losses calculated by Bechtel Power Corporation of opproximately 16.2 f t and 18.0 f t for the two RHR sumps, including the effects of pipe length, volves and bends on the suction side of the pumps.
I WESTERN CANADA HVDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD 10 [ * *. , i Based on the above 16.2 ft total suction system head loss, Bechtel Power 3 Corporation has calculated on available NPSH of 33.8 ft and 32.0 f t at the RHR pumps A and B respectively. Bechtel Power Corporation odvises that the NPSH required for the RHR pumps is 20 ft and that required for the spray pumps is 15 ft. 5.3 Factors Affecting Vortex Formation Strong circulation in the approoch flow con lead to vortex formation at the intoke with a marked reduction in flow and possibly air ingestion ic.to the intoke. I Studies of vortex formation have been conducted by several investigators, see l list of selected references. The majority present test results os functions of: the intake head loss coefficient; the depth of water over the intake; the circulation i number of the flow approact.ing the intoke; the Reynolds Number; or some combino-tion of the above parameters. The performance of an intoke, os representea by the head loss coefficient K l is usually described (Anwar (1968), Amphlett (1976), Chong (1976) as: K = f (local geometry, r max, R R ' IN' W) where: Local Geometry = f (D, h, b) i 20 RR = Radial Reynolds No. = g Df fN = Circulation No. = 7 W = Weber No. = 0 h D u2"0 D r max = r dius of the tank (or sump in which the intake is located or maximum radius of circulation in the vicinity of the intoke) D = intake diameter I h = depth of submergence of intoke b = height of intoke above sump floor O = discharge i f = circulation strength = 2n V,r V, = tangential velocity 1 i i i t I
2
's .. t9ESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABOR ATORIES LTD.
f* gg r = radial distance v = kinemotic viscosity of water p = density of water 0 = surface tension of water Work by Dogget and Keulegon (1974) and others have shown that for high l 4 2 2), radial Reynolds number (RR 210 ) and moderate values of circulation ( fN typical operating ranges for the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant recirculation intakes, the effects of surface tension and viscosity are relatively small, i.e. W and RR "i important. In this case, the intake performance, and hence the formation of vortices, is a function of three parameters: the local geometry, the maximum circulation radius, and the strength of circulation of the opproaching flow. These factors are discussed in the following section and were accounted for in the test program and procedure for the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant recirculation j intoke tests. l i q-i_. L ._ _.- - _ _ _ . _ . _ ...
(2 f*$ .' WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD l
- 6. RATIONALE FOR MODEL COtFIGURATION APO TEST PROGRAM 6.1 Model Scale It had been found in previous studies for the Davis Besse Nuclear Generating Station that the vortex formation process cannot be readily modelled at scales below l
1:1. A 1:1 model using water of up to 155 F was selected for this study. The I:I model was chosen to minimize scale effects in modelling vortex flows and to properly simulate the screen hydrodynamics. The water temperature of 155 F, equal to the maximum water temperature then postulated for the recirculating mode following a LOCA, was used to achieve the expected prototype water viscosity and Reynolds numbers at prototype flow rates. This was important in predictably modelling the effects of the trash rock-screen coge, grating coge, and trosh rock blockage on flow to the intake, and in determining the prototype trash rock and intoke head losses. Subsequent to these tests, a revised maximum water temperature of 254 F has been postulated for the recirculating mode following a LOCA. The range of Reynolds numbers which would be developed at the higher water temperature was covered in the test program conducted at 155 F by conducting tests with substantially ougmented dischorge rates. 6.2 Rationale for Model Boundary Selection in section 5.2, the anticipated magnitude of the intake head loss was discussed. Intoke head losses are mainly a function of overage flow velocities, circulation and non-uniform flow in the vicinity of the intoke. Thus to successfully model intoke losses, for-field conditions must be duplicated only so for as they influence near-field flow. Tests on ECCS sumps for the J.M. Farley Unit 2, Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 and Son Onofre Units 2 and 3 generating stations had shown that trash rocks acted as flow straighteners for the range of opprooch velocities postulated for each plant during post LOCA conditions. This conclusion had been based on observation of flow I exiting perpendicularly to the plor'e of the trash rock irrespective of flow conditions in l : (.
--~ _ _ - . _
- a- / WESTERM CAN ADA NYDR AULIC LABOR ATORIES LTD. l3 i
the for field. Tests during the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2,1:1 scale ECCS studies, Appendix A, had shown that a single layer of I-l/2 in. by 3/16 in. grating at I-3/16 in. centers octed as a flow straightener for opproach velocities up to 1.5 fps at angles up to 60 off the normal to the grating. The flow straightening property of trosh rock grating had been photographically recorded during supportive studies for Son Onofre f Units 2 and 3 using opproach flow velocities up to 0.50 fps and a single depth grating i of 2-1/4 in. by 3/16 in. of I-3/16 in. center to center spacing, Appendix A. t The moxin um opprooch flow velocities of up to 0.50 fps in the Alvin W.
- Vogtle Nuclear Plant were similar to those of 0.49 to 0.53 fps used in the studies for Joseph M. Farley Units I and 2 respectively and to the 0.50 fps used in the Son Onofre
} Units 2 and 3 Supportive tests and were less than the 1.5 fps examined for Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2. The 3-3/4 in. total depth of double trosh rock grating and screen cage was equal to that used to straighten flow for the Joseph M. Forley Units I and 2 9
recirculating sumps and was greater than both the single depth of 2-1/4 in. grating i used in the Son Onofre Units 2 and 3 supportive tests and the 1-l/2 in. grati.ng examined in the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 supportive tests. l The flow straightening capabilities of the Alvin W. Vogtle trosh rocks are therefore considered equal to those used for the Joseph M. Farley Units I and 2 frosh rocks and better than those demonsrated photographically in the Son Onofre Units I and 2 and Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 supportive tests. The direction of the flow entering the sump therefore is uncoupled from effects caused by containment geometry, structural members, and piping external tc the trosh rock. For field conditions may influence intake head losses by inducing non-uniform conditions in the approach flow and cousing unequal velocity distribution across the open oreo of the trosh rock. Flow through the containment with the trosh rock in the unblocked condition will produce a unique trosh rock velocity distribution. Blockage of
- the trosh rock con produce on infinite number of other velocity distributions many of which might produce more adverse conditions in the sump relative to inlet losses than
- the unblocked condition. This assertion is born out by previous studies performed for Davis Besse and Joseph M. Forley Unit I whose containment was modelled to simulate for-field conditions.
- WESTERM CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD g Rother than model the containment areo, o test program (see Section 8) involving rationally chosen blockoge conditions was adopted as the most oppropriate technique to confirm effective vortex control and acceptable intoke beod losses. The test program included the following goals:
- a. to experimentally develop opprooch flow velocity distributions pro-ducing the most adverse flow conditions in the vicinity of the intoke relative to vortex potential and high inlet head losses.
- b. to choose blockage conditions which produce velocity distributions of on odverse nature and which con be hypothesized as realistic with I respect to simulating blockage produced by positively buoyant, neutrally buoyant, and negatively buoyant material,
- c. to demonstrate that the adopted intake design provided complete vortex control and .
. d. to measure octual intake head losses during the worst conditions ! determined in (o.) and (b.) above.
Following consideration of the following factors:
- a. the impossibility of testing every conceivable velocity distribution
- b. the ficw straightening property of the trash rock and
- c. the adoption of a test program which investigated velocity distribu-tions of the most adverse nature,
' the containment crea was not modelled nor was any attempt made to simulate aproach flow conditions. Test results and documentation justifying this approach are discussed in Appendix A. }
h
? .
l ' ** ? WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD' 15 l 6.3 Selection of Single intake and Sump for Testing I , Eoch intoke for the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant is located singly in similar sized containment sump wells. A single sump using a 14 in. diameter intake pipe was i modelled at a scale of 1:1. This was considered representative of all four sumps for the following reasons:
- a. the geometry and principal dimensions of the sumps are identical with respect to hydrodynamic similarity, i
5 b. the location and depths of submergence are identical for each sump, I
- c. the 12 in. diameter spray intakes draw a lower maximum flow per
' unit cross sectional creo than does the 14 in. RHR intake modelled.
- d. the maximum flow rate postulated for any of the possible intake operating conditions, producing the highest prototype Reynolds numbers and intake head loss was to be used for the test progam and
' the results of the tests applied to all other intakes,
- e. the geometry and dimensions of trash rocks, r,creen and grating cages covering the intokes will be identical for all sumps.
There are on infinite number of flow patterns that con occur following a LOCA depending on the location of the water source; the quantity of water delivered to each opening in the secondary shield wall; to whether single or two train operation is in effect; and to the blockage conditions which may occur in the containment area. As discussed in section 6.2, modelling selected opproach flow conditions might not lead to the most adverse velocity distributions through the trash rock. In light of this, tests I into the most detrimental operating conditions to o single sump were considered representative of the worst operating conditions which could be experienced at any of the ECCS sumps. An intake flow of 4500 gpm, corresponding to on RHR sump during i, single train operation, was selected for the test program. e !, -n - -~g,.-,. _ ,. _._ ,. - ..
'7 l *. . . WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABOR ATORIES LTD. g To ensure that the worst hydraulic conditions with respect to vortex ! formation and inlet head loss were being tested, the following steps were taken:
- c. the minimum postulated water level, producing the highest Reynolds nurnbers, maximum inlet losses and strongest vortical tendencies (Anwor, Weller and Amphlett (1977); Doggett and Keulegon (1974))
I were used in all tests.
-- i
- b. Intake discharges equal to or greater than the maximum postulated discharges for the worst operating conditions following a LOCA were used in all tests.
l
- c. the maximum water temperature of 155 F, producing the nwest kinematic water viscosity and therefore highest Reynolds number and greatest vortex tendency, postulated at the time of the study for the ECCS following a LOCA was used in all tests. intake conditions were verified using on ougmented discharge of 1.82 times the design flow which demonstrated satisfactory performance at higher Reynolds numbers than those which would be developed at
' the subsequently revised higher post LOCA water temperature of 254 F.
- d. flow-directing guide vones surrounding the model were used to gerierote a greater circulation in flow approaching the modelled intake than was measured in tests run on a 1:7 scale model around the RHR A and Spray A intokes at their maximum discharges of 4500 gpm and 2600 gpm respectively.
?
g m wa. ~e-.
c
'* i V/ESTERN CANAD% HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD l7 . 7. TEST FACLITY 7.1 General The test facility consisted of a 1:1 scale model of the intoke, elbow, sump, trosh rock-screen cage and grating coge surrounded by flow-directing vones, Figure 8.
{ Plan and section views of the experimental facility are shown in Figures 9 and 10. A source sump with diffuser, located at each end of a 60 ft by 25 ft by 12 ft high concrete tank, provided the opprooch flow to the intake creo. Flow was delivered
! to the concrete tank by two centrifugal pumps. The distribution of flow to each source sump was controlled by volves on the flow transmitting pipe network, Figure 11.
The direction and circulation of the flow into the intoke crea was controlled by a system of 18 in, wide directional vones, extending the full depth of flow, set in on 18.5 ft diameter circle about the intoke sump, Figure 10. The vones were used to generate o circulation strength greater than postulated for the prototype. The vones were not a model boundary. Two 2.5 million BTU /hr gas heaters were used to heat the water to temperatures of opproximately 155 F. 7.2 Intoke Description A 4 ft 6 in. long by 4 ft 6 in wide by I ft 11 in deep s;mp was formed to initially proposed sump dimensions of welded sheet steel with clear acrylic flooring to permit observation and lighting of the area inside the screen coge from viewing windows in the access tunnel, Figures 8,9 and 10. The 14 in. diameter intoke pipe was modelled exoctly including the 150 psi slip-on flange at its upper end. A 90 elbow was located 2 ft 8 in. below the face of the intoke. A steel grating coge, Figures 3 and Irt, encapsulated the intake of the g
. entrance of the intake pipe. The vertical sides of the grating coge were extended 3 in, n-- - . - - , - . - . - . --
w . __ _
' gg
".* WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD -
, downwards from the bottom horizontal grating as in the prototype to form o support footing for the structure to avoid undue forces on the intake pipe.
The sump assembly was enclosed by a steel trosh rock-screen cage with inside dimensions of 5 f t by 5 ft by 2 ft 5 in. depth, Figures 4 and 13. The model trosh rock-l screen coge had o i ft wide by 5 ft long grating and screen area open to the flow along two opposing sides of the cage top, Figures 4 and 16. Metal surfoces subject to corrosion were protected by point, while exposed I wood surfaces were fiberglassed. 7.3 Screen Blockage in order to simulate screen blockages by floating debris, neutrally buoyant debris, and sinking debris, the open area of the tro,h rock was partitioned into,10 segments os shown in Figures 16,17,18,19, and 20. Various blockage panels were fitted to the segments to simulate the desired blockage condition. Sizes of debris expected to block the trash rock following a LOCA vary. Large debris may block the I-3/16 in. grating while smaller debris may block either of
- the two screens. The blockage method employed in these tests directly simulated blockage of the 1-3/16 in. grating. This would closely opproximate blockage of the screen located at a distance of i 1/4 in, behind the grating bars, Figure 4 Any difference in head loss and/or flow conditions produced by blockage of the screen as j opposed to blockage of the grating bars in front of the screen would be inconsequen- f tial.
7.4 Test Observations Surface flow phenomeno were observed from two platform decks. One deck was set 5ft above the minimum postulated water level and extended around the entire intoke oreo; o second 4 f t wide platform was set 14 ft above the minimum postulated , .. water level and was centered over the intake area. Visual observation of surface flow phenomeno,35 mm photos and video records were taken from both decks; temperature and velocity measurements were taken from the lower deck. t , l I 4 9
!\
- i
~~
..~,_:'l, l ' , .. TT l L.- - , X .~ __, - . J :','. J. - - J. -
l l9 .l * '. - ? WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. Flow phenomena within the trash rock-screen cage could be observed and 4 recorded on video tape through the ocrylic cover plate and through portholes in the observation tunnel. Use was made of air bubbles injected into the trash rock-screen coge through the acrylic plastic floor for flow visualization. Surface and subsurface flow paths were documented using the motion of confetti as it was transported by flow into the intoke. Dyes were used sparingly to preserve water clarity. 7.5 Test Measurements Pipe intoke and trash rock-screen coge and grating coge losses were I determined from o total of eight piezometers, Figures 8 and i1. Piezometers I and 2 were located in the supply sumps and indicated the water surface elevation. Piezo-meter 3 consisted of two interconnected tops in the floor inside the trosh rock-screen coge to produce on overage pressure within the screen oreo. The mean static head indicated by piezometer 3 therefore gave on indication of screen losses when , compared to the mean water surface elevation from piezometers I and 2. Piezometer 4 consisted of two interconnected tops in the floor inside the trosh rock-screen cage L near the intake below the grating cage. Two inter-connected tops each on the horizontal diameter determined the overage piezometric head inside the intake pipe at each of four locations, tops 5, 6, 7 and 8, at distances of 5.33,13.33,21.33 and 30.22 pipe diameters downstream of the intoke. These piezometers when compared with each other and with piezometer 4 permitted the determination of the friction factor for the intake pipe and the incke loss coefficient respectively. Flow measurements were obtained with calibrated orifices and U-tube monometers. Flow velocities were measured with o i in. diameter propeller meter. 7.6 1:7 Scale Model of Containment Floor Measurements were made os port of this study to determine circulation strengths which would occur around the intokes during post-LOCA conditions. The measurements were mode using on existing 1:7 scale model of the containment floor area at el 171.75 ft which had previously been used to assess and improve flow conditions to the intakes. Layout, construction and flow control techniques for the I:7
- 8'* ' f -**y e-, ._
-g w+vy-,-,,,y-
i.*' ' .* WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD 3 scale model are described in the report titled " Final Report, Hydraulic Model Studies of Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, Flow Conditions to Containment Emergency Sumps", dated September,1984. Flow velocities on the I:7 scale facility were measured with o I in. diameter propeller meter. I i
,rs- % 3_. _ ,,..;-. _
r
'- ? WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. pg
. 8. TEST PROGRAM 8.1 Objective The objective of the test program was to demonstrate that the Alvin W.
Vogtle Nuclear Plant ECCS intokes will not be subjected to degrading effects on pump Jerformance such as air ingestion or high intoke head losses.
'I i The objective was ochieved through the 611owing test program steps:
- i. documenting the effectiveness oi the grating coge over the intcke in straightening approach flow and removing imposed circulation which, without the grating present, produced a strong air-entraining vortex, i
li. documenting the effectiveness of the grating coge in straightening flow to the intake and eliminating vortex oction which had been created inside the trosh rock and screen coge by blockage conditions exceeding 50 percent of the trosh rock creo, iii. demonstrating the conservatism in the grating cage and intake design to prevent the formation of air or vapour core vortices from opproaching the intoke by repeating the design tests, iv. directly measuring on a full scale model the head losses incurred by the trash rock, grating cage and intoke during maximum postulated flow conditions to any sump with zero percent and with more than 50 percent blockage of the trosh rock surfoce creo. 8.2 Comparison Of Test Conditions With Plant Conditions I' The conditions for which the intoke was tested are compared below to the ! , latest plant design porometers. I t i i l i o
-~- -~~- . n. . . _ . . . . .
= ~ = r. , _
- .. J
WESTERN CANADA HVDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. 22 Postulated Post LOCA Conditions I Single Train Two Train Conditions Operation Operation Tested 1
- Spray RHR Spray RHR Minimum Water Depth, in. 20 20 20 20 20 l
Maximum Intake Flow, gpm 2600 4500 2600 3550 4500 - 8270 Water Temperature F 254 254 254 254 155 j Circulotion at 5 ft, ft2/sec 5.3 5.1 - - 5.6 S Intake Reynolds No. 2.5 4.37 2.52 3.44 2.5 x IO
*6 *6 *4 ' 6 x6 10 10 4.5 x 10 10 10
% Blockage of Screen Area 0 - 50 0 - 50 0 - 50 0 - 50 0 - 90
)
Conservatism was therefore incorporated into the test program by imposing flow conditions in the model which were generally potentially more degrading to intoke performance than conditions postulated for the plant. This was achieved by:
- i. conducting tests at maximum and/or obove-maximum flow rates for i oil intokes, ii. conducting tests at the minimum portulated water level, iii. conducting tests with a circulation greater than that measured near the RHR A or.d Spray A intakes during maximum discharges of 4500 gpm and 2600 gpm during single-train operating conditions on a 1:7 scale model, iv. conducting tests at maximum and/or above-maximum Reynolds numbers for all intokes.
9 9 W.M
" * - w
* '. WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. 23
,{ ,
4 8.3 Determination Of Circulation Numbers 1 Circulation strength around the RHR A and Spray A intakes during single Il , r train discharges of 4500 gpm and 2600 gpm respectively were determined on on existing 1:7 scale model.
. I i
Single train operation was selected for these observations in order to minimize momentum effects of strong flow streams, which were shown to develop around the model walls during two train operation in the previously completed I:7 scale study, from the measurement of angular velocities induced around the intakes by l! pump discharges and in order to develop the maximum discharge of 4500 gpm , ! postulated for any intoke during post-LOCA conditions. Train A was selected as ' having slightly more symmetrical flow conditions around the intokes during single train operation than did train B, Figures 5 and 6. The intoke openings in the 1:7 scale model had been left uncovered without grating or trosh rock-screen coges during measurements. The flow depth in the model ! had been set to 2.67 ft. As flow was not concentric oround the intokes, measurements i had been mode of tangential velocities at mid-depth along four perpendicular rodii at distances of 1.0,2.0,3.0,4.0 and 5.0 ft from the centre of the intakes. The rodii had been oligned from the Spray A intoke in the north-south and east-west directions and from the RHR A intoke at N50'E, S40 E, S50 W and N40 W. Circulation strengths calculated from these measurements are given in Table 1. The guide vones around the 1:1 scale model were odjusted to produce the visually largest air-core vortex over the intake obtainable under the test conditions. Tongential flow velocities were measured radially outwards at distances of 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0 ft from the centre of the intake during a discharge of 4500 gpm. Measurements were mode at heights of 0.5,1.5 and 2.5 ft above the containment floor and the overage values used to determine circulation strengths around the intake, T able 1. Measurements were mode with on uncovered intake, with the grating cage f only over the intoke and with the grating coge plus trosh rock-screen cage over the intoke to confirm that circulation in the model was('as strong as or stronger than would occur under similar flow conditions in prototype. f l- - - - - - . _ - - - . . _ _ , _ , _ - . _
! . '. . , . WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD 24 i
The overage tangential velocity components measured at 5.0 ft distance from the uncovered intake were opproximately 35 percent to 50 percent of the maximum total flow velocities, which included a direct velocity component of flow towards the intokes, determined at selected points during single train operation in the I:7 scale study. Higher maximum total velocities had been recorded in the 1:7 scale study flowing non-symmetrically near the intakes during two train operation then during single train operation. However, these velocities, associated with RHR and Spray f intoke flows of 3550 and 2600 gpm respectively, hcd included flow momentum effects derived from flow constrictions remote from the intakes and did not describe circulation induced near to the intakes by the pump discharges. 8.4 1:1 Scale Model Test Program The test conditions and sequence conducted with the 1:1 scale facility during the study are given in Table 11. 8.4.1 Tests With Free Surface Above intake Test G was run with a free air surface above the intake and water heated to 155 F to create on air-core vortex when there was no grating cage or trosh rock cage over the intake. The guide vones were adjusted to develop the visually largest cir-core vortex possible under the test conditions in the model, Figures 18 and 19A. The vone positions were recorded and fixed for subsequent testing. 8.4.2 Test With Grotina Coge Following Test G, the grating cage was installed over the intake and test H run under identical operating conditions to demonstrate the vortex eliminating capabilities of the grating coge. Test H was run twice to confirm reliability of intoke loss coefficient measurements. 8.4.3 Test With Trashrock And Gratino Coces Following Test H, the trosh rock and screen cage was installed over the sump and Test I was run with conditions identical to Tests G and H to further demonstrate that vortex action would not develop of the intake due to circulation outside the screen coge.
~
l j
25 l ' ,* WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. ? 8.4.4 Tests With Ambient Water Temperatures Tests B, C and D were run with similar test conditions to Tests G, H and I h respectively but with the recirculating water at ombient temperature. Velocity profiles and documentation of surface flow conditions were corried out by video ond/or photography without interference by vapour rising from the water surfoce. 8.4.5 Trash Rock and Screen Blockooe Tests Test E was run on on iteritive basis without the grating cage to develop trash j rock blockage conditions which produced roof, wall and floor vortices in the sump with a water temperature of 155 F. 6 i The worst conditions for vortex formation were then re-examined in Test F with the grating coge installed to demonstrate its effectiveness in eliminating all vortex oction from the intoke. 8.4.6 Augmented Flow Test Test J was run to demonstrate the degree of conservatism against vortex oction inherent in the intoke design. The effectiveness of the grating cage in preventing vortex action was again demonstrated with the most unfavourable blockage conditions determined in Test E with a flow rate of 1.82 times the maximum intoke discharge and Reynolds numbers greater than maximum values postulated to occur in the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant following o LOCA. 8.5 Test Procedure
.; The procedure used in establishing test conditions in the model during the study was as follows:
e I The relevant sump elements such as trosh rock, blockage configuro-tion and grating cage were placed in position. The water in the tank was heated to the desired temperature. The pumps were started, monometers and piezometers bled, and the model intake flow set using control .gote volves and
~
*' ' ? WN6
- M N99 & *NF* i * * - ' *
! * * ' ,' ' WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD- 26 pressure readings taken across Orifice meters No. I and 2, Figure i1. Flow was allowed'to stabilize before the required measurements were taken from the pipe piezometer tops and flow observations were mode and recorded.
The intoke loss coefficient was calculated from the piezometer e l readings using the following equation: H44 -hg -V 2/2g Intoke Loss Coefficient K= V2/2g j where K = loss coefficient including intake, 90 bend and 3 ft of straight pipe. H4-8 = difference in piezometric head between top 4, located in the sump and top 8, located 30.22 pipe diameters downstream of the intoke pipe entrance, ft. V = cverage flow velocity in pipe, fps. h = pipe friction loss from intoke entrance to top 8, f based on a friction factor of f = 0.012, for steel 6 pipe at a Reynolds number of 4.5 x 10 , and o
' length of 30.22 pipe diameters.
I i e 4 i* i _ _ , . . . ,_
= - - -- - -~ _, _ ._. _ _ _ . . _ , _ _ _
*' # WESTERN CANADA HYORAULIC LABORATORIES LTD.
9.0 TEST RESULTS 9.1 Phase 1 9.l.1 General It should be restated, and noted, that the purpose of the Phase I tests was to l test and document the effect of the trosh rock-screen and grating cages on a free surface vortex that was larger and more intense than any vortex potential postulated outside of the trosh rock-screen coge in the plant. The free-surfoce and internal vortex potential inside of the trosh rock-screen cage was studied and fully examined l during the Phase 2 tests. The test procedure for the Phase I tests was os follows: With no grating or trosh rock-screen cage in place, the directional vones surrounding the intoke sump were angled to produce the maximum size free surface air-entraining vortex. Then, without changing the vone angle, the effect on the air-entraining vortex and intake loss coefficient was documented following installaton of:
- a. grating cage only;
- b. both grating and trosh rock-screen cages.
Two tests were conducted for each of the structural arrangements listed above. One test was run of the postulated maximum water temperature of 155 F to measure head losses and observe vortex action and one test was conducted at ambient water temperature of opproximately 55 F for taking video records and observing the free surface flow conditions. All tests were run at the maximum discharge of 4500 gpm for any of the postulated operating conditions. All Phase I tests were conducted at the minimum postulated water level, el 172.42 ft. Data recorded for each test included vortex size, pressure measurements, photographs, video and observations of flow conditions in the vicinity of the intoke. i Phase I tests are described in Table 11 and test results are listed in Table Ill. sa - - ..w - , eg ,s*- , _ _ - m -
,,,gp p p yyy*
26
', WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD 9.l.2 Unprotected intoke With a water temperature of 155 F and without grating or trash rock-screen l coges installed, test G, a large stable air core vortex formed centrally above the intake. The vortex was increased to o maximum core diameter of 2 ins. and a surface diameter of opproximately 8 ins. by setting the adjustable guide vones to on angle of 48 from normal to the intake centre, Figure 18. The vortex penetrated continuously to the mouth of the intoke. Tongential flow velocities were measured across the g
i vortex and circulation strength calculated at varying rodii from the center of the 2 circulation cell, Toble 1. The maximum circulation strength of 7.1 ft /sec at 3.0 ft j from the intake was greater than any circulation postulated to occur at the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant on the basis of flow velocities measured in the I:7 scale model. Unquestionably, the free surface vortex formed by the discharge of 4500 gpm and 2 circulation of 7.1 ft /see was larger and more intense than any vortex that could develop outside of the trash rock-screen cage in the plant. . At a lower water temperature of 55 F, test B, one or more porosite air core vortices of up to 2 in. surface diameter formed intermittently at radial distances of up to 3 ft from the intake, Figure 19A and B, which on occasion also reached into the intoke. The porositic vortices produced water surface dimpiing but did not develop cir cores at any time during the tests at a water temperature of 155 F. An intake loss coefficient, K, of 1.04 was calculated for the unprotected intoke from the piezometric pressure measurements, Table Ill. 9.l.3 Intake with Grotina Coce The grating coge was pioced over the intake and test H run under otherwise the some conditions os test G. All cir-core vortex formation was eliminated at water temperatures of both 155 F and 55 F. A counterclockwise circulation developed above the intoke with slight dimpiing of the water surface. Dimpling of the surface also occurred in the locations of the former porosite vortices but these did not develop tails nor air cores. Observations were mode of the water surface and of conditions at the intoke pipe entrance for I-l/2 hours.
)
.- . _ _ . ,------r= _--_-_-~_~__r _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ -_J
. . * . WESTERM CANADA HYDRAULIC LABCRATORIES LTD 29 The observation that placement of the grating cage over the intake pipe a completely eliminated all air core vortex action from opproaching the intoke was consistent with observations mode during 1:1 scale hydroulic model studies for similar design grating coges used in the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant - Units I and 2, l
Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 2, Son Onofre Nuclear Generating Stations Units 2 and 3 and Midland Nuclear Plant - Units I and 2. It was demonstrated and documented on video tape that the grating coge by itself precluded the formation of on air-entraining vortex under conditions in which the circulation strength was forger than postulated for the plant. Circulation is a h necessary and essential feature of a vortex. The grating cage, in acting as o flow straightener, eliminated the circulation required to support a vortex into the intake. The flow straightening properties of the grating cage produced more uniform flow conditions to the intoke with a reduction in the measured intake loss coefficient, K, to 0.92. 9.l.4 Intoke with Grotino and Trashrock Screen Coces i, The trash rock-screen cage was installed over the intake and grating coge, tests I and D. The trosh rock-screen coge was effective in eliminating all dimpling from the water surf ace over the study region inside the guide vones. A slow counterclockwise surface flow potterr developed around the screen cage, Figure 19C. Air bubbles and confetti introduced inside the screen cage os flow tracers showed no circulation between the screen and grating coges. ! The complete sump installation including grating cage over the intoke pipe l plus unblocked trash rock-screen coge was shown to be effective in eliminating all L . pump degrading air core vortex action from the recirculating flows under post LOCA conditions as severe or more severe than those which could occur in the Alvin W. Li Vogtle Nuclear Plant. O l The flow straightening properties of theC ash rock-screen cage produced o ,i 1 l further reduction in the intake loss coefficient, K, to 0.88. l i 1 4 il l s i 1- . _. _ ____ . _ _ _ . .
s j." . WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD 30 9.1.5 Summary of intoke Head Loss intoke beod loss and loss coefficients for each test in Phase I are tabulated in Table 111. Intoke loss coefficients, K, were calculated as described in Section 8.3 using the equation: I K= N4-8 # f-Y /29 V2/2g intoke loss coefficients were os follows: Structures in Place Average intoke Loss Coefficient intake Only 1.04 . Intake with Groting Coge 0.92 Intoke with Trash Rock-screen Cage and Groting Coge 0.88 The following trends in intoke loss coefficients were noted:
- a. The installation of the grating cage reduced the loss coefficient from 1.04 with the intake only to 0.92. The reduction is attributed to the flow-straightening capabilities of the grating producing straighter and more uniform streamlines into the intoke. Installo-tion of the grating cage over the intoke reduces intake head losses os well as providing complete vortex control.
- b. A further reduction in intake loss coefficient to 0.88 was achieved by the addition of the trosh rock-screen cage over the sump due to the added flow straightening effect of the trash rock bors.
b -_- - _ . - - _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _
WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABOR ATORIES LTD 31
,.'l*
1 9.2 Phase !! - Tests with Trashrock-Screen Cage Blockage 9.2.1 General Tests G, B, H, C, I and D had shown the effectiveness of the grating cage with unblocked trash rock-screen cage in supressing vortices at the intake. Test E was l run with a water temperature of 155 F to develop screen blockage conditions which would induce vapour-core vortices inside the trosh rock-screen cage when the grating I coge was not in place over the intoke pipe. With only the trash rock-screen cage in place, conditions were imposed to induce internal vortices inside the trosh rock-screen , I coge. Blockage plates were placed on the trash rock-screen coge at various locations around the cage periphery. These blockage plates offected the velocity distribution through the trash rock-screen cage such that internal vortices were formed for some blockage conditions within the sump. Test F was run under identical test conditions to demonstrate that installo-tion of the grating cage would preclude development of those vortices into the intake. The blockage arrangement producing the most unfavourable vortex conditions in test series E was selected, the grating cage was installed and data were recorded for the identical test conditions which previously had produced internal vortices. 9.2.2 Experimental Blockoae Tests without Grotina Coge Initial experimentation showed that internal vortices could only be produced from the sump walls when at least 3 sides of the sump were completely blocked and the total imposed blockages covered at least 6lpercent of the creo. Internal vortices from the sump floor or trosh rock-screen cage ceiling could only be produced with imposed blockages in excess of 72 percent of the trash rock area. Thirteen experimentally determined blockage configurations, shown in Figures 15,16 and 17 were documented in tests E I to E 13. Internal vortices were observed in opproximately 85 percent of tests conducted at blockage conditions in excess of 61 percent. Vapour core vortices were frequently noted originating ogainst the sump walls and entering the intake. Vortices which drew air from under the solid portion of the trosh rock roof were noted in tests E 10, E II, E 12 and E 13. Air was corried into the trash rock-screen cage by:
- s w e4 y y _4, gy,
" * --__gwp
i WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. 32 l*** i
- c. surfoce turbulence entraining air bubbles into the trosh rock flow; 7
e
- b. air entraining, free surface vortices breaking up of the trosh rock boundary with the air core forming small bubbles which were subsequently corried into the sump.
i The blockage condition producing the most deleterious conditions with respect to pump performance was determined in test E I1. This condition consisted of g f complete blockoge of 87 percent of the side trosh rock area plus 50 percent of the top grating area, totolling 81 percent of the total trosh rock area, Figure 17. This j blockage condition induced the following 3 internal vortices to form:
- . a. o 1/8 in. to 1/4 in. diameter air or vapour core vortex originated from the roof of the sump behind the blocked half of well number 1, Figures 14 and 17 and was present for about 50 percent of the I hour test;
- b. o stable 1/8 in. to 1/4 in. diameter vapour core vortex originated from the centre of sump wall number 4 during opproximately 90 percent of the test observations, Figure 20A;
- c. on intermittent weak vortex circulating scad and tracer material on the sump floor, occasionally visible with a 1/3 in. to 1/4 in. diameter vapour core for brief periods of about 2 seconds.
This blockage condition was selected for further testing of the grating coge. 9.2.3 Experimental Blockooe Test with Grotino Coge The grating cage was reinstalled over the intoke pipe and the blockage condition E I1, which produced roof, wall and floor vortices in the sump, were re-
' imposed on the trash rock. Test F was run for 1.5 hrs with the some flow conditions os test E II.
i i 1 i
'
- 33
, . WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD i 1 i
No internal vortices with vapour core formed inside the sump offer the grating coge was placed over the intoke. A general swirling of air bubbles brought through the trosh rocks occurred at the sump roof where vortex li) had formed in test E 11 but due to the presence of the grating coge, flow could not organize into either o diffused or definite toiled vortex, Figure 208. l 1 1 The elimination of all 3 pre-existing vortices by the addition of the grating I cage over the intoke in test F demonstrated that no vortex action could develop to the intoke when the coge was installed despite trash rock blockage conditions considerably more severe than are postulated to occur during post LOCA operations. I ' 9.2.4 Augmented Discharge ~ The blockoge conditions determined in test E II were imposed on the trash rock and the intoke discharge was increased to 1.82 times the maximum postulated flow for any sump operating condition in test J. No internal vortice; were observed l inside the trosh rock-screen or grating coges. Flow circulated in a counterclockwise direction around the outside of the trosh rock-screen coge. Flow inside the trash rock-screen cage was in a clockwise direction around the outside of the grating coge, os evidenced by the movement of air bubbles sucked through the trosh rock. On possing in through the grating, the bubbles were drawn radially into the intake. Test J demonstrated the effectiveness of the grating coge in preventing occess of air or vapour core vortices to the intoke~ despite trosh rock blockage and l pump intoke flows considerably more severe than were postulated for post LOCA l i conditions. These results were similar to, and were confirmed by, findings of I:1 scale studies for ECCS sumps in the Joseph M. Farley Units I and 2; Arizona Nuclear One, Unit 1; Son Onofre, Units 2 and 3; and Midland Units I and 2 nuclear power generating stations. The measured intoke loss coefficient, K, during this test was 0.86. a ,,.,m,,_ , , , _
~ er- ***N**"'
1 . l*' . WESTERM CANADA HYDRAUUC LABORATORIES LTD 4 9.3 Discussions of Test Results 9.3.1 Vortex Action The grating coge precluded any free surface air entraining vortices, from forming through which air was ingested by the intoke under all conditions tested. Circulation, which is on essrtial feature of a vortex, was not transmitted through the grating coge. The grating was totally effective in eliminating any vortex with air or vapour core which would otherwise have formed without the presence of the grating coge. Without the inner grating cage, internal vortices could be developed by blockage of the trash rock-screen coge. These vortices, which were formed only from smooth surfaces, did not increase intoke entrance losses significantly. However, with the grating coge in place os proposed for the Alvin W. Vogtle design, no internal vortices will develop. Circulation developed within the trash rock-screen cage, which could lead to internal vortices, was not transmitted inside of the grating cage. 9.3.2 Head Losses The combined intoke and 90 pipe bend will have a maximum head loss coefficient of 0.89, Table Ill, with the 'trosh rock-screen and grating coges installed, even with screen blockages in excess of 50 percent. The maximum measured head loss coefficient for the trosh rock-screen coge was 15.5. These coefficients will produce o maximum combined head loss of 1.5 ft at a pump discharge of 4,500 gpm. This loss is not of major importance when considered with the other suction line system losses of 14.7 ft and 16.5 ft for the RHR A and RHR B pump operating conditions. The combined losses of 16.2 ft and 18.0 ft would leave on NPSH ovalloble at the pumps of 33.8 ft and 32.0 f t at the RHR A and B pumps respectively. The RHR pumps require an ovalloble NPSH of 20 ft for normal operation. The spray pumps require on ovalloble NPSH of 15 f t for normal operation. The combination of trosh rock-screen coge, grating coge,14 in. diameter intoke pipe and 90 elbow will not produce any head losses which would offect the satisfactory operation of the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant ECCS pump.
._.=_m . _ . _ , - - - ...
WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD 35 e 9.4 Reproducibility and Accuracy The ability of the grating on both the trash rock-screen and grating cages to i remove swirls, circulation and angularity of the flow was reproduced throughout the test program for opproach flow velocities greater than postulated for the plant. The position and strength of free surface and internal vortices which developed without the grating coge could be readily reproduced. The elimination of these vortices by the grating cage could be reproduced with equal ease. I Discharges measured by orifice meters were occurate to 2 l percent. Piezometric levels were read to 20 005 ft. Temperatures were recorded to 10 5 F. Intoke loss coefficients are derived values. The number of tests conducted for any particular model configuration was not sufficient for statistical onelysis. Tests H I and H 2 showed the repeatability of results. Thirty and twenty repetitive tests made with similar test procedures during studies for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station - Units 2 and 3 and Midland Nuclear Plant Units I and 2 respectively showed that mean values of intake loss coefficient for 50 percent blockage conditions were occurate to 1 5.3 percent within 95 percent confidence limits. Ascribing this occuracy to the values for the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant gives intake loss coefficients of 0.92 2 05 and 0.89 1 004 for for the unblocked and 50 percent blocked trosh rock conditions respectively.
/.
' W.A. McLaren, P. Eng.
Monoger, WCHL t
i . .- .. le TABLEI
SUMMARY
OF CIRCULATION 1 ALVIN W. VOGTLE CONTAINMENT SUMP MODEL 1:1 SCALE MODEL Q = 4500 gpm 1:7 SCALE MODEL l RADIUS INTAKE ONLY GRATING TRASH RACK & RHR A SPRAY A l ft CAGE GRATING CAGE O = 4500 gpm O = 2600 gpm 1.0 - - - 1.5 2.1 f 2.0 6.8 6.1 - 2.2 3.2 1 3.0 7.I 8.1 - 2.6 3.2 4.0 6.8 7.0 5.2 3.1 , 3.5 5.0 5.6 6.0 6.2 5.I 5.3 2 Circulation values given in ft /sec C., I i
?
- - - - -_ .__2 m .,
TABLE 2 J, TEST PROGRAM ALVIN W. VOGTLE CONTAINMENT SUMP MODEL Discharge Water Water Blockage intake Cover Test Objective Procedural Steps Test Condition Open Grating Screen Number gpm Depth, f f Temperature F PHASE I Yes No No Develop vortex into Adjust flow vones to produce . G 4500 2.33 155 None the strongest possible l; intoke. air-entroining vortex into intake. No Study effect of Leave vones as per Test C, 2.33 155 None No Yes H-1 4500 grating coge. odd grating coge, note j vorticity and loss co-j efficient. No Yes No Confirm results Repeat Test H-l. H-2 4500 2.33 155 None of Test H-l. Yes Study effect of Leave vones as per Test G, 4500 2.33 155 None No Yes I grating plus odd grating and screen screen coges. coges, note vorticity and loss coef ficient. None Yes No No Document Test G Approoch conditions os per B 4500 2.33 Ambient Test G; document water surfoce conditions. profile, velocity distri-bution; video.
.~
1 - TABLE 2 (Continued) l h t Test Discharge Water Water Blockage intake Cover Test Objective Procedural Steps Number gpm Depth, f t Temperotore Conditson Open Grot,ing Screen F PHASE I(Continued) C 4500 2.33 ~ Ambient None No Yes No Document Test H Approoch conditions as surfoce conditions. per Test H; document I ' water profile, velocity distribution; video. D 4500 2.33 Ambient None No Yes Yes Document Test i Approach conditions as surface conditions. per Test I; document water profile, velocity distribution; video. i PHASE 11 I E 4500 2.33 155 50 % No No Yes Create internal Block more than 50% of
! vortex from screen outer screen area to blockage. produce strong air-entroining wall, roof and floor vortex into intake.
F 4500 2.33 155 - 50 % No Yes Yes Study effect of Install grating coge 9roting coge. with Test E screen blockage condition. Note vorticity and loss coefficient. J 8200 2.33 155 50 % No Yes Yes Confirm conservo- With Test E screen tism of design. blockage condition, increase discharge to confirm conservatism of design.
i 1
- . ... , _ - .~ .. ' - ~ , -- - - - - -
4 TABLE 3 4 TEST RESULTS 4 ALVIN W. VOGTLE CONTAINMENT SUMP MODEL P Dis- Pipe Reynolds Trash- Trash- Intoke Pipe intoke intoke l Test Trash- Grot- Trash rock ing rock charge Velocity No.Rn rock rock and friction loss loss 1 No. pipe loss, Coeff.K Block- Coge in gpm head, loss, screen ft. . in Ploce ft coge loss, ff oge ft ' Place loss ft j coeffi-cient i PHASE I 1.588 2.53 x 10' 2.263 0.605 1.658 1.044 G No No No 4513 - - 1.583 2.53 x 10' 2.062 0.603 1.459 0.922 H-l No Yes No 4507 - - 6 2.066 0.605 1.461 0.920 H-2 No Yes No 4513 1.588 2.52 x 10 - - 6 9.57 2.017 0.608 1.409 0.883 I No Yes Yes 4525 1.596 2.51 x 10 0.008 f 4 PHASEII l 0 4496 1.576 2.40 x 10 0.100 I I.42 f.969 0.600 1.369 0.869 E-lI Yes No Yes 0 2.013 0.603 1.410 0.891 F Yes Yes Yes 4507 1.583 2.50 x 10 0.l l3 12.87 8272 5.334 4.52 x 10' O.458 15.49 6.591 2.031 4.560 0.855 J Yes Yes Yes
4- [ , ,4 LIST OF SELECTED REFERENCES I
- 1. Addison, H.1948; " Centrifugal and Other Rotodynamic Pumps." (Chapman i and Hall, London).
I
- 2. Akers and Crump; "The Vortex Drop," Journal, Institution of Civil Engineers, August,1960, p. 443.
9 I 3. Al'Tshul, A.D., and Morgolin, M.S.; "Effect of Vortices on the Discharge Coefficient for Flow of a Liquid Through an Orifice:" (translation), Gidro-tekhnieheskoe Stroitel'stvo, No. 6, June,1968, p. 32.
- 4. Amphlett, M.B.; " Air Entraining Vertices at a Horizontal intoke", Report No.
OD/7, Hydraulic Research Station, Wallingford, April,1976. Anwor, H.O., Weller, J.A. and Amphlett, M.B.; " Similarity of Air Entraining 5. Vortices at a Horizontal Intake," Report # IT 166, BHR Station, Wallingford, June,1977.
- 6. Anwar, H.O.; " Flow in a Free Vortex", Water Power, April,1965.
1
- 7. Anwor, H.O.; " Formation of a Weak Vortex", Journal of Hydraulic Research, Vol. 4, No. I,1966.
l 8. Anwar, H.O.; " Vortices at Low Head intakes", Water Power, Nov.,1967, l p. 455 - 457. l
- 9. Anwor, H.O.; " Prevention of vortices at intakes", Water Power, Oct.,1968, p.393.
- 10. Anwor, H.O.; discussion of "Effect of Viscosity on Vortex-Orifice Flow:" by Paul B. Zielinski and James R. Villemonte, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, a ASCE. Vol. 95, No. HY 1. Proc. Paper 6323, Jan.,1969, p. 568 - 570.
II. Baines, W.D., and Peterson, E.G.; "An Investigaticn of Flow Through i Screens", Trans. ASME, Vol. 73,194,1948,p.527. i ! 12. Berge, J.P., "Enquete sur la Formation de Vortex et Autres Anomalies d'ecoulements dans une enceinte avec ou sons Surface Libre", Societe 8 Hydrotechnique de France - Section Machines - Group de travail No.10, Nov.,1964. I 13. Berge, J.P., "A ' study of Vortex Formation and Other Abnormal Flow in a Tank With and Without a Free Surface", La Houille Blanches, Grenoble, r France, No. I,1966, p.13 - 40.
- 14. Binnie, A.M., and Hockings, G.A i "Loboratory Experiments on Whirlpools",
Proceedings, Royal Society, London, Series A, Vol.194, Sept.,1948. p. 398 - 415. 6 i i T f i _ _ . . _ . . . _ . . ..
{ . '. . . . I
~
- 15. Binnie, A.M., and Davidson, J.F., "The Flow Under Gravity of a Swirling Liquid Through an Orifice Plate", Proceedings, Royal Society, London Series A, Vol.199,1949, p. 443 - 457.
l
- 16. Brewer, D. " Vortices in Pump Sumps", The Allen Engineering Review, March, 1957. .
- 17. Chang, E.; Review of Literature on Drain Vortices in Cylindrical Tanks, Report TN1342, BFRA, March 1976.
l 18. Cornell, W.G.; " Losses in Flow Normal to Plane Screens". Trans. ASME, J. of Basic Engineering, Vol 80,1958, pp. 791 - 799.
- 19. Denny, D.F., 1953, British Hydromechanics Research Assoc. Report, R.R. 430, Preliminary Report on the Formation of Air-entraining Vortices in pump Section Wells.
- 20. Denny, D.F.,1953, British Hydromechanics Research Assoc. Research Report R.R. 465, " Experiments with Air in Centrifugal Pumps".
i,
- ' 21. G.A.J., "The Prevention of Vortices and Swirl in Denny, intakes", D.F., and Young, Proceedir.gs, lAH R 7th Congress, Lisbon,1957.
I
- 22. Denny, D.F., "An Experimental Study of Air Entraining Vortices in Purnp Sumps", Proceedings of Inst. of Mechanical Engineers, Vol.170, No. 2,1956.
- 23. Dogget, L.L., and Keulegan, G.H., " Similitude Conditions in Free Surface l
Vortex Formations", Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol.100, i No. HYl l, Nov.1974, pp.1565 - 1581.
- 24. Donaldson, C. du p., and Sullivan, R.D., " Examination cf the solutions of the Navier-Stokes Equations for a Class of Three-dimensional Vortices, Part I:
Velocity Distribution for Steady Motion". Proceedings, Heat Transfer and Fluid Mechanics Institute, Stanford University Press, Calif.,1960, p.16 - 30. i 25. Einstein, H.A., and Lt. H.: " Steady Vortex Flow in a Real Fluida, La Hoville l Blanche, Vol.10, No. 4, Aug. - Sept.,1955, p. 483 - 496. ! 26. Folsom, R.C.,1940 University of California, Pump Testing Laboratories, Technical Memo. No. 6, W-14, "Some Performance Characteristics of Deep-well Turbine Pumps". ! 27. Fraser, W.H.1953 Trans. ASME, Vol. 75, No. 4, p. 643, " Hydraulic Problems
! Encountered in intake Structures of Vertical Wet-Pit Pumps and Methods Leading to Their Solution".
- 28. Gordon, J.L.;" Vortices at Intakes". Water Power, April,1970, p.137 - 138.
l
- 29. Guiton, P., " Cavitation dans les Pompes", La Houille Blanches, Nov.,1962, No.6.
! I I6 30. Holndl, K., " Contribution to Air-entrainment by a Vortex", Paper 16-D,
- international Association for Hydraulic Research, Montreal,1959.
! t I l i 1 w q:, - - ----,w_ .-,.1- ~- _ ,_
-- :wn .. w mm. -
F k ... .. 1 1
- 31. Hottersley, R.T., " Hydraulic Design of Pump intokes", HY 2, March,1965,
- p. 223 - 249.
- 32. Hottersley, R.T., "Foctors of inlet Channel Flow offecting the Performance of a Pumping Plant", Report No. 23, Water Research Lab., University of New -
South Wales, Australia, Sept.,1960. l
- 33. Holtorf, G., "The Free Surface and the Conditions of Similitude for a Vortex",
La Houille Blanche, Vol.19, No. 3,1964, p. 337 - 384. g t Iversen, H.W.;" Studies of Submergence Requirements of High Sxcific Speed 34. Pumps", Transactions, ASME, Vel 75,1953.
- 35. Koufmon, Fluid Mechanics McGraw-Hill, p. 265 and 279.
j 36. Keulegon, G.H., and Doggett, L.L., "A Note on Gravity Head Viscometer", Miscellaneous Paper H-74-3, United States Army Engineer Waterways Exper-J iment Station, Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, Miss., Mar.,1974.
- 37. Kolf, R.C., " Vortex Flow from Horizontal Thin-Plate Orifices", thesis pre-l sented to the University of Wisconsin, at Modison, Wis., in 1956, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philisophy.
1
- 38. Kolf, R.C., and Zielinski, P.G., "The Vortex Chamber os on Automatic Flow Control Device", Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 85, No. HYl2, Proc. Paper 2310, Dec.,1959.
- 39. Lawton, F.L.; "Foctors influencing Flow in Large Conduits", Report of the Task Force on Flow in Large Conduits of the Committee on Hydraulic Structures. Transactions ASCE, Paper 4543, Vol. 91 HY 6 - Nov.,1965.
- 40. Lennart, R., " Flow Problems with Respect to intakes and Tunnels of Swedish Hydro Electric Power Plants", Transoctions, of the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, NR 71,1953.
- 41. Lewellen, W.S.; "A Solution for Three-Dimensional Vortex Flow with Strong Circulation", J. Fluid Mechanics., Vol. 14,1962.
l 42. Long, R.R.; "A Vortex in on Infinite Fluid", Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. I1. l
- 43. Marklund, E. and Pope, J.A.; " Experiments on a Small Pump Suction Well, l
with Particular Reference to Vortex Formations", Proceedings, The Insti-tution of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 160,1956.
- 44. Marklund, E.; discussion of "Effect of Viscosity on Vortex-Orifice Flow", by Paul B. Zielinski and James R. Villemonte, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, l ASCE, Vol. 95, NO HYl, Proc. Paper 6323, Jan.,1969, p. 567 - 568.
- 45. Messino, J.P.; " Periodic Noise in Circulkt$ng Water Pumps", Power, Sept.,
1971, p. 70 - 71. 1 5
* ** -~ *
- N mepepeas. gae 9 m a w e ce
I 1 1 .
- 46. McCorquodole, J.A.; discussion of "Effect of Viscosity on Vortex-Orifice Flow", by Poul B. Zielinski and James R. Villemonte, Journal of the Hy-draulics Division, ASCE, Vol 95, No. HYl, Froc. Paper 7323, Jan.,1969,
- p. 567 - 568.
- 47. McCorquodole, J.A.; " Scale Effects in Swirling Flow", Journal of the Hy-draulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, HYI, Disc. by Marco Pico, HYI, Jan.,1969.
- 48. Pickford, J.A., and Reddy, Y.R.; " Vortex Suppression in a Stliling Pond Overflow" Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol.100 No. HYll, l Nov.,1974, pp.1685 - 1697.
- 49. Quick, M.C., "A Study of the Free Spiral Vortex", thesis presented to the I University of Bristol, England, in 1961, in portial fulfillment of the require-ments for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
- 50. Quick, M.C.; " Scale Relationships between Geometrically Similar Free Spiral l Vortices", Civil Engineering and Public Works Review, Port I, September, 1962, Part II, Oct. 1962, p.1319.
I
- 51. Quick, M.C.; " Efficiency of Air Entraining Vortex Formation at Water intoke", Journal of the Hydraulics Div., ASCE. No. 96, HY7, July 1970, i' p.1403 - 1416. ,
- 52. Reddy, Y.R., and Pickford, J.A.;" Vortices at intakes in Conventional Sumps",
Water Power, March 1972, p.108 - 109. I
- 53. Rouse, H., and Hsu, H.; "On the Growth and Decay of a Vortex Filoment".
Proceedings, ist National Congress of Applied Mechanics,1952, p. 741 - 746,
- 54. Richardson, C.A.; 1941 Water Works and Sewerage Reference and Data, Part I, Water Supply, p. 25, " Submergence and Spocing of Svetion Bells".
- 55. Springer, E.K., and Potterson, F.M.; " Experimental Investigation of Critical Submergence for Vortexing in a Vertical Cylindrical Tonk" ASME paper 69-FF-49, June,1969.
- 56. Stepanoff, A.J.,1948 " Centrifugal and Axial-flow Pumps", p. 963 (Chapman and Hall, London).
l : 57. Stevens, J.C.; discussion of "The Vortex Chamber as an Automatic Flow-
' Control Device". by R.C. Kolf and P.B. Zielinski, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 86, No. HY6 Proc. Paper 2525, June,1960.
I
- 58. Stevens, J.C., and Kolf, R.C.; " Vortex Flow Through Horizontal Orifices",
Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol 83, No. SA6, j Proc. Paper 1461, Dec.,1957.
- 59. Streeter, V.L.: Fluid Mechonics, 5th edition, McGraw-Hill,1971 Weighardt, K.E.G., "On the Resistance of Screens", The Aeronautical Overterly, Vol. 4, 1953, pp.186 - 192.
- 60. Weighort, K.E.G., "On the Resistance of Screens"; The Aeronautics Ovarter-
- ly, Vol. 4,1953, pp.186 - 192.
_- _, _ , _ _ _ _ , _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - . _ . . ,_____., . ,,~.._, ,.-
I a
- 61. Weltmer, W.W., 1950, Power Engineering, Vol. 54, No. 6, p. 74. " Proper
, Suction intakes Vital for Vertical Circulating Pumps".
- 62. Young, C.A.H., " Swirl and Vortices at intakes", Report No. SP 726, British Hydro-Mechanics Research Association, April,1962.
I i 63. Zelinski, P.B. and Villemont, J.R.; "Effect of Viscosity on Vortex-Orifice Flow", Vol. 94, HY3, May,1968, p. 745 - 751. Disc. on above in Jan.1969, by Marklund, E., McCorquodale, J.A. and Anwor, H.O. l 1 I i i t t S 4
?
I i i I , i e e
-we--* * + W wege go eye aw e -m -
e- em e. . , L -*'4b- - m., g g y.,- **d ;_ m
- t * *r _
2--sm + mA u - - nd,. >A .-Mi 6sa- A-- ----*---1--,----nm-- -s-- - - - - - - - - - - --L- ------L --s--a
. , I
$ t o
ha d I t2 .
$2 l z- ss E'
e
=
wW o b In ' mE g
=-
l 5wa , I a e 8
, - T ,
[3 l 1 i ~ r ! i i A H O ! w 10 0 H U
" i H eS N I' k l l
M,.**/ l l ME m Q - g 8 l 1 a .t i l i ! - l1l I :11 l i 5 E. . l l 4 i
1
'- FIGURE 2 I i }..
m s'.T't{ = 1
> . o r ga.- ,, , t
, 6 n u nni 'q ,, I
, . ."It , ,
4W' I _ w s sfMg h,- l A q - , , A . i n <5 4 s CM. o $^ J,e.l mo. , ixi n , 'm i a [ ..1jll"
') g l
j
\
l l
. I' cover PLATE 2 j l l
l 1 - :
.~
y o- = 74 i l
'" L 4.::g.: l l
I PLAN l l l l SCREEN CAGE SIZE l'/4" s 3/r e" 3 CN 1/d* CENTERS
. I,
_t. e e l l_ 4'.6" _i FLOCR l l
\f
;,. m /, . , ,,
I
~l _. <-
/ m
/ l
/
OCTAGONAL GR ATING C AGE - e i,.
'o
*n
( r 8 7 SIZE l '/4" 8i/ - E / ~~ ON 14i8 CENTERS 'e h i f fe 1
** '/ s' */, /
l
') RAISED FACE SECTION A-A iN FLANGE M 13 '/ " h 14" O.0. STEEL PIPE ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT S C A L E i I" = 2 181 HYORAULIC MODEL STUOY t MODEL INTAKE SECTION WESTERN CAN ADA HYOR AULIC L ABORATORIES LTD. l 8Cl4 9 48 7 4.wC M
FIGURE 3
'i / F . N :w , .- X . ,- -
- 9 p / \
s7 / y ~ ,'\ A /
\ A
\
Ak I' __ l \ AN
\
\
s O { \ g / S \ \ ,
/
\ /
\
I \
\ /
/
/
\, ,)
l ~'s ,.s' y 's,.- 1 PL A N ( scatt i i". i'.o") ft 9 It!ilIPt491Ii1 119 A R R R t 19 i t 19 jl e a
, ! ! i 11 ,
i i i 1! , i 4 I' , + GRATING SIZE
, , J .,
I* , I'/4"n /e" 8 ON
'o , ddi . 18/e" CENTERS.
i l '. 7 " OlAM. I i i o - u-i i
.g SECTION A - A ( scatt i I". i'.o")
i ALVIN W. VOCTLE NUCLE AR PLANT Iii HYORAULIC MODEL STUOY MODEL GRATING CAGE WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATOMitS LTD. === SCIL $407 Ae wC M
- i. ,
, ,' FIGURE 4 5'- 0" l'-O" _ 3'-O" _
l-Cf r 7 h A A Ak o Ak f scRatn : 1r TR ASMR ACK GRATING SAR: L J l '/4 s She
- 4 A,,....
SCHEMATIC PL AN
' 5 '. 8 W" _1 8 = t 5' 0"
--- , 4 %" c 4 %"!
l' - 0" I
,,g. _
l'. 0" _ l_ - 3'- 0" _ [ 4 s
- L> 3 f iw i
f iu u u ui I" COVER PL ATE D w T i f r^~m7q-i 4 io e .o
/
i .,.- t .
.. - - -( - -. ---.--.-----------9 .. - - - ( - ,
JJ. I J, t
~, e.s utsua eine etotn 5 8 SCREEN - - - - - coat wima ANo c.iao* ,
OPENING wl0TH. m' "- SUPPORT BARS _ , ,,, _ _' ,, e e I '/la /e" 3 ON J 8 I /e* CENTERS. J_ y _ ,_ , i_ , I I
- I.- I I 2 wi .g- -.- .T- -
qJ JU - . . Y e SOLIO PLATE ' r-m L
'
- i
,.5 L 1
I
" l f
i 8 8/** i , 4'.g" _
- i
, SECTION A - A (SCALE 1"sl'.0")
SUMP WALL ALVIN W. V0GTLE NUCLEAR PLANT Iii HYOR AULIC MODEL STUOY MODEL TRASHRACK - SCREEN CAG' WESTERN CANADA HYORAULiC LA80MATOMIES LTD. ,, SCOL je8F AeWCM
D i
.c o r Da < sE t2 z 2
i
$"
- gayb 6
d8 2 y
- is.igiw !=s a<
>g P
*E a: [g _=
W i I 4 ae a O
} 2 '
! liet e i.
~
i ti s t,
*t /
= n$ : .i <
. \ r. m g1 9li~ ~
]
1
' 1 t.
/
C Is
, II l
- i 11 O
l I I. - s ,. B l .
' a-I =
7 , 4 -* 1- *g i
- i i , 1 3
__3_ r i g Sj d
,s L g w 3 i
. o.
I a
' i i u
A l o i n e e .e e -
- 4
. . 5
=
0 0 5 a D I :UW$ES s e
>= > 0 es w
y a g3
= _, gw E
ga w "au
>g gn aE a: g r.
W
' I: ti 5 8 a e=
3 o 5 s a } t *! 6 i. in y 8
; is,Ik **ij:
o t b I i fI l j ,iIj si in
<== f;f,,lj .
~
i t . -- B 4y-1- - o I
- f
~~
& E g.
- t i W h-I I e l
. 1
! ^ ,,' , t e
.( .
g , 2-g N a5 - l f, s gt-f -o- Aj
~ -
Y, a
- g 3 ----
N" >i ir i ] !- e , J4p L ! W
,4 j ,$
e I
=
\w g T
/ .
l esi l i _ l s l
\
l l
} 9Y g l I M $
9
~
6
~ FIGURE 7 l
h r -
, iJ I \ H t~~ - -- - - . - -
l N rocs .
.s.ener l l I
-. + ,
,o.., .
/
. C'
( ___a=Y i
- e. ace ew .+. an.e es.m.
e...... Ni ; ,, _,,< I M __se.ar n ( l O I e C- // N b i; .!,! Y ' Q I f l l l'
\ @ // (u m u u "G' [
-.. - - - - - - - , ,e .
~'
% ..... m '- / ) ALvtN w VOGTLE NUCLE AR PLANT get A fDRAULIC MODEL STUOT
_ SCALE E j '"" "'""
~
FLOW PATTERN AfeD VELOCITIES FROM i 7 SCALE MODEL STUDY ot STE mes Cassa04 prrDR AULIC La90aATOests LTO i 4
y 5 ,'el!l I rE l I
/
l l/ 1
;n Yj j u A l ! !
n
=
= = .--
a W g
= . ,
. 1 ,
o 3 8 d= g w . # . l o o o f 8 a 4 $ $ T. -
~. s
.~.?.~-
- ' " . .l* ;l-I ' 1 .~
,L'.: . ... -
- l , .
, .F -
t- - g 4 , s / e I * *
\,'N . t 8
., s
* '. /
/.. . . . . . .
V M
'l o -
< z i l 4 Y'
5" 8 ti Em
-s/ i a ' E Bu !"
, . M D o U b C
3 i masnme I W Y
~
*a d G !
?
z 8 i
,o ,s 0
O s
'i e
iH Hi 0
. J H h
~
) z@ a 3 devs -
O
; E 4 0d d8 s 4 '
" ?s m w
d a li % g masadelo 9E o 8E
*- g a,
l 3- _ I t
& ll I I v
s i I I
//
1 t-E ll
/ '(
q l fa I I t l l! I 0 0 t w I 5 l ,/ I c . l . I 's d J
, .f ,
l '# { I e _ I W ! ' [N h g , , 5 2
" 3 / g 5 E
lx // 5 l [, J !a c n a
, af',_ _?.2 gg:,f.. eM ,g - u
. .,.. ;'(l,
. I o o e ,
pa. k t---
* ,=
j 4 .
\
/ I j - "
- t. .- -- ,----
%:2. .
' }'
l , f y
< =
g* , 4 y_~.s/ g
.J p a.
uI $1s
, .\I < M m
e e I
....... I i y 9,
~
3mC gT I
~
I W '
- Y T T N Y I L
A D S LU I E N T P T C A V N E R S A V F L A A L R E E N O I A LD T I D CO S T C E U N M E C E R f~l R I T EI C J' O I D s,._N ' T = x. F LL TU F O GA OR VD
~ ,
R . Y N E WH O B M NI I A H I V T C L A I C N E OI T S K A L V A R W E )
" S B
D E O '4 X - " I F 1
$ 4* g ,
1
- f E
-
- L gr '
A C
- S
( A K - L A W
- A E
L - B N W - - O O E M G E I G D
- A C
A T T iO N C G C L L N E W vE E R C T I A L E N S S E S R N I G U R O T O i S T S A E R R C O O C O B A L A F L l E T C E I L R C U N A O R C D Y H A D u A N J C '.n A C w c N w R a-s
- c. s a
L s E n
'3 a I a
FIGURE 10 4 e C' - i
...)
., g ,r . . .
\ -
i
-. , -)
\
l i
.h A. Open sump and intake surrounded by guide vanes ;
i i ! HN
~
i . I l [ l 1
\
l l . , 4 l . I l
- ..'j - l
'{' S. ! hi- h 4
l i B. Trash rack-screen cage installed over sump l INTAKE ASSEMBLY Afl0 GUIDE vat 1ES l l
3 9
]QC2 L
p P 1 O M . Uo R 1 M. ** PN T T
-- ( 'O \
N Y N
) /
( A D O P L U C A P T (( R E T S S T R D
,(
R ER E AL EE N M T E T L D A L E E CO (( E CM UM H r I F O N N P2 RI EZ C O I M. OPI EI Uo L L T {,2N( 'ON t e 5 M o. k PN s a T U GA U B
/ M. o OR 3,,^ 0 V D I R
.Y 0 8 WH T 2 S w
IN1 I D V :
. N 6z E
- LI A
W O L F 3 7# # o D i ' 4 , J. -, T
) ~ L Y ,y L
N / j+ S E O E ! K R N "4 TA O O TI I N T A I A R . R B O I L B A A C L ( 4 C o IL N U A M R O, D Y H 4 A X
. yO D 6 ,
A 1 Nt 0 e C . o N w R . E . T s 4 S s E s W o c e i
. i ; ' .:l'
, mb .
3 -
- n. ~
- g '- T e i .' Mgg3
; . 7 .
e, . . N . Tlff 3 E E E 6 0 sd E 0 t g _ EsE55ses5ng, 't L E D O EsE55Es sEeg, i _ M E E D
~E E E 5 5 E s a 5 s g-IEE55Ess5sg, -
I S T E E E 5 5.E E N 5 u g , U O EEE55Ess5Dg . E G _. E E E 5 5 E E s 5 0 s A EEE55EsaE3s.. , ' , . C G N t.IEE5EEan5sg. , I T A R slR'11J3331313a E E 5E5sa:sn%. 11'111l . . G a _
%w% ~t a
i
FIGURE 13 ( '
)
, { ,
;. . , g .-
.;g
. :.:. . '. ,t},f n9
*.t -
c..;. . . gp- ,*' ,'fy _,,i .;
,n ; , . i
- y. j
.s ,c y ..
i . .y.. .,- Q,
,,, k Y
4'
,y.
-; L. ;
- 1.,;,' nu y!.s;y. ;.b. y:,,p-y,j.
- a .. . ~ . . .e . J,.R.gg ,,
4
. .. . t . . , . _ t
- .- ( 7 . g ..
g .yg. t . : . 4 < . t 7, {' 3[..,. . gg.,,re._,
.. f J p
; .4.g.
}. .. ~^';.8 .
4 . '1 .. .
.ep ,
; k-+Ii ': j .%. -Sii .
p ;" i. .i - hl,
.1 pa. .
. c. t
- } ;. ^
- . c . .. 7
?. . . .
-- y
_ 3. n. p .,
's--
g , E.1]f,2'(g(p}p v.
,..,f
, , c, y
, , fa -
u p r
.1'J ,: .. . . " . . . , .:..- .: .N :(h, ai. , . 1 A -_-
t( { I; a .. .
., ; e :- .. .8j . [. , $ ;. ;<
Q, e
,a.p. .. ,. . .
7 g_2.c.. .. ,g . . 4J g
- \ 2 - .., .p. q.g] ,e;.:q&.
e
, . -; e. 3 y.y. p ,,s 4f e 1 :- q : r. 1
, ,, g .. i. x
' 0;l f: F 9 .-:: g,j:- ,;r; g
[:p[:= ::
> ,j,4.. ,,). ~ . y. <a .
". .ye 1
y s 5.4 s r. . ' f) I(Aq c y.g r ,,. .: m
, , ._ , . g . . . . , we, . . . m -. g .q
. . . - . . . ~
,;;, ,9 g q 3 n .; ..:.
e
, h_ . 4. ... ....c .
;; y 4, -[. .., : .. m, V . . ,l .
=
.. . ,. .,,.t.jv,1 L. ,<,,m, v@,e;I'.
. ,,....' . .1 -. q i 3 .. * - ;
c -
..' . q,. <
Q..
. t. . o
. .A. ,g, t 4 . .r, t.-} e g
.; g.3..s.,J... .
g . g;v , 1 p
. . ! .m, ,1, m.ez.
, nh hap i.6 o. : . 4+ *;i n u .
.,n;g#pg
.a o <;,-
m e ( 1 tE.
,a .
~. ~: . . , _ }. . u.4 o..,,
.e ,
,. y... , y .., n . . s . a v .. ;; Q j
.mmr . - 'm r . g,' bpm c .. "m ,
a u
,g. h,. j ,
s, .y,.,...s. .
,. M.,.J 4 .. o. ,., '.!;';i v, ..i T a .1,0' =, w. .p. i.J..
g . ,g%,' . m'g; 44, .' n't j
, e. . .
- g hp: . i I m
? q f,,3,;;)MMg;.. Di" r; sM M. C,6 ! W i
4;m \
< g,
,rs n.n, .,s,w.:. p. y. ggc.,4.yt >: , a . m . .: . ...c....
A.q. ( p i , i f. S l- .:e [ 1 .' d y . g y g g ::.j QlS. 4Q, : [ ~ i.4.
- . ,s.
p ,,,. ,.s4 y, 1 :n ., . c.
. . -- ...1
. ? *v .
A 6; u,.. .. . ;\t -
- s
. . . g . :Q::.n- ** (
'y l ..qA., ;
t , ., .. m((. .. ;
. ; w ,u ,n . .:
..Q. o -
~
- : . .,: , a ,/ ~:..
y
.. ,. e m.. , y - p. .; ~t,: 4 m,
{
.,'. g ~. ; -: s {f.;;.sy,. 3 ". ': h~Y T :.) ;; ; . y .t;: } .a
' . ;, 8 .
I f , ,,~-) -
':' :. :n '
; - w
;f, . hhf :: .:^?,Y {:y _
s h. '~[ - . - y
;,s mm=
7.q y.a,
. , ' \r ,h 1 { .g[ ar: k. -k '
py :t. 6' s 4,.
.!y.. 9% g$sr.d,$tg s .A A:.. ,4 4 . . b
,3 -4'4 m 4
4
- e. ,
nr w w {%+ ~. v .. h* v . :": erV sD v. .
- v ?wL i
?
- - . _ ~
FIGURE 14 S'- 8 % " l l SOLIO COVER S'. 0" R 3 *. 0*
@ @ 5 '- 8 '/z" SCREEN AREAS S '. C* x l'. 0*
EACM y PLAN A S'. 0- i '. e f 6" ELEVATION l
??###f47/M l COMPLETELY UPPER HALF LOWER HALF RIGHT H ALF TYPES OF BLOCKAGE ALVIN W.VOGTLE NUCLEAR PLANT I:1 HYDRAULIC MODEL STUOY TRASH RACK BLOCKAGE SCHEME l
l WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. bril 6439 A-wCM SM 80 t
FIGURE 15 3 . , . 9 TEST E-1 AREA BLOCKED - SIDES 2,3,4 8 TOP 5 FLOW RATE - 4500GPM g WATER LEVEL - 172.42'
@ 'g o(g, @ @
l WATER TEMPER ATURE - 155 'F VERY UNSTABLE VORTEX FROM WALL 2 I I O l j TEST E-2 AREA BLOCKED - SIDES 2,3,4, UPPER HALF 1, TOP 5 & 6 FLOW RATE - 4500 GPM WATER LEVEL - 172.42' I I-WATER TEMPER ATURE - 155 'F NO VORTICES OBSERVED a - TEST E -3 AREA BLOCKED -SIDES 2,3,4, UPPER HALF 1 & TOP 5 FLOW R ATE - 4500 GPM WATER LEVEL- 172.42' i l_.. WATER TEMPERATURE- 155 'F VORTEX FROM SUMP WALL 2 TEST E - 4 AREA BLOCKED- SIDES 2,3,4, UPPER H ALF 1 & TOP G FLOW RATE - 4500 GPM WATER LEVEL- 172.42' l: WATER TEMPER ATURE - 155 'F INTERMITTENT VORTEX FROM SUMP WALL 2
- _ _ _ TEST E - 5 ARE A BLOCKED - SIDES 2,3,4 , LOWER HALF 1 TOP 5 8 6 FLOW R ATE - 4500 GPM WATER LEVEL - 172.42' l< l:
WATER TEMPERATURE - 155 'F VORTEX FROM SUMP WALL 2 ALVIN W_VOGTLE NUCLEAR PLANT I*I HYORAULIC MODEL STUDY BLOCKAGE CONFIGURATIONS STUDIED (I) WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. _. bcil 6639 A-wCM su 80
i FIGURE 16 9 TEST E-6 AREA 8 LOCKED - SIDES 2,3,4, LOWER HALF 18 TOP 5 FLOW RATE - 4500GPM I ' WATER LEVEL - 172.42'
@ WATER TEMPER ATURE - 155 'F I-
@ ovg, @
VORTEX FROM SUMP WALL 2 l O TEST ' E - 7 AREA 8 LOCKED - SIDES 2,3,4, LOWER HALF 1 8 TOP 6 I FLOW RATE - 4500 GPM WATER LEVEL - 172.42' WATER TEMPER ATURE - 155 'F VORTEX FROM SUMP WALL 2 1 TEST E - 8 AREA BLOCKED -SIDES 2,3,4, TOP S 8 6 , FLOW RATE -4500 GPM WATER LEVEL- 172.42' I 3 l I- I~- WATER TEMPERATURE- 155 'F VORTEX FROM SUMP WALL 2 TEST E - 9 ! 6 j AREA BLOCKED- SIDES 2,3,4 S TOP 6 FLOW R ATE - 4500 GPM WATER LEVEL- 172.42' WATER TEMPER ATURE - 155 'F VORTEX FROM SUMP WALL 2 ALVIN W.VOGTLE NUCLEAR PLANT I:I HYDRAULIC MODEL STUOY BLOCK AGE CONFIGURATIONS STUDIED WESTERN CANADA HYORAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. ( be l 6439 A*wCM Su to
?
FIGURE 17 1. O TEST E - 10 ARE A BLOCKED - SIDES 2,3,4,RIGHT HALF 1, TOP 5 8 6 FLOW RATE - 4500GPM
,, WATER LEVEL - 172.42'
@ ga,g, @ WATER TEMPER ATURE - 155 'F VORTICES FROM TOP AND SUMP WALL 4 TEST E - 11 AREA BLOCKED - SIDES 2,3,4, RIGHT HALF 1 & TOP 5 FLOW RATE - 4500 GPM WATER LEVEL - 172.42'
.l WATER TEMPER ATURE - 155 'F VORTICES FROM TOP AND SUMP WALL 4 INTERMITTENT VORTEX FROM FLOOR TEST E - 12 AREA 8 LOCKED - SIDES 2,3,4, RIGHT HALF 1 8 TOP 6 FLOW RATE -4500 GPM WATER LEVEL- 172.42' l--
WATER TEMPERATURE- 155 'F VORTICES FROM TOP AND SUMP WALL 4 TEST E - 13 AREA BLOCKED- SIDES 2,3,4 & RIGHT HALF 1 FLOW RATE - 4500 GPM WATER LEVEL- 172.42' WATER TEMPER ATURE -155 'F VORTICES FROM TOP AND SUMP WALL 4 i-ALVIN W.VOGTLE NUCLEAR PLANT I:I HYORAULIC MODEL STUDY BLOCK AGE CONFIGURATIONS STUDIED WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. lutel 4439 A-wCM Sad 80
.- m . _ _ _.- __ m _ . _ _ - - -_ _ _ .
_4 _ FIGURE 18
+! -J
.: I . bin r'. 4i _ , a, 9 I
i;'k,M q.'TkQ,%.c f re : t.
, . y +g t a * . , Q} M
- y. M'
-a.k. we .
x
?k ih j$f5' { *$ $? ' l~
h, . . h " ep,
% ,- . w"? _
l
.u,
.4.'"e, m . : ,
.,. g.>..
N 'sdiai~
~
C
hk *si.9 .i!
' 'ch i', e s
c.. : ~. t ,-r *. ~
$' Y h h*, f T, . . .
M
? m" y. -
.'.aq. Fly NJ1}q, z
a.'. ~rp'
,7.p W
- 7 ', - i 'q'j ' -( , ', f ., [ ,',
'C ~
.. +h o
*f, F
O s,
- TdI.f ' y,$ X
# i,t . .N > e
*4 *
,**; M' H
/se: 1. .
%s Y. , l ' ,
.e - '
~
.h O 6 '. 4 .1 d
' %,. h
;f.Ju W l
j e
.c$3 ?. '
-- f e- /y1: C 4,.
'3 e 44 ,
l *~. ij gG ' 4 $ ,\ g U
. ., , q. .OQ g
- M
,.:'.+8
&,:5.5 I i_ , .' :6 e *i , .", 4 . . x a o. . . s
'$%,. .e \;& st .. , ;. J. ? .
, .g ' . v.: o O < ,. .y ,p\x;.\nj s~
er**Yp 5%% hk,W.* s X .- . ~ - ,, Y '. '$
- i. n.;
;3-s',j'.y (y . , . .~
A q . s . .yt l.; .m ,p y-:J** ~ .i~ n $ r# n.~. a,:.#$[
.3
' 'p)P ., P
., d'o f ' y, *~z,, g : e a< e.'14 !,}1*V)i !- \s
., .i tT G 4f'..~'f)?:.-
$d- f hK' e
' U-{ikj 'T hT q%.5{bY'
# ') , "I,; r h l
, Ng%gs3 v.-
ji 4f
- 3 t--
. *G '
;a <). 1,
.f g
II,'.g' w ,'. SN [ ., ,, I C ,,i.
,) A ' gl l i
l k r= 4m
_____m._____ _ . __. - _ _ . . _ _ _ __ _ . _ _ . . _ . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _. _ ._. __ m
, FIGURE 19 i
i
; s.
I
- 1 1 m '
j l
"w~w
,g ,..T*,
A. Free surface vortex entering unprotected intake 1, l i a
- y. -
? '. ;
l 4g 1
- c:
B. Main vortex with satellite vortex entering intake i
. .. s,;
' o..A.,q.' % .
v.i , .
.,nh.. ,
... g
~
i > ...
.. . . *g . . .
.o : . '4 . c r,r . . -'f s.: J ,.~.i ,' :' **; .L.J. 7
. T . ;
. .e .,
, , ; e . .K * *. . * , . p . -
~ .
. .y .
l
- h.;
- N'-
~l* $, 4% * &, O b ..]..,. ,
,
- l' }) . ~.' .'-
,~; , . ; 7
.; 4.-
.. _ - ,.f. .
.)
~
\~ / _
1 C. Confetti traces on vortex-free water surface with grating , and trash rack-screen cages installed i SURFACE V0RTEX ELIMINATION [
s FIGURE 20 i i I 1
% ,- M;Iwg ,
. + e y.;
w . ;-nypy..t . ry >- 4 e , gJ
'M s , ,
. ;e. +* ! j s
.A l
A. Internal vortex formed at sump wall entering intake, as seen from observation tunnel < t l 5 l li 1 l r i l 4 i - 1 i i ,i I I , i l j B. Confetti passing through grating cage to intake without . 1 - vortex action, as seen from observation tunnel
! INTERNAL VORTEX ELIMINATION BY GRATING CAGE 1
7-WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. 5 t I 1 i, I I i APPEMMX A i I I i i t 4 l I
- ..,.o _ m .-- ~~ . . . . .. . _ . - . . . - . . . .. -- _ . .
j .i,- WESTERN CANADA HVDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. APPEtolX A SL.PPORTIVE TESTS 1 AI. PURPOSE I The purpose of the supportive tests was to demonstrate the effectiveness of grating in redirecting flows and eliminating possoge of rotational flows through such grating. The findings of these tests were to support the contention demonstrated and confirmed in the main study test program that the trosh rock - screen cage formed the
,I natural boundary for the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant ECCS study and that the flow conditions most degrading to pump operation would be developed through portial blockage of the trash rock -screen coge rather than through flow obstructions located upstream of the trash rock -screen coge. - ' Two independent sets of supportive studies have been carried out in the laboratories' fiume as part of studies for both the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 (ANO-
- 1) and the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Units 2 and 3 (SONGS) Containment Sumps to demonstrate the flow straightening effects of a similar trosh rock grating to that used in the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant, to show that vortices produced in the ,
woke of obstructions or structural members within the containment area would not pass through the trash rock and to show that any circulation which developed in flow upstream of the sump was not transmitted through a single layer of the trosh rock grating even without the introduction of screens. A2. FLUME STUOlES ! A2.1 Fiume Studies For ANO-l I A piece of i 1/2 in by 3/16 in grating on 13/16 in, centers, had been
. Installed in a 4 ft deep by 4 ft wide fiume during support tests for the Arkansos Nuclear One Unit ~21:1 scale Containment Sump Studies. An opproach flow velucity of approximately I fps was established through the grating. An 18 in. wide piece of plywood was placed immediately upstream of the grating perpendicular to the direction of the flow. The very weak eddies shad from the plywood were eliminated as
j
- tNESTERN CANADA HYDRAUUC LABORATORIES LTD.
.t ,-
g the flow possed through the grating. The plywood was aligned parallel to the flow and I rotated quickly to generate vortices, opproximately 9 in. In diameter. The vortices were corried by the opprooch flow from the point of origin to the vicinity of the j grating. The grating totally eliminated the circulation associated with the vortices and no vortices, circulation or flow ongularity was transmitted through the grating. l The tests were recorded on video tape using confetti to observe the flow straightening ochieved by the grating. I A similar test was conducted to observe whether the grating would straighten
. flow which approached at on angle to the grating. A piece of grating was placed in the
' large test tank in on crea where the opproach flow velocity was approximately 0.4 fps.
It was observed and recorded on video tape that up to the moximum ongle tested, 1 approximately 60 off the normal to the grating, the grating acted as a flow straightener and flow exited at cight ongles to the plane of the grating. The I-l/2 in.
; by 3/16 in. grating was then reinstalled in the fiume and its ability to act as a flow straightener was demonstrated for approach flow velocities up to 1.5 fps. l A2.2 Fiume Studies For SONGS A2.2.1 Description Of Focilities An 8 ft long by 2 ft wide channel was constructed using plywood and concrete block walls in the Laboratories 4 ft wide by 4 ft deep by 96 ft long flume, Figure AI.
A 4 ft by 4 ft section of trosh rock grating with bars 2-1/4 in, by 3/16 in. of I-3/16 in. ! centres, was placed vertically across the end of the channel. The channel walls were arranged so that the grating could be angled between 30 to 60 across the fiume flow. A 3 ft wide boffle was placed across the fiume downstream of the grating. A2.2.2 Test Procedure i A water depth of 2.4 ft was set in the fiume. Currents were generated along the channel using a 20 HP recirculating pump. Floating plastic blocks, confetti, dye and light wool tracers were used to illustrate flow-paths opproaching the grating and downstream of the grating. Surface and subsurface flow conditions were recorded on video tape and by 35 mm and 4 in, by 5 in. plate comeros. l
i* *
,1 WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD.
t
- The test program for the supportive fiume tests is given in Table A-l. The initial tests, IV-1 to IV-15, were undertaken to show the flow straightening properties of the trash rock grating. Tests IV-16 to IV-18 were undertaken to demonstrate that l flows possing structural members and blockages at the maximum postulated flow velocities would remain relatively undisturbed and that vorticity in the flow would be i eliminated upon possing through the trash rock grating.
A2.2.3 Flow Strolohtenino Tests Tests IV-1 to IV-6, Table A-1, were run with the grating section placed , L perpendicular to the opproach stream so that the 2-1/4 in. by 3/16 in bars were aligned with the flow. The 3 ft wide downstream baffle was used to divert flow towards one
; side of the fiume after it had possed through the grating to demonstrate that flow lines exited the grating parallel to the bars and retained their direction downstream of the grating for on appreciable distance despite o lateral attraction being imposed on the flow by downstream conditions. The distance from the grating to the baffle was varied from 2 ft to 4 ft to demonstrate that this spacing was not critical to the test i results. Three tests were run at flow velocities of 0.10, 0.25 and 0.50 fps for each g spacing. .
The grating was then aligned at 30 and 60 across the channel exit and flow I conditions documented to examine the effect of approoch flow ongle on the direction f of flow lines exiting the grating. The downstream opening between the baffle and the side of the flume was placed on the side of the fiume towards which the flow was directed by the grating. A final set of tests, IV-13 to IV-15, were run at velocities of 0.10, 0.25 and 0.50 fps respectively with the grating left at 60 to the opproach flow but with the downstream opening moved to the opposite side of the fiume. I
. A2.2.4 Vortex Repression Tests IV-16 to IV-18 examined the effect of the, grating on the rotational motion with flow approaching directly to the grating at velocities of 0.10, 0.25 cnd l 0.50 fps respectively. Angular momentum was imported to the flow by two methods:
. - . - ~ ~. _
r- - --- - _ - - - - - _ __ _ _ _
\
- g
} y' WESTERN CANADA HYDRAULIC LABORATORIES LTD.
- i. Large air-core vortices were generated by a paddle located opproximately 18 in. upstream of the grating.
li. A I ft blockoge in the channel centre produced eddy-shedding i j towards the grating. The second technique more closely simulated the rotational motions that would be experienced in prototype. However, the blockage confined flow in the remolning port of the chonnel and increased overoge flow velocities post the blockage. I A2.3 Test Results A2.3.1 Fle" Stroiohtenino i Tests IV-1 to IV-15 showed that flow paths exited from the downstream side
- of the trosh rock grating in olignment with the grating bars, Figure A2, irrespective of the opproach ongle, for velocities between 0.10 and 0.50 fps. This confirmed the findings of the fiume tests run with higher cpproach velocities and less deep, I-l/2 in.
vs 2-1/4 in. grating as port of the ANO-l ECCS studies. Results were found to be consistent for all velocities and approach angles. Flow potterns were recorded both photographically and on videotape. A2.3.2 Flow Rotation It was shown in the flume and documented on videotape that vortex cores formed by moving a large upstream paddle were broken up by the trosh rock. Large paddle-generated vortices cpproached the grating and occasionally hovered on the upstream side but did not pass through the grating. Angular momentum in the upstream opproach flow was not transmitted through the trosh rock grating even without screens. A weak newly formed circulation was occasionally noted on the downstream side of the grating. Downstream circulation could also be produced l through partial grating blockage. Surface turbulence downstream of the simulated I ft structural members was negligible of the postulated approach velocities. No cir-core vortices were shed from g the blockages with flow velocities post the blockage up to I fps. It was concluded that
WESTERN CANADA HYDHAULIC LABORATORIES LTD. I no significant eddy formation produced by upstreom obstructions to flow will penetrate the Alvin W. Vogtle Nuclear Plant trosh rocks and that the trosh rock - wreen coge constituted the natural model boundary for the til scale ECCS studies. .. I 9 l t i l i s ; I i t 1 l l t
, TABLE A-l SUPPORTIVE FLUME TEST - SONGS ECCS STUDY To demonstrate in the fiume facility that l -
the trosh rock grating will act as a flow straightener. _ l
' Angle, 0, of Distance from Test Flow Flow Number Velocity Depth Grating Plates Groting to Sink fps ft to Approcch Flow ft Degrees, ig. A-l f IV-l 0.10 2.4 0 2 IV-2 0.25 2.4 0 2 IV-3 0.50 2.4 0 2 IV-4 0.10 2.4 0 4 IV-5 0.25 2.4 0 4 IV-6 0.50 2.4 0 4 ,
IV-7 0.10 2.4 30 2 IV-8 0.25 2.4 30 2 IV-9 0.50 2.4 30 2 IV-10 0.10 2.4 60 2 IV-1I 0.25 2.4 60 2 IV-12 0.50 2.4 60 2 IV-13 0.10 2.4 -60 2 IV-14 0.25 2.4 -60 2 IV-15 0.509 2.4 -60 2 IV-16 0.10 2.4 0 degrees-w/ eddies - IV-17 0.25 2.4 0 degrees-w/ eddies - IV-18 0.50 2.4 0 degrees-w/ eddies - i I
, . - . - . . . . . . . =-- ; .
. FIGURE Al I,'. . .
t t VIEWING WINDOW 7 i t VHHHHi
^
#/UHLki,'6c'i'isiUH/H/HHH \ 'I -_
~
\
\
4' 2' = FLOW s
. 9 ---e>= , \. MRATING
~~
v
/ weissomewwouHwH/g ,
, . W//H//HH/(D//M/it/R/H/HH/MH/H//HH/HHH//H/M//HH/H//HNHH/HM, 4 8 l i
-.- ra" -
V/HU///, N/N/1 !
; "--* - - - , n?*a&!tatit**
4' 2' /ZOW Y ' HGR ATIN G
' p ; "- J # 1 i f PLYWOOO GUiOE l /H/HHHH/H/H'/HHNN/H/HHM1
~~
?h///h////U//f/h/IU//////////n////H/N/'////H/H/////////f'//////// .'/////////NH,
_ vo r. = _ 2' - SCALE:1"s3' ALVIN W. VOGTLE NUCLEAR PLANT CONTAINMENT SUMP SUPPORTIVE TESTS TEST FACILITY IN FLUME WESTERN CANADA HYORAULIC LABORATOMIES LTD. ecu seera. wen ..re
' ' - Figure A2
,' [ h l
~ .
.. - ./
/ ,
/
=
8%n . I _ w
~
\i a) Approach velocity 0.10 fps 10 Approach velocity 0.10 fps I Grating at 30 to flow Grating at 60 to flow
-I c) Approach velocity 0.25 fps d) Approach velocity 0.25 fps Grating at 30* to flow Grating at 60 to flow l
e) Approach velocity 0.50 fps f) Approach velocity 0.50 fps Grating at 30" to flow Grating at 60 to flow All flows fram left to right FI.0W STRAIGitTENING EFFECTS OF GRATING
.)}}