ML20133C265

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 961122 Meeting W/W in Rockville,Md to Discuss How Wcobra/Trac Oregon State Univ Long Term Cooling Final Validaton Rept (WCAP-14776) Addresses Concerns Re Computer Code for AP600 Long Term Cooling Analyses
ML20133C265
Person / Time
Site: 05200003
Issue date: 01/03/1997
From: Huffman W
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
NUDOCS 9701070097
Download: ML20133C265 (17)


Text

, - .-.. . - .- . - -..-.- ...-- - - - . - - - - _ - _ - - . - - - - - - - . - - - . -

I

)62-003

{3 [f* "'%g\

) UNITED STATES l

, j o

,j

~f NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20666-0001 8

{

k .... p January 3,1997 l

APPLICANT: Westinghouse Electric Corporation l PROJECT: AP600 i SU8 JECT: SupMARY OF MEETING TO DISCUSS AP600 APPLICATION OF WCOBRA/ TRAC FOR LONG TERM COOLING ANALYSES l

i The subject meeting was held on November 22, 1996, in the Nuclear Regulatory l Commission (NRC) Rockville, Maryland, offices between representatives of j Westinghouse and the NRC staff. A consultant to the Advisory Committee on

Reactor Safeguards (Novak Zuber) was also present at the meeting. The purpose 1
of the meeting was to discuss how the recently issued WCOBRA/ TRAC Oregon State i j University (OSU) Long Term Cooling Final Validation Report-(WCAP-14776) i addresses previous NRC staff concerns regarding the unique aspects of the 4

WCOBRA/ TRAC computer code application for AP600 long term cooling analyses.

Long term cooling calculations with WCOBRA/ TRAC are unique in that Westing-l house uses a " Window Mode" approach which represents the quasi-steady state  !

j behavior of the AP600 at the most limiting, but discrete, times during long l term cooling transients.

f Highlights of the discussions include the following items: I i

Westinghouse reiterated that WCOBRA/ TRAC was chosen for long term i cooling (LTC) analyses because it was the most accurate, NRC approved, j low pressure code available.

l -

Westinghouse stated that while a continuous long term cooling analysis was possible with WCOBRA/ TRAC, it is not practical. The small time step i increments required by the code result in days of computer time even for l the relatively short 1000-second periods used for the window time periods.

Conservative boundary conditions such as core power, sump liquid level,

and containment pressure are imposed on each window calculation. Other j initial window conditions that existed at the end of the design basis LOCA analyses (such as vessel water levels) are obtained from previous calculations using NOTRUMP or WCOBRA/ TRAC-LBLOCA. Westinghouse notes that WCOBRA/ TRAC - LTC calculations will converge to the same steady-

! state conditions from any reasonable values assumed for initial condi-

! tions. The WCOBRA/ TRAC - OSU Long Term Cooling Final Validation Report provides a sensitivity study showing that the long term cooling analysis is essentially independent from initial conditions and that the results j are basically driven by the boundary conditions.

Westinghouse cannot predict the oscillations observed at OSU with 3[f WCOBRA/ TRAC and did not perform any window calculations during the oscillation periods. Westinghouse believes that it understands the physics of the OSU oscillations and that the reasons the oscillations

\

OO NRC File CENTER M 97 970103 PDR ADOCK 05200003 A PDR

?  ;

i  !

January 3, 1997 f

are not a concern for the AP600. Westinghouse stated that discussions

of these oscillations are provided in the OSU Test Analysis Report and '

the AP600 Scaling and PIRT Closure Report. l l <

i Westinghouse stated that the single most important challenge to long term cooling is the ability to achieve and maintain adequate steam *

venting.

I The meeting was productive and helped alleviate some concerns the staff had 1 regarding the window appro:ch. However, the staff still expressed some uncer- ,

tainty about various aspects of the long term cooling analyses which are at i clearly explained in the documentation. These items are summarized below.

  • -- How the GOTHIC code is relied upon to establish containment conditions ,

for the long term cooling boundary conditions, such as containment  !

pressure and sump levels, and exactly how the thermal-hydraulics of the reactor coolant system have been decoupled from the containment analy-sis. In addition, it was unclear if the in-containment refueling water storage tank drain-down and switchover to the sump (recirculation) cooling mode was performed with NOTRUMP, WCOBRA/ TRAC, or GOTHIC.

Is the calculation of the best estimate containment pressure by GOTHIC conservative high or low? That is, were the calculational assumptions used in GOTHIC chosen to result in a higher than expected, containment pressure or lower than expected, containment pressure? j What assumptions were made for flooding of the normally non-flooded volumes in containment for determining the long term containment floodup level?

The staff felt that the key assumptions and their bases for the long term cooling analyses of the AP600 were not well documented. Westing-house stated that the revision to Chapter 15 of the standard safety analysis report should cover these concerns. The staff requested some kind of " executive summary" of how the long term cooling methodology and assumptions are utilized and justified for analyses of the AP600.

Westinghouse stated it would consider putting together a summary report but did not explicitly commit to submit such a report to the staff.

Westinghouse also addressed some of the SDSER open items. The staff stated that its review of the WCOBRA/ TRAC - OSU Long Term Cooling Final Validation Report had not reached a point where discussions or closeout of the SDSER

~ issues would be possible.

1 J

4 .

a Ganuary 3, 1997 4.

Attachment 1 is the list of meeting attendees. Attachment 2 is a copy of the presentation handouts with the proprietary material removed. Westinghouse stated that the proprietary material presented during the meeting is from the

, WCOBRA/ TRAC - OSU LTC Final Validation Report and that the proprietary affidavit for that report is applicable.

. original signed by:

William C. Huffman, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office Of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l Docket No.52-003 Attachments: As stated cc w/ attachments:

See next page

DISTRIBUTION w/ attachments

i iDocket File PDST R/F TMartin PUBLIC DMatthews TQuay WHuffman TKenyon JSebrosky

. DTJackson GHolahan, 0-8 E2 TCollins, 0-8 E23 I

FEltawila, T-10 G6 EThrom, 0-8 H7 DISTRIBUTION w/o attachments:

FMiraglia/AThadani, 0-12 G18 RZimmerman, 0-12 GIS BSheron, 0-12 G18 i

! EJordan, T-4 D18 ACRS (11) JMoore, 0-15 B18

WDean, 0-17 G21 Alevin, 0-8 E23 LLois, 0-8 E23 NLauben, T-10 E46 4
DOCUMENT NAME: A:ll-2LTC. SUM n *. . c.,y .* w. m . mac.= w m. wm c - copy e u.et.n.nu.new.w. r - copy wwi n.ct.n.no.now.w. r - No copy 0FFICE PM:PDST:DRPM l SC:DSSAf48XBl D:PDST;DRP)Wu / l NAME WHuffman:ia) W Alevi4M/\ TRQuay / / 'ted DATE 12/;)f96 12//u/96'l) 42/ /9A

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

)

l 1

l I:

[ Westinghouse Electric Corporation Docket No.52-003

I cc: Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo, Manager Mr. Frank A. Ross Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Analysis U.S. Department of Energy, NE-42 Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Office of LWR Safety and Technology

, Westinghouse Electric Corporation 19901 Germantown Road j P.O. Box 355 Germantown, MD 20874

Pittsburgh, PA 15230

[ Mr. Ronald Simard, Director Mr. B. A. McIntyre Advanced Reactor Program

Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Nuclear Energy Institute
- Westinghouse Electric Corporation 1776 Eye Street, N.W.

l Energy Systems Business Unit Suite 300 Box 355 Washington, DC 20006-3706 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 i Ms. Lynn Connor

, Mr. John C. Butler Doc-Search Associates Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Post Office Box 34 i Westinghouse Electric Corporation Cabin John, MD 20818

! Energy Systems Business Unit J Box 355 Mr. James E. Quinn, Projects Manager

! Pittsburgh, PA 15230 LMR and SBWR Programs j GE Nuclear Energy 1 Mr. M. D. Beaumont 175 Curtner Avenue, M/C 165 Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division San Jose, CA 95125 i Westinghouse Electric Corporation .

! One Montrose Matro Mr. Robert H. Buchholz i 11921 Rockville Pike GE Nuclear Energy j Suite 350 175 Curtner Avenue, MC-781 j Rockville, MD 20852 San Jose, CA 95125

Mr. Sterling Franks Barton Z. Cowan, Esq.

j U.S. Department of Energy Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott 1 NE-50 600 Grant Street 42nd Floor

19901 Germantown Road Pittsburgh, PA 15219 j Germantown, MD 20874
Mr. Ed Rodwell, Manager I Mr. S. M. Modro PWR Design Certification Nuclear Systems Analysis Technologies Electric Power Research Institute Lockheed Idaho Technologies Company 3412 Hillview Averoe '

Post Office Box 1625 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Idaho Falls, ID 83415 Mr. Charles Thompson, Nuclear Engineer l AP600 Certification '

NE-50 19901 Germantown Road Germantown, MD 20874 i

i y -m,,

i l

WESTINGHOUSE - NRC NEETING

' DN APPLICATION OF WCOBRA/ TRAC TO THE AP600

)

LONG TERM COOLING ANALYSES 2

NOVEMBER 22, 1996

MEETING ATTENDEES

, i HAME ORGANIZATION

~

John Butler Westinghouse Larry Hochreiter Westinghouse Dan Garner Westinghouse i Lambros Lois NRC 2

Alan Levin NRC

Farouk Eltawila NRC (Part Time) i Norm Lauben NRC Bill Huffman NRC Novak Zuber NRC Consultant i

) '

4 i

i i

]

l i

i' I 1

i I

l 4

i i

i Attachment I l,

AP600 Plant Long Term Cooling Calculations L. E. Hochreiter Nuclear Safety Analysis Westinghouse Electric Company R November 22,1996 3

~

/am/4: stat pt

.- . . . . - - = - . - .

Westinghouse /NRC Meeting on AP600 Long Term Cooling November 22,1966 AGENDA

1. Introduction Westinghouse
2. WCOBRAfrRAC OSU LTC Validation Report Westinghouse
3. NRC Comments on Validation NRC
4. W SAR Analysis Method . Westinghouse
5. Conclusion / Actions All

/am/41stJinnyt

'l 1

a mem-mum NRC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION i

l l

i l

l Pro LTC LOCA Anahsis i Result M&E Releases NOTRUMP or WCOBRA/ TRAC

--+.

~WGOTHIC code Conditions at U IRWSTinitiation Ref
WCAP- 14382 j

> , Pro-LTC Containment IWRST Draindown Pressure and Core Decay Standard Assur.wion Heat Boiloff *'*'**

Calculation M&E _

Condensate RetumGutters Releases ~

. . . . . . . ."'. . . . . . . . ' Containtnent 1

. Pressure. Surnp

  • Mass and Energy Calculation Level /

Temperature Conditions , ,

l WCOBRA/ TRAC code. *nitiaS ~ ~ ~ ~ " 's/ " ~ " ~ ~

l Sump injoction Containment wig g Calculation calculation Ref: WCAP-12945, Volumes 15, and OSU LTC Validation Report J

RCS and Core conditions durin0 LTC Figure 440.554-1 Long Tenn Cooling Calculation Code Stream 1

440.554RI-4 Wm Westinghouse

4 AP600 LONG TERM COOLING SSAR CALCULATIONS WITH WCOBRA/ TRAC LONG TERM COOLING OF AP600 IS UNIQUE PASSIVE SAFETY-RELATED SYSTEMS PERFORM THE FUNCTION i OF ACTIVE SYSTEMS, QUASI-STEADY-STATE CONDITIONS EXIST IN THE RCS AND CONTAINMENT A SIMPLIFIED WCOBRA/ TRAC MODEL IS USED WCOBRA/ TRAC HAS AMPLE LOW PRESSURE, GRAVITY REFLOOD VALIDATION (CCTF, SCTE, FLECHT, FLECHT-SEASET, LOFT)

VESSEL CHANNELS USED FOR HOT LEGS, COLD LEGS TO BETmR CALCULATE THE FLOW REGIMES, AND PRESSURE DROPS OSU LONG TERM TEST RESULTS USED FOR VALIDATION CALCULATE AP600 PERFORMANCE AT MOST LIMITING, DISCRETE

. TIMES; USING WINDOW MODE APPROACH TO VERIFY CORE COOLING

METHODOLOGY TO PERFORM A WINDOW MODE ANALYSIS 1.

DETERMINE THE LIMITING PORTION OF THE LTC PHASE:

THAT IS MOST DEMANDING ON THE SAFETY SYSTEMS J 2.

SELECT INITIAL CONDITIONS FOR CALCULATION FROM PREVIOUS CALCULATIONS.

3. USE 1971 ANS + 20% DECAY HEAT TO MAXIMIZE STEAM GENERATION.

l MAXIMIZES " STEAM BINDING" EFFECT CHALLENGES RCS VENTING CAPABILITY MINIMIZES IRWST/ SUMP FLOW i

4.

PERFORM WINDOW MODE CALCULATION FOR ~ 1000 SECONDS UNTIL '

SYSTEM IS STEADY.

4 VEnIFY THAT THE CORE REMAINS COOLABLE VERIFY SYSTEM MASS BALANCE; IE, WHERE DOES THE SYSTEM  !

FLOW GO. '

I i

-i,m .,

i

4 E6- R* " M- 'B*'h** *Adh'- MubW heeAAge4. W e a M.4 ab&M44 --au4-.h 64.. h 4_,4,F-g hMcA4,,g,LA_m_a-.g.A_d _4

"- 9 Oke.-6_.A4.L_%% m e t . a. A A=^5.-- L44-*~4*hb-*AN'Ei# '^4'AhM3**AM**'- -L"b'*4hN*4 mm A4_a A4 5  %.A.4 ,_4 44h-* 44L4W&___844.-__

  • e 9

o INITIAL CONDITIONS FOR WINDOW CALCULATION INITIAL CONDITIONS WHICH CAN BE ESTIMATED AND DO NOT '

DETERMINE THE QUASI-STEADY STATE OBTAINED PRIMARY CIRCUIT LIQUID LEVELS AND TEMPERATURE STEAM GENERATOR SECONDARY SIDE LIQUID LEVEI.S AND TEMPERATURE STRUCTURE TEMPERATURES WINDOW APPROACH ASSUMES THAT AN EQUIVALENT QUASI-STEADY STATE WILL BE REACHED FROM ANY REASONABLE VALUES FOR THESE INITIAL CONDITIONS AP600 CASES ARE ANALYZED USING INITIAL CONDITIONS FROM EARLIER NOTRUMP OR WCOBRA/ TRAC CALCULATIONS g N

1

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR WINDOW CALCULATION t

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS WHICH DETERMINE THE QUASI-STEADY STATE CORE POWER i

IRWST LIQUID LEVEL AND TEMPERATURE l

CMT LIQUID LEVEL AND TEMPERATURE SUMP LIQUID LEVEL AND TEMPERATURE  !

CONTAINMENT PRESSURE t

THE IMPOSED BOUNDARY CONDITIONS WILL " FLUSH-OUT" THE l SELECTED INITIAL CONDITIONS AND THE SOLUTION WILL REACH A ,

QUASI-STEADY STATE

  • 1

[

/ sun /4tSLEH.=yf i

i CRITERIA FOR ACHIEVING A QUASI-STEADY STATE  !

KEY VARIABLES EFFECTIVELY ACHIEVE A STEADY STATE i

CORE LIQUID LEVEL DOWNCOMER LIQUID LEVEL UPPER PLENUM LIQUID LEVEL UPPER PLENUM PRESSURE DVI INJECTION RATE BREAK FLOW l -

ADS STAGE 4 FLOW QUASI-STEADY CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATED IN THE OSU WINDOW MODE VALIDATION f

.w ,=

AP600 LONG-TERM COOLING CASES FOR SSAR REVISION 8 ANALYSIS BASES NO CREDIT FOR CONTAINMENT GUTTERS SINGLE FAILURE OF ONE FOURTH STAGE ADS VENT PATH APPENDIX K MODELING, INCLUDING DECAY HEAT MAXIMUM SUMP LINE DESIGN RESISTANCES ANALYSIS SELECTS TIME PERIODS AND CONDITIONS TilAT MINIMIZES SAFEIY INJECTION AND MAXIMIZES STEAM BINDING POSSIBILITIES 1T) CHALLENGE THE AP600 LIMITING CASES WILL BE PERFORMED - SUMP INJECTION DVI AND SMALL COLD LEG BREAK LOCA WINDOW MODEL CASES MODELING PER THE WC/T OSU FINAL VALIDATION REPORT CONTAINMENT CONDITIONS AS CALCULATED BY WGOTHIC CASES TO SHOW ADEQUATE CORE COOLING IN THE LONG TERM rowenstatmyt

_ _. __ - - - - ~ ~~

l AP600 SSAR LONG-TERM COOLING WINDOW MODE CASES CASE ' - DESIGN BASIS DOUBLE -ENDED DVI PIPE BREAK WINDOW INCLUDES THE LATE IRWST INJECTION PHASE AND THE SWITCHOVER INTO STABLE SUMP INJECTION  !

REPRESENTS EARLIEST SWITCHOVER TO SUMP INJECTION AND,  ;

THEREFORE, THE HIGHEST DECAY POWER FOR SUMP INJECTION CASE II - DOUBLE-ENDED DVI PIPE BREAK, RNS OPERATION' INITIALLY f i

RNS FAILURE ASSUMED AT THE TIME OF SUMP SWITCHOVER, AFTER IRWST HAS BEEN DISCHARGED RAPIDLY BY PUMPS ,

IN THIS WINDOW, SUMP INJECTION BEGINS EVEN EARLIER THAN IT '

DOES IN CASE I i

i w ist a ,r i

AP600 SSAR LONG-TERM COOLING WINDOW MODE CASES (CONT'D)

CASE III - TWO-INCH COLD LEG BREAK AT SUM.P INJECTION INITIATION WINDOW INCLUDES THE LATE IRWST INJECTION PHASE AND THE SWITCHOVER INTO STABLE SUMP INJECTION REPRESENTATIVE OF SMALL BREAK LOCA SWITCHOVER TO INJECT FROM A NEAR-SATURATED SUMP CASE IV - TWO-INCH COLD LEG BREAK BEYOND 24 HOURS l LONG-TERM PASSIVE LEAKAGE INTO FORMERLY DRY COMPARTMENTS DIMINISHES SUMP LEVEL BELOW THE INITIAL FLOODUP VALUE havessisty

CONCLUSION I WINDOW MODE APPROACH HAS BEEN VERIFIED BY THE OSU/WCOBRATI'RAC VALIDATION EFFECT AP600 PLANT CALCULATIONS ARE SPECIFICALLY SELECTED:  ;

USING CONSERVATIVE ASSUMPTIONS i

CHOOSING THE TIME PERIODS WHICH WILL CHALLENGE THE AP600 PASSIVE SAFETY SYSTEMS 4 RESULTS CONTINUE TO SHOW AMPLE CORE . COOLING, WITH MARGIN, AS SEEN IN OSU TESTS wistatwyr '