ML20134F399
| ML20134F399 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 08/02/1985 |
| From: | Nondahl S, Sansore R BURMAH TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. (FORMERLY CLOW CORP.) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20134F395 | List: |
| References | |
| 6-18-85, 6-18-85-R-A, 83-2462(N), NUDOCS 8508210091 | |
| Download: ML20134F399 (105) | |
Text
.
o N.]
Cl.OW Clow Corporation 40 Chestnut Avenue 312 789-8900 Engineered Products Division Westmont. !L 60559 PURGE AND VENT VALVE OPERABILITY QUALIFICATION ANALYSIS Report No. 6-18-85 Rev. A PREPARED FOR ILLIN0IS POWER COMPANY CLINTON POWER STATION UNIT 1
.O V
by Steven M. Mondahl Robert Sansone Work performed under Baldwin Purchase Order Number - C43005 Clow Job Nuinber: 83-2462(N)
This report covers Equipment Designation:
IVR006A IVR006B IVR007A IVR0078 82hD P E
k.
O REVj REV. REV. CHECKED Q.A.
fl0. I DATt BY DESCRIPTIO1 0F CHAfiGES BY BY Afl0 PAGES 9EVISED
, 0 -- -- -- Original Issue i
A B/2/85
$wQ kbh r/Hg NM Miscellaneous revisions as denoted per resolution of comments in 7/29/85 S&L letter per 8/2/85 meeting with IP/SL &
_. Clow. Pages revised are: 2,5,6,9,22, 27',32,40,59,60,61,62,66,67,68,70,72, 76, & B-5.
I i
J t ~
- O l
i \
1 l
t O
t
. _ _ _ _ _ - , . , - - - - . - - , , - . - - ww,_.,_--v-. . , , , . . , , - ,,y- ---.-<v,r-w -
--._m-----ry_- ---%w erw----.-.e---,-.-ir ---e-- ~ ww,
i
( _
CERTIFICATION.
i This is to certif3 that all valves (Equipment Ncs. IVR006A, IVR006B, IVR007A, IVROC78) have been evaluated for oferability j under the installed corefitions indicated in supplied drawings (M06-1111) and purchasing specifications (BA-K-2.882-29).
The information contaired in this report is the result of complete
- and carefully co'nducted analyses and to the best of cur knowledge
! is true and currect in ill respects. The informatior presented f
e in ccmbination with the supporting documents referenc3d, represents f a demonstrated qualificstion of the subject valves to the best of j our knowledge for the raquired service application.
Paper written anc analyses by -
{ 9t. hof.1 . Of l Steven M. Nondat1 i
4 s
1
)
l i
j i
- . _ - _ - _ . - - - . . - . _ _ - - - . _ _ - - . _ - . , , _ . - - _ _ ~ , , , - - - _ . -
i . I
}
! ii .
4 TABLE OF CO?!TEt1TS ;
1 Page I LIST OF TABLES y i
j LIST OF FIGURES vi i
i 1.0 IrlTRODUCTION 1 l l 1.1 Testing Derformed 2 l -
1.2 Cualific1ticn I
Method 5 1
- A. Envi.onmental 5 j B. Structural (For Soismic and Other 6
- Loadings)
C. Operability Under Flow 7 i 2.0 DESIGN OF VALVE AND ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY 10 I '
j 2.1 Valve Orsign 10 i
f 2.1.1 Ceometry 10
) 2.1.2 f:aterials 13
- 2.1.3 Operation 16 j 2.2 Actuator Design 20 i
2.2.1 (eometry 20 2.2.2 /,ctuator Design Materials 25 i i
i 2.2.3 /ctuator and Valve Operdtion 26
?
! 2.2.3.1 Actuators and Assessories 26 j Supplied f j 2.2.3.2 Operating Time 32
?
- i t
r
3 iii
. TAB.E OF CONTENTS (con't)
Page 3.0 VALVE OPERAfillG At:0 INSTALLATIGli REQUIRE!iEtiTS 33 3.1 Valve ]perating Conditions 33 3.2 Valve Installation Configurations 35 4.0 VALVE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY UNDER SEISMIC AtlD 38 OPERATION LOADINGS 4.1 , Valve itress Analysis 38 4.2 Actuator Tests 42 5.0 VALVE AERODYNAMIC TORQUES 43 5.1 Model Tests 44 5.1.2 Tests With An Upstream Elbow 50 5.1.3 Downstream Piping Effects 52 5.2 Model lata Verification 53 5.3 Applicition of Model Aerodynamic Test to 54
, Full S.ze Valve Operability .
5.3.1 Valve Operating Times Expected in 54 Service ,
5.3.2 Aerodynamic Torques For Valve; As 55 Installed 1
5.3.3 Conclusions Concerning Valve 65 Operability .
6.0 NRC 21 QUES"10NS 65 7.0 VALVE SEALING CHARACTERISTICS 69 7.1 Normal Sealing 69 7.2 Long Term Sealing
,, 71 7.3 Debris Effects on Sealing 72 7.4 Sealing Under Temperature Variations 73 ,
O -
i f
- i. .
i tv 1
J IABLE OF CollTE!!TS (can't) ,
c 2'
Pa. a i 8.0 REFEREfiCES 74 APPEtIDIX A i
1 l APPEflDIX B t
l 1 !
j -
1 i
l
}
i A
L I
1 i
!O 4
i 1
e t
o i
l l
l l
l .
- l l
4
\
O
]
~
v -
LIST OF TABLES TABLE TITLE PAGE
~
1 28 ACTUATOR ACCESSORIES FOR EACH UtlIT 2 VALVE BEINH TEST OPERATING TIMES 32 3 COMPARISC!l 0F CLINTON tlVCLEAR SPECIFIC RE- 39 QUIREMEfilS TO GEllERIC NUCLEAR QUALIFIC..TI0tl DATA 4 48 TEST VAltE SCALED SIZES (CRITICAL ELEMENTS) l S COMPARIS0il 0F PRODUCTION VALVE TO VALVF MODEL 49 SIZES (CFITICAL ELEMENTS) 6 EMERGENCY FLO!I, MAX CONTAlllMENT PRESSUPE 60 l CHARACTEFISTICS, STRAIGHT PIPE RUN l '
l 7 fl0RMAL FLOW CHARACTERISTICS, STRAIGHT ;'IPE RUtt 61 (SHAFT UPSTREAM) .
8 NORMAL FLOW CHARACTERISTICS, STRAIGHT l'IPE RUtl 62 (SHAFTDOWNSTREAM) 9 TORQUE FCR AS-I!! STALLED COl:DITIC!!S FOR VALVES: 63 IVR007A 10 TORQUE FCR AS-INSTALLED CONDITIONS FOR VALVES: 63
, IVR006A, IVR006B -
11 TOR 0VE FCR AS-IllSTALLED CONDITIONS FOR VALVES: 64 IVR007B ,
12 VALVE SE/ LING CHARACTERISTICS 70 t
9 I
o .
vi LIST OF FIGURIS O FIGURE TITLE 1 .TRICEllIRiC VALVE OFFSETS 2 12" VALVI ASSEMBLY AND MATERIAL .
3 DISC WITF' CLOSIllG FORCES APPLIED :
4 ACTUATOR SCOTCH YOKE DESIGN S
TYPICAL *0RQUE OUTPUT FOR DOUBLE ACTIN'i SCOTCH 2
. YOKE ACTilATOR 6 FAIL SAFE, SPRING RETllRN ACTUATOR DESIGN "
7 TYPICAL TORQUE OUTPUT CURVES FOR A SPRING l-RETURil ACTUATOR 8 CALCULATEl' TORQUE DATA NT-316-SR2 2:
9 CALCULATE.D TORQUE PLOT 3' 10 PLAtt "R" CONTINU0US-PURGE HVAC SUCTION LINE S':
11 S' PLAN "S" CONTINUOUS PURGE HVAC EX11AUST LINE 12 VALVE OR ENTATIONS RELATIVE TO UPSTREA' ELB0W I 13 & 14 CLOSE UP VIEll 0F SINGLE TEST VALVE EXP RIMEllTS ::
WITH A B,tCX PRESSURE RATIO 0F .45 n 9
0 O i
l
\
Pige 1 l
- l. II;TRCDUCTION l The fluclear Regulatory Commission has, since 1979, been highly concerned abouc the operability of purge anc. vent valves
! during certain postulated occurrences. Their study in this area
, has shown that many vslves were designed only to operate under normal flow requiremelts. For a postulated loss of coolant accident, such valves may fail to close in the time required to prevent discharge of radioactive gases to the outside environment.
Such a failure could nceed 10 CFR 100 guidelines arc present a significant hazard to the health of persons in the area.
flRC Branch Technical Josition CSB 6-4 gives some background on p operations of purge aid vent systems and basic regt.f rements for
\J '
their design. For the valves used in such systems, further guidelines are providad in " Guidelines for Deconstration of f
Operability of Purge ind Vent Valves", which was provided to nuclear plant operato*s by an flRC letter in September 1979.
, This set of guideline: covers twenty-one points (less two) which are to be addressed bi the plant operator. This paper addresses those items which may be answered by the valve manufacturer based on the conditions provided by the plant operator for the pos'tulated loss of coolant accident.
This paper describes the design of both Clow's Tricentric butterfly' valve and the Bettis pneumatic actua tor used to operate
! the valve. In addition, descriptions of various tests performed O
. Page 2 b
to determine flow and torque characteristics and application of this test data to the installed condition of the subject valves are presented. Information as to the structural integrity of the valve and operator assembly under seismic and other inplant loadings are also presented. This information, in combination with the supporting detailed technical reports (see 8.0 references),
represents a demonstrated qualification of the subject valves to the best of our knowledge for the required service application.
1.1 T'esting Performed Clow became involved with design of butterfly valves specifically for purge and vent containment isolation early in 1981. A test program was initiated to deter-mine the mass flow and aerodynamic torque characteristics
\
of the Tricentric butterfly valve design. Tests were per-formed for 12", 24", 48", and 96" scale model valves (scaled to 3" pipe size) in a straight pipe run for both unchoked and choked flow regimes. Pressure ratios for l
l choking, flow coefficients for mass flow, and aerodynamic l torque coefficients were determined in these experiments.
The experimental set ups met the ISA* test requirements for compressible flow measurement. All measurements were automatically read, digitized, and recorded on magnetic tapo. The obtained data was then evaluated by other l computer programs.
- Instrument Society of America
/
.----..-,,---c-,.,,,,,.,,_.-.----%y- ., - - . . , , - , . , - , , - - - _
--.-m , - - - . _ . - - - - - . - .-
-. -- . ..m , ,,.m , ,,- _ - , - ,- , ~ , _ ,
_ . _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ . m . _ . .. . . . . . _ . . . . . . ._
page 3 O Subs equ -n ti f, a uc puter progr:m, 0.'AP wt s covelopad using the measured data base to predict flow ard torque values for full size valves in a straight run.
In the Spring of 1981, Clow personnti met with repre-sentatives )f the NRC to review the test program to that point and t) obtain recommendations for additional testing.
As a result. Clow and it's fluid dynamic consultant set up two additional programs to determine how the aerodynamic torque characteristics of the Tricentric talve varied with installed pi,) lag conditions. For such cenditions effects of both ups: ream and downstream piping elements (elbows, toes, reduc.!rs, etc.) were considered. From results of backpressur) tests performed in the first set of exper-iments and vater table studies previousl.y done by Clow, it was determi ted that upstream piping elemcnts would present a worst cas! condition. Further, due to.the numerous types of upstream elements (upstream elbows (mitered, 900, other angles, sho t radius, long radius), tees, reducers), a worst case iad to be selected for evaluation. A 900 mitered elbow was s 21ected due to the fact that this element pre-sented the worst separated flow region at the inner corner and biased a major portion of the flo'1 to the outer corner.
A.second set of tests was developed to obtain information about the effect on each other of two valves in series (the common plant installed practice). Due to the fact O .
\
Page 4 l
O that cach e rperiment required an increasing amount of tes t combinatiors, the experiments were done in a phased approach. .
The upitream elbow tests were performed first for a scale model of a 12" valve in 3 orientatians relative to the elbow aid at 3 spacings (2, 4, & 8 diameters) from the elbow. Fron the results a worst case was determined to l
occur at 2 fiameters. Thus a scale model of the 24" and 48" were tet.ted oniy at 2 diameters. Upstream elbow effects diminished significantly at 4 diameters and were barely detectable .t 8 diameters. i From t'iese results, the two valves ii series tests were restri:ted to spacings of 2 and 4 di1 meters. As in the elbow e<periments, the worst case occJrred at 2 dia-meters and it 4 diameters the results approached those for the single 'alve experiments.
To subitantiate the model tests and show the validity of scaling :he model data to full size valves', Clow per- , ,
formed a ch iked flow operational test of s full size 12" valve with i pneumatic spring return actuator at Vought Corp., Dall.ts. Texas, in flovember of 1981 (see Appendix B I for a basic description). The test showed that the valve would operate under the choked flow test conditions , that l mass flows were as predicted, and that use of the CVAP E j program to predict torques was a conservative method i
(peak measured torque was approximately 65% of that pre-dicted). The test also incorporated a static 11.0 g load
= - _ - -- _ - _ _ . - - _ _ . _ - _ - .
Page 5 -
O to the actuator simulating a severe seismic /aero dynamic induced loading. It further validated the directional effects of aerodynamic torque measured in the model tests (in the test all torques tended to close the valve).
l.2 Qualification Method Clow provides certification of operability of valves pro-duced for purge and vent containment isolation service by a combination of tests and analysis. The following items are considered and covered in this and supplemental reports.
A. Environmental All portions of the Clow Tricentric are of com-pletely metallic construction other than stem packings and the. asbestos seal laminations. The valve seals by metal to metal contact between the seat and seal. The asbestos seal laminations used to separate the SST laminations do contain a SBR (Styrene-Butadiene Rubber) binder which may degrade under radiation. Further, the asbestos laminations are shielded by the SST laminations and disc components. Although the asbestos may become embrittled on the periphery, the valve will still perform its sealing function (see Radiation !
Sensitivity Analysis Report Wyle 17629-01).
1 0
4 e
a ,,-n ------ ,_ _,. .,m, , n.------.r.,- . , , , - , --- . . , , __.--.,-----.,,n.- . - . - - . - . , .- - - ~ , , _
. .,---e -
Page 6 The packings will perform their function under the required environment as long as they are replaced at recommended intervals.
Actuators used on the valves are qualified for the environment by the actuator manufacturer to codes, standards, or test procedures accepted by the valve buyer'.' (See Bettis Nuclear Qualification Test Report
~
37274 Rev. A Patel Report PEI-TR-852201-02)
- 8. Structural (For Seismic and Other Loadings)
Clow provides for each valve design a finite element analysis of the valve structure and hand calculations of selected components. These analyses show the valve to be constructed within ASME Section III requirements and that elements not covered by the code are designed with adequate safety margin. Analyses can be found in the code required Design Report (Clow DR-83-2462(N)),
and the Structural. Analysis Reports (PEI-TR-852400-1 and PEI-TR-833600-1 Rev. A). The elements considered by these reports include:
- 1. Valve body
- 2. Valve disc
- 3. Valve disc shaft
- 4. Valve disc shaft connection
- a. Disc ear
- b. Drive keys
- c. Dowel pin (retains shaft from static end load due to fluid pressure)
rage 7 O 5. Actuator mcunting structtre
- a. Adaptor flange
- b. Bolting Actuators and instruments mounted on the actuators are qualified separately by the manufacturer by general test results.
C. Operability Under Flow Oper.ibility under maximum flow conditions is based on a corDination of a bench test of each unit (timed test sith no flow) and analysis of the torque charteteristics. The bench test snows the closing cycle time when no aerodynamic torque is imposed.
This data combined with conservative (see assumptions beles) calculations of the aerodyramic torque is used to show the valve will close in ti.e required time.
Benc'1 tests of actuators and valve assemblies include operation during worst case conditions (minimum voltage, air supply, or maximum back presst.re for pneumatic actustors if applicable).
Th'e following method is used to show operability:
- 1. Determine no flow worst case operating time from bench tests.
- 2. Using Clow program CVAP calculate aero-dynamic torques for straight pipe conditions.
O
Page 8
- 3. Determine a torqua , modi 'ication factor based on the installed '.from buf er prints) or a worst case upstrea n piping condition using the mitered elbow or two valves in series test data.
- 4. Determine predicted tortue values for all disc angles based on 2 and 3 above.
- 5. Provide tabulation orsplot of actuator output torque for all actuator angles.
- 6. Show that actuator outpt t provides suffic-ten,t margin to overcome aerodynamic and other torques (bearing, p'acking, disc wt.)
O 7.
to close the valve.
From the above data, actuator type, and s
Vaught full size test v alve data, project a closing ' rate under thi conditions analyzed i
above.
, In the above calculations, ;he following assump-tions are employed: -
- a. Containment pressura is at a maximum value and full flow'is developed before valve starts to close.
- b. The pressure downstream of the valve is atmospheric. In the elbow experi-ment it was noted that downstream O
V ,
4
Page 9
- O elbows may choke before the valve for certain d;sc angles, producing a higher.
backpressure and lower torques.
- c. Upstream piping components may produce i
_ a less severe torque condition than the i
i
, experimental element (mitered elbow worse than radius elbow).
]
- d. Torque coefficients used in the CVAP program are worst case values. In the experiments a band of coefficients was observed with !
some dependence on pressure ratio. The high end of the band was used in the CVAP i i
program. (I.E. most conservative data samples) @
- e. Scaling of torques to larger size valves by the 03 method was shown to be conser-4 vative by the Vought Test.
} The net result of all such calculations and tests i
j to date continue to show that the design and sizing of all components used in the valve or the actuator exceed the aerodynamic closure requirements based
. on design for suitable torques to seat and seal the valve.
- O
(
_.___...____-__..____._.____..__.,..._..__.__..._,l._.._._,__. ._
Page 10
2.0 DESII
OF VAL 7 A!D ACTUATOR ASSE:CLY 2.1 Valve Design 2.1.1 Geometry
- The Tricentric
- alve uses a geometry that is inique not only to purge valves but to butterfly valves in general. This feature gives the Tricentric functional characteristics which are desirable in purge valve applications. Thru use of a conical sealing surface, with the cone axis offset from the pipe axis and a rotation point telected so that it is offset t' rom both the pipe axis and the seal plane, a metal to metal seal can be obtained (Figure 1 ). The sealing is a. result of n'ormal forces acting between the sealing surfaces rather than sealing due to surface interference typical of other butter'ly va ves with elastomeric seals.
One of the major advantages of the conical se.I design is I that it provides a ncn-jamming action. This characteristic results from controlling the cone angle so the ang'c of friction of the material is e>ceeded. This has been prc.aq in actual tests similar to the test described here:
A 20-inch Tricentric wafer valve was closed by applying 20,000 in.lbs. of seating torque. Then the unseating torque was measured. This was repeated 3 times to determine an average value for the unscating O
O .
O O )
+
~
, 3 <
w 6, 1'
N I- - ,
p ' '
UEAL
,- - seal.( PATH r \
g
\
axis [ '
I
('o f fset ,
i ' ~ ~~
POINT
~ l_ ON
- x. 7-t < .
SEAL
~'~~
pipe q I __ . _-._-- -
g
~
offset -
I 8 flote: Double flange style cone (
g yjl -
shown for illustr.ition purposes only. The I l N ROTATION same offsets apply to l
i .v7 POINT wafer style.
-,VI < <,. o t___.
____m , ,
J 1 _F y f_i r
FIGURE 1.- TRICEtiTRIC VALVE OFFSETS .
a
Page 12 torque. The te;' wc _ r pea'.cd wi th ;he sea ting torque increased by 10,000 in.lbs. increments until a maximum seating torque af 100,000 in.lbs. had been achieved.
During the enti e test, the seat / seal interface was dry .
(highest angle )f friction) and no pressure was applied to the valve. *he smallest value of torque that could be accurately measured was 1000 in.lbs and at no time was more than 1:100 in.lbs. required to unseat the valve regardless of the seating torque applied.
Since the shaft is offset in 2 directions, one from the pipe axis and, one from th. seal plane, 2 performance advantages result.
The first is th'e sea ing surface is continuous thru 360 degrees with no interruption; from the shaft penetration. This elininates the leakage and wear associated with the shaft peretration areas.
The second advantage comes from the shaft being of fset (eccentric) from the pipe axis. This eccentricity produces unequal areas about the rotation point, so when the valve is closed and oressure is applied to the shi.ft side of the disc (normal. direction), a closing moment resul:s. This will result in , increased scaling forces between the seat-seal interface as pressure increases.
This force, in combination with the mechanical torque produced by the actuator, results in the tight se'aling capability achieved with the'Tricentric. A definite relationship between these f
j Page 13 2 offsats is required to provide a valve that has no binding l
J or interference prol lems as the seal is rotated out of the se3t.
This relationship i* determined analytically to p ovide the l best performance wi hout overdesigning the valve ecmponents.
All of these features have been incorporated into the lugged l
l wafer body that results in a very rugged and sturdy valve design 1
capable of meeting or exceeding all the requirements set forth l l in most specifications.
! 2.1.2 Materials A complete list of valve component materials used on
, Purchase Order Numbr.r C43005 may be found on the G!neral
- Arrangement Drawing (D-0809) which follows this section.
Since purge anc vent valves must perform safety related functions not only during normal conditions but atso during and af ter upset, emergeicy and faulted conditions, th! material selections were basId on a worst case event. Beiause the valves are required to pre /ent discharge of radioactive Jases to the outside environment during a LOCA, the seat and sial.matertals are critical to the operation of the valves. Dur.ng normal operation the valve; are exposed to the air in th! containment and outside air, bu; during a LOCA the media may 3e made up of steam and air, all of which may be radioactive and at elevated temperatures. The seat material selected for this application was 9
SA240 316L SST. The 316 grade was selected due t) its corrosion resistan'ce and abil'.ty to withstand all of the po sible medias ,that may come in contact with the seat. The L grace of 316 SST was O
E
r
! Page 14 O -
further specified because the seat is welded t: the body (SAS16 GR 70) and'the L grade has a lower carbon conte nt that will reduce the carbide preciDitation in the heat affected zone of the seat. 4 The seal is a laminate of 316 SST and asbestos. Both laminants are 1/16 inch thick, The 316 SST was chosen it the " straight" grade since no we. ding is done on the seal. The asbestos used is made of John Manytile style 60 or equal material. The laminated type seal was selected for its ability to seal with less torque than would be regJired for a solid seal. The Icminate allows each SST member to act independently and to conform to the contour of the machined saat as seating torque is applied. The asbestos member not only allows each SST member to act independently but also reduces the seal area in contact with the seat and therefore, results in application of higher normal stress (s to the seal for -
any given seating torque.
.. t l
('
I I
.)
o'
{
- n
f J
i I k f. UUUY
_3 ; , _'g g --
n \,
, g , .
19.1 12 -
l h l l g. \@ ,
20 3G t
x i @ -
.p-,
- f\ '
. (*
]* ,
s \ e (GQi '
k
'i
$_c b-% ) ,c w v// m -
=..c=os.,,w&n' '., ,_4:,,Cr r - .
il - - - -iiiE. t i. :-~ ' '
____ ]
/i a Y W E ' //1 d.
Or% y N,zr; yO k KN a m' w,,n -!n's
( /l .I 'I
- n
,b,>
\h- i A
DNR h\d
- l p h. /. ,
I - -
A- I i q p I I c
9 13 g l'1 18 16 13 19.2 22./ 21 25 g
28 @
SECTION B-B ,
CODE REFEF ENCE: CLASS 2, SECTION .' SI' MS.- is 3/4_ ._
U-VESSEL COEE, 1980 EDITION INCLUDI"'DA FLANGE BOLTING DIMENSIONS PER ANS* u C I' , l $'2'*
? MIN.
is _._._y
^ L DESIGN CCFOITIONS:
RAISED Fi j 1 PRESSUFE:
gj. BODi: 285 PSIC, RATING CLF.: W
- s. . n *1 l msc -- 38 DISL: 30 PSID s, -
$ c- s.n. 5*"
'M p,z MIN.
TEMPERATURE: 185" F is ala. te ra.
@ l'
@ l
_'y OPERATNG TEMPERATURE: 122' F
'"
- PRESSURE TESTS:
'\
CCC> l
- r- * * " @ SHELL TEST
- 450 PSIG (#ro#0t# -
,s
" .o '
-t-+-' " SEAT TEST : .fN/rr..f/Af _F/ /S M.G
- M 'f (P;\\Q
/. " LEAKAGE PAST SEM.
os,?
";7; i/l M OVALVE HEILHT: 90 LBS. (APPROX.*
1=
'#i .-
' W em =
C p i r' ,3- ACTUATOR WEIGHT: 638 LBS. l APPRO'-
e MINIMUM THICKNESSES:
M Miu. _.. .h!- - . t ;-, E. i 6.g _-_ f __ .
.. . ;) . BODY WALL: .44' .
BEARNG NECK: .1 '7 (THE MIN. W
- f L
9 BOLT HOLE AND BODY
\
or j (norrws' ext *wa .asMc 1, ' l g MN. to 3/4 -
G. OCSCRIPTION ITEM M O 41/4 __"tN. a _ g oisc notis s /f- r VIEW C-C VIEW C-C e e COVEp PL*TE D3.?S 10]!/.
~ ~ ~
g m ,us y,3 gw_i FOR TAC NOS[:.u e- - . .FOR 77,0 NOS . ' *
@ .tDAPTCR PLATE mig 'u3 d!5 b
~*
l'/R0059' '
- """'N" -
O IVRCO7A e I rcE : Acrunna O t pens ton 9 CIVEN .*S *H!N.*
l F (,
T ;T'JA TM/rG.:;Osr nDjusT/ 7 ,i, 97rARE 1 0MIN!w)*4A
- A1 riaaNr.
" lea A ANCE DIM.S
i
~
{N, 1/16 -; '
- - 3 "--+.i AND MTERIAL MIN. f
+m&m
- . L.-
eo?:ra-lN.'fCwap x
. . .-. \N ---Q-et.etwrr.o *r'c. :o.< cc
.. ut.r.-. - ..,
igu
,41 .L > Y. gs)/- ,
0.0.
/
/{ 5 3 DENOTES SRFETY RELATED NON-PRESSURE 23 BOUNDARY PARTS.
1.3G4 i A DENOTES PRESSURE RETAIN!tO PE:.'TS.
15" \ $ DENGTES RECOMMENCEC SPARE PARTS.
R.F. lREF --Q (
- zwis a=>
IS 2 -
lig y/ JAM NUT 4 c>a.
l 1.0. E 6 3G NAME PLATE 1 552 ' ! WMiinb
$M 1:*""""o g 3
G 52E PARALLEL KEY SOC.HD CAP SCRW 1
4 cii'skih*e'2ia A.'7, l l rh,yy~~ ,
2 5 ACTUATOR 1 c'a- i.Ei W J N 3'"
. \\ ~*,,,"g 5 ADAPTOR PLATE 1 5."A i i
_ _ _4 s 7 @ 2f SCO.HD. CAP SCRW G S.'7, l $di EF**
, gx Rw._ 5 LOCXWIRE h/R SST I l x A 22 NUT 4 5.'s i l
' A2 STUD 4 $.'E i 1.1 4 A -
GLAND 1 % Es Asia k B
b~b
'* 19.2 PACKING 2 =~35 l M m-8 I b
- 5.1 PACKING I3l "m' i 3 c 5"u 2" i III PARALLEL KEY I 2 l ce'sk @#sia D DOWEL PIN 1! S%i E*$2.1LE'ic !
? :.N3 PRESSURE SNMER, 1982.
JOB NFORMATION GF6 DRIVE SHAFT 1 'T 2" =>c -" x I g ~3 BEARING 2 * :"
_j
! WITH 1/16" CUST.: I'_LIN0!S POWER COMPANY :i CLINTON POWFR STATION
- 12 'ANNU_AR KEY 1 .ifA:. i UNIT 1 acent i .a.v. .r.e. o. n. .u.n . ..
-11 SPACER 1 c-imo c-iax r4[ku.
sis m ,sa sr.23 i i
e.i..n.e
. -. . nhi t .u.
g . .
A I'J
~
HEX HD. CAP SCRW 4 M.*N i E Ef # " " l
- ji GASKET 1 =m' i l
CLOW J0G NO.: 83-2462-01(N) A ji COVER PLATE . 1 M.5s i J SOC. SET SCRW 2 c,.. !
'.s e r: m e) .-
3 F:iR MINUTE clow vatvc incie.s.- war wemmeG 2 J HEX HD.CFP SCRW 16 % 8# Edt#"*"
%%mc) SERIAL NUMBERI NO.S ix I v 2 1
- 4 LAMINATED SEAL l 1 CS' WA, ;
83-24s2-ouNi ri av.m sn es.47 -en . .f.oz G 2 2 CLFyP RING 1 83-24sz-ou Ni- ,2 ivaQess ,
2.i4 h i.3r @
S?M ~
DISC V Mear.r 1 Ef4 , i
@ 83-24G2-01(N)-03 IvRCJ7A n 2,ff 3, C2 , @@l- p ,3
.g, ,
~'CE 83-24s2-01tN)-r:4 IVROQ78 dr -2.19 -3.02 @2
- VALVE BODY
" #" ^
+
g c.c. or vAtvt w/o Ac.ruarot. . _ A 1_1 1 M?s
'A '3.sr, t .42 , : .ir.
,., 3,,, , ,7y , , , , -
e =ni ;e>tJ PP!wi ..iiM'niiii. ri vu nin:i..i.e on,ien. ga':C m >>
~x N/A :"'""i n ut intin u 3
( ) ..m .: . : . ; : tsa i n uc m.o: n ?
. n..: ' ; nii' : 'll;!!". n'!'h ""jl.','.5l 'j':, .:.', -ll.:.'! "
, .Tinirn a antanas ;;;,,g ,;;g,,,;;i;n;,,,ig,,g;g;;, '
- ,, Wir-tm N/A istinnn ""'
12
..n u n n.n.."- nennt : .oi. u - " ,.,.y
',' STOPA ALVE 4 Nff anurint: us nuu. .ni ASSET.8LY
..nt s : 3 s., .y a-N-N .nnn n.
~
.r.a D-0303 A.
g73 n..n non, ,,, o mmu ..u
.nn.: innt..n.nin Q,,,9,y., w ty,% = n.
_ - -. ..,.._a _ --m, - - -
-w %-
c3 nc?-o nn
Iage 16 (m -
2.1.3 Operation The operation of the Tricentric valve is extrur,ely simple since there are only 1. moving parts, the disc assemoly and the shaft. The valve oper ates by changing the position of the disc relative to the seat. This is accomplished through the application or control of torque nn the valve shaft through the entire operating range of 90 degress. (Zero degrees being fully closed and 90 degrees fully ocen). There are seven different torques of importance that the valve will encounter dependir.g on the disc position or change in position required, if any. Tr e valve shaft must be designed to withstand tije worst case combin. tion of these operating torques wittout being overstressed. Thes! torques are (3 described in a random sequence since they may occur in different V
sequences during actu21 valve operation.
- 1. Bearing friction torque is the result of the flow or pressure forces acting on the disc which are ;ransmitted 4
to the bearing through the shaft which suppor:s the disc.
The bearing friction torque is proportional t, these forces acting on the disc and the coefficient of fri : tion between the shaft and the bearing materials. Bearing friction torque must be overcome anytime the disc is required to change position.
- 2. Packing or seal friction torque is the result of the l norm'al forces the packing exerts on the shaf t. These normal l
Fage 17
/T U
forces are due . the ?acking gland force and the internal valve pressure. The packing gland force is required to effect a shaft seal. The packing friction torque is also dependent on the coefficient of friction betw?en the packing and the shaft mcterial. Packing friction tor;ue must also be overcome wher. the disc is required to chan;e positions. '
by the differential pressure acting on the uncqual areas of either side of t1e eccentric shaft centerline (Fig. 3)
The PAM torque is therefore dependent on the 'ralve size, shaft eccentricity and the di fferential press. ire.
Depending on which side of the disc the press ire is applied,
/~'T the PAM torque r ay aid seating or unseating o' the valve disc.
b
- 4. Seating toique is the amount of torque r quired to develop the norr.al forces between the scat an i seal to effect a tight closure. Seating torque is dependent on the sealing materials, seal thickness, valve geometry, va ve size, differential prissure and leakage requirement;. As seen in Fig. 3, as the salve is seated by applying a : losing moment T1 , the normal iorces Rn will increase. .Since the seal angle varies around the seal circumference, Rg also varies, thus the point where R;q is a minimum must be loaded sufficiently to effect a seal. Sealing characteristics will be further discussed in the section under Valve Sealing Characteristics (Section 7.0).
[a~ \ f 4
.l -
Page 13 DISC axis g CONE AXIS
\
\
ECCENTR'ICITY(E) l T CLOSE P Rn
( /y ,-
}
/sy1 '
,, - CISC/ SEAL 1 R7 I
o
~
I 8
T1 = Closiig torque applied by actuator P = Force equisalent to disc pressure loadint R;t = Normal seat reaction ' force due to torque application RT = Tangential seat reaction force due to disc raotion (friction)
DISC MITH CLOSING FORCES APPLIED O -
\
FIGURE 3 y -
r -
i'29e 19
/m U
- 5. Unseating torque is the torque required :o move the seal out of contact with the seat. Unseating torque is also dependent on the sealing materials, seal thickness, valve geometry, valve size, differential pres:ure, and also the seatinc torque. As described in the section
,under Valve Desi Jn, when no pressure was appl ed to the ~
valve, the unseating torque was small relative to the applied seating e.crquei However, when pressure is applied to the shaft sida of t.e disc, not ' nly o does *ne normal force (Rn) increase but also the frictional force (RT) which resists opening. This increase in fric tional force may exceed the F A!! torque. Thus an actuator s selected to provide an ot.tput torque greater than PA!.! .orque.
- 6. Weight offset torque is the result of thi. C.G7 of the disc being displaced from the rotation point. The weight offset torque is proportional to the disc weit nt, shaf t i
eccentricity, disc position, and the valve in: tallation position. On small size valves the weight of' set torque is generally an insignificant amount since the disc weight is so small.
- 7. Fluid aerodynamic torque is the torque due to inter-action of the flowing media with the valve disc. This is covered in detail in Section 5.0.
en er of siravi Q ,
fage 20 O As seen in the laugh: Ccrp. Test Repcet (Rafa ence 8.0 3-1) the running torque wa; approximately 1000 in.lbs. a; shown in Fig. 8 Run 1 and F.'g.15 Run 8,with no flow through the valve.
This running torque is a combination of bearing, pa: king, and weight offset torque "alues. The unseating torque may also be seen, which was appro::imately 1500 in.-lbs. when a eating torque of approximately 18,000 in A bs. was used to close t.1e valve with a 80 psig air supply to the actuator'.
2.2 Actuator Design 2.2.1 Geometry The basic actuator is'a device by which air .*ressure is converted to thrus through 'a linear cylinder ani then converted f\
J to a rotary (900) mot on through the use of a " Scot:h-Yoke".
This device has a torque output at the beginning and end of its stroke, commonly refei red to as breaking torque, thit is approx-imately twice the magriitude of the torque output at the center of its stroke, referrt d to as running torque. The )asic design -
of the scotch yoke cai, be seen in Figure 4.
s O
e
. \) .
l I
e
Page 21 r
. ,~~,
( py x x x x x x x x - xs ,-
's, b
, b l [h b'.~', .
f}/ Dj l !
n i x. - -
\ i X d: :. ' ;
I h; ; '
\; --
_ , 2
/ 3 . ecumc -H - sN - t
(' /, L: / N\,'
ji /
'd : d x x x x x - xxid I x l," .
1)
FIGURE 4 - ;CTUATOR SCOTCH YOY,E DESIGN From the above :t can be seen that the moment .t;m varies throughout the stroke. By geometric design the moment arm length at the beginning and and of the stroke can- be found by dividing I
es! the moment arm length at the center by the cosine of 450 or .707.
%J By performing this ar thmetic it will be found that the moment
~
arm at the beginning .:nd ending is roughly one and :ne hal f times the coment arm at the center.
By design the " Scotch Yoke" mechanism multiplies the force imparted by the pistor thru a reaction from the bea,ings. As pressure is applied to the piston the pin or roller is moved against the slot in the yoke causing the rod to act on the bearing.
To keep the action in a static condition a force or resistance must be applied to the yoke equal to the force from the bearing.
The total resultant fnrce then becomes the piston area times the pressure applied divided by the cosine of 45 .
V
- _ = - -- ._. - . ___ ._-
Page 22
. O The torque output from a " Scotch-Yoke" mechanism can be calculated as follows:
TORQUE AT CENTER OF STROKE i
T = P X A X MA Where:
T = Torque in in-lb i P = Operating pressure in p.s.i.
MA = Moment arm in in,ches at center A = Area of the piston in square inches TORQUE AT BEGINNING AND END OF STROKE 4k T=FX MA Cos.45u Where:
T = Torque in in-lb F = Resultant total force in pounds = PXA Cos. 45 (b)
?
MA Cos. 45o = Moment arm at beginning and end of -
stroke in inches.
A graphic representation of the torque output as a function 3
of disc position can be seen in Figure 5.
i I
i l
4 h
a
!O
fage 23 (D
L) treak tori,ue t-E 5
0 running tcrque a
O e
. o- a s- ao-RSTATICN FIGURE 5 - Typ.ical to.que cu put for double acting scotch yoke ictuator.
Since thrust is c)nverted to rotary motion, a spring is used opposing the air cyli1 der to provide a " Fail Safe" actuator. The
" Fail Safe" actuator is capable of performing its s afety related 3 function in the event of a loss of either the air Inpply or the J
control signal to the solenoid valve which controls the air supply to the actuater. The basic construction of the "Fiil Safe" actuatcr is seen here (Figure 6). .
,y..
g .&& / 5 %
'. r3-
- i b::bi!
,d,n.,,
. w.
<,u 3-.
l
-- ,m >_:e=If!ETY
- m. . .
,M.As II u s Q
,-~
.. w ji#;i, l l I I I ! I~l r;4g j c< i r,ub!
' m' -
W s fI!l.'iill -
P !..123
~'
db:: o o a o a a o a o a v' ~M'fij
/, .
gg. u e -
mm.. . -;s A 4
%hf' ~ '
FIGURE 6 - Fail safe, soring return actuator design t i
\v !
t k
Jage 24 O) t v
Since the outpu. of the unit is a function at the thrust applied, a new torque output curve must be u ed because the air cylinder not only moves the " Scotch Yoke" but must now also compress the spring. A typical torque output graph is shown here for both the pressure stroke and the spring return stroke.
t i i 2 8..?. .? 3. 4.. . .. ... . i. . .... .... .. . . .;. .. . :. . . .. . i !
... ...... ... 3. . .... . .i.: . .... . .....!
i : ; -
2can .
i.
w-............-........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .: . . . . . . . . . . . .:. .
- s . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . :. . . . . . . . . . ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
s : : : . ; : '
Q pc u .;..... ... .. ..... .. .j....... . . .
.. j. ....... .. ...j .. .. . .. . ... ; .. . .... . . . ..c, ... ... .... ... :... ........... ; . . .. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . - .....4......
...................,0,,,4n.k7, , , c .:
._=
~ . . . . , . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ..: . . .
A
~ .
m e ....... ...
r- : :
g ,h............. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . .
t
- .. drbl:
.= .
m :
a . . . . . . . . ...... .. ........, . . . . . . . . . . . ............................
m n i : -
C .e. M r a t 'u.. .f."e t,
.i..........:,.......-....................... . .
- 8 BPS 1!
. . u.i a"P. m%. . u . .
..e................
. 3 . .
y .
C_, .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . :
q
- .......g m .: :. .
m ... .
............-.................................. ..***..*.....y..............
L2 J
- c.::: : i :
C-.- . . . . . . . . . . . .
..................................................4.............
)
"mn .
.a L, .............s..............
- ..........................e..
.*.......4.. ........ . . . . . . . . . ,
1 .
e ,. *
. . e e . * . ,.
a a a a a a a a a
- m m - -
u, t.o e. a a,.
c.
Yoke Arm Angle i
FIGURE 7 - Typical torque output curves for a spring return actuator
fage.25 I 2.2.2 Actuator Design Materiais Jhe Bettis ac tuators used for this job are 'IT316-SR2-M3 series actuators. These were further specified ti be the N version for nuclear service and qualified per IEE. 323, IEEE 344, j
and IEEE 382. Also, upgraded seismic qualifications are pro-vided based on Patel Report PEl-TR-83-29 with Addendum I and II.
These actuators inccrporate use of special materials for nuclear service as listed below.
Special Material:
Grease - Dow Corning .Molykote 44 Seals - Ethylene Propylene Internal cylinder coating - Molybdenum disulfide Yoke pin anc rollers - Ryton coated t
O 4
6
~
O -
, Page 26 k) 2.2.3 Actua tor and '!ilve Caeration 2.2.3.1 Actuator and Accessories Supplied A complete list of all accessories specified f ar use on each valve can be found in Table 1 and each is further d: scribed here.
i An Asco solenoid valve is used on each actuatcr to control the air supply to the act::ator and, to " dump" the air in the cylinder which' allows the valvt to open or close as required. The solenoid I
valves are 3-way, internal piloted diaphragm valves The solenoid
, valves are controlled by a ccil. !! hen the coil is ce-energized by f
j intentional or faulted conditions, the cylinder port is allowed to 2
discharge through the exhaust port and thereby allo s the spring return actuator to pet form its required function. ! hen the coil is energized, the supply pressure is directed into the cylinder and rotates the valve in a direction opposite to spring induced rotation. The soleno d valve model recommended for use is a 4
liPL831664E. This vals e is designated for use in nu: lear power s
applications which cor,sists of providing IEEE compliance and a waterproof solenoid. ciosure.
It is a high flor valve which has 1/2-in. NPT ) orts and a S/8 -in. ori fice. All elastomeric materials of cons;ruction are
- Ethylene Propylene material for the MP unit.
8 i
, .,, - - - - - - - c.,,~- ,,-----, -, ,- ---. - - _ . , - - - - - - - , , , , . _ . . - . , . . - - - . . , , _ - - .
Page 27 Limit switches are also provided. These are mounted on the actuator to indicate full open or closed position. One of each model number switch is supplied, one for the open position and the other for the closed position. The switch model numbers are Namco EA180-31302 and EA180-32302 which are DPDT switches with 2 NO and 2 NC contacts and are qi$ick make-quick break type. The switches meet NEMA 1, 4, and 13, and IEEE 344 requirements. Both switches use the same lever arm which is a Namco model EL010-53337.
Other accessories to the actuator include a Fisher type 95H regulator, A Y6-1/2-40-CI Rosedale Filter, A1008 CHNF Hoffman Junction Box, Anaconda flexible liquid tight conduits, and various tubing, pipe, and electrical fittings and appropriate mounting hardware. All items were not supplied with full nuclear IEEE (d \
qualifications.* The unit as sold will perform its intended function to fail close even if failure of unq'ualified components occur.
Further, seismic tests performed under Clow Job 82-2053(N) did show such unqualified items performed their intended function under the required vibration level of the specification as they were mounted -
for the test.
The air operators are manufactured in accordance with Bettis Engineering Design Standards.
- Items which are not required to provide the valve safety function are not IEEE qualified and do not need to be.
O
I V TABLu' )
ACTUATOR ACCESSORIES FOR EACil UNIT
." u t i _ .i a m '4 cen 1:mit s.tiicher Bettis Rotation Fail- Solenoid and lever arm Valve Clow Actuator (viewed safe Valve Model Nos.
Size Equipment Job Model act. end Valve Model (i closed position switch) Other items (in.) flo s . 11 0 . No. of unit) Position No. (1 open position switch) (each unit)
- 1. RECOMMENDED EQUIPMENT 12" IVR006A 83-2462(N) NT316-SR2-M3 Cil Close NP'X831664E IVR006B
- EA 180-31302 L.S. Fisher type 9511 IVR007A regulator IVR007B EA 180-32302 L.S. Rosedale Y6-1/2-40-CI EL010-53337 L.A. filter Misc fittings u f.
- OICctiic a.!
accessories II. SUPPLIED EQUIPMENT i
12" IVR006A 83-2462(N) NT316-SR2-M3 Ct1 Close NPL831664E IVR006B EA180-31302 L.S. Fisher type 9511 IVR007A regulatcr IVR0078 ." "
EA160-32302 L.S. Rosedale Y6-1/2-40-Cl EL010-53337 L.A. filter Misc fittings ano electrical accessories
[
2 0
- ) age 29 The torgue plots )rovided in this section represent the calculated output torque of the a:tuators for the spring and various supply pressure shown. The graphs, which follow, show how '.he torque output varies for the pressure stroke as a function of supply pressure.
It can also be seen th1t the spring output torque is not a function of sup' ply pressure. The graphs also demonstrate tha; the output torque (pressure on sp ing stroke) is a function of yoke position.
The graphs provided are based on the numerical data provided in Figure 8. '
e I
4 O
i L.-.---._.-__---_- _
FIGURE 8 Page 30
, n
.. J
- CA.CULATED TORQUE DATA
. JATA INPL~
CYL! HOER DIAMETER Cin)- ,
15.58 CENTER OR TIE BAR DIAMETER Cin)= 0.875 PIS OH RCD DIAMETER Cin)= 1.375
'HUF8ER OF PIST0HS = 1
'MOPEHT ARM Cin)- 2.812
- SPRING LCAD A ( 1,b s ) =
- 4597
.SPEIhG LOAD 8 (Ibs)- 7436
- <. BRE W EFFICIENCY CI)= 70
.en RUll.l!HG EFFICIEHCY CI) = 85 TEHC IHG- EFFICIEHCY C ) -
74 a.e t'RE SSURES Cpsi) - 50 60 70 80
-NC1 UATCR TYPE C8-1,HD= 2,T TR=3, = 3 ,
iO "W 0lE ARM 1- SPRING -PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE PRESSURE EFFICIEHCY V .--! AH( LE TORQUE TORQUE TORQUE TORQUE TORQUE SPR. PRES.
.. .{d.grees) Cin Ib) C 50)ps! C 60) psi C 7 f,) p s i ( 80)pst I I 0' 21045 17090 24490 31889 39289 74 70
-5 e d9047 -147G5 21357 27949 34542 77 . 73
- 10, '.17513 -13033 19013 24994 35974 79 76
'.=' :1 .d G338 -11721 17235 22749 28263 81 78
... .'.;2 0 2.15450 'do718 15878 21037 26197 82 80' 25 '14798 ---99550 14844 . 19739 24633 83 82 20 :14348 .;9355 14068 18772 23475 84 83 -
" l 3 14077 4929 13505 18081 22657- 85 84
-a4 0 13973 8G18 13124 17629 22135. 85 85
--4 5 14031 S415 12905 17394 21884 85 85 50 14254 3312 12838 17364 21889 85 85 55 14G53 8301 12918 17536 22153 84 85 60 15249 8383 13151 17919 22688 83 84 G5 '16072 8559
- 1354G 18533 23520 82 83 14123 19409 24695 80 82 O .70 17173 8837 75 18G19 9227 14911 *20596 26280 78 81 83 20514 9746 15955 22163 28372 76 79 s
-SS 23011 10415 17315 . 24216 3111G 73 77
. 90 26347 11259 19082 26904 3472G 70 .74
. r i bu.<t 9 C A L'. U,L A T E..D_..T O..R..Q..U..,E_
P L.O..T..... . .. P a g e 31 t ... . . , . . _ .._.......4.
....2_.. :
.....~- . . . . . ..<
p g.. _.. _ .. :_
3
.:. 3
.:;. .4_.
/O.A C1.
. ......i........i ... ....; .
6** _t.. ..... . . . . . .......: ...... .... .:
- . p t - _, m e n ,. .
LTl., M I V5 NibLt -- ~*-
--"'--! --t. ~ a. .; I' ta 4
. .....z.
- ...-.~.w 76 3 X.. r .
T .w. i . .. : .. .... t....-...............s...................
. te... . . s. . .
t f f,
. .! .t . 4 .? . f. f,
=== = = o - - - m -
- na m -
in w r- . m cn
- i. i i..
i..
i :. :. .i
_ --..--._. . ~~. 4
. - . . - .. 4
-1,E
- . : .. . :
- i
.. 6 .-... _
- : : i : : i :
I : : : : : : : :
.....~'aM aJ . : ._.-.: ..- :, .* . i.
- W 4. . ......
4 4
6 i
- 2 I : : :
.. (.. . g. <
- . 6 : . :
I i :.
- i
. .w 5$33 4
= L U
- I. . .
. * : . ngqf t.
g.g,y
{.
,6... . r
- i. :. . !. .
- i. .
6 : :.
I t : : 6.
- w. 6- ..=
C 6 .g i i : : : : i :
\ i !* i i. i i !;
..mL,222.
~ e . .. .
. . . , .:.. .... ._ . .. . .r.jUU ny %. .:
- i 6 . . : .
8 .J. . _. . . . - _ . ..;
- p. . -.4 ,
TR ' G BUEfiD i i i . i i !
4 LA ! *7My : i : !
, ,- J LLLwU . . . . . . .
4-
. .i . . 4.
p.., e C3 : "
- : : . gj tr C3 :.
i :* i* .
I w . * .
. . . . ..q.
t.*) :. i. :
- : : : : I
. . 3
~_._. qm : .
C2 , jwLLC . . . . i. . . . . . . _
,. . . . .! .. . . .i
- C.'". : :
- 4./) : : . .
C - .
- -- 3 ?
g ._.4 . - *.*
- Pa=************ i
- . : : . : :* .gnpr f: I w :. ;
2
.sD dJ* '
l D
C2' : i .
- : . l L/'3 . : . :. ? :
L/'3 , * . . . :
ws : : ! *.
M : :
. .e- : :
- 1 Rae : : !
- I :
,w f- .
y... .
-t_ - . t-.-
ga-.---.=: . .
. .t 3:. *
. a . . . * .I . .
g , i . f . . f t f .
L, t I e f 9
, a a a 4 6 . a, i . a i i a a 6 a M Cr3 'T3 C53 4-3 CD ru3 h3 ts3 C_E:3
- N M ""*8" lI"3 E4.:.3 & E1J M YaXE A M ANGl.E
Page 32 2.2.3. 2 Operating Time Bench Test - The following is a summary of the operating times recorded during the operational test performed on each valve.
The tests were performed using a 100 PSIG air supply. There was no flow through the valve during this test.
TABLE 2 VALVE BENCH TEST OPERATING TIMES Equipment Valve Bettis Opening Closing No. of Size Actuator Time Time Valve (inch) Model No. Sec. Sec.
IVR006A 12 ~ NT316-SR2-M3 5.0 4.2 @
IVR006B ~ 12 "
5.1 4.3 IVR007A 12 4.9 4.2 IVR007B 12 4.9 3.9 0
I O
Page 33 3.0 VALVE OPERITING \MD INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS 3.1 Valve Operating :cnditions The valves were fesigned to fail close (on loss of power or signal to the solenoid valve) and to allow closure and sealing against a 15 PSI differential applied to the shaft side of the disc during post
- LOCA flow.
Seismic and'othea loading conditions for operation are as indicated in the specification. Actuator qualifications for anvironmental an'd seismic are covered by previous actuator qualifications supplied by the manufacturer (Bettis) and added seismic tests performed in accord with NTS (National Technical System) Test Plan No. 528-0951 (included in PEI-TR-83-29 Rev. A) 'or Clow Job No. 82-2053(N) (see References Sect. 8.0 B.2). The Bettis units have been tested as described in PEI-TR-83-29 Rev. A End have demonstrated their ability to function as required. .
For the subject valves the following operatinf and design conditions are applicable:
Operating condit!ans - Normal operating presture = 1.0 PSIG Normal operating temperature = 122 F Normal operating flow = 8000 SCFM l
l
l-5
. P ge 34
, Design conditions-Max. operating pressure body only = 285 PSIG @ 100 F Max. pressure differential disc = 15 PSID Max. temperatdre - 185 F Regt tred Torque to seat = 18,200 in-lb Failure mode = Fail close i Allcwed leakage = .4 cc/ min air i
t i-l
@15 PSID -
1 I
t P
r !
i.i e
- i r e
}
i .: .
3 .i . ,
i 4
l
). k 1
t 5
1 ,
.I ..
c
- I i
P
~ '
t i
~
~ ~~~ Z .,,--_,_,7~.' . . . .
i ~
Fage 35 4
3.2 Valve Installatici Configurations In addition to the pressure and fl .s ccnditicas specified in 3.0, the valve perfortrance is affected by the as int.talled orientation.
Upstream and downstream, t'ees, elbows, reducers, ano other valves can affect the aerodynamic torque characteristics of butterfly valves.
These effects are discussed in Section 5.0. The inst alled config-urations for the subje:t valves, as derived from Sargent & Lundy Drawings M06-1111; Rev E are summarized in Figures 'O and 11.
h i
l J
l t
o i
I
. e' I
j f
i g l
I 5
1 i
l !
. \
w/ G ,
I l.t S
E!S!er --
VALVE < AIR mIVR0000 CYLINDER EL60H CUT
[ _.
\,. gy: . O SUIT g g _27' FLOW s -
' 3"1 .x\ '
VALVE SPRING CAN SP G %t #IVR006A 24* m
- a-REDUCER \ N 24*X12" '
l'-3 1/4. M
- ~ '
NLDUCEr<
- 3'-0* - 4 f
._o._e.
- 1 e f=a l N,v,"p" / s x
' ~
4 />
CYLINDER i.
FIGURE 10 - PLAN "R" ( I CONTINU0US PURGE HVAC SUCTION LINE REF. SARGENTALUNDY DWG. #M06-1111 REF. CLOW JOB n 83-2462-01(N)
I i
I
O O
~
O. .
O '~ga IN SP{gg 3 *. 0, g .
N g.
o-gtges a ,0 * *V scaEE"
$o"!!cla-
- b p. - . _
' - c 2 --*,
ciItD*" yggo,e
____-N.lcf s% \
,- gsasa
- 1M* 33 To i: ]ia-gg
. ' ~-
- / . s n*
. ,g -
p ...
e-- -
N t
f 2 QY* '
N go'@sa- +
atW~ #\"DN i
2r . o'S s
N ui FIGURE 11 - PLAN "S" CONTINUOUS PURGE HVAC EXHAUST LINE $- '
REF. SARGENTALUNDY DHG. aM06-1111 R;
- REF. CLOH JOB # 83-2462-01(N)
..N...........
N. N .. N -- - - -
.-- =-=--w--~--
rage 38 4.0 VALVE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY UNDER SEISMIC AtiD LPERATIONAL
( LOADINGS '
Operability of the suoject valves has been der.cnstrated by a combination'of testirg and analysis in accord with the design specification. Separate reports have been prepared and provided to demonstrate suitability of valve components and .he assembly.
A listing is providet in the References 8.0 at the end of the report. This.sectior summarizes the results of suth tests and analyses in meeting tae conditions as presented in Section 3.0. .
I 4.1 VALVE STRESS ANA YSIS Valve stress' analysis was performed by Patel Engineers, Huntsville, Alabama f'Jr the subject valves. The aralysis was made using the ANSYS finite element computer progr:m developed by Swanson Analysis System, Inc., Houston, PA. This public domain program has had a suf ficient history of use to jus .lfy its appli-cability and validit). The analysis performed compares the nuclear ,
specific requirements of the Clinton Valves, Report PEI-TR-852400-1 to an already perfor: red worst case generic qualiff(ation report for a Clow 12" Wafer Stop Valve, PEI-TR-833600-1 R(v.A. The .
- comparison of key elements in these reports is shorn in Tables 3 and 4 .
e 0 *
+
I' age 39
('T TABLE 3 V
COMPARISON 0 ' CLItiT0ll NUCLEAR SPECIFIC REQJ1REMENTS TO -
GENERIC NUC. EAR QUALIFICATION DATA (REFERENCE 8A)
LOADINGS GENERIC CLINTON Pressure Shell (psig) 285 285 Seat (psid) 175 15 Torque (in-lb) 39,275 18,200 Seismic Acceleration i NS (g) 10.9 4. 5 EW (g) 10.9 4.5 Vertical (g) 10.9 3.0 OPERATOR Weight (Ib) 700 638 -
Center of Gravity X (in) 15 4.5 Y (in) 15 5.5 Z (in) 10 5.5 ,
FREQUENCY fg (Hz) 48.8 Hz f g;> 50 Hz EVALUATION AGAINST ASME Section III ASME Section III Design and Level A Design and Level A O
i Table 4 ,
Sunnary of Allowable Stresses LOCATloti MATERIAL ALLOWABIE STRESS STRESS REPORT Ill WilICll STRESS (psi) VALUE ITEM IS Af1ALYZED** RATIO (PER ASME SECTIOri (psi) / SEISMIC LOAD LEVEt III, TABI.ES I-7.1 TilROUCil 1-7.3)
Valve Body SA 516 17500 8575 Generic 10.9 9 .49 CR.70 Disc SA 516 17500 9275 Generic 10.99 .53 GR.70 Drive Shaft SA 564 34550 29395 Generic 10.9 9 .85 i Type 630 11-1100 Operator Adapter A 516 '17500 on= 1893 Clinton 4.59 .11 Plate CR.70 l
Adapter Plate A 193 25000 o n m 13958 Clinton 4.59 .36
- l Bolts CR.B7 Axial = 6250 T = 9231 l phear = 2583 OP erator/ Adapter A 193 25000 o n = 13471 Clinton 4.59 .41* y Bolts GR.B7 xial = 6250 t = 10593 '8 hear = 2583 ,
Cover Plate SA 516 17500 9356 Generic 10.9 9 .54 CR. 70 Cover Plate Bolts SA 193 25000 o n = 6370 Generic 10.9 9 .10*
CR.87 xial = 6250 t = 60 hear = 25833 )
I
- Per ASME,Section III, Appendix XVII, Subsubarticle 2460.
- Generic Report:is Patel PEI-TR-833600-1.Clinton Report is Patel PEI-TR-852400-1
... . .... . - _ . - - -- -- -. ., - - . . . . . . - _ . , - ,,.,-- _ ~-,., _ .
Fage 41 The Clinton seisr..ic analysis specifically addresses the operator adpator plate, adaptor plate bolts, and oporator/
adaptor bolts since ttese were determined to be-the weakest items. The other items are covered in the generic analysis.
The conclusion that can be drawn is that the s;ructural integrity of the subject valve assemblies fully mee.s the requirements of Baldwin Design Specification DA-K-2tB2-29, '
Issue 2 and ASME Section III,1980 Edition thru Suncer 82.
e O
e a
G O
e 0
4 0.
F
_ _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ k
--.=====-.=m. - - - - - -. . - =----~~- - - - - --
" age'42 (D
\~.)
4.2 Actuator Tests i
Two different Be. tis actuators moddls were tes.ed for the Bechtel Limerick Project under Clow Job No. 82-2053(N) in accord with National Technical Systems (Sailgus, Ca. facility) Procedure 528-0951. The units tested were as follow.;:
Unit 1 NT-820-: R4-S Spring ending torque = 13,098 in Ib Pressure torque + = 178,160 in lb -
Unit 2 NT-312-SR5 Spring ending torque = 5,810 in lb Pressure torque + = 31,253 in ib
+ at 80 PSIG pressure to air cylinder The units were both spring return fail closed units and were representative of the line of actuators which would be used on containment purge and ve$t valves. The units were .ested for (s. baseline performance, subjected to OBE and SSE leve's in accord with the procedure anf specification, and then were operationally ,
tested. The units prc ved to be operable both durin; and af ter the required tests anc upon inspection showed no siIns of
- not'iceable wear. Succ essful operation of these uni :s in combin- ,
ation with previous generic qualification for enviromental conditions genericall3 qualifies the NT316-SRh-M3 u11ts used on this job. (Note a report is provided justifying similarity, see PEI-TR-8522201-02 and Section 8.0) h a
l L)
_ _ - - , , , ,_ - --y-,- ,- -
=... . . .
t.. .. - _ -. _ .- _.
Pag ~e 43
)
() 5.0 VALVE AERODYNAMIC TORQUES )
Depending upon the valve design, actuator si:ing, in~p lant 1 I
installed configuration, and operating conditions, aerodynamic torque may be of majar. concern to valve operability. The magnitude and direction of this torque, which is p roduced by flow of the media over the disc, depends on several factors:
- 1. Disc shape .
- 2. Pivot shaft location
- 3. Magnitude of diff rential pressure acros; the va'lve
- 4. As installed upstream piping elements (elbows, tees, ete'. including distance and orien ation.
relative to these items.
- 5. As installed downstream piping elements ,' elbows, n.)
tees, leng'.h of pipe runs, etc.) includi1g distance and orienti tion relative to these items.
- 6. Angle of tre disc
{,
Clow has done ntmerous tests of scale models af the Tricentric design ano a test of a full size 12 inca production valve. The data obttined in these tests provide a substantial base for predicting aerodynamic torques in full size production valves under various operating conditions.
O O .
Page 44 Q( 5.1 Model Tests In 1980, Clow er tablished a program to determine mass flow and aerodynamic torques of the Tricentric design. Exact scale models (see Tat le 4 ) were designed and built of 150 lb class Tricentric vahes of standard design. Scale models of a 12, 24, 48, and 96 irch valve were constructed and tested using University'of Illinois facilities under the c irection of A.L. Addy, Ph. D. (Engineering Consultant in Fluid Dynamics and Engineering and Assoc ate He'ad, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, U. of I. at Urbana, Champa:gn, Ill.).
The tests were.made with air in accord with ISA stzndards for a straight pipe run flow test The tests were run at various
] pressure ratios (upst.eam to downstream pressure) in both the (V
choked and non-choked pressure regi.mes. Very low p ressure ratios were also applied to tilow correlation to incompressible (liquid) flow in acco-d with ISA standards. Tests were made with flow in the normal direction for Tricentrics (shaft upstream) and for reverse flow shaft downstream). Further, several pressure ratios near ;he choked flow point were applied to determine the point of choking. This test pointed out that the standard rule of thumb (downstream pressure / upstream pressure =
.528) for determining when choking occurs is not valid at all disc angles. The tescs showed choking wi11 occur at a ratio of .75 in* the full open position and .54 in. the near closed O '
>O -
1 l
r
- __. _ ._ - . _ . . . - . . . __.m. . .m . a... _ m .m._. . . _ _ . . . . . .
Paga 45 l
's. /
position.
The test also showed, that although chtking prevents the fluid velocity f rom increasing, aerodynamic tcrque will rise in a linear fashi'an in accord with the pressure differential across the valve in the choked flow regimes.
The models used for testing were made in accced with the Tricentric standard 1.50 lb class double flange design. This is a fabricated design in which the seat is at a l') degree angle from a normal to the p,ipeline axis. Due to '.he seat position, this valve rotates only 800 from closed ta full open.
The valves supplied /or the subject job uses a similar geometry except the seat is ne rmal to the pipeline axis making this a (
900 (1.s turn) valve d! sign. Therefore, at small opening angles 0
(0 to 200) there ar t some differences in torque. For angles over this amount, th e aerodynamics ~ are the same. 11so, at -
small angles the torlue approaches the value of th? pressure area torque (as explained in Section 2.1.3) thus, lifferences between the two desiens are not significant. With reasonable -
similarity between the test models and the full si te valves, the data may be used to predict torque characteristics of the subject valves.
From the data base developed by the model tests a computer program CVAP (Clow Valve Analysis Program) was wri: ten for use in predicting valve operating characteristics. In this program, mass flow rates are predicted by standard equations for flow J
Page 46 -
()
through an ideal con /erging nozzle acjusted with (cefficients developed in the tests. Torques are predicted on the basis of the equation T=CT A P Dy 3 where T =, predicted aerodynamic torque (in Ib)
CT = torque coefficient developed in mode' tests AP = pressure diffqrential across the valve (lb/in2 )
Dy = nominal valve diameter (in.') '
The test perfort ed on a full size 12" valve showed that the mass flow obtained. wts within approximately 10*,' of that predicted by the computer madei while torques were much less than predicted.
Torques were on the crder of 65% of that predicted which could be correlated by charging the power of 3 to- 2.84 ii the above equation. The power of 3 used in the equation and in. the Program CVAP is a derived value obtained by use of the equations lj for conservation of rromentum for a general control volume. -
Thus the program indicates torques which would be higher than those obtained in the actual situation.
t Table 4 shows the dimension of critical (to torque i
conditions) elements of the double flange Tricentric 12, 24, 48, and 96 inch designs and their scaled down dimensions which were used for model construction. Table 5 shows a comparison between the provided size valves and sizes interpolated from test valves. '
e *
. , _ _ , _ , __..._.___._,.._,,,,,_.,,.,,,7 ,,-,r__.-._,~. -_,-,_,,,,.,--,m.m-, . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ . - . , , , ,-. . - _ _ _ _
j Page 47 -
?
5 l
Linear interpolation was u:ed to predic: ::.rque cr.t racteris tics l_ in Clow Program CVAP, thus a similar interpolation of sizes is applicable for size comparison purposes. It can be seen in the table that very good 'less than 10% deviation) correlation was
{ i obtained for torque critical items. Thus torque dita from the 1
j program is valid for this application.
! . r 1
i s
'l i
I i
- l i I
O i
l i i i
I i
j b
O .
I i I r ,
t 4 -
.I
...--. Y. _ - - - - - - - - ... - --- -- ~ ~ - - - - ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ * -
Page 48 4
Oi 1
V 4
TABLE 4 Test Valve Scaled. Sizes (Critical Elementt) i VALVE SIZE ELEMEllT 12" 24" 48" 96" Full Model Full Model Full Full Model Model Size Size Size Size Size Size Size size I.D. 11.94 3.07 22.62 3.07 46.00 3.07 96.00 3.07 A2 11.33 2.91 21.89, 2.97 45.59 3.04 96.20 3.07 K2 10.80 2.78 20.86 2.83 43.44 2.90 91.66 2.93 Shaft Dia. 2.25 .58 3.25 .44 6.0 .40 12.0 .38 Shaft CL to Seal q,, L 2.0 .51 2.69 .36
~
5.06 .34 7.51 .24 Domed
, Disc s Shape Thickness 1.5 .38 1.88 .25 3.75 .25 11.63 .37 Shaft '
Offset E + 1.25 .22 .81 .11 1.31 .09 1.16 .04 Sha f t Offset LC + 1.67 .43 1.38 .19 2.31 .15 ~1.66 .05 1
1 Ear .
Width
- 2.25 .58 3.25 .44 6.0 .40 12.0 .38 Ear Height
- 3.38 .87 4.88 .66 9.0 .60 15.25
.49
+ E is offset from disc centerline, LC is offset from body centerline
- Ear is element welded to disc which shaft is mated to.
'llote: Full size dimensions are for a Clow Tricentric 150 lb class i
double. flange desisn.
A2 = flajor axis of elliptical seal K2 = Minor axis of elliptical scal
() E = Offset between shaft axis and disc center (see Figure 2)
LC = Offset between shaft axis and pipe run centerline All dimensions in inc.hes I .
Fage,49 r
TABLE 5 Compt.rison of Production Valve to Valve Model Sizes (Critical Elemen'.s)
VALVE ELEMEl.TS 12" Size Ratio
- I.D. 11.938 1.00 AA 2 11.145 1.02
- K 10.876 .99 2
Shaft Dia. 2.000 1.13 Shaft CL to "
, Set 1 CL,L 1.875 1.07 i
- Disc
- / Thickness 1.50 1.00
- Shaft Off set E 1.312 .95 Shaft.
Off set LC 1.364 NA i'
Ear .
Wic th 2.00 NA Ear .
Height 8.58 NA l 1
- Elements considered important to torque characteristics NOTE: RATIO = product n a e size
- A2 = Major axis of elliptical seal X2 = Minor axis of elliptical seal
. A -
V E = Offset between shaft axis and disc center (see Figure 2) ,
i LC = Offset between shaft axis and pipe run centerline All dimenslops in inches
__ __u-_-_ . . _ _ . - _ _ . . _ . _ . - - _ _ _ . - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - . _ _ . _ _ _ _
= .. = .
i' age 50 5.1.2 Tests '. lith An Upstream Elbes One element of riping system which has an effect on the aerodynamic torque of butterfly valves is a turn wl.ich may occur with an elbow cr a tee. Since numerous types of elbows (short and long radius, reducing, mitered, etc.) may exist in a particular piping system, it was necessary to determine a worst case c'onditio.1 for testing. It was determined use of d mitered elbow Would be a Worst Case and that this Configu-ration had applicability to ' flow through tees also.
The mitered elbow produces the greatest separ; ted flow region at the inside )f the turn and biases the fitw to the outside corner to a traximum. Flow around the corne r produces a lower local pressure around the inside of the turn and higher O.
V local pressure to the outside. This will oppose c'osure for geometry 1 (see Figure 12 ) and aid closure for geometry 2 '
when the disc is in the full open position.
Based on these considerations, models of a 12", 24", and 48" valve (per Table f)'were tested for torque chaucteristics. '
All valve models were tested for geometries 1, 2, nd S at 2 diarr.eters downstream from the mitered elbow. In addition, the 12" model was tested at 4 and 8 diameters downs'tream. The test showed the greatest variation of torque from that obtained for straight-line flow occurred at 2 diameters downstream from the elbow. Differences due to valve orientation were small at 4 diameters downstream ,1nd were just detectable at 8 diameters o downstream.
N .
4
Page 51 l
Geometry 1 l N N C
.Q l ;. ti, i e
i - - . : -. ; _g((f _ -
l { ._
\
~7 s l 'Q~
- Spacing dhs 61 a=00 Shown Flow .
Geometry 2
.R ! .R OPfhf r {e k
/ I Off set
- Spacing =
a = 00 Shown a .\ .
Y Flow Geometry 3 ,
-R j.
- l '-
Offset
, i i into orrfi--
- ~~
i
[]
- ! page
~-[ \
-fj xy Spacing J f,Sha f t Q a = 00 Shcwn' s4 Flow FIG'JRE 12- Valve Orienta tions Rela tive to U.0 stream Elbow
~
- - - ~ - - - - - ~ - - -
-~ ~
Page 52 O
V 5.1.3 Downstream Pioing Effects In various testr described in this section, it was necessary to provide downstrean piping to discharge the flow In the conduct of these tes.s the effects of downstream piping were noted several times. In the straight line tests, I downstream valve was installed to vary back pressure. Any in:rease in back pressure lowered the torque values. In the elbow tests an elbow was installed 20 or more diameters downstream. It showed .that for the 24" and 48" rodels in the full open positilo, the down-stream piping would choke before the valve model. This prevented any substantial incrtase in pressure differential across the '
valve model even witt large increases in upstream )ressure, thus n/
s_, the torque was limited. From the piping layouts p ovided down-stream, piping would provide some degree of back p
- essure making
- the assumption of atnospheric pressure downstream ; sed for calcu-f
! lation of torques car.servative.
'i 4
l 9 4
O .
Page 53 r
5.2 Model Data Verification A test of a ful' size 12" valve was run at Vought's High Speed Wind Tunnel in Dallas, Texas (see reference 8.081) to demonstrate operability and substantiate model tes' data.
The tests demonstrated the valve would operate in the required 5 second period. It further showed that torque values were less than predicted from model data. The valve usnd for the test incorporated a ole piece thru shaft design while the model l had a two piece shaft. To verify the torque effect due to this change, another test vas made (data not put into a formal report form) in which a 2 piace shaft was installed in pl. ice of the thru shaft. The test was made with the disc held .n a station-ary position by a marual worm gear type actuator. The result was Q that the peak torque was the same for both the one and two piece shaft design. The orly difference was that the two piece shaft
- design showed a peak torque closer (by 5 to 10 deg:*ees) to the full open position. A test was also run with the one piece shaft .
design with the disc held in a stationary position. This was done to provide direct correlation with the model, :ests which were done in this manner. It also allowed a comparison to 'he t torques measured during the dynamic test with the shaf t connected to the pneumatic actuator. A summary of the operability test is included in Appendix B.
- O -
I
. l-e p w epemme MMM 4
- e h e e meee4 _ _eee r -- - eme +O ena*e---- e p ed*e.e w = **
i P3ge 54 !
i O
h 5.3 Application of 11odt 1 Aerodynamic Test To Full Si te Valve Operabili ty 5.3.1 Valve Operating 'imes Expected In Service All valves are designed to close within 5 seconds for flow conditions produced by '.ne maximum differential pressare of 15 PSIG when 100 PSIG is released from the actuator air cylinier. The valves will clqse under these nstalled conditions due to the fact that the operator output torque (spring torque) and the val.ve Eerodynamic torque are tending to close the valve at all disc angles for LOCA conditions. (See Table _ti_and Tables 9,10,11,) While not required for LOCA, to opca the valve under the above conditions.3194 in-lb of torque is required to crack the disc off the seat, anel 4606 in-lb max is required to hold the valve disc open. (See Tab'.e 6 )
The air torque of the at tuator (valve open direction) is rated at 20,200 in-lb @ 80 PS:G, and therefore is more than adequate for ,
the required norst case operating conditions.
In the Vought Test (Reference 8.0 B1 ) cl.ising times were shown to improve slightly with flow through the talve. The '
conduct of the test would suggest that opening times :n actual service might be retarde.d about .3 to .5 seconds and i: losing times might be improved by the same amount under maximum diffei 2ntial pressure conditions relative to the Clow bench test data.
l .
{
s O /
/
l .
Pag'e SS O)
'w 5.3.2 AER0 DYNAMIC TOR]UES FOR VALVES AS INSTALLED As described in Section 5'.1, torques from straight line model tests can be used to p edict full size valve torques by 03 scaling.
Tables 6 thru 11' present torque and other data for the subject valves at various operating conditions. The item of concern for valve oper-ability is TQA (for no mal operating conditions, open cycle) and TQA (for maximum operating conditions, closing cycle). The positive torque values tend to close the valve. The meanings of the other listings can be found in 8.0 Referer.ces.
To obtain torque conditions for the as instal.'ed valves a judge-ment must be made as ta what set of test data most n!arly represents
~
the actual conditicris. ,
For the subject job there are four identical talves of which one is installed more than 8 diameters downstream of an albow. Another valve is installed app oximately two pipe diameters downstream from an .
elbow, and the remaint,ig two valves are installed wl;h debris screening and 24 x 12 concentric reducers on their inlet sides. (See Figures 10 l
and 11). All of the volves are installed with the s.1 aft side facing
The valve which is more than 8 pipe diameters downstream from an elbow can obviously be modeled using test data for straight pipeline flow since torque deviation from the straight flow situation is negli-gible wnen the as insttilled valves are greater than 8 diameters from an upstream elbow. For the valve that is installed approximately 2 pipe l
diameters from an elbow, use of the test dita for mitered elbow installed l
2 diameters upstream for determining instal led operability is considered O .
L _. - _ .
Page 56 conservative. The 90 mitered elb w used in the nd.I t sts is a worst case condition comparec to radius type elbows which are typically used for in-plant installation. The elbow angle in this (.ase is 23 , further making a 90 mitered elbow assumption conservative. If torque operating margins are adequate, these judgements are justified.
For the remaining two valves with debris screens and 24 x 12 reducers on their inlet sides, using trends from striight pipe flow test data would be considered conservative. During a LOCA the flow influxes into the screen, and as the flow passes through the screen and towards the shaft side of the valve disc, it will be turbules.t and not fully developed as the flow would be in the case of a strafght pipeline.
The reducer would tend. to converge the turbulent flow somewhat, but it p will still not be fully developed due to the short length of the reducer.
tv)
Thus, the aerodynamic torques will be less than pred'cted because the flow turbulance would create a more evenly distribut.ed pressure over the area of the valve cisc. Further, the screen wou,d act as a flow restriction and something less than full LOCA pressure would actually be ,
g seen by the valve disc. The net result is that with the screen and reducer installed, the tendency for the flow to clost the valve will be diminished as comparcd t'o the straight pipeline flow case. Experiments in which a restriction, namely another valve, placed upstream at a close distance from the first valve has shown the torque coefficients of the downstream valve to be less than would be expected for single valve in straight pipeline flow given the same pressure ratio (Reference C 2).
O v
I
l 3 Page 57 i
Therefore, the two val'es with screens and reducers nodeled as single valves in straight pipeline flow will yield the largast aerodynamic l
torque coefficients for analysis purposes, and would be considered ,
l conservative.
i On two of the valies there is a 3/4" pipe pressure tap approximately i
one foot from the valve inlet. This tap is normally closed and should be of no consequence tc either the valve flow or the torque during a
, LOCA.
The torque. values for all four valves are listed in Tables 9 thru 11.
o a
O
- l ~
l '
j .
i I
i
)
t i
~
-.- ~
Page 58
\ . en- . . - . .
~-
- 7. ' r . . . . - -
}
y.,. . .. o. -
_.-- - ~ --
7 -,
.-...--- -_,-,=r._
N. ":;L'.**. ;?[,' f "*5*',,*
. - m,n u. *4.'"hWC. se .(,.;t'$8'th'.'-2'. **L
%---- -6 m -. .:.,,y-r- .
. - ,,,.-n -.
c=; - - --. . _ . - .. '** ---- - =- * % . u -- v..- .:
--.=_=...e,-.- .
.-J-
- . f.
..- .. . _ _-%; _:- %m%w . ,-- s.
, e- : n.-n%.,
m
%,_. W- _
.-...w.
=::=i.an
-... -r - - - _.-...;;::: _
-- 7.. :.- .Or.a. .
__ . ----- .~.
w - -:.-
--rw
- - .. _m.;-: -;. ~ -%. ' :n;Q '.
-r ; 4. .~ m-s. . _ -.-,,_ -wwy
- w. ._-
'=.;wn.w-- - -. . w-:::.' -- , .y.-
w -e 2-. .
.g s u.v -.- w-
...v u t
. ~ ,z - w-ip; Q 3.2T..=-*-, , 9;;. --G ~
.,1
- 2, T* 3".'.. -.-- -
. .[ - --- es, ,
_ r. . . .~ _- _ __. _ #
e- .
- s. . .%. i.,.e. . . ' - - ow
< r:. :Y
=-- -'E
"".~?--- c.".- -'_:c-d'~~'05~L::::.6 w.-- :.=::i.:
- m
-~h. ~ _ _- v w-.- ~.F-;"hW.- % s~ ~-
%a e,-@-,f.g w[.
p --=.a =, -
J L J -
Wte_.cs.yv:"s'.'t - rN--- F . : -- we ew
__. $. .** -.d. [l f.f ? $YL & f
?- .....; .Y .A'g, :, i. . s .' .B :5 .. ;;,; *. 7 .
- m. y ~ .;-- . . . .
("4 .-('~C. .
M,*
r. i; l A {.' %.Q.. .f]r?,1,i . ...-..'.,.. .-} - +JC. .'.c . .Yf,
. ," '~ ~. ;7 . . . .. ,". .:,'., ..:. s* ..?. . . ;.'...% m. '.rl'. * : ~ * )*h. u * * ;r e.r t, H, @ y.h"' .-. * *.*,+ * ' . . * '.s-
, . ' .,.g'. "
,' ': ' ' a. .f.. *>'.!*
' ' . ' ~ . * . * . *.' .. ' , , .*.
+
.,...m
.. d.,
a = 80*
i
\
3 v .
l - i - L ~.. ;;i '. = f L . '.T._ -
. . ; . W'- .7 x.,q7W s .,r .-
- s. . .
5-t --
.i
......,...,r.,u .a _ u, r., . . _ _ _ _ , _,.-
i-- _
.. - = .
.; : . . :,- uuee; *^ .,- ,
~
- _ _ ~
.m,.--+~.....,
e r -- - -.s mse.s.w W' -
ye
._ , .--- ,Z *;
. ~,,- ** q;-
2 .m _.. -:,
. . ~
.m. an
- i ==m.w --r, -
-~~~>w. .W -- " e,un s=T.f
,,=L
~
~ - 5'"~_'-. _'
" ; p,N 7_:=.==s ew- 5. Ek_
_ _ - ~ .(::T. -- _ _.
$ 5,.,Q9 h
..-wm
..m.. ,
'~ y ,% . ..
W"'";- .mW.-'*
h"%b-.
+
J e.--. t..M:. 7C""Q r.v y,M"".'ra :,,,. ".
- n. - -
- .-,=.-~_.~"*""- : _.,
-+ n.5,;;; *.!.k.h.T. N' eq N' %D .Q.J., ~~N'
-e e==.,6$. . Qm
.- x s-c
%MsM'.
='. M W . . '. %,D..,
- t D D.M'.;,c*;w%
GQ ==. W ,_ __ M (
. O -J
_.g.: h,-. N %.(bh.%.
1
[- i . 6 F1ow
&'ia..<'nor],..il:Q.}j yo--. *
.. .3 Q *;7 *--=m
?::jQ.j k. .!. ' 'fl.'$,.i.Y ( W :P & ; .~ ,,.
V,);;3
? sh ~*- f h: : l' ,,., D 5E* ~~
.k W '~~
23 L-,
s;,.d'_Sh__
==-i - w&_
.c t .::,b:,Waw.xptug ;. uw x-. p.SAW::. -t% . M:~_m.ar .t_
- .n.:.'".:::' ,
.t1 m .w - 7., - -
w -e .s
- .2; .;m..ng . .
. a c.- . .
1 t . e.7 ..- ~ ~;;.v.c .w.n , . , . . . . .... . . ~ . .. .,,
. ..-. ., . . . .c- . .m-. . . _ . . ,. < . . .
.t -
. s .-
s a = 60*
Figure 13 Close-up view of single test valve experinents with a back pressure ratio of 0.45.
Pao.n 59 O
/ \
- . .' ..- . s.,o = .' - N -" 3
- a f"*"" ' . - - " ----J' . I 8
[ , . . . . .. . . $. .
l
.. . . . - . . ~
@~3e =r.*~"%"'._"d_' .,*- ._ -
L J- , ;6,. .h gi,E-
~ ,,, .a.r :-- ~~~
__ a 3 : :-5 e med %.***w.=,W==.,
- -- . :: "l3,. c=
, .=..#- . .
s . , *;.:r'.
r ,.,,,.,~ ,,...c.g.ra.
. .a
'==s'~-
c . ,,
- ' . :% r:;.rr. *.- r c(,,,h s-- se > =c --- n me - -j; .
.w w g,,' s .. s;*'- a- -- .aer.c;".
-.= h ' h, ,., -. - ,,,
- yw= --*. r== t w- - -:: *8*-,. - _. .~. ::;,.
, -::r. .
- 7.,,,;.re a-u:-y.:-*' **.f***.%;~.;w :. r- -e -* .,
',e// "
-f ',%CCl>** :'%, ::=,-=se -(""' .E. : a==;= '
.' ' Q.=*
f'N{,f ./.f?<ML=. tiA'40f*.<M,'MC' qM' G'M a
r ;- w *>h *.s '
%-*',*, *l*- ~~~ e<* ',.X^
- i. hj W[ h'Vr. Q) Y y =*.' d.,{ -h'- Q R, . 't', L: ."=2 .p.'.m r*.~_s.&_
h' h"****j:
- af/* Q'c;'k,,**"'T&, ~ Y;.:: ;*.*S. h-t****.w=xq bh. :;,. Q%%y.' . Js'.'.".Nd a :. --1~ a Y. .;~,, s 9 y . . ." =*
'M .M DN4 :6ad-7d*,. .J:s$.I'-~
- pe.,,_.,
- A. .-
w.-
4 .3Y' s hc/ s;;,::.
,e.-;c.,/f V,'<*[*e.. i.ew-
. ' . - -=< ' * --
.e . . .
e .
- s m%
n---\ c3 7:--
y p s.x %> m.. o.:.:--d : c.p.
~ .a -v
- a"*,,.r +n.j
... .e4-,4
- 0 j -
. . mms
[if W. j.3 -,." ,.;' f y-.ff **t*'l*'l* .c0 ;,%:' Afd
- h.L - :- D. U-7 n:'.e:sr.% F1ow L,'** V, .*f'**" = ;. h.YN]Wy. , ky,*D,4.Q;Cr-fn:k **l ** 5.r:-:
S*W r:fr-- _" : ,r e , 'S.u;,; .,):;;fsTQ".
~t' 6 4 ' ,.;;**
N* ~- 4 sc6;f,4i-:.'M .t. .
' .: %N
- iuse. M:W:p**.*.
. 7% m* -
- -- .-e.w-- c =*-- -c A g .; =m= -, : -t ..,;-a' b"==_- J:.. ,.- ,h
-~ c.,;;. ,. ,.: .:*;.***'h.,
ww -.r,,.4.::a,$g-*.,M,.
.=-e-**~-,_ . ;; - #_, - .
- - .r, ,,s,
- ~ s
-h
/ #"- ':**-*.
- T,. .,*
- ::==.,, . "..r.f . *
.r
, %M - '"" gg;.g-;c .~* -=i ;.M't ,;.~%.,.a e '.c , ,, -
- e==
w se "* '
- -Samum 6.Ma#':*%,r.~
"a"="'.". .r>':::S M,,,.n M
- _ _ . - - - - -- n
- r.
- %n'.r e .1 ;--- ~~ ~ ';"lT
-. _=-_ ..;,,,,X$ ,,,,, 1,,, s -++*'- - ae'--
> ,7 ..._.o.. .,, , , ;; .c;3:.m n.!,- x. w: : -
.a.,r-- - g-
.. ,. . ; r.-;- . u ~ i,.. a . y es ;, u v; .). i , . . . *i . '.,y. .- , .
. ; W> :.: s *TG. ,,b.2.; 9. .-::.-. *.'.p:'
3.y J.. ..p.tc..:.,c. y-,e. *p-c .%. a. . t .r. .v. 3 er.e,.,, ;; y ;" .},,;,. .*, ?.. '~. ..:- .?, *..; &.s.V- ..-
7a.t l+r.n. . ". e c.+ .:: ... ..man . . .c 3. ** . Y 7 n
.4.: . .
a ,
i, ...
, , q.. y'~ . s s
~
nj g 4:, 'm ic:J. A m.: M _ _' ' , . -
8.t r . ;.1 d - t;- : .. t ; ..e. . _ u. ._
a = 40' t
(
\g/ *
.n r. ::.::; :. w-,"
(gf. :.h.. 1 f . u.. e s .,.g..
3: .-
.. . , ';;; c. . 9 .- ; 2 =-m; qi~ :e..
L ;; - .< , . .
.a,. .r,. ,
j
- l. .. . . ., -- - __ _
c
~. .m - -.n...-
, w- , s .m . _
s
>e ' . , pw,-
m.
-.C=-
. -? : . _c.a,or::
---.A * ** m,a=,.,.~
'"ya
. ~. .
s,, ,,,- :=;-:::x- ..
...n .m.r.::,,.s
. .u* . . .-~ . .,;e. .
-1..= t% s.
.r.
% M.: . . . ~ * * - -+ e
~c. s'.
h '
(.w . 2
- b. W: y , .W. .--*l*. W,,g :.. . <r. . r. .;, ;.
g .:7. -
y . .. .
Lg,;,,,s. n;m, - -. ..N . . -:~ .+p.m*
%.c, .. ,,~,: ,c. .e
_- w.s.m,, . ,e... ,i J.:g.,/ h.. ;.J. . w% A, ..M x' w p%r ., . , ' ; .4'
.e : . .- <
.u...;v . d~%
~
};.p:::.,s- +. n &. :s.: ',.p . 5.m
,f
- tryvt.N~ 3.J. .-
v,:k:w.? -
. . +A v w . c c
. .r
. A fu-9".,., .,>W.r.d. .g. ~.r n.&~...v,. x w .,;7,J ., t ..w
.?.#. g(}n.-::+
- ,w
,~.s.
%a L ;
a
.. t m. . xs , .
.x : .-.,~,~ .,,c-r- .w.x .c.x 3.s ;.a f x. -wt,.:~m) w .
h - ,J ,L ,\, .: >
l yn@y; '
f'*.H M y,,O.%w@' -D N.7 . dh hY qa g ),. 5.$.M3~dMI'~~J'/gr F1ow l
~~, ;hb--:;;t. Qv'"v%.a.,.,o.,.y- , 3,'.,1. . .G. .$ ~..%.-..:,: :. ~.;y e.*
r.> .: -. - v:: ~
r es . .c.r % J.
p ~,y 597; . . g:l':.r...:. .
.,1.!;....iLe.... .o lOv 4.%.. ,s..':",".P'w'
. ,; . ,9y, . ' .@.v .
. . e y.W3.'.:J.P. W.- .e-a'e . ,
~ ~ .Nk
- k ,k' M $ .- ='.[*'
,c'.. :_ .-.w-t-#**=%. ,' 't:M. _.M.. ,, m,:;: - gy
_w - n'I.7.a., + -
"kN: : f. ,:. y. .s. ,.. ~
, %. ~._
w .- . m n. . . . . - . m -.. . - - . - -.-
- M .y. .
- ::p W hi:.3di.,U. -iv- @ k .:.:l W ': & * . .
. r; ; -
C,Q- . :: g? '. _ . _. -: , y .av .. ' .. ....r i s>' .
n.. . .
, t ' *. e [m .* ~~-;>."1.,'h, y ~ .__
T i s ,/ a = 20' ,I i
Figure 14 Close-up view of single test valve experiments with a back pressure ratio of 0.45. l
l Page 59A
~
V DEFINITION OF TERMS USED IN TABLES 6, 7, & 8 PATM - Atmospheric pressure
'PSU - Upstream static pressure GAS =A - Gas analyzed assumed to have properties similar to air UF
- Analysis if .for unchoked flow (sub sonic gas velocity)
W80 - Flow rate with disc th full open position ,
DV - Nominal valve size -
TSU - Static upstream temperature in degrees Rankine Gamma - Specific heat ratio for gas selected Option 1 - Program p,arameter selegtf on made (important only to person running program)
ES - English system of units used MW - Molecular weight of gas selected DF80 - Pressure drop ( A P) across valve in full open position for given flow conditions Alpha - Angle of valve disc off of seat for double flange style valve with seat at 10* angle relative to valve flange face CF - Mass flow coefficient from experimental data WR - Portion of full open flow for selected disc angle which will pass thru valve for given flow conditions DPS - Downstream static pressure (PSIA) -
POU - Upstream stagnation pressure PSC - Downstream static pressure for onset of valve choking POD - Downstream stagnation pressure
^
TQRI - Torque coefficient based on experiments W - Mass of gas flowing thru valve TQ - Torque induced on valve disc and stem due to aerodynamic flow for conditions specified in a straight piperun at onset of choked flow or less than choked flow. See definition of TQA below.
TQA - Torque induced on valve disc and stem due to aerodynamic flow for choked conditions specified in a straight piperun.
YCV - Flow coefficient O
l
/ i
-+ -
TABLE 6 age 60 EMERGENCY FLOW, MAX CONTAINMENT PRESSURE STRAIGHT PIPE RUN
) CASE: BALDWIN/ILLP80WER DATE: 03-04-85 UNITS SYSTEM
-PATM: 14 70(PSIA) SHAFT: US PSU = 29.70(PSIA) TSU = 644.67(R)
MEDIUM: GAS = A GAMMA = 1.40 MW = 29.0 FLOW = CF OPTION = 2 DV = 12.000(IN)
OUTPUT DATA .
1 CHOKING PRESSURE RATIOS: PSC/POU = .752 DPS/PSU = .186 SOLUTION: W80 = 41.01(LBM/S)
NOTE: TO BASED ON DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE AT ONSET OF CHOKED FLOW TOA BASED ON PSU UPSTREAM AND PATM DOWNSTREAM
\l PSC/POU = , .7523 (A)
ALPHA.-. .CF --.. WR.. DPS/PSU PSU/POU PSC/POU POD /POU . TOR 1 --
80.0 .5447 1.0000 .1861 .9243 .7523 .8701 75.0 .0674
.5345 .9814 .1888 .9274 -.7509 .8592 .1115 70.0 .5144 .9444 .1939 .9332 .7477 .8473 65.0 .1415
.4858 .8918 .2005 .9409 .7427 .8347 .1600 40.0 .4501 .8264 .2080 . 9498 .7351 .8219 .1693
\ 55.0 .4090 .7510 .2155 .9590 .7248 .8094 .1713 50.0 .3639 .6682 .2227 .9678 .7117 .7976 .1679 45.0 .3144 .5808 .2291 .9759 .6957 .7870 .1608 40.0 .2678 .4917 .2346 .9829 .6772 .7776 .1515 35.0 .2198 .4036 .2390 .9885 .6566 .7698 .1412 30.0 .1739 .3193 . 2423 .9929 .6347 .7634 .1311 25.0 .1315 .2414 '.2446 .9959 .6124 .7587 .1221 20.0 .0942 .1729 .2461 .9979 .5909 .7554 .1148 15.0 .0634 .1164 .2470 .9991 .5719 .7536 .1099 -
10.0 .0407 .0747 .2474 .9996 .5570 .7529 .1078 5.0 .0275 .0505 .2476 .9998 .5482 .7532 .1087 ALPHA YCV W TG TQA *
(DEG) (...) (LBM/HR) (IN-LBF) (IN-LBF) 80.0 2847.28 147645.37 645.64 75.0 1752.31 2765.31 144098.00 1083.62 2099 32 70.0 2609.77 139439.00 1420.95 3702 61 65.0 2403.30 131676.87 1675.82 4221.93 60.0 2166.39 122019.69 1855.89 4508 02 i 55.0 1915 11 110875.47 1965.31 4605.94 50.0 1660.92 98452.69 2009.44 4557 39 l
45.0 1411.67 85759.59 1996 84 4401 76 40.0 1172.79 72604.19 1939 62 4176 22 35.0 948.32 59594.81 1852.44 3915 37
/}
( ,/
30.0 25.0 741.72 556.48 47139.62 35646 77 1751.00 1650.89 3650 46-
-3400 72 ----
20.0 396.45 25524.37 1565 54 3212 70 15.0 266.08 17180.45 1506.05 3079.87 10.0 170.48 11023.04 1480.48 3022.45 SeeReference80C-1andPage59kdefinition f t rms
________enspieTartnN4 rnHpsFTr-__-___-a* @
Page 61 l TABLE 7 NORMAL FLOW CHARACTERISTICS STRAIGHT PIPE RUN (SHAFT UPSTREAM)
O- CASE: BALDdIN/ILL POWER DATE: 03-04-85 Pr.IM: UNITS SYSTEM: ES 14.70(PSIA) SHAFT: US PSU.= -15.70(PSIA) .TSU = 581.67(R)
MEDIUM: GAS = A OAMMA = 1.40 MW = 29.0 FLOW = CF OPTION = 2 DV = 12.OOO(IN)
OUTPUT DATA CHOKING PRESSURE RATIOS: PSC/POU = .752 DPS/PSU =
SOLUTION: W80 = . 186 22.82(LBM/S)
NOTE: TO BASED ON DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE AT ONSET OF CHOKED FLOW h TOA BASED ON PSU UPSTREAM AND PATM DOWNSTREAM PS,C/POU = .7523 (k)
ALPHA CF WR DPS/PSU PSU/POU PSC/POU POD /POU TOR 1 80.0 .5447 1.0000 .1861 .9243 .7523
- .8701 .0674 75.0 .5345 .9814 .1888 .9274 .7509 .8592 .1115 70.0 . 5144... 9444... 1939 --.9332 . 7477. .8473 ..1415.~.-.. .
65.0 .4858 .8918 .2005 O .9409 .7427 .8347 60.0 .1600
.4501 .8264 .2080 .9498 .7351 .8219
\_/ .1693 55.0. 4090... 7510 .2155 . 9590 .7248. .8094 .1713 50.0 .3639 .6682 .2227 .9678 7117 .7976 45.0 .3164 .1679
.5808 .2291 .9759 .6957 .7870 .1608 40.0. 2678 ..49.17 . 2346 ... 9 8 2 9..-. ..- . 6 7 7 2 - .7776 .1515 .._-
35.0 .2198 .4036 .2390 .9885 .6566 .7698 .1412 30.0 .1739 .3193 .2423 .9929 .6347 .7634 .1311
. 25.0.. 1315. 2414..-.2446. . 9959 .6124 . 7587-. 1221-_.-_.
20.0' .0942 .1729 .2461
~
.9979 .5909 .7554 .1148 15.0 .0634 .1164 .2470 .9991 .5719 '.7536 ' 1099 .
. 10.0_. 0407 . 0747 .. 2474 .9996 .5570..
. 7 5 2 9 ... 1 0 7 8. . .... - _ . -
50 .0275 .0505 .2476 .9,998 .5482 .7532 .1087 -
ALPHA YCV W. . . . TO
.. . . . T O A .. . .- _.
(DEO) (...) (LBM/HR) (IN-LBF) (IN-LBF) 80.0 2847.28 - - . . 82156.12 341.24 .114.82 .
75.0 2765.31 80627.34 572.75 193 29 70.0 2609.77 77589 78 751.05 246.84 65.0 2403.30 73270.56 885.76 281.44.
60.0 2166.39 67896.91 980.94 300.53 55.0 1915 11 61695.83 1038.77 307.06 50.0 .- 1660.91.- 54894.52 1062.10 .-- .. 303.83..-.
45.0 1411.67 47720.25 1055.44 293.45 40.0 1172.79 40400 02 1025.19 278 41 35.0 ..
948.32 .
33161.06 979 11 261.02-.--
S 30.0 741.72 26230 48 925.54 243 36 25.0 556.48 19835.34 872.59 227.25 20.0 -396.45 .. 14202.83 827.47 .. .214 18-.._
15.0 266.08 9559.93 796.03 205.32 10.0 170.48 6133.69 782.51 201.50 5.0 115.'31 4151.03 789.47 See Reference 8.0 C-1 ande,-Page 59A for definition of terms..-.203.14@.--
________cnuo.varenue en u m .
1 TABLE 8 NORMAL FLOW CHARACTERISTICS, STRAIGHT PIPE RUN (SHAFT DOWN STREAM)
( CASE: BALDWIN/ILL POWER '
D ATE :. 03-04 -- .- -. --
PATM:. 14.70(PSIA) - UNITS -SYSTEM: -ES ,
_SHAF.T: DS PSU = 15.70(PSIA) TSU = 581.67(R)
MEDIUM: - G A S .. = A . . GAMMA 1.40 MW = 29.0.- . . - .
FLOW = CF OPTION = 2 DV = 12.000(IN)
OUTPUT DATA -
CHOKING PRESSURE RATIOS: PSC/POU = .756 DPS/PSU = .175 SOLUTION: W80 = 24.20(LBM/S)
NOTE: TO BASED ON DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE AT ONSET OF CHOKED FLOW
..TGA BASED ON PSU.UPSTREAN AND.PATM DOWNSTREAM .-
PS C/POU =*
.7556 h
ALPHA CF WR DPS/PSU PSU/POU PSC/POU POD /POU TOR 1
.. 80.0.... 5728. 1.0000.. . 1746.._.4 9154' .. 7556 ... 8904.-.0240 . . . _ _ . - .
75.0 .5695 .9942 .1755 .9165 .7553 .8779 70.0 .0360
.5531 .9655 .1802 .9217 .7534 .8641 65.0. .0457 5255...9174 .._.18 7 5 ... . . 93 0 0.. . 7495 O
V 60.'O 55.0
.4887 . 8531 .. 1963 .9402
. .'7432
. 8 4 9 3. .: 0 5 3 3--.
.8342 .0590
.4447 .7763 .2055 .9511 .7338 .8191 .0630 50.0.'. 3954_-.4903.-.. 2144 .. 9618 . 7210 - .8045. .0657. _- ..
45.0 .3429 .5987 .2223 .9716 .7049 .7906 40.0 .0671
.2891 .5047 .2289 .9800 .6856 .7776 .0675 35.0 .2359 . 4119.... 2342 .9868 .6638 . 7656 .0672.._.....
30.0 .1853 .3235 ..2382 .9919 .7544 25.0
.6403 0644
.1392 -.2430 .2409 . 9954 .6165 .7446
.0654 20.0 .40993.. 1734 .2426 . 9977 . 5940 . 7355.. 0443. ....._...
15.0 .0675 .1178 .2436 .9989 .5745 .7270 .0635 10.0 .0454 .0793 .2440 .9995 5.0 .-.0347
.5602 .7192 .0631
.0605 .. 2442 . 9997 .5530 . 7119 .0634.-... ..
ALPHA YCV W TO TGA (DEG) (...) (LBM/HR) ( IN-L Bf*) . '(IN-LBF) . - . .
80.0 3121.81 87117.19 -113.49 -41.42 75.0 3091.53 84614.03 -171.50 -62.25 -
70 0 2946 29 84115 25 -224.76 -79.46 65 0 2719 69 79918 16 -275.24 60 0 -93.51 2445 37 74323.00 -322.55 -104.48 55 0 2149.01 67630.19 -365 10 50.0 -113 18 1851.10 60140.55 -401 08 -119 21
. 45.0 .. --1560 56.. --52154 14 -429.14 .-. . -12 3. 01 -- ...
40.0 1285 21 43969.47 -448.75 -124.88 35.0 ,
1029 76 35882 47 ~460.29 -125 19 30.0 ....
. 798. 0 0 ..-.-.- -28185. 4 4 - .. ..-464.96 - ~ . --- 12 4 3 7
( 25.0 593.73 21165.70 -464.60 -122.86 20.0 421 21 15102.93 -461.42 -121.17 15.0 -
285.41 -
10266.47 .-457.84 -119 74- -...
10.0 191.84 6910.94 -456.17 -119 11
~,
1andPage59dfor..definitYon*kterms See Referenc
_____nnue.eitartnue nouni r w d
M
- ._ u .___ __ __- -
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ ._ = --
Table 9 Page 63 TORQU2 FOR AS-ItlST5LLED 20flDITI0flS FOR Valve tios. IVR007A Model All Data For Torques Aerodynamic Torque Modification: Mitered elbow 2 diameter in In-lbs.
upstraam Geometry 1 (Positive torques tend t) close valve)
Model ,
Test Actual Torque f er Valve Valve Torque Torque for Straight Flow Modi fica tion Angle Angle flo rma l
- Installed Condition Maximum ** Fac tor # Normal
- Maximum **
80 90 116 lida .1
. 14 175 70 80 246 3702 .9 221 3332 60 70 300 4508 1 300 4508 50 60 303 4557 , 1 303 4557 40 50 278 4176 1 278 4176 30 40 243 3650 1 243 3650 20 30 214 3212 1 214 3212 -
10 20 201 3022 1 201 3022 *
- For 1.0 PSID **15 PSID
- Torque modification factor represents effect of insta led condition as compared to flow in a stralght pipe run. Based on Tes Data.
3 Table 10 TORQUE FOR AS-If1 STALLED 00fl0!TIONS FOR Valve fios. IVR006A, IVR0f 6B
- Model Data For Aerodynamic Torque Modification:
Valvos under straight All torques in In-lbs. line flow conditions.
(Positive torques tend to close valve)
Model Test Actual Torque fer Torque Torque for Valve Valve Straight Flow Modification Installed Condition Angle Anale Normal
- Maximum ** Factor # Normal Maximum **
80 90 -42 1752 1 -42 1752 70 80 -80 3702 1 -80 3702 60 70 -105 4508 1 -105 4508 50 60 -120 4557 1 -120 4557 40 50 -125 4176 1 -125 4176 30 40 .
-125 3650 1 -125 3650
'20 30 -121 3212 1 -121 3212 O 10 20 -119 3022 O 1 -119 3022
- For 1.0 PSID **15 PSID
- Torque modification factor represents effect of installed condition as compared to flow in a straight pipe run. ' Based on Test Data.
-.....--....- -.-.~. .-- - --, --
. . , - - . . . .:=~.-- . .w-- . : .
. Page 64 Table 11 TORQUE FOR AS-IllSTALLED CONDITI0flS FOR Valve Nos. IVR0078 Model Data For Aerodynam'c Torque Modification: Valvas under straight All torques in In-lbs. line flow conditions.
(Positive torques tend to close valve)
Model Test Actual Torque for Torque Torque for Valve Valve Straight Flow Modification Installed Condition Angl e Angle Normal
- Maximum ** Factor # Normal Maximum **
, 80 90 116 1752 1 llo 1752 70 80 246 3702 1 246 3702
~ '
60 70 300 4508 1 300 4508 50 60 303 4557 1 303 4557 40 50 278 4176 1 278 4176 30 40 243 3650 1 243 3650 20 30 214 3212 ,
1 214 3212 10 20 201 3022 1 '201 3022
- For 1.0 PSID **15 PSID
- Torque modification factor represents effect of installed condition as compared to flow in a scraight pipe run. Based on Te~t Data.
9 l
'l O '
4
Page 65 5.
3.3 CONCLUSION
S CONIERNING VALVE OPERABILITY .
For a LOCA condit.un it can be seen in Tables .j ,10, & 11 that torques for the subjec'. valves are positive (closing) torques for all disc positions. For these valves, any flow condition from none to maximum, in combination with the timed bench tests sl10w the valve will close within 5 seconds or less. As shown in Section 5.3.1, the valves will operate in both the open and closed directions inder maximum LOCA conditions.
For the presented data and supplemental test reports, it has been shown that the valves will operate as -designed ur. der the prescribed conditions. This has Nen shown using the conservative assumption of no credit taken for pressure ramp in containment and no credit taken for back pressure due 10 downstream piping.
6.0 NRC 21 QUESTIONS Clow has pursued !n extensive p'rogram to demonstrate operability ,
i of purge and vent valvis in accord with NRC Guidelines. Since every installation is unique, Clow's basic approach is to'use a combination of test and analysis dita. The following pages give an item by item response to the 21 point (less 2) list of considerations issued by the NRC to utilities. Thes? responses include descriptions of such tests.
A copy of the NRC questions responded to in this paper is attached (Appendix A).
- 1. The d P across the valve is deter. mined from. the customer's
- spe'c and/or dita sheet. The containment pressure and temperature condition (s) is based on destgr, basis considerattor,s (i.e. pressure = 15 psig and temperature = 185*F) and are higher 4
e
Page 66 than analytically determined DBA-LOCA conditions. This is much more conservative than torques calculated from a containment pressure time-history analysis at incremental valve angle positions. Clow assumes downstream pressure is atmospheric although it may, in fact, be higher.
- 2. Dynamic torque' coefficients were developed based on scale models of a 12", 24", 48", and 96" valve. These were'shown to be conservative by a test of a full scale 12" valve. Further, model tests were performed for an upstream mitered elbow for 2 valves in series using the 24" models. For actual production valves disc shapes are identical or only slightly different.
All differences, although small, are fully documented.
(Section 5.1,5.2,5.3)
- 3. Installation effects were accounted for in all cases, but down-stream piping back pressure'was not. A higher than atmospheric downstream pressure would result in a smaller AP across the valve, and thus smaller calculated torques. Not accounting for this, produces a more conservative calculation. (Section 5.1.3)
- 4. Clow does not consider a containment pressure response profile.
Clow assumes the isolation signal may be delayed until full containment pressure is reached, then the valve will be called upon to close. Actual time lag for equipment response is not considered by Clow since the approach taken is more conservative.
Clow does, however, record test lag time as part of unit bench testing. (Section 1.2.C 5.3.1, 5.2.3)
O
Page 67 l
p
( 5. Valve angle and predicted AP for choking across the valve is presented. The maximum A P is conservatively stated as equal to l the maxinun service A P for all angles. (Section 5.3.2)
- 6. Codes used, allowed stresses, and predicted stresses are presented in the Code Design Repcrt and/or Seismic Analysis Report (s). l Load combinatio'ns dre described in these reports . The valve is l analyzed by finite element techniques. (Section 4.0) 9.
The vent / purge valves located inside containment are not effected @
by backpre sure because both sides of the actuator piston will be influenced by the containment air pressure. Thus we do not believe it is necessary to consider backpressure.
- 10. Clow to date has not used accumulators for valves used in containment isolation system service.
' bi V 11. NA to Clow design.
- 12. Units are not modified to limit the travel angle, except by actuator stops. The purpose of these stops is to limit travel of the disc to being parallel with the pipe centerline. Clow's report shows, from the test data base and bench tests of each unit, that sufficient torque is available to close and seat the valve against all flow induced loads. Since Clow's seat / seal design is conical; no special considerations for low temperature is required. (See Section 5.3.1,5.3.2)
- 13. Clow selects operators for each unit with maximum operating torques much larger than that produced by flow interaction with the disc. (See Section 5.3.1)
O
Page 68
- 14. Not applicable to air operators.
- 15. Not applicable to air operators.
- 16. Not applicable to air operators. A manual jack screw is pro-h vided and the unit is tagged indicating the full disengagement length of the screw. No automatic features are provided to insure disengagement. . Proper operation is assumed by administrative controls and procedural checks.
- 17. The valve, being of all metal construction except for packings, seil laminations, and gaskets, will not degrade under the required environmental conditions. Metal components are generally accepted in the industry as suitable for the required environmental conditions. Tests at both high and low temperatures have been performed by Gebruder Adams of Bokum, West Germany for the subject seal / seat design. Seismic considerations are covered by both analysis and previous static load tests. (See Section 1.2, Section 7.0, Section 8.0 B1).
- 18. All operators and solenoid valves installed by Clow are qualified to appropriate IEEE requirements by testing. (See Section 2.2.2, 2.2.3).
- 19. All tests are summarized in the supplied qualification report and are documented by separate test reports. (See Section 8.0 F1)
- 20. Assumptions and the basis for use of analysis combined with test t
data are presented in the report. (All Sections).
- 21. Clow provides operation and maintenance manuals describing required maintenance intervals (typically replacement at least p every 5 years on all elastomers).
.V e
- i Page 69 f
i 7.0 VALVE SEALING CiMRACTERISTICS j 7.1 Normal Sealing j Table 13 shows t'Te sealing ability of the Clinton valves as
- they were shop tested for record. The tests were pe* formed with pressure on the indicated side of the disc and the opposite side open r
to atmosphere. The normal recommended flow directic1 for these valves is with pressure on the shaft side. During t'11s test, the air , !
under water method was used to indicate leakage.
4 4
i I 5
O
\ .
i
?
I i
i 4
i 4
t 1
) _ . - - - . . _ - . - , _ , _ _ _ . _ , . . _ _ _ _ _ . - _ . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . . _ _ . . . . . _ . . , _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ , , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . - . . _ .
.l 1 Page 70 1
i k Table 12 I VALVE SEALING CHARACTERISTICS PRESSURIZED SIDE VALVE CLAMP VALVE SIZE TEST FRESSURE SHAFT RING LEAKAGE t
MARK NO. ( IN. ). PSIG SIDE SIDE (BUBBLES / MIN) 1VR006A 12" 15 X NA 0 IVR006B 12" 15 -'
X NA 0 1
1VR007A 12" 15 X NA 0 4
1VR0078 12" 15 X NA 0 i
i ,
e a
lo 2
t 4
l O
I
=
Page 71 7.2 1.ong Term Sealirg The conical seal / seat design of the Tricentric valve in com-bination with the laminated metal / asbestos seal offers good long term sealing characteristics. When the seal and seat are machined a certain surface finish is obtained. With this finish certain leak rates are obtained during a bench test (see 7.1). On a microscopic scale these surfaces contain peaks and valleys. When the disc is seated, these surfaces mate and high local (above yield) stresses are induced at the peaks. The peaks will yield and deform and form a match between the seat and seal. As the valve is cycleo throughout 1*.s life, this match tends to improve and a visual seating pattern appeal 5. This results in improved sealing as the valve ages.
This has been vrrified by experience and is documented in the Shell International C) cling Test (Reference 8.0 D3)_ This test was performed by Gebruder Adams of Bochum, West Germany. Clow's Engineered Products Division protuces the Tricentric design unuer license of Gebruder Adams. The test showed sealing improved c'ontinuously up to 41,000 cycles, the litit of the test. '
m e
h F
l Page 72 O
G 7.3 Debris Effects On Sealing A test was performed to determine the effect on sealing capability of a Tricentric valve if a foreign object became trapped between the seat and seal. As with any valve, if the object is large enough.and hard enough and happens to be caught between the sealing surfaces, the valve will fail to close completely and the valve will leak. Leakage will be dependent on tne size and shape of the object and open gap size wriich remains when the valve does not fully close. Since no stand-ards as to debris size exist, the test made determined leakage due to object damage after the object was removed. For in plant operation this would represent leakage after recycling of the valve if the object was blown out of the way during recycling.
The object selected was a cooling tray liner used in the petrochemical industry. It's dimensions were approximately 1/8" x 1" x 6" and was a filled polyvinyl chloride plastic of 80 shore D hardness. The valve was closed upon this material, opened to remove the material, then closed again to measure leakage. Depending on the applied seating torque, a leakage of .015 SCFM to .333 SCFM was measured. This test showed the valve could tolerate some large debris and still maintain a relatively low leakage even with a damaged seal (See reference 8.0 D2. )
As can be seen from Figures 10 and 11, debris screens are provided to prevent large debris from entering the valves.
. ._._._s_..-
- j Paae 73 l 3
7.4 Sealing Under Temperature Variations The Tricentric design has been used successft 11y for' sealing applications from cryogenic to 9000F. The Shell International Cyclin) Test describes sealing charteteristics fo r 'a media operatin; temperature of 8420F when tie body reached a temperatura of 7160F.
The Tricentric r:onical seal / seat design lends itself well to accommodating temper,ature changes in the body and resultant size variation of the sealing components. Due to the torque seating dusign and some seal flexibility, the valve will self adjust to nhe small dimensional variatic1s which could be anticipated for the subject valves. Of course, if ID
( ,/ large thermal gradients (very unlikely from inform 3 tion provided to Clow) ex sted around the body circumference higher ,
levels of leakage could be expected. Again no standards exist to the knowledge of t' low personnel which could become a basis for prediction or a :est of such leakage. .
i I
O e
,- \ .
U
Fuge 74 -
I
_ G.0 REFEREtlCES A. Seismic Analysis Rcports prepared by: Patel Engineers Hur.tsville, Alabama The following incit.de stress and frequency analy:is for the subject valves: -
- 1. Technical Report PEI-TR-833600-1, Rev.A Seismic
' Qualification Analysis of Clow 12 Inch Wafe Stop Valve.
. 2. Technical Rep >rt PEI-TR-852400-1, Addendum to PEI Technical Report PEI.'-TR-833600-1 covering 1E valves IVR006A, IVR006B, IVR007A. IVR007B.
B. Seismic Qualificatica fest Reports -
prepared by: Vought Corp.
Higi Spaed Wind Tunnel Facility Dallas, Texas' G
/j
\ 1. Report flo. 2-59700/1R-52972 " Simultaneous F tatic Seismic Load of Flow Interruption Capabil.ity Tests of a 12 Inch Valve for the Clow Corporation" (Dec.15, '981).
. Application of 11.0 g biaxial static load 1.o valve
- actuator duriig operation with choked air 110w thru the valve.
- 2. Patel Report ?EI-TR-83-29, Revision A (Aug. 10,1983)
" Seismic Qualification of Clow Wafer Stop \alve Assemblies" including Addandum I and II.
e O
V .
I -
Page 75
()
p 8.0 PEFERENCES (con't)
C. Air Flow Tests .
~
prepared by: A.L. Addy, Ph.D.
Urbana, Illinois (Engineering Consultant in Fluid Dynamics)
- 1. Final report an the Clow Valve Analysis Prcgram CVAP (Oct. 1981). Report covers methods of analysis, development of data base from model tests, and set-up
, of computer program to predict characteristics of. full size valves.
- 2. " Aerodynamic Torque And Mass Flow Rate For Compressible Flow Through Geometrically Similar Scale-Model Clow Valves In Series." (October,1982)
D. Other Reports and I1 formation *
- 1. Operating Instructions for Clow Tricentric Wafer Stop Valve covers installation, maintenance, anc operating instructions for 83.-2462(N) valves.
- 2. Clow Test Report Project No'82-003 "Effect s of Foreign Bodies on Tricentric Sealing" by Robert Sarsone.
. 3. Shell International Cycling Test (2/6/72) ty M. Nijenhuis (Note: Clow croduces Tricentric valves unc er license of Gebruder Adams of Sochum, West Germany.)
E. Other References '
- 1. Baldwin Associates Design Specification 8\-K-2882-29, Issue __jL.
- 2. "A Water Table Investigation of Two-Dimensional Models of The Clow Corporation Tricentric Valve" by Dr. Robert F.
Hurt, Engineering Consultant, Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Bradley University, Peoria, Illinois, Sept. 14, 1979.
3.. " Radiation Sensitivity Analysis of Luminated Valve Seals For Clow Corporation." Wyle No. 17629-01 (.Jan. 31, 1983)
M M
Page 76 O
8.0 REFERENCES
(con't)
F. Environmental and Seismic Qualification Reports
- 1. PEI-TR-852201-02 " Seismic Qualification Status Report on Clow Wafer Valves, G.H. Bettis Valve Actuators, and Associated Control Components", dated 4/15/85
- 2. G.H. Bettis Nuclear Qualification Test Report 37274, Revision 9, dated November 28, 1984.
- 3. " Qualification of EA180 Series Limit Switches for use in Nuclear Power Plants" Namco Controls Report No. QTR105, Revision 1, dated August 28, 1980.
- 4. " Report on Qualification of Automatic Switch Company (ASCO)
Catalog NP-1 Solenoid Valves for Safety-Related Applications in Nuclear Power Generating Stations," ASCO Report No. AQR-67368/ Revision 1, updated.
O
l APPENDIX A NUCLEAR REGULATORY PURGE VALVE OPERABILITY GUIDE LIttES l
S 0
0 4 *
=
Page A-1 BRA!!CH 'ECH::ICAL POSITIGl1 CSS 6-4
- COTITAlfiME IT PURGItiG IURIriG T10RMAL PLAtlT OPERATIO?ls A. BACKGROUf!D This branch tectnical position pertains to syt. tem lines which can provide an open rath from the containment to the environs during normal ' plant cperation; e.g. , the purge and vent lines of -
the containment purge system. It supplements the position taken in SRP section 6.7,4. * '
, While the contai1 ment purge system provides pla nt operational flexibility, its desi;n must consider the importance of mini-mizing the release of containment atmosphere to the environs following a postulatcd loss-of-coolant accident. 1herefore, plant v designs must not rel) on its use on a routine basi .
The need for purging has not always been anticipated in the ,
design of plants, anc therefore, design criteria fr.r the contain-ment purge system hau not been fully developed. The purging experience at operating plants varies considerably from plant to plant. Some plants co not purge during reactor opr? ration, some purge intermittently for short periods and some purge continuously.
The containment purge system has been used in a variety of ways, for example, to alleviate certain operational problems, such as excess air leakage into the containment frnm pneumatic controllers, for reducing the airborne activity within the contain-ment to facilitate personnel access during reactor power operation,
- flote : This paper is retyped for legibility from paper supplied h~, -
by flRC.
/.
/
~
Page A-2 (D
V and for controlling '.he c0ntainment pressure, tem erature and relative humidity. .fowever, the purge and vent 1 nes provide an open path from th) containment to the environs. Should a LOCA occur during containment purging when the reactor is at power, the calculated accident doses should be within 10 CFR 100 guide-line values. .
The sizing of tt.e purge and vent lines in most plants has been based on the net.d to control the containment atmosphere .
during refueling operations. This need has resulted in very large lines penetrating the containment (about 42 inches in diameter). Since these lines are normally the only ones provided that will permit som! degree of control over the containment atmosphere to facilitate personnel access, some plants have k- ; used them for contai.1 ment purging during normal plant operation.
Under such conditions, calculated ' accident doses could be signif- -
icant. Therefore, tae use of these large containcent purge and i
vent lines should be restricted to cold shutdown conditions and .
refueling operations.
The design and use of the purge and vr.nt lines should be based on the premise of ac11eving acceptable calculated offsite radio-
! logical consequences and assuring that emergency care cooling (ECCS) effectiveness is not degraded by a reduction in the contain-ment pressure.
Purg'e system de-igns that are acceptat>le for use on non- .
routine basis during normal plant operation can be achieved by
/ s V
t
.__7.. . o . - w . ~ o .. o p ,.. w g _. o.g,p _.
=-d- : _==.:.= = = = = w *-. - = : - - -- - - - -
Page A-3 (q ~
l providing additional purge and vent lines. The s ze of these lines should be limited such that in the event of a loss-of-coolant accident, assuming the purge and vent valves are open and subsequently close, the radiological consequences calculated in accordance with Regulatory Guides 1.3 and 1.4 would not exceed the 10 CFR 100 guideline values. Also, the maximum ti...e for valve closure should not e::ceed five seconds to assure t1at the purge i and vent valves woulc be closed before the onset of fuel failures following a LOCA.
The size of the* purge and vent lines should be about eight inches in diameter for PWR plants. This line size may be overly conservative from a "adiological viewpoint for the fiark III BWR O
i plants and the HTGR , slants because of containment and/or core design features. Therefore, larger line sizes may be justified. .
However, for any pro,csed line size, the applicant must demon-strate that tne radiological consequences following a loss-of-coolant accident wou'.d be within 10 CFR 100 guideline values. ,
In summary, the acceptability of a specific line size is a function of the site meteorology, containment design, and radio-logical source term for the reactor type; e.g', BUR, PHR or HTGR.
B. BRA!!CH TECHflICAL POSITION The system used to purge the containment for the reactor operational modes of power operation, startup. hot standby and hot shutd'own; i.e., the on-line purge system, should be indepen-dent of the purge system used for the reactor operation nodes of cold shutdown and refueling.
. Page A-4 (O 1. The on-line purc e system should be designed 11 accordance with the following cr iteria:
- a. The performance and reliability of the purge system isolation valves should be consistent with the oper-ability asst.rance program outlined in PEB Branch Technical Position MEE-2, Pump and Valve Operability Assurance Program. (Also see SRP Section 3.9.3) The design basis for the valves and actuators should include the buildup of containme1t pressure for the 1.0CA break spectrum, and the purge line and vent line flows as a fuaction of time up to and du-ing valve closure,
- b. The number of purge and vent lines that may be used should G
/
be limited t) one purge line and one vent line.
- c. The size of the purge and. vent lines should not exceed about eight inches in diameter unless dettiled justifi-cation for 1 trger line sizes is provided.
~
- d. The containment isolation provisions for the purge system .
lines should meet the standards ap'ropriate p to engineered safety featu es; e.e., quality, redundancy , reliability and other appropriate criteria.
- e. The instrumentation and control systems provided to isolate the purge system lines should be independent and actuated by diverse parameters; e.g. , containment pressure, safety injection actuation, and containment radiation level.
If energy is required to close the valves, at least two O
diverse sources of energy shall be provided, either of N] j whicht can affect the isolation function.
/ -
g
- - : = - - . . . - _ . - . . . . - ~_ - .
P, ige A-5 f.
Purge systen isolation valve closure times, including instrumenta tion delays, should not exceec five se'conds.
9 Provisions should be made to ensure that isolation valve closure wil' not be prevented by debris which could potentially become entrained in the escaping air and steam.
- 2. The purge systen should not be relied on for r.capcrature and humidity control within the containment.
- 3. Provisions should be made to minimize the nee f for purging of the containmtnt by installing containment atmosphere cleanup systems within the containment.
4 Provisions shou'd be made for testing the availability of
[)
v the isolation ftnction and leakage rate of th? isolation valves, individually, during reactor operatio1.
i
- 5. "he following at alyses should be performed to justify the containment purt e system.
- a. An analysis of the radiological consequences of a loss- ,
of-coolant nccident. An analysis should 3e done for a spectrum of break sizes, and the instrumeitation and i;
setpoints that will actuate the vent and purge valves closed should be specified. The source term used in the radiological calculations should be based on a calcul-ation under the terms of Appendix K to determine the extent of a failure and the concomitant release of fission products, and the fission product activity in bq j the primary coolant. A pre-existing iodine spike should
Page A-6
'~'
be consideram in determining primary coolint activity.
The volume of containment in which fissi]n products are mixed s!'ould be justified, and the fission products o
from the above sources should be assumed to be released through the open purge valves during the naximun interval required for valve closure.
, The radiological conseq-uences should be within 10 CFR 100 guidelEne values.
- b. An analysis which demonstgates the acceptability of the provisions made to protect structures and safety-related equipment; e.g., fans, filters and ducting located beyond
- the purge system isolation valves against loss of function to control the environment created by the escaping air and steam.
(f } ,
- c. An analysis of the reduction in the conta.nment pressure resulting fr om the partial loss of contai iment atmosphere during the Lccident for ECCS backpressure determination.
- d. 'The allowable leak rates of the purge and vent isolation valves shou;d be specified for the spectrum of design basis presstres and flows against which t.ie valves must cl os e'.
S e
t e
__ _ _ _ _ . _ _ __ _3 . _ , . .. ,_
Page A-I .
D (v
GUIDELI:lES FOR DE",0:ISTRAT IO:i 0F OPERABILITY OF PURC E AND VE: T VALVES OPERABILITY In order to establish operability it must be shown that the valve actuator's torque capability has sufficient n:argin to over-come or resist the torques and/or forces (i.e. , fitid dynanic, bearing, seating, fri: tion) that resist closure whei stroking ,
from the initial open position to full seated (bubble tight) in the time. limit specified. This should be predicted on the pressure (s) established in the containment folicwing a design basis LOCA.
Considerations which hould be addressed in assurirg valve design adequacy include:
- 1. Valve closura rate versus time - i.e., corstant rate or other.
- 2. Flow directi]n through val.ve; AP across valve. ,
- 3. Single valve closure (inside containment cr outside containment >alve) or simultaneous closurc. Establish worst case. -
- 4. Containment back pressure effect on closirg torque margins of air operated valve which vent pilot air inside contain- ,
ment.
S. Adequacy of accumulator (when used) sizing and initial charge for valve closure requirements.
- 6. ,For valve operators using torque limiting devices - are the settings of the devices compatible with the torques required to operate the valve during the design basis b
\ condi tion .
l
/
.. I s
Pa,ge A-8 O 7. The effect c,f the piping system (turns, t aanches) up-stream and townstream of all valve installations.
- 8. The effect of butterfly valve disc and shaft orientation to the fluir. raixture egressing from containment.
i DEMONSTRATIO!I
- Demonstration o' the various aspects of opera)ility of purge and vent valves may Ie by analysis, bench testing, insitu testing or a combination of these me,ans.
Purge and vent valve structural elements (val"e/ actuator assembly) must be eviluated to have sufficient stress margins to withstand loads impo:ed while valve closes during n design basis accident. Torsional shear, shear, bending, tensioi and compression loads / stresses should be considered. Seismic loadings should be addressed.
Once valve closcre and structural integrity a e assured by analysis, testing or a suitable combination, a det?rmination of the sealing integrity after closure and long term exposure to the .
containment environmt:nt should be evaluated. Emphisis should be directed at the effec t of radiation and of the con:ainment spray chemical solutions on seal material. Other aspect; such as the effect on sealing from outside ambient temperatures and debris should be considered.
The following censiderations apply when testing is chosen as a means for demonstrating valve operability:
~
O .
' . w
Page A-9
(.
Bench Testina A. Bench t.esting cz n be used to demonstrate suitability of the in-service valve. by reason of its tracibility in design to a test valve. The following factors should be considered when qualifying valves through bench testing.
- 1. Whether a vilve was qualified by testing if an identical valve assembly or by extrapolation of dat: from a similarly designed valve.
- 2. tihether meas Jres were taken to assure that piping up-stream and destnstream and valve orientation are simulated.
- 3. Whether the following load and environmen:al factors were considered .
O a.
b.
c.
Simulation of LOCA Seismic loading Tempertture soak .
- d. Radiation exposure ,
- e. Chemicci exposure
- f. Debris B. Bench testing of installed valves to demonstrate the suitability of the specific valve to perform its required function during '
the postulated cesign basis accid'ent is accep+.able.
- 1. The factors listed in items A.2 and A.3 siould be considered when taking this approach.
In-Situ Testing -
In-situ testing of purge and vent valves may Se performed to confirm the suitabili-ty of the valve under actual conditions.
O ,
t
i Page A-10 2
1 4
)
When perfor:.ing such :est, the conditions (loading environment) :
i to which the valve (s: will be subjected during the test should simulate the design tasis accident.
NOTE: Post test valse examination should be perfomed'to establish '
(
i structural integrity of the key valve / actuator comp onents.
(
End CSB 6-4 I' i
6 b f .
h i !
}
?
1 L
n l
t I
I I !
1 I. j i
e 3
O ,i I
./ !
/ :
_s
Page A-11 O
CLARIFICATIO:10F SEP'. 27 LETTER TO LICE!! SEES REGAIDIflG*
DE!40!! STRATI 0i10F OPERABILITY OF PURGE A!!D VEllT VAL /ES
- 1. The AP across the valve is in part predicated on the contain-ment pressure and gas density conditions. What were the containment conditions used to determine the aP's across the valve at the incremental angle positions furing the closure cycle?
, 2. Ware the dynamic torque, coefficients used for the deter-mination of torcues developed, based on data resulting from E
actual flow tesis conducted on the particular disc shape /
design / size? Wiat was the basis used to predict torques.
developed in va've sizes different (especially larger valves) than the sizes Inown to have undergone flow t sts?
- 3. Were installatir n effects accounted for in th! determination .
of dynamic torgtas developed? Dynamic torquei are known to
, be affected for example, by flow direction th ough valves
'{ with off-set discs, by downstream piping back ressure, by ,
shaft orientation relative to elbows, etc. W1at was the basis (test data or of her) used to predict dynamic :orques for the particular valve installation?
I
- 4. When comparing the containment pressure response profile against the valve position at a given instant of time, was the valve closure rate vs. time (i.e. contstant or other) taken into account? For air operated Valves equipped with spring return operators, has the lag time from the time the
- flote: This paper is retyped for legibility from paper supplied by flRC.
- g
Page A-12
~
(3.
V valve receives a signal to the time the valvt starts to stroke been accaunted for?
tt0TE: Where a tutterfly valve assembly is equipped with spring to close air operators (cylinder, diaphragm, etc.), there
, typically is a lag time from the time the isclation -signal is received ,(solen)id valve usually deenergized) to the time the operator starts to move the valve. In the case of an air i
cylinder, the pilot air,.on the opening side of the cylinder is approximately 90 psig when the valve is opan, and the spring force available'.*aay not start to move the piston until the air on this opening side is vented'(solenoid valve de-energizes) below about 65 osig, thui the lag time.
- 5. Provide the necissary information for the taHe shown below for valve positions from the initial open position to the seated position (10 increments if practical),
Valve Position -
(in degrees - 900 Predicted aP Maximum AP
= full open) _ (across valve) (capability) ,
- 6. What Code, stanlards or other criteria, was the valve designed to? What are t1e stress allowables (tension, shear, torsion, etc.) use'd for tritical elements such as. disc, pins, shaft yoke, etc. in the valve assembly? What load combinations were used?
- 9. For those valve assemblies (with air operators) inside contain-ment, has the containment pressure rise (backpressure) been considered as to its effect on torque margins available (to V close and seat the valve) from the actuator? During the closure period, air must be vented from the actuators opening f
[
Page A-13 s
side through thi solenoid valve into this bac: pressure.
Discuss the ins.:alled actuator bleed configurition and provide .
basis for not cc.nsidering this backpressure effect a problem on torque margir.. Valve assembly using 4 way solenoid valve j should especial'y be reviewed.
- 10. Where air operat ed valve assemblies use accumulators as the fail-safe feature, describe the accumulator air system config-
! uration and its 3perati,on". Provide necessary information to
- show the adequacy of the accumulator to stroke the valve (i.e.
sizing and operation starting from lower limits of initial air pressure charge). Discuss active electricci components j
in the accumulator system, and the basis used to determine their qualification for the environmental contiitions exper-ienced. Is the accumulator system seismically designed?
j 11. For valve assemtlies requiring a seal pressur zation system (inflatable mair seal) describe the air presstrization system configuration and operation including neans used to .
determine that valve closure and seal pressurization have taken place. Ciscuss active electrical compcnents in this system, and the basis used to determine their qualification for the environmental condition experienced. Is this system seismically designed?
For this type valve, has it been determined that the " valve travel stops" (closed position) are ca~pable of withstanding the loads imposed at closure during the CSA-LOCA conditions?
s g d 1 --- .- - - - - - -
"~~~
Page A-14 O
\, /
- 12. Describe the corification made to the valve a:senbly to limit the opening angie. With. this modification, is there . sufficient torque margin as.ailable from the coerator to overcome any dynamic torques developed that tend to oppose valve closure, starting from the valve's initial open positian? Is there sufficient torque margin available from the cierator to fully
' seat the valve'? Consider seating torques req sired with seats that have been at low ambient temperatures.
.* i
- 13. Does the maximum torque developed by the valve during closure exceed the maxir un torque rating of the operators? Could this affect opeiability? , -
- 14. Has the maximum torque value determined in 12 been found to
-~
be compatible w;th torque limiting settings u1ere applicable?
'~#
- 15. Where electric notar operators are used, has the minimum avail-able voltage to the electric operator under bith normal or
- emergency modes been determined and specified to the operator F
manufacturer, to assure'the adequacy of the ooerator to stroke l ,
the valve at DBI conditions with these lower limit voltages
- available. Doer this reduced voltage operati)n result in any significant change in stroke timing? Describe the emergency mode power source used.
- 16. Where electric operator units are equipped with handwheels, does their design provide for automatic re-engagement of the motor operator Tollowing the handwheel mode of operation? l If not, what steps are taken to preclude the possibility of g
. a .- .
Page A-15 O the valve beine left in the handwheel mode fellowing scme maintenance, test etc. type operation.
- 17. Describe the tests and/or analysis perforSed to establish i
the qualificatian of the valve to perform itt intended function under the environmental conditions exposed'tc during and after i
the DBA following its long term exposure to the normal plant environment'.
- 18. What basis is used to establish the qualification of the valve, operators, soleroids, valves? How was the valve assembly (valve / operators) seismically qualified (test, analysis, etc.)?
- 19. Where testing was accomplished, describe the type tests per-formed conditio1s used etc. Tests (where applicable) such as flow tests, Iging simulation (thermal, radiation, wear, vibration endurance, seismic) LOCA-DBA envircnment (radiation c steam, chemciali) should be pointed out.
- 20. Where analysis vas used, provide the rationa.ls used to reach the decision that analysis cculd be used in lieu of testing. ,
Discuss conditians, assumptions, other test cata, handbook data, and classical problems as they may apply.
- 21. Have the ' preventive maintenance instructions (part replace-ment, lubrication, periodic cycling, etc.) established by the manufacturer been reviewed, and are they being followed?
Consideration should especially be given to clastomeric com-ponents in valve body, operators, solenoids, etc. where this hardware is installed inside containment.
b v
- = - a
. . . -__ . _ . _ . - . , - - . . - ~ . - . . . . - ..--- . -.
t O -
APPEf1 DIX B l
OESCRIPTIO:t 0F OPERATIONAL TESTS OF A 1? INCH CLOW TRICENTRIC VALVE
, , FOR .
fiUCLEAR PURGE SYSTEf! SERVICE BY J. E. KRUEGER ftUCLEIR VALVE DESIGN EllGIllEER NOVEMBER 30, 1981 O
M O
. . . -. . . . ~ - - - - - - < - - - =--- - ~
-- - - - = - - - - - - -"
. PaJe B-1 v
IllTRODUCTI0fl -
A test was perfo med at Vought Corp. , Dallas, Texas, on flovember 16, 1981, to demonstrate operability of a 12 inch Tricentric valve for ' low and load conditions possible in case of a LOCA (Loss of Coolant Accident) in a nuclear plant. The test was run with a viIve to be used in Jersey Cent al Po.ier and Light's Oyster Creek Plant. The test was performed by Yought personnel under the direction of a Clow Engirecc.
~
Witnesses to the tests included representatives of fiPU flucl' ear of flew Jersey and Bect tel of San Francisco.
~
OBJECTIVE -
The test was performed to demonstrate that the valve would operate under pressure, flow, and loadings simulatiig operating and seismic conditions possible during a LOCA. It was also
- desired that the open to close cycle be demonstratei to occur F
in less than 5 seconds. A secondary objective was :o show aerodynamic torques produced by air flow over the d sc were '
equal or less than these predicted and used in destining the valve and selecting tre actuator. (Predicted torques used in i
design derived from previous air flow test performed with 3 inch scale models.)
TEST SET-UP -
The valve was installed in a straight pipe run with a stagnation chamber upstream approximately 6 feet. Dounstream 3 feet was a diverging nozile to prevent downstream pressure
_m -
m._- _ _ _ _
Page B-2 from exceeding one atmosphere. U;:s trea, of the st gnation chamber there were several servo-controlled valves used to maintain a constant pressure in the chamber. Air ;o this system was supplied from Vaught's 28,000 cubic fee air storage tanks. The tanks were pressurized to 600 psig wit'i the servo-valves used to maintain a pressure of 65 psig at the stagnation chamber upstream of tae valve. Hydraulic load cyli ders n were provided to produce an 11.0 g load in two perpendicular
. directions through thE valve actuat'or center of gravity.
IllSTP.UMErlTATION -
Numerousmeasure[1entsweremadeduringthetestwiththose relating directly to "alve operation being printed on an oscillographic chart. These measurements were us'ei to verify test parameters were net during the test and to mor itor valve performance. All dat.1 was fed through a digitizer and recorded directly on magnetic : ape for later study. Measurtnents were made at a rate of 10 :1er second. The measurements taken during the demonstration run; were as follows:
- 1. Total pressu e in the stagnation chamber *.
l 2. Total ' temperature in the stagnation chamber.
- 3. Total and static pressure upstream of the Clow valve.
- 4. Total and static pressure downstream of the Clow valve.
- 5. Static pressure in the pneumatic actuator cylinder.
- 6. IIydraulic pressure to the static . load cylinders.
- 7. Angle of the disc in the Clow valve.
( ) 8. Torque on the valve drive shaft.
w/
b i
__ m
Page 8-3 val.VE A!iD ACTUATOR DEilGil PARAliETERS -
O The valve tested was designed for a differential operating pressure of 65 psi an! combined operating and seismic loads of 11.0 g's. The seal wts of laminated 316 SST and ascestos. .
The body design was 150 lb. class per ANSI B16.34. The shaft used for transmitting torque to close and seal the valve was of a 17-4 PH age hardenable stainless steel, heat treated to conditionH-1150. The actuator used was a Bettis TC-316B-SR2 pneumatic spring return actuator. The actuator was of a fail closed de' sign with the spring supplying the closing and seating torque (Note: Triceritric valves are designed for torque seating). The actuator was qualified for nuclear service.
CC:lDUCT OF TEST -
p Q The test consisttd of applying the static load to the -
actuator and establisling a 65 psig. upstream pressu e with the
~
Clow valve closed. A signal was then initiated to spen the valve.
The valve then cycled full open against flow and reaained open
~
until a signal to close the valve was provided. Thr valve then cycled to the closed position and seated. During tais period data was taken automatically at 10 mearurements per second at all sensors. This test was repeated 4 additional times at 65 psig and once at 35 psig. Note: These upstream pressures produced choked (flow at sonic velocity) flow through the valve during the valve'open period.
G
% 1-Page ?.-4 RESULTS OF TESTS -
(
The tests demon .trated the following:
- 1. The Clow disc and shaf t geometry provid(s for a.
positive a.'rodynamic closing torque for all angles '
from full open to full closed.
- 2. The aerodynamic torque values used for design of i the Clow valve are conservative relative to measured torques. (Design torques were based on arevious 3" scale model . tests.)
- 3. The construction of the valve i.s rigid ir its design such that r o binding resulted Under an 11.0 g load applied in two directions. simultaneously.
- 4. The valve 5ill cycle from full open to fill closed in p
v less than E seconds with any amount of f;ow from none to the maximum tested (108 lb/sec of air).
Any value of flow above zero tended to c'ose the valve '
faster (the valve closed in 3.6 sec. for a no flow L
1 h condition). .
i .
- 5. Operator sizing was sufficient to cycle ".he valve from full closed to full open in less th.tn 5 seconds 3
for any tested flow rate.
CONCLUSION -
Clow has demonstrated that their nuclear purge valve design can meet ,and exceed typical specifications for this type of service. It was further shown that the valve will function as
. .= R
Page B-5 O
O required regardless of the LOCA pressure ramp curve (assumes lower pressures upstream at start of valve closure) often used by other valve manufacturers to show operability. In conjunction with other tests (now in progress) to show operability under many installed piping configurations, Clow val,ves can allow full open purge function during shutdown and for normal operation as opposed to the partially cpen position @
now allowed by the NRC. Further, it has been shown that the Tricentric can meet tight leak rate requirements with a metal to metal sealing which is more reliable and less costly in maintenance than sealing with clastomers.
C\
V e
O