ML20153G645
| ML20153G645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200003 |
| Issue date: | 09/23/1998 |
| From: | WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153G631 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9809300154 | |
| Download: ML20153G645 (225) | |
Text
. _ . . - - .. -. - . -- - __ -__. - _ _ - - -
I 4
\
- i PRESENTATION MATERIAL FROM FEBRUARY 12 - 14,1997 l
- AGRS T/H PHENOMENA SUBCOMMITTEE
, MEETING i
- l 4
4 k
1 i
}
l l
k I
l
,3 Enclosure 9809300154 980923 PDR ADOCK 05200003 A PDR
N s f
i-RELAP5/ MOD 3 Adequacy Demonstration for AP600 Applications Presented to the ACRS T/H Phenomena Subcommittee ,
Farouk Eltawila, NRC/RES February 12-14,1997 6
l 4
Outline of Presentation e t s am Objective, Elements, and Assumptions e Background, Status & Accomplishments:
PIRT RELAP5 Developments Scaling Analysis RELAPS AP600 Integral-Effect and Separate-Effect Test '
Assessment RELAP5 Models & Correlations Applicability Long Term Cooling !
Other AP600-Related Activities e Sufficiency of Data Base o Conclusion .
l
Program Objective, Elements and Assumptions Program Objective Demonstrate the Adequacy of the RELAPS Code to Analyze AP600 Postulated Small Break Loss-of-Coolant Design Basis Accidents (SBLOCA).
Program Elements Used the Principles of the CSAU Methodology: PIRT, Scaling Analysis, Code Development, Assessment & Models and Correlations Applicability.
Program Assumptions e Used the RELAP5 Which Has Been Extensively Assessed and Used to Analyze NPP Transients and Accidents.
e Focused on Scenarios That Can Challenge the AP600 Passive Systems.
e Performed Pre- and Post-Test RELAP5 Calculations for Numerous Tests.
e Performed Data Evaluation for Numerous ROSA, OSU, and SPES Tests to Determine the Governing Processes During the Different Phases.
e The 1" SBLOCA, DVI L B, PBLB Were Chosen For the Adequacy Study Because They Cover the Phenomena Seen in All SBLOCA Transients and There is Data From The Three Test Facilities OSU, SPES, ROSA.
i
ELEMENTS OF ADEQUACY ASSESSMENT i
Adequacy Standards PIRT Knowledge of Physics
- 1. Code Runs t
- 2. Agreement with Data what's important /
Excellent Reasonable 4cP ;
s ;
Minimal 48 Insufficient What's Good Enough is Data Scaling i C TheoryManual Adequacy ,ppi,cabre Decision r Developmental 3 *%
, , _m g, i
, Assessment Rpt:
Adequacy Assessment ii
- a FundamentaI and i( Full Partial o$
E SETS Assessmentsj Plant
" Closure Relations c
- o. af Analysis (Bottom-Up) % if ppi ca ility
? Correct Fidelity O Code !
Scalability y !
C Theory Manual ,
5 Reasonable representation !
r e integrated Code 5 of AP600 behavior '
y (Top-Down) g C Numerics -
Governing Eqns Numerics O
m Reasonable assurance that NRC will reach correct Component -
Applicability E conclusions regarding >
Assessments -
Fidelity $ AP600 accident behavior Operability < ;
[lET Assessments:
Scalability A i (ROSA, OSU, SPES <
j US NRC Office of Research i
i l
. I l Spectrum of Tests Evaluated by NRC i
i ROSA OSU s, 3 0.60 Sao tirgte '"Y a rins
, e SPES-? O
- T CLB SPES-3
- CMTFe8 ea an u e f* CLB SGTit R m a SPES-10 3 of 4 AoS4 Fe8 #
e NRCSY CLB e $313 Y oVfB SPE -4
= Nncia r Cts
. S. ,. .o m. . SPES-,
i E nWICS 1"THE Pft99Urt" f 0.40 .
SPES-S 33 S821 e ;
i % I
! Sott oEo oves =
l
$g a SetsoEoone h
a r
5
% llcat up occuns l S I 2
at g 0.20
- .mv l i
f l
I i
k f
?
0.00 !
b Ratnun of Ar C*rsset r l
5 i
?
PIRT (IXEL-94/0061 Rev. 2, Xovember 1996) i Background .
e TeamInvolved Gary Wilson , J. Reyes, P. Griffith, B. Boyack, G. Lel!ouche, Y.
Hassan Thermal Hydraulics Expert Consultants e Scope of PIRT Development:
l Identify Phenomena That Are important to AP600 Thermal Hydraulic Behavior and Ensure That They Are Addressed in the Experimental Program and the RELAP5.
Guide the Scaling Analysis, and the RELAPS Adequacy.
Demonstration Accomplishments:
e INEL-94/0061 Rev. 2 Incorporate Experimental Evidence. '
f
i I
RELAP5 Development i
Background
e TeamInvolved !
Gary Johnsen, W. Weaver, R. Shumway, R. Rimke, G.
Mortensen, J. Kelly
- G. Wallis, Y. Hassan, P. Griffith, B. Boyack, V. Ransom, J Mahaffy, D. Liles e Scope of RELAP5 Development:
Model PIRT High Ranked Phenomena.
Correct Known Errors. I
- Formerly of INEL
RELAP5 Development (Continued)
Status During the February 22-23,1996, ACRS T/H Subcommittee Meeting Several PIRT Phenomena Were Not Considered to Be Well Modeled by the Code.
o PIRT Hiah Ranked Phenomena:
ADS-4 Mass Flow Rate, Core 2-$ Mixture Level, Core Subcooling Margin.
e PIRT Medium Ranked Phenomena: l Break Mass Flow.
o PIRT Low Ranked Phenomena. j Core Make Up Tank and IRWST Thermal Stratification. i i
i
i RELAP5 Development (Continued?
Accomplishments:
e Determined Root Causes for Deficiencies and Implemented Corrective Actions for the High , and the Medium-Ranked PIRT Phenomena.
e Core Make Up Tank Thermal Stratification--Performed Tests at OSU to Assess its Effect--No Significant impact on Minimum Core Inventory. !
e IRWST Thermal Stratification-- Performed Sensitivity Study--No ,
Significant impact on Minimum Core Inventory.
Separate-Effects and Integral-Effects Tests Have Been Analyzed to Identify Modeling Weakness. In Sonte Instances, Titis Analysis Has Led to ModelInsproventents. In No Instances Were Models Citanged to Fit Results to tire AP600 Integral-Effects or Separate-Effects Test Data
Scaling Analysis i (INEL-96/0040) i Background t e Team Involved : i
. Sanjoy Banerjee (UCSB), Thomas Larson & Marcos Ortiz (INEL), Doug Reeder Wolfgang Wulff & U.S. Rohatgi(BNL)
M. Ishii, J. Reyes, G. Kojasoy, G. Wallis e Scope of Scaling Analysis Show That Facilities Scale the important Phenomena in the PIRT.
Interpret the Data for Code Assessment. I
b Scaling Analysis (Continued}
' ^
Status Issues identified During the February 22-23,1996, ACRS T/H Subcommittee Meeting:
o Perform the Scaling Analysis for the Entire Tiansient to Quantify '
the Effects of Various Distortions in OSU, ROSA, and SPES.
e Scaling Efforts Should Be integrated With PIRT.
Accomplishments The INEL/UCSB Methodology Expanded to Cover the Entire Transient.
Adopted Additional Approach by Wolfgang Wulff.
l Scram i AP600 1 inch Cold Leg Break S-Signal n
4- ADS 12 344- ADS 4 -(4 IRWST Injection ll3 (R ,
tn -
gg. l - ~~--,lHjection-Accumulator +
t
~~~~~~
j .
..__; PrimaryN ' ' ' ~ ~~ Secondary
~~~~_
i Time . i
<* II I i
Sub Phase 1 Sib Phase 2 Sub Phase 3 i g 4 >ig kig -- -
> i
= Phase Il Phase lli Phase IV
< -- -rl '
r l
INEL f F-
--** - - - - ** - - - -
- l I i i BNL i, g. _ _ I, _. _ . l Phase 11
->g . ._
Phase lli _
._.pg.
Phase IV Phase V I Sub Phaise 1 i Sub Phas_e 2 i 4 -
-- i - --- - W4 > -
f Part 1 l Part 2Fl
- n. e >i4 - >
. l 4 >
l AA '
Sub Phase 2 ,
Sub Phase 1
. y RELAP5 AP600 Integral Test Assessment iINEL-96/0400) i e Background e Team Involved D. Fletcher, P. Bayless, S. Sloan*, R. Shaw*, Et Al.
B. Boyack, G. Lellouche, Thermal Hydraulics Expert Consultants e Scope of Integral Test Analysis:
Evaluate Whether RELAP5 Can Be Used for AP600 Analysis. I identify Limitations, Provide insights for PIRT Ranking.
- Formerly of INEL i
i
i RELAP5 AP600 Integral Test Assessment (Continued) t Status issues identified During the February 22-23,1996, ACRS T/H '
Subcommittee Meeting:
e Different Analyses Used Different Code Versions.
e The Code Adequacy for Some High- and Medium Ranked PlRT Phenomena Was Judged " Minimal" or " Insufficient."
Accomplishments:
e Re-Analyzed the 1" SBLOCA, DVI Line Break, PBL Break Using RELAP5 MOD 3, Version 3.2.1.2 And Concluded That the Code Predicts All Major Trends and Phenomena in AP600.
RELAP5 AP600 Separate-Effect Test Assessment
Background
Repeated RELAP5 MOD 3, Version 3.2.1.2 Assessment '
Using W ADS and CMT SET Data.
Assessment Centered Around:
- Mass Flow Rate Through the ADS 1-3 Valves.
- Condensation , Noncondensible, Thermal Stratification, l Mixing , Flashing , and 2-4 Level.
Team Involved j n S. Sloan*, L. Stickler *, L. Ghan, J. Adams
- Formerly of INEL
RELAP5 AP600 Separate-Effect Test Assessment (Continued) 4 Status l Problems With W PRHR Data Delayed RELAPS Assessment.
Accomplishments:
e RELAP5 MOD 3, Version 3.2.1.2 Provides Reasonable Predictions of :
The Two Phase Flow Through the ADS 1-3 Valves.
> The CMT Condensation, Level Response, Noncondensible Effects.
e CMT Thermal Stratification and Mixing is Judged Reasonable.
e The IRWST Thermal Stratification Prediction is Judged to Be Minimal. Sensitivity Studies Showed No Significant Impact on Minimum Core Inventory.
RELAP5 Models & Correlations Applicability (IXEL-96/-0440)
Backgrourid e TeamInvolved C. Slater, C. Davis John Mahaffy, Y. Hassan, B. Jones e Scope of Task:
Determine the Applicability, and Parameter Range of Interest of the RELAPS Models and Correlations for AP600 SBLOCA.
Guide the Development of Assessment Matrix.
l RELAP5 Models & Correlations Applicability l [ Continued)
Status issues identified During the February 22-23,1996, ACRS T/H Subcommittee -
Meeting:
o Changes Were Made to the Critical Flow Model, Horizontal Stratification and ;
Entrainment Model (HSE), and the Level Tracking Models. Assessm.ent of These Models Was Ongoing.
Accomplislunents:
e The RELAP5 MOD 3, Version 3.2.1.2 Models Have Validation Base Which Covers the Anticipated Range of Expected AP600 Conditions and Geometry, Except for the HSE Model. The Results of the Sensitivity Study Performed Show No Significant impact on Minimum Core inventory.
Future Plan e We Will Develop Data and Improve the HSE Model To Ensure Appropriate Treatment of Phase Separation. In the Interim, the Proposed Bounding i ApproachIs Appropriate. ,
l i
t
i Long Term Cooling (IXEL-96/0395) .
Background
e TeamInvolved C. Davis, P. Bayless, J. Fisher *, P. Roth, S. Polkinghorne P. Griffith, J. Reyes, B. Boyack, G. Lellouche, N. Lauben i e Scope of Task:
Determine the Capability of the RELAP5 Code to Perform Long Term Analysis Until Stable Sump injection Occurs (About 50000 Sec.)
- Formerly of INEL
Long Term Cooling (Continued)
Status e Because of Time Limitations, We Were Unable to Make a Detailed Presentation During the February 22-23,1996, Subcommittee Meeting.
Accomplishments:
e Simplified Long Term Cooling Models (LTCM) of OSU and AP600 Have Been Developed.
e The OSU LTCM Was Assessed Against the OSU Experiments (1" CLB, DVlB, PBLB). Results Show Reasonable Agreement With Data.
e Analysis With the AP600 LTCM Was Performed for the Same Transients Used in the Early SBLOCA Phase.
e Sensitivity Calculations Were Performed With the AP600 LTCM to investigate the Effects of Containment Boundary Conditions.
e CONTAIN Analyses Were Performed to Provide Boundary Conditions.
h e
b Other AP600-Related Activities
Background
o Preseritation Was Made on February 22-23,1996, ACRS T/H Subcommittee Meeting The Screening Study for Water Hammer in the AP600 Should Be Published As Separate Report.
Status o NUREG/CR-6519, " Screening Reactor Steam / Water Piping Systems for Water Hammer," by Peter Griffith Has Been Submitted for Publication.
Other AP600-Related Activities i Continued >; <
e Completed 14 Tests in the ROSA Phase i Test Program and Two Tests in Phase 11.
e Performed RELAPS (Three Versions) Pre-Test Calculations for All 14 ROSA Phase i Tests (9 SBLOCA,2 Medium Break LOCA,1 SBO,1 .
e The RELAPS Code Showed Reasonable Agr;ement for PIRT High-Ranked Phenomena.
e Completed 26 Tests in the OSU/ APEX:
Testing of Beyond-Cesign-Basis Transients.
Counterpart Tests to ROSA to Understand Scaling issues.
Resolution of Questions From Examination of Data From WestinghouseTesting.
Other AP600-Related Activities (Continued) t i
e Independent Evaluation of The SPES Test Data Performed by MIT:
The Geometry of the inlet Line to the PRHR Allows for i Thermosyphon Induced PRHR Flow / Core Void Fraction Oscillations Evidenced in the SGTR and PBL-DEG Tests. j
- t Oversized ADS 4 Valves Precluded the Development of Pressurizer Refill Events During the IRWST Draining Phase.
e The RELAPS Code is Being Used by the OSU Staff to Perform Comparisons to APEX Data (SBLOCA, SBO, ADS Blowdown). '
e The OSU Staff is Using the CFX-4 Code to Examine Thermal t Stratification and Mixing in the APEX (CMT, Cold Leg, Steam Generator Lower Plenum, RPV Downcomer, and the IRWST).
e independent Assessment of RELAP5 MOD 3, Version 3.2.1.2 For
-Selected OSU and ROSA Tests is Being Carried Out by ,
Scientech/ University of Maryland.
i
. t i
Y 4
Other AP600-Related Activities (Continued}
Status: of RELAP5 MOD 3 Manuals NUREG/CR-5535; http://.www.ntc. gov /RES/RELAP5 e Volume 1 : Code Structure, System Models, and Solution Methods o Volume II : User'S Guide and input Requirements e Volume ill : Developmental Assessment Problems e Volume IV : Models and Correlations e Volume V : User'S Guidelines e Volume VI : Validation of Numerical Techniques in RELAP5 MOD 3 e Volume Vil: Summaries and Review of Independent Code Assessment Reports
. Sufficiency of Data and Adequacy of RELAP5 l
Sufficiency of the Data Base and the Adeauacy of the RELAPS Code for AP600 SBLOCA Have Been Established Based on Different, But Mutually Supportina Technical Bases.
e The AP600 Test Facilities Were Constructed to Preserve Geometric, j Kinematics, and Energy Similarities.
The Details of the Scaling Methods Were Different in Each Facility and Each ['
Facility Has Known Scaling Distortions, Yet the Results From the Three Facilities for the SBLOCA Experiments Were Comparable.
e The Transients Before ADS Activation Are Very Similar to Existing Plants. We Have More Than 20 Years of Extensive Experimental and l
Code Development Work. The Code Can Handle These High Pressure Blowdown Phases.
e The ADS System Makes Various SBLOCA Transient to Converge into j a LBLOCA Scenario. j i i
Sufficiency of Data and Adequacy of RELAP5
~
(Continued) .
In the Ensuing Presentations, We Will Present the Supporting Bases For Data Sufficiency and Code Adequacy:
e W. Wulff & S. Baneriee's Presentations Will Show That The Major FI Groups for AP600 and the Test Facilities Are in the Same Range Such That Similar Phenomena Dominated the Transients. This Also Shows That On Global Level, the Facility Design Simulate AP600.
j e M. Ortiz's Presentation Will Show That By Comparing the Solution of the Control Volume Balance Equation for the Dominant Parameters, it is Possible to Demonstrate the Similarity of the Transients in AP600 and Facilities.
e M. diMarzo & D. Bessette 's Presentation on Experimental Data Evaluation Will Show That, Within the Limit of the Scaling Study, the Data Collectively, Identified Major Phenomena, Processes and Trends, and Provided Quantitative Measure of Transients.
Sufficiency of Data and Adequacy of RELAP5 (Continued) e P. Bayless, C. Davis's Presentations Will Show That We Have Established Code Capability at Facility Level By Demonstrating That All Three Experiments Were Satisfactorily Simulated by RELAP5 Code.
Results Form a Band With Small Deviations.
e G. Johnsen's Presentation Will Show That We Have Established That the RELAP5 Models and Constitutive Relations Are Applicable (Extendale) to AP600 Conditions. This Was Accomplished By Examining the Data Base of the Code's Models and Correlations and Analyzing the Scale Effects Included in these Models.
e D. Fletcher's Presentation Will Demonstrate That the AP600 SBLOCA l Code Predictions for the Plant and for the Test Facilities Are in Reasonable Agreements. The Comparison Demonstrated That There !
Was General Qualitative and Quantitative Agreement. !
OVERVIEW USE OF PIRT PROCESS IN AP600 RELAP5 EVALUATION Presented by: Gary E. Wilson ACRS T/H Subcommittee Meeting February 1214,1997 Los Angeles, CA g
The purpose of this presentation is to briefiv review the development and use of the PlRT process in the AP600 related work o Objective of the development and'use of the PlRT process e Summary of major efforts to develop and document the PIRTs e only the RELAP5 PIRT related work will be covered a LBLoCA PlRT development and use, by LANL,is noted, but willnot be discussed e Summary AP600 SBLOCA high ranked phenomena E - m.
Page1
_ m -.__ _ _ _ _ - __ . . _ - _ . . _ _ . - _ _ _ _ . _ _ . __. - - . _
l l
d 1
i The primary objective of the development anc' use of PIRTs was to help provide sufficient and efficient:
o Experimental data e Development of RELAP5 for AP600 applications e Assessment of RELAP5 for AP600 audit analyses I o Guidance for scaling analyses e Guidance for audit calculations related to vendor design certification studies It/f1
-...w.
The RFLAP5 related PiRTs have been developed and used in four stages Code Development & Assessment RELAPSS10D3.1 --* RELAPSSIOD3.2 + RELAPS/A10D3.2.1.2 JL JL JL di Inittet on of T/H Consuhant loput < k review in process If 1r If if If Preliminary Pevision 0 , Revision 1 Final (Rev 2)
PIRTs PIRTs PIRTs PIRTs JL JL JL JL l l l Oct.1993 Oct.1994 Jan.1996 Present If If If If Experimental facility & test specification, Integrated data analyses, &
Intermediate audit analyses perteere 8 tWM Page 2
l l
i l
Starting in 1993, recognized T/H experts helped enhance the PIRT process l
ElRT Suberona !
Brent Boyack, Peter Grift 1th, Yassin Hassan, Jerry Lellouche, O Full T/H Consultant Groun Jose Reyes, Gary Wilson (Direct contributions via working Peer rer w) meetings, analyses, review, etc.)
p .
A Mamoru Ishil, Barclay Jones, Gunol Kojasey, Tom Larson, l Jerry Lellouche, Dennis Liles, 1 INEL Senior Staff John Mahaffy, Mike Podowski, (Initial development, _
Vic Ransom, Jose Reyes, confirmation with data Neil Todreas & Graham Wallis analyses, etc.)
- w.a Throughout the PIRT development, evolving evidence was used to help confirm prior versions Sensitivity Sensitivity Studies,
- Studies.
Integrated " + lategrated ""
Data Data Analyses Analyses
& Scaling & Scaling Plant Plant Plant Calculations Calculations Calculations MOD 3.0 MOD 3.1 MOD 3.2
+ Developmental - + Developmental -
+ Developmental -
Assessment Assessment Assessment CAMP CAMP CAMP
- Assessments
-
- Assessments Assessments and Data qr and Data y and Data qr Preliminary Revision 0 Revision 1 Revision 2 PIR1s PIRTs PIR1s PIR1s pWwas,s 9-1347s Page 3
The final AP600 SBLOCA PIRTs are based on:
i i -=====:==:=====
e Relative influence on minimum vessel inventory is ,
the primary evaluation criterion for ranking each phenomenon e The transient has been partitioned into two time phases:
s Short-term Initiation of break to established IRWST Injection a Ler.;-;e.r6 After established IRWST injection 4
& n ><wn i
l The AP600 SBLOCA highly ranked phenomena i are given in the table below Short. Term Phase Long. Term Phase Accumulator Bow ADS energy release ADS energy release ADS mass How ADS mass Sow Core two phase mixture level Break mass Bow Downcomer level CL-to-PBL phase separation Fuel rod core power / decay beat Core Sashing IRWST Dow resistance Core subcooling margin IRWST pool level Core two-phase mixture level IRWST pool thermal strati 5 cation CMT Dow resistance Sump Buid temperature CMTlevel Sump level Fuel rod core power / decay heat Upper plenum two phase level HL phase separation in tees IRWST Dow resistance Pressurizer level m >iwa Page 4
f l i i THE ROLE OF DATA EVALUATION IN THE PHENOMENA IDENTIFICATION PROCESS D. BESSETTE & M. DIMARZO l RES/ DST /RPSB i
ACRS T/H SUBCOMMITTEE FEBRUARY 12-14, 1997 f
f OUTLINE 1
9 OBJECTIVE O PROCESS O
SUMMARY
OF ISSUES O ISSUE CLOSURE RATIONALE O CONCLUDING REMARKS J
i 4
f
OBJECTIVE .
PERFORM EVALUATION OF DATA OBTAINED FROM :
AP600 INTEGRAL TEST FACILITIES (ROSA, OSU,.
SPES) TO DETERMINE IF ADDITIONAL CAPABILITIES ARE NEEDED FOR THE RELAPS CODE
- i-
PROCESS e THE PIRT (REV.0) WAS USED TO GUIDE A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW 0F ALL THE PHENOMENA' OBSERVED IN THE THREE FACILITIES FOR SEVERAL ACCIDENT SCENARIOS.
e THE DATA EVALUATION IS USED TO GROUP THE OBSERVED PHENOMENA AS FOLLOWS:
- 1. PHENOMENA THAT ARE REAL, RELEVANT AND IMPORTANT.
- 2. PHENOMENA THAT WILL OCCUR IN THE AP600 BUT THAT ARE i NOT RANKED HIGH IN THE PIRT BECAUSE THEY DO NOT AFFECT '
SIGNIFICANTLY VESSEL Itl VENT 0RY (I.E. REAL, RELEVANT BUT NOT IMPORTANT PHENUMENA) .
- 3. PHENOMENA THAT ARE OCCURRING IN THE FACILITY BUT THAT CANNOT OCCUR IN THE AP600 (I.E. REAL BUT NOT RELEVANT i PHENOMENA) l 4. PHENOMENA THAT ARE CAUSED BY INCORRECT B0UNDARY
, CONDITIONS OR INCORRECT TEST PROCEDURES (I.E. NOT REAL l PHENOMENA) l
'i
PROCESS (CONTINUE) e THE OUTCOME OF THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS HAS UNC0VERED PHENOMENA WHICH WERE NOT CONSIDERED IN (REV.0) AND WAS USED TO DE-RANK PHENOMENA WHICH WERE HIGHLY RANKED IN PIRT (REV.0) . THE TWO REVISIONS OF THE PIRT WERE THE RESULT OF INTEGRATION OF DATA EVALUATION, 0F ANALYSES AND OF EXPERT JUDGEMENT OBTAINED THROUGH PEER REVIEW PROCESSES.
e NOT ALL THE PHENOMENA OBSERVED IN THE TEST PROGRAM ARE ADEQUATELY REPRESENTED BY RELAP5. IN THESE SITUATIONS A RATIONALE FOR THE CLOSURE OF THE ISSUES MUST BE PROVIDED.
e THE BASIS FOR THE SATISFACTORY ISSUE CLOSURES ARE:
- 1. THE OBSERVED PHENOMENON IS THE EFFECT OF FACILITY l DIST0RTIONS OR INCORRECT B0UNDARY CONDITIONS (I.E. THE PHENOMENON IS NOT REAL)
- 2. THE OBSERVED PHENOMENON IS JUSTIFIED IN THE FACILITY BUT WILL NOT BE PRESENT AT THE AP600 SCALE (I.E THE i l PHENOMENON IS NOT RELEVANT)
- 3. THE OBSERVED PHENOMENON IS REAL AND RELEVANT BUT IT IS NOT AFFECTING VESSEL INVENTORY (I.E. THE PHENOMENON IS l NOT IMPORTANT) l _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
t
STATUS e THE FOLLOWING TABLE SUMMARIZES THE STATUS OF THE DATA EVALUATION PROCESS REPORTED ON MARCH 27-28, 1995 i
SUMMARY
AND FUTURE WORK PATTERN MECHANISTIC SCALING RECOGNITION EXPLANATION INTERMITTENT IRWST ONGOING DONE ONG0ING INJECTION OSCILLATORY SATURATED DONE ONGOING ONG0ING CONDITIONS INTERMITTENT CMT N/A DONE N/A DRAINING SUMP-GENERATED DONE DONE N/A 1 OSCILLATORY BEHAVIOR SUMP /IRWST MAN 0 METRIC DONE DONE N/A OSCILLATION e THE PATTERN RECOGNITION AND THE SCALING OF THE ,
INTERMITTENT IRWST INJECTION WERE PRESENTED ON FEBRUARY 22-23, 1996 (SEE SECTION 4.2)
SUMMARY
OF OUTSTANDING ISSUES PHENOMENON REAL RELEVANT IMPORTANT RELAP5 REPRESENTATION CMT STRATIFICATION YES YES NO YES C.L. STRATIFICATION AT TIMES YES NO NO CMT DRAIN TIMING YES YES NO YES CMT REFILL DRAIN AT TIMES NO YES IRWST STRATIFICATION YES YES NO NO ,
THE FOLLOWING ISSUES WILL BE ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS:
e RETURN TO SATURATION OSCILLATIONS J. REYES/D. BESSETTE (REAL, RELEVANT BUT NOT IMPORTANT; SEE SECTION 4.4) e INTERMITTENT IRWST INJECTION J. KELLY /J. UHLE (REAL, RELEVANT, IMPORTANT; SEE SECTION 4.2)
i CMT STRATIFICATION e THE EFFECT OF CMT STRATIFICATION ON VESSEL INVENTORY IS
, LIMITED AS SHOWN BY B0UNDING TESTS PERFORMED AT OSU.
e THE THERMAL STRATIFICATION IS OVERSTATED BY THE C0 ARSE MODEL IMPLEMENTED IN RELAP5. THEREFORE, THE CMT ENERGETIC CONTENT MAY BE OVERESTIMATED. THIS WOULD BIAS THE PPEDICTIONS TOWARDS THE HOT CMT DATA.
e THE RELAP5 REPRESENTATION OF CMT STRATIFICATION IS ADEQUATE TO PREDICT AP600 BEHAVIOR AS IT WILL BY SHOWN IN THE FOLLOWING REAL, RELEVANT BUT NOT IMPORTANT
- SEE SECTION 2.3 t
I i
TESTS CONDUCTED AT OSU SHOW THAT THE MIXTURE LEVEL IS ABOVE THE TAF FOR THE FULL RANGE OF CMT CONDITIONS ;
250 , , , , , , i e
l Cold CMT 200 -
/ Hot Lea Centerline l tl ;;;;":
/ y .; - y -m L *::',,,
v '
- Hot CMT i3 ,. .
\/
50 -
i 0' 3b0 6b0 9b0 1200 1500 1800 Time (s) i,
C.L. STRATIFICATION e THE PRHR RETURN GE0 METRICAL CONFIGURATION IS NOT TYPICAL IN ROSA. THIS REDUCES THE MIXING OF THE PRHR FLOW WITH THE SG OUTFLOW. THEREFORE, THE PHENOMENON IS OVERSTATED IN ROSA FOR SMALL BREAK SIZES.
e THE EFFECT OF C.L. STRATIFICATION ON THE SYSTEM BEHAVIOR IS LIMITED TO THE ONSET OF CMT DRAINING WHICH WILL BE ADDRESSED HEREAFTER. C.L STRATIFICATION IS WIPED OUT BY THE ADS ACTIVATION.
e RELAP5 CANNOT REPRESENT THIS PHENOMENON. HOWEVER, SINCE ,
THE TIMING OF CMT DRAIN HAS NO SIGNIFIt' ANT IMPACT U1 VESSEL INVENTORY, C.L. STRATIFICATION IS NOT IMPORTANT THEREFORE, THE REPRESENTATION OF THIS PHENOMENON BY '
RELAP5 IS NOT ESSENTIAL FOR THE PREDICTION OF AP600 BEHAVIOR.
REAL AT TIMES, RELEVANT BUT NOT IMPORTANT SEE SECTION 2.3 & 2.4 i
1 GEOMETRICAL CONFIGURATION OF THE PRHR RETURN LINE CONNECTION OSU & AP600 l Steam Generator .
Vessel !
Cold Side Hot Side
_ Outtet Plenum y} I" 8' """* Downcomer n Cold Leg I Hot Leg ' PRHR Return DVI '
~~~~~~~
I Vessel Steam Generator ge Hot Side Downcomer Cold Leg 15h[f ' n PRHR - Dyl Return y Hot Leg i 1 - - - -k
" ar o -7 .. .,. 1,, ,,, ,,.,oo ... ,,a <, ,,,.. ,, ,os.. ,,oo
l i ADS ACTIVATION WIPES OUT THE C.L. STRATIFICATION ROSA 1-inch Break 600 ; . . 580 '. ' 560 540 ADS 520 ~'-
~
500 Y j ' i
$ 480 'I 460 ;
f ,
\
4 340 320 V( _~ ~ t 300 - - . * - '- - " * . . .s . 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Time (s) f 1
CMT DRAIN TIMING i e THE PREDICTABILITY OF THE ONSET OF CMT DRAINING IS A CHALLENGE FOR SYSTEM CODES DUE TO THE TIGHT COMPETITION BETWEEN MECHANISMS DOMINATED BY LOW RANKED PHENOMENA.
.e THE THREE FACILITIES EXHIBIT A BROAD SPECTRUM 0F MECHANISMS LEADING TO CMT DRAINING.
e CORE UNC0VERY IS NOT AN ISSUE BECAUSE THE SYSTEM LEVEL W.R.T THE PBL-COLD-LEG CONNECTION DETERMINES THE MINIMUM
- LEVEL AT WHICH CMT WILL DRAIN.
e THERE IS NO IMPACT ON VESSEL INVENTORY ASSOCIATED WITH
- THE TIMING 0F CMT DRAINING.
i ' , REAL, RELEVANT BUT NOT IMPORTANT SEE SECTION 2.4 l i 1 l
l PHENOMENOLOGY e THE ONSET OF DRAINING IN THE CMT IS THE RESULT OF BROAD SYSTEM INTERACTIONS:
- 1. THE CMT RECIRCULATION BRINGS WARM WATER AT THE TOP OF THE CMT FROM THE COLD LEGS VIA THE PBL'S
- 2. AS THE SYSTEM DEPRESSURIZES THE WARM WATER REACHES NEAR SATURATION CONDITIONS
- 3. COLDER WATER FROM THE PRHR AND FROM THE CMT DRAIN IS GRADUALLY FED IN THE COLD LEGS AND IN THE PBL'S e IT IS THE RACE BETWEEN THE COLD WAVE AND THE FLASHING INDUCED BY THE DEPRESSURIZATION THAT DECIDES WHETHER:
, 1. THE CMT WILL DRAIN AT THE MINIMUM 0F THE INFLOW SCALING PARAMETER (BREAKS OF 1" OR LARGER)
- 2. THE CMT WILL DRAIN LATER ON BY VAPOR INFLOW OR FLASHING-CONDENSATION IMBALANCE
CMT ENERGY BALANCE ; r , l N PBL = Sh (Tsa,- T,,1) DEPRESSURIZATION ) o A c, crso ,- Tc0 f : VS l INLET SUBC00 LING (1 - Tct / T s,1) dT,,, M, C, di
- CMT i
i Figure 2.4-8 Local Level Energy Scaling I
THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CMT DRAINING EARLY ON IN THE TRANSIENT. IF THIS OPPORTUNITY IS MISSED THAN DRAINING WILL OCCUR AT A.LATER TIME 0.20 , Figure 2.4-13 CMT Level Respense During Failure of ADSI-3 1 4 0.15 -
.m -
i-N a 0.10 - O ' b ' s Onset of Drainmg 0.05 -
~
A 0.00 ' 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Time (s)
1 O DRAINING OCCURS BY INTERNAL FLASHING IN ROSA DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF THE LOOP SEAL IN THE COLD LEG G DRAINING OCCURS BY VAPOR INFLOW IN SPES DUE TO LARGE HEAT LOSSES O DRAINING OCCURS BY BOTH VAPOR INFLOW 4 AND INTERNAL FLASHING IN OSU _ --- -- - --- _- - -- - - - - ?
IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO < , j PREVENT CMT DRAINING _ WHEN THE PBL-C.L. CONNECTION IS UNCOVERED. ' THIS INVENTQRY PBL CONDITION IS REACHED WHEN THE CORE IS FULLY COVERED. ! i Vessel
.Y , G old L q DVI J i Downcomer i Figure 4.5-1 Basic Configuration of System
THE TIMING OF CMT DRAIN HAS NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON MINIMUM VESSEL INVENTORY (ROSA TESTS) ROSA CLB's l ONSET OF CMT DRAIN O.5" CLB f 2" CLB j 10
- /
1 j El
/ - '
i8 , l 0 I u 6 l 3 TAF
$ ~~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~FOT5NT AL UNCOVERY LEVEL 2
. ._ e . .........2. ..._. . . .. . . . . . . . ;
o . . .. o 5000 10000 15000 20000 ; Time (s) i i
THE TIMING OF CMT DRAIN HAS NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON MINIMUM VESSEL INVENTORY t (OSU TESTS) OSU CLB's 120.0 -.,.. . ,.. . , . ,,-.,,...,,-.-.- 0.5" CLB ! ONSET OF CMT DRAIN 2" CLB 100.0
/ x -s t
/ s g x.
'c 80.0 L N t N
~_
Y ./ N
~ ~ ~~ i E 60.0
$ - JM I
d - 15 40.0 0 POTENTIAL UNCOVERY LEVEL 20.0
' '-" ' '- " ' ' ' i 0.0 - ' ' ' ' ' '
0.0 ' '2000
* .0 4000.0 6000.0 8000.0 Time (s) l l
PHENOMENOLOGY . e THERE IS NO SAFETY ISSUE ASSOCIATED WITH THE CMT REFILL
- BECAUSE THE PBL-C.L. WOULD UNC0VER WHEN THE CORE IS STILL
, FULLY COVERED i e CMT REFILL AND DRAIN ARE OBSERVED IN OSU BUT NOT IN ROSA e THE OBSERVED PHENOMENA ARE HIGHLY MLIKELY NON-TYPICAL AT THE AP600 SCALE BECAUSE THE PBL ELEVATION AT THE CMT INLET WOULD REQUIRES A CMTC00 LING CONSISTENT WITH A HEAD DIFFERENTIAL OF 8.5 METERS. THEREFORE, THE CMT SHOULD C00LDOWN TO APPR0XIMATELY 60 C WHICH IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY GIVEN THE CONTAINMENT THERMAL CONDITIONS DURING THE SUBC00 LED PERIOD OF THE TRANSIENT (80 - 60 C).
-l
4 t 4 CMT REFILL / DRAIN e THE PHENOMENA ARE AN EFFECT OF THE OSU QUARTER ' HEIGHT ! SCALE AND OF THE INCORRECT REPRESENTATION OF THE i CONTAINMENT THERMAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONS AT THE CMT. e ROSA LONG TEST DOES NOT EXHIBIT CMT REFILL NOR SUCTION OF COLD WATER INTO THE PBL. e RELAP5 PROVIDES A C0 ARSE REPRESENTATION OF THE CMT REFILL / DRAIN PHENOMENOLOGY. l REAL AT TIMES BUT NOT RELEVANT SEE SECTION 4.3 1 l f
mm. - __. _ _ . . . l IN OSU, WATER IS LIFTED THROUGH THE PBL DUE TO CONDENSATION IN THE CMT
.. ,. ...., ....... . ... . < t..., .mm ,,,, . ..
I
}
l i i [. 4 4
\ l l ;'lI lll i l! Il1}!: I 4 .
S L. D H A ( P" ' J N s r u c c . yr J od i n ve or y n,
/
ie t as sb y l no l e di s ne ,
) t J( i f
R e or co T c M T, e - C Mh L B W I. m r Ct n P e hl ei t a sr s k V. D T g n r e v e 1 o. t t ne er . 6 idw ul o L. 3 qf C 4 id Y l e a n e h r t ) u G n: e r 6*,4 L i F g O h W( / 9 *8 J L T : O M C N t E M O T S N W R E I H P 9 ll -
IN .R O S A , THERE IS NO SIGNIFlCANT
~
CONDENSATION IN THE CMT AND THE PBL REMAINS EMPTY PBL Line Level ROSA /AP600
u ; i IRWST STRATIFICATION e RELAP5 MODELS OF THE FACILITY- AND AP600 HAVE N0 l RtPRESENTATION OF THE IRWST STRATIFICATION PHENOMENON. t e TESTS IN ROSA AND OSU INDICATE THAT IRWST STRATIFICATION ! . HAS NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON MINIMUM VESSEL INVENTORY IN i l THE SHORT TERM PHASE. e A DETAILED PRESENTATION FOR THE LONG TERM PHASE WILL BE GIVE.W IN THE FOLLOWING REAL, RELEVANT BUT NOT IMPORTANT SEE SECTION 3.4 4
!f
I STATION BLACK OUT AND INADVERTENT ADS ; PROVIDE BOUNDING CONDITIONS FOR THE IRWST STRATIFICATION (ROSA TESTS) ! i l l I I
STATION BLACK OUT AND INADVERTENT ADS PROVIDE BOUNDING CONDITIONS FOR THE IRWST . STRATIFICATION (OSU TESTS) , i f l i i 4 i l i
- l
CONCLUDING REMARKS , i e A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW 0F THE DATA OBTAINED FROM THE THREE FACILITIES TEST PROGRAM WAS PERFORMED. EACH PHENOMENON WAS THOROUGHLY UNDERST0OD (I.E. INITIATION, PROPAGATION, ; TERMINATION) AND IDENTIFIED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PIRT. e THE PHENOMENA THAT ARE NOT MODELED OR ARE MINIMALLY REPRESENTED IN RELAPS ARE EVALUATED ON THE BASIS OF THREE-LEVEL RATIONALE (REAL, RELEVANT, IMPORTANT) AND l SET TO REST l e DOCUMENTATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL DECISIONS HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO COMPLEMENT THE INFORMATION PRESENTED AT PRIOR 4 ACRS T-H SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS i e DETAILED PRESENTATIONS ON THE CLOSURE OF THE REMAIN ISSUES FOLLOWS . t
- 1. RETURN TO SATURATION OSCILLATION
- 2. INTERMITTENT IRWST INJECTION 1
i [ t REFERENCE D. BESSETTE, M. DIMARZO & P. GRIFFITH, "PHENOMENOLOGY. 1 OBSERVED IN -THE AP600 INTEGRAL SYSTEM. TEST PROGRAMS CONDUCTED IN THE ROSA-AP600, APEX, AND SPES FACILITIES" ; AUGUST 1996 i i i i I
h : i 1 t THERMAL HYDRAULIC SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS LOS ANGELF.S, CA < FEBRUARY 12-14, 1997 ! MINIMUM VESSEL INVENTORY DuRING ADS 4 BLOWDOWN PERIOD DAVID BESSETTE REACTOR AND PLANT SYSTEMS BRANCH ! 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH ., i l l
i' OBSERVATION e A MINIMUM IN VESSEL INVENTORY OCCURS DURING THE ADS 4-BLOWDOWN PHASE JUST AROUND THE BEGINNING OF IRWST INJECTION OBJECTIVE i e TO SHOW THAT, FOR DESIGN BASIS EVENTS, THERE IS A EXCESS SUPPLY OF LIQUID AVAILABLE TO THE VESSEL AND TO THE CORE AND, AS A CONSEQUENCE THAT, o MIMIMUM VESSEL INVENTORY IS GOVERNED PRIMARILY BY PHENOMENA THAT RELATE TO VESSEL TWO PHASE MIXTURE LEVEL i 1 h i i i i t i i I i
i i System l. CMT Rreak-CMT ADS 1 Accumulator ADS 2 Accumulator ADS 3 Mass and Mass In _ Energy Out Energy l CVS Mass ADS 4A _
= -
NRHR ADS 4B IRWST _ ( Sump Decay Heat l l l n n PRHR SGA SGB l I
- . o o o i
Energy Out Energy In/Out , l-t Figure 3.4-1 Schematic Representation of AP600 Primary System 3-41
. - - . . - . = . .- . - - - . ~ . . - . ... . _-_ - . . . . ._ ..
k 33" from Hot Leg r Upper Head A = 4.35cm2 1" } /////////////sssssm i Cold Leg 3.5" t 5" ADS 4
- e- 1.6" Break t
5" Hot Leg i 5
^ 1 Upper Plenum I.12" DVI 12.5" i 1.12"
- 3.5" Upper Core Plate ,,
Core Bottom of Core Figure 4.4-31 Schematic Configuration of Active Components 4-85
MASS LOSS FROM THE VESSEL IN THE FORM OF YAPOR e THE VAPOR THAT MUST BE DISCHARGED FROM THE VESSEL DURING THE ADS 4 PHASE INTERVAL HAS TWO SOURCES: FLASHING AND BOILING
-e THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT MUST FLASH IS DETERMINED BY THERMODYNAMICS AND IS INDEPENDENT OF THE TIME INTERVAL WHILE THE AMOUNT OF WATER !
THAT WILL BOIL IS A FUNCTION OF THE LENGTH OF THE TIME INTERVAL ! e THE VAPOR FLOW IN A RAPID DEPRESSURIZATION IS DOMINATED BY.THE : FLASHING TERM WHILE THE FLOW IN A SLOW DEPRESSURIZATION WILL BE A COMBINATION OF THE TWO 1 i i I i I 0
MASS LOSS FROM THE VESSEL IN THE FORM OF YAPOR (CONT'D) e THE TWO SOURCES OF VAPOR ARE OF THE SIMILAR MAGNITUDE DURING THE ADS 4 PHASE. THE MINIMUM MASS THAT WILL BE LOST (IF STRICTLY VAPOR FLOW) FROM THE SYSTEM DURING THE ADS 4 PHASE IS APPROXIMATELY 9000 KG l e THAT CAN BE COMPARED WITH THE INVENTORY HOUSED IN THE REACTOR VESSEL BETWEEN THE TOP OF THE CORE AND THE HOT LEG. THE MAXIMUM MASS OF WATER THAT CAN BE CONTAINED IN THIS REGION AT 7 BAR IS APPROXIMATELY 16,000 KG e THEREFORE, THE MARGIN TO UNCOVERY WITH NO INVENTORY MAKEUP TO THE SYSTEM AND NO ENTRAINMENT OUT ADS 4 IS APPROXIMATELY 7000 KG e THE CMTS HAVE A TOTAL OF 21,000 KG OF WATER REMAINING WHEN ADS 4 OPENS, THEREFORE, THE MAKEUP TO THE SYSTEM DURING THE ADS 4 PHASE EXCEEDS THE VAPOR MASS LOST BY A MORE THAN FACTOR OF 2. THE EXCESS MASS IS ENTRAINED OUT THE ADS 4. e EVEN IF ONE ECC TRAIN IS DISABLED AS IN THE DVI BREAK THERE IS STILL SUFFICIENT MAKEUP SUPPLIED TO COMPENSATE FOR THE VAPOR MASS LOST. e SEVERAL DATA COMPARISONS FOLLOW TO SUPPORT THESE CONTENTIONS i
THE FOLLOWING COMPARISONS WILL BE SHOWN WITH RESPECT THEIR EFFECT ON ' MINIMUM VESSEL INVENTORY e UPPER AND LOWER BOUNDS ON SYSTEM . ENERGY LEVEL (PRESSURE) AT ADS 4 OPEING 4 UPPER AND LOWER BOUNDS ON TIME DURATION FROM ADS 4 OPENING TO IRWST INJECTION 9 UPPER AND LOWER LIMITS TESTED THUS FAR ON ADS 4 SIZING G UPPER AND LOWER BOUNDS ON BREAK ELEVATION e EFFECT OF WATER OR NO WATER IN THE PRESSURIZER 4 NO RESERVE ADS 4 BLOWDOWN TEST SERIES IN APEX
- OTHER COMPARISONS MADE BUT NOT SHOWN HERE INCLUDE: HOT VERSUS COLD IRWST; HOT VERSUS COLD CMTS (TO BE SHOWN BY PROF DI MARZO);
FACILITY-TO-FACILITY COMPARISON; REDUCED ECC DELIVERY
TIME TO OPENING OF ADS 4 AND ASSOCIATED SYSTEM PRESSURE o TIME, S TRANSIENT TYPE SYSTEM PRESSURE, MPA 505 DVI BREAK (DV-01) 0.58 1,709 INADVERTENT ADS (AD-01) 0.49 ! 2,332 2" COLD LEG BREAK (CL-08) 0.44 ! 2,731 2" PBL BREAK (PB-01) 0.43 ! 3,486 1" CL WITH FAILURE OF CMTS, 1/2 ACCl IRWST (CL-09) 0.68 i 4,450 1" COLD LEG BREAK (CL-03) 0.40 4,513 MULTIPLE SGTR FOLLOWED BY ADS ACTUATION (SG-01) 0.53 i 4,618 MSLB WITH 5 SGTR (SL-01) 0.46 4,690 1" COLD LEG BREAK (CL-07) 0.44 5,124 1" COLD LEG TOP BREAK (CL-06) 0.41 9,725 1" CL TOP BREAK WITH PRHR FAILURE (CL-02) 1.23 ** i 9,726 1" PBL BREAK WITH FAILURE OF INTACT CMT (PB-02) 0.29 ** i 10,460 1" COLD LEG (CL-05) 0.98 ** ' 15,057 1/2" COLD LEG BREAK (CL-04) 0.61 53,657 STATION BLACKOUT (80-01) 0.40 FIGURE COMPARING THESE THREE EXPERIMENTS FOLLOWS l
Figure 3.4-10 Effect of High Versus low System Energy State 3-56 5
TIME BETWEEN OPENING OF ADS 4 AND START OF IRWST INJECTION TIME, S TEST TYPE ADS AREA ! 95 200% DVI LINE BREAK (DV-01) 3/4 ADS 4 - 114** 1" PBL eREAK WITH FAILURE OF INTACT CMT (PB-02) NONE i 417 2" COLD LEG BREAK (CL-08)- 3/4 ADS 4 i 469 MSLB WITH 5 SGTR (SL-01) 3/4 ADS 4 i 475 1" CL TOP BREAK WITH PRHR FAILURE (CL-02) NONE ' 504 1" CL, FAILURE OF CMTS, 1/2 ACC, IRWST (CL-09) 2/4 ADS 1-4 3/4 ADS 4 i 528 1" COLD LEG BREAK (CL-03) 571 INADVERTENT ADS 1 ACTUATION (AD-01) 3/4 ADS 4 i 584 2" PBL BREAK (PB-01) 3/4 ADS 4 i 638 1/2" COLD LEG BREAK (CL-04) .' 3/4 ADS 4 l 651 1" COLD LEG TOP BREAK (CL 3/4 ADS 4 ' 1" COLD LEG (CL-05) 0 ADS 1-3, 4/4 ADS 4 730 966 STATION BLACKOUT (BO-01) 3/4 ADS 4 i f 1125** 1" COLD LEG BREAK (CL-07) 1/4 ADS 4 3/4 ADS 4 1154 MULTIPLE SGTR FOLLOWED BY ADS ACTUATION (SG-01)
** FIGURE COMPARING THESE TWO TESTS FOLLOWS k
h
\
i t 8 L eg C j
=
> l C
w m sn
'9 V
C N 1 O a N
# i Ch.
M O ( u A a & FA o ri 1 G E b a y i W i i E e i O w M > l N l "n M m l i I elP m I I e . 6 M m. b l
Figure 3.4-16 Effect of ADS 4 Sizing on Inventory Recovery 3-66 1
Figura 3.4-14 Failtra cf Three cf Friur ADS 4 Valv2s la APEX 3-64 1.0 ' O.8 E 0.6
~
Q. b 3 Vessel Pressure 20.4 - Pressure at Which IRWST Injection Would Begin in Full Height System
~
0.2 -- Start of Core ery Uncov/' g . a I B
^
0.0 2000 2500 3000. 1500 Time (s)
,-a m- 4mw # _ a..,a -4 ,- a m6 --ma 4.=4.i it a _ . _.m++.4 m 4 - ,4,,.am ..maaa,,,
C U W U M
.hl N
(9 L CD 4 O C en O w est t
- M b
n m N I W M 63 b 3 w b i
Figure 3.4-3 DVI Brcak Cera and Upper Plenum Inv;ntery 3-46
~ ROSA 1-Inch Cold Leg Break -
10 r i > i - i t L r i 6 t l 5 i b-i f h P
i i - m
~
d
'E i
~. I
.i t
I k I l l l l v e i 1 9 d
! l
' l
~ 1 i ;
1
- 1 F
b W O C Z - X L1.1 I O i , 4 ! 1
+
1
- I e i
! l L
p De o D e j l i e O b l l I-
APEX No RESERVE TESTS TEST I INITIAL PRESSURE ADS 4 VALVES OPEN POWER ** ENTRAINED LIQUID (PSIA) (KW) (LBM) 0 103 2/4 125 37 1* 100 2/4 144 45-2* 198 . 2/4 128 63 3 194 2/4 80 43 i 4* 102 4/4 302 100 i
- TESTS THAT EXPERIENCED BEGINNING OF CORE UNCOVERY
** FOR REFERENCE, SCALED DECAY HEAT 1 HOUR AFTER SHUTDOWN = 138 KW e ONLY WATER IN THE SYSTEM IS IN THE VESSEL AND IT IS SATURATED. -l BALANCE OF THE SYSTEM FILLED WITH STEAM. No ECC SUPPIED UNTIL IRWST e INITAL LIQUID LEVEL JUST BELoW Hor LEG ,
i e REAL IIME, No PRESSURE SCALING, " FULL HEIGHT" IRWST INJECTS AT 14.7 . PSIG ! e ADS 4 BLOWDOWN (ADS 1-3 CLOSED) I i i
.. _ _ __ _ .. _ .. _ _ . _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ ._ _.___ ____.______ _ .__ _ . =..___ _ _ . _ . . . _ _
i CONCLUSIONS e LIQUID LEVEL IN VESSEL RELATIVE TO ADS OFFTAKE FROM HOT LEG IS DEFINITIVE WITH RESPECT TO ADS FLOW. VESSEL INVENTORY ALWAYS i ADJUSTS ITSELF SUCH THAT TWO-PHASE LEVEL FALLS NEAR ADS 4 ENTRANCE. IF ADDITIONAL WATER IS ADDED TO SYSTEM, EQUIVALENT MASS GETS ENTRAINED OUT ADS. ' e IN TESTS CONDUCTED THUS FAR, ECC DELIVERY HAS EXCEEDED AMOUNT REQUIRED TO COMPENSATE FOR LOSSES DUE TO BOILING AND FLASHING AND EXCESS IS LOST FROM THE SYSTEM (EXCEPTING A RECENT ROSA TEST). 1 e THE MOST SEVERE TESTS CONDUCTED THUS FAR IN TERMS OF ADS CONSTRICTION WERE ONE OUT OF FOUR ADS 4 VALVES OPEN IN COMBINATION OF ALL OF ADSl-3. THESE TESTS WERE SUCCESSFULL IN DEPRESSURIZING TO ALLOW IRWST INJECTION. BY COMPARISON, FAILING ALL ADSl-3 BUT HAVING i ALL ADS 4 AVAILABLE IS LESS RESTRICTING. e ONLY TEST IN WHICH THE INVENTORY IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS IS THE DVI BREAK BECAUSE IT IS A RELATIVELY LARGE BREAK AT LOWEST POSSIBLE POINT IN SYSTEM, HALF THE AVAILABLE ECC IS LOST OUT THE BREAK, AND VESSEL EXPERIENCES RAPID DEPRESSURIZATION AND INTENSE FLASHING. ALL OTHER TESTS TEND TO CONGREGATE TOGETHER. SAME BREAK SIZE LOCATED
- HIGH BREAK IN THE SYSTEM (INADVERTENT ADS) GIVES RESULTS SIMILAR TO THE BASE CASE (l" COLD LEG BREAK) . DVI BREAK DOES NOT UNCOVER CORE.
e THIS LED TO THE CONDUCT OF A "NO RESERVE" TEST SERIES IN APEX TO BE DISCUSSED BY JOE KELLY. FURTHER TESTS ARE PLANNED TO HELP DEFINE THE MINIMUM ECC INJECTION AND ADS DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS.
$( * ^
Retum to Saturation Oscillation Behaviorin APEX l.? Presented to: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards -- Thermal Hydraulic Subcommittee February 12-14,?997
- S.C. Franz J.N. Reyes, Jr.
Oregon State University Department of Nuclear Engineering i16 Radiation Center Corvallis, OR 97331-5902 i . 4 Outline Introduction Research Goals Summary of Research Effort - Parameters Affecting Oscillation Behavior Description of Phenomenon
- Stages of the Oscillation Cycle
- Scaling of Oscillation Characteristics APEX Oscillation Simulator (APOS)
Effects of the RSO on the Core Liquid Inventory Conclusions
/
au-.
- 1. Introduction During the testing program at the APEX Test -
Facility, oscillations in system pressure, Reactor Vessel liquid level, DVI flows, ADS 4 flows, and break flows were observed late in the IRWST injection phase.
- Further investigation of this phenomenon was warranted to better understand its potential impact on AP600 passive safety systems performance.
Team Ivolved: S. Franz, J. Reyes, G. Wallis, D. Bessette, M. diMarzo Reactor Core Temperatures NRC-6113 i l l l i i l r 2
~ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ , . - . . _ - - - -__ ,,, % sm ,,,,, ,,,4% . .~ , . . . . , , .,
i l
DVI Flows and Exit Flows NRC-6113 k . . . _ . , _ ,,T
'I Reactor Head Pn ssui NRC-6113 18 la -
Od.
.g. .*9A*M%AmtAuwaqsvM4e%aassave:essystnigmawayw.wsmg:myggg-ggyg,ggggg y .* r , . .g;ge, ,ry; .cy .,s <9
- 2. Research Goals To understand the physics governing the oscillation behavior.
Develop a predictive model. Provide scaling rationale for key characteristics of the oscillation. Provide conclusions regarding the effects of oscillations on core liquid inventory.
- 3. Summary of Research Effort Performed a series of steady-state return-to- ;
- saturation oscillations (RSO) tests (NRC-5013, NRC-6113, NRC-6213).
Developed the APOS computer model for l oscillation predictions. l Facility modifications for improved measurement of RSO characteristics include:
- Improved ADS 4 steam measurements
- Flow visualization at the ADS 4 exit L - Level measurement in vertical portion of ADS 4 line a
l
1 1
- 4. Parameters Affecting l Oscillation Behavior l IRWST liquid level Break size and location ,
ADS 4 vent size, elevation, and line resistance i 1 Upper downcomer bypass flow area Core power DVI line resistance r
- 5. Description of Phenomenon Onset of the RSO
- RSO begins late in the IRWST injection phase when the IRWST liquid head no longer provides injection flows sufficient to keep the core subcooled.
5
. 1
- 5. Description of Phenomenon (continued)
Stages of the RSO cycle
- State 1 - Hot leg becomes liquid filled. No steam or liquid flow through WDS 4, core steam I generation is minimum, pressure is minimum, DVI flow is maximum, and break flow is minimum.
- Stare 2 Pressure increasing due to steam genera: . DVI flow decreasing, break flow increasin;;, core ste.'.m generation rate increasing.
No steam or liquid flow through ADS 4. 1 t I i l
- 5. Description of Phenomenon l (continued)
- Stare 3 - Top of the hot leg becomes uncovered initiating two-phase flow through the ADS 4, core steam generation is muimum, DVI flow is minimum, and break flow is maximum.
6
i i ! I I l l 5. Description of Phenomenon l (continued)
- Stace 4 - Pressure is decreasing due to steam venting, DVI now is increasing, break flow decreasing, core steam generation rate is decreasing, and ADS 4 two-phase Dow is decreasing. If termination conditions are not met, cycle repeats from Stage 1.
(g
%;g793e%%9
*n : fy g p"]inMMR d'
ggg musrwm m@Q.43!!ipg$ m 1% % n wism .em I
- 5. Description of Phenomenon (continued)
Termination of RSO
- Termination occurs when the liquid flow rate entrained through the ADS 4 lines equals the DVIinjection flow rate at the minimum pressure of the RSO.
?Q gg 5k W.- *F w:sw
'~/ +
.!!l l .r..
P, , b5 Y l 2
- 6. Scaling of Oscillation Characteristics Scaling Maximum RSO
- Maximum RSO pressure limited by gravity head term in the ADS 4 line Governine Eauation:
maa Of 8 ADS 4 where the head loss in the ADS 4 line is small.
- Scaline Ratio:
p ^" s (H,os,),
- 6. Scaling of Oscillation Characteristics (continued) where:
(H3o34), = M Numerical Estimates: APArax = l 1 Psi AP3p6oo = 4.4 psi
+ Therefore the peak oscillation pressure for l RSO in AP600 would be approximately 19.1 psia.
l
^
i
- 6. Scaling of Oscillation Characteristics (continued)
Criterion for the Onset of RSO Control Volume: Reactor Core j Assumptions: Steady-State,1-Dimensional now l
. Enerav eauation: subcooled core with saturated mixture at exit.
(i = s,,,,(h - h,) Continuity eauation for core inlet: i E core =EDVI ~ EBRK l t i 6. Scaling of Oscillation l l Characteristics (continued) Usina Bernoulli's Eauation: j 2 2g P-P, movi = p,Aovi < H- -
,(Ko+ 1) _ , pog _,
u t
*,,x = ^ . x 2p,(P-P 3 h g4
/
1 l i I l
- 6. Scaling of Oscillation Characteristics (continued)
Defining the dimensiotiless ratio as: 4 (movi - rn,,g )(h(x = 0.047.)- h,) Onset of RSO will occur when: RSO r , 1 i Criterion for Onset of RSO ; m. le< i.. . tJ - * ) A'. O. u. 04< u- ~ ~ ~ . 0 80 20 m e 30 40 10 t un u,,w l Proprietary Information l 1C
- __ -_--_-_i
- 7. APEX Oscillation Simulator (APOS) l l
i
- .~
APOS Predictions of NRC-5111 Reactor Liquid Temperatures 1 i 11 l l \ l
/ , ,
)
- - s '4 i e*,
a y
$l 4
~ ,
l
~ , .- . . ---
AFUS Predictions of NRC-5111 Reactor Vessel Pressure APOS Predictions of NRC-5111 IRWST Liquid Level l I 12
- xvwmamarn:w;s:ugungsushuisguyspsgawnaw%wcasxusurgu+%A4;;;qdffg;.;;gfg}fgq.y;g;Qy;_4g4;, c54 ;,4;;}l
i APOS Predictions of NRC-5111 ADS 4 Liquid Flowrates _ , , , , l i l 1 l l l APOS Predictions for NRC-5111 DVI Flowrates _ , , _
- NRC.)l I
13 i l' i l - r . g.; ,9 p- .:c.,
' k ;< l}k 'lx $A1i {/ ; ),- * * ^ '
t i,)? [^[,,_ *
,if'lt ,* ; ;L *l g ' ' , .!j ., ) ,
^
s_
. ; u !,
' /
l
- 8. Effect of the RSO on Core l
Liquid Inventory When the Reactor Vessel liquid level drops below L the top of the hot leg, a vent path for the steam in the Reactor Head is established through the ADS 4 line reducing system pressure to the extent that ' DVI flow is no longer impeded and core boiloff is prevented.
- Therefore, the minimum Reactor Vessel liquid level that results during an oscillation cycle is l
l physically limited to the vicinity of the top of the hot leg. Thus, the RSO phenomenon cannot lead to core uncovedng.
~
l t Reactor Vessel Collapsed Liquid Level NRC-6113 14 I l
. . m = y .;. .
a.sg;g jg4 - . , e .$ . , '$ m - m .m#x .. y 1:.j: lE}
l l 9. Conclusions The NRC-13 test series has been performed to understand the physics of the RSOs. l Our study reveals: l - The need for multi-dimensional modeling of the core to simulate complex saturated / subcooled liquid mixing. l - The need for improved models for predicting vapor quality in vertical off-takes on horizontal lines. l
- The minimum Reactor Vessel liquid level that results i during an oscillation cycle is physically limited to the vicinity of the top of the hot leg. Thus, the RSO phenomenon cannot lead to core uncovering.
r e i s i i t 15
e; e ' & i Pressurizer Drain / IRWST Injection Oscillations J.L. Uhle J.M. Kelly U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
}
ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 1 !
Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection
- Oscillations e Observation-During ROSA tests, after ADS 4 opens, oscillations have been observed to occur in pressurizer I
draining that result in intermittent IRWST injection. e
Conclusions:
- Oscillations are primarily a function of ADS 4 capacity vs.
system vapor generation rate.
- AP600 behavior is bounded by experimenta! facilities.
- RELAPS provides a reasonable simulation.
No significant effect on minimum vessel inventory. ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 2
i Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection i Oscillations s
~ l o Approach:
Examine origin & effect of oscillations to determine if they are:
- REAL ? (Yes)
- RELEVANT ?
e expected to occur in AP600 ? (to some extent, Yes)
- IMPORTANT ?
e significant impact on the minimum vesselinventory ? (No)
- PREDICTABLE ?
e can RELAP5 provide a reasonable simulation ? (Yes) ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 3
~ Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations
- oCONTENTS i
Introduction:
brief description of oscillations Phenomenology: root cause of oscillations j Relevance: expected to occur in AP600 ? Importance: effect on minimum vessel inventory ! Predictability: RELAP5 calculation results
]
Conclusion ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 4 j
ROSATest AP-CL-03 (1" CLB) Pressurizer Level vs. Time -r-
i 4 Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations ; ; r I ' e ROSA Test AP-CL-03 (1" CLB):
- ADS 1-3 causes pressurizer to be ~70% full at time of ADS 4 actuation. :
- During ADS 4 the pressurizer drains in a stepwise fashion . !
e rapid " dumps" followed by refills i ' - IRWST injection follows same oscillatory pattern e injection flow rate decreases at time of PRZR " dumps"
- Effect on vessel & core inventory: :
t 1 e both peak upwards when pressurizer drains l e provides saturated water to core & delays return to subcooling caused by IRWST injection. ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 5 t
ROSA Test AP-CL-03 (1" CLB) h IRWST injection Flow Rate vs. Time g-l t i
- _ _ - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - . - - - _ _ _ _ - = _ _ _ _ _
ROSA Test AP-CL-03 (1" CLB) Core Collapsed Level During ADS 4 Blowdown to IRWST > [ i I i n i t
Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations e Phenomenology: ' Stage One: " Plateau" Phase i
- Core flashing (depressurization) and boiling (decay heat) generate more vapor than ADS 4 can vent.
e Combined ADS 4 vapor flow rate: ~ 65% (x ~ 15%)- e Combined ADS 1-3 vapor flow rate: ~ 35%
- High velocity (10-20 m/s) vapor flow in surge line " holds up" liquid level in the pressurizer.
- As system depressurizes, vapor flow through ADS 1-3 steadily decreases.
ACRs T/H subcommittee 2/10/97 6
Conditions During Plateau in ROSA 225s-640s After ADS-4 P Z R
' ~
CLL = 50%
...s tg<; '. ',
.e t s- s i ?:3.:;: ,
- s. :sg.3 "
.ss:jv
,, s
- . .f.dy. x. .r.: .. ....e
- o.2 :9.:. xga. x ppi:.- s
.s 4?jf;:SitiSj::9^
. M . ,
v-. o s N j = 10 m/s .' kifhh: .
~
*..:. . o'; sis J's &P x = 0.2 :
w:yyss- :e.to e /.: :.:. p:g+: ;:::g::; x y[.y v M., :; . ., 4
<-y.:.;.y.
,. t:r. :e - - :s ,' #S::x.:o..x.,.x.:.::.:e y'
.> s<
M = 1.0 kg S ?g.5xFX:
'i :;r;j.y: 0:f.q':::: 'e " " ~ '
- . . .:e >:.
AD84 s. fl"5 ' s
,..,~
s ' imi: ' s M. s. .;:.; s w
? e
[ SUfg8 LIf18
, s f I'
- 34;: :
' [
Upper Plenum '
~ , s t g, y CLL = 30% ' '-
j, = 35 m/S P = 0.21 MPa i m = 0.6 kg/s IRWST [y e.msnc;m. nmy~sg* ~.v.:s ~xceepy *w2y.ygmmmmmm+w.m-ww;zyy,yysr: - tv.w~,yr<.+ ~ s j = 10 Hot Leg . .
, t a = 0.5 , DVI CLL = 64%
1
----------------,----w --
g ,_g <t.u y ,,p , ---- - - - ,-- - - - - - - -- - - - - ---- - - --- - m --,-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
--~--,--,---n- - - ----- --- -----,~--- ------ - -- --
RELAPS: ROSA AP-CL-03 (1" CLB) p_ _ Surge Line Superficial Vapor Velocity During Oscillations f i t l 1
Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection l Oscillations ; o Phenomenology: Stage Two: Pressurizer Drain Phase
- Reduced ADS 1-3 vapor flow allows " break through" of pressurizer liquid, filling surge line and increasing liquid levels in hot legs & upper plenum.
- ADS 4 liquid fration & flow rate increase (x ~ 5%). ,
- - ADS 4 vapor flow rate decreases.
l - Upper plenum pressure begins to increase. l e core generates more vapor than ADS 4 can vent. l i l
- IRWST Injection is interrupted (or decreased).
ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 7
Conditions During Drain in ROSA 640s - 680s After ADS-4 O P Z R CLL = 20%
'?T!)}!lf 9:.,
Q":..yR)-' T:f '
- .s. a :; ;;.p:c.y-ss ' .p. ;,. ,
' i: Ti-s '
, -;:g. . . . . ,,
j' = 0 m/s s . . . . - di: tin; # x = 0.05 .,
~
' l'[ j j j ; ' ' ' '
m = 7 kg/s ::w ADS 4 , +a;;p g; ' -'
~
g : g:p;s.+ kNN ' , ' ~ ' 1 Sum Um _ -
, s a=0 upper Plenum s
- -4 l CLL " 38' ,
j 9
= 5 m/S P = 0.20 MPa
~
- ..l m = 1.0 kg/s 1 .. IRWST 3 = 6 Hot Leg *,
a = 0.3 DVI CLL = 72% A :m:
ROSA Test AP-CL-03: RELAP5 Results-Rapid Pressurizer Drain Floods Surge Une 1nn n l L
'l i
i I i m
RELAPS: ROSA AP-CL-03 (1" CLB)
.. ADS 4-A Flow Rate During Pressurizer Drain ,
a P i i l , i 0 , t l
RELAP5: ROSA AP-CL-03 (1" CLB) nm ADS 4-A Vapor Flow Rate During Pressurizer Drain l
.a- - _ _-
' , I r i > f. I t i!
- i -
) _
Bi an L r _ CDr _
" e _
1 i z _ ( r - u _ 3 s _ s _ 0 e r
- P ,-
L g Cinr _
- u P D ,
A-e r u A s s S e - OP r R m
- u 5 n e
Pl P A
,i r
L e p E p _ RU - _ 0 _5 0
i;! t : it .,(t:
!j!! j! i !
8 _ n t o i o e i n p g n l e v t i n u i z l e _ c l ew d i r u R j e go rl uf r i u q s s R Z i e P n s o l r _
/p s p r e _
I r e c . e a i w e z v r d r t o T ae i3 r cs i n l h u g S s s s1 sS eg nl e e t i w Wn b _ eD i ) e _ o%a l l t s l i f r pA eo gh t 5 e h Ro. i R ss ee r uin s s m1 e ~ p I s x "u t r mhs de t
/ a ... e z
ol cb i g i nl e v y s et (s a e 7 9 we
/ -
l r 0 r a nli etaup
, i r gsl p 1
/
u vs l ol n e" a 2 i : f g _ a c ys s oeis r n i wrct o r s ge ed sr ei u oir pe l on i s DO* a aw ay n l r q oP d v o t r l e nl r i "s i l u o: e cae yl r at e r n n t aq u r r ne i id i ce e e 4 m l e a e oz z ern r eg uh r l er vu i l "cS t e s i mI sc si u s s 4 D A y s r oe et r ta e hges S D e e u s n g a Ps i Hp r A t e e t et S i
- - - m s h m e
r P b u o c s _ P e H
/
T S _ R C A
~
RELAPS: ROSA AP-CL-03 (1" CLB) s Surge Line Vapor Velocity During Pressurizer Refill 75.0 i
L Conditions During Refillin ROSA 680s - 800s After ADS-4 O P Z R CLL = 30% 5?::3 72"
$$i
's-kk -
- ~ y e x,3 -
-=w.m e;ey
}(IRWST!
, -q3 s
- -: . a.; s j
9
=
30 m/s '
- ' s
~. ,
m ' x = 0.1 ,.-
- 's -
in = 2.5 kg/s '
.s AD84 -
Surge Line Upper Plenum a = 0.9 cLL - 32s 4; j 9
=
28 m/s P = 0.22 MPa m = 0.4 kg/s ; IRMST [, , , , .s s , s . .x- - y:s ,s s, .- -s j = 10 Hot Leg . m a = 0.45 _ oys 4 CLL = 68% , i
y i t - c a p a _ C3 - g1 i nS - t D - nA e o VN Ad n _ S a Os e R v l _
- a _
nV i o4 t S l aD uA l c4 / a3 C d n a H n n
~a n
5 Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations , s - "
. , , - . ~ -._ :
{ e e Phenomenology: I
" Hand Calculation": ROSA ADS 4 venting capacity e Core at saturation: all decay heat causes vapor generation e All ADS 4 flow is vapor & 3/4 ADS 4 valves are open ;
- o Pressure is constant: no flashing
Conclusions:
- i 1 e ADS 4 flow is friction limited (not choked). e Pressure necessary to vent decay heat is just below threshold for IRWST injection. e To depressurize below ~2 bar, ADS 1-3 flow is needed. e ADS 4 venting capacity & core vapor generation are crucial ; p factors in oscillations. ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 9 s
5 Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations i i e Relevance: t Are oscillations expected to occur in the AP600 ? Approach:
- Compare ADS 4 venting capcity vs. core power for the AP600 design and ROSA test facility.
- Perform RELAPS calculation for 1" cold leg break in AP600 and compare to ROSA results.
Conclusion:
- Oscillations may occur but should persist for a shorter period than in the ROSA tests.
1 AcRS T/H subcommittee 2/10/97 10
;!! !!3' i' i !' !!?!i
! I r i! !!f ! L' i [! t! :
0 A 0 6 S PO AR _
- 0 -
0 -
- - 0 -
0 - 4 B - 0 - L , 0 0 - C 0
- 3 1 l /
r e - v - f o L e [ ^ ) s ( s d i 4 n u q f S oi L - .
- 0. D i -
t ad es , 0A
. l 0 r u p -
0 2t e cla f f A a Co l l e C R i m T
. 5 Z -
P - P ) A - 0 L 0 E , N' 0 0
.R .N 1 i l Ly i
A - S -/ - O IIII1I'l (I' R
%lgI11060 l
\ P s
l > \
\
- A - 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0.0 O 6 4 2 EEI 5g # p
t Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations i e Relevance: Compare ADS 4 venting capacity to core power: t e same assumptions as ROSA " hand calculation"(3/4 ADS 4) ; e use system pressure corresponding to IRWST injection
- ROSA: < e. ,
- 1 19 l,
i
- AP600: e$ " ,
- 2o3
'*~'**'
- SPES: < y. ,
- 4 53 I
Oscillations are less likely to occur in the AP600 and are bounded by the experimental facilities. i ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/11/97 11 i
[ Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations 1 i e importance: Do pressurizer drain oscillations have a significant . impact on the minimum vessel inventory ? Approach:
- Examine CCFL behavior at upper core pla"
- Sensitivity Experiment: AP-CL-05 (failed ADS 1-3)
- Sensitivity Calculation: empty pressurizer i
Conclusion:
1
- - Impact on minimum vessel inventory is negligible, phenomena is of low importance.
i ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 13
RELAP5 Results for AP6001" CLB CCFL Limit is Not Exceeded at Core / Upper Plenum 10, , , ,
-- Hg*
, CCFL Limit I i l ll I
l!
-$ 1 10
)'I
- time period of oscillations -
l :
> I I l Ts l 5 'III I E II I I
@ ll' I
( 5 10-' - 1I I l - g iI l z I h lli I L i I I core becomes subcooled d') 1
~
I ' 8 ' ' 10 ' O.0 1000.0 2000.0 3000.0 Time After ADS-4 (s)
6 Pressurizer Drain / IRWST Injection Oscillations .
~.,.a._. ,, 5.<-s e importance:
CCFL behavior at upper core plate:
- If pressurizer drain causes interruption of IRWST injection, can the core boil-off & uncover ?
e Pressurizer drains increases the liquid inventory in the upper plenum. ! e if this liquid can " fall back" into the core, the core inventory cannot be depleted until the upper plenum is dry. e During the time of pressurizer drain oscillations, the core exit vapor flow is more than a factor of 2 below the CCFL limit.
- Fall back from the upper plenum will occur providing core inventory make-up.
ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 14
a . . . , , . - . a - - . ., - ~ . - - - i [_ um O 1 J _ O O I J l O
< ~
CO O < c l j t O O Iw
Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations l
, .. - +- [ . ; :w $ -s .e .g >
e Importance: i Sensitivity Experiment:
- Compare AP-CL-03 with AP-CL-05 (ADS 1-3 failed):
e Minimum vessel inventory almost identical. e Recovery of subcooling is delayed by pressurizer drain. Sensitivity Calculation:
- Restart AP-CL-03 & empty pressurizer just before ADS 4:
e Minimum vessel inventory almost identical.
Conclusion:
pressurizer drain oscillationc have negligible impact on minimum vessel in :ntory . ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 15
RELAP5 Sensitivity Calculation Results. Comparison of Vessel Collapsed Liquid Level 10 i u , , . " 4 i
Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection Oscillations I e Predictable: i Can RELAP5 provide a reasonable prediction of the pressurizer drain oscillations ?
- ROSA: correct trends predicted including reasonable agreement with frequency & amplitude.
- SPES: oscillations not observed in tests or in cales. ,
- OSU: some oscillations observed in tests & in cales.
e reasonable agreement except for 2"PBL (minimal)
Conclusion:
reasonable predictive capability. ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/11/97 16
ROSA 1" CLB: RELAPS Results vs. Test Data PZR Collapsed Liquid Level 1 i f i l
ROSA 1" UL8: RELAPS Results vs. Test Data IRWST Mass Flow Rate 3.0 i
. . G t
6 4 1
l l l 1 Pressurizer Drain /IRWST Injection l Oscillations l o CONCLUSIONS: Pressurizer drain / IRWST injection oscillations ; may occur in the AP600, but
- Oscillations should be less pronounced than in ROSA
-- Behavior is bounded by experimental facilities
- RELAP5 provides a reasonable prediction of ROSA i
and i i Oscillations have negligible effect on the minimum vessel inventory. ACRS T/H Subcommittee 2/10/97 17 o
[ t-1 t i Top-Down Scaling Analysis for AP600 SBLOCA Presented to the ACRS T/H Phenomena
- Subcommittee Farouk Eltawila, NRC/RES ;
February 12-14,1997
5 Top-Down Scaling Strategy
Background
e Team Involved : Sanjoy Banerjee (UCSB), Thomas Larson & Marcos Ortiz (INEL), Doug Reeder i Wolfgang Wulff & U.S. Rohatgi (BNL) M. Ishii, J. Reyes, G. Kojasoy, G. Wallis !; Objectives e Show That Facilities Scale the important Phenomena in the PIRT e interpret the Data for Code Assessment e in Conjunction With RELAP5, Demonstrate That Data is Sufficient and Relevant ___-_--_____________________________________________-_________________________________________________________________________I
i 1 1 - i Top-Down Scaling Strategy (Continued) , l
- e The INEL Scaling Approach Provides a Detailed Representation of the Elements Affecting Directly the Reactor Vessel Inventory and Energy Removal for a Variety of SBLOCA Transients.
o The INEL Scaling Results in Conjunction With: PIRT Data Evaluation, RELAP5 Data Analysis (Both Integral-Effect, and Separate-Effect AP600 Tests) RELAP5 Model and Correlation Applicability to AP600 Have Been Used to Demonstrate That the Data is Sufficient and Relevant for the Assessment of the RELAPS Code. e BNL Approach Focuses on the Overall System and Provides a Measure of the Relative importance of the Various Term of the Conservation Equations. e The BNL Scaling Result is Expected to Confirm That the Data is Properly Scaled and That Facility Distortions and Their Effect on the Overall Transient Are Are Understood. i i
i i AP6001" CLB PHASES Event INEL Phases BNL Phases Comments Bred: Subcooled Depressurization Depressurization Phase Phase, l begins Subphase 1 begins Scram signal Depressurization Scram at 132 bar pressure Phase, Subphase 2 begins S-Signal Intermediate Phase, Passive Heat Removal S-Signal at 128 bar pressure Passive Cooling Phase, Phase, Subphase 1 begins Subphase 1/Partl begms SG primary side Intermediate Phase, saturated Passive Cooling Phase, Subphase 2 begms l SG Press = Prim Passive Heat Removal Press Phase, ! Subphase 1/Part2 M l Accum Injection Intermediate Phase, Passive Heat Removal Accumulator Inj at 48.2 bar l Passive Cooling Phase, Phase, pressure Subphase 3 begins Suphase 2 begins ADS-1,2,3 ADS blowdown CMT level at 67% Phase, ADS 1,2,3 Phase Begins ! ADS-4 ADS-4 Blowdown Phase ADS Blowdown CMT level at 20% begins Phase, ADS-4 Phase begins IRWST Injection IRWST phase begins IRWST/ SUMP Prim Press = l injection Phase begins Hirwst* rho *g+ Press Containment i I i
\ Su a'"
AP600 1 inch Cold Leg Break S-Signal 4-ADS 123*4- ADS 4 IRWST Injection E
- s en r-- - _
.in g ,
i 3 A ccumulatorlHjection s., l __
.. .! Prima '- _ Secondary
-~~~~
\
f Time
.. 1 g
,Sub Phase,1,So,lb Phase,2
, ,4 Sub Phase 3 t
e l Phase il Phase lli Phase IV INEL i < - -- 5 *< -*<
- BNL g _
PhaseIl Phase ill Phase IV Phase V
'e' g. Sub Phape 1 ,_._ Sub Phase 2 ,
f Part 1 Part 2
- g g___..__. . M _._ _ _ _ . >l: ;
4> Np Sub Phase 2 Sub Phase 1 -
Concluding Remarks t e Facility Distortions Can Be Determined From the Two Studies. e Both Approaches Have Essentially Used the Same Phases and include Detailed Treatments of System Interactions. However, There Are Difference: Definition of Control Volumes. Selected Reference Quantities. Data Base for Geometry, Form Losses and initial Conditions. Non-Dimensional Groups Due to Differences in Formulations. e The Two Methods Are Complimentary to Each Other: In the Early Phase Results From BNL Method Will Be Used. ADS 4 to Sump injection, Results From INEL Method Will Be Used. e Differences Will Be Resolved, if They Arise, Provided That They Are Important and Relevant.
)k l AP600 SCALING ANALYSIS 1
presented to the . l ACRS Subcommitte on Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena on February 13 - 14,1997 1 at the Double Tree Inn Los Angeles, California m by W. Wulff and U.S. Rohatgi BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY BNL SCALING, Part 1; 1/2 1
/
l
1
- 1. OUTLINE -
(Five Parts)
- 2. PURPOSE OF SCALING ANALYSIS (Three Objectives)
- 3. GENERAL APPROACH TO SCALING ANALYSIS AND
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS
- 4. GOVERNING EQUATIONS AND STATE VARIABLES USED FOR GLOBAL SCALING l
- 5. APPLICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF SCALING
SUMMARY
6. BNL SCALING, Part 1; 2 / 2 .
% . i
i
- 2. PURPOSE OF SCALING ANALYSIS (Three Objectives)
~
2.1 Development and Interpretation of Scaling Criteria for the GLOBAL COMPONENT INTERACTIONS of AP600, APEX, ROSA, and SPES for 1-in Cold-Leg Break, j h t 2.2 Identification of . Leading Processes and Phenomena, ! Scale Distortions (if any), and l BNL SCALING, Part 2; I/2 l t
1 i
- 2. PURPOSE OF SCALING ANALYSIS (continued) 2.3 Evaluation of -
Scaling Adequacy of Test Data from Integral Test Facilities APEX, ROSA, and SPES for Code Assessment, ; l s
=
The Focus is on the Similarity between GlobalResponses of AP600 and the Test Facilities, not on the Prediction of a
~
Transient. ! Similarity provides relevance of test data to AP600.
, BNL SCALING, Part 2; 2/2 -
j l
i Part 3 GENERAL APPROACH TO SCALING ANALYSIS AND
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS 3.1 Identification of Systems and their Control Volumes , 3.2 Identification of Five Phases i 3.3 Selection of Reference Data 3.4 Impact of Selection of Reference Data i 3.5 Summary of Findings , i BNL SCALING, Part 3; 1/24
l _ B 4 E 2 F
/
G I 2 F
\ ;
0 3 0 " P t 6 r P M a _ U P M S C , G p O N I L r
~ .
c A B] C
- \ - S
, C L C
Vi A N 1 e / B s a h - P ' e , d i S y r a S R B r (l B-l h m I I b p h 9 B- _ i R 1 i s r P - d P 8 _ f l A-o l B- B-b l 2 s p s i c l c e - m Vn _ l u o 7 I M , [ ~ 8~ _ V L.P6 V T 1 S QI 2 R. C . *4' l o W ' q t r R I .
+
2 M 7 n V - o / A-C / 6;. 1-.
/ 2 l i
A-2 l
' c c _
0 ' 0 6 4 L7
'jl
~
3 A- A-P 1 p i h i A d s 1 3 _ 2 3 g
;l y
4 h i r c
's F _
_ 3 1
)
^ \
m , l )1 a 2 i A-7 1 V / C I 9 C ( 7 s A 1 _ 9 - 1 9 1 0 1 - y r a u r b _ e i F
~
l 1 l
- 3. GENERAL APPROACH TO GLOBAL SCALING ANALYSIS l (Wulff, NED-163 (1996))
l l 3.1 Identification of Systems and Definitions of Control Volumes l is based on PIRT Description of System Configurations (INEL 94/0061, November 1994): 9 Primary System, for Pressure: . l Fluid in all components that conununicate hydraulically: l l RPV + SGs (primary) + CMTs + PRHR, l + ACC after trip,
+ IRWST after trip.
- Secondary System, for Pressure:
Fluid in secondary side of, and tubing in, Steam Generators (closed system). I BNL SCALING, Part 3; 3 /24 l [
- 3.1 Identification of Systems and Definitions of Control Volumes (continued)
I
- Two-Phase Mixture and Vapor Volume for System l Inventory.
Volume of Subcooled Liquid in Primary System for l Primary-System Mean Temperature. L l CMT, PRHR, RPV, IRWST and Sump for Inventory
& Temperature: -
Fluid in component and connecting lines, PBL , and DVI for CMT; Injection and discharge lines I for PRHR. System of Closed Loops with potentially circulating fluid, for Loop Momenta. l l BNL SCALING, Part 3; 4 /24
Febmary 10,1997 (9:17am) Fig. 3.2 AP600 FLOW DIAGRAM - Initial Depressurization C:\AP600\ FIG FEB IRWST
. ! .18 :[
I:; PRIIRS 7- j 14 , 17 pbl-A 'pbl-B S A SG-B CMT-B
. , CMT-A y r 3 ( m r... ~8
- m. .
Ik ,. ..
' 3h ,
s - CD - e .: ; SUMP 10 Kl' ADS-4 pg b5 -M gg M-ACC-A 3 : g 4 .,
.)
# ' " ACC ,B 4 3 2 / .. c. hl-B r cil-A - -
cll-R B 19 h 11 12 13 cl2-A [. cl2-B 8 {M , dvi-A dsi-B BNL SCALING, Part 3; 5 / 24 s
~~
February 10,1997 (9:17am) Fig. 3.3 AP600 FLOW DIAGRAM - CMT/PRHR Circulation cW600TIG FEB IRWST
' k/k/k:. ::1g
/ $ -
.x'/; .
;.g .I.
PRIIRS g .r_16Jf.y '-- 17 pbl-A pbl-B SG-A SG-B CMT-B 3 CMT-A < , z ,
< m -
2 z i 15 c , r s _ c_- I> > si _s CJ . r ,* t C-b SUMP , 10 l$p$
. (;f AD S-4
.5[
ij: PRZ M 18 M- , ACC-A
-h '-
V k k I
., ACC-B 3 2 / (;az g 2 M ' '
hl-A g did ij dl4 ' l19 1 cl2-A cl2-i 8 11 12 13 [] - gj ME m dvi-A I!;l4. ' dyi-B fh M @ RPV IISIE BNL SCALING, Part 3; 6 / 24 . s
COMPARISON OF PHASE DEFINITIONS BY INEL AND BNL 4
\'*'*'"
j S-Signal AP600 1 inch Cold Leg Break
, 4-ADS 123** - ADS 4 - i* IRWST Injection
$ I e
a 7-~~s mMjectigen s_.
~
.._j Prirnary .' N
~.__ Secondary V
Time , 4> Sub Phase Si!b Phase Sub Phase 3 PhaseN Phase 15 Phase N _ Ph* ** " BNL ._ _ --
- --. . ?h* ** "' -o "h'** "
-. . Phasey ,.
> , _. Sub Pha et ,, _ _Sub Phs,se 2 _ . '
Part 1 Part 2 2 4- - -p 4- > 4i l Sub Phase 2 f 8""""*'*' BNL SCALING, Part 3; 7 / 24 s _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - ______1
i
- 3. GENERAL APPROACH TO GLOBAL SCALING ANALYSIS (continued) 3.2 Identification of Five Phases and Processes INEL PIRT Report (INEL 94/0061, Nov.1994, Figure 6) and specified Control Actions determine
- PHASE 1. Initial Depressurization Phase, 2 Subphases: Before and After Scram PHASE 2. Passive Decay Heat Removal by Natural Circulation and CMT.
Draining (combines Phases 2 and 3 ofINEL 94/0061) 2 Subphases: Before Accumulator Trip, j 2 Sub-subphases: with SG cooling and with SG heating the primary side, After Accumulator Trip. BM, SCALWG, Part 3; 8 /24 -
3.2 Identification of Five Phases and Processes (continued) PHASE 3. ADS 1-3 Depressurization PHASE 4. ADS 4 Depressurization, PHASE 5. IRWST and Sump Injection b
. EVENT SCHEDULE t
. TIME TABLE i
BNL SCALING, Part 3; 9 /24 x
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK Ev;nts AP600 SCALING 3:42 PM 2/9/97 SB-LOCA: 1-in COLD-LEG BREAK EVENT
SUMMARY
Phase Control Action Dominant Events Control Volume Parts Process Single Phase Single Phase Two-Phase Liqu.d i Gas 2 Passive Heat Removal
= = =-- =
start at 128 bar S-Signal trip PRZ is " empty" . SG Cooling CMT activated Flow transition to nat. circul. PRHR natural Prim. Syst. drd PRHR activated pump coast-down CMT UHD passive heat removal greater than PRZ saturated PRHR 4 vapor only Exchange of stored energy between Steam Lines t primary side and isolated secondary side, SG SG pressure rises over primary pressure. RCP trip - CMT circulation disrupted, CMT draining CMT PRHR goes from convection t condensation. PRHR depressurization accelerates Prim. Syst. ACC flow ACC H2O 48.2 bar .. ACC N2 (1/3) initiated (2/3) CMT level end at
@ 67%
BNL SCALING, Part 3; 10 / 24 . x
~
. . ~ . . - . . . ._ . -. - . . - . . . . - - . - ~ , . - . . . ~ .. W.Wulff, BNL Pl_APdDOWBK Time T.* @ PM 2897 TIME TABLE Compenson of Event Sequences EVENT APEX ROSA SPES Time in seconds
- Break initiation 0 0 0 PRZ Heater off 139 Scram 0 172 300 S-Signal CMT, PRHR. RCP trips; SG isolation 0 203 300
. PRHR starts condenssiian mode 0 300 600 PRZ "emptf 208 285 PrimlSec. Pressure Cross-Over 450 727 . 1,300 CMT Circulation stops 459; 544 i;2200l' 2,600 Min. RPV (DC) coll. leve 554 ineser;i !
...,. !5 00]!
Accumulator opens 624 1,934 2,500 ADS-1 Trip' 628 3,533 4,598 PRZ refloods 634 3,540 4,600 SGs Pre " empty" 640* jff6h0]f 4,600 Core voiding begins !!!beisr;i! 2,600 !!f300) Accumulators are 'emptf 1,000 3,900 5,035 ADS-4 Trip 1,113 '4,450 5,635 IRWST trips 765 4,978 5,777 eawn m r BNL SCALING, Part3; 11/24
b
- 3. GENERAL APPROACH TO GLOBAL SCALING ANALYSIS (continued) 1 3.3 Selection of Reference Parameters for Normalization Requirements: Plant-Specific and Process-Specific, :
Lowest Upper and Highest Lower Bounds of Variable Range ' to render normalized variables of order unity (for II-Groups to have magnitude of terms and to yieldfractional changes), , Consistent Application to all four facilities. , Four Sources Only: Direct Use of Plant-Specific Parameters on Geometry, including form - losses, mass or volumes of structural components (~200 per plant); Direct Use of Plant-Specific Initial Conditions: pressure, volume fractions, initial core flow rate, heating and cooling power, pressure rise in, and power i of RCP, temperatures in HL, CL, and containment (~ 15 per plant); ; BNL SCALING, Part 3; 12 /24
-Four Sources For Reference Data (continued):
Direct Use of Specified Control Actions: Trip Set Points for scram (pressure), S-signal (pressure), ADS injection (volume fractions), D , cay Heat, PRZ heatmg power, t Indirect Use of Geometric Data, Initial Conditions, and Trip Set Points to compute (and then to confirm with test data) steady-state estimates for: Break and ADS Flow (correlation); CMT and PRHR Reference Flow Rates (momentum balance, buoyancy and impedance ofloop), i PRZ and ACC Reference Flow Rates (volumetric flux divergence equation, using the global depressurization rate), Heat Transfer Coefficients and Rates of Heat Transfer to and from structural components (the smaller of McyATo/tg and A.ATov '(4kpcy/ (utg)). BNL SCALING, Part 3; 13 /24 .
. t s .
i L
\
Four Sources For Reference Data (continued): 1 Indirect Use of Data, Initial Conditions, and Trip Set Points to compute (and then to confirm with test data) estimates for' i Common Pressure in Primary and Secondary Sides, where SGs switch from cooling to heating modes i seekingp* for which the difference between primary and secondary pressures is zero, Sp* = 0 from) i
~
p,Q,
- p,bk
~
p,Q14 ? Q,SG 5** N I b BNL SCALING, Part 3; 14 /24 . ; i
~
L o J EXCEL TABLE WITH a COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED REFERENCE PARAMETERS WITH TEST DATA (For confirmation) d To make sure that later identified scale distortions are not the : consequence of uncertain estimates for reference parameters. 2 In the absece of test data one needs to vary the conditions for computing reference parameters over the range of possible conditions (free convection ^! to condensation, for example). *!
. IMPORTANCE of Form Losses, Flow Areas. :
i BNL SCALING, Part 3; 15 /24 k
( W. Wulff, BNL; REFCOMP.RSN COMPARISION OF 2/9/97 8:48 PM L REFERENCE PARAMETERS t l WITH TEST DATA l l -
)
AP600 APEX ROSA SPES PHASE 1, Depressurization, before scram ; PRZ Fluid Residence Time, estim. 303 not applicable 268 279 tre m test not available not applicable 220 285 Depressurization Time, break-estim. 178 not applicable 168 247 to S-Signal test not available not applicable 203 300 l Surgeline Re ass Flow estim. 42.1 not applicable 1.36 0.10 l test not available not applicable not available not available Break Mass Flow Rate (kg/s) estim. 55.2 not applicable 1,81 0.13 test not available not applicable PHASE 2 Passive Decay Heat Removal CMT nat. circut. ref. mass flow rate, W, (kg/s) estim. 55.84 l test not aval!able CMT draining ref. mass flow estim. 55.55 rate, W (kg/s) - test not available i PRHR nat. circut. ref. mass flow rate, W (kg/s) estim. 132.65 test not available ADS-123 Mass Flow estim. 491.4 Rate (HEM) test not available i 1 BNL SCALING, Part 3; 15 / 24 4GIM$
4
- 3. GENERAL APPROACH TO GLOBAL SCALING ANALYSIS
- (continued)
! 3.4 Impact of Definitions and Selections of
- Reference Data on Scaling Objectives Numerical Values of Scaling Groups depend on
- ,
- Control Volume Selection, Model Formulation and Type of Normalization, Selection of Reference Data for Normalization.
l RANKING OF PHENOMENA AND EVALUATION OF SCALE DISTORTION DOES , NOT DEPENDENT ON FORMULATIONS AND CHOICES OF CONTROL VOLUMES AND REFERENCE PARAMETERS,provided: all facilities are scaled with the sameformulation and with reference values obtained by the same method; the Scaling Groups (II-Groups) are process-specrylc and truely represent the magnitudes of the terms in the governing equations. BNL SCALING, Part 3; 16 /24
/
l l
- 3.4 Impact of Definitions and Selections of Reference Data on Scaling i Objectives (continued):
I ~
. Special Role of Time Scale l
Time is the only independent variable of the global analysis; each balance equation has its own ; characteristic time. ; l 1 l Howaver, the same Time Scale must be common to : all balance equations: at leastfor a Phase ofthe transient, the ratios of response frequencies (thermal over hydraulic) yield the fractional completion of the slower i process during the phase. L l for the entire transient, needed for assessing the propagation of scale distortion effects from phase to phase. . l. i i BNL SCALING, Part 3; 17 /24
3.4 Impact of Definitions and Selections of Reference Data on Scaling Objectives (continued): . Time Scales V
"I fluid residence time (mass balance) (@ is vol. flow rate)
*g n xy"" Apo depressurization time (depress. equation) (X i s elasticity,
@fn of the system, or system compliance)
V, p c, ATo thermal response time of fluid (energy balance for fluid) Wo Aho Mc therrnal response time of structure (structure energy balanc i w c , BNL SCALING. Part 3; 18 /24 , i
t . I 1 3.5 Summary of Findings i 41 OF 84 PHENOMENA EVALUATED FOR PHASES 1 TO 3 i ARE IMPORTANT-(II/IImu 20.1).
. IMPORTANT PHENOMENA ARE: !
HEATING & COOLING OF THE PRIMARY SYSTEM, - . ITS MECHANICAL RESPONSE, AFFECTING THE PRESSURE AT WHICH ADS-4 WILL OPEN AT THE INVENTORY TRIP SET POINT. I i BNL SCALING, Part 3; 19 /24 , l i I
3.5 Summary of Findings (continued) FOR CODE ASSESSMENT, t ALL IMPORTANT PHENOMENA ARE SCALED WITHOUT ? DISTORTIONS (exceeding the %,2 criterion) IN AT LEAST ONE TEST
~
FACILITY, EXCEPT IN ONE SUBPHASE THE THERMAL RESPONSE OF FLUID IN CMT TANKS. P BNL SCALING, Part 3; 20/24 .
b 3.5 Summary of Findings (continued) t Adequacy, Based on Scaling, of Data from Test Facilities for AP600 ' and the distortion criteria of %,2 (1/3,3) - DISTORTION
SUMMARY
,1" CLB, UP TO ADS-4 TRIP No. of No. of Distortions Comments for No. of PIIASE Important Scaling Groups APEX ROSA SPES Groups Phase 1 Sub Ph 1 12 3 NA 1 (1) Adequate Sub Ph 2 15 4 NA 3 (3) Adequate Phase 2 S u b P h 1. 30 22 CMT Wall IIT i 11 (6) 6 (5) 4 (3) PRIIR Flow Sub Ph 2 17 9 6 (3) 1(0) . Adequate Phase 3 11 3 1(0) Adequate Total 85 41 18 (9) 11 (9) 4 (3) , i BNL SCALING, Part 3; 21 /24 ,
3.5 Summary of Findings (continued) SIGNIFICANCE OF DISTORTIONS . Data are available from the test facilities for code assessment which are relevant to AP600 for- t Phases I (Subphases 1 and 2), Subphase 2 of Phase II, and Phase 3. . Data needed from the test facilities for assessing models of . CMT wall heat transfer and PRHR flow under conditions of gravity draining do not represent AP600. Code adjustments made to match test data on CMT wall heat transfer and PRHR flow dependent processes may not apply to AP600. t BNL SCALING, Part 3; 21 /24
3.5 Summary of Findings (continued) APEX (OSU) has 18 Processes (Scaling Groups) distorted due to six phenomena 7 Groups due to low-pressure operation (vapor volume generation due to heat transfer and flashing, i temperature difference between primary and containment) 6 Groups due to low PRHR flow rate and power ! 6 Groups due to low CMT flow rate and 1 Group due to low CMT wall heat transfer ! i 1 Group due to low friction in the primary loop 1 Group due to low heat transfer in SG/UHD BNL SCALING, Part 3; 22 /24 i w !
~_
i, 3.5 Summary of Findings - Code Assessment (continued): i ROSA has 10 Processes (Scaling Groups) distorted due to four phenomena 4 Groups distorted due to low SG heat transfer ( SG operated at only 16% of Full Power) 3 Groups distorted due to low PRHR heat transfer l 1 Group distorted due to low CMT wall heat transfer i i 2 Groups distorted due to low primary side inertia (7% l ofAP600) i i BNL SCALING, Part 3; 23 /24
~
3.5 Summary of Findings - Code Assessment (continued): i SPES has 2 Processes (Scaling Groups) distorted due to two common phenomena 2 Groups distdrted due to large stored energy in RPV . 1 Group distorted due to low CMT wall heat transfer, i 1 Group distorted due to low PRHR flow. BNL SCALING. Part 3; 24 /24
i i
- 4. GOVERMVG EQUATIONS and STATE VARIABLES I for GLOBAL SCALING i
CONSERVATION EQUATIONS:
. MASS BALANCE for subcooled liquid, ,
for two-phase mixture, for vapor, for perfect gas; .
. ENERGY BALANCE for subcooled liquid, for two-phase mixture, for vapor, for perfect gas. ' . MOMENTUM BALANCE for each loop of system BNL SCALING, Part 4; !!28
a
- 4. GOVERNING EQUATIONS and STATE VARIABLES
.(continued) t STATE VARIABLES:
For Primary System and SG: Pressure (p), For Primary System, CMT Tanks, PRHR Loops: Liquid Inventory (a), Mean Liquid Temperature (T); For Flow Loops: Flow Rates (Loop Momenta) in: Primary Loops (Wct), CMT Loops (Wcur), j PRHR Loops (Wpmia). BNL SCALING, Part 4; 2/28
4.1 MASS AND ENERGY BALANCES , 4.1.1 SYSTEM DEPRESSURIZATION . Basis for Equation of Depressurization . Summary of Steps in Derivation . Equation for Time-Rate of Depressurization in V,,, . Scaled Equation for Depressurization in V,,, . Four Scaling Groups for Depressurization in V,,, . Interpretation with Results in Section 4 BNL SCN.ING, Part 4; 3/28
4.1.1 DEPRESSURIZATION (continued) Single-Phase Liquid or Vapor, V, or Vy: 1 Dp V'" = - Mass Balance: p Dt
= _
1 '8p Dp ,'ap Du P _ t BP ) , Dt <au>p Dt _ Energy Balance: p = -vg pvir. Dt BNL SCALING, Part 4; 4/28
i 4.1.1 DEPRESSURIZATION (continued) i Two-Phase Mixture in Thermal Equilibrium, V3 : i dp Mass Balance: V-j,,, = v/gPg E "* P
- di k=f g Pg
~
"* P* Ik
- V p , dp Energy Balance: p =
fg El llfg BNL SCALING, Part 4; 5/28
4.1.1 DEPRESSURIZATION (continued): , Perfect Gas (Nitrogen), Vm : d(p u V) 1 d(p V) dV - Energy Balance: = = p +g dt y-1 dt dt Also, by application of perfect-gas relations to formulation for single-phase fluid. BNL SCALING, Part 4; 6f28
4.1.1 DEPRESSURIZATION (CONTINUED) MASS AND ENERGY BALANCES COMBINED:
. Standard Identities of Thermodynamic Properties
. Differential Calculus ;
C"K p- hr y.g Vf, ,, : VF= ; Cp Q C,
~
- f )
V3: Vf,= 3 [ a, pi h', + ##
- 1 p_h/gy.g Ifg Vjg pg ,
_k =g,I jg Vy : VF= - p Y~ V-p 2 7p yp ; BNL SCALING, Part 4; 7/28 i
t 4.1 MASS AND liNiilMiY BAI.ANCliS noniinued) CO:NTROL VOLUME COMBINATIO:N i ) l , V101 I V s/ 2$
/
BNL SCALING, Part 4; 8/28 j
4.1.1 DEPRESSURIZATION (continued): Equation of Depressurization . Divergence Theorem to convert volume into area integrals, . Mean-Value Theorem ofIntegral Calculus for volume averaging, = V,,,= V,+ V,+ V24 + Vm is rigid. Volume fluxes at interfaces are continuous. t p = Xy,,,
-f&+
bk, ADS Ng h "
+fI, v pCp h,,, +
yp hy ( ) xy'c'
=
[ c,
- i. ,
V+ k [ a, p,h',+ k hg _k=g,i vg pg ,
-1 V g + yp I
V,. BNL SCALING, Part 4; 9/28 _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . ___.____._..___________..__________.___..___..__m.____
4.1.I DEPRESSURIZATION (continued): Scaled Equation of Depressurization and Four Groups : f&. y X Y,,, h p, @,i i Ep,m,i y bk, ADS
% ,,, b yn X y ,,y f )* r 3 f I 4 g, fR Y V Q *+ g _ fg ref 1% 0
'* Nfg , Y' * '
q Nfg
,9 & ,7 y n b X y ,,
( ) e
+fEp,Q '
h net H. = S " f 0
\ P) '
p C,, 9 &,,, byn f y, t. u2 = 'Y-1 i V,,f kN fo 2 g #'0"2 g #' x2
, pm;, ( y j o &,,f Apg2 xynei\
p+APo BNL SCALING, Part 4; 10/28
4.1 MASS AND ENERGY BALANCES (continued): 4.1.2 VAPOR MASS BALANCE FOR SCALING I3VENTORY RATE OF CHANGE: . Basis for Equation of Vapor Generation . Summary of Steps in Derivation Equation for Time-Rate of Vapor Volume Change in V+ 2 Scaled Equation for Vapor Volume in V 2+ Five Scaling Groups for Rate ofInventory Change in V 2+ - Interpretation of Scaling Groups with Results in Section 4 i BNL SCALING, Part 4; i1/28 r
4.1.2 INVENTORY (continued): VAPOR MASS BALANCE for V 2+:
" P For V:
24 Vp 24 g
=
Wo+V24 P g - a p ', N
,,er + dp 1~GPg,h ' -(1 -a)pf fh'
[" Vhis dt h le dp from depressurization equation, Ch. 3, on p. 9 dt b
4.1.2 INVENTORY (continued): Equation for Time-Rate of Vapor Volume Change in v 2+ Integrating over V2+ (Averaging), i i
. Solving for da/dt.
" 8 8 "
V = b @g + - 24 V2 + xy 24 dt i,,; h,, v, f , ( )
-Y24 [@+[1,v pCT Q +
X y,,, z hk, ADS Y~ I Q,2 yp p , With = 8 8 #8 8> / ~ Y" Pshf, BNL SCALING, Part 4; 13/28
4.1.2 INVENTORY (continued): ~ Scaled Equation for Vapor Volume Fraction Change in v2+ (vapor injection) (heat transfer with phase change) f i*/ 3,
" = "
V '+ d t , 2 EHa.e * ' + He.d2+ um.g g fg , fg - V + Xv N '4 2 2 ; i r 3. - I T" 3* p G". EHe.d +U n'dN2 b N *** gg,,gg e. X y,,, , v.s q QC , pmm APo . f (depressurization) t BNL SCALING, Part 4; I4/28
l l 1 1 l l l 4.1.2 n4VENTORY (continued): Five Scaling Groups for Inventory (vapor l Volume Fraction Change in V 2+) ! l
\
(t' V \
= ( 810 ref .\
*1 A' *g >
\
@f(re 2&l0 !
1 > f - h24]O Y 9"S E &, Q1+ ref "f8 * - V \ 24
@,ef !V '24ja <fgh , n vfg XV,,,,o \
0 ref " ref q XYtot ) 0\ 0 l- \ N;n V7ef 2 Ya T~ k s N2
@ ret hP Y q
EVior > 0 V ref 0 " O'# D ref g EVio ) 0 1 BNL SCALING, Part 4; 15/28
i 4.1. MASS AND ENERGY BALANCES (continued): i ! l 1 I l 4.1.3 LIQUID TEMPERATURE IN V, l Basis for Equation of Temperature Transient Summary of Steps in Derivation l Equation for Time-Rate of Temperature I Change in V3 l Scaled Equation for Temperature l
=
Five Scaling Groups Governing Rate of Change of Liquid Temperature l l i l
- BNL SCALING, Part 4; 16/28 l
4.1.3 LIQUID TEMPERATURE (continued): . i MASS and ENERGY BALANCE FOR TEMPERATURE OF LIQUID in Control Volume of Primary Side, V, p = V - V cur - Vem ; i dh dp ' Energy : V Ps p gg gg g, net , y , g,,, _ g) , y ypy y,1 g, _ g Mass : V,, dp dt
= y ,,,
, y cur,em y, _ gg Flow from V24 : W ,,,
=
P ,,, f# 24 -X24 i
< 1 where X+2
=
E k=l,g "A Pi rh'+ pg Vjg , 1 V+ 2 BNL SCALING, Part 4; 17/28
4.1.3 LIQUID TEMERATURE (continued): N i J g/a!'!'1!'!!yy,* Time Rate of Change Equation for " m isis : TEMPERATURE OF LIQUID gy,,, _ i Veur Wh Vrmn, . Eliminate Unknown Enthalpy flows at ~ Internal Boundaries, ** Use Time-Rate of Pressure Change from P. 9 of Ch. 3, ; Introduce Thermal R.esponse Function (property function): v t T ps T - 12$ m - h)bm g^ h . Normalize the resulting equation to obtain: BNL SCALING, Part 4; I8/28
4.1.3 LIQUID TEMPERATUP { continued): < SCALED EQUATION FOR RATE OF TEMPERATURE CHANGE IN LIQUID . L k 0' {p cy)* dt,
= U f.d I+
Xy,,pcp , Nr r + cur,rtum bU t.n W,* (h,- h)* '
/ )
r 3. yr p"'
+ _ { gf, 9. g EVg bk, ADS t.d"2 , p,;,
( L 0)
*r 3 . i' Yr v A
+U P={h,,,-h)+
f.d2+ G2 '+ Ysot k k) t i i BNL SCALING, Part 4; 19/28 :
4.1.3 LIQUID TEMPERATURE (continued): FIVE SCALING GROUPS for TEMPERATURE CHANGE IN LIQUID
- r. >
3 ' V net l0 YT g t,Q _ ref ( 1+ T y,, (p c,)9 ATo@,,f ( X y, p c, , 0 V,g (@)o YT t,o V,, {p c,), ATo @,,, X y, , ,
- r. 3 -
7 3 ' V,'I , g = $2+lo "tg ~ t,Q1+ Pm('mh - h )\ + V,, (p c,)9 ATo @,,, h,,, , Xy, o
- t. \
V,g 0 5T
* <Nln 2 T~I t,Qn2 V,, (p c,)9 ATo @,,, X y,, ,
T V,g (AT o), IWo), 1 t, m> , V,, ATo (p)o@,,f BNL SCALING, Part 4; 20/28 i
- 4. GOVERNING EQUATIONS (continued) i 4.2 LOOP MOMENTUM BALANCES <
FOR THE DYNAMICS OF FLOW BETWEEN SYSTEM COMPONENTS 4.2.1 System of Loop Momentum Balances Scaled Momentum Balance (vector equation) Scaling Groups for Forced and Natural Circulation 4.2.2 Loop Momentum and Inertia Matrix 4.2.3 Flow Resistance and Impedance Matrix . Interpretation of Scaling Groups with Results in Section 4. BNL SCALING, Part 4; 21/28
4.2 LOOP MOMENTUM BALANCES (continued): 4.2.1 The System of Loop Momentum Balances ; dM For the l'h Loop: "
~ ~
dt '" ' Zg where M, = W,,, A* = [ies~ W,,, A
~, o ;
## + *
=
'W,),(0) ,fg ,
f gp, A4,,, - a Ap av,3 dz i P BNL SCALING, Part 4; 22/28 j i
i [ 4.2.1 The System ofLoop Momentum Balances (continued): ( ) . and f(z) = 1-a SP co ( PI J AGm = Ap p dp P'r g 0k
- i PPfg gg *=I.g Pi .
i t f 1 i For single-phase liquid: M, = ElW,)'(0) 5 lEl <A,, i BNL SCALING, Part 4; 23/28 i i [ I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--___________t
4.2 LOOP MOMENTUM BALANCES (continued) The Scaled Momentum Balance for Forced Circulation Hg,p 2* = A p p.y+Hag,p G*-H R* gg,p dt, , Gravity Vector Gi = Pr gyo dzo*, i I ; Resistance Vector R*f = [ r,* W,,*, iEl
\*o), f L Impedance Matrix f. = L@=hefA>i A i,i r 3
(@0/, I L' iEl Pret m j\ ) i BNL SCALING, Part 4; 24/28
4.2 LOOP MOMENTUM BALANCES (continued) The Scaled Momentum Balance for Forced Circulation (continued) 3 ( W' 2*( K + fL \ - Wut> , g d,, A '. Impedance Matrix R f,*, = W,,o (
\
W"$) i \ K + fLd Ai ieloop4 A,2 t BNL SCALING, Part 4; 25/28
l l l 4.2 LOOP MOMENTUM BALANCES (continued) 1 THREE SCALING GROUPS for l Forced Circulation, IIpp = 1 i l f 8 1 l l< @g)i /
@bk L) l 11 =
y"I l
\ 1,prz Ppp , n tetoop,,, '@, ),,, g A,,
l i l .
)
S GR TO 0 Q k
=
II*# W,{c,Ap,
,, p
/
W
) 2 ' K + fL '
ref \ ref ; , \ )i g"' ' _ l 2{pApppl9 , , , , , , , , , , ,2 l l BNL SCALING, Part 4; 26/28
t 4.2 LOOP MOMENTUM BALANCES (continued) The Scaled Momentum Balance for Natural Circulation i i i i
-+ :
HIN,G =H GR,G,ML C*-H RS,G N* i dt, ; t i i BNL SCALING, Part 4; 27/28 , i i [
i
)
4.2 LOOP MOMENTUM BALANCES (continued) a THREE SCALING GROUPS for Natural Circulation, { PRHR Flow is Reference i i WoL IN,G
~ Wret* ret [WA ML rel 1
y,,, ~gAHy p7'Tgt -T)_,,g, o I i (AHy), iTyt - To), II GR,1 =
'AH h
\
'THL -Th r 8)PRHR r oIPRHR s
/ S2K+L \
W* d \ W"'ML[ W,,f, A II = g 2 gAH3(T t 2 pa y r yt - To)'_,,yy ; 1 I BNL SCALING, Part 4; 28/28
- 5. APPLICATION OF GOVERNING EQUATIONS AND SCALING FOR:
Phase 1: From Break Opening to S-Signal (subphases for before and after scram) Global Control Volume: V, + V3, containing in l V,: RPV, SGs, CMTs, PRHR; HL, CL, PBL, DVI V: 3 PRZ ' Processes: Depressurization, PRZ Flashing Reference Data: Time: ( V,,,m)o/43 , residence time Pressure: po-pysy, Temperature: T,, - T,,,,, Power: Init. Core Power, Pump Power Flow: Initial Core Flow BNL SCALING, Part 5; 1/ 40
- 4. GOVERNING EQUATIONS and STATE VARIABLES '
for GLOBAL SCALING - l t 4.1 CONSERVATION EQUATIONS: t
. MASS BALANCE for subcooled liquid, for two-phase mixture, for vapor, for perfect gas; 4
. \
. ENERGY BALANCE for subcooled liquid, for two-phase mixture, for vapor, for perfect gas.
. MOMENTUM BALANCE for~each loop of system BNL SCALING, Part 4; 1/6
- 4. GOVERNING EQUATIONS and STATE VARIABLES (continued) 4.2 STATE VARIABLES:
For Primary System and SG: Pressure (p), . For Primary System, CMT Tanks, PRHR Loops: Liquid Inventory (a), . Mean Liquid Temperature (T); . For Flow Loops: Flow Rates (Loop Momenta) in: ' Primary Loops (Wct.), < CMT Loops (Wcur), PRHR Loops (WpW. ' f , BNL SCALING, Part 4; 2/6 ; e
i I
4.3 Depressurization(continued)
s CONTROL VOLUME COMBINATION
)
Vtot l. d1, IY \ I y..v , i
!!!EI
-_:_- EE_-E~"_EE!E!E$.
!(Ei"~E"I _Y__"_ E- ;; 24 6
, .:_ m _
_ x .. 2:E:: jsE:- "l:E: E"N, ;E: :_ :":: -
@i
' N2 l- @l . l BNL SCALING, Part 4; ,9 / 6 N
4.3 DEPRESSURIZATION(continued)
4.3.1 Equation of Depressurization Divergence Theorem to convert volume into area integrals, Mean-Value Theorem ofIntegral Calculus for volume averaging,
- V,,,= V,+ V,+ Y24 + Vm is rigid.
Volume fluxes at interfaces are continuous.
= '" +
~
P E@+N
^
bk, ADS 2+ ' + I,Ev pCp rier yp y2 . X 57,,, _ fg
~
f
- I x ,,
=
['V+ I, v C p Nfg I" [a k=g,I g pg W& + V f* fg pg ,
-1 V,4 + y y V. g BNL SCALING, Part 4; 4/6 ,
\
. . - - . . _ _ . - - . - . _ _ _ _ - - _ - - . . _ -____m
4.3 DEPRESSURIZATION (continued): 4.32 Scaled Eq. of Depressurization and Four Groups :
, y ?&.\
- _ ref L ')3 X y, , h p, @,i i
&,.gf byn 'X y,, ';
I * ,. ,
- p. 24 "Is d'N
~1 H = v'". V'" ( 2$ /0 h ' lb '
h, fg D,.ef APoXv,,3jo ( ) # ( ) hT *\ V
+ 5b' (
\ inet U' = T ref \0" O .
v,1 QCp , b'O 1 q ( pCp ,0 Daj No h,,,)\,0
- t. 1 f
O* N H = y_}h V,.gf Nl9 2 p,NN2 '
, ( Y )0 re/ APo (Xv,,, j P+APo .
BNL SCALING, Part 4; 5/6
Impact of Processes on Rate of Depressurization FRACTIONAL CHANGE OF TOTAL PRESSURE CHANGE 1- ~_ _ c 1
' II '
P bk Break Flow
~;r i
P* ' {p. ,Q . Cooling 4
'\
0 t* . 1 ! (PRZ " empty") BNL SCALING, Part 4; 6/6 I
l l 5. APPLICATION OF SCALING l AND l INTERPRETATION OF SCALING GROUPS Matrix of Scaling Groups Convention for Quantifying Importance Convention for Criterion of Distortion
- Inertia Matrix Interpretation Impedance Matrix Interpretation l
l l BNL SCALING, Part 5; 1 / 12 I I
/
W.Wulff BNL PI_AP800WBK Piteups cib-Il AP600 SCALING W1OW 2.41 PM PI-Groups-Il I .e N o l g
.E g y$ y"j E8 PI - Group @ 5 N $ Reasons for Scale Symbol
% I O $ Distortion
= &
6 1.2 EE Depressurization 1 After E { g$ Scram y w g-e
^
W id fg Low SG Cooling. Only 16% of Thermal compliance Pi p,a,i - ' 4j 9.81 full-power is rejected through l SG _ _ l Break Flow Pip,ew 1.35 1.21 0.87 PRZ Heating Pi p,Q,2pt, 0.27 0.17 0.15 - RCP Power Pi ,p pump 6E-2 3 E-4 3E-2 i
. i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 2 /12
Method ofInterpreting Scaling Groups in the Matrix of Scaling Groups: II-Groups in the Column of any facility present the, relative importance ofprocesses andphenomena on the rate of change in that facility, i.e.: Global Heating or Cooling, Pumping Power, Break Flow;
= Confirmation of PIRT for a facility.
- II-Groups in the Row of any ~ Process or Phenomenon indicate the Scale Distortion in a facility relative to AP600 of that process orphenomenon.
BNL SCALING, Part 5; 3 / 12 I I
/
Convention on Criteria Of Significance and Distortions
~
. t A Significant Scaling Group is at least 1/10 of the maximum term in the i scaled equation, (if also Ilm ,2 0.1 in Phase 1) .
II 2 0.1 . II max , i and signals an important process. The Distortion Criterion was selected so that even the smallest significant group identified as distortion contributes 25% or more distortion to the nondimensional rate of change of the state variables: pressure, inventory, etc. BNL SCALING, Part 5; 4 / 12 i
b Effect of Distortion Criterion on Fractional Change Identified as Distorion Selection of A = %, B = 2 Distortion Criterion, Total slope distortion due to g ,/g AP600 significant group: O {0.1}
<A >B (A*IIracii + B*II racii) 1/2 2.0 0.250 1/3 3.0 0.333 1/4 4.0 0.425 t
i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 5 / 12 i 7_
i i r i e DYNAMICS OF FLOW BETWEEN SYSTEM COMPONENTS Definition and Interpretation of r INERTIA MATRIX i AND IMPEDANCE MATRIX . i Evaluation and Interpretation t i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 6 / 12 I l f
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK LOA-4-AP600 AP600 SCALING 1028 PM 2/10/97 4 LOOPS:
- 4 Primary Loops Ncrmal Operation, initial Depressurization .
Phase 1 INERTIA MATRIX l SCALED INERTIA MATRIX,14 t Loop Flow Rate leaving from on Side through SG Exit of Loops, SG Exit of Loops 2 SG Exit of Loop 4, SG Exit of LoopA2 B Cold Leg 1 0.575 0.341 0.042 0.042 B Cold Leg 2 0.341 0.575 0.042 0.042 A Cold Leg 1 0.042 0.042 0.575 0.341 A Cold Leg 2 0.042 0.042 0.341 - 0.575 i i w BNL SCALING Part 5; 7/12
-i W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600 WBK LOA-4-APEX - APEX SCALING 10:44 PM 2/10/97 4 LOOPS.
4 Primary Loops - Normal Operation INERTIA MATRIX SCALED INERTIA MATRIX, i4 Loop Flow Rate leaving from !
'l i
- on Side through SG Exit of Loopei SG Exit of Loops 2 SG Exit of Loop 4, SG Exit of LoopA2 i B r.old Leg 1 0.748 0.210 0.021 0.021 B Cold Leg 2 0.210 0.748 0.021 0.021 !
4 A Cold Leg 1 0.021 0.021 0.748 0.210 : A Cold Leg 2 0.021 0.021 0.210 _ 0.748 I 0 BNL SCALING Part 5; 8 /12 s
Interpretation ofInertia Matrix
. The II,3-Group of the scaled momentum balance is the ratio of l - inertia to driving forces globally.
The elements of the inertia matrix are a measure of the inter-loop coupling by inertia. As a result of scaling, the elements of the main (reference) loop
! add up to 1.
The diagonal terms measure the inertia of the loop corresponding to the row of the matrix.
. The off-diagonal terms measure the cross-coupling by inertia.
BNL SCALING, Part 5; 9 / 12
'f -O O W.WulN, BNL PI_AP60C.WBK RSIST-4-APEX APEX SCALING 10:50 PM 2/10/97 4 LOOPS:
4 Primary Loops initial Depressurizatic n Phase 1 RESISTANCE MATAIX i Scaled Resistance Matrix R4 , (-) Lwp Resistance Coefficients of Loop Sections between Branch Points: on Side through RPV to Exit of SG 1-5 to W Intenorof M I B Cold Leg 1 , 0.354 0.482 0.164 B Cold Leg 2 0.354 0.482 0.164 . A Cold Leg 1 0.354 0.482 0.164 A Cold Leg 2 0.354 0.482 0.164 p ! BNL SCALING, Part 5; 10 /12 .
W. Wufff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK RSIST-4-AP600 AP600 SCALING 9:22 PM 2/10/97 4 LOOPS: . 4 Primary Loops initial Depressurization Phase 1 RESISTANCE MATRIX Scaled Resistance Matrix R 4 , (-) Loop Resistance Coefficients of Loop Sections between : Branch Points: l RPV to Exit of SG on Side through SG Exit to RPV Interiorof RPV 1-5 i B Cold Leg 1 0.561 0.026 0.413 i B Cold Leg 2 0.561 0.026 0.413 1 A Cold Leg 1 0.561 0.026 O.413 i A Cold Leg 2 0.561 0.026 0.413 ' t BNL SCALING, Part 5; 10 /12 l x
-- i
Interpretation ofImpedance Matrix: j 4
- The II n-Group of the Momentum Balance is the ratio of resistance over driving forces in a global sense.
. The-Impedance Matrix reflects the distribution of flow '
resistances.
. As the result of scaling, the elements in the row of the reference (main) loop add up to 1.
. Together, the Inertia and Impedance Matrices determine the .
eigenvalues of the flow equations and thereby how fast the flow approaches quasi-steady conditions or if the flow is unstable. BNL SCALING, Part 5; 11 / 12 , i --
Interpretation ofImpedance Matrix (continued): l - Only the aggregate resistances which appear in the Impedance Matrix count for scaling the interaction between components and for assessing scaling l distortions. 1 The distribution of resistances between j branch points is not important (this gives l freedom to insert restrictions to meet l l scaling criteria). l l l l BNL SCALING, Part 5; 12/12
i SCALED EQUATION FOR DEPRESSURIZATION Phase 1 f T. y.3 dp
- 07 -
0 14 Ad,14 dt. \pcP) 24 ; ; !! : g pCp x
$ 4,% +- = r i.
t a y gy ms 4y g fg A.
- tya ;g g 14 PP y2$
m , m,.,,,. AQ,2$ h V, <,,,
,4%w~l4?t8
$y WiR ,
s. D bh
-HAbk(b*kb BNL SCALING, Part 5; 2 / 40 i
Definition of Scaling Groups: fi r 3 3 i Stk or 'rrVI,pam , Heating / Cool.ing in Vg : = II~'. d' r 3 z bk,3 q QCp ,0 AfgXyw g , t- 1 r 3 3 92+k vfg \rVt.pa> a Heat.ing/ Cool.ing in V 2+: II p.e.2+
=
r4 bk;) ( hfgl 0 AE0 X V,,,0 ' (
' ' f ' ' '
3 1 YI.Przj IIj pg = 1Appy y \ @cr)) g T t y Pumping Power: ' 3 g (,@33,, ( p yc , , AP0Xv ,0 f y 1 . g I,przig , Break Flow: ** Ap0Xv ,0 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 3 / 40
i t Impact of Processes on Rate of Depressurization ' 1- ~' '
' 'r
~
- Break Flow II),i bk ,
h, i P* . II;,,4 Cooling If O t* 1 (PRZ " empty") BNL SCALING, Part 5; 4 /40
W Wupf BNL PI_ APEX)WBA Pigoups Gil AP600 SCALING 2no97 24 PM PI-Groups-ll
. 8 l
= +e- !o x <
E 8' 8 ' PI - Group $ m m 'mm Reasons for Scale f .Ef yy&j m Symbol Q k
@! $ Distortion I
6 l
. igg 1.2 Depressurization 1 After dt u q$$
Scram j l l , Low SG Cooling. Only 16% of Thermal compliance ! Pi p,0.i 9.81 full-power is rejected through t l
! SG i ;
Break Flow i Pi p,ex 1.35 1.21 0.87 I PRZ Heating , Pi p.,Q,2m 0.27 0.17 0.15
- 1 l
RCP Power Pi.ppump l 6E-2 ; { 3E-4 3E-2 l i I BNL SCALING, Part 5; 5 /40 t f
Method ofInterpreting Scaling Groups in the ; Matrix of Scaling Groups:
. II-Groups in the Column of any facility present the relative importance ofprocesses andphenomena on the rate of change in that facility, i.e.: Global Heating or Cooling, Pumping Power, Break Flow; t
=> Confirmation of PIRT for a facility.
. II-Groups in the Row of any Process or Phenomenon indicate the Scale Distortion in a facility relative to AP600 of that j process orphenomenon .
i l BNL SCALING, Part 5; 6 / 40
Convention on Criteria Of Significance and Distortions
. Significant Non-Dimensional Groups normalized with driving term, are selected on the basis of their magnitude.
H 2 0.1 H,
. Distortion Criteria was selected so that even the smallest significant group distortion contributes only 0.25 distortion in nondimensional rate of change of primary variables; pressure, inventory, etc.
BNL SCALING, Part 5; 7 /40
1 Distortion Criteria Selection of A = %, B = 2 Distortion Criterion, Total slope distortion due to IIracii /II AP6M distortion in smailest , significant group: O {0.1} l t
<A >B (A*IIr cii + B*II racil) ,
1/2 2.0 0.250 1/3 3.0 0.333 1/4 4.0 0.425 r BNL SCALING, Part 5; 8 / 40 i
- w. waiti aNL PS,AP60o.W9K Pl-groups cib-N AP600 SCALING 2/4/97 1:34 PM PI-Groups-ll o E3 n va j l! $.g Pl - Group n v4 n ven g,,
n ven
,,, ser Reasons for Scale Distortion symbol f ;l }~g AP600 APEX ROSA SPES s=
c pr urir.ti.rt , . 'i' a Scram Ili E$ i Thermal compliarice: ratio or welurnetric expansion / contraction rete due to heeunescoonna imbosence in Pf,..O . 7.OE-2 4.2 E-4 3.8E-2 prunary systern vs. total expansion rete due to depressurization. ! Break Flow: retto of volume i dieps.c.m.nt e.te due to be.ek vio" Pl, .. 1.59 1.12 over volume empenelon rete due to + . depressurtretion. , PRZ Heating: ratio et vetumetric expenelon rate due to PRZ heating vs. Pf,.,0.sg 0.19 0.17 ; empenelon reto due to depressurization. RCP Power; ratio or volume i expen on rete due to mechanical Pl, m 7.OE-2 4.2E-4 3.8E-2 pumping power vs. expension rete due I to depressurization. i t t i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 9 /40 i I I
W. Wulft BNL Pl_AP600.WBK PI groupe cbH AP600 SCALING PI-Groups-ll 214/9 7 1:34 PM o
' &=
2- i E I $ $g Pt - Group n veh
'"' n v.ie. n ven.e n vene.
[ SY"D I 8"' '"' '"' N "j AP600 APEX ROSA SPES Reasons for Scale Distortion < k r u, .tl.n 1 t.i
.e,o,. g.J y ,
l Scram .; a j;
~,
Break Flow; crowth rate of vapor volume fraction due to volume dieprecoment through the breek: normalized frequency of veper Pt .a generetion due to volume empenelon . 0.55 through to breek. 0.55 Pimary-side Heating / Cooling: Shrink / Growth rete of vapor volume traction due to heatino/cooang of subcooled squid; nonneared frequency Pfe. of vapor generation due to subcooled- o.
. 3.1E 2 1.SE-4 Equid volume contraction. 1.9E-2 Machanical Power of Pumps:
S - hrink rate of v por volume fraction i d \ ue to heating of subcooled liquid by p umpe; normeRied frequency of vepor Ple.- generation due to subcooled-liquid 3.1 E-2 v olume expension. 2.6E-4 3.4 E-2 PRZ Heating Effect; crowth rete of va por volume fraction due to f.eeting of tw o-pheee mixture in PRZ; normallred fre M.p.o.w quency of vapor generation due to S.1E-4 heating in PRZ. 2.5E-2 3.2E-2 __I (1b]1 V A 1 tw ** -
W Wulff BtJL PI_AP000 WBK Pi groups cib ll AP600 SCALING PI-Groups-ll 2/10s7 2 st PM e 15 E f fc Pi - Group h 5 $ f;,f j
- gyj 3 Symbol
$ Reasoils for Scale E .
Distortion
- i 6 ,
Depressurization 1.2 jg$ 1 ; After ( dE g y Scram y w ;- l W
! t Thermal compliance .
Pip.o.i Low SG Cooling. Only 16% of 1 9.81 full-power is rejected through SG Break Flow i Pip ,a 1.35 1.21 0.87 PRZ Heating Pi.,Q,2pn p 0.27 0.17 0.15 RCP Powar _ . Pi.ppomp 6E-2 l i ( 3E-4 3E-2 J BNL SCALING, Part 5; II /40
. . . _ . _ _ _ _ - ~. .. .. . -. . _ _ . .__ W. Wulff BNI. Pl_APSCO.WBK PI-groupo cab-Il AP600 SCAUNG 214/9 7 1:34 PM . PI Groups-ll cB
. ;- n v he. nvs. nvow nvs.
e "c3 Pt - Group
- b b k
- Reasons for Scale Distortion f Symbol AP600 APEX ROSA SPES l[
u= c li o-Preeeurtretion 1 1.2 After j{I3 ! serem a =1 1 Thermal compliance, ratio of volumetrie supension/ contraction rate due to heating / cooling imbolence in , .cu 9.81 , primary eyetem vs. total eitpension rate due to depressurisation. Break Flow, ratio of volunw displacement rete due to tweek flow , over volume expension rate due to i depreneurization. ! l PRZ Heating, ratio of volumeteto empenolon sete due to PRZ heating vs. PI,..Q.r# 0.17 0.15 impenelon rate due to dopsessuriaation. RCP pc ver, ratio of volume esperwlon rate due ?o mechanical M " 2* 2 pumping power vs. empenelon rate due to depressuritation. BNL SCALING, Part 5; 12 / 40 ! L i ___._.__.____.__.___..______._.._____.________._.___m. _ . . . _ _ _ _ _
W. Wulff SNL PI_AP600.WSK Pt groups cPJH AP600 SCALING 214D7 1:33 PM PI-Groups-ll o $" B nv*e;nve. nve. nve. m 2-I N j - Group Symbol
'o' '*' 8 8*' Reasons for Scale Distortion f [ j AP600 APEX ROSA SPES k "' __
1.2 After $ popeseeurtretion 1 ;; I l serem
.4
- n Pimary-side Heating / Cooling.
Shrink / Growth rete of vapor volume Low 50 Cooens My 10% of he power le fraction due to heating / cooling of pge ,o> g gg W through 50 subcooled Equid; normeHrod frequency of veper generation due to subcooled. Equid volume contraction. Break Flow, Growth rate of vapor volume fraction due to volume displacement through the breek; PI,p. a 0.70 0.63 0.62 normeHred frequency of vapor generation due to volume empenelon through to break. FRZ Heating Effect on PRZ Draining. Growth rete of vapor volume fraction due to heatinotcoonne Pf.wa.3,e 8.0E-4 2.1 E-3 1.1E-3 of two-pheee rnisture in PRZ: normeH:M frequency of vapor generetion due to heating in PRZ. Mechanical Power of Pumps, Shrink rete of vapor volume fraction due to heating of subcooled Equid by pg##" , 0.00 0.01 pumpe; normalized frequency of vapor 0.02 ( l generation due to subcooled-Nguld l volume empenelon. f BNL SCALING, Part 5; 13 / 40
w.wuur aNL Pf,AP600.wsK Mom ebn AP600 SCAUNG 2ms7 1:24 m PI-Groups-Il
' E5 m veen. n ven n vane. n vens.
] 6j M - Group Symbol for for br k Reasons for Scale Distortion f g }{ AP600 APEX ROSA SPES
?*
'i re.e . e . i 'g,^; r ljg
__ u _ _ _ Primary-side heating / cooling Icore. SGl. ratio of not cooling power Pir .oj 10.19 oniv ses .t umi. w w se over rate of stored energy retenee. Pumping power, retto of RCP puruping power over rete of stored Pir m 0.065 0.000 0.031 energy rolesee. Break Flow m.chenical power (pvi of break discheroe over rate of stored Pine 0.038 0.078 0.061 energy rolesse. PRZ heating / cooling, sotto of PRZ heatin9 power over rate of stored Pis .o.w 1.2E-2 3.0E-3 8.9E-4 enerovreie m . BNL SCALING, Part 5; 14 / 40
- w. wutti SNL Pf_AP900.WBK PI-groupe ch-N AP600 SCAUNG 214:57 1:33 PM F1-Groups-ll
- Ea n v.n n vese. M vese.
y- n v.h l uj Pi - Group Symbol
,,, ,,, ,,, k Reasons for Scale Distortion f }{ AP600 APEX ROSA SPES 15 au e
EE W *d*" l 1.2 After serem f
.l 3#
inertie, nose of ineres over Pump N ,, 1.8E-3 2.1 E-6 2.5E-7 forces. I I Gravity. retto of ore *y ever pump N ,, 1.7E-2 6.5E-2 2.2 E-2 forces. I 1.z;:fonce, rette of fr5stional and Ny, 9.6E-1 1.0E + 0 fo= L:: forces ever pump forces. 1 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 15 / 40
c i DYb AMICS OF FLOW BETWEEN SYSTEM ,
, COMPOFEFTS Definition and Interpretation of Scaling Groups j INERTIA MATRIX Evaluation and Interpretation BNL SCALING, Part 5; 16 / 40
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK LOA-4-AP600 AP600 SCALING 1:47 PM 2/4/97 4 LOOPS: 4 Primary Loops Normal Operation, Initial Depressurization Phase 1 INERTIA MATRIX Loop Flow Rate leaving from strough SG Exit of Loop.. SG Eult of Loop., SG Eult of Leopa, SG Exit of Leopa, on Side Cold Leg 1 Loam. LO Ae... . loa., Lo A. , B B Cold Leg 2 Lo A . . loa w Lo A. . Lo A.. A Cold Leg 1 Lo A. . loa.. LOA-. loa. .. . A Cold leg 2 Lo A., loa. , loa .i e LOA % NUMFalCAL VALUES of INERTIA MATRIX, I. (1/m) Loop Flow Rate leaving from strough SG Euft of Loop., SG Euft of Loop. SG Ewit of Loop . SG Exit of Leopa, on Side B Cold Leg 1 70.es3 42.oos 5.1 e1 s.t at Cold Log 2 42.008 70.se3 5.181 5.181 B Cold Log I 5.181 5.181 70.es3 42.005 A A Cold Leg 2 5.181 5.181 42.o08 70.983 SCALED INERTIA MATRIX, l. Loop Flow Rate leaving from through SG Exit ei Loop., SG Exit of Loop., SG Exit of Loopa. SG Eult of Loop , on Side B Cold Leg 1 0.575 0.341 0.042 0.042 B Cold Leg 2 0.341 0.575 0.042 0.042 A Cold Leg 1 0.o42 0.042 o.s7s o.341 Cold Leg 2 0.042 0.042 0.341 o.s7s A BNL SCALING, Part 5; 17 / 40
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK LOA-7-AP600 AP600 SCALING 2:16 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: , 4 Primary, 2CMT, IPRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 INERTIA MATRIX DEFINITION OF INERTIA MATRIX LOOP FIOw Rete leaving from Flow Rete from CidT Branch CMT Branch a a ch NHR &anch Swge % t '
'" SG Exit Of SG Exit Of Breeltin through Of LOOP.i tO Of Looper, tO Of LOOpsi. to Of Looper tO Of LOopa, to hot Log Of g side k P^' L #^* '
CMT, CMT. RPV PRHR LOOpa B Cold Leg 1 LOA,,,, s i LO A.,, i . LOA., LOA., LOA ,... LO Ae.., s O O (-LOAs si A cMT. (-LO A. ,) LOA %. . , (-LO A. ,1 (-LO A.,) O (-LO A.31 O O LOA., ! A Cold leg 1 LOA., LOA,, LOA%4, LO Aa,.i . LOA,, LOAsi ( LOAa., sl (-LO Agi st (-LO A, ,) A cold L*9 2 LOA., LOA,, LOAa.e s e LOA,,,,4, LOAr LOAoi (-LO Any s) (-LOA4,31 f LOA,,) B cMT.s (-LO A., >,1 O ( LO A.11 (-LO A. ,) LOL. . ..r (-LO A. ,1 O O LOA., B cold Lee 2 LO A. . . . LO A , i . LOA.i LOA. LO A , i . LOA % O O (-LOA. . A PMHR LOA., LOA,, LOAN ., LOAa i , LOA,.i LOAsi LOA, 3e (-LOAa,i n) (-LOAsil ! glow inde 19.5 CMT.A 51.A 52.A CMT.B R.B RHR SRL est t BNL SCALING, Part 5; 18 / 40
W. Wulffo BNL PI_AP600.WBK LOA-7-AP600 AP600 SCALING 2:16 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: ' 4 Primary, 2CMT, IPRHR CMT/PRMR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Dr'etning risase 3 INERTIA MATRIX NUMERICAL VALUES of INERTIA MATRIX, I, (1/m) Loop Flow Rate leaving from Flow Rate from CMT Branch CMT Branch CMT Branch CMT Branch PRHR Branch Surge Line to
*" GMM SG M M of Loopei, to of Loop.3, to of Loopa, to Hot Leg of g
through of Loops, to ' Of Looper, to side loopas Loopar Loopsi RPV CMTa JT. RPV PRHR Loopa B Cold Leg 1 7c.ee 41.29 5.1s s.13 s1.Os 42.01 0.00 0000 -s.1 s A CMT. -0.72 2.023.91 -0.72 -o.72 0.00 -19.s l 0.00 0.000 0.72 A Cosd Leg 1 s.1s 4.46 70.ss 42.01 4.46 5.1s -2 s.3 s -46.05s -4.46 A Cold Les 2 s.Is 4.4e 42.01 70.se 4.4s 5.t a -2s.3s -4s. cts -4.4s B CMT,8 -19.31 0.00 -0.72 -0.72 2.251.ee -0.72 0.o0 0.000 0.72 B Coso Leg 2 si.s0 st.os s.1 e s.t s s1.Os 7o.se o.00 0.000 -s.1 s A PRHR s.13 4.4 s 42.50 13.e3 4.4e s.1s 1 o7s.74 -s.445 -s.ts BNL SCALING, Part 5; 19 / 40
W. Wufff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK LOA 7-AP600 AP600 SCALING 2:16 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPO: 4 Primary,2CMT,1PRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 INERTIA MATRIX FLOW RATE SCALING FOR INERTIA MATRIX, I,(1/m) Loop Flow Rate leaving from Flow Rate from CMT Branch CMT Branch "" *" " *" SG Exit of SG Exit of Break in
, ," etwough of Loopes to of loopes, to of Loopsi, to of Loopen, to of Loopa, to Hot leg of g RPV CMT, CMTe RPV PRHR Loopa B cm Leg 1 17.721 0.207 1.295 1.295 0.256 10.502 0.000 0.000 -0.029 A cMT. -0.180 10.126 -0.180 -0.180 0.000 -4.952 0.000 0.000 0.004 A cm Leo i 1.295 0.022 17.721 10.502 0.022 1.295 -0.379 -0.225 -0.025 A cm Leg 2 1.295 0.022 10.502 17.721 0.022 1.295 -0.379 -0.225 -0.025 ;
B cMT.s -4.952 0.000 -0.180 -0.180 11.265 -0.180 0.000 0.000 0.004 B cm Lee 2 12.949 0.256 1.295 1.295 0.256 17.721 0.000 0.000 -0.029 A PRHR 1.295 0.022 10.625 3.407 0.022 1.295 25.114 -0.041 -0.029 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 20 / 40
. ~ . . _ . _ - _ _ _ . . . . . . . _ . _ _ _ . . _ . _ . - . - . _ . ._ . . _ . _ . ._.
W. Wulff, BNL; PI_AP600.WBK LOA-7-AP600 AP600 SCALING 2:16 PM 2/4/97 , 7 LOOPS: 4 Pnmary,2CMT, IPRHR ! CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 ! INERTIA MATRIX t I i SCALED INERTIA MATRIX, I, H: located with Loops, as referencel Loop Flow Rate leaving from Flow Rote from . CMT Branch CMT Branch SG Exit of SG Exit of Break in I of Loopsit o of loopes, to of loopet, to of Looper, to of Lova, to Hot Leg of { ttrough RPV CMT, W Te RW NR LWa g
~
B coid Lee 1 0.567 0.007 0.041 0.041 ~ 0.008 0.336 0.000 0 -0.001 A cMT. -0.006 0.324 -0.006 -0.006 0.000 -0.158 0.000 0 0.000 , A cow Les 1 0.041 0.001 0.567 0.336 0.001 0.041 -0.012 -0.007 -0.001 l A coulee 2 0.041 0.001 0.336 0.567 0.001 0.041 -0.012 -0.007 -0.001 B CMT.s -0.158 0.000 -0.006 -0.006 0.361 -0.006 0.000 0 0.000 ; B Ceu Log 2 0.414 0.008 0.041 0.041 0.008 0.567 0.000 0 -0.001 A PRHR 0.041 0.001 0.340 0.109 0.001 0.041 0.804 -0.001 -0.001 i i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 21/ 40 i
I i i INERTIA MATRIX Evaluation of the Inertia Matrix: . Express Mi in terms volumetric flow rates of flows leaving branch points of the 1* loop. . Replace unknown flaw rates by state-variable flow rates and , collect L/A-terms for reach state-variable flow rates. Enter L/A combinations in Ith row ofInertia Matrix and scale. I i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 22 / 40 ; c
1 I T Interpretation ofInertia Matrix N .
. As a result of scaling, the elements of main (reference) loop add up to 1. i
. The II,3-Group are the ratio ofinertia to driving forces globally.
The elements of the inertia matrix are a measure of the inter-loop coupling by inertia.
. The diagonal terms measure the inertia of the loop corresponding to the row of the matrix.
. The off-diagonal terms measure the cross-coupling by inertia. ,
BNL SCALING, Part 5; 23 / 40
i DYbAMICS OF FLOW BETWEEN SYSTEM COMPONENTS (continued) r Definition and Interpretation of Scaling Groups L IMPEDANCE MATRIX i l Evaluation and Interpretation j 4 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 24 /40 , t
W. Wolff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK RSIST-4-AP600 AP600 SCAllNG 1:48 PM 2/4/97 4 LOOPS: 4 Primary Loops initial Depressurization Phase 1 RESISTANCE MATRIX RESISTANCE MATRIX R4 , normal operation Numerical Values of Resistance Matrix R , (1/m*) Rosietence Coefficiente of Loop Sectione Roeletence Coefficiente of Loop Sectione i LOOP tutween Branch Pointe: 000 between Branch Pointe: RPV to Exit of SG Exit t RPV to Exit of SG Exit to interior of W of RW m S*& W@ SG 1-5 RPV SG 1-5 R*V RPV B CoM Leg 1 R ,, , R. ,,, , R., B CoM Log 1 18.404 3.469 3.386 B Cold Leg 2 Rg, , Rer.se R., B CoM Log 2 18.404 3.460 3.386 A CoM Leg 1 R.,, , R ,,, , Re, A CoMLeg1 1s.404 3.4ss 3.3ss A CoM Log 2 R ,, , R ,,, , Re, A CoM Leo 2 1s.404 3.4ee 3.3es 1 Scaled Resistance Matrix R , (-) Reelstence C#,efficiente of Loop Sect 6one between Branch Pointe: RPV to Exit of SG Exit to Interior of on Side through SG 1-5 RPV RPV B CoM Leg 1 0.561 0.026 0.413 i B Cow Leg 2 0.561 0.026 0.413 A Cow Leo 1 0.561 0.026 0.413 A CoM Leg 2 0.561 0.026 0.413 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 25 / 40
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.W8K RSIST-7-AP600 AP600 SCAllNG 1:49 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: 4 Primary,2 CMT,1 PRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 RESISTANCE MATRIX RESISTANCE MATRIX Ry (symbolic form) Loop Resistence Coefficients of Loop Sectione between Branch Pointe: I" " * *** " " " " i RPV to PRHR PRHR to SRL IRemainder Upper on " ' Side of LooPa of looPA of) Cold Leo DownComer and SG Loop. Plenum DVI SGinLoopa 7 e B cold Leo 1 0 0 R.,i R.3,s.i . R i,i. . R, Rr. 0 0 A cMTa 0 0 0 0 R 2.... R .y 0 Res,. .., O A coid Leo 1 R4,s.: R4 23 RA. -s O Rai,s.. R ., R7.i 0 0 A cold Lee 2 Ra,s.: Ra,2 3 Ra.s-s O R A2.s Ry Rr.: 0 0 , B CMT.s 0 0 0 0 Rei,i .. R.. 0 Re i,, ... 7 0 B cold Leo 2 0 0 R.,i.s Res.s R.3,... R.., Rr.i 0 0 A PRHR Ra,i.: 0 0 0 Rai R.., R ,., O Ra,m.,1.s ! 6 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 26 / 40 '
W. Wulff, BNL Pi AP600.WBK RSIST-7-AP600 AP600 SCALING - 1:49 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: 4 Primary,2 CMT,1 PRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 RESISTANCE MATRIX Numerical Values of Resistance Matrix Rr. (1/m*) Loop Reeletence Coefficients of Loop Sectione between Bronch Pointe: IRemeinder SG to CMT Vessel from CMT from PRHR from on RPV to PRHR PRHR to SRL o I Hot Leg Branch in IRome W % DVI to Upper Cold Leg to Hot leg to Side of Loop, of Loop, of) Cold Leg Downcomer
**Po Pienum DVI SG in Loop, B cold Lee 1 0.000 0.000 18.404 0.496 2.973 -0.026 3.412 0.000 0.000 A cMT. 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 2.973 0.026 0.000 4.39E + 4 0.000 A cold Lee 1 0.124 0.635 17.646 0.000 3.469 -0.026 3.412 0.000 0.000 A cold Lee 2 0.124 0.635 17.646 0.000 3.469 -0.026 3.412 0.000 0.000 B cMT.s 0.000 _0.000 0.000 0.000 2.973 0.026 0.000 5.53E + 4 0.000 B coid Lee 2 0.000 0.000 18.404 0.496 2.973 -0.026 3.412 0.000 0.000 A PRHR 0.124 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.469 -0.026 3.412 0.000 6.25E + 3 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 27 / 40
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK RSIST-7-AP600 AP600 SCALING 1:49 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: 4 Primary,2 CMT,1 PRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 RESISTANCE MATRIX Flow Rate Scaling for Resistance Matrix Ry, (1/m*) Loop Reelstence Coefficiente of Loop Sections between Bronch Pointe: i eme SG to CMT Vessel from CMT from PftHR from on RPV to PRHR PRHR to SRL oft Hot Log Branch in (RomeW % DVI to Upper Cold Leg to Hotlegto Side
"# of Loop, of Loop, of WL Dmo end SG Loope Plenum Ovl SG in Loop.
B cold Leg 1 0.000 0.000 4.601 0.031 0.186 -0.026 3.412 0.000 0.000 A cMT. 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.186 0.026 0.000 1.387 0.000 A cold Leg 1 0.031 0.159 4.411 0.000 0.217 -0.026 3.412 0.000 0.000 A cold Leg 2 0.031 0.159 4.411 0.000 0.217 -0.026 3.412 0.000 0.000 B cMT.s 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.186 0.026 0.000 1.747 0.000 B cold Leo 2 0.000 0.000 4.601 0.031 0.186 -0.026 3.412 0.000 0.000 A PRHR 0.031 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.217 -0.026 3.412 0.000 1.115 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 28 / 40
W. Wulffo BNL Pl ,AP600.WBK RSIST-7-AP600 AP600 SCALING 1:49 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: 4 Primary,2 CMT,1 PRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 RESISTANCE MATRIX i Scaled Resistance Matrix Rr (-I Loop Reeletence Coefficiente of Loop Sectione between Branch Pointe: (Memeinder SG to CMT Veseet from cMT from PRHR from on RPV to PRHR PRHR to SRL I *** Hot Log to of) Hot Leg Branchin DVI to Upper Cold Log to Side of L60Pa *I l"Pa U ' and SG Loope Plenum DVI SG in Leop. B cold Lee 1 0 0 5.61 E-1 3.77E-3 2.26E-2 -3.13E-3 4.18E-1 O O A cMT. 0 0 0 0 2.26E-2 3.13E-3 0 1.69E-1 O A cold Leo 1 3.77E-3 1.93E-2 5.38E-1 0 2.64E-2 -3.13 E-3 4.16E-1 0 0 A cold Leg 2 3.77E-3 1.93E-2 5.38E-1 0 2.64E-2 -3.13E-3 4.16E-1 0 0 B cMTs 0 0 0 0 2.26E-2 3.13E-3 0 2.13 E-1 O B cold Lee 2 0 0 5.61 E-1 3.77E-3 2.26E-2 -3.13E-3 4.16E-1 0 0 A PRHR 3.77E-3 0 0 0 2.64E-2 -3.13 E-3 4.16E-1 0 1.36E-1 ' i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 29 /40
Evaluation ofImpedance Matrix: Enter the sum of resistance values between the branch points of a loop into the row associated with the corresponding loop momentum balance and the column associated with the branch point. Scale, first with the ratio of reference flows squared, and then with the loop resistence of the reference loop. BNL SCALING, Part 5; 30 / 40
a i Interpretation ofImpedance Matrix: l
. ' As the result of scaling, the elements in the row of the reference 1 (main) loop add up to 1.
I
. The II m-group of the Momentum Balance is the ratio of resistance over driving forces in a globalsense.
t
. The Impedance Matrix reflects the ditribution of flow resistances. i 1
f , BNL SCALING, Part 5; 31/ 40 i
Interpretation ofImpedance Matrix (continued): The Impedance Matrix determines how the flows distribute themselves over the interconnected loops, predominantly in the asymptotic approach to steady state. l Together, t1e Inertia and Impedance Matrices determine t:1e eigenvalues of the flow equations and thereby how fast the flow approaches quasi-steady conditions or if the flow is unstable. BNL SCALING, Part 5; 32 / 40
Interpretation ofImpedance Matrix (continued) Only the aggregate resistances which appear in the Impedance Matrix count for scaling the interaction between components and for assessing scaling distortions. The distribution of resistances between branch points is not important (this gives freedom to insert restrictions to meet scaling criteria). BNL SCALING, Part 5; 33 / 40
ROSA SCALING 3:25 PM 2/4/97 W. Wulffo BNL Pf_AP600.WBK LOA-2-ROSA 2 LOOPS: 2 Primary Loops Normet Operation, initial Depressurization Phase 1 INERTIA MATRIX Loop How Rate leaving from on Side through SG Exit of Loops SG Exit of LoopA B cow Leg a Lo % e LOA,, A CoM Log A LOA., LoQ NUMERICAL VALUES of INERTIA MATRIX,1 2 (1/m) Loop Flow Rate leaving from on Side through SG Edt of Loope SG Edt of LeopA B cow Lee a see.3s1 e2.sso A CoM Log A 62.530 See.351 SCALED INERTIA MATRIX,12 Loop Flow Rete leaving from on Side through SG Exit of Loops, SG Exit of Loop., 8 cow Leg B e.sts o.oe4 A Cow Log A o.084 0.91o BNL SCALING, Part 5; 34 / 40 -
.. .. . _ . _ . _ . . . _ _ _ = _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK LOA-4-SPES SPES SCALING 3:26 PM 2/4/97 4 LOOPS: 4 Primefy Loops Normal Operation, Initial Depressuritation Phase 1 , INERTIA MATRIX I Loop Flow Rete leaving from ; on Side ttwough SG Exit of Loop , SG Eult of Loop , SG Exit of Leopa. SG Exit of Loop , i B coM Les 1 Lo%ei LOA. i: LOA.. LOA.. ! B cowtog2 LO A .. . Lo%e. LO A. . loa., A cow Los 1 LOA.. loa., Lo % m loa. , . A cow Leo 2 LOA. . loa., LO A... . . Lo % . l t NUMERICAL VALUES of INERTIA MATRIX, I. (1/mi ! Loop Flow Rete leaving from on Side etwouch SG Exit of Loop SG East of Leop SG Exit of Loop., SG Exit of Loop , B ceM Leg 1 1130s.ee2 1o1e0.313 177s.es7 177s.es7 8 c=M Leg 2 1o180.313 1130s. set 177s.es7 177s.es7 ; A coM Log 1 177s.es7 177s.es7 times.eet lot eo.313 , A CoM Leg 2 1778.857 1778.857 1o180.313 113e0.002 ! SCALED INERTIA MATRIX, l. l Loop Flow Rete leaving from on Side through SG Exit of Loop., SG Exit of Loop., SG Exit of Leopai SG Exit of Loop , ! B ceM Leg 1 0.4s2 o.40s o.o71 o.o71 8 coM Lee 2 o.40s e.452 0.071 0.o71 _ A coM Leg 1 o.071 o.071 0.4s2 o.40s A CoM Log 2 o.o71 o.o71 o.406 0.452 l i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 35 / 40
- - . . . - - _. _ - - . . . . - .. . . - - ... . ~ . ~ . . - - .. ,_ .
W. Wulff, BNL P1 AP600.WBK LOA-4-APEX APEX SCALING 3:25 PM 2/4/97 4 LOOPS: 4 Primary Loops i Norme! Operation INERTIA MATRIX Loop Flow Rete leaving from on SIEe through s0 Edi of Loop.i s0 Edt of Leop., SG Edt of Leopa. SG Ent of Leopa, B coE Leg 1 Lovi loa.,.. . loa., loa.. l B coE Leg 2 LO A. .. . LoQ LO A. . loa.i A CoE Leg 1 loa., LOA., LoQi loa .. . A com Leg 2 LOA. LO A. , LOA .. . Lo % t NUMERICAL VALUES of INERTIA MATRIX, l. (1/m) I Loop Flow Rete leaving from on SiEs through SG EMt of Loopen SG Edt of Loop., SG Edt of Leop., SG Exit of Leop., B com Log 1 14et.s74 ass.4oo as.so7 as. soy B CoE Log 2 393.400 14et.e74 38.807 30.8o7 A cow Log 1 sp.so7 se.so7 14ei.s74 3s3.400
- A cow Leg 2 as.so7 as.so7 3s3.400 14et.s74 i
SCALED INERTIA MATRIX, I. Loop Flow Rete leaving from , on SiEe ttwough SG Exit of Loop. SG Exit of Leop . SG Exit of Leopai SG Exit of Leopar B coE Leg 1 0.74e 0.210 0.021 0.021 ! B coE Leg 2 0.210 e.74e 0.021 0.o21 A coE Leg 1 0.021 0.02 t e.74e o.210 A CoE Leg 2 o.o21 0.o21 o.210 e.74e r BNL SCALING, Part 5; 36 '40 ;
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK LOA-7-APEX APEX SCALING 3:43 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: 4 Primary,2CMT, IPRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 INERTIA MATRIX DEFINITION OF INERTIA MATRIX f Flow Rete leaving from Flow Rete from Loop a a HR a h SwgeWet CMT Branch CMT Branch SG Exit of SG Exit of Break in
*" of Loops, to of Looper, to of loopei, to of Looper, to of Loopa, to Hot leg of ,
ttwough " ' sm CMT, CMTs RPV PRHR I.oopa RPV LOA. LC As.1 i-i, LOAs..i . 0 0 (-LOA.., B caid Lee 1 LOA w i LOA . s LOAsi {-LO A. ,) (-LO A. ,) 0 (-LO A. ,) 0 0 LOA., A CMTa (-LOA ,) LOA m e,, LOAwi LOAa..i s LO A r-i LOAsi t-LOAna nt (-LOAa.i sl t-LO Ar il i A cold t.e 1 LOAsi LO As i LOA., (-LOAa; el (-LOAa, 31 (-LOA, il A Cold L.g 2 LOA,e LOA,i LOAa, , a LOA % LOA,i (-LOA.,) (-LO A. ,) LOA gio , (-LO A. ,) O O LOA., B CMT,8 (-LOA ,i ,) 0 t' LOA. LOA.: Lo^e.>-i . LOA = == 0 0 (-LOA. . B cold Leg 2 LOA .. LOA... . LOA., LOAri LO A ,. ., LOAa,. ., LOA,i LOA., LOA,,,,, , (-LOAa.i 31 (-LOA. ) A PRHM cMT.A 51.A 52.A cMT.8 R.8 Nm 3RL set new mu Is.s , r 4 i t BNL SCALING, Part 5; 37 /40
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.W8K LOA-7-APEX APEX SCAL NG 3:43 PM 2/4/97
' 7 LOOPS: i 4 Primary,2CMT, IPRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 INERTIA MATRIX l t
i NUMERICAL VALUES of INERTIA MATRIX, I,(1/m) Loop Flow Rete leaving from Flow Rete from . i CMT Branch CMT Branch CMT Branch CMT Branch PRHR Branch Surge Line to
"" SG Exit of SG Exit of Brook in ttveuch of Loopes to of looper, to of Loopei, to of Loop 3, to of Loopa, to Hot leg of
^' ^* Loopa '
RPV CMT4 CMT. RPV PRHR B cow Lee 1 1.4et.e7 3ss.es ss.s1 as.s1 ses.so 393.40 0.00 0.000 -3s.s t A CMTa -s.31 2s.ses.te -s.31 -s.31 0.00 -s13.72 o.co c.000 s.31 A ceM Les t as.st 33.50 1.4et.e7 as3.40 33.so as.s t -3s4.ss -12.132 -33.s0 A CeW Lee 2 38.s1 33.50 3s3.40 1.401.e7 33.50 3s.s1 -3s4.se -12.132 -33.so B carr.s -sos.17 o.co -s.31 -s.31 24.s3e.es -s.si o.oo . o.oco s.31 B cow Lee 3 es3.2e es7.ss as.s1 3s.st es7.ss 1.4ot.e7 o.oo o. coo -as.si A mm 3s.s1 33.50 1.047.os 3s.s1 33.50 3s.s t 2e.14e.12 o. coo -3s.s t i BNL SCALING, Part 5; 38 / 40
W. Wulffo BNL . Pf_AP600.WBK LOA-7-APEX APEX SCALING 3:43 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: . 4 Primary,2CMT, IPRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation l Phase 2 , and ; CMT Draining , Phase 3 INERTIA MATRIX ) f i FLOW RATE SCALING FOR INERTIA MATRIX, I, (1/mi ; Loop Flow Rate leaving from Flow Rete from , I l CMT Branch CMT Branch SG Exit of SG Exit of Break in
*" of loopei, to of Loopen, to of Loopa, to Hot Leg of skeuch of Loop , to of loopes, to g !
*W' '
^' ^* '
RPV CMTa CMT. RPV PRHR Loopa B c.W L.e i 350.418 1.737 9.702 9.702 4.485 98.3E0 0.000 0.000 -0.358 . A cur. -1.328 115.730 -1.328 -1.328 0.000 -128.431 0.000 0.000 0.049 , A c.W tes 1 9.702 , 0.150 350.418 98.350 0.168 9.702 -2.955 -0.112 -0.309 A ceW L.e 2 ' 9.702 0.150 98.350 350.418 0.168 9.702 -2.955 -0.112 -0.309 B cur.s -126.293 0.000 -1.328 -1.328 122.731 -1.328 0.000 0.000 0.049 B c.W Lee 2 223.315 3.973 9.702 9.702 4.443 350.418 0.000 0.000 -0.358 A PRHR 9.702 0.150 261.770 9.702 0.168 9.702 217.835 0.000 -0.358 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 39 / 40 i
W. Wulff, BNL PI_AP600.WBK LOA-7-APEX APEX SCALING 3:43 PM 2/4/97 7 LOOPS: 4 Primary,2CMT,1PRHR CMT/PRHR Recirculation Phase 2 and CMT Draining Phase 3 INERTIA MATRIX SCALED INERTIA MATRIX, I, (-l: (scaled with Loop., as reference) j Q.g
. tc Loop Flow Rete leaving from Flow Rete from CMT Branch CMT Branch * * * '" SG Exit of SG Exit of Break in ttrough of Loops to of looper, to of LooPet, to of loops 2, to of Loopa, to Hot Leg of g sWe ^' ^8 RPV CMTa CMT. RPV PRHR Loopa B cow Leg 1 0.739 0.004 0.020 0.020 0.009 0.207 0.000 0 -7.55E-4 A cMT. -0.003 0.244 -0.003 -0.003 0.000 -0.271 0.000 0 1.03E-4 A ceW Leg i O.020 0.000 0.739 0.207 0.000 0.020 -0.006 -2.36E-4 -6.52E-4 A CoM Leg 2 0.020 0.000 0.207 0.739 0.000 0.020 -0.006 -2.36E-4 -6.52E-4 8 cur.s -0.266 0.000 -0.003 -0.003 0.259 -0.003 0.000 0 1.03E-4 8 CeW Leg 2 0.471 0.008 0.020 0.020 0.009 0.739 0.000 0 -7.55E-4 A PRHR 0.020 0.000 0.552 0.020 0.000 0.020 0.460 0.00E + 0 -7.55E-4 BNL SCALING, Part 5; 4C.*40
- 6.
SUMMARY
41 OF 84 PHENOMENA EVALUATED FOR PHASES 1 TO 3 ARE IMPORTANT (II/IImu 2 0.1). . ALL IMPORTANT PHENOMENA ARE SCALED WITHOUT DISTORTIONS (%,2)IN AT LEAST ONE TEST FACILITY, EXCEPT IN ONE SUBPHASE THE THERMAL ~ RESPONSE OF FLUID IN CMT TANKS AND PRHR POWER. BNL SCALING, Part 6 1/4
- 6.
SUMMARY
(CONTINUED)
=
APEX (OSU) has 18 Groups distorted due to: low-pressure operation, i low PRHR flow rate 1 low CMT flow rate and low CMT wall heat transfer t low friction in the primary loop low heat transfer in SG/UHD j i BNL SCALING, Part 6 2 / 4
~
- 6.
SUMMARY
(CONTINUED) : ROSA has 11 Groups distorted due four common phenomena I low SG heat transfer ( SG sized for 16% of Full Power) i low PRHR heat transfer low CMT wall heat transfer low primary side inertia ( 7% of AP600) ,
~
t BNL SCALING, Part 6 3 /4 s k ~ .
- 5.
SUMMARY
(CONTINUED) ' ~ SPES has 4 Groups distorted due three phenomena large stored-energy release from RPV . low CMT wall heat transfer low PRHR flow BNL SCALING, Part 6 4 / 4
/\
l t Main Topics
- 1. Objectives of the Study Top-Down Scaling Stud.ies 2. ,,, ,,,,oac, Related to AP600 Facilities 3. Phases of the SBLOCA
- 4. The ADS-4 discharge phase (PIRT Priority: high)
- Goveming equations
- Reference parameters
- Validation of scaling results D. L Reeder - Intercomparison of facilities Sanjoy Banerjee 5. The IRWST Injection phase (PIRT Priottty: high)
- Goveming equations
- Reference parameters j ACRS Thermal-Hydraulics validation of scaling results Subcommittee Meeting _ intercomparison of taciiities Los Angeles, CA 6. The Intermediate phase (PIRT priority: medium)
- 7. Earfy deptessurIzation (PIRT priority: low) i~&bruary 12-14,1997
- 8. Summary of findings gg a '~M
6I Objectives of Study The Approach
- 1. To derive the mein nondimenolonel groups that Step 1. DEFINE THE PHASES OF THE TRANSIENT govern almilitude between facilities with regard to the Phases refers to periode when efferent sy_ n come key eyetem response (s) e.g., reactor vessel mass into play, e.g., when ADS.4 opene,IRWST eterte, etc.
"I' Step 2. IDENTIFY THE IMPORTANT COMPONENTS AND
- 2. To verify that these nondimenolonel groupe do scale SUBSYSTEMS INVOLVED IN A PARTICULAR PHASE reeutte between verlous experimental facilities of For exemple,for the ADS.4 docherge phase, before IRWST M erent s h starte to inject, the CatTo are 20% full at the beginning, and re must be coneh
- 3. To determine whether the mapnitude of the nondimenolonel groupe obtelneble in the verlous Step 3. DEFINE THE INTERCONNECTIONS BETWEEN feellities encompose the AP900 values, and hence, COMPONENTS AND DERIVE THE CONSERVATION clarify the applicability of the experimental date to EQUATIONS INTEGRATED OVER EACH COMPONENT assessmente et AP600 scale. AND EACH INTERCONNECTION. DEFINE THE
- CLOSURE" RELATIONSHIPS REQUtRED.
Step 4. NON-DIMENSIONALIZE THE EQUATIONS Step 5. SELECT REFERENCE SCALES FOR EACH EQUATION SO DEPEADENT VARIABLES AND THEIR
- 1. Consideration of Inter,.onnections between componente DERIVAhVES, EXCEPT FOR THE SYSTEM RESPONSE Feeds to nondimenolonel groupe that involve OFINTEREST, ARE-O[1]
parameters from more then one component " cross" Step 6. F!ND THE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE OF EACH N'b NONDIMENSIONAL COEFFICIENT IN AN EQUATION
- 2. Determinetton of the relativeImportance of the groupe AND DISCARD THE TERMS THAT ARE (RELATIVELY) with regard to the key system response (shows that the SMALL mejority of groupe play a secondary role, the system Step T. VALIDATE. TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, EACH
[eeponse being governed by a ilmited number of StMPLIFIED EQUATION AGAINST EXPERIMENTAL cme" groups). DATA FROM FACILITIES OF VARIOUS SCALES
- 3. b .edation by comperleon of predletions with Step 8. COMPARE THE MAGNITUDES OF THE REMAINING esperimental date (ver!fication that the important groups (IMPORTANT) NONDIMENSIONAL GROUPS BETWEEN do Indeed scale results between the verlous facilities). FAC1LITIES AND WITH AP600. CLARIFY WHETHER THE RANGE OF NONDIMENSIONAL GROUPS FOR THE FACfLITIES ENCOMPASSES THOSE FOR THE AP600. HENCE, ELUCIDATE THE APPUCAB ITY OF '
N THE DATA TO AP600. 8C IT 4 k
SBLOCA Pressure and Invento W Step 1: Define the phases of a transient One-inch CLB Transient Phases HosA APG-es Pressure ] Fwat IfGL Phases itNL Phases Coenements Itealt S ecookd ikpresswvaten Depressurusten Phase, Subphase Phase beges Ibeams Screen agraal ikpresswuntem Scram, Phase, Sephase P = 112 bar 2 beams S-egnal Inscrenatete Passwe skat 5 sewt, Phase, Passive Resnomal Phase, P = B23 bar Coolmsg Phase, Subphase I/ Port Subphase I I beges benes Sti prmirty suie Intermedmee sasse med Phase, Passive Caobg Phase, Subphase 2 e == n na n n . r ... besta Ts M P - P,... , Passwe llem m nosA AP-ctes eyeteen sa4 so eed menee Reeruwsl Phase.
-.. Subphase t/Part 2 benes
_MX inyctann laternmfate Passwe llem M Y: ep tum, Phase, Passewe Removal Phase, P
- 4R 2 bar Coolsig Phase, Subphase 2 Sahphase I began beges M >s- i,-2, Mis sm..a n cu r k.ca a Phase, 6W.
NDS t,-2 3 l Phase teams MDS 4 M)S filowdown M)S fibwdown (MT level at Phase beges Phase, ADS-4 20*(. Phase beges IRWST inyttion IRWST Phase IRWSTISLNP P,...,- beges Inyrcise Phee t y*pog,
'" P nwen wu Thnwel Note: OSU facMtty not deelgned for early depressurtr"_- _ _ E"M " NW
. .: 1L -
i k f
*ma====mm w ADS-4 Discharge Phase ADS-4 Discharge Phase (Cont'd) t Step 2: Importent componefit identification Step 4: Nondimensionellred equations (ADS-4) t 8 mus: dV,- dL, .
4 v - -- - ri,., In,. qw - m. .m1 ; dt, dt { cut .nm: dirwr =-n., m qwr ! a u, e . !
,g ,N E. L 3 dl T
Nh e-U 2M EIII7I'- Uss ~SY! Pressure de Sypeusgj., H, , T syya,e gJ., M ,,,,,- g- I - n,m Co where l * = l *yfor t ,21
- i !
NTI "N cm.,, Py.Tb F%
*I.m "'I l.v<Io. ve !
n o, m en o.u i , &. d(Trwr - Ti ,) l i l
- l LP mi%: . . g}, ,pgy, gymr- T )'g Tmr -constaru ;
1 4884 vues ses a
~
6 1 lO dt [ AYCMT, a SY e t p I 3] s l rnsT ; I 4dI- ""- 'lL.- where sV " V,;I " toily * (V a/Ael;8Ns a " m.
+
1 ova 8r 4 ,,, ,,,(,,,, . Qwr . Irur . AY T
.-=d .d===
=*== Qur = Qwr.e;trur = i<wr.o; AY = AYrur,o, Q'*=== . (Trwr - T,) i ,
(Tcut -T,,) = ; l t Note- All parameters with subscript 0 require specirstation as references, t i r.e. 7 r.e. - I i
?
[
M w ADS-4 Discharge Phase (Cont'd) ADS-4 Discharge Phase (Cont'd) Step 4: Nondimensionalized equations (ADS-4)(Cont *d) Step 5: Selection of reference parameters (ADS-4) PhysicalInterpretation: .
- m. = m
..(n _.) based on IIEM(n..), assume constant to- time scale related to vessel residence time ,4 -Qs,c,(T, -T,)
GAY , t. PiOmrh e n, _, = - Measure of rate of change of now Rough estimates for x = 0.3 (ROSA),0.3 (SPES), ~0+ (OSU) Omr.LIAic rate due to gravitational effects 3 1 V, p, where Veis volume in vessel to bonom of heated length g . Omt '.Rcm - Meawre of rate of change of now " 4 L/ A)cm rate due to frictional effects in
's AYorr.e'
- b. e = , with AYm , being the difference n,_, . $n'A - Vessel nondimensialal b8 p V. residence time between 20% full CMT and DVI line D%= Omt .'. - Ratio of vessel residence time Other reference parameters are geometric in nature and consist V,.. to lower plenum mixing time ofiniiial vahrs at start of ADS-4 disci wge,e g , torr.o =
20% CMT tevel. rg" "' ,, Ocm..'. - Ratio of vessel and CMT residence times Denning Qm,as a ve es nam = H,w Acm.tm. C"" !*" CMT line equation
, 3 vn 0% = [n,.tb - n,,1* + AY'f
II = m,Rb 8 '"' - CMT now to ADS-4 How cm, ,
~
Y' ' ' II, = - Vessellevel to CMTline head , 4 g ,g. g g. [ A.AYm,.. H tm. - CMT level to CMT line head is " gycm. d *' Ie 6 ***-
m usammuseman ADS-4 Discharge Phase (Cont'd) ADS-4 Discharge Phase (Cont'd) ADS outflow (rho) reference check (Step 5) Parasseter RUSA S r t.5 05U AF605 sh (kg/s)' l.8 0.21 (ADS-l.-2.-3) 0.75 58 A P-CI,-03 IA 'I 1 " to 261 averaged t I .86) [0761
--e-- IIEM ('P, m 10.3)' ' '
,l"
--G t.(s)' 830 725(ADS I,-2 -3) 520 1870 E8 - Vapor criskaldirherge(p"'472 m/s),0 >
290(ADS-l - 4)
-+-C ,(ROSA dare) ,./ Orwr., (m'/sl
-*,e" I.2 E-3 1.3 E-4 7 E-4 3.3 E-2 5
^ * ~
g
.* Vessel Mass
-o
~
__Qu__ _ _ Lo_ _ _ ___it___ __P__ _ _ Lt _ . ' s Ilm 06 0.58 0 86 0.55 g- 04 -
, e',, -
0 23 [ -' v' CMT mass I O.2 - Utscur 1.32 1.9 2. I 2 13
/
ADS 4 blowdown a76 0i~' ' ' . CMI hac
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -04 -0.2 0 O ', 2I 2.8 2.2 1.85 l' = (t - tu.a) I te Um 0 29 0.35 0 33 0 35 LP mixing Hew { 28 2.R2 5.7 3.5 l 1.11 i Parameters are determined >ssed on IIEM for AD.i-4.
tt Bracketed values are fits to emperiments. t, defined by emptying lime of vessel lo bottom of heated length,i.e. by setting II,.y = 1.0. I p A3f&" 5 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .-_-.m_ __.m_..____m_._a._u.-,..-_._a_.._m_m... - _m.s. m_
[ ; .
; fLf[ jt L ll , , 9 1 l' ! *
- ! -' I m n t
n + 4 m) .a e ) 1 _ md m Q i W (n s n a ,
' 2
, P e
g a .
't s r v . _
t bI, m n i - g _ H I iw N ;i< n _ m + _ mo -
= d Ng 0
)
+
)
le mC u( ( , lm m.d ge , *t s N r. g . e d n I Q
" t px t
e i d h a 2 "* e c e n s
- c "
" 0
)
"' x e e, s e a
3 3 ( h C r a 'va '* '6
"'* 1 (
h a s 4
- A + 0 + =, ES P .m a S
D
+ , ,
+
2
)
't
]
P
.Sn _
e g
.r r
A Nq f , : f I H,,
- i
*n r w in nU ,n t
n ) i y hr S: de. I( o 0 f l n - F .m a f la t n t r i t u (
, m ia )
0 P S m h a O Q ( 1n m bQa _ u , C l o H, A c l I a s n, S L Q. a ae s - 0 ( O U ar W :n t { i n S
= R n. Ow D .,7d t
d e I
- t eg
)
0(
=
^t
,, o t
[
= of b 4 r s t 4- =
s T e
- I e ie )
0 es otu _
.,* t V
D A w v V. r lp ( lp ne n e lV S d d o ) h w A p ph A w D * ** C 't ( lV A V
)
t I) I d e 3
) s u _ _
0 1 e d e t la ) e
't ,
c h4 P _ y s _ n
- Q o
gDt tt ss t i 1 0 o t af m O(A
-A
_ C ( l I
= =
1 a Pmmulei a 2 o s 0 Auoe e , t - t 5s s e
)
bH A u s 4- s 3Ftu ope s s_ 3 d a SD e r d n fSso t a 4 *t b e _ h A h e a d d P ( s 1 w 0nox 4
- lu o
0 *t e g n o e c 4_ s n - d o d c n en i
*A m r t a *n n g 5. j e
_ i e a qut e - , g 0- - ht g h e b s n c s f o sa n s bI v o D 6 0-dir ai wra n i D i om ,- od t r a e U* ne l t 7 _ 4- d s s 8c) 0- ioizr t i a u S Va Ve,V,7 l
) f is
_ d _ _ o h' 8 vs e e Dp r _ D : 1 o 1, 2 4 5 6 7 8 - i 0 A 7 0 0 0 40 0 0 t S p e
, %o 0 ^, O*.>
n - 3 : IRWST Injection Phase a f
.c '
O. -
.-- - - - Step 2: Important component identification g ,
j
^
$ 2 I-
,.E ,
,i, a - - . :"_'i' " " '
O " ,o . g E~ i
~-
g ' ist II . - 1 m
* .; 1 j t sawsr T b.
+'
, PI T i I?!!*I ,sE- 4 'y -
g ., ,s / : , As (! M o Ena r" j y<'1 j / Pr**=r* NT2 gyp g ye, NTI Q h ,3
. N,,,,,,,
v s - I . l - 7\
~. r, ja a
C* E'8 k 6 y , j IRWST CdL4 "
! g ?.y i.
~
O ! % "" -
'-'d, ^5" --
-: , I .N
-e o.' ' '**
l pt - u i 7= 9 E.> ,, -
>1 C y _
y'-- .E
- g ". h. q 1
"" 8's
_h'4_ t l ' i _ _matMerI
" g twL' I
- C e .::..
1 =T T} r i tv dv.% . . -m.[d""" _C 3 . i g lw *="d
- o 2 $ T g M / I(e) ',A - ( n) ',Al
-~ ~- ,,1 rte I
r I i
[ , m m d
)
d P: _ m 't a . m) m no "N h e e lo w r e m 'd C( h ln i f mt M T a
=C W nT oS
)
hd m u t r P S W R I t o e r u s s e n
, f.
e r R to e a o ( e sn I ( wW s. n a t e s s e t r p n e mdn
't in g
x n t w o s a o it . m i v n hs eh i m d h a e I V m D h u aq d c - n u e P n d e d'f ds s e h i a o o e f an c a o S o W l T i ne n lp r e gS
.W i
l T n f w o e s n e : e 8 a it a R o w R e n i ol rn o v F r r I l I s t le ti - - - - - , - c no a g _
- j ei s e t r
n ne pr y o e
- e. se.
I e g = e T imt t , l e. Y , m d n = b V, * . e ,,
- e 4e e. n ^r S I Y e
( - S n l t s p Y 8 a. V e. o ac
- u WN i s
w n I "P d e h QV ip Ps _ y a, = s , = R : y 4 h - 8 1 n, e 2
, n I
p P U' H n g y U t e _ S _
)
s
),
6 -
.e s g 1
1 a s . mP d n i
) n
't U
- m e
tr
;P. ) , s e
n e r e _ n . . T, l f
" e _
. T) 1, )
*P e
ha c dn Q j = - E d a r s , oS Q a, h se
- g
- m ;=Ta(i3 o a ,
C WR
- _ b n ,
er Y. ( (ut s ( l n 2 iw a t . io , ( I l , a r e r t P s & t a ( *t ts
)=g ,rc e s A I,
- 1 f
3 d n I, o 1 ofr ec h ( o c n + c. * ,i c s n + c
. m , =,
s ., - - T
- 4p e 3 u *= y a iot ,
) [a Q I I
=
,s
'R e h a u ,
A, I, ds P, I = " T. T n *u A; N, .t P q, _ 1 [ 3 h n *I g _ 4 (I NT (T. e e e n , t rni e e wr .) +8 = Y 4 0 r nd ,
- lgs e = I e o
t - e 1 h n + Q. p r?. [ YA rn w a a , a k" =- y r i t c ne l t l d d e
=
_ ( [
=,
T, a i a 4 s P = p.Aa L r w y
- a ir
*b u y* s e i o* V, . o j sd d n ne t
( . 5 1 *, P
, I. =
.=
Y *s t ht iw I T imd s o o i n a n ec a a n e
=
- t. p,A Pg Y
e s s r n S no e m u g t la
=
=P'praa WN s r : = . =
e e e . g a e r p ; .v t s r in e s *V m P P N m t n e t A R l
- s u r l T ix a n e 4 e e w s I e n S a s e e p e e W im n g 11 e v r
e t e e r R P a h o t V P I L A w N S
n , IRWST Injection Phase (Cont'd) IRWST Injection Phase (Cont'd) Step 5: Selection of reference parameters (IRWST) t a r4 = p,0 - A .(m .), ensume constan ADS outflow (d10 ) reference check (Step 5) Q, evalassed essaming the vessel level is at the hot les -
"~* . 4' 'O*AY -T,) gogg ap_cy,g3 1.4 , .,. ... .,. .,. .,.
p,QA . + teu r, n = e n sans-e(Imas- ) based on HEM (s .) 1.2 ' --o - leM r. n = e3)
- - e . v.p..eka a.a.m.(p,*cw h - For n = 0.3 OtOSAL 0.2 (SPES),=0M (OSU) . g ,, p , , ,
- to " *here V, is the vohane in vessel u bouem of W length ^
. 0.8 -
,a O .
/
h as
-gy,(, en p #j,,
* %i, e " wMiYg e te distance framsheinkielIRWST [ o.4 -
g Rea, , , water lewi to the DVInozzle 0.2 -
% = 1878 s ,
ROSA dets (5100 s to 6000 s)IRWST phase : o M *'"' - ^ ' '- -
- Inisial presswe, Pe. is answned to be etmenmment pressure (= one memosphere) plus initial RWST head o o2 o4g o.s o.s i i2 s.4 ;
i = (t - t,y / t, Other reference parameters are geometric
?
O d% g . . - Page 19 Peteh l s
i h === == nee 8 m . IRWST Injection Phase (Cont'd) IRWST injection Phase (Cont'd) Step 6: Order of magnitude of parameters (NT) Step 7: Validation of equations (IRWST)
- 1. Vesselmass belance Parenweer AOSA SPES OSU APett .
dVi %. .. .. site (kg/s) ' * * ~*~" ' 1.36 0.15 0.58 79.4 a m ,
- t. (s)" 1178 104I 680 570 Qg,(m'/s) 4.6 E-03 3.6 E-04 1.5 E 03 1.2 E-1 vemen ums ,,, .,_ ,
_Il"T1,, av_ _ _ _' S _ _ . . _ _83_ _ _ __8-1__ _ _ _83_ _ . C' y . , u,,, , , PZR mass 3.2 2.3 2.5 i .5
; g :
' ~
* ~
_ _H" r_ _ ___3.__.. _ _*2_ _ _ _ _ _*1_ _ . $ - __ 0 36'. _s 0.27 __ Un 0.4 0.3 --- . l DVI ime , _ _ H_ i,___ _ _ _0._7 3_ _ .. _ _1_.02_ _ __ _0_.9_3_ _ _ _ _0._92_ _ . .$
> o.s - -
H,. 0.37 i.: 4.2 i.i . p O sultA APO.01 l LP mixmg C o spia ser,i U,e
*
- 08" 8 "
15 11.4 16 9.3 > . t Q (assumag vessellevet at het leg). Etiht for ADS-4 Oi us- - - ' --- it Vohene used is vessel volume above the henaea length. O 0.5 1 1.5
, I ma.e ,4t . I ma. ', ai s
I
. , , m M1 rage 22
- - - - - - - - _ . - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - _ _ - - _ _ - - - - - - - - _ _ - - _ _ _ - _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____-_s
i
-^
w ! i IRWST Injection Phase (Cont'd) L Solution for short times after start of IRWST Injection, {E . Lo. t* - t*(fRWST start) -+ 0 -
'{ -
vl(f)-vl(o). jn, no n,,6;,- n,h' c"'- (*;,,-e; )c 2 jj Em: Vl(i)-Vi(0) = 1.40 * *'- e.74 i sta: vf()-vito)-3.soi**-i.32i Correct only when L, y
$ '[ .
i 1 E }tt
- m: v*(i)- v,'(o) = 1.13 * - e st e
* { gg lJj i <2 ii A*m h 4 mx A;.w.s .i %.r c.,
AP, = neisini possese- ======ra ==le (OSU and SPl!5)
= Inisisi press == - 1.s + somespeurle (csisted ROSA) w+i ,o
$g) ] i 1 ,
C y ~ II. Solution for )DDg times (asymptotic) after start of IRWST ~ j
& 1
~
Vl(-+1=se)-vl()=[Vi(Israe)-vl(0)]e=r[-n n,,cco;(-))] r/) RM: Idf-+ large) heed g3i a i
' lleguld E ll; g*
V*(s')= 0.70- 0.43 0.72-enp(-l.17 /l 0.26 M emp(-1.16il } esi M$ sEM: V[(i)= .
~
~
hot d
~
M: V[(t')= 0.70 - 0.20 espl-l.16 [I beg 4 / A'
?
Pressurizer assumed empty at t'-+ 1 erg
- M E %./*
- e.
O "
's E ~
h
- ~
2- . .
; 6
- o ; o ; o
*A f *A a (3) *, A p 7 " em
&% o p ' W
SPES IRWST Injection Phase , 0.7 g 04 _ s ".. . +4
. i.
, . 05 - w s. - i - t- o I 8 0.4 - N./*. 'l --o-- sns o l
, ::::R::;c=/
02 0 03 1 13 Page 25 i l l l
- OSU IRWST injection Phase -
1 . 02 , , 0.7s - a V __ , . ... y. ;.----. A
,. Oss p-
,...- \ sul.ses
.f.--
, 0, . -
e
*~
t > Oss - - Os ,- -
,/
-.....,o.,
...om >
.. . n
- gg s
-'u % u, 0.<s -
i- o OA 0 03 1 13 2 23 3 a Page 34 n 4
i t ip Intermediate PhaEJ Intermediate SubphaSe I Equations [ ! 4 1 1 1 : Start: Pressurizer Empty (S Signal) i Control Volume: Entire PCS ' ! t End: ADS-4 Vefwe Open (CMT Level 20%) No inflows, Break i Divided into 3 Sao-F.;n; i SQmi Mass Balance: Start: Pressurizer EW dM'
= t j ,*
(S Signal) dt f End: Hot leg, SG, UH saturation ' SubphaseN Depressurization Rate: End: Net inflows from ACC/CMT dP' . I
-- = -T,C. .ia.m (h. - u,).+ T,c" (q,.- nmq ,)
Subphase m
- 7 r
gg, g +T Q*rh*,. End: ADS-4 Valve Open ; < (CMT Level 20%) , l ! i t rose 27 rate 28 t I b i
~
=mmunesse, summmaeman.
Subphase I Nondimensional Groups Subphase I Facility Comparison o.oe %, ws,.e j ri,y,ic.i
#
- N* I'"'*"' O Facility 7, T3 T,, te(s)
** C,1,(h, - o,),s,t, R.d.o subcooled iu of AP600 3.65 E-4 -0.04 -0.031 58 ,
P, (h4), so the reference ROSA 2.0$E-4 -0.02 -0.0I 7 27 pressee SPES 5.82E-4 -0.14 -0.099 78 Te C, ,gg,t, R*'io of ressure P change. due to change bi specific
-0.06*
P. energy of the subcooled field from heat transfer, to the reference presswe te = M / the makingT s = 1 i Tm C2.oy i.es,te Ratio of presswe change, due to clunge be specific P. ennene of the subceoled a. T for 3 SPES varies between - 0.14 assuming , rent. io reference presswe no heat losses to - 0.06 assuming losses y,, ,;,',' Ratio of kregrated mass ibw to reference sness , Me I C pg',v,itaPfa.'k' *"k '", ( I . C* = (P.V.)/(dP/dy,(
,,,,, Jr.ees
.. m.
e
m - Intermediate Subphase II Equations Subphase il Nondimensional Groups No innows, sreek outflow Dens,onkss A p ar Physral Coerfrievil Dewrprinn Interpre eerion Yi "*'" Presswe change, Cu.ekh -II).!"e e due to WooW oath d e l P. (b-e), to the refaence presswe
?> ct A.'. ""*'"*"""re'-
8 Mass Balance: due to change si speci P, gg g, gg reu from hem aansrer,i. dM. .. dt T,, c, ,,t,mi,v,
**"'"',8""'"'
Ratio of pro we change, due to thanee si specirr P. % ,g gy ,gg rrM, to referesse rressure
'" n . U, erd '."."ss*
Depressurization Rate: $j',2 dP* 7 * -T C[,m*w(h, r - u,)'
+v,c;,(9 - n,,,,,q;,,,,)
+v,,c;*W #"I#"k ##"I#l c,,=E.p.v./(dP/av.(,
I C* = (p,V,)/(dP/dy,(
- JM #- m eer
t
- m Subphase 11 Facility Comparison Interrr ediate Subphase ill Equations l Facihty Y, Control Volume: Entire PCS T, Y,, te(s)
L AP600 9.37E-4 0.11 -0.20 3050 ACC and CMTinflows , ROSA 9.3 I E-4 0.12 -0.20 3400 Break, ADS-1,-2,-3 Outflows SPES 9.36E-4 0.53 -0.20 2615 , OSU ?.98E-5 -0.09 2700 88 Balm:
=P n (II s + IIcm -II rh - rh* ...., ,)
OSU va' ues lower because partial derivatives of
- pressure are different due to the lower pressures Depressurization Rate:
= T,C[,film m,(h -u,)'+Ilcm'h 1(h - u,)*l
-T:C[,II ,rh;,,,( u,[ + T,C* ,(q',,, - II,,,,,q;,,,,)
-T,C*,th;m(h, t - u,[ + T.C[ (q'. - II,,,,,q l,,,,)
+T C;vi[-II,m -IIc ,rh , + TI rh l ie l
+T,,c;v,rn;,,, <,.., l t
t I
t w ==mmmmmmmmme - Subphase ill Nondimensional Groups Subphase ill Facility Comparison ! Dunenssonhns AWest Physstel , Caeffick Descrgerion Interpressiian Y, c.,,,h,_(h, - a,),t, R*s" *f P rma chage, ; due to cleange si speciflic P, g g,, g reu sem en hthms i. FacEity To T: T3 T, ; the refersace seuss= AP600 0.04 6.8E-4 0.04 2.6E-2 I
- v. C 1,%(h, - a,),t, """,d P'**M , ROSA 0.05 9.7E-4 0.06 1.3E-3 P. (h-a) to the rderence SPES 0.06 10.7E-4 0.30 3.4E-4 s'"*" OSU 0.02 1.4E-4 0.05 1.9E-4
- v. C ,,.,q,t, R*'i' d Presse e% ;
due to etmige h specific L P. ene,gyge i,c ang t reis nom heme transfer, h, Facaity T. Tei T, te(s) [ she s=fersace preeme AP600 0.24 -0.077 -I1.0 275 , C...aw (h. - =.),4 Ys [# ,P d rma , ROSA 0.24 -0.094 -17.5 249 P. (h-e) to the rderene, SPES 1.56 -0.113 -14.7 316 s==* OSU l.91 -0.074 -6.13 458 l T. C,1,4,t, R*'b ef emwe P change, due to change to specific Pe energy dthe h rru froom heme semisfer, to the [ refereme presseee ! Y., C,,vg,ria. wt , ""m *f resswe P change. l due to change h specNic P, ,,,ausine of she besiehd rsett to reference prumoure ' Tin C,,v .siem. t R" ofre m weefunge, j due to change b speeWie i P. vehene of the sansrated ? rett to refsence senseure , T. , rh Rano of meegrased mess !
.t. fbe se reference men w A5 d*- hPulsed6 r
i
i
)
- aummmmmmmmmum ;
Model and Nitrogen Effects Validation of Intermediate Phase Two-nehi modevemi s.bph.se ,,, Prediction r., , ,, ,, , v. v. , Predc&m: Nondnwnsnelled prumns t APSD $ 7.31E7 61EA 08 5 04 -3 tees -3 21 N > IlOSA 65556 94fE7 73FA 1955 0.5 -455 -4 00 d NN E SPES tesE6 9.24L7 4 2EL3 9.22ELS 2.$ -31253 -3 93 osu neEs 2.2s7 8.E4 112Es is -e s7Es -s se t.2 e g ROSA Cl 8 l 3 ROSA PBLB TIsree-Fleid Moderese I rl/_:_x lII '
--~---'~!
i g E f ""~ a gy [ Factly Ye Y Y, Y,
- i o 2, s m..
, ,, i e 94f-Can
- I..,_._,....
AP600 2.37E-7 3.l8E-8 2.7E-5 2.06E-7 E $ osuEt
$ C ROSA l.658-7 2.388-8 8.9E-5 1.12E-7 a osuIAos SPES 2.528-7 2.906-8 I .3 F-4 1.52E-7 h, c e y -- - --
osu m g OSU 8.168-7 5.51B-8 2.2B-5 0 72E-8 6g ! g Areco Pete
. . j . . .. .4_ A APeaC LAOS FacGry T. Y. Y,i 0* ,
i v APeooovis AP600 0.02 -l .5 l E-6 -0.83 .0-l ROSA 0.01 -103E 6 -0.30 c.2 -- +- - -- P - SPES 0,08 - 1.61 E-6 -0.82 ! OSU 0 04 - 1.19E-6 -0. l 5
, mam I
- Numerical values change, but effect on ordering o of o. ee oe between magnitudes of groups is senali. Effect on (I-a) i ordering of doeninent group niagnitudes between [
faciliths is swielt. Nitrogen FEects: If seltrogen replares steem in j Three-fleid needel, C,3 and C2 do not change. So , no ! significant effect. 6
*' PageN Pete 30 ,
f
+
_ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __z.__. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
5 i l Early Depressurization (Cont'd) Early Depressurization (Cont'd) Step 3: Governing equations and closure definitions I Step 2: klontify important components "
. Governing equatione are mese and energy belance Integrated over preneurtrer assuming HEM and neglecting gravity head (reasonable et high ;
he pressure) for control volume 1 lserw.=4
%,g%nquid and see => + Heat input = heet output in control volume 2. Le. no 9act g expenelon or shrinkoge ;
seen =d
-~ '#
- Closure relettonehlp needed for break outflow liquid (subcooled supplied as Henry-Feuske relettonehlp)
%m j
"'Pd) Step 4: Nondimensionalize equations (Note: no l :
Inflow into pressurizer) ! Ilest removal l (me== eeaerma ! d* 1
= $,[s'(h,,-(p, + xp,,))* dp ,
i i - - pri r,.y I ne (a e) *a*g ! comenives n. l +$,[sii.(v, + xv,,). -- I L________, % EM.M ; Sh i
-$,[mL(h, + xh,, -(p, + xp,,))
-*.EmL(v, + xv,,) + *,qL dr . ,* K - *L)_ 0-c) dPd'P dt (p;-p*) (p;-p,*)dp' dt' rose 39 rare 48 f
i i 4 i i
M Early Depressurization (Cont'd) Early Depressurization (Cont'd) l Where all estedeked verlebles are made dimenoloniese by dlwiding by a reference Step 5: Reference scale selection (b,. . p) - rd-aice ==ha of hht fW8 9r -'#"'"'""'""8' h.i .kdet Equid authalpy v, .sewstedlignid specree voksme I kitennelenergy hr -sueurstedligned enthalpy v, . sewatal nyer specific wihune (h - p). - reference vahse of Nid t. - reference time ; bg . lutait heat of vaporteetion vg .spedlic voluene chanF as phase chemy enthshy minus specTc i L -level n .semic qualiay 6sternet emergy [ A - bde ness flow rate . p .spedfic intenalamery 4 . Weist criaitsi discharge rate pm . reference valse of p, - pr 6 4, . outlet sness flow rate from the break
- pr . satwated Equid specific beternal energy g . rgewie, suses g . rdaevice specific drne p . presswe y, - sewated vapor spedfic internal enery - refeence presswe ps w h - "I'"" "" "I 's
- D I
% .ne energy addition pg, . p, . p, t . time p, . saturated liquid desmity Select t, as the emptying time for the pressurizer v - specific voinne p, .seweed near density (then t,,,,,It,- 1.0 for this phegof transient)
$, = =$to" m, Phyelcol :..;.i,,, _^^"{.. M o Step 6: Orders of magnitude for nondimensionel
, ,, t sin,(h,-p),3p o Plessu e change due to net energy added groups p,M, ap ,, , by inflow to neference pressee [
Grou p AP600 ROSA SPES
,*
- t,rh,v, %d Presswe change due to e " -_k Is *
- p,M, ,, ap , " inflow to seference pressure e, 0.062 0.062 0.062 t sh,(b-p), ap Pressure change due to net energy rernoved e, 0.41 0.41 0.41 p,M, 3p , " by outflow to refesence presswe e, 0.04 0.04 0.04
,' , t,th,v, %g Pressure change due to volumetric outflow e, 1.0 1.0 1.0 P.M. v u, ap , , to sefesence Pressee e,te, 6.7 6.7 6.7 '
,' , J.n i in_h , Presswa change due to net heat added to p,M, Jp 'eference pressuse e,te, 10.34 10.44 10.4 e, . 'di Note: $ = 1 by definit.on to allow calculation of to, j
= Nondinnensional transit tirne M. $, >> $p $s !
p,y 4, Laeedt . I t i
t t Early Depressurization (Cont'd) ' Step 7: Validate simplified equations Summary w N
- and
- ere the onor ereneene nonernenosons gn,upe and 1. A topdown scanng opproech hoe been proposed that mielnnies .,_._:,.. mie propermee are wie es,,,e, men wie
. includes interactions between components , and focuses coupeed squemene for at im and d, im must have soeveens on the nonemenelonel groupe that moet effect key 1 a 1 *(t) system responee(s) e.g. ww el mass inventory
. P's P'(t) ;
eauadas 'a' e t 9 eea*=at
- w* heist cocherse raw e ,,,,,,,,,,,
,, 7,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,g Prwourim pres pogg eq(l,V9ttornDetIDW1 parameters, involved in nondimenolonetization of the
-- * - ama i mne... . m. conservation gz:a overaged over component-level volumes,in order to obteln nondimensionoured 1
_ " ' $m$:..wi
$(' ..$.s,$*,' dependent verlebles, and their derivatives, of O[1]. This y
' * ' "S ***"* % - '8 8 then ellows e dominent belance (order of magnitude) t
. N ". 1 , onelyele that clerlHee the relative importance of the yF 8 verlous nondimenolonel groups that erlee.
0.9 - D.- 7- .- ; s . . t 0.6 ' 3. Engineered Safety Features are a mejor influence on the l a 0.8 - Iin n si.2se.cie.
.: PCS Inventory et initletion of ADS-4, Flow from ADS-1,- i e 2 in ovi. and 4 in Dvs '+. e 2,-3 (and to some entent CMTe and occumulators) is the >
a doubleendnes enknineb.esh .
> - 04.a _ dominent mechanism.
= ""^'""^t***
0.7
'I'.
_ ENe[E',' l % ,,, 0.2 4. It was shown using very almple closure modele,that
-+.- ms im esce. .. N' . response could be scaled with a limited number of 0.6 M 7 0 *1mportent" nondimensionel groups. This in sphe of }'
O 0.2 0.4 ' 0.6 0.8 1 signht GNemnce behvan experhW fecNMies. t = t / t, For esemple: Step 8: Facility /AP600 comperison - In SPES, ADSt. 2 and 3 discharge to the atmosphere
- In OSU, the absolute vessel pressure et which :
- 1) ROSA and GPES have te -1. for AP900 IRWST Injection begins (our reference) is
- 2) ROSA and SPES have 6. and $3, e, some es AP900 significentfy lower then the other facilities l
.. .M wu 45' 4f,.
I i 4 ; I l
M Summary (Cont'd)
- 4. (Ce .""- - _"",
- >- SA, the DVI Mnes enter the weseel
.- , lower then be the other SectI1 Wee
- 5. After ADS-4 initio6on, the system behoves much Nke e large brook, e.g. Nke e "once through" systen.
Iri terms of the vessel Inventory, feelstence to flows In and out em importent. For nempse, cur now and hence teolotence of the CRIT Bnes eru "-- , _.; .- - In mointelning vessel;..._..__ , during ADS-4 blowdown prior to IRUrST Inl action. S. The values of the importent nondhnenolonel groupe for the verloue , _ _ . facMIties encompeeses , the AP900 range. This suggeste M the aperirnental date are appeleable to seeeeemente of . calculational procedures for the key AFdOO mystem FMPonn(s). i L 1 i k L r c h r 9
. _ ~ . _ _ . _
APPLICATION OF THE Contents SCALING ANALYSIS TOOLS TO e OBJECTIVES (of the application) AP600 trJTE6dAL TEST DATA Marcos G. Ortiz, Constance E. Lenglade, e BACKGROUND (Methodology) Sandra M. Sloan, and Laura Teerlink Idaho National Engineering e ANALYSIS PROCEDURE APPLIED TO And Environmental Laboratory THE LONG TERM PHASE Lockheed Martin Idaho Technologies Company i I ; e
SUMMARY
TABLES Presented at the ACRS Meeting, in e cot 'LUSIONS AND Los Angeles, on February 12-14, 1997 REC >M M EN DATIONS i 1 2 i i
Within the scaling analysis methodology, this procedure corresponds to steps 7 and 8: The Objectives of the Application Were: 1. Define phenomenologically distinct phases of the transient.
- 2. Identify and define participating subsystems and their inter-
"'~
e To determine if the available integral test I data include AP600 expected dominant be~ 3. Determine topology for the system and the dynamic equations g corresponding to that topology
- 4. Nondimensionalize the equations.
e To verify RELAPS integral performance
- s. Define and select reference paumeters (reference scares)
- 6. Perform Order of Magnitude Analysis (OMA) to identify dom-
- To evaluate the effect of known facility dis- inant processes and nondimensionai coefricients.
tortions on' system performance j i l, 7. Validate, to the extent possible, each equation against test data, i I
- 8. Compare the magnitudes of the nondimensional groups be-tween facilities and with AP600, to elucidate the applicability of the data to AP600.
3 4
# MN l - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - -
- 7. Validation of Modeling The scaling tools application ,
Steps are: . Each dynamic equation of the reduced set of gov-erning equations is tested with data. 7 Validation of modeling assumptions against the data (qualitative and quantitative evaluation of trends) 8 Verification of data relevancy (range of nondimen- Or exaMe (a ma% Or T.m Man @& sional coefficients of test facilities includes AP600) tion): ' plus 2 additional ste 9 Verify Integral code performance. (quantitative com-parison between code results and data trends in non-dimensional space) , if 01 >> O2 and M1 >> M3 i 10 Evaluation of,the effect of known scaling distortions . on system's verall performance then: L.H.S. = nizl+ small terms ;
!i! ,
or L.H.S. ~ ng R. H.S. s 6
t I I l 9 Verification of Code Integrated Performance
- 8. Verification of Data Relevancy Having validated the modeling assumptions with the data, we verify that the AP600 nondi- e Calculation results are compared with data mensional coefficients fall withing the range of in nondimensional space, according to the those for the facilities. verified models.
- We found that RELAPS- captures the I dominant phenomena. We found fur-Da S UAP600 $ Ub ther that RELAP5 captures the fine struc-ture of the behavior neglected in the OMA 7 8 i
i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____._._____-.._.___m___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _m______ _
- 10. Evaluation of Distortions Sample Analysis e Distortions are inevitable. We make sure that we understand the distortions and in- The tools (which were developed -for the 1-clude them in the analysis. inch CLB) were used to analyze four experi-mental scenarios, in three different scaled fa-
- We verify that the distortions have been cilities. The previous talk demonstrated the .
accounted for in the nondimensional co- application to a case in the SBLOCA Short efficients (i.e., what is important for the Term Phase. The following slides show (as an : plant is important for the facility). example) the application of the analysis to a , case in the SBLOCA Long Term Phase.
- We also verify if behavior differences are due to distortions.
9 10
.' ~~
! t
I LONG TERM PHASE IRWST Draining Sub-Phase of the SBLOCA Long-Term Phase Sub-phases: ;. c _, ~ IRWST Draining: Begins with the IR- ^ = 2' WST Injection and en'ds when the con- -, p IRWST Pressuriser necting valves betwe'en IRWST and Sump i y i I
5 ADS-4 ADS 4 open. The key variables in this phase are: t_,
"**~'
the IRWST pool level and the stdui - ----- - -- AZ , Z" Al s on Long Term Cooling Quasi-Steady State: ... *".d.... . . .
. yh.@,- .-----
4,,, . It follows sump injection, and the key vari- ~~ able is the Vessel Inventory. , suur j 12 u l i _.________._.______._m -__
" > ; ; i ,'
s - m e . u . t cr n o 4 . e f 1 . m m o u m t r n e e
'; v m
), o o 37a
' o o i i t
o_ * - s m o f r s, e c 5 - o c f o_' so_
.~
- s r o _
o
, d i, R ,a y 'R )A s .
y, )i, 2= )s o , o / f e _ t t o L ic c _ g A 6 A / o (g hr ( r o r o p (r 9 o L F( m o p o p t e f l a
'[ [\ m n o o
_~ = n 5^~ i
- a t
~
"' s. d' m ic
' s.
- f r
* ^
M-3 f n " o f o
" i o o t
a it a Rd R n
- a :
e , e r ns o i e j e t c s_ h 2r 3 W 0f o M s . 3 1 l e v e , l s " n ' T o .' "n l 7i S i t - W a i.
. +
s u ; y d e R q g l n" S l b I e . ' ' m E 4i f
- a d g Y R O n !\l. - .+
n ,' i r a i l n" M a i n = E v r % @ e y w e i e
- Y 7 @
e l o v l e L dt t i p f o v d L K s g e : g s L w _- _ a e l o mhT o l H 2.$S o f s L _ I P s V a D T m S I W V R I D
. . . - . . . . _ . ~ - . . - - - - - - ~ - - - - . . . . . . - - . - ~ . . . . - , . - . - - .. . . . . . - . . . .- . . . -. - k The data show that our assumptions are correct and capture the dominant process. The theory is verified. IRWST DRAINING SUB-Pil ASE DVI Lines Behavior The values of these parameters for OSU and
- i4 oosu ctoi the plant are: o osu m'I oo C OSu LADS O I2 m O
, , 33,p, n AP600 OSU nosu/narsao io E o n;-a.4 25872 56409 2.2 0 4 30 0 2 _.a,4 16232 32438 2 "e o s
- j' o ,
M3 .a 4 9296 21318 2.3 M 3_ a,4 344 2658 7.7 $ .
' i A 21,, 0.43 0.40 0.94 @
pn go O 02 9 o i 00 02 04 06 08 to 12 14 Right IIand Side (ns and liesd Terms) l 15 16 l t i , t
# s
l i I l i The calculations also capture the dominant trend. AP600 expected behavior is contained in the data eange. IRWST DRAINING SUB-PHASE IRWST DRAINING SUB-PIIASE t DVI Lines Behavior DVI Lines Behavior
's-T ]-
U $ : U BL
""U s .*,n.,
.2 IO
--- OSU PSLB (RS i
}l
. O us- , .2 _ 23r#,os,
- OSU Pete (RS)
^ '
e o s-I"'I
'o go Z-
#g .
l g o 8 Os O
~
"E o s O i
I 3' i : O E'
' i o o*
- !o o*
I o d @ c 4 Treas6ents Trans.cata 00 00 02 04 0.6 03 ! I .0 1.2 84 00 0.0 02 04 06 08 t .0 t2 14
- Rish Hand Side (Ils emi Head Terms) Right fland Side (ns and stead Termst
!i '
i i 3 17 18 I O 1 i i
! l i
i The results of the DVIB are also consistent with the previous conclusions. Step 8 IRWST DRAINING SUB-PH ASE aM" Having verified th the modeling assumptions
$U E*v'*s cas, N, . are valid, we can etermine if tiie? data repre-
- ~ ^' " v'" t" sents AP600 expected behavior by comparing
( the dominant Iis. o
,. s i >
E
' 05 s i n AP600 OSU nosu/Darsoo ;
. o - N h,.
\ SBLOCA '
5 " 1
"';7 n 0.63 0.58 0.92
, n,.+n, *1 0.37 ie i n,. 0.42 1.1 j L
, A Zj,,, 0.43 0.40 0.94 DVIB 00 ! " ' *o- +"'-**1 02 04 06 0.8 1.0 1 1 n
Right lland Side (Ils and IIcad Terms) O 2],,, 0.114 0.104 0.91
+
20 t 6
t Long Term Quasi-Steady State Sub-Phase of the SBLOCA Long-Term Phase Assumptions: ADS-123 e The driving force that sustains the steady r, flow through the system is the density dif-ference between a cold side (Sump, down-ADS-4 ' e s-4 comer, lower plenum) and the hot side (core, i upper plenum, ADS-4). h... M- '
. . _ _ . .T. Az.m
- m. 47 .g 1.
=, Dw
~
Dw e The fluid in either side is homogeneous and
..... ..................... .. .. $. ...._..... ~
the density varies linearly through the core. SUMP t i 21 l 22 r
The governing equations for this sub-phase are: IN NON-DIMENSIONAL FORM: M *,,,,i = V * ,, + (V;o,, + V*,,)fIrre 7"2
- PegL, - pygaZads 4 n*
rg W + (n sus - 04 ) (1 - n,) ( pc PH / And, Quality
- nsus = ";"-*#* - A subcooling number.
<j - rhcpAT l z _-
hfgrh ; n,=,,,y,,_,: A heat flow number. Density of the hot side (py) i n, = pop, - A dens.ty i ratio number. 1 1/2 PH = (1 - z)vf + xvg ,. _ g t:-n,.~493 : Nondimensional mass Vessel Inventory %+n,
.< ?~ -
flow. 1 Afvessei = 5pcVcore + 1PH(Vcore + Vup) i . f .
!! 23 24 i i i
i i I
5 i
! i*
3- .- l
. The values of the key geometries for OSU $ and the plant are:
2 2 "";^2' u = n _a,4 z Ratio of opposing manometric heads ' in the DVI-ADS 4 flow path. 0.35 0.35 1 y.co,.,/2 p* L-+
* (V*ot e Y V*p)/2 0.65 0.65 1 L = n n._g , sat % or hot to cold line resistances c u 4 in the DVI ilow path.
L, 7.29 1.92 0.26 03 ads 4 8.79 2.16 0.25 rho = \%/ ld'bN . Reference mass flow. R$,3 2,762 9,383,000 3,397 Rads 4 111 1,268,000 11,437 E i q A I 2s ;;; 2e ,
#3 s.
. ~ y F
SBLOCA Short-Term Phase l PIRT High-Ranked AP600 Phenomenon / Pertinent x, AP600 ROSA SPES OSU Bounded? Notes Accurnulator Flow p4 14.8 15.6 17.8 40.5 No Vethn 5% ADS Energy Release 14.a 15.6 17.8 40.5 No Vethe 5%
+.
ADS Mass Flow U, . , 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Yes U, 0.54 0.87 0.39 0.92 Yes CLB,PBLD 0.39 0.38 0.22 0.59 Yes DVILB
, Hi 1.57 1.52 1.53 1.01 No CLB, F BLD, Vethe 3%
2.05 1.94 1.96 1.01 No 0VILB, kAlhan 5% Break Mass Flow H,,, 1.00 1.00 1.00 N/A Yes U.,. 0.0130 0.0129 0.0130 N/A Yes Cold Log Tee Phase Separebon (Phenomenon not direcoy represented with top-down scalang) CMT Flow Resistance U, Dir. 0 77 0.54 0.85 0.37 0.48 0.76 Yes Yes CLB,PBLB 0.26 0 99 DVILB l CMT Level Hi Hi.. 0.77 0.54 0 85 0.48 0.76 Yes CLB PBLB 0.37 0.26 0.99 Yes DVILB Core Flashing (Phenornanon not directly represented with top-down scaisng) l l SBLOCA Short-Term Phase (Cont.) PlRT High-Ranked AP600 Phenomenon / Pertinent n, AP600 ROSA SPES OSU Bounded? Notes Core Subcool:ng Margin U. 3 50 5.98 2.05 8 06 Yes CLB, PBLB, ADS 4 Blowdown 2.48 2.60 1.12 4.03 yes DviLB, ADS-4 86owdown l i l 9.75 10.1 7.71 6.52 Yes CLB. PBLB. IRWST Inj. 12.7 12.8 9 90 6.50 Yes DVILS, IRWST Ini l Di 0.54 0.87 0 39 0 92 Yes CLB. PBLB, ADS-4 Blowdown 0.39 0.38 0.22 0.59 Yes DVfL8, ADS-4 Blowcown l l Diem 1.57 1.52 1.53 1.01 No CLA. PBLS IRWST ini., Wun 3% ! 2.05 1 94 1.96 1.01 No DVILB. IRWST try., Wirvri 5% Core Power Decay Heat (Phenomenon not addressed by the integral test facilities) Hot Log Tee Phase Separauon (Phenornenon not directly represented with top-down scaling) IRWST Flow Resistance
~
i Hi./Us 1.96 1.49 1.96 4.79 Yes l,, Di 1.57 2.05 1.52 1.94 1.53 1.96 1.01 1.01 No No CLB. PBLB. Wthin 3% DVILB. Wittun 5% V Pressunzw Level i U,, 1.00 1.00 1.00 N/A Yes U.,. 00130 0 0129 0.0130 N/A Yes n, n i.w 13 1 n1 su m No ADS.4 - wdowe. W - so% g 11.8 10 2 20.9 21.4 Yes CLB, PBLB, IRWST ing
, . 21.8 18.3 37.9 30.4 Yes DVILB, IRWST in; l
Definition of IIs
$3: Ratio of pressure change due to change , n16~iI"* :. Non-dimensional flow through a in specific energy of saturated field from
~
line (between two tanks) w.th i respect to mass inflows to the reference pressure ' the reference flow (C 1godoto) (h .ne-oy ti q Po j ( 50 ) 0 7_ ve,,,1 : Non-dimensional vessel empty- 15-tan @i7--une : CoeMent (non-ing/ filling time (M) "O with respect to ref- dimensional) of tank draining equation erence time
~
- ~ f Qoto T ILoT'
~
Os : Ratio of heat input over stored or Ia-tent heat I doto T 1 (hjgaMoj I 28 27 !
+
i e
F19 -volume : Non-dimensional flushing time Conclusions ratio . IQOt ol l , y e The integral tests data base is sufficient. AP600 expected behavior is captured within the range of facility nondimensional results. - (h), : Ratio of pressure forces over fric-tion forces in a line .- e RELAP5 captures the dominant phenom-
/ Po T ena expected of AP600, and furthermore,
#0Q$RO ) captures the finer structure of the behavior j neglected from the top-down viewpoint.
- Ratio of manometric pressure (h)ltne 3 . .
over. friction forces in a line e From the top' down viewpoint, distortions f Yog T were either negligible.(OMA) or included ' (Q$R$j in the analysis. ; i 29 30 + t
.b 4
,ei
y i RELAPS ADEQUACY EVALUATION: INTRODUCTION ' i 6 Presented by: C. D. Fletcher , Prepared by: P. D. Bayless, C. B. Davis, C. D. Fletcher, G. W. Johnsen, M. G. Ortiz, and G. E. Wilson _visory Com.mittee on Reactor Safeguards Thermal Hydraulic Subcommittee February 12-14,1997 Los Angeles, California ms ~ .. , - . . . : ,
- - _ - _ _ _- - - - - - -_2 _
i The objectives of this presentation are:- e to introduce background material pertinent to the three subsequent presentations (that provide detailed evaluations of code model and correlation applicability, integrated code performance assessment, and top-down integral facility scaling) e to place those presentations into perspective e to provide the top-level results and conclusions from the evaluations.-
?
4 , i j m. . . , ACRSitthe 2-3-37/2 " i
a t i The outline of this presentation is as follows: l e Role of the AP600 SBLOCA PIRT in the evaluations e Evaluation methods employed i e Top-level evaluation results t e Evaluation conclusions e Roadmap to the subsequent pre ~sentations of the detailed evaluations i I f r i
- ~ ,
ACRS11the 2-3-97/3 l
.[
The AP600 SBLOCA PIRT was used to focus the evaluations on the most important subject areas. (1 of 3) ' e Model and correlation applicability evaluations u Started with the list of PIRT high-ranked phenomena a Selected those phenomena most appropriately evaluated through separate-effects assessment as opposed to integral-effects assessment u Determined the RELAP5 models and correlations that dominate code capabilities for predicting the selected phenomena u Evaluated the dominant models and correlations r.. .. , __ ACRSinhc 2-3-97/4
i The AP600 SBLOCA PIRT was used to focus the !,
- evaluations on the most important subject areas. (2 of 3) e Assessments ofintegrated code performance Code capabilities were evaluated for the prediction of
The PIRT figure of merit (minimum reactor vessel inventory) i ! PIRT high-ranked phenomena: 14 for the SBLOCA short-term phase 11 for the SBLOCA long-term phase PlRT medium-ranked phenomena: . 34 for the SBLOCA short-term phase 10 for the SBLOCA long-term phase . ACRS1/the 2-3-97/5
I t The AP600 SBLOCA PIRT was used to focus the evaluations on the most important subject - areas. (3 of 3) , e Scaling evaluations m Top-down integral scaling analyses were guided by PIRT dominant system processes and structured based on PIRT phases. The analyses investigated sub-phases, based on changes in the plant behavior and systems operative during the transient. ; m Bottom-up scaling analyses addressed localized PlRT , phenomena. ilNE& fL.~.,.s.-..,# ACRS1Mhc 2-3-97/6
..m._ _ __ _ . . ___._. _________ _ _ _ _ - ___ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ - - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
The code model and correlations assessments evaluated the applicability of the dominant code models for AP600 SBLOCA analysis. i i e Key independent parameters were identified for the dominant models and the AP600 SBLOCA ranges of interest for these key parameters were determined e For each dominant model we: m Reviewed model documentation and pedigree l m Compared ranges for key parameters o as originally developed o as implemented in RELAPS o as assessed j o as required for AP600 SBLOCA m Reviewed developmental assessment comparisons between the code model and appropriate experimental data m Evaluated if the model is acceptable for use at the AP600 scale s Formed a conclusion regarding applicability i I - ~. ACRSitthe 2-3-97/7 c.... . . .__ ,
The performance of the integrated code was evaluated through comparisons between code calculations and pertinent measured data. (1 of 8)
- i e Experimental data were obtained from t integral experimental facilities representing the AP600 system in different scales
- !
a ROSA /AP600 ! u SPES-2 m APEX /OSU ! e Experimental data were obtained from 1 separate effects experimental facilities ' representing AP600 components: s Core Makeup Tank u ADS, Stages 1,2, and 3 f
,lNER.
_ . . ~ . . . acasir'ac 2-=-'7<= :
s i ! The performance of the integrated code was evaluated through comparisons between code . calculations and pertinent measured data. (2 of 8) i e Similar tests in the three integral effects ; facilities representing three AP600 SBLOCA scenarios were selected for evaluation u 1-inch diameter cold leg break m Double-ended rupture of a direct vessel injection line m 2-inch diameter pressure balance line break i l ( l i rflREE
The performar ce of the integrated code was evaluated through comparisons between code calculations and pertinent measured data. (3 of 8) : e The experimental facilities and the AP600 plant were mcdeled using consistent approaches m Model nodalization based on user guidance and sensitivity studies i e User input option selection based on user guidance ; a Extensive effort put forth to assure assumptions, features and nodalizations among the models were comparable; allows evolution of a recommended AP600 modeling scheme and user guidance that i.s based on the collective assessment expenence ! e Fast running OSU and AP600 models were developed for economical analysis of the SBLOCA long-term phase e Model documentation and independent quality assurance ; lend confidence to the conclusions regarding code capabilities 1NER. _ . , , ACRS1/the 2-3-97/10 } t
E e . The performance of the integrated code was evaluated through comparisons between code ; calculations and pertinent measured data. l (5 of 8) i e A consistent set of evaluation criteria was : used in the detailed comparisons between code-calculated and measured data for the PIRT phenomena. Four levels of agreement are defined: e Excell'ent agreement a Major & minor phenomena & trends are correctly predicted. m With few exceptions, the calculation lies within the uncertainty bands of the data. i ACRSitthe 2-3-97112 '
The performance of the integrated code was evaluated through comparisons between code calculations and pertinent measured data. j (4 of 8) e RELAP5/ MOD 3 simulations were performed of the selected tests in ROSA, SPES and OSU and of the corresponding accident in AP600 ' e All calculations were performed using the identical code version: RELAP5/ MOD 3, Version 3.2.1.2 l ACRS1/the 2-3-97/11
i The performance of the integrated code was ' evaluated through comparisons between code calculations and pertinent measured data. (6 of 8) e Reasonable agreement m All major phenomena & trerids are correctly predicted. u The calculation frequently lies outside but near the uncertainty bands of the data; however, the correct conclusions about phenomena & trends would be reached if the code were used in similar applications. e Minimal agreement a Some major phenomena or trends are not correctly predicted. m Some calculated values lie considerably outside the data uncertainty bands, therefore, incorrect conclusions about phenomena & trends may be reached if the code were
- used in similar applications. .
i y { ACRSitthe 2-3-97/13
The performance of the integrated code was evaluated through comparisons between code calculations and pertinent measured data. (7 of 8) e insufficient agreement a Major trends are not correctly predicted. m Most calculated values lie outside the data uncertainty bands, therefore, incorrect conclusions about phenomena & trends are probable if the code were used in similar applications. e Excellent or Reasonable agreement is considered to indicate the code is acceptable for use in similar applications. e Minimal or Insufficient agreement for a PIRT high-ranked phenomenon indicates that code or facility input model changes are necessary or a satisfactory work-around must be developed. flR_E& ACRS11the 2-3-97/14 _ _ _ - __ -_--_ _ __ ._ --_1
i The performance of the integrated code was
- evaluated through comparisons between code calculations and pertinent measured data.
(8 of 8) e Using this set of criteria, a judgement was made regarding code capabilities for predicting each PiRT phenomenon u initial judgement made by INEL analyst m INEL review committee reconciled and approved judgements among analysts and formed composite, overalljudgements a NRC reviews m NRC thermal-hydraulic consultant reviews i f ..
., j 4
ACRSitthe 2-3-57115
Recall the top-down integral scaling an'alysis procedure e Develop scaling methodology (theory) e Verify scaling theory e Application The presentations that follow will review the application e Correspondence between scaling nondimensional puameters (ns) and the PIRT high-ranked phenomena e Bounding or close approximation of AP600 behavior by the experiments for the pertinent ns e Physicalinterpretations of the pertinent ns ACRS11:he 2-3-97/16
We found that RELAP5/ MOD 3 can acceptably predict the overall SBLOCA behavior and event sequence progression of experiments in scaled integral systems representing AP600. (1of 2) Measured and calculated short-term phase RCS pressure responses Measured and calculated short term phase RCS and reactor vessel for the ROSA 1-inch diameter cold leg SBLOCA scenareo mass inventory responses for ROSA 1-inch cold leg S8tOCA scenaro 10000 r- . . . i , . i i -v-l pa-0 1 Ns "= =- ' = = - o ' 4-- - - -- . - . _ ..__m 0 2000 4000 6000 6030 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Time (S) ' Time (S) ADS-4
.3 The results of the code model and correiation evaluations are that the dominant code models are applicable for AP600 SBLOCA analysis.
SBLOCA PIRT Short-term SBLOCA PIRT Long-term RELAPS Model Phase High-ranked Phenomena Phase High-ranked Phenomena or Correlation Dominated by this Model Dominated by this Medel ; Accumulator Component Accumulator Flow Critical Flow ADS Energy Release, ADS Mass ADS Energy Release, ADS Mass Flow, Break Mass Flow Flow Decay Heat Fuel Rod Core Power / Decay Heat Fuel Rod Core Power / Decay IIeat Flow Resistance Accumulator Flow, CMT Flow IRWST Flow Resistance Resistance, IRWST Flow Resistance Horizontal Stratification ADS Energy Release, ADS Mass ADS Energy Release, ADS Mass and Entrainment Flow, Break Mass Flow, Cold Leg- Flow to-PI}L Tee Phase Separation, Hot Irg Tee Phase Separation Interphase Drag in Bundles Core Two-Phase Mixture Level Core Two-Phase Mixture Ixvel Interphase Mass and Core Flashing Energy Transfer (Vapor Generation) (I' *
\ ,A ..
ACRS1/the 2-3-97/17 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ ______________I
6 We found that RELAP5/ MOD 3 can acceptably predict the overall SBLOCA behavior and event sequence progression of experiments in scaled integral systems representing AP600. (2 of 2) Measured and calculated long-term phase reactor vessel inventory responses for the OSU PBL SBLOCA scenario
- P.Tli la l l'jy)' l' 8
l - I,.f ! iEhli :
! [h . #p fY I
y, I: l.Ili, R 4 w) f:::;;pphtim 8 s .
~
$ I m
E 0.6 - i i i 3N :: l Test RELAPS
~m 's l Z
!0.4 -
l i l i i i l l s
, , t ;
0.2 - i 6 i 1 i 2 i g
,[
, m
'y '
'E l
' ' ' ' ' l 0.0 -
O 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 , Time (s) I i
i l A ~* T ];. , RELAP5/ MOD 3 acceptably predicted the PIRT figure-of-merit (minimum reactor vessel inventory) for the three accident scenarios in ; the three integral test facilities. Minimum vessel inventory in short-tenn phase i l Normalized inventory = (Minimum) / (Initial at break) Facility l 1" CLB DVILB l 2" PBL l Mess. l Calc. Mess. l Calc. l Meas. l Calc. I ROSA l 0.70 l 0.60 0.55 l 0.51 l 0.77 l 0.64 ! SPES l 0.49 l 0.45 0.20 l 0.25 l 0.62 l 0.53 OSU ll 0.62 lj. 0.54 . 0.46 l 0.44 lj 0.70 l 0.68 f Minimum vessel inventory in long-tenn phase l Normalized inventory = (Minimum) / (Initial at break) Facility l 1" CLB l DVILB l 2" PBL l Mess. l Calc. l Meas. l Calc. l Meas. l Cale. OSU 0.69 0.62 0.74 0.60 0.74 0.65 AP600 0.58 0.59 0.57 e RELAP5/ MOD 3 underpredicted the normalized minimum vessel inventory (which occurs during the short-term phase) by an average of 0.05 and underpredicted the normalized vessel inventory dunng sump injection (in the long-term phase) by an average of 0.10. i , __, _ fg ACRSitthe 2-3-97/20
RCS Pressure - 1" CLB i i i 4.0 , , , e - e AP600 CALC *
$3 e a SPES TEST A--A SPES CALC m
x--x OSU TEST
$ 3.0 nj g
+ + OSU CALC g o' Y-Y ROSA TEST
' 4-- 4 ROSA CALC i
__ ,j 5 i t
.e ,
i
.E h o
C 2.0 - _ 2 a L
'! i m
h )I 2 i o_ ,t "O m 4W . y s '2', h m 1.0 - '- E S- _.\ Q %w. m , s k i-s 0.0 ' "M=L&tv"* -*A**= #= = ---- x H ' 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 i Normalized Time (to IRWST injection)
RCS Mass inventory - 1" CLB . 1.2 . . . e- e AP600 CALC 1.0 4L. m m SPES TEST SPES CALC
*g* ' [ ' e ,
;h -
x- --x OSU TEST
+ + OSU CALC -
-,'*~~
g ... v----Y ROSA TEST S 0.8 - U ~ 0-- 4 ROSA CALC _ E g pk'. shg'-. (*N& S %g .s ( a- 0.6
'(g\\
v e \1 N
- + % ,.,.. ,
s c E
/
5 0.4 - x- -._.-_-x-- Z , i
- + [. _ - ~ -
\;g < f * *
\j.
\'-
g' vf,4% i 0.2 -
' # '* l ' t ' ' ' ~ 'I ~*~~~ -
O.0 - ' -- O.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Normalized Time (to IRWST injection)
Reactor Vessel Mass inventory - 1" CLB 1.4 , , , 1.2 -
-+Iso -
1 43, ' l 1.O n s A
, sf , j\ ' ,fri ~~' ' ?( ~ ..-
('\} l%
\ '
$ i ,
j , i _._ _
-et#-AN -x --
; " ~
i h* ,4 , 1 \, 9 _t! 0.6 - s - as -
\, ,-
Z e e AP600 CALC O.4 - 3d = a SPES TEST - i A- A SPES CALC
, - - x OSU TEST
+----+ OSU CALC 0.2 -
V V ROSA TEST _
- ROSA CALC 0.0 ' '
O.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Normalized Time (to IRWST injection)
Reactor Vessel Mass inventory - DVILB 1.2 . , , e e AP600 CALC Y Y ROSA TEST 1.04 4
- ROSA CALC E a SPES TEST _
A-A SPES CALC
'. x-x OSU TEST
+
+OSU CALC J
h0.8 l - h YY E , V. Y y yvvYY yvvv vg. l . 0.6 ' Y,,Y . vv.,yy g'gp $ h<~' t j y 0.4 , i 3yr ,k gwar#" 0.2 4 l
*( '
i 0.0 ' ' - 1 -- 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Normalized Time (to intact accumulator emptying)
Reactor Vessel Mass inventory - 2" PBLB 1.2 , , , 1.0 a y _ 0.8 -
- We'n
[ 0.6 - R em e--e AP600 CALC l 5 *--w SPES TEST y 0.4 - SPES CALC -- M--x OSU CALC
' +--+ OSU CALC Y--Y ROSA TEST 1 ROSA CALC f 0.2 -
l. l 0.0 - 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 i Normalized Time (to IRWST injection)
h RELAPS/ MOD 3 acceptably predicted 13 of the 14 PIRT high-ranked phenomena for the SBLOCA short-term phase (fuel rod core power / decay heat is addressed , through the code model and correlation evaluations). ! I t I liigh ranked phenomena Overall Assessment Results i Accumulator flow Reasonable ADS energy reicase Reasonable ADS mass flow Reasonable ! Break mass flow Reasonable Cold leg-to-PBL tee phase separation Reasonable ' Core flashing Reasonable Core subcooling margin Reasonable Core two-phase mixturelevel Reasonable ! CMT flow resistance Reasonable C M T Icvel Reasonable Fuct rod core power / decay heat Boundary Condition t flot Icg phase separation in tecs Reasonable IRWST ilow resistance Reasonable ' Pressurizer level Reasonab': ' f
} i. >
ACRS1/the 2-3-97/21
RELAP5/ MOD 3 acceptably predicted 9 of the 11 PIRT high-ranked phenomena for the SBLOCA long-term phase (fuel rod core power / decay heat is addressed through the code model and correlation evaluations). Iligh ranked phenomena Overall Assessment Results ADS enern release Excellent ADS mass now Excellent Core two-phase mixture level Reasonable Downcomer level Reasonable Fuel rod core powerfdecay heat Boundary Condition IRWST flow resistance Reasonable IRWST poollevel Excellent IRWST pool therinal stratification InsuHicient Sump fluid temperature Reasonable Sump level Excellent Upper plenum two-phase snix ture level Reasonable e An insufficient code capability judgement was made for "lRWST pool thermal stratification" because the code does not contain mechanistic models for representing this phenomenon. A satisfactory work-around (involving sensitivity studies) for this code limitation has been developed and will be addressed in a presentation that follows. ACRSitthe 2-3-97/22
i Summary of the top-down scaling applications review o The behavior'of AP600 is bounded by that of , the experiments a For the nondimensional scaling parameters pertinent to the AP600 SBLOCA PIRT high ranked phenomena, the n values for AP600 are within or near the ranges of n values for the experiments ACRSitthe 2-3-97/23
i Evaluation Conclusions ;
- e The dominant RELAP5/ MOD 3 Version 3.2.1.2 i models and correlations are applicable for AP600 SBLOCAs.
e The code is capable of acceptably simulating the overall SBLOCA behavior, event sequence progression, and minimum reactor vessel inventory in scaled, integral test facilities representing AP600. e The code is capable of acceptably predicting the AP600 PIRT high-ranked phenomena as observed in the integral test facilities. e The behavior of AP600 is bounded by that of the integral experiments I IIN'E-LI -- .
i Presentations that follow provide detailed information supporting the top-level evaluation l conclusions. j e SBLOCA Short-Term Phase a Code model and correlation applicability u Assessment ofintegrated code performance m Integral facility scaling applications analysis ; ! e SBLOCA Long-Term Phase i a Code model and correlation applicability t m Assessment ofintegrated code performance j s Integral facility scaling applications analysis i' l Additional presentations will discuss j containment modeling for AP600 SBLOCAs. i f il
$_REn .,,...g-ACRS11the 2-3-97/25 ii t
L t f RELAP5 Adequacy Evaluation: 1 SBLOCA Short-Term Phase l Paul D. Bayless and Gary W. Johnsen Presenters ' ACRS Thermal-Hydraulic Subcommittee Meetmg i February 12-14,1997 t i i Mm i ACRSPBAhc 2-3-97I1
= =_ -
The objective of this presentation is to describe the evaluation of the adequacy of RELAP5/ MOD 3, Version 3.2.1.2 for predicting the short-term phase of an SBLOCA in the AP600. i i o The adequacy evaluation depends on: , a Models and correlations review (developmental 1 assessment) a AP600 integral and separate effects test assessments ! a Scaling analyses i i [
; ACRSPS/the 2-3-97/15 w
- 2 22 = 1,
4 l The method used for the adequacy evaluation is ! described below. l e Analysis was guided by the PIRT. a Short-term phase (<~2 hours) ! i a Long-term phase (after IRWST injection established) a Highly-ranked phenomena i e Detailed RELAPS models were developed to represent the short-term phase.
- e Three transients were analyzed for the short-term phase:
m 1" CLB ) m Double-ended DVILB a 2" PBLB : l e Short-term phase analyzed for three experiment facilities: m ROSA /AP600 a SPES m OSU/ APEX k f ACRSPBithe 2-3-97/15 i i
Consistent short-term RELAPS input models . were developed for the AP600, ROSA, SPES, and OSU facilities. i e Each of the models includes: m Reactor coolant system (reactor vessel, steam generators, pressurizer, hot and cold legs, coolant pumps) m Steam generators (steam generator downcomer, boiler, separator and steam regions, steam lines) u Safety systems (ADS, CMTs, accumulators, IRWST, PRHR) m Trips and control systems e User guidelines and input options applied consistently in the four
- input models. i e Model boundary conditions: '
s Core power a Reactor coolant pump speed prior to trip a Steam generator steam pressure a Feedwater flow and temperature l m Constant atmospheric containment pressure ' WGB ACRSPBithe 2-3-97/17
=
1 r Evidence supporting the code adequacy evaluation will be presented for five of the high-ranked phenomena. r Accumulator flow ADS energy release ADS mass flow Break mass flow Cold leg-to-PBL tee phase separation Core flashing ! Core subcooling margin Core two-phase mixture level I CMT flow resistance CMT level Fuel rod core power / decay heat i Hot leg phase separation in tees IRWST flow resistance ; Pressurizer level i flNGR _, ACRSPBithc 2-3-97/18
l i r Summary ofinformation for Core Two-Phase Mixture Level during the short-term phase , Rationale 1. Affects core cooling for PIRT 2. Threshold effect in that there is no fuel rod - high rank heatup as long as core is covered Adequacy 1. Basic features of bundle interphase drag evaluation model based on 2. Developmental assessment
- 3. Integral assessment:
~
ROSA 2" PBLB e SPES 1" CLB OSU DVILB
- 4. Scaling application i
, I.
; ACRSPBtthe 2-3-97/9
.' - ..4
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . __ _ . _ = _ _
(BuddlednterphaseDrag Model! 1 i e For interphase drag in rod bundles, RELAP5/ MOD 3 utilizes an adaptation of the EPRI (Chexall/Lellouche) Drift Flux Model o The EPRI model is empirical, based on a statistical treatment of data from thirteen facilities encompassing wide ranges of pressure, flow, and void fraction l f i I
{ EPRI DrifEFlup:Model DataLBases GEOMETRY FLOW PRESSURE VOID TYPE TEST AND HYDR. CONDITIONS (bars) FRACTION DIAMETER AND RATE RANGE (cm) (kg/m'-s) FROJA, Rod bundle 956 to 1853 40 to 64 0 to 1.0 lligh pressure, FRIGO.CISE,Kasai 1.0 to 4.7 et al. high flow Kasai et al. Boiling tube 278 to 1667 68.7 0.to 0.8 1.5 ORNL-TliTF Rod bundle Level swell 40,75 0 to 0.8 liigh pressure, 1.23 3 to 30 tow flow GEC TLTA Pod bundle Boildown 13,27,54 0 to 0.8 Rod bmJie - Levt.1 swell I, 2, 3, 4 0 to 0.3 11a11 et al. Pipe above Level swell I, 2, 3, 4 0 to 0.5 Low pressure, bundle 10.5 low flow FLECIIT Rod bundles Boildown I, 3, 4 0 to 0.8 SEASET 1.3 TIIETIS Rod bundle 0.91 Level swell 2,5,10,20, O to 1.0 40 Natural FIST Rod bis 41e Natural circulation 72 circulation Pretetype AP699 Red Bundk 1.1 9 to 199 i se 79 9 to 1.0
k'..k'M h5 [-.< d: C$n $3
'"a #"d- . *':'Y .
/p,'M !- 7,; . -
Wss$O; lev ell m.lbg ~%sesS,mdN. N,Nsingsc . ex Pa .,,. !I,N'd;b cg m add E M.ORNL 0FH.
- e ,E.;M4%m.e$i -m m, #
TFE~D. . .h. t..hF r - E!h[kfjkdf;.';ijffis;$,;:.::n. !? x s[ , (( [# @l [ '-< >' 'x;- .. 'UU ' W' l *' L e I 4 -- y e 1.2 -- I A 1-
}
5 t > W e 0.8 - . .. - High Tolerance 1 g 0.6 - 1 - Low Tolerance g I A k o Measured n 0.4 - - 4 > A Calculated 5 0.2 - m )[ , 6
-{ .
e t 0-- ,, e r -0.2 * * ' = - - ' - - - - - e a a e a a i i s e a a S FF N CC EE K BB M DD J L AA l Test identifier for ORNL THTF Series 3.09.10
.h -
M -
., a a ma' ?%nwa!A; - ' . Iessmen'J o .:'fi' .? b -. -- -eveESwsil:
t'e?.. _ %; .;ss.
~
.: . ; 1 .,..
$$ g%. asPinFRIGfdFndility!
~
e.c'ig@! n .- t
- m. 4.<
, 't
.:y:q_ pg.
i i t 1.0 . i . i . i i , P = 5 MPa _ 700 < G < 1500 kg/s-m2 p - j 0 .8 - : s 200 < q < 700 kW/m2 ; g e : N 0.6 - o
~5 . _ ;
y s t 0.4 -
.9 i ns . . . i H i 4 -. -
0.2 - A -- I 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 , 0.6 0.8 1.0 l Measured Void Fraction ; 1 ; I
)
i
.-[-
~'
[3 &! ft 'p * ::.-! ? . . .
, % ; c Ayssessment o:fi. 4'" e%vebSwell.
.. 1 3 - , . . . . .. . .. . . . hi.. .N + ,
C-- g -- < in,@RNDTHTFfFadility
.g: e c 1.0 ,
s'." 0.8 - * * - g . g
- N 0.6 - -
.2 %
o - o s 0.4 -
.2
- o ~
E , . 4 < P < 8 MPa
~
m 0.2 - 2 < G < 30 kg/s-m 2 _ 11 < q < 74 kW/m 2 .. 0.0 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' O.0 0.2 . 0.4 0.li 0.8 1.0
- Measured Void Fraction E
L
s:- :;r:. ,i r s- , .;;:. ' x. Uc . .~ ? >C '
- ...,}'-
. , '.~ '
e., :.: F ?? !!Mbi h . N ::'e)fD., g x yw;L[ev-e'la: Swelq .' As.:-7.rsessment c
, y; f ..q..
;4,: g. q. c..ii.;f g;THETISThcility? '
u '
.'r
,y .
- y:
- t .o " '
l 1.0 . , . , . 3
~
. i
~
P = 0.5 MPa , . 0.8 - G = 0 kEls-m 2 . _ c: . - y - q = 13 kW/m 2 . . g .* r N 0.6 - * - .5! . O c
- sO 0.4 -
E ~ i 2 -
- n.
- 0.2 -
t 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 , Measured Void Fraction 5
mrum "g ; 1Eev.e:leSwel,l Assessment-q(f i x J: PERICLES! Facility; 1.0 . i i i i i i i i 0.2 < P < 0.4 MPa . 10 < G < 80 kg/s-m2 .,
- s.
2 . c 10 < q < 40 kW/m , 8o .. ..a* . . E N 0.6 - * * -
'E 0.4 - - '
.9 o . .
E m 0.2 - - 0.0 < 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 ! Measured Void Fraction t r
i Core collapsed liquid level was judged regsonable for the ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Te,st AP-PB-01). 120i-. f L t i
F
> s Core collapsed liquid level was judged reasonable for the- < SPES 1 -inch cold leg break experiment (Test S00401).
i i J i ?
a ..a s u e ++ s ....u.,- - - -
-a a n.m aasu .s-1~---+-a s a .s---s u-s+ . ~ - - a -a a s- .*= -n- sm -m-s== - - =a-~ a n--., =-. == as 4
s W
.C e
L O
@CC
.O b ,
CU i CO o2 E CU 0
$GF tw
@~
c) C . VO
.o E .-
8 3 *C
- a:
O
>M WG
-Wu o O 3
.L:TC@
=
D-W v> > c.a
.E D
'5 C/>
00 w O O
i Top-down scaling pertinent nondimensional parameters for core two-phase mixture leval e (ADS-4 blowdown sub-phase, vessel inventory equation) Dominant x Physical unoSa/ RAP 900 KSPESlKAP 900 KOSMKAP900 Interpretation
~'
xiew Ratio of CMT flow 1.60 0.72 1.69 CLB, PBLB to RCS outflow 0.99 0.56 1.52 DVILB a x ratics greater than 1.0 indicate the experimental facility vessel inventory (and, therefore, core level) decreases at a slower rate than for AP600 4
- e (IRWST injection sub-phase, vessel inventory equation)
Domirant x Physical u nOSAIKAP900 KSPESIKAP800 KOSMEAP800 Interpretation xiew Ratio of DVI line 0.97 0.97 0.64 CLB, PBLB flow to net inflow 0.95 , 0.95 0.49 DVILB
e.
.t i
L Summary of findings for Core Two-Phase Mixture Level during the short-term phase e The bundle interphase drag model was Judged applicable. m Model scale encompasses the application scale e Expected range of application is covered by the assessments ; e Developmental assessment cases were well simulated m Inherent bias of 5-10% (lower than measured) u EPRI has recent!y developed a revised correlation that appears to improve
. the predictions at low pressures i e The composite integral assessment Judgment was reasonable.
1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable SPES Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable OSU Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments brended or closely approximated those of the AP600. gg,ggp ACRSPB/the 2-3-97/27 j ___.2-..
1 Summary ofinformation for Phase Separation in Tees during the short-term phase Rationale 1. Cold leg: Important if void convection from CL-to- ! for PIRT CMT is the initiating mechanism for CMT draining high rank 2. Hot leg: Influences ADS mass and energy release. Controls quality of fluid entering the pressurizer
- surge line (ADS 1-3) and the ADS-4 inlet lines. q
! Adequacy 1. Basic features of horizontal stratification and evaluation entrainment model based on 2. Deve'opmental J assessment
- 3. Integral assessment
- ROSA i i
i i n 4
b f
.. .. .g.
Horizontal Stratifiestibni Entrainment;Modef L Models the phase separation at tee's connected to horizontal pipes in which the flow is stratified
- Encompasses top, side, and bottom connected tee's Empirical model predicts:
- - the critical water level in the main pipe at which entrainment ofliquid (top and side connection) or pull-through of vapor (side and bottom connection) will occur
- the quality of the fluid exiting the offlake I
e - p.sa p A m--L 4 6,4. --,A<4 <,Go-4s.-.L-,A m a4 ak.-ua-- - a4. wmm -amMna-pa-.-a,k 2--om M ..a A A ,0Lm-- ,s aL sa e,-s_.eem -m. tf t
.% ' 2 1, C y
' e3 O
v ,, r l
, 4 0 '
y~ ,
'h :h $
F ).,j:'Ci .; 1 d
//
{ O ~: c ' , fl& 3.- a.c c ; l4.C%if
.m mw .
[;lh, i . '$? gm:.a y , _i -
.2,*&l *???hern o
$ b ggg, w :
i ? e f h TTN
$hC.h$q$$lfl{ 1 s u ,
h c_ uw e des .s s(H t. s e i a t 8 * . 4
. m $
v> ; HSE Data Base' Ranges Compared to AP600 Application ! FACILITY FLUID MAIN PIPE OFF-TAKE DIAMETER PRESSURE OFF-TAKE DIAM. DIAMETER RATIO (MPa) ORIENT. (mm) (mm) KfK Air-Water 206 6,12,20 0.03 - 0.10 0.2 - 0.5 H 206 12,20 0.06 - 0.10 0.2 - 0.5 U i 206 6,8,12 0.03 - 0.06 0.2 - 0.5 D ; CEA Steam- 135 20 0.15 2.0 H,U,D Water UCB Air-Water 102 3,6,10 0.03 - 0.10 < l.1 U Steam- 102 3 0.03 < l.1 H Water 102 3, 6 0.03 - 0.06 < l.1 U, D Steam-Water AP600 Steam- 787 267 0.34 0.15 - 0.6 U (ADS-4) Water
o HSF Model!for Top Offtake Critical Liquid Height Convected Quality h3 =CW3 #/(gp,Ap)o.2 x = R3.25(i n)~2 R = h/h 3 where h is the critical liquid height, C is a where x is the fluid quality exiting the ofRake constant, W, is the mass flow of the continous from the main pipe and h is the distance from the phase in the ofRake, g is the gravitational from the oIRake to the liquid level constant, p is the density of the continucus phase in the ofnake, and Ap is the phasic density ditTerence ,
gi& jh",N!YMh '+i
. ; .x hjh0N,c. N.,
.;u . , ,
N .: s.<-N'iI(btfelaiIObh
;h;j!!b, c- eea eng.k%e% sg gw-3aX {tO5itsDhtsbases,1-4
..u., n . - -
+ "
e -
.$ . .g: g :: ~ w;;r g y; ~ ,:..;;t e ,p , es; -
f i L A KfK air-water P = 0.4 MPa o UCB air-water P < l. IMPa e UCB steam-water P < l.1 MPa ___ Equation . q 1.0 - M 4
- I h
y~
- i I 0.5 - e a
e
.A A e e* e e * '
~ '
e ee ee
- ee e O
5 I I 5 5 I 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0'.7 I 0.8 0.'9 g 1.0 x _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - - ---- --- _J
Available Data Suggests No Scale Effect Due to Main Pipe Diameter 1.0 . i - = 6
. $)
8 a8 ~ O U one(o. a038 m) 5 - o o.m (o-au m) 0.6 - O -- 1 o 's 0.4 - O -
. O w a2 -
O - tq) O. 0.0 G.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Fasetiert of Gas nken Off
me. _4# t Comparison of HSE Model to Azzopardi and ' Smith Data Suggest Diameter Ratio Unimportant ' L A&S Data: Offtake to Main Pipe Diameter = 0.67 ; i 1.0 .
, , l O Data 8 0.8 -
$ RELAP5 ,
j - 5) b 0.6 - a %-
'8 04 ^
-l ' op.
2 c.2 - O Q-0.0 0.0
'* - * ' @' ' @g oC 0.2 OA 0.6 0.8 i .o Fvaction of Gas Taken Off i
e
~ Cold leg A and PBL-A fluid densities for the ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP--DV-01). ,_,
1 1 k
?
l Cold leg B and PBL-B fluid densities for the [_ ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01). ' 7 i 5 N k
. I i
I
s
- Hot leg phase separation in tees was judged reasonable for the ROSA 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test AP-CL-03). , ,
i i i i e l l 3 l L 5 k i a I ( t
Hot leg phase separation in tees was judged reasonable for the g,__ TROSA 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test AP-CL-03). , b
)
b 6 f i t i l i _-_____ _ _ _ _ _. __ _._ _ =m- _ - - - _ __- _-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - . . . - - - - - - - = - - . _
~
Hot leg A and ADS-4A fluid densities for the ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01). ,
. . - = - _ - - - - _.
Hot leg B and ADS-4B fluid densities for the ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01). I I 5
m E g_,6 . g g g. > AA + WAA e M -a m m - m 4.aB.La5 - .a 4- L4--4A = _ 4 .t -ee*ha 5. A A a S b. a m .m. -_ne..__ f b 6 I Z 1 t p i
Hot leg phase separation in tees was judged minimal for the ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). - 900 tin .
?
i t i i
Integrated ADS-4 mass flow in the base case and HSE sensitivity study for the AP600 2-inch PBL break calculation. 300000 , , 7 . 6 5 t l I I i 1 I k i t i
b
- Reactor vessel mass in the base case and HSE sensitivity study IEnnnn for the AP600 2-inch PBL break calculation. . _, :
b i i 1 i e
Summary of findings for Phase Separation in Tees during the short-term phase , i e The horizontal stratification and entrainment model was Judged applicable. m The AP600 scale is not covered by the data base m There is no obvious scale effect in the experiment data u Developmental assessment case was well simulated m Sensitivity calculations should be considered to account for uncertainties in the phase separation 1 o The composite integral assessment judgments were reasonable. (PBL-CL) 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Not observed Reasonable Reasonable i SPES Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable OSU Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable , (HL) 1" CLB DVl(B 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Minimal SPES Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable OSU Reasonable None made Reasonable 1 e Phase separation sensitivity calculations have been performed for an AP600 2" PBLB, showing little impact on the minimum reactor vessel inventory. - f
't 1
. d ACRSPB/the 2-3-97/23
l ; i Summary ofinformation for ADS Mass Flow during the short-term phase l: Rationale The dominant outflow term in RCS mass balance for PIRT high rank Adequacy 1. Basic features of model (Henry-Fauske) i evaluation 2. Developmental assessment based on 3. Integral assessment: ROSA DVILB,2" PBLB SPES 2" PBLB OSU 1" CLB
- 4. Scaling application t i
i i
# ACRSPBAhc 2-3-97/4 , .,.,,-t ,.
Critical Flow lModel Based on the well-established empirical Henry-Fauske Model , i Developed for nozzles, orifices, and short tubes Assumes equal phase velocities but allows thermal non-equilibrium
- Mass transfer correlated in terms of equilibrium rate:
gx dx -
,l,=Nj*l, where N=xjo.14 Model was extended for noncondensable gases Discharge coefficient and non-equilibrium constant are input to .
correspond to break geometry
,v
~
;AP600 RangesIhf Application of the CriticalFlowxModel; COMPONENT PRESSURE SUBCOOLING QUALITY (MPa) ( C) i Break 3 - 15 0 - 100 -
ADSl-3 0.3 - 3 - 0+ to 1.0 ADS-4 0.12 - 0.3 - 0+ to 1.0 j
un i ,. .VU . , . . ~ . . :^. . . . . ... .
...e ., . _ . .
- sh: isHenn'yhFadske' Developmental'Assbssment -
- t .. + ~ , cy;, .y N1 ~ -- - '
EXPERIMENT PRESSURE QUALITY SUBCOOLING DATA POINTS (MPa) ( deg C ) IIREAK FLOW Sozzi & Sutherland Nonle #2 (IJD = 0) 5.7 - 6.7 < 0.0065 < 19 13 Soni & Sutherland Nozzle #2 (IJD = 1) 5.6 - 6.9 <0.006 < 20 47 Soni & Sutherland Nozzle #2 (IJD = 3) 5.7 - 6.9 <0.004 < 22 17 Sozzi & Sutherland Nonle #4 (11D = 0) 5.6 - 6.6 <0.0099 <2 23 ROSA AP-CL-03 3 - 15.5 <0 < 100 transient ADSI-3 FLOW Sozzi & Sutherland Nozzle #3 (11D = 0) 4.3 - 6.9 <0.006 < 63 58 Neussen (D = 6.4mm) 0.84 - 3.8 0.022 - 0.228 25 Neussen (D = 1Imm) 1.6 - 6.5 0.0028 - 0.157 12 ADS-4 FLOW Fincke & Collins 0.09 - 0.3 5-40 92 Carofano & McManus 0.I3 - 0.19 0.64 - 0.89 9 Deich et al. 0.12 0.15 - 0.98 22
4 Henry-Fauske'Model Assessment- . Using ROSA AP-CL-03 as a !' Separate Effects" Experiment i t E e Simple two volume model representingjust upstream and downstream of ROSA break orifice ; e Specify upstream conditions as a function of time using data from test e Use high subcooling data to set discharge coefficient
- Co = 0.92 e Use data near saturation to set non-equilibrium parameter -
- N = x,y/3.5 (0.14 is default)
4 h I i k ROSA AP-CL-03 Break Flow . i e
)
1 t r b 1 f t t i i 4 e , 4 2 !
8 ci 4 s d t
.O g 4-4
;J "
', .RELAP5/HsnryAFuusks:
i E 1 iCompafisonWDhibh%ta
-.,, :,);
r v - a
- Converging / Diverging Nozzle
- e 3 Dt = 32.6 mm P = 1.2 bar
, 1000 ,,, , , ,
~
4. A Deich Data
~
1 x 800 - R5: Henry-Fauske - t a . g-
$m?
g N 600 -
-A -
A
, sE g -
A E x 400 4A - o - - g--- 2 - AA g U 200 M - 0 - - ' - - - - ' - - - O 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Quality 4
ADS-123 mass flow rate was judged reasonable for the
- ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01).
i
-r
ADS-4A mass flow was judged reasonable for the ROSA DVI line break exoeriment (Test AP-DV-01L 1 I i i I i i 1 i l
ADS 123 mass flow was judged reasonable for the ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). _ 3000 , , , . . . .
-w t
ADS-48 mass flow was judged reasonable for the
, ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01). .
51 . . .
?
1
[ ADS 4A mass flow was judged reasonable for the-1 ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). ' I 1750; , , , , , , il ,
ADS 4B flow was judged minimal for the
. ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). t 1000 i ,
t l 6 L i
1 ADS-123 integrated mass flow rate was judged reasonable for the-SPES 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test S01007). ~ t fsoo . . I 1 i i
6 ADS-4 integrated mass flow rate was judged reasonable for the :
- SPES 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test S01007).
800 r - . . - T i 4 ..
I integrated mass released through ADS-123 for the { _ OSU 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test NRC22). 1200. , i f i i i I i
Integrated mass released through ADS-4 for the . OSU 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test NRC22). 2000 i
, , . _I 1
i l I
- Top-down scaling pertinent nondimensional parameters for ADS mass flow e (ADS-4 blowdown sub-phase, vessel inventory equation)
Dominant x Physical xnoSdKAP900 KSPESlE AP900 KOSUlKAP900 interpretation xiew Ratio of CMT flow 1.60 0.72 1.69 CLB, PBLB to RCS outflow 0.99 0.56 1.52 DVILB j
- o (IRWST injection sub-phase, vessel inventory equation) i i
Dominant x Physical xnoSdKAP900 KSPESIKAP900 KOSulKAP900 : Interpretation ! xi a Ratio of DVIline 0.97 0.97 0.64 CLB, PBLB ' flow to net hiflow 0.95 0.95 0.49 DVILB t y
-.. _~(
ACRSPB/the 2-3-97/3 !
- _ - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - _ - - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ __ - - _ _ ___ _ - - _i
j. Y Summary of findings for ADS Mass Flow l during the short-term phase ; e The Henry-Fauske critical flow model was judged applicable. m Model does not have an inherent scale limitation f a The expected range of AP600 conditions is within the model assessment base ! a Developmental assessment cases were well simulated t 4 e The composite integral assessment judgment was reasonable. l 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Minimat i SPES Excellent Reasonable Reasonable i OSU Reasonable None made Reasonable i r e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments bounded or i closely approximated those of the AP600. e Sensitivity calculations can be performed to account for the AP600 ADS valve design ranges. i
~
#[.
! . h,. h .
r .
.~.ee ._ ACRSPB/the 2-3-97/21 l
L CMT liquid level for the _. CMT separate effects test with 20% of the tank heated (Test C077507). 3.0 . n t I i t 6
)
I k s h I I I
l Summary ofinformation for : CMT Level during the short-term phase
- Rationale The CMT level determines time of ADS actuation
for PIRT high rank l Adequacy 1. Separate effects test assessment (CMT test evaluation facility) based on 2. Integral assessment: ! ROSA 2" PBLB ; SPES 1" CLB, DVILB OSU DVILB,2" PBLB
- 3. Scaling application t
i k---- J
--s ACRSPBahc 2-3-97/11
i CMT level was judged minimal for the . OSU 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test 889). 110 , CMT 1 - Experiment 100 " '\ --- cur i - caicuiation _ s e-4CMT 2 - Experiment 90 - ( e -9CMT 2 - Calculation ,
\ .. -
k Data uncertainty 80 - 4 \ " g 1 i, , l e 70 - s e u E \ l , - - - - 'g-d g
.a s s ,
g 60
\
(4' g
@ \ ' .
$n 50 t
\
i s
\
a , s s p-* 3
- g. 40 -
s
\ -
J $ 's , l 30 -
\ ' , N -
\, N u ---- - r-- r 20 - s ' ,
s a s i s i 10 -
\ , _ . .: . ie - it. -
N \ ' 0 - O~, ' - f 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 t Time (s) e
{ j Il' l l 0 0 5 1 t n ntn n e uo eio mamt 0
. r ii r u s
) ieme gia mlca ia t y '
0 i n s 2 EcEc t a r eC - - e 1 i22 c hR t TrTT MUMM a a n ' rN o CcCc t a
^
f t Ge D s s - 0 t n Te , 9e "
\ '- 0 l
l e( s' 0 1 cxet n e em s - dre i e P s N ^
)
( s g p s' e dx s m jk ue s
' i T
sae s' - a N - l wr b s
^
veen , N - 0 el i ' 0 l 5 I TV - MD _ CU S 9- - _ O , s' - e
~
s
',i,'1
\ %
m % ; l l
,)
, gg i 1 8 6 _ - - - - -
0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 8 /
~ 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1
^e gE2g e$s. O 3R.8 _ - -
(' !
CMT liquid level was judged minimal for the SPES DVI line break experiment (Test S00706). 100 i CMT A - Experiment
--- CMT A - Calculation 80 -
9-GCMT B - Experiment
, e -eCMT B - Calcubtion -
I Data uncertainty
\
_ 60 -
\* -
8 4 > g
~ \
q) \
> \
G) % J 1 % 40 - N i % 1
\
q l
' 's 20 - i 's s --
I s I s t N s t 's, I uu,g'- '%
. - - m... i..a.
_ _ _ . . _ _ . .. .m. . s % .m
.. m_. m. . _. . ...
. . . i.... . . s . . i . . . i .
.___m__
)
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 1 Time (s)
' l e ,,,m_ . . . _ . . . . . . _ _ .
CMT liquid level was judged reasonable for the SPES 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test S00401). ; i , , : 100 ".'t 10 0 0 ? - , -e s
\
\
\ CMT A - Experiment I \ --- CMT A - Calculation g
\ G--eCMT B - Experiment g ,
80 -
\,
V ry , ,,e e -eCur o - Caicuiation - t t i Data uncertainty (
'\ t
_ 60 re i' i i i e I i i _i 40 - i i 1
\
\
\ ,.
t ' 20 -
\ !
\ -
\ \
\ i f
\ \ V g %
\ \ !
0 -
- d., j O 2000 4000 6000 8000 Time (s) l
CMT-B collapsed liquid level was judged reasonable.for the ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). 110 e; ' ' ' 100 --- -
;-f u g, ------
s,_ gype,imen, g --- Calculation 90 -
's -
N' Y; 80 -
's -
s 70 -
's
,, 60 -
N\ v
\
E 50 - I oata uncertainty
's - -
h ' \ 40 -
's -
s 1 30 - \ J N 20 - x
's s,
10 - 0 - -
-10 - - ' '
O 1000 2000 3000 4000 Time (s) ,
CMT-A collapsed liquid level was judged reasonable for the ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). 110 , , , , , I 100 -\ , - ! k I t '3 , 'g Experiment j I \
\ ' \ f \ --- Calculation i 90 -
\' \ , \ --
i
\l gg g 'g i g !
i. 80 -
\
\/
70 -
\
\
_ 60 -
\ -
[ v
\
\
3 50 - I oata uncertainty \ !
> \
40 -
\ -
\ :
\
30 -
\\ -
f
\
20 - N -
\
10 -
\ s
's '
0 -
's '--------
N i
-10 - - - - - - -
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 i Time (s) I
Top-down scaling pertinent nondimensional parameters for CMT level e (ADS-4 blowdown sub-phase, CMT draining equation) ' Dominant x Physical unosalnap co x spesIx4p a xosulxAP.00 Interpretation xis X K r i Nondimensional CMT 1.10 0.63 0.99 CLB,PBLB ; draining rate 0.68 0.48 1.82 DVILB e n ratios greater than 1.0 indicate the experimental facility CMT is relatively smaller, lower in elevation and/or faster draining as compared with AP600 [ k a c a s e e ,ine 2 2 71. I
- i i
~ ! Summary of findings for CMT Level during the short-term phase , i e The separate effects assessmentjudgment was reasonable. l e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable. l 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable SPES Reasonable Minimal Reasonable j OSU Reasonable Excellent Minimal e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the ugeriments bounded those of the AP600. 7 i ...;. ACRSPBithc 2-3-97/29
The RELAP5 code was found to be adequate for simulating the short-term SBLOCA phenomena ' in AP600. e The pertinent models and correlations are appropriate and applicable. e The integral code assessments found that 13 (of the 14) high-ranked PIRT phenomena were reasonably simulated by the code; no ; assessment of the core decay power was
- made because this was a boundary condition in all of the experiments.
e The scaling application showed that the pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments bound or closely approximate those of the AP600.
$ ACRSPB/thc 2-3-97/33
Summary ofinformation for Accumulator Flow during the short-term phase Rationale i
- 1. Major contributor to RCS mass and energy for PIRT balances. Primary mass source during DVILB high rank blowdown, and during smaller break ADS
- 2. Provides subcooling at core inlet with subsequent impact on vessel level Adequacy 1. Basic features of model(s) evaluation 2. Developmental assessment based on 3. Integral asses 6r.3ent:
ROSA 1" CLB SPES CVILB i OSU 2" PBLB Y$ ACRSPBMhc 2-3-97/2 i
RELAP5/ MOD 3 Accumulator Model Natural convection N a treated as a wall heat transfer % ideal gas . Heat and mass y - iquid subace i 4 Isothermal water mass Liquid flow model , t includes inertia, wall friction, form loss, " Geometry: ' Cylindrical or gravity - Spherical - t
" Lumped Parameter" Model t
s
i i Accumulator Model Basis and Assumptions
- Two regions, ' aped parameter model 1
- Gas dome Liquid zone .
> - Gas dome: i l Homogeneous ideal gas (nitrogen) with constant Cp 100% relative humidity (effect on N 2 neglected) Energy transport: wall heat transfer, condensation, ! vaporization
- Liquid zone- i Isothermal; vaporization and condensation ignored Integral momentum formulation: inertia, wall friction, form loss, gravity ;
Wall heat transfer: turbulent free convection in enclosure l t I
i Accumulator Model Conservation Equations Dome Gas Mass EOS Mn= Pn Vo = Constant PVo = M n Rn Tg Energy M ni r dun 3 r dVo 3 ( dt >i = -P ( di )1+ On ni Liquid Flow Momentum dv . pnA(L + ly2) + Fv2 = -A(P - Pexit) + AAP z dt 2 Mn- mass of nitrogen Tg- nitrogen temperature pn - density of nitrogen On-rate of heat transferred to nitrogen Vo - volume of gas dome from wall and liquid surface Un - nitrogen internal energy A - flow area of surge line i Pn- nitrogen pressure L - flow length of surge line APz- elevation pressure difference V - velocity in surge line Rn - nitrogen gas constant F - friction term = ppa (UD)A/2
- ~ .m ar l
l
.- a; [' ' ,[ ; , hf, .
'[ -(
f. ,4 , Y [:t.fd ', ... , '%
.v . . ," $4 b,
,.,v
-S
,O'
' Y J, N' ftI'.
ge{'h'lg.g jfecumula h' b)' L ty.sI ore'.}: I SM ' $ <t'!%$ . ,'M at Er;. [' YUl-I?(odele]
. .. . fe' rs ans W' ' 'a;l'k' g'H'e:
illf M %#!9 6!s! E # i W R F % 6 @ T E i '/ P W e w i Turbulent Natural Convection I L h=0.12 8 (GrPr)ll3 DT 6 , where t 3 , Gr= A slT,-yl$ g ; v2 1 i and 10's Gr s 10' . For AP600, Gr ~ 10'" t I i
D (- -
,v-,i(g y,' Y , .,
- M'
,{+'
$'$gy:w"!'y, !M' fAfcfgyjgtbr!M6ddln ' ' '
4Aa m a m s. m m - ,- - .. . MnPMkg a,. w# gma. i iquid4id4Ght!
- ww- Heatn;o /MdssNrdrisfers Sensible and latent heat transfer are included I
Gas expansion is considered quasi-static Condensation in gas dome Vapori7ation at liquid / vapor surface Sensible Heat Transfer Latent Heat Transfer i h=0.15 *(GrPr) E Qvap=M,,lig Q) L b Qcora=Mcoru}'ig(T,) i i i e
)
i t Pressure Range Comparisons for Accumulator Model i RELAP5 I AP600 Required Developmental Assessment i l Integral Assessment i ----------------------------- . 1 I I l l 0 1 2 3 4 5 Pressure (MPa) - , _ ... 1
Gas Temperature Range Comparisons for Accumulator Model : I RELAPS i ! i i AP600 Required i ! Developmental Assessment Integral Assessment
=============
- I I I i l
-40 -20 0 20 40 60 Temperature (C) - , _ ...
i l l
t Developmental Assessment of Accumulator Model LOFT L3-1 SBLOCA Primary system piping Accumulator A j N Accum Pressure Component measurement Standpipe k '3 < > l Surgel.ine - T . Time-dependent ( 9 volume Pressure in the time dependent volume is input as a function of time to match the test data. cooi u o m oir
; i,.. : " :i. y.
N +' -'. . ' . ' ".>- " . . s _ A c :.. s . :. . %'i' ' '
. ~ . . . , . . .f . .' ._ -
* .3 g ,% ,KORTlU213lA6cunnilhtodDisshaig6- 1 p$[IEPhidi$i80!$ddMdasbred!GaslSpacdN6111m6Ns
(%.g ~; w Tiine' w ,._ ' '
?'
- :y.> ;-
3.0 . . . i i LOFT Data
-- IlELAPS Prediction 2.5 -
n ' E a> t E aO 2.0 - E O i' 1.5 - t f 1.0 ' i 0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 1000.0 Time (s)
Accumulator A mass flow was judged reasonable for the _ ROSA 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test AP-CL-03). - 5 i , , . - t .; i
Accumulator B mass flow was judged reasonable for the
, ROSA 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test AP-CL-03). --
5 . p ., , - t i _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ m_-____- _ _ __ _ _ ___ . _ _ _ . . _. - _ _
Accumulator A injection flow rate was judged reasonable.for the
._ SPES DVI line break experiment (Test S00706). -
o.5 i t t i i
+
- Accumulator 1 mass flow was judged excellent for the -
, OSU 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test SB9). -- 1.5 F ~~' ' ' ' ' ' - ' i 4 i t L t 6
Accumulator 2 mass flow was judged excellent for the OSU 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test SB9). 1.5 p- , , 't
?
l f 5 1 __________m._.___________ ____ _ _ __ ._.m_____. _ _ . _ _ _ _ ___._. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . __ _ _ _ ___. . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Summary of findings for Accumulator Flow during the short-term phase e The accumulator model was judged applicable. a Model does not have an inherent scale limitation a Expected range of application is covered by the assessments a Developmental assessment case was well simulated e The composite integral assessmentJudgment was reasonable. 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBL l ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable SPES Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable ' OSU Reasonable Excellent Excellent
\
l g, y.m.> ACRSPBMhc 2-3-97/19
Summary ofinformation for ADS Energy Release during the short4erm phase ; i Rationale. The dominant outflow term in RCS energy for PIRT balance high rank ! Adequacy 1. Models and correlations review -see ADS evaluation Mass Flow based on 2. Integral assessment: ROSA DVILB,2" PBLB SPES 2" PBLB OSU 1" CLB
- 3. Scaling application -see ADS Mass Flow i
l I !
.. =
)
a ACRSPBithe 2-3-97/3 '
ADS-123 energy release was judged reasonable for the
- ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01). ~ . .
20 i i - .. .. t c i i i i t
ADS-4A total energy release was judged reasonable for the ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01). c 8( , - i i i L i I i
ADS-4B energy release was judged reasonable for the !
- ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01). t 8[ > ' ' '
"I i
i i l l i f l I f t l i
ADS 123 energy release was judged reasonable for the
- ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01).
2500 i 2
1 ADS 4A energy release was judged reasonable for the
] - ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01).
; 1000 , .
, , , . 1 l
l
ADS 4B energy release was judged minimal for the
- ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). ~
600; , .
, , .- -i i
ADS-123 energy release was judged reasonable for the SPES 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test S01007). , . - , 2.0 i
, , , i i
i l 1 h-l .i
?
ADS-4 energy release was judged reasonable for the- ' SPES 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test S01007). - li.0, , . t i l I i i I i l n
Integrated energy released through ADS-123 for the OSU 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test NRC22). l 900 i , , , D
Integrated energy released through ADS-4 for the
- OSU 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test NRC22). ~
1000 i j I i t i t-i
Summary of findings for ADS Eneray Release during the short-term phase e The Henry-Fauske critical flow model was judged applicable. a Model does not have an inherent scale limitation a The expected range of AP800 conditions is within the model assessment base u Developmental assessment cases were well simulated e The composite integral assessment Judgment was reasonable. i 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Peasonable Minimal SPES Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable OSU Reasonable None made Reasonable e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments bounded or closely approximated those of the AP600. e Sensitivity calculations can be performed to account for the AP600 ADS valve design ranges. ( *
$ ACRSPBAhc 2-3-97/20 f II
Summary ofinformation for Break Mass Flow 1 during the short-term phase i i Rationale Primary RCS mass loss until ADS actuation ; for PIRT Inventory depletion leads to CMT draining, l high rank then to ADS ! Less important after ADS initiation . Adequacy 1. Basic features of model (see ADS flow) evaluatiors 2. Developmental assessment (see ADS flow) based on 3. Integral assessment: ROSA 2" PBLB i SPES 1" CLB . OSU DVILB
- 4. Scaling application I
l i ACRSPBithe 2-3-97/5 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . -_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - __. _____--______________I
1at - a w 3 Break mass flow was judged reasonable for the !
- ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01).
7 i. . .
- . 3 ,
k i i 4 t b l l s
1 j Mass flow through the vessel-side break was judged reasonable for the . j - OSU DVI line break experiment (Test NRC20). ' 8j .
.7
A Integrated break mass flow rate was judged excellent SPES 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test S00401). 400 1 , , , 7 , L
Mass flow through the PSIS-side break was judged reasonable for the OSU DVI line break experiment (Test NRC20). _ 10 4 - i i
- Top-down scaling pertinent nondimensional parameters for break mass flow i
f l
- e (Initial depressurization sub-phase, RCS i
pressure equat. ion) Dominant x Physical unosAIKArtoo useeslxAP90s Interpretation x r ,, Pressurizer emptying 1.00 1.00 time ratio x.,, Ratio of energy input 0.99 1.00 .l to energy storage 1
.i l
i ACRSPBAhc 2-3-97/15
Summary of findings for Break Mass Flow during the short-term phase e The Henry-Fauske critical flow model was Judged applicable. m Model does not have an inherent scale limitation a Expected range of application is covered by the assessments m Developmental assessment case was well simulated e The composite integral assessmentJudgment was reasonable. 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Excellent Excellent Excellent SPES Excellent Reasonable Reasonable OSU Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments closely approximated those of the AP600. ll ' ' a ACR8PBithe 2-3-97/22
- - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------J
- 1 2
Summary ofinformation for Core Flashing during the short-term phase i Rationale 1. Affects RCS mass and energy distributions for PIRT during ADS l high rank 2. Affects core liquid level . Adequacy 1. Basic features of flashing model evaluation 2. Developmentalassessment
- 3. Integral assessment: ROSA based on ac=- u m
_v , _es,+, y 2
~
FlashingModbl% : . . Flashing is a subset of the overall mass transfer model RELAP5 considers vapor generation near the wall surface and in the bulk as separate, but additive processes: - r,= - ## C#'-P"f*'-9 + r,, hs a where: F, is the total vapor generation rate per unit volume, H;, is the product of the gas-side heat transfer coefficient and interfacial area per unit volume, H ir is the product of the liquid-side heat transfer coeflicient and interfacial area per unit volume, T' is the saturation pressure, T, is the gas temperature, Tr is the liquid temperature, h,* and br
- are the gas and liquid jump condition enthalpies, respectively, and F, is the vapor generation near the wall due to wall heat transfer.
c .. a. .g ; w.: '
+ ;:.
hing_?M_6d,6,Wn.m.3
.1 ,m jFla_sm ;;r -ghW c ,
..v.. . gy +< j + gy
~wJ
- 1(Cont!d q! in l v :-
W c p.u- .
. .:. ~kg .:)^2 M m;;: ash
% *'+ :n
- For flashing, the jump condition enthalpies are given as:
h; = h; h}=h,
- Vapor generation near the wall is given by:
9" r" = hl-h] r; Hirand H, idepend on the flow regime and the thermodynamic
, state of the phases. During flashing caused by depressurization, the liquid is superheated and the vapor is saturated.
f t
1 Flashing lMadslt . l(conn 1)f The bubbly flow regime is most prevalent during flashing. In bubbly flow:
- The interfacial area is based on the assumption of spherical bubbles whose diameter is governed by a Weber Number .
criterion: agr= 3.60:%/d %3 and d %3 = d,,/2 where d,,, = owe c,/p,(v,-v,)2
- The critical Weber Number used in RELAP5 is 10. i
/ $ --7.,[
Flasliing!M6d, elf
^
w(dont'd)j. e. * ^ e,, ;g i g% ~. :.
- e k
The interfacial heat transfer coefficient is taken as the maximum of the Plesset-Zwick and Lee-Riley models: Plesset-Zwick: h = 12kgTrT,)p,C pr /xd 3p,hrs ir Lee-Riley: hi r = k,(2.0+0.74Re 3a5) A factor is added to account for enhanced nucleation effects at low void fraction:
+ 0.4 v r PrC,gnin(0.001,a3,3)/a3,3 i i
The assessment of core flashing was based on circumstantial evidence from the ROSA j experiments. t t e There is no direct measurement of flashing in the core. i e The pressure history and sequence of events were well simulated in all three experiments. e The initial core liquid level decrease in the DVI line break experiment was well calculated. l i ACR8PBMhc 2-3-97/24
Summary of findings for Core Flashina during the short-term phase e The flashing model was judged applicable. a Model does not have an inherent scale limitation a Expected range of application is covered by the assessments u Developmental assessment case was well simulated e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable. 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable SPES None made None made None made OSU None made None made None made 2 ACRSP8Ahc 2-3-97125
i Summary ofinformation for Core Subcooling Margin ; during the short-term phase , i i Rationale 1. Affects core flashing and boihng for PIRT 2. Threshold effect in that there is no fuel rod ~ i i high rank heatup as long as core is covered and subcooled Adequacy 1. Integral assessment: evaluation ROSA 1" CLB based on SPES DVILB OSU 1" CLB,2" PBLB l 2. Scaling application '1 [ i ' ACRSPB/the 2-3-97/8 _ . _ _ _ _E$ i
Core inlet subcooling was judged reasonable for the ROSA 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test AP-CL-03). iii5 i -
-I l
Core inlet fluid subcooling was judged reasonable for the : SPES DVI line break exoeriment (Test S00706). .
; =
i Core inlet subcooling was judged minimal for the ' OSU 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test NRC22). _
.. , l' 4
6 W 6 h t 4 i
+
4 f
i Top-down scaling pertinent nondimensional 1 parameter for core subcooling margin i e-(IRWST injection sub-phase, temperature 4 equation) , Dominant x Physical snoSAIxApggg xSPESlE AP900 KOSulEAP900 Interpretation' ! x% Lower reactorvessel 1.03 0.79 0.67 CLB, PBLB mixing coefficient 1.01 0.78 0.51 DVILB ! t I t t l ! f f i
'4 ACRSPBtthe 2-3-97/11 f
t
l Core inlet subcooling was judged reasonable for the OSU 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test SB9). m 6 l
~
L
.i P
h _ - _ - . - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___-m -__.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _'
Summary of findings for Core Subcoolina Marain during the short-term phase i e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable. 1" CLB DVILB 2 PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable SPES Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable OSU Minimal Reasonable Reasonable e The pertinent nondimensional p a ~ameter from the experiments bounded that of the 0600. ACRSPBAtic 2-3-67/26
Summary ofinformation for CMT Flow Resistance during the short-term phase Rationale Affects C10lT recirculation and draining rates. for PIRT CMT is likely the only source of coolant makeup high rank between ADS-4 actuation and initiation of IRWST injection Adequacy 1. Basic features of single-phase pressure drop evaluation model based on 2. Developmental assessment
- 3. Integral assessment:
ROSA 2" PBLB SPES 1" CLB OSU DVILB
- 4. Scaling application '
M' acas m u m.
k iSingle-Phase Pressure Drop lModel e Pressure drop from wall friction and form loss are both modeled ; e Wall friction is computed using the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor computed from correlations for laminar and turbulent flow - Laminar: At= 64/Re@s , O s Re s 2200 ! where @3 is a shape factor for non-circular flow channels l Turbulent: 1/lu2 = -21ogio {0.27e/D+(2.51/Re)[1.14 - 2!ogio(e/D - 21.25/Re")]} ! t which is the Zigrang-Sylvester approximation to the Colebrook-White correlation
Single-Phase!Presstire!DiopM6dsi
' ~
e
~
L(cont'd)) L e For the laminar to turbulent transition (2200sRes3000): AL,r Re-2200 i t,2200) + A L,2200
= {3000-2200 r,3 o i
e A correction factor is used for heated walls: H =g+ H En#)D _ g) Au P r (( M un 6 l i f [
\
' 4 I. .; '. ; c . " *' -
- , -- . u :' & '; .
'ff
~
Jf l-:- ' . ')>> ki' ., . l., -!IW >7.- ..g. .;. . ,l.ff'.
$if$[jb ,3W,.z]5EormsEbssjM:, d.3d s lf "
$[i ,4QfN 1 "j~[ 5 .
%a-Nj4 ' : 4 m .y n^ /' ^
.
- Smooth and abrupt area change models are available. The smooth area change model utilizes the classical pressure drop expression:
2 AP = K( )pv
- The abrupt area change model employs the Bourda-Carnot assumption for computing losses associated with the expansion part of the flow process K=(1 * )2 ee ct
- where e = A2 /A i (expansion), et = A,/Ai (orifice), and e, = A/A, = 0.62 + 0.38(e,)3 .
E
- c. <a,,}
y g
$[fiikggsj,g x i je@haselIdessureiDropiFidh w
e Janssen Experiment e Rectangular Test Section e Area Reduction and Expansion (0.5" x 1.75" to 0.2" x 1.75" to 0.5" x 1.75") ! e P = 0.5 Mpa, T = 330K, Re ~ 55,000 2.0 , 1.5 - O ! 9 s 0 U O e O O i U e g' o 1.0 - O@O a On On i e O Data M O O Abmpt -- Roughness e 5.0e-6 ft 0.5 - O Abrupt -- Roughness = 1.Se-4 ft - A Smooth - Roughness = 5.0e-6 ft X
' Smooth -- Roughness = 1.5e-4 ft O.o n 'E NO '
o 10 20 30 40 Distance (inches)
d CMT-A integrated mass flow for the . c- ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). , . t b 1 t i i
- Assessmbr$t'of Atsrupt Areadliangel iModel Using EPRI.:FlowLBlockage Experiment'::
Calculated and Measured Pressure Drop Across Blockage , Run (AP )cac Kcuc (AP )uus Kuus % Error (blockage) (Pa) (Pa) 1 369 0.32 429 0.37 -13.4 i (21%) _ f 5 701 0.32 801 0.37 -12.5 ! (21%) }. 9 4567 2.12 4410 2.05 +3.6 j E (41.5%) I 13 19799 9.16 16682 7.72 +18.7 ;- (61.3%) I f t
![
e I 5
- Al
CMT-B integrated mass flow for the ROSA 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test AP-PB-01). 1 i t i P I i i t i
j es si gi CMT A discharge line and pressure balance line integrated flow rates for the J , SPES 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test S00401). 7 . 1 Ij i,
l-i i-
- l CMT 1 injection mass flow for the
,( OSU DVI line break experiment (Test NRC20). t m .I i'
.z. i
~)
l
-g i
i i 4 i 1 i t t a i r
1
! CMT 2 injection mass flow for the OSU DVI line break experiment (Test NRC20).
1
?. ~
i i 4 5 f^ e
1 i l \ i l Top-down scaling pertinent nondimensional parameters for CMT flow resistance e (ADS-4 blowdown sub-phase, CMT draining ; equation) i Dominant x Physical x nosalzaP000 usPeslxAP000 K OSU lxAP900 * , Interpretation ;i K s X xir i Nondimensional CMT 1.10 0.63 0.99 CLB, PBLB ; ; draining rate 0.68 0.48 1.82 DVILB - i I f e x ratios greater than 1.0 indicate the experimental facility CMT is relatively smaller, : lower in elevation and/or faster draming as ; compared with AP600 l
)
ACRSPBAhc 2-3-97/T 1
l l Summary of findings for CMT Flow Resistance during the short-term phase e The single-phase pressure drop model was judged applicable.
- a Model does not have an inherent scale limitation !;
a Expected range of application is covered by the assessments u Developmental assessment case was well simulated e The composite integral assessmentJudgment was reasonable. 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable SPES Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable OSU Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments bounded those of the AP600.
'r r -
ACRSPBtthe 2-3-97/28
I l ! 1 i ! Summary ofinformation for Fuel Rod Decay-Heat during the short-term phase l
- Rationale 1. Primary energy source in the RCS for PIRT 2. Removing this energy is the basic safety issue high rank in a SBLOCA i Adequacy 1. Basic features of decay heat model evaluation 2. Comparison with ORIGEN2 calculation based on t
[ I ACRSPB/thc 2-3-97/12
l l - - 5 ^
'??lYN: . . . . . . . ' ' $f C 'I? Q:.$ bb.b 'l
..S *N- ~
s $ .,:..- - h.?< k V- h'Jh Yi - t.
--%,bl%%H.,:'blW"%{tM'il~$0lo in e l e.k"Oh:g'lk'ffe' k C 922?%hl&&hf.j l,.;d[# ');E T 7% ' ' eat r,D'e: -
ye .
~ .\ Cay g +y;:;;gggggggg:y,;pu- ,
RELAPS/ MOD 3 contains the American National Standard for ' Decay Heat Power in Light Water Reactors, ANSI /ANS-5.1-1979. The so-called "G Factor" correction factor of the standard was recently added to account for the effects of neutron absorption during very long transients. The standard specifies an equation for : 4 t < 104 secs and a table for t 210 secs. t 10 . . . . RELAPS ORIGIIN2 g . e _ y 10-2 _
.c -
4 : - cN _ 10-3 5000 10000 15000 20000 O Time (s) i i
i t Summary of findings for Fuel Rod Decay Heat during the short-term phase ! e The decay heat model was judged applicable. u Model based on ANS 5.1 (1979) m Calculated decay power agrees well with best-estimate I ORIGEN2 calculation for AP600 l i i t
,,' ACRSPBAhc 2-3-97/30 i
Summary ofinformation for IRWST Flow Resistance during the short-term phase Rationale 1. The IRWST discharge line to the vessel for PIRT represents a large portion of the overall flow high rank resistance during IRWST injection
- 2. Affects core coolant flow, IRWST injection rate, and vessel coolant inventory Adequacy 1. Basic features of single-phase pressure drop evaluation model (see CMT flow resistance) based on 2. Developmental assessment (see CMT flow
, resistance)
- 3. Integralassessment:
ROSA DVILB l SPES 2" PBLB l OSU 1" CLB l
- 4. Scaling application l acuseen. u m L_ _ _ . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . .
1 Total IRWST discharge rate for the ROSA DVI line break experiment (Test AP-DV-01). q i t i i i r 1
- - _ - - _ - - _ . - - . - _ _ - - . . _ ...-_.___.--.-.--__-.----_-._.-_-_-___.__.--___._.--.__.._.__.J_---.-- . _ - - - , _ - - - ._ - . _ _ . - . _ - - - _- - - - - _ --
9-IRWST A injection flow rate for the , SPES 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test S01007). : t
.t t
3 f i
'I 4
E 4 l 1
q 4 e
! 1 ; Mass flow from the IRWST to DVI line 2 for the. t j r. OSU 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test NRC22). ! ) ;
1 i i
~
i b s f i i l i __m- _._ __._.________ _ _ _._________ _ __ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ ___ _ _ ____._ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ . _ __ . _ . __..______.____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __________ . _ _ _ __ _ _ .
Mass flow from the IRWST to DVI line 1 for the-c OSU 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test NRC22). - t t I t I i (
1 l
- Top-dowescaling pertinent nondimens'ional
- parameter for IRWST flow resistance e (IRWST injection sub-phase, vessel inventory equation)
Dominant x Physical xnosA IxAP xSPE9lK AP900 K OSulEAP900
- Interpretation xi m Ratio of DVIline 0.97 0.97 0.64 CLB, PBLB flow to netinflow 0.95 0.95 0.49 DVILB 4
Mg j e- 1 a ACRSP8Mhc 2-3-972 - 1
IRWST liquid level for the OSU 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test NRC22). 120 - - i i ' ' ~
,, -- ~~,,
l ~~~,% 100 -
~,' .
~~- ..
80 - . Experiment
--- Calculation v
gy .. 3 60 - wo uncetamty -
]o-
]
40 - 20 - M , , . . a . - . . Time (s)
Summary of findings for IRWST Flow Resistance during the short-term phase e The single-phase pressure drop model was judged applicsble. m Model does not have an inherent scale limitation m Expected range of application is covered by the assessments m Developmental assessment case was well simulated e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable. 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable SPES Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable OSU Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable
- e The pertinent nondimensional parameter from the experiments j closely approximated that of the AP600. ;
l l ACRSPB/the 2-3-9T/31
i i b Summary ofinformation for Pressurizer Level (Inventory) during the short-term phase l t Rationale 1. Affects ADS 1-3 mass and energy release for PIRT 2. Primary source of liquid for core cooling after '
- high rank ADS-4 actuation and the onset of IRWST l
injection , Adequacy 1. Integral assessment: evaluation ROSA 1" CLB, 2" PBLB based on SPES 1" CLB, DVILB OSU 2" PBLB
- 2. Scaling application i
I i
~
- WN5$ -.- wma
Pressurizer collapsed liquid level was judged reasonable for the ~ ROSA 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test AP-CL-03).
. ,7 l
i l i i t 5
t
! Pressurizer collapsed liquid level was judged reasonable for the
- ROSA 2-inch PBL break ex.oeriment (Test AP-PB-01). _
1 1 7 f b
Pressurizer liquid ievel was judged excellent for the SPES 1-inch cold leg break experiment (Test S00401). _i l
s i i i Pressurizer liquid level was judged minimal for the
- , SPES DVI line break experiment (Test S00706). _
i - i l i i 4
1 , q .
't
- .- Pressurizer liquid level was judged minimal for the ,
!! OSU 2-inch PBL break experiment (Test SB9). y .. i 1 , i ii L l 3 , i i i 1 b
a Top-down scaling pertinent nondimensional parameters for pressurizer level e (Initial depressurization sub-phase, RCS pressure equation) Dominant x Physical x mosaix p000 a xSPESl xAP000 interpretation w, r Pressurizer emptying 1.00 1.00 time ratio x0, Ratio of energy input 0.99 1.00
- to energy storage
- t. . . m **. 4
'Jgtg' 1 ...-w...-
A AcRsPB/the 2-3-97/13 a j! r 'b
Summary of findings for Pressurizer Level during the short-term phase
~
e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable. 1" CLB DVILB 2" PBLB ROSA Reasonable Reasonable Reasonable SPES Excellent Minimal Reasonable . OSU Minimal Minimal Minimal e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments closely approximated those of the AP600.
.t-
K ~j RELAPS Adequacy Evaluation: SBLOCA Long-Term Phase Presented by: C. B. Davis i ACRS Thermal-Hydraulic Subcommittee Meeting ; February 12-14,1997 l i i o
The objective of this presentation is to describe i the evaluation of the adequacy of RELAP5/ MOD 3, Version 3.2.1.2 for predicting the long-term phase of an SBLOCA in the ' AP600 : i e The adequacy evaluation depends on. , a Models and correlations review (developmental assessments) m AP600 integral test assessments s Scaling analyses - t i RER ACRSC90Rhc 2447t2
The method used for the adequacy evaluation is described below: e Analysis was guided by the PIRT: m Short-term phase (< ~ 2 hours) u Long-term phase (after IRWST injection established) m Highly ranked phenomena e Same transients analyzed as for short-term phase. , m 1" CLB u Double-Ended DVILB u 2" PBLB e Analysis of the long-term phase performed for: i e OSU APEX facility u AP600 , SBLOCACBOmtec 2447/3 l
-- -__-___-_----------_--------------_--_J
Depiction of Long-Term Phase W Steam to o containment shell i IRWST Condensate from 2 containment shell A A.B.C Reactor vesse.' : Steam ADS-4 , tim _
]
R3 circulation _B__ _ _ _ _ Liguid_ _ B,___ Curb valve setpoint -- ~~ ~
~~ :~~c_::: r_ : :: -- a C - -- ---- ------
C _ _ _ _ _ _ A_ :___ l IRWST A B: DVI _ B.C_______ __ injection line (1/2) C Hot leg = = =
...TA.F.......
B B,C = = = ^ - V - l Sump injection line (1/2) M Normally T non-flooded rooms
. . p4F, , , , , , , A l
Sump A IRWSTinjection B Sumpinjection C Recirculation valves open N Sump check valve N Sump recirculation valve
=
Consistent long-term RELAP5 models were developed for the OSU and AP600 facilities e The long-term models were developed by condensing, and significantly simplifying, the detailed models m Simplified models contain about 100 control volumes a Detailed models contain about 500 control volumes e The simplified models represent: u Reactor coolant system ' s Steam generators m Safety systems a Primary and secondary sumps (OSU) i ! a Containment (AP600) e Boundary conditions are the same as the detailed models except for the AP600 containment model, which is described further in subsequent presentations SBLOCAC80Rhc 244T14
J The simplified models allow economical simulation of these longer transients e The simplified models were used to evaluate transient response from the time the break opens until nearly steady conditions were obtained during sump injection, a period of about 14 hours in the AP600 ' a Required 1 to 2 cpu days j u Represented conditions reasonably well at *'r start of the long-term phase i RGB_ , ___ .
Evidence supporting the code adequacy evaluation will be presented for seven of the highly ranked phenomena for the long-term phase Long-Term Phase ADS energy release ADS mass flow Core two-phase mixture level Downcomer level . Fuel rod core power / decay heat . IRWST flow resistance IRWST poollevel IRWST pool thermal stratification Sump fluid temperature Sump level Upper plenum two-phase level (6_ _ _ , _ ,
I i l Summary ofinformation for
~
ADS Mass Flow during the long-term phase Rationale 1. Dominant RCS mass outflow in the long-term for PIRT phase t high rank Adequacy 1. Basic features of two-phase pressure drop model
];
evaluation 2. Developmental assessment based on 3. OSU integral assessments
- 4. Scaling applications I
e t [ I ACRSCBORhc 2 3.erta . i
The two-phase form loss model is the dominant model affecting ADS mass flow during the long-term phase e The two-phase form loss model is: AP = 0.5 K (a gp,V,2 + a p,V,2) r e The model does not depend on scale e The model is not limited in its range of application o The code does not use an explicit two-phase i multiplier, but simplification of the model yields an effective multipher
@2=AP2p / APro
~ ila for r a po g << "fPr e The pressure drop depends on the calculated void fraction which depends on the flow regime and
- . interphase drag i
i
T' I
)
The assessment base of the two-phase form , loss model includes: ' 1 i e Many pre-AP600 integral assessments o The EPRI flow blockage tests i a Represented flow bloc.kage in a core subchannel l a Measured two-phase pressure drops across the blockage l u Air / water in vertical upflow m Low pressure (< 0.2 MPa) ; l I AcRSCBORhc2,387m
I ! , . 1
~_ . ~ -,
ADS indss flow was j'udgeife'~cellent x integrated ADS-4 mass flow i l l i a..
~
g - , .
~~
0 5000 10000 15000 ewwwogggt,Allif Time (s) OSU 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22) l 4
.y. .-/
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Time (s) - OSU DVILB (Test NRC20) w: -
/
L0'0 ' l 5000 10000 15000 20000 l Time (s) { OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9) t
~ The form loss model represented the trends observed in the EPRI tests !k 1 4.0 i r - i , i , i . i . , ,- [' i 5 I m l i i i 21% blockage m l j A 41.5% blockage 0 61.3% blockage , I 1/" } 4 "O 3.0 Solid: Data O
~
A [ Open: Calculation a-2; I E ! e - l p" 2.0 ,, i (1, OA i i 6 O a 3 I' i1 F > V n fI W () A. ( yN i l M I C 1.0 il , 01 0.2 U3 0.4 - 05 06 07 0.8
) 0.0 Void Fraction
k k i The scaling analysis of the long-term phase evaluated: e The long-term IRWST draining sub-phase with specific analyses for a DVI line flow m IRWST pool level e The scaling results are the same for each applicable PIRT phenomenon and thus are presented only once i i f setocaceome 2.s-eme
Nondimensional parameters from the top-down scaling analysis of the long-term IRWST draining sub-phase are presented below: Nondimensional Physical nosu l xAP600 Parameter interpretation n3.u + x3..m4 Ratio of frictional 1.1 . n2.u forces to t gravitational forces AZ'u Nondimensional 0.94 elevation in DVI line n2 m4 Ratio of gravitational 0.92 n2.u forces e The IRWST drains slower in the OSU facility if the ratio of CEs-dvi+ Es-ads 4)/2E -dvi i s greater than 1.0 setoce mmt
Summary of findings for ADS Mass Flow during the long-term phase: (1/2) e The two-phase pressure drop model was judged applicable a Model does not depend on scale . m No limitation on the range of application a The developmental assessmentjudgment was reasonable o The composite integral assessment judgment was excellent F a c ility 1" C LB DVILB 2" P B L B OSU E x c e lle n t R e a s o n a b le E x ce lle n t setocAcoonhe 2-34m4
Summary of findings for ADS Mass Flow during the long-term phase: (2/2) e The pertinent nondimensional parameters l from the experiments closely approximated those of the AP600 e Sensitivity calculations can be performed to account for uncertainty in two-phase. pressure drops and the ADS valve design range I i i 881_OCAC904hc 24 47tts
Summary ofinformation for ' Core Two-Phase Mixture Level during the long-term phase i Rationale 1. Level directly affects vessel inventory for PIRT high rank ._. _ _________ Adequacy 1. Basic features of the model (see short-term phase) evaluation ; 2. Developmental assessment - based on 3. OSU integral assessments
- 4. Scaling applications AcRscoorthe 2447ts
The developmental assessments showed that the EPRI correlation overpredicted core void fractions at low pressures 1.0 - r *-- i-- - i - i~~~~~~~ 0.2 < P < 0.4 MPa '. 10 < G < 80 kg/s-m'
- 10 < q < 40 kW/m' *
, g
. .. /
0.8 * *
. ..f /
o
~j0.6 . . / ,
.. I
- u. /
g , j E l h 0.4 2 / CL
*[
t' ,
/
0.2
/
,/p ,
0.0 < '-
'. ' L---- - ' ' '- '
O.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Measured Void Fraction Void fractions from the PERICLES tests.
Cora mixtura ISval w;s judg d cson2bla l Collapsed core liquid level i , i l I 4
# '0'"' 5000 10000 T5000 - ._ u,,#1 y a Time (s)
, OSU 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22) 9 lj 0 '
O 5000 10000 15000 , 20000 ' 25I Time (s) OSU DVIB (Test NRC20) 11 s- -- - l l I i wu o 5000 10000 15000' 20000'* "~ 2 Time (s) ! l OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9)
-- n. .
.af..
""n .s._.
1 i
'sfji[fM9
t The EPRI drift flux correlation underpredicts collapsed core liquid levels in the OSU facility during sump injection : Collapsed Core Liquid Level . (%) OSU Data 95 (1-in. CLB) Number of Core Nodes independent RELAP5 Calculation (%) i (%) j 2 77 73 l 8 83 82 16 85 32 85 j i i L
i Summary of findings for Core Two-Phase Mixture Level during the long-term phase: (1/2) l e The EPRI drift flux correlation was judged applicable u Correlation was validated for a wide range of bundle geometries , u Correlation was validated over the appropriate parameter ranges e The composite integral assessment judgment was reasonable F a c ility 1" C LB D V IL B 2" P B LB OSU R e a s o n a ble R e a s o n a ble R e a s o n a ble ACRSC80mhc 2-34TI17
---------------------------------------------------J
i Sumrnary of findings for Core Two-Phase - Mixture Level during the long-term phase: (2/2) e Core collapsed liquid levels were underpredicted by 5-15% at low pressures,
- with most of the underprediction caused by
- the bias in the EPRI drift flux correlation m EPRI has recently developed a revised correlation that appears to improve the predictions at low pressures e High-frequency oscillations in core flow and level were observed during IRWST injection in the OSU calculations i
e The pertinent nondimensional parameters , ! from the experiments closely approximated i those of the AP600 ' . _ _ m ,,,. l
-abe IRWST pool level was judged excellent
_ g IRWST collapsed liquid level _i
. . t
.MT ' 5000 10000 1500tr - -we- -....s s
Time (s) y OSU 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22) r
."** l .01-
- 0. 5000
' ~ ~ ~~~~
10000 15000 2'd560 M Timo (s) OSU DVIB (Test NRC20) nQ _ . . . .
. {0. 0 5000 10000 15000"
" ~
20000 - Time (s) OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9)
, - >re emn , ,, _
. agsgg.- .
% 3m
.~ ,,
-rw-es ,---m *w- Ce ev'--'- "+-**-*-"w-- -- e e-- -e.- -P' s**9" e '"W-- *P +-"' JF**'-d'# #
- Summary ofinformation for IRWST Pool Level during the long-term phase-Rationale 1. Primary driving force for IRWST injection for PIRT 2. Together with the IRWST discharge line flow high rank resistance and RCS pressure, determines the IRWST injection rate
- 3. Affects the core coolant flow Adequacy 1. OSU integral assessments evaluation 2. Scaling applications based on t
ACRSC90%c 2447tr _.__________.]
. f i
Summary of findings for IRWST Pool Levej ' during the long-term phase: e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was excellent F a c ility 1" C L B D VIL B 2" P B LB i OSU E x c e lle n t E x c e lle n t E x c e lle n t e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments closely approximated those of the AP600 f ,, a EfE $9LOCACBONhc 244mt unmuummamap
'. i Summary ofinformation for IRWST Pool Thermal Stratification during the long-term phase t Rationale 1. Affects temperature of water injected to RCS for PIRT 2. Thermal stratification occurs due to PRHR high rank heat transfer & ADS 1-3 blowdown Adequacy 1. OSU integral assessments evaluation based on i ACRSCSDRhc 24W4
r l ] The offccts of IRWST thermal stratification in a 1-in. CLB in the AP600 were bounded with a sensitivity calculation ! 400 1
. I i 1
- Base Case {
[ No IRWST Thermal Stratification _' ]
. \
l 2 .
~
i
; 360 - -
l
~
j g . p - E - g340- - W ,- -
/ ,
l 320 - _' 1
/ .
J 300 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 Time (s) IRWST line 2 injection temperature 1.0
..d I Y% 6 .
7f g' 4, - Base case I "# #""***' "*"'" t 0.8 - ,' h - l
) -
0.6 , 5 i {0.4-Z { - 0.2 L - 0.0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 l Time (s) Normalized vessel fluid mass e
l - The capability to model IRWST thermal ! stratification was judged to be insufficient because the code does not have a mechanistic ! model of this phenomenon 4 i e The nodalization of the long-term models f induces a similiar temperature profile, with
!j warmer water above the ADS-123 sparger and g colder water below, following ADS-123
; actuation regardless of the actual mixing process e An AP600 sensitivity calculation was performed to bound the effects of IRWST pool thermal stratification m Restarted at the time of IRWST injection m Represented complete mixing in the IRWST by inputting a constant liquid temperature that conserved energy S8LOCAC80Rtic 24W120
Summary of findings for IRWST Pool Thermal Stratification during the long-term phase: e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was insufficient i F a c ility 1" C L B D VIL B 2" P B LB OSU in s u fficie n t In s u fficie n t In s u fficie n t i e A sensitivity calculation showed that the effects of IRWST pool thermal stratification were small during an SBLOCA e The effects of IRWST pool thermal stratification in other transients can be bounded with sensitivity calculations
.coc - m m,
f [ Summary ofinformation for Sump Fluid Temperature during the long-term phase Rationale 1. Represents the temperature of a portion of the for PIRT liquid that is injected to RCS, thereby affecting high rank core subcooling and RCS energy balance Adequacy 1. OSU integral assessments evaluation based on acmem umm i
Sump fluid temperature was judged reasonable l lRWST injection line fluid temperature i p g,o -- ; vug ~~ ~ ~- ~ - ivuvv uvuv m%s Time (s) OSU 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22) ~~- y - gnon Q' Q Time (s) OSU DVILB (Test NRC20) . T80 , -. -- s' 70 5000 10000 ~1506f 20000 ' ' -- Time (s) OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9) O ON
-1 h
s . . _ , , - . , , . -
- , . - _. ,,.,.; - . , , , , .-v.-
i Summary of findings for Sump Fluid Temperature during the long-term phase: e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable F a c ility 1" C LB D VIB I 2" P B LB l OSU R e a s o n a ble R e a s o n a ble R e a s o n a ble E ACRSCBOme 2-347/22
Sump level was judged excellent I y Primary sump collapsed liquid level
, , , , _g.3- - "' '5000'~~ ~~~"" "10660 15066 ~ ~~20if00 ""
Time (s) OSU 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22) s 9
' ~ '
{0.0 O' 5000 10000 l 15000 20000 Time (s) OSU DVlB (Test NRC20) l5a x - c-- -~-
=
i l l s' 1 1 > 1 - ' y.u 0 5000 i 10000 15000 20000 Time (s) OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9) ] l t -
Summary ofinformation for Sump Level during the long-term phase i I Rationale 1. Provides the driving force for sump injection for PIRT to the RCS ; high rank 2. Affects core coolant flow rate, cooling & inventory i Adequacy 1. OSU integral assessments evaluation 2. Scaling applications based on i i l Acasceome runn i
i i i Summary of findings for Sump Level during the long-term phase: e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was excellent F a c ility 1" C L B D VIB 2" P B L B t l OSU R e a s o n a b le E x c e lle n t E x c e lle n t e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments closely approximated those of the AP600 E SOLOCAC80Rhc 2 3-8F/23
, Summary ofinformation for IRWST Flow Resistance during the long-term phase Rationale 1. IRWST flow resistance affects IRWST injection for PIRT flow, core coolant flow, and vessel coolant ;
high rank . _ inventory _ _ _ Adequacy 1. Basic features of single-phase pressure drop . evaluation model (see short-term phase) based on 2. Developmental assessment (see short-term phase)
- 3. OSU integral assessments
- 4. Scaling. applications
=== mm
~~ .
l
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
l
. j IRWST flow resistance was judged reasonable Total IRWST injection flow F -
l i l.
# V "' o 20000*""
~
l 5000 10000 15000 l Time (s) OSU 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22) l . 4 j . 1 i 1 l 4.6 - L 0 5000 10000 15000 20000' Time (s) OSU DVlB (Test NRC20) a-,,-~----' =-
,,., . [,, . . .- , c w . , ,c ~ .a .
l 1 l l i
- s. m.
T0 5000 10000 15 boo 20000 Time (s) n . v. OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9) b i 1
-)
l
. _ . . . _ _ . . - . _ . _ ._ _ . , _ _,._.. - ~ _ - . _ . - _ _ _ . _ .
. I ! e I' k
0 - 0 6 P . A - _ n - a _. ht U , S O _ i n . e r )B ,. eL _ vC, _ e sn' i e~ r1 ~ o( ~ ' mwo' ef r l
~
en' o~ wi~ oj~ _ t nce in t ci eT 7 jS iWn TR" SI ' l Wta' ~ RoT" I g i n ' r u ' _ d s - _ n l o p i t l a l _ i - _ c s O j 5 1 y . h , a. _ % s T -.
Oscillations are more severe during IRWST injection in the OSU facility than in the AP600 ~ , o Oscillations are related to the generation of voids due to subcooled boiling in the core and the condensation of these voids in the core and upper , plenum o Because of scaling compromises, subcooled boiling is more important in the OSU facility than in the AP600 m OSU core rods are oversized (2.5 cm versus 0.9 cm) m OSU core heat flux is about 10 times too high j u OSU core hydraulic diameter is about 4 times too high ~ u Saha-Zuber correlation predicts that the onset of
- significant voiding during IRWST injection occurs at
- l.
o 10 K subcooling in the OSU facility ! ( o 0.2 K subcooling in the AP600 f ACRSC80Rhc 2-347124 I
[ i Summary of findings for IRWST Flow Resistance during the long-term phase: (1/2) i e The single-phase flow resistance models were judged applicable (see the short-term discussion of IRWST flow resistance) . e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable F a c ility 1" C LB D V IB 2" P B LB i l OSU R e a s o n a b le R e a s o n a ble R e a s o n a b le
i t I Summary of findings for IRWST Flow. Ej Resistance during the long-term phase: (2/2) t i e The pertinent nondimensional parameters
- from the experiments closely approximated .
. those of the AP600 e High-frequency oscillations in the injection .
flow rate were observed during IRWST l injection in the OSU calculations i I s I f setocaceomic swa
The adequacy evaluation findings are summarized below: (1/2) e The models and correlations review showed that the important code models were applicable e The pertinent nondimensional parameters i from the experiments closely approximated 1 those of the AP600 e The integral assessments indicated that the . code capability was reasonable or excellent for most of the highly ranked PIRT phenomena during the long-term phase
The adequacy evaluation findings are summarized below: (2/2) ; i e The code capability for IRWST pool thermal stratification was judged to be insufficient because the code does not have a model for this phenomenon a Sensitivity calculations were performed to bound the ; effects of thermal stratification. These effects were shown to be small. q i
i I Summary ofinformation for ADS Energy Release during the long-term phase , i i Rationale 1. Dominant RCS energy outflow in the long-term j for PIRT phase high rank _. _ _ . __ Adequacy 1. Basic features of two-phase pressure drop evaluation model (see ADS Mass Flow) based on 2. Developmental assessment (see ADS Mass ' Flow)
- 3. OSU integral assessments :
- 4. Scaling applications l
i l l l ! ACRSCBOtthe 2,3-0T/12 l
m..,,,,...... l ADS energy release was judged excellent Integrated ADS-4 energy flow
- As t. L 2a.-mLe w .w
_<r
~
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Time (s) nRif 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22)
~
i e
~
'}im~W~*^ '
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Time (s)
, -,o m . _
e
.m OSU.D...V.IB_.
(T_._e,st N.RC20) ~. -
] j , ,
- 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Time (s) no '~,s _ . , OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9) 6
,~ . ,,.
i i Summary of findings for ADS Energy Release durin'g the long-term phase-e The two-phase pressure drop model was judged i applicable } j e The composite integral assessment judgment was j excellent , 'k F a c ility 1" C L B D V IB 2" P B L B i ,{ l OSU E x c e lle n t R e a s o n a b le E x c e lle n t
- l 1
l e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from l the experiments closely approximated those of j the AP600 i e Sensitivity calculations can be performed to l account for uncertainty in two-phase pressure drops and the ADS valve design range f f $8LOCAC804tte 2 347/29 1
i t Summary ofinformation for-Downcomer Level during the long-term phase Rationale for 1. Level directly affects vessel inventory PIRT high rank Adequacy 1. OSU integral assessments evaluation based on __ ._ _ l ACRSCBOmhc 2447M
----....- ~ ~ mu -~ _. _ _ _ _ . _ ,
Downcomer level was judged reasonable , 4 Collapsed downcomer liquid level (0 , 3. i i "I/ m- --
)
. . . . . , . mu -- iww owv -m -- --.,
OSU 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22) l % -_
~
- w. M O ~' ~' 5000 10000 15000 20000 ^~~~' 2h0h Time (s) ,
OSU DVlB (Test NRC20)
'~
l t ! 6 L u 5000 10000 15000 20000 256d0"" Time (s) OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9)
.,e :n p uc,- .. . -
I _ -g , w
Summary of findings for Downcomer Level 2 during the long-term phase: 1 e The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable l F a c ility 1" C L B D V IB 2" P B LB OSU R e a s o n a b le R e a s o n a b le R e a s o n a b le e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments closely approximated those of the AP600 i NE setoCAcsonhc 2-347tse naammemmansur
Summary ofinformation for ~ Upper Plenum Two-Phase Level during the long-term phase Rationale 1. Directly affects vessel inventory for PIRT 2. Affects ADS mass flow & energy release j i high rank Adequacy 1. OSU integral assessments evaluation 2. Scaling applications based on j
--- mm ,
L Upper plenum level was judged reasonable , p Upper plenum collapsed liquid level I e i . 4 -e- . d"T~ 5000 10000 15000'
~
iOvvy -%# Time (s) OSU 1-in. CLB (Test NRC22)
..__ g _ ~ , - ,
'~
L 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Time (s) l OSU DVIB (Test NRC20) l , .,-. Wn -n~ v.s : .-vn, -
)
/
~
g.u . l Time (s) l OSU 2-in. PBLB (Test SB9)
~ + , , . . . , . .
-.n, ,
i I
# A A4PM $ h - E#? M *'*V %Y- ,
c s
Summary of findings for Upper Plenum Level during the long-term phase: o The composite integral assessmentjudgment was reasonable j F a c ility 1" C LB D V IB 2" P B LB OSU R e a s o n a ble R e a s o n a b le R e a s o n a ble e The pertinent nondimensional parameters from the experiments closely approximated those of the AP600 SBLOCACBOntic 24 47131
i Summary ofinformation for Fuel Rod Decay-Heat ! during the long-term phase i
- Rationale for 1. Primary energy source in the RCS i
{ PIRT high 2. Removing this energy is the basic safety : rank issue in a SBLOCA Adequacy 1. Basic features of decay heat model (see - evaluation short-term phase) ; 4 based on 2. Comparison with ORIGEN2 calculation (see _ _ _short-term phase) . ._ _ _ . i ACRSC90Rhc 2-3474 ; i
1 Summary of findings for Fuel Rod Decay Heat during the long-term phase: e The decay heat model was judged applicable m Model does not depend on scale a No limitation on the range of application e Results were in excellent agreement with those from the ORIGEN-2 computer code l ACRSCBOMhc 24 47132
Al i f AP600 Containment Modeling During the Long-Term Phase i Presented by: C. B. Davis . i ACRS Thermal-Hydraulic Subcommittee Meeting ! February 12-14,1997 ; , ;i i [
The objective of this presentation is to demonstrate the adequacy of the approach used for representing containment phenomena during the long-term phase of an SBLOCA in the AP600 (1/2) e The containment is an integral part of the passive safety design of the AP600 m Heat transfer across the containment shell provides the ultimate heat sink during the long-term phase of an SBLOCA a The containment supplies water to the reactor coolant system during sump injection 1 ACR$C904hc 2447/2
,i
! The objective of this presentation is to demonstrate the adequacy of the approach used for representing containment phenomena during the long-term phase of an SBLOCA in , the AP600 (2/2) e The assessments of the OSU experiments l showed that the code could reasonably calculate sump pool level and injection temperature e The OSU experiments did not simulate containment pressurization, heat transfer acro.ss the containment shell, or flow of condensate from the shell to the IRWST e Additional analysis was required to verify that the containment modeling approach was ' adequate for AP600
.cm_ mm
T Two RELAPS input models of the AP600 .
)
containment were developed and applied during this analysis e INEL Model (CONB) s Simple model using bounding parametric variations and i sensitivity calculations e NRC Model(CONI) m Detailed model of the interior of the containment f I
?
i i ACR$C904hc 2,347/3 ;
The AP600 containment is modeled simply in the INEL model ! i e The containment sump is modeled using RELAP5 hydrodynamic volumes and heat structures i e The upper containment region is modeled with a pressure boundary condition i e The steam flowing from the sump to the upper containment region is assumed to condense on
- the containment shell and is returned (as condensate) to the IRWST and/or the sump e Evaluations were performed to determine the effects of bounding variations in containment parameters i
l Four sensitivity calculations were performed to determine the effects of bounding parametric variations Parameter Base Calculation Sensitivity Calculation Pressure 101 kPa 179 kPa Condensate 305 K 361 K temperature Split of condensate All condensate to All condensate to flow IRWST sump Amount of liquid to Calculated by the Normally non-the normally non- model flooded rooms flooded rooms forced to fill ACRSCBOmtec 2 3-8715
Tha CONTAIN rcsults are bounded by the paramstric values
., used in the RELAP5 sensitivity calculations 200 i ,
j l l 180 - 160 - T l C. l d - CONTAIN l E 140 - RELAP5 (base) l g RELAP5 (sensetnnty) . 8 , E . 120 4
-~ "~
100
, i i 80 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 ,
Time (s) AP600 containment pressure for a 1-in. CLB l 380 , , i 6
~~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~~ ' ~
~
360 - e 5 340 1 2
- CONTAIN RELAPS (base) 320 - REWS (umnnty) -
l 3" 0 10bo 20000 30b0 40000 50000 Time (s) AP600 containment condensate temperature for a 1-in. CLB
i Overall, the results were insensitive to large changes in containment parameters. i e The effects of the parametric variations on the a minimum vessel inventory during sump p injection were. , i
} m containment pressure +6.6%
j u condensate temperature -0.3% a split of condensate flow -0.4% m amount ofliquid to normally non-flooded rooms -3.5% o Because of the possibility of transient containment /RCS interactions, calculations were also performed with the NRC containment model j ACRSC90mc 2,347M i
8 l EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS TO STUDY CONTAINMENT FEEDBACK EFFECTS USING RELAP5 FOR THE AP600 ONE INCH COLD LEG BREAK LONG-TERM COOLING PHASE , G. NORMAN LAUBEN, USNRC/RES , i ACRS THERMAL-HYDRAULIC SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING FEBRUARY 12-14, 1997 !
4 i t PURPOSE ; 4 l EVALUATE THE CONTAINMENT METHODOLOGY USED FOR THE LONG TERM COOLING MODEL (LICM); IN PAidiISULAR: ,
- 1. THE CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY CONDITIONS,
- 2. THE SINGLE SUMP COMPONENT, AND l
- 3. THE EFFECT OF CONTAINMENT FEEDBACK ON HIGH AND MEDIUM RANKED t CONTAINMENT RELATED PHENOMENA.
t I t i ! t i i s*
t r METHODOLOGY . STANDARD NETHOD i 1 ;
- 1. DzVELOP A CONTAINMENT MODULE TO BE INCLUDED As l A. ANALYZE THE 1" CLB WITH l r_Ar<T Or A RELAP5 AP600 LTCM INPUT DECK. l THE LONG TERM COOLING MODEL g W r-I>
I PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED (CONB INPUT MODEL).
- 2. BENCHMARK THE CONTAINMENT MODULE l l O l AGAINST OTHER CONTAINMENT ANALYSES.
' l V! I i , B. PERFORM CONTAIN ANALY- i 1r 8 SIS USING MASS AND ENERGY I I
- 3. REPLACE THE SIMPLIFIED SUMP MODEL AND CONTAINMENT l RELEASE FROM STEP A BOUNDARY CONDITIONS USED IN A. WITH THE CONTAINMENT t I (OR STEP 4). I MODULE DEVELOPED IN STEPS 1 AND 2 TO PRODUCE AN l g j '
INTEGRATED CONTAINMENT /RCS INPUT MODEL (CONI INPUT MODEL) l t u
- 4. ANALYZE 1" CLB WITH CONI INPUT MODEL AND CONTAINMENT 'a EXTERIOR BOUNDARY CONDITIONS CALCULATED IN STEP B.
1r
- 15. COMPARE RESULTS OF STEPS A. B. AND 4 ON A PIRT-INFORMED BASIS.l v
- 16. BASED ON THIS COMPARISOL EVALUATE THE CON 8 INPUT CONTAINMENT METHODOLOGY.l THE BALANCE OF THIS PRESENTATION WILL DESCRIBE THE AP600 LOWER CONTAINMENT AND THE RESULTS OF THE ABOVE STEPS.
ll l-STEP B - i SNL CONTAIN CALCULATNNS . I OBJECTIVES:
- l. PROVIDES SANITY CHECK FOR CONTAINMENT RESPONSE CALCULATED WITH !
RELAP5 L.TCM.
- 2. ASSESSES WHETHER THE CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY CONDITIONS USED IN THE
, PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED PARAMETRIC STUDIES WERE INDEED BOUNDING. l
- 3. CALCULATED EXTERNAL SHELL HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS AND AMBIENT TEMPERATURES WERE USED AS BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR CONI CALCULATIONS. i
?
STATUS:
- 1. SNL PERFORMED A 1" CLB ANALYSIS USING A MODEL OF THE COMPLETE CONTAINMENT. THAT IS, BELOW DECK COMPONENTS MODELLED IN RELAP5 WERE '
ALSO MODELLED IN CONTAIN. I
- 2. THE FOLLOWING BOUNDARY CONDITIONS WERE PROVIDED TO SNL FROM THE RELAP5(CONB) ANALYSIS PERFORMED IN STEP A:
- BREAK TO STEAM GENERATOR ROOM MASS AND ENERGY
- ADS 4 TO STEAM GENERATOR ROOM MASS AND ENERGY ;
^
- ADSl-3 TO IRWST MASS AND ENERGY l - IRWST INJECTION MASS AND ENERGY
- SUMP INJECTION MASS AND ENERGY
- PRHR TO IRWST ENERGY i
1
_ _ _ _. _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____.m.-.__ . . . _ . _ . _ _ _ STEP 1 - AP600 CONTAINMENT DESCRIPTION AND CONTAINMENT MODULE DEVELOPMENT
- 1. THE STEAM GENERATOR ROOMS ARE COMBINED TO FORM PART OF THE PRIMARY SUMP AND ONE PATH TO THE UPPER CONTAINMENT.
- 2. THE VESSEL CAVITY IS CONNECTED TO THE COMBINED STEAM GENERATOR ROOMS AT THE RCS COOLANT LOOP ELEVATIONS AND A COMMON VOLUME AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SUMP. IT IS A SECOND PATH TO THE UPPER CONTAINMENT.
- 3. THE UPPER STAIRWELL IN THE CMT ROOM FORMS A THIRD PATH TO THE UPPER CONTAINMENT.
- 4. A FOURTH PATH TO THE UPPER CONTAINMENT IS FROM THE EXISTING IRWST.
S. THE VOLUMES IN THE UPPER CONTAINMENT WERE SIZED TO BE EQUIVALENT TO THE CONTAIN NODALIZATION WITH THE SAME CONTAINMENT SHELL SURFACE AREA. NO SPECIAL INTERIOR HEAT TRANSFER MODEL WAS USED.
- 6. HEAT TRANSFER BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE CONTAINMENT STEEL SHELL ARE REQUIRED FROM CONTAIN (OR ANOTHER ASSESSED CONTAINMENT CODE).
_.1 5. Sirst CourAInneNr Swett 3
?,4 6.
./ \ h 4.
- 2. 3. 135' OPEMTINc Deck l l'N '/ .
/l I //////////////////// /
mv . ;6
? AvNyf / CNT Room IRWST , 1,
/ /
i',
' /m \
i i p Cuna 107' Lowen Dec Cune
.A
( s / . / / -/ 4 l- 0////,/</// bx
,e / , . .
AccumutAron. , AccumuLATom /
//
^
/- Lowgn s,g, / Roon j Rm / CVCS R m
/
Rooms j
/ -
' 4 3 /
., p ,
&_ . ws /4
' , " /
... i'
' < < < r < // / < / / / r -'
Seconoany Sune' ' /// <, / / fn e .
/ . y ; '
/ / '
}'
'/ S.G. '
.,a j ACCESg N INS */' ECONDAnY UMP
/ + LWER EC
("**"^ "' "*"~***** "**"'I Tum m f CAVITY 2. < .
///s' // ' /s , // ' /, '. ' /
AP600 LOWER CONTAINMENT m
BENCHMARKING THE CONTAINMENT INPUT MODULE AGAINST OTHER CONTAINMENT CODE CALCULATIONS i l
- 1. THE RELAPS AP600 CONTAINMENT INPUT NODULE DESCRIBED IN ST
~
I USED IN A STAND-ALONE MODE TO ANALYZE AN.AP600 DOUBLE-ENDED CO , SREAK IN ORDER TO EVALUATE THE AP600 CONTAINMENT FEATURES, ESPECIALLY VOLUMES AND HEAT STRUCTURES.
- 2. CONTAINMENT PRESSURE RESULTS WERE BENCHMARKED AGAINST SIMILAR CALCULATIONS USING CONTAIN, CONTEMPT, AND WG0THIC (SEE FIGURE).
- 3. REASONABLE COMPARISON OF CONTAINMENT PRESSURE SHOWS THAT VOL HEAT STRUCTURE MODELLING IS REASONABLE.
- 4. ALL F0uR CODES USED THE SAME " CONSERVATIVE" IN PARTICULAR, POST-LOCA RELEASERCS MASS WASAND ENERGY RELEASE FROM THE AP600 FSAR.
ALL STEAM BASED ON DECAY HEAT.
- 5. EACH CODE HAS ITS OWN MODEL FOR HEAT TRANSFER ON THE INTERNAL CONTAINMENT STEEL SHELL AND FOR HEAT SINKS WITHIN THE CONTAINMENT
- 6. WGOTHIC AND CONTAIN EACH HAVE ORIGINAL MODELS FOR OUTER SHELL CONTAINMENT HEAT TRANSFER. CONTEMPT AND RELAP5 uSED AVERAGE VALUES OF HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS AND EXTERNAL BULK TEMPERATURES OBTAINED FROM THE CONTAIN ANALYSIS.
RELAPS Containment input Module Benchmark AP600 DECLB - Upper Containment Pressure f t 110.0 '- REMP5 . 100.0 -
.... CONTEMPT
- - - - - cONNN CONTEMPT 90.0 - - - - WGOTHtC ADIASATIC BOUNDARY SHOWS STEEL SHELL N.T. ,. _
80.0 - UNxmPORTANT Str0RE 1000 SEC.. N .'
,/
MASS AND ENERGY EXTERNAL MEAT TRANS'FER b RELEASE DOMINATES: g 60.0 RELAPS v0LumES AN3 '././ 00mzmATES WALL MEAT TRANSFER 3 PROPERTIES 0.K. ' 50.0 p ..t
- fg
-f' IMOEPENDENT GOTHIC 40.0 s..'.8 kN.N. EXTERNAL H.T. n00EL 5
INTERNAL MEAT STRUCTURES *%,N/ - 30.0 g,/j ' IMPORTANT. RELAPS MEAT STRUCTURES C0mPARABLE TO ( s,' ( y;- j
/, OTHER CODES.
RELAPS AND CONTEMPT EXTERNAL MEAT TRANS-rER rROM CONTAIN. 10.0 { 1 0.0 ' 1000 10000 100000 1 10 100 l Time (s)
4 4
- STEP 3 -
INTEGRATE CONTAINMENT MODULE INTO LTCM i THE RELAP5 CONTAINMENT MODEL WITH A SINGLE SUMP COMPARTNENT AND UPPER CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY CONDITIONS (CONB) WAS REPLACED WITH ! i THE CONTAINMENT MODULE DEVELOPED JUST Dl.dCRIBED. THE NEW RELAP5 . INTEGRATED CONTAINMENT /RCS MODEL WAS DESIGNATED AS CONI.
- STEP 4- t
+ t ANALYZE 1" CLB WITH RELAP5 USING CONI INPUT MODEL WET AND DRY HEAT TRANSFER COEFFICIENTS CALCULATED BY CONTAIN IN STEP B WERE USED AS BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ON THE OUTSIDE STEEL CONTAINMENT SHELL. THE SINK TEMPERATURE WAS AN AVERAGE VALUE OBTAINED FROM CONTAIN. i i
- - _ - - - . .. ._ _ - . _ - - _ - ___ a
AP6001-inch Cold Leg Break f Containment Water Levels (ft) 135.0
- t 130 0 - ! CONI recirc. actuation /*
- RELAP5(CO"" I gf -
125.0 - : '
. iRwsTievei -
120.0 - i
, curb elevation j
! saatt oRivzMs-NEnoS anoNs 115.0 - : Te!'MliF* a CONTAINMENT WATER SOURCES h decknoor 6 x; g 110.0 - .
[
,- r u - _ s:: . . .
- . - tb : . . -- =a. .. . . . . . .
,g
} 105.0 -
i
.2 :
- 100.0 -
sun,ie.i Accumulator room levels ~ . og . I
- 4 tn ;
T.A.F. ;
'35 95.0 -
CVCS roomlevel ;
$J : -
i 90.0 - ! i 85.0 - Note: CMT room waterlevel and sump ; i water level track together after sump -
' eve' r**che$ Cur room noor 80.0 -
i i 75.0 - i f 70'0 40000.0 50000.0 10000.0 20000.0 30000.0 t O.0 Time (s) : i
,. 1
i
- STEP 5 -
i BOUNDARY CONDITION COMPARISON ;
- THERE ARE THREE CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY CONDITIONS REQUIRED IN THE RELAP5 (CONB) INPUT: ,
- 1. THE NEXT TWO SLIDES COMPARE THE PARAMETRIC VALUES FOR RELAP5(CONB) CONTAINMENT PRESSURE AND CONDENSATE TEMPERATURE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS WITH THE CALCULATED AND ASSUMED VALUES USED IN CONTAIN AND RELAP5(CONI).
- 2. THE THIRD BOUNDARY CONDITION, CONDENSATE RETURN FRACTION, WAS DISCUSSED'IN THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION. THE LIMITS OF 0% AND 100% WERE USED IN THOSE STUDIES AND DID NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT.
t l
RELAPS Containment Pressure Boundary Selection . AP6001" CLB - Upper Containment Pressure 200.0 - , 190.0 - . F1ELAP5(C0NB) 179kPa 180.0
- t 170.0 -
160.0 - RELAP5(CONI) CONTAIN g --
- n. 150.0 - -
d6 -- Pressure boundary conditions
@ 140.0 -
chosen, envelope calculated g P"S**** - 2 130.0 -
- n. -
120.0 110.0 - RELAP5(CONB) 101kPa , 100.0 90.0 - 80.0 20000.0 30000.0 40000.0 50000.0 O.0 10000.0 Time (s)
=
RELAP5 Condensate Return Temperature Boundary Selection AP6001" CLB - Condensate Temperature 380.0 . . . i - 370.0 -
. ..R. . .E. .L. A...P. 5. .(CO.. .N. . .B. .). 36.1..K.... . . . . .
P M ELAP5(CONI 350.0 - ~ 2 CONTAIN - - 340.0. - wndary cowions cuen, E envelope calculated temperatures ! e - i- 330.0 ' 32 I S - a 320.0 E y 310.0 -
. ..RELAP5(CONB) 305K..
i 300.0 - 290.0 - 3 i 1
- i ana i 280.0 20000.0 30000.0 40000.0 50000.0 0.0 10000.0 Time (s)
_ - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ ~ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
i
- STEP 5.- '
PIRT INFORMED COMPARISON i BETWEEN RELAP5(CONI) AND RELAP5(CONB) I i 4 PNENOMENON RANK l RCS MASS (FIGURE OF MERIT) ' SUMP FLUID TEMPERATURE HrsN CONTAINMENT PRESSURE
- MEDIUM IRWST POOL LEVEL HIGH SUMP LEVEL HrsN CONTAINMENT LIQUID DISTRIBUTION MEDIUM i
- COMPARISON ALSO WITH CONTAIN r
i i i i
i 1 REACTOR VESSEL MASS I
- 1. IN THE LONG TERM, MINIMUM VESSEL INVENTORY OCCURS DURING SUMP It'JECTION -
- BECAUSE OF INCREASED CORE STEAM GENERATION -
- WHICH CAUSES INCREASED SYSTEM TO AMBIENT PRESSURE DROP -
- THUS REDUCING THE HEAD AVAILABLE FOR SUMP FLOW INTO THE SYSTEM.
2.. THE INCREASED STEAM GENERATION IS DUE TO HIGHER INLET TEMPERATURES -
- SINCE THE PRINCIPAL WATER SOURCE DURING THIS PERIOD IS WARMER
" UMP WATER COMPARED TO THE COOLER IRWST WATER SOURCE DURING ,
IRWST INJECTION. I
- SUMP WATER TEMPERATURE IS HIGHLY RANKED.
- 3. THE CONB MODEL RESULTS IN HIGHER SUMP TEMPERATURES COMPARED TO CONI AND THUS CONSERVATIVELY LOW VESSEL MASS.
- THE REASON FOR THE DIFFERENCE IS DISCUSSED IN THE NEXT SLIDE.
- 4. THE TWO CON 8 CALCULATIONS SHOW THE PRESSURE EFFECT, WHICH IS DUE TO LOWER SUS-COOLING AND INCREASED VOID VOLUME AT LOWER PRESSURE.
- CONTAINMENT PRESSURE IS MEDIUM RANKED.
RELAP5 CONI /CONB Vessel Mass Comparison I AP6001" CLB - Reactor Vessel Mass 90000.0 . , 3 IRWST Intection %mp injection { 80000.0 - ! d l.Mb61
\
- m. .f 70000.0 / 1 'I i l
p %,. h?
, CONB vs. CONI sump temperature effect 60000.0 -
I i i. 1
/
} 50000.0 - l' l d fh- . m Mlu u Au. - muy yrr 5 j
~ '
y n v3 $ 40000.0 - i a (conb) 101kPa 30000.0 - i Pressure doet due to f i vokune and sutr-emana 3 20000.0 -
- Note: Core unmvery begins about 20.000 kg j 10000.0 - ;
0.0 ' I 0.0 10000.0 20000.0 30000.0 40000.0 50000.0 Time (s)
_. __m - .._..m _ _ . . - . . _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . . _ . . . . _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ . . . _ _ . _ ~ _ _ _ _ , l
.j SUMP TEMPERATURES
- 1. IN RELAP5 THE ADS 4 EFFLUENT EQUILIBRATES TO THE PARTIAL PRESSURE OF THE STEAM IN THE RECEPTOR VOLUME.
- THUS, IF NON-CONDENSABLES ARE PRESENT, THE STEAM PARTIAL PRESSURE IS LOWER, AND THE SATURATION TEMPERATURE AND PHASIC TEMPERATURES ARE LOWER.
l t l
- 2. THE SINGLE SUMP VOLUME IN CONB AFFORDS NO OPPORTUNITY TO CONVECT NON-CONDENSABLES INTO THE SUMP AFTER THEY ARE INITIALLY PURGED BY BLObDOWN STEAM.
- THUS THE NON-CONDENSABLES IN THE SUMP ARE LOWER IN CONB THAN IN CONI, AND THE ADS 4 EFFLUENT LIQUID, WHICH IS THE PREDOMINANT SOURCE OF SUMP WATER, 15 WARMER.
- 3. THus, RELAP5(CONB) WILL ALWAYS PREDICT A HIGHER SUMP TEMPERATURE.
RELAP5 CONI /CONB Sump Temperature Comparison AP6001* CLB - Sump Delivery Temperatures 400.0 . . 390.0 - - - , , , ,
-)
l , _,, ... 380.0 - l ,- R, ELAPS {QNB}1gPa, ,, ', ' . . , W ;,l. i, ,, . . e ... ',,' a ,, ~ a 370.0 - RELAP5(CONB)101kPa_,
'.' , ., ..(
~
RELAP5(CONT) i 350.0 - 340.0 30000.0 40000.0 50000.0 O.0 10000.0 20000.0 Time (s)
CONTAINMENT PRESSURE I
- 1. AS NOTED IN THE DISCUSSION ON SUMP TEMPERATURE, IN RELAP5 THE ADS EFFLUENT EXPANDS TO THE PARTIAL PRESSURE OF THE STEAM IN THE RECEPTOR VOLUME.
- 2. IN CONTAIN, THE EFFLUENT EOU'tLIBRATES TO THE TOTAL PRESSURE OF THE 1 CONTAIIMENT, INDEPENDENT OF CONCENTRATION OF NON-CONDENSABLES f PRESENT. l
- TUGS, CONTAIN WILL PREDICT A HIGNER EFFLUENT TEMPERATURE (AND i I
THEREFORE SUMP TEMPERATURE) DURING IRWST INJECTION WHEN SIGNIFICANT NON-CONDENSABLES ARE PRESENT. )
- 3. IN ORDER TO CONSERVE ADS 4 EFFLUENT ENERGY IN CONTAIN, LESS ENERGETIC STEAM IS PRODUCED AND THE NET MASS AND ENERGY FLOW TO THE UPPER CONTAINMENT IS LESS THAN IN 1HE RELAP5(CONI) CALCULATION.
- Tuus, THE CONTAINMENT PRESSURE IS LESS IN CONTAIN DURING IRWST INJECTION.
RELAP5/CONTAIN Containment Pressure Comparison AP6001* CLB - Upper Containment Pressure 200.0 , . . , . . IRWST Infection Sump Injection : j 190.0 - l l j i , i 180.0 - .. I .. RELAP5(CONBL179kPa , ,, j l , _= 1 I 170.0 - i - l l 160.0 - l RE m CoNO l E 150.0 - l 6 i l l
] 140.0 E l l 1
2 130.0 - '
- i CONTAIN j 120.0 l ', l 4 1 110.0 ', ;
...R...EL. A.. P. 5..(C.O. ..N...B. ).101..kP.a. ..
gg , . . ;. . .
. .a. . ,
I I l , 90.0 - 80.0 O.0 10000.0 20000.0 30000.0 40000.0 50000.0 Time (s)
RELAP5 CONI /CONB.lRWST Pool Level Comparison AP6001" CLB -IRWST Water Level 10.0 . 9.0 - -. RELAP5(CONI)
' \l .
RELAP5(CONB)101kPa . 8.0 ' - 'k.g\ --- RELAP5(C)NB)179 kPa
'. \
o-7.0 - 6.0 - ' g ~ N e 5.0 - 4 a m s s ~ 4.0 -
\
+
x 3.0 - s s
. \. -
s 2.0 - l N . . .
~
1.0 - oo 10000.0 2o000.0 sooo.o 4000Eo-"soooo.o o.o Time (s)
RELAPS CONI /CONB Sump Level Comparison AP6001" CLB - Sump Water Level i i i . - 12.0 - - com 11.0 : - noor . . . . . . . . - - . . . , . . . . .. . . . ,_ 10.0 - - 9.0 - - ll 8.0 - a - g 7.0 -
~
r I
$ 6.0 - I -
.3 .
5.0 - - 4.0 _ RELAP5(CONI) RELAP5(CONB)101kPa l 3.0 -
- - - - RELAP5(CONB)179kPa -
2.0 - - i 1.0 - - 4 0.0 ' -- ' O.0 20000.0 40000.0 60000.0 80000.0 100000.0 i Time (s)
t RELAP5 CONI /CONB Sump Overflow to Normally Non-flooded Rooms t AP6001" CLB - Overfow Mass 400000.0 . . . . i i ( nb)179kPa d t 350000.0 - .. _ . _ . . . _ ..
~
,/ (conb)101kPa l -
300000.0 - t (coni)
)
250000.0 - ,
.15i x -- ! 200000.0 - P i g
2 150000.0 - 100000.0 - f 50000.0 -
/ i
' ' ' " " " ~ ' ' ~ ' ' ' ~ ' ~ ' ~ ' " " ' " " ' '
0~ 0 30000.0 40000.0 50000.0 0.0" " " " ' " ' "1 0 0 0 0.0 20000.0 Time (s) ____._m__ _ _ ___._ ________._______________________________________-_____.__.__.=___.._m_ . - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _
CONCLUSIONS
- THE LTCM CONB INPUT METHODOLOGY, INCLUDING A SIMPLIFIED SUMP AND APPROPRIATE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS TO SIMULATE THE UPPER CONTAINMENT, IS SATISFACTORY FOR AUDIT ANALYSIS.
- THE ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE BOUNDARY. CONDITION RESULTS IN A LOWER BOUND OF VESSEL INVENTORY COMPARED TO THE INTEGRATED MODEL. r
- THE CONS SINGLE SUMP COMPONENT CONTRIBUTES TO THE LOWER BOUND ON ,
INVENTORY BECAUSE NON-CONDENSABLES ARE PURGED AND THE SUMP ATNOSPHERE IS HEATED WITHOUT CIRCULATION FROM THE-UPPER CONTAINMENT.
- NO CONTAINMENT PHENOMENA WERE OBSERVED TO CHANGE SG RAPIDLY THAT i TIGHT COUPLING WITH THE RCS IS REQUIRED.' i
~
. . . x N
- )
t
- ADEQUACY EVALUATION CONCLUSION Presented by: C. D. Fletcher Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards ,
Thermal Hydraulic Subcorhmittee . February 12-14,1997 Los Angeles, California i f i i flNEE
The objectiver of this presentation are: e to summarize the results of code adequacy evaluations discussed in the preceding presentations, e to describe the lessons learned from those evaluations and their significance for AP600 modeling recommendations and user guidance and t e to state the conclusion of this effort regardmg the adequacy of the RELAP5/ MOD 3 code for performing AP600 SBLOCA analysis. i ilNEn ACRS2/the 2-3-97/2
I The outline of this presentation is as follows: e Elements of code adequacy evaluation e Summary of the results from those elements , o Recommended AP600 modeling and user guidance e Adequacy conclusion ACRS2/the 2-3-97/3
The code adequacy decision is based on a combination of results from three evaluation elements. f Code Model and l Correlation Evaluations Are code models applicable? r i Integrated Code g Performance Evaluations y Adequacy Decision Does the code acceptably : predict the behavior observed i in experiments? Scaling Evaluations Does the experimental data base acceptably represent AP600? FREE ACRS2/the 2-3-97/4 l
'2 c "oT:.p'H??Td $3p%?Mie -
G. .. :: :' :U '
- hk.
- wn 6]Ji;m?h 4 %fii$
4 .9)I .PlRT e. e".Rangeg$sV S'/ Geometry e 5 f Developmenkal W
^
- I ,j' y.infoymationgh .j )g,71 f.l, gj' -QAssessme, hts [h up{f '(
- :i '.
b y,;fg q q q .
; ac{ i. -
r 4a - .,.giapy
, . c :::w . a:
, _ g_ .%:}if W .4 ) 3 : 3
.v' ,a x n x9 q ,;; '
- s,.
st .
' 5a a., s
. ) y: .. U J h ;. - s ; ~.
- ,n s ,
- ,-.t Code Model and Correlation Evaluations '
. L.. ~3 D.ominan.t . . m . .mod.e.ls.and correlat, ion d fi ..,
d a t,Mo,de. l.~,do. cum,en..ta. tion,and pedigr. .s e ne ee reviewed ; bf J.i.g . ~ l'.i Ran. ge,inf.or. ,n.iation compared ;
. 2Develo.-pmental assessments reviewed '
.Mo. del, ~ con i pared with AP600l scale ,
5 31 s s ', 3 ; ,
Conclusion:
The RELAPSIMOD3 models and correlations important for AP600 SBLOCA analysis are applicable. f . , flNED 3 . . . - i i
i Consistent, S AP600- '
- 7, CQDQ}j; PIRT { Modelingi f Related Cornpadsong Philosophy < ' Test Data , Evaluation;.}y ifCriteriafDN a' ' . .
3.a .'-
, , , . . 1%> ?P ,0 :@ si' ' . t , ' t ,
. Intearated Code Performance Evalu'ations Perform RELAP5 calculations of tests and AP600 ht , t; ,[i ;accidentsI ,
- f " F / ~
l ~ l' ?. Comparecalculationswithtests' .- 1 Judge code capability to prodlet.overall behavior udge code espebility to predict speelfic behavior J ' for,important PIRTphenomena
;c . ., ! ,
, .q.,,
k. t
Conclusion:
RELAP5/ MOD 3 is capable of acceptably simulating the overall SBLOCA behavior, event sequence progression, minimum reactor vessel inventory and AP600 SBLOCA PIRT high-ranked phenomena in scaled AP600 integral test facilities. b
', _ ,' ACRS2/the 2-3-97/6
Geometry - O Geometry 2" E % integral. Test
. PIRT (Experimerds I"I'U'*I . Test Dah ,
. ?;. PIRT .- '
Whs
, 3 . and AP600) 3 Dataj
{ . and AP400)} ,
. ,, g ,
I II V -
; r '. . n.a ,
. ht -
Top-down Scalina Evaluations ," Bottom-up Scalina Evaluations
' investigate localized phenomena ; '
. Develop scaling theory t7 Verify scaling theofy (compare with test data)- % Develop understanding of behavior Evaluate distributions and bounding of ;' f: Determine significance for; AP600.%i-AP600 behavior (compare ms)' '.- .'- 3.^'
" T '[M a,$ ,
- c
- ~ ,
s
,, ,,~ s
,}}