ML20216E137

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Rev 1 to Calculation QDC-3200-M-0096, Increase in Dp Due to Unbalanced Feedwater Flow. W/One Oversize Drawing
ML20216E137
Person / Time
Site: Quad Cities  
Issue date: 05/28/1996
From: Adlon K, Atherton R, Killian S
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20216E123 List:
References
QDC-3200-M-0096, QDC-3200-M-0096-R01, QDC-3200-M-96, QDC-3200-M-96-R1, NUDOCS 9804160103
Download: ML20216E137 (26)
v • d • e


Text

.s Exhibit C D

NEP-12-02 o

Revision 2 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION REVISION PAGE CALCULATION NO.

QDC-3200-M-0096 PAGE NO.:

2 REVt 1

STATUS: Approved QA SERIAL NO. OR CHRON NO.

N/A DATE:

5/28/96 PREPARED BY:

DATE:

O k[,

REVISION

SUMMARY

Calculation was revised to incorporate a value for the instrument loop inaccuracies of I

57 psi.

This value was transmitted in NDIT No. QDC-96-021 and is based on a 3 month calibration interval for both transmitters.

Pages 5, 15-18, and 21 were revised.

~

ELECTRONIC CALCULATION DATA FILES REVISED:

(Name ext / size /date/ hour: min / verification method / remarks) fwevflwq.med/145'182/12-14-95/2:26pm/ source file validated through comparison with record revision /

DO ANY ASSUMPTIONS IN THIS CALCULATION REQUIRE LATER VERIFICATION YES NO X I~~

~b REVIEWED BY:

DATE:

REVIEW METHOD:

Detailed review of Calculation COMMENTS' (C OR NC) :

Mb DATE: [ 9 [o APPROVED BY:

O REV:

STATUS:

QA SERIAL NO. OR CHRON No.

DATE:

PREPARED BY:

DATE:

REVISION

SUMMARY

ELECTRONIC CALCULATION DATA FILES REVISED:

)

(Name ext / size /date/ hour: min / verification method / remarks)

DO ANY ASSUMPTIONS IN THIS CALCULATION REQUIRE LATER VERIFICATION YES NO l

REVIEWED BY:

DATE:

REVIEW METHOD:

COMMENTS (C OR NC) :

APPROVED BY:

DATE:

9804160103 980409 PDR ADOCK 05000254 P

P. D. R i

d Exhibit D NEP-12-02 Revision 2 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT NO. N/A

(

CALCULATION NO. QDC-3200-M-0096 REV.NO. 1 PAGE NO. 3 DESCRIPTION Increase in dP due to unbalanced PAGE NO.

SUB-PAGE NO.

feedwater flow TITLE PAGE l

l REVISION

SUMMARY

2 l

l TABLE OF CONTENTS 3

l PURPOSE /OBJECITVE 4

j l

METHODOLOGY AND ACCENANCE CRITERIA 4

I l

ASSUMPTIONS 5

l l

DESIGN INPUT 5

I REFERENCES 5

CALCULATIONS 6

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS 18 APPENDICES 19 ATTACHMENT - NDIT No. QDC-96-021 M-D

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. Gbc -32co-M 00%

PROJECT NO.

9/A PAGE NO.

4 PURPOSE 1 l

The feedwater check valves 1 -0220-62A, 1 -0220-58 A, 1 -0220-62B, 1 -0220-58B, 2-0220-62A, l

2-0220-58A, 2-0220-62B and 2-0220-58B need to be tested to assure they can admit flow from HPCI and RCIC when required. This is presently accomplished by disassembling them during alternate refueling outages such that each valve is evaluated every other outage. This evaluation is a visual inspection. It has been proposed to substitute a calculation method to support a test that would replace the disassembly process. ReferringEthe simplified drawing given by Figure 1, feed flow is split into two feed headers from a common header downstream of the high pressure heaters. The two feed headers are in tum split into two smaller lines that connect directly to the Reactor Vessel. If one of the feed checx valves were to become partially clogged or to go shut or partially shut, more water from one feed line would be redirected to the other feed line (given that total feed flow and power stay the same). This would, in theory, cause tha l

pressure instrument P to read higher because of the increased DP need to drive the increase flow down 1

the line.

l The purpose of this calculation is to demonstrate the feasibility of using the increased & to supply

" alert / action" levels as the basis of a test procedure to replace the valve disassembly test.

METHODOLOGY:

Utilizing Bernoulli's Equation, an expression for flow down one of the feed paths is generated. The flow path taken will be that of the line opposite the line that contains HPCI. By selecting this flow path, a flow l

split can be equal to the flow needed by HPCI in one feed line with all remaining feed flow going to the other feed line. Using plant data obtained during normal operation, when flow is assumed to be split equally between the feed flow lines, the equation can be set equal to the recorded & and the remaining unknown parameters can be explicitly solved for as a lumped sum. This is substituted into the equations for unbalanced flow and the & is calculated. Once a constant has been solved for that represents the unknown parameters, a set of balanced and unbalanced solutions can be generated corresponding to specific power levels. By applying appropriate instmment error adjustments to the calculated &,

appropriate " alert / action" levels can be set that will detect a condition when either one line or the other is restricted. The advantages of this test is that it reduces maintenance effort and Man-REM and supplies a better evaluation of tme check valve operability than a visual exam of a disassembled valve.

1 REVISION NO. O (Final)

J

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 2 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. (PDC. 37.o0- A co% PROJECT NO. N/A PAGE NO.

6 ASSUMPTIONS:

1.

This calculation uses a value for the instrument loop inaccuracies of 57 psi. This value was transmitted in NDIT No. QDC-96-021 (attached) and is based on a 3 month calibration interval for both transmitters.

2.

The assumption that under normal operations there is balanced flow is based on the knowledge that the system is designed to give essentially balanced flow Pressure readings from P (see Figure 1) i were reviewed, determined to be constant over recent operating history and can be correlated to conditions when recent visual inspections have shown that valves were clear and working properly.

Using the HPCI flow requirements as a means to set the action level envelopes RCIC due to the more demanding HPCI flow requirements.

Additional assumptions are stated throughout the calculation as they come into play for use in the calculation at that point.

DESIGN INPUT:

Design input for the calculation is obtained from Tech Spec requirements, Feed Water piping system construction drawings, UFSAR, Spec R-4411 and the References.

a

REFERENCES:

1. Quad Cities Technical Specifications
2. Quad Cities UFSAR
3. Crane TP410, Flow of Fluids through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe
4. Irvine & Liley, Steam & Gas Tables with Computer Equations, Academic Press, Orlando, FL
5. Specification R-4411, Rev. 6
6. P& ids M-15-1 and M-62-1 REVISION NO. I s

f Exhibit E

~

NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE t

[

l COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. Goc.3260- m oogb PROJECT NO.

Oj/L PAGE NO.

(a l

l CALCULA710NS:

RCIC r

RPV "A"

i P'.'

I rw..e.. m i

~

HPCI FW HTRS 18" LINES 12" 4--

LINES Figure 1. Portion ofFW Flow Path Analyzed Constants bA g = 32.17-gc

  • 32 I7' S A := 144-Mlb := 10' lb sec-Ibfsee A

.I General equation: Ref. [3], page 1-5, equation 1-3 2

V S

V SAP 2 2

Z + APg Eqn.1 3

Z+

+--+ht

+-- -

2 3

1 2g g

2g p

p Sc Sc APs are relatively small and fluid is incompressible. Therefore: p = constant.

V V

BAPj GAP 2 2

I Eqn.2 Z 3+

Z2+

+-----thL

=

1 1

2g 2g p

p Ec Sc l

l REVISION NO. O (Final)

0 Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 0 l

CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY i

(

CALCULATION NO. ODC-Stob-m-no%

PROJECT NO.

4Ik PAGE NO.

7 l

l 2

gA V

V 2

g 4 (P - P )

-- ~ -- + (Z - Z ) + ht l

Eqn. 3 3

2 2

1 2g 2g l

Ec i

P.E-2 2

V y

g*

i Eqn.4

- (P,j - P )

+ (Z2-Z)+ht gA 2

1 2g 2g f

Ref. [3], pages 3-4, equations 3-5 & 3-14:

v' V'

L2 L i V

V i-+E'-3 +f2 2-+E' 2-l Eqn. 5 ht

= hj+hL2 " II t

l 2

D 3 2g 2g D 2 2g 2g 1

.3.

l

.IV*

V '\\

L 1 V' V'

Sc 2

I

--+K

-I I

P-P2*

+ (Z 2-Z )+fi l

Eqn.6 3

+:.

3 3

(2g 2gi D 3 2g 2g gA V

V L --+K'2-2 2

+f2 2

D 2 2g 2g I

1 From P& ids M-15-1, M-62-1, and PDT "C" the 18" pipe consists of:

PDT "C" which is schedule 120ID ': 15.250 in A '= 3 ID2 2

A = 1.268 ft 4

The 12" pipe consists of:

PDT "C" which is schedule 120ID = 10.75 in A:3 ID2 2

A = 0.63 *ft 4

Consider two cases:

j case a: Feed flow is split equally between upper and lower headers.

case b: Feed flow in lower header is reduced to that of needed HPCI flow. Then, total feed flow minus HPCI flow goes through the upper header.

i I

REVISION NO. O (Final)

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. Qt>c-3200-m-00%

PROJECT NO.

9lA PAGE NO.

8 Case "a" represents the normal and expected flow pattern. Pressure instruments read Pi and P. Suppose the check valve in the feedline where HPCI injects were to go closed 2

to the point where feed flow in that line is reduced to HPCI Tech Spec requirements (5000 gpm per T.S. 3.5/4.5C). Then the remaining flow goes through the upper header. By reading the AP, this condition can be detected. By calculating this flow (case "b") based on data obtained from nonnal operation (case "a"), a predicted AP for case "b" can be obtained. In doing this calculation, ignoring things which would tend to make the AP higher is conservative.

Calculate flow areas of 18" versus two 12" pipes:

D j :15.25 in D2 = 10.75 in

~

2 3::fD A2 ':2 D 2 A

3 2

2 A 3 = 1.268 ft A2 = 1.261 *ft l

Note: The area A represents the area of two 12" pipes into which the flow is split 2

from the 18" pipe.

As will be shown later, the pipe lengths do not enter into the calculation since they are part of a constant term "C" which is evaluated from plant data.

The head loss coefficients due to bends, contractions, heat exchangers, etc. (K) which are included in the calculation are lumped together and solved for the condition for which data has been obtained (i.e. case "a"). They are considered constant since they depend on piping geometry. However, the check valves in question open with increased flow thus lowering their K valve and consequent AP contribution. The check valves portion of the total K is small and the relatively small non-conservatism of using a constant K is l

balanced by the other conservatisms.

The friction factors (f) are weakly dependent on flow through Reynold's Number (Re). For the flow regime we are considering, Re is high enough that the friction factor is constant.

It turns out that the factors L and D for the pipe, which are constant, are lumped into an overall constant for head loss. This means that detailed knowledge of pipe lengths is not required to solve the problem at hand.

REVISION NO. O (Final) l

Exhibit E

~

NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE l

1 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. GbC 32co-A-oo% PROJECT NO.

WIA PAGE NO.

9 Elevation heads are:

Z 3.= 596.ft from transmitter locations inside (U-1) or outside (U-2) RFP Rooms Z2 = 648 ft + 8 in from Dwgs.1-3204-ED-4 and 2-3204-ED-3 CASE "a" Temperature ofFW: ~--

T gw := 340 deg F from computer point data

{

SpeciSc Volume of Saturated Water from Ref. [4], pages 21-24 DEGK(X) := -(X + 459.67)

TKCR := 647.3 9

3 AVF := 1 BVF := 1.9153882 VFCR := 3.15510-3 E kg CVF = 1.201518610 DVF :=-7.8464025 3

VFCR =0.05'l 3 Ib 3.888614 E

2.0582238 TC(TK):=

~

-2.0829991 y

TKCR d

EVF = 8.2180004 10-3 TVECTOR(x) := x 4.7549742 10-3 2

l 0

6 x

2 j

s 2

YVF(TK) = AVF + BVF TC(TK)3 + CVF TC(TK)' + DVF ~ C(TK)*.

+EVF TVECTOR(TC(TK))

l YVF(300) = 0.318 VF(DEGK(T pw)) = 0.018+IO)

VF(TK) = VFCR YVF(TK)

RHOF(TK) =

RHOF(DEGK(Tpw)) =55.952 5 3

VF(TK) ft REVISION NO. O (Final)

4 Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. Got-Moo-A-oo44 PROJECT NC.

O/Ar PAGE NO.

/0 Then:

p w:=RHOF(DEGK(Tpw))

p p w = 55.952 *Ib and:

p 3 = p yw, p 2

  • PFW p

ft' Viscosity 6fFW:

p0m 1 10~7 lbf%

Avisc := 1.005885 Bvisc := 2813.416 e

c16 m-1.06607 cl7 m 9.798022 centipoises 100 sv.c p (TF) '= po Avisc e"+#

g s

Then.

p pw = p.(T gw) g p w = 3.387* 10' *1bf %

p w = 0.162

  • centipoise p

p ft O.

Mass Flow of FW:

mdotpw,joo = 9.72510'.

at 100% power [UFSAR Sect.10.4.7.1]

mdot pw joo

  • A
  • V = p2*A *V mdotFWB
  • 3 i

i 2

2 2

where: A1 = flow area of 18" pipe and A2 = flow area of 12" pipes.

When flow splits from one 18" line into two 12" lines:

mdotFWB mdatFWB1*

and mdotFWB2 =mdotFWB1 2

REVISION NO. O (Final)

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPAPW CALCULATION NO o

- Szoo-A-oo%

FRO NO.

DJ A PAGE NO, 1I V g = 19.031

  • A

'3nen:

V 3 :=

o3 Ag see Ag 2 = 19.15

  • g V 2 :: A 3

V V

2 Egyno!ds Number ofFW Flow:

p wV D 3 y

p j

Re3:

Re 3 = 1.24210 kFW 4 mdotFWB or:

Re 3 ::

Re 3 = 1.24210' sppyD j Re2 = Fw V D P

~

2 2 Re 2 = 8.807*10' PFW 4 mdot FWB1 or:

Re 2 :=

Re 2 = 8.807*10'

  • p wD 2 y

Moody Friction Factor:

c ':.00015 in I$

f(c,D Re) :

S.. + S 74

2. jog

_3.7 D Re)/

(

(

Then:

f j =f(r,D,Re g) f j = 0.014 3

f2 : f(c,D,Re 2)

I2 = 0.015 2

REVISION NO. O (Final)

Exhibit E

~

NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE l

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY j

CALCULATION NO. GDC-32.co-A-oo9 b PROJECT NO.

MlA PAGE NO.

12 Evaluation of AP:

P.f.

.I 2)

V V

g y )2~ + E *- -}

2 y

g 2

3 +(1 -Z )+f Eqn.6 Pj-P2"

+8 2

1 I

1 D 3 2g 2g gA (2g 2g)

V V

L2 -- + E ' 2 2

+f'

~

2 2 D 2 2g 2g Since;

^1 y,

y}

A 2 then-1

'A I'

Eqn.7 l

1

-V 1

2 Pyy V

(A' 3

1 Ec

+ (Z2-Z).

AP

=

3 2g 2g.

gg fA 12 lA 12

]

3 j

-V

-V 2

2 I

I

+K '(A V

L2 (A2

/

Lj V 2

)

-+K.

3 +f' 3

+f3 2

3 2

3 2g 2g D 2 2g 2g D

O Collecting terms:

Eqn.8

,,g_

V fA 1 L

L, fA 9 fA 9 ge 2

3 3

3 3

3

- 1 + f -3 6 f-

+K 3+K'

+ (Z - 1 )

AP =

2 1

2

^ 2) 3 D D 2 (A )

2'S

.(A21 3

(

SA 2

Collect constant terms into a single constant:

fA 9 L

L A l IA 1 3

2 E.in. 9 c=

-1+f j + f.

+K 3+K' I

3 2

(A )

D D 2 (A )

(A21 2

3 2

l REVISION NO. O I (Final)

\\

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY l

CALCULATION NO. ODC 5200- A-00%

PROJECT NO.

N/A PAGE NO.

/3 l'

I Then:

l I

2 PFW y

Eqn.10 AP = - --(C) + (Z2-Z )

3 2g gA From data:

AP,,gg '= 84 psi at 100% power The'a&ual driving head for the flow is found by subtracting the head due to the submergence of the FW sparger:

AP, := APaxed-I 443' Psi (head correction due to subnierged FW Sparger; from Appendix 2 The total AP for arbitrary power levels can be calculated by correcting the AP due to flow only:

Power := 100 1

PFW PFW "2

- 2. psi

+ (Z2-Zg) gA AP,,,g.= 84 psi- (Z2-Zj)

SA

+ 2 psi 100 1

i AP, = AP.ng-l 443 Psi (head correction due to submerged J

a FW Sparger; from Appcndix 2)

AP. read " 84 78i a

Then:

AP, g A i

- (Z 2-Z )

1 P

FW '

  • Eqn.I1 c=

. Powerf 2g 100 /

Which yields:

c - 28.387 l

which depends only on geometry and is independent of flow.

u i

l l

REVISION NO. O (Final)

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE COMMONWLLLTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. ODC 5200- A 00%

FROJECT NO.

4lA PAGE NO.

/*/

Then:

2 P FW" Eqn.12 y

AP(V):= CI- + (Z - Z )

2 1

j 8

8A To calculate AP as a function ofmass flow:

t

'.V[(,mdot) :=

P A}

3 l

JL PN V (mdot)2 j

g Eqn.12a AP(mdot) :=

C-

+ (22-Z )

1

'E SA

)

and:

Re(mdot) :=

sppgrD 3 CASE "b"

,t For the case in which all FW flow (adjusted for power level) less rated HPCI flow (2.496 Mlb/hr or about 5000 gpm)is going through one FW line:

mdot pg,jg = 9.725 *b d

hr mdatHPCI '= 2.496-mdot pg.B = mdot pw,j g-

- mdotHPCI l

REVISION NO. O (Final)

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 2 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY I

CALCULATION NO. QDC.- b2co-vA-oo94 PROJECT NO. N/A PAGE NO. /5 Then, for Power = 100%:

Calculate &,:

APb = AP(smiotFWB)

Ap b = 157.704 psi

~

but: APbsUd OP(mdotFWB) + l 443 Psi (head correction due to submerged FW Sparger; from Appendix 2)

Then:

APbud = 159.147 ysi For Power = 100 %:

Maximum & for " Alert Level" l

If we measure a & such that APaxead<APGAlert Then we can be 95% confident that HPCI flow will meet Tech Spec requirements.

O The instrument uncertainty from Appendix 3 is:

APUncerta57 psi (Assumption 1)

The maximum " Alert Level" & is APAlm : APbxcad-APUncert

~

Then:

APAlm = 102.147 psi l

REVISION NO. I

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 l

Revision 2 l

CGE l

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY l

l CALCULATION NO.Gbt 3wo-m-oog(,

PROJECT NO. N/A PAGE NO. Hg l

)

Maximum AP for " Action Level" Ifwe measure a AP such that:

AP<.}DP Alert then we can be 95% confident that the high AP is not due to instrument error.

The instrument uncertainty from Appendix 3 is:

APUncerta57 psi (Assumption 1)

The maximum " Action Level" AP is: APAction :: AP g APUncert Then:

APAction " 141

  • Psi

~

l For a range of power levels:

Power = 81,82.100

- mdotHPCI mdotpw(Power) :mdatFW.100-AP (Power) : AP(mdotpw(Power))

b Alert (Power) : AP (Power)+ 2 psi-APUnc:.st AP b

l Ppw APa rcad(Power) :

84 psi- (Z2-Z ) psi I

+ 2 psi l

p/

y

+ (Z - Z ).

l 2

3 BA l

REVISION NO.1

Exhibit E NEP-12-42 Revision 2 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. Qtc-3200- A-coes PROJECT NO. N/A PAGE NO. ) '7 APw(Power) := AP,,dPower)+ APUm mdot pgPower)'

{g)

AP dPower)

APAlert(Power)

Power i hr /

p,;

p,;

81 5.381 62.838 41.512 82 5.478 63.841 44.286 83 g

64.856 47.109 84 5.673 65.884 49.982 85 5.77 66.924 52.904 86 5.867 67.976 55.877 87 5.%5 69.041 58.899 88 6.062 70.117 61.97 89 6.159 71.207 65.091 90 6257 72.308 68.2.62 91 6.354 73.422 71.483 92 6.451 74.548 74.753 93 6.548 75.686 78.073 94 6.645 76.837 81.443:

95 6.743 78 84.862 6.84 79.176 88.331 97 6.937 80.363 91.85 98 7.034 81.563 95.418 99 7.132 82.775 99.036 100 7.229 84 102.704 REVISION NO. I

Exhibk E NEP-12-02 Revision 2 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. QDC-32co-A co%

PROJECT NO. N/A PAGE NO. l g Graphing APu and APa as a function ofpower:

100

/

95 90

/

8, 8Aleg Power)

,./

  1. ,Q Power)

. ',,s' Y

,/

../

/

+

65 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 Power From the graph, this technique is impossible to apply below 92% power and difficult to apply below about 96% power.

CONCLUSIONS This calculation demonstrates the feasibility of predicting a DP that would be representative of a situation where one of the feed lines is restricted to the point where HPCI flow might be reduced to below Tech.

Spec. limits. It can be used as a basis for setting alert / action levels when a specified DP limit has been reached or exceeded as long as the conditions for which the calculation are valid are adhered to. The DP with instrument error included as developed by this calculation represents the maximum DP for alert / action levels that should be used. The " read DPs" must be taken at corresponding power levels as given by this calculation for the calculation to be valid. Given the stated instrument errors this methodology becomes impractical below 96% power.

REVISION NO. I 1

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 l

o Revision 0 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. ODC-3200- A-0091o PROJECT NO.

OIA PAGE NO. 19 Anoendix 1: Calculation ofMoody friction factor over range ofFW flows.

mdotFWB :1-hr,1.5-hr br

. 8-Re(mdotFWB) f(c,D j,Re(mdotFWB))

2.554 10 0.016 6

0.015 6

3.83-10 0'015 5.107 10P 0.015 6.384 10' O.014 6

7.661 10 0.014 6

0.014

)

8.938 10 0.014 7

1.021 10 0.014 7

1.149 10 0,014 7

1.277 10 0.014 7

0.014 1.404 10 l

1.532 10' 4

7 l.66-10 0.013 7

1.788 10 01 7

1.915 10 2 G?310' l

r.o i.n.(

  • n.3))

g l

l N

  • ==,

l l

"i a 1.,g Re(* FWB)

REVISION NO. 0 (Final)

{

r l

l l

Erhlhit E NEP-12-02 Revision 0 CGE I

l COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. Obt-3200- M-00%

PROJECT NO.

OjA PAGE NO. a?O Anoendix 2: Pressure correction due to submergence ofFW sparger p RPV ': 1020 psi at rated power T, given p,

8 Units:

MPs a 10' Pa p o ':1 MPa kj=10 joule p 0 = 145.041 psi 2

A :.42677610 B ::.3892710' C :.94865410 TK(p) :: A+

TF(p) :=(TK(p)- 273.16) E + 32 f

i in1 +C 5

i (P 0/

)

TRPV = TF(p RPV)

T ppy = 546.917.

Then:

pRPV :RHOF(DEGK(TRPV))

PRPV = 46.176

  • Pressure Correction:

Normal reactor water level (RWL) elevation: ZRWL = 540 in FW sparger elevation:

ZFWS = 486 in

  1. FWS*(ZRWL~ZFWS)'PRPV 8c Then:

APFWS "l 443 'P55 REVISION NO. O (Final)

Exhibit E NEP-12-02 Revision 2 CGE COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY CALCULATION NO. QDC. 32co-M-co%

PROJECT NO. N/A i

PAGE NO. & t(N)

Appendig.1: Instrument Uncertainties Pressure transmitters PT-1-0647-A, PT-1-3241-15, PT-2-0647-A and PT-2-3241-15 are used to obtain the pressure drop through the portion of the FW system with which we are concerned and which contains the subject check valves.

This calculation uses a value for the instrument loop inaccuracies of 57 psi. This value was transmitted in NDITNo. QDC-96-021 (attached) and is based on a 3 month calibration interval for both transmitters.

0:

4 REVISION NO. I

P"90 E ATTACHMENT B, PART 1 CALC: Q BC '5& o0- M - 009 to COMED NUCIEAR DESIGN INFORMATION TRANSMTITAL ESAFETY-RELATED Originating Organnrion NDIT No. ODC-96-021 DNON-SAFETY-RELATED EComEd OREGULATORY RELATED Oother (specify)

Station On=A Cirian Unit (s) 1 & 2 Page 1

of 6

Design Change Authority No.: N/A System Designation:

3200 To G.E. Knano Subject Determination of the Total Combinad Error Associa'ad with Dametor Pra==ure Indication and Feedwater Hggi.er Pressure Indication D.L Cuiko Desien Ensinaarinn-OC

).

8f-o f - 9 (,

h,--

n, n

R.G. Wunder Desian Fnuinaarinn-OC f- /-Ho

\\

.a. -

~

t Status of Information: B Approved for Use OUnverified OEngineering Judgement Method and Schedule of Verification for Unverified NDITs: N/A Description of Information:

This NDIT is issued to transmit results of calculation QDC-3200-I-Oll3, Revision 1. Please be advised that an NDIT transmitting calculation QDC-3200-14113, Revision 0, results has never been issued.

Calculation QDC-3200 I-0113, Revision 1, determmes the total combined instrument uncertamty associated i

with using the Reactor Pressure Indication Loop and the Feedwater Header Pressure Indication Loop to determine the differential pressure across Feedwater check valves 1(2)-0220-58A&B and 1(2)-0220-62A&B.

i This NDIT includes:

l

- calculation conclusions, references, design inputs, and assumptions

- instrument calibration frequency, tolerances, and ranges

- M&TE requirements This NDIT is applicable for the following components:

PT -001(2)-0647-A PT -001(2)-3241-15 PI -001(2)-0640-25A Unit 1&2 Process Computer Purpose of Issuance: To support flow testing of Feedwater check valves 1(2)-0220-58A&B and 1(2)-0220-62A&B Source of Information: Calculation QDC-3200-I-0113, Revision 1 Distribution:

R.J. Atherton P.J. Wicyk M.L. Bridges K.D. Peterson D.M. Cook D.Y. Yee File No.:

n/a CHRON No.:

n/a

ATTACHMENT B, PART 2 COMED NDIT No. ODC-96-021 NUCLEAR DESIGN INFORMATION TRANSMTITAL Page._2 of 6 CONCLUSIONS The total combined instrument uncertainty associated with using the Reactor Pressure Indicating Loop and the Feedwater Header Pressure Indicating Loop, to determine the differential pressure across Feedwater check valves, 1(2)-0220-58A and B, and 1(2)-0220-62A and B when calibrated with the MTE rpecified in the Calibration Instrument Data Section is:

M-1(21-0647A and PT-1(21-3241-15 3 Month Calibration Interval TEAPn = i 57 PSIG (2a)

PT-1(21-0647A and PT-1(21-3241-1518 Month Calibration Interval TEAPn = i 71 PSIG (2a)

PT-1(21-0647A ana Irr-1(2)-3241-15 24 Month Calibration Interval TEAPn = i 78 PSIG (2a)

REFERENCES 1.

ANSI /ISA-S67.04-1994, "Setpoints for Nuclear Safety Related Instrumentation."

2.

TID-E/I&C-20, Rev. O, " Basis for Analysis of Instrument Channel Setpoint Error & Loop Accuracy."

3.

TID-E/I&C-10, Rev. O, " Analysis of Instrument Channel Setpoint Error and Instrument Loop Accuracy."

4.

Quad Cities Instrument Surveillance Procedures QCIS 600-2, Rev. 3, Quarterly Reactor Pressure O to 1200 PSIG Indication Calibration l

5.

Comed Standard Instrument Tolerance Document, Revision 0, dated 05-01-92, for GEMAC Model 551 Electronic Pressure Transmitter i

6.

NED-I-EIC-0052, Rev.2, Reactor Pressure Indication Error Analysis.

l 7.

Quad Cities Instrument Database Irr-1-647-A Revision B Verified 03-08-94 l

PI-1640-25A Revision A Verified 03-01-94 PT-2-647-A Revision 0 Verified 05-10-91 I

PI-2-640-25A Revision 0 Verified 05-10-91 i

frT-1-3241-15 Revision 0 Verified 05-10-91 j

Irr-2-3241-15 Revision 0 Verified 05-10-91 Associated Supplemental Data Sheets (SDS)

COMED NDIT No. ODC-96-021 NUCLEAR DESIGN INFORMATION TRANSMTITAL Page 3 of 6 8.

Instrument Tolerances, Quad Cities Instrument Maintenance Memorandum 13, from Dennis M. Cook '.o IM Department Personnel dated March 5,1994 9.

Quad Cities Specification 13524-069-N202, Rev. 4; Response to IE Bulletin 79 01B, Procedure for use of Environmental Zone Maps.

10. UFSAR, Section 9.4, Air Conditioning, Heating, Cooling, and Ventilation System i1. NED-I-EIC-0255, Measurement and Test Equipment (M&TE) Accuracy Calculation For Use With Comed BWR(s), Rev. O, CHRON #208597
12. ACME Steam Tables,2nd Edition,1%7
13. Procer.s Computer Analog Input List Verbal Conversation Memorandum dated 03-07-1996,with Jim Schnimneyer regarding Process Compute 14.

A/D accurac' and shunt resistor accuracy

15. QDC-3200-M4096, Revision 0, Increase In dP Due To Unbalance Feedwater Flow.

DESIGN INTUTS Design inputs are taken to be the resources used herein to evaluate.the instrument errors.

ATTACEWENT B, FART 2 P^t

COMED NDIT No. ODC-964)21 NUCLEAR DESIGN INFORMATION TRANSMITTAL Page 4 of 6 ASSUMPTIONS 1.

Published instrument vendor specifications are considered to be 2 sigma values unless specific information is available to indicate otherwise.

f 2.

Temperature, humidity and pressure (static and ambient) errors have been incorporated =5n provided by the manufacturer. Otherwise, these errors are assumed to be included within the moufacturer's reference 1

accuracy specification.

3.

Drift error has been assumed to be 0.5% of span per 18 months for eleconic devices and 1 % per year for mechanical devices including the addition of 25% late factor, unless r;4cified otherwise by the manufacturer. The calculated drift error will be adjusted for surveQance intervals cf greater or lesser length based on calibration frequency.

4.

Radiation induced errors associated with normal environments 'Jave been incorporated when provided by the manufacturer. Otherwise, these errors are assumed to be small and capable of being adjusted out each time the instrument is calibrated. Derefore, unless specifiolly provided, the normal radiation errors can be assumed to be included in the instrument drift related e.rors.

5.

It is assumed that instrument power supplies have been designed to function within manufacturer's required voltage. As such errors associated with power supply / frequency variations are negligible with respect to other error terms during normal conditions.

6.

Here is no QCIS procedure for PT-1(2)-3241-15 instrument loops. Derefore, MATE listed in the Calibration Instrument Data Section are assumed to be the most likely for use in calibrating the instrument loops.

7.

There is no QCIS procedure for PT-1(2)-3241-15. For the purpose of this calculation, calibration frequencies of 3 months,18 months, and 24 months will be assumed. It is also assumed that the instrument loops are calibrated by applying pressure of known accuracy to the input of the transmitter and (

adjusting the mA output span consistent with the input span.

n 8.

Evaluation of M&TE errors is based on the assumption that the test equipment listed in the Calibration Instrument Data Section is used. Use of test equipment less accurate than that listed will require evaluation of the effect on calculation results.

9.

A system directly connected to the reactor vessel is assumed to be 1000 psig at saturation temperature.

j

10. The control room CRT screen (where the PT-1(2)-3241-15 process value will be obtained) has a 4 digit display (Reference 3.14). It is conservatively assumed that the 4 digit CRT display is a 3-1/2 significant digit display, Therefore the resolution at the control room CRT display is considered to be 5 psi.

N AWACEMENT B, PART 2 COMED NDIT No. ODC-%021 NUCLEAR DESIGN INFORMATION TRANSMrITAL Page 5 of 6

~

CALIBRATION DATA Reactor Pressure PT-1(2)0647-A, PI-1(2)-0640-25A (From Reference 6)

Transmitter Calibrated Range:

10 to 50mV O 14 psig to 1214 PSIG (includes 14 PSIG head correction)

Calib. Tolerance:

t 6.0 psig Indicator Calibrated Range:

10 to 50mV O O to 1200 PSIG Scale Range Calib. Tolerance:

i 20.0 PSIG 1

0 e'*

Calib. Frequency: Existing - Every 3 Months TSUP - Every 18 Months Proposed - Every 24 Months Reactor Feed Water Header Pressure (No QCIS Procedure)

FT-1(2)-3241-15 Transmitter Calibrated Range: 10 to 50mV @ 0 psig to 2000 psig (Ref.13 & Assumption 7)

(does not include head correction)

Calib. Tolerance: = i 0.5% of span (Reference 8)

= i0.005(40 mV)

= i 0.2 mV Computer Indication Calibrated Range:

10 to 50 mA @ 0 psig to 2000 psig (Ref.13) 10 to 50 mV across transmitter test jacks per Assumption 7 Calibration Tolerance:

N/A (Reference 14)

Calibration Frequency:

Per Assumption 7, Every 3 Months Every 18 Months Every 24 Months

ATTC""ff Be PART 2 A

COMED NDIT No. ODC-96-021 NUCLEAR DESIGN INFORMATION TRANSMITTAL Page._f_ of 6 CALIBRATION INSTRUMENT DATA Calculation NED-I-EIC 0255, Measurement and Test Equipment (M&TE) Accuracy Calculation For Use With Comed BWR(s), Rev. O, Reference 11 is used to provide the errors for the calibration instruments noted herein.

The following list of calibration instruments are likely for use based on the pressure range and application (Assumption 6). The list provides the errors for these instruments from the above noted calculation. The list also provides the evaluation parameters used in NED-I-EIC-0255.

Transmitter Input Calibration signal i

Calibration Instrument MTE Error flal Evaluation Parameters PT-1(2)-0647-A Heise C-12 (0 - 1500 psig) i6.668771 psig 1500 psig,104 'F Heise CMM (0 - 2000 psig) i8.215230 psig 2000 psig,104 *F Druck DPI601 (2000 isig) 4.921016 psig 2000 psig,104 'F l

Druck DPI601 (3CM psig) 7.380677 psig 3000 psig,104 'F PT-1(2)-3241-15 Heise CMM (0 - 2000 psig) ill.410960 psig 2000 psig,120 *F Heise C-12 (0-3000 psig) i19.140859 psig 3000 psig,120 'F Note:

MTE error values for the Druck DPI-601 oculd be reduced slightly by using the ensual antibrataan limit for reading value. For conservatism.the enor values were simply transposed from Reference 11.

Transmitter Output Calibration Signal Calibration Instrument MTE Error flal Evaluation Parameters PT-1(2)-0647-A Fluke 8050A (200 mV) i0.039778 mV 50 mV,104 'F PT-1(2)-3241-15 Fluke 8050A (200 mV) i0.056886 mV 50 mV,122 'F

.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20216E137&oldid=3970348"