ML20217D861
| ML20217D861 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 09/28/1996 |
| From: | NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20013G029 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9803300296 | |
| Download: ML20217D861 (31) | |
Text
4
~%
9 Moisture Separator System Engineering Evaluation DR..
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY i
MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT i
MOISTURE SEPARATOR SYSTEM ENGINEERING EVALUATION TASK 18.05 l
Rev Prepared Date Reviewed Date Approved Date Approved Date By NSP By))SP By NSP By GE O
krkhl '/bl/f6 $brau_
h~
7////% $1Tcvv Rf2Sf%
'l-lf-46
//'
ff f'
3 l
l l Rsrate: Word-18.05:jao 1 of 6 l
l
1 l
1.0 GOAL OF RERATE PROGRAM This analysis is being performed as an assessment in support of the Power Rerate Program. The effect of an increase in reactor thermal power up to a level of 1880 MWT (112.5%) will be evaluated for each system to determine if this increase can be accomplished safely within existing l
system configurations. The license submittal will request approval to operate at 1775 MWT (106.3%). The objective of the report will be to determine if the system is capable of performing its l
design function at the increased power level, to determine if any modifications are required to support the power increase and to evaluate plant reliability.
The evaluation will identify the differences in system operation for both new power levels.
Increasing rated power provides the most cost effective use of existing equipment. In most cases, l
there is sufficient capability in the equipment that no significant decrease in margin is required to operate at the higher power level.
2.0 SYSTEM FUNCTION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 System Functions The purpose of the moisture separators is to remove entrained moisture from the high pressure turbine exhaust steam and retum this moisture to the #14 feedwater heaters.
2.2 System Description
Moisture removal consists of 4 separators,1 on each of the HP exhaust lines.
Each separator vessel contains an array of separating vanes (P8X design) made of stainless steel.
The vanes are assembled to provide an erratic flow path that separates the moisture entrained in the steam.
l Steam exhausted from the HP turbine enters the moisture separators with a moisture content of approximately 12 percent. After exiting the moisture separators, the moisture content is reduced to approximately 0.67 percent assuming a 0.95 moisture separator effectiveness.
Moisture removed by the separators is drained to collector tanks that are provided with level i
instrumentation that regulates the drain flow via drain control valves to the #14 feedwater heaters. High levels in the collector tanks are directed to the main condenser via dump valves. If the level rises into the lower region of the moisture separator, a turbine trip will l
occur following a 10 second time delay.
3.0 REQUIREMENTS To maximize cycle efficiency, the moisture separators must effectively remove moisture over the normal range of inlet flow. The Moisture Separator Drain Collector Tank Level Control System 4
must also be capable of handling the steady. state full power moisture removal rate. This is evidenced by maintaining proper drain tank level without dump valve assistance.
j The Moisture Removal System must be designed to operate at the maximum pressure and temperature encountered by the system.
1 1
Rerate: Word-18.05:jao 2 of 6 i
4,0 IMPACT ON SYSTEM Inlet flow rate to the moisture separators will increase due to Power Rerate. As a result, to assure optimal LP turbine performance the effectiveness of the moisture separators should not change significantly. Also increased inlet flows will result in higher drain flows assuming a negligible change in moisture separator effectiveness. The moisture separator drain collector tank level control valves must be capable of handling the higher flows without dump valve assistance. Dump valve capacity must be adequate to handle full flow assuming the associated drain valve fails closed.
The moisture seperator drain tank level controllers will be required to maintain stable level control.
The full impact on stabili$ will not be known until operation is implemented at the new power levels.
R: sizing of the drain valves, as discussed in Section 5 below, should enable continued stable operation.
Pr:ssure and temperature in the moisture separators and cross around piping will increase due to Power Rerate. The pressure and temperature rating of these components must exceed the expected conditions. Also the current settings on the cross around relief valves will be reviewed for th3 expected conditions.
The evaluations for this Rerate report were performed at Rerate powers of 1771 MWT and 1818 MWT. The 1771 MWT power level corresponds to the new HP turbine design flow rate. The 1818 MWT power level corresponds to the HP turbine flow rate at turbine control valve wide open position. The 1818 MWT evaluation bounds 1775 MWT for this report increasing power to 1880 MWT will require further evaluations.
5.0 EVALUATION The effectiveness (E) of the moisture separator vane assembly, defined as the fraction of inlet moisture removed in the vane assemblies, was evaluated in Appendix A. Appendix A, Attachment 1 shows the manufacturers performance curve for the P8X separator vane design. The curve shows the relationship between outlet moisture percent and inlet steam flow dynamic pressure 2
(pV ) for inlet moistures of 3 percent to 15 percent. Appendix A, Table 1 summarizes the dynamic pr:ssures associated with the applicable thermal powers. As shown on Diagram A (Appendix A, pg 3), the outlet moisture does not vary significantly over the applicable range of dynamic pressures and an average value of about 0.07 percent is representative. The approximate relationship b: tween separator effectiveness and outlet moisture percent (Y) is given by equation 1 on page 2 of Appendix A. This equation shows that the effectiveness exceeds 0.99 for an outlet moisture of 0.07 percent. The actual effectiveness of the moisture separators cannot be determined without performing a tracer test. The vane assemblies perform less effectively than indicated by Figure 1.
This is due in part to non uniform inlet flow distributior, nd the potential for some bypass flow at the separator vane to support structure boundary. The result of these inefficiencies would likely cause an upward shift in the performance curve to higher outlet moistures without a significant change in curve shape, thus the change in effectiveness from rated power to 1818 MWT is expected to be minimal.
The moisture separator drain collector tank level control valve flow requirements were evaluated in Appendix B. The following assumptions were used in this analysic.
l Rerate: Word-18.05:jao 3 of 6
' 1. General Electric heat balance calculations generally assume a 0.85 moisture separator effectiveness. New P8X separating plates were installed in 1994 which have improved moisture removal efficiency over a significantly wider inlet steam dynamic pressure range. As a result, it will be assumed that the moisture separators' effectiveness is 0.95. Also it will be assumed that assigning this effectiveness will have little effect on the cycle heat balance calculations, thus the moisture separator inlet steam flows and steam properties needed to evaluate drain control valve flow requirements remain valid,
- 2. Moisture separator performance and inlet steam flow and steam properties do not vary between moisture separators. As a result, the drain flows are identical.
l
- 3. The piping geometry between the moisture separator drain collector tank and the drain control valves does not vary significantly between separators, as a result flashing due to pressure drop t
is similar in all cases and only 1 drain line need be evaluated.
Moisture separator outlet saturated liquid flow rate at Rerate powers was calculated in Appendix B, l
Part 1. It was assumed that at the outlet of the moisture separators the flow was entirely saturated liquid. Pressure drop occurs from the separators to the drain control valves as a result of an elevation increase and line losses. The drain control valve inlet saturated liquid and steam flow rates resulting from the pressure drop were calculated Appendix B, Part 2. As shown, the drain control valves should be sized to handle the maximum expected flows of 198934 pounds per hour (pph) saturated liquid and 1908 pph steam at the corresponding Rerate power of 1818 MWT.
Vendor calculations for two phase flow will be used to modify the existing drain control valves for 1
the required flow plus the vendor recommended flow margin.
NOTE: Sizing calculations for the drain control valves would increase their capacity (Cv) rating to
)
equal the moisture separator dump valve Cv rating. Therefore the dump and drain valves will have adsquate capacity to handle expected flow rates. The dump valve location with respect to the drain l
tanks, allows for little pressure drop so two phase flow is minimal. Based on this, no additional capacity will be required to increase power to 1818 MWT, however further increase to 1880 MWT, will require additional evaluation of dump valve capacity.
4 The control system will have to provide stable level control under rerate flow conditions with the new valves. This should not be a problem. In order to insure stable control and appropriate controller tuning, an action has been made to monitor and tune the controllers to insure stability during the startup testing phase following implementation of the rerate program.
The cross around piping and moisture separators were evaluated by General Electric (Ref. E) and found acceptable for the steam conditions associated with the new HP turbine design. These conditions correspond to 110.0 percent of current rated flow and relate to a tharmal output of approximately 1818 MWT. Since the cross around piping was not evaluated for conditions exceeding 1818 MWT, further evaluation will be required to provide additional Rerate to 1880 MWT. The design pressure / temperature rating of the moisture separators is 314.7 psia and 423 F respectively. This rating exceeds the pressure / temperature that would exist at 1818 MWT (i.e.,
224.3 psia and 391 F). The relief valves were evaluated by General Electric for 110.0 percent flow (Ref. D). The relief valves are set to open at equal increments of pressure increase to provide a stepped relief response. The setpoints on the two lowest pressure setpoint relief valves will be raised to avoid lifting during control intercept valve testing. Further evaluation of the relief valves will be required for additional power Rerate to 1880 MWT.
Rerate: Word-18.05:jao 4 of 6
?
6.0' ADDITIONAL COMPONENT, SUBSYSTEM OR AREA EVALUATIONS, ETC.
i Task 18.06.01, Extraction Steam, should evaluate Drain System capacity.
! 7.0 REVIEW OF NRC COMMITMENTS LER 83-011, Replace carbon steel reducers with stainless steel. The "D" moisture separator drain i
d veloped a leak in the downstream carbon steel reducer. As a result, the reducer was replaced with a stainless steel reducer. Higher flow rates could make the flashing conditions worse under i
rarate power levels. Replacement of the original carbon steel reducer with a stainless steel reducer will more than compensate for any increased flashing by the use of a material with substantially more erosion resistance. Therefore no further action is required by Power Rerate.
! 8.0 REVIEW OF GENERIC COMMUNICATION CONCLUSIONS No generic communications were applicable to this area.
9.0 CONCLUSION
S The Moisture Separator System comprised of cross around piping, relief valves, moisture s parators, and Drain Control System will not require major modifications to handle higher pressures and flows associated with Power Rerate to 1775 MWT, however further evaluation of the cross around piping, relief valves, and Drain Control System will be required if further power increase is desired.
10.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS The moisture separator inlet flow will increase from approximately 6320138 pph at 1670 MWT to 6931551 pph at 1818 MWT.
This increase in flow should not significantly impact moisture s parator effectiveness. Saturated liquid flow from the moisture separators to the drain control valves will increase from approximately 718094 pph at 1670 MWT to 774084 pph at 1771 MWT and 803367 pph at 1818 MWT. The drain control valves will be modified as necessary to handle the flow at the higher Rerate power. The dump valves should handle the flow at 1818 MWT without modification. Additional evaluation will be required if the plant Rerates to 1880 MWT.
The cross around piping relief valves were evaluated by GE and 2 of the 4 valves were found to require an increase in setpoint pressure. The setpoints will be changed prior to startup following the 1996 refuel outage.
l Rerata: Word-18.05:Jao 5 of 6
E 11.0 REQUIRED ACT10NS :
- 1. Increase the capacity of the moisture separator drain _ control valves in accordance with vendor.
recommendations.
2.. Change setpoint on 2 of the 4 cross around relief valves-as required for operation at '1818 MWT.
'3. Monitor the' stability of the MS Drain Tank level controllers during startup to verify acceptable stability. Tune the controllers to provide the maximum stability.
- 4. Make the calculation shown in Appendices A and B into a formal calculation under the NSP calculation process. If any changes result, revise this report accordingly.
12.0 REFERENCES
-A. MNGP Operations Manual B.6.1-02, Revision 2 B. ASME Steam Tables, Fifth Edition C.. NX-8435-245, Vessel Assembly Details
'D. NH-108168, CD9-6"-GB Moisture Separator Drain l
E. Turbine-Generator Final Report.111.7 Percent of Original Throttle Flow, General Electric Company, Revision 0 1
F. Crane Technical Paper No. 410 G. D-81934, Retrofit of MS Separators with P10 Vanes to P8X Vanes 13.0 APPENDICES
_ A. Moisture Separator Effectiveness Evaluation B. Moisture Separator Drain Flow Evaluation t
l L
Rorato: Word-18.05:]ao 6 of 6
NO30402G W '4 1996 Gt 1
MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT 3494 TITLE:
CALCULATION / ANALYSIS CONTROL FORM Revision 2 10/12/94 Page 1 of 1 Calculation / Analysis No.: CA-96 - 009 Page 1 of 6
Revision No.:
0
Title:
Moisture Separator Effectiveness System:
TRB Topical Subject Area:_ Power Rerate Modification No.:
Vendor Name/ Calc No.:
Assioned Personnel (Names & Titles)
Approval:
- s. Hammer Superintendent Turbine Sys Ener Preparation:
J. Beres Project Engineer Verification:
J. Tollefson Senior Engineer Verification:
NA References /Filina':
Ei!g Descriotion/ Location
)
X 1.
Power Rerate File 1
]
g, 3.
X Calculation / Analysis file.
Verification Method (s)
Review Altemate Calculation Test Other Explanation:
Comotetion (Signatures)
NA Verification /Approvalin Document Prepared By:
be Date: 2 %
u Verified By:
/g Mr Date: p-f1-94
/
Verified By:
Date:
Approved By:
[Mi Date:_ 7///7g 3087 (PROCEDURE / FORM CHANGE AND HOLD N,OTICE)incorpofated: _ / ' '" h
(
1 AFOR ADMINISTRATIVE Resp Suow GSSA (/Q) l Assoc Ref: AWi-05.014525iej sR: N Freo: 0, yrs,
- j. R6fA USE ONLY+% " ARMS: 3494 l Doe Tvoe: 3042 l Admin initials: cio Date: /4 //t /9V g
, /
-- q, o f-j j
L.
=*
i.
3495 MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT
. TITLE:
CALCULATION / ANALYSIS VERIFICATION Revision 3 09/22/94 CHECKLIST Page 1 of 1
. Place initial by items verified.
CA.
96 009 Attachment Pageytof 6
yerified
{
REVIEW
///
1.
Inputs correctly selected.
'z#
2.
Assumptions described and reasonable.
///
Applicable' codes, standards and regulations identified and met.
['M 3.
4.
Appropriate method used.
'/#
Applicable construction and operating experience considered.
' //
5.
Applicable structure (s), system (s), and component (s) listed.
9
/
6.
7.
Formulas and equations documented, unusual symbols defined.
_ /s#
8.
Detailed to allow verification without recourse to preparer.
W 9.
Neat and legible, pages all correctly numbered.
I4T 10.
Signed by preparer.
'///
11 Interface requirements identified and satisfied.
'M 12.
Acceptance, criteria identified, adequate and satisfied.
13.
Result resonable compared to inputs.
I '
ALTERNATE CALCULATION 1 4.
Alternate cale results consistent with original.
1 15.
Items 1-4 above verified. (Required by ANSI N.45.2.11)
TESTING 16.
Testing requirements fully described and adequate.
17.
Shows adequacy of tested feature @ worst case conditions.
If test is for overall design adequacy, all operating modes considered in 18.
determining test conditions.
19.
If model test, scaling laws and error analysis established.
Results meet acceptance criteria, or documentation of acceptable resolution 20.
is attached.
OTHER (Explain)
FINAL DOCUMENTATION (Verify applicable items included) 21.
Alternate or check cales.
22.
Summary of test results.
23.
Comments (errors, discrepancies, recommendations).
24.
Method of resolution of comments.
Date: p/ 7-96 Completed By:
,N. Q 3087 (PROCEDURE / FORM CHANGE ANo HOLD ROTICE)incomoratei _ M A/ru
?FoR ADMINISTRATIVE. Reso Suov: GSSA 7Wl l Assoc Ref: AWi-05.01.69 CSr4SR N Froc: 0, yrs
} M*Wr: tJsE ONLY'M ARMS: 3495
' 'lDoc Tvoe: soap 1 Acmin inttals: %,
Date: c// r/4 v 0
/
I/crs
GENERAL COMPUTATION SHEET 1
~~-
Northem States Power Company s
I
?ROJECT Power Aerate E NO None SUBJECT CA M-009 Moisture Seoamor Effectiveness SHEET NO.1 OF 1 DATE 0247-96 COMP BY1 C'K'D BY t
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this calculation is to determine the impact ofincreased power rerate conditions on the moisture removal efectiveness of the HP tu a es atproposed System Engineering Evaluation (Ref. 4).The results of this calc parators.
s ure Separator METHODOLOGY:
thefraction ofinlet moisture removed by the P8X v a s e ned as calculating the ratio of the moisture removal diferential and the inlet moisturee Standard thermodynamic and hydraulic equations are used.
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA:
There is no acceptance criteriafor this calculation.
lNMS:
J A.
Moisture Separator Hydraulic Conditions (Ref.1)
Power Level Heat Balance l
1670 MWth 334 HB 118 1771 MWth 534 HB 103 Rev.1
.1818 MWth 534 HB 102 Rev.1 B.
Moisture Separatorinlet Area (Ref. 2)
C.
Performance Data (Attachment 1) l D.
The moisture separator hydraulic conditions at present and rerate pow conditions. The outlet moisture is determinedfr ons are
\\
from Attacianent 1. According to the manufacturer, outlet mois
[
the continuity equation. The approximate inlet area w i
1 ng Ref. 2.
ASSUMPTIONS:
\\
be assumed to be equal to the moisture separator o ressure can in A above. See Attachment 2.
nce diagrams fMALYSIS; h.
The numerical calculations are contained in the attached sections.
GENERAL COMPUTATION SHEET Northern States Power Company r
m, l
ENO None l
PRCUECT Power Rerate SHEET NO. 4 OF 1 DATE 02-07-96 s
SUBJECT CA 96-009 Moisture Separator Effectiveness COMP BY JB C'K'O BY l
This analysis verifles the conclusions made in Engineering Evaluation Task 18.05. Evaluate Moisture l
Separators System (Ref. 5).
CONCLUSIONS:
The calculated efectiveness of the moisture separators at various power levels is asfollows.
1670 MW, E = 0.9954 1771 MW, E = 0.9952 1818 MW, E = 0.9951 These results are in agrnment with those contained in Ref. 4.
l FUTURE NEEDS:
i None.
l
\\
ATTACHMENTS:
5 1
~
1.
Performance Data, P8X Moisture Separator, Peerless Mfg. Co.
l 2.
Pressure Loss vs. pV' Straight Duct, Peerless Mfg. Co.
l
REFERENCES:
1.
Turbine-Generator Final Report 111.7 Percent of Original Throttle Flow, Northern States Power Company, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant 170X361, GeneralElectric Company, Rev. O, October 1995 (Draft) i 2.
D-81934, Retrofit of MS Separators with P10 Vanes to P8X Vanes.
3.
ASME Steam Tables,1967 4.
Moisture Separator System Engineering Evaluation, Task 18.05, Rev. 0, January 2,1996 5.
Flow of Fluids Through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe, Crane Tecknical Paper No. 410,1991 Edition 1
1
i l
GENERAL COMPUTADON SHEET l
Northern States Power Company
,-mom ENO None l
PROJECT Power Rerate SHEET NO. 5 OF 6
~
DATE 0247-96 I
SUBJECT CA 96-009 Moisture Separator Effectiveness COMP BY JB C'K'O BY Moisture Ser>arator EWettiveness A.
Data inputsfrom Tables and Figures (Refs.1 and 3) 1670 MW, 1771 MW, 1818 MW, inlit enthalpy (h)in 1098.1 1098.2 1098.2 BTUllbm inlet pressure (psia) 204.7 217.9 2243 inlet quality (x) in %
88.04 87.9 87.8 where x = (h - h) I h,,
inlet moisture 11.96 12.1 12.2 (M)in %
l')
where y
M, = 100% - x inlet density (p) in 0.51 0.54 0.55 lbm/ff where p = 1/v and v = v + xv, f
inlet massflow rate 6320138 6734095 6931531 (w)in Ibm /hr 1
B.
Moisture SeparatorInlet Area Determination Using the inlet view from Ref. 2, the total moisture separator inlet area (2 banksivessel, four separators) is appronmately 481.6ff.
l C.
Mean Velocity and Dynamic Pressure i
1.
According to the continuity equation (Ref. 5), velocity can be obtainedfrom thefollowing relationship:
V = w I (p
- A)
(ft/s) where w isfluidjlow rate in Ibmis, p isfluid density in !bmiff, and
,]
A is area inff.
.. ; /
(
GENERAL COMPUTATION SHEET Northern States Power Company
,=. m u
i l
- ROJECT Power Rerate ENO None SHEET NO. i, OF 1 i
DATE 02-07-96 SUBJECT CA 96 009 Moisture Separator Effectiveness COMP BY JB C'K'O BY l
2.
To determine the outlet moisturefrom Attachment 1, velocity must to converted to dynamic pressure. This is accomplished by solvingfor pY. Using the continuity equation with the data contained in the table above and converting w to ibm /s gives thefollowing values.
\\
@ 1670 MW, V = 7.15ft/s, pY = 26.06 lbmift/s*
1
@ 1771 MW, V = 7.20fils, pY = 27.94 lbmift/s*
@ 1818 M Wa V = 7.27ft/s, pV* = 29.06 lbmift/s*
D.
Effectiveness Efectiveness (E) is determinedfrom the following equation:
E = (Ms - M ) / Mg where M is inlet moisture, and i
M, is outlet moisture.
Using this equation with the moisture data contained in the table above and graphically obtaining outlet moisturefrcm the pV' values and Attachment 1 gives thefollowing values.
@ 1670 MW, M, = 0.055%
E = 0.9954
@ 1771 MW, M, = 0.058%
E = 0.9952 l
@ 1818 MW, M, = 0.060%
E = 0.9951 I
l I'
1>
ysu a "
.c The P8X Advantage l'1' The Peeness separator vanes are proven w
aerformers with over 60.000 Megawatts of
- -7,,,......._76 ~ "2%
erating systems on-line today. The supenor y
W.;g~f;.;,
( y.3 vation efficiency of these vanes means less 3
.., - p'
,. ;b
., eve superheating. This energy savings y
- V.e.) f fG M.b':
- y is required dunng the reheating stage to k
- y means greater megawatt output and increased 1r
- revenues, L.,
y
___ y An added advantage to using a Peerless MSR b.
separation system is their proven reliability No d
3 MSR ycihsginal Peerless equipment has ever k
k, required backfitting due to a failure to meet
[
i Q'
performance requirements. And, because your i
,k Peertess system is more efficient, you can count l!
_ _ _ _ L
\\
\\,
on added reliability from associated equipment.
h- -- -- 4 a t.ess tube bundle erosion.
3 Reduced turbine blade damage.
- More operating efficiency.
+-- --
\\
More good reasons to specify Peerless
$8$ M an
}A separation systems.
h 5EE
- ~
.. c.r 2e r ~
1mgw Performance of
- f __ dagdf$$EEW.gM Peerless Double-Pocket M@q g.gg@
8" Vane h
hh Outlet Moisture Percent d82 $$jNQgM+fssQg+
Versus p V2
- sm-25&ee_.. _.
20/ 8 8
(-
'0 l
40 60
'80 100 '120 140 '160 180 Steam Flow, p V. LblFtJSec.8 3
(Inlet Moisture-3% to 15%)
Custom Capabilities A History of Performance For new applications, Peerless can custom Since 1933 Peerless Manufacturing Company design a separation system to meet your specific has led the industry in the design and requirements. Our performance curve (diagram A) manufacture of efficient separation systems. In shows the high level of standard performance fact. the modem vane type mist extractor was efficiency for our P8X vane profile.
developed in 1931 by Peerless' founder, Donalti When your system is already up and the need foi A. Sillers, Sr. With constant systems refinement higher separation efficiency is called for, backfit and over 50 years of worldwide applicatior, with a Peerless custom designed unit.
experience, Peerless is recognized today as an Regardless of existing space restrictions, intemational leader in liquid / gas separation Peerless will custom design a system that will technology.
outoerform your present equipment. Whether Peertess has been heavily involved in all facets backfitting vane to vane or mesh pad to vane of both govemmental and commercial nuclear your Peerless representative can discuss the separation programs. These projects have many projects on line today that enjoy greater included: the nuclear submarine program, operating efficiency and higher revenues with a commercial PWR applications, boiling water Peerless custom design backfit.
reactor dryers and crossover separators. These applications have been extensively field tested Research and Manufacturing and their reliability verified by independent Peerless has continued to be a leader in authorities. Similar applications are now on-line particulate separation technology. Every system throughout the world and this depth of knowledge is tested and performance is documented.
has given Peerless the hands-on expenence Additional testing is conducted by indepenoent necessary to hand!e any critical separation authorities on equipment in the field.
problem.
"6th over 60.000 square feet of space devoted to l'
design, fabrication and manufacturing of s-o 4,*
"ation equipment, Peerless' resu!!s are hteed regardless of job si2e.
g n
u
[
O uig O
P o. Box 206s?
p 2811 Walnu! Hell Lane
%W oatias. Texas 7s220 N OH Puct000 SP'* Q(S*5
,,1 e b$
gm
- . u - m
. The P8X Advantage F
"'? * " * * /
The Peertess separator vanes are proven merformers with over 60.000 Megawatts of a
crating systems on-line today. The supenor
'tration efficiency of these vanes means less
\\:
~
4
- y is required during the reheating stage to eve superheating. This energy savings means greater megawatt output and increased h_
revenues.
An added advantage to using a Peerless MSR separation system is their proven reliability. No MSR Wibesiginal Peerless equipment has over
)
k D required backfitting due to a failure to meet w
performance requirements. And, because your.
,,,,,,,,,,,,i Peerless system is more efficient, yo.o can count on added reliability from associated equipment.
k
. Less tube bundle erosion.
. Reduced turbine blade damage.
. More operating efficiency.
separation systems. ' ~ pecify Peerless More good reasons to s m ---
A h.
hf
- ) Os @MW,1. ygK%dutyhilii$ Peerless Double-Pocket 9,
am Performance of E!0f.s Y-$5Wi%. W ? W a m i'T N x. h.. w 8" Vane A
Outlet Moisture Percent
- "MWikilfnM '*"""
0 I20} 40 60 80 h00 20 140 160 180 I
(
Steam Flow, p V8 Lb/FtJSec.8 i
(Inlet Moisture 3% to 15%)
Custom Capabilities A History of Performance For new applications, Peerless can custom Since 1933 Peerless Manufacturing Company design a separation system to meet your specific has led the industry in the design and requirements. Our performance curve (diagram A) manufacture of efficient separation systems. In shows the high level of standard performance fact, the modem vane type mist extractor was efficiency for our PBX vane profile.
developed in 1931 by Peerless' founder, Donald When your system is already up and the need for A. Sillers, Sr. With constant systems refinement higher separation efficiency is called for, backfit and over 50 years of worldwide application with a Peerless custom designed unit.
experience, Peerless is recognized today as an Regardless of existing space restrictions, international leader in liquid / gas separation Peerless will custom design a system that wil; technology.
outoerform your present equipment. Whether Peerless has been heavily involved in all facets backfitting vane to vane or mesh pad to vane of both govemmental and commercial nuclear your Peerless representative can discuss the m' any projects on-line today that enjoy greater separation programs. These projects have operating efficiency rad higher revenues with a included: the nuclear submarine program, Peerless custom des.gn backfit.
commercial PWR applications, boiling water reactor dryers and crossover separators. These applications have been extensively field tested Research and Manufacturing 8ad their reli8bility verified by ind*Pendea' Peerless has continued to be a leader in authorities Similar applications are now on-line particulate separation technology. Every system throughout the world and this depth of knowledge is tested and performance is documented-has given Peerless the hands-on experience Additional testing is conducted by independent necessary to handle any critical separation authorities on equipment in the field.
problem.
- 'th over 60,000 square feet of space devoted to design, fabrication and manufacturing of g*
ration equipment, Peerless' results are hteed regardless of job size.
g o
av e
0 g
o P.o. Box 20657 4
- c, 2811 Walnut Hill L,ane
% 6 oatias. Texas 7s220 MROM PMC1000
,, fc73 88",
SN
CA % - co; e.:. i.(_:
. v _-
PRESSURE LOSS (inches w.c.)
,~
.N w
a m
e O
o o
o o
e s
I I
I I
8 i
I w
I j
I
(
8\\
I 1
a*
I I
I l
'm T
l l
M
- W m
\\,
- o
- =
9 m
1
]
~
w g
D <
w I
l
= w A
=.
m m
N r=
.m o
oww no e
vC
\\
C C
<2>r:
\\
r
~n cS
- c
("3 g;aaeg
.,886-
- ":07" r
- [g
- rr
- e
- t: -
3
~o NA N
Ae 7 :[:1
- 2
,J o
8 r. :t
- rg,-
x
- le.rlr
- :: r 8
ii: t,
- ta
- r *:1 e5 iJ 3
- 3 X
5.If'.
k
~
g-j
.". L,t o
- TT:Ar
!". :!:: r:
o
- ?
- rte, g...
D
! :E.
o it l 1
- *t e
1:st No k
2[
Oul'et Moisture %
o a
o o
' N-i gg L
c,B11 1,
~
\\N Y
^
h;p l
1 O
j
.IhIk N$
s 71
=
s g
1
~;
[@ $$k[
E?['MN E
3 - 4 't &
MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT 3494 TITLE:
CALCULATION / ANALYSIS CONTROL FORM Revision 2 10/12/94 # -
Page 1 of 1 (d
6,
<..?
Page 1 of 4
Calculation / Analysis No.: CA-96 - 013 l
[ D E.'S Revision No.: o Etle:
Moisture Separator Drain Flow System:
Tas Topical Subject Area:
Power Rerate Modification No.:
Vendor Name/Cato No.:
Assigned Personnel (Names & Titles)
Approval:
S. Hammer Superintendent Turbine Systems Ennineerine Preparation:
J. Tollefson Senior Engineer Verification:
J. Beres Project Engineer Verification:
NA Rete'rences/Filingt Eila Descriotion/ Location X
1.
Power Rerate File 2.
3.
X Calculation / Analysis file.
Verification Method (s)
Review X
Attemate Calculation Test Other Explanatiori:
Comoietion (Signatures)
NA Verification / Approval in Document Prepared By:
a / %dd/[
Date:.2-s4-94 N
Date: 7-;7 16 Verified By:
Verified By:
Date:
Approved By-
/[w Date: a/274t 3087 (PROCEDURE / FORM CHANGE ANo HOLD N,OTICE) incorporated: // '^
A/-,t.c
- FOR ADMINISTRATIVE Resp Suav
GSSA [/Ch l Asso: Ref: AWi-05.01.0925o;dSR: N Freo: 0,vrs,
@ MitSE ONLY&GD ' ARMS: 3494 (DoeTvDe: 3042 l Adrntn Irdtials: C#3 Date /e//t/W o
i p
I 1/jae 1
MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT 3495 TITLE:
CALCULATION / ANALYSIS VERIFICATION Revision 3 09/22/94 CHECKLIST Pcge 1 of 1 Place initial by items verified.
CA -
0/3 Attachment Pagefof u
REVIEW
' Verified 1.
Inputs correctly selected.
46 2.
Assumptions described and reasonable.
V4 3.
Applicable' codes, standards and regulations identified and met.
/df 4.
Appropriate method used.
9D 5.
Applicable construction and operating experience considered.
M 6.
Applicable structure (s), system (s), and component (s) listed.
84 7.
Formulas and equations documented, unusual symbols defined.
8.
Detailed to allow verification without recourse to preparer.
9.
Neat and legible, pages all correctly numbered.
,49%
10.
Signed by preparer.
fx 11.
Interface requirements identified and satisfied.
T7 12.
Arceptance, criteria identified, adequate and satisfied.
13.
Result resonable compared to inputs.
ALTERNATE CALCULATION 14.
Altemate cale results consistent with original.
15.
Items 1-4 above verified. (Required by ANSI N.45.2.11)
TESTING 16.
Testing requirements fully described and adequate.
17.
Shows adequacy of tested feature @ worst case conditions.
18.
If test is for overall design adequacy, all operating modes considered in determining test conditions.
19.
If model test, scaling laws and error analysis established.
20.
Results meet acceptance criteria, or documentation of acceptable resolution is attached.
OTHER (Explain)
FINAL DOCUMENTATION (Verify applicable items included) 21.
Alternate or check cales.
22.
Summary of test results.
23.
Comments (errors, discrepancies, recommendations).
Date:
J-d ?-4, ompt e By:
3087 (PROCEDURE / FORM pdANGE Af)D HOLD btOTICE)incorporaad: M M/M
[FOR ADMIN!sTRATIVE; RespSupv* GSSA '7W l Assoc Ref: AWi-05.01.09 25cASR: N From O. Vrs 5-ARMS: 365
' 'lD00TVDe: 3M?
~
( Admm initials: M+
Date /0//f/dv TRUSE Of{LYMCt:
6 t/crs
' GENERAL COMPUTATION SHEET Northem States Powar Company m,-
ENO None PRCUECT Power Rorate SHEET NO. d OF 1 DATE 0247-06 SUBJECT CA 96-013 Moisture Separator Drain Flow COMP DYJT_ C'K'D BY f PURPOSE:
The purpose of this calculation is to determine the inletflow rate, in Ibm /hr, of saturated ligsid and steam to the moisture separator drain control valves at power rerate conditions. The results of this calculation will be used to wrffy conclusions made in the Moisture Separator System Engineering Evaluation (Ref. 5).
METHODOLOGY:
Standard thermodynamic and hydraulic equations are used to calculate the drainflows.
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA:
There is no direct acceptance criteriafor this calculation.
INPUTS:
A.
Moisture Separator Thermal and Hydraulic Conditions (Ref.1)
PowerIsvel Heat Balance 1670 MWth S34 HB 118 1771 MWth S34 HB 103 Rev.1 1818 MWth
$34 HB 102 Rev.1 B.
Moisture Separator Elevations (R f. 2.)
A C.
The moisture removal rate in Ibmthr is determined in Part 1 ofAnachment 1. In Part 2, the prenure dropfrom the moisture separator outlet to the drain valve is determined unne the general energy equation. Given the known pressure drop the steam quality, steamflow, and liquidflow are determined by applying theprst law of thermodynamicsfor the pipe section ofconcern.
ASSUMPTIONS:
The pressure drop from the HP turbine outlet to the moisture separator inlet is due to throttling losses, and the enthalpy is approximately constant.
The pressure drop across the moisture separator is sadiciently small such that the inlet pressure can be assumed to be equal to the moisture separator outletpressure shown in the heat balance diagrams ofRef.1. See Attachment 2.
In the determination of the piping pressure drop, the piping size is assumed to be uniform, andfluid weight density is assumed to be constant. La the line loss determination. single phaseflow is assumed, and the elevation headfor that ponion of the moisture separator outlet piping located immediately downstream of the moisture separator and above the datum is neglected.
Moisture separator efectiveness is assumed to be 0.95, This is considered adequate to bound actual moisture separator efectiveness andis conservative with respect to drain valve requirements and the
CENERAL COMPUTATION SHEET Northem States Power Company r,,...
ENO None PROJECT Power Aerate SHEET NO. V OF 4 DATE 02-07-96 SUBJECT CA 96-013 Moisture Separator Drain Flow COMP BY J T C'K'D BY f corresponding heat balance dectiveness assumption of 0.85.
The piping sections between the moistwe separators and the drain valves are assumed to be clean commercial steelpipe.
ANALYSIS:
The calculations are included as Attachment 1.
This analysis verifies the conclusions made in Engineering Evaluation Task 18.05, Evaluate Moistwe Separators System (Ref. S).
CONCLUSIONS:
The calculated satwated liquid and steamflow at the inlet of the moistwe separator drain control volves is asfollows.
1771 MW, my = 191663 lbm/hr m,,,,,, = 1858 lbmthr 1
1818 MW, mg = 198934 lbm/hr m,,,,,,, = 1908 lbm/hr These results are in agreement with those contained in Ref. S.
FUTURE NEEDS:
None.
ATTACHMENTS
- 1.
Analysis of Moistwe Separator Drain Flow 2.
Pressure Loss vs. pV* Stra'ght Duct, Peerless Mfg. Co.
REFERENCES:
1.
Turbine-Generator Final Report 111.7 Percent of Original Throttle Flow, Northern States Power Company, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant 170X361, GeneralElectric Conpany, Rev. 0, October 1995 (Drqft) 2.
NH-108168, CD9-6"-GB Moistwe Separator Drain 3.
ASME Steam TaNes,1%7 4.
Flow of Fluids Through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe, Crane Technical Paper No. 410,1991 Edition S.
Engineering Evaluation Task 18.05, Evaluate Moisture Separators System, January 2,1996
C A 9(,,'- O/3 A llA C,(1L /)T / _
ALIAL131.$ Of Pl0/.57()M &[Adb70 A O/(AU) fLhfl
. '. 1.:,.l l..i lYll.YT,l7..? ~ ~ *;Th.l< i.,.i "} 7. iMRMiE,l:.O.;6l=- e,bl:l(a. ;l,.f ~ -
~
~
- w. ;,,a.....:
s.
-/
..x....-
u
,. c r
..e,
- u....
..a:
Part 1 Purpose Evaluate the total flow of saturated liquid from the moisture separators at rated thermal power and rerated thermal powers.
The evaluation will assume a moisture separator effectiveness equal to 0.95 Mr = E*Mi = 0.95*Mi
~
Mr = total moisture removed in the separators (1bm/hr)
Mi = inlet moisture flow rate (1bm/hr)
- a. Evaluate Mr at rated power (1670 MWT) and rerate powers of 1771 MWT and 1818 MWT.
Table 1 (ref. )
MWT Flow (pph)
Pressure (psia)
Enthalpy (Stu/lbm)
^
1670 6320138 204.7 1098.1 1771 6734095 217.9 1098.2 1818 6931551 224.3 1098.2 Mi = Flow
- Y /100 Y=
( (Hg-H) / (Hg-Ef) ) *100 Y(1670 MWT)
((1198.7-1098.1)/(1198.7-357.6))*100
=
= 11.96 percent Y (1771 MWT) = ((1199.5-1098.2)/(1199.5-363.3))*100
= 12.1 percent Y(1818 Mwt)
((1199.8-1098.2)/(1199.8-366.0))*100
=
= 12.2 percent Mi(1670 MWT)
= 632013 8
- fl. 9 6 /100
= 755888 pph Mi(1771 MWT)
= 6734095
- 12.10 /100
= 814825 pph Page 1 of 7 ma w
.. que eng
[.A %,- O f 's b lT ll Cli Al E h ) T l
\\
.y
+
[k"I,):
EL-O.',
4
\\
Mi(1818 MWT)
= 6931551
- 12.2 /100
= 845649 pph s
Mr(1670 MWT)
= E*Mi =.95*755888
= 718094 pph
\\
= 179524 pph per separator Mr(1771 MWT)
= E*Mi =.95*814825
= 774084 pph
\\
= 193521 pph per separator l
Mr(1818 MWT)
= E*Mi =.95*845649
= 803367 pph
= 200842 pph per separator
.pc,.
Part 2
- y~
Purnose
. Evaluate the flow rate of saturated liquid and steam at the inlet to the
) moisture separator drain contol valves for rerate powers of 1771 MWT an$ g
~ 1818 MWT respectively.
Assume single phase flow in determining.the
]
pressure drop due to elevation change and line losses.
Tho analysis is shown on pages 3 thru 7, cf thi., 4WL.
Table 2 contains a summary of calculations performed.
TABLE 2 MWT Pressure (psia)
Quality (%)
Flow (pph)
I Liquid Steam 1771 199.1 0.96 191663 1858 1818 205.5 0.95 198934 1908 i
Page 2 of 7 i
)
1 c4 96-o/.5 4<TM/McDT /
l
'i if Sc/remebe. foe /he c/m,4 rysle a, {s
/le ou//e / o f /Je mois/um ceporo /or-dnia /,,k 4 /Je > h/ o f /Le dn 4 enin/ vale 4.rtiaw,, oz fo //ows (ref 2) e t
z. e, + y 1.i '
1x ro iv sw.6-
.on, ca. b./ a l <
(7 pic o / of 4 a'ro n, /iais )
7 v.
a p,>.n.h O 4*~
2, c 4
/9pply eswrysj ejtes l*n (nx locc.l>m I /o /*e n /im A.-
v,%3 +- r, P,/s, R,/ca vs h y ha,.,
+-
=
+
+
e.,
t A44: i. rkobsw *e rektmed h e, (s /~)
j Pp,4, stie it u -,5 m fi n /oca b m i lo loco lm.i a d cAny e.s
{
.r.
is wip Af due,} w,// 4 m,/eekd.ie. r, va, r A ess s velocrG e
of loc * /in / egun/r sefoce} */ foea bm a s.'e. V, r s.
w,/4 Ane no/r1 si me /, /de wejy epuolom m 6e.si.yoliNed er {o llows :
Afg P,fg e
g, p /h i.a
=
Pa A-y ( z, + h,,,,, )
f Cs/c e.l ale /Le /i re /ns (in,.,) fen /oee /,n i h /oes/,n.a sGe rero /r pe< >+r3 0l 177i N J T u d / 9tB tres/ T.
/,.7 o f v
b CA 96,-0i3 A TT A Cl/ M E f) 7 l
/
The droN /ihr wpe b on jti os f//rws :
^
I.
Ph o G " Cs4 40
/48 ff (dypeos. )
- 2. E /W 90 's b
tl i
~
3.
Eibow ' 93*, 4 "
I Gr V'/oy h,.,
kra r
=
=
i ay l'4 a).bc,.,(I,7/nWr) 2
=
p s/, ta 6 f"/ */ut
- l/93F2I fYJ" l
> (A )
l (ie.to)( 1)(stoo) kwr k, p, e
A<,,*
+
kvr e
f L/D KrP r
(TV./0) f/2 4r. ht) f4. /]
/}. ff-i.,
Ec c
f V b.
f.M5alo e
,a
(. ie)(c.72 aio *)(iz) tilit.,- z...r.
ft. soc. - ft
{
3'
- o. ois (ref7)
('nf. y) o.oS l1W9 lia)_
Kpp y.3]
r s.1 ty (teh)
(nf. t/)
iv (iv < o.oir )
Kso s.99
( is = o. oir)
- o. : y (af1) 1 (it fr)
Kyr-1 e
V 37
+
2.99 1
~7.CC
- 0. 2 y Kr r lh,,,(n7terwr) 2 L[ (pg.68)
- 2. g1 ff
=
=
- c. v. <t' Ae </' o f 7 j
C4 % - 013 r :1Actimenf I b) lu,., (aie ~ r) 1'
( ne h
- npra'-
axsa
=
pa.c e
' t4 )
(sv.o)(.ab~) j s
kr r xiyr
+
x,..
+
x,,.
=
kre r t/s t rv.o)(4 s.se)(s.1)
- i. c io '
He
(.aXs.mi")( a) f"
- o. oss
- c. cir {ivo (m Kr,jo
- y. 39
=
=
4.i ivfierr) irfie o.oir) cro-
=
2.oy i(a/,)
(is o.oir) sr -
i a
- o. i s kr r
~
e 31
+
s.44
+
o.24
=
- y. sr L (ioie nar) -
,.sr (ps.se) 3.is. /+
6 v.y Pope 5 o f '7
C A 9(, - O/3 br/ic//NEAlf /
ca/c ~/ ale ne i.,le/ pmsua lo & modfare sapoeah-dm, c.h/ ya tu.
y (g x + hz,,, ')
Pa P,
=
A (n71 truir) - c a17. 9 -
5<t. io ( s'7. i + 2 87 )
/11.1 psiE-c
/vy e,(ieterwr)
=
- m. s -
g_s.2 ( n.i + s.is) aor. s psi -
/t/Y co/cula /e o< dr.m enfr./ vs/x idkf f/w.c cr/10/mied I' a.'l n d rle -,.
j n,(tyu:J) t1r (sis )
ere
+
n c,/c u/ ale ne6/e
), ne yo/w i 7e/ g usGy (x) mud 6 kawn.
- s. A. -e x a, c.tcsi, ii.. n./sy.i n,,-11 1,, n, v. ta. w,s n,
nt,>y s - ~ dsnuun n~., x ca & +/..-ines.
s.a, ri r - i.c.i,-, i. i.c. i,~,,1 sc.
,,,t -ci n,, i it.- ('.n ~..c!
.d.;t/a), no flid u./ n~,/y.,-4 s c~ 4 ardh or 4//ws.-
n, (4,- 4, 1 (2,-a.))
]~=.joute's coas/.o.d fj]_lb
{
6 y
/
Bra-h, -
.b..f.t h>
.r ha (t7ti i1<>r) -
,3< 3. 3 - et 7. i _
=
3 c. 2.1 eta /i4 n e. z K s {I71/ ttWY) "
Xfi99.Ipsie',243.2 41c./its )
0 94 to
=
11. (ists sur) -
.2&c.o - 41.1 36T 9 4/u/ta
.ns.z x, cisie ~r) x ( a or. s,,,, s o r., zwis.) -
- c. vs-7.
/p & of 7
)
CA 9c,-013 Arrect/Nis rir I
(
\\
cake /d /4 (An e,/, of so/aea/d /p,,;t c a/ s/en./ixei.?e//, /1e dro,a n//o/ vo /ws.
e ne(hpaw) iveGM )
Me
+
t ne (s /<, ) -
n e (x,3
/00 Mr (11ri nur) =
ir ss;a j 14 /4,-
ne 6/~, mi nar) =
n.s.o i (o.,c) c isse is../>,-
Joo Ar f/// ll, / ? ?/ M"'T
/$3TJ/
~ /ST8 =~
/9/463
//o./he b
ac (isis n ir) -
acosyz is p ncGi<c., mise)
=
noe a-A s ca vz (0.w)
=
s, Arf /jkd, /0/9MdT)
/f9ffi!
i$rl4e
- ~
300$V2 ~ /108 r
l A
'7 *b ~7 p
..-.a A TT4 C//MC/JT E.-
PRESSURE LOSS (inches w.c.)
N w
a w
O O
O O
n i
l I
I i
I i
w I
g I
(
\\'
I 1
i s
O I
I 5
I l
3 "9
I
\\!
1 m
e i
a:
w w
i i
D <
m eu t
i me m
m b
+
C
.S U
\\
C C
.<Z>-r Y
V n o
=0W c8 xm s
t:gg1 it :i 9
3~
a[gp -
- tt a
o
\\
g E
Ihis 3 J 8
l! tig N
1":i-
- p 9
n:::rp:g 8
- tr.
- : j g :'
-%4 A
$' 58 1
" 7,
- [-'
G 7 7 :'.
3,*. * :
.t.. 8 7 5:*
a
- o 5.7. ~t E
T tn
,8,, *.=.0 F. :
em O
t{g.a t
- 1:7:;
Q l
Power Rerate Work Scope i
I i
l
Pow:r Rrrits Work Scope TASK NO.
SYSTEM or TOPICAL AREA PREPARER REVIEWER 1.5 PHASE ONE SCOPING STUDY GE NSP 2.1 REACTOR HEAT BALANCE GE NSP 2.2 REACTOR CORE & COOLANT HYDRAULICS GE NSP 3.2 THERMAL LIMITS ASSESSMENT NSP GE 3.3 POWER FLOW MAP GE NSP 3.4 STABILITY REPORT GE NSP 4.3 CRD SYSTEM GE NSP 5.1 NUCLEAR SYSTEM PRESSURE RELIEF NSP GE 5.1/5.2 RPV OVERPRESSURE PROTECTION NSP GE 5.3 RPV INTEGRITY GE NSP
~
5.4 RPV FRACTURE TOUGHNESS GE NSP 5.5 RIPD GE NSP 5.6 RPV INTERNALS VIBRATION GE NSP 5.7 RECIRC SYSTEM NSP GE 5.8.1 MAIN STEAM PIPING NSP GE 5.8.2 REACTOR RECIRC PIPING NSP GE 5.8.3 FEEDWATER PIPING NSP GE 5.9 RCIC GE NSP 5.1 RHR NSP GE 5.11 RWCU NSP GE 5.12.1 PLANT PIPING NSP GE 5.12.2 EROSION / CORROSION NSP GE 5.15 RPV AND INTERNALS GE NSP 5.16 IGSCC NSP GE 5 17 RPV DRYER / SEPARATOR GE_
NSP 6
CONTAINMENT RESPONSE GE NSP 7.1 HPCI GE N5P 7.2 LPCI GE NSP 7.3 CORE SPRAY GE NSP 7.4 ADS GE NSP
~ [5-7 ECCS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION GE.
NSP I
~9.1
~
N5~P G5 CGCS 9.2 EDG-ESW NSP GE 9.4 CRV-EFT
]10.2_.
NEUTRON MONITORING SETPOINTS GE NSP 10.1/10.3 BOP INSTRUMENT SETPOINTS NSP GE
~iUU GENERATION & SUBSTATION NsP GE i
~ 0.2 AUklU~ R'Y'POUIIER 5i5' TEM
~[
~
11.2 DC POWER NSP GE 12 FUEL POOL COOLING NSP GE 13.1 SERVICE WATER NSP GE 13.3 RBCCW j
NSP GE 13.4 ULTIMATE HEAT SINK l
CHILLED WATER j
I Page1
i Power R:rtta Work Scope TASK NO.
SYSTEM or TOPICAL AREA PREPARER REVIEWER 14.1 EMERGENCY SERVICE WATER NSP GE 14.2 RHR5W NSP GE 13.4/14.3 SR ULTIMATE HEAT SINK NSP GE
--15 SBLC NSP G]E 16 HVAC NSP GE 17.1 FIRE PROTECTION / APPENDIX. R NSP GE
_ 17.2 APP. R FUEL CLADDING INTEGRITY GE NSP
_ 1_8.1 TURBINE / GENERATOR GE NSP
_ 18.2 CONDENSER / SJAE NSP GE 18.4.1 CONDENSATE & FEEDWATER NSP GE 18.4.2 CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZERS NSP GE 18.5 MOISTURE SEPARATORS NSP GE 18.6 EXTRACTION STEAM NSP GE
_18_.7 STEAM SEALS / DRAINS NSP GE 13 2/18_.8_
CWT / COOLING TOWERS NS_P GE 1_8.2/18.9 CONDENSER-NORMAL / TRANSIENT NSP GE 19.1 UQUID RADWASTE NSP GE 19.2 _
GASEOUS RADWASTE / H2 WATER CHEMISTRY NSP GE 19.,3 SOLID RADWASTE NSP GE
_ 20 RADIATION SOURCES IN CORE \\
GE NSP 21 RADIOLOGICAL SOURCES GE NSP 22 RADIATION LEVELS GE NSP 23 REACTOR TRANSIENTS NSP GE 24 ACCIDENT RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSES GE NSP 25 ATWS GE NSP 26 STATION BLACKOUT NSP GE
_ 27 HELB NSP GE 28 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION NSP GE
_ 29 PWR ASCENSION TEST RECOMENDATIONS G_E NSP
_ 33 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT NSP GE 37 CLASS 1 STRUCTURES \\
IPE/PRA NSP GE 40.1 INSTRUMENT AIR NSP GE
, 40.2 ALTERNATE N2 NSP GE 41.1 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT /INERTING NSP GE 41.2 SUBCOMPARTMENT PRESSURE GE NSP Page 2
r 1
i
?
l NSP Responso to Question 6 of RAI dated February 11,1998 i
l l
i t
I 6.
For each component / equipment type (or one representative / bounding example of I
a component / equipment type) where expected environmental conditions at the uprate powerlevel exceeds the environmental conditions tested to, provide the following:
a)
Description showing the relationship between environmental conditions (i.e.,
temperature) tested to, the expected environmental conditions at current power levels (if applicable /available), and the expected environmental conditions at power uprate level from time 0 (i.e., initiation of accident) to the time the component / equipment type is required to remain operable forpost LOCA [ loss-of-coolant-accident) operation.
NSP Response l
A description of the relationship between tested temperature conditions and the l
expected environmental temperature conditions at current power levels is provided within the calculations included with this attachment. The description of the relationship between the environmental conditions that equipment required to be environmentally qualified was tested to and the_ expected environmental conditions at rerate power levels is described in the enclosed calculation CA 98-105.
b)
Evaluation demonstrating qualification for each segment of the powerlevel temperature response that is not enveloped by the environmental conditions (i.e.,
temperature) tested to.
NSP Response The evaluation of qualification for each portion of the rerate power level temperature response that is not enveloped by the environmental temperature conditions from the test is contained in Calculation CA 98-105. This includes those equipment types where the qualification test does not envelop the required operating time.
c)
Where (orif) margins derived through the use of the Anhenius methodology are utilized as part of the basis for concluding continued qualification, provide the Arrhenius calculation at the current (if applicable /available) and uprate power levels. Define the margins available for the current and uprate powerlevels and describe andJustify the reduced margin for the uprate powerlevel.
NSP Response The evaluation of margin for current and rerate power levels is contained in calculation CA 97-176 that is included in this attachment. Data used in this l
comparison is used as input to the evaluation of the test versus accident profiles in calculation CA 98-105.
l 2
l-1
d)
Provide MNGP Calculation CA 97-176 which shows that the equivalent
- temperature exposure time for the EQ [ environmental qualification] temperature evaluation profile exceeds the equivalent temperature exposure time for the DBA
[ design basis accident] temperature profile.
l NSP Response The subject calculation is included with this attachment.
I i
i 1
3