ML20236E238
| ML20236E238 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1989 |
| From: | Bamford W, Chang K, Coslow B WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19302D730 | List: |
| References | |
| WCAP-12172, NUDOCS 8903240030 | |
| Download: ML20236E238 (105) | |
Text
e.A , c. .+ 1 . .1.,
- i.,: . / 9' i ..a.. ;: '.*, m,,-3 -,(
, 7 , '
l
't , %, ' . ,s. ;. { . . ,, ,. c .. -- .* ' ' ' .- '-
g _ ; :* . .. ",.- - , . _ ,' , .' . . :' -
l _ . .
1$ .
.3
- .p . .y *
,.t
,. : ;i - -
- , . ,n,gq. .- . . ,. 3
..p .:
3,,.,
-p a _,g
. / p n
. , , . . . . .. .- .. 3 . , - - .5 '
- .. , , . '- i
- v. . . . :- .* .
.,a t ,
.;,0 ll ! I h,l ,N)&.li'. ? A "' . , ? ' ' .l: ' , .
- lL N Y '~9l ?g ' $ l,'s : '., ' ; l _' l r..,
d-
~
- I ;
f
- I*/t
- - .)c, .
.-.... ' l. 'f
. ' . . . + , . ' Y. . $ ' b '.
.%,+ : . r . - . i,N.. .. +'.
.. ..s
..,., .,... .>.g., -.7..,.<, - . "
-)
- .;s.
....A a
i -..
.p;..' :7..; y, ....le E
'u..$'" , . . q1p:p, . . ._
- Q- . , v .' , . # t. .
r.r ( .t ,, ..h,;; '
.* - g -., e . .;. 3,v . .:^. 'y. ;;y ;,. ,.-- ,.,- ..._;j
, t
.e ; s
- .)- ,Ag
, ._ sq , _ .....:
no, . =
_, -,,.* ,,,_s :.t
- 4 t' . .
- ;. ? ! -
4 - -
- .t r
- 6. '.
j
'y j
'\ ,:Q,l . -}, } ./ , 'l , , , ,*:.'.,/.' .
u ~-
'f. i , l
,),, [g:. [j,;,;, ,, .>,! ^~ ' '
,l';]:'.
- k. gs.,. , g :
<:',.._,'%'.*L,.
.g , j ,i , ' ._:' _.[. ; ; ; , . . , . , ,
d.. g h.(,; - ,. y4_ ,*'",
, ; .- s. - ', .
, .' !; $ YY '
. k.^. [.h 'Y: . UN ~) '.i', ^
- ;. L
, ; y. , ' Y. S ~ W' E. . . ' ' ~ - .'
' ^ '
a
. .. .. '. . .^'
) . . h . . . ,. \ h.#i . YS,[$) .f 4 ., ; .' 's ') - - .,
' . ^
/
l ,, i .< j. : . P ,.
- 3
~
};
ie. [ ' v':_ [ [ C ':' # ~; ..]/g ,' 3+, f.,.m;. ;,'f.,i ,99(.O l.. .b y [ , 'M.h.:; i"..., '. 1_;- ..fi ^ ,- , , , . . . . -
^ '.ldf.. f,.'. . .' : ! h;. 'y'.
. : ,\ _4.f l&:r
. .- '. . . )
(lj,g; . . l .y y ;f;f,fl$. l;g;*[!l '.h'Q :. .ll' i)
- e z.,s' - ' '.' d,'q . . ,' -- l.?; * ?;;$,.. V,V I_
6 , - l. : .- ' ; - ,,._
- i. ^ _ _ , . ,- ' _ - - - ' . ' ' *[**- : :: ;, '; ,
^ *
' . f;, ' ~![ ? . ' ,lf .
'A 1 .
. :.. .- , , f '.l.\,f:. ;; g_ ,'; .{ ,
,9 ll
, 'Jj
.A .[ ;.
- 5 a
~
, i, '. g __ .k?f.Q t SYY ' $YYN U' Y ' A* Y : N.' O'~.Y.~ " : : $ Y .' I . ;I..... .. - . . .h '
^.i. .'.
+-
e
'.-l . ~ l.l4
'_:} ,
.jj, .-
l '
".'u.-
(
. z. ,
, . " , -' :. a.
,_,,l;
._n: .: _- 8
,d . g s '
- g.. '... 'i - - .'h
-;,. , [q,
, . .. 1: . . w ! .Q. i ' . '., \i]> , ,;.. 4.1 e.-. , ; .
n
.;- (- 'e. _ ,. , ' , _ ',
- . ;;, }y s;. . .
.. e ' * ' . ' , ..
.y C
,; , - .; ' ' . . . ;, .,v-,'.1:,[ . 'f ; ,. tj . wg ,g
,._...3 Ys-
, . g
-: . t..
- a-
's
- F, e
L p_
y_
s.
, * ,.? - _' . . b, s -' .. , ,_ -. L _ .' ; - .: ,e
.. - ...._,,,s e- 4
,c , .
f
- 8' -'
j %p . a
,, . , " : ...g ,. .,' .;, _. I, .
.g \ r
" N #
,..!,J -
yge^ :':' . '. ,'.-: /,:E 1
- . t*- *.h;
_. . .) . . , ,.
- q -v.
.. s. . a ....'k. -w
, ,' .; .4._
'..*'/ . . --..j,.,t...-',-' ,7.r
' g[ . , *.
.i,. e'_, . .'. : . 5,', ., -
. s; -
y.. o . , . L ~;.. , . . .
,q
- - - ., . . _ . 1. '. - ,,}
', , ~
~
- y '. , , ,
'. [ ,
_. " - . _ ;- .W '.'- '
) *-[ - '. ' h , ' , . .l
- l[ 1 - 'i f,. . l ,{ O& .: ***'i ' .L ? . j' , '. ' ) ._l * .
^ '
- .N .
.i .;' ; . f . '. . .' [. . _-
,1:; $.l:^&f c'.' l h *? l . j';
l * . - ' . &% ' ', : . -' ' l. * ? s A' '. !
\ . .: -
. '.. Y. { ..* - ,. . +*'b' ty- (p,.6. .. E , f _', i, '
;.... . / < 'y s g .7 .- 4'? '
, , 'l l . f. 3- , .
. ;- . ,- . ' . ~ L s,Q'f
'il ;d y .. . ;, de" . . j. '.,..,,:~ : .! .g g,. ..
i
,i- -:' , ^ *..,.Q.-*
'S
..f
.', , '. 4 .
% *l *'
sy.. z' ' .- _ '_ ' - '. , = ,' : ', i ;- ,,- ,,
- s.
; j.:[y :"
,. ' * 't '. \ . . ? 'f ., 'l.: ,- ,,
- e. .,-
i...-
> ,.. . _, s '.t,,.
,ti . .e -
- 9 ' - *.t.
. s, / - ,
. 7. {d .;?f:.- ' ] .g- Q. . . ,;,g . , : !,* . r S . , . - .
.- [-..- Q ..l. , ., ... g. f . , t,
,.3 ,
...s 4 s -x -.'.- . . ., .:, 1 .- _~ : _ ,:- n . - v .
.r: 4 - . a t . s-
^r, ? - . ' ! : .
y:. . ,, . 3 ,J. w., s - f y e -y ,.1;_1; . ,\. : , c?.rw.~, . , ; ( %,;- . :/ 6 .. ...- ,
-. , .s5. - c ,, c , ~ ,-, . , _ . .
.: :. 3 , ;'
. . ... - ' % --.'^ ...
x' - - - n ' *.
..: I
". 9.
3 4
- p' * - '., t
'i
.-s - _
.._.a.: ;, ' ' n. - . i .- \,' - ,. _
, ! $ ~, et. . ';. .' ':b _ .- "
# "*t
. . . . 1/-. - ,,' - -
' * '.- ' '/
id,:-
.+. '.
1 s. _- ,,q..~..
.\
c-
- - . ,. s- .-
..p:.y. .
r _; , , , -. .A ;'. , ., . ,- .
.'-- .;e , ,_
p. r_ [:M . f+;.- ,
.\.
-: ..a. . . . ,
'; . '
- j .;' :....: ?:.; . i'
- f.l f
~
, ;.: i .: f . ;,
.: .. '.' . .':J'.:.y J, : ,. , . . . - ', 'f :
.b '.,_:.' f .:}_ar s;;; 4 _ s., . f'T q'} ._', .:
'_ ,[ .:
;,.:i i .' -
' 3.. ; L } ' ;' ._. _: -'.[ , T, f , . ,* j n
_. 5 . .
.,a.. - w . .- s .
~- _;'.. l ..'~..e ..
.;. O
. ;( ;$c.& ( .' ' . . ,; y' ? : '. ' . e '. .s.s
- c ; -.
5,,. o-w
.l ;}
.. ' v.l
.t,; . ,. - s -
; . .j--
. .i
, ? .'. .
- g; 4,Q..'.
3 .
,. , , .s . ,,. .
.,: ).
- .. e - - _... ,-*, - ', . ' . ' , ' . .___:. _.,
1 . .i' : .
;.- ,- . . -i ,.L- ,. _ ._.-.- , . -
. .;; ; ; .. -c . 33, y
; , l. . , % _. - . . y,
. ," . . .= . . . g ... ... - -
,j . ' ' '
y... 5
/ . -~'f I [' , . , .
d I' a.:,.... 4.g!m. ). - . . . ....
. .- ..p.,.. , , . . . ; ,
e
. . . , j'. . 'l;
; . . =[.-, .. . . ;y
- a. n 9r . . .q.. .. . _..:.,
,- :,r
= . ..
.e.._.. . -
., - _. ,y ,
_ .;.;y . _ ._,. 'g:;4 ,.a
~1 _ _
<.?
.; _" l .,4 :
;_: - ..~;; y',; f.;.f ;-' ' , 3 'y_$ , - - .;
. ; _7.;.,,:...h] a
- . ;., (,.. '::Qg 4.. / . ..' ..
' , , - I' ', ' .'
// . . _ , ,. * ;. [ p.
i',, ' .;'* [ ~ O. ;. ) , . : [ .,'[ -. .(
,i >.- - y: i . (.;
, y ;.
^
..r.. , ~. s , . s.. . , . ?. s . - y a... , .
. ,t. a. : . . . :e. . . , . V L. ; .. .J ,T. : ', .2. :;+. c. . .
.:: , .y'
4
, , , "ay. Eg . '.. .
., . ' 1.
. MP 2't
, . 4 ., g .; . >.
c.
. ~ ,#- .* - ,.,,g. - .]% w......,a..; , . n . .. ._
f .,g - y ',.,.A :.8.2
... ..- .:,;-....- :,' .n...:*
.u.....~i
, 2 ., . ,
..n
. .r>-
; f.
;l- .
." ' .e,- P ....'7,s
=,. < ,4, d
., .. j :.
. . . w' ~..4 s... . . . ,
,4,.,..1..
~ .. , , . .
', a. : s ~; s ,. .%
.:. ..'. . . . ~ . g.
.J
-t - ' . , > .; <..i. <y.,.
.:o.,.i.__- ..
.-- . . m.s .3- .- . s. *.
. . - .,,a. ..
r
' .c , . ^ 1z; x;,3. y'u ~, 4_P.. . '
. y; '
a
'.y,l , . ' . .- *f. h N , +,...J. ,. 8.l. - .:4,f. '% -
t : .
,?.,'
6 h =, , 4,. s . ,
..a. .,t t . . f.
7 '.*f i+- ., 'O. . - . . . I [. I A
'. l
. e - .- :q s _ , , . . .
> .3 ; .. : .. . . -
Il_ .. . , . .'.O
...? .q. .' f 's -l'_.
_. _ y; .v, . .J. . : . .'[ l _' t i
-_-Q
,, L , . . ., .
.v.. . ,
.,g.-....',; ,r ,;:; e... -
, . t ,,:' .
.'s.. ,:,...;rw
- c . . '
_;. ' . ., . - 9 . c ,-
- . ' ;y e i :.
;; - r.e.
, - ; }p ',
5 -
.+ . .. : .
... 'c
; ** .: ,.~: .. .
ft g' f- :. k .>
- *.;n a.m:;,:_ m. ,y": e i 2
- , _ , w '.p R:v,. ; , f. :, - . . . . , , _
n... m yv i.,..w,... z "n. . , %. . L t ; r . c. ; ; ,.: r ; ;@ < _ . . % s;.. W m , ,n..
%n.. : J,,;. .q
.~ . s . c >- , . -:~,.uv , >... :*: . : .;; ...
\ . ., . .se. n. w .. , ; ..nm: yf n . .m. e
?
? ;, : .,g m: ' ;s ( e
. .. . . : 6i i. v. ..:. :..t r~.,. . O
-v_n.n
;; -;.. ;{. [..H f yr- . /, .;r V
..:. , i 3 ,;. . , . . . , _ . ;; ; g:t ' 3_; %c. ; 3. . , , ;._ ], .
, : 4; .
ll% ,,y e m .,. '; 4 q , -}gg y y :f:f: ? ,;x!(g. .z.
...-c - 3.5 s e ._. ; .. - -
- - 2 . : . s.
- 4
'g ,; 4t 4 * ..;rn, s . i. , .lpp i a 4 ,., f q s ; ,. /' . ./ e q'. , i - J. t < .. , j .(
, ;.,q; , . ]Y -. ..'Lj . ^ ,.gn ;..g. f ;g.f., , ,, # g., . 7 f
.hk. .b Sjh[. . hh E b' [h h M. iMb . .
. .' [
, . 4
e 4 4 9, 6 P ', P* (*e Y c f,. g 7..,,,,
,s, ei 1-s, . ,
l((* 77 I , - '- 4 4
, .=,. .
1 1 f 1 4 5 P P a
L l I WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 WCAP-12172 i C l Evaluation of Thermal Stratification I of the Surge Line and RHR Lines for i Comanche Peak Unit 1 Presentation Overheads for ! 2/21/89 TV Electric /NRC Meeting ; Prepared by: K. C. Chang B. J. Coslow W. H. Bamford Plant Engineering Department l l March 1989 Approved: [ Approved: [// m ,
/ 7 l
l
. I l
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION I T Energy Systems Business Unit P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 1 1 i- - - . - - ______ __)
g o. Introduction A TU Electric /NRC meeting was held on February 21, 1989, to discuss the evaluation of thermal stratification of the surge line and RHR lines for Comanche Peak Unit 1. This document contains the overheads used during that meeting.
=
1 l 1 l
. l
.y.
i i
COMANCHE PEAK UNIT 1
. PRESSURIZER SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION Design Transients Stress Analysis ASME Ill Fatigue Usage Factor Fatigue Crack Growth l
Leak-Before-Break Conclusion
~
s t I en
. I b
l 1 as11vs2irse io , 1
V 4 Y O v v , l O o , o a
- O % Gd W b % /M h
w j D - 3
%o n i
I w o - e i Q- t
, e '
v y b v Q
/l Q tasv tw Y f
% . ,,, W C U SMf g g l
{. ( , I l PFESSUR!ZER O l l l
- I 3/g= 7'-2" N tt*.
RCL
-e m 004-C5lK i s'-. ,/.- ,.
i
/, %,OO7-C415 -
7'-10 7/." OlO-C IK ) OO.-C4iK ,,,, 14- -l-lM-2SolR*' neus I 6'-7 1/4 '830 '8 LJ 7*.3-
,,,, ii (g :-C4:s i, ow % i 24*-z /4-7'-li 7/a-i'.O.
SCH I40 Y o "X' CIRCLED NOS. ARE ANEYS N00E POINTS l
.' 1 Comanche Peak Unit 1 Pressurizer Surge une isometric ,
l l e M9 A 27443 2 3
o PRESSURIZER SURGE UNE STRATIFICATION i o Design Transients 1 Stress Analysis l l ASME Ill Fatigue Usage Factor Fatigue Crack Growth Leak-Before-Break Conclusion - l l 1 F e 4 i
l l PRESSURIZER ' SURGE UNE TRANSIENT DEVELOPMENT WITH STRATIFICATION i
^
o Design Documentation - 1 o Thermal Hydraulic: of ' gratification ' o Monitoring Programs o Operations Survey , i l o Heat Transfer and Stress Analysis o Stratification P'rofiles o Transient Types o Heatup - Cooldown Transients Design Transients w/ Stratification o 1 o l m .namesie b __-._______--___.a
)
)
TRAN51ENT DEVELOPMENT PLOW CHART SYSTEM DEllGN MONITOAEL INFOAMAT10N OATA (1) (3) STRATINCATiON MSA7 TRAM 1FER EFFECT5 CAITEAIA STRESS ANALYSIS (2) (4)
- ho ce r
1 - l HISTORICAL
, DATA (B) 1 inA=sE=Ts (10) l e Event Cesagn 3
e Cydes Desagn + Monetored e Trenesentfree 5tructures e Design
- Monitored Trans#ent Magnetasse i
4 \ o i
=
Dece.11236410 6
= " ~
a _'v ee e - S e b O Se BK EW l as a' l b mm [
}} -, -
a.g 4 i (
,, u .g h 5
( aC j! ~ Jj8 3 l
~
._ i ape ::
= = , g
. .1 o v ,
.p ;) _ _
I
! l 3
+ 1 :
i o , er ][ l j) ] 1' I ! a s. j} j j 1 r L
-4 se.e. nains is , l 7 l l
~
t Aux, Spray * -
'.t 4
- Spray )
From
.L Loop CL
+
I'. ,
- Spray From
; Loop CL Su'rge Line Connecting
- to Loop HL 1
5 RCS Pressurizer Mees *1Iaset t4 27824 14 8
-0 l i
1 ?. U e' {
- 1 i.
I l 1 l l l l ! l l l l l l l E l m b
& 1 8 ., <
~ ~ z j G 2 l E- $.
m
)
s m 1 1 i i O l I 2 l
.s
- i D
~ 1
- E -
G HI l 2
.: 9 h
e C d. N / I g i i i.
- 8 -
1
- 1
~ I
@ e E 3 F a E
m e_, E
- s o
E e . li i
-iin i.
10 f f 9
Fr . e .. j_ l;
. b
^
l-
- o. ..a M
- t'
.= .;
l I Jf 6
.8 U . *- C .
U I 9 4 1
-l M 1 i
G Il l h i l 2 l 1 i
)
.1 1
1 9' u
' 1
.I.
O e-e 11 1
'S j
' 'I W
U'
.,'g.
t i I l. Y e 4 3 : A l
,. 1 L
U C U i
.. I
~
8 U E i I 4 ' t N b J
-J h
l l
? 4
, t 12 L ._
j y. e e er Z l !
>}
i i
.J; j
- -- w ,
l
= e 3
I s 5 m A k N j I J . e D e W
=
SMee 11330810 13
e , c , a r e
.= .
i z e i t y I [' r c c f o nu a r l e ._ i d u3 os - V _ _ F l i t s - _ _ d ae l _ o crP / C *- t i f
~=
_ and l i t r y .
._ n g co ae rd e t
i l c o _~S t aT e n - t > . C V SU r - e^ . e/
. z w owu i
r (' N l o s e ' F b s]m O.I4i!l6 r l P ' IItii{ 1 f E m[ o n o- , r g i Ii1 i j g f wg Welti1{ ei oT g' arn t l F t o i me t t t H . sa m o EP m. I ia
~*
l I e U. l e . l l l l I I 1 \ l C -
.f C
m 5 6
.s D A 0
CL :. s E a 1
@ i b E
- us t FJ j j
*=
O . V) > > m \ C y )
. -- c {
VJ 5::
.R 3 g
i Q w . O V w l e Cl 1 4 l
- n o. . l 15 1 r il
MONITORING PROGRAMS ' o
~
o G.eneral Criteria j q Develop Sufficient Data to Characterize All Critical ! Operating Transients Heatup and Cooldown Most Critical Times (Continuous j Monitoring) d Temperature Data Needed:
' )
o Characterize Temperature Profiles o Capture Transient Effects o Develop input for Structural Analysis i o Externally Mounted RTD's/TC Used ! I - Displacement Needed: o Check Potential Interferences o Benchmark Structural Analysis o LVDT's (Lanyards) Used a I 16
MONITORING PROGRAMS q
~
Plant-System Data Needed ) Obtain Actual Fluid Temperatures / Pressures Identify Critical System Operations Correlate Operations to Transients I i i I 0
.j d
mae.-tines is , 17
-.--_.______--_-_-___----_____________f
APPUCABluTY OF OTHER MONITORING PROGRAMS TO COMANCHE PEAK o 14 Inch Pipe Size o Plant Operations Procedures Enveloped o Most Detailed Monitoring Program to Date Planned e 4 4 9 e 1 - - - . . 18
a e e
~
u.
~%
(O - a i 1 c n \ a
;ug i
. . / we \
_- ; ,t v s< gg
, . .R f . am l
N
'%e gg 's \ = -
w
.c h
g w y 'i \ <' *d k v j h be4 v'
\
- /= ~5h
" / k. N
'
- s, '?
n w zm s , __x_________ 5 g g *g g Nz - x s JO v d 'g- i
' N i t* l - Laj >== i '-
e ac .W 3 $
- ce u - -
9 30 a s_ mJ i g /' . i CC C W .? i w wz t NM - NM e cc o
- 4
- 3 >- o /
l m >< s - M v w ac -
-e
=
=
5
; $$s y n .'
.P.3 4
.? 4 N
OW 2 ? 4L EA - s W Wh / /-f
,,,,,,,,,Tu
~
Y/ f f
.G2 -/J./ e 4
} O de[ . .
e C'
\
#[ .
-5
~'
g % ~ 19 a j
OPERATIONS SURVEY o Summary of Plants Surveyed t
. NO. OF YEARS OF OPERATION t
PLANT LOOPS (MAXIlRM) C(NANCHE PEAK- 4 0
- - a,c,e i
i q l j o Reviewed Typical Heatup Cooldown Process o Reviewed Administrative / Tech Spe:: Limitations o Reviewed Historical Events and Time Durations o Developed Heatup - Cooldown Profiles e a 30116 471780 10 3 , 20 l
i 4 e o STRATIRCATION PRORLES-e S o C o_e l
. . t I
'l I ..
. l 1
J i I 1 a
~
1 1
.e ;
1 e 4 g j 21
4 4
. a,c,e i
'1 i
i i I c
\
i 1
~
Surge une Hot CoM Interface Locations l
. l j
nami.
- 1 t?S A27828 H 22 i I
1 ii b
e U E. l 1 II
.iW 3
t i l
.. i n ;
e I i t
)
U a , W X I l
]
v., O 2 l e 9 e
\ '
gence.t14m 10 9
- e O
23 '
' ,p -
9 e 4 TRANSIENT TYPES e e
' ' - EoCyB 4
m 8 e1 e e enumeu
*4 I
l l ., . I 1 '. - 4
.e a
e M1M 10 24 f
TRANSIENT TYPES l 1 o Historical Data , o Reviewed Records of Past Heatups and Cooldowns Obtained r Maximum Press. - Hot Leg Temp Diff. Approximate Time at Temp Plateaus i j i l t 4 9 4 4 25 i
y.
- a,c,e I
I d
~
a c,e a TW
~
I Temperature Profiles w iin i. 0 4 4 27826 10 il 26
.I I
l 1 l l HEATUP - COOLDOWN TRANSIENTS 1
. 1 o Transients Were Developed Based On: ~
Typical Heatup Cooldown Curves Envelope (Plus Margin) of Events (Transients) Monitored Historical Data on Temperature Plateaus ace r a
~
l l 1
)
1
~
l 1 i
)
l M l 3eece 112Me 18 27 l
DESIGN TRANSIENT 4 WITH STRATIFICATION ! o Heatup and Cooldown Combined With Other Events o Design Transient Criteria orc,e
.- )
l l 1 l _. l o input for Local and Structural Analysis Defined - Plus Nozzle o Striping Transients Defined to Consider Maximum Stratification Cycles Regardless of Range m
- 1 54dee=1122819 28
l
)
'SURGELINE TRANSIENTS WITH STRATIFICATION HEATUP (H) AND C00LDOWN (C) - 200 CYCLES TOTAL "'_'*
i l.' l- , , i
'i 1
4 m .ii i. 29
I SURGE LINE TRANSIENTS WITH STRATIFICATION i NORMAL AND UPSET TRANSIENT LIST.
\
. BrCr e l
),
l
)
! l u l 1 e e i l l l e k 3 818 er= h lisses is 30
# j i
SURGE LINE TRANSIENTS WITH STRATIFICATION NORMAL AND UPSET TRANSIENT LIST. ,
' a,c,e ' \
~
f l l l 1 1 1 l i i l l l l
> ;i 1
1
. 1 i
i I i e G e M 9 se= unne.i. i 31 , 1
SURGE LINE TRANSIENTS - STRIPING LOADS t i FOR HEATUP (H) and C00LDOWN (C) {
, - a,c,e :
Label Cycles -! 4Tmax (*F) j.
. .) >
I l W l l 1 l l
- b~
- l State-1tm tt 32 l
1 I
s
. l CONCLUSIONS o All Current Design Transients Enveloped l a,c,e
~
o Monitoring Programs From } Plants Contained Sufficient Data to Develop Conservative Understanding of Stratification
]
o Operations Surveys Provided for Interpretation of Monitored Results o- Stratification Profiles Developed For Entire Une o Transient Types Developed o Revised Design Transients Developed With Stratification l 9 0 S Seeee 11338610 33
1
- 1 {
l l PRESSURIZER SORGE LINE STRATIFICATION i i 4
~
Design Transients
- o Stress Analysis ASME Ill Fatigue Usage Factor l Fatigue Crack Growth
^
Leak-Before-Break Conclusion
]
e W 6 0 e 6 N11e/D217N 104 34
- u. -
1 --
. ,1
~
l- > . .
+ -
i e
' 4.
l DETERMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF THERMAL STRATIFICATION
&,c,e i
l I , l J I I i l i
- i k
l i l
\
t 1
'e 4
s peos
- t123B410 l
35
,t '1
4 i 1 STRESS ANALYSIS
~
Piping System Structural An.alysis Local Stress Analysis l Striping Stress Analysis l I e e e k g. M40e-11230410
)
. l l
I
\
l l
. .i HOT COLO l
}- ,
A
///////
l SIMPLY SUPPORTED BEAM
.- /
y .
/ 1,.es.--- - _ ___
f
/
/ %r
/ . COLc
/
CANTILEVER SEAM l Figure 9 Sowing of Seems Subject to Top to Sottom l Temperature Gradient SMes*11M 10 h27295 4 37 1 l
.)
a,c,a ;
- - 1 u
f-l- i l-. -) 1 i W i. l e ' j e 1 l f 1 i r I i i l l l I l 1 M BrC r e 8 9M$nal1M 10 0714 278JS 45 l 38
3 a,c.e e i i l j t Comanche Peak Unit 1 Pressurizer Surge une l 1 M 87M32 l 39 l l
I'
- l. l
[' ) L s TEMPERATURE PROFILES IN PRESSURIZER SURGE LINE I _ i
. \
Ie
~
AqC,e l l I I
. )
i
.l l
I l t a W W a e e9 0 30116/021780 10-9 40
l CONCLUSION - GLOBAL STRESS ANALYSIS o Temperature Profiles Established Through Parametric Study o Eleven (11) Cases Analyzed to Calculate All Required Loading Conditions o Pressurizer Nozzle Loads Due to Stratification Lower than Design Analysis Loads o Stresses at Hot Leg Nozzle Meet Code Limits o Piping Stress Within Code Limits o Stratification Loads on Support 009-C51R Within Design Allowable ' l o Pipe Movements to be Reviewed Against Clearance and 1 Verified During the Hot Functional Testing o Temperature Profiles to be Reviewed Against Monitoring ; Data Obtained During the Hot Functional Testing I l e
. l e
M11s/02)tte 10-4 41 J
LCCAL STRESS CONSIDERATIONS o Stresses Due to Non-Linear Thermal Gradient o Striping l m I
--ii n .
42 ___- __-____ 1
[ l l . l
=
l ! LOCAL STRESS - FINITE ELEMENT MODELS/ LOADING a,c,e a
'~
l i I
- See 1
\
l l
~^
m l l Mete-Olates 10 ,l l 43 1
\
c . i e- , d i I a,c,e i 1 1 1 1 1 1 t i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
~
1
- 1 l
Mping Thermal Boundary Conditions sease itasse io , 075 A.27826 It 44
i a,c,e l I'. e-- ,
.~
1 lM 1 l Surge une Local Axial Stress on inside Surface at Five Axial Locations ames.mo SMee-118M010 . , 45
d a,c,e 8 i l l Surge Une Local Axial Stress on Outside Surface at Mye Axial Locations 1 N H 6 29Jr , l l i-46 l l l 1 1
-- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____________.___________.______J
HOT LEG NOZZLE STRESS ANALYSIS o Two 3-Dimensional Models Developed . l o Loading included l l Pressure Bending Moments Stratification o Stratification Profile Based on Observation During RCP .- Trip I 1 i J l
)
e e 3eete titus 10 47 , 1
1 !' O
- i. =
C l. i l i l l-
. .i l
l 1 e )
= -
.- 3 z
5 y M W
..C '
and i N
)
4
.. I 1
..4 I
3Mee-It tm810 . l 1 l I 48 i
- - - - - - _ ---_----_---.-.---------__a----_-- - - - - _ -
.. s e
- e. ;
.\
l i 1 , i ..r. U.
. .: g h -.
l I ( e N W A d 3 te
]
- SMee11 m te ,
49
l LOCAL STRESS CONSERVATISM j a,c,e l l I 1 i l I
)
I 1 M40eall33810 1 50 i
1 RESULTS a,c.e o Stress Profiles Developed for Pipe Cross-Section o Maximum Stresses Occur on inside Surface Near Interface
)
o Results Consistent with Theory o Stresses to be Combined with Structural Bending esp G l an 3edes-t tM 10 51
a 1 PRESSURIZER SURGE UNE STRATIFICATION ',- THERMAL STRIPING ANALYSIS BACKGROUND: Feedwater Une in PWR*s Flow Tests For LMFBR Experimental Tests in Japan Mitsubishi Heavy industries, Ltd. l Thermal Striping Affects ASME Fatigue Analysis
- Temperature Fluctuations at Boundary
- Thermal Discontinuity Stresses Usage Factor for Fatigue Ufe O
O 52
a PRESSURIZER SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION THERMAL STRIPING ANALYSIS Factors Which Affect Striping Stress: Fluid Temperature Delta T & Cycles , l Frequency of Oscillation Surface Film Coefficient Material Properties. (Thermal Conductivity) (Thermal Diffusivity) (Modulus of Elasticity) (Coefficient of Thermal Expansion) Wall Thickness Thermal Striping Potential (6 T Level vs. Time) l 3Mee413Me 10
- 53
{ i
PRESSURIZER SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION
,- THERMAL STRIPING ANALYSIS d
1 Thermal Striping Stresses 1 o Peak Stress Range and Stress Intensity Calculated Sudace Nodes , I a,c.e e
*e I
W i
\
SMee413000 it
- 54 j L___________.___ _ __ _
i PRESSURIZER SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION
. THERMAL STRIPING ANALYSIS Conservatism: i o Striping Occurs at One Location o Surface Film Coefficient High & Constant Flow o Thermal Transient AT and Cycles
- e I
1 I f O O Mete-01300 to 55 (
V . t . I ' 4 l Pressurizer Surge Line Stratification Thermal Striping l l- Boundary Detween Hot & Cold Stratified Fluid 7 Hut Fluid
//
f - See Dotad 1 Boundary Benween Hot & Cold
.. + C t Suree eine
\
coid a s p______ __m Fluid Hot Ruid Ih = 1.125 in. J A +- -
,Ct Cold Fluid amme amm emmen amm amen ==== _ ==== -
,Secton A-A cois oneis en Seese., TIM t0 56
__ . -- . . -. J
I l
.l l
j Pressurizer Surge Line Stratification Thermal Stripinc ) th = 1.125 in l h y
.- . \
nr ^ t
- Time I
s ' T \ nsulated i I o ti Outside
@ Surface i I
T Ampuuoe of Muus Tempereue } I W verna The h Ineuse Surtece Hem Transfer Pipe Wall - Fum casament
. : surtece Temperesure '
' - ' - ; ., l O
e
*S$E !$
57
_ , _ _ _ , . - _ . . _ . .- - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ _ . , -____-__-_.,.,_w-_, , _ - - _ , . - , _ , . , _ _ - 4' e .'O G W U I l
. i
+
3 W e. e m F l i I I 6 4 4 same itases to . 58 :.i
PRESSURIZER SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION
)
Design Transion'ts Stress Analysis i o ASME Ill Fatigue Usage Factor Fatigue Crack Growth l Leak-Before-Break Conclusion 6 an e 4 bl! N ! M ski 59
CUMULATIVE USAGE FACTOR EVALUATION o i o Code / Criteria o Stress input o Conservatism o Conclusions G W l l l W 4 I w .m,m ,w. . i 60 l i l
I 1 CODE / CRITERIA i i ASME'B&PV Code, Sec. Ill,1988 Edition o
- NB3600
- NB3200 o Level A/B Service Limits Primary Plus Secondary Stress Intensity g SSm (Eq.10)
Simplified Elastic-Plastic Analysis .
~
l Expansion Stress, S, g SSm (Eq.12) - Global Analysis Primary Plus Secondary Excluding Thermal Bending s SSm (Eq.13) Elastic-Plastic Penalty Factor 1.0 g K, s 3.333 Peak Stress (Eq.11)/ Cumulative Usage Factor (U, ) l S ah = K,8,/2 (Eq.14) Dvsign Fatigue Curve I U ,, ,g 1.0 1 Mene-staneto . 61
~ . . .
M 1 I STRESS INPUT i o Pressure Stress ) i Transient Pressure J WECAN 2-D Unit Pressure Stress ) o Moment Stress ANSYS Global Moments WECAN 2-D Unit Moment Stress a,c.e O W W f l
~ 1 l
l
--i i- i . l 62
CONSERVATISM - FATIGUE USAGE
. 1
)
o ASME Code Methodology /Fa'tigue Curve o 320*F 6T Used in Transient Definition o Enveloping Peak Stress Intensification, Ky = 1.8, at Butt Welds NB3681: K j = 1.2, K2 " I'0' K3" ' i I 4 e i W 3811: 4 21788 10-9 , 63
]
CONCLUSIONS - FATIGUE USAGE f 1 o Maximum Usage Factor Less Than ASME Code Allowable ! of 1.0 (NB-3653) o Controlling Locations: Hot Leg Nozzle 1 I 5-D Bend Under Pressurizer e i l
. I P
e 1 3011s/921788 10-10 64
l l PRESSURIZER SURGE UNE STRATIFICATION I . Design Transients i Stress Analysis ASME 111 Fatigue Usage Facter o Fatigue Crack Growth Leak-Before-Break Conclusion s O e 3011a421790.1011 65
FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH o Standard A5WIE Section XI Methods Used o Crack Growth Law Besed on Current Proposed Curve for Austenitic SS in Air Environment o Initial Flaw Sizes Selected Based on Section XI inspection Detection Tolerances o All Locations Checked for FCG l o Results 3 Crack Growth at All Locations Remain Well Within 0.6T ' i O 4 9 9440e=41M10 66 I 1
c FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH EQUATION FOR AUSTENITIC STAINLESS STEEL
# 3
= C F S E AK .30 d ,
where
= Crack Growth Rate in micro-inches / cycle d
C= -0 2.42 x 10 f F= frequency fac' tor (F = 1.0 for temperature below
. 800*F)
S= R ratio correction (S = 1.0 for 'R = 0; 5 = 1 + 1.8R for . O < R < .8; and S = -43.35 + 57.97R for R > 0.8) E= Environmental Factor (E = 1.0 for PWR) 4K = range of stress intensity factor, in psi /in and R is the ratio of the minimum K, (bmin I ** ** maximum K, (K y ,,,).
l 1 I 4 1 wt :
=
i .
,} ,
1 (_ . 88EENov ' d ; I ' 5 .".(( .
- 5. - - ,
f.
, .... +y --
, }.1 -j.. f. .
.. 1
. f.. f . . -
- g. // -
,, , , g .-,-.
y . a e e.n -- 3 . .. j ~l . y-
/ / / i cl ---
- *;/;; tt:.f..."R
_f .4:/../.. .
- A m.cuoi-
. __; 4.p-l /.' .df _ _ ,_._ ._,..
/ ,
/
/
- 3) lf.f
/ /
/' i/'/'. i ur, .
3.o.g af xf. a beh/in.)
. Fatigue Crack Growth Rate Curve for Austenitic Stainless Steel M44eall230410 68 i
_ ._. __________D
1 PRESSURIZER SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION Design Trsnsients . Stress Analysis ASME lli Fatigue Usage Factor 1 Fatigue Crack Growth i
\
o Leak-Before-Break ) Conclusion
\
I i M11s421FM 10-12 . 69 l
1 ASSESSMENT OF LEAK-BEFORE-BREAK Leak-before-break methodology involves the following: (1) Establishing material properties including fracture toughness values (2) Performing stress analyses of the structure
~
(3) Review of operating history of the structure (4) Selection of locations for postulating flaws (5) Determining a flaw size giving a detectable leak rate .. (6) Establishing stability of the selected flaw . (7) Establishing adequate margins in terms of leak rate detection, flaw size and load. (8) Showing that a flaw indication acceptable by inspection remains small throughout service life. e e 70
LSB CONSERVATISM o Factor of 10 on Leak Ra.te o Factor of 2 on Leakage Flaw o Algebraic Sum of Loads for Leakage o Absolute Sum of Loads for Stability o Average Properties for Leakage j o Minimum Properties for Stability O e 9 i y _ _ A
W 4 a 6 l O TYPES OF LOADINGS O PRESSURE (P) DEAD WEIGHT (DW) NORMAL OPERATING THERMAL EXPANSION (TH) SAFE SHUTDOWN EARTHQUAKE AND SEISMIC ANCHO.R MOTION (SSE) SoCr e
+
N M r e pate-I t tat 10 72
l I j .- e : Field Welds (GTAW) a : Shop Weld (SMAW) ,
. PRESeum!zpi l
-: Critical Location j i
8 > i _.g S. u 9 - i= IMD 10 , i., n. u ; n ,. i i=
, , . n f
N 9 8 SCH I40 Y h nonm CIRCLED NOS. ME APSYS N00E POINTS Comanche Peak Unit 1 Pressurizer Surge Line j l
. 1 73
- - - _ - - J
l Case A: This is a normal operating case at 453*F consisting of J the algebraic sum of the loading components due to P, DW and TH.
-. - a,c,e ,
Case B: i Case C: Case D: This is a faulted operating case at 853*F consisting of the absolute sum (overy component load is taken as positive of P, DW, TH and SSE.
~
a,c.e Case E: Case F:
\
l< 1 l e 74
l
. CASES FOR ANALYSES A/D This is here-to-fore standard leak-before-break evaluation a,e,e A/F B/E B/F l
~
OF i 4 O e e 3 1 75 l l
' 1 I
l { LBB RESULTS l CRITICAL CRITICAL FLAW LOAD LOCATION SIZE BASED ON LEAKAGE CASE N00E IWB-3640 a,c,e FLAW a , c , e MARGIN VD 1010 2.8 B/E 1010 3.1 VF 1010 3.0 B/F 1010 3.7 l l I
)
w sasnee so-se 76 I
PRESSURIZER SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION Design Transients l l
)
Stress Analysis ASME Ill Fatigue Usage Factor . i Fatigue Crack Growth Leak-Before-Break o Conclusion e i l e M11s/021 FN 10-14 . 77 l-
1 i COMANCHE PEAK UNIT 1 ' SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION CONCLUSION (PENDING FINAL VERIFICATION) I o Design Transients Updated To Reflect Stratification in The Surge Line , o Monitoring Program will be implemented During HFT o Piping Stresses Within Code Limits o ASME Ill Fatigue Usage Factor Within Code Allowable For 40 Years Design Life o Fatigue Crack Growth Weil Within 0.6T o Leak-Before-Break is Demonstrated e M116M17W ID*15 , I 78
4 d, l COMANCHE PEAK UNIT 1 RHR LINE THERMAL STRATIFICATION e 4 F 9 I _ l l l 1 l-1 : R-1 c12sx42ise9.101 i
COMANCHE PEAK RHR LINE STRATIFICATION d ~
- 1. Description of the Genkai Phenomenon
- 2. Comparison of Genkai and Comanche Peak
- 3. Overall Assessment Approach
- 4. Development of Bounding Transients
- 5. Temperature and Stress Results L-a i
oi2sm42168910 2 R-2
GENKAI UNIT 1 RHR LINE e 6/6/88: Leak Detected Due to Increased Water in Drain Sump, and Reactivity e Leak Rate was About .2 gpm o One Crack, Elbow to Pipe Weld, Very Small Length (" pinhole") g 4 E unup 1 i 1 e l 1
)
0129x-021689.10 3 R-3 . - . . )
. l WELD FAILURE LOCATION-GENKAl UNIT 1 i
. pm - b'
./,
#~
\
l RC LOOP A HOT LEG
]
9' 1 i ;
. LEAK LOCATION . , , ,
W W l l y, t TO RHR PUMP eiin cities 104 R-4
_. . I l (l COMPARISON OF GENKAl AND COMANCHE PEAK ; PLANTS l COMANCHE
'GENKAl PEAK
_ g Line Size 12 inch 1 i L Vertical Drop From RCS 5.4 feet Distance to isolation valve 2.3,2 feet l from vertical drop (' Length of pipe from RCS to 14.2,10.7 first isolation valve feet Length of piping before Entire length , valve experiencing tur-bulence (including vertical length) O t I l c12 9 v.' ,in ei R-5
- i i
___ __ ___J
I 1 ,
, ,i N 3 1 ~
- l. F"71 fl ,,,,
i 1,1 8 L-- , _ lM: i N ,6 M
- 4 d(
l1! bd
- ! )
! l NN l - d e d dh[ l%
~
~
.. t ' i l , l l gik i
? T18 l E N M -
i \. l
; .' b l' \
J N
.o I
I r. l V/// ,",}l / / /)' GEOMETRY OF COMANCHE PEAK RHR ISOLATION VALVES 0129x 021i.ssy 10 13 R-6
'7. '7 1 3 H
2 V 2
- 5 4 g s
5 6
/W'I 1
P
'1 O 0
2 O P L 0 - 0 S E N I L R H R E H T F
< O T
U O 1' Y 6 A 1 L C I T A M E H C S t H T R
'2 D 4 N 1 5
ll l
l 07 LEG LOOP 4
/
l 4.0' I I
' 4.7' Y
l t
-I x
\ .
V 2 n,
&Y 43. .2' HEM ATIC LAYOUT OF THE RHR LINES . Loop 4 I
01292 4210#9 10 6 R-8 l;
i COMANCHE PEAK RHRTRANSIENT
.- DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS: '
RoCo e FLOW CONDITIONS: 8,C,e i
~
TEMPERATURE CALCULATIONS e Insulation specific to Comanche Peak has been included. I o Temperature vs. Distance has been calculated - l
\
l 1 a l l l 1 oim. cme m a.,
- a,c,e as i
~
TURBULENT PENETRATION FOR WATER FLOWS INTO NON. ISOLABLE TEES, FROM EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
. eim eri. io, 6
R-10
- - - _ ___ _ a
\
OBSERVATIONS ON TURBULENT PENETRATION
~ &o ce o 0129x 0219691010 g }}
l
"' B,Co e l c .
. TEMPERATURE OF STRATIFIED FLOW:
COMANCHE PEAK UNIT 1, LOOP 4 e sinn42is.9 to ti R-12
OVERALLASSESSMENTAPPROACH
. e ' Many Actions Have Been Taken to Ensure No
' Cracking Exists: .
~
Inspection Testing ofIsolation Valves e Cracking is Unlikely to Ever Occur Due to SigniEcant Systems Difference Betwee'n Genkai and Comanche Peak
.. e Even With These Precautions, An Assessment Was Carried Out To Evaluate the Effects of Stratincation ~
on PipeIntegrity
.I e
,e
- I a
e
. t-
- i stas 42 m .n ia R-13 -
I
1 STRESS ANALYSIS-STRATIFICATION TRANSIENT
- I Local Thermal Stresse~s (Finite Element Model)
Global Thermal Stresses from ANSYS Pipe Model Thermal Expansion, Stresses i Deadweight and Pressure Stresses are Constant 3 e Results Obtained in Terms of Usage Factor Contribution 1 e Locations Considered
, 1. Hot Leg Nozzle Safe End (Node 2020)
- 2. Horizontal Support on Vertical Leg (Node 2090)
- 3. Valve to Pipe Weld (Node 2180)
- 4. Maximum Temperature Difference (Node 2265)
- 5. Elbow in Horizontal Run (Node 2391) . j
- 6. Horizontal Support (Node 2530) e Analysis Performed on Loop 4 Due to Highest Stiffness of Support System
. \
9 m 0129x 421id910-15 g.g
2 -
>4
'5 u2 ~N/ '\>0 8 1
2
/ x/ - 0 0
0 8 0 2 2 2 2 4 0 5 0 4 6 3 2 2
> 7 2 L
TO OO 4 P .- \ 0 4 2x 0 9 NL 2 h 2 x\ 4 P
. % 0 7
O 2 3 2 0 2 O '0 0 4 2 0 3 4 L 1 2 j 4 0 R 2 H R L d
/ {4 2
0 7 4 2 1 E N e TD /, 0 N O I 4 4 2 UM S 5 5 2 0 1 0 5 2 K Y AS EN 2 1 5 2 [ P E A 2 5 H 1 0 2 C 0 8 / N 0 5 A \ 5 2 M M O M M C 1 0 3 6 2
. 0 . 8 6
2 0
~
e5
i i LOCAL FINITE ELEMENT MODEL e a
. SoCr e l
4 i I i 8 i t i 5
. . ~ i 0
l l j
. , , . . . , , , . .., a-is
)
1
I CODE / CRITERIA
~ ~
o ASME B&PV Code, Section III,1986 Edition NB3600
'NB3200 e Level A/B Service Limits Primary Plus Secondary Stress Intensity 13 Sm ;
(Eq.10) l Peak Stress (Eq.11)/ Cumulative Usage Factor ,. (Ucum) Salt = K Sp/2 (Eq.14) Design Fatigue Curve Ucum i1.0 a O O 0129x42i6ss.io.is R-17
\
FATIGUE RESULTS-COMANCHE PEAK LOOP 4 ALTERNATING LOCATION STRESS (ksi) CUF (Desian)
- 1. Node 2020 7.5 0.650
- 2. Node 2090 4.4 0.040 l 3. Node 2180 8.3 0.167
- 4. Node 2265 4.4 0.040
- 5. Node 2391 8.5 0.090
- 6. Node 2530 3.1 0.040 The alternating stress is below the endurance limit t
stress of 16.8 ksi and therefore does not contribute to
, the cumulative usage factor.
I 4 e 0129x 02198v to 19 R-18
4
/
ASME SECTION III EQUATION 12 STRESS INTENSITY - COMANCHE PEAK UNIT 1, LOOP 1 Node Ea.12 Stress (ksi) 3 Sm Limit 2020 19.8 50.1
- 2090 5.0 50.1 2180 15.6 50.1 2265 7.9 50.1 2391 27.3 50.1 l
2530 12.0 50.1 s o The equation 12 stresses above are the maximum range stresses between leakage, non-leakage, zero load set, i and maximum normal / upset operation. Eq.12: SE = C2 dom / 2I < 3 Sm . C2 = Moment Loading Stress Index Do = Outer Diameter (12.75 in.) M = Moment Range Due to Thermal Expansion
,. 1 = Moment ofInertia (701 in4)
Sm = Design Stress Intensity Limit (16.70 ksi at I ? 650 F) l oirsr ,2isa9 to 2n R-19
.)
I NOZZLE LOAD COMPArl3ON (KIPS,IN-KIPS) COMANCHE PEAK UNIT 1, LOOP 1
- l Loop Nozzle Node 9424 Fx Fy Fz Design Normal Operation 5.14 -1.63 -9.67 1 w/ Leak 8.45 -2.50 -12.1 l w/o Leak 7.79 -1.57 -10.2 Mx My Mz MR Design Normal Operation 623.4 -746.3 441.0 1067.7
, w/ Leak 348.6 -984.9 681.1 1247.2 w/o Leak 698.8 -840.9 633.0 1263.3 1 9
4 s 0 otax42wes.io 2' R-20
)
i RESULTS
SUMMARY
- LEAK-BEFORE BREAK ASSESSMENT- COMANCHE !
PEAK UNIT 1 . l Temperature Temperature l Distribution Distribution w/oLeak with14ak
)'
(inches) (inches) Comment l i
, l
-NODE 2391- i
) Leakage Size 4.3 3.9 Factorof10 l Flaw with respect to leak detection capability -
a,c,e
- met.
Critical Flaw Factor of 2 on e' Based on IWB 3640 flaw aize -met. Method i
- Critical Flaw Factor of1.4 with 1.4 Factor on load - met
~""
on Load Based on - IWB 3640 Approach
-NODE 2180-a Leakage Size 5.4 4.0 Factorof10 i Flaw with respect to 6,
leak detection a,e,e capability-
- met Critical Flaw Factor of 2 on Based on IWB-3640 flaw size - met.
Method 1 [ Critical Flaw Factorof1.4 ; with 1.4 Factor on load- met I
~~ . 1, on Load Based on -
IWB 3640 Approach q l e otrox42icu w 2s R-21 !
4 PROPENSITY FOR STRIPING
-
- Propensity depends on the Richardson Number 1
(
. EAph i
. Ri =
pU2 where p = density h = height of stratified flow u = velocity ofmovinglayer g = gravitationalconstant SqCo e
-. ~
l 0
'i . n:
I L 4 e ind 4 . l einx42iusan R-22 o
7 a,c,e M 4 4 9 mm. M e 4 [ t l 4 9 e l etax42 test, to a R-23
\
_ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _a}}