ML20236Y424
Text
.
MAY 161977 ,
MIGUWIDtM FOR: Those on'Attachod O st 1
FROM: 5. Fabic, Chainaan !
Contain.sent Code Review Group ;
SUBJECT:
PROPOSAL FOR MULTIPLE VENT STEAM TESTS IN GKS$ FACILITY ,
During a meeting between personnel of GKS$ and RSR, a' proposal l for steam tests with full-scale, multiple vents was prepand. We are l pursuing the organizational details of getting testing of this. kind - --
incorporated into the SKSS test program. In the meantime, we solicit _ .gf j 3
your comments and suggestions on the proposals ,to arrive at a finalized. >
1 test plan at some later date. We would like your cassants by June 10 1977. A copy of the draft proposal and the trip report is enclosed.-
I
\
~
Original Signed By l '
j S.FaWo 1
'l 5. Fabic, Chairman. -
! Containment Code Review Grov-
! (Division of Reactor Safety tesearch) l l
Enclosures:
as stated
\
l l
l ; Distribution l-
, Subj
! Cire l l Chron i Branch rf l j LS-rf l LScyb l '
SF cy
- GLB cy L ST cy ,
8712110314 871203 e PDR FDIA /
_ MENZB7-160 PDR ,
a #(5 o,,,.., _R@,ADB
/jz RSR:ADB SFabic4g
- h. :[
Bdadett/Tonq, ;
. .u a. u * ...lS_
(
. . , > R.13177 5ftSG7 SLib 127
....,..o,,
(; nac max sis c,.ts> xacu o2m $!r . ........ . .
l .VJtt\\Olli _-____
a i
1 i.
MAY l 6 .1977 -
Addressees - Memorandum dated - .
.i l
i L Zuber, RSR '
- S.' Lainas, MRR -
1 J. Kudrick, NRR
. L Jensen, NRR-C. Grimes,'MRR B. Buckley, NRR i
e E Paulson, NRR !
'I i
l i
4 f
5 l
I
'i l <
l 1 I
l I l l k !
\
, 1 l l l
T l
l l
I
' i
'l I
UPPICS P ovanams h l
l DAf t > .,
NRC PORM 318 (9 76) NRCM 0240 W u. s. sovsamment emewone orrics. nove - essaa4
TRIP REPORT Name ci Traveller: L. Slegers Date b Piace: March 30 and April 4,1977, Gesellschaft fuer Kernen-
~~~
ergieverwertung in Schiffbau und Schiffahrt (GKSS),
Hamburg, Germany.
l
Purpose:
Discuss with GKSS future test Program for GKSS Pressure Sup-pression Test Facility Attendees: Mr. Seeliger 4
Mr. Schwan '
Mr. Aust l
Summary:
{
The meeting was he7d to explore the' possibility for performing. pressure -j suppresion tests in the GKSS facility applicable to the MARK II Contain- l ment. The objective of the meeting was to determine whether. multiple vent tests (up to 5) in full-scale for steam condensations loads.can be 1 performed. During the meeting and in subsequent communications, a: pro- ;
posal has been worked out'which describes-two alternative configurations for such testing. This proposal as submitted by GKSS, is presentiv under j
review by the German Containment Review Group as part of the GKSS . future '
test program. The proposal is attached.
Further Actions: i i
The proposal should be formally submitted to BMFT for consideration.
The . German Review Group responsible for containment is evaluating these 1 tests as to their technical merit. . At the-same time, the proposal should }
be reviewed by the NRC internally to select one.of the alternatives and to arrive at a desired test scope. The proposal is therefore, distributed i to the all Containment Code Review Group Members.
I 9
i
. l l
1 i
i NRC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TESTS IN'GKSS l 4
PRESSURE SUPPRESSION TEST FACILITY i
REVISED DRAFT OF W Y 10, 1977 !
=1 1
l
-1 j
1
'I 8
4
--_~-.n.--___-.
-..__,_.u . m
., l
.y. -
y
- 1. Introduction .i
, At the combined Containment Review. Meeting of Dec. 9 and 10,1976, in Cologne, the USNRC was asked 'for recommendations asl to future pressure suppression testing in the GKSS facility 3 _n. 1 Hamburo Germany. Additional' planning by the USNRC has resulted in concrete suggestions for. testing.
A test proposal has been prepared ' jointly between the two' organizations,-
in meetings on March 30, 1977 an'd April 4,: 1977.between the'USNRC andcGKSS. ]
This proposalsconstitutes 'a part 'of the GKSS follow-up program in" pressure-l suppression' and accommodates the USNRC in~ their need, for.' data .on multiple:
vent configurations.during steam condensation. . Specific measurements' l are desired for pressure oscillations-(and pressure' spikes) during the:
condensation of-relatively air free steam' discharging from multiple, large scale vents- .
In addition, measurements on the lateral vent" loads- d in a multiple vent configuration should be included.
- 2. Objective The objective of these measurements is to provide confirmatory data:
for the MARK-II BWR containment. The MARK-II- pressure suppresion. design-E is based on full scale single vent ~ experiments that. simulate a LOCA tran-sient. Of primary interest in the design are the ' dynamic loads during steam condecation. In addition th'e magnitude of. the lateral' loads' on the structure connecting the vents needs confirmation. l The available experimental data for Lthe~ MARK-II was obtained on a full scale, single vent (unit. cell) arrangement. The objective of/
the proposed tests is to obtain comparable' data-on'a multiple venti h
-l test configuration. For the test data to be comparable 1(unit cell: vs. .
multiple vents) the tests have to befconducted in identical'scalh L '
^
and test parameters as explained below. ,
l !
, c l
--- - . = _ - -
]
1 q
'i Past experiments indicate that the amplitudes of pressure oscilla--
tions are dependent on the number of vents used in the. experiment. The objective of these tests is therefore to determine and quantify this; j.
amplitude dependence by comparing experimental results.from the unit cel:1- 4 with multiple vent results. As reference case, the~ single vent'datacof-the General Electric Co. will be used. The proposed test utilize the-GKSS facility to approximate multiple unit cells in nearly the:same scale resulting in 3 or 5 vents for the size of the GKSS suppression. pool. ]
- 3. Experiment Descriptions 3.1 Scaling Considerations The approach of unit cell testing in pressure suppression .is that the relevant plant parameters are maintained in the experi-ment in full scale. These parameters for. the MARK-II containment appear in Table 1, Column (1)' and (6). The same parameters for j
the reference unit cell data of GE with 20 inch and 24 inch vents 1 appear in column (2) and (3). .With this approach, identical test j conditions for a multiple vent arrangement are obtained if the values in table 1 for the proposed tests, column (4) and (5) are suf- l ficiently close to those in column (2) and (3)lrespectively. The values-in column (4) apply to the case of three 24 inch vent-in the GKSS ~ !
facility, whereas column (5) applies to five 20 inch vents.
)
i
- u
_ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ m____.-_b
- -3-1 3.2 Constructions' Based on'the present' configuration ofjthe pressure suppression ~
test facility (s. GKSS-Report no. 11'..15 AR B 02) a conceptual' design, has been prepared for two multi-vent configurations as
- shown'in Fig. 1 A/l B and 2 A/2 B.. These designs.are consideredi as alternatives with a fin'al selection to b'e' made at a later time.
Alternative 1 (Fig.1 A/1 B) .is the five vent configuration where two headers ~ are cornected to the drywell. via two pipes of 0.45 m I.D.
This . configuration represents' a grouping. of vents of a BWR-MARK-II with 0.51 m (20 inch) 1. D.' Vents. It should be . recognized that.
the connection to the header is smaller'then.the vent diameter resulting in an upstream flow constrictions.' - This situation'is 1
largely av61ded in alternative 2 with three. vents where the. vents of 0.61 m (24 inch)1. D. 'are directly connected .to the drywell.
However, in the 3 vent configuration, plant representative' spacing of the vents is not as closely matched with~ the reference tests as in the 5 vent configurations.
3.3 Configuration and Test parameters' ;
The values in table 1 show the degree of correspondence between- l the proposed tests and the reference tests.- Alternative .1 corresponds j closely with the reference test with a 20 inch vent (Column-3)'in- i pool area to vent area. Alternative 2 on the other hand differs' 'l significantly.from the 24 inch reference case with a 24 inch vent' i
(Column 2) in the area parameter. The height dimension is-:not very-well scaled in either of the two' alternatives. Only the vent sub-mergence, 'and to a lesser extent, the downcomer clearance-to the pool '!
i' bottom can be maintained at the same values'as:in the reference tests.
The fact that the volume of the wetwell. air space and the drywell.volumel ]
are not scaled is not considered to be.significant. 'The'se parameters '!
~
influence the pbol swell phase of the transient, but not_ the steam l cor.densation phase which is the. objective of this testing.- l l
f ~
'l i
A preliminary analysis of the pressure and temperature response. j was made by GKSS' for alternative 2 with' three vents. This analysis ~
'i j
was performed to demonstrate the espability of the apparatus.. The input- !
i data for the calculations are listed in Table 2. The mass flow rates' 1 through the vents, using two orifices of 80 mm diameter to control the vessel discharge, are.shown in Figure 3. ~The' intermittent peaks in the j mass flow apperring;at about 10 seconds are'due to evel swell in the ;
i l vessel as predicted by the code. Figure 4 and 5 shown the pressure and.. j
-1 temperature response in the drywell and wetwell. The computed pressure j i
response is quite timilar to the calculated drywell pressure response in R 1
a MARK II plant. Figure 4 and 5, thus show that the volume relations ' l between drywell and wetwell in the GKSS. test facility are 'such that con-
-l tainment pressure and therefore wetwell over-pressure can be adequately l simulated. h As was explained above, the early phase of'the LOCA transient-need not be accurately simulated. Only the later phase with relatively 1 air free ' steam condensations is of interest.- Based on these calcula- )
tions the range of interest in experimental parameters is estimated -
as'follows:
2
- specific mass flux not to exceed 60 kg/m s.
- wetwell pressure- ca. '3 bar
- pool temperature 40 - 70'C
- maximum pool depth 5.50 m !
- clearence vent exit to pool bottom 2.44
- vent submergence 3.05' l
__a _,_----.a---. .a.. x
j 4
Figure 3, 4' and 5 are intended as sample'. results. .Further.
I calculations for the specific . configuration -selected would have to be performed.
3.4 Instrumentations The level of.~ instrumentation. anticipated for' the proposed -
experiments will correspond to the scope of-instrumental' ion employed-in the reference GE tests. Th.is consists of pressure measurements to evaluate the dynamic loads for the multi-vent tests, pool: tem-
~ ~
perature, and steam flow rate measurement. This amounts ~ to a level; of instrumentation, currently available in the.GKSS facility. Addi-tional instrumentation is needed for the determination of the' lateral-loads on the vent exit. A loadeell measurement on 2 adjacent vents independently and in orthagonal- directions should be included.,
- 4. Anticipated Program Scope l The nature of these confirmatory tests is such that a limited nc.n- j t
ber of multiple vent tests (up to ten) over the parameter range listed Ei in paragraph 3.3 are desired. The preferred scheduling of these tests.
is such that data availability'is planned for late 1978. ,
'l l
! l i
- i.
5 TABLE 1: . COMPARISON, OF MARK II PLANT PSTF,IGKSS-PSS, TPRESSURE. SUPPRESSION -
'~ '
. PARAMETERS g.
Parameter UNIT- PLANT PSTF' GKSSL Mark!Il range?.
(.1 ) -( 2 ) ' (3) L(4) 15) ' ;(6)H Number of Vents .98 '1; :3- '51 Ofameter m 0,597 0.61 0.51: 0.61? 0.51 / .
in. 23.5 24.0. 20.0s '24. 0 , ,. 20.0 ' ,20-24L 3 .'.. . ', .
< a .2 Drywell Vol- m'r 64.01. 53.6 53.6 19.33 11.6' . . . .
Vent ft' ~2260. 1892.. .1892.. 683.04 410.- .1800-2700L Drywell Vol m 228.9 4 195.7' L285.3 66.24 57.2L ..
Vent area ft 750.9. 642.'O. 936.02 217 187 8-
. t575-914>
2 Pool area m 5.33 3.18 3.27a 5. 7. 3.4- ..
2 l Vent ft ' 57.4' 34.3, 35.2- 61. 36.6 .36.8-60.0; Pool area- -
19.1 11.6- '17.4 E 19.45 16,.8 '12-20 Vent area Submergence m 3.9 . . 2.74 i+ '4.11' 3.06 3.'06 -
Depth ft 12.8 9.00 e 13.5 110.0: .10.0; j 8.81-'13.5" DC Clearance m 3.66 3.66 l2.'44II2!44 to Bottom ft 12.0 12.0< 8.0L : 8.0 -
8.3 .18.0 -
l . .
6 ,8,
! Overall m 18,3 15.85-. 6 ~. 8 - ,
Height' ft 60.0 52.0- 22.~3 '. 22.~3 ! 45.4 - 62.0:
, l (1) Values based on.La Ls11e l (2) General Electric PSTF values, 24. inchivent '
(3) General Electric.PSTF values, 26 inch vent.
(4) Proposed GKSS configurellons, three.24 inch vents 1
I (5) Proposed GKSS confi9urations, five 20 irach vents q
L o 4
- l
'l i
't
.s
T.a'b 1 e 2 Input-Data for ~ GKSS-calculations (Diagrams 3 - 5).
Initial data in pressure vessels pressure: '111.3 bar.
O temperature : . 31'9 C <
mass of water + steam: .
8000 kg.
discharge-area 1.0051' 10-2 ,2 (2 x.80 mm ID)
Initial data in containment (drywell and wetwell):.
pressure: 1.0 bar' temperature:. 40.0 C mass of water in wetwell: 93 000 kg total vent area: : 0.877 m 2 (3 x 610:mm ID) submergence depth: 3.06 m Drywell volume: 58 m 3 Wetwell volume including vents: 130'm 3 Vessel volume: --
21 m 3 Pool surface area incl. vents:- 17 m2 ' ,
after 50 secs..Blowdowns mass release from vessel,, 2751.8 kg -
mass increase in wetwell: 2413.8 kg pressure in drywell: 3.23 bar temperature in drywell: 13 6 '.'.1 C-l pressure in wetwell: 2.97 bar temperature in wetwell: 55;3 C pressure in vessel: 27. 2.bar-l temperature in vessel: 217.7 O C l
m-- - _ _ _ _ _
i 0 .).
+ .
qi L
f K ^
/_ 3 . ...
- \
r (} - >. _ _ . . .
R}q
. . . . . . . . . __ . . . . . _.- o s./ . ./
- ~~
l
.. . ' ,\ , I
-$ - ..,/
,e ,w
, ,I :.
s.
7e
- al g
_ :. .s, j -- . ., . ..%
--_. .N. ,
V A / i g . . - I
. .. \ .. /
\. '
-w.
t . . . .
I
- - . . \ __._
.]
s y e
. ,/_. .
f j
,. . s. s. ./
f
. . . . .- . . j -.. .
v
/
./ . . . .
- \ _
\
'8
. __1Ym._ -
o, s m-
) .
i 1
Figure 1A Plan view of wetwell in GKSS facility with five 20 inch vents. !
8
' I.
r 2. ~,- /A : .
l'
1
. ' i e
)
I
$ DR y - WELL 1
Figure 1B Elevation view of wetwell and 1 drywell in GKSS facility with five 20 inch i
vents.
l -l 1
1 l .I l l i { .. 1
, I t NW 450 l t - -
1 1
- s 1 -._ . ..
1 -
I +
i
. Wet-We. ll
)
4 O q
. : .._. . . . ]
L J. ..' W
. __ 9.___ _
. . . g.. . . . _ . . _ _ .
l
. WW 5\00 g ..
l l . .
4 D
.i .
to D Y
__ ( -
k g \
+ *%
~> , -
i3 1 1 l -
O 4 '
- * * * * * *. = . mee e = w * ..u. ..i ee m.. a -, me e e * + o pees e e s e *= a s o ea^ ****** '
'W e
_ r _.- _ - - - _ , - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ - _ _ ,
,i I
- r .i
.) ,
1 d
.i-
[
. I
. . . . -l .
- N
+
.. \.
y
- .f_ . . .
9 '/
,. /
.j . ...
- f. ,
,b. . . . ._ _ g h
.s a . .
.s
[ /
s 6o -.
~
/ s_ -
I t
- )\ -
i-N ,
g
'\ j . .
w N
ew N ,
/ m N
.y( %. -
/ ,r l
,4
/ y[
. . . ; ~
4 K'.
l l{ ,
- y. .
... N . ,
.%/
. OoS m =- ,
- ,\
/, 4 m _
Figure 2A Plan view of wetwell E .,
in GKSS facility with three 24 3, .f , __ ,
l inch vents 1 i I
'i l
1- i
( 5 1
l '
- s. t
- .i1
~.I' 1
'p g y.yyzy i' "
Figure.2B Elevation view of wetwell . ,
and' drywell'in GKSS facility with three
!' 24. inch ven'ts '
i A
mee 5
~ NW 450' -
a 9
1 e
f * "
e e mD .'
t i V yi ... .,
.4 i4 e......
, Wet-Well {,
s
\ ~
bfW BOO. ... ..
x . uc . . -
m .l>
s * *
- 1 g .
= gl '
y 4
.I .
b i
a f (
'I I Q g
y b
% q l' I n
3 l .. e .!
5
- y } .' l,.
_ . y 9
= .
. . . . . . . . _ . . .. , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . - . . , . . . . - . . . - - - j
- e. l
.I
.e l.
t +
i y ;
1, s !lli l .ij: l y
u 7 m 7
I p. 3 7 h
' m m
m s
t ,
ns ,
h et __
vn B A
.e hv .
g -
uh ~
3 oc ru -
~ ~
- . ~_.
4 -
ho b tr $
- .L4 b ,
h ) A_
wt 2 o
l w m
fo
'e _
mf l
Nt a & - a er.
ti
~
n sa r
'e AA t l
(
a
.6 3
~s _
t n
e v
t 2 h 3 c
'i n -
4 2
)
.8 s e 2 ( e r
e h "
. t i
m .,.
t h g ~
.r u
't o
r h
. t i
r
,0 'a 2 d n
. Ne , a m
a t t e
S s
f h o -
w -
- g. : . l o 4
. 1 f
. D'< ,
s h
- s a
.J -
M -
N t 3
~
N e r _
\-
u g _
i , a.;
- F N s .
s- .
u t
.i? -
+
=e a"
- 5
, v <'.
~ :
g mNy ,oC ,mmE
.A s: . . , .
~ " .
m ll!! L. l l- j
8
=
- (
+ ;
e 9 - 4
-+
- ~* - ~
~
z l' l -
ll ee 4 - - - 4 J
ww yt r
re -
DW - a 04 -- -
M.
.e
~2
_ ._ 3
=
~.
_ - 8 )
_ -2 s
(
. s
' 'e
- i m
_ T
_ _- r.
_ 2
- e
..w _
s
.2 e0 r
- e. "-
. 6 1
.e s?-.
1
~
_ __ r "u .
_ - t
_ n * .. -
4 i
L
_ j' .I!I.t!l. :t' ;i e .,e .*
Ig
!. e -
m_
~
0 . .. o. A
_ e. .
e :
_'O2n%
- g ,sommGLo.
_ z
+ -
ll ll ee 'd ww yt '
re DW
- 8a -
7i
_ ~
+
ia
)
ir :(s e
m m.
_ i
- T
_ '4
- v. 2 V'o
+
d .
~ -g
~
_ i
~_
_ f,
/ ,
- } -.
r
/,. '. 1 .
_ I;! - .
.i' : I.iii!t, -
(t
, 1. .ua :..:.
.r" 7
. f. .h
- n9 .
noC.aw.s.ao.Uaeey
=.
-