ML20009H215

Affidavit in Support of Summary Disposition of Contention 7(a).Prof Qualifications & Diagrams Encl.Related Correspondence

ML20009H215
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	07/31/1981
From:	Abrahamson G SRI INTERNATIONAL
To:
References
NUDOCS 8108070041
Download: ML20009H215 (45)

Text

.

s 1m cuttuisp0NDENC8 p SS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA n

/g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AUG 51981 > u Before The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 9' Clfic ci th ScM/ 3 htcti.g & Smica Canc't In the Matter of ) g g s PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-387 and ) 50-388 ALLEGHENY ELEGIRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. )

(Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, ) S Units 1 and 2) ) O AFFIDAVIT OF GEORGE R. ABRAHAMSON IN SUPPORT g s %fA i -

0F

SUMMARY

DISPOSITION OF CONTENTION 7(a) $ Co ' 9 County of San Mateo )

(.A r7 7 M,(//

SS: y State of California ) \{'y l

George R. Abrahamson, being duly sworn according to law, #[

deposes and says:

1. I am Vice Prasident, Physical Sciences Division and Director of the Poulter Laboratory, SRI International. My business address is 333 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park, California. I give this affidavit in support of Applicants' Motion for Summary Deposition of Contention 7(a) in this proceeding. The facts and conclusions are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. My professional j qualifications are attached as Exhibit "A" hereto.

t l 2. Contention 7(a) in this proceeding states as follows:

1 The nuclear steam supply system of Susquehanna l

1 and 2 contains numerous generic design deficiencies, I some of which may never be resolvable, and which, when reviewed together, render a picture of an unsafe nuclear installation which may never be safe enough to operate.

Specifically:

a. The pressure suppression containment structure may not be constructed with sufficient strength to withstand the dyanmic forces realized during blowdown.

As will be shown below, it is my professional opinion that the ousquehanna l

, Steam Electric Station (SSES) containment can withstand the c vnamic forces realized during blowdown with ample safety margin. g563 l

1 l //

l 8108070041 810731

PDR ADOCK 05000387 i G PDR

e .

3. This affidavit describes the dynamic loads i= parted to the containment structures during blowdown. These loads are the hydro-dynamic loads gene -ted during steam discharge into the water pool used to condense stea; ithin the SSES containment. The affidavit compares the hydrodynamic loaU to the containment design capacity and test level.

I begin with brief description of the SSES containment and a summary of the background on hydrodynamic loads. This is followed by a review of the only two events that produce hydrodynamic loads: steam relief v.:1ve discharge, and loss-of-coolant accident. Finally, I compare the h%ro-dynamic loads to the containment design capacity and containment test level. The comparison shows that the SSES containment can withstand the i hydrodynamic loads with ample safety margin.

l l

SSES Containment

4. Figure 1 shows the SSES containment structure. The primary containment completely encloses the reactor vessel. It consists of a l base cat, a hollow cylinder, a hollow cone, and a domed cap. The base cat is reinforced concrete 7 feet 9 inches thick and rests on slate-like siltstone. The cylinder and cone are reinforced concrete 6 feet thick; l all the inner surface of the concrete is lined with steel plate 1/4 inch thick. The cap is steel plate, 1-1/2 inches thick, held in place by l 80 bolts 2-3/4 inches in diameter.

i

5. The containment is divided into two chambers by the horizontal diaphragm slab at the junction between the cylindrical and conical sections.

The upper chamber is the drywell and the lower chamber is the suppression chamber or wetwell. The drywell contains the reactor vessel and associated

pipinr;, valves and equipment; the wetwell is filled to a depth of 24 feet with water used to condense steam. Steam can be discharged into the wetwell water pool by actuation of a steam relief valve (SRV) or by a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA). These are the events that produce hydrodynamic loads in the containment.

2 l

I l

6. Each of the 16 steam relief valves has a discharge line that extends downward from a main steam lina to the bottom of the water pool, where it connects to a quencher discharge device (Figures 1 and 2). Actuation of one or more SRVs results in steam discharge from the associated quenchers.

7. There are 87 downcomers that connect the drywell to the water pool (Figures 1 and 13). The downcomers are 24-inch diameter open pipes with a deflector shield on the top; the deflector shield does not restrict the flow of steam into the pipe. During a LOCA, steam fills the drywell and is discharged into the water through all 87 downcomers simultaneously.

Background on Hydrodynamic Loads

8. In April 1972 at the Wurgassen Nuclear Plant, a boiling water reactor (BWR) built by the German firm AEG-Kraf twerk Union, a safety relief valve was opened during startup testing and failed to close. The reactor remained at full pressure, and the valve discharged steam into the contain=ent suppression chanber until the suppression pool water heated from i just above ambient to about 170*F, in approxiaately 30 minutes. Pulsating condensation developed and impulsive l)rces with substantial underpressure amplitudes acted on the contain=ent, e~entually causing leakage from the bottem liner plate. As a result, concern was expressed that the structural integrity of other BWR pressure containment systems could be ' casitive to SRV induced dynamic loads.

9. The Atomic Energy Consission issued Bulletin 74-14 to all BWR owners on Nove=ber 14, 1974 to alert them to the potential problems of condensation instability (Wurgassen effect) due to SRV operation. The Commission requested verification that BWR suppression pools had been designed to withstand loeds similar to those which were being experienced.

In January 1975 the General Electric - Nuclear Ene ' gr Program Division (GE-NEPD) identified the following dynamic load :onditions which had not

< II 3%R containments:

been fully considered in the design criteria n#

a. SRV discharge thermo-hyd -dyna. .c ,nenomena.

b. Design basis accident (DBA), acrJ-of-coolant

! accident (LOCA) hydrodynamic p.4enomena.

I l

3 i

I l

e ,

10. Following the GE announce=ent, the containment construccior sequence for the SSES as altered to enable the Pennsylvania Power & Light Company (PP&L) and its architect-engineer, Bechtel Power Corporation, to ascertain the effect of these phenomena on the existing SSES design. A task force which included representatives from Bechtel-San Francisco, GE-NEPD, and PP&L was formed in March 1975 to evaluate existing design criteria with respect to the newly defined SRV and DBA-LOCA loadings. In May 1975 Bechtel completed a preliminary study incorporating the effects of the new phenomena in the design criteria for the SSES suppression chamber structures and safety related equipment. As a result of this investigation, it was decided that the following civil-structural modifications were to be incorporated immediately in the containment design to aid in load transfer and add additional conservatism to the existing design:

a. The number of reinforcing bars in the suppression chamber vertical walls was increased.

b. The number of embedments in the suppression chamber walls for downcomer/ piping restraints was increased to accommodate future requirements.

c. Anchor bolts were placed on the underside of the diaphragm slab to accommodate additional supports for the SRV discharge piping for horizontal runs should they be needed.

d. Additional anchor bolts were placed within the drywell wall to allow installation of additional snubbers and pipe restraints, if required.

e. The diaphragm slab shear reinforce =ent was changed from a 45' to a 90' orientation (with respect to the horizontal plane) to accommodate the most conservative pool swell -

uplift loadings yet predicted.

11. It became evident that a complex technical issue existed for all l Mark II plants, and PP&L sought to create a unified utility group to address the matter. A Mark II BWR contain=ent owners group was formed

( in June 1975 to define precisely the suppression pool dynamic loads and l explore ways to assess their impact. As the direct result of action taken by the Mark II containment owners, a generic Dynamic Forcing Function Information Report, NEDE-21061P Rev. 1, which was also known as the DFFIR, j was issued jointly by GE-NEPD and Sargent and Lundy for the Mark II owners in Septe=ber 1975.

c 4

l l

i , .

! 12. Based on the analytical techniques included in the DFFIR, a

! preliminary SSES unique containment design assessment was submitted by PP&L on March 15, 1976.

13. As the body of the useful supportive data increased, Revision 2 of the DFFIR was issued jointly by GE-NEPD and Sargent and Lundy for the

! Mark II coatt.inment owners group on September 1,1976, as NED0/NEDE 21061, Rev. 2. It us at this time renamed the DFFR.

i

14. In addition to its participation in the Mark II owners group, PP&L in November 1976, selected Stanford Research Institute, now called SRI International (SRI), as a consultant to supplement PP&L in-house i technical resources.

15. A review by PP&L and SRI of the Mark II program and discussions with others indicated that the SRV discharge loads that caused the problem at Wurgassen could be eliminated by using a quencher discharge device at the outlet into the water sool.

16. Although the Mark II owners group had quencher-related tasks in their program, these tasks were not sufficiently timely to satisfy SSES construction schedule needs. From the work done in Europe at ASEATOM, MARVIKEN, and Kraf twerk Union, PP&L discovered that all known quencher l

! designs wete based on data from Kraf twerk Union (KWU) . Thus, in March, 1977, SRI, Bechtel and PP&L visited KWU for discussion and tour of quencher-related facilities. In late July 1977, PP&L employed the services of KWU to design a SSES-unique quencher device.

17. Kraf twerk Union provided PP&L design and test reports pertaining

! to the quencher development to demonstrate design adequacy and quality ot their device. These documents were submitted to' the Nuclear Regulatory j

Commission (NRC) in January,1978. The quencher load specification was submitted to the NRC in April, 1978. To verify KWU's desien approach, a full-scale SSES-unique quencher was tested by KWU for PP&L. The documentation of this test series and verification of the design specifi-cation was submitted to NRC in March, 1979.

5

-_ ._.- __ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . ~ . __ . _ _._,_ _ - . _ . - _ . . . . _ . - , _ _ . _ _ _ _

18. The definition of LOCA loads for SSES is in basic accordance with the Mark II program. In addition, PP&L :onducted a series of transient st:am blowdown tests in a test tank in Mannheim, Germany, to provide data to resolve NRC concerns on the differences in downconer length between the original facility used by GE to obtain LOCA loads and a prototypical Mark II containment, and to verify the LOCA load specification used in the SSES design.

19. The licensing documentation submitted to NRC for the SSES is summarized in Appendix A.

SRV Discharge Phenomena

20. There are sixteen SRV discharge lines running from the main steam lines at the top of the reactor vessel into the water pool (one is shown in Figure 1). Each line has a device at the discharge end to enhance steam condensation, as shown in Figure 2. These devices, called quenchers, were specifically designed for SSES to minimize hydrodynamic loads. Figure 3 shows a schematic drawing of the SSES quencher. The horizontal centerline of the quencher is about 4 feet from the bottom of the pool. Steam is discharged through about 1000 holes approximately 0.5 inch in diameter; this greatly enhances the water surface exposed to steam and thereby increases the rate of condensation and eliminates the l

types of loads encountered at Wurgassen.

21. Prior to SRV actuation, the steam discharge line contains air down to the water level. Upon SRV actuation, steam enters the line and compresses the air. As the water clears the discharge line, compressed air emerges into the pool, followed by steam. The air discharge phase is called the air clearing phase, and the steam discharge phase is called the condensation phase.

22. During air clearing, air enters the pool at a pressure substantially higher than the local hydrostatic pressure and forms a bubble adjacent to the quencher. The excess pressure causes the bubble to expand, giving an outward velocity to the water. Due to the inertia of the water, the bubble expands beyond its equilibrium volume at the local hydrostatic i

6 l

1 I

pressure, and is eventually driven back again compressing the air in the bubble. Thus the bubble oscillates, producing a periodic pressure history.

SRV Loads -

23. To determine the pressure on the pool boundary, which is the hydro-dynamic load on the containment, an extensive test program was undertaken by PP&L at the Karlstein test facility of Kraf twerk Union, the German firm with extensive experience in nuclear reactor steam discharge phenomena that designed the quencher. Tests were performed using an actual SSES steam relief valve, actual steam line diameters and line lengths, and an actual quencher. The water pool used in the te_:s was the same depth as the SSES pool, but the area was decreased to 1/16 of the SSES pool area, which is the pool area per SRV line. This corresponds to all sixteen valves actuating simultaneously, l

which is the case that gives the highest loads on the containment structure.

24. To permit calculations of containment response to proceed in parallel with the test program, KWU provided PP&L with an SRV load specifi-cation based on data taken by KWU in previous in-plant quencher tests. The load specification gives the pressure amplitude and distribution on the pool boundary, and the frequency range of the oscillations. The pressure measure-l ments obtained in the SSES quencher tests verified the validity of the load specification.

25. The test tank is shown in Figure 4. The tank contains concrete blocks to reduce the pool area to 1/16 of the SSES pool area. The quencher depth.is the same as in the SSES pool. The symbols PS.1, etc., refet to locations of pressure gages.

26. The tests covered the range of reactor operating conditions. The test matrix for the air clearing tests is shown in Figure 5; the test parameters are listed on the left. Tests were performed with the longest and shortest discharge lines, with different temperatures of the air in the discharge line (temperature affects the total air mass in the line),

different water levels in the discharge line, vacuum breaker open and closed, various pool temperatures, various steam pressures, and different numbers l of actuations. There were five repeat tests.

I 1

7 i

27. Figure 6 shows the reactor operating conditions in terms of reactor pressure and water pool temperature, together with the points for Test Group No. 1 from Figure 5. During reactor operation, only conditions within the operation field can be _ reached. The tests were designed to determine the hydrodynamic loads over the operation field.

28. Figure 7 shows the location of the condensation tests in the operation field. The solid lines extending upward and to the left indicate the loci of combinations of reactor pressure and pool temperatures that occur during a test. Thus, reactor pressure decreases and pool traperature increases. Tigure 8 indicates the different behaviors observed during the steam condensation tests.

29. The main data relating to hydrodynamic loads on the containment are the pressure measurements. The records shown in Figures 9 and 10 are typical of the data obtained. Figure 9 shows typical pressure histories for an air clearing test. The traces are for gages located throughout the pool (Figure 4). The peak overpressures are of the order of 1 bar (about 15 psig), and the main frequency is about 6 Hz.

30. Figure 10 shows 'typi' cal pressure history for a condensation test.

Figure 10a covers a long time period, Figures 10b to 10e show pressure histories on expanded time scales. The pressure amplitudes are small compared to those during air clearing.

31. For actuation of less than 16 valves, the pressure measurements must be adjusted for the larger area in the SSES pool to obtain the pool boundary pressures. This is done by a calculational method that was checked by tests in the SSES pool (see second paragraph below). The pressure histories on the pool boundary are used as input to a computer model of the containment, and the results of the calculations are compared with the allowable conditions to determine the safety margin.

32. In addition to the loads that occur on the pool boundary during air clearing, loads can also occur on submerged structures due to pressure gradients in the pool. When pressure gradients are present, one side of a structure experiences a higher pressure than the other side, and hence an unh lanced force results that must be sustained by the structure.

8

o .

33. A test program to measure loads on submerged structures for SRV discharge in the SSES pool was undertaken for PP&L by SRI. SRI designed a device, called a bubble source, that simulates SRV air clearing. The source was calibrated in the same tank in which the SRV discharge tests using the SSES quencher were performed. The cali-bration consisted of matching the peak pressure and oscillation frequency of the bubble source to the values observed during SRV discharge. This assured that the submerged structure loads found by using the bubble source in the SSES pool would be the same as would result from SRV air clearing. The similarity of the most severe pressure histories from SKV discharge in the Karlstein tank and the pressure history from the SRI source in the same tank is shown in Figure 11.

34. Eight tests were performed in the SSES pool with the SRI bubble source. Five tests were performed with one bubble, and three were per-formed with two bubbles. The loads on the submerged structures were well below the design loads.

35. These tests in the SSES pool provided an opportunity to check the accuracy of the frequency shift that occurs when SRV air clearing occurs in the SSES pool instead of the Karlstein tank. As can be seen in Figure 12, the measured oscillation frequencies in the SSES pool match the calculated frequencies yery well. The upper dot shows that the 6 Hz frequency of Figure 9 for the Karlstein tank shif ts to about 9 Hz in the SSES pool. The other dot at about 6 Hz corresponds to a frequency of 4 Hz in the Karlstein tank.

LOCA Phenomena

36. When it is desired to release steam from the reactor, it is done by actuating steam relief valves that allow steam to enter the water pool through discharge lines. A loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) is an unscheduled flow of water or steam from the reactor into the drywell, and then into the wetwell through the 87 downcomers shown in Figure 13. The cause of the opening through which the flow occurs is not defined, hence these are called " postulated breaks."

9

37. Of the postulated breaks, the one that produces the largest steam flow and hence the highest pressure in the containment is the design basis

, accident (DBA). The DBA for SSES is a postulated double ended rupture of a 28-inch diameter recirculation line. Such a break results in rapid pressurization of the drywell. This is accompanied by a downward accele-ration of the water in the downcomers, followed by discharge of air into the water at the downcomer exit plane and an upward motion of the water above the downcomer exit plane. The upward motion of the water continues until air breaks through the water layer; the water then falls back to rejoin the water below the downcomer exit plane. This phase is called " pool swell."

38. During and af ter pool swell, the flow through the downcomers decreases in air content and increases in steam content. The steam condenses as it contacts the water, and the air forms small bubbles that rise to the surface in the pool. The flow into the pool continues antil the pressure in the drywell decreases to the water pressure at the downcomer exit plane.

The phase following pool swell is called the condensation phase.

LOCA Loads

39. Loads on the containment during pool swell were investigated by SRI under the auspices of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), of which PP&L is a member. The apparatus used was a 1/13.3 scale model of a quadrant of the Mk II suppression pool, shown in Figure 14. In these tests, the critical load on the containment is the differential pressure across the diaphragm slab. Figure 15 shows the drywell and wetwell pressures, and Figure 16 shows the differential pressure. The critial loads occur when the differential pressure on the diaphragm slab is maximum downward and upward, corresponding to the maximum and minimum in Figure 16. Analyses of the containment show that at these points the stresses are within the allowable range.

40. As with the SRV discharge, a single cell approach was used to determine LOCA loads (pool swell and condensation) in full-scale tests.

Figure 13 shows a horizontal cross section of the SSES pool. The 87 downcomers are distributed reasonably uniformly, hence to examine LOCA 10

l loads we. may allocate to each downcomer a certain area of the pool.

Such an allocation is shown in Figure 17. The smallest pool area results in the highest LOCA loads, hence the smallest pool area is used in the single cell approach. The drywell volume for the single cell is taken as the same fraction of the total drywell volume as the single cell pool area is of the total pool area.

41. With the single cell pool area and drywell volume determined, the apparatus shown in Figure 18a and 18b was constructed. Except for the reduced area, everything is prototypical of SSES. The downcomer is the same size as in the plant, the water depth is the same, etc. Tests were performed with this apparatus by flowing into the drywell 1/87 of the flow that would result from the DBA in the plant. This is the fraction that would flow through each of the 87 downcomers. Measurements vera made of the pressures in the drywell, wetwell air space, and wetwell water space.

These measurements give c.he loads on the containment.

42. From the pressure measurements a load specification was derived

! that is used in calculating containment response. The c.ritica1 aspect of the load for containment integrity is the pressure buildup in the drywell ano the wetwell. As an indication of the safety margin in strength i of the containment, the measured pressure buildup is compared below with the containse t test pressure.

43. The matrix for the LOCA tests is shown in Figure 19. A total l of 22 tests (11 test conditions, 2 tests each) were performed covering a range of pool temperatures and steam flows. In particular, break sizes correspond to the design basis accident, here called recirculation line (RCL) break, the main steam line (MSL) break, and 1/3 MSL and 1/6 MSL breaks. Other break sizes result in combinacions of pool temperatures and steam flow that are reasonably close to the values that occur in these tests.

44. The other main parameter is pool temperature, which ranges from 75 to 130*F. Drywell air content was varied to show the effect of reduced air content on LOCA phenomena.

11

(.---.-.-.. , . - - - _ , , _ - , . , _ _ _ _ , , , - _ . _ _ , . _ _ _ , -. . _ _ , , _ _ _. _,-._ - -

45. The steam flow was designed to be 1/87 of the calculated flow from the reactor vessel for the given break .ize. Good repeatability was achieved, as shown for RCL tests 1 and 2 __ Figure 20. The steam mass flows for the other breaks are shown in Figure 21.

46. The pool pressure at gage P6.4 for Test 5 is shown in Figure 22.

Gage P6.4 is located near the end of the downcomer, where condensation occurs, and is in the region where the pressure is highest (Figure 18b). Test 5 was chosen because it gave high pool pressurea; it was also one of the large breaks (Figure 21) . The top trace in Figure 22 gives the pressure history for the entire test ti=e. The bottom two traces are on an expanded time scale to show the details of the pressure variation. We see

hat about every second the prescure exhibits a decrease, followed by a sharp rise and a damped oscillation. The successive pressure signals at one second intervals correspond to the frequency of condensation events at the downcomer exit. A condensation event consists of several stages:

[

(1) the growth of a steam bubble at the end of the downcomer, (2) rapid condensation of the steam bubble (pressure decrease), and (3) collapse of the surrounding water into the steam cavity (pressure rise). The damped oscillation is due to pressure oscillations excited in the pool and in the downcomer air by the collapse.

47. The pressure histories for the wetwell air space and the drywell during an RCL break are shown in Figure 23. The wetwell pressure rises to 1.74 bars (25.2 psig) and the drywell pressure rises to 2.60 bars (37.7 psig). The RCL break produces the most rapid flow of steam into the drywell, and the drywell and wetwe11 pressures for the RCL break are greater than for smaller breaks.

Comparison of Hydrodynamic Loads with Containment Design Capacity and Test Level

48. SRV discharge produces pressure loads on the pool boundary.

LOCA produces pressure loads in the drywell, in the wetwell air space, and on the pool boundary. Computer code calculations show that the combined 12

_ . - . - . - _ , .~ _ , _ _ - _ _ . . _ . _ __ __ _ ._

i .

SRV and LOCA loads (pressure and frequency) acting on the containment produce stresses in the containment that are within the design values.

49. Moreover, the design pressure for the containment is 53 psig for both the wetwell and the drywell. The SSES containment has already been tested by pressurizing it to 61 psig with air, which is more than 50% greater than the pressure of 37.7 psig produced in the containment by an RCL break (Figure 23).

50. I conclude that the SSES containment can withstand the hydro-dynamic loads from SRV discharge and LOCA with ample safety margin.

& #,e b $ $ Y u m George ll. Abrahamson Subscribed and sworn to before me this J/' day of 4, 1981.

r r

. . .n ,e blG r Notary Public go:v: r:ecco:n y x:c:x:e:o::co:x:co:g l

rs - OFF'CI AL SE AL -

q M cRS JUNE 1 WILSON  :-

' norm resuc cAumm h

> %4f%f sm rutto county -

i 8

m, cc >u;oa f.un u, 2. im N

%w:ccxxxxx:cco:xx.ux:ccxx:co:x'.1 l

13 1

Appendix A SSES LICENSING BASIS

1. Mark II containment - Supporting Prograa ,

Task Number Activity Activity Tvve Documentation A.1 "41" Test Program Phase I Test Report ND0/NEDE 13442-P-01 Phase I Appl Memo Application Memo N ee II & III Test Rept NED0/NEDE 13468-P Application Memorandua NED0/NEDE 23678-P A.2 Fool Swell Model Report Model Report NED0/NEDE 21544-p A.3 Impact Tests PSTF 1/3 Scale Testa NED0/NC E 13426-P Mark I 1/12 Scale Tests NED0/NC E 20989-2P A.4 Impact Model

• PSTF 1/3 Scale Tests NEDO/NEDE 13426-P A.5 Ioads on Submerged 14CA/RH Air Bubble Model NED0/NEDE 21471-P.

Structures IDCA/RH Water Jet Model NED0/NEDE 21472-P A.6 Chugging Analysis and Single Call Report NED0/NEDE 23703-P Testing 4T TS1 Report NED0/ND E 23710-P A.9 EPRI Test Evaluation EPRI - 4T Comparison NEDO 21667 EPRI 1/13 Scale Tests 3D Tests EPRI NP-441 EPRI Single Call Tests Unit Cell Tests EPRI Report A.11 Multivent Subscale Testing Preliminary MV Pros Plan NEDO 23697 and Analysis MV Test Program Plan & Proc. NEDO 23697 Rev 1

- Phase I h oe I Test Report Report MV Test Prog Plan & Proc. NEDO 23697. Rev. 1 Supp. 1

- Phase II Phase II Test Report Report CONMAP Tests Report MHM verification 1/10 Scale NEDE 23116-P A.13 Single Vent Lateral 14 ads Dyn aic Analysis NEDO 24106-P Summary Report NC E 23806-P Summary Report (Extension) Report i

C.1 DFTR Revisions Revision 3 NED0/NDE 21061-P Rev. 3 C.3 NRC Round 1 Questions DTTR Rev. 2 NED0/NEDE 21061-P Rev. 2 DFTR Rev. 2 a==M ==nc 1 ND0/NEDE 21061-P Rev. 2 Amend. 1 DITTR Rev. 3 Appendix A NED0/NEDE 21061-P Rev. 3 Appendix A C.5 SRSS Justification Interia Report (NDE 24010)

SRSS Report NED0/NEL?. 24010-P SRSS Exec. Report Summary Report SRSS Criteria Appl. NED0/NEDE 24010-P Suppl. 1 SRSS 3ases NED0/NEDE 24010-P Suppl. 2 SRSS Justification Suppl. Report C.6 NRC Round 2 Questions DFFR Amendment 2 NED0/NEDE 21061-P Rev. 2 Amend. 2 DFTR Amend 2, Suppl 1 NDO/NC E 21061-P Rev. 2 Amend. 2. Supp. 1 DTTR Amend 2, Suppl 2 NED0/ND E 21061-P Rev. 2 Amend. 2. Supp. 2 DTTR Rev. 3, Appendix A NED0/NDE 21061-P Rev. 3 Appendix A C.7 Justification of "41" Chugging loads NDC/NEDE 23617-P Bounding I. cads Jus tif'. cation NED0/NC E 24013-P NCO/ND E 24014-P ND 0/NEDE 24015-P NED0/NEDE 24016-P NED0/NEDE 24017-P NCO/NDE 23627-P 0nly part of this report used as licensing basis.

14

v Appendix A (ccatinued)

Task Numb-r Actiview Activity T m Documentatien C.8 S/RV and Chugging Prestressed Concrete TSI Reinforced Concrete NED0/NEDE 21936-P Steel C.13 Load Combination & Criteria Justification NEDO 21983 Functional Capability Criteria C.14 NRC Round 3 Questions Letter Report Letter Report Dry 1. Rev. 3 Appendix A NED0/NEDE 21061-P Rev.3. Appendix A C.15 Submerged Structure Criteria NRC Question E.esponses Letter Report II. KWU Reports Document Number Title Documentation 1 Formation and oscillation of a spherical gas bubble AEG - Report 2241 1 Analytical model for clarification of pressure pulsation in the wetwell after vent cleaning AEG - Report 2208 3 Tests on zixed condensation with model quenchers KWV - Report 2593 4 Condens tion and vent cleaning tests at GEM with quenchers KWV - Report 2594 5 Concept and design of the pressure relief system with quenchers KWV - Report 2703 6 KK3 vent clearing with quencher KWV - Report 2796 7 Tests on condensation with quenchers when submergence of quencher arms is shallow KWV - Report 2840 8 KK3 - Concept and task of pressure relief system KWV - Report 2371 9 Experimental approach to vent clearing in a model tank KWV - Report 3129 10 KK3 - Specification of blevdown tests during non-nuclear hot functional test - Rev. 1 dated October 4. 1974 M /V 822 Report 11 Anticipated data for blowdown tests with pressure relief systes during the non-nuclear hot functional test at nuclear power station Brunabuttal (KK3) KWU - Report 3141 12 Results of the non-nuclear hot functional tests with the pressure relief system in the nuclear power station Brunsbuttel M - Report 3267 i

13 Analysis of the loads asasured on the pressure relief system during the non-nuclear hot functional test at KK3 M - Report 3346 14 KK3 - Listing of test parameters and important test data of the non-nuclear hot functional tests with the pressure relief systen KWU - Working Report R 521/40/77 j

! 15 KK3 - Specification of additional tests for testing of the-pressure relief valves during the nuclear startup, Rev. 1 KWU/V 822 TA 16 KK3 - Results from nuclear startup testing of pressure relief system KWU - Working Report R 142-136/76 17 Nuclear Power Station Phillipsburg Unit 1 Hot Anctional Test: Specification of pressure relief valve tests as well l as emergency cooling and wetwell cooling system KWU/V 822/RT 13 1

1 18 Results of the non-nuclear hot functional tests with the pressure relief system in the nuclear power station Ph1111psturg KWF - Working impcet l

R 142-38/77 l

l l

i i 15 l

v .. - . . . . . . -- . .-, >

.= . _ .

Appendix A (cmcluded)

Document Number Title Documentation 19 KIFI - Listing of test parameters and important test data of the non-nuclear hot functional tests with the pressure relief systes KWU - Working Report 1 521/41/77 20 Air oscillations during vent clearing with single and double pipes AEG - Report 2327 l

t e

16

I i

i Drywell Head e.c I a.-

tl ed .

(# 'YT tl U 0 $> .

1 ,

.L' ' ..

~ *=

.y.?l.- -

s

,- a

, . Reactor  :

• i; Vessel '.

. n,s ..

87'- 9" l .

,r ' , - ..

i

• • Drywell

,. ;.e h

(, ,

. . .o

. *~

h... - a_

. Downcomer . .t,.

"' Jet Deflector " -

t '.' Shield '? .'. , Diaphragm ,

. ' . Slab  :.

,,. / s .

I I

a

• 9 ..:.

~.- . _, . .. . . . . . .

3 .r .\ 3'- s~

K' SRV .. .Y 00WNCOMER ..-.

1. Dischargs l*l (87 Total) .: Line ,,

N. ..

i. --p

,s

,- ,C p.

' . 52'- 6" 63*- 9" QUENCHER ..- r I

' /. e y '

i3 (16 Total) L **' I ', ',

~ i

- I' i 24 ft

, ,. 5$

{!* **

. l High *d Ed ji,*

-~

f-YC 7 Water . l[

I s .-

g ss .

tu c.I

..e a, - . . .

i,'; ,* -,7-Y ~ *~

l l ho Il T, .. . ..

!s .. i.'..,.-

wl. , , . !i l

, ,7. ga

. L.>

. . . . . . = -:, . [

. . , *a..

,. , . - . f .Q . t ,

,,. , x, . , . ,

j,,p,- , _ , , . .< 4-

- Bottom of

' )

0.D. Conc. Base Mat i El* 640'- 3"

• 30'- 0" R.- 44*- 0" R. 'l I i c 88'- 0" ,

~,

1.0. Conc. 6'- 0" M A-5881-332 l FIGURE 1 CROSS SECTION OF CONTAINMENT 17

_ _ _ . _. _ -. .. ~ . . . . .-_. . _ . . .

345* 15'

\ r* *** s .

, t ; ;.. i: .

. . s .\ ~ ,. .

.* . e 315* o. '. f '

- \ '

/ ..', 45 N .' , s ,, /

'- 'K 88 ft '~ Typical %o 300* /p

[ ' , - {, 60*

a

, H% ._ G N E 285* *

.' , 75*

'./

a. - , ,.

I .," - B. ,' o*< , . ,A \

S Lf N /

-[ *-

270

_) .

~

,r gg gz- l o. ,

-l

~

90

- ,7 . .. % }C  :

g ,

p ~-

~

,.\s,' / .

a 255 *. N -

29it 105 42 h l . '.

\ ,

/D , 3N '

240 ,

, /.--- -

.** 120

.. - =,

j S ,-

/,, *

.i.**

. e. . . .

135 225a /

.s' . *; .'s '

• sl.:.t.i. *

~ . a.

. t.

/ \

i 195 180 M A-5881-333 FIGURE 2 QUENCHER DISTRIBUTION 18

- _ . . _ = - .-

i

. -- a .

4

[ '

\ /

.  !, i --!

L .. . ,

\ l /  % 4' fp g -

e T._ ,

) Q,}

l

.- 355 -

i 1 e ' .%ts 2988 NOTE: All dimensions in mm. M A.5881-334 FIGURE 3 SSES QUENCHER 19 1

_ . . _ _ . _ . . , _ - _ - _- , _ . _ . . - , . , . . _ _ , _ . . . _ _ . _ .. _ _ ~ . _ _

y oncrete C Elements Ag

/

. . n.t. * *

• fl ' . . ..

'.-n . .

.; l .

e

- jl( .

.. i l' i

. ~l .

!t l .  !

. . i / ..

• . .'. n. C .. M V.. .

..'Vl.x.:. .:.

(.s ,.: .I e s l l. / i .

hN

\ lh: /:!l I'# . '

\ 1 g

9 7-- 4 ,=g WF$bi-.n h-. 7 4 .L.T 5

' ' j D

(

y / inhW 1

n.  ; . <

/

-p ,, ns ,.

tj'h' i il 'd. .'n;,%., p. " 'nio

- s 9 \ ummy

• • l .] i k *w D

• e. * .*

., J gga Vent Pipe c.w:}.e-Mi LT Gage PS.10

,I I L' 276C 260 Dimensions in Millimeters

""t* .., Y l* I {

l I

- f .

[

I

- f i I

' i l I I

..i.

I

.i I

. N. A.

.o... .

smin.

O .'..

I

- . . .Ht ;.,b-i O

• l 4

• l*I

. j*,

l

,,

• _ Dummy

_ -s ]- ,  !

e l

g -l >

_ Vent Pipe

,.. i

. ...l. .

j . . .

, o -

I . . .. , -

• ~ * '.

n I

. . i.

.' . ' .n.. *. , . * . .n .

I i, I *

e. *- *.. Gage PS.10

_I , ,-

• . , ,l'..I*

, , d l l *

• E

. ,l';Ll_ , . . *

• ". \-Q 3

C j'ig - m/ (_

_ w' _ -.y .. ,.: o ,L .

• h I 0, .' .* , * .f $ .." . * *. *

,' l

r. , ..#

• El m l

I

/

SSES Prototype Quencher M A-5881-114 A FIGURE 4 KARLSTEIN TEST TANK l

l 20

l l

r l

l 1

l l

, PP8L-Ouencher Verification Tests l

-Testmatrix for the Air Clearing Tests-Test tbmber 1 2 3'4 5 6 7 8 9 10111 12 13 14 15 16'17 18'1912021t2223124 252627t28293031G2

Discharge long * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• Line short ** ** * * * * * * * *

• Dscharge Line 50*C * * * * * * * * * * * * * **** * * * * * * * * * * *

• Ar Terrcerature 90*C **

• Woler Leveln normal * * * * ** * * * ** * * * * * * ** * * *** * * *

• the OschargelJne low ** *

• Vacuum unlocked ** * * * * * * * *!* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

! Brecker No2 locked * * *

! 24*C * * * * * * ** * * * * * *

• pg 45'C * * * * *

• 55*C l * * * *

• Terrpercture '

68 T * *

• 82*C * *

• i 22.5ber * * * * * -

Steam I

45.0bor * * * *

• Accumulator 700 bar * * *

• 800bor * * * * * * * '

7 7' 7 7 0% l 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1(111112' Repetition Tests * * * *

• omitteo

• 1 Test Group Number 1 2 3 4 5 l 5 S EUUZ70,@L,vo. O U E**

• These tests were not performed because sufficient data were obtained '

from the other tests in the matrix.

l MA-6881-33 5 FIGURE 5 TEST MATRIX FOR AIR CLEARING TESTS 21 l

]l 100 -

93 C a 200 F O Two Actuations (first clean, second real) 90 - l g 9 Multiple Actuaticns 4

(first clean, subsequent real) a:i 80 - <u 9 o 3 a

8 w

l 70 - -

e 8 3

$ 60 -

y 55 C a 130*F ,

N Y7 6 m a 50 - - ^

@ 5 8

• 8

<a 85 8 40 - 2 .s Operation Field

• E 8 o

= 8~

30 -

24 C a 75 F 1 2 3 4 v -

20 -

/-.

I . i i i i i i . 4 m

, 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 l REACTOR PRESSURE - bar M A-5881-336 FIGURE 6 LOCATION OF TEST GROUP No.1 IN THE OPERATION FIELD 22

100 -

93 +\40

a 200 F 90 - N 87 --

5

$ \

\

80 - .I N.

70 -

m N 5  %

E Test No.

55 C a 130 F l \ 37 w -

l o

50 - - E 2 8 E 8 8 Cll cli 40 - = =

Operation Field E E 8

o 8 n

~

30 - ~

24 e_ # _!__.__

J __.

20 - 36 35 34 33

! > . . . 4 i i 4 4 4 1 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 l REACTOR PRESSURE - bar i

i l

MA-5881-337 i

FIGURE 7 LOCATION OF CONDENSATION TESTS IN THE OPERATION FIELD 23

a 100. psia a 100,0 psia a 1300 psia f 1 i Condensation inside the Pipe -

100 - f Intermittent Condensation p

,- Stationary Condensation =

r.- s-+- a 200 F 90 - ~- , . a 1

ca A 401 <-  : '5-q-N

- -% vr-c .,

80 ..~.-

n.

-:-c+;s 39.1

. .- +. ~.> .A..-%. -%.

c.: . . . . . . .

m ...cf, s.. . _..~. . %,. -_ . . . . . . . . - . . . . .

H . .# -: .; . . . . .. . . . .. -, N.

N. c.- ......-s, w

. .. . . . ~ . ~ . - ...%..~

...~.

M ..%.~>c....u....~.%... -

......c,-..c.~.- . .-~.. .

.u- ...u..~~..-

3 . . .

& ..~..%. ....... . . s s. .s

. . .-s.. s .. -

.~ -..,.~.. . . ~ . .. ~% ...s..... est 0,

. r x .~. .. ...... .~. ....~ -r... . u..........

,..u.

.. . u. .-

w a-

, v. s-

< c-

..-~.~,c.....

_s

- ..s-v

.c

,. _ .~.c.

. ..--v .. -- -

37.2 a o w  %< - -,Jct:5.- 5. 55555: - - . . c:5 c.

-5>55:55555:.255> . . 55 .5>:U: . .-

w x

m

+

50 ...

... ...............................->51..

. . ~

erat. son .le

.~. -- .. .......

--~

4 --~ ..--- -.. c. - .v u-3 :g -. .v.~ . -%

3; 40_ % ::5-c55,3@_...,. uy . ,.c +...,- ..,. ,_.., ,_.

% -: 55555-r+ , .v. .c.

5555

- .. . . -l a .3.s-b .v. .e. _v..-..

. - .c......

o .. .. . . .. . - . . < ...

. .- . est 0:-

a .u-... . ..-...:..~....u...... . .~..~.. . .-

.-..%.. . . .=. -.%. .. ..:-

.- - . . .....%.=..:.-

l a- -

. ~ . . .-.- -. . .

. .-. . ~ ... .. .. .-- -_ -. . ~ . . . . ~

3R1.

.- ~ ... . .

uv . . . - : -

. - ..us . .*...

z -

- . . - . =

.s=.-

O,,. . . - .,.u~.... -

. ._.. _. _ _. - . . . . . . - .-. --._ . ~ . ._......_~.

.,,_. - . a ._... _ ._ _._.

f.o .

.. . o

[

co -

_ .a w

w t

x en

a. tu _

Q.

5j ,

Stationary Condensation -

10-[ . , . _

Interrnittent Condensation k Condensation Inside the Pipe 0 . . . . . . . . .

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 ABSOLUTE SYSTEM PRESSURE P2.6 - bar MA-58b1-338

, FIGURE 8 OBSERVED CONDENSATION PHASES DURING TESTS I

i l

i f

4 W

. ', - . . . . : . - . _\ . . . . . .: . . : ::: .

.- -- - . ---

• P ;t;;;"_- : . r - ? : : . . --;- . -

p.:: .. - -

l - ;.;; ; r.::t. r.e L

, =x. .* .: 27.:.1: r .

g ,  ;. _. .g

- - . ._ ;.. ,g_1 s

. .g;. - . .; .2: .g . .

,,_4 _.

< =.- x n:.: W. . : _

.:= -  :

- - . ..- --A . . . :A. :

1 -- .

w q. r , , LA- - - %

f-

.7'.... - . . .. .. . _ t ..

.. . _ . . . .. 9

..-- M. . . . . A .--  :.-: yr . . . -. - ., p

.. A

-...V.--

. :. . f_. _..:.%. _N__ .. .=:---:__2/_L-:.%. Q[

. _.. . . . .  : . %. *-s.

.~.:.-..----- .z.. .:,: . : - ; ._ . _.=. _. . ~ . c -- s  :. . . _ _ . - - --.

w --- . . _ . - < -. _..._. . _.. . . . -. _.. ~_~a - '4 .::.Zl t.: . .. . ... . . A.

.4

. . . ~.-a..__

,. .i . _

.. q_: &. ; M ..

'-*G

• 4 . = .

• ~

.}~~-%~

• J .......J=~.

. ;_ _., ,g.. .-* --

. .}_ ~q_. Q "--]I:-

'-s_...'_-.... .:.

-'. - ?

~- *

-s.*.-_.-'.- _...:__._._C2_.._---*-

1-2_._ :. . _- . . _ . ... :. _ _ - _

_ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . ___- ,_ _._q..__y .. .._ _ .,_

r _ . .-_,_ . . . __ ___

.._ . . . . _ _ _ . A_,

___.... ._, c._.- . - .L...__._.A. _

'~ ~'~~~' ._..-.4 W =~;.: M :-.--L?

_ M .:=....';,e M .=.y n --- x

• .- .; .~ - - ._;: ,2 . .~

.. ........_a ..._ _ .. ._ g . .

_ . .m. _ . : - = 2_\_ . r- _-- __2y. y _.k___.=. ..d ; / N3 .r. wmt.

, ,, . . ,_ m

- ~

= .. ;r _-- .M._- : . - - -

w._ _q _ W_U.= _ - r. N.;,; .---/'_. /--A(=f54* r:_.-A: --_X

~. k._M..: : .;;r. -

,_, .._m. ,

_ _ ..___ _..g _

_ _ . . ._ _ _.__wmre_+.ee_

...-6

-gm W ._- . _ _ . ._ 6, ..._ . . _ - . . . _ . .. _ _-.,_.___ _ . w __ _ .

. g._ e

) h a t -. :.====-

-= - - - - -

_ p)q

--- ~~ /:.:=M ,  ; _s.

. . _ _ . .__ _ J- ~~--M_:- - ~~ ..;____

_ . =:: .=. t f.. .___. $.__.Q~ 9. ,, .__:r: f. *= --, , . _ , _

- p __...= . . - - - - . = _ .=: : : = .- .-- c 7, := _. _ . ._

. , /..: _... .:: :=: - =.- ._ _._.= =:ww = . w-:-2._. - .:.:_. :. .==. .+.::y=.:=. =- = ==.:-=-

... .m . -m.n _:.

%...-* -- *:: .i., ._.:'- -  :. ~ : - :L. . .k .- :..:. :::. : L;: .

/*.* . *

.: ="-... - * --'- "_. _ _- .

• O*.: .. -

L-.% *.T: ' T _ :-- . . = . -....~:1-..-- 2.. .f.L I. "..:=. - * --* . . . .-  :.-"

TIME M A-6881-339 A FIGURE 9 AIR CLEARING TEST 25.1 VISICORDER TRACE GAGES, P5.1-PS.10 25 y -

-,y_ y,w ,, , n-

t 9 -

? O 4

e . 1

.z:  :

- : : Test S tart . .- __... - _ .

..--.~=-~~..-.:-.-

=

r ._:_.. se .: :. . . =. :.:. ..---__...._._.....:....:..:u. _ . . _ .~. - : - v: - . . -~.Test

.. . . E.1. nd - .

.4 u f ..

..;.~- _. ... _ . - . _:._ . ;..=. . . : :.:.:.,_._..

. = _ - -::.:.:.:.- . - - .::---.:

.:: = . -:::.. _- . : _:. y

..u. .t . . . ,. .- : . m. : J . .: . . .- . . - : . - : . . .:.-

._=-=.:.~_.=_.-.....:.::2,-...:,y,,y.,,......-.

m_... --

~ . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . .

m.. . . ..

=== , :: - _

.- =:

.-u

_: a _:.n . -.:. 9. _:.:.=:::

. =: : . : n  :..:. :.~b: :, .n : y -l:.:

. =: ... .. ~-- -- ..:.- m - -- .

- u.- - -: ..- -

. :. r.c'. - - - -

_.s ._e3: -. . .. . . .. .

.a -.u

,,.a,,

Tr:': :g- :- " " *r - "' ~ ~:~*'-- - T- ~

Q- ".'~ ::- 2. --#: "~~--- - :. :- .: :-*. f 7 % .2

. . . .:.=- - .-- . ..:.~ : . - .- --~ c

.h..-... -

= :-l ;-:-;' .:. r . --Y . . ~ A = ,,--b : n , - =--- - + - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -

61 - .

..._c..._..,.__.. ..

Phase of intermittent Condensation Time Axis +

M A-5881-340A FIGURE 10a CONDENSATION TEST 36.1 VISICORDER TRACE SHOWING INTERMITTENT OPERATION QUENCHER 26

s. - . - , . . , , , - - , . .-g - - , w ---- - .

1_ _

.._.._.e

.v._..______.. _ . ... _.. _ . , .... ._- ... . _ ._. .

_._A..,_.__ _

..._.._ . _ . .. h._ . . ..

__.h_

A_....__...._ _ . _ . __ _.. .__ .. .. . __ . . . .. .. .. _ . _ . . . .. __ .. _. ..._ .. . . _ . . . _ . . . . .. .

__.. . . . . . . ._. .. _. _. _. .. ..- _. _- .___m

= _ . _

4__

. _ . . .... _..- c._.

Time Axis MA-5881-341 A FIGURE 10b CONDENSATION TEST 36.1 VISICORDER TRACE SHOWING 8':OERPT FROM INTERMITTENT OPERATION OF QUENCHER 280 seconds after start.

I 27

Test Start

_ - _ _ _ _ - A .__ _ ~ __

~__ -. NA-e -' -

"~

Wn = . -

~

_ __ 4

=

. -- - _ : -. ~~~' W - _  :

~ ^^^

_':_..--.- ~ = . - - .

^

. - _ _ . - - _ - . ~ - - -. __ -..-_. .-

-.g_ _

l Time Axis @-

M A-5881-342A l

FIGURE 10c CONDENSATION TEST 36.1 VISICORDER TRACE SHOWING SINGLE EVENT FROM INTERMITTENT OPERATION OF QUENCHER l

l l

l 28 l

_ , . . -- .we

o *

...~.~..'....__.n~j,..

m T. .

- _7 _-- _-- - ---__ _ _

-m e.. .. . ..-.. _ . .. -- . . ..

W

. . . .. _e_. - _ . . . --.... .

^

^' ~_^. _ , ' "' _ , , _ ,_ ," ~

_ - , , ,w _-. _

^^

- - , ~ , ' , __., _ ,-

^^ ~

A e . -- .. . . - - - -

- _ --:--- -q----_. -~~~-

-__ - --__-_--- - ~-

-2

. -. ... . . . . .. . .. . e.

m -_ -_---.u-- --

_2 _

.. . . . -. - . ...... . . . . _ .. . .-e__.

.. ._ . ..... e.

e . e,

..e.. . .. . .

e.e.

- .. - __-- ... -"w ' ' -

__. ' - .e__.. -.......___-

-..-e--.e-- _

. ...e. ... . ...-.._...

.. . _. ...._.... . .,e

_ - em.* *

.Me.e... h em. . . e M .

. h w ee

. 4. ee. g m g,.e w.

..gmgge..e.ge.. p

=

. . .6 68 . .6*=

-.6 6

6 N

6.e@e_*.eh.. . 6m_ee. . , * -e. . . e..

,. .... ew e.,,_p . . ..e e e. . e w g. e.-

8 .= 6 WM.=m* 6ew e.

e.e'.e...4.me6- ..N

• e

...e me e .

.- . . , ...mm..

e..e . ...6-6M

+e ..eha. .6we e -

w . w ...eMmem****.-O.N*N'*-.N.e'

_l..'*.6w.

a .

e. N

. e. h en

_e . * - -e.

g . . ..B.*N_.h. . . .ee 6.

e e u.a M. w.-.

4M

--.h

. .=eaee.e..

. w w.e e

• m

.N.ew ee -.m.l.N - e-e . =am.

.m.m...ee..e.wmge e.e.h..me*-.m.ee"*-**'. < * - * * - -

e. m N #6 . . .

.e..e..

.= . ...

w.. N e ..

= S. . e -

M e .6-ph.. me

. m m e.w...e 6m.6.m 6.m..e...g.e.6.e

.s e mM . + . w e6_ e .

• % .6m.6em 6 mhe:- -_ . _ . . .

g ----- ..

e_- . e.e e_.._e._ .-- -- -

__W.. =e. . _ .ap.

i

e. ee e h.. .m N =.e.=_m> $. .

.e W

..a

.m.

-Neeem um .m. s m 6

Time Axis +

M A-5881 343 A FIGURE 10d CONDENSATION TEST 37.2 TYPICAL VISICORDER TRACE OF STATIONARY OPERATION OF QUENCHER 13 seconds after start.

9 29

i.

Time Axis +

M A-5881-344 A i

t i

FIGURE 10e CONDENSATION TEST 39.1 TYPICAL VISICORDER TRACE OF STATIONARY l

OPERATION OF QUENCHER 1

10 seconds after start.

~

30

I I i i i i i i i Bubble Test K-5 S

\ /Tv A e y v Guencher Test 25.R2 A M b A /

" V V U U Quencher Test 37.2

-A M N A /

w y V v i i i i i  ! i i i M A-5881-1288 FIGURE 11 COMPARISON OF BUBBLE AND QUENCHER PRESSURE TRACES FROM GAGE PS.10 t

h 31

)

1 l

t l

l l

12 j j i e Single Bubble Tests

! g 10 -

y8 -

1 Quencher (bubble at an outer quencher) -

z 6 Quenchers ADS Case (bubble at quencher A) 6 Quenchers (bubble at quencher B)

@6 w

c-I

u. N

- 4 a

_ *w -

o

c. 2 - -

l l - -

0 O 1 2 3 4 EQUILIBRIUM BUBBLE VOLUME - m3 M A-Sa?1-1178 FIGURE 12 COMPARISON OF ME/ SURED AND CALCULATED BUBBLE FREQUENCIES 1

l 32

.m.

l f s C

/ ontainment g Will O O O ,

O O o O oowncomer% O Oe 8'"*i"9 (Tva-)

O O OOO 0A%O 000 0O

@o8B

=Q=Q g' o i Quenchers O O"OO c OO O O O OO O& aq( PQ q o .i OOgo g ,,nc,m,r, cu,umn,q o O O O SF q O ho O Po O

O O O O hs,,,,,n O

Ooo Oo oO O w ns l

NOTE: Downcomer bracing is only partially shown in the interest of clarity.

Letters indicate SRV quenchers.

MA-Sa81-345A FIGURE 13 CROSS SECTION OF SSES POOL SHOWING DOWNCOMERS l

33

10 1.75",00 2.0" TYP.

O OO O

O O

(

O 0 o O O O o O

. O OO o O O O

i n O m ,c l

1 3 l 26.2 f1

..g f -

Dryweii 4 fnn nn , j

- i l 16.7 cu. ft.Wevell 1 l

l

'-(includes 0.9 ft3 f s- inside Pedestal) ,

? l I i; i .__:N

' ~ "

I i k '

• Pedestal 1

h j = Pool Level  ;

~~

l h h (3) 1-3/4" I

Dia. Holes S

l -:C with 7/8"

$ {

"~~

.  ! l Orifices

F-

l' 6

m E i

)

l } .. .T j i , 3-7/8" l T- i, r/ w w w / w a w w w w ww/ w//m/Wa j 1-3/4"10 x 2 00 ! Column 8-13/16" R.

Downcomers 3-1/8"00 13-7/16" R. !

39-3/4" R.

S A-4738-10 l FIGURE 14 1/13.3-SCALE MARK II MODEL I l i

34 l

l l

t

4.0 3.5 DRYWELL g /

3,o xNs# pr I \ /

f l  %/

2.5 '

/ /

s 4

/ /

$ 2.0

/ /

i / e /

e 1.5 y l N/ g

/ I s#

1.0 0.5 N

5 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 '

TIME (sec)

PRESSURE HISTORIES M A-5881-3 J1 FIGURE 15 RESULTS FROM TEST 72 35

G O 2.5 ,

2.0 1.5 /

/ \

1 1 E 1.0 j,

/ g a / \

E.

% 0.5 s / \\ /T 0 / 4 f

l

-0.5 0

5

-1.0 "

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 TIME (sec)

PRESSURE DIFFERENTI AL OF DRYWELL TO WETWELL M A-5881-354 FIGURE 16 RESULTS FROM TEST 72 36

l t

l

.. . . ' , . ,~ SSES - Single Cell at the Cantainment Wall

\ -

.' 3.7 m2

~ ~

.a -

.. .>. rg

%\i 'p~ ~

v 9-i W, .$

R

.,-. %J l NJ K .', o l e,,',** ' - i '

I A . , . . ,

l TM- -

' i' .-,..:

. =e*

8 ,* , . .

8 * ,I ,

M A-5881-346 FIGURE 17 ALLOCATION OF POOL AREA TO DOWNCOMERS l

I i

l I

i l

l 37

0 0 {

mgo 3_

a' 5

3 8

2 .

a ,

r _

0 .

0 1

8 _

mgo o p 0

6 4

=

r }'

= :

_' =

[

j -

0~

0 6

1

~

\

\ /

u gmm o b

7 8

5 a.

2 4 5

g 0

- 6 7

- M$ 3 1

l 9 - ,

2

. 0

~ I E . 5 2

= 2 5 1 7

4 I

2

!- = _

'0 2

2 3

=

rp -

1

_ 0 7

6 7, 3 2 3 9 3 0

1 3 e0 1 6

3 8 .

3 f _

_ =

=

N '+-

myo 0 1

d 8 5 . o g..a o s 33.

g aayW" 3ocg g* gzo m re- h s n.C . j-u" 1 a4 ,1

- l1 .>j '

,;,,l ;i4 J

Legend. P Pressure tnrs.1cer l ,

Th ._gp 55 CG Disosecement Gage LP Levet Proce -

LC Lood Cell l 1 ,

SG Stron Gege 4 b -

AF At Fre:tien U U l AG ACCelerorreter Ocge j C l

g <-LPia HCG &2 3 N 0056{

cp63 CGEh -

-LPi3 l t '

n I i e .< 8

{  ! . P 15 T 50 i

-LPS2]

e I

j j l gf

! N T 6.1 G i .

.LP55)

" g l l

--e AG 6 2

--L C &1

- ~ ~~-

Q,.- , LPE., _., ,l P.$+ $ T 6.1

,f - ,  : CGsc 9 I 16sGit t IsG6 Y'lwh0 T62 Ell 31 5GS 2 3 g

$ ^f h . <-LP135jl e AF y l ps2 a t Pi$ I~~ (

gg j C 7 37 '"5  :-es 3ersa ,

• c e -- -

'iS 3 rSG64 1 @

= l 'i- S sisG64 g ;;;

l vg \A B . ,6 l g O o o 3

=

2

' h SG6.7 f 3="

.:. 'w CsGia'* 1: P67 t SG 6,.7 T 6.7 g i AG6.1 Io -1 Section A-8 ~g PuI lG*p55 l P 6.4 l SG 6 5.vorte::1 g,% 5GES. horizontet

_rC !' '

.. /1 . sc-P 6.6 l SG 63.verticot 5 3 64. horizontet AF6#AF l 1f o* -T 6.1 .T 64.T 6.7

!;0TE: Dimensions in mm. MA-68st-348 FIGURE 18b INSTRUMENTATION e

39

O

• O Test Nu:.ber 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33 34 0210(RO.) *

• Break Size (:::n) 0110(1/3IR) *

• 0 80 (1/6 HSL) ll * * * * * * *

• 24*C(75F) ll*'* *

• Pool Teeper:ture ** * *

• 32*C(90F) *l*

55*C (130 F) l ,

1

$co; ... . .'. . . .. . . . . .

Drywell Air Centent * * *

• 85 % (approx.) l l Repeat Test *l

• l MA-6881-349 FIGURE 19 LOCA TEST MATRIX l

l l

l 40 l

l l _, , , _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ ._ _ _ - . -

b 0 280 - l

, 240

\ Test No.1

% 200 -

I x 160 S

\ \

m x g 120 - N 2

{ 80 s sm 40 Test Start N 0 . .

O 10.0 20.0 30 0 40'.0 280 240

\ '

Test No. 2

~

s - .

} 200 l

x 160 g 120

\

2

$ 80 40 - Test

! St rt 0

O 10.0 20.0 3d.0 4d.0 TIME - s M A-5881-355 FIGURE 20 STEAM MASS FLUX VERSUS TIME FOR RCL BREAKS 41

. .. s l

l l l l l I  ! l l 280 , ,

l 240 2 ,

g i  !

I '

I" 200 ~

dTest No.: 5 MSL-Break l l'  :

l Orifice Diameter: 190 mm g 160 -(

l i d I  !

M 120 f .

I  !

E 80 3 p N l Test No.: 11-1/3 MSL-Break l

" i l Orifics Diameter: 110 mm l-40 s

, Test No.: 15-1/6 MSL-Break ,

. l

/ Orifice Diameter: 380 mm l l l i ,

l l

0  :

0 100 200 300 400 500 TIME - s MA-5881-350 FIGURE 21 STEAM MASS FLUX VERSUS TIME FOR MSL BREAKS 42

ee e,

~

W Is / - . .....T-*..._

u. e . . :-- . i -_.. . . . .

y,.,.J"_._ _- _ -. .

_ ._..r_.....-

=_- . .. ._fr--. - _ _ . . _ _ _

-* --':

• _ :. . C .. ; **

• . . . . . ' ' 4 . .. . '

7.~ . J l ;.* . - '

. . _ . . . = -- - . - -- - . =.' ': 4 -- . - ..' t. 7".O 5 =...!.T.'.--~

.- =.:- .. .-

T-r-hN ,~bu/ k hm. e 1,

[.~2#E...

n a n t s h i..f h. k.l.d.,,(l .. i k.I_ f.a[.

y/ W-(rmmmm - - - . ((?M113flT.(.(i]Wi:ll'._(ili.

fTlfif

- f.f j(TMf

'[-.}G. f.

- w _.

.Y T.(i.".~ EW -j-- - - - - - - -

7

__. , _ _ , . ,.y..-. .._...,.._.

._. ............3._... _

. .. . _..a __...-I".**-'*~.tT".*- .a . - - . . '*I ....... .s.. . . . ,

~0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 TIME - s u'- J.~ _7 --

._. ..J .:.*: 7 ~ -- % . ..

1 u . M__ m.g. .. ._ .-t ..2 --t =g --- - -- , :::^-- .:.-

7._ p.w_

_ _1 .__

m ___

~ -

. lr.

w t . .:-- -- t -- .2.--. .r- w.-

l

~~ - * *~ ~ ' L*.'.13 s . . . ..... .*s :*. ((?-**p- -_; . ._ ' ,-e -(.~.:

'M---ht. .p .: 3.-'..:ja-  ;--= I.2-- .r.4 @- :pu 1 =:

";;;:st. . - -.t , "Mn j . . *:* _

.- .h - -

.1 . L .

l .,, z. t + v.w g1

• -. _. -.g.. . 3; r_,3 .:*g=2& Q L ~ . e .l., A y _ __

• Q.

M.G.=-in l

, r . ,1m w ;;

l l

l , MA-5881-351 A i

FIGURE 22 PRESSURE TRACES FROM GAGE P6.4 FOR MSL TEST 5 l

l 43

4-. Dewell f

-_- /. _ ..

s a,. m.

- ~ ~ - - ,

End j3-- __

l \ 2.60 bar Wetwell 1.74 bar (37.7 psig) u.: -

@2- (25.2 psig)

M E

2. ;__ :-

Test Start 0  :  ?  !

O ~ 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 20.0 24.0 28.0 32.0 36.0 40.0 TIME - s MA-5881-352 FIGURE 23 DRYWELL AND WETWELL AIR SPACE PRESSURES FOR RCL TEST 1 44

..6 EXHIBIT A GEORCE R. ABRAHAMSON Vice President Physical Sciences Division SPECIALIZED PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE Dynamics of structures under pulse loads; nuclear reactor safety; nuclear weapons effects; simulation of pulse loads with explosives; properties of explosives; mechanics of penetration; precision explosives devices REPRESENTATIVE ASSIGNMENTS AT SRI (since 1953)

Hydrodynamic loads in boiling water reactors Response of nuclear reactors to sudden pressurization Assessment of vulnerability and lethality of ICBM reentry vehicles to nuclear effects Development of techniques for simulating nuclear weapons effects and nuclear reactor excursions with explosives Experimental and theoretical investigations of the response of structures to pulse loads Development of shaped charges for oil well perforation Development of precision explosive timer Special assignments; Panel chairman for Olen Nance ad hoc acommittee for the Materials Advisory Board, National Academy of Science Staff development leave from SRI, spent at the Norwegian '

Research Establishment, Norway (1968-1969)

Panel chairman for DASA summer study on nuclear weapons effects Participant in ARPA summer study on Casaba-Howitzer and laser effects I Manager, Engineering Mechanics Group, Poulte- ifooratory (1958-1969)

Director of Poulter Laboratory (1969-present)

ACADEMIC BACKGROUND l

A.A., Compton Colicde; B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. (1958) in engineering mechanics, Stanford University PUBLICATIONS Fif teen publications in professional technical journals and numerous technical reports PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS AND HONORS '

American Nuclear Society; American Society of Mechanical Engineers (Western Committee of Applied Mechanics Division, 1970-1974; Chairman, 1974); Phi Beta Kappa; Sigma Xi; Tau Beta Pi; NSF fellowship for advanced study, Stanford University (1955) l 45