ML20096E959

From kanterella
Revision as of 19:32, 1 May 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Rev 1 to Suppression Pool Temp Transient Following Sbo
ML20096E959
Person / Time
Site: LaSalle  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 05/11/1992
From: Peterson R
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20096E925 List:
References
3C7-0390-001, 3C7-0390-001-R01, 3C7-390-1, 3C7-390-1-R1, NUDOCS 9205200115
Download: ML20096E959 (41)
v • d • e


Text

SUPPRESSION POOL TEMPERATURE~ TRANSIENT NSLD FOLLOWIN M TATION BLACKOUT Calc. No. 3C7-0390-001-Date May 23, 1990 Comonwealth Edison Company Safety Related YES LaSalle County Station Project No(s). 8726-17 Project File Nr 35.2 Page No. i

~

System: Station diackout CALCULATION

_RF'/ISION

SUMMARY

SHEET REVISION PREPARED REVIEWED APPROVED REVISED NO. BY/C.'8 I BY/DATE BY/DATE PAGE NOS.

J. w. M Teunerijnchj -fj(g),f.4 m

, 0 449-90 T~2W 0 23 M, /rw N/A T,

y W&/%

. % 2 7- 90 ,

0 ,

I

%y d N s-n . 9 L NO %d M[

s-la t_ 5- -ez

[M V All

\

d' e,.

4 9205200115 920515 3 DR ADCCK 0500

e ATD (Formerly NSLD)

Calc. No. 3C7-0390 001 Revision: 1

. . May 11, 1992 Page: 1 SAFETY-RELATED - Yes T  ;. M /.

Prepared by: - hl te N UV Date: 5 - 11 ') 2.

,tv$wed by: UbU Date: T'll-9 L xppren t n5: . . ,

v S&F Date: 5-//~kZ.

t l

SUPPRESSION P0OL TEMPERATURE TRANSIENT FOLLOWlhG STATION BLACK 0UT Commonwealth Edison Ccmpany

LaSalle County Station l Project No. 8726 17 Project file No. 35.2 System Code: SB0 WIN 1218

Calc. No. 3C7 0390-001 Revision: 1 Page: 2 Project No. 8726 17 EXCEPTIONE TO VERIFIED DATA Information used in this calculatice is assumed to be verified except as follows:

None 4

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ ._.___..__._____a

Calc.- No 3C7-0390 001 Revision: -1 Page: - 3

- Project No. 8726-17._

TABLE OF-CONTENTS

- SECTION- Pf_GE

.I EXCEPTIONS-TO VER!FIED DATA 2 INTRODUCTION 6 11- ' SYSTEM DESCRIPTION- -7 .

III- METH00 OF ANALYSIS 8 IV MODELING ASSUMPTIONS 9 V RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS '14

~ VI- REFERENCES-- 16 TABLES- 19

-FIGURES 27 TABLE 0F CONTENTS-0F-~ COMPUTER CUTPUT :38 REVIEW METHOD- 39-APPENDIX A - COMPUTER OUTPUT Al-g-

I Y

E

'I-b yg } eyy, y- w- e -

p

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 4 Project No. 8726-17 LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1: LaSalle Station Event Logic 19 Table 2: LaSalle Plant Specific Data for Station 20 Blackout Scenario Table 3: ANSI Standard Power Ratio Following Scram 24 Table 4: Event Sequence for RCIC/HPCS Cases 25

l

~

~

' Cale, No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 5 JJ Project'No. 8726-17 m

' LIST OF FIGURES p E%f Figureil': BWR Mark:11 Pressure Suppression 27 Containment System Figure 2: General Schematic of a BWR RPV and Pressure 28 Suppression Pool Case 1 - SB0 with RCIC Operation (Pool: Case)

- Figure 3:- Suppression Pool. Temperature and.RPV Pressure vs Time 29 Figure 4:- Suppression Pool. Temperature vs .RPV-Pressure

. 30-u i 1 Figure 5:: Reactor Temperature and Reactor Level vs. -Time 31

. Case IAT- SB0 with RCIC Operation (Operator Case) i 1 Figure _6: -Suppression. Pool Temperature and RPV Pressure vs. Time 32-

~ Figure;7: Suppression Pool Temperature vs.,RPV: Pressure 33 Figure 8: Reactor'Temperatu+e and Reactor Level vs. Time 34 Case 2:- SBO-with HPCS Operation-Figure; 9:~~ Suppression' Pool Temperature and RPVfPressure vs. Time 35

, - Figure 10:- Suppression.PoolfTemperature vs.-RPV Pressure 36 m

Figure 11: . Reactor Temperature and Reactor Level vs. Time 37 i

p $

a

  • 9

.f 9 w - , , -

m - r- -we

W l

Calc. No. 3C7-0390-001 l Revision: 1 Page: 6 project No. 8726-17 I. INTRODUCTION In order to demonstrate compliance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal ReDulations, Part 50.63 requirements relative to Station Blackout, specific plant parameters have been examined for a station blackout scenario. The parameters of interest are directly related to the capability of the plant in maintaining core cooling and appropriate containment integrity. This report presents the expected response of suppression pool water temperature to a station blackout. Station blackcut, defined as the total loss of AC power, both offsite and onsite (including any diesel generated power), would affect the suppression pool by eliminating any pool cooling via the RHR system for the duration of the blackout.

Two cases were analyzed to determine the suppression pool temperature for coping with a station blackout (SBO) event. The first case (Case 1) models RCIC' operation during_the SB0 event. The second case (Case 2) assumes HPCS cooling mode instead of RCIC cooling. In these two cases, it was assumed that the primary system is cooled down by manual depressurization via the Automatic Depressurization System (ADS) in conjunction with automatic cycling of the safety / relief valves. For automatic opening and reseating of the safety / relief valves, low-low set. point logic was utilized (Reference 2). In both cases, heat- transfer to the suppression pool heat structures, namely the pool steel structures, was included. Also, both cases utilize a modified ANSI Standard (best estimate) power ratio following the scram as documented in Table 3 and Reference 6.

This revision was made to add recovery techniques to cool the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) and/or the suppression pool. Some conservatism was also removed.

t

_ _ _ - _ - _ _ - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ^ ^ ^ - ^ ^ ^ ^ - ^ - - ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ' ~ ^ ~ ' ^ ' ~

Calc. No. 3C7-0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 7 Project No. 8726 17

11. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a schematic of a BWR Mark 11 pressure suppression containment 1 system. .This containment system features a drywell (upper chamber) and a wetwell (lower chamber) which consists of a pool of water (suppression pool) and a wetwell air space. The two chambers are connected by a system of vent pipes (downcomers). These two units comprise a structurally integrated prestressed concrete pressure vessel lined with welded steel plate. A steel pressure head is provided for closure at the top of the drywell. The drywell l

and wetwell are separated by a reinforced concrete floor which serves to prevent steam flow between the two chambers except through downcomers provided I

for this purpose.

A number of safety-related systems are provided in a BWR plant to mitigate the consequences of postulated transients and accidents. Systems of interest to this analysis are shown in Figure 2. These systems are the RHR, the reactor core isolation cooling system (RCIC), high-pressure core spray (HPC' j and the S/RVs. A description of these systems can be found in the LSCS UFSAR [2].

e During the hypothetical station blackout event, the reactor is isolated (main steam and feedwater isolation) and rear. tor pressure is relieved via steam flow through the S/RV system. The steam passes througn the S/RV,'the S/RV discharge line, and the S/RV quencher into the suppression pool. Since the quenchers are submerged (23 ft), steam flowing into the suppression pool is assumed completely condensed. The suppression pool water temperature will rise due to steam condensation until either 1) steam flow to the main condenser is restored and all S/RV flow to the pool is stopped or 2) one or more trains of the RHR system is started in the pool cooling code. Both of these actions require some soure.e of AC power.

I Calc. No. 3C7 0390-001 Revision: 1 Page: 8 Project No. 8726-17 III. METHOD OF ANALYSIS The suppression pool temperature transients for the two cases considered in this analysis were calculated using the S&L computer code SUPTRAN [3). SUPTRAN calculates mass within the suppression pool and Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) using a mass conservation equation for each volume. Suppression pool internal energy is calculated using the first law of thermodynamics for an open system with accounting of flew between the pool and RPV. Thermodynamic conditions within the RPV are calculated based on a rate equation for the RPV pressure.

Various flows modeled in the SUPTRAN code are depicted in Figure 2.

Descriptions of the flows and flow models can be found elsewhere [3), [4). The thermodynamic condition in the RPV is governed by the identified mass flows as well as by heat addition to RPV fluids from the nuclear fuel and from the RPV and reactor internals. The thermodynamic condition of the suppression pool is governed by the identified mass flows. Heat transfer to the suppression pool structures, namely steel components, was also included.

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 9 Project No. .8726 17 IV. H0DELING ASSUMPTIONS Tiie transient analyses were performed using the S&L computer code SUPTRAN (See Appendix A). -The evaluation made use of best estimate assumptions- such as using a modified ANSI Standard decay heat curve (Reference 6) and 100% rated reactor power. -SUPTRAN computer models'for both the RCIC and HPCS cases were obtained directly from Reference 11. These computer models were modified to represent an operator controlled RPV cooldown in a conservative manner with

. respect to suppression pool temperature.

-The acceptance criteria for suppression pool temperature is defined in i

Reference-1.in terms of a heat capacity temperature limit (HCTL) curve. This curve plots-pool' temperature versus RPV pressure.- The operating procedures requireithe operator to control vessel pressure in order to stay below this curve (Reference 14).:

The ~ operator actions implemented in the models include:

  • -Operator initiated RPV cooldown at a rate of.100*F/hr:following the initial vessel-depressurization due to.S/RV actuation after MSIV

. closure.

. Operator controlled S/RV actuation is used to control vessel pressure after 100'F/hr cooldown is terminated until the end of station blackout.

  • At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> 15: minutes, equipment is restored that allows the operator

, - to cool down' the RPV and/or suppression pool.

,,n

Calc. No. 3C7-0390 001 -

Revision: 1 Page: 10 Project No. 8726 17 In both cases conservative modeling technique were employed to maximize the energy input to the suppression pool. Although operator actions may call for termination of manual depressurization at specific reactor pressures to maintain sufficient operating margins, the analyses performed here allow manual depressurization to occur to lower reactor pressures to maximize poc! heatup.

The emphasis here is to produce bounding pool temperature transients.

Tables 1 and 2 summarize the event logic and plant specific data for the chses studied. Assumptions for each case analyzed are discussed below.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ __ __ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _s

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 11 Project No. 8726 17 l

O se 1 (R&lCl

1) Althnugh the normal opening pressure for the first two (lowest set point)

S/RVs is 1091 psia, their low low opening setpoints are 1021 and 1061 l psia, respectively. The SUPTRAN program has no capabilit) of resetting l the setpoints. Therefore, not only subsequent S/RV openings for the l first two valves were set to 1021 and 1061 psia, but also initial opening j pressures for the first two S/RVs were set at the lower pressures (1021  !

and 1061 psia). ConsiG ring that the opening setpoints are lower and the

!!ifferential pressures for reseating of the first two val'!es art I?rger l (110 and 120 psid, Table 5.2 9 of Ref. 2), this assumption f s conservative because tha S/RVs will stay open longer and the discharge of steam to the suppression pool and the resulting temperature increase in the pool-will be larger. For reseating the remaintrg valves, a ditferential pssure of 100 psid was used (Reference 9).

f) 2:t transfe.r to the suppression pool structures is includeri (Reference 4).

3) :100% of the rated teactor power was used. ,
4) ANSI Standard (best estimate) decay heat curve (Reference 6) was used in conjunction with the GE design basis curve. See Table 4.

S) (he initial suppression pool temperature assumed was 105 J (Peference 19).

6) RCIC operation is as m ed.

l 7)- S/RV reseating differential pressures of 110, 120 and 100 psid were used

. for the 18 S/RVs, respectively (See Table 2).

4 i

4 k E A-y -- ,m y .- p44 g

Calc. No. 3D 0390 001 Revision: I rage: 12 Project No. 8726 17

8) Manual depressurization cooldown at 100*F/hr was imposed until vessel pressure reached 167 psia.
9) following termination of manual depressurization cooldown , operator entrolled S/RV actuation was implementtd to control vessel ,nressure between 167 psia and 172 psia until the end of station blackout.
10) Modeling the operator controlled S/RV actuation was accomplished by specifying a 19th S/RV with a setpoint pressure of 172 psia and t reseat pressure of 167 psia. This valva is only activated following termination of manual depressurization.

l.

11). Primary system leakage of 61 spe is assumed to be addec to the drywell for the first 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />. This is based on a M nical Specification limit of 25 gpm total leakage (Reference 12)'plus 18 gpm pu recirculation pump as allowed by ?aference 13. Reference 15 calculates 37.76 percent of the 61 gpm flashes as it enters the drywell. The fla'shed steam is assumed to go directly to the suppression pool. Aftor 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, credit is taken for the reduced-RPV pressure and Reference 15 calculates 17.85 percent of 27.5 gpm is flashed to steam. This steam is assumed to go directly to the suppression pool. Reference 15 gives an enthalpy of the steam as 1205.6 BTV/lbm.

12)- The Overall Cooldown method was selected as the SUPTRAN option for performingthemanualdepressurization(3).

13) .It is assumed that at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> 15 minutes into the transient, equipment is made available to cool the RPV at a rate of 100*F/hr.

I Case 2 (HPCS)

1) Case 1 assumptions were used, l

L

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

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 13 Project No. 8726 17

2) However, instead of RCIC operation, HPCS cooling mode was used.
3) HPCS flow rate data obtained fra Reference 7 was used. This data was selected rather than the data given in Reference 10, since the modification described in Referuice 7 would result in a reduction in the HPCS flow rate. The use of a lower HPCS flow r.te is conservative.
4) Hanual depressurization cooldown at 100'F/hr was imposed. Manual depressurization cooldown was not terminated on vessel press. e because there are no pump shutoff consideratior.s. Consequently, the ve:;sel was allowed to depressurize to essentially the wetwell atmospheric pressure.
5) At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> 15 minutes into the transient, 2 RHR trains were started in the pool cooling mode to reduce the suppression pool temperature.

I

~

Calc. fio. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 14 Project No. 8726 17 V. ESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ihe results of the suppression pool temperature analysis are shown in figures 3 through 5. for Case 1 and Figures 9 through 11 for Case 2. In particular, Figures 3 and 9 represent graphs of suppression pool temperature and RPV pressure as a fur.ction of time for the RCIC and HPCS cases, respectively. Figures 4 and 10 represent graphs of suppression pool temperature as a function of RPV pressure for the RCIC and HPCS cases, respectively superimposed on the HCTL curve for comparison.

Finally, Figures 5 and 11 represent graphs of RPV temperature and RPV water level as a function of time for the RCIC and HPCS cases, respectively.

In Case 1, the suppression pool temperature at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> after the SB0 begins is 213 l'F; it is 217.l'F at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> 15 minutes. In Case 2, the suppression pool temperature at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> after the SB0 begins is 230.8'F.

At 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> 15 minutes, it is 234.2'F. The difference between the 4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> pool teaperature resulting from HPCS operation versus RCIC operatior is attriLLled to the aaditional mast and energy discharged to the pool through the 3/RVs for HPCS. This occurs because HPCS is allowed to depressurize the RPV to lower pressures. Consequently, S/RV discharge occurs for longer periods of time.

Figures 4 and 10 indicate that utilizing conservative modeling which maximizes pool heatup, the vessel pressure and pool temperature are adequately controlled below the HCTL curve. Hence, the Heat Capacity Temperature Limit would not be reached during the four hour station

' blackout event.

1 The assumptions for Case 1 included S/RV cycling between 167 and 172 psia following manual depressurization termination. This small op was

. selected to maximize energy input to the pool. However, this would

Calc. No. 3C7 0390-001 Revision: 1 Page: 15 Project No. 8726-17 result in an inordinate number of S/RV actuation cyclec which would I.st be realistic from an operations standpoint. In order to demonstrate the conservativeness of this assumption, a second RCIC case was run (Case 1A) which modified the valve set pressure to 200 psia such that operator contielled S/RV cycling occurs between 167 psia and 200 psia. The resub. of this alternate RCIC case are presented in figures 6 through 8. l The suppression pool temperature under these circumstances is 212.7'T at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> and 215.8'F at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> 15 minutes after the SB0 begins. The  ;

alternate RCIC case results in only four operator controlled S/RV cycles following termination of manual depressurization and prior to fo>sr hours after the 580 begins.

An additional run was made using the information of Case 1, but without primary system leakage to the suppression pool. The results were used as input to Calculation No. ATD Oll7, Rev. O " Evaluation of NPSH Requirements for HPCS, RHR end RCIC Pamps and Back Pressure Limitations of RCIC Turbine following Station Blackout." The results are shown in Appendix A.

The lowest reactor water level occurs during RCIC operation ar.d is approximately -130 inches. This level does not result in core uncovery since the top %f the active fuel is M1 inches per Reference 17.

L l

l l

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page. 16 Project No. 8726 17 VI. REFERENCES

1) OE! Document 8390 4C Emergency Procedure Guidelines Appendix C, WS S Heat Capacity Limit Worksheet No. 2, December 27, 1989 (Draft).
2) LaSalle County Station UFSAR, Chapters 5 and 6, Revision 0, Commonwealth Edison Company, April 1988. l 1
3) "SUPTRAN - A Computer Code to Calculate Suppression Pool Temperature Transients," (Users' Manual), S&L Computer Software Library, Program Number SUP098098131, SUPTRAN, June 1990.
4) Field, R. M., " Suppression Pool Temperature Transient Studies," NSLD Calculation 3C7-0181-003, Revision 0, Approved May 14, 1981.
5) LaSalle County Station DAR, Chapter 6 " Suppression Pool Water Temperature Monitoring System," pg. 6.1 2, Rev. 9, June 1981.
6) " Revised Decay Heat Curve for Use in Station Blackout Calculation,"

letter from W. Naughton (Ceco) to J. S. Abel (rEco), dated February 23, 1989. -

7) Attachment I to " Conceptual Design Report for the Deletion of ECCS Minimum Flow Switches E12-N010. E21-N004, and E22-N006," WIN 0762, Rev. O, La Salle County Station Units 1 and 2,
8)
  • Preprocessing and Postprocessing Program: PPP," S&L Software Library, Program No, PPP 09.8.099 1.31.-

9)' " Pressure Awitches Data Sheet," No. PS223, Revision C, dated October 9.1989, La Salle County Station Units 1&2, Commonwealth Edison

. Comptny.

i Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 i Revision: 1  !

Page: 17 -

Project No. 8726 17

10) La Salle County Station UFSAR, figure 6.3 2, Commonwealth Edison Company, Revision 5, April 1989.
11) " Station Blackout Suppression Pool Temperature,* NSLO Calculation 3C7 1082 002, Revision 2 Approved November 13, 1989.
12) Commonwealth Edison Company, LaSalle County Station Unit 2 Technical Specifications, Appendix "A* to License No. 18, Section 3/4.4.3,

" Reactor Coolant System Leakage."

l 13) " Station Blackout (SBO) Implementation: Request for Supplemental Submittal to NRC," Letter from Byron Lce, Jr. (NUMARC), Januar,y 4, 1990.

14) LaSalle Specific Operating Procedures:
a. LPLCA-01, Revision 0, January 1987
b. LPLGA-02, Revision 0, January 1987
c. LPLGA 03. Revision 0, January 1987
d. LPLGA-04, Revision 0, January 1987
e. LPLGA 05, Revision 0, January 1987
15) "Drywell Temperature Transient Following Station Blackout," NSLO Calculation 3C7-0390 002, Revision 1, Approved May ll, 1992.
16) LaSalle County Station UFSAR, Table 4.4-1, Commonwealth Edison Ccmpany, Revision 4, April 1988.

9

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 .

I Revision: 1 '

Page: lb '

Project No. 8726 17

11) Commonwealth Edison Company, LaSalle County Station Unit 2 lechnical Specifications, Bases figure B3/4 3 1, " Reactor Vessel Water Level,"

Amendment No. 33,

18) General Electric Drawing, " Reactor Core Isolation Coolant Systems",

Drawing No. 761E20SAA, Rev. 3, 3/7/77.

19) Commorwealth Edison Company, LaSalle county Station Unit 1 Technical Specifications, Section 3.6.2.1, " Suppression Chamber Limiting Condition for Operation," Amendment No. 67.

t' i

5 l

-it m  % --wnar-Q- --m w- ge f-e, u--,wr,==,emw is -w-r-~ m m - ~ a,--w-e ,- --v- :'*v '--w -

W Calc. No. 3C7-0390 001 Revision: }

Page: 19 1 Project No. 87?6-17 TABLE 1  !

l LASALLE STATION EVENT LOGIC i Four '!our Station Blackout Evaluation System or Event Case 1 Case.2 Main Steam t 3.5 sec* t=3.5 seca (Isolation)

Feedwater t=0.0 see t=0.0 sec (Isolation)

Reactor Power Scram t=0 Scram t=0 RHR in Pool Not Used Not Used**

Cooling ,

RPV Cooling RCIC on 9t 51 sec. HPCS on 9t 33 see System Cyclic Operation Cyclic Operation on RPV Level on RPV level

  • Table 6.2-4-of Ref. 2
    • Started at 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> 15 minutes l

~

l 1-

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page- 20 Project No. 8726 17 TABLE 2 LASALLE PLANT SPECIFIC DATA FOR stall 0N BLACK 0UT SCENARIO Reactor and Associated System SDe';jfications Reactor Core Power (100% rated 3323 MW) 11,338.HBu/hf Reactor Volume 2.335 x 10 ft Initial RPV Liquid Hass 6.090 x 10 lbm Initial RPV Vapor Mass 2.361 x 10 lbm Rated Turbine flow (9100% full power) 4018. Ibm /sec Initial RPV Pressure 1040 psia RPV Heat Structure Mass 3.055 x 10' lbm RPV Heat Structure Specific Heat 0.111Btuglbm*F RPV Heat Structure Area 10,000 ft RPV Heat Structure Heat Tran.cfer Coefficient 1000 Btu /hr-ft' 'F RPV Liouid level Control Soecifications RPV Cross-Sectional Area 334.8 ft' ,

Initial Void Fraction Below Liquid Level .1200 Liquid Level 2 -50.0" Liquid Level 8 +55.5" Initial Liquid Level +40.5" (References 11 & 16)

L

Calc. No. 3C7 0390-001 Revision: 1 Page: 21 Project No. 8726 17 TABLE 2 (Cont'd)

LASALLE PLANT SPECIFIC DATA FOR STATION BLACK 0UT SCLNARLO ,

I RCIC System Specifications (Rtference18) i Delay Time for Initial RCIC Flow: 30 second fn11owing Startup Signal i i

RCIC Pump RCIC Pump RCIC Turbine RCIC Turbine RPV Hass Flow Rate Mass Flow Rate Mass Flow Rate Mass Flow Rate Pressure (osia) form) (1bm/s)* (1bm/hr) (1bm/s)

O. O. O. O. O.

164. O. O. O. O.

- 165. 600. 80.3 8250 2.3 1173. 600, 80.3 27,250 7.6 2000. 600. 80.3 27,250 7.6

  • Using specific volume of 0.01664 ft 3/lbm at 200'F HPCS System Soecificationi (Reference 4 and 11)

Deiay Time for Initial H NS Flow: 30 second following Startup Signal.

RPV HPCS Pump nass Flow Rate Pressure fosial- Lgpm) (1bm/s 2) 15.45 6796 940 2'5.45 6196 857 515.55 5070 701 815.45 3774 522 1145.45 161) 222 1175.45 1339 185

'r a

tr ., m . . . _ . 9.',,' .-i .m.

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 22 Project No. 8726 17 TABLE 2 (Cont'd)

LASALLE PL ANT SPECIFIC DATA FOR STATION BLACKOUT SCENARIO Egooression Pool and Associated System Specifications (Reference 4)

Initial Pool Water Hass 7.984 x 10' lbm Initial Pool Temperature 105'F Service Water Temperature 105'F j RHR HX Effectiveness 0.372 RHR Mass Flow Rate-Pool Cooling (1 Train) 1036. Ibm /sec Pool Heat Structure Surface Area 46350. ft 3 Pool Heat Structure Mass 1,043,000 lbm 3

Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient 100. Btu /(hr ft *F)

Pool Structure Specific Heat 0.111 Btu /(lbm *F) e y ,,,.

4 1

I '

Calc. tio. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: !

Page: 23 Project No. 8725 17 TABLE 2 (Cont'd)

LASALLE PLANT SpECIF[C DATA FOR STATION BLACK 0UT SCENARIO S/RV System Specifical,igni (Reference 4)

Number of Automatically Operating S/RV's 18 SRV Seat Area (1 Valve)* 13.61 in:

SRV Loss Coefficient 1.0 SRV Reseat Differential Pressure *** 1 valve at 120 psig 1 valve at 110 psig 16 valves at 100 psig SRV Relief Setpoints 2 valves at 1091. psia **

valves at 1101 psia 4 valves at 1111. psia 4 valves at 1121. psia 4 valves at 1131. psia Number of Operator Controlled S/RV's (RCIC Case) 1 Operator Controlled SRV Seat Area

  • 13.61 in, Operator Controlled SRV Loss Coefficient 1.0 Operator Controlled SRV Reseat Differential Pres. 5 psig Opet ator Controlled SRV Relief Setpoint 172 psia
  • 122.5% of ASME rated flow.
    • 102' and 1061 psia for low Low Setpoint logic
      • Per Reference 9, the reseat differential pressure varies between 50 and 100 psi.

l Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 l Revision: 1 Page: 24 Project No. 8726 17 IABLE 3 ANSI STANDARD POWER RATIO FOLLOWING SCRAM Heat addition Time after scram (sec) ggyer ratio */ rated oowqr

0. 1.0840
2. 0.5026
6. 0.6271
10. 0.5249
20. 0.2309
30. 0.1372
31. 0.1370
60. 0.0492 100. 0.0427 101. 0.0344 150. 0.0316 200. 0.0298 400. 0.0259 600.- 0.0230 800. 0.0223 1000. 0.0209 1500. 0.0189 2000. 0.0184 4000. 0.0141  ;

6000. 0.0124

'8000. 0.0114 10000. 0.0106 150001 0.0094 20000. 0.0086

  • This is a hybrid curve which uses GE data (see Table 3 of Reference 11) _ for conservatism for the first 100 seconds after scram. After 100 seconds, actual ANSI standard data was used (Reference 6).

L l

l l'

A"' a'Ma "c'- +-

bx.

+

Calc. No. 3C7 0390 001 Revision: 1

, Page: 25 Project No. 8726-17 IMILi EVENT SE0VENCE FOR R(IC/HPCS CASES

- Case 1-(RCIC) Time (sec)

Start of Transient and MSIV closure, Scram, FW lsolation 0.0 MSIV closure _ complete 3.5 Initial S/RV operation on high reactor pressure 0-130

- Reactor pressure cycling between-935 and 1021 psia using one S/RV 130 - 434 Manual depressurization to 167 psia 434 - 6487 J< RCIC in continuous operation 51 - 10942

' Operator controlled S/RV cycling 6576 - 15300 ' ,

- between 167 and~172; psia Suppression poolftemperaturefreaches 213.1*F 14400 Supprossion pool temperature reaches 217.l'F- and cooling of the RPV at 100*F/hr and suppression 15300 pool with RHR occurs VL

+

4 l db -r ii<i- - r - i - ii - -

i-r e reiieii ie

l L

Calc. No. 3C7-0390 001 Revision: 1 Page: 26 Project No. 8726 17 )

TABLE 4 (Cont'd) j Case 1 (HPCS) Time (sec) ,

1 Start of Transient and MSIV closure, '

Scram, FW Isolation 0.0 ,

MSIV closur,e complete 3.5 Vessel level falls to level 2 21 S/RV operation on high reactor pressure 0 84 L

Reactor pressure cycling between 911 and 1021 psia using one SRV 84-1424 Manual depressurization to 24,1 psia 1424 12561 HPCS in cyclic operation between L2 and L8 1424-21600 Suppression pool temperature reaches 230.3*F 14400 Suppression pool temeprature reaches 234.2'F ans 2 RHR trains start in pool cooling mode 15300 w- ., , . , , - - _ . _ =v. .

. , ,-'- 'yj

Calc. 11o. 3C7-0390 001 Revision: 1 4

Page: 27 Project lio. 8726-17 w Y. ~.. . .: ....-. - ... ' . ml 6  :,__ ,

+

.1)

. ;t .

  • t.t , n.

p d

    • ..* T - -

..a .5 M[.,s- g 1

.. l

b. ..$ .g;*

-. on; l?a :t,..

I*e l ,'r,[

hw I )

3 $'. '. g ,' ,*.9

( i  :

.).. {,

R99Cf0f .I '" \

DRYWL'LL

-Q

4. . Na p, y

(. .'

r vs

. Steci Liner

.O i? .

y*,3.

w , . u ?. : s . se a. ity; f:

(n

?

r,j I

I i .

e (b,,4

$, I { ..Ih-i.* * -

i

  • e

&*i

.4 d.. "

L1 s

h. ,

/ 'c+'

v- t.' '

p 4.N fsu ,

l i

Ig 4

( gt,,. . M.WM 8 s ) .',

SfMI '}*

i

,r.?. Um pr '4';Usector '.Y' . . . . g I'.D' j[A 'k,.

r th .?$o,3 n . c... y 8.c. e ..-,'l ' .H. ..;p.i: W ? Wa.1(,.~1 y

p. 'yt_

. l> i *h" Downcomer

<h,'  %*  ? 1

a. - V.',.

i  ?** *?

d

. g*

f( .s 0 I:  : Wetn11 h 7.',

}lI Airagace -

%g~. c. , _ . ... .f.g - . ,, - F..'I

~ Suppression (

WETl7 ELL

,a .'*  ;#

@' F  :) 8 . ( pool ,

a. y ** l[ 'D k if u

'}

% ih Steel T'. -- t+ #* *\

cf p: ..

Liner ?. d -- '<-  ;. n.  :;t .

,4.J .

y u L, r? e;2, .

?.2. '...

oy L. -. 9 '

t i h V.d. iE'.*. ti j ,'? .*f . ?

':. 6.:t ;;iNrb'.'.S: ,. E hWisd.  :' W'.h' fi:'ad'O  %.

F s'> *P"%

M7ff ,'y;!*.e,p%g: #. ,

Vih,('l.T4d'.'*?.W'!M.If*39.f:?*1:*^:i '

i ,

I Figure 1: BWR Mark II Pressure Suppression Containment System

. e. ,

m l

l

Calc. No. 3C7-0390-091 Revision: 1 Page: 28 Project No. 8726-17

[S/RJ

~

_ Jk Main Steam Flew

] , s L8 - ,. ,

~

~'- -

L2 - ---

+-RPV RCIC Safety / Relief Active } Turbine Valve Flow n 4 Fugl y plow o Region RCI" --

f F w f HPCS Pump Condensate I, Storage ( 7 Tank

( RCIC Pump I

/ (,

( t

\- Suppression -= =

g k  : Pool RHR X 74 Heat Exchanger (s)

FIGURE 2: General Schematic of a BWR RPV and Presstre Suppression Pool

l 220. . a e

'I ""4

  • I?

i a N DECREASES DOE ' .,

y TO Pool CooLN G 200.- I '"

u. *g o

o w 180. - ~ e' ,,

<r f .

.n er "

e -

W

/ se s 160. -

a o i

0. -

z

~a Yr 140 m

N a.

\ y m DECREASES DvE To ,

120.- _ __

___x-_

w w

RPV C ooumG N

N N~~_ .0 100. i e '

3 4. 5 G-

~

O. I- ,

Tir1E SINCE LOSS OF AC POWER lit 0 URSI FIGURE -! : CASE 1 - SBC WITH RCIC COOLING tMAX POOL TEMP COSEI Calc. No. 3C7-0390-001 Revision: 1 Page: 29 Project No. 8726-17

( ~1

. . 240 -

Q - - -

~

HCTL cvRvE 220.- .

.- g c)

)

w 200.- p a

w tr D

100. -

E tr' w

(L r

'" 1 G0. -

-.s O

o n.

z 140.-

o u) us w

[

a.

l20. - ~._

o u

^ - . . . . '- . .>

10 0 . --

80 .

. . i i e i i'- i 'T'~ '**'**

.0 -l 2 -3 .4 5 6 .7 .8 9 1.0 1.1 RPV PRESSURE IPSIG)

  • I"""

FIGURE 4: CASE 1 - S80 WITH RCIC CO0 LING (MAX POOL TEril' Liini i Calc. No. 3C7-0390-001 Revision: 1 .

Page: 30 re t e - m s__ _ __

b .

600 . i e a ' ~ ~ ~ ~ I" '

550. -

U "

I u.

S o -

~

500.- U~

y .1 g p.  % A)h TAINE D N '~

'r a

y i oPEMToR ,,

r 450.- 4 \ /

-50

f g ts ,

c ..

W W

l 400.-

C008..ED DOWN

-\ ICD *F/hr 350 O.

I.

2 i

3

4. '.5

'~'~

G-I '

TII1E SINCE LOSS OF AC POWER IIIOURSI FIGURE 5: CASEI - SB0 HITH RCIC COOLING (t1AX POOL TEt1P CDSEI Calc. No. 3C7-0390-001 Revision: 1 Page: 31 Project No. 8726-17

'l h

220. , , , , , - men .* i.?

s -

~

DECREASES DuE 200. - To p o o t c o a ti,3 g ,,g u..

o o

to 100. - .c 5 4 4

n e a tn1 i

w 160.- . t. .'i,,

g  :::

n:

c, (L /

x .

C' -

140. .4 !E E

E '

i 8 DECREASES DOE To

' ~

~As s RPV Coottr4G s.

s 100 , , .

. , ,: .o 0 1 2 3 4. s. r; .

T it1E SitiCE LOSS OF AC POWER Ill0URS I FIGURE 6: CASE 1A - 580 WITH RClO COOLING 10PERATOR CASEI Calc. No. 3C7-0390-001 Revision: 1 Page: 32 '

Project No. 8726-l7

7

-l

'[

~

.-- 240 -

NCTL: LURVE -

, 220.' -

m.

u_.

oL w-200.- .

a- -

W w- '1 w

c-3 e-

.I 80. -

c er w

n, . .

r

. 'g 160. . -

J o

O Q-z 140.-

.o

~

v>

us w

ia- I20.- __. _

2 u) x.~.....,

100.-

80 , , .. , , . , -

,--- s -...s....

0. 1 2 3 .4 5 6 .7 8 9 1.r1 1.1 RPV PRESSURE IPSIG) K I"'HI FIGURE-7: CASE 1 - 980 WITH RCIC COOLING.1OPEROIOR 1llbi !

Calc. No. 3 C7-0190-00 t l: Revision: 1

,, s. . . . .. - _ , _ - ._. _ _ .. _

.. _ _ _ _ __ _ ____ __ _ _____rirarn - E_ . __ _ _ . _ . _

i. ..

600.-- , , .

. .- inn.

550.-- bu.

e_

Ss

? -

r 500.- 9.

m

[ MAird TAINED BY ,-j

% m ' OPERATOR C a

w f --

5 $

450. - -50 $

5 2 5 {

400.- inn.

cootto coma loo *F/h 350 , , . , , ,

. -. -iso.

O. 1 2 3 4. 5 G.

TIr1E SINCE LOSS OF AC POWER lit 00RS)

FIGURE 8: CASE 1 - SB0 WITH RCIC COOLING 10PERATOR CASE '

Calc. No. 3 C7 -0 3 '3 0-001 Revision: 1 Page: 34 '

- - fRPo4ae* 1Dum _ 87 "> 6 - 117

5~

240. .

. . r- 1 . .-

10W {

220.- 1 I.0

- l w /

e- .

s w .

o 200 'N w

'x. .c_

a: .

o - .

g i80.-

a_ ...

n

.tv 2 f'

<n,

'T 8a.

160.- *

.=

y u a .4 a

<n

$m 140. -

D.

Q.

a

<n 120.-

T

- .o 100 . . . . . -- - l -

0. 1 2 3 4. L G.

Tit 1E SINCE LOSS OF AC POWER IHOURSI FIGURE 9: CASE 2 - S80 WITH HPCS COOLING Calc. No. 3C7-0390-ool Revision: 1 Page: 35

~

Project No. 8726-17

lIIilllill lil2 b.

1 i' 0

." 0 *

- i H -

I 0

~ 9

- . 3 X

0

. E.

i 7

C1

> ' 3

~

oni E - t V No3 R

U T.

G N

i

. s:

cie C I l vg 1

1 L aea O CRP L

T C

H e O C

S C

ig 2 P

' H

)

' G H I T S I 6 P W

' I G

~

E

~

R B U

N s. E S

S S

'R -

h) P 9w

( -

' V 2

E P

4 R S A

C 3 0 1

~

E R

U 2

' G J I

~

F i

~

0

.. . . . . . .. . . . ~

. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 . 2 0 8 6 4 2 0 7 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 t .

- dOQ. Z O m w O' Q_u- =-

3

-kowO w o ,_ T'rr w n_"Z.t n

(. .

a:'tl ' l'; ;i1; tjj!3ii !,i i ;

l i 600. * ' ' ' ~

. i i 89 550 -

fin .

500.- (

u.

40-w ,.

9 450 I w

e < o a,,

=>

to E 400.- -'

E E o. :3 w .

~ '

e 350. - ~

o

,_ -20 o

T tns e

300. - 4n, 25 0 . -- _ ______.

60-

'. '. '. 101.

200. . i O. 1- 2 3 4 5 G.

T lt1E SINCE LOSS OF RC POWER t HOURS I FIGURE 11: CASE 2 - SB0 WITH HPCS COOLING Calc. No. 3C7-0390-001 Revision: 1 Page: 37 Project No. 8726-17

Calc. No. 3C7-0390-002 Ravision! 1 Pagel 3a ,

Project No, (1726-17 IABLE OF CONTENTS OF COMPUTER DU*PUT PART PROGRAM OATE PAGES CALC.NO. REV. RUN 10 DESCRIPfl0N TIME SUPS SvM FILE-NAME c A s t .i ( M .(c S of o i 8 0 9 8 4 L o7 M AY 92 N 3(7 0390- of I St"'-

RCIC WITH RPV IN HOT $ HUT 00WN 11:41 4.09 KWC LAS*SYM1121, 11:45 CASE 2 (HDCS SUP098098131 07 MAY 92 95 3C7 0390 001 1 KWC W/HPC$ IvCLINO & 61GPM LEAKAGE 11:$$ $,75 kWC*LA$*$YM(13).

12:00 CASE 1 1kCIC SUP098098#31 07 MAY 92 70 3C7 0390 001 1 kWC RCIC WITH RPV IN HOT SHUTDOWN b U ANU 13:to 4.00 KWC-LAS*5YM(14).

13: 16 CA$f ik (RC] SUP098098131 07 MAY 92 71 3C7 0390 001 1 kWC '

W/RCIC CYCLING & 61GPM LEAKAGE 13:33 4.09 KWC LAS*SYM(15).

13:37 CASE 1-PLOT PPP098099131 07 MAY 92 6 3C7 0390 001 1 KWC RCIC WITH RPV IN HOT SHUT 0OWN 16: 19 3.45 KWC LAS*5YM(16).

16:22 C45f. 2 PLOT- PPP09809913! 07 MAY 92 6 3C7-0390-001 1 KWC W/HPCS CYCLING & 61GPM LEAKAGE 16:23 4,88 KWC*LAS*SYM(17).

16:27 CASE 1A PLOT PPP098099131- 07 MAY 92 6 3C7 0390 001 -1 kWC W/RCIC CVCLING & 61GPM LEAKAGE 16:28 3.46 KWC*LA$*$YM(18).

16:32

-p - F 9

1

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

^. _

. Calc. No. 3C7-0390-001

~

Revision: 1 F07E ? METHZ SHER" Page: 39 (LA5"' PAGD Project lio. 8726-17 l nit 041culatica. > t been reviewE,! by me accordirig to the method (s) checked below.

1. Computer Aided Calculations

,, =. ,.

, e. .t , min. in t sn. comost., pro er..isi n : e..n v.isons.o .no oocue.nt.o. is j-f . 4 oreei.,r o.ina ,.iya.o. no tnet sn. ..ieviation consein. .i nee.ss ry

- v- . . - - nitruction ., . i ter o.s..

_~ . __

3 w-  : tn.t sn. input a s. .. So.e.fi.o for progra. ...cution is consist.

., - nout, corr etty o. fines tn. prooie. for in. co. outer .iooritn.

j -

. 3 :. n ei-seeve t. to orocan r. wits . .tnin any nu rie.1 ii.it tions of sn.

l o'C Q"9.*1.

e f meo.. states .

_ sn.t in resuits oes.in.o fro. 2n. pro ..

r.s i mitations of sn. orogr . .no ... consistent utn sn. inout.

.r. corr.es no witnin o s.vi.. v. mat 7ees.n..sion for t.r oer.r s en.no . t o i t s t.o . or ...i on..nt.i . or uniev. w ,0.

,. o opr.u .or ..;u.ie.t int onnet oreoc-....

e o n e.to . sur. sn.1 .tnoas u .o .o.ow.s.iv ve n e.t.

tion.

h

.- ne, , 3 noo. , nows ons,, .in=. 2n. co.out.- o-o r.. n.s . vet 1.nt nissory of us.

.1 h.ptnt & Lunog 1r simii.P c0 **4 i .

  • lons .

I u e nevin. . . i te .t ic nee.s s. y to o-.e. . coa. inest ost .

1.

L i

p. otnve:

2 Hand Pce;a ms Jesign Calculations q . o.t.ii.e revia cf-tn. o igins., e ie.:i.ttons.

o Revt.w ey- m .itern t.. st .infieo. o' soo*cuir..te m.tnoa of c.iewietion, e Review ef . c.o-estnt.tiv. 6. moi. of r.o.titiv. c.icui tions.

Revi.. of tn. c.ieviation g. inst . simiter e. scot tion pr.viousiy p.rfor.co.'

_ [o

. 3. Revisions

. Eastori i n.npes cWiv.

o Est.inetton of un.corov.o inost o.t. witnout .itering e.icuset.o r. suits.

j l e other: YS he os.o 4 W=d Wo M te c.cWg isig.bs vc;

.% cwC 4 &N -a d /or ~We uwess u am 9 1.

coASeNo M W 'o(S o ' E AoVEE-

~ '6cac I .

S. Other

-s i;

i-nevi..em 7 *%S W. b}N t Date- g. (f . ca

'Le - h tA .

Jau.rony.aEVIEW i'C:/19'!E; U p

) 7p _ _

ki. ,. _ _ a -- __

, e= . . - - . .

Calc. 11o. 3C7-0390-001' Revision: 1 Page: A1 ( L. AST) ,

Project fio. 8726-17 r

l

! - APPENDIX A -

COMPUTER OUTP'JT u '

5

~

c

. _ d

-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20096E959&oldid=2783271"