ML20116D879
| ML20116D879 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200003 |
| Issue date: | 07/29/1996 |
| From: | Mcintyre B WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | Quay T NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19311C149 | List: |
| References | |
| AW-96-994, NUDOCS 9608020364 | |
| Download: ML20116D879 (58) | |
Text
1 Westinghouse Energy Systems Box 355 l Electric Corporation Pit *trgh Pen 0sylvania 15230 0355 ;
AW-96-994 1 July 29,1996 Document Control Desk l U.S. Nuclear F.egulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ATTENTION: T.R. QUAY APPLICATION FOR WITHHOLDING PROPRIETARY INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE j
SUBJECT:
PRESENTATION MATERIAL FROM JUNE 6,1996 MEETING
Dear Mr. Quay:
The application for withholding is submitted by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse")
pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(1) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations. It contains commercial strategic information proprietary to Westinghouse and customarily held in confidence.
The proprietary material for which withholding is being requested is identified in the proprietary version of the subject report. In conformance with 10CFR Section 2.790, Affidavit AW-96-994 accompanies this application for withholding setting forth the basis on which the identified proprietary information may be withheld from public disclosure.
Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the subject information which is proprietary to Westinghouse be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations.
Correspondence with respect to this application for withholding or the accompanying affidavit should reference AW-96-994 and should be addressed to the undersigned.
Very truly yours, l
/ 1 ex #5i Brian A. McIntyre, anager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing
/nja cc: Kevin Bohrer NRC 12H5 9608020364 960729 PDR ADOCK 05200003 A PDR 2862A
- 1 e
AW-96-994 AFFIDAVIT l COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:
ss COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY:
Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Brian A. McIntyre, who, being by me duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is authorized to execute this Affidavit on behalf of Westinghouse Electric Corporation (" Westinghouse") and that the averments of fact set forth in this Affidavit are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief:
]
0~ Ap% -,
~
Brian A. McIntyre, Manager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing Sworn to and subscribed 1 I
v Fe' before me this day of k ,1996 d
Notary Public Nata'd Seal
% Mm p Mm'u"e'oFbyle,H, thelh fay ytgn Vy Com&sa n,pr;yt.y Coun.s ggy,4, gh l
~
wsm--n
I 1
- l l
i AW-96-994 l
l (1) I am Manager, Advanced Plant Safety And Licensing, in the Advanced Technology Business Area, of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation and as such, I have been specifically delegated the fnaction of reviewing the proprietary information sought to be withheld from I public disclosure in connection with nuclear power plant licensing and rulemaking proceedings, and am authorized to apply for its withholding on behalf of the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit.
(2) I am making this Affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations and in conjunction with the Westinghouse application for withholding accompanying this Affidavit.
(3) I have personal knowledge of the criteria and procedures utilized by the Westinghouse Energy Systems Business Unit in designating information as a trade secret, privileged or as confidential commercial or financial information.
(4) Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(4) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, the following is furnished for consideration by the Commission in determining whether the information sought to be withheld from public disclosure should be withheld.
(i) The information sought to be withheld from public disclosure is owned and has been held in confidence by Westinghouse.
(ii) The information is of a type customarily held in confidence by Westinghouse and not customarily disclosed to the public. Westinghouse has a rational basis for determining i l
the types of information customarily held in confidence by it and, in that connection, utilizes a system to determine when and whether to hold certain types of information in confidence. The application of that system and the substance of that system constitutes Westinghouse policy and provides the rational basis required.
Under that system, information is held in confidence if it falls in one or more of several types, the release of which might result in the loss of an existing or potential competitive advantage, as follows:
2k63A
AW-96-994 (a) The information reveals the distinguishing aspects of a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.) where prevention of its use by any of Westinghouse's competitors without license from Westinghouse constitutes a competitiv: economic advantage over other companies.
(b) It consists of supporting data, including test data, relative to a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.), the application of which data secures a competitive economic advantage, e.g., by optimization or improved marketability.
(c) Its use by a competitor would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing a similar product.
(d) It reveals cost or price information, production capacities, budget levels, or commercial strategies of Westinghouse, its customers or suppliers.
(e) It reveals aspects of past, present, or future Westinghouse or customer funded development plans and programs of potential commercial value to Westinghouse.
(f) It contains patentable ideas, for which patent protection may be desirable.
There are sound policy reasons behind the Westinghouse system which include the following:
(a) The use of such information by Westinghouse gives Westinghouse a competitive advantage over its competitors. It is, therefore, withheld from disclosure to protect the Westinghouse competitive position.
(b) It is information which is marketable in many ways. The extent to which such information is available to competitors diminishes the Westinghouse ability to sell products and services involving the use of the information.
2tl63A
AW-96-994 (c) Use by our competitor would put Westinghouse at a competitive disadvantage by reducing his expenditure of resources at our expense.
(d) Each component of proprietary information pertinent to a particular 1
competitive advantage is potentially as valuable as the total competitive !
advantage. If competitors acquire components of proprietary information, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage.
l (e) Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position of prominence of Westinghouse in the world market, and thereby give a market advantage to the competition of those countries. )
i (f) The Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success in obtaining and maintaining a 1 l
competitive advantage.
I l
(iii) The information is being transmitted to the Commission in confidence and, under the i
- provisions of 10CFR Section 2.790, it is to be received in confidence by the Commission.
I (iv) The information sought to be protected is not ava:lable in public sources or available
- information has not been previously employed in the same original manner or method to the best of our knowledge and belief.
(v) Enclosed is Letter NSD-NRC-96-4782, July 29,1996 being transmitted by 1 Westinghouse Electric Corporation M) letter and Application for Withholding Proprietai,~ Information from Public Disclosure, Brian A. McIntyre M), to Mr. T. R. Quay, Office of NRR. The proprietary information as submitted for use by Westinghouse Electric Corporation is in response to questions concerning the AP600 plant and the associated design certification application and is expected to be applicable in other licensee submittals in response to certain NRC requirements for i
justification of licensing advanced nuclear power plant designs. ;
i i
2863A
AW-96-994 This information is part of that which will enable Westinghouse to:
(a) Lemonstrate the design and safety of the AP600 Passive Safety Systems.
(b) Establish applicable verification testing methods.
(c) Design Advanced Nuclear Power Plants that meet NRC requirements.
(d) Establish technical and licensing approaches for the AP600 that will ultimately result in a certified design.
(e) Assist customers in obtaining NRC approval for future plants.
Further this information has substantial commercial value as follows:
(a) Westinghouse plans to sell the use of similar information to its customers for purposes of meeting NRC requirements for advanced plant licenses.
(b) Westinghouse can sell support and defense of the technology to its customers in the licensing process.
Public disclosure of this proprietary information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Westinghouse because it would enhance the ability of competitors to provide similar advanced nuclear power designs and licensing defense services for commercial power reactors without commensurate expenses. Also, public disclosure of the information would enable others to use the inforination to meet NRC requirements for licensing documentation without purchasing the right to use the information.
i 2863A
4
- AW-96-994 i
- \
t i The development of the technology described in part by the information is the result of l 1
j applying the results of many years of experience in an intensive Westinghouse effort j
! and the expenditure of a considerable sum of money.
i l In order for competitors of Westinghouse to duplicate this information, similar l technical programs would have to be performed and a significant manpower effort, 1
i having the requisite talent and experience, would have to be expended for developing j analytical methods and receiving NRC approval for those methods.
Further the deponent sayeth not.
4 h
i i
i 1
2N63A
O ENCLOSURE 2 TO NSD-NRC-96-4782 WESTINGHOUSE PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 2861A
Method for Calculating the PCS Film CoveVage input ~for the AP600 Containment DBA Evaluation Model k-e i a.
n June 6,1996 o
i
~
!R. P. Ofstun, Senior Engineer Containment and Radiological Analysis
"; 9
.I
. n.
~
Contact John Butler # f !j ,
)
.i -
~
' 1 412-374-5268 y1 -
- 1 Westin@ouse Electric Copation t
t O
1-cwewocamnweon if- '
Li- -
g ..
Objectives: .
- 1. Present an overview of the PCS test program 2.
Describe the phenomenological model for calculating film breakdown and compare with test data 3.
Describe how the bounding film coverage input is calculated for the evaluation model * " ,
1 r -
3 -
. i, ,
e a
L ,
.is! . . !
i).
1 #
It '
1
- 5 cmecocareen WPD2 h
- - -_-- - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - . - - - - - - . - - - - - _ - - , _ - - - - _ - - - - - . . . - - - _ - - - - - - _ - - , - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ - - - - - - - _ - - _ - _ - - - - - - - --_--__- -----_-----u- - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _
PCS Test Program
- 1. Water Film Formation Tests
- 2. Water Distribution Tests
~
- 3. STC Wet Flat Plate Tests
~
- 4. Small-Scale Tests
- 5. Large-Scale Tests i
C swPWOCSI907J WPO4 c .
4 I
Water Film Formation Tests (WCAP-13884) .
Purpose of Tests
- 1. To show the wettability of the selected exterior coating for the AP600 containment shell.
- 2. To characterize the general requirements for forming a water film over a large surface.
i Apparatus ;
The test section is an unheated,8-ft long,4-ft wide steel plate on a pivoting frame. Tests were run in 2 orientations, vertical and 11' from horizontal. The plate was coated with the selected inorganic-zinc r coating. .
s l
Results .
The selected coating wetted raadily.
l A point source flow rate of 1 gpm produced a 1-ft wide stripe, at both inclination angles. !
I Film breakdown was not observed.
Various methods 'were tried to enhance the spreading across the entire width of the plate. A dam and weir system was found to be the most effective in distributing trie water. i C swpWOCSisoFJ WPD6
Full-Scale Water Distribution Tests (WCAP-13960)
Purpose of Tests ,
To provide a full-scale demonstration of the capability to distribute water on Ipe dome and top of the containment sidewall with worst case manufacturing tolerances.
Appsrstus u4 The test section is a 1/8 secar of the full-scale dome. The test section was built with maximum allowable weld tolerances between the steel plates and was coated with the selected inorganic zinc coating.
Results The time to fill weirs and reach a steady state coverage at 220 gpm equivalent flow rate was about 10 minutes.
The film coverage was measured as a function of flow rate just above the second weir and at the springline on the full-scale test section.
t 4
1
. , ,, )
, ... j cwecocsueora wees ,
a _m Awa A.hm manesm-mm,4.e.v-m-m.--
S 9
e
- - .U tSh 1
(I @
v,:- w> w
, i.-
A~
! +
l
- y. ' ~
l . .
k .
\
1 i
f*4 E " ' ' *
.y.
i '
. ; ilh., . n' gs:
.a
?
4 TEST ' LOW-i NUMBERRATE GP i
}' :
- L .3 ,
\
g
)
a i
! ;j 'l,/l il ,E. ,l .?/ ! /
$ ! ,' #,// ,l
~
, Q N
/ \
t
~.
s.
p
} ;
~. . -
li x .
w u
\
r s i .
- f. /,~
i k' , ,c. *
, j' x %
lj' e -
?
' h
~
N N
\
\ 9 y,
U . '
. m,r ~ ' $
r,.
l x
/ /'/ / 4 /* A / 4 ,! / l / , [
Coverage Data From the Phase 3 Water Distribution Tests
_ - o) b) c
$2 . -
't t
I a
~t Z
f a
. .r , ,
V It t t
- i
.=
C \WPOOCS190FJ WPOS
STC Wet Flat Plate Tests (WCAP-12665 Rev.1)
Purpose of Tests
- 1. To obtain data on evaporative heat and mass transfer.
- 2. To observe film hydrodynamics including possible formation of day patches due to surface tension instabilities.
Apparatus The test section is a heated,6-ft long, 2-ft wKle steel plate. The plate was coated with the selected inorganic zinc coating. An air duct was formed with a clear Plexiglas cover to allow film flow visualization. Tests were run in two orientations, vertical and 15' from horizontal. A wavy laminar water film was formed and covered the entire surface.
Results The film was stable and showed no tendency to breakdown and form rivulets as it evaporated over the range of test conditKms. ,
The film was not adversely affected by the countercurrent coolitig air flow over the range of tested air velocities (5.9 - 38.7 ft/s).
C twPOOCS190lJ WPolo
She e
y
- meummuuan
/~i
- 5
===== h!x, 2llll:,k j ,
- t .
D
[-
,sA
,c e
--- a ea . :
- ene s
's
t 0
s D
O b
\
n.
u W.
E-= .
W
'M ,
, ,9 ' .. C;
~
- A ;
- b. .-
9 b 4'.
W 3
N ~-*.*
Q _ ,
. fr w
-*'.. - * . ,2 y
>e w --,~s ,-
.. -+ y 4 s
"? m & c# .-.'f.-
e& W m A
'Q
- bl** ns .t g ? '
a m. .
@ Y,.Me W"' -
' '- . , . ,-a .. . -- u 9 .
"O O -
I- # t, , ., .,
u b -
W ~
u 9
m b
2 u 8 e
==
b m , , e u
/ % ~
i t
d s e a t
a l e l l
l u
f f s r
a t
s ai w o be l p t n w a c
g ee rl i
r n ap d n
i d pm i l
l u si ns y c
c ag i
n t r
n e i h s
asu t n y n o bd o i
t e s dm i
. t d e e n r l o
c do nf u v
u s i r
g n or a r m i
t u w r a
r sm f o
p e l l ef i o
o s r t
f set e n o va w e ew o g r d r k n u s a a si n a
r er a em r b .
) r e
pla t
osn 4 v r
e yv yi o 3 o t ea ci t .
1 a nd 4 t a
mw a do en 1
- d i dr m nc P r o et e t f f t
s A f s 3n i
oe nt C n ,u f a l l
aA do W
(
r .
t s sn t
t
. h a e g
s so f s u dn at i i
4l nar t
s mdn 2u n
a e s do an l ehe T t s
nc at i sar bt are l
e T e t ae n t yi a
t s v 3 a ed i
l i
c n so I O
P c f o hic s a a ad we W S- e n ca u t
f g t J
7 0
si n s mar i t 9 l s a e s t 1
l a o p
t br r
a t es o
l u
l i
f o S C
oev p p 0 m r u oe p hn ec l s
e hv e a 0 P
w S P Ts A Te R Te g
C l
s_,w anwwm_,,,ue--w ,v._ww-A--w-.sm,--ww -w- w-em=
mM"-MOkeeA'H""A-"E"A"'<A-M h AMM6""MA-"-Ak"&=M&A-- -4wM-m-uA'- -m -& sx A=Aba -- - -
I i *
( .
i l
i 0
0 O
e e
1 a f
\
- k. ,
t t,
I '
l .
l 1
y.r- t
~
l 3ug ;
s ,y.
e e I
I 1
e:
l l
d I
I i
i E
i i
t
< __.- - - - _ _ -.___ ._. _ _ _ _ -, ___ _ ..-. . .. . - - - - . . . - . - -w-.--- . ,- - - - - -... ----- --- -
.4- - - --5 A at-a.44mJ e 4.AM__ J,aa_a_ .__h-e eami-. a. d e a _'a-e -ah,.__-4-... se a u, m,as s m 3,,a , , , , _ _ _
4 \
1 f .
i 1 3
sr I
4 i
)
1
\
a l 0 1 d )
4 4
s 1
5 .
1 i
4 5
.t l
4 e
t 1 .
i a
d M 01 f 9 4
h i e
. O .
1 m '
M l 3 m l l
J $ 1 1
1 i I i '
d e
t' e
e 4 4 o
2 8
o
Large-Scale Tests (WCAP-14135, PCS-T2R-050)
I Purpose of Tests To obtain heat and mass transfer data for a geometrically-similar pressure vessel including the effects of natural convection and steam condensation on the interior of the vessel and evaporation on the exterior.
i Apparatus .
The test facility is a 1/8 scale pressure vessel surrounded by a transparent baffle enclosing an air annulus. A wavy laminar film was created on the dome by a series of evenly spaced J-tubes. 1 Results As the heat flux was increased, the 100% circumferential coverage was interrupted by the formation of stable dry patches (most likely by thermocapillary breakdown of the film) just below the J-tube location on the dome. The film formed stripes which flowed down to the bottom of the sidewall.
The width of the wet stripes decreased with increasing heat flux or decreasing water flowrate between tests.
The width of the wet stripes remained constant as they flowed down the vertical sidewall (except in the case of an elevated steam source, in this case the stripe width was observed to increase below the steam source). ,
A hot, dry vessel wetted quickly.
CtWPWOCSt90FJ WPDt6 ,
me..,m.. -
.a. . . m..- . -- - - - - .- -- - -:.r.m.-r+- ,
---w ----.m ,_.-%.-ma,- - - - --.-m --,r4,w aw.m a am.m.ase u -w .mmm4.s-mes...a _mam.,.mi aa m+ m .a a e
e o
W 4
J T, 199r ". '
. h ,* " " v4 f
, ) ., 4 .
4
? .' % ~~,, l
't g, ,
Q~.
W '.' A, O * - Nij l T, , . y .
i' .
f > A A
., bs. i , ,' .
7 o ,
. ~( oM b, "
Q .-- '.,'
~,
Y '
- Q .
2,. ~ . . . .
x<:
up s.
. ns
. t
' = =
y [ ,,
.- - f '? ,
-, I l .
g * .
n e .
/
.'., /
j
-=
j l m, N
/
I 8
D
. g
,Wp, , p he -
.mmmersEF- . __ _
~ " ' ' ~T- M , - . . , , ,-.. _. ,, .
d ' ' ' -
_ma . _aa4-0 i
l
. T n,
. I8
! B ?
! a5
{
i -
- f I ! }
1e N > T-
- I ] < w / _, _
a 5- h l J I--I I
" E
< !3 .
l T N '
i
! 8 l }N _
- tw}l 7, (, i \ -
- 4 _ __ _ _ n_
l 1
l
\
Q K 1 i
di i
c s
. I I I l
)
b11 y l 1 ,
l 0 l 9 / 9_
l 3 ( / -(
i X 8 6 1 1 1
- .c -
! .T 8} }j .
? O '
b b d l'
i CU l 1 lg 3 $g l
~
k k l u) !
CD O
CL
]
w_-___ -
Large Scale Test Water Coverage Pattern
/ .
s 50j ;
' 2 h <
~
i: . .
l: i n f.
C *WPDOCS\1907J WP019
__._________._m
w--A 1- A - L n -- - a .w --
0 sr 4
U l
\
i l
M
- U
- M i 9 .
l Ea .
I G
l m <
4 o
)
i M
l e i O
w O
l W I
m l
l 1
l g O 9
=
8 O _ - ____.
~
Video Tape Presentation Key Observations from Videotapes:
. Water Distribution Test
- The weir system creates film stripes on-the vessel that cover about 90% of the surface below the weirs at the scaled 220 gpm PCS flow rate.
^
. Large-Scale Test (wetting of a hot, dry vessel)
- The hot, inorganic zinc coated surface wets and re-wets readily
. STC Fht Plate (dryout and re-wetting of surface)
- Water film remains thin to complete evaporation, consistent with a receding contact angle near zero.
C \WPOOCS6907J WPD2
~~
Comparison of the Range of Film Coverage Paiameters 64C AP600 Min Max Wet Shell Surface Temperature 212' F 2
Wet Shell Surface Heat Flux 1300 11500 BTU /hr-ft Sidewall Film Flow rase 0 256 lbm/hr-ft Applied Film Temperature 50 120' F Evap. Film Temperature 200* F Sidewall Film Reynolds Number 0 1400
- For evaluation of film stability, it is important to bound the estimated highest heat flux, lowest film temperature and lowest Re numbers
. Therefore, the test data bounds the expected range of the AP600 film co'verage paracneters O
C twPOOC$ugo7J WPO22 9
e e
e Y 1f 2 M
M M - o Y
W 1(
Ale R y
s
, w "y n uN MM M
" h 3
,= ,
Y M b V
If I X g
3 c s ,3:_
n
- a *
- M g a
= .
o
, a >
M y -
n M N 5n N
)!
- e n
' I L __t ,C O
Ja@nN ad WI!d 11x3 i
i C \WPOOCS)t 307J wPD23
Application to AP600
+ Based on the Test Data: -
- 1. Primarily surface geomety (plate misalignment) and thermocapillary effects (as the film temperature is increasing) will cause the film to breakdown on the dome (as observed in the Water Distribution Tests and Large Scale Tests). ..
- 2. Below the weirs, the siYell will be covered with a large number of film stripes instead of a continuous sheet of film (as observed in the Water Distribution Tests .and Large Scale Tests).
- 3. About 10 minutes is. required to fill the weirs and establish steady state coverage at the initial 220 gpm PCS film flow rate (as measured in the Water Distribution Tests).
- 4. The film will be ab's to wet a hot dry vessel (as demonstrated in the STC Flat Plate Tests and the Large Scab Tests) as steady state coverage is being established. ,
- 5. The film stripes will continue to thin while maintaining a relatively constant width dunng evaporation (as observed in the Large Scale Tests and STC Flat Plate Tests).
- 6. The water coverage will decrease as the PCS film flow rate decreases with time (as observed in the Water Distribution Tests and Large Scale Tests).
e a
_ m I 3
_ p g
_ 0
_ 2
- 2 e
_ t a
r o
p 0 a
v E )
_ y 2 l
1 e
- f _
t _
e l
p h r '. _
n . 5 /
o dsU C
nT _
o aB s
t d h o(
u _
e T x d u _
e l
e F N .
. 4 t a a e
r e .
A H i
l e
h S
f o a 3 n _
i o
t c
a r
F .
- 2 4 3 2 7 s. s.
- e. o . 0 o 0 o a 0 .
CO _. eu8 u eel 4 N O
W J
y m
. 9 C
O O
P y W
C b k
_..a .. 2 .-s .*_ - . 14- .-m. J ,L ~ ~ m - .-4. J. 4 .a4_
e 4 1 4
k h s
i D, W
i 4 .
4 4
1 1
i 1
F
)
i 4
1
- e t
1
+
6 1
4 4
4 k
4 S
e 4
2 s
2 3
a 1
l
Model Selection and Development Process Objectives a Need to predict the onset of film instability
. Need to predet how a film stripe behaves as it evaporates to dryout i
Process Used
- After reviewing the literature, a modified form of the Zuber-Staub dry patch stability model was chosen for calculating film. breakdown
- Mechanistic rewet model
- This model should conservatively estimate film breakdown since, typically, a higher film Re number is required to rewet a stable dry spot than to create one.
- Compared the Zuber-Staub model with test data / observations
- Developed a conservative approach to address the limitations of the Zuber-Staub model C swPOOCateofJ WPD2F
Model Development
. Assumptions in the Zuber-Staub model A dry patch has formed The dry patch stability model considers stagnation force, surface tension, thermocapillary '
force and vapor thrust The temperature decreases linearly across the film thickness
- The leading edge of the film is approximated by a wedge The film is in laminar flow
. Modifications to the Zuber-Staub model
- Added a bcdy force term (for non-vertical flow) 5 2
- Deleted the vapor thrust term (not needed for heat flux < 10 BTU /hr-ft )
. Stagnation Force + Body Force = Surface Tension + Thermocapillary Force P
f** + pgenspj - jo-case) - - U C swfaOOCSl907J WPD20 u--
Model Development Determine the Modified Zuber-Staub Model Sensitivity to input Parameters
- Heat Flux
- Film Temperature
~
- Contact Angle .-
C \WROOCSiso7J WPD29
1 l
o 1
e l I t
a O *l 8e m.m
.a 1 %
1
+ ++ h s
D E &
CD l
V $
+ x i i
3
~ *
+ ' .
.l ;
3 s . t
+ c 1 t l o is + . lg a 1 E " +
+* .-
u.
'l iP jr u I
I ' I
- t ,.g i g er .i .i l
8
~ s. a.
l O1 .JW /wQl ) auAuer)
C \WPCOC8\t007J WP030 1
r-O I
i 1
l
}
a I
i R
a 8 <r.
gg e N
+d b
i
- + h t s
"") J
- H g dl > I m ,
U e
+ x I I
3
++
+ i I
.s
- i. s
+ c i n+ l@ 8 l
<l o p.
E
" + .
u.
'I () 11 ll I '
' 8 I
g e o '- .i 8 g -
~
ll n Cu .au /woi 3 amuse C tWPCOCS180?J WPC39
e I
Model Development Determination of the Contact Angle input
- A drop of water was placed on the test surface
. The contact angle was measured using an optical comparator as the drop spread on the inorganic zinc coated surface
- Varied surface temperature
- Varied surface age
- The measured contact angles for weathered surfaces ranged from 8 = [20 to 28 ]**
- An angle of [23*T# was selected for AP600 analyses S
C WPOOCS1902J WPD32 t___._____
Model Development .
Contact Angle Measurements j / -
GW O
C \WPOOC!ius01J WPO33
t l
- l l:-
0 2
n m O , 5 1
m 5
- = N 0
- ) "
_ *m 2 t
f "
- O -
= o h r "
, 0 1 /
0 sU d O
_. nT
. m aB s(
u o
h
= T x u
g i F
e m
m e
m t ,
O a i
e s
e Omv e m w H a u ,
5 .
mm - e.
v i s-r
. a a
- e. m e
e O r.
m O m O g 0 _
9 e 7 s s 4 3 , , g _
g .,2" _
cRQMeeg pe Le@,z ea E E uo oOuo3m n $h8.!}3r
i i
Model Development - Address Limitations
- Comparison with test data shows the modified Zuber-Staub Model overpredicts the measured stable film flow rates of evaporating film - This is conservative
- Comparison with test data shows the modified Zuber-Staub Model underpredicts the measured Stable film flow rate of subcooled films at high heat flux - This is non-conservative
- Need to bound the subcooled film breakdown data from the LST dome region
- Assumptions used to calculate a bounding multiplier (R,,) for the Zuber-Staub Model Maximum heat flux (as measured on dome of LST)
- Minimum film temperature with no evaporation
[23*f# contact angle . .
- Wetted perimeter at springline = Wetted perimeter at exit e
b csweoocsueenweoas
_ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ . + -
l 4
l l
1 l
s S
8 3
V 4
f.
I 1
ft 4
e I
i i
i 4
d i i
I I
b 1 j .
4 I
i e
+
4 1 a
i c sweoocsueetJ wposs
l O
l
. \
d N
4
~s i
1 .
4
- t
?
e i
4 3
1 .
4 .
1 i .
i 4
- j '
. i s
I d
i ,
i e
f e
E e
i a
f ll 4
4 b
4 i
i i
6< e e
s f
i t
(
4 4
l I
e M.
f s
4 C swpCOC5\t0071WN7 J
1
0 _
3
. ^ _
' 5 _
2
- )
2 .
t .
f M _
x r . _
h _
- ' 0 2
/
U
- mM T _
B
, ( _
m n w
'. w .
o 5 u d k .
' 5 a .
1 se dn r g *M aB s
g,M u ot h a
, T x
l u
0 1 F m t a
e .
H n .
s g- d e e
- t .
M*' 5 a m.
m ..
e i
a t .
K = s
. m s
a E
g n m u
0 0 0 0 O-0 0 0 0 5 1
0 1
2 2
c38teeb a ae Le8S eE E .a ug _ b.aAs(u o il.I$3=
k Q
Evaluation Model Film input Required I
~
- Time of film application I I
- Film flow rate ;
i i
- Film coverage area and wetted perimeter t
t
. Film temperature i
l i
i CwvPOOC9 so7JWPO3e L
e
l Evaluation Model - Time of Film Application input Value
Calculated increase .
Time (s) in the Dry, External-Nominal Maximum Event Shell Temperature (F) l 0 0 PCS Signal generated 0 j 10 20 PCS AOV strokes open 30 50 PCS piping is filled 33 53 Water begins to flow onto dome 10 183 203 ' First weir is filled and begins to spill 50 333 353 Second weir is filled and begins to spill 70 653 Steady state coverage on dome 120 633
= The evaluation ~ model assumes no water on the shell until after steady state water coverage is established.
Time (s) Event O .
. PCS signal generated 660 PCS water applied over the shell in evaluation model S
9
. l Assessment of Conservatism in the Assumed Time of Filrn Application Objective l
- Perform a simple calculation to estimate the conservatism in neglecting transient wetting in the evaluation model Method i
- Assume the water is applied at 33 seconds (nominal delay time) and that after 6 minutes evaporates without any additional coverage. t i
Results !
8 :
- At a maximum, approximately 9 x 10 BTUs more energy could be removed from the containment by modeling the transient wetting period.
- This reduction in energy would reduce the containment peak pressure by about 2 psi.
k s
C sWPOOCS1907J WPD41
~
~
Evaluation Model - Film Flow Rate input
- Constant coverage area and wetted perimeter input values for each clime are assumed in the evaluation model. Therefore, the film flow rate input is modified to account for change,s in the evaporation rate with time Method of Calculation
. The gravity-driven PCS flow rate is calculated assuming one of two parallel valves in the PCS piping fails to open
- A conservative, maximum runoff film flow rate is calculated using the film stability model descnbed earlier
. The calculated runoff film flow rate is subtracted from the gravity-driven PCS flow rate to create the input film flow rate for the evaluation model
- Run the evaluation model and verify that the calculated average evaporative sidewall heat flux is .
greater than the value used in the runoff calculation :
CiWPOOCSte0FJ WPO42 6
J
t Runoff Film Flow Rate Calculation Methodology
- Calculate a maximum F value from the modified Zuber-Staub model
- Assume a minimum film temperature and a maximum dome heat flux
- Calculate the wetted perimeter and maximum film flow rate at the springline
- Use the bounding R, value to calculate the minimum wetted perimeter
- Assume no evaporation on the dome to maximize flow to the sidewall
- Calculate the distance down the sidewall at which the film reaches the stability limit
- Use a low estimate for the sidewall heat flux to minimize the evaporation on the sidewall
- . Assume the wetted perimeter remains constant until evaporation on the sidewall reduces the film flow rate to F.
- Calculate the runoff film flow rate l
Assume the film flow rate reinains at F until it runs off the vessel C WrRDOCSue0tJ wPO43
Comparison.with Alternative Assumption for the Evaporating Film Method
- Assume the wetted perimeter remains constant (as opposed to constant F) during evaporation on the sidewall. This is consistent with test observations.
$* . A" 4
0"zr-ig- im Results
- There is no runoff during the first 3,000 seconds so the energy removed by evaporation would increase by about 10%.
- The constant F assumption produces a higher (more conservative) runoff film flow rate cswmxesueora weo44
i o
a 1
i e
S un S
l S
ti R c
_o a
S m
m il .
A C L o U egQ .o. sO c d a o
- _E I%)
8- mQ L
- g -
m a.
D Q
a l l N R h h.
a a C C C C a a e -
2 @ @
88 11 0 9
- eg : -
e i ;o e o o O R - -
Cstooi3 asse moia 22cune 4
twP00CSI907J WPO44
I .
~
Evaluation Model - Film Flow Rate Sensitivity ,
Objective
- Show how the evaluation model is affected by an increase in the film flow rate Method
- Increase the film flow rate in 10% increments :
fl
- Adjust the application time accordingly to account for the decrease in weir fiil time as the ow ,
rate increases
- r 'ap all other input parameters the same Results !
. The calculated peak containment pressure decreases as the PCS film flow rate increases f
C \WPOOCateo1J WPDe
- ~ __
l i
b l
. I 1
1 AP600 -
Water Film Flowrote Sensitivities -
PCS Flow Rote Sensitivity l
\
- o l
t u, a -
v
- _.2 w ,
= _ -
l u,
u, 6
- a. _.4 e -
e e _
c
.- _.e o -
c ~
O o _
a .a O -
e
- m. _
e -
- N
_i
= N N
T -
O
.c ,,,
o _,,, ,
1.2 14 1.8 1.8 2 Normalized PCS Flow Rote l
l l
l C swPCCX21907J wp047 l
I l
. . . . . - . _ . . . . . . . . . . -_. .. . . - . . ~ _ ~ . _ . . .
l 4
, .'g l 2 .. l 3- =
1 w
a .
C1. Rm C E m
- 3 l w E '58 3 :
$e C 3 vE CS 1
- E $ !
.5 E b o \
- ' ~ 5
- a. a_s g g -g .se e
5e u = - q - 1
~
l
~
@ o c.
2
@j 5
E
'lm S h 'a
- c 3
@ s w og u
C
. f=
E t m
=
A O3 h,
8 fO oeb=a N
8 o me g gees E tx
=
n885 g -
e a E 3.
CD 2 gI $
2 = -
f= & V B[
ea e ae a .
O w
>e 8- 5 @
8
%s A eg. e I *
@ h 5 g
- - ~es N s * ~ ~
ga N $ h $
, g a_. 3 3 s Eh
- e. 3 o e g j 0
s s m
I2e ,
c g Tu e e
, .9 5 5gS I ~h m
s 2 23 3 = i . i. :
s se o o m h I LU . . . !
1 I '
a e
r r a .
t e
e s e g a m a
r w i r
e v m p
e p
- o g d c e e
g n 0
2 t
t o e
- a i t
2 w r a f o e
- e c o e h v l t o
t
- n a r d C o n i
t w a
- r a r o ,
e o l
f a
- t p e r
. a a l m a v i f
e
- W e e
t n g a
. f h a r
- o t n
t s
n e
v
- n i o o o s c c
- i t
eg A n a
c n
a .
i t
o
- a l
o h e l c
c d l a o L o o w l
e t m e n
- s n l d o
, h d o l
eis i
t a
t n i h r
_ o t _
o p a u
sd n o p
t s e
l a h ea a y r v t e v
- i t l e
e f om e
_ v d e o h e
o nd i
t h i
s t l l o t m h eie t o n n t hr h s pf ot t
- e i
e i o w e o v S t ar n u hl t ae l i i
t s
ue l t r f wcn n ae e oe e e l
e vm ei r
e ndr ose i s
n d
o ee r
w:e i f i
s o am tl hp r .
M t
d sh et pi r c cu is l
e ue we so at edi r dl n he ot t cd ml nc oa 0 4
O o ww ee o y/2 i
mv t P
W i
t e od ei r
l p DC1 eu J F
a v hn hp s hp Ti n 0
9 t
u i t
c Sa d o Ta - - - t l
S C
l a e h u O W
t s P v j b e R
e v w
E O
- M = = C
i 4
4 l
e M
.i l
i e l
d ,
i
=
2 a
w N
Q
- f, _ :::: !.
3 i 1
1
~
Si
~-
- Iw l,e :
8
~
h.
O o
G M
- s -
m 3-I I I I S S ? 8 8 -
. (sied) emeema C \wPCOCsu307J WP000 e
(>'
e
)
Summary
- The range of PCS film coverage test data parameters bounds the expected. range of the, AP600 film parameters and is sufficient for evaluating the film stability.model.
- The AP600 film stability model, which is based on a modified form of the Zuber-Staub Model for determining dry patch stability, is used to conservatively estimate a maximum value for the minimum stable film ;
., flow rate.
- The AP600 film stability model conservatively overpredicts the minimum stable film flow rates measured in the PCS tests for evaporating films and bounds the subcooled film breakdown data from the PCS tests.
- The input film flow rate is calculated to minimize the evaporation rate in the DBA evaluation model.
- The DBA evaluation model is insensitive to the location of evaporation. ,
6 4
6 4
C WWpc oCate07J we06