ML20113C231
| ML20113C231 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05200004 |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1996 |
| From: | Duncan J GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20113C210 | List: |
| References | |
| DFR-E50-00003, DFR-E50-3, NEDO-32540, NEDO-32540-R, NEDO-32540-R00, NUDOCS 9607010069 | |
| Download: ML20113C231 (22) | |
Text
,Q _ ik _ _ . b--] [ fp
.,.(
- , . m -,z - = _ ,m -
f.
pj^
't
[_g i le .
- ! ' ' I <
._f I. 1 Y w a, 5 l> > lb) '
_ ,l ?
s#e :%sp,.96, Alu , v%4 96 g > , mm -l ._., .. , y,,
o.# w S %wgm;m a, wp .
g.aw c,r.i '
,,, , .,7: ., x aN gm , < A n m M~ - * #'o ; a-,
q
< p*e< x y <
s'% m% ? m. p' . p'r ' D
, #e4 - - r
"# s-
<l&v. j
+ ' ' ' ^
Ag .j .~,, 7 f %{ s$ 'R _.b
,-__ h - f;N. '
}_
W .lY
- ns
' a 8
r 1 ,
.pe Mn n .. g Own n ,p, c& s ' se ' '
n' s' ~u '.
1 1-
'2 '
'y ~ :
o ..-
en m
,\
<,e P hhDk d ep w m $ ,$ mfaw -ll ,- m : '
- is ,
m m ,
+1GE Nu. ,.~,clearEnergW . ,
m&r ,
s
~4. ... ' ,o ,
, ., g, ;- wm ,. -g ,
, s-
[ ' W - p % > 3, ,
7 * "
NW> Pi [
gg$.h @hf.h hhs.g g,qs whh m we e a 4
, f 5 ...,d,' ,
,a s
_% sNED63254,0h . - u r. . , .m s ,
7 ji , ?. ; >
w o e w g l .
j %@st,p ,.e- s .. - 'g y y 7 . _w :... ,
w a . vu.w t -,, ,~e xy . , --
A. ca I,
sr ^
i
-gs v.s y ym y'
t( h e q, - ,.
w, m,-q' h1
,, 2 .
s u, ;;y ,
- u. ,e.d/M. .;4v .
w ,m g%r , 3%es, ~ + . m;,*,. g. 3.
, ,2 m~ r n ;'s . -- ,Q, ' ,
l M n- .m, .
x , + . , , =
I
- m w%v.
s: yf cul.
- t
,'. *,M w~) ',
ni, , ' .
- s . , y t yh~q q , ;c &
, ; ,
- wyfg a gd !+ *Du -
am '
fiMp$l .
- d. T
( +
' <~ en , + naje f/3 > ? '
's's .,OV
, f?g tf < r' t , ,7( ^ ?[.
'j$ y VW@flle h n h,hl ?.' ' , &l ',;,;.f,. ~ nv U.~: %l}'fd nY lo e_a., s' V b ' "
(w m W >~
v .
> , , t+
e-.<e Q. y, . , <
?ih- :f <Q y ,, .o' t?:Q.- +
4
~ ll? .:. t
.gg
. r y vn' w.w y . , . l 7 f w, y, q l .
ff x .. :l f fj
74
. . , .y a. .
9 m; ax,y_ , , n
, - - y;; _ - : pq < - m
- y. y,. g '
v g-- ,
n.+n a
..o e..
n -
y
, 8:
x ; s
~ i,
<< A< r w nw -
y,g <<, e y >s r +u WQn$ ,t%.l A 14 u.[. 4[ %. . '*
5 1 9;
yo ' l 'v / 5) '
M. c"* .Q.L l ,y +^m: -@ . .
7 s. $ q%, R.- .Q ea?> "
, .s 4 xy. 1 la v > m@c..m .T.
se %, ~k.m.
Wh- .j.1- * ,' , M m:%r ' b "e J < , ' '
w ,1 < > .- > - ,
m:J 5n1-r ,4 gxW ' %'. ",
mahp_. g&.s w s = -
g~cs ./
3 e,x
,4
%yJ
, j e.t -
a 2-s s a.%%y , e .m p - :M
-}wt .y ,
a
{
- d l> , i t
ql$w: $g$r dEgu s %m', _;& .-
, _sh ,%:m;l,?
Q %. :s T 9 ' M ' %. m , ~ ,
&c
, h ' ; ' WlaW , ,,
' , &m _ .
ny ^
yn 4_~ MRyma;&npsy ;
. e --
m ._ -
\
-+ co yeu _y; a, c; n+fh;g ~m gQ -
~ .f l,+ L . 'm _n%w w,,y
- C r o a a v,m 4
4 . > -
dnpwrNW>tistism' SA teracy a w< est;nepW 4
' M' w*
a6rtm ' "~
___W g)QM - i i ., . b W W- '
>l 3 , MQ W e Y ;l; n,p % & &+W YW"{ h)!
,. , x >
hh y ,, '
'+'
f~fll * ' ? pq O m, f ,A ,T ' - ,
ggg ggy y , q . ,
V' '
'W g' j;, Y fh#RQfglfgTfhff
~
yy %f e . , w
& y g > ~i fk[ngyy
. . , ~ , . /
, ll ;,,hhhhfyaf y??M*fMh&yffhhh Ik D
%megf ffg!jgkh[pWgghp% yc p adpp g M pu g g d
- N x9Whym;g . , ,
R . qq q Mc. Qhwygg i
.,9% c AgQMp:*mf Y g n s, , m .,m arum %m%nng&%pam s- ,
- c. x.m - , syg na 3 4;% g.
fhI my .~ lpW w. ..w;#,, bg&w ~b~
4.ygMs.
m ayp<W .g4, > -
,r
, ,3r < + ,
gg.,
g ^ #g4 p g ; .g.-- f
' YW f v.
?wf:g& w$$Yh hp g.k~4 g. :~f~ kb&g$,N
, , , a. .o x2 , *1 flho&g g O a, n]sY b h xw, ggg }fsyQg~a ?I gA ,
N ggf ; g%a m; &a 7 W. ^a<
r
. y.h h u, vy n LqAMWgWy"@Q; Q.Qr _ _ .
1 i
- M 9607010069 960627 PDR ADOCK 05200004 g%g7 Mgg MGh g- gg fjpR. %gyg{ -ayg$g$
gg %wp$y n?m abn n).,w n a n s~- . _.
-- ne-w
9- GENuclearEnergy NEDO-32540 DRF E50-00003 Class I June 1996 GIRAFFE SBWR Systems Interactions Test Report J. D. Duncan 78871888:8888L4 PDR A
GENuclearEnergy MRand BW rog 7 rtn A en $165 San Jose. CA 95125-1014 408925-1005(phone) 406 925-3991 (facsimile)
June 27,1996 MFN 093-%
Docket 52-004 Document Control Desk U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington DC 20555 Attention: Theodore R. Quay, Director Standardization Project Directorate l
Subject:
] SBWR - NON-PROPRIETARY GIRAFFE SYSTEM INTERACTIONS TEST REPORT
Reference:
- 1. Letter from J.E. Quinn (GE) to T.R. Quay (NRC), SBWR -
Proprietary GIRAFFE System Interactions Test Report, MFN 080-%,
June 17,1996 t
The attachment to this letter supplies the Non-Proprietary Test Report for the GIRAFFE Systems Interactions Tests. The Proprietary Report was supplied by Reference 1.
Should you have any questions concerning the attachment please contactJ. D. Duncan of our staff on 408-925- 6947.
Sincerely,
% James E. Quinn
Attachment:
Test Report, NEDC-32540 cc: P. A. Boehnert (NRC/ACRS) (2 paper copies of letter & report plus E-Mail)
I. Catton (ACRS) (1 paper copy ofletter & report plus E-Mail)
S. Q. Ninh (NRC) (2 pr.per copies of letter & report plus E-Mail)
J. H. Wilson (NRC) (1 paper copy of letter & report plus E-Mail)
D. Scaletti (NRC) (1 paper copy of letter & report plus E-Mail) .
A. Levin (NRC) (1 paper copy of letter & report plus E-Mail)
. /ui + w G s , \
t) - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - -
O '
GENuclearEnergy 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose. CA 95125 NEDC-32540 Revision 0 DRF-E50-00003 June 1996 GIRAFFE SBWR SYSTEMS INTERACTIONS TEST REPORT J.D. Duncan Approved NJames E. Quinn, Projects Manager LMR and SBWR Programs
NEDC-32540 IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT Please Read Carefully The only undertakings of the General Electric Company (GE) respecting information in this document are contained in the contract between the customer and GE, as identified in the purchase orderfor this report and nothing contained in this document shall be construed as changing the contract. The use of this information by anyone other than the customer orfor any purpose other than thatfor which it is intended, is not authorized; and with respect to any unauthorized use, GE and Toshiba make no representation or warranty, and assumes no liability as to the completeness, accuracy, or usefulness of the information contained in this document.
i
NEDC.32540 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 I NTR O D U CTI O N .... .. .. .. .. .. .... .. ..... ......... . ... . .... .. . ............. .. .. .... ...... ..... .... . ... ....... 1-1 2.0 0 BJ E CTI VES AN D TEST MATRIX .............................................................. 2-1 2.1 Test Objectives.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2 Test Matrix and Data Analysis... . .... . . .... .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.3 Justification of Test Conditions . . . . .. .. . .. .. ... . . .. . .. . . . 2-2 3.0 FA CILITY
SUMMARY
DES CRIPTION ............................................ ......... 3-1 4.0 I NSTR UMENTATI O N ........ ............................................................................ 4-1 5.0 D ATA A CQ UISITION S YSTEM ..................................................................... 51 6.0 TEST RE S U LTS ... ..... . .. ........ ...... ... ... .. ..... . . .... ........ . .... . ....... ... .... .. ............ .. . .. .. 6-1
7.0 REFERENCES
................................................................................................ 7-1 l
i
. NEDC-32540 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 GIRAFFE / SIT Test Matrix.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 Table 2-2 GS 1 Conditions - GDL Break, DPV Failure, IC/PCCS Off. ..... ... ...... ... .. . 2-4 Table 2-3 GS2 Conditions - GDL Break, DPV Failure, IC/PCCS On..... ... .. ..... . . . . 2-5 Table 2-4 GS3 Conditions - BDL Break, DPV Failure, IC/PCCS On..... ........ ..... ...... 2-6 Table 2-5 GS4 Conditions - GDL Break, GDCS Valve Failure, IC/PCCS On ...... ... .. . 2-7 Table 2-6 Basis for GIRAFFE / SIT Test Conditions... . .. .. .... ... .......................... 2-8 iii I
NEDC-32540 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS BDL Bottom Drain Line DAS Data Acquisition System DPV Depressurization Valve GDCS Gravity-Driven Cooling System GIRAFFE Gravity-Driven Integral Full-Height Test for Passive Heat Removal GIST GDCS Integral System Test IC, I/C Isolation Condenser LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident PCC, PCCS Passive Containtnent Cooling System RPV Reactor Pressure Vessel SBWR Simplified Boiling Water Reactor SIT Systems Interactions Test TAF Top of Active Fuel TRACG Transient Reactor Analysis Code, GE Version iv
f '
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Four transient tests were conducted in Toshiba's GIRAFFE facility to provide a database for TRACG qualification during the late blowdown /early GDCS phase of a postulated SBWR loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA). Of particular interest was the poten:ial for interactions between the containment and certain cooling systems and the Gravity-Driven Core Cooling System such that the latter is adversely affected.
This report describes the test objectives, test facility and the test results.
1-1
q NEDCJ2540 2.0 OBJECTIVES AND TEST MATRIX 2.1 Test Objectives l
The test objective of the GIRAFFE / SIT Test Program is:
Provide a database to confinn the adequacy of TRACG to predict the SBWR ECCS performance during the late blowdown /early GDCS phase of a LOCA, with specific focus on potential systems interaction effects (Integral Systems Tests).
l 2.2 Test Matrix and Data Analysis A series of four transient systems tests was conducted to provide an integral systems database for potential systems interaction effects in the late blowdown /early GDCS period. All four tests were liquid breaks: three GDCS line breaks and one bottom drain line break. Tests were performed with and without the IC and PCC in operation, and two different single failures were considered.
The test matrix defining the four tests is given in Table 2-1. Initial conditions for the tests are provided in Tables 2-2 through 2-5.
The initial conditions for all tests approximate SBWR conditions about 10 minutes post-LOCA (more orecisely, the time at which RPV pressure reaches 1.034 MPa, or 150 psia) based on !
the breaks and equipment operations listed in Table 2-1. All tests were run for approximately two I hours.
Containment related initial conditions were based on the appropriate SBWR TRACG LOCA case at the time RPV pressure is 1.034 MPa (150 psia). Initial containment pressures were adjusted slightly to account for the fact that there is volume-to-volume flow in the SBWR and no such flow in the GIRAFFE at the time of test stan. The GDCS pool water temperature was increased by a small amount (to account for non-representative RPV heat loss) so that the lower plenum inlet subcooling is approximately correct. Heater power was decayed from the start of the test to simulate decay heat and stored energy transfer.
The GIRAFFE RPV collapsed water level at the start of the test was determined by taking the liquid mass from the SBWR TRACG case and dividing by the RPV scale factor. The GIRAFFE water level is then determined. The GIRAFFE RPV is not an exact " scale model" of the SBWR.
For example, the GIRAFFE RPV lower plenum is shorter than the SBWR lower plenum.
Additionally, the GIRAFFE RPV material is thinner, and begins the LOCA simulation at a lower temperature than the SBWR. As a result, a smaller amount of energy is transferred to the RPV lower plenum fluid in GIRAFFE. Pre-test calculations indicated that the GIRAFFE minimum chimney level would be somewhat lower than the SBWR level. It was concluded that adding 0.7m of water to the GIRAFFE RPV initial level would account for this difference.
The following provides the purpose and additional inicrw ion on each GIRAFFE / SIT test:
Test GSI is the base case test, a GDCS line break, with DPV failure as the single failure and neither the PCCS, nor the IC, in operation. This test has initial conditions similar to GIST Test C01 A.
2-1
Test GS2 is the same as Test GS1, except that the PCCS and IC are operating. Test GS2 results were compared to those of Test GSI for identification of potential systems interactions associated with the IC and PCCS.
Test GS3 is a bottom drain line break with DPV failure. Both the PCCS and IC were functioning. Data from Test GS3 were examined for identification of potential systems interactions associated with the IC and PCC for a bottom drain line break.
Test GS4 is a GDCS line break, with the single failure being a GDCS valve failure in one of the other GDCS injection lines. As in Test GS3, both the PCC and IC were in operation. This ecndition was expected to provide the slowest rate of recovery for the chimney swollen water level. Data from Test GS4 were compared to Test GS1 to identify potential interactions with the IC and PCC even though the single failures are different.
2.3 Justification of Test Conditions 2.3.1 Choice of the Base Case Test Test GSI conditions resulted in the lowest predicted minimum SBWR chimney swollen water level, considering the various break locations, sizes, and single failure combinations.
Additionally, the commonality of conditions between this case and that of GIST Test C01 A allows a comparison between the GIST and GIRAFFE simulations.
2.3.2 Other Tests The other test cases were defined with the objective of identifying systems interactions, should they occur. Since the primary focus of this testing is GDCS performance, the RPV chimney swohen water level is the figure of merit in these investigations. SBWR TRACG predictions for several break locations, single failures, and IC/PCC operation combinations were performed. The additional tests, which are presented in Table 2-6, were chosen based on the TRACG results. The
" objective" column in this table indicates the major feature of each case which w;!! be captured by the test. The rate of chimney swollen water level recovery after the time of minimum level is expected to be substantially different for the GDL and BDL break cases noted for those " recovery" objcctives. Some SBWR TRACG cases evidenced chimney swollen water level oscillations, which was attributed to GDCS flow quenching voids in the RPV and to break flow depressurizing the drywell. Thus, a wide tange of conditions is represented by the four test cases selected.
l 2.3.3 Test Initiation The tests were initiated from a steady-state condition at the same time SBWR RPV pressure reaches 1.034 MPa. This is unlike the SBWR situation, wher: the accident starts at a much higher i pressure. This difference is justified, since the void formation, whict results from depressurization, occurs very soon after the pressure is reduced to the fluid saturation temperature. SBWR calculations indicate that void fractions increase in about 20 seconds to much larger values, then remain relatively constant until GDCS flow is injected on the order of 80 seconds later (causing l some void collapse) or until pressures become much lower than 1.034 MPa and the depassmization 2-2
NEDC-3L 10 rate is very low. Preliminary GIRAFFE TRACG cases indicated a very similar behavior. Based on this general agreement, the selected strategy is appropriate.
Table 2-1. GIRAFFE / SIT Test Matrix Test Breali. Single Failure IC/PCCS on?
GS1 GDL DPV No GS2 GDL DPV Yes GS3 BDL DPV Yes GS4 GDL GDCS Yes GDL = Gravity Drain Line BDL = Bottom Drain Line DPV = Depr6ssurization Valve GDCS = GDCS Injection Valve 1
l l
1 l
l 2-3
3 NEDC-32540 Table 2-2. GS1 Conditions - GDL Break, DPV Failure, IC/PCCS Off
{
Parameter Value Tolerance i RPV Pressure (kPa) 1034 12 kPa I RPV Initial Water Level *(m) -0.35 5%
Initial Heater Power (kW) 134 1kW Drywell Pressure (kPa) 271 4 kPa l
Drywell Air Pressure (kPa) 45 i4 kPa Drywen Steam Pressure (kPa) 226 4 kPa l
Dryva" initial Water Level (m) 0.05 +20%-0%
)
Wetwell Pressure (kPa) 255 4 kPa l
Wetwell Air Pressure (kPa) 234 4 kPa GDCS Gas Space Pressure (kPa) 271 4 kPa GDCS Gas Space Air Pressure (kPa) 259 4 kPa Suppression Pool Temperature (K) 334 2K Isolation Condenser Pool Temperature (K) NA NA Isolation Condenser Pool Level * (m) NA NA PCCS Pool Temperature (K) NA NA GDCS Pool Temperature (K) 322 2K )
GDCS Pool Level * (m) 16.3 0.075 m i Suppression Pool Level * (m) 3.15 0.075 m PCC Pool Level * (m) NA NA
- Referenced to TAF 2-4
NEDC-32540 Table 2-3. GS2 Conditions - GDL Break, DPV Failure,IC/PCCS On Parameter Value Tolerance RPV Pressure (kPa) 1034 12 kPa RPV Initial Water Level *(m) +0.11 5%
Initial Heater Power (kW) 134 1kW Drywell Pressure (kPa) 279 4 kPa Drywell AirPressure(kPa) 37 4 kPa Drywell Steam Pressure (kPa) 242 4 kPa Drywell Initial Water Level (m) 0.05 +20%-0%
Wetwell Pressure (kPa) 263 4 kPa Wetwell AirPressure(kPa) 245 4 kPa GDCS Gas Space Pressure (kPa) 279 4 kPa GDCS Gas Space Air Pressure (kPa) 267 4 kPa Suppression Pool Temperature (K) 331 2K Isolation Condenser Pool Temperature (K) 373 2K Isolation Condenser Pool Level * (m) 23.2 0.075 m PCCS Pool Temperature (K) 373 2K GDCS Pool Temperature (K) 322 2K GDCS Pool Level * (m) 16.3 0.075 m Suppression Pool Levei" (m) 3.15 0.075 m PCC Pool Level * (m) 23.2 0.075 m
- Referenced to TAF
)
2-5
f l
I =
l
. NEDC-32540 l
! Table 2-4. GS3 Conditions - BDL Break, DPV Failure, IC/PCCS On Parameter Value Tolerance
, RPV Pressure (kPa) 1034 12 kPa RPV Initial Water Level *(m) +1.86 5%
initial Heater Power (kW) 113 *1kW Drywell Pressure (kPa) 310 4 kPa Drywell Air Pressure (kPa) 8 4 kPa Drywell Steam Pressure (LPa) 302 4 kPa Drywell Initial Water Level (m) 0.05 +2040%
Wetwell Pressure (kPa) 294 4 kPa Wetwell Air Pressure (kPa) 278 4 kPa GDCS Gas Space Pressure (kPa) 310 4 kPa GDCS Gas Space Air Pressure (kPa) 298 4 kPa Suppression Pool Temperature (K) 328 2K Isolation Condenser Pool Temperature (K) 373 2K Isolation Condenser Pool Level * (m) 23.2 0.075 m PCCS Pool Temperature (K) 373 2K GDCS Pool Temperature (K) 323 2K GDCS Pool Level * (m) 16.3 0.075 m Suppression Pool Level * (m) 3.15 0.075 m PCC Pool Level * (m) 23.2 10.075 m
- Referenced to TAF ,
1 l
l 1
I 2-6
4 NEDC-32540 Table 2-5. GS4 Conditions - GDL Break, GDCS Valve Failure,IC/PCCS On l
Parameter Value Tolerance RPV Pressure (kPa) 1034 12 kPa 1
RPV Initial Water Level *(m) +0.14 5%
Initial Heater Power (kW) 134 1kW Drywell Pressure (kPa) 274 4 kPa Drywell Air Pressure (kPa) 40 4 kPa Drywell Steam Pressure (kPa) 234 4 kPa Drywell Initial Water Level (m) 0.05 +20%-0%
Wetwell Pressure (kPa) 258 4 kPa Wetwell Air Pressure (kPa) 240 4 kPa GDCS Gas Space Pressure (kPa) 274 4 kPa GDCS Gas Space Air Pressure (kPa) 260 4 kPa
. Suppression Pool Temperature (K) 331 2K
- Isolation Condenser Pool Temperature (K) 373 2K
- Isolation Condenser Pool Level * (m) 23.2 0.075 m i PCCS Pool Temperature (K) 373 12 K
]
GDCS Pool Temperature (K) 326 2K GDCS Pool Level * (m) 16.3 0.075 m Suppression Pool Level * (m) 3.15 10.075 m
) PCC Pool Level * (m) 23.2 0.075 m
- Referenced to TAF d
r 2-7
1
~
NEDC-32540 Table 2-6. Basis for GIRAFFE / SIT Test Conditions Option IC/PCC Objective Break Failure Operation Test ID Worst Break / Single Failure GDL DPV No GS1 Combination Benefit ofIC/PCC GDL DPV No GS1 and GDL DPV Yes GS2 Slow Water Level Recovery GDL GDCS Yes GS4 Fast Water Level Recovery BDL DPV Yes GS3 Case showing GDCS void quenching GDL DPV Yes GS2 and break flow depressurizing GDL DPV No GS1 drywell i
2-8
\
. NEDC-32540 4
3.0 FACILITY
SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION The GIRAFFE / SIT (System Interaction Tests) were performed by the Toshiba Corporation at their Nuclear Engineering Laboratory in Kawasaki City, Japan. Test data were obtained for TRACG qualification during the late blowdown /early GDCS phase ofliquid line breaks.
The GIRAFFE / SIT tests were performed in accordance with Japanese Quality Assurance Standard JEAG-4101,1990 (Reference 3.1). Review of this standard against the requirements of ANSI /ASME NQA-1 has shown that the essential elements of NQA-1 are met by this standard.
Therefore, results from the GIRAFFE / SIT program are appropriate for use as design basis data.
The GIRAFFE facility has been designed to make the post-LOCA thermal-hydraulic behavior similar to SBWR. The global volume scaling of the facility is approximately 1:400 with a nominal height scaling of 1:1.
l 3-1
I i.
l
- NEDC-32540 l l '
\ .
4.0 INSTRUMENTATION i
The following physical parameters are measured:
temperature ,
pressure l
differential pressure .
collapsed water level heater power ,
flow rate l
l l-l k
i 41
5.0 DATA ACQUISITION SYSTEM The GIRAFFE test facility has an integrated data acquisition system (DAS) for digitally acquired quantities. The DAS acquires signals from thermocouples, pressure transducers, flow rate meters and heaters.
I i
l l
l l
l l
i l
(
l l
l l
5-1
NEDC-32540 6.0 TEST RESULTS The tests showed that GDCS was injected smoothly and that GDCS had sufficient capability to keep the core (heaters) covered. No adverse interactions were found to result from IC or PCC operation.
l The database to confirm the adequacy of TRACG during the late blowdown /early GDCS phase of a LOCA was obtained.
l r
i i
4 1
i I
I i
4 3
h I
J l
i 6-1
7.0 REFERENCES
1 1
(3.1) Guide for Quality Assurance of Nuclear Power Plants, Electrotechnical Standard Survey l Committee, Japan Electric Association, JEAG 4101-1990. {
i 1
1 I
l l
l l
l 1
1 7-1