ML19354E802

Room Integrity Testing of Vermont Yankee Cable Spreading Room, Final Rept

ML19354E802
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	01/16/1990
From:	Reid B RETROTEC ENERGY INNOVATIONS, LTD.
To:
Shared Package
ML19354E801	List: ML19354E800 ML19354E802 ML19354E804 ML19354E807
References
NUDOCS 9002010378
Download: ML19354E802 (18)

Text

-

e ATTACHMENT A RETROTEC FINAL REPORT" O

-i. ., ,

O-9002010378 900116- '~1' hDR ACOCK 05000271 l' PDC- p" mu ..ine.ni iiiin am n.n i i.i .ini mii n e mii i- n-i ih - - -- -

~

• @N . kyk&NWMi$2&AW%sF'WWW

~~-

1-

=

== -

=

=

m

-~

ll ii E ;I 1

xm

=

m

=

N

=

m m

-=

m

"5ss - -iEEE ~ iggE iiiEE E- E -

Room Integrity Testing of Vermont Yankee Cable Spreading Room Testing performed for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation Governor Hunt Rd.

Vernon. VT 05354 Report prepared by: Brenden Reid, President Retrotec Energy innovations Ltd.

CONTENTS:

j

SUMMARY

2

1) INITIAL CO2 CONCENTRATION CALCULATION 2 ,

2) EQUIVALENT LEAKAGE AREA MEASUREMENT 2

3) MAXIMUM PRESSURE CALCULATION '2

4) PRESSURE PROFILE ACROSS ENCLOSURE SURFACES 3

5) TRACER GAS AIR EXCHANGE MEASUREMENT 3 i

6) CALCULATION OF CO2 LOSS RATE PER 12A FORMULA. 4

7) DETERMINATION Of MIXTURE DISTRIBUTION PATTERN 4

8) CALCULATION OF TOTAL LOSS RATE S'

9) CALCULATION OF RETENTION TIME '6-Appendices: -

A. ELA TEST DATA 7 B. 12A PREDICTION FOR WORST CASE LOSS RATE 8

'C. 12A SAMPLE SOFTWARE RUN 9 i

D. DOOR FAN BLOWER CAllBRATION CURVES

11 E. TRACER GAS ACH TEST DATA 12 F. TRACER SOFTWARE PROGRAM FOR AIR CHANGE' ANALYSIS 13 RETROTEC ENERGY INNOWATIONS LTD.

9 Antares Drive U.S. Mailing Address:

RO. Box 5632, Station 'F' P.O. Box 939 Ottawa Ontario K2C 3M1- Ogdensburg, NY .13669 i

(813) 723 2463 Fax:(613) 7232574 .l 1

.l O

SUMMARY

Between October 31 and Novencer 2. this facility was tested in order to evaluates a) the maximum pressure expected to be created by the. discharge of CO2 and b) the enclosure's ability to retain the CO2 mixture in.the event of a-discharge.

The results Indicate that the maximum pressure created will be relatively low, and that the enclosure is sufficiently tight to retain the mixture above 50% for 10 minutes.

1) INITIAL CO2 CONCENTRATION CALCULATION The type of nozzles installed in this system direct the CO2 directly downwards at a relatively low velocity. As a result the room fills up from the bottom, pushing the air in the room upwards. As a modification was installed which keeps the exhaust damper open during discharge, this -

opening will act as an air exit path. This should result in a very efficient displacement of air from the room. The initial CO2 concentration I

expected to be achieved in the room is 65%.

2) EQUlVALENT LEAKAGE AREA MEASUREMENT The tests were conducted using a' procedure recently accepted by the NFPA 12A Technical Committee and made a part of NFPA 12A in the 1989 edition.

Retrotec was a member of the research team employed by NFPA Research.

The enclosure's Eoulvalent Leakage Area (ELA) was determined by measuring-the airflow reaulred to create a pressure differential equal to the ,

theoretical maximum column pressure which the CO2 mixture would create in the room. The ELA can be described as the size of sharp edged ortflee which would exist to allow all the altflow at a given pressure difference to pass through it. In laymen's terms, it ls the size of hole that would exist if all the cracks and holes in the room could somehow be brought together.

The Eaulvalent Leakage Area for this enclosure was determined to be 154 sq.

Inches with the exhaust damper closed, and 250 square Inches with_It open.

3) MAXIMUM PRESSURE CALCULATION By inverting the formula in paragraph 2-6.2.1 of NFPA 12. the maximum pressure which the enclosure would be expected to be exposed to is calculated to be 3.59 inches of water (exhaust 1$mnper open). This is below the allowable pressure for " Light Buildings" as listed in table 2-6.2.3. I It is therefore reasonable to assune that the enclosure will withstand the l Pressure generated.

O 4,,j lt should be noted that the maximum pressure calculation in the 12. standard assumes full expansion of the gas during the discharge period.= This never i happens, and as a result this equation should be considered to be a worst case.

2.

y 1

)

4) PRESSURE PROFILE ACROSS ENCLOSURE SURFACES =

(}

An Investigation was conducted to determine the pressure differentials across each surface of the enclosure which would exist at the time of discharge, ideally, no pressures would exist. It was found that noticeable pressure differentials exist, recorded as follows:

To atmosphere (2 walls, floor drains): + 4.5 pa To control room above:- +23.0 pa To switch gear room below: -20.6 pa To corridor and computer room: -11.2 pa To reactor building: -250.0 pa (estimated)

These pressures appear to be created by 1) the exhaust fans pulling air out of the switchgear room, 2) the positive pressure balance maintained in the control room, and 3) the high negative pressure maintained in the reactor i' building.

5) TRACER GAS AIR EXCHANGE _ MEASUREMENT i Due to the known high negative pressure present in the reactor building, it was evident that a prediction of retention time based solely on ELA and static pressure measurement would not be sufficient.

l The tracer gas test to measure the actual air exchange rate of the room was conducted as follows:

b

\- / 1) A Foxboro MIRAN 1B infraspectraphotometer was obtained. Sulphur l

hexaflouride (SF6) was chosen as the tracer gas as it'Is essentially non j toxic, non contaminating, easily detected, readily avallable and has a L proven track record as a tracer gas for this application in the energy conservation and Indoor air quality industries.  ;

2) The room was set up to simulate discharge conditions (doors ci..ec, supply damper closed).

3) Two Retrotec 800 series blowers of 4,500 cfm capacity and a smoke evacuator fan were positioned at various locations in the room and turr.s on. ,

4) SF6 was gradually introduced into the blower air streams until approximately 250 ppm was present throughout the room. The blower air streams were directed throughout the room to ensure a homogeneous mix.-A much lower concentration of SF6 could have been used (i.e. 5 ppm) however it was felt that using a higher level would make the seeding process less prone to error and provide greater resolution. 250 ppm is still well below ,

the commonly used Threshold Limit Value (TLV) of 1000 ppm. -'

5) With the blower units left on, the decreasing SF6 concentration was recorded every' minute until 50% of the Initial concentration was reached.

/"'g 6) The resulting decay was analysed and the air exchange rate per (j hour was determined. The air exchange rate was 1.174 per hour or 634.8 cfm. j

7) Two other tests were done under slightly different configurations in an attempt to better understand the dynamics of the room. With the supply.

3. ,

r*

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

l

1 G dampers sealed, the rate dropped to 609 cfm. and with both the dampers and-EQ doors sealed it dropped to 558 cfm.

the final calculations .

Neither of these tests will be used in

6) CALCULATION OF CO2 LOSS RATE PER 12A FORMULA The maximum rate of CO2 loss caused by the weight of the column of mixture. I was calculated using the equations in NFPA 12A, adjusting for the different' mixture density. A 65% CO2 mixture has the same density as a 8.19% halon mixture.

For this calculation, the leakage distribution was assumed.to be 50% at the i top of the enclosure and 50% at the slab floor. This has been shown l theoretically and through lab testing to be a worst case leakage distribution.

The theoretical basis for the retention time prediction model rests on the physics of fluid flow through orifices. The leakage rate is determined as a function of the mixture density, the height of the room and the leakage areas. The greater each of these variables is, the faster the mixture will leak out. -

l The model solves for the length of time it would take for the initial

design concentration mixture to drop below the specified protected height.

l It can also be used to model the decay of concentration throughout the room

! In Instances where a descending interface does not develop due to air turbulence in the room. it assumes that CO2 leaks out of the'the lower

, \w- hole, (as it is heavier than air) and that air-leaks in through the ceiling level leaks to replace it. This prediction model has consistently 4 underpredicted retention time in all comparisons with actual discharges.

Experience has shown that many leaks which can be overlooked when '

conducting an actual discharge test must be' sealed in order to pass the room Integrity test.

When expressed in cfm. the maximum CO2 leakage rate caused by the=8.5 foot high. column of 65% CO2 was determined to be 176 cfm.

This leakage rate was arrived at by using the procedure to determine how '

long it would take for the descending Interface to drop one percent of the room height, (i.e. to 8.415 ft. from slab). This can be expressed in cubic feet as 32417 x .01 = 324 cubic feet. If it takes 1.84 minutes to lese 324 cu.ft., the worst case rate per minute is 176 cfm.

7) DETERMINATION OF MIXTURE DISTRIBUTION PATTERN Two distinct distribution patterns of the mixture have been observed during past halon and CO2 retention periods. If all air movins equipment in the room shuts down, if pressures across various surfaces'are caused only by the column pressure, and if the infiltrating alr enters the room at ceiling level, a descending interface will form. The extinguishing agent mixture will be below this boundary layer, in its original concentration, and the O air which has entered the room will be above it. Over time, this interface descends as the mixture leaks out the lower holes.

The other distribution pattern has been termed the "well mixed" case.

Instead of staying above the mixture, the infiltrating air becomes 4

4 .;

l l

i l

l l

distributed throughout the room, thereby diluting the initial concentration >

at all levels. This generally occurs when air moving equipment in the room is left on during the retention period, and if pressure differentials

, exist which cause air to enter at elevations other than at the. top of the.

l room.

l It is our opinion that this room would develop a well mixed pattern, and that the average concentration would diminich over time throughout the room. There are two reasons for this:

1) Two large motor generators are present which stay on at all tires. 1 Their operation causes a significant degree of air turbulence.

.i

2) Air is likely to enter the room at different elevations, from the walls  !

exposed to atmosphere, the supply dampers, and the floor drains if they ,

are not full at the time of discharge.

8) CALCULATION OF TOTAL LOSS RATE Two forces would cause-the CO2 mixture to leave the rooms the column pressure caused by the weight of the gas, and the purging effect caused by -

damper leakage and the various building HVAC systems. The HVAC pressures are likely to dominate.

The maximum possible total pressure created by the column of CO2 is-calculated to be 10.58 pascals. This pressure would be' distributed as a O.' gradient across the leaks in the room. For example if 50% of the leaks were in the floor and 50% in the ceiling, and no static pressures were induced by the HVAC systems, the pressure across the bottom hole would be j +5.3 pa (mixture flows out), and -5.3 pa across the top hole (air flows L in). Given the high static pressures already present, it is-unlikely that t

the presence of the column of CO2 would appreciably increase the overall l

air exchange rate.

The combined loss rate was determined by adding the two flows in quadrature, which is the appropriate technique when determining the cumulative effect of two pressure forces acting on the same openings.

(Fe2 + fp2 ) = Ft where Fc = predicted flow caused by column pressure Fp = measured air exchange flow caused by HVAC Ft = total flow in cfm For the cable spreading room with doors and damper closed:

() (1762 + 6352 ) =

~

659 cfm 5.

i i

9) CALCULATION'OF RETENTION TIME  ;

it is possible to use two approa(hes to calculate the length of time it  !

would take for the average concentration to drop from the expected initial l concentration of 65% to the minimum specified concentration of 50%. The simplest is to use a constant loss rate and translate the allowable decay .

In concentration to a loss in volume.

65% - 50% = 15. 15 / 65 = .2307. .2307 x 32417 = 7481-cubic feet 7481 cu. ft. / 659 cfm = 11.35 minutes M A less conservative approach would use an Iterative program or decay i

equation, which would take into account the diminishing concentration of' the gas leaving the room. In any case, the calculated retention time would -

be longer, in the order of 10%.

Another point to consider is that the room will reach a 50% concentration ,

before the end of the three minute discharge time, probably by the two minute point. Since the leakage calculations used start once the 65% is reached, it is appropriate to add one more minute onto the length of the retention period.

1. N!NlYG olt c ag pH m

' M ed Q ye;nu,j gg,,. .

A 0. % -ry m .

i /p/49-1 i

1

O 6.

i f

4 APPENDIX A:

ELA TEST DATA RANGE .NETA P NET FLOW AP FLOW CFM ELA (IN2) l i

-: i TEST 1 EXHAUST DAMPER SEALED AVERAGE ELA = 138 IN.SQ. -

l Depressurize 5 13 65 .638 164 =. 4 Pressurize: 3 11- 36 255 71.4~

i TEST 2 EXHAUST DAMPER CLOSED. UNSEALED AVERAGE ELA = 154 IN.SQ.

Depressurize: 5 13 83 721 186 Pressurize: 3 - 11 47 291 81-TEST 3 EXHAUST DAMPER OPEN AVERAGE ELA = 250'IN.SO.

Depressurize: 9 13 75 1294 333 Pressurize 5 11- 33 454 127 i ELA EQUATION USED PER NFPA 12A (converted to English units) e A = Q / A P / 1.0764 where A = ELA In in, sq.

0 = Airflow in efm 6 P = net room pressure created by fan '

l.0764 = constant O

.7.  ;

,pp., ,P.%..-,- - *- w *t'5+

1 i

y 1 i/

DP DOTFC DISCH4RGE SitlVLATOP VEP. 443

• APPENDIX B 44LON 1301 RETEllr!04 f ItlE 12A PREDICTION FOR WORST CASE LOSS RATE PREDICTION tl0 DEL This analysis was used to determine the Tosting Company: RETROTEC maximum possible loss rate caused by the lechnician llame: B. PEID column of CO2. See section 6 In the Date of Test: 110U. 2 89 report. The Intermediate value arrived at Location:UY CABLE V4 ULT WORST CASE LOSS was then used in section 8 to calculate CALC the total loss rate. This printout does 65*/. CO2 = 0.19'; HALON not constitute a pass or fall in itself.- .

Malis Go Slab To Slab.

Gas Being tiodelled: L30 L

~'

Lbs of Agent Not Enter ed .

Pr otected Room Volume (cu . (t): 324't? '

Elevation.Above Sea Level (ft1: 0.00 Doom Height (ft): 8.50 tlinimum Pr otected Height ( f t .1 : . 8.4L,

'tlinimum Retention Time (min):. LO. 00 '

Initial-Halon Concent.- ( *O : 8.19 Poom Static Pr essur e llEG pa: 0.00 Avg. Total Room ELA (sq-In): L54.00; Assumed BCLA (sq in): - . 0 0 -

n'" ttttt Thie Poom rolls the rent an the i Pr ocedur e pr ed'tc ts that i t. . e t l l t al e i i

1.84 m:tnutes for- the halon air inter f ace to de op below ' the mtn'imum pr otec ted height.

45tJ 4cceptance:

X _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _

This Sof twar e Conf or ms to the L989 ifrP4 124 Room Integrity Procedure-RN= l. 6 L8 PC :: 10.5'S ps.- L O . 5G p a Ar= 0.060 4LL= 0.030 F4= 0.500 C3= 2.895 Cd= 0.000 Cr= L.000 AP: 354 r= LLO 13 l i

8.

PREDICTION-MODEL  ;

i Testin9 Compan9: RETROTEC Technicion Nome:

Date of Test June 15 1989 >

Location NFPA ROON'1NTEGRITY PROCEDURE APPENDIX C 12A VALIDAT10N  ;

P 12A SAMPLE-SOFTWARE RUN Suspended Ce illn9 in Room.

~

This printout is used to demonstrate Wells Go Slob To Slob. i that the software program used in Gas Bein9 ModeiIedi 1301 Appendix B conforms to NFPA 12A. The Lbs. of A9ent Not Enteded -

values used and results obtained are Protected Room Volume (cu (t)t. 5409  ;

the same as those in the 12A sample. Elevat ion Above Sea Leve l( f t ): 0.00 See the next page for further Room Hei9ht ( f t): .[

8.86 .

Information.

Minimum Protected Hei9ht ( f t): 6.56 ,

Minimum Retention Time (min): 10.00~

Init301 Halon Concent. (%)2 6.00 ,

Room Static Pressure NEG Pat 2.00 AV9. Total Room ELA (sq in)= 163.98 Assumed 8CLA (s9.in): 81.99 This Room FAILS the Tes t as the I Procedune Pnedicts that it will take 9.02 minutes (on the holon/cin intenfoce to drop below the minimum i protected he i9h t.

AHJ Acceptonce X ____________________________________ -

' This Sof tware Conforms To The 1989 -

NFPA-12A Room Inte9nity Procedune

• • • • • • • WHOLE ROOM TEST DATA.*******

TEMP. int 64.40 TEMP. OUTt 68.00

• Fon Stat ic Pnessure NEG Pat. 1.00 GAUGE CORR. RANGE FLOW AIR CORR.

READS DPN PRESS FLOW FLOW D 11.0-10.0 99 0 650. 652 P 9.0 10.0. 99 0 465 463 ELA'S DEP= 191 in2 PRES = 136 in2 RM= 1.506 PC= 8.076 po, '10.000 Po Os AT= 0. 064 ALL = 0.032 FA= 0.500 C3= 2.208 C4= 0.000 CF= 1.000 AR= 56 T= 541 9.

.._ ___ _ _____ _ _ _ --- - - - - - =

4

6. DUPLICATING THE NFPA SAMPLE *

(?aragraph 8-2.7.3 of the NFPA procedut e contains a samole calculation. 8v

(,/unning this sample on ilA3 and obtainino the same results vou can show an AllJ that the software conforms to the Procedure.

Some of the Iriputs need to' be conver ted f rom metr ic to Enolish units to run on HA3. Here are the conversions neededt INPUT DESCRIPTION NFPA METRIC VALUE 6ONVERSION FACTOR ENGLISH VALUE (multiply by)

Volume (V) 153.2 m3 35.31- 5409.5 ft.3 Height (ilo) 2.7 m 3.281 8.86 ft.

Temperature in 18 e 9/5 + 32 64.4 F- r Tcmperature Out 20 c 9/5 + 32 68.0 F-Min. Height (H) 2m 3.281 6.56 ft.

Depress flow (Ou) .3069 m3/s 2118.6 650.2 cfm Press flow (Ou) .2197 m3/s 2118.6 465.5 cfm Some of t he results are repor ted in metr it, linte are the English coulvalantst

, Corr. Depres. Flow (Oct .3000 m3/s 2118.6- 652'.5 cfm.

jwslorr, Pres, f low (Oc) .2189 m3/s 2118.6 463.8'cfm.

Depres. Leakaae Area .1238 m2 10.76 x 144 191.8 in2 Pres. Leakage Area .0880 m2 10.76 x 144 -136.4 in2 Avg. Leakooc Area .1059 m2 10.76 x 144 164.1 in2'  !

To run the validation, simply answer the promots using the data supplied in the report as well as the conversions listed here. Enter 99 to the range prompt so vou can enter the uncorrected airflows dir ectiv. The result for the-Total Enclosure Leakage Method test is 540.48 seconds in the report and 541.47 seconds using the software (when cartled out to two decimal places). This .99 second differ ence amounts to a .18% deviation. and is due to not having gone to more decimal places in the various metric to English conversions.

The followling data is needed to run the Suspended Celling Leakaoe Neutrall ation Methods ELA (total enclosure) .1059 m2 10.76 x 144 164.09 in2 Depr es. Air f low .0767 m3 2118.6 162.50.cfm Pres. Air iIow .0549 m3 2118.6 116.31 cfm _

I, ~l"e i esult for this test to the renort is 843.56 seconds, the esult usino the

~'#

oftware is 843.00 seconds. ( The r eport result reads 840 seconds - this dDpears to be a typo.) This .56 second difference amounts to a .07 %

deviation.

N l

)

i S

i i

APPENDIX D

]i STATEMENT OF CAllBRATION.

Model #: 800 Serial Number: 89-CUSTOM 01 Owned.By: RETROTEC' a Calibration Date: October 25 89 Technician: Brian Sikorski This flow element was calibrated in conformance to ANS!/ANCA' Standard ,

210-85 (ANSI /ASHRAE 51-1985) " Laboratory Methods'for Testing Fans for -.

Rating".

• a The flow equations for this system are as follows:

I Flow Ranoe K Factor ,

18F 293.7 18R 341.4 '

I l

O\ 9 5

149.4 79.1 3 42.5 1.3 19.2 -!

1.2 14.17-1.1 9.634 0.1 5.10 '

Ti l

l FORM OF EQUATION: Airflow In CFM = Flow pressure in pa *.5 x -K Factor t

Example Range = 5. Flow Pressure = 75, Flow = 75 * .5 x 79.1== 685 cfm Infiltrometer accuracy is 1 5% of flow, or better, from a flow-pressure t reading of 25 pa to maximum. This system meets or' exceeds the requirements of ASTM E.779. CGSB CAN2 149.10-M85 and NFPA 12A 1989.

t Dated this 30 4 day'of Mhb , By d- -

M g [

Title production Manaaer ,

f

-s

tLu 4 ,_

j

'g3_ J ag

_k g

.r 5;.'s -J 1

f. 2

{

[j ^'* ,- 1 h :{ > ?s -

e M~ ,f Y_'d

+ 7' ..

f 'N. [4

• si[!, E.. 'cM

b. 9 -- ,

m 4

7

.' .* y I

' l li ' ; J .,  % * '- y/ f7 Y

k]+

.d I _P$, N

.b:.

' 1; .e;)

.h

) ,

-K

% -4 '

1;i. >

,~

p'

~

-s t; ,

r Q. p

• wsnatx1 p3j =

g  :

3

"< 4 v338 ovs woH aviv3 W

• x *

." s

~  ;

.u

,c03dc 9b$ . b t h .'":

I. h J ht.lj/.. bh[ !i

,s q.M.,

.. -4 g,, 4- .s* ,- , r :c . .t. ( f. Juy y

n s <

3 152 Cb G hCV 1 86T '

!? $ :fp

• ..i 2F & d 01C00L52 9j - v >- .y ,

' n' t lat5 T*CCC 529. r 'i ' '

'l l t J 5 h(3, . ; 5v*hCCTbJ9 s 411.l3 C i S

• OC0 .sa9::js . 31.y.

2 P b

'. 14 13T s

~18* 000 5aS( -

%. w' "

, =.

4p e

_e >

'. .4 -

'I  :. -

.. F .

(

y! A . -

12' CCCjs]9f:. -

h.-

r

< y  ;

r a l i.lB - - iviCCC'Sa9d% :Tv- ~ _

.g

~

{ (] - s ' 7 g

• g((_j gyg'c. . -

]7- --

s c..'~- ' o$

L 413J - ;16fCCC E, sa9 5, !lri ,

- .f s:

d, .

{ -'* 3  %

4 q fhhh.

h ' 5. % [.

. ~. 4

's

,o . -

i' L s . ;2p'000'Sa9 e 1; =- L L & ; -e -79*0C01$;9 .. -

l I. - -

f w

a'A<- 78*B00 529 -- . 11. , ,

~

n L& s. '

JE0'002-sas N-

-%.13' 4 >,

2l A -s C2*CCG 549 s:- 1); '

I

U A - .. Cp?008 sae s -

.i' >

m.. -

sa v z~ _. n JGbb37bboh- 50*66c- . ~ .3

, Lu 1GhS!.bhas ,16E*228 ,

6 xa s 'i bJoHs J*,TcpJ -

1 1 Lr n' oC7Dalas - E2,v icI000 .

b,.

i

).aat - '9tp'81p- +

ll 1

aI I

=>

a. ,

e 4 r e t:(

N:

1e '

1:

)- ,

.m w

li , -

.p .

)e. n..;

j

~

r .y 4 ,.l l' }

k: -

..r

r

-J g

\

c

P I

.T i 7

y s

<= f Y .*

t

...y' ,, J

. jit L.

m.___.._____

___=f., _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . _ .

1

_ . . ~ . . . . . _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _- .__'_..r._.'_..s._-.'.,.__._.. .

(

APPENDIX F TRACER SOFTWARE PROGRAM FOR AIR CHANGE ANALYSIS 2 REM PROGRAM NAME: TRACER. AUTHOR: Sebastian Mofatt, Sheltair.

3 REM Program revised by Brenden Reid, Retrotec, June'89 5 REM This program calculates the. air exchange rate of a room which has 6 REM undergone a tracer gas test using SF6. The units used for SF6 are usually 7 REM ppm however any unit may bt used. The program is written in SHARP BASIC.

8 REM Converting to GWBASIC is possible. Print and using statements need-9 REM' changes. In the cales change all LNs to LOGS. all LETs to THENS, and 10 REM wrap parentheses around the second Y(1) on line 110. Happy testing!

11 CLEAR : WAIT 0: CLS 12 DIM N8(t)*50 15 INPUT " LOCATION? " N8(0) 17 INPUT " TEST DATE? "IN$(1) 20 INPUT " NUMBER OF READINGS? " N 25 INPUT " VOLUME? (ft3)" VE:VV=VE/35.315 28 CLS : BEEP 2: PAUSE "X = MINUTES. Y = Sf6" 30 DIM X(N-1),Y(N-1):E=10*B:G=E:D=-E:F=D 40 FOR !=0 TO N-1 50 CLS :As="X("+ STR$ (1+1)+")="

60 PRINT A8 '

70 INPUT X(1): GOTO 90 80 IF N=1 GOTO 150 90 CLS As="Y("+ STR$ (l+1)+")="

l 100 PRINT A8:

110 INPUT Y(1):Y= LN Y(1) 112 IF 0<X(1) LET D=X(1) l  !!4 IF E)X(1) LET E=X(1)

I 116 IF F(Y(1) LET F=Y(1)

I 118 IF G<Y(1) LET =Y(1) 120 0=0+X(1):P=P+Y 130 Q=Q+X(1)*X(I):R=R+Y'Y:S=S+X(1)*Y 140 NEXT I 150 X=0/N:Y=P/N 160 T=Q-N'X*X 170 U=S-N'X"Y 180 V=R-N'Y'Y 190 C=U/(T'V)^.5 200 B=U/T 210 A= EXP (Y-B'X) 220 B= EXP (B) 221 Y=A'B"60 222 W=-l* LN (Y/A) 223 CLS : PRINT " Printing in Progress" 225 USING "#######.###"

226 LPRINT " TRACER GAS AIR EXCHANGE TEST" 227 LPRINT " LOCATION: " N8(0) 228 LPRINT " TEST.0 ATE: " N$(1) 231 FOR !=0 TO N-1 232 LPRINT " TIME = " X(1) " SF6 = " Y(1)

("'T 234 NEXT I Q 240 LPRINT " CORRELATION = " -l*C+.0005 250 LPRINT " CONSTANT = "A 260 LPRINT "ACPH= " W+.0005 265 IF VE)0 THEN LPRINT " VOLUME = ";VE 266 LPRINT "CFM= "I(VE'(W+.0005))/60 '

269 LPRINT : LPRINT 270 END

CO2 CONCENTRATION IN CABLE VAULT AREA. .

USING TRACER DILUTION. METHOD (ASTM E-741-80)-

O CURRENT VALUES:

ROOM VOLUME = 32417 CUBIC FEET INITIAL CO2 CONC = 65 %

LEAKAGE RATE = 659 CFM TOTAL TEST TIME = 20 MIN TIME INCREMENTS = .1666667 MIN TIME' REVISED CO2' CONC TIME REVISED'CO2 CONC T+ 0.0 MIN 65.00000 % T+ 0.2 MIN 64.780'15 %

T+ 0.3 MIN 64.56103 % T+ 0.'5 MIN 64.34266 %

T+ 0.7 MIN 64.12503 % T+ 0.8 MIN 63.90813 %

T+ 1.0 MIN 63.69197 % T+ 1.2 MIN 63.47654 %

T+ 1.3 MIN 63.26183 % T+ 1.5 MIN 63.04785 t T+ 1.7 MIN 62.83460 % T+ 1.8 MIN 62.62207 %

T+ 2.0 MIN 62.41026 % T+ 2.2 MIN 62.19916 % -

T+ 2.3 MIN 61.98878 % T+ 2.5 MIN 61.77910 %

T+ 2.7 MIN 61.57014 % T+ 2.8 MIN 61.36189 %

T+ 3.0 MIN 61.15434 % T+ 3.2 MIN .60.94749 %

T+ 3.3 MIN 60.74134 % T+ 3.5 MIN 60.53589 %

T+ 3.7 MIN 60.33113 % 60.12707 %

9 T+

T+

4.0 MIN 4.3 MIN 59.92369 %

59.51900-%

T+ - 3.8 MIN T.+ 4.2 MIN T+ 4.5 MIN-59.72100 %

59.31769 %

T+ 4.7 MIN 59.11705 % T+ 4.8 HIN 58.91709 %

T+ 5.0 MIN 58.71781 % T+ 5.2 MIN 58.51921-%

T+ 5.3 MIN 58.32127 % T+ 5.5 MIN 58.12400 %

T+ 5.7 MIN 57.92740 % T+ 5.8-MIN- 57.73147 %

T+ o6.0 MIN 57.53620-% 'T+ 6.2 MIN- 57.34159 %

T+ 6.3 MIN 57.14764 % T+ 6.5 MIN 56.95434 %

T+ 6.7 MIN 56.76169 % T+ 6.8~ MIN '56.56971 %

T+ 7.0 MIN 56.37836 % T+ 7.2 MIN 56.18767 %

T+ 7.3 MIN 55.99762 % T+ 7.5 MIN 55.80821 %

T+ 7.7 MIN 55.61945 % T+ 7.8 MIN 55.43132 %

T+ 8.0 MIN 55.24383 % T+ 8.2 MIN 55.05697 %

Tt 8.3 MIN 54.87075 % T+ 8.5 MIN 54.68515 %

T+ 8.7-MIN 54.50019 % .T + 8.8 MIN 54.31584 %

T+ 9.0 MIN 54.13212 % T+ 9.2 MIN 53.94903 %

T+ 9.3 MIN 53.76655 % T+ 9.5 MIN 53.58469 %

T+ 9.7 MIN 53.40344 % T+ 9.8 MIN 53.22281 %

T+ 10.0 MIN 53.04279 % T + 10.2 MIN 52.86338 %

T+ 10.3 MIN 52.68457 % T + 10.5 MIN 52.50637 %

T + 10.7 MIN 52.32877 % T + 10.8 MIN 52.15177 %

T + 11.0 MIN 51.97537 % T + 11.2 MIN. 51.79957 %

T+ 11.3 MIN 51.62436 % T + 11.5 MIN 51.44975 %

T+ 11.7 MIN 51.27572 % T + 11.8 MIN 51.10229 %

T+ 12.0 MIN 50.92944 % T+ 12.2 MIN 50.75718 %

9 T +

T +

T +

12.3 MIN 12.7 MIN 13.0 MIN 50.58550 %

50.24387 %

49.90455 %

T+ 12.5 MIN T+ 12.8 MIN T + 13.2 MIN 50.41439 %

50.07392 %

49.73576 %

T+ 13.3 MIN 49.56753 % Jce negf T+ 13.5 MIN 49.39987 %

T + 13.7 MIN 49.23278 % page T + 13.8 MIN 49.06625 %

T + 14.0 MIN 48.90029 % T + 14. 2 MIN 48.73489 %

T+ 14.3 MIN 48.57005.% T + 14. 5 MIN 48.40577 %~

T + 14,7 MTN 4A.74704'& T + 14.R MTN 48.07AAA S

m m G rTrenTrbmtu M T + 15.3 MIN 47.59264 % T + 15.5 MIN. 47.43167 %

T + 15.7 MIN

~

47.27123 % T + 15.8-MIN 47.11134 %

.T + 16.0 MIN 46.95199 % T+ 16.2 MIN 46.79318 %

T + 16.3 MIN 46.63491 % T + 16.5 MIN, 46.47718 %

T+ 16.7 MIN 46.31997 % T + 16.8 MIN 46.16329 %

T + 17. 0 MIN _ 46.00716 % T + 17.2 MIN 45.85154 %

< T + 17.3 MIN 45.69645 % T + 17.5 MIN 45.54189 %

T + 17.7 MIN 45.38785 % T + 17.8 MIN 45.23433 %

T + 18.0 MIN 45.08133 % T + 18.2 MIN 44.92885 %

T+ 18.3 MIN 44.77688 % T + 18.5 MIN 44.62543 %

T+ 18.7 MIN 44.47449 % T + 18.8 MIN 44.32405 %

T + 19.0 MIN 44.17414 % T + 19.2 MIN 44.02472 %

T+ 19.3 MIN 43.87581 % T + 19.5 MIN 43.72740 %

T+ 19.7 MIN 43.57950 % T + 19.8' MIN 43.43210 %

T + 20.0 MIN 43.28520 %

HIT ANY KEY TO CONTINUE...

Tok/ Coa disha q e +:m e = soo s 04 co % coa conenkko<. achived J w ' " * *A

, , ,, y, -

6s%Co, cme <x M a'n ae6'<<<d l /00 s *" A po .recoa.

1 ro % cco oncaMi., a,;s.;,,et is. e ninAc Q .f.,

qi4L eard .4 disshge a

Time h $C $ .{ &ff lCK i

l h Of K #

Yh S PCOrf

, ye seco>rk

/Yminah - 38 cecono[s l

3 i

M Og4 ~ ~~ k/Md

.i T

- ,. _.___O

ATTACHMENT B

" VERMONT YANKEE PRELIMINARY REPORT AND CALCULATIONS" I

1 i

O i

-i l

i I

i e

m . ~. -f .

'i!-i 3 -N ' 7 , ,

s 4~

,. p;: -

__r-s .

N '< *

, i4

. :. . g. f ,

i 4

1 E, , , -

,1 1 ~, -8

'A.. ,

1

h:j,

!?

?,Y, ,

e

' ' ~

Tnere~ are ' minor ' differences /between1this report and ! thelfinal _'M report issued by-RETROTEC.. toithe? 'd calculational- method ~si and 'TheJdifferences-:are-attributed conversions employed.1bytthe1a D'uthors. '4

< However both reports confirm- that thel. Cab 1'e4 .Vaul-t,i wil'1csatisty

~

.?

'its . design' bases.. - The' enclo'sure cwil1" maintainsits integrity.i #']

a

.during'the dynamic. discharge -(no:overpressurization1. willMoccur)/

.andtalcO2 concentration of:50%.wil'l'be establishedtand1 maintained d

for'more than'.fl0c minutes'(at least for 14':: minutes-38.jseconds)t. Sc f{

c)

'g i '

n '

6 K .J i^ * ,

e

'tl_ l Jq

!. s-t <s 4

i 4

,,f 4

t - i rp '?

t t ,

. s 1 .I 4

4 , , . ,

- , , 'Ar e yr f;

H -

i, a

I. N

n

(

4 y lf o.

4

(' '

i

, , *l; -

i. s

,'b 9

'[ '

e 1 L

a 11 E

,' j : . . '

h ~

q f-t

. .IV 1: _,

0

,$' f. .

ir, w

1e  :, ,

s 1 r dj_

, , , - + - . .

l

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

- , l1l' -

-