Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NUREG/IA-QO0l
Intem'at~onal Agreement ReportI. ~ -
.andHDR ExperimetgDt
Office of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20555
August 1986
NOTICE
This report was prepared under an international cooperativeagreement for the exchange of technical information. Neitherthe United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any oftheir employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, orassumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party'suse, or the results of such use, of any information, apparatus pro-duct or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its useby such third party Would not infringe privately owned rights.
Available from
Superintendent of DocumentsU.S. Government Printing Office
P.O. Box 37082Washington, D.C. 20013-7082
and
National Technical Information ServiceSpringfield, VA 22161
NUREG/IA-QO0l
150 "PA REC;'4.ý'0
1ý V'ýýoInternational Agreement Report_N': 0"
Assessment of TRJ C-PD2Using SUPER CANNONand HDR Experimental Data
Prepared byU. Neumann
Kraftwerk UnionHammerbacherstr. 12+ 14Postfach 32208520 Erlangen, The Federal Republic of Germany
Office of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20555
August 1986
Prepared as part ofThe Agreement on Research Participation and Technical ExchangeBetween the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC)and the Federal Minister for Research end Technology of the FederalRepublic of Germany (BMFT) in USNRC Thermal Hydraulic ResearchPrograms and BMFT Thermal Hydraulic Research Programs
NOTICE
This report documents work performed under the sponsorship of the Kraftwerk
Union in the-Federal Republic of Germany. The information in this report has
been provided to the USNRC under the terms of an information exchange
agreement between the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany
(Technical Exchange and Cooperation Arrangement Between the United States
Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Bundesminister Fuer Forschung und
Technologie of the Federal Republic of Germany in the field of reactor safety
research and development, April 30, 1981). The Kraftwerk Union has consented
to the publication of this report as a USNRC document in order that it may
receive the widest possible circulation among the reactor safety community.
Neither the United States Government nor-the Kraftwerk Union or any agency
thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied,
or assumes any legal liability of responsibility for any third party's use, or
the results of such use, of any information, apparatus, product or process
disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would
not infringe privately owned rights.
- ABSTRACT
This report assesses the predictive capabilities of the Transient Reactor
Analysis Code (TRAC-PD2) using data from the SUPER CANON and HEISS DAMPF
REACTOR (HDR) experimental facilities. The-report is divided into three parts.
Part I is the TRAC-PD2 assessment using SUPER CANON data. Part II is the
TRAC-PD2 assessment using HDR data. Part III provides recommendations for the
user using the combined assessment results. In general, it is shown that the
TRAC-PD2 predictions were in good agreement with the actual test pressures and
and mass flow rates for both these tests. TRAC-PD2 provided considerably
better results than TRAC-PlA. This was particularly true with regard to sound
velocity predictions which play a significant role whenever the speed of
pressure relief waves must be determined.
*iii
A.11
tL
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT
PART I: TRAC-PD2 RECALCULATION OF THE SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT
1. Introduction 2
2. Recalculation of the Results from Los Alamos 23. TRAC-PD2 Calculation with 120 Zones 4
4. Computer Time and Computer Costs 6
References 8
PART II: PARAMETRIC STUDY OF TRAC-PD2 'USING THE HDR TEST RESULTS
1. Introduction 3
2. Parameter study for the H-DR tests .32.1 HDR 1/3 initial calculation 42.2 HDR 2/3 automatic boiler connection 5
2.3 HDR 3/3 automatic boiler connection with nozzle 7
2.4 HDR 4/5 and HDR 5/4 8
3. Discussion of the Results 9
4. References 10
V
PART III: RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPLICATION. OF TRAC-PD2 TO SHORT TERM
TRANS IENTS
Page
1. Introduction 3
2. Automatic Calculation of Pressure Loss Coefficients for
Contraction or Enlargement 4
3. Parameter Study on HDR Tests 9
3.1 HDR 1/3 Initial Test Calculation 16
3.2 H-DR 2/3 Automatic Vessel Junction 23
3.3 HDfR 3/3 Automatic Vessel Junction with Nozzle 29
3.4 HDR 4/5 Vessel Junction .35
3.5 HDR 5/4 Vessel Junction without Loss Coefficient 41
3.6 HDfR 6/5 Vessel Junction with Bypass in Blowdown Nozzle 47
3.7 Summary of the Results from HDR Computations 53
4. TRAC Components 54
4.1 Trip Data 54
4.2 BREAK 55
4.3 TEE 56
4.4 STEAM GENERATOR 57
4.5 VESSEL 60
4.6 PUMP 63
5. General TRAC Instructions 65
References 66
vi
PART I: TRAC-PD2 RECALCULATION'OF THE SUPER
CANON EXPERIMENT
Translated By: TECHTRAN CorporationP.O. Box 729Glen Burnie, MD 21061
This page intentionally left blank.
-2-
1. Introduction
Recalculations of various tests with the old TRAC-PlA version showed that the
pressure relief process proceeded 1.5 times faster than would have been
expected from experimental results.
For this reason the SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT was the first to be recalculated
with the new TRAC-PD2 version.
This involves a horizontal pipe (Fig. 1.1) which is filled with subcooled
water. The rupture opening time, which is less than 1 insec, is attained by
igniting a small explosive charge which destroys the rupture disk at the end
of the pipe.
For the recalculations carried out with the TRAC-PD2 program, the following
conditions were taken as the basis:
Initial pressure 150 bar
Initial temperature 3000 C
Initial steam content x =O
Rupture opening area, full cross-section
Outlet pressure decreases to instantaneous critical pressure
Seven computer runs are carried out, in which the effects of discretization
and time step width are determined .The calculated sound velocities are
compared with the theoretical tabular values. In addition, the computation
costs and computer time are discussed as a function of the precision of the
results.
2. Recalculation of the Results from LOS ALAMOS
During the TRAC workshop held from 2/3 to 2/7/80 at LOS ALAMOS, Mr. Hughes
carried out a simple calculation of-the SUPER CANON EXPERIMENTS with the
TRAC-PD2 version. The results were brought to the meeting in the form of
a plot figure (Fig. 2.1). With the first three calculations, an attempt was
therefore made to complete this curve after the fact. Handwritten documents
Kraftwerk Union
-3-
from Mr. Hughes provided the following geometric input data for the pipe:
Length L 4.0 m (divided up to 20 zones of 0.2 m each)
Diameter D 0.1 m
From Figure 2.1 the sound velocity with L =3.9 m (length from the open end
to the midpoint of zone 20) and the transit time which can be read off (curve
Z 20) T =0.00349 sec is calculated at w = 1117.4 in/sec. At 150 bar and 300 0C,
the homogeneous, isentropic sound velocity is wh~miet 952.37 in/sec.
The deviation from this value is approximately 17.3% and can be regarded as
quite acceptable. Table 2.1 gives the recalculations~ with their input data
and results.
TABLE 2.1 RESULTS~ OF THE RECALCULATIONS
Deviation in %l
TRAC Zones T w frmFgrwhomn, isentr. Fgr
LOS ALAMOS PD2 20 -1117. 17.3 2.1
-41st recalculation PD2 20 2 x 10- 1274. 33.7 2.2-2.4
2nd reclculatin PD2 2 1 x 1-4 18.2. .-.
2nd recalculation PD2 20 1 x 105 10481. 20.0 2.5-2.6
Since the time step for the calculation for LOS ALAMOS is not known, from the
comparisation of the results it can only be assumed that it must be less than
1 x 1074 -The results from Table 2.1 indicate that, as the maximum time step
decreases in size, the sound velocity coincides better and better with the
tabular value. This relationship is verified by the fact that the TRAC program
per se uses a completely implicit procedure which calculates the time step
width AT from the following equation:
,&T 2.1
where Ax is the zone length and v is the mixture velocity. In an explicit
procedure, however, the time step is also affected by the sound velocity so
Kral work Union
-4-
that the following equation results:
LT Ax2.2
where w is the sound velocity. A comparison of the two equations shows that
sound velocity is indirectly taken into account by an artificial reduction
in the size of the time step and thus the calculation lead to better results;
This leads to the conclusion that in the transient region the time step width
should never be allowed to exceed 1 x 104 in order to ensure that the sound
velocity will not deviate by more than 25% from the actual value.
Regarding Figures 2.2 to 2.11, it can also be stated that they contain all the
curves with which the sound velocities in Table 2.1 were calculated.
Curves 2.4I and .2.9 represent profile plots. They were plotted by Dr. Sueveges
using a subroutine in the DEGAS plot program. The pipe length is plotted on
the x-axis; here the open end of the pipe is at 14.389 m (on the right in the
figure). In the case the profile plots provide instantaneous pictures (snapshots)
which depict the pressure variation at a certain point in time (1 msec, 2 msec,
3 msec, 14 msec, etc.) over the length of the pipe.
3. TRAC-PD2 Calculation with 120 Zones
These calculations were carried out in order to consider
the effect of discretization and, on the other hand, to verify the
dependency of the computation precision on the time step width.
TABLE 3.1 RESULTS OF THE 120 ZONE CALCULATIONS
Deviation in %from
TRAC Zones *Tw whom isentr. Figure
l4th recalculation PD2 120 1 x 10O4 1583. 66.3 3.1-3.7
5th recalculation PD2 120 1 x 104 11714. -23-.3- 3.8-3.11 ---
6th recalculation. PD2 120 5 x 10-5 1106. 16.1 3.12-3.17
7th recalculation PD2 120 1 X 10-5 1016. 6.68 3.18-3.20
Kraftwork Union
-5
The results summarized in Table 3.1 clearly sub stantiate the assumption that
as the size of the time step width is decreased further, the sound speed coincides
better with the tabular value. In this process discretization plays a subordinate
role,' as is clear from comparing Table 2.1 with Table 3.1 with the same time
step width. The smaller zone division provides an improvement in the results
of only approximately 1-30/. The most important thing recognized, however,
is that, in comparison with the old PlA version, the new TRAC-PD2 version provides
almost satisfactory results in the calculation of sound velocity. A comparison
of recalculations J4 and 5 shows this quite clearly. Therefore Figures 3.1 to
3.7 each contain one PD2 and one PlA curve as a means of direct comparison.
Figures 3.8 and 3.9 are again profile plots which very clearly show the faster
pressure drop in the old TRAC-PlA version.
In addition, Figures 3.14I-3.17 contain the results from the SUPER CANON
EXPERIMENT and older LECK (leak) calculations [2], which are entered by hand.
Towards the closed end and in the center of the pipe, the deviations from the
measured curve (Fig. 3.15 and 3.16) are relatively slight; here both
calculations compute the pressure drop too early to the same extent. Only a t
the open end (Fig. 3.17) is a sharp contrast noted between the LEOK and TRAC
calculations, to the extent that the TRAC-PD2 curve reflects the measured
curve very precisely, while in the first 180 msec the LECK calculation providesa greatly deviating curve plot with an excessively high pressure level.
Figures 3.18-3.20 pertain to the 7th recalculation, which was carried out with
a time step of A~T =1 x 105 and which provides the best approximation to the
actual sound velocity.
Krafiwerk Union
-6-
4. Computer Time and Computer Costs
Table 4.1 gives the problem time, the computation time and the system seconds
for the computation costs as a function of the number of zones and time step
widths. The results from Table 2.1 and 3.1 have shown that the precision
of the calculations is mainly dependent on the selection of the time step width.
Table 4.1 shows that, with the same zone distribution, the computation costs
decrease by a factor of f T - 7 if the time step is reduced from AT = 104 seccost
toWT = 10-5 sec. On the other hand, the sound velocity is calculated with fair
precision only with a time step ofAtT =10-5. On the other hand, discretization
does not provide significantly better results. When the number of zones is
increased by a factor of six, from 20 to 120 zones, the cost factor is
approximately f cost - 2. One possible conclusion from this would be that an
attempt should be made to improve the computation results with greater
discretization. This is contradicted, however, by the fact that the storage
space of the computer system is not unlimited.
In addition, these limits are reached very quickly with a model in which the
vessel components are used, in which case the division of zones just meets
the minimum requirements. This means that a true improvement in the computation
results can be achieved only with a reduction in the size of the time step
width.
In order, however, for the costs to remain within reasonable limits, the time
step must be optimized in different periods. The 120 zone calculation which
is numbered seven is an example of this.
The THAC program offers the capability of indicating several time intervals
in which the actuating variable is redefined each time. In this case the end
of the first time interval is 0.008 sec with a minimum step width of 1 x 10-6
and a maximum step width of 5 x 10-5. This means that in the highly transient
region of the first 8 msec the propagation speed of the pressure relief wave
is calculated fairly precisely. In the second time interval, up to 0.2 sec,
the time step is set at 1 x 10-4, and the third time interval up to 0.~4 sec
the pressure relief process has decayed to such an extent that a time step
Kraftwerk Union
-- 7
of 1 x 10 is sufficient. This example shows how important it is to optimize
the individual time domains. In this way the calculation cost 10,000 system seconds;
if, however, the entire 0.41 sec had been calculated with the step width of
1 x 10-5, then the costs would probably have risen to more than 100,000
system-seconds. For larger calculations it would probably be more worthwhile
.to start a computer run with a large step width in order to determine the
highly transient time intervals for the purpose of then precisely calculating
this region in a second run.
Kraftwerk Union
-8-
Bibliography
1. 1"TRAC-PD2: An Advanced Best Estimate Computer Program
for PWR LOCA Analysis"1 , LOS ALAMOS Scientific Laboratory
NUREG/CR-2O5'4
2. Neumann, U., "Recalculation of the SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT Using the
LECK Computer Program"l, KWU Working Report R11/2036/80.
Kraftwerk Union
AG AS'P6 P5 PT4,71
A3 A2 Al* P3 P2
T3 IT 2 T
~~1G~t CF
4500
1356__ _
4502
.--.--... ~ ... !389..........
Fig.1: Super-Canon Experiment.
SUPER CANNON TESTCAN-B 0023.5
13oooo~o - CELL
140000W
20mm 0
PIPE
am aQbw Obis omTI ME (S)
COMPARISON CALCULATION FROM LOS ALAMOS
d
KWU TRAC -P02
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT
COMPARISON WITH LOS ALAMO)S
.1.~:.L. -
a ~. .~ . K,
Alp%%0
0C?
(D PD2 CELL 1
+A PD2 CELL 10+PD2 CELL 20
Oq
I\.)
I\.)
TIME (S) * 10r2
150 BAR / 300 K / 20 CELLS DELI = 1.E-4
KWU TRAC -PD2
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT
COMPARISON WITH LOS ALAMOS
C3
(D PD2 CELLA PD? CELL+ PD? CELLX PD? CELL'ý' PD2 CELL
15101520
0 ?
0
tXnO
F- 0 .1 . 0 0 . 0 0 4
mcT
150 BA 0 2 EL
HI\)
IME (S) * 10o2
DELT =1.E-4
Is &
KWU TRAC - PD2
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
PRESSURE VERSUS AXIAL POSITION
o - ___ __ ___ ___ __ ___ _ _ ___ Q TIME = 1.00 MS
C,. ~TIME = 2.00 MS
TIME = 3.00 MS
(-CTIME = 4.00 MS
= I)-------- )"
L)
LENGTH OF PIPE (M)
DELT = 2.E-4
IKWU TRAC - P02 AdmbL
AF-'9&
%wSUPER CANON EXPERIMENT
COMPARISON WITH LOS ALAMOS
mn
co)Wl
C:4
C?,00
0C-,
0
Cr'
0:
0*
C3
30'.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0 .40 0.50 0.60 0.710 0.80 0 .90 1 .00
TIME (S) * 10-2
150 BAR / 300 K I 20 CELLS DELT = l.E-4
H
OPD2 CELL 1SPD2 CELL 10+ PD2 CELL 20
091
I-,
1.
KWU TRAC -P02
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT
COMPARISON WITH LOS ALAI4)S
4)
Ci)
U)U)Ci)
C3C3
C3e)
C3
C.)
... ... ..
cm
'oc o )o on .0 04 .0 .0 07 .0 09
TIE (), 0
(I)
-I-
x()
PD2 CELL 1PD2 CELL 5PD2 CELL 10P02 CELL 15PD2 CELL 20
In*
150OBAR I 300 K 20 OCELLS DELT = 1.E-4
.5 -~L..
KWIJ TRAC -PD2
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT
COMPARISON WITH LOS ALAMOS
90
o P02 CELL 1-t PD2 CELL 10+ PD2 CELL 20
U)
Cl)
fl-S
I
0~
-I
I-.
150OBARI 300 KI 20 CELLS DELT =1.E-4
1, If.
KWU TRAC -PD2' 01
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT
COMPARISON WITH LOS ALAMOS
0
______ +___ ___ ___ ___ PD2 CELLI1
c-'3 X PD2 CELL 10
C'PD? CELL 20
to
-I-0
0
-0*
ce)
c:)
0 ..
150OBAR / 300 K 1 20OCELLS DELT = 1.E-5
KWU TRAC -PD2 Aff'ý
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
PRESSURE VERSUS AXIAL POSITION
c~z
m
r:z3
C.,C,
C) -0------ ______ ______ ______
U,
C,
C.'J
C)C-,
C.,
C)C)
LI'C-.
C-'
C,
C-'C-)
-I'c.j
C,
~i-0~ 0.40 0.~3O 1.20 )AiO ~Kflfl ?Afl 3.;fl 4.flfl
T TIMEAl Tlk1+ TIMEX TIMEC0 TIME
1.002.003.004s.005.00
H0,
MSMSMSMSMS
I-,-
LENGTH OF PIPE (M)
DELT = 1.E-5
I , 19 it,
4
KWU
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
TRAC - P1)2 IN COMPARISON WITH TRAC - PIA
U)U)w
Cl
C)
C-, _______
C)
C,0*
C:,
01
C:,.01 02 .0 0.0 05 .6 .0 080 09 0TIE ()00
(D PD2-CELL 1-4.370 MA, MA-CELL 1-4.370 M4
*1~j~a.Oq
Lii
150OBAR / 300 K 12 I2CELLS DELT = 1.11-4
KWU
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
TRAC - P02 IN COMPARISON WITH TRAC - PIA
0
C3
t)PD2-CELL 14-3.895 M,44 PA-CELL 14-3.895 M
0C)-
m
~j-)
150OBAR /300 K 120 CELLS DELT = l.E-4
1*
.1 '*1
KWU
(qj .SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
TRAC - P02 IN COMPARISON WITH TRAC - PIA
C),C3
0DZA1
PD2-CELL 38-3.017 MPI A-CELL 38-3.017 M
m
U)U)
H
I-..Oq
LjJ
C-Al
150OBAR / 300 K / 2 I2CELLS DL .-DELT = l.E-4
KWU
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
TRAC - PD2 IN COMPARISON WITH TRAC - PIA
m
U)
wga.
C,
C)
C)
C)
c-I
c')
C)
C3)
0, o -0 02 .0 0 4 .0 .0 0.' 10 09 0
TIE ()) 0
oq
150OBAR / 300 K / 2 I2CELLS DELT = I.E-4
KWU
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
TRAC, - P1)2 IN COMPARISON WITH TRAC - PIA
C)C?
oD PD2-CELL 74-1.700 MA PlA-CELL 74-1.700 M
C,)
IJ3
TIME (S) * 10o 2
120 CELLS DELT = 1.E-4150OBAR /300 K/
KWUAdm%ý
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
TRAC - P02 IN COMPARISON WITH TRAC - PIA
C,C-,.
C)P02-CELL 107-0.493 MAL PlA-CELL 107-0.493 M
-I.
U)U)
(iJ
C'
TIME (S) * 10o2
150OBAR / 300 K / 2 I2CELLS DL .-DELT = l.E-4
KWU
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
TRAC - P1)2 IN COMPARISON WITH TRAC - PIA
C,C
PD2-CELL 117-0.128 MMIA-CELL 1174Q.128 M
C,)U)wz
f~.
'-A,
150OBAR /300 K 12 I2CELLS DL .-DELT = 1.E-4
KW1J TRAC - PIA
SUPER CANON EXPERIM'ENT
PRESSURE VERSUS AXIAL POSITION
A#-%
Cl)
C)C?
C3,
C-)
C.3
C3,
2i nn nn 4~ 00A~l 4.50 5.00
x
TIME=TIME =TIME=TIME=TIME=
1.002.003.004.005.00
0~~
MSMSMSMSMS
-oli u *1j i uu I -Du
LENGTH OF PIPE WMwA
120 CELLS 120 ELLSDELT = 1.E-4
* ....* 16.
KWU TRAC,- PD2
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
PRESSURE VERSUS AXIAL POSITION
C3ci
x
TIME =
TIME=TIME =
TIME=TIME =
1.002.003.004.005.00
MSMSMSMSMS
C,)L-)
C:)
r\)
'*1
120 CELLSLENGTH OF PIPE (M)
DELT =1.E-4
KWU TRAC - P02
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
(-'39
C3,C?
C3,
c;'
x
PD2 CELL 1PD2 CELL 14PD2 CELL 38PD2 CELL 46PD2 CELL 74
m
I,
c/)-V)
co
C)
C,?
C,
I-..
(~A)
0
0.00o 0.10I
0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60
TIME (S) *1020.70
I0 .80 0.90 1 .00
INITIAL CONDITIONS
120 CELLS
150OBAR /300 K)ELT = 1.E-4
p
a.
KWU TRAC -PD2
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
Agalb,
mnW
C.)C)
0*
C)
C3C3
0
0-
C3
00'.00o 0.10 0.2'0 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
x
P02P02P02P02P02
CELLCELLCELLCELLCELL
13846107120
I-..
Lii
INITIAL CONDITIONS
120 CELLS
TIME CS) * 1-
150OBAR /300 K)ELT = 1.E-4
KWU TRAC - PI2
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
m
U)U)
~1~
C)
C)
C.3
C2.
C3
C)
0*-C'J
()
C)
C)
.i* I -- - --
C) o .0 0 l- .0 0 4 .5 .0 0 7 .0 0-3 0
(D PD-CELLPD 2-CELLPD 2-CELLPD -CELLPD2-CELL
wC0
1-4.37D M14-3.895 M38-3.017 M46-2.724 M74-1.700 M
In.
INITIAL CONDITIONS120 CELLS COII
TIME CS) * 1-
150OBAR /300 KPUTATION UNTIL 0.080 SEC
I
KWIU TRAC - P02
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT0
oPD2-CELL 1-4.370 M
m
Cr)
Cl)Cl)Cx)
'2)
(A
(A
INITIAL CONDITIONSTIME (S) * 1-
150OBAR /300 K120 CELLS 120CELSDELT = 5.E-5 COMPUTATION UNTIL 0.080 SEC
KWU TR AC L P02
IENT~SUPER CANON EXPERI!AM&
x
PD 2-CELLPD02-CELLPD2-CELLPD 2-CELLPD 2-CELL
1-4.370 M14-3.895 M38-3.017 M46-2.724 M74-1.700 M
(42
C14
r'c
F-,.
oq
LA)
.g~.
INITIAL CONOITION
120 CELLS1150BAR / 300 K
COMPUTAITION UNTIL 0.4 SEC
f
KWU TRAC - P132
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT____ ___
cl.
cli
C3
0
0.00o 0.05 0.11 0.16 0.21 0.27 -0.32 0.37. 0.43 0.48 0.53TIME (S)
O W-CELL 14-3.895 MLECK-COMPUTATION
- -- EASU REMENT
C/)Cl)Cil
"7I-..Oq
(A)
U,
INITIAL CONDITIONS120 CELLS
150OBAR /300 KCOMPUJTATION UNTIL 0.4 SEC
KWU TRAC - P02
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT
OPD2-CELL 46-2.724 M
- LECK-COMPUTATION
--MEASUREMEN
c:4ro
w
U2,w
I
I-i
INITIAL CONDITIONSTIME (S)
150OBAR /300 K
COMPUTATION UNTIL 0.4 SEC120 CELLS
4 s
I.
I, *<~.;p.
KWIJ TRA(
SUPER CAON EXPEIRI MDT
:- P02
-I 4 + I.---
c,)
CV'
C)
oD PD2-CELL 117-0.128 M
-LECK-COMPUTATION
- -MEASUREMENT
'I%_n
0.01
INITIAL CONDITIONS
120 CELLS
0.16 0 .2i1 0.2i7 0.:TIME CS)
150OBAR /300 KCOMPUTATION UNTIL 0.4 SEC
i2 0 .37I
0.43 0.48 0.53
KWU TRAC - P02
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENT 0
0C?
x
P02PD2P02PD2P02
CELLCELLCELLCELLCELL
1
384674
c/)
t~A)0~
091
INITIAL CONDITIONSTIME (S) * 10-2
150OBAR /300 K
120 CELLS DELT = 1.E-5
11
KWU TRAC- P02
SUPER CANON EXPERIMENTJAnkh,
C'3C?
0
+x
P02P02PD2P02P02
CELLCELLCELLCELLCELL
13846107120
W
c/)
I-..
(-5.,
INITIAL CONDITIONSTIME CS) * 10-2
150OBAR /300 K120 CELLS 120 ELLSDELT = 1.E-5
KWU TRAC -P2
SUPER CANON EXPER IMENT
PRESSURE VERSUS AXIAL POSITION
LlC?
(13 TIME 1.00 MSA~ TIME 2.00 MS
+ TIME 3.00 MSX TIME 4.00 MSC' TIME 5.00 MS
IwcoI
m~- C)
cii C.
Cl) -
Cl)cii C.'
C,0~..~~
*1IOq
r\)0
LENGTH OF PIPE (M)
DELT = 1.E-5120 CELLS
'I.
KWU TRAC -PD2
SUPER CANON EXPERIM~ENT
OPD2-CELL 14-3.895 M- MEASUREMENT
110
Cl)Cl)C:)
0..
I-..
1\)
TIME (S) * 1i- 2
150OBAR /300 KINITIAL CONDITIONS
120 CELLS )ELT = l.E-5 )ELT =1.E-5COMPUTATION UNTIL 0.080 SEC
- ~4o -
EXTENDEDCOMPUTATION NUMBEROF CELLS
TIME STEP(S)
PROBLEM TIMEINTERVAL (S)
CPA SYSTEM SECONDSCPU
COREMEMORY CM CORE MEMORY EC
1. LOS ALAMOS2. LOS ALAMOS
WCOMP A RISON
3. LOS ALAMOS
4. PIA-CALCULATION
5. PD2-CALCULATIONAT-COMPARISON
6. P02-CALCULATION
7. P02-CALCULATION
20
20
120
120
120
120120
120
2.E-4
I.E-4 s
1 101. E-5
1.EFI4 s
I.E-4 s
1.E-4Is
1 101.E-5 a
5. E-5
1. E-4
0,010 s
0,010 5
I I0,010
0,&10
0,010
0,008
1 10,008
0,008
0,2
5,317
8,947
6,20455,512
36,1403
38,786
31,028
17,0828219,76
145,07
26,62
1859,1
533,2
571,8
457,44
17,14843423,4
3224,14 5188,02
5818,07 8809,08
17,507 16,68243679,3 58600,8
12056,2 16710.7
12930,3 17940,0
10344,2 14352.0
17,578 17,29778395,7 104826.9
1.E-3 0,4 583b,59 9310,0 213670,2 284001,T
20 1.E-5 0,0103 55,512. 1859,1 43679,3 58600,8-3. LOS ALAMOS
jTHE EFFECT OF THE 6 I10,8 I 4.95 2,3017 I2,243 2,234INODALIZATION I I I I I 1I
5. LOS ALAMOS 120 1.E- 5 0,008 s 219,76'( 3427,4 78395,7 104726,9
2. LOS ALAMOS 20 (0 I.E-4 a0,010 a 8,947 256,62 5818,07 W809,08
HE EFFECTIOF THE 6 1 4,315 I2,228 2,222 2,036
3. P02-CALCULATION 120 1.E-4l 0,010 3 38,486 571,8 12930,3 17940,0
able 4.1 COMPARISON OF TIMESTEP, PROBLEM TIME INTERVAL AND COMPUTATION TIME
PART II: PARAMETRIC STUDY OF TRAC-PD2 USING
THE HDR TEST RESULTS
Translated By: SCITRAN1482 East Valley RoadSanta Barbara, CA 93108
3
"A-.
- 1-
This Page intentionally left blank.
LO3
1. Introduction
Since the computer program TRAC-PlA was first put into operationin March 1979 [1] and the installation in the meantime of theimproved version TRAC-PD2 in September 1980.,several test follow-upcalculations have been conducted for the verification of theprogram. The information thus gained for the optimization of thecomputer models will be explained in more detail in the followingchapter.
2. Parameter study-of the HDR tests /2
Test follow-up calculations are an unavoidable step in the verifi-cation of a computer program. For this resnh IDRAV 31.1 test [33was subjected to a follow-up calculation with the program version
TRAC-PD2 [2] in order to be able to compare the TRAC calculations,with the test re *sults.. Here~the calculations mentioned in thisreport were conducted within the framework of a preliminary studyin order to investigate the effect of different discretionarysteps in the RDB connection (3D - 1D transition resp. coupling)and in the fracture location area (outflow conditions). Theindividual computer cases are listed in table 2.1. Here, the resultsof the model modifications explained in the following chapterswere referenced to an initial calculation (HDR 1/3) in order to beable to determine the effect of the individual measures clearly.Figure 2.1 presents a schematic total view of the test stand.However, only the RDB and the break nozzle (nozzle Al) are simulatedin a model. Figure 2.2 shows the RDB and contains the most importa-geometrical dimensions. In the model RDB is calculated in a gre-simplified form since the processes within the boiler are notinterest for this study. _______
In figure 2.3 ,the models used for the break nozzlesorifices are recorded. Additionally,the zone sub'most important geometrical data are plotted.
Kr WI werk Union
the measurement locations which will be used for co mparing the
results in figures 2.4 and 2.5.
The subdivision is somewhat finer only in the connection area of
the break nozzle in order to still be able to compare the calculated
results in this area with the test results.
The information gained from these calculations was utilized in the
follow-up calculation of Mr. J. Herterich within the framework
of a thesis project [4]. The model used, in this work is considerably
more detailed in RDB and produced very good results compared to the
test results.
2.1 HflR 1/3 initial calculation /3
The results of this calculation are used as a basis for theassessment of the effectiveness of the measures carried out in the
continuation of this effort. Figure 2.1.1 shows the model used
for this computer case. The RDB (VESSEL) is subdivided into 4 levels,which each consist of 2 radial rings and 4 azimuth segments so thateach level includes 8 zones. The break nozzle is connected to zone 5in level 4. In the model it consists of two pipes (PIPE 1 andPIPE 2). The exact differentiation can be seen in figure 2.3.
The surroundings are simulated by a break component (break-
boundary condition). The pressure drop is specified and proceeds
linearly within 2 ms to 1 bar.
In figures 2.4 and 2.5 the calculation results from the 5calculations are plotted in comparison with the data curves.
In the comparison of the calculated mass flux (figure 2.1.5) PIPE 2CELL 5 (measurement location RM 3003/3004) with the data curve(figure 2.5)',it can be seen immediately that in this case for
0.1 seconds the outflow rate is calculated more than twice as
Kraftwerk Union
-5-
high. The reason for this can be found in the boiler connection.
The actually occurring outflow losses from the RDB because of the
restriction in the nozzles are not taken into account by this
models so that an outflow velocity which is too high and correspond-
ingly too high an outflow rate results
From this also results the too rapid pressure loss in the RDB
(see figure 2.4) which has almost reached the pressurei level
of the pipe after 0.1 second.
In figures 2.1.13 to 2.l.18,the pressure profiles are plotted
against the pipe axis at different points in time for better
visualization. The first point at the left in the picture is
the zone 5 in which VESSEL-compononts are connected to the blowdownpipe. The last point in the right of the picture gives the pressure
in the break. All graphs show a relatively linear pressure /4
drop. In particular~the area of the connection to the RDB shows
no special effects of the pressure loss resulting from the
restriction. The profile plots for the mass flux can be taken- fromfigures 2.1.16 to 2.1.18. All profile plots, even in the following
chapters, are always referenced to the same point in time so that
a direct comparison is possible.
2.2 HIDR 2/3 automatic boiler connection
In the following sections~we shall discuss in comparison to theprevious chapter ,different possibilities for the boiler connection
and their effects on the outflow rate as well as the pressure
curves. In this model (see figure 2.2.1l)the calculation of the
pressure loss resulting from the restriction and eddy formation
in the exit opening is shifted to the pipe. This results from
the fact that the boiler connection area within the first two
zones is reduced to the cross-sectional area of the blowdown pipe.
The TRAC program then det~rmines for an appropriate input (minussign in front of the NFF value in the TRAC input) the associated
Kraflwork Union
Ar-6-
'-value,whereby the flow direction determines whether we are
dealing with a restriction or an expansion.
In the enlargement of the first two areas in the blowdown pipe
the volume in these zones must also increase. However, this is
not necessarily required because the TRAC input for determining
the geometry is redundant. For each zone length and the inlet-
resp. outlet area as well as the volume are specified.
From this it can be seen that the TRAC program does not automatically
determine the volume from the area and the zone length, but thatit uses the specified volume in the calculation.
The cross-sectional areas are used mainly for the calculation of 15the already mentioned I -values. It is thus possible to input thevolumes corresponding to the specified geometry whereby, in the
interest of an incontestable calculation, one should dispense with
too great a change in the successive zone data so that a minor
enlargement is possible-*which, however, could hardly affect the
calculations.- The f igures 2. 2..2 to 2.2. 11 show the results f rom
this calculation. From figure 2Th',one can recognize a relatively
good agreement between the measured and the calculated curve shapesfor the pressure.
In the blowdown nozzle (RP 3001/RP 3002) the pressure in the
stable region lies- ca. 10 bar below the data curve. This is an
indication of the fact that the pressure loss in this model was
calculated somewhat too high. The agreement in the curve of the
mass flux in figure 2.5 is equally good.
Figures 2.2.12 to 2.2.17 again contain the profile plots for the
pressure and the mass flux. One can readily recognize the kink in
the curves where the pressure loss is determined based on the
restriction. This produces a curve shape which is not linear in
contrast to the calculation without this RDB connection.
Kraft work Union
-7-
Therefore, for better comparison, these curves from the two calcula-
tions are plotted together in figures 2.2.18 to 2.2.23.
In addition to the already mentioned differences one can see that
the pressure drop in the first milliseconds between the first zone
in RDB and the third zone in the pipe is not as great (dashed line)
as in the calculation without the expanded connection (solid line).
In contrast thereto.,figure 2.2.20 shows that in the stationary
region the pressure losses for the expanded connection to the RDB
are considerably greater. These figures clearly show that without
special measures no resistance coefficient is being used for the
boiler connection.
2.3 HDR 3/3-automatic boiler connection with nozzle /
With this model (figure 2.3.1) we shall examine more closely the
effect of the boundary condition on the computer results. While
in all other calculations a pressure discontinuity function whichdrops oi'f linearly in 2 ms from the system pressure to'l bar, is
being used, the constant transition from system condition to
surroundings (BREAK) takes place here. For this reason~a nozzlewith an opening angle of 300 is inserted between BREAK-boundary
condition and blowdown pipe. In order to avoid that~a water plugdevelops in the nozzle acts as a lay, element; it is filled withsteam. However, this leads to the need that for program-technicalreasons1 an instant pressure drop curve to 1 bar must be used inthe calculation. Therefore,the time pressure curve in the firstmilliseconds exhibits a faster decrease to saturation pressure thanin the measurement,which can be clearly seen from figure 2.14.Viewed as a whlh calculated results agree best with the testresults. For one, the outflow rate resulting from the increasedoutflow velocity (despite higher steam formation) deviates stillless from the measured value (see figure 2.5) than is the case
for HflR 2/3; and for another ,the pressure level in the blowdown
nozzle is increased somewhat so that the pressure steadily better
Kraft werk Union
approaches the data curve.
In figures 2.3.2 to 2.3.11 all results for the blowdown pipe areplotted. Furthemore~the figures 2.3.12 to 2.3.14 present someinformation concerning the pressure, the temperature, and the
discharge for the nozzle (PIPE 999).
Additionally, the results of this calculation for the pressure and
the mass flux are contained in figures 2.3.15 to 2.3.20 in theform of profile plots. For this 'figure.s 2.3-21 to0 2.3.26 showthe comparison with the first calculation.
The differences are to be found more in the highly transient
region of the first five milliseconds ,which points to a strongoscillation in pressure and a somewhat greater outflow rate.
2.4 IIDR 4/5i and HDR 5/4 /7Boiler connection = pipe cross-sectional area with andwithout -value
For the sake of completeness two calculations shall still bementioned'which are intended to teat an additional potentialfor the boiler connection.
H~ere in both cases the RDB is differentiated in such a way thatthe area of the connection zone corresponds exactly to the cross-
sectional area of the pipe. Additionally in the calculationHDR 4/5 the annular space is divided into two annuli in order to
obtain a better local resolution in the computer results and inorder to additionally input a 5 -value for the outflow loss
=0.5 in the first zone of the blowdown pipe (see section 2.4.1).
The calculation HDR 5/4 (see figure 2.5.1), in contrast thereto,is carried out without these two changes.
Kraftwerk Union
-9-
A comparison of the calculated results in figure 2.4 shows that
the shape of the curve for the pressure in the RDB is considerably
worse than in the preceding calculation. The same is true for the
mass flux whereby in particular the curve for the calculation
RDR 5/4 deviates very greatly from the data curve. In figures 2.3.2
to 2.4.11 and 2.5.2 to 2.5.11 we have again plotted the result
of the calculation.
The equal-area transition, whether with or without T -value bringsabout no noticeable improvement in the results, neither in thepressure curve nor in the mas's flux.
3. Discussion of the result /
If one compares the results of the calculation for pressure and
mass, flux plotted in figures 2.4 and 2.5 with the data curve,
:jone can see that the calculation HDR 3/3 gives the best fit withthe data curve.
The deciding measure for improvement of the computer results is
obtained by the enlarged connection of the pipes to the RDB.
Similarly,certain improvements of the results are obtained withthe nozzle, but not to the same degree.
Without taking into account a resistance coefficient through the
reduction of the flow surfaces.,the TRAC program can calculate nopressure loss for the loss-affected flow out of the RDB.
Kraftwerk Union
- 10 -
4. References
Ell G. Hughes
TRAC-PlA Operational Start on the CYBER 176KWU-Work Report R 11/2113/79
E2] TRAC-PD2An Advanced Best Estimate Computer Program for PWR LOCAAnalysis
Los Alamnos Scientific LaboratoryNIJREG/CR- 20 54
E31 HDR-Safety Program4. Status Report Dec. 10, 1980Nuclear Research Center KarlsruhePHDR-Work Report 3/5/80
E4] J. HerterichVerification calculation for the program system TRAC-PD2with the aid of some tests, either through measurements oranalyses
Thesis
Bochum-Erlangen, April 81
Kraftwork Union
}IDR-Test Series
Chapter 2.1 HDR 1/3 1. calculation/boiler variation 3 (see figure 2.1.-1-boiler connection area-
area ratio F'KR pipe area
0-03142m 21.0
pressure- boundary condition in 2 ms to 1 bar
Chapter 2.2 HDR 2/3 2. calculation/boiler variation 3 (s. figure 2.2.1)area ratio FR= 1 through enlargement of the pipearea within two zones to boiler connection areapressure-boundary condition in 2 ms to 1 bar
Chapter 2.3 HDR 3/3 3. calculation/b oiler variation 3 (s. fig. 2.3.1.)area ratio FR= 1 same as 1{DR 2/3with nozzle at the break opening
pressure-boundary condition instantaneous pressure
drop to 1 bar
Chapter 2.4 IHDR 4/5 4. calculation/boiler variation 5 (S. fig. 2.4.1)area ratio FR= 1 through proper choice of the boiler
subdivision (no enlargement of the pipe)2 radial zones in annular space
input of a resistance coefficient-for the outflow fromthe boiler ~=0.5pressure-boundary condition in 2 ms to 1 bar
HDR 5/4 5. calculation,/boiler variation 4 (s. fig. 2.5.1)area ratio FR= 1 as in HDR 4/5 but only 1 radialzone in annular spacepressure-boundary condition in 2 ms to 1 bar
Table 2.1
Kraffmork Union
A90h,- 12-
Schematic Isometry of Lines and LoopsParticipating During Blowdown
Fig. 2. 1
- 13 -
-oberes Plenum(upper plenunroberer Einspannflansch(upper flange)
1100~ý,Stutzen A2 (nozzle A2)
-Innenraumn (iriner region)
-ilernmantel 23± t1 mm(core barrel)
-Ringraumn (downcomer)
-ROB(PY, pressure vessel)
(mass -ring)-Masse - Ring
-untere$ sPtnum(lower plenumi
- Kattwiss erstu tzen -
(cold water inlet)
RPV AND SHROUDGEO1METRY FOR THE BLOWDOWN EXPER IMENT
Fig. 2.2
- 114 -
Fz 0.03102
/PMing0
M2 RD 3001RD 3OQ2-
RM300O3RM43004R P3001ftP 002
RP3006
PE 1PIPE 2 PI 57aq1 2.3 1 2 3
02 0,2 0,2 210,2 0,1 0.L0.1 A~Rua~1081 m
ItUVi 0, 9 77m -
IE ~ 1,30 Sim1,5045 m -I
BREAK NOZZLE FOR THE MODELS HOR 1/3 4/5 5/4
F: 0.65696'
/lOPS103
F:= 0.1601 m 2
F= 0.0314 12 m?1 PIPE 2
E2 3: 4
S01016 0.006253m02 0,2
0,1
0, 835 m0,9 77m
in 3001NO03002
I m3003U M300 &RP3001WF300J
PIPEIl 6789
02 81 2, ,1 C
vUU
1,2' -,01.m
- 1,3091m I
BREAK NOZZLE FOiR THE MODELS
-1,504sm
HOR 2/3 3/3
BREAK ORIFICE FOR THE MODEL HOR 3/3
Fig. 2.3
KWU - TRAC - PD2 1
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
HOR 1/3
-- H DR 3/3....... ta curve
Id
C-,
Id
PRESSURE
KWU TRAC - PD2
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
'I
-NOR S/5HOR 514
......data curv
Qd
-CC
TIME (S) * 10
PRESSURE
Fig. 2.'4
-16 -
KWU TRAC - PD2
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
HDR 1/3--- HDR2/3
HDR 3/3data curve
*
=-JI-
C-,
MASS FLUX
KWU TRAC - PD2
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS
RECALCULATTON OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
MD-HR 415Hf8R 5/4
.......dat curve
TIME (S) * 10'
MASS FLUX
Fig. 2.5
-17 -
17 37 55
Level 2 2IP533
Level 1 2,8533
VESSEL 3
HDR 1/3
Fig. 2.1.1
KWtJ TRAC- P02
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
Cl
ý !PF 21 'ýL '5
-~Vr5jL' CP!L
V- vp( -- z
L30
L") I
0.0 0.o 020 0.30 0.40 fulJ
TIME (PIPE 2 /VESSEL TYPE 3PRESSURE
a
'.
KWU TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT'O DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HOR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C.,C,
(D PIPE I CL'LLIA~ "1FF I C W.L I+ PIPE I Ii'. U
X P!PF I Cri.L 9
I.H
a4
09
PIPE 2PRESSURE
TIME (S) * 10- 1
/VESSEL TYPE 3
KWU TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE.
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
10
C,
0cl
(D BREAK4 OUTLET2
m
L
L
C.
L
c-
.4' _____ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______
~11r -I I
*1~ ______ _____ _____ ______
~=;= ~=.
f~rj 0.60 A AI I
'Jo * rr.
r\)Q
crl rr I0.2 30J 0.40
TIME (S) * 10O1
TY PE 3
Q .70 1; cI - -ku - -i or,
PIPE 2PRESSURE
/ VESSEL
10
~%. .~.
KWU TRAC -FP2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMVETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
c'J0
*
C')
C,
-:1Lx..
C3,
C)i.0 j 0.r
C.,71 jo0 r
r ~'rr 2 'ýP Lp ~rr 2 L *;.'
I-
* 10-1
PIPE 2MvASS FLUX
/ VESSELTIME (S)
TYPE 3
KWU TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF .D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
+ PPE I CP LP F~F I If !L
P!P I UI
C.,
Xc'l
E20004 .3 .0 0~0 .0 07 .'0 0~0 10V~
PIPE 2 / VESSEL TfEý3MASS Fl Ily
IV
S
lddmmhýAr"lqft
%0KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF.THE HDR-.TESTS WITH-l THE VESSEL COMPONENT
P.orpF 2 'PL'L
+ VF%.'L'. Ci!Lmn
0
I'.,
171
PIPE 2
VOID FRACTION
TIME (s) * loO
/VESSEL TYPE 3
KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS W ITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
Ci
o 'rF I 12 L
PIPEP I ,i*L 3-- P! PF I i IL'L
X r!PF I ri' .1
-sn.
ro1
PIPE 2VOID FRAClTInN
TIME (S * 10~/VESSEL TYPE 3
KWU TRAC -P02 %
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR -TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
o M~V P!PF) 2 L
X MiV rrFF1i '
I',
TINE (S)
/VESSEL TYPE 3PIPE 2VELOCITY
KWU TRAC- P02
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR -TESTS WI TH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
-* T IV r S 5i Li L
L')
0~
E-.
N)
0
TIME (S) * 10'
IVESSEL TYPE 3PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
KWU TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH-THE VESSEL COMPONENT
AM&Am--IqL
EY
%F
0:
o F5 rP F 21 lT1.\' P!rF2 'ri! L'.
+ TV P!rF2 'Ak.L'
I
PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
TME (S)/VESSEL TYPE 3
KWU ITRAC-P
THE EFFECT OF DFFERENT PAR AMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
YaI
c')C.
(D TG r'p~lE LA, Tri. r r F -i LO3+ VI P'rFi .L
I2
LNI
E-u
I',
TIME (S) * 10-1
IVESSEL TYPE 3PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
I 16
Adolikk
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - P02 PARAM'ETER STUDY
THE EFFECT O F D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
C-,
C-,
C.,'
RPV WALLEND OF P E
L-,
C-)
C.
Go .4'0 0.60, 0.$0 ~ .O 1 .210 1.-40 -136 1 9r 0.0
(D TIME= 1.00 MSzt TIME= 2.00 M4S+ TIME= 3.00 MSX( TIME= 4.00 MS
T' IME= 5.00 MS
LAJRECALCULAT ION OF 'THE HDR-TESTS PIPE LENGTH (M)
PRESSURE WITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITHOUT EXPANSION AT TWP PP1I
'Idoi
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - P02 PARAMETER STUDY
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMVETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND TfE MASS FLUX
C..,
C0A
xTIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=
6.007.008.009.00
10.00
MsMSMSMsils
LI.
C-,~.- C,
Cii
"n2
PIPE LENGTH (M)
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HOR-TESTS
PRESSURE PRESSUREWITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITHOUT EXPANSION AT THE RPV
TRAC - P02 PARAMETER STUDYKWU PROFILE PLOT
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAM~ETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
C)C,
x1z
TIME= 20.00 MSTIME= 40.00 MSTIME= 60.00 MSTIME= 80.00 MSTIME=100.00 MS
H
Cr)
U)
N)G.0 0.0 0.AO 0.0 0 .AG 0o 1.00 12 1.40 .1.00
PIPE LENGTH (M)
RECALCULAT ION OF THE;HOR-TESTSPRESSURE WITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITHOUT EXPANSION AT THE RPV
TRAC - P02 PARAMETER STUDYKWU PROFILE PLOT
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
c')L?
OTIME= 1.00 MSATIME= 2.00 MS
+ TIME= 3.00 MSX TIME= 4.00 MS1,TIME= 5.00 MS
0
*
cl-i
C,:4
-I[I~
IA
C' PIPE LENGM .(M)
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTSMASSAFUX WITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITHOUT EXPANSION AT THE RPV
It .
TRAC - P02 PARAMETER STUDYKWU PROFILE PLOT
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSUREAND THE MASS FLUX
t-.)0
(D TIME= 6.00 MSA TIME= 7.00 MS+ TIME= 8.00 MSX TIME= 9.00 MS'C TIME= 10.00 MS
PIPE LENGTH (M)
RECALCULATION OF THE HCR-TESTSMASS FLUX MASSFLUXWITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITHOUT EXPANSION AT THE RPV
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAMETER STUDY
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
ci:
C)
RP) WALL END O PIP~
P ML IP LEGH M
RECA -CUL-4-O- OF -4- -D- -ESi
0OTIME= 20.00A TIME= 40.00+ TIME= 60.00X TIME= 80.00C 'TIME=100.00
MSMSMSMSMs
U)
123
co
MASS FLUX WITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITHOUT EXPANSInN AT THF PPV
- 35 - 41%
UW-'
Level 4. 1,44
Level 3 2,8533
Level 2 2,8533
Level 1 2,8533
VESSEL 3
WALL
pPIPE2
-PROFILE PLOT
END OF THE PID
PIPE 1
BREAK
X= 1.6775
HDR 2/3
Fig. 2.2. 1.
KWU TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PAR AMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
. 0
RECALCULATION OF ITHE HOR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C)C)
0A+x
PIPE '2 CELL IF'IFE '2 C~L 3PIPE 2r Et.L 5VESSEt CEL.L S
L
.C3
~C303
I~)0~~
*1-
TME (s) *101
r\) PIPE 2PRESSURE
/ VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION
KwIJ TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THlE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
VCi
C) -
C3
0.-00 0.10 0.2-0 0 .30 0.40 0.50) 0 .60 0.70 0.8'0 0 -90 1 .00
(D PIPE I CELL IAý PIPE I CELL *3+ PIPE I CEIL 6X PIPE I CELL 9
I.
~J.
N)
N)
LA)
TIME (s) * o1
IVESSEL TYPE 3 I AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTIONPIPE 2PRESSURE
0KWU .TRAC - P2
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0
C-i
0
En.
C-3
0~
U.n
ci
0.00 0.10 0 -20l 0-.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.130 0.90 1 .00
PI0 PE 2 CELL IP IPE 2 CELL 6
I2
Ini
TIME (S) * 1o I~
PIPE 2MASS FLUX
IVESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION
,41 r
'I'
KWU 'IRAC -'PI2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WI TH-THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0.
0
(D PIPE&! PIPE+ PIPEX PIPE
I CE( L II CELL 3
1CE, L 61 CEL.L 9
0
*
C,,
0
U)C/)
t~Aj
C')
C')
1,-n
TIME (S) * 10-
IVESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTIONPIPE 2
MASS FLUX
KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HEIR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0
cc
0r
0C-
0
C3
C)
0
0
0
0.00 0.10f n f.7n 0.3 040 .5 0lf 6nif 0f l7n n nn nf an i nn
(D !IPE CE~ILL IAý! ?I E 2CEI L 3+ PIPE 2 CEL.L 6X VE55Et CEUSN5'
C0
121
TIME (S) *
VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC10
PIPE 2VOID FRACTION
I BOILER CONNECTION
KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR -TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
Co PIPE I CEl L IA PIPE I CELL 3+ PIPE I CELL 5X PIPE I CEIL 9
H
z0I-1
C-,
f±.
0
TIME CS) * 10-1
/VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTIONPIPE 2VO ID FRACT ION
IQ#A TRAC, -PD2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS W ITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C,
CO
o9 14 V PIPE2 CEI LlA m~v F'PE2 CEI LS
+ mv PIP'E, rEt L
3X fMv PIPEl CELL I
9~~ lIv PirEi C-ElL9
0.0 .0 02 .0 04 .0 06 .0 08 .0 10
TIME () * 10
PIPE2 /VESEL TPE 1 UTOMJICBOIER CNNETIOVELO c) T
KWU TRAC - P02
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
Avmbk
~1
.0
CLn
(D
cn
C)
cr.CL,.
0'
LI
C.)
* Cun
c).
U)%
0.0 .1 .1 .0 0 4 .5 .0 0 7 .0 0 9 0
(D TS VESSEt CELLSA 71. VESSEI CELLS+ TV VESJEL CELLS
I~
TIME (S) * 10O-
TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTIONPIPE 2TEMPERATURE
/ VESSEL
KWIJ TRAC -P132
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH1 THE VESSEL COMPONENT
Apr
C,0
(D TS PIPF2 CEL.LI
+ TV P!PE,2 CELLI
I-tr
~1j
I'.,
0
20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
A TIM (S) * 10O
IVESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTIONPIPE 2TEMPERATURE
.1 J
. I -U
KWU IRAC -P02 .
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HOR-TESTS WI TH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C5
0-
c3.
CC
LAi
LA
Cl
tn
1~I~ T
--
I I I I I (75P1I'EI CE.,LL9A Ti PIPE'I CEIL9
+ TV PIPEI CEIL9
U,
C,C
01C,
LA
C3cn
To.oo 0.,
PIPE 2
-t-'-~-~-~- 4 ~ A
~IJ~1 4 ~ - 4 -.---.--- S-
0 0.210 0.30 0.40 0.50 060.ý 0.7 0.13 0 1~g týo
N) TIME (S) * 10-i
IVESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION
TEMPERATURE
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - P132 PARAMETER STUDY (DTHE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
C-,c"3
(DTIME="' TIME=
+ TIME=X TIME="-TIME=
1.00 Ms2.00 MS3.00 MS4.00 ms5.00 MS
0~~
C/)
I'.,
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS PIPE LENGTH (M)
PRESSURE WITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT THE RPV
i .. ~ 4.
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAMETER STUDY
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAM'ETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
C~)
x
TIME= 6.00TIME= 7.00TIME= 8.00TIME= 9.00TIME= 10.00
MSMSMSMSMS
m
w
PIPE LENG~h (M)
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS
PRESSURE PRESSUREWITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT TI=1 PPV
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAM'ETER STUDY doft
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PAR AMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
C-,C)
oTIME= 20.00 MSŽ~TIME= 40.00 MS+ TIME= 60.00 MS
X TIME= 80.00 MSCZl TIME=100.00 MS
co
C-)
I', PIPE LENGTH (M)
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS
PRESSURE PRESSUREWITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT THE RPV
-0 - "1
KWU
THE
AND
*PROFILE PLOT TRAC - P02 PARAM'ETER STUDY
EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAM~ETERS ON THE PRESSURE
THE MAISS FLUX
hft&
V3,I?
(D TIME= 1.00 MSA!ý TIME= 2.00 14S+ TIME= 3.00 MSX TIME= 4.00 MS!'TIME= 5.00 MS
ti.
I~
U,PIPE LENGTH (M)
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS
MASS FLUX WITHOUT DRJF~r.F ANDl WITW PYPAktqltAM AT TLIC DDII
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAMETER STUDY0
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
V)
(D TIME= 6.00 MS-' TIME= 7.00 MS+ TIME= 8.00 MSX TIME= 9.00 MS
"TIME= 10.00 MS0
*
C')
C,
C'.
CDI
C'.,
C',
0~'
PIPE LENGTH (M)
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTSMASS FLUX WITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT THE RPV
. i
a - .4.
KWU
THE
AND
PROF ILE PLOT TRAC - P02 PARAMWETER STUDY
EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
THE MASS FLUX
Alak
%0
0
,ec
C,)
C.,
hr..
C,C-,
o -I
RPV WALL E~D OF P PEC,C-,
o - ________ _________ (.O~/OOWN PIPE _________
4~ ____________A
-4- -4- -4- -4--- -4---- 4-4-
C-,
C,-C,
C..,C-,
C-.,.LA-
C..)C-,
C, - ____________ ______
C,
C,C,
L)
C,.
C,
C,-r' pp
ODTIME= 20.00 MS,:TIME= 40.00 MS+±TIME= 60.00 MSX TIME= 80.00 MS0 'TIME=100.00 MS
'iiH
.J-J 0 -210 0.40 0.50 0.90 1 .00
PIPE LENGTH
I .20 1.40i I1.6 0, 1 .!JC 2.100
-J(m)
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTSMASS FLUX WITHOUT ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT THF~ PPV
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAMETER STUDY 'pmtk
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASSIFLUXT2/HDR1-3/WIT HOUT ORIFICE/WITHOUT EXPANSION
C3C,
C+
x
TIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=
1.00 MS2.00 MS3.00 MS4.00 MS5.00 MS
C,
r:t~ nn~ u'
g~ C,
'-TI
097
0.0 0 .70 0.40 0.50 0.r -1 .0T3/HDR2-3/wITHOUI ORIFICE/WITHOUT EXPANSION PIPE LENGTH (M)
1 IM 100 MSSIN&L 2.00 MS.'TIME= 300 MS RCLUAINO DTIME= It .0 MS RCLUAINO H O
TIME= 5.00 MS tPDC~Z~l lQC
-TESTSI I~L~.hJUI~L
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - P02 PARAMETER STUDY0THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
T2/HDR1-3/WITHOUT ORIFICE/WITHOUT EXPANSIONc:9
Q)
x
TIME= 6.00 MSTIME= 7.00 MSTIME= 8.00 MSTIME= 9.00 MSTIME= 10.00 M4S
U,
r~.) C) -00 0.,20 OJ~O 0.60 0.8*0 1.00T3/THDR2-3/WITHOUT ORIFIC E/,WITH EXPANSION PIPE LENGTH (m)
TIME= 6.00 MSTIME= 7.00 ms
ZTIME= 5.00 MSTIME= 9.00 MS RECALCULATION OF THE HODRTIME= 10.00 MS fCID
-TESTSr,[%~ I'
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - P02 PARAM~ETER STUDY0
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
T2/HDR1-3/WITHOUT ORIFICE/WITHOUT EXPANSION00
o) TIME= 20.00 MS,& TIME= 40.00 MS+ TIME= 60.00 msXTIME= 80.00 MS'~*TIME=100.oo MS
U,
f'J
0
0'. 00 '0 .2'0 0.-4'0 0.5 '0T3/HDR2-3/WITHOUT ORIFICE/WITH EXPANSION"" IIF:-E: &9:88 91EALUZ TIME= 60.00 1MS EACY TIME= 80.00 MS PESR)t TIME--160.O0 Ms PESR
PIPE LENGTH (M)
AT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS
I
KWU PROF ILE PLOT TRAC - P02 PARAM~ETER STUDY
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND HE ASS LUXT2/HDRl-3/4ITHOUT ORIFICE/WITHOUT EXPANSION
C",
R V WALLEND OF PfP
C3 TIME=1.00 MScý DMIOWD L TIME= 2.00 MS
+ TIME= 3.00 MSX TIME= 4.00 MSCTIME= 5.00 MS
00
CDl
?I ----- ---- --- -------
0A1
-0.00 .0 0.40 0.60 0 .50 1 1.00 1.20 1 .40 1.60 1.80 2.00*13/HOR2-3/WITHOUT ORIFICE/WIrK EXPANSION PIPE LENGTH (M)* 4' TIME= 1.00 MSN) ~~; TIME= 2s00 Mrý itAi' A u Y1 rT
'7 TTPMC nunn 7T.* i CT
x TIME= 5.00 MS MASS FLUX
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAMETER STUDY
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAM'ETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUXT2/HDR1-3/WITHoUT ORIFICE/WITHOUT EXPANSION
1T-
- 0 TIME= 6.00 msit TIME= 7.00 MS+ TIME= 8.00 MSX TIME= 9.00 MS'! TIME= 10.00 MS
0
*
Cl)
C,
0\
f
f
C'.,
C',C',
0.0 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.60 1.00 1 .20T13,HDR2-3/WITOUT ORIFICE/WITH EXPANSION PIELGTC)'i1 TIME= 6.00 MSPIELNT(MX TIME= 7.00 MSZ TIME= 8.00 MS RCLUAINO H D-ETY TIME= 9.00 MS RCLUAINO H D-ETX TIME= 10.00 MS MASS FLUX
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAMETER STUDY
THE EFFECT OF DI1FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
A10th,
T2/HDR1-3/WITHDuT ORIFICE4IWITHOUT EXPANSION
Q3
0C0
0-0(D
WALL END Of P1 E
0 BLQWDQW-P] R-E
Li)
0n
03
0l
C3
C00:)
0 *_ _ _ __ _ _
D
O! TIME= 20.00 MSAL TIME= 40.00 MS
+ TIME= 60.00 MSX TIME= 80.00 MSC0 IIME=100.00 MS
kfl
fi'
U*UU a.~ -20 .40 0.60U 0.80
T3/HDR2-3/WITHOUT ORIFICEJWITH EXPANSION PIPTIME=2.Q
STIME= uMZ TIME= 0.00 M EACLTOY TIME= 80.00 MSRCAULTO CX( TIME=100.00 MS MASS FLUX
I .0U 1 .20 1 .40 1 .6I I .80 2 .00
E LENGTH (M)
IF THE HDR-TESTS
- 58 -
WALL
Level 4. 1,4/4
X~o.Level 3 2533
Level 2 2,8533
Level 1 2,8533
VESSEL 3
'**, PIPE 2
1 2 3 4 3111131END OF PIPE P IPE. 9
PIPE 1
- !PROFILE PLOTX= 1.6775
x =2 .17 75
a
HDR 313
Fig. 2.3.1
-4
KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPON~ENT
C3,
L)
C-,
TIVE (s)E * 10L
ro ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ PIPE 2 VESE TYE3/ATMTI OLRCNETINWT RFCPRESSURE tE
lddnl!kk
KWU TRAC - P2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATERECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WI TH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0' r
+ P'PF I ,'LX r TF I C~L
L.L),
L)~j
o .
Llc')
_________ i 4 I + t 0\0
IA r,1. 44 --,1 i i I I Ifif '
2-I' I I I t 1 1
L),
ti___ t T ----1
ofI I I I I I _ -_____ L
In,
-, I
C G.Z
/ VESSELTIME (s) * 10O
TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICE
,uuI
PIPE 2
PRESSURE
*. ~
KWU TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
I
C.)C)
o ~ 2 '~2L*-~ !PF2 rL1
0
*
C.,
I~Hl
TIME (S) * 10-1
I',
PIPE 2M~ASS FLUX
/ VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICE
KWIJ' TRAC - P02
THE tEFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR -TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0
C.,)Ll
(D: !rF I '.i :L~ !rF I !LL
+ P!PF I '~LX rl pF I Cri!L C
I'
171
PiPEmMASS FLUX
TIME (s) * 1oO
/VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICE
.5, ;,.
KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HOR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
It ,rr 2 .L
+ p , F Lc0
*
z0HC-,
rr~tx..0H0
0~
r'J
(A)
0\
PIPE 2VOID FRACTION
/ VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICE
KWU TRAC -F'02
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0
C-)
Ct.
0
0.
C)
C.,
C)
C'i
C,~i __ __ . A
(D ' !PF I [A'rFI CL
+ rr I 'L LX/ r'f'F I ~IU:L
0\.fz.
I'.,u .UU 0. I0 0.d U * .iu u .4 U .ZJU
TIME (S) *o 1o~U
PIPE 2VOID FRACTION
/ VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICE
4
Kwu IRAC - P2
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH-THE VESSEL COMPONENT
lgaqftý
C.,Ll :
0'Ell
!,v r'rF.2ýý '.~trv rPF2 2LSmv r!rrz L,4V r'PF1 ri* '!.V FIPFI CL
I
a*%
0.
L!)
If
'11
c-.C.o C30 lo.A0 0C, C 7 0 li .rj
TME (S) *10 1
/VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICEPIPE 2VELOC ITY
KWU TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR -TESTS WI TH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C?
0-,
CD,
'oc o -0 011 .0 04 -O,.0 07 ro 09 10
_________________TIME_ (S)_____________ ________________
PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICE
TRAC - P02KWU
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCI JLAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C)0
Cz4
LI)
c')
C?
Lfl
C-)
Zn
rel)lr
AD 'I. P'F2 .ZLL.
+ V/ rTpF2 '~L"
07%
w
0
.j - U Q - f- .9 ,j - )u v Iiu Lo -'Ju 0 - flu p13 .70
PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
/ VESSEL TYPE 3 /TIME (S) * 10~
AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICE
I
KWtJ TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WI TH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C-,
r .', rI Fl rLO
+ T-/v r ,rF i VL)
I'
0'-9
TIME CS) *101
IVESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICEPIPE 2TEMPERATURE
'MRAC - PD2
FECT OF DIFFERENT pARAtETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
ULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMP~ONENT
r r r 3 L
CA
C-'
C-.'
I\3
uJ 0. .40 0.,Ja O0 0.70o -a l 0.
TIME (S) * 10--1
IVESSEL TYPE 3 1 AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICEPIPE 2PRESSURE
Q.KWU TRAC - P2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAM'ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITHi THE VESSEL COMPONENT
V.
!PE-r JJJ
CI)
Ez
0
Li)TIME (S) * 10-'
/VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICEPIPE 2
4V
AddgjhL
KWU TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WI TH THE VESSEL COMPM*ET
C.,
,L 'i. Prrjjj -.:+ TV r!rFij.3 ý:
H
td
H
I'-) TIME (S) * 10Q
/VESSEL TYPE 3 / AUTOMATIC BOILER CONNECTION WITH ORIFICEPIPE 2 iTEMPERATURE
TRAC - P02 PARAM'ETER STUDYKWU PROFILE PLOT
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAM'ETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
1~)
RPV WALLEND OF PIPFORIFICE
3LOWDOWN PIPF _ _ _ 0DTIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=
1.00 MS2.00 MS3.00 MS4.00 ms5.00 MS
N,
mC!,
N,
LAJ
U.,
* ~~~--- t ---- r-----*--- r - I r + , -,-.-.--- I. - - - I. --
f' . r f /;r.0 r.; £- *j.j..D i.00i 1 -20 .,-. I,,,.' 2
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS PIPE LENGTH (M)
PRESSURE WITH ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION'AT THE RPV
KWlJ PROFILE PLOT IRAC - P02 PARAMETER STUDY
TIE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
IP AL END. of PIPE_______ BL4D04U IPEORIFICr
B LOD-1 .P
OJj r cr ! r 40l*q
0L
*.f.
TIME= 6.00 MSTIME= 7.00 MSTIME= 8.00 MSTIME= 9.00 MSTIME= 10.00 MS
LU
tA)
PIPE LENGTH (M)RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTSPRESSURE PRESSURE WITH ARIimF AImif WIT -I YDAm~izAkl AT TurI nrj,
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAM'ETER STUDY199MIL
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
(D TIME= 20.00 MSTIME= 40.00 MS
TIME= 60.00 msX TIME= 80.00 MSý'TIME=100.00 MS
rx~ ,-.0-.
N,
(~AJ
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS PIPE LENGnh (M)
PRESSURE PRESSUREWITH ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT THE RPV
,f.. -
KWU
THE
AND
.PROFILE PLOT TRAC - P02 PARAMETER STUDY
EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
THE MASS FLUX
'OftMY In%0
C,
(D TIME= 1.00 MS-'ý TIME= 2.00 MS+ TIME= 3.00 MSX TIME= 4.00 MS'ýTIME= 5.00 MS0
*
C,,
C,
CL.
g3
'ii
I\.)
LA.)
0
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS PIPE LENGTH (M)
MASS FLUX WITH ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT THF PPV
I
KWU PROFILE PLOT 'RA(; - PD2 PARAMETER STUDY
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENTJ PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUX
0o
*3
5S
0
RPV WALL END or PIPEC). *ORIFIC7
d) _ _
C?
C)
0
C)nnn ni n n r -3 .0 .0 1.0 1.0 1.c
(DTIME= 6.00 MS..TIME= 7.00 MS*-TIME= 8.00 MS
X TIME= 9.00 MS"! TIME= 10.00 MS
0~
N)
U-)
-a PIPE LENGTH (M)
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTSMASS FLUX WITH ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT THE RPV
* ~ *-...
KWU
THE
AND
PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAMVETER STUDY
EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
THE MASS FLUX
C.,
(D TIME= 20.00 MSJ4~ TIME= '*0.00 MS+4 TIME= 60.00 MSX( TIME= 80.00 MS'~TIME=100.00 MS
0
*
C')
C,
I.',
LAJ
I'.,0 RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS PIPE LENGTH (M)
MASS FLUX WITH ORIFICE AND WITH EXPANSION AT TH F PPV
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAM~ETER STUDY
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUXT2/HD RI-3A4ITHDUT oRiriCEA4ITIIOUT EXPANSION
C-,C,
(Dx
TIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=
1.00 MS2.00 MS3.00 MS4.00 MS5.00 MS
00
m
~1.
I',
I')
'b a- , G.~ 0 .40 0.60 0.930 1.00T3/HDR3-3/WITH ORIFICE/WIrH EXPANSION~ PIPE LENGTH (M)*TIME= 1.00 MSTIME= 2.00 MSTIME= .00 MSREACLTIO OFTE DR
YTIME= .00o MS RCLUA NO HHR~.TIME= 5.00 MS
-TESTS
PRESSURE
V.4
S -V..
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - P1)2 PARAMETER STUDY0
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUXT2/HDR1-3/WITHOUT ORITICE/WITHOtJT EXPANSION
C,
0L
X1~N
TIME= 6.00 msTIME= 7.00 MSTIME= 8.00 MSTIME= 9.00 MSTIME= 10.00 MS
'.0
U)
('3l
R\)I'.
r. ; 0.o0.A 0.50 0.930 1 .00T3/HDR3-3/WITH ORIFICE/WITH EXPANSION
'~TIME= 6.00 MS PIPE LENGTH (M)TIME= 0 MSTIME= 9:00 MS
.. IM~ 900MSRECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TTIME= 10.00 MS
ESTS
WKL,)UI(L
-..................-
TRAC - PD2 PARAMETER STUDYKWU PROFILE PLOT
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAM'ETERS ON THE PRESSUREAND THE MASS FLUX
T2/HD R1-3/WITHIIO~T ORTFICEA.JITHOUT EXPANSION
0L
TIME= 20.00TIME= 40.00TIME= 60.00TIME= 80.00TIME=100.00
MSMSMSMSMS
cx,0
I')
CA)
CA)
RECALCULATION OF THE HOR-TESTS
* - C
KWU PROFILE PLOT TRAC - PD2 PARAMVETER STUDY '0THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUXT2/HDRl-3A4ITHOUT ORIFICE/WITHOUT EXPANSION
C3
x
T IP1E=TIME=TIME=TIME=TIME=
1.00 MS2.00 MS3.00 MS4.00 MS5.00 MS
0/
X
c/)
I-
LAo
T3/HDR3-3/WITH ORIFICEP.4ITHSTIME T .00 MST TIMER 2.100 MS
X TIME= 5.00 MS
EXPANSION PIPE LENGTH (M)
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS,MASS FLUX
TRAC - P02 PARAMETER STUDYKWU PROFILE PLOT
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUXT2/HDRI-3/WITHOUT ORIFICE/WITHOUT EXPANSION
0:9
0
x
TIME= 6.00 MSTIME= 7.00 MSTIME= 8.00 MSTIME= 9.00 MSTIME= 10.00 MS
03
0
*
C,)
C,
Ci.
(~0
~11
co0.00 .0,.2'0 0 .4'0 0.60 0.80C 1 .00 1 .20T3/HDR3-3IWITH ORIFICE/WITH EXPANSION PIPE LENGTH (M)4' TIME-, 6.00 MSX~ TIME7= 7.00 Mi
'y 98 RECALCULATION OF TH HOR-TESTSX TIME= 10.00 MS is n x
a
4.I w . "
TRAC - Ff32 PARAMETER STUDYI(WI PROFILE PLOT
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE PRESSURE
AND THE MASS FLUXT2/HDR1-3/WIrHOUT ORIFICE/WITHOUIT EXPANSION
C0C?
A±xC)
TIME= 20.00TIME= 40.00TIME= 60.00TIME= 80.00TIME=100.00
MSMSMSMSMS0
*
U)
0
~21
co
U.)
I'.,
00.00o 0.20 ý 0.40 0.60 ,0.60 1.0 1.20I-
T31DR-3WIH R~ICIWTHEXPANSION PIPE LENG71H (M)t TIMEý' ý80.70TME MS RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTSZ TIME= 0O.00 MS* TIME= 80.00 MSMASFU* TIME=100.00 MSMASFU
- 814 -
PIPE 2 I PIPE 1
Level 4 0.177
Level 3 3,2742
Level 2 3,2742
Level 1 3,2742
VESSEL 3
11 12 13 1 ' 5 1~ l1 2 13 1679L BREAK
HDR 4/5
Fig. 2.14.1
KWU TRAC,- P02
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COtfOPET
C.3r-,
(r)n .r F 2 L2it "!PF 2 L.+r ý )
I,
Inrj 030 060 .70
TIME (S) *10-'
IVESSEL TYPEr 5 / FRICTION FACTOR (BOILER EXIT) = 0.5PIPE 2PRESSURE
AM&
w -
KWU TRAC - P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR -TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C.)C.'
w
C-,
Dj
L' . 24~~~~~ yl e.___ __ ____
v -1
0
-r
I,
"'rF I L
Z'p L ~
C~L)
PIPE 2PRESSURE
TIME (S) * 0
/FRICTION FACTOR
V. ý ,j .- £ *U~
/ VESSEL TYPE 5 (BOILER EXIT) = 0.5
a or
ITRAC - P02
ECT OF DI1FFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
]LAT ION OF THE HDR -TESTS WI1TH THE VESSEL COMPONENTr Z
0
*
Cl)
C,:4
CL.
g3
I
co
I',
PIPE 2MiASS FLUX
/ VESSEL TYPE 5 / FRICTION FACTOR (BOILER EXIT) = 0.5
Admlbk
KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HOR-TESTS WI TH THE VESSEL CoMPONENT
V.L3,
*- r E L
1, r' F L 9
0
*
Cl)
a
I,co
In-
U.'
9 .r F3 .70TIME (S) * 10-1
PIPE2 1MiASS FLUX
/ VESSEL TYPE 5 1 FRICTION FACTOR (BOILER EXIT) = 0.5
w .
I -~
KWU TRAC - P02 i
Thid EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON TH OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT IONOF THE HOR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C3
cmJ
0
-- ~~~ -__ 9__ .0
OT 'rr ,+t !~
.~L
Lc ~1
CI
TIME (S) * 10-1 :
TYPE 5 / FRICTION FACTOR (BOILER EXIT) = 0.5PIPE 2
VOID FRACTION
/ VESSEL
lddslk&
Kwvul TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT pARAtWETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECA1I.CULAT ION OF THE HOR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMMENET
-1! PF I CL '-
+ 'rrFX r''IF I ~.L 91
I.0D
0HHC-,
CL
H0
r\)
PIPIE 2VOID FRACTION
/ VESSEL TYPE 5 / FRICTION FACTOR (BOILER EXIT) = 0.5
.0
MI tV PW2E Ci'L
X mv r'rfi CUcL9
cI~
E
C-)0w
I') 20 n 30 f,.40 0 1o 0 Cn 0.70 c .91 C
TIME (S) * 10O1
IVESSEL TYPE 5 / FRICTION FACTOR (BOILER EXIT) 0.5
KWU. TRAC -PD2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0
C-3
+ TV VC';,
Wc LCt' L
:1
'1
I\
I'.)
TIME Cs) * 0-
IVESSEL TYPE 5 / FRICTION FACTOR (BOILER EXIT) = 0.5PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
UI El
S.
KWlU TRAC - P2
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARAM~ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0
C.,C-?
(D 3P!rF., 'A!.L'
+ Tv I'I'w L
oPIPE 2TEMPERATURE
TME (S) * 0
IVESSEL TYPE 5 / FRICTION FACTOR (BOI LER EXIT) =0.5
KWtJ TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HOR-TESTS WITHI THE VESSEL COMPONENT
'Il%
C:,C..,
(D 'S r'!rF I C',' 9
A i T/ r!rF 1C ' L9
I
Cl,
H
02) 0 .40 G.~ O0 A 0.0 c.3 1.']
TIME (S) * 10-1
IVESSEL TYPE 5 / FRICTION FACTOR (BOILER EXIT) = 0.5PIPE 2
TEMPERATURE
t F
- 95 -
PIPE 2 IPIPE ILevel .4 0.1773_-
Level 3 3,2742
Lovot 2 .3,2742
Level 1 3,27421
VESSEL 3
[1 1ji 2 j 1 . j1 I112+1zRIAHIII s75
HDP 5/4~
Fig. 2.5.1
KWU TRAC- P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAME TERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
c.'3C3!
+ VFS,; LcL.S
0~
U,
PIPE 2PRESSURE
/ VESSEL TYPE 4
* f
KWU TRAC - P2Ra
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
r 3C3,
+ r Jp L
X< r!rf I L -.1~
V)
I',U'
PIPE 2PRESSURE
TIME
/VESSEL TYPE 4
0KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DI FFERENT PARMtETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COW1OINENT
L.
Orr
0
*
(/20
EL.
'~0
'11I-s.oq
U'
PIPE 2MASS FLUX
/ VESSEL TYPE 4
KWUý TRAC- P02
THEOEFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAM'ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C)0
a
*
C,,
C,
C.3
'CJ
L-3
K] ~ ~ ~ . a__ 0___ 6___ G___ __
I~
Co' r.!F I c'LZL "!rF I ', ; '+ Fr'PF I ULx r'rF i 2L 02
p.
U'
ZA
TIME (SEC) * 1O-
/VESSEL TYPE 4PIPE- 2MASS FLUX
KWU TRAC - P2
THE EFFECT OF D IFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE [DR-TESTS WITH TIE VESSEL COMPONENT
(D ! r 'F ' ' , ;L :
A V! z'JL " (.c'L 5~
I u~'0*-
*
0~H ''C-,
(z.
0
H
I',
U,
0~
TIME (S) * 1-
/VESSEL TYPE 4PIPE 2VOID FRACTION
r 19
KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULATION OF THE HOR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
0
cl
(D I'frF I C*'L
+~- r,!rE I I(CL '
Y r 'rE Z UL
I-IaI.-'
*1
0I-I
I-40
~1.
U' TME (S) * 10O 1
IVESSEL TYPE 4PIPE 2VOID FRACTION
KWU TRAC. -
THE EFFECT OF
RECALCULATION
P02
DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
OF THE HOR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
(~2
Cl,
I-IC-,0w
0-
C.J
L,
Ll
o rv r rF 2, L+ tiv r'rFi cALLlX mv r~r'fi (,'jLt1
CD
I',
U,
V,cIJ- T-
c14. 0.30I I I I
0.40 G' r,
TIME (S) * 10O
VESSEL TYPE 4
I~~ I I0-r, C0.70 (' (!t~ 0. jo
PIPE 1 2
VELOCITY.1
/
KWU TRAC,-FPD2
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMWETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
RECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WI TH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C14
L) i
.-----
0. 20Ig r 4 5c O l 0 0 )r
A T1. IZ ''L E. 'L S+ TV itZ~ t".51 ,
TIME (S) *110/VESSEL TYPE 4
-1
PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
I
KWU TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATERECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPONENT
C.,C-.)
± Tv r rF? 'L'
I-i
w'a.
0
PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
VESSEL TYPE TIECS4
.1
KWUJ TRAC -P02
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATERECALCULAT ION OF THE HDR-TESTS WITH THE VESSEL COMPON~ENT
Iddsoll,
C.)
C3)
TIME~L -A-*10
T tr r F I L,.
H0U,
I-'-)
U,
PIPE 2TEMPERATURE
/ VESSEL TYPE 4
PART III: RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPLICATIONOF TRAC-PD2
TO SHORT-TERM TRANSIENTS
S
- 1-
This page intentionally left blank.
Ar-3-
Introduction
Since the first introduction of the TRAC-P1A computer code in
March 1979 and the installation of the improved version TRAC-PD2
in the meantime in September 1980, various calculations for the
Atucha II project and post-test calculations have been performed.
The knowledge gained from optimizing the computation models is
explained in more detail and illustrated, if necessary, in the
following chapters.
These activities were undertaken in particular in the process of
verifying the new version of the TRAC-PD2 code because it becomes
more and more apparent that due to its flexibility this code
yields good results in particular for complex plants and thus
has become indispensable for project work.
Kraftwei* Union
-4-
2 Automatic Calculation of Pressure Loss Coefficients for
,Contraction or Enlargement
From Chapter b. "Finite Difference Equations" (/I/, ref. p. 2) it
can be deduced that there are two possible procedures for solv-
ing the differential equations for the one-dimensional compo-
nent s.
Firstly, there is the semi-implicit procedure (subroutine DFIDS)
which determines the time interval by an explicit equation as
shown in eqn. 2.1:
hmt Eqn. 2.1
Se~condly., there is the-fully implicit procedure (subroutine
DFIDI) which is to be employed particularly for components where a
a priori high flow velocities are to be expectede.g. the
blowdown pipe. For the one-dimensional components, the user is
free to choose either one of these procedures.
.In any case the RPV. component (VrESSEL) is calculated by the
semi-implicit procedure. However, certain differences arise in
the determination of the pressure loss coefficients in the pipe,
depending on the solution procedure chosen. It can be seen from
Chapter d.6. "Form Losses" (/I/, ref. p. 28) that the semi-
implicit procedure allows for the pressure loss in the case of
sudden expansion, but not in the case of contraction or outflow
processes.
The ' ully-implicit procedure, on the other hand, calculates a
Bernoulli flowI which~however, tak~es nei~her contraction nor
expansion or outflow processes into account. This is due to
the definition of the Bernoulli equation, which only applies
to frictionless flow.
Kraftwei* Union
AdsmbhAir "T& - 5-
In this case, therefore, the mathematical results must besubjected to a correction as follows:
Ap= k z. V . lvi
where k follows from
Eqn. 2. 2
k=(I- Al )2A2
Eqn. 2.3
for expansion, and equation 2.4
k = 0.5 -0.7 (,C) + 0.2 -1)2 Eqn. 2.4
holds for contraction, with A, being the smaller and A2 thelarger flow area. These calculations are Performed by a sub-
routine called FWAIJL.
In the TRAC-PD2 version, the final pressure loss is given by
&P= J IC.1)3 vIlvi
The FF value in the TRAC-OUTPtJT is given by
Eqn. 2.5
FF = -Dh J'& + Xj
Eqn. 2.6
and the FIIC. values are calculated by including the appropri-
ate Ivalue in the following equation:
hIC~ = j h.D Eqn. 2. 7
This way it is Balso possible to put in the loss coefficientsby hand- by calculating, say, the K value for the contrac-
tion and explicitly entering it as a FRIC value in the input
of the component.
KraMt werk Union
JV-6-
'~values due to form losses, elbows, apertures, orifices, flow
restrictors, etc. can thus also be taken into account. However,
it is the purpose of the following text to determine how the
semi-implicit and the-fully implicit procedures cooperate
with the automatic calculation of the loss coefficients.
For this purpose, the respective pressure losses upon expansion
and contraction in a p~ipe are calculated; the surface area ratioA,A2 -= 0.25 is the same in both cases. The actual model is rep-
resented in Fig. 2.1.
Fig. 2.1
As has already been mentioned, the semi-implicit procedure is
capable of accurately calculating the pressure profile in the
case of expansion without a correction. The pressure difference
as determined by-the TRAC and the manual calculation*(Eqn. 2.8)
as well as the corresponding FF values for the four possible
combinations are listed in Table 2.1. This shows clearly that
the statement previously made regarding the semi-implicit pro-
cedure is correct. According to Table 2.1, the fully implicit
procedure only produces correct results if NFF = -1 is included
in the calculation. In this *case only 'the FF value from the TRAC
output is equal to the calculated FF value. For 1NFF = +1 and
fully implicit, the pressure regain is far too high, as in
this case the frictional losses are not covered by the Bernoulli
eciuation.
Kraftwei* Union
- 7-
Ex~pan sion Ap4-2~TRAC
Ap 4 - 2FFc~ k Dh.j
CAL2ý Xj j-1j
NFF-1I
INFF + I
NFF - I
NFT + I
Fl
Fl
SI
SI
0.2870
0.7228
0.2870
0.2880
0.2915
0.2933
0.2910
0.2910
0. 2267
0.00268
0.002684
0.002684
0.2244
0.2244
0.2244
0.2244
Table 2.1
1 2 1 ( 2AP 4 - 2 = P 4 V4 r P 5 (k 3
- v 32 ) Eqn. 2.8
k A, () 12-12
Contr'action Ap5- 7~TBRAC APC5 - 7
ALC FF FF= kh,
4 .1.- 4.
ITFF
IUF
M7~F
IqF-F
-1I
+1
+1
Fl
F'
SI
SI
1 .0795
0.7987
1.0841
1.2750
1.*0846
1.0917
1.0862
1.0862
*0. 1570
0.002347
-0.08742
0.002345
0.1546
0.1546
0.1546
0.1346
Table 2.2
Ap 5 - 7 -fPv 62 +P(v 2? kv 7
2 Eqn. 2. 9
kc = 0.5 - 0.7 2 .
In contrast to this, none of the procedures a priori cover
correctly the pressure loss upon contraction, as can be
seen from Table 2.2, so that for the semi implicite as well
as for the fully implicit procedures the automatic calculation
has to be employed.
With the option N~FF = -1 and semi-implicit, the dubious
case occurs that a negative loss coefficient is used in the
program. This is due to the fact that the pressure loss is
overestimated; the pressure is therefore boosted by means
of a negative I value in order to obtain the correct value.
Generally it can be stated that a full agreement between TRAC
and calculation by h 'and can only be achieved by the fullyimplicit procedure combined with a negative NFF value in thepressure loss as well as in the FF value. This combination
should, tAeref ore, generally be used so as to avoid all
uncertainties from the start.
Kraftwerk Union
-9-
5Parameter Study on IED? Tests
It-is imperative to check tests in order to verify a computa-
tional program. For this reason, the PHDR/V51 tests were checked
by means of the program version TRAC-PD2, so that the calculated
pressures and outflow rates from the TRAC calculations could be
compared with the test re sults. There was some uncertainty re-
garding the handling of the TRAC-PD2 input.; a parameter study
(Table 3.1) was implemented in order to clarify these problems
in principle. For this purpose, the results of the model modifi-
cations elucidated in the following chapters were related to an
initial calculation so as to enable the effect of the individual
changes to be determined. This initial calculation *is based on a
model of the HDR experiment(Fig.3.1) in *ihich the RPV(Fig.3.2) was
simplified to a great extent, since it was only required as a
pressure boundary condition for the basic examinations of the
pressure curves and outflow rates in the blowdown nozzle. For
this reason, the res ults are to be deemed to be of qualitative
rather than of quantitative relevance; a direct comparison with
the lIDR measurements is only possible to a limited extent. The
exact post-test calculations were performed with a more detailed a
model by H. Herterich /4/..
Kraftwei*Union
-10-
-Series of IIDR tests
HDRI/3 Junction of the blowdown nozzle without any special
changes
Ratio pipe surface: vessel junction surface I :21PIFE2 SI/PIPEI FI/pressure boundary condition in
2 ms to I bar
}IDP2/3 Automatic junction of the pipe to the vessel
Expansion of pipe surface to vessel junction surface
PIPE FI/PIPEI FI/pressure boundary condition in
2 ms to I bar
HTJR3/3 Automatic junction of the pipe to the vessel with
nozzle
All pipes FI and INFF = -1/pressure boundary condition
instantaneous
HDR'4/5 New nodalisation of vessel with 2 radial zones in thedowncomerVessel junction surface = pipe surface
I= 0.5 for the outflow from the vessel
HDR5/4 Only I radial zone in the downcomer
Vessel junction surface = pipe surface
BDR6/5 Vessel division as for HDR4/5Vessel function surface = pipe surfaceNodelling bypass mode'l in-the biowdown nozzle
SI 2' semi-implicit
FI 6- fully implicit
Table 3.1
Kraftwerk Union
- 11 -
nozzle Al
JPNF
Schematic Isometry of Lines and Loops
Participating During Blowdown Fig. 3.1
-12 -
ROB - Deckel ' 1sr
!oberes Plenum(upper plenurr
oberer Einspannflansch(upper flange)
1100
KStutzen A2 (nozzle A2)
Innenraumn (hiner region)
Alernmantei 23 ± 1mm(core barrel)
*Ringraumn (downcomer)
-ROB(PV, pressue vessel)
(muss -ring)-Masse - Ring
-untere4 Pt qnum(lower plenumn)
- altwaiss erstu tzen(cold water inlet) a
I,-
ROB und Kern mantelIgeometri e f *Ur B lowdown Exp.(RP1 and Core Barrel Geometries for Blowdown Experiments)
Fig. 3.2
-15
RD 20M1RD M0f2
RM3 003RM300I.RP30CIRp..0O2
RP3U05I~ ~r~it~r~ -~
9 P9109ROB
PJF 2 1 IPE1 6789
12 3
0,2 0,2 1 0,2 0.20, 01 011
8-35Ifm OI I 1.01 m
-, .. , Sim1,3098M0,0145 M
1,5045 M
Blowdown nozzle for the IIDR 1/3 4/5 5/4 models
~KPIPE 2RD 3001RD 3002
RM 3003RN13001.RP3001
U3002RP3006
PIPE 1 C7R~
1 22 1 67893 6 1 2 3 4 5
8PSiOSROB 02 0 2 0,2 0,2
0,Ol
0,977m1,3096m
0,1j ,1 01 0,1 D0,02w/ -~0,01m
0,01I.5M
I I~1
1,504,5M -I
Blowd~own nozzle for the HDR 2/3 3/3 models
RD 3001kD 30 02
RM3003RK3001.RP 3001RP 3002
R P3006PPP1PI PE 2 91011i
__________PIPE "1h~ II
BP9109ROB
1
02
2 3 4 5 1 2 3j4j56I7 1-QiC=ý 1t C
0O1 U "'C!C= H0 2 0 2 02
0;2 02 01-0,835m
0,977m1, 3098
0, 'A 0,01MU~0145m
1--- 1,5045M
Bypass junction
Blowdown nozzle for the HDI? 6/5 model
- 14. -V31-1 RPVI
. RM 3oo30 2 RM 3oo.4
/BN SHORT 110 BAR 338/268 DEG CSCANNING FREO CHZJ 5000.0 MPAN OF 2 ALUES
rý I
I-
--- -
'-I
NO14R 1/3HOR 2/3
--.- OR 3/3
TIME AFTER BREAK IN SEC
c
LaJ
V31.1 RPVI
I. RH 3oo3 BN SHORT 110 BAR 308/268 DEG C9 2 RM 3oo4 * ' SCANNING FRED CHZJ 5000.0 MEAN OF 2 VALUES
C3
--- --- --- - - - ... .
C3.
... . . ... .. . ... ...
C3
......... . ...
C3C2
C3
w
0 .30 Oi.40
TIME AFTER BREAK IN SEC
0.50 0.60 0'. I o-,- - HOR 4/5
NO-. UR 5/4--- - HR 6/5 Fig. 3.4I
o'.90 00
-15 -,
o 1
2 j~, ::~.~;j
e~SCANNI*NG F-REO CHZJ 5000.MIEAN or 2 VALUES _.
- I
C
c-,
Li
C
I - .
I - 4.....,. - - -
* --
-l *~=-. - - - ~*- ---.- - -.-- -~ -----o . . - -q ~* ~ .- * ~.
I . . I ~ Io 4 I
* . . Io . . ,l.. **
* 4 I I.,.* . * 1I I.* I
* . . . Io . . I ___ ___ ___0
o I *I '1.-0.20 0.00 0.10 o~ao "'~ 0.40 0.50 0.EO__ 0.70 0.60 0.W0 I. 00
TIME AFTER BREAK IN SEC1- - HUH 1/3
-. . OR 2/3
HOR 3/3
L.a
C-)C-)
C-
- -NO f,/TIME AFTER BREAK IN SEC
HUR 5/I,
SNOR 6/5 Fig. 5.5
AIR- -% 16 -
5.1 EDRI/3 Initial Test Calculation -
The results of this calculation form the basis for an assessment
of the effectiveness of the measures subsequently implemented.
The pressure and mass flow rate curves determined are compared
with those resulting from the KDR tests; no absolute agreement
is to be expected here; nevertheless, the same qualitative behav-
iour should be observed. Fig. 5.1 shows the entire set-up of the
HDR experiment. In this model, only the PPV and nozzle Al are
pictured. Fig. 3.2 provides an overview of the RPV internals and
the corresponding geometrical dimensions. The model pertaining
to this calculation is pictured in Fig. 3.6. The RE~ACTOR PRESSURlE
VESSEL is subdivided into 4I levels', each of which consists of 2
radial annuli and 4 azimuthal segments, so that each level com-
prises 8 zones. The blowdown nozzle is connected to zone 5 in
level 4. It consists of 2 pipes (PIPEI and PIPE2). Fig. 3.3 shows
the exact discretization. The surroundings are represented by a
BRlEAK (pressure boundary condition). A pressure drop to I bar
within 2 ms is specified as the boundary condition. The locations
of the measuri~ng points for the pressures and flow rates are also
indicated in Fig. 3.3. Figs. 3.4 and 3.5 feature the correspond-ing measurement curves. For easier comparison, the mathematical
results obtained from the 6 calculations are also listed in
these figures.
Furthermore, the most important mathematical results are plotted
in Figs. 3.7 to 3.10. These are pressure, steam quality and flow
rate.
Kraftwei* Union
AMU, 17-
A comparison of the calculated ma~ss -flow rate (Fig. 3.8) inPnIPE2 CELL~5 (measuring point Rflu 3003/3004) with the measurement
curve (Fig. 3.4) makes readily apparent that in this case the
outflow rate is calculated as being more than twice as high at'
0.1 s. This is due to the vessel connection. The actual outflow
losses are not covered by this model; this implies an excess-ive outflow velocity and a correspondingly high outflow rate.
This results in a faster pressure loss in the RPV, which has
nearly reached the pressure within the pipe after 0.1 s (Fig.
3.5).
Kraftwe* Union
- 18 -
Level 4. 1,44
PIPE 2
1 1I 2 1 3I 1. 5 1 11I2 131NIHII1 BREAKIPIPE 1
Level 3 2,6533
Level 2 2,48533
Level 1 2,8533
4.
VESSEL 3
HODR 1/3
Fig. 3.6
- 19 -
KWU TRAC-FD2-
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMiETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE KDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COM"PONENT
CD BREAK40UTLET
LoJ
TIME CS) m 10'PIPE 2 - SEMI-IMPLICIT / VESSEL VERSION 3PRESSURE
KWU` TRAC-P.D2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMIETERS ON THE OUTFLOW BATE
CHECK OF THE EDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENTC30
o! PIPE 2 CELL TA PIPE t CELL 5+ VEWSL CELL 5
I-
Qa
PIPE 2 - SEMI-IMPLICIT / VESSEL VERSION 3PRESSURE Fig. 3.7
- 20 -
KWU` TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
6BREAK40UTLET- 1t )lr Cli.L 9
PIP 2 - SEMI-IMPLICIT / VESSEL VERS ION5FLOW RATE
KWIJ TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARMW'ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATECHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
oD PIPE 2 CXLL IA PIPE 2 CELL
;.ecc.~ .Z2 .AOTI) .(S
PIPE 2 - SEMI-IMPLICIT I VESSEL VERSION 3FLOW RATE' Fig. 3. 8
- 21 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THtE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE EDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
Q) FIrf I CUL :& lfrf I CILL I+ p I r I c ItL SX Fiff I CIL.L 9
.oc ~ ~ ~ -i ,: o., 0.3 -a .0 o~ 0.-,o.- -TIME(ýS) .10-' -
PIPE 2 -SEMI-IMPLICIT / VESSEL VERSION
STEAM QUALITY
KWU` TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMIETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
0 ~flp CE.LL t
+ VESSEL CELL S
TIME (s) -. o'
PIPE 2 Q EMI-IMPLICIt'/ VESSEL~ VERSION 3STEAM QUAL~ITY Fig. 3.9
- 22 -
KWU` T2RAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE EDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMIPONENTr
X Pi~r I CUM 9
.. ~ ~w ~
C,'-"C
C-,
L~ C,0
0
a.
TIME (S) v 10"
PIPE 2 - SEMI-fIMPLICIT / VESSEL VERSION 3
PRESSURE
KWU` TRAC-PD2
'EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COM'PONENTC,0
CU
C-i
I-"
',_
9* 3im
C3
a.
Co
-.L
oD PIPE I CELL I,& PIPE I CELL 3+ PIPE I CELL 6X PIPE I CELL 9
Is
Tirl (s)- :..3 . - ý. j a -
PIPE 2 - SEMI-IIIPLICiT / VESSEL VERSION 3
FLOW RATE Fig. 3.10
-23-
5.2 11DR2/3 Automatic Vessel Junction
In-the following paragraphs,, the various possible vessel jun~c-
tions and their effects on the outflow rate as well as the
pressure curve are discussed.-.
In this model (Fig. 3.11), the pressure loss occurring due to
the contraction and turbulence of the flow upon leaving the
vessel, is taken into account within the pipe.
This is effected by reducing the vessel junction area within
the first two zones of the cross sectional area of the blowdown
pipe. The pressure loss resulting from the contraction is thus
automatically calculated with 1NFF = -4i, in accordance with. the
equations in Chapter 1. Fig. 3.4I shows a relatively good agree-
ment of the measured and the calculated curves of the outflow
rates.
The agreement in the pressure curve for the IRPV is similarly
extensive, whereas in the blowdown nozzle the value of approx.
10 bar remains below the measured curve. This is certainly due
to the outflow losses through the pipe and into the open being
insufficiently considered (Figs. 3.12 to 3.15).
Krafiwork Union
- 24 -
Level 14 1,44
Level 3 2,8533
Level-- 2 -- 2-8533
Level 1 2,8533
VESSEL 3
P PIPE 2 PIPE 213 BRA
1 6711
A
HODR 2/3
Fig. 3.11
- 25 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE 11DB TESTS WITH VESSEL COMiPONIE1T
oD PIPE 2 CELL I4 PIPE 2 CELL 3+ P IPE 2 CELL 6X< VESSEL CELL 5
L.J
a-
PIPE 2 - Fl/VESSEL VERSION 5/AUTOKATIC VESSEL JUNCTION
PRESSURE
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
C3
03
C3 I
C 7 ac 09 0
o! fiff I CCLL 146 PIPE ICELL 3+ PIPE I CELL 6X PIPE I CELL B
"a
C-,La0~
PIPE 2 ý- Fl/VESSEL VERSION 3/AUTOMATIC VESSEL JUNCTION
PRESSURE Fig. 3.12
- 26 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAM~ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
PIPEP I CELL ISPIPE I CELL3
+ I PE I CELL 6X PIPE I CELL 9
0.40 0.o 0.60 0.70 0.80TIME Cs)1 .
VERSION 3/AUTOMATIC VESSELPIPE 2 - PI/VESSEL JUNCTIONSTEAMi QUALITY
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMIETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDlR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT'C
CC
C
~~1 I I
__ __ __ __ I __ __ ________ ______ I : ______ ______ ______ ______ ______
TAI I
~CI___ ___ _______ ___ ___ ___T I!
oD PIPE 2 CELL. I& PIPE 2 CELL. 3+ PI PC 2 CELL 6X VESSEL CELLS
.:; C 0 so i -6CTIME (s v .0--
I -GG
PIPE 2 - FI/VESSEL VERSION 5/AUTOMATIC VESSEL JUNCTION
STEAM QUALITY Fig. 3.15
- 27 -
KWU TRAC-1PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THEE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
CDC
.-c
Ccc
Q PI Prc ~Iu CEL&BREAK40OUTLET
0.00 0.10 0-20 0.30
VERSION 3/AUTOKjATIC VESSEL JUNCTIONPIPE 2 - FI/VESSEL
FLOW RATE
La.
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARlIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE IiDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
Q
C3
in.
P IPE;~ CELL tPIPEc 2 CtfLL 0
TIME (S) I0
PIPE 2 - :FI/VESSEL VERSION 3/AUTOMA.TIC VESSEL JUNCTION
FLOW RATE Fig. 3.14V
- 28 -
KWVU TURAC-mPD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMIETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATECHECK OF THE 1DR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
CD IIP I CEL *i c I.& PIPE t CELL 3+ P I E I C ELL6
C3 X PIPE I CELL
0.0 o.1 0.20 0.30 0 .40 .50 0.6c 0.10 0.90 0.90 1 .00TIVZ (0s)0*
PIPE 2 -Fl/VESSEL VERSION 5/AUTOMIATIC VESSEL JUNCTIONFLOW RATE
Fis. 3.15
-29 -
3.3 HDR3/3 Automatic Vessel Junction with N9ozzle
This model (Fig. 5.16) -is intended to serve for a more de-
tailed examination of the effect of the boundary conditions on
the computation results. Here, a continuous transition from
the system state to the environment (BREAK) occurs, whereas in
all other calculations a pressure discontinuity function is
employed, which drops linearly from system pressure to I bar
within 2 ms. For this purpose, a nozzle with an opening angle
of 500 is positioned between the BREAK boundary condition and
the blowdown pipe. In order to prevent the possibility of a
water slug acting as a delay element in the nozzle, the nozzle
is filled with steam. However, this implies that for programm-
ing reasons, an instantaneous pressure drop to I bar must be
calculated. The time-based pressure curve thus displays a more
rapid drop to saturation pressure during the first few milli-
seconds than in the measurement, which'-can be clearly seen in
Fig. 3.5. On the whole, the calculated results agree best withthe measured results. Firstly, due to the increased outflow
velocity (in spite of an increase in steam formation), the
outflow rate features an even smaller deviation from the mea-
sured value than in the case of H7Df2/5; secondly, the pressure
level in the blowdown nozzle is slightly raised, so that the
pressure in the steady state agrees better with the measure-
menit curve.
This is due to the realistic simulation of the free jet. Nor-
mally, this effect should be covered-by the boundary conditions.
In any case, the program must take these outflow conditions into
account, provided these are exactly defined- in physical terms.
In a first approximation, a diffusor with an opening angle of500 can be used for this purpose.
Kraftwerk Union
- 30 -
PIPE 999
Level 4 1,44
Level 3 2j8533
Level 2 2,F8533
Level 1 2,8533
VESSEL 3
~PIPE 2 PIPEl1
1Y 6713
H DR 313
Fig. 3.16
- 31 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THlE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COM~PONENT
o) ?lrr I CfL !;11PE it C'LI+ zrf C CLL 6
X rzrr I CELL 9
.0c C.10 c -20 0.30 c.40 .,,o 0 .6c - .-0 - 0.'sC 0.90 1.00TIME Cs) ~o
PIPE 2 - Fl/VESSEL VERSION 3/AUTOMATIC VESSEL JUNCTION WITH NOZZLE
STEAM Q.UAILITY
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH COMIPONENT
o ?HE i tECLL 13
+ PIPE , ' CELL 6X 'ECSSCL rt
TIME Cs) * .
PIPE 2 .- FI/VESSEL VERSION 3/AUTOMATIC VESSEL JUNCTION WITH NOZZLE
STEAM QUALITY Fig. 3.17
- 32 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE 11DB TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPFONENT
± !Pf 21 U'L !
;! rPf 2 ti'L 1
X vrrLCt'L
TME (s) -0PIPE 2 - Fl/VESSEL VERSION 3/AUTOMATIC VESSEL JUNCTION WITH NOZZLEPRESSURE
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMIETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE 11DB TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONiENT
o! PIPE I CrtL IA. PIPE I CF'l *3+ PIPE I CE*L 6X( PIPE I CELL S
w
L.J
C-,C-,
0~
-~TRIE (S)* x*,s
PIPE 2 - F1/VESSEL VERSION 5/AUTOMATIC VESSEL JUNCTION WITH NOZZLE
PRESSURE Fig. 5.18
- 53 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMtETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HI)R TESTS WITH VESSEL COM1PONEN~T
! REAK' OUTLET
PIPEFLOW
2 - F1/VESSEL VERSION 3/AUTOM~ATIC VESSEL JUNCTION WITH NOZZLE
RATE
MW TRAC-Pfl2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COM~PON~ENTaa
C)PIPE f CELL IA PIPE 2 CELL 6
''TIME (S)PIPE 2 - Fl/VESSEL VERSION 5/AUTONATIC VESSEL JUN~CTION WITH NOZZLE
FLOW RATE Fig. 5.19
- 341 -
-KWU TRA.C-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
-CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS.-WITH VESSEL COMiPONENT
,t irEF I CELL 3+ P I PE CftL 6X ripr I SELL 9
PIPE 2 - FI/VESSEL VERlSION 5/AUTOMATIC VESSEL JUNCTION WITH NOZZLE
FLOW RATE
Fig. 3.20
3.4 HJXR4/5 Ves "sel- Junction Area = Pipe Cross Sectional Area
with Los's Coefficient
An additional vessel junction option is provided by the dis-
cretization of the vessel junction area (Fig. 3.21), so that it
is in exact agreement with the pipe cross sectional area. How-
ever, this requires a great deal of discretization, which in the
case of a complex installation can hardly be implemented, as the
capacity of the computer is rapidly exhausted by the significant
increase in the number of celles in the vessel. Furthermore, the
outflow process from the EPV into the pipe is a three-dimensional
flow for which a model must be produced which also represents the
flow within the pipe. Within the BPV, as has already been men-
tioned, this is only possible with considerable difficulty; how-
ever, calculations within the pipe must always be one-dimensional,
so that it is impossible to produce a complex model of the three-
dimensional flow in the vessel nozzle with this program. Further-
more, due to the crude azimuthal subdivision of the RPV,the measured
value obtained from the test does not coincide with the mathemat-
ical location in the program, so that a direct comparison of the
curves is only possible to a limited extent.
.A comparison of the curves in Figs. 3.4 and 3.5 shows that due
to the increased pressure loss within the first few milliseconds,
the flow curve remains below the experimental curve due to the
increase in steam formation. In this case, the transition equal
in area does not lead to an improvement in the result, since the
loss for the outflow is not taken into consideration to a suf-
ficient degree, in spite of I~ being given as 0.5.
Kraftwerk Union
- 36 -
t
PIPE 2 IPIPE 1
Level 4 0,1773
Level 3 3, 2742
Level 2 3,2742
Level 1 31 274 2
VESSEL 3
111251213 1 j ~123L4U BREAK
.1
HDR 4/5
Fig. 3.21
- 57 -
XWU TRAC-PD2EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HJ)R TESTS WITH VES$EL- COMPONENT
(D BREAK40UTLETd, *lE I UILL 9
TIME (S) 1 1PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VTERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) 0ý.5
FLOW RATE
KWLJ TRA.C-PD2
EFTECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF. THE IIDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
o noi 2 Ltut t,A Pift t2W.ZL 3
PIPE 2 - SI/VrESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) =0.5
FLOW RATE Fig. 3.22
- 38 -
KWU TRAC-PD2 -
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMiETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE EDE TESTS WITH VESSEL COMIPONENT
(0 BREAK40UTLET
liML k5) . v 0'
PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) = 0.5
PRESSURE
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
.CHECK OF THE H])R TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
Air 2 CCLL S+ Vasa: £II.L0
4
S
1-0
PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) = 0.5
PRESSURE Fig. 2.23
- 39 -
KWU TBAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETEBS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE 11DB TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPON~ENT.
;I*rr I CI.L LI PfE I tf~t 5
X PIPE I CELL 9
b.oc cI - c., - 0.30 -C.40 - '. 0.7. .0 0 .80 0.90TIME (S) wigo-,
PIPE 2 -SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) =0.5
STEAM QUALITY
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF TEE 11DB TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
+ vrwcumt. 9
TirE (S)PIPE 2 -SI/VESSEL VERiSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) =0.5
STEAM QUALITY F:ig. 3.24
- 40 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
A+x
*!Ff! rr
firr ~1L 9
i
PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) =0.5
PRESSURE
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMIETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENTC39
CDPP CEL.L I& PIPE I CELL 3+ PIPE CELL 6X FIFE I CUL. 9
i
TIME Cs)
PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) = 0.5
FLOW RATE Fig. 3.25
AV%-41-
3.5 HDR5/4' HTJ4/5 without -
The difference between this calculation and the last calcula-
tion in subsection 3.4 lies in the reduced model of the down-comner, consisting of a single ann~ulus compared to 2 annuli in
the HDR4/5 and IflJI6/5 calculations. It can be seen from Fig.
3.4 that the calculated time-based mass flow curve deviates by
more than 40 % from the measurement. This calculation showsquite clearly that this discretization leads to a different
pressure profile and thus also to a different velocity profile
in the downcomer, which in turn effects a higher outflow rate.
It is thus evident that with an increasing number of annuli in
the RPV downcomer and equal surface area ratios in the nozzle
area, closer agreement of the mathematical results with the
measurements is achieved.
Krafiwerk Union
.- 42 -
PIPE 2 IPIPE 1
Level 4 0,1773
Level 3 3,2742
Level 2 3,2742
Level 1 3, 2742
VESSEL 3
1 1 211 & ' 11I2131&4W BREAK
(A
H DR 5/4.
Fig. 3.26
- 43 -
KWU TIAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMiPONENT
* ______ J _______ ______ ______________________ ______ ______ ______ ______
C-,I I j I I.- C,
t~.j c.,. __________ _________ _________ _________ _________
(D BREAK40UTLET4- 'Iff I UL 9
C,
C,ýC?C3
10TIME (s)
PIPE 2 -SENI-IIIPLICIT/VESSEL
FLOW RATEVERSION 4
C.¶C C.SO .0O
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAM'~ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE EDI? TESTS WITH VESSEL COM'PONENT
?~in 'c au. 5
PIPE 2 - SENI-INPLIC IT/VESSEL VERSION 4i
FLOW RATE Fig. 3.27
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMIETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
.CHECK OF THE KDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMiPONENT
-ii1
WI2CA~
~
~iI)
0) BREAK40OUTLET
t
PIPE 2 - SEMI-fIMPLICIT/VESSEL VERSION 4
PRESSURE
EMWl TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAME~TERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THlE 11DR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMiPONENTaa.c~.
a0
p PIPE t cflL IA PIPE 2 CELL 5+ VEBSfl. CELL 5
cc-
JIME (S)SEliI-IHPL~ICIT/VFSSEL VERSION 4PIPE 2 -
PRESSURE Fig. 5.28
- 45 -
KWIJ TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
C,C,
W0
o *iPE I CFLL '' Iirf I Mt.I 3
+ rlPf k CR.L 6X !Zrr I CULL. 9
TIME CS) s10-,
PIPE 2 - SEMI-IMPLICIT/VESSEL VERSION 4
PRESSURE
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
,,HECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
^.^a C.10 1C.40 ^ ~.110 1.r 1-70TIME (S) 1 -
SEMI-IMPLICIT/VESSEL VERSION 4PIPE 2 -
FLOW RAT] Fig. 3.29
- 46 -
KWEJ TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE FfDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMIPONENT
A !Pf I C~
+ lrr I Ct' L 5X riFF I CEU. 9
.5
i
OCl S.10 0.~ .3 .O C ~ O6 .TIME (S)
PIPE 2 - SEMI-IMPLICIT/VESSEL VERSION 4
STEAM QUALITY
C3
KWU TRAC-Pfl2
E FFE CT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE IUYR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
c;
0L
(! rIP! t.CL IA rIPt t CELL 5+ VEsSSM CELL S
5 -- sTIME (S)
VERSION 4
I.'393 1. -0.
PIPE 2 - SEMI-IMIPLICIT/VESSEL
STEAM QUALITY Fig. 5.50
-47-
5.6 IflR6/5 HDR4/5 with By-pass in Blowdown Nozzle
This calculation is basically identical with IITR4/5. However,
in this case, the bypass to the blowdown nozzle is moddlled,
which is used in the ebxperimental set-up for setting a uniform
-temperature distribution within the nozzle.
In view of the measurement curves, the question remained-as to
whether the liquid present in the bypass might prevent flash-
ing in the nozzle within the initial 10 to 20 ins, thus increas-
ing the outflow rate. This assumption could be confirmed by the
calculation as a trend; however, the effect on the mathematical
results is marginal. It was assumed, however, that the valve in
the bypass is closed, so that only liquid from the dead end can,
flow into the blowdown nozzle.
The drop of the outflow rate to zero after 5 ms can be clear-ly seen in Fig. 3.4. None of the .po st-te st-c alculat ions has produced
results which have even approximated this behaviour. This is
probably due to the rupture opening not being included with a
sufficient degree of accuracy. After the rupture disc has been
destroyed, a certain amount of time is required to blow it out
of the pipe. During this time, however, the first decompres-
sion wave is reflected from the LIDR inlet and hits the disc
still located in the pipe.
The outflow rate is thus reduced to zero and subsequently rises
again with an increased gradient. This process could be clari-
fied,, by using for instance the PISCES-2 DELK-pro gramn.
Kraftwerk Union
.1
- 48 -
PIPE 2 ITEEl1
Level 4 0,1773_
Level 3 3,2742
Level 2 3,2742T
Level 1 3,2742
VESSEL 3
1 1i 1 13 1 1 5 1112[131 RE\ AK191011I
1312
FIL Y=O
V
HDR 6/5
Fig. 5.31
-- 49 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAM4ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COM2PONENTC
oBREAK40OUTLET6 ?(C I? CELLUI
PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETAL (VESSEL OFF) = 0.5 WITH BYfPASS
FLOW RATE __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE 11DR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENTC39
0 PIPE Z CELLIA PIPE t CELL 5
PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) = 0.5 WITH BYPASS
FLOW RATE Fig. 3.32
- 50 -
KWU TRAC-Pfl2EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAM~ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATECHECK OF THE IiDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMIPONENT
0 BREAK40UTLET
PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) = 0.5 WITH BYPASSPRESSURE_____
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATECHECK OF THE 11DR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMIPONENT
0 1UttCEL?'A let *.CPl994+ 'Ir it VMLLX let lrtiF -lt.
a.
TDIM (s) T
PIPE 2 -SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) = 0.5 WITH BYPASSPRESSURE Fig. 3.33
- 51
KWU TRAC-FD2EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE ITDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMIPONENT
0 rift 2 CELL I,& PIPE 2 CELL 5+ V ESSEfL CELL SX VESSEL CELL 5
PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) = 0.,5 WITH BYPASS
PRESSURE
a
L.t
KWIJ TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAM'ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE
CHECK OF THE HDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMiPONEN~T
@4
mcd
C90-07 0 D 10
CD Tgv t 1?cr.L AA Aft -it CELL 4+ MK IF CELL. *1X nTE IF CELLSO
.00 0.10
PIPE 2 -
FLOW RATI
TIME (S) maSI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) =0.-5WITH BYPASS
Fig 5.54
- 52 -
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PAPRAMETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATE- .CHECK OF THE KDE TESTS WITH VESSEL COMIPONENTC
0 IEE IF CELL I,& TEr IF CELLI+ Trr I F CELL 7X TEE If CELLIII
#4
1OO0 .0 0-o .20 0.3 0 .4 , 0-i fl.i 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
TIME (S) z1* 1PIPE 2 -SI/VESSEL 1 VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF) =0.5 WITH BYPASSSTEAM QUALITY
KWU TRAC-PD2
EFFECT OF VARIOUS PARAM~ETERS ON THE OUTFLOW RATECHECK OF THE IIDR TESTS WITH VESSEL COMPONENT
o! ?IPCI.LLX tilrf,461LL a+ vEuIsI CELL 9
a
0.00 0.10 G..-0 0.30 0.43 3.5G , 0.60 0.10 0.80
TIVE Cs) 1 'PIPE 2 - SI/VESSEL VERSION 5/ZETA (VESSEL OFF)STEAM QUALITY
=0.5 WITH BYPASS
fig. 3.35
- 53 -
3.7 Summary o-f the Results from HIM? Computations
Comparing the pressure and mass flow curves for the various
computations plotted in Figs. 3.41 and 3.5, it can be stated
with a high degree of certainty that the computations HDP2/5
',d 3/3 yield by far the best results. In these two models,
the pressure loss due to outflow from the RPV is calculated
relatively well, so that very close agreement of the pressure
curves as well as the mass flow curves with the measurements
is obtained. The EDR2/3 computation is to be given preference
over the others here, as the transition from the system state
to the ambient state is modelled with pl-y7sical exactness with
the aid of the nozzle, thus forcing the program-to take these
conditions into account in the calculations.
Krattwork Union
54-
4 TRAC .Coniponents
This chapter contains several hints which have resulted from
the work done so far with the TRAC program. However, there are
plans to establish a systematic card file of all TRAC users
so as to profit from the experience of others.
4.1 TRIP-DATA
W~hen restarting with TRIP cards, the following possibilities
exist: Firstly, the TRIP-data cards can again be placed into
the input. This leads to the TRIP being reinitialized and re-
started. In most cases, however, the TRIP is to be continued
with the restart. In this case, a card with a negative numb~er
and a blank card must be placed behind the Main Control Cards,
so that the TRIP's are read in from the restart file. This is
the only way to continue an already started TRIP in the re-
start mode.
Xraftiwork Union
-55-
4. 2 BREAK
This instruction is based on several test calculations regard-
ing the arrangement of components having a BREAK at the
inlet and the outlet.
In this case, so high a pressure difference is obtained that
the flow velocities in the components may be far greater than
the speed of sound. For this reason, no useful results can be
obtained with this calculation; in principle, this arrangement
is therefore not advisable. As an alternative, either a large
vessel or a large-volume pipe can be employed for the pressure
boundary condition.
IKraftwerk Union
-56-
4-.3 TEE-
This component allows the modelling of branches in a
network.
The following conditions should be fulfilled: A minimum of 2
celles should exist between the junction celles of the side3
tube and the pipe end of the primary tube, as otherwise
numerical instabilities must be expected.
Fig. 4I.3.1 shows an obstructed rupture with a TEE; the geometri-
cal data are represented as a function of pipe diameter.
Fig. '4.3.1
This model has generally proven to be reliable. Furthermore,
it is important to reduce the celle length in the rupture open-
ing to 1 cm, so as to keep the time interval at the high out-
flow velocities as small as possible.
Kraffwerk Union
A992fth,
Ar- _1%
%Wj
- 57'-
4.4 STEAM GENERATOR
The great advantage of the TRAC program is the modular arrange-
ment of complex installations. For this reason, realistic mo-
deling is possible with all components. The only exception is
the steam generator, since only the flow in the inner shroud is
calculated. The secondary side of the steam generator thus only
acts as a heat sink. This fact barely has any relevance for the
pressure wave analysis in the primary circuit, so that no
negative effect results from this. Nevertheless, an improved
steam generator component is to be employed in subsequent TRAC
versions. For the steam generator component in this TRAC version,
two items of information are required for the feed-water inlet
on the secondary side. These are inlet velocity and inlet tem-
perature. The respective values are determined by the following
calculating operation:
VAW TRAC SystemBounidary
.1L4A1,
Fig. 4.4
Kraftwerk Union
hv%VW
- 58 -
During steady-state operation, ~1W =-"I ;Hence:
ýG= f'W (h' - hW) Eqn. 4. 1
for the steam generator i- SG
This equation allows us to calculate the inlet water mass flow:
ýSG"W=Un-h Eqn. 4. 2
Furthermore, the following equation applies to the riser:
31 ris hris = 11W hW + (C - 1) 31W h' Eqni. 4. 3
C ý- number of cycles
With the mass flow rate in the riser given as
ALris s . Eqn. 4.4
we obtain the following expression for the enthalpy in the riser:
1!W hW + (C - 1 ) AW . hhri s - Eqn. 4.5
~ri a
With the enthalpy obtained from Equation 4.5 and with the aid
of the steam table, the temperature of the water in the riserspace and hence the inlet temperature in the FILL on the second-
ary side of the steam generator can be calculated.
Furthermore, the specific volume at that temperature and system
pressure can be determined from the steam table.
Hence it follows from Equation 4.6 that
'~ 1 311ri s
= kgnas jh& s v Eqn. 4.6
Kraftwork Union
'p- 59 -
Given the f low area oiia the secondary side, the inlet velocity
into the riser can be calculated using Equation 4.7:
Vri =Iris Eqn. 4.7
Thus all the input parameters required for the FILL on the
secondary side of7 the steam generator are known.
Kraffiverk Union
- 60 -
4.5 VESSEL
As a matter of principle, only one PIPE component may be con-
nected to the VESSEL component. If it should be necessary to.
initialize a pressure loss in the junction area of the PIPE
component by stating a I value, the pressure loss is given by Eqn.4. 5.1
hp= IPIPE * 17 3V2 PIPE, End Eqn. 4.5.1
The corresponding FRIO PIPE value, which is entered as an input
parameter, follows from Equation 4.5.2:
FI PIPE -P ILLH D PIPE Eqn . 4.5.2
The individual items of Equation 4.5.2 are depicted in Figure
4.5.1.
5PIPE e-A
A
PIPE
Fig. 4.5.1
Kraftwerk Union
AOMIth,K in
%F- 61 -
Equation 4.5.2 also applies in ~case s where the PIPE component
is connected to one of' the inner cylinder surf'aces of the ves-
sel component; of course, a different &r must be employed.
Furthermore, it is possible to state " values inside the vessel
component so as to take for instance the pressure loss upon
flowing through a cooling channel into account. In this case,
the loss coefficient 5 between two axially superimposed celles
is determined and enters as CFZ input. Its numerical value is
obtained from Equation 4.5.3:
CFZ' I AXIAL--2h1,2
Eqn. 4. 5. 3
with Fig. 4.5.2 explaining the geometric parameter h112 -
.4
A i4IV, # TAXIAL
112.
I
h41 2
Fig. 4.5.3
Kraftwerk Union
AsEbý,AV 'M
um
-, 62 -
If a 1coefficient is to be inserted between two radiai celles,
Equation 4.5.L14 applies:
CFR - ! RADIAL~2&Kij Eqn. 4.5.4
Ar1,,2 being given in Fig. 4.5.3.
A r1, 2 = ~--~+ B-
Fig. 4.5.3
Kraftwork Union
-63-
4.6 PUMP -. a
The pump is an important aid for the exact setting of the steady
state solution. In complex model configurations, it is the only
effective means of influencing the steady state setting. Such a
model consists, tor example, of a RPV and two closed loops, so that no
boundary conditions, neither BREAK's nor FILL's, which determine
the state of the installation, exist. The pump determines both
the flow rate (i.e. the mixture velocity) and the pressure in-
crease in the loop. The required data are included in the input
of the pump.
M21. Rated head 7'
5
2. Rated torque /Nm/M3
3. Rated flow /L-
4. Rated density k
5. Rated pump speed /rpm/
The input information of the rated head consists of the head of
the pump multiplied by the gravitational constant g. This can
be expressed as follows:
RH =H .g 2 Eqn. 4.6.1
RH = Rated head/2/5
H = Discharge head of the pump (manufacturer's specification) /m/
g = Gravitational constant PT
The specific rated speed is given by the following equation:
nq = Eqn. 4.6.2
H3/
nq = Specific rated speed 1rpm!
n = Speed /rpm/
Kraftwverk Union
-64I
H = Head/m
Q= Flow rate P-is
The relationship between the pressure. increaseap and the rated
head is given by the following equation:
Eqn. 4.6.3
-- p = Pressure increase in the pump /bar/
S= Rated density/kM3
With the aid of the last two equations, 4.6.2 and 4.6.3, the
flow rate and the pressure increase in the pump can be set within
a certain bandwidth. The procedure is as follows:
The manufacturer's pump data are used in the first mathematical
operation for the steady state setting. The specific rated speed
nq is given by Equation 4.6.2. The current values for each of
the boundary conditions then result from the TRAC computation.
If the calculated values do not sufficiently correspond with the
intended setting, the input data are corrected in a new compu-
tation. If, for example, the flow rate through the pump and the
loop is insufficient, the specific rated speed nq is to be in-
creased in accordance with Equation 4.6.2. If furthermore the
pressure increase achieved by means of the pump is insufficient,
IRH (Equation 4..6.1) would also have to be increased. This in
turn has an effect on the specific rated speed nq, which there-
fore must also-be'changed. This is evidently an iterative pro-
cess, which must be continued until the values calculated by
means of TRPLC correspond with the stipulated setting. This method
has been tried and tested in practice by setting each of the
circuits individually and only then linking the component sys-
tems to the RPV.
Kraftwerk Union
-65
5 General TBAC Instructions-
In the following paragraphs, several facts or items of experi-
ence are briefly outlined.
Due to its state equations, the TRAC program can only compute
up to a pressure of 190 bar.
Since the error messages are not always very informative and a
direct cause may not be indicated, the input should be checked
very thoroughly. All errors that hitherto appeared to be in-
explicable were inpunt errors.
In order to accomplish an optimal setting of a steady state
solution, the components should be tested individually and only
then be combined to form a system. This may mean having to put
up with more extensive paperwork, since it is not possible to
combine several restart files. However, there are plans to pro-
vide for such an operation.
In pressure wave analyses, DELT = 1. E-5 should be employed in
the calculation during the first 10 to 20 ms in order to accu-
rately calculate the initial phase of the decompression wave.
Kraftwerk Union
-66-
References
/1/ TRAC-PD2
An Advanced Best Estimate Com-puter Program for PWR
LOCA Analysis, LOS ALJAMOS Scientific Laboratory
NUPEG/CR-2054
/2/ HDR Versuchsprogramm
/3/ G. HughesTRAC-P1 A
Inbetriebnabme auf der CYBER 176
KWU-Arbeitsbericht R 11/2113/79
/4/ J. Herterich
Diplomarbeit IKWIJVerifikationsrec'bnuingen fUr das ProgrammsystemTRAC-PD2 anhand einiger me~technisch erfa~ter, bzw. a
analytisch berechenbarer VersucheBochum/Erlangen 19)81
Kraftwerk Union
NRC FORM 335 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1. REPORT NUMBER (Assigned by TIOC. add Vol. No., it any).12-84)
3201,I320 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET TUE/A00SEE INSTRUCTICNS ON THE REVERSE.
2. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 3. LEAVE BLANK
Assessment of TRAC-PD2 Usinci SUPER CANNON and HDRExperimental Data 4. DATE REPORT COMPLETED
MONTH YEAR
5. AUTHOR(S)
6. DATE REPORT ISSUED
U.NemanMONTH Y EARU._________Neumann_________________ Auciust 1986
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (Includeztjo Code) B. PROJECT/TASK/WORI( UNIT NUMBER
Kraftwerk Union 9.__FIN __OR__GRANT__NUMBER_
Hammerbacherstr. 12+14 9 I RGATNME
Postfach 32208520 Erlanaen, The Federal Republic of Germany
10. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (Include Zp Code) Ila. TYPE OF REPORT
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Technical ReportU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ______________
Washington, DC 20555 b. PERIOD COVERED fnuieas
12. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
13. ABSTRACT (200 words or less)
This report assesses the predictive capabilities of the Transient Reactor-AnalysisCode (TRAC-PD2) using data from the SUPER CANON and HEISS DAMPF REACTOR (HOR) experiLmental facilities. The report is divided into three parts. Part I is the TRAC-PD2assessment using the SUPER CANON data. Part II is the TRAC-PD2 assessment using HORdata. Part III provides recommendations for the user using the combined assessmentresults. In general, it is shown that the TRAC-PD2 predictions were in good agreementwith the actu~i test pressures and mass flow rates for both these tests. TRAC-.PD2provided considerably better results thaii TRAC'PlA. This was particularl'y true withregard to sound velocity predictions which play a signifcdnt role whenever the speedof pressure relief waves must be determined.
14. UU'.UMcNT ANALY5I5 -4. KEYWDRD5IDE5CRIPTORS14. DOCUMENT ANALYSIS - a. KEYWORDSIDESCRIPTORS 15. AVAILABILITY
STATEMENT
TRAC-PD2, Super Canon, and HDR
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN.ENDED TERMS
Unl imited16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
(T7hiis )ec
Unc fssified( This res'jort
Uncl ass if ied17. NUMBER OF PAGES
1s. PRICE
AI
IA
/
UNITED STATESNUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555
OFFICIAL BUSINESSPENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300
SPECILFOURTH-CLASS RATEPýTG rFEES PAID
IUSNRCII WASH. D.C
PERMITNo.G-67
/*
-t