NUREG/IA-0116KWU E412/91/E100, International

Agreement Report

Assessment of RELAP5/MOD3/V5m5 Against the UPTF TestNo. 11 (Countercurrent Flow inPWR Hot Leg)

Prepared byF. Curca-Tivig

Siemens AG-KWU GroupD 8520 ErlangenFederal Republic of Germany

Office of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555

May 1993

Prepared as part ofThe Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchangeunder the International Thermal-Hydraulic Code Assessmentand Application Program (ICAP)

Published byU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

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-0116

KWU E412/91/E1002

InternationalAgreement Report

Assessment of RELAP5/MOD3/V5m5 Against the UPTF TestNo. 11 (Countercurrent Flow inPWR Hot Leg)

Prepared byF. Curca-Tivig

Siemens AG-KWU GroupD 8520 ErlangenFederal Republic of Germany

Office of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555

May 1993

Prepared as part ofThe Agreement on Research Particpation and Technical Ecangeunder the International Thermal-Hydraulic Code Assessmentand Application Program (ICAP)

11

NOTICE 4

This report documents work performed under the sponsorship of BMFT by its designated agent

SIEMENS AG. The information in this report has been provided to the USNRC under the terms of an

informative exchange agreement between the United States and BMFT (Agreement on Thermal-

Hydraulic Research between the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission and BMFT/FRG,

January 22, 1985). BMFT and its designated agent SIEMENS have consented to the publication of

this report as an USNRC document. The document contains data which were generated in the 2D/3D

International Program and are only for use by authorized users within the restrictions of the 2D/3D

Program.

Neither the United States Government or any agency thereof nor BMFT or its designated agent

SIEMENS or any of their employees, make any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal

liability or responsability 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.

KWU E412/91/E1 002 III

ABSTRACT

Analysis of the UPTF Test No. 11 using the "best-estimate" computer code RELAPSv1OD3Nersion

5M5 is presented.

Test No. 11 was a quasi-steady state, separate effect test designed to investigate the conditions for

countercurrent flow of steam and saturated water in the hot leg of a PWR.

Without using the code's new countercurrent flow limitation (CCFL) model, RELAP5/MODN/V5M5

overestimated the mass flow rate of back down flowing water up to 35 % (1.5 MPa runs) and 43 %

(0.3 MPa runs). This is the most obvious difference to RELAPS/MOD2, which did not allow enough

countercurrent flow. From the point of view of performing plant calculations this is certa nly an

improvement, because the new junction-based CCFL option could be used to restrict the flows to a

flooding curve defined by a user-supplied correlation.

Very good agreement with the experimental data for 1.5 MPa - which are relevant for SBLOCA reflux

condensation conditions - could be obtained using the code's new CCFL option in the middle of the

inclined part (riser) of the hot leg. Using the same CCFL correlation for the simulation of 0.3 MPa test

series - typical for reflood conditions -, the code underestimated by 44 % the steam mass flow rate at

which complete liquid carry over occurs.

An unphysical result was received using a CCFL correlation of the Wallis type with the intercept C =

0.644 and the slope m = 0.8. The unphysical prediction is an indication of possible programming errors

in the CCFL model of the RELAPS/MOD3NSM5 computer code.

KWU E412/91/E1002 IV

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

During the boil-down phase of a small-break LOCA. an important source of cooling water to the core

may come from the steam which, having previously boiled off in the core, condenses in the steam

generator tubes and drains back down into the reactor vessel via the hot leg. The condensate and the

steam flow through the hot legs in coutercurrent; therefore, the possibility that steam flow could inhibit

the water back down flow is a potential concern regarding the reflux condensation cooling mode.

Test No. 11 conducted in the Upper Plenum Test Facility (UPTF) was a quasi-steady state, separate

effect test, designed to investigate the conditions for countercurrent flow of steam and saturated water

in the hot leg of a PWR. Analysis of the UPTF Test No. 11 using the 'best-estimate" computer code

RELAP5/MOD3Nersion 5M5 is presented in this report.

Without using the code's new countercurrent flow limitation (CCFL) model, RELAP5/MOD3N5M5

overestimated the mass flow rate of back down flowing water up to 35 % (1.5 MPa runs) and 43 %

(0.3 MPa runs). This is the most obvious difference to RELAP5/MOD2, which did not allow enough

countercurrent flow. From the point of view of performing plant calculations this is certainly an

improvement, because the new junction-based CCFL option could be used to restrict the flows to a

flooding curve defined by a user-supplied correlation.

Very good agreement with the experimental data for 1.5 MPa - which are relevant for SBLOCA reflux

condensation conditions - could be obtained using the code's new CCFL option at the junction situated

in the middle of the inclined part (riser) of the hot leg. The flooding correlation used was of the Wallis

type: (Jt s)1/2 + m,(J*w)l/ 2 = C, where J*s and J t w represents the Wallis parameters for steam and

water respectively. The parameter C (determining the steam mass flow rate at which complete liquid

carry over occurs) was set at 0.664; it was calculated using UPTF data for 1.5 MPa and riser's

hydraulic diameter (DH = 0.750 m). The slope m of the flooding curve was determined through

parameter studies. The data were matched best when using m=1. Using the same CCFL correlation

for the simulation of 0.3 MPa test series - typical for reflood conditions -, the code underestimated by

44 % the steam mass flow rate at which complete liquid carry over occurs.

An unphysical result was received using a CCFL correlation of the Wallis type with the intercept C =

0.644 and the slope m = 0.8. This is an indication of possible programming errors in the CCFL model.

KWU E412/91/E1002

LIST OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACTEXECUTIVE SUMMARYLIST OF CONTENTSLIST OF FIGURES

1 INTRODUCTION

2 FACILITY AND TEST DESCRIPTION

2.1 UPTF SYSTEM DESCRIPTION2.2 TEST OBJECTIVES FOR TEST No. 112.3 UPTF SYSTEM CONFIGURATION FOR TEST No. 112.4 DESCRIPTION OF THE TEST2.5 TEST RESULTS AND FINDINGS2.6 COMPARISON TO CCFL DATA OF SMALL-SCALE PWR MODEL HOT LEGS

3 CODE AND MODEL DESCRIPTION

3.1 CODE DESCRIPTION3.2 RELAP5 NODALISATION3.3 SIMULATION PROCEDURE AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 POST-TEST CALCULATIONS WITHOUT CCFL MODEL4.2 POST-TEST CALCULATIONS USING THE CCFL MODEL4.3 NODALISATION STUDIES

5 CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

FIGURES

APPENDIX A - RELAP5/MOD3 Input Deck for the Simulation of UPTF Test No. 11APPENDIX B - Analysis of UPTF Test No. 11, Runs 36 - 45 (Pressure 1.5 MPa) with

RELAP5/MOD3/V5M5 (Basic Nodalisation). Results of Calculation without CC;FLModel

APPENDIX C - Analysis of UPTF Test No. 11, Runs 30 - 35 (Pressure 0.3 MPa) withRELAPS/MOD3N5M5 (Basic Nodalisation). Results of Calculation without CC;FLModel

APPENDIX D - Analysis of UPTF Test No. 11, Runs 36 - 45 (Pressure 1.5 MPa) withRELAPS/MOb3N5M5 (Basic Nodalisation). Results of Calculation Using a CCFLModel of the Wallis Type with m = 0.8 and C = 0.644.

KWU E412/g91/E1002 2

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 2.1: UPTF Flow Diagram

Fig. 2.2: Upper Plenum Test Facility - Primary System

Fig. 2.3: Major Dimensions of UPTF-Primary System

Fig. 2.4: System Configuration

Fig. 2.5: Design of Water Separator JEA04BB01 Inlet Chamber

Fig. 2.6: Arrangement of Pipe Flow Meter Measurement System in Broken Hot Leg

Fig. 2.7: Reflux Condensation Flow Path

Fig. 2.8: UPTF Hot Leg Countercurrent Flow

Fig. 2.9: CCF of Steam and Saturated Water in Hot Leg

Fig. 2.10: Superficial Velocities of Steam and Water in Hot Leg

Fig. 2.11: Comparison of UPTF Data with Correlations of Richter et a[., Ohnukl and Krolewski

Fig. 3.1: RELAP5 Nodalisation 1 for UPTF Test No. 11

Fig. 3.2: RELAP5 Nodalisation 2 for UPTF Test No. 11

Fig. 3.3: RELAP5 Nodalisation 3 for UPTF Test No. 11

Fig. 3.4: RELAP5 Nodalisation 4 (Basic Nodalisation) for UPTF Test No. 11

Fig. 3.5: Boundary Conditions for RELAPS Simulation of UPTF 11 Runs 36 - 45. Injected Steam and

Water Mass Flow Rates.

Fig. 3.6: Boundary Conditions for RELAP5 Simulation of UPTF 11 Runs 30 - 35. Injected Steam and

Water Mass Flow Rates.

Fig. 4.1: Experimental and Predicted Flooding Curves (Nodalisation No. 4)

Fig. 4.2: Comparison of RELAPS/MOD3NSM5 Results with UPTF-Data and Flooding Correlations

Fig. 4.3: Experimental and Predicted Flooding Curves for 1.5 MPa (Nodallsatlon No. 4). Study on

Code Sensitivity to the Slope m of the CCFL Correlation

Fig. 4.4: Nodalisation Studies. Experimental and Predicted Flooding Curves

Fig. 4.5: Injected Steam, Injected Water and Water Back Flow at the Hutze

Fig. 4.6: Comparison of UPTF Data with RELAPS/MOD3NSMS-Predictions Using a Wallis Type CCFL

Correlation with m = 0.8 and C = 0.644 at the Junction 420.02 (Basic Nodallsatlon). Steam

and Water Mass Flow Rates through the Hot Leg.

Fig. 4,7: Comparison of UPTF Data with RELAPS/MOD3N5MS-Predlctions Using a Wallis Type CCFL

Correlation with m = 0.8 and C = 0.644 at the Junction 420-02 (Basic Nodallsation). Wallis

Parameters for Steam and Water at the Hutze.

KWU E412/91/E1 002 3

1 INTRODUCTION

During the boil-down phase of a small-break loss-of-coolant accident (SBLOCA), an important source

of cooling water to the core may come from the steam which, having previously boiled off in the core,

condenses in the steam generator tubes and drains back down into the reactor vessel via the hot leg

(reflux condensation cooling mode). The condensate and the steam flow through the hot legs in

coutercurrent; therefore, the possibility that steam flow could patialy or totaly Inhibit the water back

down flow - partial delivery or countercurrent flow limitation (CCFL) respectively - Is a potential

concern regarding the reflux condensation cooling mode.

Test No. 11 conducted in the Upper Plenum Test Facility (UPTF) in Germany was a quasi-stE ady

state, separate effect test involving the UPTF system with blocked pump simulators and broken hot

leg open to the containment simulator. The test was designed to investigate the conditions for

countercurrent flow of the steam coming from the core and saturated water in the hot leg of a

pressurized water reactor. Saturated water was fed into the inlet plenum of the UPTF water separator

simulating the steam generator in the broken loop hot leg and saturated steam at various flow-rates

was introduced via the core simulator system.

A steady flow test case that simulates specific PWR conditions was run to verify that there i.; no

countercurrent flow limitation in the hot leg for expected PWR conditions. A second main objective was

to study CCFL phenomena in a large pipe under hydraulic conditions related to SBLOCA (high

pressure) and reflood (low pressure). Tests that map out CCFL were run to determine the

countercurrent flow boundary. It was found that stable countercurrent flow existed at condi:ions

expected during the reflux condensation phase of a SBLOCA and that there was no countercurrent

flow limitation until the steam flow-rate was well above that seen during the reflux phase of typical

SBLOCA calculations.

The test provides valuable data for assessing the ability of advanced thermal-hydraulics codes to

model countercurrent flow limitation in much bigger pipes than those in which experiments had

previously been carried out. A number of codes have already been used to model the test, including

TRAC-PFi/MOD1 and MOD2 Ill, ATHLET /21, RELAPS/MOD2 /3,4/, the developmental version of

RELAP5/MOD3 (RELAPS/MOD2.5N4B1) /5/ as well as the final Nfrozen" version of RELAP5/M'DD3,

KWU E412/91/E1002 4

which differs from the earlier developmental version in the way in which the flow-regime and

interphase friction are determined in inclined pipes /6/.

The present study describes post-test calculations of the UPTF Test No. 11 performed with the

RELAP5/MOD3Nersion 5M5 computer code.

This report is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the experimental facility and section 3

describes the RELAP5 model used to simulate the experiments. In section 4 results from the

simulation are presented and discussed. Conclusions are presented in section 5.

KWU E412/91/E1002 5

2 FACILITY AND TEST DESCRIPTION

This section is largely taken from reference /7/. It is included here for completeness.

Primary concern of the UPTF test program is the overall 1:1 scale investigation of the three-

dimensional thermaihydraulic behavior of fluid in the reactor pressure vessel and primary s;ystem

during the last part of blowdown, the refill and the reflood phases of a postulated loss-of-coolant

accident (LOCA) in a pressurized water reactor (PWR).

The UPTF test program is one of the research activities being performed within the framework of the

Arrangement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange among the United States Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (USNRC), Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI) and the Federal

Minister for Research and Technology (BMFT) of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) in a

Coordinated Analytical and Experimental Study on the Thermalhydraulic Behavior of Emergency Core

Coolant (ECC) during the Refill and Reflood Phases of a LOCA in a PWR (the 2D/3D Agreement).

2.1 UPTF SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

UPTF is a full-scale model of a four-loop 1300 MWe pressurized water reactor including the reactor

vessel, downcomer, lower plenum, core simulation, upper plenum, loop simulation with steam

generator simulation. The thermalhydraulic feedback of the containment is simulated L'sing a

containment simulator. The flow diagram of the system and an isometrical view of the test facility are

shown in Figures 2.1 and 2.2. The major dimensions of the test facility are given in Figure 2.3.

The test vessel, core barrel and internals are a full-size simulation of a PWR, with four full-scale hot

and cold legs simulating three intact loops and one broken loop.

In UPTF both cold and hot leg breaks can be investigated including emergency core coolant injection

into the intact and broken cold legs and/or hot legs and into the downcomer. The steam proc.uced in

the real core and the water entrained by this steam flow are simulated by steam and water injection

through the core simulator. •

KWU E412/91/E1002 6

The steam production on the primary side of the real intact loop steam generator is simulated by direct

steam injection into the steam generator simulators.

2.2 TEST OBJECTIVES FOR TEST No. 11

This test investigates steam/water flow phenomena in the hot leg during reflux condensation, which is

a cooling mode that may occur during a small-break loss-of-coolant accident (SBLOCA). Reflux

condensation refers to the cooling mode in which steam is the continuous phase above the reactor

core and in the primary loops. Heat is transferred from the core by partial evaporation of the water in

the core and subsequent condensation of that steam in the steam generators. The condensate flows

in countercurrent to the steam through the hot legs back into the reactor vessel in so-called reflux

condenser mode. The possibility that steam flow could inhibit the water back flow because of

countercurrent flow limitation is a potential concern regarding this cooling mode (see Fig. 2.7).

A steady flow test case that simulates specific PWR conditions was run to verify that there is no

countercurrent flow limitation in the hot leg for expected PWR conditions. A second main objective was

to study CCFL phenomena in a large pipe under hydraulic conditions related to SBLOCA (high

pressure) and reflood (low pressure). Tests that map out CCFL were run to determine the

countercurrent flow boundary.

The UPTF can only be operated in a pressure range up to 1.8 MPa (261 psia), whereas PWR reflux

condensation would be expected to occur at pressures as high as 8 MPa (1160 psia). Since the actual

phenomena at high pressure cannot be tested directly, posttest analyzes will be required to apply the

test results to the higher pressures typical of PWR's. The test conditions were selected to produce the

"best simulation" of PWR conditions, considering the lower pressure of UPTF.

2.3 UPTF SYSTEM CONFIGURATION FOR TEST No. 11

The UPTF configuration for Test No. 11 is shown on Fig. 2.4. In this diagram the steam and wa*er flow

paths used in this test are indicated by thick lines.

KWU E412/91/E1002 7

- All vent valves were locked closed.

- All pump simulators were closed.

- All drainage systems were not activated.

- The valves (JEA 01-03 AA02) connecting the steam generator simulator secondary side to the

primary were open.

- The sparger (spray nozzle) was installed in the water separator JEA 04 BB01 (see Fig. 2.5).

- All valves of the ECC system were closed. The pressure in the ECC system was the same as the

pressure in the primary system to assure no leakage between primary system and ECC system.

- The core simulator water injection system was not activated.

- During the runs 030 to 034 the break valve JEC 05 AA001 was fully open and system ard

containment simulator pressure were constant at 0.3 MPa.

- During the runs 036 to 045 the break valve JEC 05 AA001 was partially open and the bypass valve

JEC 05 AA02 was used to control the primary system pressure to 1.5 MPa.

2.4 DESCRIPTION OF THE TEST

Countercurrent flow in the hot leg was simulated by venting steam from the primary sy:;tem through

the UPTF broken loop hot leg to the containment simulator downstream from the water separator.

Simultaneously, a stream of saturated water was injected into the water separator iilet chamber

(Figure 2.8).

The test consisted of a series of flow conditions to map out the countercurrent flow curves at 0.3 and

1.5 MPa. The steam and water mass flow rates injected during this test are listed in Tablh 1.

In UPTF-RUN 037 (see Table 1) typical PWR reflux condensation mode fluid momentum fluxes were

applied. These fluid momentum fluxes were based on typical PWR reflux condensation mode mass

flow rates assuming three active steam generators. A pressure-scaling method that maintains PWR

fluid momentum fluxes was used to determine the UPTF mass flow rates for RUN 037. For details the

reader is referred to /8/.

KWU E 412-191 /E 10028 8

Table 1: Series of Flow Conditions in Test No. 11

UPTF Injected Mass Flow Rates Water Downflow

RUN

No. Pressure Steam Water Rate

bar kg/s kg/s kg/s

37 15.3 + 0.18 8.3 + 0.6 9.8 + 0.6 9.8 + 0.6

36 15.2 - 0.18 9.2 + 0.6 29.6 + 0.6 29.6 + 0.6

38 15.25 + 0.18 18.1 * 0.6 29.4 + 0.6 29.4 + 0.6+ 5.0

39 15.0 + 0.18 24.0 - 0.6 29.6 + 0.6 25.2 + 1.0.... 1.0

45 15.0 _ 0.18 28.0 +e_ 0.6 29.5 + 0.6 14.2 2.8÷ 1.0

40 14.97 - 15.46 31.0 + 0.6 29.4 + 0.6 5.4 - '0.5

44 15.0 * 0.18 32.6 ÷ 0.6 29.4 + 0.6 2.7 + 0.6.... _ 0.5

43 15.0 : 0.18 33.5 + 0.6 29.5 + 0.6 2.0 + 0.5

42 14.82 - 15.78 36.0 : 0.6 29.4 + 0.6 0.6 + 0.2

41 15.0 * 0.18 40.2 + 0.6 29.5 + 0.6 0

30 3.06 ÷ 0.08 4.6 + 0.2 30.5 * 0.6 30.5 * 0.6

31 3.1 ÷ 0.08 11.0 + 0.6 30.6 + 0.6 30.6 + 0.6

33 3.16 * 0.08 12.4 * 0.6 30.5 + 0.6 17.7 + 8.8.... 0.5

32 3.18 * 0.08 12.9 + 0.6 30.5 + 0.6 11.7 + 5.8.... - 0.5

35 3.2 * 0.08 15.3 + 0.6 30.5 + 0.6 2.4 1.2. I - 0.5

34 3.1 * 0.08 20.5 + 0.6 30.5 * 0.6 0

KWU E412/91/E1002 9

The measured water level increase in the lower plenum of the test vessel was used to calculate the

mean downflowing water rate by means of the volume versus elevation calibration curve.

The upflowing water mass flow rate was separated by the cyclones and measurecd using the water

level outside the cyclones in the water separator. At higher injected steam mass flow rates a small part

of the upflowing water was carried out by the steam to the containment simulator. To check the water

mass balance the water level in the water separator was measured and no water was drained from the

water separator or from the lower plenum of the test vessel during the test.

The water mass collected outside the cyclones was determined using the volume versus elevation

calibration curve for the water separator.

The injection of saturated water into the inlet chamber of the broken hot leg water separator started

before the injection of steam into the core simulator (water first mode).

The water flow on the bottom of the hot leg before start of steam injection is clearly indicated by the

pipe flow meter data (see Fig. 2.6).

After starting the steam injection the water mass stored in the broken loop hot leg and ill the inlet

chamber of the water separator increases when relatively high steam mass flow rates are injected.

This water accumulation is typical for the onset of flooding or complete liquid carry-over.

The water and steam injection lasted at least 200 s when water downflow was observed. In case of no

water downflow the steam and water injection was stopped when the water level outside tho cyclones

reached the upper end of the cyclones.

The mean water downflow rate was determined for time periods when the injection rates were

constant and the accumulated water mass in the broken loop hot leg and water separator inlet

chamber reached a quasi-stationary maximum value (indicated by the DP-measurements JEC 04

CP009 and JEC 04 CLOO1 and the pipe flow meter data).

For test runs at 1.5 MPa test vessel pressure in the test vessel was controlled by opening and closing

the hot side break valve (as the maximum allowed pressure in the containment simulator was

KWU E412/91/E1002 10

0.6 MPa). This pressure control led to slow oscillations of the test vessel pressure in these test runs.

In test runs with a test vessel pressure of 0.3 MPa the hot leg break valve was open and the pressure

in the containment simulator controlled the test vessel pressure.

For each of the 16 test points the pipe flow meter fluid density and differential pressure measurements

in the broken loop hot leg are plotted versus time in reference /7/. These measurements indicate that

beyond the complete carry-over limit liquid was still present in the horizontal section, but it did not flow

out into the upper plenum.

2.5 TEST RESULTS AND FINDINGS

The injected mass flow rates and the measured mean water downflow rate rnw,d for quasi-stationary

conditions are listed in Table 1 for each test point. Using these data the following correlations between

the injected steam mass flow rate m~s and rnw,cd were plotted:

rns = f(rhw,d) see Fig. 2.9

is = fOw,d) see Fig. 2.10A = f(J*w,d) see Fig. 2.11

with

= superficial velocityJ*k = Wallis parameter (modified Froude number)

JA k --- k (2.1)g.DH.(pf - pg)

p = Fluid density

g = Gravitational acceleration

DH = Hydraulic diameter

KWU E412/91/El 002 11

Subscripts:

w = Water

s = Steam

w.d = Water downflow

The hydraulic diameter was set at be 4 times the minimum flow area divided by the circumference of

this flow area in the deflector nozzle region (see Fig. 2.11).

A mass balance method based on the water level measurement in the lower plenum of the test vessel

and in the water separator secondary side was used to determine the error bands for the calculated

mass flow rate mwd.

Relatively high uncertainties (e. g. for the 0.3 MPa data) were determined because a small part ot the

injected water was flowing via the steam injection holes into the inactive core simulator steam pipes

near the broken loop hot leg. This water was automatically drained during the test for safety reas:)ns.

That is why, for total water downflow, the water mass increase measured in the lower plenum was

about 15% smaller than the water injection rate. That is why for zero water upflow the water downflow

rate in Table 1 could be set equal to the water injection rate.

Figure 2.11 shows that the Wallis parameter seems to be the right method for pressure scaling of

countercurrent flow data in a PWR hot leg.

2.6 COMPARISON TO CCFL DATA OF SMALL-SCALE PWR MODEL HOT LEGS

Countercurrent flow tests in scaled PWR hot legs have been performed by Richter et al. /9/ (inner

diameter of hot leg D = 0.203 m) and Ohnuki /10/ (D = 0.026 m/0.051 m/0.076 m) for air-water flovi /9,

10/ and steam flow /10/.

Richter et al. and Ohnuki used the Wallis correlation

(,J*S) 1/2 + m -(Jw) 1/2 = C(2) (2.2)

KWU E412/91/E1 002 112

to represent their experimental data.

Richter et al. used the constants m = 1 and C = 0.7. which were drawn from countercurrent flow data

in vertical pipes.

Ohnuki /10/ investigated the dependence of the parameters m and C on the geometry of the hot leg

using 19 different model hot legs in his tests. Ohnuki's correlation forthe parameter C is valid only for

inclination angles of the riser part of the hot leg up to 45", while the UPTF hot leg has an inclination

angle of 50". Therefore only an approximate value for parameter C can be calculated using Ohnuki's

correlation and the geometrical data of the UPTF hot leg (horizontal part: 7.146 m, riser part: 1.391 m,

diameter 0.75 m. C = 0.753). For Ohnuki's investigations the parameter m is 0.75.

As shown in Figure 2.11, the Wallis correlation with the parameters m and C according to Richter et al.

agrees fairly well with the UPTF data although there was no ECC injection pipe in the model hot leg of

Richter et al. and the inclination angle of the riser part was 45".

Deviations between the UPTF experimental data and the Ohnuki's correlation shown in Figure 2.11

are probably caused by the higher geometrical scaling factor.

Flooding in an elbow between a verticp! and a horizontal pipe was investigated by Krolewski /11/ and

Siddiqui et al. /12/ using air-water flow.

Krolewski used a tube with 50.8 mm inner diameter. The onset of flooding was taken as the point at

which the pressure drop across the test section increased sharply as t-e gas flow rate was gradually

increased. The data of Krolewski indicate a minimum Wallis parameter of about J*s = 0.25 for

complete liquid carry-cve, which is well below the Wallis parameter drawn for UPTF experiment.

The experiments of Siddiqui et al. were performed with an elbow shape consisting of tubes of inner

diameters 36.5 to 47 mm. It was observed that flooding is caused by unstable wave formation at the

hydraulic jump which forms in the lower pipe limb close to the bend. A minimum Wallis parameter of

A = 0.2 for complete liquid carry-over was measured which was largely independent of tube

diameter, bend radius and liquid supply rate. Beyond the complete carry-over limit liquid was still

present in the horizontal section, but it did not flow out of the gas inlet. This phenomenon could also be

KWU E412/91/El 002 13

observed in the UPTF-tests.

The comparison of data shown in Figure 2.11 indicates a strong effect of the inclination of the ri,,er

part on the CCFL-characteristics. That is why, care should be taken in extrapolating CqF-data for

PWR hot legs to higher inclination angles of the riser part.

KWU E412/91/E1 002 14

3 CODE AND MODEL DESCRIPTION

3.1 CODE DESCRIPTION

The present study was performed with the RELAP5/MOD3Nersion 5M5 computer code. This is the

last official "frozen" version released within ICAP for code assessment calculations. The code is

implemented on a SIEMENS WS30-1000 computer operating under AEGIS and UNIX. The computer

is a 32-bit workstation with a PRISM risc processor; it is quite similar to Apollo Domain DN 10000

workstations.

With the exception of a correction for fixing an error concerning the restart capability the code had not

been modified. The MLIST in the installation procedure for 32-bit machines was completed by

variables FLOMPJ and STRGEO. For code compilation the *-save* option was invoked to force the

compiler to allocate static storage to all variables.

3.2 RELAP5 NODALISATION

Four RELAPS nodalisations have been developed for the simulation of UPTF Test No. 11. They are

depicted in Figures 3.1-3.4. Nodalisation no. 1 is similar to the one used in reference /3/ for the

assessment of RELAP5/MOD2 (see Fig. 3.1). In nodalisations 2, 3 and 4 single volume components

(SNGLVOL) have been introduced between source terms (e.g. steam-supply - TMDPVOL 100 +

TMDPJUN 105 - and water supply - TMDPVOL 450 + TMDPJUN 445) and connecting branches in

order to avoid possible RELAPS-errors evaluating the volume average velocity at the branch.

Nodalisations 2, 3 and 4 differ only in the number of control volumes modeling the hot leg. The hot leg

of nodalisation no. 2 consists of 6 control volumes (Fig. 3.2), whereas the hot leg in nodalisation no. 3

and 4 consist of 12 volumes and 9 volumes, respectively (Fig. 3.3 and 3.4). Nodalisation no. 4 seems

to be best suited for the simulation of the test.

Correspondingly, Nodalisation No. 4 is considered the basic nodalisation within the present study. It is

described in detail in this section.

The hot leg piping is modeled with two branch and two pipe components. Components 400 (branch)

KWU E412/91/E1002 15

and 401 (branch) simulate the pipe from the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) to the Hutze, while the

region at the Hutze itself is modeled by the pipe component 410 having 4 volumes of the same length

(4°0.9645 m). The first junction of the branch 401 (junction 401-01) connects the adjacent components

401 and 410. The region between Hutze and steam generator inlet is modeled with the pipe

component 420 consisting of 3 volumes. The first volume of this component simulates the hor:,ontal

part (length 1.251 m), the second and third volumes simulate the 50* inclined part - riser (length

2°0.834 m). The single junction (SNGLJUN) component 415 connects the pipe component 410 to the

pipe component 420.

The flow area of the pipe 410 simulating the Hutze region has 0.3974 m2, the corresponding hydraulic

diameter is 0.639 m. Junctions 401-01 and 415 have the same flow areas and hydraulic diametars as

the pipe 410.

The steam generator inlet plenum is modeled as one volume using the branch component 430. The

first junction of the branch 430 connects the pipe component 420 to the steam generator inlet plenum.

Above the steam generator inlet plenum two volumes are modeled: single volume component 600 and

branch component 610. These two volumes do not reflect the UPTF geometry. Nodalization studies

have shown, that connecting volume 430 directly to the time dependent volume 440 leads to

unrealistic carry-over of injected water into volume 440 (see reference /3/).

The steam injection is simulated by components 100, 105 and 200. The injection steam mass flow rate

is controled by the TMDPJUN 105. The steam coming from TMDPVOL 100 is injected through

SNGLVOL 200 into the hot leg (volume 400). Passing the hot leg and the steam generator inlet the

steam escapes via the volumes 600 and 610 into the time dependent volume 440. This volume

controls the system pressure.

The injecion of saturated water into the inlet chamber of the broken hot leg water separator is

simulated by components 450, 445 and 500. The water coming from TMDPVOL 450 is injected into

volume 430 through the SNGLVOL 500. The time dependent junction 445 controls the injected water

mass flow rate. The water flowing through the piping system can finally escape into the pipe

component 120 via the second junction of the branch 400.

The pipe component 120 represents the core simulator. Since the core simulator does not play an

KWU E412/91/E1 002 16

important role for the objectives of the UPTF Test No. 11 it is modeled in a simplified manner. The

water accumulated in component 120 is drained through the TMDPJUN 125 into the TMDPVOL 120

using a control system depending on the collapsed water level in the core simulator.

The RELAP5 input deck described above is enclosed in Appendix A.

Several calculations have been performed using a CCFL model. The CCFL correlation was applied in

the middle of the riser, i.e. for nodalisation no. 4 at the junction 420-02.

3.3 SIMULATION PROCEDURE AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

Both the 0.3 MPa and the 1.5 MPa UPTF 11 test series have been simulated with RELAP5/MOD3/

Version 5M5. Every series was simulated in a "through" run. The calculations followed the

experimental procedure of allowing the liquid flow to settle down into a steady state before starting or

increasing the steam injection.

Boundary conditions for the 1.5 MPa series: The simulated test rig was initially filled with pure

steam. There are no water or steam injections during the first 12 seconds of the simulation. At 12 s

water injection started and reached 9.8 kg/s within 0.5 s. At 45 s after simulation beginning, the steam

supply to the reactor vessel was ramped up from zero to 8.3 kg/s over a period of 5 seconds, and then

held steady for 200 seconds. These boundary conditions corespond to the UPTF1 1 run 37 (see Table

1). At 150 s the water supply was increased to 29.4 kg/s over 50 s and kept then constant for the rest

of the calculation time. The steam injection flow rate was gradually increased, in steps of 50 seconds

length and then held steady for 200 seconds. In this way, all UPTF 11 runs of the 1.5 MPa series (runs

36 - 45) have been simulated within a "through" RELAP5 calculation. The simulation was not limited to

the steam injection flow rates measured in the test. It was continued also for higher steam flow rates in

order to reach complete liquid carry over. The sequence of the simulation's boundary conditions for

the 1.5 MPa series is depicted in Figure 3.5.

Boundary conditions for the 0.3 MPa series: The simulated test rig was initially filled with pure

steam. There are no water or steam injections during the first 10 seconds of the simulation., At 10 s

water injection started and reached 30.5 kg/s within 2.5 s. It was then kept constant for the rest of the

KWU E412I91/E1002 17

calculation time. At 45 s after simulation beginning the steam supply to the reactor vessel was ramped

up from zero to 4.6 kg/s over a period of 5 seconds, and then held steady for 200 seconds. During the

simulation the steam injection flow rate was gradually increased, in steps of 50 seconds length and4then held steady for 200 seconds. In this way, all UPTF 11 runs of the 0.3 MPa series (runs 30 - 35)

have been simulated within a *through* RELAP5 calculation. The sequence of the simulation's

boundary conditions for the 0.3 MPa series is depicted in Figure 3.6.

KWU E412/91/El 002 18

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

As already stated, several nodalisations were used for the post-test calculation of the UPTF Test No.

11. The calculations presented and discussed in section 4.1 and 4.2 were performed withthe basic

nodalisation (nodalisation no. 4 with 9 volumes hot leg model). The simulations were done in two

steps: the first one without using the flooding model (see section 4.1) and the second one by testing

various flooding correlations in the inclined part (riser) of the hot leg (see section 4.2). Results of

nodalisation studies are presented in section 4.3.

4.1 POST.TEST CALCULATIONS WITHOUT CCFL MODEL

Figures 4.2 and 4.1 show the flooding curves calculated by RELAPS/MOD3 with and without using a

CCFL model, respectively. In this section, only calculations without a CCFL model are discussed. The

evolution in time of various parameters and variables is included In Appendix B (simulation of the 1.5

MPa tests) and C (simulation of the 0.3 MPa tests).

The most obvious difference between RELAPS/MOD3 predictions and former calculations with

RELAP5/MOD2 (e.g. ref. /3/) is that RELAP5/MOD3 allowed too much countercurrent flow where

MOD2 did not allow enough. It means that new junction-based CCFL option could be used to restrict

the flows to a flooding curve defined by a user-supplied correlation. This is undoubtedly an

improvement from the point of view of performing plant calculations.

Another interesting point is that the code predicts qualitatively well the inclination of the water-steam

interface over the hot leg when stratified flow occurs. Fig. 17 in Appendix B shows the liquid fractions

VOIDF in volumes 400-01 (outlet of the core simulator), 410-01 (first volume of the hutze region), 410-

04 (last volume of the hutze region) and 420-01 (last horizontal part of the hot leg). It can be seen that

the water level is increasing from core outlet to the riser, especially during the partial delivery phase

(beginning at approx. 1950 s), when the water back-flow begins to be limited by the steam flow.

SImulation of the 1.5 MPe tests: The code calculates qualitatively well the countercurrent flow

limitation when the water down-flow is restricted by the steam flow. This is an improvement compared

to RELAP5/MOD2 calculations in which the transition from full liquid flow (total delivery) to complete

KWU E412/91/E1002 19

liquid carry over happened suddenly caused by a very small increase in steam flow. Quantitatively

seen. RELAPS/MOD3 overestimates the water back-flow by 15 to 35 %.

Complete liquid carry over is predicted in the RELAPS/MOD3 calculation at a steam mass low rate! of

46 kg/s, i.e. an overestimation of 15 % compared to experimental data (complete liquid carry over was

measured in UPTF Test No. 11, run 41 at a steam mass flow rate of 40.2 kg/s). The Wallis paramEoter

for steam at the carry over point (related to the Hutze hydraulic diameter DH = 0.639 m) was J*s =

0.50 in the test, whereas in the RELAP5/MOD3 calculation JXs = 0.57.

The code predicts over the whole range of steam mass flow rates - up to the complete liquid carry

over point - stratified flow in the horizontal part of the hot leg. For the Inclined part (riser) the 11ow

regime is annular mist through out the simulation since the void fraction exceeds the value of 0.75 In

this region (see Fig. 18 - 20 in Appendix B). The transition from slug to annular flow in vertical pipes

happens at a void fraction of 0.75 regardless of the gas velocity.

Simulation of the 0.3 MPa tests: At this pressure level RELAPS/MOD3 again overestimates the

water down-flow (code uncertainty up to 43 %). Compared with the calculations for 1.5 MPa, the

predictions for 0.3 MPa are - qualitatively seen - less accurate. The same behavior as in the former

RELAP5/MOD2 calculations can be observed: the transition from total water delivery to com,3lete

liquid carry over happens suddenly, caused once again by a very small increase in steam flow.

However complete liquid carry over was well predicted at a steam mass flow rate of 21.3 kg/s f20.5

kg/s in the test), The corresponding Wallis parameter for steam related to the hydraulic diameter of the

Hutze was J*s = 0.53 in the test whereas in the RELAPS/MOD3 calculation JXs = 0.54.

4.2 POST-TEST CALCULATIONS USING THE CCFL MODEL

Post-test calculations of the UPTF Test No. 11 were also done using the code's new CCFL option at

junction 420-02 (in the middle of the riser). Four Wallis type correlations have been used which differ

only by the slope m:

(Jl's)1/2 + 0.9.(J*w)1/2 = 0.644 (4.1)(J~s)1/2 + 1.0°(J'w)1/2 = 0.644 (4.2)

KWU E412/91/E1 002 20

(Js) 1/2+ 1.1o(J*w)1/ 2 = 0.644 (4.3)(J*s)1/2 + O.8o(J*w)1/ 2 = 0.644 (4.4)

4

The parameter C = 0.644 - which is determining the steam mass flow rate at the complete liquid carry

over point - was calculated using the UPTF data for 1.5 MPa (complete liquid carry over at rhs = 40.2

kg/s) and riser's hydraulic diameter (DH = 0.750 m). The slope m of the flooding curve was varied

between 0.8 and 1.1 in order to analyze the sensitivity of the code.

Experimental and predicted flooding curves using the flooding correlation (4.1) are compared in Fig.

4.1. The good agreement with 1.5 MPa data is obvious. Complete liquid carry over is predicted in the

RELAP5/MOD3 calculation at the same steam mass flow rate as in the experiment: 40.2 kg/s. The

Wallis parameter for steam (related to the Hutze hydraulic diameter DH = 0.639 m) at the carry over

point was Xs = 0.50 in the test as well as in the RELAP5/MOD3 calculation.

However, the RELAP5/MOD3 prediction failed when using the same correlation for 0.3 MPa. In this

case, the code underpredicts the water down-flow and calculates complete liquid carry over at a steam

mass flow rate of 11.2 kg/s, which is 44 % lower than measured data. The predicted Wallis parameter

related to the Hutze hydraulic diameter is J*s = 0.29 (J*s = 0.53 in the experiment).

Predictions using the flooding correlations (4.1), (4.2) and (4.3) are compared against experimental

data in Fig. 4.3. When changing the parameter m from 0.9 to 1.1, the slope of the predicted flooding

curve was slightly modified. The slope can be further optimized through parameter studies until the

best fit with data is reached.

Code failure using the CCFL model: An unphysical result was received when simulating the 1.5

MPa test series (runs 36 - 45 of the UPTF Test No. 11) using the CCFL model (4.4) with the slope of

the flooding curve m = 0.8. Following the procedure described in Section 3.3 a quasi steady state

phase was reached between simulation time 2200 s and 2250 s; within 50 s the water and steam were

injected at constant mass flow rates of 29.4 kg/s and 36 kg/s, respectively (see Fig. 4.5). The mass

flow rate of the water flowing back through the hot leg was in this period of time approximately 2 kg/s,

i.e. the water back flow was limited and the code calculated the water velocity using the given flooding

curve (4.4). At 2250 s the mass flow rate of the injected steam started to increase and the water back

flow was more and more limited down to 0.3 kg/s at 2280 s. Then happened a sudden and unphysical

KWU E412/91/E1002 21

jump in the mass flow rate of the back down flowing water though the steam injection mass flow rate

was continuing to increase. At 2300 s the injected steam mass flow rate was 40.2 kg/s anc' the mass

flow rate of the countercurrent water 6.8 kg/s. Nevertheless, at this steam mass flow rate the

countercurrent flow should be limited to 0.0 as requested by the flooding correlatiop (4.4). Figure 4.6

compares experimental data against the predicted flooding curve in terms of water and staam mass

flow rates. The flooding curve that the code should approximately predict if it worked corre,."tly is also

indicated. A representation of the same calculation in terms of the Wallis parameters for slteam and

water at the Hutze is given in Fig. 4.7. Appendix D includes supplementary curves which give more

information about this case.

The unphysical prediction discussed above is an indication of possible programming er'ors in the

CCFL model of the RELAP5/MOD3/V5M5 computer code.

4.3 NODALISATION STUDIES

Simulations of UPTF Test No. 11 were performed using various nodalisations in order to quantify the

influence of the spatial .discretisation on calculational results. The results are compared against

experimental data in Fig. 4.4. The sensitivity of results to the use of the abrupt area chang a model at

the Hutze was also analyzed.

Spatial Discretisation

As noted above, four RELAP5 nodalisations have been developed for the simulation of UPTF Test No.

11. Nodalisation no. 1 is similar to the one used in reference /3/for the assessment of RELAP5/MOD2

(see Fig. 3.1). In nodalisations 2, 3 and 4 single volume components have been introduced between

source terms (e.g. steam-supply - TMDPVOL 100 + TMDPJUN 105 - and water supply - TMDPVOL

450 + TMDPJUN 445) and the connecting branches in order to avoid possible RELAP5-errors when

evaluating the volume average velocity at the branch. Nodalisations 2,3 and 4 differ only in the number

of control volumes modeling the hot leg. The hot leg of nodalisation no. 2 consists of 6 contiol volumes

(Fig. 3.2), whereas the hot leg in nodalisation no. 3 and 4 consists of 12 volumes and 9 volumes,

respectively (Fig. 3.3 and 3.4).

KWU E412191/E1002 22

Predictions with nodalisations no. 1 and 2 (both with 6 volumes hot legs) overestimate the water down-

flow through the hot leg more than the other two nodalisations (Fig. 4.4); too much countercurrent flow

is allowed. In both calculations a sudden transition from full liquid flow to very low flow occured, when

the steam flow was increased slightly over 40 - 41 kg/s. This behavior was not seen in tlhe experiment.

Calculations with nodalisations no. 3 and 4 (with 12 and 9 volumes hot legs, respectively) have shown

a better agreement with the experiment from the qualitative point of view. The sudden transition seen

before does not occur any more and the slope of predicted flooding curves is closer to the one of the

experimental curve. The water down-flow is still overestimated but not so much as when using only 6

volumes for the hot leg nodalisation.

When using 12 volumes for the hot leg (nodalisation no. 3) the predicted flooding curve ist the closest

to the experimental one. This nodalisation is, however, not recommendable since several volumes

have the ratio length to diameter L/D < 1.

Predictions for the 0.3 MPa tests were not very sensitive to the nodalisation used at least qualitatively.

In all calculations the same unrealstic jump from full liquid flow to complete liquid carry over was

observed.

Conclusion: A nodalisation with 9 volimes for the hot leg seems to be best suited for the simulation

of steam/water countercurrent flow in the hot leg of a PWR. This is the reason why nodalisation no. 4

was defined as the basic nodalisation for the present study.

Abrupt Area Change Model

A calculation was done using the abrupt area change option in the junction 401-01, which connects

the Hutze region (flow area 0.397 m2) with a normal pipe part (flow area 0.442 m2 ). None impact on

the calculation results has been observed with except of unsignificant differences in the amplitude of

pressure drop oscillations over the entire hot leg during the partial water delivery phase.

KWU E412191/E1002 23

5 CONCLUSIONS

Without using the code's new countercurrent flow limitation model, RELAP5/MOD3P/SM5

overestimated the mass flow rate of back down flowing water up to 35 % (1.5 MPa runs) and 43 %

(0.3 MPa runs). This is the most obvious difference to RELAP5/MOD2, which did not allow enough

countercurrent water flow. From the point of view of performing plant calculations this is certainly an

improvement because it means that the new junction-based CCFL option could be used to restrict the

flows to a flooding curve defined by a user-supplied correlation.

Without using the new CCFL model, RELAP5/MOD3 predicts complete liquid carry over at a s;team

mass flow rate of 46 kg/s within the 1.5 MPa simulation (40.2 kg/s in the experiment) and at 21.3 kg/s

for the 0.3 MPa simulation (20.5 kg/s in the experiment), respectively. The corresponding Wallis

parameters (related to the hydraulic diameter of the Hutze) for steam as predicted by RELAP5/IMOD3

are JAs = 0.57 for 1.5 MPa and J*s = 0.54 for 0.3 MPa. The Wallis parameters for steam calculated

from UPTF experimental data were J*s = 0.50 and J*s = 0.53 for 1.5 MPa and 0.3 MPa test s;eries,

respectively.

Very good agreement with the 1.5 MPa experimental data (which are relevant for SBLOCA-cond lions)

could be obtained using the code's new CCFL option at a junction situated in the middle of the inclined

part (riser) of the hot leg. The flooding correlation used was of the Wallis type: (J*s)1/2 + m.(J*w)l/ 2 =

C, where J*s and J*w represents the Wallis parameters for steam and water, respectively. The

parameter C (determining the steam mass flow rate at which complete liquid carry over occur;) was

set at 0.664; it was calculated using UPTF data for 1.5 MPa and risers hydraulic diameter (DH =

0.750 m). The slope m of the flooding curve was determined through parameter studies. Thi data

were matched best by using m=1.

Applying the flooding curve presented above complete liquid carry over is predicted by

RELAP5/MOD3 at the same steam mass flow rate as in the experiment: 40.2 kg/s. The Wallis

parameter for steam at the carry over point was J*s = 0.50 in the test as well as in the RELAP5/MOD3

calculation (related to the Hutze hydraulic diameter DH = 0.639 m).

Using the same CCFL correlation for the simulation of 0.3 MPa test series - typical for reflood

conditions -, RELAP5/MOD3 underestimated by 44 % the steam mass flow rate at which complete

KWU E412/91/El 002 24

liquid carry over occurs.

Nodalisation studies have shown that a hot leg model with 9 control volumes between reactor vessel

and steam generator inlet chamber is quite adequate for simulating steam/water countercurrent flow in

the hot leg during typical reflux condensation conditions.

Code failure using the CCFL model: An unphysical result was received when simulating the 1.5

MPa test series (runs 36 - 45 of the UPTF Test No. 11) using a CCFL correlation of the Wallis type

with the intercept C = 0.644 and the slope m = 0.8. The unphysical prediction is an indication of

possible programming errors in the CCFL model of the RELAP5/MOD3N5M5 computer code.

KWU E412/91/El 002 25

REFERENCES

/l/ M. Cappiello

Posttest Analysis of the Upper Plenum Test Facility Small-Break

Loss-of-Coolant Accident Test with TRAC-PFI/MOD1 and MOD2

LA-CP-88-154

/21 H. G. Sonnenburg

Analysis of the UPTF Test 11 (Hot Leg CCF) with a Full-Range Drift-Flux Model

GRS, Garching, W. Germany

/3/ G. J. Seeberger,

RELAP5/MOD2 Post Test Analysis of the UPTF Test No. 11

Countercurrent Flow in the Hot Leg of a PWR

Siemens Work-Report U811-88-e2171, 21.10.1988

/4/ M. J. Dillistone,

Analysis of the UPTF Separate Effects Test 11 (Steam-Water Counter-Current

Flow in the Broken Loop Hot Leg) Using RELAP5/MOD2

UKAEA Winfrith, UK, Report AEEW-M2555, 1989

/5/ G. J. Seeberger, 0. Mazzantini,

RELAP5/MOD3 Develompental Assessment UPTF Test No. 11

ICAP Meeting, Bethesda, October 1989

/6/ M. J. Dillistone,

Simulation of UPTF Test 11 with RELAP5/MOD2 and RELAPS/MOD3

Joint RELAP5/TRAC-BWR Int. User Seminar, Chicago, Sept. 1990

/7/ P. Weiss et al.

UPTF Test No. 11, Quick Look Report

Countercurrent Flow in PWR Hot Leg Test

Siemens KWU-Report R515/87/08, March 1987

KWU E412/91/E1 002 26

/8/ P. S. Damerell

US Input to Definition of Test Objectives and Conditions for UPTF Hot Leg SBLOCA Test

MPR Associates Inc., March 13, 1986

/9/ H. J. Richter, et al.

Deentrainment and Countercurrent Air-Water Flow in a Model PWR Hot Leg,

Thayer School of Engineering, September, 1978

/10/ A. Ohnuki

Experimental Study of Countercurrent Two-Phase Flow in

Horizontal Tube Connected to Inclined Riser

J. of Nuclear Sci. and Techn., Vol 23, No. 3, pp. 219 - 232, March 1986

/11/ S. M. Krolewski

Flooding Limits in a Simulated Nuclear Reactor Hot Leg

MIT, Submission as part of Requirement for a B. Sc. (1980)

/121 H. Siddiqui, S. Banerjee and K. H. Ardron

Flooding in an Elbow between a Vertical and a Horizontal or Near-Horizontal Pipe

Part I: Experiments

Int. J. Multiphase Flow, Vol 12, No. 4, pp. 531 - 541 (1986)

/13/ Sarkar, Liebert

UPTF Test Instrumentation

Measurement System Identification, Engineering Units and Computed Parameters

KWU-Work-Report R515/85/23 Sept. 13, 1985

KWU E412/91/El 002 27

FIGURES

QKWU mCDm4.b

00D

1 Test Vessel2 Steam Genalor Simulator

(Intact Loop)3a Steam Generator Simulatorl

Water Se•aralo(Broken Loop Wt Leg)

3b Water Separator 4 Hot Water Storage Tank 10 Steam Cooler(Broken Loop Cold leg} 5 Accumulalof 11, Pump Simulator

3c Drainage Vessel $ Containment Simulatorfor Hot Ltg 7 Steam Storage Tank

3d Drainage Vessel I N2 - Tank 0 Samplefor Cold Leg 9 Water Collecting Tank

Fig. 2.1: UPTF Flow Diagram

Loop II

QKMWU m

CD

.-i

I Ted Vetssel2 Stow Gewdt Sdmebtw 0

(Wactlnop)3. Stem Geemsto Shmwda•t

Waet. SeOeWMto(Imou"mto Hot too

3bWaew Soparet(MDek. to" Cod tLo

3. D iat~ve Yarnd las HotiIag

3d Ot4* aheg. h..le Cold log4 Puwq Sledaoc5e aBrok Vakve OWt L•o)Sb 1•Dadl Ya(ColMd lg

9 CoetbeiInlm I Sb

CD

® Cam Sbmabtw Ifectd NHoule®• W-Deeg. Nozzle

Steam IWt)e Noule

So Diochin Hoz ule

Fig. 2.2: Upper Plenum Test Facimiiy - Ffh-naoy Systrm,

Q KWU

mC

m.ii

00

N£Steam Ceaeato

To Steam Geneaomw

mLipper Emd od• --. Dowce Aw• 4~.,e~1t,,

-- Test VesselCover

test VesseFlange

7 55

jM9223-Uppe Edf of Umw

UPPer Edo e /

.----S330--4DamayFed &assm*l O

Upper f d of CoreSNmulatoe I 56ort2Nozzle 6562

Core Simidator

Zone Wall(peorsatedCaem lypmuUce -

Lower fad of Active Feel iR524 L'

Lower End ofLower Grale

hBttoma olas vessel0

- Test Vessel(lower p )

Lt.q lt

Fig. 2.3: Major Dimensions of UPTF-Primary System

Q.KWU

C

0r%)

1 Test Vessel2 Steam Generator Simulator

flntt4 I nlntI ..... .-- . re F-

3m Water Separator(Broken Loop Hot Leg)

3 b Water Separator 4 Hot Water Storage Tank 10 Steam Cooler F- _ Flow Path(Broken Loop Cold Leg) 5 Accumulatur 11 Pump Simulator

3 c Drainage Vessel 6 Containment Simulator 0 Sample Filled withfor Hot Leg 7 Steam Storage Tank Water

3d Drainage Vessel 8 N2-Tank Not Activatedfor Cold Leg 9 Water Collecting Tank

Fig. 2.4: System Configuration

KWU E412/91/E1002 32

View

Sparper (mam)Outer Diameter : 168.3Inner Diameter : 159.3Number of Holes : 550Hole Diameter 2.5

Section B - B

At

Fig. 2.5: Design of Water Separator JEAO4BB01 Inlet Chamber

M

Flow Meter 0IASource C

Pipe Flow Meter

ORPCPA

GD

f ECC

Pipe flow Mo.tor Consiuts of:I Absolute Pressure Trais ducet IPA)I. fluld 7heraoceupita ITEll1recorded)

~.Drag Pokes tORII T-estsf.Seet Oefte~rsX60)

C.,C,

/1 L. Drag Rake N!2j / ~ThermocoupleN2

Deteclor 2DreJectar I

' • lbeafe 11

Drag R a He I 3Thermocoup(e Nt 3

The Thermocouple is attached to the Drag Rake

Fig. 2.6: Arrangement of Pipe Flow Meter Measurement System in Broken Hot Leg

M

M~

SteamGenerator

Carryover Hot Leg Cold Leg

Reflux

Reactor Coolant

Pump

Two - Phase MixtureCovers Core -

Fig. 2.7: Reflux Condensation Flow Path

Section A-A

CIT

0

0

Hutze'Area = 0.04438Open Flow Area = 03971L

Saturated WaterA Injection

~~1 Inlet

01

Steam Vented fromPrimary System

Hot Leg ECCInjection Pipe (Hutze)2jU

A

Fig. 2.8: UPTF Hot Leg Countercurrent Flow

KWU E412/91/El 002 36

40

U,O

30

20

10

00 10 20 1 vw. kg/s 30

0 RUN No.

Fig. 2.9: CCF of Steam and Saturated Water in Hot Leg

KWU E412/91/E1002 37

Flow Area ( UPTF

300 UPTF Data* UPTF Data 1

EI'A

20-

(/I-10

0.05 MJ ,d 0.1

Fig. 2.10: Superficial Velocities of Steam and Water In Hot Leg

Water

0 = 26/51/76 mmInclination Angle

c t 2 4 5 0

0.8 Air

0 PFData 3 bar01A* UPTF Data ISbar ,

UPTFNo 750 mmInclination Angle Saturated Water 4,,,.

0.6 500Ohnuki Steam venled

fromPrimary System o

R e e t a . R ic h t e r e t a t ,

0.4 Krolewsi = = 203 mmInclination Angle 0(

Air col Water

Hydraulic Diameter D" = 0.639 m

0.2 Flow Area I UPTF I A= 0.3974 mDAKrolgwSl1

4A D " 50.mm(irmt~Dnc 0 102mm o

N~Z11~fInclination Angleu90,

0(X0 0.1 0.2

Air

Fig. 2.11: Comparison of UPTF Data with Correlations of Richter et al., Ohnuki and Krolewskl

m

BOUNDARY WATER ..

PRESSURE SUPPLY --

TMDPVOL 440 450 TMOPVOL Q

f• - a445of TMOPJUN

BRANCH 610

SNOLVOLI 600

STEAM BRANCH 430SUPPLY 43

.OP VOL 100 HUTZE RISER• • S~lira . I~ SmmI tI •, .4O iM

2CA

T M DP J U N 1 05 4 1

11 4 5 4 0m7

5 BRANCH.GJU 4P

A, j-.O 71.

WATEISINK Figure 3.1 : RELAP5 Nodallsation 1 for UPTF Test No. 11

BOUNDARYPRESSURE

TMDPVOL

TMDPVOL. SNOLVOL

WATER F.-]SUPPLY LJO45L.J

TMDPJUN

STEAM

UPPLY

HUTZE RISER

BRANCH

m

0

0

SNGLVOL

BRANCH

is

381m. I 251

SNGOJUNA- 30N7 in2

.~-0 $36 ma

PIPE

PIPE

TUDPJUN

TMOP VOL

A407442m-071.-

WATERSINK Figure 3.2 : RELAP5 Nodalisation 2 for UPTF Test No. 11

cm

BOUNDARYPRESSURE1 1om

440 TaOtPVOL

TMDPVOL SNOLVOL 610 BRANCHWATER, 0] Soo6SUPPLYI 5 - 0

6MDPJUN 600 SNOLVOL

10- r- -4 0STEAM BRANCH20 10 SUPPLY RISER

SNOLVOL "mOPVOL HUTZE •A- .0462o .- 01S2

| \ ' 4000o, 401 Of 410 '1415 42 • : 1

S BAC BRNHptP SNO)LJUN PIPE

4A.0 4-011

PIPE 120 3 A-O.?.. A.6 .,- A-o0 . A.042

TUtPJUV 1250TMDPVOL 1 130 1

Figure 3.3 : RELAP5 Nodallsation 3 for UPTF Test No. 11WATER

SINK

Cm

BOUNDARYPRESSURE

440 TMDPVOL o0

010

TUMOL SNOLVOL 610 BRANCH

SUPPLYI 45o 45• 600 SNOLVOL

M430 BRANCH

RISEWSN.VK L N HUTZE

, 4000,1- 4 i1 11410 415 1 / ---- 420 ' "•_

FM• 2 A-0131Mm iA-03870 A. 0I31~l? A. 1 42m2ON-09i0-0e 1403,m : 0/

"TawcPJLmN 1251 "

WATERSINK

Figure 3.4 : RELAP5 Nodalisation 4 (Basic Nodalisation) for UPTF Test No. 11

KWU E412/91/E100260.

43

50.

40.

30.

20.

10.-

0.0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200

TIME (s)Fig. 3.5: Boundary Conditions for RELAP5 Simulation of UPTF 11 Runs 36 - 45. Injected Steam

and Water Mass Flow Rates.

60.

50.

J

40.

30.

20.

10.

WATER

S*M

n•0. 250. Soo. 750. ' 1000. 1250. 1500. ' 1750. 2000. 2250. 250).

TIME (s)Fig. 3.8: Boundary Conditions for RELAPS Simulation of UPTF 11 Runs 30 . 35. Injected Steam

and Water Mass Flow Rates.

KWU E412/91/E1002 44

50

mn s / kg/s t C

40

30

20

10

0

Mw,d /kg/s* CCFL on (m = 0., C = 0.644), ( O.3 MPa)* CCFL on (m = 0.9, C = 0.644), ( 1.5 MPt)A CCFL off ( 0.3 MPa)o CCFL off ( 1.5 MPa)

+ Experimental Data

o RUN No.

Fig. 4.1: Experimental and Predicted Flooding Curves

(Nodalisation No. 4)

c

Co00

CCFL OPTION OFF0.8

0.6

OA

0.2

0

410 ~0° 0

UPT Dat 0

. ........................... .........

Ohnuki

Richter

Krolewsid

CCFL OPTION ON

0.2

0 CCFLcn~m-0.3.C.abOjs4 ~MP&A CCFLQinm.1.0C-OiS44)1.GMPa

1 1 CULanon-I.1.C.o."IstUps

0.

U1

0 0.1 0.2, 0 0.1 02 0-.O.2 JW

Fig. 4.2: Comparison of RELAP5/MOD3N5M5 Results with UPTF- Data and Flooding Correlations

KWU E412/91/E 1002 46

rm s / kg/s

50

400

30

20

10

* CCFL on (m =1.1, C =0.644)* CCFLon(m1l.0,C=0.644)* CCFLon(m=0.9,C=0.644)

rh w~d /1kg/s

+ Experimental Data

0 RUN No.

Fig. 4.3: Experimental and Predicted Flooding Curves for 1.5 UPs(Nodalisation No. 4)Study on code Sensitivity to the Slope m of the CCFL Correlation

KWU E412/91/E1002 47so

rn s / kg/s

40

4

30

20

10

0

rnw,d / kg/s* Nodalisati* NodallsatA Nodalisato Nodalisat

o RUN No.

+ Experimel

ion 1on 2Ion 3Ion 4

nMal Data

Fig. 4.4: Nodalisation Studies.

Experimental and Predicted Flooding Curves

UPTF TEST No. 11. RUNS 36 - 45 (PRESSURE 1.5 MPa)

POST-TEST CALC.WITH RELAP51MOD3N5M5, NOD. No.4 (9 VOL HOT LEG)

CCFL MODEL (m=0.8, C=0.644) USED AT JUNCTION 420-02 (RISER)

m

(0

0N

50.

40.

tu

010)

30.

20.

I A

0 INJECTED WATERA iNJECTED STEAM+ WATER BACK FLOW

03

10.

0.

•A0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 21i

TIME (s)

Fig. 4.5: injected Steam, injected Water and Water Back Fiow at the Huge

80. 3200.

KWU E412/91/El 002 49

50

iin ./ kgls

rnlw,d / kg/s+ Experimental Data

o RUN No.

o RELAP5- Predictlon

Fig. 4.6: Comparison of UPTF Data with RELAP5IMOD3/V5M5 -Predictions Using a Wallis Type CCFL Correlation with m = 0.8and C = 0.644 at the Junction 420-02 (Baski Nodalisation).Steam and Water Mass Flow Rates through the Hot Leg

KWU E4V 12MM

KWU E412/91/E1 002 50

0.8

• • Ohnuki

0.4

~Krolewskl

0.2

0 RELAP5 - Prediction

0-00.1 0.2 .

_Oh-u-l

Fig. 4.7: Comparison of UPTF Data with RELAP5/MOD3NVM5 -

Predictions Using a Wallis Type CCFL Correlation with m = 0.8and C = 0.644 at the Junction 420-02 (Basic Nodalisation).Wallis Parameter for Steam and Water at the Hutze

KWVU E412iMrMg.S.Iil

KWU E412/91/E1002 A-i

APPENDIX A4

RELAP5/MOD3 Input Deck for the Simulation of

UPTF Test No. 11

KWU E412191/E1002A. A-2

-UPTF TEST NO 11. RUNS 36-45, DT-0.025. CCFL OPTION OFF. BASIC NODALISATION

* HOT LEG WITH 9 VOLUMES

* INTRODUCE SNGLVOL BETWEEN TMOPVOL+TMDPJUN (SOURCE/SINK) AND

* CONNECTION COMPONENT (AS SUGGESTED BY STUBBE).

PRESSURE 1.5 MPao STEAM INJECTION - UP TO 2500 LIKE IN UPTF RUNS NR. 36 - 45" - 2500 - 3200 INCREASED STEPWISE UP TO 52 KG/S" - STEAM MASS FLOWS CHANGED WITHIN 50 S

- STEAM MASS FLOWS KEPT THAN CONSTANT 200 S

WATER INJECTION 9.8 KG/S AT 12.5 S• WATER INJECTION 29.4 KG/S AT 200 S

100101102105201

NEWRUNSI1.0

3200.

TRANSNT

SI2.0

1.E-9200000.

0.025 3 200 20000 100000

501 TINE 0 GT NULL

'MINOR EDIT

0 13. L

301302303

304

305306307308309

310311312313314

P 430010000MFLOWJ 445000000MFLOWJ 105000000

CNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVAR

CNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVAR

103104109110III

112

254258284288234

" WATER MASS FLOW AT J 41001" STEAM MASS FLOW AT J 41001" WATER MASS FLOW AT J 42001

STEAM MASS FLOW AT J 42001• WATER MASS FLOW AT J 43001• STEAM MASS FLOW AT J 43001

* SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.) FOR WATER AT J 42001" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.) FOR STEAM AT J 42001" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.) FOR WATER AT J 41001

* SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.) FOR STEAM AT J 41001" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.) FOR WATER AT J 43001

KWU E412/91/E1002A3 A-3

315 CNTRLVAR 238 SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.) FOR STEAM AT J 43001

320 VELFJ 410010000321 VELGJ 410010000

322 VELFJ 420010000323 VELGJ 420010000324 VELFJ 430010000325 VELGJ 430010000

330 NFLOWJ 410010000331 MFLOWJ 4300100007

371 VOIDF 400010000372 VOIDF 410010000373 VOIDF 410020000374 VOIDF 410030000375 VOIDF 420010000376 VOIDF 420020000377 VOjDF 430010000

381 FLOREG 400010000382 FLOREG 410010000383 FLOREG 410020000384 FLOREG 410030000385 FLOREG 420010000386 FLOREG 420020000387 FLOREG 430010000

390 DT 0391 DTCRNT 0

*------- STEAM SUPPLY SIMULATION ---------------------------------

* NAME TIME DEPENDENT VOLUME

1000000 OBPLI TMOPVOL* AREA LENGTH VOL X ANGLE ELEV ROUGH CHYOR FLAG1000101 2. 0. 5. 0. 0. 0. 0.00015 0. 00* CTRL1000200 2* VAR PRESSURE1000201 0.0 15.E+5 1.

a

* TIME DEPENDENT JUNCTION FOR STEAM SUPPLY

* NAME TIME DEPENDENT JUNCTION

1050000 OP-HKL1 TMOP3UN* FROM TO AREA1050101 100000000 200000000 0.5

KWU E412/91/E1002 A-4

1050200

10502011050202105020310502041050205105020610502071050208105020910502101050211105021210502131050214105021510502161050217105021810502191050220105022110502221050223105022410502251050226105022710502281050229105023010502311050232105023310502341050235

2000000

2000101

2000200w

CTRL1VAR WFLOW SFLOW X

0. 0.45. 0.

50. 0.

250. 0.

300. 0.

500. 0.

550. 0.750. 0.

800. 0.

1000. 0.

1050. 0.

1250. 0.1300. 0.

1500. 0.

1550. 0.1750. 0.

1800. 0.

2000. 0.

2050. 0.

2250. 0.

2300. 0.2500. 0.2550. 0.2650. 0.

2700. 0.

2800. 0.

2850. 0.3000. 0.3050. 0.3150. 0.3200. 0.3300. 0.3350. 0.3450. 0.

3500. 0.

0.

0.08.38.39.39.3

18.118.124.024.028.028.031.031.032.632.633.533.536.036.040.240.2

42.0.42.043.043.044.044.046.046.048.048.050.050.052.0

NAME SNGLVOLCONNECTI SNGLVOL

AREA LENGTH VOL X ANGLE ELEV ROUGH DH VFLAG0.5 1. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 10000CNTRL PRESSURE QUANTITIES002 15.E+5 1.

KWU E412/91/E1002 A-5

------ - - CORE SIMULATOR ---------------------------------------

12000001200001120010112002011200301120040112005011200601120080112009011201001120110112012011201202120120312013001201301ft

CORE1 PIPE57.00.00.50.0 50.0 5

545

90.0 50.00015 0.350.0 0.0 400000 5000000 4002 15.OE5002 15.0E5002 15.0E5

5

0.00.51.0

0.

0.

0.

0. 0. 10. 0. 20. 0. 5

I0.0 0.0 0.0 4

-- SYSTEM FOR CONTROLLED WATER DRAIN ----------------------

1250000 RDBI TMDPJUN1250101 120000000 130000000 0.041250200 1 501 CNTRLVAR 2001250201 0.0 0. 0. 0.

1250202 100. 100. 0. 0.

1300000

130010113002001300201

UPI TMOPVOLAREA LENGTH VOL X ANGLE ELEV ROUGH DHYDR FLAG2. 0. 2. 0. 90. 1. .00015 0. 000000020.0 15.E+5 0.

................ a.....am.....a..................... ..........

MAIN COOLANT SYSTEM.........ft...0 ......... mfto.0 ...... a ...... a .......

-------- HOT LEG BETWEEN HUTZE AND CORE SIMULATOR

40000004000001

NAMEHKL13

BRANCHBRANCHI

4000101ft

AREA LENGTH VOL* X ANGLE ELEV ROUGH OH VFLAG0.4418 0.766 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.00015 0.75 10000CNTRL PRESSURE QUANTITIES

KWU E412/91/E1002A6 A-6

4000200 002 15.E+5 1.

400110140021014003101

a

4001110

400120140022014003201

FROM TO400010000 401000000400000000 120010000200010000 400000000

AREA0.44180.44180.04

KFOR0.00.00.0

KBACK FVCAHS (JFLAG)

0.0 0000000.0 0000000.0 000000

JUNCTION DIAMETER AND CCFL DATADH FORM C H0.639 0. 0.7 1.0

CTRL0.00.00.0

WFLOW SFLOW0.0 0.00.0 0.00.0 0.0

x

a

40100004010001

4010101

4010200

4011101

4011110

4011201

NAME

HKL2

BRANCH

BRANCH

1 1AREA LENGTH VOL X ANGLE El0.4418 0.766 0. 0. 0. 0OCNTRL PRESSURE X002 15.E+5 1.FROM TO AREA401010000 410000000 0.3974

JUNCTION DIAMETER AND CCFL DATADH FORM C H0.639 0. 0.7 !.oCTRL WFLOW SFLOW X0.0 0.0 0.0

LEV ROUGH DH VFLAG0.00015 0.75 10000

KFOR KBACK FVCAHS (JFLAG)0.121 0.0 000000

-........-HOT LEG WITH HUTZE ----------------------------------

4100000

4100001

4100101a

4100301*

4100601

4100701

NAME PIPEH1(L3 PIPENUM OF VOL4J-AREA VOL.NO0.3974 4LENGTH VOL.NO0.9645 4ANGLE VOL.NO

0. 4ELEV VOL.NO0.0 4ROUGH DHYDR VOL.NO

KWU E412J91/E1002A- A-?

4100801 0.00015 0.639 4O KFOR KBACK JUN.NO4100901 0.0156 0.0156 3* PVBFE (VOL.FLAG) VOL.NO4101001 10000 40 FVCAHS (J-FLAG) JUN.NO4101101 000000 30 CTRL PRESSURE.4101201 2 15.E+5 I. 0. 0. 0. 4" CTRL4101300 00 WFLOW SFLOW X JUN.NO4101301 0. 0. 0. 3" JUNCTION DIAMETER AND CCFL DATA0 DH FORM C N4101401 0.639 0. 0.7 1.0 14101402 0.639 0. 0.7 1.0 3

0

0 NAME SINGLE JUNCTION

4150000 HKL4 SNGLJUN0 FROM TO AREA KFOR KBACI JFLAG4150101 410010000 420000000 0.3974 0. 0. 000000

JUNCTION DIAMETER AND CCFL DATA0 DH FORM C N4150110 0.639 0. 0.7 1.00 CTRL WFLOW SFLOW X

4150201 0 0. 0. 0.

-------------- RISER ----------------------------------

* NAME PIPE4200000 HKL5 PIPE* VOL.NO4200001 30 AREA VOL.NO4200101 0.4418 3

LENGTH VOL.NO LENGTH VOL.NO4200301 1.251 1 0.834 30 VOL VOL.NO4200401 0. 3" ANGLE VOL.NO ANGLE VOL.NO4200601 0. 1 50. 30 ELEV VOL.NO ELEV VOL.NO4200701 0. 1 0.63885 30 ROUGH DHYOR VOL.NO4200801 0.00015 0.75 3" KFOR KBACK JUN.NO4200901 0.0157 0.0157 2

KWU E412/9I/E1oo2A- A-8

4201001

4201101

4201102

4201201

4201300

V-FLAG VOL.NO10000 3J-FLAG JUN.NO000000 1000000 2 " OR 100000 FOR CCFLCTRL PRESSURE2 15.E-5 1. 0. 0. 0. 3CTRL0WFLOW SFLOW X JUN.NO

4201301 0. 0. 0. 2" JUNCTION DIAMETER AND CCFL DATA* DH FORM C4201401 0.75 0. 0.644

M1.0 2

----------.WATER SEPARATOR INLET CHAMBER ------------------------

NAME BRANCH4300000 EIN-DE BRANCH

4300001 3 1AREA LENGTH VOL X ANGLE E

4300101 0.0 1.3 4.22 0. 90. 1" CNTRL PRESSURE QUANTITIES4300200 002 15.E*5 1.

FROM TO AREA4301101 420010000 430000000 0.44184302101 430010000 600000000 1.04303101 500010000 430010000 0.04* JUNCTION DIAMETER AND CCFL DATA

D OH FORM C M4301110 0.75 0. 0.7 1.0

CTRL WFLOW SFLOW X

:LEV.076

KFOR0.591.00.0

ROUGH DH VFLAG0.00015 0. 10000

KBACK0.1251.00.0

JFLAG000000000000001000

430120143022014303201

0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0

------- WATER SEPARATOR ---------------------------------------

* NAME SNGLVOL

6000000 STDOM SNGLVOL

6000101

6000200

AREA LENGTH VOL X ANGLE ELEV ROUGH DH VFLAG1.0 2.0 0.0 0. 90. 2.0 0.00015 0. 10000CNTRL PRESSURE QUANTITIES002 15.E-5 1.

KWU E412'9.1/El002A- A-9

* ARTIFICIAL SEPARATOR

NAME BRANCH6100000 SEP BRANCH

6100001

*

6100101

6100200

61011016102101

61012016102201

4400000

4400101

4400200

4400201

4450000

4450101

4450200

44502014450202445020344502044450205

4500000

4500101

2 I

AREA1.0CNTRL002

LENGTH VOL X ANGLE ELEV2.0 0. 0. 90. 2.0

PRESSURE QUANTITIES15.E+5 1.

ROUGH DH VFLAG0.00015 0.44 10000

FROM TO610010000 440000000600010000 610000000CTRL WFLOW SFLOW X0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0

AREA KFOR KBACK JFLAG2.0 3.5 3.5 0110002.0 3.5 3.5 011000

NAME TIME DEPENDENT VOLUMEDE2 TMDPVOLAREA LENGTH VOL X ANGLE ELEV ROUGH DHYDR V-FLAG4. 0. 5. 0. 0. 0. 0.00015 0. 00000CTRTL2VAR PRESSURE0.0 15.E+5 1.*

WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM -------------------

NAME TIME DEPENDENT JUNCTION

DE-HKLI TMDPJUNFROM TO AREA450000000 500000000 0.04CTRL1VAR WFLOW SFLOW X0. 0. 0. 0.12. 0. 0. 0.12.5 9.8 0. 0.150. 9.8 0. 0.200. 29.4 0. 0.

NAME -TIME DEPENDENT VOLUME

DEI TMDPVOLAREA LENGTH VOL X ANGLE ELEV ROUGH DHYDR VFLAG

2. 0. 5. 0. 0. 0. 0.00015 0. 00

KWU E412/91/E1002 A-lO0

4500200

4500201*

CTRL2VAR PRESSURE0.0 l5.E÷5 0.

0

NAME SNGLVOL5000000 CONNECTI SNGLVOL

5000101

5000200

AREA LENGTH VOL0.04 0.5 0.CNTRL PRESSURE002 15.E+5

X ANGLE ELEV ROUGH0. 0. 0. 0.0

QUANTITIES1.

DH VFLAG0.0 10000

................................---..----.--..

CONTROL COMPONENTS

* CONTROL VARIABLES SIGNIFICANCEft

ft

CNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVAR

1234567

8910

1112

" WATER SUP.VEL." STEAM SUP.VEL." WATER SUP.VEL." STEAM SUP.VEL." WATER SUP.VEL." STEAM SUP.VEL." WATER SUP.VEL.

" STEAM SUP.VEL." WATER SUP.VEL." STEAM SUP.VEL." WATER SUP.VEL." STEAM SUP.VEL.

AT J 40001AT J 40001AT J 41001AT J 41001AT J 41002AT J 41002AT. J 41500AT J 41500AT J.42001AT J 42001AT J 43001AT J 43001

CNTRLVAR 14CNTRLVAR 16

CNTRLVAR 17CNTRLVAR 18

" COLLAPSED WATER LEVEL IN COMP. 120 (CORE)" COLLAPSED WATER LEVEL IN COMP. 430 (SG INLET)

" WATERVOLUME IN SYSTEM (FROM 400 TO 610)" INTEGRAL OF INJECTED WATER

" WATER MASS FLOW THROUGH J 40002 (DRAINED WATER)" WATER MASS FLOW THROUGH J 61001 (ENTRAINED WATER TO SG)

" INTEGRAL DRAINED WATER THROUGH J 40002" INTEGRAL ENTRAINED WATER THROUGH J 61001

CNTRLVAR 19CNTRLVAR 20

CNTRLVAR 21CNTRLVAR 22

? CNTRLVAR 34 * WALLIS PARAMETER FOR WATER AT J 43001

KWU E412/91/E1002

" CNTRLVAR 38 * WALLIS PARAMETER FOR" CNTRLVAR 54 * WALLIS PARAMETER FOR" CNTRLVAR 58 * WALLIS PARAMETER FOR

" CNTRLVAR 64 " WALLIS PARAMETER FOR" CNTRLVAR 68 * WALLIS PARAMETER FOR" CNTRLVAR 74 * WALLIS PARAMETER FOR" CNTRLVAR 78 * WALLIS PARAMETER FOR" CNTRLVAR 84 * WALLIS PARAMETER .FOR" CNTRLVAR 88 * WALLIS PARAMETER FOR

A-11

STEAM AT J

WATER AT J

STEAM AT J

WATER AT J

STEAM AT J

WATER AT J

STEAM AT JWATER AT JSTEAM AT J

430014200142001415004150040001400014100141001

ft

ft

CNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVARCNTRLVAR

100101102103104105106

107108109110111112

ft

ft

ft

ft

ft

WATER MASS FLOW AT J 40002WATER MASS FLOW AT J 40001

STEAM MASS FLOW ATWATER MASS FLOW ATSTEAM MASS FLOW AT

WATER MASS FLOW AT

STEAM MASS FLOW AT

WATER MASS FLOW AT

STEAM MASS FLOW ATWATER MASS FLOW AT

STEAM MASS FLOW ATWATER MASS FLOW ATSTEAM MASS FLOW AT

J 40001J 41001J 41001J 41002J 41002J 41500J 41500J 42001J 42001J 43001J 43001

CNTRLVAR 170 * WATER INVENTORY IN SYSTEM (FROM 400 TO 610)

CNTRLVAR 234CNTRLVAR 238CNTRLVAR 254CNTRLVAR 258CNTRLVAR 264CNTRLVAR 268CNTRLVAR 274CNTRLVAR 278

CNTRLVAR 284CNTRLVAR 288

-...... SUPERFICIAL

" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)" SORT(WALLIS PARAM.)" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)

" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)" SQRT(WALLIS PARAM.)

FOR WATER AT J 43001FOR STEAM AT J 43001FOR WATER AT J 42001FOR STEAM AT J 42001FOR WATER AT J 41500FOR STEAM AT J 41500FOR WATER AT J 40001FOR STEAM AT J 40001FOR WATER AT J 41001FOR STEAM AT J 41001

VELOCITIES (MIS) ................

20500100 JF40001 MULT 1.0

20500101 VOIDFJ 40001000020500102 VELFJ 400010000

0. 1

2050020020500201205002020t

2050030020500301

JG40001VOIDGJVELGJ

MULT 1.0400010000400010000

0. 1

0. 1JF41001 MULT 1.0VOIDFJ 410010000

KWU E412/91/E1002 A - 12

20500302 VELFJ 410010000

20500400 JG41001 MULT 1.0 0. 120500401 VOIDGJ 41001000020500402 VELGJ 410010000

20500500 JF41002 MULT 1.0 0. 120500501 VOIDFJ 41002000020500502 VELFJ 410020000

20500600 JG41002 MULT 1.0 0. 120500601 VOIDGJ 41002000020500602 VELGJ 410020000

20500700 JF415 MULT 1.0 0. 120500701 VOIDFJ 41500000020500702 VELFJ 415000000

20500800 JG415 MULT 1.0 0. 120500801 VOIDGJ 41500000020500802 VELGJ 415000000

20500900 JF42001 MULT 1.0 0. 120500901 VOIDFJ 42001000020500902 VELFJ 420010000

20501000 JG42001 MULT 1.0 0. 120501001 VOIDGJ 42001000020501002 VELGJ 420010000

20501100 JF43001 MULT 1.0 0. 120501101 VOIDFJ 43001000020501102 VELFJ 430010000

20501200 JG43001 MULT 1.0 0. 120501201 VOIDGJ 43001000020501202 VELGJ 430010000

... PHASE MASS FLOWS CALCULATED WITH JUNCTION PROPERTIES (KG/S)...

20501900 W40002 MULT 0.442 0.0 020501901 VELFJ 40002000020501902 VOIDFJ 40002000020501903 RHOFJ 400020000

20502000 W435 MULT 2.0 0.0 020502001 RHOFJ 61001000020502002 VELFJ 61001000020502003 VOIDFJ 610010000

KWU E412/91/E1002 -A- 13

20510100 WF40001 MULT 0.3974 0. 1

20510101 VOIDFJ 40001000020510102 VELFJ 40001000020510103 RHOFJ 400010000

t4

20510200 WG40001 MULT 0.3974 0. 120510201 VOIDGJ 40001000020510202 VELGJ 40001000020510203 RHOGJ 400010000*

20510300 WF41001 MULT 0.3974 0. 120510301 VOIDFJ 41001000020510302 VELFJ 41001000020510303 RHOFJ 410010000

20510400 WG41001 MULT 0.3974 0. 120510401 VOIDGJ 41001000020510402 VELGJ 410010000

20510403 RHOGJ 410010000*

20510500 WF41002 MULT 0.3974 0. 120510501 VOIDFJ 41002000020510502 VELFJ 41002000020510503 RHOFJ 410020000*

20510600 WG41002 MULT 0.3974 0. 120510601 VOIDGJ 41002000020510602 VELGJ 41002000020510603 RHOGJ 410020000

20510700 WF415 MULT 0.3974 0. 120510701 VOIDFJ 41500000020510702 VELFJ 41500000020510703 RHOFJ 415000000

20510800 WG415 MULT 0.3974 0. 120510801 VOIDGJ 415000000

20510802 VELGJ 41500000020510803 RHOGJ 415000000

20510900 WF42001 MULT 0.4418 0. 1

20510901 VOIDFJ 420010000

20510902 VELFJ 42001000020510903 RHOFJ 420010000

20511000 WG42001 MULT 0.4418 0. 120511001 VOIDGJ 42001000020511002 VELGJ 42001000020511003 RHOGJ 420010000

KWU E412/91/E1002 A- 14

20511100205111012051110220511103

20511200

205112012051120220511203

WF43001 MULT 0.4418 0. 1VOIDFJ 430010000VELFJ 430010000RHOFJ 430010000

WG43001 MULT 0.4418 0. 1VOIDGJ 430010000VELGJ 430010000RHOGJ 430010000

"---- WALLIS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER -------------

20503000 DRHO SUM20503001 0.0 0.75 RHOFJ

20503002 -0.75 RHOGJ

9.81 0.0 0430010000430010000

20503100 NENN2050310120503102

20503200 ABS20503201 ABS

20503300 SORT20503301 SQRT

20503400 JF4302050340120503402

20503500 NENN2050350120503502

20503600 ABS

20503601 ABS

DIV 1.0 0.0CNTRLVAR 30RHOFJ 430010000

0

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 31

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 32

MULT 1.0

CHTRLVAR 33CNTRLVAR 11

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

DIV 1.0 0.0 0CNTRLVAR 30RHOGJ 430010000

20503700* 20503701

205038002050380120503802

SORTSQRT

J0430

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 35

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 36

MULT 1.0CNTRLVAR 37CNTRLVAR 12

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

* 5.555555 teStS. vs. we USeS. 5* OUSt *55* SSSSSSSS SSSSSSS 55

20505000 DRHD SUM20505001 0.0 0.75 RHOFJ

9.81 0.0 0420010000

KWU E412/91/E1002 A-15

20505002 -0.75 RHOGJ 420010000*

.20505100 NENN DIV 1.0 0.0 0

20505101 CNTRLVAR 5020505102 RHOFJ 420010000*

20505300 SORT STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 020505301 SORT CNTRLVAR 51*

20505400 JF420 MULT 1.0 0.0 0

20505401 CNTRLVAR 53

20505402 CNTRLVAR 9

20505500 NENN DIV 1.0 0.0 020505501 CNTRLVAR 5020505502 RHOGJ 420010000*

20505700 SORT STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 020505701 SORT CNTRLVAR 55*

20505800 JD420 MULT 1.0 0.0 0

20505801 CNTRLVAR 57

20505802 CNTRLVAR 10

S......................t.................................

20506000 DRHO SUM 9.81 0.0 020506001 0.0 0.639 RHOFJ 41500000020506002 -0.639 RHOGJ 415000000

20506100 NENN DIV 1.0 0.0 020506101 CNTRLVAR 6020506102 RHOFJ 415000000

20506300 SORT STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 0

20506301 SORT CNTRLVAR 61

20506400 JF415 MULT 1.0 0.0 020506401 CNTRLVAR 63

20506402 CNTRLVAR 7

20506500 HENN DIV 1.0 0.0 0

20506501 CNTRLVAR 60

20506502 RHOGJ 415000000*

20506700 SORT STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 0

20506701 SORT CNTRLVAR 65

20506800 J0415 MULT 1.0 0.0 0

20506801 CNTRLVAR 67

KWU E412/91/E1002 A- 16

20506802 CNTRLVAR 8

20507000 DRHO SUM 9.81 0.0 020507001 0.0 0.639 RHOFJ 40001000020507002 -0.639 RHOGJ 400010000

205071002050710120507102

2050730020507301

205074002050740120507402

205075002050750120507502

2050770020507701

205078002050780120507802

NENN

SORTSORT

JF400

NENN

SORTSORT

J0400

DIVCNTRLVARRHOFJ

STDFNCTNCNTRLVAR

MULTCNTRLVARCNTRLVAR

DIVCNTRLVARRHOGJ

1.0 0.0 070400010000

1.071

1.0731

0.0 0

0.0 0

1.0 0.0 070400010000

STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 0CNTRLVAR 75

MULT 1.0 0.0 0CNTRLVAR 77CNTRLVAR 2

5553 .... sw ss.v.wv vs.. vs. 5.5 55.5. 555 55sss a. *555 55 5555

205080002050800120508002

205081002050810120508102

2050830020508301

20508400205084012050840220508500

205085002050850120508502

DRHO SUM0.0 0.639 RHOFJ

-0.639 RHOGJ

9.81 0.0 0410010000410010000

1.0 0.0 080410010000

NENN

SORT

SORT

DIVCNTRLVARRHOFJ

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 81

0.0 0

0.0 0JF41001 MULTCNTRLVARCNTRLVAR

1.0833

NENN DIVCHTRL VARRHOGJ

1.0 0.0 080410010000

KWU E412/91/E1002 A1A -17

20508700 SORT20508701 SORT

20508800 JD410012050880120508802S

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 85

MULT 1.0CNTRLVAR 87CNTRLVAR 4

0.0 0

0.0 0

-........ SQUARE ROOTS FROM WALLIS PARAMETERS ..............

20513400 ABS20513401 ABS

20513800 ABS20513801 ABS

20515400 ABS20515401 ABS

20515800 ABS20515801 ABS

20516400 ABS20516401 ABS

20516800 ABS20516801 ABS

20517400 ABS20517401 ABS

20517800 ABS20517801 ABS

20518400 ABS

20518401 ABS

20518800 ABS20518801 ABS

20523400 SQJF43020523401 SORT

20523800 SQ_JG43020523801 SQRTS

20525400 SQJF420

20525401 SQRT

20525800 SQ_JG420

STOFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 34

STOFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 38

STDFNCTNCNTRL VAR

1.054

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 58

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 64

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 68

STOFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 74

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 78

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 84

STDFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 88

STMFNCTN 1.0CNTRLVAR 134

STOFNCTN 1.0CHTRLVAR 138

STDFNCTN 1.0

CNTRLVAR 154

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

0.0 0

STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 0

KWU E412/91/E1002 A-18

20525801 SORT CNTRLVAR 158t

20526400 SQJF415 STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 020526401 SORT CNTRLVAR 164*

20526800 SQJG415 STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 020526801 SORT CNTRLVAR 168B

20527400 SQJF400 STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 020527401 SORT CNTRLVAR 174

20527800 SQJG400 STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 020527801 SORT CNTRLVAR 178

20528400 SQJF410 STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 020528401 SORT CNTRLVAR 184

20528800 SQJG410 STDFNCTN 1.0 0.0 020528801 SQRT CNTRLVAR 188

......... COLLAPSED WATER LEVELS ................

205014002050140120501402205014032050140420501405

CL120 SUM0.0 0.5

0.50.50.50.5

1.0 0.0 1VOIDF 120010000VOIDF 120020000VOIDF 120030000VOIDF 120040000VOIDF 120050000

20501600 CL430 SUM 1.0 0.0 120501601 0.0 1.0764 VOIDF 430010000

-...... MASS INVENTORIES ..................

20501700 WATERAC SUM205017012050170220501703205017042050170520501706205017092050171120501712205017132050171420501715

0.0 0.3384410.3384410.382950.382950.382950.382950.5526920.36850.36854.222.02.0

1.0 0.0 0VOIDF 400010000VOIDF 401010000VOIDF 410010000VOIDF 410020000VOIDF 410030000VO1DF, 410040000VOIDF 420010000VOIDF 420020000VOIDF 420030000VOIDF 430010000VOIDF 600010000VOIDF 610010000

20517000 WATERAC MULT 1.0 0.0 0

KWU E412/91/E1002 A- 19

20517001 CNTRLVAR 1720517002 RHOF 4100100000

20501800 WINJ INTEGRAL 1.0 0.0 020501801 MFLOWJ 445000000

20502100 WDPRAIN INTEGRAL 1.0 0.0 020502101 CNTRLVAR 19

20502200 WOUT INTEGRAL 1.0 0.0 020502201 CNTRLVAR 200

-........ SYSTEM FOR CONTROLLED WATER DRAIN ..........

20520000 LEVLAG LAG -1.0 0.0 120520001 1. CNTRLVAR 101

............... END CONTROL VARIABLES ...........0

• EXPANDED EDIT/PLOT VARIABLES

*0800001 DT 020800002 DTCRNT 0

. END OF INPUT

4

I E412/91/E1 002 -8-1

APPENDIX B

Analysis of UPTF Test No. 11, Runs 36 - 45 (Pressure 1.5 MPa)

with RELAPS/MOD3IVSM5 (Basic Nodallsation)

Results of Calculation without CCFL Model

,.-

KWU E412/91/E1 002 B-2

w(xCL

1 64

1 60

1 56

1 52

1.48

1.44

1.40

I4 P 400010000t P 430010000

I0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 1: SYSTEM PRESSURE

aia

(U

U)U)UJwua:

600

500

400.

300.

200

100

0.

0 P40001-P42001

!0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600.

TIME()FIG. 2: DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE OVER THE HOTLG

(TO BE COMPARED WITH JECO4CP006).

1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

KWU E412/91/E1002 B-3

60.

50.

40.

30.

20

10.

0.

F* MFLOWJ 445000¢00A MRLCWJ 105000000

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920.

TIME )FIG. 3: INJECTED STEAM AND WATER MASS FLOW K) TES

2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

50.

40.

30.

20.

10.

0.

INJECTED WATER

* DWLOWJ 44SO00000ACNTRLVAR 103

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME ()FIG. 4: INJECTED WATER (MFLOWJ 445) AND WATER BACK FLOW AT HUTZE

KWU E412/91/E10020.

B-4

0u-

cIn

50.

40.

30

20.

10.

0.

* MFLOWJ 105000000a CNTRLVAR 103

3I.0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240.

TIME (s)FIG. 5: INJECTED STEAM (MFLOWJ 105) AND WATER BACK FLOW AT HUTZE

2560. 2880. 3200.

6

0

En

80.

60

40.

20.

0.

-20.

* CNTRLVS -01a CNTRLVAI 12

3I

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920.

TIME (s)FIG. 6: STEAM AND WATER MASS FLOWS THROUGH J 400-01

(CALCULATED WITH JUNCTION PROPERTIES)

2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

KWU E412/91/E1002 B- 5

80.

60.

* CNMhVAR 103a CNTALVAA 104

0,.J

40.

20

0.

-20.

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2580. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 7: STEAM AND WATER MASS FLOWS THROUGH J 410-01

(CALCULATED WITH JUNCTION PROPERTIES) -

60.

40.

STEAMt

0 cmm~vAR $0

,% CNTRVAA Ila

C,,

0-JCLc,,c,,

20.

0.

-20.

-40.-

~--

.. ... . .

7ILJ~WATER

.-60.0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 8: STEAM AND WATER MASS FLOWS THROUGH J 420-01

(CALCULATED WITH JUNCTION PROPERTIES)

KWU E412/91/E1 002 B -6

20.

16.

12.0L-

-.J

a:o1 5.U-

0-

C,)4.

0.

A .140001

!0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 9. STEAM AND WATER SUPERFICIAL VELOCITIES ATJ 400-01

20.

16

L) 12.0-J

w

uJa:.

4..

0.

* JF_41001b Jo_41O "

p 00b I

3

I0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 10: STEAM AND WATER SUPERFICIAL VELOCITIES AT J 410-01

ovft^l%.-OawA-wwrý ýo

KWU E412/91/E1002 B-7

20.

16.

12.

0 JF_42001A JG42001

B.

4.

0.

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920.

TIME (s)FIG. 11: STEAM AND WATER SUPERFICIAL VELOCITIES ATJ 420-01

2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0.

----- I

0 SORT(S.STAM_)41 001A SORTCJO-STAM_41 001

4-

r$ +

.4/

.1. J320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880.

TIME (s1FFIG. 12: WALLIS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER ATJ 410-01

3200.

ml4 Iq•O mlq•'lm'q.t .L mS

KWU E41 2/91/El 002B-B- 8

1.2

1.

0.8

0 SCT(JF.STARV6OOOI11 SCRTCJO.STAM_40001

4

I-

C3

(n

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 13: WALUS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER AT J 400-01

.8

C,,

1.2

1.

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.

* SORT(J.S~TAR)_415& SOMWJO-STAC4.4S

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240.

TIME (s)FIG. 14: WALUS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER ATJ 415-00

25W, 280. 32M.

KWU E412/91/E1002 B-9

1.2

1.

0.8

0.6

0 SOR'rCJF-STAR)...2wla SORTjOG-STAM_.42001

-4--

*1Al.

0.4

0.2

0.

~=1_______________ _______________

__________________________________________ I __________________________________________ _______ __________________________________________ __________________________________________

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880.

TIME (s)FIG. 15: WALUS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER AT J 420-01

3200.

PNLWý lomýýJm ft -

1.2

1. *SO0T(.W.STARM.43CC1SounSOAnL43OO¶

0.8 1--

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

/04

-. 4.

p -..-.-..-.--.--. I .- ~-*-*-.-I14 mi

320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 16: WALUS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER ATJ 430-01

KWU E412/91/E1002 B-10

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

* VOC DF 400010 o00a VOIDF 410010000+ VO1DF 410040000x VOI0F 420010000

z0

d

0

0.1 A h

I

W. Ii

I0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 17: VOLUMETRIC LIQUID FRACTION IN PIPING

06

0.5 * V040F d20rm4100SVOIOF 4. 10* VOIDF 4-5 Jo

z0

,.a:U-

0J

-j0

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.

I0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 18: VOLUMETRIC UQUID FRACTION IN PIPING

KWU E412191/E1002 B-11

12.

10.

a.

6.

4.

2.

II '~' 44. * .4..44...~ -4--4-4-4--.- 444

h-p p p p p * p 4-4-e- 4--4--

0

* FLOREG 4000oooCoA FLOREG 410010000* FLOREG 410030000x FLOREG 4100400

0. I. L _____________ I _____________ L _____________

0. 320. 640. 960.

FIG. 19: FLOW REGIME IN PIPING

1280. 1600.

TIME (s)

1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

Pk ý&

12.

10.

8.

6.

4.

2.

0.

K * *-*-*-*--@.*

* FLOREO 420010000a FLOREO 420020000

7

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

0. 320. 640. 960.

FIG. 20: FLOW REGIME IN PIPING

1280. 1600.

TIME (s)

19 . 2240. 256. 2880. 3200.

OMA ft ýw

KWU E412/91/E1002 B-12

* VELFJ 400010000A VELGJ 400010000

4

8.

4-JwJ 4.

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME 2s)FIG. 21 : WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 400-01

09...0ooodwoAm'J *. ...ia

16.

12.

68.

>-

L 4

0.

-4.

* VELFJ 41 -4a VELGJ 4 .00

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 22: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 410-01

KWU E412/91/E1002 B-13

* VEUFJ 410020000, VELOJ 410020000

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIME (s)FIG. 23: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 410-02

.wu fOsmablvmm"1#w. ft ý

16

12.

0 VELFJ 415000000A VELGJ 415000oDo

0.

-4.

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

TIIM5 s)FIG. 24: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 450

lql•i w•mr 4W.Of l=i, •lil•l

KWU E412/91/El 002 B -14

16.

12.

w

8.

4.

*6 ~

**~

0.

-4.

-4-4

*7~7P. 00

* VELFJ 420010000

A VELGJ 42000000

K~I1 I

i|If

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600.

TIME 2s)FIG. 25: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 420-01

1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

20

15.

10.

5.

*0 VELFJ 4W-ooa VELWU4: 10

.41 ~

-Jw>

-~

4 -- .1--

0. J ......... ..........

I ___ ___

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600.

TIME. )FIG. 26: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J1430-01

1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

=11U•'I•ODU•am qlNl• aim' 4•. =l

KWU E412/91/E1002 C-I

APPENDIX C

Analysis of UPTF Test No. 11, Runs 30-35 (Pressure 0.3 MPa)

with RELAPS/MOD3/VSM5 (Basic Nodailsation)

Results of Calculation without CCFL Model

KWU E412/91/El 002 C-2

w

(nLaJa-

0.44

0.40

0.36

0.32

0.28

0.24

0.20

0 P 400010000& P 430010000

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG. 1: SYSTEM PRESSURE

P11AP-00ý9f&-j" r

12.

8 0 P40M1.P42001

a:

wL

0

.4

.8

-12.0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250.

TIME (s)FIG. 2: DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE OVER THE HOT LEG

(TO BE COMPARED WITH JEC04CP006)

1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

KWU E412/91/E1 002 C-3

60.

50.

40.

30.

20.

10.

O.

1 MFLOCWJ 445000000t. MFLOWJ 105000000

0

- 4--e--*. ~ * * 0 -0-0-0--.

WATER

•-4--°-. - )-e- -- - - -4-.

4-- &--&- A a- &ýA- -4- --- TEAMINJECTES,TEAM

Iu iL L ______________ J ______________

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1

TIMEI 3):EsPIG. 3: INJECTED STEAM AND WATER MASS FLOWRTE

500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

50.

40.

30.

20.

10.

0.

4--. 4--* * -. .e~.4.....4. *& -6- .6..6- ...-

INJECTED WATER

0 -- . 4 . -... .. • +41 -'.*'.'-.' 4 1

WATER BACK FLOW

................ _-6 -4 .. . .- . !. . . _. 00 , _,

40 MFLOWJ 445000000A• CNT'RLVAA 103

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000.

TIME (s)FIG. 4: INJECTED WATER (MFLOWJ 445) AND WATER BACK FLOW AT HUTZE

2250. 2500.

llll•.Ipl• lll•qlllAll•+qlm'PJq.,O'P lql. l•ml

KWU E412/91/E1002 C -4

50.

40.

0-JU..C,,

30.

20.

10.

0.

F ~* , I °I -- • -z .

--- -- --- -

INJECTED STEAM

WATER BACK FLOW

.... ____ I ___

* MFLOWJ l0SOV000DOti CNTRLVARt 103

................. - - - - - - - - - -

!0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750.

TIME (s)FIG. 5: INJECTED STEAM (MFLOWJ 105) AND WATER BACK FLOW AT HU'TZE

2000. 2250. 2500.

U..U,U,)

80.

60.

40.

20.

0.

-20.

* CNrTRLVAS 1016 CWTRLVAF '2

!0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500.

TIME (s)FIG. 6: STEAM AND WATER MASS FLOWS THROUGH J 400-01

(CALCULATED WITH JUNCTION PROPERTIES)

1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

a

KWU E412/91/E1 002 C-5

80.

60.

40.

o 20.-JIA-

0

-20.

.40.

* CNTRLVAR 103A CNTRLVA, 104

0P. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG. 7: STEAM AND WATER MASS FLOWS THROUGH J 410-01

(CALCULATED WITH.JUNCTION PROPERTIES)

160.

120.

80.

08~~~~. APA0*.0..% t'

* CNTRLVAR I"AC'NimLVA 110

-40.

-80.0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG. 8: STEAM AND WATER MASS FLOWS THROUGH J 420-01

(CALCULATED WITH JUNCTION PROPERTIES)

KWU E412/§1/El002 C-6

0-Jui

u-C,_

LU

cnw•

50.

40.

30.

20.

10.

0.

0 JF_40001A JG_40001

!0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500.

TIME (s)FIG. 9: STEAM AND WATER SUPERFICIAL VELOCITIESATJ 400-01

1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

100.

0 JF041001A J_41001

L)0Iu1

-J

U-cc0j

C/)

80

60

40

20

0

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500.

TIME (s)FIG. 10: STEAM AND WATER SUPERFICIAL VELOCITIES ATJ 410-01

1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

KWU E412/91/EI 002 C-7

100.

80.

C) 60.0-J

-3 40.Er~Lu,

U)20.

0.

* JF 42001& JO_42001

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG. 11: STEAM AND WATER SUPERFICIAL VELOCITIES AT J 420-01

IB tI~J=O~N~m •r Po g•

1.2

1.

08

0 SORT(JF.STAR1.41001A SORTVG-STARI' loot

0.4

0.2

0.0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG. 12: WALLIS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER AT J 410-01

N L~invr~DT 91. i~j

KWU E412/91/E1 002 C-8

a-

co03

1.2

1.

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.

* SORT9.JF-TAA_4=l0a soRT(O-STAF_=

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250.

TIME (s)FIG. 13: WALLIS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER AT J 400-01

2500.

n-

I--O1

I,-0-00

1.2

1

08

06

04

0.2

0.

*0 SOAT(3.! lisa SORT(JO-S 415

i0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000.

G iME (s)FIG. 14: WALL.IS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER AT J 415-00

2250. 2500.

KWU E412/91/E1002 C-9

1.2

1.

08

0.6

04

0.2

0.

0 S0RTjJF.STAR)_Q001* d SORT(JO.STAPRIA2001

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME(s)FIG. 15: WALUS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER AT J 420-01

MIm ~ W~*

1.2

08

06

04

0.2

o.

a...'

II

0 SORTOJF-STAM_~43001A~ SORTU-STAMooi0

Ir

ftC71

y

J -- -- -- ] I I1- -- io IIE

L!-- L ~...LJJ.JJL.~.LJ.JAWjJL

0,0. 250. 500. 750: 1000. 1250. 1500.

TIME (s)FIG, 16: WALUS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER ATJ 430-01

1750. 200 . 2250. 2500.

omLMp" i 77ou rw1m mU I""

KWU E412/91/E1 002 C-10

z

Ll~

j

-J

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

01

4

* VOICIF 4000100D0VOICf 410010000

+ VOIC.F 410020000x VOIC• 410030000

U.0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG. 17: VOLUMETRIC UQUID FRACTION IN PIPING

z

-J0

06

0.5

04

0.3

0.2

01

0.

* VOIciF 42001M00A V010f 42F I# V04DF 434 .1

0. 0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. • 2500.TIME (s)

FIG. 18: VOLUMETRIC UQUID FRACTION IN PIPING

0L*OmY mw^fllo.

KWU E412/91/E1002 C-ll

12.

10.

8.

6.

-- A -4 --- 4--4---4-v *-4 4 -0- - 4- -4--i , 4-4---4---4---4--4--. $ 1 - T - - -- -

uzii. 4-4--4-4-. 4 4 4

* FLOREG 400010000A FLOREG 41001 0000+ FLOREG 410020000x FLOREG 410030000

2.

0.0. 0. 250. 500. 750.

FIG. 19: FLOW REGIME IN PIPING

1000. 1250.

TIME (a)

1500. . 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

12. " 4 .Y. ~ I * r - V - -

10.

6.

4.

2.

* FLOREO 420010000A FLOAEO 420020000

Ii *0~~L -6-*-4--.- 4-- '--4--A-

S- 4 - A. A o4 a,.-& A-A--.- & & A - 6- A - a I

AfU...

0. 250. 500. 750.

FIG. 20: FLOW REGIME IN PIPING

1000. 1250.

TIME (a)

1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

00APWW0V4~AWY.5 fLt. •m

KWU E412/91/E1 002 C-12

100.

80.

7ý 60.

00w 40.

20.

0.

0 VELFJ 40MID000a VELQ 4M00DO00

!I0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG. 21: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 400-01

-. -- - T -. -- -

100.

*0 VELFJ 41 **0a VELGJ -t 00

7ý 60

uj 40

20.

0.

II0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG. 22: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 410-01

KWU E412/91/E1 002 C-13

100,

80.

60.

40.

20.

0.

* VELFJ 410020000a VELCW 410020000

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250.

TIME (s)FIG. 23: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 41•0-0

1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

foulmV PC .a

0--Jw

100

80.

60.

40,

20.

0.

16 VELFJ 41500D000a VEL.J 415000000

0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250.

TIMEE(s)FIG. 24: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 415-0

1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

- ~Amft ~

KWU E412/91/El 002 C- 14

100.

80.

60.

-JwL 40.

20.

0.

0 VELFJ 420010000A VELGJ 420010000

I

II0. 250. 500. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. " 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

TIME (s)FIG- 25: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT J 420-01

100.

80.

S60

50wJ 40

20

0.

0 VELFJ 430010000A VELGJ 43' '00

!

Ii

0. 250. 50o. 750. 1000. 1250. 1500. 1750. 2000. 2250. 2500.

FIG. 26: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES ATJ 43ME1)

b.

KWU E412/91/E1002 D-1

APPENDIX D

Analysis of UPTF Test No. 11, Runs 36 - 45 (Pressure 1.5 MPa) with

RELAP5/MOD3N5M5 (Basic Nodalisation). Results of Calhlulation Using it CCFL

Model of the Wallis Type with m = 0.8 and C = 0.644

KWU E412/91/E1 002 D-2

T(.

w 1.52

W

Q- 1.48

1.44-

1.4o0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600.

TIME (s)

FIG. 1: SYSTEM PRESSURE

1000.

80u.

~.600.thI

U')

" 400.

200.-

0. 6

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600.TIME (s)

FIG. 2: DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURE OVER THE HOT A

(TO BE COMPARED WITH JEC04CP006)

1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

KWU E412/91/E1 002 D -3

50. * INJECTEID WAT'ER.

A INECTED STEM+ WATER BACX FLOW

40.

LU 30.

00.

---

0.

o. --------- ---- . -----------.-.-------.--------...... ý.-•

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 200.

TIME (s)FIG. 3: INJECTED STEAM AND INJECTED WATER MASS FLOW RATES,

WATER BACK FLOW AT THE HUTZE

1.1

0.9

z0

o 0.8U-

0

> 0.7

S%0100 40010000A vl0O0 410010=00.6+ V=IO 41002000

X VOO 4100000000 VODO 4100400

0.5, 320. 640. .60. 1280. 1600. l0. 2240. 250.. 3200.

FIG. 4: VOID FRACTION IN PIPINGTIME (s)

KWU E412/91/E1002 D-4

1.1

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

. ............... ........................................................... I ..........

z0

0

0.6- r__ý -r"x

volooVOIDOV04DO%,DDG

I

oo 410040000V~O 420010000v~o420020000

W.-

0. 320. 640. 960.

FIG. 5: VOID FRACTION IN PIPING

-~ A

1280. 1600.

TIME (s)

1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 3200.

1.1

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

z0C-,

0

-------------------- --------- I -----------------------------------

0.60 V01GJ 410010000A VOODGJ 420~0==

U.: L L

0. 320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920.

FTIMEG(SRIG. 6: VOID FRACTION AT VARIOUS HOT LEG JUNCTIONS

2240. 2560. 2680. 3200.

L)

ILcc

KWU E412/91/E1 002

20.

0

16.

12.

4. -

0.

D-5

320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240.TIME (a)

FIG. 7: STEAM AND WATER SUPERFICIAL VELOCITrES AT JUNCTION 410-01

32)0.

I-

0(n,

1.2

1.0 *SQWPGF4TAFO.ý4¶10

0.8

0.6

Vo4,v. %PO. 7u0. 1;itlU. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2;60. 2880. 32C0.

TIME (s)FIG. 8: WALLIS PARAMETERS FOR STEAM AND WATER ATJUNCTION 410-01

KWU E412/91/E1002

16.

12.

8.E

0-jwj 4.

. .-------------

D-6

320. 640. 960. 1280. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880.

T1ME (s4FIG. 9: WATER AND STEAM VELOCATES AT JUNGTION 410-01

16.

12.

4.

0.

-4.

I -

11 vwl Q*==cVE= 4NOM=

0.0

0. 320. 640. 960. 1250. 1600. 1920. 2240. 2560. 2880. 32O0.

TIME (s)FIG.I0: WATER AND STEAM VELOCITES AT JUNCTION 420-02

NRC FORM 335 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1. REPORT NUMBER|AJ•Wd by NRC. Add Vol.. Suo•o Rf..NRCM 11029 M& Adoeudm Numwn. If 6my.)

0I. 3202 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET NUREG/IA-O116IS" i-KrutctiOsohJ E412/91/E1002

2. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Assessment of RELAP5/MOD3/V5m5 Against the UP'W Test No. 11 3. DATE REPOR" PUBLISHED

(Countercurrent Flow in PWR Hot Leg) MONTH ,EiAMay 1993

4. FIN OR GRANT NU1BER

L2245S. AUTHOR IS) 6. TYPE OF REPORT

F. Curca-Tivig Technical Report7. PERIOD COVERED Ii.aCaw Doml

&. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION - NAME AND ADDRESS 0' NRCV Mivi Od.wi~iA. 0he19ea',AO.V,. U.1 NAW0 R`Pd.wV C6-ws.&..a. m, wv•. .

Siemens AG-KWU GroupD 8520 ErlangenFederal Republic of Germany

0. POSOIN ORANZAIO - AM AD DDRSShiNR. t~e~S.Y m o~ Ic.r~ure. awde RCD~~e~n.Df~c e R.oa U± ~c~ Rp~tav Ca.uion0. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION - NAME AND ADDRESS llI NRC. typ •• r *vsabw iC~araccW, Vrn•,drN01C iki. At fic0okeflaft. U.1 veo•~vCm••

Office of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, DC 20555

10. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

11. ABSTRACT o a i9 or vA

Analysis of the UPTF Test No. 11 using the "best-estimate" computer code RELAP5 MOD3/Version 5m5 ispresented.

Test No.11 was a quasi-steady state, separate effect test designed to investigate the conditions for countercurrentflow of steam and saturated water in the hot leg of a PWR1

An unphysical result was received using a CCFL correlation of the Wallis type with ihe intercept C = 0.6•4 and theslope m = 0.8. The unphysical prediction is an indication of possible programming exmrs in the CCFL m Ddel of theRELAP5/MOD3/V5m5 computer code.

12. KEY WORDSIDESCRIPTORS (L ist woo aor johmmsU, whi ruirw',w hi Ica" 11- mp re .I 13. AVAILAIILITY STATEMENT

ICAP Report Unlim'itedRELAP5/MOD3/V5m5 ,, SCURITY CLASSIFICATION

UPTF Test 11 I, l,,Uncla&:sified

I rk RFlow

Uncla,:sifiedIS. NUMBER OF PAGES

15. PRICE

I-NRC FORM 335 10411

I

I

Federal Recycling Program