NOC-AE-14003190

Attachment 1

Strainer Test Plan in Support of STP Pilot Risk-Informed GSI-191Pilot Licensing Application Executive Summary

South Texas Project Risk-Informed GSI-1 91 Evaluation

Strainer Test Plan in Support of STP Pilot Risk-InformedGSI- 191 Pilot Licensing Application

Executive Summary

Document: ALION-REP-STP-8998-13

Revision: 0

Date: October 28, 2014

Prepared by:

Bruce C. Letellier, Alion Science and Technology

Daniel LaBrier, University of New Mexico

Ernie Kee, South Texas Project

Reviewed by:

Wes Schultz, South Texas Project

Approved by:

Steve Blossom, South Texas Project

pA L I 0 N TECHNICAL DOCUMENT COVER PAGEWCIEHCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Document No: ALION-REP-STP-8998- 13 I Revision: 0 1 Page I of 8

Document Title: Strainer Test Plan in Support of STP Pilot Risk-Informed GSI- 191 Pilot Licensing Application: ExecutiveSummary

Project No: STP-8998

Project Name: STP Risk Informed GSI- 191 Support

Client: STP Nuclear Operating Company

Document Purpose/Summary:

In support of Risk-Informed-Resolution (RIR) arguments developed for closure of Generic Safety Issue-191 (GSI- 19 I),South Texas Project (STP) is constructing a horizontal flume facility to conduct a limited-scope investigation of strainerperformance at the University of New Mexico (UNM) Thermal Hydraulics Laboratory. Below is an executive summaryof the Flume Integral Effects and Separate effects Testing and Analysis (FIESTA) facility.

This document is not considered safety related. However, it has been prepared, reviewed, and approved. Review wascompleted by the client.

Design Verification Method:

X Design Review

Alternative Calculation

_ Qualification Testing

Professional Engineer (if required) Approval: NA Date: NA

Prepared By: Bruce Letellier 7 C. 4 10/29/2014

Printed/Typed Name Signature Date

Ernie Kee - STPNOC 4 10/29/2014Reviewed By: -.

Printed/Typed Name Signature Date

Megan A Stachowiak _ IO/• I aoi qApproved By: 4 6 C/o[-1a

Printed/Typed Name Signature Date

Form 3.3.1Revision 2Effective Date: 2/28/07

A L IONSCIENCE AND TEC4H~OLOGY

REVISION HISTORY LOG

Page 2 of 8

Document Number: ALION-REP-STP-8998-13 Revision: 0

Document Title: Strainer Test Plan in SUDDort of STP Pilot Risk-Informed GSI- 191 PilotLicensing Application: Executive Summary

REVISION DATE Description

0 See Cover Page Initial Release

Form 6.1.3Revision 3Effective Date: 9/12/14

aStrainer Test Plan in Support of STP Pilot Risk-Informed GSI- 191 Pilot Licensing Application

A L I 0 N Document No: ALION-REP-STP-8998-13 Rev: 0 Page 3 of 8SCIENCE AIJO TECHNOLOGY

Table of ContentsI Objectives of Strainer Module Testing for South Texas Project ............................................................... 4

2 Test Description .......................................................................................................................................................... 5

3 FIESTA Facility .............................................................................................................................................................. 6

4 R eferences ..................................................................................................................................................................... 8

QStrainer Test Plan in Support of STP Pilot Risk-Informed GSI- 191 Pilot Licensing Application

A L I 0 N Document No: ALION-REP-STP-8998-13 Rev: 0 Page 4 of 8SCIENCE ANO TECENOLOGY

I

I Objectives of Strainer Module Testing for South Texas Project

In support of Risk-Informed-Resolution (RIR) arguments developed for closure of Generic SafetyIssue-191 (GSI-191), South Texas Project (STP) is constructing a horizontal flume facility toconduct a limited-scope investigation of strainer performance at the University of New Mexico(UNM) Thermal Hydraulics Laboratory. The Flume Integral Effects and Separate effects Testingand Analysis (FIESTA) facility is described below.

Test conditions will emphasize total transport of specified debris (including fiber, particulates andchemical products) to a full-scale strainer module with corresponding time-dependentmeasurement of flow velocity, head loss, water temperature and volume, chemical concentration,and debris mass. These tests are intended to emulate the procedures and strainer configurationused for deterministic STP strainer performance testing [I] while expanding the data baseavailable for calibration and validation of both the L-star (L*) additive, chemical head-lossresponse envelope [2] and the VISTA head-loss correlation applied to a functional strainermodule [3].

The planned flume tests will generate data in prototypical performance ranges for the STP ECCSstrainer and help quantify the margin of uncertainty between actual behavior and semi-analyticapproximations of head loss induced by chemical and non-chemical debris. Specific test objectivesinclude:

I) Collecting strainer performance data across the full range of known head-loss challengesincluding thin-bed conditions with high particulate/chemical loads and design-basisconditions with maximum fiber and maximum particulate/chemical loads;

2) Maximizing the amount of information collected during the formation of each bed becauseintermediate loads represent unique accident conditions in the spectrum of possible Lossof Coolant Accidents (LOCAs);

3) Emphasizing thin-bed conditions that are most likely to occur and most likely to influencerisk quantification if adverse responses exceed thresholds of concern;

4) Increasing data resolution in regions of low chemical loading (mass per unit area) whereexisting measurements are sparse;

5) Complementing existing strainer performance tests by filling data gaps rather thangenerating replicate information;

6) Employing familiar test procedures for debris preparation and transport, and familiarchemical product surrogates.

2 Test Description

Traditional strainer performance testing emphasizes debris combinations that are known to causelarge head-losses including: (A) thin, uniform fiber beds with high particulate and high chemicalloads; and (B) thick, uniform fiber beds with high particulate and high chemical loads. For STP,Condition A represents Medium Break LOCAs (MBLOCA) with high debris transport factors,and small-to-medium-sized Large Break LOCAs (LBLOCA) with lower debris transport factors.Condition B represents a design basis accident (DBA) with LBLOCA debris inventory and hightransport factors. Previous strainer module testing emphasized Condition B [2], so the DBAstrainer response is better understood for LBLOCAs than the more likely cases represented byCondition A.

Debris combinations selected for these flume tests emphasize most likely conditions (risk-dominant) while recognizing uncertainties in the chosen conditions. Prior strainer module testsperformed at Alden Research Laboratory (ARL) emphasized extreme debris loads [I]. So incombination with an understanding of how infrequently extreme conditions occur, ARL data canhelp quantify uncertainties with respect to results obtained from current FIESTA studies. TheFIESTA test plan includes an option to replicate a DBA loading condition if existing data arejudged to be insufficient.

Table I provides generic descriptions and a brief rationale for each of the planned tests. Allmaterial quantities will be scaled from the plant conditions to the test-module surface area.Clean-strainer data will form an aggregate basis for correlating clean-strainer head-loss as afunction of temperature and velocity when stock chemical solutions are present. During a typicaltest, nonchemical debris will be introduced first in a series of small batches of constant particle-to-fiber ratio until maximum specified debris loads are achieved. Surrogate chemical precipitatewill then be added to the pre-established debris bed. Chemical products will also be introducedin small batches to improve data resolution in the low-concentration range and near chemicalloads of special interest. Total chemical inventory added to each test will be calculated usingWCAP- 16530 corrosion rates.

Table 1. High-level test description

Test Series Non-Chemical Conditions Chemical ConditionsFTA-000 Facility Shakedown: Surrogate preparation and introduction procedures

- Temperature/flow control- Debris intro/transport procedures- Cleaning and transport calibration- Diagnostic function and acquisition

0 I O: Clean strainer, no solid debris Pure water with no chemicals120: Clean strainer, no solid debris Baseline chemicals130: Clean strainer, no solid debris Baseline chemicals + WCAP surrogate [4]140: Batch additions of solid debris Optional continuation of FTA- 130I / 16th -in. total equivalent fiber, all failed WCAP surrogate with initial loading rates informed

FTA-200 unqualified coatings + SBLOCA damaged by UNM corrosion data.qualified coatings + latent debris Addition up to reduced 30-day inventory.

Addition up to full WCAP 30-day inventory.

o Strainer Test Plan in Support of STP Pilot Risk-Informed GSI- 191 Pilot Licensing Application

A L I 0 N Document No: ALION-REP-STP-8998-13 Rev: 0 Page 6 of 8MCIINCE AND TtCHUOLOGI

Test Series Non-Chemical Conditions Chemical Conditions1/4t -in. total equivalent fiber, failed WCAP surrogate with initial loading rates informed

FTA-300 unqualified coatings + MBLOCA by UNM corrosion data.damaged qualified coatings + latent Addition up to reduced 30-day inventory.debris Addition up to WCAP 30-day inventory.DBA condition to confirm ARL data WCAP surrogate with initial loading rates informed

FTA-400 using new maximum loadings by UNM corrosion data.OR, replicate one FTA test for variability Addition up to reduced 30-day inventory.

I OR, improve thin-bed characterization Addition up to WCAP 30-day inventory.Notes: a. Clean-strainer tests may be performed in a single continuous run during shakedown. b. Option FTA-140would add solid debris at the end of FTA- 130 (reverse-order loading)

3 FIESTA Facility

The FIESTA experimental facility is designed to simulate fiber transport during the recirculationphase. Test procedures will emphasize total transport with no credit for settling. The FIESTAfacility will house the STP prototypical strainer module at one end of the flume and will beinstrumented to collect time-dependent pressure-drop data. The FIESTA facility (Figure I) will bea closed-loop insulated flume that is 32 ft (L) X 4 ft (W) X 6 ft (H) and will be capable ofachieving temperatures as high as 85 C, with an expected operating temperature near 55 C.

aIN

Figure I. Notional schematic of the UNM Flume Integral Effects and SeparateAnalysis (FIESTA) Facility

Effects Testing and

Elevated solution temperatures can be achieved by use of an inline heat exchanger system.Additional small-scale heat exchangers will be installed to allow the facility to vary thetemperature of the solution during a test (e.g. a temperature sweep). A customizedpolycarbonate channel will be installed interior to the open channel of the flume to developappropriate flow conditions and encourage debris transport, similar to previous tests performedat Alden Research Laboratory [I]. Incorporation of a STP strainer module (Figure 2) allows for

4 Strainer Test Plan in Support of STP Pilot Risk-Informed GSI- 191 Pilot Licensing Application

A L I 0 N Document No: ALION-REP-STP-8998-13 Rev: 0 Page 7 of 8$ AWO ADTtC

OLOGY

characterization of prototypical head loss under a variety of specified debris loads andvelocity/temperature test conditions. Plant operating velocities will be established by controllingtotal volumetric flow across the strainer face area.

Figure 2. Series of Strainer Modules (left) and Single Strainer Module (right) for STP

Solid debris and chemical surrogates will be introduced at the far left side of Figure I via anisolation tank or baffle that can feed into the primary channel flow. A chemical batch addition planwill be constructed with an actual time history and a total loading goal in mind, withconsideration given to condensing the timeline with a faster rate (or more batches) as needed.Sweep tests (gradual variation of fluid velocity and temperature) will be performed to collect dataover a wider range of operating conditions for a given debris load. Bed integrity will be assuredduring sweeps by defining trends that further compress the bed with respect to nominal testconditions. Table 2 lists the primary diagnostics that are needed to conduct FIESTA flume testsand describes their purpose and sampling frequency.

Table 2. Primary Supporting Diagnostics and Data Collection

Diagnostic Purpose Flume Sampling Frequency ModeVolumetric flow rate Face velocity on the test 0. 1 to 0.02 Hz (every 10 to 50s) Online

moduleDifferential Pressure Hydraulic loss through the matched with flow samples OnlineArray debris bed. Clean strainer

response along the module.Static pool pressure Fluid density in combination matched with flow samples Online

with levelLiquid Temperature Fluid properties, pH correction matched with flow samples OnlineRoom Temperature Differential pressure matched with flow samples Online

correctionLiquid Level Fluid density, chemical conc, 4 times per hour or as specified Online or

water make up. in test plan Spot ReadTotal pipe volume Chemical conc. NA Once

Diagnostic Purpose Flume Sampling Frequency Mode.pH Chemical debris preparation Once per 4 hours after first Bench Reading

and flume test conditions chemical add or as specified intest plan

Viscosity Fluid properties Once per 4 hours after first Bench Reading(option) chemical add, or as specified in

test planICP Flume concentration for mass Once per 4 hours after first Grab Sample

balance chemical add, or as specified intest plan

Particle sizing Characterize surrogate NA As neededchemical product

Light table Verify debris preparation NA Each debrisbatch

Prior to each test, the FIESTA facility must be cleaned, filled and prepared with stock chemicalfluid, and heated to a specified temperature. Procedures will be developed for (a) cleaning theflume system, and (b) preparing the stock chemical environment. The documented WCAPpreparation procedure will be followed in tests where the WCAP chemical surrogate is used [4].All surrogate chemicals will be formulated external to the flume, verified for acceptability, andthen introduced according to a detailed procedure that will be defined for each test.

4 References

I) South Texas Project Test Report for ECCS Strainer Testing, AREVA NP Document #66-9088089-000. August 2008.

2) Leavitt, J.J. and Kee, E., "Quantification of Chemical Head Loss Epistemic Uncertainty;Basis for Incremental Chemical Head Loss Correlation," ALION-REP-STP-8998-08 Rev. I,July 2014.

3) Letellier, B.C., Macali, M.E., Kee, E.J., "Viscous Inertial Shear-Transition-Adaptive (VISTA)Porous Media Head-Loss Formulation for Assessment of South Texas Project LicensingAmendment Request," ALION-REPSTP-8998- I I, Rev. 0. July 2014.

4) WCAP- I 6530-NP-A, "Evaluation of Post-Accident Chemical Effects in Containment SumpFluids to Support GSI- 19 1." March 2008.