. gtIS!'"I'Ir~bO-'38~QgtIcf 0 780'>I5og >ZRt~mam GREBES

—as translated I'r'to ..E. t3 .G. L.I. S.K.......

RESULTS OF THE ttGi~l-t'mCLEAR HOT TEST1'fITH THE RELIEF

SYSTEtl Ii'l THE PHILIPPSBUR6 t'UCLL

PROPRIETARY INFORMATION

This document has been made NON-PROPRIETARY by thedeletion of that information which was classified asPROPRIETARY by KRAFTWERK UNION AG (KWU).

The PROPRIETARY information deletions are so notedthroughout the report where indicated by

a) Use of the term KRAFTWERK UNION AG PROPRIETARYINFORMATION,.

')

Use of blocked out areas by cross hatch bandsin the report text and figures/tables, e.g.

i) ...." with a mass flow density ofQ~~1Kg/m2s...";

iii)iv)

M~ mm

should be kept below Metm."

8/l7/78

Horking ReportTopic:

Results of the non-nuclear hottest with the relief system inthe Philippsburg nuclear power plant

Reference (e.g., project, RaD project):

Suppression chamber, relief system,test results

R 142 - 38/77Number (department/no./year)

Offenbach, 22 March )977Place, date

Gobel R 142 3245Author Department Tel.

II /s/ FrenkelClass Signature/classifierFile no.

Summary

This report represents a summary of the loads measured with the

relief system during the non-nuclear hot test in KKP.

The information relates to:- the measured pressures and pressure distributions in the sup-

pression chamber during vent clearing and condensation;- the loads on the relief system itself, insofar as they are solely

of a thermal«hydraulic nature.

The measurement values are transposed to the most unfavorable

boundary conditions in the plant and are compared with the speci-

fication values. The specification values aie not exceeded in any

case. There are adequate reserves relative to the specification

values. Accordingly, the expert condition of GB 2.6.3-7 of the

expert opinion for the pressure relief system /9/ is satisfied.

/s/ (ille ible)Countersignature

/s/ Gobe 1Aut or s signature

DistributionRF 13 3xR 1R 14R 142 3x

list:R 314R 321R 322R 52

Table of Contents Pacae

l. Introduction

2. Scope of the tests

3. Pressure load on the suppression chamber

3.1 Vent clearing

3.2 Condensation

4. Loads on the relief system4.1 Vent clearing pressure4.2 Steady-state pressure

4.3 Vertical force on the blowdown pipe

12

12

4.4 Forces on the struts of the protective tube 13

Re ferences 15

l. Introduction

Extensive development tests with the perforated-pipe quencher wereperformed in the Mannheim Central Power Plant and in the model teststand. The test results are documented in /1,2/.

The relief system with perforated-pipe quencher was tested underactual conditions and in the actual geometry as part of a non-nuclear hot test in the Brunsbuttel nuclear power plant in October1974.

The test results of those tests are documented in /3,4/.

The result of the KKB hot test displayed an adequate marginbetween the measurement results and the specified limits.

Furthermore, tests with the relief system were performed duringthe KKB n uclear start™up. The measurement results are docu-

mented in /5,6,7/.

Zn additxon, tests were performed with the relief system duringthe non-nuclear hot test in the Philippsburg nuclear power plant.Those tests were based on the actual geometry of the relief system

-.. 4'hey were erfop rmed under plant-relevant or conservative operatingconditions in S eptember 1976. The measurement results confirm themeasurements of the KKB non-nuclear hot test and the KKB nuclearcommissioning.

cation values. The+~~3 bar, compared

bar.

maximum measured pressure at the bottom was

to a maximum specification value of Q~

The result" disisplay an adequate margin relative to the specifi-

2. Sco e of the tests

Vent clearing and condensation tests w'th th 1'e re ief system wereperformed during the non-nuclear hot test, in September 1976 inthe Philippsburg nuclear power plant. The relief pilot valveswere actuated in the relief and safety function.

In order to cover "single failures" th 1'e re ie valves were alsoopened with simultaneous actuation of two pilot valves.

To measure the ressp ure profile during clearing of severalquenchers, clearin testsg were performed with adjacent perforated-

pipe quenchers (E, F, G)'.

A total of about 70 clear'ng and condensation tests were performed.0

The operating range in which the relief system was tested isillustrated in Fi uin Figure 01. The operating range tepted in KKB isillustrated in Figure 02.

The tests performed and their boundary conditions are shown inTables 1-7.

The actuated relief valves and the associated perforated-pipequenchers and all the instrumentation are shown in Fi'gures 1-13.

From the tests in KKP it was able to be demonstrated- that the me asurement results of the non-nuclear hot test and

the XKB nuclear start-up test are reproducible;- any further test s eries with the relief system would provide no

18- 4

new information concerning the loads on the containment and

relief system;— the load reductions determined for the containment load in

KKB are equally valid for KKP;— the clearing tests with three adjacent perforated-pipe quenchers

resulted in no significant, increases of the bottom and wallpressures;

- the condensation proceeded calmly.

3. Pressure load on the su ression chamber

3.1 Vent clearina

In the vent clearing tests, the main interest lies on the pressureoscillations that are produced by the expulsion of air from the

t

relief system into the pool of the suppression chamber.

The effect on the pressure oscillations caused by the variationof parameters such as reactor pressure, valve opening time, water

pool temperature and condition in the blowdown pipe was examined

thoroughly during the KKB non-nuclear hot test.

Accordingly, a repetition of these parameter variations was nolonger necessary for the KKP non-nuclear hot test. All thatremained was the parameter variations caused by the trial operation:reactor pressure, valve opening time, condition in the blowdown

H

pipe ~

The variation of the valve opening time was caused by the .different

18 5

opening characteristics of the relief valves and al o by the actua-I

tion of one or two pilot valves.

The condition in the blowdown pipe was varied in such a way that

the initial conditions in the blowdown pipe with respect to thewater level in the pipe were left as they were set instantane-ously (real conditions) or a pressure equalization was brought

about by opening the snifting valves so that the water levels in

the pipe and in the suppression chamber were the same (clean con-

ditions). Xn the tests with real conditions, the water level in

the blowdown pipe was determined by a pressure-difference

measurement.

As in KKB, no .dependence of the pressure oscillations on the

above»mentioned parameters was found in KKP. A dependence of the

pressure oscillations on the clearing pressure was found, as in KKB.

Figure 14 shows the measured maximum pressure amplitudes in com-

parison to the limits of the scatter band that was measured in

the KEB non-nuclear hot test. We note that the pressure amplitudes

measured in KKP fit well into the KKB scatter band. The measure-m'ent values from test 19Z are somewhat above the KKB scatter band

boundary. Considering the boundary conditions prevailing for that

test (e.g., clearing pressure i~ bar, which was not nearly reached1

in KKB), the difference is within the statistical error of the test

Figure 15 shows the slight rise of the pressure oscillations with

clearing pressure for "clean conditions", as measured previously

18-6

in KKB. For comparison, the test results with "real conditions"t

are also entered in this Figure. No dependence of these bottompressures on, the clearing pressure is recognizable.

I

When the relief valves were opened sequentially at intervals of5 or 10 seconds, the following pressures were measured at the bot-

, tom in time order:bar. Thus, the interval test shows a behavior similar to thatobserved for such boundary conditions in the multiple intervaltests in KEB. A slight load increase must be anticipated in thesecond and subsequent clearing processes /3/. This is probablyattributable to the larger amount of air expelled, due to thequencher being only just filled with water.

Figure 16 shows the variation of the bottom pressure (DA 10) for"real conditions". Figure 17 shows the same pressure variationfor "clean conditions". It is clearly evident from the twoFigures that after five oscillations the bottom pressure has fal-len below i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q. Accordingto the expert condition GB2.6.3-9 from /9/, the bottom pressureofQ~gbar is to be used as a basis for the fatigue analysis asa mean expected load. From the KKp hot test it can be confirmedthat this is a very conservative hypothesis.

The decay of the clearing oscillations can also be seen at theprotective tube. This is demonstrated by DMS 5/6 in Figure 17.The KKP containment is designed to be durable for a pressure load

18-7

of 4~~~~~~~ bar for loads from the pressure relief system(see /12/).

Figure 18 shows a comparison of the ratio of positive to negativepressure amplitudes based on KKB measurements and theory.

The theory is based on the formula

hp ~ pneg hp + p o KK ETTpos 0

pKK= pressure in the air space of the suppression chamber

BRETT= hydrostatic pressure corresponding to the submergence

(ETT) of the blowdown pipe.

This formula was presented at the 1974 Reactor Convention in thelecture entitled "Depressurization of a boiling water reactor withperforated-pipe quencher; Part 1: Air oscillations during ventclearing". The formula is also the basis of the pressure ampli-tude assignment in the expert opinion for the KK8 pressure reliefsystem /8/.

A theory describes the primary trend of a process which proceedsunder the conditions specified in the theory.

Zn practice, those conditions are falsified by perturbing factors.Therefore, this formula is confirmed in practice only for thoseevents which are large enough to enable possible perturbing factors

to be neglected. Zn the non-nuclear hot test, the pressure ampli-tudes 'were Q~Q bar. Zn that range, the measurement values werescattered about the theoretical curve in KKB also. Only forpressure amplitudes greater than Kg did the theoretical curve

18-8

indicate the trend unambiguously. In principle, therefore, thetheoretical relation

hpneg hp +pos po

is valid for KKP also.

The negative pressure am 1,p itude measured under extreme conditions

(opening with two ilot vap'lves under clean conditions with a valveopening time of 250 ms) was 4~@ bar a d thar an t us was sufficientlyfar from the design value of g~Q bar.

As shown in Fi ures 14g and 15, the KKP measurement values fit inwell with the KKB measurement values.

As shown in Fi ure 15 t'g, the pressure amplitude remains g~g bar*even at the s pecified clearing pressure of@'g bar. Therefore,the pressure amplitudes in Table 8 from /9/, which were specifiedon the basis of KKB mea surements, can be considered as verified.

Figure 19 shows ththe czrcumferential distribution of the bottompressures. The measuredd circumferential distribution for test 19Kis illustrated in the u er artupper part of the Figure. Test 19'as usedon the basis of the evaluation of the KEB tests, where 'bottom pres-sures i~~~ bar werere selected for the circumferential distribution,since it turned out to be. the only KKP test having a comparablyhigh bottom-pressure of '~~~~g~~ bar. In turn, the selection of thepressure ma nitudeg ' is based on the fact that perturbing influences

18- 9

can be minimized only for relatively powerful events. Thus, what

was already said concerning the'ratio of positive to negative

pressure amplitudes applies here also.

The 1/R law in the circumferential direction was able to be con-

firmed with the KKB tests. For the KKP tests, Figure 19shows'hat

the 1/R law was also able to be confirmed in test 192. In

this circumferential distribution it is assumed that the pressure4 f

remains constant within the circumscribed circle having the radius

of the quencher.

In the bottom part of the Figure it is shown that the 1/R circm-ferential distribution, based onbar (see Table 8), represents an

the specification value of 4~~upper envelope for normal response

of the relief system for all KKP tests.

As already shown in Figure 14, the load reduction found at the

spherical shell in comparison to the values at the L-joint in the

vicinity of=.the quencher is also verified in the EEB hot test.

As part of the vent clearing test program,.a few tests were run

in which three adjacent relief valves were opened simultaneously.The measurement results show that this causes no increase of the

pressures. Furthermore, there were also no differences in the

pressure distributions in the meridional and circumferential

directions compared to the single-valve tests.

The pressure values measured in the multi«pipe tests are entered

as crosses in Figure 14.

18- 10

On the whole, it can be stated that the vent clearing tests inPhilippsburg have fully confirmed the KKB measurements in regardto the pressure amplitudes and pressure distribution. Thus, thesuppression charrher loads according to Table 8 were able to beverified for the clearing of the pressure relief system.

3.2 Condensation

The condensation tests were so performed that condensation occur-

red through one or two quenchers at reactor pressures of 70-11.5

bar and with the quenchers provided only in the automatic depres-surization mode IX at reactor pressures below ll,'5 bar.

A maximum harmonic pressure oscillation of +~~%bar was measured(see Figure 20). This is below the specified condensation pres-sure of /~~+bar. The frequency was approximately LM4W At re-actor pressures below 11.5 bar, pulsating condensation occurred.

The pressure spikes measured then had a maximum value of lkM3bar

with a base width ofi~+ms. Because of this small duration ofaction, the pressure spikes have no effect on the stresses in thestructural members of the suppression chamber (see Figures 21, 22) ~

The temperature distribution in circumference and elevation ex-\

hibited a mean deviation of h~~Q in the condensation tests.

On the whole, the condensation proceeded calmly and exhibited the

results already measured previously in KKB.

4 ~ Loads on the relief s stem

4.1 Vent clearing pressure

Pronounced clearing pressures were measured only in three tests.

The reactor pressure was approximately 70.5 bar.

The measured maximum clearing pressure was approximately k% bar

with a valve opening time of approximately 250 ms.

Figure 23 shows the extrapolation, to 88 bar reactor pressure and

100 ms valve opening time based on the measurement values.

The computation results for the reactor pressure of 70.5 bar andthe corresponding valve opening times envelop the measurement

results. Thus, the basis of the extrapolation is conservativewith respect to the clearing pressures. The maximum clearing

pressure calculated on that basis isQQ bar. Th's value isclearly smaller than the specified clearing pressure of iW bar.

4.2 Steady-state pressure

The steady-state pressure in the quencher's vicinity is plotted

the maximum steady-state pressure for a reactor pressure of 88value is below the value ofbar is approximately h~ bar. This

g~ bar specified for the quencher.

versus the mass flow density in Figure 24. Zt can be seen that

4.3 Vertical force on the blowdown pipe

To measure the vertical force on the blowdown pipe, two straingauges each in the circumferential and vertical directions were

18- 12

mounted in the water region (see Figure 2).

The evaluation technique used to infer the vertical force fromthe measured stresses and to perform the extrapolation to 100 msvalve opening time and 88 bar reactor pressure based on theavailable measurement results is described in /7/.

I

The evaluated measurement results for the three informative testsare shown in the following,Table:

Test Reactor Valvepressure opening

timebar m's

Pipepressure

bar

Verticalforce

kN

.19Z

70. 8

70

71

816 [?)*

616

255

KRAFTWERK UNIONAG PROPRIETARY INFORMATION

The extrapolation to 100 ms valve opening time and 88 bar reactorpressure results in a vertical force of approximately '.ILMMX

The specification value of the vertical force is5kWM~. Thereis an adequate margin between the specification value of KW%%and the extrapolated value of K~gkN for the vertical force.

4.4 Forces on the struts of the protective tube

The maximum strut force was measured in test 19Z at a'clearingpressure of ~3 bar and a valve opening time of abouts ms. Ztwas L~

*Tr. note: First digit not clear in German document.

18- 13

This force is composed of three factors:1. Pressure difference across the vent pipe2. Pressure difference across the protective tube3. Displacement of the pivot point of the struts on the

inner cylinder.

All three factors together yield the total force. The measuredI

total force must be viewed in terms of the load case on which thedesign is determined.'hat case is not the clearing of therelief system, but rather air-poor condensation at the ventpipes. A temporal coincidence of the two load cases was excludedby the premature automatic depres urization.

The external force on a strut of the inner cylinder for the loadcase of air-poor condensation is /~3 kt< /10/. This force islarger by a factor of Q~~ than the measured force of 4Q kN on thestruts of the protective tube. The difference'etween the twovalues seems to be large enough, so that it can be stated that theload case of air-free condensation conservatively envelops theload case of vent clearing.

-3For the probability of occurrence of 10 /LOCA, a maximum innerstrut force of approximatelg hW kN was demonstrated in /11/.This force is greater by a factor of g~Q than the force of L% kNmeasured in KKP and .can surely still be supported by the struts.

18-14

References

/1/ Becker, M.sConstruction and design of the relief system with perforated-pipe quencher

U

Technical Report KWU/R 113 - 2703, July 1973

/2/ Becker, M.:KKB - Blow-free with the perforated-pipe quencherTechnical Report KWU/R 113 - 2796, October 1973

~ /3/ Becker, M.:Results of the non-nuclear hot. test with the relief systemin the Brunsbuttel nuclear power plantTechnical Report KWU/R 113 - 3267, December 1974

/4/ Becker, Feist, Gobel:Analysis of the loads measured on the relief system in theKKB non-nuclear hot testTechnical report KWU/R ll/R21 - 3346, April 1975

/5/ KKB - Relief valve testsKKB - EB 50, August 1976

/6/ KKB - Relief valve testsKKB - EB 46, August 1976

/7/ Gobel, D.:KKB - Nuclea:. start-up, results of the tests with thepressure relief systemWorking Report KWU/R 142-136/76, September 1976

18-15.

/8/ Expert opinion on the safety of the 770 MWe boilingwater reactor for the Srunsbuttel site, Part 9, April 1976

1

/9/ KKP pressure suppression systemExpert opinion on the relief systemMay 1976

/10/ Gobel, D.:Design specification for load on the bracing of the pipesimmersed in the pool of the suppression chamber

Spec. No. KKP/XK/SD 010, Rev. 1, Oct. 1975

/ll/ Gobel, D.:Determination of strut load combinations and their probabil-

'ty,based on the GKM II tests with the 600 mm pipe and a „submergence of 2 m

Working Report KWU/R 142 - 168/76, Nov. 1976

/12/ Nowotny:Design specification KKP ], KKP 2Pressure and temperature load on the containment and suppres-

sion chamber

No. KKP/XA/SD/002, Rev. 1, April 1974

18- 16

e

4 v ne>eenvenae eevvee a

KV/UV 822/R 52 t

siKKP I HOT TEST, test phase II (blowdown tests)

Operating Log

KKP I —HEISSTEST, Testphase II (Abblaseversut he)- Betriebsprolotcoll

Status26 Jan. 1977

StandI 117,

Versuch

g A'NI IliTNIII 5

IsrOotum ze,l

Ent toslungs.) Yentsl-

Nr. O6

'7

hnsteuer ungC)F»))s)on)L

im U3Eyy eyy Abblocesohr Qegi>v>

lo

suchsdover

FA,»Ibande

AAe~ IOcginn

>IAcoktoss ik

IFut ~

InKK

ross» I)

nlrbvoe

Q r>)>nb

0 ~ C)Iron)

1

A ~ IlSlrnne)

7

F ~ 0s)sons

3

DPKSI > nnt)

c

t)urchsntz Vcntil-Nr. " Acmcr kungcn

1176

)7 'I

~ mY)5 m VIS 'C

In Ie).>ebo>

Ie e,ix x

z cx

rX

r.,nre

re

rCe Ii I ~ n

4(i i')

I.),) 14

Iif(>cps vpnp» Ce)>phtprhee ~ k nvr trs)vi inpI'' nr.t

17 ~ ') ~ ) I ~ r,r,n F.x xI'

rc )G >> I ~ 1 )G,I> 71(I ))7Vtp '.prs.>e) ee>ehvvrr ~ i>ehve>>i I pr v ieh fi I

"n.h. I S.:. ~ CC 34 10 GP>,>i )G >e ~ S)G

0 zn.o.

1 ) "n1 17 'r

::n. ).

'1, ) "n,o 17

CC

n,s

e'C l e

ni ~

71 ~ 0

G),n

r.).n

67>S

(.1,n

ci7,0

I,;.n

s6,47

sfi 41

Sli,s>O

I!i,4ei

1,77n,) 1irk~ I>i).ieivriitI ) Iii

7LOurrh ntxt)CStin)S>es>I») nOCh >I -WC It- )XC Sungen )t tntC'IYOtltent Ct re = reat COnditiOnS. CC' Cltnn COnditinnS Se.»S,), „„,I„l,~ „,„

(SEE NEXT PAGE FOR KEY)

KEY FOR TABLE 1

1. Test

3 ~

4 ~

5.6.7 ~

8 ~

9 ~

10.

12.13.14.15.16.

17.18.

.-. - 19.20.21.22.23.

PA no. [abbreviation unknown]Running no.DateTime

Relief valve no. 5)Actuation lEVV ~ relief pilot valve, SVV ~ safety pilot valve)Liquid level in blowdown pipe 4) mRS "-m water columnBYK before beginningKTest durationReactor pressure 1)PR el PR elBeginning EndLiquid level in suppression chamberLiquid level in reactor pressure vessel before beginningFlow rate, valve no. fStrang ~ leg)2)Remarks

1) Entered reactor pressures were read from the digital readingin the control room before and after the test.

2) „Flow-rate determination according to a-value measurements3) Interval test4) rc ~ real conditions, cc ~ clean conditions5) Valves E and G with swing check valve in,control line of

independent safety and accident protection system from26 September 1976 on.

1 min previously, F opened 2 s due to ccMeasurement technique only partially coveredRepeat test of test 6.15 s after test 9.110 s after test 9.2Test was repeated (valve had not opened)Repeat test of test 13.1

18- 18

KKP I HOT TEST, test phase II (blowdown tests)Operating log

Status26 Jan. 1977

I(WUV 822/R 521

V>'(such

i7 >...nn

(« ~

kr les Ilnrhssvrt rntokol'Iv nr Is.in I e st l7

17 17 rs< ~ 1t F,r,r.. itx x

rx

s, rec's,el 1'I n. rsr vX X

r)et

r.4,o ci7, ) I(e) In. (ste

' I

"n ~< ~ <

In,ln ~ t >u ~ Ceu

I"lte

In)te

Inca

c,>n

I'vent' ~ ~ ~ s

~ ~ ~ < ~ Is ~ I ~ ets s ve nV ~ rviirkl p

KEY FOR TABLE

2 ~

3 ~

4 ~

TestPA no. [abbreviation unknown)Running no.Date

5. Time6.7 ~

8.9.

'10.

12.13.14.15.16.

17 ~

18.19.20.21.22

'elief

valve no. 5)Actuation fest% ~ relief pilot valve, SVV = safety pilot valve)Liquid level in blowdown pipe 4) mWS ~ m water column8KK befor» beginningTest durationReactor pressure 1)PRrel PR 1relBeginning EndLiquid level in suppression chamberLiquid level in reactor pressure vessel before beginningFlow rate, valve no. [Strang = leg)2)Remarks

1) Entered reactor pressures were read from the digital readingin 'the control room before and after the test.

2) Flow-rate determination according to a-value measurements3) Interval test4) rc = real conditions, cc ~ clean conditions5) Valves E and G with swing check valve in control line of

independent safety and accident protection system from26 September 1976 on.

No computer log availableNo recording of lift for valve ENo recording of lift for valve G7 s after test 22.1 **No recording of lift, therefore repetitionRepeat of test 24.1

18- 20

KKP I HOT TEST, test phase II (blowdown tests)Operating Log

Status26 Jan. 1977

KWUV 822/A 52 I

KKP I —HEISSTEST, Testphase II (Abblaseversuche)- Detriebsprolokoll

Stand

5hr-

teil

VJ 76 «a

-fo "I 'I 11 I I

Versvch,3 00IU)

7

Irh I. I;:I.'i. 1«11hn 'o hi ei 11 )

r»

rc

P

P

71 Pi

71of'Co, )) Ir'e el

n7 IC>,«n Il ~

I 'e e I 1(i, Ini eove char< 1 i 11 l ~ i«i .'0 I I ni i~ II

il Eectnttot9cte.en. 1< ' ~ e< II Y. ie,< a'"i, ~ >,7(r~ ~ I Ii«iLhi < I oee' pe ~ « I I>i

)I gvrrt>not(tin li -vl«l - Mr»nut>et< n )I Intc

KEY FOR TABLE 3

1. Test2.3 ~

4 ~

PA no. [abbreviation unknown)Running no.Date

5. Time6.7 ~

8.9.10.

12.13.14.15.16.

17.18.19.

Relief valve no. 5)1

Actuation [EVV = relief pilot valve, SVV ~ safety pilot valve]Liquid level in blowdown pipe 4) mWS ~ m water column8~ before beginningTest durationReactor pressure 1)PR

1 PR 1relBeginning EndLiquid level in suppression chamberLiquid level in reactor pressure vessel before beginningFlow rate, valve no. [Strang = leg)2)Remarks

1) Entered reactor pressures were read from the digital readingin the control room before and after the test.2) Flow-rate determination according to a-value measurements3) Interval test4) rc = real conditions, cc = clean conditions5) Valves E and G with swing check valve in control line of

independent safety and accident protection system from26 September 1976 on.

E opened after 14 sE opened after 10 sTwo-way blowdown

18- 22

«

KWUV 822/R 521

KKP I HOT TEST, test phase IX (blowdown tests)Operating Log

KKP I —HElSSTEST, Testphase 8 (Abblaseversuche)— Det riebsprotokoll

Status26 Jan 1977

StandI ~ I '177

VC'(5uCh 'tOn)urn

IC

teilEn)ln iong-' vvnti)-

0 EVV SVV7

Atlv> Cue(tingC)FIIIIStiS

im PAt>t>IO>CC

vorOeg cys

rrVn

sue hs.dotter

lt I))ra)s)oi ut)I)'nrci )arriftegnn t:ni)e

I?r'ss hl

It1

KK

Fvl IIn I

onVOI

Ilrginn

t) ~ C F. ~ IIvvlrssng 51>nng

I

F ~ G5llnnq

Cl ~ I5'llqng

c

@')ttr(hgn)Z Vcnli)-)s+ Occncrtsungcn

1976 ~ mW5 - mW5 -'C -s iver t>»SI rn m tits lrh lrh I IhI ~ tis. IC.." . re too ).h ~ ).5 Ir..s ,hi ») ~e ~ rh«e.l rl I lnr»

At lit.o I n 17

I » I » I ~ I ~ I, Ion I ) ~ 5 I ~ 7 I(i~ '"~ hi «rrh»e I«rltlnv«Aiehl n«n es~ I

I ~ I I)

re

re

Ion

Ion

Go

Go

Ih»7 I I »>I

I I ~ ') I i,h 1(,5..

I"eh I

111 ~

I '14»' 'cli ~ ' ~ i I I ~ 9vrAl eh I n «v>e

«c Ch»vl ~ e i I lee ~ ~Alii>I 'l «i

~ i

~I

Ie ) I, In. r..c»Aec 6 '»CrcG

h,hCe» I) Ie I 'I ~ ~ 7 ~ 9 I(e ~ 5) i",Ie,'I Iiyslrnoil l«eh>» Of Crnhnlle ~ ~

eel t Tll Fy « le» IgIo. 17 ~ "I ti ~ F. ~ A >C I:,A,Cre

re

h,o )7 rinl I ~ «v. I vio esisrllln«A.C:.0 I»inn«rhvltvt

hrl >eh . ~ II~ ill,s>II C >K ~ A»C s. ~ A»C~'C

r.Ie ri >its

I~ ~ ~ Ie, lt I(i,v0 (i ~ ) 1(i ~ >5 l)enli

)0 1(h.. I",9 (n0 9 u,h 1u Go

orfrnhnl tv y»t ~ n nb>orI, ln, I» ~ «Vn IVVI' lleil nsl'i « ~ i

I. les«I ~ s «rn Iv sr Ivrhnl ~ > ~ >es«Vvr«sirh >e»1 \ IOf re'nllnl tl'sy»tvn

Qi

(Di

I) Elngcltorcnc F'eok)ordcuttsc vtucdcn urvnsllclbor vof und no(h Vcr. u(h von d('f t)tgitalanzctge in t)cr hY

KEY FOR TABLE 4

1. Test2 ~

3 ~

PA no. [abbreviation unknown)Running no.Date

5. Time6.7 ~

8.9.10.

12.13.14.15.16.

17.18.19.20.21.'22.

Relief valve no. 5)Actuation [EVV ~ relief pilot valve, SVV = safety pilot valve]Liquid level in blowdown pipe 4) mNS ~ m water column8KK be fore beginningTest, durationReactor pressure 1)PRrel relpBeginning EndLiquid level in suppression chamberLiquid level in reactor pressure vessel before beginningFlow rate, valve no. [Strang ~ leg)2)Remarks

1) Entered reactor'pressures were read from the digital readingin the control room before and after the test.

2) Flow-rate determination according to a-value measurements3) Interval test4) rc ~ real conditions, cc ~ clean conditions5) Valves E and G with swing check valve in control line of

independent safety and accident protection system from26 September 1976 on.

Two-way blowdownHydraulic holding open with TH systemHold-open systemHold-open system connected to A, C, G after 30 sHold-open system without injection (test interrupted)Hold-open system without injection (repeat of test 49.1)

18-24

KV/UV 822/R 521

IVc fsuch

3 ttotvrnI'c d Nr5

zc il

I

Cnt tostungs.5) vcntit-

Nr. Qg

KKP I HOT TEST, test phase II (blowdown tests)Operating Log

~ I tlAenktar fudf

7Ans s erung

CIFifltstongIcn US

tie

vor sue hv>Begim doucr

rt'ur(tisntz Ventit-Nr, 'IFof I .II 3

)tntvfer

npfienn

Fu st.In

IC IC

B ~ cSt conn

I

OvESttonei

C

A ~ II F ~ 6Slcnceft tttong

5

AACPI

EnftePArctB'qinnSyy

Abhtnsrrohr

KKP I —HEISSTEST, Tesiphase 8 (Abblaseversuche)- Betriebsprolotcolt

Status26 Jan. 1977

StandI )sir

S'ccncckvngen

21

)976

~ I iI I I . Ci I

tmvf5

2eJ

- mvf5 o 'c oS hot17,}

hot

)6.4 12, enIfh tch Ifh

I 5Q

Ifh

rn 27.n. I ri ~ 7 IG,o IG, Io 12 ~ Ori

2) 'l 12.)) se5 15, ti I fe ~ 7 I ri ~ fe 157

17 I fr )eo 5n 76,n r"Ie'I I re ~ 5 I 12,Gsi

I-2 «I )7,I>f) ~ PC 57 7J ~ 7 Go,s IG, 11 12 ~ fi r 72

coI )fl,ie,

17 I) fe ~

rc

77 7 Il ~ 5

7 II,n

67,2

67,.r

Ice ~ )fr )oe51

~ I rl

Gffr.

21

2

2)Z

~ r

zl,o,

21 O ~

15.II7

Ife,o ~

I'C

rc

rc

57

5n

5n

75.5

7 ~ I

7.n

7n.f. 16,5k

ci J ~ 5 I re ~ 5'I

rin te I re ) fe

I",G

12,G

12,te )

G)..

6" I

17 ~ / "I,'I

I r> ~ Ore

KEY FOR TABLE 5

1. Test2. PA no. tabbreviation unknown)3 ~

4 ~

Running no.Date

5. Time6. Relief valve no. 5)7. Actuation [EVV = relief pilot valve, SVV = safety pilot valve)8. Liquid level in blowdown pipe 4) AS ~ m water column9. 8K> before beginning10. Test duration11. Reactor pressure 1)

PR 1PR

Beginning End12. Laquid level in suppression chamber13. Liquid level in reactor pressure vessel before beginning14. Flow rate, valve no. [Strang = leg)2)15. Remarks16. 1) Entered reactor pressures were read from the digital reading

in the control room before and after the test.2) Plow-rate determination according to a-value measurements3) Interval test4) rc = real conditions, cc ~ clean conditions5), Valves E and G with swing check valve in control line of

independent safety and accident protection system from26 September 1976 on.

17. Preliminary test for test 17, only valve E opened

18-26

n/ oOseoootsvv,rva~ ~voesnia

V 822/R 521

/ VcrsvchQ gs . -)It Pcg >rt l)alum

19)G

En) >ashtngs.sr

7hts r>tctung

8vv ."ivv

IFulsslon~sm ~$

'>eb>O>rtchr

~ mws - mws

Vcvor cvclss

Oct)ins ksucr

c'c

sI evOrcskln ~ turk

)'I „I).nc>c

)'O

tv�>

nngenn

>vs t >asst

r >IIts

KK

Feil >i /I

hn>vet t

I>l eJenn

te/ Ou>CKSOIC Vrn>il-Hr. "0 ~ C h ~ Il

S>tons Sltnn9I 7

I I Is

F ~ a 0 ~ F.Slross9 Slitleo9

3 C

'I>Is It>e

KKP I HOT TEST, test phase II (blowdown tests)Operating Log

KKP I —HEISSTEST, Testphctse II (Abblaseversuche)- Betriebsprotokott

Status26 Jan. 1977

Stand"(e, I ~ 1777

Ocmcr kungc 0

/. Is ~ I

„1st'.10

>

/. Is>eo

/.>0)

"I,'I, 1st et ~

cG. i. s>.)r.

0 os, I's toil

0 o I 'I ~

? ~ I ) ~

)2

) ~

1st )et ~ It

le 7

47 F 7

teoeu

I~ ~ ~

:a!e.n

tofe,"

~ e ~

I 'I ts')

>f ~ I I 12 ~ 7>e

Ira ~ 1 a >hen>

> fe ~ )I'f.

~ )r s2.7

tictn

ts I/o

2> I

I e>9

/.I>ore 'I '>, "0 10 Is rc tsr,l to l,'> ICi ~ 1>'2,'>7 )02

/I~ s ~

/,I~ it>

":I s, cis,'ts

t> 'I, /ss, Jn

0

i'c 33

tefe,h

t te,n

te

4),0

IG." lt'

fo ~ )

I,n) )9...74

n>er) 2>l e> (I to 5 rc ter tete, ) >c,.)n sa,rn )>)7

/,110 cn,n, . I ~ ure rc )te to 7.'I CG,C >G,)es >2.)oh tents

2n.o. „>. n rc 3r rn,) '"),0 Il',) i 12 ~ )G t,2t,

Ci 12 'en er ..>.tsn te ~ ) )fo i,n,n hro,) Sr ~ ) 12,24 Cnr

te 4 ~ )fo, . te te ts ) ~ ) I Co ~ 4 12,> ~ 377

/I ste rn t. )Ce ~'her 4)oa >Co ~ )" I"~ 11 Vi~ ~ irrneosssesee vnnVrrrsich /I> l /erCn.9. Sn.etn te )ts 71 ~ So if.,h . Ia,r I C.ifo

/.> ICe sr..nn 2u.aus /ii'c ~ 4 Co9 ere IG ~ vr I ) ~ I» Cot:.117 >t.. sr rc 7).2 fe'I, 7 I (» ~ is 1)e01 G)s

/I In s. > i).ns 0 )7 7) ro 7n. I fo ~ ~ I I 2 ~ Ce7 I'a)4

e. I I 'I : ~ ~ .et. I/.. )II rc )7 o , 0 ~ /e f.h. >G.;: in.n > t,n7

II cstsac>tc>grnc r>ce»Istic>tvckn wurdcn utvnillrllsnr vnt und nach vctsvch von d>r otg>lu)nnrcsgc in dcr svnrlc o)>gclrscn. 5) v»III >, ~i.n»e ol.e/.)r.tei I It Ictavrt ~ 1netvri ~ I I I isa)I Ourchnn)z)>c tiinn»ino) nnrh i> -hvcrl - Mns unt)cn 3) )nlcrvalllc t C) rC = rt nl cnndi)in>le. CC = CICan Condilions iicvs str...e i. i >i e«

(SEE NEXT PAGE FOR KEY)

KEY FOR TABLE 6

1. Test2. PA no. (abbreviation unknown)3. Running no.4 Date5. Time6. Relief valve no. 5)

"7. Actuation [EVV = relief pilot valve, SVV ~ safety pilot valve]8. Liquid level in blowdown pipe 4) mt

- KV/U'822/A 521

KKP I NOT TEST, test phase ZI (blowdown tests)Operating Log

KKP I —HEISSTEST, Testphase II (Abblaseversuche)- Oetriebsproloicotl

Status26 Jan. 1977

Stand::li I I'177

I VersuchPA-tlr

lr0 Iturn

I'f76

Ent tOStlrngS.al vc'nlll

Nr.

Ans ever ung

EVV SVV

nllv5 rnWS

Ct F v I l a Innlnl

5'bblnreroril

Gegiltl

Vcsuchr

KEY, FOR TABLE 7

1. Test2 ~

3 ~

4.

PA no. [abbreviation unknown)Running no.Date

5. Time6.7 ~

8.9 ~

10.

12.13.14.15

'6.

17 ~

Relief valve no. 5)Actuation,tEVV ~ relief pilot valve, SVV ~ safety pilot valve)Liquid level in blowdown pipe 4) mWS ~ m water column8KE before beginningTest durationReactor pressure 1)PR el PRBeginning EndLiquid level in suppression chamberLiquid level in reactor pressure vessel before beginningFlow rate, valve no. [Strang = leg]2)Remarks

1) Entered reactor pressures were read from the digital readingin the control room before and after the test.

2) Flow-rate determination according to a-value measurements3) Interval test4) rc ~ real conditions, cc = clean conditions5) Valves E and G with swing check valve in control line of

independent safety and accident protection system from26 September 1976 on.

No Visicorder traces18. No computer log available19. Independent safety and accident protection system

18-30

,KRAFTNERK UNION AG PROPRIETARY INFORMATION

18-31

KRAFTNERK UNION AG PROPRIETARY INFORMATION

Key for table 8Table.......

18-32

I

KRAFTWERK UNION AG PROPRIETARY INFOKIATION

18-33

KRAFTWERK UNION AG PROPRIETARY INFOM4ATION

Figure.......02

18-34

I

Arrangement of blowdownquenchers'in the suppressionchamber with associated relief.valve numbers

I'' »Sc8e +II~-Itg.

ISMII1rrOt SN toflee

ff1 ~l, - I\ I(

r 4:* r',Y

jgqr .j'/I /

2C/I ~ 8II 2 AnnfdnUnS2 dsr AbbtosMsfts~ensrf d!r K~fdenSC!fen! I O~fr er

III >15>2zt;o'I OMS-6S~-

OMS-70DMS 71 -+ ~t- —~———

270'a

gs25Qt

Cr ZO m MD Sf fSOffDM 1MMffN et fr

Of/ fS

~nett.s.r~8

0OS

f

o 0t,>IMS

~TefDoer otssf torse eT 23I,T 25I I 27

f4!

glQ 1 YNP I-I left!le,lI btlcseversvet .DMze yf . ) tTT5

I DSS'~ s

TTfenero ItIrlcngM /S7 r,VT22II 2r. +/

.p+.y

/I

~ 0

Oetdr+ e ~Mtf' 'M7

&0 0g

N 0'ITK IM'tt 0tft Dtt %&reII 0 A

Iktcf 6 ttf0 II OretCL'0 K gO'gH 0

O AI; to

tft tftttl eeK $ 5ot 9 0

g0

0Q

tb

C40

00ttf

Figure l:KRP I — hot test,

Figure 2: KEP I - Bio~down tests duringthe hot, test. Instrumentation of the

p mb 1976pressure relief system. Revision.~ 3 of 1 Se„ te er[SEE NEXT PAGE FOR KEY] I

I

Pd-5

QJ'0 —: KKPI-Abb(oseversvche telm Heir) (es(esstrs'rsseprheesJrq oes prs2ss ersI!cslvc s+!c&sRevision: 3 vom 19 76

1 Nyf II

)

ScRnit t I/IWd -2

We) 1

P'

Ps(

. @reer.P ~

~ PP

~ ~ ~

.schnit t I/Ip DMS (Y) C)

~ ~PDMS(Y)1 DMS

(V) 2

~ ~"P

~ P

~ PP ~P

~ ~P ~P ~

~ ~r P~ ~ P P

~ P

Q 0 OMS(V) 3Abb(user ohr

Pd-5~ P

Ia-- «s an J-.~r..

~

KEY FOR FIGURE 2

1. Section2. Blowdown pipe3. Quencher E4. Quencher G5. PF 1 and PF 2 (quencher G)6. Normal water level7. See Figure 128. Note: V "- vertical, U ~ circumference9. If not otherwise noted, the measurement transmitters in

relief system F at 260

DMS = stain gauge

18- 37

Figure 3: KKP I - BIowdown tests inthe hot. testInstrumentation of quencher F (BA 3l S22)Revision 3 of 1 September 3.976

BLO 7: KKPI-Abbtaseversuche beirn Heiittestlnstrurnentierung der Duse F ]RA 3t 5 221)

View toward fittingAll strain gaugesdisplaced rotatablyto the left by.%amfrom the middle of theweld on the top of thetwo quencher arms

WeldSchweiOembt

DMS- 23

DMS ~ strain gauge

DM5-19 8 ///

/

DMS - 25/ 26

/I DMS-2c,I

~~

DMS-20 'yHS-2)122

eben ~MenonDusena. ~enin dei senkiecnten F bene

Top and bottom on quencherarms in thevertical plane

18- 38

~ 16.54

WA-16

ADA-14

Duse A

Quencher A

+12,78 m

~ DA ~ pressur transducerWA ~ displa ement transducer

DMS strain gauge

'oo

DA-16

DA-15

DWS-86

DMS -87

+ 1G45 m

WA-18

WA-17 OMS-88DM"-89

Figure 4: KEP 1Instrumentation of thesuppression chamberMeridian: 108Revision: 3 of 1 September

1976

Bild 4: KKP 1inst rum en t i er ung derKondensa t i ons- Kamrn erMeridian: 108 .'

e v i s i On: 3 vo~ 1.9. 76

DA «17

+>0~5 m

DMS-944 A-19

DMS -95

Figure 5: KKP 1Instrumentation of thesuppression chamberMeridian: 145oRevision 3 of 1 September

1976

Bild 5 '. KKP 1Instrumen ti er ung derKondensations- KarnrnerMeridian: 145'oRe V i S l on: 3 vom 1 9.76

18" 40

Duse G '.

Quencher G

+ 12,780

WA-20

DA-2

DM S-90

DA-1

WA- 21'

MS-91SA- 22

DM S-92

DMS-93

Figure 6: KYP lInstrumentation of thesuppression chamberMeridian: 228'oRevision: 3 of l September

l976

B)ld o ', KKP 1Instrumen tier ung derKondensations- KammerMeridian: 228oRevision: 3 vom 1.9.76

+ 1450

DA-6DA-3

DA-5

Figure 7: KKP 1Instrumentation of thesuppression chamberHeridian: 244oRevision: 3 of 1 September

1976

Bild 7 .'KP tInstrumentierung aerKon de ns a t i ons- Ka rnm erMeridian: 244Revision: 3 vom 1.9.76

~ 16.54

DM

+14 50

DMS- 68/7069/71 /i)

DA-12DA7

+ 15,04

DMS-67DMS@6

WA-23 H.11

WA-15

+ 11,92

DMS-65DMS-64

f" 12 780DA -1 l

DMS-63,

„/~DM5'62

DUse F

Quencher F

ooWA-14DMS-60

DMS-61DA -10

DA-8

DMS-92 ++49

D MS-53~iDM 5-50

DMS-51DMS-57DMS .56

DMS 58 DMS 551) St,rain gauges glued

tvicc~ 'w1.red'Pconnected only once DA-9

1) DMS doppelt Kleben,verdrohten,nor 1- fachonschlie Aen

Bi ld 8 'KP 1Instrume.n ti er ung der

Figure 8: KKP 1 Kondensotions- KarnmerInstrumentation of the g er i diQn 26O osuppression chamberMeridian: 260o Revision: 3 vorn1.9.76Revision: 3 of 1 September

1976

Ouse E

'uencher E

+8

DA- t

I4x strain gauges,earth

displaced by90

DtlS-82 - 85CxDt45 jeweitsum 90~verse tz t

Stutze auf 285~

Dh'is 82Support. at 285

x"Rtr,

360

— D>S BS

i MS8r.270

180

!

OJvIS 83

Bitd 9 'KP 1Inst ru men tier ung derKonden so t i ons- Ko rnm erMeridian: 284oRe v i s i on; 1.9.76Figure 9: KKP 1Instrumentation of thesuppression chamberMeridian: 284oRevision: . 1 September 1976 1) Lt.

KRAFTWERK UNION AG PROPRIETARY INFOM4ATION

18-45

KRAFTWERK UNION AG PROPRIETARY INFOK4ATION

Fxgures ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

18-46

DMS-78D S 79 DMS 76

DMS 7g, DM S - 77DM S -75

DMS- 80DMS-81

yf.

j 4>1~ ~ 1 c

r1i:.

DViS

)'it.)lik

73 longitudinally~glued

Middleconical ri$/

IiI)~l

+ 9890 mI

at«W A - 11/12 auf 260W A - 17 ouf

108'A

- 21 uf 228

a

a

IAnsicht von untengegen Rippea

bottom view toward ribWA-12 hg

Meridian 260O

DMS - 72long s gekl e bl

longitudinally glued

Bi(d i"Inst ru men t i er ungdes BereichesBodenha t ter ungin der Kond-Kammer

'evision3 y 1 9 76

I

Figure 12: Instrumentation of the region of thebottom mount in the suppression chamberRevision 3 of 1 September 1976

I 1.8-47

+10)4 5

(M)

'(U)

Figure 13: KKP 1Xnstrumentation of thesuppression chamberliningRevision: 3 of

1 September 1976

atDMS -96 auf 108'(M)DMS-97 auf 228~(M)DMS-98 auf 260~(M)DMS - 99 auf 108 (V)DMS - 100 auf,. 228' U)DMS - 101 auf 260 (U)

Bitd G: KKP 1Instrumentierung derKondensations- Kamrner

-Lfn ing-Re Yl SIOn: 3 VOfll 5.9.76.

18-48

KRAFTWERK UNION AG PROPRIETARY INFOMIATION

Figure, 14 through, 24

18-49 through 59