FR0200367

EMPLOYING OF RELAP5 CODE FOR LBB DETERMINISTIC ANALYSIS IN THE

IGNALINA NPP
V. KRUNGLEVICIUTE, LEI
Breslaujos 3, 3035 Kaunas, Lithuania
E-mail: vaiva@isag.lei.lt
A KAUATKA, LEI
Breslaujos 3, 3035 Kaunas, Lithuania
E-mail: algis@isag.lei.lt

KEYWORDS : Safety - Water - Flow

The application of methods that make it possible to determine fracture processes in

equipment and/or piping systems and to predict possible accidents is an effective
mean to improve the safety of operation of nuclear facilities. For this purpose, for a
long period the concept "Leak-Before-Break" (LBB) has been used in nuclear power
production of various countries. For reason to choose method of leak detection first
of all it is necessary to perform evaluating thermal-hydraulic calculations. These
calculations allow to determine flow rate of discharged coolant. Because it is not
possible to define all characteristics of rupture, in this work was performed sensitivity
studies of parameters of rupture.
For coolant leak rate calculations through possible cracks in Ignalina NPP pipes
SQUIRT and RELAP5 thermal-hydraulic codes were used. SQUIRT is well known as
computer program that predicts the leakage rate for cracked pipes in NPP. As this
program calculates only water (at subcooled or saturated conditions) leak rate,
RELAP5 code model, that calculates water and steam leak rate, was created. For
model verification a comparison of SQUIRT, RELAP5 and experimental results was
performed. Analysis shows RELAP5 code model suitability for calculations of leak
through through-wall cracks in pipes.

oooo
METHODS OF CRACK CALCULATIONS
Development of leak-rate estimation methodology was initiated in response to
intergranular stress corrosion cracking in boiling water reactor (BWR) piping. Further
interest in this area was stimulated by investigations into the application of a LBB
philosophy to piping integrity safety analyses instead of assuming a double-ended
guillotine break. Adoption of an LBB philosophy [1] requires reliable leak detection
systems and verified leak-rate estimation techniques. Accurate leak-rate prediction
requires correlation of crack size and shape, and is necessary to evaluate the ability
of normal makeup systems to handle potential leakage. The development of
verifiable leakage rate assessment methodology is critical to LBB evaluations.
Regulatory implications include the elimination of pipe whip restrains and jet
impingement shields, as well as changing requirements for equipment qualification
for the case of steam released form break.
For reason to choose method of leak detection first of all it is necessary to perform
evaluating thermal-hydraulic calculations. These calculations allow to determine flow
rate of discharged coolant. For coolant leak rate calculations through possible cracks
in Ignalina NPP pipes SQUIRT and RELAP5 thermal-hydraulic codes were used.
SQUIRT, which stands for Seepage Quantification of Upsets In Reactor Tubes [2], is
a computer program that predicts the leakage rate and area of crack opening for
cracked pipes in nuclear power plants. In all cases the fluid in piping system is
assumed to be water at either subcooled or saturated conditions. The SQUIRT code
also includes technical advances that are not available in other computer codes
currently used for leak-rate estimation.
The RELAP5 (Reactor Excursion and Leak Analysis Program) computer code [3] is
an advanced-thermal hydraulic Light Water Reactors (LWR) transient analysis code.
It was developed at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL), USA, for the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), for licensing-audit calculations. The RELAP5
code can model transients in LWR systems, such as loss of coolant, operational
transients, anticipated transients without scram (ATWS), e.g. loss of feed-water, loss
of offsite power, station blackout, and turbine trip. RELAP5 is a general purpose
code. It can be used for simulation of a wide variety of thermal hydraulic systems.
The RELAP5 code employs hydrodynamic, heat structure and reactor kinetics
models with control and trip systems and time step control.
The RELAP5 hydrodynamic model is a one-dimensional, transient two-phase flow
model. To describe hydrodynamic phenomena, the RELAP5 code employs:
1. Two-fluid non-homogeneous and non-equilibrium model for two phase flow;
2. Non-condensable gas transport model;
3. Soluble boron transport model;
4. Critical (choked) flow;
5. One-dimensional neutron kinetics with thermal-hydraulic feedback.

OGO
As it is seen from above presented description, RELAP5 code is developed for
modeling of reactor cooling systems. This paper shows, that RELAP5 code could be
employed for calculations of coolant discharge through cracks. Such RELAP5 model
was used in development of LBB conception for RBKK-1500 steam lines. RELAP5
was chosen because SQUIRT code is not suitable for modeling of cracks in steam
lines.
RELAP5 MODEL
If crack opening area (COA) is sufficiently big, then crack can be modeled as narrow
pipe. The pipe cross-section shape can be assumed as round, rectangular and
elliptical. However in most cases, analyzing real cracks it is seen that it does not look
like straight pipe. In most cases when coolant runs through crack, he changes its
direction many times (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Photo of crack in the heat affected zone

This section describes the RELAP5/MOD3 models for crack modeling in the pipes. In
the first model, the crack was modeled as long horizontal pipe with round,
rectangular or elliptical shaped cross-section (see Figure 2a). In this model "101"
element is a volume with steady conditions and represent atmosphere (inside
pressure Pi=0.1 MPa, steam quality Qi=100 %). Element "103" simulates coolant
condition inside of affected pipeline. Because the conditions inside and outside
pipelines do not changes, the elements "101" and "103" are simulated using time
depended volume components. Through-wall crack in the pipeline (element "102") is
modeled using RELAP5 element "pipe". "201" and "202" elements are junctions and
simulates coolant entry from pipe to the crack and from crack to the atmosphere.
Local flow energy loss coefficients are conservatively accepted maximal: forward
=0.5, reverse =1.0. Open flow area and hydraulic diameter of "102" element is
equal to corresponding parameters of crack.

oooe
In the second RELAP5 model the conditions inside and outside pipelines are
modeled employing same manner (see Figure 2b). But through-wall crack in the
pipeline is modeled by stepped pipe with bends of 90 (element "102"). The number
of 90 turns depends on crack origin. For fatigue growth crack - 0.673 of turn per 1
mm crack depth. For intergranular stress corrosion cracks - 2.82 turn per 1 mm of
crack depth [2].
Models verification was fulfilled using known experimental data. First of all RELAP5
and SQUIRT codes verification using experimental leak through long horizontal tube
data [4] were performed. For this case RELAP5 model with round shaped crosssection tube was used. The results are presented in Figure 3. Calculations of coolant
leak through horizontal rectangular shaped pipe also were performed. The SQUIRT
and RELAP results were compared with leak rate measured data for rectangular slits
[5] (see Figure 4). As it is shown in Figures 3 and 4, the calculated RELAP5 and
SQUIRT results compare favorably with experimental data.

(a)

(b)

Figure 2. The RELAP5 crack model

To choose model, which would be suitable not for an experimental equipment, but for
modeling of real cracks, were used experimental leak rate data for intergranular
stress corrosion cracks [5]. In this case RELAP5 models with straight and stepped
pipe were used (see Figure 2). The pipe shape in both cases was assumed elliptical.
Pipe length was taken equal to crack depth. Results are presented in Figure 5. As it
is seen from presented figure, the calculated errors (difference between calculation
results and measured data) are less if RELAP5 model was with stepped pipe.
Especially it is seen, when COA is small (when coolant discharge through crack is
less then 0.0015 kg/s). When COA are bigger, coolant discharge through crack is
very similar for both models.

o
100
D SQUIRT
A RELAP5

LU
"O

-O-

1
3
_O
(0

-100
2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

Measured Crack Leakage Flow Rate, kg/s

Figure 3. Comparison of SQUIRT and RELAP5 model predictions with leak through
long horizontal tube (round shaped cross-section) experimental data [4].

100

2 3

HI

n
A

"

a w

(0

a SQUIRT
A RELAP5
-100
0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Measured Crack Leakage Flow Rate, kg/s

Figure 4. Comparison of SQUIRT and RELAP5 model predictions with leak through
rectangular slits experimental data [5].

ooo
ouu

tu
o
2a

n .

3
U

75
O

LJ

n SQUIRT

A
r-O

600 -

0.0005

0.001

A RELAP5 (horizontal tube)

A RELAP5 (stepped tube)
,

0.0015

0.002

0.0025

0.003

Measured Crack Leakage Flow Rate, kg/s

Figure 5. Comparison of SQUIRT and RELAP5 model predictions with leak through
intergranular stress corrosion cracks experimental data [5].

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF COOLANT DISCHARGE THROUGH THE CRACKS

IN STEAM LINES
As it was mentioned above, RELAP5 model was created for calculations of coolant
discharge through the cracks in steam lines of RBMK-1500. For modeling of cracks
in the steam lines the stepped pipe model was chosen (see Figure 2b). Pipe length
was taken equal to crack depth. The number of 90 turns (pathway loss coefficient)
was assumed according to the SQUIRT recommendations for fatigue growth crack 0.673 of turn per 1 mm crack depth. Parameters of crack model are presented in
Table 1.
A number of the nodes in the model is very important for carrying out analysis using
RELAP5 code. Usually the detailed nodalization (larger number of nodes) and
shorted time step of calculation correspondingly allows to obtain more precise
results. To determine the influence of nodalization the RELAP5 model was chosen in
which the rupture was modeled like straight pipe (PLC=0). This straight pipe was
divided into 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 40 nodes. The steam leak rate in these
calculations is presented in the Figure 6. As it is seen from the presented figure,
steam leak rate for 1 and 15 nodes differs in 15%. Steam leak rate for 15 and 40
nodes cases are very similar (the difference is about 1%). It allows to conclude, that
pipe dividing into more than 15 nodes is not to the purpose.
Using crack model, created with RELAP5 code, two crack types were reviewed: pipe
with 13 90 turns (bends) and flat (straight) pipe. Pipe wall thickness was 19 mm in
both cases. Local flow energy loss coefficient t, of each bend was assumed equal to

oooo
0.75. As it is seen from Figure 7, modeling of bends in the crack pathway reduces the
amount of discharged coolant more significant, when crack opening displacement
COD (in that way bigger crack opening area) is bigger.

COD

c0

^COA

])1

T
1

<
Crack depth (pipe wall thickness)

t=19mm

t=25 mm

Crack shape

Elliptical

Crack properties

Fatigue crack

Surface roughness

SR=0.040513, 0.00508 mm

Pathway loss coefficient (PLC)

Crack length

13

17
1=150 mm

COA=11.8-82.5mm' :

Crack opening area (COA)

Crack opening displacement (COD)
The fluid conditions inside the steam line

COD=0.1 -0.7 mm
Saturated steam (P=6.9MPa, mixture
quality=1)

The fluid conditions outside the steam line

Atmosphere (P=0.1MPa, mixture

quality=1)

Table 1. Parameters of crack model

QQQO

Figure 6. Influence of nodaiization (Saturated steam at P=6.9 MPa inside the

pipeline; Crack depth t=19 mm; Crack length 1=150 mm; PLC=0; SR=0.040513 mm)

0,6
0,5

I
-A-RELAP5 [13 bends, t=19mm)
-RELAP5 '0 bends, t =19mm)

0,4

CD

"cc

0,3

CO
CD

0,2

y
4

0,1

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

COD, mm

Figure 7. Influence of number of bends on leak rate (Crack length 1=150 mm;
SR=0.00508 mm)
The influence of crack depth is shown in the Figure 8. The analysis of two different
crack depths t=19 mm and t=25 mm was performed. In the case of crack depth
equals to 25 mm, the number of 90 turns is 25*0.673 = 16.825 17. As it is seen

oooe
from the presented figure, the crack depth influence is larger for larger crack gap
(COD).
0,6
0,5 -
CO

I
--RELAP5 (0 bends, t=19mm)
-0-RELAP5 (13 bends , t=19mm)
^-RELAP5 (0 bends, t=25mm)
-A-RELAP5 (17 bends , t=25mm)

D> 0,4

fi

"co 0,3
CO

0,2
0,1

i
0,1

rl

r
0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

COD, mm
Figure 8. Calculated steam leak rates (SR=0.040513 mm; Crack length 1=150 mm;
Discharge coefficient DC=0.70)
The influence of crack surface roughness is shown in the Figure 9. The analysis of
two different surface roughness 0.04051 mm and 0.00508 mm was performed. The
surface roughness SR=0.040513 mm is recommended for Fatigue growth crack [2].
However also it is possible smooth surface of the crack (the surface roughness
SR=0.00508 mm). As it is seen from the presented figure, the increased crack
surface roughness reduces the amount of discharged coolant. Such influence of
roughness is almost the same for various COD. However, the number of bends in the
crack pathway has a significant influence. The larger PLC, the crack surface
roughness influence is less.

oooe
0,6

D- - R E L A P 5 (0 bends, SR=0,00508mm)

-- R E L A P 5

0,5

.eak rate, 1

O)

(13 bends , SR=0,00508mm)

- -ir - RELAP5 (13 bends , SR=0,040513mm)

- -A- - RELAP5 (0 bends, SR=0,040513mm)

0,4

0,3
0,2

0,1

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

COD, mm

Figure 9. Calculated steam leak rates (Crack depth t=19 mm; Crack length 1=150
mm; Discharge coefficient DC=0.70)

Conclusions
The models of crack employing RELAP5 code has been developed. For model
verification a comparison of SQUIRT, RELAP5 and experimental results was
performed. Analysis shows that calculated RELAP5 and SQUIRT results compare
favourably with experimental data. It means, that the RELAP5 model is suitable for
calculations of leak through through-wall cracks in pipes.
Sensitivity analysis of coolant discharge through the cracks was performed. This
allows to determine flow rate of discharged coolant through the cracks in steam lines
Nomenclature
ATWS

Anticipated Transients Without Scream

BWR

Boiling Water Reactor

COA

Crack Opening Area

COD

Crack Opening Displacement

INEL

Idaho National Engineering Laboratory

LBB

Leak-Before-Break

LWR

Light Water Reactor

NPP

Nuclear Power Plant

ooo
NRC

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

PLC

Path Loss Coefficient

RBMK

Russian Acronym for "Channelized Large Power Reactor"

SR

Surface Roughness

References
1. Guidance for Application of the Leak before Break Concept at Ignalina NPP
RBMK-1500 Reactors. VATESI VD-E-03-98, 1998
2. SQUIRT 2.4 Users Manual.
3. Fletcher C. D. et al. RELAP5/MOD3 code manual user's guidelines. NUREG/CR5535.-Idaho: Idaho National Engineering Lab., 1992.
4. Sozzi, G.L., and Sutherland, W.A. "Critical Flow of Saturated and Subcooled
Water at High Pressure", NEDO-13418, 1975.
5. Collier, R.P., Stulen, F.B., Mayfield, M.E., Pape, D.B., and Scottt, P.M. "TwoPhase Flow Through Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracks and Resulting
Acoustic Emission", EPRI Report No. NP-3540-LD, 1984.