Comparison of MARS Code Analysis

on DVI Line Break LOCA at Different

Break Sizes between SNUF and
APR1400

2009/05/21
Korean Nuclear Society Spring Meeting
Xin-Guo Yu, Keo-Hyoung Lee, Goon-Cherl Park
Nuclear Thermo-hydraulics Engineering Lab.
Seoul National Univ.

1
 Outline

2
 Introduction

Background

Broken DVI- Line Core Pressure

Upper
Downcomer
Cold- Leg Hot- Leg

Fig. 1. Flow Path of Coolant in

DVI Line Break LOCA
3
 Introduction

Description of SNUF
 RHRP(Reduced Height and Reduced
Pressure) facility
Scaled-down from APR1400
Designed to simulate LOCA of APR1400
 Scaling Factors of Geometry
Length: 1/6.4
Area: 1/178
 Operation Capability
Maximum Pressure: 8 bar
Maximum Power: 150 kW

Fig. 2. Schematic of SNUF (Seoul National Univ. Facility)

4
 Introduction

Objectives and Analysis Strategy of Research:

5
 Energy Scaling Method and Test Conditions

Derivation of Energy Scaling Method

 Mass and energy conservation equations in primary system
dM
 m&in  m&out 
Where M   dV : mass inventory in primary system
dt
dMh
 Qc  m&in hin  m&out hout   hdV 1
M
Where h    hdV
dt
  dV
Non-dimensionalize and energy conservation equation with respect to initial
values of primary system
⇒ Mass inventory : M 0
⇒ Enthalpy difference between cold leg and hot leg : h0
⇒ Thermal power : Qc

6
 Energy Scaling Method and Test Conditions

 Dimensionless conservation equations

dM *  m&in  m&out
*
 
dt M0 M0
dM *h *  Qc  m&in hin  m&out hout
    
dt *
M 0 h0 M 0 h0 M 0 h0
Set   1 , to conserve time scale, the scaling criteria are given as follows:

 m&in   m&out   Qc   hin   hout 

  1   1   1   1   1
 M 0  R  M0  R  M 0 h0  R  h0  R  h0  R

⇒ Energy scaling criteria

※ Henry-Fauske critical flow model adopted to obtain estimated critical mass flow rate GcR
M
⇒ Ratio of broken area : AR  0R
GcR
7
 Energy Scaling Method and Test Conditions

 Steady-state and Transient Conditions

 Conservative core power
Normal operation: 102 % of normal power Decay Heat: 120 % of decay heat (ANS73 model)
 Test conditions obtained from energy scaling method
Scaling
Parameter APR1400 SNUF Parameter 100 % 50 % 25 %
Factor
Core Power 4,063 MW 108 kW 2.66E-05 Core Power
0 ~ 100 s 71.4 kW 72.7 kW 73.1 kW
Primary System 100 ~ 300 s 47.6 kW 47.6 kW 47.8 kW
157 bar 6.3 bar 0.04
Pressure 300 ~ 1000 s 37.4 kW 37.5 kW 37.6 kW
Secondary System
69 bar 1.725 bar 0.025
Pressure Break Size 158 mm2 78 mm2 39 mm2
Hot-leg Temperature 324.53 oC 145.51 oC 0.448
HPSI flow rate 45.9 g/s 40.3 g/s 31.8 g/s
Cold-leg Temperature 290.85 oC 126.91 oC 0.436

Mass flow rate SIT flow rate 28.0 g/s 20.4 g/s N/A
10,496 kg/s 0.673 kg/s 6.41E-05
in the core
Mass flow rate SIT temperature
4,400 kg/s 3.53 kg/s 8.02E-04 20.27 oC 20.27 oC 20.27 oC
in secondary system

Table 1. Steady State Conditions of APR1400 and SNUF Table 2. Transient Conditions of SNUF

8
 Simulation Results and Discussion

 Primary System Pressures at Different DVI Line Break Accident

1.0 1.0 1.0
SNUF SNUF SNUF

Primary System Pressure [ P/P ]

Primary System Pressure [ P/P0]

Primary System Pressure [ P/P ]

0
0
APR1400 APR1400 APR1400
0.8 0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0 0.0

0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Time [s] Time [s] Time [s]

Fig. 3. Primary System Pressure Fig. 4. Primary System Pressure Fig. 5. Primary System Pressure
at 100% Break Accident at 50% Break Accident at 25% Break Accident

• Good agreement of change rate of primary system pressure between SNUF and APR1400
in each case of accidents
• Test conditions are reasonable, in the view points of energy and pressure in the primary
system during accident
9
 Simulation Results and Discussion

 Downcomer Water Level at Different DVI Line Break Accident

1.0 1.0 1.0 SNUF
(100) SNUF

Downcomer Collapsed Water Level [H/Ho]

Downcomer Collapsed Water Level [H/Ho]
APR1400
APR1400
Downcomer Collapsed Water Level [H/Ho]

0.9 () 0.9 0.9

0.8 0.8 0.8

0.7 0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6 0.6

0.5 0.5 0.5

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1 0.1

0.0 0.0 0.0

0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Time [s] Time [s] Time [s]

Fig. 6. Downcomer Water Level Fig. 7. Downcomer Water Level Fig. 8. Downcomer Water Level
at 100% Break Accident at 50% Break Accident at 25% Break Accident

• Timing of downcomer seal clearing phenomenon did not show good agreements
between SNUF and APR1400 for 50% and 25% break accident.
• It is due to no consideration of momentum conservation in the process to determine
test conditions with energy scaling method.
10
 Simulation Results and Discussion

 Core Water Level at Different DVI Line Break Accident

1.0 1.0 1.0

Core Collapsed Water Level [ H/H0]

Core Collapsed Water Level [ H/H0]

Core Collapsed Water Level [ H/H0]

SNUF SNUF SNUF
0.8 APR1400 0.8 APR1400 0.8 APR1400

0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0 0.0

0 100 200 300 400 500 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Time [s] Time [s] Time [s]

Fig. 9. Core Water Level Fig. 10. Core Water Level Fig. 11. Core Water Level
at 100% Break Accident at 75% Break Accident at 25% Break Accident

• Simulation results of APR1400 shows lower core water level compared to that of SNUF
after break, 75s / 130s / 250s for 100%, 50% and 25% break accidents respectively
• Large discrepancy of core water level between SNUF and APR1400 due to difference of
timing of downcomer seal clearing phenomenon and no consideration of momentum
conservation
11
 Conclusion

 Summary
• Reasonable test conditions was obtained from energy scaling method
∵ good agreement with primary system pressure between SNUF and APR1400
• Water levels of downcomer and core were not scaled down resonalbly
∵ no consideration of momentum conservation in deriving scaling method
• Additional study is required to scale-down the momentum in the loop

 Further Study
• Study dimensionless momentum equation to obtain dimensionless criteria
to determine test conditions for SNUF experiment
• Conduct SNUF experiment to research DVI line break LOCA, served as a
counterpart of ATLAS test conducted in KAERI
• Validate capability of MARS code in simulating DVI-line break LOCA

12