1 / 26

A Comparison of ARCON96 vs. Murphy & Campe Including Case Study Results

A Comparison of ARCON96 vs. Murphy & Campe Including Case Study Results Stephen A. Vigeant, CCM and Carl A. Mazzola, CCM To be presented at the Eight Nuclear Utility Meteorological Data User Group (NUMUG) Meeting St. Charles, IL, May 9, 2002. Overview.

talli
Download Presentation

A Comparison of ARCON96 vs. Murphy & Campe Including Case Study Results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Comparison of ARCON96 vs. Murphy & Campe Including Case Study Results Stephen A. Vigeant, CCM and Carl A. Mazzola, CCM To be presented at the Eight Nuclear Utility Meteorological Data User Group (NUMUG) Meeting St. Charles, IL, May 9, 2002

  2. Overview • Murphy-Campe endorsed by NRC for CR Habitability Analyses Since 1974 • Other Methods Occasionally Used (K Factors) • ARCON96 Developed for More Realistic Treatment of Diffusion Near Buildings • Nuclear Plants Start Using ARCON96 to Reduce Conservatism • DG-1111 Endorses both ARCON96 and Murphy- Campe

  3. Outline • ARCON96 vs. Murphy-Campe Methodologies • Compare Case Study Results • Explain Behavior • NRC Concerns in Application of ARCON96

  4. ARCON96 Methodology • Straight Line Gaussian Plume Model • Ground-Level, Vent , and Elevated Releases • Low Wind Speed Plume Meander • Aerodynamic Wake Effects

  5. ARCON96 Methodology • Diffuse Source Option • Sector Averaging Constant • Wind Direction Sector Width • Surface Roughness Length • Hourly Meteorological Data

  6. ARCON96 Methodology C/Q = [(u)(p)(S y)(S z)]-1 exp -1/2 (y/sy)2 where: C/Q = relative concentration for a 1-hour period (sec/m3) Sy = [sy2 + sy12 +sy22]1/2 Sz = [sz2 + sz12 +sz22]1/2 sy = normal atmospheric horizontal dispersion coefficient sz = normal atmospheric vertical dispersion coefficient sy1, sz1 = low wind speed corrections sy2, sz2 =building wake corrections

  7. ARCON96 Methodology sy1 = 9.13E05[1 - (1+(x/1000 u))exp(-x/1000u] sz1 = 6.67E02[1 - (1+(x/100 u))exp(-x/100u)] sy2 = 5.24E-02u2A[1 - (1+(x/10A1/2))exp(-x/10A1/2)] sz2 = 1.17E-02u2A[1 - (1+(x/10A1/2))exp(-x/10A1/2)] u = wind speed (m/sec) x = downwind distance (m) y = horizontal distance from the center of the plume (m) A = cross-sectional area of the building (m2) Sector Averaging Used for Periods > 8 hours

  8. Murphy-Campe Methodology • Straight Line Gaussian Plume Model • Point Source - Point Receptor • Diffuse Source - Point Receptor • Building Wake Only

  9. Murphy-Campe Methodology C/Q= [3upsysz]-1 (point source)* C/Q= [u(psysz + A/(K+2))]-1 (diffuse source) where: 3 = wake factor based on Regulatory Guides 1.3 and 1.4 k = 3/(s/d)1.4 s = source to receptor difference (m) d = containment structure width (m) * elevation difference between a point source and a point receptor less than or equal to 30 percent of the building height

  10. Murphy-Campe Methodology Intermediate Averaging Times Based on 0-2 hour C/Q Value: Averaging Occupancy Wind Speed Wind Direction TimeFactorFactorFactor 0 - 8 hrs111 8 - 24 hrs15%/10% speed0.75 + F/4 1 - 4 days0.65%/20% speed0.50 + F/2 4 - 30 days0.45%/40% speedF F is the fraction of time the wind blows the activity toward the receptor

  11. Case Studies • Nine Meteorological Databases Included • Diffuse and Point Ground-Level Sources • Containment Walls, Vents, Relief Valves, Main Steam Line Breaks • Cross-Sectional Building Areas for Wake Effect Used when Appropriate • NRC/DG-1111 Guidance Used

  12. Case Studies TABLE 1 Comparison of ARCON96 and Murphy-Campe Control Room C/Q Values for Site A (Low Wind Speed) 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site A: Unit 1 Containment Edge (x = 75 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe2.88E-03 2.88E-03 1.90E-03 6.62E-04 1.41E-04 ARCON964.88E-04 4.07E-04 1.79E-04 1.41E-04 1.22E-04 Credit5.9 7.1 10.6 4.7 1.2 Site A: Unit 1 Containment Top (x = 94 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe2.51E-03 2.51E-03 1.66E-03 5.77E-04 1.23E-04 ARCON965.93E-04 4.63E-04 1.84E-04 1.34E-04 1.16E-04 Credit4.2 5.4 9.0 4.3 1.1

  13. Case Studies Site A: Unit 1 Auxiliary Building (x = 28 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe8.24E-03 8.24E-03 6.01E-03 2.32E-03 6.18E-04 ARCON966.48E-03 4.91E-03 1.95E-03 1.45E-03 1.19E-03 Credit1.3 1.7 3.1 1.6 0.5 Site A: Unit 1 Main Steam Line Break (x = 35 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe7.81E-03 7.81E-03 5.55E-03 2.11E-03 7.11E-04 ARCON964.24E-03 3.87E-03 1.69E-03 1.18E-03 1.06E-03 Credit1.8 2.0 3.3 1.8 0.7 Site A: Unit 1 Main Steam Relief Valves (x = 86 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe2.97E-03 2.97E-03 1.94E-03 6.92E-04 1.54E-04 ARCON967.46E-04 6.31E-04 2.62E-04 1.98E-04 1.62E-04 Credit4.0 4.7 7.4 3.5 0.9

  14. Case Studies TABLE 1 - CONTINUED 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site A: Unit 2 Containment Edge (x = 72 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe4.16E-034.16E-032.81E-031.09E-031.58E-04 ARCON964.82E-043.59E-041.55E-041.21E-049.18E-05 Credit8.6 11.6 18.1 9.0 1.7 Site A: Unit 2 Containment Top (x = 93 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe3.65E-033.65E-032.47E-039.56E-041.39E-04 ARCON965.56E-044.45E-041.91E-041.39E-049.35E-05 Credit6.6 8.2 12.9 6.9 1.5

  15. Case Studies Site A: Unit 2 Auxiliary Building (x = 25 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe1.33E-021.33E-029.30E-033.94E-031.20E-03 ARCON964.82E-033.20E-031.58E-031.13E-038.07E-04 Credit2.8 4.2 5.9 3.5 1.5 Site A: Unit 2 Main Steam Line Break (x = 54 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe6.46E-03 6.46E-03 4.90E-03 2.00E-03 5.75E-04 ARCON961.22E-03 8.69E-04 3.66E-04 2.71E-04 2.02E-04 Credit5.3 7.4 13.4 7.4 2.9 Site A: Unit 2 Main Steam Relief Valves (x = 91 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe7.75E-037.75E-035.63E-031.99E-033.26E-04 ARCON965.01E-043.58E-041.61E-041.19E-048.32E-05 Credit15.5 21.7 35.0 16.7 3.9

  16. Case Studies TABLE 2 Comparison of ARCON96 and Murphy-Campe Control Room C/Q Values for Site B (Low Wind Speed) 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site B: Unit 1 Containment Edge (x = 46 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe2.10E-032.10E-031.40E-035.20E-041.40E-04 ARCON961.04E-037.60E-043.04E-042.73E-042.14E-04 Credit2.0 2.8 4.6 1.9 0.7 Site B: Auxiliary Building Stack (x = 94 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe1.70E-031.70E-031.20E-034.00E-049.00E-05 ARCON961.75E-031.25E-034.52E-043.34E-042.91E-04 Credit1.0 1.4 2.7 1.2 0.3

  17. Case Studies Site B: Unit 1 Main Steam Relief Valves (x = 45 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe2.10E-032.10E-031.40E-035.20E-041.40E-04 ARCON962.77E-032.02E-036.79E-045.63E-044.65E-04 Credit0.8 1.0 2.1 0.9 0.3 Site B: Unit 2 Containment Edge (x = 31 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe3.00E-033.00E-031.90E-037.10E-041.90E-04 ARCON961.34E-031.02E-033.88E-043.04E-042.23E-04 Credit2.2 2.9 4.9 2.3 0.9 Site B: Unit 2 Main Steam Relief Valves (x = 34 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe2.70E-032.70E-031.80E-036.50E-041.60E-04 ARCON963.75E-032.58E-039.28E-047.58E-046.91E-04 Credit0.7 1.1 1.9 0.9 0.2

  18. Case Studies TABLE 3 Comparison of ARCON96 and Murphy-Campe Control Room C/Q Values for Site C (Low Wind Speed) 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site C: Building Vent to Intake 1 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe3.48E-042.94E-042.53E-042.01E-041.44E-04 ARCON961.20E-049.96E-054.85E-053.15E-052.02E-05 Credit2.9 3.0 5.2 6.4 7.1 Site C: Building Vent to Intake 2 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe3.48E-042.94E-042.53E-042.01E-041.44E-04 ARCON962.17E-041.64E-047.89E-054.33E-053.35E-05 Credit1.6 1.8 3.2 4.6 4.3

  19. Case Studies TABLE 3 - CONTINUED 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site C: Ground Level Release to Intake 1 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe3.70E-032.38E-031.91E-031.19E-035.97E-04 ARCON962.00E-041.28E-045.72E-054.05E-053.09E-05 Credit18.5 18.6 33.4 29.4 19.3 Site C: Ground Level Release to Intake 2 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe1.20E-037.91E-046.42E-044.09E-042.14E-04 ARCON968.60E-056.46E-052.80E-052.00E-051.53E-05 Credit14.0 12.2 22.9 20.5 14.0

  20. Case Studies TABLE 4 Comparison of ARCON96 and Murphy-Campe Control Room C/Q Values for Site D (Low Wind Speed) 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site D: Unit 1 Vent to Intake 1 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe3.84E-032.03E-031.68E-031.18E-038.89E-04 ARCON967.96E-044.68E-042.23E-041.78E-041.44E-04 Credit4.8 4.3 7.5 6.6 6.2 Site D: Unit 1 Vent to Intake 2 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe4.07E-032.47E-031.97E-031.37E-039.84E-04 ARCON964.03E-033.35E-031.54E-031.05E-038.81E-04 Credit1.0 0.7 1.3 1.3 1.1

  21. Case Studies TABLE 4 - CONTINUED 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site D: Unit 2 Vent to Intake 1 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe2.53E-031.72E-031.46E-031.04E-037.23E-04 ARCON962.60E-032.16E-031.02E-036.96E-045.71E-04 Credit1.0 0.8 1.4 1.5 1.3 Site D: Unit 2 Vent to Intake 2 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe1.70E-031.10E-039.44E-046.73E-044.64E-04 ARCON965.85E-043.89E-041.93E-041.47E-041.17E-04 Credit2.9 2.8 4.9 4.6 4.0

  22. Case Studies TABLE 5 Comparison of ARCON96 and Murphy-Campe Control Room C/Q Values for Sites E-I (Moderate Wind Speed) 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site E: Unit 1Containment Edge (x = 31 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe4.05E-03 4.05E-03 1.90E-03 9.55E-04 3.42E-04 ARCON966.10E-03 5.30E-03 2.66E-03 2.00E-03 1.52E-03 Credit0.7 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.2 Site E: Unit 2 Containment Edge (x = 31 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe4.05E-03 4.05E-03 1.90E-03 9.55E-04 3.42E-04 ARCON966.04E-03 5.30E-03 2.68E-03 1.98E-03 1.53E-03 Credit0.7 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.2

  23. Case Studies TABLE 5 - CONTINUED 95th Percentile C/Q Values (sec/m3) Site F: Unit 1Containment Edge (x = 31 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe6.24E-03 6.24E-03 3.16E-03 1.40E-03 3.50E-04 ARCON966.08E-03 5.32E-03 2.79E-03 1.82E-03 1.32E-03 Credit1.0 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.3 Site F: Unit 2Containment Edge (x = 31 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe6.24E-03 6.24E-03 3.16E-03 1.40E-03 3.50E-04 ARCON966.20E-03 5.37E-03 2.74E-03 1.80E-03 1.31E-03 Credit1.0 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.3

  24. Case Studies Site G: Main Steam Relief Valves (x = 69 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe1.29E-031.29E-037.61E-044.84E-042.13E-04 ARCON961.13E-039.45E-044.54E-042.68E-041.67E-04 Credit1.1 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.3 Site H: Main Steam Relief Valves (x = 67 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe1.29E-031.29E-037.61E-044.84E-042.13E-04 ARCON961.24E-031.08E-035.29E-043.43E-042.72E-04 Credit1.0 1.2 1.4 1.4 0.8 Site I: Main Steam Relief Valves (x = 30 m) 0 - 2 hr 2 - 8 hr 8 - 24 hr 1 - 4 day 4 - 30 day Murphy-Campe3.19E-033.19E-032.05E-037.61E-042.13E-04 ARCON962.85E-032.31E-039.84E-048.83E-047.82E-04 Credit1.1 1.4 2.1 0.9 0.3

  25. CONCLUSIONS • ARCON96 Provides Lower C/QValuesthan Murphy-Campe in Most Cases • Lower ARCON96 C/QValuesGenerally Occur at Low-Wind Speed Sites • Higher ARCON96 C/Qs Occur at Moderate- Wind Speed Sites • Lower ARCON96 C/Qs Due to DominanceofLow-Wind Speed Plume Meander Effect • ARCON96 C/Qs Maximize at Moderate Wind Speeds (i.e., 3-4 m/sec)

  26. NRC CONCERNS • Proper Use of Meteorological Data • 5 years on-site data • data QA (e.g., no nearby obstructions) • correct wind speed units • Avoid Vent (i.e. mixed mode) and Elevated Release Options (i.e., for short distances) • Avoid Application to Distances < 10 meters • Appropriate Use of Cross-Sectional Building Area for Wake Effect

More Related