PSI - Issue 60

Rahul Mittal et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 60 (2024) 604–613

611

8

Rahul Mittal/ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

Level-B

NB-3222

PL + Pb+ Q  3 Sm PL + Pb+ Q +F → Sa, CUF <1 for Fatigue * Pm < Greater of 1.2Sm or Sy PL < Greater of 1.8Sm or 1.5 Sy PL + Pb < Greater of 1.8 Sm or 1.5 Sy

Level-C

NB-3224

Level-D

Appendix-F F-1331

Pm < 2.4 Sm or 0.7 Su (lesser of) for Austenitic steel and Pm < 0.7 Su for Ferritic steel PL < 150% of Pm Pm+ Pb < 150% of Pm

7. Results: 7.1 Thermal Analysis

On performing the thermal analysis of FE model temperature mapping across the cross section of Feed water nozzle was obtained for all transients and some to the critical contours are shown in Table-5. Plots for Steady state and crash cool conditions are shown. Contours show temperature distribution at the cross section of the nozzle along the thickness of sleeve, crotch, and axial direction. The effects of transient temperature difference on temperature distribution are compared. With the increase in the loop temperature difference, the range of the temperature difference increases.

Table 5. Thermal Transients Contour Plots Sr. No Thermal Condition

SA-12 Assembly Temperature Mapping

FWN & Thermal sleeve Temperature Mapping

1. –‡ƒ†› –ƒ–‡

2.

Crash Cool Down