B12934, Core Xv Startup Physics Test Rept

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Core Xv Startup Physics Test Rept
ML20154K371
Person / Time
Site: Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date: 05/31/1988
From: Claffey S, Mroczka E, Stanford J
CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO.
To:
References
B12934, NUDOCS 8805310015
Download: ML20154K371 (31)
v • d • e


Text

. -_ _____ ____________

m'

';..(

CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY HADDAM NECK PLANT CORE XV STARTUP PHYSICS TEST REPORT MAY 1988 Prepared by: Ad CAAb tt) 5- Y-W S.'F. Claffey? R tor Engineer Approv, , Sy: %Y w ek- 5/C/6B Sfanford, ssistant Engine 6ririg Supervisor Reviewed by: r L a d u --s 4 T + @ f

' P. F. L'Fleureux, Engineering Supervisor 8805310015 880524 ,

PDR ADOCK 05000213 P DCD

TABLE OF CONTENTS Eage

1. I n trod uc ti on . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. Control Rod Drop Time Measuremen ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2.1 Cold Control Rod Drop Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2.2 Hot Con trol Rod Drop Te s ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. New Core Initial Approach to Criticality........... ................................ ..... 6
4. All Rods Out, Critical Boron Concentration............................................... 7
5. Control Rod Coupling Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Iscthermal Temperature Coefficient Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Control Rod B ank Reactivity Worth Measure me nt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Rodded, Cri tical B oron Conce ntration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. Differential Boron Worth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10. Thirty Percent Power Flux Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
11. Ei g h t y Pe rc e n t Powe r F1u x M a p s . . . . .. ... . .. .. . . . . ... . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
12. O n e Hu ndre d Pe rce nt Power Flux M ap...... .. . ........ ..... ................ ........ .23
13. Re ac tor Coola n t S y ste m Flow Te st. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . .. .. . . . . .. .. 25 9

4

LIST OF TABLES Iahh Eau

1. Hot Control Rod Drop Time Measurements............................................... 5
2. Delayed Ne utron Fractions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3. Co n t rol R od B a n k Wo r t h s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4. Differen tial Boron Worth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5. Summary of Results f)om 30% Power Flux Map CY-XV-2-412.....................18
6. Summary of Results from 80% Power Flux Map CY-XV-4-414...... .. ... ....... 20
7. Summary of Results from 80% Power Flux Map CY-XV-6 416..................... 21
8. Summary of Results from 80% Power Flux Map CY-XV-8-418........ ............ 22
9. Summary of Results from 100% Power Flux Map CY-XV-11-421.................. 24
10. R CS Loop Flow Te s t Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 l

l l

I

1. INTRODUCTION This report documents the Connecticut Yankee Core XV Startup Physics Test program. The testing sequence was completed as follows:

Initialcriticality March 19,1988 Zero power testing completed March 21,1988 Turbine phased to grid March 27,1988 80% power flux maps completed April 3,1988 100% power flux map completed April 11,1988 The Cycle 15 core loading is as follows: a Batch 17 feed of 56 stainless steel clad fuel assemblies loaded on the periphery of the core, four twice burned Batch 15B Zircaloy clad Lead Test Assemblies (LTAs) loaded on the core diagonals, one once burned Batch 15C stainless steel c.'ad niel assembly loaded in the center of the core, and a mixture of 44 Batch 15A and 52 Bt.tch 16 stainless steel ciad fuel assemblies loaded in the core interior.

All startup physics test acceptance criteria were met. All requirements of the Technical Specifications were fulfilled.

Page 1 of 27

. . . . - , . , - _ _ = - . - _ _ - , . _ _ _ . - _ - . - _

2. CONTROL ROD DROP TIME MEASUREMENTS 2.1 Cold Control Rod Droo Tests Obiective The purpose of the cold rod drop time measurements is to determine, prior to hot zero power conditions, if each of the 45 control rods will fall freely from its fully withdrawn position.

These rod drop time measurements are not a Technical Specification requirement. This test is performed to identify any problems before performing hot rod drop testing (critical path). The drop time is measured for each of the 45 control rods. The drop time is the elapsed time for a control rod to travel from a fully withdrawn position to a fully inserted position.

License Reauirements There am no license mquimments for cold rod drop testing; as such, the procedure is optional and may not be performed (especially when the procedum would be critical path).

Procedum ne rod position detector primary coil inputs for an entire bank am connected to a Hewlett-Packard Multiprogrammer computer system. The bank is dropped using the main control board manual scram button. Pushing the scram button also triggers the computer system to initiate data collection. The coil output voltage signals, which are a function of control rod velocity, are sampled by the computer system at one millisecond intervals for 3.5 seconds. nese data are then analyzed by computer code which detennines the time elapsed until the control rod strikes bottom. Two graphs depicting the drop are also produced from the voltage signal fc ch rod.

Page 2 of 27

Results The cold rod drop procedure was not perfomied this cycle because its perfom1ance would have been critical path. This,in turn, would have defeated the purpose of the test.

2.2 Hot Control Rod Dron Tests Obiective The purpose of the hot control rod drop time measurements is to measure at operating remuerature and pressure the time for eacil of the 45 control rods to travel from a fully withdrawn position to a fully insened position.

Licenz Reauirements Technical Specification 3.iu 2.4 requires that the hot rod drop time for each control rod be determined each refueling.

Procedure A procedure similar to that described in Section 2.1,"Cold Control Rod drop Time Measurements," is used for the Hot Control Rod Drop Time Measumments, with the addition of a backup method using a high speed recording oscillograph. The backup method is necessary for two reasons: 1)in the event that the computer system is unavailable for any reason, and 2) to retest any questionable rods. The backup method was used to retest seven control rods.

Results All 45 control rods traveled from a fully withdrawn position to a fully inserted position in 2.25 seconds or less with 4 RCPs operating, satisfying the Technical Specification requimment of 2.5 seconds. The measurements were performed on March 16 and 17, 1988. The nominal RCS pressure was 2020 psig and the RCS temperature was 530 5'F. The maximum drop time was 2.250 seconds (rod #18 of bank C) and the minimum drop time was 2.058 seconds (rod #3 of bank A).

Page 3 of 27 1

1 The average drop time was 2.161 seconds; the standard deviation was 0.042 seconds.

Data are presented in Table 1.

A justification for continued operation was submitted to the Staff on February 2,1988.

"Cracking in Control Rod Guide Tube Support Pins," E. J. Mroczka to USNRC.

This document established that in the event that both pins failed for a given guide tube, that the maximum increase in 4 loop control rod drop time would be 0.15 seconds. If the slowest control rod drop time was increased by 0.15 seconds, the resultant drop time would be 2.40 seconds. This value is still within the 2.50 second limit. .

l l

l l

l l

Page 4 of 27 i

l

TABLE 1 Hot Control Rod Drop Time hieasurements Rod No. Bauk Core Lmation DIpp Time (sec)

, 1 A H8 2.104 l 2 A K8 2.089 l 3 A H6 2.058 l 4 A F8 2.126 5 A H10 2.100 6 D K6 2.197 7 D F6 2.196 8 D F10 2.205 9 D K10 2.125 10 B M8 2.148 11 B H4 2.107 l

12 B D8 2.154 13 B H12 2.200 14 C M6 2.235 15 C K4 2.159 16 C F4 2.201 17 C D6 2.139 18 C D10 2.250 19 C F12 2.154 20 C K12 2.171 21 C M10 2.196 22 A N7 2.147 23 A J3 2.128 24 A G3 2.133 25 A C7 2.120 26 A C's 2.120 t 27 A G13 2.115 28 A J13 2.139 29 A N9 2.221 30 B M4 2.200 31 B Di 2.162 32 B D12 2.142 33 B M12 2.149 34 D N5 2.200 35 D L3 2.183 36 D E3 2.179 37 D C5 2.211 38 D C11 2.180 39 D E13 2.184 40 D L13 2.160 41 D N11 2.215 42 A P8 2.200 43 A H2 2.120 44 A B8 2.200 45 A H14 2.136 Page 5 of 27

3. NEW CORE INITIAL APPROACll TO CRITICALITY Obiective The objective of the new core initial critical approach is to provide a safe and efficient means for achieving the initial criticality.

License Reauirements None Procedum At hot, zero power conditions, the reactor coolant system (RCS) boron concentration is first reduced from the refueling boron concentration to approximately 450 ppm above the predicted C/D/A @320 and B @200 critical boron concentration. 1/M plots are maintained throughout the approach to criticality. After the initial dilution, control rod banks C, D and A are fully withdrawn and bank B is withdrawn to 200 steps. The final approach to criticality is then made by additional RCS dilution and shimming of Bank B after the dilution has been terminated.

l Results Core XV initial boron concentration at hot conditions was approximately 2550 ppm. This concentration was reduced to 2218 ppm by adding demineralized water to the reactor coolant l

~

fstem. Control rod banks C, D, and A were then withdrawn to 320 steps and bank B withdrawn to 200 steps. Criticality was achieved at 0055 on March 19,1988 by adding approximately 11,200 gallons of demineralized water. The critical conditions were 535'F, bank B at 208 steps, and 1798 ppm boron. The corrected critical boron concentration with bank B at 200 steps and 535'F is 1795 ppm boron. The predicted boron concentration with bank B at 200 steps is 1768 ppm. The difference between the corrected test data and the predicted critical boron concentration of 27 ppm is well within the acceptance criteria of 100 ppm.

l l

Page 6 of 27

4. ALL RODS OUT CRITICAL BORON CONCENTRATION Obiectise The objective is to measure the all rods out, critical boron concentration at hot zero power conditions.

License Reauirements Technical Specification 3.10 requires verification of adequate shutdown margin prior to exceeding five percent power following a refueling. This test provides infom1ation used to verify core design and thus, adequate shutdown margin.

Procedure Bank B controls rods are borated to 290 steps. The remaining control rod banks are all fully withdrawn. Critical boron concentration is measured. The predicted worth of bank B from 290 to 320 steps then is used to correct the critical boron concentration with bank B at 290

steps to the all rods out condition.

Results The all rods out critical boron concentration was 1834 ppm at 535'F. The predicted hot zero power boron concentration was 1813 ppm. The difference between the predicted and measured critical boron concentrations of 21 ppm was well within the 100 ppm acceptance criteria.

Reactivity Comouter Nuclear Instruinentation System channels 34A and 34B corresponding to the upper and lower ion chambers were used as inputs to the reactivity computer together with the hot zero power delayed neutron fractions for all zero power tests. Reactor coolant temperature and pressurizer level were also input to the reactivity computer. The reactivity computer was calibrated against several stable reactor periods varying from 50 seconds to 400 seconds. The all rods out hot zero power beta fractions are listed in Table 2.

Page 7 of 27

4. . , .

TABLE 2 Delayed Neutron Fractions at 0 EFPD, ARO Hot Zero Power

-1 Group Beta. eff Lambda. Sec 1 2.130E-4 1.280E-2 2 1.312E-3 3.160E-2 3 1.189E-3 1.203E-1 4 2.f60E-3 3.208E-1 5 9.290E-4 1.400E+0 6 2.260E-4 3.882E+0 Beta (Total) = 6.429E-3 Relative Importance (I) = 0.970

, Beta Effective = 6.236E-3 I

h 4

Page 8 of 27

.5. CONTROL ROD COUPLING-VERIFICATION Objective The objective of this test is to verify that each control rod assembly is connected to its respective drive shaft.

License Reauirements None Procedures After the All Rods Out Just Critical Boron Concentration procedure is completed, each control rod is inserted into the core until at least a five pcm change is observed on the reactivity computer. This is accomplished by disconnecting the lift coils for all rods except the test rod in the test bank and driving the rod into the core. The test rod is then returned to its initial position. All control rods are tested in this manner.

Results All control rods exhibited at least a five pcm reactivity change upon insertion into the core.

The acceptance criteria was met. This is not a Technical Specification sun'eillance.

Page 9 of 27

- - - - - - ~ -

l

6. ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT MEASUREMENTS Objective The objective of these measun:ments is (1) to determine the isothermal temperatum coefficient (ITC) for the new core at hot zero power conditions at two control rod configurations and (2) correct the ITC data at ARO/HZP to ARO/HZP/BOL, ARO/HFP/BOL and ARO/HFP/EOL moderator temperatun: coefficient (MTC) for verification of the Technical Specifications limits.

License Reauirements Technical Specifications, Section 3.10.1.5,"Moderator Temperature Coefficient," requires that the temperature coefficient be determined for a new core.

Procedure Hot zero powerjust critical conditions are established. The reactor coolant temperature is then reduced by approximately 5'F by controlling the atmospheric steam dump. The reactivity computer calculates the reactivity change due to the change in temperature and displays reactivity as a function of temperature during the cool down on an X-Y plotter. Temperature coefficients are obtained at the ARO and a rodded control rod bank configuration.

l l

Results Four isothermal temperature coefficient measurements were obtained at the ARO configuration. The average isothermal temperature coefficient measured was -0.52 pcm/*F.

The predicted value is -1.25 pcm/*F. The difference between the measured and predicted temperature coefficients is well within the acceptance criteria of 4 pcm/'F. This result was then extrapolated to HZP BOL, HFP BOL and HFP EOL conditions.

The measured hot zero power HZP BOL moderator temperatum coefficient (MTC) is 1.55 pcm/'F. The predicted value is 0.82 pcm/*F. 'Ihe technical specification requin: ment that the HZP MTC be less positive than 5.0 pcm/*F was met.

Page 10 of 27

l l

l The extrapolated hot full power BOL MTC is -5.09 pen (F. The predicted value is -5.82 penfF. He Technical Specification requirement that the BOL MTC shall be less positive than 0.0 pen (F was met. The extrapolated hot full power EOL MTC is -26.66 pen (F. The predicted value is -27.39 penfF. He Technical Specification requirement that the EOL MTC shall be less negative than -29.0 penfF was met.

One isothermal temperature coefficient measurement was performed at hot zem power with banks A, B, and D fully inserted and bank C fully withdrawn. The measured temperature coefficient was -9.91 pen (F. The predicted value is -11.53 pen (F. The difference between the measured and predicted temperature coefficients is within the acceptance criteria of 4 pen (F. A spurious reactor trip occurred following the first rodded ITC measurement. Based on the mpeatability of the ARO ITC measurements and the excellent agreement between predicted and measured values for other test panuneters, plant management decided that additional measurements were not necessary.

i a

i Page 11 of 27

,f .

7. CONTROL ROD BANK REACTIVITY WORTH MEASUREMENTS Obiective The objective of this test is to measum the differential and integral reactivity wonhs of control rod banks B, A, and D. i License Requirements Technical Specification 3.10 requires verification of adequate shutdown margin prior to exceeding five percent power following a refueling. This test pros ides information used to verify core design and thus, adequate shutdown margin.

Procedure At hot zero power control rod banks are insened into the core in snull increments using the normal sequence for operating bank insertion. Control banks B and A as well as shutdown bank D were measured. The rate of insenion is governed by a reactor coolant dilution established by adding demineralized water to the RCS at 25 gpm. The reactivity of the core is v continuously calculated and displayed on a strip chan by the reactimeter. The strip chan is then analyzed to determine the reactivity wonh of each control rod bank movement.

Results The measured and predicted values for control rod bank worth are pmsented in Table 3. The total rod wonh measured was 2.20% greater than the predicted worth. The results are well

! within the acceptance criteria of 15% for an individual control rod bank and 10% for total measured worth.

Page 12 of 27

TABLE' 3 Control Rod Bank Worths Control Rod Bank Measured Wonh. PCNJ Predicted Worth. PCM % Deviation B 1085 1074 -1.01

'A 2007 1938 -3.44 D~ 2175 2139 1.66 Total 5267 5151 -2.20

% Deviation = Predicted - Measured x 100 Measured i

l i

Page 13 of 27 i

- 4-m,,9-, ,y_.

8. RODDED CRITICAL BORON CONCENTRATION Obiective 4

The objective is to measure the rodded critical boron concentration at hot zero power conditions.

License Reauirements None Procedure Bank C controls rods are fully withdrawn. The remaining control rod banks are all fully inserted. Critical boron concentration is measured.

Results The rodded critical borun concentration was 1098 ppm at 535'F. The predicted hot zero power boron concentration was 1102 ppm. The difference between the predicted and t measured critical boron concentrations of 4 ppm was well within the 100 ppm acceptance criteria.

e Page 14 of 27

9. DIFFERENTIAL BORON WORTli Obiective The objective of this test is to measure the reactivity worth of the soluble poison in terms of pcm/ ppm.

License Reauirements None Procedure Reactor coolant and pressurizer boron samples are taken and analyzed at the equilibrium ARO and banks B A, and D inserted configurations. The critical boron concentrations are corrected for temperature and rod configuration. He differential boron worth is calculated by dividing the measured bank worth by the change in boron concentration.

Results Table 4 presents the data of the predicted and correctedjust critical boron concentration for the ARO and rodded configurations, the predicted and measured total reactivity worth of banks B, A, and D and differential boron worth.

Page 15 of 27

TABLE 4 Diffemntial Boron Worth Measured Predicted ARO/HZP critical boron (ppm) 1834 1813 Rodded HZP critical boron (ppm)

(Banks B, A, D insened) 1098 1102 Boron Difference 736 711 Bank worth (pcm)

(Sum of B, A, D) '5267 >

5151 Differential boron wonh (penVppm) 7.156 7.245 i

e i

Page 16 of 27 i

o

10. THIRTY PERCENT POWER FLUX MAP Obiective The objective of the nominal 30% power flux map is to detennine if any gross neutron flux abnormalities exist.

License Reauimments None Procedum One flux map is taken using the incore flux mapping system and evaluated using the INCORE computer code.

Results The results of the flux map demonstrated that the core power distribution is as predicted. A summary of the results is shown in Table 5.

Page 17 of 27

.- - , _ . - , . . . . , _ - - , , - . - , - , - - - - , ~ , . - - = , ,--,-,....,,r., ,v . .,n,,-,.= - , , , , ..,

. 1

.l .

TABLE 5 Summary of Results from 30%

Power Flux Map CY-XV.2 412 Power - 30%, Burnup -' 11.26 mwd /Mtu (10 EFPH), Boron - 1605 ppm, Bank B - 299 steps Core Peaks Adiusted kW/ft F. delta-H Measund Limit Measured Limit SS Fuel: 3.5 N/A 1.469 1.94 Zr Fuel: 2.4 N/A 1.022 1.94 Incore Ouadrant Power Tilt Measured Limit 0.9973 1 0.9937

........ 1 ......-

N/A 0.9982 1 1.0109

Core Averace AxialOffset 8.36%

1 Page 18 of 27 i

L_ _ _

11. EIGilTY PERCENT POWER FLUX MAPS Obiective The objective of the thme 80% power flux maps is to confimi the predicted core power distribution and to establish the incore/excore axial offset correlation.

License Reauirements Technical Specification 3.17 mquires that the linear heat generation rate and enthalpy rise hot channel factor be determined from incore measurements and evaluated before exceeding 80%

of rated power. Additionally, the excore/incore calibration must be perfomled prior to exceeding 80% power.

Procedure Three flux maps are performed at approximately 80% power. A new incore/excore axial offset correlation is established based on these three maps. The axial offset indication is calibrated and the power distribution parameters are evaluated prior to increasing power from 80% to 100%.

Results The results of the 80% power flux maps produced power distributions that compared well with predicted values and were within the Technical Specification 3.17 limits. Based on the evaluation of the 80% power flux maps, power was increased to 100%. A summary of the results is shown in Tables 6,7, and 8.

Page 19 of 27

p .

]

TABLE 6 Sumnnry of Results From 80%

Power Flux Map CY-XV-4-414 Power - 82%, Burnup . 60.79 mwd /Mtu (52 EFPH), Boron 1392 ppm, Bank B - 310 steps Core Peaks Adiusted kW/ft F. delta H Measured Limil jMeasured Limil SS Fuel: 8.7 13.3 1.44 1.69 Zr Fuel: 6.2 13.3 1.02 1.69 Incore Ouadrant Power Tilt Meastred Lirnit 1.0009 1 0.9973 l ...... -

1.02 1.0027 1 0.9991 Core Averace Axial Offset 3.72%

Page 20of 27

- - - - ~--- -- - - - - - ~

TABLE 7 Summary of Results from 80%

Power Flux Map CY-XV-6-416 Power - 80%, Burnup - 83.27 hiWd/httu (71 EFPH), Boron - 1378 ppm, Bank B - 283 steps Core Peaks Adiusted kW/ft F-delta-H hieasured Limil hieasured Lim!1 SS Fuel: 8.6 13.3 1,43 1.70 Zr Fuel: 6.1 13.3 1.02 1.70 Incore Ouadrant Power Tilt hieasured Ilmit 1.0018 1 0.9982

. . ... l ... .... 1.02

, 1.0018 1 0.9982 Core Averace AxialOffset 1.34 %

l i

l Page 21 of 27 l

. 1 TABLE 8 Summary of Results from 80% -

Power Flux Map CY-XV-8-418 Power - 80%, Burnup - 103.81 mwd /Mtu (88 EFPH), Boron - 1350 ppm, Bank B - 263 steps Core Peaks Adiusted kW/ft F-delta-H Measured Limg Measund Limil SS Fuel: 8.6 13.3 1.43 1.70 Zr Fuel: 6.2 13.3 1.02 1.70 Incore Ouadrant Po.ver Tilt

Measured Lima

, 1.0025 1 0.9935

......... I . ....

1.02 1.0016 1 1.0025 Core Averace AxialOffset 4

l 2.05 %

i i

l l

i Page 22 of 27 l

L _. _

4 .

12. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT POWER FLUX MAP Obiective The objective of the 100% power flux map is to confinn the predicted core power distribution parameters and to verify the excore/incore axial offset corn:lation determined at 80% power.

License Reauirements Technical Specifications 3.17 requires that the linear heat generation rate be evaluated based on incore measurements at rated powt r following each refueling outage.

Procedum A flux map is taken at rated power. Excore readings are also taken du;ing the flux maps.

After the evaluation of the flux map, the excore/incore axial offset correlation is verified.

Results An incore flux map was performed at 100% power. Data generated by this flux map wem used in the evaluation of the excom/incom correlation. Allincore results were within the Technical Specification 3.17 limits. A summary of the results is shown in Table 9.

Page 23 or 27

TABLE 9

'lummary of Results from 100%

Power Flux Map CY.XV.11421 Power . 99.8%, Burnup . 297 mwd /Mtu (252 EFPH), Boron - 1289 ppm, Bank B - 312 steps Core Peaks Adiusted kW/ft F-delta-H Measured Limil Measured Limit SS Fuel: 10.35 13 30 1.43 1.60 l

Zr Fuel: 7.46 13.30 1.03 1.60 l

I l Incore Ouadrant Power Tilt l Measured Limh 1.0007 1 0.9945

...l ......... 1.02 1.0024 l 1.0024 Core Averace AxialOffset

+1.083%

Page 24 of 27

r-

13. REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM FLOW TEST Obiective The purpose of the r.: actor coolant system flow test is to measure the total vessel flow rate (including con: bypss flow) at 100% rated power operating conditions. A precision heat balance was used and the results were corrected for all measurement uncertainties. The results of this test provide flow constants used for shiftly RCS flow surveillance, l.icense Reauirements Technical Specification 3.17 requires that the reactor coolant system flow rate be detemiined by a heat balance within 7 EFPD of achieving 100% rated them3al power after each refueling outage.

Procedure A precision heat balance was established for each loop using the steam generators as the control volumes. The following parameters were measured:

  • hot leg temperatures

+ cold leg temperatures e feedwater temperatures a

feedwater flow rates feedwater pressure s'eam generator pressures Since steam generator blowdown error was not considered in the flow uncertainty, blowdown was isolated during the period of data acquisition. For the same reason, auxiliary steam loads were placed on an auxiliary boiler. The above data were used to calculate the following time averaged parameters for each of the four loops: steam generator heat transfer rate, primary coolant enthalpy change and cold leg specific volume. The hot leg temperatures were corrected for stratification effects by using empirically derived worst case stratification values.

The 4 loop test was conducted at 1810 MWth,563 *F average coolant temperature and 2020 psig average coolant pressure.

Page 25 of 27

An uncertainty analysis was performed in 1986 for this measurement in accordance with NUREG/CR-3659,"A Mathematical Model for Assessing the Uncertainties of Instrumentation Measurements for Power and Flow of PWR Reactors." The analysis considered the effects of all sources of uncertainty in each instrumentation loop which was used. The flow uncertainty value for the four loep configuration was established to be 2.963% of the nominal flow rate,4.255% for the tr ee loop configuration.

Respits The best estimate reactor coolant system flow rate was detemiined to be 269,356 gpm.

Corrected for measurement uncertainties, the flow rate was established to be 261,375 gpm.

This flow rate is 15375 gpm (6.25%) greater than the minimum value of 246,000 gpm, as required by Technical Specification 3.17. Rated themial power was reached at 10.0 EFPD.

The reactor coolant system flow testing was completed at 10.5 EFPD, thus the flow test was conducted 0.5 EFPD afte r 100% rated thermal power operation was achieved. The flow test data is summarized in Table 10.

Page 26 of 27

  • , i i

TABLE 10 Reactor Coolant System ,

Flow Test Results I

Stratification i Loop AT(*F) Correction (*F) Flow Rate (GPM) 1 45.98 + 1.05 68947 2 46.48 + 0.65 66211

.3 46.61 + 0.45 67704 l 4 46.85 + 1.05 66494 r

i Total RCS Loop Flow Rate: 269356 gpm ,

2.963% Uncertainty Penalty: 7981 gpm f

+

Minimum Guaranteed Flow Rate: 261375 gpm i

! i 1 ,

l l  ?

l l

l.

l l

Page 27 of 27

General Offices

  • Selden Street, Berlin, Connecticut I sIeYE5sTi$c'**~ P.O.B0X 270 EA'I) HARTFORD. CONNECTICUT 06141 o270 k k J w .w sm.7[.Y.
m. cc.. a~w (203) 665-5000 May 24, 1988 Eqcket No. 50-213 B12934 W. T. Russell, Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Gentlemen:

Haddam Neck Plant Lycle 15 Startuo Physics Test Report In accordance with Section 6.9.1.a of the Haddam Neck Plant Technical Specifications, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCO) hereby l

submits the Startup Physics Test Report for Cycle 15 operation for the :laddam Neck Plant. This report is being submitted within 90 days following completion of the startup test program.

l l Should you have any questions related to this submittal, please contact us.

l Very truly yours, CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY

/

M M-E. J.ftroczka~

Seniof Vice Fre// sident cc: Document Control Desk A. B. Wang, NRC Project Manager, Haddam Neck Plant J.1. Shediosky, Senior Resident Inspector, Haddam Neck Plant fh I l

_

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=B12934,_Core_Xv_Startup_Physics_Test_Rept&oldid=3351067"