IR 05000254/1993013
| ML20057A459 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 09/03/1993 |
| From: | Forney W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Delgeorge L COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| GL-89-10, NUDOCS 9309140245 | |
| Preceding documents: |
|
| Download: ML20057A459 (71) | |
Text
__
. _ _ _ _ -
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
'
-
m Mc,
UNITED STATES
-
e e
ft
\\
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMiss10N
,
y S
nEcion m re f
/
CLEN ELLYN. 4LLINOl$ 60137
""**
SEP 31993 l
l l
l Docket No. 50-254 i
Docket No. 50-265 l
Commonwealth Edison Company
,
'
ATTN: Mr. L. Vice President Nuclear Oversight and Regulatory Services Executive Towers West III 1400 Opus Place, Suite 300 Downers Grove, IL 60515
Dear Mr. DelGeorge:
SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 26, 1993, WITH COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY REPRESENTATIVES TO DISCUSS GENERIC LETTER 89-10 ISSUES
'
On August 26, 1993, the Regional Administrator and members of the Region III staff, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation's (NRR) Mechanical Engineering Branch, and NRR Projects met with representatives of Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) to discuss CECO Generic Letter 89-10 Program issues.
The staff raised concerns regarding the status of the GL 89-10 program observed during inspections of the program at several CECO sites, most recently at the Quad Cities GL 89-10 Part 2 inspection in July 1993 (50-254/93013(DRS); 50-265/93013(DRS)). Specifically, the staff was concerned about program safety focus, management control, and technical issues regarding evaluations of valve expected performance.
NRC outlined the details of each concern.
The lack of safety focus issue was described as CECO's failure to focus on those valves with the greatest impact on plant safety and those valves with the least design margin when determining
,
test prioritization. Concerns with management controls of the program included minimal progress in dynamic testing, especially for boiling water reactor plants, and deferral of testing from recent outages. The staff j
indicated that the basis for acceptance of CECO's original extended GL 89-10
'
schedule was no longer valid and would be reevaluated.
The method and slowness of test result evaluation was expressed as a concern due to the need to consider the differences between actual results and design assumptions when evaluating valve performance.
Also, validation of design assumptions will be necessary to evaluate adequacy of valves that will not be tested.
Commonwealth Edison Company acknowledged the concerns and presented action plan details for improving the GL 89-10 program performance (enclosed as Attachment 3).
For dynamic test scheduling, prioritization would be based on both the valve's impact on plant safety and the amount of design margin.
Test prioritization would start with the next outages where feasible.
LaSalle had
}
13116i r
i e
9309140245 930903 i
ADOCK0500g4
,
DR
- .r
.
!
!
!
~
Commonwealth Edison Company
SEP 3 1993
!
I completed the prioritization review, however, the Dresden and Quad Cities q
efforts would be completed in the Fall of 1993.
NRC requested that CECO submit the schedule of planned dynamic and static testing for future outages
i at each boiling water reactor site.
CECO indicated that an MOV test schedule would be developed and provided to NRC within approximately 30 days.
.
The LaSalle dynamic test prioritization effort identified which valves were j
most significant from a plant safety standpoint and had evaluated whether
-
design margin was available to ensure operability until testing could be performed on these valves.
Ceco's conclusion was that even with the use of a
j higher valve factor (0.4 - 0.5), the valves were operable.
There was
'
discussion regarding the method used to determine operability and Region III agreed to review the specific parameters used for operability determinations l
l at LaSalle Station within the next few weeks.
t j
CECO addressed how management control of the program would be improved and stated that the Engineering and Construction Manager (SECM) at each site has i
l the responsibility for successful completion of the program, including MOV
'
testing. The corporate office would act as a support group for each site.
l
\\
-
The discussion regarding evaluation of test results reft cred to the June 24, 1993, letter from CECO to NRC describing reasons for ncn completing the
,
evaluation of past test results within the four month time frame originally t
indicated in a letter dated September 24, 1992.
Specifically, NRC was i
concerned that the data base of test information had not been evaluated promptly. These evaluations are necessary to assess the individual valve
-
performance and could provide useful information for the purposes of validating assumptions for stem factors, valve factors, and load sensitive
,
behavior.
CECO indicated that the evaluation of individual dynamic tests was j
expected to be completed by the end of 1993 and that program assumption
validation would continue to be pursued.
I If you have any questions, please contact Mr. G. C. Wright of my staff at (708) 790-5695.
Sincerely,
,
bJ6 L. D
~
-
William L. For
, Acti Dire tor
.!
Division of Reactor Safety i
i l
Attachments:
1.
GL Meeting Attendees 2.
NRC Handouts i
'
3.
CECO Handouts See Attached Distribution
j
I i
..<
.
Commonwealth Edison Company
SEP 31993 i
Distribution
]
REGION III
,
AUGUST 26. 1993
!
i
)
Nuclear Reculatory Commission Title
.
!
i
!
J. Martin Regional Administrator i
H. Clayton Chief, Reactor Projects S anch 1 i
!
A. Dur. lop Inspector, Materials and Processes Section W. Torney Acting Director, Division of Reactor j
-
l Safety
{
C. Gainty Inspector, Materials and Processes' Section
!
G. Grant Director, Division of Reactor Safety
{
J. Guzman Inspector, Materials and Processes Section
A. Hansen Project Manager, NRR i
i M. Huber Inspector, Materials and Processes Section i
J. Jacobson Chief, Materials and Processes Section i
,
i T. Martin Deputy Director, Division'of Reactor i
Projects j
H. Miller Deputy Regional Administrator
.
j J. Norberg Chief, Mechanical Engineering Branch, NRR i
j W. Pegg Inspector, Maintenance and Outages Section G. Replogie Inspector, Materials and Processes Section
j T. Scarbrough Senior Engineer, Mechanical Engineering l
Branch, NRR j
J. Smith Inspector, Materials and Processes Section i
j G. Wright Chief, Engineering Branch J
l
{
Commonwealth Edison Company 1111e
! Vice President, Nuclear Oversight and
!
Regulatory Services
{
B. Adams NETS Regulatory Assurance
!
C. Bedford Braidwood SEC
P. Dietz Supervisor, Mechanical and Structural
Engineering
J. Gieseker Supervisor, LaSalle Station SEC
Y. Lassere MOV Project Manager i
H. Mulderink MOV Engineer, Dresden Support i
J. O'Neill Dresden SEC i
K. Passmore Byron SEC
}
S. Stimac Supervisor, NETS Regulatory Assurance l
D. Taylor Superintendent, Mechanical and Structural-
.
Engineering I
B. Westphal MOV Engineer, LaSalle Station l
E. White Quad Cities SEC i
e l-a
!
i l
l
__
_
_
_
. _ _ _ _
_
__
.
.
.
_ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _.. _
. -
_
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
..
__ __;_ _; _ _
.
f NRC COMMONWEALTH EDISON
,
p >* **%<
'
t
'
!
GENERIC LETTER 89-10
-
l lMPLEMENTATION REVIEW AUGUST 26,1993 i
-
!
\\
-
.. _ _
.
-
MOV Program Concerns
'
,
Programs Safety Focus
,
I
,
'
!
j Management Control
1 I
l Program Technical Issues
i l
i
-
- -
-
,
-.-
,-
.
..
_ -=.
_.
.
__
.. _
_-
_ _ _ _. _. _.
- _ _ _ -
-
,
i
..
i
!
'
>
Program issues a
.
i Safetv Focus
.
f
'l Test Prioritization
,
.
i i
Test Schedules
l Test Results Feedback i
i I
Management Controls Responsibilities / Control
i l
Testing Progress Testing Deferrals
)
Technical Issues Valve Factor Operability Criteria Load Sensitive Behavior
!
l
..
.
_
_
-
.
, - _ _ _.. _. _, -
<
_ - _
-_.
li.
t
'
t
i
,
I
.
CECO /NRC Management Mebting
.
.
GL 89-10 Program Management Issues
.
l August 26,1993 Region IB Headquarters
.
.
.
l
_
.
..
CECO MOV Program Management Issues
- CECO has performed limited dP testing', especially af the BWR facilities.
- Testing schedules have been repeatedly deferred into the future.
- Numerous assumptions relied upon as a foundation for our analytical program have not been technically justified.
- Inappropriate management oversight and control of the program.
- CECO has been slow to evaluate test data and has not incorporated the results of these data evaluations into the program.
- The belief that the CECO MOV program schedule approved by the NRC contemplated a broader scope of equipment thatis now pianned.
!
,
.
O l
'
.
.-
~
Index
.
l 1. Status of Testing at CECO Nuclear Stations
-
2. CECO's Self Assessment of MOV Program j
3. CECO's Risk Based Prioritization Strategy 4. LaSalle Station Specific MOV Test Plan 5. Engineering Activities to Validate MOV Design Assumptions
'
'
i e
-_
. - -.
-
.
.
..
~
1. Status of Testing at CECO Stations i
,
GL 89-10 MOVs MOVs Total MOV GL 89-10 Outages StaticaDy dP dP Tests Station MOVs Completed Tested Itand Eleand Byron 257
125
100 Braidwood 237
135
96 Zion 249
148
116 Dresden 170
82
68 Quad Cities 1%
110
54 LaSalle 301
191
110
'
i Total 1404
757 225 544
,
i CECO's PWRs are completing dP testing on or ahead of schedule and in
excess of CECO's original commitment to the generic letter, including Priority I MOVs.
CECO's BWRs are behind schedule, particularly Dresden and Quad Cities. In
!
addition, we recognize that safety significance has not been the primary focus for prioritization and scheduling of dP testing at the BWRs.
,
CECO has been working over the past 6 months to refocus our dP testing
'
efforts for the BWR stations, based on safety significance.
Our current projections for dP testing as a company indicate that we will
l significantly exceed our original commitment to test a minimum of 10% of our l
MOVs at each-site. -
_
,
._,
__
., -
._
l
.-
l
.-
2. CECO's Self Assessment of MOV Program a. Basis for Performing Assessment
.
.
t
,
b. Major Findings of Assessment - Strengths / Weaknesses i
,
i l
c. Action Plan / Progress to Date
h a
>
.
.
l
_.
.
l
.
2a. Basis for Performing Assessment
'-
,
CECO's MOV Program is the single largert project which affects all 6 of
stations.
~
-
- Based on the NRC findings from the LaSalle Phase I MOV inspection in Fall,1992, CECO upper management directed that comprehensive assessments of the MOV program implementation be performed for CECO's stations.
i
'
- Station MOV team self assessments were performed in late 1992/early 1993 at Byron, Dresden, Quad Cities, and LaSalle. Key lessons learned from the j
assessments were shared with all of the sites, including Zion and Braidwood.
Program Strengths, Weaknesses, and Potential Opportunities for
Improvement were identified during each of the assessments.
j An action plan for the overall MOV program was developed at the conclusion
of the assessments and was presented to CECO upper management (NOC) in February 1993 and approved. The NOC also directed that periodic updates to the NOC be provided on the status of the MOV improvement actisities.
l Significant corporate and station management attention has been applied to
address the deficiencies identified during the assessments, with a particular
focus on CECO's BWR stations.
<
.
-
.
-
-
-.
._
.--
.
.
.
l
-
i-
Ib.
i j
2b. Maior Findines of Assessments - Strengths / Weaknesses
!
,
l IdendHed Strengths i
.
'
~
I
- Working level communications, particularly at stations.
~
h i
- Working level personnel committed to program.
,
!
l l
- MOV parts replacement and required surveillance testing planned well
l
- Technical expertise of site and corporate MOV Coordinators was good.
l
l Identified Weaknesses
!
i
- Corporate MOV Program was not developed to manage the changing l
technological and regulatory environment of GL 89-10.
i
}
- Inadequate attention was given to program management activities at both the corporate office and the sites.
- The technical basis and closure criteria for program commitments had not
,
!
been fully developed. This resulted in a lack of management buy-in of the j
total scope of program.
i
!
- The commitment management process was lacking. For example, l
commitments that were made during MOV inspections at one site were turned
!
into CECO corporate commitments without buy-in from other sites.
i j
- Personnel staffing decisions assumed that the program was short term. This j
led to extensive use of contractor personnel and inadequate development ofin-l house expertise.
,!
- The division of responsibilities between corporate and the sites was not clearly
defined.
-
a j
- Success for the program was always defined as "no problems". The working i
level personnel operated with the philosophy to only schedule work that had reasonable assumace of being completed before the end of the outage.
'
!
I
.
_
..
-.
.
__
._
.
__.
_-.
.
. _. --
.-. _ _. -_.
. _ - _.._ _ _ __._
.
'
.
2b. (cont.)
.
Identified Potential Opportunities for ImDrovement
.
..
_
- Clear establishment of who is accountable for the program at a management
'
level, at both the corporate office and the sites.
Clear identification of division of responsibilities between corporate and sites e
and development of detailed plans to close on the outstanding technicalissues of the program.
Development of detailed site implementation plans. The plans would clearly
define the hand off from corporate to site and the necessary level of consistency between the sites.
Make decision on role of contractors for both short term and long term.
- Apply the appropriate program resources to emphasize project management and team building.
Establishment of a single regulatory point of contact within CECO for the
MOV program and establishment of a consistent GL 89-10 commitment j
management process.
l i
e
,
e
l
-
_-
.
-
.
.-
..
,
!
j
'
.
!
!
2c. Action Plan / Progress to Date
!
i Specific actions taken:
-
!
.
- New corporate MOV program management personnel were named; emphasis j
j placed on providing direct administration and control of the MOV program.
i
!
i
- The Site Engineering & Construction Managers (SECMs) have been j
identified / reaffirmed by the NOC as the clear owners of and accountable for j
the MOV program at the stations.
i j
- The NETS M/S Design Superintendent has been designated as the corporate i
owner of the MOV program.
i t
l
- The MOV corporate technical support staff was more than doubled m size.
!
l j
CECO has dedicated a corporate MG v' technical expert to each station. The
j focus is on development of better onsite MOV engineering technical expertise.
i j
Program holes and open technical issues were identified and prioritized;
j action plans to address issue closure have been and are continuing to be j
developed.
!
!
$
Corporate engineering and station MOV personnel have developed a detailed
l schedule / action plan to address safety significance for remaining MOV testing
at LaSalle Station; similar efforts have been initiated for Quad Cities &
l Dresden.
i
.
- A dedicated regulatory interface was named along with implementation of a
]
GL 89-10 commitment management process.
$
i
!
'
,
i
.
.
...
.
. -.
. _.
'
.
.
2c. (cont.)
.
Future MOV Program Actions Include:
.
-
i Development of detailed site implementation plans for the program to ensure
appropriate raanagement oversight, control, and consistency.
i
I
,
l i
Further participation in and establishment of new industry coalitions to take
advantage of economies of scale and increase our own technical expertise.
)
!
Development and implementation of prioritized (PRA) listings of MOVs for
all of CECO's stations.
,
!
i i
I
.
-
-
,
.
3. CECO's Risk Based Prioritization Strategy a. CECO's Goals for MOV Prioritization
.
.
.
b. LaSalle Prioritization Effort
!
c. Prioritization for Other Stations
!
l l
.
Il I
l
!
..
i.
l.
I 3a. CECO's Goals for MOV Prioritization
CECO's prioritization approach will provide a means for scheduling the
remaining dP tests at those stations which require it.
.
-
.
-
,
,
!
From a programmatic standpoint, the prioritization will also provide a means
for applying a graded approach to GL 89-10 activities in the future, i.e. a way
!
of managing the program.
,
i MOVs with high safety sigaificance will get the first priority for resolution of
{
future technicalissues.
i t
- The prioritization will provide a basis for deciding what frequency is required
for future verification of GL 89-10 MOVs.
d
,
d
-
!
)
I t
-
i
1
i
,
-
J
.
_
_
,
.
.-
.
. _-.
. -
-
-
- -
-
_
,
k*
,
..
.
3b. LaSalle Prioritization
.
!
l
- Using the NRC Sponsored PRA for LaSalle Station prepared by Sandia
)
National Laboratory, CECO assembled an expert team in March,1993, to j
perform a deterministic review to rank LaSalle's GL'89-10 MOVs in terms of safety significance. The approach used was consistent with the work currently
.
!
.
ongoing with NUMARC and the BWROG.
I
~
i l
- The team was comprised of:
l
l
- 2 LaSalle Licensed opemtors,
- 1 Safety Analysis expen from CECO's Nuclear Fuels Services Depanment,
- 2 Mechanical / Structural Engineers from NETS, including an industry events
l analyst expert,
i i
- 1 PRA expen from NETS, and i-,
- 1 NETS Regulatory Assurance Engineer
i
!
l
increase number and a loss of function value for each MOV. In addition, the l
valves were grouped by safety function into 10 separate groups.
i
)
- The evaluation team then took the information and developed a prioritized
'
j ranking of LaSalle's MOVs. The valves were split into 4 prioritization j
categories; high, medium, low, and low-low.
i
!
CDF risk due to.a single MOV failure.
!i'
- The proposed LaSalle specific test plan was based on the prioritized ranking.
!
13 i
.. -.
. _ _
.-.
,
~
-
I l
l.'
i
-
'
3c. PRA for Other Stations Preliminary "Prioritization Assessments" have been completed for Dresden
'
and Quad Cities utilizing the results from the LaSalle study.
_
- Final Prioritization Assessments for Dresden and Quad Cities, similar to the LaSalle effort, will be completed in Fall,1993, utilizing their station specific PRAs.
- Prioritized rankings for CECO's 3 PWRs are expected to be completed by the end of 1993.
- The preliminary rankings for Dresden and Quad Cities are already being factored into planning for remaining dP testing.
- CECO has generated a proposed ist schedule for LaSalle Station, utilizing the PRA prioritization approach.
,
!
.
e
..
-
.
_
_
__
-
.
s
-
4. LaSalle Proposed dP Test Plan
.
a. LaSalle GL 89-10 Program Status
.
-
-
!
b. LaSalle Ranking
-
c. Prioritized Approach d. Proposed LaSalle dP Test Completion Schedule e. LaSalle MOV Operability f. Summary
.
e
..
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
_ _ _ _
.
i
..
.
f 4a. LaSalle GL 89-10 Program Status
-
l
- Program Population 301
_
- Planned Static Tests 301
-
-complete to date 191
- Planned dP Tests 110-complete to date
Gates - 14 Globes - 11 I
.
.
l
l
,
l
- -.
!
!
.
.
4b. LaSalle Ranking
i
!
Rank Safety Signi6cance Example Number High High contribution to core ECC Inj. vivs.
~~ 22
.
damage S.P. Cooling Medium Less contribution to core RCIC DW spray
damage but greater than
' insignificant l
l Low Low contribution to core SDC some PCCS 104 I
damage. Failure doe not signi6cantly alter the accident required
,
Low-Low Same as Low MSIV-LCS 112 i
l Low and Low-Low could be combined. Elected to place higher
importance on some of the PCIS and system valves.
-
)
l
, - - - -
.,.
,~
.
.
.
.
4c. Prioritized Approach
,
CECO proposed to modify the priority of MOV program activities
based on the deterministic PRA ranking for LaSalle Station;-
- the revised ranking clearly illustrates where the emphasis should fall,
,
- Initial testing, periodic retesting, Part 21's, industry is' ues etc. will s
be addressed based on the revised categories.
CECO proposes to establish a schedule for the remainder of LaSalle
GL 89-10 testing that would be based on the revised prioritization;
\\
- complete all baseline static testing on all MOVs within 3 outages, I
- complete high importance valve dP testing within 3 outages,
- upgrade performance of safety significant valves to high degree ofconfidence, i
- approximately $3 million for design, analysis and installation of modifications to the 22 hid safety significant valves at LaSalle.
.
_
-
-
.--
..
l
-
, -
I
.
4d. Proposed LaSalle dP Test Completion Schedule i.
PRA MOVs in Planned 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
Rank Category dP Tests RO RO RO RO RO d
ggjg[gijj
~
!
High
22
2
77 ;g;;; ;
--
.
JE WW
-
.
Medium
22
4
7
~;
.
i d EER
!
PnR#!
-y Low 104
5
5
g Ixygy;
.
i Lo-Lo 112
10
3
5
I
Total 270 110
19
31
.
j l
.
i o
I
4
-
.
A
19
l
.
...
'
.
'
4e. LaSalle MOV Operability Identified the High and Medium Priority Valves from the pri_oritized
ranking that had not been statically tested.
Screened these valves using the current torque switch setting and
required thrust.
Identified 6 valves with low margin.
- l Reviewed the valves for current operability.
!
Concluded these valves were operable, and therefore, all valves were
l l
l
..
-
l
I
.
i i
'
.
i 4f. Summarv
!
,
-
i The deterministic prioritization approach clearly identifies the safety
!
significant valves
-
-
-
l
The prioritized ranking should dictate the 89-10 program focus
.
I i
n l
l
!
l i
l l
-
-
l
..
_
_
_.
.
.
...
.
.,.
,
-
.
-
.s 5. Engineering Activities to Validate Design Assumptions I
~
a. Generic Testing
-
-
--
d
.
b. Analysis of Dynamic Test Results
.
!
i
1
,
.
,
a
,
e
n
!
_
c.
.
\\
.
5_a. Generic Testine Generic Testine Completed
- DC Motor Testing
.
-
- Live Load Packing Testing
'
Generic Testine Oneoine I
- AC Motor Testing
- Roller Screw Testing i
)
- Lubrication Degradation Shop Testing I
- As Found Lubrication Degradation Field Testing Butterfly Valve Bench Testing l
KALSI Actuator Thrust & Torque Testing
Butterfly Valve dP Testing
Proposed Generic Testing Actuator Efficiency Testing Flow Loop Testing
i
.
l
-
-
-
.-.
...
...
-
- - -
.
.
'
'
i
!
-
t s
I j
Sh. Analysis of Dynamic Test Results
-
r Coordinated analysis of CECO and other utility data
.
..
_
!
,
Subject of Breakout Session
.
i I
-
i
!
t i
!
!
I
,
i
.
'
.
-
...
.
-
~
^
.
.
,
..
-
.
s Attachment A Nuclear Station Outage Schedule for GL 89-10*
.
.,
-
Station Unit 3rd Outsee Date 5th Outare Date
.
Byron
B1R06 -Fall 94 BIR08 -Fall 97
B2R05 - Spring 95 B2R07 - Spring 98 Braidwood
AIR 04 - Spdag 94 AIR 06-Spring 97
A2R04 - Fall 94 A2R06 - Fall 97
,
Zion
Z1R14 -Fall 95 Z1R16 -Fall 98
Z2R14 - Fall 96 22R16 -Fall 99 Dresden
D2R15 - Spring %
D2R17 - Spring 99
'
D3R15 - Fall 95 D2R16 - Fall 98 Quad Cities 1 Q1R14 -Fall 95 Q1R16 - Fall 98
Q2R13 - Fall 94 Q2R15 -Fall 97
<
LaSalle I
L1R06 - Spring 94 L1R08 - Spring 97
L2R06 - Spring 95 L2R08 - Spring 98 Note that refueling outage dates are subject to change based on CECO
corporate system power planning requirements.
.
.
-
{
'
1 l
l J
l
/
-
ET S A N DO y
e
.
n I I a
LT p
AP m
'
o VM C
O U n
- y o
T S b
s S
d d
i SA e
E t
E n
h e
t V18 l
s a
e e
ITS P
w r
AA no B
m IT m
N N I
o G
C I
I oS C E E D C
'
.
lll
__
-
-
__ _
-
_ --
-
-
_
--
CECO INITIATIVES TO VALIDATE l
DESIGN BASIS ASSUiMPTIONS
.
Presentation Purpose
.
i
.
Discuss the Initiatives Undertaken by CECO a
- Focus on Dynamic Testing Analysis Results
'
l
'
-
i
!
l
,
!
-
.
.
,
l
--
_
_ _. _
a
_
.
.
_
-
. _ _ _ _
..
.
,
^
>
CECO INITIATIVES TO VALIDATE DESIGN BASIS ASSUMPTIONS
.
Accomplishments
.
.
- DC Motor Testing Live Load Packing Shop Tests KALSI Actuator Thrust and Torque Testing EPRI Validation Program
'
300 Dynamic Tests Completed on 200 Valves
!
i i
'
--
-
-
_.
_
.2
- _ - -
_ - -. _ - -. _ -
.
_ - - - _ _ _
.
CECO INITIATIVES TO VALIDATE DESIGN BASIS ASSUMPTIONS
.
Ongoing
.
AC Motor Testing
-
Roller Screw Testing
-
Butterfly Valve ~ Bench Testing
-
Torque Switch Repeatability Shop Test
-
Lubrication Degradation Shop Test a
eDYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS
-
.
-
-
-
- -
-
.
.
.
__.
..
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
DYNAMIC TEST DATA. ANALYSIS s
.
Objectives
.
.
Validate Design Basis Assumptions
- Valve Factor
- Load Sensitive Behavior
-
- Identify Test Limitations and Capabilities
,
- Improve Methods for Evaluating Test Results
- Optimize Dynamic Testing
-
.
g s-
.
i
- _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
. - _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ - -
.
-
..
.
.
.
.
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS
.
RESULTS
-
,
.
.
eLOW DP LOAD DYNAMIC TESTING IS NOT MEANINGFUL
Globe Valve - Valve Factor Assumptions are l
Supported l
Globe Valve - Load Sensitive Behavior is
[
Typically Bounded l
'
,
l
l
-
.
l
.
&
.
i
'
-
.
.
-
.
_
.
'
-
.
.
.
.
_
_
.
-
S
_
_
I
.
_
S
_
_
t Y
c
-
L e
ff
-
A s
a
.
d E
_
N e
o o
-
A v
L n
.
_
_
P o
_
la D
t
_
A S V
w e
l
_
T T o
tt i
_
AL d
l t
L a
n e
r D U o
cf e av a
o
_
TS L
f vh i
ni i
r n
ot SE p
gia o
t t t
ER D
Sl e a
an c
i
-
u T
s sF w
i pe or e
.
C Pp v
-
n o
g e
a
.
i l
_
I dR N n r
M L
a e
_
Mtsisdg
_
i
_
A-ar
_
e s oa
_
laTeLM
-
N
_
u t
e v
_
_
_
Y chaPn l
.
D ATvDo
.
.
-
.
-
-
-
.
-
.7l1x1 ll1l
.
jl l
- i
- !i l
4!.j l
!j
--
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
O*
g
-
Running Load + - A'JJSTSSS_1
- -2%
Ipecking and piston effect)
Measured Apparent Required Thrust Measured
a.=ir i.e.di t.
kquired Thrust
'
_
at test DP (C11)
-"
'
f E:;4ed Thrust Extrapolated
$
, r
- g t
Required Thrust t design basis DP E
MAIRGIN
- Control Switch
"0
__
,/
Trip Thrust (C14)
l l
.
.
,
4
-
,
-
.. -
-
-
.
- - -
e. *
.
,
.
g _C
!
8@
.
-2 g....g....g....g....g.
.g...
gi...g...g..
g....g....g....g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
o..;.......<........:........;........:........:........;.......
.......:........;.......#........:........)._
R.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...;..2...................;......4........:........;......)........:.........
- ....... 4...............
- ..
..
.
.
.
.
,.
.....'X............
.
.
..........
..........
.........
CD
....................
.......
.......
..............
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.........................
o......
..........................................................
.
.
X*.........
.
.
....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..;.......;........:........'X...*)C.'.......:........;X..*X......M...............4.......4.........:...
.
i
.
'
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
......X.
. X.....
.
.......
...............
M
..............
..........................................
...
X Xpf X.X NK
)f(
.
X
.
.
.
l
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
l
...
.
X. gogg
'
g i
,
i
.
'O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,O Q
.
.
.
O
..t.......g........g........g...... 9........g........g.......
.
.
.
.
m
..~. * * ta *"~ *2 aa* a t. a a *a t.aaa al a =
J:
.
.
.
J
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
D
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
u g
.
.
.
Q X
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
X.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..;.......t.........g........;......
9........g........;.......
... g,.g.......
2*******t. *******t.********.!**=
.
.
- U
.M
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
M M.C
.X
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
y-C
.
.
.
.
.
X
)MC
.
.
<
-
.
X b.
X
.
XX-
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
agll-
.
.
.
c
.
.
.
.
o
.
.
.
.
.
O g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- X X :
X:X X :
_
.
E M
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
m
.
.
Q X........X.
.....X.
..............................
.
- U Q
.
.......
...........
.................
...
.......
.
.
.........
.........
O
..............................
.
.......
................
..............
....
,--
&
M
.
.
.
.
...,..............
.
3 *>
..........
,.
.......
....,.,........
J c
.
......,.,........g.........
g
.
,.
.......
g....
.......;...
.
g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Q w Q
.>....... p.......g....... 3........:........g....... 3.......
.......g.......3........:........g.......3...
.
.
.
..
m Q, g g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
O
- O
.
.
........
.
.
q J.
........................
..............................
...
.
........................
s.
.
.
X X
.
.
.
.
.).......
...... g o... o.}. o. o. 4..o.. g. o.. o. 3. o n o n. o.. g u n o o g o o o n:....o o g.o n o.3 ~.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
D
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
U
.
.
.
O M
..
.
.
.
..........
......................................
.
.........
O
.......
.......
.............
......
c
...
O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.,
.
.
X
.
Q
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
l
...................
.........
.... X.
..............................
.................
.......
...........
.
!
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
X)(X.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
X
.:...... 4.................;...... 4........:........:.......
.......:........;......4.....g......;...
,
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
X M.(
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
>
.
.
.
,
Jg i
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
'U
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
y.......g........g....... 3.........:........g........;.......
-
... * * * * I a a " ".2 a " a t. "" a t.a a * * * * 2 * =
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,.
J
.
ffff ffIf ffff ffIf Ifff fffI fIff Ifff fIff fIff ffIf ffff N.
e.
O.
G.
M.
N.
O.
O.
M.
N.
.
w O
!
- -
v-
- -
O O
O O
O O
O O
O
.
.
t
.
i
!
.
1sruu.LSO du /1WE PeJinbeg pelejodeJ1x3
!
1 e
.
m m - -
- -
- -
- - -
,
-
I I
I t
Os l
.
_C
,
y
.
"2 l
.
.
!
I g....g....ji...j...ig..
.g.
.ig....j
...g....!...ig.
.ig...
g n
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,,..;.......g................;......4........:........;.......
.......:........;......4................;.-
(9
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4.... K........:...... 4..W.....:........;..... %........:........:......4.......4.........;...
...:
.........
,
.
.
........$.......:..........
.
. w....:........
- ...... w
..... g.
........
........
........
- ...
.......
........
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
.........r.........................
.
........
!
.......,
.......................... ~...
................
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
...;....... g........ :........'90.... 4........ :........;.... W,.......R.........;......4................:...
l a
,
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.................................
.........................................................
......
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
5(
g..gM E g Mg
.. g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
,
R : TFk.
T A.
!
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
O
.,
.
.
.
.
.
y
- Q
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
g
...y.......g........g........y...... 9.......g........!*******l [ * * * * * * * t a g*E.* * $ * * * @ " %.* * W *".! * * *
,
e O
W.
.
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
t J
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
K.
.
.
.
.
K.
.
.
.
.
O
...y.......g........g........;...............
.
.
.
.
.
......
.
g....... 3........
.. s.......
g.
g
-
8"5g g +....... t.a a a ~ ; ".
.
.e M.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
O G-
.
.
.
.
.
w W
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
MM
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
0" K
.
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
gA C
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,,,,
w \\)
.
.
.
.
.
Q
.
.
.
.
.
t
.
._
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t e
.:.......:........:........:......4........:........:.......
. a m (:........g g m...: m.... a........:.
O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.........
..........
........
,- O.
.O.~.,
.
.
.
..........
......................
........
...............................
gg
.,,.3
.
e
...;.......<........;........;...... 4........;........;.......
...............;...... 4................>...
._,
Qm
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
OQ. >
...).......<....aat....".~.)....**+~~~.taa.a.la..."
~~.af.a.=~).a.M W aaa(~~.a.3a.
O 89
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
e3
.........
..................
... W.......... g g...............
..........
..............
.......,
.......
...
.
.
w
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...>...... 4........t.........>...... 4........g." ".. 3.= = ~
.....o g. o o.. 3 o... o 4...... g.
. o o 3...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ee-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
.........
..........
...............................
-
.
.
..
w.......
......................
.......
.......
...
O G
.
.
.
O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.-
.
e
.
.
.
.
M.:
.
.
d
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
l
[
O.,
...;...... 4.......:........;...... 4........:........
.......
.......:.............. 4..... E.
.
........;...,
O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
l
.@E
.
.
.
.
.
\\
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
gg
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
j
...:.......:........:........;...... 4........:........:.......
.......:........;......4........:........:...
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
E M.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.......
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
.3.......<........:........,........:...............
3.......
.........
- .................,.
,
@g
.......
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
l.... lie,ili,,,le...l
...I,...l....l
...l...
I
...l....l....I
'
a o
a e
s e
m
e w
-
o
--
.
&
&
&
6
6
6
6
isnJE.LSO dO / tsnJu peJinbeg petelode.nx3
.
.
,
P
.
.
.
.
.-.
.-
._
-. -
-- -
,
-.-
.
Exp;ctsd M:rgin B ssd on CSTThrustvs
.
.
Actuti Mergin B: sed on Test Data
,....,....,....,....i....,....,....,....i....,....,
43o
_..:............:...........:............:............:....._...............................:...........................
/............. :.. _
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- i i
i.
i MR.T < 200. 0 lbf i i
i.
i i :
i
.
.
.
.
_-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
>............
....................:..........................:..........................,...................................
y 4oo
.......
_-.
... _..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. ~
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
-
..
-
-
gy
_..:.............::........... :.............::............ ::..............c..............
....:............:..._-
350
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
V
- C
g
-
-
+-*
-
-
m.
.
-
.C O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.........A.........
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,i =
300
.-_..>............<.......
............<.....................................<...............................v_..<-_
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. -
g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
O.
N
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
-
- p,
.-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A
C e
.
O 2 250
-
.
.
-
g
" " * " *. "
"
.
.
. --
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/
>
-
.
.
.
"U
-
-
A
-
.,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- .
-
e
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
200
_..............:.......
................................................................<......................................:.._
.O
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
C,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C.
-
-
-
G.
<,2
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-.
.
.
.
.
.
. -
n.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
e 150
~~:~~~~~
v.~~~ ~~:-~-
f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v. " ~ " ~ : - ~ ~ ~ ~.: ~ ~ ~ v. ~ ~ ~ ~
- . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v. -
.
.
.
.
.
2%
- i i
!
A'
Ri i
!
Only L.ow Margin (< 8000 lbf i :
!
'
-
'
-
i :
~l 2
-
i/8 i
- i i
i i
or < N00% tes'ts considdred,
_ _:- - _ ~ ~ ~. _ _ _._._ _ _ _ _ _:_ _ _ _ _ _.: - _ _ _ _ _:_ _ _..)_ _.i a
f5 joo
_ _: _ _ _ _ _ _ :.. _ _ _
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- .
-
<
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
..
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-:
-
i-
>
<
>
.<
.>........<--
i i
i.
i i.
i. MRT foi gate val (me txamedion cunerit
!.
-
-
p.
..
.
-
i
!
i.
.i i design basis vahi.s factors @.3 or 0.5$).
i
'
-
-
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
o
_..e...........:.......
...:.............:............:.............:.............:............:.............:.............:............:.._-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i....i....i....i....
....i....i....i....i....
....i
,
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 i
.
Expected Margin based on Static CSTThrust (%)
.
Low DP Load study (Static CST Thrust-MRT) / MRT 8/25/93
!
s
//
.
t
-.-
__.
.-
_
_
.
._
__
l i.-
9 j
-
s
.
.
i to l
i g....l
.g.
..j....l...
g
...ii..
g....
g
.
... i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,n
_.3........<...........>...........:...........:...........>.......:...........>......... 4..........>.
a
- g
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
c:
e j
-
- -.
-
.c
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
s
.= P m
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
- >
-
I
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
....:..........y...........:..........
E.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.......o:..........*.........o.=
.
- ..........g......
,,.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.C
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
=
-
,
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.c
.
.
.
.
)
,.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
. -.
.
....o....
....,..................................................
.,,,............................
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
O..
.
.
.
.
.
.
>
$
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,,
.
.
.
.
.
..
,
.
.
,
G
..
.
.
.
.
. =
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
)
'M
,
3..........g..........
......... 4......
...:...........>..........:...........>.......V4
.......3..,.
i w
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
.
.,
,,
C.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
,.
.
.
m.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
O~'
C.
,
.,
=
-
~,
\\
.
.
p.,,,
.;. w.....g............
- ..........g..........
.. g......:.....
.
.
.
.
.........
..... g..
g
...........
...
..D
0.:
C
.;
i
.
.,
.
C o
.-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.V
-
,,,
O
. r
-.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- T
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
-
e
,
.
.
.
.
.
y (4
.
.
.
i
.
. o u.
,
.
.
.
.
.
,,.
.
.
o.
m
-
.......U.............,............
g
.
.
.
.
.
<
.
M
.
...........
O
-
.....
.....................................,
.
C=
. *.
.
.
.
.
.
m$
y
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
,
T
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
.,
.
.
.
.
O C
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
C
e
-
-
-
CD
I'
-
.
C,,D
-
-
.
.
.
.
-
-
-
-
n
,Q n
...>..........g........
n, g
-.3
.................;...........:...........:..g......
.....
.....
.
.g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
th
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
!
E:
0)
-
.
T U
(L:
W
-
-
n i
c
.3.,,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
}
.
-.............g...........:......... p...........
.
p......................
... g........eR ae.*
...........
......
..
O g
.
.
.
.
,
l
..
.
.
.
O.
t e,x T
.
.
. :>
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Q,
.
-.
.
.
.
.
.
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
r
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
-
.
.
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
l
o
-
-
!
-...........:..................C..:.......K..:..C.................:...........*..................:.
Q.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
u cp
.
-
.
.
-.
.
.
. -
l
.
C. C l
.
.
.
.
.
~
"
l W-E.
E
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
l
- 2
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
O
-.;.........4............;...........;...........:...........>..........:...........>.....................;..,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.,
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.g g
..
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
s.
-........... g.......... 3.......... g........... :...........y.......... g. o o o o o 3 o o o o o g. o o o. o g..
g
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
lt lt lt lt t t t lt lt lt lt lt asl t t t t I t t t t t t t et t t t t t t t t
l
@
@
$
E
$
$
8 E
g
.
-
t
-
-
wmu pAes dagxs / 6smu pAes daax3 -wmu.tso do) -
1%) Mea 188.1.uo peseg ul 1eW [enpy
.
,
_
__
._.
_ _ _ _
. _.. _ _ _..
..-
_-
__ _ _ _ __-- __ _ _ _
-_- _
- -
_ - _ _ _ _ - _
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
Exp;cted Margin Bas:d on CST Thrust vs Actu 1 M:rgin Besed on Test D:.ta
,....i...
,...
,....,....
_..................:................................:..............:.... ~..... ~.:i.... i....
.... i eoon
~.............:..... ~... ~..:... ~.... ~.... _
/:
-:
- .-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-i i
i n
i
"
W !
/
!
!
!-
-:
V:
-
a N
y
A :
_
- f*
/.*
- * $
- * r: -
.
.
.
.
.
g 5000
.
.
-- -
r
-
o
.
-
-
--
.
-
-
_
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
- .n v
e
.
.
.
.
.
-
+-
_
e
.
.
.
.
.
O a_,
n
- -
-
.
.
- .-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.........R****'************b.**** ~ ** U ~ *'****** ~ *** ~ f ~ ~ * ~ *** i * ** ***
- i * ~
g
_..>................)...............
m
f ::
_
e
c0
.
-
W
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
C
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
o-
.n
-
g
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
M
_
..L................:.. y.V.........
.......................:..............................................i................. _
.....
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
!
n/!
R
!s i
i i
!-
.
-
a
-.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
C
-
c
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I:D
.
/...v
-
m-g
_.9.................................
...g.........................................................:................;:.................:.._
$
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
a
-
u/
-
-
] g
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- 3 g,
!
j
/
j i
Only. Low Margirt (< 0000 lbfj i
-
-
-
,
..!>...............,k..............................!
-
!
..........................and k 800.%...). tests considerea.
!
-
.g toon
.
.............
.................... <................ <.. _
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
-
i. /
i
.!
MFI. T for gate vWyes based bn cunent i.
!
-
-
.
.
O
-. s.................i...............
..................i............d..e..s.ig n.. b..as..is va....... l.ve...f.a.c..t.o..rs.... 3..o..r. 0. 5
.
.
....
..
..
.
..
.
.
I...
....;....I
....i...
1...
1....t
....t
.
.
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0000
')00 8000 Expected Margin based on Static CST Thrust (Ibf)
,
Low DP Load Study (Static CSTThrust-MRT)
'
8/25/93
-
.
/A
- -
.
. -
-
-
-
- - -
.
-
-
-.
.
.
. - -
-
_
__-
______ -
___
- _ _ _
___
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__
. _ _ _ _ ___---_ _
_-__ _
.
.
,
Expected Margin Based on CST Thrust vs
-
Actual Mnrgin Bas d on Test Dats
,....i....i..
,,,...i....i....i....i...
i
-- ;
i
- * *
- * ! * *
" " !. * " " " " " " " i. " " " " " " "/." " " " " " " " i." " " : * " * " " " -
"i 8000
.
.
.
- a
-
.-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
u.
.
.
.
n.
n
- a
/
.
.
.
.
.
.-
.
-
-
n
- 5
- /-
-
- .-
5000
--
g
- * " * * * * " " " :: " " " " "/ :" " " ' " g " " " i" " " " " " V " ' " " " " " " " i" -
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
o
v
R
.
-
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
._
,m l
!
n y
i
/
.i i
i.
!
.
,
.
.
.
.
e
.
.
.
.
g
... n.......... pi.......... 9. c :./..... y
.
.
.
.
.
O V
i i
A i
i i
i i-
-
-
E 4000
_...>...............................
........................................ <................ <.. _
3 i
!
i
/ i i
n i
Outfibr due to i.
_
$[
j j
IV cc
!
!
i y
veryjhigh LSB i-
_
c i
i i. V Xi i.
i w/ Meolube on i
-
.-
.
.
.
.
O
!.
n i
................./................i e
i.
i i.
store. (1991 test)!
-
-
Y
.
.
.
.
q9 M
-..,..... N V................V
......
- .................................................................. _
R.
G
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
/l I;
-
-
- .n n
.
-.
.
.
.
.
.
. -
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
c-
.
C
-a%
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
................j:...............:...............!................{...............4...............p._
f
-
gr g
.3................i...#..........p
-
F f
-
u/
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
!
!
/
i i Only Low Margin (< 00bo Itd i
!
-
-
k i
O
-
1000
-~>"~"~"~/"~'"~- ~~~~~~i i and <e00% tests considered.
!
!
~ ~ ~ ~ " " ~. : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ': ~) ~ ~ ~ ~
-
V
..
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- -
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
- /
-
-
.
.
.
.
,
- ................:....... gate vdives based in o.55 VF. !
.
.
-!
i MRTfor
!
-.#.................:................................i
-
o
.........:................:................:................:..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I a a a a l a a a a l a a a a I a a a a I a a a a l a a a a l a a a a ia a a a f
.
o 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 sooo 7000 sooo
.
.
Expected Margin based on Static CST Thrust (Ibf)
-
,
Low DP Load Study (Static CSTThrust-MRT)
8/25/93
/Y
'
'
- -
-
-
.
.
..
.
-
-
..
.. _ _
__-
.. _.
.., _.
_
_
_
-
.
- .
\\ l
....
_
,......................q...................y...'....'....'....'...g............'....'....I...=....*....*....'....s..,,,
g
..
. *
I
.
.
.
-
..
.
.
.
.
.
,
%
-
.
G
.
-
-
,
,
-
e.*
.
.
.
.
.
.
T M
.
.
,
.
C
-
,...............v...................................................................................
..,.
,
i
-
{
e
.....-- - - - - - - --
(Q
-
g3 O
.
.
.
.
,.
.
..
.
E
CI:
l
.
~
'"
.
s=
.
-
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.'
C
-
-
-
. -
.
...........i,....................!....................{:....................:...........a s.
-
-
-.:....
g
1C
.
.
.
.
.
i
.:
E
l
-
.
m
.
.
.
.
.
<
O w
.
.
L$
.
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
2:.
-
..
.
.
S
-
.
.
g.... 9................... 7....................g.....................
.
Q l
.........
- ...................
.
.
.
.
@
.C.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
--
.
-
-
e
-
-
.g C1.
-.i.............
!
!
_..
t...__..__:.._._._.._.._."
r
~
V
__
_..........f_...._
___
i
...........................................................
.
.
.
.
..
_____ _
I
-
>=
.
-
-.
l
.
.
.
.
.
-- _' _..-
i g
=
. _
_..........____....._....__.._......._....._.._.
e
..
.
.
_ _ -:._
-__
C
.
.
.
.
-
.3....................>...................<....................g....................;..................
o
!
.'
i t
....
t
..
..
t
....
t
.
...
t
....
t
6 N
to e
-
8 o
-
%
o o
o Aouenbey eAgeley
-
_.
.a
.C'
.
O b5
,.
,
,.
..
......
....,
,.:....................y...................g....................g.......,............g....................i.
.
.
.
.
.
t
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
!
g
.
.
.
5$
l
..
.
.
.
.
.
.:
-
.
.M
e
C C
g
-........... g........................-............................................................,..
cum
8
- - - -
.O
.c
", -
-
w
&
-
-
g
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C g:gn,.
,
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
'
-
-.:.... N....
......:...................(....................:....................(..................<
j
,
.c.,.
.
.
.
.
.
E
.
.
.
.
CD
,..
.
.
.
.
n, C
cu m O
.
-
.
.
m
g
.
.
.
w
.
.
-
.
.
.
-.
.
R
..
.
.
.
.
-......,...... W..... s...................,.
.
.
==.
....................g....................e................
g T
.:
..,.
.
- - - - - -
.
_
g n
.
@
U
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
__..____
-
_
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
/
.
.
-
..................................................................... - _ -. _ - _ - _
.
,,
............
_
.-
.
.
.
.
.. _ _. _ _ __
.:
- _ - - - - ---
,
,,
- ---
i
,
.
.
.
.
.
I __ _. _ _ _ -
.
..
.
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _... _.'_....;; _ _- _ _ _ _ _
.
i
,..
__ ___
- _ _ _-_-_ _- - _-
,
.
- -
- - - - - - - -
.
,
.
.
.
i
,..:....................;,..................
4....................:....................:..................
O
..
t
..
t
.
.
.t
...
n....
t
....
t
]
M N
IC.
e W
o N.
d D.
'
o o
o Aouenbey eAnsieg
.
J j
~.;
.
x, ar-
-+
e-s e-- e e,e-ww*v-w
+e r-w~tm++4
--sr
_ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _.. _
_ _ _ _. _ _ _.... _. _ _ _ _._
.
.
Overall Population Tested Population Expected Margin in Thrust Expected Mergin in Thrust
!
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
i
,
i i
..,
.
.,
,.
.
...
...
...
...
..
.
0.14 _:.................:.................:...............4....""""""4.-
0.14 -.""""""""4.
" """""4.- """.""4.~
"""""4.-
.
.
!
!
ChierallMean &.1897IM i
.i.
.i Tes.ted Mean =i.2710 IM i.
.
.
.
.
i
!.
Chierall Medlari. = 901 IM i i.
l tem Median y 1091 IM i
.
'
-
.
.
.
i
!
Overall Std Dey!= 4111 IM i i
.
.
.
Tested Std Dev
" " "" " a " + " " " " " " " "+> " " "05 IM i -
0.12 -i."""""""4.""""""""+."""""""">"""""""".>-
0.12 - 6. " " " " " "
'
',
-
" " " " ". >.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
,
.
..
,
.
.
.
,
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
,
.
.
,
.
..
,
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
..
.
.
,
.
O.10 - t " - " " " < " " " " " " " ": " " " " " " " ".> " " " " " " " "
.
,
>-
0.1
- <. " " " " " -,-
"""""""+
-
""""
"""">"""""""">
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
- -
.
.
,
i
.
>
C
'
-
o
- -
e
.
,
t
.
c
s
-
,
,
,
'
gp
.
.
.
..
..
.
T
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
3 0.08-t"""""""
,
.
,
.
.
" " " " " " + " " " " " " " " > " " " " " " " ".>-
e 0.08 -e""""""
,
-
'
.
.
.
"
~~~~"""e """"""">"""""""">-
y
m-
'
,
'
-
o.
A
- -
,
,
'
-
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
K
.
.
O
.
.,i
.
.
.
,'
,
a
.
.
.
.
.
.
.:
,
,
,
.
. -
.:
.
,
,
O.
-
.
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
.'
.
.
.
0.06 -t.
-
.
,
,
.
t.
- """""".r-0.08 -t.""~~~- ',
"
t- """e.
.
.
-
.
,
.
.
-
,
@
" """ ":"""""""".-
-
,
.
,
.d
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
a
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
,
t 1)
,.
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
.
,
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
.
..
,
.
,
.
..
j
.
'
'
a, I
I
.
,
.
.
,
,'
l
,
'
,.
,
'
I.
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
..
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
,,o,
.
.
!
0.04 - i. ~ ~ " ",' :
l
.
,
,
"'
,
,
.
,
""".
,'
" " " ". " " " " " " ". -
0.04.""""""
-
,
',,,
- E. " " " " " " 4. - " " " " 4. -
-
--
"-
,
,
,
e
,
,
,
- .
.:
,
.
,
,,.
,
,
,
,
- e,:
,
,
.
'
,
c,
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
..
,
.
.
.
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
.
s
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
.
..
..
'
,
,
.
,
..
.
-
,
,
o,
.
.
,
.
.
.
,
,
.
,
,
..
c e
.,
,
,,
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
..
.
i
.
,
,
.
,
'
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
l
,..
,
.
.
,
m,
,
,
,
0.
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
....
,
i
.............
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
e
.
.
,
..
.......................
,
,
,
,
..
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
..........
.
,
,
,
..........
............
...
e
,
.
.,
...
,
,
,
,
,
i
.
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
..
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
..
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
i i
a
,
'
,
,
i
'
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
.
,
.
.
i t
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
..
..
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
..
.
..
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,,
,
,
.
i n.ld,.,0:e, : ; e.,]
- r: : a,,d o en!
!
?
'
.:
- ^
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
%
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
-
.
.
!
-.-
h '.!?
,
.
O
!
!
,
'
.
.
'
-
.
.
.
i..
.-
.i...i...i...i i... i...
-
.
.
i... i... i-2000
2000 4000 0000-2000
2000 4000 8000
Expected Margin [TTW Bottom - MRT] in Ibf
.
,
,
,
MRT for gate valves based on 0.55 Valve Factor Low DP Load Study
n
.
=
'
'
.
-.-,
.. -
~. - - - -,.,.. -. - -, - -,.,
e-._%-.,.
...-,-,-,,,-...m,-e w-,..
e--+,-..m..-rem-
,.-- -,.
ue
.r-,-2-
.wa--
-
--,e
-
_
-
_
_-
__
_
_
Overall Population Tested Population
~
.
,
Expect d Margin in Pcreant Expect:d M rgin in Percent
,....,....,....
....,
i
.i....i....i....i
. >.
0.25 -i.
i.
t.............j..~....~.j-0.25 - t. ~
' ~ ~ ~ t. - ~ ~ ~ ~ t. " "" ~ " " j ~ ~ ~ " " j -
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
!
Overdit Mean = 82.7%
j
..i
.i Teste.if Mean = 10.,3.8%
i.
..
.
.
.
..
.
!.
O. verall Stanb. ard Deviatib. n = 74.5%.i
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
-
i
- Tested Standard Deviatib. n = 115.89l.
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.:
- .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i t.
i
-
?.
- ~?.-
0.2 - t. - ~~~t.--
-
~t." ~~ ~t.""
-
"~!-
.
.
.
.
.
.
0.2
.
.
.
.
.:
.
,
.:
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.:
- .
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
,
.
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
.
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'
.
.
.
.
.
-
c s,w.15 - t. - - -""":.""~~"+."""""+.""~~~+:-
e0.15 - +: " -
,,- " - +: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e.: " ~ ~ " " ~ +.: ~
CO r
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
3
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
&
- -
,
-
e
,
'
'
e3
6.
,
'
- -
.
w
t.a.
,
'
La.
'
.
..
,
.
.
,.
e
.
,
.
.
O-
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
0.1
- :.
!
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
o. " " " "." " "
" " " t. " " " " " " " t. " " ~ " ~ t. -
_e 0.1
"
.
-:--
'
""""t.-"""~~t."""""~t.-""""""":-
(J.
.
.
,
.
,
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
,
-
.
.
.
.
..
e
..
.
.
.
.
n-
,
,
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
,
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
.
..
,
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
.
..
,
.
.
.
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
,
,
.
,
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
.
<
,
,
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
0.05 - :..--,'.ko ~": """"" ~ ;"""""""".: -""""""
,
'
.
.
.
..
0.05
-
-
'
'
,
.. " "
,
u,
~ ~ ; " " " " ~ ~ " ; " " " " " " " ".: ~ ~ ~ " " ".: -
,
I
,
,
,
..
.
,,,
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
,
i
.
.
.
.
,.
.
.
.
N
.
.
,,
.
i
.
,
.
.
.
..
.
.
e
,
,
,
.
i
.
i
.
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
.
.
,
,
,,'N
,
,
,
.
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
,
.
e
,
,
,
,
,
-.
.
,
..
,
.
.
,
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
-
,
,
.
,
,
.
.
.
,
,
,
,
ll
.
,
.
.
,
.
i
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
I
.
,
,
,
,.
-
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I I
.
J:,,,,W,i
.
.
,
i
,
,
,
,
'
,
,
,
,
i i
,
.
.
,
o
'
.
N
.
,
,
i
.
,
,
.
'
c;1
,,
,h:
nu_:h n _ Ri
.i.
.s l,; L L;
.
,
- .
.:
'
'
.
'
'
,
@ %
'
l
,i
,, %i
.
,
,
i
- .
Y!
,,
'
,
O
!.
'
,
'
,
.
.
.
.
._
-
1..
..l
....t
....t
..
..I
.
.
.
._
...1...
1...
1...
.1 i
100 200 300
.400
100 200 300 400
'
i Expected Margin [(TTW Bottom - MRT) / MRT] in %
-
,
Low DP Load Testing MRT for Date valves based on current design basis VFs W12M
.
/7
!,
.
.
..
-...
.
-
-
m
.
m
--.
-w w
e-u
-..
.
.
.-
.-.
-
.
.-
.
--
.
.
~ -
!
l
.
.
'
f.
%
-
%
!
\\
.
es
[
-
\\
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
........:.........................:..........................
.
.
.
.
.
i.
,
.
.
,
..........................
.
+
e
,.,.................
r
.
.
.
.
,
.
!
.
t
-
,
.
.
.
.
-
-
'
.
s'
!
.
.
-
g
!
.
.
.
.
,
..>.........g....
........).........................;........................ 1.........................
,
.
e
.u..
.:
e f
-
o
.'.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
-
.O
.
,
w
.
.
.
.
.
4,.
..
.
.
.
-.
-
.........................................................................................
.
...
.
.
.
r
$
I I
M
.
.
,
..:
i
-
.
.
.
.
-
.C
. :.
.
.
,
.
.
O (w,.
.,3........b..
........}.........................).....a...................)....
.
.
.
-
....................
.
.
.
.
.
'.
-:
-
i
-
.
-
.
'
.
.
.
.C.,.
.:
-
.
.
o
_______.. ----.._______ _________
_
.
______
____
-,
.
o
._
.
.
.
.
.
-
- -
i
!
!
!
c u.
-
.
_
.
g
.:
'
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
--
.
.
?
- - - - - - -
.,,,
O
-........... - - - - -
---
-
-
_ - _ - _ _ _ _ _
.,
-
--
i_==.
.s
..
- - - - - - - - -.-__-_-_ _ _
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
o i
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
-.>.........................>.........................;.........................s.........................,.
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
E
3 o
.
m o
.
.
o o
o o
Aouenbeid eAgeleg
'
-
,
i
%
-
-
m.o*
!
-
.
.
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.g..............
........}.........................}.........................g........................gi.
g
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
N gu.
w
.
.
,.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.:.......g............:.........................:.........................:........................,
.
.
.
w~
..
.
.
.
.
m
.
.
.O O-3
$.
$.
es=mlIE
@
-
w l
..
.
,a
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
!
i
-
......................................................
S.
j g
..................... q
................
,.
.
.
.
.
__
_ ____
- c.
.:
-
-
C
.
U-
.:
- _
....
bC
.!
!.
!
!
.
og
-
.
.
.
n
.>...........
.......>.........................s.........................>.......
_______
.,
g, w;
m
!
..
.
.
O
'
- -
l
.. _ _ _ _ _
_-
.
,
__ - - -
_
..
.
.
.
--
.
_ _ - _ - _
_
.
..
.
.
-
___ _ - -
_ _
-
.
.
.
.
-.
6 'D
..........................:.........................:..........- - -
- -
- - --
. O *u
.
'
-
sum:s i
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _
'
.:
.
.
- - - - -_ -_ -
,
.
__
............
--- _ - _ - _ - _ - _ - _ - _ _
_ _ _ - _
.
.
.
_ _
_
...........................
-
Q
.........................
_ _ - _
- -_____
.
..
.
.
.
.
---.----
"""
su
..
.
.
.
.
~
.:
-
.
.
ii.-.........................................................................................................,.
t
,
t
,
t t
.
,
t
,
e u
o
.
.
fouenbe>o
.
o o
o 3 eAgeley
.
-
-
.
m
. -,.. -
.
.,. -,,,. -..
,
a.m.y
_. -. - -. _ _
-
.y-,-
.-----m.____
-
_
_
_
_-
..
.
,
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS
.
.
Low Do Load Valves VALVE VENDOR VALVE VALVE
-
TYPE PRESSURE SIZE
,
CLASS GALE ANCHOR / DARLING 150
GATE ANCHOR / DARLING 150
GAIE ANCHOR / DARLING 150_
GATE ANCHOR / DARLING 300
GATE VELAN 150
GATE VELAN 1500
GATE VELAN 1500
GAIE WEsilNGHOUSE 150
GAIE WESTINGHOUSE 316
GATE WESTINGHOUSE 900
GATE WESilNGHOUSE 1500
GATE WESTINGHOUSE 1500
GA1E WESTINGHOUSE 1500
GATE WESllNGHOUSE 1840
GATE WESTINGH00SE 2035
GLOBE ANCHOR / DARLING 300
GLOBE ANCHOR / DARLING 900
GLOBE ANDERSON GRWD 300
GLOBE CRANE 800 1.5 GLOBE EDWARDS 1500 0.75
'
GLOBE EDWARDS 1500 1.5
'
GLOBE-VELAN 1500
.
-
/9
.
.
i i
!
DYNAMIC TEST DATA. ANALYSIS RESULTS~
'
,
.
l Low Dp Load Valves
.
.
Criteria for Application
'
.
-
Minimum Margin Between Static CST and MRT
-
'
Large Cross Section of Valves, Represented by
-
this Evaluation
,
Methodology Accounts for:
!
- Variability in Valve Factor f
- Load Sensitive Behavior
.
e i
+
-
.
!
!
-
i ao
-
'
I
/
&
-
J I
'
-
,
_
S IS
.
-
Y
-
s L
R Dir A
E o
O t
-
Ti o
N n
T Rav C
A s
A Oh i
e
.
g F PB
.
A S n
P
-
T T s
V Si e
it E U v
.
AL i
e t
T L
s
-
D U c
AE n
-
TS m
A
VRe i
S SE a
d d n
ES ae ER y
D VN od T
LO Ln d
AI u
_
a T
eo C
oluV PlvB I
Lf
.
gEMay M
Vl PnB l
-
A Di U
a e
nO c
-
N-waL Sbi o e S
opy
-
Y LM G A GT l
-
D e
-
-
'
,
.
-
.
_
.
.
_
-
-
!'
'
I l
l
!I
i
.
.
,
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS l
RESULTS
.
l
'
.
.
Valve Factors Observed During Testing are l
Consistent with Design Basis Values i
,
.* Appeared Unpredictable Initially
,
!
'
,
l l
!
!.
'
.
'
-
i c.
I i
l
-
.
.
o.-
c
.-
_ _.
- _ _ _
__
_.
.
_ _ _ _ _
_ _
_
. _
.
?to
%
,
i
!.
,
i
{
- ..ii;ii.ig.
..
....
i...
g....g
....
.
.
.
.
_
.3.............
.............+.............<......... %... s.............:..............:...............
.
.
,
4,
.
._
.
.
.
_.
.
_., O
.
.
,
.
.
-
o ++-+
.
.
.
,i
.
.
.
o..*-o
>:
.
.
.
.
.
.
_.
.......................................
.
.
............
............................................
.
.
.
.
.
. :
.
.
.
.
C
_.
<
<
.
.
.
.
.
,C
..
.
.
- - >
.
-
.
i
.
.m
.
.
.
.
.
.-
i
.
.
%
_.3..............>.............g.............4........t.... A. MM.....:.
.
.
.
.
a
.
..............:............._
.
.o c
.
.
.
s:
s
c.
C.. -
.
..
..
.
.
. -
.
.
....
.
-<:
i.
O
.
c
-
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
co
.:.
.
.
~
.
...........................d.6..,............d_.............:
.
.
.
,
..............:.
.,
....
.
,
=
.
.
.....
.....:.
.
-
LJ
.
-<
Cc
-
o
.
.
.
-
,
x
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.,
.
,
..
.
e
.
.
_
3:
O
.
.
.
.
.
..
-
.
.,..
_
.
.
.
c.
...........
m.
i,
..
.....................
............ W..............
...........
_.
.
_
............. _
.
..
.
.
.
V
.
iC c
C
...
.
-
.
.
]
.
.
.
C.
_,.7,
-
-
.
- O o i
!P P i
P**
J
-- :
.
.
g g
_.>...........g....j................. 5..........c..
........... p......;!......j......;...
i cto a O s.
,
u c.
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
co
.
.
.
- C
"O
c
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
<
C.
>a a..
-
..
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
-
..........................
s
..
.m
,
.......................
.(
..........p,
..............
-
..................,.
o.:
x o.:
C
- <
.
?
.
_
'
.
-
"Y.
.
,
y
.
e
.
-
.
.
-
C, m.
.
m
,
C
.
-n
o
.
.
.
,
-..
C.,
i
.
- d
_
W
.
C
-
.
1 y..............y.............g..............g.......
.f..
W
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.,
O
.
..... M.... : = """ * a ".: ~ ~" a a ".2 =
-
'
C.
.
.
.
m o,, @
.
Q
.
.
$
.
.
b
.
.:
.
-
.
,
o+ mmo.:
e
.
i
V
.
.
.
C 4...............;............
4.............. &...........
.
.
. g.... p,....:..............:..............:.
g
.
..
..
.
g
.
.
C
,
>
..
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
,3 O
-
n C
.
.
. m
.
O
.
.
.
l - m.
.
.....D... g......... s.. u,
.........g...
O
. -
.
.
.
, C,
,
m
.
.
.
. -
_
..
.
.
.
...........................
.
.
..
...............................
I
$$
.
.
.
-
<
t
C
.
.
m,.
.
.
.
.
,
Q
.
..O
.
.
.
.
.
-
,
,
.
.
"
D
.
.
..
-
.>.........C...>......d.........6........<..............
m
-
.
.
a
.
.
.n..........Y.,................. 5......... 3.
.
.
.
C
.-
.
.
..
O
.
.
.
.
.
m.
C-.
.
.
.
.
O
.
C.
.
.,, t so.. o.
.
m
--
.
u
.
.
m O
.
,,
.
i
-
........
-
..................a.......................
.
..
n
.
.
... 4~.o.o n.o.mmo om.
.
-
-
-
-
.:
C
.
C
,.
.. -
,5
.
.
.
v.:
s
.
-m
.
.
.
,,
.
.
.
_.. C
.
.
.
..
-
<
.
.
,.,
..
.
.
.
.
O
..
y.............3.......E....g.
.
-
.
.
-
.
v
......
4.....
4................u.....?...g.
.
.
.
.............. ;..............g.
.
i lt
}t t t t t t t-! t
.
!t
.
.
lt lt a e t
e a e a e l
1-i e t ie t
i, E9 C.
N O.
i u
M.
O e
'
- =
i
,
.
-
.
o
.
,= 1 e
Y
.
1 ;o
<
{
.
..
I
{
JopeIeAlsA
,i a
i
.)
b.
?
!
!
. -, -
_
_
-.
,
,
,,
,
, ~ - -., _ _, _,,
,...~_..c-.,-.,,,w
,, - _,. -
l
_ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ -
_ _ _ _
___
.
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS
-
.
.
.
.
Detailed Evaluation Methodology
Trace Zeroing and Marking Evaluation
-
Disposition Outliers a
,
- Cause Identified and Corrected
- Test Excluded l;
- Determine and Apply Uncertainties j
- Random
- Bias
~
- Seat Diameter
,
,
.
.
l
,
e
....
_
_
_ _ _ _._ _ _ _
--
_
_ - -
_ _ _
_
__
.
.
.
.
.
,
i DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS
.
.
'
l
.
,
Factors Resulting in Outliers Line Pressure Assumptions
-
Flow Direction i
-
,
No DP Load (Anti-Cavitation Trim)
a Marking Problems
-
,
'
'
!
.
.
l
.
-
,
.
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS~
-
.
.
.
Factors Contributing to Uncertainty
>
- Accuracy Concerns (Iow load, noise and/or cyclic loading)
>
Marking Uncertainty Use of Disk Skirt Diameter
.
i
,
.
.
'
a4 i
.
t
..,,
_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _. _. _ _ _. _ _.. _.. _ -.
._-
--
- - _, _ _ _ _. _ _ _. _ _. _.. _
_ _ _ _
_--
_ _ _ _ _ _.
,
'
.
.
CORRECTION FOR HARD SEAT CONTACT BIAS
.
-
.
Beginning
'
Run Load
,
STATIC
-
-
- - -
- - - - -
- - ~ ~ -
TEST Static onset.
y --
'
.
Hard Seat
'
Contact Beginning i
Run Load DP
_
_.
_ _ -. - - - - - - -.
-
'
DP Onnet TEST
~
~~~
'
.
Hard Seat
,
contact
.
.
}
True DP Load = DP Offset - Static Offset
(consistfrnt marking of hard seat contact is critical to accuracy of m
.
.
'
.
i 3'
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
_
.
-
. _ _.
__
a I
I
-
@
' *
00
-
-
.
ID g
g
-......._e.g....................................,....,
..
n
....................x
........................................ 3...................:.............
Q
.,
.
.
.
i.
.
.
.
i
.
.O
.
.
.
k
................ -..........
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
...............
-
.
.
.............................
.
...-...........
N
.:
++
i
M
^
l LJ
.=
-
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
l
.
.
.
. 3.......
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
.. =.
,
l
.-
......
.........
...............................................
.........
,
.
.
-
,-
.
.
. -..
.
.
.
.
.
=
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
..
-
.
OW
.................
......................................................
_........... a
-.
.
.
.
.
g
..
-_
.
.
.
=
.
g
,..;
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
..
.
O O
i................
......:........4...........;........4.........4..........
.
......:..........}.
.
.
.
- .
..
a<eO.:
,;.
I
.I. _
P.=*
.
.
,.
.
.
.
.
. _
=.
'
.
.
.
.
.
-.).........g..........>.........:.........<.........
3.........(..........>....=... :-
- <......... 3..
n na.
@
..
.
.
.
.
,,,
..
.
.
.
.
.
-
.,
.
.
- .........
- .........;.........;.................. -
- ..........;...
.
.
.,
[
..
.
.
>
.-.;.........
.........
l
- .........
.._
.
m y
.
J
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
><
.......................................
.
.
.
e
..
>
.-
.........
............._....
.........................
.
,
.
-
-
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.-
.
O.,,
.
.
.
.
.
....................
[j,j
.
.
..
.........
............................................_.....
-.
...........
.
.
W
.
._
-
..
%
=4
.
.
.
.
.
D,..........:........4..........:....................
.
-
.
.
- ................ -
-
... 4..........:..
.
-.s
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.=
W
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
s
.-
.
.
.
.
.
..
Q
.- 4..........
........ 4..........:.........g........................................>................. 4..........;.
._
.
.
- ........ 4
.
.........
,;
.........
.........
<
c e.
m.
n m.
N e.
e.
o O
,
e O
v e
N
-
o
-
B O.LO W BA'W A i
@
.
<
-
_
!
g B
e
,
,
-
O 3.........g...... E..y,.W......:.
..
,.,
,
,
..
.....
,...,
E.
.........<..........;.........t...........p.........
.........g..........;.
e 3g
..
.
.
,
.,
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
-
.
.
.
,
i
.
.
......
..........
.
,,,.
...............
.
.......... -
..........
.................................
.
.-
,
.,, ee g.
.
=.
i
.
,,,,,,
,,,.
.
.
.
.
.
2......
.
.
.,
.
.
O.
.
.
.
............
i.
...............
... -
-.
.........
...................
........
.........
.
Q
-
.
.
.
-
,-
.
.
.
.
.
- g
.
.
.
.
.
E
O
-.................. m. a................:.....................I..........:........:.
.:
.
.
=
C p
s.: s
.
...........
-
..
.
.
-
.:
c
.
h.
=
.
.
.
.
=
.
.
_
(1.
.
.
.
OO.
,.;................;
.
.
.
-
.
......:.........g..........;........4.........4...........
.... 4..........;.
.
O
.-
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
<
.:
!.
I
+=*
.
.
.
=
t~
.
.
.
.-
,.
.
.
.
.
ff O
.-.).........g..........>.........:...<,g..........}.........t...........>......__
..:......... 3.
.
.
me.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,,.
.
.
.
.
.
WZ
.
.
-
.
>
.
.
.
.
_
g..........y.........:.........q........**
.!*********t.********e*.*>e*********
-.
.=
n
.-
.
>. d
.
@
-.3.........
-
,*********!**"*
.f
.
.
.
.-
.
.
.
,..
.
.
.
.
.
w.
.
.
=
J
.
.
.
e*:
,
.
,.'....
><
=
.
.
.
.
.............................................
.........
-
_..
..........
..........
.
-
.
.........
J
,
.
-
.
.
,-
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
><
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.........................................................
_......... =
.........
.
O
..
....... -
,
.
.
..
-
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
-
~
.
.
.
.
.
.-
.
J
.
......... - -
.
....................
...........
.........
.
.........
.. _
..............
,
.-
.
.
.
,,
.
m
-
.,
.-
.
.
.
,
.
-
.
.
- 4.........:........ 4.........:........ 4..........:............~..... 4.........
-
........4.........*.i e
e r.
.
e,..
t
,
e
...t
..
n..
.
.
..t
... t O
m e.
<
m.
n e
N m.
e.
o e
a v
e N
-
o g
j
$
W o.Lo w B K W A
-
!
.
L
~
, _ _ _.., _
_
. - - _ _. _, _ _ - - - -.
_
_
_
..
-
. _.
.
_ - _ _ _
. - _ _
_ _ _ _
- - - - _
..
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS
,
RESULTS
,
.
Criteria for Applicatiori
,
i l1
- Globe Valve Design Bounded '
= Flow Under the Seat
-
.
- Sample Testing at each Station to Verify i
Applicability
!
!
.
I
!
~
-
-
,
I
'
l
.n
__
- _ _ _ _ _
_ _._ _ _ _--__ ___ _ _ _ -
- - _ _ _ _ _.
..
.
.
!
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS
~
-
.
.
.
- Low DP Load Dynamic Testing is not Meaningful
- Globe Valve - Valve Factor Assumptions are Supported
,
e-GLOBE VALVE - LOAD SENSITIVE
.
l BEHAVIOR IS TYPICALLY BOUNDED
!
i,'
!
!
'
,
.
.
!
-
3"
- --
---_- -..-__--__
_. _ _. - _ - -. - _, _ _ - -
. -
.
t
.
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS
-
i l
t
.
Load Sensitive Behavior
.
,
.
,
,
Typical Globe Valves are Bounded by
.
Equipment Accuracy and Repeatability Further Investigation of Few Remaining Outliers
..
- Rising Rotating Valves
- Damaged Anti-Rotation Device
- Neolube
,
'
.
'
j
-
I
.
,
-
-
)
I j
..__
~
3/
i a
.
-
- -
-
.
.
.
-.
-
_
,
.- -.
. - - - _--
,
t
.
c. :
.
..
o',
l
s.
,
.
.
i
.
I I
,
l jungongonjungungungungungoujungnu ungongongongung i
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
.>.... 4.......>.... 4...... 3.... 4.......>.....
..... 3.... 4.......>...
.
.
.
.
.
.....>.....e......... 4......
..
..
.
,.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
. -
.
.
.
,
.
-.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
-
>
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.....
.
-...................................
.
.
..................................
..............
.
.
.
.
. -
=
.
.
.
.
m
.
.
.
.
.
..
-
.
C
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
>
s
.
.
.
_.
.
.
,
.
.
. _.
.
,
L
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_.
.
.
,
.
.
.-
.
,
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
._
.
.
.
,
.
i
,u i
.... 3........... >.....,............ 4...... 3.....
........... 4..........
....3._
........3..
_
_
.
.
.
.
>.
.
,
.
.
r
_
,
.
.-.
.
.-
-
.
.
,
\\. >
.
.
. -.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
..
.
.
a
_
.
.
.
.
,4
.
..
.
,
.
.
.
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
,
.
.
.
,
.
c.
_.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
,.
.
.
.
.
.
m <u.
.
...o.
......
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.-.....
.-
..
.
.>..
............................................................ -
.
.
_.
.
............_
..
,
.
.-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
-.
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
..
o
.
.
.
.
.,,.
.
.
.
.c
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
_.
.
..
...
.
Q>
.
.
Z.C.O.e;
.
.
.
.
_.
.
.
.
,
.
_.
.
.
e
.
_
_.
.
,
.
.
.
.
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
......
.
......................
_.
E
........................
......
...............
o
.
.
.......
..
..........
o
. c.
.
_-
.
._
...
.
.
.
,
WZ
.
_.
.
.
.
.
.
._
.
.
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
v
.
.
,.
,
.
.
.
..
m
.
.
.
.
.
c
.
e
.
.
.
.
.
_.
< o
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
..
.
.
OO
_.
--
.
.
.
.
.
.
..................
.
.
m.
................................. _
..............
o
....
.
.....................
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
. -.
.
-
.
u
.
.
.
.
.
_.
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
a.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
a.
=.
.-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
_.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
__
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
........................
...............
.
.............
.....
..............
.
_
............
.....
.
.
-
.
_.......
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-.
.
_.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_.
.
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.-
_.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
..
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_.
.
.
.
.
.-
._
.
.
.
..,...........,.......... 1...........>.....
.
.....<......
_
.
.
......
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
............,.....<...........<.......
lt tt tlt tt tlt tf tit t t tits e tlt t t tit t t tltt tj ! # e t ltt tt l 1It.:t#tlttttltotItettlttetl
.
3.
.
.
.
$
E E
S S
E R
14 R E
E
2 *$$
e
.
Jogeyes e^msues peo pueo;ed I
.
. -..
,
..-,
..
,
,.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
_ --- -
-
--
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
____
.,
.
i DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS
'
~
RESULTS
-
Load Sensitive Behavior
,
.
~
.
Factors Contributing to Uncertainty
.
,
Accuracy Concerns (zeroing uncertainty, noise
and/or cyclic loading)
CST Marking Uncertainty
!
'
j
l
i
{
q I
i i
k f
.
.
.
-
,
j
).
...
. - -.
3 3
-
. -
-
-
-
-
-
.
--
--
_ _ _ _ _
. - - - -
-
.
.
.
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSlS I
~
'
RESULTS
.
Load Sensitive Behavior
.
-
Factors Contributing to Outhers Incomplete Cycle Due to Operator Shutting off
Power to CST
!
i
.
.
t
.
.
i
)
3 s
!.___
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
.
.
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - -
-- -
,
__
.
_ _ _
__
_
_
_.
i i
.
.-
I,r
.
.,
.-
<:
,
l
,
gnugnugongnugungungungungongongin..n.g.n gungongnug a
.
.
.
.
f
.>...........>.....<.......>...........>.
.
.
,
.
.
.
-
.....:...........+.... 2.....
.... 2.....+......
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
......+.....>
.
.
>
- swe. s uo g n:oe s
,
.
.
.
.
r
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
,
t
,,
_.
_.
.
.
.
.
.
- - -
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
. >..... <...... >..... <
.
.
=
.
............ o......>.....<......>...-=. 4.....>.....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
......:.....
.
.
_.....>.....+......
.
-
-
.
M
.
<
.
.
_.
,
.
_
.
_
.
.
.
.
,
-
.
.
.
i
.
y
.
.
.
.
.
.
.:..... :......:..... L......:..... i...... 3.... 2.......:..... A. u. a
==*
.
,
.
..
.
.
...ai n.. 4
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
>
....a.l.- a G....=.:.
,
.
,
.
-
g
-
.
.
.
r
.
t
.
I
.i i
"I. -
.
-
.
.
O
?
i.
S W S $. U d. M N. N.
.i
.
-
.
i L
,,
.
_.
>
.
.
.
.
...
.
.-
.
.
.
.
,
-.
.
.........
.
.
.
l
.
................ -
........s...........
.
.
_
...
.
.
i
.
!
.
.
.
,
,..
.
_
.
......
........... ~....
,
.
...........
.
.
--
.
..
.
-
-1
,
-
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
=
,..
.
l <
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
>
,.
.....
s.....
.
.
.
.....
,
...................
.
. sr
_ -.......
..
-
......
,
.............
.
.
.,.
.
.
-
-
.
.
.........................
r d<
.
'
-
.
.
i
.
.
!
-
.
.
.
,
,
..
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
=
i
\\
.
.
.
i
-
,.
-
.
.
.
.
.
,
_.
.
,
.
,;
. EZ.
.
.
.
.
....................
.
.
.
.
.It b
\\
..............
.
.
t
....................... 49......
,
,
=
I e
.
..........
.
.............
.
.
<
\\
.
.
C
.
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
-
-
.-
.-
.-
.-
,.
-
-
.
.
-
e
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
\\
.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
................
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
...........
t g
......
>
_
...... -
..
...........
t
.
._
...................
.
.
....
......
.............
-
,
>
.
.
.
.
-
.
.
r
.
.
_
.
.
--
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.-
--
.
-
.
.
.
.
r
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.;.....g...........;......;.
.
............
.
.
.
......;.....
.
.
.....
......
.
- .....;......
...........
.
.
.
.
..........
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
-.
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
._.
.
.r
.
_
.
.
.
_.
,
.
.
.
-
-
_
.
.
.
-
--
.
.
.
.
.r
.
.
.
.
.
. >.....,........,.....<......>.....g......>.....-,,.
.
-
-.
-
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
..... 3.....
..... 3.....
.................
l....lonin..Inninnlu nin nin n t..nl..n inn..nliniloninni.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,.....,..... 3.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.nl ESSSE e
.
Re o
e o
'P o
e a
-
.
.
.
.
JotAsye8 eAg! sues peo1;ueoJed
.
!
i i
i e
I
,
,,
a_
,
, -, -.,
,
_.,.
..--e,
- - -.
c
.-
,,
- - -
_
_ _. _.
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
DYNAMIC TEST DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS
.
-
'
.
.
.
Conclusions
.
.
By Reducing the Required Low DP Load and Globe
,
.
DP Load Gate Valve Testir ] Valve Testi
.
t
,
k
!
>
.
e l
.
-
-
- - -
--
- I
'
'!
!
t
.
,ft!
_
/
.
-
_
E
-
_
T S
-
_
AN DO y
.
n
-
I I a
LT p
-
AP m
'
-
-
o
_
VM C
_
O U n
- y o
T S b
s
-
-
-
i S
d d
-
SA e
E
_
E n
h t
e t
VIS s
a l
e e
I
_
TS P
w r
AA no
-
B m
IT m
-
IN N o
.
-
G C
I I
oS C E
_
E D C
.
.
_
'
-
_.
- i ;
- ,
'
!
l
[
i, ;
!:!
'
-_
_
-. -
._
.
.___-____-
-
--
,, -
'
.- \\
'
.
CECO INITIATIVES TO VALIDATE DESIGN BASIS ASSUMPTIONS Presentation Purpose
.
.
.
.
~
,
Discuss the Initiatives Undertaken by CECO
'
Focus on Dynamic Testing Analysis Results
,
!
,
.
.
l
.
.
,
i
'
.
i
~
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
i
-
-
--
_ _ _ _ - -
-
-
- _ _ - - - - - - - - -
.
,
CECO INITIATIVES TO VALIDATE t
.
\\
~
DESIGN BASIS ASSUMPTIONS
~~
.
.
Accomplishments
.
.
DC Motor Testmg
!
t Live Load Packing Shop Tests
-
KALSI Actuator Thrust and Torque Testing
-
-
i EPRI Validation Program
-
~
i
!
300 Dynamic Tests Completed on 200 Valves
-
!
!
l l
-
ll
,
-
,
-
..
.