ML19312D067
| ML19312D067 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/29/1980 |
| From: | Fieno D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Kniel K Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003190744 | |
| Download: ML19312D067 (14) | |
Text
.- #
NN b
~(
UMTED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a
i 1
= = m an on.o.c.2asse t
/
FEB 2 91980 MEMORANDUM FOR: Xarl Kniel, Chief Core Performance Branch, DSS S
,FROM:-
Daniel Fieno Leader Reactor Physics Section, CPB/ DSS
SUBJECT:
MEETING WITH GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY TO DISCUSS THE CONTROL CELL CORE DESIGN CONCEPT On February 27, 1980, representatives of the General Electric Company (GE) met with the NRC staff in Bethesda, Maryland to discuss its Control Cell Core (CCC) design concept.. The meeting attendees are itsted in.
Mr. Rooer Hilliams of GE made the presentation of the CCC desi.1 con-3 capt. There are two main aspects to the concept: one concerns opera-tions'and the second concerns the fuel shuffle strateoy. The operations aspect concerns the use of a selected group of control rods for reactivity and power distribution control throughout a fuel cycle. These rods are i
each surrounded by four low reactivity fuel assemblies. Thus, while at power, control rod motion occurrs adjacent only to low power fuel. The benefits to the plant include:
(1) simpler opere.tions, (2) a small increase in thermal margins, and (3) a potential for better fuel re-liability.
The fuel strategy is changed in the following manner. The selected group of control rods remains the same from fuel cycle to fuel cycle.
Fuel is shuffled during reload so that the lowest reactivity bundles are placed around the selected group of control rods (thrice burned fuel for an equilibruim core). The fresh fuel is scatter loaded throughout the core in non-control call locations (two fresh fuel bundles are loaded with a once burned and twice burned fuel bundle for an equilibrium core). The present fuel shuffle strategy is a scatte'r loading with a fresh fuel bundle loaded in nearly all the interior control cells.
The CCC design concept uses the same fuel bundles currently approved for use. However, four initial core bundle types are used rather than three. These bundles have a larger enrichment differential than pre-viously for an initial cycle but the core average enrichment remains the same. This concept also results in simplified axial gadolinia zoning.
9 8003190' M M l-C
'~
Karl Kniel
-2 Noel Shirley of'GE stated that the Itcensing impact was miminal. There-were no'significant differences noted for the analyzed plant transients and accidents. For those plants that choose this CCC design concept there would need to be an updating of SAR Section 4.3.2.1 (Nuclear Design Description). Mr. Shirley stated that GE would not submit generic reports on this concept for its product lines as they considered it as
. optional for each plant.
- The-slides used in the presentation are given in Enclosure 2.
-p
- i.., a 3 9,,,z Daniel Fieno, Leader Reactor. Physics Section Core Performance Branch Civision of Systems Safety
Enclosures:
As stated I
e 8
9 0
w e
e l
3
ENCLOSURE 1 Meeting Attendees-RC sg W. Brooks DSS /CPB N.. Shirley.
- M. Dunenfeld.'
R. Williams
- D. Fieno D. Houston NUS K. Kniel.
H. Richings' R. Schemel R. Sullivan F. Coffman DOR /RS8 B. Morris R. Riggs
- 5. Rubin H. Vander-Molen D. Bessette ACRS e
l
~
9 I
1
-. ~,..... _..
..i.
s r
,. j;
~
ENCLO3URE F f
' 1 9
I FEB.27,1980 a
o e
t' M
F
/
7 e
+
O tf s
v J
l
{
(
, ~.,
6
' 1 t
S e
yp._
^s3 F
.. g
+
a 9
1 s'
4 9
I
^
. +
.)
c
(fQ (Q*' TROL CELL CORE l
o -
lINTRODUCTICN o-
. CONTROL CELL CORE
-.1 o.
SAR APPROACH-o-
SECTION 4.3-o SECTION 4.3.2.1 (NUCLEAR DESIGN DESCRIPTION)-
o CHAPTER 15 o
R0D WITHDPM AL' ERROR (15.4.1 &
15.4.2) o FUEL LOADING ERROR (15.A.7) o R0D DROP ACCIDENT (15.4.9) o SCHEDULE-
SUMMARY
f 4 -
j 1CS: PES /345
.2/11/80
~
[
CCC DESIGN DESCRIPTION 8 FIXED GROUP OF CONTROL RODS.IS U$ED FOR' REACTIVITY A
WER: DISTRIBUTION CONTROL THROUGHOUT THE
.0 EACH OF THESE CONTROL. RODS MD ITS FOUR SURROUNDING FUEL ASSEMBLIES COMPRISE A CONTROL CELL.
,i e
LOW CT V FUEL. ASSEMBLIES ARE PLACED IN THE
-0 CONT OL D' MOTION OCCURS ADJACENT ONLY TO LOW E7cUiW" E(S i
g.
e$
5
$a lllllll
~
~-
DESIGN AND OPERATION DIFFERENCES CONVENTIONAL CORE
~
CONTROL-CELL CORE NORMALLY AT'LEAST ONE HIGH LOW REACTIVITY BUNDLES REACTIVITY BUNDLE LOADED PLACED IN THE CONTROL I
ADJACENT TO EACH CONTROL-CELLS R0D LOCATION
' CdNTROLRODSINSERTED CONTROL RODS INSERTED
. ADJACENT TO HIGH POWER ADJACENT T0.0NLY. LOW FUEL POWER FUEL CONTROL ROD PATTERNS FIXED GROUP OF CONTROL ALTERNATED BETWEEN THE RODS USED THROUGHOUT A-1,!A-2, B-1, AND CYCLE B-2 SE0VENCES' e
_ l CCC ELIMINATES INSERTION OF COICROLl i
RODS ADJACENT TO HIGH POWER FUEL t S
6 9
e
i.
T' CCC DESIGN' IMPROVEMENTS-i 8
SIMPLER OPERATIONS /INCREASET) CAPACITY FACTOR 4
R0D PATTERN SEQUENCE EXCHANGES ARE ELIMINATED.
l CONTROL R0D PATTERNS ARE ONE-EIGHTH CORE SYMMETRIC 0
SHALLOW RODS ARE EASIER TO USE 8
FASTER STARTUP-9 THERMAL MARGINS e
REDUCED PEAK KW/FT 4~ MARGIN TO ONSET OF. TRANSITION BOILING IS IN-CREASED IN PARTIALLY CONTROLLED ASSEMBLIES e
8L FUEL RELIABILITY 8
FUEL DUTY-IS REDUCED 9
FEWER POWER DISTRIBUTION TRANSIENTS 8 ~ LESS FUEL EXPERIENCES ADJACENT CONTROL R0D
- MOTION-9 I
e Ji..
. L,.
.m.
.gs
.-.--7___
1'.
t 4
l 8
ADVANTAGES OF CCC 8
EASIER TO OPERATE
- 0' GREATER THERMAL MARGINS 6
'BETTER FUEL CYCLE' ECONOMICS 8
REDUCTION IN FUEL DUTY t.
IMPROVETENT IN CAPACITY FACTOR
't SAF mt IMPROVEMENT DUE TO CCC 8
SIMPLIFIED PLANT OPERATION-
-FEWER MANEUVERS
-LESS OPERATOR ACTIONS 9
INCREASED MARGIN TO TECH,-SPEC. LIMITS
-LHGR.
-MAPLHGR e
5 9
9 e
e em 5
e
-t
. -. +,
w g
'.k.,w e
.--*.-w--.
w-++=e-
<e-
PRELIMINARY CONTROL CELL INITIAL CORE CONFIGURATION e
FOUR BUNDLE ~ TYPES.
8 LOW EllRICHED. BUNDLES IN CONTROL CELLS 8-
. APPROXIMATELITHESAMESWUANDORE REQUIREMENTS AS THE PRESENT STANDARD
- DESIGN, 8
SIMPLIFIED AXIAL GADOLINIA ZONING
~
IMPROVED URANIUM UTILIZATION t
n e
m
.sv,
.rw v,.-
-w
-c,y
~~
m R FERENCE CCC DESIGN
^
INITIAL CCRE CDFIGURATION j.
4.
1:"na:'"
.. MMMMMt..
~
.58E8H93HE8HSBM.
./E8E88HE8EBBMEEM.
MEd BEHB8HB8HE8HE8M.
E8ME8ME8ME8H88ME8ME83.
H HBEHBEH33HE8HESHE8 Hit
=
HE8ME8M88H88HE8M88EE8M HHE8HE8HE8HE8HE8HE8HM HE8ME8HE8HE8HE8H88E88M U.
HHE8H88HE8HE6HE8HE8HM
" E8 ME8 HE8H88 HE8 ME8 EE8:"
"EE8HE8HE8HE8HE8HE8M" "HE8EE8ME8EE8M88M"
~
"EE8HEEH98HE8M" l
"" HHHHHi""
g 0.9' w/o U235 g 1.s w/o u235
- Q 2.5 W/o U235 g 2.s wio u235
.~
e~
E m
m
-e-w--
-e
-er---_evmm,e -v - e e,NTwwa w'Mr++tw we
- g-we--'wW~d
- L
- f)[.,
cp i
EQUluSRlUM CORE REFUGUNG STRATEGY 1
1M OonE SATE e EE
)
j,
I-I' ll J III 1
II l
.g l
ek
=
tn;mg_aanz_gni:.
Onh 3nigin ain x Z
Er mi M_E RZ E E n Z E E
A Xin!ECnu EE ninE-E g E ~:S luiX S inL Z in '-
EXM ZEX_XEM!n iin Z-L 3nuZmt EEing-EinEE-M Mw
' k!
l
{
12 E'__ in E iZiii ZH ml K_
it!
. = _ _ __
j!!!
lj!!!
{
EiXR niiXEE niREGiiiR 1
2 3
4 S
S 7
4 9
to 11 12 13 M
16
- CYCLE 1 PUELIFRSSMS
- U'
. cvCLs 2 ruck sones ev==soi
-g. _ _ _..__
E - ----
I~
.l
..l % _
b
--== c.
e
-0
--e e
,..ww-,-
-.n-.
-s~-,..-e--we-m..,-mes.,e-,-o-,,w,--w
~
d-'
Cl4ANGES FROM CURRENT DESIGN 1.-FOURINITJALCOREBUOLETYPESRATHERTHANTHREE.
7 2.
GREATER ENRICilMENT DIFFERENTIAL, ENRb1ENT-h hhh BUNDLE TYPE ~
1-'
O.9 0.7 2
1.6 1.8 3
2.5 2.2 4-2.8
. AVERAGE
-1.9 w/o 1.9 w/o 3.
SINGLE CONTR3L R0D SEQUENCE OPERATIONS.
e e
8 O
-,--....,----.,e-
Q J'i LICENSING IMPACT
=1.
PLANT TRANSIENT PERFORhANCE
-SCRAM REACTIVITY D0PPLER COEFFICIENT AND VOID COEFFICIENT ESSENTIALLY THE SAME.
~
-N0 CHANGE IN TRANSIENT PERFOR"ANCE.
2.
CONTROL R0D WITHDRAWAL ERROR
-N0 SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN RESULTS.
3.
FUEL LOADING ERROR
-N0SIGNIFICANTDIFFERENCEINRESULTS.
.4.
R0D DROP ACCIDENT
-N0 SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN-RESULTS.
5.
COLD SHUTDOWN REACTIVITY-
-NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCF
~G.
CORE STABILITY
~
-N0 CHANGE IN STABILITY MARGINS.
7.
LOCA PERFOR'tANCE
-N0-CHANGE IN PERF0RMANCE.
O e
e e
I..