ML19341D671

Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station,Unit 1,Cycle 6 Startup Test Results

ML19341D671
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	04/03/1981
From:	COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML19341D669	List: ML19341D668 ML19341D671
References
NUDOCS 8104080378
Download: ML19341D671 (10)

Text

.-

(.

ID TS/A QUAD-CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1 CYCLE 6 STARTUP TEST RESULTS 8164080 3 K

r TABLE OF CONTENTS Test No.

Title Page 1

Scram Timing i

2 Shutdown Margin 3

3 Initial Critical 4

4 TIP Reproducibility and Core Power Symmetry 5

l l

l i

l b-I.

d s

I.

Control Rod Scram Timing Pu rpose The purpose of this test is to demons trate the sc ram capability of

-all of the operabic control rods in compliance with Technical Specifications 4.3.C.1 and 4.3.C.2.

Criteria A.

The average scram insertion time, based on the de-energization of the scram pilot valve solenoids as time zero, of all operable control rods dering reactor power operation shall be no greater than:

% INSERTED FROM AVG. SCRAM INSERTION FULLY WITHDRAWN TIMES (sec) 5 0.375 20 0.900 50 2.000 90 3.500 The average of the scram inser*. ion ttmes for the three fastest control rods of all groups of four rods in a two by two array shall be no greater than:

% INSERTED. FROM AVG. SCRAM INSERTION FULLY WITHDRAWN TIMES (sec) 5 tb398 20

~0.954 50

'2.120 90 3.860 l

If these times cannot he met, the reactor shall not be made supercritical; if aperating the reactor shall be shutdown immediately upon detemination that average scram time is deficient.

B.

The maximum insertion time for 90% insertion of any operable -

control rod shall not exceed 7.00 seconds.. If. this' requirement cannot be met,' the deficient control rods shall be considered inoperable, fully inserted into the core, and electrically disarmed.

Results and Discussion There were '177 control rods scram tested.. The results are presented in Table 1.1.

The maximum 90% insertion time was 3.33 seconds for cont rol rod M-13 ~ (46-51).o Both criteria-A and B were met.

1 A

Table 1.1 Control Rod Scram Results NUMBER AVERAGE T;.MES FOR % INSERTFJ), SEC OF RODS 5%

20%

50%

90%

Cold 177 0.25 0.48 0.98 1.73 Hot 177 0.30 0.69 1.50 2.63 e,

m '

L :

l 1

II.

Shutdown Margin Denons tration and Cont rol Rod Funct lonal Checks Pu rpos_e The purpose of this test is to demonstrate for this core loading in the most reactive condition of the operating cycle that the reactor is subcritical with the strongest control rod full out and all other rods fully inserted.

Criteria R + B C settling penalty)

If a shutdown margin of 0.65% (0.25% +

4 cannot be demonstrated with the strongest control rod fully withdrawn, the core loading most be altered to achieve this margin.

The core reactivity has been calculated to be at a maximum 5000 MWD /T into the cycle and R is given as 0.36%.

The cont rol rod B C 4

settling penalty for Unit One is 0.04%.

Results and Discussion On November 18, 1980, control rod H-13 (the rod which was calculated by General Electric to be of the highest worth) was fully withdrawn to demonstrate that the reactor would remain.subc ritical with the strongest rod full out.

This maneuver was performed to allow cold control rod testing prior to the shutdown margin demonstration. The 2-rod diagonally-adjacent shutdown margin test could not be performed until ECCS systems were placed in operation allowing the reactor mode switch to be placed in STARTUP for multiple rod maneuvers.

Control Rod functional subcritical checks were performed as part of the cold scram timing and control rod friction testing. No unexpected reactivity insertions were observed when any of the 177 control rods were withdrawn.

General Electric provided rod worth curves for the strongest diagonally adjacent rod (C-12) with rod H-13 full out.

This method provided an adequate reactivity insertion to demonstrate _ the desiral shutdown

_ margin. On December 17, 1980, a diagonally adjacent shutdown margin demonstration was successfully performed. Using the G.E. supplied rod worth curve for H-13 (the strongest rod) and C-12 (the strongest diagonally adjacent rod), it was determined that with H-12 at position

48 and C-12 at position 2'4,' a moderator temperature of 141 F, and _ the reactor suberitical, a shutdown margin of at least 1.05 7. Zi K was demons trated. The C.E. calculated shutdown margin with H-13 withdrawn and 68 F reactor water temperatire was 2.83% /i K at the beginning of cycle 6.

At approximately 5000 mwd /t into cycle 6 a minimum calculated shutdown margin of 2.43% 46 K will occur with H-13 fully withdrawn.

-S-b

_m. _ _ _. _

G.E.'s ability to determine rod worth was demonstrated by the accuracy of their in-sequence criticality prediction. The LLK difference between the expected critical rod pattern and the actual critical 3

rod pattern was determined to be only 0.25 % tiK. This initial critical demonstrated that the actual shutdown margin at the beginning of cycle 6 was 3.08%/iK and 2.68%2iK at 5000 5 fwd /t into cycle 6.

III.

Initial Critical Prediction Pu rpcse The purpose of this test is to demonstrate General Electric's ability to calculate contr :1 rod worths and shutdown margin by predicting the insequence critical.

Criteria General Electric's p. edicticn for the critical rod pattern must i

agree within 1% d1K to actual rod pattern. A discrepancy greater than 1%2SK in the non-conservative direction will he cause for an On-Site Review and investigation by Nuclear Fuel Services.

Results and Discussion On December 20,1980, at 0333 hours0.00385 days <br />0.0925 hours <br />5.505952e-4 weeks <br />1.267065e-4 months <br /> the reactor was brought critical with a reactor. water temperature at the time of criticality of 160 F.

The LL K-dif ference between the expected critical rod pattern at 68 F and the actuai critical rod pattern was 0.0056. The temperature effect was -0.0023tiK. The excess reactivity yielding the 200 second positive period was 0.0003 tkK. These react ivities sum to give 0.0025 41K dif ference (0.25 %2s K dif ference) between the expected critical rod pattern and the actual rod pattern. This is within the 1%/1K required in the criteria of this test, and General Electric's ability to predict control rod. worths is,.therefore,: successfully demo ns t rated.

p 4

9..

IV.

Core Power Distribut ion Svanetry Analysis P

Pu rpose The purpose of this test was to determine the nagnitude of indicated core power distribution asymmetries using data (TIP traces and OD-1)

I collected in conjunct ton with the P-1 update.

Criteria A.

The total TIP uncertainty (including redom noise and gemetric uncertainties obtained by averaging the uncertainties for all data sets) must be less than M.

B.

The gross check of TIP signal symnet ry should yield a maximum deviation between syrnetrically locatel pairs of less than 25%.

Results and Discussion i

Core power sy:nmetry calculations were carried out based 'upon ecnputer program OD-1 data runs on January 6,1981, at 82% power, on January

9. - 1981, at 92% power, and January 21,1981, a t 93% power. The l

average total TIP uncertainty from the three TIP sets was 5.536%.

The random noise uncertainty was 1.040 %.

This yields a gecnetrical uncertainty of 5.437%. The total TIP uncertainty was well within the 9% limit.

f Table 4.1 lists the symmetrical TIP pairs and their respect tve t

deviations.. Figure 4.1 shows the core location of the TIP pairs and the average TIP realings. The maximum deviation be tween symmetrical

.TIP pairs was 20.356% for pair 31-37. Thus, the second criterion, mentional above, was also met.

The method used to obtain the uncertainties consisted of calculating the average of the nodal ratio of TIP pairs by:

n 22 1

E E

Rij

_R = 1Bn j-1 i=5 where Eij is the ratio for,the ith node-of TIP pair j, there being n such. pairs.

Next the standard deviation-of the ratios is. calculated by:

n 2

E (Rij - R)

s =.

j=1 i

~

Y (Isn - 1)

.FJ s multiplied by 100 to expresscrg as a percentage of the ideal i

-value of p of 1.0

% Gj =03 x 100' -

l

. -a

--=.-1-----

The total TiP uncertainty is calculated by dividing %dTg by VlP in order to account - for data being taken at 3 inch intervals and analyzed on a 6 inch nodal basis.

In order to calculate random noise uncertainty the average read ing at each node for nodes 5 through 22 is calculated by:

Mr NT

.M

[

BASE (N, M. K)

BASE (K) = NT. HT M-1 N=1 where NT = -number of runs per machine - 4 MT = number of machines - 5 BASE'(K) = average reading at nodal level K,.

K = 5 throug;h 22 The random noise is derived fran the average of the nodal variances by:

~ 22 MT NT

- 2' 30 22

$3 BASE (N, M, K) - BASE (K)

%CEnoise =

K-5 M-1 N=1 BASE (K) x 100 18 (NT x Kr -1)

. Finally the TIP geometric uncertainty can be calculated by:

% crgeometric = -(%Ftotal - % rhoise )'8 4

&Z. '

Table 4.1 CORE SYMMETRY Based on OD-l's Fron 1-6-81 (82% power), 1-9-81 (92% power), and 1-21-81 (93% pow r)

SYN &ETRICAL TIP aT = lT -T l PAIR NUMBERS ABSOLUTO DIFhERENCE

%=100xaT/Ta+Ty X DEVIATION

,2 J

a b

1 6

1.424 1.505 2 12 6.358 5.150 3 19 10.452 8.502 4 26 1.281 1.131 5 33 5.915 9.977 8 13 4.610 3.650 9 20 3.654 2.956 10 27 7.014 5.161 11 34 4.703 3.950 15 21 8.823 6.683 16 28 3.769 2.986 17-35 4.572 3.334 18 39 5.342 5.843 23 29 6.583 5.077 24 36 5.576 4.333 25 40 7.105 7.799 31 37 25.754 20.356 32 41 2.568 4.292 22 Average Deviation =

T=

2ST(K)

/18 5.705%

g i

t=3 _.

Figure 4.1 UNIT ONE POWER SYMMETRY Average BASE Readings (nodes 5 through 22)

From OD-l's on 1-6-31, 1-9-31, and 1-21-81 TIP/LPRM Avg. BASEO Axis of Symmetry String No.

i i

i e

i a

i I

i l

i 94.'%,4 @e

(,l.f17,4[

I 9tib4, l o

i 56 i

i s.

Ms i

i i

i i

i i

i i

9 l0 l l

e i

i i

i i

52 12106, i sai.'s), l tav.ka, I tarbf.

139h t, asko, I 5

l 37l

'S l

1 l G41 i

i i

f i

6s i

l l

.' o - -

, -o l_ _'_ _ t _

_ _ I i

i.

I e

a f__

i

_._l_

65 8

,,s' r. :i nho. L i

-..i_.

ll3.b2, !

139.!%f!

(A7.!97, !

96bl.

imoba. !

c

1. ~

l Sl 32' l

26l l

l i

28!

I 29l 30

,i.

,i

,i i

i i

i i

e i

i t i

i t

g 9

i e

a 38 g

f 8

i i

e i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i_

i i

e i

e 36 l

too.l14 22;I _ Isal99*231 t31.'ss* ! 871rs*25l I

I an\\st,9 a.'so, 0l un'c2

• I I

l l

24't_

l l

l 1

. l 2

i 2ll

__i 32 i.

i, i,

i.

i.

e.

i, i

i e

i i

i i

33 i

i i

i 3

i i

I i

e i

e i

i i

_t_

__ I_ _

,e i

e i

i i

i i

l I

128l20,SI _

tag.ll9, b llatjro,[n ag}.9,8 I

_j__,ia2I%,3l 12o.!!3, l I

96 I Jao.h1 I

I I

l l

'l 12l l

1 14I I

I e

i i,

i i

i

.r i.

i i

i i

i i

i i

i i

i 22 i

i i_3 3

i a

s i

i i

i i

e t

i m__

i I,

i i

,ggfg l

gggj l

121.kfel l32}3reI

//r,.he!

18 gggg 16-I 7;

81 I

9!

i 10!

I sli l

i e

e i

i e

i 1%

i i,

g i

i i

e i

i e

i e.

i i

i i

i i

12 hff *5 i

i f

i ll

[f1 j

o8 I'

2; 3't___!

4:

__ t_

/

i e

i e

i i i i

i i

i i

f i e

i o6 i i 8

i e

I i

i og L _ __ i. _ _ _ ' _ _ _ _ L_

f-i i

I I

i om

)

e r

et o3 os or o9 11 13 is 17 19 2t 23 25 27 eg 31 33 25 37 as kl 63 65 67 69 51 51 55 57 59.-